Thursday morning started in a particularly interesting way. Like a number of other undergrads, I'd decided to attend Session CG: Novel and Diverse Topics in Theoretical Physics. If you follow that link and read the abstracts listed, you'll understand why these sorts of talks draw a lot of attention.
The abstracts are about, as the session title states, very unique approaches to the problems of physics. Often, these sorts of talks attempt to unify the fundamental forces or reinterpret quantum mechanics. While the more prominent researchers at the conference usually have more busy schedules of talks to attend, undergrads often take the time to go hear what these people have to say (though, in a surprising exception to this, I ran into my advisor at this session).
A big problem that I've noticed with these talks over the years has been that they are usually prompted by trying to apply some philosophical mindset to physics. While inspiration can take many forms, it's usually best to start from known physical phenomena and try to work towards solutions to your problem of choice. Introducing a bias on the front end of things is bad science, and that doesn't help anyone.
That being said, it is good that these people are allowed to present (when they show up, that is). If the APS censored out these abstracts, they'd be setting a terrible precedent and be well on the way to becoming the Big Brother of physics. I'm all for being critical of bad scientific procedure, but barring these talks from conferences would stifle creativity and discourage researchers from trying new things.
No comments:
Post a Comment