tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post6369334777796791340..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Good physics is conflictSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-38117154281780549112007-03-17T19:57:00.000-04:002007-03-17T19:57:00.000-04:00Hi Clifford,thanks for sorting this out. Yes, I ha...Hi Clifford,<BR/><BR/>thanks for sorting this out. Yes, I have been writing about and only about (2). I am following (1) with interest, but don't feel qualified to comment. Regarding (3), I think the issue has been very carelessly dealt with esp. regarding the very unfortunate influence that media appearance seems to have. <BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-27154686884888177722007-03-17T19:48:00.000-04:002007-03-17T19:48:00.000-04:00Haelfix:-You're right, it is notable. But there ar...Haelfix:-<BR/><BR/>You're right, it is notable. But there are three discussion threads all tangled up, which are legitimate ones to have:<BR/><BR/>(1) The strong claims about string theory. I've been trying to get concrete answers about these claims in the form of real scientific arguments, including equations, but with no success.<BR/><BR/>(2) The concerns about the structure of research, and Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-29173897828045905292007-03-17T10:40:00.000-04:002007-03-17T10:40:00.000-04:00Not a single damn equation anywhere in the recent ...<I>Not a single damn equation anywhere in the recent asymptotia or cosmicvariance blog wars about this. Indeed not even a debate about the science perse.<BR/><BR/>Instead people are now routinely partaking in ad hominum and discussing sociological effects.</I><BR/><BR/>Haelfix,<BR/><BR/>In case you haven't noticed this post is not about string theory. I'm not a string theorist and I hardly have Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75089569372871081152007-03-17T06:53:00.000-04:002007-03-17T06:53:00.000-04:00Haelfix, may I point out that although I did not w...Haelfix, may I point out that although I did not write down an equation at Cliffords blog, I <A HREF="http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=305#comment-6341" REL="nofollow">linked</A> to one.<BR/><BR/>Also, I noted above that the physical predictions of [1] perturbative string theory (unbroken susy, 10 flat dimensions) and [2] AdS/CFT applied to QG (negative cc) are in sharp Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-19904160134596139792007-03-17T03:08:00.000-04:002007-03-17T03:08:00.000-04:00This whole debate has degenerated so far into exce...This whole debate has degenerated so far into excessive bs, it boggles the mind intelligent people still partake in it.<BR/><BR/>Not a single damn equation anywhere in the recent asymptotia or cosmicvariance blog wars about this. Indeed not even a debate about the science perse.<BR/><BR/>Instead people are now routinely partaking in ad hominum and discussing sociological effects.<BR/><BR/>I findAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-30138864914138672342007-03-16T21:05:00.000-04:002007-03-16T21:05:00.000-04:00Dear Tony,again you are mixing up issues. With pu...Dear Tony,<BR/><BR/>again you are mixing up issues. With public debate of physics 'content' I do not mean the LHC data, neither do I (here) want to go into the open access discussion with regard to scientific publications. We were talking about popular science books that summarize research results. <BR/><BR/>As to the LHC data, I recall JoAnne's post, and I was at the SUSY06, but I have not Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32411891640060152352007-03-16T20:54:00.000-04:002007-03-16T20:54:00.000-04:00Bee, you said that you "... have no problem with ....Bee, you said that you "... have no problem with ... physics (content) ...