https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=15401 Skip to content Not Even Wrong Not Even Wrong * Home * Euclidean Twistor Unification * Frequently Asked Questions - Future Collider Update Approaching 50 Years of String Theory Posted on December 19, 2025 by woit Brian Greene has a new video out today, of himself talking to Edward Witten, mainly about string theory. Pretty much the usual decades-old hype, with nothing even slightly different than what a similar conversation would have consisted of 20 years ago. Of historical and psychological interest, Witten explains that when the anthropic landscape nonsense arrived, it made him uncomfortable and unhappy: I was very upset. It really got me disturbed. First of all, well, as a physicist, I wanted to explain the masses and lifetimes of the elementary particles and other properties, rather than accepting the fact that they depended upon the choice of a classical solution. Literally, it made me very unhappy for years. I made my peace with it because I had no alternative. So I made my peace with it by accepting the fact that the universe wasn't created for our convenience and understanding it... So I accepted that. I came to accept that, I would say, by now almost 20 years ago, roughly 20 years ago. And I've had a more peaceful life since then... At the time I saw the "landscape" as something that would finally cause leaders of the field like Witten to admit that string theory wasn't working and to hopefully move on to something else more promising. Surely he would not follow Susskind and some others down this obviously unscientific path. He explains here that facing the failure of his dreams "made me very unhappy for years". He could have admitted failure, but that would lead to ongoing unhappiness. If he wanted to avoid admitting failure, he had no alternative. String theory and string theorists like Greene and Witten more than 20 years ago reached a dead end. They were much younger then and one could have imagined a new beginning of a more promising direction. At this point though, any hope of that is long gone. They've long ago decided that they had "no alternative" but to spend the rest of their days repeating the same hype that had inspired them in their youth. Greene does at one point refer to critiques of string theory, while dismissing these with the rather nasty ad hominem characterization of "the chatter of people who may have other agendas". Unfortunately this conversation is largely the chatter of two people with a shared agenda, that of continuing to prop up a failed idea they are heavily invested in. Share this: * Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon * Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky * This entry was posted in This Week's Hype. Bookmark the permalink. - Future Collider Update 2 Responses to Approaching 50 Years of String Theory 1. Alessandro Strumia says: December 20, 2025 at 3:51 am As it usually happens in fundamental physics the key point was simple, but it required thinking along unconventional lines. Weinberg and a few other physicists did it while string theorists were dreaming an elegant universe. 2. Old Alumnus says: December 20, 2025 at 12:48 pm Alessandro Strumia, Weinberg had already jumped on the string theory bandwagon, in 1984, before the string theorists like Brian Greene started "dreaming an elegant universe." In fact, he brought Polchinski to UT Austin around that time, before Polchinski found greener pastures in Santa Barbara. Leave a Reply Informed comments relevant to the posting are very welcome and strongly encouraged. Comments that just add noise and/or hostility are not. Off-topic comments better be interesting... In addition, remember that this is not a general physics discussion board, or a place for people to promote their favorite ideas about fundamental physics. Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Comment * [ ] Name * [ ] Email * [ ] Website [ ] [ ] Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. [Post Comment] you MUST enable javascript to be able to comment [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] D[ ] * Search for: [ ] [Search] * About Peter Woit's Home Page * Follow @notevenwrong * follow us in feedly * Quantum Theory, Groups and Representations book cover * Not Even Wrong: The Book book cover Reviews Errata * Subscribe to Blog via Email Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Email Address [ ] Subscribe Join 691 other subscribers * Recent Comments + Approaching 50 Years of String Theory 2 Old Alumnus, Alessandro Strumia + Future Collider Update 13 David Nataf, Peter Shor, Low Math, Meekly Interacting, Pasquale Di Cesare, Peter Woit, David Nataf [...] + Theoretical Physics Slop 22 Paolo Bertozzini, David Roberts, Peter Woit, Tired, Lars, Peter Woit [...] + The Situation at Columbia XXXV 15 Peter Woit, Gil Kalai, Peter Woit, Gil Kalai, Peter Woit, Gil Kalai [...] + Whatever Happened to String Theory? 53 Peter Woit, Rama, Mitchell Porter, Peter Woit, Doug McDonald, Peter Woit [...] * Categories + abc Conjecture (22) + Book Reviews (123) + BRST (13) + Euclidean Twistor Unification (16) + Experimental HEP News (155) + Fake Physics (8) + Favorite Old Posts (50) + Film Reviews (15) + Langlands (53) + Multiverse Mania (163) + Not Even Wrong: The Book (27) + Obituaries (36) + Quantum Mechanics (24) + Quantum Theory: The Book (7) + Strings 2XXX (28) + Swampland (20) + The Situation at Columbia (36) + This Week's Hype (148) + Uncategorized (1,315) + Wormhole Publicity Stunts (15) * Archives open all | close all * Links + Cosmo Coffee + FQXi Blogs + Interactions + Particlebites + Planet Musings + Quanta Magazine + Researchseminars.org + Symmetry Breaking * Mathematics Weblogs + Alex Youcis + Alexandre Borovik + Anton Hilado + Cathy O'Neil + Daniel Litt + David Hansen + David Mumford + David Roberts + Emmanuel Kowalski + Harald Helfgott + Jesse Johnson + Johan deJong + Lieven Le Bruyn + Mathematics Without Apologies + Noncommutative Geometry + Persiflage + Pieter Belmans + Qiaochu Yuan + Quomodocumque + Secret Blogging Seminar + Silicon Reckoner + Terence Tao + The n-Category Cafe + Timothy Gowers + Xena Project * Physics Weblogs + Alexey Petrov + AMVA4NewPhysics + Angry Physicist + Capitalist Imperialist Pig + Chad Orzel + Clifford Johnson + Cormac O'Raifeartaigh + Doug Natelson + EPMG Blog + Geoffrey Dixon + Georg von Hippel + Jacques Distler + Jess Riedel + Jim Baggott + John Horgan + Lubos Motl + Mark Goodsell + Mark Hanman + Mateus Araujo + Matt Strassler + Matt von Hippel + Matthew Buckley + Peter Orland + Physics World + Resonaances + Robert Helling + Ross McKenzie + Sabine Hossenfelder + Scott Aaronson + Sean Carroll + Shaun Hotchkiss + Stacy McGaugh + Tommaso Dorigo * Some Web Pages + Alain Connes + Arthur Jaffe + Barry Mazur + Brian Conrad + Brian Hall + Cumrun Vafa + Dan Freed + Daniel Bump + David Ben-Zvi + David Nadler + David Vogan + Dennis Gaitsgory + Eckhard Meinrenken + Edward Frenkel + Frank Wilczek + Gerard 't Hooft + Greg Moore + Hirosi Ooguri + Ivan Fesenko + Jacob Lurie + John Baez + Jose Figueroa-O'Farrill + Klaas Landsman + Laurent Fargues + Laurent Lafforgue + Nolan Wallach + Peter Teichner + Robert Langlands + Vincent Lafforgue * Twitter + Chris Quigg + Edward Frenkel + Frank Wilczek + Graham Farmelo + John Horgan + John Preskill + Lisa Randall + Sabine Hossenfelder * Videos + BIRS + CERN + CIRM + CMI Oxford + Columbia Math Department + Fermilab Colloquia + Fields Institute + Harvard Physics + IAS + ICTP + IHES + Institut Henri Poincare + KITP + Math-net.ru + MSRI + Newton Institute + Perimeter Institute + QGM + Rutgers HEP Theory + Simons Center + Stanford ITP + Stony Brook Mathematics Not Even Wrong Proudly powered by WordPress.