Comment: How would you define "scientific audience"?

(See in situ)

How would you define "scientific audience"?

He is certainly speaking to a large group. He makes it clear in the fourth minute that his presentation is tweaked to hold interest among those who are not advanced to his degree in mathematics.

"much of what he is saying is clearly misinterpretations of the work which is even right in his own slides"

What exactly are you referring to as "right"? As "interpretation" is the relatively least scientific moment of the process we can call "science", Crothers' interpretations will invariably be deemed misinterpretations by others, as he's claiming others' interpretations to be misinterpretations. There ain't no way around that, fer sure!

Two scientists calculate an equation for the acceleration of gravity. One sees it as an aspect of how God pushes objects toward hell. The other sees it as an aspect of how Satan pulls objects toward himself. Another might see the ground [and entire universe sans apple] rising toward an apple.

All theoretical calculation is ultimately extrapolated from observationally derived calculation. Crothers' mastery is in pinpointing divergence of the theoretical, thus the equations he presents are inherently a mix of what are to be deemed "right" and "wrong". That is entirely his endeavor here.


"In developments over the past decade event horizons have been demonstrated to be dynamically fluctuating regions at a scale where quantum mechanical effects occupy a central role." -Haramein

It is sad that theoretical Physicists don't qualify the term "demonstrate" with an adjective like "virtually", or that they don't use an entirely different term altogether [calculate?]. It is certainly possible to mathematically "demonstrate" the universe to rotate about a static earth. Do a word search for "demonstrate" in Haramein's paper. He clearly enjoys adjoining the term "clearly" to "demonstrate". This, however subtle, ultimately has the opposite effect from my hypothetical of his using "virtually". It makes me question just how deeply he believes in the reality of his theoretical paradigm.


a personal side note...
I have upvoted two of your comments on this page thus far and have issued no downvotes. When it's all said and done, I'm actually likely to have upvoted all your comments as I find all of them to have played a role in clearly demonstrating to me that which some may refer to as transference of quantum spark from you to me [that is, if it may be appropriate to use the prepositions "from" and "to" in a case which might be more conventionally deemed as simultaneous]. :D