This page shows my blog. For information about me use the menus above or:

  • View my list of publications
  • View my CV or download a pdf version
  • Download my Ph.D. thesis (pdf)

加速器免费版ios

I have 电脑下载ssr collecting links to places where you can volunteer to help with COVID 19 pandemic research.

Like many arrogant physicists, the temptation to become an armchair epidemiologists at the moment is sometimes overwhelming. I want to use my technical skills to help with research, but I recognize that it would be better to work with experts and contribute to projects already going on than to start my own thing. I started the wiki to organize the different ways of doing this. I am also including other ways to help with research, such as volunteering for clinical trials and donating money or equipment.

I hope you will distribute this link widely and help keep the wiki up to date.

加速器免费版ios

CALL FOR PAPERS

16th International Conference on
Quantum Physics and Logic
(QPL 2024)

June 10-14, 2024
Chapman University, Orange,
California, USA

http://qpl2024.org

* * *

The 16th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic
(QPL 2024) will take place at Chapman University June 10-14, 2024.

The conference brings together researchers working on mathematical
foundations of quantum physics, quantum computing, and related areas,
with a focus on structural perspectives and the use of logical tools,
ordered algebraic and category-theoretic structures, formal languages,
semantical methods, and other computer science techniques applied to
the study of physical behaviour in general. Work that applies
structures and methods inspired by quantum theory to other fields
(including computer science) is also welcome.

IMPORTANT DATES

April 1: abstract submission
April 7: paper submission
April 30: application for student support
May 12: notification of authors
May 17: early registration deadline
May 24: final papers ready
June 10-14: conference

电脑版ssr如何使用

John Baez (UC Riverside)
Anna Pappa (University College London)
Joel Wallman (University of Waterloo)

INVITED TUTORIALS

Ana Belen Sainz (Perimeter Institute)
Quanlong Wang (University of Oxford)

SUBMISSIONS

Prospective speakers are invited to submit one (or more) of the
following:

– Original contributions consist of a 5-12 page extended abstract
that provides sufficient evidence of results of genuine interest
and enough detail to allow the program committee to assess the
merits of the work. Submission of substantial albeit partial
results of work in progress is encouraged.

– Extended abstracts describing work submitted/published elsewhere
will also be considered, provided the work is recent and relevant
to the conference. These consist of a 3 page description and should
include a link to a separate published paper or preprint.

The conference proceedings will be published in Electronic
Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science (EPTCS) after the
conference. Only “original contributions” are eligible to be
published in the proceedings.

Submissions should be prepared using LaTeX, and must be submitted in
PDF format. Use of the EPTCS style is encouraged. Submission is done
via EasyChair:

http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=qpl2024

There will be an award for the best student paper at the discretion
of the programme committee. Papers eligible for the award are those
where all the authors are students at the time of submission.

PROGRAM COMMITTEE

Bob Coecke (co-chair, University of Oxford)
Matthew Leifer (co-chair, Chapman University)
Miriam Backens (University of Oxford)
Giulio Chiribella (University of Oxford)
Stefano Gogioso (University of Oxford)
John Harding (New Mexico State University)
Chris Heunen (The University of Edinburgh)
Matthew Hoban (University of Oxford)
Dominic Horsman (University of Durham)
Kohei Kishida (Dalhousie University)
Aleks Kissinger (Radboud University)
Joachim Kock (UAB)
Ravi Kunjwal (Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics)
Martha Lewis (University of Amsterdam)
Dan Marsden (University of Oxford)
David Moore (Pictet Asset Management)
Michael Moortgat (Utrecht University)
Daniel Oi (University of Strathclyde)
Ognyan Oreshkov (Université Libre de Bruxelles)
Anna Pappa (University College London)
Dusko Pavlovic (University of Hawaii)
Simon Perdrix (CNRS, Laboratoire d’Informatique de Grenoble, University of Grenoble)
Neil Ross (Dalhousie University)
Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh (Queen Mary University of London)
Ana Belén Sainz (Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics)
Peter Selinger (Dalhousie University)
Sonja Smets (University of Amsterdam)
Pawel Sobocinski (University of Southampton)
Robert Spekkens (Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics)
Isar Stubbe (Université du Littoral)
Benoît Valiron (LRI – CentraleSupelec, Univ. Paris Saclay)
Jamie Vicary (University of Oxford)
Alexander Wilce (Susquehanna University)
Mingsheng Ying (University of Technology, Sydney)
Margherita Zorzi (University of Verona)
Magdalena Anna Zych (The University of Queensland)

STEERING COMMITTEE

Bob Coecke (University of Oxford)
Prakash Panangaden (McGill University)
Peter Selinger (Dalhousie University)

LOCAL ORGANIZERS

Lorenzo Catani (Chapman University)
Justin Dressel (Chapman University)
Matthew Leifer (Chapman University)
Drew Moshier (Chapman University)

电脑上怎么使用SSR(演示Windows,Mac同理)-创意视频 ...:2021-1-11 · 电脑上怎么使用SSR(演示Windows,Mac同理) 是在优酷播出的创意视频高清视频,于2021-01-05 23:15:15上线。视频内容简介:电脑上怎么使用SSR(演示Windows,Mac同理)

加速器免费版ios

The 16th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic (QPL 2024)

June 10-14 2024

Chapman University, Orange, California

电脑版ssr如何使用

The 16th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic (QPL 2024) will take place at Chapman University June 10-14, 2024. The conference brings together researchers working on mathematical foundations of quantum physics, quantum computing, and related areas, with a focus on structural perspectives and the use of logical tools, ordered algebraic and category-theoretic structures, formal languages, semantical methods, and other computer science techniques applied to the study of physical behaviour in general. Work that applies structures and methods inspired by quantum theory to other fields (including computer science) is also welcome.

A call for papers and registration details will follow in a few weeks and will also be posted on the conference website at 电脑ssr软件

STEERING COMMITTEE

  • 从此世界没有“墙” ytb、ins、fb轻松上!ssr电脑版客户端下载 ...:2021-9-29 · ssr电脑版客户端下载及配置教程。设置好后,点击添加按钮即可。其中系统伕理模式中的全局模式是指所有的请求都走伕理(国内众及国外的),而PAC模式则是自动识别,国内的直连,国外的(例如Google,YouTube)走伕理。如果你不希望走全局 ...
  • Prakash Panangaden (McGill University)
  • Peter Selinger (Dalhousie University)

LOCAL ORGANIZERS

  • Matthew Leifer (Chapman University)
  • Shadowsocks影梭各平台(win、mac、Android)客户端下载和 ...:2021-4-17 · 有些伙伴科学上网用的是Shadowsocks影梭客户端,然后跟林云反馈说Shadowsocks影梭客户端不太会用。其实在使用上与ssr客户端差不多,今天为了方便大家使用,林云出一个ss客户端各平台的下载地址和使用教程。只需要按照步骤来,配置正常就 ...
  • Justin Dressel (Chapman University)
  • Drew Moshier (Chapman University)

For further information, please contact qpl2024@easychair.org.

加速器免费版ios

Chapman is hiring an Instructional Assistant Professor of Physics. Although non Tenure Track, this is a full faculty position with the possibility of promotion to Associate and Full professor.  Please encourage all qualified candidates interested in a teaching career in physics to apply.  We are particularly interested in people who can help develop our lab curriculum and teach physics to life sciences majors.  See the job advert here.

加速器免费版ios

ssr怎么用电脑给手机开热点,求教:2021-5-31 · 3、下载完成后在弹出的安装程序中点击立即安装软件,将软件安装到电脑上。 4、安装完成后免费WiFi自动启动,注意观看一下右下角信息框中的WiFi名称和密码。 5、打开手机端WIFI自动搜索WIFI找到电脑屏幕上显示的WiFi名称并且点击该WiFi。

Please visit our website to register, make hotel reservations, and find instructions for submitting a poster abstract: http://www.chapman.edu/research/institutes-and-centers/quantum-studies/aav.aspx

Also, note that the March Meeting of the American Physical Society takes place the following week (March 5-9) in Los Angeles, CA, which is near Chapman University, providing you with a triple reason to come visit with us in sunny Southern California.

Further details about the aims of the conference follow below.

The concept of a weak value, first formulated by Aharonov, Albert and Vaidman in their 1988 PRL paper “How the result of a measurement of a component of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100” (PRL 60:1351, 1988) has attracted widespread attention, which has only increased in recent years. It has given rise to a lot of interesting thought experiments, many of which are now being implemented in the lab. The mathematical formalism of weak values has also given rise to the related concept of superoscillations, which have been of great interest to mathematical physicists.

In recent years anomalous weak values have been shown to be related to quantum contextuality, and have attracted increasing attention for their possible application to quantum metrology, known as “weak value amplification”.

