The Blink Theory

[Cunjo Carl]

2 hours ago, KSK said:

As for $50 for 20 minutes. that sounds about right to me. $150 per hour, so call it a $1,200 a day. That's at the mid to lower end of the scale for an academic consultancy fee. Top tier professors would earn a lot more. Source - personal experience from six years in a university tech transfer department.

Hearing that, It's possible I've been seriously undercharging... Thanks, I'll need to think about that if/when I can return to consulting work more regularly.

 

2 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

There's also this:

So they're only reliably collecting $75/hr. 20 minutes of "No, that's not right" and "There's no evidence of that" and "That's not how that works" probably inclines a good number of their customers to skip out on the second half of the bill.

That's a good point.

[mikegarrison]

40 minutes ago, Cunjo Carl said:

Hearing that, It's possible I've been seriously undercharging... Thanks, I'll need to think about that if/when I can return to consulting work more regularly.

Consulting is like art -- sometimes the higher the price that is set, the more subjectively desirable it becomes to the buyers. People tend to value the input of consultants based upon how much they paid the consultant -- the more they paid for it, the more they value the results.

[kerbiloid]

9 hours ago, KSK said:

As for $50 for 20 minutes. that sounds about right to me. $150 per hour, so call it a $1,200 a day. That's at the mid to lower end of the scale for an academic consultancy fee. Top tier professors would earn a lot more. Source - personal experience from six years in a university tech transfer department.

Squad should take money for reading this highly educative forum and found a scientific call-center.

[KSK]

7 hours ago, Cunjo Carl said:

Hearing that, It's possible I've been seriously undercharging... Thanks, I'll need to think about that if/when I can return to consulting work more regularly.

No problem.

In my experience, a lot of academics do tend to undervalue themselves financially. There's something endearingly modest about that, right up until the point when your top tier prof promises to do some work for somebody for a price that's substantially less than its actual cost to the university, leaving said university to take the hit.

Mostly, I think it's a result of being around extremely smart people for your entire career and measuring yourself against them, rather than against the average layman. That's not intended to be disparaging - said layman may well be outstanding in their own walk of life - just not in the rather esoteric bits of science they're looking for a consultant to teach them about.

That link is a case in point - to me as an outsider (or somewhat informed layman at best) that looks like some phenomenally high flying stuff - string theory, philosophical underpinnings of quantum mechanics, etc. etc. To the people involved it's probably just Tuesday.

[Stephen Peterson]

I admit it may sound a little out there. But most people believe in the big bang theory which there no mathematical model to describe that. But thats popular opinion because that makes most sense. Does anyone have a better explanation other than my theory that makes more sense? 

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Stephen Peterson said:

I admit it may sound a little out there. But most people believe in the big bang theory which there no mathematical model to describe that. But thats popular opinion because that makes most sense. Does anyone have a better explanation other than my theory that makes more sense? 

This is from the wiki explanation of the Big Bang Theory...

Spoiler

...The model describes how the universe expanded from a very high-density and high-temperature state, and offers a comprehensive explanation for a broad range of phenomena, including the abundance of light elements, the cosmic microwave background (CMB), large scale structure and Hubble’s law... 

...If the observed conditions are extrapolated backwards in time using the known laws of physics, the prediction is that just before a period of very high density there was a singularity which is typically associated with the Big Bang. Physicists are undecided whether this means the universe began from a singularity, or that current knowledge is insufficient to describe the universe at that time.”

 

Can your theory do any of that? Did you use any laws of physics to arrive at your predictions? Are there any principles of physics that you can cite as being responsible for the effects you are talking about?  

From what I can see you have created the end of a story and now need to work out how to get there. This isn’t how science works.

Edited July 9, 2019 by Guest

[Stephen Peterson]

and......

[Nightside]

@Stephen Peterson, I am having difficulty following because you make some logical leaps that aren’t obvious to me.

just to start, 

On 7/6/2019 at 1:08 PM, Stephen Peterson said:

Once the universe has reached its tipping point on the balance beam it is currently balancing on, it will collapse into itself in the blink of an eye

Without getting into blackholes and alternative dimensions, can you clarify this statement?

[Rus-Evo]

Question from a dumb person:  So this theory means I travel faster than light into a black hole when gravity itself only travels at the speed of light?

Wont that change my perception of time somewhat?

[KerikBalm]

On 7/9/2019 at 8:37 AM, Stephen Peterson said:

Does anyone have a better explanation other than my theory that makes more sense? 

Universe pixies fart bob then he creates a pressurized vacuum that colorizes the radiation resulting in existence.

Done! :)

[Shpaget]

On 7/9/2019 at 8:37 AM, Stephen Peterson said:

Does anyone have a better explanation other than my theory that makes more sense? 

Are you seriously claiming that your OP makes more sense than Big Bang? 

It doesn't.

And let's refrain from calling it a theory. It's a hypothesis at best.