Editing Physics got NERPhed (section)

{{stub}}

{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1964363983403831632
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Yet your “Physics” thesis is 153 pages. 

Take care, slugger. https://t.co/LMn2in0Bzf
|media1=ERW-X-post-1964363983403831632-G0LSofMaMAAnmJb.jpg
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1964342037224042746
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Fascinating exchange gentlemen…so odd.

Why don’t you also bring up the metaplectic correction and point out that I don’t mention that? 

Or ordering considerations of classical operators? 

That would allow you both to cast even more (unsupported) aspersions.

In truth you are not making a deep point. You are making the quantum supremacy point that we should take classical limits of quantum systems. Not naively quantize classical theories…like we used to do when we were succeeding. 

Yet the Standard Model stubbornly remains a classical field theory that got quantized. Mysteriously dodging near certain death on all sides. What are the odds!! 

Well, there might be deep classical reasons for that improbable outcome that escape the quantum supremacists. I mean…it’s just possible.

[[Morals|MORAL]]: Not everyone is an ignorant idiot just because they think your community is 40+ years stalled groupthinking this exact way. I don’t think you are ignorant or stupid. I don’t think you are pseudoscientists. Or grifters. Or any of that. I just think you are wrong in your total approach. That’s just science. The quantum gravity crowd has demanded a victory parade for 40+ years over all other approaches while it fails to launch year after year after year. That is not science. I’m sorry. I don’t make that rule.

[[Morals|MORAL II]]: You might want to bring up polarization independence and the difficulty of proving (projective) flatness in the polarization discussion, if you want to be even more condescending. You might also laugh to yourselves that the classical hadron and lepton sectors don’t even separately quantize! I don’t know why this doesn’t occur to you. And finally, you might want to assert that I am ignorant of Groenewold–van Hove and have a chuckle about that too. Just a suggestion. 

Have fun. And good day, gentlemen. Keep up the high standards and good work.
|timestamp=2:56 PM · Sep 6, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=TimHenke9-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/TimHenke9/status/1964348779814846548
|name=Tim Henke
|usernameurl=https://x.com/TimHenke9
|username=TimHenke9
|content=Buddy, we're not doing "quantum supremacy". But if you wanna quantise a classical theory you must work for it. You don't get to yell "self-quantising" and call it a day

You must check topological conditions & choose/prove independence of polarisation & the prequantum line bundle
|timestamp=3:23 PM · Sep 6, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1964363983403831632
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Which is both INCREDIBLE and difficult as it stands. Yes? No? I mean I think I get this.

Like it’s almost a miracle that it works at all:
|media1=ERW-X-post-1964351563553526194-G0LHVjDa0AAZgcS.jpg
|timestamp=3:34 PM · Sep 6, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=TimHenke9-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/TimHenke9/status/1964353828628672928
|name=Tim Henke
|usernameurl=https://x.com/TimHenke9
|username=TimHenke9
|content=Now you're getting it! :)

And not only difficult but often simply false. Many classical phase spaces dont admit prequantum line bundles. Others don't have a unique one

And the choice of polarisation can be the difference between a finite- and infinite-dimensional Hilbert space!
|timestamp=3:43 PM · Sep 6, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1964360623992811644
|name=Eric Weinstein
|content=“Buddy”

“Now you're getting it! :)”

You guys are just so full of yourselves. What are you…in your 20s? Born around AdS/CFT? Am I your problem student finally coming along to “get it”?

You think I can’t understand you! Right? Like you are my teacher or something. Adorable.

I forget what this community is like. You do realize you are still playing with toy models working a million miles away from actual laboratory physics? 

Take a look out your window Tim: No quarks. No neutrinos. No generations. You are on the train to '''NERPH (Not Even Remotely Physics)'''. You just don’t know it. Before long you will leave for a job so you can buy a house or retire without ever having made contact with physical reality. As a physics person. Wake up. 

You’re not even in spacetime Tim. You are likely playing with Riemann surfaces. Your “Higgs Fields” are often valued in the adjoint bundles. Your metrics are often Euclidean signature. Your SUSY is likely unsupported by any LHC superpartners. Etc. Etc.

You actually think I don’t get it because if I did “get it” I would certainly agree with you. 

Like I can’t read what you wrote here or I wouldn’t be saying these things:
|media1=ERW-X-post-1964360623992811644-G0LPk3SbUAUniIa.jpg
|timestamp=4:10 PM · Sep 6, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=TimHenke9-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/TimHenke9/status/1964362989319901391
|name=Tim Henke
|usernameurl=https://x.com/TimHenke9
|username=TimHenke9
|content=If those two little interjections are enough to set you off like this, you really need to get your temper in check lmao

Remember, champ: brevity is the soul of wit
|timestamp=4:20 PM · Sep 6, 2025
}}
|timestamp=4:24 PM · Sep 6, 2025
}}