Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Good point. Those actual scientists who crave fame have to be in there somewhere.
I can't really argue one way or the other. I'm a recreational mathematician at best. There's wanting to be recognised/known for good mathematical work and there's wanting to be famous, and I didn't really take that distinction into account. I wouldn't mind the former - however unlikely - but the latter, no thanks.
It's not clear what your narcissist associates (? or associates of associates) actually want out of the deal, but their crank level is clearly high even if they're otherwise legit.
Maybe someone could write a paper involving the punnet square crank/non-crank versus pseudo-scientist/actual scientist, and how many of each there is in each square. Or could it be one of those 2D alignment charts. Throw in a third dimension and there'd be a fame/infamy axis too.
Hawking definitely had some crank about him - and not because of his disability - so he wouldn't be at one of the corners.