Suggestion for New General Discussion Header

  • Thread starter Thread starter Feeble Wonk
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
A suggestion was made to rename the "General Discussion" section to "Physical Philosophy" to encourage discussions about the philosophical implications of modern physics. The proposer believes there is a demand for such discussions among participants who seek informed opinions on the nature of existence and reality, despite these topics being untestable and often leading to shutdowns in the past. Concerns were raised about the previous Philosophy sub-forum, which was deemed unproductive due to disruptive members and misinformation. The discussion highlights a desire for a moderated space that balances philosophical speculation with scientific rigor. However, the overall sentiment leans against reintroducing such a forum, emphasizing the challenges it presents.
Feeble Wonk
Messages
241
Reaction score
44
I'd like to suggest a new header for your "General Discussion" options, which might be something like "Physical Philosophy". I frequently come to Physics Forums for informed opinion on a variety of Physics issues. These inquiries often lead to questions (in my mind anyway) about what modern physics is actually telling us about the nature of existence... about the nature of "reality", so to speak. I understand that this track of thought leads away from academic testable science, and the threads are frequently shut down because of that. But, despite this, I suspect that there are a lot of PF participants like myself that would enjoy those kinds of (admittedly philosophical) discussions, in an intellectual environment that is at least grounded in legitimate scientific inquiry rather than "new age" pseudoscience silliness. I also think there would be great value in having this forum of discussion monitored by your mentors for exactly that reason. Philosophical speculation about scientific concepts, by its very nature, is typically untestable, which is why it's not "science". But the mentor could at least provide some guidance about when a proposed idea is simply "wrong", for scientific reasons. Are there others out there that would have interest in such a forum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We just recently made the decision to shut down the Philosophy sub-forum because it was basically a bunch of people that didn't know the science posting as if they did and then becoming argumentative when attempts were made to correct them. It was a mess and I am afraid it's not something that fits with our mission, as stated in the Global Guidelines. It is something that we do not wish to consider at this time.
 
Fair enough. It was just a thought. The "being corrected" part was precisely the value that I was looking for of course, but I see your point.
 
  • Like
Likes Greg Bernhardt
Feeble Wonk said:
Are there others out there that would have interest in such a forum?
Member #50 says, "No." That was something that was "tolerated" for far too long, and attracted far more disruptive members and posts than was useful.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo
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...
This came up in my job today (UXP). Never thought to raise it here on PF till now. Hyperlinks really should be underlined at all times. PF only underlines them when they are rolled over. Colour alone (especially dark blue/purple) makes it difficult to spot a hyperlink in a large block of text (or even a small one). Not everyone can see perfectly. Even if they don't suffer from colour deficiency, not everyone has the visual acuity to distinguish two very close shades of text. Hover actions...
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

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
26
Views
3K
Back
Top