3 ms·
The rate at which new experimental input to fundamental physics is generated has slowed almost to a halt. How much you can trust theory in the absence of experi
by jessriedel 6y ago
The rate at which new experimental input to fundamental physics is generated has slowed almost to a halt. How much you can trust theory in the absence of experimental confirmation is debated.
- ncmncm 6y agoNot true. The LHC kills theories at the same rate as ever. What has fallen off is hypotheses that survive testing.
- jessriedel 6y agoThe only sensible way to define experimental guidance is by plausibility of the theories being falsified. (Otherwise, I rule out lots of theories every day on my walk to work because I don't witness the heretofore laws of physics melting down.) Post-Higgs and post-natural-SUSY, there are no theories that have much a priori credence. And just getting to Higgs and no-natural-SUSY, compared to the previous accelerator, took multiple decades. This slow rate is to be compared to vastly faster rate at which new experimental input was rolling in in the '30s, '40s, '50s, and '60s.