1
$\begingroup$

Questions that may fit this: 1, 2.

There's a number of sources (e.g. 1, 2, 3) that claim to teach (some part of) physics, some of which seem questionable. If they are on-topic, should there be a tag?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'd point out that your two examples are asking about research papers, not courses/tutorials, which makes them much more likely to be acceptable. $\endgroup$ – David Z Feb 20 '12 at 2:55
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidZaslavsky: I know, which is why I decided to ask instead of relying on precedent. :) $\endgroup$ – Anton Golov Feb 20 '12 at 5:47
4
$\begingroup$

I think asking about the credibility of specific, individual results is fine (of course, if it's someone clearly trying to publicize their own cranky work then it should be closed)

For specific results, there can be specific claims to support or strike down those results. On the other hand, the Khan academy videos claim to be teaching basic high-school physics and I doubt they are wrong -- if one has a question about a particular claim in one of the videos that's fine, but I don't think it's useful to ask about their credibility as a whole... Other than the assumed credibility of printed material, it's not so different from having a question for every textbook: "Is Shankar's QM a credible resource?" etc.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

You could try and post them (one item per answer) in one of our lists for online lectures, e.g.,

and let people vote them up or down, or comment. That should give you a hint about their credibility.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ That only works ideally if the list is a community-wiki(CW). Shouldn't this question be a CW? $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Feb 24 '12 at 11:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .