Shut up and calculate · HackerPapers discussions

Shut up and calculate — mentioned by fghtr

Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:23:00 GMT

> A vast majority of articles published right now will never even be reproduced and yet we take nearly all of them as if they are gospel. First of all, who is "we"? I certainly do not take them for granted. Any other responsible scientist doesn't as well. Science is not always perfect, like everything in life. Testability and reliability are just its goals. When they are reached, this is the success of science. When not, we should push further and better. > Science is based on some kinds of assumptions taken on faith (like every thought system). Here are a few (there are more surely). >1)…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Shut up and calculate — HN submission

Tue, 02 Jan 2018 16:49:02 GMT

Shut Up and Calculate

1 point; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Shut up and calculate — HN submission

Mon, 06 Nov 2017 17:33:25 GMT

Shut up and calculate: an extreme mathematical universe

159 points; 181 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Shut up and calculate — HN submission

Tue, 04 Aug 2015 10:48:14 GMT

Shut up and calculate (2007)

35 points; 25 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Shut up and calculate — HN submission

Mon, 26 May 2014 23:31:31 GMT

"Shut-up-and-calculate" approach to physics: A purely mathematical universe

4 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Shut up and calculate — HN submission

Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:37:22 GMT

Shut up and calculate

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.