Originally posted by prisoneronashipoffools
I sure hope your not teaching English in anyway shape or form, because reading comprehension, is not really your strong suit.

Originally posted by Fromabove
When I was 11, I was building rockets on my own and testing them for fun. When I was 14, I created a small plane/dart that was saturated with gas and tipped with matches that would explode upon impact. All young children want to seek and discover things around them. When I was 15 I discovered that I could take an empty plastic milk jug with an attached tube and use it to walk on the bottom of a large pond for over ten minutes and simply resurface just to fill it with more air to go back down again. This girl is as many of us, curious and exploratory. This is a great thing to teach children to be. Use one's mind and think of many ways to do things better. And enjoy the pleasure of doing it. That's what the children at the LHC in Switzerland are doing right now.

edit on 3-2-2012 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0

Originally posted by Fromabove
When I was 11, I was building rockets on my own and testing them for fun. When I was 14, I created a small plane/dart that was saturated with gas and tipped with matches that would explode upon impact. All young children want to seek and discover things around them. When I was 15 I discovered that I could take an empty plastic milk jug with an attached tube and use it to walk on the bottom of a large pond for over ten minutes and simply resurface just to fill it with more air to go back down again. This girl is as many of us, curious and exploratory. This is a great thing to teach children to be. Use one's mind and think of many ways to do things better. And enjoy the pleasure of doing it. That's what the children at the LHC in Switzerland are doing right now.

edit on 3-2-2012 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)

Indeed. I see alot of bruised ego's in this thread (no names being mentioned) who seemed to be embarassed at the fact a kid of this age could make a discovery. I don't think it's something to be embarassed about, I think it's something to be proud of.

edit on 3-2-2012 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl

Originally posted by prisoneronashipoffools

And the thing that saddens me is people like you and the university, instead of actually encouraging this girl to continue studying science might in fact just turn her off to it.

edit on 3-2-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typos

edit on 3-2-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: addition

Here's what's super-irritating: in EVERY one of my posts, I talked about how great it is that this girl is now excited about Chemistry. Did you not see that????

The title of this thread is misleading. I was pointing that out. She didn't discover it.

And by the way--I'm a fantastic teacher, and great at motivating gifted students to want to succeed. I love my job, and I love what these kids are capable of. But I also recognize what they are *not* capable of at their age.


Edit to add:

if, the molecule is synthesized in the future and turns out profitable this girl might get a Nobel Prize or even some royalties

Are you kidding???? A Nobel Prize???? And unless she has patented it, which it doesn't look like they did before it was published, she is S.O.L. That's the way this kind of stuff works....you have to patent it BEFORE you publish it. Once you publish it, the cat's out of the bag.

edit on 3-2-2012 by GeorgiaGirl because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Starchild23


There is a huge difference between discovering something and knowing exactly what it was before you found it. You don't have to know what an animal is before you discover it; you don't have to know who made a cave painting before you discover it.

Your theory is flawed. What you're talking about is hypothesis and experimentation, because that is the only way to know something before you discover it.

Try using Webster's dictionary...

dis·cov·er/disˈkəvər/
Verb:

Find (something or someone) unexpectedly or in the course of a search.

She found it unexpectedly. It was a discovery SHE made, because she made the model on her own.

edit on CSaturdayam383838f38America/Chicago04 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)

edit on CSaturdayam393939f39America/Chicago04 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine

Originally posted by Starchild23


There is a huge difference between discovering something and knowing exactly what it was before you found it. You don't have to know what an animal is before you discover it; you don't have to know who made a cave painting before you discover it.

Your theory is flawed. What you're talking about is hypothesis and experimentation, because that is the only way to know something before you discover it.

Try using Webster's dictionary...

dis·cov·er/disˈkəvər/
Verb:

Find (something or someone) unexpectedly or in the course of a search.

She found it unexpectedly. It was a discovery SHE made, because she made the model on her own.

edit on CSaturdayam383838f38America/Chicago04 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)

edit on CSaturdayam393939f39America/Chicago04 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)

I think you are all getting too caught up in the semantics of discovery. Any idiot can discover something; the proof in the proverbial pudding comes in the ability to recognise that discovery. While the child did discover a new compound, it was her teacher and later the chemistry professor who realised that discovery, not her. As I said in my above post, the OP and the article are massively overstating her intellect and her abilities based on the discovery.

Originally posted by Starchild23

Wait. Are you saying the Webster dictionary is wrong? Did you just put down the book that contains all the correct worldly definitions of more words than you and your parents know put together?

Holy crap, this guy knows more than the dictionary!