Sam said, "Can we get back to some physics? Discussing statistics is
even a stretch."
Perhaps the election discussion has run it's course. However, one of
the things physicists are supposed to do is be observant, ask questions
about things that don't make sense, and try to figure out what's going
on. Sampling bias or similar sampling problems are things we have to
deal with in our experimental work, and personal bias is a problem we
try to avoid when we interpret our results and/or compare our results to
theories. We have several dark moments in physics during which some
political maneuvering has possibly lost or corrupted or tainted the
science or the history of the science. An obvious example is the
unfortunate incidents that happened between Hooke and Newton.
If physicists have developed any knack for doing a good job of being
observant, asking appropriate questions, and figuring things out, then I
would hope we would apply those techniques broadly. Indeed, this is a
major thrust in the science portion of our university general-education
program. The fact that we require two semesters of science, at least
one of which must have a lab component, is often questioned both by
non-science students and non-science faculty. You know the routine...
"I'm not majoring in science, so why do I need to take this course."
Although we have several answers to that question, one very significant
answer is that scientists have a way of observing things and analyzing
things that is highly successful and very useful in a much wider arena
than physical science.
Now, if it is not okay for us to apply our techniques to the broader
world ourselves, then how are we going to sell the idea that
non-scientists ought to learn our techniques so they can apply these
techniques in the broader world?
Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D.
Professor of Physics and Chemistry
Bluffton University
Bluffton, OH 45817
(419)-358-3270
edmiston@bluffton.edu