Seeing Michio Kaku today. Any questions you'd like me to ask?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SeventhSigma
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Michio kaku
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around opinions and questions regarding Michio Kaku's work, particularly his approach to science communication through popular media and his portrayal of scientific concepts in non-documentary formats. Participants express their views on the impact of his work on public interest in science, the accuracy of his extrapolations, and the balance between entertainment and scientific integrity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a desire for Kaku to stop producing non-documentary sci-fi shows, arguing that they often stray too far from scientific possibility.
  • Others defend Kaku's work, suggesting that much of what he discusses is based on established science and reasonable extrapolations of future technology.
  • Concerns are raised about Kaku's discussions on topics like inter-galactic travel and time travel, with some participants labeling these as hyperbolic or unrealistic.
  • Several participants appreciate Kaku's ability to engage younger audiences with science, despite acknowledging that his methods may lead to misrepresentation or exaggeration.
  • Critiques include the notion that Kaku's shows often present speculative ideas without sufficient grounding in actual science, which some feel undermines the educational value.
  • Some participants argue that while Kaku's work may inspire interest in science, it should also maintain a commitment to factual representation.
  • There are mixed feelings about the effectiveness of Kaku's approach compared to other science communicators like Neil deGrasse Tyson, with some participants advocating for a more grounded style of popular science communication.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a range of opinions, with no clear consensus on Kaku's contributions to science communication. Disagreements persist regarding the appropriateness of his speculative ideas and their impact on public understanding of science.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the potential for Kaku's work to inspire interest in science, while others emphasize the importance of accuracy and scientific integrity in popular science communication. The discussion reflects a tension between entertainment value and educational responsibility.

  • #91
JaredJames said:
You must have missed the part where I said I "have no comment on the guy".

I don't know who he is, don't care, just pointing out a few things I've noted in a general sense.

I've not commented on any distinction between crackpot/mainstream/'popsci' etc, only on what is a common trait.

Again, misreading/misinterpreting/misrepresentation of what I actually have said.

If you really want to get into it, I've had a look at some of his stuff and it seems he pushes certain areas as though they are certainly possible or incredibly likely when in reality there is nothing to support it at all.

Yeah, you definitely need a vacation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Loren Booda said:
Has anyone here mentioned Kaku's scholarly book (700+ pages) on quantum field theory? It's mostly beyond me.

I used to hang out at Kaku's forum. It was a crazy fun kind of place. All areas were GD. I think one person was banned in the 3 years I was there. It did attract some smart people, who of course I could not understand. There was one very smart mathematician that tried to explain string theory to us laymen, but of course we did not understand. One day I told him that I'd like to understand string theory, and he told me that I should start by getting John M. Lee's book "Introduction to Smooth Manifolds". So I did. Unfortunately, it had been 30 years since I'd taken a calculus class, and the first 3 pages were all Greek, so I put it on the bookshelf with all my other "Gads I want to understand this stuff" books.

I think the forum was most fun in that it introduced me lots of scientists. I actually sent and received a response from Max Tegmark. That was pretty cool. Not since Tim Berners-Lee refused my box of chocolates, was I so delighted.

hmm...

I should go home.

btw, does anyone know who Sunfist was?
 
  • #93
This is not "today" anymore...
 
  • #94
flyingpig said:
This is not "today" anymore...

No, it's still today. It's not yesterday anymore, though.
 
  • #95
Ask him if he smokes a lot of pot, or if it just seems that way.
 
  • #96
Darken-Sol said:
and is he claiming these things exist or may exist in the future? i got the impression he is doing science fiction from the earlier posts. i still haven't had a chance to check out this kaku fellow. at what point does he degenerate to this heretic everyone paints him as?

bump
 
  • #97
lisab said:
No, it's still today. It's not yesterday anymore, though.

Looks like proof of time travel to me. Thanks!
 
  • #98
OmCheeto said:
Looks like proof of time travel to me. Thanks!

I guess not, as it will never be tomorrow. So if you are never there, how can you get back?
 
  • #99
Andre said:
I guess not, as it will never be tomorrow. So if you are never there, how can you get back?

If you don't choose yourself as a preferred reference frame...
 
  • #100
Misericorde said:
If you don't choose yourself as a preferred reference frame...

Is there any reference frame that would permit that?
 
  • #101
JaredJames said:
Is there any reference frame that would permit that?

You could just define any arbitrary set of coordinates; that's why you have past and future light cones around such chosen points. It's purely on paper of course, this isn't something that changes life as we know it, just the process of specifying 4 numbers to designate "you are here" and then everything before and after it.

If you mean a reference frame that would permit travel into the past, I believe that involves a universe unlike the one we live in. You can certainly construct one on paper however, in which events repeat a given number of times in CTCs.
 
  • #102
JaredJames said:
Is there any reference frame that would permit that?

Take into account quantum effects?
 
  • #103
Loren Booda said:
Take into account quantum effects?

Nothing that fancy, I was just being boring with whatever *space you cared to use in defining coordinates in time. Going back to the light cones and world lines as it were, not a physically realizable bit of excitement.
 
  • #104
Andre said:
I guess not, as it will never be tomorrow. So if you are never there, how can you get back?

So I can start drinking and spending money like there's no tomorrow, because there isn't one?

Yippie! :smile:
 
  • #105
OmCheeto said:
So I can start drinking and spending money like there's no tomorrow, because there isn't one?

Yippie! :smile:

I believe a group of apocalyptic nuts are literally doing that today... probably without the drinking.

Always a bit odd when the world of jokes and fun crosses over with the world of crazy sublimated suicidal urges of a religious mass.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 120 ·
5
Replies
120
Views
40K
Replies
103
Views
16K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
13K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K