Dr. Michio Kaku “I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence."

[ajb]

I think he doesn't understand that the long term merit of an idea has nothing to do with the authority or reputation of its author; only the evidence matters doesn't it?

Or in this case, as Kaku's most important work is in string field theory, the mathematics.

 

It is not like Kaku, or indeed Witten, is the only voice in string theory.

[Scotty99]

After reading i fully understand where you are coming from, but you guys arent even giving michio a chance here. It would make a whole hell of a lot more sense if you just accepted his thoughts on the matter before dismissing them entirely.

[ajb]

It would make a whole hell of a lot more sense if you just accepted his thoughts on the matter before dismissing them entirely.

We accept his thoughts - he thinks that mathematics, symmetry and order in the Universe points to a creator. Some of us disagree with this big leap. Again, none of this are statements in or about string theory.

Edited June 18, 2016 by ajb

[Scotty99]

It just strikes me as odd how many people would come out against his thoughts so fast. To me this was a new finding, had michio already stated this conclusion prior and i missed it?

[ajb]

It just strikes me as odd how many people would come out against his thoughts so fast.

Why odd? Kaku's statements are not scientific and so we can offer different philosophical positions. Some of us do not see the fact that mathematics works as a signal for a creator. That's all.

 

 

To me this was a new finding, had michio already stated this conclusion prior and i missed it?

I am not sure, I don't follow Kaku close enough to know.

[Scotty99]

Well odd to me because clearly michio is smarter than any of us on this forum, but gets instant backlash. Unless some of you think you are brighter or more involved than this man? Not saying that isnt possible, but i dont know any of you.

[ajb]

Well odd to me because clearly michio is smarter than any of us on this forum, but gets instant backlash.

All we have said is that we do not agree with his big leap from mathematics, symmetry and order in the Universe to the need for a god/creator.

 

This has nothing to do with him being smart or not. It has nothing to do with his contributions to string theory. We are just disagreeing with his philosophical position.

 

Unless some of you think you are brighter or more involved than this man? Not saying that isnt possible, but i dont know any of you.

Please explain what this has to do with disagreeing with his philosophical position?

Edited June 18, 2016 by ajb

[Scotty99]

Ya i get the process i just feel more respect should be due on a subject of this magnitude. This is a massive announcement and took real balls for michio to make it, what happens from here on out is going to be very interesting.

[Strange]

Well odd to me because clearly michio is smarter than any of us on this forum, but gets instant backlash. Unless some of you think you are brighter or more involved than this man? Not saying that isnt possible, but i dont know any of you.

 

The only "backlash" (as far as I am concerned) is to point out that this is opinion/philosophy and not science. He is, of course, entitled to his opinion. Others will disagree. I don't really care either way.

 

It just strikes me as odd how many people would come out against his thoughts so fast. To me this was a new finding, had michio already stated this conclusion prior and i missed it?

 

This isn't a finding. It is an opinion. It isn't even a new one. He is not the first to say that the fact that the world can be described mathematically is proof of the mind of god. The idea goes back to at least the Greeks and has been common ever since. Einstein said similar things (despite being an atheist).

 

Also, I don't know if Kaku is talking about a literal god (in the Christian or other sense) or just a more abstract/metaphysical concept (as Einstein meant it).

[ajb]

Ya i get the process i just feel more respect should be due on a subject of this magnitude.

I do not see that anyone has been disrespectful, at least here.

 

 

This is a massive announcement and took real balls for michio to make it, what happens from here on out is going to be very interesting.

It is a brave and strange statement from a modern scientist. But nothing will really come of it.

 

Kaku is known for his views on pantheism - that nature is identical to divinity - and that he speaks of a creator that uses mathematics. I think that people who are not religous will not make a big deal of this, while those that are will suggest that Kaku has proven that their god exisits.

[Strange]

Kaku is known for his views on pantheism - that nature is identical to divinity - and that he speaks of a creator that uses mathematics.