This symposium will survey the development of weak values, and explore the current debates about their foundational significance and practical applications.

Conference Organizing Committee:

Jeff Tollaksen
Matthew Leifer
Justin Dressel
Cristian Bourgeois

加速器免费版ios

General Information

The Institute for Quantum Studies within Schmid College of Science and Technology at Chapman University invites applications for a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the Foundations of Quantum Theory, beginning August 2018.

Chapman University, located in the heart of Orange County, California, is ranked in the top tier of western universities by U.S. News and World Report, and has gained national recognition for its commitment to excellence through innovative research and teaching. Schmid College of Science and Technology embodies Chapman’s commitment to interdisciplinarity, fostering an outstanding community of teacher-scholars across a broad range of undergraduate and graduate programs. More information on the College and its future 140,000 square foot home, the Keck Center for Science and Engineering, can be found here: www.chapman.edu/science.

电脑版ssr如何使用

Postdoctoral Fellow must hold a Ph.D. or an equivalent of a doctoral degree by the beginning of employment at Chapman University. The doctorate or equivalent must have been awarded within the last five years and candidate has not exceeded five years of prior postdoctoral experience.

A publication record showing a strong promise for future independent research is highly desirable.

Responsibilities

The postdoc will work in the group of Dr. Matthew Leifer on the project “Fine Tunings and the Nature of Quantum Reality”.

A “fine tuning” refers to a property of the operational predictions of quantum theory that cannot hold at the level of reality. Fine tunings are exposed by the various no-go theorems for realist accounts of quantum theory, such as Bell’s theorem, the Kochen-Specker theorem, and recent results on the reality of the quantum state. The project encompasses: rigorously defining the notion of a fine tuning, characterizing and quantifying fine-tunings in a resource theoretic framework, exploiting fine tunings for information processing advantages, developing ontological frameworks for quantum theory that are free of fine tunings, and explaining fine tunings as emergent.

首先Windows系统下的ssr链接-百度经验:2021-8-24 · 首先Windows系统下的ssr链接,电脑r怎么用?下面小编为你介绍下具体的操作方法。在复制了“ssr://”链接并安装成功后,打开 ...

The postdoc is expected to publish their findings in academic journals and present their work at academic conferences and workshops. The postdoc is also expected to contribute to the research culture of the institute and university. Examples of ways of doing this include: giving seminars, helping to organize conferences and workshops, helping to organize seminars and talks, and discussing research with undergraduate and graduate students who are working on research projects.

Contact Information

Applicants should send electronic copies of their CV, research statement, list of publications, and three references to Dr. Matthew Leifer at leifer@chapman.edu.

Applications should be received before December 7, 2017 in order to receive full consideration, but the position will remain open until filled.

Fellows are offered a competitive salary, benefits, research support, and personalized professional development in research.
Chapman University is an equal opportunity employer committed to fostering a diverse and inclusive academic global community. The University is dedicated to enhancing diversity and inclusion in all aspects of recruitment and employment. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, ancestry, citizenship status, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, military and veteran status, marital status, pregnancy, genetic information or any other characteristic protected by state or federal law. The University is committed to achieving a diverse faculty and staff and encourages members of underrepresented groups to apply.

Chapman University, One University Drive, Orange, CA 92866 Human Resources Department

加速器免费版ios

The March Meeting of the American Physical Society is taking place March 5-9 2017 in Los Angeles. There will be sessions on Quantum Foundations, Quantum Resource Theories, and Quantum Thermodynamics. You can submit an abstract for a contributed talk at http://www.aps.org/meetings/march/. The deadline is November 3 at 11:59pm EST.

The APS March Meeting is a great opportunity to advertise recent work in quantum foundations to the wider physics community. I hope you will consider contributing a talk so that we can showcase our research in the strongest possible way.

加速器免费版ios

The Schmid College of Science and Technology at Chapman University is advertising teaching/research postdoctoral fellowships (see the advert below). The teaching portion is in our new Grand Challenges Initiative. The research component can be in any group within Schmid College, which includes the Institute for Quantum Studies (http://www.chapman.edu/research-and-institutions/quantum-studies/). The institute is led by Yakir Aharonov and Jeff Tollaksen, and includes faculty members Matt Leifer and Justin Dressel. Applicants interested in working in the Institute for Quantum Studies should contact one of us to discuss your research plan before applying, since you will have to select a faculty mentor within the institute. You may contact me in the first instance to register your interest.

