Mindscape 183 | Michael Dine on Supersymmetry, Anthropics, and the Future of Particle Physics

[@qunningStunts]

I can feel Sean grit his teeth every time Michael's phone dings, lol.

[@drzecelectric4302]

Me too! Haha

[@furorz]

His voice sounds 20 years younger than he appears in the photo. Great podcast, love hearing these experts discuss

[@KimP0612]

Can I just say that it’s amazing, you have some of the smartest folks in the world on your show but they still can’t figure out how to mute their notifications. 🤣🤣 not a knock on them just hilarious.

[@michaelshapiro3919]

Thank you Prof. Dine and Prof. Carroll! Great guest, great podcast, great interview.

[@robw5961]

Now I have to listen to this a few times to take some of this information in, Excellent interview Thanks

[@mgenthbjpafa6413]

Excellent explanation of the state of the art of Particle Physics and related topics. I could say much more, it is a highly challenging and rewarding synthesis. Congratulations, thank you, it was a great pleasure and Honor.

[@rumidude]

I learned some things in this podcast. I think I will either get his book or listen to the podcast again, maybe both.

[@hahtos]

I feel for all the brilliant physicists who have been stuck in the desert of supersymmetry and string theory for the prime of their careers.

[@TheMemesofDestruction]

Yes we can! ^.^

[@fieldstrength6414]

We'd have a theory of everything already if Michael could only silence his notifications!

[@erichodge567]

It occurs to me to wonder why physicists are afraid to work with the Anthropic Principle. There is no more rock-solid observation in the universe than that we are here. It would seem to follow that any theory that runs counter to that observation must be false.

[@pscyking]

"There is no more rock-solid observation in the universe than that we are here" is now my favourite version of Descartes' first principle.

[@erichodge567]

@@pscyking , you know, I hadn't thought of it, but the analogy is perfect. Thanks!

[@StaticBlaster]

Math seems to point in the right direction so I wouldn't dismiss the multiverse, supersymmetry and superstring theory (M-theory). You just need better particle accelerators to test these ideas. You're dealing with scales far too small. If atoms were scaled up to the observable universe, a string would merely be a tree on Earth. So, for that reason, these ideas will not be tested anytime soon, definitely not in our lifetime. String theory is probably 4th or 5th millennium physics that accidentally fell into the 21st century.

[@eddiebrown192]

Or it’s just wrong ….

[@StaticBlaster]

@@eddiebrown192 it could be wrong but math also predicted an expanding/contracting universe and black holes. Like I said, a string if you could scale up an atom to the size of the observable universe, would be the size of a tree. You need a particle accelerator the size of the galaxy.

[@LakanBanwa]

@@eddiebrown192 gee, you don't say? captain fuckin obvious

[@ddavidjeremy]

In regards to supersymmetry, I have strong evidence to the contrary. My left arm is a full quarter centimeter longer than my right. This cosmological travesty is anything but super.

[@Life_42]

Awesome!

[@nly89]

Mute your phone so we can hear what you are saying without interruption! "In some ways it is very simple" Yes, yes it is! It starts with muting your phone. Then we can prove this super symmetry silliness is nonsense and move on to the potential truth.

[@stevesastrohowardkings2245]

Until we figure out how space reacts on different types of matter I will fly off the 🔝 Been avoiding until today love your talks thanks !

[@deeplearningpartnership]

Awesome.

[@madderhat5852]

Please answer all the mysteries of the universe before I kick the bucket. Date to be confirmed.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

ditto. also can we get lung translplants finalised.

[@garyraab9132]

All models in quantum physics have a Bayesian credence. Models with higher Bayesian credence have more empirical evidence for support. Models with lower Bayesian credence have less support or no empirical evidence; are more theoretical. Theoretical constructs are supported by some physicists, while some physicists support alternative models. I quickly became distracted by who thought what and when; in agreement or disagreement… The thoughts in the speakers head were bouncing around between the physics concepts and… Who should I acknowledge and… Should I mention the theoretical uncertainty… It’s as if I was explaining to a high school physics student that- force is equal to mass times acceleration-… And by the way did I tell you why Newton was sitting under an apple tree. State paragraph one at the start of the podcast, and then get on with the questions and answers.

[@gadgestlab]

Such a smart man, but not smart enough to turn OFF his notifications during the interview.

[@alvarorodriguez1592]

Crybaby

[@wizzelhoart]

If this dude is so smart, why can’t he figure out how to use the silence switch on his iPad?

[@eddiebrown192]

The only advancements we have made in the last few decades is due to technological abilities .

[@doyourhomeworkthenrave]

Ffs turn off your notification sounds! 🤣🤣

[@psmoyer63]

It's too bad Einstein made it OK to throw out the bathwater with the baby.

[@kadourimdou43]

String Theory requires a Cosmological Constant, opposite to what has been measured. Why doesn’t that falsify it?

[@fieldstrength6414]

String theory does not require a negative CC. Quantum gravity in general is much easier to understand with a negative CC (it has observables!) which perhaps explains why this claim has propagated. But it's been quite clear for decades that this is not the case. The KKLT mechanism is likely the best studied way to get de Sitter vacua.

[@jonathansaraco]

The Swampland conjecture is just that, a conjecture. It hasn't been proven. It is undeniable that string theory prefers a negative cosmological constant which obviously does not match our universe, but nobody has proven that string theory only has anti-de Sitter vacua.

[@Emanresu56]

Uh oh, looks like we've lost Sean Carroll, he's been infected now. /s for anyone who doesn't get the joke

[@yaserthe1]

Whaaaat?

[@yaserthe1]

Would Sean believe in God if it was some how proven that there is only 1 universe, and No multiverse?

[@drzecelectric4302]

Omg boomer can’t figure out mute. So weird. Still interesting