Hot answers tagged

23

If anyone's still reading this thread, here's a few more data points that appear to back Feynmann's interpretation. Erik Bäcklin, Nature vol 123, no. 3098, p. 409 (1929): $1.59875 \cdot 10^{-19} \pm 0.004796 \cdot 10^{-19} $. Wide error bar overlaps Millikan's. Gunnar Kellstrom, Phys. Rev. 1935: $1.60709 \cdot 10^{-19} \pm 0.011 \cdot 10^{-19} $. ...


19

The 16th (1995) edition of Kaye and Laby includes the following progression of the accepted values for the charge of an electron. The first value "is essentially Milikan's oil drop value" and the second is "the 'X-ray grating' value". I couldn't find any more details about the actual experiments. The standard errors are often over-optimistic, indicating ...


4

Here some early papers, listed in chronological order: Sterling TD (1959) Publication Decisions and Their Possible Effects on Inferences Drawn from Tests of Significance--Or Vice Versa. Journal of the American Statistical Association 54: 30–34. Rosenthal R (1979) The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin 86: 638–641. ...


2

I cannot think of any major international scientific consensus around the some ideas stemming from corruption or bias in the recent history (> 1950). STEEN, RG. Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing?. Journal Of Medical Ethics. England, 37, 4, 249-253, Apr. 2011. ISSN: 1473-4257. analyzes PubMed database ...


2

To the cases you mention, I can add a wide spread belief in astrology, which spread in the Hellenistic world almost at the same time when a true scientific revolution happened there. Later, there was a large public demand for astrology and none for the real science, so existing astronomers and mathematicians had to do astrology to make their living. The last ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible