Richard Carrier solves the mystery of the universe

[lesliedellow]

I just love this. As clear a case of the Dunning-Kruger effect as could be wished for:

http://skeptischism.com/atheismneat/2013/07/24/carriers-theory-of-quantum-incoherence/

Having sorted out the historicity of Jesus, it seems the great man has decided to lend his services to cosmology now.

 

[Tree of Life]

Carrier never learned how to stay in his lane. I hope he doesn't have a drivers license and operate a motor vehicle.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I think some of Carrier's stuff on mythicism is interesting though I am not qualified to judge its quality. However, his judgment of his compatriots works strikes me as though he thinks himself the sole arbiter of truth. As such, I wouldn't dismiss the charge of Dunning-Kruger.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Does anyone have a link to an article by Carrier on this subject that is written in his own words?

I want to know very clearly what expertise and certainty he is claiming. Anyone with a brain may have a position on physics. There's nothing wrong with having one's own views.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[lesliedellow]

Does anyone have a link to an article by Carrier on this subject that is written in his own words?

I want to know very clearly what expertise and certainty he is claiming. Anyone with a brain may have a position on physics. There's nothing wrong with having one's own views.


eudaimonia,

Mark

http://richardcarrier.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/calling-all-physicists.html

I have got a brain, or at least there seems to be something attached to the other end of my optic nerve. However, without at least a PhD in physics, I wouldn't want the job of coming up with a quantum theory of gravity.

I would be world famous if I did, of course, and maybe that is what Richard Carrier's dreams are made of.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Thanks, now I see that Richard Carrier is being reasonable.

Over the years I have been mulling a problem in metaphysics: the ontological mysteries of Quantum Mechanics. I have been developing a theory in this regard (see, for example, The Ontology of Time and my unresolved alternatives in Sense and Goodness without God, pp. 98-99, III.4.1), and now, informed by some recent discoveries and publications in the sciences (and finally a stronger understanding of EPR experiments), I am able to write up a proposal intelligibly enough for an actual physicist to evaluate it.

[...]

As this is out of my field, I fully expect it's possible my thesis is erroneous or untenable for reasons presently unknown to me. But even if that's the case, I'll regard it fully worthwhile to understand why. So I welcome any patient explanation to that effect from an actual expert (and it will be helpful if you identify your credentials). Whereas if it is tenable, but needs revision or correction, I'll certainly want to hear about that.

I see no hint whatsoever of the Dunning-Kruger effect. All I see is a baseless snipe at the guy in the OP.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[lesliedellow]

Thanks, now I see that Richard Carrier is being reasonable.



I see no hint whatsoever of the Dunning-Kruger effect. All I see is a baseless snipe at the guy.


eudaimonia,

Mark

He would need a training as a physicist to even come up with a plausible outline for a theory - with or without the mathematics.

Personally, I am pretty sure I would be laughed at if I said to somebody working in M theory, or loop quantum gravity, "Hey you guys, I've got a new theory here, you might want to try out."

World famous physicists are on the receiving end of emails, proposing crackpot theories, every day of their lives.

 

[Loudmouth]

I just love this. As clear a case of the Dunning-Kruger effect as could be wished for:

http://skeptischism.com/atheismneat/2013/07/24/carriers-theory-of-quantum-incoherence/

Having sorted out the historicity of Jesus, it seems the great man has decided to lend his services to cosmology now.

Ummmm, no. He is seeking the services of real physicists to help him understand where he got it wrong. That's hardly the Dunning-Kruger effect. He happens to have a real interest in physics, and thought it worthwhile to write a really, really preliminary paper for physicists to rip apart. What's the harm in that? It's not as if he is trying to get published in Science or something.

 

[lesliedellow]

Ummmm, no. He is seeking the services of real physicists to help him understand where he got it wrong. That's hardly the Dunning-Kruger effect. He happens to have a real interest in physics, and thought it worthwhile to write a really, really preliminary paper for physicists to rip apart. What's the harm in that? It's not as if he is trying to get published in Science or something.

See post 7. I seriously doubt whether he wrote it for it to be ripped apart; although that is doubtless what would happen.

 

[Loudmouth]

He would need a training as a physicist to even come up with a plausible outline for a theory - with or without the mathematics.

Personally, I am pretty sure I would be laughed at if I said to somebody working in M theory, or loop quantum gravity, "Hey you guys, I've got a new theory here, you might want to try out."

Curiosity is never laughed at. That's all Carrier is expressing.

"As this is out of my field, I fully expect it's possible my thesis is erroneous or untenable for reasons presently unknown to me. But even if that's the case, I'll regard it fully worthwhile to understand why. So I welcome any patient explanation to that effect from an actual expert (and it will be helpful if you identify your credentials)."

What is so terrible about that?

World famous physicists are on the receiving end of emails, proposing crackpot theories, every day of their lives.

There's a difference between crackpots and curious laymen. Carrier is definitely on the curious end of the spectrum. Crackpots are usually sure they have everything 100% correct.

 

[Loudmouth]

See post 7. I seriously doubt whether he wrote it for it to be ripped apart; although that is doubtless what would happen.

"As this is out of my field, I fully expect it's possible my thesis is erroneous or untenable for reasons presently unknown to me. But even if that's the case, I'll regard it fully worthwhile to understand why. So I welcome any patient explanation to that effect from an actual expert (and it will be helpful if you identify your credentials). "
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2011/06/calling-all-physicists.html

He fully expects that the paper is wrong, but he would love to learn why.

 

[lesliedellow]

Curiosity is never laughed at. That's all Carrier is expressing.

"As this is out of my field, I fully expect it's possible my thesis is erroneous or untenable for reasons presently unknown to me. But even if that's the case, I'll regard it fully worthwhile to understand why. So I welcome any patient explanation to that effect from an actual expert (and it will be helpful if you identify your credentials)."

Does he really suppose that he might have come up with something which defeated Einstein - making quantum mechanics surplus to requirements?

 

[Loudmouth]

Does he really suppose that he might have come up with something which defeated Einstein - making quantum mechanics surplus to requirements?

"As this is out of my field, I fully expect it's possible my thesis is erroneous or untenable for reasons presently unknown to me. But even if that's the case, I'll regard it fully worthwhile to understand why. So I welcome any patient explanation to that effect from an actual expert (and it will be helpful if you identify your credentials). "
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2011/06/calling-all-physicists.html

 

[lesliedellow]

"As this is out of my field, I fully expect it's possible my thesis is erroneous or untenable for reasons presently unknown to me. But even if that's the case, I'll regard it fully worthwhile to understand why. So I welcome any patient explanation to that effect from an actual expert (and it will be helpful if you identify your credentials). "
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2011/06/calling-all-physicists.html

It takes a reasonably sized ego to even entertain the idea that, although unqualified as a physicist, you might still have achieved something which defeated Einstein.

 

[Loudmouth]

It takes a reasonably sized ego to entertain the idea that, even though unqualified as a physicist, you might still have achieved something which defeated Einstein.

He fully expects that he is wrong, but would love to learn why. That's a lack of ego.

The only thing he is taking advantage of is his D-list celebrity, and he is using it to hopefully learn something new about physics.

What is so bad about that?

 

[lesliedellow]

He fully expects that he is wrong, but would love to learn why. That's a lack of ego.

"But failing that, I’m hoping at least to discover whether the concepts can be made sound enough that the article will be sufficient guidance to other scientists, who in future read it, to work up the math."

Other scientists? I wonder who he might have in mind as the scientist who is not other?

 

[Loudmouth]

Other scientists? I wonder who he might have in mind as the scientist who is not other?

There are the scientists who review his paper and fix it, and the other scientists who would read the revised paper and might learn something.

 

[lesliedellow]

There are the scientists who review his paper and fix it, and the other scientists who would read the revised paper and might learn something.

I suspect that they would fix it by depositing it in the nearest waste paper bin. Again, just ponder what it is that he thinks he might have achieved.

 

[HitchSlap]

It takes a reasonably sized ego to even entertain the idea that, although unqualified as a physicist, you might still have achieved something which defeated Einstein.

At least Carrier's being intellectually honest here, and admitting he might be, while putting his hypothesis out there for the experts to evaluate.

When's the last time a creationist did the same? I mean, can you imagine Ken Ham writing up his ark hypothesis, admitting he might be wrong, then submitting to several experts in the field?

 

[HitchSlap]

I suspect that they would fix it by depositing it in the nearest waste paper bin. Again, just ponder what it is that he thinks he might have achieved.

Perhaps they're a bit less close minded than you?