Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Physics

At Forbes: Hawking’s black hole paradox is NOT solved

Ethan Siegel looks at the limitations: But we’re still a long way away from determining exactly where that information goes, and how it gets out of a black hole. Theorists disagree over the validity and soundness of many of the methods that are currently being employed to do these calculations, and no one has even a theoretical prediction for how this information should be encoded by an evaporating black hole, much less how to measure it. Read More ›

Room temperature superconductivity achieved (but at huge, crushing pressures)

From Nature: Published: 14 October 2020Room-temperature superconductivity in a carbonaceous sulfurhydrideElliot Snider, Nathan Dasenbrock-Gammon, Raymond McBride, Mathew Debessai, HiranyaVindana, Kevin Vencatasamy, Keith V. Lawler, Ashkan Salamat & Ranga P. Dias  Nature  586, 373–377(2020) One of the long-standing challenges in experimental physics is the observation of room-temperature superconductivity1’2. Recently, high-temperature conventional superconductivity in hydrogen-rich materials has been reported in several systems under high pressure . . . Here we report superconductivity in a photochemically transformed carbonaceous sulfur hydride system, starting from elemental precursors, with a maximum superconducting transition temperature of 287.7 +/- 1.2 kelvin (about 15 degrees Celsius) achieved at 267 +/- 10 gigapascals. The superconducting state is observed over a broad pressure range in the diamond anvil cell, from 140 to Read More ›

Theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder is being labelled “anti-science”

Also, let this sink in: Despite believing in determinism, Hossenfelder believes we should “decide” against a new particle collider… We can decide? On that account, to other naturalists, she is “anti-science.” Naturalism is weird like that. Eats its own. Read More ›

Physicist Rob Sheldon checks out astrophysicist Ethan Siegel for ridiculing Nobelist Roger Penrose

Sheldon: The politicization of science evidently started before Ethan's graduate schooling, as Hoyle and his post-doc Chandra Wickramasinghe tell in their biographical writings. Read More ›

Researcher: We need a new Theory of Everything, one with no “things”

We’d have to guess that Stephen Wolfram’s attempt at a Theory of Everything didn’t solve all the problems. At any rate, by the time we get down to “a theory of every thing requires that one not start with a thing,” it’s not easy to distinguish science from Zen. But then maybe that’s the idea. Read More ›

Rob Sheldon on the latest effort to pretend that nothing is wrong in cosmology

Sheldon: This dashes yet another attempt to find something that the standard model could not explain. Surprisingly, this is what depresses particle theorists, who have yet to find anything new in the last 40 years, despite thousands of publications. Read More ›

Physicist: The whole universe may be a neural network

Vanchurin: “I see no reason why this process should be confined to a particular length scale and so the claim is that everything that we see around us (e.g. particles, atoms, cells, observers, etc.) is the outcome of natural selection.” It doesn’t take very long for Darwinism to become indistinguishable from magic. Read More ›

Ed Feser on theoretical physicist’s new book: “the particle collection that fancied itself a physicist”

Feser: Alfred Korzybski once said, “the map is not the territory.” If only more physicists were capable of seeing what a crackpot linguist could! Read More ›

Rob Sheldon on the latest claim that quantum mechanics imperils objectivity

Sheldon: Actually the debate over "the meaning of QM" has been going on since 1935 when Einstein published his EPR paper. It is just that the wiggle-room is getting reduced as our straight-jacket is being cinched tighter. Read More ›

Rob Sheldon on why some are upset that the Higgs boson “refuses to misbehave”

Rob Sheldon: What Blekman didn't say, but Sabine Hossenfelder does, is that there are not "tens of thousands" but rather an infinite supply of wrong theories. That should keep particle physicists employed until at least the 23rd century or until the oceans rise 30 feet, whichever comes first. Read More ›