One Fine Man, His Awesome Arrows and Why it’s Okay to be Wrong: Science, Silliness and the Nucleus of Niceness – Part 9

Oh boy! A lot of confirmation bias in Being and Niceness’ post exploring the similarities of the natural and physical world with our being and the wonder and excitement of being wrong or not knowing.

Much resonance with the brain embryos in these musings in particular:

Being and Niceness

Hopefully by now, if you’ve read any of my previous eight blog posts on our wonderful, mysterious universe, you are beginning to appreciate how bizarre existence truly is. The universe is weird – nature is odd. Life is random and unpredictable (not always entirely, but usually impossible to completely pin down or understand). Everything seems to comes down to that Sartrean existentialist contingency – the dizzying idea that nothing is planned or predetermined; electrons appear and reappear at random, and we can only approximate where they might show up next in spacetime. Probability seems to reign supreme in how we make sense of what we experience.

The fine man

The legendary 1965 Nobel Prize-winning theoretical physicist Richard Feynman knew a thing or two about probability – he (along with Schwinger and Tomonaga) devised an ingenious method for explaining the bonkers behaviour of nature – and illuminated it beautifully in his…

View original post 3,306 more words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.