[Hawthorn]

The fact that string theory has not yet developed falsifiable hypotheses doesn’t mean that it will never do so.

In other words, no matter how unlikely it might seem, this wacky set of ideas may eventually become a “science” according to a strict Popperian definition.

Ergo, let’s give the string theoreticians a while to fool around with their crazy notions, then check back with them in about 100 years to see if they’ve been able to develop the requisite hypotheses.

[DesertRhino]

At least call it “string hypothesis” until they can come up with their first experiment.

[Oberon]

Yeah... I'm with you. The development of hypotheses on the basis of what has already been observed is a reasonable scientific pursuit even when the hypotheses are not yet falsifiable through experimentation.

Einstein spent a little time ahead of this curve.

[Moonman62]

The fact that string theory has not yet developed falsifiable hypotheses doesn’t mean that it will never do so.

In other words, no matter how unlikely it might seem, this wacky set of ideas may eventually become a “science” according to a strict Popperian definition.

Ergo, let’s give the string theoreticians a while to fool around with their crazy notions, then check back with them in about 100 years to see if they’ve been able to develop the requisite hypotheses.

...

Good post. As to those who so easily dismiss the hard work done by scientists and theoreticians, I think it makes them feel somehow superior.