Ark - where are you headed?

[SoCurious]

Hello Ark,

I know (or rather understand) you have much to do, so please forgive me for asking something I know will compromise your time.

I'm absolutely intrigued by the questions you ask of yourself in the realm of that which is not physical and which you wish to quantify/qualify mathematically. I'd be fascinated to follow your progression if I could understand the language of math but unfortunately my path never led me in that direction and I'm not sure that I was ever capable of higher math anyway. I'm fully numerate when it comes to the basic operations +, -, *,/, and the logical operations of if/then/else. The latter is more of a linguistic logic construct anyway which leads me to my question.

Is there any way you could describe your work in an "Ark's work for Dummies" fashion? Or in other words, could you describe the math and where it is leading you in a verbal language (English would be good as I'm not multi- or even really bi-lingual) rather than math? I'm afraid that when I see symbols other than those mentioned above my brain does a double U-turn, followed by a brakes-off quadruple U-turn, followed by a deep comatose state of life in la-la-land.

I once read a book called Gödel, Escher, Bach by Douglas Hofstadter which explained mathematical concepts without the use of maths. I was able to understand concepts in English I could never have understood in math and may have been able to contribute linguistically rather than mathematically. This last statement is presumptuous in the extreme I know, but I did score the highest marks in the Commonwealth for 'Abstract English' (a small part of a battery of standardized tests carried out throughout the British Commonwealth way back when school was still primarily a place of learning).
(ugh, I'm trumpet blowing and I hate that)

In the end what I'm asking is, "do you have the time to explain your work non-mathematically?". For us "challenged" this way?

To borrow from Sacha Cohen - "Respect!"

 

[StrangeCaptain]

Not to speak for Ark... But to allow him to speak for himself should he be busy and miss this post...

He has a blog in Polish that seems to be written for a reasonably broad audience though it gets kind of technical from time to time. You can put it through google translator or some kind of software like that and get a decent idea of what he is talking about.

Here's the link:

http://arkadiusz.jadczyk.salon24.pl/

 

[ark]

In the end what I'm asking is, "do you have the time to explain your work non-mathematically?". For us "challenged" this way?

Time does not exist. So, surely, I do not have time. On the other hand there are clocks and they seem to run forward rather than backward. I do have many clocks around me (even, someone would say, too many). So I can use these clocks to schedule time periods for describing some of my work in English and without math. I am not sure, however, what would be the optimal form for that. A series of notes? Like blog entries? Perhaps. I like it better than writing a large piece. Something to think about. Thanks.

 

[shijing]

I am not sure, however, what would be the optimal form for that. A series of notes? Like blog entries? Perhaps.

I think that would be perfect, when and if you have the time for it. It could be as interactive as you decide, and kind of like your own fireside chat :)

 

[StrangeCaptain]

In the end what I'm asking is, "do you have the time to explain your work non-mathematically?". For us "challenged" this way?

Time does not exist. So, surely, I do not have time. On the other hand there are clocks and they seem to run forward rather than backward. I do have many clocks around me (even, someone would say, too many). So I can use these clocks to schedule time periods for describing some of my work in English and without math. I am not sure, however, what would be the optimal form for that. A series of notes? Like blog entries? Perhaps. I like it better than writing a large piece. Something to think about. Thanks.

Some small pieces when the urge hits you would be absolutely awesome. Here or a blog entry maybe if you find there are not formatting options enough for you here (like you want to show math in an aesthetically cleaner form than possible here).

 

[SeekinTruth]

I am not sure, however, what would be the optimal form for that. A series of notes? Like blog entries? Perhaps.

I think that would be perfect, when and if you have the time for it. It could be as interactive as you decide, and kind of like your own fireside chat :)

In the end what I'm asking is, "do you have the time to explain your work non-mathematically?". For us "challenged" this way?

Time does not exist. So, surely, I do not have time. On the other hand there are clocks and they seem to run forward rather than backward. I do have many clocks around me (even, someone would say, too many). So I can use these clocks to schedule time periods for describing some of my work in English and without math. I am not sure, however, what would be the optimal form for that. A series of notes? Like blog entries? Perhaps. I like it better than writing a large piece. Something to think about. Thanks.

Some small pieces when the urge hits you would be absolutely awesome. Here or a blog entry maybe if you find there are not formatting options enough for you here (like you want to show math in an aesthetically cleaner form than possible here).

Yeah, that would be so great whenever you find the time, Ark. :) You can do relatively short entries in installments -- elaborating from previous posts or covering new, related topics, etc. Perhaps even carrying them on SOTT after they're published?

 

[dugdeep]

So I can use these clocks to schedule time periods for describing some of my work in English and without math. I am not sure, however, what would be the optimal form for that. A series of notes? Like blog entries? Perhaps. I like it better than writing a large piece. Something to think about. Thanks.

