Let's get this clear. I love science. I'm reading alot about science, if i can understand it. But i was watching a program on discovery about the stars, dark matter, anti-materie and wormholes. I love the theories, but aren't they going too far? I was listening to a scientist, pressumably one of the smartest people of the world and he was talking nonsense. He was talking about alternate universes and that we can create them in the future with some device. My only question was, where do we leave another universe?

Look, i know, i'm not so smart and we need people with vision. But where is the line between interesting theory and woohoo??

I was told that the only reason bullets go in straight lines is because you were told that's how they move. Truth is, you can curve a bullet. I saw a documentary where a guy curved a bullet and shot like four or five different people standing in a circle.

the good thing about science is that if there is evidence to a theory then its never wrong or right until proven.

Some of it is and some of it isn't.

I simply wouldn't bother with a theory if it isn't testable or without any evidence. It sounds like you've being listening to string theory crap.

The line is it has to have a sound mathematical basis, and convincing evidence for the universe being like that and no other way. For example with the Higgs Boson discovery, we had speculation first, then a mathematical basis since the 1960s, and just recently gained enough evidence from the LHC in Switzerland to confirm it as a discovery.

Now, we have great evidence of that kind for dark matter and black holes. But parallel universes and wormholes and string theory are firmly in 'speculation'. It's bad that the program you watched didn't communicate you you which parts are accepted science and which are speculation. They definitely play up the 'woohoo' for TV and popular media, but I assure you it's not like that for people actually being paid to do science.

Don't pay attention to TV programs about science. They're not science, they're entertainment. And the whole point is to inspire people to take an interest in science.

Real science doesn't assume, it hypothesises. And the hypotheses have to be tested. And no self-respecting scientist will use the word "theory" in talking about things like wormholes - they're hypotheses. "Theory" is a word used in science to refer to things that have been tested so extensively that it would take an extraordinary piece of evidence to disprove it.

Ehm, what? I think somehow you are confusing science with research. Research is needed and the base for science and in research you either make observations and try to do research based on it or you make an assumption (of course an educated one) and try to prove it.

The thing with the scientist you saw is most probably a thing you just don't understand which doesn't make it nonsense. I think this person can perhaps prove you mathematically (or in physics) why he made this statement. Scientists don't wake up in the morning and decide "ok, today I am goind to talk about multiple universes with no data backing this up".

The half-life of scientific facts. Half of what science believe to be factual will be proven incorrect in a decade.

That's the one true fact.

And that is the wonderful thing about science.

Science is not about facts, its about trying to understand something as best as we can with what we can currently observe/test

I often say that real science is about proving things wrong, not proving things right.

There is something fundamentally wrong in your second sentance. Science is not a set of belief.