PHYSICS = NO PROGRESS?

[Anonymous No.11766696]

Is this really true /sci/? Sabine is saying that there's been NO PROGRESS in physics for 40 years!
WTF have physicists been doing all this time?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ7jwevZbb4

[Anonymous No.11766698]

>>11766696
It’s coming from a women disregard what they have to say

[Anonymous No.11766704]

>>11766696
Stealing funding from fields making progress to make big fireworks in Switzerland.

[Anonymous No.11766709]

isn't modern 'physics' nothing more than mathematical philosophy and speculative science fiction at this point?
I mean, there's a bunch of 'physicists' going around and claiming that science has proven that parallel universes exist and that there are multiverses.

[Anonymous No.11766710]

>>11766709
Pretty much.

[Anonymous No.11766716]

>>11766696
LMAO...
LOL...

[Anonymous No.11766721]

>>11766696
She makes a good point.
>t.engineer.

[Anonymous No.11766734]

>>11766696
She's right academia is mostly bull shit. Real progress gets scooped up because that shits dangerous same with unlimited energy etc. Humans are slaves and the weapons to keep them that way are money and reliance on that system. Physics itself requires practical knowledge not just theory but the ability to prove what's going on on a bigger scale. Academia is busy work for more funding while spewing out shit like string theory.

[Anonymous No.11766902]

>>11766709
>science has proven

Obvious bullshit you are probably misquoting

> parallel universes exist and that there are multiverses.

Completely reasonable conjecture, given all the alternative hypotheses to this are actually crazier.

[Anonymous No.11766905]

>>11766696
lol, was just about to post this..

She is right

[El Arcón No.11766917]

Not only was the no progress, there was affirmatively reversion to a previous state of greater stupidity.

[Anonymous No.11766931]

*fap fap fap*

[Anonymous No.11766943]

>>11766902
Yup, it's all hypothetical.. let's go back to gathering data, wait, gather more data, wait, and come up with a model that approximates observations (data) instead of making up shit, and inventing variables to fit said data/observations.

[Anonymous No.11766953]

>>11766902
problem with multiverse nonsense is that it was all based on string theory, which doesn't make any disprovable predictions. thus it got shitcanned. the only reason it still persists in the public consciousness is because it's a trope for hack sci-fi righters.

[Anonymous No.11767051]

she is a social media grifter who soothes the egos of people too stupid/lazy to understand ideas from quantum mechanics to string theory by telling them they don't have to try because it is actually all the experts who are stupid. her blog is basically a crackpot nursery

[Anonymous No.11767148]

Personally i do not think crazy philosophical physics in necessarily bad.
It has always been the crazy immature ideas that do not necessarily explain a lot but explain but do explain some other things that are most helpful.
I believe the early heliocentric model did not account for few things about how things fall. And also according to it planets like venus would be many times closer to us than they actually were and the telescope itself was still at the time an unproven tool only a few people had.
By all means galileo's thinking was completely wrong and the reason everyone considered him crazy.
But he was technically right, later we found out.

[Anonymous No.11767312]

>>11766696
She has a good point, honestly. The overreliance on mathematics has destroyed the gut feeling that was the physicists' most valuable asset. Einstein got to general relativity without any math for example. Imagine publishing a paper like that today.

[Anonymous No.11767327]

>>11766931
you'll love this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL9wWeEmQvo
comments are hilarious too.

[Anonymous No.11767342]

>>11767312

>The overreliance on mathematics has destroyed the gut feeling that was the physicists' most valuable asset.

Bullshit, modern theories are all about "beauty".

>Einstein got to general relativity without any math for example.

False. Special relativity was pretty light on math, but general has plenty of hard math.

[Anonymous No.11767490]

>>11766696
I agree.
But I think it's the overreliance on computers and the poor communication between physics and maths departments which has done it. You wouldn't believe the amount of times I've seen guys in the physics department reach for Mathematica to solve basic shit even high schoolers could do. And the attitude among physicists that mathematicians are useless is doing them no favours.

[Anonymous No.11767498]

>>11766696
why are scientific journalists obsessed with this woman?

[Anonymous No.11767837]

>>11766696
>>11766709
yes, and I think shes the only one in the popsci "I love science" circle that is honest and openly talking about the real state of things... we still don't even have a proper physical explanation for magnetism!!!...

