PhD's and other Academic titles

[Chris Sawatsky]

One may safely assume that many human traits are shared by every culture regardless of the state of that culture in the world today. Pride, Insecurity, Fear of Loss, Ego and the dependency that forms when we become accustomed to our individual reality and related goals. I grew up in a middle class environment but my parents owned our home, car and had only bills and property/income tax to pay while each earned between $3000/month (70's) and $4500/month (80's). I had everything within a type of reason that allowed me to get over $1500 worth of stuff at Christmas. I became used to this to the point of taking it for granted and found it hard and uncomfortable after I grew up and left home. I know that if I were to get a degree and earn 100k + a year I would be accustomed to this and want more in no time. If I had a science degree and had years of experience getting grants to do research and becoming famous in the related industries, I would not except discoveries that proved my past published theories incorrect. In fact I would probably work hard to discredit the sources and go into denial because everything I have done since publishing said theory is based on this theory being correct. If Einstein was proven to be incorrect throughout the Theory of Relativity and someone pointed out that he worked reviewing others work and put his theory together using others work, would those who built their career from the assumption that Einstein's theory is absolute truth, be willing to accept the new findings? How many times has pride allowed false beliefs to continue? The flat planet that was created in 7 days smack in the middle of the universe with the sun revolving around us was not that long ago and their are still people who believe these things? Are their a governing body of ethics that all the sciences prescribe to?If not should there be? 

[iNow]

Humans will act in flawed ways regardless of how we’re organized and governed. Science is at least fine slaughtering sacred cows and finding fault with all ideas, amd the most famous of all scientists are those who falsify something we previously knew to be true.

Only those ideas which survive experiment are kept, and even those only provisionally until something even more precise is discovered. We’ll always be biased and faulty as humans, but at least science provides a clear consistent method for minimizing those biases and faults and moving humanity forward.

You seem to be under the delusion that researchers are well paid and that relativity is accepted on faith alone. We’ve seen such childish pig ignorant claims made many times in the past. You aren’t the first and won’t be the last to repeat that nonsense.

I can only hope that you’re willing to challenge your own false beliefs and learn sometching new while you’re here seeking more ethical outcomes.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Chris Sawatsky said:

If I had a science degree and had years of experience getting grants to do research and becoming famous in the related industries, I would not except discoveries that proved my past published theories incorrect. In fact I would probably work hard to discredit the sources and go into denial because everything I have done since publishing said theory is based on this theory being correct. 

This would make you extremely unethical.

And fortunately, science has natural safeguards in place. People can check someone else's math, and experiments confirm when something works. It doesn't matter that you don't accept discoveries that show you past work to be wrong, because the science community will. Attacking the source rather than the science is a logical fallacy, and most scientists are trained to spot such. 

[Markus Hanke]

1 hour ago, Chris Sawatsky said:

would those who built their career from the assumption that Einstein's theory is absolute truth, be willing to accept the new findings?

Probably not, for the simple reason that relativity isn’t just some abstract mathematical theory, but a framework that we actually apply everyday in all manner of practical engineering applications - from MRI scanners, to chemistry, to electrical engineering, to navigation systems, to nuclear power plants, to particle accelerators…the list is endless. In short, we know the theory works because we use it everyday. So if someone comes along and says “relativity is wrong”, then he will be bound to be met with a very large amount of healthy scepticism.

[Janus]

2 hours ago, Chris Sawatsky said:

and someone pointed out that he worked reviewing others work and put his theory together using others work,

I fail to see where this would matter, other than Einstein taking credit for that which he was not due.  It has nothing to do the validity of the conclusions. And as pointed in the previous post, the theory has survived every test thrown at it, and much of the equipment we use today would not function if it were incorrect to any large degree.

