Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (11136)	4/27/2002 11:46:32 PM
From: Rick Julian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I know I'm dumber than a bag of rocks. So is this guy (a professor of quantum physics?) from MIT: web.mit.edu "The reason why Newton had such a uniform influence on the whole of society is because it was not that difficult to understand conceptually. Common people were already familiar with cause and effect, so a mechanistic universe [as elucidated by his Laws of Motion] was not much of a stretch for them." Interesting how he uses the two concepts interchangeably in his first paragraph. And further: "If you are or will become a scientist or engineer then it is an absolute imperative that you learn quantum mechanics. It is making its way into all fields of study. I wouldn't be surprised if Noam Chomsky finds a way to formulate the human language into terms based in quantum mechanics. Computer scientists will soon be plagued with quantum effects as transistor density approaches its classical limit in the next ten years. The really interesting questions in molecular biology are quickly progressing beyond the grasp of biologist as they are reformulated in terms of physical chemistry. The standard biology curriculum leaves the university trained molecular biologist as the most mathematically illiterate of the true scientists. Modern cognitive studies have now fallen out of the hands of psychologists and medical doctors (really just high tech auto mechanics) and into the hands of physicist, chemists, engineers, computer scientists, and mathematicians. A large number of the best economists come from physics and physical chemistry. I could go on. . ." Hmmm. Just what is he trying to say here? Anything resembling what I've been proposing? As to your reply that "None of those questions are important", I'll defer to this gentleman's opening sentence, as we're in total accord: "The evolution of mankind is essentially defined by the questions that we ponder"