That is, I would like to see a subcommunity of LW devoted to researching mathematical and scientific problems independently of the current formal academic structure. Indeed, this already exists for decision theory; I would like to see it extended to other mathematical topics as well.
That would be really nice. There have been some attempts, but all previous attempts (that I'm aware of) have more or less failed.
I would even like to do this project.
I'm far less optimistic about this.
So who's interested in building a rationalist subcommunity for mathematical and scientific research? Zack Davis? Any of the decision theory people? Does anyone else feel as I do?
I would be interested, and I feel this way.

Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
I would really like this to actually exist.
That is, I would like to see a subcommunity of LW devoted to researching mathematical and scientific problems independently of the current formal academic structure. Indeed, this already exists for decision theory; I would like to see it extended to other mathematical topics as well. I would even like to do this project.
I am convinced that there is a lot more fruit hanging a lot lower than people realize, in pretty much every field. Yes, even in string theory/quantum gravity/mathematical physics. The negative epistemic effects of existing social structures (aka Eld Science), as well as simple cognitive biases, really are that bad.
It may be helpful in this connection to remember Quirrell's Law:
Moreover, I have to admit that I'm just curious as hell about some of these topics, and about the level of progress that could be achieved via systematic, LW-inspired/trained effort.
So who's interested in building a rationalist subcommunity for mathematical and scientific research? Zack Davis? Any of the decision theory people? Does anyone else feel as I do?
The best part would be keeping the results secret (with independent verification). I expect it would make many people interested in lesswrong. The controversy alone due to conflicts with typical academic values of open access would be great PR.