tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post8792495404180251395..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Physics Facts and FiguresSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-84835802552441686722018-02-05T23:29:25.061-05:002018-02-05T23:29:25.061-05:00This is interesting and is a new way to look at Ph...This is interesting and is a new way to look at Physics. Each new piece of knowledge in Physics is hard fought to produce due to its age and the depths already plumbed. Still I am optimistic that physicists are on the verge of a huge breakthrough. A revolution in thinking is gathering steam. This is the most noble area of scientific study due to its profound implications about existence.Seth Thatcherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01014449367329717832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5022360407065485582018-02-03T16:57:31.596-05:002018-02-03T16:57:31.596-05:00It is obvious that one should divide credit for a ...It is obvious that one should divide credit for a paper by the number of authors. So if you collaborate with a co-author on your two papers or write them alone, is exactly the same, 2 times 0.5 or 1 paper credit. However your coauthor will cite both of your half credit papers but he won't cite yours. So twenty authors are great for your CI. Of course everybody is gaming this system as hard asUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11799738081195869823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-12369661808088342442018-02-03T12:09:50.205-05:002018-02-03T12:09:50.205-05:00I believe different mechanism's are driving do...I believe different mechanism's are driving down the exponent in physics vs math. If you open a typical ArXiv page, you see that most preprints have one or two authors, roughly equally divided between the two. Math tends to be a solitary activity, driving to lower number of authors, but also difficult to get published, tending to lower number of papers.<br />In experimental physics, you have metaplechttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04149389752291572453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-31728126288059149272018-02-03T01:41:15.534-05:002018-02-03T01:41:15.534-05:00Kaleberg,
Which statistics? Almost all analysis o...Kaleberg,<br /><br />Which statistics? Almost all analysis of paper statistics exclude large collaborations. One would really need entirely different tools to analyse those. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-195718817864886682018-02-02T22:07:49.826-05:002018-02-02T22:07:49.826-05:00Did the LHC Higg's paper with 5,154 authors af...Did the LHC Higg's paper with 5,154 authors affect the statistics? (I doubt it, but there could be are more "shared facility" papers with large numbers of authors.)<br />Kaleberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05283840743310507878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-91844491538067399592018-02-02T10:28:45.434-05:002018-02-02T10:28:45.434-05:00Some comments:
The oldest science is arguably ast...Some comments:<br /><br />The oldest science is arguably astronomy, yes. The next oldest is probably <i>medicine</i>, followed by mathematics. (There are discussions of both medicine and mathematics in ancient Egyptian and Babylonian records, but nothing that would qualify as "physics".) Physics per se dates to the Classical Greek period, and is roughly similar in age to non-medical Peter Erwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18415612458902079584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81886392328313406252018-02-01T11:34:23.841-05:002018-02-01T11:34:23.841-05:00With respect to experimental particle physics, I t...With respect to experimental particle physics, I think a lot of these statistics can be explained by the particular challenges we're facing rather than the maturity or dysfunctionality of the field. It's highly self-referential mostly because we have the Particle Data Group that nicely summarizes and averages all the individual measurements. If you're not in that sub-field, you are Topherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17958113758384139554noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-57817714926399481892018-02-01T09:52:57.710-05:002018-02-01T09:52:57.710-05:00Dan,
These tags are PACS classifications. In the ...Dan,<br /><br />These tags are PACS classifications. In the paper they use a sample from PRL of which all papers have such classifications. A paper can (and usually does) have several tags. The AMPS paper is not in this sample. It would almost certainly have been tagged as black hole physics though.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59290126564469019912018-02-01T09:43:57.040-05:002018-02-01T09:43:57.040-05:00Sabine, I just mean: take a random paper--lets say...Sabine, I just mean: take a random paper--lets say the AMPS paper--and try to apply that classification. It easily has four or five of those classifications. So I'm pretty skeptical of drawing conclusions based on a scheme like that, especially if papers only got one tag. If papers were allowed multiple classifications, then some categories will get overcounted, etc.--if I'm being too Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09480680527150522129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-50652885104588003182018-02-01T02:16:21.125-05:002018-02-01T02:16:21.125-05:00Please differ.
Exp and Theo physics are so differ...Please differ.<br /><br />Exp and Theo physics are so different in all the respects discussed in this blog.<br /><br />One thing i have witnessed throughout the last 10 years or so: <br /><br />experimentalists now have good training in working with large data, in automization and in simulations. they didn't have this before when computer natives were still too young. at that time this kind t kosubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13956052025472802645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-89895280214013884102018-02-01T00:44:10.977-05:002018-02-01T00:44:10.977-05:00Dan,
What makes you say the list is "bogus&q...Dan,<br /><br />What makes you say the list is "bogus"? Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59189668859492799342018-01-31T23:11:01.245-05:002018-01-31T23:11:01.245-05:00"...its dwindling relevance."
Thank you..."...its dwindling relevance."<br /><br />Thank you. Your writing reflects my own feelings, which I usually avoid posting because I'm not a physicist. It seems to me that the spread of untestable ideas like the multiverse is in the end self-correcting. If key members of the discipline choose to champion ideas that are "ineffective"--i.e., ideas that are widely viewed as Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06140726210295297492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60113809570331453732018-01-31T21:28:51.568-05:002018-01-31T21:28:51.568-05:00What is the effect of the very large number of aut...What is the effect of the very large number of authors on an accelerator experiment paper?Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90193346480552541102018-01-31T14:24:46.064-05:002018-01-31T14:24:46.064-05:00I see a lot of this article being relevant to the ...I see a lot of this article being relevant to the article you posted on December 12th and the need to be published due to Academia’s reward structure. Perhaps, we also are reaching human limits to understand and explain the Universe beyond the physics we now know? Either way I think many would agree there are only so many minds capable of practicing in the field at the level required. How many Louis Tagliaferrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16698865662162457632noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-82291363271369352902018-01-31T14:22:04.597-05:002018-01-31T14:22:04.597-05:00one solution i've proposed is that top physics...one solution i've proposed is that top physics departments deliberate create hire and train non-string QG researchers. i.e researchers in LQG CDT AS EG etc<br /><br />a concrete implementation would be for every university that has a string theory group, universities like princeton harvard yale stanford, MIT they also establish a LQG/LQC, CDT, AS group, MOND as QG, with funding phd's postneohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17318664916557810347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41566617537195141212018-01-31T13:35:37.950-05:002018-01-31T13:35:37.950-05:00"(1) Physics of black holes, (2) Cosmology, (..."(1) Physics of black holes, (2) Cosmology, (3) Classical general relativity, (4) Quantum information (5) Matter waves (6) Quantum mechanics (7) Quantum field theory in curved space time (8) general theory and models of magnetic ordering (9) Theories and models of many electron systems (10) Quantum gravity."<br /><br />What kind of terrible false 10-chotomy is that? ;) Even if the Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09480680527150522129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-58366383965789932152018-01-31T12:26:52.129-05:002018-01-31T12:26:52.129-05:00If I may, I believe Bill is referring to fig 2 fro...If I may, I believe Bill is referring to fig 2 from the Dong team al paper (sorry, can’t get Bevis outa my head "heh heh, he said Dong").<br /><br />The second set of data is labelled with the typo "Physcis (subsets)."Potato Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06873877832820074706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59036074882580469802018-01-31T11:39:01.465-05:002018-01-31T11:39:01.465-05:00Bill,
Figure 2? You mean the second figure in the...Bill,<br /><br />Figure 2? You mean the second figure in the blogpost? All of the dots are sub-fields of physics. EPF stands for "elementary particles and fields" and NP stands for Nuclear Physics. You can download a pdf of the paper <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282426900_A_century_of_physics" rel="nofollow">here</a>, in which you find what the other abbreviations Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32741648701379901462018-01-31T11:04:30.255-05:002018-01-31T11:04:30.255-05:00I'm unsure what field "physcis" fall...I'm unsure what field "physcis" falls into from Figure 2.Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13243006930165511059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-66126771796417663302018-01-31T10:17:36.079-05:002018-01-31T10:17:36.079-05:00Empirically sterile theory desperately cherry-pick...Empirically sterile theory desperately cherry-picks, aberrantly fantasizes, and furthers its own propagation:<br /><br />https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/missing-neutrons-may-lead-a-secret-life-as-dark-matter/<br /><br />Nonperformance commonality points to correction. Beautiful fundamental symmetries (Noether) fail. Equivocate emergent gauge symmetries (arXiv:1710.01791). Emergent Uncle Alhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05056804084187606211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-72930202733502143682018-01-31T09:36:48.223-05:002018-01-31T09:36:48.223-05:00Sylvia,
Yes, as I said, physics is an old discipl...Sylvia,<br /><br />Yes, as I said, physics is an old discipline, the easy things have been done, progress slows down etc etc<br /><br />The final line isn't a conclusion, merely my interpretation. <br /><br />The "diminishing returns" is a phrase from the paper; it just refers to the sub-linear relation.<br /><br />Of course people collaborate more because that exploits so-far Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-35865355446729412052018-01-31T09:26:50.270-05:002018-01-31T09:26:50.270-05:00I don't see your final conclusion follow from ...I don't see your final conclusion follow from the facts and figures that you discussed. Experimental work gets more challenging as time progresses: we're out of falling apples and low hanging fruit, so better collaborate to get to new physics (at higher energies, better resolution, etc.). Fewer new papers based on better collaboration isn't a "diminishing return"!<br />SinceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-43415769388325922602018-01-31T08:27:58.509-05:002018-01-31T08:27:58.509-05:00"This means it currently takes 18 years for t..."This means it currently takes 18 years for the body of physics literature to double."<br /><br />A missed opportunity to say that physics literature has a half-life of -18 years!aukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13562239714429517287noreply@blogger.com