- #1
DrummingAtom
- 659
- 2
Or maybe Science in general? I will casually watch some Youtube videos on some Physics topics and the comments just amaze me. Everyone has their own theory on that topic, whether it makes sense or not.
DrummingAtom said:Or maybe Science in general? I will casually watch some Youtube videos on some Physics topics and the comments just amaze me. Everyone has their own theory on that topic, whether it makes sense or not.
jobyts said:I think Mathematics is the only field of study that is immune to attacks. Why? may be because mathematics works only on absolute proofs.
Dadface said:I don't think it was metallic oxides I think it was the rainbow fairies being mischievous again.I heard the sirens so the police were on their way to arrest them.
jobyts said:I think Mathematics is the only field of study that is immune to attacks. Why? may be because mathematics works only on absolute proofs.
I think Biology and cosmology are the worst affected ones.
BobG said:I think it's because so many people are scared to death of math - especially most of your physics crackpots.
DrummingAtom said:Or maybe Science in general? I will casually watch some Youtube videos on some Physics topics and the comments just amaze me. Everyone has their own theory on that topic, whether it makes sense or not.
:rofl: Getting a headstart on the funniest PF member this year.BobG said:I think it's because so many people are scared to death of math - especially most of your physics crackpots.
Sadly no, there's a cottage industry in trisecting the general angle. And proving the 5th postulate.jobyts said:I think Mathematics is the only field of study that is immune to attacks. Why? may be because mathematics works only on absolute proofs.
lubuntu said:Science attracts crackpots because of how scientifically illiterate the majority of the population is. It's easy for somehow to fool people if those people don't have any basis in what is actually known on a subject. We need better science education for everyone , regardless of there career path.
jimmysnyder said:Sadly no, there's a cottage industry in trisecting the general angle. And proving the 5th postulate.
Focus said:Unknot would you care to share some links?
jreelawg said:Most geniuses have a little crackpot in them. Einstein, working so hard at a unified field theory, much of his work was crackpot. Tesla, same thing one of the biggest contributers to the field of physics, but also had ideas and claims that are considered crackpot.
Unknot said:Oh, sorry. Here's a link to his Fermat proof.
[removed]
About the tenured professor with P/NP claim:
[removed]
There's a link to a newsgroup with discussion.
Dadface said:Wow since I've got a lot of crackpot in me(and I mean totally cracked demented nonsensical crackpottery)Then I must be a big genius.Thank you jreelawg this halfwit is now off to celebrate. :uhh:
Ivan Seeking said:If we accept eccentric as a synonym, then most physicists are crackpots, which makes no sense if we wish to distinguish between crackpots and credible scientists. Impractical or foolish is probably is closer to the mark. But given the nature of GR and QM, what is impractical or foolish becomes a bit more difficult to identify. For me a crackpot is someone who makes unjustified leaps of logic, or who arrives at conclusions that lack any logic whatsoever, not someone who pursues a particular line of thinking that fails.
Focus said:Unknot would you care to share some links?
Unknot said:Oh, sorry. Here's a link to his Fermat proof.
[removed]
About the tenured professor with P/NP claim:
[removed]
There's a link to a newsgroup with discussion.
Overly Speculative Posts:
One of the main goals of PF is to help students learn the current status of physics as practiced by the scientific community; accordingly, Physicsforums.com strives to maintain high standards of academic integrity. There are many open questions in physics, and we welcome discussion on those subjects provided the discussion remains intellectually sound. It is against our Posting Guidelines to discuss, in most of the PF forums, new or non-mainstream theories or ideas that have not been published in professional peer-reviewed journals or are not part of current professional mainstream scientific discussion. Posts deleted under this rule will be accompanied by a private message from a Staff member, and, if appropriate, an invitation to resubmit the post in accordance with our Independent Research Guidelines. Poorly formulated personal theories, unfounded challenges of mainstream science, and overt crackpottery will not be tolerated anywhere on the site. Linking to obviously "crank" or "crackpot" sites is prohibited.