Roger Schlafly
As I previously told you, this is not relevant for what concerns my Essay. In my Essay I refer to the book that I previously cited, not to the 1931 Essay that you cited. Here I am not interested in Einstein's conduct in his real life.
Best wishes.
Christian Corda Your essay mentions Einstein 40 times. You have a page on that 1931 essay. You explain your essay above as being about Einstein's point of view towards glory and fame, as opposed to other scientists. If you are not interested in Einstein's conduct, then what is your essay about?
Roger Schlafly
Are you so obsessed with Einstein that you even count how many times I mention him in my Essay??!!! I'm sorry but I have intention neither to follow your obsession nor to continue this discussion. I repeat it to you for the last time. Referring to Einstein's philosophy, I am referring to what he wrote in his book entitled "The World As I See It". If you are referring to that book with "Essay of 1931", then you are wrong in saying that it is an example of his egotism and self-promotion. For the last time, I don't care how he behaved in his real life, I refer to what he wrote in that book and I am inspired by that way of seeing things. Stop. I have no intention of arguing, with you or anyone else, whether Einstein was good or bad. It is not the purpose for which I wrote my Essay or why I am intervening here. Your further replies on this matter will not be taken into consideration by me. Good day.
James Hoover
Thanks for your interest in my Essay.
Actually, I do not accept the issue that science is also strongly influenced by "politics", lobbies and economic interests as part of cultural development, but I'm too old to think I can change the world and too disenchanted to fight windmills. So I limit myself to using occasions like this Essay Contest to show my point of view and to suggest to the younger Researchers to have fun and play in doing science not caring about fame and notoriety, for which skill and merit are not enough in the world in which we live .
Your Essay looks interesting. I will read it and vote as soon as possible.
I share your concerns about economic and political interests that can condition the free development of research. Indeed, I also highlight similar problems in my essay "The Name of the arXiv".
I find the analysis of the historical development of some theories such as the AdS/CFT correspondence very interesting and well-argued.
Donatello Dolce
Thanks for your interest in my Essay and for your nice judgement. Your Essay seems very interesting. I will read and score it asap. Good like in the Contest.
Christian Corda I found your essay very interesting -- partly because I agree with the general statement that we should not accept a statement or theory (such as information loss) simply because many scientists repeat it, but also because I learned a few new things about the quantum nature of black holes. I also agree that the influence of lobbies and economic interests limits the development of science and new ideas. Your essay is also very well written and highly stimulating. I have given an appropriate rating.
My essay "Efficient funding produces better science" suggests a model of funding research in which unusual ideas could have a chance of getting some funds. You might wish to read it and give a rating.
Good luck in the final round.
Amitabha Lahiri
Thank you very much for reading and commenting my Essay and for your good judgement. Your Essay seems very interesting. I will be my pleasure reading and scoring it asap. I wish you good like in the Contest.
Hi TanAardwolf,
I see you're two ratings short of the 10 ratings needed to qualify for the next stage of the contest. Would you like to help each other get across the line by reading and rating each others essays before the June 8 deadline? Mine is titled "A tool for helping science find the optimal path toward the truth: falsification."
Cheers
CoralBear
Kelvin McQueen
Hi CoralBear,
Actually, your Essay was already on my list of those I intended to read and score by the deadline. So, I will read it and gladly score it, probably already today. I will be honored if you do the same with my Essay.
Your essay is a fine view out of strings in quantum gravity (QG). Black Holes (BHs) are really the basic element of QG. I claim also the elementary particles are BHs. I have also some theories in QG and in your essay I saw that "Gravity Research Foundation Essay Competition" exists. The next one is in May 2024. (I hope that it is not limited to universities?)
It is also fine that you read my essay precisely enough. You gave a remark about my proposal about anti-relativists. Although relativity is proven, I am afraid that the full rejection of anti-relativists will mean also a full rejection of other theories which seem nonsensical, but they are not proven to be wrong. For instance, Sabine Hossenfelder claims that free will does not exist. One proof on the contrary is panpsychism. but she claims that it is nonsensical. (But a rejection of free will is really nonsensical. And I have a theory of consciousness also.) The other reason is that anti-relativists need channels that they can communicate. (I know one of them) But of course, it is not appropriate to open them a place in arXiv. But science needs a little of chaos, I think, but not too much of it. And science needs more freedom.
I also gave you a high score.
Janko Kokosar
Thanks for your comments.
For your information, the "Gravity Research Foundation Essay Competition" is not limited to universities and they are open minded.
Concerning anti-relativists, if their theories are against relativity, such theories must be wrong.
I agree with Hossenfelder neither concerning free will nor concerning other issues. With due respect, I do not like that physicists play to be philosophers. I agree with Einstein also on another point, verbatim: "Let physicists leave philosophizing to philosophers and think about doing physics".
