The Portal Wiki

Standard Model: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Standard Model (edit)

Revision as of 22:46, 25 November 2025

26,018 bytes added ,  25 November
→‎2022
(Created page with "{{stub}} Category:Physics Category:Portal Topics")
 
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{stub}}
{{stub}}
=== 2009 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=2930581754}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=5093331929}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=6199859805}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=6200716218}}
=== 2017 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=928300831652298753}}
=== 2018 ===
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958045232150425600
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=END/ My bet is on Type III for a reason:
Type I is not unified.</br>
Type II is possible, but appears to be unworkable in details.</br>
Type IV appears to lack sufficient guidance from Quantum theory to actually 'ship' despite consuming resources for yrs.</br>
Types V &amp; VI lack any progress.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958021546718633984
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=1/ "Theories of Everything": A Taxonomy.
It is often said that "Theories-of-Everything are a dime a dozen" or that "All theoretical physicists worth their salt have several in a drawer." So far as I can tell, this is simply untrue. We've barely ever, if at all, seen candidates.
|timestamp=4:58 PM · Jan 29, 2018
|media1=ERW-X-post-958021546718633984-DUuQCV3UMAAmV4G.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958022612390563842
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=2/ The Escher Lithograph used in the first tweet points to the core of why TOEs are rare. A candidate TOE has to have some quality of "a fire that lights itself", which is difficult to think about beyond the equations that would instantiate it. Hence very few such theories exist.
|timestamp=5:02 PM · Jan 29, 2018
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958026235736567808
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=3/ I'm going to lean on the following dictionary of analogies:
Physical Paper = Void
Pictured Canvas = Manifold and/or Einsteinian Spacetime
Ink=Matter &amp; non-gravitational force fields
Pencils = Pre-Conscious Lego (e.g. amino acids)
Hands = Consciousness
Paradox = Self-awareness
|timestamp=5:17 PM · Jan 29, 2018
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958028114180714496
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=4/ In my taxonomy, Type I TOEs are our least ambitious but they best match our state of the world.  They are distinguished by two *separate* sources of origin: one for the Canvas ([[General Relativity]] or [[Ed Witten|Witten's]] point i) ) &amp; one for the Ink ([[Standard Model]] or [[Ed Witten|Witten's]] point ii) ).
|timestamp=5:24 PM · Jan 29, 2018
|media1=ERW-X-post-928296366853328896-DOE8P81U8AA_MBe.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958032334346862592
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=5 Type II TOE's are more ambitious &amp; seek to derive the Ink from the choice of a mathematically distinguished Canvas that is anything but blank. My arch-nemesis @garrettlisi's theory is Type II. E8 is his 248 dimensional canvas. The intricacy is there, but doesn't quite match up.
|timestamp=5:41 PM · Jan 29, 2018
|media1=ERW-X-post-958032334346862592-DUucltrVoAAvF2u.jpg
|media2=ERW-X-post-958032334346862592-DUucnc5VAAAtoC1.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958034414167982080
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=6/ In Type III TOEs the ink is to be derived from canvas, but the canvas is essentially blank; it simply permits mathematics to happen (e.g. calculus and linear algebra). In such theories the ink has to be bootstrapped into existence. My lectures on [[Theory of Geometric Unity|Geometric Unity]] were Type III.
|timestamp=5:49 PM · Jan 29, 2018
|media1=ERW-X-post-958034414167982080-DUufH-dVAAAD8jD.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958037099457871872
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=7/ Type IV TOE's try to change the question from Einstein's "Unified Field Theory." In [[String Theory|String Thy]], [[Quantum Gravity|"Quantizing Gravity"]] became substituted for "Unified Field." For this crowd, many are now betting that the canvas &amp; ink are both *emergent* from some deeper fundamental quantum thy.
|timestamp=6:00 PM · Jan 29, 2018
|media1=ERW-X-post-958037099457871872-DUuhS VVMAA3FyW.jpg
|media2=ERW-X-post-958037099457871872-DUuhXHwUQAAEICu.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958039046239928320
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=8/ Type V TOEs are of a type I've never been able to fully contemplate; they are without boundaries or origins. There is no "Why is there something rather than nothing" within them. That which is not forbidden is compelled into existence. Void creates canvas &amp; canvas begets void.
|timestamp=6:08 PM · Jan 29, 2018
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958041865386827776
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=9/ Type VI TOEs begin with the hands. Religions are of this type. I pass over this in silence as they aren't scientific.
I will leave open higher types, but I've really only seen attempts at I-IV &amp; I wouldn't call [[String Theory|String-Thy/M-Thy]] a full TOE try since events of the last 15 yrs.
|timestamp=6:19 PM · Jan 29, 2018
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/958043587349901312
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=10/ I believe fundamental physics is stalled out because we are finally at the doorstep of a TOE and we haven't really bothered to think about what that would actually mean because we've never been here before. A final step need not look like any previous one. In fact, it cannot.
|timestamp=6:26 PM · Jan 29, 2018
}}
|timestamp=6:32 PM · Jan 29, 2018
}}
=== 2019 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1084871544617164801}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1091743275533266944}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1170821377537925121}}
=== 2020 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1230990960093302784}}
=== 2021 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1372806822168383488}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1379872173033017346}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1379872184387039232}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1379872187692187648}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1380213542675095553}}
=== 2022 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1479257036567109636}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1483972680508325889}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1503097922207948802}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1529152648477175808}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1536778930102730752}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1537101456775385089}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1544023450104147968}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1544023460342403072}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1544023473193754626}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1552857885935161344}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1562132802279075840
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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 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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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.
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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=@DrBrianKeating I am not aware that the standard model and 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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|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
}}
=== 2023 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1618360949370671104}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1621054201957847040}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1621197260238503937}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1625896488156164098}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1666441031158730752}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1666441058442674176}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1676623162098999296}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1677230177544470529}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1677235567871021059}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1679330391063433219}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1679334548646277120}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1684481098909200384}}
=== 2024 ===
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1773060797847208382}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1774092904459629027}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1778141545260331295}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1827740131799011345}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1834698277356527999}}
== Related Pages ==
* [[General Relativity]]
* [[Peer Injunction]]
* [[Peer Review]]
* [[Quantum Gravity]]
* [[Quantum Field Theory]]
* [[Right Freeway, Wrong Exit]]
* [[String Theory]]
* [[Theory of Geometric Unity]]


[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Portal Topics]]
[[Category:Portal Topics]]
Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/20872...24200"