I like this comment. It is good to hear of a scientist who is not stuck in a certain way. For most of what I have seen many people in my courses were kind of ingrained with a certain viewpoint on how things operated. I began my studying with such a different mindset than what I came out of it with.
I like this comment. It is good to hear of a scientist who is not stuck in a certain way. For most of what I have seen many people in my courses were kind of ingrained with a certain viewpoint on how things operated. I began my studying with such a different mindset than what I came out of it with.
Thanks! Being able to look at things a lot of ways is what I do day, day out. That’s what my boss and colleagues liked about me. Until recently anyway. Apparently they are having trouble quantifying my work. I help everyone around me be successful but those don’t count for my success.
Thanks! Being able to look at things a lot of ways is what I do day, day out. That’s what my boss and colleagues liked about me. Until recently anyway. Apparently they are having trouble quantifying my work. I help everyone around me be successful but those don’t count for my success.
Oddly enough I’m a scientist, a Physical Chemist. My schooling included quite a bit on large data sets and how to deal with nothing behaving as you’d expect. Statistical Mechanics is pretty good at both of these things but not the only way to handle them. I agree that scientists shouldn’t get locked into a way of thinking. It’s very necessary to step back and look at things from as many angles as you can. Where things go awry is when we try to super impose a pattern that isn’t there. Or we ascribe intent/purpose when the observed result is just a result of chaos. Energy and chaos make the universe go around.