general

string theory is unprovable so its all theoretical

I don't think there is defacto a reason for that

considering particles are not real

I feel that every thing is probably made of something

Kappa but appaK

then what are preons made of

Whether each particle has its one sort of recipe of somethings smaller or not

we already have this wonderful guide of minimal particles, why do we need to go smaller

Right

They are all just excitations in various fields

So what makes them up

excitations

in various fields

What causes them to be different

different excitations

spin and charge

in various fields

Ok

higgs field gives mass iirc

I do not remember my particle physics class at all

despite having just taken it

higgs field doesn't even give most pass pika

most mass is just from energy density

Literally never even took a physics class in highschool

and I never took a particle physics course

yet Pika did

its a fake science

its bad

its magic with deep lore

GR and quantum theory are cooler

Honestly kinda sounds like fun stuff

although that is all particle physics is anyways

I'd rather do particle physics then gr

Particle physics is just the engineering version of quantum field theory

thats not actually how the word theory works in science

Isn't particle physics just quantum physics

except when it comes to biology

yes that is what I am saying

it is just quantum field theory

it means it is generally accepted after slews of experimental evidence is collected to back it up

except biology

Idk what the word was

a theory in the normal sense is closer to a hypothesis

Like laws or whatever are never proven until they aren't and we have to change them to make them make sense

And we always change them

laws are things we assume to be true

that are fundemental

same idea as axioms in mathematics

Ok so it was laws then

Ok yup

sometimes the word law is missused though

So other then laws, what would something that is proven be called

theory

you can't prove things in science

you explain things with models

you can only disprove things or find agreement to some arbitrarily high accuracy

So all there is is laws then

you can't prove things in science x2

you go on and use your model to investigate further

Honestly kinda makes sense

Hypothetically speaking you cannot fire

math is the only thing you can make objective claims in

Becuese a later law can disprove another law

what if there is another mechanism that exactly solves the problem you had

But thats becues we created and defined math

We don't create and define science

We observe it

we model it

science usually relies on occums razor, aka the simpliest explanation is usually better. We do not know if that is nescicarrily true

and considering the number of unsolved physics problems, it probably is not true

theory of everything is just trying to make a unified model

So be vague enough to make it true enough

model precision

You make a model, test it, then if the model works for what you know, try to use it to predict new things

if the new thing you predict does not exist, you need a new model

and if your model predicts successfully its validated

otherwise continue forever

lol climate science

On the tierlist of sciences, that one is low down