 |
The Crackpot Index
Author: WebDigger
Date: 10-14-2019 - 19:33
There are, fortunately, other interesting places to visit on the internet.
Over at Metafilter, I came across this page: They also resolved not to accept proposals of perpetual-motion machines, that led me to the Crackpot Index, proposed semi-seriously by mathematical physicist John C. Baez in 1992. Although that index is oriented toward science, it should be possible to develop a similar one for AP contributors. For starters, here are some items from John Baez' index:
The Crackpot Index
John Baez
A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics:
A -5 point starting credit.
1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.
5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.
5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.
5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards).
10 points for pointing out that you have gone to school, as if this were evidence of sanity.
10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it. (10 more for emphasizing that you worked on your own.)
10 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory.
10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.
Over at Metafilter, I came across this page: They also resolved not to accept proposals of perpetual-motion machines, that led me to the Crackpot Index, proposed semi-seriously by mathematical physicist John C. Baez in 1992. Although that index is oriented toward science, it should be possible to develop a similar one for AP contributors. For starters, here are some items from John Baez' index:
The Crackpot Index
John Baez
A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics:
A -5 point starting credit.
1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.
5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.
5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.
5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards).
10 points for pointing out that you have gone to school, as if this were evidence of sanity.
10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it. (10 more for emphasizing that you worked on your own.)
10 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory.
10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.
| Subject | Written By | Date/Time (PST) |
|---|---|---|
 The Crackpot Index |
WebDigger | 10-14-2019 - 19:33 |