Two short videos

I didn't post anything the last months and collected a few things. Those two vidoes are nice, but especially the second one is old.

The Known Universe by AMNH



Star Size Comparison

Some physics

Just a few words, I haven't posted anything the recent days...Anyhow I bought a new book:

Quantum Non-Locality and Relativity: Metaphysical Intimations of Modern Physics (Aristotelian Society Monographs)



It covers the Bell theorem and the compatibility issues that arise with it and relativity. In short, the Bell theorem states that you cannot make quantum mechanics deterministic by adding hidden local variables and thus explain e.g. quantum entanglement ("Spukhafte Fernwirkung") by a local theory.

I also want to point you to Epiphenom's blog, which has great articles. In short

I want to know why people believe in gods, and what the psychological and social consequences of those beliefs are. I read the research, and when I find something juicy I write it up and post it here!

Drugs

Without any comment: Milton Friedman on drugs. I'm thinking about writing down a short essay with more links on the subject of drugs, legalization and abuse.

Link between dishonesty and emotion

Dishonesty and Emotion have a Stronger Link than We Think on Neuronarrative.

Model United Nation

Thanks to a friend I learnt about the existence of Model United Nations. It's a role-play like simulation of a conference of some bodies of the United Nations and covers various topics. Participants play GOs and IGOs, have debates and write position papers. There is also a search engine which knows about many MUNs.

Banach-Tarski-Theorem

I wonder why I did not post this when I first read it, but because I just crossed that topic again, here is a nice, even though not formal and not technical sketch of a proof of the banach tarski theorem at irregular webcomic.

On moral and ethic

Just two quick links to videos on youtube. I will not comment on the degree of agreement I have with those, just take them as initial input for discussing those and the relevant foundational topics:

Noam Chomsky and Peter Singer on abortion

Peter Singer and Richard Dawkins: Interview on morality

I think, especially without knowing to much on the foundation of Peter Singer's ethics, these videos raise interesting questions about how to define ethical/moral behaviour. The second video suggests that moral behavoiur according to Singer tries to minimize the infliction of pain towards living beings. Beyond the discussion about vegetarianism that dominates the interview, one should also consider the "side-effects" of our current life style. Even if you doubt effects like global warming, it is obvious that we have driven many species to the edge of extinction and moreover, done considerable damage to indigenous peoples all over the world.

Assuming a decline or at least a unchanged situation, what does this imply dealing with the future harm of yet unborn animals (including humans)? What kind of trade off can we afford? Is there some kind of cost-benefit analysis weighting the benefits of our life style versus future harm? How do you measure those factors? Actually, is it even justifiable to think about cost-benefit analysis when talking about pain and suffering? Furthermore, who is to take responsibility for our life style? Even if I try to live a "green" life, due to being trapped in our rather wasteful society, I will cause harm. In fact, most of us are certainly opportunistic conformists, just following the mainstream of society.