Anonymous at Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:31:25 UTC No. 16464237

He is a relatively more classically-minded physicist with enough clout to give legitimate pushback to the mathematical fantasies currently dominating theoretical physics at the highest level. He is also critical of quantum and puts more emphasis on GR as a the theory more deserving of peoples attention. All in all I like him, hes no where near as off the fucking deepend as some of the other prominent voices in the field.

Anonymous at Thu, 7 Nov 2024 14:19:38 UTC No. 16466006

>>16464090
He's good and always brings things back around the fundamentals and basics of physics and experimentation. He's not big on all this 47 dimensions in 47 other dimension bullshit, and always ask folks for some form of experimental data to back up their claims, which they never actually have. Just lots of obtruse maths that only a couple dozen other people can actually understand. The math itself is "correct", but it also doesn't really seem to apply much to the "real world", which is Penrose's point. You can make numbers do anything on a sheet of paper, but they aren't "real", they're only ever an approximation of events and unless you can reproduce your results under "laboratory conditions", you're not doing Science, much less Physics.

"Show me." in other words.

Anonymous at Fri, 8 Nov 2024 10:41:41 UTC No. 16466994

>>16464090
There are two broad domains of physics.
Geometric gravity
Discrete lie algebras for particle physics
The former describes GR whereas the latter describes the standard model of particles
Due to the success of the standard model, it's claimed a GUT and a TOE exist via quantizing gravity
This belies the point that even QFTs have fundamental ontological problems that even mathematicians acknowledge
Meanwhile geometric gravity is ontologically well founded, albeit a host of issues arise in cosmology due to poor detection methods
In short, we need to stop talking about quantizing gravity and instead discuss geometrizing particles

Anonymous at Sat, 9 Nov 2024 00:44:11 UTC No. 16467799

>>16464090
He should publish more. His ideas are nice, but they don't have enough meat on them