Question for the scientists

stardust

Jedi Master
I'd like to know if someone of you got changes of perception ( on physical and energetical plan) after understanding mathematical /physics concepts or an equation for example.

What I ask that?

I am a health Kinesiology practitioner and I 'm working a lot with words and concepts for solving many kinds of problems.
One day during my training, I ask to my teacher if it could be possible with some people (like scientists) to have to work with mathematical symbols in place of words. She told me : " to my knowledge, no"

I don't know any super scientist and so I never experiment if E=MC2 (for example) can create stress , or resolve something inner him.

Your impressions?
 
Human experience varies considerably. Just the other day was a segment on NPR interviewing Daniel Tammet on his book that is just being released. Listen to the audio and read the excerpt, it is fascinating.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6860157
 
stardust said:
I'd like to know if someone of you got changes of perception ( on physical and energetical plan) after understanding mathematical /physics concepts or an equation for example.
Oh, sure. I will give just one example. Unfortunately only those went through the course of complex analysis (part of the mathematical curriculum)
will get it.

Q. What's the contour integral around Western Europe?
A. Zero, because all the Poles are in Eastern Europe!
Addendum: Actually, there ARE some Poles in Western Europe, but they are removable.
Hint: Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_analysis and search for "contour" and "pole" :)
 
"Unfortunately" I don't understand the example of Ark - the one of Rs is more accessible for me- but it doesn't matter , you answered to my question...Thanks!
 
Well, it was my joke - in a sense. Namely a scientist can see humor where other people see just words and symbols. And a good joke certainly induces "changes of perception ( on physical and energetical plan) "
As another example, seeing an evidently wrong equation published in a serious, peer reviewed, journal may cause an apoplexy in some. :shock:
 
ark said:
Namely a scientist can see humor where other people see just words and symbols. And a good joke certainly induces "changes of perception ( on physical and energetical plan) "
Along the same lines, my Inorganic Chem professor just yesterday gave us a hand-out of the following article; it is well-written and quite funny.
Enjoy: :)
Scientists Create World's Largest Novelty Atom
January 12, 2007 | Issue 43•02
The Onion

CHICAGO—Scientists have long been labeled as overly serious, narrowly focused individuals who don't have time for fun. But two University of Chicago atomic physicists proved that even the most buttoned-down professionals are capable of enjoying a good laugh every now and then. Last week, Drs. Marcus Hurley and Thom Fredericks unveiled what they are calling their "most hilarious work to date": an oversize novelty atom that measures "a ridiculously huge"
8.2 x 10-10 meters in diameter.

According to Hurley and Fredericks, who nicknamed the new element "Humongolium," the entire physics department was in hysterics over the sight of an atom nearly 10 times the size of a normal atom and "so big you can practically see it through a high-powered standard optical microscope."

Over the past week, the scientists have been taking their PZT scanner, microscale cantilever, laser, Wheatstone bridge, photodiode, and data-feedback monitor from office to office, trying to get a rise out of colleagues by placing the novelty atom directly next to a common hydrogen atom.

"Look at this thing," said Hurley, who illustrated the size of the particle by holding his thumb right up next to his forefinger in an exaggerated fashion. "And I thought Francium atoms were huge. It's almost as big as a molecule, for crying out loud!"

"God, it just looks so ridiculous," Hurley added, chuckling and shaking his head in disbelief. "Who comes up with this stuff?"

Hurley and Fredericks have put off their research on the properties and applications of ferroelectric materials indefinitely, instead choosing to spend the majority of their time "messing around" with the gigantic atom. In the past two days, they have each gotten their picture taken next to an oversize slide of the atom and e-mailed it to colleagues around the country, put Humongolium in a particle collider to see it smash other atoms into thousands of smaller particles, and irradiated several of the atoms to give them a "goofy green glow."

"We suspected that the creation of such a ludicrously enormous atom would be hilarious, but that hypothesis didn't fully prepare us for how truly funny the result would actually be," Fredericks said. "Man, no way we're getting any more work done this year."

