mr_bill

wphamilton

True I'm usually modest when speaking with lesser lights (and I don't mean livedarklions), but everyone needs to brag occasionally.

livedarklions

Speaking of lesser lights, is it time to start another "your strobe is too bright for the bike path" thread?

Actually, I've only done a few hundred miles riding so far this year, but I'm sensing that some people have mellowed out a little bit from the airplane-spec strobes they were running last year. Season is still young, though.

Just to keep this on topic, I think the least efficient strategy energy-wise is eating vegans whether or not they're driving a Prius.

wphamilton

FWIW, anti-glare night driving sunglasses eliminate almost all of the problem if you're bothered by bright bike headlights. I have something like this https://www.amazon.com/Night-Vision-...dp/B0719S97TH/

livedarklions

Thanks, but I can't wear yellow lenses because my color blindness then makes it impossible to read stoplights. (Please don't tell me which one is on the top--I can't actually tell which light is illuminated, it looks like all three are off) I also think it's ridiculous to make people wear sunglasses on cloudy days because a few people can't figure out that a strobe that can be seen at a half mile is absolutely inappropriate if you're going to be passing oncoming cyclists within a couple feet of each other.

Bright headlights don't bother me. Bright STROBING headlights blinking at a fast rate are an absolute hazard on bike paths, and should be illegal.

I believe the Minuteman now has signs telling people to turn the damn things off.

My fault for starting this digression, so please don't take it as rudeness if I don't respond further on this issue in this thread.

wphamilton

NP, I'm just playing the straight-man here.

rydabent

This is pretty much like many things coming out of colleges. All theory, and NO actual experience in the real world. I have seen those types all my life.

Those that can do, those that cant teach, those that cant teach, teachers. Pretty much puts that guy in the position he is in.

greatscott

I only use a strobing headlight in the city, out on country roads and bike paths it's steady mode only.

cyccommute 

Maelochs

I think that the phrase, "Those that cannot do, teach" stems from the idea that not everyone can succeed in a competitive field, and people who might have mastered all the basics still might not be able to apply them as well as some other guy ... for instance, not every engineer is as good as every other at seeing solutions, inventing workarounds, etc. They might all know all the theory, but some can apply it more readily.

Or take a "Professor of Music" (I actually know one.) Not every music teacher can maker it as a playing musician (in fact, for most types of pop music, actually knowing about music might be a drawback ... just wear the makeup and act and the engineers will make the music.) The guy I have in mind did all his classical guitar stuff for his degree---I went to his recital, and his technique was amazing---and he played for several years in working bands, but (as most musicians do) realized that having a passion for music, a great deal of knowledge about music, a strong understanding of music law and the music business, and great playing technique, only guarantees that you can always find a gig as a bar band .... This guy toured for a while playing small venues, but after a while, it gets old, and unless you are one of the lucky few, ... suddenly things like health insurance, a home, a reliable car, a family you can see more than once a month ... and a future ... all start to make sense.

So know he teaches at a prestigious music institute.

As fro this specific case ... the kid wrote a ridiculous paper ... but as I have noted elsewhere, there are a lot of ridiculous research projects being done just because some company is willing to fund them. Not every university professor, university student, or university graduate is necessarily "smart," as much as "educated," which might mean no more than the person has a good memory (I got through school that way. No clue what I I learned or what any of it means, but I could regurgitate chunks of text or lectures I didn't even know i had memorized .... )

Nothing is guaranteed. That teacher might be the best mind in his or her field or might be barely hanging on to tenure and barely able to understand what s/he is barely able to teach. That student might be a year away from deriving Unified Theory or barely able to make a passing grade even after bribing his tutors to write his papers.

In any case ... This specific paper was a pile of pusillanimous idiocy, I think we can all agree.

cyccommute 

Maelochs

"What do you mean, you don't think it's worth fighting over??!! This Is the Internet!!!!"

fietsbob

Robotics will replace you and so you wont be needed ,ride your bike in the interim..

greatscott

I hope if robots ever replace us that we all get a monthly payment from the feds that collected it from corporations, because it not then what the heck will people do to make money if there are no jobs?

fietsbob

"No Mr Bond, ... I expect you to Die..."

greatscott

Your comment had me shaken, but not stirred.

livedarklions

That makes sense.

rydabent

To me the guy from Harvard sitting at his desk is about as believable as a drunk sitting in a bar watching a football game and telling everyone what the coaches should do.

Brocephus

Bazinga !!

genec

Then, we best stop reproducing... we keep making more and more of ourselves... more than enough, as the population continues to grow.. . Although I recently hear that the rate of growth in the US IS declining.

cyccommute 

Except that the guy from Harvard admitted he made a mistake and published it. No drunk sitting in a bar would do the same.

What most people don’t understand about science is that nothing is written in stone...nor should it be. Everything is up for review as long as the data backs up the review. You can’t just say “that’s wrong” in science but you can say “that’s wrong and here is why”. Basically, you have to show your work.

On the other hand, because of this system of having to show why something is wrong rather than just stating “it’s wrong”, once something is shown to be right, it is very difficult to show that it is wrong. “Theories” in science are much stronger statements than “theory” in causal conversation. They aren’t just “ideas”...that’s a hypothesis in science and a starting point much like the Harvard student’s work...they are backed by years of work by dozens to thousands of other people’s work.

Road Fan

If your mention of "Prius" and "electric car" are jointly in your premises, be aware that most Prius' are hybrids, not electric. They blend electric technology with IC engine technology and aggressive aerodynamics to reduce fuel consumption relative to other cars of similar capacity.

Maelochs

The issue is that sometimes, for fame or funding, "scientists" (or in this case, students) do really shoddy work, publish it, and popularize it, and no one sees the retraction ... or nobody tests the experiment to see if the experiment can be replicated.

Some people really do science, and some do quackery ... and some lay people have elevated science into a religion.

Real science---the kind that says, "This is what we did, these are our results, and this is what we think it means" is great. A very useful tool, which has brought a lot of benefit to mankind.

But apotheosizing everyone in a lab coat is kind of silly. There is a lot of bad science out there. There are people looking to make money and earn fame, who are willing to exaggerate, lie, distort ... The field is no longer pure.

I am Not against science. But making excuses for really shoddy science, and passing off the rush to publish and popularize unsound work, only encourages the bad behavior.

Just as with bad cops and bad priests ... if only the tiniest percentage does wrong, the whole institution is tainted and people lose faith. Call out the bad ones to restore faith in the good ones.

cyccommute 

Several issues. First, this wasn’t a “publication”. It was a blog post. That’s more like an article in a magazine or newspaper. A more rigorous “publication” of his results would have had to be subjected to review by people who are familiar with the field. He could have still gotten it wrong but it’s far less likely that a bad assumption would have gotten out.

Second and more importantly, the student was willing to reassess his assumptions like any good scientist would. I think his new assumptions are still wrong(ish) but the fact that he is willing to reassess his assumptions is a positive sign.

Additionally, bad science...or even wrong science...can’t be discovered without science. Nothing else can check it. Bad science, be it Piltdown man, anti-vaxing, climate change denial, Lorenzo’s oil, cold fusion or any of a thousand other either outright frauds or mistakes can’t be exposed by any other means than science. Even honest mistakes...and there are a number of them and they are constant...can only be corrected by other people doing science. No quack has every been exposed expect by science.

In fact, no other human endeavor has such a built in check system. It is the single most important tool we have to find the way to truth.

JoeyBike

True! The hybrid with the qualities you mentioned are a good way to go as "electric" cars go.