5 ms·

Why We Might Be Alone

3 points by jasonhansel 4y ago

dredmorbius 4y ago
This is an interesting presentation on at least two fronts. First of course is the overt discussion: what is the likelihood of intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe, and are humans alone or not. The second strikes me as potentially more interesting: What are the bounds of knowledge and understanding in the face of little direct empirical evidence? I've spent the past few years listening to several podcasts on philosophy, most notably Stephen West's "Philosophize This" and Peter Adamson's "The History of Philosophy (Without Any Gaps)". The many failings of argument, and in particular appeals to emotion and optimism (not unknown in other domains here on HN) is a large part of that. Much of both is consumed with epistemology, logic, truth, knowledge, and many (many (many (many (many)))) religious debates. Those too, read at face value offer one level of understanding, but taken at a deeper level concern what do we know, what CAN we know, and how should we best act under circumstances of partial or zero knowledge? There's a third level which occurs as I write this: much of the interesting work over the past 50--75 years or so in physics has revolved less around new elements, particles, and forces (the major component of physics through the first half of the 20th century), and far more on sensing and detection methods, both direct and indirect. These have allowed us to extract a phenomenal amount of signal and information from immensely distant, faint, and subtle phenomena.
- vanillaicesquad 4y ago
  The moment we discovered that particles are a lattice everything began to make sense
  - dredmorbius 4y ago
    Could you unpack that a bit?
    - vanillaicesquad 4y ago
      toda particula es la expresion de un campo de fuerza, no tiene localidad en el sentido de que no existe en el espacio (es una propiedad del espacio) Si quieres saber mas mira este video: https://youtu.be/MmG2ah5Df4g https://youtu.be/MmG2ah5Df4g
      - vanillaicesquad 4y ago
        Beyond that it is mathematically evident that superstring theory is the biggest setback in the history of physics since the beginning of time. Never before has physics been stagnant for so long without making an important discovery (more than 70 years since the quantum theory of the particle wave). Imagine, materials theory is the only branch of physics that hasn't been bogged down by money. And this happens because if you write "superstrings" or "twistores" in the name of your scientific article, it is guaranteed that a university will subend your doctoral thesis. It is a complex system of corruption and scientific falsehood. To know more: https://youtu.be/0Fysjw0IXBQ https://youtu.be/0Fysjw0IXBQ
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]

3 points by jasonhansel 4y ago

This is an interesting presentation on at least two fronts. First of course is the overt discussion: what is the likelihood of intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe, and are humans alone or not. The second strikes me as potentially more interesting: What are the bounds of knowledge and understanding in the face of little direct empirical evidence? I've spent the past few years listening to several podcasts on philosophy, most notably Stephen West's "Philosophize This" and Peter Adamson's "The History of Philosophy (Without Any Gaps)". The many failings of argument, and in particular appeals to emotion and optimism (not unknown in other domains here on HN) is a large part of that. Much of both is consumed with epistemology, logic, truth, knowledge, and many (many (many (many (many)))) religious debates. Those too, read at face value offer one level of understanding, but taken at a deeper level concern what do we know, what CAN we know, and how should we best act under circumstances of partial or zero knowledge? There's a third level which occurs as I write this: much of the interesting work over the past 50--75 years or so in physics has revolved less around new elements, particles, and forces (the major component of physics through the first half of the 20th century), and far more on sensing and detection methods, both direct and indirect. These have allowed us to extract a phenomenal amount of signal and information from immensely distant, faint, and subtle phenomena.

vanillaicesquad 4y ago
The moment we discovered that particles are a lattice everything began to make sense
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  Could you unpack that a bit?
  - vanillaicesquad 4y ago
    toda particula es la expresion de un campo de fuerza, no tiene localidad en el sentido de que no existe en el espacio (es una propiedad del espacio) Si quieres saber mas mira este video: https://youtu.be/MmG2ah5Df4g https://youtu.be/MmG2ah5Df4g
    - vanillaicesquad 4y ago
      Beyond that it is mathematically evident that superstring theory is the biggest setback in the history of physics since the beginning of time. Never before has physics been stagnant for so long without making an important discovery (more than 70 years since the quantum theory of the particle wave). Imagine, materials theory is the only branch of physics that hasn't been bogged down by money. And this happens because if you write "superstrings" or "twistores" in the name of your scientific article, it is guaranteed that a university will subend your doctoral thesis. It is a complex system of corruption and scientific falsehood. To know more: https://youtu.be/0Fysjw0IXBQ https://youtu.be/0Fysjw0IXBQ
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]