Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”? • Hacker News Board

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#51

Post by SiempreViernes » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:23 PM UTC

rout39574 wrote: post #33

katmannthree wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is unfortunate that a science communicator would express her research preference in such a way. It is disappointing, and more unfortunately pretty much her personal brand now. There are, as she seems to have discovered, a lot of eyeballs to be had when you bash things that are poorly understood and already looked down upon for it. She's a fine physicist and her points have merit, but she's smart enough to be per…

I think her perspective is quite a bit more productive than just capitalizing on distaste. For example, in this discussion she's making concrete criticisms of specific communications patterns. I don't think it's too strong to call it "disinformation" out of the journals. They claimed that the next big toy will prove or disprove supersymmetry. They never acknowledged that their claim had been incorrect, or that it was…

Not really, in the sense that Hossenfelder only advocated for subtracting resources from particle physics, never about what should be funded instead.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#52

Post by Mo3 » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:24 PM UTC

treeman79 wrote: post #34

Mo3 wrote: post #2

> but to borrow a German idiom, don’t eat the headlines as hot as they’re cooked. I'm German and I have never heard this before, but I like it.

Is that like the German Christmas Pickle tradition that no Germans have heard of? https://youtu.be/Sb0qu_RjQ6I

That was excruciating.

Just like the "Oktoberfests" that take place in America. It's a shit-show.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#53

Post by SiempreViernes » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:27 PM UTC

mhh__ wrote: post #48

paulpauper wrote: post #44

I dunno why this blog keeps be voted to the top. Yeah, current physics research is lacking in some areas .since when was it perfect?

Because Sabine is has the bona fides to know her stuff but also a contrarian and a bit of an outcast, and she knows how to market herself. All of this combined is perfect for hackernews.

Yeah, it's weird how she transitioned from being a fairly normal popsci blogger into being a sort of lubos light.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#54

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:27 PM UTC

mhh__ wrote: post #48

paulpauper wrote: post #44

I dunno why this blog keeps be voted to the top. Yeah, current physics research is lacking in some areas .since when was it perfect?

Because Sabine is has the bona fides to know her stuff but also a contrarian and a bit of an outcast, and she knows how to market herself. All of this combined is perfect for hackernews.

[deleted]

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#55

Post by SubiculumCode » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:28 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #40

SubiculumCode wrote: post #26

It is not my field, but the post, the video, has all the markings I see of outrage influencers on youtube: acting like they know better than everyone else, making broad swipes and claims, posting monetized videos with exaggerated eye popping photo covers, and the whole "I used to be them but saw the light and left schtick.", claims of scientists lying, without the honesty of naming names. Well, I'd rather get this ki…

Don't respond to tone rather than content, especially if you're in no position to evaluate the content. Otherwise you'll fall for horseshit spoken in a tone you like.

Judging a book by its cover is actually not the worst strategy for picking a book. And I WAS responding to the content; content like accusing scientists of lying, content like silly photos designed to get you to click.

edit: To sum in Bayesian terms, the prior probability of reading a good book is greater if the publisher had sunk money into a high quality cover, because they believe in its content, while a trashy cover might be the only thing a trash book could obtain. Likewise, the prior probability of bullshit is greater if the tone is shrill, accusatory, and exaggerated, while the prior probability of quality content is greater if the scientific commentary is academic, serious, and professional.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#56

Post by dekhn » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:32 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #37

dekhn wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She definitely tried to undermine LIGO. This is a very carefully written article designed to cast shade: http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/09/whats-up-with-ligo....

Characterizing all (or even just the most dismissive) criticisms as attacks or devious attempts to undermine keeps nice people from being truthful.

I'm not sure what that means, but she definitely was outright wrong on that one, and she used all her skills to make what looked like a convincing argument for "there just isn't enough data there to conclude gravity waves".

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#57

Post by slibhb » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:33 PM UTC

d0mine wrote: post #16

photochemsyn wrote: post #12

Well this is kind of funny and I mostly agree so TLDR: > "I’m afraid all of this sounds rather negative. Well. There’s a reason I left particle physics. Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress or for progress in any other discipline of science. The only reason we still hear so much about it is that a lot of funding goes into it and so…

This part also stand out to me. It is unfortunate that a science communicator would express her research preference in such a way. It is true there were no breakthrough in ages in the particle physics (standard model works extremely well), it is true "paper production" has disproportionate influence on funding (applicable to academia in general), personally I'm excited about the recent deployment of Webb space telesc…

> It is unfortunate that a science communicator would express her research preference in such a way.

Why is it a bad thing to have preferences?

> but for people unfamiliar with science it may sound like "defund LHC" (that would be unfortunate)

She's on the record against building bigger colliders. It follows from her views that we should fund other stuff and not colliders.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#58

Post by mhh__ » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:37 PM UTC

SiempreViernes wrote: post #53

mhh__ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Sabine is has the bona fides to know her stuff but also a contrarian and a bit of an outcast, and she knows how to market herself. All of this combined is perfect for hackernews.

Yeah, it's weird how she transitioned from being a fairly normal popsci blogger into being a sort of lubos light.

Populism is like gravity, to paraphrase the Joker in the dark Knight.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#59

Post by SiempreViernes » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:38 PM UTC

robonerd wrote: post #45

photochemsyn wrote: post #12

Well this is kind of funny and I mostly agree so TLDR: > "I’m afraid all of this sounds rather negative. Well. There’s a reason I left particle physics. Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress or for progress in any other discipline of science. The only reason we still hear so much about it is that a lot of funding goes into it and so…

> "Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress [...] But the disciplines where the foundations of physics currently make progress are cosmology and astrophysics [...]" Can anybody explain the relevance of cosmology and astrophysics to societal progress? I'm sure these are very worthwhile fields of study in other respects.. but societal pr…

Have you heard how the military makes a lot of technology that benefits society? Well, it's the same principle for esoteric experimental science: unique requirements leads to new tech being developed and then you can turn around, and if you find some use for some bit of the new tech you can tout it as a "boon to society".

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#60

Post by colechristensen » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 4:39 PM UTC

robonerd wrote: post #45

photochemsyn wrote: post #12

Well this is kind of funny and I mostly agree so TLDR: > "I’m afraid all of this sounds rather negative. Well. There’s a reason I left particle physics. Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress or for progress in any other discipline of science. The only reason we still hear so much about it is that a lot of funding goes into it and so…

> "Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress [...] But the disciplines where the foundations of physics currently make progress are cosmology and astrophysics [...]" Can anybody explain the relevance of cosmology and astrophysics to societal progress? I'm sure these are very worthwhile fields of study in other respects.. but societal pr…

Every human society more or less has had a religion with a version of their cosmology, it seems universally relevant to human interests to have an actual set of answers. And what is “societal progress” anyway?