20080115

Cosmogony Loses It

The New York Times, venerable supporter of the Big Bang Theory, is getting deeper and deeper into the intellectual mess it had no little hand in creating. The absurdities are piling up in the form of brains running around naked through the universe with the possibility of reincarnation thrown in for good measure:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

How long before the NYT finally realizes that it is riding the wrong horse?

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I see no problem with the article. It's a relatively balanced account offering multiple interpretations of an assorted variety of professionals in the field of astrophysics. It's a healthy "univironment" for intellectual discussion, since it raises numerous possibilities and leaves no easy answers. It creates countless hypotheses, many of which can be tested experimentally (if not now, at least some time in the future).

Glenn Borchardt said...

Wow! You don't see a problem with naked brains running around the universe! Good luck with that! The "multiple" interpretations you see in the NYT definitely are "healthy" for religion, but definitely not for science. The article just shows how the indeterministic logic underlying the BBT leads to the craziest ideas that only an idealist could love.

lipox-1 said...

You seem to be falling victim to your own demons. "Religion" has many definitions, but what distinguishes it from simply "spirituality" is dogma, a canon of beliefs that cannot be questioned.

Science differs from religion, not so much by assertions, but by approach. In science, it is acceptable to assert anything... provided there is evidence. The "naked brains" idea is no doubt weird, but then again, so is a universe that goes on forever and ever. At least a naked brain can be imagined. I can't imagine "forever," because it is not a finite conception, and the mind only deals in finitudes.

Multiple interpretations are the food of science. Multiple interpretations are made, evidence accumulates, and eventually only one approach seems valid. Nevertheless, as more knowledge is accumulated, that one idea will itself divide into a new multiplicity, which must then undergo the same procedures of correction.

There is no dogma in science. Even your own, rather unusual scientific philosophy asserts the primacy of uncertainty.

Naked brains are possible. You haven't considered that there may be regions of the universe (which you claim is infinite) that support that kind of organization of microcosms. Maybe not here, but maybe many lightyears away.

Post a Comment

Thanks so much for your comment. Be sure to hit "Preview" to see if it will publish correctly. Then hit "Publish". Include your email address if you wish to receive copies of your comment as well as all other published comments to this Blog.

For those having trouble getting this comment section to work:

Nitecruzr writes:

[FAQ] Why can't people post comments on my blog?

The Blogger / Google login status, and the ability to post comments, is sensitive to both cookie and script filters. Your readers may need to enable (stop filtering) "third party cookies", in their browser and on their computer. The effects of the newly unavoidable CAPTCHA, and the Google "One account" login, requires third party cookies, even more than before.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/11/the-google-one-account-login-and-cookie.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/comments-and-cookie-filters-october-2014.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/the-new-commenting-captcha-is.html

Third party cookies filtering, in a browser setting, is the most common solution, overall - but your readers may have to search for other filter(s) that affect their use of Blogger / Google.

Any filters are subject to update, by the creator. If the problem started a few days ago, your readers may have to look on their computers, and find out what product or accessory was updated, a few days ago.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/01/almost-nobody-controls-their-own.html