|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A test of your common sense | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined:
|
Over the years, the most potent argument coming from the creationist side is that you can use common sense to solve everything and that you don't need no scientist or engineer to tell you how the world works. I've been on this forum for a while, and every time I think of this topic, buzsaw and riverrat (god bless their souls) always come to mind.
Here is a very simple elementary engineering problem. We have a beam that is 3L long. There are 2 force acting on the beam at equal distance from the ends. If this beam is to fail, where will it fail and why? Here's a quick drawing that I made.
THe reason I chose this example is because lately I've been noticing that most people have misconceptions about this. I'd argue that this example represents normal everyday thing that most people deal with. And yet, most people appear to be oblivious when it comes to this simple problem. Edited by Taz, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Hahaha, you guys are funny.
There's a reason why I said use your common sense rather than real engineering knowledge. And if you can't use everyday example to reflect this, then your imagination sucks. Instead of thinking beam, think other things. If we have just a single load in the middle then obviously when the beam/plank/car/board/person fails it's going to fail in the middle. That's where the greatest stress is. The point I'm trying to make is what if you have 2 loads like the drawing? When the beam/plank/car/board/person fails, where will it fail? By the way, xongsmith, that's a lot of BS.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
crashfrog writes:
Thank you! Your reply is the most common misconception that I was referring to. Most people would say the middle, which is of course wrong. I say it fails in the middle, dead center, because that's where the combined moment is longest. No real idea, though. The point of this thread is this is a relatively simple problem that reflects a very common everyday thing that people encounter. If you can't apply this example to real life example, then your imagination sucks. Anyway, despite how simple this example is, it's almost impossible to solve this with just common sense. And that's my point. Over the years I've seen many many creationists put all their money on common sense. I'd like to see them solve this problem using common sense. Any other taker? By the way, xongsmith, where did you learn all that mumbo jumbo?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
You know, you remind me of the following scene from doctor strangelove.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
I hope to god you're not an engineer. Here's why. Yes, the world should be based on good solid engineering foundations. But if you are as dense as that soldier in that video clip I posted in my previous post, then you are a useless engineer. I've run into guys like that at work. Sure, they graduated with very high gpa's. But you will very quickly discover while working with them that they can't really apply what they learned to real life. You have to be a lot more flexible than that. My current line of work doesn't have the luxury of having all the known factors neatly spelled out like what you find in text books. Just look at the drawing. Don't over think it.
Nuff said about that.
quote:Actually, there are 2 reasons why I put a roller in there. (1) It's out of habit. (2) I didn't want people to be concerned with the x axis.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Good god. Don't over think it, people. Don't say things like "depends on if the beam is perfectly even blah blah blah". And also don't try to insert math or engineering principles. The point of this thread is common sense. Just by looking at it, where does your common sense tell you the beam/plank/piece of wood/person/car/whatever will fail? We'll see if your common sense agrees with what reality actually is.
As I tried to say before, common people often have a mistrust in scientists and engineers (and other professionals in their respective fields) because some things don't fall in line with people's common sense. Take that simple physics experiment, for example, where college students were asked to roll a ball through a curved path. Most people tried to roll the ball in a curved path. You know what I'm talking about. That's an example of where common sense would fail most people. Again, don't over think it. Just by looking at the diagram, where does your common sense tell you the long thing will break given enough load?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Tangle writes:
It's got everything to do with it. This is an evolution vs creation debate forum. On the one side, we have honest to god scientists saying one thing and we have ordinary people saying another, using their common sense to try to stump scientists. Um, what has common sense got to do with it? I'm an engineer. I see people's misconceptions all the time. Just look at any home-made project and you'll see what I mean. I'm trying to point out that creationist usage of common sense for their argument is not only flawed in the EvC debate, it's also flawed in other areas as well.
It's an engineering question using engineering language.
Since when has this stopped christians from inserting their common sense into these things? I've actually been hoping to see some creationists try to use common sense to solve this simple problem. After all, it hasn't stopped them from making arguments in biology, physics, geology, etc. using their common sense. So, by looking at it, what does your feeling tell you about the point(s) of failure?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Haha, I find it amusing how dense some of you guys are. Yeah, took me about 30 seconds to make that drawing with paint. Didn't think I'd deal with a bunch of engineer wannabes who think real world sketches look like text book problems.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
I disagree with this. I've found that only people who aren't too knowledgable in certain field would try to look for more details when in fact all necessary details have been given. You can tell a lot from a person's questions.
Case in point. I just came back from the doctor's office. On saturday, I discovered something (medical condition of mine) and I needed to see my doctor as soon as possible. So, I called into his office and tried to get an appointment on the same day. The girl said all booked up for saturday. I then suggested "tomorrow" and she said "tomorrow is sunday". So, I said how about monday? She then said ok how about 10? Sounds good to me. Well, when I showed up this morning, I found out that she meant monday next week. I could have sworn I didn't hear any mention of next week. But I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. So, I ask her for "an earlier time". She looked at next monday's schedule and said there was no earlier time on monday. After rolling my eyes, I said when I said time I didn't just mean the time on the clock. It could also mean day. So, she looked again at the book and said there's no time opening for 10am on any day of this week. After rolling my eyes again, I explained to her that when I said time, it could mean time on the clock, day of the week, or combination of the 2, whatever that will let me see my doctor the earliest possible. Then she got it and put me down for 8:30 tomorrow. What often happens in EvC debate is there are certain people who just plain don't understand the issue. They either honestly think they need more info or they try to mask their lack of understanding by declaring there's not enough info. Then there's also the type that won't understand the meaning behind a person's sentence. Hence my video clip of doctor strangelove of the very dense soldier.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
We have a long thing made from a hard material that is designed to only withstand 500 pounds. The long thing is held up at the ends by two 10-96's. 2 insanely overweight women, each weighing 500 pounds, decide to sit on two points L distance from the ends and the women are also L distance from each other.
Where on the long thing will the crack or breaking occur? Edit. Since some people are from parts of the world that use the metric system, they may get confused. So, instead of pound, just interject kilogram. If you are from the middle east and can't understand what L distance is, pray to allah for the answer. If you are homosexual and can't imagine anything female, just replace the 2 women with 2 very attractive and muscular guys. Anyone else who might get confused? Edited by Taz, : No reason given. Edited by Taz, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Drosophilla writes:
Another way at looking at this problem is which side of the equation what belongs to. What you're doing is confusing left and right side of the equation. Three men go to a restaurant for a meal. Each has a 10 note. They choose a meal that costs each of them exactly 10. The waiter collects the three 10 notes and heads off to the till where he remembers that it is a block-booking for which they receive a 5 discount. Looking in the till he finds he only has 1 coins. He can't share 5 x 1 coins fairly amongst the three men. He scratches his head and thinks. He could keep the 5 discount - however he is (reasonably) honest and doesn't want to do that either. So he has an idea....he'll give them 1 back each telling them he's overcharged them by a 1 each and he'll keep the other 2 as his tip, So...this means the men haven't spent 10 each but only 9. Three times nine is 27 plus the 2 the waiter has kept makes 29.........hmmm...where is the 30th pound? I've had some real fun in the pub with this one. Once I got a group of around a dozen scratching their heads with it......yet it's not difficult is it?
I used to use this puzzle to confuse the hell out of people.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Tangle writes:
Unless I'm mistaken, a quick run through in my head says the ball costs 5 cents. But I have a feeling this is not the answer because there's a trick I'm not catching.
A bat and ball cost a dollar and ten cents.The bat costs a dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
xongsmith writes:
It's cop talk. I used to be a cop. After beating up a few innocent kids and then planted some drugs on them, I decided to change career path.
P.S. - what's a 10-96? Is that some kind of cinder block?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
RAZD writes:
This is why sometimes I wonder if I'm driving honest to god scientists nuts by weighing in my opinion or have a layman explanation of something as I understand it. Indeed. This is why learning the technical "language" of a field is critical if you are going to discuss it intelligently. Edit. A question comes to mind. Is it possible to have an intelligent debate without the technical language of the field? Sounds like a PNT to me... Edited by Taz, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Ok, why don't we play it by your way.
On the left side, the beam is held by a pin to prevent it from moving horizontally but allow it to rotate. On the right side, it is held up by a roller. The beam is a 3 by 5 normal weight concrete (150pcf) reinforced with 3#4 steels (that number just came out of my ass). We have a machine that assert 2 points of equal force at the locations given. The test machine is connected to a computer that has been programmed to increase the load until failure. The program was written in c++. Computer was manufactured by IBM. Test done in standard atmospheric pressure starting at noon. Test performed by a homosexual. When the beam finally fails, where do you expect to see the location(s) of failure? What else do you need to know?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024