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

Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 111 posts

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#101

Post by pfdietz »

vikramkr wrote: post #96
pfdietz wrote: post #63

It was a success for particle physics that they found the Higgs, but it was also a tragedy. Discovering the Higgs and nothing else new was the nightmare scenario for the LHC, and so it has come to pass.

Calling it a nightmare scenario is quite the overdramatic description of a successful experiment that validated a core prediction of the standard model

The scenario is a nightmare to people doing the work, since it seems to indicate there will be no new physics until energies at far beyond what can practically be reached. So, particle physics dies as an active field.

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#102

Post by canadianfella »

moomin wrote: post #76
cge wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a difficulty with science communication is that it is very rare to have someone who is both a great scientist and great science communicator, and even with the ability, it is difficult for them to devote enough time and focus to be great at both. Feynman was, if flawed in some ways as a communicator. Hawking was, but I got the sense that at some point later in his life his focus on communication to the public…

There are definitely science communicators who _are_ committed to getting it right. Dr Brian Cox and Bill Nye strike me as good examples. The late Patrick Moore was another. NDT, embarrassingly, often is just plain wrong. He treats “science” as a side, not an investigation into the wonder of the natural world.

[dead]

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#103

Post by BobaFloutist »

para_parolu wrote: post #34
BobaFloutist wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any evidence of any physical phenomena is probablystic? Maybe this is true of you go deep enough into mathematical/philosophical/quantum rabbit holes, but it doesn't pass the intuitive smell test - I could off-hand name tens of physical phenomena that will perform as expected 100% of the time, deterministic physics (on the macro scale, at least) are like the entire basis for the scientific method.

You may think you have 100% probability of event but then simulation glitches and outcome is different.

Ok but that hasn't been scientifically observed, so it's more of a religion than a theory.

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#104

Post by mbivert »

tgv wrote: post #40
dotnet00 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most childhood prodigies don't end up being all that different from the average person as an adult, and of course no one's born with the knowledge of some revolutionary discovery in their head. While all of us have things we find easier to do than the average person, short of a literal mental disability, we can build up skills in things we are not good at through practice. I used to barely pass in math class and didn…

But there definitely is a wide variation in peak capability. I have been playing keyboard instruments almost my whole life, and while I can play relatively complex pieces, I've never gotten at the level of professional musicians, let alone the greats. It's true they wouldn't have gotten where they are without practicing, but practicing is just not enough.

I'm confident that the technical skills can almost (e.g. disabilities) always be trained, given sufficient time.

Creativity/inspiration seems to be missing culturally. Consider for example Maths or Physics, where creativity is essential to internalize the material, but the teachings usually emphasize memorizing a few tricks to solve well-known problems and pass the year.

But even if it could be trained, there's 1) the luck factor 2) inborn quality variations. Some people just have it in their bones more than others, even if it manifests "just" as being more relentless in practicing.

That's to say, I mostly agree with you, but I'm curious as to how far we could reach with different teaching approaches.

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#105

Post by golergka »

eigenket wrote: post #100
golergka wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I argue with people on the internet — to be corrected and learn new things in the process! Please tell more.

Bells theorem says that he predictions of quantum mechanics are incompatible with any "local hidden variable model". Experiments show that the real world appears to follow the predictions of quantum mechanics, so no local hidden variable model can explain what we see in these experiments. Therefore all you need to understand is what a "local hidden variable model" is, and what the lack of one would mean. You should t…

> We consider that non-local hidden variables are unlikely

Doesn't that essentially mean the same as

> If Bell's theorem said that there was no hidden variables model consistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics we'd be done now.

?

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#106

Post by protocolture »

moomin wrote: post #76
cge wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a difficulty with science communication is that it is very rare to have someone who is both a great scientist and great science communicator, and even with the ability, it is difficult for them to devote enough time and focus to be great at both. Feynman was, if flawed in some ways as a communicator. Hawking was, but I got the sense that at some point later in his life his focus on communication to the public…

There are definitely science communicators who _are_ committed to getting it right. Dr Brian Cox and Bill Nye strike me as good examples. The late Patrick Moore was another. NDT, embarrassingly, often is just plain wrong. He treats “science” as a side, not an investigation into the wonder of the natural world.

