• Home
  • About

Many Worlds Theory

In one universe, this blog is about quantum mechanics. In another universe, it is not.

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« “It’s only weird if it doesn’t work”: the NEW worst slogan in the world
An H-R diagram for the 9 kinds of physics undergrad »

The 9 kinds of physics seminar

October 3, 2013 by Matthew Rave

As a public service, I hereby present my findings on physics seminars in convenient graph form.  In each case, you will see the Understanding of an Audience Member (assumed to be a run-of-the-mill PhD physicist) graphed as a function of Time Elapsed during the seminar.  All talks are normalized to be of length 1 hour, although this might not be the case in reality.

Typical

The “Typical” starts innocently enough: there are a few slides introducing the topic, and the speaker will talk clearly and generally about a field of physics you’re not really familiar with.  Somewhere around the 15 minute mark, though, the wheels will come off the bus.  Without you realizing it, the speaker will have crossed an invisible threshold and you will lose the thread entirely.  Your understanding by the end of the talk will rarely ever recover past 10%.

Ideal

The “Ideal” is what physicists strive for in a seminar talk.  You have to start off easy, and only gradually ramp up the difficulty level.  Never let any PhD in the audience fall below 50%.  You do want their understanding to fall below 100%, though, since that makes you look smarter and justifies the work you’ve done.  It’s always good to end with a few easy slides, bringing the audience up to 80%, say, since this tricks the audience into thinking they’ve learned something.

Theorist

The “Unprepared Theorist” is a talk to avoid if you can.  The theorist starts on slide 1 with a mass of jumbled equations, and the audience never climbs over 10% the entire time.  There may very well be another theorist who understands the whole talk, but interestingly their understanding never climbs above 10% either because they’re not paying attention to the speaker’s mumbling.

Experimentalist

The “Unprepared Experimentalist” is only superficially better.  Baseline understanding is often a little higher (because it’s experimental physics) but still rarely exceeds 25%.  Also, the standard deviation is much higher, and so (unlike the theorist) the experimentalist will quite often take you into 0% territory.  The flip side is that there is often a slide or two that make perfect sense, such as “Here’s a picture of our laboratory facilities in Tennessee.”

Undergrad

You have to root for undergraduates who are willing to give a seminar in front of the faculty and grad student sharks.  That’s why the “Well-meaning Undergrad” isn’t a bad talk to attend.  Because the material is so easy, a PhD physicist in the audience will stay near 100% for most of the talk.  However, there is most always a 10-20 minute stretch in the middle somewhere when the poor undergrad is in over his/her head.  For example, their adviser may have told them to “briefly discuss renormalization group theory as it applies to your project” and gosh darn it, they try.  This is a typical case of what Gary Larson referred to as “physics floundering”.  In any case, if they’re a good student (and they usually are) they will press on and regain the thread before the end.

Guest

The “Guest From Another Department” is an unusual talk.  Let’s say a mathematician from one building over decides to talk to the physics department about manifold theory.  Invariably, an audience member will gradually lose understanding and, before reaching 0%, will start to daydream or doodle.  Technically, the understanding variable U has entered the complex plane.  Most of the time, the imaginary part of U goes back to zero right before the end and the guest speaker ends on a high note.

Nobel

The “Nobel Prize Winner” is a talk to attend only for name-dropping purposes.  For example, you might want to be able to say (as I do) that “I saw Hans Bethe give a talk a year before he died.”  The talk itself is mostly forgettable; it starts off well but approaches 0% almost linearly.  By the end you’ll wonder why you didn’t just go to the Aquarium instead.

Poetry

The “Poetry” physics seminar is a rare beast.  Only Feynman is known to have given such talks regularly.  The talks starts off confusingly, and you may only understand 10% of what is being said, but gradually the light will come on in your head and you’ll “get it” more and more.  By the end, you’ll understand everything, and you’ll get the sense that the speaker has solved a difficult Sudoku problem before your eyes.  Good poetry often works this way; hence the name.

Politician

The less said about “The Politician”, the better.  The hallmark of such a talk is that the relationship between understanding and time isn’t even a function.  After the talk, no one will even agree about what the talk was about, or how good the talk was.  Administrators specialize in this.

