Scientists are from Mars, the public is from Earth
Here is a very interesting table . It lists words that are often used in science
but are commonly misinterpreted by the public . So without further ado here is the
"Rosetta Stone" which translates between a few useful science terms and
more clear terms which the public would more readily understand .
The writer of this article , Phil Plait , is a science journalist . Here is what he had to say
about this table :
" Ill admit, when I read it I laughed. But then my chuckle dried up when I realized just how dead accurate this is. "
link
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/10/19/scientists-are-from-mars-the-public-is-from-earth/
Tags
Who is online
85 visitors
Great seed, Rich,
I have to admit that I got two wrong;uncertaintyand error. Bad science teacher... bad!
OK ,
Be honest now . How many of these terms would you misinterpret ?
Can you think of other terms which are also "misleading" in the vernacular ?
Hey Perrie ,
I just noticed your comment . Thanks for owning up . Now if we can just get some
other honest replies ....
Yeah... see... I'm honest. I even should beembarrassed!
Well Perrie ,
In all fairness those 2 terms are used in statistical modeling . That is not a
very widespread subject matter ...
Hi Feronia ,
I know people like that Chinese guy you mentioned . Heck , I might have some of him
in me !?
The thing about Edison is he was remarkably persistent . Of course later in life that same stubbornness was used to interfere with other people's progress . Are you familiar with that story ?
Ol' lab tech here, eat and breath QC, and "manipulate" statistics all the time...so It was easy.
It is interesting to me how varied and wide our perceptions are. It is also scary is how large and deceptive thatdivideis at times.
I so totally agree. He only developed the record player and then shamelessly took credit for the work of other scientists who worked for his lab. Tesla was a true genius. You could say it was the same difference between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.
Hey Feronia... you beat me to almost the same post, except it seems that we are on different sides of the argument. It seems that great minds think alike, LOL!
Edison developed DC and Tesla developed AC. DC doesn't travel far enough to be used as electricity. But Edison wanted to prove it was the better power, so he electrocuted an elephant to prove his point.
Isn't error alsovariance?
Possibly, but not as descriptive. What if the variance is not an error?
That is sooo cool! I can't believe you did that! I am so impressed!
Well, once again, great minds think alike! LOL!
I agree, that isimpressiveFeronia!
She seems like a woman with many talents. One smart cookie!
I'm gaga about the portableTesla coils in the Warehouse 13 series .
They are used as long range stun guns . But not in real life ...
To be precise , variance must have several values to be computed .
Error only needs one value and some mean value .
Me, too Randy!
I suppose it is on DVD somewhere . I just watch it free with online streaming video & no commercials .....
Ya know, something this article does touch on though. In my profession I have a desire to see my statistics meet certain requirements.
When I get results that fall beyond certain parameters, whether that value is one that I had hoped for or not, is still a value. It gives me information one way or the other...i.e. is the instrument or the reagent having an issue? Have I reviewed technique and sample integrity? Things like that. In other words, if a control value falls outta range, even as we label something as pass/fail, that doesn't infer positive or negative data. When dealing with a human component on both ends, from patient (sample) to technician (lab) values must all be equally valued. That's the hard part sometimes; realizing that averages are made up of a population of extreme values...and many times those extreme values are your neighbors kids or a co-workers husband. It's an easy thing to lose objectivity at times, even when you know better.
There is a metaphysical aspect in the way we approach science. There comes a point where the very axis andboundaries of scientificinquirycome under attack, and are shattered. The world is proved to be round andquantummechanics reveals unimaginable possibilities,mathematicsis our own invention; we cling to explaining and describing our reality. It's a strange thing at times to use values when describing horrendous realities. It's somehow disarming, disengaging , anddisquieting all at thesame time.
We as humans have a difficult timeseparatingvalue, from value.
Some fields have more extreme values than others . Statisticians don't like
bi-modal distributions etc.
I hate talking math with you. You always win.
A bi-modal distribution looks like cleavage .....sort of .
Thnx 4 the graphic Larry . There are many examples of bi-modal distributions available . But they are brought about because one is not looking at enough variables . When the data has enough dimensions the distribution can usually be simplified to a normal function .
What I like are LOTS of plots, it makes my job a lot easier. My main thing is watching that my means and standard deviations are where they should be. When it comes to new method verification studies and linearity studies I use bi-modal, the above graphic would represent a disaster for me as they should come very close to overlapping...but I would still enjoy the evocative imagery!
:~)