Strange Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 40 minutes ago, et pet said: In all actuality, John Cuthber, most Cites of that famous Albert Einstein Quote have it as "Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler" He was just correcting the grammar in beecee’s post, not trying to give an authoritative version of the original. But I’m sure everyone appreciates your work in that respect. 7 hours ago, et pet said: Seriously, though, it makes sense that if you honestly cannot explain something fairly simply, you probably do not truly and fully understand it. That is true for simple things. And (as the original was about physics) I think it would be fairly easy to explain, say, Newton’s laws to almost anyone. The basic concepts of more complex ideas can be explained in simple terms. But you soon run into the problem that people will only have a limited understanding. In the case of GR or the Higgs mechanism, their understanding will probably based on analogies of limited accuracy. This isn’t normally a problem. Except when people think they have a proper understanding and either attempt to disprove it or create their own theories based on their limited understanding. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
et pet Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Strange said: He was just correcting the grammar in beecee’s post, not trying to give an authoritative version of the original. But I’m sure everyone appreciates your work in that respect. Well, as you are ofttimes quick to point out, Strange, I can only be wrong. Not sure why you would refer to 2 seconds on google as work, though. Actually, spending 2 seconds on google to properly Cite a famous Quote by Albert Einstein should be considered compulsory or de rigueur. You know like mandatory, even, aye? Wouldn't you agree? But...this is scienceforums, Strange, so I am not sure that many Members appreciate it at all. 45 minutes ago, Strange said: This isn’t normally a problem. Except when people think they have a proper understanding and either attempt to disprove it or create their own theories based on their limited understanding. ...or when those people that only have an over-inflated ego and very mediocre subjective understanding cannot help but belittle and berate anyone that they perceive to actually have a more proper or better understanding than them... Again, wouldn't you agree, Strange? Edited October 28, 2018 by et pet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 28, 2018 Author Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 23 minutes ago, et pet said: Actually, spending 2 seconds on google to properly Cite a famous Quote by Albert Einstein should be considered compulsory or de rigueur. You know like mandatory, even, aye? If you want criticise anyone for that, it should be beecee, not John. You know, if you are being really pedantic. 23 minutes ago, et pet said: Well, as you are ofttimes quick to point out, Strange, I can only be wrong. We are all wrong at some time! Science is the art of being constructively wrong (someone famous said something along those lines). Edit: It was Feynman, who said: "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." Not quite the same thing. But he also said, more relevant to this thread: "Hell, if I could explain it to the average person, it wouldn't have been worth the Nobel prize." https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman Edited October 28, 2018 by Strange quotations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
et pet Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Strange said: If you want criticise anyone for that, it should be beecee, not John. You know, if you are being really pedantic. Well...like I said : as you are ofttimes quick to point out, Strange, I can only be wrong. At any rate, I did NOT criticize John for that! He made no Quote without Citing the source. Why, may I humbly ask, Strange, do you think that beecee should be criticized for that? And, you know, if you are being really pedantic, could you Cite an example? btw : you seem to be able to quite quickly see, in any of my Postings, that which you judge me to be wrong about , and yet at the same time you seem not to be able to see any queries that I proffer...? Edited October 28, 2018 by et pet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 28, 2018 Author Share Posted October 28, 2018 4 minutes ago, et pet said: At any rate, I did NOT criticize John for that! OK. It may not have been a criticism, but it was John's post you quoted, rather than the person who quoted the sentence originally. 4 minutes ago, et pet said: Why, may I humbly ask, Strange, do you think that beecee should be criticized for that? I don't. I was under the impression you did. Sorry if I misunderstood your desire to correctly represent Einstein's words. This is all unnecessarily off topic. So shall we drop it now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
et pet Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Strange said: This is all unnecessarily off topic. So shall we drop it now? That is entirely up to you, Strange. I thought it was unnecessarily off topic when you initiated it, but then...you know...with me always being wrong... Well, I figured you would never bring up something that was unnecessarily off topic...and this is scienceforums...so... Anyways, Strange, are you going to drop it now? Edited October 28, 2018 by et pet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
