- Email: [email protected]
Final frontier
OPINION LETTERS Cosmology’s problem From Larry Constantine Your excellent existential issue (23 July) is most revealing in what it ignores. It exposes modern cosmology as a sophisticated shell game using advanced mathematics to generate infinite regresses of explanations that explain nothing. Problems are solved by positing ever more perplexing problems that multiply like angels on the head of a pin. Accounting for our universe by postulating infinite parallel universes or explaining the big bang as the collision of “branes” in a higher dimensional “bulk” are not accounts at all, but merely ignorance swept under a cosmic rug – a rug which itself demands explanation but is in turn buried under still more rugs. Modern physics would do well to get back to basics and take a lesson from Occam, whose razor is sadly missing in a science that fills holes in its theories and addresses anomalous data by invoking ever more complicated unseen forces, undiscovered particles or invisible dimensions. Simplify, simplify. On the smaller and more personal scale, neuroscience fares no better when it dismisses the self, awareness and consciousness
as illusory while ignoring the elephant in the room. Something must be experiencing the illusion, something is being fooled into thinking that it is and that it is aware. What do they propose to call that deluded something? The self, perhaps? More Russian dolls. Rowley, Massachusetts, US
I think, therefore… From Robert Morley In Michael Brooks’s excellent article on existence, he suggests that “our reality is in fact a simulation run by entities from a more advanced civilisation” (23 July, p 36). Robin Hanson then says that if we uncovered a clue to the existence of this simulation, the operators could just rewind everything to a point where the clue was erased. If this process did not completely clear out the memory buffers, it might explain déjà vu. London, UK From Peter Hoare Your existential issue contained an interesting discussion on what it might take for us to die out (23 July, p 39). But the doomsday events listed don’t reflect the suggestion that we are a simulation run by a more
advanced civilisation. Maybe mass extinction would occur quite simply when they upgrade to the latest version of Windows. Quorn, Leicestershire, UK From Andy Bebington In contemplating the question “How do I know I exist?”, Michael Brooks references Descartes’ statement “I think, therefore I am”, but he didn’t go far enough. If I meet you, the “you” I meet is unique, because no one else can see you through my eyes. My experience of you is unique – our mutual history, however short, is not shared with anyone else. Anyone else will experience you through their own eyes and their/ your mutual history. Descartes ought to have continued “and I think, therefore you are”. London, UK
Final frontier From Ross Sargent Mary Midgley’s letter on the space race (30 July, p 28) could be interpreted as humankind’s suicide note.
Enigma Number 1659
Pairs of numbers IAN KAY I have before me four two-digit numbers, all eight digits being different. I have grouped them into pairs, such that the product of the two numbers in each pair is the same, and is a perfect cube. What are the four numbers? WIN £15 will be awarded to the sender of the first correct answer opened on Wednesday 14 September. The Editor’s decision is final. Please send entries to Enigma 1659, New Scientist, Lacon House, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS, or to [email protected] (please include your postal address). Answer to 1653 Cut-free: 27 dominoes The winner Ian Fletcher of Saxmundham, Suffolk, UK
30 | NewScientist | 13 August 2011
She consigns human space exploration to the realm of fantasy “which has proved imaginatively nutritious but which needs to be kept separate from real life”. Real life also includes meteorite impacts, super volcanoes, basalt floods and other menaces. Humanity will only survive such catastrophes if it has colonised the solar system. Keeping all our
eggs in a single basket will, sooner or later, prove disastrous. It is a mistake to treat human space exploration as simply a flag-planting exercise. On the contrary, it may well be the human race’s best insurance policy. Folkestone, Kent, UK From Brian White Thank you, Mary Midgley. At last someone has voiced scepticism about the future of crewed space exploration and colonisation. Former Astronomer Royal Richard van der Riet Woolley declared that going to the moon was impractical. Some claim that those sceptical about modern space exploration may likewise be mistaken. But the unpalatable fact that humans are not suited to interplanetary travel speaks for itself. We will never set foot on another planet. Ashford, Middlesex, UK
Cyber space From Barry Gehm Michael Le Page discusses scenarios for what artificial intelligences will do when they exceed human intelligence (23 July, p 40). One possibility described is that computers, being better suited than humans to interstellar travel, will leave Earth to explore the galaxy. In the spirit of the late author Douglas Adams, I suggest that their parting message to humanity could be: “So long, and thanks for all the chips.” Batesville, Arkansas, US
Self interest From Chris Sharples Anil Ananthaswamy seems to suggest that improved understanding of the neurological basis of our sense of self shows that “self” is just an illusion (23 July, p 41). I think it shows that the sense
as illusory while ignoring the elephant in the room. Something must be experiencing the illusion, something is being fooled into thinking that it is and that it is aware. What do they propose to call that deluded something? The self, perhaps? More Russian dolls. Rowley, Massachusetts, US
I think, therefore… From Robert Morley In Michael Brooks’s excellent article on existence, he suggests that “our reality is in fact a simulation run by entities from a more advanced civilisation” (23 July, p 36). Robin Hanson then says that if we uncovered a clue to the existence of this simulation, the operators could just rewind everything to a point where the clue was erased. If this process did not completely clear out the memory buffers, it might explain déjà vu. London, UK From Peter Hoare Your existential issue contained an interesting discussion on what it might take for us to die out (23 July, p 39). But the doomsday events listed don’t reflect the suggestion that we are a simulation run by a more
advanced civilisation. Maybe mass extinction would occur quite simply when they upgrade to the latest version of Windows. Quorn, Leicestershire, UK From Andy Bebington In contemplating the question “How do I know I exist?”, Michael Brooks references Descartes’ statement “I think, therefore I am”, but he didn’t go far enough. If I meet you, the “you” I meet is unique, because no one else can see you through my eyes. My experience of you is unique – our mutual history, however short, is not shared with anyone else. Anyone else will experience you through their own eyes and their/ your mutual history. Descartes ought to have continued “and I think, therefore you are”. London, UK
Final frontier From Ross Sargent Mary Midgley’s letter on the space race (30 July, p 28) could be interpreted as humankind’s suicide note.
Enigma Number 1659
Pairs of numbers IAN KAY I have before me four two-digit numbers, all eight digits being different. I have grouped them into pairs, such that the product of the two numbers in each pair is the same, and is a perfect cube. What are the four numbers? WIN £15 will be awarded to the sender of the first correct answer opened on Wednesday 14 September. The Editor’s decision is final. Please send entries to Enigma 1659, New Scientist, Lacon House, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS, or to [email protected] (please include your postal address). Answer to 1653 Cut-free: 27 dominoes The winner Ian Fletcher of Saxmundham, Suffolk, UK
30 | NewScientist | 13 August 2011
She consigns human space exploration to the realm of fantasy “which has proved imaginatively nutritious but which needs to be kept separate from real life”. Real life also includes meteorite impacts, super volcanoes, basalt floods and other menaces. Humanity will only survive such catastrophes if it has colonised the solar system. Keeping all our
eggs in a single basket will, sooner or later, prove disastrous. It is a mistake to treat human space exploration as simply a flag-planting exercise. On the contrary, it may well be the human race’s best insurance policy. Folkestone, Kent, UK From Brian White Thank you, Mary Midgley. At last someone has voiced scepticism about the future of crewed space exploration and colonisation. Former Astronomer Royal Richard van der Riet Woolley declared that going to the moon was impractical. Some claim that those sceptical about modern space exploration may likewise be mistaken. But the unpalatable fact that humans are not suited to interplanetary travel speaks for itself. We will never set foot on another planet. Ashford, Middlesex, UK
Cyber space From Barry Gehm Michael Le Page discusses scenarios for what artificial intelligences will do when they exceed human intelligence (23 July, p 40). One possibility described is that computers, being better suited than humans to interstellar travel, will leave Earth to explore the galaxy. In the spirit of the late author Douglas Adams, I suggest that their parting message to humanity could be: “So long, and thanks for all the chips.” Batesville, Arkansas, US
Self interest From Chris Sharples Anil Ananthaswamy seems to suggest that improved understanding of the neurological basis of our sense of self shows that “self” is just an illusion (23 July, p 41). I think it shows that the sense