5 ms·

I like the side-point this author makes. Anytime there's a new discovery in quantum theory or some other escoteric, sexy area of research, thousands of armchair

by jpxxx 14y ago

I like the side-point this author makes. Anytime there's a new discovery in quantum theory or some other escoteric, sexy area of research, thousands of armchair scientist knowitalls fall all over themselves to decry or incorrectly interpret what's been found. Ask a basic question on physics, biology, or engineering and only an actual scientist will pipe up. I blame science fiction novels.

bollockitis 14y ago
I think the big difference here is that quantum theory and string theory hold enormous implications for the nature of reality. Understanding these concepts, even on a basic level, ignites in us a sort of spiritual fascination with the universe. That's why they are sexy. It has nothing to do with science fiction novels. It's just that understanding the mechanics of a vacuum cleaner doesn't leave us in awe of the universe.
- 6ren 14y ago
  I think you're right about motivation, but that's about ego and fame within a social hierarchy. Someone who loves understanding for its own sake also loves understanding the little bits - and they are better at it, because their attention is not divided, and they are open to serendipity. One can't predict where understanding will come from e.g. the motion of a spinning plate. One could only be sure that understanding a vacuum cleaner is unrelated to understanding the universe in hindsight.
  - sesqu 14y ago
    There are two issues at stake here. The curious layman would, I argue, rather study the vacuum cleaner than quantum mechanics, if only because the former offers a well-understood topic to study, whereas the latter offers hostile theories and confusion. On the other hand, studying sci-fi physics sheds some light into what's coming to our world in the near term, and what is in flux. This is obviously valuable to a different sort of curious layman, one who is less interested in how everything works and more interested in refining their world view.
icelancer 14y ago
>Ask a basic question on physics, biology, or engineering and only an actual scientist will pipe up. Evolution/creationist crackpots?
dalke 14y ago
To be fair, if there's a new discovery related to evolution, you are likely to get non-scientists to respond. Granted, those will be people who argue that Darwinism is an evil, false influence in the world, but biology still has its own knowitalls. Or, look at controversial topics in other domains of science: AIDS was created as a biological weapon, vaccines cause autism. Fluoridated water is a Communist plot to "deplete the brainpower and sap the strength of a generation of American children." The WTC could not have fallen because of planes crashing into it, and must have been leveled due to planned explosives. This holds even outside of science. Ask a question on copyright laws and a bunch of people with no formal law training (including me) will chime in - leading to complete ripped movies on YouTube prefixed with the magic phrase "fair use."
- loceng 14y ago
  You sure know your conspiracy theories.
  - derleth 14y ago
    > You sure know your conspiracy theories. Some believe them, others collect them.
- ekianjo 14y ago
  You forgot "JFK was not killed by Oswald" and "We did not go on the Moon". Apart from that, you should avoid putting ridiculous conspiracy theories next to more believable ones. The fact that governments can and do stuff is secret and cover it up is hardly a "theory" anymore, wikileaks should ring some bells. Always believing what is written in the History Books sponsored by government oversight does not mean you are being fed the truth. Everyone has their own agenda.
  - dalke 14y ago
    I figured that the non-controversial controversies were easier to use as a counter-example.
  - derleth 14y ago
jere 14y ago
It's like reverse bike shedding. Bike sheds have proved too boring for anyone to actually care about their color anymore.
- vacri 14y ago
  Online, perhaps. But get involved in meatspace and bikeshedding is flourishing like always.
rbanffy 14y ago
> I blame science fiction novels. I personally blame self-help literature that borrows scientific terms to construct a fantasy magical world where their readers can actually help themselves by [insert stupid idea here]. And I cringe when someone says something represents a "quantum leap" from something else.

by jpxxx 14y ago

bollockitis 14y ago

I think the big difference here is that quantum theory and string theory hold enormous implications for the nature of reality. Understanding these concepts, even on a basic level, ignites in us a sort of spiritual fascination with the universe. That's why they are sexy. It has nothing to do with science fiction novels. It's just that understanding the mechanics of a vacuum cleaner doesn't leave us in awe of the universe.

6ren 14y ago
I think you're right about motivation, but that's about ego and fame within a social hierarchy. Someone who loves understanding for its own sake also loves understanding the little bits - and they are better at it, because their attention is not divided, and they are open to serendipity. One can't predict where understanding will come from e.g. the motion of a spinning plate. One could only be sure that understanding a vacuum cleaner is unrelated to understanding the universe in hindsight.
- sesqu 14y ago
  There are two issues at stake here. The curious layman would, I argue, rather study the vacuum cleaner than quantum mechanics, if only because the former offers a well-understood topic to study, whereas the latter offers hostile theories and confusion. On the other hand, studying sci-fi physics sheds some light into what's coming to our world in the near term, and what is in flux. This is obviously valuable to a different sort of curious layman, one who is less interested in how everything works and more interested in refining their world view.

icelancer 14y ago

>Ask a basic question on physics, biology, or engineering and only an actual scientist will pipe up. Evolution/creationist crackpots?

dalke 14y ago

To be fair, if there's a new discovery related to evolution, you are likely to get non-scientists to respond. Granted, those will be people who argue that Darwinism is an evil, false influence in the world, but biology still has its own knowitalls. Or, look at controversial topics in other domains of science: AIDS was created as a biological weapon, vaccines cause autism. Fluoridated water is a Communist plot to "deplete the brainpower and sap the strength of a generation of American children." The WTC could not have fallen because of planes crashing into it, and must have been leveled due to planned explosives. This holds even outside of science. Ask a question on copyright laws and a bunch of people with no formal law training (including me) will chime in - leading to complete ripped movies on YouTube prefixed with the magic phrase "fair use."

loceng 14y ago
You sure know your conspiracy theories.
- derleth 14y ago
  > You sure know your conspiracy theories. Some believe them, others collect them.
ekianjo 14y ago
You forgot "JFK was not killed by Oswald" and "We did not go on the Moon". Apart from that, you should avoid putting ridiculous conspiracy theories next to more believable ones. The fact that governments can and do stuff is secret and cover it up is hardly a "theory" anymore, wikileaks should ring some bells. Always believing what is written in the History Books sponsored by government oversight does not mean you are being fed the truth. Everyone has their own agenda.
- dalke 14y ago
  I figured that the non-controversial controversies were easier to use as a counter-example.
- derleth 14y ago

jere 14y ago

It's like reverse bike shedding. Bike sheds have proved too boring for anyone to actually care about their color anymore.

vacri 14y ago
Online, perhaps. But get involved in meatspace and bikeshedding is flourishing like always.

rbanffy 14y ago

> I blame science fiction novels. I personally blame self-help literature that borrows scientific terms to construct a fantasy magical world where their readers can actually help themselves by [insert stupid idea here]. And I cringe when someone says something represents a "quantum leap" from something else.