Comments on: Charter for Citizen Science

by: Crooked timber of scholasticism at Freedom of Science

Tue, 15 May 2007 23:57:28 +0000

[…] Institute for simplification of physics Physics is a vast legal system which consists of movable placeholders. These placeholders can only be moved by physicists according to a codified ritual as strict as any Catholic ceremony. This Newtonian ritual is called “derivation.” Stringy Chiropractor Google’s Academic Translator Beta converts academic gibberish of physicists into proper English by eliminating all high level notation from equations and makes all the necessary substitutions of symbols, eliminates philosophical principals (the world has yet to see a physics paper which is not based on some philosophical principal), digs all references to outside sources (typically a single physics paper will reference you to entire google) and eliminates all professional cabalistic notation. Charter of citizen science Charter of citizen science to transfer the scientific authority from professional doctors to the people. Citizen science jury How to move theoretical discussions about physics and doctors of physics into actions which will result in a modern scientific revolution? Open letter to academic physicists Physicists’ allegiance is not with rationality (proportionality) but with the equation (a broken proportionality carrying labels). The physicists’ equation is the root cause of all the absurd in physics. […]

by: globalpioneering

Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:03:30 +0000

Bee wrote: This is why we publish our research results, whether experimental or theoretical. You just have to read them.

“I asked you to explain it, not to talk physics!”

I just saw this quote on Backreaction. It seems to be a good reply to your comment:)

At first look, what you say appears to be so right. Physicists publish and whoever wants it can read it.

But Just like an Apple box is a closed information realm physics too is a closed information realm. No one is supposed to open and try to figure out what’s in Apple’s products.

No one is supposed to read and understand an academic physics paper. That’s why physicists never simplify their papers. This is unthinkable.

Physicists monetize authority, not knowledge. So physicists popularize but never simplify. Once simplified and legible the physics paper looses all of its authority.

Thanks for your comment.

by: Open letter to lawyers at Freedom of Science

Sun, 07 Jan 2007 17:54:43 +0000

[…] This internet court will be conducted as a public international arbitration case and will allow people from around the world to contribute their evaluations. Technology to create such a site is available, e.g. social networking sites. Would you be interested in consulting for such an endeavor? We will need to establish a) the rules of the court, b) the rules for the evaluation of the evidence, and c) a precise description of the subject matter to be evaluated. Your contribution can be as simple as reviewing this draft for a Charter of Citizen Science in order to put it in a binding legal format. I believe that judges, law professors, lawyers interested in science issues, intellectual property lawyers and law students would be perfect for this case. Please also take a look at this transcript of an imaginary mock trial and feel free to contribute to its development as a text in this wiki, or simply send me your mark up and I’ll do the edits. You may get involved either explicitly in this forum or you can help by contributing anonymously by writing to me. Please help make this a historic case. […]

by: Bee

Sat, 06 Jan 2007 22:50:27 +0000

If an evidence is not publicly legible the evidence is not evidence.

This is why we publish our research results, whether experimental or theoretical. You just have to read them.