The Portal Wiki

Quantum Field Theory: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Quantum Field Theory (edit)

Revision as of 02:15, 9 January 2026

4,041 bytes added ,  Yesterday at 02:15
→‎2025
Line 2,813: Line 2,813:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=@_mistaacrowley @martinmbauer Exactly. That is a fine strategy. ‘Look at the boundaries between regimes’ is something I support.  
|content=@_mistaacrowley Exactly. That is a fine strategy. ‘Look at the boundaries between regimes’ is something I support.  


But we can also guess it more or less from here I believe. That apostrophe and L aren’t seen by most for the clues they are.
But we can also guess it more or less from here I believe. That apostrophe and L aren’t seen by most for the clues they are.


Most [[Quantum Field Theory|QFT]] people took the wrong lesson from [[Ken Wilson|Wilson]].
Most [[Quantum Field Theory|QFT]] people took the wrong lesson from [[Ken Wilson|Wilson]].
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=martinmbauer-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/martinmbauer/status/1986747573730709602
|name=Martin Bauer
|usernameurl=https://x.com/martinmbauer
|username=martinmbauer
|content=Effective field theories don’t imply that there is no fundamental physics, but that any (local, unitary, causal) fundamental theory looks like an effective field theory at low energies (compared to the fundamental scale)
You can climb a ladder rung by rung, doesn’t mean it never ends
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1986478849413312902
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Congratulations to John Donahue on winning the Sakurai prize!
If you have heard me say that fundamental physics has been basically stagnant since 1984 or 1973, this is one of the best counter arguments against my argument…particularly if I am using shorthand or am not being careful.
Essentially this argument, continued on from ideas of Ken Wilson, is that there is no fundamental physics. Fundamental physics to this way of thinking is an illusion born of a narcissism and confusion.
That seems crazy. But it is technically, theoretically and practically correct. What it says is that everything observed happens at a scale. Your arm is a limb at the scale of anatomy, made of tissues at the scale of histology; which are in turn made of cells at the scale of cytology. Etc. There is no fundamental in arm, or skin, or basal cell. Each belongs to a scale and is pseudo-fundamental (at best) only to that scale.
So this way of emphasizing the scale while accepting non-renormalizability  and the incompleteness of descriptions in most all theories at every energy level took over in many ways. And it IS solid, responsible theory. I don’t hate it. It’s not wrong. And it was the quiet revolution against string theory which partially worked because the String theorists were already sold on Wilson.
I don’t fight the Effective Field Theorists the same way. They are doing real work. Good work. Work that needs to be done.
A great choice. Mazal Tov.
|timestamp=5:00 PM ¡ Nov 6, 2025
}}
|timestamp=10:48 AM ¡ Nov 7, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1986858129972437043
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I can’t keep saying it: there is nothing wrong with EFT mathematically or physically.
The issues arise at the level of how the communities get grooved. Strings got grooved to chauvinism. EFT to defeatism.
We can’t keep having these non-conversations. Non physicists grasp this:
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1986803710551290047
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Here is what is wrong with Effective Field Theory, to me, as explained by Wheel Of Fortune.
Imagine this puzzle was the information at some low energy (Standard Model), and the number of letters left to find matched the orders of magnitude from where we are to (UV) completion.
Effective Field Theory says “Be modest and learn to live with lack of unique UV completion and a rambling effective Standard Model so many orders of energy away from the Planck Scale because it can’t be guessed from so far away.”
|timestamp=2:31 PM ¡ Nov 7, 2025
|media1=ERW-X-post-1986803710551290047-G5KLccDboAAWxiM.jpg
}}
|timestamp=6:07 PM ¡ Nov 7, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=crowleylab-profile-9oxOwle-.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/crowleylab/status/1986861559168290851
|name=Joe Crowley
|usernameurl=https://x.com/crowleylab
|username=crowleylab
|content=is there a scoping argument to be made from EFT across multi-scale physics?
seems like most conventional BSM use of things like SMEFT/HEFT is looking for violating/consistent terms. these would place a few more letters on the board.
|timestamp=6:21 PM ¡ Nov 7, 2025
}}
|timestamp=6:25 PM ¡ Nov 7, 2025
|timestamp=6:25 PM ¡ Nov 7, 2025
}}
}}
Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/25342"