FEYNMAN AND THE CHALLENGER EXPLOSION
berezin at MCMAIL.CIS.MCMASTER.CA
Thu Feb 1 13:35:04 EST 1996
[ RANDOM SNIPS ]
> On Thu, 1 Feb 1996, Chris Sully wrote:
> inforamp.net (David Lloyd-Jones) writes:
> Nick Landau <nick at n-landau.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> love at not.war (TEMPEST) wrote:
>> gimme a break.
> My, that'a an intelligent response!
> I thought "Tempest"'s response was intelligent:
> brief, pungent, and
> relevant. Gold's aricle was an unpleasant exercise in a rather
> simpering kind of paranoia.
>> Give me a break indeed!
I am amaized at the level of mixed emotions
(some samples are above) triggered by the
original posting on Feynman and Challenger.
What Bert Gold originally said, is that a great man
was able to convince people by a highly lucid
common sense argument.
But imagine it was not Feymnam but some little known
prof of physics or engineering from some small
university or college who would come up with the
precisely same demonsration (oil ring in ice water,
or what it was) in the same day and on the same
occasion. Who would notice this argument then ?
Obviously nobody, and it won't affect Challenger
invesigation in any way whatsover.
This simply confirms that most of us know already.
That people (even in science) have little patience
with common sense argumentation when it goes
against their personal interest. So, they keep
ignore criticism and insist on irrelevancies to
maintain the warmth of their cusion existence.
For essentially anyone OUTSIDE science it is perfectly
clear that the anonymous opinion in science merits to
rather little on an ethical (and scale) and even on
the factual side its credibility is often very low.
Nonetheless, scientists as a guild, keep insisting
on the APR (anonymous peer review) and highly selective
funding models (nonsensical idea of 'excellence
enforcement' through rat race 'competition').
Dick Feynman was lucky (wise enough ?) not to talk
on APR or selectivity - if he would, he would
undoubtedly be ignored too. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
and Henrich Rohrer (both are Nobel prize laureates)
who DID TALK talk on the idiocity of competition
were ignored either.
More information about the Bioforum