Slap MessageBoards
General Discussion => WHATEVER => Topic started by: frig deuce on November 05, 2009, 07:00:33 PM
-
is anyone a fan of the podcasts?
my fav episodes so far are stochasticity, choice, race, emergence, DIY Universes
they're all about philosophy/psychology/science/sociology/neuroscience and essentially better understanding the world around us, kind of like the discovery channel, on the go. lots of fun to
radiolab.org (http://radiolab.org)
-
im a huge fan of the program. those guys really use the medium of radio to the fullest extent.
-
FUCK THAT SHIT YALL LIKE ILL BEATS CHILL SHIT, NOT RAPS, BEATS,
BEATORACLE.NET A REAL MAN'S PODCAST
PHILOSOPHY IS FOR PHAGZ
-
oh man, i got into radiolab about a month ago. AMAZING. So well put together, so many interesting stories. Almost every episode leaves me baffled at how awesome everything is.
So far my favorite ones are the Parasites episode and the one about the original War of the Worlds.
-
haha i listened to the parasite one yesterday, i have minor allergies and now im looking into getting a hook worm lol. im just about to google if theres any disadvantages to having a hookworm. though what creeped me out was that the dude who sells them shits them out everyday, which means theyr reproducing inside of you, but perhaps thats not a bad thing, gonnna loook into that now!
-
radio lab hasn’t been as interesting to me since the changing of the guard, mostly because of the subtle change in tone and style, but the premise of this episode was interesting.
https://radiolab.org/podcast/quantum-birds
TLDL (in my words);
a theory proposes that migratory birds have a sensor in their eyes which can see the earth’s magnetic field. This sensor is powered by a chemical battery that is charged when sunlight enters the eye and induces quantum entanglement of the chemical electrons.
-
radio lab hasn’t been as interesting to me since the changing of the guard, mostly because of the subtle change in tone and style, but the premise of this episode was interesting.
https://radiolab.org/podcast/quantum-birds
TLDL (in my words);
a theory proposes that migratory birds have a sensor in their eyes which can see the earth’s magnetic field. This sensor is powered by a chemical battery that is charged when sunlight enters the eye and induces quantum entanglement of the chemical electrons.
Fascinating stuff, I listened to a chapter from "An Immense world", a book about non-human sensory perception that touched on that.
This pod I'll rec isn't directly related but it's about light and biology and their quantum relationships.
It's an initially contentious discussion, which kept me interested, but all the terminology was interesting to hear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrdRVDk66JE
-
Expand Quote
radio lab hasn’t been as interesting to me since the changing of the guard, mostly because of the subtle change in tone and style, but the premise of this episode was interesting.
https://radiolab.org/podcast/quantum-birds
TLDL (in my words);
a theory proposes that migratory birds have a sensor in their eyes which can see the earth’s magnetic field. This sensor is powered by a chemical battery that is charged when sunlight enters the eye and induces quantum entanglement of the chemical electrons.
Fascinating stuff, I listened to a chapter from "An Immense world", a book about non-human sensory perception that touched on that.
This pod I'll rec isn't directly related but it's about light and biology and their quantum relationships.
It's an initially contentious discussion, which kept me interested, but all the terminology was interesting to hear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrdRVDk66JE
going to listen to this. i love that it starts out by shitting on andrew huberman
-
so i listened to the demystifysci podcast interview with jack kruse and that is a complete rabbit hole. thanks for sharing.
the TLDW (in my words): biology should be studied through the framework of solid state physics or else the systems are fundamentally misinterpreted and will never be properly understood.
a couple take aways.
i might have to change the quote at the bottom of my posts to “what the heck is rick rubin doing at the center of this biology conversation?”
kruse’s issue with centralized science reminded me of the book “rhetorical darwinism”, which does a good job of exploring how western science has huge blind spots that are introduced by the human need to set up and follow belief systems. the author is coming from a religious studies angle, but they draw from a similar range of issues as kruse.
-
Expand Quote
so i listened to the demystifysci podcast interview with jack kruse and that is a complete rabbit hole. thanks for sharing.
the TLDW (in my words): biology should be studied through the framework of solid state physics or else the systems are fundamentally misinterpreted and will never be properly understood.
a couple take aways.
i might have to change the quote at the bottom of my posts to “what the heck is rick rubin doing at the center of this biology conversation?”
kruse’s issue with centralized science reminded me of the book “rhetorical darwinism”, which does a good job of exploring how western science has huge blind spots that are introduced by the human need to set up and follow belief systems. the author is coming from a religious studies angle, but they draw from a similar range of issues as kruse.
please note that I'm not challenging any of this and haven't listened to the pod. I am curious and ask that you clarify what's going on in the bolded statement vis a vis Western Science v Western Religion, Western Science v Older/Other Sciences, Western Science v Non-Western Religion, Western Science as an objective system based on proving various hypothesis v Western Science as as a belief system.
that is a fair request. not sure i could appropriately contextualize for you what i meant by “western” based on the various distinctions you propose. i am sure there is a proper term, but i think anything i would say would likely fall short of clarifying.
from a description of the book:
“Lessl analyzes the descent of these patterns of scientific advocacy from the world of Francis Bacon into the world of Thomas Huxley and his successors. In the end, Rhetorical Darwinism proposes that Darwin's power to fuel the establishment of science within the Western social milieu often turns from its scientific course.”
the bacon to huxley part i suppose is what i would call western.
and to be clear, i didn’t read it as an anti-evolution thesis. it read like a critique of the rhetoric used in popular science by scientists to sell their ideas and their work.
-
Expand Quote
so i listened to the demystifysci podcast interview with jack kruse and that is a complete rabbit hole. thanks for sharing.
the TLDW (in my words): biology should be studied through the framework of solid state physics or else the systems are fundamentally misinterpreted and will never be properly understood.
a couple take aways.
i might have to change the quote at the bottom of my posts to “what the heck is rick rubin doing at the center of this biology conversation?”
kruse’s issue with centralized science reminded me of the book “rhetorical darwinism”, which does a good job of exploring how western science has huge blind spots that are introduced by the human need to set up and follow belief systems. the author is coming from a religious studies angle, but they draw from a similar range of issues as kruse.
please note that I'm not challenging any of this and haven't listened to the pod. I am curious and ask that you clarify what's going on in the bolded statement vis a vis Western Science v Western Religion, Western Science v Older/Other Sciences, Western Science v Non-Western Religion, Western Science as an objective system based on proving various hypothesis v Western Science as as a belief system.
IUTSM, for what it is worth, i was thinking about your question, my original statement and my initial response. my statement about gaps in western science was very poorly worded at best, and my response was also maybe me misinterpreting what needed to be clarified.
so, to take a stab at rewording what i meant about rhetorical darwinism: there are shortcomings in the public’s understanding about what science has proven and can prove, and in western culture, science has also become some what of a belief system, often based on popular misconceptions of the facts.
regarding how any of this relates to jack kruse, it is totally tangential. kruse conspiratorially claims that the u.s. government has systematically stifled research on the photoelectric effect within the body and this has lead generations of biologist into a myopic approach to the physical systems being studied in their field. he’s a real firecracker. the connection, however thin, would be people thinking they understand the science, when really they are satisfied working with a generalized version of it because it suites their needs.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttjX3e1qo-s
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttjX3e1qo-s
no one will not divide us
classic episode. i tell people about this story any time someone brings up shia labeouf.
-
I like Science Friday a lot as well
-
Expand Quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttjX3e1qo-s
no one will not divide us
classic episode. i tell people about this story any time someone brings up shia labeouf.
I just find it fascinating how they went about finding the "he will not divide us" flag in a random field. Poor Shia.