| Pages:
1
2
3 |
BromicAcid
International Hazard
Posts: 3229
Registered: 13-7-2003
Location: Wisconsin
Member Is Offline
Mood: Rock n' Roll
|
|
Seriously, the posts in question.... they are so out in left field, or so worthless that the person posting in the first place has to at least realize
that what they are posting is a waste of space. We are not splitting hairs here, it's as Wolen said, 'common sense' this isn't McDonalds, we don't
need warnings to say that things are hot, we're thinking people here. The additude should be, "So what if my reply was deleted, must have missed my
mark on that one, better try again, this time better make myself clearer." Or "Hummm, I guess that really didn't fit in that topic."
The point being, this is nothing to get riled over, if for some reason several of your posts in a row start being deleted, I bet someone will contact
you. If only to try and guide you on the path to enlightenment. It seems to me the only people who would fight this measure are those people who
want to defend their right to post crap.
|
|
|
MagicJigPipe
International Hazard
Posts: 1554
Registered: 19-9-2007
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suspicious
|
|
Okay. The reason I asked (I will admit this only happened once and without further incident) is because I posted a structure and stated the full name
of an abbreviation and was chastised for it by chemoleo because apparently it was "standard information" and it "wouldn't help anyone". I just
thought it was a general rule to define an abbreviation at least once because not all abbv. are standard for everyone.
Where is the line here? If someone types an abbreviation that is "standard" for a certain field of chemistry is it out of line to define it and post
the structure? I just don't see how that could possibly hurt anything. I could be completely wrong but I just didn't see anything wrong with what I
did.
I think it went something like this:
XXX: "PyBOP is and diisosomething(?) can be formed with blah blah etc..."
Me: "Please define acronyms at least once. Also, PyBOP is [gave IUPAC name] and here is it's structure"
Chemoleo: "Don't tell people what to do. That is a standard reagent used in X chemistry field and your definitions and structure won't help anyone."
(Except I believe it was much more rude.)
Me: "Okay, next time I will stay out of your priviledged discussions"
NOTE: Those are NOT exact quotes.
Was I really in the wrong? That is all I need to know. Also, is that "post whoring".
Thanks.
"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry ... There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any
question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and
that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think,
free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
|
|
|
chemoleo
Biochemicus Energeticus
Posts: 3005
Registered: 23-7-2003
Location: England Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: crystalline
|
|
Let me reiterate, for I think you didn't get it.
Peptide chemistry is complex, and totally non-standard in every-day chemistry (although this is becoming less so, admittedly)
Telling people (who are clearly in the know) quite authoritatively to inform what an acronym is, is useless without the context of the overall
reaction.
Do you honestly think anyone will understand amide - carboxy couplings because of the structure of PyBOP you posted, which was the only bit of real
information in your post? You gotta be damn well specialised for that. And I'd wager that no-one, including yourself, was any wiser with that very
information - therefore it likely amounts to posting for the sake of it.
Ultimately I was trying to say (not only once), that if you quite strongly tell people what to do, then at least provide the real
answer to the question - which here is how this type of coupling works, explaining the role of PyBOB etc. You can in fact download
PyBOP/HoBT coupling schemes from the internet that are of some help.
But don't tell people what to do whilst your own answer contributes nothing to any real understanding.
Similarly, you wouldn't go up to your prof/superior/boss/chef telling him, dude, tell me the acronyms, at least once, without understanding what
they'd do in the first place - whilst you are trying to keep the job and make sure everyone is impressed of you.
No, instead any sane person would shut up, look it up, and then make an informed response.
That's all I'm asking for.
Anyway, no more hair splitting please.
[Edited on 2-2-2008 by chemoleo]
Never Stop to Begin, and Never Begin to Stop...
Tolerance is good. But not with the intolerant! (Wilhelm Busch)
|
|
|
12AX7
Post Harlot
Posts: 4803
Registered: 8-3-2005
Location: oscillating
Member Is Offline
Mood: informative
|
|
Bleh, undefined acronyms are an endless source of hair-pulling!
Most papers are intelligent enough to state in at least one place WTAA (What The Acronyms Are), like this. Somewhere in the thread, preferrably in an
easy to find place, like the first page, some terms should be defined. It's a courteous thing to do.
And incidentially, acronmys would be defined within the first few posts in a perfect world. Sometimes, people don't feel it's necessary
(sometimes it isn't; everyone here does know what "HBr" is), or they forget to, or they just assume that EKWTTA. These situations are iffy to rude.
There should be a general allowance for clarifying these things, wouldn't you say?
This forum is completely open. I can read and post in any public forum, from inorganic to biochem, whether I know anything about that subject or not.
It's rude to hide yourself way in a specialist cocoon rattling off "PyBOP/HoBT" and such nonesense, when there may be curious readers following the
thread, not knowing WTF you're on about. And it's even more rude to snap at that curious reader directly with "Use The Fucking Search Engine"! If
you want to hide yourself away, go to a forum that's more specialized than this one. Subscribe to a journal or professional association (you pay for
the priviledge of the service in these media). But be kind when someone's just asking a damn question!
Tim
("Everyone Knows What They're Talking About". I'm just not rude enough to make up an acronym and leave it a *complete* mistery.)
|
|
|
chemoleo
Biochemicus Energeticus
Posts: 3005
Registered: 23-7-2003
Location: England Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: crystalline
|
|
Well then, make the acronyms meaningful by saying what they are used for, what their role is. Don't just demand them, post a useless
tidbit, and feel magnanimous & righteous for doing so sparingly little. And, I must say, the most frequent posters in this thread seem remarkably
apt at this - providing posts of minimal info for minimal effort, whilst their screaming is by far the loudest and righteous.
That's got to stop (the minimal/no info posts). You can scream all you want, within reason 
Make a serious contribution, explain what it means, and everyone will just lap it up. You'll be a hero in no time 
Bye Bye shitty posts!
Not hard eh?
[Edited on 2-2-2008 by chemoleo]
Never Stop to Begin, and Never Begin to Stop...
Tolerance is good. But not with the intolerant! (Wilhelm Busch)
|
|
|
Polverone
Now celebrating 21 years of madness
Posts: 3186
Registered: 19-5-2002
Location: The Sunny Pacific Northwest
Member Is Offline
Mood: Waiting for spring
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Rosco Bodine
Well you old catfish wrangler you , just saddle up and
dig in the spurs and watch that thang porpoise through
the waves ....yeee haaa
Hey boss , where's the trim tabs on this damn thing 
She's hot coming out of the hole , but it shore is a bouncy ride ....yeee haaa .......ride'em cowboy !!! |
This was just excised from the "PC PSU to laboratory PSU" thread. Note its horrifying emptiness and be sure that you never approach this Platonic
ideal of no-content posting.
PGP Key and corresponding e-mail address
|
|
|
MagicJigPipe
International Hazard
Posts: 1554
Registered: 19-9-2007
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suspicious
|
|
I would have to say that having a post that has a small amount of info is better than not having that info there at all. It's like saying, "No
information is better than a little".
This ends my participation in this discussion for I am tired of arguing.
"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry ... There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any
question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and
that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think,
free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
|
|
|
woelen
Super Administrator
Posts: 7978
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: interested
|
|
It is information density which counts. No post is better than a post with low information density.
|
|
|
Rosco Bodine
Banned
Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: analytical
|
|
Somebody familiar with the signal trace on a waveform analyzer would understand the analogy which I was making to the oscillatory pulse response of an
unstable circuit , the porpoising effect compared with a boat
having its throttles opened when there is too much
positive trim . An inside joke perhaps , but not at all devoid of content . Got boat , has power trim
Of course there's much to be said for sailing .
