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.

It is certainly possible for outsiders or amateur physicists to make
notable contributions and to have their work published in reputable
peer-reviewed journals. There are a number of notable cases even from
the past century:
Alfred Loomis - electroencephalography, radar, spectroscopy, LORAN
Gustave Le Bon - light transport
Forrest Mims III - various

But it is plain that these folks did something different than the
cranks that populate this group. Clearly delineating what the
difference is would be instructive to all. Comments?

Nowadays, the forefront of physics is that much
advanced that amateurs cannot contibute due to
lack of equipment. Be that an accelerator, cryo gear,
nano equipment - atomic microscopes, electron,
microscopes and such.

There is a field where the amateurs matter by their
sheer number and that is astronomy. The professionals
use their time and equipment to measure a spectrum
of an invisible whatever, but the amateurs can still
detect new asteroids, comets and such.

Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net
.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast