"Saying what needs to be said about the most sucky parts of physics"
I propose to raise a revolution against the lie that the majority has the monopoly of the truth.
- Henrik Johan Ibsen
Sign me up, Henrik. I'm with you, brother.
I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks.
- Michael Crichton
Pernicious, adj.: causing insidious harm or ruin; injurious; hurtful.
I never understand why people say "peer reviewed science" as though it were a good thing. The atom bomb was peer-reviewed. Mercury in vaccines was peer-reviewed. Glyphosate, DDT, Agent Orange, Aluminum in vaccines, AZT, Nevirapine, Vioxx, Lunesta, The Tuskeegee Airmen, exploding 2,000 nuclear bombs, nuclear power, Fukushima, fracking, bleached sugar, MSG in vaccines, the van on Hemp -- all peer-reviewed. Science in action is just engineering. Engineers are people. People are programmable.
Cowards and leftists rule by consensus.
Peter Boghossian, an assistant professor of philosophy at Portland State University in Oregon, led a trio of scholars last year who submitted to leading publications what they called "intentionally broken" papers on gender, race and sexuality. Several of those absurd pieces were published. Portland State University has now started disciplinary proceedings against Boghossian.
There you have it.
When the messenger threatens the 1%, shoot the messenger.
In 2003, researchers writing in the American Journal of Medicine discovered something that should change how you think about medical news. They looked at 101 studies published in top scientific journals between 1979 and 1983 that claimed a new therapy or medical technology was very promising. Only five, they found out, made it to market within a decade. Only one (ACE inhibitors, a pharmaceutical drug) was still extensively used in 2003. - Source
100 "new" or "promising" things that weren't were promoted by one thing and one thing only.
Nobody knows more than a tiny fragment of science well enough to judge its validity and value at first hand.
For the rest he has to rely on views accepted at second hand on the authority of a community of people accredited as scientists. But this accrediting depends in its turn on a complex organization. For each member of the community can judge at first hand only a small number of his fellow members, and yet eventually each is accredited by all.
What happens is that each recognizes as scientists a number of others by whom he is recognized as such in return, and these relations form chains which transmit these mutual recognitions at second hand through the whole community.
This is how each member becomes directly or indirectly accredited by all.
The system extends into the past.
Its members recognize the same set of persons as their masters and derive from this allegiance a common tradition, of which each carries on a particular strand.
- Michael Polanyi, "Personal Knowledge", 1958
This is exactly how we are most effectively controlled.
Legions, infinite legions, of others.
One of the advantages of ridiculously weak positions, is that it makes attacks on such positions very predictable.
As a result, the 1% can intimately plan out how to respond, and disseminate that message to all key "defenders of the scam".
And so over time, as reasonable people (i.e. 99%ers) hear exactly the same defensive (and usually highly offensive) statement from multiple sources, it comes across as more and more convincing. And inevitable.
Reasonable people (i.e. 99%ers) respond in individual ways and thus are inherently fragmented.
And so the big bluff works.- Spring-And-Loop Theory
In an extroverted society, an introvert is often unconsciously deemed guilty until proven innocent.
- Criss Jami
In a Standard Model physics world, those who don't buy into it are labelled "crackpots".
If the subject was about race, this response would be racist.
If the subject was movies, this response would be a troll.
But tEmP theorists do this, and everyone else nods their head, like the red-beaked dipping bird novelty item.
In my considered opinion the peer review system, in which proposals rather than proposers are reviewed, is the greatest disaster visited upon the scientific community in this century.
I believe that U.S. science could recover from the stultifying effects of decades of misguided peer reviewing if we returned to the tried-and-true method of evaluating experimenters rather than experimental proposals.
Many people will say that my ideas are elitist, and I certainly agree. The alternative is the egalitarianism that we now practice and I've seen nearly kill basic science in the USSR and in the People's Republic of China.
- Luis W. Alvarez
The only solution is to get people to fund their own work, and for everyone to publish to everyone at no cost.
No journal fees. No pay to publish. No payment for peer reviewing of papers.
