Pseudoscience is defective science

1

• Pseudoscience is defective science

2
pseudoscience

• pseudoscience is an established body of knowledge
  which masquerades as science in an attempt to
  claim a legitimacy which it would not otherwise
  be able to achieve on its own terms it is often
  known as fringe- or alternative  science.

3
pseudoscience

• The most important of its defects is usually the
  lack of the carefully controlled and thoughtfully
  interpreted experiments which provide the
  foundation of the natural sciences and which
  contribute to their advancement.

4
pseudoscience

• The term "established body of knowledge" is
  important here, because the pursuit of scientific
  knowledge usually involves elements of intuition
  and guesswork
• experiments do not always test a theory
  adequately, and experimental results can be
  incorrectly interpreted or even wrong.
• In legitimate science, however, these problems
  tend to be self-correcting, if not by the
  original researchers themselves, then through the
  critical scrutiny of the greater scientific
  community.

5
Some other kinds of defective science

• pathological science
• N-rays
• Poly-water
• Cold fusion
• Bowen Technique
• Intelligent Design

6
Some other kinds of defective science

• junk science
• "9944/100 Pure It Floats"
• Ivory Soap is a classic example of junk science
  from the 19th century. Not only is the term
  "pure" meaningless when applied to an undefined
  mixture such as hand soap, but the implication
  that its ability to float is evidence of this
  purity is deceptive. The low density is achieved
  by beating air bubbles into it, actually reducing
  the "purity" of the product and in a sense
  cheating the consumer.

7
Some other kinds of defective science

• bad science
• Bad science describes well-intentioned but
  incorrect, obsolete, incomplete, or
  over-simplified expositions of scientific ideas.
  An example would be the statement that electrons
  revolve in orbits around the atomic nucleus, a
  picture that was discredited in the 1920's, but
  is so much more vivid and easily grasped than the
  one that supplanted it that it shows no sign of
  dying out.

8
How can you recognize pseudoscience?

• The primary goal of science is to achieve a more
  complete and more unified understanding of the
  physical world.
• Pseudo-sciences are more likely to be driven by
  ideological, cultural, or commercial goals.

9
How can you recognize pseudoscience?

• Most scientific fields are the subjects of
  intense research which result in the continual
  expansion of knowledge in the discipline.
• A pseudo-scientific field evolves very little
  since it was first established. The small amount
  of research and experimentation that is carried
  out is generally done more to justify the belief
  than to extend it.

10
How can you recognize pseudoscience?

• Scientists commonly seek out counterexamples or
  findings that appear to be inconsistent with
  accepted theories.
• In pseudo-sciences, a challenge to accepted dogma
  is often considered a hostile act if not heresy,
  and leads to bitter disputes or even schisms.

11
How can you recognize pseudoscience?

• In science observations or data that are not
  consistent with current scientific understanding,
  once shown to be credible, generate intense
  interest among scientists and stimulate
  additional studies.
• In a pseudoscience observations or data that are
  not consistent with established beliefs tend to
  be ignored or actively suppressed.

12
How can you recognize pseudoscience?

• Science is a process in which each principle must
  be tested in the crucible of experience and
  remains subject to being questioned or rejected
  at any time.
• The major tenets and principles of pseudoscience
  are often not falsifiable, and are unlikely ever
  to be altered or shown to be wrong.

13
How can you recognize pseudoscience?

• Scientific ideas and concepts must stand or fall
  on their own merits, based on existing knowledge
  and on evidence.
• Pseudoscientific concepts tend to be shaped by
  individual egos and personalities, almost always
  by individuals who are not in contact with
  mainstream science. They often invoke authority
  (a famous name, for example) for support.

14
CARL SAGAN'S BALONEY DETECTION KIT

• Wherever possible there must be independent
  confirmation of the facts
• Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by
  knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
• Arguments from authority carry little weight (in
  science there are no "authorities").
• Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run
  with the first idea that caught your fancy.
• Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis
  just because it's yours.
• Quantify, wherever possible.
• If there is a chain of argument every link in the
  chain must work.
• "Ochkam's razor" - if there are two hypothesis
  that explain the data equally well choose the
  simpler.
• Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in
  principle, be falsified (shown to be false by
  some unambiguous test). In other words, it is
  testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and
  get the same result?

