There is also the "Crackpot Index" by physicist John Baez:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
Stephen Hawkins in his book The Theory of Everything complained that science had become too complicated for philosophers and in conclusion had this to say:
from the index: "8. 5 points for each mention of "Einstien", "Hawkins" or "Feynmann"."
"However, if we discover a complete theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principal by everyone, not just a few scientists. Then we shall all be able to take part in the discussion of why the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason. For thin we should know the mind of God." Einstein's theories and the string theories are too complicated as Hawkins observed. Mine is not.
"29. 30 points for suggesting that a famous figure secretly disbelieved in a theory which he or she publicly supported. (E.g., that Feynman was a closet opponent of special relativity, as deduced by reading between the lines in his freshman physics textbooks.)"
(Hawking is, of course, not an opponent of Einstein's theories--most of his work is in General Relativity, and the overlap of that theory with quantum physics. The quote does not say that theories of physics should be rejected for being 'too complicated', it simply says that once we have a unified theory it can be explained in simplified terms to nonspecialists, just as his book tries to do with relativity and quantum physics.)
I understand it took four years before people began to accept Einstein's theories. If you guys had been around a hundred years ago, you would probably have sent this link to him!
"18. 10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence). "
(Actually Einstein's ideas were accepted pretty quickly, and even those who disagreed with them did not accuse him of failing to understand existing physics or of being a crackpot)
Jesse
