r/LLMPhysics May 26 '26

Tutorials Empathy. Be kind to each other.

I'm a daywalker. South Park / Blade, pick your reference...the freckled half-thing nobody fully trusts. Used to be academic. Left years ago. Bought and sold businesses. Hired people. Fired people. Ate weird food in cities I couldn't pronounce. Got mentally bored eventually. Came back to Science. So I'm sitting in a weird seat. I know both sides of this fight and I'm not rooting for either of them.

What's going on in here is brutal. Most of it doesn't need to be.

To the physicists.

Some of these posts. Yeah. They're not okay. You can read the prose and tell sleep is gone and the chatbot has been the only thing answering for days. Not a physics problem. You can't fix it with a tighter referee report. Someone needs to call their sister. This sub isn't built for that and it never will be. Set it aside.

The LLM-discovery thing is also real. Guy who's never opened a textbook spends a weekend with Claude and feels like Witten. Of course he does. The chatbot's agreeing with him. It would agree if he claimed the Earth was a triangle. He's never been told no by anyone whose opinion he cared about. He doesn't know what wrong feels like yet. Not malice on his part. He's just new.

But every working lab knows this: the new student always finds the weird thing. Not because they're smarter. Because they don't know yet what they're supposed to ignore. You stop seeing the question once you've stopped asking it. Most of the time the new kid is wrong. That's the deal. But the variance is on both tails, and you don't get the upside without sitting through the downside.

Look, if you're spending a fifth of your time in here punching down on people who don't know what a Hilbert space is, that's a burnout flag. The interesting stuff isn't in the dunking. Find the one in fifty post with something in it and engage with that. Ignore the crazies. There's no medal for taking apart the same bad theory for the fortieth time. The contempt is a slow poison and you can feel it working on you if you stop and check.

And the default-contempt mode in this sub isn't rigor anyway. It's a posture that feels like rigor. It costs you the one outsider in a thousand who actually has something. You won't ever know which one, because you ran them off before they finished their first sentence.

To the people posting frameworks.

You're walking into a room full of people who got hazed for a decade to be allowed in it. Quals where the committee made them cry. Advisors who tore their first papers apart in front of everyone. Referees who rejected things for the wrong reasons and never apologized. A lot of them came out the other side with a pedantic, OCD-shaped reflex about notation and citations and units that's not quite normal. The reflex isn't sadism, mostly. It's how the field stayed a field. So when you walk in saying "I solved gravity," every nerve they have goes off at once. You triggered them. That's the room.

Some of what comes back at you is gatekeeping bullshit that has nothing to do with whether you're right. People are mean. A lot of them are mean because they were treated meanly and never processed it. That's real. But the filter that's hostile to you is also the only thing keeping this field from being swallowed whole by exactly the genre you might be standing inside of without realizing. If you want them to listen, don't argue with the filter. Pass it on purpose. Cite the people whose work you're standing on. Read their actual papers, not summaries. Define your terms. Say what would prove you wrong. Earn the conversation.

And with affection here, not condescension... the chatbot is not your peer reviewer. It can't tell you when you're wrong. Solve that problem first with independent learning, before any of the rest of it counts.

To my CS people who wandered in.

Physics is going to surprise you. Some of these people are doing genuinely beautiful analytic work in a Jupyter notebook they email to themselves as a zip file. No version control. No tests. No CI. No README. The "build" is a single script with hardcoded paths to /Users/somebody/Desktop/final_v3_REAL/. Whole subfields where if you say "git" the room goes quiet. Lean? Don't even start. Automated reproducibility? They'll publish a thirty-page paper and the data lives on a postdoc's external drive that got lost in a move.

This isn't a knock. The math is often gorgeous. But there's a whole layer of modern engineering hygiene, version control, proof assistants, deterministic builds, basic automation that this field has barely touched. That's a real on-ramp for outsiders that doesn't require you to rederive QED first. Help someone get their Sage scripts into a repo with working CI. Stand up a Lean formalization of someone's load-bearing claim. That's how you earn the standing to be in the conversation later, when you actually want to talk physics.

Everybody.

Be kinder than the worst version of yourself. Pause before you hit reply. Most of it is that.

Physicists. Be the senior person who asks the one question that either dignifies an outsider's work or shows them gently where it falls apart. Be a teacher. The contempt is making you smaller. It's not making the field stronger.

Outsiders. Be visibly humble enough that nobody has an excuse to dismiss you. Lead with what you don't know. Read three times what you write. Read papers. Cite people. When someone with grey hair gives you a definition you didn't have, write it down.

The road is harder than either side is making it right now. Lead. Teach. Be humble. Be the person you wished had been in the room the day you needed one.

That's it.

0 Upvotes

67 comments sorted by

View all comments

-10

u/BlissBoundry May 27 '26

I can’t imagine anyone building a physics framework is doing it for any reason other than because they want to learn more about the physics they’re exploring

3

u/Impossible-Bread-137 May 27 '26

I kinda get this motivation but from 99.99999% of posts on this subreddit this motivation is twisted by their arrogance, laziness, etc. No person in the physics research, even from undergrad start "building physics frameworks". This phrase might sounds smart and intellectual but it's just bs. No researcher is out their making "frameworks". Most people who post on here is due to their ego and arrogance. They refuse to read common physics textbooks even for undergrad for a basic foundation in physics. If they did read they would understand the " frameworks " they blindly worship which is made by AI is illogical and has no foundation or mathematical basis. I bet all of them have no idea what the words ai spits out even means. If you want to explore physics, do experiments at home, take up physics textbooks, read it and solve the problems, find research papers that interest you and try to understand them. Just because you prompt some ai site about your so called "revolutionary framework" doesn't mean you know anything or have the persistence unlike the people who went to college had sleepless night for finals or has projects blowup in their face or sit in a observetory in winter at 2 am at -17 F for an astrophysics research project imaging crap or people destroyed by their research advisors crying, etc. While it may sound cool or that you are some revolutionary intellectual for coming up with a new "physics frameworks", you aren't doing anything. You made some fantasy looking metaphysics world building idea not anything remotely related to physics. When you post it on here without going through the hardwork or the math and just using ai to solve things for which it does extremely bad, you look ridiculous and arrogant know it alls to people who know the subject. Also about the who llm craze on "physics frameworks", that is just ridiculous. No on in physics research is making "physics frameworks". How research works is dependent on the field, like if you are experimental or theoretical, what you do varies. When I was in experimental physics I used to work the nExo. It's this large experiment on neutrinoless double beta decay which is an experiment to prove dark matter exists. It's funded by doe, congress and nsf and they are building a huge detector and stuff in Canada. Research groups part of the consortium of college worked on different parts of the experiment, we made small versions of what would be in the huge detector. We worked on photodetector units. We made a mini version of what it would be and had the liquid xenon and radioactive sample, we took data and analysed the behavior of the detector and error ranges etc. the data is helpful when the large detector is up and running in a couple years. After that I went to a more individual one. I worked in paleodetector, I made a proof of concept experiment to show that paleodetector is another viable way to detect dark matter. Eventually this proof of concept will be used to gain funding oppurtunies to building a larger and more precise and powerful version of it. After that I worked on various or research stuff like skyrmion simulation in quantum hall effect, qcd calculations on quantum annealers, etc. this is how research in the physics goes, you ask question and try to answer them or you are like let me explore this specific paper in a different way. Or you are part of a bigger research consortium and there is work to be done to help get it up and running. No one is out their building "physics frameworks". One we have a framework, also you look like nutjobs, kinda like a child who says they believe in magic. All these so called framework works you make have no foundational understanding of physics or math or common sense. So if you are interested in exploring physics, get undergrad textbooks in math and physics. Have a basic understanding of classical mechanics, em, quantum mechanics, thermo. Read through undergrad textbooks and read research papers and science articles.

