Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #700357 > unrolled thread

Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? alal65536@gmail.com - 2018-08-29 07:10 -0700
    Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-29 09:32 -0500
      Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-08-29 16:52 +0200
    Re:Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-08-29 16:46 +0200
      Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? alal65536@gmail.com - 2018-08-29 08:10 -0700
        Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-29 16:20 +0000
        Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-08-29 18:45 +0200
          Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-29 13:11 -0500
            Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-08-29 23:13 +0200
              Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-29 20:25 -0500
                Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-29 18:46 -0700
                  Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-29 21:14 -0500
            Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2018-08-30 00:04 -0700
      Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2018-08-29 23:57 -0700
        Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-08-30 15:23 +0200
          Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2018-08-30 16:40 -0700
    No one is welcome here. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-08-29 08:26 -0700
    Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-29 16:10 +0000
      Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? alal65536@gmail.com - 2018-08-30 03:34 -0700
        Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-08-30 08:43 -0400
          Re: Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-30 13:00 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#700357 — Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?

Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.

I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.

In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.

If you don’t make me feel welcome in this newsgroup, remember the golden rule.

Abhinav Lal 
Writer & Investor 

“Truth is my religion”

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#700364

On 8/29/2018 9:10 AM, alal65536@gmail.com wrote:
> Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.

are you a non-physicist ?

> 
> I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.

great career!

> 
> In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.

excellent hobby

> 
> If you don’t make me feel welcome in this newsgroup, remember the golden rule.

But I have no control over your feelings.

Golden Rule = put the butter on the top side of the toast ?

> 
> Abhinav Lal 
> Writer & Investor 
> 
> “Truth is my religion”
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700367

Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> Wrote in message:

>> If you don’t make me feel welcome in this newsgroup, remember the golden rule.
> 
> But I have no control over your feelings.

Control over own behaviour is  enough.
> 
> Golden Rule = put the butter on the top side of the toast ?

No.
"Behave toward  the others in the way
 you wish they should behave toward  you.".

There is a the equivalent related "silver rule",
negatively reformulated:
"Do not behave toward  the others in the way
 you do not wish they should behave toward  you.".
> 


-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700366

alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
> Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.

They are welcome.

But many pretend superior knowledge about topics
they have hardly any  clue about except few popular articles or
 books. They have often boosted self-confidence running far ahead
 of their knowledge 

Those are not so welcome.

> 
> I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.

> In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.

Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.

So to prevent feeling not welcome,
The best us to avoid  the above behaviour patterns. :-)


-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700370

On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 8:16:11 PM UTC+5:30, Libor Striz wrote:
> alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
> > Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.
> 
> They are welcome.
> 
> But many pretend superior knowledge about topics
> they have hardly any  clue about except few popular articles or
>  books. They have often boosted self-confidence running far ahead
>  of their knowledge 
> 
> Those are not so welcome.

I have intermediate knowledge of business and computers through university education and work experience.  I have beginners knowledge of physics and mathematics through college education.

> 
> > 
> > I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
> 
> > In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
> 
> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.

Some of you scientists seem to have a superiority complex.  

> 
> So to prevent feeling not welcome,
> The best us to avoid  the above behaviour patterns. :-)

Physics is not perfect.  Scientific theories are provisional.  According to scientists, a scientific theory can never be proven to be true, only shown to be false.

> 
> 
> -- 
> Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)
> 
> "Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
> Miloš Forman

“What goes around, comes around”

> 
> 
> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Abhinav Lal 
Writer & Investor 

“He shall make the high places low, and the low places high”

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700388

<alal65536@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 8:16:11 PM UTC+5:30, Libor Striz wrote:
>> alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
>>> Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been
>>> made to feel unwelcome.
>> 
>> They are welcome.
>> 
>> But many pretend superior knowledge about topics
>> they have hardly any  clue about except few popular articles or
>> books. They have often boosted self-confidence running far ahead
>> of their knowledge 
>> 
>> Those are not so welcome.
> 
> I have intermediate knowledge of business and computers through
> university education and work experience.  I have beginners knowledge of
> physics and mathematics through college education.

Good. So what is your strategy for improvement on the “beginners
knowledge”? I would suggest that you don’t say you don’t have a strategy. 

> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired
>>> from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
>> 
>>> In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
>> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.
> 
> Some of you scientists seem to have a superiority complex.  

Be careful here. There are actually very few physicists here. A lot of
people here are well educated amateurs. However, they will react badly if a
weakly educated amateur claims to have the same value of opinion as a well
educated amateur. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but an informed
opinion is more valuable than an uninformed one. 

> 
>> 
>> So to prevent feeling not welcome,
>> The best us to avoid  the above behaviour patterns. :-)
> 
> Physics is not perfect.  Scientific theories are provisional.  According
> to scientists, a scientific theory can never be proven to be true, only shown to be false.

Of course. No one is claiming science is infallible or complete. However,
in order to know which questions are still truly open or interesting, you
do have to know more about the work done to date. 

> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)
>> 
>> "Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
>> Miloš Forman
> 
> “What goes around, comes around”
> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
>> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
> 
> Abhinav Lal 
> Writer & Investor 
> 
> “He shall make the high places low, and the low places high”
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700392

alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
> On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 8:16:11 PM UTC+5:30, Libor Striz wrote:
>> alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
>> > Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.
>> 
>> They are welcome.
>> 
>> But many pretend superior knowledge about topics
>> they have hardly any  clue about except few popular articles or
>>  books. They have often boosted self-confidence running far ahead
>>  of their knowledge 
>> 
>> Those are not so welcome.
> 
> I have intermediate knowledge of business and computers through university education and work experience.  I have beginners knowledge of physics and mathematics through college education.
> 
>> 
>> > 
>> > I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
>> 
>> > In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
>> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.
> 
> Some of you scientists seem to have a superiority complex.  

It is quite the opposite. The most retured engineers I meet here
 have superiority complex over scientists.

I am not such a fool to pretend
I am better in engineering than engineers. 
> 
>> 

> 
> Physics is not perfect.  Scientific theories are provisional.  According to scientists, a scientific theory can never be proven to be true, only shown to be false.

And that is true, in contrary to mathematics. Theories as models
 of nature behaviour  either fit this behaviour either not. That 
 is the only test we have, aside of formal consistency
 check.

If the theory does not fit, it cannot be right.
If the theory does fit, it does not tell it is right, it just
 tells it's predictions fits observations.


-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700399

On 8/29/2018 11:45 AM, Libor Striz wrote:
> alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
>> On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 8:16:11 PM UTC+5:30, Libor Striz wrote:
>>> alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
>>>> Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.
>>>
>>> They are welcome.
>>>
>>> But many pretend superior knowledge about topics
>>> they have hardly any  clue about except few popular articles or
>>>  books. They have often boosted self-confidence running far ahead
>>>  of their knowledge 
>>>
>>> Those are not so welcome.
>>
>> I have intermediate knowledge of business and computers through university education and work experience.  I have beginners knowledge of physics and mathematics through college education.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
>>>
>>>> In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
>>> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.
>>
>> Some of you scientists seem to have a superiority complex.  
> 
> It is quite the opposite. The most retured engineers I meet here
>  have superiority complex over scientists.
> 
> I am not such a fool to pretend
> I am better in engineering than engineers. 
>>
>>>
> 
>>
>> Physics is not perfect.  Scientific theories are provisional.  According to scientists, a scientific theory can never be proven to be true, only shown to be false.
> 
> And that is true, in contrary to mathematics. 

    Math is also founded upon assumptions, axoums, .

Theories as models
>  of nature behaviour  either fit this behaviour either not. That 
>  is the only test we have, aside of formal consistency
>  check.
> 
> If the theory does not fit, it cannot be right.

theory is modified, or accepted as working in regions

> If the theory does fit, it does not tell it is right, it just
>  tells it's predictions fits observations.
> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700412

Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> Wrote in message:

>> And that is true, in contrary to mathematics. 
> 
>     Math is also founded upon assumptions, axoums, .

Yes, but built over set  of axioms,
it's  theorems can be proven true or false. That is not case of
 scientific theories and  their parts.
> 

> 
> theory is modified, or accepted as working in regions
> 

Sure, but if it needs modification, it is not right.
If  it needs to be limited to a region, like GT or SR, it is not
 right either out of region.
It neither means it is right within the region. It may just mean
 the error is  acceptable or statistically insignificant.


-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700424

On 8/29/2018 4:13 PM, Libor Striz wrote:
> Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> Wrote in message:
> 
>>> And that is true, in contrary to mathematics. 
>>
>>     Math is also founded upon assumptions, axoums, .
> 
> Yes, but built over set  of axioms,
> it's  theorems can be proven true or false. That is not case of
>  scientific theories and  their parts.
>>
> 
>>
>> theory is modified, or accepted as working in regions
>>
> 
> Sure, but if it needs modification, it is not right.
> If  it needs to be limited to a region, like GT or SR, it is not
>  right either out of region.
> It neither means it is right within the region. It may just mean
>  the error is  acceptable or statistically insignificant.
> 
> 

yes, like a math model. I have a set of Dover book on Physics, a 2
volumes, and each chapter covers a branch of physics, they are composed
of math models, and the equations "work" for that 'region' of the
problem.  most chapters are completly different equations which describe
what is going on, within error bounds, and with assumptions, etc

take the math model of the flight of a bullet, simple at first, then add
air resistance, add temperature and density, add wind, add spin, add 3rd
dimention, add shape of bullet, add in material of bullet, add density
striation, add non uniform accelleration in gun barrel, add in
transition from gun barrel etc. refining the model to make it more
accurate. (in WW2 they used analog computers made of gears and turning
rods to calculate this stuff)

so there is no black or white, truth or lies in physics, unless some
researcher makes stuff up, but that could be unintentional, like cold
fusion.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700426

On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 6:25:42 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> On 8/29/2018 4:13 PM, Libor Striz wrote:
> > Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> Wrote in message:
> > 
> >>> And that is true, in contrary to mathematics. 
> >>
> >>     Math is also founded upon assumptions, axoums, .
> > 
> > Yes, but built over set  of axioms,
> > it's  theorems can be proven true or false. That is not case of
> >  scientific theories and  their parts.
> >>
> > 
> >>
> >> theory is modified, or accepted as working in regions
> >>
> > 
> > Sure, but if it needs modification, it is not right.
> > If  it needs to be limited to a region, like GT or SR, it is not
> >  right either out of region.
> > It neither means it is right within the region. It may just mean
> >  the error is  acceptable or statistically insignificant.
> > 
> > 
> 
> yes, like a math model. I have a set of Dover book on Physics, a 2
> volumes, and each chapter covers a branch of physics, they are composed
> of math models, and the equations "work" for that 'region' of the
> problem.  most chapters are completly different equations which describe
> what is going on, within error bounds, and with assumptions, etc
> 
> take the math model of the flight of a bullet, simple at first, then add
> air resistance, add temperature and density, add wind, add spin, add 3rd
> dimention, add shape of bullet, add in material of bullet, add density
> striation, add non uniform accelleration in gun barrel, add in
> transition from gun barrel etc. refining the model to make it more
> accurate. (in WW2 they used analog computers made of gears and turning
> rods to calculate this stuff)
> 
> so there is no black or white, truth or lies in physics, unless some
> researcher makes stuff up, but that could be unintentional, like cold
> fusion.

Eternal quantities are better. Unity as a concept... oneness in religion
and unification in science... or most superior- Into Togetherness

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700428

On 8/29/2018 8:46 PM, mitchrae3323@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 6:25:42 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
>> On 8/29/2018 4:13 PM, Libor Striz wrote:
>>> Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> Wrote in message:
>>>
>>>>> And that is true, in contrary to mathematics. 
>>>>
>>>>     Math is also founded upon assumptions, axoums, .
>>>
>>> Yes, but built over set  of axioms,
>>> it's  theorems can be proven true or false. That is not case of
>>>  scientific theories and  their parts.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> theory is modified, or accepted as working in regions
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, but if it needs modification, it is not right.
>>> If  it needs to be limited to a region, like GT or SR, it is not
>>>  right either out of region.
>>> It neither means it is right within the region. It may just mean
>>>  the error is  acceptable or statistically insignificant.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> yes, like a math model. I have a set of Dover book on Physics, a 2
>> volumes, and each chapter covers a branch of physics, they are composed
>> of math models, and the equations "work" for that 'region' of the
>> problem.  most chapters are completly different equations which describe
>> what is going on, within error bounds, and with assumptions, etc
>>
>> take the math model of the flight of a bullet, simple at first, then add
>> air resistance, add temperature and density, add wind, add spin, add 3rd
>> dimention, add shape of bullet, add in material of bullet, add density
>> striation, add non uniform accelleration in gun barrel, add in
>> transition from gun barrel etc. refining the model to make it more
>> accurate. (in WW2 they used analog computers made of gears and turning
>> rods to calculate this stuff)
>>
>> so there is no black or white, truth or lies in physics, unless some
>> researcher makes stuff up, but that could be unintentional, like cold
>> fusion.
> 
> Eternal quantities are better. Unity as a concept... oneness in religion
> and unification in science... or most superior- Into Togetherness
> 

     like a jar of gummy bears in the sun,

the 'All Stuck Together Theory' (ASTT)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700439