15
Marks of Pseudoscience or Bogus Science

• A lack of well-controlled, reproducible
  experimental support.
• (by definition)
• 2. Over reliance on anecdotal evidence.
• 3. Play on supposed inconsistencies in science.
• 4. Attempt to explain the (so far)
  unexplainable. Appeal to mysteries
• myths.
• 5. Argument by analogy. Argument by spurious
  similarity.
• 6. Abuse of well-known scientists by
• a. inferring they would agree with them.
• b. quoting them out of context.
• 7. Over reliance on surveys and statistical
  arguments
• 8. Filtering data. The grab-bag approach to
  data.
• 9. Use of anachronistic arguments. Arguing
  against long-dead theories.
• 10. Use of irrefutable hypothesis.
• 11. Refusal to revise in spite of being proven
  wrong.

16
More marks of Pseudoscience or Bogus Science

• Makes Pitch to News Media instead of
• bona fide Scientific Journals
• Makes claims of suppression
• Proposes effect nearly impossible to detect
• Evidence to support idea is mostly anecdotal
• Works in isolation
• Proposes new law of nature to explain discovery

17
Examples of Pseudoscience or Bogus Science

• Dianetics
• Worlds in Collision
• Creationism
• Astrology
• acupuncture
• astrology
• Bermuda triangle
• biorhythms
• codependency
• creationism and creation science 
• hollow Earth
• hypnosis
• intelligent design
• morphic resonance

18
Bad Science

• Frequently deliberately dishonest
• Overlooks facts
• Misinterprets
• Presents incorrect data
• Data Incomplete or absent
• Many hidden variables
• Unreliable or anecdotal data
• Exhibits researcher bias
• Poor preparation or inadequate education

19
Alien thinking

• Not many scientists are prepared to take tales of
  alien abduction seriously, but John Mack, a
  Harvard professor who was killed in a road
  accident in north London last year, did. Ten
  years on from a row which nearly lost him his
  job, hundreds of people who claim they were
  abducted still revere him.

20
Good or Bad Science

• Pylons 'may be a leukemia risk' The researchers
  looked at high voltage power linesLiving too
  close to overhead power lines appears to increase
  the risk of childhood leukemia, researchers say.
  A major study found children who had lived within
  200 meters of high voltage lines at birth had a
  70 higher risk of leukemia than those 600m or
  more away.

21
Nano-scientist's dark secret

• One of the most brilliant scientific researchers
  of recent years stands accused of committing an
  elaborate scientific fraud, fooling many eminent
  experts.
• Bell's internal inquiry on Schoen was damning
• In 2001, a team led by Hendrik Schoen appeared to
  have invented the smallest organic transistor
  ever made.
• Only a single molecule in length, it was hailed
  as a huge breakthrough, capable of transforming
  the world of computers.
• But, as BBC Two's Horizon program shows this
  week, the "breakthrough" led to his disgrace and
  began a cascade of events that would result in
  one of the most intriguing science stories of
  recent years.
• When he published his work, Schoen's tiny
  transistor was regarded as a discovery that could
  have blasted open the world of nanotechnology -
  where cheap, powerful computers could transform
  the world in which we live.

22
Nano-scientist's dark secret

• In 2001, a team led by Hendrik Schoen appeared to
  have invented the smallest organic transistor
  ever made.
• Only a single molecule in length, it was hailed
  as a huge breakthrough, capable of transforming
  the world of computers.
• But, as BBC Two's Horizon programme shows this
  week, the "breakthrough" led to his disgrace and
  began a cascade of events that would result in
  one of the most intriguing science stories of
  recent years.
• When he published his work, Schoen's tiny
  transistor was regarded as a discovery that could
  have blasted open the world of nanotechnology -
  where cheap, powerful computers could transform
  the world in which we live.

23
Stuff of legend

• Transistors are the minute "switches" that
  control the flow of information in a computer
  chip. The more you can fit on to a chip, the more
  powerful your computer.
• Schoen's transistor was far smaller than anything
  possible on a silicon chip, so it seemed to
  herald a new age when computer power could grow
  to undreamed of levels.
• It was the latest in a long line of great
  discoveries made by Schoen. He was only in his
  early 30s and yet had already made advances in
  the world of superconductors and lasers.
• His name had become so prominent in the
  scientific journals that to many of his rivals he
  had taken on legendary status.

