>>12087>Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the whole principle of scientific inquiry was supposed to be based upon something like the open source ethic, otherwise the fundamental criteria of Peer Review would not be possible… right?Some parts of research are open, although many scientific papers are blocked off behind paywalls. Other parts of research are fully closed, like military secrets or commercial unpublished research. Science isn't merely research, it's also education. Scientific education is also only partially open, like you get some scientific education in public schools and some of it's also freely available online, but a sizeable chunk is pay-walled.
I think that there are conspiracies to disperse false information too. Like for example a few years ago the quantum computer industry all of a sudden started pushing bits of quantum-theory that had been refuted in the late 1980s.
<Science minutia startThere was an attempt to rule out all hidden variables theories using Bell's theorem. But as it turns out that Bell's theorem only rules out local hidden variables, while it does not rule out non-local hidden variables theories, like for example the de broglie-bohm interpretation of quantum theory.
The refutation came from: Carl H. Brans in February 1988
The paper is called "Bell's theorem does not eliminate fully causal hidden variables"
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227200042<Science minutia endThis erroneous bit of information has made it into scifi Television shows, various youtube edutainment and potentially even into some of the online science education services. I'm relatively sure that it's quantum computer companies doing this because the people who proliferate this, often say that they have consulted with people working in the quantum computer industry.
I've considered that it might be something motivated by ideology, like for example the physicist David Joseph Bohm was exiled for "unamerican activities" from the US by McCarthyism in 1951. I somehow doubt that quantum computer companies in the 21st century are still worried about something as moronic as "communist physics". Realist/physicalist/materialist philosophic underpinnings in science is hardly unique to communism. It would also be strange for them to quote John Stewart Bell's theories, because he was a outspoken supporter of de broglie-bohm theory. Bell wouldn't have supported a theory if his own theorem contradicted it.
The other more likely explanation is that they found out something about quantum-theory that's important for overcoming an important technical hurdle and they are spreading FUD in order to make it harder for competing quantum computer firms to overcome that hurdle. So it could be that non-local hidden variable theories might make it easier to describe quantum physics effects that are uniquely useful for quantum computing.
This long detour into physics was to illustrate a third part of science that happens inside of industries during the exploratory engineering phases, which is usually almost entirely closed, with information only slowly leaking over time.
In conclusion there is some open source practice in science, but it's being undermined pretty heavily, which causes massive amounts of "scientific drag" that massively slows down the rate of scientific progress.
If we are talking about open source medicine, you kinda need more than just open source science, you need to opensource the means to make medicines as well. Like open source software code also needs open source software compilers.