Posts Tagged ‘science’
Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code embedded WITHIN Superstring Equations
There are many possible implications here, but the biggest one is not that our universe is an actual data transmission of some kind.
Vodpod videos no longer available.
To my mind this does not just suggest the obvious, that it is all code. That is true, but trivial. What is really suggested is that the coding has a data transmission correction process. This is yet another neat trick for the subatomic level showing ties to the rudiments of consciousness. For those that insist that the implication is that the universe, including ourselves, are a simulation, I must respond that we clearly pass the Turing test and are indistinguishable from real humans. This makes the simulation argument moot because it becomes a perfect emulation.
To see the professor explain his theory in more detail, look here.
That said, one can never rule out Illuminati.
How you live in a community, and the direction you wish it to take, needs to be based on ethical, not scientific principles. If you attempt to base your society or personal decisions (or the solution of ills) on science alone, then I can see it going nowhere other than to falsify the attempt as an immoral enterprise and ultimately to result in the corruption of both science and society.
Science only hypothesizes on how things work, not why they should be one way or another. That “why” is a question outside the realm of science. True science is for the most part value free , its results are independent of your opinions of them, but no human community can be so maintained without values. When you allow your social agenda to be hitched to a scientific theory, then you endanger both the community and the science when the scientific theory is falsified.
A good example of what I mean can be seen in global warming, or what I prefer to call climate change. Those that advocate scientific models touting to show global warming also happen to be socially progressive. Indeed, it is a guiding principle of progressives that we need to model our society on a more sustainable framework. It would be truly unfortunate for progressives in this noble goal to be dismissed because they push sustainable solutions based on a false scientific model.
The values we hold in science must be separated from those we hold in community. The former only tells us how we know something, the latter tells us what we should do with that knowledge. A sustainable lifestyle is an appropriate goal independent of any result of climate change. That the science of climate change has gotten muddied by political, economic or other social concerns threatens to invalidate all in the mix.
Many know what constitutes scientific knowledge, fewer can give an adequate account (without dogma) of what is moral.
Galileo faces the Roman Inquisition who, without evidence, demand he recant his statements on heliocentrism. by John Atcheson James Lawrence Powell’s The Inquisition of Climate Science is a straightforward, thorough and well-researched account of the assault on climate science. The book is scholarly, yet entertaining, as a quick review of the titles in the Table […]
James Lawrence Powell’s The Inquisition of Climate Science is a straightforward, thorough and well-researched account of the assault on climate science.
The book is scholarly, yet entertaining, as a quick review of the titles in the Table of Contents reveals. Among the best are: “Toxic Tanks” (think tanks), “An Industry to Trust” (in which he contrasts the oil and gas companies’ and Insurance companies’ positions on global warming), “Climategate: Much Ado About Nothing” (in which he drives yet another wooden stake in the heart of this travesty and dispatches other “gates”).
Powell’s account is – pardon the pun – intelligently designed to thoroughly debunk the baseless dogma and diatribes coming out of the denier community. [more]
I have just one thought here on the above:
Note the difference between denial and skepticism. The former is the dismissal of science, the latter is its heart. The denial is really the denial of the diagnosis made by the doctors of science. We can just ignore the problem as the denier would, however, most of us would rather take some form of treatment, no matter how painful.
The skeptic may ask for a second opinion, especially on a terminal diagnosis. Also, the skeptic might ultimately prefer an alternative medicine route, rather than a more conventional treatment. However, even the skeptic in the face of evidence will often become a reasonable patient and look at all alternatives, and seek to use some combination of treatments which he trusts based on the evidence. The denier, if he never moves though anger and bargaining to acceptance, will just hope he is not wrong, rather than returning to a healthy skepticism and weighing the available options in the face of death.
I am not saying that there is not bias (and money) on both sides of this argument. I am saying that in the name of the precautionary principle we need to start doing what is good for a sustainable world.
The reasoning involved in the nature of the evil of an “ex-chemical company” like Monsanto is not rocket science. We only have to consider a few basic principles. Once they are accepted as true, the rest follows. The first principle is that life processes and systems are complex. They are the most complex systems known. This makes all developing life sciences, especially those involved with the dysfunction and repair of life processes, as much an art as a science. Those that would create a product must also be able to maintain and repair it, not only the product, but also any consequence of its use. So the practice of ’making’ or modifying of life must equate to the healing of life in its methods in order for it to be a moral enterprise. Those that would improve life must be able to heal it when things go awry. To confuse a practicing art with an applied science is to engage in fraud and quackery of the most unethical and dangerous sort.
Corporate Power – The Bane of Civilization
It is corporatism. It is the new slavery. If you don’t like the status quo, then march on your capital on #OCT06. Bring a tent.
Vodpod videos no longer available.