Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 88 of 88

Thread: Passive Q&A forum

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    547
    philippeb8, I am not seeing any reasons - beyond what's on p1 of this thread - as to why it would be good idea for CQ to host something like what you propose in the OP.

    On the other hand, I've read many reasons why such a thing would be a bad fit for CQ.

    Would you please focus on why you think CQ would be a good place, and how the many posted reasons why not are "off"?

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Jean Tate View Post
    philippeb8, I am not seeing any reasons - beyond what's on p1 of this thread - as to why it would be good idea for CQ to host something like what you propose in the OP.

    On the other hand, I've read many reasons why such a thing would be a bad fit for CQ.

    Would you please focus on why you think CQ would be a good place, and how the many posted reasons why not are "off"?
    Like I said before building up a giant neural-network is the only solution I consider and for all I know CQ is the only platform already in place with numerous open minded smart & credible people.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    Like I said before building up a giant neural-network is the only solution I consider and for all I know CQ is the only platform already in place with numerous open minded smart & credible people.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Call it: the “Collective” if you want but that’s basically the same way of working.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    34,938
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    Like I said before building up a giant neural-network is the only solution I consider and for all I know CQ is the only platform already in place with numerous open minded smart & credible people.
    Well, me too, but my experience with scientific fora is quite limited. While a few posters here have a solid science background and education, I am certain there are other collections of accomplished individuals with far more influence and scientific credentials than CQ. We are not accredited in any way. Anyone can get on here and claim to be an expert or PhD and no one here would question it. We are not a citable source. We're a loose gathering of self selected space nerds, nothing more. And we do no research or very much mathematical calculation. We just talk.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Well, me too, but my experience with scientific fora is quite limited. While a few posters here have a solid science background and education, I am certain there are other collections of accomplished individuals with far more influence and scientific credentials than CQ. We are not accredited in any way. Anyone can get on here and claim to be an expert or PhD and no one here would question it. We are not a citable source. We're a loose gathering of self selected space nerds, nothing more. And we do no research or very much mathematical calculation. We just talk.
    I’ve been researching such groups for many years and CQ is the only place where they were willing to test their knowledge against anybody in the world. That’s what I call credibility.

    I would rather win a $500 prize from CQ than $3,000,000 from the Breakthrough Prize because the latter will never happen and they never helped me out anyways.

    One of my values is also that I believe in “constructive science” rather than “destructive science”. Because it is mainly more difficult and challenging than creating “bombs”.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    34,938
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    I’ve been researching such groups for many years and CQ is the only place where they were willing to test their knowledge against anybody in the world. That’s what I call credibility.

    I would rather win a $500 prize from CQ than $3,000,000 from the Breakthrough Prize because the latter will never happen and they never helped me out anyways.

    One of my values is also that I believe in “constructive science” rather than “destructive science”. Because it is mainly more difficult and challenging than creating “bombs”.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Science is a means of analyzing phenomena. It is people that apply that science to constructive or destructive ends.

    But on topic, CQ does not award prizes beyond Order of Kilopi. That's not its purpose or its nature. And those things are not about to change.

    If you want people to chip in for a prize, organize that. Start your own site with a Patreon or GoFundMe. Then solicit members. Because I can tell you right now, CQ isn't going to do it, not in the way you are suggesting.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Science is a means of analyzing phenomena. It is people that apply that science to constructive or destructive ends.

    But on topic, CQ does not award prizes beyond Order of Kilopi. That's not its purpose or its nature. And those things are not about to change.

    If you want people to chip in for a prize, organize that. Start your own site with a Patreon or GoFundMe. Then solicit members. Because I can tell you right now, CQ isn't going to do it, not in the way you are suggesting.
    Ok I understand.

    I just felt the urgency of the need given we’re all in the same boat at the end of the day and that we would need to cooperate collectively to move science forward.

    I will try to promote the project indirectly myself then using funds from my own company. The good news is I trust myself


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    10,320
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    On the other end the author can also create as much Youtube presentations he wants in 30 days to make sure everybody understands.
    That is a terrible idea.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    10,320
    Just to go back to the original idea for a moment. I was trying to understand what a "Passive Q&A" could mean and the only thing I could think of is a forum where the proponent of a new idea can only post answers to questions posed by others (after an introductory post laying out the idea).

    But then people would try and get round that rule by posting lots of new information (and attacks on GR or whatever) instead of actually answering the question. It would be too much work for the mods to check every reply and see if it was actually an answer. So it would be up to the person who asked the question: next to the answer there would be a "Did this answer your question" option. If you say "no" the reply is automatically deleted. This would be like a much stricter version of stack exchange where, instead of just down voting inappropriate answers, you get to delete them.

    I suggest philippeb8 sets up such a forum and uses it to defend his idea then invites everyone who has had an ATM thread closed here to join. It might be interesting to see how it works out.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    10,320
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    I just felt the urgency of the need given we’re all in the same boat at the end of the day and that we would need to cooperate collectively to move science forward.
    I am quite happy to let the experts carry on with that. It has worked pretty well so far.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    9,047
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    But I don’t think journals have time to fully understand a theory in its objectivity in 10 days and I strongly believe new theories make them nervous because they risk losing reputation, especially when the author doesn’t have a PhD (even if PhDs contributed).
    How do you get to 10 days? The referee process takes much longer than 10 days, in my area (space physics/plasma astrophysics) the referee gets at least 3 weeks to judge the paper.
    And I also don't buy the "making them nervous" because the might "loose reputation". If that would be the case than many paper would never have been published.
    You really have a twisted view of how scientific journals work.
    All comments made in red are moderator comments. Please, read the rules of the forum here and read the additional rules for ATM, and for conspiracy theories. If you think a post is inappropriate, don't comment on it in thread but report it using the /!\ button in the lower left corner of each message. But most of all, have fun!

    Catch me on twitter: @tusenfem
    Catch Rosetta Plasma Consortium on twitter: @Rosetta_RPC

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    9,047
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    I don’t care about the Breakthrough Prize and the Nobel Prize anymore because they are too selective. We can create our own prize.
    What the heck is it with your fixation on prizes?
    Is scientific work only valuable if it wins a prize? Then you can basically throw away 99% of all scientific publications.
    All comments made in red are moderator comments. Please, read the rules of the forum here and read the additional rules for ATM, and for conspiracy theories. If you think a post is inappropriate, don't comment on it in thread but report it using the /!\ button in the lower left corner of each message. But most of all, have fun!

    Catch me on twitter: @tusenfem
    Catch Rosetta Plasma Consortium on twitter: @Rosetta_RPC

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
    What the heck is it with your fixation on prizes?
    Is scientific work only valuable if it wins a prize? Then you can basically throw away 99% of all scientific publications.
    Well it’s more fun and a whole lot more people will get involved.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
    How do you get to 10 days? The referee process takes much longer than 10 days, in my area (space physics/plasma astrophysics) the referee gets at least 3 weeks to judge the paper.
    And I also don't buy the "making them nervous" because the might "loose reputation". If that would be the case than many paper would never have been published.
    You really have a twisted view of how scientific journals work.
    It’s very informal so I am guessing the explanation.

    If my paper gets rejected from General Relativity and Gravitation then I give up with the politically correct way and I’ll promote it myself.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    I am quite happy to let the experts carry on with that. It has worked pretty well so far.
    We don’t cover all possibilities and we might get stuck in the mud for a very long time this time, given the complexity involved.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    34,938
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    It’s very informal so I am guessing the explanation.

    If my paper gets rejected from General Relativity and Gravitation then I give up with the politically correct way and I’ll promote it myself.
    Maybe if the paper gets rejected, you could learn why, fix the problems in the paper, and re-submit.

    (...Politically correct method? What does that even mean in this context?)
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Maybe if the paper gets rejected, you could learn why, fix the problems in the paper, and re-submit.

    (...Politically correct method? What does that even mean in this context?)
    The only thing I can do is rehire some physicist to rewrite the text and resubmit. But it is easier to promote it myself at this point.

    The politically correct way is a “I trust the system no matter what”.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    34,938
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    The only thing I can do is rehire some physicist to rewrite the text and resubmit. But it is easier to promote it myself at this point.

    The politically correct way is a “I trust the system no matter what”.
    Why not cut out the middle man and get a physicist to start with? No false steps, no early rejections. They'd already know the system, and how to maximize the chances of getting published.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    47,741
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    The politically correct way is a “I trust the system no matter what”.
    Nonsense. That is an abuse of the term "politically correct". And no one is saying trust any system no matter what. What we are saying is maybe you should question your own work as much as you question the system.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,343
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    ...I didn’t get a PhD because I don’t believe in a depth-first search type of research when I believe the mainstream is wrong after having finished my freshman classes....
    Well, there's your whole problem. After having finished your freshman classes, your background and understanding of higher-level physics and mathematics are simply inadequate to reach such a conclusion and arrogantly dismiss "the mainstream." You've apparently decided that you don't want to "stand on the shoulders of giants" and would rather spend your time under their shoes. So to speak.
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Cougar View Post
    Well, there's your whole problem. After having finished your freshman classes, your background and understanding of higher-level physics and mathematics are simply inadequate to reach such a conclusion and arrogantly dismiss "the mainstream." You've apparently decided that you don't want to "stand on the shoulders of giants" and would rather spend your time under their shoes. So to speak.
    I am not arrogant because like I said: I want to be remembered as an amateur, but I am extremely rational, I also have a rebellious nature and I’ve distrusted the system for a long long time.

    It helped me understand many things people in general don’t see. But now I’m here to share my conclusions and I am willing to help otherwise we’ll never gonna evolve. If I was arrogant I wouldn’t share anything.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Why not cut out the middle man and get a physicist to start with? No false steps, no early rejections. They'd already know the system, and how to maximize the chances of getting published.
    I will put a minimalistic amount of efforts in doing that but thanks for your proposal.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Swift View Post
    Nonsense. That is an abuse of the term "politically correct". And no one is saying trust any system no matter what. What we are saying is maybe you should question your own work as much as you question the system.
    I’ll give it one last try then. I’ll hire some physicist to help me out.

    Thanks again.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Falls Church, VA (near Washington, DC)
    Posts
    8,202
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    I’ll give it one last try then. I’ll hire some physicist to help me out.

    Thanks again.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    That's more like it. That is what Einstein did in consulting mathematicians to help him sharpen his math skills for developing GR and making it convincing to the scientific community.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornblower View Post
    That's more like it. That is what Einstein did in consulting mathematicians to help him sharpen his math skills for developing GR and making it convincing to the scientific community.
    Agreed. I will change the text.

    For those who wonder I hire professionals using: Upwork.com.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    34,938
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    Agreed. I will change the text.
    Good that were willing to take advice. Too many folks don't, these days.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Good that were willing to take advice. Too many folks don't, these days.
    I admit my mistakes

    Thanks again for all the help.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  28. #88
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    14,765
    This thread is not about creating a forum anymore but, as usual, changed topic to philippeb8 trying to get his ideas published and complaining about the scientific establishment. We've been over that one often enough. Thread closed, use the report button on this post if there is a good reason to reopen this after all...
    ____________
    "Dumb all over, a little ugly on the side." -- Frank Zappa
    "Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
    "This is really very simple, but unfortunately it's very complicated." -- publius

    Moderator comments in this color | Get moderator attention using the lower left icon:
    Recommended reading: Forum Rules * Forum FAQs * Conspiracy Theory Advice * Alternate Theory Advocates Advice

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •