Siegel offers an inside look at the details. While the finding is doubtless a success for the scientific method, it must be frustrating for those physicists who need dark matter to exist in order to make cosmology understandable — but can’t find any.
It’s interesting that a science writer sees through the most fundamental materialist rot. Unfortunately, it sounds as though he hopes to replace it with a different one.
Hossenfelder: You can approximate the laws that we know with a computer simulation – we do this all the time – but if that was how nature actually worked, we could see the difference. Indeed, physicists have looked for signs that natural laws really proceed step by step, like in a computer code, but their search has come up empty handed.
At SciAm: Different micro environments in the air dictate the final shape in a way physicists are still trying to understand.
Sheldon: It is curious that the author of this Aeon article has frozen Wheeler at his second stage, neglecting to mention his final conclusion.
A friend now writes to remind us that physics great Max Planck had quite immaterial views on the nature of the universe.
In a debate with four other philosophers of physics, Sebens argued that there are no particles, everything is fields.
Hossenfelder: First, you cannot transfer information faster than the speed of light with the quantum internet or with any other quantum effect.
Michael Egnor: Both an intelligent designer (assuming we’re talking about God) and a black hole are supernatural, in the sense that they are not objects in the natural world. This may not surprise you about God, but it is also true of black holes.
This is more what spiritual reality is like: A man in his nineties once got a message from beyond this world. It was pure information, not particles.
One can’t help wondering what the notion of many additional dimensions is supposed to do. … By now, you probably get the picture. The side door to “Anything we want to believe is true.”
Those [theories] that haven’t been disproven yet are the ones that are the least lumpy. Let’s just say that the data are consistent with there being no dark matter lumps at all.
What if there isn’t any? Maybe we are pursing a phantom? Just a thought.
In pop science media, supersymmetry has been one of the ideas that lead to support for a multiverse and all that. So, if it’s in trouble…
Diminishing hope for new physics? That isn’t the triumphant scientism we were told to expect.