Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I’ve heard that it also predicts at very low precision, some values that are practically measurable, and, unsurprisingly for how little precision these predictions have, these predictions are correct (I.e. the experimental results are within the predicted range).

(Or, maybe “a prediction” rather than “predictions”? I only heard about one, and I forget what it was.)




I think the prediction you may be referring to is supersymmetry, which was apparently empirically disproved by the LHC, or at least the supersymmetric extension to the standard model was disproved.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/supersymmetrys-absence-l...


I am aware of no case where it clearly made an advance prediction of any behavior that later turned out to be true.

I'm aware of quite a few where they managed to "predict" something we already knew.

That said, they've made so many "predictions" that I'm sure that some likely worked out by sheer coincidence.


Oh, yes, I meant predict a value we had already measured at the time the "prediction" was made. I should have made that clear in my original comment. I would add it now except that the editing time has run out. Maybe I should have said "postdicted".

Actually, I think the value might have been something like, the electron mass? Or something like that. (Which, obviously, had been measured before string theory made a "prediction" of it.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: