tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post4062897155578494036..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Science Marketing needs Consumer FeedbackSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-47424364521962042422013-11-07T15:48:42.708-05:002013-11-07T15:48:42.708-05:00"Does Mr. Helbig have any idea how many order...<i>"Does Mr. Helbig have any idea how many orders of magnitude are involved in guesses about WIMP masses?"</i><br /><br />Huge difference: You are claiming that something which has been detected (your free-floating planets) are the dark matter but can't back it up with any numbers. Sure, people are looking for WIMPs, but also looking for other things which could be the dark matter.Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-33341235776929155142013-11-06T21:50:45.115-05:002013-11-06T21:50:45.115-05:00Jim Baggott's new book, Farewell To Reality, s...<br />Jim Baggott's new book, Farewell To Reality, says it all in a polite and a well-informed manner.<br /><br />We are clearly in the pseudo-science era.<br /><br />Let's hope it does not last as long as the Ptolemaic paradigm did.Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-8018715836271881612013-11-06T20:21:24.283-05:002013-11-06T20:21:24.283-05:00@Robert L. Oldershaw,
http://news.sciencemag.org/...@Robert L. Oldershaw,<br /><br />http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2013/11/live-chat-does-dark-matter-consist-weird-particles-called-axions<br /><br />Science has become a Craig's List escort service. Three orthogonal votes of no confidence against Tully-Fisherinos: arXiv:1310.8214, 1306.5534, 1306.3983. Put Wesley Crusher in charge of Particle Particulars. <br /><br />http://Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-62609900561584399722013-11-06T11:24:04.100-05:002013-11-06T11:24:04.100-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-64815475908873736632013-11-06T11:23:02.202-05:002013-11-06T11:23:02.202-05:00Does Mr. Helbig have any idea how many orders of m...<br />Does Mr. Helbig have any idea how many orders of magnitude are involved in guesses about WIMP masses?<br /><br />Are new ways of thinking anathema to Mr. Helbig's belief system?<br /><br />Is an astrophysical answer to the dark matter problem unacceptable?<br /><br />Is particle dark matter the only game in town?Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-55751799977555817702013-11-06T09:51:26.308-05:002013-11-06T09:51:26.308-05:00Meanwhile 100 billion to 1,000 trillion unbound pl...<i>Meanwhile 100 billion to 1,000 trillion unbound planetary-mass nomad objects roaming around the Galaxy only rate a "ho hum".</i><br /><br />That estimate spans an awesome 4 orders of magnitude. If you don't know how many there are any better than that, what do you know?<br /><br />Nevertheless, the question at hand is what objects have a total mass (that is what matters, not thePhillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-30466096117281575912013-11-05T20:08:57.782-05:002013-11-05T20:08:57.782-05:00Speaking of science marketing, the WIMP salespeopl...Speaking of science marketing, the WIMP salespeople have done an amazing job.<br /><br />They have sold stock in the pot of WIMPs at the end of the rainbow to nearly everyone.<br /><br />Meanwhile 100 billion to 1,000 trillion unbound planetary-mass nomad objects roaming around the Galaxy only rate a "ho hum".<br /><br />Way to go!Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61212036524344705272013-11-02T09:27:52.476-04:002013-11-02T09:27:52.476-04:00Unknown,
Selecting first for scientific quality a...Unknown,<br /><br />Selecting first for scientific quality and then selecting second for marketing skills to narrow down isn't what's happening in reality. You notice people or products by marketing first, and then second you look at the quality, or how well they fit your needs. My point is that this means you'll a) entirely miss those people who lack marketing irrespective of how Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69353042002432264062013-11-01T11:15:09.279-04:002013-11-01T11:15:09.279-04:00Scientists should always strive to speak "tru...Scientists should always strive to speak "truth to power" but they should not hesitate to speak, when they don't (public) perception drifts off course, we end up with climate denial, unfounded fear of radiation, etc. Keith Woodwardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01415941663527940986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44380557910967397382013-11-01T07:48:33.251-04:002013-11-01T07:48:33.251-04:00Bee,
what I was trying to say is that after you h...Bee,<br /><br />what I was trying to say is that after you have selected only things that work, using your words, you still need to do further selection, because resources are limited. This further selection is necessarily subjective, as the selection of a candy bar. We'll put money in a new space telescope or in a super linear collider? Assuming that these two ventures are both good scienceUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11453264117086069974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-24714759317013027662013-11-01T06:57:17.131-04:002013-11-01T06:57:17.131-04:00Unknown,
