The Portal Wiki

Peer Review: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Peer Review (edit)

Revision as of 06:00, 1 December 2025

8,792 bytes added ,  Monday at 06:00
→‎2025
No edit summary
 
(11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[File:Melinda-Baldwin-Peer-Review-Scholarly-Kitchen-GtB-mQUagAAEpyl.jpg|thumb]]
Peer review is a relatively [https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/the-birth-of-modern-peer-review/ new form] of gatekeeping used by the [[Distributed Idea Suppression Complex|DISC]] to suppress ideas. It functions to keep out bad ideas and amplify good ideas. Like any human process, it fails in its function at times. It sometimes amplifies bad ideas such as those exposed by the Grievance Studies Hoax. It sometimes suppresses important ideas such as those discussed in [[19: Bret Weinstein - The Prediction and the DISC|The Portal Episode 19]].
Peer review is a relatively [https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/the-birth-of-modern-peer-review/ new form] of gatekeeping used by the [[Distributed Idea Suppression Complex|DISC]] to suppress ideas. It functions to keep out bad ideas and amplify good ideas. Like any human process, it fails in its function at times. It sometimes amplifies bad ideas such as those exposed by the Grievance Studies Hoax. It sometimes suppresses important ideas such as those discussed in [[19: Bret Weinstein - The Prediction and the DISC|The Portal Episode 19]].


Line 453: Line 454:




{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1445816124835196929
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=@DrBrianKeating @EcoHealthNYC Or this:
https://conductscience.com/what-is-grant-proposal-peer-review/
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
Line 459: Line 470:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I have been warning you about Peer Review. Because almost no one says this, it sounds crazy.
|content=I have been warning you about [[Peer Review]]. Because almost no one says this, it sounds crazy.


Dr Daszak & @EcoHealthNYC have been thoroughly Peer Reviewed and are endorsed by the highest levels of scientists. It’s ‘preposterous’ to question a decision to terminate their funding.
Dr Daszak & @EcoHealthNYC have been thoroughly [[Peer Review|Peer Reviewed]] and are endorsed by the highest levels of scientists. It’s ‘preposterous’ to question a decision to terminate their funding.
|timestamp=5:40 PM · Oct 6, 2021
|timestamp=5:40 PM · Oct 6, 2021
|media1=ERW-X-post-1445806211366932483-FBCJFczVgA80xkA.jpg
|media1=ERW-X-post-1445806211366932483-FBCJFczVgA80xkA.jpg
}}
}}
=== 2022 ===
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1483860161965932544
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1445806214055489537
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We should discuss this graph more.
|content=I will be held up by PhDs as crazy for saying what I am about to say:
|timestamp=5:53 PM · Jan 19, 2022
 
|media1=ERW-X-post-1483860161965932544-FJe683sVIAMF4LW.jpg
Peer Review is INCREDIBLY dangerous. [[Peer Review|Modern Peer Review]] really begins in the 1960s. It has more to do with Ghislaine Maxwell’s father & Permagon Press than science. 77 Nobel laureates are wrong. We are right.
|timestamp=5:40 PM · Oct 6, 2021
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1485039821047287811
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1445806215460622336
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Academe. We still haven’t woken up to the destruction of Robert Maxwell, '''Peer Review''', oversight & transparency.
|content=Further the CCP supplies labor for these Nobel laureates to run their teams. Our labor program is disguised as “Graduate Study” and “Post-Doctoral training” so as to avoid unionization, wage scrutiny, and “Labor Certification”.  


If you still believe that peer review has always been the gold standard in science, you simply didn’t want to look at the history of Permagon Press and its aftermath.
Our professors are not acting as scientists here.
|quote=
|timestamp=5:40 PM · Oct 6, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=DGlaucomflecken-profile.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/DGlaucomflecken/status/1484679759829209090
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1445806218887372806
|name=Dr. Glaucomflecken
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/DGlaucomflecken
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=DGlaucomflecken
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Nature does open access
|content=[[Peer Review]] has moved from where it began in BioMedicine, to a business model for shaking down universities forced to pay extortionary journal fees, to a funding game of keep away that keeps failed incumbents funded and competitors from being able to show those incumbents failed.
|media1=DGlaucomflecken-X-post-1484679759829209090.png
|timestamp=5:40 PM · Oct 6, 2021
|timestamp=12:10 AM · Jan 22, 2022
}}
|timestamp=12:00 AM · Jan 23, 2022
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1486003790423547904
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1445808605639307274
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=This is a system in which the appearance of fairness and objectivity is masking a collection of inner mechanisms that are far more important, and that are often intensely interpersonal rather than dispassionate and objective.
|content=What does it tell us about [[Peer Review]] that it allows Dr Daszak, a zoologist w/ a theory of preventing pandemics that sounds more similar to a bioweapon program scouring the earth for lethal pathogens, the ability to be defended by 77 laureates?
|thread=
 
