Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?

PD wrote:
There's been much flambe flung about having to do with whether
scientists have institutions (like the scientific method) that are
specifically designed to keep outsiders away or to suppress valuable
contributions from amateurs, and on the other hand whether an amateur
has any hope of making a substantial contribution to physics without
formal training in physics at the hands of professional physicists.
<snip>

I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I'm sure when the printing press made books easily available, there was a similar discussion on how increased literacy (or the printing of screeds) was good or bad for knowledge.

In any field- science, art, music, engineering, etc.., some formal training is essential to learn the foundational concepts and how to use them. The difference between productive "amateurs" and the cranks is the willingness to spend time learning instead of spewing.

--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
.

Relevant Pages
Loading