Live data from Hacker News

The present phase of stagnation in the foundations of physics is not normal

backreaction.blogspot.com

1–10 of 218 posts

Re: The present phase of stagnation in the foundations of physics is not normal

#3
Love this comment left on the post by Peter Shor (of Shor's algorithm--the algorithm that kicked off the quantum computing frenzy). I assume it's him and not an imposter.

"It's not just that scientists don't want to move their butts, although that's undoubtedly part of it. It's also that they can't. In today's university funding system, you need grants (well, maybe you don't truly need them once you have tenure, but they're very nice to have).

So who decides which people get the grants? It's their peers, who are all working on exactly the same things that everybody is working on. And if you submit a proposal that says "I'm going to go off and work on this crazy idea, and maybe there's a one in a thousand chance that I'll discover some of the secrets of the universe, and a 99.9% chance that I'll come up with bubkes," you get turned down.

But if a thousand really smart people did this, maybe we'd actually have a chance of making some progress. (Assuming they really did have promising crazy ideas, and weren't abusing the system. Of course, what would actually happen is that the new system would be abused and we wouldn't be any better off than we are now.)

So the only advice I have is that more physicists need to not worry about grants, and go hide in their attics and work on new and crazy theories, the way Andrew Wiles worked on Fermat's Last Theorem."

(new comment right below)

"Let me make an addendum to my previous comment, that I was too modest to put into it. This is roughly how I discovered the quantum factoring algorithm. I didn't tell anybody I was working on it until I had figured it out. And although it didn't take years of solitary toil in my attic (the way that Fermat's Last Theorem did), I thought about it on and off for maybe a year, and worked on it moderately hard for a month or two when I saw that it actually might work.

So, people, go hide in your attics!"

Re: The present phase of stagnation in the foundations of physics is not normal

#5
We’re stuck in a paradigm that doesn’t result in any valid fundamental predictions. The idea that running the expanding universe backward makes everything denser and hotter in the past is just dumb.

The universe is not like a loaf expanding from dense batter to fluffy bread.

Instead, the chaotic vacuum produces, for want of a more accurate concept, particle-antiparticle pairs at random that exert a “pressure” seen as the Casimir Effect and a force that underlies the expansion of space-time.

These pairs are mostly ephemeral, but under certain conditions they can randomly transition to a stable state. This eventually results in matter. (It results in a lot of things, but we’re biased toward the minor component, matter, because we’re made of it.)

The process happens a lot in very empty space, and almost not at all in space that is constrained by the existence of matter already. This is why “dark matter” exists out there and not down here. The Casimir Effect will give this to you; constrain the available space and some wave equations are excluded, resulting in a measurable inward pressure.

Run the expanding universe backwards: space-time contracts and we have exactly what we have right now. Run it forward and space-time expands, again giving us exactly what we have right now. Of course, things are different, but the physics is unchanged. The universe doesn’t get hotter or cooler, there’s no era of total ionization or inflation.

The fundamental ground state of the universe is chaos. Anything can arise out of that chaos, but specific events are constrained by probability: some are so unlikely that we never see them; some are so likely that they are certain and they happen all the time.

Mathematics, so useful a tool in the past, cannot describe this situation. The only way to describe this system is by using the system itself; there are no shortcuts.

Math, philosophy, reason and order are inapplicable because they are only rules-based approximations of a chaotic state.

Re: The present phase of stagnation in the foundations of physics is not normal

#6
If you are doing theoretical research all your really need is an office, a computer and a basic salary; it's not like university pay is great.

If the need for funding from existing sources is hindering your research, try to find another way to support it, like by freelancing 20% of the time or Patreon.

Re: The present phase of stagnation in the foundations of physics is not normal

#7
I kind of like the model of the turn of the 19th century where you had great geniuses like Tesla who would just get funding to create whatever kind of cool crap they could think of. Are there still any people like that in physics? Legendary scientists/engineers who run there own lab and just make cool stuff?

Re: The present phase of stagnation in the foundations of physics is not normal

#8
post #3

Love this comment left on the post by Peter Shor (of Shor's algorithm--the algorithm that kicked off the quantum computing frenzy). I assume it's him and not an imposter. "It's not just that scientists don't want to move their butts, although that's undoubtedly part of it. It's also that they can't. In today's university funding system, you need grants (well, maybe you don't truly need them once you have tenure, but…

Except you can’t just go hide in your attic. Everyone is more risk averse than ever as the cost of housing, healthcare, and education relentlessly increase faster than wages.

Re: The present phase of stagnation in the foundations of physics is not normal

#10
post #3

Love this comment left on the post by Peter Shor (of Shor's algorithm--the algorithm that kicked off the quantum computing frenzy). I assume it's him and not an imposter. "It's not just that scientists don't want to move their butts, although that's undoubtedly part of it. It's also that they can't. In today's university funding system, you need grants (well, maybe you don't truly need them once you have tenure, but…

And Einstein didn't write his breakthrough papers while employed at a university either
Post reply on HN