Especially with those ladies who have learned the
secret of a life without affliction by tan lines
Now that's engineering !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZelKmTJz0Q4
[Edited on 6-2-2008 by Rosco Bodine]
|
|
|
Ephoton
Hazard to Others
Posts: 463
Registered: 21-7-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: trying to figure out why I need a dark room retreat when I live in a forest of wattle.
|
|
this forum is changing a lot of late. once it was a place were people were interested in hobby
chemistry making many things from the things we found in every day life. this was useful for
both parties the bee's and the pyro's that began this place. all of a sudden a heap of ex pro
chemists that have nothing better to do than argue about what is right and wrong and give excellent
chemical advice that requires a damb merck account. I still like this place but alas it is loosing it
childish and special charm that it had right from the start. yes the rules were kind of strict and some
were not happy with them but they had good reasons to be. just look at other forums that were
hosted for the two parties (not including old retired and bored chemists) no longer are we
braking ground in the home chemical field like we were (well as quickly anyway) instead
its all way to pro and way to bullied. delete what eva you like of mine delete it all for all I care
just please lighten up and get back to building shit and making things for the average person.
other wise its just not amateur chemistry in my book its an off shoot of after hours pro chem.
[Edited on 11-3-2008 by Ephoton]
e3500 console login: root
bash-2.05#
|
|
|
ScienceGeek
Hazard to Others
Posts: 151
Registered: 22-1-2008
Location: Norway
Member Is Offline
|
|
Amen!!
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
You'd like some of us to drill holes in our heads and let some knowledge, education and experience leak out and run down a drain somewhere?
Get off it. This is a chemistry forum, stop complaining because some real chemists have shown up and you can't keep up with them.
You have two choices: hit the door, adios, or, stick around and you might just learn some chemistry, accidentally, and through no fault of your own
I'm sure.
There are a lot of VERY bright scientists on this forum. I won't even try to list them, for fear of forgetting some and thereby offending. As far as I
am aware, none of them posts about their professional chemical activities, part or present. This was, is and remains an amateur chemistry forum.
Polverone owns the forum, and he was trained as a chemist. Maybe he makes his living as a chemist, I don't know. Do you want to disqualify all here
who have formal training? I was trained as a chemist. Never did I work as a chemist once out of school. Would you like me to forget everything I
learned and did?
Ozone's up for his Ph.D. in chemistry.
C'mon, YOU lighten up, enough with this bullshit reverse elitism. If you are feeling inadequate - try reading a chemistry book.
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
Ephoton
Hazard to Others
Posts: 463
Registered: 21-7-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: trying to figure out why I need a dark room retreat when I live in a forest of wattle.
|
|
been to uni have a huge library including a lot of gmelin all osyn origonal inorg syn trans metal treaties god knows what else a huge library lots of
gear to my man. studied a double in fact
but thats my bizz oh an ive made money from my chemistry and not from drugs. you would sell the world that
dislexia is a horrid condition that needs to be punished on a daily basis. who are you to say such
things. a few good chemists have just come on to the site. mate there were heaps of great chemists
on the site the whole time just most of them were interested in doing it the old fashioned way
so as every one could do it. yes I can buy shit from merck if I wish or other suppliers but thats
not what its about this hobby thing otherwise its just a rehash of what a lot of us not so good chemists as your self have done in our past or present
employment.
as a programmer as well do you know what hobby code is  I tell you now its not
going out and build a company database other wise I would want money for it. why becouse im a good coder
and any one good in there fields that are not doing something for the fun of it well they get paid.
to me and many trying to make sodium and even trying to make silicon tetrachloride are
a heap more fun than going to my book and going how damb cool am I to order this to do
a reaction so as I can post about it or what not. if this is not the case well maby your "research"
is not so amateur as the title of this site leads us to belive it contains.
there is nothing amateur about ordering from a cataloge or reciting well known textbook reactions.
