Should Scientific Discussions Cater to the Lowest Common Denominator?

[russ_watters]

Well, the first thing I have taken notice (for too long now) is that people use the ME/AE forum as a homework help section; yet at the same time, I hardly see people using the Engineering section of homework help.

That's largely my fault - I tend to take a play-it-where-it-lies approach and often leave threads that probably should be moved. I'll try to be more cognizant of that.

And I don't blame you, compared to the Math and Physics Sections, the standards just seem so low in the Engineering Forums these days

I try to stay away from them for that reason. From the ME/AE forum, you would think being an ME is about fixing your car's engine...

It seems like it's a pop-science forum and not a science forum. Sorta like a really bad Tech magazine that's full of fluff...

Sorry guys, no offense, but its been bugging me for months now

Have you looked at the open topics in General Physics lately? The top thread is a common lame hypothetical about the sun vanishing and the second is a poorly worded question about photons traveling through time.

Frankly, I'm not sure what you are looking for here: sure, we get a lot of pop-sci type threads, but so what? One of the reasons I like this place so much is that it is such an eclectic community. Where else in the world can a layman or teenager have a question on nuclear power answered graciously by a Lawrence Livermore nuclear physicist/engineer? The very idea of that is absurd! And we encourage it! It is a truly remarkable and beautiful thing.

Also, pop-sci discussions make kids interested in engineering and that is also a good thing. Heck, they keep me interested. Do you have any idea how mundane HVAC engineering is?!?

I couldn't help noticing that you proclaimed that none of us were qualified to contribute to Rainmanaero's question about initial pitch control reversal in a delta-wing aircraft. I can assure you that you were speaking for yourself only. Comments like that shouldn't be made unless you know who it is that you're commenting about.

I noticed that too and was confused. Cyrus, are you suggesting that only professional aerodynamicists should be holding discussions in the Aero forum? This isn't a work-group for people designing airplanes, it's a discussion forum. The other forums here aren't like that either - you don't see people gathered in the cosmology forum conducting real research on the origin of the universe.

I also took that thread as a light brainstorming session and keep in mind that threads are not private. I often go off on tangents in threads like that specifically for the benefit of other people who might be reading it who may be interested in related issues that are almost on topic. I don't know if the OP question was answered - but I do know that a lot of people learned a lot about aerodynamics from that thread, and that is just as important.

 

[russ_watters]

Arg, here is another one that gets at me.

Is this a serious thread? You want to build a 12 foot rocket with 2000lbs of thrust.

Well, do you have any permits? Have you ever built a rocket? Are you a member of a model rocket association and have insurance?

If you do, why are you asking us and not someone qualified with experience who has built a similar model rocket? If you're building a rocket that big with that much thrust, you should have built a rocket before in your lifetime and know people who do rockets or find people to talk to that do large scale rockets. This kind of post shows me you really don't know what your doing, or don't care.

When I see this, I honestly don't know how to take it as a serious thread.

Please, someone tell me I am not alone in thinking this?

I don't know if it is a serious thread or not, but I'm not going to start with the assumption that it isn't, and even if it isn't, slamming the door on the guy will only serve to drive him away and prevent him from learning anything useful here. We do keep an eye out for things that people may do that may be dangerous, and that thread is borderline, but I don't see any reason at the moment to close it.

 

[Cyrus]

Also, pop-sci discussions make kids interested in engineering and that is also a good thing.

Yes, and I agree. But to flip the coin, look at that thread I liked with Ultima and Rainman about Kalman filtering. That was a serious discussion and the first post by Ultima. He got no answer to his question and he left. I have not seen him since. When you have lots of 'pop sci' posts, it makes people who want a serious discussion want to not stay around. And that to me is the biggest loss, because those are qualified people. Teens asking about science are always going to come and go, its the people who know what their doing, i.e. Rainman, that it would be nice to attract.

Cyrus, are you suggesting that only professional aerodynamicists should be holding discussions in the Aero forum?

No, not at all. But the thread is for Mechancial Engineering, not popular mechanics. I for one, would love to see people like Fred talk about Jet Design research, not sift through threads about some guy with a 4m 2000lb rocket wanting to know how to light it up. And people give him serious replies!? It blows my mind!

