/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15194337
>(This is why I lost faith in science)
Ok, so she's a downright malicious actor now. Good to know. I'll report her videos for misinformation from now on

>>15194337
She's right tho. People make shit up and thow them at the wall hoping it sticks so they can farm clout off of it.
>t.post grad

>>15194337
>mfw not a particle physicist

>Inane take from le science man :I
>Inane take from le science woman :O !!

>>15194392
Why would anyone take seriously something which is so obviously clickbait?

She's a retard
The standard model is wrong
Higgs boson and quarks and ECD are fake

>>15194560
She's not like the other science women :3

>>15194560
>Inane take from Anonymous: 200 (You)'s.

>>15194437
She's talking specifically about particle physics. What they are doing doesn't reflect all areas of physics. Her video is right, you have several thousand physicists making stuff up because there hasn't been any new fundamental physics observed for several decades. They are creating answers for problems that don't exist.

>>15194337
>(This is why I lost faith in science)
Holy based

>jewtube bread and circuses thread
soience circus

>>15194399
baseddd

>>15194399
how is she so powerful

>>15194437
Oh yeah. Grad school thoroughly disillusioned me about science. So much of it is pure bullshit.

T H I C C

Why did don't you guys link to yewtu.be instead of youtu.be?

>>15194913
Because our minds haven't been turned to mush by /pol/

>>15194641
but we have particles like pions, neutrons, protons. What are they made of?

>>15195159
Protons and electrons are the smallest identifiable divisions of matter.

>>15195162
protons change shape, possibly due to deformations on collisions. There is "stuff" inside, or that has to be explained.
Pions, or gluons are also necessary to explain how protons stay together in the nucleus.

I share the skepticism towards the Standard Model, but some other explanation has to replace it.

>>15194337
She's so based.

>>15194346
Seethe more, it won't make your imaginary particles real.

>>15195171
>Pions, or gluons are also necessary to explain how protons stay together in the nucleus.
Not necessary with the new model of Proton-electron pairing put forward by the Structured Atom Model.
Here's your new model to replace it: https://structuredatom.org/

>>15195177
a nucleus can exist without electrons, you know.

>>15195180
>a nucleus can exist without electrons, you know.
Does it have neutrons in it by any chance?

>>15195184
maybe, but not necessarily.

I can see attacking quarks, but removing the strong force entirely? That's bold, and stupid.

>>15194551
>sabine wants to burn the coal
bros no... not this...

>>15195187
>maybe, but not necessarily.
Show me one.
>I can see attacking quarks, but removing the strong force entirely? That's bold, and stupid.
It's ultimately the only correct approach to the subject, because it's both predictive of all atomic behaviors and elegantly unifies forces that scientists already believe are unified on some level.

>>15195197
unifying forces is not the same as removing it.
It's been experimentally observed that the force binding a nucleus together is much, much higher than electromagnetism, and it rapidly appears as the particles get closer to each other.

>>15195203
>It's been experimentally observed that the force binding a nucleus together is much, much higher than electromagnetism, and it rapidly appears as the particles get closer to each other.
And it can be surmised from our new understanding of atoms that this force is electromagnetic in nature, resulting from the energetic bond formed by protons locking together against an electron.

>>15194337
her first somewhat interesting video in weeks. still, not that interesting. she needs to do more vids about quantum foundations. of course, she won't because it's not the best choice for views, and she has children she has to pay for.

>>15195207
You have a 2 in Charisma, and a 5 in Intelligence.

Do you really think hand waving decades of empirical results is how you usher in your replacement new physics? And of course, no attempt at explaining anything, or anticipating the natural defenses of the existing theory.

>>15195228
>Do you really think hand waving decades of empirical results is how you usher in your replacement new physics? And of course, no attempt at explaining anything, or anticipating the natural defenses of the existing theory.
Those are in the book and related papers, which you're free to read.

>>15195177
I can't tell if you're shitposting or are simply an idiot.

>>15194337

Aren't the Week Force and Electromagnetism the same force at higher energies and we have even tested it experimentally? Is it really that unreasonable that higher energies this electroweak force also becomes one with the strong one?

