Engineering and Arrogance

Sounds like "the pot calling the kettle black".

I even invite your sharp comments. Still waiting for one with value.

Thanks for the nice reply. Looking forward to something meaningful from you,

too.

there are all types, but so can ignorance, and one does not have to be an engineer either for that.

"Engineers usually pounce on anything that isn't proven."

Thomas Edison did not invent the light bulb.

My mind is made up on this point.

Excellent post, I agree with you to some extant, But Wish if they all could learn a lesson from you whom you are fighting for,

I'll grant you that CR4 contributors could stand to exhibit a good deal more civility (myself included, on occasion). Particularly to visitors whose English is poor.

But you have to realize that many visitors repeat the same tired, disproven, disreputable concepts time and time again. And often apparently without doing the tiniest bit of research on their own. They don't even bother to search through this forum before posting. Little wonder this frustrates long-term users.

What some people don't seem to realize is that skepticism about Their Big Idea isn't personal criticism. It's a crucial step that can't be ignored. You mentioned Thomas Edison. How likely is this scenario below?

Kid Inventor: "Hey Mr. Edison! I just invented a thing I'm calling a transistor! It does stuff!"

Edison: "Hmm. I like the sound of that funny word. Here's $50,000 for it, sight unseen!"

Doesn't sound very logical, does it? Doesn't even sound like Edison! (in fact, he probably would have just tweaked the kid's nose and stolen the idea, as he was so prone to do - look it up!)

So while it may be inconsiderate for someone to "demand" supporting data be posted along with a topic up for discussion, I don't think it's the least bit out of line to (gently and politely) fire the ball back into their court to let them know they should at least be prepared to debate their point intelligently.

If you really want to see how a new engine idea is received in this community, take a look at how it should be presented. This guy did it, with proper presentation, facts and proper attitude and after a few discussions, managed to gained the respect and admiration of most engineers on this forum.

You will see that most are contributing and are trying to solve the issues that are still at hand. And all this in a very civilized manner. Lessons to be learned...

I do not know why we have to apologize! Engineers are as far as I know HUMAN BEINGS and have the positive and negative properties of all human beings. Since CR4 is an open site all kind of people come and believe that we will fall on our knees to sing ossana to their fantastic ideas. We had lately a very good example with Mr Kastratsky. Engineers are more open minded than many other professionals who ban those who do not share their ideas. Here we only make a TECHNICAL critic of what has been presented. Engineering is a profession where we apply laws of nature and if a "genius" comes and claims that all natural laws are s...t then we react but mostly in a progressive way. First we try to explain where the flaw is. You gave the example of Edison, all he did respected the natural laws he did not come to claim that he has a bulb without supply which will give light for ever. He combined in a genial way natural principles. Do not forget that his words were : 1% inspiration and 99 % perspiration. He was an empirical inventor. The problem is that when an uneducated "genius" does not understand the explanations and believes he is a victim because his idea is not accepted and because contrary arguments are given. When the "genius" goes over the limit then he can expect a hard reaction. People who do not understand or do not know theory consider that only "practice" can lead to the truth. What they do not know is that theory is condensed practice. All theories are evolutions of experimental knowledge and were obtained by an analysis to define what is general since every experiment is particular. If an idea is stupid (as many presented were) shall we congratulate the generator ? or shall we tell him / her that the path leads to nothing ? I prefer the second approach since it is better he will not invest his time and money when it is sure that the result is nothing.

Harry Truman said it best: If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

If a post seems arrogant, it would be wise to check the context, because there may be good and sufficient reason. There are some people who pretty much know what they are talking about, and others who don't--and refuse to learn.

Ouch! Busted.

Let he that is without guilt cast the first stone.

very good follow up with citations and references.....telling things as there are, may only appear condescending, when in reality its telling it like its is.

I especially like 'Whereas Engineers tell someone they are 'wrong', to "Make Them Right"'

You've hit the nail on the head.

This may not be the best place to come if you want only "positive" feedback (feedback supporting your own skewed view of things). Such feedback is of no utility.

This is a good place to come if you want real feedback, that can help to refine ideas, the way you communicate about them, etc.

Many of us seem to have functional memories despite our sometimes advanced years. This can heighten our appreciation of irony: pots do call kettles black, don't they?