[exchemist]

5 hours ago, Chris Sawatsky said:

One may safely assume that many human traits are shared by every culture regardless of the state of that culture in the world today. Pride, Insecurity, Fear of Loss, Ego and the dependency that forms when we become accustomed to our individual reality and related goals. I grew up in a middle class environment but my parents owned our home, car and had only bills and property/income tax to pay while each earned between $3000/month (70's) and $4500/month (80's). I had everything within a type of reason that allowed me to get over $1500 worth of stuff at Christmas. I became used to this to the point of taking it for granted and found it hard and uncomfortable after I grew up and left home. I know that if I were to get a degree and earn 100k + a year I would be accustomed to this and want more in no time. If I had a science degree and had years of experience getting grants to do research and becoming famous in the related industries, I would not except discoveries that proved my past published theories incorrect. In fact I would probably work hard to discredit the sources and go into denial because everything I have done since publishing said theory is based on this theory being correct. If Einstein was proven to be incorrect throughout the Theory of Relativity and someone pointed out that he worked reviewing others work and put his theory together using others work, would those who built their career from the assumption that Einstein's theory is absolute truth, be willing to accept the new findings? How many times has pride allowed false beliefs to continue? The flat planet that was created in 7 days smack in the middle of the universe with the sun revolving around us was not that long ago and their are still people who believe these things? Are their a governing body of ethics that all the sciences prescribe to?If not should there be? 

You need to brush up on your history of science. The "flat planet" was already out of date by 300BC, when Eratosthenes made a pretty good stab at calculating the circumferences of the Earth. Every sailor will have known the sea curves out of sight at the horizon. The Greeks were seafarers.   

As for new ideas overturning established ones, that has always been a feature of science, throughout its history. Obviously you are right that individual scientists, being human, cannot help but have a personal investment in the hypotheses they espouse. However science is a collective enterprise, founded on reproducible observation of nature. It is, in the end, that which determines which theories are successful and which ones fall by the wayside. The personal preferences of individual scientists cannot prevent that.  

If someone were to come forward with observations that do not fit relativity, then first they would be carefully checked and, if confirmed, there would be Nobel prizes for anyone improving on relativity to account for the new observations.  But if someone were to come along, as they regularly do on forums like this one, with some silly notion they have just pulled out of their arse with no observational support, then they would be dismissed as just another anti-relativity crank and sent packing.

As for a board of ethics, as so much scientific research is now done all over the world, there are a lot of papers produced, many good but inevitably some bad, and a few even fraudulent, i.e. with fake data. The system of peer review is intended to catch those, but at times it fails to do so. There is not much more that can be done to prevent that, given the decentralised nature of scientific work. However, as I indicate above, in the end, results that cannot be reproduced will be discarded and so will any theories that rely on them.   

[swansont]

10 hours ago, Chris Sawatsky said:

If I had a science degree and had years of experience getting grants to do research and becoming famous in the related industries, I would not except discoveries that proved my past published theories incorrect. In fact I would probably work hard to discredit the sources and go into denial because everything I have done since publishing said theory is based on this theory being correct.

Being wrong is part of doing science.

The average person doesn’t see a lot of this, because the first thing one tends to do is check for errors/problems, and the second is to have colleagues do that. 

Even the act of publishing doesn’t mean an idea is in its final form. Einstein published several papers, refining general relativity as he went. He was also wrong about QM.

If your temperament is to discredit people for disagreeing, maybe it’s a good thing you aren’t in the field.

[Janus]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Even the act of publishing doesn’t mean an idea is in its final form. Einstein published several papers, refining general relativity as he went. He was also wrong about QM.

 

There is a neat story about Einstein concerning this.  This occurred during some scientific conference. Einstein and a few others were at a table debating QM. Einstein would come up with some problem that he felt disputed QM, and the others would go over it until they found a flaw with his argument.  Einstein finally came up with on that no one could find the flaw in. It started to get late, so they decided to call it a night.  They met up again the next day.  Whereupon Einstein stated that he'd been thinking about it, and had found the problem with his own argument.

[exchemist]

1 minute ago, Janus said:

There is a neat story about Einstein concerning this.  This occurred during some scientific conference. Einstein and a few others were at a table debating QM. Einstein would come up with some problem that he felt disputed QM, and the others would go over it until they found a flaw with his argument.  Einstein finally came up with on that no one could find the flaw in. It started to get late, so they decided to call it a night.  They met up again the next day.  Whereupon Einstein stated that he'd been thinking about it, and had found the problem with his own argument.

Was that one of the Solvay conferences? 

[Sensei]

13 hours ago, Chris Sawatsky said:

One may safely assume that many human traits are shared by every culture regardless of the state of that culture in the world today. Pride, Insecurity, Fear of Loss, Ego and the dependency that forms when we become accustomed to our individual reality and related goals. I grew up in a middle class environment but my parents owned our home, car and had only bills and property/income tax to pay while each earned between $3000/month (70's) and $4500/month (80's). I had everything within a type of reason that allowed me to get over $1500 worth of stuff at Christmas.

I used to get $2 socks for Christmas. They had to last for the next year..

 

[CharonY]

Compared to other areas, being famous is less of an issue. We always fall back to data and experiments. Ultimately, even if folks do get defensive, the self-correction kicks in eventually. In other areas this is more commonly not the case. I.e., the system is not perfect, but at least better than elsewhere.

[Janus]

4 hours ago, exchemist said:

Was that one of the Solvay conferences? 

The 1927 Solvay conference. 

[mistermack]

4 hours ago, Sensei said:

I used to get $2 socks for Christmas. They had to last for the next year..

Luxury. We had it tough. We had just one pair of socks amongst 12 kids. My mum knitted them from used wire wool scouring pads. How we fought over who's turn it was for the socks. I've still got the scars. 

17 hours ago, Chris Sawatsky said:

Are their a governing body of ethics that all the sciences prescribe to?If not should there be?

No and no.

Ethics is for the individual and the state legislature. (elected not appointed)

We've had our ethics dictated to us by unelected panels of popes and bishops for centuries, and it has a bad history. The principle of regular elections puts a brake on ethics being decided for us. It's not perfect but it's better than before, and slowly nudging in the right direction. 

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, Janus said:

The 1927 Solvay conference. 

Ah thanks. Your anecdote rang a few bells. 

[Sensei]

7 hours ago, mistermack said:

Luxury. We had it tough. We had just one pair of socks amongst 12 kids. My mum knitted them from used wire wool scouring pads. How we fought over who's turn it was for the socks. I've still got the scars. 

Unwise. Used socks and shoes should not be given, exchanged, purchased or sold to other people -  in this way it is very easy to get infected with onychomycosis and/or foot fungus. Onychomycosis ends with the old nail falling off and a new one growing in its place.. It takes many months..

 

[mistermack]

9 hours ago, Sensei said:

Onychomycosis ends with the old nail falling off and a new one growing in its place.. It takes many months..

Can you get that in the mouth? I'd willingly chew some socks, if I could grow a new set of teeth. 

[TheVat]

17 hours ago, mistermack said:

Luxury. We had it tough. We had just one pair of socks amongst 12 kids. My mum knitted them from used wire wool scouring pads. How we fought over who's turn it was for the socks. I've still got the scars. 

We were sent out to walk on fresh road tar so that it would adhere to our feet and form a sock that would last for several weeks.  

(I feel we are entering The Four Yorkshiremen sketch)

[Sensei]

The number of bizarrenesses increases with each generation..

The apparent result of living too well..

 

[Janus]

55 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Can you get that in the mouth? I'd willingly chew some socks, if I could grow a new set of teeth. 

Unfortunately, it isn't the fungus that causes the regrowth.  I talk from experience. Over my life I've lost two thumbnails, due to trauma, that then grew back.

[Sensei]

18 hours ago, Janus said:

Unfortunately, it isn't the fungus that causes the regrowth.  I talk from experience. Over my life I've lost two thumbnails, due to trauma, that then grew back.

..and they never look the same as they did before, so every time you look at a nail like that, you are reminded of an accident from the past..

Accident, is the most common way to lose nails..

 

[Janus]

5 hours ago, Sensei said:

..and they never look the same as they did before, so every time you look at a nail like that, you are reminded of an accident from the past..

 

 

That hasn't been my experience.  Both my thumbnails look perfectly normal, and you'd never guess that anything out of the ordinary had ever happened to them.

[Sensei]

11 minutes ago, Janus said:

That hasn't been my experience.  Both my thumbnails look perfectly normal, and you'd never guess that anything out of the ordinary had ever happened to them.

..I would guess without even bothering microscope.. I would just use my lie detector..

 

[Sensei]

On 11/12/2023 at 6:24 PM, Sensei said:

I used to get $2 socks for Christmas. They had to last for the next year..

..unfortunately those good times are over..

 

Edited November 14, 2023 by Sensei