Philosophy Now Forum

Now the 'public' is uninterested in the LHC, I'd thought I'd make a few comments about the way the media coverage showed the diabolical lack of 'scientific', I prefer 'philosophical', understanding of Science that our media re-presents.

I'm not sure about the rest of you but my media presented the situation as though the LHC was a toaster. Switch it on, wait a bit and out pops the result. So they had a big build-up waited a bit, realised that it wasn't a toaster and left.

I'm not sure what is worse. The fact that this situation is either that 'smart' people are taking the piss out of what they think are 'dumb' people, or, that the 'smart' and 'successful' people believe this shite themselves. Our education system(UK) must be in a terrible state if the 'smart' people believe that a 'machine' as complicated as the LHC can be turned on like a toaster and its outrageous that they are promoting such a concept. Not least because any car-worker on an assembly line would understand that a start-up procedure would be needed for a complex 'machine', such as an asssembly-line, in its powering-up and down. So, to me, the 'meja' are stupider than their readership in this respect, regardless of the qualifications. Give adults correct information and they can generally make a model of it that they can relate to. They might not agree with others deductions from it but at least they can argue in a way that discussion can be had.

a_uk
p.s. And the 'meja' is also having a 'laugh' at the fact that the 'toaster' has problems. The most fucking complicated machine Man has ever built and these twats are making money poking fun!!!!! Right up against the wall I reckon.

THE LHC is fascinating. I look forward to them analysing the data once its onstream again. I was aware of its predecessor at Cern.
The fault maybe journalistic rather than philosophic i guess they are trying to make it comprehensible to Jo public trouble is joe public is brighter than they previously supposed.

arising u_k,

In the opening sentance you use the word 'public' and then go on to criticise media comment on the project. Do you think people and the media can be directly equated? Are we merely socially constructed thinking things? I expect the thought occured to a lot of people that day at work - when they couldn't get the photocopier, or chainsaw or coffee machine to work properly - this is not a hadron collider!

Also, this is without doubt the most information rich we have ever been - perahps overirch, and thus I think you're right to raise concerns about the quality of information we get pumped at us by the mainstream media - but equally, the information is out there if one wants to look for it.
I imagine, those of us interested enough googled HLC and and got a fuller account of what occured.

But I think the format of news-like information is changing due to technological advance - rolling news, text headlines. They wanna call it clues, not news.

Then last but not least you assume jouranlists intelligent. I'm sure there are intelligent people in journalism but intelligent jouranlsim is rare. It's mostly just a middle of the road singalong, entirely conscious of massively distorting reality, and conscious of doing so while maintaining an aura of journalistic objectivity.

But I've never heard anyone, talking in the pub about the news swallow it whole. Everyone knows it's all slanted 'our' way by everybody, and if not actually false certainly open to much broader interpretation than is customary. That's why nothing makes sense. Even that which makes sense makes too much sense - if you know what I mean?.

Okay, now I'm waffling. I am in general agreement with your sentiments. Bit pissed.

mb..............

Great post A_UK. Watched the coverage on the LHC. Ridiculous. It was trailed as possibly the end of the world because soom fringe scientist saw his chance for a headline. So the BBC send a crew out there and wait for them to press the 'Make it go' button. Unbelievable.

Journalists typically have a far greater understanding of the Arts than science. In most cases this is simply because of their background. One great exception is Ben Goldacre who writes on science for the Guardian. He has just published a book based on his column called Bad Science. Highlights include his attacks on TV 'scientist' Gillian McKeith.

Arising wrote:So, to me, the 'meja' are stupider than their readership in this respect, regardless of the qualifications.

The is that the media is firmly entrenched in its view that the viewer/reader is bloody stupid, I suspect this view comes more from the hope that they are or should be so bloody stupid than from any evidence that they are.

Rortabend wrote:Gillian McKeith

God I hate her.

I remember all the problems that the Hubble Space Telescope had and the dimwits who poked fun at it. It turned out to work very well in the end. I see the same with the LHC and am looking forward to it's results.

Word! I HATE GILLIAN MC KEITH AND HER PSEUDO SCIENCE I am not surprise she is in for another postgrad programme.
Word II I look forward ditto to excited reports on analysed data sets from THC.

TetraHydroCannibinol?

Psychonaut wrote:TetraHydroCannibinol?

Both!

The Large Hadron Collider is a quest for more power.

Scientist have split the atom and what we got was Hiroshima and Chernobol.

Now they want to split even smaller particles and what they'll get is the power to wipe out a planet, if not a whole solar system.

The world has to come to an end. It is inevitable. Maybe this is the way it is going to happen.

The only thing to survive such a catasrophe is bacteria which will be carried off to another galaxy only to land on another suitable planet and recreate life once more.

All the knowledge and history of Earth gone.

If the LHC goes wrong and creates a black hole (which it won't by the way) then there won't be any bacteria left either.