et pet Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 2 hours ago, John Cuthber said: Interestingly, one of the most important things Einstein did was show that Newton was wrong. Should Einstein not have done that because Newton was dead? It's amusing to note that I didn't say Einstein was wrong. I said he was right, and that's how you could tell that Beecee hadn't quoted him. Did you actually read what I said? Yes John Cuthber, I read every Post in its entirety. What I am fairly sure that you said was : "You seem not to have noticed that, while he said it was a quote, he didn't say from whom. Einstein said something similar- but since he got the grammar right that can't be who Beecee quoted. With all due respect to Einstein; he's dead. It doesn't matter exactly how he said it, or even if he didn't." Part of my reply : speaking of Respect, John, I refuse to Denigrate, Belittle, Berate or Accuse Albert Einstein of being Wrong , and one of the reasons is simply because he is deceased and cannot defend himself! ...okay... Albert Einstein got the grammar right, right? Someone else's possible quote of possibly someone else's words, did not have the grammar right, right? So, that someone else could not possibly have been Quoting Albert Einstein, right? So possibly...just possibly...one or the other might possibly have not been right, right? Well, John, there is no way that a proven font of knowledge of such high stature could possibly be wrong, right? Ergo, that only left the other one... At that point, John, it was out of my deep respect for the deceased, that I refused to Denigrate, Belittle, Berate or Accuse Albert Einstein of being Wrong. So no, you didn't say Einstein was wrong. And neither did I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 28, 2018 Author Share Posted October 28, 2018 21 minutes ago, et pet said: Einstein said something similar- but since he got the grammar right that can't be who Beecee quoted. Or he could have been repeating the quotation from memory and just got it wrong. But it doesn’t really matter, does it. 2 hours ago, beecee said: Einstein was wrong on occasion...that is a simple fact, and something the great man was humble enough to accept and admit. I don’t think he ever admitted he was wrong about quantum theory, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 16 minutes ago, Strange said: Or he could have been repeating the quotation from memory and just got it wrong. But it doesn’t really matter, does it. Bingo ! What I actually said was, and as I already corrected John Cuthbert on was... "Something should be explained as simple as possible, but not any simpler"....or words to that effect." So, obviously I was not sure of the exact quote, nor of who to attribute it to, despite the questionable antics from some quarters. Quote I don’t think he ever admitted he was wrong about quantum theory, though. What was the general consensus though with regards to quantum theory before Einstein kicked the bucket? And ironically, he actually contributed to it himself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 28, 2018 Author Share Posted October 28, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, beecee said: Bingo ! What I actually said was, and as I already corrected John Cuthbert on was... I think all John was correcting you on was the use of “simple” as a flat adverb, rather than “simply”. I wouldn’t do that in my dialect of English, but it may be standard in others. 17 minutes ago, beecee said: What was the general consensus though with regards to quantum theory before Einstein kicked the bucket? And ironically, he actually contributed to it himself! It may have been less generally accepted than it is now. But we need people like Einstein (and Podoldky & Rosen) to “poke” at theories in order to test them. Perhaps if EPR hadn’t pointed out the apparent paradox, Bell wouldn’t have come up with his theorem and others wouldn’t have found ways to test it. So the mavericks either make existing theory stronger or, occasionally, replace it. Edited October 28, 2018 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted October 29, 2018 Share Posted October 29, 2018 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Strange said: I think all John was correcting you on was the use of “simple” as a flat adverb, rather than “simply”. I wouldn’t do that in my dialect of English, but it may be standard in others. Yep, and I accepted that correction and admit mostly through laziness, that sometimes my grammar is not strictly in line with proper English...It was though blown way out of proportion with nonsensical pedant and attempted science lessons by another. Quote It may have been less generally accepted than it is now. But we need people like Einstein (and Podoldky & Rosen) to “poke” at theories in order to test them. Perhaps if EPR hadn’t pointed out the apparent paradox, Bell wouldn’t have come up with his theorem and others wouldn’t have found ways to test it. Of course, couldn't agree more! And that is evident every day with science and scientists correcting themselves... Quote So the mavericks either make existing theory stronger or, occasionally, replace it. Agreed again. Edited October 29, 2018 by beecee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted October 29, 2018 Share Posted October 29, 2018 7 minutes ago, beecee said: Yep, and I accepted that correction and admit mostly through laziness, that sometimes my grammar is not strictly in line with proper English...It was though blown way out of proportion with nonsensical pedantry and attempted science lessons by another. Of course, couldn't agree more! And that is evident every day with science and scientists correcting themselves... Agreed again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts