Albert
Alexander
Henri
Isaac
Michael
James
6 characters • Hover to meet them
Einstein, the searcher : $b his work explained from dialogues with Einstein
by Alexander Moszkowski
About This Book
Einstein, Albert, 1879-1955, Relativity (Physics)
Conversations
I'm a young physics professor, and my research suggests something disturbing: a foundational assumption in my field might be wrong. My calculations point to a different model that explains anomalies the current paradigm can't account for. My department chair says I should be very careful. "The current framework has been validated by decades of experiments. Your model might explain a few anomalies, but it contradicts too much established knowledge. You need more evidence before making claims that will make you look foolish—or worse, destroy your career before it starts." A colleague in another department says I should publish boldly. "Science advances through paradigm shifts. If you're right, you'll transform the field. If you're wrong, you'll have contributed to the conversation. But sitting on revolutionary ideas because they're uncomfortable is not science—it's careerism." I believe my calculations are correct. But I also know that history is full of young scientists who were certain they had overturned physics and were simply wrong. How do I balance intellectual honesty with epistemic humility? — The Paradigm Shift Question in Cambridge
Knowledge & Discovery Debate: When your research challenges the paradigm, do you proceed cautiously or publish boldly?
4 messages
I'm a climate scientist who has spent 20 years studying models and data. I know the research inside and out. I've testified before Congress. I've been called "one of the leading experts in the field." But the truth is, I'm increasingly aware of how much we don't know. Our models have significant uncertainties. New data keeps surprising us. The more I learn, the less confident I am about specific predictions. The problem is: when I express this uncertainty publicly, it gets weaponized. Deniers quote me out of context. Policy makers use my caveats as excuses for inaction. My colleagues say I'm "providing ammunition to the enemy." They want me to project confidence, even when I feel doubt. "The big picture is clear," they say. "Don't confuse people with nuance they can't handle." But I became a scientist because I believe in truth. If I overstate certainty, am I any better than the deniers who overstate doubt? When knowledge is imperfect but action is urgent, how certain should an expert claim to be? — The Expert Who Doesn't Know in New York
Knowledge & Certainty Debate: Should experts project confidence they don't feel when action is urgent?
4 messages
Discuss Einstein, the searcher : $b his work explained from dialogues with Einstein
AI-powered discussion with characters from Einstein, the searcher : $b his work explained from dialogues with Einstein by Moszkowski, Alexander
0 messages
Want to join the conversation? Sign in to talk with your favorite characters!