This: [[Peer Review|Peer. Review.]] Doesn’t Work.
|timestamp=5:50 PM · Oct 6, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=DrBrianKeating-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/DrBrianKeating/status/1445811834150260740
|name=DrBrianKeating
|usernameurl=https://x.com/DrBrianKeating
|username=Prof. Brian Keating
|content=“Peer review” is a term typically used for journal articles, not grant proposal reviews. I think it’s sloppy journalism by NPR. Perhaps it’s meant to regularize it for a non-scientific audience, comparing to something the public has heard of & considers the gold standard.
|timestamp=6:02 PM · Oct 6, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1486001426862166018
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1445815788103892993
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If you are having trouble with “Trust the Science(tm)”, then we really need to talk about the disaster that is modern '''Peer Review''' and Academic Publication across all technical subjects:
|content=The world of biology and medicine grant making works differently than Physics and Mathematics just as NIH/Howard Hughes work differently from DOE/[[National Science Foundation (NSF)|NSF]] respectively:  


https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2022/01/25/how-do-things-work-at-top-econ-journals-exactly-this-is-one-weird-ass-story/
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer-review.htm
|timestamp=3:42 PM · Jan 25, 2022
|timestamp=6:18 PM · Oct 6, 2021
}}
}}
|timestamp=3:51 PM · Jan 25, 2022
|timestamp=6:20 PM · Oct 6, 2021
}}
}}


=== 2022 ===


{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1491813693042008067
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1483860161965932544
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Monthly Reminder Moral: it’s really really really hard to fake a field. Economic Index Numbers like CPI are not real numbers. They are naturally group-valued *FIELDS* that would be nearly impossible to fake and manipulate.  
|content=We should discuss this graph more.
|timestamp=5:53 PM · Jan 19, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1483860161965932544-FJe683sVIAMF4LW.jpg
}}
 


The *entire* subject is off. '''Peer review''' won’t help. 🙏
|media1=ERW-X-post-1491813693042008067-FLP8pUdUcAEwwlo.jpg
|timestamp=4:37 PM · Feb 10, 2022
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1491811219161817090
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1485039821047287811
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I understand that CPI is 7.5%.  
|content=Academe. We still haven’t woken up to the destruction of Robert Maxwell, '''Peer Review''', oversight & transparency.


Different question. Look at the spread.
If you still believe that peer review has always been the gold standard in science, you simply didn’t want to look at the history of Permagon Press and its aftermath.
 
Tell me how we got 7.5%? Do you have any idea what 7.5% means?
 
Now listen to who repeats this number.
 
If they said 7.57348977% ± 0.0000003% you would be laughing.
 
We should be laughing, not nodding.
|quote=
|quote=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=charliebilello-profile.png
|image=DGlaucomflecken-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/charliebilello/status/1491767729736536073
|nameurl=https://x.com/DGlaucomflecken/status/1484679759829209090
|name=Charlie Bilello
|name=Dr. Glaucomflecken
|usernameurl=https://x.com/charliebilello
|usernameurl=https://x.com/DGlaucomflecken
|username=charliebilello
|username=DGlaucomflecken
|content=Price increases over last year (CPI report)</br>
|content=Nature does open access
Used Cars: +40.5%</br>
|media1=DGlaucomflecken-X-post-1484679759829209090.png
Gasoline: +40.0%</br>
|timestamp=12:10 AM · Jan 22, 2022
Gas Utilities: +23.9%</br>
}}
Meats/Fish/Eggs: +12.2%</br>
|timestamp=12:00 AM · Jan 23, 2022
New Cars: +12.2%</br>
}}
Electricity: +10.7%</br>
 
Overall CPI: +7.5%</br>
 
Food at home: +7.4%</br>
Food away from home: +6.4%</br>
Transportation: +5.6%</br>
Apparel: +5.3%</br>
Shelter: +4.4%
|timestamp=1:35 PM · Feb 10, 2022
}}
|timestamp=4:28 PM · Feb 10, 2022
}}
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1530230628020461568
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1486003790423547904
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Am I mad? Not in the slightest. As to why scientists can’t afford to look at the truth, the author correctly put his finger on that issue too: Academic research has what I call a “Hotel California” problem.
|content=This is a system in which the appearance of fairness and objectivity is masking a collection of inner mechanisms that are far more important, and that are often intensely interpersonal rather than dispassionate and objective.
 
The author may have publicly checked out of legacy journal work. But…
|media1=ERW-X-post-1530230628020461568-FTx4pKcVIAAD4qN.jpg
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1530226540876771329
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1486001426862166018
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Academics have to be quite sensitive. Even the bold of academe don’t want to talk about how we quietly switched from editors holding the reins at a few high quality journals, to '''peer review''' mysteriously taking over as the number of lower tier journals exploded.
|content=If you are having trouble with “Trust the Science(tm)”, then we really need to talk about the disaster that is modern '''Peer Review''' and Academic Publication across all technical subjects:


Crazy talk… ;-)
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2022/01/25/how-do-things-work-at-top-econ-journals-exactly-this-is-one-weird-ass-story/
|timestamp=4:36 PM · May 27, 2022
|timestamp=3:42 PM · Jan 25, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1530226540876771329-FTx07XYUsAAOk7X.jpg
}}
|media2=ERW-X-post-1530226540876771329-FTx07XWUsAAGebH.jpg
|timestamp=3:51 PM · Jan 25, 2022
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1530227311403884544
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1491813693042008067
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Don’t take it from me. Look at the history yourself with these search terms:
|content=Monthly Reminder Moral: it’s really really really hard to fake a field. Economic Index Numbers like [[CPI]] are not real numbers. They are naturally group-valued *FIELDS* that would be nearly impossible to fake and manipulate.  


History of Peer Review in Science
The *entire* subject is off. '''Peer review''' won’t help. 🙏
|media1=ERW-X-post-1491813693042008067-FLP8pUdUcAEwwlo.jpg
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1491811219161817090
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I understand that [[CPI]] is 7.5%.


Pergamon Press
Different question. Look at the spread.


Robert Maxwell
Tell me how we got 7.5%? Do you have any idea what 7.5% means?


Number of academic Journals over time
Now listen to who repeats this number.


Cost of Academic journal subscription
If they said 7.57348977% ± 0.0000003% you would be laughing.


Reviewer compensation
We should be laughing, not nodding.
 
Tuition over time
 
Good luck.
|timestamp=4:39 PM · May 27, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1530227311403884544-FTx1oKaVIAEEfed.jpg
}}
|timestamp=4:53 PM · May 27, 2022
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1581039245610733568
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content='''Peer review''', always fails, real review.
|quote=
|quote=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=michael_nielsen-profile.jpg
|image=charliebilello-profile.png
|nameurl=https://x.com/michael_nielsen/status/1580950048841469952
|nameurl=https://x.com/charliebilello/status/1491767729736536073
|name=Michael Nielsen
|name=Charlie Bilello
|usernameurl=https://x.com/michael_nielsen
|usernameurl=https://x.com/charliebilello
|username=michael_nielsen
|username=charliebilello
|content=I enjoy the ironic expansion of the meaning of "the Matthew Effect" in the subtitle. Maybe familiarity would make people more likely to click...
|content=Price increases over last year (CPI report)</br>
|media1=michael_nielsen-X-post-1580950048841469952-FfCpbWMUUAAAygH.png
Used Cars: +40.5%</br>
|timestamp=3:53 PM · Oct 14, 2022
Gasoline: +40.0%</br>
Gas Utilities: +23.9%</br>
Meats/Fish/Eggs: +12.2%</br>
New Cars: +12.2%</br>
Electricity: +10.7%</br>
Overall CPI: +7.5%</br>
Food at home: +7.4%</br>
Food away from home: +6.4%</br>
Transportation: +5.6%</br>
Apparel: +5.3%</br>
Shelter: +4.4%
|timestamp=1:35 PM · Feb 10, 2022
}}
|timestamp=4:28 PM · Feb 10, 2022
}}
}}
|timestamp=9:48 PM · Oct 14, 2022
|timestamp=4:37 PM · Feb 10, 2022
}}
}}


=== 2023 ===


{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1610720650125283329
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1530230628020461568
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=<nowiki>*</nowiki>knows
|content=Am I mad? Not in the slightest. As to why scientists can’t afford to look at the truth, the author correctly put his finger on that issue too: Academic research has what I call a “Hotel California” problem.


Now in about 10 minutes you are likely going to see academics in the timeline talking about how much more knowledge there is to consume so that there really is no problem. We don’t need to examine anything. We don’t have to fix anything. “Myth of the lone genius.” Etc.
The author may have publicly checked out of legacy journal work. But…
|media1=ERW-X-post-1530230628020461568-FTx4pKcVIAAD4qN.jpg
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1610719520704069632
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1530226540876771329
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=“No one know why.”
|content=Academics have to be quite sensitive. Even the bold of academe don’t want to talk about how we quietly switched from editors holding the reins at a few high quality journals, to [[Peer Review|peer review]] mysteriously taking over as the number of lower tier journals exploded.


We have the highest quality science. It is thoroughly peer reviewed. It is vetted.
Crazy talk… ;-)
 
|timestamp=4:36 PM · May 27, 2022
Why, it’s almost as if the more we improved the quality control and peer review via extreme vetting, while handing power to social engineers &amp; activists, the smart people left.
|media1=ERW-X-post-1530226540876771329-FTx07XYUsAAOk7X.jpg
|quote=
|media2=ERW-X-post-1530226540876771329-FTx07XWUsAAGebH.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=nature-profile.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/Nature/status/1610697803751120897
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1530227311403884544
|name=nature
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/Nature
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=Nature
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=‘Disruptive’ science has declined — and no one knows why https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04577-5
|content=Don’t take it from me. Look at the history yourself with these search terms:
|timestamp=5:00 PM · Jan 4, 2023
 
}}
[[Peer Review|History of Peer Review in Science]]
|timestamp=7:27 PM · Jan 4, 2023
}}
|timestamp=7:31 PM · Jan 4, 2023
}}


Pergamon Press


{{Tweet
[[Robert Maxwell]]
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617626351154114560
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Here is the simple point:


You can have scientists you trust.
Number of academic Journals over time


You can have scientists you control.
Cost of Academic journal subscription
 
Reviewer compensation
 
Tuition over time
 
Good luck.
|timestamp=4:39 PM · May 27, 2022
|media1=ERW-X-post-1530227311403884544-FTx1oKaVIAEEfed.jpg
}}
|timestamp=4:53 PM · May 27, 2022
}}


And you can pick only one of the above options.


You’re getting angry at wolves you bred into obedience to non-scientific masters who have no idea what they are doing. That’s why.
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617623568145350656
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1581039245610733568
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We’ve been trying to destroy US scientists’ freedom &amp; their research universities for ~60 years.
|content='''Peer review''', always fails, real review.
 
Peer Review 1965</br>
Mansfield Amendment 1969</br>
Eilberg Amendment 1976</br>
Bayh-Dole Act 1980</br>
IMMACT90 1990</br>
SSC Cancelation 1993</br>
ADEA Faculty Uncapping 1993</br>
Dear Colleague Letter 2011</br>
DEI 2017
|quote=
|quote=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=MarioNawfal-profile.jpg
|image=michael_nielsen-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1617596488502370304
|nameurl=https://x.com/michael_nielsen/status/1580950048841469952
|name=Mario Nawfal
|name=Michael Nielsen
|usernameurl=https://x.com/MarioNawfal
|usernameurl=https://x.com/michael_nielsen
|username=MarioNawfal
|username=michael_nielsen
|content=When a successful polio vaccine candidate was introduced in 1953, it made its developer a minor celebrity.
|content=I enjoy the ironic expansion of the meaning of "the Matthew Effect" in the subtitle.  Maybe familiarity would make people more likely to click...
|media1=michael_nielsen-X-post-1580950048841469952-FfCpbWMUUAAAygH.png
|timestamp=3:53 PM · Oct 14, 2022
}}
|timestamp=9:48 PM · Oct 14, 2022
}}


In 1960, Time magazine’s “Man of the Year” was awarded to “US Scientists.”
=== 2023 ===
 
What used to be people’s celebrity in the 1950s is seen by many as a villain today.


Why?
|timestamp=5:53 PM · Jan 23, 2023
}}
|timestamp=8:41 PM · Jan 23, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617625356416192512
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1610720650125283329
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=You are looking at domesticated Scientists that were bread over almost 60 years from Wild Type scientists.
|content=<nowiki>*</nowiki>knows


It’s not that there is no connection. But the difference between a wolf &amp; a poodle can be significant. One is fiercely independent. One needs obedience to be fed regularly.
Now in about 10 minutes you are likely going to see academics in the timeline talking about how much more knowledge there is to consume so that there really is no problem. We don’t need to examine anything. We don’t have to fix anything. “Myth of the lone genius.” Etc.
|timestamp=8:48 PM · Jan 23, 2023
|thread=
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617625358454644738
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1610719520704069632
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=And inside every domesticated animal lies an unkillable dream of being wild and free again. That’s why occasionally my dog brings me a squirrel or still pees on territory while on a leash.
|content=“No one know why.”
 
We have the highest quality science. It is thoroughly peer reviewed. It is vetted.


Your real scientists want to hunt again. They need to be reintroduced into the wild. Now.
Why, it’s almost as if the more we improved the quality control and peer review via extreme vetting, while handing power to social engineers &amp; activists, the smart people left.
|timestamp=8:48 PM · Jan 23, 2023
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=nature-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/Nature/status/1610697803751120897
|name=nature
|usernameurl=https://x.com/Nature
|username=Nature
|content=‘Disruptive’ science has declined — and no one knows why https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04577-5
|timestamp=5:00 PM · Jan 4, 2023
}}
|timestamp=7:27 PM · Jan 4, 2023
}}
}}
|timestamp=8:52 PM · Jan 23, 2023
|timestamp=7:31 PM · Jan 4, 2023
}}
}}


Line 776: Line 774:
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621058252246237184
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617626399615119361
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content="I remember when rock was young...🎶"
|content=<nowiki>*</nowiki>bred. 🙏
 
|thread=
Let's get that energy back, by any means necessary.
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621058252246237184-Fn8n3VFacAA_dcF.png
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054161885499395
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617623568145350656
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Today May be Considered the 50 year Anniversary of the Stagnation of Particle Physics.
|content=We’ve been trying to destroy US scientists’ freedom &amp; their research universities for ~60 years.


Today Feb 1 marks the appearance of Kobayashi &amp;  Maskawa's englargment of the Cabibo Angle to the three generation 3x3 CKM matrix.  
[[Peer Review|Peer Review 1965]]</br>
 
[[Mansfield Amendment (1969)|Mansfield Amendment 1969]]</br>
That should be cause for celebration. So let us celebrate!
[[Eilberg Amendment (1976)|Eilberg Amendment 1976]]</br>
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
[[Bayh-Dole Act (1980)|Bayh-Dole Act 1980]]</br>
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054161885499395-Fn8U2kYaIAMg8wk.png
[[IMMACT90|IMMACT90 1990]]</br>
}}
SSC Cancelation 1993</br>
ADEA Faculty Uncapping 1993</br>
Dear Colleague Letter 2011</br>
DEI 2017
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=MarioNawfal-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1617596488502370304
|name=Mario Nawfal
|usernameurl=https://x.com/MarioNawfal
|username=MarioNawfal
|content=When a successful polio vaccine candidate was introduced in 1953, it made its developer a minor celebrity.
 
In 1960, Time magazine’s “Man of the Year” was awarded to “US Scientists.”
 
What used to be people’s celebrity in the 1950s is seen by many as a villain today.  
 
Why?
|timestamp=6:53 PM · Jan 23, 2023
}}
|timestamp=8:41 PM · Jan 23, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054165408706560
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617625356416192512
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Unfortunately, it also marks the end of what we can be certain actually is physics.
|content=You are looking at domesticated Scientists that were bread over almost 60 years from Wild Type scientists.


Imagine if Elton John's "Crocodile Rock" was still the #1 song on Billboard's Hot 100 &amp; Tony Orlando and Dawn were singing "Tie a Yellow Ribbon". That, in a nutshell, is fundamental phsyics.
It’s not that there is no connection. But the difference between a wolf &amp; a poodle can be significant. One is fiercely independent. One needs obedience to be fed regularly.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=8:48 PM · Jan 23, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054165408706560-Fn8iMnEaUAMg0wC.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054168764133376
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617625358454644738
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=To be clear, It is not as if there are no Nobel Laureates recognized for fundamental discoveries in particle theory left. I believe we are down to the last 8. Half of them are in their 70s. One in his 80s. Three are nongenarians. Yes. It's that bad. And we're not honest about it.
|content=And inside every domesticated animal lies an unkillable dream of being wild and free again. That’s why occasionally my dog brings me a squirrel or still pees on territory while on a leash.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
 
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054168764133376-Fn8iezwaMAAErrN.png
Your real scientists want to hunt again. They need to be reintroduced into the wild. Now.
|timestamp=8:48 PM · Jan 23, 2023
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054172224421888
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617626351154114560
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=When you hear about "Peer Review" in this field, you have to understand that the field stopped working. Without nature telling us, we don't actually know who the physicists are any more. We have no idea who is a fundamental physicist. All we know is that what we do doesn't work.
|content=Here is the simple point:
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
 
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054175483432960-Fn8iwsfaAAAVeiu.png
You can have scientists you trust.
 
You can have scientists you control.
 
And you can pick only one of the above options.
 
You’re getting angry at wolves you bred into obedience to non-scientific masters who have no idea what they are doing. That’s why.
|timestamp=8:52 PM · Jan 23, 2023
}}
|timestamp=8:52 PM · Jan 23, 2023
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054175483432960
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621058252246237184
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So I am celebrating today by pointing out the obvious: maybe it isn't a good idea to have people who haven't made contact with actual fundamental physics telling everyone else what they must and must not do to be members of a club that no longer works according to normal science.
|content="I remember when rock was young...🎶"
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
 
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054175483432960-Fn8jAhDaMAED_d4.png
Let's get that energy back, by any means necessary.
}}
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621058252246237184-Fn8n3VFacAA_dcF.png
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054178570407936
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054161885499395
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=What fundamental physics really is, is (approximately) captured by the table below. In short, if someone is below the age of 70, they may have proven their brilliance and mathematical ability, but they have not proven any ability to make contact with reality as theorists.
|content=Today May be Considered the 50 year Anniversary of the Stagnation of Particle Physics.
 
Today Feb 1 marks the appearance of Kobayashi &amp;  Maskawa's englargment of the Cabibo Angle to the three generation 3x3 CKM matrix.
 
That should be cause for celebration. So let us celebrate!
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054178570407936-Fn8YxU6acAEQmCD.png
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054161885499395-Fn8U2kYaIAMg8wk.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054181443514369
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054165408706560
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I will point out that our experimentalists are in FAR better shape. The massive nature of neutrinos, discovery of gravitational waves, the Higgs field, Intermediate Vector Bosons, Accelerating Expansion of the Universe/Dark Energy are all major successes over the last 50 years.
|content=Unfortunately, it also marks the end of what we can be certain actually is physics.
 
Imagine if Elton John's "Crocodile Rock" was still the #1 song on Billboard's Hot 100 &amp; Tony Orlando and Dawn were singing "Tie a Yellow Ribbon". That, in a nutshell, is fundamental phsyics.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054181443514369-Fn8jMQWaQAENPbQ.png
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054165408706560-Fn8iMnEaUAMg0wC.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054184186613760
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054168764133376
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So what went wrong? I will be talking about my understanding of the stagnation this year at a different level. But the single greatest threat to fundamental physics in my estimation is something called "Quantum Gravity" which was really born 70 years ago around 1953.
|content=To be clear, It is not as if there are no Nobel Laureates recognized for fundamental discoveries in particle theory left. I believe we are down to the last 8. Half of them are in their 70s. One in his 80s. Three are nongenarians. Yes. It's that bad. And we're not honest about it.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054184186613760-Fn8jTU3aYAAIeGf.jpg
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054168764133376-Fn8iezwaMAAErrN.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054187512668160
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054172224421888
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=To put it bluntly, it is not just that Quantum Gravity doesn't work. It's that you can't comfortably question Quatnum Gravity because the failed investment is on a scale that I think is difficult for us to contemplate. It includes StringTheory, Loop Quantum Gravity, AdS/CFT etc.
|content=When you hear about "Peer Review" in this field, you have to understand that the field stopped working. Without nature telling us, we don't actually know who the physicists are any more. We have no idea who is a fundamental physicist. All we know is that what we do doesn't work.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054187512668160-Fn8jeqSaUAAU1O9.png
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054175483432960-Fn8iwsfaAAAVeiu.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054190691975168
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054175483432960
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Next Year, will be 40 years of failure for modern StringTheory to ship a product. To be clear and STEELMAN the argument for strings, it *is* a remarkable framework. It is REAL math. It teaches us things no other framework has.
|content=So I am celebrating today by pointing out the obvious: maybe it isn't a good idea to have people who haven't made contact with actual fundamental physics telling everyone else what they must and must not do to be members of a club that no longer works according to normal science.
 
But, it *destroyed* the culture of honest physics.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054190691975168-Fn8j43gaYAEp0Cd.png
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054175483432960-Fn8jAhDaMAED_d4.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054193426661376
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054178570407936
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We spent almost 80% of this time being told that ST was a 'Piece of 21st Century Physics that fell into the 20th Century.'
|content=What fundamental physics really is, is (approximately) captured by the table below. In short, if someone is below the age of 70, they may have proven their brilliance and mathematical ability, but they have not proven any ability to make contact with reality as theorists.
 
Uh. Bullshit. That is an excuse. It's not clear that it's physics at all.
 
It's a "Failed piece of 20th Century Physics still hanging around in the 21stC".
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054193426661376-Fn8kDPoacAAwub7.png
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054178570407936-Fn8YxU6acAEQmCD.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054196949651456
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054181443514369
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=It is time to hold conferences dedicated to the issues of groupthink in physics. Why wont our leading voices admit failure? We don't know. Previous generations wanted their students to succeed. But String Theory is dominated by boomers who seem oblivious to danger.
|content=I will point out that our experimentalists are in FAR better shape. The massive nature of neutrinos, discovery of gravitational waves, the Higgs field, Intermediate Vector Bosons, Accelerating Expansion of the Universe/Dark Energy are all major successes over the last 50 years.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054181443514369-Fn8jMQWaQAENPbQ.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054198824710144
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054184186613760
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If we're going to truly wrestle w/ dark matter, or dark energy, or UAP that supposedly violate our laws of physics (e.g. General Relativity) we can't afford a leaders projecting their fears that THEY have wasted their lives, credibility and students careers on "Quantum Gravity".
|content=So what went wrong? I will be talking about my understanding of the stagnation this year at a different level. But the single greatest threat to fundamental physics in my estimation is something called "Quantum Gravity" which was really born 70 years ago around 1953.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054184186613760-Fn8jTU3aYAAIeGf.jpg
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054200439537667
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054187512668160
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So by all means, let's celebrate. But it is time to ask new voices for wild, dangerous and irresponsible ideas. Peer review failed. Quantum Gravity Failed. Community norms failed. And soon there will be NO ONE LEFT proven to be able to play this game. So what do we do?
|content=To put it bluntly, it is not just that Quantum Gravity doesn't work. It's that you can't comfortably question Quatnum Gravity because the failed investment is on a scale that I think is difficult for us to contemplate. It includes StringTheory, Loop Quantum Gravity, AdS/CFT etc.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054187512668160-Fn8jeqSaUAAU1O9.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054201957847040
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054190691975168
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We need to spend perhaps 5yrs asking "If the leaders have not succeeded for FIVE DECADES in moving beyond the Standard Model, then why are they leading this field and directing the resources, research, and path forward? What if we listened to those who the leadership push aside?"
|content=Next Year, will be 40 years of failure for modern StringTheory to ship a product. To be clear and STEELMAN the argument for strings, it *is* a remarkable framework. It is REAL math. It teaches us things no other framework has.
 
But, it *destroyed* the culture of honest physics.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054190691975168-Fn8j43gaYAEp0Cd.png
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054203522347008
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054193426661376
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=As someone who has tried to ask this question, I can tell you that mostly the big programs have granted themselves a science equivalent of 'dipolmatic immunity' from the standards they impose on their intellectual competitors.  But from today forward, we must end that game.
|content=We spent almost 80% of this time being told that ST was a 'Piece of 21st Century Physics that fell into the 20th Century.'
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
 
}}
Uh. Bullshit. That is an excuse. It's not clear that it's physics at all.
{{Tweet
 
