[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>> But that's not possible.Besides it seems to me that you are not   
   convinced   
   >>>>>> that Lorentz force can exist in circuits in which alternate current   
   flows.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Regards   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Thank you for keeping Mr Sloman amused.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It's Dr.Sloman.   
   >>>   
   >>> Given a sound theoretical basis confirmed by experiment, it is our   
   >>> company policy to never hire PhDs.   
   >>   
   >> That makes sense. The literature survey is an essential part of a any   
   >> Ph.D. thesis, and it has to demonstrate a capacity of for critical   
   >> thinking. John Larkin doesn't like criticism.   
   >   
   > Just four of the problems with PhDs:   
   >   
   > Years of being forced to kowtow to authority   
      
   I don't recall doing much of that.   
      
   > and   
   >   
   > Ingrained unwillingness to think crazy   
      
   My Ph.D. work didn't proceed the way my supervisor had expected. There   
   wasn't anything crazy about using computers and modern electronics, but   
   he wasn't familiar with either - it didn't worry him, though he would   
   have liked it to go faster.   
      
   > and   
   >   
   > Affection for complexity.   
      
   Knowing what you are doing - not your strong suite - can lead to   
   elaborations that the less well-informed can see as unnecessary   
   complexity. My colleagues were known to describe me as "gadget happy"   
   but were happy enough to accept my help when writing computer programs.   
      
   > and   
   >   
   > Lack of common sense   
      
   You think that Trump has common sense. Anything that cures what he has   
   got has got to be a good thing.   
      
   > Phil, of course, is the rare exception. The occasional dose of   
   > gin+tonic cures any residual academic side effects.   
      
   Alcohol does make people stupid.   
      
   > I've been to some meetings of physicists. They are brutal, instantly   
   > attacking any non-scientifically-defensible idea. Not a good   
   > brainstorming environment.   
      
   They can probably spell defensible correctly too.   
      
   You can waste a lot of time in brain=storming sessions on obviously   
   impractical ideas. Getting rid of them without inhibiting the expression   
   of the unconventional idea you want can be difficult. Not including   
   ignorant half-wits in the the brainstorming session is an easier solution.   
      
   > Are chemists the same way?   
      
   The ones I interacted with mostly knew what they were talking about,   
   which didn't prevent heated discussions.   
      
   --   
   Bill Sloman, Sydney   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)