Re: [Phys-l] BEC

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

"...and how urban legends are spread - as has happened on occasionon 
this net, I seem to recall.


Regards,

Jack"


Not a crit, but would appreciate reading an example.

bc

p.s.  I thought JD took care of this: the authority stated the GRAT&A rule (generally regarded as true & applicable); applied it to example(s); voilà.

bc


Jack Uretsky wrote:

> Hi Rick-
> 	My tongue is NOT in my cheek.  I don't know who "my friend the 
> theoretician" is, how reliable he/she is, and whether Terry is accurately 
> quoting what he heard.  Appeal to authority is to be contrasted to a 
> verifiable line of reasoning, which may come from authority.
> 	In the context of purveying facts to physics teachers to be passed 
> on to their students, blatant appeal to authority, without a great deal 
> more, simply teaches the wrong lesson.  That's one way that junk science 
> comes about and how urban legends are spread - as has happened on occasion 
> on this net, I seem to recall.
> 			Regards,
> 				Jack
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 18 May 2006, Rick Tarara wrote:
>
>  
>
> > Jack,
> >
> > Are you being serious here or is your tongue firmly in your cheek--hard to
> > tell via this medium.
> >
> > If we are not to at least provisionally trust the 'BEC theoretician' to
> > answer BEC questions to the best of today's understanding, then what?
> > Appeal to authority IS the way we come to know most of what we know.  We
> > have only a limited time (and expertise) to 'create for ourselves' from the
> > vast array of knowledge we might wish to partake in.
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jack Uretsky" <jlu@hep.anl.gov>
> >
> >
> >    
> >
> > > Well, Terry, I guess your answer to my question is that you are not in
> > > able to vouch for the accuracy of your friend's information.  My inquiry
> > > was in the spirit of the objections that have been made to the
> > > unquestioning acceptance of authority - objections that have been made
> > > eloquently by others on this net and, perhaps less eloquently, by myself.
> > > Regards,
> > > Jack
> > >
> > > On Thu, 18 May 2006, Terry Scott wrote:
> > >
> > >      
> > >
> > > > Well  Jack,  I guess my answer is take it or leave it. I am responding
> > > > to this thread in a spirit of public service, if you do not accept the
> > > > accuracy of this information it is of no concern to me.
> > > >
> > > > The only other suggestion I can make is to read the literature, follow
> > > > the research and make up your own mind i.e. go and create it yourself.
> > > >
> > > > Terry
> > > >
> > > >        
> > _______________________________________________
> > Forum for Physics Educators
> > Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> > https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
> >
> >    
>
>