Editing Chirality (section)

=== 2024 ===

{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1871127090067915264
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Some of us propose such solutions. 

Some of us do not.

Those that propose other solutions are targeted for self-promotion.

Those that do not are told "You have no alternatives."

Woit is an excellent example of someone who was told he was barren when he was a pure critic...only to then be told he was a self-promoter when he had something to say about the structure bundle of CP^3 being potentially the low energy electro strong SU(3)xU(1) and the oddity of the chirality of the weak force being either fully on or off rather than merely conjugate V vs \bar{V}.

It's time to stop pretending this is about physics. It's about protecting a 4 decade MASSIVE screw up pretending that there is only one game in town.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1870919781559443546
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=I think you may not be understanding that your colleagues are not so much 'angry', 'disgruntled' or 'envious' as...how do I say it...absolutely *outraged* by our universities, funding agencies, tech companies and news media conspiring to constantly mislead the public while hurling insults as SG does (or worse as others do) at competent colleauges on the side of the public's right to know what is actually going on. 

Matt. Love your work. But think about what you are saying:  

https://t.co/H2sQ3Q5p1z
|timestamp=7:50 PM · Dec 22, 2024
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1870919779189670098
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=I'd be happy to discuss the merits of this claim.

"News Story:  Physicists ‘Bootstrap’ Validity of String Theory NYU and Caltech scientists develop innovative mathematical approach to back existence of long-held framework explaining all physical reality"

https://t.co/Clq4GGS2cJ
|timestamp=7:50 PM · Dec 22, 2024
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1870920899722977310
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=And I don't appreciate our colleagues picking on @skdh. She pisses me off quite a bit. But she's responsive as a colleauge in most of my interactions. And she is sometimes in possession of a point I hadn't considered or one that's better than my own. Let's not pretend she's just 'angry'. She has a difficult and deep point that the community is avoiding. I agree with good chunks of it.
|timestamp=7:54 PM · Dec 22, 2024
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1871122619661205902
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=Hi Matt. 

Sam regularly portrays himself as outraged about 'angry' or 'dissatisfied' or otherwise 'upset' voices and insinuates that they are turning to sensationalism. I furnished two (of very many) cases that folks like Sam would find absolutely outrageous if the real concern was damaging science with sensationalism, and which cause *far* more harm to fundamental physics than independent voices like Sabine Hossenfelder.

SG is a brand on line. A guy who tries to make the establishment seem 'edgy'...often by targeting people who are raising the real issues with the institutions.

The big problem for fundamental physics is institutional sensationalism, excuse-making, and cheerleading for failing programs as well as anti-collegial behavior of the form that SG regularly tries to turn into disparagment for entertainment. 

Many of those independent critical voices are actually focused on *institutional* sensationalism particularly surrounding outrageous claims for particle theory,  quantum gravity and String Theory/m-theory. 

I generally view your public outreach work very favorably, communicating the beauty of the Standard Model, and to a lesser extent GR. Within research, you  mostly seem to be trying to connect String Theory and other speculative frameworks to things like experimental accelerator signatures. Despite my distaste for 4-decades of anti-scientfic String Triumphalism and dissembling from the Susskinds, Wittens, Motls, Grosses and others, I have never associated that with you.

Gregson clearly has a problem. He is strawmanning colleagues talking about a VERY real problem of denial, and anti-collegial behavior which is anethma to science.
I may not agree with @skdh's critique (this is no secret to her), but even I can steelman her points.

I feel like people such as yourself, David Tong, @3blue1brown, etc are doing amazing work.  I was simply disappointed to see a leading voice of high level outreach join a toxic voice gleefully targeting a colleague. I thought 'Perhaps Matt is not be aware of SG's MO."
|timestamp=9:16 AM · Dec 23, 2024
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1871124671053345101
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/ericweinstein
|username=ericweinstein
|content=I'm just not going to put up with this quietly again after all the sadistic cruelty Sabine has been through from the Lubos Motl's of the world while her community largely stayed silent or laughed along.

SG can man up and take Sabine on if he likes. But the man has an anti-collegial strawman problem followed by blocking.
|media=ERW-X-post-1871124671053345101-GfeRDnQaIAAZVdB.jpg
|timestamp=9:24 AM · Dec 23, 2024
}}
|timestamp=9:33 AM · Dec 23, 2024
}}