0 Members and 39 Guests are viewing this topic.
bad people
only to the sellers of the product, and those who promote conflict based on religion.
QuoteI am not the one who is confused here. I perfectly understand that work is forced times distance or, for a rotational system torque times angle of rotation. My point is that there is no reason to express torque in units of energy per angle of rotation. The fundamental nature of torque is force acting at a distance. Not all torques result in work being done. Only if the torque is accompanied by a rotation then there is work being done. There is no reason to include the concept of work associated with torque for the situations where there is no work being done.That is, such as the case where the torque is applied statically. Newtons and meters are fundamental units in the SI system. Torque is readily defined in terms of these fundamental units. There is no need to introduce additional units such as radians. Furthermore your suggestion that I am confused and my confusion would be cleared up by looking at variables speed devices is quite condescending. I have been engineer for more than 50 years. I worked with and designed vehicle power trains, including those that had continuously variable and infinitely variable speed transmissions. In my work I worked with advanced power trains including those for hybrid vehicles andI have co-authored numerous SAE papers on the subject, and have taught thousands of Mechanical Engineering students. I am confident that I am not confused about the fundamental nature of torque.
I am not the one who is confused here. I perfectly understand that work is forced times distance or, for a rotational system torque times angle of rotation. My point is that there is no reason to express torque in units of energy per angle of rotation. The fundamental nature of torque is force acting at a distance. Not all torques result in work being done. Only if the torque is accompanied by a rotation then there is work being done. There is no reason to include the concept of work associated with torque for the situations where there is no work being done.That is, such as the case where the torque is applied statically. Newtons and meters are fundamental units in the SI system. Torque is readily defined in terms of these fundamental units. There is no need to introduce additional units such as radians. Furthermore your suggestion that I am confused and my confusion would be cleared up by looking at variables speed devices is quite condescending. I have been engineer for more than 50 years. I worked with and designed vehicle power trains, including those that had continuously variable and infinitely variable speed transmissions. In my work I worked with advanced power trains including those for hybrid vehicles andI have co-authored numerous SAE papers on the subject, and have taught thousands of Mechanical Engineering students. I am confident that I am not confused about the fundamental nature of torque.
We can lose our confidence in that specific knowledge if it contradicts some other knowledge that we're more confident in.
Quote from: alancalverd on 30/01/2025 19:08:51bad peopleWhy can't good people defeat the bad people?
Weapon manufacturers and smugglers often benefit from conflicts, even though they don't share the same religion as the conflicting sides.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 01/02/2025 11:35:28Weapon manufacturers and smugglers often benefit from conflicts, even though they don't share the same religion as the conflicting sides.But without that religion, there would be no conflict or market, and without weapons, the conflict would fade away. By supplying one side or even both, you are promoting the basic cause of the conflict.
Academia is broken. That?s a phrase we hear more and more, but what does it actually mean? Why is academia broken, and how did it reach this point?In this video, I explore the realities of working in higher education today, based on a major new report that gathered insights from over 4,000 academics, faculty members, and administrators. Their experiences paint a clear picture of a system that is struggling?one where burnout is the norm, not the exception, and where toxic workplace dynamics have become deeply ingrained.A toxic work culture doesn?t emerge overnight. It builds slowly, fed by unrealistic expectations, a lack of proper leadership training, and a structural design that encourages competition over collaboration. In academia, success is often a zero-sum game?if one researcher secures funding, another misses out. This scarcity-driven mindset fuels environments where backstabbing, overwork, and fear of failure take precedence over actual intellectual progress. It?s a system that claims to value knowledge and innovation but often rewards those who play the bureaucratic game best.Many academics report feeling trapped in a cycle of increasing demands with decreasing support. Instead of hiring replacements when staff leave, institutions simply distribute the extra work among those who remain. The result? A workforce drowning in administrative tasks, unable to dedicate enough time to the research and teaching that should be at the heart of their careers. Employee morale suffers as universities prioritize performance metrics, rankings, and funding over the well-being of their staff.Perhaps the most concerning part is that this problem isn?t new. For years, academics have raised concerns, but meaningful change remains elusive. Universities continue to operate as businesses, focused on growth and reputation rather than fostering environments where research and education can truly thrive. So, if academia is broken, can it ever be fixed? That?s the question we need to start asking?before it?s too late.................................................▼ ▽ TIMESTAMPS00:00 Intro00:43 Welcome00:59 Toxic Work Environment04:39 Increased Workload and Burnout08:01 Lack of Recognition and Appreciation11:37 Corporitization of Higher Education13:02 Impact on Teaching and Research14:44 Conclusion14:49 Outro
As a tenured faculty staff in the UK, I confirm that I spend more time and prioritize applying for funding and grants than doing research and publishing. I keep the latter to a minimum and spend most of my time pondering the language of funders and making my reserach 'investable'. UTTERLY SOUL CRUSHING. If I don't tick the box of funding, I will never progress in my career. In fact, applying for funding is part and parcel of HR's expectations!
I was always planning of becoming a professor but the closer I got to realizing that goal the more I realized I was burnt out so I left academia. I have friends that continued on and from what they tell me I?m glad I got out when I did.
As a PhD student, i'm living paycheck to paycheck every month with zero savings in my bank account, and i dont even have a car. Atleast US citizens or PRs can work outside without any restrictions and take a leave of absence for atleast a semester..but as an international student we can't. So our situation is even worse than just a consequence of "Academia being broken", we are also affected by a broken immigration system.
Thanks for posting this! As an academic, I can confirm that the toxicity is absolutely stupefying. Bullshitification is the perfect term that encapsulates everything that?s gone wrong. The leadership in my Department and College operates on smoke and mirrors, using faculty and students as stepping stones to climb the administrative ladder. Just this year, our College Dean secured a higher-level position elsewhere after gutting programs and removing faculty and student opportunities. Does she care? Not a chance. She got rewarded for the 'initiatives' that looked great on paper while leaving chaos in her wake.Administrative bloat has turned what was once a deeply fulfilling career, something I lived and breathed, into an endless bureaucratic nightmare. For instance, it now takes months just to purchase something as simple as an online workshop. I could go on and on. Even with tenure, I could theoretically flip them the bird whenever I want, but it?s hard not to keep pushing back and trying to fix things as I truly do care. The problem? Nearly every time I do, I end up feeling like smashing my head against a wall. Presenting evidence is fundamental in research, yet completely irrelevant in the broader workings of academia. They just don't give a sh1t. The hypocrisy is maddening.Thanks for making this video. It was just refreshing to know I'm not alone with the BS. I just wish there was a way to fix it.
So I'm not alone here.
As an adjunct professor who is advocating for the learning revolution, I thank you dearly Andy Stapleton for commuinicating all of this. You are the best.
Yep jealousy, stealing other's ideas, backstabbing is a big problem. Although, this is not limited to academia.
I left. Was working on a PhD and decided to get the MS and leave. My lab was becoming dysfunctional, my department was mismanaged and was mismanaging money. They had to fire 17 faculty and post-docs. It?s insane.
Imagine having an ADJUNCT assistant doing all your teaching for you while you spend all your time on the paid lecture circuit?college is a total rip-off.
It?s been broken since the late eighties. It?s just that the problem is that now it is just becoming impossible to hide
All "education" has become a business, with profit as the goal, so actual teaching/learning is no longer important.
wow so accurate from my experience in Canadian higher ed...more people need to watch this....
I am a first year PhD student. I wrote the whole paper... completed the 95% of the work including journal finding and then my professor became the first author. Does this happen a lot in academia, too?
Sorry, the uk is worse, its broke now too, betting too much on overseas students. Losing my job hss given time for reflection. All that seems to matter is teaching more students, research time cut to nothing and the ladder pulled up by estimated academics. Maybe i will never return but i will desperately miss the discipline of research....
This is the most brutally honest and painfully accurate takedown of academia I?ve seen in a long time. The delivery is sharp, relentless, and laced with just the right amount of dark humor to make you laugh while simultaneously wanting to scream into the void. Every point is dead-on?the toxic work culture, the burnout, the corporate infestation of universities turning them into money-chasing bureaucratic nightmares. The bit about stale cake as appreciation? Perfect. I hated myself for pointing out an earlier video I didn't like, this one I did like and so kudos. Of course what a little person like me thinks may not be statistically significant, but I may be in the soon to be extinct homo thinkus.What makes this so good is that it?s not just an angry rant; it?s a well-researched, articulate breakdown of why higher education is eating itself alive. The way it builds up from the survey data to real-world experiences hits hard because it?s not exaggerated?it?s just the truth that no one in leadership wants to admit. If you've ever worked in academia, this will feel like someone has read your mind, condensed all your frustrations, and handed them back to you in a perfectly packaged PowerPoint of doom. And if you haven?t? Well, congratulations on dodging a bullet.
15:01 Things seemingly never change. But they can, and in some cases do. When they do change for the better, it always involves a ground-up push (actually, a FIGHT) for change. You mention Graeber in your video. That guy (may he RIP) was an amazing philosopher and scholar. You ought to present more about what he says; crucially, HOW to change things. As well as WHY this bullshittification exists. Which ties into the "how" to change it above.Basically, power never yields power willingly. It has to be fought for. This is where radically democratic (which means member-led) unions are necessary. And to topple and replace the university system with something better will require a national, or perhaps, international movement led by such unions (and not just in academia).And, with respect, I do take issue with the title of your video. People DO want to change it who work or have worked within academia. Don't you?
I didn't go the academic route after grad school. Thinking about spending the next few decades teaching unmotivated 19-year-olds just didn't sound too appealing. But I still managed over 120 publications, 20 patents, etc. On the other hand, I really didn't quite get to do exactly what I wanted to do, but it was close enough. I can't imagine what it's like in academia today. From everything I've heard, it's why we have the word "soul-crushing" in English. I'm fairly sure that I made the right choice.
Wow this resonates!
I left academia in part because of the issues described here.
Thank you very much for highlighting the issues in academia, which has been alienating true scholars. This has been causing huge loss for all humanity.
I agree 100%.The only thing I'd add is that more papers means a lot more BS you need to go trough, leading to a lot of wasted resources and time.
30+ years in education in the US. 20 in higher ed, full time. Education is broken. Leadership is dysfunctional. The pet projects of each new administrator, the new initiatives that keep getting recycled every couple years. The diplomas are barely worth the paper they?re printed on. Maybe not even that much. I?m getting out soon. Not retiring (I don?t have that luxury at this point), but it?s not worth the cheap paycheck that barely covers my bills.Looking forward to the freedom from the institution, even while nervous of the future.
Yeah! 6th year Ph.D student here and the struggle is real
All grades and schools have pretty much let me down. I feel like I wasted so much of my life to be ?educated? and groomed to their version of adulthood. They failed and I am still try to figure everything out. I?m 48 and scared in lieu being older and still skidding my wheels trying to find a career that I can be successful at. It?s hard because I learn differently than others and learning in a classroom never prepared me for the real world. Learning in the job is the only way for me, but that?s another tricky situation. Anyway, I guess I?ll just keep trying..
This is why I choose to pursue a research path in industry. Academic system is beyond help.
Too often academia is exactly what it shouldn?t be. Academics should be dedicated to finding the truth, to asking the right questions, instead it?s often dedicated to building people?s reputations, there?s a really dreadful "apprentice" system in lots of universities and people will actually try to torpedo research that disagrees with their own, so they can keep their reputation.Honestly, some academic departments make Corporate boardrooms of big companies look good in terms of behaviour.
Academia is broken because it?s become focused on nonsense issues. The infantalization of the students is borderline psychotic where nearly everyone gets ?A?s, abundant safe spaces, and pervasive trigger warnings, it feels like a kindergarten. Along with the constant investigations of faculty who dare to step away from the pervasive permissive narrative makes for an environment that has laregly broken from reality testing. Furthermore add in these academia bubble majors that will do very little for the student after graduation other than burden them with overwhelming debt and we find higher ed out of touch at a highly unethical level. The poor students who are being ?sold a bill of goods? after having their financial future demolished. We are in serious need of a new paradigm.
This is straight out of Tom Sharpe?s *Wilt*?a world where academia is less about knowledge and more about surviving an absurd bureaucratic hellscape run by incompetents and backstabbers. Wilt trudged through a university department filled with petty rivalries, clueless administrators, and a system so broken that doing actual work was a liability. This video feels like an update to that world, except now the stakes are even higher, the burnout is real, and the joke isn?t funny anymore because people?s careers and mental health are on the line.
I?m a recently employed assistant professor at a UK university and I?m approaching my 1 year probation meeting. I didn?t land a single grant last year despite writing for several. Needless to say I?m a bit worried!
I lecture for 3 world top 1% universities and I couldn't agree more with everything you've said.Salaries especially are miserable while universities keep investing money in new buildings and rental accomodation
The funny thing is, youtube video can do 80% of the work that those univerisites are doing. Obsolete system that will die
I live this and what i`ve done is work, give classes, drink my coffe and back home as fast as I can. I`ve trying to not interact with co-workers (professors) cause is extremely toxic, with gossip, complains against other professors, complaints against administration etc., Only hour I`m happy is when I interact with students otherwise I already had given up.
My department wants to pump out papers and make phd students graduate as fast as possible. This way they get the "recognition" through papers and save money by making them graduate faster. One student finished his phd in 18 months...
. If the situation proceeds in such a way that every new breakthrough requires a 10-fold, or even larger, increase in the machines? size, power and costs, then clearly we won?t get much beyond where we are now. I cannot exclude such obstacles standing in the way of progress, but the history of science suggests, in such a case, progress will simply go in different directions. One may not only think of precision improvements but also [think of] totally different avenues of discovery such as cosmology and black hole physics.But I would like to advise to the new generation of scientists: don?t worry about that, because the real reason why there?s nothing new coming is that everybody?s thinking the same way!I?m a bit puzzled and disappointed about this. Many people continue to think the same way?and the way people now try to introduce new theories doesn?t seem to work as well. We have lots of new theories about quantum gravity, about statistical physics, about the universe and cosmology, but they?re not really ?new? in their basic structure. People don?t seem to want to make the daring new steps that I think are really necessary. For instance, we see everybody sending their new ideas first to the [preprint server] arXiv.org and then to the journals to have it published. And in arXiv.org, you see thousands of papers coming every year, and none of them really has this great, bright, new, fine kind of insight that changes things. There are insights, of course, but not the ones that are needed to make a basic new breakthrough in our field.I think we have to start thinking in a different way. And I have always had the attitude that I was thinking in a different way. And particularly in the 1970s, there was a very efficient way of making further progress: think differently from what your friends are doing, and then you find something new!I think that is still true; however, I?m getting old now and am no longer getting brilliant new ideas every week. But in principle, there are ways?one could argue about quantum mechanics, about cosmology, about biology?that are not the conventional ways of looking at things. And to my mind, people thinking in such novel ways is not happening enough.
the physical world itself is a very ordinary one that is completely classical
Quantum mechanics was invented because it turns out that you can't map reality onto classical continuum mechanics with sufficient precision to make accurate predictions. Similarly for relativistic mechanics, though in that case the theory was developed before the observations that supported it. So any attempt to analyse or predict reality from a purely classical standpoint is at best an approximation, and at worst, more wrong than starting from a quantum/relativistic axiom.The test of quantum or relativistic physics is whether, for large objects and low speeds, it approximates to what we observe in the mesoscopic everyday world, and for small objects and high speeds it gets us closer to what actually happens.So far, both approaches have proved very robust, so anyone who thinks Quotethe physical world itself is a very ordinary one that is completely classical is directing himself away from understanding, not towards it. Ordinary, obviously; classical, obviously not.
The claim for better understanding can only be supported by better prediction for the behavior of a system from the first principles with less assumptions and free parameters.
Wrong. There is no way you could predict the existence, never mind wavelength, of x-ray fluorescence from a classical model. Nor indeed the behavior of protons in an MRI machine, or electrons in a tunnel diode.
Quantum mechanics has turned out to be one of the most spectacularly successful theory in terms of predictions.
Quantum mechanics is often hailed as the most successful theory in physics?capable of explaining the behavior of atoms, particles, and light itself. But what happens when we ask it to predict something as basic as the shape of a molecule?In this episode, we explore a surprising truth at the heart of quantum chemistry: quantum mechanics doesn?t naturally produce structure?it requires help. From the Born-Oppenheimer approximation to computational constraints and empirical corrections, we dive into the hidden scaffolding that makes quantum models work.We?ll unpack how structure in molecules and nuclei is not derived from first principles but instead imposed through assumptions and approximations. What does this mean for the limits of quantum theory? And could it suggest that something deeper?something structural?is being overlooked in our models of matter?Join us as we challenge the standard narrative and ask: does quantum mechanics really explain structure?or just approximate it well enough to get by?00:00 Introduction01:51 Quest to Model Molecules02:59 N-Body Problem04:27 Born-Oppenheimer Approximation06:02 Solving Schr?dinger?s Equation Without the Approximation07:46 Limits & Assumptions09:39 Why is this a Problem?10:45 Electron Orbitals15:06 Quantum Mechanics and the Nucleus17:51 The 3 Domains & Structure19:47 QM & Visible Structure
Perhaps some ingredients are still missing. Or some assumptions made in the classical theories of the past are false.