Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 15:21:22 08/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 17:59:22, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >On August 20, 2002 at 16:05:24, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On August 20, 2002 at 15:58:54, Bo Persson wrote: >> >>>> Euclid's "Elements" was completely unoriginal. Just a catalog of existing >>>> ideas. And yet, I think it has value. >>> >>>But it wasn't a thesis! :-) >> >>I don't really know what requirements for a thesis are. But here is what I >>think they ought to contain: >> >>"Something that furthers knowledge in a way that is valuable and interesting." >> >>Most of them don't accomplish that. They are obscure little documents that >>nobody reads except the advisors and the panel and are generally terribly dry >>and boring. I don't think I am exaggerating one bit. I suspect that I am one >>of less than ten people on earth who have read my sister's Master's thesis >>(English major). Most of the time, they are an extensive and exhaustive waste >>of time and energy. >> >>Documents that come from a university should be something valuable for teaching. >> >>IMO-YMMV. > >I completely agree. What is the sense in writing a masters thesis that only 10 >people on the planet can understand? It's very possible that the heads of the >university (not the advisor) don't count to these 10 persons, and your research >project gets cancelled. > >Andy To set a lowest common denominator for research is a very bad idea. Einstein would never have been able to publish, for instance. Some times you need the vocabulary to understand, some times you even need to be a professor. If you do research into the spectrum analysis of gravitational waves eminating from colliding black holes, do you care if your mother understands anything? Of course not, it is enough that the other researchers in closely related fields understand. -S.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.