🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <12193@watnot.UUCP> ccplumb@watnot.UUCP (Colin Plumb) writes:
>I think the basic source of a lot of beliefs in "supernatural" events stems
>from a misapplication of Occam's razor.
>Given two equally valid explanations, I'll choose to believe the simpler.
>As a matter of fact, I'll choose simplicity over some degree of validity.

Why choose?  In such cases, it's good to carry a "handful" of
ideas to cover "the facet of reality".  Since systems (patterns)
of information repeat, there is a good chance that by and by we
can sort through the handful and find the better matches or even
discover a "replacement concept" to solve missing piece of the 
puzzle.   It's probably not necessary that we carry the same
handful, either. 

>I have no objection to people having beliefs that are utter nonsense.
>If they try to tell the public about them, I can pay no attention.
>If they try to tell *anybody* that these beliefs have a basis in reality, and
>present them as fact, I get very angry - whether these beliefs are about
>psychic powers, cretinism, or green men from Mars building the pyramids of
>Giza. ... . I hope future posters will be more careful about the claims they
>make on the subject.

Why don't you either pay attention or, "use your 'K'" key instead
of steam in silence?  

Physics is such a dud when it comes to totally new parent technologies
and innovative theories.  "They MUST be convinced" before they will
"lower" themselves to publish such "things".  Look at the
problems Einstein faced and even Maiman's attempt to get the
results of the first laser published.  Six (6) Journals rejected
his paper, before the British Journal "Nature" did publish!

PHYSICS should have known DECADES EARLIER that, since "material can 
absorb" radiation, it could "amplify".  Then WHY did it take an 
electrical engineer, a mere "technologist" to do it??   Ahh!  but 
of course, there is no PSI, yet how many times do the fiction writers 
spill the beans about future theories and technologies that at the 
time are "pure nonsense" i.e. the ray gun?  Is there a kind of "super 
computer intelligence" that is secretly attached to our brains "wish 
centers" OR just dumb luck?  

My feeling about such "creative nonsense" is not to dismiss, but
to query "if true, how so?".  What possible mechanism/s could
make something like this work, or in the case of a new hypothesis,
what natural phenomena could such a notion explain and simplify if 
it does hold true? 

NOT - is there evidence for PSI, but ... . since it is a concept
how, could it possibly work.  Then let's try it and search for
another way and a better understanding of reality if that
approach fails and why it failed.   

              We can all be a little smart, but imagination,
	      that's something the government can't recognize.
              
Q: How many physicists does it take to screw in a light bulb
R:            That depends on how you define "in". 

If we could only trade our "Nobel Physicists" for a favorable
balance of trade.  
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+
| Paul M. Koloc, President: (301) 445-1075                | FUSION |
| Prometheus II, Ltd.; College Park, MD 20740-0222        |  this  |
| {mimsy | seismo}!prometheus!pmk; pmk@prometheus.UUCP    | decade |
+---------------------------------------------------------+--------+