6 September 2017

How not to find the theory of everything

Many men are bizarre creatures. The most bizarre are the physicists looking for the TOE. Here are the main types:
  1. There are those men who continue exploring supersymmetric theories, even though every experiment since over 40 years has proven them wrong. Examples: Witten, Arkani-Hamed, Gross, arxiv/hep-th authors. 
  2. There are those men that only explore quantum gravity, and think they can learn something doing so, against all experimental guidance and without even thinking about gauge interactions: Examples: Sen, Rovelli, arxiv/gr-qc authors.
  3. Then there are the crackpots; the internet is full of them. Examples: vixra authors. They are harmless.
  4. Then there are those men who make fun of all the above groups, but stubbornly refuse to look elsewhere, or to propose or even to discuss alternatives. Examples: Woit, Motl, writers of reviews of the field.
  5. Finally there are those men who think than anybody looking for a TOE is a fool or mad. This group includes the majority of researchers.
Meeting such men is like visiting a zoo: you see strange animals, and you ask yourself what they do all day long in those cages.
  1. Those are people continuously running against a solid wall, because they think the food is on the other side. 
  2. Those people are searching for food in an illuminated empty room. 
  3. They are begging for attention like small zoo animals begging for food.
  4. These are watchdogs for herds.
  5. These are herd animals - animals that nobody distinguishes from their neighbors.
Some men are even found in different cages at different times. Are there any researchers that are not in one of these cages? A researcher has to be outside a cage to find the TOE. This is the first condition for succeeding.

So the big question is: are there any male researchers that are outside cages? At present it seems that none is, thus that no man will find the theory of everything.

Isn't this sad? But there is a solution: a woman will do it. This is the second condition for succeeding.

6 May 2017

Standard model still true - how to find the theory of everything

The CERN results at the 2017 Moriond conference have shown again that the standard model is the true theory of nature. And the results have shown again that supersymmetry does not occur in nature. I have to care for children these days, so I can look at all this with some distance. I guess there are different types of researchers.

All those researchers who claimed that supersymmetry is a symmetry of nature or that strings theory is correct should take a deep breath. Do get those incorrect ideas out of your brain! And after you let fresh air into your brain, look around for or invent a theory of everything, or TOE, that has no supersymmetry.

All those researchers who never worked on a TOE due to the arrogance of string theorists should have a try now! The old guard was wrong - and it is tired. The old guard is unlikely to find a new candidate.

All those researchers who just make fun of string theorists should also take a decision: either stop making fun or do it better! We got the message that string theory is wrong. Look at Woit, Baez and others that have left doing research and started commenting research. Do research, don't talk about it!

To all researchers: Look at the bad examples! Look at Witten, Seiberg and Arkani-Hamed: three lives wasted producing hot air. Together, they achieved as much as Motl, Distler, Siegel or your favorite crackpot did: Nothing. Zero. 

Just think of it: the smartest physicists in Princeton, i.e., the smartest physicists on Earth, have been proven wrong! In other words, if you do not live or work in Princeton, you have a good chance to succeed. To find the theory of everything, go as far away from Princeton as you can. Avoid white males, avoid religious people. Go at least to Africa, stay far away from any internet connection, and search for women doing research.

7 August 2016

From Standard Model to True Theory

The ICHEP Conference has shown: the Standard Model is correct. We should rename it the "True Theory".

Stop - you will say. It is well-known that the standard model "cannot be correct". Thousands of papers and presentations start in this way.

Cannot be correct? In the past years, I have tried to collect ALL the arguments at the origin of this statement. For example, that the standard model obviously is an effective theory, that its results cannot be true up to Planck energy, that supersymmetry must hold, that scientists have again and again believed to have found a true theory, that gravity must have an influence before the Planck scale, and so forth.

Listen, men, every one of those arguments does not hold water! The Standard Model is the "True Theory". Not only for all practical purposes, but really.

12 June 2016

Cassandra, Sabine and Lubos

Cassandra always told the truth, but nobody believed her. That was her destiny.

Sabine is a well-known blogger and researcher in quantum gravity. She tells the truth and people believe her. That is her destiny. She recalls that string theory is wrong and that supersymmetry is wrong. Who gets upset? Nobody of importance. The most upset person is a funny little man who has given up working on the field. Why did he give up?

