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

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

backreaction.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 218 posts

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

#41

Post by jon_richards »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #20
fjuerfilis wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh, so true. Heartening that Shor has the same thoughts about the grant system that I do. I don't have quite the same critical perspective as the blogger, but I think there's a certain misguided attitude underlying the phenomena observed by Shor. Yesterday or the day before I was listening to the radio and someone with a physics background was talking about something (I think quantum entanglement) and started asser…

>> What irritated me about it was the assumption that, if most of your predictions are correct, your model is almost entirely correct, and just needs to be tweaked a bit. Haha, no. We wish. Epicycles worked very well and were highly accurate, because, as Fourier analysis later showed, any smooth curve can be approximated to arbitrary accuracy with a sufficient number of epicycles. However, they fell out of favour wit…

See also: relativity, quantum physics, etc.

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

#42

Post by teilo »

tree_of_item wrote: post #32
teilo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the ether guy again. It's all he can talk about.

Well, that sort of reaction to "out-there" ideas is kind of contributing to stagnation, don't you think?

How do you take someone seriously who says, "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."

That's tantamount to saying that his theory is not based on data, logic, or even sound reasoning, and cannot be proven. Pretty much the definition of a crackpot theory. Of course, what he is actually admitting is that he doesn't understand and can't do the math.

Or how can you take someone seriously who says, "We’re stuck in a paradigm that doesn’t result in any valid fundamental predictions." This is so obviously false that the only possible explanation is that he is ignorant about the foundations of modern physics, what they are, how we got here, etc. The field is freaking loaded with predictions that have been proven.

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

#43

Post by EGreg »

gbumakefan wrote: post #8
tylermw wrote: 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.

This is one of the best arguments for UBI. Imagine how much humanity would innovate in science, open source and other public gift economies if everyone didn’t have to worry how they will eat and pay rent next month.

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

#45

Post by coldtea »

Btw, something to think on. Consider this slowdown in physics, and the oft-repeated ideas that we'll sure to colonize not just the solar system, but eventually even the galaxy...

E.g.: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2007/06/the_high...

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

#46

Post by maxxxxx »

TremendousJudge wrote: post #10
tylermw wrote: 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

He had an easy job at the patent office so he had time and energy to work on other things.

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

#47

Post by Pica_soO »

The truth is, that science empowers the common men- every device crafted giveth more power to the capable individual. And that scares the upper crust. Thus, knowledge must be reduced and separated, and the increasing of dangerous potential must be subverted. If everyone owns a flying car with a fusion reactor- everyone owns the means to eliminate a city.

So, here we are, with leaders who praise innovation, while doing everything they can to sabotage it. And after 9/11 one would be tempted to call them not completely wrong. The human environment altogether is deteriorating so fast that this sabotage will have to cease very soon, or else, there might not be a surveillance state left to protect with a science ban.

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

#48

Post by andrepd »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #20
fjuerfilis wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh, so true. Heartening that Shor has the same thoughts about the grant system that I do. I don't have quite the same critical perspective as the blogger, but I think there's a certain misguided attitude underlying the phenomena observed by Shor. Yesterday or the day before I was listening to the radio and someone with a physics background was talking about something (I think quantum entanglement) and started asser…

>> What irritated me about it was the assumption that, if most of your predictions are correct, your model is almost entirely correct, and just needs to be tweaked a bit. Haha, no. We wish. Epicycles worked very well and were highly accurate, because, as Fourier analysis later showed, any smooth curve can be approximated to arbitrary accuracy with a sufficient number of epicycles. However, they fell out of favour wit…

>A theory can explain observations even perfectly well and still be wrong- because the frame of reference is wrong. The worse thing is that you can't figure that out until you've figured out what the correct frame of reference is, and looked at your obsrevations in a new light.

Well strictly speaking, it wasn't wrong. It explained the observations perfectly well. What a heliocentric description brought was a simpler description that illuminated the principles behind it, in a way that enabled us to discover the inverse-square law of gravity, link that to Gauss's theorem for gravitation, explain it even from a more fundamental geometric perspective with general relativity, etc.

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

#49

Post by tree_of_item »

teilo wrote: post #42
tree_of_item wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that sort of reaction to "out-there" ideas is kind of contributing to stagnation, don't you think?

How do you take someone seriously who says, "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." That's tantamount to saying that his theory is not based on data, logic, or even sound…

I take it seriously because it echoes a sentiment I've seen expressed previously. If you're interested, I believe this post outlines the idea: https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2018/11/logic-explainability...

The tl;dr is that physics is not necessarily explainable, however much you want it to be. So it's very possible that the underlying phenomena of reality is simply out of reach of theories (i.e. it's incompressible).

> That's tantamount to saying that his theory is not based on data, logic, or even sound reasoning, and cannot be proven. Pretty much the definition of a crackpot theory.

You misunderstood the post I think. It's not proposing a theory, or even a crackpot one. It's saying that maybe the underlying phenomena is out of reach of theories.

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

#50

Post by jsweojtj »

walrus1066 wrote: post #27

I think this is excessively harsh. The only guarantees made about the LHC were, that it would prove or disprove the existence of the Higgs Boson. Believe me, experimental physicists are desperate to find the slightest deviation from the standard model. I spent 2 years on one such 'stab in the dark' rare decay analysis! The SM's predictions have been tested to a rigor unparalleled in history. It predicts stuff like ma…

It does not predict the fine structure constant, that is an input into the model.
Post reply on HN