Michio Kaku

if scientists didn't have the creativity to imagine something like string theory as reality, i don't think we would have made half the discoveries we did. it takes coming up with weird wacky shit sometimes because as humans, we really don't have a good idea about reality based solely on observations. you've got to realize that most of these theories will be laughable in 100 years, but in order to progress we have to explore every possible option in order to better explain the possibilities of our own reality.

  On 2/9/2010 at 3:01 PM, delet... said:

like the universe is far older than big bang can account for

Not that I want to open the can of worms that these theoritical scientists have already opened... but did you ever thnk that perhaps "time" didn't exist..

Also// top 3, recently, just because they've interested me:

Michio Kaku

Ray Kurzweil

Brian Cox (At first he annoyed me, but I've been enjoying his LHC stuff)

  On 2/9/2010 at 5:08 PM, EDGEY said:

Not that I want to open the can of worms that these theoritical scientists have already opened... but did you ever thnk that perhaps "time" didn't exist..

Did you see that Brian Cox special about the nature of Time? I mean, that's one of the amazing things, everyone thinks they know what time is, and how to measure it, but it's actually incredibly tricky to define it or indeed prove a damn thing about it.

i always hoped we would discover the physical nature of time before i croak

thx for the suggestions guys. i will look into the cox special

lol cox

  On 2/9/2010 at 5:07 PM, theSun said:

if scientists didn't have the creativity to imagine something like string theory as reality, i don't think we would have made half the discoveries we did.

There's nothing wrong with creative thinking. It's when but one aspect of how to solve something becomes the be all and end all orthodoxy, that there is a problem. It's human nature though, and has plagued science through the ages. Once an untestable idea reaches a critical mass of participation. It is very hard to budge the mostly uncreative worker bee minds, that are set loose on a problem after having been moulded by the previous generation of the orthodoxies missionaries who lecture at their universities, write their textbook, are lauded in the science media as demi-gods of their field. There is this intractable glue blocking the way for new creative approaches.

Also, as the problems of the field are presented as so complex to come to grips with. This only help reinforce the sense of awe we should feel for it's strongest salesmen.

the whole idea of science is that it is always subject to change, based on new observations usually derived from new technology. any scientist who tries to sell their theory like a salesman is not a scientist. the whole idea behind coming up with these elaborate, large scope theories is basically a "prove me wrong" statement from whoever came up with it.

depending on the technology it may not be possible to disprove something, but then we make something new and shiny like the LHC and we know just a little more about particle physics which could lead to advances in a ton of shit, and could disprove a few or many previously untestable theories.

i'm not disagreeing with you, just think you're overconcerned with the politics of modern science.

  On 2/10/2010 at 2:20 AM, delet... said:

  On 2/9/2010 at 5:07 PM, theSun said:

if scientists didn't have the creativity to imagine something like string theory as reality, i don't think we would have made half the discoveries we did.

 

There's nothing wrong with creative thinking. It's when but one aspect of how to solve something becomes the be all and end all orthodoxy, that there is a problem. It's human nature though, and has plagued science through the ages. Once an untestable idea reaches a critical mass of participation. It is very hard to budge the mostly uncreative worker bee minds, that are set loose on a problem after having been moulded by the previous generation of the orthodoxies missionaries who lecture at their universities, write their textbook, are lauded in the science media as demi-gods of their field. There is this intractable glue blocking the way for new creative approaches.

 

this is bullshit. where do you get this perception about academia anyway?

  On 2/10/2010 at 5:38 PM, theSun said:

the whole idea of science is that it is always subject to change, based on new observations usually derived from new technology. any scientist who tries to sell their theory like a salesman is not a scientist. the whole idea behind coming up with these elaborate, large scope theories is basically a "prove me wrong" statement from whoever came up with it.

 

depending on the technology it may not be possible to disprove something, but then we make something new and shiny like the LHC and we know just a little more about particle physics which could lead to advances in a ton of shit, and could disprove a few or many previously untestable theories.

 

i'm not disagreeing with you, just think you're overconcerned with the politics of modern science.

the politics of modern science is exactly what is wrong with modern science.

  On 2/10/2010 at 6:53 PM, GORDO said:

  On 2/10/2010 at 2:20 AM, delet... said:

  On 2/9/2010 at 5:07 PM, theSun said:

if scientists didn't have the creativity to imagine something like string theory as reality, i don't think we would have made half the discoveries we did.

 

There's nothing wrong with creative thinking. It's when but one aspect of how to solve something becomes the be all and end all orthodoxy, that there is a problem. It's human nature though, and has plagued science through the ages. Once an untestable idea reaches a critical mass of participation. It is very hard to budge the mostly uncreative worker bee minds, that are set loose on a problem after having been moulded by the previous generation of the orthodoxies missionaries who lecture at their universities, write their textbook, are lauded in the science media as demi-gods of their field. There is this intractable glue blocking the way for new creative approaches.

 

 

this is bullshit. where do you get this perception about academia anyway?

have you ever met an accomplished professor?

of course? have you ever felt sure about something?

what politics of modern science?

where do you people come up with this stuff?

Anyone have IMAGINING THE TENTH DIMENSION?

http://www.tenthdimension.com/flash2.php

was wondering if it's any good

last i checked there were only four dimensions

Dimensions are all just mathematical constructs anyway.

Every time I start thinking about Calabai-Yau spaces my head starts to hurt. In the best possible way.