I’m not suggesting the techie is correct, I just don’t think the right answer is complete dismissal instead of communication. Ok, so you know it’s obviously wrong, but there’s no obligation to then go and stifle their curiosity or imagination. Just don’t say anything or let them talk to somebody who has the time and care to indulge.
The original commenter I’m replying to, taken at their word, is ready to dismiss anything somebody says, regardless of merit with no further discussion, just because they think there’s “no way” that person could be right. Which is hilariously close-minded way to conduct oneself.
This is fine the first few times, but after a few dozens it gets exhausting. This is also not about stifling their curiosity or imagination. It's about understanding that in a field as advanced as physics and cosmology, how incredibly unlikely it is for some layman to come up with a worthwhile idea that hasn't already be tackled. To even be able to explain why an idea is impractical or beside the point, a solid knowledge and understanding of the field is often aready necessary. Articles like from Quanta Magazine dress the topics up in language that make them seem substantially simpler, and closer to human intuition, than they actually are.
Quanta Magazine generally write very well written, well researched and pretty comprehensive articles. They cite their sources and they're very careful to get science as correct as they possibly can (I'm a scientist, and they once contacted me to fact-check one of their articles).
Comparing their work to the dross that AI produces is insulting
If you're not doing math, you're not doing physics.
Lookup what General Relativity actually is, what it looks like. The mass-energy tensor and the extremely complicated underlying partial differential equations it is actually encoding.[1]
Every parseable language explanation is irrelevant: the mathematics works. If you have an alternative idea...then the mathematics needs to work. What that means is irrelevant, provided it makes useful predictions and does not contradict established observations.
> Ok, so you know it’s obviously wrong, but there’s no obligation to then go and stifle their curiosity or imagination.
Dismissing uninformed ideas does everyone a service. If you're a complete outsider to a field and have no training it it, decide to come up with random ideas about difficult unsolved problems, and then feel stifled when an expert dismisses your ideas... well, that's a level of arrogance and hubris that I think is more than a little infuriating.
> The original commenter I’m replying to, taken at their word, is ready to dismiss anything somebody says, regardless of merit with no further discussion, just because they think there’s “no way” that person could be right. Which is hilariously close-minded way to conduct oneself.
That is a hilariously uncharitable interpretation of what they said.
I had the idea that each of these phenomena were being influenced by our local gravity well, in a different way. Then I remembered my physics. Then I read a few of their papers. This is not just good science, it's great science.
I withdraw my idea, but continue to wave lengths of wire 11.8 inches long.
I do wish I could read a website called cosmogony news, every day.
The original commenter I’m replying to, taken at their word, is ready to dismiss anything somebody says, regardless of merit with no further discussion, just because they think there’s “no way” that person could be right. Which is hilariously close-minded way to conduct oneself.