Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

thereader.mitpress.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 156 posts

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#131

Post by taneq »

morog wrote: post #130
toasterlovin wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am inclined to say the real problem is that smart people don’t have kids. But we’ll probably figure out how to make all babies intelligent before that becomes a problem. Incidentally, the problem you mention will also be solved in the same way.

genuine question - what do you mean by smart people? High IQ? Deep knowledge about mankind's place in the Universe / natural order? or their ability to maximise their own personal happiness over their lifetime? If the last point, then personal experience would suggest that having kids makes you happier person (once they are sleeping through the night)YMMV

Probably a high 'g factor' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) ).

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#132

Post by bobajeff »

behringer wrote: post #83
jonny_eh wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically a theorist is a lazy person masquerading as a diligent one Tell that to Einstein.

Didn't we recently confirm gravitational waves by checking out a couple interacting black holes, originally theorized by Einstein 100 years ago? I think even Einstein would agree that it was much harder to discover it than to theorize it.

There have also been serious doubts over that discovery:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24032022-600-exclusiv...

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#133

Post by ramblerman »

ivalm wrote: post #56
dekhn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This book tries to argue that we've got as close to objective truth about the universe as we'll ever do: https://www.amazon.com/End-Science-Knowledge-Twilight-Scient... and that most remaining science is just find of filling in the tiny bits. I personally don't expect anything that will change with respect to backwards time travel or faster than light travel.

And like all such books, almost certainly it is wrong. Backwards time travel or FTL are not measure of progress. Even with the field of "fundamental" physics: 1. There are lots of things we do not understand in cosmology (cosmological constant, nature of dark matter, matter/antimatter asymmetry, force unification at very high energy scales, gravity at high energies, etc). Each of those could potentially revolutionize…

> gravity at high energies

Not a physicist so excuse the ignorance, but do we understand gravity at all?

I mean afaik we can observe and predict it's behaviors but do we understand what underlying force causes it, and if it potentially has a counter force.

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#134

Post by Kaibeezy »

ggggtez wrote: post #77
izzydata wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently it was the first thing humankind mastered.

Obviously, we are discussing immortality of non-human species. However, we more or less understand that morality of larger lifeforms is encoded in our DNA (e.g. telemers). Mortality seems to be a defense against cancer. There is no particular reason that a human needs to grow old, except for the accidents of evolution.

They do say “laughter is the best medicine”, and morality is obviously funnier than mortality. No mere telomere can tell me my mortality, as long as I’m defending myself by laughing at spelling errors.

Did I tell you about the time, in 7th grade biology class, the kid sitting next to me was asked to read something aloud from the textbook about ”organisms”, but of course she said “orgasms”. She might have died a little right there, whilst the rest of us got her energy recycled as a power-up.

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#135

Post by unishark »

krastanov wrote: post #102
ethbro wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does population control enter into this hypothetical? Because that's the only way you get to post-scarcity.

Pretty much any study of the past century and any projection from reputable sources says that populations reach equilibrium and stop growing as the level of education, in particular education of women, rises. This is a non-problem that has always taken care of itself in any developed country and we have no reason to believe it will not take care of itself in the developing world as well. The UN for instance does not…

I wouldn't quite call world population growth a non-problem, considering it is already a problem. The future predictions may well turn out correct, and have some solid reasoning behind them, but the numbers still look fairly crude to me. Plots of historic growth rates are bouncing up and down, while the prediction is they will suddenly turn a corner tomorrow and drop monotonically to zero and all will be peachy. How often has that happened? Considering the current record-breaking population numbers, the ultimate answer is it has never happened, at least not permanently. There's a lot of risk in betting on things to just work themselves out. Development can actually work against us in a sense, as new food production technology and cures allow faster-than-ever growth in new regions and populations.

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#136

Post by TulliusCicero »

toasterlovin wrote: post #127
krastanov wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much any study of the past century and any projection from reputable sources says that populations reach equilibrium and stop growing as the level of education, in particular education of women, rises. This is a non-problem that has always taken care of itself in any developed country and we have no reason to believe it will not take care of itself in the developing world as well. The UN for instance does not…

Fertility is heritable. Population will probably continue to rise.

And yet, basically every developed country is below the replacement rate.

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#137

Post by modo_mario »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #96
ggggtez wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously, we are discussing immortality of non-human species. However, we more or less understand that morality of larger lifeforms is encoded in our DNA (e.g. telemers). Mortality seems to be a defense against cancer. There is no particular reason that a human needs to grow old, except for the accidents of evolution.

Mortality is not a defence against cancer. Mortality is a tool that allows species to more speedily adapt to changing environment. Sexual reproduction is another such tool, which ensures enhanced diversity of future generations, so some of the descendants will adapt better and leave more better adapted descendants. Btw, in this sense cancer is just another tool, that limits lifespan and ensures generations change. Of…

>"Btw, in this sense cancer is just another tool, that limits lifespan and ensures generations change. Of course, it didn't appear as such, but most species have no natural incentive to develop a resistance to it."

Not exactly and i believe there are a rare few that are much much more resistant to it and as such have become subject of research (trough TP53 in elephants or P16 and P27 in naked mole rats)

At the end of the day this natural incentive depends on when the cancer can appear (generally right away at every step of the cell cycles) and how likely it is which probably depends on the turnover and amount of cells of a particular type or in the being overall which one would assume increases as the being grows and additionally how likely it is to inhibit reproduction as it grows.

As it stands i'd say whilst they're not too inhibiting on this front (for example humans are most fertile at relatively young age well before most cancer occurrences become a problem. We've just extended our lifespan quite a bit) they still can be (kids can die of cancer too) and thus an evolutionary incentive against it however minor is present.

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#138

Post by alfonsodev »

jonny_eh wrote: post #81
cryptonector wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that wrong? Clearly anyone who says that is being somewhat facetious / comedic.

> Basically a theorist is a lazy person masquerading as a diligent one Tell that to Einstein.

There is a cool documentary about how Einstein was trying to prove relativity theory, and it involved a lot of work, special telescope, traveling, war... I think it was done at third attempt. Imagine if he would have died before proving it ... My point is, he didn't stop in the theory, but also designed an experiment and worked a lot to get it proved. Cajal's statement clearly doesn't apply to him. I'll try to find the video, or if someone remembers please link it.

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#139

Post by sabas123 »

mikorym wrote: post #120
jhbadger wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As typical with contrarians, Ramón y Cajal said some things that held up well and others that didn't. In the same book "Advice for a Young Investigator" that this excerpt is from he also gave his view of theorists: "Basically a theorist is a lazy person masquerading as a diligent one because it is easier to fashion a theory than to discover a phenomenon"!

I would say that successful theorists are exactly those who discover phenomena. Saunders Mac Lane is perhaps the epitome in mathematics of someone who was guided by phenomena. This is why category theory was not discovered, it was reverse engineered! The reverse engineering steps were: 3. Natural transformations 2. Functors 1. Categories Edit: Of course, when he said theorist I think he meant people who don't experim…

Can't you similarly say that category theory is just us abstracting previously known knowledge like we do with software?

Re: The most important scientific problems have yet to be solved (1897)

#140

Post by ethbro »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #136
toasterlovin wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fertility is heritable. Population will probably continue to rise.

And yet, basically every developed country is below the replacement rate.

How many countries are "developed"? And how quickly will the remainder join them?
Post reply on HN