| Author | Message | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1025 Registered: 5-2007 |
Unfortunate choice of name | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4475 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is a certain Reverend relevant (as per the title)? | ||
| La_sparky (La_sparky)
New member Username: La_sparky Post Number: 152 Registered: 10-2008 |
name of a person? place? thing? if person, F? M? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 3635 Registered: 5-2003 |
Anything to do with kings? conquerors? King Kong? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1027 Registered: 5-2007 |
Is a certain Reverend relevant (as per the title)? no - bonus marks for general knowledge or for research, though name of a person? place? thing? this is closest Anything to do with kings? conquerors? King Kong? nothing whatsoever | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1913 Registered: 3-2006 |
So, no spoonerisms relevant then? No Mary Hinges or such? But is it something along similar lines? Someone who inadvertently chose a comical name for their baby? Foreign languages relevant at all? Johnny Marr? | ||
| Peter365 (Peter365)
New member Username: Peter365 Post Number: 2886 Registered: 1-2007 |
Are topical events relevant? Politics relevant? Is the "thing" a concept, new idea or innovation? Is sport relevant at all? | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1918 Registered: 3-2006 |
Oh, on second thoughts: is it a URL? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4487 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the "thing" a tangible object? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1028 Registered: 5-2007 |
So, no spoonerisms relevant then? no No Mary Hinges or such? certainly not - this puzzle is suitable for families But is it something along similar lines? not really, no Someone who inadvertently chose a comical name for their baby? nothing like this at all Foreign languages relevant at all? no Johnny Marr? no Are topical events relevant? no Politics relevant? no Is the "thing" a concept, new idea or innovation? no Is sport relevant at all? I am afraid not Oh, on second thoughts: is it a URL? no Is the "thing" a tangible object? yope | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4512 Registered: 4-2010 |
The "name" in the puzzle statement...is it a name given to a person? To the "thing"? Is it a type of food? Or drink? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4513 Registered: 4-2010 |
The "name" in the puzzle statement...is it a name given to a person? To the "thing"? Is it a type of food? Or drink? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 3647 Registered: 5-2003 |
Yope to tangible object... is it something that cannot be seen but is still known to exist, like wind, heat or cold? | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1930 Registered: 3-2006 |
Is it the name of a book? A website? A crossword puzzle? A TV show? A computer game? A commercial franchise? Are foreign languages relevant (such as the French incarnation of the Toyota MR2)? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1029 Registered: 5-2007 |
The "name" in the puzzle statement...is it a name given to a person? To the "thing"? \b[this one} Is it a type of food? no Or drink? no Yope to tangible object... is it something that cannot be seen but is still known to exist, like wind, heat or cold? not this kind of thing Is it the name of a book? this is closest A website? A crossword puzzle? A TV show? A computer game? A commercial franchise? Are foreign languages relevant (such as the French incarnation of the Toyota MR2)? no | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1931 Registered: 3-2006 |
A chapter of a book? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1030 Registered: 5-2007 |
A chapter of a book? no | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4578 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is it the title of something? A movie? TV show? Episode of a show? Video game? Is it a brand name? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1031 Registered: 5-2007 |
Is it the title of something? yes A movie? TV show? Episode of a show? Video game? Is it a brand name? but none of these | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4617 Registered: 4-2010 |
Title of a magazine? A newspaper? An article? A headline? A byline? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1032 Registered: 5-2007 |
Title of a magazine? this one A newspaper? An article? A headline? A byline? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4621 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the magazine a well-known publication? Is it published to a specific audience? Is it published worldwide? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1033 Registered: 5-2007 |
Is the magazine a well-known publication? yes Is it published to a specific audience? yes Is it published worldwide? yes - moreover, it has recently appeared on the LTPF | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4629 Registered: 4-2010 |
New Scientist? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1034 Registered: 5-2007 |
New Scientist? that's the bunny. Now, why is New Scientist an unfortunate choice of name? | ||
| Peter365 (Peter365)
New member Username: Peter365 Post Number: 2898 Registered: 1-2007 |
Given the recent spate of cryptic clues in the chatroom i've been playing around with the letters in New Scientist and am delighted to discover that it's an anagram of "Incence Twits" or "Incences Twit" . It has also been alleged that it "Incites Newts" into all sorts of shenanagins . And for those trying to start a family it also "Entices Twins". I gave up after those. | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1949 Registered: 3-2006 |
