There is a scholar: For a long time, laymen have said that his level is high, but laymen often do not agree (annotation: there is an air cooler manufacturer claims that how high and high my product test pressure is, the oil return pulse will not burst into clouds ). The camps on both sides are obvious. Why is there such a clear difference? In my opinion, the reason is that his point of view is often logically "right", but in practice it is "wrong", and the logic and practice deviate.
People who are logical are attractive. We often say that logical thinking and expression skills are important-this is because most people are not logical enough when they think or express problems. This point is particularly prominent in China's academic circles. Even university professors have very few logical people. Therefore, when people hear a particularly logical report, the audience naturally feels good about him and naturally thinks his point is right. That's why laymen like him.
But logically, it is not necessarily correct. 以目前的技术工艺水平，再高也不会超过10MPa，而液压回路故障产生的脉冲峰值，就有可能超过这个数值。） (Note: Looking at the current level of the hydraulic air cooler
, it will never exceed 10 MPa, and the peak value of the pulse caused by a hydraulic circuit failure may exceed this value.)
We listened to storytelling when we were young. The storyteller talks logically. But we all know: storytelling is not real history. In fact, what the history books say may not be true history. The famous British scholar Russell realized early on that historians always explained history according to their own logic. History books that boast of objectivity are not necessarily objective.
This is because the logic system of different historians is different: when a historical event occurs, some people look at the problem from an economic perspective, some look for evidence from a moral perspective, some look for an answer from a military perspective, and some go from a mental perspective. Analysis, some people find the reason from a geographical point of view ... If the historian has a religious belief, he is likely to find: In what ways does the governor violate God's will?
Some ideas are interesting, such as:
l The northern nomads invaded the Central Plains, which often occurred during the period of cold climate in the northern hemisphere ...
Why did n’t Native Americans invent a carriage? Because the population of the Americas is mainly distributed in the north-south direction, different latitudes lead to different climatic conditions; climatic differences lead to less communication. And the people who keep the horses and the people who invented the wheels are at different latitudes ...
Logic is not a guarantee of correct conclusions. This is because: one reason can lead to very different results.
An analogy: someone pushes a stone on the mountain. The stone may or may not have been pushed down the mountain. Both results are logical-the key is strength. Engels realized very early that the development of science to a certain extent would surely be combined with mathematics.
Therefore, logic leaves the concept of "quantity", which is likely to be unreliable. If a person does not have practical experience, he often lacks the ability to grasp "quantity", which leads to absurd logic in reality; and experienced people often find it easier to find that "logic is wrong".
When we talk about the concepts of CPS, digital twins, big data, industrial big data, intelligent manufacturing, and industrial cloud platforms, there are "quantity" concepts behind them: why these technologies can bring value, why can improve work efficiency, and reduce work costs . For example, I mentioned in the previous article: The combination of cloud computing, big data, and industrial Internet technology makes it easier to eliminate information silos, and thus reduces work costs. Think about the problem. Of course, how to reduce the difficulty is still a science that requires in-depth research-looking at the problem from this perspective can make our understanding deeper and away from superficial brick homes.
For most engineering and technical questions (annotations: such as the oil leakage problem of the air cooler of the hydraulic system), the logical concepts of "OK" or "NO" are not to be answered. It is to answer how much it costs to be "feasible" and how much value this "feasible" can bring. This is the transformation of technical issues into economic issues. With regard to leaving economic feasibility, only throwing out some logically advanced concepts, it is easy to be viewed by front-line people as "bricks". Original author: Guo Zhaohui.