Nick @internic@qoto.org

@FelisCatus wrote:

"But because these theories are so perfectly fine, each in its own domain of validity..."

I don't think the Standard Model of particle physics and general relativity are "perfectly fine" in their domains of validity.

First, nobody has given a mathematically rigorous formulation of the Standard Model, so it could be inconsistent, and we certainly don't know *for sure* what predictions it makes, though in practice we are very good at extracting predictions from it. We don't know if the Higgs destabilizes the vacuum, computations of the proton mass use a lot of ad hoc assumptions, etc.

Second, while general relativity is much closer to being mathematically rigorous, the overall features of the Universe as predicted by general relativity require dark matter, whose properties are mysterious - if it exists at all. If dark matter doesn't exist, general relativity is in trouble.

Also, general relativity probably breaks down when it predicts infinite curvature at the Big Bang and black holes.

I'm mentioning these problems not because these theories are bad, but because right now we *need* problems, to help us make progress.

"Which brings me (at last) to my question, namely is technological progress the current limit to contemporary theoretical physics (at least insofar as to seeking for a "theory of everything") ?"

We'll see! We are still improving our experiments to better understand dark matter, dark energy, neutrinos, etc. Maybe we'll make progress experimentally, but maybe not.

As mentioned there are also lots of problems with the Standard Model and general relativity, so we might make progress purely theoretically - but maybe not.

J. J. Thomson, who was born #OTD in 1856, received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1906 for his discovery of the electron, the first subatomic particle to be found.

Thomson was also a teacher, and seven of his students went on to win Nobel Prizes: Ernest Rutherford, Lawrence Bragg, Charles Barkla, Francis Aston, Charles Thomson Rees Wilson, Owen Richardson and Edward Victor Appleton.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._J._Thomson

Books by J.J. Thomson at PG:
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/38322

#books #science #physics

Is it petty to be annoyed at all of the “Microsoft released a docx to markdown tool” statements when the tool itself is mostly a wrapper for pre-existing tools they had nothing to do with—many of which had to put in a lot of effort to figure out Microsoft’s garbage office formats with all too little documentation and help?

Asking, uh, for a friend.

#Introduction Hi #fediverse ! We’re the European Southern Observatory, and we design, build and operate ground-based telescopes.

One of them is our Extremely Large Telescope, currently under construction in #Chile. It will have a 39 m mirror, and its rotating enclosure will weigh 6100 tonnes, or about 700 mastodons!

We’re looking forward to chatting with all of you about #astronomy

📷 ESO/G. Vecchia

#astrodon #astrophysics #space #science

Some personal news: Excited to team up with @snarfed.org to form A New Social, a non-profit focused on building cross-protocol services and tools for the open social web.

It's time for social media to be centered around people, not platforms. Let's build bridges 🌐

https://www.anew.social/hello-social-web/

Physics often "goes out on a limb", developing theories that nobody can test - and often these limbs come crashing down. String theory and loop quantum gravity are crashing down as we speak, but there are plenty of earlier examples.

Neither of these theories truly make testable predictions. That is, starting from the core theory, without adding ad hoc assumptions or making vast leaps of logic, these theories predict essentially *nothing* that we see around us - much less make new predictions that we can test with experiments today.

However, physicists are not shy about making ad hoc assumptions and making vast leaps of logic!

So, string theorists have a long track record of 'predicting' particles and other effects that are just out of reach by current detection methods, and claiming that future experiments will see them. When these experiments are carried out, these predictions are always falsified. But string theorists argue that the core of string theory is not falsified, only the extra ad hoc assumptions and leaps of logic. So string theory carries on.

Hossenfelder gives a good explanation in the video.

And yet, despite having installed string theorists in top positions worldwide, string theory is gradually fading. Physics departments are less likely to hire string theorists than they were 10 years ago - and that was also true 10 years ago. So it seems the tree branch is slowly breaking off the tree, and will eventually crash onto the forest floor, opening up a bit more light for new plants to grow.

Loop quantum gravity has similar problems, but far fewer people work on it, and it hasn't managed to dominate institutions of higher learning in the same way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JYwmxZBjZQ

Companies issuing RTO mandates “lose their best talent”: Study
Despite the risks, firms and Trump are eager to get people back into offices.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/12/companies-issuing-rto-mandates-lose-their-best-talent-study/?utm_brand=arstechnica&utm_social-type=owned&utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social

Ah, OK. This is just another term for passkey (in this case one that's resident on my Windows laptop).

So even when I already have a passkey synced through 1Password, eBay is going to suggest I create a separate passkey that's native to the OS I happen to be using at the moment. This is only going to confuse people and discourage the adoption of passkeys.

I love the technology behind passkeys, but they're not (yet) anywhere close to qualifying as usable security.

Excited to announce that I’m teaming up with Anuj Ahooja on a new non-profit for the open social web, across protocols, with Bridgy Fed as its first main project! Introducing A New Social.

When I posted Possible futures for Bridgy Fed a while back, I was surprised and gratified by the outpouring of support. So many of you really believe in it and want it to survive, grow, and find a stable footing beyond the useful little one-person side project it is today.

Some people stepped up even further and said, “I’m willing to put the work in and actually help build, drive, and even lead this.” Anuj is one of those people. He’s a renaissance man who’s worked on the fediverse and open social web for many years at sub.club, Flipboard, and more. He’s written at length about the potential he sees in the open social web, across all sorts of networks – “people, not platforms!” – and how we have an opportunity now that we haven’t had in a long time.

And there are so many more of you, across the space, who’ve joined and committed to supporting us! We’re truly humbled and grateful. We’re still only at the very beginning, we have a lot of work to do, but we’re excited to get started. Wish us luck, and please reach out if you want to get involved!

This year, I am determined to continue working in my hammock through the winter, including the cold winter mornings (cold by LA standards, e.g.6'C).

I've got *TWO* electric heated slankets: a battery powered one that has most of its elements along my back, and a mains-cabled one with foot-pouches whose elements run down its front.

I'm wearing my EFF staff beanie and a pair of thin, warm "typing" gloves advertised for writers, and I've asked for new slippers for Xmas.