Is it just this forum or is it about the same everywhere?
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right and why people can't just make up their own theories. There are some delusional crackpots like farsight who will always be around and DavidD's crackpot index score is in danger of diverging! It seems as though there are more and more with their pet theories, and people who are willing to agree with the cranks (I'm thinking or poor ignorant gorgeous here).
Why are there so many crackpots, and what can we do to get rid of them?
You just need to give them the chance! You're just being an ignorant forum poster and dismissing us even though our proof is right there! Sure we can't prove anything or use it to solve anything, but you're all just being mean!
/sarcasm
/sarcasm
All the cranks make me feel smart, even though I'm totally ignorant.
QUOTE (prometheus+Jul 5 2008, 01:56 AM)
Is it just this forum or is it about the same everywhere?
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right and why people can't just make up their own theories. There are some delusional crackpots like farsight who will always be around and DavidD's crackpot index score is in danger of diverging! It seems as though there are more and more with their pet theories, and people who are willing to agree with the cranks (I'm thinking or poor ignorant gorgeous here).
Why are there so many crackpots, and what can we do to get rid of them?
I do so love it when the REAL CRANKS get desperate!
Keep stabbing yourself in the back, trickster.
g.
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right and why people can't just make up their own theories. There are some delusional crackpots like farsight who will always be around and DavidD's crackpot index score is in danger of diverging! It seems as though there are more and more with their pet theories, and people who are willing to agree with the cranks (I'm thinking or poor ignorant gorgeous here).
Why are there so many crackpots, and what can we do to get rid of them?
I do so love it when the REAL CRANKS get desperate!
Keep stabbing yourself in the back, trickster.
g.
QUOTE (prometheus+Jul 5 2008, 12:56 PM)
Is it just this forum or is it about the same everywhere?
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right and why people can't just make up their own theories. There are some delusional crackpots like farsight who will always be around and DavidD's crackpot index score is in danger of diverging! It seems as though there are more and more with their pet theories, and people who are willing to agree with the cranks (I'm thinking or poor ignorant gorgeous here).
Why are there so many crackpots, and what can we do to get rid of them?
Part of it is lack of moderation here. This board was decent when I first logged on back in 2005. There were people with legitimate questions and interesting discussions were being had. You'd get a wacked out person every now and again. It seemed to really go down hill around 2006 and it keeps getting worse. There are certain people who need to stop posting here. There's no philosphy section here and shouldn't be. People who are posting their philosophical perspectives here need to find another board that suits that type of discussion. Get rid of the creation/evolution section. I thought this was a science board. Having a creation/evolution section is like debating whether an X-wing fighter can outrun NASA's space shuttles. It will just keep getting worse until the moderators get a clue.
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right and why people can't just make up their own theories. There are some delusional crackpots like farsight who will always be around and DavidD's crackpot index score is in danger of diverging! It seems as though there are more and more with their pet theories, and people who are willing to agree with the cranks (I'm thinking or poor ignorant gorgeous here).
Why are there so many crackpots, and what can we do to get rid of them?
Part of it is lack of moderation here. This board was decent when I first logged on back in 2005. There were people with legitimate questions and interesting discussions were being had. You'd get a wacked out person every now and again. It seemed to really go down hill around 2006 and it keeps getting worse. There are certain people who need to stop posting here. There's no philosphy section here and shouldn't be. People who are posting their philosophical perspectives here need to find another board that suits that type of discussion. Get rid of the creation/evolution section. I thought this was a science board. Having a creation/evolution section is like debating whether an X-wing fighter can outrun NASA's space shuttles. It will just keep getting worse until the moderators get a clue.
QUOTE (oomchu+Jul 5 2008, 05:03 AM)
Part of it is lack of moderation here. This board was decent when I first logged on back in 2005. There were people with legitimate questions and interesting discussions were being had.
Yeah, this from Troc and GoodElf was quite wonderful...
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=34709
g.
Yeah, this from Troc and GoodElf was quite wonderful...
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...indpost&p=34709
g.
It depends on crank definition, which is highly subjective one. For example, I can ask, why are so many thieves on Internet, who are stealing the movies and MP3's?
Just make their behavior legal and all of these "thieves" will disappear immediately.
Just make their behavior legal and all of these "thieves" will disappear immediately.
true, I guess when I see the term crank, I'm thinking of the overly zealous religious types that come here just to preach, the people who refuse to see why their new theory of everything doesn't work, and people who come here just inflate their own ego.
