Off-topic posts (was Re: So-long...)

Walter Eric Johnson wej3715 at scully.tamu.edu
Mon Dec 14 23:46:16 EST 1998


kkollins at pop3.concentric.net wrote:
: Example =Abound=... the =Trouble Is= that that you're Presuming to
: "Know" what "Expertise" Is, and from that Presumption, Attempting to
: Dictate, to everyone else who meets here, what they should Think.
: 
: Folks who'd have Failed your Presumptuous "test":

Not at all.
 
: The Wright Brothers (just Celebrated the Anniversary of their First
: Flight the other night... they were "mere bycycle-builders".

The Wright Brothers made engineering progress, not scientific progress.
They overturned no established theories of the day.  However, they
did understand, on an engineering level, the theories they needed.

: Mendelson... who's work did meet with Presumption similar to that which
: you've Expressed.

Mendelson was, if I remember correctly, well versed in the theories
of the time.

: Gallois... who's not Celebrated, but who had to Race to get his work
: written-down before his world caved-in on him.

As was Gallois.
 
: The Great Indian Mathematician, whose name I cannot, presently,
: recall... Chandekar(sp?).

I've read about him but don't remember his name, either.  In any
case, he had a remarkable ability to learn the field.  You cannot
claim that he was ignorant of the theories of his day.

: Einstein, who, subject to Presumption similar to yours, could not find a
: Professor's position, so he had to work in the Swiss Patent Office... he
: was called "dull" by one of his teachers.

Einstein was an expert in the theories.  Without that expertise, he
would never have been able to come up with Relativity.
 
: The woman, whose name I, also, cannot, presently, recall, who did the
: most Crystallographic work on which hinged the Reification of DNA... her
: Expertise was so-little respected that practically all Credit was
: Withheld from her (which Remains the case, BTW).



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list