>>15195325
> Aren't the Week Force and Electromagnetism the same force at higher energies
Yes and it has been tested in particle accelerators than can generate high enough energies.

> Is it really that unreasonable that higher energies this electroweak force also becomes one with the strong one?
It's not unreasonable, she even says that in the video, but her point is that every prediction Grand Unified Theory's have made have all failed. Apart from the fact such symmetrys worked in the past there is no evidence such an idea is true.

>>15194337
This woman is the very definition of a loser burnout who accomplished absolutely nothing in her field so now she dedicates her life to trying to bring others down.

>>15194337
sabine is coal and so is the standard model

>>15195392
this is my main takeaway as well. if steven weinberg said the same thing i wouldn't have a problem cause he contributed so much to the standard model so his opinion has weight.

>>15194337
How is she so based?

desu I have no issues with what she says in that video, it all sounds right to me
the "lost faith in science" bit in the title is a bit over the top though

>>15195420
Here's the thing, there are plenty of outspoken critics of certain parts of particle physics.

Carlo Rovelli, one of the most prominent physicists alive today, absolute shits on string theory. What he doesn't do though, is go full crabs in a bucket mode and try to bring all others down. Sabine constantly shits on absolutely every field of physics while pushing pseudoscience (superdeterminism) that's on the level of what the bleep do we know.

She' a crab in a bucket. Didn't get far in her career and now constantly tries to bring others down with her. A very pathetic person.

>>15195228
>decades of empirical results
you mean statistically manipulating the results of unreliable equipment until something in the data looks like a prediction and pretending you can calculate the probability of a given event with that equipment without including the results of EVERY time it was run with those parameters?

because if that's empirical i don't fucking want to be.

>>15195392
>>15195420
>>15195538
oh no, not the precious approval of a handful of faithful parishioners of the sacred contrivances that have gridlocked physics for over half a century! whatever will she do without that?

i think you're just starting to encounter the unhappy reality that academia is absolutely FULL of fraudsters and unless that changes, the weight of its approval (and the meaningfulness of the credits for "contribution" it gives) will decline - even if most of them or nearly all of them are doing good work, the few that aren't will destroy their credibility. academia quite strongly needs people like Sabine if it wants to continue being taken seriously, because if science is self correcting, the fact that academia isn't makes it unscientific.

>>15195558
meds

>math dead because no one can prove RH
>physics dead because no one make gravity work with QFT
Its over

>>15195606
we'll just let AI figure it out

>>15194337
>we should stop researching particles because standard model is the last ever truth to be found and there will NEVER EVER be anything to modify. Physics are SOLVED

>>15195682
Not what she says. Her argument is that the current method on how particle physics is done is massively flawed.

>>15195538
>Sabine constantly shits on absolutely every field of physics
No she doesn't.

>>15195704
Yes she does, midwit.

>Her argument is that the current method on how particle physics is done is massively flawed.
No it's not, midwit.

>>15195850
>No it's not, midwit.
Confirmed halfwit.

>>15195851
Yeah whatever you say, quarterwit.

>>15194337
>clout chasing jewtuber

>>15194337
She isn't wrong. The only mildly exciting thing going on in particle physics currently is the muon's anomalous magnetic moment, but event that may just as well turn out to be consistent with SM.

>>15195538
>plenty of outspoken critics of certain parts of particle physics
outspoken they are indeed
they all have one thing in common - they're absolutely out of their league when talking about that "certain part" of particle physics; so much so that their "understanding" of that certain part of particle physics wouldn't be enough to pass, by now even undergrad course on that certain part of particle physics
>Rovelli
>one of the most prominent physicists
ok carlo, but shitposting on rhodesian ritual killing website won't revive your pet theory killed by those pesky proponents of that certain part of particle physics
i mean, how embarrassing it must be to get btfo by the likes of motl

>>15195937
>i mean, how embarrassing it must be to get btfo by the likes of motl
quick rundown?

>>15195927
> that may just as well turn out to be consistent with SM.
True, the calculations are incredibly complex and so is the software required to perform them. Last year I read one team published an updated result that gave a value within the margin of error for the experiment but I haven't seen anything since (to be fair the calculations by other teams gave differing answers).