One can become entrenched with an idea, it may be right or wrong. But it's that's person's belief.

We give everyone the chance to voice his or her opinion.

My favorite line in your short rant has to be the one where you...<This one way thinking can lead to great consistency in the design and production world. However it scores rather poorly in embracing anything new or different.> ....travel destroys narrow mindedness too. Sincerly, Ray

How well your idea will be received by engineers has a lot to do with how you present it.

This Is why Adam (ADoyle88) does not let me post anything about my engine.

He is my translator.

I told Adam to look at the post from Rick@cae. That made him feel very good!

We really appreciate all of the feedback we have received from CR4, both negative and positive. It has helped us look at the engine from other peoples perspectives. especially the negative.

Positive feedback does very little to help someone improve his or her invention whereas negative feedback points out the areas that need more time and thought.

I have been working on the DRE for 26 years. I firmly believe I could have progressed more quickly with corrective criticism from a forum such as CR4.

It does not feel very good to hear your idea has flaws and the first instinct is to ignore the flaws and convince yourself that they just don't understand or that they are just picking to be mean.

More often than not you will find that they have seen something that either needs to be changed or you need to find a better way of presenting it.

Thanks again for all of the feedback

Lonny

"Unfortunately engineers can be some of the most arrogant and stubborn people you'll ever meet. They too often think their way of thinking is the ONLY way to think."

Obviously you haven't met any lawyers or politicians.

Just because you can do a thing doesn't make it a good idea

Let's open up a chain of "brain gyms." The idea would be to strengthen mental and ego functioning at least up to the pec/ab functioning of merely physical gyms.

Only since the time of Hypatia.

GA

And yes we have, and yes it appears, they 'not normally' are.

I doubt that this "library" idea will catch on. It sounds a little like a Kindle that you can't carry around with you. At very least, the "r" after the "b" should be dropped, to make the word easier to pronounce.

The fact that you have used the time-honored Wikipedia as your source points up some of the issues with a libary. Here I sit, surrounded by half-empty snack bags, dried up salsa, piles of laundry (clean or dirty... can't tell) wearing a bathrobe, unshaven, and reeking to high heaven, having not found the time to bathe. Your public libary would not be appreciative of my lifestyle. But I can get to Wikipedia in seconds.

I quote from the article you provided:

• Patrons may not know how to fully use the library's resources. This can be due to some individuals' unease in approaching a staff member. Ways in which a library's content is displayed or accessed may have the most impact on use. An antiquated or clumsy search system, or staff unwilling or untrained to engage their patrons, will limit a library's usefulness.

There you have it. Your idea will not work. Now don't give me anyayer lip about naysayers and arrogant engineers squelching your ideas!

_<sigh>

I suppose you are correct. We will then have to settle for such pearls of wisdom as are bestowed upon the unwashed masses _{(really, K Fry)} by the loftier thinkers among us.

I think the OP could use a little less ego

I usually do not do a research about what the OP did before he started the thread. This time due to some comments about past threads I did it. My conclusion is that you are a frustrated person because your ideas were not accepted. You should think a bit further. Your comparison with Edison is not suited since as I mentioned Edison wanted to make a new thing but within the frame of natural behaviour of the system, your suggestions had a lot of flaws from the physics point of view and those were mentioned, your reaction was not all the thread long to accept them but I dare say the contrary. I do not know which part was arrogant, the one who tried to show errors and give the possibility to correct them or the part which did not accept critics ? What do you sincerely think ? May I imagine the the way CR4 would have reacted to an Edison statement as: "Gentlemen, I want to make a light bulb using a filament heated by a trough passing current and fixed in a glass bulb". The comments would have been first related to the nature of the filament and its dimensions, then to the value of the current and also to the risk at such a high temperature that the filament would burn. I am pretty sure nobody would have said it is not feasible but only that according to their knowledge it could be difficult and the difficulties every one thought about would have been listed. If you look at the evolution of the incandescence light bulb you will notice how the steps have been solved one after the other. That some engineers can be arrogant all agree, in general the arrogant are those who have little knowledge and little practice and are over-proud of the little they know. I have a philosophy which is shared by many serious people: "the more you know the more you know that what you know is not and never will be enough". This is a pleasant part of the profession you have the pleasure to learn some thing new all your life !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This keeps you YOUNG.