5 ms·

So uh, things are not looking so good for actual physics these days, I gather?

by cfcf14 2y ago

sva_ 2y ago
Interesting thought. I hear some voices saying theoretical physics is stuck with string theory, but am not really qualified to make a judgement.
- drpossum 2y ago
  Physics is not stuck in string theory as physics is not just high energy theoretical particle physics. There's also more going on in high energy theoretical particle physics than just "string theory".
  - Animats 2y ago
    Much of the experimental action in recent decades has been in low energy theoretical particle physics. Down near absolute zero, where quantum effects dominate and many of the stranger predictions of quantum mechanics can be observed directly. The Nobel Prizes in physics for 1996, 1997, 1998, 2001, and 2003 were all based on experimental work down near absolute zero.
- rty32 2y ago
  Nobel prize was awarded to theoretical work in 2021: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2021/popular-information/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2021/popular-infor... "theoretical physics" is such a big and ambiguous concept that physicists tend not to use the word in discussions. Thereotical work often involves a lot of numerical simulation on super computers these days which are kind of their own "experiments". And it is usually more productive to just mention the specific field, e.g. astronomy, condensed matter, AMO etc, and you can be sure there is always a lot of discoveries in each area.
oefrha 2y ago
Former high energy theorist here: things are not looking so good for high energy physics (both theoretical and experimental) which loosely speaking accounted for maybe 1/3-1/2 of Nobel Prizes in the 20th century. That’s part of the reason I got out. I’m inclined to say astrophysics and cosmology, another pillar of the fundamental understanding of the universe, isn’t doing that well either, probably in the okayish but not as exciting as it used to be territory. I’m not qualified to talk about other fields.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  I think saying they're not looking good might be a bit of an exaggeration. Technological developments in both high energy physics and astrophysics stuff are in-between generations of technology right now, which is why things are a bit slower than usual. With astrophysics, we're probably going to need the more sensitive gravitational wave detectors that are in development to become operational for new big breakthroughs. With high energy physics, many particle colliders and synchrotron light sources seem to be undergoing major upgrades these days. While particle colliders tend to get the spotlight in the public eye and are in a weird spot regarding the expected research outcomes, light sources are still doing pretty well afaik. This Nobel I think is mainly because AI has overwhelmingly dominated the public's perception of scientific/technological progress this year.
  - T-A 2y ago
    > With high energy physics, many particle colliders and synchrotron light sources seem to be undergoing major upgrades these days. AFAIK synchrotron light sources are tools for materials science and other applied fields, not high energy physics. Did I miss something? I am also puzzled by the "many particle colliders". There is currently only one capable of operating at the high energy frontier. It's getting a luminosity upgrade [1] which will increase the number of events, but those will still be the 14 TeV proton-proton collisions it's been producing for years. There is some hope that collecting more statistics will reveal something currently hidden in the background noise, but I wouldn't bet on it. [1] https://home.cern/science/accelerators/high-luminosity-lhc https://home.cern/science/accelerators/high-luminosity-lhc
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
optimalsolver 2y ago
Well I'm sure a $50 billion collider will fix things.
- fnands 2y ago
  Please bro just one more collider. Just one more collider bro. I swear bro we're gonna fix physics forever. Just one more collider bro. We could go up or even underground. Please bro just one more collider.

So uh, things are not looking so good for actual physics these days, I gather?

by cfcf14 2y ago

So uh, things are not looking so good for actual physics these days, I gather?

sva_ 2y ago

Interesting thought. I hear some voices saying theoretical physics is stuck with string theory, but am not really qualified to make a judgement.

drpossum 2y ago
Physics is not stuck in string theory as physics is not just high energy theoretical particle physics. There's also more going on in high energy theoretical particle physics than just "string theory".
- Animats 2y ago
  Much of the experimental action in recent decades has been in low energy theoretical particle physics. Down near absolute zero, where quantum effects dominate and many of the stranger predictions of quantum mechanics can be observed directly. The Nobel Prizes in physics for 1996, 1997, 1998, 2001, and 2003 were all based on experimental work down near absolute zero.
rty32 2y ago
Nobel prize was awarded to theoretical work in 2021: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2021/popular-information/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2021/popular-infor... "theoretical physics" is such a big and ambiguous concept that physicists tend not to use the word in discussions. Thereotical work often involves a lot of numerical simulation on super computers these days which are kind of their own "experiments". And it is usually more productive to just mention the specific field, e.g. astronomy, condensed matter, AMO etc, and you can be sure there is always a lot of discoveries in each area.

oefrha 2y ago

Former high energy theorist here: things are not looking so good for high energy physics (both theoretical and experimental) which loosely speaking accounted for maybe 1/3-1/2 of Nobel Prizes in the 20th century. That’s part of the reason I got out. I’m inclined to say astrophysics and cosmology, another pillar of the fundamental understanding of the universe, isn’t doing that well either, probably in the okayish but not as exciting as it used to be territory. I’m not qualified to talk about other fields.

dotnet00 2y ago
I think saying they're not looking good might be a bit of an exaggeration. Technological developments in both high energy physics and astrophysics stuff are in-between generations of technology right now, which is why things are a bit slower than usual. With astrophysics, we're probably going to need the more sensitive gravitational wave detectors that are in development to become operational for new big breakthroughs. With high energy physics, many particle colliders and synchrotron light sources seem to be undergoing major upgrades these days. While particle colliders tend to get the spotlight in the public eye and are in a weird spot regarding the expected research outcomes, light sources are still doing pretty well afaik. This Nobel I think is mainly because AI has overwhelmingly dominated the public's perception of scientific/technological progress this year.
- T-A 2y ago
  > With high energy physics, many particle colliders and synchrotron light sources seem to be undergoing major upgrades these days. AFAIK synchrotron light sources are tools for materials science and other applied fields, not high energy physics. Did I miss something? I am also puzzled by the "many particle colliders". There is currently only one capable of operating at the high energy frontier. It's getting a luminosity upgrade [1] which will increase the number of events, but those will still be the 14 TeV proton-proton collisions it's been producing for years. There is some hope that collecting more statistics will reveal something currently hidden in the background noise, but I wouldn't bet on it. [1] https://home.cern/science/accelerators/high-luminosity-lhc https://home.cern/science/accelerators/high-luminosity-lhc

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

optimalsolver 2y ago

Well I'm sure a $50 billion collider will fix things.

fnands 2y ago
Please bro just one more collider. Just one more collider bro. I swear bro we're gonna fix physics forever. Just one more collider bro. We could go up or even underground. Please bro just one more collider.