Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: larens on 08/04/2020 19:47:38

Title: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 08/04/2020 19:47:38
The replies I have experienced on this forum have been:

* Gatekeeping - Controversial assumptions necessary for discussion are outright rejected.

* Timid - I am just presented with a superficial explanation of the current paradigm.

* Displaying a lack of familiarity with current science, and/or

* Antireligious - This inhibits serious discussion in regions of overlap with science.

One of my main goals has been to get feedback on how people react to my presentation of a highly controversial theory. This forum's generally low participation rate in discussion has thwarted this goal. I also find that repliers suffer from the tendency in our larger current intellectual culture to be satisfied with just playing Devil's Advocate, rather than being positively engaged in serious discussion. Thus I present this poll.


Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 08/04/2020 20:19:40
This forum's generally low participation rate in discussion has thwarted this goal.

:-)
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 08/04/2020 20:32:41
 :-\  Your schadenfreude is a major problem of the forum.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Kryptid on 08/04/2020 20:51:39
Sure, I'd like to see that. If it actually was a breakthrough and had compelling evidence to support it.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 08/04/2020 20:57:18
:-\  Your schadenfreude is a major problem of the forum.
I don't think you know what that word means.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 08/04/2020 21:17:16
Sure, I'd like to see that. If it actually was a breakthrough and had compelling evidence to support it.

What do you mean by "compelling evidence"? I am working with the Classification of finite simple groups. Its simplified proof is still incomplete at over 5000 pages after decades of team work. Since a consensus on the validity of my work might be comparably long, I first need to find out what may be compelling enough to recruit an initial research team.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 08/04/2020 21:19:17
:-\  Your schadenfreude is a major problem of the forum.
I don't think you know what that word means.

I understand well what the word means.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 08/04/2020 21:26:31
I think it's something like "joy at the suffering of others".
So, if I was laughing at Boris johnson because he is ill- that would count.
However, if I I wish him a rapid recovery, but laugh at the fact that he was bragging about shaking hands with everyone, that's an appreciation of irony.
I don't think I'm a big source of schadenfreude .

Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 08/04/2020 21:28:11
What do you mean by "compelling evidence"?
Better than numerology.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Kryptid on 08/04/2020 21:52:45
What do you mean by "compelling evidence"?

It's difficult to specify exactly, but the ability to make falsifiable predictions and then finding that those predictions pass the test would be a good start.

I first need to find out what may be compelling enough to recruit an initial research team.

Just a heads up: you probably shouldn't look to me to be a part of a research team. I am a science enthusiast, but (sadly) not an actual scientist. What I find compelling personally may therefore not be relevant.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 08/04/2020 22:01:28
This forum's generally low participation rate in discussion has thwarted this goal.

:-)


I think it's something like "joy at the suffering of others".
So, if I was laughing at Boris johnson because he is ill- that would count.
However, if I I wish him a rapid recovery, but laugh at the fact that he was bragging about shaking hands with everyone, that's an appreciation of irony.
I don't think I'm a big source of schadenfreude .



Then why did you post a smiley when I expressed frustration? Laughing at someone is an insult. I was not bragging about anything. I was being analytical about the forum. If you wanted to express irony, there are better emoticons.

Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Lance Canham on 08/04/2020 22:12:21
Yes I would, this thread is not that,  ;)
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 08/04/2020 22:31:54
Yes I would, this thread is not that,  ;)

My feelings also,  ;)
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 08/04/2020 23:02:52
What do you mean by "compelling evidence"?

It's difficult to specify exactly, but the ability to make falsifiable predictions and then finding that those predictions pass the test would be a good start.


That is why I made the prediction for the mass of the axion. To confirm that will take a fair amount of engineering to advance the state of the art.

I first need to find out what may be compelling enough to recruit an initial research team.

Just a heads up: you probably shouldn't look to me to be a part of a research team. I am a science enthusiast, but (sadly) not an actual scientist. What I find compelling personally may therefore not be relevant.

My neighbors who are fairly well educated but not pursuing an academic career nearly all appreciate my work.

What do you mean by "compelling evidence"?
Better than numerology.

My neighbors understand the idea that starting from the sizes of groups is a reasonable way to proceed to derive fundamental constants. The over-educated insist on using numerology as a derogatory term.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Kryptid on 09/04/2020 05:59:12
That is why I made the prediction for the mass of the axion. To confirm that will take a fair amount of engineering to advance the state of the art.

Are there any other predictions you can make that can be tested with existing technology?
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 09/04/2020 07:07:21
Are there any other predictions you can make that can be tested with existing technology?


Currently I am working on an abstract for the Astrobiology Australasia Meeting 2020. Because of Covid-19 they have postponed their person-to-person meeting in Tokyo and extended the abstract deadline. They are talking about having a virtual meeting on September 9-11. They are outside my regional area, but I would have no trouble attending a virtual meeting.

The Japanese Space Agency announced in February that their Martian Moon eXploration (MMX) mission has been greenlighted to move forward, with the goal of launching an orbiter, lander and possibly a rover with sample return capability in 2024. This means the mission planning is in an advanced stage. I should talk with them about the importance of a sample return for verifying my origin-of-life model through finding microfossils. I need to include this in my meeting abstract.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: syhprum on 09/04/2020 07:40:25
There are many German words and expressions that have found their way into English but have had a false meaning ascribed to them such as blitz or fuehrer is schadenfreude another of them.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 09/04/2020 08:51:31
Then why did you post a smiley when I expressed frustration?
I posted an smiley to mark the irony that this
"This forum's generally low participation rate in discussion "
means that your poll is likely to go nowhere.

It's  possibly an insult to the whole of the membership.

You somehow thought it was about you.
Nice ego  you got there.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 09/04/2020 08:53:46
There are many German words and expressions that have found their way into English but have had a false meaning ascribed to them such as blitz or fuehrer is schadenfreude another of them.
That's the most interesting  point raised so far in this thread.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 09/04/2020 08:55:28
That is why I made the prediction for the mass of the axion. To confirm that will take a fair amount of engineering to advance the state of the art.

Are there any other predictions you can make that can be tested with existing technology?
Well, there's his "calculation"  of the fine structure constant which is based on having 5 fingers on each of two hands.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 09/04/2020 17:56:58
Well, there's his "calculation"  of the fine structure constant which is based on having 5 fingers on each of two hands.



I failed to mention that, among many other numbers, 10 appears, because it is the smallest number which is neither a power of a prime nor a highly composite number. For the large part of the calculation I did present, see replies #13 and #30 of "How is the biggest scientific breakthrough since Newton to be recognized?". https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=79129.0
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 09/04/2020 18:19:35
I failed to mention that, among many other numbers, 10 appears, because it is the smallest number which is neither a power of a prime nor a highly composite number.
You also forgot to explain (her or there0 that such a distinction is relevant.
Otherwise it looks like arbitrary justification- possibly post facto at that.

(That's a fancy way of saying you made it up)
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 09/04/2020 18:56:40


You also forgot to explain (her or there0 that such a distinction is relevant.
Otherwise it looks like arbitrary justification- possibly post facto at that.

(That's a fancy way of saying you made it up)


I very briefly described my philosophy of calculating fundamental constants in my summary of my theory in reply #7. Within this description I said, "The next necessary idea  was to find privileged positions in the topology of natural numbers that arise from the order of sets in the Classification of finite simple groups." Since I knew that this sentence was too sophisticated for most people to understand, I expanded on the idea in reply #13. I do not mind, if people ask me to explain something again. I do mind, if they insult me.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 09/04/2020 19:23:47
There are many German words and expressions that have found their way into English but have had a false meaning ascribed to them such as blitz or fuehrer is schadenfreude another of them.

Bored chemist and I were both using the correct meaning.


Then why did you post a smiley when I expressed frustration?
I posted an smiley to mark the irony that this
"This forum's generally low participation rate in discussion "
means that your poll is likely to go nowhere.

It's  possibly an insult to the whole of the membership.

You somehow thought it was about you.
Nice ego  you got there.


In my OP I said, "One of my main goals has been to get feedback on how people react to my presentation of a highly controversial theory. This forum's generally low participation rate in discussion has thwarted this goal." The context here is about "my main goals", not about the secondary fact that there is also a problem for the forum as a whole. I am, of course, going to think that your comment was about me.
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: Bored chemist on 09/04/2020 19:52:42
The context here is about "my main goals", not about the secondary fact that there is also a problem for the forum as a whole. I am, of course, going to think that your comment was about me.
So, you didn't realise that the bit I was referring to was the bit I quoted.

Given that it's easier to quote a whole post than an excerpt from it, why did you think I'd bothered to clip just part of it?
Title: Re: Would you like to see serious discussion here on a breakthrough in science?
Post by: larens on 09/04/2020 20:41:30
Given that it's easier to quote a whole post than an excerpt from it, why did you think I'd bothered to clip just part of it?

To cover up the fact that you were quoting out of context.