Jump to content






Photo

A wonderful lecture by Lawrence Krauss


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#61 Ninth Doctor

Ninth Doctor

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,992 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fiction authors: Umberto Eco, P.G. Wodehouse, Thomas Pynchon, Douglas Adams, Robert Heinlein

Posted 07 March 2012 - 09:41 PM



The fact remains that no one has produced an induction from unquestionably true premises which fails which cannot be explained as failing due to an invalidity of form.

Produce one.


Here and Now with no bullshit. Define Proper Form Induction. Make it clear. Make it brief.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Ted hasn't posted here in about a year I think. You weren't paying attention when he took his leave?
Prandium gratis non est

#62 BaalChatzaf

BaalChatzaf

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 11,214 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Currently residing in New Jersey, the Bad-a-Bing State.
  • Interests:mathematics, physics, alternative energy sources.

    I am also involved in preparing recorded books for blind and dyslexic folks.

Posted 07 March 2012 - 10:06 PM

Ted hasn't posted here in about a year I think. You weren't paying attention when he took his leave?



Thank your for the heads up

Ba'al Chatzaf
אויב מיין באָבע האט בייצים זי וואָלט זיין מיין זיידע

#63 Ninth Doctor

Ninth Doctor

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,992 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fiction authors: Umberto Eco, P.G. Wodehouse, Thomas Pynchon, Douglas Adams, Robert Heinlein

Posted 29 April 2012 - 07:29 PM

Here's an interesting new piece from Krauss. He's defending himself from philosophers.

http://www.scientifi...ation-of-philos
Prandium gratis non est

#64 Ninth Doctor

Ninth Doctor

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,992 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fiction authors: Umberto Eco, P.G. Wodehouse, Thomas Pynchon, Douglas Adams, Robert Heinlein

Posted 29 April 2012 - 07:43 PM

"Philosophy is a field that, unfortunately, reminds me of that old Woody Allen joke, "those that can't do, teach, and those that can't teach, teach gym." And the worst part of philosophy is the philosophy of science; the only people, as far as I can tell, that read work by philosophers of science are other philosophers of science. It has no impact on physics what so ever, and I doubt that other philosophers read it because it's fairly technical."

http://m.theatlantic...bsolete/256203/
Prandium gratis non est

#65 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 14,959 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 29 April 2012 - 08:43 PM

There is no nothing so nothing came from it. Space itself is only an abstraction explaining and/or encompassing distance, various densities and energy. The "vacuum" of space is only a relative vacuum, defined into existence. The universe cannot expand into nothing so, if it's expanding it's into something--which might be a basically static "something." That is something that may be all around us and in us and likely is.

--Brant
why isn't the speed of light faster or slower, btw?--is something holding it back?
God as "nothing"--that explains a lot!

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#66 Mikee

Mikee

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 1,099 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 April 2012 - 09:39 AM

There is no nothing so nothing came from it. Space itself is only an abstraction explaining and/or encompassing distance, various densities and energy. The "vacuum" of space is only a relative vacuum, defined into existence. The universe cannot expand into nothing so, if it's expanding it's into something--which might be a basically static "something." That is something that may be all around us and in us and likely is.

--Brant
why isn't the speed of light faster or slower, btw?--is something holding it back?
God as "nothing"--that explains a lot!

Planck's constant.

#67 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 14,959 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 30 April 2012 - 09:55 AM


There is no nothing so nothing came from it. Space itself is only an abstraction explaining and/or encompassing distance, various densities and energy. The "vacuum" of space is only a relative vacuum, defined into existence. The universe cannot expand into nothing so, if it's expanding it's into something--which might be a basically static "something." That is something that may be all around us and in us and likely is.

--Brant
why isn't the speed of light faster or slower, btw?--is something holding it back?
God as "nothing"--that explains a lot!

Planck's constant.

This is fascinating, at least in so far as I can understand it, which is not very much.

--Brant

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#68 Ninth Doctor

Ninth Doctor

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,992 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fiction authors: Umberto Eco, P.G. Wodehouse, Thomas Pynchon, Douglas Adams, Robert Heinlein

Posted 30 April 2012 - 10:01 AM

There is no nothing so nothing came from it.