In NDT's defense.

I feel like the problem is that he is (whether its because he feels he must or some other pressure) "on" 24/7 thanks to social media. Other science communicators would pop up for some cool, edited, scripted, interviews or a documentary and slip away. What you get would be their best side 100% of the time in reruns on discovery or whatever. NDT seems to think that literally everything is an unmissable opportunity to advance science literacy and will jump in on literally anything to try.

If it wasnt for people sharing his dumbest tweets, I would only know him from the one documentary series, which was actually really impressive (to me). We really don't need "Ah but actually did you know transformers is impossible" or whatever every 15 minutes.

What I am saying is NDT please log off sometimes and let me remember the good bits.

In oz we have Dr Karl who can get a bit like NDT sometimes too. It really feels like he will repeat whatever the government hands him (he has repeated the governments misinformation about vapes, despite most of it coming from lobby groups and not scientists). And he clowns on socials and interviews. But because of that they have him mainly targeted at school age audiences.

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#107

Post by protocolture »

mptest wrote: post #92
dotnet00 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They still aren't all that interested in this stuff, and on their advice I ended up studying computer engineering instead of physics, but I've still found myself working at one of the other labs with big particle accelerators, as a researcher who can link the computing side with enough of the physics side to work with physicists. They don't fully understand what I do and don't really care too much about the details,…

Damn. Tell your parents you love them often. This comment made me deeply pine for parents that feigned even the tiniest bit of interest in what I'm interested in. Your folks seem wonderful.

Yeah my mothers like this. She has given me exactly 1 compliment about my skills in my entire life.

I was in bed one morning, my cousin having slept over. I let him use the family PC when I went to bed the previous night.

I awoke to my mother screaming my name. Then she stopped. She said "No, x is too smart to let us find this." and then screamed for my cousin.

He had been cruising google image search for cartoon porn and had left it all in autocomplete. My mother accidentally let slip that she has an understanding that I would at least be devious enough to cover my tracks. Its something I guess.

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#108

Post by eigenket »

golergka wrote: post #105
eigenket wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bells theorem says that he predictions of quantum mechanics are incompatible with any "local hidden variable model". Experiments show that the real world appears to follow the predictions of quantum mechanics, so no local hidden variable model can explain what we see in these experiments. Therefore all you need to understand is what a "local hidden variable model" is, and what the lack of one would mean. You should t…

> We consider that non-local hidden variables are unlikely Doesn't that essentially mean the same as > If Bell's theorem said that there was no hidden variables model consistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics we'd be done now. ?

Unlikely does not mean the same as impossible, so no.

There are also some "loopholes" in the story I told above. For example the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is completely local and deterministic, but weird enough that the standard formulation of hidden variables models doesn't apply to it.

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#109

Post by lupire »

wholinator2 wrote: post #77
tgv wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there definitely is a wide variation in peak capability. I have been playing keyboard instruments almost my whole life, and while I can play relatively complex pieces, I've never gotten at the level of professional musicians, let alone the greats. It's true they wouldn't have gotten where they are without practicing, but practicing is just not enough.

Well you probably don't practice at much as they do.

Look, a lot of people throw their heart in soul into $FOO, and a lot of them give up or never succeed (if they can afford to keep failing) because they aren't getting the results, not just vice versa.

Slow and steady doesn't win the race against fast and steady.

Re: Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died

#110

Post by lupire »

wpietri wrote: post #65
lupire wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think he wasn't born with it? I can see in own kids that each one is built differently, with different inmate propensities despite similar environment.

I think the point is that if one aspires to be a figure like Higgs, one can't just coast on "innate propensities". It requires fiendishly hard work. That really resonates with me. When I was a kid I got complimented a lot for being smart, especially when I did something quickly and easily. This trained me pretty well in seeming smart, but really discouraged me from things that required hard work or persistence throug…

The question wasn't whether hard work was needed. The question was whether genius was needed. Hard work is table stake.
Post reply on HN