Live data from Hacker News

Which of the Basic Assumptions of Modern Physics are Wrong?

blogs.scientificamerican.com

51–52 of 52 posts

Re: Which of the Basic Assumptions of Modern Physics are Wrong?

#51
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget dark energy, also (like dark matter) invented to fit the observations. How many hundreds of $millions of taxpayer money will be spent searching for it? These inventions are keeping many scientists employed, it seems. If they went back to correct the mistakes (like any good software developer) there might be a mass layoff.

Just imagine the fame a researcher or a team would get should they explain dark matter by updating current theories (in a way that fits _all_other_explained_ observations). I don't think if anybody had a good idea they would care about mass layoffs.

But the people who'd review the idea would care about that, so they might refuse to review it as "too nutty". Plate tectonics might have fit into that category, although of course it did reach general acceptance when the evidence became overwhelming.

Re: Which of the Basic Assumptions of Modern Physics are Wrong?

#52
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Firstly, neither string theory or "gravity leakage" or more than 4 dimensions of space-time are even remotely accepted theories in physics or cosmology. So tell me please: Why are people like Brian Greene able to obtain the funding to make TV series like http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/fabric-of-cosmos.html and get public speaking engagements like https://secure2.convio.net/ata/site/Ecommerce/3120701?VIEW_P...…

Are you implying that TV funding is tantamount to scientific authority? Are we to believe dragons and white walkers are accepted scientific fact along with mitochondrial eve being a cylon hybrid? Don't be ridiculous.

Nice straw man!

And how many dragons and white walkers and Cylons are featured by Nova specials, the Discovery Channel, and get pop-sci articles written up in Scientific American?

Post reply on HN