randomsoldier1337

Hi. I wasn't sure what details to add earlier but I hope the following helps. I should clarify when I say computational, I mean computer simulation being the major/only component. I was reading some papers on radiation detection as well as application of computational fluid dynamics for part of the system design within some of those papers. Those have both a computational as well as experimental component. But from what little I understand, there are papers that are purely theoretical as well as those that are purely computational. I was hoping someone could point out papers which serve as good examples of the method of doing such research. I'm not sure if the term is appropriate but I believe fully computational uses the phrase in silico, based on some of what I have heard elsewhere. Of course the only examples listed on the wikipedia page are of biology which is not quite what I am looking for but I hope it helps describe what I mean when I say simulation. Cosmology papers are probably an obvious example of where a lot of purely theoretical/computational research might be done but I was hoping for physically realizable studies where one could have done experimental research (battery chemistry/medical particle accelerators/etc.) but has chosen to submit simulation results only (again only if such a thing exists). If anyone is aware, they could probably give an example in the fields I mentioned (radiation detection and CFD). However, one does not need to restrict themselves to those only.

Hi, I understand there is computational research as well as completely theoretical research compared to experimental research. I was curious about what they are like. Could anyone point out some good papers? Thanks.

I encountered a website with statistics for a large number of video games, specifically regarding their availability across various platforms, their sales over time and some other things and methods to visualize them I found this really helpful. Might there be other services like this that people find helpful, other than obvious ones like weather forecasting and data?

I was reading papers on neutron flux traps. Some people in the University of Tehran used MCNP to determine effectiveness of different neutron moderators. Context out of the way, my question is regarding the situation. How did researchers paid by an organization like the University of Tehran get access to a software like MCNP?

Or at least honing ones current scientific skill/knowledge? How would one go about this? NOTE: I am talking about a non-pandemic or otherwise non-emergency situation.

I'm in nuclear engineering and it seems fairly laid back. Everyone feels like bit of a party animal and the faculty don't seem to be in a particular rush to get things done.

I mean apart from the obvious that they'll select some research topic and learn about that.

Oh don't get me wrong. Our advisor doesn't obligate any of us to it (unless nobody shows up then well... IDK) and usually takes us out for an evening of feasting on their tab. I'm guessing the net loss is still much less than hiring movers, however.

So our group advisor had to move our equipment from one lab to another since the department was moving to another building. Our advisor and us pitched in using uhaul to bring it where it was needed. I MAY choose academia in the future and personally, I would not want my students to have to handle the move themselves. Is there any alternative way to handle it? Is there a good reason to do it the way formerly described, anyway?

Well seems like I am getting highly varying answers from all the various places that I have asked. Just to be clear, I am not saying I don't talk to anyone who likes to or enjoys speaking to me or that I don't help when asked for. But I really don't feel comfortable going out of my way to go to parties or unnecessarily engage people because all I ever feel is that everybody gets piss drunk or there is simply bland, low level, gossip, respectively or perhaps somewhat overlapping. I think my time would be better spent honing my core skills. Networking seems more chance based than that and I haven't quite gotten a particularly motivational answer to make me seek a more active role in it than what I have described.

When you put it like that, that sounds so manipulative and antithetical to the idea of friendship. Though I understand what you are trying to say. I just don't feel I have been able to effectively do what you have suggested.

I've talked to a few people and I think I get the basic gist that you talk to a bunch of people in your field, some outside, make friends and then you have a 'network' of people with certain skills you can fall back on when you need it and your own ability in that area is insufficient and vice versa when they need you. However, practically, for some reason, I just can't fathom it. Or maybe I don't want to. I don't know. Maybe it's my background/upbringing. I haven't thought about it too much. All I know is that it's important and the few people I have asked about it, I couldn't fully understand the concept. Like who do I do it with? Why is it really that important? How do I do it? And is it really worth it if I find the person disagreeable in some way?

Even so, one has access, not necessarily the knowledge itself. Assuming they do manage to learn a lot, I'm not aware of how one person from one field makes contributions to a related but quite different field by direct study, within the modern research framework. For example, I don't think I could ever expect someone that is by trade a mechanical engineer to contribute to the study of understanding the properties of dark matter. At best they may help design the detector from given specs. Nor do I expect them to come up with a new interpretation of quantum mechanics or a new algorithm for cryptography. Again, the best they could probably do is build the surrounding systems or work with given specs.

We've reached a point where it seems like you can't be an expert in everything. But it seems from history that there was a time when you could be good at all the latest research subjects. Over what time period did those changes happen and what changes happened for such a shift?

I don't know your experiences (apart from the ones you showed). Maybe it is true. Personally, I can't say. Well let me tell you guys, that I used to believe in homeopathy once. Didn't know the actual workings. Just that it was "cheaper" under the circumstances and that it "worked" for some people and it seemed to "work" for me for a while as well. Until it didn't anymore and I decided to see how it "works". I'm not a medical expert but once I read up on it a bit, I got the feeling that there might be some quackery involved so I stopped putting any faith in it. Turns out that my body was recovering from colds, not the medicine affecting me (unless placebos count) and that it can't do anything on asthma. My point is that, some people can change their views and you shouldn't right everyone off. Now if they will drop their ego in front of you like they would drop their pants for a hottie asking for action and change right then and there because of your words, I can't say.