Qatar figures out novel way to cool crowds for 2022 World Cup

"dirigible"? How deep did the writer have to dig in a thesaurus to find THAT word? Is it asking to much to use words people are more likely to know like, "air ship"? The point of writing is to communicate. The point of communication is to transfer knowledge. The most effective way to transfer knowledge is to use language that the target audience is likely to understand... unless the point is NOT communication, and is instead to win points on a vocabulary test or to show off at the cost of poor communication.

One problem would be positioning them (and keeping position stable) so that the players are not randomly running from sunlight to shade and having consequent problems tracking the ball. It is hard enough to track fast moving balls when the shade lines are stable, let alone wobbling across the field.

And CSharpner: dirigible is a fairly common word associated with steerable lighter-than-air craft. I'm quite sorry that it seems arcane to you.

How about just build an indoor stadium with AC?...

CSharpener: Perhaps you should hang out at a kid's science website. Everybody who reads these articles knows what a dirigible is.
musmusculus: The shade is only really obvious from the vantage point of a person watching tv. The shade is not much of a bother to the players on the ground.
ereneon: An indoor stadium for 100,000 plus football fans is too big of a challenge to build - also cost prohibitive. It's not like there's a huge demand for a stadium like that in a place with 115 degree fahrenheit average temperatures during summer. I mean, who would want to live there in the first place? Go figure.

I think that using wireless remote control on a hovering cloud sized dirigible is a stupid idea when all you would have to do would be to anchor it down with cable at the four corners. That would be a lot cheaper. Why, they could shade the whole country with a flotilla of those things.

"dirigible"? How deep did the writer have to dig in a thesaurus to find THAT word? Is it asking to much to use words people are more likely to know like, "air ship"?

A person's vocabulary generally grows with age. As they encounter more language, they internalize more of it.

Since you're proposing that we limit writing to only those words that we all 'should' know, at what level should we limit our writing?

Should writing above the 5th grade level be discouraged? Too low? Surely nobody should be expected to actually learn anything after they've passed the 12th grade.

--

Joking aside, I gather that you looked up the word to find out what it meant. Congratulations, that is how learning happens. Celebrate that learning!

Don't fear ignorance (don't celebrate it either), relish it as opportunity to learn. We are all ignorant about things until we learn about them, and each time we learn, the universe becomes a slightly more interesting place.

A dirigible is an airship with a rigid frame -- "Zeppelin" are loosely synonymous with "dirigible". A "blimp" is an airship with a nonrigid frame, that is when it's deflated it collapses.

"Blimp" is also sometimes used for tethered balloons that have blimplike envelopes -- classic barrage balloons are good example -- but they're better referred to as "aerostats".

Only a half million? Dang that's cheap for something of that scale. I would bet along with control and power systems, it will carry a surveillance package with an imager turret to keep an eye on the crowds for terrorist actions.

Oh man this just a perfect doomsday scenario. A modern Hindenburg crashing on top of all those thousands of spectators (except not ablaze..)

I think that using wireless remote control on a hovering cloud sized dirigible is a stupid idea when all you would have to do would be to anchor it down with cable at the four corners. That would be a lot cheaper.

A fixed shade is not going to be able to adjust its position as the sun moves through the sky. This means it will have to be larger than the dirigible in order to consistently cover a given space throughout the day. The free-floating dirigible also has the benefit of being able to float higher (cable is heavy after all) and thus will block out the sun but less of that pretty blue Qatar sky.

Oh man this just a perfect doomsday scenario. A modern Hindenburg crashing on top of all those thousands of spectators (except not ablaze..)

Ever been injured through a party balloon full of air falling on you?

dirigible is a word i knew as s child -- its a word that conveys an exact meaning -- it literally means a vehicle held aloft in the air by trapping helium or hydrogen that uses propellers to steer and accelerate.

i think it is a common word when used to describe types of aircraft --- what does "air ship" mean ???

So the US has finally found a buyer for all that Helium we have down in those caves --- unfortunately NONE of our grandchildren will ever know the joy of losing a balloon or talking like a mouse.

-- no I have never been injured by a balloon falling on me -- but i could imagine the posiblity of suffocating when one the size of an office building falls on me, unless i am near the edge and can crawl out of that heavy mess.

dirigible is a fairly common word associated with steerable lighter-than-air craft. I'm quite sorry that it seems arcane to you.

It does. In my 40 years on this planet, it's never crossed my eyes (at least, not that I can recall) and I'm a fairly educated and intelligent person. It's quite possible though, it's just one of those unusual set of events where a common word just never worked its way into my life.

Perhaps you should hang out at a kid's science website.

Kudos for going the mature route. Feel better now?

Everybody who reads these articles knows what a dirigible is

Obviously, by definition, that is not true. BTW, don't end your sentence in a preposition. I just did a quick survey of 9 colleagues I know, two of whom do read these articles:

1 History expert: Never heard of it.
1 Electrical Engineer: Never heard of it, except maybe in passing in a movie, but can't define it.
1 CIO: Never heard of it.
(continued...)

(continued...)
1 Systems Analyst: Semi-guessed and got fairly close, but wasn't sure.
1 Small Business co-owner: Never heard of it.
1 Photo journalist: Yes.
1 RN: Never heard of it.
1 School Teacher: Yes.
1 Small Business owner / entrepreneur (nationally syndicated columnist): Never heard of it.

Out of 10 professionals (3 of whom are regular readers here), including myself, 70% never heard of it. 10% knew, but weren't sure. 20% knew. I'd say I'm in fairly good company.

at what level should we limit our writing?

Are you under the false impression that each word has a "level"? Do you consider "dirigible" a "higher" level word? Interesting. Here's a thought: How about at the level of a 40 year old, 29 year veteran systems architect, a CIO, a history expert, and an electrical engineer?
(continued...)

(continued...)

Don't fear ignorance (don't celebrate it either), relish it as opportunity to learn. We are all ignorant about things until we learn about them, and each time we learn, the universe becomes a slightly more interesting place.

You're preaching to the choir brother. While learning new words is great, choosing the right ones to use shows intelligence.

From a view point of maximizing communication, dirigible is an unneeded and lessor used and lessor known synonym, and as such, communication has little to no need for it. For example: There's a similar type of problem in my field of computer programming: When we write source code, we're creating two products. 1 is the end product that the users use, the other is the source code that other programmers will have to eventually maintain. We do a disservice to our fellow programmers when we make arcane labels for objects.
(continued...)

(continued...)
In programming this is usually done with a malpractice in the form of making cryptic, made up, abbreviations for everything. To maximize the intent (the communication) of what the program is intended to do, we avoid cryptic names and abbreviations to convey to the other programmers what we intended. Instead we use commonly known words for labels to increase the communication and usability of our source code.

Spoken and written human language is no different, logically. I realize there are pseudo-intellectuals who have a false pretense that wasting mind space with rarely used words puts them "above" other people, but they don't realize how silly and irrelevant they appear. There are few things more annoying than the type of person who holds themselves in such high regard based on more or less, useless (except maybe on "Jeopardy!") trivia.
(continued...)

(continued...)

at what level should we limit our writing?

Words don't have "levels", they have "usefulness". When a thought has multiple labels for it, logic dictates to use the most commonly known word, otherwise you fail at your task of communication. There are, of course, times when one of the synonyms has a slightly different nuance and is also somewhat uncommon, but that nuanced meaning is important. That's not the case here.

Is there a hyphen in "anal retentive"?

Is there a hyphen in "anal retentive"?

AHAHAHa gold. :)

"Dirigible" is a word I hear once a year from watching the history channel.

How about multiple layers of parasols with enough space to let light in but that only reflects visible light but not heat? sort of like standing sails in an iris formation over the stadium.. like the Roman coliseum.

Dirigable is the right word for thic artaficial cloud. Also have to mention that Football is played outdoors by tradition at these events.

CSharpner: In my sixty years, I learned the word "dirigible" as a child in grade school. No, I'm not a professional, I spent the majority of my working life operating a brick kiln. An "airship" may refer to any aircraft, i.e. a dirigible, a blimp, a 747, an F-15 or even the Wright Flyer, though usually only to lighter than air vehicles. A dirigible is a specific kind of lighter than air vehicle that uses gas bags in a rigid frame and whose motion is powered by propellers. A writer's job is to convey exact meaning, not fuzzy, kind-of-like meaning. As someone else said, if you don't know a word, look it up and deal with it.

CSharpner: For a person who for all intent and purpose admits to not having a huge vocabulary you are quite given to didactic pedantry.

As an immigrant at the age of seven, in second grade I took it upon myself to read the entire Roget's Thesaurus. When I was in sixth grade, my teacher would give me until the next day to write out three pages of the Oxford English pocket dictionary every time he felt that I deserved it. Let it not go unsaid that I was destined to become a master of the English language. Chalk much of it up to self-motivation.

The correct definition of "savant" is: A learned person; a scholar. Surprised? Too many people throw away the books once they get their walking papers from whatever academic institution they earned them from. That's a sad thing, because as you may have heard, "Those that can, do; those that can't, teach."

Keep learning.

baudrunner: I applaud your perseverance. My daughter-in-law spoke no English when she arrived here six years ago. She is now making straight "A"s in her university English classes. The vast majority of people have the ability to perform well in school, they just don't use it. As you said, "a sad thing".

As someone else said, if you don't know a word, look it up and deal with it.

I do and I did. "steerable air ship" is essentially all dictionary.com has. Assuming that to be the right definition, "air ship" or "steerable air ship" would have been a better choice for improved communication. Don't be an ass.

For a person who for all intent and purpose admits to not having a huge vocabulary

Interesting. Admitting to not knowing one particular word and you derive "not have a huge vocabulary" from the one word. Amazing.

you are quite given to didactic pedantry

Yep, being attacked from multiple points and defending myself on only a select few (which requires a certain amount of minimal text) and I get further attacked for defending myself. Jeesh! I do applaud your drive as an immigrant to learn the language though... seriously, that is awesome. That is not an excuse to be rude though.

Keep learning.

I never stop. You're preaching to the choir.

CSharpner: I apologize if we all seem to be talking down to you, it's just that we are amazed that 1. you've never run into the word "dirigible" before and 2. that you seem to be complaining that someone used a "big" word that you had to look up. "Dirigible" truly is a fairly common word. Complaining about it only makes you seem as if you're auditioning for Jay Leno's "Jaywalking" segment. You may be forty years old but your complaint is couched in the language of a balky teenager. Your statements come across as "Don't make me learn the hard words, no one else knows them."

CSharpner: I apologize if we all seem to be talking down to you, it's just that we are amazed that 1. you've never run into the word "dirigible" before and 2. that you seem to be complaining that someone used a "big" word that you had to look up. "Dirigible" truly is a fairly common word.

I understand and expected this misperception. I appreciate your response (and I fived it, BTW). As I explained above, it's not that it's a "big word", it's that it appears to be a poor choice for communication as it does not appear to be a well known word, in spite of the claims to the contrary in this thread, and after a quick survey of my educated peers, some of whom, like myself, consistently score around the "genius" mark on IQ tests (I apologize for pointing that out, as it always triggers negative reflex responses), hardly any of them had ever heard of it either, much less, even knew what it meant.
(contined...)

(Continued...)
Note that I did query my peers BEFORE I posted that. I wanted to make sure it wasn't just me. If it was, I'd have felt a tad embarrassed for not knowing it, learned a new word, kept it to myself, and moved on, quietly.

@ CSharpner

I doubt anyone other than a select vocal few here is showing any contempt for your (and your peers') ignorance of the word 'dirigible' as opposed to your need to post five paragraphs defending why it's ok for you not to know it and why it was a poor choice for the author to utilize despite its accuracy. It's just a bit pretentious to suggest that no one else should know the definition or be familiar with the word just because you and a few friends have never heard of it. As a matter of deduction I would say that it's probable you and said peers all were educated at the same place and that that place chose not to include 'dirigible' as a vocabulary word in grade 5 (the latter suggestion because it was a vocab word in my school). I expect most of the negativity is due to your choice to make it a "big deal" when it really isn't, and the fact that even if you didn't know, its definition should be obvious in context with the rest of the sentence without looking it up.

[As I explained above, it's not that it's a "big word", it's that it appears to be a poor choice for communication as it does not appear to be a well known word, in spite of the claims to the contrary in this thread

First, the idea that we shouldn't use words that are not exceedingly common is a bit narrow-minded.

Second, "dirigible" scores 963,000 hits on google, a fair measure of its current use I hope we can agree. Here are some other aircraft-related words/terms that, I'd assume you would suggest should never be used to communicate:

triplane: 953,000
gyrocopter: 590,000
scramjet: 266,000
solid rocket booster: 379,000 (in quotes: 137,000)
aerofoil: 461,000

With words, 'if the shoe fits' use them. Just because an object is somewhat rare today, like dirigibles, and thus the word that aptly describes them may be used less frequently, that does not mean that we should not use the name that fits that object!

Attacking the use of such apt nouns seems... unschooled (453,000).

as opposed to your need to post five paragraphs defending why it's ok for you not to know it

Again, my responses were very limited compared to the amount of attacks towards me, and again, my defense is being used against me.

a bit pretentious to suggest that no one else should know the definition or be familiar with the word just because you and a few friends have never heard of it. As a matter of deduction I would say that it's probable you and said peers all were educated at the same place

In fact, they are from various grammar schools, high schools, and colleges. One went to the same grammar school as me. Two to the same high school, 2 to the same college. The rest were from different schools and most I never went to school with as I've met them in my professional life.

I expect most of the negativity is due to your choice to make it a "big deal" when it really isn't

A misperception, probably derived from the fact that I chose to defend myself. It's NOT a big deal.

Everybody who reads these articles knows what a dirigible is

Obviously, by definition, that is not true. BTW, don't end your sentence in a preposition.

Two last notes:

1. You really should read up on the 'grammatical rule' that one should not end a sentence with a preposition. Like many grammatical rules, it was completely arbitrary made up by supposed scholars, in isolation of much of English writing. Many of the greatest writers in English history have written quite effectively without ever paying heed to the 'rule'. As Winston Churchill once quipped, it is a rule "up with which I will not put!"

2. Failing that, remember "is" isn't a preposition, it's a verb.

Cheers!

Wow! This just never ends. Like Simonsez and I said, it's not that big of a deal, yet the attacks keep piling on. I do reserve the right to defend my self and defense will take text to do...

First, the idea that we shouldn't use words that are not exceedingly common is a bit narrow-minded.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said only "exceedingly common" words should be used and you know that full well. You see, this is a type of debate tactic where one tries to stretch what one's opponent says to a much further extreme than all know was meant. It's dishonest.

I too have done some Googling. Google trends comparing blimp to dirigible, dirigible hardly shows up. Google news, the word shows up only about 15 times a month in all Google indexed news articles for the last 20 years. It goes down back to the 1940's, and spikes up in the 20's and 30's.

I could be mistaken (and so could YOU). I do not believe I am.
(continued...)

While its use in the 1930's may be interesting, I thought we were talking about the words current use.

"dirigible" shows up on the internet far more frequently than "solid rocket booster".

What is your point again? We shouldn't use "dirigible" because it's not a commonly used word? Should we not use the term "solid rocket booster" to describe "rockets". The word "rocket" is a far more commonly used word, granted, it's not as descriptive as the term "solid rocket booster", but then "blimp" isn't as descriptive as "dirigible" is it?

You are trying to tell people what they shouldn't do. It just so happens that your arguments are based on shaky logic, arguments that, if one follows your logic, then your argument appears to state that we have to stop using a great number of aptly descriptive nouns.

I'm not right or wrong, but I am comfortable in using the word dirigible.

Guys, end the nonsense. It's a word, someone raised a question about it's use. The question was answered. All parties are happy with the occurance.

It's time to just end this useless conversation.

(continued...)

With words, 'if the shoe fits' use them.

Of course. But if you have two or more words, and they all fit equally well, there's no good reason to choose the one that's known to be lessor known. That's essentially all I'm saying, but everyone's blowing it WAY out of proportion. I respond because I'm being attacked and insulted.

You really should read up on the 'grammatical rule' that one should not end a sentence with a preposition.

LOL! OMG! Oh That's so funny! I was admittedly being as as back to him. Yes, we all know that (at least, I assume we do and won't attack anyone if they didn't) and the Churchill quote is one of my favorites. One of my favorite jokes:

Student: Do you know where the library is?
Professor: Don't end your questions with a preposition!
Student: OK. Do you know where the library is... ASSHOLE!

I'm a bit of a grammar nazi myself.

Guys, end the nonsense. It's a word, someone raised a question about it's use. The question was answered. All parties are happy with the occurance.

It's time to just end this useless conversation.

AGREED!!!! Thank You!

Kansas City has a unique stadium setup. They have an American football and Baseball stadium right next to one another. They share parking lots and neither one is covered. The original design called for tracks to be constructed between the two buildings and then a rolling roof built. The roof would stand on tall legs with wheels on the bottom, so that it could be placed over either stadium or the concourse between them, and moved slightly to account for the angle of the sun if needed too. They never found funding to build the roof, so it doesn't exist today, but it is a neat design idea. Much more affordable than some flying roof I would guess. I'm also going to assume that the half million pricetag is not realistic, just by virtue of understanding the cost of building one of a kind complicated prototypes that interact with public safety.

