LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 11-29-2008, 01:18 AM   #1
SallyIsNice5

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
553
Senior Member
Default I just had an idea for a future empire
Who are you?
SallyIsNice5 is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 02:25 AM   #2
cauddyVab

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
602
Senior Member
Default
tries to project meaning he doesn't actually understgand it, nor even do a good job of acting like he does? Is it like that field stuff....the vector algebra stuff?
cauddyVab is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 02:32 AM   #3
Adollobdeb

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
523
Senior Member
Default
M theory. Is that the branes? Lubos Motl string theory crap? That has no physical proof and that Feynman said wasn't physics?
Adollobdeb is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 02:39 AM   #4
enfoires

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
527
Senior Member
Default
There are differing amounts of the aphysicalness?
enfoires is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 02:43 AM   #5
Progniusis

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
477
Senior Member
Default
It relates to how far away you get from observables.

JM
Progniusis is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 02:45 AM   #6
mtvlover571

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
408
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by TCO
Hey...I want you to go fvck up Lubos Motl. I told him I knew a dude who could take him in a math fight. I'll loan you my old Bessel function. He's a twit. But I would not challenge him to math fight.

And thanks, but I have my own Bessel functions.
mtvlover571 is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 03:40 AM   #7
Wckcvhsg

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
494
Senior Member
Default
How about the "landscape"? What's your take on that? And how about Smoit and that other critic of string theory?
Wckcvhsg is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 03:57 AM   #8
sasaderesada

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
341
Senior Member
Default
Hate Lisa? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Randall

Or just Lubos?
sasaderesada is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:04 AM   #9
iklostardinn

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
347
Senior Member
Default
What's your take on these hojos?

http://www.thetroublewithphysics.com/

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/

Do you keep up with their blogs and such?
iklostardinn is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:17 AM   #10
dremucha

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
520
Senior Member
Default
IO know you are just going on topic to annoy me.
dremucha is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:24 AM   #11
gamecasta

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
538
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by TCO
What's your take on these hojos?

http://www.thetroublewithphysics.com/

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/

Do you keep up with their blogs and such? Hell no. Don't keep up with Lubos either.
gamecasta is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:28 AM   #12
Serttyfd

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
422
Senior Member
Default
Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Lisa is full of herself and published a book for the general public. That means she is no longer a serious physicist. Hawking? Einstein?
Serttyfd is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:33 AM   #13
nretdjuend

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
497
Senior Member
Default
Do you think Randall got a benefit from being a woman or was her initial fame, purely deserved?
nretdjuend is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:36 AM   #14
zoolissentesy

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
484
Senior Member
Default
Feynman is the only possibility that I can think of? I don't know when he published his books.

Gates is definitely smart, but hsan't done anything for a couple decades either.

JM
zoolissentesy is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:38 AM   #15
parurorges

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
501
Senior Member
Default
I think Einstein wrote his popular book in 1917. And Hawking also wrote popular books while still doing serious work. No?
parurorges is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:44 AM   #16
Muramoursuard

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
588
Senior Member
Default
Feynman? I think the Cal Tech lectures were published earlier. Although perhaps that is diginfied as textbook vice popular book.
Muramoursuard is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:48 AM   #17
CGH1KZzy

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
448
Senior Member
Default
Some of this is that we are thinking of theorists, and msot of them are no longer significant after their 40s.

JM
CGH1KZzy is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:51 AM   #18
EzekelEnzino

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
742
Senior Member
Default
What is title?
EzekelEnzino is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:56 AM   #19
zithromaxlinks

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
560
Senior Member
Default
Einstein gets a pass then. He has ~10 years of useful work left after publication of book.
zithromaxlinks is offline


Old 11-29-2008, 04:58 AM   #20
Nothatspecial

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
574
Senior Member
Default
Luckily both of my siblings are ****ups, so no need to compete with them.
Nothatspecial is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:16 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity