Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 13:29:48 UTC No. 16186177

>>16186072
>tfw no german physics mommy hagmaxx gf

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 14:48:43 UTC No. 16186229

>>16186177
>hagmaxx
hehe

Barkon at Tue, 21 May 2024 15:40:27 UTC No. 16186275

Puffy Monster White versus Relentless

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 16:36:43 UTC No. 16186362

God I want to see her tits

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 16:40:49 UTC No. 16186370

>>16186362
she's got the headlights on in like 1/4 of her videos (or at least used to, haven't watched in a while)

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 17:03:32 UTC No. 16186391

S

>another e-celeb spam thread

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 18:26:16 UTC No. 16186507

>checked her twitter
>see her at 28

damn she was hot. How do I get a phd physics gf

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 18:28:39 UTC No. 16186511

>>16186507
post pics for those of us without twitters

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 20:10:39 UTC No. 16186645

>>16186511
just google Sabine Hossenfelder. I don't have one either. She's super cute

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 20:25:41 UTC No. 16186660

>>16186507
Rather eh

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 21:09:40 UTC No. 16186753

>>16186660
eye of the beholder ig

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 22:47:50 UTC No. 16186917

>>16186072
Glad if true. Stupid old contrarian bint. Every single video of hers is
>what if the standard model isn’t wrong?
>is dark matter is just black holes?
>can exceed the speed of light?
>is X theory is wrong?
Any evidence? No. Just bitching about the orthodoxy and saying we might not have a conclusion yet because we’re looking in the wrong places, while never actually suggesting what we should be doing instead. Completely skips over why we have these theories in the first place and the gaps in our knowledge they were intended to address. Acts like they were just invented for no reason.
Of course she’ll never question the orthodoxy on climate change, she’s paid to make videos on it instead.

Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 23:10:18 UTC No. 16186951

>>16186917
the basis of science is questioning things if you don't know for a fact it's true so in principle that's not wrong at all, especially when it comes to questioning stupid shit like dark matter(not real)

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 00:26:55 UTC No. 16187058

>>16186917
She's devolved to just clickbaiting about science news, like a hundred other sciencetubers

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 01:56:21 UTC No. 16187172

>>16186951
That’s not what she’s doing though. She’s just being a smug contrarian.

>hey there’s this gap in our knowledge, I propose this hypothesis that explains it fairly well but it’s going to cost trillions of dollars to test.
>but what if there is no gap HMMMM?
>300k+ views

Anyone can be a faggot and just say “maybe it isn’t” to anything. She never proposes alternatives or even acknowledges the reasons for the hypothesis she’s criticising.
I watched one of her videos on the Standard Model a while ago and it was literally just:
>what if the standard model is complete HMMM?
>it’s pretty good at predicting things!
>we’ve spent a lot of money looking for extra particles and haven’t found them!
>this isn’t science, it’s religion!
>fin
Literally didn’t even mention all the reasons we have to believe the standard model is incomplete.

You can’t pull this “good science is questioning things :)” bullshit and ignore the fact that “good science” is weighing competing hypotheses and justifying why you prefer one over another.

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 02:08:25 UTC No. 16187188

>>16186917
also
>look at me i'm a wammen who can do scianze!!!!1

and it works, just like those wammen chess streamers like the Botez sisters who are popular because they're hot wammen who can do chess

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 04:31:54 UTC No. 16187341

>>16187172
>>16186917
>She's just being a smug contrarian
Her criticism about modern science having flawed methodology in theories is true though. Physics nowadays is mostly about making shitty theories that makes wild predictions, then propose budget to burn cash to do verification experiments to verify the shitty theories, then fix things in the shitty theory to match that of experimental physics in order to do more dumbass predictions (which will not be true anyway so the cycle repeats ad infinitum). Real high quality good theories have not existed for long (like Higgs or Einstein's) because retarded academia nigger faggots have gamed the h-index bullshit by churning out bunch of bullshit low-quality papers that perpetuate this shitty methodology.

If anything, this vicious cycle pointed out by her is factually true because this is the basis of not committing the overfitting sin in Machine Learning 101, which physicists are not conceptually taught in undergrad/grad/post doc level. I think you're too retarded to understand Sabine so you should stick to IFLScience, Kurzgesagt, or other nu-science YouTube channels.

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 05:12:35 UTC No. 16187360

There's no substance to get videos. That's why she can crank them out like she does. You end up dumber having watched them.

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 05:17:32 UTC No. 16187364

never clicked a single one of this woman's videos, never will

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 07:54:06 UTC No. 16187473

>>16187341
I'm not replying to your bait. You're lauding her for criticising the scientific orthodoxy. I have already explained in detail why her criticism is utterly worthless here >>16187172

Re-read it as many times as is necessary to bring your IQ above room temp. The only thing I would add is that the video I referred to was this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu4mH3Hmw2o
And the problems with the standard model that she completely skipped over are:
>matter-antimatter asymmetry
>incompatibility with general relativity
>preservation of strong charge parity symmetry

I genuinely hope that you will read about the problems with the standard model and realise how at best her video is meaningless for failing to mention them, and at worst she's deliberately being deceptive to make her position look more credible than it is.

🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 12:21:02 UTC No. 16187756

>>16187473
lemme guess, you're mad about her criticism of particle physics

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 14:21:33 UTC No. 16187919

>>16186511
Got you, senpai

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 14:25:22 UTC No. 16187923

>>16187919

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 14:38:23 UTC No. 16187945

https://youtu.be/fjoLHJUo6vY
>Hags: Misogyny & The Middle-Aged Woman, with Victoria Smith, Sonia Sodha and Hadley Freeman

Why are middle-aged women these days subject to so much rage and hatred – frequently from people who see themselves as kind and ‘on the right side of history’? What explains the popularity of the Karen meme, which references a stereotypically privileged white woman whom everyone feels entitled to loathe? Why does this age-old misogyny feel so very now?

As writer Victoria Smith approached middle age she made her peace with her sagging neckline and having to cope with ageing parents. But the disdain and vitriol she experienced as a woman in mid-life came as a shock. In her acclaimed book 'Hags: The Demonisation of Middle-Aged Women' she traces the prejudice that has been directed towards older women down the ages and explores the prevalence of witch hunts in recent years.

Smith was joined in conversation by The Sunday Times’s Hadley Freeman and author and columnist and author Sonia Sodha. Together they explored why women who have the temerity to exist beyond the age at which they are conventionally deemed desirable to men are seen as superfluous to society; and they will look for solutions which can benefit all women – whether they are hags or hags-in-waiting.

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 19:55:16 UTC No. 16188396

>>16187919
Looks like man
>>16187945
It would help if she wasn't a clickbaiting pseud

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 21:15:30 UTC No. 16188543

>>16187945
lmao. they're just being treated like they're regular people instead of prime baby holes now. Like their male counterparts have had to deal with their entire lives. Oh the humanity, won't anyone think of their feelings.

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 22:48:24 UTC No. 16188639

Particle physicist here. I can't even begin to describe my fury toward Sabine. The damage she's done is off the charts—our field is shrinking faster than a quark in a black hole. Grants are drying up, and I keep seeing bright students veer toward applied physics and other "practical" fields because of "that cool physics woman on YouTube." Morale is in the toilet, and funding feels like it's guarded by a dragon named Sabine. Watching my life's work fade because of some disgruntled YouTube sensation is infuriating. Seriously, if you don't like a field, keep it to yourself and stop blabbering for attention and ad revenue. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to calm down with my Wimshurst machine and stare at my under-cited papers on quark gluon plasma, which I've lovingly scotch-taped to the walls of my crumbling office.

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 22:53:44 UTC No. 16188651

>>16187919
this is surprisingly titillating, thanks sabine

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 23:10:54 UTC No. 16188672

>>16186072
Why does this board like this old ugly midwit determinist hag?

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 23:16:27 UTC No. 16188677

>>16187919
she looks 40 with skin cancer here
>the absolute state of the modern white man's aesthetical tastes

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 23:19:17 UTC No. 16188679

>>16187945
The value of a hag is in providing care of her children and family, if they're feeling ostracized it's probably because they aren't providing that value.

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 23:38:33 UTC No. 16188694

>>16188639
I feel like this is bait but also bait by a real professional academic.
But not a physicist. "Faster than a quark in a black hole"? Really?
Engineering, or chemistry. [what do I win?]

Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 23:40:31 UTC No. 16188696

>>16187945
Smith's future is sati, as the West browns
As not for whom the poo loos, the loo's for thee

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 03:28:45 UTC No. 16188912

>>16188639
Particle physics in bullshit, that has nothing to do with her.

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 04:37:42 UTC No. 16188967

>>16188694
>[what do I win?]
An all-expenses-paid trip back to >>>/reddit/

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 05:06:16 UTC No. 16188983

>>16187919
>already looking post menopausal at 28
"The wall" is heckin relentless

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 17:45:41 UTC No. 16189802

>>16186362
She knows lmao

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 18:01:03 UTC No. 16189817

>>16186917
Please bring your blog back, Lumo.

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 19:06:19 UTC No. 16189909

>>16186072
sexo

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 19:18:05 UTC No. 16189942

>>16189802
>>16189909
My God that’s pathetic

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 19:19:33 UTC No. 16189944

>>16189942
I don't care I'd cum inside

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 19:32:09 UTC No. 16189963

>>16189944
Your cum would mix with all the dust to create a thick paste

Sage at Thu, 23 May 2024 19:55:10 UTC No. 16189997

>>16188639
>Freedom of speech goes brrr
Hey idiot, how about putting your degree to good use and figuring out how to become a lobbyist for nuclear power?

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 20:43:16 UTC No. 16190078

>>16188639
oh thanks I was trying to figure out what happens with quarks and gluons at super high temps

Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 23:14:45 UTC No. 16190329

>>16189942
Fuck you, it's amazing. I want to spray my gluons on her Einstein-Rosen bridge thigh gap

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 09:23:02 UTC No. 16190856

>>16187341
Please post the data that disagrees with dark matter. I'll wait.

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 09:25:35 UTC No. 16190859

>>16187172
>hey there's this gap in our knowledge
>source, numerology

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 09:26:35 UTC No. 16190860

>>16189963
And then I slurp it out and hit it again.

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 09:30:19 UTC No. 16190862

>>16188639
Kek, doing gods work. But seriously the funding wasn't going to go on forever. Maybe the idiots in the EU don't know a grift when they see one but do one to many TV appearances and the people in the us get a bit shifty.

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 10:36:29 UTC No. 16190920

>>16190859
>numerology
Is that what you call the problems with the standard model?

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 10:41:24 UTC No. 16190930

>>16186917
She’s a science communicator retard. What do you expect from her? Videos saying “what if this is wrong?” are decent clickbait.

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 10:52:07 UTC No. 16190940

>>16189802
>>16189909
did she solve the cube pushed through a moving portal?

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 16:41:01 UTC No. 16191276

>>16186072
She looks kinky as fuck

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 17:25:15 UTC No. 16191314

>>16190930
PBS Space Time is exactly the same fucking market and they actually bother to explain the problem and then weigh the hypotheses.
She doesn't. She's created a persona around denouncing the field for religious thinking, and then she makes highly biased videos to prove her points. She doesn't explain why we have these theories to begin with, and she doesn't propose alternatives.

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 19:02:52 UTC No. 16191454

>>16191314
She's good in her videos dealing with explaining the basic mechanics of quantum physics or particle physics that other 'communicators' fail at totally because their actual knowledge of physics caps off with a few classes they took for an engineering degree, if that.
But I also agree that she has a strong contrarian streak/image she works to maintain.

I can only assume, giving her the benefit of the doubt, that she ended up dealing with so much bad science and woo around those fields that it eventually turned her on almost all of it that is at all rooted in theory or prediction rather than just documenting extant information.

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 19:09:26 UTC No. 16191465

>>16186917
Strong theory is in fact religious nonsense tho
Evidence? Name a single insight or prediction that string theory has gotten right experimentally(pro tip: you can't)

Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 19:16:48 UTC No. 16191475

>>16186917
>never question the orthodoxy on climate change
Okay we questioned it. It turns out it's all real, now what?

https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/here-are-10-myths-about-climate-change