The Portal Wiki

String Theory: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

String Theory (edit)

Revision as of 22:08, 3 December 2025

8,154 bytes added ,  Yesterday at 22:08
→‎2021
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 404: Line 404:


=== 2018 ===
=== 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
}}




Line 973: Line 1,097:
|content=Yet you can’t do this in academic depts.
|content=Yet you can’t do this in academic depts.


Moral: we destroyed our ability to self-police. Peer review won’t work. We need to go back to doing physics. What’s holding us back may not be physics but the political economy of academic labor, citation, reputation &amp; attribution.🙏
[[Morals|Moral]]: we destroyed our ability to self-police. Peer review won’t work. We need to go back to doing physics. What’s holding us back may not be physics but the political economy of academic labor, citation, reputation &amp; attribution.🙏
|timestamp=4:06 PM ¡ Apr 22, 2021
|timestamp=4:06 PM ¡ Apr 22, 2021
}}
}}
Line 2,007: Line 2,131:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=@martinmbauer Seiberg/Witten/Dijkgraaf/Maldacena
|content=@martinmbauer [[Nathan “Nati” Seiberg|Seiberg]]/[[Ed Witten|Witten]]/Dijkgraaf/Maldacena


All string folks.  
All string folks.  


Maybe get a string theorist to admit this to you. Brian Greene likely wouldn’t disagree with me.
Maybe get a [[String Theory|string theorist]] to admit this to you. [[Brian Greene]] likely wouldn’t disagree with me.
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 2,021: Line 2,145:
|content=It really depends. Being totally honest:
|content=It really depends. Being totally honest:


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


If the String Theorists who led the movement were to undo some of the damage by admitting what happened, it’d be a major positive.
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
|timestamp=4:22 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,032: Line 2,158:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Here is where I respectfully disagree with my colleague @skdh. You can’t ‘get rid of 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.
|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
|timestamp=4:25 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,050: Line 2,176:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=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.
|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
|timestamp=4:34 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,059: Line 2,185:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=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 ST as a major theory. But without that I’m unsure.
|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
|timestamp=4:43 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,068: Line 2,194:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=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.
|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
|timestamp=4:43 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,079: Line 2,205:
|content=So to sum up:  
|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, $$$). That was a crime which may prove fatal to our being able to do physics.
[[String Theory]] deserves to be a major branch. But it has already mostly given up on the ‘80s promises/lies it told us to gobble up all the resources of the community (brains, mind share, $$$). That was a crime which may prove fatal to our being able to do physics.
|timestamp=4:52 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
|timestamp=4:52 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,108: Line 2,234:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=@martinmbauer 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.
|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
|timestamp=5:06 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,139: Line 2,265:
Physics in total? Is a large field.
Physics in total? Is a large field.


Beyond the 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.
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=5:38 PM ¡ Aug 23, 2022
}}
}}
Line 2,437: Line 2,563:


=== 2023 ===
=== 2023 ===


{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 2,459: Line 2,584:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Discussion of the future of theoretical physics seems like a game of "Intellectual Keepaway."
|content=Discussion of the future of theoretical physics seems like a game of [[Intellectual Keep-Away|"Intellectual Keepaway."]]


Its the same group of mandarins who predicted LHC SuperSymmetry, Mini-Black holes, SU(5) Grand Unification, [[String Theory]], [[Quantum Gravity|Q-Gravity]] would work.  
Its the same group of mandarins who predicted LHC SuperSymmetry, Mini-Black holes, SU(5) Grand Unification, [[String Theory]], [[Quantum Gravity|Q-Gravity]] would work.  


What do our *heretics* say instead?
What do our *heretics* say instead?
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=AspenPhysics-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/AspenPhysics/status/1618036764878442498
|name=Aspen Center for Physics
|usernameurl=https://x.com/AspenPhysics
|username=AspenPhysics
|content=Past ACP President Michael Turner and Maria Spiropulu in conversation with @overbye of @nytimes discuss the future of Physics! #physics #particlephysics #spacetime #stringtheory #physicists
|timestamp=11:03 PM ¡ Jan 24, 2023
}}
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
}}
}}
Line 2,489: Line 2,624:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Said differently, what if our leadership is brilliant but SPECIFICALLY untrustworthy in identifying the path forward. What if 1000 David Gross &amp; Ed Wit1ten Keynotes setting the agenda are the problem? What if Lenny Susskind is not correct sbout non-string people wasting our time.
|content=Said differently, what if our leadership is brilliant but SPECIFICALLY untrustworthy in identifying the path forward. What if 1000 [[David Gross]] &amp; [[Ed Witten|Ed Wit1ten]] Keynotes setting the agenda are the problem? What if [[Lenny Susskind]] is not correct sbout non-string people wasting our time.
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
}}
}}
Line 2,500: Line 2,635:
|content=What if we *excluded* people who are consistently wrong about the path forward and asked:  
|content=What if we *excluded* people who are consistently wrong about the path forward and asked:  


"Are there any OTHER ideas? Not Strings. Not Loops. Not Asymptotic Safety. Not Simple Compact GUTs. Not Quantum Computing. Not Black Hole Information. Not Technicolor. Not Amplitudes."
"Are there any OTHER ideas? Not [[String Theory|Strings]]. Not Loops. Not Asymptotic Safety. Not Simple Compact GUTs. Not Quantum Computing. Not Black Hole Information. Not Technicolor. Not Amplitudes."
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
}}
}}
Line 2,522: Line 2,657:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Look, we could just hold a conference: "Fundamental Physics: Can't *Anybody* Here Play This Game?"
|content=Look, we could just hold a conference: [[Can’t Anybody Here Play This Game|"Fundamental Physics: Can't *Anybody* Here Play This Game?"]]


David, Ed, Maria, Cumrun, Nati, Lenny, Juan, Lee etc. could be respondents giving constructive feedback. We would then at least learn why we are where we are. But this is nuts.
[[David Gross|David]], [[Ed Witten|Ed]], Maria, [[Cumrun Vafa|Cumrun]], [[Nathan “Nati” Seiberg|Nati]], [[Lenny Susskind|Lenny]], Juan, [[Lee Smolin|Lee]] etc. could be respondents giving constructive feedback. We would then at least learn why we are where we are. But this is nuts.
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
|timestamp=8:36 PM ¡ Jan 25, 2023
}}
}}
Line 4,796: Line 4,931:
|content=Respectfully. Here is what I think is going on.  
|content=Respectfully. Here is what I think is going on.  


I) Independent breakthrough science is in a long wind down starting with the Mansfield amendment, and is being partially decommissioned. Why? Because it was found to be too powerful and redistributive.
I) Independent breakthrough science is in a long wind down starting with the [[Mansfield Amendment (1969)|Mansfield amendment]], and is being partially decommissioned. Why? Because it was found to be too powerful and redistributive.


II) The National Security and National Interest folks now use science, journalism,  academe etc to dump their cognitive sludge. Epstein cover stories, UAP cover stories, Assasination cover stories, COVID cover stories, Inflation/Money Supply cover stories, etc. That is, the organs that kept us partially free in 1975 are now used to attack our ability to think, every day of our lives.  
II) The National Security and National Interest folks now use science, journalism,  academe etc to dump their cognitive sludge. [[Jeffrey Epstein|Epstein]] cover stories, [[UAP|UAP cover stories]], Assasination cover stories, COVID cover stories, Inflation/Money Supply cover stories, etc. That is, the organs that kept us partially free in 1975 are now used to attack our ability to think, every day of our lives.  


III) Anyone not going along with I) and II) sticks out like an absolute sore thumb and is targeted for “Image Cheapening”. This is abhorrent abuse of power.  
III) Anyone not going along with I) and II) sticks out like an absolute sore thumb and is targeted for [[Image Cheapening|“Image Cheapening”]]. This is abhorrent abuse of power.  


IV) @RepLuna isn’t stupid. If she can talk about Physical Law and “Interdimensional beings”, she can place a phone call or two to our physicists or differential geometers/topologists.  I’m happy to help direct her to good folks.
IV) @RepLuna isn’t stupid. If she can talk about Physical Law and “Interdimensional beings”, she can place a phone call or two to our physicists or differential geometers/topologists.  I’m happy to help direct her to good folks.


V) The UFO community is way too recreational. What ever is hidden behind the UAP curtain is serious business. It involved high level physics as recently as 50 years ago. Then that connection got buried. I just don’t know what this about. And I have *zero* proof it involves aliens or interdimensional beings.  
V) The [[UAP|UFO]] community is way too recreational. What ever is hidden behind the [[UAP]] curtain is serious business. It involved high level physics as recently as 50 years ago. Then that connection got buried. I just don’t know what this about. And I have *zero* proof it involves aliens or interdimensional beings.  


VI) Adults who would never discuss the Tooth Fairy in public should not discuss alien equivalents of the Tooth Fairy. Alien life and higher dimensions are both super serious subjects to me. And they would be too you too if this wasn’t made into a cheap farce. Space opera is just dumping cognitive sludge in the middle of a central scientific question. And I don’t take kindly to it.  
VI) Adults who would never discuss the Tooth Fairy in public should not discuss alien equivalents of the Tooth Fairy. Alien life and higher dimensions are both super serious subjects to me. And they would be too you too if this wasn’t made into a cheap farce. Space opera is just dumping cognitive sludge in the middle of a central scientific question. And I don’t take kindly to it.  
Line 4,816: Line 4,951:


X) Lying about COVID and UAP is a modified NIMBY issue for all scientists: Not in our back yard(s). I’m just tired of scientists and technical folks being fed cognitive sludge by NatSec and national interest types we can’t see. Interdimensional or otherwise.
X) Lying about COVID and UAP is a modified NIMBY issue for all scientists: Not in our back yard(s). I’m just tired of scientists and technical folks being fed cognitive sludge by NatSec and national interest types we can’t see. Interdimensional or otherwise.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=Onuora-profile-5mx-MBmV.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/Onuora/status/1956019859382526085
|name=Onuora Amobi
|usernameurl=https://x.com/Onuora
|username=Onuora
|content=I’m a big fan of yours.
But isn’t it a little much to expect a politician to not speak plainly on a podcast but use “scientifically precise” terms?
Regarding the propaganda element of all this, here’s what I believe. The level of discourse recently about UAP’s and potential alien activity is refreshing whether or not it’s murky.
The fact that we have Government officials going on record to validate that SOMETHING is out there is progress.
Compared to a decade ago where people were demonized and destroyed for even speaking out about this, I see progress.
Respectfully. 🙏🏽
|timestamp=3:47 PM ¡ Aug 14, 2025
}}
|timestamp=11:11 PM ¡ Aug 14, 2025
|timestamp=11:11 PM ¡ Aug 14, 2025
}}
}}
Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/23895...24606"