Maybe he should go to a model rocket forum. Because that isn't an engineering question. That's a how to. Heck, put it into a 'how to build' forum. But its insulting to call that engineering.

 

[russ_watters]

Maybe what would solve this problem is the creation of a subforum division between 'amateur' questions and 'pro' questions?
'I am a hobbyist looking for ideas' vs. 'I am a professional looking for professional expertise'

I mean, I think it's a formula for disaster, but I'm just putting it out there.

No, absolutely not. As I said above, one of the things that makes this forum great is that laymen and experts can mix in an unintimidating and productive way.

 

[Cyrus]

No, absolutely not. As I said above, one of the things that makes this forum great is that laymen and experts can mix in an unintimidating and productive way.

Well, that's a bit conflicting to me. I can understand a layman asking a question. But I hope I don't see a Layman giving engineering advice to someone. That is why he is a Layman and not a professional engineer.

I have no beef with some kid coming and asking 'hey how does jet engines work', or something to that effect.

But when a guy like Rainman comes in here with a top notch question, and he gets answers like that...man, it's depressing.

 

[Danger]

Did you happen to notice that Rainman thanked us profusely for our input? That, to me, indicates that he got the sort of response that he was looking for.

edit: And thanks, Russ, for expressing the same feelings that I have for this site. You're way up the ladder, but the idea is the same. When I, without a high-school education, can interact and be friends with the likes of Astronuc and Moonbear and Fred... and be treated as an equal mentality (which I'm not)... it's just astounding. I'd gladly pay 10 times the contributor fee to be a part of this. Thanks for clarifying the forum situation. As much as I adore reading Clausius' posts about fluid dynamics, and can understand them to some point because he's so good at teaching, I couldn't stay here if all posts were held to that standard.

 

[FrogPad]

Where else in the world can a layman or teenager have a question on nuclear power answered graciously by a Lawrence Livermore nuclear physicist/engineer? .

That would be a good shirt. Oh wait, what did I just find ...

too bad, I couldn't just post that as an image... kind of lost some of its luster.

I also wanted to add...
Something I really enjoy about this forum is the fact that the little guys get a chance to be heard. It's nice that I feel that I can actually respond and answer some questions that people have. I have definitely been wrong, but that gets corrected very quickly, and I learn a lot in the process. If the standard was set so high, that only PhD's were qualified to respond to questions, then this forum would have a very different feel to it.

 

[Cyrus]

Did you happen to notice that Rainman thanked us profusely for our input? That, to me, indicates that he got the sort of response that he was looking for.

edit: And thanks, Russ, for expressing the same feelings that I have for this site. You're way up the ladder, but the idea is the same. When I, without a high-school education, can interact and be friends with the likes of Astronuc and Moonbear and Fred... and be treated as an equal mentality (which I'm not)... it's just astounding. I'd gladly pay 10 times the contributor fee to be a part of this. And the only reason that I left you out of that list is that I don't think that you could be friends with someone who despises your political stance (just as you despise mine). I can certainly still interact with you on a civil basis, however, and have learned one hell of a lot from you (especially about Tomcats). Thanks for clarifying the forum situation. As much as I adore reading Clausius' posts about fluid dynamics, and can understand them to some point because he's so good at teaching, I couldn't stay here if all posts were held to that standard.

Hey, I am by no means trying to belittle anyone here, especially you. I have tons of respect for you, that's for damn sure. Don't doubt that for one second! I am glad your around here and you give tons of good advice.

Im not saying its anyone particular persons fault. I'm just saying that in general, there is a lot that could/should be done to improve the engineering section. It feels like it is diverging from engineering and going off into la-la land sometimes.

Have you guys every stopped to hear cyclo for example? From time to time he asks about civil engineering and if there are other civil engineers. I feel bad for the guy, he wants to talk about civil/structural engineering, but there's no one for him to talk to, and at the same time I don't see anything done to attract other civil engineers.

Now compare that to the physics section, I see a slowly growing number of people giving good advice that I have not seen before.

Contrast that to Engineering, its the same 4-5 people in there, and that's about it. It's like Engineering is getting sold short and sometimes I feel like people who skim those threads don't even get a glimpse of what real engineering is about.

 

[Cyrus]

That would be a good shirt. Oh wait, what did I just find ...

too bad, I couldn't just post that as an image... kind of lost some of its luster.

I also wanted to add...
Something I really enjoy about this forum is the fact that the little guys get a chance to be heard. It's nice that I feel that I can actually respond and answer some questions that people have. I have definitely been wrong, but that gets corrected very quickly, and I learn a lot in the process. If the standard was set so high, that only PhD's were qualified to respond to questions, then this forum would have a very different feel to it.

I'm not saying that. Look for example, at the physics section. You got guys like Zz who are Phd's or teachers. When something needs to be set straight, they will set you straight.

On the other hand, what checks and bounds are there in the engineering forums? Hardly any. Sometimes it is nice to sit back and listen to someone who knows what they are talking about and learn something. I feel like I can do that in the Math/Physics threads.

In the engineering threads I sit back and shake my head sometimes.

 

[Cyrus]

Do you have any idea how mundane HVAC engineering is?!?

It's actually pretty damn interesting with a lot of thermodynamics. My thermo professor works for the Center for Environmental Energy Engineering and does things for alternative energy methods on HVAC and power systems.

http://www.enme.umd.edu/ceee/

This is what I'm talking about. This is just a small % of the good stuff no one sees, and is exactly my point.

 

[Integral]

Cyrus,
We have never done anything to attract anybody, in a organized manner. It has always been word of mouth and Google searches that have brought people in. You have been around long enough to see it. There is a steady parade of members that post a few times then vanish. A few stick around for a few weeks or a few months then move on. We have little control over this. It has always been our goal to provide a place where you can have a meaningful conversation without the distraction of pure garbage that you see in the vast majority of web based forums. To a large degree we have succeeded. Now it is not easy, to at the same time, control a conversation and encourage participation. If you get to heavy handed with the deletions and censorship you kill conversation. Conversation is key to our existence, we have to balance the need to keep the conversation alive and cutting the nonsense. The blatant crackpots are easy, it is the borderline cases that are hard. Do we delete a post that is close but missed the mark or do we let the more knowable members deal with the errors. That is were the real learning occurs, we have to hope that the OP is open to learning. That is not always the case, those not willing to learn find themselves banned.

Do you see the dilemma we face? Yes you are correct there are to many homework problems in the Engineering forums, the report post button is the best defense against this.

I do not think that there is much we can do to raise the level of conversations, that comes with a higher level membership. I think we have higher level physics discussions (sometimes anyway) simply because these are the PHYSICSFORUMS. We just do not get the quantity or quality of engineers. We do have a small but very solid core of engineers, with time that will grow, you just have to be patient. You would be amazed to see what the level of conversations were in the physics and math forums 4 years ago. I think with the addition of Berkeman as a Mentor you will see an improvement. A single active mentor (Russ) simply cannot provide the time required to keep the forums clean.



I, for one, appreciate your input.

 

[Danger]

I, for one, appreciate your input.

Likewise. It just seems to me that since this is an educational site, the answers should be kept to the level that the asker can follow. An expert who can follow all of the math won't be asking, except in cases such as Rainman's where a 'carpet-bombing' approach is desired. Moonbear, for instance, won't any time soon have a question about glycolitic phosphorilation. (If she does, for whatever reason, she wouldn't likely ask it here.) She might very well, on the other hand, have a casual curiosity about why a dropped test-tube shattered in a particular pattern. There would be no need to go into every intricacy of the atomic structure of glass.
In addition, others of a lower educational level are reading the answers as well. They shouldn't be excluded from learning, so I tend to 'talk down' a bit even when responding to someone that I know can follow it fine. I've gained an immense amount of information that way, about subjects that I didn't even know were of interest to me until I read them.
Cyrus, I never took anything that you said as a put-down, so don't worry about that, and I hope that you didn't take my responses as a dismissal of your opinions. You explained your view very clearly, and I'm just trying to do the same. Thanks for the kind words.
Okay, I'm done now. I'm going to bail out of this thread before I wear out my keyboard.