/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6045477]

Why are pop scientists given any fucking attention? All they do is create pseudo-intellectuals who consume their garbage.

[Anonymous No.6045480]

neil degrasse tyson is actually pretty cool.
but his fanboys are annoying as fuck.

hawking is a pop physicist and he is legit as fuck.


frankly i am just glad we are still injecting a modicum of intellect into the mainstream.

[Anonymous No.6045481]

>>6045480
i mean, even einstein was a pop sensation in his time

in a sense he is to this day.

[Anonymous No.6045485]

>>6045477
>complains about them getting attention.
>makes a thread to talk about them

Can't tell if retarded or trolling.

[Anonymous No.6045488]

>pop scientists
>popular scientists
It's by definition given attention else it would't be pop sci

Also this
>>6045485

Your thread is bad and you should feel bad.

[Anonymous No.6045493]

>da possibilities r endliss 4 lyf. Wut if dere r silicawn baysd lyf formz in da yoonavers?

Pop science in a nutshell

[Anonymous No.6045558]

Why do art supply stores sell art supplies to amateur artists. It's not like they're making any masterpieces.

[Anonymous No.6045560]

At least they make people interested in their fields. I remember watching dangerous knowledge and that Marcus du Sautoy series on the history of mathematics and it got me really interested. So yeah, some people are inspired by this kind of shallow entertainment to dwell deeper, like myself.

[Anonymous No.6045582]

>>6045477
Kaku is a prof at my school, I ran into him one time but didn't have the balls to ask him how he became such a media whore

[Anonymous No.6045626]

>>6045560
>some people are inspired by this kind of shallow entertainment to dwell deeper, like myself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hR5YNqE3K8

People like Kaku gave me a really bad impression of what scientists are like. Opinionated blowhards, who don't really have good reason to believe half the shit they spew. They dazzle people with fancy stories and manage to pass off their LSD trips and even political opinions as scientifically backed ideas.

They get away with it, because when pressed for details on why they say the things they do, they throw out some theory that is bogged down in mathematics. The average person's ignorance of mathematics and laziness ensures few can call them on their shit, so the deflection almost invariably works.

The few people knowledgeable enough to set the record straight don't get the same media attention, because they don't tell fanciful stories that people want to hear.

So yeah, instead of inspiration, I got the impression most scientists were basically well educated snake oil salesmen, clothing their pet ideas in equations so they look more legit.

Wonder which is effect is more prevalent among the masses?

[Anonymous No.6045630]

>>6045480
they're kind of a duel-edged sword, on one hand by having people to introduce others to the sciences you could motivate someone to develop the love of knowledge that could create the next Hiesenburg (the science one not the meth one) or Tesla.

But you also run the risk of creating the kind of cretin that watches and likes The Big Bang Theory.

>Almost not worth it.

[Anonymous No.6045631]

I used to kinda agree with those who thought pop-sci is cancer, but now I realize that there's nothing bad about it. People are just really enthusiastic about their work, which is good, and they share it with others, which is also good.
Even if the analogies are really silly at times, it's still worthwhile doing, because 1) most of the world is ignorant and 2) someone might get interested in said "silliness", look it up for him/herself and become less ignorant.
/cpt obvious signing out

[Anonymous No.6045636]

>>6045477
Because engaging the general populations interest in science is detrimental to the advancing the field of science via economic funding. Unfortunately for ass pies like OP that lack social skill's and the ability to communicate to the general public . It is up to scientist's like micheo to ensure funding for your backwards ass close nit group of scientific hermits and autism eleets.

Your tears of my precious like gollem from lord are thanks enough when it comes to science.

The great work this man and his like are enough to satisfy your jealousy knowing that you will never be recognised or reach their level in your backwards ass life you live in a bubble.

That's ok stay mad and pretend anyone gives a fuck what you think, wanker.

[Anonymous No.6045638]

>>6045560
What exactly do you mean by "dwell deeper".
Because if all it accomplished is make you read a few wiki articles and a history book, it's not worth giving as an example of successful inspiration.

[Anonymous No.6045643]

>>6045636
But precisely, quantum-mystic faggots like Kaku only contribute to the separation of science from the general public and the wrongful picture of scientists as modern priests.

