Fairly long review of "Lost in Math" by a philosopher of science, Jeremy Butterfield. It's an interesting read & will give you a good impression what my book is about. Pls be warned that in some places he misrepresents my argument. More on my blog later. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/15724/1/HossenfReview2feb19.pdf …
-
-
Replying to @skdh
Generally good, but this seems weak to me: "quantum field theory and general relativity are victims of their own success. For we need to go beyond them, since they face various technical and conceptual problems: such as the hierarchy and cosmological constant problems."
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @johncarlosbaez @skdh
Those dubious problems aren't the main reasons we need to go beyond QFT and GR. We need to go beyond them because they are inconsistent with each other. We need to find a consistent framework for physics.
6 replies 3 retweets 29 likes -
Replying to @johncarlosbaez @skdh
The way I interpreted that remark was that because QFT and GR apply to great accuracy way beyond the domains that they were originally designed for, they feel more universal, and therefore their inconsistency is all the more puzzling.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
Actually, I would argue that the extraordinary successes of GR and QFT do indeed make their inconsistency all the more puzzling (with puzzling understood as a synonym for intransigent.) Were either less successful, its failures might suggest ways of resolving their inconsistency.
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.