Sabine Hossenfelder: "I want to tell you how particle physicists are wasting your money." https://youtu.be/9qqEU1Q-gYE?t=3

Sabine Hossenfelder (Bee): "The criticism you raise that there are lots of speculative models that have no known relevance for the description of nature has very little to do with string theory but is a general disease of the research area. Lots of
theorists produce lots of models that have no chance of ever being tested or ruled out because that's how they earn a living. The smaller the probability of the model being ruled out in their lifetime, the better. It's basic economics. Survival of the '
fittest' resulting in the natural selection of invincible models that can forever be amended." http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9375

Ethan Siegel: "Scientific Theories Never Die, Not Unless Scientists Choose To Let Them. When it comes to science, we like to think that we formulate hypotheses, test them, throw away the ones that fail to match, and continue testing the successful one
until only the best ideas are left. But the truth is a lot muddier than that. The actual process of science involves tweaking your initial hypothesis over and over, trying to pull it in line with what we already know...By the addition of enough extra
free parameters, caveats, behaviors, or modifications to your theory, you can literally salvage any idea. As long as you're willing to tweak what you've come up with sufficiently, you can never rule anything out." https://www.forbes.com/sites/
startswithabang/2017/11/16/scientific-theories-never-die-not-unless-scientists-choose-to-let-them/

Sabine Hossenfelder: "In private, many physicists admit they do not believe the particles they are paid to search for exist – they do it because their colleagues are doing it." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/26/physics-particles-
physicists

Similarly, physicists know that the speed of light is variable, not constant, but worship Einstein's constancy because their colleagues are worshiping it (and because the truth, if officially admitted, would put an end to the moneymaking scheme):

"Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All
these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity. And all denied the possibility of establishing a well-defined border, common to all observers, capable of
containing new quantum gravitational effects." Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250 http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257

"He opened by explaining how Einstein's theory of relativity is the foundation of every other theory in modern physics and that the assumption that the speed of light is constant is the foundation of that theory. Thus a constant speed of light is
embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels." http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html

"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light...So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much." https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8q87gk/light-speed-slowed

See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, 26 September 2022 at 13:22:27 UTC+1, Pentcho Valev wrote:

Sabine Hossenfelder: "I want to tell you how particle physicists are wasting your money." https://youtu.be/9qqEU1Q-gYE?t=3

Sabine Hossenfelder (Bee): "The criticism you raise that there are lots of speculative models that have no known relevance for the description of nature has very little to do with string theory but is a general disease of the research area. Lots of

theorists produce lots of models that have no chance of ever being tested or ruled out because that's how they earn a living. The smaller the probability of the model being ruled out in their lifetime, the better. It's basic economics. Survival of the '
fittest' resulting in the natural selection of invincible models that can forever be amended." http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9375

Ethan Siegel: "Scientific Theories Never Die, Not Unless Scientists Choose To Let Them. When it comes to science, we like to think that we formulate hypotheses, test them, throw away the ones that fail to match, and continue testing the successful one

until only the best ideas are left. But the truth is a lot muddier than that. The actual process of science involves tweaking your initial hypothesis over and over, trying to pull it in line with what we already know...By the addition of enough extra
free parameters, caveats, behaviors, or modifications to your theory, you can literally salvage any idea. As long as you're willing to tweak what you've come up with sufficiently, you can never rule anything out." https://www.forbes.com/sites/
startswithabang/2017/11/16/scientific-theories-never-die-not-unless-scientists-choose-to-let-them/

Sabine Hossenfelder: "In private, many physicists admit they do not believe the particles they are paid to search for exist – they do it because their colleagues are doing it." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/26/physics-particles-

physicists

Sabine’s YouTube channel spends most of its time pushing the nonsense of these
particles dark matter relativity etc. And then she has the nerve, when faced with JWST
supplying evidence that it’s all BS, to write a guardian article criticising the people
who push this same particle zoo dark matter nonsense.!
Take dark matter. Only made up to try to fix the erroneous assumption by Newton that all of the mass of a galaxy is at a singularity at its very Center. Presumably
Sabine et al think the rest of the visible galaxy is an optical illusion.
Yet if one spreads out the mass of the galaxy across its visible disc and recalculates.
Then suddenly one gets a flat galaxy rotation curve. No dark matter needed.

Similarly, physicists know that the speed of light is variable, not constant, but worship Einstein's constancy because their colleagues are worshiping it (and because the truth, if officially admitted, would put an end to the moneymaking scheme):

"Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All

these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity. And all denied the possibility of establishing a well-defined border, common to all observers, capable of
containing new quantum gravitational effects." Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250 http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257

"He opened by explaining how Einstein's theory of relativity is the foundation of every other theory in modern physics and that the assumption that the speed of light is constant is the foundation of that theory. Thus a constant speed of light is

embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels." http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html

"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light...So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much." https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8q87gk/light-speed-slowed

See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)