"Einstein's relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king.. its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists." - Nikola Tesla
What did he mean?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
theguardian.com
khanacademy.org
bbvaopenmind.com
astronomyclub.xyz
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Theoretical physics != science
He meant that he was wrong and didn't know what he was talking about at all. That's not really his fault, but he was still wrong.
You know how even though autistic people would seem like they'd get along but when they see each other they hate each other for some reason? That's what's happening here.
He meant to say
> i cant understand it so its wrong
Dont worship a pigeons husband
>What did he mean?
He meant he did not understand Einstein's work.
“I have worked out a dynamic theory of gravity in all details and hope to give this to the world very soon. It explains the causes of this force and the motions of heavenly bodies under its influence so satisfactorily that it will put an end to idle speculations and false conceptions, as that of curved space. According to the relativists, space has a tendency to curvature owing to an inherent property or presence of celestial bodies.
“Granting a semblance of reality to this fantastic idea, it is still very self-contradictory. Every action is accompanied by an equivalent reaction and the effects of the latter are directly opposite to those of the former. Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curvature of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies and, producing the opposite effects, straighten out the curves.
“Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible -However, even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for them and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion.” ~ Nikola Tesla
>What did he mean?
Tesla was butthurt over the Aether being disproven.
>What did he mean?
He meant:
>"I'm a massive brainlet"
>t. Genius
There is a lot of SR that hasn't been empirically verified. Whenever you hear about SR being verified it is almost always the Lorenz-Lorentz Transformation which Einstein had nothing to do with. I think it is still an open question if Einstein's intuitions about how it all fit together are correct. Einstein certainly gets credit for convincing the Scientific community to take these results seriously, but, again, the Lorenz-Lorentz Transformation is what has been empirically observed.
I'm not claiming to be a genius, just not a brainlet.
Some one post the image, you know which one I'm talking about.
So it technically wasn't. Einstein convincingly argued it wasn't needed. He convinced the scientific community to abandon it. The Lorenz-Lorentz Transformation was not seen as directly contradicting Aether theory. Not only Lorenz and Lorentz weren't convinced to abandon Aether, but also Poincare who was actually the smartest guy alive at the time.
brainlet
mega brainlet
Silly me for placing empirical verification above Hollywood Tropes. Do you even understand SR math? It is like High School level math. Nearly every example of "Special Relativity" being empirically proven is a confirmation of the Lorenz-Lorentz Transformation. That is just factual.
So what are you saying? Einstein, Lorenz and Lorentz conspired to kill the Aether by making up General and Special Relativity?
*Cough* Flat Earth *Cough* Electric Universe *Cough*
Tesla was one of the smartest guys alive at the time, but Edison was right. And Edison was plenty smart himself, despite what you hear.
The fuck did you just say?
>my simple mind
No, you can't read. I will state this one more time. The Lorenz-Lorentz Transformation seems to be empirically correct and has been verified many different ways. Not everyone thought that the Lorenz-Lorentz Transformation contradicted Aether theory, they simply did not know how it could be put together. These people include Lorenz and Lorentz and dozens of others.
Einstein convincingly argued that Aether wasn't needed and did away with it. This claim has not been empirically verified. It was simply very convincing.
When people say that SR is one of the most verified theories out there they are just saying that the Lorenz-Lorentz Transformation holds, which says nothing about all the other issues in SR.
>Thinks "science" has to be complicated to be true
Name me one claim made by SR that hasn't been proven.
>That is just factual.
No one is denying that retard, the point is Lorentz never applied any of his ideas to kinematics. Moreover Einstien was able to derive the Lorentz transformation using only the principle of relativity and the invariance of the speed of light.
Not at all. But this honestly doesn't make any sense:
>Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible
>It's another Electric Universe thread
>Dont worship a pigeons husband
What does this mean?
>What does this mean?
Tesla wanted to fuck Pigeons. He was crazy.
Nikola Tesla fell in love with a pigeon
Celestial bodies act upon space to create curvature, but if all actions have an equal and opposite reaction then curvature isn't possible. What's so hard to get about that?
>This claim has not been empirically verified.
