| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
"ComposTumbler"?
I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device
for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? -- VX (remove alcohol for email) |
"VX" wrote in message s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? -- VX (remove alcohol for email) Dont bother ......have not heard any good reports on these and they are sure expensive The best compost bins remain close boarded pallets put together line with heavy duty polythene or old carpet put them on concrete or paving slabs fill with a good mix of grass, leaves, shredded prunings ,shredded paper, cardboard , horse manure , weeds etc mix together well .....add a few buckets of urine cover with plastic plus a solid lid ........in 3 months turn the whole lot into a 2nd bin and depending on weather and worm action in 6 to 9 months you will have compost like potting compost |
"VX" wrote in message s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. It is a rip-off. There is not even the faintest possibility that any home composter will produce compost in 14 days. It is being sold at around 10 to 20 times a reasonable price. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? Franz |
In article ,
Franz Heymann wrote: It is a rip-off. There is not even the faintest possibility that any home composter will produce compost in 14 days. Hmm. If you selected only the tenderest, most delicate, kitchen waste and composted it perfectly during a heatwave, then just maybe .... It is being sold at around 10 to 20 times a reasonable price. Yes, indeed. Completely ridiculous. Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
Franz Heymann wrote:
"VX" wrote in message s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. It is a rip-off. There is not even the faintest possibility that any home composter will produce compost in 14 days. It is being sold at around 10 to 20 times a reasonable price. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost money before it'll work. Mike. |
Mike Lyle wrote:
:: :: It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's :: too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as :: shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of :: separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a :: simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get :: better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are :: just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost :: money before it'll work. It's not just gardening I'm afraid, every retailer now uses marketing speak to sell crap that doesn't work, usually at exhorbitant prices. This is just one more example of the 'instant' culture which has taken over our society, no one wants to wait for anything....this mindset was created by marketing departments (fast food, microwavable everything, on-demand technology etc etc) and they utilise it every day to sell more and more garbage which gets used twice then discarded but they have acheived what they set out to do, part you from your money. -- http://www.blueyonder256k.myby.co.uk/ |
In message m, VX
writes I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? I had one from our local council around 12 years ago and it cost £10. I think they now charge £20 or so. It works fine but takes an awful lot longer than 14 days to make compost. £199 seems highly excessive. -- June Hughes |
"VX" wrote in message
s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? -- VX (remove alcohol for email) I remeber these, or something similar, were tested in the Gardeners' World composting trials, a year or two ago. I recall Monty was very sceptical about it to start with but was then very impressed when it did produce compost considerably faster than any of the other heaps/dalek bins/whatever. However, at that price, I'd want it to make compost instantly, and also make me cups of tea. |
Mike Lyle wrote:
It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost money before it'll work. I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? Likewise, my shredder minces all my woody trimmings which can then go on the compost heap. My garden is not big enough to have a pile of clippings, taking years to rot away, and I don't have a van, trailer or the inclination to drive miles to the nearest tip. Perhaps you could explain why my shredder was a waste of money? The tumbler, however, I completely agree with you about. -- "In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point." -- Friedrich Nietzsche |
bigboard wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote: It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost money before it'll work. I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? OK, different strokes for different folks, of course. But I don't see the advantage over a plain old compost-heap. Likewise, my shredder minces all my woody trimmings which can then go on the compost heap. My garden is not big enough to have a pile of clippings, taking years to rot away, and I don't have a van, trailer or the inclination to drive miles to the nearest tip. Perhaps you could explain why my shredder was a waste of money? Last time I shot my mouth off about shredders, I was more careful. I said something like "most people have gardens too small to justify shredding woody material". Most things you can cut with a spade don't need shredding before composting, and in a typical tiny garden there won't be enough tougher stuff to warrant the cost and storage space of the shredder -- it's simplest to burn or bin what woody stuff there is, or take it to the Council's composting service if one can. A barrow-load of hedge trimmings yields how much compost? and uses up how much nitrogen on the way? But if using a shredder suits your gardening, it's none of my business: and I can see the satisfying side of it, too. I just don't want people to go into it blindly -- you'll have noticed I'm a bit hostile to B&Q "must-haves" and over-consumption of energy! The tumbler, however, I completely agree with you about. Good lad! Mike. |
Mike Lyle wrote:
bigboard wrote: I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? OK, different strokes for different folks, of course. But I don't see the advantage over a plain old compost-heap. I have both. The wormery is in my nice warm kitchen, the compost heap is ninety feet up the garden. Likewise, my shredder minces all my woody trimmings which can then go on the compost heap. My garden is not big enough to have a pile of clippings, taking years to rot away, and I don't have a van, trailer or the inclination to drive miles to the nearest tip. Perhaps you could explain why my shredder was a waste of money? Last time I shot my mouth off about shredders, I was more careful. I said something like "most people have gardens too small to justify shredding woody material". Most things you can cut with a spade don't need shredding before composting, and in a typical tiny garden there won't be enough tougher stuff to warrant the cost and storage space of the shredder -- it's simplest to burn or bin what woody stuff there is, or take it to the Council's composting service if one can. A barrow-load of hedge trimmings yields how much compost? and uses up how much nitrogen on the way? Strangely almost exactly the amount my lawn clippings provide! But if using a shredder suits your gardening, it's none of my business: and I can see the satisfying side of it, too. I just don't want people to go into it blindly -- you'll have noticed I'm a bit hostile to B&Q "must-haves" and over-consumption of energy! Oh, I'm with you on that. My particular pet-hate is leaf blowers! I just think that the shredder uses less energy than driving all the way to the dump, which I would have to do more than once every time I cut my hedges. Plus, I don't have to drive to the Garden Centre for compost. The tumbler, however, I completely agree with you about. Good lad! Mike. -- A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular. -- Adlai Stevenson |
"Mike Lyle" wrote in message ... Franz Heymann wrote: "VX" wrote in message s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. It is a rip-off. There is not even the faintest possibility that any home composter will produce compost in 14 days. It is being sold at around 10 to 20 times a reasonable price. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost money before it'll work. Hear hear. Franz |
"bigboard" wrote in message ... Mike Lyle wrote: [snip] I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? The fact that it takes six weeks to dispose of 1 week's kitchen waste. [snip] Franz |
Franz Heymann wrote:
"bigboard" wrote in message ... Mike Lyle wrote: [snip] I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? The fact that it takes six weeks to dispose of 1 week's kitchen waste. Then your wormery is too small for your needs. Mine suits me perfectly. -- All science is either physics or stamp collecting. -- E. Rutherford |
|
"bigboard" wrote in message ... Franz Heymann wrote: "bigboard" wrote in message ... Mike Lyle wrote: [snip] I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? The fact that it takes six weeks to dispose of 1 week's kitchen waste. Then your wormery is too small for your needs. Mine suits me perfectly. Mine has a diameter of approximately 1 ft. How large must I make it to cope six times as fast as it does now? All science is either physics or stamp collecting. My profession was physicist and my hobby is stamp collecting, so according to Rutherford, I was a full time scientist. Franz |
wrote in message ... On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:55:13 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann" wrote: "bigboard" wrote in message ... Mike Lyle wrote: [snip] I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? The fact that it takes six weeks to dispose of 1 week's kitchen waste. You pamper your worms Franz. Since we last spoke on the topic, I threw those Tubergen bulb trays in the waste bin and rehoused my worms in a wormery made by drilling plenty of holes in the bottom of some old chicken pellet buckets. They stack nicely. The worms still don't eat. They just lie there laughing at me. Franz |
wrote in message ... On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:55:12 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann" wrote: "Mike Lyle" wrote in message ... Franz Heymann wrote: "VX" wrote in message s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. It is a rip-off. There is not even the faintest possibility that any home composter will produce compost in 14 days. It is being sold at around 10 to 20 times a reasonable price. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost money before it'll work. Hear hear. ... said the man with the failed worm farm :-) I do not have any failed worms on my farm. They are thrivind and rotund. They just don't eat fast enough Seriously, should I perhaps put a trowelful of garden soil in their hostel now and again? Franz |
