Are All Cranks Male? | Unification Theories

  • Thread starter jostpuur
  • Start date
In summary: TV shows/movies there are where the lead character is the woman with some sort of mystical, paranormal powers? Yes, I have noticed that. It seems that Hollywood is catering to the female audience more and more with these types of stories.
  • #1
jostpuur
2,116
19
I just made a curious remark: All people who believe they have personal unification theories and so on, are male. Is there not female cranks at all?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Wow. I've never even noticed that, and I'm a woman!
 
  • #3
most women don't want to 'make a mark' as an odd duck, or take the chance of being disliked----but things have changed---the more women get degrees in odd things like theoretical physics--there'll be more cranky women--

what about Lisa Randall? (I guess only if you consider 'string theory' as a crank theory though)
 
  • #4
Oh, there are a few cranky females. In more ways than one.
I tried explaining my interest in astronomy to my girlfriend and she told me she was a Gemini. Is astrology a crank theory?
 
  • #5
tribdog said:
Oh, there are a few cranky females. In more ways than one.
I tried explaining my interest in astronomy to my girlfriend and she told me she was a Gemini. Is astrology a crank theory?

Yes, but with a scent of patchouli.
 
  • #6
Oh yeah, there is lot of women interested in astrology and paranormal phenomena... I was thinking about more like these personal physics theories. It depends little on what we mean by "a crank".
 
  • #7
I think there are plenty of female cranks out there. They are just more invested in mysticism rather than cranky physics.
 
  • #8
"HEY! Whats your Sign?" asked the blond girl wearing a tank top and really tight jeans.
 
  • #9
most women I know want to believe in the 'magic' of ...!

I think its part of the 'shiny knight'/'happily ever after' / 'if only...' syndrome
 
Last edited:
  • #10
rewebster said:
most women I know want to believe in the 'magic' of ...!

I think its part of the 'shiny knight'/'happily ever after' / 'if only...' syndrome

I wouldn't say they believe in it, they wish it was true. but with comments like that you've shown why they don't believe in it.
 
  • #11
Math Is Hard said:
I think there are plenty of female cranks out there. They are just more invested in mysticism rather than cranky physics.

With the few intellectual females that I've known (in person), most do seem to be more interested in mysticism rather than physics. Primarily those who would consider themselves Wiccans.
 
  • #12
That's because females are never wrong.
 
  • #13
JasonRox said:
That's because females are never wrong.

well said.:biggrin:
 
  • #14
Well, it was the famed Ms. Lucie Irigaray who said that Newton's "principia" was a rape manual.

She also said that it was the phallocentrism of males which explained why structural mechanics was so more successful than fluid mechanics, because the latter had more affinity with the female principle of menstruation..
 
  • #15
arildno said:
Well, it was the famed Ms. Lucie Irigaray who said that Newton's "principia" was a rape manual.

She also said that it was the phallocentrism of males which explained why structural mechanics was so more successful than fluid mechanics, because the latter had more affinity with the female principle of menstruation..

Isn't this about postmodern social constructionism? Is it appropriate to call it pseudoscience or crackpottery?

I've read an article by Dawkins, and I think he mentioned this Irigaray, although I don't remember for sure and I cannot find the article now. (It's the fluid mechanics argument that I feel like remembering... :rolleyes:)
 
Last edited:
  • #16
mhmhmhmhmhmhm... I've never tried to decide what postmodern social constructionism really is. I've always somehow thought that pseudoscience must be outside the academic world. And that something that is inside academic world would be at most cargo cult science.

btw, (an off-topic question (I'm the original poster, I have right to go off-topic)) is there clear difference between pseudoscience and cargo cult science?
 
Last edited:
  • #17
i asked my wife why men were rational beings who understand science while women were irrational crackpots that believe in mysticism. She turned me into a toad.
 
  • #18
jostpuur said:
Isn't this about postmodern social constructionism? Is it appropriate to call it pseudoscience or crackpottery?

I've read an article by Dawkins, and I think he mentioned this Irigaray, although I don't remember for sure and I cannot find the article now. (It's the fluid mechanics argument that I feel like remembering... :rolleyes:)
Probably, it is his review "Postmodernism Disrobed" of Alan Sokal's "Intellectual Impostures":
http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Reviews/1998-07-09postmodernism_disrobed.shtml [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
jimmysnyder said:
i asked my wife why men were rational beings who understand science while women were irrational crackpots that believe in mysticism. She turned me into a toad.

Congratulations.
 
  • #20
tribdog said:
I wouldn't say they believe in it, they wish it was true. but with comments like that you've shown why they don't believe in it.

what's a 'wish'?----(isn't that part of the magic thing that someone wants/believes will happen?)


Ever notice how many more TV shows/movies there are where the lead character is the woman with some sort of mystical, paranormal powers? I think women, (and yes of course it's a generalization) tend to believe more in magic due to the (now disappearing) perception that if they had a little more 'power' --'things' would be better---
 
  • #21
jostpuur said:
Are all cranks male?
Only those that come with a crank shaft!
 
  • #22
Gokul43201 said:
Only those that come with a crank shaft!
They are nuts..
 
  • #23
ubermensch said:
"HEY! Whats your Sign?" asked the blond girl wearing a tank top and really tight jeans.
I was wondering the same thing as I read the first few replies...maybe nobody notices a crank if she's got a large chest and a tight, low-cut shirt on.

JasonRox said:
That's because females are never wrong.
An even better explanation. :biggrin:

Gokul43201 said:
Only those that come with a crank shaft!
:rofl:
 
  • #24
Moonbear said:
I was wondering the same thing as I read the first few replies...maybe nobody notices a crank if she's got a large chest and a tight, low-cut shirt on.


An even better explanation. :biggrin:


:rofl:

you're right--you're right------you are ALWAYS right MB







<smoozing MB, just a little>
 
  • #25
JasonRox said:
That's because females are never wrong.

This must be wrong because men are always wrong :smile:
 
  • #26
Before I started posting on PF, A female crank was banned from here for her views on quantum theory. She posted under her real name.
 
  • #27
George Jones said:
Before I started posting on PF, A female crank was banned from here for her views on quantum theory. She posted under her real name.
Yeah, she's dead now. She was constantly vandalizing wikipedia too.
 
  • #28
Oh my God, you actually killed her for that? That's some harsh moderation.
 
  • #29
She WAS really bad, besides, Evo couldn't let ZApperZ get his hands dirty. He had a full-time job exposing her intellectually..
 
  • #30
Are the threads still alive, or have they been deleted? I need a laugh.
 
  • #31
arildno said:
She WAS really bad, besides, Evo couldn't let ZApperZ get his hands dirty. He had a full-time job exposing her intellectually..

WarPhalange said:
Are the threads still alive, or have they been deleted? I need a laugh.
They're probably still around.
 
  • #32
Evo said:
Yeah, she's dead now. She was constantly vandalizing wikipedia too.

I ran into her on usenet/google groups years before I started posting here, and I didn't agree with her ideas or methods, but I'm sorry to find that she died of cancer.
 
  • #33
George Jones said:
I ran into her on usenet/google groups years before I started posting here, and I didn't agree with her ideas or methods, but I'm sorry to find that she died of cancer.
Yes, that is not something I would wish on anyone.
 
  • #34
Evo said:
Yes, that is not something I would wish on anyone.

Really? I wish it on four or five people a day. Doesn't seem to work though
 
  • #35
rootX said:
This must be wrong because men are always wrong :smile:

No, that's not true. As I explain to my boyfriend, he can be right sometimes...as long as he agrees with me. :biggrin:
 
<h2>1. What is a "crank" in the context of unification theories?</h2><p>A "crank" in the context of unification theories refers to an individual who proposes a theory that is not widely accepted by the scientific community and is often considered to be pseudoscientific or lacking in evidence.</p><h2>2. Are all cranks male or are there female cranks as well?</h2><p>While the term "crank" is often associated with male individuals, there are also female cranks who propose unification theories that are not widely accepted by the scientific community.</p><h2>3. How do unification theories differ from established scientific theories?</h2><p>Unification theories attempt to explain complex phenomena by combining multiple theories or concepts, while established scientific theories are widely accepted and supported by evidence from experiments and observations.</p><h2>4. Can unification theories ever become accepted by the scientific community?</h2><p>It is possible for unification theories to become accepted by the scientific community if they are supported by strong evidence and can successfully explain and predict phenomena that were previously unexplained by established theories.</p><h2>5. What is the role of skepticism in evaluating unification theories?</h2><p>Skepticism plays a crucial role in evaluating unification theories, as it encourages critical thinking and questioning of claims that lack sufficient evidence. It is important for scientists to approach unification theories with a skeptical mindset in order to determine their validity and potential impact on the scientific community.</p>

1. What is a "crank" in the context of unification theories?

A "crank" in the context of unification theories refers to an individual who proposes a theory that is not widely accepted by the scientific community and is often considered to be pseudoscientific or lacking in evidence.

2. Are all cranks male or are there female cranks as well?

While the term "crank" is often associated with male individuals, there are also female cranks who propose unification theories that are not widely accepted by the scientific community.

3. How do unification theories differ from established scientific theories?

Unification theories attempt to explain complex phenomena by combining multiple theories or concepts, while established scientific theories are widely accepted and supported by evidence from experiments and observations.

4. Can unification theories ever become accepted by the scientific community?

It is possible for unification theories to become accepted by the scientific community if they are supported by strong evidence and can successfully explain and predict phenomena that were previously unexplained by established theories.

5. What is the role of skepticism in evaluating unification theories?

Skepticism plays a crucial role in evaluating unification theories, as it encourages critical thinking and questioning of claims that lack sufficient evidence. It is important for scientists to approach unification theories with a skeptical mindset in order to determine their validity and potential impact on the scientific community.

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
4
Replies
106
Views
7K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
13
Views
648
Back
Top