If you don't want the physicists to explain everything then don't pay any attention to it. It's not about you getting your way with what others learn and discover.
Now you are being a fool, spitting out straw man.
I never said anything about physicists shouldn’t try to work out String Theory.
String Theory simply hasn’t work yet.
I am former civil engineer, not a scientist, and like my physics to be usef, as having real-world applications. So I only follow physics that have evidences, not just proofs.
String Theory have plenty of proofs, but no real evidences.
And evidence and proof are not the same things.
Proof is either logical or mathematical model or representation, like equations and formulas. Equations are proofs, not evidences.
Take for instance, the Big Bang theory. It started out as 3 separate hypotheses, formulated by 3 different and independent physicists during the 1920s:
- Alexander Friedmann, in 1922,
- Howard Percy Robertson, in 1925-26,
- and Georges Lemaître, in 1927.
All 3 were pioneers of the expanding universe model (before it was called the Big Bang theory in the late 1940s), and each one came with proofs of this model, but not evidences to go with it.
It was Robertson who predicted the Redshift as a mean to observe the galaxies moving away from each other, as the sign of the universe is expanding.
That redshift was discovered by Edwin Hubble in 1929, which became the first piece of evidence that the expanding universe model is true.
The next piece of evidence didn’t appear until the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) in 1964, by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. The discovery was accidental, when they working with radio telescope at Bell Lab.
CMBR became the 2nd evidence for the Big Bang model, which changed the field of cosmology.
But CMBR was predicted back in 1948, by Ralph Alpher and Robert Herman. Alpher also worked with his former professor and mentor George Gamow to develop the hypotheses of the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) and of the Hot Big Bang model.
BBN gave us insight to how stable and electrical-neutral atoms were formed from subatomic particles, before there were ever stars.
The Hot Big Bang model, is the current theory that went beyond Lemaître’s original hypothesis. It predicted that the earliest stage of the young universe was hotter and denser.
As the universe expand exponentially, it cool the universe so that energy can turn into subatomic particles (eg quarks, leptons, photons, Higgs boson, etc), and the these particles became the building blocks of atomic particles (eg protons and neutrons) and atomic nuclei, as the universe cooled further. Eventually hydrogen and helium atoms formed.
So the Big Bang model started out as proof-driven hypothesis, but only became scientific theory when evidences were discovered.
So until String Theory have empirical evidences, it is merely explanations with complex mathematical equations - which in essence, is a theoretical “hypothesis”.