I had a thought after seeing a few of these "Minute Physics" videos on Youtube. _http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR4tJr7sMPM&feature=related

Perhaps Ark could just speak on a certain topic and a talented animator could illustrate the topic graphically, creating a short video? That way it would likely take up little (or less) of Ark's time and others could be involved in the process.

Just an idea...

 

[Guardian]

Yup, a blog that explains Theoretical physics without the use of mathematics would be very interesting indeed. :D

 

[Mikey]

I am not sure, however, what would be the optimal form for that. A series of notes? Like blog entries? Perhaps.

I think that would be perfect, when and if you have the time for it. It could be as interactive as you decide, and kind of like your own fireside chat :)

I always see your blog posts in Polish and I always wish they were in English! :)

 

[ark]

I always see your blog posts in Polish and I always wish they were in English! :)

Today's topic of my Polish blog are "Dangers of Science". I used this:

Bertrand Russell On the Destructiveness of Science

In “Religion and Science”, Bertrand Russell summarizes it this way:

"The scientific temper of mind is cautious, tentative, and piecemeal; it does not imagine that it knows the whole truth, or that even its best knowledge is wholly true. It knows that every doctrine needs emendation sooner or later, and that the necessary emendation requires freedom of investigation and freedom of discussion. But out of theoretical science a scientific technique has developed, and the scientific technique has none of the tentativeness of the theory. Physics has been revolutionized during the present century by relativity and the quantum theory, but all the inventions based upon the old physics are still found satisfactory. The application of electricity to industry and daily life—including such matters as power stations, broadcasting, and electric light—is based upon the work of Clerk Maxwell, published over sixty years ago ; and none of these inventions has failed to work because, as we now know, Clerk Maxwell's views were in many ways inadequate. Thus the practical experts who employ scientific technique, and still more the governments and large firms which employ the practical experts, acquire a quite different temper from that of the men of science: a temper full of a sense of limitless power, of arrogant certainty, and of pleasure in manipulation even of human material. This is the very reverse of the scientific temper, but it cannot be denied that science has helped to promote it.
The direct effects of scientific technique, also, have been by no means wholly beneficial. (…) they have increased the destructiveness of weapons of war, and the proportion of the population that can be spared from peaceful industry for fighting and the manufacture of munitions.(…) These evils of our time are all due in part to scientific technique, and therefore ultimately to science. "(Italics, mine.)

 

[SoCurious]

Thank you very much for considering it, although if there's no time to write there isn't time to read either.

I'm looking forward to whatever you have.

 

[John G]

...such matters as power stations, broadcasting, and electric light—is based upon the work of Clerk Maxwell, published over sixty years ago ; and none of these inventions has failed to work because, as we now know, Clerk Maxwell's views were in many ways inadequate... The direct effects of scientific technique, also, have been by no means wholly beneficial. (…) they have increased the destructiveness of weapons of war...

Yeah science can be really evil in plain sight, really evil behind the scenes; and there's also just that turf protecting evil make your side look good, make others look bad (including long dead ones like Maxwell). It often looks like political parties just putting on a show where the truth is kind of just an optional thing if it happens to help your side. Even someone like Peter Woit who is supposed to be like a Ron Paul against the establishment type guy will stop a good conversation if it starts to make his blog seem too far off the beaten path (and Ron Paul is for show too). Even out of nowhere surfer dude Garrett Lisi won't look at conformal transformations for gravity when people directly suggest it to him. People just won't go there.

 

[Soluna]

I would also be very interested in reading your blog posts in English - I will give google translator a try.

As well as for my own curiosity and interest - I am keen to try and light the fire of enthusiasm and curiosity under my husbands feet!

We have a lot of discussion about physics, and possibilities - he finds it difficult to accept uncertainties that aren't 'proven' by scientific peer review. I will show him the excerpt you posted above, as I imagine he would find it as interesting as I did - my sadness, is that he will ask where I read it - and doubt it due to the nature of the place I found it. He disregards anything that 'looks unofficial', or might be a part of a 'conspiracy' that the world isn't as set in stone as he believes it to be.

One of his 'heroes' is Neil de GrasseTyson - who to me, does seem like a very charismatic speaker. He has a pleasant way of speaking or expressing himself in ways that people can understand, who may not have the knowledge of more complex concepts.


How do you try and entice the curiosity, or open the mind, of someone who doesn't believe or accept anything that is not 'proven' by scientific peer review?
Someone who doesn't believe there was ever a global flood - because there is no 'hard proof'?
Someone who believes flouride is good for your teeth, that wars are beneficial because they 'create jobs' and an environment where scientific discoveries progress in leaps and bounds....

It breaks my heart that I can't pull the blinkers away for one second.

 

[Laura]

Well, Soluna, you have to remember that, even among his critics, Ark is considered to be one of - if not THE - world's living expert on hyperdimensional physics. There is literally, almost nobody who can referee his papers...

 

[Mountain Crown]

I'm looking forward to whatever you have.

Me too!