Issue4: No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study.
In deed, some fields encountered significant changes when outsiders brought their knowledge and experience to those fields. Yet, I suggest we take into the basic conception of “significant advance” and some other conditions into consideration before making a assessments to the assertion.
The conception of significant advance could be described as breakthroughs. Many fields, if not all, have ever countered troubles that inhibit their further improvements. For example, chemistry got to new stages when innovative detective machines are introduced. The X-ray radiation diffusion machine has changed the way to identify unknown chemicals. Spectrum introduced from physical optics has established a new branch of analytical chemistry. Knowledge and experience from other fields have offered new conceptions and powerful tools for the native field to get out of the old routes, and hence the study of it could advance significantly.
But it does not mean that verifying and deduction works that bring the field of study from a breakthrough to the next deadlock is insignificant. It is common that brilliant scientists solve difficult problems with amazing imagination and intelligence in a short time, such as the experiments to prove Einstein’s theory of relativity and efforts to calculate basic constants in a formula. Maybe the deduction jobs didn’t consume much time and energy of other scientists and as a result didn’t arouse a great deal of attention. But we can never say such deduction works are insignificant. And ironically, the reason why the introduction of knowledge from other fields seems to be significant might be that the proper introduction is a process that demands for lucky occasions and consume a lot of time. Actually the efforts to make use of an innovative theory or tools are so important that academically, a theoretically proved theory could not get acknowledgements before the experiments that could justifies its validity in the real world. That’s why many scientists are awarded the Nobel Prize after decades.
Moreover, creation has also helped a field make consequential development. In the field of code programming, the programmers spend much time working out the algorithms. Computers could only finish basic steps such as adding. When a computer is doing a multiply question, the programmer will order it add the number again and again. It seems an onerous job, but computer could get it done in one tenth of a second. The programmers must be creative, since the world of digitals are quite different form the real one. Hence the basic constructions and algorithms are the creations of the early code artists. Not only in the fields of computer science, has each field its unique creations that have helped make significant progresses or serve as foundations.
On the other hand, the persons who have brought fresh things from other fields are not always outsiders. They might be outsiders to other fields and specialists of the native one. Galileo Galilei invented the telescope, thus improved astronomy to a new era, is not an optic master, instead he is a specialist in mechanics. A machine designer often seeks his afflatus from the creatures such as a frog or ant. An excellent scientist is sensitive person who are collecting inspirations all the time, thus introduce corresponding essences of others to his own study.
There is a common interconnection among different fields. A general have to take weather and geography conditions into account if he wants to work out a successful plan. The intercrossing is offering so many inspirations and a smart introduction should be praised. However, from what have been argued, it might be presumptuous to assert that no significant advance could be achieved without an outsider to bring knowledge and experience from other fields.作者: johnmclain 时间: 2010-8-14 01:51:21
syllabus:
1.Knowledge and experience from other fields have offered new conceptions and powerful tools for the native field to get out of the old routes, and hence the study of it could advance significantly.
2.it does not mean that verifying and deduction works that bring the field of study from a breakthrough to the next deadlock is insignificant in promoting the research.
3. creation has also helped a field make consequential development.
4.the persons who have brought fresh things from other fields are not always outsiders.