tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post3673795884951871205..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Research perversions are spreading. You will not like the proposed solution.Sabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger133125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5334042110284492112018-10-31T14:12:56.837-04:002018-10-31T14:12:56.837-04:00Witches and pagans learned how to scientifically p...Witches and pagans learned how to scientifically prove their abilities and everything you every told us that wasn't real or didn't exist actually does because all science was created with the Imagination as it resides in the same area of the brain to invent new experiments to follow, so whats fake and whats real?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09804337683032052381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-35869804142637494322018-02-22T16:20:24.904-05:002018-02-22T16:20:24.904-05:00"The essence of the scientific method is to t..."The essence of the scientific method is to test hypotheses by experiment and then keep, revise, or discard the hypotheses. However, using the scientific method is suboptimal for a scientist’s career if they are rewarded for research papers that are cited by as many of their peers as possible."<br /><br />The real problem is academia became a bureaucracy, which exist for the benefit of Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03628683615904883486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-66685083428768927112018-01-16T11:54:08.225-05:002018-01-16T11:54:08.225-05:00You might want to read “The Voice of the Dolphins”...You might want to read “The Voice of the Dolphins” by Leo Szilard, famous for the nuclear chain reaction, written in 1961. One of the stories, The Mark Grable Foundation I think, describes how to kill scientific research by handing ot lots of high value prizes. It’s effectively what’s happening now.Paul in Bostonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01594268198072348815noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-58467159033047734862018-01-11T19:20:16.036-05:002018-01-11T19:20:16.036-05:00my comment that it was humane that torture was not...<i>my comment that it was humane that torture was not allowed for the old or disabled was meant ironically.</i><br /><br />Compared to secular courts, which did not so disallow its use? Or which permitted torture to be used as punishment?<br /><br /><i>in many cases, [torture] was used for no other reason than disagreement (and, yes, heresy is merely a disagreement).</i><br /><br />The same is TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41610874481170346822018-01-10T03:58:14.068-05:002018-01-10T03:58:14.068-05:00Yes, compared to 17th cent. secular courts, they a...<i>Yes, compared to 17th cent. secular courts, they actually were more humane. Torture had been re-introduced with the rediscovery of Imperial Roman Law, which not only allowed torture, but required it under certain circumstances.</i><br /><br />In case it wasn't clear, my comment that it was humane that torture was not allowed for the old or disabled was meant ironically.<br /><br /><i>Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81431513595439318302018-01-09T16:02:51.350-05:002018-01-09T16:02:51.350-05:00I may have been a bit too brief. To justify the he...I may have been a bit too brief. To justify the heliocentric theory, you had to show Aristotle was wrong regarding falling, and everybody "knew" he was right. The problem was, you can work out that orbital motion must involve falling awards the centre, and moving away sideways. I think adequate geometry was available at the time. Now if you accept Aristotle, then if the Earth moved, Ian Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252375814985734176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-34916894820119357132018-01-09T11:37:11.313-05:002018-01-09T11:37:11.313-05:00Yes, compared to 17th cent. secular courts, they a...Yes, compared to 17th cent. secular courts, they actually were more humane. Torture had been re-introduced with the rediscovery of Imperial Roman Law, which not only allowed torture, but <i>required</i> it under certain circumstances. <br /><br />A useful account of the workings can be found in Edward Peters, <i>Inquisition,</i> University of California Press, 1989. But also in <br /><br />TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51007625704865487292018-01-09T09:32:49.234-05:002018-01-09T09:32:49.234-05:00I don't see the heliocentric theory as vanquis...<i>I don't see the heliocentric theory as vanquishing all because of the "beauty" of its maths. Part of the problem was Aristotle's dynamics.</i><br /><br />One of the problems with history, as John Lukacs used to say, is that we must study Salamis as if the Persians might still win. That is, we must look at matters based on what was known at the time. To judge the reception of TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41688237009338547412018-01-09T06:25:40.453-05:002018-01-09T06:25:40.453-05:00"The rules of the Inquisition forbade the use...<i>"The rules of the Inquisition forbade the use of torture on the elderly and infirm"</i><br /><br />How humane! (Takes break from writing book and thinks.) Let's see, I am old or infirm enough to avoid torture? Yes, things are more complicated than the cardboard stories often recounted about Galileo and Giordano, but to suggest that a powerful institution which can and did Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1561640310643971232018-01-08T15:27:51.249-05:002018-01-08T15:27:51.249-05:00I don't see the heliocentric theory as vanquis...I don't see the heliocentric theory as vanquishing all because of the "beauty" of its maths. Part of the problem was Aristotle's dynamics. Once you get a feeling for the equivalence principle, and recall the measurements of Aristarchus of Samos, who showed the sun was really a very long way away (I think he underestimated by almost a factor of 5 through the observational Ian Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252375814985734176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90055063510105293572018-01-08T10:32:21.308-05:002018-01-08T10:32:21.308-05:00even if the Church didn't burn people because ...<i> even if the Church didn't burn people because they were Copernicans, the fear that they would greatly influenced the debate.</i><br /><br />There was no such fear and the debate was not "greatly held back" by religious reasons. Everyone in the Late Renaissance knew how the game was played, and there were as many churchmen in favor of the new theories as there were opposed. The TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-52809268515708896392018-01-08T03:06:21.966-05:002018-01-08T03:06:21.966-05:00"No, it really was. The only one burned, as I...<i>"No, it really was. The only one burned, as I recollect, was the hermetic mystic, Bruno, who was not a scientist at all. His sentence did not involve his incidental [and uninformed] approval of Copernicus."</i><br /><br />I agree with most of the rest of your post, but even if the Church didn't burn people because they were Copernicans, the fear that they would greatly influencedPhillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-12822113373363296282018-01-08T01:50:41.543-05:002018-01-08T01:50:41.543-05:00The Copernican revolution (how many get the pun?) ...<i>The Copernican revolution (how many get the pun?) is a bad example, since this wasn't a scientific debate, but rather the church burning people at the stake who disagreed.</i><br /><br />No, it really was. The only one burned, as I recollect, was the hermetic mystic, Bruno, who was not a scientist at all. His sentence did not involve his incidental [and uninformed] approval of Copernicus. TheOFloinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3331795396447575682018-01-03T05:39:40.167-05:002018-01-03T05:39:40.167-05:00Philip
You prejudge without even seeing the videos...Philip<br />You prejudge without even seeing the videos. Sure sign of ignorance and arrogance. Ivar Giaever won the 1973 Nobel prize in physics. Each of the scientists in the four videos is more qualified than you. If you can't beat them, smear them.Dr. Strangelovehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18403919518896164503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-65309078582077223602018-01-03T04:54:59.378-05:002018-01-03T04:54:59.378-05:00Non-axiomatic physics - one in which "guessin...Non-axiomatic physics - one in which "guessing the equation" is naturally followed by "guessing the fudge factor" - consists, by definition, of "invincible models that can forever be amended": <br /><br />Sabine Hossenfelder (Bee): "The criticism you raise that there are lots of speculative models that have no known relevance for the description of nature has Pentcho Valevhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17402794850276749822noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-79883694334034970832018-01-02T13:59:37.643-05:002018-01-02T13:59:37.643-05:00"Related to the problems of science. Freeman ...<i>"Related to the problems of science. Freeman Dyson, Nobel laureate in physics, physics Prof. and distinguished scientists expose fake physics in climate change"</i><br /><br />Freeman Dyson never won a Nobel Prize. If you can't even get that right, why should we believe anything else you say, ever?