5 ms·
Peter Woit has strong opinions but they're often not representative of the physics community as a whole. In my opinion, which as a physicist myself I think matt
by zachf 4y ago
Peter Woit has strong opinions but they're often not representative of the physics community as a whole. In my opinion, which as a physicist myself I think matters as much as Woit's (i.e. not much), Scientific American is variable in quality, but I wouldn't dismiss the article before reading it.
This article does a pretty good job of summarizing a range of modern ideas about spacetime. I see that it introduces laymen to some of the important names in the field, including van Raamsdonk and Maldacena, and presents their important and influential work in an accessible way.
No paywall version: https://web.archive.org/web/20221124171006/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-spacetime-really-made-of/ https://web.archive.org/web/20221124171006/https://www.scien...
- ogogmad 4y agoThere's also nonsense like this: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/physicists-need-to-be-more-careful-with-how-they-name-things/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/physicists-need-t... https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=6202 https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=6202 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nasa-needs-to-rename-the-james-webb-space-telescope/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nasa-needs-to-ren...
- zachf 4y agoIs this what the kids call "cancel culture"? I'm judging the quality of the OP article, not the sum total of everything that they've ever published. The politics of the editors of Scientific American may not align perfectly with my own, but it's still worth engaging with their content when it's thoughtful, and I think this article is an example of that. Edit: actually that's not true, I just wrote that SA's overall quality is "variable". So yes, I already conceded not everything they publish is a winner. And for what it's worth, I agree that the piece they published on E. O. Wilson was in very poor taste.
- ogogmad 4y agoNo, it's not "cancel culture". If you're not an expert in the area, you need to know how trustworthy the publication is. As it stands, there are indicators that it's not trustworthy. [edit] Sure, the article might have some value. I can accept that. Thank you.
- zachf 4y agoI have a PhD in physics. I gave my assessment of the article in the first reply above. You're welcome to disagree, but since it seems you're mostly interested in rejecting the article on the basis of who published it instead of the content, perhaps this is a dead end. Edit: appreciate the edit :)
- api 4y agoIt’s what the kids call click bait of the subspecies known as “trolling for controversy.” It comes in two flavors: “woke” and “anti-woke.” In all cases the goal is to get you to click so someone can sell ads.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- swayvil 4y agoAt some point in the past SA contradicted some point of dogma. Now their output is forever picked over for evidence supporting a case for, yes, "cancelling them". That's how they do it these days.