Lubos has given up on string theory because he does not believe in it himself. Now he insults women to hide his own mistakes and lack of intelligence. To hide his own lack of motivation. And to hide his failure.

Lubos is the Czech word for Looser. We women know how to handle such men: we smile at them and turn away.

23 November 2013

Progress of particle theorists

Act 1
I see children shouting: "Only one bar of chocolate? I want more!"

Adult theoretical particle physicists, instead, are much deeper: "Only three dimensions? I want more!" "Only these symmetries? I want more!" "Only these particles? I want more!" "Only this energy? I want more!"

Act 2
After the answer "Sorry, there is none left.", children say: "You are nasty!"

Adult theoretical particle physicists, instead, are much deeper: "You are stupid!"

Act 3
After that, children get creative in some new direction.

Adult theoretical particle physicists get stubborn and go on. Who is wiser?

14 November 2013

The next nail in the coffin of supersymmetry

The newest measurement of the electron dipole moment reduces the likelihood of supersymmetry even more. See http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.7534 . It is the newest step from supersymmetry to supercemetery.

Of course, this is not a surprise; enough people, including Nobel Prize laureates in particle physics, have stated since decades that supersymmetry is a "figment of the human mind". And of course, there is no string theory without supersymmetry. Yes, a tiny negative experimental result can destroy even the most ugly theory.

10 November 2013

Please DO THINK about alpha=1/137.03...

The value of the fine structure constant alpha=1/137.03 is one of the great mysteries of nature. Understanding it will yield a Nobel prize.

So, who is working on understanding the fine structure constant? Search the arxiv: no result. Ask string theorists: nobody. (This fact alone shows that string theory is worthless.) Ask any supersymmetry researcher: no answer. (So supersymmetry is worthless.) Ask any quantum gravity researcher: no answer. (So quantum gravity is worthless as well.) Ask most bloggers, crackpots, and fringe scientists: no answer. Look for talk slides on the topic: nothing (except for cosmological variations, which are of no use and are all nonsense anyway.) A few crackpots "work" on the problem, but they are so obviously mistaken that it is not even worth spending time on reading their confused ideas.

People do not work on 137 and do not think about it. There is a big gap in physics here. Nobody has filled it, in the 100 years since it was discovered. Will you? Think about this: Einstein has not succeeded, neither has Feynman or Pauli, who thought about the problem for a long time. After them, researchers stopped trying.

Please change the situation. Try. Try even more. You WILL succeed.

26 October 2013

Also quantum gravity is now religion

In quantum gravity, people are arguing about firewalls. Are black hole horizons hot or not?

Both sides argue with what happens behind the horizon. Yes, "behind" it. Of course, behind a horizon there is whatever you want. Behind a horizon there is only religion. Behind a horizon or outside the universe is the same. Whatever one says about it, it is nonsense.

I am missing a simple and clear discussion on whether a Rindler horizon is hot. That would be refreshing and clarifying.

But reading papers that use unproven conjectures in non-existing regions to make either one point or another shows only one thing: quantum gravity is mainly a belief system.

20 October 2013

Weinberg is depressed

Read this new article: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/nov/07/physics-what-we-do-and-dont-know/ Weinberg is embracing the anthropic nonsense and writes that there is no explanation for the fundamental constants.

Weinberg, an actual scientist who once was an example to many, is publicly making the statement that for something there is no explanation. What a sad story.

This is the sadness of seeing death into the eye. That sadness induces him to say: "Because I did not find the explanation for the fundamental constants, nobody else will."

17 September 2013

Counting dimensions

High energy theorists are split in two camps. One camp believes that space and time have ten, eleven or twelve dimensions. The other camp believes that there are two or three dimensions, not four. Reading the arxiv preprints, we can see each camp presenting arguments for its respective view.

A normal person might say that the battle is futile, because no experiments will ever verify either camp. In the past, some experiments have been proposed, but they all had flawed premises. No experimental test seems possible, so that the camps will go on discussing.

But why will they continue? Both camps claim that there is a minimum experimental length in nature. That is bizarre. A minimum length means that there is no way to measure the number of dimensions. Dimensions only exist if lengths can be as tiny as imaginable.

So these theorists fight about something that cannot ever be measured. Isn't that sad?