Pseudoscience: How to spot a Crackpot

[Beatnik Bob]

The guy mastered integral and differential calculus by the time he was 16 and taught himself geometry at 12.

I was just saying math isn't the be all and end all.
I mean, who was that one Asian girl (she's 30 now?) who taught herself calculus and advanced math at 12 (the age she graduated high school).

She is mathematically smarter than Einstein, but she will never reach his imagination or intuition. (And I think that goes for many mathematicians anyway).

That was my point.

And as for the more subtle aspects of general relativity, that continued even after he had died. It's not really a testament to a weakness Einstein had, but more a testament to the scope of the theory.

I'm not saying he was weak at all. To the contrary, I think he was a genius.

The most intelligent mind in math could have never done what Einstein did. I think Einstein was great. He was offered the presidency of Israel, (but turned it down because he hated politics).

but the existence of atoms,

Ancient Greeks had theorized on the existence of atoms. And their existence was understood in most scientific circles before they were discovered.

quantum mechanics

That was born independent of Einstein. In fact, I don't know if Einstein had even offered an opinion on the Double Slit experiment. Though he may have.

photons

Photons were understood as well. Light had been experimented with from ancient Egypt, to Newton's paper experiments, to the Double Slit experiment.

I mean, I kid you not, the stuff he was doing at the end of his career were highly mathematical- the very cutting edge of math at the time.

Yes, because he had so many hypotheses and theories that he was feverishly trying to explain in terms of math.
Einstein developed theories first, and then tried to develop the math afterward.
That's my point. Math isn't the height of scientific genius. Imagination is.
In Einstein's own words, "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
And I'd say he really is correct.

The sad truth about this aspect is that his own uncanny intuition that had brought him so much success early in his career failed him at this later stage, even though the mathematical sophistication of his work remained at the level of what he did with general relativity.

Because he passed his "crime-genius" prime.
Based on the age-crime curve.
In psychology, genius and crime, correlates with the prime of a male. Beginning after puberty and tapering off at middle-age.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...er-get-laid-ii

From an evolutionary perspective, genius is primarily masculine because it allows males to acquire more mating opportunities.
Productive success means competition, and with every act of competition (violent, intellectual, etc.) it gives males extra opportunities to attract mates.

Einstein's (and males in general) loss in genius is attributed to his loss in virility. He didn't lose intelligence, but he lost some of his genius. As all men do, starting in middle-age.

It's the reason why, from mathematicians, to poets, to songwriters, to artists, to playwrights like Shakespeare, their best work is done within a specific time frame. Of course there are exceptions. Some men may maintain their prime longer, as many people in general naturally live longer than others.
But for the most part...

NOTE: Many feminists have apparently been bothered by this: that genius is inherently male. If you are a feminist and you are reading this post, don't take this discussion off-track. And don't be perturbed by this. Because women in general are smarter than the average man, as they occupy a stable middle-ground. Men are either very stupid, or exceptionally genius/smart. And who can say which is better.

Einstien did not have a disadvantage at math, at least not in the way most people understand it. He was FAR better at it than most people in the world.

Again, Einstien's "failings" at math were with respect to the best mathematicians on the planet.

Fair enough, but you lose points for inadvertently adding fire to the Einstein math myth.

And you lose 10 points for misspelling Einstein's name twice (5 points each).

When people in the fields say Einstein "struggled" in mathematics, they mean he had difficulty compared to the best mathematicians in the world, not that math was difficult for him or that he had trouble understanding it.

Yes, I know.
I was going off of a documentary that interviewed many who were close to Einstein.
Some of them explained his equations to him more in-depth.
Obviously he wasn't mathematically illiterate. Not by a long shot.

[Cartesiantheater]

The points you lost weren't from what you actually said, just from what other people would interpret.

[Doc Velocity]

[Fuck Science] Says the guy who doesn't have SmallPox or Polio, while typing on his computer to talk to people around the world.

For your information, I took the smallpox and polio vaccines back when they were baddass in the 1960s — that's when they'd fire a flaming arrow with the polio vaccine into your shoulder, and it took about a week to recover.

And I was writing and cranking out ideas long before personal computers came along, sweetheart. I think Science is a fun hobby, but I'll tell you who's really fucked... It's you people who can't live without it.

See, I have skills and talents and knowledge that enable me to survive, make a living, and even rise to fame (over and over), without relying on Science. I can survive and thrive anywhere in the world without a computer, a cellphone, a refrigerator, or any of that shit.

Science has to invent shit to undo the shit that Science does. See? Science is half-baked, it's not fully-thought-out.

Like, okay, let's build the FUCK out of internal combustion engines for a hundred years and then OOOPS... Did we fuck up the climate? Did we pollute the fucking oceans? Did our zeal exceed our common sense?

