Is Null Physics a Legitimate Theory or Just a Crackpot Idea?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter maverick_starstrider
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Crackpot Physics Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the legitimacy of "Null Physics" as a theory, questioning whether it is a credible scientific approach or merely a fringe idea lacking academic support. Participants express curiosity about the theory's basis and its reception in the scientific community.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about "Null Physics," labeling it as a crackpot theory and questioning its validity due to a lack of peer-reviewed material.
  • One participant seeks more substantive information about the theory's basis and how it is purported to be proven, indicating a desire for a deeper understanding despite the skepticism.
  • Another participant notes the absence of a Wikipedia article on "Null Physics," suggesting a lack of recognition or acceptance in mainstream discourse.
  • A later reply emphasizes that discussions on unpeer-reviewed material are not permitted, hinting at the thread's potential closure due to forum rules.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express skepticism about "Null Physics," with some outright dismissing it as a crackpot idea. However, there is a curiosity about the theory's content and basis, indicating that not all views are entirely dismissive.

Contextual Notes

The discussion is limited by the absence of peer-reviewed information on "Null Physics," which affects the ability to engage with the theory substantively. The participants' views are influenced by the lack of academic scrutiny surrounding the topic.

maverick_starstrider
Messages
1,118
Reaction score
7
Hey,

I've seen this "Null Physics" book advertised in magazines like Scientific American (which is a rather shameful move on SciAm's part) and it basically seems like some guy's got some crackpot theory and is trying to circumvent any actual academic scrutiny that would come by publishing in a journal and is simply peddling it straight to the 'what the BLEEP do we know' type crowd.
However, I am a bit curious. I can't seem to find any information about this theory (other then buying the book of course). Does anyone know anything about it (i.e. what the basis of the 'theory' and basically how out there is it).

(I know this has been discussed before but there doesn't actually seem to be any information about it).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ya I read that but I'm just a little curious if anyone can actually provide some substantive information on what its basis is and how it goes about getting 'proven' in the book.
 
P.S. I'm surprised there's not a Wikipedia article about it yet. This things been around for awhile.
 
I'm afraid that, as per PF rules, we cannot discuss material that has not been peer reviewed. Thus, as I'm sure you were expecting (judging from the result of the other thread) this thread will be closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
Replies
26
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
12K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 94 ·
4
Replies
94
Views
7K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K