Some links for non-scientists like myself: A commenter links here. CERN article here and background article here. One page explanation by different physicists about what it is and why they’re looking for it.
Even if ancient cultures had very precise (mathematical, observational) understanding of the the natural world as well as religious myths and rituals that they performed alongside that understanding, is Frank’s book a faithful attempt at addressing the problems of the epistemology (theory of knowledge) of science that has developed since then?
Does he more aim to just mold and change engrained popular opinion on the subject; re-focusing the debate away from creationist/darwinist dualism?
It’s interesting to hear two such bright people discuss such ideas. Your thoughts are welcome.
“The following, however, appears to me to be correct in Kant’s statement of the problem: in thinking we use, with a certain “right,” concepts to which there is no access from the materials of sensory experience, if the situation is viewed from the logical point of view.
As a matter of fact, I am convinced that even much more is to be asserted: the concepts which arise in our thought and in our linguistic expressions are all — when viewed logically — the free creations of thought which cannot inductively be gained from sense experiences.”
“The lesson to draw from his [Kant’s] careful discussion of this subject might well be not that there must be a form of reality lying beyond space and time but rather that nothing can be real that does not conform to spatial and temporal requirements. Space and time are bound up with particularity, and only what is particular can be real.”
Carroll is a physicist at the California Institute of Technology who runs the Cosmic Variance website with others, as well as making frequent appearances on Bloggingheads (all links can be found at right).