Where are the people like him nowadays? People that have the breadth and width of knowledge, but also the necessary philosophical thinking which people like Hawking discarded to his discredit.
>>16925098On /pol/
>>16925098People like him don't make it through academia anymore. The higher education system is about building clout with special interest groups and politics. This is a more recent trend that started up around the time of the first world war. Ever since then, ideology has mattered more than scientific progress, and so progress has steadily declined over the past several decades. There's still some progress, but it's a tiny trickle compared to the huge torrent of progress we saw post world war 2.
>>16925182That can be true in the aggregate, but it's also possible that 20-th century was the last century where low-hanging fruits that yielded giant leaps in physics were possible. Personally I think it's maybe a bit of both.
>>16925966No. It’s DEI bullshit impeding the sandbox of exploration and experimentation. You can’t get shit done with those people around.
>>16925098old age dementia is catching up with him, as his microtubules-for-consciousness mania demonstrates.
>>16926397A Penrose with dementia is still more intelligent than any anon
>>16925098I'm afraid of thinking about string theory or anything more than 4D especially around Brian Greene.
>>16926556Absolutely true, people ith dissing him for the microtubules which was basically a fun experiment for him and discarding his 70 years of actual productive work in the field. No wonder he's the last of his kind.
>>16925098It's interesting the future was read as making another universe. I think it might just collapse through to the outside, having massless particles. Where all of the energy from all the other universes in our group would be turned over.
>>16925966It is a little of both, but if you've been through college you know how it is man. The whole "shut up and calculate" vibe they have going on now, especially if you're in QM like I was. You'd have to be insane to try and promote your own theories these days. The only way you can actually graduate or get published is if you find some already existing research being done by an alumni or dean and you ask them for permission to endorse their work with your own research and then MAYBE you get to have someone read your post-grad thesis for a masters. Even then, it's like, okay good job, here's your degree, well done faggot. But if you spent all your time just focusing on your research and the quality of your work, and you weren't out there sucking cock and networking at the seminar booths, going to conventions, emailing your professors for clout, then you probably won't get to do anything interesting with your life and get stuck in some public lab doing material research at a community college in a midwestern state nobody's heard of playing FireRed on your fucking switch all day.Roger Penrose was born upper class british with a fuckton of money and a fuckton of potential to tap into and exploit. If you're not born into that kind of exceptional starting circumstance, in this world, the way it is right now, your chances of achieving anything remotely close to what he did are basically zilch.That is why you don't see anymore people like Penrose around.
>>16927785> Roger Penrose was born upper class british with a fuckton of money and a fuckton of potential to tap into and exploit. If you're not born into that kind of exceptional starting circumstance, in this world, the way it is right now, your chances of achieving anything remotely close to what he did are basically zilch.Historically most of science was done by aristocrats/upper class people like him. And the type of education and personal tutoring they got was immensely higher as in quality compared to what was in public schools then (not even talking about today...).Going into the sciences today is much more accessible, but I have to agree with what you say about the environment. Look at Witten, he got an undergrad degree in the humanities (which I find as a quite interesting fact about him) and is still considered a mathematical genius based on his later chosen path. But his family is hardcore scientists, so his thinking was formed in an intellectually stimulating environment to begin with.
>>16929394Gauss was poor, you are just dumb
>>16925098I don't know why they gave this guy a Nobel prize. His work is just theoretical and his nobel citation is that he "proved black hole formation is a robust prediction of general relativity" -- what a strange nobel citation! Giving a prize because a theory predicts something "robustly" rather than giving one because of a novel prediction? Weirdly, not many people seem to have a trouble with this Nobel. I guess it's because he's been in the public consciousness for a long time after writing all those pop science books. In the end, I just don't find him very impressive.
>>16927785That's a long way to say that you just weren't smart enough
Neo-democracy promotes the flattening of the curve at the expense of the outliers. With the result that mediocrity become the most common output.Neo-democrats distrust exceptional talent becasue that leads to social stratification. Therefore exceptional talent must be hobbled and discouraged. The easier way to do that is to withdraw resources, remove incentive, and promote the ordinary.
>>16929417https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_holecrtl+f and search "penrose"
>>16925966this meme is how gen x and millenial physicists can delude themselves into thinking they're not midwit failures
>>16929417Krautbot malding at Anglo SupremacyMany such cases
>>1692973116 matches. Let's see what they're saying.>Roger Penrose proved that general relativity predicts that singularities appear in all black holes,[37] although this may not still hold when quantum mechanics are taken into accountOkay, so an unconfirmed prediction.>showing that the mathematics of general relativity requires the formation of black holesSo not a novel prediction as already explained.>The weak cosmic censorship hypothesis, proposed by Penrose [...] However, this theory has not yet been provenAgain, an untested and unconfirmed prediction.>The Penrose process, which involves extraction of a black hole's rotational energy, has also been proposed as a potential mechanismProposed as a potential explanation? Still no tested prediction?The remaining ones are just his names in citations. I am once again left deeply unimpressed.
>>16929777Sir Roger's breakthrough was to use new approaches - including those topological tools - to show that a singularity, or a state of infinite density and pressure, would be a generic expectation, regardless of symmetry, if you had enough matter clumped together."I was thinking about the geometry of what goes on (inside these things we now call black holes) - how light rays behave, what they do when they start focusing, and can you stop them focusing, and that kind of thing," he explained."And I had general arguments which were pure mathematical, topological arguments - not the kind of thing people were using. And it was this idea, which I later called a trapped surface, which is a characterisation of when your collapse had reached a point of no return, roughly speaking, but it didn't depend on symmetry or anything like that. It was just a general characterisation that could tell you that something has gone funny."If astronomers went out and looked in the right places, they would find the evidence, Sir Roger figured. From the remnants of exploded stars to the gargantuan features that lurk at the cores of most galaxies."While Einstein's general theory of relativity predicts the existence of black holes, Einstein didn't himself believe they really existed," said Prof Jim Al-Khalili, who interviewed Sir Roger for the BBC's The Life Scientific programme in 2016. "Penrose was the first to prove mathematically, in 1965, that they are a natural consequence of relativity theory and not just science fiction."
>>16925098>>16925182>>16926098The republicans have specifically cut research and science spending every time they have been office for the last 50 years.If ever you wonder what has gone wrong in academia, you need to look no further than the republicans actively sabotaging it.PS: anywhere not in america doesn't matter.
>>16929720Why are you blaming democrats when republicans are the ones who are anti-intellectual on every level and have worked to cut all funding for all research types again and again?
>>16929790You should post where you copied this text snippet from so others can also look at it. But even then, it still doesn't address any of the concerns I raised -- he did not make a new prediction about black holes. He just showed that Einstein's theory predicts them "robustly".
>>16929797idk but heres what ai says1. What Was Known Before PenrosePhysicists already had exact solutions to Einstein’s equations that contained singularities.Example:the Schwarzschild metric (1916)It predicts that atr=0r=0curvature diverges singularity.But this solution assumed:perfect spherical symmetryperfectly static spacetimePhysicists suspected that real stars are messy, so maybe singularities only appear because of these unrealistic assumptions.So the argument was:“Maybe singularities only happen in special mathematical cases.”2. What Was MissingBefore Penrose, there was no theorem saying gravitational collapse must create a singularity.Researchers could only say:This particular model produces a singularity.But they could not say:All realistic collapse produces one.That’s a huge difference mathematically.3. What Penrose AddedPenrose’s key result was the Penrose Singularity Theorem (1965).He proved that if three very general conditions hold:Einstein’s equations applymatter has positive energya trapped surface formsthen spacetime must contain geodesic incompleteness (a singularity).No assumptions about:spherical symmetrystatic conditionsperfect matter distributionsThis was the breakthrough.
late night penrose thread theme songhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yebNIHKAC4A
>>16929799The singularities have never been observed because they are inside the event horizon, so this AI is implying that he got a nobel prize for something which is not even observationally confirmed and probably will never be observed.
>>16929801*because they are allegedly inside the event horizon
>>16929795ah yes, whatever would we do withtout grants for studying homosexuality in bees and why we should encourage it more on white males. stfu moron. None of the great scientific advancements being describe from yesteryear itt were government funded. You are an idiot, Probably a reddit troon
>>16929796having a degree in gender studies and the oppression of non binaries in medieval Europe isnt an "intellectual" you absolute clown. No one has ever done more damage to science in all of history than leftists in the last decade.
>>16929806>>16929807There is no field of science you have not cut. You are currently posting from a government funded piece of research.Nearly all of modern life relies upon this scientific advancement you spurn at every single opportunity.
>>16929795>academia is corrupt, greedy, and systemically built on clique values>its your fault for not throwing more money at ityou sure are a smart fella.
>>16926397>as his microtubules-for-consciousness mania Seething reductionist.