[being]... debated in the public ... even if the issues are unsettled ...". <BR/><BR/>Last year, over at Cosmic Variance, JoAnne had a blog entry "Should the Data be Public?", <BR/>referring to a panel discussion at SUSY06 in which JoAnne said "... Tao Han ... (Wisconsin) ... proposed that the LHC data should be made Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-35583440125854620792007-03-16T17:46:00.000-04:002007-03-16T17:46:00.000-04:00Hi Tony,You are mixing up various different issues...Hi Tony,<BR/><BR/>You are mixing up various different issues. Open to what, which debate is public? Let me clarify what I meant. <BR/><BR/>I totally agree that 'physics must be open, critical and responsive' - but actually this statement is so general, I would agree on it also if you replace 'physics' with 'literature' or 'customer service' or whatever. I have chosen to quote it because being 'Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86615647491688723612007-03-16T16:37:00.000-04:002007-03-16T16:37:00.000-04:00Bee said: "... this [physics] debate should not h...Bee said: <BR/>"... this [physics] debate should not have been lead in the public. <BR/>...<BR/>Nancy Cartwright ... made the important point ... <BR/>"Physics must be open, critical and responsive" ...". <BR/><BR/>Bearing in mind that, even taking into account private contributions by RIM and Kavli etc, <BR/>the vast preponderance of funding for physics comes from the public (taxpayers Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44169319509044249992007-03-16T14:40:00.000-04:002007-03-16T14:40:00.000-04:00hi a,She can't talk with her private vocabulary.sh...hi a,<BR/><BR/><I>She can't talk with her private vocabulary.</I><BR/><BR/>she shouldn't. <BR/><BR/>regarding your points 1 & 2, I understood her statements like 'good physics is conflict' and we don't know which way is the best so we should be open to all possibilities etc, not so much to be about 'what' but about 'how'. Whereas your point 2 is about the 'what'. So. I can agree on 1 but not on 2Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-76961466361430873152007-03-16T14:14:00.000-04:002007-03-16T14:14:00.000-04:00"Lee Smolin is the one who has discovered the litt..."Lee Smolin is the one who has discovered the little known facts that finiteness [1] of the perturbation expansion and the AdS/CFT conjecture are, horrors, not proven."<BR/><BR/>What seems to be little known facts are that the physical predictions of [1] perturbative string theory (unbroken susy, 10 flat dimensions) and [2] AdS/CFT applied to QG (negative cc) are in sharp disagreement with Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-89849419235617054672007-03-16T12:44:00.000-04:002007-03-16T12:44:00.000-04:00hi bee, I wanted to refrain myself but... :))She d...hi bee, I wanted to refrain myself but... :))<BR/><BR/>She didn't made 100 points, she made 2 points:<BR/>1 we don't know what is the best strategy for progress (choice problem)<BR/>2 unification scheme is wrong<BR/><BR/>Second point is corrolary of 1.<BR/>And I certainly don't see any support for 1. point in her talk, only remark that 'every theory so far failed'. That is vary ambigous statementAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90006519308372900262007-03-16T11:54:00.000-04:002007-03-16T11:54:00.000-04:00Hi Anonymous,well. The reason why I am 'as sanguin...Hi Anonymous,<BR/><BR/>well. The reason why I am 'as sanguine as I am', is probably that I don't pick on every point that doesn't agree with me. But yes, that statement didn't make sense to me too. I am not completely sure though what she had in mind when talking about 'unification' - it might not have been in the technical sense that we use the term. Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-54049171617007519372007-03-16T11:45:00.000-04:002007-03-16T11:45:00.000-04:00what to say about Nancy comment that majority unif...what to say about Nancy comment that majority unification attempts failed? None failed, in fact unification scheme has been so succesfull that only one unification remained: Quantum & GR. What's more, every progress in physics IS progress precisely BECAUSE of unification of some kind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51108320560952906482007-03-15T23:14:00.000-04:002007-03-15T23:14:00.000-04:00I should say, too, that my thoughts on incentives ...I should say, too, that my thoughts on incentives and things are at the link above.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75854069690586990072007-03-15T22:32:00.000-04:002007-03-15T22:32:00.000-04:00If you don't want to talk about Lee Smolin, then d...If you don't want to talk about Lee Smolin, then don't talk about Lee Smolin. I already tried to bow out of this once. I'll do so again now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-55454573717730608732007-03-15T22:20:00.000-04:002007-03-15T22:20:00.000-04:00Dear Aaron,I don't understand your first remark? I...Dear Aaron,<BR/><BR/>I don't understand your first remark? If you mean to indicate that I disagree with myself, I don't see how.