• In total there are 39 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 39 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Engage in discussions encompassing themes like cosmology, human evolution, genetic engineering, earth science, climate change, artificial intelligence, psychology, and beyond in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
User avatar
President Camacho

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
I Should Be Bronzed
Posts: 1655
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:44 pm
15
Location: Hampton, Ga
Has thanked: 246 times
Been thanked: 314 times

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

Have you seen the Southpark Thanksgiving episode? It's super funny and it's all about how the History Channel has gone completely off the board with their fantasy science and what-if History. That channel is getting to be like MTV where in order to see real History or real Music Videos you have to be awake at 3 a.m. in the morning.
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2198 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

We were flipping channels just today and came across the History Channel. Some show was talking about the "evidence" in the Bible for extraterrestrial visitation. I didn't linger for long, but was quite surprised that this is the kind of crap that is aired on the "History Channel" nowadays.
-Geo
Question everything
User avatar
johnson1010
Tenured Professor
Posts: 3564
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
15
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1280 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

Prof. Brian Cox talking about the counter-intuitive realm of quantum mechanics, and how that doesn't mean magic is real. (so shut up, Dedpak.)

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2012/02/ ... nderstood/
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
User avatar
Dexter

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
I dumpster dive for books!
Posts: 1787
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:14 pm
13
Has thanked: 144 times
Been thanked: 712 times
United States of America

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

johnson1010 wrote:Prof. Brian Cox talking about the counter-intuitive realm of quantum mechanics, and how that doesn't mean magic is real. (so shut up, Dedpak.)

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2012/02/ ... nderstood/
Good article, I want to read his book:
http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Universe- ... 485&sr=1-1
User avatar
johnson1010
Tenured Professor
Posts: 3564
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
15
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1280 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

I've got Quantum universe sitting in front of me!
I also picked up his book on relativity. Good reads, both of them!
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

Lets straighten you out , Johnson

First of all no one is an "expert" in the relm of quantum mechanics. Any quantum physicist will gladly admit to that.
You are being a silly little cheerleader here again - "Yay Science!"

Secondly, the laws that givern quantum phenomena, science can only describe( to a very limited degree)and treat as "brute" laws with zero explanation as to what it is that governs them. Most naturalists like yourself (although you seem to be more of an outdated atomist) sidestep meta questions naturally arising from QM because of the default answer being so unsatisfying - nature is dumb. and all we have is brute dumb laws that come into play for no rational reason that would imply intelligence.

Lastly, Deepak is a well educated doctor. although i would not agree it gives him license to speculate in the manner he does about QM, i certainly would tell you to shut your big mouth before asking him to.

Thanks
Last edited by ant on Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

Lastly, Deepak is a well educated doctor. although i would not agree it gives him license to speculate in the manner he does about QM, i certainly would tell you to shut your big mouth before asking him to.
Educated shmeducated. Just like well-educated YEC's, education is rationalized as it's ingested. Those who are better rationalizers can shoehorn nearly any new information into their worldview.

Most naturalists like yourself (although you seem to be more of an outdated atomist) sidestep meta questions naturally arising from QM because of the default answer being so unsatisfying - nature is dumb.
I think johnson's answer will be similar to my own. The reason I sidestep meta-questions is that I don't have the answer to them. Saying "I don't know" is an honest answer. The most honest one, in my opinion. Yet when you reply with "I don't know" to questions that a YEC or other belief fundy throws at you, they scream at you for dodging the question. Or sidestepping the question. Accept "I don't know" as the answer.

Be wary of those who instead claim to have the answers. Men like Deepak Chopra, who has a fabricated worldview he sells to people for a profit. New age worldviews aren't as profitable as the old school ones such as Christianity, but that doesn't mean there isn't a niche in the market.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
johnson1010
Tenured Professor
Posts: 3564
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
15
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1280 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: 2 ways to be an expert: Science or Fake it.

Unread post

Lets straighten you out , Johnson
Haha, yeah. You do that, Ant. Let that wisdom shine down!
First of all no one is an "expert" in the relm of quantum mechanics. Any quantum physicist will gladly admit to that.


Like this for instance. Let me bask in this radiant display of knowledge!

There certainly are experts in quantum physics. And Deepak Chopra is certainly not one of them. You like to think that the "quantum" must mean "nobody knows anything about this" physics.

Expert:

Image
Knows what he is talking about.

Bull-shitter:
Image
Doesn't know what he's talking about.

The physicists who use this know exactly what the standard model says is going to happen when they make their calculations. To a ludicrous degree of accuracy. Better predictions than have ever been made, by anybody else, using any other method, ever.

So these guys are all wandering around with a blind fold on?

What i've explained to you before and you've worked very hard not to aknowledge, is that what's difficult is to try to picture the interactions of QM in your head in terms of objects on human scales. Not in how QM works. They know perfectly well how it works. It's just hard to wrap your brain around it.
Secondly, the laws that givern quantum phenomena, science can only describe( to a very limited degree)and treat as "brute" laws with zero explanation as to what it is that governs them.


If by that you mean, with more accuracy than anything that has ever been uttered by a human mouth in history, you are right on the mark.

But what you are really complaining about here is that we've nailed down the how of QM, but not the why. We don't know the why, but that hasn't prevented us from using it to revolutionize the world. How you like that computer? Well the transistors that make it work rely on quantum mechanics. And you know computers, just whizzing boxes full of who-knows-what...

Nobody knows anything about them.
Most naturalists like yourself (although you seem to be more of an outdated atomist) sidestep meta questions naturally arising from QM because of the default answer being so unsatisfying - nature is dumb. and all we have is brute dumb laws that come into play for no rational reason that would imply intelligence.
To you, it may sound unsatisfying. But so what if you are not satisfied? I have had no difficulty saying things to you that i know you won't like to hear. Hasn't made me side step saying them.

And once again you are pushing your failing off onto others. You think people dodge meta questions BECAUSE they don't imply an underlying intelligence? No. They give answers to you which don't imply an underlying intelligence, so you THINK those answers are a dodge. Because they didn't say what you wanted them to say. So they must be avoiding "the truth". Understand?

You came to the table expecting everyone to point at a mysterious invisible entity which set everything up, then get sad when they not only don't say that, but seemingly are perfectly fine with the evidence which suggests one isn't even necessary.
Lastly, Deepak is a well educated doctor. although i would not agree it gives him license to speculate in the manner he does about QM, i certainly would tell you to shut your big mouth before asking him to.
On what basis, exactly? Is the fact that Chopra went to medical school, and after having studied what has been demonstrated to work for certain, instead chose the path of "alternative" medicine, which has not been demonstrated to work in the least as his career path... is that what's impressed you about his credentials?

This just makes him more of an idiot.

And in any case, i consider your credibility here pretty low, so i am not overly concerned to hear you would rather hear Deepak Chopra than me.

Anyway, carry on Anting.
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
Post Reply

Return to “Science & Technology”