>its just vector space
>its just virtual particles

Fundamental lectures Richard Feynman:
The best way is to use the abstract field idea. That it is abstract is unfortunate, but necessary. The attempts to try to represent the electric field as the motion of some kind of gear wheels, or in terms of lines, or of stresses in some kind of material have used up more effort of physicists than it would have taken simply to get the right answers about electrodynamics. It is interesting that the correct equations for the behavior of light were worked out by MacCullagh in 1839. But people said to him: “Yes, but there is no real material whose mechanical properties could possibly satisfy those equations, and since light is an oscillation that must vibrate in something, we cannot believe this abstract equation business.” If people had been more open-minded, they might have believed in the right equations for the behavior of light a lot earlier than they did.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_01.html#Ch1-S5

[Anonymous No.11767849]

>>11766698
t. Salty physicist

>>11766709
It's a jewish mystery cult meant to mindfuck you

[Anonymous No.11767857]

>>11767498
>why are scientific journalists obsessed with this woman?
>woman

[Anonymous No.11767861]

It's because they think that .999... = 1. Circular logic.

[Anonymous No.11767864]

Didn't they detect gravitational waves no too long ago? That should be worth something...

[Anonymous No.11767999]

>>11767864
>Didn't they detect gravitational waves no too long ago?
Do you know when gravitational waves were predicted? Einstein predicted them in 1916. Over 100 years ago.
We're talking about foundational physics and not experiments.

[Anonymous No.11768005]

>>11766696
It's because the "shut up and calculate" retards has destroyed physical thought and led to the suffocation of new physical theories as a consequence.

[El Arcón No.11768064]

[Anonymous No.11768080]

>>11768005
>It's because the "shut up and calculate" retards
Heh. Those "retards" are the reason why we have all this wonderful technology and why you can easily shitpost about them all these decades later.
And pretty much of all of the interpretations of QM are either proven wrong (anything involving hidden variables) or just untestable sci-fi that offer no predictive value over Copenhagen.

[Anonymous No.11768081]

>>11768064
Fuck off tooker

[Anonymous No.11768088]

>>11767849
>too retarded to understand physics so calls it a Jewish mind fuck
Current state of this board.

[Anonymous No.11768096]

>>11766709
Multiverses can be proven by semantics and modal logic, we don't need a fucktard with a ton of cash by the academia saying this type of shit

[Anonymous No.11768109]

>>11768096
>Multiverses can be proven by semantics and modal logic
that's not how science works.

[Anonymous No.11768121]

>>11768080
That's exactly the argument that always misses the point.
>we got technology out of it, so just go with it
The point is that applications are not all that matters. This argument could just as easily be applied to ancient astronomical calendars. They work, and they have formulae built in which give corrections to the errors which build up over time so as to allow them to keep giving correct physical descriptions. But predictions should not be an obstacle to rethinking the actual representation behind the theory, because without an idea of what the theory represents, it is not possible to move to a radically new one: applying "shut up and calculate" is essentially why the Mayans had their mechanistic calculus but Europe leaped forward with Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton.
>either proven wrong (anything involving hidden variables)
And if you're referring to Von Neumann's proof this is just an old-fashioned misconception. His argument is circular and was only rejected too late, by which time the damage had already been done.
The fact remains that the predictive power of the formulae of quantum mechanics should not be an obstacle to reinterpretations of what the theory actually means. To say otherwise is to make physicists take the role of vastly inferior mathematicians, and blunt any kind of incisive vision we used to have that allowed us to see new theories.
>offer no predictive value
Firstly, this is false. Just last year Howard Carmichael's stochastic ideas of how quantum transitions work back in the 90s allowed those experiments to be done in which they showed that transitions don't actually need to be instantaneous.
Secondly, the predictive value is not the full point, and it's this obsession with what symbolic manipulations "do" rather than what the ideas mean or represent which drives theoretical insight, and the lack thereof is what stifles it.

