The Sound Of Settled Science

Apparently they figured out just how stupid their article was, that Archimedes figured out the principle of mechanical advantage 2300 years ago, and took it down.

In addition, there's the aspect as to why bikes tend to remain stable when moving and why there's a resistance felt in the handlebar when turning.

I learned about that during my freshman and sophomore years as an engineering undergrad. Any half-decent text on vector mechanics, such as those by Beer and Johnston or Synge and Griffith, can explain that.

I checked that URL and it had a link to this one:

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/332/6027/339

It title is A Bicycle Can Be Self-Stable Without Gyroscopic or Caster Effects. That's a long way from saying that we don't know how bikes work.

The article at the original URL was written by someone with a Ph. D. in quantum physics, which, supposedly, makes him an "expert" on something or another. He should have known better than to write a misleading title like that.

Then again, some wag once came up with an accurate definition of what an expert is. "Ex" means former and "spurt" refers to being all wet.

"accurate definition of what an expert is. "Ex" means former and "spurt" refers to being all wet"

Try this: "Ex" is a has-been and "spurt" is a drip under pressure.

Someone with a Ph. D. in Quantum Physics is supposed to be an expert on "Quantum Physics", duh. He has taken the exact same lower division physics classes that you took as an engineering major, wherein you learned about classical mechanics. But beyond the physics you have taken, he has also taken two years of upper division physics, delving farther into each area of physics, such as classical mechanics, eletromagnetism, thermodynamics, and modern physics. In graduate school, he takes two more years of those subjects, as well as courses in his area of interest. He has to pass a qualifying examination to show expertise (yes) in all those areas before advancing to candidacy and concentrating in his own area (such as quantum physics) and doing research therein. In my own oral portion of the qual, the board (composed of mostly quantum physicists) attacked me mercilessly on thermodynamics and statistical mechanics, which the written portion revealed me to be weakest on, even though my own area will have little if anything to do with those subjects. But they were right of course, if you are to be called a physicist, you must be knowledgeable about all areas of physics.

I don't disparage engineering, it applies the scientific foundation of physics to develop applications that advance the general well-being of society. For every Maxwell, there are Faraday (himself a physicist) and Edison and others, to make electromagnetism relevant to everyone. I worked as an engineer for over twenty years. The background in physics allowed me to understand the theories behind satellites, fighter jets, and radars, to name some fields I was involved in. It was a lot easier for me than some layman, of course, or even someone with an engineering degree in a different area. Truth be known, most of the applications I had to learn are not taught in college engineering courses anyway, and must be learned on the job by everyone.

You really should not disparage physicists, either, even from an engineering point of view.

I have degrees in mechanical and electrical engineering. Much of what you studied, I did as well. I took courses in thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, strength of materials, and heat transfer, among others. The subjects I studied in grad school included celestial mechanics, microprocessors, and digital logic design. Eventually, I earned a Ph. D. in electrical and computer engineering.

I also worked as an engineer and I'm registered as P. Eng. in 3 Canadian provinces.

The fact remains that author of the original piece, and having a doctorate in quantum physics, ought to know better than to write something that's misleading, if not incorrect.

Unfortunately, there are many celebrity scientists who, by virtue of their education, claim an intellectual superiority over those who do not possess the same academic background. I can name several who, despite all their learning, spout twaddle in public and expect the Great Unwashed to believe all of it without question.

As some wag once said, having a Ph. D. provides no immunity against foolishness.