I have to refuse to take your quiz until you address my claims all your climate change data has been altered. Therefore all predictions derived from the data is incorrect.

You invest in Francaise De l'Energie and then start wearing more expensive clothes all of a sudden? Poor you, you must be afraid of having potentially made the wrong guess.

DIPOLE ELECTRON FLOOD THEORY replaces all other sub atomic nuclear bit theories. I will take the quiz will you respond? I say protons are made of 1823 dipoles and neutrons are 1824. I have experiments using lasers and venturis that CRUSH fields same as colliders but can squirt a stream of Electron Neutrinos like a hose. dipoleelectronflood.com/the-theory/

String Theory is NOT a THEORY Don't you smart clever physicists have a specific definition of the word "Theory"? Like "well-substantiated" backed by "laws" with the ability to make predictions and test it? I wish you "science communicators" would get your communication straight! Others great exampled We don't know Dark Matter is anything to do with Matter! You guys have observed what appears to be a Gravitational effects.... Just using the word "Dark" is NOT an excuse for "Matter" ditto Dark Energy? The "Force" of Gravity.... Is it actually a force? Have you guys found the mediation particle... The Graviton? How about you smart people have a little get together over a coffee and agree some terms that are clear and not misleading! And don't get me started on "Planets",.... Sticking to a word based on "wandering star" and having to do linguistic gymnastics to make up a group that puts Mercury with Jupiter!

​@@mikelivingood7797 Kind of a bizarre "threat". I doubt anyone cares if you take the quiz.

one could say they strung us all along, spun a great yarn.

You could still get a lot of funding if you know someone who can pull some strings

String theory is still correct, none of this propaganda makes any difference.

@@james6401 JA,JA,JA!...

@@annaclarafenyo8185-An untestable theory isn’t a theory. It’s a mathematical model

That's brutal, I'm sorry that the academic world is like this. I hope you are still able to do research in your field.

I tried to go into academia at my alma mater in the early 10s. However, I didn’t have time to be a lab assistant or a teaching assistant, and I intended to take night classes. Although I had recommendations from the school’s ex-dean and current profs, as soon as the dean found this out, he scolded me for being a spoiled brat and personally rejected me. Instead, I went to Silicon Valley, and the rest is history. Dodged a bullet.

Why did the dean consider you spoiled? Because you couldn't be a lab or teaching assistant? why would that make you spoiled? That sucks, but glad you are doing well without going through academia@@unvexis

Don't be sorry my friend, you have preserve your honesty and your self-respect. I have a news for you that you are vindicated - TOE exists and you can find it in the book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe"

@@valentinmalinov8424 Take your lunacy elsewhere. You are not my friend.

Tertiary education is becoming too money focused, I found a lot of local universities doesn’t teach you hard part because of the complaints from students (lower satisfaction reduces relevant staffs’ benefits). Though I can understand in that short amount of time you have to study all days to get pass, yet somehow I feel university isn’t supposed for everyone. Maybe if something like tafe provides higher quality practical course that are acknowledged by the business owners, it can help the situation. But again a lot of people in uni need to scam moneys to do the research.

Once you realize basically all modern science in the West has eschewed philosophy as an optional + valueless elective, much like selfish + immature students in a school, it makes a whole lot of sense of how things are going!

I remember Leonard Susskind making fun of a philosophers of science in his TED talk a few years ago.

Exactly. Philosophy should be required in all majors because if you don’t know how to ask questions, how can you expect the correct answer?

I agree with them. I hate essays.

I'm educated but not a PhD level at math but I've always kept up with what's going on ever since I stole a copy of bhot when I was 12 in 1990. As well as a layman can anyway. It never seemed to hold any water with me and soured me on on the topic for a long time. I'm a software engineer so my education level was (known to me as) woefully lacking but it always seemed like a game of telephone to me where reputation was more important than the work. I felt second hand embarrassment for the whole community that I'd grown to have so much respect for. I still have as much respect but any snowball that rolls long enough is bound to get covered in shit and common sense never allowed me to buy into it. I realize I'm very under qualified to even have an opinion but my love for the cosmos and the excitement of people unlocking it's secrets is probably why I took to programming computers for fun and buying math books to create particle simulations and such in my passtime and since I retired at 35 I've been obsessed with electronic engineering and a regimented guitar practice schedule since I have the time haha. I'm going to go back to school this fall and take ee, I have almost 2 years worth of math credits that carry over. I was going to challenge a bunch of the theory courses but decided against it as I've always loved learning. I don't even have a beer anymore because I find it dulls my curiosity and makes me procrastinate if I'm designing circuits. I'd like to specialize in fpga development as I've always been obsessed with logic and bitwise solutions to tough coding challenges. Some of the best programmers I've ever met were physics grads I tutored in c their first year in university. I used to do people's assignments for free because playing guitar at an advanced level taught me that I had to practice to be good at something. I am a much better musician than programmer these days as I'm so into learning ee theory and donating learning kits to people who ask nothing worse than wanting to learn something and not being able to afford it. We have all these content creators making people think learning anything is trivial these days but do nothing besides collect gear they'll never use when it can give someone a start so if a person is in canada or the us I send them kits tailored to their goals and if they stick with it I buy them better gear. It's made me realize how suspicious people are of good deeds and how laziness can keep them from getting a new oscilloscope. I've had folks beg me for more gear and they couldn't even use ohms law to work out resistors in series or parallel. That's my only catch if they want more than the 400 worth of stuff I've already mailed them. I ramble. Sorry. Mental ilness with full faculties I think may be worse than the bliss of ignorance sometimes. I never lie, even though I can't shut up when im tired haha.

Ha, wish I'd thought of this 😅

​@@SabineHossenfelder did you hear about the small string theory experiment that was sent outside the solar system in the 70s? It was called String Trek: Voyager if I recall. Ok I'll leave

The can have conventions and eventually crown a Lord of the String.

String theory is still around but mostly used in the music industry.

String trek to boldly calculate where no physics has been before

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Same for UKposts videos. Make a mistake, everyone hops in the comments and pumps up the stats for you

I heard a story about someone who did that on Reddit. Ask for a solution on something and you get no responses, give an incorrect solution and everyone will jump in to give you the right one

This is Cunningham's law

Well Eric Lerner could tell you about that. But you have to make a big splash. He's been against the Big Bang for years. Mainstream science ignored him. Then he gave "Crisis in cosmology," substance, with predictions after the JWST. His paper was commented on by anyone and everyone. Going as far as to say, ""crank science and conspiracy theory." He really wanted to debate the questions. No one would touch that. Eric is a smart cookie, no one wanted to be embarrassed by the so called "hack. "

Great guy. He could have played along with this string stuff and gotten tenure at Columbia or elsewhere. But he chose to stand by his principles.

And we are thankful, that she makes these great videos instead for us now.

To be honest, string theory was always a bit of a stretch.

@@aarondavis8943 🥁

@@aarondavis8943 then it got all tangled up, which was knot funny

Which is ok for a couple of years and a few physicists around the world. But not at the scale it actually happenend.

There is much more to theoretical physics than string theory. Condensed matter, astrophysics, quantum information etc are examples of huge areas of theoretical physics with almost nothing to do with string theory.

@@raghavdeshpande3415 string theory looks like a major bust…like the Ptolemaic description of the solar system.

What happened to loop quantum gravity?

Eric Weinstein did it better

No it’s not, lmfao. 😂

In the land of anti De-Sitter space where the equivalencies lie

Was never a fan of Laws of the String

typical Calabi-Yau haters.

@@facepalm486 ???

Quite clever

Think I’ll just Sitter this one out.

Nothing looks like AdS/CFT except AdS/CFT. It's a very specific thing that is unimaginably constraining.

