FYI: Dec 12 MythBusters: Airplane Hour

John, I would agree these guys are fun to watch, but their
experimental designs are often sophomoric. If they worked in my lab
they'd get retrained, or fired.

They are special effects guys, aren't they? They are good at that, and
great at entertainment, but the 'science' I'd seen on some of their
shows made my hair hurt.

But hell, if I could have as much fun as they seem to, I wouldn't care
that the science part was weak.

wrote:
John, I would agree these guys are fun to watch, but their
experimental designs are often sophomoric. If they worked in my lab
they'd get retrained, or fired.

They are special effects guys, aren't they? They are good at that, and
great at entertainment, but the 'science' I'd seen on some of their
shows made my hair hurt.

But hell, if I could have as much fun as they seem to, I wouldn't care
that the science part was weak.


Despite the stated format of the show, the boys are in the entertainment
business primarily. This means that what they do and how they do it is
severely restricted science wise due to multiple reasons, most of it
directly related to shortcuts required on a strict time line and the all
important "entertainment requirement".
The guys do the best they can within these restrictions and attempt to
produce a show for as wide a demographic audience as possible. They live
or die by the ratings book as do all such programs.
As someone interested in science, try sitting down at a table with an 85
year old grandmother, a six year old, and a high school dropout and
explain lift to them.........oh yes.....and do it so that they
completely understand every aspect of it on the science and engineering
level.....and do that in 30 minutes. :-))


--
Dudley Henriques

I do believe we've said the same thing using different words. It may
not scientific, but they are having fun. Who knows, maybe some few
kids, watching the show, will be inspired to become experimental
physists.





On Dec 11, 10:27 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
wrote:
John, I would agree these guys are fun to watch, but their
experimental designs are often sophomoric. If they worked in my lab
they'd get retrained, or fired.

They are special effects guys, aren't they? They are good at that, and
great at entertainment, but the 'science' I'd seen on some of their
shows made my hair hurt.

But hell, if I could have as much fun as they seem to, I wouldn't care
that the science part was weak.

Despite the stated format of the show, the boys are in the entertainment
business primarily. This means that what they do and how they do it is
severely restricted science wise due to multiple reasons, most of it
directly related to shortcuts required on a strict time line and the all
important "entertainment requirement".
The guys do the best they can within these restrictions and attempt to
produce a show for as wide a demographic audience as possible. They live
or die by the ratings book as do all such programs.
As someone interested in science, try sitting down at a table with an 85
year old grandmother, a six year old, and a high school dropout and
explain lift to them.........oh yes.....and do it so that they
completely understand every aspect of it on the science and engineering
level.....and do that in 30 minutes. :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

wrote:
I do believe we've said the same thing using different words. It may
not scientific, but they are having fun. Who knows, maybe some few
kids, watching the show, will be inspired to become experimental
physists.





On Dec 11, 10:27 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
wrote:
John, I would agree these guys are fun to watch, but their
experimental designs are often sophomoric. If they worked in my lab
they'd get retrained, or fired.
They are special effects guys, aren't they? They are good at that, and
great at entertainment, but the 'science' I'd seen on some of their
shows made my hair hurt.
But hell, if I could have as much fun as they seem to, I wouldn't care
that the science part was weak.
Despite the stated format of the show, the boys are in the entertainment
business primarily. This means that what they do and how they do it is
severely restricted science wise due to multiple reasons, most of it
directly related to shortcuts required on a strict time line and the all
important "entertainment requirement".
The guys do the best they can within these restrictions and attempt to
produce a show for as wide a demographic audience as possible. They live
or die by the ratings book as do all such programs.
As someone interested in science, try sitting down at a table with an 85
year old grandmother, a six year old, and a high school dropout and
explain lift to them.........oh yes.....and do it so that they
completely understand every aspect of it on the science and engineering
level.....and do that in 30 minutes. :-))

--
Dudley Henriques


It's funny about the show. I'll catch it sometimes while surfing for old
movies late at night and find myself watching them trying not to blow
themselves up :-) Last night it was building an ancient Chinese throne
and fitting it with 47 rockets to see if the Emperor who actually tried
this way back when managed to get off the ground without killing himself.
I ended up going up to the bathroom and missing the ending. My best
Occam's Razor scientific guess on this one is that the ole' Emperor is
still out there somewhere thinking that one of these days he's "simply
GOT to pull himself together" :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:


As someone interested in science, try sitting down at a table with an 85
year old grandmother, a six year old, and a high school dropout and
explain lift to them.........oh yes.....and do it so that they
completely understand every aspect of it on the science and engineering
level.....and do that in 30 minutes. :-))


I'm going to try that with Anthony, right after I learn to walk on water.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:


As someone interested in science, try sitting down at a table with an 85
year old grandmother, a six year old, and a high school dropout and
explain lift to them.........oh yes.....and do it so that they
completely understand every aspect of it on the science and engineering
level.....and do that in 30 minutes. :-))


I'm going to try that with Anthony, right after I learn to walk on water.

Bertie

You mean you CAN'T walk on water??? Damn!!!

Hey...you're missing all the fun over at RAS. Check out the thread on
Mxsmanic. I swear, I must be picking up some good troll habits from you
Bertie :-)))
Dudley

--
Dudley Henriques

In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Hey...you're missing all the fun over at RAS. Check out the thread on
Mxsmanic. I swear, I must be picking up some good troll habits from you
Bertie :-)))
Dudley

There are NO good troll habits. (-{

They only good way to respond to a troll is to ignore it. (-{

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Bob Noel wrote in news:ihatessppaamm-
:

In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Hey...you're missing all the fun over at RAS. Check out the thread on
Mxsmanic. I swear, I must be picking up some good troll habits from you
Bertie :-)))
Dudley

There are NO good troll habits. (-{

They only good way to respond to a troll is to ignore it. (-{


Is this a troll?


Bertie

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:


As someone interested in science, try sitting down at a table with
an 85 year old grandmother, a six year old, and a high school
dropout and explain lift to them.........oh yes.....and do it so
that they completely understand every aspect of it on the science
and engineering level.....and do that in 30 minutes. :-))


I'm going to try that with Anthony, right after I learn to walk on
water.

Bertie

You mean you CAN'T walk on water??? Damn!!!

Hey...you're missing all the fun over at RAS. Check out the thread on
Mxsmanic. I swear, I must be picking up some good troll habits from
you Bertie :-)))

Wow! I'm honoured!

I try to stay out of RAS. You guys are generally sturdy enough to put up
with the kind of nonsense I generate, but I'd only be bullying some of them
over there. I don't like screwing up a really useful group..

Bertie

wrote:
John, I would agree these guys are fun to watch, but their
experimental designs are often sophomoric. If they worked in my lab
they'd get retrained, or fired.

They are special effects guys, aren't they? They are good at that, and
great at entertainment, but the 'science' I'd seen on some of their
shows made my hair hurt.

Boy - do I disagree with you! I say they _are_ doing science. "Full
Stop." ;-) Here's one checklist for some of the essentials that define
scientific methods of experiments (all IMHO of course):

0) State the nature of the question to be resolved.
Check.
0.5) Write proposal/grant request and do resource budgeting.
Partial Check. ;-)
1) (Mostly optional) Design and build preliminary small scale
experiments where possible.
Check.
2) Make predictions on expected results of small scale experiments.
Check.
3) Run preliminary experiments, record observations, and compare with
expectations.
Check.
4) Run experimental controls (i.e. factor being tested is absent or
otherwise not applied) if at all possible and/or relevant.
Check.
5) Run steps 1 through 4, but using larger or "full" scale.
Check.
6) Compare observations with the original question and attempt to draw
conclusions.
Check.
7) Publish the way the experiment was preformed and the reasoning used
in drawing the conclusions. This should give others enough
information to either replicate the results, critical review the
experimental methods used and the reasoning applied in the
conclusions.
Check (done via their show and their fan site feedback forums).

Last I looked, real science isn't defined by how "clean" the experiments
are but by the methodology employed. On that basis I'd say they show
_real_ science as it really is because they show how difficult or
ambiguous it can be at times, not how wonderfully elegant it is (because
often it isn't). As far as credentials go - if the methodology is
basically correct then I think the main value added by credentials is
that it reduces the probability any given experiment will be
"sophomoric" or poorly designed. It also reduces the need to do
experiments in the first place, because as the old saying goes:

"A couple of months in the laboratory saves spending a couple hours in
the library."

But of course their show isn't about saving time in the library. ;-)

But hell, if I could have as much fun as they seem to, I wouldn't care
that the science part was weak.

Well, I don't think they have to put together grant proposals, so yeah,
lots of fun if someone else is bankrolling your efforts! On the other
hand they do have restrictions on time and budget. Just like real
scientists do! :-)