I take zombies as seriously as anyone really should take a mock-hobby.

Mmmm fried 'nanner and BRAINZ sandwich . . .

Zeno,

I bumped the cold fusion thread to provide updates. Did you even notice? If no one wanted to discuss them, it would have quickly disappeared again, so there was no reason to lock the thread. AFAIK, the editor of Nature is not the final authority in science, and neither are you. But I may be wrong about that. If so, you should forbid the ACS from holding meetings that are being overrun by nutjobs.

Nothing like that, deeply uninteresting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_process

I read the updates, not impressed (I could be wrong), but please repost the updates on Cold fusion here. We can keep tabs on developments and see if a breakthrough occurs at which point I will offer an apology and give myself 20 infraction points.

-Zeno

On Unix and Unix-like computer operating systems, a zombie process or defunct process is a process that has completed execution but still has an entry in the process table. This entry is still needed to allow the process that started the (now zombie) process to read its exit status. The term zombie process derives from the common definition of zombie—an undead person. In the term's colorful metaphor, the child process has died but has not yet been reaped. Also, unlike normal processes, the kill command has no effect on a zombie process.

That one was good!

I don't have any real understanding of nuclear physics.

I do have some questions though.

Muon catalyzed fusion is a real process that occurs at low temperatures and pressures. So, low temperature and pressure fusion does not violate some fundamental law of physics. It just requires some exotic particles aimed at a mix of tritium and deuterium atoms and it is not self sustaining.

Physicists keep assuring us that the Universe is composed of five times as much Dark Matter as ordinary matter. Now if 80% of the matter is an unknown something how can anyone say what is or isn't possible? Dark matter doesn't interact with ordinary matter. But, deuterium atoms absorbed into a palladium matrix is not exactly something that occurs in nature. Who can say that there isn't some quantum state of dark matter that produces an exotic particle anti-particle pair that is impossible to detect unless it just happens to occur in the presence of two unusually close deuterium atoms?

I don't know if cold fusion is real. I don't know if dark matter is real. I think I have a soft spot for cold fusion because the original announcement came out when I was a freshman at GeorgiaTech and the entire campus was electrified with the possibilities of a new world. It's been 20 years and no progress has been made. Then again, the dark matter theory was ignored for 40+ years and despite being embraced for the last 30 or so it is still a mystery.

So, if cold fusion belongs in the 'Fringe' thread I say dark matter and dark energy do as well. I'll take (mass of dark matter particle/ mass of electron) infraction points when they prove me wrong

It is my contention that the evidence for dark matter and dark energy are more robust than that of cold fusion:

http://nasascience.nasa.gov/astrophy...is-dark-energy

http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/spa...e/dark_matter/

but there are some good physics posters that could help us with this, so if they wish they can add their expertise which would be welcome.

I bolded a portion of the quote of your post because it illustrates something of great importance; that emotional attachment to an idea or theory can be a blinding force for the majority (pervasive in the public mindset), and, unfortunately, can include a few scientists. Emotional detachment and intellectual honesty is imperative in any scientific endeavor or pursuit of empirical knowledge. Sometimes a cult status pervades some endeavors until the rug is pulled out from under them. See the history of N-rays for example (see link below)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_ray

Self-deception is a powerful drug. Best to avoid it.


-Zeno

A better question is how someone makes it to the third year of medical school without watching Dawn of the Dead.

There is fictionalization in (granted, very good) movies, and there is medical fact. Excuse me for wanting a definitive response.

You mean, that wasn't a documentary?

These days the phrase "based on a true story" is used quite lightly.

Want to get this thread going.

Anything new about the crop circles?



This one has to have been done by intelligent creatures.

Nope. It was done by humans like all the rest.

Ok. Sorry. End of thread.









Except:



Evidence of the Jelly Invaders?
(note the capital letters in the beginning of the words)






Oh, I see:

I was talking with a law student friend about her philosophy paper, and she said that she is enjoying the science in it. She thinks that metaphysics is science. Is she right?

No, but it doesn't matter because you won't change her mind.

haha "give myself 20 infraction points" made me laugh. obv you're not a bad guy, and i don't totally disagree with your "fringe" idea. i just think that another way to handle it would be to create a "Fringe" category under OOT and then posters could have individual threads about each "fringe" topic. over time, there are going to be lots of different Fringe subjects and it won't be very efficient having a 12,000 post thread to handle them all.

hopefully you reconsider.

ps: a Neutron walks into a bar, ask how much for a drink, bartender says, "for you, no charge" ooh

(sorry saw on a tv show and had to laugh)

You are correct sir.

There's no way to do that if you refuse to reconsider an idea. Some ideas (e.g. the cosmological constant, heliocentrism) have come back after being 'discredited'.

I don't know if cold fusion belongs in the same category with n-rays, but anything labeled 'fringe' isn't going to get serious discussion. No wonder progress comes one funeral at a time.

Free cold fusion, imo.

A forum that includes discussion on speculative topics does not need a containment thread for subjects in which widespread research by professionals is ongoing, even if marginalized by the mainstream.

The belief that self-deception is avoidable is a conspiracy of the subconscious, whose goal is to convince the consciousness that it somehow isn't completely flawed...

...and controlled by the Illuminati.

this is a problem in lots of areas of life: people believe that mainstream/widespread belief in an idea (or disbelief in this case) makes it fact. just look at any religion for example. a billion christians couldn't be wrong, could they? no way a billion people are wrong...

for the small % of us living in the real world (not Narnia) we understand that widespread belief in something does not necessarily make it fact.

+1
But wide spread "believes" MAY be right, especially if they are based on science. The tricky thing is to estimate the importance of different evidence. It´s a real challenge to do it correctly, in a way to free yourself from the rest of the world (and from yourself!).

In Narnia many believed the winter would never end.