Posts by Martin

Yes, I have the icons/avatars on my screen instead.

It shows the avatars on my PC screen as usual.

The meme seems to be at least 7 years old. I found no definite source.

Welcome Chump!

Le Sage's theory of gravitation is a nice example of a theory which can model some aspects but is refuted by experimental results.
By using simple senior high school physics, I found that the model can produce the observed 1/(distance * distance) dependence in gravity but results in a dependence on mass with with an exponent of 2/3 instead of 1. Attempts to fix this lead to a strong anisotropy, which contradicts observations. My own take fits statements by Paul du Bois-Reymond, Richard Feynman and others.
The history of the reception of the model shows that many physicists gave it friendly consideration but found it to be refuted by observations.
The claim that Le Sage's theory of gravitation explains what we observe is false. The strong analogy between Epicurus' and that theory is an example of where Epicurus' physics is false or obsolete.
The claim that Le Sage's model can explain magnetism or observed relativistic effects has no base and appears to be rather cultish/esoteric.

Welcome Natalia!

There is not necessarily great pleasure over time for a scientist. Paul Ehrenfest contributed to quantum theory but felt that peers made greater discoveries around the same time and commited suicide.
In other cases, peers have dismissed a revolutionary new theory, even with ad-hominem. Accolades which come in only posthumously are too late. Examples of this are Ludwig Boltzmann and Alfred Wegener (geologist, but close enough). In Boltzmann's case, the hostility by peers probably contributed to his suicide. Dan Shechtman's discovery of quasicrystals was initially rejected, even by his boss, such that Dan Shechtman had to leave his research group and was the target of ridicule, e.g. Linus Pauling's infamous ad-hominem "There are no quasicrystals, only quasi-scientists". Luckily, Dan Shechtman is not a "snowflake" like Boltzmann and Ehrenfest may appear to have been and got eventually the accolades, including the 2011 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

Welcome Ontologix!

"Engaging In Discovery" should be changed to "Making a Discovery" or similar because the path to a discovery is more or less painful, as expressed in quotes attributed to Thomas Edison and Albert Einstein on the ratio of inspiration to perspiration. We can skip the "Great" because the pleasure I had with my small discoveries was certainly not less than the great physicists had with their great ones, in analogy to the "Great Physicist" and the lion.

Welcome back JMGuimas!

Welcome O2x Ohio!

Sorry! I took a nap and overslept, then somehow could not find the Zoom link on the smart phone.

In most cases, the term to be used instead of "dimension" during today's discussion was "scale", i.e. instead of "in another dimension": "on another scale".

Welcome Ernesto.Sun!

Welcome Hubblefanboy!

Welcome ZarathustrasGarden!

Welcome Sam_Qwerty!

Welcome Simteau!

The worst part of that AI overview is that the AI misrepresents our position in a way that it appears to contradict Epicurus' philosophy. A reader with some familiarity with Epicurus but not us is likely to dismiss epicureanfriends.com.
This shows that attempts to countercheck AI by letting it contrast different positions may still lead to misleading nonsense. You already need to be an expert to make good use of AI.