How to politely tell someone that I'm more knowledgeable than them in a particular area?

Question

The problem

I participate in a lot of research regarding in-space propulsion systems, and because many of my friends are decently science-minded I sometimes talk to them about it just for fun when we're waiting for something more-interesting to happen. As much as I would like to talk about something that isn't work, I'm not really very invested in other culture and would much rather not just talk about what's on the news or what the weather is, and as it turns out I get asked about my work directly a lot because people hear that I'm working on cool space stuff and then that's all I end up getting talked to about.

The issue I have is that a lot of people come to me having heard the pop-sci version of the story of what I work on (by "pop-sci" I don't mean SciTechDaily and Forbes, I mean like Star Trek and The Expanse), and they seem to immediately think that that gives them a complete enough grasp of the subject matter to give me advice, or something adjacent. I am not exceptional at reading social cues or identifying meaning but that certainly seems to be the case.

The typical conversation looks like-

Them: So you're trying to X?

Me: Yeah, and I figured out a good way to do it too. [I'm trying to just give a tiny bit of context for where I'm at because they seem to be interested in the work that I'm doing.]

Them: Okay, so you're assuming that you can do Y?

Me: No, I'm not assuming that. [X does not even remotely require Y, as an introductory knowledge of X will tell you; I'm just trying my best not to seem condescending while explaining here.]

Them: Then you'll never be able to do X!

-and that's really annoying because I have, experimentally, in the lab, done X without even trying to do Y, and I feel like it's understandable for it to feel sorta bad to be told by someone who has never studied this subject to the degree I have that those accomplishments were just impossible to ever have been accomplished.

What I've tried

There are a few different ways I've tried to resolve this so that they don't have misconceptions about what I'm trying to do and so that I don't come off as a condescending prick. The first usually goes like-

Me: Well, you don't actually need Y to do X. You can just do Z instead - in fact much of my research revolves around figuring out how to do Z so you don't have to do Y. [This is just as polite and accurate a response as I can think of in the moment.]

Them: But that doesn't make any sense! You always need Y to do X, and if you don't have Y, you can't X.

This typically goes in one of a few ways. The less-polite but more-effective way is-

Me: Well, if you think you need Y to do X, how do you explain the A, B, and C properties of F that make the Spock field equations do G w.r.t. Z?? [Just a direct point using all the proper context to identify their mistake; I sort of get why this would make someone feel really dumb even if it gets the point across immediately. It uses a lot of unfamiliar jargon which of course makes it impossible for them to come back from that and establishes clearly that I know what I'm talking about and they don't, so they should accept my point.]

Them: ...

-but obviously I don't want to do that because then I seem like a prick and they learn nothing. The other way is to try-

Me: Well, the underlying mechanism of X (the thing I'm trying to do) is actually W, and W doesn't explicitly require Y - Z works too. [Sort of a more-educational(?) approach, just using enough of the terminology to teach a basic concept relating to my work.]

Them: Hold up, what's a W?

Me: W is a tool you use in My Field that tells you what X you get when you put in some J, and it's highly A, B, and C but it turns out that there exist Z you can use instead of Y to get the right X. [I'm just answering the question I was asked with the minimal possible terminology and complexity, with the hopes of them being able to learn about it, since that's usually how I interpret questions - requests to learn.]

Them: Whoa, whoa, whoa! You can't just go spewing technobabble like that! What's a J? What do A, B, C mean?

-which seems to end up with me still an impersonal four-eyed scientist who can't interact with people normally. The other thing I occasionally try when I'm tired and don't want to talk much is-

Me: It's really complicated, but after a lot of research it turns out that X doesn't require Y. [Just directly restate the fact in a way that tries to establish that I know what I'm talking about and that this fact is what I've found out.]

Them: But doesn't X require Y? What about cases I, J, and K? That doesn't make any sense!

-which doesn't end up with them learning anything and being more confused than before.

An ideal solution

The question I'm asking here is is there a way to effectively and politely establish that I actually know what I'm talking about here? I don't want to be a prick, but I also don't want to have to go on for half an hour trying to teach a course on my subject matter or trying to excise all the pop-sci from their heads, if only because that's emotionally-taxing for me (and certainly more-so for them).

Additional context

• These people are usually either close friends or family, rarely strangers - strangers usually ask about my work when I'm at presentations or demonstrations, where they are usually there to ask questions and learn. The people who I have these interactions with are usually ones I interact with otherwise on a semi-regular basis (at least once a week).

Answer 1

One approach that has sometimes worked for me with my area of specialization is to make this conversation explicit. Make talking about your work mean talking about how hard it is to talk about your work. This is very boring, but also relatable, and should be a non-offensive way to steer away from the topic.

— So you work in space propulsion? That's so cool.
— Ha, yeah, except it's really hard to talk about at parties. It's something everyone knows a bit of pop science about, but when you really get into it, nothing is like the pop science or even easy to explain. It makes it kind of a pain because people always want to talk about it but it's like speaking two different languages.
— Oh yeah? I bet that's frustrating. Why don't you try me?
— [Intentionally self-conscious] Well, for example, everyone thinks you need Y to do X, right? But actually, X turns out not to be related to Y at all. You need W, which is related to A and B and C, and that involves knowing about Z and... Well, you get the idea. By the time we circle back to X people's eyes glaze over.
— I see what you mean.
— Haha, yeah. To think I spent five years doing a PhD just to find out it's not Star Trek.

Cons: You still come across as a nerd. Pros: You seem friendly and have included them on the "you know how it is" side of the equation, not made them the recipient or cause of your frustration.

I do imagine that this is harder with family and friends, who already know you and what you do and feel they can talk to you about these things. I would say the solution still involves making this conversation explicit, but not by playing it off so casually.

Answer 2

I worked in IT for 25 years. TV shows and movies portray computers in ridiculous ways and many people don’t realize how wrong it always is, so they read some Wired or CNet or whatever and want to talk to me about computers.

is there a way to effectively and politely establish that I actually know what I'm talking about here?

After 25 years of sharing your experience except computers instead of rocket science, I believe the answer to your question is no.

I reverted to saying something like "business computing is different from [whatever]" or "I mostly specialize in [something unrelated to what they said/asked]".

I assume cops and doctors have similar experiences. You just can’t easily explain differential equations to someone who struggled with algebra.

Them: But that doesn't make any sense! You always need Y to do X, and if you don't have Y, you can't X.

Also, my experience is you can never effectively talk about your area of expertise with someone who knows far less than you but believes they know enough to disagree with you. These people will just frustrate you. They are not ready to hear they are wrong, I never found a way to get past that. I usually extract myself with some variation on "interesting, I hadn’t thought of that before. Well, I gotta get another drink, see you later!"

Answer 3

I did not have this problem often, but experience taught me that the best solution is to just let them be. Of course it is feels deeply uncomfortable to allow them to remain with their wrong "knowledge", but your well-intended efforts will germinate as well as some seeds spread in some hot desert.

So shortly, I do something like this:

1. Get into the discussion somehow.
2. Try to explain the correct version of the "story".
3. If the other person is receptive, continue the discussion.
4. If the other person already "knows" that I am from another planet, I just mumble loudly-enough a "Maybe you are right and I am wrong, we will see..." and let the discussion die.

In your case (as well as as in my case too, in the past) the conflict is not really a conflict of information, but a conflict of two people needing to prove that they are right. It is less important that you are right (hopefully) and they are wrong. You both try to prove that you are right at the expense of the other one - and that will not end well unless one gives up. Usually, the wiser gives up first. Now you decide :)

Answer 4

Is politeness your primary goal? Or is the primary goal not to let someone talk nonsense that others might believe, mixed with you not liking to be told that you don't know anything about your job?

Let's say you are an excellent car mechanic. I tell people that in order to solve engine problem X they should do Y. You know this will damage the engine. Then you can say "do that, and you'll have to pay for a new engine". Get the tone right. What you say should not sound like bragging, or starting an argument, but like a plain statement of fact, that cannot be changed by any discussion. If you get it right, I will know the outcome of doing Y will be having to pay for a new engine, and contradicting you will result in me looking like a fool. But what you say should also sound just like stating true facts, not like accusing me of being stupid. And of course you better be right with what you state.

Another approach is asking "explain that to me". If you are told "but everyone knows that", you can say "I don't know that, so could you explain this". That's more polite, and probably no explanation will be forthcoming.