Personal Topic

[marcospolo]

Clearly you are more brilliant than any physicist who ever lived, Marco.  All of them putting together, actually.

 

Congratulations!

Why do you think that these guys were so great? They are just guys.

[marcospolo]

Ive met ordinary guys who have done great things, and Ive met great people who made mistakes.  Brilliance is subjective.

[marcospolo]

anyway, I'm not coming up with any brilliant new stuff, I'm just noticing that some old stuff is a bunch of BS.

Does not take much brilliance to have hindsight.

But Im off to bed. that a worthwhile exercise. This is not.

[Moronium]

In my opinion, it's a very cheap and easy philosophical position to adopt.  "I only know one thing for certain, to wit: nobody in the world knows anything."

 

Once assumed, this allows a person to safely snipe, carp, ridicule as unfounded, and summarily dismiss everything anyone says.  There is no need to ever make any positive claims or assertions. That would be kinda burdensome, after all.  You can be the bearer of ultimate truth simply by denying everything.

 

Want to be the wisest person in the room on every occasion?  Want to demonstrate your immensely superior brilliance and insight with ease?   Want to be able to quickly answer every question, on any and every topic, and give "solutions" to every problem?

 

If so, there's your ticket, sho nuff.

 

Become a professional contrarian, a nay-sayer, an "independent thinker,"  a non-conformist who is too brilliant to accept "conventional wisdom."

 

Best part is, you don't have to think at all.  You don't have to assert or try to prove anything.  You don't need a speck of knowledge.  You have one answer to everything another person claims, to wit:

 

"You're wrong, and you have to be wrong, because nobody knows anything.  Well, except for me, of course.  I, and probably I alone, know that nobody knows anything."

Edited February 17, 2019 by Moronium

[marcospolo]

Want to be the wisest person in the room on every occasion?  Want to demonstrate your immensely superior brilliance and insight with ease?   Want to be able to quickly answer every question, on any and every topic, and give "solutions" to every problem?

 

If so, there's your ticket, sho nuff.

 

Become a professional contrarian, a nay-sayer, an "independent thinker,"  a non-conformist who is too brilliant to accept "conventional wisdom."

 

Best part is, you don't have to think at all.  You don't have to assert or try to prove anything.  You don't need a speck of knowledge.  You have one answer to everything another person claims, to wit:

 

"You're wrong, and you have to be wrong, because nobody knows anything.  Well, except for me, of course.  I, and probably I alone, know that nobody knows anything."

No, once again you are speaking for me and doing a bad job of it.

 

They would be wrong because their claims are self contradictory, PERHAPS because they are based on assumptions, not on facts.

 

And IN THIS FORUM ONLY it's possible I AM the only person contributing that does realize that not knowing real facts on this particular subject, will equate to false conclusions. You guys, all of you who write replies, seem to think that we can have theories without understanding what we are talking about! But it will all work out in the end.

 

 

Plus some stuff they (physicists)  believe is just plane BS.  The gravitational constant is one such belief.

You cant demonstrate that Cavendish had any sensible approach to trying to measure this assumed force, yet you accept his result, which is about 0.000006 somethings... too small to find in reality. Its a guess, that is what "g" is. A guess. Even if he did really measure something, to claim that this force is everywhere and is evenly distributed, is totally without any observational evidence, so its only an hypothesis. But 'g" is used as if its fact.

 

But the only people who act as if they are the masters of knowledge are the guys you worship, the custodians of all truth, Lorentz and Poincare, in your case.

 

What independent thoughts have you contributed to the mix?

Seems that you have no thoughts of your own, you only are expert of cut and paste others ideas.

 

You just pick your favorite and whatever he says is what you believe.

 

At least everything I have said is totally my own ideas, independent of association with others ideas unless I agree with them.

 

My opinion is as valid as anyone else's, until proved wrong. I don't care how famous the other person may be in your eyes, they are all just regular guys.

 

People don't prove me wrong, they just say i don't understand such and such, but if I did I would believe as they do.

 

Now I CAN prove that this idea is an error of logic.

 

 

Because I get this exact identical claim from two people who have totally opposite claims!

How can I believe in two opposite claims just by studying the two theories carefully?

 

But as you said, I am irrational, so maybe you cant tell me how this really works?

Edited February 17, 2019 by marcospolo

[OceanBreeze]

^^^ Classic  Dunning–Kruger effect

any further discussion is pointless (as is most of this thread)

[Moronium]

^^^ Classic  Dunning–Kruger effect

any further discussion is pointless (as is most of this thread)

 

 

Just curious, Popeye.  Why do you say that "most of this thread" is "pointless."

 

For my part (which is probably "most of this thread"), I have pretty much confined my comments to the topic of comparing and contrasting two competing scientific theories.  In the process, I have cited a good number of academic papers pertaining to the subject--papers published in mainstream, peer-reveiwed scientific journals, etc.

 

Is all such analysis and debate of theoretical physics pointless in your view?

Edited February 17, 2019 by Moronium

[Moronium]

^^^ Classic  Dunning–Kruger effect

any further discussion is pointless (as is most of this thread)

 

 

Thanks for the link.  I had never come across the Dunning-Kruger analysis before.  For those too lazy to click on the link, here's an excerpt:

 

In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people of low ability have illusory superiority and mistakenly assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is. The cognitive bias of illusory superiority comes from the inability of low-ability people to recognize their lack of ability. Without the self-awareness of metacognition, low-ability people cannot objectively evaluate their competence or incompetence....

