This sounds quite unreasonably defeatist. That argument (can not be solved without an experiment) can be made for pretty much anything, but it has a few counterexamples in physics, and many more in math and theoretical computer science.
How can that argument be made for pretty much anything?
I thought Sabines point is that the measurements required to confirm the theory aren't possible, so it's largely lots of money and time going into pointless speculation right now - even if you find the right solution you have no means to test it.
Mathematics you can make your own proofs on paper, physics is not the same.
Comments
This sounds quite unreasonably defeatist. That argument (can not be solved without an experiment) can be made for pretty much anything, but it has a few counterexamples in physics, and many more in math and theoretical computer science.
How can that argument be made for pretty much anything?
I thought Sabines point is that the measurements required to confirm the theory aren't possible, so it's largely lots of money and time going into pointless speculation right now - even if you find the right solution you have no means to test it.
Mathematics you can make your own proofs on paper, physics is not the same.
A solution might have predictions for other areas of physics. Predictions for other areas of physics that we _can_ test.