Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #510388 > unrolled thread

Why Still Old Framework?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Why Still Old Framework? Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-07-30 20:09 +0000
    Re: Why Still Old Framework? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 20:29 -0500
      Re: Why Still Old Framework? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 16:51 -0500
    Re: Why Still Old Framework? Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-01 02:23 +0000
      Re: Why Still Old Framework? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 16:49 -0500
        Re: Why Still Old Framework? Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-03 12:42 +0000
          Re: Why Still Old Framework? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 08:51 -0500
            Re: Why Still Old Framework? Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-03 16:52 +0000
              Re: Why Still Old Framework? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 12:01 -0500
          Re: Why Still Old Framework? Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 15:53 +0200
            Re: Why Still Old Framework? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 09:14 -0500
              Re: Why Still Old Framework? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-08-03 09:08 -0700
            Re: Why Still Old Framework? Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-03 16:27 +0000
    Re: time is not spatial per se (only if the flipbook store was closed Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-01 02:50 +0000
      pollution per se noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 14:21 -0700
        Re: pollution per se noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 21:05 -0700
    Re: Why Still Old Framework? HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-01 06:45 -0400
    Re: Why Still Old Framework? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-08-02 00:12 -0700

#510388 — Why Still Old Framework?

Euclidean space, as a concept, no longer applies.

We live in a 4D Minkowski space.  This is fact.  Being over 100 years
old this fact cannot be called "new."

So why are virtually all people still being inculcated with the
antiquated nonsense of a Euclidean space?

Sure, the approximation of the old Euclidean view is quite sufficient
for everyday practical purposes, but so too is a "flat earth" model
ad we do not, thankfully, inculcate the idea of a flat earth.

It's time to purge the anachronistic Euclidean space model forever
from the common conception.

Especially, the school curriculum, from elementary to post-graduate,
should introduce only the 4D Minkowski space. 

A 4D Minkowski manifold represents the *modern* conception (it even
applies locally in General relativity).  Let us leave the past to
the ancients and start thinking like modern people. 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#510595

On 7/31/2015 4:47 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:58:56 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm sorry, dude. Sucks to be in your state. And it's only going to get
>> worse, if left untreated.
>>
>
> Let us not forget that you have openly acknowledged right here on this
> newsgroup that you have actually "enjoyed" going to school.

Yup.

>
> Any truly creative and innovative person would be bored and frustrated
> unto a raging madness within the confines of that inane and stifling
> bureaucracy known as the formal educational system.

Sorry, dude, but your experience isn't because that's what creative and 
innovative people all feel.

Can't help you with your delusions. You need a professional.

>
> But you, by your own free admission, *enjoyed* your formal educational
> experience.  You also had respect for your "teachers".
>
> Lord God almighty!  What does that reveal?
>
> You may as well have a custom tee shirt emblazoned with the words "I am
> a total idiot."
>
> Wear it proudly to the shopping mall.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510804

On 8/1/2015 1:42 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:29:26 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Let us not forget that you have openly acknowledged right here on this
>>> newsgroup that you have actually "enjoyed" going to school.
>>
>> Yup.
>>
>
> Oh yes.  Odd Ball was such a good boy.  He always dutifully did his homework
> on time and never engaged in the disruptive classroom antics that are so typical
> of the more rebellious lads.  Nor did he ever question authority as did
> those troubled kids that were always in detention.  His teachers always gave
> him the "Gold Star" in recognition of his perfect performances.

Not at all. I questioned authorities frequently. And I enjoyed going to 
school, yes.

>
> As an adult he continues the tradition.  He never cheats on his income taxes.
> He faithfully obeys the speed limits.  His credit rating is outstanding.  He
> adheres to the hierarchy at his place of work and he never, ever "rocks the boat"
> with selfish or frivolous concerns.  He is the model citizen ideal that few
> others can even approach.
>
> But don't expect innovation.  Such things come from an opposing temperament.

Gee, I'm not so sure. Did Murray Gell-Mann do all that without learning 
from coursework?

>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510603

On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:57:13 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> Now, if I'm wrong 
> and you HAVE been formally trained in either mathematics or physics, 
> then simply telling me about that formal training will show my error. 
> If, however, I am right and you have no formal training in either, then 
> it doesn't matter how I arrived at the right answer.
> 

Ol' Odd Ball seems to have a bug up his ass about my educational
history.  Of course, my personal background is totally irrelevant
to any discussion, but he is quite insistent nevertheless.

Well, perhaps we should not disappoint ol' Odd Ball

In the first place, his continued use of the expression "formal
training" would tend to indicate that *he* has had no professional
level experience in any STEM discipline.  If he had, then he would
realize that the concept of "formal training" does not even exist.

The "education" of a physicist occurs at a post-graduate institution
that is chartered by the state to endow specific degrees such as
the Masters or the Doctor of Philosophy.

Now, these post-graduate institutions share a common practice: there
are no formal classes.  The "student" (actually already a professional
at this point) is expected to master the discipline entirely through
his own initiative and devices.  Although the "student" is assigned
a thesis advisor, who is sometimes called a "mentor," it is not the
task of this advisor to supervise or manage the "student" in any way.
In fact, most advisors remain quite aloof and inaccessible (my own
advisor was only rarely on the campus as he was busy with his own
private business).

This is how the professional education, or "formal training" as
Odd Ball calls it, of a scientist occurs in the United States and
probably in most of the rest of the world as well.  There simply
is no "formal training" of any kind.  One either does or does not
entirely on his own.

The fact that Odd Ball has completely missed this basic aspect
and continues to refer to "formal training" strongly indicates
that he has not ever been involved in the actual process himself.

Please do not try to castigate others to make up for your own
shortfalls.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510812

On 7/31/2015 9:23 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:57:13 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> Now, if I'm wrong
>> and you HAVE been formally trained in either mathematics or physics,
>> then simply telling me about that formal training will show my error.
>> If, however, I am right and you have no formal training in either, then
>> it doesn't matter how I arrived at the right answer.
>>
>
> Ol' Odd Ball seems to have a bug up his ass about my educational
> history.  Of course, my personal background is totally irrelevant
> to any discussion, but he is quite insistent nevertheless.
>
> Well, perhaps we should not disappoint ol' Odd Ball
>
> In the first place, his continued use of the expression "formal
> training" would tend to indicate that *he* has had no professional
> level experience in any STEM discipline.  If he had, then he would
> realize that the concept of "formal training" does not even exist.

Well, as it turns out, I've had formal training in M.

>
> The "education" of a physicist occurs at a post-graduate institution
> that is chartered by the state to endow specific degrees such as
> the Masters or the Doctor of Philosophy.

Bachelor of Science, Physics, I believe exists as a degree.

>
> Now, these post-graduate institutions share a common practice: there
> are no formal classes.

Excuse me? I believe there are in fact graduate-level courses. Would you 
like to see a sample?
http://www.physics.wisc.edu/academics/gradstudents/course-descriptions

> The "student" (actually already a professional
> at this point) is expected to master the discipline entirely through
> his own initiative and devices.  Although the "student" is assigned
> a thesis advisor, who is sometimes called a "mentor," it is not the
> task of this advisor to supervise or manage the "student" in any way.

Again, not my experience or my understanding.

I have no idea what you were brought up with.

> In fact, most advisors remain quite aloof and inaccessible (my own
> advisor was only rarely on the campus as he was busy with his own
> private business).
>
> This is how the professional education, or "formal training" as
> Odd Ball calls it, of a scientist occurs in the United States and
> probably in most of the rest of the world as well.  There simply
> is no "formal training" of any kind.  One either does or does not
> entirely on his own.

I'm sorry, but you're simply full of shit.

>
> The fact that Odd Ball has completely missed this basic aspect
> and continues to refer to "formal training" strongly indicates
> that he has not ever been involved in the actual process himself.
>
> Please do not try to castigate others to make up for your own
> shortfalls.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510922

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 16:49:26 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

>>
>> This is how the professional education, or "formal training" as
>> Odd Ball calls it, of a scientist occurs in the United States and
>> probably in most of the rest of the world as well.  There simply
>> is no "formal training" of any kind.  One either does or does not
>> entirely on his own.
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're simply full of shit.
> 

Hardly.

If you have had "formal" training, you should have realized that at the
UNDERGRADUATE level, the textbook is read for the student by that idiot
in front of the classroom known as the "teacher."

At the POST-GRADUATE level, however, the "student" is expected to read
the textbook for himself.  Some institutions may offer advanced coursework
for those who require a helping hand, but there should be no requirement
for it.

After all, post-graduate school is essentially for training scientists
to solve current problems and to discover new knowledge.  When probing
the unknown, there can be no recourse to established methods taught
within some established classroom.  Indeed, people at the post-graduate
level are expected to create the *new* textbooks and the *new* curriculum
that reflects the new knowledge.

I would be wary of any college of university that actually required
the completion of advanced classroom coursework.  This would not
foster an intellectual independence.  In fact, it would do just the
opposite by breeding a dependence on some external authority for
the discovery of knowledge.

As you should have noticed, I am now creating the new way of apprehending
the world by advocating the complete abandonment of the 3D Euclidean
perspective and the exclusive reliance on 4D Minkowski spacetime.
Physics education must now *begin* with coordinate transformation, tensor
analysis, and differential geometry.  There is to be no more "beating
around the bush" with useless and obfuscating approximations.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510934

On 8/3/2015 7:42 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 16:49:26 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>>
>>> This is how the professional education, or "formal training" as
>>> Odd Ball calls it, of a scientist occurs in the United States and
>>> probably in most of the rest of the world as well.  There simply
>>> is no "formal training" of any kind.  One either does or does not
>>> entirely on his own.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but you're simply full of shit.
>>
>
> Hardly.
>
> If you have had "formal" training, you should have realized that at the
> UNDERGRADUATE level, the textbook is read for the student by that idiot
> in front of the classroom known as the "teacher."

You must have had a really terrible college experience. This does not 
match at all my experience in college. No professor of mind read from 
the textbook.

>
> At the POST-GRADUATE level, however, the "student" is expected to read
> the textbook for himself.  Some institutions may offer advanced coursework
> for those who require a helping hand, but there should be no requirement
> for it.
>
> After all, post-graduate school is essentially for training scientists
> to solve current problems and to discover new knowledge.  When probing
> the unknown, there can be no recourse to established methods taught
> within some established classroom.  Indeed, people at the post-graduate
> level are expected to create the *new* textbooks and the *new* curriculum
> that reflects the new knowledge.
>
> I would be wary of any college of university that actually required
> the completion of advanced classroom coursework.

Then you are wary of graduate schools in general, as they do require 
advanced classroom coursework.

Again, I just want to point out that you earlier said that graduate 
schools DO NOT require advanced classroom coursework, which is simply a 
delusional statement. I will also repeat my earlier statement that 
delusional people cannot tell the difference between their delusions and 
reality -- that's what makes them delusional. And I'll now repeat my 
additional earlier statement that I see no point in responding seriously 
to a delusional person such as yourself, and so take this entire 
response to be only as serious as your delusional state warrants.

>  This would not
> foster an intellectual independence.  In fact, it would do just the
> opposite by breeding a dependence on some external authority for
> the discovery of knowledge.
>
> As you should have noticed, I am now creating the new way of apprehending
> the world by advocating the complete abandonment of the 3D Euclidean
> perspective and the exclusive reliance on 4D Minkowski spacetime.
> Physics education must now *begin* with coordinate transformation, tensor
> analysis, and differential geometry.  There is to be no more "beating
> around the bush" with useless and obfuscating approximations.

Frankly, I don't think anyone is going to care much what a delusional 
person who's had a serious break from reality is going to advocate, as 
the delusional person has more seriously pressing things to attend to.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510976

On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 08:51:18 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
>  I will also repeat my earlier statement that 
> delusional people cannot tell the difference between their delusions and 
> reality -- that's what makes them delusional. And I'll now repeat my 
> additional earlier statement that I see no point in responding seriously 
> to a delusional person such as yourself, and so take this entire 
> response to be only as serious as your delusional state warrants.
> 

LOL!  You forgot to throw in the universal causative factor for all
apparent social and psychological dysfunctions which is known as DRUGS.
A little METHEDRINE can go a long way toward inducing suitable
delusions to serve any purpose.

I suspect that your level of exasperation has not brought you
to that point yet



> 
> Frankly, I don't think anyone is going to care much what a delusional 
> person who's had a serious break from reality is going to advocate,
>

Heck, I already know that.  Most people, like you, have their head
firmly up the ass of nineteenth-century Victorian puritanism.
They could not accept even minor change, let alone radical change,
if their lives depended on it.

It's true.  Tens of millions will have to needlessly perish before
the reality of climate change or overpopulation begins to sink into
their intransigent minds. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510981

On 8/3/2015 11:52 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 08:51:18 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>>   I will also repeat my earlier statement that
>> delusional people cannot tell the difference between their delusions and
>> reality -- that's what makes them delusional. And I'll now repeat my
>> additional earlier statement that I see no point in responding seriously
>> to a delusional person such as yourself, and so take this entire
>> response to be only as serious as your delusional state warrants.
>>
>
> LOL!  You forgot to throw in the universal causative factor for all
> apparent social and psychological dysfunctions which is known as DRUGS.
> A little METHEDRINE can go a long way toward inducing suitable
> delusions to serve any purpose.

Well, if meth is responsible for your present state, then I sure hope 
you're getting help kicking.

In the meantime, foaming at the mouth about how physics is taught 
wouldn't really help solve your problem.

>
> I suspect that your level of exasperation has not brought you
> to that point yet
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510938

On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> 
> If you have had "formal" training, you should have realized that at the
> UNDERGRADUATE level, the textbook is read for the student by that idiot
> in front of the classroom known as the "teacher."
> 
> At the POST-GRADUATE level, however, the "student" is expected to read
> the textbook for himself.  Some institutions may offer advanced coursework
> for those who require a helping hand, but there should be no requirement
> for it.
> 

Hmm, I see now that my undergraduate lectures in physics
( I have formal education as a chemist )
were since beginning intended for postgraduate level.

I probably attended to wrong lectures by mistake
without them noticing it, even passing the exams with best marks.

Or, there is possible other explanation
that my country had better education level at my time
than US education system now.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510941

On 8/3/2015 8:53 AM, Poutnik wrote:
> On 08/03/2015 02:42 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>
>> If you have had "formal" training, you should have realized that at the
>> UNDERGRADUATE level, the textbook is read for the student by that idiot
>> in front of the classroom known as the "teacher."
>>
>> At the POST-GRADUATE level, however, the "student" is expected to read
>> the textbook for himself.  Some institutions may offer advanced coursework
>> for those who require a helping hand, but there should be no requirement
>> for it.
>>
>
> Hmm, I see now that my undergraduate lectures in physics
> ( I have formal education as a chemist )
> were since beginning intended for postgraduate level.
>
> I probably attended to wrong lectures by mistake
> without them noticing it, even passing the exams with best marks.
>
> Or, there is possible other explanation
> that my country had better education level at my time
> than US education system now.
>

I'm fairly certain that Fabian either has no exposure to the American 
post-secondary education system, or has forgotten what it was really 
like, or is so far gone mentally that he has replaced his actual memory 
with fantasies of what it was like.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510964

<bodkinodd@gmail.com> "Odd Bodkin" the Boinker, oinked & wrote:
> The seriously wandering Poutnik wrote:
>> Fabian Russell, the Fagie wrote:
< snip Fagie's crap>
>
Pouter wrote:
>> Or, there is possible other explanation that my country 
>> (Czech Rep) had better education level at my time
>> than US education system now.
>
hanson wrote:
The Austrian poster Hellmutt Wabnigger voiced the same.
But, Pouter, your edu is not better, it is just different.
>
For instance in CZ, DE, AT & CH etc, an Apprenticeship
is superior to the B.Sc. from GB, FR or US... and an
European M.Sc or an Engineering  School Degree is as
good as a Ph.D  from GB, FR or US.
>
BTW, PhDs are anyway only post-MSc slave work scams
to  benefit the University's establishment.
>>
Boinker wrote: 
> I'm fairly certain that Fabian either has no exposure to the American 
> post-secondary education system, or has forgotten what it was really 
> like, or is so far gone mentally that he has replaced his actual memory 
> with fantasies of what it was like.
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> 
hanson wrote:
Boinker, go read and see where, today, ... 
>
Fagie Russel wrote:
For me, truthfully, the only sounds that can satisfy are pure noise.
>
hanson wrote:
Boinker, understand that Fagie is posting to make noise 
but Fagie has no idea what he is talking about, as is seen 
in his posts given by:
>
"Fabian Russell" <root@localhost.localdomain> the Fagie
who also posts as <whataguy@zen.info> the criminal swine 
"Bo Dai", which is an acronym for "Brainless Old Dreck And
 Imbecile" and whose real name is Bodaiski, a US Jew, aka 
"Joe Genteel" <root@localhost.localdomain> aka 
Frank, the Crank Colessi, which means in Sicilian Slang 
"Little Asshole" , etc, under a "new nym -- but same old idiot", 
who got fired over his loud-mouthing and his total lack of 
productivity, is still unemployed & on welfare... etc, etc...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510969

On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 15:53:56 +0200, Poutnik wrote:

> 
>  even passing the exams with best marks.
> 

That's all that matters.

In American post-grad schools, or at least the best ones, the
"student" is rigorously examined on his knowledge and how he
acquired that knowledge is irrelevant.

Hence, no required coursework.

Now, all this fine education still has to be measured and paid
for (like meat at the butcher shop).  In post-grad school they
keep track of credit hours but they will employ a "catch all"
category called Graduate Research to account for the activity
of the "student."  In fact, on my own official post-grad transcripts
there is only one entry repeated over and over: Graduate Research.

Odd Ball must have received his "formal training" at some
fifth-rate fly-by-night diploma mill and he mistakingly
assumes that his experience is definitive.


>
> Or, there is possible other explanation
> that my country had better education level at my time
> than US education system now.
>

I'd believe it.  In the US, at the undergrad level, football
is supreme and all those who strive for truth and the expansion
of knowledge are accused of being mentally deranged (check
with Odd Ball for the specific technique).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510606 — Re: time is not spatial per se (only if the flipbook store was closed

On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 17:13:26 -0700, noTthaTguY wrote:

> many believe that FDR would ne'er have bombed a)
> Hiroshima and b)
> Nagasaki, but Truman was not so good of a president, in any case.
> 

Roosevelt was a bumbling dumb-fuck ass of a president.  He was
too stupid to comprehend the gravity and scope of Stalin's
intentions in eastern Europe, whereas Churchill could not be
so easily fooled.  The giveaway of Berlin and the quick spread
of vile communism can be attributed to his stupidity.

This naive idiot would likely not have nuked Hiroshima/Nagasaki
and then your immediate ancestors would have been killed in the
battle for mainland Japan and consequently you would not be here
to pollute Usenet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510802 — pollution per se

plenty pf documentation exists to show that
they (the emperor of Japan etc. were quite ready
to surrender, although I heard it read on Pacifica 

> This naive idiot would likely not have nuked Hiroshima/Nagasaki
> and then your immediate ancestors would have been killed in the
> battle for mainland Japan and consequently you would not be here
> to pollute Usenet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510897 — Re: pollution per se

actually. it was on larouchepub.com, some where

> to surrender, although I heard it read on Pacifica 
> 
> > This naive idiot would likely not have nuked Hiroshima/Nagasaki
> > and then your immediate ancestors would have been killed in the
> > battle for mainland Japan and consequently you would not be here
> > to pollute Usenet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510633

On 7/31/2015 12:28 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>
>> 2. What is your own formal training in physics?
>>
>
> My standards, derived from the laws of God, go well beyond the standards
> of any mundane institution.  Therefore, any formal training given
> by these mundane institutions is not valid or worthy in any way.
>
> (Note: you will not fully comprehend this statement.)
>
> Formal education is junk.


Game, set, match. Mr Bodkin wins





-- 
Cut off one head, two more shall take its place.
HAIL HYDRA!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZcG5UOY224

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#510858

<root@localhost.localdomain> "Fabian Russell" the Fagie aka
"Joe Genteel" <root@localhost.localdomain> aka Frank, the
Crank Colessi, which means in Sicilian Slang "Little Asshole"
also posts as <whataguy@zen.info> "Bo Dai", the "Brainless
Old Dreck And Imbecile", etc, under a "new nym -- but same
old idiot", who got fired over his loud-mouthing Bibleering
that caused his total lack of productivity, is still unemployed 
& on welfare, & so he wrote:
> My standards, derived from the laws of God, go well beyond 
> the standards> of any mundane institution.  Therefore, any 
> formal training given by these mundane institutions is not 
> valid or worthy in any way.  Formal education is junk.
>
hanson wrote:
.... Hey Fagie, you sorry junky, it must have been god who
steered and put you into your sorry condition. Pray more,
Pray harder and Praise the Load... Halleluiahahahahaha...

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web