[extropy-chat] unidirectional thrust

[Dirk Bruere]

Hal Finney wrote:

>A meta point on this thread.  It's interesting to engage in this kind
>of discussion in the context of the results Robin has been writing about
>regarding the nature of disagreement.  I have become self-conscious about
>my reasoning processes.  I am always surprised now when I find myself
>disagreeing with someone.  It rocks me back on my heels, mentally, when
>someone says something I strongly disagree with.  What's going on here?
>How could they believe that, in the face of all the evidence that brought
>me to my contrary belief?  They must have some reason!  Is it possible
>that there's an enormous body of evidence that I am unaware of which
>lends support to their position?  Maybe I'm wrong about my belief!
>
>But then I think, what about all the other people who believe as I do?
>They have good reasons for their beliefs as well.  If I change to this
>new position, I will be contradicting those others.  So it makes sense to
>hold to my current views.  But then it turns again; surely the other guy,
>who is advocating this crazy position, is also aware of the many people
>who share my view.  Their evidence hasn't been enough to persuade him!
>So again, I am back to the possibility that this guy really does know
>something so convincing that it outweighs the enormous mass of expert
>wisdom which informs my view.
>
>So I do have to think seriously about it.  Maybe I'm wrong.  I don't
>just think that lightly, or formally.  I really mean it.  Maybe I really
>am wrong.  Maybe I don't understand electrostatic phenomena as well as I
>think.  Maybe I don't understand the nature of mass and inertia.  Maybe I
>don't understand conservation of energy.  But of course that's not enough.
>I am confident that my positions are consistent with mainstream physics.
>I believe that Mike would agree.  That means I have to consider that the
>conventional understanding of these physical phenomena have major holes
>in them, such that a simple arrangement of aluminum foil and a few tens
>of kilovolts will violate Newton's third law.
>
>In the end, I have to weigh the probabilities.  Which is more likely:
>that conventional science has made such a fundamental error, or that the
>community of "lifter" hobbyists is fooling themselves?  And I have to
>fall back on the position I have advocated before, which is to respect
>the conventional wisdom of science.  Yes, scientists make mistakes.
>But so do non-scientists!  And science has mechanisms for self-correction
>which simply aren't present in the hobbyist and enthusiast community.
>
>What about the disagreement?  I cast my lot with science, but what
>about the fact that Mike continues to advocate unconventional physics?
>I still face the fact that we disagree.  Here is where Robin's results
>have their bite.  If I believed that Mike was rational and honest and
>that he accorded me and other skeptics the same courtesy, I could not
>disagree with him.  But I do disagree.  And so I have to admit that
>I don't believe these traits apply to Mike.  He has a creative and
>energetic mind, but from my perspective, Mike is crazy.  He has all
>these wild beliefs that seem to have little support, and his explanations
>and justifications don't make sense to me.  Now, I don't meant this as
>an insult.  Probably many successful people in science and in the world
>would also be considered crazy in the same sense.  Some people can fight
>the conventional wisdom and win, and the world is better off because of
>those people.  It's good to have some crazy people around.  But in this
>case, it explains why I am able to disagree without contradicting myself.
>
>  
>
My position is somewhat simpler.
I have looked at the implications of such devices as the Woodward drive, 
and even done some expts in that direction.
If an expt is successful then either conservation of energy goes or the 
equivalence of inertial frames.
OTOH my experience over the years with such claims leads me to believe 
that it is extremely unlikely new physics is being uncovered.
Maybe I'm wrong. Time will tell.

-- 
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.3 - Release Date: 15/03/2005