🧵 Fraudulent physicists meet to scheme coverups for their frauds
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 06:40:27 UTC No. 16200385
A wave of retractions is shaking physics
Grappling with problematic papers and poorly documented data, researchers and journal editors gathered in Pittsburgh to hash out the best way forward.
https://www.technologyreview.com/20
Recent highly publicized scandals have gotten the physics community worried about its reputation—and its future. Over the last five years, several claims of major breakthroughs in quantum computing and superconducting research, published in prestigious journals, have disintegrated as other researchers found they could not reproduce the blockbuster results.
Last week, around 50 physicists, scientific journal editors, and emissaries from the National Science Foundation gathered at the University of Pittsburgh to discuss the best way forward.“To be honest, we’ve let it go a little too long,” says physicist Sergey Frolov of the University of Pittsburgh, one of the conference organizers.
The attendees gathered in the wake of retractions from two prominent research teams. One team, led by physicist Ranga Dias of the University of Rochester, claimed that it had invented the world’s first room temperature superconductor in a 2023 paper in Nature. After independent researchers reviewed the work, a subsequent investigation from Dias’s university found that he had fabricated and falsified his data. Nature retracted the paper in November 2023. Last year, Physical Review Letters retracted a 2021 publication on unusual properties in manganese sulfide that Dias co-authored.
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 06:43:32 UTC No. 16200390
The other high-profile research team consisted of researchers affiliated with Microsoft working to build a quantum computer. In 2021, Nature retracted the team’s 2018 paper that claimed the creation of a pattern of electrons known as a Majorana particle, a long-sought breakthrough in quantum computing. Independent investigations of that research found that the researchers had cherry-picked their data, thus invalidating their findings. Another less-publicized research team pursuing Majorana particles fell to a similar fate, with Science retracting a 2017 article claiming indirect evidence of the particles in 2022.
In today’s scientific enterprise, scientists perform research and submit the work to editors. The editors assign anonymous referees to review the work, and if the paper passes review, the work becomes part of the accepted scientific record. When researchers do publish bad results, it’s not clear who should be held accountable—the referees who approved the work for publication, the journal editors who published it, or the researchers themselves. “Right now everyone’s kind of throwing the hot potato around,” says materials scientist Rachel Kurchin of Carnegie Mellon University, who attended the Pittsburgh meeting.
Much of the three-day meeting, named the International Conference on Reproducibility in Condensed Matter Physics (a field that encompasses research into various states of matter and why they exhibit certain properties), focused on the basic scientific principle that an experiment and its analysis must yield the same results when repeated. “If you think of research as a product that is paid for by the taxpayer, then reproducibility is the quality assurance department,” Frolov told MIT Technology Review. Reproducibility offers scientists a check on their work, and without it, researchers might waste time and money on fruitless projects based on unreliable prior results, he says…
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 06:48:44 UTC No. 16200396
>>16200385
>A wave of retractions is shaking physics
Excellent! The scientific method is working, as desired!
Would you have preferred if the fraud had never been detected, nor corrected?
Don't tell me you'd prefer that there never had been any fraud in science in the first place, we all do, but that's naĂŻve: that's like desiring human nature to completely disappear, come the fuck on.
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 07:35:20 UTC No. 16200421
>take public money for fraudulent research
>no criminal charges
LOCK THEM UP
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 21:49:07 UTC No. 16201493
>>16200396
you have no idea what the scientific method is
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 22:40:43 UTC No. 16201576
>>16200396
Nigger faggot. AI is going to doom your whole profession and then we will run a lynch mob on all of you.
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 22:43:56 UTC No. 16201584
>>16200385
this is literally science working as intended. if there's a problem, it's that there are not great incentives to reproduce most results. high profile, sensational results, sure, lots of people try to reproduce them, and if they don't reproduce, papers get retracted. it's not the editor's job, not the reviewers' job, and not even really the authors' job to really put the work to the reproducibility test. publishing is the way an experiment gets communicated so that others can try to reproduce it. unless there's fraud, even failure to reproduce shouldn't be grounds for retraction.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 00:28:31 UTC No. 16201708
Harold Hillman showed a lot of fraud in biology years ago
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 01:37:40 UTC No. 16201812
>>16200396
Only the most obvious fraud is getting caught, which is just the tip of the iceberg
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 06:28:38 UTC No. 16202134
>>16201567
Academia attracts blowhards and liars because academics don't produce anything useful for a living. On the rare occasion someone in academia accidentally finds something useful, they immediately leave academia and go to the private sector to cash in
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 09:57:12 UTC No. 16202255
>>16201812
>Only the most obvious fraud is getting caught
For now, if your statement is even true. Dubious claim, at best.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 19:42:58 UTC No. 16202900
>>16200385
When the frauds outnumber the honest scientists - and they do by a lot - then that means the frauds can control the peer review process and its game over in their favor. The meeting they're holding is just window dressing, they're just pretending to do something about the problem so they can pretend the issue is being addressed while the continue to shill lies and thieve money.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 21:59:53 UTC No. 16203064
>>16200396
>*Still believes Kosher light dualism switch theory over 100 years later.
>>16201812
Colleges make more money than ever. The keep building Tokamaks, colliders, and stupid bottle rockets knowing full well they're never going to work. No one's going anywhere.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 22:16:59 UTC No. 16203085
>>16200385
> around 50 physicists
What is the ethnic breakdown?