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
It's a "Failed piece of 20th Century Physics still hanging around in the 21stC".
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054205107802112
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|name=Eric Weinstein
|media1=ERW-X-post-1621054193426661376-Fn8kDPoacAAwub7.png
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
}}
|username=EricRWeinstein
{{Tweet
|content=Let's put resources in new avenues, theories and theorists that have yet to fail. The next time you hear a theorist telling you about quantum gravity, the multiverse or String theory or Loops or Supersymmetry or AdS/CFT, etc. Ask them the following dangerous question:
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054196949651456
}}
|name=Eric Weinstein
{{Tweet
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|username=EricRWeinstein
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054206814871552
|content=It is time to hold conferences dedicated to the issues of groupthink in physics. Why wont our leading voices admit failure? We don't know. Previous generations wanted their students to succeed. But String Theory is dominated by boomers who seem oblivious to danger.
|name=Eric Weinstein
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
}}
|username=EricRWeinstein
{{Tweet
|content="If you haven't succeeded in 50-70 years, what other theories would be viable if we relaxed the standards you have imposed on your competitors given that your theories do not seem to work? What if your Quantum Gravity were subjected to such standards? Would QG be quackery?"🙏
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054198824710144
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If we're going to truly wrestle w/ dark matter, or dark energy, or UAP that supposedly violate our laws of physics (e.g. General Relativity) we can't afford a leaders projecting their fears that THEY have wasted their lives, credibility and students careers on "Quantum Gravity".
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054200439537667
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So by all means, let's celebrate. But it is time to ask new voices for wild, dangerous and irresponsible ideas. Peer review failed. Quantum Gravity Failed. Community norms failed. And soon there will be NO ONE LEFT proven to be able to play this game. So what do we do?
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054201957847040
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We need to spend perhaps 5yrs asking "If the leaders have not succeeded for FIVE DECADES in moving beyond the Standard Model, then why are they leading this field and directing the resources, research, and path forward? What if we listened to those who the leadership push aside?"
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054203522347008
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=As someone who has tried to ask this question, I can tell you that mostly the big programs have granted themselves a science equivalent of 'dipolmatic immunity' from the standards they impose on their intellectual competitors.  But from today forward, we must end that game.
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054205107802112
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Let's put resources in new avenues, theories and theorists that have yet to fail. The next time you hear a theorist telling you about quantum gravity, the multiverse or String theory or Loops or Supersymmetry or AdS/CFT, etc. Ask them the following dangerous question:
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621054206814871552
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content="If you haven't succeeded in 50-70 years, what other theories would be viable if we relaxed the standards you have imposed on your competitors given that your theories do not seem to work? What if your Quantum Gravity were subjected to such standards? Would QG be quackery?"🙏
|timestamp=7:53 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621055968699383808
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Let's honor those who tried before by bringing the same energy they once brought to the attempt to learn our place in the universe. Happy to be corrected. But this is an emergency if we're ever going to go beyond chemical rockets and use physics to take our place among the stars.
|timestamp=8:00 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
|timestamp=8:09 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1632936637125767169
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=For those who still believe in '''peer review''' and scientific consensus, ask yourself why someone like the great particle theorist Steven Weinberg (1933-2021) understood Corona Virus GoF risk enough to issue such a strong statement in support of @EcoHealthNYC:
https://www.coalitionforlifesciences.org/77-nobel-laureates-express-concern-of-nih-grant-cancellation/
|media1=Peter-Daszak.jpg
|timestamp=2:50 AM · Mar 7, 2023
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1634609981596258307
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=This is the age of the Knarc.
 
I want you to remember this when I tell you things supported nowhere by the mainstream: to a Knarc, every dissenter is a crank.
 
Peer review, awards, credentials, etc don’t behave positively during a universal institutional intellectual collapse. 🙏
|timestamp=5:39 PM · Mar 11, 2023
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1682982386936565762
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So you have my list. It is incomplete and idiosyncratic. I’d love to have your corrections and additions.
 
So….Where is yours? Thanks again.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1682977588484947969
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=It is an interesting question as to who inspires us in physics. Here is a list of 20th century giants whose work inspired me that might work as protagonists with interesting stories that deserve to be considered along with the best known Einstein/Hawking/Oppenheimer/Etc.:
 
[[CN Yang]] (with Lee and Simons)</br>
[[Paul Dirac]]</br>
Ernst Stueckelberg</br>
[[Madame Wu]]</br>
David Bohm</br>
Abdus Salam</br>
[[Ken Wilson]]</br>
Emmy Noether</br>
Ettore Majorana</br>
Carlo Rubio</br>
Shin'ichirō Tomonaga</br>
[[Lev Landau]]</br>
Simon Van der Meer</br>
Freeman Dyson</br>
Julian Schwinger</br>
Paul Ehrenfest</br>
John VonNeumann</br>
Feza Gursey</br>
Wolfgang Pauli</br>
Louis and [[Ed Witten|Edward Witten]]</br>
Hans Bethe</br>
George Sudarshan</br>
Vera Rubin</br>
Gerard 't Hooft
 
Not all of those stories are…uh…simple.
 
Would be curious to hear names from others.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=sama-profile-k43GMz63.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/sama/status/1682809958734131200
|name=Sam Altman
|usernameurl=https://x.com/sama
|username=sama
|content=i was hoping that the oppenheimer movie would inspire a generation of kids to be physicists but it really missed the mark on that.
 
let's get that movie made!
 
(i think the social network managed to do this for startup founders.)
|timestamp=5:48 PM · Jul 22, 2023
}}
|timestamp=4:54 AM · Jul 23, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1682977591836196866
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=But let’s face facts: inspiration is not the issue. Fundamental Physics needs to be a good life. What is holding us back is:
 
A) Terrible Pay.
 
B) Worse Odds of Survival
 
C) Decoupling of Success at Physics from Success in Physics
 
D) The Matthew Effect.
 
E) Math and Physics Pricks
 
F) Tyranny of large programs over individuals.
 
G) Multi Decade Stagnation
 
H) Un Scientific And even Anti-scientific behavior.
 
I) The Matilde Effect
 
J) The Sudarshan Effect
 
K) Ethics Collapse
 
L) Needlessly long pedagogical sequence (e.g. intro physics -> Classical Mechanics -> Grad Classical Mechanics -> Symplectic Geometry)  driven by history.
 
M) Socializing physics into a team sport in areas dominated by individuals and iconoclasts.
 
N) Tolerance for Program level failure (e.g. *obsessive* use of toy model physics to evade a reckoning).
 
O) Intolerance for individual error and failure by those in programs.
 
P) Failure to reward early contributions (e.g. *Abelian* Chern Simons QFT).
 
Q) Atrocious MSM journalism distorting the public understanding.
 
