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)
A golden age for precision observational cosmology
Yin-Zhe Ma gave a nice physics colloquium at UQ last week, A Golden Age for Cosmology I learnt a lot. Too often, colloquia are too speciali...
-
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