tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post1817811684204889381..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Check your BiasesSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger78125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-53806341325483474442021-06-08T04:39:30.434-04:002021-06-08T04:39:30.434-04:00Same here. She's an excellent source.Same here. She's an excellent source.C Thompsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723392308309671498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-16088589777412752282021-06-08T02:39:39.729-04:002021-06-08T02:39:39.729-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Mr. Jonathan Camphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06001639663507984948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-45681069142325405742021-06-08T02:30:02.778-04:002021-06-08T02:30:02.778-04:00You forgot the "Sabine Hossenfelder Bias.&quo...You forgot the "Sabine Hossenfelder Bias." That's the one where people like me hold off judgement on something, e.g., the Muon G-2, until we know what Sabine thinks of it.Mr. Jonathan Camphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06001639663507984948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-71865175911771922382020-07-17T09:09:36.267-04:002020-07-17T09:09:36.267-04:00Thanks a lot Sabine for raising your head, risking...Thanks a lot Sabine for raising your head, risking yourself but challenging the top predator of scientific food chain i.e. Particle physics community. That have a very high image of themselves as being an elite force of science. But your book adequately demonstrates where these string theorists are going wrong. May the force be with you in this endeavourFishyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02553705512617156768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3532932821442180912019-03-16T10:30:39.541-04:002019-03-16T10:30:39.541-04:00No, it is not silly. Without an FCC, most particle...No, it is not silly. Without an FCC, most particle physicists that would have worked on it would then have to, like other college professors, have to write proposals, get grants, and be otherwise far less financially secure. Not to mention they might have to teach, eating up 2/3 of their time to work on research.<br /><br />This is a function of collective action; like a hundred men of a village Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10551964396427981262019-03-15T19:41:58.409-04:002019-03-15T19:41:58.409-04:00most particle physicists will be paid if they buil...most particle physicists will be paid if they build an FCC or not and continue to travel if it gets built or not. So that is just silly. They would just work on another experiment. No - she is getting rich from spending her time attacking people. kbot3000https://www.blogger.com/profile/10317243829166183481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-34854142470057583022019-03-09T18:10:37.272-05:002019-03-09T18:10:37.272-05:00In this case, the groupthink will have to be overc...In this case, the groupthink will have to be overcome by demonstrable practical utility. When you've had to change your name like ValueJet, to try to make people forget that you crashed and burned, you have a big hump to get over.Archimedes218https://www.blogger.com/profile/12242764583554426760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-72571132978020484512019-03-09T15:51:24.935-05:002019-03-09T15:51:24.935-05:00Perhaps the most fundamental and important cogniti...Perhaps the most fundamental and important cognitive bias is believing that you are right and the person disagreeing with you is wrong and, subordinate to that, believing that the reason you're right and they cannot be is that YOU have reached your conclusion based on a careful and rational examination of the evidence, while THEY somehow have not.<br /><br />But the truth is, that of all the Archimedes218https://www.blogger.com/profile/12242764583554426760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10787204621085311372019-03-09T00:09:37.249-05:002019-03-09T00:09:37.249-05:00Axil,
"Why can't solid state physics be ...Axil,<br /><br /><i>"Why can't solid state physics be used to develop tools to explore the basic fabric of nature?"</i><br /><br />Roughly speaking because solid state physics probes an entirely wrong regime of parameter space. Maybe there are ways that it can be done, but I do not know of any. So, I am afraid, this idea is not a workable route. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-74955016060315088422019-03-08T20:08:43.778-05:002019-03-08T20:08:43.778-05:00As an outsider, I can recognize the origin of Sabi...As an outsider, I can recognize the origin of Sabine's options about the lack of creativity and imagination that currently exists in particle physics. Why is a particle accelerator the only tool that can inform how particles behave?<br /><br />Why can't solid state physics be used to develop tools to explore the basic fabric of nature?<br /><br />Recently for example, currents of chiral Axilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-58771283063345783312019-03-07T19:23:28.141-05:002019-03-07T19:23:28.141-05:00Late entry to the debate but there's an articl...Late entry to the debate but there's an article titled "Why science needs philosophy" published a couple of days ago in the Proceedings Of The National Association of Sciences (USA):<br /><br />https://www.pnas.org/content/116/10/3948RGThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07140943290963588247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-813654378813363592019-03-07T11:45:16.730-05:002019-03-07T11:45:16.730-05:00An excellent article dealing with the state of LEN...An excellent article dealing with the state of LENR today. See:<br /><br />https://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2019/03/icebergs-in-the-room-cold-fusion-at-thirty.html<br /><br />Dr Huw Price is a scientist/Philosopher who has overcome the group think pervasive in science.<br /><br />Huw Price is Bertrand Russell Professor of Philosophy and a Fellow of Trinity College at the University of Axilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-43923807068369178332019-03-07T11:43:57.378-05:002019-03-07T11:43:57.378-05:00While it could be true that almost no engineer rem...While it could be true that almost no engineer remembers almost anything of all the many questionable things they’ve learned, certainly all the physicists in the all the world holding all encyclopedic knowledge of it cannot now resolve our esteemed host’s problem: "Why do we still not know what dark matter is made of?”; else there’d be a grain of wheat in that googol of chaff. So it might Emmette Davidsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15566381168125492666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3791014285665649382019-03-06T09:51:08.594-05:002019-03-06T09:51:08.594-05:00I note there appears to be a lot of Anchoring Bias...I note there appears to be a lot of Anchoring Bias in a lot of subjects. Especially because before everyone has learned the math of a subject, one had already accepted the narrative, which will become a problem unless the narrative is an absolutely accurate translation of the math.<br /><br />Alone, this could be fixed in a discussion, but in its "armed with science" variant, things getAmbi Valenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03488247852564879628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88429994803162165972019-03-06T06:57:03.321-05:002019-03-06T06:57:03.321-05:00Emmette Davidson asked me:"Mightn’t implicit ...Emmette Davidson asked me:"Mightn’t implicit understandings of the fundamentals of Einstein’s gravity and Noether’s theorem from before their formalizations yet be of worth?" Hmmm... I'm not sure I understand your point. If you're suggesting that engineers understand those concepts, they don't. (I've known some very, very bright engineers, but they're not PhysicistDavehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11111405959451703182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-12997384287130693822019-03-06T06:47:46.835-05:002019-03-06T06:47:46.835-05:00Arshad,
Of course I have biases. I strive hard to...Arshad,<br /><br />Of course I have biases. I strive hard to avoid them. Please let me know what mistake you think I made and I will correct it. <br /><br />I cannot recall Gell-Man reviewing my book. Do you by any chance mean Glashow? Different guy, that. In case that's what you are referring to, I did not "nit-pick", I simply pointed out that the review contains mistakes and Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-63843506423000346692019-03-06T06:33:58.318-05:002019-03-06T06:33:58.318-05:00It's ironic that your own bias against particl...It's ironic that your own bias against particle physics makes many of your arguments hyperbolic and obtuse to those of us who are not in either camp.<br /><br />Murray Gell-Man is his review of your book had some good points to make, whereas your response was nit-picky and overly defensive. Arshad Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17203682655590941193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-35482193422017952602019-03-05T17:15:35.379-05:002019-03-05T17:15:35.379-05:00@kbot: I think the physicists advocating for a big...@kbot: I think the physicists advocating for a bigger collider will profit a whole lot more than Dr. Hossenfelder will profit from her book. They will profit in the form of years of salary and other perks, like paid travel expenses to conferences, as a result of getting the collider funded. That would likely be several hundred thousand US$ each over the life of the new collider, and likely tens Dr. A.M. Castaldohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17988116835722393503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-23394562066266347122019-03-05T12:01:50.689-05:002019-03-05T12:01:50.689-05:00Bias does have positive influences along with nega...Bias does have positive influences along with negative however, scientists need to make a much greater effort to understand how much more their work is influenced by it then they realize. It causes them to be unaware their scientific method is corrupted by their own subjectivity.<br /><br />The solution is not to point fingers at others but to be more honest with ourselves.Louis Tagliaferrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16698865662162457632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51963177920067411942019-03-05T10:46:59.891-05:002019-03-05T10:46:59.891-05:00“But how do these assorted worthies make their dec...“But how do these assorted worthies make their decisions? I know lots of engineers, ranging from civil engineers to EEs. Almost none of them remembers almost anything from their very basic QM course: I've found that they do not even know that energy conservation in QM is basically resonance. They certainly have no concept at all of how superstring theory works, of preons or technicolor, of Emmette Davidsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15566381168125492666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-80854462763790699942019-03-05T07:00:47.474-05:002019-03-05T07:00:47.474-05:00@Dr. AM Castaldo
I totally agree. Simply dismissin...@Dr. AM Castaldo<br />I totally agree. Simply dismissing Wegener was not the right thing to do. However, this story is so often framed in the "dogmatic scientists simply disregarded the obvious explanation" that I always feel the need to counter this impression.MartinBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439162869843258149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82788977360349904282019-03-05T05:09:20.651-05:002019-03-05T05:09:20.651-05:00Bias can be good, e.g., the probability of success...Bias can be good, e.g., the probability of success of a line of research times the probability that you will be the one to first to succeed in that line is a priori low, and still people conduct research. Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-54660369559052247002019-03-05T04:59:25.022-05:002019-03-05T04:59:25.022-05:00RGT said, "We could argue that only these bod...RGT said, "We could argue that only these bodies are 'qualified' to make a judgement on funding. And, as I pointed out previously, for the UK the responsible body comprises a selection of scientists, engineers and civil servants the majority (or possibly all) of whom have no financial interest..."<br /><br />Well, I take your point, but <i>how</i> do these assorted worthies makePhysicistDavehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11111405959451703182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-68482115847624149342019-03-04T23:50:27.907-05:002019-03-04T23:50:27.907-05:00kbot,
I did not "declare the entire field of...kbot,<br /><br />I did not "declare the entire field of particle physics a failure". That's nonsense which you have fabricated.<br /><br />You claim that I have personally attacked someone. Please produce an example for this claim.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-16256690516861777972019-03-04T20:55:53.220-05:002019-03-04T20:55:53.220-05:00i don't think anyone has a problem with arguin...i don't think anyone has a problem with arguing if we should build a new super higher energy collider. There is a legitimate discussion as to if it makes more sense to go after more indirect ways of probing the universe. I think the problem is when you publicly decide to declare the entire field of particle physics a failure and come close to accusing them of lying to the public for personal kbot3000https://www.blogger.com/profile/10317243829166183481noreply@blogger.com