Notices
Results 1 to 44 of 44
Like Tree19Likes
  • 1 Post By Devon Keogh
  • 2 Post By anticorncob28
  • 2 Post By Harold14370
  • 2 Post By Harold14370
  • 4 Post By LuciDreaming
  • 2 Post By Markus Hanke
  • 1 Post By KJW
  • 1 Post By Janus
  • 1 Post By Cogito Ergo Sum
  • 2 Post By Markus Hanke

Thread: In the films: "Einstein is wrong"

  1. #1 In the films: "Einstein is wrong" 
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    In popular media today and films, it seems as if it is in fashion to say Einstein was wrong. Was this because of the whole Jake Barnett fiasco or some other reason?

    One example of this poking fun at Einstein's theories would be Transformers (I dont know which film)


    Neverfly likes this.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    In popular media today and films, it seems as if it is in fashion to say Einstein was wrong. Was this because of the whole Jake Barnett fiasco or some other reason?

    I do not know, but Hollywood and the media is not exactly known for its scientific knowledge nor its scientific accuracy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    One example of this poking fun at Einstein's theories would be Transformers (I dont know which film)

    Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.


    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior anticorncob28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Nebraska, USA
    Posts
    269
    Jacob Barnett doesn't have much to do with it. Most people have never heard of him, and I think he's actually beginning to accept relativity.
    The reason so many people deny special relativity is mostly that it contradicts common sense and it seems bizarre, nobody has ever experienced time dilation that they could actually sense without a super accurate clock. People also don't like to admit they're wrong, so when they hear that some things in science fiction are actually possible (to a degree), they don't like to believe it.
    My parents don't believe in relativity, and it really bothers me. I would really like to convince them that they are wrong, because it is aggravating in discussions.
    Markus Hanke and Neverfly like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Don't try to learn science from popular media and films.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Don't try to learn science from popular media and films.
    But Hollywood taught me all that I know about physics.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,517
    Obviously the main reason why films state that "Einstein was wrong" is that if he were right (in the film's story line) then FTL travel wouldn't be possible and that would screw the entire premise of the film.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Roadrunner gravity
    Neverfly and LuciDreaming like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Masters Degree LuciDreaming's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    656
    Brian Cox tweeted a couple of days ago "Why do people keep sending me emails saying Einstein was wrong? He wasn't. Shut up". Short, sweet and to the point :-)
    "And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh" Nietzsche.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    People are lazy. It is always easier to label something that "doesn't appear to make sense to me" as wrong, rather than putting in the effort to sit down and study it in detail.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by LuciDreaming View Post
    Brian Cox tweeted a couple of days ago "Why do people keep sending me emails saying Einstein was wrong? He wasn't. Shut up".
    That's usually my response too.
    "Ok, brain let's get things straight. You don't like me, and I don't like you, so let's do this so I can go back to killing you with beer." - Homer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Don't try to learn science from popular media and films.
    But Hollywood taught me all that I know about physics.
    Yeah, we've noticed ...
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Maybe we should do this here. Whenever we get a crank anti-relativity thread no one responds except an Admin posts, "Einstein was right, SHUT UP!" It will be interesting to see what happens.
    I am having a hard time understanding why "anti-relativity" threads are even allowed anywhere else but in the trash can. Let's save ourselves some work...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Actually, it would be handy to have an "Against the Mainstream" section ( separate from Pseudo or New Hypotheses ), specifically for topics such as anti-relativity. People whose threads are put in there can then work their way out of that section by providing proper scientific arguments as to why they should be promoted back into the main forum areas - let the cranks do the work, as opposed to us working to have them relegated to trash. That's really how it should be, I often think we have it the wrong way around...

    EDIT - There could be a predetermined list of topics which end up automatically in "Against the Mainstream", such as anti-relativity, anti-quantum, aether, "gravity is electromagnetism", push gravity and such like. Just saying...
    PhDemon and LuciDreaming like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Actually, it would be handy to have an "Against the Mainstream" section ( separate from Pseudo or New Hypotheses ), specifically for topics such as anti-relativity. People whose threads are put in there can then work their way out of that section by providing proper scientific arguments as to why they should be promoted back into the main forum areas - let the cranks do the work, as opposed to us working to have them relegated to trash. That's really how it should be, I often think we have it the wrong way around...

    EDIT - There could be a predetermined list of topics which end up automatically in "Against the Mainstream", such as anti-relativity, anti-quantum, aether, "gravity is electromagnetism", push gravity and such like. Just saying...

