3 ms·

> Now run the numbers Why don't you do that, and share the results here? > I would want to see it done Why don't you do it yourself?

throwawaymaths 3y ago
Im not a physicist. I am not selling a theory that needs to answer to a simple challenge. Cosmologists are, it is their responsibility. Moreover, if I did, it would be a huge waste of time because dollars to doughnuts I get gatekept and no one believes me, and, if anything it could make challenging the CMB worse because this model gets filed away as "that one crackpot throwawaymaths idea don't listen to it". Back when I was a hard scientist it was MY responsibility to show that I had done all the controls correctly. And trust me that was hours, weeks of grueling manual labor. A pity if physicists aren't held to the same standard. Imagine this exchange. Reviewer: Did you run this control? Scientist: No, you run it. Good luck publishing.
- raattgift 3y ago
  True; people with any sort of expertise will be less generous with their attention if it's clear that you won't make an effort to understand what it is you're challenging. Additionally, is it really you that's mounting a challenge? Quoting you: "There's a 'fringe' theory ... the primary proponent ... if my understanding is correct it would still be compatible with ..." <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39674424 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39674424>. So, > crackpot throwawaymaths idea it is not really your idea, is it? I see you as taking the position that you're entitled to require me to make efforts to assist you. I also note that what I did volunteer upthread, you rejected as "muddling the point". Fine. I think we've evaporated each other's conversational good will. Bye bye.
  - throwawaymaths 3y ago
    What you were doing was muddling the point. As best I can tell (and it was difficult to understand what you were saying), you were talking about summing blackbody radiation over time and distance. That's not what this model is.

throwawaymaths 3y ago

Im not a physicist. I am not selling a theory that needs to answer to a simple challenge. Cosmologists are, it is their responsibility. Moreover, if I did, it would be a huge waste of time because dollars to doughnuts I get gatekept and no one believes me, and, if anything it could make challenging the CMB worse because this model gets filed away as "that one crackpot throwawaymaths idea don't listen to it". Back when I was a hard scientist it was MY responsibility to show that I had done all the controls correctly. And trust me that was hours, weeks of grueling manual labor. A pity if physicists aren't held to the same standard. Imagine this exchange. Reviewer: Did you run this control? Scientist: No, you run it. Good luck publishing.

raattgift 3y ago
True; people with any sort of expertise will be less generous with their attention if it's clear that you won't make an effort to understand what it is you're challenging. Additionally, is it really you that's mounting a challenge? Quoting you: "There's a 'fringe' theory ... the primary proponent ... if my understanding is correct it would still be compatible with ..." <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39674424 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39674424>. So, > crackpot throwawaymaths idea it is not really your idea, is it? I see you as taking the position that you're entitled to require me to make efforts to assist you. I also note that what I did volunteer upthread, you rejected as "muddling the point". Fine. I think we've evaporated each other's conversational good will. Bye bye.
- throwawaymaths 3y ago
  What you were doing was muddling the point. As best I can tell (and it was difficult to understand what you were saying), you were talking about summing blackbody radiation over time and distance. That's not what this model is.