 

 

That (without pantheism) sounds quite similar to Einstein's views, as far as I understand them. It has been quite a common view of philosophers and mathematicians (including some who might claim to be atheist - this is their alternative to a god).

[imatfaal]

 

First off i know almost nothing about this man, all i know is string theory is a legitimate theory and along with brian green (is that his name?) he was at the forefront. My only question here is does this at least legitimize the question of a created universe to be talked about in public arenas etc?

 

Kind of curious tho, if michio is so unpopular with scientists (or at least this forum) how is he so popular with people? Where is the disconnect?

 

 

Being a good theoretical physicist does not give you free rein to talk AND have attention paid to you when you stray into metaphysics and philosophy. This is called the Argument from Authority - and is a well known logical fallacy (check section 2 of the link)

 

 

I didnt link the post because it was michio kaku, i posted it because of string theory. Is string theory not an accepted theory on this forum?

 

String theory is NOT a legitimate theory yet - it is a mathematical framework of breathtaking brilliance which is yet to shown to be of any predictive power. We are still waiting for one prediction of string theory to be conclusively observed in a laboratory.

 

Fair enough on your last point, but if he is one of (if not the) leading proponents of the theory how do you not talk about his latest conclusion?

 

You talk about the maths - who created the maths is completely immaterial. One of the greatest Mathematicians ever is Nicolas Bourbaki and he doesn't actually exist

 

But aren't we completely stuck in contemporary physics right now? Isnt string theory viewed as the leading theory to get out of the rut? If i am not wrong isn't science trying to get away from dark matter and dark energy?

 

Theoretical physics is doing great and there really is no rut - to be honest the idea that string theory being the "be all and end all" of progress was probably the rut; and physics has moved on and is very healthy. Remember - you cannot dial up breakthroughs like Einstein every couple of years. Dark matter and to a lesser extent Dark Energy are backed up by empirical evidence - they are something we need to explain

 

Then why did you say this:

 

 

Should we not take all theories into account and not shut anything out? Is this forum now about politics more than anything? Its just really offputting when someone tells me to ignore something, it almost puts a bullseye on you as having an agenda.

 

No we shouldn't taken all theories into account. We take the well evidenced theories into account and think hard about how to get to well evidenced theories on everything else.

 

 

Here is the thing guys, he is one of the creators of the theory. I dont understand how you can accept a theory yet dismiss the man who co founder'd it in the same breath.

 

That's easy - men are falliable and weak whereas good science is strong and trustworthy. One of my scientific heroes was Prof Walter Lewin - he was forced to resign, look at James Watson co-discoverer of DNA - not a great role model. Dismissing the science cos we don't like the man is wrong, accepting the science but distancing ourselves from the man is fine

 

Then who do you go with? Who is now the leading proprietor of string theory nowadays?

 

theories really do not have owners. Brian Greene is probably the leading pop-sci promoter at present and as others have said Ed Witten is maybe the leading theorist; my favourite would be Leonard Susskind who is brilliant at both

 

After reading i fully understand where you are coming from, but you guys arent even giving michio a chance here. It would make a whole hell of a lot more sense if you just accepted his thoughts on the matter before dismissing them entirely.

 

I have seen Michio Kaku say stuff that I KNOW to be complete bullshit too many times. By the way - I do not "accept" anybody's thoughts on any matter without critical analysis first

 

 

It just strikes me as odd how many people would come out against his thoughts so fast. To me this was a new finding, had michio already stated this conclusion prior and i missed it?

 

Because we have seen this very very often - trust me we would be quicker and harsher in our words if the ArchBishop of Canterbury had made guesses about LHC results. We have seen Kaku step out of his zone of expertise and speak nonsense so many times before that he no longer gets the "he is a theoretical physicist at NYU perhaps this might be good" break any more

 

 

Well odd to me because clearly michio is smarter than any of us on this forum, but gets instant backlash. Unless some of you think you are brighter or more involved than this man? Not saying that isnt possible, but i dont know any of you.

