There is a good Opinion piece in the November Scientific American, Fudge Factor: a look at Harvard science fraud case by Scott O. Lillienfeld. He discusses the problem of distinguishing intentional scientific fraud from confirmation bias, the tendency we have as scientists to selectively interpret data in order to confirm our own theories.
This is a good reminder that the easiest person to fool is yourself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Maxwell's demon and the history of the second law of thermodynamics
I recently reread Warmth Disperses and Time Passes: The History of Heat by Hans Christian von Baeyer As a popular book, it provides a beaut...
-
This week Nobel Prizes will be announced. I have not done predictions since 2020 . This is a fun exercise. It is also good to reflect on w... -
Is it something to do with breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation? In molecular spectroscopy you occasionally hear this term thro... -
Nitrogen fluoride (NF) seems like a very simple molecule and you would think it would very well understood, particularly as it is small enou...
No comments:
Post a Comment