Content deleted Content added
Removing {{more citations needed}}, things are generally verifiable now, adding one {{cn}}. Removing {{notability}}, we have multiple independent sources with SIGCOV |
Surv1v4l1st (talk | contribs) m →Baez's crackpot index: Punctuation |
||
| (13 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Method of rating scientific claims}}
The '''crackpot index''' is a number that rates scientific claims or the individuals that make them, in conjunction with a method for computing that number. While the indices have been created for their humorous value, their general concepts can be applied in other fields like risk management.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eXPCBwAAQBAJ&q=%22crackpot+index%22&pg=PA137|title=The Failure of Risk Management: Why It's Broken and How to Fix It|last=Hubbard|first=Douglas W.|date=2009-04-27|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|isbn=9780470387955|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wired.com/2006/01/every_field_of_/|title=Every field of study deserves its own Crackpot Index|author=Wired Staff|magazine=WIRED|access-date=2018-07-17|language=en-US|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180717124851/https://www.wired.com/2006/01/every_field_of_/|archive-date=July 17, 2018}}</ref>▼
'''The Crackpot Index''' is a number that rates scientific claims or the individuals that make them, in conjunction with a method for computing that number. It was proposed by [[John C. Baez]] in 1992, and updated in 1998.
▲
== Baez's crackpot index ==
The method
| date = 28 April 2010
| title = Towards a universal crackpot standard
Line 8 ⟶ 11:
| magazine = [[New Scientist]]
| access-date =2023-08-10
}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html|title=Crackpot index|website=math.ucr.edu|access-date=2018-07-17}}</ref> An earlier version only had 17 questions with point values for each ranging from 1 to 40.<ref name=index1>{{Cite web|url=http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html|title=Crackpot index|date=1996-11-10|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/19961110050053/http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html|access-date=2018-07-17|archive-date=1996-11-10}}</ref>
Sample point assignments:<ref name=index1/>
Baez confirmed in a 1993 letter to ''[[New Scientist]]'' that he created the index.<ref name=BaezNS>{{cite magazine▼
*1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
*5 points for each mention of "Einstien"{{sic}}, "Hawkins" or "Feynmann".
*10 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory.
*20 points for every use of science fiction works or myths as if they were fact.
*40 points for comparing those who argue against your ideas to Nazis, stormtroopers, or brownshirts.
*50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.
The ''[[New Scientist]]'' published a claim in 1992 that the creation of the index was "prompted by an especially striking
outburst from a retired mathematician insisting that TIME has INERTIA".<ref name=NSFeedback>{{cite magazine
| date = 5 December 1992
| title = Feedback
| url = https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13618508-100-feedback/
| magazine = [[New Scientist]]
| access-date = 2023-08-10
}}</ref><ref>{{cite news
| last = Kesterton
| first = Michael
| date = 11 Dec 1992
| title = Social Studies a Daily Miscellany of Information by Micheal Kesterton About the Body …
| page = A.28
| work = [[The Globe and Mail]]
| ___location = Toronto
}}</ref>
▲Baez later confirmed in a 1993 letter to ''
| last = Baez
| first = John
Line 19 ⟶ 46:
| issue = 1857
| access-date = 2023-08-10
}}</ref> The index was later published in ''[[Skeptic (American magazine)|Skeptic]]'' magazine, with an editor's note saying "we know that outsiders to
| last = Baez
| first = John
Line 30 ⟶ 57:
}} [https://www.skeptic.com/magazine/archives/8.4/ Contents]</ref>
Though the index was not proposed as a serious method, it nevertheless has become popular in Internet discussions of whether a claim or an individual is [[crank (person)|crank]]y, particularly in [[physics]] (e.g., at the [[Usenet newsgroup]] sci.physics), or in mathematics.{{cn|date=August 2023}}
Chris Caldwell's [[Prime Pages]] has a version adapted to [[prime number]] research<ref>{{cite web |url=http://primes.utm.edu/notes/crackpot.html |title= ''The PrimeNumbers' Crackpot index'' |accessdate= October 23, 2007 |author=Chris Caldwell}}</ref> which is a field with many famous unsolved problems that are easy to understand for amateur mathematicians.
Line 39 ⟶ 66:
==See also==
* [[List of topics characterized as pseudoscience]]
==References==
| |||