Poland inwards "Entropa", Czech sculptor David Černý's provocative portrait of the EU.
The lawsuit that made her write nigh this junk 1 time again was the recent publication of a Lewandowski+2 (2014) article inwards a journal. All the differences betwixt the papers are irrelevant. All these people guide maintain been playing amongst the thought that quantum gravity "forces" the speed of lite to last energy-dependent or, equivalently, the metric tensor must depend on the frequency of the quanta, just similar inwards real-world materials (such every bit glass) which create dispersion (and thus rainbows).
All these people part a belief of a sort – a totally irrational belief – that gravity inwards combination amongst quantum mechanics makes it necessary for the spacetime to aspect similar "glass" of a sort, or an aether, something that unavoidably breaks the regulation of relativity (or the Lorentz invariance). However, whether or non yous believe that string/M-theory is the right theory of Nature, it is a sufficient counterexample to disprove the thought that the Lorentz symmetry, quantum mechanics, together with gravity are incompatible. They're perfectly compatible inside string theory!
For years, the incorrect thinking has been associated amongst Leslie Winkle who, despite her beingness a subpar scientist, dared to debate amongst Sheldon Cooper just nigh this issue. (Yes, I do suspect that the scientific discipline adviser of The Big Bang Theory David Saltzberg had to last aware of some of my exchanges amongst the DSR-style pseudoscientists when he recommended that detail conversation.) Winkle said that loop quantum gravity was ameliorate scientific discipline because it made a prediction – namely the energy-dependence of the speed of light.
Numerous experiments guide maintain refuted this concept. I don't genuinely boot the bucket on rail of all the (astrophysics-based) experiments because it's been a totally settled number for me for over twenty years but they boot the bucket on on coming together with are beingness improved every year. Experiments can't ever "rigorously prove" that some existent coefficient is strictly null but the electrical flow experimental upper restrict for many related coefficients is so unnaturally minor that 1 may conclude that the coefficient is either just zero, or the Lorentz-violating primal theory would guide maintain to solve an additional, huge, novel hierarchy work to boot the bucket viable.
It's only non truthful that whatsoever sort of violation of the Lorentz invariance (within a Minkowski background) must come about or should last expected. The regulation of relativity, the regulation of constancy of the speed of light, the equivalence principle, together with the postulates of quantum mechanics are inequivalent principles. But they are non contradicting each other. All of them are consistent. They are logically independent. Only a brutally sloppy mortal may sentiment 1 of these principles every bit a argue to abandon another. The theories (well, 1 theory, every bit nosotros believe today) that obeys all these principles is real special, constrained, together with basically uniquely determined, but it exists. Even earlier string theory was known to last a consistent theory of quantum gravity, people knew that all those principles were compatible at the guess flat of effective land theories. The demand to honour both quantum mechanics together with gravity (it's ameliorate to avoid the term "quantum gravity" hither because these crackpots are basically injecting incorrect statements into the real phrase) just doesn't mean that the spacetime resembles a drinking glass or a rainbow or a classical cellular automaton or anything of the sort.
Again, the counterexample to these pseudoscientists' supposition that the principles higher upward are incompatible indisputably exists whether or not string/M-theory is the right theory of the Universe just about us. Hossenfelder together with swain would-be scientists don't hesitate to deny fifty-fifty the most well-known facts, pretend that they guide maintain never heard nigh them. For example, Hossenfelder wrote:
Einstein’s theory of full general relativity yet stands apart from the other known forces past times its refusal to last quantized.When Scherk together with Schwarz showed that quantum gravity did follow from a consistent quantum mechanical framework (and thus the judgement higher upward is just land wrong), your humble correspondent was less than 1 yr former together with Ms Hossenfelder hadn't been conceived yet. She has had all her damn life to guide maintain noticed this of import evolution together with lots of people just about her guide maintain been helping her but she has yet failed – only because she lacks the basic integrity, non just the sort of enhanced integrity expected from scientists but the ordinary person's integrity, too.
In effective land theory description of gravity, the metric tensor arises together with its values may last described every bit beingness subject on the observed liberate energy scale. But the key signal that all these individuals are trying to deny to 1 extent or some other is that the descriptions amongst dissimilar metrics (e.g. metric tensors associated amongst dissimilar renormalization grouping scales) are complementary to each other. One only cannot purpose all of them at the same time.
There is solely one metric tensor land inwards the spacetime whenever it makes feel to utter nigh the land at all – non many permit lone infinitely many. One may parameterize the physics inwards dissimilar ways together with assume that the same dynamics is taking identify on dissimilar geometric spacetime backgrounds (especially because of the numerous dualities inwards string theory). But 1 must ever realize that either 1 background exists, or another, but non both of them simultaneously. These are just dissimilar descriptions of the same degrees of freedom. There can't last "very many" independent metric tensors inwards the same spacetime because there's solely "one package" of the conservation laws (for the stress-energy tensor) or the corresponding (spacetime translational) symmetries that are needed to homecoming the unphysical degrees of liberty inwards "one metric tensor" harmless.
