0

I'd like to carefully say that people not well trained in a field think that some solution X basically closes the whole problem Y, which is false. But instead of saying it is a common misconception, I'm saying it carefully: it is not uncommon.

I don't want to say "it is a common belief that X ends the search for Y" because that's not careful: experts know what's going on, but they'll also recognize that some people do have misconceptions and this is surely a case. At the same time I don't want to say something that sounds too odd or unnatural. How would you say it? (Do keep in mind that this is very formal writing, of course.)

Related question.

user338395
  • 13
  • completes the search for (I would edit, though we are not really supposed to do that). – Lambie Mar 01 '19 at 16:35
  • What are the circumstances in which this is so sensitive? But, granted the expression might upset some very sensitive people, why use it? Why not just say you disagree and give your reasons. “It is a common misconception” is not by itself a reason for anything. – Tuffy Mar 01 '19 at 16:39
  • 1
    Is there a reason you need to be so terse? Why not explain the situation more verbosely? E.g. "Some people mistakenly believe that solution X completely solves problem y and therefore, more research is unnecessary." – Juhasz Mar 01 '19 at 16:45
  • @Juhasz, this is an shortened abstract of a master's thesis for announcing the oral defense internally. It should be quite brief, but I wouldn't say terse. (It is not the master's thesis abstract for publication --- that one is longer.) – user338395 Mar 01 '19 at 16:59
  • 1
    This sounds like scientific writing. As a former physicist, I don't believe you need to be so careful to avoid offending people in science. Almost all scientists value truth and clarity over feelings. You may be working in a more sensitive environment, however, if you're outside of North America and Europe. – hguler Mar 01 '19 at 17:48
  • 1
    One final comment: if this is in particle physics, "X ends the search for Y" is better than "X completes the search for Y." All your colleagues will immediately understand the former; they will have to think about the latter and wonder why you didn't just use the standard lingo. – hguler Mar 01 '19 at 17:48
  • 1
    That X obviates the search for Y is shown to be a misconception. – Jim Mar 01 '19 at 18:13
  • @hguler You're quite right. The specific sentence is actually ``it is not an uncommon belief that Shor's algorithm ends the search for factorization algorithms in the quantum model of computation.'' It's not particle physics, but perhaps quantum computing or computational mathematics or computational number theory or something like that. Thanks so much for your thoughts. – user338395 Mar 02 '19 at 13:54

1 Answers1

0

Perhaps something along the lines of

"One might think that X ends the search for Y; however, this is not the case..."

You could leave it there, or, if you wish to clarify further, continue with "because..."

paw88789
  • 574