    Yes, but if the section is created, then it should not be made available for guests (as is the case with the Trash Can).
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Don't try to learn science from popular media and films.
    I never said I did, I use lectures from the likes of Leonard Susskind on youtube to learn physics. This thread was all about the annoying attitude of the media to things they do not understand...

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Don't try to learn science from popular media and films.
    I never said I did, I use lectures from the likes of Leonard Susskind on youtube to learn physics. This thread was all about the annoying attitude of the media to things they do not understand...
    Annoying that you could not ignore and you had to make a thread for it instead of sending a pm to any member. You are even annoying than the film makers#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    I disagree, Merumario. Making people aware of the trend that may result in more and more cranks signing up to denounce "that fraud Einstein" doesn't seem annoying to me.

    Phil Plait devoted an entire blog, called "Bad Astronomy" to dispel myths including movie and popular culture myths and the Bad Science often portrayed in them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    I disagree, Merumario. Making people aware of the trend that may result in more and more cranks signing up to denounce "that fraud Einstein" doesn't seem annoying to me.

    Phil Plait devoted an entire blog, called "Bad Astronomy" to dispel myths including movie and popular culture myths and the Bad Science often portrayed in them.
    1st poster doesn't look like one who is denouncing but seeking our concept before(probably) denounce#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    1st poster doesn't look like one who is denouncing but seeking our concept before(probably) denounce#
    That is a possibility, but I guess I don't always feel suspicious right away.
    He has 107 (Currently) posts on the board- maybe reviewing them might reveal whether he has a history of denouncing "Einsteinism."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    1st poster doesn't look like one who is denouncing but seeking our concept before(probably) denounce#
    That is a possibility, but I guess I don't always feel suspicious right away.
    He has 107 (Currently) posts on the board- maybe reviewing them might reveal whether he has a history of denouncing "Einsteinism."
    True(maybe)#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    KJW
    KJW is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Actually, it would be handy to have an "Against the Mainstream" section ( separate from Pseudo or New Hypotheses ), specifically for topics such as anti-relativity. People whose threads are put in there can then work their way out of that section by providing proper scientific arguments as to why they should be promoted back into the main forum areas - let the cranks do the work, as opposed to us working to have them relegated to trash. That's really how it should be, I often think we have it the wrong way around...

    EDIT - There could be a predetermined list of topics which end up automatically in "Against the Mainstream", such as anti-relativity, anti-quantum, aether, "gravity is electromagnetism", push gravity and such like. Just saying...
    I think crackpots like the idea of being "Against the Mainstream". Why would they want theirs posts out of such a section? At least with the trash, they are being told what is thought of their posts, and maybe they'll be motivated to do the work to get their posts out of that section.
    RedPanda likes this.
    There are no paradoxes in relativity, just people's misunderstandings of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    I think crackpots like the idea of being "Against the Mainstream".
    Probably right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,156
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Actually, it would be handy to have an "Against the Mainstream" section ( separate from Pseudo or New Hypotheses ), specifically for topics such as anti-relativity. People whose threads are put in there can then work their way out of that section by providing proper scientific arguments as to why they should be promoted back into the main forum areas - let the cranks do the work, as opposed to us working to have them relegated to trash. That's really how it should be, I often think we have it the wrong way around...

    EDIT - There could be a predetermined list of topics which end up automatically in "Against the Mainstream", such as anti-relativity, anti-quantum, aether, "gravity is electromagnetism", push gravity and such like. Just saying...
    I think crackpots like the idea of being "Against the Mainstream". Why would they want theirs posts out of such a section? At least with the trash, they are being told what is thought of their posts, and maybe they'll be motivated to do the work to get their posts out of that section.

    I think this depends on what "stage" the crackpot is in. In the early stage all most want is for their ideas to be accepted by the mainstream, and when first rebuked feel that it is because they haven't explained it properly. Then they move on to the stage where they shift the blame to a lack of understanding on the part of others. Finally they reach the "Sour Grapes" stage, where acceptance by the mainstream is no longer desirable. In other words, if they cant' have it, it's not worth having. This is where many start claiming that mainstream science is run by cabal who's only desire is to keep out new ideas in order to protect their own status.
    Markus Hanke likes this.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    67
    kind of Perfect holograms in star war movie is one of the contradictory invention according to theory of relativity .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,517
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencestudy View Post
    kind of Perfect holograms in star war movie is one of the contradictory invention according to theory of relativity .
    What?
    How does relativity say anything about holograms?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sciencestudy View Post
    kind of Perfect holograms in star war movie is one of the contradictory invention according to theory of relativity .
    What?
    How does relativity say anything about holograms?
    And he clearly appears to be stating it as a scientific fact# how is this true?
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Maybe we should do this here. Whenever we get a crank anti-relativity thread no one responds except an Admin posts, "Einstein was right, SHUT UP!" It will be interesting to see what happens.
    I am having a hard time understanding why "anti-relativity" threads are even allowed anywhere else but in the trash can. Let's save ourselves some work...
    I sympathise, but I've noticed one of the more satisfying roles this forum performs is one of education. I've certainly received some education here - and been forced by debate to go and educate myself, so as not to be caught out speaking ex ano. That's valuable. So, personally, I would always hope we would be able to give someone expressing an anti-Einstein view at least one chance at being set straight, through civil discussion, before we consign them to a trash or alternative baloney section. Unless of course they already have "previous" for tiresome crankery.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    I think crackpots like the idea of being "Against the Mainstream".
    Probably right.
    No no , it's far worse then that : they want to educate the mainstream
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    And now we have the opinion of one of the cranks. It's just a shame that cranks have such a shaky grasp of science and reality that I wouldn't trust them to train a dog let alone educate anyone in a scientific subject.
    And while you do the above, I will trust them in misleading cranks ℓιкє themselves and perhaps science illiterates#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    I forgot to mention there are good cranks and bad cranks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    I forgot to mention there are good cranks and bad cranks.
    A physics crank is a crank no good no bad#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    I forgot to mention there are good cranks and bad cranks.

    I beg to differ.

    Cranks waste other people's time and efforts and their ideas can be harmful when ignorant or gullible people accept them.
    They are unwilling to change their (inaccurate) views based on solid scientific evidences and they have problems with expressing and representing their ideas in a coherent manner.
    PhDemon likes this.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Why not take a look at the work of Erik Verlinde, a theoretical physicist and string theorist.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/science/13gravity.html?_r=1&src=mv

    a
    lso he is on wikipedia and has a personnal website.


    Here's the example of a serious scientist who has the guts to bring forward an idea, a concept, that tries to elaborate on the true fysical nature of 'gravity'.

    This man is far from being Bozo the Clown.

    And he is not dismissed as a crank, although his idea has not been proven in any way at all.

    May i remind you that Einstein's ideas were in the beginning controversial, yet it is his persistence to persue those ideas, that brought on the greatest science theory of all times.

    I doubt it were the crank shouters who helped him further elaborate his theory.

    Crank shouters do not seem to realise that a new idea does not necessarily have to go against the theories of Einstein, they can just further detail or elaborate them.

    And as you know , there is a lot to be elaborated from the point of Einstein's "gravitational field" and "some sort of medium in which it could propagate".

    His space-time curvature is probably correct as a mechanism for gravity , showing the results of gravity, but he is not elaborating on the principles that make the space-time curvature happen, or showing what this looks like in detail, the causes, the origin, the fysical reality of it.


    >>> So why feel attacked if attempts are made to make progress in that field ?


    I should start up a wikipage on 'the crank shouter'. My opening sentence would be "The crank shouter is 'an sich' against progress..."


    >> Bad cranks have bad new ideas
    >>Good cranks have good new ideas


    Just an oppinion ,), no need to get the shotguns out ,)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Key words>

    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    ...a serious scientist...
    I.e. someone who actually understands the mainstream theory he may or may not agree with and has logical reasons for his disagreement, not an ignorant nut job with no clue but who still disagrees because they don't understand it. The first case describes a "scientist" the second describes a "crank".
    >> I wouldn't say all cranks are nut jobs who don't have a clue, but other than that i agree (!) with your statement.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    Why not take a look at the work of Erik Verlinde, a theoretical physicist and string theorist.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/science/13gravity.html?_r=1&src=mv
    a
    lso he is on wikipedia and has a personnal website.

    Here's the example of a serious scientist who has the guts to bring forward an idea, a concept, that tries to elaborate on the true fysical nature of 'gravity'.
    This man is far from being Bozo the Clown.
    And he is not dismissed as a crank, although his idea has not been proven in any way at all.

    I do think that his papers (which are mostly published in Nuclear Physics B and JHEP, both peer-reviewed journals) are the reason why he is not dismissed as a crank.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    May i remind you that Einstein's ideas were in the beginning controversial, yet it is his persistence to persue those ideas, that brought on the greatest science theory of all times.

    I doubt it were the crank shouters who helped him further elaborate his theory.

    I doubt that Einstein's ideas were controversial when he first published them.
    I am certain that member Markus Hanke can give you more information about this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    Crank shouters do not seem to realise that a new idea does not necessarily have to go against the theories of Einstein, they can just further detail or elaborate them.

    And as you know , there is a lot to be elaborated from the point of Einstein's "gravitational field" and "some sort of medium in which it could propagate".

    Yes, but some cranks dismiss the foundations of Einstein's work, such as special and general relativity. That is not elaborating or expanding the ideas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    His space-time curvature is probably correct as a mechanism for gravity , showing the results of gravity, but he is not elaborating on the principles that make the space-time curvature happen, or showing what this looks like in detail, the causes, the origin, the fysical reality of it

    Who is "he"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Noa Drake View Post
    >> Bad cranks have bad new ideas
    >>Good cranks have good new ideas

    There is no such thing as "good cranks".
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    A most interesting paper; I wouldn't necessarily agree with everything in there, but I must admit that the basic idea would warrant further thought. Attempts to reduce gravity to entropy have been made before, but not quite in this way...I skipped through the paper, but will definitely give it a more thorough read when I get the chance.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    I doubt that Einstein's ideas were controversial when he first published them.
    I am certain that member Markus Hanke can give you more information about this.
    Einstein's ideas were not an entirely new construct, but merely a generalisation of already existing Newtonian concepts; the major new paradigm was to look at gravity in terms of geometry as opposed to a mechanical interaction. I am not much of a historian, but to the best of my knowledge there was not very much controversy in mainstream circles when Einstein published his papers; Special Relativity pretty much falls straight out of electrodynamics and Minkowski geometry, and General Relativity was experimentally supported rather quickly. I would say the acceptance level was quite high, at least among those who possessed the capacity to understand his maths. Tensors and differential geometry wasn't exactly common knowledge amongst physicists back then.
    Neverfly and Cogito Ergo Sum like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    It's a common crank claim that has been repeated often enough that people have begun believing it was true.

    The concept of Relativity predates Einstein. However, Einstein was the first to tie it all neatly together into a well supported theory, providing greater insight into its workings.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Cranks are all just very tedious. I just wish they would actually do some studying before blathering on about stuff they don't have the first clues about.
    Maybe cranks believe in a thought which was a thought proposed by either plato or socrates(can't really remember which) it says "all that there is to know is in the mind"........cranks appears to be good followers of that#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Do think that if they did know how science work they will be cranks? I don't think so#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Do think that if they did know how science work they will be cranks? I don't think so#

    So, you state that an individual who knows how science works, cannot be a crank?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Do think that if they did know how science work they will be cranks? I don't think so#

    So, you state that an individual who knows how science works, cannot be a crank?
    Yeah someone ℓιкє that can hardly be a crank but its not for all cases#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Do think that if they did know how science work they will be cranks? I don't think so#

    So, you state that an individual who knows how science works, cannot be a crank?
    Yeah someone ℓιкє that can hardly be a crank but its not for all cases#
    Definitely not. We had recently a guest on our faculty from University of Toronto. Some renoved astrophysicist engaged in stellar spectroscopy of B[e] type stars. Sure he was a capacity in his field but expertise in astrophysics probably gave him impression that he understands other fields of physics just as well. I was shocked to see such accomplished scientist disputing Standard model especialy when top of his knowledge in QM was hydrogen atom basicaly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Gere View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by merumario View Post
    Do think that if they did know how science work they will be cranks? I don't think so#

    So, you state that an individual who knows how science works, cannot be a crank?
    Yeah someone ℓιкє that can hardly be a crank but its not for all cases#
    Definitely not. We had recently a guest on our faculty from University of Toronto. Some renoved astrophysicist engaged in stellar spectroscopy of B[e] type stars. Sure he was a capacity in his field but expertise in astrophysics probably gave him impression that he understands other fields of physics just as well. I was shocked to see such accomplished scientist disputing Standard model especialy when top of his knowledge in QM was hydrogen atom basicaly.
    1stly; I doubt if he is renowed scientist, 2ndly;if he was a good scientist he cannot or should not have a poor understanding of 'standard model'....3rdly; if he stumbles doesn't actually mean many will stumble. 4thly; he is just one of the few guys I said earlier#
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 13th, 2013, 03:12 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 22nd, 2012, 01:53 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 22nd, 2012, 01:53 PM
  4. "There are never right or wrong opinions"
    By Kyleg in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: January 24th, 2012, 06:51 PM
  5. "Einstein was wrong!! And Evil!!"
    By That Rascal Puff in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: August 20th, 2006, 04:58 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •