Requirements for Posting Engineering Inventions Online

[Cyrus]

And who does that serve?

How does it help all these other people who have questions and aren't engineers?

The risk here, I think, is elitism.

It helps them by framing their question in such a way that other trained people (who they are asking anyways) can understand. As it stands, their threads are convoluted and time consuming to understand. I for one, am not wasting my time trying to figure out what should be explained properly by the OP.

It's really not asking all that much to do a background patent search, explain the context for your idea, and any analysis you have or pictures of a working model.

Honestly, if you can do that then you really shouldn't be wasting peoples time posting here.

 

[DaveC426913]

It helps them by framing their question in such a way that other trained people (who they are asking anyways) can understand.

No, all it does is stop them from posting. They might be able to reframe their question but they're pretty much out in the cold.

I for one, am not wasting my time trying to figure out what should be explained properly by the OP.

So don't.

Or put another way: it is no more your forum than any other member's, even an inventor wannabe.

Honestly, if you can do that then you really shouldn't be wasting peoples time posting here.

Well, that's the thing isn"t it? Are you speaking only for yourself, or do you think your viewpoint speaks for the majority of PFers?


I'm not trying to shoot you down or completely disagree with you, I'm trying to tease out any changes you're suggesting that are simply for your own personal benefit from those that are best for PF (of which these people are also members). But personally, I think you should be doing that so I/we don't have to...

 

[Cyrus]

No, all it does is stop them from posting. They might be able to reframe their question but they're pretty much out in the cold.

Too bad so sad?

So don't.

Honestly, I don't.

Well, that's the thing isn"t it? Are you speaking only for yourself, or do you think your viewpoint speaks for the majority of PFers?

It wouldn't really matter because aside from Fred, minger, and myself, hardly anyone else posts in the engineering section.

But more to the point, PF cannot be all things to all people. So, do we want it to attract people who know what they are talking about, or not? Because clearly we are in need of them and the current way of doing business is not attracting them to engineering.

 

[DaveC426913]

Too bad so sad?

So, we're not here to help people with their physics questions? We have some other, more noble purpose?

That's sarcastic and rhetorical.

Seriously, is your idea going to serve the best interests of as many PFers as possible? Can you say that your idea is putting the needs of the many over the needs of the few? Or the one?

 

[Cyrus]

So, we're not here to help people with their physics questions? We have some other, more noble purpose?

There is a massive difference between answering peoples physics question, and doing a full engineering analysis for them for free. Besides, they're not even asking physics questions. They are asking tech questions, like how to weld. This is a good question for a shop tech: literally, because I have asked a shop tech that before. I don't seek engineers for non-engineering questions.

Seriously, is your idea going to serve the best interests of as many PFers as possible? Can you say that your idea is putting the needs of the many over the needs of the few? Or the one?

Yes.

 

[DaveC426913]

Well, I've stated my case. Not much more to say on that front.

 

[Cyrus]

Think of it this way. I am an eye doctor with a series of lenses. Right now, you have glasses on. When I change something the question is: better or worse?

I simply don't see how leaving things the way they are will magically make things better.

 

[DaveC426913]

Perhaps a good middle-ground might be to set up a template, loosely analagous to the homework fora. They would be obliged to post their ideas/questions along with their answers to such questions as:
- have you applied for a patent?
- have you run numbers on your designs?
etc.
This would accomplish several things:
- they would be prompted with what they could be doing without effort on our part (except the template), encouraging pro-active behaviour
- there would be much less required effort on our part to give them the customary answers; it is all laid out and easy for us to read their current status at a glance
- our responses could be reduced dramatically, becoming as expedient as: "Please come back when you've reached step 4".

Think of it this way. I am an eye doctor with a series of lenses. Right now, you have glasses on. When I change something the question is: better or worse?

I simply don't see how leaving things the way they are will magically make things better.

I never suggested there shouldn't be a change.

 

[Cyrus]

I was lazy, but just finished reading moonbears post. She has excellent points.