<BR/><BR/>Besides this, how can I make it more clear that I don't want to talk about Lee? He uses the string community as an example, and given that he knows the field it's an obvious choice for him. Though a very unfortunate one. If I had written the book, I had Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32879897554118317172007-03-15T21:37:00.000-04:002007-03-15T21:37:00.000-04:00But we started with If the book is insulting for a...But we started with <BR/><BR/><I>If the book is insulting for anybody, then it is insulting for all of us theoretical physicist</I><BR/><BR/>The thing is, Lee doesn't accuse all of us theoretical physicists as being mired in groupthink. He has an entire chapter in there (16, as I recall) full of blind quotes about string theorists. Not theoretical physicists, not quantum gravity types; string Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-70735972804206758382007-03-15T20:16:00.000-04:002007-03-15T20:16:00.000-04:00Loooove it LUBOS! I missed it at Bee's:-) Hi Quasa...<I> Loooove it LUBOS! I missed it at Bee's</I><BR/><BR/>:-) Hi Quasar,<BR/><BR/>my husband was so charming to publish his new post only 30 min after I was done - and while I was asleep, so it was easy to miss it.<BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60778343262622708132007-03-15T19:57:00.000-04:002007-03-15T19:57:00.000-04:00I can't believe I got the link to the MP3 from the...I can't believe I got the link to the MP3 from the Reference Frame.<BR/><BR/>Loooove it!<BR/>One of my favourite tracks<BR/>You should 'release' this - lol!QUASAR9https://www.blogger.com/profile/00593390598251093182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61036575122862861702007-03-15T19:55:00.000-04:002007-03-15T19:55:00.000-04:00Hi BeeHi BeeQUASAR9https://www.blogger.com/profile/00593390598251093182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-56424902646850448842007-03-15T17:42:00.000-04:002007-03-15T17:42:00.000-04:00Dear Aaron,the majority doesn't care about theoret...Dear Aaron,<BR/><BR/>the majority doesn't care about theoretical physics anyhow. But I share your concerns about the potential damage to the scientific community as a whole, as I've pointed out long before the book was published, e.g. <A HREF="http://www.haloscan.com/comments/lumidek/114999355098496881/#537842" REL="nofollow">here</A>. I am not happy about the present situation, but I think we Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-53133442161648291182007-03-15T11:09:00.000-04:002007-03-15T11:09:00.000-04:00Well, I'm not nearly as sanguine as you are. I ten...Well, I'm not nearly as sanguine as you are. I tend to think that the reaction from nonscience blogs probably does represent a good measure of public reaction to the book. In particular, as best I can tell the majority of them seem completely unaware of the discussions on various physics blogs. <BR/><BR/>Moreover, I think this response is neither irrelevant no unimportant, especially when it actsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51450432774527228482007-03-15T08:13:00.000-04:002007-03-15T08:13:00.000-04:00Hi Aaron,I didn't say anything about the 'actual' ...Hi Aaron,<BR/><BR/>I didn't say anything about the 'actual' effects of the book. If I did, I most certainly wouldn't judge on it after only 6 months and it wouldn't be based on what a google search shows up when I enter 'trouble with physics'. Opinions displayed in online reviews (or comments to these) are most often either entertaining, or upsetting, or both, but hardly ever constructive, and Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59536755834287502962007-03-15T00:51:00.000-04:002007-03-15T00:51:00.000-04:00AaronObtaining more seers is not a matter of ident...<B>Aaron</B><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=475#comment-18087" REL="nofollow"><I>Obtaining more seers is not a matter of identifying the iconoclasts (who in physics isn’t a bit iconoclastic, after all?), but a matter of figuring out how to make it less dangerous for a young person to devote a significant amount of time thinking about extremely difficult problemsPlatoHagelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00849253658526056393noreply@blogger.com