<br /><br />It is usually a mark of trouble when someone who has a good and Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69697524702929404622018-01-01T08:05:26.151-05:002018-01-01T08:05:26.151-05:00Related to the problems of science. Freeman Dyson,...Related to the problems of science. Freeman Dyson, Nobel laureate in physics, physics Prof. and distinguished scientists expose fake physics in climate change<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvhipLNeda4<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Mx0_8YEtg<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKfWdXXfIs&t=215sDr. Strangelovehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18403919518896164503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-48069419406047845702017-12-31T09:06:24.954-05:002017-12-31T09:06:24.954-05:00My own idiosyncratic view of science falls somewhe...My own idiosyncratic view of science falls somewhere between Drs. Helbig and Miller (both of whose comments I appreciate). For me it is another form of evolution, which I define as consisting of lots of trials, selection criteria to rank the trials on a scale from failure to neutral to success, and memory to pass the results forward through time.<br /><br />I would like to think, with Dr. Helbig,JimVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10198704789965278981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75401151744219167812017-12-31T07:19:45.589-05:002017-12-31T07:19:45.589-05:00Ian, indeed, in my neck of the New England woods a...Ian, indeed, in my neck of the New England woods at about 42.75 degrees north latitude, (less than a degree north of Rome, Italy), it's currently -15F (-26C). Yesterday morning it was -16F, or approaching -27C, colder than what one of the Martian rovers recorded for a daytime high, recently. We've been getting these subzero F/C temps for nearly a week, and will endure the same David Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18048116250413347228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-8771007651267065262017-12-30T16:20:31.853-05:002017-12-30T16:20:31.853-05:00Phillip, The current cold spell in NY is in accord...Phillip, The current cold spell in NY is in accord with what the climate scientists are saying. The extra energy is stirring up the Arctic generating stronger wind systems that happen to be taking the cold air further. Yes, we have to differentiate the general from the particular, but without the particular you cannot uncover the general, and without an example, claims are simply arm-waving. I Ian Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252375814985734176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-72347329923436969622017-12-30T06:42:49.619-05:002017-12-30T06:42:49.619-05:00“There are books by Les Smolin with " The Tro...“There are books by Les Smolin with " The Trouble with physics" and a blog " Not even wrong " by Peter Woit. The book and blogs are good , but we require a Focault,a Derrida, or a Bourdieu like critical thinkers in science to analyse the way science is performed.“<br /><br />Rather, we need clues as to how science can go into trouble. Let me make two suggestions:<br /><br />1.Pentcho Valevhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17402794850276749822noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-67710848325782856832017-12-29T19:01:28.234-05:002017-12-29T19:01:28.234-05:00" The review could not be published in the ac..." The review could not be published in the academic literature. One journal refused it on the grounds that the issue was well established (can't have a review that says that is wrong!) but the usual reason was they did not publish logic analyses"<br /><br />Do you think science lacks critical thinkers? If you compare with social sciences, you have Foucault ( Based on history he Ramahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08335534368912718077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-70768492131482507112017-12-29T10:20:34.307-05:002017-12-29T10:20:34.307-05:00"That, to me, is not the science I thought I ...<i>"That, to me, is not the science I thought I was signing up for so long ago. However, it is evidence for Philip Helbig that Kuhn was more right than wrong."</i><br /><br />No. At best, it is evident that in this particular case someone screwed up. Does the current cold spell in the USA prove that Trump was right and climate scientists wrong? Nope. Learn to differentiate the Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88211579108644236992017-12-29T10:18:58.978-05:002017-12-29T10:18:58.978-05:00"There are suggestions, e.g. by Peter Woit, t...<i>"There are suggestions, e.g. by Peter Woit, that science (physics) is dying. Are they completely unjustified?"</i><br /><br />Yes.<br />Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32534577301525869282017-12-28T16:25:14.224-05:002017-12-28T16:25:14.224-05:00Regarding the post by Unknown, I think the argumen...Regarding the post by Unknown, I think the argument in the link that cancer research is so unreproducible is misleading. There is no single cancer, and there are a huge number of variations. One obvious source of irreproducibility is that the starting position is not reproduced. Notwithstanding that, there are definitely bad practices out there. In my PhD research, I could not reproduce a Ian Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252375814985734176noreply@blogger.com