Is PF tolerating crackpot theories ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mentz114
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights concerns regarding the acceptance of non-mainstream interpretations of special relativity on Physics Forums, particularly in two threads about simultaneity. Participants argue that some users are promoting private theories that contradict established principles of relativity, which could undermine the forum's reputation. While one user is seen as genuinely seeking to understand relativity, others are accused of straying into unsupported claims about concepts like the arrow of time. The conversation emphasizes the importance of adhering to forum rules to maintain quality discourse. Overall, there is a call for moderation to ensure discussions remain focused and scientifically valid.
Mentz114
Messages
5,429
Reaction score
292
I refer to two threads in the Relativity section -

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=221494

which is titled 'Revisiting the lesson of the "Relativity of Simultaneity"' and this

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=213911

entitled "Simultaneity".

My understanding of special relativity is that simultaneity of two distant events is observer dependent, and therefore has no physical significance. Despite excellent and detailed answers from PF members ( JesseM mostly) neither poster will accept this, and other posters have now joined in, with statements denying conclusions from SR.

If someone does not accept the validity of all of SR, and presents arguments purporting to support this view, are these not 'private theories' as defined in the forum rules ?

What about sticking to the topic ? The second thread I cite has gone from a question about simultaneity ( answered in the second post) to a discussion of a private theory in which the arrow of time is attributed to cosmic expansion.

The reputation and quality of the PF depends on application of the rules, and I think it is slipping.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the case of the first thread I think joey_m is sincerely trying to understand relativity of simultaneity. I mean, he is working off of Einstein's writings directly, it's not like he's articulating an alternative. You can't call something a "crackpot theory" if it is not theorizing anything. I've been reading through that thread because I've had some of the same questions myself.
 
Mentz114 said:
The second thread I cite has gone from a question about simultaneity ( answered in the second post) to a discussion of a private theory in which the arrow of time is attributed to cosmic expansion.

To be honest, I've not read through the thread, but I don't think that attributing the arrow of time to the cosmological expansion is a private theory; after all, the cosmological arrow of time is defined to be the direction in time in which the universe is expanding.
 
Please report any thread in question and the staff will review. Thanks.
 
I want to thank those members who interacted with me a couple of years ago in two Optics Forum threads. They were @Drakkith, @hutchphd, @Gleb1964, and @KAHR-Alpha. I had something I wanted the scientific community to know and slipped a new idea in against the rules. Thank you also to @berkeman for suggesting paths to meet with academia. Anyway, I finally got a paper on the same matter as discussed in those forum threads, the fat lens model, got it peer-reviewed, and IJRAP...
About 20 years ago, in my mid-30s (and with a BA in economics and a master's in business), I started taking night classes in physics hoping to eventually earn the science degree I'd always wanted but never pursued. I found physics forums and used it to ask questions I was unable to get answered from my textbooks or class lectures. Unfortunately, work and life got in the way and I never got further the freshman courses. Well, here it is 20 years later. I'm in my mid-50s now, and in a...

Similar threads

Back
Top