tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post5926298276711067242..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Extra Dimensions at the LHC: Status UpdateSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-91025156042684148452011-06-15T07:13:47.879-04:002011-06-15T07:13:47.879-04:00Eric: IMO it's nothing personal about it. Main...Eric: IMO it's nothing personal about it. Mainstream physicists are curently living from writing of publications filled with various combinations of equations, instead of explanations of things. The informations and ideas, which cannot be rewritten into rigor immediatelly are useless for them. They cannot handle them, they cannot publish them. Such ideas simply don't exist for mainstream Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-57839775131614994922011-06-14T19:10:07.332-04:002011-06-14T19:10:07.332-04:00Zephir, I was obviously wrong about her influences...Zephir, I was obviously wrong about her influences on the paper she wrote. I'll leave it at that. Everyone can be pushed to the edge under the right circumstances and she pushed my my buttons in a way that brought me there.<br /><br />I have never said that she wasn't very talented, and she also has a right to have that self awareness. But there are very many different kinds of talent Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08213251864943443334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44310557590787224822011-06-14T17:59:15.114-04:002011-06-14T17:59:15.114-04:00Eric: Which visualisation do you mean, exactly? I ...Eric: Which visualisation do you mean, exactly? I presume, it should be possible to trace the original source. In general, if you don't want to get some ideas stealed, don't exploit the traffic of foreign highly visited blogs for their presentation...;-) <br /><br />Every frontier has a bit hypertrophed ego (me included). Bees is very talented and diligent (... and she knows about it Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-91382839909677098932011-06-14T14:32:48.645-04:002011-06-14T14:32:48.645-04:00Really? The solution to the hierarchy problem was ...Really? The solution to the hierarchy problem was not considered serious enough topic? My impression was that such models were not too popular mainly because they didn't require low energy SUSY to solve the hierarchy problem and String phenomenology has been built largely upon this assumption.Giotishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03594944884584261018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10484525526197589792011-06-14T14:24:33.382-04:002011-06-14T14:24:33.382-04:00Well Bee, you certainly ask for any abuse you get ...Well Bee, you certainly ask for any abuse you get when you state that ideas are a dime a dozen and imply that execution of the idea is the only thing that is important. They are both very important and good ideas can be quite rare. When you say a thing like that, and you have said it twice now that I remember, I lose total respect for you. It is basically the same as saying "what I do is Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08213251864943443334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81452086905946050142011-06-14T12:42:02.714-04:002011-06-14T12:42:02.714-04:00Hi Giotis,
Well, they were not popular as a topic...Hi Giotis,<br /><br />Well, they were not popular as a topic to work on. They were considered not serious enough and left to the phenomenologists, mostly particle physicists in my impression. Lisa Randall's book tells the story. They were, and still are, however very popular among string theorists as something to point to when asked about experimental evidence. In the last some years that hasSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-7247170110915868882011-06-14T12:02:45.398-04:002011-06-14T12:02:45.398-04:00These scenarios were never popular among string th...These scenarios were never popular among string theorists as far as I know. Even the famous GKP paper, which reproduced the basic features of the RS model within String theory, became popular not because of the large hierarchy it introduced but because it stabilized the complex structure moduli via flux compactifications.Giotishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03594944884584261018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-77585145061405655102011-06-14T03:12:04.576-04:002011-06-14T03:12:04.576-04:00Hi Eric,
"There is no need to get snotty... ...Hi Eric,<br /><br />"There is no need to get snotty... for a narcistic person like you..."<br /><br />It's called projection. <br /><br />I have noticed you seem to believe that your comments have something to do with my recent paper. I thought I would do you a favor not correcting you, but see now that it was a mistake. What I wrote in the paper has nothing, I repeat, absolutely Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-58152223365115735562011-06-14T02:29:18.172-04:002011-06-14T02:29:18.172-04:00Bee,
There is no need to get snotty. I have never ...Bee,<br />There is no need to get snotty. I have never once in all my time seen you give credit to a commenter here on a technical matter that actually helped you. I know for a fact that I have helped you on occasion but have never received acknowledgment by you. In fact usually I can tell when I've helped by your silence. Stealing credit is what it called. You take ideas from commenters Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08213251864943443334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-36731336063573450402011-06-14T02:04:36.447-04:002011-06-14T02:04:36.447-04:00Hi Eric,
I've heard this story like ten milli...Hi Eric,<br /><br />I've heard this story like ten million times as a comment to other people's seminars. Still, I have no clue what you're trying to say. Look, I don't mean to be annoying, I'm just saying if you have an idea, write it up, do the maths, publish it. Having ideas isn't the difficult part. It's bringing them in a useful form that is. And my blog btw isn&#Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69843382853443474132011-06-14T01:35:55.776-04:002011-06-14T01:35:55.776-04:00"I'm afraid I don't actually understa..."I'm afraid I don't actually understand what you mean. In case you mean that the size of the extra-dimensions might be position-dependent, I think that's been looked into in a few papers. Don't think you learn very much from it though, it just makes matters more complicated. "<br /><br />Bee, did you ever hear the story about the guy (gal) who lost one of his (her) Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08213251864943443334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86260664586818518972011-06-13T10:02:09.422-04:002011-06-13T10:02:09.422-04:00Zephir: Enough now. This is the first and last war...Zephir: Enough now. This is the first and last warning.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82017412440029888692011-06-13T10:01:28.663-04:002011-06-13T10:01:28.663-04:00What all these missintepretations have in common:
...What all these missintepretations have in common:<br /><br />1) The contempoary physics is driven with formally thinking people (the articles without formal models aren't even alowed in many peer-reviewed journals). But the math is strictly schematic language, it doesn't allow dual persperctive of problem solution, which would make such solution fuzzy<br /><br /><br />2) Physicists are Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86157988906252840392011-06-13T09:45:36.707-04:002011-06-13T09:45:36.707-04:00For example, the string theorists are seeking for ...For example, the string theorists are seeking for extradimensions too with violation of inverse square law of gravity force. If they met with electrostatic force during their experiment, they will eliminate it for not to interfere their measurements. If they find Casimir force, they eliminate it too from the same reason - because they just want to measure "only the gravitational effect"Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60029440266445001492011-06-13T09:39:37.890-04:002011-06-13T09:39:37.890-04:00The whole discussion is about the lack of evidence...The whole discussion is about the lack of evidence of extradimensions at the case of LHC collisions. But what actually prohibits the physicists to consider the jet suppression as an evidence of such extradimensions? The jet suppression has been observed before many years already.<br /><br />The whole problem is, it can be explain with dispersion of quarks inside of quark-gluon condensate, too. Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-18813319710254218782011-06-13T09:28:46.955-04:002011-06-13T09:28:46.955-04:00Isn't it a bit suspicious, the physicists ofte...Isn't it a bit suspicious, the physicists often recognize some phenomena just after years of grants spent into it? We discussed it at the case of extradimensions and dark matter strings in connections of dark matter structures, but here are many other examples? What prohibits physicists to consider CMBR noise as a gravitational waves, extradimensions as a dispersive effects, the atom nuclei Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-50904508832839819162011-06-13T05:55:50.831-04:002011-06-13T05:55:50.831-04:00Zephir: If you want to voice an opinion, I am sure...Zephir: If you want to voice an opinion, I am sure you are able to do it without calling other people imbecile. It seems a little... inappropriate. Best,<br /><br />B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69629667148898530022011-06-12T21:36:46.672-04:002011-06-12T21:36:46.672-04:00I humbly make two requests.
1. When scientists di...I humbly make two requests.<br /><br />1. When scientists discuss purely speculative hypotheses or entities, i.e., those for which there is not yet a shread of empirical evidence, would they please not speak of these speculations as if they were well-tested facts? This appeal is directed to the entire scientific community.<br /><br />2. I beseech the Great God of Hockey to smile upon the Boston Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-28148163582262071442011-06-12T09:09:38.719-04:002011-06-12T09:09:38.719-04:00The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea?:)Logically?
That...The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea?:)Logically?<br /><br />That one might graduate to an NBody problem shows a graduation of a kind? Kind of like a "geometrically enhanced view?" Like a jump from euclidean to non-euclidean?<br /><br />Maybe Navier would be happy to know "the vortex" can be applied in "two cases" not just one:)<br /><br /> Viscosity relativistically, mayPlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-13313199863230323312011-06-12T08:59:41.931-04:002011-06-12T08:59:41.931-04:00Hi Michael,
Sorry, I meant N >= N_min, though ...Hi Michael,<br /><br />Sorry, I meant N >= N_min, though in some cases it's also N>N_min. Take the figure I've used in this post and the uppermost dotted line for M_D=1.5TeV, M_BH^min=3TeV, n =6. In the table, N_min for that case =3, ie if N_min is the number of particles in the final decay, and the hole makes only the final decay, these events should be missing. So why is there a Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82132584790249101032011-06-12T07:56:31.922-04:002011-06-12T07:56:31.922-04:00Hi Bee,
I'm rather sure that N_min is a cut t...Hi Bee,<br /><br />I'm rather sure that N_min is a cut that the experimenters place on the observed multiplicity N (the sum of the numbers of jets, leptons and photons). Please note, though, that the cut is N >= N_min, not N > N_min, according to the caption in Table 1 and second-to-last paragraph on page 7. So the case that you have in mind, N = N_min, is included in the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-26610104637641198482011-06-12T05:50:02.518-04:002011-06-12T05:50:02.518-04:00Hi Bee,
Thanks for the explanative update and com...Hi Bee,<br /><br />Thanks for the explanative update and comments. It seems that for many quantum gravity researchers the news hasn’t been good for a while. That is invariance doesn’t seem to vary, dimensions resist being expanded and black holes won’t come out to play;-) That is the Paradigm shift that many are looking for stubbornly refuses to happen. <br /><br />Perhaps this has a physical Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-15930582418279224362011-06-12T01:44:54.723-04:002011-06-12T01:44:54.723-04:00Hi Michael,
Thanks. No, now I'm even more con...Hi Michael,<br /><br />Thanks. No, now I'm even more confused. I thought the parameter N_min is a parameter that goes into the MC simulation and I thought it must have something to do with the number of particles in the final decay, which is usually a parameter that has to be set in these codes. (In CHARYBDIS, it's called NBODY.) <br /><br />My confusion is this: from some simulations I&#Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-8294760025302168902011-06-12T01:37:34.313-04:002011-06-12T01:37:34.313-04:00Hi Exl Blogger,
Sorry, I don't know what char...Hi Exl Blogger,<br /><br />Sorry, I don't know what chart you're talking about? Best,<br /><br />B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-24405694706987876482011-06-12T01:36:32.168-04:002011-06-12T01:36:32.168-04:00Hi Eric,
I'm afraid I don't actually unde...Hi Eric,<br /><br />I'm afraid I don't actually understand what you mean. In case you mean that the size of the extra-dimensions might be position-dependent, I think that's been looked into in a few papers. Don't think you learn very much from it though, it just makes matters more complicated. Best,<br /><br />B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.com