Primer

The recent XKCD has brought Primer back to the collective foreground.

I've seen many MANY people explaining the timeline in Primer, and with the exception of the 'birds nesting in the attic' (which I didn't catch when I watched it, because it was too far away from the Big-Reveal), they don't seem to add much to the conversation. The timeline didn't really seem complicated enough to need an explanation; it is internally consistent. The Big-Reveal follows the movie's logic. So, what's to explain, right?

So, is this an Internet joke? Like the 3-wolf-moon t-shirt reviews? It didn't occur to me until today, but is everyone just playing and I didn't get it? Like, if we all pretend that Primer is really complicated and unknowable, that makes it funnier? I kind-of get that.

The Ascent of Man

The inspiration for Carl Sagans 1980 series, Cosmos, Jacob Bronowskis 1973 series, The Ascent of Man, alludes to and seeks to somewhat challenge the notion of some of Charles Darwins conclusions in The Decent of Man. Over the course of thirteen episodes, Bronowski travelled around the world in order to trace the development of human society through its understanding of science.

Jacob Bronowski was one of a small group of men and women in any age who find all of human knowledge-the arts and sciences, philosophy and psychology-interesting and accessible. He was not confined to a single discipline, but ranged over the entire panorama of human learning. His book and television series, The Ascent of Man, are a superb teaching tool and a remarkable memorial; they are, in a way, an account of how human beings and human brains grew up together. Carl Sagan, The Dragons of Eden

If you haven't seen this incredible series yet, I highly recommend it. It has been mentioned on Screenwipe several times, and then on Ze Frank's Blog.

Here's a preview: Show/Hide


There's a full playlist at YouTube. Good stuff!

Nuclear Discussion

Seen on Slashdot recently:

A stranger was seated next to a little girl on the airplane when the stranger turned to her and said, 'Let's talk. I've heard that flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger.'

The little girl, who had just opened her book, closed it slowly and said to the stranger, 'What would you like to talk about?'

'Oh, I don't know,' said the stranger. 'How about nuclear power?' and he smiles.

'OK, ' she said. 'That could be an interesting topic. But let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass. Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?'

The stranger, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, 'Hmmm, I have no idea.'

To which the little girl replies, 'Do you really feel qualified to discuss nuclear power when you don't know shit?

Hand vs Liquid Nitrogen

What would happen to you if you stuck your hand in liquid nitrogen? Watch this video to find out:Show/Hide


It's SCIENCE!

Why Science Is Awesome

(Originally scheduled for yesterday, but got bumped)

Saw this comment on Digg recently:
GREEDOnvrFIRED
on 01/20/2009

What happened to Pluto is what I adore about science. New technology... providing new information... that causes the scientific community to realize fault in it's existing information. No adherence to tradition, no injured pride, no accusations of heresy and no excommunication. You just inform the world that billions of books, posters, documentaries and science fair models are WRONG. And when the world replies "COME ON!" Science replies "TOUGH SH*T" this is science. I love it.

Update: After I wrote this, Neil deGrasse Tyson appeared on the Daily Show and talked about Pluto:
Show/Hide

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Neil deGrasse Tyson

Daily Show Full Episodes
Funny Political Videos

Important Things With Demetri Martin
More Funny Videos

Happy Birthday Darwin

Happy Birthday Charles Darwin!

I was just thinking about him! There was this post over on Slashdot the day before yesterday. Darwinism Must Die So Evolution Can Live.

"Equating evolution with Charles Darwin opened the door for creationism by ignoring 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution — Gregor Mendel's patterns of heredity, the discovery of DNA, developmental biology, studies documenting evolution in nature, and evolution's role in medicine and disease. Darwinism implies an ideology adhering to one man's dictates, like Marxism. Nobody talks about Newtonism or Einsteinism, and that by making Darwin into a sacred fetish misses the essence of his teaching. By propounding "Darwinism," even scientists and science writers perpetuate an impression that evolution is about one man, one book, one theory. "Darwinism" implies that biological scientists "believe in" Darwin's "theory." It's as if, since 1860, scientists have just ditto-headed Darwin rather than challenging and testing his ideas, or adding vast new knowledge."

Yeah...except as MANY /.ers pointed out, actual scientists DON'T SAY "DARWINISM". They say neodarwinism; Darwins theory plus all the addition evidence of the last 150 year. Or they say darwinian evolution (to distinguish it from, say, lamarckian evolution), meaning natural selection as the mechanism. But when they are talking about evolution in the modern understanding of it, you know what they say? "Evolution". As Thomas pointed out, Darwin didn't invent evolution. The only people that say "Darwinism" are creationists, trying to obfuscate the arguments: if you pin an idea to a person, you can ad hominem attack the person.

I didn't even know it was Darwin's birthday today until Google told me. (More on that in some future post)

SPEAKING of Creationists, I hope everyone has seen the Creationist Junk Debunked videos. Sometimes funny, and sometimes sad that people believe the things they say.