Paradigm Shifts

This thread is based on a presentation by Moray B. King which he gave in response to participants in a chat room devoted to Gary Henderson's The SmartScarecrow Show. Gary Henderson states his mission:

The SmartScarecrow Show features alternative energy related discussions, projects, people and products. . . .

smartscarecrow.com...

The PowerPoint document from which King was speaking is available for download from the Description of a YouTube video of the presentation : Paradigm Shifts.

I thought King did a good job of laying out in an objective way the situation faced by researchers and inventors in alternative energy.

He points out that all of us operate from a paradigm of the possible according to our belief about the laws of physics. The problem is others can have a different paradigm. And what people do is claim "fraud" if a claim is made that violates our paradigm.

He talked about the book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions Third Edition by Thomas S. Kuhn from 1962 where it was pointed out that when experiment violates accepted laws scientists will ignore, ridicule, and reject a new claim. Then they die and a new generation takes over.

Of course not all scientists do this but it's very common.

King said that if you're going to claim fraud the least you can do is be specific. What kind of fraud?

• Intentional scam
  
• Mistaken measurement
  
• Bad business conduct
  
• Wrong explanation
  

He went on to list the catagories of paradigms which conflict with each other:

Here is a screenshot:



The point I'm trying to convey here is that the "laws of physics" are a matter of opinion and people discussing science and technology should respect that and not try to lord it over each other with claims of authority.

Mary Rose

The point I'm trying to convey here is that the "laws of physics" are a matter of opinion

Then by all means just float the f@#!k away.

reply to post by Mary Rose


You have to watch out for those people wearing the white lab coats lol

reply to post by the2ofusr1


Yes, you do. Just like everybody else. One has to recognize human nature.

Mary,

I've got to say you're way off base here. The laws of physics are NOT a matter of opinion. they are carefully verified through experimentation to be things we've found to be 100% consistent no matter how many times you or anyone else does the experiment no matter where on earth it's done etc.

Now is there room for new knowledge? Of course there is! Do I believe there's still surprises out there for us? Oh most definitely!

However it's not science when you just discard everything that's been done before.

I think many people in the scientific and engineering community would have much more respect for the people making claims if it wasn't so blatantly obvious that not only do they have no respect for or desire to learn what others have put so much work into, but also that they really don't have any respect for science and the scientific method as a way of getting results!

A good experimentalist collects, shares, and values the data they collect! This is how you learn things and take something from an interesting anomaly to a quantifiable and maybe even useful phenomena! Also it really does help to have a firm grasp on the established science in the field ESPECIALLY if you think it is wrong or incomplete or otherwise not totally representative of reality.

I firmly believe that if we can keep the idiots in power from shutting down things like desktop manufacturing and start to pry the deathgrip of fear and idiocy they have off of things like chemistry sets and basic labware that there's real potential for true paradigm shifts as well as an era of truly disruptive technologies emerging so fast and furious that the state of the art could only stay start of the art for MINUTES or HOURS sometimes!

In order for this to happen though we need to restructure our science policy and intellectual property law in such a way that COLLABORATION and widespread dissemination becomes more profitable than jealously guarding one's new technologies and techniques.

I am also of the apparently completely insane belief that when our government pays our publicly funded universities to do research that bears fruit that we the people should have access to this research! Then again I'm also of the, also insane, belief that many of the artificial barriers to entry that are put in the way of public pursuit of home science and engineering should be dismantled and replaced with a system designed to ENCOURAGE garage research!

GetHyped

Mary Rose

The point I'm trying to convey here is that the "laws of physics" are a matter of opinion

Then by all means just float the f@#!k away.

There, there now...

Did Mary Rose just violate your beloved paradigm ?

roguetechie
The laws of physics are NOT a matter of opinion. they are carefully verified through experimentation to be things we've found to be 100% consistent no matter how many times you or anyone else does the experiment no matter where on earth it's done etc.

The laws of physics as people think they know them is, I insist, a matter of opinion.

All experimentation is interpreted and then sometimes ignored.

Only God, if there is one, knows for sure what the laws of physics really are.

roguetechie
I am also of the apparently completely insane belief that when our government pays our publicly funded universities to do research that bears fruit that we the people should have access to this research!

I agree with you but I'm also of the opinion that our government is actually not our government; instead, it is bought and paid for by vested interests and that is a root problem that we have to tackle.

roguetechie


Mary,

I've got to say you're way off base here. The laws of physics are NOT a matter of opinion. they are carefully verified through experimentation to be things we've found to be 100% consistent no matter how many times you or anyone else does the experiment no matter where on earth it's done etc.

Your paradigm...

Now is there room for new knowledge? Of course there is! Do I believe there's still surprises out there for us? Oh most definitely! However it's not science when you just discard everything that's been done before.

Your paradigm...

I think many people in the scientific and engineering community would have much more respect for the people making claims if it wasn't so blatantly obvious that not only do they have no respect for or desire to learn what others have put so much work into, but also that they really don't have any respect for science and the scientific method as a way of getting results!

Align our paradigm to closely match the paradigm of the "establishment". In other words, never challenge "authority".

A good experimentalist collects, shares, and values the data they collect! This is how you learn things and take something from an interesting anomaly to a quantifiable and maybe even useful phenomena! Also it really does help to have a firm grasp on the established science in the field ESPECIALLY if you think it is wrong or incomplete or otherwise not totally representative of reality.

All science is theory, err a paradigm.