On Thursday, 30 August 2018 04:11:33 UTC+10, Sergio  wrote:
> On 8/29/2018 11:45 AM, Libor Striz wrote:
> > alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
> >> On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 8:16:11 PM UTC+5:30, Libor Striz wrote:
> >>> alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
> >>>> Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.
> >>>
> >>> They are welcome.
> >>>
> >>> But many pretend superior knowledge about topics
> >>> they have hardly any  clue about except few popular articles or
> >>>  books. They have often boosted self-confidence running far ahead
> >>>  of their knowledge 
> >>>
> >>> Those are not so welcome.
> >>
> >> I have intermediate knowledge of business and computers through university education and work experience.  I have beginners knowledge of physics and mathematics through college education.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
> >>>
> >>>> In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
> >>>
> >>> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
> >>> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.
> >>
> >> Some of you scientists seem to have a superiority complex.  
> > 
> > It is quite the opposite. The most retured engineers I meet here
> >  have superiority complex over scientists.
> > 
> > I am not such a fool to pretend
> > I am better in engineering than engineers. 
> >>
> >>>
> > 
> >>
> >> Physics is not perfect.  Scientific theories are provisional.  According to scientists, a scientific theory can never be proven to be true, only shown to be false.
> > 
> > And that is true, in contrary to mathematics. 
> 
>     Math is also founded upon assumptions, axoums, 

Geometry is founded upon axioms which are not assumptions but appear as self-evidently correct. Arithmetic is based upon representation. Algebra is based upon abstraction. Calculas integrates all these together. 

Unfortunately, when wrong assumptions are made using maths, or correct analytical methods are not used for a problem, mathematical results do not seem to work. It is not a problem with maths as such, but with the way it is used.
> 
> Theories as models
> >  of nature behaviour  either fit this behaviour either not. That 
> >  is the only test we have, aside of formal consistency
> >  check.
> > 
> > If the theory does not fit, it cannot be right.
> 
> theory is modified, or accepted as working in regions


Or it is dropped. Like the theory that all heavenly objects went around the Earth. Or that one would all off the edge of the flat Earth.
> 
> > If the theory does fit, it does not tell it is right, it just
> >  tells it's predictions fits observations.
> > 
> >

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700438

On Thursday, 30 August 2018 00:46:11 UTC+10, Libor Striz  wrote:
> alal65536@gmail.com Wrote in message:
> > Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been made to feel unwelcome.
> 
> They are welcome.
> 
> But many pretend superior knowledge about topics
> they have hardly any  clue about except few popular articles or
>  books. They have often boosted self-confidence running far ahead
>  of their knowledge 
> 
> Those are not so welcome.
> 
> > 
> > I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
> 
> > In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
> 
> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.

Unfortunately that is what the engineer - such as I - must do when he finds that some science (in this case, physics) has been corrupted, and is thus hindering technical advancement.
> 
> So to prevent feeling not welcome,
> The best us to avoid  the above behaviour patterns. :-)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)
> 
> "Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
> Miloš Forman
> 
> 
> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700450

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> On Thursday, 30 August 2018 00:46:11 UTC+10, Libor Striz  wrote:

>> 
>> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
>> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.
> 
> Unfortunately that is what the engineer - such as I - must do when he finds that some science (in this case, physics) has been corrupted, and is thus hindering technical advancement.

Science would require reproducible evidence for this. This thing
 is uneasy to corrupt.

-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700518

On Thursday, 30 August 2018 23:23:07 UTC+10, Libor Striz  wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> > On Thursday, 30 August 2018 00:46:11 UTC+10, Libor Striz  wrote:
> 
> >> 
> >> Unfortunately, many of them are retired engineers, 
> >> who decided to show they understand science better then scientists.
> > 
> > Unfortunately that is what the engineer - such as I - must do when he finds that some science (in this case, physics) has been corrupted, and is thus hindering technical advancement.
> 
> Science would require reproducible evidence for this. This thing
>  is uneasy to corrupt.

Science is a method. The progress of science depends upon those using it honestly. When dishonest people take over the show, and block honest people using corrupted institutions, science suffers.
> 
> -- 
> Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)
> 
> "Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
> Miloš Forman
> 
> 
> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700375 — No one is welcome here.

