tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post2200913510628016104..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Gian-Francesco Giudice On Future High-Energy CollidersSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-34521236285366219192019-03-26T01:58:28.688-04:002019-03-26T01:58:28.688-04:00Hi dga,
Thanks for commenting! I believe when I r...Hi dga,<br /><br />Thanks for commenting! I believe when I read this, I thought you were referring to technical naturalness, but it seems you just mean the parameters are of order 1. <br /><br />It looks to me like the experiment will make new discoveries at the LHC less likely regardless of what the phase, it's just that if the phase is small, it will not make much of a difference. <br /><brSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44986019333003248172019-03-25T22:42:41.153-04:002019-03-25T22:42:41.153-04:00Hi Sabine (& RK),
I just came across this comm...Hi Sabine (& RK),<br />I just came across this comment - I'm the person who wrote the blog post above. I think my original choice of words was a little sloppy and is confusing. I'm an experimentalist, not a theorist, and I hope I am not misunderstanding something. What I meant is that, as I understand it, naturalness-motivated assumptions are essential to be able to compare low-energydgahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16296282032976065966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-89544465808931575502019-02-27T11:36:43.576-05:002019-02-27T11:36:43.576-05:00Roberto,
I am sincerely sorry in case I mistakenl...Roberto,<br /><br />I am sincerely sorry in case I mistakenly referred to you as technician, which was my interpretation of your LinkedIn page. It was not my intention to make any incorrect statement. Please let me know how you want to be referred to and I will use that in the future. (I cannot edit comments.)<br /><br />Regarding Einstein, I am afraid you may have to actually read the paper to Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10200049411410876432019-02-27T04:45:56.230-05:002019-02-27T04:45:56.230-05:00@sabine
"I am not a plumber. This isn't e...@sabine<br />"I am not a plumber. This isn't even an ad-hominem attack, it's simply false information."<br /><br /> ???<br /> You sense of humour is zero, Sabine!...<br /> Of course you are not a plumber, but I am not a technician either... so... correct your statement and I'll correct mine.<br /> You are also humour-impaired!<br /><br />"I can recommend this paper,roberto kersevanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08293551219458418162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81964825771109430212019-02-26T02:25:24.998-05:002019-02-26T02:25:24.998-05:00Roberto,
I am not a plumber. This isn't even ...Roberto,<br /><br />I am not a plumber. This isn't even an ad-hominem attack, it's simply false information.<br /><br />An experiment that's 5 times more expensive than another experiment is 5 times more expensive. I was thinking you could have figured that out. I never said it is "incredibly expensive" - thats another quote that you have simply fabricated. I said a next Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-20064911963756997932019-02-25T21:49:40.722-05:002019-02-25T21:49:40.722-05:00Why does he think Higgs is a new force? Isn't ...Why does he think Higgs is a new force? Isn't the Higgs field part of the electroweak theory? Is he talking about the unified electroweak force?<br /><br />The wakefield accelerator would make giant colliders obsolete. Why spend billions of euros when you can make a table-top LHC? The race would be on the smallest, highest energy, lowest cost accelerator.Enricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11062542721973950650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-40392909468351051242019-02-25T21:26:50.711-05:002019-02-25T21:26:50.711-05:00Apologies for posting several times. I think I pos...Apologies for posting several times. I think I posted earlier as unknown. <br /><br />I would like to correct the idea that the historical Michelson-Morley experiments produced clear "null" results. The effect seen in these experiments was merely below that predicted by the stationary ether hypothesis.<br /><br />Dayton Miller wrote in 1933 about the 1887 experiment: “The brief series Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18148243698891646502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-25504799270365009372019-02-25T18:34:21.990-05:002019-02-25T18:34:21.990-05:00Addendum: For completeness, by "gentler"...Addendum: For completeness, by "gentler" quantum theory I mean observer-dependent QM. This is the idea (my own, apologies, but any related paper refs would be very welcome) that quantum behavior can exist only in the presence of an observer. Observer-dependent QM is gentler because it makes energy-free space truly empty, with field theory applying only when passing energy or matter Terry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-48000482457991077352019-02-25T14:39:49.268-05:002019-02-25T14:39:49.268-05:00I am a retired control systems engineer who worked...I am a retired control systems engineer who worked in heavy ion accelerators and a laser system for fusion energy research. I browsed your book a few times, each bringing me more understanding, and I have just finished actually reading it. I understand your essential points, your supporting arguments, and your reason for betting with yourself. <br /><br />Each of the several engineers I know Korean War Photo Documentaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12109120741562284394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-45665132374487458862019-02-25T12:05:26.439-05:002019-02-25T12:05:26.439-05:00@RGT
Exactly... 11 events in 3 years... and 11x5...@RGT<br /><br /> Exactly... 11 events in 3 years... and 11x52/year after upgrade IF the upgrade reaches the promised specs. We'll see... of course I wish them the best.<br /><br /> So, RGT: as per the document you've cited... they will be able to test "extreme nuclear matter" and AE's GRT... what about the famous "origins of the universe" that matter so much to roberto kersevanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08293551219458418162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-72816203254478841002019-02-25T11:45:05.206-05:002019-02-25T11:45:05.206-05:00@sabine hossenfelder
"Leaving aside that you...@sabine hossenfelder<br /><br />"Leaving aside that you seem to be ill-informed about the history of general relativity,...<br /><br />I am sure that you know all that. And since you know all that, the only reason I can think of that would make you write the above comment is that you hope some reader may accidentally believe what you wrote. "<br /><br /> Sure!... 1916 is not a good roberto kersevanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08293551219458418162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-55295849170586847482019-02-25T11:39:17.711-05:002019-02-25T11:39:17.711-05:00"Roberto,
That I inform the reader about you..."Roberto,<br /><br />That I inform the reader about your identity is not an ad hominem attack "<br /><br /> OK, fine... noted.<br /><br />For the readers: Sabine is a plumber who specializes in PVC conduits. She's here to show us how plumbers who specialize in PVC conduits argue.<br /> roberto kersevanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08293551219458418162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41106464898964039522019-02-25T09:55:30.911-05:002019-02-25T09:55:30.911-05:00Roberto,
That I inform the reader about your iden...Roberto,<br /><br />That I inform the reader about your identity is not an ad hominem attack because I have not used this information to argue that something you said is incorrect or should be disregarded. <br /><br />You, on the other hand, have repeatedly tried to draw upon my biographical information to convince the reader to not listen to me. That is an ad hominem attack. <br /><br />Look it Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75388383823033597622019-02-25T06:26:20.461-05:002019-02-25T06:26:20.461-05:00technically, ad feminam.
the classism implicit in ...technically, <i>ad feminam</i>.<br />the classism implicit in considering "technician" a pejorative term seems to be a <i>conditio sine qua non</i> for academia.rmshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04255841383671422571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61764798910558948422019-02-25T04:47:29.557-05:002019-02-25T04:47:29.557-05:00"Ad hominem attacks will help neither you nor..."Ad hominem attacks will help neither you nor your colleagues. "<br /><br /> Yeah!... right!... no ad hominem!<br /><br />"Roberto Kersevan is a technician at CERN and he is here to demonstrate how particle physicists argue."<br /><br /> You are shameless.<br /><br /> roberto kersevanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08293551219458418162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61676826937585867292019-02-25T04:14:14.885-05:002019-02-25T04:14:14.885-05:00Roberto,
The history of the prediction of gravita...Roberto,<br /><br />The history of the prediction of gravitational waves is considerably more complicated than that. I am sure that some Googling will lead you to the light.<br /><br /><i>"because this has been EXACTLY your reasoning for the past months!... LHC/CERN is useless because"</i><br /><br />This is nonsense. First, I never said a single word about the use of CERN. Second, I Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-13978786344237538292019-02-25T03:28:35.514-05:002019-02-25T03:28:35.514-05:00@sabine
