3 ms·
I'm sure Wolfram is for real; it's just funny how supposed scientists would jump out of their trousers to criticise him, all the while happily ignoring fraud in
by tucnak 2y ago
I'm sure Wolfram is for real; it's just funny how supposed scientists would jump out of their trousers to criticise him, all the while happily ignoring fraud in their immediately field, their own faculties, etc. Talk spineless. Then the next big fraud is revealed, and they suddenly go back to the usual pikachu face routine.
Surprise!
- PaulHoule 2y agoYeah, but talking about grand unification of any kind in 2024 seems to be besides the point. Newton postulated a relationship between physics on Earth and the cosmos, specifically that a single theory of gravity explains objects falling here and the moon orbiting around the Earth, planets going around the Sun, etc. Astronomical measurements show quite clearly that there either (1) there is a sector of hidden particles and fields responsible for most of the mass of the universe or (2) gravity and/or inertia (two sides of the same coin?) don't behave the same way at the galaxy scale as the solar system scale. Either way Newton's connection has broken down, so the physics we know is not the physics of the real world. The microphysics of MOND are baffling; it's not hard to imagine some particles and fields that explain dark matter but impossible to prove that any of them are for real unless we get a breakthrough in experiment that can rule some of them out.
- tucnak 2y agoThank you, it's always interesting to hear physicists talk about this stuff :-)