Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

There may be some scientists like this but they are few and far between. The vast majority of academic scientists I've had the privelage, nay honour, of meeting and working with have been some of the most honest and virtuous people I've ever met.

There was an anecdote relayed in one Dawkin's books (I forget which one) where an aged sage has hosted a lecture by a new researcher whose work had apparently destroyed the older scientists pet theory to pieces. The older man sat quietly and respectfully throughout the presentation which showed the work and evidence collected and he went to meet the young researcher in the front of the lecture room before the applause had even finished. He could be seen to be visibly moved to tears as he shook the lecturer's hand. But these were quickly seen to be tears of joy as he said: 'Thank you, dear boy! I have been mistaken these last 42 years. It is a pleasure that I have lived to see the error of my ways. Once more, thank you!'

I'm paraphrasing, as I haven't got the quote to hand, unfortunately. But this had been my experience of the vast majority of worker within science. Very thoughtful men and women who do not jump to brash conclusion but carefully consider the evidence and above all want to know the truth - even if it means they're wrong. Especially if they are wrong who wants a career of barking up the wrong tree! Not me!

 

Apparently, neutrinos do mutate as you put it. They change shape and flavours as they move. The Yanks are planning a giant experiment to fire them through 300+ miles of rock starting in New York (I think).

 

Passed through the what now? Like went through the centre and came through the other side intact? When did this happen?

 

Someone's son passed through a comet once in Northwich and came out unscathed.

 

How did they manage to fire that place towards the Sun - let alone through it?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

My dad was an adherent of Hoyles' 'Steady State' theory, though it seemed pretty obvious that Hawkins, amongst others, had destroyed it with maths. Seemed is maybe the opportune word. There are obviously things we don't understand about dark matter - including actually finding some. Still think the answer to everything is understanding what is inside the particles of an atom, and all the forces inside them.

 

All true, but Dawkins doesn't relate the tale that Newton, perhaps the greatest scientist ever (after Darwin!), spent half his professional career trying to ruin the reputation of fellow scientist Robert Hooke. Even the best of eggheads can get human now and again.

 

Probably why they went out of business.

 

Are you American, DD? I'm not being contemptuous, but I have heard a few Americans making this same mistake. I think you meant Stephen Hawking (the physicist), not to be conflated with Richard Dawkins the Ethologist and Evolutionary Biologist.

 

No, my bad. I have three books by Hawking too!

Edit: have six by Dawkins.

Edit edit: I don't have any albums by The Darkness.

 

We all have blond, or senior, moments, DD!

 

I'm worried about all this concentration on Maths (please spell it right as this is a UK site) and in particular the reliance upon modelling.

Now as far as I can remember, Statistics is based upon the Law of Statistical Regularity and the Law of Inertia of Large Numbers. Both of those laws are predicated on a limited universe but do those 'truths' stilll hold true i the vastness of space and time?

Now the only reason for modelling something is because it is impossible or impractical to experiment in real space and time. The model is of necessity an edited version of those factors the modeller believes to be important combined within mathematical processes to represent the 'real' world. Therefore no matter how complex and no matter how good the mathematical techniques employed the model can only suggest what may be or may happen - hence no definitive answer.

 

Can't believe this has gone threes pages without an RHC post......is he de-barred?

 

I'm glad you hold the same opinion on math's as I do, Dave. The American math' which is slowly gaining ground amongst our youth - who are too reliant on American culture to make their own - sounds ungainly and discordant when spoken aloud. I wince every time I hear it, although I'm not averse to changes in language, words or culture. I guess in this sense I'm a total English snob!

As far as mathematics goes, I'm a pragmatist. If it can inform on, or anticipate, an experiment then I'm all for theoretical mathematics or mathematical modelling. At the end of the day, the difference between science and the old metaphysics (philosophy) is that science can be confirmed (to an extent) in the 'real' world by experiments. There is a wonderful passage in Sagan's Demon Haunted World which explains with crystal clarity this very point. Well worth read that book. I can't recommend it enough. It would help Sisu immensely!

 

what you need is

[video=youtube;lFPLgGWMndc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFPLgGWMndc[/video]

 

This thread needs moving to the Man Utd board where it may be a useful basis for their #alternative view of footballing reality

 

I think some of their posters might enjoy this thread.

 

I have a growing feeling that our society needs a return of metaphysical philosophy. Since WW2, we have progressively become bound in a systems orientated environment wherein we have to adapt ourselves and our behaviours to meet the needs of systems and technologies. Hence we have entered the Age of The Rule - nothing has value unless it can be measured or weighed. However, human existence goes far beyond that.

 

Disagree Dave, think our issue is the same old thing. The human representing the bigger picture starts to believe they are the bigger picture.


Religious version:

God>representative> organization>fame> ego>corruption.

Science version:

Truth>representative>organization>fame>ego>corruption.

And ditto, politic, philosophy.


Reason I lean to science? At its truest, it never claims to have the final answer, just the next question. The rest tell you what is, what should be and that you are a traitor\heretic\sub human if you question that starting/finish point.

Any scientist that starts sounding as certain as a politician, Pope or Bono is no longer a scientist.

 

Actually, on a broader level, we do a agree.