 

I have taught Philosophy - he has taught Physics; when he strays into my area I call shenanigans. Frankly I wouldn't argue with him on any point of empirical science - but outside that zone I know he takes rubbish.

 

 

Ya i get the process i just feel more respect should be due on a subject of this magnitude. This is a massive announcement and took real balls for michio to make it, what happens from here on out is going to be very interesting.

 

It definitely took real balls - big brass balls that demonstrate that he really doesn't care what the theoretical physics community think about his mad publicity seeking alter-ego

[ajb]

That (without pantheism) sounds quite similar to Einstein's views, as far as I understand them. It has been quite a common view of philosophers and mathematicians (including some who might claim to be atheist - this is their alternative to a god).

I think Kaku's views are similar to Einstein's views. The word 'god' and/or 'creator' gets thrown about a bit and means different things to different people.

[StringJunky]

 

 

It definitely took real balls - big brass balls that demonstrate that he really doesn't care what the theoretical physics community think about his mad publicity seeking alter-ego

Evidence for the prosecution:

 

[ajb]

After a bit of searching, I wonder if this is really a hoax.

 

See http://blog.drwile.com/?p=14864

[swansont]

Ya i get the process i just feel more respect should be due on a subject of this magnitude. This is a massive announcement and took real balls for michio to make it, what happens from here on out is going to be very interesting.

 

 

No, not really. On all counts.

Kind of curious tho, if michio is so unpopular with scientists (or at least this forum) how is he so popular with people? Where is the disconnect?

 

 

Being right have having a following are not necessarily correlated. Being engaging is much more a matter of presentation style than veracity of the content. And since the audience with whom he is popular can't really tell what's right, then it's all a matter of style.

I have seen Michio Kaku say stuff that I KNOW to be complete bullshit too many times. By the way - I do not "accept" anybody's thoughts on any matter without critical analysis first

 

Because we have seen this very very often - trust me we would be quicker and harsher in our words if the ArchBishop of Canterbury had made guesses about LHC results. We have seen Kaku step out of his zone of expertise and speak nonsense so many times before that he no longer gets the "he is a theoretical physicist at NYU perhaps this might be good" break any more

 

 

...

 

It definitely took real balls - big brass balls that demonstrate that he really doesn't care what the theoretical physics community think about his mad publicity seeking alter-ego

 

 

And that's the rub. Kaku is willing to get in front of the camera and he lives in NYC, so he's accessible to the press. That's why he's well-known. But once outside his area of expertise, it's a crapshoot as to whether he knows what he's talking about. That's why I don't think it took all that much for him to make this kind of announcement. No braver than Howard Stern or Donald Trump are for saying something outrageous. There's not any special fortitude involved for people who love the attention.

[marieltrokan]

I'm intrigued by the quote. The reason of existence I think has to be one with existence - so the challenge of intelligence is to fulfil the reason, but at the same time fulfil the means of the reason (in other words, infinite reflection).

[Phi for All]

The Brian Greene's and the Michio Kaku's of the science world bring interested people to theoretical physics, and the key is to recognize when your interests need more detail and depth than popular science provide, so you can abandon them for more mainstream texts. You can't let yourself get addicted to the easy reading if you really want to dig down and understand how these theories develop.

 

An analogy would be learning to swim. You learn in the swimming pool and you find you really like swimming. But if you're interested in swimming in the ocean, you need more than the pool can teach you. In fact, the pool might make you reach poor conclusions about what swimming in the ocean is like. You need to get out there in the real seawater, go deep, experience it, and don't stay in the sanitized, convenient, popular pool water.

 

I agree with the others who've said that Kaku is not making a scientific statement, he's making an explosive, opinionated statement designed to bring him attention. I suppose if it gets a few religious folks who wouldn't normally expose themselves to theoretical physics to think better about science, then he's done a good thing.