You missed my point. I'm not saying ...Unknown,<br /><br />You missed my point. I'm not saying that science *is* not marketed like a candy bar, I'm saying it *shouldn't* be marketed like a candy bar because it defies the purpose. Science is supposed to deliver an objective assessment on whether we "need" some particular study or research in the sense of how promising it is. Marketing skews this assessment. That&#Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1040186100128357452013-11-01T06:37:10.000-04:002013-11-01T06:37:10.000-04:00The main point in marketing is not making the cust...The main point in marketing is not making the customer to believe that the product is good, but making him believe he needs the product. In "research marketing" I think that the goal is to get funds against equally good research, trying to convince the guys with the money that this particular research is somehow better for them. In this sense I think thats not so different from a candy Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11453264117086069974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60334054098670693722013-11-01T06:10:57.746-04:002013-11-01T06:10:57.746-04:00Joseph,
I agree with you. The core of the problem...Joseph,<br /><br />I agree with you. The core of the problem I think is again that we conflate the process with the product. On the one hand, as I mentioned in my post, this has the consequence that people are getting hired not for how good they do science but for how interesting they topics that they work on currently are. Of course that is correlated to some extent, which is why the system Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-25854444857067658712013-11-01T06:00:48.614-04:002013-11-01T06:00:48.614-04:00Thomas,
No, you misunderstand me. What I mean wit...Thomas,<br /><br />No, you misunderstand me. What I mean with "independent" is performed by people who have no stakes in the outcome. You cannot test everything by experiment, because most often the whole point of a theoretical paper is to convince somebody to invest money into doing the experiment in the first place. Best,<br /><br />B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69638792735299896242013-11-01T03:44:38.222-04:002013-11-01T03:44:38.222-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.MarkusMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03431499396962852389noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-76394835619775449972013-10-31T21:20:24.535-04:002013-10-31T21:20:24.535-04:00I think the problem is deeper and even less extric...I think the problem is deeper and even less extricable than this blog post lets on. If comments on the arxiv were enabled tomorrow, and we could post short comments on new papers, I doubt anyone interested in staying in physics theory would post anything. Especially if a critical comment were correct, I would expect the authors to be embarrassed -- unnecessarily in a perfect scientific community,Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13983816158107789491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-66385731119638125632013-10-31T19:13:59.513-04:002013-10-31T19:13:59.513-04:00/* scientific knowledge is eventually either right.../* scientific knowledge is eventually either right or wrong */<br /><br />In AWT it just depends on the observational perspective. For example, for observer inside of gravity field of black hole the space-time is curved and the speed of light is invariant, but for observer outside of it the space-time appears flat and it's the speed and the path of light, which is variable there. Both Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-67610060181093334202013-10-31T17:11:45.256-04:002013-10-31T17:11:45.256-04:00http://luxdarkmatter.org/papers/LUX_First_Results_...http://luxdarkmatter.org/papers/LUX_First_Results_2013.pdf<br />arxiv:1310.8214; 1306.5534, 1306.3983<br /><br />Fire them for ruining expansively indeterminate theory. Rescue dark matter with Yukawa potential alpha-lambda fraud. Meanwhile, 26.8 mass-% of the CMB universe vanished on 30 October 2013. The Tully-Fisher relation lost its Tully-Fisherinos. Do a geometric Eötvös experiment to Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3537924549913959952013-10-31T13:45:02.831-04:002013-10-31T13:45:02.831-04:00"Independent product tests" = experiment..."Independent product tests" = experiments.<br /><br />Rule out supersymmetry almost certainly, and all other kinds of BSM physics much stronger than that.<br /><br />Companies that score poorly in independent product tests tend to obscure that fact. Not surprisingly, theorical physicists tend to behave in the same way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com