|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
| Re: John Baez Wins FQXI Prize for Crackpot Research |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: hhc314hhc314 Date: Aug 10, 2008 12:44
On Aug 10, 3:08Â pm, "hhc...@ yahoo.com" yahoo.com> wrote:> On Aug 9, 7:56Â pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> 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), postdoc4e...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>|
>>>| >http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762#comment-42541
>>>| >
>>>| >http://www.fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/baezsays,
>>>| >
>>>| >"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:
>>>|
>>>| Â I would prefer to say that there are infinitely many "nows", but no
>>>| Â one "now" that is any better than the rest. Â In special or general
>>>| Â relativity, we can define a "now" to be a spacelike hypersurface -
>>>| Â or more technically, a Cauchy surface. Â In one "now", I am typing
>>>| Â this article while sitting at my desk on a hot summer morning in
>>>| Â Riverside. In another, I am asleep on an airplane flying to
>>>| Â Portugal. Â In most of them, I don't exist. Â Since we can describe
>>>| Â the state of the universe by giving the values of fields at any
>>>| Â given "now", all these "nows" give isomorphic descriptions of the
>>>| Â universe. Â The isomorphism between them is what we call "the
>>>| Â passage of time".
>>>|
>>>| ahahaha... Wait, it gets even better. In response to the following
>>>| mesmerizing nugget of wisdom by fellow crackpot, Mark William Hopkins:
>>>|
>>>| Â In reality, there is no "I". Â It's all an illusion based entirely
>>>| Â on the abovementioned misperception. Â Once you begin to perceive
>>>| Â yourself as you actually are (i.e., part of a 4-dimensional
>>>| Â web-like structure) then the "I" part just disappears.
>>>|
>>>| Baez brilliantly replies with the refined aplomb of a professional
>>>| academic crank:
>>>|
>>>| Â Â I wouldn't say there is no "I". Â I would instead say there are
>>>| Â Â 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.
>
>>>* Â "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. Â 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: Â "Can I buy you a beer?"
>>>Stephen Hawking's first wife: Â "Do you know who this is?"
>>>Androcles, ever honest: Â "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: Â Mistress Hawking, gurney and Stephen.
>
>>>At least he had the sense to marry a second time....
>
>>>WHAT AM I SAYING? Â 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...
>
>> Louis Savain
>
>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Here is another sad but true truth. Â The pomposity of many physicists
> grows inversely to the rarity of their research accomplishments, and
> directly with the intellectual significance of the college that
> granted their degrees.
>
> This is particularly evidenced by the total lack of pomposity in
> phsicists and other major figures in the physical sciences who have
> actually made great contributions. To their various fields. These
> individuals could be best categorized as having a great deal of
> humility, coupled with a rather keen sense of humor that helps them to
> keep their accomplishments in perspective.
>
> The same thing is true in medicine. A well known (for his
> accomplishments) surgeon once told me that he cannot heal anyone, and
> that he simply creates consitions that are conductive for God to
> accomplish the actual healing.
>
> Also, since I spent many years living in the Princeton area, there are
> many jokes circulated about Dr. Einstein, and most are actually funny.
> It is said that Einstein himself had created many of these stores, and
> none of the locals who would talk with him on his daily walks doubted
> this, because he always had a new joke to share with them, even the
> local grocer.
>
> Even Dr. Feynman played the Bongo Drums in his spare time, and never
> took himself very seriously. Â (See the book: "Surely you're joking,
> Mr. Feynman".) Â He's the guy that authored the well known physics
> lectures under his name.
>
> I personally have no time for those pompous individuals whose brains
> are so shallow and self centered that they do not find a need to
> relieve the stress with a bit of humor rather than alcohol or other
> drugs (which is not exactly rare in the world of acadaemia).
>
> And when you need a surgeon....
>
> Nuff said.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Just as an afterthought, here is one of what was Albert Einsteins
favorite stories that he like to tell...
"An old man was walking down past Palmer Square in Princeton,
evidently lost. He approached a young boy who was waking down the
street and asked him if happened to know where a well known elderly
scientist lives.
The boy replied, sure, on Mercer Street. Follow me dad and I'll show
you the way home."
This is typical of the Einstein humor, always self depreciating, never
pompous. An while a matematician, he was every physicist's physicist.
Now young readers should realize that this guy published the first
accepted scientific paper explaining the physical nature of the
photoelectric effect, and won his first an only Nobel Prize for this
work (which is today taught in every textbook). He later went on to
develop his Special Theory of Relativity, which although his greatest
achievement, never received a Nobel Prize (likely do to the anti-
semetic attitudes that were prevailing at that time, plus the genius
of this work was obvious to all scientists).
Then, just for the record, I am not Jewish and enjoy a Jew joke just a
much as I enjoy a good Polish joke.
Here's a Polish joke:
"A Polish man went to a carpenter and asked, "Can you build me a box
that is two inches high, two inches wide, and fifty feet long?"
"Hmm..." mused the carpenter. "It could be done, I suppose, but what
would you want a box like that for?"
"Well, you see," said the Pole, "my neighbor moved away and forgot
some things, so he asked me to send him his garden hose."
Now here is a Jewish joke:
"Harry was walking down Regent Street and stepped into a posh gourmet
food shop.
An impressive salesperson in a smart morning coat with tails
approached him and politely asked, "Can I help you, Sir?"
"Yes," replied Harry, "I would like to buy a pound of lox."
"No. No," responded the dignified salesperson, "You mean smoked
salmon."
"OK, a pound of smoked salmon, then."
"Anything else?"
"Yes, a dozen blintzes."
"No. No. You mean crepes."
"Okay, a dozen crepes."
"Anything else?"
"Yes. A pound of chopped liver."
"No. No. You mean pate."
"Okay," said Harry, "A pound of pate then and I'd like you to deliver
all of this to my house on Saturday."
"Look," retorted the indignant salesperson, "we don't schlep on
Shabbos!"
Enjoy, but more importantly realize the role of humor and simple
humility in human lives.
Harry C.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
