{"id":13837,"date":"2024-02-27T19:15:44","date_gmt":"2024-02-28T00:15:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=13837"},"modified":"2024-02-27T19:32:01","modified_gmt":"2024-02-28T00:32:01","slug":"three-items","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=13837","title":{"rendered":"Three Items"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Kind of like the last posting, but this time you get two worthwhile items to make up for one that&#8217;s not.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Dan Garisto has a very good article <a href=\"https:\/\/www.technologyreview.com\/2024\/02\/20\/1088002\/higgs-boson-physics-particle-collider-large-hadron-collider\/\">here<\/a> examining the present state of high energy experimental particle physics and phenomenology.  He also summarizes current thoughts about the future.  The CERN FCC-ee proposal is still in feasibility study mode, with the big problem its high cost.  Numbers like \\$15 &#8211; \\$20 billion have shown up in press reports, and Garisto has &#8220;tens of billions&#8221;. The feasibility study is supposed to be finished late next year, and presumably a big part of it is people at CERN crunching numbers trying to figure out some plausible way this could work financially. <\/li>\n<li>There&#8217;s a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.quantamagazine.org\/a-new-agenda-for-low-dimensional-topology-20240222\/\">very good article at Quanta<\/a> about efforts to put together version 3 of the very influential &#8220;Kirby List&#8221; of open problems in topology.  For version 1, see <a href=\"https:\/\/math.berkeley.edu\/~kirby\/papers\/Kirby%20-%20Problems%20in%20low%20dimensional%20manifold%20theory%20-%20MR0520548.pdf\">here<\/a>, version 2 <a href=\"https:\/\/homepages.warwick.ac.uk\/~masaw\/ftp\/kirby_list.pdf\">here<\/a>, and as far as I can tell, version 3 still not finished (but discussed <a href=\"https:\/\/aimath.org\/pastworkshops\/kirbylist.html\">here<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li>Brian Keating has <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=fbIso1SFwu4\">a video<\/a> asking &#8220;What would It take for String Theory to move beyond the realm of pure math, Into verifiable territory&#8221;? The answer obviously is a conventional substantive scientific prediction of anything.  By describing the problem with string theory as being that it is now in &#8220;the realm of pure math&#8221;, I think Keating is missing the point.  The problem with &#8220;string theory&#8221; is not that it&#8217;s pure math, but that it&#8217;s not a theory.  &#8220;String theory&#8221; is now a 50 year old set of failed hopes and dreams that a theory might exist, see for instance <a href=\"https:\/\/inference-review.com\/letter\/theorists-without-a-theory\">Theorists Without a Theory<\/a>.  Every so often I try to figure out what people still pursuing this are up to, most recently today taking a quick look at KITP talks by Liam McAllister <a href=\"https:\/\/online.kitp.ucsb.edu\/online\/strings24\/mcallister\/\">here<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/online.kitp.ucsb.edu\/online\/strings24\/mcallister2\/\">here<\/a>.\n<p>The problem shows up clearly at 10:23 of the first talk where he&#8217;s talking about his goal, which gives up on studying all or even representative string theory solutions and tries just to find any &#8220;valid solutions&#8221;.  But what is a &#8220;valid solution&#8221;?<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>And by valid solutions, we should say what equations are we trying to solve? And, it&#8217;s not the case that we can currently think about finding cosmological solutions of the exact theory in any non-perturbative sense.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>McAllister artfully avoids saying what everyone at the talk knows (after all, the talk is part of a program entitled &#8220;What is String Theory?&#8221;): you can&#8217;t look for solutions to the theory because there is no theory.  More specifically, no &#8220;exact&#8221; theory, just a long list of possible theories that one hopes might be in some sense approximations to a real theory.  He then goes on to specify the extremely complex approximate theory he wants to work in, chosen by the &#8220;look under the lamppost&#8221; method as something you could actually imagine calculating.  Whenever I look at things of this kind I&#8217;m completely mystified why anyone thinks it make sense to embark on insanely complicated calculations like these with essentially zero credible scientific motivation. Somehow though, he has <a href=\"https:\/\/liammcallistergroup.com\/\">a whole group of people doing this<\/a>.  By the end of the second talk he&#8217;s giving his vision of the future, which features an old photo of a room of hundreds of men in suits and ties calculating with pencil, paper and slide rules.<\/p>\n<p>I was mystified twenty years ago why anyone thought this was a good idea, and the whole thing has just gotten stranger and stranger&#8230;\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kind of like the last posting, but this time you get two worthwhile items to make up for one that&#8217;s not. Dan Garisto has a very good article here examining the present state of high energy experimental particle physics and &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=13837\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13837","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13837","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=13837"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13837\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13850,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13837\/revisions\/13850"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13837"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13837"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13837"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}