Then, and only then, will the cream rise to the top.
'Normal science' means research firmly based upon one or more past scientific achievements, achievements that some particular scientific community acknowledges for a time as supplying the foundation for its further practice.
- Thomas S. Kuhn, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"
This is ridiculous.
This would reward the status quo and encourage non-change.
We need individuals doing radical science. That is to say, work based entirely on truth. There is nothing more radical.
Relations between authors and referees are, of course, almost always strained.
Authors are convinced that the malicious stupidity of the referee is alone preventing them from laying their discoveries before an admiring world.
Referees are convinced that authors are too arrogant and obtuse to recognize blatant fallacies in their own reasoning, even when these have been called to their attention with crystalline lucidity.
- N. David Mermin
The Model T was invented by a single person.
Same story for the personal computer. Thanks to Steve Wozniak.
Fermat's Last Theorem -- the world's most difficult math problem -- was solved by one person, working in his attic, for ten years straight.
Peer review is hilariously useless and billions-of-dollars-a-year destructive. It exists only because it is financially rewarding to those who use it. It needs to be cast as the bad guy in the next Terminator movie.
Only when he has published his ideas and findings has the scientist made his contribution, and only when he has thus made it part of the public domain of scholarship can he truly lay claim to it as his own. For his claim resides only in the recognition accorded by peers in the social system of science through reference to his work.
- Robert King Merton
"the public domain of scholarship..." I remember when knowledge used to be public and shared. Those were the days by friend...
The key action here is that a person figured something out and then gave that figuring away.
We need more of that. Giving. Pure, no strings attached, giving.
As to "peers", how does a person with a new theory go about finding peers?
The very nature of a new theory is that it ultimately shows the old theories to be wrong and worthless.
Instead of peer review, a new theory needs a security detail.
Normal science, the activity in which most scientists inevitably spend almost all their time, is predicated on the assumption that the scientific community knows what the world is like.
- Thomas S. Kuhn, "The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions"
And what a terrible assumption that is.
If you want to kill any idea in the world, get a committee working on it.
- Charles Franklin Kettering (1876-1958)
In the Royal Society, there has been a constant Resolution to reject all the amplifications, digressions and swellings of style. To return back to the primitive purity, and shortness, when men delivered so many things, almost in an equal number of words. They have exacted from all their members a close, naked, natural way of speaking -- positive expressions; clear senses; a native easiness -- bringing all things as near the Mathematical plainness, as they can, and preferring the language of artisans, countrymen and merchants before that of wits or scholars.
- Thomas Sprat, "The History of the Royal Society", 1667
Publishing monopolies are in control today
because there is no money in progress.
Peer reviewers go for orthodoxy.
Many of the great 19th century discoveries were made by men who had independent wealth -- Charles Darwin is the prototype.
They trusted themselves.
- James Black
Darwin was overrated.
The correct example is Sir Isaac Newton.
And James Clerk Maxwell.
It is folly to use as one's guide in the selection of fundamental science the criterion of utility.
Useful outcomes are best identified after the making of discoveries, rather than before.
- John C. Polanyi
There are all kinds of filters, and they all have the same goal -- keeping physics from progressing toward the truth, and thereby killing it.
It is one thing to show a man that he is in error and another to put him in possession of the truth.
- John Locke
Life today is extremely diluted.
Thoughts are published because they threaten nothing.
If thoughts threaten anything, they will not only be unpublished. They will be actively censored, in the most vicious and evil ways possible.
Peer review controls by not pointing out error.
Let's all be different same as me.
- John Brunner
Most of the crackpot papers which are submitted to "The Physical Review" are rejected, not because it is impossible to understand them, but because it is possible. Those which are impossible to understand are usually published. When the great innovation appears, it will almost certainly be in a muddled, incomplete and confusing form. To the discoverer himself it will be only half-understood; to everybody else it will be a mystery. For any speculation which does not at first glance look crazy, there is no hope.
- Freeman Dyson
Cute...don't believe you.
