tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post5163053513453841904..comments2021-06-20T17:43:21.836-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: What do physicists mean when they say the laws of nature are beautiful?Sabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-78763523615886405392018-06-25T14:37:59.453-04:002018-06-25T14:37:59.453-04:00I think an important aspect of beauty that is actu...I think an important aspect of beauty that is actually a valid guideline for physics, is that a physical description should be as free as possible from arbitrary choices that are made by us humans to provide for a description. Usually this means being closer to the "Copernican principle" that the world is less centred around you and that if you make a choice at a point in space time (Rogier Brusseehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09202922971663241521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-67317166965212365802018-06-05T09:56:56.943-04:002018-06-05T09:56:56.943-04:00"Huh? You're speaking as a mathematician?..."Huh? You're speaking as a mathematician?"<br /><br />t h ray, are you surprised that the examples I gave were from physics rather than mathematics? Well, it is hard (in my opinion impossible) to find an example of ugly in mathematics.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06098439870046873701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-43013939329925977762018-06-02T07:37:15.234-04:002018-06-02T07:37:15.234-04:00Surely the idea of beauty, as applied to a physica...Surely the idea of beauty, as applied to a physical theory, only makes sense if it is assumed that you are looking at the fundamental theory. Unless that is the case, ugly equations are the norm.<br /><br />For example, I was stunned as a teenager by the gas law equation PV=nRT - then I learned it is only an approximation, and more accurate, but vastly uglier equations do better!<br /><br />Is David Baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172248428321078417noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-11460630376881598242018-05-31T17:35:40.586-04:002018-05-31T17:35:40.586-04:00"For the multiverse, the disagreement is over..."For the multiverse, the disagreement is over whether throwing out an assumption counts as a simplification if you have to add it again later because otherwise you cannot describe our observations."<br /><br />I think you mean that the collapse postulate is removed, and then splitting is added later. Splitting is metaphorical. Splitting never happens. You don't need to know when or Patat Jehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01677169592055512438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51174624262612064952018-05-30T21:19:10.888-04:002018-05-30T21:19:10.888-04:00Mathematics is required , but the way it is done t...Mathematics is required , but the way it is done to do physics for funds and just survival is wrong. One can go to the screen in " The Man who knew infinity " where Professor Hardy tells S Ramanujan probably in the hospital " I want rigor Ramanujan" when Ramanujan writes the problem and just the right solution without the steps. Ramanujan responds well , he gives rigor Ramahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08335534368912718077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-77744492382058288262018-05-30T14:46:48.421-04:002018-05-30T14:46:48.421-04:00Bill,
"A beautiful equation is also one that...Bill,<br /><br />"A beautiful equation is also one that exhibits the fewest free parameters while explaining the most physics. That's why general relativity is beautiful while the Lagrangian of the Standard Model is ugly as hell."<br /><br />Well and compactly said.<br /><br />Space Time,<br /><br />" ... general relativity is beautiful, modified gravity is not. The orthodox t h rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00150085167540063914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61147654385695408602018-05-30T10:45:13.397-04:002018-05-30T10:45:13.397-04:00@The Universe Otto Stern’s measured proton magnet...@The Universe Otto Stern’s measured proton magnetic moment showed <b>the Dirac equation is empirically wrong</b> for composite particles. Nobel Prize.<br /><br />Stern's value was poor but sufficiently far from Dirac's calculated value. Current proton-antiproton values 1.5 ppb diverge re baryogenesis. One hour in a microwave rotational spectrometer measures overall vacuum chiral Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-24269244137841722622018-05-30T10:40:49.118-04:002018-05-30T10:40:49.118-04:00Space Time,
I don't know what you mean. Would...Space Time,<br /><br />I don't know what you mean. Would I have had a different view about beauty than Dirac? Presumably. Or a different view than presently? Probably not. Or else, I don't know what you mean. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-23962762526841758622018-05-30T09:19:31.953-04:002018-05-30T09:19:31.953-04:00I think one additional aspect (or may be you inclu...I think one additional aspect (or may be you include this with the "Surprise element" under elegance) is that beautiful theories use non-intuitive concepts to explain everyday experience.<br />Even Newton is rather non-intuitive (compared to Aristoteles). <br />GR explaining things falling down by time running slower close to a mass gives a totally weird-seeming explanation.<br /><br />MartinBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439162869843258149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-34733283036484981462018-05-30T08:30:20.579-04:002018-05-30T08:30:20.579-04:00John Duffield,
Dirac seems to be an example of ex...John Duffield,<br /><br />Dirac seems to be an example of exactly the opposite. Beauty was certainly a very important motivation for his work (one can argue it was the only one). And his contribution to physics is undeniable. <br /><br />Sabine, if you could have interviewed Dirac, would you have had a different view about beauty?<br /><br />(M,g)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06098439870046873701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-57520942018125891462018-05-30T07:39:09.601-04:002018-05-30T07:39:09.601-04:00My professor in mathematics used to qualify beauti...My professor in mathematics used to qualify beautiful equations as horny, because such equations are stimulating the faculty's survival. martenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02423871089614417690noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-7799920300137369282018-05-30T05:14:08.381-04:002018-05-30T05:14:08.381-04:00I think the elegance aspect has to do with the spa...I think the elegance aspect has to do with the sparseness of the description and its predictive power - one can get far more phenomena explained and flowing out without fudging than was put in; and preferably it happens in a way that is non-obvious and startlingmilkshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08188961610554710616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-83484866967491619502018-05-30T01:14:27.323-04:002018-05-30T01:14:27.323-04:00Hi all,
