17 ms·
It's unrealistic and unfair to expect scientists/experts to do the hard work of debunking every crackpot that comes along. The crackpot needs to be more apparen
by aklemm 6y ago
It's unrealistic and unfair to expect scientists/experts to do the hard work of debunking every crackpot that comes along. The crackpot needs to be more apparent and enticing if he wants to break through.
- danpalmer 6y agoYeah I don't expect them to debunk every crackpot, but a large project with multiple people involved, the backing of a large company, and several papers submitted for peer review feels to me like it passes the bar of "worth engaging with".
- aklemm 6y agoMaybe, but his track record is not great. If he's really got something, I'd think he could easily draw people into it rather than create skepticism. But I don't know much...
- ricardobeat 6y agoHe published a paper, asked for comments, and here we are saying he is a crackpot and should somehow 'draw people into it'. Seems like everyone is losing...
- aklemm 6y agoWell, I'll bet anyone $100 he doesn't have a theory everything.
- stared 6y agoIf it gets through peer-review of reputable journals - then certainly yes. The burden of proof always rests on the one proposing a grand claim. But my bet*) is that if it gets accepted, then with severely reduced claims (not "theory of everything", but "We model X with Y, and were able to replicate Z1 in general and Z2 in low-energy limit. Further studies..."). Large company and many people involved, as of now, is the only reason why it gets some attention. Otherwise it would be buried as a PDF in "misc" section on one's academic website.