What the intent of your Language?

omin

The Forums on this website have rules. We must stick to said theories in which the Forums represent. That's acceptable, otherwise this website would eventually lack organization and could possibly mislead vistors about what the actually said theorys do express.

There is a logic problem with this. When people arrive, who have an interest in a specific Forum, and they ask a question that is relevant to the Forum, but because of their lack of experience with the topic, they word it in an unconventional way, they can be accused of posting in the wrong area and the thread is moved.

I have had this happen. I've tried to discuss a subject, such as the speed of light from it's source, which I am aware is a general physics question. After all, it is discussed in basic physics books. Maybe it's not 'general', maybe it is theory development. What do I know, I'm still learing alot of this.

Maybe it wasn't the question that got it moved. Maybe it was my attempt to explain in the best words I could put forth from what I've understood from physics I have studied. If my language or theory was in unconventional, then shouldn't my intent of the language been questioned before I was rushed off to theory development, which assumes I want to soap box.

If it's possible for the thread to be moved to theory development because the discussion goes off the wayside of theory, then can any one else post a comment pushing the thread into out of context of the forum requirements, thus forcing it into development?

And when we're in development, isn't this a free for all? How do we know then we're not listening to the personal theories of mentors and being misled about conventions, because this is anyones chance to turn my seriousness into a soapbox convention? Are mentors bound by conventions in Development? Not that they would want to, but what about it?

I think the mentors should have more patience with people learning the theory and langage conventions of a particular theory, take time to explain why terminolgy in specific cases is important and get the line of discussion in line with the forum. But this can't occur if they've haven't taken the time and discovered that the intent of the question is really intended for convention and thus the forum.

I understand there are people who just want to argue, but they're nihilists, because they won't shut up when the proof has been demostrated. Some just want to convince, but never know a damn thing. I understand some people, 'just don't get it'. But, some of us are here to learn and all we have we must bounce off the conventions to get anywhere.

Tom Mattson

The remedy for this is staring you right in the face: Learn physics! You won't be misled by anyone if you know what you are talking about in the first place.

The Mentors here are very patient. It is the most helpful members who are asked to be Mentors in the first place! I myself teach for a living, and I have a great deal of patience in answering questions from excited novices. But one thing that causes my patience to come to a screeching halt is when the novice stops asking questions and starts making statements on things about which he has no knowledge. If you examine your thread that has been moved to Theory Development, it should be clear that you are doing this.

If you want your questions to stay in the scientific forums, then you really need to stop telling us what Newton's third law says, how physicists need to think, etc. You say these things as though we are peers. We aren't.

But you can take advantage of the expertise of the more knowledgable members here if you will listen. It's up to you.

omin

Tom, when people take things seriously and they use the wrong words or are a bit confused about what they assert, they can't know they don't know what they are talking about. The fact is everybody is this way. When you think you know something, you really think you know it, until an explanation taps into unconsidered knowledge that proves it invalid.

I see that you had patience. I see that you are taking time out. Obviously you care. But Tom, your tone seemed arrogant and insultive. I think arrorance and insults should be used for those who really don't give a bleep. I'm not here because I don't give a bleep. That would be the yahoo chatroom on physics, minus a ten percent serious crowd that does look for those who are atleast discussing the subject of physics.

There is a confusion. I simply approach things at the level and language skill I am at. If I assert something I say I know, prove it's wrong, rather than assume I mean to develop the next theory when my physics education is nearly begining.

I'll do the best I can to do that.

Tom Mattson

I'll say it again: The only safeguard against being led astray by anyone in the realm of physics is to take the initiative yourself and study it.

I did not deliberately insult you. When I said you posted gibberish, it's because that's the honest-to-goodness truth. "Psychological mass in the brain", "no mass (boolean)", referring to inertia as the shape of light, and at least a half dozen other terms you use quite simply have no meaning in physics. They are proprietary terms that were invented by you, and it is up to you to convey their meaning to those with whom you wish to interact. I'm not expecting you to be a physics expert, I'm just expecting some basic communication skills.

If you go back to the thread in which we last interacted, you'll see that I asked you to define your terms, but you did not respond. Why should I ask twice?

Since you didn't meet me halfway, I didn't bother asking again.

If your physics education is just beginning, then you should not be making statements such as "photons have the property mass" or "There is but one road to c and it is through Newton". These statements are demonstrably false, and we have been explaining why. You should be aware it is standard practice at Physics Forums to move threads that make such statements to the Theory Development Forum.

That's a good start.

russ_watters

Well, there is something to be said for open-mindedness: those who are ignorant (nasty sounding word, but everyone is ignorant of something) should recognize the fact that they have gaps in their knowledge and be open to the information that can fill those gaps. Certainly, not everyone is open minded and ironically those who consider themselves the most open mided are often the least open minded.

Try to keep an open mind and really consider the things being taught to you by people who know more than you. And don't be insulted by the implication that others may know more than you - listen to those people.