tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post7426207206993929479..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Models and TheoriesSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-22455172905053944812008-04-14T15:31:00.000-04:002008-04-14T15:31:00.000-04:00Bee:Setting aside our differences in the appropria...Bee:<BR/><BR/>Setting aside our differences in the appropriate use of "model" and "theory", all the concepts; idea, speculation, hypothesis, theory and law of nature are conceptual sketches that our minds put together, usually out of words and/or symbols, to try to communicate something about a sensory perception, or a set of sensory perceptions 'of reality' to others.<BR/><BR/>By their natures, Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-46825841504178019712008-04-12T16:02:00.000-04:002008-04-12T16:02:00.000-04:00Oh Bee, more on that point hereOh Bee, more on that point <A HREF="http://eskesthai.blogspot.com/2008/04/determinismindeterminism.html?showComment=1208028660000#comment-c6117247222800184998" REL="nofollow" TITLE="Determinism/Indeterminism">here</A>PlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-38069912657224128092008-04-12T15:56:00.000-04:002008-04-12T15:56:00.000-04:00Alain ConnesWhere a dictionary proceeds in a circu...<B>Alain Connes</B><BR/><BR/><I>Where a dictionary proceeds in a circular manner, defining a word by reference to another, the basic concepts of mathematics are infinitely closer to an indecomposable element", a kind of elementary particle" of thought with a minimal amount of ambiguity in their definition.</I><BR/><BR/>My central Theme on my blog site is on "How theories are born in mind?" This PlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-52030018223249012572008-04-12T10:33:00.000-04:002008-04-12T10:33:00.000-04:00Hi Plato,Well, even after re-reading your comments...Hi Plato,<BR/><BR/>Well, even after re-reading your comments I am sorry, but I still don't understand your question. The essential content of the post is what the figures show that I've included, the rest is plenty of examples. If even these figures are too much, then how about mind-mapping it as <BR/><BR/>Real World out There ---- [Theory] ----> Model<BR/><BR/>That's it. The only thing I've beenSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-87247555677476015212008-04-10T10:32:00.000-04:002008-04-10T10:32:00.000-04:00Hi Plato: Sorry I am presently somewhat short on t...Hi Plato: Sorry I am presently somewhat short on time, I will come back to it. - B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-66703376050643158892008-04-09T13:53:00.000-04:002008-04-09T13:53:00.000-04:00In terms of drawing in html with key board. make s...In terms of drawing in html with key board. make sure you use greater and less signs then beside the br signs. I had to removerthe brackets because this blog format in comments will not allow br in them.<BR/><BR/>br Probabiltiesbr (The Fifth Dimension)br |br |br Idea of the pipebrPlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-20204435823882684572008-04-09T11:22:00.000-04:002008-04-09T11:22:00.000-04:00Oh, click on the "image itself" and it will go big...Oh, click on the "image itself" and it will go bigger, so you can read the wordings. That's for those who are more inclined to look further at Numerical relativity with interest.PlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-56031390846041813522008-04-09T11:18:00.000-04:002008-04-09T11:18:00.000-04:00Bee:If you don't understand it, it would help if y...<B>Bee</B>:<I>If you don't understand it, it would help if you could ask a more specific question.</I><BR/><BR/>Okay, lets say in context of "Numerical relativity and human experience" we understand "<A HREF="http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/Expo/NumRel2B.gif" REL="nofollow">this map</A>?"<BR/><BR/>While one can learn to draw using "pre" in the blog entires, such drawings I linked too, in my PlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-91280816410960991822008-04-09T09:02:00.000-04:002008-04-09T09:02:00.000-04:00Hi Phil,Yes, from what I gather I'd say I am more ...Hi Phil,<BR/><BR/>Yes, from what I gather I'd say I am more philosophically inclined than Lisa, but hard to say since I don't know her (I am never sure how accurate the public profile of a person actually is.) I liked her book better than Greene's though. I think I never finished the latter. (I'm not actually entirely sure why since Greene's was without doubt better written. It just left me withSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-55831879340695835882008-04-09T08:52:00.000-04:002008-04-09T08:52:00.000-04:00Hi Plato,My apologies. I've tried to be as clear a...Hi Plato,<BR/><BR/>My apologies. I've tried to be as clear as I can in what I wrote above. If you don't understand it, it would help if you could ask a more specific question. Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-64603456746030408872008-04-09T08:51:00.000-04:002008-04-09T08:51:00.000-04:00Dr Who,You completely, totally, utterly misunderst...Dr Who,<BR/><BR/>You completely, totally, utterly misunderstand me. I know you've been following this blog for a longer time so by now you should have realized that what you say has nothing to do with what I think. What I am saying is that for science that is as speculative as ours to work optimally there should ideally not be external influence of any kind, but this *is* de facto the case. The Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-14836191732213596852008-04-08T23:13:00.000-04:002008-04-08T23:13:00.000-04:00Hi Neil,“It just doesn't follow from the suspect t...Hi Neil,<BR/><BR/>“It just doesn't follow from the suspect theory to doubt the phenomenon, but doubting it is the tempting psychological reflex in such cases.”<BR/><BR/><BR/>Yes, the theory that the moon is made of cheese, does not disprove the existence of the moon; and yet the moon being real lends no validity or significance to cheese. On the other hand, if the cheese it required to have the Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-17981642068828011982008-04-08T23:04:00.000-04:002008-04-08T23:04:00.000-04:00It is nice to see the train of thought commentors ...It is nice to see the train of thought commentors are leaving for consideration.<BR/><BR/>Bee,<BR/><BR/>I am having trouble digesting your "mind map." So many words your using, it leaves a certain ambiguity with what you are actually saying. Could be my denseness.:) <BR/><BR/>Can you "map" how you would have assigned "model" "theory" "Hypothesis." I would think this would be much more "clear and PlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-24699402427863868292008-04-08T22:55:00.000-04:002008-04-08T22:55:00.000-04:00Bee said: "and this trend goes on the expenses of ...Bee said: "and this trend goes on the expenses of 'real' science."<BR/><BR/>I don't understand this. Suppose you install some kind of dictatorship which declares that no leading journal will ever again accept a paper on [insert name of field that you don't like HERE]. Do you really think that this will benefit "real" science, whatever that is? How *exactly* is that going to work? <BR/><BR/>Put itAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-33570170350024779782008-04-08T22:08:00.000-04:002008-04-08T22:08:00.000-04:00Often overlooked and misused is that when believer...Often overlooked and misused is that when believers in a phenomenon have a bad (or seemingly bad) explanatory theory, it doesn't really cast doubt on the phenomenon. For example, traditional practitioners of acupuncture had "strange" theories of why it worked. That instinctively leads us to doubt the efficacy, but consider: Suppose that somehow, it is found that a certain practice works. The Neil Bateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04564859009749481136noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69774993734152982012008-04-08T21:17:00.000-04:002008-04-08T21:17:00.000-04:00I think I went on Perimeter Institute's website an...I think I went on Perimeter Institute's website and Lee Smolin was not listed. Maybe I just missed it or something. Anyway thanks for the tip about his lectures! I'll definately take them in.Edhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16562010882893542878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-23249321021232120382008-04-08T21:00:00.000-04:002008-04-08T21:00:00.000-04:00Hi Bee,I’m glad you found the article of interest....Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>I’m glad you found the article of interest. I guess I have subscribed to Discover since it came out and although it’s not intended to give one an in depth understanding of anything, it does serve quite well as say the news magazine of science. You say you agree with Lisa on the religious aspect of things, which I suspect you would. What I was more referring to was the why Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-21090650890521262522008-04-08T19:14:00.000-04:002008-04-08T19:14:00.000-04:00A very interesting point about string theory is it...A very interesting point about string theory is its "uplifting" from a theory of mesons to a theory of Planck scale. Such radical change does not fit in the scenary of the post, where a theory seems to be linked to specific phenomena to be explained.Alejandro Riverohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16181521111080562335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86912856196835568362008-04-08T15:54:00.000-04:002008-04-08T15:54:00.000-04:00Hi Marty, Andrew,I agree with Marty. It's more com...Hi Marty, Andrew,<BR/><BR/>I agree with Marty. It's more complicated than people just wanting to be the first to find the TOE. That I could understand. There are many people who know damned well what they do is so far off reality or the possibility to ever be testable in their lifetime (and longer) is basically non-existent that there has to be some other reason. Part of this I think is just Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75523497146073150332008-04-08T15:32:00.000-04:002008-04-08T15:32:00.000-04:00Hi Andrew,You mentioned,I just think it's human na...Hi Andrew,<BR/><BR/>You mentioned,<BR/><BR/><I>I just think it's human nature: every scientist would love to be the one that discovers the "Theory of Everything", and parallel universe theories offer a shortcut to achieving this</I><BR/><BR/>You are probably right that this motivates some people. But there are plenty of people working on very speculative ideas which have no hope of having a hugeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10892084553337105892008-04-08T10:49:00.000-04:002008-04-08T10:49:00.000-04:00Andrew: regarding the why and the how. What I mean...Andrew: regarding the why and the how. What I mean is answering a question without providing a mechanism (the 'how') isn't sufficient. I could tell you I think the parameters of the standard model are what they are because they maximize complexity, that's an answer to the 'why' but that's not sufficient, because the 'how' isn't clarified. To make this a scientifically useful approach one would Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82353647049667889862008-04-08T10:37:00.000-04:002008-04-08T10:37:00.000-04:00Hi Phil,Thanks for the link to the interview, whic...Hi Phil,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the link to the interview, which I hadn't read before. Well regarding what she says about religion, it goes very well with me. Actually, the very first answer (<I>Later I decided that just doing math would drive me crazy. I'd be up all night working on a problem, and I thought, "I can't live the rest of my life like this." [Laughs] I wanted something more connected toSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-70898601871668771492008-04-08T06:43:00.000-04:002008-04-08T06:43:00.000-04:00Hi Andrew,Yes that’s precisely what I mean, that s...Hi Andrew,<BR/><BR/>Yes that’s precisely what I mean, that science should not give up on what are for the most part the small whys? Something like Darwin with “why” is life so diverse and ever changing, answering it is nature’s best method to assure continuance within an ever changing environment. Another being Einstein’s revelation, that it is with the recognition of time being a dimension Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-53289986672845846342008-04-08T05:41:00.000-04:002008-04-08T05:41:00.000-04:00Hi Marty, I just think it's human nature: every sc...Hi Marty, I just think it's human nature: every scientist would love to be the one that discovers the "Theory of Everything", and parallel universe theories offer a shortcut to achieving this: <I>"Why are the physical constants apparently fine-tuned? The physical constants are set to different random values in each universe. Hence, Theory of Everything. Problem solved."</I><BR/><BR/>However, Andrew Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03852211910001840777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82904987497691387302008-04-08T05:12:00.000-04:002008-04-08T05:12:00.000-04:00Hi Bee,You asked,Tell me where all the 'speculatio...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>You asked,<BR/><BR/><I>Tell me where all the 'speculations' about unparticles, extra dimensions, time travel, parallel universes, or all other kinds of more or less unmotivated modifications of our theories come from for which we have no observational evidence whatsoever?</I><BR/><BR/>That is a good question, but since I don't claim to have the answers I'll just give my Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com