TCT how many chemists in the industry use it. HEAPS what about sulfur chlorides. now thats
an amateur compound. if your a pro you look down on amateurs and go man thats amateur why
use that I would use this. even in the music industry this is so. but only truly a master can be
a pro and then step back for a minute enjoy the peace and tranqual state of mind of going
now I shall be amateur and do it the hard and old way just for fun just for kicks just to see
it done.
get a job mate your a great chemist in your own right but merck is far from amateur even you
must agree and your statement above was totally proving it. soften up mate we do like
the pro stuff but this is a hobby site well it always was before maby some of us would like it
to be a pro site.
in all honesty only a person who views this as pro chemistry would consider a persons education as paramount to a hobby. I dont know bromics education
but I tell you what that
potassium in a can sure sparked a lot of peoples passion hats off to him the purple flame rocked.
e3500 console login: root
bash-2.05#
|
|
|
YT2095
International Hazard
Posts: 1091
Registered: 31-5-2003
Location: Just left of Europe and down a bit.
Member Is Offline
Mood: within Nominal Parameters
|
|
oh Great!
now it devolves into a Dick Waving competition, PATHETIC!
\"In a world full of wonders mankind has managed to invent boredom\" - Death
Twinkies don\'t have a shelf life. They have a half-life! -Caine (a friend of mine)
|
|
|
Ephoton
Hazard to Others
Posts: 463
Registered: 21-7-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: trying to figure out why I need a dark room retreat when I live in a forest of wattle.
|
|
you are right I am sorry sauron I have baited you and said some mean and nasty things as
I felt hurt and slighted not by your chemistry but rather by your need to voice personal opinions
and prejedous remarks about others pressence and posting matters on this site.
I shall refrain from baiting you anymore it is childish of me and far from productive.
I ask only one thing if you find a post that you do not like rather than getting down a dirty
and telling the world why your better than every one please just use the report button and
let the ever so kind administration of this place look into it. as I have said I could not care
if all my posts are deleted infact that would mean I was totaly anonymous I got the questions
I wanted answered and did not have to give anything for them.
I shall also if you can be so kind as to do this refrain from showing the rest of my lovely and
cute Thai vocab.
fair is fair I shall leave you and this whole pro hobby bee pyro and fogy gang thing alone.
after all a post whore is some one in my opinion who is posting so as others think something of them. ranks are nothing to those who enjoy there hobby
and in all honesty I share most of my
joy with people face to face or over email or pm.
I dont often go into this political shit but I kind of could not help my self this time.
sorry I shall do my best to leave the personal shit out of my posts.
e3500 console login: root
bash-2.05#
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
Actually. yesterday all I did was to question the thread author's spelling of Pamona, California (there is no such place, there is a Pomona, Ca.) and
to merely arch an eyebrow - no more than that - about your having resuscitated a thread dead for five long years.
Actually, I can swear much more colorfully than that in Thai. But this is not the Thai profanity forum.
[Edited on 12-3-2008 by Sauron]
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
12AX7
Post Harlot
Posts: 4803
Registered: 8-3-2005
Location: oscillating
Member Is Offline
Mood: informative
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Sauron
Actually. yesterday all I did was to question the thread author's spelling of Pomona, California (there is no such place, there is a Pomona, Ca.)
|
Hilarious! I thought the same thing.
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
To be fair there does seem to be confusion as there IS a Pamona community college but the official name of the city is Pomona not Pamona.
But the error was in the profile of NeverSleepy the thread author who is long gone. Nothing to do with Ephoton.
But he went postal on me anyway.
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
Nicodem
Super Moderator
Posts: 4230
Registered: 28-12-2004
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Please do not allow this thread to fall victim to post whoring!
Sauron, it would help a lot if you would not provoke other members whenever there is opportunity. That thread was not a place where to discuss
geographic dilemmas and there is no need to always express your dislike with other member's posts, being because they resuscitate an old thread or
whatever other reason you manage to find.
Ephoton, you better start using a spell checker and write comprehensible posts or else you risk more and more anger and provocations instead of
appropriate replies. If you would know how much effort it takes me to read what you write you would probably think my tolerance has no limits (but you
would be wrong!).
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
Nicodem, I must demurr. My sole comment directed to Ephoto was:
Let sleeping threads lie.
Which was polite advice. And good advice in general. I fail to see how that can be construed as "provocative". I was a suggestionm and not a command.
His response was to shout MOTHERFUCKER! at me (in another language). Now that was provocative, and uncalled for. But I did not rise to the bait (and
Ephoton now admits publicly to baiting me.) Did I? All I did was quite properly report his post.
Kindly detail how I am being "provocative" and to whom, so we can all know. It's a mystery to me.
It's a forum. Are members not free to express themselves as long as they do so with courtesy? There was NOTHING discourteous in my remark - only in
his reply.
[Edited on 12-3-2008 by Sauron]
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
len1
National Hazard
Posts: 595
Registered: 1-3-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: NZ 1 (goal) - Italy 1 (dive)
|
|
| Quote: |
this forum is changing a lot of late. once it was a place were people were interested in hobby
chemistry making many things from the things we found in every day life. this was useful for
both parties the bee's and the pyro's that began this place. all of a sudden a heap of ex pro
chemists that have nothing better to do than argue about what is right and wrong and give excellent
chemical advice that requires a damb merck account. I still like this place but alas it is loosing it
childish and special charm that it had right from the start. yes the rules were kind of strict and some
were not happy with them but they had good reasons to be. just look at other forums that were
hosted for the two parties (not including old retired and bored chemists) no longer are we
braking ground in the home chemical field like we were (well as quickly anyway) instead
its all way to pro and way to bullied. delete what eva you like of mine delete it all for all I care
just please lighten up and get back to building shit and making things for the average person.
other wise its just not amateur chemistry in my book its an off shoot of after hours pro chem.
|
- the viewpoint of a number of people
The definition of an amateur is one who has little equipment, little time, or little money, but certainly not one who has little brain - for then he
is a complete loss, and be better spending his time on something more suitable to him.
In fact the amateur compensates for lack of funding by having more brain. Hall's process for aluminium is a prime example.
|
|
|
MagicJigPipe
International Hazard
Posts: 1554
Registered: 19-9-2007
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suspicious
|
|
I always thought the definition of "amateur" was someone who does something and doesn't get paid for doing it (as opposed to professional).
From Dictionary.com:
1. a person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons. Compare
professional.
3. a person inexperienced or unskilled in a particular activity: Hunting lions is not for amateurs.
Surely we don't want to identify with number 3! However, I think our definition of "amateur" is simply our creation.
"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry ... There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any
question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and
that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think,
free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
|
|
|
chloric1
International Hazard
Posts: 1071
Registered: 8-10-2003
Location: GroupVII of the periodic table
Member Is Offline
Mood: Stoichiometrically Balanced
|
|
Yes a chemical equivolent of #3 would be a noob preparing hydrogen sulfide by the liter and trying to liquiify it!
A noob mixing any sulfide with a chlorate or burning magnesium near open containers of water.
heheh...Jeez.
Fellow molecular manipulator
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
The entire amateur/professional thing is inherently divisive, and a lot more complex than implied by any silly-ass dictionary entry.
What about people who are both amateurs AND professionals?
What about ex-professionals?
Stop trying to divide the forum into disparate camps. IMO anyone who says he is an amateur IS an amateur. It's a state of mind. No one who has formal
chemical training and/or experience should have to apologize for it on this forum or anywhere else. Amateurs lacking such credentials should welcome
such chemists into their midst if they have a lick of sense.
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
MagicJigPipe
International Hazard
Posts: 1554
Registered: 19-9-2007
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suspicious
|
|
Okay, but that can be said for any other word in our language. No one (including me) said that you couldn't be both at the same time. However, just
because you don't agree with the definition doesn't mean the dictionary presenting it is "silly". Would you consider the Oxford English Dictionary
silly?
| Quote: |
-a person who engages in a pursuit, esp. a sport, on an unpaid basis.
-a person considered contemptibly inept at a particular activity: that bunch of stumbling amateurs.
-engaging or engaged in without payment; nonprofessional: an amateur archaeologist.
-inept or unskillful.
|
(actually this is the "pocket" dictionary but it's written by the same people, I can't afford a copy of the real dictionary as it's around $6000)
Okay, I gained access to the full OED through my school's database. Here is the entry (I only include the one that is still in use today, there are
several different meanings that are no longer used):
| Quote: |
2. a. One who cultivates anything as a pastime, as distinguished from one who prosecutes it professionally; hence, sometimes used disparagingly, as =
dabbler, or superficial student or worker. See also quot. 1861.
1786 European Mag. Dec. 421/1 Dr. Percival..writes on philosophical subjects as an amateur rather than as a master. c1803 REES Cycl., Amateur, in the
Arts, is a foreign term introduced and now passing current amongst us, to denote a person understanding, and loving or practising the polite arts of
painting, sculpture, or architecture, without any regard to pecuniary advantage. 1807 Edin. Rev. X. 461 It was not likely that an amateur..should
convict these astronomers of gross ignorance. 1827-39 DE QUINCEY Murder Wks. 1862 IV. 15 Not amateurs, gentlemen, as we are, but professional men.
1861 B. HEMYNG in Mayhew London Lab. Extra vol. (1862) 221/2 This class [of prostitutes] have been called the ‘amateurs’, to contradistinguish
them from the professionals, who devote themselves to it entirely as a profession. 1882 Boy's Own Paper IV. 807 Our amateurs are improving, and the
interval between them and the professionals is growing beautifully less. |
And professional:
| Quote: | b. Of an event, activity, occupation, etc. (now esp. a sport): undertaken or engaged in for money; engaged in by professionals (as distinct from
non-professionals or amateurs).
1779 Remembrancer Public Events 1779 109 A question arises..if a national land defence [of conscripted men] was once fairly established,..whether any
other professional army would be necessary. 1789 C. BURNEY Gen. Hist. Music IV. 676 Bach and Abel..opened a subscription, about 1763, for a weekly
concert... The same concert now subsists in a still more flourishing way than ever, under the denomination of the Professional Concert. 1851 J.
PYCROFT Cricket Field iv. 56 The chief patronage..was..in London. There the play was nearly all professional: even the gentlemen made a profession of
it. 1884 Cyclist 13 Feb. 247/2 A rule prohibiting the holding of professional events at amateur athletic meetings. 1919 Vanity Fair July 23/1 At the
top of the list came Professional Golf, closely followed by the best Amateur Golf. 1947 Partisan Rev. 14 258 He concealed his fear most of all from
himself by means of his devotion to professional sports, major league baseball especially. 1950 J. DEMPSEY Championship Fighting ii. 11 Punchless
performers who can win amateur or professional bouts on points. 1994 Sports Illustr. 22 Aug. 3/1 The Hermosa Beach event was only the second known
appearance of professional beach soccer in the U.S. |
So, according to the OED (which is probably one of the best sources of info on the English language) an amateur is basically the opposite of a
professional. And a professional is someone who does something for money.
Now I did say that our version of amateur was "simply our creation". However, you turned it around on me to make it seem as if I was trying to be
divisive. I was simply pointing out the contrast between our definition and the "true" definition.
And I suppose technically "ex-professionals" would be exactly that.
I really don't think it is too complex until you throw in different groups' definitions. I mean, it seems simple to me. If you have a "chemistry
career" and you also do home experimentation, you are both. If you just do it at home you are an amatuer in the sense that you don't make money (but
in another, less used definition you are a professional if you are skilled at what you do). So, they obviously aren't mutually exclusive/inclusive.
But, like I said, I think it's simpler than you are saying.
"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry ... There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any
question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and
that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think,
free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
