“ |
When in doubt, we are to be guided by the scientific method. The Rule of Laplace (or Sagan's law for TV junkies) tells us that an extraordinary assertion must be supported by extraordinary evidence before we are obliged to treat it with respect. | ” |
The problem with your approach is that you want everything ready and may be even published in a scientific journal before considerig it, isn't it? This is the lazy approach. Lot of work is needed sometimes before this happen. Particularly in this post I proposed something new to be analyzed with a new point of view giving a good piece of evidence: I proposed to consider the fact that galaxies are finite (not infinite) and so the gravitational field formula could have a "reachability" factor not considered yet. Wouldn't this be enough to at least be discussed reasonably in this forum? But my post was deleted without any justification.
“ |
The Moderator of this board has determined that your assertions, which challenge the theories of physics, are not backed up by extraordinary evidence. For this reason they have been sent to the Pseudoscience board. That is a place for the discussion of such ideas, and you are free there to try to convince us that you have found new evidence to back up the hypotheses. It is not equivalent to being treated with the disrespect that Laplace/Sagan would permit, because that would have meant consignment to the Cesspool or simply deletion. | ” |
