Text 1: Physicist Marlowe argues that string theory remains the most promising candidate for a unified theory of physics. Its mathematics naturally incorporates gravity and quantum mechanics, and many physicists have devoted careers to working out its implications.
Text 2: Physicist Sato is unimpressed. Decades of work, she argues, have produced no testable predictions distinctive to string theory. The theory's mathematical elegance, she contends, has insulated it from the discipline of evidence; it persists less because data support it than because community investment is too large to abandon. Calling it "promising" without testable predictions stretches the word.
Based on the texts, how would Sato (Text 2) most likely respond to Marlowe's appeal to "many physicists" devoting careers to string theory?
- A
She would agree that career investment indicates the theory's empirical strength.
- B
She would suggest physicists abandon all theoretical work.
- Ccheck_circle
She would argue that career investment is not the same as empirical support.
- D
She would say string theory has been definitively confirmed.
Explanation
Sato explicitly distinguishes career investment from empirical evidence. B captures her sociological critique. A reverses her position; C overstates; D contradicts her.