Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fake Physics

math.columbia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: Fake Physics

#61

Post by mojuba »

scottlocklin wrote: post #50
reikonomusha wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this assessment is magnificently incorrect. Over the past 30 years there have been very important experiments, many of which have reached the mainstream. This includes anything from the Higgs experiments to the LIGO experiments. What about things closer to the HN crowd, like communications infrastructure like the Internet? The discovery of the transistor didn't bring an iPhone overnight. Same with many other…

Higgs and LIGO are big nothingburgers compared to anything that happened in physics in any given year between 1910 and 1950 or so. Meanwhile "physicists" spend their careers doing piffle like writing programs for quantum computers that arguably will never exist in the corporeal world. Yeah, I coulda been one of those guys: I even had a pretty good idea for an imaginary QC platform and a position in a major research i…

Look at how computing has changed in the past 30 years. From huge ugly boxes with CRT monitors to powerful touch computers in our pockets. How is this not physics? Sure, the principles and the foundations were laid out in the decades prior to that, but moving in smaller but important practical increments is also science.

Re: Fake Physics

#62

Post by kmonad »

scottlocklin wrote: post #50
reikonomusha wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this assessment is magnificently incorrect. Over the past 30 years there have been very important experiments, many of which have reached the mainstream. This includes anything from the Higgs experiments to the LIGO experiments. What about things closer to the HN crowd, like communications infrastructure like the Internet? The discovery of the transistor didn't bring an iPhone overnight. Same with many other…

Higgs and LIGO are big nothingburgers compared to anything that happened in physics in any given year between 1910 and 1950 or so. Meanwhile "physicists" spend their careers doing piffle like writing programs for quantum computers that arguably will never exist in the corporeal world. Yeah, I coulda been one of those guys: I even had a pretty good idea for an imaginary QC platform and a position in a major research i…

> "Physics and science in general looks stagnant (...) because it is actually stagnant.

Mate, what are you on about? We manipulate life almost at will, we have proven theorems that were unsolved for centuries, etc. Your limited imagination and your apparent lacking ability to see things in perspective make no rule.

Re: Fake Physics

#63

Post by posterboy »

Animats wrote: post #5

This is a frustrating era for physicists. In the mid 20th century they were like gods, giving the world the atomic bomb and the semiconductor. Today many branches of physics are stuck. The cosmologists can't find "dark matter", and aren't even sure it's necessary. The string theorists have pretty but un-testable theories. The fusion guys can't make fusion power work. Quantum mechanics and general relativity still hav…

> The multiverse approach

Why, isn't that un-testable as well, even more so than stringtheory, pretty much by definition?

Re: Fake Physics

#64

Post by chmike »

There are two forces sustaining fake physics :

    1. "publish or perish"
    2. preserve credibility capitalization (scientist's karma points)
The former is what generates fake science, and the later is what let it prosper.

I would nevertheless be very cautious when someone claims he can make the difference between true and fake physics. There is a risk of error, and a higher risk of manipulation by introducing a bias by leveraging the credibility force (2). His book where he spit in the soup, and his promotional web site where we have been directed too, looks very like what he condemns.

I'm curious to see if that author is able to recognize real physics [1].

[1](http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2017.81004)

Re: Fake Physics

#65

Post by Hondor »

posterboy wrote: post #63
Animats wrote: post #5

This is a frustrating era for physicists. In the mid 20th century they were like gods, giving the world the atomic bomb and the semiconductor. Today many branches of physics are stuck. The cosmologists can't find "dark matter", and aren't even sure it's necessary. The string theorists have pretty but un-testable theories. The fusion guys can't make fusion power work. Quantum mechanics and general relativity still hav…

> The multiverse approach Why, isn't that un-testable as well, even more so than stringtheory, pretty much by definition?

Perhaps it's testable the Sherlock Holmes way of eliminating everything else and being stuck with that as the only answer you can think of. Not a very convincing test of course, but better than saying "we can't think of any possible way this might work".

Re: Fake Physics

#66

Post by marktangotango »

kmonad wrote: post #62
scottlocklin wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higgs and LIGO are big nothingburgers compared to anything that happened in physics in any given year between 1910 and 1950 or so. Meanwhile "physicists" spend their careers doing piffle like writing programs for quantum computers that arguably will never exist in the corporeal world. Yeah, I coulda been one of those guys: I even had a pretty good idea for an imaginary QC platform and a position in a major research i…

> "Physics and science in general looks stagnant (...) because it is actually stagnant. Mate, what are you on about? We manipulate life almost at will, we have proven theorems that were unsolved for centuries, etc. Your limited imagination and your apparent lacking ability to see things in perspective make no rule.

> manipulate life ... at will

Cure for cancer? Cure for any genetic disease? Antibiotic resistant bacteria?

Re: Fake Physics

#67

Post by [deleted] »

kmonad wrote: post #62
scottlocklin wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higgs and LIGO are big nothingburgers compared to anything that happened in physics in any given year between 1910 and 1950 or so. Meanwhile "physicists" spend their careers doing piffle like writing programs for quantum computers that arguably will never exist in the corporeal world. Yeah, I coulda been one of those guys: I even had a pretty good idea for an imaginary QC platform and a position in a major research i…

> "Physics and science in general looks stagnant (...) because it is actually stagnant. Mate, what are you on about? We manipulate life almost at will, we have proven theorems that were unsolved for centuries, etc. Your limited imagination and your apparent lacking ability to see things in perspective make no rule.

[deleted]

Re: Fake Physics

#68

Post by kmonad »

marktangotango wrote: post #66
kmonad wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Physics and science in general looks stagnant (...) because it is actually stagnant. Mate, what are you on about? We manipulate life almost at will, we have proven theorems that were unsolved for centuries, etc. Your limited imagination and your apparent lacking ability to see things in perspective make no rule.

> manipulate life ... at will Cure for cancer? Cure for any genetic disease? Antibiotic resistant bacteria?

Do you genuinely believe this is an insightful response? Without knowing your background, this makes it seem rather likely you are arguing from the 'larger population' point of view.

Given the forum, let's assume you're a little more familiar with tech: Perfect encryption? NLP that understands meaning? Do you see now how it's a fallacy to take cutting edge scientific breakthroughs and demand instantaneous applications, and if these aren't met, discard the breakthroughs as having little meaning?

Re: Fake Physics

#69

Post by criddell »

mojuba wrote: post #61
scottlocklin wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higgs and LIGO are big nothingburgers compared to anything that happened in physics in any given year between 1910 and 1950 or so. Meanwhile "physicists" spend their careers doing piffle like writing programs for quantum computers that arguably will never exist in the corporeal world. Yeah, I coulda been one of those guys: I even had a pretty good idea for an imaginary QC platform and a position in a major research i…

Look at how computing has changed in the past 30 years. From huge ugly boxes with CRT monitors to powerful touch computers in our pockets. How is this not physics? Sure, the principles and the foundations were laid out in the decades prior to that, but moving in smaller but important practical increments is also science.

That's a win for engineers I think. Isn't the stagnation argument saying that physicists aren't creating new foundations for the engineers of 2075?

Re: Fake Physics

#70

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

criddell wrote: post #69
mojuba wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at how computing has changed in the past 30 years. From huge ugly boxes with CRT monitors to powerful touch computers in our pockets. How is this not physics? Sure, the principles and the foundations were laid out in the decades prior to that, but moving in smaller but important practical increments is also science.

That's a win for engineers I think. Isn't the stagnation argument saying that physicists aren't creating new foundations for the engineers of 2075?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_magnetoresistance
Post reply on HN