4 ms·
"Growing consensus" is not the same thing as consensus. If currently 20% of the top physicists think spacetime is not a primitive notion and this number has mon
by abdullahkhalids 1y ago
"Growing consensus" is not the same thing as consensus. If currently 20% of the top physicists think spacetime is not a primitive notion and this number has monotonically increased by 1% every year for the past decade, that would be an example of "growing consensus".
Besides, Vlatko Vedral is a top theorist in the area, who talks other top theorists at conferences and workshops. He wouldn't say this if he didn't think other top theorists didn't agree with him.
- stared 1y agoWeasel words (or other common sense statements said passed as objective truths) should not be a part a scientific paper, regardless of who is writing that (yes, I know that Vlatko Vedral is an established researcher). Myself, I am quantum physicist by training. While I have certain views on stuff (e.g. many-world interpretation and decoherence, in the line of ZH Zurek), I actually cite surveys on the view on physicist on QM interpretation. (Even though I "know" from my personal observations that all almost all theoretical physicists are in the MWI.) > If currently 20% of the top physicists think spacetime is not a primitive notion and this number has monotonically increased by 1% every year for the past decade, that would be an example of "growing consensus". Awesome! Then any reference with such data would be useful. If one cannot make (or even create a personal survey), then one should not write such things as facts.