Dear Zibsey, what a response to my short-cut exuberance in my 'agnosticism'! Reminds me Rostand's tirade by Cyrano to the vicompt's brief "Sir, your nose is big".. I read it with gusto and - as usual - don't want to argue in detail. I accept it as an addage to my ideas which I never want to get accepted by others. I was expecting a short snap from Brent's (Liz's?) wits - that's all. I do not envy those who make a career in ongoing science, be it financially supported, or just societally rewarding, I was active in 'that' domain for my 1st 1/2 century, until I learned to "think" better - for the 2nd half.
I am glad my note triggered you into participating on this list, usually discussing more exciting (scientific?) terms than those godforsaken religious topics we get lately. Best regards John Mikes Ph.D. (chem), D.Sc. (sp.polymer techn) and classical music performer. On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:35 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sunday, October 26, 2014 9:53:36 PM UTC, JohnM wrote: >> >> Brent, these guys are SOOOOO smart! They even knew how to convert >> infinity into a definitely lucrative career with awards and stuff. >> >> you made a good insight here, so my thanks that you shared it. > > Reading the fuller laid down by you across the whole post, but taking > particular note of the sentence above, in which you do appear to make a > direct causal linkage between two individually distinctive manifestations > of "Smart" normally associated with very different human domains, and as > such kept separate from one-another thus not causally coupled the way you > imply, instead non-interacting. > > I'll clarify what I say there in just a moment. But the upshot is...Yes > you are right, I think. This is one of the rare instances in the history > of Science that awards, scientific status, influence, authority and > reputation : awhich science in the institutional tense of the word has > evolved its own unique checks and balances and all the other effects, to > keep things like reputation, awards and the other items above, strongly > convergent with real breakthroughs and advances, at some sort of parity. > Possibly the most successful solution for this in human history. > > And it is for that reason, the occurrence of what you imply above is very > rare. Scientists/thinkers can certainly seek financial rewards and better > career conditions. Say, writing a popular science book; Brian Cox > accomplished that kind of success for little more than the fortuitous > "perfect storm" - not really a storm at all...maybe Lou Reedd's Perfect > Day,. Some very positive traits. Some others insubstantial (like much > rehearsed eyes straight into camera and saying one particular > word..possibly the best anyone has ever said that word "Beautiful". > > But Brian Cox's awesomeness and personal advancement has never secured him > even a small upward-notching in the real of Science. He has yet to make a > significant contribution to science - he may one day in the future. But his > celebrity status and profile have not changed his prospects of doing that > at all. In fact, due to access to his ideas being more ready to hand, the > truth is, at least for a cursory look, his depth of understanding of what > by rights he ought to be able to master to earn the desk he occupies; He > seems not to pass muster. > > And that's a good illustration of the amazing effectiveness and awesome > success of science in this sense of self-correcting...taking its own > rubbish out. Exceptions are rare...too rare for my ability: I would not > have seen this that you saw. > > But I do see it now, thanks to the heavy lifting being sorted out all by > you, wrapped ribbon'ed and to the door delivered: I do see it now. > > And it's a great insight. You're saying that for the same reasons you > regard Infinity - the concept - safe for human handling, if at all, in its > most minimal form. And if you're right in the substance of what you say, > that infinity is beyond the human intellect for now. And if Science no > matter how unique it surely is, is no different than all the other things > humans have done, at least in the most minimal sense of it being, like all > the rest, ultimately reduceable nothing more - nor less - but significant > here, nothing more; than the affairs of human beings, warts and all, > intellectual ceilings, inclusive. > > Thus your insight does indeed make the falsifiable prediction, 'Science, > all of it, it's whole, it's parts: it breaks down when theories - the > substance they bring, reduce to infinities, the remainder of not-infinities > reducing necessarily to nothing. Science cannot operate, for example, > science cannot resolve one infinity-theory in terms of the size of its > contribution, from another. > > Therefore, the infinity theorist secures advancement only by the old > fashioned way: by career boosts, celebrity, PR. That's the way, the only > way, an infinity theorist becomes status-upgraded. The only way to > beat the competition to the prizes and scientific greatness. > > So yeah. They *are* smart, those guys. If they realized that ahead of > their time and before all the others. True vision of new kind of genius > never seen before. not in Science anyway. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
