I love this video. Deepak Chopra, one of the biggest charlatans in the world, gets smacked around with incredible ease by Leonard Mlodinow, co-author of The Grand Design.
Filed under: Humor | Tagged: Deepak Chopra, Leonard Mlodinow |
Author
Michael holds a BA in Biology with a minor in Philosophy. He likes to spend his free time hiking and defending science, though not usually at the same time. Contrary to popular (but not scientific) belief, the positive and appropriate perception of science is undermined by religion, alternative medicine, the U.S. education system, and most science journalists.
Recent Comments
Somdeb Lahiri on Thought of the day Allen Stone on This is the logic of anti-abor… Steve on Don’t do business with B… Hank on Why circumcision is a very goo… Kay on Andreas Moritz is a clever sna… Michael on Colloidal silver and natu… Rick on Colloidal silver and natu… Michael on VP debate Michael on The Internet just became a sli… AUHLPIBIOITLIVWTEVK on VP debate
Holy crap that man talks shit!
This is an old video. Chopra just spews a word salad of terms out and his sentences are quite meaningless.
Mlodinow’s M theory with its gazillion phoney universes and multitude of hypothetical dimensions is way more woo-woo than anything Deepak has ever said. Its a fairy tale.
Mlodinow’s views fit the evidence. Chopra makes it up as he goes along, abusing terms and lying.
What evidence does Mlodinow’s view fit exactly? Seriously.
What terms are Chopra abusing? What is he supposedly lying about?
Mlodinow’s view fits with what the evidence says is necessary of the Universe. Chopra, on the other hand, uses words like “quantum” to mean anything he can’t explain – which includes a lot of stuff.
The evidence to which you presumably refer is that the 22 or so constants which describe the universe (mass of electron, charge of proton etc etc etc) are precisely what are necessary to have a universe with stars, life and consciousness. Our universe with life and consciousness is a one in a gazillion possibiiity. The question of how/why we have these precise conditions is known as the Anthropic principle. Paul Davies wrote a book about it called The Goldilocks principle. There are two basic possible explanations.
One is that there is intelligence/consciousness guiding the formation of the universe (Deepak).
The other (Leonard) is that there are a gazillion other universes and we happen to be in the one and only one which is just right for consciousness. To support this possibility, physicists came up with M theory which posits precisely that – a gazillion universes. But there is absolutely no evidence for other universes, and no way to test for them. M theory is not even a theory, as Roger Penrose says.
On the other hand Deepaks contention that intelligence/consciousness is intrinsic to quantum spacetime geometry is testable. He has a theory, or at least he refers to Penrose-Hameroff theory which is consistent with Vedic philosophy. Mlodinow doesnt even have a theory.
No.
First off, the so- called 22 or so constants which describe the universe are not so exactly aligned. It has been shown that many of these can be changed together and there are many sets of possibilities.
Second, Mlodinow’s science (not view) comes from the mathematics of string theory and M-theory. It is true that none of it has been verified, but the mathematics holds up by itself.
Chopak is nothing but a charlatan who speaks in word salad mode and makes thins up, just like his consciousness crap. He has no evidence to back up anything he says. His nonsense has been shown to be just that many times.
The constants which define the universe are constants. They’ve not been changed. When you say ‘it has been shown’…what are you talking about? By whom? How??
String theory and M theory are contrived, and thus far completely useless. Mathematical elegance doesnt prove anything.They require all these fabricated universes and made-up dimensions.On top of that, they don’t provide the background spacetime in which the strings supposedly vibrate. Quantum geometry, loop quantum gravity, twistor theory are alternatives which DO give the background. String theory/M theory is like phlogiston – some made-up baloney. And you attack Deepak for no evidence??!!! Shame on you.
And as far as your silly ad hominem attacks against Deepak, take me on. Ive got his back. Penrose-Hameroff theory and its related topics provide a framework that is both scientifically plausible and testable, and consistent with Deepaks Vedic philosophy.
See http://www.quantumconsciousness.org
If you want to talk science and consciousness, bring it on.
Certain constants are dependent upon each other; change one constant and you’ve inherently changed another.
It’s unclear how something is both contrived and elegant at the same time.
M-theory is consistent with the evidence; Chopra just uses science-y words to make a buck.
“Change one constant and you’ve inherently changed another”.
In this universe? Are you serious? Are you playing God? Constants are constants. And you criticize Chopra for not making sense?
“It’s unclear how something is both contrived and elegant at the same time.”
Any decent fantasy qualifies, including M theory/string theory.
“M-theory is consistent with the evidence; Chopra just uses science-y words to make a buck.”
What evidence? How could you even test for these gazillion universes?
What science qualifications do you have? I havent seen an intelligent word out of you yet.
*sigh* What I find really annoying about this is that I had to go dig up an old book, search through its various chapters, and now I have to type up one of the relevant excerpts.
Change their mass and you change their numbers.
*sigh*
Did you even bother to read the book?
Honesty.
Your reply is regurgitating Victor Stenger. OK.
As an appeal to authority, your choice is pretty lame.
Regarding fine tuning and the neutrino mass, he’s assuming the net mass of all neutrinos is relevant, and unknown. But Max Tegmark (another multiverse-ian) points out the net mass of the three types of neutrinos is constant, and selected anthropically.
Stenger’s contention that fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background, or its propagation through space, is even potential evidence for multiple universes is silly. We know such fluctuations are due to granularity in Planck scale geometry. If such granularity is non-random, then we have evidence for what I’m saying – a possible intelligence in the universe.
More recently Craig Hogan has observed that so-called noise in gravity wave detection repeats at various scales, suggesting a holographic organization of the universe (still only one universe), showing how Planck scale information can conceivably influence biological systems.
And as far as Inflation, see Paola Zizzi’s work on consciousness in the early universe (the ‘Big Wow’ theory). Its way more credible than Stenger and a gazillion universes, all contrived to make this one appear random.
I confess I havent read Stenger’s book(s) in entirety, just excerpts which were so silly and ill-informed (and negative toward my ideas) i invited him to debate at a conference last year. He declined. I’m for open discussion and debate, not trashing people based on ignorance and sound bites. Thats dishonest.