Oct12-06, 05:14 AM
There is an article about the "Bogdanov Affair" in Wikipedia
of course the Bogdanoff's brothers have gotten involved to protect their
reputation. while some consensus has been achieved there might be some
remaining dispute to what the objective measure of opinion of the existing
physics community competent in the field is of their published papers.
please can all of you that consider yourselves competent in the subject
matter indicate your assessment?
may i suggest choosing from:
a) Brilliant and novel contribution to the body of knowledge. Possible
b) Novel contribution to the body of knowledge with some ideas not proven or
provable. (perhaps "Protoscienc"?)
c) Run of the mill work. Nothing spectacular, nothing particularly
d) Possibly having value, but plagued with numerous errors.
e) Pseudoscience or quackery or hoax. How did these guys ever get their
Ph.D.s based on this?
f) Add your own comment.
r b-j firstname.lastname@example.org
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
|Register to reply|