Voici quelques réflexions que j'ai un jour partagé par email, sous le titre "Mauvais temps pour la physique".
J'explore le web, divers articles de blog de physiciens de divers bords, je vois les physiciens se faire la guerre... les partisans des théories des cordes d'un côté, les opposants de l'autre. Il semble que l'âge d'or des succès de la recherche en physique theorique soit derrière nous."In recent years though, some theorists who definitely understand and have made contributions to modern physics have started promoting research which looks depressingly like the typical sad examples of “unconventional physics”. Many of the products of the ongoing multiverse mania fit into this category. Lubos is getting quite worried to see that a very talented and well-known leader of the string theory community, Erik Verlinde, seems to be engaging in this sort of research, and getting positive attention for it. Within a month of its appearance, Verlinde’s “Entropic Force” paper has already generated a dozen or so preprints from other physicists on the same topic. It could easily end up being the most influential (in the sense of heavily referenced) paper of 2010. Seeing this coming from a string theorist he admires is worrying Lubos and his correspondents." " I don’t understand why a smart, capable scientist is putting out this sort of paper, just as I don’t understand why a lot of other smart, capable people pursue multiverse pseudo-science."Commentaire de "Bee" = Sabine Hossenfelder:
"What I find disturbing is how quickly people are jumping on the topic. I mean, look at this, it’s a matter of weeks! The thing goes through the blogs, is in New Scientist, and so on, and so on. I mean, really, what’s this?"Fabio :
"Its not just formal theory that is having quality control problems. A large portion of the phenomenology community spends it’s time shamelessly chasing the statistically insignificant experimental anomaly du jour. Some phenomenologists I know have privately indicated disgust at the situation. I’m not sure exactly how Lee Smolin can be blamed for this, but there must be a way, because he is the devil. But citations for crappy papers are better than no citations for crappy papers not written, so it will continue to get worse before it gets better."Lubos est lui-même un drole d'energumene, bien pire que moi pour "insulter" les gens avec qui il n'est pas d'accord, et pas toujours à bon escient.
"— I believe [Lubos Molt] does physics a disservice by ranting and spewing bile on research programs outside his own field.Lubos lui-même a été un bon physicien par certains aspects, et a dégénéré par d'autres aspects, en particulier son soutien aux frères Bogdanov par son livre marqué par le secret de polichinelle qu'il aurait été en fait co-rédigé par les Bogdanov eux-mêmes, ce qui le discrédite complètement. Mais même s'il y a du mauvais dans ses articles, il y a du bon aussi. A chacun de faire son tri. Notamment il n'aime pas Woit, dont j'ai une bonne opinion pour le moment du fait de son article que j'ai lu dans le concours FQXI, et que j'ai classé parmi les meilleurs contrairement à celui de Smolin.
— However much vitriol he expresses them with, his opinions represent virtually to the letter the mainstream view, and this is really all that should matter"