Fundamental physics is dead - there are many hints in this direction:
Peter Woit: "If, as seems increasingly all too possible, we're now at an endpoint of fundamental physics, with the field killed off by a pseudo-scientific argument..."
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9444
Neil Turok: "It's the ultimate catastrophe: that theoretical physics has led to this crazy situation where the physicists are utterly confused and seem not to have any predictions at all."
http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/09/05/perimeter-institute-and-the-crisis-in-modern-physics/
Frank Close: "In recent years, however, many physicists have developed theories of great mathematical elegance, but which are beyond the reach of empirical falsification, even in principle. The uncomfortable question that arises is whether they can still be regarded as science. Some scientists are proposing that the definition of what is "scientific" be loosened, while others fear that to do so could open the door for pseudo-scientists or charlatans to mislead the public and claim equal space for their views."
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/what-happens-when-we-cant-test-scientific-theories
Peter Woit: "As far as this stuff goes, we're now not only at John Horgan's "End of Science", but gone past it already and deep into something different."
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=7266
Sabine Hossenfelder (Bee): "The criticism you raise that there are lots of speculative models that have no known relevance for the description of nature has very little to do with string theory but is a general disease of the research area. Lots of theorists produce lots of models that have no chance of ever being tested or ruled out because that's how they earn a living. The smaller the probability of the model being ruled out in their lifetime, the better. It's basic economics. Survival of the 'fittest' resulting in the natural selection of invincible models that can forever be amended."
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9375
Mike Alder: "This, essentially, is the Smolin position. He gives details and examples of the death of Physics, although he, being American, is optimistic that it can be reversed. I am not."
https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-172684821.html
Up until recently there was still hope that physics might be resurrected. Scientists had decided to abandon Einstein's absurd spacetime:
Nima Arkani-Hamed (06:09): "Almost all of us believe that space-time doesn't really exist, space-time is doomed and has to be replaced by some more primitive building blocks."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U47kyV4TMnE
Nobel Laureate David Gross observed, "Everyone in string theory is convinced...that spacetime is doomed. But we don't know what it's replaced by."
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/26563
What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Steve Giddings: "Spacetime. Physics has always been regarded as playing out on an underlying stage of space and time. Special relativity joined these into spacetime... [...] The apparent need to retire classical spacetime as a fundamental concept is profound..."
https://edge.org/response-detail/25477
"Rethinking Einstein: The end of space-time [...] The stumbling block lies with their conflicting views of space and time. As seen by quantum theory, space and time are a static backdrop against which particles move. In Einstein's theories, by contrast, not only are space and time inextricably linked, but the resulting space-time is moulded by the bodies within it. [...] Something has to give in this tussle between general relativity and quantum mechanics, and the smart money says that it's relativity that will be the loser."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727721.200-rethinking-einstein-the-end-of-spacetime.html
"And by making the clock's tick relative - what happens simultaneously for one observer might seem sequential to another - Einstein's theory of special relativity not only destroyed any notion of absolute time but made time equivalent to a dimension in space: the future is already out there waiting for us; we just can't see it until we get there. This view is a logical and metaphysical dead end, says Smolin."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/jun/10/time-reborn-farewell-reality-review
"Was Einstein wrong? At least in his understanding of time, Smolin argues, the great theorist of relativity was dead wrong. What is worse, by firmly enshrining his error in scientific orthodoxy, Einstein trapped his successors in insoluble dilemmas..."
https://www.amazon.com/Time-Reborn-Crisis-Physics-Universe-ebook/dp/B00AEGQPFE
Spacetime is a consequence of Einstein's constant-speed-of-light postulate, and since the combination "true postulate, wrong consequence" is forbidden by logic, scientists were actually moving towards the conclusion that the postulate, the "root of all the evil" in fundamental physics, is false:
"Special relativity is based on the observation that the speed of light is always the same, independently of who measures it, or how fast the source of the light is moving with respect to the observer. Einstein demonstrated that as an immediate consequence, space and time can no longer be independent, but should rather be considered a new joint entity called "spacetime."
http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2015/04/professor-baumgarte-describes-100-years-of-gravity/
Then extremely dishonest people, LIGO conspirators, came to power in physics, "discovered" (actually, faked) gravitational waves (ripples in spacetime), and all hope for resurrection of physics died. If you have ripples in spacetime, you cannot claim anymore that "space-time doesn't really exist, space-time is doomed and has to be replaced", can you?
Pentcho Valev