1 / 20

Consensus in Science is WRONG

Consensus in Science is WRONG. By David de Hilster. Mainstream Holds the NPA Hostage. The mainstream says…. We all are in agreement The NPA has no agreement The NPA are a bunch of mavericks, each with their own theory Science is founded on consensus, repeatable experiments

jescie-hansen
Download Presentation

Consensus in Science is WRONG

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Consensus in Science is WRONG By David de Hilster

  2. Mainstream Holds the NPA Hostage • The mainstream says…. • We all are in agreement • The NPA has no agreement • The NPA are a bunch of mavericks, each with their own theory • Science is founded on consensus, repeatable experiments • Consensus is the minimal requirement for any scientific community to be relevant • The NPA is irrelevant because they can’t agree on anything and because there is no consensus

  3. The NPA is Selling Itself WRONG • We try and find consensus • What is now in “vogue” is convergence (more on this later) • We are missing the point • We are setting ourselves up for failure in the mainstream’s eyes and therefore the public’s eyes • We can never come to a consensus • WE SHOULD NEVER COME TO A CONSENSUS!

  4. What Other Professions Agree? • Computer languages? • Human languages? • Technology? • Engineering? Everyone agrees there? • Marketing? • Politics? • The Arts? • Music? • Science?????

  5. Variety = Progress • More than one idea or task or product or language or artwork or engineering plan existing together creates progress • Why not in theoretical physics and cosmology?

  6. Mainstream’s Silent Answers • Power, Prestige, Money • Dictatorships wield a lot of power • Dictatorships garner a lot of prestige • Dictatorships earn a lot of $$$ • Dictatorships can crush opposition

  7. Mainstream’s Silent Killers • Agreement causes stagnation • Agreement causes frailty • Agreement eventually conflicts with new evidence • Agreement eventually becomes a religion, not science

  8. What the NPA Does Wrong • Our minimal consensus (two strikes – “minimal” “consensus”) (not saying intentions were wrong) • We tell people we don’t have a consensus but it will come • We are a bunch of salesman of our own ideas without even listening to our peers • You need to know my theory • Meanwhile, no one knows about your theory

  9. What Can the NPA do Better • State: “There can be more than one viable theory and they can live, work, and thrive, side by side” • Different theories have different strengths. Use theory X here, theory Y here • Variety forces competition and the survival of the fittest • Those theoreticians who adapt, change, throw out, start over, combine, will win • IF YOU DON’T ADAPT YOUR THEORY, SOMEONE ELSE WILL AND THEY WILL GET CREDIT FOR IT

  10. What Can We Show the Public • Variety is best in theoretical physics and cosmology • Consensus is not only wrong, but detrimental and dangerous and keeps us from true scientific progress • Show the public surveys of current work in the NPA • THIS IS TOUGH TO CHANGE • WE ARE SO USED TO THIS MANTRA

  11. Robert de Hilster Has Started This • David talks about his dad too much • David is Robert’s son and therefore is bias • Hey! What the @#$&*! (Added by Greg Volk! )

  12. Robert de Hilster Has Started • Over the last 3 years, Robert de Hilster has held gravity group meetings regularly • For a long time, we didn’t even know what it was for, was it worth it, or if anything would come out of it • Persistence has paid off!!! • Currently, he is surveying all theories in the NPA who deal with gravity • He has collected over a dozen one to two page descriptions of different scientist’s theory of gravity • We will eventually put this on the NPA website

  13. David de Hilster Has Started This • Problems in Mainstream Science • Without permission, David de Hilster put up this page on the website in early 2012 • Its necessity came from comments on Amazon.com on the book “Physics on the Fringe”

  14. David’s Review of Physics o/tFringe On Amazon.com • “I believe the author came up with this thesis to try and explain why this movement is growing. The author doesn't seem to exam the obvious answer for that growth: there are big fundamental problems with physics and cosmology that more and more scientists are finding those problems given the wealth of information on the internet. The fringe scientists are not coming from a need for the simpler. They are coming from the growing recognition that there are fundamental flaws in todays theory. Most people don't study theoretical physics or cosmology. Most fringe scientists do and more and more of them find it full of holes.”

  15. Amazon Repy#1 • textgenie says: • “It would be interesting if you would give some examples of the kind of problems with conventional physics that you have in mind, and perhaps other books which detail this area well. Does the author do this, as well as describe Carter and his ideas?”

  16. Amazon Reply #3 • Joseph P. Moore says: • “I think the reviewer definitely needs to enumerate at least a few of the ‘big fundamental problems with physics and cosmology’ in his review. His review is not creditable without.” • (Stage right: David jumps up and down and screams)

  17. David’s Response to the Posters • David de Hilster says: • “Here are some: the big bang has a frontier problem (if it is the size of a pea, what is around it? not universe?), what started it problem, does it end problem, and most important, there are many different explanations for red-shift other than the big bang or expansion. Even amateur astronomers know this. There is no dark matter. Dark matter exists because our theory of gravity is wrong. Don't need dark energy with better theories of gravity. The growing earth model explains much more than plate tectonics. Relativity is not used where it is said to be used and evidence is non-evidence. The higgs particle is an absurd concept: a particle that gives mass to the universe. What is the stuff it gives mass to? Not mass? There are only three dimensions in the universe and only three things: space, mass, and movement of mass in space. "Parallel Universe" is an illogical statement. There is only one universe. No black holes with infinite points with infinite mass. And the universe gets infinitely big, an goes infinitely small with no end. The universe is eternal and no big bang.”

  18. We Don’t Even Tell the Public! • We have over 5000 papers, but there was nothing on our website to tell the layman what is wrong with physics and cosmology • No one lists this anywhere on the internet • The NPA does now! That’s big • It is a SURVEY, not CONSENSUS • You will disagree with something there • Someone had to do it • I did it • It is our most popular page on the site

  19. NPA Marching Orders • List Problems in Mainstream Science • Create Surveys of Major Areas of Work • Gravity (Started, can be used as a model) • Relativity • Structures • Sub-atomic Structure • Cosmology • Big-Bang Alternatives • Expansion Tectonics • ???

  20. Conclusion • We need to admit consensus is wrong • We need to admit that convergence is not interesting or understood by the public • We need to give real examples, real experiments (Franciso Muller’s), real surveys, and real theories that the public can become interested in • We need to change theoretical science where variety is not only accepted, but required • And then and only then, will we have real progress in science and the NPA will make its mark on the world

More Related