Should Scientific Discussions Cater to the Lowest Common Denominator?

[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.