The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
Bazinga. I suppose this leaves Sheldon Cooper as the greatest living theoretical physicist.NotRPB wrote:Theoretical Physics :cirus wrote:crazy2medic wrote:I Guess now he's finding out there is a God!
In theory, he may still be alive
We won't actually know if he is or not until they open the box
Schrödinger
Exactly.Charles L. Cotton wrote:I'm trying so hard to stay out of this thread!
Hawking was adored by some of his contemporaries and debunked by others. Yes, he was an atheist and that would have been purely his own decision and business, if he hadn't tried to use his popularity to keep others from a saving relationship with Christ. It's interesting that Michio Kaku readily admits that the universe and life are both of intelligent design. He doesn't go so far as to claim/admit the God of the Bible, but once you admit intelligent design, the no-God house of cards falls.
I'm not glad Hawking has left life on earth for his destination in eternity. I wish he had been saved.
Chas.
I will miss his phone calls checking to see if he was right. (of course, I missed all his calls, but I am sure he tried to reach me)Abraham wrote:76 with his malady?
Pretty darn good.
P.S. he was smarter than you...
Thank you for making this post. I've been having a hard time expressing to people the way I felt about Hawking. You managed to sum it up much more concisely than I have been able to thus far.Charles L. Cotton wrote:I'm trying so hard to stay out of this thread!
Hawking was adored by some of his contemporaries and debunked by others. Yes, he was an atheist and that would have been purely his own decision and business, if he hadn't tried to use his popularity to keep others from a saving relationship with Christ. It's interesting that Michio Kaku readily admits that the universe and life are both of intelligent design. He doesn't go so far as to claim/admit the God of the Bible, but once you admit intelligent design, the no-God house of cards falls.
I'm not glad Hawking has left life on earth for his destination in eternity. I wish he had been saved.
Chas.
It's the theory of promote to failure. You promote a good employee to the level of their incompetence.Keith B wrote:My company had about 3 different research and lab locations where they had 'the smartest of the smart' working on new development of software, features, etc. I frequently saw some of these people walking down the halls talking to their feet.
One of these guys worked for a co-worker of mine. He was brilliant and could sniff out code issues and programming errors better than the best bloodhound. However, he was so deep in the minutia when you would ask him a question he couldn't give you a sensible answer that wasn't 30,000 feet deep and confusing. We had to promote him to a Sr. Manager position to keep him from jumping ship and going to work for one of our equipment vendors. Unfortunately at that level you had to be able to make presentations to executive management and they wanted the 'Dragnet' version of 'Just the facts ma'am'.
My co-Director and I spent two weeks working with him to get him from 20-30 page presentations down to where he would produce 2-3 page ones and semi-concisely present his information. We always sent an 'answer partner' with him to address questions as if you let him do it he would take another 15 minutes explaining why this one bit did what it did and shouldn't have.
In this case, it was not the 'Peter Principal' as you describe, but more likely a savant/autistic person. He was very brilliant and had the ability, but his brain just had trouble filtering out the minutiae and and summarizing the issue. He felt every detail was important. And, when you deal with computer code in a program, it is. Just think of Sheldon on Big Bang Theory and that was this person but not a PhD degreed astrophysicist.allisji wrote:It's the theory of promote to failure. You promote a good employee to the level of their incompetence.Keith B wrote:My company had about 3 different research and lab locations where they had 'the smartest of the smart' working on new development of software, features, etc. I frequently saw some of these people walking down the halls talking to their feet.
One of these guys worked for a co-worker of mine. He was brilliant and could sniff out code issues and programming errors better than the best bloodhound. However, he was so deep in the minutia when you would ask him a question he couldn't give you a sensible answer that wasn't 30,000 feet deep and confusing. We had to promote him to a Sr. Manager position to keep him from jumping ship and going to work for one of our equipment vendors. Unfortunately at that level you had to be able to make presentations to executive management and they wanted the 'Dragnet' version of 'Just the facts ma'am'.
My co-Director and I spent two weeks working with him to get him from 20-30 page presentations down to where he would produce 2-3 page ones and semi-concisely present his information. We always sent an 'answer partner' with him to address questions as if you let him do it he would take another 15 minutes explaining why this one bit did what it did and shouldn't have.
I had a guy working under me with a degree from A&M in chemistry (you’ll probably ask yourself in a minute why he wasn’t in a job utilizing his degree but I won’t go into that). He was a very smart guy but acted similar to what you describe. He could not troubleshoot worth a darn since he always looked for the most complicated possible answer (and he came up with some off the wall stuff). In my field you start from the simplest and work your way up from there. He rarely came up with the correct answer when there was a problem and was a terrible technician. The problem was that he could convince people who didn’t know better that the most complicated answer was the problem when it wasn’t (he was a talker and could justify his solution).Keith B wrote:My company had about 3 different research and lab locations where they had 'the smartest of the smart' working on new development of software, features, etc. I frequently saw some of these people walking down the halls talking to their feet.
One of these guys worked for a co-worker of mine. He was brilliant and could sniff out code issues and programming errors better than the best bloodhound. However, he was so deep in the minutia when you would ask him a question he couldn't give you a sensible answer that wasn't 30,000 feet deep and confusing. We had to promote him to a Sr. Manager position to keep him from jumping ship and going to work for one of our equipment vendors. Unfortunately at that level you had to be able to make presentations to executive management and they wanted the 'Dragnet' version of 'Just the facts ma'am'.
My co-Director and I spent two weeks working with him to get him from 20-30 page presentations down to where he would produce 2-3 page ones and semi-concisely present his information. We always sent an 'answer partner' with him to address questions as if you let him do it he would take another 15 minutes explaining why this one bit did what it did and shouldn't have.
It is difficult to understand how one who believed in an infinite number of universes could not grasp how one of those universes might be perfect.philip964 wrote:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/201 ... ultiverse/
Leaves behind a new multiverse theory.
I worked 37 years in Telecommunications. We had people like that as well, but they were usually just better at bluffing their way into things than actually knowing what they were doing. In the case of the person I was talking about, he didn't look for the hard stuff, but logically sectionalized the issue and would be able to drill down through sections of code quickly and then isolate it down to the bit where no one else was able. His issue was he felt every detail was important to tell people, when all they needed to know was 'I switched a bit in this section that fixed the problem'.mrvmax wrote:
One time he was called out for a fan that wouldn’t start, his solution was that the entire cooling tower needed to be re-wired. It turned out that the switch was wired wrong and it only took a few minutes to fix. He routinely did stuff like that and eventually quit when they forced him into a group he didn’t want to be in due to his incompetence.
