XPost: sci.electronics.design
From: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl
Bill Sloman wrote:
> On 12/02/2026 9:39 am, john larkin wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 23:09:43 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
> > Lodder) wrote:
> >
> >> john larkin wrote:
> >>
> >>> Why are physics types so often insulting and obnoxious?
> >>
> >> Their big big problem is their inability to suffer fools gladly.
> >
> > Linked to their enthusiasm to call people fools.
>
> I can't say I've ever noticed that. Pointing out that somebody hasn't
> taken an effect into account that they should have known about isn't
> actually calling them foolish, though it can come close.
>
> >>> I've been to physics meetings that shocked me with their brutality.
> >>> That mentality is terrible for brainstorming and inventing things.
> >>
> >> They are professionals amongst themselves. They can take it.
> >> Brutality is what keeps the brainstorming in check,
> >
> > For sure.
>
> You don't brainstorm at scientific meetings. You do it in a more
> cooperative environment where you try to find a new angle of attack on
> problem that doesn't seem to have an obvious solution.
IMHO brainstorming is much overrated.
It may be useful in 'creative' environments,
when for example inventing a new ad campaign
to sell yet another useless product to the suckers.
In a serious environment, in engineering or science,
there is litle room or need for it.
High level professionals already know their stuff,
and the likelyhood of instantly coming up with something
that nobody has thought up yet is small.
And anyway, given the highly competitive environment,
it would be quite unwise to blurt out half-baked 'brilliant' ideas
rather than work them out first for yourself,
(and claim them)
Jan
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
