## Tuesday, November 05, 2013 ... /////

### Milner New Horizon Prize: Cachazo, Minwalla, Rychkov

Five candidates for the $3m prize in 2014 announced, too This seems like a cool choice. I was informed about the new winners of the$100,000 Junior Milner Prize from the inner sources ;-) but Jay Wacker leaked the news at Quora so I think it's right to inform you, too:

Tuesday at 7:00 a.m. PST, the list of nominees for the $3 million Fundamental Physics Prize for 2014 will be released. I took the picture at the Harvard Law School dining hall. Yup, Shiraz's Wikipedia page was also started by your humble correspondent. We are happy to share the news that Freddy Cachazo, Shiraz Minwalla and Slava Rychkov are the winners of the three available New Horizons in Physics Prizes for 2014. This is a$100,000 award for junior researchers who have made an outstanding impact in the field.

Please visit the following website tomorrow (Nov. 5) to learn the names of the winners and more about the ceremony, which will be held in San Francisco December 12.
I don't really know Slava Rychkov in person although I know some of his work. But I know Shiraz and Freddy extremely well. They're brilliant (and hard-working) physicists who truly deserve such an award.

Shiraz wrote lots of rocksolid papers on the AdS/CFT correspondence, especially on various phase transitions, the holographic viewpoint on fluid dynamics, indices, and interactions in the $pp$-wave backgrounds (to mention a paper we co-authored, too). But I also love his work on non-commutative field theories, soliton solutions in them, OM-theory, and related advances.

Freddy got some training under Cumrun Vafa so he really knows lots and has done something on the higher-dimensional geometric issues in string/M-theory, more speficically in F-theory. You could say that F-theory is the most geometric way to view the compactifications of string/M-theory because it deals with the highest number of dimensions. He has studied phases in gauge theories, with and without quivers, and various chiral rings and dualities in them.

However, most of his work – almost all of his work since some moment – is about the twistor minirevolution and various recursion relations that hold for the scattering amplitudes. For example, he is the "C" (no, not "F") in the "BCFW" recursion relations and he has written many papers about related methods to calculate the amplitudes himself. Things became much clearer and thanks to his contributions, the methods became applicable in a day-to-day computational industry.

Vyacheslav Rychkov did various work on the AdS/CFT correspondence, phenomenology, cosmology etc. and the main reason why I don't say much more about his work is that I am much less familiar with it (and with the author himself) than with Shiraz and Freddy.

Congratulations to all of them. A senior huge prize candidate should be announced later today.

Update: The candidates for the 2014 \$3 million prize are Polchinski; Green and Schwarz; and Strominger and Vafa. Great candidates, of course. ;-) None of these folks need to be introduced to TRF readers. Polchinski appears in 94 blog posts (although some of the references are negative); Green and Schwarz (simultaneously) in 93 blog posts; and Strominger and Vafa in 32 blog posts simulaneously (but 68 and 98 separately and I know them more closely than the others).

See previous TRF blog posts mentioning the Milner Prize.

#### snail feedback (32) :

Tell us what you really think (-:

https://fundamentalphysicsprize.org/news7

Here. http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2013/11/05/harvard-smithsonian-global-warming-skeptic-helps-feed-strategy-doubt-gridlock-congress/uHssYO1anoWSiLw0v1YcUJ/story.html

Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe is getting help on the campaign trail from climate scientist Michael Mann, the figure at the center of a scandal that came to be known as Climategate.
Mann, a former University of Virginia professor, attended a campaign event Monday at Virginia Tech alongside McAuliffe.

http://freebeacon.com/climategate-scientist-backs-terry-mcauliffe/

How many Democrats does one have to help on the campaign trail before one becomes a "part activist"?

Never heard of Willie Soon doing that.

Luboš, stay cool, global warming stopped, global warming propaganda will fade away quite (willie) soon ;-)

cheers

Haha cool, I like this happy news :-)

Congratulations and a big cheers to them !

These hit pieces are very toxic because most people think that they are rational, but they still believe to some degree things that they read, and the targets are put in the same position as the "When did you stop beating your wife?" mythic person.

I agree that these innuendo/gossip pc hacks are scum. ...reminds me of the following scene from Blazing Saddles:

Incidentally, Shiraz is so energetic and fast on the board, he comes close to violating relativity. For that alone he deserves a prize.

LOL, also quantum mechanics of a string. ;-) This point has been made by many before you, e.g.

http://youtu.be/z1KItEUGhg0?t=20s

Dear Alexander, you have lived pretty much all of your life on an Earth that saw no trendin the climate temperature but that still haven't prevented from having written thousands of psychopathic texts about the Sky That Is Falling.

This very fact (as well as millions of similar facts) proves that the global warming propaganda doesn't depend on any real events or facts; it's completely independent of them.

Good post my friend but you seem to have a blind spot for the same thing in other areas. For example, many of the economists who predicted the outcome of America's inflationary policies were attacked just as harshly by the establishment that was cheetring on the central planners at Treasury and the Fed. They were ridiculed as know-nothings who were extremist nut-cases that were to be avoided. And just like with Dr. Soon the attacks continued after they were proven to be correct.

You might consider using that considerable intellectual horsepower to see similar patterns elsewhere, particularly when some that are supporting many of the ideas that you are touting are doing the same thing as the Boston Globe.

I think you just proved the point of the article. Thank you.

For those that don't know, the funniest part is super hero Lubos at 5:13 into the video.

What these folks write seem like old articles published in Pravda, which I used to read years ago as part of my Russian classes (I think it was selected largely because it was readily available in major U.S. cities [in my case, Chicago], in contrast to the hinterlands). Whenever I see the NY Times, I think of Pravda -- the main difference is that Pravda was quite thin...about the thickness of the NY Times editorials pages.

Lubos,

'Big Oil' loves solar and wind.

One correction. The money on the side of the Greens does not come from government, it comes from the large energy companies that own the wind and solar installations around the world. It is their money and power that is used to lobby governments.

Energy demand in terms of MWh per person is not rising in rich countries. The only way to make more money is to raise prices. Thats why everyone from BP to Shell to Suncor all invest in hugely profitable wind and solar 'programs'(scams).

Its not called the 'Green Industrial Complex' for nothing.

Ha ha, nice! :-D

I liked the way this guy, a geologist, talks frankly about the "climate change industry."

Thanks, David! And you're on the white list now.

"When you print a lot of money purchasing power of the money goes down
even if the price of goods relative to each other is relatively
constant."

You seem to be deliberately missing the point here. If all the prices rise at once, of *course* they don't change *relative* to one another.

"It means that the value of the circulating media of exchange went down."

Relative to *what*? In the first place I don't think you mean to say value since value is subjective. But there is obviously some confusion coming from you here. If there are twice as many dollars but every dollar can still buy the same amount of goods and services, it hasn't "lost value." The "value" of a dollar must be in what it stands in for in an exchange. The lost "value" is really a "price" of a dollar measured in goods and services. The purchasing power of a dollar goes down when less things can be bought with it.

"In 1946 the US government cut spending drastically and the private
economy exploded as the lid was removed from pent up demand."

Wow. You have literally regurgitated the Keynesian fairytale about why the war draw down wasn't a disaster.

First of all what you just said had exactly *nothing* to do with what I said, which is the *historical fact* that there was a sudden jump in prices after the price controls were lifted, which reflected inflation that had actually occurred earlier.

Second of all, what happened was *not* a sudden jump in consumption spending after the war, what happened was a sudden recovery of *investment* which had been depressed since 1929. You really should read Robert Higgs' Regime Uncertainty. It is quite obvious from his analysis that investors where fucking terrified of the government during the Roosevelt and War years, and *that* finally ended after the war as we transitioned away from a command economy to a relatively free (but still "mixed") one.

"There is no doubt that is true for some products. But not for others."

This is absolute fucking sophistry. Of course not everything has improved, of course some improvements are not objectively improvements. The real question is whether, on balance, we should expect most people to place a higher value on what they have now than what they could have had decades ago. If you don't think the vast majority of people would, then you are a fucking nutcase who doesn't believe in capitalism.

"As for real wages, I do not think that the average worker is in a better position than before."

This and a lot of other things you say about how much worse off people are today than decades ago proves you are an anti-capitalist nutcase who happens to have managed, fortunately, to redirect his irrational and wrong grievances with the capitalist system towards a Government institution.

I am not going to take you or the Robert Reichs of the world seriously because you are both equally moronic communists ranting on about how people's lives have been made worse than 30 years ago and deny the progress brought by capitalism. Your just totally fucking insane.

