## Friday, February 22, 2019 ... /////

### Über-IPCC chairman Will Happer may need good bodyguards

In the most recent Will Happer blog post, prominent Princeton retired physicist Will Happer was referred to as a Trump "new tech adviser". Trump has ignored the Paris treaty and similar things but I have felt uneasy because he left the underlying cause of such irrational campaigns, the politicization of science, untouched.

Some good news may change it. As The New York Times wrote,

White House Climate Panel to Include a Climate Denialist.
The main task for Happer's new panel should be to recheck the Pentagon statements that "climate change represents a national security threat" for the U.S. I guess that like your humble correspondent, Happer has already made some research into this particular mind-boggling statement and he may already believe in certain conclusions.

The New York Times article above used the word "denialist" – something that has become so common among the left-wing activists (a category that includes most of the "MSM" journalists) that most of us no longer express any irritation about it. But The Washington Times still ran a story about the "backlash" by people like Roy Spencer who didn't like the denialist slur.

## Thursday, February 21, 2019 ... /////

### "Boltzmann vs foes": precursor to "QM vs anti-quantum zealots"

Yesterday, Ludwig Eduard Boltzmann would have had a chance to celebrate his 175th birthday if he hadn't killed that chance by hanging himself at age of 62, while vacationing with his wife Henriette and daughter Elsa (in Tybein) near Trieste, Northern Italy, Austria-Hungary.

The wife and daughter probably had a reason for some anxiety when they found him (the daughter found him first). But Boltzmann's reason powering the suicide were intellectually driven frustrations. And while it's sometimes said that the timing of his suicide was lousy because his ideas were going to win soon afterwards, I actually disagree.

If he were resurrected and if he were around, he would probably ask me whether there's a reasonable chance that the people will get more reasonable when it comes to the ideas required for his new statistical picture of thermodynamics and physics in general. I would probably answer "No" and he would hang himself again.

I could feel a bit guilty but my "No" answer would be a matter of scientific integrity because the anti-quantum zealots are nothing else than heirs to the high-profile idiots who opposed his ideas more than 100 years ago.

## Tuesday, February 19, 2019 ... /////

### Henry Tye & pals: fermion masses from anti-naturalness of string theory

Before I discuss the cute new paper by Tye et al., I must mention a SUSY paper

Low-energy lepton physics in the MRSSM: $(g−2)_\mu$, $\mu\to e\gamma$, and $\mu\to e$ conversion
by Kotlarski, Stöckinger, and Stöckinger-Kim, by a Polish, German, and German-Korean ;-) trio. They revisit the 2007 Kribs-Poppitz-Weiner model known as MRSSM. The acronym stands for the same thing as MSSM with the extra "R-symmetric" inserted in between.

There's an extra $U(1)$ R-symmetry in the model, the Standard Model particles are neutral but the superpartners are charged under it. They carry some special new superpartners. In this scenario, compressed spectra are assumed so that the LHC bounds aren't violated even though some superpartner masses are below $200\GeV$. Instead of the LHC, they predict new phenomena to be seen at experiments "directly converting electrons to muons" such as COMET.

Now, the main paper I want to discuss is
String Landscape and Fermion Masses
by Andriolo, Yan Li, and Tye. Henry Tye is of course a brilliant playful man and this paper – building on some previous papers by a similar group – shows that.

### Separation of cash and e-money is a creepy and useless ideology

It's a cure in search of an illness and a gesture to solidify the power and arrogance of the Big Governments

On Saturday in the press, Czech ex-president Václav Klaus, an economics professor, has attacked a self-evidently dangerous idea floated by the staff of the International Monetary Fund. See e.g.

IMF Staff Floats Dual Money to Allow Much Deeper Negative Rates
The idea of Mr Ruchir Agarwal (D.C., just 100 Twitter followers!) and Ms Signe Krogstrup (Denmark) is simple. All these people apparently take it for granted that it was great to lower the interest rates and to push them below zero in some cases. However, they are aware of a problem. If the interest rates given to the final consumers are negative, they may simply keep the cash under the mattresses that give them the 0% interest rate – which is better than the negative rates!

So the negative rates don't really work. If you impose them, the actual result is the removal of the cash from the banks. Now, "which interest rates cannot be below zero" is a subtle question and some people have oversimplified views. Some interest rates, like those on the deposits electronically stored in the banks, may indeed be negative. But as long as you can move your money from the bank to the mattresses and vice versa, the mattress solution affects the electronic money in the banks, too.

## Monday, February 18, 2019 ... /////

### Bill Gates: advocates of dominant wind & solar energy are imbeciles

I've been turned into a Microsoft fan roughly when I came to the college. The later finding that Bill Gates actually wrote the "Microsoft BASIC" on my beloved Commodore 64 has increased my respect for him and his company, too. It may have contributed to my being a Microsoft partisan in all the silly college battles about Microsoft vs Apple and Microsoft vs Linux – but I have had lots of other reasons to take the Microsoft side, too.

Microsoft has been another politically correct company in some respects. But in so many other respects, Microsoft and its founder remained such oases of common sense and the "moderate" rational way of thinking that was mainstream in the 1980s and perhaps 1990s. I don't know how many of you agree – but Microsoft (even without Gates) doesn't quite seem to be a member of the bunch of Silicon Valley friends who talk to each other and complicate the lives of all the people who aren't fully politically obedient.

After all, Redmond doesn't sit in the Silicon Valley.

### Lee Smolin, division algebras, and deception

Lee Smolin is a top example of a pseudoscientist who keeps on producing would-be influential research by writing down chaotic papers that combine concepts from mathematics and physics in childish ways (or ways resembling the intoxication by drugs), who impresses some stupid laymen by claims that he is the savior of physics oppressed by the evil white men in physics, and who then demands to be given workers on his and similar ideas.

These subordinates – who are themselves hopeless people as physicists – who were donated to Smolin have written or co-written hundreds of additional meaningless and childish papers of their own which is why many of Smolin's ludicrous papers have managed to collect as much as hundreds of citations.

But nothing of a lasting value has ever come out of this kind of rituals. This is simply not how you can make progress in science. For progress to take place in science, one actually needs some clever ideas that work. Those can't really be planned. Some cleverness and expertise are probably necessary conditions but they're not sufficient. Some good luck is needed, too. Most ideas that are proposed aren't destined to become valuable. They're eliminated or forgotten. And the ability to impress the laymen isn't correlated with the progress in science at all.

## Sunday, February 17, 2019 ... /////

### Janice Fiamengo on the new SJW physics

Some fun neuroscience: the Quanta Magazine discussed a claim that the brains don't remember processes as functions of time but rather as their Laplace transforms and they are capable of performing the inverse Laplace transform rather well. Clever if it's true.

Many of you know and watch Prof Janice Fiamengo who is smart, sensible, articulate, and anti-feminist, among other qualities.

## Friday, February 01, 2019 ... /////

### Baer et al.: string theory predicted Higgs mass, everything at LHC, and beyond

Related to physics wars: the hardcore intersectional SJW activist in physics, an anti-white and anti-Semite racist with a notoriety in much of Jerusalem, and Lee Smolin's ex-collaborator Chanda Prescod-Weinstein (who recently paid respects to the interplanetary territorial might of the Native American elders robbed by the evil white man, along with her curly Avatar pal; thanks, Joe) became an unlikely defender of particle physics (against the likes of Ms Sabine Hossenfelder) when she teamed up with Tim Tait and authored Particle Physics Is Doing Just Fine for Slate. Hat tip: Andreas Karch and Tom Hendrix. See also Lisa Randall and Jeremy Bernstein in NYT
A wonderfully upbeat SUSY article that ignores all the exploding "bad mood" appeared on hep-ph today:
LHC SUSY and WIMP dark matter searches confront the string theory landscape
Baer, Barger, Salam, Serce, and Sinha (Oklahoma+Wisconsin) argue that the $125\GeV$ Higgs boson, along with the absence of superpartners at the LHC at this point as well as the null results of the dark matter direct search experiments, is exactly what the most conventional string theory scenario – equipped with a naturally sounding refreshed notion of naturalness and a seemingly conservative type of the anthropic veto – has always predicted.

From the beginning, BBSSS make it clear that they belong to Team Stanford – or, given their admiration for Michael Douglas' stringy adjustments to naturalness considerations, Team Rutgers-Stanford (although by current locations, I should say Team StonyBrook-Stanford). They surely believe in a vast landscape of de Sitter vacua.

OK, how does their theory of everything work and what methods and assumptions does it use?