originally posted by: werewolf99
a reply to: peter vlar
Isn't it a bit of a fraud for you to talk about the mathematics he invented
No, its a fraud to misinterpret my statement. I said that you were completely ignoring all of the work and effort that was involved in creating a new
subset of a scientific discipline and the math that goes along with it. Perhaps I could have been more concise, so to clarify my meaning, it was a
reference to the multitude of new calculations and equations that were worked up in the search for corroboration and evidence supporting string
theory. So is it a fraud on my part? You tell me.
: yes thring theory has inspires pure mathematicians but is supposed to be a theory of physics and so it is only true if it can be proved true,
and as yes Michio Kauku is a theoretical physicist then that for his part would mean a finished equation or equations?
Outstanding, now that you've rearranged the parameters for how theoretical physics operates you should let everyone else in on it so that science can
acquiesce to how you believe it works. However, despite your reworking of science, you have still failed to support your statements that Dr. Kaku is
only well known because of his failure to definitively prove all of the varies aspects of string theory to you. You can reword the statement to your
hearts content but it is not substantiative of anything let alone your thesis that failure is the key to popularity.
As for Dr King
here is a link
Your claim was that Dr. King was telling everyone that he was working on something spectacular, which is what his reputation hinged on. And that when
he died they found nothing in his possessions meaning he was a fraud.
What your link states is-
They expected his work as a mathematician to make an epoch in the science.
When he died, it was felt that the memory of such an extraordinary man should not be permitted to die out, and his papers should be published. So
his papers were examined, and nothing whatever worth publishing was found."
This is a testament to other people's expectations of Dr. King, not to what Dr. King claimed to be working on. Is it a let down to have massive
expectations from someone and be disappointed? Sure, but it doesn't mean they didn't earn their place at the table, didn't deserve the accolades or
were frauds. It's a pretty bold charge you're making with, again, nothing to support it.
Also if you think it is impossible to get on without doing what you say, then you have a serious misunderstanding of the british class system:
in fact any class system.
I didn't say that at all. I just think that the notion of someone trying to be famous for failure to deliver, which is the crux of your thesis, is
ludicrous and you many substantiate it.
I will also add this link to show how it is possible to get on without doing what is requires: but in no way accuse Michio Kaku or anyone else
of this immorality other than those mentioned
Then why Include it if its not pertinent?
Yes Michio Kaku has got his qualifications, but like it or not when a person gets these they define themselves differently in terms of how they
are thought of by people:
Are you implying that Dr. Kaku is acting out a caricature of hi self to please an audience?
a person with a phd and is defines as an academic and essentially is compared to other academics,
Again, you're just hung up on what you perceive as failure while entirely ignoring all of the real science and work that has gone into forwarding
string theory. It's either a willfully ignorant or an intellectually dishonest way of seeing it.
I'm not sure what your vision of it all is but the Impression you leave me with is that you think it's as easy as sitting down and writing out a
magic equation, problem solved when it sometimes is a years long process before something can even be tested or even before a way of testing can be
For example: www.theguardian.com...
But as he is defined differently and he chose to be, then it is perfectly reasonable to ask is his reputation enhanced by having not solved a
problem: because it is thought of as difficult.
Sure, you can ask, but you also have to be able to justify and support your position, especially when making accusations of the nature you are.
Perhaps the real problem is that some people seem to see string theory and physics are like philosophy: it doesnt matter that philosphy has
not proved anything since Rene Descartes said "I think therefore I am." if you think that because it is philosophy then it's ok. Perhaps the real
problem is that many people revel in the reputation they get by not producing things.
Not nearly as much as you revel in repeating that last line like a mantra but you have nothing to back it up.
I would furthermore state that Micheo Kaku obviously isn't bothered by this thread in the least and probably doesn' t care after all there is
no such thing as bad publicity: but what this thread has revealed is that many people love not solving things, not just some physicists and
How exactly has it revealed that many people love to NOT solve problems? Are we reading the same thread?
They find it easier to get respect by working in a field which they are not expected to produce a result, than by impressing people and
garnering praise by producing truly great results. Perhaps the problem the big problem is how many other people are working in string theory: or
claiming to be: without the slightest thought that they will actually solve it? How many just decide to revel in the reputation of being a string
theorist, and don't really care if they solve it or not, and some may not really be trying at all.
Where do you come up with this inane notion? It seems both arrogant and ludicrous to me, to see someone all but admitting they believe that
scientists, or at least a certain segment thereof, are lazy and in it for a paycheck and some camera time.