# Things most experts falsely believe about their field **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 9, 2015, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596 "2015-05-09T02:51:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![edwardcoast](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/cab0a1/32.png) [@edwardcoast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/edwardcoast)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/41 "2015-05-10T03:45:27Z")
> [@D18](#): > > For centuries the received wisdom among classical musicians was that Stradivarius violins and those made by other Italians at the time were vastly superior to anything made since. A great deal of ink has been spilled and oxygen has been breathed writing and discussing the reasons for their vast superiority. Two very well designed studies in PNAS ([Study 1](http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760) and [Study 2](http://www.pnas.org/content/111/20/7224.short)) have pretty unequivocally challenged that view, and demonstrated that expert violinists actually prefer modern instruments in blind playing tests. These studies do a really good job at simulating the way a violinist would evaluate an instrument. > > (There is a [current thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=756127) in Cafe Society if one wants to read more.) They may prefer playing modern instruments, because this is what they are use to doing. It’s what feels most comfortable to them and familiar. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/42 "2015-05-10T03:46:51Z")
Not sure if it counts but: In the field of computer programming, there have been many paradigm shifts. Some of these have been good techniques superseded by better ones (which of course doesn’t fit the OP). But other times, they are the whole industry basically deciding that a particular technique once preached as safe and/or efficient is actually the opposite and they were arguably better off before having thought of it. Examples that come to mind are Hungarian notation (as it was popularly interpreted; I’m aware the original idea was misunderstood) and the Singleton pattern. Although, in my view, this is mostly because computer science seems to always be about absolutes. Nuanced views like “This can be useful sometimes, but mustn’t be overused” or “This technique is probably not optimal, but rarely makes much difference in practice, so is not worth foaming at the mouth about” don’t seem to get a look in. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/43 "2015-05-10T04:41:59Z")
> [@The\_Joker\_and\_the\_Thief](#): > > It’s ridiculous to claim that Christian philosophy and ethics, a domain of rational inquiry thousands of years old, is “designed for a 3-year old”. Considering that the field in question has addressed all of your questions, often at length, I think your juvenile assertion says more about your preconceived beliefs towards Christianity and lack of knowledge thereof than anything else. But the end result of those thousands of years of rational inquiry is what the average Christian is taught, and what guides his actions: “Thou shalt not . . . .” ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 9:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/44 "2015-05-10T09:10:32Z")
The difficult thing with this thread is not knowing why the experts think what they do. For a current example I recently faced, I didn’t really see the big deal about why computer scientists are pretty sure that P =/= NP. So some harder problems might be solvable relatively easily, not a huge deal. I thought P=NP had a decent shot at being proven. Then I learned about the polynomial hierarchy, and while I concede that whether or not P=NP is an open question, I can also pretty confidently state that just from a philosophical standpoint it would be completely ludicrous if P did, in fact, equal NP. (The simplified reasoning is that proving P=NP also entails that proving the existence of something is exactly as hard as proving something about everything, and that the statement “there exists an x such that for all y there exists a z such that for all…” is exactly as hard to prove as the statement “there exists an x such that…”). ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 10:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/45 "2015-05-10T10:13:37Z")
I think it is widely guessed that P [SIZE=“4”]≠ NP[/SIZE] is, like Gödel’s famous _G_, an undecidable statement. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/46 "2015-05-10T10:41:33Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > In the past there have been “facts” that almost all experts in the field didn’t believe in. > > Are there any current examples? Though the problem is that a majority of the relevant experts would disagree… This is probably more of an IMHO thread but… One answer is the view shared by the great majority of NT historians that Jesus’s existence is a well-established historical fact. [runs away] ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/47 "2015-05-10T12:25:35Z")
> [@F.U.Shakespeare](#): > > I can’t imagine that _some_ driving training/education wouldn’t be an improvement over throwing kids the keys and telling them to figure it out. If anything, the linked article makes a case against loosely regulated, for-profit schools in general. It acknowledges that “some (driving) schools are awful and some are excellent”. The linked article is just a wish-washy offend-nobody filler piece published to attract advertising. The underlighing evidence referenced is much stronger. Here is another example from 2009: > [@http://rrisk.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/RRISK-Young-driver-education-programs-build-resilience-Pediatrics-Nov-09.pdf](#): > > WHAT’S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: No link between young driver > education and motor vehicle crash reductions has been established. That article goes on to suggest (wildly restating here) that Church and Family might have an effect, but not Driver Ed. Here’s soething similar from my car association: [The Effectiveness of Driver Training and Education - 2011.pdf](http://www.racv.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/e21e218046f4a67f9d40fdcedbccd5d8/The+Effectiveness+of+Driver+Training+and+Education+-+2011.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=e21e218046f4a67f9d40fdcedbccd5d8) The problem is as suggested by the OP. No expert thinks that Driver Ed has any effect, but lots of people think that they are expert on education, including (but not limited to) many teachers, and even more random internet posters like me… …Surgery is clearly full of expert surgens who are not as good as they think they are, and who offer treatment that is less effective than they think it is. It takes a good deal of self-belief to take a knife and cut someone open… Speaking of which, whats the opinion on Vertebroplasty these days? Last I looked there was some dissagreement: some of the experts must have been wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Apollon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47774/32.png) [@Apollon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollon)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/48 "2015-05-10T13:08:00Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > Who is perhaps more famous for his _Guten Tag_ concerto, originally a long if rather trivial piece, now much shorter for having been rescored in C#. I hope this is a joke about programming languages, because otherwise it makes no sense (and is also factually wrong). :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/49 "2015-05-10T13:14:20Z")
I seem to recall something about Galileo having a hard time convincing people that two objects of different size would fall at the same rate. ---
**Author:** ![fachverwirrt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/94ad74/32.png) [@fachverwirrt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fachverwirrt)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/50 "2015-05-10T13:52:49Z")
> [@Apollon](#): > > From the field of classical music: > > - That you should always play a trill where there’s one written, and never play one when there’s none written. > - That there was no crescendo and diminuendo in baroque music, nor any accelerando and ritardando. > - That the triad G-C-E (from bottom to top; when the key is C major) is a C major chord. In truth, it’s almost always a G major chord with a suspended 6th and 4th. > - That Bach’s famous Minuet in G was written by Bach. It was actually written by Christian Petzold. > - That Mozart ever wrote a piece named “Turkish March”. It’s actually called “Rondo alla Turca”. Incidentally, Beethoven did write a “Turkish March”. > - That you can do a vibrato on a piano. Many Russian pianists have been brainwashed into believing this. > - That minuets are to be played in a slow tempo. > - That it’s a bad thing to analyse music, because it somehow destroys the soul of the piece. :smack: Those sound like things that a lot of casual musicians may believe. I don’t think they’re things that most experts in the field believe. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2015, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/51 "2015-05-10T22:26:30Z")
> [@Apollon](#): > > I hope this is a joke about programming languages, because otherwise it makes no sense (and is also factually wrong). :dubious: [Of course.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Petzold) He wrote a very widely-read book about programming in Windows which included a “Hello, world!” program to introduce people to how Windows 95 GUI programming was going to work. [His books.](http://www.charlespetzold.com/books.html) ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2015, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596/52 "2015-05-11T03:01:05Z")
> [@Apollon](#): > > I hope this is a joke about programming languages, because otherwise it makes no sense (and is also factually wrong). :dubious: Meta joke [Christian Petzold](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Petzold_%28director%29) [Charles Petzold](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Petzold) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-most-experts-falsely-believe-about-their-field/719596.md?page=2)