6 ms·

There's a very subtle undertone of negativity in this article about physics. Before I get into, William Bardeen is not in the same league as 'Surfer Dude and h

There's a very subtle undertone of negativity in this article about physics. Before I get into, William Bardeen is not in the same league as 'Surfer Dude and his E8 Theory of Everything' which throws basic facts about representation theory out the window, coming up with 'todalay boogus' arguments which amazes auntie, mommie and magazine editors but a real physicist would instantly dismiss. Bardeen is the real deal. His papers are very interesting and feel a bit like reading Sidney Coleman's papers. If you're interested... http://arxiv.org/find/hep-th/1/au:+Bardeen_W/0/1/0/all/0/1 http://arxiv.org/find/hep-th/1/au:+Bardeen_W/0/1/0/all/0/1 Is nature scale invariant? So far the answer is absolutely NO but I strongly advise to wait and see. There are many topics that point to some breakdown in scale or reorganizing what we think of space and distance (dualities in string theory, conformal field theory). OK, now the important thing I want everyone here to realize. You are living through a GOLDEN AGE of physics. You wouldn't think that based on what all the popular magazines tell you. Here's why... 1. Higgs particle - discovered! 2. Inflation - discovered! Denying this one is like denying the Big Bang itself. The evidence is overwhelming and in fact I would list this as the single greatest scientific discovery of all time. The concurrent discovery of gravity waves, quantum gravity and a real life example of a Hawking process only sweetens the deal. 3. Supersymmetry has basically already been discovered IMHO. They aren't announcing anything at CERN and won't until they have so many sigmas under their belt but trust me, it's coming and truth be told, it isn't really so surprising. SUSY physics has always been rock solid from the beginning. The situation is very similar to that before offical Higgs announcement and before someone went knocking on Andre Linde's front door. Many were extremely confident in the Higgs particle a least a year before the official announcement. The BICEP 2 results were even more glaringly apparent than the Higgs results. Many people were walking around the Earth with 'secret knowledge' that inflation theory was correct even 2 to 3 years before the official announcement. So you are living through EXTREMELY interesting times but you wouldn't know it with all the big science bashing being thrown around.

