Hmmm ... yes. I've been in the position of making decision that could affect US$10million+ in hardware.
You make those as conservatively as possible.
But there comes a place when you think---hope!---that you really have dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's, and then you have to try it.
I've failed to break KamLAND and Double Chooz and some less expensive systems over the years.
And that is always worth a beer.
Once---when I was a lowely grad student, none-the-less---I have to make a US$250,000 decision on the fly in short time: the thermal feedback system on a cryotarget had suddenly gone wonky and I was the "expert" on shift. I guessed right. Phew!
I was watching this video on YouTube (this is the second part of it) and it motivated me to ask this question.
From the videos:
....that's the good aspect of peer review. It should work to sift out problems with the interpretation, problems with the results. It should work to improve a paper...
Proposed Q&A site for students needing help and hints for physics problems and questions either experimental, conceptual or computational and people who need help to understand a concept in physics or have questions about some concepts taught in class or physics books.
Yeah, well, it perhaps will reduce the flood of homework here. But I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the notion that solving explicit physics problems is worth its own SE.
Proposed Q&A site for most of the time when it comes to contribute in opensource project or to edit others code, most of the time newcomers [or even sometimes pro coder] failed to understand where to start or edit. This site will help them to take help and understand.
Is it the real @JohnRennie over there? Not linked to his account here
And that proposal is not yet defined, but the intention should not be to answer homework questions, but rather to asks basic physics problems, without the concept-oriented we need here
I was watching this video on YouTube (this is the second part of it) and it motivated me to ask this question.
From the videos:
....that's the good aspect of peer review. It should work to sift out problems with the interpretation, problems with the results. It should work to improve a paper...
