Physics used to be &quot;hard science&quot; - if it wasn&#x27;t testable, it wasn&#x27;t meaningful.  Physicists used to look down on other sciences for that reason. This article shows how much worse things have become.  Nobody can figure out a way to test string theory.  In cosmology, you can only observe, not experiment.  As the article points out, the big questions are out of reach for scaling reasons.<p>Trying to fix the problem through weaker definitions of &quot;testable&quot; is desperation. All those smart people hate to face the fact that what they&#x27;re doing may be total bullshit.  This has major economic consequences for physicists - why should they be funded? Physics is funded because it produced the atomic bomb and semiconductors.  Those came from the testable parts of physics.  Untestable physics cannot produce engineering technology.<p>(The article says &quot;no one has ever seen an atom&quot;.  That&#x27;s just wrong. There are lots of picture of atoms. Even pictures of atoms lined up to spell &quot;IBM&quot;.[1])<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;1990&#x2F;04&#x2F;05&#x2F;us&#x2F;2-researchers-spell-ibm-atom-by-atom.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;1990&#x2F;04&#x2F;05&#x2F;us&#x2F;2-researchers-spell-ibm...</a>