# Who is most respected in particle physics?

1. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

Dear Marcus,

You know everybody in the particle and QG fields and their reputations.

Could you name several names of senior, experienced theoretical particle physicists who are highly respected, please?

Responses of other PF members are also welcome.

Regards,

Last edited: Nov 3, 2009
2. Nov 3, 2009

### hamster143

Witten, Weinberg, Georgi.

3. Nov 3, 2009

Isaac Newton

4. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

I did not mention it but I need the names of alive physicists. I would like to contact some of them to ask for recommendation letters.

5. Nov 3, 2009

### fatra2

Hi there,

You want to have recommendation letter from someone you never met???

Good luck!!!

6. Nov 3, 2009

### MTd2

I guess you should not look for the best, but the best person, in a given context, that thinks and agrees with you.

7. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

Yes, I do. I have a positive experience in the past. It works sometimes.
No, I need the most respectable ones. You know why? Because their word is decisive in the selection process.

8. Nov 3, 2009

### MTd2

But they are immensely more likely to give a damn about you.

9. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

I will pick up (leave) those who will be favourable about my project.

10. Nov 3, 2009

### MTd2

The most open minded among the top is t'Hooft. But it seems to me that the best is really something contextual.

11. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

Thank you, MTd2, I keep him in mind too.

12. Nov 3, 2009

### MTd2

So, are you looking for what kind of place?

13. Nov 3, 2009

### humanino

Why care about recommendation letter ? If I had a theory to replace the renormalization process, I'd better spend half an hour to talk with them rather than get a recommendation letter. If any of them agree with you, you do not need a recommendation letter.

14. Nov 3, 2009

### MTd2

Maybe he doesn't have money to pay for a travel. Who knows?

So, it is renormalization, right? I guess Weinberg is the best one on these matters, he's been hard thinking on these matters for 35 years. But Percacci is a nice guy to ask things though, since he pursuit Weiberg's asymptotic safety for 25 years, even though Weinberg himself gave up.

Maybe Percacci would be more likely to have a more positive view. Look also for his collaborators and think about Smolin. He is a very nice guy.

15. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

I work presently in France and the position opening is in the USA. It is a research position with one's own research program. Just what I need. I my life I solved a lot of problems for others (to make living) and could not spend enough time on my own subject.

Yes, it is about formulation of, say, QED, in a different way - without self-action and thus without renormalizations. It is a promising direction for all QFTs.

I need three RLs because it is an open competition and I have to respect its rules.

Last edited: Nov 3, 2009
16. Nov 3, 2009

### MTd2

You should go to a conference on new approaches to renormalization and expose your ideas. Garrett Lisi got grants by doing something similar.

17. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

Thanks for names and advice. I am rather busy at work, not that free to go where I like and do what I like, unfortunately. I've got to break free in order to get donw to my project entirely.

Last edited: Nov 3, 2009
18. Nov 3, 2009

### marcus

My nomination (adding to people already mentioned by others) would be Lance Dixon at SLAC-Stanford.

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/slac/faculty/hepfaculty/dixon.html [Broken]

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~lance/

I have several reservations about adding this name to your list. One is that I'm the wrong person to ask, since not being an insider myself, I can't claim to know who is highly respected in particle physics.
Another problem is that, although we can tell you names of "senior, experienced theoretical particle physicists who are highly respected", these will not necessarily be suitable people for you to write to for the purpose you have in mind!

You say you are trying for a position in the USA. I think maybe you should get a rec from at least one mainstream USA particle theorist. Also senior is good, but not too senior. A very old famous guy may have already in his life received too many dubious-appeal letters or have already helped too many near-desperate struggling colleagues. So very old might work but is risky.

So I say Lance for 3 reasons.
Lance is absolutely mainstream
Lance is USA
Lance is still fairly young (although already known and respected.)

Michael Peskin, also at SLAC-Stanford, is of course well-known too, and of about the right generation. I have the impression that he has an odd (maybe even congenial to you) sense of humor.
Here is his homepage:
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~mpeskin/
It has this beautiful quote from a Classical Chinese story:
Whereever you go', said the Patriarch, I'm convinced you'll come to no good. So remember, when you get into trouble, I absolutely forbid you to say that you are my disciple. If you give a hint of any such thing I shall flay you alive, break all your bones, and banish your soul to the Place of Ninefold Darkness, where it will remain for ten thousand aeons.' I certainly won't venture to say a word about you,' promised Monkey. I'll say I found it all out for myself.'
--from A Journey to the West, by Cheng-En Wu, tr. by Arthur Waley

Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
19. Nov 3, 2009

### Bob_for_short

Thanks, Marcus.

I have already been explained how the selection process is carried out. Nobody cares what the research program one presents - because there is no sufficiently competent people amongst those who make decision. The only things they take into account are RLs. They rely upon them. It is not wise to present RLs from unknown people. It makes my task much harder.

Last edited: Nov 4, 2009
20. Nov 3, 2009

### MTd2

You have to make it with the few competent people amongst those who make decision then.