Another very fine article. I especially like the distinctions you draw between your views and Sabine Hossenfelder's. I agree in particular with your sense that building hardware to do an experiment, even if done so initially in response to a theory that will turn out to be of little use, is on balance a good thing.
That said, I did want to encourage anyone else who has clicked over to watch SH's video to also read the article she buried in her notes for the video. (This also applies to those who do not care to watch a video.) The article has the same thrust as the video, but is more measured. I don't completely agree with it, especially after having thought about it for a few hours, but it is thought-provoking. Here is the link she posted:
Another very fine article. I especially like the distinctions you draw between your views and Sabine Hossenfelder's. I agree in particular with your sense that building hardware to do an experiment, even if done so initially in response to a theory that will turn out to be of little use, is on balance a good thing.
That said, I did want to encourage anyone else who has clicked over to watch SH's video to also read the article she buried in her notes for the video. (This also applies to those who do not care to watch a video.) The article has the same thrust as the video, but is more measured. I don't completely agree with it, especially after having thought about it for a few hours, but it is thought-provoking. Here is the link she posted:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5o31k2jovu4nmyy219tzh/nphys4079-1.pdf?rlkey=f5y07dj0i6ob29fuq01zgkibs&e=1&st=xtv22uph&dl=0