QUOTE (oomchu+Jul 5 2008, 08:34 AM)
true, I guess when I see the term crank, I'm thinking of the overly zealous religious types that come here just to preach, the people who refuse to see why their new theory of everything doesn't work, and people who come here just inflate their own ego.
You are describing the bulk of Humanity, sadly! This is essentially why Humanity causes so many 'unforeseen' problems for itself. The whole race is 'crank', while we continue to think in such (polluted) ways.
The true understanding of how things necessarily exist is pretty crucial to being able to exist as parts of it! This makes it all the more sad when Real knowledge is suppressed for mere political gain.
g.
You are describing the bulk of Humanity, sadly! This is essentially why Humanity causes so many 'unforeseen' problems for itself. The whole race is 'crank', while we continue to think in such (polluted) ways.
The true understanding of how things necessarily exist is pretty crucial to being able to exist as parts of it! This makes it all the more sad when Real knowledge is suppressed for mere political gain.
g.
QUOTE (prometheus+)
Replying to Why Are There So Many Cranks Around?
Consider that there should be no mystery here - if you guys don't leave, then you're still "around". Also, consider that making fake accounts tends to bias the statistic of there being "so many" if you simply count distinct logins. (If Alpha makes an account as Cecil P. Abstract or Trout etc., then it might appear his crankishness is prevailent amongst forum members, but that's a biased measure - most of the more mature members don't manipulate the forum in that manner)
Consider that there should be no mystery here - if you guys don't leave, then you're still "around". Also, consider that making fake accounts tends to bias the statistic of there being "so many" if you simply count distinct logins. (If Alpha makes an account as Cecil P. Abstract or Trout etc., then it might appear his crankishness is prevailent amongst forum members, but that's a biased measure - most of the more mature members don't manipulate the forum in that manner)
QUOTE (StevenA+)
Consider that there should be no mystery here - if you guys don't leave, then you're still "around".
You think you know better than a guy who studied at Cambridge and who is currently pursuing a PhD in String Theory. That most certainly makes you a crank.
Oh, that reminds me - I'm still waiting for that proof of yours that I'm a sockpuppet of Alpha.
You think you know better than a guy who studied at Cambridge and who is currently pursuing a PhD in String Theory. That most certainly makes you a crank.
QUOTE
Also, consider that making fake accounts tends to bias the statistic of there being "so many" if you simply count distinct logins.
Oh, that reminds me - I'm still waiting for that proof of yours that I'm a sockpuppet of Alpha.
QUOTE
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right
LOL,, what a lark.. chances are that they are all wrong in time...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right |
LOL,, what a lark.. chances are that they are all wrong in time...
and why people can't just make up their own theories.
If a personal theory fits all observations.... I WELCOME IT
science is finding ALL THE OPTIONS
after all, all humans have the same processor... and where do you think the "discoveries" come from ?
outa some person's brain.... it is all given, and sometimes quals just set a brain in stone...
Understand just what a forum is, and then grow up, and stop laying shite upon people who want to have a go... and who wanta learn where their mistakes are.... and maybe one day they will call you a total idiot as I am now calling you
QUOTE (Zerkoff+)
... and who wanta learn where their mistakes are....
Finding your mistakes is easy Flexi, it's when you are typing.
Finding your mistakes is easy Flexi, it's when you are typing.
QUOTE (Beer w/Straw+Jul 5 2008, 01:35 PM)
All the cranks make me feel smart, even though I'm totally ignorant.
But I must add, that sometimes I'm intimidated by stupidity, not mine though.
http://www.vivpope.org/
But I must add, that sometimes I'm intimidated by stupidity, not mine though.
http://www.vivpope.org/
Doc,
Are you now defining a crank as anyone who challenges orthodox thought? If you reflect on the history of science you should be able to come up with some interesting "cranks"
E3
Are you now defining a crank as anyone who challenges orthodox thought? If you reflect on the history of science you should be able to come up with some interesting "cranks"
E3
QUOTE (prometheus+Jul 5 2008, 12:56 PM)
Is it just this forum or is it about the same everywhere?
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right and why people can't just make up their own theories. There are some delusional crackpots like farsight who will always be around and DavidD's crackpot index score is in danger of diverging! It seems as though there are more and more with their pet theories, and people who are willing to agree with the cranks (I'm thinking or poor ignorant gorgeous here).
Why are there so many crackpots, and what can we do to get rid of them?
If you can't debunk my theory, then you are cranck
I think physicists have to take some of the blame in this, it seems we can't explain to the general public why the physical theories we have are right and why people can't just make up their own theories. There are some delusional crackpots like farsight who will always be around and DavidD's crackpot index score is in danger of diverging! It seems as though there are more and more with their pet theories, and people who are willing to agree with the cranks (I'm thinking or poor ignorant gorgeous here).
Why are there so many crackpots, and what can we do to get rid of them?
If you can't debunk my theory, then you are cranck
QUOTE (TheDoc+Jul 6 2008, 12:42 AM)
Oh, that reminds me - I'm still waiting for that proof of yours that I'm a sockpuppet of Alpha.
Btw, bigest crancks are string theoretics!
QUOTE (Edward 3+)
Doc,
Are you now defining a crank as anyone who challenges orthodox thought?
No.
Are you now defining a crank as anyone who challenges orthodox thought?
No.
QUOTE (DavidD+)
If you can't debunk my theory, then you are cranck
Sorry idiot, science doesn't work that way. Find some evidence for your claims, and then get back to us, yeah?
Sorry idiot, science doesn't work that way. Find some evidence for your claims, and then get back to us, yeah?
QUOTE (DavidD+Jul 6 2008, 11:13 AM)
If you can't debunk my theory, then you are cranck
If you can't prove your theory, you are a crank.
If you can't prove your theory, you are a crank.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 6 2008, 04:47 PM)
If you can't prove your theory, you are a crank.
Noone theory/interpretation is possible to prove, but my interpretation is without wavefunction colaspe and with more natural/logical understanding of waves and entanglement...
Noone theory/interpretation is possible to prove, but my interpretation is without wavefunction colaspe and with more natural/logical understanding of waves and entanglement...
QUOTE (DavidD+Jul 6 2008, 12:14 PM)
Noone theory/interpretation is possible to prove
um...100% false.
um...100% false.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 6 2008, 06:01 PM)
um...100% false.
My theory diferent colourse explaining with fact that each electron at diferent orbit falling into nuclear with diferent aceleration, becouse of diferent distance!
My theory diferent colourse explaining with fact that each electron at diferent orbit falling into nuclear with diferent aceleration, becouse of diferent distance!
David, either you're suffering from a degenerative neurological problem or you're a wind up, because your spelling is getting worse and worse. You deliberately ask questions you've had answered before, sometimes 3 or 4 times, and wind up people like Trippy making claims you've had falsified before. It's almost as if you're trying to spell 60% of your words incorrectly. You weren't the sharpest tool in the shed before but now it's as if you're trying to see increasingly more idiotic.
QUOTE (DavidD+Jul 6 2008, 01:21 PM)
My theory diferent colourse explaining with fact that each electron at diferent orbit falling into nuclear with diferent aceleration, becouse of diferent distance!
You fuc*ing crank, you copied the different colors idea from the wikipedia pictures of electron orbits. You have nothing. Nada. Zilch. No experimentation, no evidence, no proof.
You fuc*ing crank, you copied the different colors idea from the wikipedia pictures of electron orbits. You have nothing. Nada. Zilch. No experimentation, no evidence, no proof.
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Jul 6 2008, 06:46 PM)
David, either you're suffering from a degenerative neurological problem or you're a wind up, because your spelling is getting worse and worse. You deliberately ask questions you've had answered before, sometimes 3 or 4 times, and wind up people like Trippy making claims you've had falsified before. It's almost as if you're trying to spell 60% of your words incorrectly.
I don't concentrating my brains power on writing correctly like you doing it... It's importance in my brain prioritet sistem is very small.
You show that you even 1% don't understand entanglement, thus idiot is you... And about atoms and so on I am going in right direction and such physics like tripy based on half tru half wrong schrodinger equation, which can't be checked and which predicting very small number of realy realistic thing (fails with protein folding etc). There no any prove that schrodinger equation is correct and that there no simply electrons spceific configuration due to charge and magnetic forces deciding atoms properties and atoms mass itself. SCHRODINGER EQUOTION IS WRONG. REDISCOVERING BIKE.
I don't concentrating my brains power on writing correctly like you doing it... It's importance in my brain prioritet sistem is very small.
QUOTE
You weren't the sharpest tool in the shed before but now it's as if you're trying to see increasingly more idiotic.
