Was Brian Cox wrong? - Sixty Symbols

Apparently Brian Cox raised a fury among some scientist with his explanation of the Pauli Exclusion Principle. Sixty Symbols explains the controversy and gives their views.
Enzobluesays...

This is funny. I was talking to a guy at work about this and told him how what Cox said bothered me and sounded like scientists were making the universe fit their model. I mean, changing the energy of a group of electrons in my hand can cause all electrons in the universe to change theirs? Come on... Now I know it should be changing the quantum state, (not just energy as Cox said), of the electrons can, which is still pretty far out but a bit more believable given my ignorance of QM.

westysays...

This goes back to exactly what I said when the lecture was put on-line , and that is that some things can not be simplified and understood to any usfull level. Sure have some vaague descriptions and get people intrestead but then make sure you tell them that it simply cannot be understood unless you do some research into it and understand the principals behind it to a reasonable depth.



http://videosift.com/video/Professor-Brian-Cox-A-Night-with-the-Stars

"I actually think its probably futile trying to explain or teach Quantum physics to the general public other than saying it exists and this is how things are. It would be far more productive teaching the importance of science and the scientific method and the philosophy of science as that is something that can be grasped fully by sum-one of very limited knowlage of the subject matter and has the largest ramifications. "

sholesays...

Things do need to be simplified when doing a show of a limited time.
They can't do a show where it's like browsing wikipedia, jumping from one subject into some minute detail of it, and digging deeper until you forget what you were studying in the first place.
Not that i would mind if someone were to make a show like that.

westysays...

>> ^shole:

Things do need to be simplified when doing a show of a limited time.
They can't do a show where it's like browsing wikipedia, jumping from one subject into some minute detail of it, and digging deeper until you forget what you were studying in the first place.
Not that i would mind if someone were to make a show like that.


exactly but the compromise is not saying verbs and words that have no real meaning. The compromise is saying , " this is what it is called " " these scientists have done x " "the ramifications are y"
and then include links at the end of a show or a short sting that tells people where to go if they are interested in perusing it or what books to read / maths to study.

The general public is ignorant as to what the basic principles of the scientific method are so trying to then explain the more abstract aspects of quantum mechanics is utterly futile.

Still the lecture was a realy good effort and most of it was fantastic , IT is depressing to me that your average joe on the street probably doesn't know of the slit experiment and that a good proportion of the adults in that room with him didn't .

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More