Comment by astro1234

Open in a window
Comment

Comment by astro1234

I think you make a fair point, but also remember: new paradigms don't necessarily require confusing / contradictory observations. You could have the simple idea of "what if gravity is an inertial force?" at any period in time and work out the mathematics of this. It would make theoretical predictions which could then be falsified, but then again, who would take it seriously enough to test it if it was maybe say 1850 and not 1899.

A better example is maybe Maxwell's laws. Maxwell wasn't inventing a theory to try and explain confusing results, he was unifying a chaotic, empirical laws from existing experiments. That may be a cleaner example. That knowledge compression into satisfying theoretical framework is likely what is attractive.

You can potentially ask the same thing about like you say -- general relativity / quantum gravity but also likely plenty of other areas that may be like this today. Again going outside my particular area of expertise: standard model physics is in a large important sense empirical; lots of values and numbers that are simply unmotivated by theory or where we don't have a good way to make a principled theoretical choice. That could be a place where these models are able to help.

But right now: I doubt it. This is what everyone is working furiously on right now. How do you close a "science" verification loop? In principle this should be easy right: you have ideation (exploration, sampling with ~high temperature maybe as an analogue) and you have verification (which of these ideas are good) which amounts to rejection sampling in idea space. You have to have a sampler that is good at picking _good_ ideas for efficiency sake and you need a relatively fast and reliable verification step of "is this idea good and worth continuing to explore". But I may oversimplify

Replies astro1234 · 27d
Open on HN
Loading the discussion…

Domain filters

Stories from these domains are hidden from every list. Subdomains match too: blocking substack.com also hides danluu.substack.com. The list is kept in this browser only.

Help

Keyboard

j / k
Move down and up the story list. The arrow keys scroll whatever has focus.
Enter
Open the marked story in a window.
]
Open the next story in the list in place of the one in front. Back returns to it.
p
Pin or unpin the marked story, which keeps it in Pinned.
n / N
Move to the next or previous top-level comment in the window in front.
c
Collapse or expand that comment.
f
Hide or show the story list.
Esc
Close a menu or this help.
Access key m
Go to the menu bar. Most browsers take it with Alt on Windows and Linux, and Safari with Control and Option.
?
Show this help.

Windows

Each story opens in a window holding its article above its discussion; drag the bar between them to share the room differently. A window can be moved by its title bar, resized from any edge, snapped to a half or a corner by dragging it there, maximised, or minimised to the bar at the foot of the page. Open several stories to compare them, and switch between them from that bar. A window's Next story link reads on down the list in the same window.

A link in a comment or an article to another Hacker News or Lobsters thread opens that thread in a window too. A link to a single HN comment opens the comment above its replies.

While a story's window is in front, the Story and Discussion menus in the menu bar hold its commands: pinning, Next story, sorting, collapsing every thread, jumping to the first new comment. Each window also remembers where you were in its article and discussion, so a reload, or Back to a story that Next took you past, finds your place again. Closing a window forgets it.

The whole arrangement lives in the address, so a bookmark or a shared link brings it back, and Back undoes the last change. Moving between Hacker News, Lobsters, their lists, Pinned and Find changes only the list, and leaves the windows open.

The list

The pin at the start of a row keeps the story in Pinned, and the cross at its end hides it. Pinned can be narrowed by words in the title, site or author, by source, and to the stories you haven't opened yet, and ordered by when you pinned them, by points or by comments; the filters are part of the address, so a filtered view can be bookmarked. Scroll past the end of the list to load more. Domain filters, in the View menu, hide every story from a site.

Applets

The Applets menu in the menu bar holds three tools, each a window of its own. Replies to me takes your Hacker News user name and lists the replies to your last thirty comments and stories, checking again every three minutes while it is open, and marking what is new since you last marked them read. Look up a user opens a profile on Hacker News or Lobsters, with their submissions and recent comments, as a commenter's name in any discussion does; the bar at the top of a profile looks up someone else in the same window, and Back returns to the one before. Who is hiring? filters the posts of HN's monthly hiring threads by the words you type.

They read only what the sites publish to everyone, so none of them asks for a login, and your user name stays in this browser.

Find

Find takes any link and lists every time it was submitted to Hacker News and Lobsters, so you can read each discussion of it.

About

YAVCHN never sees your Hacker News or Lobsters login. The discussion is fetched from each site's public API; to vote or reply, follow the link above the discussion, or the arrow beside a comment, to the source's own site. Pins, hidden stories, filters and layout are kept in this browser only.

Open source: github.com/paulmooreparks/yavchn. Built with PUDL.