>who gets to try to repeat those results? Experiments don't do themselves, and they're not free. Scientists are from all walks of life and funding comes from m

>who gets to try to repeat those results? Experiments don't do themselves, and they're not free. Scientists are from all walks of life and funding comes from many different sources. >Who gets to publish results so they can be peer-reviewed? I think this is how it works... Anyone with a paper can submit it to a journal, then the journal decides if they are going to publish or not. There are many journals with different amounts of specialization and reputation. > Who sets the "consensus" about if a "model makes a prediction". Who gets to decide whose opinions are included and disincluded in this consensus? You will find the answer to those questions in the definition of the word "consensus". > What is the punishment for making an incorrect prediction? Do you get to be disincluded from "consensi" for a spell if you get it wrong? Its kind of like other communities (including this one)... the better your reputation the more seriously people take your input. If you have a better approach to understanding the universe, I am extremely interested in what it could be. I do like the idea of open journals (aaron swartz style), but i honestly don't know what the ramifications would be.