Decoding the Controversial Theories of ram1024 on Physics Forums

[ram2048]

for those of you who haven't been following the thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=23975

i have been twice exiled to theory development because of my theories scare people. Do you think I'm a crack-pot?

 

[enigma]

You've been twice "exiled" to theory development because that is the correct place for theories which either go against current accepted science or haven't been peer reviewed yet.

Posting Rules

If you feel that you have better ideas then those taught at your local University please post your concepts in our Theory Development Forum.

The topics of the regular fora only cover current accepted sceince. It is that way because otherwise we'd have to either put up with "Pi=3", the "Earth is flat", or similar craziness in addition to pet theories, or just delete them all out of hand.

Be thankful for the theory development forum. Without it, your posts wouldn't have been "exiled", they would have probably been deleted.

 

[Hurkyl]

In particular, you display this behaviors common to crackpots (disclaimer: I'm not asserting you have no other similarities to crackpot behavior!):


You believe that your ideas frighten the establishment.

You make up your own definitions for things, and subsequently act as if standard concepts conform to your definitions, instead of the standard ones.

You fail to realize that merely presenting a new theory does not invalidate an old theory.

You fail to realize that merely presenting a new theory does not compel others to abandon the old theory.

You use the term "logical" to mean something other than "deducible via the rules of logic".

You don't consider that the "establishment" may have actually considered your ideas already, and may have even developed them more than you have.

 

[ram2048]

duly noted ;D

<who reads those 5 page disclaimers anyways? "blah blah you hit accept you're signing away your soul and the soul of any offspring you may possesses blah blah ... <tired> *accept* 'yay i can post...' <doorbell rings> <answers door> Satan: "we're here for the soul" 'whaaa?' Satan: "it's all right here in the contract" <takes soul> <leaves> ... 'hmm' ... 'yay i can post...'

 

[ram2048]

You don't consider that the "establishment" may have actually considered your ideas already, and may have even developed them more than you have.

this is where you're wrong. if the "establishment" had already developed them, in the course of my 3 months and multiple forum postings someone would have said "hey this already exists <here> shut the hell up already"

so there you have it :D

 

[cookiemonster]

It's ridiculous to expect someone to be familiar with all the ideas ever developed. Most of them are dead-end and never gain fame (or, more likely, infamy) beyond one or two people.

cookiemonster

 

[Hurkyl]

Might I suggest that the questions I've been posing to you haven't been entirely random?

 

[Zurtex]

Yes, not only does his theory not work which is fine because at some point we all make mistakes even having thought on something for a while. However he does not listen to constructive comments showing where he has gone wrong, he assumes maths is wrong which is amazingly arrogant considering how long and how many have been involved in its progress. He will not listen to suggestions that he learns more maths so he actually understands what's involved and he doesn't and won't learn and refuses understand basic mathematical concepts.

It's ridiculous to expect someone to be familiar with all the ideas ever developed. Most of them are dead-end and never gain fame (or, more likely, infamy) beyond one or two people.

cookiemonster

Very true, I had a friend who had come up with this very clever system of deriving imaginary and complex numbers from natural numbers. This made it more mathematically logical rather than just a pragmatical jump, but other than managing to get it published in a small corner of some vast mathematical website for a few years he never got anywhere with it.