Regarding the comment issue, turns out it...Hi all,<br /><br />Regarding the comment issue, turns out it's not a problem with my blog, but a blogger-wide issue that will supposedly be fixed next week or such. (<a href="https://productforums.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/blogger/S6_75ktaHh4/p42QAlBoAgAJ" rel="nofollow">See forum thread</a>.) So rather than switching to a different comment widget (which Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-6336447720234144972018-05-29T17:44:04.280-04:002018-05-29T17:44:04.280-04:00Beautiful mathematics is absolutely no substitute ...Beautiful mathematics is absolutely no substitute for understanding. Dirac was the epitome of that. He had absolutely no understanding of the electron, but didn't care, and he even ignored the likes of Gustav Mie and Charles Galton Darwin. In fact, seeing as his 1962 paper <a href="http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/268/1332/57" rel="nofollow">an extensible model of the electron</John Duffieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02867342924571644602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-80787461195124913142018-05-29T15:31:41.689-04:002018-05-29T15:31:41.689-04:00You may want to check your spam folder; sometimes ...You may want to check your spam folder; sometimes a setting gets broken and many things go there. I've seen it happen to others.<br /><br />Travel safely.<br /><br />sean s.sean s.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04190153587965701495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90296737891960827092018-05-29T12:10:48.889-04:002018-05-29T12:10:48.889-04:00Beauty is not something we can easily codify. Much...Beauty is not something we can easily codify. Much of this has to do with induction nature of proposing a grand theory. There is no deductive structure to proposing some set of physical axioms or postulates as the most economical and elegant foundation to the universe. Beauty is a relative of “quality” and as Pirsig wrote in <i>Zen in the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance</i> is not something that Lawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-57847120574971963482018-05-29T11:51:15.104-04:002018-05-29T11:51:15.104-04:00Dr Hossenfelder:
How do the following score in bea...Dr Hossenfelder:<br />How do the following score in beauty,in your view?<br /><br />The C*-algebraic version of LQG (see LOST theorem).<br /><br />The spectral derivation of the standard model (see Connes's work).<br /><br />Isham and Döring's topos-theoretic formulation of the Kochen-Specker Theorem.<br /><br />Geroch's Einstein algebras<br />M. J. Glaeserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05153269635849920592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-29585850814314516052018-05-29T10:59:06.589-04:002018-05-29T10:59:06.589-04:00arxiv:1712.07969 k. How can that be empirically ...arxiv:1712.07969 k. How can that be empirically furiously wrong?<br />XENON1T, 1300 kg active liquid xenon target of total 2000 kg. ZERO net output.<br />XENONnT, 5200 kg active liquid xenon target of total 7500 kg. 2019 launch.<br /><br />Zero signal crashes physical theory. Simple, natural, elegant: The math is rigorous but empirically irrelevant. It's a curve fit. It's Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-87474934711308561682018-05-29T07:33:21.110-04:002018-05-29T07:33:21.110-04:00To me, as a mathematician, beauty in physics/scien...To me, as a mathematician, beauty in physics/science is something that is almost impossible to describe and define but easy to tell when you see it. It is also very subjective and different people may disagree. for instance general relativity is beautiful, modified gravity is not. The orthodox quantum mechanics is beautiful, Bohmian mechanics is not, and so on.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06098439870046873701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-52260828590518702102018-05-29T01:18:32.587-04:002018-05-29T01:18:32.587-04:00Folks,
Something's wrong with the comment fea...Folks,<br /><br />Something's wrong with the comment feature at blogger - I'm not getting comment notifications, meaning I basically don't know if anyone submitted a comment until I check the website. If anyone has an idea what's the issue, please let me know. For the rest, may I kindly ask for your patience. I'll be traveling today but will look for a fix once back home. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2897025590402484892018-05-28T23:13:50.529-04:002018-05-28T23:13:50.529-04:00I only recognize simplicity of the Occam's raz...I only recognize simplicity of the Occam's razor kind. Make only a few assumptions that can be tested empirically. Naturalness is just modern numerology of the ancient Pythagoreans. (They believed the square root of two is evil) Elegance is epistemology because no scientific theory explains itself. They explain observations. We can make theories that explain themselves or anything except the Enricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11062542721973950650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-85098630349724488102018-05-28T18:33:32.195-04:002018-05-28T18:33:32.195-04:00Simple, natural, elegant: The answer exits a print...Simple, natural, elegant: The answer exits a printer after a one-hour observation.<br /><br />... 1) Baryogenesis is post-Big Bang excess matter over antimatter violating conservation laws via selective leakage. <br />... 2) Sakharov conditions. Vacuum is neither <i>exactly</i> mirror-symmetric nor <i>exactly</i> isotropic toward quarks then hadrons.<br />... 3) Einstein-Cartan-Kibble-Sciama Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-53369515073564065562018-05-28T17:42:11.267-04:002018-05-28T17:42:11.267-04:00A beautiful equation is also one that exhibits the...A beautiful equation is also one that exhibits the fewest free parameters while explaining the most physics. That's why general relativity is beautiful while the Lagrangian of the Standard Model is ugly as hell. They both work, one by itself and the other by brute force, although I would never compare one with the other. <br /><br />Looking forward to purchasing your book!Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13243006930165511059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-62101533176180420092018-05-28T16:10:26.965-04:002018-05-28T16:10:26.965-04:00Every time I read something like "the laws of...Every time I read something like "the laws of nature are beautiful?" someone want to sell a new book to the public :-(Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09775814708334120689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-9896928561702855162018-05-28T13:17:55.890-04:002018-05-28T13:17:55.890-04:00"General relativity, string theory, grand uni..."General relativity, string theory, grand unification, and supersymmetry score high on all three aspects of beauty. The standard model, modified gravity, or asymptotically safe gravity, not so much. "<br /><br />where does loop quantum gravity score on aspects of beauty?neohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17318664916557810347noreply@blogger.com