[Anonymous No.11768152]

>>11768121
>They work, and they have formulae built in which give corrections to the errors which build up over time so as to allow them to keep giving correct physical descriptions
Sure, but that's definitely not the case with QM. We've continually tested it to the current limits of our measurement abilities for decades and every time we made advancements in measurement, they agreed with theory.
>applying "shut up and calculate" is essentially why the Mayans had their mechanistic calculus but Europe leaped forward with Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton
That's stretching it way too much. Copenhagen is definitely not wrong. It ignores certain things because we can never know what actually happens. Ever considered that there might be limits to our testing and understanding?
>>either proven wrong (anything involving hidden variables)
>And if you're referring to Von Neumann's proof this is just an old-fashioned misconception
No, I'm referring to a bunch of experimental results that have proven hidden variable theories wrong. Over the past 10 years, there have been NUMEROUS experimental results excluding any form of hidden variable in QM. If your fav interpretation has hidden variables in it, it's definitely wrong.
>Secondly, the predictive value is not the full point
What value does something like MWI offer (which is the current preferred interpretation of many blowhards and brainlets) over Copenhagen? MWI is untestable and will forever be untestable. It also fails Occam's razor.

[Anonymous No.11768175]

>>11768152
>We've continually tested it to the current limits of our measurement abilities for decades and every time we made advancements in measurement, they agreed with theory.
Even if this were true (which it isn't, because we can't, for example, predict the magnetic moment of the electron, just for one example). This doesn't change anything. Ancient calendars also work very well in predicting regular astronomical events, so going back hundreds of years you'd still be making this same statement to support the model of the old astronomers.
(I'm not referring to the actual theory of epicycles and so on, but specifically to the calculations themselves in other models which weren't taken to represent anything other than a way to get the right prediction)
>Copenhagen is definitely not wrong.
The exact reason I mentioned the Yale experiments last year is that Copenhagen interpretations predict instantaneous collapse, whereas the Yale experiment managed to catch and reverse the transition. So this "definitely" should be downgraded to a "probably" at the very least.
>What value does something like MWI offer
I don't care for MWI either.
>Ever considered that there might be limits to our testing and understanding?
Yes, I just don't accept this as a reason to stop seeking a theory to which we can attach a physical representation, and certainly don't consider this an argument in favour of "shut up and calculate." That's what we have engineers for.

[Anonymous No.11768555]

>>11767327
what did she mean by blatantly showing her nips like that

[Anonymous No.11769207]

>>11768555
>what did she mean by blatantly showing her nips like that
she knows exactly what she's doing. she's way too smart.

[Anonymous No.11769362]

she’s just buttblasted about being a failure

[Anonymous No.11769381]

>>11769362
And who has genuinely helped physics?

[Anonymous No.11769479]

>>11767342
>Bullshit, modern theories are all about "beauty".
Yes, that's what that means, captain obvious.

>False. Special relativity was pretty light on math, but general has plenty of hard math.
You're a huge fucking idiot and you should work on your reading comprehension. He used next to no mathematics whatsoever in deriving his thoughts. Damn I hate your kind. This board is filled with imbeciles like you.

[Anonymous No.11769512]

LHC will be getting shut down within a few years unless it finds something big which will spark a breakthrough because it's no longer justifying it's expense. Physics as a field is largely stuck arguing over several theories which none of them can prove and the academics are trapped in rabbit holes like magnetic monopoles. Also funding is not given to actually useful research topics largely due to them going against the interests of big corporations. I personally think the education system needs to be revamped and we need to take on a broader spectrum of subjects. Philosophy was always an integral part of the education of physicists of the past, though nowadays there is an arrogance towards the subject coming from a position of ignorance from the majority of stem academics, many of whom simply do not understand the things philosophers are discussing.

[Anonymous No.11769521]

I want Sabine to be my large hardon collider.

[Anonymous No.11769526]

>>11767999
Yeah, that's why I said "detected" and not discovered. You may recall, people still debated if they actually existed before then. So yeah, I'd say it was at least a kinda important.

[Anonymous No.11769551]

>>11769512
>LHC will be getting shut down within a few years unless it finds something big which will spark a breakthrough because it's no longer justifying it's expense
don't they want to build an even bigger one?
it's just a massive waste of money. they won't find anything. there are no more elementary particles.

[Anonymous No.11769574]

>>11768088
Yeah I'm sure string theory is totally real with its ten or eleven dimensions that match the number of sephirot in kaballah

[Anonymous No.11769580]

>>11769551

I think there's some advocates of a larger one but it seems more like grasping at straws. There's still some interest in magnetic monopoles which could push some electromagnetic manipulation research forward but the only way the LHC will help is if they just keep smashing things together and randomly catch one. Nothing happened so far so it's likely a dead end.

[Anonymous No.11769679]

Sabine is against new collider... the Future Circular Collider (FCC). They must hate her guts at CERN.

[Anonymous No.11769687]

>>11769679
Ha Ha, yeah that would be big money for them.

[Anonymous No.11769704]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxLGUKRNHXM

cute autism

[Anonymous No.11769729]

>>11769362
https://www.fias.science/en/fellows/detail/hossenfelder-sabine/

?

[Anonymous No.11769746]

>>11769679
>Michael Benedikt, a CERN physicist who led the FCC study, says that a supercollider facility would be worth building regardless of the expected scientific outcome. “These kinds of largest scale efforts and projects are huge starters for networking, connecting institutes across borders, countries. All these things together make up a very good argument for pushing such unique science projects.”
lol

[Anonymous No.11769752]

>>11768096
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11769755]

>>11769746
the mask slips....

Given how extreme events in the cosmos are, it seems more logical to invest in building better telescopes to look more closely at events many orders of magnitude more reactive than any experiment on earth could be. We know those will get results.

[Anonymous No.11769756]

>>11769574
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11769757]

>>11769729
pity job in an irrelevant group. she’s like their popsci staffer

[Anonymous No.11769759]

>>11768175
>The exact reason I mentioned the Yale experiments last year is that Copenhagen interpretations predict instantaneous collapse, whereas the Yale experiment managed to catch and reverse the transition. So this "definitely" should be downgraded to a "probably" at the very least.
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11769775]

>>11769757
It appears to be an offshoot of a major German university and to do a lot of work with the Max Planck Institute,and has hosted international conferences on physics that included Verlinde and Unruh

https://events.fias.science/event/4/

Not exactly an "irrelevant group".

[Anonymous No.11769881]

>>11769775
look at their “research groups”. a bunch of no-names. euro academia is filled with those types

[Anonymous No.11769901]

>>11769746
>>11769755
please remind us, where was http invented?

[Anonymous No.11769912]

>>11769746
people saying shit like this makes me want to slap them, take away all their funding, and give it to SpaceX

[Anonymous No.11769934]

>>11769679
the LHC is a huge dud, so yeah, all the scholars can say is that another 2billions spending would be good for networking and not get people bored.

[Anonymous No.11770413]

>>11769679
I was at cern for a short time. We got a tour from a guy who literally knew where every single freaking cable was going. Spoke four languages fluently and God knows how many more. Really friendly guy as well, albeit a bit autistic.
Then I asked him, how people and countries justify putting billions of dollars into cern, where no clear outcome or benefit can be promised and there are other, more pressing problems. I meant it as an innocent question really. He completely ticked.

[Anonymous No.11770863]

>>11770413
What was his response

[Anonymous No.11771100]

>>11770413
that's CERn for you

[Anonymous No.11771123]

>>11769881
...one of these groups was published in Nature a few years back. I found that out in 2 minutes of looking.

Anon, its okay, you dont have to like this person, but dont lie about the prestige of their employer.

[Anonymous No.11771175]

>>11766696
She's right though. It kinda feels like since Einstein, physics has become more like mathematical constructivism and sci-fi.

[Anonymous No.11771796]

>>11769746
>maybe the real science was friends we made along the way...

[Anonymous No.11771818]

>>11766709
I'm beginning to think this site has no idea about anything.
I need a new website.

[Anonymous No.11771996]

>>11771123
so what. half of the stuff in Nature is boring. the entire faculty of FIAS has nobody worth mentioning in high-energy physics besides sabine for her popsci crap.

look at her history, starts out at UCSB. cool. perimeter institute, cool but offbeat. at least some people there are relevant. Uppsala? wot? then in her book she complains about “muh no job prospects”. then Frankfurt no-name department? it’s a total downward trajectory, face it. she got memed by the Perimeter shills like Smolin and that leads everyone to dead-end jobs

[Anonymous No.11772066]

>>11771175

The problem is that Einstein was wrong about quantum mechanics.

Bohr pretty much destroyed his first two thought experiments, then the third one was shown to be false due to Bell's inequality.

I'm a mathematical logician who works on foundation of physics. What I think is happening is that logic breaks down when you combine quantum mechanics and gravity.

[Anonymous No.11772645]

>>11766734
This 100%. Even in STEM reproducibility is below 50%, we're standing on the shoulders of frauds rn (I'm a fraud too :^)).

We need to go down 5 decades and start running reproduction studies but no one is willing to take the hit on their rep to actually clean up academia. And no one is willing to give the money. Our best bet is honestly ARPA 2.0 around 2030 when the military realizes that all the bread and butter is still pre-1990 research.

t. someone who published lies because nothing was working because the stuff I was building on was false (figured that out too late) just to get my piece of paper. Other people have cited me since then. oof

[Anonymous No.11772677]

>>11766696

No progress? Nonsense. Physics was unified by Anon at The Optimum Institute.

[Anonymous No.11772693]

>>11772677
>Physics was unified by Anon at The Optimum Institute
god damn... that's a pretty good grift.

[Anonymous No.11772694]

>>11772645
What should be reproduced/looked back into?

[Anonymous No.11772700]

>>11766696
Nukes were 40s tech based on decades old theory. Advancements since then have to be kept secret as to not risk other forms of planet destroying tech from proliferating.

[Anonymous No.11772705]

>>11772700
>Advancements since then have to be kept secret
you base this on what?
tighten that tin foil bro... it's leaking.

[Anonymous No.11772719]

>>11772705
The literal trillions that have been poured into the black hole that is the pentagon for over 70 years now. Can you name one SAP program that is going on right now?

[Anonymous No.11772728]

>>11772719
you assume that they were all successful. the thing you don't understand about the DOD budget is that is serves as sort of a welfare program for white collar workers.
and let's not forget that DOD does release projects from the black world all the time.
to assume that they've "beaten physics" and made something that can 'destroy planets' is just utter batshittery.

[Anonymous No.11772779]

>>11772728
>and let's not forget that DOD does release projects from the black world all the time.
They don't, you made this up, because you don't know what you're talking about. You have no basis to assume very little of the trillions they've spent has been successful, and probably have no comprehension of the scale of funding that gets thrown around in the USA. I've never assumed they've "beaten physics", only that they've advanced it and kept it secret to keep Russians, psycho chinks and other bad actors from having such knowledge as well. They've already developed planet ruining tech with nukes, and its foolish to think they wouldn't put more research in other tech of such magnitudes, and that any break throughs would become public.

[Anonymous No.11772835]

>>11772694
Pretty much everything that hasn't been commercialized. The big pharma companies (Merck, Bayer) have literal labs full of scientists just doing reproducibility studies at the request of other parts of the company because several big projects took published findings in major journal at face value and burned several billions before finding out the truth. They estimate about 2/3rds of all published things in their target fields are wrong.

>>11772728
> the DOD budget...serves as sort of a welfare program for white collar workers
This 100x. Of the 50k engineers at a given major defense companies, maybe 250 of them are diligently doing actual work. When I worked at one I did maybe 4 days of real work every 3 months and I was a top performer. Spent most of my time just learning new things.

[Anonymous No.11772848]

>>11766696
Let's see the discovery of the quark–gluon plasma was in 2011
which, if I know my math 2020-2011= 9
and 9 < 40, so I think there was progress in the last 40.

[Anonymous No.11772882]

>>11768175
There actually no instanteneous collapse -- it's a vulgar interpretation. There is a actually a stochastic DE behavior

[Anonymous No.11772927]

>>11766721
>.t engineer
No.

[Anonymous No.11773033]

>>11771996
You're so clearly a bitter failure projecting on her...its sad

[Anonymous No.11773684]

>>11769912
>SpaceX

[Anonymous No.11775246]

>>11772848
>quark–gluon plasma

That was predicted in the 1970s.

[Anonymous No.11775266]

>>11773033
tits or gtfo

[Anonymous No.11775306]

>>11768555
She has breasts like a man with gynecomastia so I'm not sure she "meant" anything.

[Anonymous No.11775326]

>>11769512
Yes, I agree that philosophical education and maybe even the corpus of classical literature would be invaluable to the formation of stem academics, but at the same time I don't trust the current educational environment to approach those areas in a way that would be meaningful to anyone, let alone to scientists. Fields will keep on being pigeon-holed into constantly diminishing niches of corporate interest until very academic is sucessfully turned into autistic savant monkey.

[Anonymous No.11775338]

>>11766698
>It’s coming from a women disregard what they have to say
This is where you should go----> >>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.11775341]

>>11766698
fpbp

[Anonymous No.11775347]

>>11767327
kek, how many of those aren't paid?
I saw some racism in there. Which one of you was that?

