[118600] in Cypherpunks
Re: Science Bloopers (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Cordian)
Sun Oct 3 23:00:26 1999
From: Eric Cordian <emc@chao.insync.net>
Message-Id: <199910040243.VAA89417@chao.insync.net>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 19:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <vp905k0y4c.fsf@tty0.sten.org> from "Firebeard" at Oct 03, 1999 07:26:43 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: Eric Cordian <emc@chao.insync.net>
> I'm afraid I don't see it. In the first instance, the company
> processing the uranium were deliberately using an illegal procedure
> because it was faster - the scientific knowledge was ignored.
Illegal procedure or not, no one with an ounce of science education
is going to be convinced to manually dump 35 lbs of enriched uranium
into a tank while they are standing next to it.
Criticality is one of the first things one learns about in nuclear
engineering, and people have hosed themselves just by pouring the same
amount of fissionable liquid into a differently shaped container.
> In the second, the problem wasn't a lack of scientific knowledge, but a
> lack of communication and documentation.
A science education generally includes instilling an understanding of
computing everything 6 different ways and asking yourself continuously
"does the answer make sense?"
You don't get a B+ in Bridge Design by getting the right answers to
84% of the structural equations. It's only right when it's 100%
right and you can prove it to yourself and your peers.
That 100% right includes not confusing newtons with pounds.
--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
