5 ms·
I found HN somewhat amusing when it came to physics, now I find it increasingly irritating. I don't think the same arrogant know-it-all attitude coming from lay
by mnl 8y ago
I found HN somewhat amusing when it came to physics, now I find it increasingly irritating. I don't think the same arrogant know-it-all attitude coming from laypersons would take place if the topic were neurosurgery or the theory of integro-differential equations. For some reason physics gets the "they don't know what they're doing" treatment by people that haven't bothered to get any formal training on it.
Well I have, and even though I'm not too keen on superstring theory I just couldn't dismiss it like this. It makes sense, it's important and it's a possibility worthy enough to be explored. Will people here just try to understand that they're talking about another profession with a really high skill access barrier that takes many years of hard work to become just acquainted with? Can we please just admit that if we don't know what we're talking about, we really don't know what we're talking about?
- andrewmcwatters 8y agoSpare me your thinly veiled insult and learn some modesty; my kid sister doesn't need to know how blockchains work to know that a bunch of guys running GPUs in their garages and in datacenters to generate toy virtual coins doesn't make a currency accessible to her girlfriends. The scientific community has openly criticized string theory for years. To attempt to gate-keep by telling me I can't read and interpret the opinions of those more informed than myself is arrogance of its own kind.
- peteradio 8y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks072waMayk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks072waMayk
- madhadron 8y agoI partially feel the same way. At the same time, there are a lot more people who studied physics commenting on Hacker News than neurosurgeons. So you have people who have passed the skills barrier commenting negatively. Does that encourage people who have not passed the skills barrier to feel safe to comment?
- martinpw 8y agoI think one of the frustrations is probably that the tone, and level of nuance and confidence expressed seems to be inversely correlated with level of expertise in the field. So for example from the current thread: (someone with training in the field): "It makes sense, it's important and it's a possibility worthy enough to be explored." versus: (admittedly uninformed person): "As a layman from a distance, [...] it's total garbage."
- maxxxxx 8y agoI like to read about physics and as far as i understand the energies needed to confirm string theory are so far out that we will potentially never achieve them. I also read that a lot of physicists believe that string theorists have lost touch with reality. Is there any nearer term benefit that may come out of string theory ? I am honestly curious. Somehow I find it hard to believe that so many very intelligent people are chasing something misguided.
- auntienomen 8y agoI don't think there's any direct near-term benefit that will come out of it, especially of the engineering variety. Our civilization doesn't even make use of the subnuclear physics described by quantum chromodynamics, which is now nearly 40+ years old. It's likely to be a long time before we 'need' correct physical models on shorter distance scales. That said, we're not devoting the kind of resources to string theory that we devote to engineering ready problems. Probably somewhere in the ballpark of $10M/year worldwide funding provided by various governments, with a similar amount provided by private donors. This is rounding error. In the US, we spend about 10x this on the National Endowment for the Arts. You can make an argument that all money spent on extensions of the Standard Model (and there are a lot of them besides string theory) has been wasted. But string theory at least has taught us far more about the structure of the mathematical models we use to describe physics than any of its competitors. This is why people continue to study it, even in the absence of experimental confirmation.
- andrewmcwatters 8y agoBetter yet, here's an idea, if you don't like it, don't upvote articles talking about physics on HN. Perhaps to you, I'm the equivalent of Twitter dribble from the masses. What a shame. Would you complain about modern art being commented on from the uninformed after being posted in a forum discussing primarily music because they're only similarly relevant? Maybe you'll have more experiences like this and learn HN isn't widely a physics forum. It's barely even a data science one, and that's far more relevant to people here.
- mnl 8y agoI'm just tired of nonsense. I don't understand what's the point in writing op-eds pontificating about things you have no idea, and now they're coming in every day because for some reason many in the HN community think that you can get an education in theoretical physics by reading popsci and blogs. I know everybody has an opinion about everything under the Sun, me having an opinion about theirs is only natural. I'm just pointing out the fact that laypersons feel increasingly entitled to dismiss not only the professional work of experts, but whole bodies of knowledge available to them but that they can't be bothered to study. As I don't know whether the professional fields of these people allow for winging it, I'm assuming that maybe they think that you can do that in physics. Well you can't, so if you have a problem with some physical theory the proper way is to engage like everybody else, not trying to kill whatever you don't like because how it sounds from the proudest and laziest outside. This new sense of entitlement from the opinionated laypersons is actually an antiscience stand, this is what gets you anti-vaxxers and shuts down funding of honest research.
- JKCalhoun 8y ago> Can we please just admit that if we don't know what we're talking about Poster you're replying to admits they're a layman. As am I. Perhaps the people writing articles for the laymen should do a better job explaining the redeeming aspects of String Theory. Because like the OP, I too have been left with the impression (from reading articles targeting laymen) that String Theory is clever math in search of a reality it can describe.
- mcnamaratw 8y agoLaypeople can go ahead and express opinions about physics they don't understand, in exactly the same way a layperson can read HN and then go on to express opinions about the merits of Java vs Ruby without ever trying either language. It's a little bit silly, though.
- goatlover 8y agoWait, is Java point particles and Ruby superstrings, with LISP being quantum fields?
- mcnamaratw 8y agoSure! Any two things I don't understand are equivalent to me!
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Koshkin 8y agoWhich it indeed is.
- evanb 8y agoPhysics Today isn't for laymen. It's a trade journal, for physicists.