David’s Comments (group member since Dec 13, 2009)

David’s comments from the Science and Inquiry group.

I just finished reading The Mind and the Brain. It is an excellent book. I learned how people with severe conditions can sometimes overcome the debilitating effects of stroke, OCD, and so on.

Toward the end of the book, the author describes how quantum mechanics may be a key component to volition and free will. But, like Sandra and Chas, I also am not completely convinced of the connection with quantum mechanics. I understand how the act of observation of an atom can resolve its (previously probabilistic) state. And the analogy between "observation" and "attention" is striking. But doesn't this just beg the question, what is the mechanism for the mind/brain to show attention to something?

Chas, that sounds like a very interesting book. I've just put it on my "to-read" list.

I just finished a very good book,
The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature by Steven Pinker. The idea of the blank slate, is that when one is born, his mind is a totally "blank slate", that is to say, his nature is completely malleable. It is not a new idea, and Steven Pinker does a good job showing that it is simply not true. The book covers a very wide range of topics, and Pinker shows how his ideas impact each topic. Highly recommended.

The book The Edge of Physics: A Journey to Earth's Extremes to Unlock the Secrets of the Universe was recently nominated for the June 2010 book of the month. Although it did not win the poll, it looked interesting, and I just finished reading it.

I found this book to be an easy read--it is sort of a travelogue, going to far-away, exotic locations where physics research is being done. The interplay between theory and experimental research is a key element of this book, and helped to keep me turning the pages. Highly recommended.

Chas wrote: "Hi David,
...McCutcheon's book is "self published" and in reading some of the first chapter at his web site I saw sweeping statements with not a single reference to back them up....not one single peer review or even a comment from the reputable community "

Chas,
Yes, those are key clues to the worthiness of a new theory. Self-published books are often just toss-outs of hypotheses that are half-baked. Generally, groundbreaking scientific ideas are published in peer-reviewed journals. Truly new ideas are published in world-renowned journals, like Science and Nature.

Of course, it wasn't always like that. A hundred years ago (and more), it was commonplace for reputable scientists to self-publish their theories and research in their own books. There are exceptions, of course--for example, Stephen Wolfram's A New Kind of Science (which I wouldn't classify as groundbreaking, and is somewhat overblown).

Çhas, that is very intriguing. Is the theory correct? By that, I mean, does the theory explain nature better, more completely, or more simply than other theories?

There are many many theories that have been expounded, that claim to explain "everything". For example, see my review of Milo Wolff's book "Schroedinger's Universe". It might be truly groundbreaking, based on the reviews at Amazon.com. The theory makes quantitative, testable predictions. On the other hand, the theory might be total rubbish.

My point is just that with all these theories of "everything", they can't all be correct, they cannot all be groundbreaking, can they?

I recently read the book Schroedinger's Universe and the Origin of the Natural Laws because I thought that it would be an interesting summary of modern physics. It isn't--it is a fresh new theory of the foundations of physics. It is a very clever theory; it purports to derive--from three basic principles--all of the characteristics of an electron. According to the theory, an electron is not a particle, but a wave; actually a superposition of an outgoing and an ingoing wave. The author derives many other properties of the physical universe; he actually, in a sense, derives F=ma! Whoa! He does this by deriving the fact that inertial and gravitational mass are the same. He also derives several of the physical constants. He derives gravitation! Absolutely unbelievable.

I cannot decide if the book is a brilliant masterpiece, or the work of a quack! The author realizes that his theory is revolutionary, so he takes on the language of a crackpot, over and over again.

The last few chapters are the most interesting, as they bring in some quantitative analysis. I highly recommend this book, but I'm still not sure if it is genius or deluded quackery.

Chas wrote: "Then there is also "The Emperor's New Mind" by Roger Penrose. I read it several years ago, but he postulates quantum effects in the human brain also."

Chas, I'm sorry; I created the poll at the same time you posted this suggestion. Save your suggestion for next time (which will be soon). I read both of these books by Penrose, and I especially enjoyed "The Emperor's New Mind". It is exactly my favorite type of book, covering a wide variety of topics under a single theme.

We need to close the nominations now, as we have quite a few books suggested already. Please vote in the poll now!

Vote here

Chas wrote: "Might I suggest:
The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force by Jeffrey M. Schwartz and Sharon Begley
"

This book sounds fascinating! It reminds me of the theories by Roger Penrose The Large, the Small and the Human Mind and by Erwin Schrodinger What is Life?: With Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches. Both of these authors discuss how consciousness may be due to some quantum physics, that is not yet understood.

Salvatrice wrote: "...I also think it would be timely to read something that would help expose the environmental impact of the ongoing oil spill...."

Not One Drop: Betrayal and Courage in the Wake of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
This book is about the impact on the people who were most affected by the Valdez Oil Spill, politics, and corporate corruption. This book is certainly timely, and received high review marks. It isn't about science and inquiry, but I think I'd like to read it.

The problem is, I would like to read all the books that have been nominated!

Desgreene wrote: "It is one of life's glorious mysteries that while sharing a genetic code not that dissimilar to single celled lifeforms, we have evolved into a species capable of deciphering the genetic code itself in all its complexity!"

Researchers are starting to realize that epigenetics is just as important as genetics, in determining a lifeform. See, for example, the book:
Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life

As an extreme example, think about the fact that every cell in your body has virtually identical genes. But cells in various organs of your body are very different from one another!

Desgreene wrote: "Without language we are not human but can humanity claim credit for its existence? "

In a sense, the answer is "no". I would credit man's genes with the existence of language, more than culture. Steven Pinker shows this pretty convincingly, in "The Language Instinct". He shows that languages around the world are more similar to one another (even the ones that seem so different) than they are different, i.e., the differences are superficial.

On the other hand, our genes do not directly build up our languages, or produce great works of literature. People do that.

Desgreene, the two things that pop out first in my mind are:
1) the invention of language
2) the invention of the scientific method
It's hard to say they are the "greatest", but they certainly have had a great impact on our lives.

I agree with Andrea. I purchase some books, while others I prefer to obtain from the library. Sometimes the books are checked out, and it can take several weeks to borrow a book by putting it on reserve.

Of course, there is always a danger of someone "jumping the gun" by starting a discussion a month early; but it does seem worth the risk of picking a book a month ahead of time. In that way, more people would have a chance to participate.

Jack, I read the book "Chaos" by James Gleick, and I agree, it is excellent. I have not yet read the other books, but they both look quite interesting, too.

But I must ask this question: in what sense are they "groundbreaking?" The reviews I've read mention that these books cover great new ideas. But do the respective authors themselves perform groundbreaking research that is described in their books?

Likewise, I also would never have independently chosen to read this book, but I'm glad I did.

I've taken the factoid about the statue in the lobby of the headquarters of the World Nuclear Association (in London), and turned it into a trivia question. People love it!

Melissa wrote: "... I wonder if a new folder for botanical threads and book recommendations/discussion would be a good idea? "

Melissa, go ahead and add a new folder for botanical threads. Start some discussions.

Alice, could you educate us a little about environmental illness? Does anybody get it, who is exposed to certain toxins, or are some people genetically more sensitive than others? Are there foods one can eat (or avoid) to diminish the sensitivity?

A quick Google on the term found some essays that purport that the symptoms are real, but psychosomatic. I don't believe that. I have a hard time believing that respiratory diseases due to asbestos, pollution, pollen, etc. are psychosomatic.

Melissa,
I would definitely be interested in discussions on these subjects. I am currently reading "The Flamingo's Smile" by Steven Jay Gould. He wrote quite a number of books of essays, many of them reprinted from the Natural History Magazine.

I've started reading Uranium...it is a fascinating book! It doesn't say all that much about the science behind uranium, but the author is an excellent storyteller. Well worth reading.