Head over to https://www.masterclass.com/theories for the current offer. MasterClass always has great offers during the holidays, sometimes up to as much as 50% off.
In today’s episode of Theories of Everything, Curt Jaimungal speaks with physicist Sabine Hossenfelder to cover what’s truly wrong with fundamental physics. Together, they uncover why long-standing problems linger, why essential data remain elusive, and how systemic pressures are stifling meaningful breakthroughs.
Links Mentions:
• Curt’s Previous Conversation with Sabine on TOE: https://youtu.be/walaNM7KiYA
• Existential Physics: A Scientist’s Guide to Life’s Biggest Questions: https://amzn.to/3BeOyML
• Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray: https://amzn.to/3OL4GbV
• Sean Carroll’s TOE Episode: https://youtu.be/9AoRxtYZrZo
• Peter Woit’s TOE 1st Episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z3JYb_g2Qs
• Peter Woit’s TOE 2nd Episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTSeqsCgxj8
• Chiara Marletto TOE Episode: https://youtu.be/40CB12cj_aM
• Sabine’s Crisis in Science Series:
• Sabine Hossenfelder’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SabineHossenfelder
• Sabine’s paper on quantizing gravity: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269313006011
• Scientific publishers are producing more papers than ever (The Economist): https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/11/20/scientific-publishers-are-producing-more-papers-than-ever
• Ivette Fuentes on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUj2TcZSlZc
• Chiara Marletto on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40CB12cj_aM
• Peter Woit on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z3JYb_g2Qs
• Eric Weinstein on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KElq_MLO1kw
• Garrett Lisi on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7ulJmfFvd8
• Tim Palmer on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlklA6jsS8A
• Sean Carroll on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AoRxtYZrZo
• Lee Smolin’s book on String Theory: https://amzn.to/3D9TWBh
• The End of Science (book): https://amzn.to/4f9sa5d
Timestamps:
00:00 – Introduction to the Physics Crisis
03:29 – The Role of Experiment in Physics
06:21 – Internal Contradictions in Quantum Gravity
08:21 – Progress in Theoretical Physics
11:01 – Serendipity and Discovery in Research
12:09 – The Role of Funding in Physics
15:33 – Overproduction of Models in Academia
18:16 – Focus on Solving Inconsistencies
19:51 – The Crisis in Science
32:32 – Overhyping Research Possibilities
37:27 – Mistrust in Science and Academia
42:08 – Humor in Science Communication
57:46 – Addressing Problems in Academia
58:56 – The Scientific Underground and Job Market
1:02:29 – Academic Exodus
1:05:42 – Critique and Counterpoints
1:07:28 – The Irony of Theory Development
1:12:46 – The Scientific Underground
1:15:58 – The Crisis of Scientific Progress
1:28:31 – Challenges of Quantum Gravity
1:31:59 – The Special Issues Dilemma
1:42:10 – AI Episode Recap! (Brought to you by The Economist)
As a listener of TOE you can get a special 20% off discount to The Economist and all it has to offer! Visit https://www.economist.com/toe
New Substack! Follow my personal writings and EARLY ACCESS episodes here: https://curtjaimungal.substack.com
TOE’S TOP LINKS:
– Enjoy TOE on Spotify! https://tinyurl.com/SpotifyTOE
– Become a YouTube Member Here:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdWIQh9DGG6uhJk8eyIFl1w/join
– Support TOE on Patreon: https://patreon.com/curtjaimungal (early access to ad-free audio episodes!)
– Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurt
– Discord Invite: https://discord.com/invite/kBcnfNVwqs
– Subreddit r/TheoriesOfEverything: https://reddit.com/r/theoriesofeverything
#science #podcast #physics #theoreticalphysics
22 Comments
Head over to https://www.masterclass.com/theories for the current offer. MasterClass always has great offers during the holidays, sometimes up to as much as 50% off.
It seems part of growth is dependent on energy density and energy mobility which is stagnant with oil.
I have just conceived of a remake of Seinfeld, with Eric Weinstein as Jerry, Peter Woit as George, Sabine as Elaine, and Curt as Kramer. Forgive me world
In the not-so-distant past THE WAY great science was often done was by a SINGLE brilliant individual working on his/her own or perhaps with a singular adviser who crafted an ENTIRE concept individually. He/she then presented that premise/concept/campaign to a SMALL group of peers (the Vienna Circle and others). We are now in an era where people THINK (for some reason) that the HERD MENTALITY is now, somehow valid and we wonder why nothing is happening. When others are allowed and even encouraged to beat down that one individual often prior to it having been completed by the original thought leader. The real question should be … WHY do we think we using HERD MENTALITY is a "good" thing?
Apparently Sabine hasn’t watched enough anime as she doesn’t know what to do about the abuse of the young PhDs and post-docs. She needs to watch Laputa, Castle in the Sky where one of the protagonists, an heir to the aero-dominion, uses her power to destroy the very thing her enemy desires that happens to be the source of her power.
The problem is these well meaning academicians are aware of the problems, and they have power. The problem is they must use their power to destroy the source of their own power to prevent the real enemy, those who control academia from accessing said power. Find a way to use your position to destroy this monster so the real revolution in science can take place!
Atomic physics is a result of Darwinian evolution. Darwinian Universal YT channal
The evidence is abundant
Long form interviews. Good arent they
@TheoriesofEverything, about the clickbait thing, what I consider clickbait is only that which says something is going to be shown, and the presenter fails to show it. Christo Avilis has gotten really bad with this in the last couple months. He just pastes together video clips from major news outlets, none of which give evidence to such wild claims, post election, as, "tRump Surprised to Find He's Losing!" That obviously did not happen, and nothing in the video came close to mentioning that idea, let alone proving it. I have never found Sabine's titles to be clickbaity, as she always delivers what she is advertising. Sometimes it is a slight misdirect, because she will suggest the opposite of reality in the title, but if we watch, we get it. There is nothing wrong with using attractive words, if you deliver. I have defended our Sabine variously, tho she has stated publicly that she does not want nor expect anyone to speak up for her. Respectfully to her, I am my own person, college educated. If I feel a valid educator is being castigated unfairly, especially being lied about for clout chasing purposes, I am going to call that out. I respect honest, kind people, and that is exactly what I see in Ms. Hossenfelder.
There is much discussion about a crisis in physics, particularly among experts in the field, yet no one seems capable of finding a way forward. From my perspective, this stems from a confusion of solutions and options inherent in the nature of science itself. Science, being fundamentally reductionist, has produced millions of papers delving into physical reality without assembling a concise and coherent working model. In recent years, physics appears to have gone down a rabbit hole leading nowhere. To experimental physicists, I suggest taking a step back and seriously engaging in an art form, composing music, writing essays, sketching, painting, ceramics, or glassblowing. Such practices can activate the creative, intuitive right hemisphere of the brain, opening new doors to insight. Stop lamenting the crisis and embrace a broader perspective; it might lead to new horizons.
NOTHING! The problem is not with physics, it is with physicists. It is not physics that has the vision to clarify or demonstrate what they are looking for. They have to change the focus of attention, because what connects the two pillars of physics is the macroscopic world; It is not relativity that needs to be adjusted with quantum theory, it is exactly the opposite; because the observer comes first, then the observation, God comes first then the creation, just as the artist comes first then the scientist.
😊
She is just a complainer, can't bring anything new to table
The idea that the spacetime functions as a Block Universe, where time exists as a unified, predetermined structure, and the possibility of closed timelike curves (CTCs), carries not only fascinating theoretical implications but also profound consequences for how humans perceive reality. Below is an expanded exploration of these effects on individuals and society.
