On Peter Woit's "Expanding Crackpottery"

See Not Even Wrong blog for details.

Woit: “In many ways I also share Lubos’s concern. Like lots of people,
over the years I’ve been deluged with examples of what I’ll call
“unconventional physics”, in a spectrum ranging from utter idiocy to
serious but flawed work.”

Of course you do because you are the “keeper of the flame for the
standard model", just as Lubos is the “keeper of the flame for string
theory". You both have your religions and your dogmas. You just belong
to different churches.

Woit: “Much of it shares the all-too-common feature of making
grandiose claims for new understanding of fundamental physics, based
on vague ideas that often use not much more than a few pieces of high-
school level physics and mathematics.”

Just So! And I suppose simple equations like E = mc^2 and E = hv do
not pass muster in your church of Ptolemaic complexity.

Give it some thought, my friend. Will you be able to open-mindedly
evaluate the successor to the standard model, which must eventually
come along because this is science not religion, or are you forever
“married” to your religion?

RLO

General Omar Windbottom wrote:
See Not Even Wrong blog for details.

Woit: “In many ways I also share Lubos’s concern. Like lots of people,
over the years I’ve been deluged with examples of what I’ll call
“unconventional physics”, in a spectrum ranging from utter idiocy to
serious but flawed work.”

Of course you do because you are the “keeper of the flame for the
standard model", just as Lubos is the “keeper of the flame for string
theory". You both have your religions and your dogmas. You just belong
to different churches.

Certain theories are just completely baseless crackpottery, but there
are others that have some possibility of being true, but they just don't
have enough proof to be undeniable yet.

Yousuf Khan

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
General Omar Windbottom wrote:
See Not Even Wrong blog for details.

Woit: “In many ways I also share Lubos’s concern. Like lots of people,
over the years I’ve been deluged with examples of what I’ll call
“unconventional physics”, in a spectrum ranging from utter idiocy to
serious but flawed work.”

Of course you do because you are the “keeper of the flame for the
standard model", just as Lubos is the “keeper of the flame for string
theory". You both have your religions and your dogmas. You just belong
to different churches.

Certain theories are just completely baseless crackpottery, but there are
others that have some possibility of being true, but they just don't have
enough proof to be undeniable yet.

Yousuf Khan

Burden of proof is upon the claimant.
My theory is bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes.
That has some possibility of being true, but it just doesn't have enough
proof to be undeniable yet. Please find a black hole and check for
broken eggshell.

Androcles wrote:
Burden of proof is upon the claimant.
My theory is bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes.
That has some possibility of being true, but it just doesn't have enough
proof to be undeniable yet. Please find a black hole and check for
broken eggshell.


Burden of proof is always upon the claimant. But people are willing to
accept certain ideas, if they seem to build upon existing accepted laws
rather than try to rewrite them. So such ideas as Superstring Theory, or
Dark Matter Theory are accepted because they don't contradict the
existing known laws of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. Yet the burden
of proof isn't that high on them, because they simply predict stuff we
can already predict from Relativity and QM. But ideas that try to
refute, contradict, or rewrite existing laws, even mildly, are severely
savaged. An example would be modified gravity theories; these theories
are just a slight modification to existing laws, yet they bring great
controversy.


Yousuf Khan

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
Androcles wrote:
Burden of proof is upon the claimant.
My theory is bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes.
That has some possibility of being true, but it just doesn't have enough
proof to be undeniable yet. Please find a black hole and check for
broken eggshell.


Burden of proof is always upon the claimant. But people are willing to
accept certain ideas, if they seem to build upon existing accepted laws
rather than try to rewrite them. So such ideas as Superstring Theory, or
Dark Matter Theory are accepted because they don't contradict the existing
known laws of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.

The theory of a virgin birth is accepted by millions of dorks. That doesn't
make it science.
I don't accept Superstrings or Angels Dancing on the Head of a Pin or
Dork Matter, but I do accept the theory of the existence of known dorks.
How can I not when there are enough of you around with your heads
up your arses?


Yet the burden of proof isn't that high on them, because they simply
predict stuff we can already predict from Relativity and QM.

Relativity was written by a known dork. QM is a different subject,
incompatible with Relativity.

But ideas that try to refute, contradict, or rewrite existing laws, even
mildly, are severely savaged. An example would be modified gravity
theories; these theories are just a slight modification to existing laws,
yet they bring great controversy.

A better example is emission fact. ****wits and dorks would rather
believe in crackpot theories than simple logic and provable mathematics.
You tell me that a crackpot theory that is based on a crackpot theory
is accepted, I say accepted only by the millions of dorks out there, the
same idiots that accept virgin births. Eat ****, 10 billion flies accept it
and that many flies can't be wrong.

In science, the burden of proof is upon the claimant. Dork Matter,
Einstein's Relativity and Superstrings are not science.
Galilean relativity is science, and it makes no exception for light.

My theory is bright green flying elephants lay their eggs in black holes.
That has some possibility of being true, but it just doesn't have enough
proof to be undeniable yet. Please find a black hole and check for
broken eggshell.