PDA

View Full Version : uggg ... ATM vs Q/A



tommac
2011-May-20, 01:19 PM
So if I want to post into ATM I supposedly need a theory that I am putting up to be tested.

To post in Q/A it is only for questions about mainstream physics.

But there seems to be a big gap between these two items.

For example, I currently had a question to discuss what would happen if negative mass was to be plugged into einsteins equations, what effect would that have on the universe. To me this is a straight forward question based on mainstream physics although looked at from a diferent perspective. I am not proposing that this happens in nature ... but just would like to see some of the implications of plugging in negative mass into these formulae and understanding how it would affect the curvature etc .

This post got quickly closed without discussion supposedly because any answer to it would bring it into the ATM realm ... OK fine ... but then ATM is only if I have a new theory ... which I dont ... I have a question about mainstream physics.

Are we really saying that there is nothing useful that could come out of this question? This is the type of inconsistancy on this board that really baffles me. What would discussing this topic hurt? Who is being protected? Who is the victim?

Swift
2011-May-20, 01:28 PM
But there seems to be a big gap between these two items.
And so what if there is a big gap (I'm chosing not to address whether there is or not)? As has been explained many times, about many things allowed or not on BAUT, this forum is not designed to be all things to all people, or to be a conduit for every possible discussion that humans can engage in. Maybe it would be a good discussion elsewhere, like on your own forum.


This post got quickly closed without discussion
Actually, that is not true. There was a lot of discussion among the moderators, it was closed while that discussion happened, and the decision was to leave it closed, all of which was stated in thread.

tommac
2011-May-20, 02:00 PM
The point is why? And why the segrigation?

korjik
2011-May-20, 03:17 PM
Q&A is for questions then answers. As has been explained to you before, asking a question, then advocating a non-mainstream position belongs in ATM.

The segregation is there to keep this forum from being overrun with ATM ideas, driving away people who want to learn.

Which has also been explained to you before IIRC

R.A.F.
2011-May-20, 04:06 PM
Q&A is for questions then answers. As has been explained to you before, asking a question, then advocating a non-mainstream position belongs in ATM.

Some posters feel that constraint to be too "strict". They want to advocate an ATM idea without being held responsible for "proving" it correct.

jlhredshift
2011-May-20, 04:11 PM
Some posters feel that constraint to be too "strict". They want to advocate an ATM idea without being held responsible for "proving" it correct.

That is the best explanation that I have ever heard. It explains a lot.

slang
2011-May-20, 04:12 PM
The point is why? And why the segrigation?

Because it's not just the OP who reads the thread. Others come here for answers too, even more so because BAUT has a decent Google rating. Getting a whole load of discussions of non-mainstream topics in the Q&A section is confusing, especially to those without formal training.

Strange
2011-May-20, 04:22 PM
If you want to talk about "fictional" concepts, maybe Off Topic Babbling?

R.A.F.
2011-May-20, 04:54 PM
That is the best explanation that I have ever heard. It explains a lot.

Thankyou, although I'm only a small "cog" in the gigantic wheel that is BAUT, I do appreciate the compliment. :)

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:29 PM
That is not what happened. The question was asked and then it was closed, stating that no mainstream answer could be given. It is not that any ATM talk happened. It seems your statement here is EXACTLY part of the incosistencies in moderation of this board.


Q&A is for questions then answers. As has been explained to you before, asking a question, then advocating a non-mainstream position belongs in ATM.

The segregation is there to keep this forum from being overrun with ATM ideas, driving away people who want to learn.

Which has also been explained to you before IIRC

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:33 PM
Some posters feel that constraint to be too "strict". They want to advocate an ATM idea without being held responsible for "proving" it correct.

I dont even think it is that. Some questions, which if misunderstood, could lead someone into the world of ATM. So the questions are asked to clarify. The question is asked to figure out WHY it is ATM rather than mainstream.

In this case the question itself was fully mainstream, as it is legal to have negative values in einsteins equations, the same way it is legal to travel faster than the speed of light ( not possible to accelerate to the speed of light though ). So is it really ATM to ask what if we plug in these numbers to the formula ... what does that suggest? Why is Baut scared to have that type of question around? I am not saying that the world is based on negative energy ... what I was asking is what happens to the universe if you plug in negative numbers, which is legal, into einsteins eqations ( which is mainstream ).

what is the fear about having this question or type of question asked?

Strange
2011-May-20, 07:37 PM
That is not what happened. The question was asked and then it was closed, stating that no mainstream answer could be given. It is not that any ATM talk happened. It seems your statement here is EXACTLY part of the incosistencies in moderation of this board.

but if there is no mainstream answer (because it is a fictional scenario) then it doesn't belong in Q&A. It could have been moved to Science & Technology, I suppose... You could try requesting that, but I guess They considered that.

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:37 PM
Well this is a different issue. Really in my opinion there should be a forum for these types of questions. Somewhere where the answers are not as clear cut as what will hit the ground first if I drop a bowling ball and a feather ... but not proposing and defending and ATM ... rather a forum where inquisitive questions could be asked. This part is easy to solve.

The ATM section as is,for the most part, is useless.


Because it's not just the OP who reads the thread. Others come here for answers too, even more so because BAUT has a decent Google rating. Getting a whole load of discussions of non-mainstream topics in the Q&A section is confusing, especially to those without formal training.

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:41 PM
Yeah I would be totally cool with that ... no problem with a move. The problem is with the over-aggresive moderation.
This for the most part is a math / physics question. So I am not sure why it wouldnt have a mainstream answer. It should in fact have an absolute answer. All it is doing is plugging in numbers into an equation. The fact that those numbers do not represent the way our universe works is irrelevant. It is like null universes.



but if there is no mainstream answer (because it is a fictional scenario) then it doesn't belong in Q&A. It could have been moved to Science & Technology, I suppose... You could try requesting that, but I guess They considered that.

PetersCreek
2011-May-20, 07:45 PM
That is not what happened. The question was asked and then it was closed, stating that no mainstream answer could be given. It is not that any ATM talk happened.

As the one who closed the thread, I'll chime in.

It has long been policy that the Q&A forum is where folks get mainstream answers to their questions. You set up up a hypothetical situation, which is contrary to reality and mainstream views thereof, and asked for answers based on that ATM hypothetical. It then follows that those answers could only be speculative in nature and those speculations would necessarily be based on the ATM physics you proposed. To date, we have received no reports or PMs from any member stating a desire to provide a strictly mainstream answer to the OP of that thread.


It seems your statement here is EXACTLY part of the incosistencies in moderation of this board.

Since korjik is not a moderator, his statement cannot "EXACTLY" be part of any inconsistency in moderation that you perceive.

Tog
2011-May-20, 07:47 PM
Used the way you suggest there wouldn't really be a problem with a new forum for that type of discussion. The problem would come from the people posting their own ATM ideas in it, then crying foul when they are told they must be moved to the full ATM section. It's come up several time before and that seems to be the main factor as far as I can recall. The temptation to abuse that forum to skirt the responsibility of a full ATM thread is too great.

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:48 PM
If you want to talk about "fictional" concepts, maybe Off Topic Babbling?

But it is not fictional. It is pure physics and math. It is modelling. The fact that the results end up being fictional doesnt mean that running through the model is a waste of time. Isnt the SR of a BH in fact "fictional" as it deals only with non rotating/non charged black holes?

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:52 PM
Call the forum : Enter at your own risk - or unsupported by baut. The rules could be simple. Post politely, no name calling, no profanity, no politics, no religion. Thats it. Put it under the off topic forum even. I still dont understand the fear behind it not being super-over-moderated. If people dont like that forum they wouldnt read or post there. Maybe even remove it from the sitemap or exclude it in robots.txt so that it doesnt get google indexed.


Used the way you suggest there wouldn't really be a problem with a new forum for that type of discussion. The problem would come from the people posting their own ATM ideas in it, then crying foul when they are told they must be moved to the full ATM section. It's come up several time before and that seems to be the main factor as far as I can recall. The temptation to abuse that forum to skirt the responsibility of a full ATM thread is too great.

Moose
2011-May-20, 07:54 PM
So if I want to post into ATM I supposedly need a theory that I am putting up to be tested.

Yes.


To post in Q/A it is only for questions about mainstream physics.

Yes.


But there seems to be a big gap between these two items.

Absolutely, yes.

BAUT's management decided long ago that BAUT will not be used to develop ATMs. This is not an ATM site. This is a mainstream science site. Full stop. Testing ATMs (within the proving grounds only) is also a function of the scientific mainstream, as testing is necessary for something to eventually become accepted by the mainstream. And so we offer, for a limited time, under certain conditions that have proven necessary in order to host such a function, a place to test ATMs.

Summary:

1) Mainstream questions and mainstream answers only in Q&A. Do not post ATM questions or answers in Q&A.
2) ATM proposals (they must be testable proposals) may be posted in the ATM forum.
3) ATM development must take place elsewhere. BAUT does not offer that service.

borman
2011-May-20, 07:57 PM
FWIW, I believe the question of negative energy was addressed by Edward Witten and he developed a NOGO theorem proving it does not happen. So it has been addressed by a mainstream theorist.

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:58 PM
Isnt much of physics speculative to some extent? How is this question more speculative than say string theory. Maybe wording should have been simplified ... to how would negative values plugged into einsteins equations affect the universe. Or why are negative numbers plugged into einsteins equations prohibited by mainstream science .... but I dont see this and other questions being so far out of the realm of what Baut does ... I do see it as just another opportunity for Baut Moderators to moderate for the sake of moderation. I sort of understand that is how Baut is set up with its set of rules that are longer than the American constitution, so I dont blame the moderators. I just dont understand the spirit/intent of the rule.

As the one who closed the thread, I'll chime in.

It has long been policy that the Q&A forum is where folks get mainstream answers to their questions. You set up up a hypothetical situation, which is contrary to reality and mainstream views thereof, and asked for answers based on that ATM hypothetical. It then follows that those answers could only be speculative in nature and those speculations would necessarily be based on the ATM physics you proposed. To date, we have received no reports or PMs from any member stating a desire to provide a strictly mainstream answer to the OP of that thread.



Since korjik is not a moderator, his statement cannot "EXACTLY" be part of any inconsistency in moderation that you perceive.

tommac
2011-May-20, 07:59 PM
FWIW, I believe the question of negative energy was addressed by Edward Witten and he developed a NOGO theorem proving it does not happen. So it has been addressed by a mainstream theorist.

That would have been a very interesting post for that thread. It would have been interesting to see why. However lets stick to the topic of this thread.

tommac
2011-May-20, 08:01 PM
But this is a mainstream question that could be answered fully with mainstream math/physics. So I guess I totally miss your point.



Yes.



Yes.



Absolutely, yes.

BAUT's management decided long ago that BAUT will not be used to develop ATMs. This is not an ATM site. This is a mainstream science site. Full stop. Testing ATMs (within the proving grounds only) is also a function of the scientific mainstream, as testing is necessary for something to eventually become accepted by the mainstream. And so we offer, for a limited time, under certain conditions that have proven necessary in order to host such a function, a place to test ATMs.

Summary:

1) Mainstream questions and mainstream answers only in Q&A. Do not post ATM questions or answers in Q&A.
2) ATM proposals (they must be testable proposals) may be posted in the ATM forum.
3) ATM development must take place elsewhere. BAUT does not offer that service.

Strange
2011-May-20, 08:10 PM
All it is doing is plugging in numbers into an equation.

I don't want this to come across as too negative, but if that is the case why not just learn the math? Or maybe the question just isn't that important?

tommac
2011-May-20, 08:33 PM
I don't want this to come across as too negative, but if that is the case why not just learn the math? Or maybe the question just isn't that important?



Well that is what I am trying to do. Havent you seen math in my posts as of late? I have been posting hardcore math.

