5 ms·
>> Jonathan Oppenheim, who runs a program exploring post-quantum alternatives at University College London, suspects that’s because gravity simply can’t be sque
by sandworm101 3y ago
>> Jonathan Oppenheim, who runs a program exploring post-quantum alternatives at University College London, suspects that’s because gravity simply can’t be squeezed into a quantum box.
So... he is still part of the Orthodoxy. He is challenging ideas, but as an employee of University College London he is hardly any sort of outsider to the physics community.
- outlace 3y agoGenuine question here, when was the last time a total outsider made a significant contribution to physics?
- tonycoco 3y agoWhen was the last time an insider made one?
- sandworm101 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STEVE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STEVE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subauroral_ion_drift https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subauroral_ion_drift Not exactly the discovery of a new quark, but it triggered realworld research into the cause of the phenomena. That qualifies as contribution imho.
- FollowingTheDao 3y agoAsk yourself; why are they outsiders in the first place? It's like asking why hasn't anyone who is not a player in major league baseball ever won a world series?
- outlace 3y agoThose are disanalogous in the case of theoretical physics where you don’t need access to any expensive equipment. There’s nothing in principle preventing someone from learning math and physics on their own or from a traditional university and then coming up with new theories alone. And in fact this happens all the time and most of those people get called crackpots.
- 1270018080 3y agoA better analogy is asking why someone who is bad at baseball isn't on an MLB team
- srejk 3y agoYou have to be trained in physics to theorize about it. Thinking otherwise is the realm of the crackpot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11lPhMSulSU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11lPhMSulSU
- weatherlight 3y agoI love Dr. Collier's videos. Her method of story telling/video essay is extremely unconventional but very effective.
- srejk 3y agoMe too bestie, I haven't taken physics since undergrad but I appreciate that it's a layer of understanding above popular science (that never covers any of the math) while remaining accessible.
- bowsamic 3y agoI’m a quantum physicist and you wouldn’t believe how many people try and sell me on their theory that solves everything that is literally just an idea in their head and can’t even produce any quantitative predictions. The levels of self delusion that these people display is astounding and we need to mock it more openly imo
- rvcdbn 3y agoif i have a crackpot theory and i’d like a real physicist to look it over and am willing to pay for their time where would i find one? asking for a friend
- binarycoffee 3y agoSabine Hossenfelder apparently does this [1, 2] for $50/20min. [1] http://backreaction.blogspot.com/p/talk-to-physicist_27.html http://backreaction.blogspot.com/p/talk-to-physicist_27.html [2] https://aeon.co/ideas/what-i-learned-as-a-hired-consultant-for-autodidact-physicists https://aeon.co/ideas/what-i-learned-as-a-hired-consultant-f...
- dang 3y agoThis sort of objection only arises because titles say baity things like "challenging orthodoxy". There's no information there—not in the bait and not in the objections the bait triggers. The solution is to have a more substantive title. Fortunately the article supplies one of those in its HTML doc title, so we've switched to that (plus the s/the/a/ debaiting trick). Let's focus on the article content now please.