You show that you even 1% don't understand entanglement, thus idiot is you... And about atoms and so on I am going in right direction and such physics like tripy based on half tru half wrong schrodinger equation, which can't be checked and which predicting very small number of realy realistic thing (fails with protein folding etc). There no any prove that schrodinger equation is correct and that there no simply electrons spceific configuration due to charge and magnetic forces deciding atoms properties and atoms mass itself. SCHRODINGER EQUOTION IS WRONG. REDISCOVERING BIKE.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 6 2008, 06:46 PM)
You fuc*ing crank, you copied the different colors idea from the wikipedia pictures of electron orbits. You have nothing. Nada. Zilch. No experimentation, no evidence, no proof.
Experiment already exist and there just need choose some orbit and electrons and simulate it in computer. but I don't have computer skills to this... But I bet that my theory will sucessfuly explain all this like schrodinger equation, becouse schrodinger equation have only one diference about phase, but using the same electrons distance understanding, electrons charge forces and magnetic forces...
Experiment already exist and there just need choose some orbit and electrons and simulate it in computer. but I don't have computer skills to this... But I bet that my theory will sucessfuly explain all this like schrodinger equation, becouse schrodinger equation have only one diference about phase, but using the same electrons distance understanding, electrons charge forces and magnetic forces...
QUOTE (DavidD+Jul 7 2008, 07:34 PM)
I don't concentrating my brains power on writing correctly like you doing it... It's importance in my brain prioritet sistem is very small.
You show that you even 1% don't understand entanglement, thus idiot is you... And about atoms and so on I am going in right direction and such physics like tripy based on half tru half wrong schrodinger equation, which can't be checked and which predicting very small number of realy realistic thing (fails with protein folding etc). There no any prove that schrodinger equation is correct and that there no simply electrons spceific configuration due to charge and magnetic forces deciding atoms properties and atoms mass itself. SCHRODINGER EQUOTION IS WRONG. REDISCOVERING BIKE.
Only you haven't come close to proving that the Schroedinger equation is wrong. The only thing you've proven is that you don't understand the application.
You show that you even 1% don't understand entanglement, thus idiot is you... And about atoms and so on I am going in right direction and such physics like tripy based on half tru half wrong schrodinger equation, which can't be checked and which predicting very small number of realy realistic thing (fails with protein folding etc). There no any prove that schrodinger equation is correct and that there no simply electrons spceific configuration due to charge and magnetic forces deciding atoms properties and atoms mass itself. SCHRODINGER EQUOTION IS WRONG. REDISCOVERING BIKE.
Only you haven't come close to proving that the Schroedinger equation is wrong. The only thing you've proven is that you don't understand the application.
QUOTE (Trippy+Jul 7 2008, 09:51 AM)
Only you haven't come close to proving that the Schroedinger equation is wrong. The only thing you've proven is that you don't understand the application.
Schrodinger equationis quantized in my theory plenty will be all the same, but no quantization and I show how ti possible eliminate quantization and have all colourse...
Schrodinger equationis quantized in my theory plenty will be all the same, but no quantization and I show how ti possible eliminate quantization and have all colourse...
epidemic's pass.
PS burn the bodies
PS burn the bodies
QUOTE (DavidD+Jul 7 2008, 10:00 PM)
Schrodinger equationis quantized in my theory plenty will be all the same, but no quantization and I show how ti possible eliminate quantization and have all colourse...
Quantization was derived from experimental results, so any theory that does away with quantization can be disregarded as erroneous.
Quantization was derived from experimental results, so any theory that does away with quantization can be disregarded as erroneous.
QUOTE (Trippy+Jul 7 2008, 10:21 AM)
Quantization was derived from experimental results, so any theory that does away with quantization can be disregarded as erroneous.
How you can measure quantization if you don't kow that it is quantized? For example there is big emision of some many waves wich are average green ligh but they have... Anyway how you kow that this is the only one some lenght of photon? Supose that you have matrial, which can be eated by photons, the longer photon the more it can eate material. so you puting helium atoms and lookking how much eated material in what elgnhts... And how you this all can precisly to measure? IT's imposible to make experiment, which would find wavelenght, that it consist of fin line, but not of large spectr of waves!
How you can measure quantization if you don't kow that it is quantized? For example there is big emision of some many waves wich are average green ligh but they have... Anyway how you kow that this is the only one some lenght of photon? Supose that you have matrial, which can be eated by photons, the longer photon the more it can eate material. so you puting helium atoms and lookking how much eated material in what elgnhts... And how you this all can precisly to measure? IT's imposible to make experiment, which would find wavelenght, that it consist of fin line, but not of large spectr of waves!
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.