Watch The Elegant Universe (3 hours) available online!

[Nlighten1]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

Sweeeeet!

[Catshrink]

1. Yep!

I taped it and downloaded the study guide. I may need it for a class -- I'm learning to always be prepared for classes!

[Bridget Burke]

2. Thank you!

I was unaware of my PBS schedule & stumbled onto these shows. Very excellent & definitely worth repeated viewings.

Need to check on my local PBS membership & see if it's time to re-up. I'll forgive them the endless re-runs of the moldiest British comedies for shows like this (& Bill Moyers).

[Catshrink]

3. You don't like Hyacinth?

the old gal's a hoot. And poor Richard!! The rest are indeed moldy, but that one is a keeper.

[papau]

5. Hyacinth is the reason I donate!!!!

She is a must watch!

:-)

[Catshrink]

6. Yep....

I know someone who is a dead ringer for her -- not in looks but in behavior. Creepy really.

My dad's hero is Onslow. He actually wears a Packers shirt -- not that I care about the dirty cheatin' Packers mind you. Go Bears!!

[papau]

4. It is a nice understandable w/o background presentation - but I'll

pass. I saw the first two hours - and those should have been 20 minutes total. Nice graphics, and an excellent intro to some of the many areas where science lives off of faith.

I did like the last episode's topics:

"The weakness of gravity compared to the other forces has confounded physicists for decades, but now string theorists believe that gravity may be leaking into parallel universes." (seems the gravity "constant" changes - so we have different size leaks in different areas?)


"The origin of the universe has always been a mysterious event in which the laws of physics appear to break down. Could it be that the Big Bang was caused by the collision of two parallel universes?" (A QM fluctuation is a popular "beginning" - except for that nasty "can not destroy or make mass/energy concept" that some try to get around by saying it was just energy at first - to get the QM as possible - and the positive and negative imbalance means we are just do not know of some new form of matter - but string theory really doesn't require new types matter.)


"The hunt is on for evidence that supports string theory -- for example, extra dimensions or supersymmetry." (Of course no one can describe what they are hunting for, and how - if they find some factoid - it will confirm string theory)

"Will string theory turn out to be a dead end? Most string theorists believe that such an elegant and mathematically beautiful idea couldn't be completely wrong." ....sigh..... :-)

[Guaranteed]

7. Personally,

I think science itself is a dead end. For thousands of years Western Civilization has been looking to the unobservable to try to explain the observable (first Christianity, now theoretical physics and chemistry). Both times now progress has petered-out before the issues were ultimately resolved, simply because they engaged in an unresolveable debate. The human mind has an affinity for setting itself up for failure, for some reason.

I believe that if more scientists had a more solid familiarity with philosophy we would be able to forego many of these LARGE mistakes that we're repeatedly making and instead start off with principles that mandate that debate be based on some semblance of the real world. The sooner we do that, the sooner we can stop explaining things using "alternate universes" and 11th dimensions.

[Catshrink]

8. Science is philosophy...

it's questioning, reasoning, etc. Scientists don't expect things to be resolved, that everything will be wrapped up in a nice little explanation. That's the appeal, the mystery, the attraction. Theories constantly evolve. It's not the answer, but the journey that's so cool.

[papau]

9. sounds like religion!

:-)

indeed even if your religion is athieism - and that does require as much faith as any other religion, the "it is the journey that's so cool" fits !!!!

:-)

[Catshrink]

10. There are many parallels...

both are a quest for truth. Ah, but what is truth? And how do you know when you find it? And is my truth the same as your truth?

Many science researchers are BS/MS/PhD's -- bull shit, more shit, pilled higher and deeper.

Seems that way sometimes.