Other than the complete lack of evidence for an Aether. There's about a century of work there user, that more or less culminates with Michaelson-Morley, and (to a lesser historical degree) through observation of the Sagnac effect.
aether = spacetime
Tesla cared for pigeons in his later life, he was a very empathetic person, he wanted his discoveries to benefit humanity, not profit from them like that cunt Edison.
He was too humble for his own good though, he didn't believe he was good enough for women so never married when he could have fucked as many women as he wanted.
Those experiments don't disprove that the aether exists. Either it doesn't exist, or it does exist but the earth isn't moving.
ok I see...but space doesn't have a reaction force like matter with matter.
>space doesn't have a reaction force
Correct, therefore it cannot be acted upon in the first place.
"I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view."
So the Catholic church was right! Earth is the center of the universe!
Lorentz & Fitzgerald were trying to salvage the aether by postulating it resisted moving bodies and 'mechanically' squeezed them along their direction of motion. Their transformation is correct in that it explained why Michelson-Morley gave negative results. But Lorentz thought it was only a first-order approximation, which would break down when better data was available. He accepted Einstein was right and there is no aether. (Curiously, Michelson never believed in Relativity and spent the rest of his life trying to measure the aether wind.
Other experiments, such as Kennedy-Thorndike, Ives-Stillwell, and the Sagnac effect put the final nails in the coffin. The Lorentz length-contraction alone doesn't explain their outcome. Time dilation is also needed.
Relativity has also been borne out by gravitational radiation, frame dragging around a rotating mass, and time dilation due to relative velocity and/or gravitational fields.
Tesla was a sharp inventor. He invented the AC induction motor and was right about the superiority of AC in a commercial power system. He was no great shakes as a mathematician thiough. He said he could 'visualize' the fields. Like Faraday, he relied upon mental models. Which only work up to a point, and then you flounder.
Like a lot of people on Veeky Forums "I don't understand" equals "It can't be right."
Modern electrical engineering is based on Seinmetz's introduction of imaginary numbers into the calculations.
The Catholic church were the ones who spread the helio-centric model as well as the big bang.
>The Catholic church were the ones who spread the helio-centric model as well as the big bang.
>>>youtube.com
Idiots like him probably don't even know that Lemaitre was a Catholic Priest, they just mindless spout their anti-clerical garbage. Another reason to believe this board is mostly populated by thirteen year old kids.
There's a reason they don't teach that in school.
Tesla's models could be proven with actual practical experiments, mathematics cannot be a substitute for that.
Ether theory is real and we've all been tricked by ((them))
So you literally do not contradict a single word I said and are now posturing like you did? Einstein's work was philosophical. We accept his explanation because it makes sense. However, Einstein's contributions to SR have never been empirically tested because their empirical predictions are identical to any other system that is "Lorentz Invariant".
>stormfags are gonna start attacking einstein because they can't cope with the fact that one of the most intelligent men who ever lived was jewish
Worst timeline.
>if you criticize Einstein then you're a racist
Worst timeline.
>liberals lie about Einstein's accomplishments because they say it is moral to do so
Time dialation and length contraction are literally the same fucking thing in Einstein's version of relativity. Maybe you should check out the math. Or go through Einstein's brilliant explaination of clocks (light bouncing back and forth between to mirror). JESUS FUCKING CHRIST GET OFF SCI AND LEARN FUCKING ALGEBRA
Time as a dimension did not come about until Minkowski reformulated Special Relativity in Space-Time. Time slows down because of length contraction.
Relativity is stupid. How can anyone think time is a physical dimension or that space can bend?
>light bouncing back and forth between to mirror)
Do you mean "two mirrors" you fucking idiot?
I know that. Probably better than you do.
But you don't get the right answers if you assume that ONLY lengths change. It's good enough for Michelson-Morley, but contraction alone fails the other tests.
>en.wikipedia.org
While the Michelson–Morley experiment showed that the speed of light is independent of the orientation of the apparatus, the Kennedy–Thorndike experiment showed that it is also independent of the velocity of the apparatus in different inertial frames. It also served as a test to indirectly verify time dilation – while the negative result of the Michelson–Morley experiment can be explained by length contraction alone, the negative result of the Kennedy–Thorndike experiment requires time dilation in addition to length contraction to explain why no phase shifts will be detected while the Earth moves around the Sun.