Tensor
2011-May-20, 09:31 PM
The problem is with the over-aggresive moderation.

Your opinion. Doesn't mean everyone thinks the moderation in that case was overaggressive.


This for the most part is a math / physics question. So I am not sure why it wouldnt have a mainstream answer. It should in fact have an absolute answer.

And, from previous experience with your "questions", when you get an absolute answer, you then go into ATM (or even further into ATM). The problem, IMHO, is the experience I've had of you're not accepting the mainstream answer. If you would accept the mainstream answer, there wouldn't be a problem. I don't have a problem if people don't want to accept the mainstream answer. But, do it with some data that supports your opinion.


All it is doing is plugging in numbers into an equation. The fact that those numbers do not represent the way our universe works is irrelevant. It is like null universes.

Yes it is relevant. If it doesn't apply to our universe, it's not science, so it doesn't belong here, since this is a science board.

Tensor
2011-May-20, 09:34 PM
Is it just me, or does this seem like another "I don't like your rules, so change your rules so I can have my way" thread.

R.A.F.
2011-May-20, 09:47 PM
I dont even think it is that.

I KNOW it is that...there are humnumerous (just made that word up...it means very, very many) examples.

Should I cite a few??

R.A.F.
2011-May-20, 09:47 PM
Is it just me, or does this seem like another "I don't like your rules, so change your rules so I can have my way" thread.


It's not just you...

Garrison
2011-May-20, 10:28 PM
So if I want to post into ATM I supposedly need a theory that I am putting up to be tested.

To post in Q/A it is only for questions about mainstream physics.

But there seems to be a big gap between these two items.



I don't really see that, there's plenty of speculative threads that lie between those two extremes in Space Exploration, Life In Space, and Science & Technology, heck there was a thread in the latter on how the Blackbird from the X-Men might work. Frankly sound to me as if you just started the discussion in the wrong place, and it happened to resemble a tactic used by ATM proponents to avoid having to answer questions, hardly surprising the mods shut it down is it?

R.A.F.
2011-May-20, 10:32 PM
The thing is, you can speculate without going over the "it must be true" line...once you cross that line, it becomes ATM.

I don't see what's so hard to understand about this.

Garrison
2011-May-20, 10:33 PM
It's not just you...

To butcher a bit of Shakespeare:

The fault, dear poster, is not in our mods,
But in ourselves

HenrikOlsen
2011-May-21, 02:30 PM
That is not what happened. The question was asked and then it was closed, stating that no mainstream answer could be given. It is not that any ATM talk happened. It seems your statement here is EXACTLY part of the incosistencies in moderation of this board.
You asked a question and was given the mainstream answer that in mainstream physics the question is meaningless.

Now you're complaining that you weren't allowed to continue with the meaningless questions, which would by necessity have required you to first explain why you think it isn't meaningless, which would by necessity have required you to posit an ATM, which would by necessity have forced the question to be moved to ATM.

A longer explanation of why the question was meaningless before the closure might have been preferable, but I suspect the moderators didn't expect this to come before the forced move.

Usher
2011-May-21, 05:40 PM
Yes.



Yes.



Absolutely, yes.

BAUT's management decided long ago that BAUT will not be used to develop ATMs. This is not an ATM site. This is a mainstream science site. Full stop. Testing ATMs (within the proving grounds only) is also a function of the scientific mainstream, as testing is necessary for something to eventually become accepted by the mainstream. And so we offer, for a limited time, under certain conditions that have proven necessary in order to host such a function, a place to test ATMs.

Summary:

1) Mainstream questions and mainstream answers only in Q&A. Do not post ATM questions or answers in Q&A.
2) ATM proposals (they must be testable proposals) may be posted in the ATM forum.
3) ATM development must take place elsewhere. BAUT does not offer that service.

This is a direct answer to the question posed and pretty clear to me. Do some homework (i.e., don't expect the [initial] work to be done using a BAUT thread), develop the position (i.e., implications of this speculation), then post on ATM when you are comfortable doing so. From what I've seen, you will then get plenty of help in testing your assumption(s) and conclusions. What's so bad about that?

tommac
2011-May-21, 05:41 PM
It's not just you...

Really ... the point is what are the rules? We have a Mainstream question about mathematical modelling that got closed.

tommac
2011-May-21, 05:43 PM
The thing is, you can speculate without going over the "it must be true" line...once you cross that line, it becomes ATM.

I don't see what's so hard to understand about this.

What I dont understand is that this is just a mathematical model. Are you saying that any mathematical model is ATM unless its results are real world? How about the SR of a black hole? Is there such things as non-rotating black holes in nature? Then wouldnt the idea of a SR be ATM per the same definition?

tommac
2011-May-21, 05:45 PM
This is a direct answer to the question posed and pretty clear to me. Do some homework (i.e., don't expect the [initial] work to be done using a BAUT thread), develop the position (i.e., implications of this speculation), then post on ATM when you are comfortable doing so. From what I've seen, you will then get plenty of help in testing your assumption(s) and conclusions. What's so bad about that?

Then what is the point of Baut? This is the point of a question. I am not proposing anything ... just wondering what would happen if certain numbers were plugged in. I am sure they would result in stuff that would be strange ... but just wanted to see what would happen if unorthadox, yet legal, numbers were plugged in. How is that ATM ?
It is just math ... how could any math be ATM ?

tommac
2011-May-21, 05:47 PM
You asked a question and was given the mainstream answer that in mainstream physics the question is meaningless.
.

Really, meaningless? I disagree. Why would it be meaningless to see how the main formulae that shapes most of mainstream physics reacts by putting in, unorthodox, yet legal numbers? Meaningless ????

tommac
2011-May-21, 05:48 PM
If that is the case then I request the thread be reopened and moved.


I don't really see that, there's plenty of speculative threads that lie between those two extremes in Space Exploration, Life In Space, and Science & Technology, heck there was a thread in the latter on how the Blackbird from the X-Men might work. Frankly sound to me as if you just started the discussion in the wrong place, and it happened to resemble a tactic used by ATM proponents to avoid having to answer questions, hardly surprising the mods shut it down is it?

tommac
2011-May-21, 05:54 PM
Your opinion. Doesn't mean everyone thinks the moderation in that case was overaggressive.

What is funny is that this is what is said every time someone complains about it. There are only a handful of people here that bully people when someone complains. It is always the same argument ... "that is just your opinion ... look everyone else ( meaning the 10 or so posters ) thinks that it is just right" The fact is that EVERYONE ( except for the inner circle thinks that the moderation is overaggressive and arbitrary." So while this argument can continue to be used ... it really is far from the truth. What really happens is that people come here and are really turned off by the overaggressive moderation and are either silenced by banning or leave. Leaving the 10 or so inner circle people to bully the new people and silence their complaints. Do you really think that it is just me? Am I the first to complain about this stuff? Maybe after the 100th post you will realize that it is only the few that complain ... but everyone feels it.

Saying this in all due respect for you Tensor ... as you are one of the very knowledgeable people here. Love your knowledge and your posts in general ... just making a point on this one topic.

Garrison
2011-May-21, 06:24 PM
The fact is that EVERYONE ( except for the inner circle thinks that the moderation is overaggressive and arbitrary." ...

...Maybe after the 100th post you will realize that it is only the few that complain ... but everyone feels it.


So your right and everyone else posting in this thread is some sort of stooge for the mods, no that doesn't sound at all egotistical...

Noclevername
2011-May-21, 07:00 PM
... but everyone feels it.


Wow, you must be psychic to know what everyone on BAUT feels! Can you tell me what number I'm thinking of? :rolleyes:

HenrikOlsen
2011-May-21, 07:03 PM
The fact is that EVERYONE ( except for the inner circle thinks that the moderation is overaggressive and arbitrary.
Those who don't disagree with you will naturally be the majority of those who don't disagree with you, and redefining those who do as inner circle is a classical No True Scotsman fallacy.
For those who haven't spoken up yet you claim them as being on your side, which is as bad as when the "UFO's are aliens" guys count every case for which there'e no evidence either way as proof they're right.

Infinity Watcher
2011-May-21, 07:11 PM
Those who don't disagree with you will naturally be the majority of those who don't disagree with you, and redefining those who do as inner circle is a classical No True Scotsman fallacy.
For those who haven't spoken up yet you claim them as being on your side, which is as bad as when the "UFO's are aliens" guys count every case for which there'e no evidence either way as proof they're right.
I'm about as far from any reasonable definition of "Inner Circle" as it's possible to get (I spend most of my time lurking, don't have a lot in the way of astronomical knowledge and although I date back to the BaBB I'm hardly the oldest member, have never met another Bautizen etc.) and the thing is I don't think the moderation is overaggressive, just about every ban I've seen is one I would have done myself (and probably with a lot more electronic violence-equivalent). It's why I've never applied for the job of modding, I couldn't do it according to the rules, if I was a Mod the Banned Posters list would start to look like a Hieronymous Bosch painting, I simply lack the patience that the Mods have repeatedly displayed.

Paul Beardsley
2011-May-21, 07:12 PM
The fact is that EVERYONE ( except for the inner circle thinks that the moderation is overaggressive and arbitrary."

I am getting so bored of hearing this rubbish.

Anyone who thinks the moderation is overaggressive and arbitrary is unlikely to have anything to contribute to, or indeed benefit from, BAUT as it is.

Paul Beardsley
2011-May-21, 07:14 PM
if I was a Mod the Banned Posters list would start to look like a Hieronymous Bosch painting, I simply lack the patience that the Mods have repeatedly displayed.

Which demonstrates once again that even the most inane threads can inspire great posts!

Noclevername
2011-May-21, 07:25 PM
tommac, it's their bat and ball. They don't have to let you --or me, or anyone-- play at all, we should be thankful that they do.

astromark
2011-May-21, 07:52 PM
Its perfectly clear...

Questions and Answers ... Is for mainstream science based astronomicle Answers to Astronomicle related subject questions.

Against the Mainstream ... Is for ideas or posting positions that are not mainstream science and must be able to be tested and challenged.

Off Topic Babbling ... Is where almost anything can be discussed...

...................................... WHAT MORE COULD YOU WANT ? .................................................. .........

Noclevername
2011-May-21, 08:10 PM
He, by his own statements (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/115781-uggg-...-ATM-vs-Q-A?p=1891387#post1891387), wants a special section created where non-mainstream concepts can be put forth and discussed without the responsibility of the ATM rules.

Garrison
2011-May-21, 08:23 PM
He, by his own statements (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/115781-uggg-...-ATM-vs-Q-A?p=1891387#post1891387), wants a special section created where non-mainstream concepts can be put forth and discussed without the responsibility of the ATM rules.

A soapbox in other words.

jlhredshift
2011-May-21, 08:33 PM
A soapbox in other words.

Correct

R.A.F.
2011-May-21, 09:17 PM
Really ... the point is what are the rules?

Well, that's easy...the rules are those "guidelines" that you don't want to follow.

R.A.F.
2011-May-21, 09:22 PM
What I dont understand is that this is just a mathematical model. Are you saying that any mathematical model is ATM unless its results are real world? How about the SR of a black hole? Is there such things as non-rotating black holes in nature? Then wouldnt the idea of a SR be ATM per the same definition?

What schooling do you have that makes you an "authority" on mathematical models??

R.A.F.
2011-May-21, 09:27 PM
I am not proposing anything ... just wondering what would happen if certain numbers were plugged in.

That's fine...you are more than welcome to do that on your own board.

R.A.F.
2011-May-21, 09:34 PM
Do you really think that it is just me?

Yes...I have for some time now...

pzkpfw
2011-May-21, 09:40 PM
Question asked and answered (perhaps not accepted). Possibly a good idea to close this now before it gets (too) personal.

As usual, report this thread to request a re-opening - please present a case.