[gloryjulio]

Because the act of the believe doesn't affect reality. Either u have a robust way to make the right judgement of the progress (in the case u r at the forefront of the research and knows what they r talking about), or u r just a bystander.

In the later case, the is no point in overthinking

[Zetice]

Or you take what information you have at the time and you evaluate a situation based on just that, which is exactly how real life decisions work.

Rarely, exceedingly rarely even, do you have the luxury of waiting for all of the facts before deciding something.

[gloryjulio]

In this case that means you have the physics expertise to actually understand what's going on, which I already mentioned in the previous post. Not everything is accessible to layman, in this particular case the bar is very high.

My best answer is I don't know. If you are knowledge enough, go ahead

[Zetice]

Nope, no expertise necessary. What I do have an expertise in is risk management however, and the cost of being wrong here is effectively zero, so in cases like that there is no reason to act so cautiously, and in fact it's costly to have such a low tolerance for risk in a situation like this.

[gloryjulio]

I'd say the cost being wrong depends on the people. For a lot of people being in the state of unknown is better than random guesses with 0 expertise. Not everyone like to flaunt their ignorance

Not sure why r u so insist that only your way is right. That's ur choice of course

[Zetice]

The fear of being wrong is a crippling one that haunts ineffective people. Effective people don’t care, because they know they can update their beliefs when new information is introduced.

You’re talking about pride. Prideful people are not effective.