Swooning with "reputation points" - a rant

[MomentTheory]

It became apparent to me that I have already accumulated a negative reputation rating on this site but I have backed up every single claim I've made with data or a retort admitting my error, how is this so?

It makes me laugh to see the same people gallivant around this site like they are some scientific authority, diminishing every post they possibly can by flexing their knowledge muscle through sarcasm and ignorance of the experience someone may or may not be having.

For instance, a topic was started regarding ET life and the possibility that we are being observed and right away someone swooped in and basically said "whats the point in asking this question if it all boils down to a conspiracy theory?"

WHAT IS THE POINT OF ASKING ANY QUESTION!? Seriously, that is the most cowardly response I've ever seen in my life!

 

If we aren't supposed to question or discuss the hard topics, then what is the point of ANY inquiry in relation to the majesty of our Universe, and the unknown?

Any scientific advance made by men has come from those willing to question EVERYTHING with a willingness to ALWAYS be wrong.

That being said, the majority of the "high reputation" members on this site exhibit NONE of those qualities, and by that standard, are not scientists of the universe but are merely researchers of the already known and solved. - End rant.

[imatfaal]

I think it more likely that your post was neg-repped (I though I had done so but apparently it wasn't me) because after receiving two requests for clarification of terminology your response was "I'm not sure how to educate one on what a trion re shape is aside from telling you to research it". When you introduce non-standard terms it is is your responsibility to define and explain them (not least to prevent confusion) I had already researched it and found the only source as a bonkers new-age artist - so I assumed there was a different meaning.

 

Furthermore comments such as "Based upon your response, I would hypothesize that you aren't quite grasping the importance of what I've discovered. Familiarize yourself with the 5 basic string shapes and M-theory, take a look at the trion re, the schwarzschild blackhole equation, then return with such judgments." are condescending and do not seem to be treating members with a great deal of respect . And let us be completely honest there are few people in the world who could legitimately claim to be familiar with M-theory and the trion re - so therefore as it is your idea - and the onus is on you to explain; you can take basic maths and physics for granted - but not high level hypothetical physics

 

The above combined with several sentences which smacked of being a word salad dressed with buzz-phrases meant that a member felt that your contribution was worthy of a negative point.

[MomentTheory]

^That kind of response I can appreciate. Thank you.

I will retort by saying, I did not feel it was my responsibility to educate anyone on the 5 basic string shapes or the specifics of what a trion re is for the very same reason that I would not take the time to educate someone on what the value 1+1=2 actually means. Just because the words I used sounded "buzzy" due to lack of knowledge on the subject, does not at all make what I am saying a "buzz word salad", but I will respect your opinion.

I would rather someone refrain from responding at all rather than trashing my work because they have no clue as to what I'm talking about due to their narrow view of universal theory. What I was looking for was an intelligent thought provoking response by people of the same caliber of knowledge. Unfortunately, those seem to be far and few between.

Edited January 22, 2015 by MomentTheory

[elfmotat]

I will retort by saying, I did not feel it was my responsibility to educate anyone on the 5 basic string shapes or the specifics of what a trion re is for the very same reason that I would not take the time to educate someone on what the value 1+1=2 actually means. Just because the words I used sounded "buzzy" due to lack of knowledge on the subject, does not at all make what I am saying a "buzz word salad", but I will respect your opinion.

 

I would rather someone refrain from responding at all rather than trashing my work because they have no clue as to what I'm talking about due to their narrow view of universal theory. What I was looking for was an intelligent thought provoking response by people of the same caliber of knowledge. Unfortunately, those seem to be far and few between.

 

This is why you get negative rep points. Because your posts reek of arrogance and condescension.

[MomentTheory]

This entire forum reeks of it, that's my point, how thick are you people!?!

 

Honestly, I'd rather have the negative rep than consider myself part of your lot, disadvantaged by an uptight outlook on everything.

[elfmotat]

This entire forum reeks of it, that's my point, how thick are you people!?!

 

Honestly, I'd rather have the negative rep than consider myself part of your lot, disadvantaged by an uptight outlook on everything.

 

The problem is everybody else? Good luck convincing everybody else.

[hypervalent_iodine]

This entire forum reeks of it, that's my point, how thick are you people!?!

 

Honestly, I'd rather have the negative rep than consider myself part of your lot, disadvantaged by an uptight outlook on everything.

!

Moderator Note

You make comments like this and you genuinely wonder why you attract negative rep? Cut out the insults. They are not welcome here. I will hide any more posts of this nature from you.

 

Do not respond to this mod note in-thread.

[iNow]

Why does everyone always choose not to talk to me and even ostracize me when I arrive at their house, barge into their discussions, act condescendingly, disregard their feedback and questions, and treat them like morons when they ask me to clarify or explain what I'm saying? It just doesn't make sense. I expected more from my hosts and their guests. Don't they know with whom they're dealing?

 

[/illustrative exaggeration / parody]

[Arete]

What I was looking for was an intelligent thought provoking response by people of the same caliber of knowledge. Unfortunately, those seem to be far and few between.

 

A) No one understanding your points is in no way an indicator that you are smarter than everyone else - all it means is you are bad at explaining it, or wrong. The smartest people I know are great at making complex concepts seem simple - these are the people I academically aspire to be like. People who take simple concepts and attempt to make them impenetrable (there are a lot of them, both here and in formal academia) are often less intelligent than they think they are.

 

B) I've never once seen a person on this forum claim to be correct and completely misunderstood (.i.e., everyone here is an idiot and i alone understand this concept) and not be comprehensively and trivially proven to be completely wrong. If people are pointing out incomprehensible statements or flaws in your idea, claiming persecution/superior intellect operates like a litmus test for crackpottery. In fact this thread in of itself operates as a giant red flag that you're very well impervious to rational thought.

 

In light of these facts, it might be advisable to adjust your posting style - it will probably yield better discussion that will assist your understanding and scientific communication skills. Being patient and better explaining yourself is crucial to being an effective scientist - I personally work in evolutionary medicine, and careful, concise, clear explanations of principles are critical in explaining science to both clinicians and patients. If I can make a high school educated parent know how vaccinations work, and convince them to vaccinate their kids, I'm a better scientist than someone who gives up in disgust because they can't explain herd immunity without using inpenetratable jargon

[MomentTheory]

 

 

In fact this thread in of itself operates as a giant red flag that you're very well impervious to rational thought.

 

For the record: Rational thought is not always a prerequisite to scientific discovery.

 

I'm not claiming superior intellect, I'm addressing a legitimate issue regarding how my very first post ever made on this website was handled very poorly by your community. Everyone was very fast to jump down my throat, demanding extra citations and explanations to material in which you can only gain insight by educating yourself! Clearly I can not and should not have to explain string types and 1-dimensional geometric shapes just to harbor your approval! This is a forum, not a free college course.

 

No one opened their eyes to the very rational possibility that my light experiment has legitimate groundbreaking data.

 

On top of that, when I opened up about it (by posting this thread), look at how I was received. Once again, very poorly with a lot of judgment, even so far as to calling my work a "buzz word salad". Why is that not be seen as offensive, no one took my side on that? Honestly, it's pretty offensive to me, I put in 6 months of research and my results are not only accurate and testable but extremely fascinating!

 

No worries, I'll just refrain from posting my work here. This community is obviously not a place that will aid in expanding my understanding of the universe.

Really it was only for your benefit, I'm not gaining anything by trying show you my observations. I'm comfortable with just knowing, but are you?

 

B) I've never once seen a person on this forum claim to be correct and completely misunderstood (.i.e., everyone here is an idiot and i alone understand this concept) and not be comprehensively and trivially proven to be completely wrong. If people are pointing out incomprehensible statements or flaws in your idea, claiming persecution/superior intellect operates like a litmus test for crackpottery. In fact this thread in of itself operates as a giant red flag that you're very well impervious to rational thought.

 

I never once said that everyone is an idiot, only that I did not desire to educate the idiots. And honestly, I was as polite about it as I could be.

Edited January 23, 2015 by MomentTheory

[Arete]

And honestly, I was as polite about it as I could be.

 

Then you may want to reconsider trying to communicate anything resembling a scientific concept. If posting on forums causes you to behave as such, I' hate to think what peer review would do to your blood pressure.

[Sensei]

 

I never once said that everyone is an idiot, only that I did not desire to educate the idiots. And honestly, I was as polite about it as I could be.

 

You know nothing about science, and you're writing such text... Disgusting..

 

Scienceforums.net servers are in UK.

People writing here are in USA.

Distance between USA and UK is 5571 km.

Below ocean there is fiber-wire sending data.

If it would be ending up after 49 bounces, like you claim, one straight line segment would have to have 5571 km/49 = ~114 km.

Even bending fiber wire in circle and pointing laser to one end wouldn't work...

Buy fiber wire and check this carefully experimentally..

Edited January 23, 2015 by Sensei

[Strange]

I will retort by saying, I did not feel it was my responsibility to educate anyone on the 5 basic string shapes or the specifics of what a trion re is for the very same reason that I would not take the time to educate someone on what the value 1+1=2 actually means.

 

As everybody knows what 1+1 is but nobody knows what "the 5 basic string shapes" are (you never did explain), that analogy doesn't really hold water. This attitude that you have some "special knowledge" which you refuse to explain (and which could therefore be something you made up) is what causes a negative reaction.

 

 

What I was looking for was an intelligent thought provoking response by people of the same caliber of knowledge.

 

So you only want agreement from people who hold the same views as you. Maybe you should start your own forum and ban anyone who asks you to explain what you are talking about.

Honestly, I'd rather have the negative rep than consider myself part of your lot, disadvantaged by an uptight outlook on everything.

 

You don't think it is "uptight" to have a hissy fit when asked to explain what you are talking about?

[Klaynos]

Asking background questions when someone unknown presents an idea is an expected aspect of communicating science. Even journals so it in requiring an introduction/lit review. Out shows you understand what you're taking about so people don't waste their time trying to pick through the rest trying to work out what the terminology means and how it fits into what is known. Dismissing this does not bode well for a background understanding of science.

 

Trying to understand what you're saying in context of the existing work is the first step to a critical review. Often on these fora or becomes apparent that when you do this the existing evidence precludes the proposed concept.

[ajb]

I will retort by saying, I did not feel it was my responsibility to educate anyone on the 5 basic string shapes...

I have a suspicion about what you are talking about here; the 5 well-defined perturbative string theories in 9+1 dimensions. Is this correct? Anyway, the point is this terminology is unclear, I have never come across 'string shapes' before. Thus it would be a very reasonable request for some kind of clarification. This does not mean you have to give a series of online lectures covering basic string theory, just indicate more carefully what you are talking about. Getting uppity upon such a request helps no-one.

[Strange]

I have a suspicion about what you are talking about here; the 5 well-defined perturbative string theories in 9+1 dimensions. Is this correct? Anyway, the point is this terminology is unclear, I have never come across 'string shapes' before. Thus it would be a very reasonable request for some kind of clarification. This does not mean you have to give a series of online lectures covering basic string theory, just indicate more carefully what you are talking about. Getting uppity upon such a request helps no-one.

 

Indeed. I would never have guessed it was a reference to string theory. All that was needed was a link to clarify, such as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory#M-theory

 

Is that really so hard?

[EdEarl]

New scientific "paradigms" are difficult to sell to the community of scientists and to others. Once a person understands an idea, even if it is wrong and some might say especially if it is wrong, changing a person's mind, including scientists, to accept an alternative is difficult. For example, at one time slavery was legal in the USA and practiced by many, especially in the South. A civil war, millions of deaths, and 150 years after the war, there is still discrimination against descendents of former slaves.

 

Life is a bitch and then you die. If you think that merely being right will make your idea sail through scientists, who cherish their right to be critical of ideas, (and who hate their ideas being criticized as much as you do) you really must embrace reality. Life is not fair, and you have to fight for every inch of credit you get. If you want your ideas to be accepted, you must provide undeniable proof, and usually do it is several ways. If your communications about your idea and proof of concept are not clear to morons, it may not be read. That is true for everyone, not just MomentTheory. Even acknowledged superstars, for example Hawking, know their work must be impeccable, and that it will be read critically and criticized if there are any imperfections.

[Phi for All]

Personal opinion warning: I think you're reaction to criticism is way overblown. I can appreciate that you've spent months trying to overthrow theories that have been around for decades, but you started this rant with a total rep of -1. Now you're at -14, and you should certainly be able to plot which of your posts are being downvoted.

 

But whatever, we have members who made the same choice. They got a few negative votes for behavior early on, then decided to sulk and keep it up, try to have the worst reputation possible. Most end up breaking enough rules to be banned, but some are still here.

[iNow]

you started this rant with a total rep of -1. Now you're at -14, and you should certainly be able to plot which of your posts are being downvoted.

I had a very similar observation. This thread was created after one single post received one single neg rep from one single person. If your skin is that thin, then science is probably not for you, my friend.

 

What's sad is that, as a direct result of this whiney thread after such insignificant challenge, is that you're now down to -15 rep (technically, minus 16 as someone neg repped your OP, but I negated it and up repped it in hopes of salvaging your experience and turning things around before they got out if hand).

Just out of curiosity, you're in your teens still, right? Maybe very early 20s at the oldest?

[MomentTheory]

 

You know nothing about science, and you're writing such text... Disgusting..

 

Scienceforums.net servers are in UK.

People writing here are in USA.

Distance between USA and UK is 5571 km.

Below ocean there is fiber-wire sending data.

If it would be ending up after 49 bounces, like you claim, one straight line segment would have to have 5571 km/49 = ~114 km.

Even bending fiber wire in circle and pointing laser to one end wouldn't work...