24
Growing doubts

• What he had apparently achieved was a way of
  connecting up dye-like molecules in a transistor
  circuit. When the circuit was switched on, they
  found it had the same characteristics as a
  silicon transistor.
• It was a double breakthrough. Schoen's transistor
  was not just very small, it was made from simple
  organic molecules.
• It promised incredibly cheap computer chips that
  did not need to be manufactured in hugely
  expensive fabrication plants, but instead could
  be custom-built, at a fraction of the cost, in
  simple laboratories.

25
Growing doubts

• What he had apparently achieved was a way of
  connecting up dye-like molecules in a transistor
  circuit. When the circuit was switched on, they
  found it had the same characteristics as a
  silicon transistor.
• It was a double breakthrough. Schoen's transistor
  was not just very small, it was made from simple
  organic molecules.
• It promised incredibly cheap computer chips that
  did not need to be manufactured in hugely
  expensive fabrication plants, but instead could
  be custom-built, at a fraction of the cost, in
  simple laboratories.

26
doubts

• Many of Hendrik Schoen's fantastic claims just
  could not be repeated in the lab by rival
  scientists, and many were getting frustrated. It
  had got to the point where there were serious
  whisperings about his credibility.
• Analysis of his papers going back through
  previous years provided more evidence of
  suspicious data.
• Schoen's employers, Bell Laboratories, instantly
  launched an independent investigation into his
  conduct and the verdict was damning.
• After its findings were released, Bell fired
  Schoen. Nature, the journal which had published
  much of his work, retracted the suspect papers
  triggering a huge amount of soul searching in the
  scientific community.

27
Good Science

• Good Science is
• Consistent
• Parsimonious
• Empirically testable
• Progressive
• Retrogressive
• useful

28
Some Examples of Good Science

• Natural Selection
• DNA
• Thermodynamics
• Quanta
• Standard Model of Particle Physics
• Cosmology
• Relativity

29
Bad Science

• Poly-Water and Cold Fusion
• Case Histories

30
Outline

• The Russian revolution
• Fedyakin and Deryagin
• Experimental setup
• Results
• Spreading to the West
• Lippincott and Allen
• Involvement of the media
• Donahoe article
• Polybunking De Water
• Rousseau et al

31
In the Beginning

• Nikolai N. Fedyakin
• Kostrama Polytechnical Institute
• Found spontaneous water condensation in
  capillaries under certain experimental conditions
  (1962)
• Different properties than normal water
• Boris V. Deryagin
• Surface Forces Laboratory at the Institute of
  Physical Chemistry of the Soviet Academy of
  Sciences
• Took over research
• Perfected experimental technique for production
  of condensate

32
Experimental Setup
33
Process and Results

• Condensate Properties
• Freezing Interval 243 K to 213 K
• Boiling Point 523 K to 573 K
• Density 1.4 g/cm3
• Thermal expansion coefficient 1.5 times normal
  water

34
Spreading to the West

• Ellis R. Lippincott U. of Maryland
• Infrared Spectroscopy
• Very different from normal water
• Taken as evidence of polymeric
  structure

Poly-water
Water
Rousseau 57
35
Spreading to the West

• Leland C. Allen
• First methodical theoretical investigation
• Found feasible structurecyclometric water
• Roughly the same internal energy as normal water
• Compatible with high density and viscosity of
  polywater

Franks, F., Polywater, p.93
36
Media Involvement

• F. J. Donahoe (1969)
• Most Dangerous Material on Earth
• Mass-media gets involved

The Number of Publications Per Year
Franks, F., Polywater, p. 120
37
Lehigh Conference (1970)

• The Showdown between believers and doubters
• Nothing much resolved
• Lippincott
• trouble producing spectra without contaminants
• Allen
• new calculations cast doubt on polywater
• Denis L. Rousseau
• introduced theory of organic contaminants