>>15195974
>motl was interested in finding equivalence between st and lqg
>found fundamental incompatibilities
>shitposted about them, basically implying lqg is wrong
>this was over two decades ago
>ravioli army seethes until this day
>ravioli army has yet to refute a single point
you could probably find some parts of his shitpost on his blog, it would be the pre-schizo era where his blog was about physics
otherwise you're probably out of luck because the blogs these discussions took place on are long dead
it was just an expansion of some harvard lunch discussions about lqg
but you don't even need the actual technical arguments to make raviolis seethe, just remind them they have still yet to reproduce gr

>>15196006
https://youtu.be/W_TO2WESSA4
kek

>>15194909
i would pay 1 monero to see her completely nude on all fours

>>15196019
kek, i remember that one

>>15196001
It's also incredibly hard to make a more precise measurement, because the current methods are dominated mostly by systematic error (ex. what Fermilab did).

Can't say much without doxxing myself more than I'm comfortable with here, but if stars align we might be able to get the uncertainty of the SM prediction down significantly in the next few years. It requires a lot of precision though, so it's really hard to tell at this point if we'll succeed.

>>15196091
bad LARP

>>15195606
>math dead because no one can prove RH
Retard.

>>15194909
does she have scoliosis?

>>15195538
>pseudoscience (superdeterminism)
it's a legitimate hypothesis. just because you don't like its implications doesn't make it unscientific.

>>15195571
academia's credibility should not require medicating the audience

>>15196400
i disagree with concluding superdeterminism (even if there is an unseen underlying deterministic process, we don't have a way to observe it), but i like that Sabine sticks to her guns on it, since the vitriol she generates by doing so demonstrates quite succinctly how shit physicists are at philosophy. especially epistemology

>>15196411
she has suggested an experiment involving looking for "autocorrelations in the time series of measurements" in a small, cold system, which would evidence determinism.

the proper evidence needed to really establish determinism however, would be to falsify statistical independence, which is impossible because that requires testing for the existence of counterfactual worlds.

but at the very least we have to understand that this assumption is critical to the direction physics goes, and we're stuck so long as we can't determine whether it's true or not (apparently, that's forever)

>>15195606
the RH is too abstract to be useful IRL.
understanding reality better would help us achieve more things

particle physics is just as gay as chemistry. Maybe gayer. Real physics is done elsewhere

>>15196400
Any "hypothesis" that proports the universe conspiring to secretly manipulate every single measurement, even going back in time to the very beginning of said universe, is not legitimate anything.

it is pseudoscience for midwits like yourself. on the exact same level as deepak chopra's cult about how consciousness can alter reality.

>>15196476
it's not any more of a conspiracy than the idea that the future magically poofs into existence from nothing, aka the indeterminist's account of physics.

>>15194337
isn't she a believer in superdeterminism? she's clearly out of her depths

>>15196485
>determinism bad and wrong!!
proof?

>>15196488
learn to read retard

>>15196485
She got mindbroken by quantum entanglement and ended up championing quantum wooism to try and get rid of it.

>>15196492
what point are you trying to make then? you're not very good at making yourself clear.

>>15196498
>>15196492

>>15196499
seethe and damage control harder

>>15196513
>>15196485

>>15194337
>(This is why I lost faith in science.)
>>Science doesn't exist
>>>Physics doesn't exist
Isn't the three body problem supposed to be just sci-fi?

>>15196497
>quantum wooism
you mean the current copenhagen paradigm in which the wavefunction is god and magically creates the future from nothing?

>>15196535
>the future
it's EVERY future, chud

>>15196541
that would be many-worlds? something different

>>15196535
meds

>>15196541
Whatever you say, chud

>>15195704
not the methods, she's basically talking about sunk cost fallacy that affects even the particle physicist's mindset

>>15196620
yup, that's a better description.

I don't see a single reason to think super determinism isn't correct

>>15197907
you're in the wrong thread dumbass

>>15195505
So all you have is an emotional objection to what she says? Got it.

>>15194337
Particle Physicist bros how do we respond to this ?

>>15198016
just tell her to have sex, she clearly needs it

>>15194337
Pretty sure I saw a video from this person arguing free will doesn't exist because of determinism. I think that's so funny. Like she lives out every waking moment believing that she is trapped and pre ordained to do all of it.

>>15194337
Her very first assertion is wrong, though... "Particle physicists constantly fail to find what they're looking for"

Then why was the new cycle dominated by the actual detection of the Higgs just a few years ago?

>>15198108
>find shit once every 30 years
>big sigh of relief everytime it happens
>boast about muh predicshuns
>ignore dozens of failed predictions before and after

>>15198108
She explains that in the video though

That the particles we have today were found with the principle that they would fix/complete the standard model, not change the model entirely which is what people who are looking for WIMPs are doing

>>15198016
Try discovering new particles? That's the whole point of her criticism.

>>15198108
confirmed for not watching the video.

>>15198095
i think it's funny that you think that's somehow an absurd idea. determinism does preclude libertarian free will.

>>15198174
Why?

>>15198228
determinism precludes counterfactual worlds, which are required for libertarian free will

>>15198247
>determinism precludes counterfactual worlds
That's a circular argument. We make decisions by examining the counterfactuals of the available possibilities.

>>15196534
That was literally just aliens doing a bit of trolling. Just a prank bro

>>15198259
how is that circular?

>We make decisions by examining the counterfactuals of the available possibilities.
our examination of counterfactual ideas doesn't tell us whether counterfactual alternatives were ever actually possible or not.

>>15198259
babby just discovered determinism and can't help but spam buzz words every thread he goes

>>15198463
have you got an argument, or just seethe?

>>15196463
chemistry is useful
wtf is particle physics other than a money sink
a bunch of nerds defrauding the tax payers to run pointless experiments

>>15198474
sounds like you got found out

>>15198494
just seethe then, got it

>>15198518
don't worry child we all got excited when we discovered determinism, just try to keep it in your panties ok

>>15194337
>this is what a 46 year old German woman looks like
Yikies

>>15198765
Wtf she's mid 40s??? No way I thought she was late 50s.

>>15195184
Wait people disbelieve neutrons?
That's a kind of radiation you know.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_radiation

>>15198976
Nobody disbelieves neutrons, but in the SAM a neutron is a free proton-electron pair. This is evidenced quite clearly by neutron decay products.

>>15196460
You can't understand reality better if you have no words to describe it.
Mathematics provides the words physicist use to describe reality.

>>15198982
>in the SAM a neutron is a free proton-electron pair

>>15198991
It's an interesting idea don't you think? Not only does it explain experimental results, but it also explains why some configurations of atoms are more unstable than others.

>>15198996
I'm a big supporter of out of the box thinking like that. Very hard to do irl and they all should be cherished.

>>15199001
If you get the chance I recommend checking out their website. They have a tool that visualizes the shape of atoms of different types in a way that illustrates how and why they decay the way they do.

>>15199002
Sure fren. I'll shill your website in the future. Don't worry about it.

>>15199026
Nah it's not my website. I only found out about it after seeing their ICCF poster.

>>15194392
Anyone got a good collection of Sabine faces for reaction image purposes?

>>15198982
>>15198996
it might also explain the issues with free neutron decay rate not being consistent across measurement methods

i've personally wondered if the free neutron's motion is directly influencing its decay rate as a composite particle, as an increase in the velocity of the composite would create an extremely short range magnetic attraction between the component electron and component proton - basically, the decay rate could be slower for faster moving free neutrons as they would have a magnetic attraction as well as an electrostatic one
the magnetic effect would also be essentially undetectable outside the composite, as the fields would cancel out

if such a thing were occurring, it might very well look like decay rate being very slightly dependent on neutron energy, with higher energy (i.e. faster) neutrons decaying more slowly

which, uh...

is exactly what we observe:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_neutron_decay#Neutron_lifetime_puzzle

>>15194337
The only thing that irritates me about this is her saying
>aesthetic misgivings
Like that’s a trivial concern.

Fuck that. Fuck “shut up and calculate”. The universe must make some sort of sense. The entire history of scientific progress is one of reduction from a larger number of explanations to a smaller number.

