The Dawn of the Post-Naturalness Era

Gian Francesco Giudice is a theoretical physicist at CERN (where my brother Andrew did research); the research activity of Giudice mainly deals with the formulation of new theories that extend our present knowledge of the particle world toward even smaller distances. He is also studying how these theories can be applied to cosmology in order to describe the early stages of the history of our universe. His most notable results are in the areas of supersymmetry, extra dimensions, electroweak physics, collider physics, dark matter, and leptogenesis. Giudice is clear in the Dawn of the Post-Naturalness Era (In an imaginary conversation with Guido Altarelli), he still holds that “naturalness is a well-defined concept.” Dr Sabine Hossenfelder believes this is wrong, or rather if you make naturalness well-defined, it becomes meaningless. Dr Sabine Hossenfelder's argument goes as follows. Naturalness in quantum field theories – ie, theories of the type of the standard model of particle physics – means that a theory at low energies does not sensitively depend on the choice of parameters at high energies. People say this means that “the high-energy physics decouples.” However that changing the parameters of a theory is not a physical process - the parameters are whatever they are. The processes that are physically possible at high energies decouple whenever effective field theories work, pretty much by definition of what it means to have an effective theory. However this is not the decoupling that naturalness relies on. To quantify naturalness you move around between theories in an abstract theory space. This is very similar to moving around in the landscape of the multiverse. Indeed, it is probably not a coincidence that both ideas became popular around the same time, in the mid 1990s. So if you want to quantify how sensitively a theory at low energy depends on the choice of parameters at high energies, you first have to define the probability for making such choices. This means you need a probability distribution on theory space. It’s the exact same problem you also have for inflation and in the multiverse. Most papers on naturalness, have the probability distribution left unspecified which implicitly means one chooses a uniform distribution over an interval of about length 1. The typical justification for this is that once you factor out all dimensionful parameters, you should only have numbers of order 1 left. It is with this assumption that naturalness becomes meaningless because you have now simply postulated that numbers of order 1 are better than other numbers. You can read Gian's paper here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.07663.pdf

Thank You

Safe.. for now

Waddeton Park has withdrawn the planning application for a 165 housing development between Shepherds Lane and the Coombe Valley. The proposed scheme was to build new houses on the countryside on the outskirts of West Teignmouth. Unfortunately the building of 250 houses across the valley between Higher Exeter Road and Coombe Valley, has been given planning permission despite concerns about traffic and wildlife.

Save Teignmouth Hospital MIU

Teignmouth residents concerned and angry packed the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) meeting on the future of Teignmouth Hospital in the Alice Cross Centre, with many people turned away because the venue was full. At the second Teignmouth Consultation the Methodist Church Hall was packed and dozens of people were again turned away because there was no more room. People are rightly angry because the CCG consultation offers ‘Hobson’s Choice’ two options both of which mean the closure of Teignmouth MIU and the down grading of our hospital. This isn’t government diktat, the CCG has choices. The CCG’s proposals are predicated on the assumption that all Teignmouth, Shaldon and Bishopsteignton residents will go to Dawlish rather than Newton Abbot or even the overstretched Accident and Emergency department at Torbay Hospital. Greater pressure on the A&E will cost the NHS as a whole more. Residents have shared with me moving accounts of how their nearest and dearest have had the care and treatment they need close to family and friends at Teignmouth Hospital. Teignmouth Hospital is the first hospital build under Beveridge’s NHS. People derided Beveridge’s plans for a National Health Service, but in the end united behind what has become one Britain’s most cherished institutions. Teignmouth must be united in defense of our hospital services, a community that through its League of Friends can raise a million pounds in a decade should be given the opportunity to come up with a solution for Teignmouth Hospital. I would call on the CCG to work with the community to secure a sustainable future for Teignmouth, not simply confront us with a fait accompli - closure of the MIU and loss of acute beds. Please sign the petition: http://signme.org.uk/1034

Council Tax ‘Scrooge’ Letters

I strongly suggest residents receiving one of these ‘Scrooge’ letters contact Teignbridge and request a copy of the credit reference agency data that leads them to suppose you may no longer be entitled to the discount, because it could be someone is using your address for nefarious purposes. I think in the circumstances it would not be unreasonable to request a reply within 14 days.

Is the Council using Big Brother Tactics?

The Council is sending out a very curt letter to people who receive the 25% Single Person Discount on their council tax, to say that checks suggested other adults were living with them. The letter says: "We are working with an external agency to carry out a residency check on all properties receiving a single person discount and results indicate that you may no longer be the only adult at your address". Recipients are given 14 days to declare whether they are the sole adult in the house to avoid automatically losing their council tax discount, backdated to 1st April. The letter is ominously signed by the council Fraud Manager This letter was sent out in December, some people are away for Christmas, other will mistake the letter as junk mail. I know many people who live on their own received the letter and were upset by its tone. One resident told me "The Council is basically accusing people of lying without being able to explain what evidence they have". I'm concerned A lot of people living on their own will be confused and frightened by this letter. What is the Council doing running checks on its own residents via credit reference agencies, the tone and timing of this letter raise serious questions. I could see many people loosing a discount they are fully entitled to. I will be asking for an apology.

Save Teignmouth Minor Injuries Unit

You can sign the petition here: http://signme.org.uk/1034 Did The Teignbridge Conservative leader know in September of the proposal to close Teignmouth MIU and say nothing.