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

Freeman Dyson Has Died

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 267 posts

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#91

Post by whatshisface »

hirundo wrote: post #17

"When I listen to the public debates about climate change, I am impressed by the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations and the superficiality of our theories" "We have no reason to think that climate change is harmful if you look at the world as a whole. Most places, in fact, are better off being warmer than being colder. And historically, the really bad times for the environment and for…

Those points may have been true when he said them. "The models are bad" becomes less true over time. Also, since the ice age was so bad for humans, it's forgivable that a non-expert would think that going further in the same direction could be helpful.

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#92

Post by dorchadas »

While at undergraduate studying physics, I once emailed Dyson asking about something he had written with regards to NASA, and what he thought the future of space travel was. I always remember he took the time to respond and email me back. Was really nice, especially as he gets no telling how many emails a day, and easily could've ignored it.

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#93

Post by jes5199 »

My favorite thing about Dyson was that, in the middle of doing atomic research, he plotted a graph of the total number of nuclear tests done every year, and saw that it was increasing exponentially - which caused him to reverse his position on the use of nuclear devices, and argue to cancel his own project and all similar projects.

from Dyson's 1962 memo on the Test Ban Treaty:

"The choice, whether or not to accept a test-ban agreement, is thus not a choice between two static situations, one without testing and the other with testing at some constant rate. This choice seems rather to be, either to stop tests, or to continue to double the rate of testing every three years ad infinitum."

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#94

Post by eesmith »

gbronner wrote: post #21
astrophysician wrote: post #5

About 4 years ago, I was a grad student in astrophysics at Princeton. Dyson worked at the Institute for Advanced Study which, while not officially part of the university was essentially an extension of the various departments (shared colloquiums, any researcher there was a valid thesis adviser, etc.). The grad students have a tradition (or used to) called “Thunch” (Thursday Lunch) where they invite someone to come ha…

I've met him and his other daughter. They are/were wonderful people. There were a lot of "solutions" using nuclear weapons looking for a problem. There was a proposal to blow a new canal through nicaragua, to blast harbors into Alaska, etc. My roommate's father showed me his paper that anticipated fracking: drill a deep well in oil shale, through a small nuclear weapon in the bottom, blow it up and watch as the press…

Minor point concerning "anticipated fracking" - hydraulic fracking dates from no later than the late 1940s, as you can see from this 1949 paper: https://www.onepetro.org/journal-paper/SPE-949001-G .

"THE ATOM UNDERGROUND" is an educational video, available from https://archive.org/details/32212AtomUnderground (undated; likely late 1960s). It includes some video from the 1967 test of Project Gasbuggy that matthewmcg mentions.

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#95

Post by jkeat »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #81
rtrunck wrote: post #2

“It is remarkable that mind enters into our awareness of nature on two separate levels. At the highest level, the level of human consciousness, our minds are somehow directly aware of the complicated flow of electrical and chemical patterns in our brains. At the lowest level, the level of single atoms and electrons, the mind of an observer is again involved in the description of events. Between lies the level of mole…

Related: http://nautil.us/issue/82/panpsychism/is-matter-conscious-rp

Here's another article that introduces the idea of panpsychism:

https://aeon.co/ideas/panpsychism-is-crazy-but-its-also-most...

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#97

Post by bhickey »

Between ten and fifteen years ago I was at a colloquium featuring Leon Cooper, Craig Venter and Freeman Dyson (via video). At one point in the conversation, Dyson slumped over only to rouse a few minutes later. He rejoined the conversation without missing a beat.

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#98

Post by naiveprogrammer »

djsumdog wrote: post #69
m0zg wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Excess carbon in the air is good for plants, and global warming might forestall another ice age. How is it not "rooted in science" that excess carbon is good for plants? We're already seeing significant global greening, and yields are up. Excess CO2 also reduces the amount of water the plants need.

He's gone, so this isn't really the place for this discussion at all. However, I'm glad this is mentioned and how it shows that there are a lot of intelligent people who have concerns with the current science debate. Consensus isn't science, it's politics, and challenging ones ideas is how we both reinforce the truth as well as dispel myths.

Amen

Re: Freeman Dyson Has Died

#100

Post by jes5199 »

whatshisface wrote: post #87
jes5199 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where I first heard that view, but I've long thought it was the only one that was plausible - where else could free will come from? is it supposed to sneak into physics somehow at a higher level?

Another plausible view is that it never sneaks in. Nondeterminism would only lead to free will if the mind somehow controlled the nondeterministic outcomes. We know the brain can't do that, so it's clearly a metaphysical question if you want to go further (the mind would have to be an agent distinct from the brain.) The answer to a metaphysical question is not always "no," but you will never be able to prove it.

sure... but that means the three options are: "free will exists in atomic physics" "free will doesn't exist" "free will exists but cannot be studied". I find only one of these to be an acceptable answer.
Post reply on HN