OK, this is pretty bloody impressive.

As might be considered fitting on the birthday of Copernicus, a few items regarding the Fermi Paradox turned up in my feeds today, so I thought I’d share the wealth. Continue reading “Fermi Paradox manifests”

Café Scientifique has started up again here in Portsmouth, and yours truly was there to catch the action. This event featured a talk by Prof. Ajit Narayanan, Head of the School of Computing at Portsmouth University, entitled ‘Can we find a mind gene?’

Continue reading “Cafe Scientifique: Can we find a mind gene?”

It was, with no doubt or hyperbole, a day that changed the world. I didn’t see the television pictures, because I don’t own a television, but I was at home with the radio on that day, and remember wondering if the reports that suddenly came through were some sick version of Orson Welles’ ‘War of the Worlds’ broadcast. Continue reading “September 11th remembered”

Science fiction is often described as being ‘proleptic’ – as a vehicle for prediction of the future, if not reflection of the present, and a lot of debate has been kicking around the blogosphere concerning that definition. Continue reading “Coded commentary: science fiction and contemporary politics”

The idea of telecommuting has been kicking around for a good ten years, at least in practical form, but there’s still been no huge take-up in it. Continue reading “At home in the office”

Crikey. I know Stephen Hawking is a genius and everything, but I’m not sure whether he foresaw this happening. Continue reading “The great Hawking off-planet debate”

That’s the question posed by the people at Seed magazine to their stable of science bloggers. Continue reading “Will the human race exist in 100 years’ time?”

…at least, not any more. Over in San Francisco this week, the Experimental Biology symposium is getting into swing; among the many topics being discussed are the many ways that science can be used to augment, repair and replace elements of the human body. Continue reading “Bionic humans: not just science fiction”

An interesting little debate is taking shape over at ‘Adventures in Ethics and Science’, regarding whether one’s occupation is actually worthwhile in ‘real life’, and broadening out to ask whether:

The Socratic method, as a way of approaching questions, is harmful because it occupies people in critical examination of issues and delays (or prevents altogether) action.

Or to put it another way:

Critical thinking has failed as a tool with which to address pressing societal problems, and teaching students critical thinking as if it were the key to making the world a better place is tantamount to corrupting the youth.

Yours truly has put his two pence worth in on the side supporting critical thinking, and hence by implication the many branches of human endeavour that do not produce instantly tangible results or solutions to real problems. I’d be interested to hear any arguments for or against this position from my own readers…come on, I know some of you have opinions on this sort of thing, so let’s hear it. Speak up!