152
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: + +
→"Beautiful, but not robust" Quote
:The quote speaks for itself, and your comment is unfortunately incoherent. A lack of robustness in a theory is obviously a weakness in the theory, not in the requirements for the theory. No, we're not going to censor the quote.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:51, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
:The quote speaks for itself, and your comment is unfortunately incoherent. A lack of robustness in a theory is obviously a weakness in the theory, not in the requirements for the theory. No, we're not going to censor the quote.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:51, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
Well, clearly the quote does not speak for itself, since it comes at the end of a long lecture praising the progress that has been made in QFT. As far as lack of robustness being a weakness--it seems like this is the exact opposite point Weinberg is trying to make. He discusses, for example, how pleased he was when people discovered the need for theories to be renormalizeable. His point was that this was a hard condition for a theory to satisfy, and therefore imposing that condition greatly narrowed the search for the correct theory. I hope that clarifies the point I was trying to make. --[[User:Lemonpeel|Lemonpeel]] 21:19, 15 June 2009 (EDT)
== Mass Increase Section ==
== Mass Increase Section ==