2 ms·

I 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 peopl

I 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 ago
I 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 ago
  I 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 ago
    I 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.

martinpw 8y ago

I 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 ago
I 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 ago
  I 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.