pouët.net

Just minor corrections for Prof. Chromag. Last time I saw Touchstone he wasn't a professor but a professional, as in senior software engineering manager at Apple.

So, nice to have another professor from the demoscene. :)

Here is a fresh paper published by an Australian mathematician about a unified field theory:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/190727827/Einstein-Wrong-Uft-Physics

It seems serious to me, yet I am unable to assess its quality as I'm not a physicist.

I think it is very unfortunate that he will probably not be taken seriously by experts because he only has a Bachelor's degree.

I bet nobody gives a fuck about papers you post.

I was in academia too btw.

Figures that this is at the top of the page and that adok would link to it.

Jealous much?

skomp: What you want to say is that nobody cares about my linking to a paper. But that does not mean that nobody cares about this paper.

That has ALL the crackpot signs right there.

Preacher: He says he spent thousands of hours working on his theory. Is it fair to dismiss a theory if he spent thousands of hours working on it?

One of the core principles of science is that you leave the question whether you just revolutionized anything to _other people_, not brag about yourself before presenting even the slightest result.

And yes, I'd say it's fair to dismiss any scientific "paper" that in its abstract essentially says "fuck your peer review, I'm too smart for you anyway". Maybe what the guy says has merit but then he really should present it in a form that people can take seriously (and I'm saying that as an academia dropout who normally very much prefers layman's terms in papers).

kb_: Point taken. What you say is reasonable.

The problem with Peter is that he is not formally qualified to do this kind of research. It is therefore also possible to "peer-review" his research if one takes the word "peer" literally, because Peter is not a "peer" of the people who usually review this kind of research.

What I wanted to say: It is therefore also not possible to "peer-review"...

It's analogous to a situation where an oppressed member of a persecuted African royal family wants to find someone to help do transactions over the Internet. For all you know, the offer might actually be genuine, but common experience has taught you to disregard them completely, because the chance of it being genuine is negligible. Arxiv.org is full of similar articles and few, if any, serious researchers pay any attention to them, since having an abstract with all the telltale signs of the usual nonsense is a surefire way to get it ignored, and even a quick glance at this particular paper shows that it's got more to do with psychiatry than physics.

Preacher, but you do have a glorified picture of academia ... Much that happens in academia is not quite as kosher as you might think.

Where did you get that from?

the showers?

Preacher, I had this impression because you talked about "serious researchers". Please forgive me if I misunderstood you.

what Barti says?

Adok poppycock. If the paper was worth anything and as revolutionary as you claim, he should have submitted it somewhere with a blind review, preferably double. Those places exists, even in physics. That ensures that it is carefully and fairly judged, free of bias - only the message remains. I didnt even have a masters degree when I got my first paper accepted and nobody cared about my rank - since they DID NOT KNOW MY RANK (or even my name) WHEN THEY EVALUATED THE PAPER. And they wouldn't have cared anyway, because unlike certain others, their estimation of people is not bound to some rather arbitrary number.

You see, in science, if someone was titled "Emperor", if they scored a 175 or a 75 on an IQ test, does not matter - the words and numbers you put in your paper matters. So saying someone is not a "serious researcher" while spouting crap like the above means that you continue your now 15-20 year running streak of, while maybe having a high IQ, being a complete and utter moron in every aspect of life that does not concern the identification and comparison of triangles and squares. So please, for the love of god please, stop thinking that IQ and knowledge are related issues. Because you clearly have no fucking idea about how academia, science or dialogue works.

Regarding scientific journals - well, perhaps you do not have a high opinion of me, but what about a Nobel Prize winner? Listen to Randy Schekman, I fully agree with his views on this matter:

http://www.elifesciences.org/how-to-break-free-from-the-tyranny-of-luxury-journals-the-conversation/

what nic0 said and in addition: please don't think stuff like "they have to adore me because i'm intelligent" or whatever. you might have a high iq, but you obviously lack social skills completely.

Adok:
-How many peer reviewed papers have you published?
-How many times were you invited as a reviewer in a highly ranked journal?
-Have your publications been cited?

Adok, I commend you for being able to google "journals and peer review + criticism" on google - clearly you are developing new and interesting abilities. But have you actually read what he is writing? He critiques the current system of journals integrated with career advancement, and then goes on to separating the two, and advocating a more open review system. I agree with most of his points (although open access has a lot of problems as well, most pertinent the tendency towards crowdpleasing), but I dont really see how that is the point. You whined about a guy not getting recognition for his paper because he just has a bachelors degree (and I have no idea whether the paper is good or bad, although I highly doubt its quality, but that is by the transitive property of you linking it as well as the fact that the guy felt the need to put his IQ on the frontpage. That reeks of crackpot, but who knows, maybe he is the new einstein).

Would this paper do better in an open access system? Would it be lauded as the second coming of Christ? Is "the man" really keeping your guy's paper down because they cannot accept that a mere bachelor student is a genius who is smarter than the entire departments of physics all over the world? Is that actually why nobody listens to him, or indeed, listens to you when you muse on the relationship between liberalism, eugenics and so on? Or is it because it is really not very impressive, and reeks of the curse of bachelor's students everywhere? That curse, that allowed them to read a few texts, digest 20% of their meaning and then launch into a long tirade against "the establishment", while heralding their own Messiah-complex? That is the sole strength of review, open or not. It tells more humble bachelor students or even master students (who should now better) which pdfs online can be safely disregarded as crackpottery.

Calexico: I am just beginning my scientific career. My first two papers as a co-author have been submitted and will probably be published at the beginning of the next year. At the moment I am working on my first paper as first author.