I firmly believe that if we can keep the idiots in power from shutting down things like desktop manufacturing and start to pry the deathgrip of fear and idiocy they have off of things like chemistry sets and basic labware that there's real potential for true paradigm shifts as well as an era of truly disruptive technologies emerging so fast and furious that the state of the art could only stay start of the art for MINUTES or HOURS sometimes! A paradigm, yet closer to the one I hold... In order for this to happen though we need to restructure our science policy and intellectual property law in such a way that COLLABORATION and widespread dissemination becomes more profitable than jealously guarding one's new technologies and techniques. I am also of the apparently completely insane belief that when our government pays our publicly funded universities to do research that bears fruit that we the people should have access to this research! Then again I'm also of the, also insane, belief that many of the artificial barriers to entry that are put in the way of public pursuit of home science and engineering should be dismantled and replaced with a system designed to ENCOURAGE garage research!

Sounds like you are suggesting a paradigm.

hurdygurdy
All science is theory, err a paradigm. Except math.

But we have to be careful with math, too I think.

We have to choose the math to apply to various phenomena that we observe with our senses. We can choose the wrong math, can't we?

reply to post by Mary Rose


I was actually thinking the same thought.

GetHyped

Mary Rose

The point I'm trying to convey here is that the "laws of physics" are a matter of opinion

Then by all means just float the f@#!k away.

Explain to me how your comment relates to the OP which rightfully expresses the vast diverse theories, and theory is not fact, ie big bang for example, explosive technology based science versus implosive, for example. There are a lot of theories, and many of ours have had holes blown in them for decades but the priests oops I meant scientists worshipping at the altar of their beliefs, or is it that those beliefs serve religious leaders and our corporate heads, especially the oil and nuclear industry....so all theories are not plausible and even outdated.

But how does any of that pertain to your comment?

Math is one of the biggest illusions going. You can create many realms theoretically with it, but that doesnt mean its the one we're in. My father was a math teacher, my uncle a phsycist. They can be the biggest dreamers out there.

Mary Rose
Then they die and a new generation takes over.

Of course not all scientists do this but it's very common.

King said that if you're going to claim fraud the least you can do is be specific. What kind of fraud?

No matter how many generations die, Keely's fraudulent motor will never work. He used hidden air pressure to commit his fraud.

In some cases like Ed Leedskalnin, I wouldn't call it fraud, I'd call it gross incompetence and lack of familiarity with well known observations of his time.

Of course we don't know the true laws of physics as "God" knows them and I think most physicists would agree with something along those lines. But we do have a lot of observations, and we've come up with some decent models which are consistent with those observations. I don't think anybody thinks they are perfect and we are looking for something better.

The biggest problems I see with "alternative science" is either contradicting observations or not having any coherent model. We have measurements of the moon's magnetic field (or should say lack of it) that prove Leedskalnin's ideas about the moon's orbit wrong. There is simply no paradigm under which his ideas match observation. They are simply wrong.

"String theory" is in a gray area. I haven't seen observations to support it, but neither can I say it's wrong. I can say that so far it has not been a useful model because it hasn't made useful predictions that I know of. There could be some "alternative science" in a similar category (I'd lump Bernard Haisch's patent on vacuum energy extraction in this category for example), though I think it's in the minority and most of it contradicts observation (and as Bernard Haisch pointed out, all the vacuum energy extraction devices except his own are complete non-scientific nonsense, and he admits that his own idea may not even work but at least it has some foundation in scientific ideas).

But when the "alternative science" is supported by observation, it should then become science. Mostly what I see in "alternative science" are people making claims that are never supported, but the proponents like to sell DVDs and books to the gullible and scientifically illiterate.

reply to post by Mary Rose


Thank you for this enlightening topic. It just goes to show/support the famous quote:

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

reply to post by hurdygurdy


All I have to say about your first post, is that it gave me intense Deja Vu. Not kidding. With its length, I can only assume you've never written that identical post anywhere else on ATS in the last few years. But OMG... I recognized it ever so strongly, word for word, and it's creeping me out. Get out of my head, please, hurdygurdy!!! Thanking you in advance (in which case, maybe you'll get Deja Vu back, LoL.)

reply to post by the2ofusr1

You have to watch out for those people wearing the white lab coats lol

Yes, they don't like it when patients keep the ambulance waiting.

Once again i see statements made about a subject matter and whole society that you appear not to know anything about Mary.

It is like working as a waiter/waitress at a restaurant and saying "Hey, I know how an office works, because I also use pens and paper to write things"

I will one of these days write a thread on exactly what fundamental science research is like from 1st hand experience. Along with some anecdotes that I have heard down the years. That said, you don't need to read them or even accept them, after all, no one from the 'alternative' seem to be good at reading realistic accounts, understanding them, or making useful comments other than something along the lines of

"Down with the man!"

It may be your opinion that science is just that, an opinion. Though I can assure you that your opinion as evident from the vast number of threads similar to this one, is one that is not at all placed well enough from background, thought process or evidence based thinking to really be much of a concern.

You do have a team of nodding yes men/women, so, that seems cool. Though no amount of wishful opinion is going to change anything unless the alternative starts actually producing real results. So far, modern science is kind of ahead in terms of predictions and theories carved. It stands at a ratio of something like millions to maybe a handful.

It is like the absurd idea that people have that if you flip a coin 8 times, and it lands on heads 8 times, that on the 9th it MUST land tails. sorry, its 50:50 no matter how much you might WANT it to be otherwise.

People have actual verifiable results.

Alternative energy fraudsters never do.

That is why they are frauds. They make claims, ask for money, and then fail to live up to their claims.

Andrea Rossi comes to mind.

OccamsRazor04

Andrea Rossi comes to mind.

Mary, if Rossi actually comes through with something, I will be right here to say "Wow, nice one, you guys were right" You have my word on that one (but hey I'm a Scientist, can't trust me right? So my word is of no value).

What would have to happen is that Rossi has to produce a working device, and have others take a good strip down of it, repeat and reproduce it. Understand how it works and its characteristics... but we all know that won't happen right?