Is PF tolerating crackpot theories ?

  • Thread starter Mentz114
  • Start date
In summary, there are two threads in the Relativity section that are causing some controversy. One discusses the relativity of simultaneity and the other discusses the arrow of time and its relation to cosmic expansion. Despite detailed explanations from members, some posters are not accepting the validity of special relativity and are presenting their own theories. However, it is important to stick to the topic and follow the forum rules to maintain the reputation and quality of the Physics Forums. One member, joey_m, is sincerely trying to understand relativity of simultaneity by referencing Einstein's writings. Attributing the arrow of time to cosmic expansion is not a private theory, as it is defined as the direction in which the universe is expanding. If there are
  • #1
Mentz114
5,432
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
  • #2
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.
 
  • #3
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.
 
  • #4
Please report any thread in question and the staff will review. Thanks.
 

FAQ: Is PF tolerating crackpot theories ?

1. What is a crackpot theory?

A crackpot theory is an unproven or widely discredited idea or belief that is not supported by scientific evidence or accepted by the scientific community.

2. How do scientists determine if a theory is a crackpot theory?

Scientists use the scientific method to evaluate theories and determine their validity. This involves conducting experiments, collecting data, and analyzing results to support or refute a theory.

3. Can a crackpot theory ever be proven true?

It is highly unlikely that a crackpot theory will ever be proven true, as they often lack evidence and do not follow scientific principles. However, if new evidence is discovered that supports the theory, it may be re-evaluated by the scientific community.

4. Why do some people believe in crackpot theories?

There are a variety of reasons why someone may believe in a crackpot theory. Some may have a personal or emotional attachment to the theory, while others may not have a strong understanding of scientific principles and are easily influenced by misinformation.

5. How does the scientific community handle crackpot theories?

The scientific community takes a skeptical approach to crackpot theories, requiring strong evidence and adherence to scientific principles before accepting a theory. If a theory is deemed to be unsupported by evidence, it will not be accepted or taken seriously by the scientific community.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
58
Views
8K
Replies
12
Views
5K
Back
Top