I didn't know there was one so I'd like to know too :)

Me! Used to be a physicist and am now a psychologist so I have a whole range of science knowledge! :)

Awesome. I have a bit of background in physics and engineering, but I am a macromolecular structural biologist and now oncoscientist. I work mostly with proteins, do synchrotron x-ray cryocrystallography, 3D modeling, etc.

Wow! I remember doing a paper on protein crystallography at sub-zero temperatures but I hated it at the time and resented that I had to take the class because I just wanted to study gravitational waves and lattice gauges like the theoretical physics nerd I am! I commend you for sticking with something so boring, lol.

It's not the most exciting, but it is really insightful to find structures, interpret kinetics data, do some oligonucleotide directed mutagenesis, and observe a phenotypic change that can be therapeutic. It really ties together everything in an organism. Also, I eventually want to get into nanobiomimetics, so getting a lot of structural biology experience is super useful.

That's how I felt when I was studying physics and all my friends were in "sexier" fields but just being able to work something out and make data come together is so satisfying. And it's good to know what you want to do and how to get there.

I like to consider myself part of it, however I am quite young.. And I haven't had a formal education on the things I try to explain, so I don't know if I can be trusted.

Sometimes you can learn more from a 30min YouTube video than a year of university.

Does having knowledge on a very large random facts about a lot of things count ? Or computer science ?

Formal education can often just instill bias. That's what stagnated physics around the turn of the 20th century. There were experiments showing them their picture was just the frame, and many theories showing the artwork, but many failed to see it, choosing to ignore anything that didn't fit the classical theories. Something similar occurs in biology, with some adhering to the Central Dogma, while there are many cases that prove it to be wrong or incomplete. You can gain expert knowledge without formal education, which is the beauty of the current availability of information.

Nicely worded, I agree to an extent. I think bias does occur if you just stick to the theories and don't go into things with an open mind and a willingness to learn but I do think you need a basic understanding of the topic from credible sources before presuming you know everything. I mean you never know everything, that's what's so great, none of us will and ever know everything, so there's always something new to discover.

I spent just over a decade at university and I can say that there was definitely a certain amount of reluctance to explore anything that went against what was previously established. Like proposing theories that disagreed with Einstein or whoever would earn you some startled looks. This was a lot more relevant in physics, where some actually had the arrogance to assume we knew everything. I think this age of new technology has lessened this a lot since the availability and free exchange of information has allowed people to question established theories. But I still think formal education (taken with a grain of salt) is an important aspect in any field, at least as a gateway for knowledge.

I am young now, and I know for sure that I will get a formal education. I will also keep an open mind.

Awesome Silver! You have potential to do great things with that attitude

I'd like to say that I am but I just have a good google when I get in the mood.

I'm not sure if I am, because I'm just very good at googling
I'm still in school, but do physics, chemistry, engineering and IT classes, so I have base understanding of what I'm googling

Well, google has driven me