The mad CERN ’s project.
=== .
In 1906, Rutherford studied internal structure of atoms,
bombarding them with high energy a- particles.
This idea helped him understand the structure of atom.
But the clever Devil interfered and gave advice to physicists
to enlarge the target. Bomb them!
And physicist created huge cannon-accelerators of particles.
And they began to bomb micro particles in the vacuum, in hoping
to understand their inner structure. And they were surprised with
the results of this bombing. Several hundreds of completely new
strange particles appeared. They lived a very little time and do not
relate to our world. Our Earth needs its real constants of nature.
But this was forgotten.
What God carefully created, is destroyed in accelerators.
And they are proud of that. They say: we study the inner structure
of the particles. The clever and artful Devil is glad. He again has deceived man.
Physicist think, that an accelerator - is first of all the presence of huge energy.
And the Devil laughs. He knows, that an accelerator - is first of all the Vacuum.
But this, he has withheld from man.
He has not explained that the Vacuum is infinite and inexhaustible.
And in infinity there is contained an infinite variety of particles.
And by bombing the vacuum, one can find centaurs and sphinxes.
But my God, save us from their presence on Earth.
========= .. ========.
Rutherford was right.
His followers are mistaken.
Why?
Imagine, that I want to plant a small apple- tree.
For this purpose I shall dig out a hole of 1 meter width and 1,20 m depth.
It is normal.
But if to plant a small apple- tree, I shall begin to dig
a base for a huge building (skyscraper),
or if to begin drill ground with 10 km. depth,
will you call me a normal man?
========== .. ===============.
Imagine a man who breaks watches on the wall.
And then he tries to understand the mechanism of the watches
by thrown cogwheels, springs and small screws.
Does he have many chances to succeed?
As many as the scientists have who aspire to understand
the inner structure of electron by breaking them into accelerators.
If not take into account the initial conditions of Genesis,
the fantasies of the scientists may be unlimited.
========== . ======== .
The Nature works very economical.
For example, biologists know 100 ( hundred ) kinds of
amino acids. But only 20 ( twenty) kinds of amino acids
are suitable to produce molecules of protein, from which all
different cells created on our planet. What are about another
80 % of amino acids? They are dead end of evolution.
The physicists found many ( 1000 ) new elementary particles in
accelerators. But we need only one ( 1) electron and one (1 )
proton to create first atom, to begin to create the Nature.
All another elementary particles (mesons, muons , bosons, taus,
all their girlfriends - antiparticles, all quarks and antiquarks…etc)
are dead end of evolution.
============.
What was before - “ the big bang” or the vacuum ?
The physicists created “ Europe’s Large Hadron Colider “
Please, look at how our physicists made this accelerator.
They made the vacuum and after they generated a big reaction
between two colliding particles in some small imitation of the
“big bang”. They didn’t make this process in the reverse.
So, what was prior in the Universe: “ big bang” or vacuum?
===========================..
The Universe as whole is Vacuum, first of all.
=== .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

thelastmessiah wrote:The Large Hadron Collider is a quest for more power.

Scientist have split the atom and what we got was Hiroshima and Chernobol.

Now they want to split even smaller particles and what they'll get is the power to wipe out a planet, if not a whole solar system.

The world has to come to an end. It is inevitable. Maybe this is the way it is going to happen.

The only thing to survive such a catasrophe is bacteria which will be carried off to another galaxy only to land on another suitable planet and recreate life once more.

All the knowledge and history of Earth gone.

And then Lord Xenu will wipe out that planet too.

Arising_uk wrote:Now the 'public' is uninterested in the LHC, I'd thought I'd make a few comments about the way the media coverage showed the diabolical lack of 'scientific', I prefer 'philosophical', understanding of Science that our media re-presents.

I'm not sure about the rest of you but my media presented the situation as though the LHC was a toaster. Switch it on, wait a bit and out pops the result. So they had a big build-up waited a bit, realised that it wasn't a toaster and left.

I'm not sure what is worse. The fact that this situation is either that 'smart' people are taking the piss out of what they think are 'dumb' people, or, that the 'smart' and 'successful' people believe this shite themselves. Our education system(UK) must be in a terrible state if the 'smart' people believe that a 'machine' as complicated as the LHC can be turned on like a toaster and its outrageous that they are promoting such a concept. Not least because any car-worker on an assembly line would understand that a start-up procedure would be needed for a complex 'machine', such as an asssembly-line, in its powering-up and down. So, to me, the 'meja' are stupider than their readership in this respect, regardless of the qualifications. Give adults correct information and they can generally make a model of it that they can relate to. They might not agree with others deductions from it but at least they can argue in a way that discussion can be had.

a_uk
p.s. And the 'meja' is also having a 'laugh' at the fact that the 'toaster' has problems. The most fucking complicated machine Man has ever built and these twats are making money poking fun!!!!! Right up against the wall I reckon.

I blame xkcd

http://xkcd.com/401/