Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I am offended by the narrow vision of this forum

  1. Mar 5, 2006 #1
    How unamerican. I am ashamed to have posted a creative intellectual idea here, then to have it criticized simply because it has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal! And further to have the thread locked to prevent further discussion, not that it was possible given the attitude here. What are you people? Stupid? If you ever tried to dupicate published journal articles you would find fully 50 percent of them frauds, providing nowhere near sufficient information to reproduce the results they claim.

    This forum IS a form of publishing. And it is NOT professional. I will continue to post elsewhere, on one of the other thousand or so science forums out there that support freedom of expression and free exchange of ideas. Sit on it.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 5, 2006 #2

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I've moved this out of Astrophysics. Feedback goes in the Feedback Forum.

    Don't let the door hit your kiester on the way out. :smile:
     
  4. Mar 5, 2006 #3

    Tom Mattson

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    InfernoSun,

    I have looked at your profile page and it shows that you have not agreed to the PF Global Guidelines. The forum software isn't supposed to let you post without doing that, and we are trying to figure out what went wrong here. But you should be aware that those Guidelines do in fact apply, and you should read and agree to them before you continue posting, if you continue posting.

    https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=5374

    Sorry for the confusion, and thank you for your anticipated cooperation!
     
  5. Mar 5, 2006 #4

    VietDao29

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Nah, the way I see it, Janus does not lock the thread to prevent any further discussion. It's just that, here, if you have any new idea, you may want to send it to the Independent Research, and have a discussion there. However, there are strict rules that you need to abide in order to have the thread displayed there.
    As pervect had already said:
    And from Janus:
    I think they are guiding you to the Independent Research board, which is the sub-forums of the General Physics board. And I see no offense there.
     
  6. Mar 5, 2006 #5

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    There is a great variety and diversity of opinion expressed at PF, so I disagree with the assertion that PF expresses a narrow vision.
    Nevertheless, we do adhere to certain standards comparable to those found in journals and professional circles.
    OK, please feel free to do so. :rolleyes:
    That doesn't sound very nice. And you didn't say, Please! Besides, I don't what 'it' to which one is referring. :biggrin: Please be more specific.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2006
  7. Mar 5, 2006 #6
    Why are you offened by that.You can submit to the Independeatnt resarch fourm.
    There is a reason why PF has this policy.This prevent thories that are incorrect being seorioulsy used.Let's say this someone creats a theory about that states that when toast goes faster then speed of light it will turn into butter.Now some physics student takes it seourisly.Let say this physics student has a very importent resarch project about a new theory.If he doesn't pass the project he will fail physics.So he decides
    to do a project on the theory toast goes faster then speed of light it will turn into butter.His physics profesr knows this not true so he fails that student.
    InfrenoSun, You can leave if you want to.Please do.
     
  8. Mar 6, 2006 #7
    What are the qualifications of the PF staff? Are you professionals, or are you trying to emulate professionals?
     
  9. Mar 6, 2006 #8

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The staff here are comprised of a combination of graduate students and professionals in our respective fields. However, that's largely aside from the point. We do have our own vision of what this forum is intended to do, how we plan to accomplish that, and what types of posts and what topics we wish to host here. It's rather silly to become offended because an internet site does not include the topic you wish to discuss within the subject matter it hosts. If we do not offer what you like, want or need, then it's simply a matter of finding or creating a site that does offer it. We do the things we think we do best. That's not going to appeal to everyone, we know that, and it does not offend us if you do not stay because we don't appeal to you. It would be rather like walking into university bookstore and wanting to know why they aren't selling the latest bestseller you're interested in reading. It simply is the wrong place for that sort of subject matter, but all you need to do is walk down the street to another bookstore that sells the bestsellers, but not textbooks, to find what suits your interests or needs. If our vision is not your vision, find the place that suits your vision, don't try to tell us we are the ones who need to change.
     
  10. Mar 7, 2006 #9
    Moonbear,

    That's a pretty kitty.

    Anyway, I'm not trying to disparage this site or the staff. I'm genuinely curious. What are the qualifications of the staff here?

    I ask this not to bring anyone down, but rather to better understand the environment. This information has particular rammifications to anyone interested in posting in the IR forum, but it also has a bearing on the content in the rest of this site.

    For instance; were I to ask a question, how assured might I be that the answers provided by the staff are accurate, complete and current?

    I've grown to like PF very much. I just wish I knew how reliable the content is.
     
  11. Mar 7, 2006 #10

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This has already been answered by the Moonbear, but I'll provide more detail.

    All of the mentors of the more technical portions of the site (the physics, math, engineering, biology, etc.) are either graduate students or have their doctorates already (the majority have advanced degrees).

    I'm going to assume that your next question will be why don't we publish a curriculum vitae for each of our mentors? There are several problems with this:

    1) We permit anonymity here. While many of our mentors (or members) are quite willing to discuss their personal lives, others are concerned about internet privacy and prefer not to publish personal information.

    2) We have no way of verifying the authenticity of a CV. We're volunteers, and we don't have the resources to go about researching the validity of such information. Universities hire full-time professionals to do this kind of investigation.

    3) We don't judge members (or mentors!) by their credentials, anyway; we judge only by the quality of one's posts. Anyone is permitted to post here, regardless of their formal education, so long as their posts pass our (rather basic) academic standards.

    Our recognized homework helpers and science advisors may or may not have any particular level of formal education; we don't ask them. If they consistently make posts that are on the money, we recognize them.

