Chapters 5–6 document the career consequences faced by physicists who pursued medium-based physics or challenged the mainstream consensus.
The book argues that suppression operates through institutional mechanisms: funding denial, peer review gatekeeping, tenure committee bias, and social ostracism — not through any central conspiracy. The effect is the same, but the mechanism is distributed.
Have you encountered or witnessed these dynamics in your own field? How do institutional incentives shape which questions physicists are allowed to ask?