Instead of spreading honest down-to-earth science, they insist on that grandiose mystic bullcrap, which is completely remote from the viewer concerns and understanding.
The mixture of rationality, analysis and experimentation that characterizes science transpires in no way through that.

Science funding are never unlocked by making people believe stuff like "hurrr in quantum mechanics errything is possible", it's unlocked by insisting on the innovation and technological applications.

[Anonymous No.6045655]

>>6045643
Funny you say that. In Australia we just dumped our science minister and merged it with industry as well as removed our climate council because they think its bullshit. not to mention canning a fibre network plan to bring this country up to speed with the rest of the planet.
the current govt does not give a shit about science and technology not due to misinformation but sheer ignorance. We need more individuals like micheo gaining interest in science , by hiding it in the shadow's and not engaging the general population is only asking to turn this place into idocracy.

[Anonymous No.6045656]

>>6045636
>his first sentence contradicts everything else he says after it
>attacks other people's communication skills

>claim scientists get funding, not because they can demonstrate the utility or truth of their ideas, but because of good marketing by a few douchebags.

>views science as a popularity contest, meaning it's virtually no different from politics.

[Anonymous No.6045660]

>>6045638
I study mathematics.

[Anonymous No.6045662]

>>6045656
>>First sentence is missing a question mark at the end.

Science has nothing to do with popularity but you need people like this to keep people's interest in science. Using your same argument you could say people like Carl Sagan is a douchbag. If that's your argument then I really have nothing to say.

[Anonymous No.6045665]

>>6045656
>>6045662
of course science has to do with popularity
you don't get to do expensive experiments because they're important to technological advancement or furthering our knowledge of the universe
you get money if people believe what you're doing is profitable on the short term

[Anonymous No.6045674]

>>6045662
>Carl Sagan is a douchebag
Funny story, I was arguing with some philosotard one time about space related shit and all of a sudden he started coming at me with shit Sagan said and asking me to defend it. Did I even bring up Sagan? No, I'm not even all that familiar with his stuff, but people seem to think scientists are like the fucking borg. They speak with one voice, attacking one guy is the same as attacking all of them and the veracity of everyone's claims by extension. This is retarded and it's the exact same thing you're doing.

[Anonymous No.6045676]

>>6045665
That's reputation not popularity.

[Anonymous No.6045679]

> people promoting scientific worldview
> "why are they given any attention?"

3/10, made me reply.

[Anonymous No.6045696]

>>6045676
i'm not sure what you mean
the point is politics being equally if not more important to pursuing ideas and generating new ones as "doing science" is
if no one gives a crap about science funding the politicians making decisions aren't gonna find it important which leads to funding cuts, less interest in the area, less people working and less results
the pop sci guys are trying to impose the idea that science is important and saying they're full of shit or that what they do isn't important sounds pretty silly to me

[Anonymous No.6045700]

>>6045679
So much this

you edgy undergraduates should stop feeling so threatened that non-science people are trying to interact at the face of science and popculture

[Anonymous No.6045704]

>>6045696
"muh quantum consciousness, muh aliums" popsci shit holds no weight whatsoever in science policies decisions.

[Anonymous No.6045708]

>>6045700
Fuck off. Those people who spread science in a mystic format are responsible for it becoming just that, another mysticism, in the public eye.

When you spend your time talking about things that are way beyond the public scope, and they should just trust you because you are za voice of science, in the end they realize they could listening to any other preacher for the same results.

[Anonymous No.6045714]

>>6045704
i'm not saying kaku talking about cyborgs is gonna start a new manhattan project
i'm saying the effect is more of a gradually increasing interest and inspiration kind
planting ideas and raising awareness rather than a call-to-arms

[Anonymous No.6045719]

>>6045708
They mention things beyond the public scope that engage people in science at some level, gets them to be inspired by science and like (and from that trust) science. But guess what, they dont just stop at that, many push ideas that are within the public scope too.

>inb4 you actually believe that engaging with the public at such a level is bad.
more people that like science means more people that will potentially study it - and better yet - more people in the general public that will trust science. You should stop feeling threatened that people are engaging in your field.

How are you enjoying your undergrad?

