Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.
Aren't you in the slightest interested if it holds water?

No. Crackpots of all sorts invent interesting sounding hypotheses every day, but following them always leads to disappointments.

Where's your curiosity so prevalent in pseudoscience?

Curiosity is one of the really great traits of humans. And cats of course. Without curiosity, there wouldn't be much science. Given there's only limited time, I just prefer to satisfy my curiosity with results and analyses that have a significant probability to be true, and inspire my imagination with plausible hypothesis clearly stated as speculation, and science fiction that doesn't pretend to be based in reality. We shouldn't conflate the two.

I'm cringing here, man. Have been for the past 7 years.

Well, most pseudoscience lets us cringe. Why defend a pseudoscience hypothesis, that didn't make significant progress in years? If there was any merit to it, there should be reliable experimental evidence and peer reviewed papers in credible journals by now somewhere.

If you read the description youd knew it's promising

I don't think so:

viXra:

Wikipedia: Although dominated by physics and mathematics submissions, viXra aims to cover topics across the whole scientific community. It accepts submissions without requiring authors to have an academic affiliation and without any threshold for quality.

Rationalwiki: Given some of the lunacy available on arXiv, you can guess what sort of content viXra accumulates: lots of Electric Universe crankery and occasional global warming denialism, and "proofs" of famous mathematical conjectures, notably the Riemann hypothesis and the Goldbach conjecture, which for some reason no serious mathematician gives a hoot about. viXra also directly invokes the Galileo gambit with their blog category "'Crackpots' who were right".
viXra also features blog-style comments for each abstract, which are a delight even by the standards of the bottom half of the Internet.
The scientific world is mostly amused, insofar as it takes any notice at all. The founder claims some papers of value that made it to peer-reviewed publication, though.

Pierre-Marie Robitaille:

Rationalwiki: Pierre-Marie Luc Robitaille (born 1961) is an accomplished radiologist and a Nobel disease-type crank. [...] In 2000, he was asked to step down from his position as director (though he remains a professor) when he began to promote theories that were outside his actual realm of expertise, specifically related to non-mainstream beliefs in the areas of astronomy and physics: he maintains that satellite measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation, believed by most astronomers to be an afterglow of the Big Bang, are actually observations of a glow from Earth's oceans.
He also maintains that the Sun is not a gaseous plasma, but is in fact made of liquid metallic hydrogen. None of his ideas have been accepted by any reputable physics publication.

Quora.com: TL:DR Pierre Robitaille is a world class crank who believes that he has discovered a serious flaw in the theory of thermal radiation. His "proof of invalidity" is vacuous. He's missed the simple point that a perfect blackbody is from the outset only a theoretical idealization which is nevertheless very much relevant to the theory of actual thermal radiation from real cavities.
He believes that the source of the cosmic microwave background radiation, which has been experimentally measured by many satellite observations and which has almost exactly a perfectly Planckian form for the radiation distribution, is the earth's oceans, a completely ludicrous suggestion on its face.
There are no consequences of anything that Robitaille has to say on this subject, for physics, at all.

It's probably bullshit but should be interesting enough for people to check out, dude's using the procedure.

Yes, don't bother, no he doesn't.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl