A Twi**er exchange about woo

September 1, 2015 • 8:41 am

Grania sent me this Tw**er exchange with Jim Al-Khalili, a physicist and popular science writer/broadcaster in the UK, and one other person. Al-Khalili recounts a phenomenon that I’m well familiar with: kooks sending us crazy papers and asking for our opinion. I get several of these a month, all in manila envelopes with scrawled handwriting. I can tell from the envelope alone that it contains some wacky theory.

The tw**ts (read from the bottom up):

toe

That paper’s title is not too far from the kind of thing that Deepak Chopra writes.

46 thoughts on “A Twi**er exchange about woo”

  1. Do English speakers need to google some of those words too? I often find myself with woo on one page and google translate on the other.

    1. Being a native speaker doesnt really help with the woo crowd since they generally take a relaxed approach to the correct meaning. Most of the time it looks like they just did an obscure word search and chose whichever ones look pretty.

    2. As a native english speaker I understand each individual word, but put together in one sentence it might aswell be in mandarin.

  2. This guy, Chris Langan, claims to be the smartest man in the world, with an IQ over 200:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Langan

    Apparently Mr. Langan does not quite consider Einstein to be his equal, as Mr. Langan has gone further than Einstein, with his brilliant Theory of Everything!

    The CTMU has gained both praise, and controversy in the scientific community. Robert Seitz, a former NASA Executive and Mega Foundation director stated “every physicist is inundated with amateurs’ ‘Theories of Everything,’ but Chris’ CTMU is very, very different”.[17] On the flip side, the CTMU theory has been criticized for its use of convoluted language. Langan’s use of terms he has invented (or redefined) has made his exposition obscure, leading some to question his honest intention to make himself clear

    Of course, no one really understands this ‘theory’ which is just proof of Mr. Langan’s superior intelligence, no?

    1. There is smarts and there is smarts. I am sure Langan would have butt smarts if one points out that his claim of “you cannot describe the universe completely with any accuracy unless you’re willing to admit that it’s both physical and mental in nature” is rejected by cosmology, or that his creationism is dumb.

      [Notably his IQ claim doesn’t seem to be supported by a reference to a test. At least the first reference is just going along with Langan’s story, no hard questions asked.]

      1. He was a guest on a BBC show about the human mind.

        He even has a special group that meets up once a week for something, only folks with an IQ over 160, or is it 180, need apply:P

        1. Sounds like Mensa. My SAT scores in high school would qualify me for membership, but I never did see the point. But the people I know who’re members get something from the social functions, so all the more power to ’em…especially considering some of them have problems socializing….

          b&

          1. Yep… pretty much nails it. I joined many years ago, with a plan to avail myself of the various groups, esp. one that could secure deals on group dive trips. Didn’t work out so well, as coordinating with the personality types that ended up in these groups was like herding cats. I had never met such a large number of low-EQ people in my life, and gave it up after a few short years. There indeed seemed to be no point in it besides providing a means for stroking one’s puzzle-solving ego among other similarly-motivated people. It was a very odd experience, to put it mildly.

      2. According to the wiki article:

        Langan didn’t grow up with his biological father as he died or disappeared before he was born.

        It’s really the biological father who is the truly impressive intellect. Dying and/or disappearing before one is born is very impressive indeed.

    2. “On the flip side, the CTMU theory has been criticized for its use of convoluted language. Langan’s use of terms he has invented (or redefined) has made his exposition obscure, leading some to question his honest intention to make himself clear”

      Sounds suspiciously reminiscent of po-mo philosophy, to me. (See e.g. Postmodernism Disrobed
      http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/dawkins.html )

      cr

  7. Some famous scientist (I forget who) had a system for dealing with the massive amounts of crank theories he received on a regular basis. He would send out a brief note to the most recent correspondent saying something like “I don’t have the time to deal with your paper but I thought you’d be very interested in this one. You seem to be capable of pointing out some of the major flaws to the writer.”

    And then he would forward on the last crank theory, with name and address. The most recent paper was then kept on hand to be used for the next brilliant budding scientist.

    The expectation — fulfilled, I assume — was that the cranks would be so busy arguing with each other that they’d be distracted from pursuing a long and fruitless correspondence with said famous scientist and/or colleagues. I do not know if this story is true, but I enjoy imagining that it is.

    2. Fantastic image in my brain, like a small set of Spanish eight year olds completing Russian crossword puzzles in Hawaiian.

  8. Our professor in graduate school got tons. Quantum chaos, stochastic phenomena, transition from classical to quantum through decoherence….oh yeah, you can bet that draws out the wackos.

    Most of the people are from India…think chaos and quantum are the yin yang of wooness. Likewise, dot matrix printers, if not hand written, were the method of choice promoting the craziness…with CYG colors all over the place.

    And yes: envelops tell the story completely. Look at the envelope and there it is in full wackadoo quantum foaminess.

  9. I am a great fan of our Jim. To see him ‘do physics’ on TV is a pleasure. He is an atheist and former president of the British Humanist Association

    1. I saw him on TV on some special on British scientists, I believe, and I agree he’s really good!

  10. My grand theory is that stupidity and intelligence are not on opposite ends of the same continuum; rather that stupid is quite independent if intelligence. They could be plotted with IQ, say, on a horizontal axis and SQ on a vertical.

  12. Is it always physics? Seems to be. I’m a biology professor. A couple years ago I got this out of the blue via email from a physics graduate student working in the building next door. It is sort of the opposite of a theory-of-everything, instead it is a sort of theory-of-one-very-particular-series-of-unrelated-things. Trigger warning: random craziness, plus a gratuitous slur against the developmentally disabled.

    Assume maximum work load on the mitochondria during teething; that the inflow and outflow of nutrients are at a maximum. A net electrical charge must exist within the formation of each tooth. The electric forces must exert forces on neighboring tooth and the embryonic cells as well. The specific electrical charges created by the maximum flow of ions give the tooth its distinct shape. Thus, we conclude that the teeth shape is inherited maternally, assuming mDNA mutation does not occur. Ideally the sum of electrical forces on each tooth should be zero that no tooth will need to shift to alleviate any excess forces. The entire process must be optimized to ensure excess forces will not develop. An analogy would be placing magnets with the same poles facing each other on a finite space. If the magnets produce too much force they will naturally shift to alleviate excess forces. I have tested this hypothesis for approximately eleven specific cases, all were true: ten had teeth shape inherited maternally while the other had mDNA mutation.
    An even more surprising discovery was that when a female was too much for a male to handle the resulting offspring will have malocclusion, while spaces in between for the vice versa scenario. If a female’s intention was much more obvious than the males than the offspring will have receding gum line, vice versa for the alternate scenario. If we assume that voice energy signal is distinct to each specific mDNA and assume that voice signal energy is distinct to each specific y-chromosome. Assume that voice signal energy of female represents mDNA output rates and assume that voice signal for the male represents the demand for energy. If female signal is greater than male signal, energy produced will be greater than energy demand; sum of electrical forces will cause teeth to shift during the maximum workload phase, causing malocclusion. Let a human’s intentions be directly proportional to the voice signal amplitude. If a female’s intention is greater than the male, offspring will have long teeth and vice versa for the other scenario. The ideal combination is no difference between amplitude and voice signal energy.
    We assume this principle holds true for mammals; that the appropriate mDNA and y-chromosomes must exist to form optimized combinations. We can make the following hypothesis. For a population with a low mDNA and low y-chromosome diversity, the most effective reproductive method would be polygyandry. Chimps for example, all shout at the same level. A population with high y-chromosome and low mDNA diversity, would be polygyny. If we assume that the same teething process is true for lions. Then lions for example, must have low mDNa diversity, since all lions posse very similar fangs.
    A unverified hypothesis is that if the voice signals are out of phase, the resulting offspring will be retarded.

  13. I used to be the webmaster at the aerospace R&D company I work for and so had to handle all the unsolicited e-mail we received (thankfully others have mostly taken over those jobs so I can focus more on engineering). Man, did we get some doozies, including a few perpetual motion machines. It wasn’t an overwhelming amount, so I usually tried to be helpful and point out when someone had an idea doomed to failure. Occasionally, the person would thank me for correcting their ignorance. More often, they’d ignore me or respond back as to why their idea really would work, at which point I’d politely tell them that we didn’t have the resources to investigate their concept.

    Here’s an excerpt from an actual response I received from one of these people. It’s odd how often these crank ideas go hand in hand with poor grammar and punctuation.

    sorry but the laws of thermal dynamics does not always aply to everything even tho we are raised to beleive it does . its hard to think out side the box and most of the time the law of thermal dynamice is right

    Another idea struck close to home because it was an idea I’d had myself when I was a kid, and had dreams of revolutionizing the aerospace industry with my new flying machine (Interesting Hovercraft Concept That Won’t Work). Unfortunately, that was another guy who wouldn’t take no for an answer. I do wonder how much time he wasted on the project. I hope it wasn’t too much.

  14. I was never important enough to get anything like these, but one of the bacteriophage gurus down the hall once got a manuscript from China detailing how to self-examine your prostate.

  15. I just noticed on Dawkins’ Facebook feed that he reposted Jerry’s Conspira-Sea cruise post, and a self-appointed genius popped up there to try to skool Richard with his intellectual prowess in all things woo. I include his post (and my response) as an example of a certain flavor of Dunning-Kruger behavior that keeps the manila envelope business thriving. This one would also be a good one for one of his lovely, intimate, fireside readings on a chilly winter’s night. I apologize for its length…

    Richard Sexton (“studied biology and math at University of Waterloo”) When GMO’s cross the placental barrier in clinical tests when they said they would resulting insecticide in the brains of unborn children it’s a cause for some concern. You haven’t read that paper, I get it.

    You also haven’t read the ones that show deleterious effects on other essential chemicals in the body and how it makes them no longer bioavailable (pollution does the same thing)

    I’ve posted the citations a dozen times. I get it that Monsanto is paying you to be scientific as they did with “science girl” (check it\) but this does not change the facts.

    We get that the Dawkins column on FB is commercial PR and nothing to do with either science or dawkins.

    As for holistic medicine, that’s what cured Ebola which saved Africa and the world. If you’d like to debate this live on pay per view, I’m game. Better, in person. Have your poeple talk to my poeple and we’ll set this up and clear the air once and for all. Bring all your experts and references and I’ll be blindfolded. You can use the net if you want I won’t need to. There is not now nor will there ever be an Ebola (or HIV) vaccine. If you don’t understand why you need to learn a little about viruses.

    So, we on?

    Or do you know you know nothing and would only look a fool in trying?

    But please, impress me with your scientific prowess or anything skill other than writing PR releases masquerading as fact.

    I responded: “BINGO! Not that your comment has any veracity whatsoever, Richard Sexton; I was just playing ‘psychotic conspiracy theorist bingo’ and got five in a row.”

  17. Cranks area peculiar phenomenon – people smart enough to know better deluded into thinking they’re unrecognised geniuses. This is what happens when the craft element of science as a discipline is undervalued – people get it into their heads that they alone can do science better than the scientists without being scientists themselves. Creationists at least have the sense not to think they’re able to disprove evolution on scientific terms.

  18. Speaking of Jim Al-Khalili, he is part of the Holy Trinity of british physicists/mathmaticians who do bbc documentories, the other two being Marcus du Sautoy and of course Brian Cox.

    The BBC has recently re-aired Jim Al-Khalili’s programmes on quantum physics, this episode talks about the (possible, maybe) intersection of qunatum physics and biology:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04v85cj/the-secrets-of-quantum-physics-2-let-there-be-life

    I have no idea if he is reaching a bit there, but it might be of interest.

Comments are closed.