Room-temperature superconductivity?

[MSimon]

What I do not appreciate at present is the fact that the "physics-church" tells other people that in contrast to other disciplines they have an open mind when new ideas come along which challenge mainstream physics dogma.

What would you expect them to say?

Every one who is not asleep knows that physics is in trouble. For most physicists doing the same old math is easier than trying to think through a better TOE. And the answers are quite good with the old math.

Why would you expect it otherwise? The better schools actually teach the troubles. It really is not you against the world. Your biggest problem is that you are meeting little resistance and mostly indifference. You are not being fought. You are being ignored. A far different problem.

[MSimon]

It becomes impossible when you are blocked

Not really. You see there is this internet thingy. And it is not fully developed but there are all kinds of interesting places where new ideas can be discussed.

When I set my goal to get Polywell funded (I wasn't the only one, Tom Ligon was at it for far longer than me for instance and there were quite a few others) in Nov of 06, I had no idea that by Aug of 07 it would be in the bag. In fact I had no idea if the effort would even be successful. I just kept plugging away.

In other words - quit complaining and start leaving urls at blogs that might be interested in your work. Try setting up some Google alerts. You know - sell.

Try setting up a kickstarter project:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/199 ... on-reactor

Really. The frontier is wide open. Hitch up your horses.

[MSimon]

You are finally forced to write your own book and then you are classified as a crank "since only cranks publish on their own without peer review".

So be a crank. I have been one all my life. What's the big deal? Either your stuff has merit or it does not. You want the esteem of your fellow men? Go into business and buy some friends.

[WizWom]

There is this Internet thingy that I had a very small hand in developing. My revolution has been going on since late December of 1974. Thirty-five years in for me. So far so good.

Heh, that brings back memories. I wire-wrapped a prototype 1200 baud modem for CyberPak back in '84. I was still in High School.

I've done a lot of stuff since then, but that still ranks up there near the top of the "cool" list.

[Helius]

I'm the very last thing in the world to a marxist and I can recommend the book without reservation.

Agreed. Great essay. I don't understand the "marxist" parallel at all.

[icarus]

Once an institution does not adhere to its founding principles anymore, like in the case of the Royal Soc. of London, The AAAS, The APS, Nature Publishing House, etc. they should be closed down in disgrace and liquidated in the interest of the future of humankind.

No, there is a much more deserved fate in store for such institutions, a slow, crumbling decline into irrelevancy.

[johanfprins]

What would you expect them to say?

To be honest and not to claim the moral high ground when they are even worse that any other didcipline has EVER been.

Every one who is not asleep knows that physics is in trouble.

Then why accept that this is "how it must be".

The better schools actually teach the troubles.

Which schools? Cambridge, Oxford, Princeton, Harvard etc. do not feature in this respect at all

It really is not you against the world. Your biggest problem is that you are meeting little resistance and mostly indifference. You are not being fought. You are being ignored. A far different problem.

You are wrong. It only takes a single example to prove that you are wrong. My forthcoming book contains many such examples. I will at this point only give two:
1. If, at a DISCUSSION meeting of the Royal Society of London, a person who did not attend this meeting, Marshall Stoneham FRS, is specially brought in as a chairman of a session on superconduction in diamond to restrict me to ASK ONLY A QUESTION, then it is NOT indifference.
2. If another website "Physics Forum" bans me to be lifted "Never" after I have posted that superconduction at room temperature is possible, then it can surely NOT be indifference!
The rot is far deeper than you want to acknowledge. I know by pointing this out I will next be accused of being a "conspiracy theorist".
But remember, we ARE an evolving species and at present we are being kept alive by our knowledge. If we refuse to adapt to new insights as the "physics-church" is preventing us from doing at present, there is only one end point: WE WILL DIE OUT! Maybe this would not be such a bad conclusion to the mess I have been born into!

[GIThruster]

I'm the very last thing in the world to a marxist and I can recommend the book without reservation.

Agreed. Great essay. I don't understand the "marxist" parallel at all.

I understand the parallel but it is a mischaracterization of Kuhn's contributions.

Anyone who has not made a careful study of philosophy is likely to group things like post-modernism, cultural relativism and incommensurability together. They're all saying something about how our more elementary insights with regards absolutism and objectivity need some qualification. People who push post-modernism are going the farthest and telling us we have a right to interpret anyone anyway we like, and so there's just no responsibility toward understanding people, literature, etc. No rules, no responsibility.

Cultural relativism is pretty much gone now, but it was likewise an assault on critical thinking. Not so much a concern because it became obvious in the '70's that as an ethical theory, it cannot stand up under scrutiny since it leads to such absurd conclusions.

Kuhn's theory seems on the surface to be like these others, in that at first glance, it appears to be saying we're not entitled to certain kinds of critical thinking judgements. That's not the case. That's how Kuhn was mischaracterized. The subject of incommensurability really is a tertiary issue that relies very heavily on a thoroughgoing understanding of how Kuhn uses the term "paradigm" in it's broadest sense. Much more urgent to take from Kuhn is his recognition that science proceeds in fits and starts, through both normal, evolutionary science, and disruptive, revolutionary science. He traces hundreds of examples of both in his book, to the point you'd be hard pressed to disagree with what he's saying and why.

More to our point however, is the fact that what Dr. Prinz is describing has always been the case. His use of emotionally inflammatory language will make his book essentially useless. No one will read it. Doesn't matter how he's been wronged, totally insufficient numbers of the folks will realize this in his lifetime if he displays any of the emotions he's suffering.

Don't believe it? Read some history. Read Kuhn's book. This has all happened before and it is all going to happen again. Getting angry about it only hurts--never helps and virtually guarantees failure.

