Curt Doolittle

Category: Science, Physics, and Philosophy of Science

  • ON MSG – MONOSODIUM GLUTAMATE (worth repeating) Now, you know, that ‘after lunch

    ON MSG – MONOSODIUM GLUTAMATE

    (worth repeating)

    Now, you know, that ‘after lunch food coma’ is likely msg effecting you. That ravenous ‘this tastes good’ you get from snack, fast, and packaged foods, is almost certainly msg.

    For some percentage of us, the after lunch food coma puts us to sleep for 6-24 hours and the ‘confused’ or ‘food coma’ reaction lasts for three or more days.

    So, it affects all of us, but it affects all of us with different levels of intensity.

    For me, msg makes me confused, sleepy, … and agitated, and it doesn’t wear off for three to five days.

    https://www.facebook.com/notes/10150578864161103/

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-13 09:10:00 UTC

  • The Laws of Nature (correcting Aristotle) …. Physical Laws ( TRANSFORMATION?) th

    The Laws of Nature (correcting Aristotle)

    …. Physical Laws ( TRANSFORMATION?) the POSSIBLE

    …. …. …. Physics: Astronomy, Chemistry, Biology, Sentience, Engineering, Mathematics

    …. …. Law of Man (properties of man) ACTION) the NECESSARY

    …. …. …. ….. ( acquisition, perception, memory, psychology, sociology )

    …. …. …. Law of Nature – COOPERATION – THE GOOD

    …. …. …. ….. …. ethics, morality, (law), (economics)

    …. …. …. …. Law of Testimony (TRUTH)

    …. …. …. ….. …. …. Testimony, (logics), epistemology, rhetoric

    …. …. …. ….. …. Law of Aesthetics (BEAUTY)

    …. …. …. ….. …. …. …. sense, beauty, design, craft, content. manners. sport (fitness)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-09 09:44:00 UTC

  • “If the universe offered no resistance than it would offer no reward for the mos

    —“If the universe offered no resistance than it would offer no reward for the most capable and no punishment for the less capable and rather than evolution we would have biological chaos.

    Our species has been (and will continue to be) sculpted by this resistance as we now consciously seek adaptation to it. The universe has no evident purpose or interests, it is not “against us”, it simply is.

    It is our own weakness which is against us and this weakness is a lack of adaptation to natural law.

    To “conquer the universe” is really only to conquer our own deficiencies.— Joel Davis

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-05 09:23:00 UTC

  • “You can never prove how life originated but what we can now wonder is, ‘Is ther

    “You can never prove how life originated but what we can now wonder is, ‘Is there a plausible way that life arose from nonliving inorganic chemistry?’ And it’s starting to look like you can connect the dots between the periodic table, the atoms available to us in the universe, and life as an emergent property of matter,” —Harry Noller, 77, Molecular biology professor, University of California at Santa Cruz,

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-05 05:27:00 UTC

  • “The laws of thermodynamics in general and entropy in particular, make the unive

    —“The laws of thermodynamics in general and entropy in particular, make the universe hostile to us. Everything tends to come apart over the long term – even our cells and their component parts, on up to planets and stars.

    Whatever “coming back together” that might occur on the larger time scale of the universe is beyond any meaning to us in practical terms – other than enjoying the knowledge of it, and perhaps gleaning from it any useful bits in regards physics that we can put to work in our machinations of survival and continuation, development, and improvement of the species.

    Within the short time scales that we deal with as biological agents it’s this constant “coming-apart” that forces us to defeat the red queen. To survive we must find ways to build bastions and bulwarks against this one tendency of the universe.

    I would submit that it’s most accurate to say that the universe is indifferent to the fact that the way it operates is hostile to us.” — Shanaynay Tomson

    (CD: edited to: remove suggestion that the universe has intent; fully expand sentences; rephrase parentheticals. tip. I try to use parentheticals to create parallel sequences between vernacular terminology and technical terminology, or to insert my ‘voice or opinion’ into the middle of an objective text. I recommend that you write however you are comfortable to get an idea out of your head and into text, but then go through it, organize it and fully expand it. -cheers)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-04 13:19:00 UTC

  • Emotional Intelligence: A Construct in Search of Evidence

    Emotional Intelligence: A Construct in Search of Evidence. https://twitter.com/charlesmurray/status/802291734700900352

  • Retweeted Andrew Sabisky (@AndrewSabisky): the arc of science is long, but it be

    Retweeted Andrew Sabisky (@AndrewSabisky):

    the arc of science is long, but it bends inexorably towards validating the Victorians and their common sense

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-02 21:45:00 UTC

  • WHAT’S YOUR OPINION OF KUHNs SoSR? (from James Santagata) (copied for archival p

    WHAT’S YOUR OPINION OF KUHNs SoSR?

    (from James Santagata) (copied for archival purposes)

    GREAT QUESTION!

    I think that he tried to complete popper’s program (despite poppers usual nonsense objections).

    Popper basically showed us that science is a MORAL process, and that it was a process of removing error, bias, (and deceit) from free associations. This eliminated the problem of induction by saying that no method of discovery of a candidate association conveys truth in and of itself, only survival (darwinian knowledge) from criticism.

    That as a moral process, science is conducted SOCIALLY like other moral processes. I expanded this to say that we can create legal tests of information (due diligence) just as we have for all other criteria, that warrant information just as we do goods and services. this is in fact how science is largely conducted today – but it is not how political speech is conducted today – and it should be.

    Kuhn simply addresses the issue of scale, and he illustrated the resistance to innovation of entrenched programs because of scale – a sort of punctuated equilibrium of discovery similar to Gould’s. IN other words, scientific knowledge progresses like all other normative, traditional, and legal knowledge.

    He is a precursor to Taleb’s attempt to discover the amount of information necessary to predict outliers.

    He is a precursor to my attempt to predict the unit of intelligence necessary to determine a relation given n units of information.

    So my view is that he was making very general statements – moral statements – but he was not, like popper, able to, as did hayek, transform their observations of constant relations of the hard sciences to the inconstant relations of the social sciences: particularly philosophy, sociology, economics, politics, and law.

    That was my job it seems.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-02 19:29:00 UTC

  • This is why science progresses with the death of the previous generation – statu

    This is why science progresses with the death of the previous generation – status preservation of malinvestment.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-01 01:38:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804137490093326337

    Reply addressees: @grimsithe @jeffreyatucker

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804116030335369216

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804116030335369216

  • It’s harder if your malinvestment is in a sentimental, or rational, ideology rat

    It’s harder if your malinvestment is in a sentimental, or rational, ideology rather than scientific evidence.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-01 01:36:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804137034260553728

    Reply addressees: @grimsithe @jeffreyatucker

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804116030335369216

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/804116030335369216