Timeline for Why were quasicrystals initially so controversial?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2021 at 13:36 | comment | added | Buttonwood | @GeorgeKontogeorgiou It wasn't for giving a proper answer, rather than an extension of the other by a few illustrations. Don't underestimate the power of dogma within communities in lines of «you belong to our school / line of thought if you follow concept A, refrain from touching concept B, and strongly disagree to this newly concept X by our (perhaps personally disliked) competitors». It takes courage to admit if a perspective previously taken was incomplete (or wrong) - irrespective if in the past, or in present time, irrespective if in science, or society. | |
| Jun 23, 2021 at 13:12 | comment | added | George Kontogeorgiou | Thank you for the answer, but my question indicates that I know both the crystallographic restriction theorem and about translational symmetries. My point is, I also know that not all tilings must admit translational symmetries and obey the crystallographic restriction theorem, i.e. there are aperiodic tilings. And people of that time also knew this. So why were some chemists, including some accomplished ones, so hostile to the idea of quasicrystals? | |
| Jun 23, 2021 at 13:06 | history | answered | Buttonwood | CC BY-SA 4.0 |