Welcome to the SMN Blog
If you are a member of the SMN, you can become a contributor to the blog. To be added to the list of official blog contributors, contact Dr Olly Robinson on: olly@scimednet.org
Currently the blog contains 149 entries.
The faith of scientists
The great difference between science and religion is that scientists follow the evidence and follow their senses – they are empiricist and are open to being disproved. On the other hand, we are told, religion is dogmatically chained to the past and sensory data cannot overturn scripture. But the longer I work as a scientifically researcher (admittedly in psychology, not the natural sciences, but the point I am making applies for all), the more I realise that what we do is steeped in faith. Every article I write, or any researcher writes, must first review scores of other previous studies/experiments and develop hypotheses correspondingly. But how do I know that all of these are legitimate? How do I know that they are reliable sources of fact and Truth? Well, there are various safeguards in place. Research goes through the peer-review process – we hope that other people will be able to vet out rubbish or falsified data. But the truth is that they can’t. If someone wants to make up data, then without looking at the original data itself, then even that can be meddled with and made up. Also, research generally has to come out of a recognised university department, and that is considered a safeguard against dodgy research too. But in fact, whenever I refer to somebody else’s research, I have faith that the knowledge is legitimate. If I was to be a true empiricist, I would have to directly sense something first before I accept it as knowledge. In science, the majority of knowledge is second-hand, not direct. The majority of knowledge is not derived empirically. How many people have actually seen the climate change data, and how many just take on faith – accepting scientific authority? So why is the faith in science, in academia, any different than religious faith? Why is trust in a scientific authority any better than trust in a religious authority? Big questions, but the best we can do while pondering them is to retain a healthy scepticism of scientific authority, avoid scientific dogma and avoid scientists pontificating about things over which they have no authority. Science can state what is and is not the case, it cannot tell us what is valuable, precious or morally right. At least as far as I can tell.
Olly Robinson
Relativity Equations derived in one line, and without assuming the two Relativity postulates
Strong evidence for absolute motion can be taken from the "Big Bang" of cosmology, which locates a point of origin in the universe. In contrast, the First Principle of Special Relativity denies the existence of any absolute point of reference which could be used to measure distances from.
A new phase in the quantum consciousness debate
The debate over the possible existence of quantum coherence and entanglement in the brain and their connection to consciousness may have been moved into a new phase by the discovery that quantum coherence (the wave as opposed to particle state of quanta) has a functional role in the transfer of energy within proteins, the basic building blocks of living cells (1. Engel et al, 2007). Most importantly, this discovery undermines the central argument against quantum consciousness, which has been the claimed impossibility of quantum coherence being sustained for any useful period in biological matter. At the same time, it moves the discussion of what sort of coherent features could support consciousness on from a phase of more-or-less pure theorising, to a phase in which ideas can be related to features that have been shown to exist in biological matter.
Bergson's philosophy and influence
To commemorate the 150th anniversary of the birth of Henri Bergson on 18 October 1859, David Lorimer held a dialogue with Rupert Sheldrake at the Study Centre last month. RS described his first reading of Bergson’s Matter and Memory in 1972, at a time when he was reflecting on morphogenetic fields and the formative influences on living organisms in relation to plant morphogenesis, as a life-changing experience. Their discussion triggered a range of connections from the audience and this is a continuation.
SMN member in new BBC Slot: assistance requested
Members of this SMN Blogsite may be interested to know that I have been offered a regular slot on BBC Merseyside.
I will be broadcast live every second Monday starting on the 9th November (next Monday). This will be for half an hour starting at 1500 (UK time). The show will then be available on "Listen Again" for seven days.
In my first slot I will be discussing "Deja Vu". The station actively requests calls and emails so if you have a spare few minutes do listen in. I intend to mention my membership of the SMN (and this site) if I get the chance. Full details of how listeners outside of the Greater Merseyside area can listen in can be found on my FORUM at:
http://www.anthonypeake.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=945&sid=06c3bfc54cffaf2c8f6cfd690281907f#p8966
You can also listen-in on line at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/liverpool/hi/tv_and_radio/
The reason I have been asked to do this is that the station has long been looking for somebody who takes a scientific, and rational, approach to the ongoing mysteries of consciousness, PSI and other "paranormal" phenomena.
With the help of others of a similar attitude, such as my fellow members of the SMN, I am hoping to make this spot an oasis of rational discussion and considered opinions.
I will be delighted to have the involvement of any SMN members via the phone lines, text messages or emails. The more responses the more likely it will be that the BBC will continue to allow me this facility.
Copyright © 1996-2012
| The Scientific and Medical Network - SMN, PO Box 11, Moreton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire, GL56 0ZF, England
| www.scimednet.org
eMail: info@scimednet.org,
Tel: +44 (0) 1608 652000, Fax: +44 (0) 1608 652001
| UK Charity No. 1101171 | Company Ltd by Guarantee No. 4544694