3 ms·
You need to read the article to understand my comment. It is specifically about the crisis in high energy particle physics and cosmology. My comment specifica
by mrjangles 5y ago
You need to read the article to understand my comment. It is specifically about the crisis in high energy particle physics and cosmology. My comment specifically mentions advances in other areas of physics. In case it wasn't clear, I am saying these advancements, such as imaging and understanding glass (and quantum computers, semiconductor tech...etc), are currently the edge of science and our understanding of the universe. It is progressing, albeit slowly, it just doesn't get any hype like the pseudo-science stuff does.
- colechristensen 5y agoAnd my point is, be more charitable to scientists you think are wrong who are acting in good faith. There is a long history of people like this being right despite the oppression on occasion. You want other things to be studied, go help yourself.
- mellosouls 5y agoThere is a long history of people like this being right despite the oppression on occasion. A dominant school of thought producing no observable results over decades, instead apparently relying on career pressure to conform and perpetuate the path would normally be considered dogmatic rather than oppressed, and doesn't immediately spring to mind as a model for "a long history of people like this being right".