• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Prof. Brian Cox On Ghosts

MorningAngel said:
But we could well not have them fully grasped anyway. What about nothing goes faster than the speed of light idea (The one Cox thing I watched at Christmas with Noel Fielding on a bicycle as Einstein -liked it 'cos they took the pee) , I believe CERN had something that didn't play along with that.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for those of us longing for warp speed, the CERN data was a mistake, and the laws of physics still apply (currently, anyway).
 
graylien said:
Aliens, time travel and sentient A.I don't require us to revise the laws of physics as we currently understand them. Ghosts do.
Click to expand...

I though that time travel did violate the second law of thermodynamics? But, I would really know about that type of thing.

I don't think ghosts clash with any law of physics, just some of our explanations for them.
 
oldrover said:
I though that time travel did violate the second law of thermodynamics? But, I would really know about that type of thing.

I don't think ghosts clash with any law of physics, just some of our explanations for them.
Click to expand...


only going backwards?
 
GNC said:
Unfortunately for those of us longing for warp speed, the CERN data was a mistake, and the laws of physics still apply (currently, anyway).
Click to expand...

I looked it up and what's confusing is that they did it twice (the second time with less chance of error). Then someone went and disproved it. I'm suspicious it's a cover up, although now we are now heading into conspiracy area.

However it is just a theory that nothing goes faster than the speed of light. There could be things Einstein never even knew about, things we've not even come across.

Ps I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't like Cox.
 
MorningAngel said:
I looked it up and what's confusing is that they did it twice (the second time with less chance of error). Then someone went and disproved it. I'm suspicious it's a cover up, although now we are now heading into conspiracy area.

However it is just a theory that nothing goes faster than the speed of light. There could be things Einstein never even knew about, things we've not even come across.

Ps I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't like Cox.
Click to expand...
Not totally true. The universe itself is expanding faster than the speed of light.
 
MorningAngel said:
Exactly something is happening, how can you deny that? However we don't know what and surely any scientist worth their salt should be interested in why people see things? What's making it happen? Is it internal or external? Not just say it doesn't happen.
Click to expand...

MorningAngel, you may be interested in this website, Skeptical about Skeptics
http://www.skepticalaboutskeptics.org/skeptical-investigations/
Not all scientists want to dismiss these things out of hand, but unfortunately the mocking debunkers are the ones who speak the loudest.
 
Krepostnoi said:
Eww, I thankfully haven't heard/seen that exchange. I'm a fan of RHLSTP! too, so am down with the cool kids ;) I'm currently listening to Richard Osman running absolute rings around Herring. In the latter's defence, whether it's his willingness to act dumb or some other thing going on, he does manage to draw interesting responses out of his guests (of course, it could also be that all his guests are such raving egomaniacs, what with being slebs, that they'd hold forth to a lamp post...). He's also willing to tolerate quite a lot of awkwardness, as the episode with Limmy demonstrates. I'll have to look up the Simon Munnery one.

Anyhoo, to wrench this digression back on Fortean if not thread topic, the Vic Reeves episode is a good listen, with non-dismissive answers to the Bigfoot and Ghost emergency questions, his propensity to encounter serial killers before they were famous, plus some very entertaining stuff about Tom Baker - and that's just the things he can tell us o_O
Click to expand...

Ah, I'd forgotten about the Vic Reeves RHLSTP. Very good episode featuring some Fortean themes, as you say!

Of course RH's more 'edgy' moments are part of an act. I slightly regret highlighting his trout-sperm routine, but I still think it was a bit cruel and humiliating. Lots of comics pull the same trick whereby the more unpleasant aspects of their semi-fictional personas irresistably rise to the surface unbidden, scuppering their best intentions at playing the bien pensant liberal. S.Lee, for example, has acted out meticulously rehearsed sudden mental breakdowns where he'd come across as incredibly patronising, bitter and passive-aggressive in order to discomfort the audience (also it's very funny and often quite moving). I'm sure Lee and Herring would agree that clowns of all stripes (see below) are granted a license to be unpredictable, shocking, and even frightening. I remember Stew beginning one show which he toured around the UK by drawing a chalk circle around himself then explaining how this created an (un)safe space for the jester where the normal societal rules do not apply in some folk traditions. Which was a nicely Fortean touch.

Sorry; this isn't a comedy thread, but while we're on the subject of transgressive comedy this might be of interest to anyone interested in that sort of thing and an intellectual / analytical approach to comedy in general - not that that sort of navel-gazing did Tony Hancock much good, or to a lesser extent John Cleese, who merely became less funny for all his time spent on the psychoanylist's couch (for a while anyway).

 
Last edited:
MorningAngel said:
Exactly something is happening, how can you deny that? However we don't know what and surely any scientist worth their salt should be interested in why people see things? What's making it happen? Is it internal or external? Not just say it doesn't happen.
Click to expand...

To me Angel, the appearance of a ghost is ephemera - ephemera, meaning insubstantial, rather than something lightweight - the importance of the sighting to me, is what's behind it, what caused it, where is the energy from - what is it!
 
Time travel would violate the conservation of mass, of energy, of momentum and the principle of causality. So I would tend to think that time travel is as far outside the realm of current science as ghosts, if not more so. You really do not want to live in a universe without causality, but a universe with ghosts could be intriguing.

On the other hand time travel and its consequences are very well understood by current science, while we don't have any working hypothesis for ghosts.
 
Last edited:
'Simple solutions to difficult questions': my summary of Brian Cox's approach. The other day I heard him on Radio 2 saying that Richard Branson and Elon Musk were in the space race to Mars, not to make money, but to save Mankind! There may be an element of this - the pioneering drive of the Wild West - but they wouldn't, couldn't do it without a commercial payback - which for Branson is virtually everything, apart from feeding his ego.
 
How will colonising Mars save mankind? We'll just take our problems with us there.
 
Swifty said:
"Is Brian Cox on acid ?" ..

Click to expand...

tumblr_morcmjz5Ob1r3jsrko1_500.jpg


In all seriousness, I like and 'get' what he's talking about.
 
Me too. Medium sized fan of BC. Sucker for a scientist.

He's a show called Stargazing starting here down under in a couple of weeks, which I'm really looking forward to. Partnering with Julia Zemiro, who I also admire and would love to schtup.
 
skinny said:
Me too. Medium sized fan of BC. Sucker for a scientist.

He's a show called Stargazing starting here down under in a couple of weeks, which I'm really looking forward to. Partnering with Julia Zemiro, who I also admire and would love to schtup.
Click to expand...
I enjoyed watching the comedy celebrity Philomena Cunk in that above clip (I forget the actor's real name sorry) winding him up in her 'What is science?' episode .. that's gold dust .. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top