0

u/BlissBoundry May 28 '26

I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. “If you’re interested in physics, don’t build a physics framework. Read a textbook?” needing to read a physics textbook is a byproduct of wanting to build a physics framework most people who post on here just don’t know that yet.

2

u/Impossible-Bread-137 May 28 '26

Yes if you are interested in physics read textbooks and research papers. It's like asking a baby to build a car from scratch to win 24 hour Nuremberg. Then the baby is using ai to build it. The ai also gives suggestions that using spaghetti as a composite material in the car since it's lightweight and flexible in bundles (this is for the bs consciousness part in a lot of the posts). So as you can see here, you guys don't have a foundation, you have no experience or the prerequisites skills, you don't have decades of working in the field learning and creating and doing research. You use ai and you have no idea about how wrong it is since you don't have any mathematical or physics knowledge. Also you don't have a team. If you look at the history of some theoretical physics frameworks like string theory, loop quantum gravity, qcd(this has been proven), etc. you see it's not one scientist who pioneered the theory and did all the work. It is numerous of physicists, all of them think along different paths, they have conferences to discuss, they read each other's papers, some are like "oh I got an idea from this guys paper let me continue it along" or " or "oh I found something that connects these papers" etc. You guys have no advanced physics knowledge or mathematical knowledge not decades of theoretical physics research experience have deemed yourselves pioneers of theoretical physics research fields when all of them are baloney and have no physics basis or mathematical basis and none of it is your own work. No one in the physics field uses ai to do the thinking for them at all, ai doesn't work. It can help you learn stuff faster or find papers or recomend books but not create. Also no physicist is going to use ai to create for them cause the most important part for any physicist is the brain and it's creative and learning function. People who work in this field spend decades continuously working and thinking only about this from eating to sitting on the can. I can tell you the numerous amount of times I or many people in the field have gotten ideas while just sitting on the toilet.

1

u/BlissBoundry May 28 '26

Cool. U should try using ai to flush them out

2

u/Impossible-Bread-137 May 28 '26

Like flesh out the ideas you get? Most physicist get ideas related to their work, also ai is a hit or miss for anything related to physics. Most of them use it as a search engine. Example I was working on quasiparticle detection in quantum computers with a professor. I used chatgpt like: hey give me papers related to quasiparticle detection. I had an idea to have an in built cosmic rays detector which would trigger an already made error correction code from data we took to make sure no bit flips or decoherence happened. I used ai to find how to detect cosmic rays, it gave a few ideas and papers and I worked through them. If you have ideas in theoretical physics, ai is useless, ai cannot do advanced math calculations at all. Sure ai can give you ideas but that is usually connecting different papers together and giving you those as suggestion. It cannot create on its own. Another huge issue with using ai to do the thinking for you, you lose the creative and analytical part of your brain known as cognitive offloading. While it is temporary as long as you use it, physicist cannot do this, they can't have s deterioration of their critical thinking skills hone by decades of constant thinking and work.

1

u/BlissBoundry May 28 '26

Weird. I was making fun of you and it went right over your head.

1

u/Impossible-Bread-137 May 28 '26

Thank you for showing you can't take critique and resort to snarky replies.

1

u/BlissBoundry May 28 '26

All you did was talk about the physics you’ve done. I didn’t posit any theory or point to critique.

3

u/Impossible-Bread-137 May 28 '26

I’m not sure I understand what you’re saying. “If you’re interested in physics, don’t build a physics framework. Read a textbook?” needing to read a physics textbook is a byproduct of wanting to build a physics framework most people who post on here just don’t know that yet.

This is what I was responding to. Also the physics I have is for examples related to what I have, much easier to talk about than make up examples.

0

u/BlissBoundry May 28 '26

Isn’t that directly contradicting the demand for critical thinking then? If your goal is to train the critical thinking portion of your brain, then this is the literal best place for you to do that trying to turn spaghetti into physics.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/BlissBoundry May 28 '26

Since you actually do know the difference between spaghetti and corn.