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 22:18:05 UTC No. 16203086
>>16203085
>What is the ethnic breakdown?
That's antisemitic.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 22:18:27 UTC No. 16203087
>>16200385
>One team, led by physicist Ranga Dias
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 22:21:13 UTC No. 16203092
>>16203086
He said "ethnic" not "religious".
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:17:58 UTC No. 16203807
>>16203092
fuck off back to /ic/ birkhead
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 22:38:40 UTC No. 16205272
>>16200385
Its weird how they're only concerned about covering up the evidence of fraud instead of being concerned about prevent academic fraud to begin with. Its like they're planning on shilling more lies and want to figure out how to do it without getting caught
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 21:12:45 UTC No. 16206753
>>16205272
academics are all style over substance, thats why they're so useless and unproductive.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 21:14:29 UTC No. 16206758
>>16206753
anyone worth a damn goes to make real money in industry leaving only the increasingly incestuous dross sidling around academia
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 06:55:02 UTC No. 16207379
>>16200390
>researchers affiliated with Microsoft working to build a quantum computer. In 2021, Nature retracted the team’s 2018 paper that claimed the creation of a pattern of electrons known as a Majorana particle, a long-sought breakthrough in quantum computing.
Fraud is the only thing academics know how to produce
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 18:46:24 UTC No. 16208189
>>16207379
lol
its funny because its true
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 02:51:15 UTC No. 16209004
>>16200385
Its retarded that they're willing to put that much effort into covering up fraud just to create nothing worthwhile and get away with it. If they put the same effort into doing real science then they wouldn't have to worry about putting extra effort into covering up their fraud
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:16:41 UTC No. 16210128
>>16209004
Low IQ people come up with worthless results when they do honest science too, such is the nature of the low IQ beast. Thats a big part of what leads them to become frauds to being with, they want to have success in their fields, but they're too dumb to do so on an honest basis, so fraud is their only other option.
Thats one of the less discussed ways of how affirmative action hiring propagates and exacerbates academic fraud. People hired for reasons other than merit can't compete honestly with those who were picked for reasons of merit alone, so cheating or failure becomes the only options available to the female or negro scientist
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:19:29 UTC No. 16210134
>>16200385
this is physicsts, the gold standard of science. imagine the bottom dwelling science fields like sociology, psychology, medicine... etc.
and they're enforcing scientism in this society like it's another christian renaissance.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:27:52 UTC No. 16210157
>>16210134
nah it's worse than that. christianity had that whole truth worship through logos concept, all this crap has is nihlistic atheist hedonism opposed to beauty and the natural order
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:30:50 UTC No. 16210162
>>16210134
>science
>sociology, psychology, medicine
nice b8
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 04:18:39 UTC No. 16211049
>>16210162
The idea of psychology as a science tends to offend people who are mentally ill and are not willing to admit to their condition
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 20:54:00 UTC No. 16212387
>>16210134
>physicsts, the gold standard of science.
maybe its time for you to reconsider your value judgements
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 21:33:45 UTC No. 16212487
>>16200385
>Fraudulent physicists meet to scheme coverups for their frauds
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 08:07:53 UTC No. 16213273
>>16212487
This, those frauds should be defunded, then they wouldn't have the resources needed to concoct their schemes to begin with
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 22:49:11 UTC No. 16218251
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:07:19 UTC No. 16220105
>>16200385
>A wave of retractions is shaking physics
is retraction a particle or a wave?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 04:43:16 UTC No. 16221289
>>16220105
>is retraction a particle or a wave?
probably an anti-graviton
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 20:39:01 UTC No. 16222740
>>16220105
Its a wave, don't listen to >>16221289 he is a total pseud
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 09:23:59 UTC No. 16224082
>>16200390
>In today’s scientific enterprise, scientists perform research and submit the work to editors. The editors assign anonymous referees to review the work, and if the paper passes review, the work becomes part of the accepted scientific record. When researchers do publish bad results, it’s not clear who should be held accountable—the referees who approved the work for publication, the journal editors who published it, or the researchers themselves. “Right now everyone’s kind of throwing the hot potato around,” says materials scientist Rachel Kurchin of Carnegie Mellon University
HAHAHAH we published total frauds again HAHAHAH its nobody's fault. Oooooopss we did it again!!! Better increase our funding so we can shit out even more lies!!!!
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 23:10:34 UTC No. 16225727
>>16218251
accurate characterization, the per scientist welfare gibes several thousand times greater than the per negro cost. scientists are amongst the greediest, most wasteful and least productive people in america
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:16:10 UTC No. 16226659
>>16200396
>as desired!
Not quite: this took way too many years and fradusters got a massive career boost based on fraud, much paid for by the tax payers.
>>16200421
>LOCK THEM UP
Yes.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:29:56 UTC No. 16227829
>>16210128
>People hired for reasons other than merit can't compete honestly with those who were picked for reasons of merit alone, so cheating or failure becomes the only options available to the female or negro scientist
If they were able to compete honestly the DEI and affirmative action never would have been needed to begin with
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:24:09 UTC No. 16229139
>>16227829
This, the fact the those programs exist is proof that women and darkies are not the intellectual equals of white male Christians