Tell me what you know about Black holes

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


If you'd bothered to read my previous posts you would have seen this one:

I got into physics through popular books on astronomy (~5 years old) and later from science fiction.

I read A Brief History when I was 13 or so. I had the sneaking suspicion that wheelchair-bound bastard was lying to me, and I found out later I was right.

Bah, if you want to use that tone...

Originally posted by Lul Thyme
I don't want to dwell too long on your case, because it may not be generic and you can say anything anyway.

[/q]

I did read all your posts.

[KrazyHorse]

It was fine, but also full of ****. I read it when I was already doing my BSc.

I enjoyed his other books better (autobiographical ones)

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I did not read a popular book on modern physics until I was well and truly interested in the field already. And every time I did read one I was really annoyed by it, not interested.

As I said before, you were not the target audience at all.

[KrazyHorse]

Honestly, kids' science books about classical physics were much more formative for me. I loved **** about geometric optics, thermodynamics etc.

[DaShi]

If a blackhole were inverted, would it destroy the universe?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Lul Thyme


As I said before, you were not the target audience at all.

I thought you were claiming that the major target audience was the crop of possible future scientists?

[Kuciwalker]

I doubt any kids' book on thermo would be worthwhile as a pedagogical tool either.

[KrazyHorse]

Why not? I understood phase diagrams and how to extract work out of a heat engine before I entered high school.

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


I thought you were claiming that the major target audience was the crop of possible future scientists?

I claimed it was to get people interested.
You said you were already interested.
In any case KH, you should know that your personal experience is only anecdotal in the end.
I brought you up because I assumed it was similar to most people I know or read about. If it's not, fine.
You didn't respond to my two posts about the general situation:
"But there are many examples, in both our fields for example, of top researchers who have admitted being inspired by this type of publications when younger.
Just this fact is enough justification that they fill an important role no?
If it was enough to convince Fields Medalist to become mathematicians, the fact that you get to correct Spec on black holes is close to irrelevant...

Such books induce a "wow this field is cool" feel in some people, and will make some of these seek further (proper) understanding of the field.

This is not just my opinion, it is a very well commented on phenomena in science, and most people deem it crucial to the strength of future generations of scientists."

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Lul Thyme
In any case KH, you should know that your personal experience is only anecdotal in the end.

Obviously.

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Obviously.

I know but in the last page you only replied to comments referring to you , and skipped the general ones so I wanted to get back on track

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


My point is the wasted effort on the parts of both the scientist writing the book and the person reading it.

If that's all people can get out of the books then that's all the books should say.

I'm against wordiness in science for the sake of wordiness.

It's not a waste of effort if the scientist gets more money and the reader gets more satisfaction out of it.

[KrazyHorse]

If it was enough to convince Fields Medalist to become mathematicians, the fact that you get to correct Spec on black holes is close to irrelevant...

I simply think you are overstating the importance of these works in motivating people...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Lul Thyme
and skipped the general ones so I wanted to get back on track

I doubt this issue has been studied in any sort of statistically significant way. That's why I'm responding anecdotally.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

It's not a waste of effort if the scientist gets more money and the reader gets more satisfaction out of it.

Again, this can be accomplished with a book about magic pixies.