4 ms·
> but physicists all seem to promote it It does not seem like it to me (non physicist with some physicist friends from other fields who try to dumb down stuff
by ashildr 6y ago
> but physicists all seem to promote it
It does not seem like it to me (non physicist with some physicist friends from other fields who try to dumb down stuff to me).
In my world (SE) it seems like a proprietary binary that must be included for the rest of an open source product describing the observable universe to work very well. Everyone seems to hate it, but nobody wrote something better, yet.
Every competing implementation fails to work in other areas that we already are using in production, extensively.
And when some professional, who read and understood the source code, starts talking about it, a lot of people voice stupid ideas that they would not have if they passed some lectures on the subject.
Edit to add: I envy physicists a little - the best thing for “them” to happen seems to be if something does not work in a very peculiar way.
- andrewflnr 6y agoOk, but do any of them take seriously the idea that it doesn't exist at all? It was my impression that even theories that try to modify gravity in ways that also explain stuff like the CMB spectrum sort of end up inventing dark matter anyway (IIRC TeVeS was the big one like that).