Theme: Science

I love that Sir Roger Penrose claims string theory is nonsense, the Schrodinger equation does not describe reality, and instead advocates twistors, using positive and negative frequencies, recognizing the importance of choice of vacuum, and that gravity produces the collpase problem, limits doing physics to existentially demonstrable dimensions, yet he claims the existence of a separate mathematical realiity (mathematical platonism). Though as I’ve aged, as had he, I’ve come to understand that he means this other than how he speaks it. So I may have to stop lovingly teasing him over his platonism given that he behaves otherwise. 😉 He is still the clearest thinker in the field and I’ll lament his passing.

–“I’m not a believer myself. I don’t believe in established religions of any kind. … I think I would say that the universe has a purpose, it’s not somehow just there by chance … some people, I think, take the view that the universe is just there and it runs along—it’s a bit like it just sort of computes, and we happen somehow by accident to find ourselves in this thing. But I don’t think that’s a very fruitful or helpful way of looking at the universe, I think that there is something much deeper about it.”– Sir Roger Penrose

Here he is saying that there is something deeper to the existence of the universe, and it’s useless for us to imagine this vast clockwork of computation and not search for it’s purpose and function. He’s NOT saying that purpose and function is by design.

I love that Sir Roger Penrose is claims string theory is nonsense, the Schrodinger equation does not describe reality, and instead advocates twistors, using positive and negative frequencies, recognizing the importance of choice of vacuum, and that gravity produces the collpase problem, limits doing physics to existentially demonstrable dimensions, yet he claims the existence of a separate mathematical realiity (mathematical platonism). Though as I’ve aged, as had he, I’ve come to understand that he means this other than how he speaks it. So I may have to stop lovingly teasing him over his platonism given that he behaves otherwise. 😉 He is still the clearest thinker in the field and I’ll lament his passing.

–“I’m not a believer myself. I don’t believe in established religions of any kind. … I think I would say that the universe has a purpose, it’s not somehow just there by chance … some people, I think, take the view that the universe is just there and it runs along—it’s a bit like it just sort of computes, and we happen somehow by accident to find ourselves in this thing. But I don’t think that’s a very fruitful or helpful way of looking at the universe, I think that there is something much deeper about it.”– Sir Roger Penrose

Here he is saying that there is something deeper to the existence of the universe, and it’s useless for us to imagine this vast clockwork of computation and not search for it’s purpose and function. He’s NOT saying that purpose and function is by design.