I'd rather someone read the science, understood it, then looked into if they can do something different, even if it's contrary to the current knowledge.
That would be ok if there wasn't such authoritarianism going on, making people afraid to go off the beaten path.
So it depends on the person. One person may realize he's been made sensitive to that and it's just going to limit him. Another may ideally feel inspired by it and be able to just see it as a basis to start from.
Maybe a middle ground that would lead to success the most often is a guy like Cliff, who does consult the science but is self-taught enough to keep more of a free thinker spirit alongside that.
Someone who deliberately ignores the science is just getting lucky if they manage to make something that debunks the existing science.
Let me also turn that around...
Someone who adheres to all the known science is just getting lucky finding an
"entirely new" thing.
Besides, I've seen how some laws came to be, and some seem based on ridiculously short simple experiments. Some of these seem to be holding up, yet others you say, "No wonder there seems so much room to break it -- anyone can do it."
I'll give some more hints on previous hints...
One result of someone who ignored the science is a microscope with incredible
optical resolution. By deliberately not wanting to be influenced by what is "impossible," his microscope seemingly has two features that are considered impossible... Although he once had a conversation w Royal R Rife (another guy with such microscope), he went with his own ideas and made an even better one.
When you would mention this about 10 to 20 years ago, the science types would have these typical reactions...
- "IT'S IMPOSSIBLE!!!" *triggered* They adhere to the Abbe (diffraction) Limit.
- They don't even ask how it works, yet they are supposing it would
have to break the Abbe (diffraction) Limit to work, so
it can't be.
- They don't even seem to wonder if someone may have cleverly found a way around it, which is the first thing that would come up to me. Most of 'em seem uncreative and just riding the authoritarian train...
On top of that, the microscope can still adjust Depth of Field at wide open diaphragms, to which all photography nerds will shout, "IT'S IMPOSSIBLE!!!" (and they love wide open for shallow depth)
= = =
The example of someone who later became a friend is an engineer reading a biology book. When seeing the attempt at explaining how trees raise fluids to the top, he cringed (I know of 7 theories myself). Within 15 mins he came up with a theory of his own. He successfully tested it in the presence of some scientists and other people (more than once, even though it was not an official experiment, IIRC).
He used some tubes hanging on a large rock face, some 27 meters high, IIRC. According to Toricelli's Law, around 10 meters is the maximum...
IMO, it's not 100% sure that this is what trees are using, but it is clear he invalidated that law or caused it to need an update.
Another point here would be that I don't consider that "lucky" -- he is recognizing poor science and using his brain for a minute.
I see at least three things with these laws and things...
- what I mentioned before: some seem based on next to nothing
- some are so old that certain factors were not known yet (I guess this might remain true forever)
- IMO, undoubtedly some things they want to keep hidden to us (I would even agree with some reasons). We get "need to know" stuff that is enough to build our regular world.
Considering these three alone, it's no wonder how "anyone" can break things left and right. It's rather a wonder how not everyone is doing it, and/or how well it's gatekept. This, of course, is greatly helped by authoritarianism and brainwashing in our "elite" education...
I find science types can be nice people as long as you leave them on their pedestal. But OMG if you don't have a high degree, yet you know or can prove something that is outside of their small cubicle. Most of them will be revealed as closed-minded d*cks.
IMO, even this one trick is enough to cause that... You charge a very high price for (supposedly) elite education... This alone makes it extremely difficult to entertain you are only the expert in a small cubicle. Then add to that all the brainwashing... After all, many of these people will later educate others who "they" want to be working sheeple, so you have to brainwash them even more, not give them
better education...
YMMV
www.fractalaudio.com
