The Portal Wiki

Peer Review: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Peer Review (edit)

Revision as of 06:00, 1 December 2025

5,148 bytes added ,  Monday at 06:00
ā†’ā€Ž2025
Ā 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 612: Line 612:
The *entire* subject is off. '''Peer review''' wonā€™t help. šŸ™
The *entire* subject is off. '''Peer review''' wonā€™t help. šŸ™
|media1=ERW-X-post-1491813693042008067-FLP8pUdUcAEwwlo.jpg
|media1=ERW-X-post-1491813693042008067-FLP8pUdUcAEwwlo.jpg
|timestamp=4:37 PM Ā· Feb 10, 2022
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 655: Line 654:
|timestamp=4:28 PM Ā· Feb 10, 2022
|timestamp=4:28 PM Ā· Feb 10, 2022
}}
}}
|timestamp=4:37 PM Ā· Feb 10, 2022
}}
}}


Line 675: Line 675:
|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 donā€™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=Academics have to be quite sensitive. Even the bold of academe donā€™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.


Crazy talkā€¦ ;-)
Crazy talkā€¦ ;-)
Line 690: Line 690:
|content=Donā€™t take it from me. Look at the history yourself with these search terms:
|content=Donā€™t take it from me. Look at the history yourself with these search terms:


History of Peer Review in Science
[[Peer Review|History of Peer Review in Science]]


Pergamon Press
Pergamon Press


Robert Maxwell
[[Robert Maxwell]]


Number of academic Journals over time
Number of academic Journals over time
Line 774: Line 774:
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1617626351154114560
|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=Here is the simple point:
|content=<nowiki>*</nowiki>bred. šŸ™
Ā 
You can have scientists you trust.
Ā 
You can have scientists you control.
Ā 
And you can pick only one of the above options.
Ā 
Youā€™re getting angry at wolves you bred into obedience to non-scientific masters who have no idea what they are doing. Thatā€™s why.
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 796: Line 788:
|content=Weā€™ve been trying to destroy US scientistsā€™ freedom &amp; their research universities for ~60 years.
|content=Weā€™ve been trying to destroy US scientistsā€™ freedom &amp; their research universities for ~60 years.


Peer Review 1965</br>
[[Peer Review|Peer Review 1965]]</br>
Mansfield Amendment 1969</br>
[[Mansfield Amendment (1969)|Mansfield Amendment 1969]]</br>
Eilberg Amendment 1976</br>
[[Eilberg Amendment (1976)|Eilberg Amendment 1976]]</br>
Bayh-Dole Act 1980</br>
[[Bayh-Dole Act (1980)|Bayh-Dole Act 1980]]</br>
IMMACT90 1990</br>
[[IMMACT90|IMMACT90 1990]]</br>
SSC Cancelation 1993</br>
SSC Cancelation 1993</br>
ADEA Faculty Uncapping 1993</br>
ADEA Faculty Uncapping 1993</br>
Line 819: Line 811:


Why?
Why?
|timestamp=5:53 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
|timestamp=6:53 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
}}
}}
|timestamp=8:41 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
|timestamp=8:41 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
Line 844: Line 836:
Your real scientists want to hunt again. They need to be reintroduced into the wild. Now.
Your real scientists want to hunt again. They need to be reintroduced into the wild. Now.
|timestamp=8:48 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
|timestamp=8:48 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|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.
You can have scientists you control.
And you can pick only one of the above options.
Youā€™re getting angry at wolves you bred into obedience to non-scientific masters who have no idea what they are doing. Thatā€™s why.
|timestamp=8:52 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
}}
}}
|timestamp=8:52 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
|timestamp=8:52 PM Ā· Jan 23, 2023
Line 1,083: Line 1,092:
Peer review, awards, credentials, etc donā€™t behave positively during a universal institutional intellectual collapse. šŸ™
Peer review, awards, credentials, etc donā€™t behave positively during a universal institutional intellectual collapse. šŸ™
|timestamp=5:39 PM Ā· Mar 11, 2023
|timestamp=5:39 PM Ā· 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. Iā€™d love to have your corrections and additions.
Soā€¦.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 areā€¦uhā€¦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 Ā· Jul 22, 2023
}}
|timestamp=4:54 AM Ā· 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 letā€™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)Ā  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 Ā· Jul 23, 2023
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1682977595321720832
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=But lastly, if outsiders want to fund and fix movies, you will find that going to the ā€œLeading physicistsā€ wonā€™t work. [[Peer Review|Peer review]] canā€™t work when the leadership *is* the problem. You get more failure.
You need to hold meetings where you get disagreement. So choose the leaders and iconoclasts with great care. Patrick Collison isnā€™t terrible at this. B+. Best I have ever seen. Start there. Good luck. šŸ™
|timestamp=4:55 AM Ā· Jul 23, 2023
}}
|timestamp=5:14 AM Ā· Jul 23, 2023
}}
}}


Line 1,168: 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 ā€œMan, a Course of Study.ā€
|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 ā€œMan, a Course of Study.ā€
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 1,369: 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 ā€œAmericans suck at STEMā€.</br>
We have [[Labor Shortages|ā€œAmericans suck at STEMā€]].</br>
We have a ā€œSettled Scienceā€ narrative.</br>
We have a ā€œSettled Scienceā€ narrative.</br>
We have a '''ā€œPeer Reviewā€''' narrative.</br>
We have a [[Peer Review|ā€œPeer Reviewā€]] narrative.</br>
We had a ā€œGreat Moderationā€ narrative.</br>
We had a [[Great Moderation|ā€œGreat Moderation]]ā€ narrative.</br>
We have ā€œIndependent Journalismā€.</br>
We have ā€œIndependent Journalismā€.</br>
We have a ā€œDisgraced Financierā€ story.</br>
We have a [[Jeffrey Epstein|ā€œDisgraced Financierā€]] story.</br>
We have an ā€œAerospace and UFOā€ opera.
We have an [[UAP|ā€œAerospace and UFOā€]] opera.


Itā€™s all one thing that cannot be named: Ā 
Itā€™s all one thing that cannot be named: Ā 


National Interest ā€œManaged Reality.ā€
National Interest [[Managed Reality TM|ā€œManaged Reality.ā€]]
|timestamp=3:38 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=3:38 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}
Line 1,495: Line 1,642:


* [[Academic Freedom]]
* [[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/23397...24442"