@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji

19.6K posts

@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji banner
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji

@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji

@postdocforever

Physicist (noneq stat phys), interested in writing, socialism, history, other stuff to distract me from work. he/him. Math isn't real. Planaria dad.

Island of France Katılım Mayıs 2009
931 Takip Edilen891 Takipçiler
Håkon Fløystad
Håkon Fløystad@hakflo·
Of course. It's about studying the fields that generate these particles, as directly as possible. In a bit over 50 years, we went from the Photoelectric Effect to the Standard Model. Part of the attraction is how so little (a single equation that fits on a single page) can explain so much.
Håkon Fløystad tweet media
English
1
0
0
25
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
Condensed matter physics is apparently "more applied than the Higgs Mechanism" someone ought to have told that to Anderson who came up with the Higgs mechanism before Higgs, in the context of superconductivity
Håkon Fløystad@hakflo

@postdocforever It's about as applied as theoretical chemestry, and more applied than the Higgs Mechanism or Quantum Electrodynamics.

English
4
1
25
1.9K
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
Also it was in studying the spontaneous symmetry breaking in superconductivity that Nambu came up with the very idea of a (Nambu-) Goldstone boson
English
0
1
3
108
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
@hakflo Firstly, the analogy doesn't work because it's the same mechanism, unlike Lorentz and Einstein. Secondly, you seem to believe elementary particles are not quasiparticles. We're in a post-renormalization world, buddy. There's no such thing as a "bare" electron.
English
1
0
2
32
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
@hakflo The Higgs mechanism? Proposed by Anderson in the context of superconductivity before Higgs? QED understood only in the light of renormalization first introduced by Kadanoff in statistical physics?
English
1
0
3
128
Håkon Fløystad
Håkon Fløystad@hakflo·
@postdocforever It's less applied than Engineering, though. But it's one or two steps in that direction, if you start from QM.
English
1
0
0
128
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
How you can distinguish between the crank critics of string theory and the sensible ones (me) is that the cranks don't actually care about experiments. A good second-order sign is if they say physics has "stagnated" - they're trying to sell you AI or their favourite crank theory.
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji tweet media
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji@postdocforever

String theorists, and AI zealots who claim AI will take over physics which has "stagnated", are two dialectical sides of the same coin - neither believe contact with the real world is essential to what makes physics a science

English
11
5
65
2.4K
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
@hakflo There's no reason to consider theoretical solid state physics as applied. Applied what, exactly? If anything both HEP and solid state use theories developed in the other.
English
1
0
3
129
Håkon Fløystad
Håkon Fløystad@hakflo·
@postdocforever And this is not about experiments vs theory. There is theoretical solid state Physics and experimental Particle Physics. The former is applied but theoretical, the latter is experimental but fundamental.
English
1
0
0
126
Jeffrey Sachs
Jeffrey Sachs@JeffreyASachs·
@yehyabrown No, that's not an honest question. Here's what you actually want to ask: Given the huge number of people being killed right now in Lebanon and Iran by Israel, isn't it inappropriate to tweet about the attempted murder of Jews in Michigan? That's what you really want to know.
English
2
1
38
1.2K
Sturgeon's Law
Sturgeon's Law@Sturgeons_Law·
@nikicaga It's not. Hindu right-wingers just have an obsessive desire to be victims all the time and so actively look to interpret things in ways that allow them to feel victimized.
English
10
20
344
7.3K
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
@vrundasays_ Human intuition isn't good enough to work without experimental validation, but thats far away for quantum gravity and "fundamental" theories (but which are sold as the "real" physics). I think exploring QG is quite okay, but low energy physics needs smart students just as much.
English
2
0
8
163
stringking42069
stringking42069@stringking42069·
@postdocforever Oh just fuq off ffs. You dont even know that most string theorists are ofc pro experiment and would love to have direct tests. It’s just damn hard to get to the required energies. Its a generic feature of quantum gravity btw so i guess u also hate anything to do with that too.
English
1
0
1
86
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
It's a fool's game for me to criticise strings though. String theorists have consistently shown good politics, while other physicists are apathetic, and string critics have all moved to the alt-right. String theorists are doing good mathematical work, and the world is burning.
English
0
0
8
184
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
@skdh I thought your criticism of string theory was all about how it doesn't care about experiment, now what you want to do away with observation and experiment? What stupidity.
English
0
0
34
410
Sabine Hossenfelder
he's entirely right of course. even if you think he is wrong, at the very least physicists should think about why everyone else agrees they've lost the plot.
Sabine Hossenfelder tweet media
English
331
111
1.5K
94.2K
@postdocforever.bsky.social / karanji
String theorists, and AI zealots who claim AI will take over physics which has "stagnated", are two dialectical sides of the same coin - neither believe contact with the real world is essential to what makes physics a science
English
4
2
34
3.3K
big brane boi
big brane boi@bcubeddd·
@postdocforever why look through a telescope when you can derive a priori true knowledge in between spells of tweeting
English
2
0
2
79