1. Perception of time and reality:
a. Reality as a frozen whole:
If time is not linear but exists in its entirety (like frames in a movie that can be viewed at any moment), our intuitive understanding of reality would undergo a complete transformation. Instead of experiencing the present as the only "real" moment, people might learn to think of the past and future as equally existent. This could alter the emotional experience of life – potentially reducing fear of loss but also challenging the significance of the "here and now."
b. CTCs and cyclicality:
If the Universe operates through time loops, not only individual events but entire lives might repeat endlessly. This could lead to extreme reactions, from fatalism to acceptance, or even fascination with eternal recurrence. People might also focus more on the quality of their lives, knowing they will live them repeatedly.
2. Free will and sense of agency:
a. Illusion of free will:
In a deterministic Universe, every choice would be less a "free" decision and more a consequence of prior conditions. For many, this might be liberating – removing the burden of responsibility for decisions – but others might feel deeply disheartened, perceiving themselves as "puppets" in a grand cosmic theater.
b. Free will within constraints:
However, if within a closed timelike curve we can make decisions that must align with future events, free will might be reinterpreted. It would be a constrained will – something that seems free at first glance but ultimately adheres to the rules of temporal consistency.
3. Morality and ethics in a deterministic world:
a. Reevaluating responsibility:
If everything is predetermined, the concepts of guilt and merit might need to be reconsidered. For instance, can someone be blamed for a crime if it was destined to happen? New ethical frameworks might emerge, focusing more on understanding human actions than on judging them.
b. Morality in a loop:
In a scenario of eternal recurrence, people might question whether their actions hold universal significance or merely local relevance in a given cycle. This could lead to a heightened sense of responsibility, emphasizing the value of every decision as potentially eternal.
4. Impact on psychology and everyday life:
a. Existential crisis:
For some, the vision of having no real influence on the course of events could provoke a profound existential crisis. Questions about the meaning of life, actions, and emotions might become even more pressing.
b. Sense of reassurance:
On the other hand, knowing that everything happens according to a "preordained plan" might be comforting. People might find solace in the stability and unchangeability of their place in the universe, reducing fear of the unknown.
c. Increased mindfulness:
In a deterministic world, individuals might learn to appreciate the present moment more, understanding it as an integral part of a greater whole that cannot be altered.
5. Education, science, and culture:
a. New understanding of time:
In a society aware of the Block Universe, education might shift towards teaching about the non-linear nature of time. Science could focus on exploring temporal structures and the possibilities of utilizing them.
b. Time travel technologies:
If CTCs were practical, it could lead to a societal revolution. The ability to return to the past or travel to the future could affect every aspect of life. On the other hand, if CTCs assume a deterministic nature of the Universe, time travel wouldn't involve changing the past, but fulfilling events already set in motion. In such a model, travelers to the past wouldn't alter the course of events in a way that contradicts what has already happened, as their actions would inherently be part of the same timeline:
○ No time paradoxes:
This approach resolves classic paradoxes, such as the "grandfather paradox," because the actions of the time traveler must align with events that have already occurred.
○ Fulfilling a role in history:
Time travelers could become witnesses or participants in past events, but only in ways that are already accounted for in the temporal structure. For example, they might turn out to be "unidentified figures" in historical incidents but would not alter the outcomes.
○ Limited social impact:
In terms of personal choices and historical events, time travel would be more about observing and understanding what happened rather than actively reshaping reality. This might limit the scope of potential societal revolutions, as time travel wouldn't be used to manipulate events, but rather to "experience" them in a predetermined way.
c. A new perspective on society:
Despite these limitations, practical CTCs could still influence society by introducing new possibilities:
○ Revolutionizing historical studies:
The ability to travel to the past could transform history and archaeology, allowing for precise verification and documentation of events.
○ Enhanced self-understanding:
Traveling to one’s own past could provide insights into personal decisions and the context in which they were made.
○ Technological challenges:
The development of the technology to enable such travel could lead to massive scientific and technical breakthroughs, regardless of deterministic constraints.
7. Impact on religion and spirituality:
a. A deterministic divine plan:
Religions might adapt their teachings, viewing the deterministic universe as a manifestation of divine will. "God as the architect" could take on new meaning, and questions about free will could be integrated into theology as mysteries to be accepted.
b. Reinterpreting death:
If time is cyclical or exists as a unified block, death might lose its traditional meaning. Instead of being an end, it could be seen as a transition to another point within the never-ending structure.
The acceptance of the Block Universe theory and the concept of CTCs could change our understanding of life as profoundly as the Copernican or Darwinian revolutions. This worldview wouldn't only require new philosophical frameworks, but also psychological adaptation. It could lead to greater acceptance of reality while raising fundamental questions about the meaning of existence that we are only beginning to explore today.
Sabine is spot on with her criticisms of academia and where the problems lie. I was a neuroscientist and left academia in large part because I saw firsthand what she’s calling out. But back in my day, there was no one around for me to talk to about what I was seeing. I wish I’d had Sabine then! One thing she doesn’t speak directly about is the lack of integrity that the publish or perish model promotes (almost requires even). It’s not like I was directly told to lie exactly but I was told to only include my positive results because it supported the story and was less “confusing” for the reader. All of that plus the fact that I was witnessing fantastic scientists get stuck as post docs for 8+ years (at Stanford!) with no where to go and I am female (which presents it’s own problems in so many ways), resulted in me deciding that I had to go. But I’m a scientist at heart and love podcasts like these to keep me connected to what I’m passionate about. It still stings really. It was a heartbreaking experience. Science is losing some of those with the most integrity. Please keep this topic alive. It needs to change. I couldn’t stomach it long enough to change it from the inside.
Maths is not the world nor is physics nor is biology, nor psycholgy/ They are our extrtemely limited models of ceratin asppects of 'repeated' observations. There are aspects not repaetable . SO called science closes its eyes.
Language , be it Mathematics, Physics, Python, English is all man-made. It can never model Nature, not man-made. Science 'improves' itself adding new cosntructs to 'talk' of newer ,better ,observation, with words like quantum, dark matter. Particularly to-day this has become a farce , very much so in 'astrophysics' , anthropology , , 100 million light years away, a 20 million year old fossil!!!!!!!
Love the interview, hate the style of AI summary at the end. The robots interrupt and talk over each other so much the voices start glitching, and the "style" distracts from the contents.
Edit: The end of the AI summary is glitched and loops. Not a good look for the service you are using for that (but also, hm, you didn't listen to it yourself, did you?)
Decades without awnsers , thats not too bad.
How long did we go between Newton and Einstein ??
And realistically it was Newton that solved it , Einstein just gave us the mechanism and reason Newton was right.
If you don't want to judge a book by its cover, or a YouTube video by its title and/or thumbnail, then one has to invest their time and energy consuming the content and that takes even more time to think-through, to regurgitate. So not judging too fast is laudable, but not everyone has the spare time and energy. Also people form groups and holding certain believes and convictions can be part of how the group identifies itself.
Weird. When it comes to an exponential increase of scientists, I would expect that if scientific progress were linear (and assuming you could even capture it in a number) than the rate of progress should increase. I mainly think we observe a slow-down because we have had the low-hanging fruit. We already have the important bits. Figuring out quantum gravity isn't going to tremendously impact anyone's life down here on Earth. It doesn't create better wi-fi. It doesn't enhance battery capacity. It doesn't cure more diseases. I think we have a lot of disrespect to the advances made by scientific minds in the early part of the 20th century and a lot of scientists come across as if they deserve to be spoken of as the next Einstein and such sorts of entitlement. Just like the entitlement of having open questions. For a long time? Three generations in the standard model? That's about half a century whereas Sabine herself stated physics is thousands of years old. It's not that we cannot answer that question today, tomorrow or anytime soon… it's that we expect to see answers fast.
Great conversation..
This Aunty Sabine has no idea, what's coming in 2025.
"A New Theory of Relativity".