The state of physics, science and the human condition have never been any different than they are right now. These kinds of troubles have always occurred. Claiming we have some sudden calamity is just going to alienate the people who ought to be reading Prinz's book. Totally self defeating. . .

Johan, why did you think that the archtypal "prophet crying out in the wilderness" was in the wilderness to begin with? Had it never occurred to you to wonder?

[MSimon]

Which schools? Cambridge, Oxford, Princeton, Harvard etc. do not feature in this respect at all

Who said they were any good? The University of Chicago is different. At least according to the recent graduate I spoke to.

[MSimon]

Claiming we have some sudden calamity is just going to alienate the people who ought to be reading Prinz's book. Totally self defeating. . .

Some people make a hobby of being beaten in the hopes of garnering sympathy. Occasionally it works. Mostly it doesn't.

[johanfprins]

Who said they were any good? The University of Chicago is different. At least according to the recent graduate I spoke to.

I doubt it very much. I have not yet seen any worthwhile physics coming from this institution. I am not qualified to judge other disciplines, but according to physics it would be better if this second rate institution is closed down permanentlty as soon as possible.

[johanfprins]

More to our point however, is the fact that what Dr. Prinz is describing has always been the case. His use of emotionally inflammatory language will make his book essentially useless.

Please define what you mean by my "inflammatory language". When you see somebody stealing and you call him a "thief" are you "inflammatory"? Or should you call him an "affirmative shopper". No racism intended!

No one will read it. Doesn't matter how he's been wronged, totally insufficient numbers of the folks will realize this in his lifetime if he displays any of the emotions he's suffering.

So if somebody kicks in your balls you must feign no pain? Why should I according to your point of view even expect ANYBODY to read the truth no matter what the language is being used?

Don't believe it? Read some history. Read Kuhn's book. This has all happened before and it is all going to happen again. Getting angry about it only hurts--never helps and virtually guarantees failure.

So lie down and be raped for "Mother England". Please stop this defeatist nonsense. I might be proved wrong, but I KNOW that if we just accept that "it has always been so and have to accept that it will always be so" we are REALLY a worthless species; which we most probably are.

The state of physics, science and the human condition have never been any different than they are right now.

As I have already pointed out this is not true in physics. After the founding of the Royal Society in the 17th Century we have had a respite until nearly the end of the 19th Century; and during this time physics has flourished. That it has most probably not been so in other disciplnes might be true, but our survival does not depend on these other disciplines. In fact most of them are irrelevant!

Claiming we have some sudden calamity is just going to alienate the people who ought to be reading Prinz's book. Totally self defeating. . .

Where have I claimed a "sudden" calamity? Please substantiate your claims in a more scientific manner.

Johan, why did you think that the archtypal "prophet crying out in the wilderness" was in the wilderness to begin with? Had it never occurred to you to wonder?

Yes it has, and it is a pity that we are such a worthless species which does not deserve to be alive! All I am pleading is that people with common sense should realise that modern physicists have become the biggest liars EVER! And that our survival depends on complete honesty. If this cannot even be achieved in phsics, which claims that HONESTY AND OBJECTIVITY IS physics, we have no chance of survival.

[GIThruster]

Looks like we'll need to agree to disagree. Certainly I'll read your book when it's done. I hope there's more than five people get past the first page.

It really is instructive to look at what's happened with BLP. Mills also forgot to say how physics is wrong, and instead started off with saying how he was right. More than twenty years later, he can't get people to read his book, despite the evidence.

Just, IMHO.

[johanfprins]

Mills also forgot to say how physics is wrong, and instead started off with saying how he was right. More than twenty years later, he can't get people to read his book, despite the evidence.

With all due respect: If you read the first chapter of my book on my website, you will see that it is a detailed summary of why present physics is wrong; on which I expand further in the book. Other critics have accused me of "only" attacking present physics in my first chapter "instead of showing where I am right": It seems that one can NEVER win; as you would probably gladly agree to: However, I want to believe that "we will overcome".

[BenTC]

Johan, In another post you ask for an example of inflamatory language, then you provide one straight away.

Who said they were any good? The University of Chicago is different. At least according to the recent graduate I spoke to.

I doubt it very much. I have not yet seen any worthwhile physics coming from this institution. I am not qualified to judge other disciplines, but according to physics it would be better if this second rate institution is closed down permanentlty as soon as possible.

Really. What was the point? I know you are probably just talking off the top of your head, but if MSimon doesn't respond to that, does that mean you've won that little side issue and convinced him you are right - or does he just lose interest and you lose a supporter? (Though MSimon isn't that thin-skinned.) I don't mean that you should tippy-toe around everyone, but that WAS rather inflamitory. I would think it would be as important to win supporters, as win arguments. Rather than blandly invalidating someone's personal experience, you might have inquired further about what that graduate had been reported. Also, second rate institutions are still useful, we can't all be first-rate (by definition) - and it only takes one inspired lecturer to mix thing up.

To extrapolate, you need to at least "look like" you are listening to people - even if its frustrating that you have to revisit the same thing over. Its each person's "first time" to consider these things.

As much as you feel the "experts" have been against you, its not you against the whole world unless you make it so. I guess some of your book will require an review of the politics you've encountered - I just hope it doesn't get bogged down in it. I'll check out the book excerpts sometime soon.

Disclaimer: I have no views regarding the institution itself. I'm just a non-physics bystander responding to how it comes across.

MSimon, apologies for speaking for you.

Edit: some grammar, and the following...
Johan, having said that, please know that I have enjoyed and welcome the discussion you've contributed here. Please take my comments constructively.