@@annaclarafenyo8185 Of course. This is not only the problem of cosmic constant wrong sign of the but also finite versus infinite universe.

If my income depends on everything looking like AdS/CFT you bet your a** that I'll make sure eeeeveerything looks like AdS/CFT.

Maybe ads/cft was the friend we made along the way

Apt comparison…

Earth is the Center of the Universe. The Observable Universe that is.

This is what I was coming to say. Tweaking it constantly to fit feels like epicycles. If it can always be tweaked to fit, it can never be falsified. Where a better theory predicts new things that can be checked experimentally.

exact same observation is made in Lee Smolin's book

So, do we have an ellipse equivalent somewhere in physics that was initially dismissed for being less elegant, but which is far more elegant than string theory with all the fixins? Or has no one heard of it because Galileo is writing pamphlets about how the people doing the actual experiments are lucky to find their own backside with both hands?

Maybe there's a particle for it

You need higher friction shoe laces. Or you need to tighten them

You could get those curly laces that don't need to be tied to keep your shoes on securely. It's a mistake to assume knots are necessary to explain how to walk.

that's explained in knot theory.

You need flat laces. They have more friction to keep themself under tension. You can also adjust your laces more precisely w/ flat laced.

Aber auch Harald Lesch und Josef Gaßner tuen alles, um Sabine im deutschen Sprachraum totzuschweigen. Ich nenne das wissenschaftliche Inquisition.

Guter Vergleich!

Absolutely.

They're in love with the 'beauty' of their maths with no interest in reality.

Harald Lesch und Josef Gaßner sorgen aber genauso wie andere dafür, dass Sabine im deutschsprachigen Raum totgeschwiegen wird und keine Anstellung bekommt. Für mich ist das wissenschaftliche Inquisition.

Love it.

We use language to make poetry about universe. Quantum physicists just try to use math instead in their poetry

Wittgenstein was right but then without language philosophy (including science) can say nothing.

@@SoulDelSol That's because math is a language

Huh, I'm no expert but on my first read through I interpreted "by means of language" to be referring to the cause of bewitchment, not the tool by which we battle it.

It rather went from science fiction to pseudoscience. 😀 Sadly, with billions of invested public money. There was a rather historical break in theoretical physics, when serious old-school quantum field theorists rather suddenly got out of fashion, when Regge-theory, S-matrix theory, pomerons, strings and the like entered the scene and took over for some years, with people such as Chew, Frautschi, and others. At that time, "axiomatic QFT" was thought to be "dead" and S-matrix-theory was thought to be the only game in town. If I'm not mistaken, String Theory and Superstring Theory somehow emerged from that.

lol it’s a lie. String Theory is almost completely untested. Foolish physicists made ultra-convenient easily-testable predictions in the 90s/00s, which LHC falsified. There are plenty of valid “inconvenient” string models that reproduce GR and QFT, and predict essentially no proton decay or superpartners. The 10^500 claim is also false, and proves Sabine doesn’t care about truth.

epic, really!

One key fits all kind of idea

@@k9876k yep. Made it worthless/unfalsifiable 😆

@@k9876k String theory is The One Ring To Bind Them.

That was there on purpose

@@LuisSierra42 why

@@hamud7708 I was being sarcastic

@@LuisSierra42 Yes, but why?

because there was a mistake in the video, and the photos of both of them were labeled "Lee smolin" ​@@Lovin_It

Exactly, 2024 she published a new scientific paper on arxiv about the statistical relevance of DM and MOND together with two colleagues. But she has no payed job anymore. She's remarkable busy and she's a brave heart and a beautiful mind.

...she was joking 🙂

@@Bramps66She was joking, that´s right, but there´s a bit of salt in it, cause here in her homeland, she doesn´t get a payed job anymore. It´s a kind of scientific inquisition.

There is nothing that says that a random sample can't be well above average. She is definitely not the average UKpostsr but if you are lucky you maybe have picked her at random.

@@larslindgren3846She´s simply great and she still does scientific research on physics on her own account.

lol

And CERN is the biggest, most expensive cock ring ever made.

Given that for the majority of human history, the majority of fiction was basically fanfiction that budded off and grew, I don't know if calling it "fanfiction" is a correct analogy. If anything, it's the Twilight of physics, because there was an era where it was all the rage and now the branch it's on is dying.

​@@natewatson1951​other notable fiction have had the exact same life cycle as twilight - initial huge popularity and then a never ending series of retrospectives (and likely historical analysis way down the line). In fact twilight has had a significant impact on more modern fiction in general and continues to do so even now, with the tropes it popularised. the sheer cultural impact it has had means itll never truly die, because like it or not, it is a significant part of literary history now. You could say the same thing about string theory, of course

The dominance of string theory also had to do with the fact that it's cheaper for universities to hire string theorists than experimentalist physicists and they could pump out papers faster, making it easier to rise up the academic ladder. Since more of them were hired, they had the numbers to drown out everyone else, dominate votes, and shape “mainstream” academic culture. Academics is still a human setting & trends emerge from the social dynamics.

Yes, sorry, I saw this too late. Put a note in the info.

There's definitely only one Lee Smolins. Great respect for an amazing mind 👍

Presumably, if you have some kind of supersymmetry going on, there would be multiple Lee Smolins.

But can you ever have enough Lee Smolins? 😉

@@7rich79Well only if the mass of the second one was much greater than the Standard Smolin.

_per se_

It is just normal animal behavior. Physicists are animals like you and me, not "winged angel heads"

Philosophy is the construction of _frameworks_ for describing reality. This leaves the field open to a lot of grifters. What makes science special among all the philosophies is that is can make extraordinarily accurate and testable predictions. If it can't, it gets tossed in the bin. Proponents of string theory protected their theory by constant alteration every time they failed at a prediction but that can only hold back the tide for so long.

@@aarondavis8943bcz most of history string theory was not physics. It is mathematical physics field, meaning study mathematical problems inspired by physical systems. As I know, nobody really cared much about application of it to physical problems last 40 years. But in popular media it is shown as physical theory, meanwhile professionals don't treat it like this since 80s.

Like everyone else they want money. Also, sometimes power plus they feel a need to be popular. Basically, the human condition.

Agreed. The daily ones felt like I was being spammed. Edit: used past tense because I unsubscribed.

This was a particularly good long video.

Ditto!!!

With infinite flavors too😊

Yes, it was always a math-induced theory.

I think that if Sabine released a video next week saying that string-theory is correct, I suspect you would say you've been suspecting it to be correct for decades too. 🥴

​@@VindensSagaalthough people do make similar comments either way, it's a mistake to think these are the same people

@@VindensSaga nah. Extraordinary claims require extra evidence. And string theory has a huge deficit of evidence to make up for.

interesting, because one of the hardest problem in political economy is finding the mathematical solution to explain price formation in the markets. The problem is so incredibly difficult that probably we have not the right math instruments just to tackle it. Marx tried to solve it (he was a good mathematician) and failed, but who succeeded in progress a very little bit was piero sraffa, an italian economist who adopted some marxian concepts, obviously rejected by the great majority of bourgeoise academic world. But he refused to introduce the real deal, the concept of labour exploitation by the owner of the means of production, because capitalist economics would be shattered to the foundations. In my opinion, official physical theories like strings, discarding alternative theories to the quantistic model, are just fake like official bourgeoise economy theories, which discard communist labour exploitation theories alternative to austrian school, keynesism, monetarism, etc.

@@zdenekburian1366 hello, are you an economist?

but how he can switch from physics straight into economics?

@@xmedian003x9they're both applications of mathematical models. There's nothing difficult in economics if you know physics

@@xmedian003x9 not in an academic sense, I study the scientific critique of political economy, that is, dialectical materialist theories, such as libertarian communism or anarchism, which are in antithesis to the innumerable, contradictory and false theories of bourgeois political economy which have always shaped the governments of all capitalist countries, today in their decadent imperialist phase, and which have brought us to the current disastrous geopolitical situation

Yeah she's my girlfriend and can confirm she is great 😊

It was a great brief summary of the history of string theory, and the fact that it is dead now.

@@blucat4 Hm, And what do you think is alive in physics? the budget?!

A history of any topic by Sabine would be compelling, with her razor sharp intelligence and delightful humour revealing the facts.

We’re not as smart as we like to think.

Because we went horribly wrong at some point and that point preceded string theory. I wish there was funding and will to retest and critically (with true open mind, with "every single holy cow of physics can be slaughtered" attitude) re-examine all hypotheses and experiment results from last 120 years (from Planck onwards). And also re-do the experiments.

There are plenty of disappointments to go around in physics and engineering. I worked as an aerospace engineer in the 1960s, the Golden Age of space exploration on Gemini, Apollo Applications, Skylab, Space Shuttle. My degrees are in applied physics. Apollo 17 occurred in Dec 1972. I've been waiting over 50 years for the next humans on the Moon. That may occur within the next 3 or 4 years and I may still be around to witness that event. The big difference between my experience and that of the string theorists is that we actually did what we set out to do.

@@rays2506 I would like to borrow the words of Peter Thiel. ``We have been so distracted by advances in information technology that we have failed to notice that progress in physics and engineering has stalled``

Indeed, that was very appealing…

Good old guitar screens 😅

yeah the entire point of string theory was to change 0 dimensional point particles into 1 dimensional strings, that way the mass would be more evenly distributed and the infinities that come from quantizing gravity into 0 dimensional particles get avoided.

I think in the video though she explained how one of the string vibrations naturally gave rise to the graviton. Which is quantized gravity in its simplest hypothetical explanation.

Late sixties, guitars... LSD?

"the 4th dimention confers mass to volume" ??

Yes, you know, I've been wondering why string theorists don't just argue that the measurement for the CC is wrong and it's really negative. That would have been much more convincing.

​There's perhaps another line of thought among some theorists: That the Cosmological Constant is really negative, but due to some additional "quintessence" -kind of field​ it appears to be slightly positive. 😊 @@SabineHossenfelder

@@SabineHossenfelder Moreover, the inflation of atoms is not observed in any experiment. Hubble and James Webb Space Telescope pose the question of the causes of the Big Bang, without proving the expansion of the Universe in any way. As a Physicist, you have to be honest, to signify the meaning or sign cosmological constant, within the framework of the unproven big bang, prematurely.

The famous Upton Sinclair quote comes to mind: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

A serious dead end for lot of physicists.

Yes. 😎

Hard to disprove is the wrong term, since its never been proven.

I sure philosophers / sociologists of science will have interesting things to say about the string wars in due course.

It's not an "interesting idea", it's a complete theory, and it's likely the only possibility for quantum gravity.

Spot on, my friend. Spot on.

@@RockBrentwood I can't understand this comment. Oppenheim? Except being none at all? No quantum gravity? That's silly rhetoric.

We should not over look solutions because they're "not elegant enough".

@@sosomadman We are not looking for a solution, but for understanding. And string theory hides the garbage of physics under the pile of the carpet.

She only says that when it's science without the gobbledegook, but String Theory turned out to be above 99% gobbledegook with 7 Sigma certainty.

Shhhhh! The gubbernment might hear you and raid your house looking for evidence!

The Whatever Wars.

@@audiodead7302 I mean, "Whatever happened" is valid too, but it means something different. "Whatever happened to Dan, we must press on" = "No matter what happened, we must". If you're asking "What happened to X", it's unambiguously "What ever happened to X" and not "Whatever happened to X".

Mistakes happen. Context goes a long way to straighten them out.

The “whatever” is possible in an Anti-DeSitter space.

At least grammar makes sense.