[Moontanman]

After a bit of searching, I wonder if this is really a hoax.

 

See http://blog.drwile.com/?p=14864

 

 

You beat me to it! The source of this revelation is a christian news outlet known for their rather extreme bias.... I suspected quote mining but it appears that it was made up of whole cloth....

[Velocity_Boy]

I didnt link the post because it was michio kaku, i posted it because of string theory. Is string theory not an accepted theory on this forum?

 

Some of us probably accept it and some don't. I'm not really sure it deserves the title of Theory, however. Is it not really more of a hypothesis? Evolution is a theory. The big bang is a theory. From what I have heard and read on String Hypothesis the amount of evidence for it is nowhere near the formidable levels that Evolution and the BB enjoy. In fact I was under the impression it fell out of favor for several years after that initial Elegant Universe deal had its fifteen minutes? LOL. And thaf only recently it's ideas have resurged a bit.

In fact, have any if those LHC's or Super Colliders ever even detected those tiny vibrating strings that are alleged to comprise the most fundamental particles? If they were I didn't hear about it. Hell, we can smash neutrons together and get s.a. particles even smaller than quarks that last for a nanosecond, but no pictures of those elusive vibrating strings?

Nah, I ain't buying, amigo. I propose here and now that the whole thing be renamed String Hypothesis.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2015/12/23/why-string-theory-is-not-science/#6bfbe88217e7

Edited June 19, 2016 by Velocity_Boy

[ajb]

I propose here and now that the whole thing be renamed String Hypothesis.

I take string theory as it is, to be a non-trivial mathematical framework in which point-particle quantum field theory is extended to 1-d objects and higher (we need D-branes also). The point is that this framework has given us deeper understanding of QFT and it may be possible to build phenomenologically reasonable models within this framework. However, right now the latter has not really be realised.

 

String theory is however mainstream and discussions thereof should remain in the mainstream physics section.

[Scotty99]

Still I don't see the link between astral projection - a phenomena with no scientific evidence - and the claim that Kaku said that mathematics, order and symmetry in the Universe points to a creator?

 

Again, we are quite sure that the OP is based on a hoax. That said, Kaku has spoken of 'god as a mathematican' and so on. We doubt he is really talking about god as understood in mainstream religion.

 

Right i wasn't sure of the source either but i did see two news stories about it on yahoo. Like you said michio has stated god is a mathemetician, and ya he isnt speaking of a christian god but more that we were created. I hope i live a while yet, these next 10-20 years are going to be very interesting.

[StringJunky]

 

Right i wasn't sure of the source either but i did see two news stories about it on yahoo. Like you said michio has stated god is a mathemetician, and ya he isnt speaking of a christian god but more that we were created. I hope i live a while yet, these next 10-20 years are going to be very interesting.

I'm not going to hold my breath.

[Scotty99]

I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

Why's that? I think a lot of logically thinking people are starting to at least entertain the idea that we were created. My geocentrism thread got a lot of traffic before they closed it due to "abrasive posting style" is what i believe they put. I even had regulars on this forum private messaging me telling me to keep posting as they believed it was important to at least have the discussion. Now im not saying i know geocentrism to be a correct theory, but with michio coming out with these statements (if proven they did happen) then it just opens the door to having the discussion about a creator.

[StringJunky]

 

Why's that? I think a lot of logically thinking people are starting to at least entertain the idea that we were created. My geocentrism thread got a lot of traffic before they closed it due to "abrasive posting style" is what i believe they put. I even had regulars on this forum private messaging me telling me to keep posting as they believed it was important to at least have the discussion. Now im not saying i know geocentrism to be a correct theory, but with michio coming out with these statements (if proven they did happen) then it just opens the door to having the discussion about a creator.

Michio's opinion is as valid yours or mine on this subject; not much.