Don't be buffaloed by experts and elites. Experts often possess more data than judgment. Elites become so inbred that they produce hemophiliacs who bleed to death when nicked by the real world.
- Colin Powell, "My American Journey"
No politics, no committees, no reports, no referees, no interviews -- just highly motivated people picked by a few men of good judgment.
- James Black, on Max Perutz's ideas of how best to nurture research
And at the other extreme? The LHC.
Schools are designed on the assumption that there is a secret to everything in life; that the quality of life depends on knowing that secret; that secrets can be known only in orderly successions; and that only teachers can properly reveal these secrets.
An individual with a schooled mind conceives of the world as a pyramid of classified packages accessible only to those who carry the proper tags.
- Ivan Illich, "Deschooling Society"
Science progresses not because scientists as a whole are passionately open-minded but because different scientists are passionately closed-minded about different things.
- Henry Bauer
Scientists today are dispassionately open-minded about everything.
As a result, there is zero progress in science.
"Let a million worthless research papers turn to compost!"
The customary human reaction when confronted with innovation? To flounder about, attempting to adapt old responses to new situations, or to simply condemn or ignore the harbingers of change -- a practice refined by the Chinese emperors, who used to execute messengers bringing bad news.
- Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980)
Today the 'execution' takes the form of becoming unemployed or unpublishable.
Nothing is more hated than the truth.
Try to prove ^ this statement ^ wrong.
The extrovert assumption is so woven into the fabric of our culture that an employee may suffer reprimands for keeping his door closed (that is, if he is one of the lucky ones who has a door), for not lunching with other staff members, or for missing the weekend golf game or any number of supposedly morale-boosting celebrations.
More than half of us don't want to play.
We don't see the point.
For us, an office potluck will not provide satisfying human contact -- we'd much rather meet a friend for an intimate conversation (even if that friend is a coworker).
For us, the gathering will not boost morale -- and will probably leave us resentful that we stayed an extra hour to eat stale cookies and make small talk. For us, talking with coworkers does not benefit our work -- it sidetracks us.
- Laurie A. Helgoe, "Introvert Power: Why Your Inner Life Is Your Hidden Strength"
All social gatherings should be optional.
Same with the music in elevators.
Silence isn't golden. It's much more valuable than that.
The history of this paper suggests that highly speculative investigations, especially by an unknown author, are best brought before the world through some other channel than a scientific society, which naturally hesitates to admit into its printed records matters of uncertain value.
- John William Strutt
The guy who figured out that Africa and South America used to be joined was not going to be accepted, period.
Life is all about control.
New ideas have a negative, not a positive, value to the 1%.
There is nobody so irritating as somebody with less intelligence and more sense than we have.
- Don Herold
The majority hate the truth.
This was always true. Is true today. Will always be true.
Peer review has never worked. Will never work.
Truth is not determined by majority vote.
Everything but the truth is determined by majority vote.
Voting itself is a completely flawed process.
Promote what you believe
With your own money only.
Sink or swim.
Zero F's given.
#Meritocracy, or death.
Universities make learning repellent and thus prevent its becoming dangerously common. They discharge this beneficent function all the more efficiently because they do it unconsciously and automatically. The professors think they are advancing healthy, intellectual assimilation and digestion when they are in reality little better than cancer on the stomach.
- Samuel Butler
tEmP theories have stage 4 cancer...of the brain.
We are all inclined to direct our inquiry not by the matter itself, but by the views of our opponents; and, even when interrogating oneself, one pushes the inquiry only to the point at which one can no longer offer any opposition.
We have been taught -- by the media -- to bring everything down to the petty plane of personality.
When you start in science, you are brainwashed into believing how careful you must be, and how difficult it is to discover things.
There's something called the 'graduate student syndrome'; graduate students hardly believe they can make a discovery.
- Francis Crick
When you start in atom smashers, you are endlessly reminded of how many trillion particles it will take to produce how many million collisions of which how few results will be important enough to even look at later.
There's something called the 'over 25 syndrome', if you're older than 25, you'll never make a great discovery.
Sounds like the 1% is trying to corner the market on "new" theories.
Your job is being a professor and researcher. That's one heck of a good excuse for some of the brain-damages of Minix.
- Linus Torvalds (1969-), to Andrew Tanenbaum
Andrew Tanenbaum taught Linus Torvalds.
Linus Torvalds learned the lessons taught.
And applied them to Minix -- the professor's operating system.
Life is full of sacred cows, and their hot air is a fire hazard.
Incineration for the win!
Stefan Molyneux: The Corruption of Science - 56min.
Stefan's talks are so important, YouTube took down his entire YouTube channel.
The audio still exists here.
In general, novel-theorists have nothing very urgent or interesting to say about literature. Why then do they write when they have nothing to say? Because the ambitious teacher can only rise in the academic bureaucracy by writing at complicated length about writing that has already been much written about. The result of all this book-chat can't interest anyone who knows literature while those who would like to learn something about books can only be mystified and discouraged by these commentaries.
- Gore Vidal
Everything the 1% allows is run into the ground.
Pulverized. Shredded. Dissected and impaled on a wall.
A better fate than happens to important things, by the way.
"Recent experimental evidence suggests that there is a stronger inclination to behave immorally in groups than individually." - Source
Groups are weak.
Individuals are strong.
Peer Review -- i.e. control by the group -- is control by the weak.
Be careful when you follow the masses. Sometimes the "m" is silent.
- Herr Kemper
Yes, be careful with your assumptions!
Of all possible committee reactions to any given agenda item, the reaction that will occur is the one that will liberate the greatest amount of hot air.
- Thomas L. Martin
People love to hear themselves talk.
And the less they have to offer, the more they want to prove both facts.
Nobody cares how old you are but you. People only care about what you can do, and you can do anything you want, at any age.
- Steve Chandler, "100 Ways to Motivate Yourself"
Nobody cares...except tEmP theorists.
Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact.
- Carl Sagan
Those few are then rewarded with being shunned by their peers.
Sagan was an optimist.
No really he was.
I have no trouble publishing in Soviet astrophysical journals, but my work is unacceptable to the American astrophysical journals.
- Hannes Alfven, whose ideas often conflicted with tEmP theories
The important point here is to realize how completely irrational journal selection criteria is.
is a disaster
for the 1%.
When the biotech firm Human Longevity published a controversial paper claiming that it could predict what a person looks like based on only a teeny bit of DNA, it was just a little over a week before a second paper was published discrediting it as flawed and false.
The lightning speed of the rebuttal was thanks to bioRxiv, a server where scientists can publish pre-prints of papers before they have gone through the lengthy peer-review process.
It took only four more days before a rebuttal to the rebuttal was up on bioRxiv, too.
This is of course the way things should be done.
So you'll never hear of this again.
When information is plentiful, peers take over.
- Kevin Kelly (1952-)
"Peers" take over in all situations.
If you work by yourself in your attic for ten years, as Andrew Wiles did, you do not get your own talk show on NBC.
You become, instead, a 3-second answer to a Jeopardy question.
Rest assured that the very last group on the face of the Earth that want to "abandon" the statistical measure of 'significance' is Statisticians.
Here is the corrected headline:
The 1% Want To Continue To Corrupt Science, One Drip Of Poison At A Time
The ultimate reveal on Peer Review.
The Speed Of Light Black Holes Einstein's Equation The Ether Gravity
222 Answers The Atom Quantum World Neutrino Black Holes Revisited
The Comedy Of Science et=mc3 Comparing Physics Theories
Diffuse Interstellar Bands Einstein's Ether Talk No Strong Force
The Electron Relativity Unification Assumptions Modeling The Greatest Story
Big Bang Dark Matter/Dark Energy Dogma Forget The Fields Math Sucks Particle Physics Peer Review Standard Model Star Gazing String Theory tEmP Theories/Theorists The Control System Trolls
Spring-And-Loop Theory by Floyd Maxwell is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Other subjects Site Map Contact
Quotes provided by:
Click here (then click Join Group) to subscribe