Your book argues that physics has definitively demonstrated how something can come from nothing. Do you mean that physics has explained how particles can emerge from so-called empty space, or are you making a deeper claim?

Krauss: I'm making a deeper claim, but at the same time I think you're overstating what I argued. I don't think I argued that physics has definitively shown how something could come from nothing; physics has shown how plausible physical mechanisms might cause this to happen. I try to be intellectually honest in everything that I write, especially about what we know and what we don't know. If you're writing for the public, the one thing you can't do is overstate your claim, because people are going to believe you. They see I'm a physicist and so if I say that protons are little pink elephants, people might believe me. And so I try to be very careful and responsible. We don't know how something can come from nothing, but we do know some plausible ways that it might.

But I am certainly claiming a lot more than just that. That it's possible to create particles from no particles is remarkable---that you can do that with impunity, without violating the conservation of energy and all that, is a remarkable thing. The fact that "nothing," namely empty space, is unstable is amazing. But I'll be the first to say that empty space as I'm describing it isn't necessarily nothing, although I will add that it was plenty good enough for Augustine and the people who wrote the Bible. For them an eternal empty void was the definition of nothing, and certainly I show that that kind of nothing ain't nothing anymore.
Prandium gratis non est

#69 Mikee

Mikee

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 1,099 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 April 2012 - 10:13 AM



There is no nothing so nothing came from it. Space itself is only an abstraction explaining and/or encompassing distance, various densities and energy. The "vacuum" of space is only a relative vacuum, defined into existence. The universe cannot expand into nothing so, if it's expanding it's into something--which might be a basically static "something." That is something that may be all around us and in us and likely is.

--Brant
why isn't the speed of light faster or slower, btw?--is something holding it back?
God as "nothing"--that explains a lot!

Planck's constant.

This is fascinating, at least in so far as I can understand it, which is not very much.

--Brant

Yes, same here. In my last physics class (~25 years ago) I did the derivation of the speed of light from first principles and using Planck's constant. When I got the correct answer it was like looking into the face of god. I could not do the math now without considerable study. When I retire I'd like to take those classes again and study astrophysics. If anyone has bonehead old guy courses somewhere. My wife and I have talked about moving to Flagstaff. I'd like to get a telescope and just look at the stars.

#70 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 14,959 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:16 PM




There is no nothing so nothing came from it. Space itself is only an abstraction explaining and/or encompassing distance, various densities and energy. The "vacuum" of space is only a relative vacuum, defined into existence. The universe cannot expand into nothing so, if it's expanding it's into something--which might be a basically static "something." That is something that may be all around us and in us and likely is.

--Brant
why isn't the speed of light faster or slower, btw?--is something holding it back?
God as "nothing"--that explains a lot!

Planck's constant.

This is fascinating, at least in so far as I can understand it, which is not very much.

--Brant

Yes, same here. In my last physics class (~25 years ago) I did the derivation of the speed of light from first principles and using Planck's constant. When I got the correct answer it was like looking into the face of god. I could not do the math now without considerable study. When I retire I'd like to take those classes again and study astrophysics. If anyone has bonehead old guy courses somewhere. My wife and I have talked about moving to Flagstaff. I'd like to get a telescope and just look at the stars.

I went to college in Flagstaff for two years. It's basically a railroad town. Real estate prices are rather high, I think because of an absence of buildable land. It also has the Lowell observatory and Northern AZ U.

--Brant
cold winters

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#71 Ninth Doctor

Ninth Doctor

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,992 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fiction authors: Umberto Eco, P.G. Wodehouse, Thomas Pynchon, Douglas Adams, Robert Heinlein

Posted 19 July 2012 - 05:23 PM

I thought this was really good. Jazz it up with some better production values and it could end up being the viral follow up to the Krauss talk.


Prandium gratis non est

#72 Ninth Doctor

Ninth Doctor

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,992 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Fiction authors: Umberto Eco, P.G. Wodehouse, Thomas Pynchon, Douglas Adams, Robert Heinlein

Posted 29 July 2012 - 07:02 AM


Oh brother. It got pulled down by the uploader, meanwhile someone else has posted the same talk from a different camera angle. It's roughly the same quality. Oh well.


Prandium gratis non est




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users