5 ms·

You know something has gone horrifically badly when a paper begins with > This reply paper should be read as a continuation of my previous reply paper [1], whi

You know something has gone horrifically badly when a paper begins with > This reply paper should be read as a continuation of my previous reply paper [1], which is a reply published in this journal to a previous critique of one of my papers We're way too deep in replies now, and anyone who values their time should get out now.

0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago
On the other hand, academics slap fights are magnificently petty to behold. In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake. That is why academic politics are so bitter.
- n4r9 2y ago
  The conclusion reads like someone who can't admit they're wrong on Reddit: > The common defect in the critiques [2], [6], and [14] is that, instead of engaging with the original quaternionic 3-sphere model presented in my papers [1], [7]– [11] using Geometric Algebra, they insist on criticizing entirely unrelated flat space models based on matrices and vector “algebra.” This logical fallacy by itself renders the critiques invalid. Nevertheless, in this paper I have addressed every claim made in the critique [6] and the critiques it relies on, and demonstrated, point by point, that none of the claims made in the critiques are correct. I have demonstrated that the claims made in the critique [6] are neither proven nor justified. In particular, I have demonstrated that, contrary to its claims, critique [6] has not found any mistakes in my paper [7], or in my other related papers, either in the analytical model for the singlet correlations or in its event-by-event numerical simulations. Moreover, I have brought out a large number of mistakes and incorrect statements from the critique [6] and the critiques it relies on. Some of these mistakes are surprisingly elementary.
  - c3534l 2y ago
    I thought that was satire. I can't believe someone actually wrote that.
  - marcosdumay 2y ago
    That looks like a person attacked by a troll in a position of power. But then, I don't want to read the actual claims.

0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago

On the other hand, academics slap fights are magnificently petty to behold. In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake. That is why academic politics are so bitter.

n4r9 2y ago
The conclusion reads like someone who can't admit they're wrong on Reddit: > The common defect in the critiques [2], [6], and [14] is that, instead of engaging with the original quaternionic 3-sphere model presented in my papers [1], [7]– [11] using Geometric Algebra, they insist on criticizing entirely unrelated flat space models based on matrices and vector “algebra.” This logical fallacy by itself renders the critiques invalid. Nevertheless, in this paper I have addressed every claim made in the critique [6] and the critiques it relies on, and demonstrated, point by point, that none of the claims made in the critiques are correct. I have demonstrated that the claims made in the critique [6] are neither proven nor justified. In particular, I have demonstrated that, contrary to its claims, critique [6] has not found any mistakes in my paper [7], or in my other related papers, either in the analytical model for the singlet correlations or in its event-by-event numerical simulations. Moreover, I have brought out a large number of mistakes and incorrect statements from the critique [6] and the critiques it relies on. Some of these mistakes are surprisingly elementary.
- c3534l 2y ago
  I thought that was satire. I can't believe someone actually wrote that.
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  That looks like a person attacked by a troll in a position of power. But then, I don't want to read the actual claims.