Ongoing important Science news thread

[peter12]

Originally Posted by polak

Why do you have such a negative outlook on Scientific advancement.

15 years ago we didn't even know about other planets. Now we can observe them with such detail that we can notice anomalies that set our imaginations running wild, a scientific gold mine, and you're here raining on the parade.

Realistic/pessimistic.

I think science is fabulous. In fact, so fabulous that it has mostly done what it set out to do. There are limits, obviously, and I think we are starting to hit those limits now - both from a pure and applied science perspective.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by peter12

Realistic/pessimistic.

I think science is fabulous. In fact, so fabulous that it has mostly done what it set out to do. There are limits, obviously, and I think we are starting to hit those limits now - both from a pure and applied science perspective.

I do not really think we are hitting those limits. Maybe slowing down a bit as huge discoveries opened up big areas of innovation in transportation and communication.

In so far as Cosmology and Space exploration there is a tonne of new satellites and planned missions happening. We may actually be in the infancy of an age of Space exploration. Plus the exoplanet hunt is just getting started. A breakthrough in space propulsion could really open things up.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/?type=future
https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/miss...uture-missions

The human Genome project has opened up huge windows of discovery that we are in the infancy of exploring. In fact, they just saved a infants life, using gene Exchange, who had Leukemia.

How about all the potential advances in energy production ? Solar, Wind, Battery, fusion etc. While there have not been any huge breakthroughs, there have been incremental improvements constantly.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by peter12

Realistic/pessimistic.

I think science is fabulous. In fact, so fabulous that it has mostly done what it set out to do. There are limits, obviously, and I think we are starting to hit those limits now - both from a pure and applied science perspective.

Yes, we are certainly reaching our limit to Science and Technology. I am definitely really feeling that these days. Thank goodness science has done what it has set out to do!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Hesla

I do not really think we are hitting those limits. Maybe slowing down a bit as huge discoveries opened up big areas of innovation in transportation and communication.

In so far as Cosmology and Space exploration there is a tonne of new satellites and planned missions happening. We may actually be in the infancy of an age of Space exploration. Plus the exoplanet hunt is just getting started. A breakthrough in space propulsion could really open things up.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/?type=future
https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/miss...uture-missions

The human Genome project has opened up huge windows of discovery that we are in the infancy of exploring. In fact, they just saved a infants life, using gene Exchange, who had Leukemia.

How about all the potential advances in energy production ? Solar, Wind, Battery, fusion etc. While there have not been any huge breakthroughs, there have been incremental improvements constantly.

Incremental improvements with diminishing returns. Promises that are never fulfilled. We are certainly measuring more and more data, but with the opposite effect of scientific discoveries. Einstein and Newton created simple and elegant theories that helped explain much of the world. Now, we can actually explain less! The search for a unified theory in physics is probably farther away now then it ever was. Darwin's theory of evolution is just being filled in at this point. It does not look like there will nor can be any improvements in terms of increasing our understanding of the biological sciences.

Exoplanets were neat to consider, but we can't really hope of ever reaching one with the current space propulsion technology, and even if we make massive gains there, we would still have to travel for thousands of years.

I think the Human Genome Project can say that has saved one life so far, but even then, we don't know if the success can be replicated.

It is really interesting to consider that we may actually be at the End of Science - especially at the cognitive level. Chomsky compares our current plight to a rat being asked to navigate a maze where he has to make a left hand turn at every prime number. The rat just isn't cognitively capable of executing the task successfully.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Yes, we are certainly reaching our limit to Science and Technology. I am definitely really feeling that these days. Thank goodness science has done what it has set out to do!

Not sure if this is green text or not, but I actually would agree with the sincerity of it.

Science has done an incredible job, and that may be why it is ending!

[Coach]

I don't see how someone could say that Science is ending. The only way science can "end" is by destruction of all the information we've learned up to now. Without that, people will continue to try and expand on what we already know.

It's barely getting started. All we've figured out is how to automate monotonous things, communicate instantly, help some illnesses, and learn a minuscule fraction about our environment. Very arrogant to assume we're done or can't go any further. Imagine how stupid people from 100 years ago look now. Or even 15 years ago. Having a discussion with my Dad about space is like talking to a 8 year old, who probably knows more about space than my Dad could ever conceive of, and even that is so minor a fraction of potential knowledge about our universe that it's barely significant progress at all.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I don't see how someone could say that Science is ending. The only way science can "end" is by destruction of all the information we've learned up to now. Without that, people will continue to try and expand on what we already know.

