This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Elwood Herring's Profile

Elwood Herring's Avatar Joined about 6 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by Elwood Herring

More Discussions by Elwood Herring

Latest Comments by Elwood Herring

Go to: Aberystwyth embraces Monty Python's Life of Brian

Elwood Herring's Avatar Jump to comment 55 by Elwood Herring

comet halley: that sounds like the Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (Denethor and Faramir, brother of Boromir. Denethor jumps off the cliff after trying to set Faramir on fire.)

Absolutely nothing to do with Monty Python!

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:56:00 UTC | #342215

Go to: Aberystwyth embraces Monty Python's Life of Brian

Elwood Herring's Avatar Jump to comment 51 by Elwood Herring

Best limerick ever:

Nostalgic in old Aberystwyth,
I sat down and made out a list, with
The names of the rude
Lovely ladies I'd screwed,
And the chaps I'd gone out and got pissed with.

(RON RUBIN)

Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:21:00 UTC | #341674

Go to: Cathedral seminar to equip clerics to deal with Dawkins

Elwood Herring's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by Elwood Herring

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Gandhi.


Seems Richard is now at stage 3.

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:53:00 UTC | #239604

Go to: Rochester Physicist's Quantum-'Uncollapse' Hypothesis Verified

Elwood Herring's Avatar Jump to comment 34 by Elwood Herring

Well to be sure, the one thing I'm certain of is that I'm not certain of anything!

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:55:00 UTC | #214346

Go to: Rochester Physicist's Quantum-'Uncollapse' Hypothesis Verified

Elwood Herring's Avatar Jump to comment 31 by Elwood Herring

It's like this: you start off with four types of people, the first set contains people who understand QT, the second set don't, the third set only think they understand, and the final set think they don't understand it. Now all four of these types exhibit a certain amount of uncertainty, even (by necessity) the ones who think they are certain. So you must relabel these sets as 1) people who think they are certain they know, 2) people who believe they are certain they don't know, then 3) and 4) who are uncertain about knowing and not knowing, respectively. The problems arise when some new data is discovered concerning QT, such as the article here. This has the effect of creating much more uncertainty across the board, realigning the boundaries between those who are certain they are certain, and those that are not, etc. In effect, this creates a certain amount of superposition of uncertainties about whether to accept the new data, and whether they can be certain about it. There will inevitably be some people who will reject this new information outright, but there will more likely be a greater proportion who will be uncertain about it, creating a feedback loop of uncertainty and therefore separating the previous superposition back to more or less the original state. With me so far? The upshot of all this is that the theory of QT will always be intrinsically uncertain, being by its very nature contrary to common sense. The more experiments are done, and the more facts are learned, the less certain anyone can be that it is understandable at all. The only way to understand QT is actually to not do any research into it at all, and also to destroy all data so far collected into the entire phenomenon, then there can be no superposition of individuals in various states of uncertainty about it. In effect, the only way we can ever understand QT is to not understand it at all. That's the only way we can ever be absolutely certain.

...I think...

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:32:00 UTC | #214332

More Comments by Elwood Herring