    How do we decide whether a post is valid or not? We come to a consensus. The staff here has a wide variety of experience in a wide variety of subjects. It's almost certain that at least one of us has experience with almost any academic subject. Also, our membership includes some absolutely brilliant people, and the "reporting" feature allows anyone to participate in the site's moderation by alerting us to posts that may not be accurate, or otherwise fail to meet our standards.

    How can we gaurantee the accuracy of PF's content? We can't, of course. This isn't a textbook, nor is it a refereed journal. Our mentorship acts in a mostly democratic fashion, and no single person is responsible for any of our content. Certainly, there are times when some misinformation gets past both the mentors and our entire membership, but experience has shown this to be quite rare. While PF does not attempt to meet the academic rigor of a textbook, our members are generally a quite reliable source of information.

    Our best qualities, however, are how we're different from textbooks and journals: we promote informal conversation and debate involving people of any and all qualifications.

    - Warren
     
  12. Mar 7, 2006 #11

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I am a professional and I have published at various conferences. Most of what I publish however is proprietary and confidential to various organizations, and therefore not in the public domain.

    I have sent my qualifications (and my corporate affiliation) to the staff, so they can verify my background. They can google on my name and find various references.
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2006
  13. Mar 7, 2006 #12
    How narrow minded to assume every person on this site is American. I'm British, though I'm hardly a big poster, but I know Matt Grime isn't American (or at least doesn't attend/work/research at a US uni). :rolleyes:
     
  14. Mar 7, 2006 #13

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That's very true, we have quite an international membership, even among the staff, we have several countries represented.
     
  15. Mar 7, 2006 #14

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yup, we have people from the US, Canada, various European countries, Antarctica, etc etc.
     
  16. Mar 7, 2006 #15
    What he means is that the site is being run out of America, under American law and American values.
     
  17. Mar 7, 2006 #16
    You mean there are other civiized countries besides the USA? Next you'll be telling me that the USA doesn't rule the world! :biggrin:
     
  18. Mar 7, 2006 #17
    Well, I suppose that's one.

    Googling is a good idea. I did this in another site where I'd been vehemently shot down by someone for stating a fact I knew to be true. I googled the guy and found out he was a fashion photographer! Weird.

    That's why I'm interested in learning more about the staff. Online, people can claim to be any darn thing they want. Heck, as far as you guys know I'm the Vice-President of the United States (read: Absolute Ruler of Earth). Or, maybe I'm a costume designer and seamstress for a major Hollywood motion picture studio. No, wait. I think I'd like you to know me as poor villager living in Mexico. My husband works in the fields in America and I stay home to raise our six children (Como este'?). Wait. Now I know. I want to be known as a talking horse. Just call me Mr. Ed! :rofl:
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2006
  19. Mar 7, 2006 #18

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    You honestly don't think we are THAT naive, do you?

    Did you somehow guess that people with Science Advisor or Mentor designation got them simply without already producing a track record? What, we simply dragged someone off the street and make them in charge?

    You seem to have missed Chroot's post. We NEVER asked for people's credentials on here. So the last part of your post here is completely moot, since who people claim they are is of no significance.

    Zz.
     
  20. Mar 7, 2006 #19

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That's quite true, which is why I'm often puzzled when people get so upset about not being able to post here about whatever newfangled theory they've just hatched. While we strive for quality content, we're not the same as a peer-reviewed journal, and we don't try to be or claim to be. We provide a place for students to get help on homework, and a place where anyone can discuss science topics among a group of other people who share those interests, and with a number of professionals and upper level graduate students around who can help keep those discussions from getting sidetracked by those who don't know what they're talking about but claim they do. The members requested a place where new, unpublished ideas could be discussed, which is the IR forum, but that's not at all the equivalent to peer review or publication, it's just a place where those with a keen interest can discuss their ideas. There's no guarantee we will have professionals with expertise on any of those subjects, and no guarantee that if we do, they'll participate, and we've separated that out from the other discussions because it is speculative and we don't want to confuse students who have enough on their plate figuring out the stuff that's already fairly well established and covered in their coursework. Likewise, if we err and shut down discussion by someone who really does know what they're talking about and does have more expertise than we do in an area, I suspect they would have thick enough skin and confidence enough in their knowledge and have enough other venues to disseminate their findings to not really be concerned if some internet site didn't let them talk about their work.

    Generally, though, we judge posts by their content and by the support people provide for their claims, not on the credentials of the person making the post (we can't ever truly verify those anyway; someone could just as easily claim to be someone they are not, although certain ways of arguing a point can give us clues). A student, or a person who is not a scientist but has an interest in learning more about science, can ask questions and contribute side-by-side with the professionals here, and as long as they ask questions about what they don't know or don't understand, and refrain from making claims they can't support, it's all good and welcome. It's when the claims are unsubstantiated, or outlandish, or someone asserts as fact some random myth or rumor they heard at the corner bar without checking their facts or asking if it actually is true or makes sense, or thinks they've come up with a new theory without even knowing the status of currently accepted theories that folks run afoul of our guidelines.
     
  21. Mar 7, 2006 #20
    Of course not. I was just bein' silly.

    I didn't suggest that. I actually like and respect the staff I've encountered here.

    Well, for the most part it isn't significant. However, I'm interested in posting something to the IR forum and I'd just like to know more about the folks that will be passing judgement on my work.

    I'm not looking for names or other personal information. I'd just like a general understanding of folks' strengths and weaknesses in terms of their ability to perform a peer review. If this information is unavailable, then I won't sweat it. I'd just prefer to know.
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2006
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: I am offended by the narrow vision of this forum
  1. I Love Physics Forums (Replies: 4)

  2. I broke the forums (Replies: 6)

Loading...