tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post115016555850044315..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Science and DemocracySabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1160769066785174092006-10-13T15:51:00.000-04:002006-10-13T15:51:00.000-04:00I think the reason people are doubting string theo...I think the reason people are doubting string theory is simple: there are no predictions and no experimental confirmations despite 20 years of research. You don't have to understand string theory to realize that this is a big problem<BR/><BR/>Science is based on creating models of the world and comparing them to the world to see if they are correct. That is about it.<BR/><BR/>As for Marx, he Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1154805171381640432006-08-05T15:12:00.000-04:002006-08-05T15:12:00.000-04:00Scientists always think they understand philosophy...Scientists always think they understand philosophy and political theory but that philosophers cannot understand science. This is a natural outcome of the capitalist state and also deeply flawed. Just like Christianity and Conservatism (of which western science is an offshoot), the more powerful science becomes the more it screams about being threatened, persecuted, and marginalized. It is an Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150978690640172962006-06-22T08:18:00.000-04:002006-06-22T08:18:00.000-04:00Hi B,Thanks for the interesting links."I also thin...Hi B,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the interesting links.<BR/><BR/>"I also think the timescale of referee reports is so short in physics, because the pressure to publish for the authors is so high. The reason for which is that they are being judged on their amount of productivity, most often due to a lack of better criteria."<BR/><BR/>On the contrary, my strong impression is that productivity is not the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150882640780599942006-06-21T05:37:00.000-04:002006-06-21T05:37:00.000-04:00Hi amused,Thanks for your thoughtful comment.I agr...Hi amused,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your thoughtful comment.<BR/><BR/>I agree with you that the quality of publications (and the number of citations) is an important factor to judge on research. And a factor which in theoretical physics has become doubtful. However, I also think that this is only part of the problem, and in itself not sufficient to improve the situation. <BR/><BR/>It tells a lot Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150814953991072242006-06-20T10:49:00.000-04:002006-06-20T10:49:00.000-04:00Hi B,I wish that the general framework for making ...Hi B,<BR/><BR/>I wish that the general framework for making the judgements would be the one described in my original comment. But this still leaves the questions you rightly raised about "what is 'significance', what is 'progress' and who decides about that." This is a tricky issue without an easy answer. For what it's worth, here are my thoughts on it:<BR/><BR/>In your post you rightly point outAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150579531826533852006-06-17T17:25:00.000-04:002006-06-17T17:25:00.000-04:00amused said...I also hope Bee will say more about ...<I>amused said...<BR/><BR/>I also hope Bee will say more about this. My worry is that this could lead to a prejudging of which directions are going to be the most fruitfull. Better imo to let individual physicists work on whatever they like, without preferential weighing for any particular areas, and simply judge them on the significance of the progress they make.</I><BR/><BR/>Indeed, this is Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150564627374666932006-06-17T13:17:00.000-04:002006-06-17T13:17:00.000-04:00Hi Stefan,You are quite right about the general be...Hi Stefan,<BR/><BR/>You are quite right about the general benefits of the (hypothetical) large committee - I agree completely.<BR/><BR/>Regarding the contribution of physics blogs to explanatory communication between different fields, I think this is already happening to quite a large extent but certainly there's scope for extending it. In fact the way I originally discovered these blogs was Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150559903134021712006-06-17T11:58:00.000-04:002006-06-17T11:58:00.000-04:00Hi stefan, Hi nigel,I don't mind the comment about...Hi stefan, Hi nigel,<BR/><BR/>I don't mind the comment about extra dimensions. My opinion is roughly: as long as we have no explanation why we live in 3+1 dimensions, there might as well be more, String Theory motivated or not. <BR/><BR/><I>and other unobservable belief systems. It is a religion...</I> <BR/><BR/>Since I have been working on the observables of such extra dimensions, I don't feel Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150470219669854322006-06-16T11:03:00.000-04:002006-06-16T11:03:00.000-04:00Hi Stefan,I've found nobody wants to discuss scien...Hi Stefan,<BR/><BR/>I've found nobody wants to discuss science since string theory came to town, calling all "alternatives" crackpot.<BR/><BR/>At University of Gloucestershire in 2002, my arxiv submission was removes within 30 seconds without being read.<BR/><BR/>So I feel that if they don't permit science, they shouldn't object to this being pointed out!<BR/><BR/>;-)nigehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03402194253543690982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150409456636225412006-06-15T18:10:00.000-04:002006-06-15T18:10:00.000-04:00Hi nigel, and all others,could you please continue...Hi nigel, and all others,<BR/><BR/><BR/>could you please continue your more personally tainted attacks on people not connected to this blog somewhere else...<BR/><BR/>BTW, nigel, since Bee has published quite a lot about <A HREF="http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=fin+a+hossenfelder+and+t+extra&FORMAT=WWW&SEQUENCE=" REL="nofollow">LXD phenomenology</A>, she may not appreciatestefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09495628046446378453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150406565331074872006-06-15T17:22:00.000-04:002006-06-15T17:22:00.000-04:00Clarification: where I wrote stringy equations don...Clarification: where I wrote stringy equations don't describe reality, I'm referring to 3+1 dimensional reality.<BR/><BR/>Of course, Lubos is genuinely convinced that reality is extra dimensional, so he might claim the stringy equations do describe reality, just as lunatics believe their delusions are real.<BR/><BR/>;-)nigehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03402194253543690982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150406398327007442006-06-15T17:19:00.000-04:002006-06-15T17:19:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.nigehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03402194253543690982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150405969604076612006-06-15T17:12:00.000-04:002006-06-15T17:12:00.000-04:00Dear Lubos,"... I am leaving Academia soon..."But ...Dear Lubos,<BR/><BR/>"... I am leaving Academia soon..."<BR/><BR/>But you are in extra dimensional fantasy land now, which is hardly academia! How can you leave somewhere you are not? Stringy speculation has no connection to reality and hyping that it does, is not really academic. Except as metaphysics.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps you are muddled and think that you are in real academia now, so that you nigehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03402194253543690982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150405012298818892006-06-15T16:56:00.000-04:002006-06-15T16:56:00.000-04:00Hi amused,I would like to see a large committee wh...Hi amused,<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>I would like to see a large committee whose members cover the whole spectrum of theoretical physics.</I><BR/><BR/>That is exactly what I had in mind, but then that someone<BR/><BR/><I>would have to explain to their<BR/>colleagues in condensed matter and atomic physics why string theory [...]</I><BR/><BR/>should, of course, not be restricted to string theory, but stefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09495628046446378453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150396509253392502006-06-15T14:35:00.000-04:002006-06-15T14:35:00.000-04:00Hi B,A few thoughts on this topic: In principle I ...Hi B,<BR/><BR/>A few thoughts on this topic: In principle I agree with Lubos that research <BR/>funding shouldn't be distributed "democratically" in the sense that the <BR/>amount of funding for a particular area is correlated with the number of <BR/>people with PhDs (or n number of publications, or whatever) who favour that <BR/>area. I agree with him that it is better instead to "leave the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150379726487267842006-06-15T09:55:00.000-04:002006-06-15T09:55:00.000-04:00Hi Bee,Just some remarks. I have never said string...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>Just some remarks. <BR/><BR/>I have never said string theory is wrong. I am completely open to the possibilitity that it is correct. What I have said is that ST is under development (that is why I have called it an "approach"). In my conception, it will be a scientific theory <I>de facto</I> if it survives experimental testing. <BR/><BR/>Also, I have never said that ST and LQG Christine Cordula Dantashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05271747374185459530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150378342506910192006-06-15T09:32:00.000-04:002006-06-15T09:32:00.000-04:00FYI:http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=20...FYI:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2004&leaf=02&filename=6801&filetype=html" REL="nofollow">http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2004&leaf=02&filename=6801&filetype=html</A><BR/><BR/>Perhaps captures the confusion of non-scientists?Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150377959165800502006-06-15T09:25:00.000-04:002006-06-15T09:25:00.000-04:00Dear Stefan,I am adding some links to that post, b...Dear Stefan,<BR/><BR/>I am adding some links to that post, but I need the help from the string theory experts so that the links refer to good introductory/expository papers.<BR/><BR/>ChristineChristine Cordula Dantashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05271747374185459530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150375463182672872006-06-15T08:44:00.000-04:002006-06-15T08:44:00.000-04:00Well, taking Luboš's concerns seriously, as...Well, taking Luboš's concerns seriously, as a first step, we have to end all public financing of science, or risk falling into the communist abyss.<BR/><BR/>Market funds however, always seek a return. The day when the great industrial labs, like Bell Labs, supported research with no practical applications are long over (and such labs were funded with monopoly money).<BR/><BR/>Otherwise, Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150360468518821402006-06-15T04:34:00.000-04:002006-06-15T04:34:00.000-04:00dear all, I think that this sociological discussio...dear all, I think that this sociological discussion can be summarized as: we need experimental data.<BR/>Attempts of attaching quantum gravity with pure theory progressively degenerated into hype, philosophy, and now insults. At some point, even ancient greeks got bored of their attemptsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150343903127124232006-06-14T23:58:00.000-04:002006-06-14T23:58:00.000-04:00Dear Stefan,Thanks for the contribution, and for t...Dear Stefan,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the contribution, and for the interesting link. <BR/><BR/>I have the impression that I might not have made clear what I was talking about. Or it might have gotten lost. <BR/><BR/>I am not talking about peer review of proposals, which certainly should be made by experts specialized on the field under consideration. To decide whether or not a derivation is correct, Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150327910169487072006-06-14T19:31:00.000-04:002006-06-14T19:31:00.000-04:00There is a very interesting comment by Georg von H...There is a very interesting <A HREF="http://latticeqcd.blogspot.com/2006/06/peer-review-and-trial-by-jury.html" REL="nofollow">comment by Georg von Hippel</A> on his <A HREF="http://latticeqcd.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">blog</A> about the discussion here on advisory committees and decision making in science. Georg compares the current procedures to <I>trial by jury</I>, where a jury consistingstefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09495628046446378453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150296638272398342006-06-14T10:50:00.000-04:002006-06-14T10:50:00.000-04:00Anonymous said... Lubos is absolutely right. Where...<I>Anonymous said... <BR/><BR/>Lubos is absolutely right. Where does he find so much time and energy to fight with crackpots? Crackpots should be banned from sci sites. NO MATTER he or she (political correctness, you understand). </I><BR/><BR/>Hi anonymous 2,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for this very qualified comment. I too wonder where Lubos finds the time to type all these words. Besides that there is Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150296189547333752006-06-14T10:43:00.000-04:002006-06-14T10:43:00.000-04:00Anonymous said... In a true "free market", there w...<I>Anonymous said... <BR/><BR/>In a true "free market", there would be no government funding of anything and no taxes. In fact there would be no government to speak of in a true "free market". </I><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>Hi anonymous1,<BR/><BR/>You too are mixing up the political and economical system. No government is usually called anarchy. It's actually possible to have a government that is eitherSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1150273726051271722006-06-14T04:28:00.000-04:002006-06-14T04:28:00.000-04:00Lubos is absolutely right. Where does he find so m...Lubos is absolutely right. Where does he find so much time and energy to fight with crackpots? Crackpots should be banned from sci sites. NO MATTER he or she (political correctness, you understand).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com