"If anyone supports the Fed's activity then s/he opposes the free market."

You'll be hard pressed to find a statement I have made that indicates I "support the Fed's activity" In fact I have described here the Fed as "stupid."

"I respond to what I read. And what I read was, "...it's important to set a *consistent* rate..""

Way to take what I said out of context and even then totally misunderstand the context. The context was that I was acknowledging I understood what Lubos was saying about why the exact rate itself is less important than that the rate doesn't change. Even then you completely fucking misunderstand because apparently you believe only the Government could maintain a consistent rate. Now who is the anti free market asshole?

Oh yeah, it's obviously you.

Only in the last few years has it really become apparent to me that the way liberal minds analyse any issue is wholly and entirely determined by their political persuasion. There is no better example of this than Noam Chomsky. Now I used to have a lot of respect for the guy. He's smart and speaks his mind or so I thought. I have to admit, I read manufacturing consent and agreed with a lot of his analysis. But then one day I googled "global warming + noam chomsky" and surprise surprise, the great, fierce intellectual analysis of the subject matter was gone. No, chomksy says global warming is a threat, not because he ever read a book or a blog about it (like this one), but because he's a liberal and it fits in with his view of the world. This is what makes molt a conservative but also a real thinker and jerks at the Boston Globe...well jerks...well done lubos!

Pravda. I was in the USSR when the tanks rolled into Prague - though we didn't know about it. What we did know was Pravda's headline the next day, which was

"Great victory for Russian diplomacy"

Below - how the Liberal Progressive brain works...

Mann's doing that because he needs McAuliffe's opponent (the incumbent) out - Ken Cuccinelli is still trying get all of Man's emails released from his time at the Uni of VA. As well as doing this, he tweets repeated abuse about Cuccinelli. Indeed, Mann seems to spend more time tweeting and on Facebook than working. Were I a taxpayer in Virginia, I'd like to know how that works...

BTW the update is very nice too!

I want Cumrun Vafa to get a buck next year, as this would encourage him to put a nice talk on the FFP homepage and I like listening to him explaining stuff ... :-)

Lubos Motl has a powerful perspective on freedom that the likes of a lazy, arrogant pseudo-journalists like Rowland could never understand. Rowland is delusional in that he and his ilk are the rightful royalty that should have privilege for being born, not for earning the respect of mankind.

If Lubos was persecuted at the said university couldn't he just find a more suitable venue in Texas?

Speaking of which, its JFK assassination time coming around again soon. The quality newspapers are getting busy filling their articles with good cheer concerning the lack of conspiracy. I have just been watching on Youtube the movie 'Executive Action' from the 1970s. Its rather pedestrian but interesting for those who find this sort of thing interesting. I only mention this for cultural reasons since to my surprise in the movie the actor playing the Oswald duplicate resembles Sheldon from the Big Band Theory comedy series.

Does the New York Times still own the Globe and with what value do they keep it on the books -- one dollar? Rowland and the other bow-tied eggheads at the Globe think they work for a presitigious publication with actual, living, breathing readers. When they find out the truth their heads are going to explode like in Cronenberg's film Scanners.

Speaking of newspapers, a realistic (pessimistic?) article by Steven Weinberg in the New York Review of books today. Most regular TRF readers won't find anything new in it, but as an executive summary of the progress made in the standard models of cosmology and elementary particle physics, it works nicely.

Not long ago, Lubos sponsered a guest post in which the author took the opportunity to gratuitously mock Lubos for his well supported AGW denial. That author invoked Murray Gell-Mann as an authority. Well, here's an interview of MG-M in which he appears a senile old fool (appealing to
"simple arithmetic" and the authority of the discredited IPCC liars). Anyone, especially physicists, who watch it and are not embarrassed by it, are themselves an embarrassment.

Note, the interviewer uses the example of the housing crisis to illustrate what fools people are for denying a dangerous trend. Unfortunately, the only ones who were in denial were the Democrats who caused it in the first place, and who prevented appropriate measures to contain it. Just one more proof that virtually everything Leftists know is wrong.

Thanks. Great Video.

An interesting article on Yuri Milner in today's WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304337404579209950328966242?mod=WSJEUROPE_hps_MIDDLESixthNews