Re: Wikipedia crackpottey

gharnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 12:55:11 +0000, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:

>
On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 9:26:34 +0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

>
You may all be interested in an article at
>
>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problems_with_Einstein%27s_general_theory_of_r

elativity

>
>
that presents some of the ideas we hear from the crackpots here. It's
signed with a pseudonym, but I don't think it's the work of one of our
local crackpots because it's better written. It's currently under
consideration for deletion:
>
>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Problems_with_

Einstein%27s_general_theory_of_relativity

>
Thank you! I'm already somewhat familiar with this editor (who appears
reasonably reliable when NOT editing relativity articles) and added my
delete vote.

 
Has he contributed to other relativity pages?
 
The page under discussion seems to be quite comprehensive, although
it seems to dwell a bit overmuch on SR and the presence of matter
(even atomic level matter) having gravitational influences and their
effect on flat spacetime.  Certainly, SR works perfectly well in
particle physics.
 
Anyway, I don't think you and I are competent to make a judgment
on this treatise.  Personally, I feel that such a long dissertation
may belong in a peer-reviewed paper or arXiv, but what do I know?
OTOH, being on wikipedia, though, may give it a wider viewing, and
summarily deleting it seems like censorship, or book-burnig.  I
think it's important to look at our assumptions from time to time,
particularly as new evidence comes to light.
 

I find it interesting that the majority of crackpots are crackpots in
only a limited range of topics. They can be quite competent in other
areas. Examples abound, even among Nobelists: Montagnier, Mullis,
Shockley, Pauling etc. come quickly to mind.

 
ProkaryoticCaspaseHomologue, Dono, gharnagel ...
 
"When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with
creatures of logic, but with creatures bristling with prejudice
and motivated by pride and vanity." ? Dale Carnegie

Now there you have a great example for 'a creature of logic',

Jan