On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> He sure knew what he was getting into. Fleischmann wrote a lighthearted > account of this, quoted in Beaudette's book. It starts off with Arrhenius > in 1883. He was one of the most important electrochemists in history, like > Faraday. He made a revolutionary discovery. As any student of history would > predict, this led the academic authorities to kick him out of the > university. He was vilified and ridiculed for years and years. Finally, > long after, he won a Nobel prize. > You mean like Einstein got kicked out of university? No, because his revolutionary ideas got him kicked *into* university. You mean like Planck's ideas got him kicked out of university? No, because they named one after him. etc. You can't just make shit up to please your audience. I'd like to know of a professor who got kicked out of university for a revolutionary idea. At least one that turned out to be right, and didn't have religious objectors. Because, contrary to your claim, Arrhenius does not provide an example. I admit, my source does not go beyond wikipedia, but according to it, his controversial ideas were presented in his doctoral thesis, so he didn't have a position to be kicked out of. And while there were local skeptics, his degree was granted, if only as 3rd class. Nevertheless, when the dissertation was sent to other European scholars, they came to Sweden trying to recruit him. Doesn't really sound much like cold fusion, does it? The Swedish Academy then awarded him a grant to study with the likes of Boltzmann and van 't Hoff. That doesn't sound like years and years of vilification does it? A few years after his graduation, he was *given* an appointment at the Stockholm university, and was a full professor/chair (rector) about a decade after his PhD. That doesn't sound much like ridicule, does it? It did take almost 20 years to recognize his work with a Nobel prize, but maybe the fact that the prize was not initiated until about 17 years after had something to do with that. He got the 3rd one in chemistry. He was on the Nobel committee from the beginning until his death, and it seems he was not a particularly nice guy himself, arranging awards for his friends, and attempting to deny them to his enemies. He also got involved in racial biology (eugenics) later in his life. > That happens so often I am astounded anyone believes the myth that > scientists welcome new ideas. > Well, you would not be astounded if you actually paid attention to history, instead of twisting it to rationalize your fervent belief in cold fusion. Right about the same time as the CF announcement, high temperature superconductivity was discovered, and the Nobel prize was awarded -- now get this -- one year later. The discovery had no theory to support it, was unexpected, and yet the discoverers were not dismissed from their positions. Amazing, isn't it. Of course, most Nobel prizes (including Einstein's) take much longer, because it usually takes time for the importance to become manifest, but new discoveries are always celebrated in science, by scientists. As I've said before, the most revolutionary ideas in science in centuries, relativity and QM, were accepted almost as quickly as they could be developed. Because they fit the evidence so perfectly. Just about every evaluation of merit in science, from granting of degrees, to awarding academic or industrial positions, to granting awards, to giving funding, to accepting manuscripts for publication, to any degree of fame and glory, has as its first criterion: *** novelty ***. What scientists fear is not new ideas (they crave them), but wrong ideas. Scientists are skeptical; they have to be. Skepticism is a critical filter in guiding research. Without it, they would simply flounder around, like, well, like cold fusion researchers. Of course, that sometimes leads to rejecting good ideas, and finding the right balance is the most important quality a scientist can strive for. Linus Pauling was clever enough to win 2 Nobel prizes, and yet he ridiculed quasi-crystals. At the other end is perhaps Josephson, who got a Nobel prize for work done as a graduate student, when skeptical guidance was still provided by others. On his own, his lack of skepticism has led him to dabble in the paranormal, and to a life's work wholly unworthy of his brilliant beginning. > After the press conference, Dr. Caldwell came up to us and said, "Well, > when my grandfather proposed electrolytic disassociation, he was dismissed > from the University. At least that won’t happen to you." I said to her, > “But you are entirely mistaken. We shall be dismissed as well." > > > Their ideas were dismissed, but they were not fired from academic positions. Fleischmann was already retired, and continued to list his affiliation with Southampton until at least 1994. Pons was tenured, and left voluntarily for greener pastures and more money in France. Even so, he also listed his affiliation with Utah for several years after he left.
