Although I am quite frustrated with the physicists I have encountered in social media due to their attitude problems, bullying, and their tragically wrong interpretations of nature and the universe, I feel an onus to try to get attention from the fields of physics and cosmology on to NPQG so we can move on with the new era. Just imagine the opportunity cost that has already been incurred since mid-2018 when I could have directed physicists to a solution in short order. How could we estimate that cost? The lost science productivity, the wasted funding, the delay in embarking on technologies that seize the opportunities enabled by NPQG, and the minds of our best and brightest still working on epicycle rivaling nonsense narratives in GR, QM, and ΛCDM.
The way I see it, NPQG enabled technologies will be a significant engine for the future economy and will enable intelligent life from Earth to accomplish objectives that have, until now, been unachievable dreams. My guess is that billions of dollars will be invested in NPQG in the first decade, with the goal of starting that economic engine. How big is the world economy?
In twenty years, I could easily see NPQG having enabled well over a trillion dollars in world economy and that’s just the economic benefit. Imagine what will be accomplished with NPQG. Elon Musk’s SpaceX will have a regular shuttles departing to Mars. We’ll be scrubbing CO2 from the atmosphere at enormous scale. Energy generation will be done with entirely new scalable and inexpensive methods. Furthermore we will eventually manufacture with 3D printing directly from spacetime aether or other abundant, inexpensive, and green resources. How much is all that worth? We are already 3 years delayed on that vision and it is a day for day slip.
I am reluctant to initiate new online conversations with physicists since the ones I have encountered are usually offensive bullies who accuse me of purveying nonsense and being mentally ill. This is one area where physics is not fun. Beyond the bullies, there are so many of the outreach physicists who let it be known in their interviews, tweets, and blogs that they are frustrated by pestering from ‘crackpots’. There seems to be no way to engage these physicists via phone, email, or social media and WAKE THEM UP from their nonsense narrative nightmares. I’m more offended by the ‘crackpot’ slander than I am by the ‘nonsense’ pejorative. I understand why physicists are generally skeptical of anyone not in the field who says they have found the theory of everything. I’m completely OK with intellectually honest criticism of ideas. I’m also totally OK with physicists simply declining to engage. However, if physicists invested even ten minutes, they would be hooked by NPQG and at that point it’s off to the races on the new era.
Here are some of the physicists who are offensive and bullying in their strident attacks on people they call ‘crackpots’. I’ll list them roughly in the order in which I encountered their bullying.
- Sean M. Carroll — California Institute of Technology
- Purveyor of the ‘many worlds’ nonsense theory.
- John Baez — UC Riverside
- Author of the extremely hateful ‘Crackpot Index‘
- Sabine Hossenfelder — Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies
- Bans ideators from her blog.
- Katherine Mack — NC State University
- Peter B. Denton — Brookhaven Lab and reddit moderator
- Warren Siegel — Stony Brook University
- Author of the extremely hateful ‘Are you a quack?‘
- Brian Keating — UC San Diego
These are fairly well known physicists and their universities and institutions allow them free rein to publish hate speech and bully independent ideators. But this is only the tip of the iceberg. Google ‘crackpot’ and you find more people in the field who have written about their disdain and frustration towards ‘crackpots.’
- Johanna L Miller, editor Physics Today — author ‘Sorry, crackpots‘
- Randy Scalise at SMU — author of ‘The CRACKPOT Page‘
And pity the poor creative ideator who tries to post and catch a conversation on reddit or a discord server. People claiming to be physicists, with anonymous user names, will pounce on you and start a groundswell of people calling you a crackpot and try to get you banned. You might think the moderators would toss you a lifeline, but not on reddit groups related to physics and cosmology. Those moderators are the worst power abusers.
The irony of the entire situation is enormous. 150 years of wrong physics. 50 years of no major progress in particle physics. Cosmology is completely lost. Nonsense narratives from physicists abound, and we are talking hugely wrong interpretations, like the Big Bang or the quantum, which are a total misunderstanding of nature. Physics and cosmology as proffered today looks like blindfolded scientists collectively played ‘Pin the Tail on the Donkey’ and tacked their theories on to what is now a monstrosity of incorrect interpretations.
The ideators can see that these fields are in crisis and they absorb the outreach material and often have some pattern they observe, and perhaps some level of insight, but virtually none of the academic language or math. No journal will publish them, so they appeal to their idols in the academic community with emails, tweets, letters, you name it. And what do the enthusiast ideators get in return? A lot of ignoring and muting — I am ok with that, no physicist is required to read or respond to ideators. The ideators get a lot of blocking — it is offensive to block one of your fans who has ideas if you ask me. Muting is their less offensive option. Then there is the name calling, bullying, and accusing the ideator of being mentally ill.
Are there any remedies? I’ve come to believe that it may be near impossible to find physicists who will engage with an ideator from outside the field. So what are the options?
- The ideator could enter the field and embark on a degree and then from within the system, they might be allowed to publish, and might be able to get other physicists to engage with their ideas. The fields are also rife with politics though, so there is no guarantee of survival, especially for someone trying to overturn accepted interpretations. Not all ideators are in position to take this course of action. Plus who would want to be around so many mean and cantankerous physicists?
- The ideator could sue those physicists generating the hate speech and performing the bullying. That might be satisfying, and it might serve notice to the physics community that they need to alter their ways. However, it is not going to do anything to advance the ideator’s ideas. It would only drain their funds and consume their time.
- The ideator could sue universities for decades of teaching nonsense interpretations of physics and cosmology. The errors that physicists have made amount to gross incompetence. All those students minds filled with wrong interpretations. Can we hold the universities accountable for such a poor performance? I don’t know. Nature is a trickster and once the scientists locked in on the first wrong interpretations, those became the faulty priors that more incorrect interpretations were built upon. At this point the fields are so far off track that it is worse than epicycles.
- The ideator might possibly try a different angle through professional academics in chemistry, philosophy, or the history of physics. This might be worth a try because all of those folks have enough knowledge and background and may not be so determined not to engage with an independent ideator.
I don’t know the answer. My approach is this blog, where I continue drilling into physics and cosmology whilst picking the low hanging fruit and patiently hoping some bright scientist somewhere picks up on the breakthrough and becames an advocate. I still post some ideas to scientists through social media, but that seems unlikely to ever work.
I have spent much time thinking about what I would advocate to rehabilitate the fields of physics and cosmology once the paradigm shift to NPQG is underway. Note that I give astronomers a pass, since they are supposed to be properly guided by the physicists and cosmologists, not thrown under the bus by them. Here are some ideas.
- The scientific method has failed, and it will need changes so this scale of travesty never happens again. One such major change is that when lost, unproductive, and spouting nonsense, there must be more attention applied to searching for incorrect priors.
- Physics and astrophysics departments will need a total redesign for the new era. I’m not talking reorganization. A total redesign is required.
- Given the magnitude of changes required, it would be wise for universities and institutions to dismiss the entire physics and cosmology departments, revoking all tenure, and then open up hiring for the newly redesigned departments. Those that were dismissed could apply for the new positions.
- From an accountability standpoint, I would hope that universities and institutions would no longer employ those who so miserably failed to solve nature and the universe. I’m mainly thinking accountability rolls up hill, so department heads, group leaders, and other senior physicists that have been entirely off track.
- Provide counseling to physicists and cosmologists whose career or research is decimated by the paradigm shift. I can imagine particle physicists and astrophysicists being quite stunned and then despondent at the setbacks for them personally, even though the science will have taken a huge leap forward. I can also imagine astrophysicists and astronomers being rather irritated at particle physicists.
It’s time to cancel the theories of general relativity, quantum mechanics & QFT/QED/QCD, and lambda cold dark matter. These need to be refactored and recast for the point charge era.
Here are some exemplars of physicists anti-crackpot anti-outreach.
John Baez at UC Riverside
N.B. Items 2, 6, 17, 19, ~30, and 37 are actually TRUE of NPQG for entirely legitimate and scientific reasons. Baez’s index is scientifically flawed, because if someone were to develop the breakthrough theory, many of these items would be TRUE. Ooops, I put TRUE in ALL CAPS, guess that increases my score too. Give me a break. This hateful bullying index has been deployed countless times by physicists to shame and bully eager, excited, vulnerable, independent ideators who have no ill will and are only trying to help discover a solution because particle physicists and astrophysicists and cosmologists have screwed up for 150 years and can’t figure nature out despite it being right in front of their face no matter what direction they look.
John Baez’s crackpot index even has an entry in Wikipedia. I made a comment on the talk page.
Randy Scalise at SMU
Warren is unabashedly bullying people with ideas by calling them mentally ill in highly pejorative terms.
p.s. I didn’t include this in the main article because my impression of Matthew Von Hippel is still hanging in the balance. I wrote a blog article about our first encounter here : Matthew von Hippel : Lost and Clueless. Today, I read Matthew’s 4gravitons blog article from 2016 “The (but I’m Not a) Crackpot Style Guide“. Note, this was about 2 years before I started research on NPQG. I posted this comment now some 5 years after the article was published.
While this post emphasizes the word ‘crackpot’ which I find to be a term used to bully independent ideators, other than that the advice is decent. Thank you 4gravitons for the empathy and thought you put into this. Maybe I should give 4gravitons another chance. I still think there is a huge issue : those physicists who react emotionally and negatively to ideas have an anger management issue. Here are some suggestions. Ignore the idea. Say something polite and encouraging. You are not on the hook to respond to anything. Why get annoyed? Oh, because physicists know their field is in a crisis for 50, 90, 150 years depending on when you start counting and these ideators keep reminding us physicists and cosmologists that we work in a failed discipline that continuously spouts nonsense. Really physicists?J Mark Morris 2021 reply to Matthew Von Hippel blog post from 2016.
That seems like a good point to conclude this post.
J Mark Morris : San Diego : California