Anything But Physics
*If* we are being visited, it is likely not with conventional propulsion. It is insane that we are not talking about this as possible new physics. The conversation will go right back to technology, security, skeptism etc.
Anything but physical discussion of a physical phenomena.
And the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics does not go to physics...
âAnything but Physicsâ has tremendous predictive power.
We can discuss Spin Foam.
Or Boltzmann Brains.
Or 3D Chern-Simons.
Or Strings.
Or Alien warp drives.
Or Quantum computing.
Or Calabi-Yau manifolds.
Or Machine Learning.
Or Tenure/PeerReview/Grants.
Etc Etc
But not physics.
Mark my words: âAnything-But-Physicsâ.
And I badly want to eat those words.
But weâll literally do anything around advancing physics that does not amount to advancing theoretical physics.
Thereâs an âAnything But Actual Theoretical Physicsâ force field shielding us from GR+SM.
đșđž NEW NASA CHIEF JARED ISAACMAN: TRUMP'S SPACE ORDER IS "MOST SIGNIFICANT COMMITMENT SINCE KENNEDY ERA"
Isaacson revealed that Trump's sweeping space executive order signed last week represents America's biggest space commitment in over 60 years, laying out plans for a permanent lunar base and nuclear-powered deep space exploration:
"It's been a week, we've been going near 24-7.
The president's national space policy is probably the most significant commitment to American leadership in space since the Kennedy era.
It reaffirms our commitment to return to the moon and establish the infrastructure so we can maintain an enduring presence.
Build the moon base.
From there we're gonna start making investments in nuclear power in space, nuclear propulsion so we can make that next giant leap in human space exploration. Extraordinarily exciting time at NASA."
Source: CNBC @rookisaacman
Weâll do quantum computing.
We can do quantum information.
Weâll try fusion.
Weâll fund String Theory.
Weâll do space exploration.
Weâll celebrate chemical rockets.
Weâll have space stations.
Weâll talk meta-materials.
Weâll launch telescopes.
All to starve fundamental physics.
Has anyone else noticed how consistent this is? Anyone?
Anything that sounds like theoretical physics, but isnât fundamental physics gets a green light.
This is glaring at this point.
Unmistakeable.