AtmaScout 12y ago
Thanks for your post and link. I recently watched Particle Fever on Netflix and became extremely fascinated with the field. A lot of the information you posted is touched on in the documentary. It is mostly focused around CERN and the years leading up to the Higgs particle discovery. There are also great interviews with David Kaplan and Nima Arkani-Hamed. You've likely seen it but if not you might enjoy it.
evanb 12y ago
Do you have any rumors or specific knowledge (even if it's not something you'll share) regarding SUSY? They found missing energy? A new plethora of resonances? Higgsinos or sfermions? Something more exotic?
- MisterMashable 12y ago
  The dilepton events are the best evidence yet IMO
- nilaykumar 12y ago
  By the end of the last run, the people I talked to at CERN were fairly certain that there's no SUSY in the current dataset and that SUSY will likely not be found during the upcoming run. But perhaps the people I talked to are simply of a different persuasion.
  - evanb 12y ago
    Hi Nilay! -- Evan from TQHN.
jwuphysics 12y ago
I study astrophysics, so I won't be able to say much about SUSY or string theories or conformal field theories. I do agree that we're living in a golden age of physics! But your second and third points, inflation and SUSY-- those are definitely not confirmed. In fact, the primordial gravitational waves from BICEP2 are almost certainly dust contamination signal (e.g., http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5857 http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5857). The discovery of supersymmetric particles would also be extremely shocking to me, since my institution is heavily involved in CERN LHC experiments, and I haven't heard any hints of a discovery yet. Perhaps you know something that I don't!
- derefr 12y ago
  > The discovery of supersymmetric particles would also be extremely shocking to me, since my institution is heavily involved in CERN LHC experiments, and I haven't heard any hints of a discovery yet. Why does an absence of evidence imply that the arrival of evidence would be shocking? They're doing the experiment because they already believe things are this way and they're trying to get evidence to confirm it. If they disconfirmed it, that'd be surprising.
  - differentView 12y ago
    >They're doing the experiment because they already believe things are this way and they're trying to get evidence to confirm it. Hypothesizing is one thing, but to believe without evidence is just blind faith.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - obruchez 12y ago
      Isn't faith blind by definition?
      - kybernetikos 12y ago
        No. One of the most commonly used definitions of faith is trust or confidence in a person or thing. Whether or not that trust or confidence is based on evidence or not is a separate matter that is not conveyed by the word. Even in the case under discussion, that someone might have faith that something is a particular way, and are doing an experiment to confirm it (more likely disprove an alternative), that doesn't mean it's 'blind' as in without reason. People can have a lot of good reasons for believing something is a particular way without having measured it directly yet.
angersock 12y ago
So, erm, what does that buy us? I'm just an engineer, so I'm not sure I see the utility in any of that--sorry to sound closed-minded, but am genuinely curious.
- redraga 12y ago
  A lot of discoveries do not have immediate uses and some might indeed never have any applications. But discoveries can spurn others in unexpected ways. The most famous example of course if the WWW which came out of CERN, a pure physics research institution. Cryptography is another example that has had a profound impact on information security. But the most compelling reason, at least to me, is we investigate because we can! That is just human nature.
- nilaykumar 12y ago
  It doesn't buy you anything, just as fine art and music do not buy you anything.
- 21echoes 12y ago
  The road from theoretical physics to engineering is a very long one, so it's very hard to predict exactly what this would buy us. Relativity, for instance, spent a long time with no concrete engineering benefit, but now it allows GPS to be much more accurate by adjusting for the time dilation on GPS satellite clocks. As we get closer and closer to the mysteries at the heart of the universe, I think it's safe to say that the engineering benefit will be both more arcane and more powerful.
- xenophonf 12y ago
  Basic research is the foundation of all engineering. You can't design things without understanding how the universe works. If you need examples, look no further than to particle physics, which has had a huge influence on medical imagery since at least the fluoroscope.
  - kazinator 12y ago
    All things hitherto designed have been designed without a complete and truthful understanding of the universe. If we go back in history, we find examples of useful inventions that were produced amid a rather poor understanding. Levers and inclined planes were produced without knowing anything about basic arithmetic, let alone physics.
dllthomas 12y ago
"'todalay boogus' arguments which amazes auntie, mommie and magazine editors but a real physicist would instantly dismiss." For the record, my father was far more amazed by rambling, not entirely coherent speculative physics ideas than my mother or either of my aunts.
jrussino 12y ago
Are there any particular resources that you recommend for a high-level overview of this kind of stuff? I'm an engineer with a solid grasp of classical mechanics and strong math background, but very little exposure to modern physics (basically, anything discovered after 1905) and I would like to be able to read about and appreciate this type of work. Where to start? Apologies for taking the conversation off on a tangent, but you seem passionate about this.
- auxbuss 12y ago
  The short course, 'From the Big Bang to Dark Energy'[0], is an excellent introduction. [0] https://www.coursera.org/course/bigbang https://www.coursera.org/course/bigbang
dandrews 12y ago
Surfer Dude and his E8 Theory of Everything ... 'todalay boogus' arguments which amazes auntie, mommie and magazine editors but a real physicist would instantly dismiss. I suppose you're referring to Lisi? Neither he nor E8 were even mentioned in the article. You're both OT and unnecessarily unpleasant.
- MisterMashable 12y ago
  Well there is no way Lisi's E8 theory can fit gravity and the standard model at the same time. At first glance the group structure seems to allow it but the actual group representation (which are the actual particles allowed if one wishes to construct such a theory) don't allow it. I'm totally fine if someone wants to pursue this area of research the problem is the MAGAZINES have printed his theory as though it were a valid contender or alternative to string theory or some other theory. Lisi's theory isn't. If it were a plane, it never got off the ground, it blew up on the runway. A recent TIME magazine special issue features this broken 'theory'. It's deeply misleading and shows a lack of concern about misleading the public. Loop quantum gravity, simplicial quantum gravity, and causal sets etc. are all examples of broken theories that just don't work. Just so you know there ARE valid alternatives to superstring theory regarding unification or physics beyond the standard model. Alain Connes non-commutative gravity, superconformal field theories, Kac Moody algebras, twistor gravity, twistor string theory, plain old N=8 D=4 supergravity is a contender, SO(10), SU(5), MacDowell Mansouri gravity, matrix models,... I could list more. These theories aren't broken, they actually work. Those are the kinds of things the public deserves to hear and read in the magazines.

AtmaScout 12y ago

Thanks for your post and link. I recently watched Particle Fever on Netflix and became extremely fascinated with the field. A lot of the information you posted is touched on in the documentary. It is mostly focused around CERN and the years leading up to the Higgs particle discovery. There are also great interviews with David Kaplan and Nima Arkani-Hamed. You've likely seen it but if not you might enjoy it.

evanb 12y ago

Do you have any rumors or specific knowledge (even if it's not something you'll share) regarding SUSY? They found missing energy? A new plethora of resonances? Higgsinos or sfermions? Something more exotic?

MisterMashable 12y ago
The dilepton events are the best evidence yet IMO
nilaykumar 12y ago
By the end of the last run, the people I talked to at CERN were fairly certain that there's no SUSY in the current dataset and that SUSY will likely not be found during the upcoming run. But perhaps the people I talked to are simply of a different persuasion.
- evanb 12y ago
  Hi Nilay! -- Evan from TQHN.

jwuphysics 12y ago

I study astrophysics, so I won't be able to say much about SUSY or string theories or conformal field theories. I do agree that we're living in a golden age of physics! But your second and third points, inflation and SUSY-- those are definitely not confirmed. In fact, the primordial gravitational waves from BICEP2 are almost certainly dust contamination signal (e.g., http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5857 http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5857). The discovery of supersymmetric particles would also be extremely shocking to me, since my institution is heavily involved in CERN LHC experiments, and I haven't heard any hints of a discovery yet. Perhaps you know something that I don't!

derefr 12y ago
> The discovery of supersymmetric particles would also be extremely shocking to me, since my institution is heavily involved in CERN LHC experiments, and I haven't heard any hints of a discovery yet. Why does an absence of evidence imply that the arrival of evidence would be shocking? They're doing the experiment because they already believe things are this way and they're trying to get evidence to confirm it. If they disconfirmed it, that'd be surprising.
- differentView 12y ago
  >They're doing the experiment because they already believe things are this way and they're trying to get evidence to confirm it. Hypothesizing is one thing, but to believe without evidence is just blind faith.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - obruchez 12y ago
    Isn't faith blind by definition?
    - kybernetikos 12y ago
      No. One of the most commonly used definitions of faith is trust or confidence in a person or thing. Whether or not that trust or confidence is based on evidence or not is a separate matter that is not conveyed by the word. Even in the case under discussion, that someone might have faith that something is a particular way, and are doing an experiment to confirm it (more likely disprove an alternative), that doesn't mean it's 'blind' as in without reason. People can have a lot of good reasons for believing something is a particular way without having measured it directly yet.

angersock 12y ago

So, erm, what does that buy us? I'm just an engineer, so I'm not sure I see the utility in any of that--sorry to sound closed-minded, but am genuinely curious.

redraga 12y ago
A lot of discoveries do not have immediate uses and some might indeed never have any applications. But discoveries can spurn others in unexpected ways. The most famous example of course if the WWW which came out of CERN, a pure physics research institution. Cryptography is another example that has had a profound impact on information security. But the most compelling reason, at least to me, is we investigate because we can! That is just human nature.
nilaykumar 12y ago
It doesn't buy you anything, just as fine art and music do not buy you anything.
21echoes 12y ago
The road from theoretical physics to engineering is a very long one, so it's very hard to predict exactly what this would buy us. Relativity, for instance, spent a long time with no concrete engineering benefit, but now it allows GPS to be much more accurate by adjusting for the time dilation on GPS satellite clocks. As we get closer and closer to the mysteries at the heart of the universe, I think it's safe to say that the engineering benefit will be both more arcane and more powerful.
xenophonf 12y ago
Basic research is the foundation of all engineering. You can't design things without understanding how the universe works. If you need examples, look no further than to particle physics, which has had a huge influence on medical imagery since at least the fluoroscope.
- kazinator 12y ago
  All things hitherto designed have been designed without a complete and truthful understanding of the universe. If we go back in history, we find examples of useful inventions that were produced amid a rather poor understanding. Levers and inclined planes were produced without knowing anything about basic arithmetic, let alone physics.

dllthomas 12y ago

"'todalay boogus' arguments which amazes auntie, mommie and magazine editors but a real physicist would instantly dismiss." For the record, my father was far more amazed by rambling, not entirely coherent speculative physics ideas than my mother or either of my aunts.

jrussino 12y ago

Are there any particular resources that you recommend for a high-level overview of this kind of stuff? I'm an engineer with a solid grasp of classical mechanics and strong math background, but very little exposure to modern physics (basically, anything discovered after 1905) and I would like to be able to read about and appreciate this type of work. Where to start? Apologies for taking the conversation off on a tangent, but you seem passionate about this.

auxbuss 12y ago
The short course, 'From the Big Bang to Dark Energy'[0], is an excellent introduction. [0] https://www.coursera.org/course/bigbang https://www.coursera.org/course/bigbang

dandrews 12y ago

Surfer Dude and his E8 Theory of Everything ... 'todalay boogus' arguments which amazes auntie, mommie and magazine editors but a real physicist would instantly dismiss. I suppose you're referring to Lisi? Neither he nor E8 were even mentioned in the article. You're both OT and unnecessarily unpleasant.

MisterMashable 12y ago
Well there is no way Lisi's E8 theory can fit gravity and the standard model at the same time. At first glance the group structure seems to allow it but the actual group representation (which are the actual particles allowed if one wishes to construct such a theory) don't allow it. I'm totally fine if someone wants to pursue this area of research the problem is the MAGAZINES have printed his theory as though it were a valid contender or alternative to string theory or some other theory. Lisi's theory isn't. If it were a plane, it never got off the ground, it blew up on the runway. A recent TIME magazine special issue features this broken 'theory'. It's deeply misleading and shows a lack of concern about misleading the public. Loop quantum gravity, simplicial quantum gravity, and causal sets etc. are all examples of broken theories that just don't work. Just so you know there ARE valid alternatives to superstring theory regarding unification or physics beyond the standard model. Alain Connes non-commutative gravity, superconformal field theories, Kac Moody algebras, twistor gravity, twistor string theory, plain old N=8 D=4 supergravity is a contender, SO(10), SU(5), MacDowell Mansouri gravity, matrix models,... I could list more. These theories aren't broken, they actually work. Those are the kinds of things the public deserves to hear and read in the magazines.