R) Relentless discussion of woo physics in public and 3-5 real topics (e.g. somebodies cat).
 
S) Learned Helplessness coming from over-learning Ken Wilson.
 
T) Inability to support motherhood of female physicists.
 
U) Inability to keep physics marriages easily together with jobs.
 
V) DEI loyalty oaths and loss of autonomy.
 
W) Flooding of markets with disposable labor and abuse apprenticeship as labor.
 
X) Kicking up on attribution.
 
Y) Overpaying for cherry topping.
 
Z) Fetishizing the quantum when innovation in classical field theory remains the heart of QFT.
|timestamp=4:55 AM · Jul 23, 2023
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1621055968699383808
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1682977595321720832
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Let's honor those who tried before by bringing the same energy they once brought to the attempt to learn our place in the universe. Happy to be corrected. But this is an emergency if we're ever going to go beyond chemical rockets and use physics to take our place among the stars.
|content=But lastly, if outsiders want to fund and fix movies, you will find that going to the “Leading physicists” won’t work. [[Peer Review|Peer review]] can’t work when the leadership *is* the problem. You get more failure.
|timestamp=8:00 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
|timestamp=8:09 AM · Feb 2, 2023
}}
 


{{Tweet
You need to hold meetings where you get disagreement. So choose the leaders and iconoclasts with great care. Patrick Collison isn’t terrible at this. B+. Best I have ever seen. Start there. Good luck. 🙏
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|timestamp=4:55 AM · Jul 23, 2023
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1632936637125767169
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=For those who still believe in '''peer review''' and scientific consensus, ask yourself why someone like the great particle theorist Steven Weinberg (1933-2021) understood Corona Virus GoF risk enough to issue such a strong statement in support of @EcoHealthNYC:
https://www.coalitionforlifesciences.org/77-nobel-laureates-express-concern-of-nih-grant-cancellation/
|media1=Peter-Daszak.jpg
|timestamp=2:50 AM · Mar 7, 2023
}}
}}
 
|timestamp=5:14 AM · Jul 23, 2023
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1634609981596258307
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=This is the age of the Knarc.
 
I want you to remember this when I tell you things supported nowhere by the mainstream: to a Knarc, every dissenter is a crank.
 
Peer review, awards, credentials, etc don’t behave positively during a universal institutional intellectual collapse. 🙏
|timestamp=5:39 PM · Mar 11, 2023
}}
}}


Line 1,093: Line 1,315:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content='''Medical Peer Review''' starts then because of the passage of the Social Security Amendments of 1965 establishing Medicare. Scientific Peer Review comes out of Robert Maxwell, Pergamon Press and ultimately the Baumann Amendment a decade later responding to “Man, a Course of Study.”
|content='''Medical Peer Review''' starts then because of the passage of the Social Security Amendments of 1965 establishing Medicare. Scientific Peer Review comes out of [[Robert Maxwell]], Pergamon Press and ultimately the Baumann Amendment a decade later responding to “Man, a Course of Study.”
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 1,294: Line 1,516:
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We have a COVID=Wet Market narrative.</br>
|content=We have a COVID=Wet Market narrative.</br>
We have an Inflation and CPI narrative.</br>
We have an Inflation and [[CPI]] narrative.</br>
We have a Quantum Gravity narrative.</br>
We have a [[Quantum Gravity]] narrative.</br>
We have a Vaccine Narrative.</br>
We have a Vaccine Narrative.</br>
We have “Americans suck at STEM”.</br>
We have [[Labor Shortages|“Americans suck at STEM”]].</br>
We have a “Settled Science” narrative.</br>
We have a “Settled Science” narrative.</br>
We have a '''“Peer Review”''' narrative.</br>
We have a [[Peer Review|“Peer Review”]] narrative.</br>
We had a “Great Moderation” narrative.</br>
We had a [[Great Moderation|“Great Moderation]]” narrative.</br>
We have “Independent Journalism”.</br>
We have “Independent Journalism”.</br>
We have a “Disgraced Financier” story.</br>
We have a [[Jeffrey Epstein|“Disgraced Financier”]] story.</br>
We have an “Aerospace and UFO” opera.
We have an [[UAP|“Aerospace and UFO”]] opera.


It’s all one thing that cannot be named:  
It’s all one thing that cannot be named:  


National Interest “Managed Reality.”
National Interest [[Managed Reality TM|“Managed Reality.”]]
|timestamp=3:38 PM · Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=3:38 PM · Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}
Line 1,417: Line 1,639:




==See Also==
== Related Pages ==


* [[Academic Freedom]]
* [[Competition and Careers in Biosciences]]
* [[IMMACT90]]
* [[Knarc]]
* [[Knarc]]
* [[Peer Injunction]]
* [[Peer Injunction]]
* [[Quantum Gravity]]
* [[Quantum Gravity]]
* [[Science Since Babylon]]
* [[Science Since Babylon]]
* [[Science-serfdom]]
* [[The Evolution of U.S. Science and Defense Research Policies]]
* [[The Evolution of U.S. Science and Defense Research Policies]]
* [[Thug-Review]]
* [[Thug-Review]]
* [[Welfare Queens in White Lab Coats]]


[[Category:Concepts]]
[[Category:Concepts]]
Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/22861...24442"