And again, there's only no argue to "sacrifice" the Lorentz invariance, straightforward natural ways to do so are self-evidently ruled out experimentally, together with if 1 were "sacrificing" the Lorentz invariance, 1 would guide maintain to do it properly, anyway. To demonstrate the utter stupidity of these people, permit me quote a feature slice of the "recent" article past times Lewandowski+2 just about equation 23:
We thus obtain a modified dispersion relation from (20),\[if yous allow me to simplify their talkative text. Holy cow, yous must last joking. The right formula is \(E^2=m^2+p^2\) i.e. \(\beta=0\) together with no additional \(\O(p^4)\) term appears inwards the relation. You just demand to accept an ordinary proton together with accelerate it to the speed comparable to 50% of the speed of lite to come across that relativity works. The actual experiments people guide maintain performed guide maintain tested these phenomena every bit good every bit vastly to a greater extent than extreme ones. So how tin Lewandowski et al. fifty-fifty suggest that they're non unhinged imbeciles if they believe that the ordinary dispersion relation relation for the ordinary proton is violated past times \(\O(100)\) per centum at speeds comparable to 50% of the speed of light? No detectable violations exist. Of course of didactics they are consummate idiots if they believe inwards such violations.
E^2 = m^2 + (1+\beta)p^2 + \O(p^4)
\] where \(\beta\approx 1\) should last truthful fifty-fifty for \(p\approx m\approx 1\GeV\),
H5N1 feature delusion penetrating all these people's texts is their belief that the introduction of random errors into the formalism is a principle of a sort. So they just accept Einstein's special relativity, throw it out of window past times adding just all the price that the theory prohibits, together with they apparently recall that they guide maintain flora something every bit of import every bit Einstein did, if non to a greater extent than so.
But the deliberately introduced errors together with inequalities are non principles.
Instead, errors together with inequalities may last described every bit the "lack of principles". If yous contradict the dispersion relation \(E^2=m^2+p^2\) that special relativity makes unavoidable, so yous clearly cannot assume the same postulates that led Einstein to the special theory of relativity. But yous haven't replaced them past times whatsoever other, at to the lowest degree comparably strong, principles. You guide maintain solely denied some principles.
So if yous desire to create upward one's hear what this "general framework" yous are talking nigh predicts, yous guide maintain to allow all kinds of theories that violate the rules of relativity inwards basically whatsoever way. You are dorsum to the most full general non-relativistic model edifice amongst a preferred reference system. The probability that a random theory inwards this score volition aspect relativistic at the precision of experiments nosotros tin do – i.e. the probability that such a theory may avoid falsification – is basically zero.
Clearly, yous demand either the strict rules of relativity or something that has basically the same effect. These people just don't guide maintain anything of the sort. Most likely, aught of the sort exists. So it's almost just accurate to tell that they just 100% contradict all the empirical evidence that was used to verify Einstein's relativity. They are full-fledged relativity deniers.
Everywhere inwards their papers together with weblog posts, yous may come across their incredibly lousy standards together with the consummate inability to larn anything from research. Let's aspect at a judgement from Hossenfelder's weblog post:
In a newspaper which of late appeared inwards PLB (arXiv version here), iii researchers from the University of Warsaw guide maintain made a novel endeavour to laissez passer on important to rainbow gravity. While it doesn’t genuinely solve all problems, it makes considerably to a greater extent than feel than the previous attempts.In these words, yous may come across that Hossenfelder belike realizes that none of the previous papers nigh the "rainbow gravity" makes sense. But she makes it explicit that she realizes that the novel newspaper doesn't quite brand sense, either. But she believes it makes "considerably to a greater extent than feel than the previous attempts". What is this declaration supposed to mean? If yous guide maintain 2 papers or 2 theories that don't genuinely brand sense, how do yous mensurate which of them makes to a greater extent than sense? And fifty-fifty if this comparing could last made, what's Hossenfelder's evidence that the novel newspaper makes feel than the previous ones?
It doesn't. All of them are garbage together with these people are just stuck. They boot the bucket on on producing bogus scientific discipline because they are getting coin from generous sponsors for this worthless activity. So they pretend that at that topographic point is some progress but at that topographic point is none. Their novel papers brand no feel just similar their previous papers made no sense. Meanwhile, the people who are doing genuine science are writing papers where everything is carefully verified to brand sense. If they claim that something follows from something, they real carefully verify all the arguments that it's the case. If they claim to guide maintain a theory that's compatible amongst a nifty trunk of some empirical data, they genuinely do lots of move to banking firm check this claim – and, to a greater extent than importantly, this claim is true. If it didn't seem sufficiently convincing that this claim is true, genuine scientists wouldn't dare to set out a paper making such a claim. Only subpar writers tin comport inwards this way.
You know, genuine scientists are working difficult to brand certain that good over 99% of their argumentation works. They can't last satisfied amongst hints that 32% of their newspaper seems to brand feel piece it could guide maintain been just 31% x years ago. One only can't prepare whatsoever scientific discipline on a conglomerate of ideas out of which solely 32% seems to brand sense. It's similar edifice a skyscraper amongst 32% of bricks added inwards betwixt 68% of sand. It won't move every bit a home.
Hossenfelders, Smolins, Magueijos, Lewandowskis, together with similar people guide maintain aught to do amongst science. What they do may superficially resemble scientific discipline inwards the eyes of a layman who has no clue how to verify any claim. But none of the things they do genuinely plant – just similar the wooden phones of the cargo cultists inwards the well-known analogous story. And whenever something of import is flora past times others or, much less frequently, past times themselves, they brand certain that they deny or forget all these things every bit presently every bit possible. Their master copy dogmas together with misconceptions are always together with forever to a greater extent than of import for them than whatsoever novel evidence, whatsoever chance to larn a lesson. They're stuck inwards a stinky cesspool where no valuable cloth floats together with they're trying to throw the content of the cesspool into all directions inwards the sweat to pretend that they're practiced plenty because the whole earth is a giant cesspool.
But the whole earth is not a cesspool.
No comments:
Post a Comment