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

Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 316 posts

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#141

Post by denton-scratch »

catchclose8919 wrote: post #122
denton-scratch wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a physicist; but the GP mentioned consciousness as an alternative to matter as the fundamental "substance". Well, I've come across that idea before; in certain kinds of Buddhism, consciousness is considered fundamental, the senses are created by consciousness, and the material world is projected by consciousness through the senses. Well, this was explained to me in the context of a particular type of tantric…

...so you're just using "Brahma" to refer to the computer that is running the simulation that is the universe. And when the simulation becomes aware of its own condition, it becomes conscious? This is just rephrasing of the symulation hypothesis in mystical terms and is just as useless as the symulation hypothesis itself (regardless if it's "true" or not). There's some valuable deeper stuff in hindu and buddhist phil…

> ...so you're just using "Brahma" to refer to the computer that is running the simulation that is the universe.

That "Brahma" isn't a computer; the model doesn't suggest that the universe is a simulation. You seem to have wedged in an interpretation that is fundamentally materialist, which sort of misses the point; according to this model, consciousness is fundamental. That is what was being discussed.

I agree that it's "mystical" to postulate that consciousness is fundamental; but it's equally mystical to assume that matter is fundamental.

In the Buddhist tradition where I learned this, the Brahma story was just that - a myth. But they treated the "consciousness is fundamental" thing as a core teaching, they elaborated it, and the practices grew out of that view. The tradition was a practice tradition; they shunned metaphysical speculation, and "philosophy" was generally treated as another technique for breaking-down conceptual thought.

This wasn't something you were supposed to believe, or reason about; it was presented as a way of seeing the world (a "view") that was useful in Buddhist practice. In the same tradition, we were taught that all views are provisional.

I was just answering the OP's question about what "fundamental" means in this context. I am not advocating for the view that consciousness is fundamental. I happen to take the view that consciousness exists, and is not an emergent phenomenon; but I don't have a philosophical system built around that idea. It's just that I can't see how the subjective experience of consciousness can emerge from what amounts to a system of levers and gears.

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#142

Post by tablespoon »

It wouldn't surprise me or sadden me if particle physicists don't make any new fundamental discoveries or real theoretical breakthroughs for the next millennium.

They also probably only have 20-30 years to show something if they ever want to build another, bigger and more expensive particle accelerator.

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#143

Post by typon »

lokimedes wrote: post #129

These articles will be gold in 100 years. We found the bottom of reality, guys, no need to look further!

This comment itself might be the "real" gold, if in a 100 years, we actually make no material advances in experimental physics and the state of the art remains. I would bet that it's quite likely, unless somehow we achieve communist utopia and the world economies combine to fund a solar system size accelerator.

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#144

Post by l33tman »

abhv wrote: post #127
gus_massa wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you had a good look? It's difficult to explain, but they[1] tried very hard. For example the electron has an electric charge but it's also like a small magnet. In an ideal elementary particle, the value of the magnet is 2 * something. In a real elementary particle the value is almost-2 * something, so they are measuring the almost-2, and it's call g [2]. For an electron, the measured value of g is 2.0023193043…

gus_massa: Since you are likely an expert, could you recommend a resource that explains how you use the Lagrangian equation for the standard model [1] to actually compute a predicted value for the electron's g ? An elementary resource that goes through basic steps for a computer scientist (non expert in QFT) would be a great. A simpler particle than electron is also ok, but I'd love to understand how you mess with th…

The paper describing the theoretical steps necessary to compute g for the muon is hundreds of pages of condensed math, theorems and approximations etc.

The SM Lagrangian is not computable, so a big part of theoretical physics is about finding tricks to actually compute it.

Incidentally this is why there is disagreement on the muon g-2 discrepancy, at least two theory groups have calculated different values using different approximations.

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#146

Post by dlsa »

vanderZwan wrote: post #134
dlsa wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've received feedback from some very smart people who laughed out loud and knew exactly what I meant by having a good look . Two of them are physicists and many more are engineers. They said they have found many metaphorical couches and there's a lot of nothing. They've also found quite a few interesting metaphorical paperclips and other debris. But that there's so many more places to look. They also think there's a…

Yeah I assumed your comment was in good faith, and as a physics drop-out I'm well aware of how most people have no idea of the sheer scope of these research projects, so I didn't mean it as a jab against you.

I didn't take it as a jab. I also received a bunch of messages from people poking fun at me elsewhere for my comment. In the past several physicists have been a source of fine wine when I've won a bet.

There will probably be photos of couches in my office next week when I get back.

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#147

Post by Isinlor »

survirtual wrote: post #82
Certhas wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the problem we face though. Consider the following: For all terrestrial phenomena that we have observe so far we have a theory of everything. In order to put matter into a state where it behaves in such a way that you can tell the difference between two competing theories that describe the world, you have to build the LHC. Anything less than that and the theories all are perfectly good at describing what w…

Let’s build a particle accelerator on the moon. Make it go around the circumference of the entire moon.

Given current predictions we would need colliders the size of the Solar System.

Something bigger than Neptune orbit.

We are ~12 orders of magnitude away from the grand unification energy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_unification_energy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_(particle_physics)

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#148

Post by weego »

SkyBelow wrote: post #124
jerf wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that "finding nothing" isn't progress. The problem is that "finding nothing" is terrible progress-per-dollar. If you're still having trouble with that concept, peer into the alternate universe where the LHC actually provided enough data to nail down the Theory of Everything. Now that would be some progress-per-dollar to celebrate. There's a contingent of people who just don't want to think about "ho…

What are the alternatives? Better weapons, better ad targeting systems, better gambling hidden behind a veneer of gaming on mobile? We can look at where our government and our society currently allocates money and find that the allocations looks bad enough that even building a bigger particle accelerator that might not find anything is an improvement overall. As a singular species, I think we would be better for goin…

That feels like a false dichotomy.

This is pushing forward research into theory, even with highly positive results it's completely unknown whether any of those results actually result in any progress for the human race other than knowledge, and at a base cost of €21 billion that knowledge comes with a huge opportunity cost.

We face so many tangible risks right now that €21 billion invested elsewhere into things that will likely produce meaningful advances to our problems that the question of 'is spending this much money disproving philosophical arguments justifiable right now?' should rightly be being asked.

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#149

Post by danaris »

lokimedes wrote: post #129

These articles will be gold in 100 years. We found the bottom of reality, guys, no need to look further!

That's not really what's being said. We know there's more to find; we know there's problems with our current understanding; we know we haven't found "the bottom".

The problem is, we've found what looks like a bottom, and all the looking we do for cracks in it, or knocking on it to find hollow spots, or hitting it really hard to try and bust through, just keeps coming back with everything being unbroken, solid, and unyielding.

It's not self-congratulation; it's frustration.

Re: Ten years after the Higgs, physicists face the nightmare of finding nothing else

#150

Post by supportengineer »

SkyBelow wrote: post #124
jerf wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that "finding nothing" isn't progress. The problem is that "finding nothing" is terrible progress-per-dollar. If you're still having trouble with that concept, peer into the alternate universe where the LHC actually provided enough data to nail down the Theory of Everything. Now that would be some progress-per-dollar to celebrate. There's a contingent of people who just don't want to think about "ho…

What are the alternatives? Better weapons, better ad targeting systems, better gambling hidden behind a veneer of gaming on mobile? We can look at where our government and our society currently allocates money and find that the allocations looks bad enough that even building a bigger particle accelerator that might not find anything is an improvement overall. As a singular species, I think we would be better for goin…

Huge fleets of space telescopes

Multiple gravity wave detectors

Post reply on HN