[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi.
      There are only about a dozen people who use this forum and half of those are moderators.  What are your main areas of interest or expertise?
     Why am I asking?  Just interested really.   People, especially the moderators, spend hours contributing stuff and answering questions. 

Examples:    Alancalverd  --->  Probably studied practical and experimental physics at University and didn't specialise in Engineering until the last year.  Not shy about declaring their political views.   Has declared experience setting up medical physics equipment (NMR scanners etc.) and flies (aeroplanes).

    It's not just moderators who use the site but mentioning others is unreasonable.    However, if you're happy and well aware of the security and safety issues about putting info down on the web, then write your piece.   There's nothing wrong with staying quiet.  Let's cut down on the amount of stuff before it gets out of hand:  If you can't read it in 1 minute it's too long and let's say you're only a regular if you've made 40 posts.

Best Wishes.

[Halc]

My main interests are identification of irrational biases, things people take for granted without ever really justifying them. I tend to discuss such things elsewhere as this is a science site.

My limited expertise seems to be in relativity, quantum interpretations, and logical reasoning, as such expertise is required in the pursuit of the above, but I'm by no means an actual expert in any of it. My knowledge is weak in electromagnetism, and I avoid answering questions there. I am here mostly to answer questions coming from the rare poster that actually seems interested in learning.

You (ES) have probably already figured out most of that, except probably the bit about the biases.

[alancalverd]

Every scientist I've worked with called me an engineer, and every engineer called me a scientist. The business of medical physics involves me in matters of law and ethics, with a bit of biology so I can understand the problem that the medics want solved with a machine. 

The plane takes me to work and the job pays for the plane. What could be better? A double bass that fits inside an old Cessna, and a weightless bass amplifier!   

Final ambitions 
eradicate Kruger-Dunning syndrome from statutory inspectorates
teach journalists that force, energy, power and strength are not the same thing
teach everyone else that "quantum energy field" is a symptom of bullshit and Heisenberg's Ungenauigkeit is best
      translated as indeterminacy, not uncertainty
to die on stage at the Westport Jazz Festival, just after my solo on "All Blues".

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Advance Notice:  I'm going to give the award of the "best answer" in a couple of days.  If you want a chance to win this greatly coveted award then get your replies in soon.

[Halc]

I'm going to give the award of the "best answer" in a couple of days.  If you want a chance to win this greatly coveted award then get your replies in soon.

This topic is more of a survey and not a question where there are answers more correct than others, so I'm not sure of the meaning of one of them being the best. Is one person's interest/expertise better than another?

Secondly, I suspect you overestimate the level at which that 'best answer' status is coveted. Saying thanks to all replyers is often more appropriate, and something where the 'score' is kept as well.

Best regards

[Bored chemist]

Advance Notice:  I'm going to give the award of the "best answer" in a couple of days.  If you want a chance to win this greatly coveted award then get your replies in soon.

Thanks for the warning; I will wait...

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi.

Is one person's interest/expertise better than another?

   Obviously not.
   It is just a survey and there isn't any serious competition.  Marking an answer as the "best answer" doesn't bring a photo opportunity or grant any material award like chocolate bar for the winner.   However, this is not the sort of thing you say when you want to get a few more replies.

Criteria for winning this award will include:
  1.  Writing style and presenting interesting information.   For example, @alancalverd currently has the edge on that.
  2.  Originality.   @Halc is leading there because it was difficult to be the first one to answer given very limited guidance.   Subsequent replies will probably be shaped by the information and examples they can already see.
  3.   Compliance with the limited guidance that was given.   For example, you can't put a poem in here.  Drifting way off the original question just to score highly on writing style won't win.
  4.   Other things at the discretion and judgment of the OP.

Best Wishes.

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi.

   I appreciate there are only about a dozen regulars but getting just three replies isn't much.  I wonder if you I can prompt another regular or two by just speculating on what their area of expertise is.  As before, I'm not going to speculate on anyone who isn't a moderator.

Colin2B   ---->   I'm deeply suspicious this is someone who is mentioned on (let's say near the top of) the "about" page for this website and seems to speak on the podcasts quite often.   They have claimed sailing interests but I wouldn't have thought they go racing in a sailing dinghy.  They've got a little bit of style so it might be a yacht of wooden construction and not the modern fibre glass rubbish.

ChiralSPO   --->  Physical Chemistry seems to be their specialty.  Fairly sure they have already declared using a model based on QM to predict the properties of elements as being one of their own research areas.

Evan_au  --->  There was a Naked Astronomy person from Australia.   However, they spend quite a lot of time on the Biology questions, which forces careful consideration.  I don't know that much about the Australian education system but I reckon they would have studied a broad range of science at University.   Their writing has a generally professional and formal style.  I'd say they've had some experience writing science articles for the public, perhaps as a journalist for some newspaper or someone running a science museum, something like that.   I suppose writing for the Naked Astronomy podcasts would fit that description.

Best Wishes.

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Award of best answer:

Every regular (except those mentioned below) gets joint 4th place.  Staying quiet for safety or security and/or not boring everyone with your life story is to be highly commended.  I just can't grade or assess what I can't see.
    @Bored chemist  gets  3rd place.    They didn't write enough.
    @alancalverd gets 2nd place.  Their content was exceptionally good and probably the most interesting.
    @Halc  gets 1st place.   Some explanation has already been made.  Another thing which I liked is not claiming to be an expert in anything.

Obviously people can continue to write on this thread.  I'll probably read what is written eventually (but I'm not going to remove or change any of the awards).

Best Wishes.

[Bored chemist]

So... the winner of "best answer" didn't actually answer.
I wonder why that title isn't particularly coveted. :-)

[Pseudoscience-is-malarkey]

History, preservation.

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi @Pseudoscience-is-malarkey ,

    History is a great subject.   A compulsory subject in most schools and a university subject that produces the greatest number of school headmasters.   (A headmaster is the American equivalent of a principal, I think).

     Do you think we (human beings) study History to avoid making the same mistakes, or to become better in warfare and the control of people under your authority / care?

Best Wishes.

[evan_au]

I studied Electrical Engineering at an Australian university, but I have always had a broad interest in the sciences, mathematics and museums.
- As a youngster, fueled, I think, by electronics magazines and Isaac Asimov's fiction & non-fiction
- I studied a lot of software at university (much easier these days than back then...)
- I have spent most of my career working on software-based telecommunications systems
- In my career, I have had the privilege of traveling to many countries, and even to live in Europe for a year (for work)
- My main science-writing experience outside telecommunications has been on the Naked Scientists forum (not as a journalist or for a museum)
- I try to consider the ethical aspects of a subject, beyond the science itself
- I haven't even tried teaching my gym instructors that force, energy, power and strength are not the same thing.
- I have only contributed one short audio segment to the Naked Scientists podcast, and that was on (pseudo)random numbers.
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/podcasts/short/what-random

PS: I only saw this survey today - not all new topics pop up in my in-tray...

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi and thanks @evan_au.
   I'm still fairly surprised and impressed that you reply to so many questions or discussions in the Biology sections.
Best Wishes.
   

[evan_au]

I'm still fairly surprised and impressed that you reply to so many questions or discussions in the Biology sections.

One view of biology imagines it to be a fantastically complex program, coded in DNA.
- The cell represents the computer which executes the program (unlike silicon computers, it also has programs for self-repair)
- You can see parts of the program that are no longer executed, or which have been corrupted by viruses
- Each little computer interacts with others around it, at various levels up to whole ecosystems...
- Not entirely different from the telecommunications systems that I work on...

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi.

One view of biology imagines it to be a fantastically complex program, coded in DNA.....

    One reasonable view for sure. 
    It's a bit of a reductionist approach.  There is some value in not even trying to reduce all of Biology down to a microscopic scale explained by principles of physics.   For example, a single theory or equation that explained all of Biology may be so complicated and slow to process that it won't be useful for human understanding in the time available for the species.

Best Wishes.

[mayorovd]

My main interests are identification of irrational biases, things people take for granted without ever really justifying them. I tend to discuss such things elsewhere as this is a science site.

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi @mayorovd .
   That post seems oddly similar.  Did you just copy-and-paste it from  Halc's first post?   
All of your posts seem to have been made today and at least one of them seems to be advertising a casino website.  You'll need to forgive me if I'm a little bit suspicious that you aren't really that interested in this thread.
   If you are genuinely interested.  Hi and welcome.

Best Wishes.

[hamdani yusuf]

I'm just a simple man with a simple mind, so I prefer simple explanations.

I studied industrial electronics engineering in a polytechnic. I'm interested to science in general, especially physics, and more specifically in electromagnetism.
My past and present jobs had me studied programming, communication protocols, industrial instrumentation, power generation and distribution, water treatment, microbiology, chemistry, statistics, and some other things.

I'm also interested in philosophy, which should encompass all bodies of knowledge. Although in current stage, it seems lack of clarity and suffers unresolved disagreements among philosophers. I hope it can be improved soon. IMO, we need to be more consistent with our definitions, logic, and math as a language to communicate effectively.

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi and thanks @hamdani yusuf

   That is a wide variety of subjects   (Microbiology --> communication protocols).

I'm also interested in philosophy...... I hope it can be improved soon. IMO, we need to be more consistent with our definitions, logic, and math as a language to communicate effectively.

    That seems to be treating philosophy as if it is just like a science subject.  Personally, I would have preferred that but our Philosophy lecturer occasionally reminded the class that Philosophy is not exactly like a science and is simply not meant to be.  It's got just as much in common with Humanities and even purely Arts subjects.   In particular, it is often involved with trying to understand and analyse the "human condition".  Using words with precise and consistent definitions can then be less important than selecting words that convey meaning, stirs emotional response and provokes the reader to question something they have felt and might actually be impossible to put into words.
    Anyway, the practical consequence was that essays with some literary prowess and poetry, instead of just scientific precision,  usually scored very highly.   (I'm not an expert:  I didn't sit the final exam and have no formal qualification in Philosophy, you could only submit a certain number of subjects for examination and credit).

Best Wishes.