XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math   
   From: physfitfreak@gmail.com   
      
   On 4/16/25 5:22 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   > On 4/16/25 4:14 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:   
   >> Physfitfreak  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 4/14/25 2:01 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:   
   >>>> rhertz  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Wien was already a Nobel Prize by 1905. He had a tremendous respect   
   >>>>> and   
   >>>>> influence from the European physics community (and also abroad).   
   >>>>> Planck   
   >>>>> didn't have this.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Why should we believe anything you write   
   >>>> when you can't even get simple facts like this right?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Jan   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> What difference does it make what happened anyway. I don't understand   
   >>> you guys in this relativity forum.   
   >>>   
   >>> Some physics were developed and that's it. The important thing is the   
   >>> physics not the history of physics. Doesn't matter who did what.   
   >>>   
   >>> And all these human names Priests have packed into it. Concepts as well   
   >>> as units and rules and even some formulas! All with human names on them.   
   >>> Are you people nuts?..   
   >>   
   >> Perhaps, but it is a very human trait.   
   >> Things memorise more easily when there is a name attached to it.   
   >>   
   >> For example, even asteroids get names.   
   >> Asteroid 1001 Gaussia for example may be easier on the brain   
   >> than the provisional designation 1923 OA.   
   >> Asteroid 'Gaussia' will even be understood if the number is forgotten,   
   >>   
   >> Jan   
   >>   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > No it's not that innocent a mess. Priest-minded crappy scientists,   
   > disguised as "scientists" have been forcing it to pack non-related   
   > humanities stuff in it for their own tribal interests. And they've gone   
   > too far. It's become disgusting in fact. Takes the attention of students   
   > away to stuff unrelated to physics.   
   >   
   > Did Newton ever do that? Of course not. As far as I know he never named   
   > names in his physics works. The closest that he came to point to a   
   > "history" of it was his comment about "giants". He was too good a   
   > physicist to name even those giants, cause it would be trash as far as   
   > physics concepts were concerned.   
   >   
   > Physics history is a humanities field. It has absolutely nothing to do   
   > with physics.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
      
   Wouldn't it be better if for a paper that's been published, the writers   
   of it would appear as only codes, and not their names or affiliations,   
   codes which themselves would change with each new paper they write. This   
   will secure the danger of bias in reading such papers. There'd only be   
   the material to concentrate on, and nothing else that could give the   
   readers any cues about in whose presence they are when they're reading   
   the work. Physics requires such degree of objectivity.   
      
   The references section of the paper should likewise avoid giving such   
   cues. Only the titles of the papers, and dates, together with the   
   corresponding codes tied to each one and unique to it, would be given.   
      
   This will fight tribalism.   
      
   All that bias that's packed today in the form of who's who will get   
   eliminated, and what's left is physics itself to research and understand   
   and develop.   
      
   Under such system, Arindams of the world will subsist, but only at the   
   subsistence level. All that bullshit keeps coming and are quickly read   
   and tossed away by researchers. I don't think the loss of time and   
   effort involved would be even mentionable. If I read 20 different works   
   of Arindam not knowing they've all been from him, it would still take me   
   really seconds for each to find the bogus there and toss them. I mean   
   the waste of time for 20 of them added together would be less than 10   
   minutes.   
      
   And with continuation of this norm, researchers will get super sharp in   
   detecting bogus not from knowing the author, but from the  presented   
   material itself because they would have no other ways to prevent such   
   material coming to them. They won't have an "Arindam" or "Archimedes   
   Plutonium" name attached to help them toss'em faster. I think the   
   additional bogus detecting skills it creates is/8 worth the little price   
   paid.   
      
   And physics will remain a physics-based, not an author-based science.   
      
   The way it is now, when I open a physics book I get nausiated by it. It   
   feels like a Bible, written by the Fremasonry. Fuck you of course for   
   it. Fuck you cro-magnons.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)