[cgbg]

One of the problems I see in science is that we have seen great advances in mathematics (which are legit and amazing).

The problem is that the advanced mathematics gets scientists overconfident—just because they can make mathematical models that are brilliant and internally consistent does not mean that they are a match with the real natural world.

That verification is only possible with direct observation—and a lot of modern physics relies on indirect inference from data that we may not fully understand.

If the foundation is not solid then we can get lost building a house of cards that will eventually collapse—even though the math remained correct.

—
Analogy: Mathematics can prove amazing in calculating the number of angels on different portions of the head of a pin—but ultimately cannot prove they are actually there.

Direct observation is the missing piece.

[Right_Wing_Madman]

The problem is that the advanced mathematics gets scientists overconfident—just because they can make mathematical models that are brilliant and internally consistent does not mean that they are a match with the real natural world. That verification is only possible with direct observation

This is how string theory got so out of control. It became strictly a brilliant mathematical exercise based on zero evidence from the actual universe we observe.

String theory initially said there were 10 dimensions to the universe. But then a mathematical error was discovered and to correct it, there are now 11 dimensions! All this time, we have only been able to observe 4 dimensions.