4 ms·
>For over 55 years, John Bell has misled the physicists community and... The way this is phrased, and the topic itself, makes this strongly sound like a crackp
by Jiro 5y ago
>For over 55 years, John Bell has misled the physicists community and...
The way this is phrased, and the topic itself, makes this strongly sound like a crackpot that somehow sneaked into a journal.
- stephc_int13 5y agoI disagree, showing a bit of irreverence is not a tell-tale sign of being a crackpot. Also, having misled a community do not imply having done so voluntarily.
- sthnblllII 5y agoThe authors of the paper didnt write that. Thats the article's words.
- monocasa 5y agoThe article's author is the paper's author as well.
- sthnblllII 5y agoNice lol. My bet is on crackpot then.
- joshuamorton 5y agoThe article author is the paper author.
- frakt0x90 5y agoYes. I don't think there's every been a theorem that could be classified as maliciously misleading. And even if the author didn't mean to make it sound malicious, the grandiose language is unbecoming of an academic article.
- ajju 5y agoI don't see the text you quote in the actual paper. Here is a link to the paper: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/134/10004/pdf https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/134/100...
- arbitrage 5y agothat's the science journalist writing for sciencex, not the author of the paper.
- TeeMassive 5y agoYeah this was hugely inappropriate. On the bright side it is a good way to know it's bunked.