[Anonymous No.11777506]

>>11775347
>paid
wat?

[Anonymous No.11778145]

>>11766696
I really can believe that she has not done any progress in 40 something years

[Anonymous No.11778164]

>>11766696
Real progress ended with tesla and is hidden in military installations. Only military bases work on actual physics while our "performance" physicists just spew nonsense math based on assumptions and derivative bullshit

If anyone is even close to finding out about a breakthrough you are deleted and your petents overtaken,falsified and made useless.

Happens all the time.

[Anonymous No.11778231]

>>11769746
Kek that's the weakest comeback you could ever imagine.

[Anonymous No.11778316]

>>11768064
This looks like it was written by a toddler and not a PhD-holder....
Fuck off tooker

[Anonymous No.11778354]

>>11766698
>>11766716
>>11767051
>>11767498
>>11772677
>>11772700
>>11778145
She's right, you fucking idiots.

[Anonymous No.11778735]

>>11778354
you'd like to lick her pussy, ok, but she has not understood anything going on beyond 1970's when she was born

[Anonymous No.11779407]

>>11768121
>Howard Carmichael
I studied under this guy. He's a total chad for a dude in his 70s or whatever he is now. Looks like a lion or something.

[Anonymous No.11779419]

>>11772882
Originally people did seem to think it was instantaneous but that's been revised. So his original claim that the Copenhagen interpretation is just definitely correct isn't worth much when what the Copenhagen interpretation is to begin with has been revised a few times. There's no reason to stop looking for new interpretations of theories.

[Anonymous No.11779472]

Embrace the EU pill anons.

[Anonymous No.11779587]

>>11766953
but the math in string theory is good!

[Anonymous No.11779599]

>>11772835
That.....kind of shoddy science is not acceptable
What the fuck happened?

[Anonymous No.11779613]

is robitaille right then?

[Anonymous No.11779674]

>>11772835
>Pretty much everything that hasn't been commercialized
What are some science fields that haven't been commercialized?

Also, why does commercialize even mean that much? Opiods were commercialized as something safe and that didn't turn out to be true...

[Anonymous No.11779892]

>>11769934
unironically, yes.
Just imagine for a second - what all those young bright inquisitive minds would be up to if they were "bored". Imagine all the smart phds at, say, cern out of a job suddenly. Out of a whole system to employ or at least validate them. A sudden heap of the smartest brains on the planet, bored, desperate. It's social dynamite, more so in these politically unstable times (i.e. everything post 9/11). From the system's point of view, it is imperative to keep those kinds of people occupied, if not to keep an active repo of brains to be queried in case of warfare, then at the very least to keep them from diverting their attention to society's various ills by occupying them otherwise. And this means a) keep em happy (til late 20th century), or b) "divide et impera"(nowadays), have 100phds competing for the one tenure track position.
Just think of academia as one giant google captcha.

[Anonymous No.11779912]

>>11769934
>huge dud
>discovers higgs
We can safely file your opinions in the trash can.

[Anonymous No.11779943]

>>11779912
>>discovers higgs

[Anonymous No.11779967]

>>11766709
Not really. You've got a problem on the frontiers where in order to test your hypotheses you need to start probing some crazy high energy levels that the human race probably wont even scratch the bottom limits of for a while (presuming there isn't something that comes along and forces a paradigm shift in the understanding of the fundementals).

[Anonymous No.11779994]

>>11779912
>discovers higgs
It was predicted in 1960s!
This whole thread is about FUNDAMENTAL ADVANCEMENT and not about experimental confirmations.

[Anonymous No.11779995]

>>11779967
This. Doesn't confirming the next fundamental particle require an accelerator the size of the solar system?

[Anonymous No.11780028]

>>11779995
There are hopes that SUSY is hiding just beyond the capabilities of the LHC. The higher energy the sparticles need to be the less optimal they are to fit the theory.
For things like string theory though, barring any game changing technology out of nowhere, will need a particle accelerator that's just retardedly huge.
Fingers crossed that it might yield predictions that we can validate before that.

[Anonymous No.11780064]

>>11768152
>MWI is untestable and will forever be untestable.

For you, maybe.

[Anonymous No.11780413]

>>11766696
All the big brains moved on to newer fields that offered more opportunity for social and economic advancement

[Anonymous No.11780492]

>>11780413
>All the big brains moved on to newer fields
which one anon?

[Anonymous No.11780519]

>>11769574
You're not sure how many dimensions it is, but you ARE sure it matches the number of "sephirot in kaballah". Lol.
If it's ten, it also matches the number of fingers humans usually have. Another word for fingers? Digits. And ten is a number. So we can clearly see that string theory is a hoax peddled by Big Glove

[Anonymous No.11780583]

>>11779994
you realize that physics must be supported by physical phenomena. if we never experimentally discovered it, particle physics would still contain theories that don't contain the higgs. it's hard for me to believe actual retards come to this board thinking theory is the only thing to worry about when dealing with science. this is ignoring high energy is the meme subfield of physics and hasn't been useful since renormalization group

[Anonymous No.11780585]

>>11779943
>higgs discovery is soijak!!! maga awoo!!!

[Anonymous No.11780697]

>>11780585
that guy is much cooler and more respectable than any soijack poster

[Anonymous No.11780920]

>>11780583
You are a dumb. It doesn't matter what theoretical physics model people like because it's just autism anyway.

[Anonymous No.11781065]

>>11766696
>woman
yeah i dont care, opinion discarded

[Anonymous No.11781137]

>>11781065
>micropenis
opinion discarded

[Anonymous No.11781183]

>>11781137
>not having a penis
opinion discarded

[Anonymous No.11781198]

>>11780028
supersymmetry is dead

[Anonymous No.11782315]

>>11766696
>(((Hossenfelder)))
Opinion gassed

[Anonymous No.11782355]

>>11780413
>>11780492
This. What are they? Please don’t say AI

[Anonymous No.11782486]

>>11771818
Imagine a bunch of biofags like me that maybe had basic mechanics,thermo,electrodynmics getting fed half-assed info throughout this board.
Now imagine that shit actuality accumulating to the thought that one understand shit and this is how this post probably happened.

[Anonymous No.11782535]

>>11766696
physic theorists are cancer that only do mathemagics and other faggot assumption shit. yes. but physics has progressed just not as much as I would like.

[Anonymous No.11782601]

>>11766696
>no advancement for 40 years in a time where technological progress has only continuously accelerated.

[Anonymous No.11782674]

>>11769746
>in my mind this sounded like a good point to make

[Anonymous No.11782957]

*solves physics*
Heh, nothing personnel.

[Anonymous No.11782974]

>>11766696
she has crazy liberal eyes

[Anonymous No.11782981]

>>11782957
Man if he didn't have a physics pedigree i would think he is a total crackpot... i think he went to deep down the cellular automata rabbit hole.

[Anonymous No.11782987]

>>11782601
To be fair most of those advancements aren't coming from pure physicists. Like 99% of them are from some form of engineer, CS, biology, chemist, or bastardized child of multiple disciplines.

[Anonymous No.11783107]

>>11782957
>le shiggy physics man

[Anonymous No.11783212]

>>11782974

[Anonymous No.11783399]

Last week a bunch of physicists were delighted that they were able to send a man to space, something achieved 50 years ago.

[Anonymous No.11783434]

>>11783399
Manned spaceflights were achieved 60 years ago.

[Anonymous No.11783518]

>>11766696
FYSIGGS?

[Anonymous No.11783806]

>>11767837
Are you stupid? Magnetic field is the relativistic effect of the electric field. Have you ever studied electrodynamics or are you just and undergrad spewing bullshit?

[Anonymous No.11783828]

>>11766696
>WTF have physicists been doing all this time?
telling everyone else what to do because they think they're the smartest guys in the room

[Anonymous No.11784741]

>>11766696
damn people can't you see that technological progress, science, civilization hit the wall? such miracle as smartphone is achievement of logistics, management, which allowed affordable price. what science has done recently for consumer products? internet of things? dildo with Bluetooth? civilization is headed for disaster, every field of science becomes toxic. people run out of practical ideas everywhere. even music and movie industries suffer, no new sounds, styles, plots, almost anything new is just cover or remake. and gender studies, liberal arts, shutdown stem are result of saturation. next generation will not know what to do, greatest depression ahead.

[Anonymous No.11784746]

>>11766696
muh higgs boson

[Anonymous No.11784756]

>>11768096
That's not how anthropic principle logic works. How could you possible prove that the existence of a universe with the right balance of forces is the result a multiverse and not intelligent design?