Is Tartaglia's 'Nova scientia' relevant at all? ('New science' meant warfare, pretty much.) Or perhaps 'new science' is a Blairite euphemism for teaching creationism in schools (the idea that science is an ideological construct, and all that guff)? Is the problem with the 'scientist' part? Or with the 'new' part? Did the old scientist die horribly? Was there, in fact, an old scientist? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1035 Registered: 5-2007 |
Given the recent spate of cryptic clues in the chatroom i've been playing around with the letters in New Scientist and am delighted to discover that it's an anagram of "Incence Twits" or "Incences Twit" . It has also been alleged that it "Incites Newts" into all sorts of shenanagins . And for those trying to start a family it also "Entices Twins". I gave up after those. pity - you might also have come across "nitwit scenes", which would obviously be unsuitable content for an ostensibly erudite publication. But anagrams have nothing to do with this puzzle, I am afraid. | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1036 Registered: 5-2007 |
Is Tartaglia's 'Nova scientia' relevant at all? ('New science' meant warfare, pretty much.) indeed - a most ingenious notion, though not relevant here Or perhaps 'new science' is a Blairite euphemism for teaching creationism in schools (the idea that science is an ideological construct, and all that guff)? no - this is nothing like New Labour Is the problem with the 'scientist' part? to a lesser extent Or with the 'new' part? to a greater extent Did the old scientist die horribly? some of them did, but none that are relevant here Was there, in fact, an old scientist? not that I am aware | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1950 Registered: 3-2006 |
Does the title allude in some way to New College, which is one of the oldest colleges? And is New Scientist actually one of the oldest science rags in circulation? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1037 Registered: 5-2007 |
Does the title allude in some way to New College, which is one of the oldest colleges? no And is New Scientist actually one of the oldest science rags in circulation? no - that would render the title merely inaccurate, rather than unfortunate. But New Scientist began publication in 1956, so is a mere whipper-snapper compared with such veterans as Scientific American (1845) or the two pre-eminent titles Science (1880) and Nature (1869). | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4635 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the magazine founded by a scientist? More than one? But the founder is really old now? So he (or she) is not really a New Scientist anymore? And I've never read that magazine, but I'm wondering if they'll ever do an article about "Ewe Instincts." | ||
| Peter365 (Peter365)
New member Username: Peter365 Post Number: 2902 Registered: 1-2007 |
Ok should we concetrate on the magazine's format? contributors? readersip? Has it always been an unfortunate choice of name or have recent events made this so? Any relevant controversies? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1038 Registered: 5-2007 |
Was the magazine founded by a scientist? More than one? the magazine was originally founded by a group of nuclear physicists who were concerned that the public might be unduly worried about nuclear physics, in particular nuclear weaponry, and wished to improve the general understanding of the matter But the founder is really old now? some of those scientists are no longer alive, the remainder are no longer young So he (or she) is not really a New Scientist anymore? but this has nothing to do with the matter at all Ok should we concentrate on the magazine's format? contributors? readership? on none of the above - just the title Has it always been an unfortunate choice of name yes or have recent events made this so? no - the events that made it so occurred before the first issue appeared Any relevant controversies? yes, but this may mislead | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4646 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the placement of the title on the magazine cover relevant? If the title were "Old Scientist" would the problem emerge? If it were "New Physicist"? Is any wordplay relevant? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1039 Registered: 5-2007 |
Is the placement of the title on the magazine cover relevant? no If the title were "Old Scientist" would the problem emerge? no If it were "New Physicist"? yes Is any wordplay relevant? yes, for svv of "wordplay" | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4653 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is it that physics had been around for a long time by the time the magazine was founded? Nuclear science? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1040 Registered: 5-2007 |
Is it that physics had been around for a long time by the time the magazine was founded? Nuclear science? nothing of this kind - the magazine itself continues to publish articles that are very much up-to-the-minute in terms of the science they contain | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4657 Registered: 4-2010 |
Are world events that occurred around the time of the magazine's founding relevant? The US/Soviet arms race? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1041 Registered: 5-2007 |
Are world events that occurred around the time of the magazine's founding relevant? no The US/Soviet arms race? no | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4666 Registered: 4-2010 |
If the magazine were "New (anything)," would the problem emerge? If it were "New (anything to do with science)"? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1042 Registered: 5-2007 |
If the magazine were "New (anything)," would the problem emerge? probably not If it were "New (anything to do with science)"? definitely so | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4669 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were there a bunch of scientific discoveries around that time? Few? Relevant? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1043 Registered: 5-2007 |
Were there a bunch of scientific discoveries around that time? Few? Relevant? put it this way - the reason that New Scientist is an unfortunate choice of name has nothing whatsoever to do with what was happening globally in the 1950s, nor with what has happened before or since. The puzzle is not about whether certain aspects of science were then, or are now, "new" or "old", nor whether certain events or people were then, or are now, "new" or "old". | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4685 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was there already another magazine called New Scientist? Or New (something)? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1045 Registered: 5-2007 |
Was there already another magazine called New Scientist? Or New (something)? there was not, but if there had been, its name would have been equally ill-chosen. What you need to do is to focus on the word "New" and to work out why it was not a good choice for a magazine that contained articles about science, even though it published (and still does) articles that represented what was (and is) new in the scientific world. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4687 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is "new" not considered an appropriately scientific word? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1046 Registered: 5-2007 |
Is "new" not considered an appropriately scientific word? not in the context I intend, no. But the founders of the magazine had not thought of the various ways in which "New" might be interpreted... | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4691 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did people assume the magazine would be about new (upcoming) scientists, rather than new (recent) discoveries in science? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1047 Registered: 5-2007 |
Did people assume the magazine would be about new (upcoming) scientists, rather than new (recent) discoveries in science? not at all. You are thinking literally rather than laterally - to this day, the publishers and the readers of New Scientist do not know that they are reading a magazine with an unfortunate title. Only I know why, and soon you will know also - but you will not know it if you think about what the word "New" means in the real world... | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4698 Registered: 4-2010 |
Are any of the following definitions of "new" relevant: ongoing? Just-found? Just-created? Is the spelling of "New" relevant? Is the phonetic sound of "New" relevant? That animal with pointy horns that Hillaire (forgot last name - Belloc?) wrote a weightless poem about, which I've seen in three separate places on this site, and enjoyed all three times? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4699 Registered: 4-2010 |
...my constantly guessing wrong is really starting to be a New-sance. I'm going to sleep now. | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1048 Registered: 5-2007 |
Are any of the following definitions of "new" relevant: ongoing? Just-found? Just-created? no Is the spelling of "New" relevant? yes Is the phonetic sound of "New" relevant? no That animal with pointy horns that Hilaire Belloc wrote a weightless poem about, which I've seen in three separate places on this site, and enjoyed all three times? no | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4715 Registered: 4-2010 |
If the first word in the magazine's name were an anagram of "new," would the problem still emerge? If the word began with N? Ended with W? Had an E in the middle? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1049 Registered: 5-2007 |
If the first word in the magazine's name were an anagram of "new," would the problem still emerge? no - the only one of the five possible anagrams of "new" that is actually a word is "wen", which means a boil. That would indeed be an unfortunate title, but it would also be a rather silly one. If the word began with N? Ended with W? Had an E in the middle? it needs to have all those characteristics to give rise to the problem in question | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1951 Registered: 3-2006 |
North-East-West? (I have no idea why that would be unfortunate, but I'll ask anyway.) | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1050 Registered: 5-2007 |
North-East-West? (I have no idea why that would be unfortunate, but I'll ask anyway.) no, but this is very much on the right lines... | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4730 Registered: 4-2010 |
Well, "New Scientist" begins with N-E-W-S, which correspond to the compass directions (relevant?), but also spell out "News" - is this relevant? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1051 Registered: 5-2007 |
Well, "New Scientist" begins with N-E-W-S, which correspond to the compass directions (relevant?), but also spell out "News" - is this relevant? no - recall that if the magazine were entitled "New Physicist", the same problem would exist | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4745 Registered: 4-2010 |
Relevant that "New" kinda looks like "Men" when you flip it upside down? Is an acronym relevant? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1052 Registered: 5-2007 |
Relevant that "New" kinda looks like "Men" when you flip it upside down? no Is an acronym relevant? yes | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4754 Registered: 4-2010 |
Does the word "NEW" acronym to something related to science? Something completely unrelated to science? | ||
| Whirligig (Whirligig)
New member Username: Whirligig Post Number: 295 Registered: 8-2010 |
Nuclear Ends War? Is the first word correct? Second? Third? Ditto with taking different word forms into account. | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1053 Registered: 5-2007 |
Does the word "NEW" acronym to something related to science? yes Something completely unrelated to science? no Nuclear Ends War? Is the first word correct? Second? Third? Ditto with taking different word forms into account. none of those is correct, I am afraid - the reference is not to nuclear warfare, or any other kind | ||
| Biograd (Biograd)
New member Username: Biograd Post Number: 1007 Registered: 6-2008 |
Does this same problem exist when mentioning a "new discovery"? "new findings? or is it only unfortunate when followed by an occupation? or a type of person in general? | ||
| Biograd (Biograd)
New member Username: Biograd Post Number: 1008 Registered: 6-2008 |
Oh, nevermind. I just noticed above that what matters is that the second word is related to science. Does the acronym NEW stand for: Something that indicates stupidity or ignorance? Something that means "false" or "invalid"? The initials of a person who promoted pseudoscience or disrespected science? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4790 Registered: 4-2010 |
Just to be clear, it is the letters "NEW" that form the acronym, correct? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1054 Registered: 5-2007 |
Does this same problem exist when mentioning a "new discovery"? "new findings? not really, no or is it only unfortunate when followed by an occupation? this one or a type of person in general? Does the acronym NEW stand for: Something that indicates stupidity or ignorance? to an extent Something that means "false" or "invalid"? very much so The initials of a person who promoted pseudoscience or disrespected science? no Just to be clear, it is the letters "NEW" that form the acronym, correct? correct | ||
| Biograd (Biograd)
New member Username: Biograd Post Number: 1012 Registered: 6-2008 |
Does the N stand for "Not"? And another clarification: The acronym is in English, right? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1055 Registered: 5-2007 |
Does the N stand for "Not"? yes And another clarification: The acronym is in English, right? it is | ||
| Lynne (Lynne)
New member Username: Lynne Post Number: 4737 Registered: 12-2000 |
Not Ever Working? | ||
| Mattiel (Mattiel)
New member Username: Mattiel Post Number: 381 Registered: 6-2005 |
Not Enough Worth? | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 1975 Registered: 3-2006 |
Not even warm (which I imagine will be the answer) | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1056 Registered: 5-2007 |
Not Ever Working? no, although this applies to many scientists and many of the inventions thereof Not Enough Worth? no Not even warm no (which I imagine will be the answer on the contrary...) | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4852 Registered: 4-2010 |
E: Even? Ever? Enough? Exact? Exactly? Einstein? Not Einstein Worthy? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4853 Registered: 4-2010 |
E: Everybody? Not Everybody Would? Not Everybody Wants? Or are these Not Equitable Woubit? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1059 Registered: 5-2007 |
E: Even? this one, and now you should have enough Ever? Enough? Exact? Exactly? Einstein? E: Everybody? Not Everybody Would? Not Everybody Wants? Or are these Not Equitable Woubit? they may be equitable, but they are not equatable with the correct answer | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 4867 Registered: 4-2010 |
Not Even...Wrong? Worthy? Worthless? Willing? Worth? Wet? I suppose the LTPF list of words beginning with W is taboo here...W-right? | ||
| Woubit (Woubit)
Moderator Username: Woubit Post Number: 1060 Registered: 5-2007 |
Not Even...Wrong? this one Worthy? Worthless? Willing? Worth? Wet? I suppose the LTPF list of words beginning with W is taboo here...W-right? in general, the guessing of solutions by asking whether the first word is some member of the LTPF List of Words, and whether the second word is some other member of the same list, and so forth, is frowned upon because it would reduce all puzzles to the trivially soluble. But this was not a particularly serious puzzle, so... ***** SPOILER ***** One of the more famous put-downs in scientific history was attributed to the great physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who remarked of a somewhat fantastical notion in a student's paper "That's not right. That's not even wrong." By this Pauli meant that the ideas expressed were not just bad science (which could in keeping with the scientific method be falsified by experimental results) but not science at all - they were so bad that they could not even be shown to fail to correspond with anything in the real world. Since then, the phrase "not even wrong" has acquired a significance among scientists such that, for example, a book taking the position that string theory is a load of nonsense was published with the phrase as its title. It struck me that a magazine purporting to be a serious scientific publication bearing a title that could be regarded as Not Even Wrong Scientist had a singularly unfortunate choice of name. |