"bigboard" wrote in message ... wrote: On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:55:12 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann" wrote: "Mike Lyle" wrote in message ... Franz Heymann wrote: "VX" wrote in message s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. It is a rip-off. There is not even the faintest possibility that any home composter will produce compost in 14 days. It is being sold at around 10 to 20 times a reasonable price. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost money before it'll work. Hear hear. ... said the man with the failed worm farm :-) LOL! Franz was probably putting all the cats in he shoots. Wormeries were never designed for cat disposal. I am sticking rigorously to the EU directives and exclude cats and other sorts of meat from the wormery. {:-)) Franz |
In article ,
Franz Heymann wrote: Then your wormery is too small for your needs. Mine suits me perfectly. Mine has a diameter of approximately 1 ft. How large must I make it to cope six times as fast as it does now? Have you read Charles Dodgson (a.k.a. Lewis Carroll) on the question of how many cats it takes to kill rats in a given time? Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
In article ,
Franz Heymann wrote: "bigboard" wrote in message ... LOL! Franz was probably putting all the cats in he shoots. Wormeries were never designed for cat disposal. I am sticking rigorously to the EU directives and exclude cats and other sorts of meat from the wormery. {:-)) Does anyone here run a maggotery? Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article , Franz Heymann wrote: "bigboard" wrote in message ... LOL! Franz was probably putting all the cats in he shoots. Wormeries were never designed for cat disposal. I am sticking rigorously to the EU directives and exclude cats and other sorts of meat from the wormery. {:-)) Does anyone here run a maggotery? I saw one on TV once. "Maggotry", on the other hand, sounds like an obscure criminal offence, possibly less common in these days of widespread street-lighting. Mike. |
"Steve Harris" wrote in message ... In article , (Franz Heymann) wrote: Mine has a diameter of approximately 1 ft. How large must I make it to cope six times as fast as it does now? Wild guess, 2.449489742783 feet :-) Approximately :-) Yours and mine round off differently. {:-)) Franz |
"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message ... In article , Franz Heymann wrote: Then your wormery is too small for your needs. Mine suits me perfectly. Mine has a diameter of approximately 1 ft. How large must I make it to cope six times as fast as it does now? Have you read Charles Dodgson (a.k.a. Lewis Carroll) on the question of how many cats it takes to kill rats in a given time? No, but I look forward to hearing where he wrote that. If all the animals are reasonably spaced, I guess the number killed per unit time is proportional to the product of the number of cats and rats. {:-)) Franz Franz |
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 22:08:58 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote: ~ ~"bigboard" wrote in message ... ~ Franz Heymann wrote: ~ ~ ~ "bigboard" wrote in message ~ ... ~ Mike Lyle wrote: ~ ~ [snip] ~ I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid ~ plant ~ food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to ~the ~ bin in ~ my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against ~ them? ~ ~ The fact that it takes six weeks to dispose of 1 week's kitchen ~waste. ~ ~ ~ Then your wormery is too small for your needs. Mine suits me ~perfectly. ~ ~Mine has a diameter of approximately 1 ft. How large must I make it ~to cope six times as fast as it does now? I presume current volume is therefore 0.25.pi.depth so you'd need to be at approximately 2.449 feet diameter. As if you didn't know! :) jane checks following emails - yep, we all agree! ~ All science is either physics or stamp collecting. ~ ~My profession was physicist and my hobby is stamp collecting, so ~according to Rutherford, I was a full time scientist. ~ :-) I love that quote. Would have liked to put it at the start of my thesis but at the time my external examiner wasn't sorted and could have been a medical physicist or a clued-up medic and I didn't want the latter to get rebuffed and be more likely to fail me! (As it was, I got two physicists and no problems, phew, so I could have put it in!) Now I collect china ducks but it was once British mint stamps until I got disillusioned with the mail obviously printing them for collectors to buy and making way too much money. (ie when I was a student!). I still buy the ones with plant or astronomy connections though, thus linking hobbies! So, this begs the question, what do urglers have as other hobbies for when they can't garden? jane, medical physicist, duck collector, reader of murder-mysteries and science fiction, and avid photographer. :-) -- jane Don't part with your illusions. When they are gone, you may still exist but you have ceased to live. Mark Twain Please remove onmaps from replies, thanks! |
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 22:09:00 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote: ~ ~"bigboard" wrote in message ... ~ wrote: ~ ~ On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:55:12 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann" ~ wrote: ~ huge snip ~ ~ Hear hear. ~ ~ ... said the man with the failed worm farm :-) ~ ~ LOL! Franz was probably putting all the cats in he shoots. Wormeries ~were ~ never designed for cat disposal. ~ ~I am sticking rigorously to the EU directives and exclude cats and ~other sorts of meat from the wormery. ~{:-)) ~ Actually, this is a good point. Cats compost their products naturally - does this mean the EU has banned cats? :-) :-) :-) g,d&rlh -- jane Don't part with your illusions. When they are gone, you may still exist but you have ceased to live. Mark Twain Please remove onmaps from replies, thanks! |
Franz Heymann wrote:
"bigboard" wrote in message ... Franz Heymann wrote: "bigboard" wrote in message ... Mike Lyle wrote: [snip] I have a small wormery that produces excellent compost and liquid plant food, and takes all of my organic kitchen waste. It sits next to the bin in my kitchen and was worth every penny. What have you got against them? The fact that it takes six weeks to dispose of 1 week's kitchen waste. Then your wormery is too small for your needs. Mine suits me perfectly. Mine has a diameter of approximately 1 ft. How large must I make it to cope six times as fast as it does now? Six times as large? Seriously, I suspect that you are being a bit impatient with your worms. It can take quite a while for them to reach sufficient numbers to be efficient. Once they get there though, there's no stopping them. All science is either physics or stamp collecting. My profession was physicist and my hobby is stamp collecting, so according to Rutherford, I was a full time scientist. LOL. Nice one. -- Love your enemies: they'll go crazy trying to figure out what you're up to. |
In article ,
Franz Heymann wrote: Have you read Charles Dodgson (a.k.a. Lewis Carroll) on the question of how many cats it takes to kill rats in a given time? No, but I look forward to hearing where he wrote that. "The Monthly Packet", February 1880. It is on pages 140-142 of The Magic of Lewis Carrol by John Fisher (Penguin), but my copy was published in 1975. If all the animals are reasonably spaced, I guess the number killed per unit time is proportional to the product of the number of cats and rats. {:-)) You've got to the first step. Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
Franz Heymann wrote:
"bigboard" wrote in message ... wrote: On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:55:12 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann" wrote: "Mike Lyle" wrote in message ... Franz Heymann wrote: "VX" wrote in message s.com... I've got some sales literature that came in a Screwfix order about a device for making compost called the ComposTumbler that- supposedly- makes good compost in 14 days because it has the facility for turning rather like a cement mixer; you turn it every day and this allows the process to speed up somewhat. All was well until I called the freephone number and heard the prices- £299 and £399 for the medium and large ones respectively and for the small garden-porch model, £199. It is a rip-off. There is not even the faintest possibility that any home composter will produce compost in 14 days. It is being sold at around 10 to 20 times a reasonable price. If these reelly are that good I *might* be interested since whatever it takes to make compost normally is probably too much effort for me with my physical limitations. But this does sound a little expensive! Anyone know anything about these? It's just ridiculous. If it's small enough to turn by hand, it's too small to make compost. Put it in the same compartment as shredders, flame-throwers, and wormeries: just another way of separating the innocent from their hard-earned. Gardening is a simple business, and those who do it on next to nothing can get better results than those who spend thousands. These sharks are just trying to cultivate the idea that everything has to cost money before it'll work. Hear hear. ... said the man with the failed worm farm :-) LOL! Franz was probably putting all the cats in he shoots. Wormeries were never designed for cat disposal. I am sticking rigorously to the EU directives and exclude cats and other sorts of meat from the wormery. {:-)) Franz Good point! I'd forgotten about the animal waste directive. Bury them under newly planted trees then. -- "I'm fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in." -- George McGovern |
Franz Heymann wrote:
I do not have any failed worms on my farm. They are thrivind and rotund. They just don't eat fast enough Seriously, should I perhaps put a trowelful of garden soil in their hostel now and again? I don't think that would help. They like a bit of calcified sea weed now and again though. -- Excellent day for putting Slinkies on an escalator. |
In article ,
jane wrote: I love that quote. Would have liked to put it at the start of my thesis but at the time my external examiner wasn't sorted and could have been a medical physicist or a clued-up medic and I didn't want the latter to get rebuffed and be more likely to fail me! Whereas I loathe it intensely. It wouldn't matter if so many boneheaded physicists didn't believe it - and extrapolate it to mean that they don't need to learn from other sciences :-( Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article , jane wrote: I love that quote. Would have liked to put it at the start of my thesis but at the time my external examiner wasn't sorted and could have been a medical physicist or a clued-up medic and I didn't want the latter to get rebuffed and be more likely to fail me! Whereas I loathe it intensely. It wouldn't matter if so many boneheaded physicists didn't believe it - and extrapolate it to mean that they don't need to learn from other sciences :-( Aha! A stamp collector. ;) -- In the old days, it was not called the Holiday Season; the Christians called it "Christmas" and went to church; the Jews called it "Hanukka" and went to synagogue; the atheists went to parties and drank. People passing each other on the street would say "Merry Christmas!" or "Happy Hanukka!" or (to the atheists) "Look out for the wall!" -- Dave Barry, "Christmas Shopping: A Survivor's Guide" |
In article ,
bigboard wrote: Nick Maclaren wrote: Whereas I loathe it intensely. It wouldn't matter if so many boneheaded physicists didn't believe it - and extrapolate it to mean that they don't need to learn from other sciences :-( Aha! A stamp collector. ;) Sigh. Carroll would have despaired at you, I despair at you, and for the same reason. Even accepting Rutherford's definition, I am neither a physicist nor a stamp collector. Yet I can (with justification) claim to know more about what constitutes a science than most scientists. What am I? [ Actually, I don't claim to be a specialist in that area, but I can honestly claim what I did. Unfortunately :-( ] Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 10:01:10 +0000, bigboard
wrote: ~Nick Maclaren wrote: ~ ~ In article , ~ jane wrote: ~ ~I love that quote. Would have liked to put it at the start of my ~thesis but at the time my external examiner wasn't sorted and could ~have been a medical physicist or a clued-up medic and I didn't want ~the latter to get rebuffed and be more likely to fail me! ~ ~ Whereas I loathe it intensely. It wouldn't matter if so many boneheaded ~ physicists didn't believe it - and extrapolate it to mean that they don't ~ need to learn from other sciences :-( Nah, we just used it at Uni to wind up the Chemists! (Best way was to mention that chemistry is a subset of physics. You got the best effect after they'd had 2-3 pints on a Friday night :-) The quote never fails to wind up every other scientific discipline. As all physics students know well :-) And we must know If it moves, it's biology If it reacts (or blows up, or smells) it's chemistry If it doesn't work, it's physics. which is a negative comment on school physics lessons! (Though having had a capacitor blow up in my face once in a physics lesson, I could alter it a bit). However!!! Anyone who is a gardener is an amateur botanist and biologist (and entomologist!) . If you test soil for pH, and add matter/compounds to correct soil problems, you're a chemist. And we are all also amateur meteorologists (at least in Europe!). Any others? I'm sure I've missed several. So there we are, every gardener is a scientist. Also an artist (after all, we paint with flowers and design our plots.) What better hobby can one have to cover so many disciplines equally? ~Aha! A stamp collector. ;) Wouldn't you love to know what Rutherford got as a reaction when he originally said it? I'm sure it got one... -- jane Don't part with your illusions. When they are gone, you may still exist but you have ceased to live. Mark Twain Please remove onmaps from replies, thanks! |
|
|
Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article , bigboard wrote: Nick Maclaren wrote: Whereas I loathe it intensely. It wouldn't matter if so many boneheaded physicists didn't believe it - and extrapolate it to mean that they don't need to learn from other sciences :-( Aha! A stamp collector. ;) Sigh. Carroll would have despaired at you, I despair at you, and for the same reason. Even accepting Rutherford's definition, I am neither a physicist nor a stamp collector. Yet I can (with justification) claim to know more about what constitutes a science than most scientists. What am I? Humourless? [ Actually, I don't claim to be a specialist in that area, but I can honestly claim what I did. Unfortunately :-( ] -- All science is either physics or stamp collecting. -- E. Rutherford |
"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message ... In article , Franz Heymann wrote: Have you read Charles Dodgson (a.k.a. Lewis Carroll) on the question of how many cats it takes to kill rats in a given time? No, but I look forward to hearing where he wrote that. "The Monthly Packet", February 1880. It is on pages 140-142 of The Magic of Lewis Carrol by John Fisher (Penguin), but my copy was published in 1975. If all the animals are reasonably spaced, I guess the number killed per unit time is proportional to the product of the number of cats and rats. {:-)) You've got to the first step. I'll have to hunt the net for a copy of the book. Franz |
"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message ... In article , (jane) writes: | ~ | Going by your old .sig and email addy, a computer scientist? No way! To quote a founder of modern computing: "Computer science has nothing to do with computing and isn't a science." | Otherwise known as someone who has to deal with whacky computing | requests from every other discipline. And maybe knows a fair bit about | semiconductors, materials science and logical flow. The first, but not the second (except for logical flow). | Either that or a mathematician (you could argue all physics is just | applied maths, which would have shut Rutherford up). Yes, precisely. Mathematician, statistician and incidental logician and mathematical philosopher. My main point was similar to your previous one in some respects. Statistics was largely created by biologists, and most physicists (including all 'hard' sciences here) still have trouble with it, That's true, and entirely understandable. Physicists deal, more often than not, with such a profusion of clean data compared with folk in the medical and social sciences that in practice they can afford to be somewhat cavalier with specifying their confidence limits. despite modern physics being increasingly probabilistic. But when we get onto intrinsically unrepeatable experiments, observations that are linked acausally and experimenter/observation interactions, this gets MUCH worse. The experts on those, such as exist, are in the fields of philosophy and the 'social sciences'. Franz |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:20 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter