The problem is, ideas are cheap and data is expensive. So separating the correct from the incorrect ideas takes lots of time and money. Hence, people often want to know whether the black box has any value before pouring money down a hole. Spouting clearly wrong ideas calls into doubt the usefulness of any of the ideas, especially for people who have no track record of being insightful on the topic.
Yes, this is the the pint of “Lost in math” book: arxiv is full of ideas, but testing each would cost billions. All low-hanging ideas are already tested.
You should follow her blog too. Lots of good interactions and criticisms of the current state of affairs in science overall and theoretical physics in particular
The problem is, ideas are cheap and data is expensive. So separating the correct from the incorrect ideas takes lots of time and money. Hence, people often want to know whether the black box has any value before pouring money down a hole. Spouting clearly wrong ideas calls into doubt the usefulness of any of the ideas, especially for people who have no track record of being insightful on the topic.
Yes, this is the the pint of “Lost in math” book: arxiv is full of ideas, but testing each would cost billions. All low-hanging ideas are already tested.
How did you find that book?
I am subscribed to the author’s Facebook and she wrote about it. https://www.facebook.com/sabine.hossenfelder
However, I don’t remember why I subscribed at her, maybe some of her posts in her blog backreaction appeared in my google search about multiverse.
Ha! I apologize, I was ambiguous. What I should have said was, how did you like that book?
You should follow her blog too. Lots of good interactions and criticisms of the current state of affairs in science overall and theoretical physics in particular
She posts links on her new blogposts on her FB, so I am often read it.