Condensed matter physics is full of exciting revolutionary ideas that are being confirmed by experiment. So-called "fundamental" physics - the search for fundamental new laws - is not. Why not? Sabine Hossenfelder has a new article on that: (1/n)https://iai.tv/articles/why-physics-has-made-no-progress-in-50-years-auid-1292 …
-
-
Maybe it's linguistics, I am just questioning "fundamental" being firmly pinned to the study of the most elementary constituents of matter known to date. Surely, it is important, but quarks and gluons will not help me solve problems about topological spin current, will they?
-
If you don't like "fundamental" being used as the technical term for whatever the Standard Model + general relativity are trying to do, please make up a less loaded term and popularize it. Until that replacement catches on, people will use "fundamental".
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.