The first retractable roof was built in Houston (and used for the Super Bowl in 2004), and was followed shortly by another retractable roof. They obviously aren't that expensive for an oil-producing nation, especially when the initial use will be for the Olympics.

I think countries always try to outdo other coutries during the olympics or even the World Cup -- you get the eyes of the world on you and you get to show off what you can do with creativity and money. Whether to boost your educational system's esteem in other courties eyes or to show off you engineering prowess -- you have simple problems on a big scale but you get to come up with a solution that people will talk about for years

as long as is doesn;t crash on the drunk masses watching the game ;-)

Csharpener, "It does. In my 40 years on this planet, it's never crossed my eyes"

Just because you are IGNORANT of some things doesn't mean everybody else is. Instead of whining about it, consider it something learned that you didn't know before. Don't demand everybody else remain as ignorant as you.

Csharpener, "Yep, being attacked from multiple points and defending myself on only a select few "

Probably because you've "written" more in this article than anyone else extolling how brilliant you consider your ignorance to be and demanding that everyone else sink to your "level" of literacy.

I mean, the only source you use is dictionary.com and if the word isn't there you just consider the word unused by the majority of the populace. Really? Really? There is this thing even Homer Simpson knows about... the INTERNET. Dictionary.com is hardly the one and only source on it for determining how many people know what a given word means.

Stop being a boogerhead (is that on dictionary.com?) and just admit (since you're going to go right on spewing large quantities of words as to how you're being unfairly attacked, sniff sniff poor me) you were a jerk.

(Continued...)
Note that I did query my peers BEFORE I posted that. I wanted to make sure it wasn't just me. If it was, I'd have felt a tad embarrassed for not knowing it, learned a new word, kept it to myself, and moved on, quietly.

All that demonstrate is that you have a very poor pool of peers to pick from when it comes to language. You ALL need to get out more, and using the group of people you hang with to prove everyone else is using big words that you don't know is truly biased logic. Argument from ignorance logical fallacy comes to mind. And probably why I have posted here several times in response to your posts. The sheer arrogance is just too blatant to attribute to anything other than an April Fools joke.

I bow to Skeptic Heretics wisdom, would have quit sooner but had to read through all Csharpeners posts before I got to him and lost track of time.

So I will no longe..... oh shrew it. dirigible! dirigible! dirigible! platypus! oxymoron! indubitable! miasma! enchiridion! barathrum! horseless carriage!

I feel better now!

lol csharpner is an idiot

Just because you are IGNORANT...

4 posts of insults snipped (and ignored)...

I feel better now!

Wow! Congrats on acting like an ass. This thread was finished days ago.

lol csharpner is an idiot

LMAO! My world revolves around your reactionary, childish outbursts.

God help us!
Its just a word, and the question has been answered long ago. Also dirigable is a valid word that is used where i live so i myself dont get all whiney when its used!

Ontopic i think it makes sence to use such a thing as football ( NOT Soccer ) is pretty much popular all around the world so it makes perfect sence for the hosts of the world cup to show off as its a chance to show off in front of the whole world.

Part of the appeal in using a floating roof might be the resale potential. As soon as the World Cup moves on, they probably won't have a need for the stadiums and, consequently, the roof technology. They're already planning on selling off part of the stadiums for use in impoverished countries.

Due to the dry climate, having an open-air stadium with water misting for cooling would be the most efficient way to cool the entire stadium. The A/C costs to cool over 5 stadiums would be astronomical...

A more interesting challenge will be to protect the dirigibles against the relatively common sandstorms in the area

How about just build an indoor stadium with AC?...

How about not holding the event in a marginally habitable desert?

The first retractable roof was built in Houston (and used for the Super Bowl in 2004), and was followed shortly by another retractable roof. They obviously aren't that expensive for an oil-producing nation, especially when the initial use will be for the Olympics.

The Millenium Stadium, Cardiff was opened in 1999 with a fully retractable roof a full two years ahead of the Houston Stadium which opened October 2001.
However, it was a first for the NFL and a first in the USA.

To CSharper,

"Nothing makes argue harder than being proven wrong."
-Scott Adams