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

ST to strict

  1. Aug 5, 2006 #1

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think what well known scientists think beyond the standard model is important, there are so many topics that the BTSM thread doe's not cover,
    The very fact that PFs allows a BTSM thread should mean that the forum is willing to debate What these guys have put in print, or is PFs going to sensor the thoughts of renowned scientists.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 5, 2006 #2

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What exactly is your complaint, wolram?

    Is it something in the Guidelines you disagree with or were there specific posts/threads that you are talking about? And what is "ST"?
     
  4. Aug 5, 2006 #3

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    My complaint is that all cosmology is so unintuitive, dark energy, dark mass,
    Space tiger closed a thread that i thought could explore what is a well known problem, and what scientist thought about the problem, it is only human to ask, the guide lines should dissallow BTSM if these things can not be discused.
     
  5. Aug 5, 2006 #4

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Or may be you think i am to stupid to understand , well i am sure i am but to try is better than not.
     
  6. Aug 5, 2006 #5

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    OOps i have gone to far, you guys love your meat and two vege, sorry i will shut up now.
     
  7. Aug 5, 2006 #6

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Appart from saying cowards.
     
  8. Aug 5, 2006 #7

    SpaceTiger

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    We have an entire forum devoted to "Beyond the Standard Model", which includes topics such as modified gravity, alternative inflation models, cyclic universe, etc. I don't mind you addressing any one of these topics in the Cosmology forum, but I think it's silly to have a thread that collects all of them together. The scope is too broad and is redundant with BTSM. It would be just as silly to put a thread in the astrophysics forum that collects work on the "expanding universe".

    Nothing in the Cosmology forum guidelines disallows discussion of extensions/alternatives to the standard model, as long as they are studied in the mainstream. We have had many threads on the cyclic universe, alternative inflation, MOND, SCC, etc. The only time you have been censored in the Cosmology forum is when you were putting forward conspiracy theories about the suppression of non-mainstream material.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2006
  9. Aug 5, 2006 #8

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    What the heck has this to do with what well known scientists have put in print, i only want to know the mind , and arxiv what these guys have said.
     
  10. Aug 5, 2006 #9

    SpaceTiger

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I don't see what's confusing about this. You can't have a thread that archives "Beyond the Standard Model" papers in the "Cosmology" forum, for the reasons I already gave you both in your original thread and in the reply above. Every single day, multiple BTSM papers appear on astro-ph and gr-qc. It is not this site's purpose to archive those papers, particularly in the "Cosmology" forum.
     
  11. Aug 5, 2006 #10

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Wollie, do you really think it would be at all useful (from a scientific point of view) to list various quotes without complete reference to context? And don't you just hate it when quotations from "famous people" get thrown about in defense of this or that pet opinion.

    Edit : I thought the idea was to collect quotes, rather than papers.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2006
  12. Aug 5, 2006 #11

    SpaceTiger

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    If this is your intention, wolram, then I have even deeper objections. Collecting quotations from papers, popular science books, and newspaper articles is an extremely poor (even counterproductive) way to learn about science. Aside from the issues with context, the quotes are often outdated.
     
  13. Aug 5, 2006 #12

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Would you think quotes from mr j baez counter producutive?, come on guys
    what is science?
     
  14. Aug 5, 2006 #13

    SpaceTiger

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Without context? Of course I would. Dr. Baez has many fine articles explaining topics in physics and astrophysics that are frequently referenced in the Cosmology forum, but I don't think we should have a thread devoted to cherry-picking quotes from them.


    Not the process of collecting quotes from famous people, that's for sure.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2006
  15. Aug 5, 2006 #14

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member


    Cherry pick you say, i would rather say a wealth of knowledge from the most informed scientists you not included.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2006
  16. Aug 5, 2006 #15

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Science is certainly NOT made up with a bunch of quotations!

    Zz.
     
  17. Aug 5, 2006 #16

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Single quotes out of context of the entire paper is not science and does not contribute much to knowledge, unless one just happens to like having a quote for every occassion. It still remains that the physics and cosmology forums are not an appropriate place for a collection of quotes. Neither is there a reason to try to cover within one thread a topic for which we have an entire forum. If there is a particular paper that interests you, feel free to discuss it, but if all you're doing is collecting quotes, you can use your journal for that (you can even put a link to the journal in your signature line so others can find it easily if they would be interested in nice quotations).

    Wollie, I'm not sure why you're so upset about this. And certainly ST doesn't deserve such harsh treatment for deleting that thread.

    I think the original question of why the thread has been deleted has been answered, and you've had your chance to vent about it. Continuing on being rude to ST is uncalled for. Any further disagreement can be continued via Private Message. I'm locking this here.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?