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

Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 245 posts

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#11

Post by ricksunny »

btilly wrote: post #4

The fundamental reason for this is simple. Humans are prone to cognitive dissonance. Meaning, we do absurd things to avoid painful thoughts. And anything that questions our sense of identity, is a painful thought. So if my self-image is, "I've advanced our understanding of the fundamental nature of reality," then the idea that my contributions weren't useful becomes painful. So we avoid thinking it, challenge people…

This is beautifully articulated.

And reinforces my general below-the-line (layperson) fear about the state of physics today (as reinforced ofc by the likes of Sabine Hossenfelder & Eric Weinstein).

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#12

Post by farts_mckensy »

Theoretical physics are theoretical; that seems to be the crux of her problem. And in that light it makes sense that she's become an influencer who makes content instead of someone who devotes most of their time to advancing the science. Yes, oftentimes people will be paid to work on problems, and they'll end up in a cul-de-sac. That will be the case for the majority of the field in the case of something like quantum physics. But if we pay enough of these people to sit in rooms and work on problems, maybe one of them will figure something out. That's how science progresses.

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#13

Post by lazide »

farts_mckensy wrote: post #12

Theoretical physics are theoretical; that seems to be the crux of her problem. And in that light it makes sense that she's become an influencer who makes content instead of someone who devotes most of their time to advancing the science. Yes, oftentimes people will be paid to work on problems, and they'll end up in a cul-de-sac. That will be the case for the majority of the field in the case of something like quantum…

[flagged]

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#14

Post by farts_mckensy »

lazide wrote: post #13
farts_mckensy wrote: post #12

Theoretical physics are theoretical; that seems to be the crux of her problem. And in that light it makes sense that she's become an influencer who makes content instead of someone who devotes most of their time to advancing the science. Yes, oftentimes people will be paid to work on problems, and they'll end up in a cul-de-sac. That will be the case for the majority of the field in the case of something like quantum…

[flagged]

There is no evidence to suggest that string theorists designed the theory to be untestable.

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#15

Post by lamontcg »

gizajob wrote: post #9
dang wrote: post #88

If you want to reply to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41811140 or say something Sabine-adjacent, please do it here. (This is so https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41808143 doesn't get too offtopic)

She was ripping on the valuations and economics of quantum computing companies the other week, and her critiques were such that they could be levelled against capitalism itself and basically any company in the market. Was an obvious and clear step way out of her area of expertise.

That doesn't have anything to do with her criticism of Loop Quantum Gravity, and is precisely the derailing of the topic that dang is asking you to avoid.

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#17

Post by lamontcg »

notamy wrote: post #7
nabla9 wrote: post #2

John Carlos Baez thinks Sabine has a point. https://mathstodon.xyz/@johncarlosbaez/113285631281744111 >Despite the silly clickbait title of this video, Sabine says a lot of interesting stuff in it: her criticism of claimed deviations from Lorentz invariance in loop quantum gravity is about as good as you'll get from anyone who hasn't actually worked on loop quantum gravity. I worked on it for about 10 years, and the…

> John Carlos Baez For those like me who didn't know, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Baez > John Carlos Baez (/ˈbaɪ.ɛz/;[2] born June 12, 1961) is an American mathematical physicist and a professor of mathematics at the University of California, Riverside (UCR)[3] in Riverside, California. He has worked on spin foams in loop quantum gravity, applications of higher categories to physics, and applied category th…

And he was known on Usenet and sci.physics before the World Wide Web was invented...

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#18

Post by whatshisface »

If LQG turns out to be unworkable, we're back at string theory as the only renomalizable description of quantum gravity.

Quantum gravity research amounts to one professor per university faculty on average. Even in the worst case this would not be the crisis of unmet expectations it is made out to be... QG researchers are very brave because they are risking everything on the possibility that existing data constrains quantum gravity in a way that hasn't yet been understood. I doubt there is even a single person making that gamble unaware that the Planck energy density is something like 20 orders of magnitude above present-day experiments.

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#19

Post by Shawnecy »

lazide wrote: post #13
farts_mckensy wrote: post #12

Theoretical physics are theoretical; that seems to be the crux of her problem. And in that light it makes sense that she's become an influencer who makes content instead of someone who devotes most of their time to advancing the science. Yes, oftentimes people will be paid to work on problems, and they'll end up in a cul-de-sac. That will be the case for the majority of the field in the case of something like quantum…

[flagged]

Exactly. Consistently untestable and unfalsifiable claims for decades has to be seriously questioned at some point, and I think we're well beyond that point. This is especially true for string theory. I'm particularly fond of how Angela Collier laid out the timeline of string theory in her video on it[0] as well as the consequences that science communication is now facing as a result.

[0] = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kya_LXa_y1E

Re: Fundamental physics is dying? [video]

#20

Post by AdamH12113 »

notamy wrote: post #7
nabla9 wrote: post #2

John Carlos Baez thinks Sabine has a point. https://mathstodon.xyz/@johncarlosbaez/113285631281744111 >Despite the silly clickbait title of this video, Sabine says a lot of interesting stuff in it: her criticism of claimed deviations from Lorentz invariance in loop quantum gravity is about as good as you'll get from anyone who hasn't actually worked on loop quantum gravity. I worked on it for about 10 years, and the…

> John Carlos Baez For those like me who didn't know, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Baez > John Carlos Baez (/ˈbaɪ.ɛz/;[2] born June 12, 1961) is an American mathematical physicist and a professor of mathematics at the University of California, Riverside (UCR)[3] in Riverside, California. He has worked on spin foams in loop quantum gravity, applications of higher categories to physics, and applied category th…

He was also a long-time maintainer of the Usenet Physics FAQ and has been writing about physics and mathematics on the internet for decades. So not only is he the real deal in terms of knowledge, he also has a long history of communicating that knowledge to the public, albeit typically for a more advanced audience.
Post reply on HN