[Anonymous No.6045725]

>>6045719
>many push ideas that are within the public scope too.
Not Kaku. There's a whole class of pop-sci fucks whose professions it to throw around smoke and mirrors rather than vulgarize.

[Anonymous No.6045734]

>>6045725
>b-but kaku...
refer to my points about inspiring people and engaging the general public in science. even if its pretentious and esoteric for the sake of esoteric - there are still positives.

Theres plenty of people who vulgarize science, Kaku works at public interaction on a different level.

[Anonymous No.6045748]

>All they do is create pseudo-intellectuals who consume their garbage

Not always, and the science fields are filled with pseudo-intellectuals anyway. This includes graduate students and professors.

[Anonymous No.6045750]

>>6045734
I like how you keep ignoring the very real possibility that this esoteric shit can and does have the opposite effect of what you believe. Keep piling on religious trappings on science and soon enough the ignorant start judging it by it's cover and missing the essence.

[Anonymous No.6045772]

>>6045750
The number of people that would negatively judge science solely because of theoretical physics from guys like Kaku would be incredibly less than the number of people who would engage more in at least some form of science through people like Kaku.

I'm not ignoring the fact; I'm acknowledging that is negligible

[Anonymous No.6045775]

>>6045772
You're pulling shit out of your ass is what you're doing.

[Anonymous No.6045779]

>>6045775
aren't we all

[Anonymous No.6045787]

>>6045779
That's the point of these threads I think. Unsubstantiated claims can be dismissed with other unsubstantiated claims.

[Anonymous No.6045792]

>>6045787
probably not the best place to publish one's paper

[Anonymous No.6045799]

>>6045792
Would certainly be the most hilarious place though. Wonder what it would be like to have someone draw a cock on the front page and post it? Or shop the text to turn it into retarded talk.

[Anonymous No.6045806]

>>6045775
>cant think of a reply so will say you're bullshitting
oh wow you sure showed me m8.

[Anonymous No.6045807]

>>6045799
>No thangs up in dis biatch found fo' We assess tha detection prospectz of a gravitationizzle wave background associated wit sub-luminous gamma-ray bursts (SL-GRBs). We assume dat tha central enginez of a thugged-out dope proportion of these bursts is provided by newly born magnetars n' consider two plausible GW emission mechanisms. Firstly, tha deformation-induced triaxial GW emission from a newly born magnetar. Shiiit, dis aint no joke. Right back up in yo muthafuckin ass. Secondly, tha onset of a secular bar-mode instability, associated wit tha long lived plateau observed up in tha X-ray afterglowz of nuff gamma-ray bursts.

[Anonymous No.6045812]

>>6045806
>thinks his beliefs constitute an argument

[Anonymous No.6045814]

>>6045477
It still does more good for the scientific community than Kim Kardashian...just be happy with what we've got

[Anonymous No.6045815]

>>6045477
Pop science gave me something interesting to watch before I educated myself with real science.

I want to see more advanced versions of pop-science shows. Additional, extra long episodes rich with a lot more technical details about what they're describing i.e. no brushing over the maths and dumbing it all down to metaphors of metaphors.

[Anonymous No.6045816]

>>6045812
>believes that what I believe is wrong
you dont say

[Anonymous No.6045824]

>>6045816
>also believes his beliefs are more in line with reality than other people's, for reasons which apparently are superior to mine.

[Anonymous No.6045834]

>>6045481
>comparing Tyson to Einstein

[Anonymous No.6045844]

>>6045558
Horr dorrrr
>implying they don't become famous from hard work and doingsometging.

[Anonymous No.6045846]

>>6045477
>Why are pop scientists given any fucking attention?

Because they are on television, dummy.

[Anonymous No.6045847]

Would you prefer a greater number of people ignorant of basic scientific knowledge?

Get fucked and die

[Anonymous No.6045851]

>>6045847
That would be the role of school.

"muh alium" and "muh quantum robots from the black holes" isn't "basic scientific knowledge".

[Anonymous No.6045854]

>>6045558
Can't believe I missed this initially.

artist - scientist
art supplies - scientific training and equipment
work of art - research results

According to this retarded analogy, popsci videos are supposed to be the equivalent of scientific training and equipment.

[Anonymous No.6045864]

>>6045854
>implying everyone doesn't benefit from learning at least the basics of science

[Anonymous No.6045868]

>>6045864
>implying popsci teaches you enough basics to be worth a fuck

[Anonymous No.6045873]

>>6045864
>popsci teaches that estrogen makes you grow boobs
>popsci teaches that estrogen is in soy milk
fucktards walk around saying soy milk makes you grow boobs.

[Anonymous No.6045874]

>>6045868
>implyingstorm you know anything about pedagogics

[Anonymous No.6045881]

>>6045864
But popsci does NOT teach you the basics.
School does that.

[Anonymous No.6045884]

>>6045477

No one gives a shit

Does richard dawkins and kaku and fucking nigger degrasse tyrone stop you from conducting experiments and writing up journal articles?

No it doesn't so who fucking cares it doesn't interfere with what scientists do at all if anything it gives them more funding and makes them seem cool and less fucking autistic to the general public

>hey anon what do you do
>I study theoretical physics
>omg like the big bang theory are you guys going to invent time travel XD
>yeah sure whatever slut get on your knees

And that's exactly how it should be

[Anonymous No.6045887]

>>6045884
Read the thread before posting.
I know you're convinced you're one little special snowflake, but we don't care if you're just gonna repeat what's been said multiple times.

[Anonymous No.6045888]

>>6045874
>argues from authority, presumably his own
>appeals to ridicule
>thinks I don't have experience trying to learn shit from both popsci and proper sources of knowledge

[Anonymous No.6045911]

>>6045887
>Snowflake.

[Anonymous No.6045938]

What I don't like about a lot of pop scientists is that they're often given credibility although they talk about something completely outside their field of expertise. Sometimes they can be humble about it and speak about it from their discipline's point of view (e.g. when Brian Cox talks about the physical aspects of life in his series), but far too often they just pull some opinions out of their asses and people believe it as fact because they have some sort of authority (like Dawkins' whole career during the last decade or however long he's been preaching about atheism).

[Anonymous No.6045951]

Popsci presenters are best when dealing with the history of their fields and I like such popsci. They tend to stick to facts and it's interesting to see what things were like in the past. Things begin to unravel when they start getting into contemporary stuff and the oracular future predicting shit is just abysmal to watch.

[Anonymous No.6045959]

>>6045938

'preaching about atheism'
you mean explain how we gain information scientifically? which is what he is paid to do?

are you a butthurt Believer or just an edgy Agnostic?

[Anonymous No.6045961]

>>6045851
There are only so many hours in a school day, and few of them are spent studying science and natural phenomena. If people wish to extend their learning on their own time, you think this is a bad thing? Also are you blaming these science enthusiasts for a failing school system? Also "alium" and "quantum robots" isn't the topic of most pop-sci videos/infographs. It's usually stuff that the general populous find interesting, thus easier to digest

again, get fucked, and die

[Anonymous No.6045963]

>All they do is create pseudo-intellectuals who consume their garbage.

Because we live in a consumerist culture whose aim is to create more and moar consumers to increase 'muh economy' even if it leads us to the point of extinction.

If we want to stop being parasites of the planet we need to become more aware of our actions as a species, sadly this goes against the interests of the people with more money (so the people with more power) and unless we start a global revolution to overthrow the system established by globalization then we will see earth continue to become more and more inhospitable for the human species.

[Anonymous No.6045967]

Yes it would be better if more people were illiterate peasants

>hand rubbing intensifies

[Anonymous No.6045978]

>>6045959
Not him, but here's a fun fact, dipshit, atheism is a philosophical concept. Even atheists will tell you this and add that science can not and does not make claims regarding the existence of a deity. Dawkins however blurs this line, although there are reasons for this.

The reason Dawkins talks about atheism so much, is because creatards insist on lumping it in with mainstream science, when they try to discredit current theories that they don't like, because "muh bible, it r from gawd". The unfortunate result is that atheism, skepticism and science are all terms that fucking meld together in the mind of the average dullard. It's a trend not everyone is happy with.

There's nothing wrong with not believing in a god, I don't believe myself. I recognize this as a belief though, I do not slap the science sticker on it, unlike creatards and the retarded kind of atheists.

[Anonymous No.6045986]

>>6045938
Dawkins just loves to troll people cocky enough to believe they know The One And Only Truth.

He truly is doing God's work by putting these people down. It is ridiculous that we still have leaders that swallow these medieval stories.

It's okay to believe in God, what is not okay is to legislate on no more logical grounds than 'muh beliefs'.

[Anonymous No.6045991]

because fools need something to believe in too.

[Anonymous No.6045996]

>>6045991
The only thing necessary to stop being a fool is merely the will to do so.

[Anonymous No.6046163]

>>6045477

Kaku is speaking at my university tomorrow, and I'm obviously going. I paged through a few of his books and yes, he does, like most popsci, graze over important concepts just to get to "so, in conclusion, this is possible". However I don't think thats a bad thing, because for public plebs it might inspire them to not be one of those "i h8 mth and reeding lol" faggots that the US' extremely dry and boring education system produces in such volume because of its presentation of math and science.

As far as being 'mystic', I'd say that's the idea. Nobody wants to actually be lectured on pages upon pages of formulas and abstract ideas that they are too stupid and lazy to understand, because then they'll just quit and go back to caring about things like civil rights. More people need to at least care about the idea of science and technology instead of caring about 'social issues'. If ideas that are cool enough are presented in a basic enough fashion, maybe the public will stop caring about the banal bullshit they do.

[Anonymous No.6046180]

>>6046163
There are plenty of ways to explain scientific methods and ideas without being boring as fuck.
Hell some kids show do it. Generally better than Kaku and the like.
For starters, it could be more about 10-20 years down the line tech, and less about aliums and spacedrives and humanlike wobots.

[Anonymous No.6046185]

>>6045961
Yeah sure, babbling about how string theory reflects the Torah is gonna help scientific learning.

>>6045978
Dawkins actually did some great skepticism teaching, with kids.

[Anonymous No.6046197]

>>6045480
Oh, yes, "gravity created teh universe" is just so legit

[Anonymous No.6046199]

>>6045582
Yes, because words can be so challenging to say out loud.

[Anonymous No.6046231]

>>6045477
Pseudo-intellectualism>Complete ignorance
If you don't like them minimize your interactions with them.

/thread

[Anonymous No.6046235]

>>6045834
>technically Tyson knows more

[Anonymous No.6046237]

Would you rather remove popsci in favor of more honey boo boo and jersey shore? Maybe we should drop the cosmos remake in favor of another animated family sitcom with talking animals or another workplace comedy. Let's give even more time to Kim kardashians ass.

Is that really what you would prefer?

[Anonymous No.6046249]

>>6046237
>more Kim kardashians ass

[Anonymous No.6046250]

>>6046237
>animated family sitcom with talking animals
these kinds of shows can be made to support critical thinking and creativity while never mentioning science, which would be good. popsci supports a religion where instead of priests we have quantum mechanics and warp drives, popsci makes people just babble quotes from famous "scientists" without thinking about what it is they are saying in order to sound "deep" and "intelligent" because they can pronounce Schrodinger almost correctly.

[Anonymous No.6046253]

>>6046237
>Is that really what you would prefer?

>implying this isn't what most people prefer regardless
>making false dichotomies
Human intelligence has a gaussian distribution, live with it.

[Anonymous No.6046258]

>>6046250
>tfw you announce you don't truly understand general realativity, let alone string theory or similar
>tfw every arts major smiles and starts to explain it to me with multiple dimensions and rubber sheets... waving his hands up and down

[Anonymous No.6046262]

>all this assburgers
>all this USI
It's like I'm really on Reddit.

[Anonymous No.6046267]

>>6046253
>Human intelligence has a gaussian distribution, live with it.
and this relates how to interest in science?
people are interested in things they're made to be interested in, what they see and hear about
loudmouths are going to get attention so it's better to join in rather than to sit silently in the corner being ignored
the einsteins and such are going to pursue their passions but that doesn't mean "regular" people aren't important as well, not everyone worthwhile has to be the smartest man on the planet

[Anonymous No.6046276]

>>6046267
>hurf durf you don't care about the little people
Holy shit stop with that fucking strawman already you cunt.
It's precisely because we care.

[Anonymous No.6046279]

>>6046258
Holy shit people actually do that?

[Anonymous No.6046284]

>>6046276
>Holy shit stop with that fucking strawman already you cunt.
>It's precisely because we care.
i don't even know what you're talking about now

[Anonymous No.6046290]

>>6046279
then when
>[citation needed]
you get this:
http://youtu.be/4MuS0ge8-mE

[Anonymous No.6046299]

I don't think they're all like that, I haven't studied science in formal education for years but I still listen to some podcasts (Guardian science weekly is quite good) and watch some TV programs (BBC has some good ones). I don't think I'm particularly clever for having done so but science doesn't need to be some esoteric club

[Anonymous No.6046307]

>>6046299
>defending this plebshit
You're the reason we have dreck like "ancient aliens".

[Anonymous No.6046317]

>>6046299
>science doesn't need to be some esoteric club
Precisely why we don't need the like of kaku.

[Anonymous No.6046320]

>>6046267
>not everyone worthwhile has to be the smartest man on the planet
Yet you decry their lowbrow entertainment. Live and let live dog, I never said everyone has to be smart. Quite the opposite.

[Anonymous No.6046325]

implying Sagan wasn't pretentious elitist prick in Cosmos.

[Anonymous No.6046326]

>>6046290
>TEDx
Why am I not surprised?

[Anonymous No.6046348]

>>6046307
>"ancient aliens"
This and the tsoukalos.jpg got me in the feels.

>went to intern at a measurement instrument calibration lab
>people start talking about ancient aliens srsly
>people who should know better

Thanks for the spike of disappoint anons.

[Anonymous No.6046367]

>>6045477
You're right. We need people to equate science with blasphemy once more.
The more strange and unknowable science is to the layman the better for us. After all, we don't need funding, political support, or informed voters to shelter us from the now growing masses of anti-scientific religious fanatics.

In fact, I'll go out on a limb here and say that every single person on this board agrees with you and me when we subtly insinuate that widespread ignorance and the resulting anti-intellectualism is exactly what we need in the year 2013.

Finally someone who agrees with MY opinion.

[Anonymous No.6046379]

>>6046367

As someone who was tempted by creationism at one point, I tell you this >>6045626

[Anonymous No.6046384]

>>6046367
this. Unfortunately, there has to be a better, more "interesting" way to get science to the attentions of the laypeople without dumbing it down too much. Popsci is the best we have right now.

[Anonymous No.6046386]

>>6046367
Read the thread you cockmongler.

[Anonymous No.6046412]

how to recreate the op of this thread
>take one bitter dork desperate to feel superior
>have him observe someone or something that most people enjoy
>get ready for him to eagerly jump at any chance to disagree with that person or thing
>get ready for his melodrama to blow it out of proportion
>and then he will share with as many people as possible how clever he is to hate this thing people like

pop scientists take people who would never in a million.years become real scientists, and they embue these plebs with a love of science. this influences public opinion, elections, funding, education. Can you imagine a world where the average pleb distrusts and despises science? I don't want to live in that world. So thankyou pop science.

Also whatever that thing is that you're mad at sagan or Tyson for saying. You're probably wrong. you're an arrogant fucktard child who thinks he knows more then anyone.

[Anonymous No.6046417]

>>6046379
To expand a bit, I eventually stumbled across the opposition, of course. However that alone didn't turn me round. Accepting the fact that I made a bad judgment call did.

Here's the scary bit, some people don't do that. Instead they just dig their heels deeper and continue rationalizing. We live in a time where everyone with a soapbox seems to think themselves a social engineer. I don't think anyone drawing breath can truly determine how a given message is recieved and disceminated in society. That's why I'm critical of certain people, even if they mean well. Unfortunately it's not the thought that counts, it's the result.

[Anonymous No.6046418]

>>6046325
well he wasn't. but you clearly are.

[Anonymous No.6046421]

>>6046367
we need popsci done by honest - top tier scientist

[Anonymous No.6046438]

>>6046421
feynmann vids get quite a few hits on youtube

[Anonymous No.6046466]

>>6045477
>Michio Kaku
God I fucking hate that prick.

[Anonymous No.6046485]

>>6046466
> I fucking hate that prick.
I wouldn't say hate, but I don't see what people see in him. He's boring as fuck in my book.