4 ms·

Its generally not worth it to give smart answers to dumb questions. I guess its a pet peeve of the author though.

by apalmer 12y ago

WaxProlix 12y ago
That's not true - if your goal is to change minds or address a standpoint, treating the position fairly and giving a smart, reasoned, and respectful response to a charitable interpretation of your opposition's standpoint is the BEST way to proceed forward.
- Kalium 12y ago
  Were this universally the case, creationism would have ceased to have adherents several generations ago. Therefore, I submit that your position is only true for rational positions reached and held by rational people who are willing to be convinced by rational discourse.
  - MichaelGG 12y ago
    Most people don't have such ... strongly-held ... beliefs about rocket science as they do their origin.
    - Kalium 12y ago
      I suspect you are correct. I simply wished to make a point about the generality of parent's point.
  - Crito 12y ago
    "Why can't we launch waste into the sun?" doesn't really signal irrationality. If they prefaced it with "I believe the earth is 6000 years old and I wonder..." then maybe you'd have a point.
MichaelGG 12y ago
Why is that so? It's not a particularly dumb question for many people that don't know anything about launch costs or the massive amount of energy. I'd bet many people think if you can get it out past the moon's orbit it should start to fall into the sun. And even if it was a flippant question, showing exactly how wrong it is through an in-depth analysis is a great way to refute such positions.
- throwagravity 12y ago
  It's a dumb question if you know anything about orbital mechanics, which the author purports to do. > I'd bet many people think if you can get it out past the moon's orbit it should start to fall into the sun. This thought is actually true, to a first-order approximation. If you time it right and use gravity slingshot(s) to bleed off velocity and/or adjust the direction towards the sun. The amount of delta-V needed after the moon is basically noise compared to the amount needed just to leave the surface of the earth (which is HUGE, as the author points out). It's still probably cost prohibitive, but the delta-V required is a lot less than the author thinks.
  - MichaelGG 12y ago
    Funny coincidence. I was putting my daughter to bed and she asked aren't rockets launches in danger of going into the Sun?
saulrh 12y ago
Not true - sometimes a dumb question exposes confusion which when corrected reveals a smarter answer. Same reason testing works: if you're worried that your implementation (understanding) is wrong, put in malformed data (ask a dumb question) and see what you get out.
civilian 12y ago
Just wait until parenthood...
mynameishere 12y ago
I would argue it's a waste not because it's stupid, but because it's just extraordinarily trite: http://www.reddit.com/search?q=nuclear+waste+sun&restrict_sr=off&sort=relevance&t=all http://www.reddit.com/search?q=nuclear+waste+sun&restrict_sr... ...variations include "why can't we put garbage in the sun", "why can we put nuclear waste in volcanoes", etc. It's a great question coming from a 6-year-old, but if an adult asks it, he's simply not the kind of person who will spend one second in critical thought, or in researching anything himself. So, yeah, not worth it.
- phlakaton 12y ago
  That is a ridiculous and insulting characterization of the audience and the answer. This is a question that I've actually wondered about on and off over the years, and whatever you think of me for not knowing the answer flat-out, or for never having cared deeply enough about the topic to actually research the answer myself, I did very much appreciate an answer that looked at the actual physics involved, and that led to interesting follow-up questions about orbital slingshots and alternate destinations. One of the college discussions I remember the most fondly was a night spent scribbling on napkins with physics majors over whether you got more wet if you walked more quickly through the rain, and why. Not all questions have to be earth-shakingly brilliant to yield interesting and intellectually stimulating discussions.
- washadjeffmad 12y ago
  You're right of course, we're free to determine how to spend our time. And you thought it worth yours to search for reddit discussions to post here to illustrate why you felt this topic not worth your time, perhaps as a lone beacon to guide future generations who might be tempted towards the folly of exploring questions which have answers you already know. Discussing good explanations for a topic, no matter how common, is not a waste for anyone who is interested, especially any curious people who might currently be lacking the tools to solve it themselves. I don't believe any of us comes fully equipped.

Its generally not worth it to give smart answers to dumb questions. I guess its a pet peeve of the author though.

by apalmer 12y ago

Its generally not worth it to give smart answers to dumb questions. I guess its a pet peeve of the author though.

That's not true - if your goal is to change minds or address a standpoint, treating the position fairly and giving a smart, reasoned, and respectful response to a charitable interpretation of your opposition's standpoint is the BEST way to proceed forward.

Kalium 12y ago
Were this universally the case, creationism would have ceased to have adherents several generations ago. Therefore, I submit that your position is only true for rational positions reached and held by rational people who are willing to be convinced by rational discourse.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  Most people don't have such ... strongly-held ... beliefs about rocket science as they do their origin.
  - Kalium 12y ago
    I suspect you are correct. I simply wished to make a point about the generality of parent's point.
- Crito 12y ago
  "Why can't we launch waste into the sun?" doesn't really signal irrationality. If they prefaced it with "I believe the earth is 6000 years old and I wonder..." then maybe you'd have a point.

MichaelGG 12y ago

Why is that so? It's not a particularly dumb question for many people that don't know anything about launch costs or the massive amount of energy. I'd bet many people think if you can get it out past the moon's orbit it should start to fall into the sun. And even if it was a flippant question, showing exactly how wrong it is through an in-depth analysis is a great way to refute such positions.

throwagravity 12y ago
It's a dumb question if you know anything about orbital mechanics, which the author purports to do. > I'd bet many people think if you can get it out past the moon's orbit it should start to fall into the sun. This thought is actually true, to a first-order approximation. If you time it right and use gravity slingshot(s) to bleed off velocity and/or adjust the direction towards the sun. The amount of delta-V needed after the moon is basically noise compared to the amount needed just to leave the surface of the earth (which is HUGE, as the author points out). It's still probably cost prohibitive, but the delta-V required is a lot less than the author thinks.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  Funny coincidence. I was putting my daughter to bed and she asked aren't rockets launches in danger of going into the Sun?

saulrh 12y ago

Not true - sometimes a dumb question exposes confusion which when corrected reveals a smarter answer. Same reason testing works: if you're worried that your implementation (understanding) is wrong, put in malformed data (ask a dumb question) and see what you get out.

civilian 12y ago

Just wait until parenthood...

mynameishere 12y ago

I would argue it's a waste not because it's stupid, but because it's just extraordinarily trite: http://www.reddit.com/search?q=nuclear+waste+sun&restrict_sr=off&sort=relevance&t=all http://www.reddit.com/search?q=nuclear+waste+sun&restrict_sr... ...variations include "why can't we put garbage in the sun", "why can we put nuclear waste in volcanoes", etc. It's a great question coming from a 6-year-old, but if an adult asks it, he's simply not the kind of person who will spend one second in critical thought, or in researching anything himself. So, yeah, not worth it.

phlakaton 12y ago
That is a ridiculous and insulting characterization of the audience and the answer. This is a question that I've actually wondered about on and off over the years, and whatever you think of me for not knowing the answer flat-out, or for never having cared deeply enough about the topic to actually research the answer myself, I did very much appreciate an answer that looked at the actual physics involved, and that led to interesting follow-up questions about orbital slingshots and alternate destinations. One of the college discussions I remember the most fondly was a night spent scribbling on napkins with physics majors over whether you got more wet if you walked more quickly through the rain, and why. Not all questions have to be earth-shakingly brilliant to yield interesting and intellectually stimulating discussions.
washadjeffmad 12y ago
You're right of course, we're free to determine how to spend our time. And you thought it worth yours to search for reddit discussions to post here to illustrate why you felt this topic not worth your time, perhaps as a lone beacon to guide future generations who might be tempted towards the folly of exploring questions which have answers you already know. Discussing good explanations for a topic, no matter how common, is not a waste for anyone who is interested, especially any curious people who might currently be lacking the tools to solve it themselves. I don't believe any of us comes fully equipped.