If you enjoyed this post, you may also enjoy my book Why Is There Anything? which is available for the Kindle on Amazon.com.  The book is weighty and philosophical, but my sense of humor is still there!

sargasso

I am also currently collaborating on a multi-volume novel of speculative hard science fiction and futuristic deep-space horror called Sargasso Nova.  My partner in this project is Craig Varian – an incredibly talented visual artist (panthan.com) and musician whose dark ambient / experimental musical project 400 Lonely Things released Tonight of the Living Dead to modest critical acclaim a few years back.  Publication of the first installment will be January 2015; further details will be released on our Facebook page, Twitter feed, or via email: SargassoNova (at) gmail.com.

Advertisement

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Comix, Physics | Tagged Physics, physics seminars, science | 174 Comments

174 Responses

  1. on September 3, 2014 at 7:52 PM House Foundation Contractors Denver CO

    Hi to all, because I am genuinely keen of reading this
    blog’s post to be updated regularly. It includes nice stuff.


  2. on September 5, 2014 at 2:49 AM indiatimes shopping

    Hi to all, the contents existing at this site are really remarkable for people experience, well, keep up the nice
    work fellows.


  3. on June 26, 2015 at 11:18 PM Rebellion — an introduction | M-invariant

    […] in the LHC, Islamic theology, Westerosi history, obscure blogs on metaphysics…), looking at lists, feeding the insane infatuation I have with some my favorite actresses, learning how to […]


  4. on September 10, 2015 at 8:18 PM Why Scientific Posters Are Bad | Rated Zed

    […] can take: the talk, the poster, and the paper. Talks are bad because they inevitably come in one of nine types*, most of which are not illuminating. Papers are bad because they are incomprehensibly […]


  5. on January 12, 2016 at 8:31 PM Nine types seminars in physics | Mathematical Biology

    […] https://manyworldstheory.com/2013/10/03/the-9-kinds-of-physics-seminar/ […]


  6. on January 13, 2016 at 12:25 AM The 9 kinds of physics seminar | Many Worlds Theory | Selected news about Russia

    […] https://manyworldstheory.com/2013/10/03/the-9-kinds-of-physics-seminar/ […]


  7. on March 2, 2016 at 7:14 AM Mistrzostwo świata – BLOGRYS

    […] swoje internetowe pięć minut, gdy w humorystyczny i bardzo celny sposób sportretował wykresami dziewięć typów seminariów z fizyki. Potem udało mu się także odnaleźć najgłupszą osobę na legendarnym […]


  8. on December 6, 2016 at 5:22 PM Teaching Literacy in College Physics – Musings on Teaching Science

    […] can point to at least 37 bad colloquium talks or conference presentations that you have attended. (Check out graphs of the intelligibility of seminar talks here.) Think for another minute and try to think of the last journal article you read that was […]


« Older Comments

Comments are closed.

  • Blog Stats

    • 424,404 hits
  • Recent Posts

    • Why Avatar 2 sucks
    • RGB color trends in NFL team colors
    • Your dog thinks you’re a wizard!
    • Epiphany
    • Your Story: or, A Vision in a Dream: A Fragment
  • Archives

    • December 2022
    • September 2021
    • August 2021
    • May 2021
    • March 2021
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • May 2020
    • March 2020
    • August 2019
    • March 2019
    • December 2018
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • August 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • August 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • January 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • August 2014
    • July 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
    • December 2013
    • November 2013
    • October 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
  • Categories

    • Charity
    • Comix
    • Fiction
    • Image
    • Many-worlds Interpretation
    • Music
    • Physics
    • Poem
    • Puzzle
    • Rant
    • Socratic dialogue
    • Theology
    • Uncategorized
  • Most used tags

    "What I Really Do" Aaron Burr Archimedes astronomy Austrians Big Bang theory blogging Bruckner chess classical music Climate change culture Deepak Chopra economics Einstein extra spectral colors flat-Earthers folk etymology general relativity George R. R. Martin grammar gravity Grover Norquist GRRM gun control Kristen Stewart language Magnus Carlsen many-worlds many-worlds interpretation Marco Rubio math Matt Damon memes metaphors Mozart Nate Silver NCAA football number form orbits Oulipo philosophy Physicist Physics physics instruction physics is hard physics seminars poetry Proposition B pseudoscience puzzle quantum mechanics radioactivity Ralph Fowler RGB rgb color code Rihanna Santorum scaling science Shostakovich Solvay conference spacetime special relativity sports statistics superstition synesthesia Theology topology vulgarity Walt Whitman Western Carolina William Walton witches
  • Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 235 other subscribers

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Many Worlds Theory
    • Join 235 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Many Worlds Theory
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: