That Wormhole Garbage

I’m glad I was too busy today to respond earlier to a junk science story that has been doing the rounds, in the Guardian, in Quanta and even in Physics World to name but a few. Had I had time to write something as soon as I’d seen these pieces of tripe I would probably have responded with more expletives than would be seemly even for this blog. This sort of crap makes me rather angry, you see.

Meaningless Illustration

The story is basically that a group of scientists have created a “wormhole in space-time” that enables quantum teleportation.

Of course they have done no such thing. The paper, like so many stories hyped beyond the bounds of reason, is published in Nature. There are some interesting things in this publication, but nothing to justify the absurd claims that have propagated into the media. The authors must take some of the blame for allowing such tosh to be spread about in their names. I don’t think it will do them any good in the long run.

At least I hope it doesn’t.

You can read it for yourself and make your own , but my take is the following:

  • Did the authors create a wormhole (even a baby one) in a laboratory? Definitely not.
  • Did they discover anything whatsoever to do with quantum gravity? No way.
  • Did they even simulate a wormhole in a lab? Not even close.
  • Did they even make progress towards simulating a wormhole in a lab? Still no.

Apart from all that it’s fine.

The author of the Quanta article, Natalie Wolchover, writes:

Researchers were able to send a signal through the open wormhole, though it’s not clear in what sense the wormhole can be said to exist.

Au contraire, it’s absolutely clear that no wormhole can be said to exist in any sense whatsoever.

I hope this clarifies the situation.

UPDATE: I see that Peter Woit has gone to town on this on his blog here.


6 Responses to “That Wormhole Garbage”

  1. […] More coverage of this here, here and here. Quanta and Wolchover are, quite appropriately, blaming the “some of the […]

  2. What does it matter that it is garbage … as long as it gets a fan club write-up by certain `science’ journalists who have little idea what they are talking about! To them this is mainly about gossip and celebrities – no different than show business.

  3. Couldn’t agree more. Speaking of more interesting garbage – or perhaps not? – what did you make of the first cosmology paper from JWST? Surely a very strange result, or have I misunderstood?

  4. Anton Garrett Says:

    There is more going on in Nature than goes on in nature.

  5. […] a Laboratory,» Of Particular Significance, 01 Dec 2022;  Peter Coles, «That Wormhole Garbage,» In the Dark, 02 Dec 2022; Chad Orzel, «Wormhole to 2006. Imagine a blog stomping on a human face, forever…» Counting […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: