tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post4898163865921580557..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Particle Physicists begin to invent reasons to build next larger Particle ColliderSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3165118223894145672018-04-09T20:58:24.401-04:002018-04-09T20:58:24.401-04:00Bee
I have an interesting question to ask for you...Bee<br /><br />I have an interesting question to ask for your next blog post<br /><br /> can you rule out particle dark matter? Or can you make it fit all and every measurement?<br /><br />i'm sure you find this question interesting ;-)<br /><br />IMO the combination of Stacy McGaugh's RAR and recent findings that dark matter only interacts gravitationally with baryonic matter is enough neohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17318664916557810347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5903189312761767112018-04-09T13:25:45.548-04:002018-04-09T13:25:45.548-04:00Eusa,
I really think names are more confusing tha...Eusa,<br /><br />I really think names are more confusing than enlightening here. Write down a theory and show it works, it really doesn't matter what you call it. As I have said several times already, mathematically the difference between particle dark matter and modified gravity isn't all that large. Modified gravity adds fields to GR, particle dark matter adds particles to the SM, but Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44416558977408753332018-04-09T13:07:17.907-04:002018-04-09T13:07:17.907-04:00How about if dark matter is something between modi...How about if dark matter is something between modified gravity and particles? "Zippers"?Eusahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14114706429392111062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-83952572551213892992018-04-09T13:01:04.183-04:002018-04-09T13:01:04.183-04:00neo,
You can make MOND redshift-dependent in the ...neo,<br /><br />You can make MOND redshift-dependent in the same way that we made Verlinde's model redshift-dependent, by assuming that the acceleration constant that enters is actually related to the Horizon-size, which depends on the redshift. If you do that, the redshift-dependence is small, and the curves look very similar to the ones we plot for CEG in the paper. <br /><br />But you don&Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-40173555699982354332018-04-09T12:49:09.998-04:002018-04-09T12:49:09.998-04:00Bee
ok thanks, but what redshift does MOND predic...Bee<br /><br />ok thanks, but what redshift does MOND predict in RAR then?<br /><br />could observation of certain values of the redshift in RAR rule out MOND?neohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17318664916557810347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-74666417161550956942018-04-09T04:53:43.107-04:002018-04-09T04:53:43.107-04:00I do not know Andrew Thomas or the series which yo...<i>I do not know Andrew Thomas or the series which you mention, sorry.</i><br /><br />Oh, I can’t promote my own work here, but you should do a search!Andrew Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11075608749064975687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-84759547861058937242018-04-09T03:10:01.199-04:002018-04-09T03:10:01.199-04:00"Heck, it’s like the head of NASA just told B..."Heck, it’s like the head of NASA just told BBC we know there’s life on Mars!" <br />Exactly!! <br />Thank you for this and the pamphlet debunking, and all the rest. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32759614966198520982018-04-09T02:37:13.190-04:002018-04-09T02:37:13.190-04:00Sabine.
Thanks, that makes sense to me. Sabine. <br /><br />Thanks, that makes sense to me. Mattihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16378902135503029904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-14269472885990034362018-04-09T00:50:10.154-04:002018-04-09T00:50:10.154-04:00neo,
No, there's no Nobel prize here. For all...neo,<br /><br />No, there's no Nobel prize here. For all I have seen of particle dark matter simulations you can make these fit any redshift dependence. The reason for writing the paper was just to prompt them to at least make these calculations before the measurements actually come in. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-45093417922772890742018-04-08T14:50:21.140-04:002018-04-08T14:50:21.140-04:00bee
for your next blog post i'm intrigued by ...bee<br /><br />for your next blog post i'm intrigued by the claim that stacy mcgaugh's radial acceleration relation can be used to in conjunction with redshift to distinguish dark matter vs modified gravity, MOND in the paper you wrote. <br /><br />what does dark matter predicts in the redshift of RAR vs MOND<br />what is needed to measure this redshift of the RAR<br /><br />sounds like aneohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17318664916557810347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2814419256768620532018-04-08T10:49:47.237-04:002018-04-08T10:49:47.237-04:00@ neo,
The so called free parameters in SUSY are ...@ neo,<br /><br />The so called free parameters in SUSY are only those of the gauge theory imposed on it. SUSY does have the property of doubling things with particles and their super-partners. As for breaking SUSY, I am only really familiar with the Fayet Iliopoulos, which adjusts the Hamiltonian to a value other than zero. As for falsifiable, SUSY may only be falsifiable at Planck scales. BelowLawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-37143583599889954122018-04-08T02:45:41.602-04:002018-04-08T02:45:41.602-04:00yeah, sorry. I shouldn't have answered to that...yeah, sorry. I shouldn't have answered to that question about Uncle. But it's a recurring question (which I usually don't publish), so I thought it'd be worth a few words. You're right though, enough now. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69478436628327208392018-04-08T02:20:58.909-04:002018-04-08T02:20:58.909-04:00bee
you allow alot of off topic comments :(bee<br /><br /> you allow alot of off topic comments :(neohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17318664916557810347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59992443435222216862018-04-08T01:36:03.249-04:002018-04-08T01:36:03.249-04:00FaceMD,
I do not know Andrew Thomas or the series...FaceMD,<br /><br />I do not know Andrew Thomas or the series which you mention, sorry.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-79589549130769456882018-04-07T18:45:25.205-04:002018-04-07T18:45:25.205-04:00As a lay person, I have not understood a whole lot...As a lay person, I have not understood a whole lot of the ideas and theories presented in your blog, but have thoroughly enjoyed it nonetheless. As one who constantly encounters charlatans and professionals with conflicts of interest in my own field, I appreciate your honesty and skepticism of modern physics theories. I know this may be a laughable question from your perspective, but I wonder if FaceMDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07794174060159243373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-80882454648261767772018-04-07T12:53:19.818-04:002018-04-07T12:53:19.818-04:00"When Christopher Columbus set sail with his ..."When Christopher Columbus set sail with his small flotilla, he had no clue that he would discover a vast land area of 15.6 million square miles inhabited by millions of people ranging from hunter-gatherer groups to sophisticated civilizations with advanced knowledge of astronomy and architecture"<br /><br />Actually, he died decades later while still convinced that he had reached "Rob van Son (Not a physicist, just an amateur)https://www.blogger.com/profile/12611755507524401026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-19027726933977730492018-04-07T10:47:32.035-04:002018-04-07T10:47:32.035-04:00A big "thank you" to Dr. Hossenfelder fo...A big "thank you" to Dr. Hossenfelder for letting us discuss an empirical approach to understanding physical theory.<br /><br />@Unknown I created structural chemistry that fully reduced to practice Petitjean's n-dimensional quantitative chiral divergence and its normalized measure CHI. His Chemistry Department got him to CHI = 0.68. I repeatedly did CHI = 1. Success required Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-87263636372176005082018-04-07T09:16:47.772-04:002018-04-07T09:16:47.772-04:00It is in the nature of our species to explore the ...It is in the nature of our species to explore the unknown. When Christopher Columbus set sail with his small flotilla, he had no clue that he would discover a vast land area of 15.6 million square miles inhabited by millions of people ranging from hunter-gatherer groups to sophisticated civilizations with advanced knowledge of astronomy and architecture. Once again we are confronted with a David Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18048116250413347228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69092938806968032592018-04-06T12:35:19.103-04:002018-04-06T12:35:19.103-04:00Uncle Al also comments on chemistry. On the things...Uncle Al also comments on chemistry. On the things I was a specialist in, <br />his blatherings were not nonsense, just strange. Sometimes he was actually correct!<br />But this was not recently. I think he may well be actually correct about the meaning of rotational spectra of chiral molecules. And the lines are so very, very sharp <br />that with a big enough apparatus ... maybe interesting. dtvmcdonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07594633209626059331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-83574442069878508462018-04-06T09:57:56.969-04:002018-04-06T09:57:56.969-04:00@Lawrence
a theory with as many free parameters a...@Lawrence<br /><br />a theory with as many free parameters as SUSY it shouldn't be surprising there is gauge coupling. and if a GUT scale collider discovers there is no gauge coupling, would this falsify SUSY?<br /><br />these additional higgs fields have not been found. <br /><br />what observation would falsify the SUSY framework?<br /><br />how is SUSY broken, and does this sector make neohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17318664916557810347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-53058767265304427572018-04-06T08:13:34.710-04:002018-04-06T08:13:34.710-04:00"The standard model, however, works just fine..."The standard model, however, works just fine without supersymmetric partners."<br />According to Burton Richter, fundamental progress in theoretical physics tends to come from simplification — and supersymmetry does not seem to be simplification.<br /><a href="http://susy06.physics.uci.edu/talks/p/richter.pdf" rel="nofollow">Is "Naturalness" Unnatural? Presentaton at SUSY &#David Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10537922851243581921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81744245849502615122018-04-05T20:12:37.835-04:002018-04-05T20:12:37.835-04:00Neo,
Most of the predictions of SUSY are within s...Neo,<br /><br />Most of the predictions of SUSY are within some model of gauge fields and fermions. The standard model of electroweak interactions plus QCD is the usual. SUSY can be made to predict loads of different stuff with different models. Back the the standard model issue the theoretical interest is that SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) with SUSY has a renormalization group flow that converges to a commonLawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-28203244689530346862018-04-05T17:13:49.202-04:002018-04-05T17:13:49.202-04:00“Finally, for anomaly cancellation to work you nee...“Finally, for anomaly cancellation to work you need equally many leptons as quarks,...” This decades old idea is not the only way to have anomaly cancellation. For example, suppose there are 3 lepton families and 4 quark families, then if each family represents a different discrete symmetry subgroup of SU(2), one can calculate lepton mixing angles and quark mixing angles that agree with the Frank Potterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00563070331658507061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-28945111089960672512018-04-05T15:50:03.035-04:002018-04-05T15:50:03.035-04:00Is it me or some of the others who missed your poi...Is it me or some of the others who missed your point? I thought you were mostly arguing there are more promising areas for research and resources, that scientist need to recognize it. Just because something is not disproved doesn’t mean it’s reasonably viable; it’s often been said (correctly) just because god's existence can’t be absolutely disproved doesn’t mean it’s rational to believe he Louis Tagliaferrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16698865662162457632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-87371947639855788352018-04-05T12:09:10.236-04:002018-04-05T12:09:10.236-04:00Matti,
Because the dependence on the cutoff is qu...Matti,<br /><br />Because the dependence on the cutoff is quadratic. (Rather than logarithmic.)Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.com