4 ms·

If you take the results of soft 'sciences' seriously you've already lost. Recognize submissions like the one you linked as noise and move on. Common sense goes

by Kenji 10y ago

If you take the results of soft 'sciences' seriously you've already lost. Recognize submissions like the one you linked as noise and move on. Common sense goes a long way.

aaron695 10y ago
I think this comment actually nails it. Most of the current issues in published science are around the 'soft sciences' They are notoriously hard to disprove I think because they are so wishy washy. Maths, Physics, Chemistry can get you disproven in a hard way. There's a lot more incentive to make sure your study is valid.
- gus_massa 10y ago
  There is a lot of dubious Physics that is very popular here. My antifavorite is the Em-drive: Most popular article: "EmDrive study officially published" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12995125 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12995125 (595 points, 21 days ago, 432 comments) (My second choice is Cold fusion / LENR.) This has slightly less votes that the most popular stories about colossal experiments: "Second Gravitational Wave Detected at LIGO" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11910700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11910700 (621 points, 178 days ago, 175 comments) "Higgs Boson Explained by Cartoon" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4193590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4193590 (646 points, 1622 days ago, 128 comments) The problem is that most people like nice stories, and a massless thruster that can make space travel much faster is interesting. And it's much easier to explain than why we need the Higgs's boson or gravitational waves. The two later have no possible application in sight. They are interesting results, but it's not clear how they will change your life. (I'm optimistic, let's see what happens in 30 years.) The Em-drive looks more promising. Cheap and fast space travel soon, for some definition of soon. It's easier to explain, in particular because the theoretical explanation is worse than the experimental setup. No one tries to explain something about gauge invariance of curvature tensors.
  - Kenji 10y ago
    As far as I know, the EmDrive is still considered controversial and it is not certain whether and how it works. It is interesting because it could cause a revolution to how we view impulse, so it might be a colossal thing just as much as it might be complete nonsense. So I think the comparison is disingenous.
    - gus_massa 10y ago
      It's difficult to explain in a short comment, but the Em-drive is as controversial as the yeti. If it were true, then it breaks the current laws of physics. In particular the conservation of momentum and energy. There are some bogus explanations that try to make it compatible with the current laws of Physics, but they are nonsense. Breaking the current laws of Physics is not bad if you have a good experiment. The problem is that they are measuring a very small force that is very close to the experimental error. And there are many other forces that are difficult to calculate and may explain the force they are measuring.

by Kenji 10y ago

If you take the results of soft 'sciences' seriously you've already lost. Recognize submissions like the one you linked as noise and move on. Common sense goes a long way.

aaron695 10y ago

I think this comment actually nails it. Most of the current issues in published science are around the 'soft sciences' They are notoriously hard to disprove I think because they are so wishy washy. Maths, Physics, Chemistry can get you disproven in a hard way. There's a lot more incentive to make sure your study is valid.

gus_massa 10y ago
There is a lot of dubious Physics that is very popular here. My antifavorite is the Em-drive: Most popular article: "EmDrive study officially published" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12995125 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12995125 (595 points, 21 days ago, 432 comments) (My second choice is Cold fusion / LENR.) This has slightly less votes that the most popular stories about colossal experiments: "Second Gravitational Wave Detected at LIGO" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11910700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11910700 (621 points, 178 days ago, 175 comments) "Higgs Boson Explained by Cartoon" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4193590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4193590 (646 points, 1622 days ago, 128 comments) The problem is that most people like nice stories, and a massless thruster that can make space travel much faster is interesting. And it's much easier to explain than why we need the Higgs's boson or gravitational waves. The two later have no possible application in sight. They are interesting results, but it's not clear how they will change your life. (I'm optimistic, let's see what happens in 30 years.) The Em-drive looks more promising. Cheap and fast space travel soon, for some definition of soon. It's easier to explain, in particular because the theoretical explanation is worse than the experimental setup. No one tries to explain something about gauge invariance of curvature tensors.
- Kenji 10y ago
  As far as I know, the EmDrive is still considered controversial and it is not certain whether and how it works. It is interesting because it could cause a revolution to how we view impulse, so it might be a colossal thing just as much as it might be complete nonsense. So I think the comparison is disingenous.
  - gus_massa 10y ago
    It's difficult to explain in a short comment, but the Em-drive is as controversial as the yeti. If it were true, then it breaks the current laws of physics. In particular the conservation of momentum and energy. There are some bogus explanations that try to make it compatible with the current laws of Physics, but they are nonsense. Breaking the current laws of Physics is not bad if you have a good experiment. The problem is that they are measuring a very small force that is very close to the experimental error. And there are many other forces that are difficult to calculate and may explain the force they are measuring.