Comments on: Quantum Diaries http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:18:29 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Peter http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2102 Peter Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2102 Hi David, Good luck with your studies. Can't help with your prelims, but can help on one of the prevalent themes you mention for your blog. Hi David,

Good luck with your studies. Can’t help with your prelims, but can help on one of the prevalent themes you mention for your blog.

]]> By: David Guarrera http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2103 David Guarrera Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2103 Apprapos, I'd like to take this opportunity to plug my own blog at http://web.mit.edu/guarrera/www/blog.htm . It's the musings of a theoretical physics first year grad student (namely, me)... Apprapos, I’d like to take this opportunity to plug my own blog at http://web.mit.edu/guarrera/www/blog.htm . It’s the musings of a theoretical physics first year grad student (namely, me)…

]]> By: Fabio http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2104 Fabio Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2104 Ellis is one of the world's most published string theorists, and also one of the world's most cited (if you include self-citations). Ellis is one of the world’s most published string theorists, and also one of the world’s most cited (if you include self-citations).

]]> By: Luboš Motl http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2105 Luboš Motl Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2105 Dear Peter, it's very sad if I am taking your naive, innocent, childish ideals :-) from you, but most of the people are working in string theory in one way or another. I am not sure whether you will believe me that determining the ten-dimensional string coupling by John Ellis et al. in December (20th) 2004 is a recent work on string theory http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0412240 Also, Stephon Alexander has the biggest hobby right now - he was explaining it at Harvard - about determining the string scale in the heterotic models http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0409014 Jochen Weller is a hard astroparticle guy, sure. Best Lubos Dear Peter,

it’s very sad if I am taking your naive, innocent, childish ideals :-) from you, but most of the people are working in string theory in one way or another.

I am not sure whether you will believe me that determining the ten-dimensional string coupling by John Ellis et al. in December (20th) 2004 is a recent work on string theory

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0412240

Also, Stephon Alexander has the biggest hobby right now – he was explaining it at Harvard – about determining the string scale in the heterotic models

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0409014

Jochen Weller is a hard astroparticle guy, sure.

Best
Lubos

]]> By: JC http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2106 JC Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2106 I always found "first person" accounts and/or diaries quite interesting in seeing what people were thinking at a particular point in time, without the benefit of hindsight. The real world of physics is a lot more messy and uncertain as one is doing research, unlike how it is presented in future textbooks and/or monographs. Everything in hindsight looks "obvious" and/or "simple" for many things. I always found “first person” accounts and/or diaries quite interesting in seeing what people were thinking at a particular point in time, without the benefit of hindsight. The real world of physics is a lot more messy and uncertain as one is doing research, unlike how it is presented in future textbooks and/or monographs. Everything in hindsight looks “obvious” and/or “simple” for many things.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2107 Anonymous Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2107 Thanks for the informative post. Notice that these sort of posts, which do not merely concentrate on (possibly justified) opposition to something, and are emotionally neutral, do not attract the flood of crackpots. If you really don't want them, you know what to do. Thanks for the informative post. Notice that these sort of posts, which do not merely concentrate on (possibly justified) opposition to something, and are emotionally neutral, do not attract the flood of crackpots. If you really don’t want them, you know what to do.

]]> By: Fabio http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2108 Fabio Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2108 Wow, this Quantum Diaries thing is great. I can't think of any better way to celebrate Einstein's legacy than to read a bunch of random physicists detail who they had dinner with the other night or the latest movie they saw. Wow, this Quantum Diaries thing is great. I can’t think of any better way to celebrate Einstein’s legacy than to read a bunch of random physicists detail who they had dinner with the other night or the latest movie they saw.

]]> By: Sean http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2109 Sean Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2109 Please don't stoop to smileys; I'll just try to fine-tune my tongue-in-cheek sensitivity. Sure, a lot of particle physicists are increasingly working on astrophysics. Too many, actually, especially on the experimental side. Ten or fifteen years ago that would have been a great career move; but right now particle experiment is just beginning to get interesting again. Please don’t stoop to smileys; I’ll just try to fine-tune my tongue-in-cheek sensitivity.

Sure, a lot of particle physicists are increasingly working on astrophysics. Too many, actually, especially on the experimental side. Ten or fifteen years ago that would have been a great career move; but right now particle experiment is just beginning to get interesting again.

]]> By: Peter http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2110 Peter Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2110 Hi Sean, The part about string theory was meant to be kind of tongue in cheek (I really got to figure out how to put in those smileys the way Lubos does...). But surely you agree with the first part (about more and more particle physicists working on cosmological and astrophysical topics), that was meant seriously. Hi Sean,

The part about string theory was meant to be kind of tongue in cheek (I really got to figure out how to put in those smileys the way Lubos does…). But surely you agree with the first part (about more and more particle physicists working on cosmological and astrophysical topics), that was meant seriously.

]]> By: Sean http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135&cpage=1#comment-2111 Sean Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=135#comment-2111 Oh come on, Peter. Do you really think that the choice of blogging physicists tells you something about where the field is headed, rather than the predispositions of the certain individuals that run the site? Shall we conclude that condensed matter physics is basically dead, since it doesn't appear here? All we can conclude is that the site was set up by HEP experimentalists. Oh come on, Peter. Do you really think that the choice of blogging physicists tells you something about where the field is headed, rather than the predispositions of the certain individuals that run the site? Shall we conclude that condensed matter physics is basically dead, since it doesn’t appear here? All we can conclude is that the site was set up by HEP experimentalists.

]]>