3 ms·

What would you do if you genuinely believe you'd discovered something as potentially important? 1) Get paranoid, figure out where you've gone wrong 2) Kicked

by zh3 3y ago

What would you do if you genuinely believe you'd discovered something as potentially important? 1) Get paranoid, figure out where you've gone wrong 2) Kicked it as hard as we can, can't find a problem. So... 3a) Keep this potentially important result under our hats for as long as it takes 3b) publish it with with some risk of embarassmment, and - hopefully - get others to either verify the result or point out where we went wrong. I'd always go for b) - after strenuous effort to falsify my own theory. Of course, some people - scientists are not an exception, just less susceptibl to it - can't bear to abandon a lovely result.

nwienert 3y ago
4) Go to your government to get the biggest cash out immediately, for the lowest risk (they may be unhappy if you didn't disclose it to them first), also putting your nation potentially massively ahead of others. They supposedly started playing with this in 1999. If they discovered this stuff nearly two decades ago and SK was let in on it, maybe they have a whole array of military projects built around it already?
TheAceOfHearts 3y ago
If I encounter something world-changing I'd consider it an ethical obligation to share it with the world. Show your work, be transparent about what you know and what you've found, and try to help others in replicating. Maintain humility. Something I dislike about modern research is that there's not a lot of transparency or rapid updates. It wouldn't take someone much time to record a few additional videos and try to address concerns regarding the magnetic properties. If you really think the findings are important you should try to have public communications with other scientists where you share as much information as possible. Too many people get caught up with playing politics and lose sight of the real goal, which is pushing humanity forward.
wmf 3y ago
In theory you should privately invite someone to replicate your work, then publish it if the replication works. You'd probably get scooped though, so you have no choice but to arxiv it immediately.
- kadoban 3y ago
  > In theory you should privately invite someone to replicate your work, then publish it if the replication works. You'd probably get scooped though, so you have no choice but to arxiv it immediately. What are we optimising for here? I'm not even convinced that that's better. What's the harm in the way they went instead, assuming they're not frauding.
  - wmf 3y ago
    Embarrassment, although there may also be some career blowback.
    - kadoban 3y ago
      Ah, I see. I mean, the authors don't terribly seem to be worried about that. I thought we were talking about better for society or something.
N19PEDL2 3y ago
I think point 3b depends on how you publish your findings. It can be either: "I found the first superconductor material at room-temperature", or "I found a material which seems to be superconductor at room-temperature, please help me to test if it is true or otherwise to find the error in my observation data" The latter doesn't seem to me to be at risk of embarrassment, on the contrary it is how the scientific method should work.

by zh3 3y ago

nwienert 3y ago

4) Go to your government to get the biggest cash out immediately, for the lowest risk (they may be unhappy if you didn't disclose it to them first), also putting your nation potentially massively ahead of others. They supposedly started playing with this in 1999. If they discovered this stuff nearly two decades ago and SK was let in on it, maybe they have a whole array of military projects built around it already?

TheAceOfHearts 3y ago

If I encounter something world-changing I'd consider it an ethical obligation to share it with the world. Show your work, be transparent about what you know and what you've found, and try to help others in replicating. Maintain humility. Something I dislike about modern research is that there's not a lot of transparency or rapid updates. It wouldn't take someone much time to record a few additional videos and try to address concerns regarding the magnetic properties. If you really think the findings are important you should try to have public communications with other scientists where you share as much information as possible. Too many people get caught up with playing politics and lose sight of the real goal, which is pushing humanity forward.

wmf 3y ago

In theory you should privately invite someone to replicate your work, then publish it if the replication works. You'd probably get scooped though, so you have no choice but to arxiv it immediately.

kadoban 3y ago
> In theory you should privately invite someone to replicate your work, then publish it if the replication works. You'd probably get scooped though, so you have no choice but to arxiv it immediately. What are we optimising for here? I'm not even convinced that that's better. What's the harm in the way they went instead, assuming they're not frauding.
- wmf 3y ago
  Embarrassment, although there may also be some career blowback.
  - kadoban 3y ago
    Ah, I see. I mean, the authors don't terribly seem to be worried about that. I thought we were talking about better for society or something.

N19PEDL2 3y ago

I think point 3b depends on how you publish your findings. It can be either: "I found the first superconductor material at room-temperature", or "I found a material which seems to be superconductor at room-temperature, please help me to test if it is true or otherwise to find the error in my observation data" The latter doesn't seem to me to be at risk of embarrassment, on the contrary it is how the scientific method should work.