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

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

backreaction.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 282 posts

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

#71

Post by klyrs »

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…

I dunno about "progress" per se but when smart physicists and mathematicians leave their fields, they often end up in finance and tech. Mostly doing the opposite of "societal progress," they're pulling levers to maximize profit from the destruction of society.

What I'm saying here is essentially "idle hands are the devil's playground." Keeping wonks fascinated by the minutae of the nature of the universe is, in my mind, better for society than many alternatives I see.

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

#72

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

XorNot wrote: post #46
photochemsyn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a limited pool of resources available to do basic fundamental science and it's fair to argue that things like LHC have absorbed a disproportionate share of these scare resources, without a whole lot to show for it. Since it's the general public that ultimately funds these projects (unless the LHC can attract its own Jeff Bezos), I think it is OK to have a public discussion about it.

> 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…

As opposed to open season on new theory - or even new kinds of theory.

The Standard Model is a bit of a franken-theory of a thing, a kit of parts bolted together in awkward ways. It looks a lot like the pre-quantum ad-hoc theories that attempted to describe quantum effects before QM was invented.

It's hard to believe that physics can't do better. But easy to believe that physics won't do better while most of the money and all of the mental space is owned by concepts that are more than a hundred years old now.

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

#73

Post by spekcular »

photochemsyn wrote: post #28
katmannthree wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is unfortunate that a science communicator would express her research preference in such a way. It is disappointing, and more unfortunately pretty much her personal brand now. There are, as she seems to have discovered, a lot of eyeballs to be had when you bash things that are poorly understood and already looked down upon for it. She's a fine physicist and her points have merit, but she's smart enough to be per…

There is a limited pool of resources available to do basic fundamental science and it's fair to argue that things like LHC have absorbed a disproportionate share of these scare resources, without a whole lot to show for it. Since it's the general public that ultimately funds these projects (unless the LHC can attract its own Jeff Bezos), I think it is OK to have a public discussion about it.

"Not a whole lot to show" from the LHC? We got the Higgs Boson, and piles of data providing more accurate measurements of fundamental constants in the Standard Model, along with a ton of progress in various "applied" areas related to developing the materials/tools for constructing the thing.

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

#74

Post by dehrmann »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #67
colechristensen wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every human society more or less has had a religion with a version of their cosmology, it seems universally relevant to human interests to have an actual set of answers. And what is “societal progress” anyway?

My view of societal progress would look retrograde to almost everyone.

Have you considered becoming Amish?

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

#75

Post by LordDragonfang »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #65
mhh__ wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Populism is like gravity, to paraphrase the Joker in the dark Knight.

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.

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

#76

Post by gotaquestion »

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…

> string theory this and god particle that, and it's really not very satisfying or illuminating

I think what would be interesting would be a study of why researchers are drawn to string theory. I remember reading about it in OMNI magazine as a teen back in the 80's. During my studies at university, I learned about many proposals in physics that failed after people spend decades trying to hammer into reality (like the electrical ether, or planetary motion), only to have a genius show up and resolve the dilemmas with a completely different proposal. Going on its 5th decade, string theory feels like one of these ancient red herrings, but maybe it just needs a few more centuries?

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

#77

Post by k2xl »

I just started watching (and enjoying) Sabine's YouTube channel after one of her posts were shared on HN the other week.

I am surprised to find so many people here have negative opinions on Sabine. I've probably seen a dozen videos about the double slit experiment but her explanation about it (and why the other videos were not precise/accurate) was really eye opening for me as a layman. Also her explanations about delayed observer not being as "weird" as people claim was also very helpful in demystifying quantum weirdnesses.

She seems like a competent physicist with strong opinions that are grounded in some basis - can someone elaborate why they don't like her points of view? Are they problematic scientifically or do they just not like her style of rhetoric?

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

#78

Post by jcranmer »

XorNot wrote: post #46
photochemsyn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a limited pool of resources available to do basic fundamental science and it's fair to argue that things like LHC have absorbed a disproportionate share of these scare resources, without a whole lot to show for it. Since it's the general public that ultimately funds these projects (unless the LHC can attract its own Jeff Bezos), I think it is OK to have a public discussion about it.

> 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.

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

#79

Post by gizmo686 »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #72
XorNot wrote: 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…

As opposed to open season on new theory - or even new kinds of theory. The Standard Model is a bit of a franken-theory of a thing, a kit of parts bolted together in awkward ways. It looks a lot like the pre-quantum ad-hoc theories that attempted to describe quantum effects before QM was invented. It's hard to believe that physics can't do better. But easy to believe that physics won't do better while most of the mone…

That sounds like you are complaining about the amount of investment in experimental physics in general, rather than the LHC in particular. It is true that fundamental physics could use a major breakthrough from the theorists. However, the theorists we do have are desperate for more experimental evidence to help them.

Add to that that experimental physics is simply far more expensive then theoretical physics, and it should come as no surprise that we spend more money on experiments then pure theory.

The complaint about LHC is more about questioning weather spending $5 billion to smash protons together is the most effective way of getting more empirical evidence to the physicists.

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

#80

Post by analog31 »

I'm a physicist, but was never smart enough to grok particle physics. Today I work on measurement instruments.

Still, I think breaking the standard model is a good thing. It means there's more physics to be discovered.

Like Tolstoy said about happy families, successful physics theories are boring. In fact, if a fundamental theory is too successful, physicists start to get restless. The people who have a problem with breaking the standard model are those who were looking for a perfect final theory, or who wasted their time looking for its philosophical implications.

Post reply on HN