She says to focus on “necessary modifications only” like making General Relativity and Quantum Field Theory agree is not the POINT of all the GUT work she derides. And yes, people are trying to make those theories elegant and pretty. Because history and common sense suggests that whatever winds up happening, it’s going to involve a reduction to a few equations. People aren’t just postulating new particles for fun, they’re trying to come up with clean, consistent models that explain the data WITHOUT the standard model zoo, and WITHOUT using separate regimes for the quantum and classical, and focusing on whatever new as-yet-untested thing might result from that.

To listen to that you’d think most particle physicists just sit around going “dude, what if like… there was a Ziggs Joson? IDK why, jus cuz, man” and not because they’re trying to figure out how to combine QM and GR or unify Strong and Electroweak or whatever else.

>>15199508
shut up sabine is a genius and literally my girlfriend she taught me about counterfactual worlds

>>15199522
still seething, lmao

>>15194337
>hello we need a bibber bollider :DDDD

>this is still up
i never thought my shit post would get this much engagement kek

>>15199911
strannaya nauka

>>15197913
you are tranny

>>15199934
ur brown

>>15199497
You should get in touch with them and see about performing an experiment to validate it. You'd probably get tenure guaranteed if you were able to prove a direct relationship and settled it once and for all.

The problem with Particle physics is that any true fundamental theory would engage with and develop a proper understanding of the Æther. The fact is, all particles are Æther wave packets with particular properties. Electromagnetism? A dynamic wave packet localized in the Æther. You? Me? A collection of wave packets in the Æther. Gravity? Displacement in the Æther by a sufficiently large wave packet. Everything comes back to Æther and the fact that physics is in such shambles is because they imagined that the misunderstandings of the Æther in experiments like Michelson-Morley disproved its existence. All it proved is that experimenters and those who theorized about he Æther only misunderstood it. Particle physics itself is just a natural consequence of the structure of Æther.

>>15196460
Poster of a certain ethnicity
0 faustian spirit

>>15198485
But maybe they'll make a transporter or replicator or holodeck or something.

>>15198982
Whenever I first learned about beta decay, the first thought that popped into my mind was that there are actually electrons in the nucleus and that neutrons were just made of a proton and a neutron. Interesting that someone has made a serious theory about that.

Extraterrestrial sophons interfering with experiments to prevent a technological explosion.
As they prepare their final solution.

>>15200656
It's somewhat baffling that it was never considered beforehand, especially considering >>15199497

>>15200746
I meant "neutrons were just made of a proton and an electron." Of course.

>>15200829
How do we reconcile this theory with the observed antineutrino?

>>15199475
https://www.youtube.com/@SabineHossenfelder/videos
find suitable image -> insert video id between //
https://img.youtube.com/vi//maxresdefault.jpg

>>15202633
presumably by either reexamining the nature of the detection or of neutrino/antineutrino production mechanisms (such as by transferring the angular momentum of a bound proton/electon, which is kind of the theoretical purpose of neutrinos already - and would explain neutrino chirality and possibly indicate a chiral nature of matter/antimatter)

>>15200188
any idea how to get in contact with them? does their website have contact info?

>>15202741
I'll cut some out when I have time, hopefully tonight.

>>15203983
Here's my quick collection
https://files.catbox.moe/pto6z0.zip

Imagine being a Stringlet
Based Standard Model mogs all Stringlets, lol

>>15194337
>(This is why I lost faith in science)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JupDzKOBTcM

>>15203990
Thanks Anon

>>15198988

>>15194337
I usually find her videos boring but this one's well done

>>15198982
>free proton-electron pair
Isn't that just hydrogen

>>15194913
Why don't you just redirect all youtu.be links to yewtu.be? desu any specific invidious incident is too inconsistent for me to justify sending as that link.

I swear to god on either Sabine’s channels or one of her video descriptions she wrote something like “I’m a worthless bitch” I know I didn’t hallucinate this did anyone else see that??

>>15209879
a broken clock is right twice a day

I have her book "lost in math"
I'll get around to it

>>15209002
i think the way they explain it is the close nuclear electron cloud needs to be stabilized by at least two protons in the nucleus, making neutrons unstable alone but allowing them to exist in the nucleus as the "traditional" chemically relevant electron clouds and greater absolute positive charge of the nucleus (from neutrons having a proton component) electrostatically contain the nuclear electrons. even in a plasma of sufficient density, electrostatic forces might prevent neutron decay, rather than an additional force binding neutrons to protons that vanishes outside the nucleus

>>15210654
Is there a way to make neutron decay into hydrogen?