> If you don’t make me feel welcome in this newsgroup,
>  remember the golden rule.

No one is welcome here, especially not me.

> Truth is my religion

You can't prove anything, not ThermoDynamics ( Entropy and eXergy ),
nor General Relativity; in fact, they _ contradict each other.

The best you can do is:

  - Find it useful ( in its domain ).
  - Try to Falsify it ( in its domain ).

All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells me:

  Randomness is ignorance, nothing more.

Everyone, from the serial killer to his executer, slave and master,
are best viewed under this light (SuperDeterminism), instead of 
assuming "free will" ("the uncaused cause"), à la Christianity.

SuperDeterminism was useful to Einstein, and to me;
it is _ not useful to The Pope.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700387

<alal65536@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been
> made to feel unwelcome.
> 
> I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from
> my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
> 
> In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
> 
> If you don’t make me feel welcome in this newsgroup, remember the golden rule.
> 
> Abhinav Lal 
> Writer & Investor 
> 
> “Truth is my religion”
> 

Abhinav, just a little advice. 

A lot of what you post is not really physics but metaphysics or ontology or
even psychology. Metaphysics about spacetime is still metaphysics. The key
here is not what the physical subject matter is — atoms, the universe,
quantum fields — but how that subject is being investigated. A scientific
investigation is wholly different than a philosophical one. 

I think you’ll find that if you focus on science and how scientists
investigate nature, and stay away from topics that are inherently not
amenable to scientific investigation, then you’ll get less backdraft. 

-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700446

On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 9:40:44 PM UTC+5:30, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <alal65536@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been
> > made to feel unwelcome.
> > 
> > I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from
> > my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
> > 
> > In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
> > 
> > If you don’t make me feel welcome in this newsgroup, remember the golden rule.
> > 
> > Abhinav Lal 
> > Writer & Investor 
> > 
> > “Truth is my religion”
> > 
> 
> Abhinav, just a little advice. 
> 
> A lot of what you post is not really physics but metaphysics or ontology or
> even psychology. Metaphysics about spacetime is still metaphysics. The key
> here is not what the physical subject matter is — atoms, the universe,
> quantum fields — but how that subject is being investigated. A scientific
> investigation is wholly different than a philosophical one. 
> 
> I think you’ll find that if you focus on science and how scientists
> investigate nature, and stay away from topics that are inherently not
> amenable to scientific investigation, then you’ll get less backdraft. 

I guess that interdisciplinary discussion is not welcome here. 

Abhinav Lal 
Writer & Investor 

“What do you care what people think?”

> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#700447

On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 03:34:01 -0700 (PDT), alal65536@gmail.com wrote:

>On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 at 9:40:44 PM UTC+5:30, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> <alal65536@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Are non-physicists not welcome in this newsgroup?  Lately I have been
>> > made to feel unwelcome.
>> > 
>> > I have a B.S. Computer Engineering, and a MBA Finance.  I am retired from
>> > my work as a consultant, and write and invest.
>> > 
>> > In my free time, I like to read, including popular books on physics.
>> > 
>> > If you don’t make me feel welcome in this newsgroup, remember the golden rule.
>> > 
>> > Abhinav Lal 
>> > Writer & Investor 
>> > 
>> > “Truth is my religion”
>> > 
>> 
>> Abhinav, just a little advice. 
>> 
>> A lot of what you post is not really physics but metaphysics or ontology or
>> even psychology. Metaphysics about spacetime is still metaphysics. The key
>> here is not what the physical subject matter is — atoms, the universe,
>> quantum fields — but how that subject is being investigated. A scientific
>> investigation is wholly different than a philosophical one. 
>> 
>> I think you’ll find that if you focus on science and how scientists
>> investigate nature, and stay away from topics that are inherently not
>> amenable to scientific investigation, then you’ll get less backdraft. 
>
>I guess that interdisciplinary discussion is not welcome here. 

Compare the meanings of *inter*disciplinary and *extra*disciplinary.

Which do you want to make a habit of doing in sci.physics?

Many can't seem to comprehend the difference between a group where
they want to post/participate and a blog where they can spew frequent,
stream-of-consciousness musings, or promotions of their off-topic
religion and/or hobby horse.




>Abhinav Lal 
>Writer & Investor 
>
>“What do you care what people think?”
>
>> 
>> -- 
>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web