HackerPapers

arXiv:2602.10181astro-ph.IM

Why do we do astrophysics?

David W. Hogg

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

At time of writing, large language models (LLMs) are beginning to obtain the ability to design, execute, write up, and referee scientific projects on the data-science side of astrophysics. What implications does this have for our profession? In this white paper, I list - and argue for - a set of facts or "points of agreement" about what astrophysics is, or should be; these include considerations of novelty, people-centrism, trust, and (the lack of) clinical value. I then list and discuss every possible benefit that astrophysics can be seen as bringing to us, and to science, and to universities, and to the world; these include considerations of love, weaponry, and personal (and personnel) development. I conclude with a discussion of two possible (extreme and bad) policy recommendations related to the use of LLMs in astrophysics, dubbed "let-them-cook" and "ban-and-punish." I argue strongly against both of these; it is not going to be easy to develop or adopt good moderate policies.

arXiv comments
21-page white paper
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
astro-ph.IMInstrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics physics.hist-phHistory and Philosophy of Physics

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Apr 2026 to Apr 2026. Found in 4 HN submissions from Apr 2026 to Sep 2026. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.