Has our half-baked Science ramped up Human population without really thinking about how we're gonna feed and house these fuckers? Or maybe we'll just eradicate a few billion of them and take over their territory with these marvelous weapons and toxins that Science has given us.

Science is to Blame

So, I say Fuck Science.

— Doc Velocity

[lycanox]

You would not last a second without science. As even animals use small forms of science to survive.

Which means that without science to survive. You would have to do without the ability to distinguish poisonous plants from eatable plants. Tools or even tactics to assist hunting. And basic shelter.

And again, it is very easily to accuse science of all kind of bad stuff.
But the very easy truth is. Without science, our living conditions would be a lot worse.
Instead it is very likely that you would not exist without it.

[Beatnik Bob]

You would not last a second without science. As even animals use small forms of science to survive.

With all due respect, I don't believe that is the facet of science Doc was referring to.

These were probably the deffinitions he was using:

a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study

a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method

: a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws

[Fut004]

Blah Blah Blah... Nonsense... Blah Blah Blah
So, I say Fuck Science.

You're still a hypocrite. You think science is so bad, get the fuck off the internet, Dingus.

[Doc Velocity]

You're still a hypocrite. You think science is so bad, get the fuck off the internet, Dingus.

What the fuck does my use of the fucking Internet have to do with anything, Shit-for-Brains? Are you suggesting that, since I use products of Science, I must wholeheartedly endorse Science?

FUCK YOU. What black-and-white fucking two-dimensional world do you inhabit? I can hammer the Scientific community to my heart's fucking content, in any venue using any technology I wish.

Plus, I'm bigger than you and I can beat your ass barehanded. So fuck off.

— Doc Velocity

[Fut004]

What the fuck does my use of the fucking Internet have to do with anything, Shit-for-Brains? Are you suggesting that, since I use products of Science, I must wholeheartedly endorse Science?

FUCK YOU. What black-and-white fucking two-dimensional world do you inhabit? I can hammer the Scientific community to my heart's fucking content, in any venue using any technology I wish.

So Science sucks, but not when it's providing things that you enjoy? That's hypocrisy by definition.

Plus, I'm bigger than you and I can beat your ass barehanded. So fuck off.

Oh, Physical threats from an anonymous nerd on an online forum. What are you 12 years old? Or are the Roid-Rages becoming too unbearable for you to contain?

[palerider]

Yes Cartesian, what you say about Einstein and his mathematical ability is very true....was not able to prove his relativety theories alone...but it doesn't mean that he was incapable of high level maths on the contrary to even have the intelligence to suggest such a theory shows some considerable understanding of the physical world!

I love science and after reading this thread I'm a little concerned by some of the harsh logic used in defining pseudoscience etc. Science when discussed on public forums should be discussed in a langauge that all understand. It is unfair to write eqautions and qoute intense theoretical ideas on a public domain. If we wish people to engage with us from all walks of life, then we have to simplify the language and ideas used so that all can engage and grasp the concepts at play and hopefully after some thought contribute to the discussion and also learn from it.

There are a few threads on here where streams of equations are qouted, which most readers canot understand and will not wish to follow. A genuine scientist who does not present their case clearly in a way that can be simplified is equally as bad as a crackpot one...in my opinion!!!

[Cartesiantheater]

Yes Cartesian, what you say about Einstein and his mathematical ability is very true....was not able to prove his relativety theories alone...but it doesn't mean that he was incapable of high level maths on the contrary to even have the intelligence to suggest such a theory shows some considerable understanding of the physical world!

I love science and after reading this thread I'm a little concerned by some of the harsh logic used in defining pseudoscience etc. Science when discussed on public forums should be discussed in a langauge that all understand. It is unfair to write eqautions and qoute intense theoretical ideas on a public domain. If we wish people to engage with us from all walks of life, then we have to simplify the language and ideas used so that all can engage and grasp the concepts at play and hopefully after some thought contribute to the discussion and also learn from it.

There are a few threads on here where streams of equations are qouted, which most readers canot understand and will not wish to follow. A genuine scientist who does not present their case clearly in a way that can be simplified is equally as bad as a crackpot one...in my opinion!!!

It's not about mathematical equations. It's about following the scientific method. It's about evidence, theory matching evidence, peer review, falsifiability, all those things that are indispensable to modern science. You can be using all kinds of mathematical equations and still not be doing science (dedanoe is often guilty of this). You could not use any sophisticated math at all and still be doing science.

It's about the method, not necessarily the content itself (note that the method includes falsifiability, however).

[palerider]

I'm not playing Cartesin, not after your outlandish attack on the other thread [which I wont name]!!!

Unfair boyo!!!

[Cartesiantheater]

I'm not playing Cartesin, not after your outlandish attack on the other thread [which I wont name]!!!

Unfair boyo!!!

You must have missed where it says the user name next to the quote. I didn't even mention black holes to you. That was to tahn. Sorry for the confusion.