It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Ok, I understand. Well, we are far collegues. I teach Political Science at the University but I'm also interested in Physics, although I don't have the Math skills to understand everything. But I get what you mean. In that sense, I don't know your feelings towards predicting voter turnout in different countries...
I have planned to read all of Conan Doyle's Holmes (I've only read The Hound of the Baskervilles), but that will be when I finish Karla's Trilogy.
It'll be time well spent, my friend!
http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/3440/last-graphic-novel-comic-book-manga-you-read/p1
I'll report once I'm done, sir.
Ha! Good question and to be fair, I haven't given it any thought yet. I guess my immediate answer at this point would be that voting isn't exact science and that predicting the voter turnout doesn't follow the scientific method to which I almost unconditionally cling. Would have to think it over some more though. ;-)
Haha, and what if I told you that in my dissertation I ajusted a model that explained around 79% of the variance of voter turnout? Just to show you that politics can be study scientifically.
Awesome! I'm impressed. I apply science nearly all the time. Even in bed... errr... I didn't say nothin'. =P~
Thank you, I really wasn't trying to flatter myself (well... maybe a little haha). But what I wanted to show you is that there are a lot of Political and Social Scientists indeed trying to apply the scientific method into our field. How succesful have we been is another discussion. But regarthless of that, there are many amazing research projects and very interesting findings.
A person by the name of Nat Silver has written a book about correctly predicting outcomes of elections, he got it right in 2008 and this year as well. It also had a review in the "volkskrant" last saturday.
So you are "popperian"! In the Social Sciences we haven't (and perhaps can't) formulate laws, just statistical or probabilitic causations or associations between variables, as you well put it. And back to the reading subject, what accesible book would you recommend me on string theory?
Yes, I saw it. Very interesting! I'm want to see how he establishes his model because his accuracy is amazing.
Popularising string theory and making it sound quite normal, is Michio Kaku's terrific book 'Hyperspace'.
http://www.amazon.com/Hyperspace-Scientific-Odyssey-Parallel-Universes/dp/0385477058/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1353540176&sr=8-1&keywords=hyperspace
I've read it twice now and if I keep in good health, I might consider reading it a third time at one point. ;-)
I own two books of his, one about the Theory of Relativity and one about the universe. Neither dives too deep into the concept of String Theory.
Copy that, Kaku's is now on my Wish List!
He's well known for popularising science without making it vulgar or too simplistic even for the layman. In that regard I always recommend my knowledge hungry students that they give the man's books a try.
In my spare time, I try to do some science reading. Right now I'm devouring a 600 page college text book on astronomy. I've got a quarter of it behind me already and man, I'm excited. I find physics and chemistry very stimulating but I'm an even bigger enthusiast of hard Sci-Fi. Asimov and Clarke are my two favourite writers and their concepts and ideas are big enough to include serious astronomy. It's mostly in order to get a better grip on the worlds and events they feature in many of their books that I have intensified my reading on astronomy. That, and the fact that as a teacher I feel it is important for me too to keep learning through reading and subsequently to keep learning through teaching. :-)
Why good sir, you oughtn't fall asleep; rather, you should turn excited all the way. String theory isn't even 30 years old yet and already it has proven itself worthy of our time. To understand the building blocks of the universe is to understand the universe itself and us in it. Atoms, electrons, protons and neutrons are a stage one usually passes in school. Quarks may be discussed in school as well, although not by everyone I think. String theory now offers what appears to be a sufficiently satisfying understanding of what constitutes those quarks. As we travel deeper and deeper into the inner universe of all matter, some of the most exciting and shocking ideas arise.
But I'm a bit of a science geek in some ways I dare say. ;-)
The thing that fascinates me the must about contemporary Physics is how you search answers for the huge, the Universe, by studying the tiniest, the subparticles.
And with that disturbing thought, I will now go to bed. ;-)
I am 50 pages from finishing The Girl Who Played with Fire, the second Millennium book of three by Stieg Larsson. Great stuff, highly recommended. Let's just hope that Dan, Rooney, and Finchy are able to film it and the last book, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest because I envision Dan and Rooney as Blomkvist and Lisbeth, respectively. It'd be a shame to cross those wires with a new cast or no films at all. I am debating whether to take a break after and dig into Fleming or continue right on with the last.
That's true. There's a real continuity in the novels.
Okay, the last Millennium novel it is. And thanks for the advice, gents. :)
John Grisham
Ken Follett