It's barely getting started. All we've figured out is how to automate monotonous things, communicate instantly, help some illnesses, and learn a minuscule fraction about our environment. Very arrogant to assume we're done or can't go any further. Imagine how stupid people from 100 years ago look now. Or even 15 years ago. Having a discussion with my Dad about space is like talking to a 8 year old, who probably knows more about space than my Dad could ever conceive of, and even that is so minor a fraction of potential knowledge about our universe that it's barely significant progress at all.

This is actually a fallacy. 19th c. Victorian England was an absolute teapot of excitement over future scientific discoveries.

[polak]

Originally Posted by peter12

This is actually a fallacy. 19th c. Victorian England was an absolute teapot of excitement over future scientific discoveries.

Yeah... who needs the human genome, or genetics, or observing all wavelengths of the Electromagnetic Spectrum or the transistor or anything else that has been developed since the 19th century.

What a weird statement.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by polak

Yeah... who needs the human genome, or genetics, or electro magnetism or the transistor or anything else that has been developed since the 19th century.

What a weird statement.

No, it's been great. I am so happy for all of this stuff. You are misinterpreting my statements as anti-science. I am more of a pessimist regarding its future progress.

[polak]

Originally Posted by peter12

No, it's been great. I am so happy for all of this stuff. You are misinterpreting my statements as anti-science. I am more of a pessimist regarding its future progress.

Yeah I think I am.

Are you saying that we've taken care of all of the low hanging fruit?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by polak

Yeah I think I am.

Are you saying that we've taken care of all of the low hanging fruit?

Exactly.We've created elegant, simple theories in physics and biology that probably can't be improved upon. Who can beat Darwin or particle physics? We know they are true. Anything further has shown to be minor tweaks or ironic (like superstring theory) speculation. Advances are diminishing, and hype is increasing.

Even the current hype regarding gene therapy's role in curing this baby of cancer-we know for a fact that claims for biomedical advances are false or very exaggerated. We might just be at the limits.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by peter12

Not sure if this is green text or not, but I actually would agree with the sincerity of it.

Science has done an incredible job, and that may be why it is ending!

It was not sincere at all. What you are saying is asinine.

[calumniate]

Yeah well, good job science! Can close the book on that one.. :/

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by peter12

It comes from science desperately clinging to the margin of returns. There isn't much more we can learn, so we make up potential scenarios that keep us all somewhat invested in the process.

Science is not an institution. The only institutions counting to anything are religious ones

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by peter12

We might just be at the limits.

Lol what, by limits you mean scratch the surface right?

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Science is just scratching the surface. To say otherwise suggests that we are running out of things to question, to investigate, to wonder.

What Newton gave to the world was amazing. But if we stopped there, perhaps we wouldn't have an Einstein. Similarly, if we stopped there, we wouldn't have the next Einstein or Newton.

[PsYcNeT]

Personally I believe we are spawning more Newtons and Einsteins all of the time, the issue is, is that the science itself has become so complex that geniuses do not have the earth-shaking magnitude they once did, as it's humans that are limited, rather than the science.

Think of it like a game of Civilization. Each "Great Scientist" has a +500 (or whatever) to the total technology of your civ, regardless of the era they are born in. Up until ~1960ish, the amount of "points" needed to discover a new technology were below 500, so all that was required was a single "Great Scientist". After 1970 however, the required technology "points" has risen dramatically, to where we are today, where it takes dozens or more "Great Scientist"s to discover one new technology.

Don't blame limitations of science, blame the limitations of humans.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Personally I believe we are spawning more Newtons and Einsteins all of the time, the issue is, is that the science itself has become so complex that geniuses do not have the earth-shaking magnitude they once did, as it's humans that are limited, rather than the science.

Think of it like a game of Civilization. Each "Great Scientist" has a +500 (or whatever) to the total technology of your civ, regardless of the era they are born in. Up until ~1960ish, the amount of "points" needed to discover a new technology were below 500, so all that was required was a single "Great Scientist". After 1970 however, the required technology "points" has risen dramatically, to where we are today, where it takes dozens or more "Great Scientist"s to discover one new technology.

Don't blame limitations of science, blame the limitations of humans.

Those two are exactly the same thing.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by peter12

those two are exactly the same thing.

two letters, AI

[ken0042]

Let's get back to "Ongoing important Science news." If you'd like to start an "I don't like science" thread, please feel free to do so.