Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 2]
Discussion
Justin Cyder said:
Yes indeed, the question came to mind as I re-read Einstein taking forward Plank's work on Quanta. The real underlying question is why these extraordinary minds don't occur to public notice more frequently than they do.
they wouldn't be extraordinary if they were, well, ordinary, would they?Ayahuasca said:
No really, no. Read it again.
I did. I understand your non response perfectly. The question, for your benefit & your benefit alone, is why isn't there a Johnny Rotten - if you like - in every generation? However, given that scientists of extraordinary reserve change the world in profound ways, Johnny Rotten can do one.Geddit now?
FiF said:
Is there anywhere on the planet which is truly and completely silent?
Excluding any specially constructed chamber, talking about natural environment.
A) just sounds in human audibility range
or
B) all sounds
I'd have thought the middle of a desert could be completely silent, no animals, no trees to creak in the wind etc.Excluding any specially constructed chamber, talking about natural environment.
A) just sounds in human audibility range
or
B) all sounds
markmullen said:
FiF said:
Is there anywhere on the planet which is truly and completely silent?
Excluding any specially constructed chamber, talking about natural environment.
A) just sounds in human audibility range
or
B) all sounds
I'd have thought the middle of a desert could be completely silent, no animals, no trees to creak in the wind etc.Excluding any specially constructed chamber, talking about natural environment.
A) just sounds in human audibility range
or
B) all sounds
And there are plenty of animals in the desert chirping away.
FiF said:
Is there anywhere on the planet which is truly and completely silent?
Excluding any specially constructed chamber, talking about natural environment.
A) just sounds in human audibility range
or
B) all sounds
The middle of the Antarctic plateau, when the wind is not blowing (very seldom), no animal or tree life at all.Excluding any specially constructed chamber, talking about natural environment.
A) just sounds in human audibility range
or
B) all sounds
Sargeant Orange said:
I've just thrown a spider out of the bedroom window, he hit the floor & scuttled off like nothing happened. Why didn't he die? It must be the equivalent of a human being chucked off a cliff
F = ma, where m is "fk all". The insect kingdom in general has little to fear from falling.grumbledoak said:
Sargeant Orange said:
I've just thrown a spider out of the bedroom window, he hit the floor & scuttled off like nothing happened. Why didn't he die? It must be the equivalent of a human being chucked off a cliff
F = ma, where m is "fk all". The insect kingdom in general has little to fear from falling.DervVW said:
grumbledoak said:
Sargeant Orange said:
I've just thrown a spider out of the bedroom window, he hit the floor & scuttled off like nothing happened. Why didn't he die? It must be the equivalent of a human being chucked off a cliff
F = ma, where m is "fk all". The insect kingdom in general has little to fear from falling.a bigger creature wouldn't get enough air
Hugo a Gogo said:
DervVW said:
grumbledoak said:
Sargeant Orange said:
I've just thrown a spider out of the bedroom window, he hit the floor & scuttled off like nothing happened. Why didn't he die? It must be the equivalent of a human being chucked off a cliff
F = ma, where m is "fk all". The insect kingdom in general has little to fear from falling.a bigger creature wouldn't get enough air
DervVW said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
DervVW said:
grumbledoak said:
Sargeant Orange said:
I've just thrown a spider out of the bedroom window, he hit the floor & scuttled off like nothing happened. Why didn't he die? It must be the equivalent of a human being chucked off a cliff
F = ma, where m is "fk all". The insect kingdom in general has little to fear from falling.a bigger creature wouldn't get enough air
Justin Cyder said:
Why have we produced only one Einstein? One Newton, one Gallieo? Amongst all the famous names in science, Planck, Darwin, Mendel, Faraday and so on, why don't we see scientists who make truly conceptual leaps in our comprehension of the universe seemingly more than once every thirty to forty generations?
We haven't - take Einstein, he was was a theoretical physicist, he was a very famous one, but there are a hundred or so prominent theoretical physicists working today a mere generation later, including Stephen Hawking. He's thought to be even more brilliant than even Einstein.In terms of why we don't see the huge leaps in comprehension, IMO is simply down to the fact that despite the huge advantages Hawking has over Einstein in terms of computer power to help him, the most important bit is the mushy bit between his ears and that hasn't changed since Newton was trying to do the same as Hawking does with a super computer with an apple and it's not enough to overcome the law of diminishing returns.
DervVW said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
DervVW said:
grumbledoak said:
Sargeant Orange said:
I've just thrown a spider out of the bedroom window, he hit the floor & scuttled off like nothing happened. Why didn't he die? It must be the equivalent of a human being chucked off a cliff
F = ma, where m is "fk all". The insect kingdom in general has little to fear from falling.a bigger creature wouldn't get enough air
http://insects.about.com/od/morphology/f/breathing...
P-Jay said:
We haven't - take Einstein, he was was a theoretical physicist, he was a very famous one, but there are a hundred or so prominent theoretical physicists working today a mere generation later, including Stephen Hawking. He's thought to be even more brilliant than even Einstein.
In terms of why we don't see the huge leaps in comprehension, IMO is simply down to the fact that despite the huge advantages Hawking has over Einstein in terms of computer power to help him, the most important bit is the mushy bit between his ears and that hasn't changed since Newton was trying to do the same as Hawking does with a super computer with an apple and it's not enough to overcome the law of diminishing returns.
Thanks, but that leaves the question why does a brain of such capability come along so infrequently? Einstein was recognised within his lifetime as a one off, I don't think Hawking reaches that rarified atmosphere with his theories quite so much.In terms of why we don't see the huge leaps in comprehension, IMO is simply down to the fact that despite the huge advantages Hawking has over Einstein in terms of computer power to help him, the most important bit is the mushy bit between his ears and that hasn't changed since Newton was trying to do the same as Hawking does with a super computer with an apple and it's not enough to overcome the law of diminishing returns.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff