3 ms·
Oy ve, if you're going to get upset about names, please get upset about the Standard Model particle names, which are a dumpster fire. The problem is that a tiny
by javajosh 7y ago
Oy ve, if you're going to get upset about names, please get upset about the Standard Model particle names, which are a dumpster fire. The problem is that a tiny group signals outrage on behalf of a much larger group, and sensitive, empathic people like Aaronson take the bait.
This just doesn't matter, Scott. Protecting others from outrage is a fool's game, because you will always (always!) lose. Outrage is NOT a signal that someone has been harmed; 99% of the time outraged offense is a signal that someone's ego is getting fed that sweet sweet nectar of negative, powerful emotion.
Honestly, if you just wrote another post about how QM is a very natural consequence of the reality of negative probability, instead of this post about nothing, the world would be a better place.
- sanxiyn 7y ago> Standard Model particle names Which names are you talking about? Nothing comes to my mind.
- javajosh 7y agoColor charge. Nothing to do with color. Quarks: up/down, top/bottom, and...charm/strange? Mediating particles are gluons, photons, and...Z Boson and W Boson. I personally dislike composite category names like 'hadron' and 'baryon', although they aren't as bad as the others. It's a dumpster fire of names that makes learning the stuff far harder than it should be.