Speculative ‘supergravity’ theory wins US$3-million prize

[socrat44]

NEWS 06 August 2019

Speculative ‘supergravity’ theory wins US$3-million prize
Three physicists honoured for theory that has been hugely influential — but might not be a good description of reality.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02397-8

================

[socrat44]

Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics
Prize awarded for . . . . . string theories , inflationary cosmology,
for advances in quantum field theory, quantum gravity,
for the observation of gravitational waves, supergravity,
for the discovery of Hawking radiation, multiverse,
for dark matter , . . . . . . etc . . .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthro ... al_Physics
=======

[Faradave]

"But Sabine Hossenfelder, a theoretical physicist at the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany, warns that the LHC’s failure to find supersymmetry particles deals a near fatal blow to supergravity’s chances of being true. She says that the winners have “done great mathematical work that deserves recognition”, adding, 'but perhaps the award should be for pure mathematics, because this is not physics.' "

[socrat44]

"But Sabine Hossenfelder, a theoretical physicist at the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany, warns that the LHC’s failure to find supersymmetry particles deals a near fatal blow to supergravity’s chances of being true. She says that the winners have “done great mathematical work that deserves recognition”, adding, 'but perhaps the award should be for pure mathematics, because this is not physics.' "

Tuesday, August 06, 2019
Special Breakthrough Prize awarded for Supergravity
Posted by Sabine Hossenfelder

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/0 ... d-for.html
===============

[Faradave]

"To date, we have no evidence that supergravity is a correct description of nature. Supergravity may one day become useful to calculate properties of certain materials, but so far this research direction has not led to much.

The works by Ferrera, Freedman, and van Nieuwenhuizen have arguably been influential, if by influential you mean that papers have been written about it. Supergravity and supersymmetry are mathematically very fertile ideas. They lend themselves to calculations that otherwise would not be possible and that is how, in the past four decades, physicists have successfully built a beautiful, supersymmetric, math-castle on nothing but thin air.

Awarding a scientific prize, especially one accompanied by so much publicity, for an idea that has no evidence speaking for it, sends the message that in the foundations of physics contact to observation is no longer relevant. If you want to be successful in my research area, it seems, what matters is that a large number of people follow your footsteps, not that your work is useful to explain natural phenomena. This Special Prize doesn’t only signal to the public that the foundations of physics are no longer part of science, it also discourages people in the field from taking on the hard questions."

Sabine is fearless! Thanks for the links.

[socrat44]

Sunday, August 11, 2019
Four Tommaso Dorigo's SUGRA blunders
#
Almost all the media informed about the new Special Breakthrough
Prize in Fundamental Physics (which will be given to the guys during
a TV broadcast event on November 3rd; in NASA's Hangar One,
Mountain View, CA) – a prize to three founders of supergravity –
as if it were any other prize.
#
/ Luboš Motl v 1:39 PM | comments (5) /
https://motls.blogspot.com/2019/08/tomm ... nders.html
=============

[socrat44]

Sunday, August 11, 2019
Comment :
Lubos Motl to Jason Stanidge:
''Dear Jason, SUGRA helped to direct theoretical physics in
the right direction because it taught the physicists not to
be afraid and vigorously search for the most symmetric
(and most supersymmetric) - and therefore most constrained
and most likely, among viable alternatives - versions of
theories of various kinds, including gravitational theories.''
/ Lubos Motl /
https://motls.blogspot.com/2019/08/tomm ... nders.html
====
. . . the Pedagogy prize for teaching scientists
not to be afraid to write an abstract math subject --
-- the award is ahead.
=======

[socrat44]

Selection Committee
Selection Committee for the Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental
Physics and the New Horizons Prize in Fundamental Physics:
https://breakthroughprize.org/Committee/1
#
Did ''Selection Committee'' give the prize to themselves ?
=======

[Event Horizon]

Open ended strings seem unlikely to me. I think loops conserve energy in either 2 or 3 dimensions, and maybe more. A string is not a discreet package, whereas a loop is. A loop in 3d might become a bubble given probability theory where it is impossible to say where the edges are, describing a circular area in spacetime.
I haven't seen anything yet to suggest supergravity exists, but it's a cute theory.

[socrat44]

Open ended strings seem unlikely to me.
I think loops conserve energy in either 2 or 3 dimensions, and maybe more.
A string is not a discreet package, whereas a loop is.
A loop in 3d might become a bubble given probability theory where
it is impossible to say where the edges are, describing a circular area in spacetime.
I haven't seen anything yet to suggest supergravity exists, but it's a cute theory.

''string'' (as an open , as a closed-loop) and ''supergravity''
are ''cute theories'', but without a grain of real evidence
===