Buy fiber wire and check this carefully experimentally..

 

Obviously you are so concerned with flaming me that you failed to realize I am testing the reflective index of snells law when it passes through glass, obviously I'm aware of how fiber optics work, and are of no concern to this experiment. Put your guns away.

 

Personal opinion warning: I think you're reaction to criticism is way overblown. I can appreciate that you've spent months trying to overthrow theories that have been around for decades, but you started this rant with a total rep of -1. Now you're at -14, and you should certainly be able to plot which of your posts are being downvoted.

 

But whatever, we have members who made the same choice. They got a few negative votes for behavior early on, then decided to sulk and keep it up, try to have the worst reputation possible. Most end up breaking enough rules to be banned, but some are still here.

 

I'm not overthrowing any theory, I've found a new constant of light, that is all.

 

For the record, I'm 27, father of two, and it urks me that my 2.5 year old has more respect than some on this forum. Forgive me for being so touchy, but I'm all about peace love and unity for the greater good of the world, and I see none of that here.

 

Indeed. I would never have guessed it was a reference to string theory. All that was needed was a link to clarify, such as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory#M-theory

 

Is that really so hard?

 

 

How would you never have guessed M-theroy when I specifically mentioned the "5 basic string types" which are dualties including 11-dimensional supergravity? THAT IS M THEORY! Perhaps I'm taking common sense for granted here? How hard is that?!

Edited January 24, 2015 by MomentTheory

[iNow]

I'm all about peace love and unity for the greater good of the world

And yet you continue to express such consistent outrage, disgust, and vitriol. Nobody here (that matters) is interested in being your enemy.

 

Perhaps we can abandon this unproductive thread, elaborate on your idea in the original thread, help with people's questions, and address criticisms rationally so all of us can move forward together to a place or deeper, richer, more robust shared understanding?

[Sensei]

 

Obviously you are so concerned with flaming me that you failed to realize I am testing the reflective index of snells law when it passes through glass, obviously I'm aware of how fiber optics work, and are of no concern to this experiment. Put your guns away.

 

I am not flaming you.

That's me who instructed you what experiments you should perform next in your original thread.

 

There is no "reflective index", but "refractive index".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index

 

I didn't see any test with refractive material performed by you.

Your original video had no such experiment.

I only saw two mirrors quasi-parallel to each other.

Edited January 24, 2015 by Sensei

[Strange]

How would you never have guessed M-theroy when I specifically mentioned the "5 basic string types" which are dualties including 11-dimensional supergravity?

 

Maybe I am slow to understand. That doesn't shift the requirement away from you to be clear when explaining your idea. It is not up to us to be "mind readers" and fill the gaps in your explanation.

 

If someone genuinely doesn't understand a term you use why berate them for stupidity when you could just as quickly provide a link to clarify.

[EdEarl]

Think I'll go work on perpetual motion; too much emotion here.

[Harold Squared]

It became apparent to me that I have already accumulated a negative reputation rating on this site but I have backed up every single claim I've made with data or a retort admitting my error, how is this so?

It makes me laugh to see the same people gallivant around this site like they are some scientific authority, diminishing every post they possibly can by flexing their knowledge muscle through sarcasm and ignorance of the experience someone may or may not be having.

For instance, a topic was started regarding ET life and the possibility that we are being observed and right away someone swooped in and basically said "whats the point in asking this question if it all boils down to a conspiracy theory?"

WHAT IS THE POINT OF ASKING ANY QUESTION!? Seriously, that is the most cowardly response I've ever seen in my life!

 

If we aren't supposed to question or discuss the hard topics, then what is the point of ANY inquiry in relation to the majesty of our Universe, and the unknown?

Any scientific advance made by men has come from those willing to question EVERYTHING with a willingness to ALWAYS be wrong.

That being said, the majority of the "high reputation" members on this site exhibit NONE of those qualities, and by that standard, are not scientists of the universe but are merely researchers of the already known and solved. - End rant.

Conspiracy theory? And what is wrong with this? If there is a conspiracy involved, it should be identified as part of the investigation. It is amazing to me how otherwise rational people treat conspiracies as if they were mythical creatures instead of vital and even indispensable tools to achieve certain goals, e.g., every political revolution known to history.

 

Weighing in on whether we are being observed by extraterrestrial beings, it seems unlikely at present since our rate of energy utilization is paltry, yet even at this stage we are engaged in a formal search for other sentient species in the stars. Just because we haven't been found yet doesn't mean nobody is looking. Knowing what we ourselves consider a priority seems like a reasonable starting point for inferring alien motives and first and foremost we seek to gratify our curiousity, hence science and this very forum.