Live data from Hacker News

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

backreaction.blogspot.com

141–150 of 282 posts

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

#141
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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…

An easy, direct link, for example: Careful observation of the orbit of Mercury —> Special Relativity —> General Relativity —> GPS satellites able to keep exact time —> the map app on your mobile phone.

Was the orbit of Mercury (or any other astronomical observations) important for the discover of Relativity. My understanding was that experimental impetus for relativity was the Michelson–Morley experiment, which was an in-lab experiment, not an astronomical observation. General relativity was then developed on a purely theoretical basis.

That it was able to explain Mercury's orbit was a nice bit of empirical confirmation after the theory was developed. Having such evidence probably helped get the theory accepted faster; but probably wasn't necessary. Almost by definition, a theory that is ultimately useful can be confirmed without need of astronomy. If the theory is useful to do X, then we can try doing X as an experiment and see if it works how the theory predicts.

As a secondary point, we could probably get GPS to work even without relativity. The core idea makes just as much sense under any theory of a finite speed of light. When we actually launched a GPS constellation and try it, the engineers would notice that the clocks were drifting for some unknown reason. Some ad-hoc corrections later and the engineers could account for the drift based on empirical evidence, likely with regular re synchronization and recalibration of the fudge factors.

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

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fox and the grapes fable, not sure if it's known to most cultures. That's one of Aesop's fables. I believe it's widely known, at least in all western cultures. The fox can't reach the grapes he desires, so he concludes the grapes were sour and he didn't want them anyway.

That's the one, yes.

The idiom "sour grapes" comes from that story!

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

#143
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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…

An easy, direct link, for example: Careful observation of the orbit of Mercury —> Special Relativity —> General Relativity —> GPS satellites able to keep exact time —> the map app on your mobile phone.

True, but if we graft this argument onto Sabine's argument, it doesn't seem very fair. Those astronomical observations and the development of General Relativity were done a century ago and have relevance today. But if particle physics is being judged against astronomy, then shouldn't the modern societal benefits of century old of particle physics count as well, contradicting the claim that particle physics lacks societal benefits?

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

#144
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m just generally increasingly off put by the internets incessant “quibbling”. This seemingly endless juxtaposition of antithesis to follow any thesis. At some point that becomes just more noise, and that can be used by an agenda. I still found her point valid and interesting and not at all noise. My takeaway is more that new physics might well be out of our energetic grasps until we build some much larger accelerat…

The HN-centric term for this is "middlebrow"; a good middlebrow filter is definitely required to navigate HN.

Can you elaborate?

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

#145
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LHC have absorbed a disproportionate share of these scare resources As opposed to? This sentiment was bandied around a lot before the LHC went online, but no one ever had a proposition of what the alternative was is the goal was to advance fundamental particle physics. You've got exactly 2 ways to probe subatomic interactions: (1) particle accelerator measurement and (2) incidental measurements of high-energy space…

Proton decay experiments? Magnetic monopole searches? Providing better bounds on the (non-)existence of phenomena predicted by existing non-Standard Model particle physics theories sounds like a worthwhile endeavor rather than praying that particle accelerators will maybe uncover a particle if you give it just a little bit more juice.

What's the difference to new particles predicted by BSM theories you might uncover if you give it just a little bit more juice? Especially if you measure a ton of other things at the same time?

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

#146
post #129
post #98

No. Particle physics has shown a clear need for a clean next gen e/p collider. The author unfortunately got caught up in the grind of the field and not the context or big picture. And frankly this is exemplified by the US having an even stronger publish or perish attitude. Almost nobody ever in the field has used the phrase "god particle", at least in Europe. Thats yet another american contribution I'm sorry. Fine, l…

Has it shown a clear need? What's the required energy needed to show the new thing, and what what need does it fill? Will the next collider solve climate change?

However pressing you may feel climate change is, it shouldn't be the sole focus of mankind for around trillion reason, give or take. We need progress on all fronts, hard science as much as more societal-oriented ones and everything around and in between. Just look at current world...

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

#147

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.

There are numerous problems with approach you mention, ie strong push for emotions to sway opinion. If one resorts to attacking primitive emotions, hard facts clearly are not most important in the discussion anymore. In proper science, that should never be the case.

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

#148
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

I don't think the contention here is whether she's right or wrong. Phrasing like 'undermine' and 'cast shade' seems to imply malicious intent, which is going too far. Being wrong isn't the same as being wrong with malicious intent.

The fact that she chooses to bring forward here doubts via youtube, books, and blogs (i.e. the things she earns money with) instead of/in addition to a well written paper on arxiv (i.e. like everyone else who wants to partake in a honest physics discussion*) lets me question her intent. (She has papers to some of the things she complains about, which normally get answered by rebuttals. This is normal scientific discourse. A blog with locked comments is not.)

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

#149
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An easy, direct link, for example: Careful observation of the orbit of Mercury —> Special Relativity —> General Relativity —> GPS satellites able to keep exact time —> the map app on your mobile phone.

Was the orbit of Mercury (or any other astronomical observations) important for the discover of Relativity. My understanding was that experimental impetus for relativity was the Michelson–Morley experiment, which was an in-lab experiment, not an astronomical observation. General relativity was then developed on a purely theoretical basis. That it was able to explain Mercury's orbit was a nice bit of empirical confirm…

Good luck finding a $1Tr project without real world evidence - just theoretical models.

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

#150
post #129
post #98

No. Particle physics has shown a clear need for a clean next gen e/p collider. The author unfortunately got caught up in the grind of the field and not the context or big picture. And frankly this is exemplified by the US having an even stronger publish or perish attitude. Almost nobody ever in the field has used the phrase "god particle", at least in Europe. Thats yet another american contribution I'm sorry. Fine, l…

Has it shown a clear need? What's the required energy needed to show the new thing, and what what need does it fill? Will the next collider solve climate change?

Higgs energy, discrepencies, and the need for precision higgs-science which we can only really do with a precision e/p collider rather than the dual-barral shotgun that is the LHC. The need it fills is to answer open questions about the standard model not explaining all known particle (the stuff you're made from) interactions or behaviours.

Asking if it solved climate change is like me asking if your netflix subscription does. I'll ask nicely please don't be facetious.

Post reply on HN