= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Daniel_Burfoot comments on The Graviton as Aether - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (134)
Posts like this shouldn't appear on this blog. Adequately considering the question requires a truckload of special knowledge that most visitors don't have and that is not associated with the topic of the blog.
The rhetoric that is visible on the surface (comparison with something ridiculous, etc.) strongly privileges a hypothesis (of the teacher's password opaque kind, no less -- to most readers), which in absence of understanding of the subject may as well be pure Dark Art.
Being contrarian doesn't mean that we should be interested in entertaining contrarian hypotheses any more seriously just because they are contrarian. This way lies madness.
The point of the post seems to be that the physics establishment may be in danger of falling into an egregious (and maybe even obvious, from an outside perspective) group irrationality trap. That point is highly topical - it shows that even mighty physics is not immune to rationality breakdowns. String theory is probably popular because lots of senior physicists, who based their careers on string theory, take on students who want to study string theory, and reject students who want to study alternatives to it.
Do you seriously consider saving the experts from error, without yourself understanding the subject? (Doesn't matter whether this limitation applies to you in particular -- the important thing is that it does apply to the blog as a whole).