Only one "a" in "dilation, incidentally.
You are right. Einstein did not initially appreciate the significance of Minkowski's geometrical approach and dismissed it as a needless complication. Later, he changed his mind. I doubt he could have come up with General Relativity without Minkowski's insight.
>I know that. Probably better than you do.
I'm confident in my SR knowledge. I am not sure where we disagree now.
>I doubt he could have come up with General Relativity without Minkowski's insight.
It wouldn't have been relativistic. Riemann, Einstein, Minkowski, and Hilbert all deserve credit, maybe even equal credit for GR.
it's imaginary shit
I give Riemann the most credit, though this is debatable. He came up with the idea that gravity is resulted of warped space (which is almost always wrongly attributed to Einstein) and came up with the foundational math. In my opinion he deserves top billing.
Never Forget
>Warped space
>Gravity is just clearly just field fuckery
I think most people assume that is the case and GR will be replaced eventually. I don't know.
>warped space
>space is basically like water
Huh. I hadn't heard of him. I knew that other scientists had very similar equations to E=MC^2 and mass-energy equivalence was not a rare thought (despite what 99% of your teachers will tell you).
LOL
look at this shit
khanacademy.org
It's all one big fucking guess, there is no proof of anything here
>there is no Aether but space acts exactly like it
If gravity was just spherical or flat, I could understand it.
But the planets spinning, their orbits, the galaxy formations, stars, hollow bodies, draining water, poles of the planets, orbits being along your golden ratio, gravitational anomalies on the planet.
It's too much. It's done.
My point was that Einstein did not experimentally disprove Aether, he just abandoned it and convinced others to do the same. I don't see why some knowledgable and semi-knowledgable people took such offense.
The one thing in Relativity we are pretty damn sure of is that the Lorentz transformation holds, but that doesn't mean the rest has to be right.
It's fucked watching people trying to describe what exactly and electron is these days, or any particle really.
>It's a point in a cloud
>It's a literal ball
>It's a wave vibration in an electromagnetic background
>It's a wave in a self propagated wave
It's nonsense now.
Nooooo user, all motion is on the same reference. All of it.
" I, I , Really want you to APPRECIATE this, it, it really shows that space and time are really, just really different directions in spacetime, and there's a nice symmetry to them right over here, notice ... "
This is why we have thousands of lies in science shit nowadays - and a totally corrupt press spewing it
The aether has physical properties, unlike space.
very telling the sort of world we live in when the ashkenazi responsible for the nuclear bomb is lauded as the smartest person ever
translation: " please accept this gibberish fantasy on the board as proof of our glorified einsteinium theory !!!! "
"We've PROVEN the thesis and hypotheos many many times using this method ! my asshole can wrap around to my face as my cock penetrates my sphincter - it all works !
>((them))
This is your physics on /pol/
>There's no way science could be hijacked
science could be hijacked to actually do something for once, instead of being hijacked to literally no other end beyond keeping paranoid retard awake at night, like with this shit and others like flat earth or 20 and back armada
Certainly Riemann deserves a great deal of credit. Einstein had great physical insight, but he was only a mediocre mathematician as physicists go. He'd have floundered indefinitely without Grossmann telling him where to look. And Einstein knew his math wasn't the greatest. He worked frantically on General Relativity, fearful that Hilbert would arrive at the correct equation (and get the credit) based on Einstein's preliminary (incorrect) results.
In fact, no one today uses Einstein's derivation except as a historical exercise. Hilbert was a few days late, but his methods are far superior. (And Hilbert wouldn't have "stolen" the credit. He acknowledged the physical insight was all Einstein's.)
Riemann invented Reimannian Geometry, of course, but I never heard he suggested it had any connection to gravity. Citation, please.
>bbvaopenmind.com
Einstein knew his shortcomings. When he got the offer from the Institute of Advanced Study, he insisted they hire his "personal" mathematician as well. They said there was no money in the budget. "Fine," Einstein said. "Take it out of my salary!".