>>15194346
>Anyone who disagrees with me is a malicious actor.

>>15211109
yes

>>15211162
grow up

>>15211052
yeet the emitted proton and electon back at each other? they kinda already do that if you've got enough neutrons isolated from nuclei

>>15211204
be more mature

>>15211554
stop being childish

>>15194346
>getting assmad because even academics are now ditching your soience religion

>>15211562
>youtube academy

>>15211564
So now she was never a real scientist in the first place, huh? I don't mind you acting this way. It just demonstrates my point that your mentally diseased cult is a religion.

kek why is this thread still up?

>>15211569
post real scientist work, i'll wait

>>15211585
Post "real scientist work" for 99.9% of the people you call scientists.

>>15211594
>petty non argument
so it's established she's merely a pop sci entertainer

>>15211605
So it's established that most of the people you call "scientists" are pop-sci academic parasites. :^)

>>15211613
who are these non descript people i call scientist?
the butthurt is palpable

>>15211615
>who are these non descript people
The overwhelming majority of scientifically educated academics doing research. Your anal destruction is palpable.

>>15211624
how are they pop-sci?
>Your anal destruction is palpable
how so?

>>15211639
>how are they pop-sci?
How is she pop-sci? She has her name on over a hundred published theoretical physics papers. If she's not a "real scientist", then neither are most researchers. Your anus is bleeding profusely all over this thread, but that's okay. Please keep demonstrating how your mentally ill cult continually unpersons any scientists that criticize it.

>>15211641
her highest claims to fame are her pop sci articles she's been writing for decades and her youtube channel, do you lack any sort of thinking capabilities?

>>15211651
>her highest claims to fame are her pop sci articles
So? Does that somehow cancel over a hundred published research papers? You are literally dying from rectal blood loss.

>>15211641
>Your anus is bleeding profusely all over this thread
>noo my youtube girlfriend is le real scientist, if she isn't, nobody else is
massive projection

>>15211654
I can tell you're losing your mind with rage by your need to resort to samefagging. Imagine being so new you don't know about the IP counter.

>>15211653
she's never published anything worth of note ever, let alone authored anything at all. indeed she'd be a nobody no name academic like many others if not for her youtube channel, sorry to burst your bubble

>>15211657
>she's never published anything """worth of note"""
Same goes for the overwhelming majority of your so-called scientists. This is completely irrelevant. It's just funny that even her likes are now turning against your cult.

>>15211667
>Same goes for the overwhelming majority of your so-called scientists. This is completely irrelevant.
kek exactly at least you know your what aboutism is completely irrelevant. she's a pop sci icon deal with it

>>15198982
>in the SAM a neutron is hydrogen

>>15199508
Not science.

Yall are mad because she's right.

>>15194337
Long ass winded way to say too much research grants spent on useless shit. As if that is ground breaking news. Fuck.

Honestly Star Ship Troopers had the right way. "Would you like to know more?"

Get to the fucking point at the start, then I will continue watching if it interests me. Honestly the bitch is peak irony.

>>15213491
>Yall are mad because she's right.

Sabine is a stooge who subscribes to the differentiation and segmentation of study, i.e. "stay in your lane". She is not a being of the enlightenment. She is a tool of the oppressor in makeup to appear otherwise.

>>15199508
Shut up you ignorant stupid pig fucker.

>>15213532
>Shut up you ignorant stupid pig fucker.

Get fucked you whip cracking, oppressor faggot. The human race will overcome with or without you.

>>15213532
Excuse me, I'm not ignorant and those pigs appreciate the attention.

>>15213530
You will NEVER discover a novel particle.

Look chaps, its all very obvious. The way things are now with all our theories, the Universe is just way too complicated. A fuck ton of particles of all varieties and many more being postulated.
No. Just no.
This is all a big red flag that we have cocked up along the way.
The Universe shouldn't be complicated, it isn't made up from all sorts of different particles. No. The Universe should be fundamentally simple. There is one fundamental building block upon which all matter and energy is built. Simplicity begets complexity, not the other way around like these brain dead faggots in academia seem to think.
I have decided to call this fundamental building block the "Fucko". All effort and research should be channeled to discovering the Fucko. Everything else is put on hold. Even if it takes 10,000 years. In the meantime all the shit like quarks and tachyons and fucking Higgs particles, even fucking wave functions and all that shit...just throw them all in the trash can. Then piss in the trash can. Then add buckets of bleach.

Why give the elementary building block of the Universe the name of "Fucko" you may ask? Because fuck, why not? I postulated the existence of the Fucko and I will damn well name it as I wish. Just be thankful I didn't decide to name it the "Assdrip"

>>15213583
>no evidence for the claims of your theory
You're just as bad as the rest of the particle physicists.

>>15213583
Excellent idea my dear friend!

Lets assume your Fucko concept is correct, then all observed phenomena in the Universe can be explained by various builds of the Fucko and their interaction with each other. It could be a simple system, just like the Fucko itself. Much like a chemical formulae, without the need for all the faggy nomenclature!
Let F denote a single Fucko
F = point of existence
F + F = time
2F x F = space
3F = energy
3F x F = matter unit
etc
HOLY FUCKING GOD YOU ARE A FUCKING GENIUS!
PHYSICS THROWN OUT THE WINDOW!
A glorious new dawn of enlightenment is upon us all Anons! Lets REJOICE by burning some text books!

>>15213590
gimme grant munny bitch then shut da fuck up. pajeet bitch

>>15213609
You will NEVER be given a particle accelerator.

>>15213605
weird post

>>15213611
Dont need one. The discovery of the Fucko will be obtained through the copious ingestion of mind bending drugs, followed by the publication of some very well illustrated texts featuring all sorts of cool imagery of space and shit.
>>15213612
Inferior minds such as yours are often confused when confronted by superior intellects. When the existence of the Fucko has been verified you will be given the job of cleaning our toilets, which will be awash with diarrhea as a result of our lavish consumption of lobsters and truffles.

>>15213563
>You will NEVER discover a novel particle

Lmfao

I am already eternal

Darwin

Newton

The human algorithm always condenses to some semblance of truth. I have some, and you, Sabine, have virtually none.

>>15213635
meds, now

>fermilab releasing pure cope videos on youtube in direct response to Sabine
lmfao

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCS7Fd47-aA

>>15213976
Kek

>>15213479
Free neutrons do decay into hydrogen atoms.

>>15214160
I disbelieve

>>15214182
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_neutron_decay#Energy_budget
>A very small minority of neutron decays (about four per million) are so-called "two-body (neutron) decays", in which a proton, electron and antineutrino are produced as usual, but the electron fails to gain the 13.6 eV necessary energy to escape the proton (the ionization energy of hydrogen), and therefore simply remains bound to it, as a neutral hydrogen atom (one of the "two bodies"). In this type of free neutron decay, in essence all of the neutron decay energy is carried off by the antineutrino (the other "body").

>>15214182
Structured Atom and Standard Models both agree on this (see second to last paragraph in this section):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_neutron_decay#Energy_budget

since i got ninja'd, i'd also add that the reason behind the rarity of decay directly into hydrogen is the same in both models (namely, the energy of the emitted electron)

Fine. Then compress hydrogen into neutrons

>>15214312
neutron star, done

>>15214326

>>15214312
Add energy to the hydrogen atom until electron capture occurs?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture

>It would be nice to have a way to derive the masses of the particles in the standard model from a theory with fewer parameters, but there is nothing wrong with these masses just being what they are. Thus, not a good problem.
How can she be this based?

>>15214366
Can this be used to store energy?

>Sabine making a video on her actual field of expertise for once
>/sci/ nerds losing their minds

cope and seethe

>>15194337
So basically she's whinging about particle physicists get lots of grant money for kooky open ended experiments that aren't well-motivated because "REEE the standard model works"? Does she not realise that's actually really based?

>>15194337
>please don’t question the Standard Model
>There‘s nothing wrong with it
>I don’t bother telling apart experimental physicists and theorists