Dissapointed with old closed minds in ME forum

[Clausius2]

I have faced a couple of guys in the engineering PF that base all their analyses in their virtual experience in a company. No analytical demonstrations, no numbers, no concepts, only words and curriculums. I want let you know, PF administrators, that young people like me get dissapointed with these behaviors, because when one is young one looks for the proof of everything, looks for the insight, not for someone telling you that you should believe in what is he saying because he has a lot of experience. What I mean is that I am not going to spend a lot of time showing the thing for having afterwards a guy throwing everything to the trash by means of nothing. And this is going to cause that the Mech&Eng forum is going to be a place of OLD gurus, not a place for the knowledge and learning.

PS: Those who know what I am thinking about know who is included in the list or not.

 

[Bystander]

Incomplete problem statements 'll do it every time --- everybody in that thread needs to back off, cool down, and state the boundary conditions, initial values, and what's at the other end of the pipe.

 

[berkeman]

Incomplete problem statements 'll do it every time --- everybody in that thread needs to back off, cool down, and state the boundary conditions, initial values, and what's at the other end of the pipe.

Is it mainly one thread? What's the thread?

 

[Bystander]

Cyrus's "open vertical pipe."

 

[Clausius2]

Incomplete problem statements 'll do it every time --- everybody in that thread needs to back off, cool down, and state the boundary conditions, initial values, and what's at the other end of the pipe.

I think it is not a problem of the initial conditions or boundary conditions of the setup. I think it is a problem of the boundary conditions of this guy. I am not going to make reverence to anyone only because he has a lot of experience. Never. One can have faced the same problem thousands (as he and other guys usually say) of times, and one can be wrong every time. I'm not going to bear with it here, nobody is paying me for doing that, maybe when I'll be in a company I will have to do so.

So if someone wants to tell me I'm wrong he or she will have to support his words with facts, not with air. And if they can't, they must do the same thing than I do when I don't know about something: shut up.

 

[Moonbear]

This is sounding like it's an issue with a single thread and single poster, and not a general forum issue. If so, please take it up with the mentors via PM, and not here.

 

[Astronuc]

Or send me a PM. I've been meaning to get back to that problem, but I've been busy.

And to end the week, I experienced an electrical disruption at work - power out followed by a voltage reduction - and then discovered a leak in the ceiling above my desk (I'm on the 4th floor of a 5 story office building, and I think the water is coming from a leak which developed in the external paneling of the building ). The building owner has apparently requested bids for repair of the building (since when I don't know)

Edit: I just looked at the post. Who'd of thought that fluid mechanics could be so exciting? :rofl: I wish we were meeting in person, in front of chalk board. I'd bring the beer.

 

[Clausius2]

This is sounding like it's an issue with a single thread and single poster, and not a general forum issue. If so, please take it up with the mentors via PM, and not here.

Honestly I think it is a general forum issue. There is a great problem, Moonbear, when you try to explain something complex to someone without the background needed to understand a mathematical explanation. Moreover, there is a great problem when that someone doesn't care about the formulation, and does not have modesty enough for learning what you are showing him (and costed you time to do so). I have found around 3 people in the ME forum. These guys do things with their hands, but they don't definitely know how to get along with pencil and paper, and the worst thing is that they are not willing to do so.

You won't probably find these behaviors in Quantum physics forums or in the strings theory forum, because they are highly specialized in what they are doing. The problem with engineering is that even a carpenter believes he thinks how to do engineering, because this people think that everything can be explained in plane words and based on plane arguments. And sometimes the physics of engineering requires and advanced knowledge, that's because we spend 5 years in school (i think 4 in US), we get a MS, and others a Ph.D.. In the world of engineering, you will usually find these old elephants that have forgotten even how to write the Navier Stokes equations, but they base their reasonement in Mouth-To-Ears or Boss-To-Employee experience, believing that their bosses were right for sure and afterwards they are right also. The chain goes on, and at some point and without any background, they find a notebook 1000 pages thick in their desk describing how to do the 100 tasks that they know how to do because they are programmed to do them as the company chief wants.

That's a pity, and that's because I'm here doing a Ph.D. and not working over there. I don't want to loose my brain. My brain is my palace.

 

[Danger]

Hey, Clausius;
It's always a bit disheartening to see personalities enter into a scientific discussion, but that's human nature. I quit reading that thread when the first equation showed up, because I can't understand that stuff. I've just gone over the whole thing (again, without understanding it; I can't find enough information in the whole thing to deem it an answerable question--to me, what's at the top of the pipe is important).
Unfortunately, I am one of those to whom you refer--no real science background, but a fair bit of experience. Please don't paint us all with the same brush. With no schooling, all that I have to rely on is common sense and educational mishaps from my past. I defer to the formulae when they conform to reality, but that's not always the case (I cite my post in the 'How fast does a bullet fall' thread). Sometimes, experience disproves theory. That is not to say that I scorn degrees; as I've said before, you have some of the most insightful and articulate posts that I've ever seen in the area of fluid dynamics and similar subjects. Even without invoking the math, you make things clear to the likes of me. Keep in mind, though, that if someone has actually done something, as opposed to theorizing about it, he/she might have been in a situation where reality doesn't conform to the blueprints. That could mean that they didn't fully understand the theory, or misinterpreted what was going on, but not necessarily.
I remember a similar situation when Stingray and I were going on about panic stops in a car. We both have a lot of experience (not the same type, though), and he knows more of the theory. We managed to stay on good terms, although it came close. Still, if I'd gone by what he considers proper stopping technique I'd be dead now... a couple of times over.
Okay, I've said my bit.
Astro... great last post in that thread.

 

[Clausius2]

Unfortunately, I am one of those to whom you refer--no real science background, but a fair bit of experience. :

Not quite!. I'm not referring to you!. You may not have the background, but you have the modesty of learning, and you are willing to do so, and you never appeal to your wonderful experience, and you try to answer with your best tools. Do not compare you with these other people please. There is one thing that differs you from those: lack of arrogance.

I think you represent the positive side of the people who are here and wants to help, not to destroy or overcome the rest without the background needed to do so.

Keep on working here danger, we need you.

 

[Clausius2]

By the way, I'm thinking about launching a tutorial with this problem (and pipe flow in general) and another one about when the hell one can assume incompressible or compressible flow without panic on his head because of making a great numerical error (because I forgot to tell that when this people get in panic they appeal even to the effect of the explosion of a nearby nova and its influence in the flow).

 

[Danger]

Keep on working here danger, we need you.

No you don't, but it's nice to be wanted.

 

[Astronuc]

No you don't, but it's nice to be wanted.

Yes we do - you are our Automotive Engineering Guru. :tongue2:

 

[russ_watters]

Incomplete problem statements 'll do it every time --- everybody in that thread needs to back off, cool down, and state the boundary conditions, initial values, and what's at the other end of the pipe.

This is the basic problem with the thread and unfortunately I've been busy this weekend and haven't been able to try and sort through it. Perhaps it isn't even worth doing, but I did read the posts in question and agree that civility is lacking. There is no need to get worked-up over a physics problem. Everyone needs to understand that everyone else is just trying to help.

I'm closing the thread for now until I can sort out if it has any redeeming value and trim the offending posts. And I apologize for not taking action sooner.

 

[Clausius2]

The post

One of my tutorials about incompressibility is now posted and open to debate in ME forum.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=1067505#post1067505

Doubtless, the above one is the thread I feel most proud of since I have been writting here.

 

[Lisa!]

but it's nice to be wanted.

If W wouldn't mind...

 

[Danger]

Well, she didn't mind me dancing with another girl at the bar Friday night, so there's hope.

Astro... you never cease to amaze me with the undeserved respect that you show me. Love you, dude. But for the automotive scene, the aforementioned Stingray, and Hypatia (if she can ever learn English), and Fred are miles ahead. Still, I ain't leaving now that I have a family.