In the first three decades of the twentieth century physicists came to a realization that they had been mistaken in their most fundamental assumptions about the nature of the universe. The world turned out to be not a smoothly running, intelligible machine but "a monstrous system of contradictions." These contradictions could not be resolved within the framework of logic and common sense on which classical science was based. They forced physicists to renounce the accepted scientific standards and adjust them to the requirements of the new research. The result of that adjustment was the development of the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics, and one of its essential characteristics was a pronounced shift in physics toward the methods of the humanities, particularly philosophy. Andrzej Duszenko

 

Garyj,

What purpose could you possibly have in quoting an English professor's artistic view of quantum theory?

It's like asking me to describe what it's like growing up as a poor black child on the mean streets of Chicago.

- Warren

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Garyj
[B]

Hi Woody,

Yes, that is one opinion isn't it.

 

Yes, so you understand that everyone doesn't? And the departments and libraries are intact. Good, I'm glad we agree.

 

Why would someone with a Bachelors degree, who gives opinions on a subject outside his area of expertise, be critical of the quote of a Ph.D. who also had an opinion outside his area of expertise?

What is it like growing up as a poor black child on the mean streets of Chicago?

 

I have a bachelor's of physics, and I'm working on a master's in astronomy -- which is about 80% physics and 20% observational experimentation. I hardly think physics is outside my area of expertise.

The passage you quoted is from an article written by an English professor about the works of James Joyce. If you're going to get a physics education from him, you might as well start referencing cereal boxes, too -- Tony the Tiger probably has more precient things to say.

- Warren

 

I'm not talking about physics. I'm talking about biblical literature. Read the quote.

 

Ohhh, now I get it. You're trying to show me up. How.... quaint.

So which part do you find outside my expertise? That the Bible is a book that's been translated, abridged, edited, and retranslated so many times that now it's only just a book of fables? Am I wrong?

Or that I have to laugh when someone brandishes their New American English King James Edition "Fifty Cent Coupon for Paper Towels Inside!" Bible and has the gall to claim it's the direct inerrant word of a diety? That's an opinion, see.

- Warren

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by chroot
[B]Ohhh, now I get it.

 

Since when has the concept that translations rarely convey the complete message of the original been reserved only for the "elite" biblical scholars?

- Warren