He didn't need all the money, but he knew he needed mathematical help. (It's also rumored Einstein's first wife helped him with the math. I don't know if that's so.)
I think our difference is that Lorentz thought the contraction was a physical effect, a compression of atoms by the aether. That's sufficient to "explain" M-M's null result. Time dilation is un-needed and Lorentz & Fitzgerald never advanced the notion. It IS needed in other experiments. Contraction is only half the answer, though the derivations are, of course, very similar and come out "naturally" in Minkowski space. As I wrote, Fitzgerald accepted SR quickly even though those other experiments were still in the future. He recognized a good idea when he saw it.
>Other experiments, such as Kennedy-Thorndike, Ives-Stillwell, and the Sagnac effect put the final nails in the coffin.
When you need 5 or 6 experiments to try to prove your unprovable theory and have to cite them all, each as nails in a coffin...
then get to "borne out" and it's all bullshit too...
Did you know the GPS systems have another explanation... you knew that, right ? I mean you checked if your shit had any other explanations, or did you just sucka cock ?
Look it up.
>While the Michelson–Morley experiment showed that the speed of light is independent of the orientation of the apparatus
LMAO - YOU PEOPLE ARE TRULY THICK AS A BLOCK OF LEAD
in 1887 you believe a 10 foot wooden table measured the fluctuation mind you, in the perturbation of the speed of light....LOL
you also believe in LIGO don't you ? YEARS to "set up the fine tuning on the equipment"... literally YEARS and it's ridden with noise and data errors that must be discarded...
YOU MORONS TRULY ARE INSANE
MICHAELSON MORLEY NEVER PROVED A GOD DAMNED THING OTHER THAN STUPID PLEBES WILL BUY ANYTHING, A FOOL AND HIS MIND ARE EASILY SEPARATED
astronomyclub.xyz
I am bad with search engines. Riemann's work is well known. Hilbert knew of it. Einstein learned of it. Multiple thinkers thought it could explain gravity. Einstein's great contribution was he figured out how to find the actual tensors that could explain gravity. Everyone else could not figure out how to get the math to work. Einstein took over Riemann's program.
As far as Hilbert goes, Hilbert knew of Riemann's program and may have told Einstien about it. What happened was that Einstein figured out how to do it and gave a lecture in 1914 but his math was flawed and messy. Hilbert and Einstein corresponded about how to fix the problem. We do use Hilbert's math today, but he deserves even more credit than that.
>>frame dragging
>en.wikipedia.org
LOLOLOLOL
" A review by a panel of 15 experts commissioned by NASA recommended against extending the data analysis phase beyond 2008. They warned that the required reduction in noise level (due to classical torques and breaks in data collection due to solar flares) "is so large that any effect ultimately detected by this experiment will have to overcome considerable (and in our opinion, well justified) skepticism in the scientific community".[32] "
NOW COMES THE DATA MASSAGING AND IGNORING THE GYROSCOPIC ERROR FAR THAT EXCEEDS DETECTION LEVELS, A NEAR UNIVERSAL OCCURRENCE IN MODERN SCIENCE
" NASA funding and sponsorship of the program ended on 30 September 2008, but GP-B secured alternative funding from King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia[6] that enabled the science team to continue working at least through December 2009. On 29 August 2008, the 18th meeting of the external GP-B Science Advisory Committee was held at Stanford to report progress. The ensuing SAC report to NASA states:
The progress reported at SAC-18 was truly extraordinary and we commend the GPB team for this achievement. This has been a heroic effort, and has brought the experiment from what seemed like a state of potential failure, to a position where the SAC now believes that they will obtain a credible test of relativity, even if the accuracy does not meet the original goal. "
OH LOOK AT THAT ! MANY MAN YEARS OF HEROIC EFFORT ! AKA DISCARD AND MASSAGE AND MAKE UP SOME LIES ! YOU WOULDN'T CRITICIZE YEARS OF HARD WORK WOULD YOU?
WELL.... ?
HOW ABOUT A COUPLE MORE YEARS...?
" The Stanford-based analysis group and NASA announced on 4 May 2011 that the data from GP-B indeed confirms the two predictions of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity.[33] "
LMAO AND YEARS LATER AGAIN IT'S ALL TRUE AND GOOD ! AMAZING ! SCIENCE !
>IT'S TOTAL BULLSHIT BUT A THOUSAND TARDS WILL CITE IT
they won't even read the wiki article, they won't go directly to sac-18 or nasa and read their own words on the matter
They do this: > buuu uull shheeeitttttttttttttttt
>grvity probe B beeeeiitchgh !
fuck it - why check anything when yer a fucking tard who believes light travel was checked on a 10 foot wooden table in 1887 ! LOL
186,000 MILES a second divided by 10 feet
a fuckin mosquito on the wall disrupts that experiment
People love to cite math and their giant brains but they don't use them - the errors in the MM experiment WERE GIGANTIC
EVEN TODAY THEY CANNOT BE OVERCOME
This is where I stand I still think that is correct.
Dumb engineer.
>hijacked
What does that even mean in this context?
Anyone can publish something. That doesn't mean if you publish garbage it'll become mainstream science, but you at least have the opportunity to try publishing something, and if the something you publish isn't garbage and isn't trivial then there's a good chance others will engage it and try to test it themselves.
The problem with this Electric Universe / SAFFIRE crap is you're not even trying to participate in this peer review process. It's a very insular cult where any "evidence" is produced and assessed only by members of said cult and if any anons here try to ask where the evidence is what they get is a two hour youtube link to an Electric Universe convention about an experiment with zero academic papers published.
No one's talking about Electric Universe stuff, but even they have some points.
The Electric Universe idea on redshift for example, isn't some out of the blue conclusion. It was taken from an article in the 70's about the formation of a tail end from a lager galaxy where the shifts were different.
So how does anyone go against that sort of evidence? Well you just don't even look at it for a start, because it already invalidates the main model so why bother?
Is the majority of peer reviewing done in the scientific communities actually reviewing the work or is it there to act as a gate?
It should be fine to question anything, yet you get called out on it straight away.
what are you?
>but he was only a mediocre mathematician as physicists go
Einstein had great physical insight....
>this one can BS and make it up
>this one is a FIZZ ASS CIST
>cause he can make up mathies
Guess what people... it's all TARDED
Look at all these preconceived notions, so scientific.
>It should be fine to question anything, yet you get called out on it straight away.
This thread shows that you can point out flat truths and still get attacked. Contradict the liberal Hollywood/newspaper narrative about Einstein and suddenly you must be an antisemite and a quack.
that's "bad data" that's "an anomoly", that's "someone messing with us, we checked yeah it looks the same, heck it's our data bank but..."
>discarded for reasons
Also, if you don't shut the fuck up and say YES MASTER, your career and life will be destroyed immediately - so "banned" forever, a great way to think about it
>It was taken from an article in the 70's about the formation of a tail end from a lager galaxy where the shifts were different.
There's a lot more than just one red shift blow out data pack...
Just think of the global warming data gate ... then multiply x100 and you have a decent picture
>peer review
The Bogdanoff twins submitted a physics paper that was full of jargon and it got published. Peer review does nothing to stop cults forming, who only accept what they want to accept. Why would they ever promote something that threatens their field?
Based on logic brainlet. Tesla was the last true scientist.
That one example, ruins the whole redshift and expanding universe theory and it just gets passed off.
This theory seemed to eliminate completely any idea of an ether dragged into motion with the earth, a theory that Michelson clung to because it explained the negative result of his experiment. Lorentz's ether stood even more firmly at rest than had Fresnel's. However, when Michelson's experiment was repeated in 1887 with more accuracy and the same negative result, Lorentz's stationary-ether theory was shaken to an ominous degree. But he, in turn, could not accept the idea that the earth dragged the ether along.
About 1892 George F. FitzGerald of Dublin visited Oliver Lodge in Liverpool to dis cuss the negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment as well as the first-order effect of an ether-drift experiment that Lodge had made. FitzGerald said, "Well, the only way out of it that I can see is that the equality of paths must be inaccurate; the block of stone must be distorted, put out of shape by its motion . . . the stone would have to shorten in the direction of motion and swell out in the other two directions."
Lodge reported the substance of this conversation in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1893. A length of 8,000 miles (approximately the diameter of the Earth), he wrote, would have to be shorted only 3 inches in order to ac count for the zero result of the experiment.
Lorentz came upon the same idea independently and embellished it with fervor. His hypothesis stated that every body which is moving at velocity u with respect to the ether contracts along the axis of motion by the factor
Einstein actually was a very good mathematician, better than most physicists, he just wasn't nearly as good as Poincare or Hilbert, but that isn't anything to be ashamed of. If you even looked at Nobel winning physicists, Einstein could hold his own against most.
This means that the Earth is squeezed very slightly into an elliptical shape because of its motion in orbit; that a ruler is shortened if pointed in the direction of this motion; and consequently Michelson's interferometer underwent this same modification only on the leg that was pointed in the direction of the earth's motion, thus canceling any hope of measuring a positive effect.
For different reasons, Michelson and Lorentz both longed for a positive result for ether drift. Michelson's frustration came to some extent from the feeling that mathematicians were taking the question out of his hands into a realm beyond his comprehension whence they drew their own, somewhat preposterous conclusions. He wished the dogged little Dutchman would drop the matter and accept the fact that both of Michel son's ether-drift experiments had been miserable failures. The ether was out there, but at present his instruments were unable to detect its presence. Lorentz, however, was not in a mood to let go of such a lively issue. With bulldog determination he wrestled with it until his fertile imagination produced an astounding explanation, which others also endorsed—that "rigid matter" may not really be "rigid." By the turn of the century, physicists would be calling this hypothesis the "FitzGerald-Lorentz Contraction." The idea was so shocking that only mathematical physicists could read about it without recoiling from the implications. The contraction theory was one solution to the question, and by this ingenious explanation Lorentz had managed to keep his stationary ether intact.
in other words, nothing can measure an answer
it's all a head game, just like here, a bunch of cucks arguing, the answer may mean this or it may mean that, what is important is the imagination used to surround the experimental non answer
that is not the problem with peer review. anonymous peer review is a great system, but the reviewer's comments should be made public. otherwise it's simply an incomplete system.
why did the experiment need a continuing regime of "more accuracy"....LOL
I'll tell you why - IT WAS A JOKE, AND LIGO TODAY IS A JOKE !
How do you become a reviewer in the first place?
THE DUMB FUCK IS BREATHING ALL OVER IT !
WALZING AROUND BENT OVER HUNKERING AN EYE ABOUT THE 1/4 INCH "VIEW" HOLE LOL
" Two changes improved the apparatus over the one used at Potsdam [in 1886]. Morley suggested floating the heavy sand stone slab bearing the optical parts on mer cury. The stone, about 5 feet square, was mounted on a doughnut-shaped wooden block, which floated in a cast-iron trough containing the mercury. This method was economical and efficient, for the mercury-bearing removed practically all stresses and allowed the interferometer to glide smoothly around all points of the compass. Vibrations from outside disturbances, so troublesome in Berlin and even in Potsdam, were virtually eliminated.
With the new "interferential refractometer" Michelson and Morley were able to determine effects of the second order with an accuracy hitherto unobtainable. The second improvement lay in placing the mirrors so that the light was reflected over a path about 10 times longer than that of the earlier experiment.
While the stone, floating on its channel of mercury, turned steadily on its axis, one of them walked around it in a circle, keeping his eye on the moving eyepiece. The ob server could not touch the instrument, nor could he for a moment lose sight of the interference fringes. It was tiring to watch these through the small aperture of the eyepiece, only about a quarter of an inch in diameter, and the physical, mental and nervous strain told particularly on Michelson. ":
THE LIGO TODAY IS 10X WORSE, FUCK MERCURY, WERE TALKING UNIMAGINABLE CUNT HAIR ATTEMPTS AT STABILIZING - CROSS LAB TO TRY TO IGNORE LOCAL ISSUES, A WAVE IN THE OCEAN FUCKS IT UP...FARTING BLOWS IT OFF ITS SCALES
Peer reviewing is a political system. People only care about results. But you can come to the wrong conclusions about the results.