I was alluding more towards stuff that's so new and advanced most undergrad science majors will have no clue. Example, how many people here know enough about Clifford algebras and spinors/plexors to answer a toss-up about them? There's a physics professor here at Tech that loves these things, but that doesn't mean the average undergrad will know it. Stephen --- In quizbowl_at_y..., grapesmoker <no_reply_at_y...> wrote: > I totally disagree with this. If you're knowledgeable about science > you can extract material from science journals to write questions > on. For example, not too long ago, I wrote a question to which the > answer was "the second law of thermodynamics" but several clues came > from recent discoveries published in scientific journals. So just > because it's in a journal doesn't mean it's obscure or completely > inaccessible. Writing current events questions to fulfill a science > distribution is sketchy at best, though, and editors should crack > down on that sort of stuff. > > --- In quizbowl_at_y..., "Stephen Webb" <sdwebb91984_at_y...> wrote: > > The problem with writing current events science questions is there > > are two types: > > > > *The stuff that appears on CNN > > > > or > > > > *Stuff in recent scientific papers that don't make CNN because the > > average person on the street doesn't know enough about group > theory > > and Clifford algebras or quantum mechanics to understand it, or > care > > about it. > > > > If you lean to the former, you end up with endless Quaoar > questions, > > but if you lean to the later unless people are totally and > completely > > up on their science journals and read every article, they won't be > > answered. > > > > Just my two cents, > > Stephen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST