What no Stephen Hawking - Master of the Universe thread

[Sweaty Betty]

he directs his cursor thingy over an alphabet/dictionary thing on the screen afaik. Plus he pre-prepares lots of stuff obv.

ahhhhh, i had all theories, like he had a computer that could read his thoughts- i was getting a bit carried away i know

 

[cliche guevara]

Do you think they'll manage to blow up the universe while conducting their experiments?

What a fuck up that would be!

Last night made me think how sometimes physics is a bit like religion... Just a leap into the unknown, lots of theories that can't be proved and many attempts to answer the 'where are we from'? question.

I hope not! Seriously though, the risk of the is incredibly small.

With regards to physics being like religion, in some respects then yes, but in others it's the exact opposite. For example, religion is happy to explain everything with a simple answer, that of "god", wheras physics wants to know the how, and why, of "god".

 

[TrippyLondoner]

Loved this programme, learnt a few interesting things which made me think.

 

[story]

I hope not! Seriously though, the risk of the is incredibly small.

With regards to physics being like religion, in some respects then yes, but in others it's the exact opposite. For example, religion is happy to explain everything with a simple answer, that of "god", wheras physics wants to know the how, and why, of "god".

So does theology

(Literally "study of god")

 

[story]

he directs his cursor thingy over an alphabet/dictionary thing on the screen afaik. Plus he pre-prepares lots of stuff obv.

And he uses a muscle in his cheek to direct the cursor.

 

[cliche guevara]

So does theology

(Literally "study of god")

The difference being that phyics does it with physical objects, not thoughts.

 

[story]

The difference being that phyics does it with physical objects, not thoughts.

A brane is not a physical object. Nor is superstring, nor gravity, nor the nuclear forces...
etc.

 

[DotCommunist]

And he uses a muscle in his cheek to direct the cursor.

which sounds like fucking hard work of itself imo

 

[TrippyLondoner]

One of the thing things that really tickles me about all these theories is that they are given such credence and weight despite the fact that it's impossible to prove them. So far as anyone can tell, most of it will remain theory cos no-one can think of a way to prove them.

But because these wonderful and wacky ideas are elegant and have internal logic, and they are put together by physicists, then they are not considered fantastic in the least.

Yeh exactly, thats the one thing that gets me. He basically goes on about this new crazy theory, and then claims 'we can't see it as its outside of our reality so it can never be proven'. Hmm, not too convincing that part i must admit!

Btw i wonder what drugs he takes(or took) to start thinking this stuff?

 

[story]

which sounds like fucking hard work of itself imo

Indeed.

He must have great resilience and strength of will alongside all the other amazing things of which he is capable.

 

[DotCommunist]

Yeh exactly, thats the one thing that gets me. He basically goes on about this new crazy theory, and then claims 'we can't see it as its outside of our reality so it can never be proven'. Hmm, not too convincing that part i must admit!

Btw i wonder what drugs he takes(or took) to start thinking this stuff?

If you're comparing Hawkings genius to lame trip philosophy

 

[TrippyLondoner]

If you're comparing Hawkings genius to lame trip philosophy

 

[cliche guevara]

A brane is not a physical object. Nor is superstring, nor gravity, nor the nuclear forces...
etc.

All are based on particles, whether observable to us or not.

 

[story]

All are based on particles, whether observable to us or not.

The forces are not particles. They act upon particles.

 

[Sweaty Betty]

Didnt he look cute in his space outfit ?

His smile made me beam...

 

[story]

I suppose the next thing to ay is that we can deduce the existance of the forces by the observable effects they cause.

Those who believe in a deity that acts in the material would claim the same thing, I suppose.

 

[i-am-your-idea]

If you're comparing Hawkings genius to lame trip philosophy

it all sounded very far out to me!

do you think being told he was going to die early on in his life gave him a sense of fatedness?

 

[cliche guevara]

Is not the point of the Large Hadron Detector to detect previously unknown particles which are the cause of the fundamental forces?

 

[manifold]

The forces are not particles. They act upon particles.

Don't gluons mediate e.g. the strong nuclear force, gravitons (undetected to date) mediate gravity and so on? The LHC should hopefully detect the Higgs boson too.

String theory's on the downturn now that it's having to appeal to the anthropic principle to retain its plausibility. A shame, but it's become unconvincing.

 

[story]

I do not mean to suggest that these theories are not defensible, nor am I arguing that they are "untrue"; I am merely hoping to highlight the current similarities between belief in such theories, and religious belief. As I stated earlier, this is an area of fierce and fascinating discussion right now. (I say "current similarities" because the elision between the two may disappear as soon as we achieve a Grand Theory)

Is not the point of the Large Hadron Detector to detect previously unknown particles which are the cause of the fundamental forces?

Currently we cannot see or observe any sub-atomic particle, we can only deduce its existence by theory, and by the effects any such particles have upon other known particles. We cannot even observe the effects of sub-atomic particles in the macro world (although we may be n the threshold of achieving this). It is hoped that the LHD will enable us to see and observe the effects of sub-atomic particles, specifically the Higgs-boson, which so far is only theorised. However, "seeing" such quanta is really a matter of theorising the effect it will have, and then looking for the effect; we do not see the actual particle.

This is my understanding; I'm happy to be corrected about this

Don't gluons mediate e.g. the strong nuclear force, gravitons (undetected to date) mediate gravity and so on? The LHC should hopefully detect the Higgs boson too.

Indeed... But such particles (if they exist in the form in which we suppose... or exist at all....) are still just mediating the forces. What are the forces themselves?

String theory's on the downturn now that it's having to appeal to the anthropic principle to retain its plausibility. A shame, but it's become unconvincing.

Yep.

Attention has now turned towards Dark Matter: yet another theory that cannot be seen, has not been proven, and is a matter of faith based on reasonable deduction.

The argument about the similarity between physics and religion is based on this same premise.


Just to clarify, I'm not saying that physics is a religion, nor that religion is a science; I am saying isnt it interesting to see the similarities between the two?

 

[cliche guevara]

Currently we cannot see or observe any sub-atomic particle, we can only deduce its existence by theory, and by the effects any such particles have upon other known particles. We cannot even observe the effects of sub-atomic particles in the macro world (although we may be n the threshold of achieving this). It is hoped that the LHD will enable us to see and observe the effects of sub-atomic particles, specifically the Higgs-boson, which so far is only theorised. However, "seeing" such quanta is really a matter of theorising the effect it will have, and then looking for the effect; we do not see the actual particle.

This is my understanding; I'm happy to be corrected about this

This is also (roughly) my understanding, however, with regard to your quote that

But such particles (if they exist in the form in which we suppose... or exist at all....) are still just mediating the forces.

Is this confirmed or just one theory? I thought that it was the particles themselves which were expected to be the fundamental elements of the force, rather than just a medium for a force to work through? I also am happy to be corrected, I'm not trying to argue,just broaden my understanding

 

[story]

I thought that was just the voicebox hardware, he decided to stick with it because that voice is so strongly associated with him. According to last week's programme the problem is that his body has so deteriorated that the only thing he has left to communicate with the hardware is a muscle in his cheek.



Overall thought it was a reasonable programme, not marvellous, but when you compare it with the pile of shite Horizon's become...

Apparently the voice was cobbled together form 1980's ansamachine technology.

And yes - he doesn't want to lose the voice cos it's his voice.

I think the more updated stuff would theoretically allow him to compose prose more swiftly - perhaps on eye movements rather than clenching a cheek muscle? I don't know. Does he still have eye movements? Can he blink? I assume so...

 

[story]

This is also (roughly) my understanding, however, with regard to your quote that



Is this confirmed or just one theory? I thought that it was the particles themselves which were expected to be the fundamental elements of the force, rather than just a medium for a force to work through? I also am happy to be corrected, I'm not trying to argue,just broaden my understanding

No, it's not confirmed. I was mainly responding to the specific post/point made by manifold.

The underlying nature of the forces is a deep mystery. It is hoped that the Unifying Theory will make everything more..... sensible; or at least easier to work out and perhaps understand.

Not being a physicist myself I am in no position to theorise; however, I await the unfolding of each chapter in this tale with great eagerness.

 

[N_igma]

But we all know the universe is really only 6,000 years old.

Interesting programme, didn't really like the part where it talked about his family life and stuff, I wanted pure science.