Yes, in a heartbeat.

( girlinthehole, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:12, 1 reply, 15 years ago)

Good girl
+10 psychochomp points.
(PsychoChomp, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:13, Reply)

*looks worried*
Bear in mind that although I like my own company, I am shit at science.
( girlinthehole, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:14, Reply)

most the science will be done off world
You're just there to move equipment around.
Plus anyone can learn science.
(PsychoChomp, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:17, Reply)

Cool!

( girlinthehole, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:19, Reply)

Congratulations.
The award for the most wrong statement in the history of the internet goes to ..... Chompy!

*watches party poppers go off and streamers and balloons and shit*

Most fields of science are categorically things that NOT anyone can learn. At least not well.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:35, Reply)

the person would be a technician though
anyone can do that
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:37, Reply)

Nah, I still disagree
maybe anyone can be a shit technician, but for this you'd need a good one, and that requires understanding of fields outside the capabilities of a lot of people. And since there is no second opinion, you'd need to be an expert in pretty much anything.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:39, Reply)

I could take a textbook

( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:43, Reply)

Or pretty much every piece of reference material you'll ever need on the vehicles computer.

(PsychoChomp, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:47, Reply)

precisely
I reckon I'd be a good candidate. Cross-disciplinary innit
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:48, Reply)

There's not likely to be any textbooks
on stuff that hasn't been seen yet. Or reference material, Chompy.

If you are going to just compare to what already exists, why send a person at all? a probe will do that equally well.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:51, Reply)

Geological references would be needed
and most of the science would be geology and chemistry, and possibly a bunch of meterology.
(PsychoChomp, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:52, Reply)

haha how does it feel to be on the receiving end of a patronising put down for once Chompy?

( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:43, Reply)

Fine, I disagree but I respect badger.

(PsychoChomp, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:44, Reply)

doesn't stop him from going on your list though does it?

( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:47, Reply)

There are probably some fields you can just "learn"
certain aspects of biology like botany and zoology, for instance.

But physics, chemistry, biochemistry, etc - there's an understanding "step" to get over to get to any decent level, and a lot of people's minds just don't work in the right way.

It's why you don't always need a biology A-level to get on to a medicine course but you do need chemistry. You can't just learn it, you need to understand how it works.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:49, Reply)

An awful lot of maths and science is (in my opinion) not based on innate ability
it's about practice.
(PsychoChomp, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:51, Reply)

Low level stuff, maybe
not anything at higher level. It's about how your mind is able to function. Unless you can disconnect the human mind's innate tendency to visualise problems, you're fucked in maths and physics for a start. And most people can't do that.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:53, Reply)

Nah, I think you're totally underestimating the minds ability to adapt.
Someone who is mentally normal, should be able to do everything they're asked for on a mission like this if they have enough training and practice.
They're not going to be able to unify various theories but they're there to observe experiment record and transmit the information.
(PsychoChomp, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:59, Reply)

I'm not underestimating at all
I get your point, but I feel that anyone not of a serious scientific bent is going to be little more than a glorified probe. Admittedly, you'd also want someone able to rapidly adapt, repair things, make snap decisions, etc, which a probe would be shit at. And actually, most good scientists would be shit at too ;)
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 16:15, Reply)

so they might as well give the job
to someone who was scientifically trained but not necessarily to the top standard, pyschologically adapted to being alone for the rest of their life, and had excellent decision making and adaption skills. And had something else to offer on top of that.

I'm really not fitting the bill here
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 16:18, Reply)

Are you being polite
and saying their minds don't work the right way, or saying they're stupid?
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:51, Reply)

No, it's totally about the way minds work.
There's nothing stupid about not having a science mind. In fact, almost the opposite - I'd argue skills in other areas, languages etc are harder to achieve. If you can "do" high level maths and science it's rarely necessary to put much effort in, for a start.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:55, Reply)

except aren't languages
and maths in the same area of the brain and use some of the same skills?

Since I stopped all science past GCSE and only did AS maths I'm no expert. I understand that's nowhere near the level being talked about, but it really wasn't very hard
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:57, Reply)

Don't think so
no. languages rely on memory and rules. being really, properly good at maths is the ultimate, real "thinking outside the box". All bets are off, all rules are off, it's only about how your mind works on problems.

I should point out I'm not, by those standards, good at maths at all. But I collaborate with people that are, and they are scary.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 16:04, Reply)

I get what he means
I'm not particularly stupid (shut up Chompy) but the more in depth science gets the less I understand it. I just can't comprehend it. I know how it should work and I get what it means when I read about it, but I can't comprehend it.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:57, Reply)

dimensions are the classic.
maths operates in an infinite number of dimensions and we can only visualise three. So unless you can switch off from visualising in three dimensions you're basically fucked.

It doesn't help when people go "oh, but time is the fourth dimension" ...it is and it isn't. Not it any way that we normally associate with time.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 16:01, Reply)

I think people can grasp bits
but not all of it. I was pretty interested in the whole concept of dimensions a while back and it never really blew my mind in the way some scientific concepts did
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 16:07, Reply)

physics and maths interpretations of dimensions are different, too.
only the same, as well. It's quite fucked up.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 16:11, Reply)

yeah but the point you overlook is this:
most people wouldn't WANT to!
( rachelswipe with a fork, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:46, Reply)

No, true.
But if those of us that do study it didn't bother, the rest of you would be completely and utterly fucked.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:50, Reply)

I think she was pointing out
in the context of mars landing
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:51, Reply)

from the post she's replying to
I assumed she meant "doing science" to be fair.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:56, Reply)

i am now picturing you
as professor frink.

my brother - also a science geek - looks exactly like him too.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:54, Reply)

Steady
I don't look like a geek in any way.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 16:07, Reply)

are these points exchangeable?

( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Fri 29 Oct 2010, 15:18, Reply)