 

[DaveC426913]

If we do create a new subforum, I think Cyrus' subject header has inspired the name for it:

Pretengineers.

 

[russ_watters]

Cyrus, what is your perception of the fraction of threads in the engineering forum that are under-developed inventions? In my opinion, it is at worst 1 in 10 and I consider that a pretty good signal to noise ratio.

Moreover, I consider it part of the purpose of the forum to try to help such people. These guys (even the "doods, check out my design" guy) seem to me to be genuinely interested in developing an idea and just don't know how. And the ideas (as per Moonbear's question) are not typicaly crackpot ideas. So I don't see any real violation of the guidelines or basis for locking/deleting such threads outright.

 

[Cyrus]

To me, the point of PF should be to promote science first and foremost. So, if someone has an idea the goal should be to have them think through it using proper methodologies.

It serves no one any good when people come in fling stuff against the wall and hope something sticks. In the thread you are referring to, the guy said "opinions?e.pdf" and that was it. Not even a basic discussion concerning what it was - an absolute joke (let's be honest here).

There are quite a lot of questions also about calculating (fill in the blank) to do (fill in the blank) for their project. Its ok to ask questions like that, but then - at the very least- talk about what it is you're trying to do. What websites you looked at in terms of products that make what your calculating as a sanity check for your numbers, and what level of accuracy and assumptions you are willing to make. This is, at the very least, what I expect an engineering student to be able to ask. But I never, ever, see anyone do this.

Also, because people don't bother to do this, they post new threads every time they run into a new problem on their project. They should just consolidate their project into a singular thread. There is no need to make multiple threads on each thing that crops up on their project.

If I had to guess a number, I'd say 1/30 threads are interesting. Maybe less. I just constantly see: "hey I need this e-book", "hey, set up this software for me", "hey, do a literature search for me"

To summarize, there is an engineering process one follows to develop an idea. It is not used or encouraged here, ever.

 

[rootX]

I don't have sufficient engineering background but I agree with the OP. Engineering is more than coming up with an invention and hope it works without doing any analysis.

 

[story645]

Engineering is more than coming up with an invention and hope it works without doing any analysis.

But the posters are trying to have some analysis, done for them by other PF posters. That's the worst part about these threads (the comp sci forum gets them occasionally too), the utter lack of any real effort to find a solution if it forces them to deal with some of the less shiny aspects (like implementation, practicality, and math) of their ideas. Even a simple "I tried to google X, found Y, these seems off so help" would raise my opinion of most of these types of posters.

 

[DaveC426913]

But the posters are trying to have some analysis, done for them by other PF posters. That's the worst part about these threads (the comp sci forum gets them occasionally too), the utter lack of any real effort to find a solution if it forces them to deal with some of the less shiny aspects (like implementation, practicality, and math) of their ideas. Even a simple "I tried to google X, found Y, these seems off so help" would raise my opinion of most of these types of posters.

Part of the template I'm suggesting would list "What answers have you sought and found?" as a required step.

 

[drizzle]

I have an idea, exclusively for PF!
Is it possible to add a set of options as a new feature, where one can choose the level of the discussion/question, and let it shows next to the thread's title? If so, members would only see the level of the matter in question and decide whether they want to respond/help/whatever to it or ignore it without wasting their time reading. And I think it’s better than creating new sub-forums in PF, what do you think?

 

[Brian_C]

There are a lot of crackpots on this forum, not just the engineering sections. It's almost as bad as Usenet.

 

[lisab]

There are a lot of crackpots on this forum, not just the engineering sections. It's almost as bad as Usenet.

The mentors have a tough job. They can't be everywhere, so if you read a post that you believe isn't up to PF standards, please report it.

 

[Cyrus]

Part of the template I'm suggesting would list "What answers have you sought and found?" as a required step.

I think I realized two things

-a) design engineering sub-forum to segregate all these threads out of the main engineering sections

-b) a lot of faux engineers come up with ideas and just post it, without doing any kind of background into the fundamentals of what they are doing or why they are doing it. I think that is a very important part of the process that is missing.

 

[russ_watters]

There are a lot of crackpots on this forum, not just the engineering sections. It's almost as bad as Usenet.

You should have seen it before we changed the rules to disallow crackpottery about 4 years ago!

 

[DnD Addict]

You should have seen it before we changed the rules to disallow crackpottery about 4 years ago!

How long has PF been around?

 

[russ_watters]

We haven't yet come up with an official response to this, but I suspect what we will end up doing is adding a sticky to the appropriate forums that contains elements of the OP. Something entitled "Read this before posting your new invention".

The direction the discussion in the mentor's forum is leaning is that there is no problem with the rules, but a sticky to reference would help improve the posting quality and act as a reference to refer "look at my new invention!" posters to rather than having to explain from scratch what they should be doing every time we see a new thread.

 

[russ_watters]

How long has PF been around?

I thought we used to have a sticky with our history, but it is about 7 years ago that the current form solidified (addition of other related fields and with them additional mentors such as myself), with the exception of the removal of our crackpot-infested "theory development" forum, which happened a few years later.

 

[tchuck]

For what it's worth, I just joined this forum and have an opinion on this subject.

I would much rather read the opinion of a creative individual with a HS diploma than an arrogant, jaded, elitist with an engineering degree. I have worked in engineering long enough to know the difference between a good engineer and a jerk with a degree. A good engineer can read between the lines. A jerk with a degree asks for the same thing in a different format to make himself feel important. A good engineer listens to good ideas, no matter their origin and provides guidance. A jerk with a degree listens only to other engineers with similar experience and education levels. A good engineer is a teacher. A jerk with a degree will always be just that, a jerk. Good engineers also have more friends, participate in more interesting discussions, complain less, and command far more respect.

Obtaining an engineering degree does not require intelligence, creativity, ingenuity, or properly understanding the process of filing for or searching for a patent. It requires money and math skills. I've seen it a hundred times.

Finally, at the risk of being banned on my second day I will say: Cyrus, get over yourself. If you don't like a post, can't understand it, or you feel that you're above providing some good advice to an amateur, then by all means stop reading it and move on. Go have a beer, read a book about what engineers USED to do, and leave the innovations to the open-minded.

EDIT: This link is great! http://www.aircraftdesign.com/Advice2Inventors.html
Here's a quote from it...
"Maybe getting such "nut letters" says something about me - after all, I'm the guy with the patent for a jet aircraft with the engine mounted backwards (for VSTOL). Or, maybe the rest of the engineers think it's funny to stick me with them. Actually, I enjoy seeing new thoughts - good or otherwise - but I do dread having to tell someone that their beloved brainchild isn't going to work, or that it might work but probably not have enough benefit to be worth the trouble."

^Good engineer.

 

[Cyrus]

For what it's worth, I just joined this forum and have an opinion on this subject.

I would much rather read the opinion of a creative individual with a HS diploma than an arrogant, jaded, elitist with an engineering degree. I have worked in engineering long enough to know the difference between a good engineer and a jerk with a degree. A good engineer can read between the lines. A jerk with a degree asks for the same thing in a different format to make himself feel important. A good engineer listens to good ideas, no matter their origin and provides guidance. A jerk with a degree listens only to other engineers with similar experience and education levels. A good engineer is a teacher. A jerk with a degree will always be just that, a jerk. Good engineers also have more friends, participate in more interesting discussions, complain less, and command far more respect.

Obtaining an engineering degree does not require intelligence, creativity, ingenuity, or properly understanding the process of filing for or searching for a patent. It requires money and math skills. I've seen it a hundred times.

Finally, at the risk of being banned on my second day I will say: Cyrus, get over yourself. If you don't like a post, can't understand it, or you feel that you're above providing some good advice to an amateur, then by all means stop reading it and move on. Go have a beer, read a book about what engineers USED to do, and leave the innovations to the open-minded.

