Editing Standard Model (section)

=== 2022 ===

{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1479257036567109636
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Huh. Let’s see…

[[Standard Model]]: [[Bundles|Fiber Bundle]]

[[General Relativity]]: [[Bundles|Fiber Bundle]]

Our universe: Derived from  [[Standard Model|SM]]+[[General Relativity|GR]]

So…uh…yeah. So far. Crazy right? 

Weird flex, but it checked out.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=joe_r_Odonnell-profile-q8PSQM7u.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/joe_r_Odonnell/status/1477836258906759171
|name=Joe — e/adgbe 🎸
|usernameurl=https://x.com/joe_r_Odonnell
|username=joe_r_Odonnell
|content=When all you’ve got is gauge theory, everything looks like a fiber bundle
|timestamp=2:56 AM · Jan 3, 2022
}}
|timestamp=1:02 AM · Jan 7, 2022
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1483973927701409792
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Video source: @AlchemyAmerican
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1483972679199649792
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=A claim that you find repeatedly when you look into [[UAP|UFOs]] is that Aerospace Companies hold the most advanced knowledge of Physics. Not academe.

I do **not** believe this claim. Happy to be wrong. Can someone tell me what its origin is? Why do so many believe it?

Thx #UFOtwitter!
|timestamp=1:20 AM · Jan 20, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1483972680508325889
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Note: I’m agnostic on materials science or condensed matter claims. I was trying to engage in fundamental physics beyond the [[Standard Model]] or [[General Relativity]] here. Likely unsuccessfully.
|timestamp=1:20 AM · Jan 20, 2022
}}
|timestamp=1:25 AM · Jan 20, 2022
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1503097922207948802
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=I’d like to point out that we don’t know whether we are functionally trapped in this solar system.

We are with modern science &amp; technology. But we don’t know if it is easy or hard to escape this place. And we won’t know if we stagnate in [[General Relativity]] &amp; the [[Standard Model]].
|timestamp=7:57 PM · Mar 13, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1503097922207948802-FNwTmDfVUAAJN46.jpg
|media2=ERW-X-post-1503097922207948802-FNwTmDgVsAIHalO.jpg
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1529153695803314176
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=When it became clear that the W Vector Boson might be more massive than claimed, we asked such questions. “Could we be wrong here?”

When I question these other theories, no one ever says that. They just call names. How are we more certain of Whiteness Studies than say Einstein?
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1529151449996832769
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=We seem to be rebasing our entire society on aggressive and unquestionable academic theories from the social sciences that appear not to have even existed in 1988.

That seems like a big decision. I mean, I believe in [[Quantum Field Theory]]…but I wouldn’t bet the country on it.
|timestamp=5:24 PM · May 24, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1529151449996832769-FTijI8aVIAEMmbP.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1529152648477175808
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=I make frequent claims that are counter to the description of the [[Standard  Model]] of physics. It’s not fun, but it’s tolerated to question things like “How well do we know this to be true? How strong is the evidence? How might this all be wrong or formulated in a misleading way.”
|timestamp=5:29 PM · May 24, 2022
}}
|timestamp=5:33 PM · May 24, 2022
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1536778930102730752
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=First slide of a talk on “Beyond the [[Standard Model]] physics” at the UCLA Schwinger-Fest conference on the g-2 muon anomaly. #Schwingerfest #UCLAPhysics

Sums up the mood of many.
|timestamp=6:33 PM · Jun 14, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1536778930102730752-FVO8SrVUEAAXwZp.jpg
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1537101456775385089
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Agreement between collaborations whittles away hope for new physics beyond the [[Standard Model]].

Will try to go over to UCLA to hear what my colleague Laurent Lellouch of the BMW group has to say today at #schwingerfest. He is not hopeful there is ANY easy BSM physics to be found. https://t.co/ISm6VKJOGm
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=Jordy_de_Vries-profile-0WQcjA1w.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/Jordy_de_Vries/status/1536969391048470529
|name=Jordy de Vries
|usernameurl=https://x.com/Jordy_de_Vries
|username=Jordy_de_Vries
|content=News from lattice land; new study of hadronic vacuum polarization contribution to muon g-2 seems to agree with the BMW result. This would reduce the g-2 anomaly significantly https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.06582.pdf
|timestamp=7:10 AM · Jun 15, 2022
|media1=Jordy_de_Vries-X-post-1536969391048470529-FVRpg3UWQAE0XUd.jpg
}}
|timestamp=3:55 PM · Jun 15, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1537101456775385089-FVThoJVUUAEBJm6.jpg
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1544023478604423169
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=But, of course, The Matrix wasn’t about The Architect. It was about Neo. Neo was protagonist, not the Architect.

And the Higgs isn’t a mere differential geometric anomaly. Nor is it unnatural. It’s just not *understood* as geometry. Yet, that is.

Do stay tuned…

Happy 4th all!
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1544023450104147968
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=It’s worth reflecting today on the oddity of Higgs sector within the [[Standard Model]].

Three weeks ago, I heard Nobel Laureate David Gross single out the Higgs field/particle/sector/mechanism  as “unnatural”, but what does that mean? Why single the Higgs out?
Herein lies a puzzle.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=CERN-profile-fTg5cXXe.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/CERN/status/1543945424255520768
|name=CERN
|usernameurl=https://x.com/CERN
|username=CERN
|content=A packed auditorium listens to Peter Higgs within the segment “Brout, Englert and Higgs - memories and reminiscences” at CERN's #Higgs10 symposium today. In 2013, the #NobelPrize for Physics was awarded to François Englert and Peter Higgs. 

Live webcast: http://indico.cern.ch/event/1135177
|media1=CERN-X-post-1543945424255520768-FW0x8EpXoAAfu0B.jpg
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
}}
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1544023456445919232
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Oddly, sectors that gives us the four fundamental forces are not considered fundamentally unnatural. Nor are the sectors that given us matter. They seem like natural structures, that at worst were “defaced” with mysterious graffiti (internal quantum numbers, multiple copies..).
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1544023456445919232-FW15Jl2UIAAZAfL.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1544023460342403072
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=So why is the Higgs still under suspicion well after it has been found? It’s hard to say exactly. In some sense, you can see the rest of the field theory of the [[Standard Model]] as being differential geometric in origin with our best comparison of the Higgs sector being Yang-Mills.
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1544023460342403072-FW15J49VsAAfNrj.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1544023464473808896
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=If I started talking jargon about a “sector governed by relativistic second order Euler-Lagrange equations, subject to quartic interactions, and coupling to matter fields…” you wouldn’t be able to tell if it was the natural  YangMills sector or supposedly unnatural Higgs sector.
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1544023464473808896-FW15KG6UUAAh1oi.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1544023468542345216
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Thus the unnatural nature of the Higgs sector cannot be coming from its analytic description. It is simply that we have learned to see force as coming from geometry we know, while the supremely geometric seeming Higgs comes not from differential geometry, but from our *desire*.
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1544023468542345216-FW15KW0VEAEJF0s.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1544023473193754626
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=To quote the Architect’s speech, you would think he was describing the life of the Higgs Sector (as Neo) within the [[Standard Model|Standard Model of Particle Theory]] (as TheMatrix). The Higgs Mechanism is the remainder of an unbalanced (chiral Weak nuclear force) equation forbidding all mass.
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1544023473193754626-FW15KlhVsAEiAAd.jpg
}}
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Jul 4, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1544023478604423169-FW15K3gUEAAROMs.jpg
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552857885935161344
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@sluitel34 @FrankWilczek This should be in any book that discusses the [[Standard Model|standard model]] via groups, representations, [[Bundles|bundles]], etc.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552762259847258112
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=A surprisingly deep simple question. 

There appears to be a mysterious circle at every point in spacetime which physicists accept but cannot explain. And, every type of particle is endowed w/ a mysterious complementary ⭕️. The spacetime ⭕️ rotates the particle’s sympathetically.
|timestamp=9:05 PM · Jul 28, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552762262170923008
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=The charge on the particle is the gearing ratio of the 
spacetime ⭕️ with the particle’s ⭕️. It’s like a bicycle where the pedal gear⚙️ is the spacetime ⭕️ and the particle ⭕️ is the rear wheel ⚙️. Positive charge is clockwise drive. Negative charge is counterclockwise.
|timestamp=9:05 PM · Jul 28, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552762264679157760
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=An electrically neutral particle is like a particle not having a chain hooked up between the pedal and wheel. So a +2/3 Up Quark will be driven around 2 times clockwise for every three times an electron goes counter-clockwise with charge -1=-3/3.

That may sound weird. So be it.
|timestamp=9:05 PM · Jul 28, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552776702366846977
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@TEMguru That U(1) is the circle at every point in space time. It’s minimal gauge coupling via a character is the chain between the gears. C’mon.
|timestamp=10:03 PM · Jul 28, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552848580506923009
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Uh. That’s *exactly* how it’s done. There is a principal U(1) (circle) bundle. But it isn’t the U(1) that you refer to which is weak-hypercharge. And the analogy makes perfect sense based on internal quantum number

\chi_n:U(1) —&gt; Aut(C)

before tensoring with the spinor bundles.
|timestamp=2:48 AM · Jul 29, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552849821626601474
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Let me just say that there is a community of academics who throw a lot of nasty anti-collegial scientific shade that just isn’t scientifically accurate. Don’t know what to do about that. These people try to cast a spell of Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.

I stand by what I say here.
|timestamp=2:53 AM · Jul 29, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552854175226114048
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@sluitel34 Let me help you then. You have a group: 

G=SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1)

And a homomorphism: 

rho: G —&gt; U(16)

So 

Spin(1,3) x G —&gt; SL(2,C) x U(16)

represents on C^2 tensor C^16, and its conjugate, to give one generation of the Fermions (with Right handed neutrinos assumed). With me?
|timestamp=3:11 AM · Jul 29, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552855045246312449
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@sluitel34 Now the U(1) ⭕️ of the original description lives inside the SU(2) x U(1) via bundle reduction or symmetry breaking as you see fit. The gearing ratio I mentioned is simply the integer indexing all irreducible representations of U(1) which are all 1-dimensional characters. Clear?
|timestamp=3:14 AM · Jul 29, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552856356322832384
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@sluitel34 Every U(1) character can be visualized as two circular gears connected by a chain with some integer ratio of the circumferences. Negative integer representations are ones with the chain having a half twist. The trivial representation has no chain at all. 

Hope that helps.
|timestamp=3:19 AM · Jul 29, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1552857586143096833
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@sluitel34 @FrankWilczek Not true at all. @FrankWilczek correctly points out that there is something super compelling about SO(10) Grand Unified Theory. Both space time and internal representations are spinorial if this is true.

I just don’t know from what position  you’re speaking so authoritatively.
|timestamp=3:24 AM · Jul 29, 2022
}}
|timestamp=3:25 AM · Jul 29, 2022
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562132802279075840
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@martinmbauer [[Nathan “Nati” Seiberg|Seiberg]]/[[Ed Witten|Witten]]/Dijkgraaf/Maldacena

All string folks. 

Maybe get a [[String Theory|string theorist]] to admit this to you. [[Brian Greene]] likely wouldn’t disagree with me.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562112981185441792
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=It really depends. Being totally honest:

[[String Theory|“String Theory”]] has done a *tremendous* amount of good while “String Maximalism” has done even more harm.

If the [[String Theory|String Theorists]] who led the movement were to undo some of the damage by admitting what happened, it’d be a major positive.

https://x.com/JMarkMcEntire/status/1562089447189086209
|timestamp=4:22 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562113698717528066
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Here is where I respectfully disagree with my colleague @skdh. You can’t ‘get rid of [[String Theory|string theory]]’. String-like objects are natural and have an unbelievably rich and beautiful interlocking mathematics. The beguiling beauty isn’t the problem in my opinion. Beauty is the excuse.
|timestamp=4:25 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562114833561964545
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=The problem is that string theory on its own has taken the last 40years to PROVE it doesn’t work as a stand alone path by gobbling up mind share, students, resources and (to be fair) most of the most brilliant brains. So much that no one dares say the full extent of the disaster.
|timestamp=4:29 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562115994822225921
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=During that time [[String Theory]] diverted the entire field into a magical never-land of “toy physics”. Models that aren’t in any way real. You now have “particle physicists” at the end of their careers who have never worked with anything like a particle and can’t remember them.
|timestamp=4:34 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562118340256022528
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=So, here’s my analysis. In a world where [[David Gross]], [[Ed Witten]], [[Lenny Susskind]], [[Cumrun Vafa]], [[Michio Kaku]] had a public Come To Jesus moment where they admitted the disaster in front of the community faithful, I’d be up for having [[String Theory|ST]] as a major theory. But without that I’m unsure.
|timestamp=4:43 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562118341854081024
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=The damage to the culture of High Energy Physics is more severe than the damage done by Geoffery Chew in a different era. And here I support @skdh, [[Peter Woit]], [[Lee Smolin]] etc. These are brave people who paid with abuse to communicate that physics was diverting into pure fantasy.
|timestamp=4:43 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562120564939952130
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=So to sum up: 

[[String Theory]] deserves to be a major branch. But it has already mostly given up on the ‘80s promises/lies it told us to gobble up all the resources of the community (brains, mind share, $$$). That was a crime which may prove fatal to our being able to do physics.
|timestamp=4:52 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562121223189893121
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=But it is also so thoroughly investigated and badly behaved relative to scientific norms that it deserved to be shrunk. And that happened to a large extent already. The most important thing to realize is that physics is still about the physical world. Not Calabi Yau. Not AdS/CFT.
|timestamp=4:54 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562121896828608513
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=And we need our brilliant failed string theorists to admit the disaster within a scientific paradigm. 

Science is a culture. Perhaps the most fragile one. It won’t survive this suspension of collegiality, decency and self-critical behavior. We need to go back to real physics. 🙏
|timestamp=4:57 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562124046128492545
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@martinmbauer [[String Theory|String theory]] was a giant percentage of a tiny priesthood. That was the same tiny priesthood that brought us Thermo Nuclear devices. And if you want to pay for me to research the numbers I’m willing to hire somebody to put together the data after 1984. It’s not usually contested.
|timestamp=5:06 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562125170600341509
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@DontsitDJ @martinmbauer I wasn’t aware of it like that. I think he disagrees with me and has a bit of an edge. But maybe I missed a tweet or two. I haven’t seen much interaction and he has written some things I liked.
|timestamp=5:10 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562125539619454976
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@DontsitDJ @martinmbauer I love a good critique. It’s hard to find. Most people out here develop a side hustle in interpersonal drama. I try not to.
|timestamp=5:12 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562132136596889600
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@martinmbauer I don’t know which version of “The Field” you mean. 

Physics in total? Is a large field.

Beyond the [[Standard Model|standard model theory]]? Is a small field. Tiny. But hugely consequential. And the percentage and effect wasn’t small. Do you really dispute this??? Look at the IAS professors.
|timestamp=5:38 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
|timestamp=5:40 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562467397281337351
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=P.S. “It hasn’t even failed” because it can’t fail. So far as I can see, it can never fail. In the minds of the faithful, It’s unable to fail because it *has* to be the way forward. It’s hard to explain what’s wrong with that to the enlightened who see its infinite power &amp; glory.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=martinmbauer-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/martinmbauer/status/1562121660194504705
|name=Martin Bauer
|usernameurl=https://x.com/martinmbauer
|username=martinmbauer
|content=What has string theory done to become the poster child of failed physics? It hasn’t even failed.
|timestamp=4:56 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562460747560497153
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Physics in 1980: “I’m trying to grasp why nature has 3 generations of chiral fermions with SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) internal symmetry.”

Physics Today: “Remind me again what the internal quantum numbers are? I do [[Quantum Gravity|quantum gravity]] so it’s not something I’ve worked with since my [[Quantum Field Theory|QFT]] class.”
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=martinmbauer-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/martinmbauer/status/1562121660194504705
|name=Martin Bauer
|usernameurl=https://x.com/martinmbauer
|username=martinmbauer
|content=What has string theory done to become the poster child of failed physics? It hasn’t even failed.
|timestamp=4:56 PM · Aug 23, 2022
}}
|timestamp=3:24 PM · Aug 24, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562463292345372672
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=A) High energy physics of real particles became the no-energy physics of toy models.

B) [[Quantum Gravity|Quantizing Gravity]] was substituted for unification or extension of the [[Standard Model|Standard model]].

C) Other research programs were obliterated because [[String Theory|ST]] claimed it had it all rapped up.

D) Hype won.
|timestamp=3:34 PM · Aug 24, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562463294014627841
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=E) Focus shifted to mathematical structure of abstract field/[[String Theory|String/M theory]]. Not our particular world’s choice of thy.

F) Standards of scientific progress were rewritten to disguise failure.

G) Differential application of standards became the norm.

It ended physics culture
|timestamp=3:34 PM · Aug 24, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562465038962610178
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=String Theory isn’t the problem. String culture is poisonous to science.

String theory, like love, means never having to say your sorry. Or mistaken.

It’s the January 6 problem…but in science. But where the physics versions of Mike Pence often got fired for not going along. 🙏
|timestamp=3:41 PM · Aug 24, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562465914695520256
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=<nowiki>*</nowiki>you’re
|timestamp=3:44 PM · Aug 24, 2022
}}
|timestamp=3:50 PM · Aug 24, 2022
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1570145951293251585
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=@DrBrianKeating I am not aware that the [[Standard Model|standard model]] and [[General Relativity|GR]] “work fine”: CKM, PNMS, Strong CP, Mass Hierarchy issues, CC origin, origins of internal symmetry, initial singularity and black hole singularity, Miniboone, etc. all require explanation.

If that’s what she means, I say it’s wrong.
|timestamp=8:22 PM · Sep 14, 2022
}}


{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590755212503183363
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Note Added: many readers are making wild inferences about me talking about  flying fakes. I was very clear that this was about apparent crafts on the ground and in Hangars in Nevada, Ohio &amp; elsewhere.

Wild or bad inference patterns will get you blocked. I don’t have time. Thx.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739362454843396
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=One of the questions about UFOs that needs to be asked, and that I don’t hear much about, is: [[UAP=SAP|“Has the US government built fake UFOs?”]]

UFO people are so focused on whether there are real UFOs that they don’t push hard enough on this question.

Allow me to share a thought or two.
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1590739362454843396-FhNxBNvVUAMH8ns.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739368503046145
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=When I first realized I was totally wrong about [[UAP|UFO/UAP]], I was shocked by how many folks have very similar stories about recovered crashes of very similar advanced vehicles.

It was mind blowing in 2 ways.

A) We have real crashed vehicles.
And/Or
B) We built fake alien vehicles.
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1590739368503046145-FhNxBicVUAA69V9.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739374559617025
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=At this point I’m reasonably sure there are things that look like cool alien vehicle in some hangers. But I also grew up near Hollywood and remember super cool looking fake space cars visible off the Hollywood freeway.

So: does anyone have stories of building fake UFOs for USG?
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1590739374559617025-FhNxB4iVUAg6Ff.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739382201307140
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=As you likely guessed, all the photos in this thread are fake military equipment. The airbase is totally fake. The dummy tanks are often inflated on the battlefield. The fake tank pieces are bolted on to real cars.

Q: Did we build fake [[UAP|UFOs]] in places like Wright-Patterson AFB?
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1590739382201307140-FhNxCXaVUAA7vrd.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739384583979008
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=After studying this issue for 2yrs, I’m pretty convinced that there ARE wild looking vehicles in secret high security locations. But I also find NO SIGN OF OUR TOP PHYSICISTS. That is a huge red flag. If you had fake UFOs, you would have a puzzle for physics: What is the science?
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739386131689472
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=A true recovered interstellar craft would be like LHC or LIGO data: potential scientific data for physics beyond the [[Standard Model]] and [[General Relativity]].

But if the crafts are fake, you would be crazy to let the A-team physicists near them. It would blow up in your face.
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739390351159297
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=So my ignorant question is this: are there stories of building fake UFOs for sites in Nevada? Ohio? Are there fake retrieval teams? To what extent does faking military equipment spill into faking a UFOgasm for decades?

Because there are too many very similar craft stories.
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1590739390351159297-FhNxC3_VUAEUmwE.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739392733536256
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=So, at this point, the stories of craft kept at secret locations is most likely to be true in my opinion.   But it is also true that all the top physics talent that was working only semi-covertly on suspicious gravity projects left by the early 1970s. So any craft may be faked.
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739394285428737
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Either way, it’s a big deal. Everything changed in the early 70s. It’s impossible to say how much. The moment the Mansfield amendment came in, physics began to stagnate. And [[Quantum Gravity|“Quantum Gravity”]] destroyed our culture of science. We don’t even whisper about its “Anti-Gravity” origin.
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1590739396055412736
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=So to sum up: there do *appear* to be craft. But advanced armies all build dummy weapons.

Q1: Do we have any Fakes?</br>
Q2: Do we have only Fakes?</br>
Q3: Why do we talk almost  *exclusively* about Technology and not new Post-[[General Relativity|GR]]/[[Standard Model|SM]] science if there are *any* real interstellar craft?

🙏
|timestamp=4:13 PM · Nov 10, 2022
}}
|timestamp=5:16 PM · Nov 10, 2022
}}