TJHairball
I love this place
I went back there in response to Wong issuing a challenge to anybody with a "real science or engineering degree" to come disagree with him.
Here is the thread. I got banned about five minutes after posting what's now the initial post of that thread in another thread, apparently in order to prevent me from debunking Wong's subsequent lies about my education and alma mater, so I'm posting it here so y'all can at least have a look. Especially poor TK resident CaptainChewbacca, who seems like he got completely suckered by Wong. (Poor Chewie! Always check facts presented by honesty-deficient folks like Wong! Nub.)
Wong has claimed that a degree in physics from Appalachian involves a "core of six classes and 4-5 courses in a concentration, posting this edited version of the Appalachian Physics B.S.:
Like the part where the physics core includes 6-8 more hours (2-3) classes, or the actual concentration checksheets, which make it clear that actual concentrations at App are a minimum 6 courses, not "4-5."
Or the part where, after the 62 hours in classes relating to the major, an additional 60 hours of credit are required... only around 30 hours of which are accounted for by the general core. Meaning that regular Appalachian physics students regularly take between 60 and 90 hours related to their major field of study, and 75 is quite typical.
Or the part where a standard (normal) class is 3 credit hours and represents ~10 hours of work a week (sometimes the ratio between credits and work is higher the physics department), meaning that what he's representing as a 5 year-course units related to the physics program is in fact 10-15 year-course units related to the program. Whoo! How's that for a "Big Lie?"
In comparison, he has posted this schedule for the University of Waterloo physics program, and claimed that the coursework for an Appalachian degree "...wouldn't even get you through the second year of an equivalent program at another university..." citing the large number of courses.
Heck, even being generous to Waterloo, most of the third year material is also covered at App, and there are a few things I recall covering that I can't figure out when they would have put it in before then. Of course, most of those were elective, like the course I took in differential geometry (and how are you going to talk much about general relativity without taking diff geo?)
(And Waterloo is supposed to be the #1 or #2 school in Canada for that kind of thing? Of course, since MIT only actually requires 13 "courses" it wouldn't make a good example for counting courses, even if it is rated higher. I guess MIT isn't such a good school, huh?)
He also chooses to completely ignore the firmest and most final measure of a bachelor physics program's effectiveness:
Rate of successful graduate study.
Currently, about 5000 Americans graduate with physics bachelor's graduate each year, and about 500 graduate with physics Ph. Ds. 2,000 people get master's degrees in physics in America every year (including the ones that just came over here to get 'em. Sorry, no breakup by citizenship for master's degrees.)
Of Appalachian's physics graduates, 10% have gone on to successfully complete Ph. Ds and 50% have gone on to successfully complete master's degrees. The deviation from average bachelor's behavior can be explained perfectly by the fact that ~10% of the departments graduates included in those statistics are graduating from a terminal master's program - most of those too recently to have had a chance to earn a Ph. D.
Whaddaya know. It's like... a normal physics program with average results! Not a top school in physics, but I never claimed that.
A "community college program," as the SDN-sheep are claiming? Bullshit. Inferior - with, mind, equally serious programs in mathematics and philosophy - to Wong's singular bachelor-level engineering degree? Bullshit, even leaving alone my assorted honors and accolades.
Good for a laugh when you realize just how much emotional investment Wong has in his engineering degree? Depends on your sense of humor.
Did I let myself get trolled but good? I'll grant that.
Here is the thread. I got banned about five minutes after posting what's now the initial post of that thread in another thread, apparently in order to prevent me from debunking Wong's subsequent lies about my education and alma mater, so I'm posting it here so y'all can at least have a look. Especially poor TK resident CaptainChewbacca, who seems like he got completely suckered by Wong. (Poor Chewie! Always check facts presented by honesty-deficient folks like Wong! Nub.)
Wong has claimed that a degree in physics from Appalachian involves a "core of six classes and 4-5 courses in a concentration, posting this edited version of the Appalachian Physics B.S.:
Curiously, not one of Stardestroyer.net's mindless sheep has seen fit to actually looked at the checksheet he edited out significant portions of. Nor have they bothered to even read and find out that Appalachian isn't a "community college."
Like the part where the physics core includes 6-8 more hours (2-3) classes, or the actual concentration checksheets, which make it clear that actual concentrations at App are a minimum 6 courses, not "4-5."
Or the part where, after the 62 hours in classes relating to the major, an additional 60 hours of credit are required... only around 30 hours of which are accounted for by the general core. Meaning that regular Appalachian physics students regularly take between 60 and 90 hours related to their major field of study, and 75 is quite typical.
Or the part where a standard (normal) class is 3 credit hours and represents ~10 hours of work a week (sometimes the ratio between credits and work is higher the physics department), meaning that what he's representing as a 5 year-course units related to the physics program is in fact 10-15 year-course units related to the program. Whoo! How's that for a "Big Lie?"
In comparison, he has posted this schedule for the University of Waterloo physics program, and claimed that the coursework for an Appalachian degree "...wouldn't even get you through the second year of an equivalent program at another university..." citing the large number of courses.
Reviewing this schedule, Appalachian's standard mathematical physics program would definitely get you through the first two years of this program even if you took minimal numbers of courses. The course breakup is different, of course; Appalachian likes to combine its lower level courses, which makes it difficult for freshmen to get AP physics credit in (because the intro course corresponds to AP Physics B and AP Physics C in terms of lecture material, and then has a lab tacked on.)
Heck, even being generous to Waterloo, most of the third year material is also covered at App, and there are a few things I recall covering that I can't figure out when they would have put it in before then. Of course, most of those were elective, like the course I took in differential geometry (and how are you going to talk much about general relativity without taking diff geo?)
(And Waterloo is supposed to be the #1 or #2 school in Canada for that kind of thing? Of course, since MIT only actually requires 13 "courses" it wouldn't make a good example for counting courses, even if it is rated higher. I guess MIT isn't such a good school, huh?)
He also chooses to completely ignore the firmest and most final measure of a bachelor physics program's effectiveness:
Rate of successful graduate study.
Currently, about 5000 Americans graduate with physics bachelor's graduate each year, and about 500 graduate with physics Ph. Ds. 2,000 people get master's degrees in physics in America every year (including the ones that just came over here to get 'em. Sorry, no breakup by citizenship for master's degrees.)
Of Appalachian's physics graduates, 10% have gone on to successfully complete Ph. Ds and 50% have gone on to successfully complete master's degrees. The deviation from average bachelor's behavior can be explained perfectly by the fact that ~10% of the departments graduates included in those statistics are graduating from a terminal master's program - most of those too recently to have had a chance to earn a Ph. D.
Whaddaya know. It's like... a normal physics program with average results! Not a top school in physics, but I never claimed that.
A "community college program," as the SDN-sheep are claiming? Bullshit. Inferior - with, mind, equally serious programs in mathematics and philosophy - to Wong's singular bachelor-level engineering degree? Bullshit, even leaving alone my assorted honors and accolades.
Good for a laugh when you realize just how much emotional investment Wong has in his engineering degree? Depends on your sense of humor.
Did I let myself get trolled but good? I'll grant that.
