 I can relate to “the laws of physics [might] evolve and change over time.” Ok, fine. But “Different laws might even compete” is, to me, not so easily understood, to put it mildly. Mind boggling territory. Any #scifi stories on that subject that can help? https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/02/opinion/cosmology-crisis-webb-telescope.html 4 comments
 @J12t opinion piece in the NYT not an article in a science magazine. Citing philosophers in a physics article seems strange "But the model has already been patched up numerous times over the past half century to better conform with the best available data" Yup, scientific theory adjusts to fit data rather than data adjusting to fit theory The 4th Doctor said something about views fitting facts, not the other way around :) https://mastodon.social/@guide@tardis.team/110990776108357241 @lufthans imho most interesting questions — to me at least — posed by either very large-scale or very small-scale physics border, or often cross over into philosophy. Start with the Copenhagen interpretation and continue to the simulation hypothesis … of course not everybody might be interested in those. @J12t physics is using math to describe the data of the universe In the Matrix or not, physicists are exploring how the universe works via data and math In my experience the simulationists don't show up with math They might be right, but they need to demontrate CPU bugs or math to prove that the JWST is now rowhammering the heck out of the simulation system :) |
Gregory's Server
@J12t As a nonphysicist and particularly not a cosmologist, this piece was rather mindblowing. While is/isnot clickbait for science geeks, yet another effort by those authors (see their 2015 piece linked at the bottom of the article) to give the rest of us a readable preview of very serious goings-on and some of the arguments in the field. Similar impact from the sideangle reveal of exoplanet discovery in Sara Seager’s grief memoir.