Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Topic

Philip Ball

At Mind Matters News: Science writer: Explain-away-the-mind book doesn’t succeed

Ball notes that the Journey of the Mind authors’ (phantom) reductionist revolution relies on a single cognitive scientist’s work. It's not that he thinks it's a terrible book. But he supposes (unusually in this area) that critical standards matter and that he should apply them. Read More ›

At Quanta: “The molecular signaling systems of complex cells are nothing like simple electronic circuits.”

Actually, the best way to understand the systems would be that they are somewhat like a great novel. To someone with no understanding of the language, it might seem like a “riot” or “mess” of meaningless characters. To someone who does understand the language and has a mature appreciation of literature and life, it seems like “a sophisticated signal-processing system that can extract information reliably and efficiently from complicated cocktails of” life. Read More ›

Science journalist: Science IS political!

If it is admitted that “science is political,” Why Trust Science? is a very good question indeed. A bigger question looms: Will frank assertions that science is political, accompanied by a demand for trust, be any good for science? Isn’t this more likely to to be the beginning of a highly politically charged but largely barren period? Read More ›

Science writer critiques the “many worlds” (multiverse) fantasy; Rob Sheldon weighs in

But the multiverse isn’t really about evidence or falsifiability. The theory is held in defiance of the demand for evidence and believed in such a way as to make falsifiability sound unCool. As Ball perceptively notes, “Even though most physicists dismiss or even deride it, it is often eagerly embraced by physics popularizers and their audiences.” Perhaps it is best described as a lifestyle choice. Read More ›

A science writer offers some interesting thoughts on free will

It’s interesting that a science writer sees through the most fundamental materialist rot. Unfortunately, it sounds as though he hopes to replace it with a different one. Read More ›

A return of purpose to biology?

He turns out to be looking for a “bottom up” theory of agency—that is, a materialist one. And he admits that there is no such theory but he offers “a sketch of what a solution might look like.” One suspects that materialists will be offering such sketches centuries from now. Read More ›

Straw in the wind? Get a load of the insightful review of a string theorist’s Big Book at Nature

In sharp contrast with the classic slobbering review at Time of string theorist Brian Greene’s new book, Until the End of Time: Mind, Matter, and Our Search for Meaning in an Evolving Universe (Penguin 2020), , which resurrects mid-twentieth century attempts to undermine traditional religions via schlock science religion, the Nature reviewer is not impressed. (Kiddos, that was back when Time Magazine mattered, as did newsprint in general.) By contrast, Philip Ball at nature appears appropriately skeptical. Read More ›

At Nature: For now, “uncertainty seems the wisest position” on the implications of quantum mechanics

 In a review of science writer Anil Ananthaswamy’s Through Two Doors at Once: The Elegant Experiment That Captures the Enigma of Our Quantum Reality, science writer Philip Ball captured the essence of the sheer oddity of quantum mechanics: What’s odd is that the interference pattern remains — accumulating over many particle impacts — even if particles go through the slits one at a time. The particles seem to interfere with themselves. Odder, the pattern vanishes if we use a detector to measure which slit the particle goes through: it’s truly particle-like, with no more waviness. Oddest of all, that remains true if we delay the measurement until after the particle has traversed the slits (but before it hits the screen). Read More ›