The gods must be crazy (Physics article)

U.S. News and World Report ^ | September 8, 2003 | Charles W. Petit

[RightWingAtheist]

It's just that too many have too much vested interests to protect to acknowledge Halton Arp and others' observations of quasars that serves up a dead Big Bang complete with little X's over its eyes.

It's more likely that their theories just aren't good enough to withstand scrutiny, and that they fail to account for all of the overwhelming evidence for the Big Bang which has accumulated over the years.

One of my main research areas is the rhetoric of science, and I often find myself in conflict with my peers, who believe in a "hegemony" of scientific elites deciding what counts as science and what doesn't. I prefer to focus on science as a cognitive process (my other main interest is cognitive rhetoric), which means taking into account the individual's practice of science, and not just the institutional and social dimensions. If the consensus in the scientific community is that a (scientific) theory is wrong, than the reason is probably because the theory IS wrong.

In my own field, I know of someone whose very solid work is regularly slammed

What is your field of work? I also noticed on your page that you live in Chicago; you wouldn't happen to knwo any of the scientists discussed in this article, would you?

[null and void]

Schrodinger (who's cat is STILL dead)

Well, yes and no...

[RightWingAtheist]

Einstein sounds to me like a man who knows his limitations, unlike the arrogant twits referred to in this article.

They have their Ph.ds. Where's your Ph.d?

[null and void]

I think we all got a charge out of Millikan...

[RightWingAtheist]

LOL!

[boris]

"'Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.'"

I've heard it differently : "Hydrogen and stupidity" and variously attributed to everybody from Frank Zappa to Einstein.

Here's a goodie:

"Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain."
--Frederich von Schiller, The Maid of Orleans

At least in this one we KNOW the actual author and the precise quotation. BTW, Asimov used "The Gods Themselves" as the title of a novel (not a very good one, in my opinion)...

--Boris

[hosepipe]

"We know less than 1/1,000,000th of a percent about anything." - Albert Einstein

[aruanan]

What is your field of work? I also noticed on your page that you live in Chicago; you wouldn't happen to knwo any of the scientists discussed in this article, would you?

Just a quick reply for now. I've just decided to put a gel to run overnight because I don't want to be here until midnight getting it ready to transfer and I want to get some sleep. Anyway, I'm about a four minute walk from that person quoted above--that is, if she's in the building I'm thinking of--but I don't know her. There are always a lot of cool seminars that I mean to get to but almost never do!

[Doctor Stochastic]

Or as Schroedinger's wife may have said: "Erwin! What have you done with the cat? He looks half dead."

[eddie willers]

I was hoping to see a planet, but instead saw a large star.

The next time Saturn comes around, take a look even through a cheap telescope.

It will still be just a little, cream colored round ball....but you will say, "Yep....those sure are rings around it."

Blew my mind when I first saw it and it was made real.

[null and void]

Blew my mind when I first saw it and it was made real.

Church officials didn't have time to look at the defects introduced by Galileo's telescope.

These days we call those "defects" the Galilean satelites. The first direct proof that not everything revolves around us...

[null and void]

*groan*

[ovrtaxt]

You want evidence?

Then there is the "fine-tuning" problem. The universe appears marvelously constructed to produce stars, planets, and life.

What some would call evidence, others would call a 'problem'. Sure it's a problem if you're trying to prove to the contrary. Very telling choice of words here.

[myself6]

Liberals...

The "liberal" mindset invades even physics.

They want the universe to be a specific way. They want the rules to be simple and "beautiful". They are disheartened as they discover the truth or they completely ignore it. They continue to try and shape the universe to match the image they have in their minds, instead of letting the universe shape their mental image.

They will never be able to control or even comprehend all the variables that construct and continually shift this universe on an atomic or galactic scale. Those with the "liberal" mindset who realize this truth become dejected and ramble about an "ugly universe" and such.

This same mindset is what keeps the socialists going or drives them into misery. They make the same mistakes about humans as they do with the universe. They want the rules to be simple. They want the variables to be few and easily controlled. The realities they construct are so disjointed from everything that is real that they consistently dissolve into a chaotic yet predictable mess. Those who are given no choice but to see the true nature of the universe and human nature; a glimpse at the infinite scale of variables are driven to misery, loathing and hatred.

The universe and human nature are ugly things to those who wish to control them; and that is one of the things makes them beautiful.


I just couldn’t resist writing this. I know it has very little to do with the technical aspects of the article. It was the thought process and mindset of these people that caught my attention. I find it rather comical that the more they find out about the universe the uglier it is to them. You don’t use adjectives like ugly unless you have some type of negative feeling or thought about the subject.

[RightWingAtheist]

There's nothing in this article that even suggests these scientists are liberals. Sure, there are a lot of lefties in science, but it has more to do with the overall leftward tilt of academia than with science itself. Science is the most apolitical of human activities; it has to be, otherwise, it wouldn't come to conclusions which are valid for everyone.

[RightWingAtheist]

Any comments from the resident physics club?

[myself6]

My point was not that they were "political" leftists(liberals, socialists, collectivists) although they may be.

Like I attempted to state at the end of my last post ( of which I obviously didn’t do that great of a job) The thought process ( call it the mindset ) of these people reminded me of political leftists. It seems that there is a scientific branch that believes that life, the universe and everything will be able to be explained through a few simple formulas (E=mc2). Commonsense tells me that the universe is made up of, and continually shifts/progresses based upon an almost infinite number of variables that cannot be expressed formulaically to describe “the meaning of it all”. Don’t get me wrong, that would be cool and all. No unintended consequences, no missing variables to throw a monkey into the wrench a mere million reactions down the line. We could begin to create utopia.

Anyway, it doesn’t really matter if I think they are chasing their tails or not . I was reacting to something subtle in the article, which reminded me of political leftists. If a leftist actually gets a glimpse of the one real REALITY they either choose to ignore it or they become bitter. They begin to look at the world and people in general as ugly things because the “reality” they created in their minds was too far off from the real thing. Their idea of beautiful was an impossibility, therefore the farther away their “reality” deviated from REALITY the uglier everything looked to them.


I guess I shouldn’t have even posted, but I have this desire to understand EVRYTHING about the “liberal” mindset and this article just triggered me to think about another aspect of their self delusion.

[gcruse]

The universe may 'just so' because any other formulation would not allow life to arise. This principle doesn't require intelligent design, not should it. More an example of a broken clock being right eventually. We're here because we can be. There may have been/be 'failed' universes running alongside ours to infinity.

[Stallone]

Nice tag!

[Stallone]

My professional degree is attached to my name. And yours?

Appealing to authority is a logical argument fallacy.

'Because the Queen says so' isn't any kind of valid defense.

In this instance, because the PhD's can't understand the workings of the universe they declare it a hodgepodge of random laws, i.e. ugly.

We really don't need PhD's to validate the elegance and grand design of our universe. It exists in its glory whether we will ever comprehend its meaning or not.

The arrogance of these fools is truly breathtaking.