Schmid College Teaching and Research Fellows

The Schmid College of Science and Technology at Chapman University invites applications for its new postdoctoral teaching and research fellows program. Appointments will begin in summer 2017 for two years with a third year extension possible. Schmid College Fellows are outstanding early-career scientists who provide innovative teaching and mentorship to undergraduate students in our Grand Challenges Initiative (http://www.chapman.edu/GCI), as well as advance independent research in collaboration with a member of the faculty. Fellows are offered a competitive salary, benefits, research support, and personalized professional development in teaching and research.

Chapman University, located in the heart of Orange County, California, is ranked in the top tier of western universities by U.S. News and World Report, and has gained national recognition for its commitment to excellence through innovative research and teaching. Schmid College of Science and Technology embodies Chapman’s commitment to interdisciplinarity, fostering an outstanding community of teacher-scholars across a broad range of undergraduate and graduate programs. More information on the College and its future 140,000 square foot home, the Center for Science and Technology, can be found here:
http://www.chapman.edu/scst/index.aspx.

Schmid College Fellows will be responsible for teaching foundational coursework on scientific problem solving and critical thinking in the Grand Challenges Initiative. Fellows will then serve as mentors for student teams immersed in the process of solving problems of global importance. Interested candidates are strongly encouraged to contact prospective mentors to discuss shared research interests and to learn more about the Grand Challenges Initiative.

Candidates should submit the following electronically via http://academicjobsonline.org/ajo/jobs/8460

• cover letter
• curriculum vitae
• teaching philosophy statement
• research statement
• names and contact information for three references

In the cover letter, the applicant should discuss their personal motivations and goals as they pertain to serving as a teacher and mentor in the Grand Challenges Initiative. The applicant should also identify their prospective faculty collaborator/mentor and briefly outline the proposed research collaboration.

Postdoctoral Fellows must hold a Ph.D. or an equivalent of a doctoral degree by the beginning of employment at Chapman University. The doctorate or equivalent must have been awarded within the last five years and candidate has not exceeded five years of prior postdoctoral experience. Schmid College will provide visa and immigration-related support for postdoctoral fellows. Citizenship is not a selection criterion.

File review will commence on January 2, 2017 and will continue until all positions are filled.

Chapman University is an Equal Opportunity Employer committed to fostering a diverse and inclusive academic global community. The university is dedicated to enhancing diversity and inclusion in all aspects of recruitment and employment. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, ancestry, citizenship status, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, military and veteran status, marital status, pregnancy, genetic information or any other characteristic protected by state or federal law. The university is committed to achieving a diverse faculty and staff and encourages members of underrepresented
groups to apply. More information on diversity and inclusion at Chapman can be found at http://www.chapman.edu/diversity/. Questions can be addressed to: SchmidGCI@chapman.edu

加速器免费版ios

Here are the details of the next Q+ Hangout.

Speaker: Lorenzo Maccone (Universita’ di Pavia)
Date/time: Tuesday 9th June 2015, 2pm BST
Title: Quantum Time

Abstract:
We give a consistent quantum description of time, based on Page and Wootters’ conditional probabilities mechanism, that overcomes the criticisms that were raised against similar previous proposals. In particular we show how the model allows to reproduce the correct statistics of sequential measurements performed on a system at different times.

This is joint work with Vittorio Giovannetti and Seth Lloyd and
is based on arXiv:1504.04215.

To watch the talk live, visit the event page at the appointed hour.

To keep up to date on the latest news about Q+ hangouts you can follow us on:

  • Google+: ssr 下载
  • Twitter: @qplushangouts
  • Facebook: http://facebook.com/qplushangouts

or visit our website at http://qplus.burgarth.de

加速器免费版ios

On Saturday 25th April, I took part in a discussion panel sponsored by FQXi at the 怎样在电脑上下载手游阴阳师:2021-6-15 · 怎样在电脑上下载 手游阴阳师相关资料 阴阳师手游新手快速升级攻略 阴阳师手游新手快速升级攻略,在游戏中很多玩家发现别人都已经20多级了,自己才5、6级,那么要怎么升级快呢?下面就跟随游民小编一起来了解一下吧。阴阳师手游新手快速 ... conference in Washington DC.  My co-panellists were Sabine Hossenfelder and Dagomir Kaszlikowski.  Sabine has already posted her comments on her blog, and I largely agree with what she had to say.  However, since I wrote out my comments before the discussion, I might as well post them here, as it is just a cut-and-paste job for me.

The discussion was very interesting, and it evoked more passion from the audience than I thought it would.  Given the limited time, I did not give the best responses to all of the comments from the audience, so I have added a few thoughts on the discussion, particularly the points raised by Mile Gu and David Wallace.

Without further ado, here is my intro.

How do we convey foundational physics concepts to non-physics audiences?  It is obviously hard to do so in a way that is both accurate and accessible.  As this conference shows, it is difficult to do so even amongst ourselves.  However, this is not the main problem we should worry about.  To explain why, requires a diversion on the broader aims of outreach.

I think outreach has three main goals: INSPIRATION, EDUCATION, and ACTIVATION.

Inspiration is making physics seem cool and interesting, so that, for example, a high school student might decide to study physics at university.

Education is the obvious, we want people to understand more physics after the outreach than they did before.

Activation is perhaps less obvious, but it means that we want people to actually DO something after the outreach.  This might be voting for a politician who supports evidence based policy and science funding, or it might mean persuading people not to employ the services of a new age “quantum healer” who claims to resolve health issues holistically using quantum entanglement.

To my knowledge, there is very little research into the effectiveness of outreach for these various goals.  That’s worrying because it feels good to win an FQXi essay (as well as being good for the bank account), to get immediate feedback on a blog post, to give a public lecture to a large audience, and, despite the fact that I have no personal experience of this, I imagine it feels good to have a bestselling popular science book or appear on TV in flashy a documentary.  In absence of hard data on how best to spend our limited time and resources, we will continue to do the things that feel good, regardless of whether they are the most effective.

Nonetheless, I think it is fair to say that the likes of Neil de Grasse Tyson and Brian Cox are doing a pretty good job on the inspiration front, so the rest of us should not devote too much time towards that.  Regarding education, there is now voluminous evidence from Phs Ed research on what are the best methods of teaching physics to high school students and lower level undergraduates.  This research is still ignored by the vast majority of institutions, and given that we know that these methods work, I think we would be better off putting our efforts into implementing research validataed cirricula in schools and universities rather than trying to do it with outreach, the effectiveness of which is largely unknown.  Incidentally, one of the things we do know about good physics pedagogy is that it is largely uncorrelated from the personality of the instructor, which leads me to be suspicious of the personality-driven nature of much scientific outreach.

That leaves activation, and I think we could be doing a much better job here.  Not everyone is going to take action in the name of science, but that does not matter, so long as those who do it do so loudly.  We are past the age of mass media, so we need no longer always cater only to the GENERAL public, instead going for smaller niche audiences who are currently underserved.  In particular, I am thinking of the science fanboys and girls, such as the community of skeptics who like to debunk pseudo-science.  They may be a relatively small community, but they are also the ones most likely to act in the name of science.  Most of them can give you a coherent acount of evolution and why it is true, but ask them about quantum theory and you’ll likely get some vague mumblings about waves, particles and the uncertainty principle.  They’d like to understand things more deeply, but we haven’t given them the tools to do so.  I think this is because we have been far too focussed on making our popular accounts accessible to everyone, e.g. publishers always advise against
including any equations in pop physics books.  This advice is appropriate for the mass audience, but not if we are targeting niche audiences, who are probably bored of hearing the same vague and inaccurate descriptions in fifty different popsci books.

So, turning back to the question of how we should convey foundationsal physics concepts to non-physics audiences, it is almost impossible to do so accurately for the mass audience, and it is probably best to go for inspiration in that case.  However, we can, and should, target more accurate explanations, with more math and more subtle details, to those smaller communities who are already passionate about physics, and who are more likely to act on the knowledge when they have it.

Following these remarks, there are two points from the discussion that I want to address.  Firstly, Mile Gu raised the point that we want to direct outreach to the broadest audience possible, as we need popular support to change government policies on science funding, or at least to keep it at a reasonable level.  To this, I responded that only a tiny minority of people are going to change their vote based on science policy, compared to the big issues like the economy, education, and healthcare, so we are better off focussing on that minority.  I know think that this is wrong.  If there is a general consensus within society then this can influence the policy of all major political parties, regardless of whether it is a vote-changing issue.  An example of this is the issue of gay marriage.  Very few people in the UK would have changed their vote based on this issue alone, but because there was a general feeling in the population that allowing people to marry whoever they choose is a good thing, there was a political consensus that pushed the issue forward.  Similarly, if there were known to be a general consensus in the population that science funding for basic research without ties to immediate applications is a good idea, then there would be political consensus on that too.  For this, I think we need to go beyond inspiring the general public into thinking that science is cool, by also emphasizing that the process of science and technology development as a whole does not work without the freedom to think freely, without knowing in advance what, if any, applications there may be.  We also need to emphasize that science is not just a machine for generating economic growth, but also a key part of human culture, comparable to the arts and humanities, all of which we should fund for their own sake because they enrich the human experience.

Secondly, David Wallace cautioned against my advice to verify the effectiveness of outreach via empirical research, suggesting that to emphasize research too much might make us too bogged down to actually do much outreach.  Instead, he suggested a “let a thousand flowers bloom” approach.  Let people go ahead and do the outreach they want to do, and presumably there will be enough different approaches that we’ll eventually have the desired effect.

怎样在电脑上下载手游阴阳师:2021-6-15 · 怎样在电脑上下载 手游阴阳师相关资料 阴阳师手游新手快速升级攻略 阴阳师手游新手快速升级攻略,在游戏中很多玩家发现别人都已经20多级了,自己才5、6级,那么要怎么升级快呢?下面就跟随游民小编一起来了解一下吧。阴阳师手游新手快速 ...

There is a compelling analogy here with physics education.  Professors have been left to their own devices to teach in whatever way they want for decades, and they almost universally choose methods that are pedagogically sub optimal, such as just lecturing from the front for an hour.  These methods can actually harm people’s perception of physics, reinforcing the idea that the subject is too hard for them.  Personally, I think it would be better if all the future medical doctors undergoing their required physics courses came out with a positive impression of the subject, and a good understanding of it, rather than regarding it as an alien subject that is irrelevant for their careers.  It is only through rigorous research that we have developed better pedagogy that is gradually being accepted in physics departments, although we still have a long way to go.

My position on outreach is that, although we shouldn’t encumber every attempt at outreach with a rigorous research investigation, if we think there are widely employed methodologies that are actually harmful to the aims of outreach then we should verify this empirically, try to figure out what works better, and encourage change.

If there are harmful aspects in current outreach, I suspect they are mostly in things like TV documentaries and popular science books, which are driven by popularity and sales.  A literary agent giving advice on how to write a popular science book is not giving advice on how to best convey the science, but rather on how to best sell it to a publisher, who is in turn concerned with how many people will buy the book.  So the usual advice to avoid any equations and to emphasize personal stories over the science, might not be good advice for communicating the science, even if they increase popularity and sales.

I think the focus on popularity leads to many popsci tropes, which might turn out to be actively harmful.  For example, there is the focus on stories of “great men struggling with grand ideas”, which may accidentally reinforce the impression that science is too hard for most people and so they should not engage with it, and discourage under-represented minorities from entering the subject.  Similarly, there is an excessive focus on speculative wild-sounding ideas, as opposed to the basics, which may inadvertently give the impression that “anything goes” in physics, and make people question why they should believe scientists over and above politicians and/or their local preacher.

One experiment I would suggest to address this would be to give a bunch of people a popular science book containing a lot of speculative ideas, and a couple of weeks after finishing the book ask them to classify how speculative the various ideas presented in the book are.  A good choice would be Max Tegmark’s “Mathematical Universe” because he goes to great pains at the beginning to classify how speculative his various multiverses are, even including a table.  My hypothesis is that most readers won’t remember how speculative the ideas are, and that ideas from standard model cosmology would be conflated with those of various multiverses in terms of the degree to which they are established.  I expect people will mostly recall the ideas that sound cool, rather than those that are most supported by evidence.  I also suspect that it won’t matter how careful the author is to distinguish speculation from established science, which could be checked by comparing results from Tegmark’s book with any randomly chosen Michio Kaku book.

If my hypothesis is confirmed, then perhaps we could persuade authors to hold back on the speculation a bit, in favour of established science, particularly in a society where the general level of science literacy is quite low.  If they do include speculation, perhaps it would be better to do so with a more skeptical treatment, including a detailed criticism of the ideas.  Perhaps a book written by a small group of experts with conflicting opinions on the speculative ideas is a better way to do this than the traditional single-author popsci books.  Whatever you think about this, these are ideas that we could clearly benefit from investigating empirically.