Something is wrong in the state of QED · HackerPapers discussions

Something is wrong in the state of QED — mentioned by jjgreen

Sat, 25 Feb 2023 15:17:30 GMT

Also on arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.02078

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Something is wrong in the state of QED — HN submission

Mon, 20 Feb 2023 21:25:21 GMT

Something is wrong in the state of QED

38 points; 15 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Something is wrong in the state of QED — mentioned by sashank_1509

Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:01:10 GMT

Well if it’s about QED I’m always drawn to the paper : “There’s something rotten about the state of QED” by Oliver Consa (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2110.02078.pdf). Since I’m in CS, not physics could anyone let me know if the paper above is making stuff up. If not, then it does paint QED in a very bad light and indicates something wrong with that field

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Something is wrong in the state of QED — mentioned by bloggie

Thu, 18 Aug 2022 16:43:06 GMT

“As one of the inventors of QED, I remember that we thought of QED in 1949 as a temporary and jerry-built structure, with mathematical inconsistencies and renormalized infinities swept under the rug. We did not expect it to last more than 10 years before some more solidly built theory would replace it. Now, 57 years have gone by and that ramshackle structure still stands” - Freeman Dyson Link to the actual paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.02078

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Something is wrong in the state of QED — HN submission

Thu, 19 May 2022 05:14:26 GMT

Something is wrong in the state of QED - history of physics

13 points; 20 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.