4 ms·

You might be interested in Lee Smolin’s book which explores this very hypothesis, among others and a generally fascinating review of how physics got where it is

You might be interested in Lee Smolin’s book which explores this very hypothesis, among others and a generally fascinating review of how physics got where it is… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_of_the_Cosmos https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_of_the_Cosmos

gradschoolfail 5y ago
When I was a grad student I once attended a lecture by Kip Thorne (before he won the Nobel prize but after Interstellar came out). He basically implied something that is vaguely heretical (and kinda tangential to the above): we should look for aliens inside black holes because thats where they prefer to be. For one, from their point of view (and this situation was sort of enacted in Interstellar) they can observe our epic timescales in “real time”. This puts the phrase “angels dancing on the head of a pin” in a new light, where pin could be loosely interpreted to mean “singularity”, I suppose.
- a9h74j 5y ago
  FWIW, I could be mistaken, but I once heard that the spirit of that question (angels on the head of the pin) was less about realism than countability -- i.e. more like asking about the countablility of the Real Numbers in an interval, or something of that sort. One way or another I took it as a much more generous description.
  - gradschoolfail 5y ago
    Interesting, do you have a citation? The Wikipedia page mentions nothing like that.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_can_dance_on_the_head_of_a_pin%3F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_can_dance_on_t...
    - a9h74j 5y ago
      'Countability' is too precise a term for the meaning or context. The article as I read it makes the core point I wanted to express: a derisive reference to scholarship of the time period as obcessed with "angels on pinheads" is probably ungenerous. If you know of JMG one statement of his was roughly this: Every school-child (of that time period) used to know that an 'eternal being' was outside of time, not a being [within time] that would "live forever." That is, 'eternal' apparently had a precise sense [then] which most are now ignorant of. Again, I could be wrong. It is hard for me to look down on curiousity about "what could be outside of time" when it remains a popular science question -- i.e., where did the big bang happen?, etc
- TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
  Based on your nick, I’m guessing that Kip Thorne lecture didn’t help your grades.
  - gradschoolfail 5y ago
    He turned me into a new believer so what can I do? At least i have someone to blame now

gradschoolfail 5y ago

When I was a grad student I once attended a lecture by Kip Thorne (before he won the Nobel prize but after Interstellar came out). He basically implied something that is vaguely heretical (and kinda tangential to the above): we should look for aliens inside black holes because thats where they prefer to be. For one, from their point of view (and this situation was sort of enacted in Interstellar) they can observe our epic timescales in “real time”. This puts the phrase “angels dancing on the head of a pin” in a new light, where pin could be loosely interpreted to mean “singularity”, I suppose.

a9h74j 5y ago
FWIW, I could be mistaken, but I once heard that the spirit of that question (angels on the head of the pin) was less about realism than countability -- i.e. more like asking about the countablility of the Real Numbers in an interval, or something of that sort. One way or another I took it as a much more generous description.
- gradschoolfail 5y ago
  Interesting, do you have a citation? The Wikipedia page mentions nothing like that.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_can_dance_on_the_head_of_a_pin%3F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_angels_can_dance_on_t...
  - a9h74j 5y ago
    'Countability' is too precise a term for the meaning or context. The article as I read it makes the core point I wanted to express: a derisive reference to scholarship of the time period as obcessed with "angels on pinheads" is probably ungenerous. If you know of JMG one statement of his was roughly this: Every school-child (of that time period) used to know that an 'eternal being' was outside of time, not a being [within time] that would "live forever." That is, 'eternal' apparently had a precise sense [then] which most are now ignorant of. Again, I could be wrong. It is hard for me to look down on curiousity about "what could be outside of time" when it remains a popular science question -- i.e., where did the big bang happen?, etc
TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
Based on your nick, I’m guessing that Kip Thorne lecture didn’t help your grades.
- gradschoolfail 5y ago
  He turned me into a new believer so what can I do? At least i have someone to blame now