 

In 2011 David Dunning wrote about his observations that people with substantial, measurable deficits in their knowledge or expertise lack the ability to recognize those deficits and therefore, despite potentially making error after error, tend to think they are performing competently when they are not: "In short, those who are incompetent, for lack of a better term, should have little insight into their incompetence—an assertion that has come to be known as the Dunning–Kruger effect". 

Edited February 17, 2019 by Moronium

[marcospolo]

Actually, to make SOME sense,  the quote SHOULD be, ""I only know one thing for certain, to wit: nobody in the world knows EVERYTHING."

 

Then its hard to counter that statement, which is exactly what I DO believe.

 

You must believe that some people CAN know everything. Just not me, as I'm a imbecile. according to your subjective view.

Edited February 17, 2019 by marcospolo

[marcospolo]

Thanks for the link.  I had never come across the Dunning-Kruger analysis before.  For those too lazy to click on the link, here's an excerpt:

Which is EXACTLY what I am claiming is happening when Lorentz and Poincare and Einstein think that know what they are talking about, but they make error after error... its the Dunning Kruger effect in action.

[Moronium]

Which is EXACTLY what I am claiming is happening when Lorentz and Poincare and Einstein think that know what they are talking about, but they make error after error... its the Dunning Kruger effect in action.

 

Well, you're certainly the best one to judge that, no doubt.

 

QED

[marcospolo]

You guys are all tared with the same brush.

You think that an answer to my objections about the claims of your heroes, is simply to claim superiority, and say I don't understand, but I may if I learned like a parrot what you all have.

 

You don't show me where I'm wrong, you just always say I don't understand some mystery which you and your hero's cant even explain coherently.

If you could, your would.

 

For instance, I said the Cavendish's "g" is crap,  But no-one even thought to ask why, or demonstrate that it MUST be correct because of....... ??

 

You all are comforted by your own lies. It's a group wank is what it is.

Edited February 17, 2019 by marcospolo

[marcospolo]

but at least you are all correct, trying to discuss problems with physics here is a pointless exercise.

 

Nobody replies to your posts, only cherry picking out the snippets where one has neglected to use the coolest term to criticize things that's are not really important to the problem at hand?

 

Why? well because noone is allowed to be critical of your cherished beliefs.

That is the real and only reason. Its nothing to do with who is lacking understanding.

 

It's like trying to point out to the Pope that something is wrong with Catholicism.

One must attend 20 years in the Seminary, accept and fully believe in the Catholic faith before one is qualified to criticize.But then one would not dare to.

The feeling of comfort of the mindless group is preferable to shaking ones faith in superior leaders.

Without a perfect leader, (Lorentz and the academics at the UNI) one would be tossed about without his anchor.

 

That's what is going on here. People cherish their own faith, and no counter logic or criticism is tolerated.

 

(oh the poor fool, Marcos, thinks he knows something, but only we special enlightened and chosen few really know stuff, cause we have a blessed leader, who does know everything.)

All praise to our leaders!

Amen

[marcospolo]

Want to be the wisest person in the room on every occasion?  Want to demonstrate your immensely superior brilliance and insight with ease?   Want to be able to quickly answer every question, on any and every topic, and give "solutions" to every problem?

 

If so, there's your ticket, sho nuff.

 

Become a professional contrarian, a nay-sayer, an "independent thinker,"  a non-conformist who is too brilliant to accept "conventional wisdom."

 

Best part is, you don't have to think at all.  You don't have to assert or try to prove anything.  You don't need a speck of knowledge.  You have one answer to everything another person claims, to wit:

 

"You're wrong, and you have to be wrong, because nobody knows anything.  Well, except for me, of course.  I, and probably I alone, know that nobody knows anything."

And its an ever cheaper philosophical position to adopt, that says: "I don't even have to try to explain what I am claiming, or reply to pointed criticisms, because you are not smart enough to understand it. " That's a really cheap and arrogant position to take.

[Moronium]

Dunning and Kruger tested the hypotheses of the cognitive bias of illusory superiority on undergraduate students of introductory courses in psychology by examining the students' self-assessments of their intellectual skills in logical reasoning (inductive, deductive, abductive), English grammar, and personal sense of humor...

 

Across four studies, the research indicated that the study participants who scored in the bottom quartile on tests of their sense of humor, knowledge of grammar, and logical reasoning, overestimated their test performance and their abilities; despite test scores that placed them in the 12th percentile, the participants estimated they ranked in the 62nd percentile.

 

Moreover, competent students tended to underestimate their own competence, because they erroneously presumed that tasks easy for them to perform were also easy for other people to perform.

 

 

I wonder if that's a sliding scale.  I mean, like, would someone in the 1st percentile estimate themselves to be in the 99th?

Edited February 17, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

Perform the same test in the Walmart parking lot and everyone would rank themselves in the top 1%. Not because the stupider you are, the smarter you think you are but because they're smart to be Walmart shoppers.

[OceanBreeze]

Just curious, Popeye.  Why do you say that "most of this thread" is "pointless."

 

For my part (which is probably "most of this thread"), I have pretty much confined my comments to the topic of comparing and contrasting two competing scientific theories.  In the process, I have cited a good number of academic papers pertaining to the subject--papers published in mainstream, peer-reveiwed scientific journals, etc.

 

Is all such analysis and debate of theoretical physics pointless in your view?

 

You usually make very reasoned arguments. But when you engage with Marcos, something strange seems to happen: