Im not sure what you’re disagreeing with. It seems like selective quoting to sidestep my point about quality of predictions and pivot to ridiculing the original theory which I actually was originally critical of.
I don’t feel any need to shame the author. There’s clearly a good faith effort to contribute and I think the most constructive feedback is to suggest how it could be stronger.
Predictions – quantifiable predictions based on mathematical models – are not the final gold standard, they are the admission for entry.
Perhaps if you are an established physicist with a history of significant contributions then your vague predictions might hold some interest, but the author studied English and philosophy and has a career to match, and it is clear from reading that they have no actual experience developing physics theory.
I'd never heard of the site before yesterday. Doesn't some day need to be the first day everyone starts posting? And can't a theory someone read about months ago and finds compelling be reason enough to seek out others to engage with on the subject?
Are you suggesting I'm a bot or an alt from the author or something? Because that feels like an illogical leap to make based on someone posting enthusiastically about a subject. I do wonder if you'd suspect these accounts equally if the viewpoint expressed aligned with yours.
No?
Im not sure what you’re disagreeing with. It seems like selective quoting to sidestep my point about quality of predictions and pivot to ridiculing the original theory which I actually was originally critical of.
I don’t feel any need to shame the author. There’s clearly a good faith effort to contribute and I think the most constructive feedback is to suggest how it could be stronger.
Predictions – quantifiable predictions based on mathematical models – are not the final gold standard, they are the admission for entry.
Perhaps if you are an established physicist with a history of significant contributions then your vague predictions might hold some interest, but the author studied English and philosophy and has a career to match, and it is clear from reading that they have no actual experience developing physics theory.
[flagged]
@dang there are several brand new accounts created today which have only commented on this post which I find rather suspicious
I'd never heard of the site before yesterday. Doesn't some day need to be the first day everyone starts posting? And can't a theory someone read about months ago and finds compelling be reason enough to seek out others to engage with on the subject?
Are you suggesting I'm a bot or an alt from the author or something? Because that feels like an illogical leap to make based on someone posting enthusiastically about a subject. I do wonder if you'd suspect these accounts equally if the viewpoint expressed aligned with yours.