Scientific American关于电子自旋的文章

[Caravel]

他说Peter woit是lecturer. 你说D. Hestenes是ASU tenured。

没注意上下文，woit好像精力都在写blog，他水平找个小学校做professor 应该可以，一直待在哥大

[TheMatrix]

他说Peter woit是lecturer. 你说D. Hestenes是ASU tenured。

对。

[Caravel]

对。

Woit最新贴的Nature 虫洞论文Holographic wormhole也很有意思，cover story，炒作的杰作。他反弦理论数十年如一日，这次也不意外，估计学术界大佬全得罪完了，在物理学都混不下去了，只能在数学系当lecturer。

https://www.nature.com/nature/volumes/612/issues/7938

[TheMatrix]

Woit最新贴的Nature 虫洞论文Holographic wormhole也很有意思，cover story，炒作的杰作。他反弦理论数十年如一日，这次也不意外，估计学术界大佬全得罪完了，在物理学都混不下去了，只能在数学系当lecturer。

https://www.nature.com/nature/volumes/612/issues/7938

封面story上没看到Woit的名字啊。看到了Maria Spiropulu.

[verdelite]

封面story上没看到Woit的名字啊。看到了Maria Spiropulu.

矩阵没头脑啊。。。他现在算体制外民科，只能写blog吐槽别人的封面文章，他自己怎么会上封面。

[TheMatrix]

矩阵没头脑啊。。。他现在算体制外民科，只能写blog吐槽别人的封面文章，他自己怎么会上封面。

哦。是他blog上的啊。

[rgg]

Woit最新贴的Nature 虫洞论文Holographic wormhole也很有意思，cover story，炒作的杰作。他反弦理论数十年如一日，这次也不意外，估计学术界大佬全得罪完了，在物理学都混不下去了，只能在数学系当lecturer。

https://www.nature.com/nature/volumes/612/issues/7938

这个新闻值得单开一帖。John Baez 的评论也犀利：

John Baez says:
December 1, 2022 at 6:05 am
Unfortunately Natalie Wolchover didn’t seem to realize that this hype was merely hype: on Twitter she wrote: “Curious to see so many people approve of the article but bristle at the headline. Can someone (who has actually read our article or the Nature paper) articulate *why* they don’t think it’s valid to say the experiment created a wormhole?”

Various people who know what’s going on tried to explain it carefully and gently. But I think one has to be brutally clear in situations like this, so I replied:

They did an simulation that crudely, roughly mimicked a system dual to a 2d wormhole. So it’s like a kid scrawls a picture of an inside-out building and the headline blares

BREAKING NEWS: CHILD BUILDS TAJ MAHAL!

[TheMatrix]

这个新闻值得单开一帖。John Baez 的评论也犀利：

John Baez says:
December 1, 2022 at 6:05 am
Unfortunately Natalie Wolchover didn’t seem to realize that this hype was merely hype: on Twitter she wrote: “Curious to see so many people approve of the article but bristle at the headline. Can someone (who has actually read our article or the Nature paper) articulate *why* they don’t think it’s valid to say the experiment created a wormhole?”

Various people who know what’s going on tried to explain it carefully and gently. But I think one has to be brutally clear in situations like this, so I replied:

They did an simulation that crudely, roughly mimicked a system dual to a 2d wormhole. So it’s like a kid scrawls a picture of an inside-out building and the headline blares

BREAKING NEWS: CHILD BUILDS TAJ MAHAL!

你光改个标题好像不行 - 还在同一主题里。

我给你来出来吧。