this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
267 points (100.0% liked)

Science

13009 readers
8 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Dr. Angela Collier plays the Binding of Isaac: Rebirth and talks at length about what went wrong with string theory, and how that affected science communication.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] StringTheory@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The ones who were human and were full of hubris and errors and didn’t want to give up their pet theory?

Being angry at humans for being human is kinda futile. Humans have always done this, and always will.

And the excited physicists didn’t destroy science communication any more than Stephen Jay Gould did. People can be wrong. People can cling to things they cherish and that they poured their heart and years of effort into.

People are people, and this too shall pass.

[–] jellyfish@beehaw.org 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's also very human to commit murder; humans have always committed murder, and always will. That doesn't mean I can't be mad at someone for doing it..

[–] StringTheory@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think murder might be a leeeeeeeetle bit different than refusing to give up on a theory you worked on for 30 or 40 years.

[–] jellyfish@beehaw.org 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My point is that saying you can't hold something against someone because it's human nature isn't a reasonable argument.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

It is if you don't believe in free will, and as long as we're talking physics, there is zero evidence of free will existing.

In that context being mad at someone is only useful in so far as it influences future behaviour. In this case, it won't, because she's not actually angry in a way that anyone could use to help guide their own behaviour. What message do I take from her distracted rant? That Brian Greene is a self serving dingus? That self serving dinguses exist in every field? That every single string theory physicist is a lying asshole?

It's ironic that she's complaining about people making science education hard when she's actively distracting herself from making a more cohesive argument by playing a pointless video game.