Hi Christopher Ferro

You are right, I was a bit confusing or ambiguous. The type of Ph.D that has “entrenched thinking” is one that would describe him or herself as an “expert” in the field or topic of discussion. There is no way anyone is going to “teach” him or her anything really new. (Adding to their accepted knowledge base is ok, but accepting new concepts that require a change in their basic understanding of nature, forget it. History repeats itself, the same process happened in the acceptance of a Keplerian model over a Ptolemaic model. (I prefer to refer to Kepler over Copernicus since Copernicus used the same flawed mathematical model of epicycles found in the Ptolemaic system. )

(Now everything is really statistically based, So I should be more accurate, out of about 40 face to face encounters with professional physicists and over 200 email correspondence attempts, I can state that the general reaction is “I must get 40 of these a year, I’ve made up my mind to not look at them”. Their loss. )

Snowflake