Sister blog of Physicists of the Caribbean. Shorter, more focused posts specialising in astronomy and data visualisation.

Saturday, 20 January 2018

The scientific method gone badly wrong


Pretty much. Needs stuff about popularity and highly funded grants.

I need scarcely remind readers that I do not think this indicates anything whatsoever about how common this is in practise.
at
Labels:

3 comments:

  1. Dan Weese20 January 2018 at 11:26

    Also something about p-values.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Shaun Griffith20 January 2018 at 12:39

    And grant proposals to study the effectiveness of different grant proposal workflows.

    ReplyDelete
  3. James Garry21 January 2018 at 00:37

    I particularly like how there are no loops back once you hit the ''computer model' stage.

    "Sure our model's probably wrong and has a ton of bugs! Let's get that poster cranked out and then think about a paper!"

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Weaponising dark matter

Stephen Baxter's Xeelee sequence revolves around a war between baryonic and non-baryonic life forms. One memorable sequence features a p...

  • Proving a negative is perfectly possible
    Of course you can prove a negative. In one sense this can be the easiest thing in the world : your theory predicts something which doesn...
  • Death of the Flying Snakes
    In the last batch of simulations, we dropped a long gas stream into the gravitational potential of a cluster to see if it would get torn...
  • How not to build a galaxy.
    And more importantly, how not to build a galaxy. Uniform discs of pure gas turn out to be almost impossible. Exponential discs - where ther...