Our best model of particle physics is bursting at the seams as it struggles to contain all the weirdness in the universe. Now, it seems more likely than ever that it might pop, thanks to a series of strange events in Antarctica. .
The death of this reigning physics paradigm, the Standard Model, has been predicted for decades. There are hints of its problems in the physics we already have. Strange results from laboratory experiments suggest flickers of ghostly new species of neutrinos beyond the three described in the Standard Model. And the universe seems full of dark matter that no particle in the Standard Model can explain.
But recent tantalizing evidence might one day tie those vague strands of data together: Three times since 2016, ultra-high-energy particles have blasted up through the ice of Antarctica, setting off detectors in the Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna (ANITA) experiment, a machine dangling from a NASA balloon far above the frozen surface.
I’ve used string theory as an example of “settled science” in discussions with warmists from time to time. You can even cite a sitcom as proof!
I hope this new info doesn’t ruin what precious little physics I’ve learned in recent years.
“I hope this new info doesn’t ruin what precious little physics I’ve learned in recent years.”
Indeed. This is precisely the sort of thing the late Dr Richard P. Feynman was getting at when he observed:
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”
“Neither ANITA nor IceCube is an ideal detector for the needed follow-up searches, ”
And there is your hook, more research funding please…
That’s often the case. “We can get more precise results if someone else is willing to foot the bill. We, of course, will take all the credit for making any new, preferably ground-breaking, discoveries. If we don’t make any, it’s because we didn’t get enough money.”
Mention that to an academic and they will not only deny it, they will claim their only motive in doing the work in the first place is the pursuit of knowledge and satisfying their curiosity. Yeah, right.
“Mention that to an academic and they will not only deny it, they will claim their only motive in doing the work in the first place is the pursuit of knowledge and satisfying their curiosity.”
Yes, the idea that being a scientist or an academic might make someone any more ethical or less venal than anyone else ought to have been debunked long ago.
Yesterday was the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz by the Red Army. One cannot help but ponder how many German scientists and academics helped develop and streamline the Nazi extermination system with “their only motive in doing the work [being] the pursuit of knowledge and satisfying their curiosity”.
Yes, the idea that being a scientist or an academic might make someone any more ethical or less venal than anyone else ought to have been debunked long ago.
My image of academics was shattered soon after I started grad studies over 40 years ago.
ah yes BA.
the highest levels of academic research where ‘cost is no object’.
and other pursuits, to whit:
humans on fcukin Mars.
a decade ago I concluded, given MY choice, NASA would:
-launch 100s, and over time THOUSANDS of satellites all over the solar system, each with compatible and improving technology, each tracked and many capable of acting as radio transponders for signal enhancement.
many single purpose upon finding interesting sctuff a more sophisticated multi-capable one would follow.
NONE of them needing to deal with liq/solid waste, O2, returning, biological effects of radiation, weightlessness,
etc up the wazzo.
I would also put a ginormous radio telescope upwards of 5-10 kms diameter, orbiting the moon, maintained by live astronauts,
on and on and on. none of the ‘they sacrificed themselves fer schiensh’ crapola.
on top of that, lOOk at the advancements in digital technology to manage things automatically in those remote places.
but NASA STILL insists on treating space as a $500,000,000,000 very dangerous amusement park ride.
If 93% of the universe is made up of Dark energy (read: dark = unknown) that means we think we understand ~7%… We are mental morons to claim any Scientific knowledge…..We are blind to anything but the speed of Light….We also know that the Speed of Light can be changed/modified in the Lab, even stopped….Seems to simple
I’ve long thought that dark energy/dark matter was like what we used to call Skinner’s Constant when I was an undergrad. (Look that one up.)
The bank called and told me I was overdrawn. I told them that can’t be right and that it was probably due to dark spending.
I’m not saying it’s aliens.
But it’s aliens…..
(The post Kate was expecting.)