|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
| Re: John Baez Wins FQXI Prize for Crackpot Research |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: AndroclesAndrocles Date: Aug 9, 2008 17:44
"Traveler" nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:ebbs94lk6gjg7f0h7f1sgg59erfmndm761@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 00:39:32 +0100, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|
| >
| >"Traveler" nowhere.net> wrote in message
| >news:fs4s94tanser1fms7tac6o14i0kkje1060@4ax.com...
| >| On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 13:40:44 -0700 (PDT), postdoc4ever@gmail.com wrote:
| >|
| >| >http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762#comment-42541
| >| >
| >| >http://www.fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/baez says,
| >| >
| >| >"Dr. John Baez
| >| >University of California at Riverside
| >| >
| >| >Project Title:
| >| >Categorifying Fundamental Physics
| >| >
| >| >Summary:
| >| >In ordinary mathematics, and physics as well, equations are
| >| >fundamental. However, every equation is a half-truth: after all, if
| >| >the two sides of the equation look different, why are we saying
| >| >they're the same? 'Categorification' is a fancy name for coming clean
| >| >on this issue: instead of merely saying that two things are the same,
| >| >we specify a way of regarding them as the same.
| >| >
| >| >This has surprising consequences. For example, we usually think of
| >| >quantities like energy as continuously variable, or 'analog'. Quantum
| >| >mechanics shows there is a certain discreteness built into the world,
| >| >but it still uses analog ideas. Using categorification, we can phrase
| >| >large portions of quantum mechanics in a purely discrete way. We want
| >| >to know how far we can push this.
| >| >
| >| >In addition to thinking about physics in new ways, we shall explore
| >| >new methods of carrying out research. We intend to share not just our
| >| >results, but the process by which we find them. We will do this by
| >| >incorporating a wide range of multi-media into our research, including
| >| >videos of lectures and seminars made publicly available online. "
| >| >
| >| >Good to see John Baez got some funding, but then again, FQXI is using
| >| >Baez's very own "crackpot index" as a metric by which to parcel out
| >| >the two+ mil:
| >| >
| >| >http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
| >| >
| >| >Is it just me, or does Baez's description seem somewhat snarky,
| >| >especially in light of his crackpot index?
| >| >
| >| >Baez writes, "In ordinary mathematics, and physics as well, equations
| >| >are fundamental. However, every equation is a half-truth: after all,
| >| >if the two sides of the equation look different, why are we saying
| >| >they're the same? 'Categorification' is a fancy name for coming clean
| >| >on this issue: instead of merely saying that two things are the same,
| >| >we specify a way of regarding them as the same."
| >| >
| >| >I guess we will find out what it means to "regard things as the same"
| >| >when his youtube videos go live: "We will do this by incorporating a
| >| >wide range of multi-media into our research, including videos of
| >| >lectures and seminars made publicly available online." Imagine that.
| >| >Publicly-available video on line!
| >| >
| >| >Too bad Sesame Street already did this whole study on "two things
| >| >being the same," and also has the scientific genius to post it online
| >| >in a publicly-available multi-media format, including video, words,
| >| >categorification, and music:
| >| >
| >| >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZIvgQ9ik48
| >|
| >| ahahaha... I love it. Dr. John Baez of UC Riverside, who loves to
| >| point out that he regularly flies to conferences around the world
| >| (he's a proud jet-setting physicist), is the well-known usenet
| >| crackpot and math puzzle fanatic who once wrote this wonderful gem:
| >|
| >| I would prefer to say that there are infinitely many "nows", but no
| >| one "now" that is any better than the rest. In special or general
| >| relativity, we can define a "now" to be a spacelike hypersurface -
| >| or more technically, a Cauchy surface. In one "now", I am typing
| >| this article while sitting at my desk on a hot summer morning in
| >| Riverside. In another, I am asleep on an airplane flying to
| >| Portugal. In most of them, I don't exist. Since we can describe
| >| the state of the universe by giving the values of fields at any
| >| given "now", all these "nows" give isomorphic descriptions of the
| >| universe. The isomorphism between them is what we call "the
| >| passage of time".
| >|
| >| ahahaha... Wait, it gets even better. In response to the following
| >| mesmerizing nugget of wisdom by fellow crackpot, Mark William Hopkins:
| >|
| >| In reality, there is no "I". It's all an illusion based entirely
| >| on the abovementioned misperception. Once you begin to perceive
| >| yourself as you actually are (i.e., part of a 4-dimensional
| >| web-like structure) then the "I" part just disappears.
| >|
| >| Baez brilliantly replies with the refined aplomb of a professional
| >| academic crank:
| >|
| >| I wouldn't say there is no "I". I would instead say there are
| >| many.
| >|
| >| ahahaha... I am not making this shit up, I swear. This shit is forever
| >| recorded in the annals of sci.physics.research, one of Baez's favorite
| >| censored hangout.
| >|
| >| http://www.lns.cornell.edu/spr/1999-07/msg0016990.html
| >|
| >| The only other academic crackpot (that I know of) that may surpass Dr.
| >| John Baez in crackpottery is Dr. David Deutsch of quantum computing
| >| fame. Deutsch wrote the book on voodoo physics. ahahaha... Having said
| >| that, I must add that the little con artist in the wheelchair is not
| >| too far behind. Ah, the wonderful farce of physics. Insane nerds
| >| having fun with the little games they love to play. I love it.
| >|
| >| ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
| >|
| >| Louis Savain
| >|
| >
| >You are so right, Louis.
| >But not about some of the shit you come out with.
| >I could respect you if you did not behave as they* do, but what
| >the fuck, you are just another druggy with a fucked-up head and
| >its too late to fix it.
| >
| >Androcles.
| >
| >* "They" being the characters you've nominated, including the
| >twerp in the wheelchair whom I met at Sussex U. some 30 odd
| >years ago. The dozy bastard refused a pint when it was my round,
| >no self-respecting Englishman would do such a thing.
| >I once said there was no such thing as a black hole, but I was
| >wrong. There is one in the middle of his head.
| >
| >Act 1. scene one. The bar as Sussex U. after a long day, still
| >discussing physics. Up comes a gurney, pushed by a woman.
| >The gurney occupant makes a remark, by my glass and the glasses
| >of my colleagues are empty.
| >
| >Androcles: "Can I buy you a beer?"
| >Stephen Hawking's first wife: "Do you know who this is?"
| >Androcles, ever honest: "Err... no..."
| >Stephen Hawking's first wife: "HE...(pause for effect)... is Stephen
| >Hawking.
| >Androcles: "Yeah, ok, but would you like a drink?"
| >
| >Exit stage left: Mistress Hawking, gurney and Stephen.
| >
| >At least he had the sense to marry a second time....
| >
| >WHAT AM I SAYING? Dang! I did that, whatta mistaka to
| >maka. I must be dwinky poo.
|
| ahahaha... Funny. I think it was Hawking's first wife who said that
| her job as Hawking's wife was to keep reminding him that he was not
| God. I'd say. It's a little hard to be God when you're a crumpled fool
| in a wheelchair making shit up that don't exist. The most annoying
| thing about physicists is not their crackpottery but their
| insufferable pomposity.
|
| ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
|
|
There you have it. The dozy bastards think they are aristocracy
and Newton the dwarf (as the cretin Robert Hooke, creator
of Hooke's Law, called him) proved to be a real giant.
Hooke's Law: springs stretch proportional to the force. Big hairy deal,
we can all learn something new in that.
"I may be a dwarf but I have stood upon the shoulders of giants
and seen further than any man before me."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
