Astrophysics for People in a Hurry
by Neil deGrasse Tyson
Ch. 1: The Greatest Story Ever Told
Please use this thread to discuss this chapter.by Neil deGrasse Tyson
Ch. 1: The Greatest Story Ever Told
In total there are 3 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 3 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am
A story about the where the cosmos came from is known as a cosmogony. Science is just about facts, while stories are about what people consider important and why. Tyson jumps between science and story to make the astronomy interesting and lively. That is why Tyson introduces Biblical allusions, first with this chapter title and then explaining that the creation of hadrons prevented the ultimate let there be light scenario.Harry Marks wrote:It's a little bit awkward to see this treated as a "story" - the inferences drawn are based mainly on theory. Even later in the book we get to some possible problems with the "story."
Very pertinent questions. There are people working on possibilities, but I haven't been impressed with any I have heard about. The fact is cosmologists are just scrolling backwards on a "video" that we have a small, thin slice of. They assume that things before worked as they do now, for good reason, except that when you get to the first micro-mili-femto-second, you can't scroll back anymore. We have so few clues where all that Big Bang came from that theorists are free to make stuff up within very wide parameters. And they do.Penelope wrote:It seems that the beginning of everything was infinitesimally small. Even smaller than atoms and electrons? Is it still matter? Is it a thing?
Mass and matter can neither be created nor destroyed, I was told in my physics class. I am wondering??
I love that stuff. The demonstration was pretty awesome.Penelope wrote:I've just visited Classical Greece where 3000 years ago, they designed theatres using Fibonacci mathematics, so that you could hear a pin drop on the back row.
Penelope wrote: you say that science is just about facts. It isn't, it is about theory and most likely 'meaning/outcome, based on the accumulation of facts, don't you think?
Well, that's why we have epistemology, and why people should always put persuasion ahead of imposition, when it comes to moral and mystical truth. The problem comes when religion gets involved in ethnic solidarity, so that economics comes into play. Then you can even get Buddhists to kill people (as in Myanmar today). But it isn't really for the sake of "religious truth" and you should never believe anyone who says it is.Penelope wrote:when we start to make up stories as to 'why' we are here.....and then start fighting and killing one another as to whose story is the truth......Trouble is, there might not be a reason why and that thought, is freeing to some people, but unbearable to others of us.
Hi Penelope. Scientific theory, such as the theory of gravity or the theory of evolution or the theory of relativity, is closely linked to factuality, with the observation that no factual evidence exists that contradicts these theories and abundant evidence confirms them. Scientific theories are factual, even if all predictions involve probability.Penelope wrote:Robert, you say that science is just about facts. It isn't, it is about theory and most likely 'meaning/outcome, based on the accumulation of facts, don't you think?
I think he is calling it a story in order to claim that the astronomical explanation of the universe is a greater story than the story of Jesus Christ, which is the origin of his chapter title, The Greatest Story Ever Told. Christianity tells the story of creation in Genesis to explain why human beings are important and why we are immoral. But Tyson aims to replace the Christian fantasy with scientific knowledge. It is just quite hard, as Carl Sagan noted in his book Pale Blue Dot, to explain the story of why humans are significant in objective terms when the universe is so big and old.Penelope wrote: Isn't this why the author is calling it a story?
Yes, the jigsaw puzzle piece in the wrong place is a good analogy for scientific theories that have anomalies. The hope of science is that the universe will prove to comply with elegant beautiful consistent mathematical laws, but the current state of astrophysics does not yet have such a theory of everything. I am more concerned where the jigsaw pieces are out of place in topics that matter to human concern, such as religion, climate change and politics. If we could somehow base our views on these topics on the objective truths of astronomy we might start to be more systematic.Penelope wrote: They get things wrong sometimes. Well....a bit wrong. I think it seems a bit like making a jigsaw puzzle and sometimes science gets a piece in the wrong place so we can't make sense of the whole picture.
We can’t really avoid the why question. Even saying there is no reason or that we can’t know is still an explanation of sorts. I prefer to say as an answer to why we are here that in scientific thought the universe reflects upon itself in symbols, and that this complex activity means human flourishing is intrinsically good.Penelope wrote: Of course, it isn't so drastic when we get the sums wrong as to 'how' we are here, but when we start to make up stories as to 'why' we are here.....and then start fighting and killing one another as to whose story is the truth......Trouble is, there might not be a reason why and that thought, is freeing to some people, but unbearable to others of us. .....the truth is so often disconcerting.... Rafael Sabatini
The idea that all the killing was just about abstract issues of religious belief is not tenable. Yes, many of the burnings of heretics (of both categories) were just about conscience, but mostly they were caught up in the fights about who could determine legitimacy of an heir, whether Rome or London had authority over the church, and whether the wealth of monasteries could be confiscated.Penelope wrote:Here in England during the Reformation thousands of people were burned at the stake just for being Protestant and then later, thousands of Catholic suffered the same fate, or worse, not having done anything wrong except practice their faith the way they had been taught.
Penelope wrote:However, I don't think a scientific mind, a religious mind, or an artistic mind are mutually exclusive. They need to be approached differently. I find it more difficult to think scientifically but I can certainly see the benefit in attempting to do so and in doing so lose the bias in my character towards the spiritual or intuitive.