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

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

#81

Post by tsimionescu » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:11 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…

Well, Newton's laws of motion are a direct result of cosmology/astrophysics.

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

#82

Post by tambourine_man » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:15 PM UTC

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…

Sabine went on full rant/iconoclastic/grudge mode IMO recently. It's a shame, as she a good communicator, but I just see myself skipping her content when it pops up.

“I left the field because it's a paper production machine that adds no value to society” without substantiation is simply a frustration ridden meme.

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

#83

Post by ralfn » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:21 PM UTC

tambourine_man wrote: post #82

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…

Sabine went on full rant/iconoclastic/grudge mode IMO recently. It's a shame, as she a good communicator, but I just see myself skipping her content when it pops up. “I left the field because it's a paper production machine that adds no value to society” without substantiation is simply a frustration ridden meme.

She wrote a book about this topic.

So the claim that there is no substantiation is false. You just didn't bother to find out.

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

#84

Post by DrBazza » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:27 PM UTC

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…

Another reason many leave is that new ideas don’t get funding. So physics, in particular becomes a monoculture. There is always merit in bad ideas even if the only conclusion is that it was wrong.

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

#85

Post by tambourine_man » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:27 PM UTC

ralfn wrote: post #83

tambourine_man wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sabine went on full rant/iconoclastic/grudge mode IMO recently. It's a shame, as she a good communicator, but I just see myself skipping her content when it pops up. “I left the field because it's a paper production machine that adds no value to society” without substantiation is simply a frustration ridden meme.

She wrote a book about this topic. So the claim that there is no substantiation is false. You just didn't bother to find out.

Fair enough, I wasn't aware. I'll check it out.

I think you mean this: “Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray”

https://www.amazon.com/Lost-Math-Beauty-Physics-Astray/dp/04...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1KFTPqc0nQ

I still find the tone off putting, reminds me of the fox and the grapes fable, not sure if it's known to most cultures.

Nevertheless, I'll watch the video and reexamine my opinion.

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

#86

Post by stevenhuang » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:27 PM UTC

SubiculumCode wrote: post #55

pessimizer wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

Bayesian reasoning has its limits. If one is lazy and don't think to reconsider when warranted, it's often accidentally used as a crutch. Works in most cases I grant you that, just user beware.

> "The man who has fed the chicken every day throughout its life at last wrings its neck instead, showing that more refined views as to the uniformity of nature would have been useful to the chicken" - Bertrand Russel

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

#87

Post by matthewdgreen » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

ralfn wrote: post #83

tambourine_man wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sabine went on full rant/iconoclastic/grudge mode IMO recently. It's a shame, as she a good communicator, but I just see myself skipping her content when it pops up. “I left the field because it's a paper production machine that adds no value to society” without substantiation is simply a frustration ridden meme.

She wrote a book about this topic. So the claim that there is no substantiation is false. You just didn't bother to find out.

I’ve read a few of these articles and they all have basically the same format, which is similar enough that they’re not quite as interesting to read. First a headline “does the invention of Swiss Cheese mean that Cheddar Cheese is extinct?” Followed by a little bit of interesting and useful scientific summarization. Then onwards to a point about how we’re dealing with lots of theories and not enough empirical data, so the whole field is useless and also not worth spending time on.

I would point out that lots of other important scientific fields have been in this situation before. Maybe there’s an interesting argument to the overfunding (but then again, developing theories is also pretty important!). But mostly it just feels like she’s made the point and while it’s an important point, getting a clear picture of the scientific results is more valuable than this particular opinion. (But I stress, it is her platform to do with as she wants.)

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

#88

Post by robonerd » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:30 PM UTC

SiempreViernes wrote: post #51

rout39574 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> never about what should be funded instead.

This isn't entirely true. In this blog post (http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/04/does-world-need-lar...) she recommends:

> "One of the key motivations for building a larger particle collider that particle physicists like to bring up is that we still do not know what dark matter is made of. But we are not even sure that dark matter is made of particles. And if it’s a particle, we do not know what mass it has or how it interacts. If it’s a light particle, you would not look for it with a bigger collider. So really it makes more sense to collect more information about the astrophysical situation first. That means concretely better telescopes, better sky coverage, better redshift resolution, better frequency coverage, and so on."

Though she goes on to say

> "But really my intention here is not to advocate a particular alternative. I merely think that physicists should have an honest debate about the evident lack of progress in the foundations of physics and what to do about it."

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

#89

Post by nobodyandproud » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:32 PM UTC

robonerd wrote: post #68

SiempreViernes wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Couldn't the same be said for particle physics? The accelerators and detectors seem very high tech.

No, not if take her at face value. She’s saying particle physics has built a framework where the goalpost can keep moving.

It’s become a bottomless trap of sorts.

Given that resources—money and bright minds—aren’t infinite, she then proposes that there are other areas of research that received less attention and are ripe for discovery.

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

#90

Post by FollowingTheDao » Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 5:32 PM UTC

LordDragonfang wrote: post #75

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, she is the Trump of Science. And I do not say that be be demeaning of either. While I do not care for Trump, he knows what he is doing when it comes to showmanship, and so does she.

This comparison strikes me as much more unfavorable than you admit, because while Trump is categorically not an expert on what he purports to be (running a successful business) Sabine is clearly an expert in her field.

Trump is successful with media, not his businesses.