physics

It has nothing to do with physics; physics was just the kindling this time.

I think you didn't quite mean to say this, the real numbers being uncountable yet forming the basis for classical physics.

Imagine that you have a lava object with a trigger collider (that means that it doesn't influence the physics) and a Lava custom component (MonoBehaviour) on it.

This completely changes all the physics assumptions, and is a good reminder to keep an open mind.

Ever flying over terrain or water at small heights the physics are completely different than general flight (ground effect).

Things like physics modeling and input control are useful in far more than just entertainment products.

Games that do their physics on the CPU still struggle to saturate it even with SSE.

I have a phd and I know I don't have the expertise to judge the physics involved.

I think too, here, of how the average age of a Nobel Prize in Physics winner is increasing at a superlinear rate.

All these physics-debunking conversations seem to assume a single source.

I think he did: you don't need real numbers to formulate classical physics.

The putative applications of Banach-Tarski to physics are ridiculous.

But if there is a response to his discussion of physics, it should be around physics, not the fact that he is a "doubter".

Einstein is the exception, not the rule." Even Einstein probably spent a lot of time talking face to face with his colleagues and presenting his ideas at Physics conferences.

"The thinking" -- or as I prefer to call it, "the physics" -- is that you create value over time.

No lessons will be learned, nobody will understand physics more because the things they (re)learned about basic science will be lost behind the veil of "stealth mode" and all of society will be a bit poorer in the end.