"The Hulse-Taylor observation dates ...@sabine<br /><br />"The Hulse-Taylor observation dates to 1974. That was the first time one could reasonably say we knew that gravitational waves exist, not 1926, as you wrote. "<br /><br />You are right, Sabine, my apologies... I was wrong when I wrote "since 1926"... my memory failed me (I'm a simple "technician, as you've written... more on that below):<br /><roberto kersevanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08293551219458418162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59844990361880950952019-02-24T19:38:47.394-05:002019-02-24T19:38:47.394-05:00Mitchell, no disagreements at all! I love the way ...Mitchell, no disagreements at all! I love the way physics theory has been percolating lately, and I'm actually optimistic that physics is on the verge of a major, 1920s-level inflection point, likely within the next ten years.<br /><br />My point instead was that current high-level physics funding is based more on habit than strategy. Hotter-Is-Better was a fantastically effective research Terry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-35468763109240450712019-02-24T19:28:54.179-05:002019-02-24T19:28:54.179-05:00Of course that is true. It's just that stateme...Of course that is true. It's just that statements that low-energy experiments are more constraining than collider searches, depends on a comparison between the two. When people say that EDMs or Kaons or whatever probes scales of many TeVs, well beyond direct limits, this assumes natural values of dimensionless couplings. If you don't assume this then you cannot really compare the Jordyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04051676140917706183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90445352736184073102019-02-24T09:46:43.620-05:002019-02-24T09:46:43.620-05:00Roberto,
To be fair to LIGO the technology is stil...Roberto,<br />To be fair to LIGO the technology is still in a relatively early stage of development. Even so it has the potential to do a far more than just confirm the existence of Gravitational Waves as you claim. Funding of just over $20million has been agreed to upgrade the experiment so that(according to the LIGO website) <i>"Advanced LIGO Plus can expand LIGO's horizons enough to RGThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07140943290963588247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-26077089404448614872019-02-24T09:04:10.362-05:002019-02-24T09:04:10.362-05:00Roberto,
The Hulse-Taylor observation dates to 19...Roberto,<br /><br />The Hulse-Taylor observation dates to 1974. That was the first time one could reasonably say we knew that gravitational waves exist, not 1926, as you wrote. <br /><br />You may have confused the observation with the prediction. Not the same thing.<br /><br />If you want to argue that we should have settled on an indirect detection of gravitational waves, I expect you will alsoSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88376532378150623732019-02-24T08:53:33.673-05:002019-02-24T08:53:33.673-05:00AKG,
Right, but the constraints on any high energ...AKG,<br /><br />Right, but the constraints on any high energy contribution will depend on the coupling in front of the respective term. I don't see how that's specific to this particular constraint. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-23613874425757028132019-02-24T07:31:56.661-05:002019-02-24T07:31:56.661-05:00Hi , what Jordy means is that for small sin[phi] t...Hi , what Jordy means is that for small sin[phi] the bound on Lam will be very weak... so your statement that EDM s can give you a bound on very high scales is incorrect unless you assume naturalness (for the value of sin[phi]). Similarly in other indirect measurements if you are allowed to assume arbitrarily small values for some couplings (for eg. flavour violating couplings in the case of AKGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01828816179249952196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-34071388927762321112019-02-24T07:08:28.271-05:002019-02-24T07:08:28.271-05:00"In basic research, seems astronomy &plan..."In basic research, seems astronomy &planetray science has been far more productive per $ spent, than HEP: LIGO"<br /><br /> Wait a sec!<br /> We are told here day in day out by the blogger that the LHC has done nothing more than discovering the last piece of the SM, a 40 years old prediction... and now all of a sudden an experiment, LIGO, which has simply confirmed what we roberto kersevanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08293551219458418162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86635845460570330732019-02-24T06:43:49.664-05:002019-02-24T06:43:49.664-05:00The Higgs field is a sort of force. The quartic sc...The Higgs field is a sort of force. The quartic scalar potential is analogous to the [A, A]^2 term in the gauge field Lagrangian. Hitchens proposed a bundle formed from the Higgs field φ and a holomorphic bundle E from a gauge field (E, φ). The bundle can be the SU(2) for weak interactions, or U(2) = SU(2)×U(1) bundle for EW, plus this additional Higgs part with the condition <b>φ</b>/\<b>φ</b> Lawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.com