According to post-doctoral stereochemist Kristy Schwarz, Hurley and Fredericks lured her into their lab Tuesday under the pretense of testing some lab equipment in order to surprise her with an image of the massive particle.

"They asked me to see if I thought there was anything wrong with their piezoelectric tube, and then gathered around with these eager looks on their faces as I checked it out," Schwarz said. "As soon as the image of that atom came on the screen, everyone just lost it. I nearly knocked over my model of a constitutional isomer, I was laughing so hard."

Although most of the UC scientists have seen the atom "about 1,000 times" by now, they say they'll never get tired of what is coming to be known as "the ultimate sight gag." Several admitted that they haven't laughed like this since Hurley and Fredericks rearranged the lab's periodic-table poster in such an amusing fashion that the lanthanides and actinides were replaced with isotopes of alkali metals.

"At first, I thought [Humongolium] was just a covalent network crystal lattice, so I didn't know what everyone thought was so funny," particle chemist Bryce Davidson said. "When they told me that it was just one colossal atom, I started cracking up too."

He added: "I know it's just a silly oversize atom, but because it maintained all the same physical properties of regular atoms, and because it still had the same tiny nucleus I'm used to seeing—I dunno. I can't explain it, it's just funny when things are really big."

Some scientists, however, are no longer amused at the atom's exaggerated size.

"Come on. It's a big atom—so what?" part-time lab assistant Bob Freedman said. "That joke has a half-life of about 15 nanoseconds."

Although Hurley and Fredericks admitted that the humor of the novelty atom is "a little broad," they argued that it's refreshing to create material that even a molecular biologist will be able to appreciate.

"Sure, it's not as subtle as the parody atom Gurtzman and Kuusivaarta came up with last year," Fredericks said. "But no one really got that one. When you have to explain to people that neutrons are supposed to have a slightly larger mass than protons—not the other way around—in order for them to understand the joke, it's not funny."

http://www(dot)theonion(dot)com/content/node/57312?utm_source=onion_rss_daily
 
ark said:
Q. What's the contour integral around Western Europe?
A. Zero, because all the Poles are in Eastern Europe!
Addendum: Actually, there ARE some Poles in Western Europe, but they are removable.
Hint: Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_analysis and search for "contour" and "pole" :)
Thanks for a good laugh. Especially about the removable poles.
 
Here is a science-related news article from The Onion (America's Finest News Source) which, if true, would change perception:

The Onion said:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38718
Bush Finds Error In Fermilab Calculations
August 1, 2001 | Issue 37•26

BATAVIA, IL–President Bush met with members of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory research team Monday to discuss a mathematical error he recently discovered in the famed laboratory's "Improved Determination Of Tau Lepton Paths From Inclusive Semileptonic B-Meson Decays" report.

"I'm somewhat out of my depth here," said Bush, a longtime Fermilab follower who describes himself as "something of an armchair physicist." "But it seems to me that, when reducing the perturbative uncertainty in the determination of Vub from semileptonic Beta decays, one must calculate the rate of Beta events with a standard dilepton invariant mass at a subleading order in the hybrid expansion. The Fermilab folks' error, as I see it, was omitting that easily overlooked mathematical transformation and, therefore, acquiring incorrectly re-summed logarithmic corrections for the b-quark mass. Obviously, such a miscalculation will result in a precision of less than 25 percent in predicting the resulting path of the tau lepton once the value for any given decaying tau neutrino is determined."

The Bush correction makes it possible for scientists to further study the tau lepton, a subatomic particle formed by the collision of a tau neutrino and an atomic nucleus.

Bush resisted criticizing the Fermilab scientists responsible for the error, saying it was "actually quite small" and that "anyone could have made the mistake."

"High-energy physics is a complex and demanding field, and even top scientists drop a decimal point or two every now and then," Bush said. "Also, I might hasten to add that what I pointed out was more a correction of method than of mathematics. Experimental results on the Tevatron accelerator would have exposed the error in time, anyway."

Fermilab director Michael Witherell said the president was being too modest "by an order of magnitude."

"In addition to gently reminding us that even the best minds in the country are occasionally fallible, President Bush has saved his nation a few million dollars," Witherell said. "We would have made four or five runs on the particle accelerator with faulty data before figuring out what was wrong. But, thanks to Mr. Bush, we're back on track."

"It's true, I dabbled in the higher maths during my Yale days," said Bush, who spent three semesters as an assistant to Drs. Kasha and Slaughter at Yale's renowned Sloane High-Energy Physics Lab. "But I didn't have the true gift for what Gauss called 'the musical language in which is spoken the very universe.' If I have any gift at all, it's my instinct for process and order."

Continued Bush: "As much as I enjoyed studying physics at Yale, by my junior year it became apparent that I could far better serve humanity through a career in statecraft."

While he says he is "flattered and honored" by the tau-neutrino research team's request that he review all subsequent Fermilab publications on lepton-path determination, Bush graciously declined the "signal honor."

"This sort of thing is best left to the likes of [Thomas] Becher and [Matthias] Neubert, not a dilettante such as myself," Bush said. "I just happened to have some time on the plane coming back from the European G8 summit, decided to catch up on some reading, and spotted one rather small logarithmic branching-ratio misstep in an otherwise flawless piece of scientific scholarship. Anyone could have done the same."

© Copyright 2006, Onion, Inc. All rights reserved.
ark said:
Well, it was my joke - in a sense. Namely a scientist can see humor where other people see just words and symbols. And a good joke certainly induces "changes of perception ( on physical and energetical plan) "
As another example, seeing an evidently wrong equation published in a serious, peer reviewed, journal may cause an apoplexy in some. :shock:
 
It reminds me of Elena Ceaucescu CV

Wikipedia said:
She was born Elena Petrescu into a peasant family in the village of Petreşti, Baloteşti Commune, Ilfov County, in the informal region of Wallachia. Her family was supported by her father's job as a ploughman. Elena's education ended at the fourth grade and she moved along with her brother to Bucharest, where she worked as a laboratory assistant before getting a job at a textile factory. She joined the Communist Party of Romania in 1937 and met Nicolae Ceauşescu in 1939 and married him on December 23, 1947. On their wedding day she forged her birth certificate (her birth year was changed from 1916 to 1919 in order to make her look younger than her husband Nicolae, who was 2 years her junior)[citation needed].

Under her husband's regime, she became a major Romanian political figure. Publicly, Ceauşescu said that it was an honor to be referred to as "comrade", but Romanian expatriates in the United States frequently referred to her as "Madame Ceauşescu" with great disdain. Her official title was "The Best Mother Romania Could Have." However, she was not particularly maternal, having been quoted as saying about her countrymen that "the worms never get satisfied, no matter how much food you give them." It is quite possible that Elena Ceauşescu was the most hated person in Romania during the 25-year reign of her husband.

After the Communists took power she worked as a secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and was an unimportant figure until her husband became general secretary of the party. In 1957 she was a research scientist at ICECHIM (National Institute for Chemical Research). In the early 1960s she was reported to be secretary of the party committee of the Bucharest Central Institute of Chemical Researches, and, when her husband Ceausescu took over the party leadership in March 1965, she was listed as the institute's director. In December of the same year, she was elected a member of the newly established National Council of Scientific Research, and in September 1966 she was awarded the Order of Scientific Merit First Class.

Elena Ceauşescu was given many honorary awards for scientific achievement in the field of polymer chemistry during the period when her husband ruled Romania. However, her educational and scientific achievements are disputed (she was once thrown out of an adult education chemistry exam for cheating). During her time as Director of the Central Institute of Chemical Research, she took the floor at several conferences and meetings but spoke on general matters. Whenever a specific scientific theme arose, she would defer to a "Comrade Engineer", who would then have to explain what had to be done. During the quick show trial that ended her life, she was accused by her interrogator, General Gică Popa, of having had her scientific papers written for her by someone else. Among her many honors, she received an honorary doctorate at the University of Bologna, an honorary fellowship from the Royal society of Chemistry (UK) (as well as an honorary doctorate), she was made a member of the Illinois Academy of Sciences etc. She allegedly obtained these awards with money, instead of merit.

From July 1972 she was given various offices at senior levels in the Romanian Communist Party. In June 1973 she became a member of the Politburo of the Romanian Communist Party becoming the second most important and influential person after Ceauşescu himself. She was deeply involved in party administration alongside her husband. The Ceauşescus issued strict public relations rules for all elements of their persona, which were rigidly followed. In March 1974, she was made a member of the Romanian Academy's Section for Chemical Sciences. At the time when she wanted to receive her doctorate from the Bucharest Faculty of Chemistry, she met with strong opposition from respected Romanian chemist Costin D. Nenitescu, the dean of the faculty. She was forced instead to present her thesis to Cristofor Simionescu and Ioan Ursu at the University of Iasi, where she met with complete success.

She frequently accompanied her husband on official visits abroad, and it was during the state visit to the People's Republic of China in June 1971, where she noticed how Chairman Mao Zedong's wife, Jiang Qing had her own position of real power in the state, that Elena's remarkable rise was given a Chinese fillip.In July 1971 she was elected a member of the Central Commission on Socio-Economic Forecasting, and in July 1972 she became a full member of the Romanian Communist Party Central Committee. She was elected a member of the Executive Committee in June 1973, after being proposed by Emil Bodnaras. In November 1974, at the 11th party congress, she was made a member of the (renamed) political executive committee and in January 1977 became a member of the highest party body, the Permanent Bureau of the Political Executive Committee. In March 1980, she was made a First Deputy Prime Minister.


Romanians hold Elena Ceauşescu responsible for the elimination of birth control that created crisis conditions during the 1970s and 1980s, resulting in a flood of unwanted infants, babies, and children that were housed in substandard state operated orphanages throughout the country. She also headed the State health commission, which denied the existence of AIDS in Romania, leading to one of the largest outbreaks (including pediatric cases) in the western world. She was also responsible for the destruction of churches and the food rationing that took place in Romania in the 1980s
 
Ark said:
As another example, seeing an evidently wrong equation published in a serious, peer reviewed, journal may cause an apoplexy in some.
Tssss....such a thing should be forbidden...What does the police???? ;)
 
stardust said:
What does the police???? ;)
Police does nothing, because equations are not like Polonium - they do not leave "signatures". So, scientists have to defend themselves. The method of defense is quite simple: scientists do not read papers written by other scientists, with two exceptions:

a) When these other scientists are their targeted victims. Then finding a little error or two may be a good starting point for launching a personal assassination campaign. (and you better never find an error in a paper of your PhD adviser, else you PhD will be delayed, sometimes indefinitely)
b) when there is a hint that something valuable, that can be stolen, is in the other scientist paper:
" If you are a conscientious scientist, you will acknowledge the sources of all the ideas that you use (supposing you remember). If you are unscrupulous, you will try to present as your own some results obtained by others. For example, if you find a good idea in a paper that you referee, you will try to stop the paper, and rush to publish the idea under your own name (or have one of your students publish it)."

David Ruelle, in "Chance and Chaos", Princeton Science Library, (Notes 5 and 7 to Chapter 11, p. 179-180)
 
Ark said:
If you are unscrupulous, you will try to present as your own some results obtained by others. For example, if you find a good idea in a paper that you referee, you will try to stop the paper, and rush to publish the idea under your own name (or have one of your students publish it)."
Do you know the real story of Louis Pasteur? I'm living in the street where he was born , and I am surely the only in this city who not recognize him as a "so great man"!

I'm not able to translate all what I have read about him but if someone can, I will be happy to give you some articles in French!
 
The source of the article I'm talking about is "Les vérités indésirables"! But I read that in an other book...
Ark , I scan some pages and send it to your e-mail.
 
OK mais il y a pas mal de termes scientifiques que je ne pourrais pas traduire même avec mon gros dico ( éventuellement je te demanderais). Il y a 16 pages , ça fait 8 chacun...cela va me prendre un peu de temps avec mon anglais sommaire. Tu veux traduire la 1ere ou 2e partie?
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom