Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Rectifying interference with more interference? (Score 2, Insightful) 228

An unknown, big change is just as likely to be good for humans as it is to be bad.

That is massively untrue. An unknown, big change is much more likely to be bad for humans. When you're dealing with a hugely interconnected web of an ecosystem, big unknown changes are likely to alter the system, such that it stabilizes in a different state. The current state of the world is very nice for humans. An end to many easily caught food species will not be so nice.

Comment Re:Give it time (Score 1) 348

Max Planck explains blackbody radiation in terms of quantized light: 1900
Einstein explains the photoelectric effect in terms of quantized light, starting everybody off on experiments, predictions, further understanding of small scale reality: 1905
Not exactly ages. Now look at string theory:
Nambu, Susskind, and Nielson develop the foundations of string theory: 1970
Nearly four decades later, what are the predictions and tests available from string theory? I'm not saying string theory is necessarily wrong; there isn't enough evidence for any statement about its validity to be anything other than essentially a religious belief.

Slashdot Top Deals

The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be correct. -- William of Occam

Working...