38
DeBunking

• Denis Rousseau and Sergio Porto at USC
• Use Raman scattering for spectroscopy
• Condensate turns to black char
• Polywater should not do this
• Combination of Na, Cl, and SO4
• Proponents-contaminants in Rousseaus but not
  theirs
• Rousseau uses infrared spectroscopy on sweat

Polywater
Sweat
Rousseau 57
39
Discussion and Conclusion

• Polywater as a Pathologic Science
• (Langmuir 1953)
• People remained divided on the subject for a long
  time
• The epidemic of poly-water was fuelled by intense
  media coverage

40
Too Good To Be True

• The Strange, But True, Story of Cold Fusion

41
The Announcement

• March 23, 1989 Salt Lake City
• Two scientists have successfully created a
  sustained nuclear fusion reaction at room
  temperature in a chemistry laboratory at the
  University of Utah.
• The greatest invention since the discovery of
  fire.

42
Pons and Fleischmann
Dr. Stanley Pons
Dr. Martin Fleischman
43
A Nuclear Fusion Primer

• In nuclear fusion two light nuclei are combined
  into a heavier nucleus, releasing energy.
• Deuterium, 2H, can be used in D-D fusion to
  release approximately 4.00 MeV per fusion.

Deuterium
44
Two Pathways

• D D ? p 3H D D ?
  n 3He

45
Energy Of Fusion

• In the D D ? p 3H reaction most of the energy
  (3 MeV) is carried away by the proton.
• In the D D ? n 3He reaction the neutron
  carries most of the energy (2.45 MeV).

46
Hot Fusion

• Because of the electrostatic repulsion between
  the deuterium nuclei high temperatures are used
  to bring them together to fuse.
• Magnetically confined plasmas are used to
  generate the high temperatures.

47
Hot Fusion Tokomak
48
The Cold Fusion Machine

• The Cold fusion machine was a beaker of heavy
  water (D2O) with a couple of electrodes and a
  small power supply.

49
The Cold Fusion Experiment

• How did they do that?

50
The Cold Fusion Cell

• The anode is a coil of platinum and the cathode a
  palladium rod.
• The cell is filled with heavy water and immersed
  in a water bath.
• LiOD is added to the heavy water as the
  electrolyte.

51
The Cold Fusion Process

• The electric current splits the D2O molecules
  into D2 gas and OD ions at the cathode.
• The ions migrate to the anode and form D2O and
  O2.
• Palladium has a great affinity for hydrogen and
  deuterium ions are absorbed into the cathode up
  to a density of thousands of times that of
  deuterium gas.
• The closely packed deuterium nuclei fuse and
  release heat, neutrons, protons, etc.

52
The Signs of Fusion

• Excess Heat
• Neutrons
• Tritium (?)
• 3He
• Protons

53
The P F Evidence

• Heat and Light

54
Excess Heat
55
Neutrons via Gammas

• Some neutrons would be absorbed by the H nuclei
  in the water releasing a 2.2 MeV gamma- ray.
• P F looked for these gammas.

56
Gamma-Rays

• The gamma-ray peak as presented in the first P
  F paper submitted to the Journal of
  Electroanalytical Chemistry (JEC).

57
The Reaction

• Men, it has been well said, think in herds it
  will be seen that they go mad in herds, while
  they only recover their senses slowly, and one by
  one.
• -Charles Mackay
• Extraordinary Popular Delusions
  and the Madness of Crowds,1841

58
A Media Explosion

• Cold Fusion became a instant media event.
• P F were interviewed on all the major news
  networks.
• Congress scheduled hearings on CF.

59
The Scramble to Confirm or Refute

• Numerous physics and chemistry labs began
  experiments using the limited information
  available.
• Large scale efforts at MIT, Los Alamos, Harwell,
  Yale, and Caltech were launched.

60
Confirmations

• Jones, et. al. (BYU Neutrons)
• Georgia Tech Neutrons
• Texas A M Excess Heat
• Seattle Tritium
• Small colleges and independent researchers
• Bobs Discount House of Knowledge

61
Doubts

• Why are they still breathing?
• Heat vs. neutron output.
• Are the nuclei really any closer?
• Where are the control runs?
• Whats wrong with that peak?
• The MIT gang goes to the video replay.

62
Gamma-Rays

• The gamma-ray peak as presented in the first P
  F paper submitted to the Journal of
  Electroanalytical Chemistry (JEC).

2200
63
The Video Peak
64
Comparing Peaks
65
The APS Meeting

• Caltech Steve Koonin and Nathan Lewis
• Questions about the Calorimetry
• Closed cell vs. Open cell
• Raw data?
• A lot of negative results.

66
Excess Heat
67
Retractions

• Georgia Tech Temperature (not Neutrons)
• Texas A M Ungrounded thermistor (not Excess
  Heat )
• Seattle Remind me how a mass spec works
  again. (not Tritium )

68
Harwell

• Working with advice from Fleischmann the Harwell
  Nuclear Lab conducted the most extensive set of
  cold fusion tests in the world.
• Cells were tested in numerous configurations for
  heat, neutrons, gammas, tritium, and Helium-3.
• No evidence for nuclear processes in any of the
  experiments.
• Sometimes brilliant people have mad ideas J.
  Williams, Dir. Harwell Lab

69
The Utah Physicists

• Mike Salamon lead a team of physicists from the
  University of Utah to make extensive radiation
  measurements in Pons laboratory.
• Na(I) detectors searched for Gamma-rays from
  neutrons, and protons.
• No signal was seen above background after 831
  hours of measurement.
• upper bound of 10 picowatts of energy generated
  by any known nuclear process

70
What Happened?

• And what can we learn?

71
Pons Fleischmann

• Was it a fraud?
• The rush to announce.
• The explosion.
• Isolation from peers.
• Sometimes brilliant people have mad ideas.

72
The Science Community

• Meeting expectations.
• The good, the bad and the normal distribution.
• Seek simplicity, and distrust it A. N.
  Whitehead

73
Desktop apparatus yields stream of neutrons

• Now Putterman, a physicist at the University of
  California, Los Angeles, has turned a tiny
  crystal into a particle accelerator. When its
  electric field is focused by a tungsten needle,
  it fires deuterium ions into a target so fast
  that the colliding nuclei fuse to create a stream
  of neutrons.Putterman is not claiming to have
  created a source of virtually unlimited energy,
  because the reaction isn't self-sustaining. But
  until now, achieving any kind of fusion in the
  lab has required bulky accelerators with large
  electricity supplies. Replacing that with a small
  crystal is revolutionary. "The amazing thing is
  that the crystal can be used as an accelerator
  without plugging it in to a power station," says
  Putterman.

74
Table-top fusion 'demonstrated'

• Previous claims for desktop fusion have been
  highly controversial. A US team has created a
  "pocket-sized" nuclear fusion reactor that
  generates neutrons, Nature magazine reports.

75
The Bowen TechniqueSome Personal Experiences of
What It Is, What It Does, and What It Doesnt

• The Bowen Technique addresses the whole body,
  which responds to the degree to which it is able.
  The Technique involves a sequence of light
  pressure movements of the practitioner's fingers
  and thumbs over the skin of the patient, at
  precise locations. Muscles are "twanged" like the
  strings of a guitar. The technique involves a
  basic treatment, with add-ons for particular
  ailments, including Frozen Shoulder, Tennis
  Elbow, or Strained Hamstrings. The sequence of
  moves is punctuated by intervals, during which
  time the patient's body is given time to respond
  to the moves.
• At first Tim Willcocks found he needed the crutch
  of his notes on the technique, his "Bowen Bible"
  and referred to it continually, even during
  treatments. However, at an environmental camp in
  Slovakia, he had gained enough confidence to work
  from his own knowledge.
• He has been using the Bowen Technique for two and
  a half years and gives some examples of
  successful cases, including cases of breathing
  difficulties, Fibromyalgia, lower back pain and
  frozen shoulder, all of which responded well to
  between two and five treatments.
• Tim went to Bosnia with the Healing Hands Network
  and was able to help in relieving the suffering
  of so many people whose lives had been damaged by
  the war. He went to Bosnia full of enthusiasm for
  Bowen and return still with that enthusiasm, but
  also with the realisation that Bowen is one ray
  in a rainbow spectrum of healing modalities.

76
'intelligent design'