This is supposed to be a free writing session before the thesis writing so we will see how that goes. I guess since this morning I have been thinking about this article, . He talks about here writing simply because it helps people understand complicated concepts. But also, when people feel threatened they turn to more complicated jargon, I have seen it during talks, when questions are flown from the back that question the very basis of their research, they start mentioning so and so's paper and quantum physics or something. The article is just a reminder to keep things simple. I think it might be the most important duty of a writer for any audience, to explain in simple words complex things, as opposed to complex words about simple things. Its hard though to remember this. I think I get caught up with my thoughts, or I assume the writer is very smart.
In the article he also talks about interesting= novelty+importance. The writer (Derek Thompson) is extremely prolific, so I recommend giving some of his other works a read or podcast(s) a listen. But he does a very good job at walking this line. In science we are always trying to be novel, something i've noticed though is sort of novel zones. And these zones are usually divided by fields, or the transition of academic science into something commercial.
So if you invented new chemistry, that would be novel in chemistry, and then you applied that in a biological system that would also be novel. But a lot of times, people and large companies repurpose things, drugs or devices. So the technology is not novel but the application is. And probably the importance, but it is a lot cheaper. A lot of discoveries were made this way, taking existing technology and bringing it into a new field or zone. This takes understanding of two areas, or just dumb luck, or just different decades and fads. I guess the important thing is to realize that it is a thing that happens, (so much so its a business plan for a lot of companies) and we should be trying that ourselves, in science but also programming or other inventions.
In the article he also talks about interesting= novelty+importance. The writer (Derek Thompson) is extremely prolific, so I recommend giving some of his other works a read or podcast(s) a listen. But he does a very good job at walking this line. In science we are always trying to be novel, something i've noticed though is sort of novel zones. And these zones are usually divided by fields, or the transition of academic science into something commercial.
So if you invented new chemistry, that would be novel in chemistry, and then you applied that in a biological system that would also be novel. But a lot of times, people and large companies repurpose things, drugs or devices. So the technology is not novel but the application is. And probably the importance, but it is a lot cheaper. A lot of discoveries were made this way, taking existing technology and bringing it into a new field or zone. This takes understanding of two areas, or just dumb luck, or just different decades and fads. I guess the important thing is to realize that it is a thing that happens, (so much so its a business plan for a lot of companies) and we should be trying that ourselves, in science but also programming or other inventions.