🚀 go-pugleaf

As a non-physics person who stumbled into this conference by accident
and stayed out of fascination, it seems to me that you are all behaving
very oddly towards Professor Abian.

If his theory (not a syllable of which can I understand) is wrong,
why can't the brainiest of you give a proper scientific proof once and
for all?

I would like someone to explain to me in layman's terms what are the
implications of Professor Abian's idea.  Even supposing that it is
utterly crackbrained, might his line of thought not be worth exploring
in case it sparks some insight?

The oddest thing for me is how those who claim to be most scientifically
orthodox attack Abian in the most emotional terms.  Has science always
been conducted in this way?

Finally, how much of the physics that all of you spout has been learned
from books?  And how much by creative thought and experiment?  Are most
of you merely parroting conventional wisdom and if so, isn't that at the
very least rather boring?

These questions are posed by someone who read English at university
and who earns his living by creative writing.

Indra