What is Reality?
Things are never quite what we seem!
There’s that wonderful quote from American comedian, Woody Allen, ”What if everything is an illusion and nothing exists? In that case, I definitely overpaid for my carpet.“
But that quote may not be as silly as it first appears if I made sense of a programme that we watched recently. That was a documentary broadcast by the BBC under their fabulous science series known as Horizon. As an aside, the range of programmes covered over the years under the Horizon banner is fantastic as this web page from March 2008 demonstrates. An in-depth history of this BBC series is available on WikiPedia and the ‘Home’ page of the current Horizon website is here.
Anyway, back to this particular programme, What is Reality? Rather than me natter on about a subject that I don’t understand, despite being captivated by it, let me allow you to watch the programme courtesy of YouTube! Here is the first half of the programme split into two YouTube videos; the last half will be posted tomorrow.
Do yourself a favour and settle down to watch them undisturbed – as the programme says you may never look at the world around you in quite the same way again!
You have been warned!
Paul Handover
Paul: Very nice series indeed, thanks(although I think Suskind’s hologram is just nuts, and not the nuts we need to crack; I appreciated that he admitted it was nuts; at some point, when I knew him, he had just been unemployed, BTW, as his physics department in NYC had disappeared… on the superiority of European universities… ).
The reality of appearances is as real as it appears. The fine, and global nature of reality is not as it happens to appear. Appearance is not essence (to mix in some old philosophical terminology).
The multiverse theory is beyond stupid; it’s giving schizophrenia an aura of intellectual respectability (maybe that is why it is popular?). The solution to all can always be said to be somewhere else.
Anyway, all this has philosophical consequences.
Patrice Ayme
March 12, 2011 at 08:53
Patrice, thank you for taking the time to comment. I have neither the knowledge nor the experience to comment in the way that you do but just love the way that programmes of this quality cause me to see things from a different perspective. As you say, more a philosophical muse.
Paul Handover
March 12, 2011 at 10:36
Paul: Although mathematics is necessary to follow some of the logic, not all the logic about physics is mathematical. For example, the notion of electron is mathematically described (because only math can describe it), but it is a (mathematical) model that fits what is observed. Now, true said observations can only be described mathematically, but the bottom line is all about observation.
That is also why Faraday, who had no mathematical formation, was able to contribute so much. He observed very carefully.
There is a back and forth between philosophy, science, and math. I am writing an essay which mixes that, tsunamis, and plutocracies… An harmonious whole called life.
PA
Patrice Ayme
March 12, 2011 at 14:53
I can see that. Michael Faraday was quite a man. When I was a callow youth, I did 2 years of a Diploma in Electrical Engineering at Faraday College in London, see http://www.electricalreview.co.uk/news/118914/Faraday_House_Association_closes_after_105_years.html
Some of Faraday’s early experiments were housed in the basement although the great man had no direct connection with that establishment; the college was founded some 23 years after Faraday’s death.
Paul Handover
March 12, 2011 at 16:09