First off, your post is extremely rude. But, putting that aside, the point of this thread was to show that at a minimalistic level, some effort needs to be shown by the person posting their invention/and or idea. Simply slapping together some sketches in MS paint and asking for analysis doesn't cut the mustard. The fact that you think getting an engineering degree simply "requires money and math skills", but not "intelligence, ... or properly understanding the process of ...searching for a patent" is telling. As an undergrad, I specifically had to do patent searches on an idea - we were told to (And, no surprise, it was for a design course). I really fail to see what part of my thread eludes you. The premise is quite simple: please put more effort when posting new ideas. I also never said I was above anyone, I simply said those who don't know should be instructed on how to formulate a proper explanation of their ideas to save everyone time.

I'm also not sure why you're giving me a quote from a link I specified - I know what it says, I read it...which is why I linked it.

 

[Redbelly98]

How long has PF been around?

It started in 2001; the current format started in 2003. More details are here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=view_item&itemid=83

(Sorry about the brief off-topic post.)

 

[tchuck]

First off, your post is extremely rude. But, putting that aside, the point of this thread was to show that at a minimalistic level, some effort needs to be shown by the person posting their invention/and or idea. Simply slapping together some sketches in MS paint and asking for analysis doesn't cut the mustard. The fact that you think getting an engineering degree simply "requires money and math skills", but not "intelligence, ... or properly understanding the process of ...searching for a patent" is telling. As an undergrad, I specifically had to do patent searches on an idea - we were told to (And, no surprise, it was for a design course). I really fail to see what part of my thread eludes you. The premise is quite simple: please put more effort when posting new ideas. I also never said I was above anyone, I simply said those who don't know should be instructed on how to formulate a proper explanation of their ideas to save everyone time.

I'm also not sure why you're giving me a quote from a link I specified - I know what it says, I read it...which is why I linked it.

I agree. It doesn't suit my point to be rude and I apologize.

However,
It's apparent that the point of your thread is to express personal frustration and assert your own educational status, as opposed to a genuine interest in helping people. Aside from contradicting yourself repeatedly and blowing this whole "too many pretend engineers" thing way out of proportion, you use condescending expressions and assume everyone with a brain agrees with you. I'd fill this reply with your quotes but I think if you read the thread over again you will see what I'm trying to say.

I said "...a PROPER UNDERSTANDING..." in regard to patents, not that you didn't have to do it once in a class. Engineers take and successfully complete English classes as well but they don't all know how to spell. As an engineer with working experience I'm sure you can agree.

I posted a quote from your link because it demonstrates how your "issue" is dealt with by someone who's interest lies primarily in helping people.

No amount of regulation or rule making is going to stop rookies from having ideas, though it may stop you from hearing about them. Even if the perfect (in your opinion) set of rules were created, how do you ensure that everyone reads them? Lots of folks enjoy giving advice and join forums like this to facilitate that desire. Others join these forums to learn something as opposed to engaging in stimulating conversation. I joined just so I could use the "search" function... Considering the aforementioned "signal to noise" ratio, it behooves us to tolerate the occasional overzealous and under prepared inventor. I think it's incredible that we can share ideas on forums like this without any regulations ("crackpottery" excluded). The best we can do is to assume patience and provide guidance.

 

[Brian_C]

For what it's worth, I just joined this forum and have an opinion on this subject.

[snip long-winded drivel]

I hate to burst your bubble, but many of the greatest scientists and engineers were not likeable people at all. See Isaac Newton. Being a good "teacher" and having lots of friends is no substitute for technical skill. Likewise, creativity without formal education is useless. Any doofus can draw a pretty picture in a CAD program, but that doesn't make them an engineer.

 

[FredGarvin]

Yahoo Answers here we come.

 

[Bystander]

"Pretend Forum Admins?" How many times has this topic arisen over the life of PF? Couple times a year at least --- someone gets jaded with the "direction" things are going --- makes a suggestion regarding "vetting/credentials" of the membership, "n-tiering" subfora, banning this, banning that, banning the other, putting together a "smart FAQ" to screen posts --- and totally ignores the fact that Greg is NOT into banning people, public chastisement of idiots, or driving himself and Warren insane trying to manage a multi-tiered monstrosity.

Someone peeves, bores, appalls, offends, or otherwise does unspeakable things in your cornflakes --- IGNORE them.

 

[Cyrus]

"Pretend Forum Admins?" How many times has this topic arisen over the life of PF? Couple times a year at least --- someone gets jaded with the "direction" things are going --- makes a suggestion regarding "vetting/credentials" of the membership, "n-tiering" subfora, banning this, banning that, banning the other, putting together a "smart FAQ" to screen posts --- and totally ignores the fact that Greg is NOT into banning people, public chastisement of idiots, or driving himself and Warren insane trying to manage a multi-tiered monstrosity.

Someone peeves, bores, appalls, offends, or otherwise does unspeakable things in your cornflakes --- IGNORE them.

Then perhaps the entire engineering section should be shut down? But seriously, do you even acknowledge there is a problem?

Again, I never proposed that anyone be banned or chastised, I simply said people should post with more care. It's staggering how many people are spinning what I said.

 

[Bystander]

Then perhaps the entire engineering section should be shut down? But seriously, do you even acknowledge there is a problem?

Again, I never proposed that anyone be banned or chastised, I simply said people should post with more care. It's staggering how many people are spinning what I said.

"Problem?" Certainly. Always has been, and that problem is that people are people --- you and I have not set up our own fora run the way we'd like Greg to run his, therefore, we're neither one in a position to criticize what is and ain't allowed here --- you and I take a little more care constructing posts than we perceive as common practice in the PF subfora, and are in a position to gripe about generally sloppy thinking and presentations of "ideas."

Greg put together a spectacularly successful forum --- with success comes popularity with the ignorant masses --- with that popularity comes a reduction in the signal:noise. C'est la vie.

 

[tchuck]

I hate to burst your bubble, but many of the greatest scientists and engineers were not likeable people at all. See Isaac Newton. Being a good "teacher" and having lots of friends is no substitute for technical skill. Likewise, creativity without formal education is useless. Any doofus can draw a pretty picture in a CAD program, but that doesn't make them an engineer.

My bubble is fine, don't worry.

Let me put it more simply so you can follow:

I wasn't equating technical skill to likability, or education to creativity. I was criticizing the methods and motives of the OP. Both parties in my "good engineer..." example are assumed to be perfectly capable engineers with plenty of technical skill. My point was that one gets results and one doesn't. Like it or not, interpersonal skills are important in science as well as business. If you think it's not true in the real world, you're only fooling yourself.

I see your Isaac Newton and raise you an Albert Einstein.

"...creativity without formal education is useless." -That's just silly.

Had you read the thread, you would know that contrary to the title, the topic is "pretend inventors" if such a thing exists. The title of "inventor" requires zero formal education or training. No one referenced is trying to perform engineering without a license.

I don't want to argue about this anymore. My intention was to express my opinion and suggest an alternative. I think I have said what I have to say. Anything further would be argumentative and redundant.

 

[drizzle]

Then perhaps the entire engineering section should be shut down...

Haven’t I told you!

Listen Cyrus, I really admire your cleverness, but that won’t give you the right to seclude people who’re interested in science, any science, from searching/learning/whatever their own way and post it here! Try to be more patient and guide/help/teach/whatever you want IF you want to! No one is forcing you.


P.S. Sorry, I know you don’t want me to post in your thread… But had to

 

[Cyrus]

Had you read the thread, you would know that contrary to the title, the topic is "pretend inventors" if such a thing exists. The title of "inventor" requires zero formal education or training. No one referenced is trying to perform engineering without a license.

Then why are people posting non-stop inventions in an engineering sub-forum?

I don't want to argue about this anymore. My intention was to express my opinion and suggest an alternative.

What is your alternative? So far, I only see people putting their hands up in the air and saying "oh, well" - that's not an answer. Well, it's an answer if you don't care, I suppose. Chuck, I've seen this problem for 6 years, you've seen it for two days. Your perspective is no where near the same as mine.