Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Topic

Sabine Hossenfelder

Particle physics is a mess but Hossenfelder should chill, fellow physicist says

Hmmm. He’s not giving fellow physicists much of an incentive to sort out the mess. On the other hand, civilized theoretical physicists fight so politely that you can learn a lot just by listening. Read More ›

The multiverse is just religion, theoretical physicist charges

Of course she’s right about the religion part. Much that is going wrong with science today is the tendency to use various science ideas as secular religions. The multiverse happens to be a particularly devastating one because it strikes at the very idea of evidence. Read More ›

Sabine Hossenfelder: Don’t expect too much from new proposals to detect dark matter

She doesn’t so much oppose it as she doesn’t want to “wait another 40 years for physicists to realize that falsifiability alone is not sufficient to make a hypothesis promising.” In any event, those who remember science from fifty or thirty years ago find this state of affairs odd. Read More ›

Sabine Hossenfelder on the flight from falsifiability

Hossenfelder is right to be concerned. Some cosmologists would like to dump falsifiability as a criterion. If they could, they would remove an obstacle to demanding public belief in ideas like the multiverse, ideas that cannot be falsified because there is no evidence for them. Read More ›

Have quantum physics’ problems been disgracefully swept under the carpet?

Possibly, but maybe it’s inherently fuzzy. Meanwhile, an update on Adam Becker’s attack on Inference Review as an ID-friendly rag; Peter Woit and Sabine Hossenfelder weigh in. Read More ›

Hugh Ross: The fine-tuning that enabled our life-friendly moon creates discomfort

Astronomer Robin Canup has spent fifteen years developing models that seem to demonstrate that, whether it is a desired finding or not: Such fine-tuning was not lost on Canup, who remarked in a recent Nature review article, “Current theories on the formation of the Moon owe too much to cosmic coincidences.”4 Indeed, the required “coincidences” continue to pile up… In yet another article in the same issue as Canup’s review, earth scientist Tim Elliott observes that the degree and kinds of complexity and fine-tuning required by lunar origin models appear to be increasing at an exponential rate. Among lunar origin researchers, he notes, “the sequence of conditions that currently seems necessary in these revised versions of lunar formation have led Read More ›