The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
physics is such a fraud field
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:38 AM Author: '"'"''"'"'''"''" no real progress in about 100 years at this point. they still have no idea what 96% of the universe is made of. most of their "research" is just failed experiments. their explanations for fundamental questions are always flimsy and reveal that they themselves are confused by what all their equations actually mean. almost as bad as the LIBERAL ARTS. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435208) |
 |
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:40 AM Author: VoteRepublican (A true Chad!! where's your gf/wifew?) show your work (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435209) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:49 AM Author: '"'"''"'"'''"''" there have been no real theoretical advances in physics since the 1910s/1920s when general relativity and quantum mechanics were developed. literally nothing. all that's happened since then is fine-tuning some of the theories and filling in some minor gaps with better tools and instruments. e.g., the accelerating expansion of the universe was a theoretical possibility ever since 1915ish, but it was just impossible to check for back then. quantum mechanics? theoretical foundations soundly in place by the early 20th century; experimental confirmation was just delayed for some scenarios, again due to technological limitations.
absolutely no progress on bridging the gap between quantum mechanics and gravity.
the theoretical models have obviously been incomplete and disjointed ever since they were created, and there isn't even a hint that this will be resolved anytime soon.
etc. |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:24 AM Author: metaepistemology is trans not really. by the late 1920s they had nonrelativistic qm and early qed ideas. they didn't have renormalization or the modern notion of qft as a low energy effective field theory yet. they didn't have standard model gauge theory and electroweak unification, non abelian gauge theories, path integrals and feynmann diagrams. topological field theories. tons of stuff has been done since the early 20th century. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435274) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:46 AM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK No advances (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435338) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:49 AM Author: metaepistemology is trans those are all big advancements (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435344) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:51 AM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK Ok, if you say so! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435351) |
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:46 AM Author: Raul Mondesi circa 1998 I’d argue it’s worse than liberal arts which occasionally brings entertainment to people via art and whatnot (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435218) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:34 AM Author: ,;;, True. At least liberal arts can make us forget about life for a few minutes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435299) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:46 AM Author: ,.,,.,.,,,,,,..................... I think you mean cosmology. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435219) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:53 AM Author: '"'"''"'"'''"''" some cosmologists and most string theorists are obviously just making shit up that can't be taken seriously.
string theorists: "we need a particle accelerator the size of the orbit of a planet to test this" lmao
some crazy cosmologists: "there probably are multiple universes out there with different physics than ours, but there's absolutely no way to observe this, so i'm really just publishing papers with ideas that a pothead could come up with" |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:54 AM Author: self-satisfied and socially compliant (Eric Weinstein) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435236) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 9:57 AM Author: '"'"''"'"'''"''" lmao another "physicist" fraud. didn't he publish some grand theory that even his peer physicists thought was garbage? i listened to one podcast with him and he came across as pretentious as fuck. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435242) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:37 AM Author: self-satisfied and socially compliant Everything you just said is true, but your thread here is the same rant he's been making for years. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435307) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:02 AM Author: cucumbers mostly agree, but a degree in physics is miles better than a liberal arts degree because of the rigorous math and science requirements. your typical liberal artist would likely struggle in a pre-calculus class (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435248) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:06 AM Author: OYT Magnus ( ) As a Philosopher I am well-versed in Metaphysics tyvm. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435252) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:49 AM Author: ethereal \\(> ' v ' <)// tp (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435342) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 12:40 PM Author: Pope Leo XXX there's grade inflation in math/science, particularly the classes required for other disciplines like physics
you have 300 lb shaquiras and goblinas now graduating w degrees in physics from Harvard |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:04 AM Author: """''''"'"''"''''' idk quantum computing is pretty impressive (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435251) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:08 AM Author: '"'"''"'"'''"''" still fits into my argument. quantum computing is an engineering project, not physics. and it's based on a 100 year old theory. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435253) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:28 AM Author: metaepistemology is trans quantum computing falls under QIS though which is an interdisciplinary expansion of physics and information theory and contains plenty of theoretical advancement (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435285) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:42 AM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435326) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:26 AM Author: columbo luis (🧐) (RGTI investor) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435281) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:25 AM Author: UN peacekeeper m theory (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435277) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:36 AM Author: metaepistemology is trans a lot of the "bridging gap between qm and gravity" issue is BS. the idea of finding the ONE BIG THEORY that explains both is all hype. its supposed to be some sort of metaphysical scandal that the math for the two theories doesn't play nice together but thats only if you treat math/theory as ontology and not just modeling. QG mostly only matters in extreme regimes anyway like black hole evaporation and early universe cosmology. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435302) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:40 AM Author: UN peacekeeper (lead burier) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435318) |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 12:01 PM Author: '"'"''"'"'''"''" quite a statement to say merging QM/QFT and gravity is over-hyped. if anyone resolves the problem, it would be the first theoretical leap in physics in over 100 years and is virtually guaranteed to make you as famous as Einstein.
physics hasn't been treated as ontology since Newton; questions of ontology are largely limited to the imaginations of potheads. only some physicists acknowledge this.
the fact that QG seems to apply only extreme cases is irrelevant; the goal of physics is to develop intelligible theories of the world regardless of practicality. engineering is a separate discipline for this reason. |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 12:28 PM Author: metaepistemology is trans I think you are reading me as saying "QG is pointless," which im not. I'm saying the popular packaging of QM+GR must be welded into ONE BIG THEORY or physics is in crisis is overhyped. The actual technical mismatch between QFT on minkowsi and classical GR is a problem about model overlap not a metaphysical scandal.
On "first theoretical leap" in physics in 100 years -- like I said earlier I don't agree on this. Renormalization group theory and EFT, QFT, QCD, Topological formulations of field theories, Topological phases quantum hall, and condensed matter physics -- all of these things are deep restructurings of how we model fields, phases and interactions--arguably as or more important than QG. When I say overhyped, I'm saying its sold as *the* bottleneck to fundamental understanding, which is an exaggeration compared to its actual empirical leverage and vs. these other advancements.
On ontology: you say "physics hasn't been treated as ontology since Newton". Agreed, that is basically my starting point. But then you immediately sneak ontology back in when you talk about merging QM/QFT and gravity into ONE THEORY. The idea of insisting on a single mathematical structure that covers both domains is already an ontological bet: that nature must be described by one unifying formalism rather than a tower of effective descriptions that don't glue together into a single neat Lagrangian. |
|
Date: November 16th, 2025 10:43 AM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK Many pumos were triggered by the OP and none made good arguments (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5798780&forum_id=2).#49435331) |