From: Regular Expression (xeger@xeger.net)
Date: Tue Jul 23 2002 - 00:02:31 MDT
The brilliance of Michio Kaku is not in the volume of his scientific
output (by which I take it you mean research), but in his ability to
explain the cutting edge of theoretical physics to a reader of average
intelligence. While science writers don't always contribute directly to
the advancement of knowledge, they do serve a valuable purpose. By
keeping the masses engaged in thought, they are promoting enlightened
thinking -- as we all know, a well-used mind is a happy mind. And
science writers stoke the fires of public's imagination, so that the raw
ore of theoretical research can be refined, and hammered into the keen
sword of applied sciences on the, um, anvil of public support. Yeah;
that's the ticket. (I'm having a bad metaphor day today.)
--similitudinously yours,
Tony
-----
Regarding Michio Kaku and his writing, Amara Graps wrote:
> One way I would measure scientific output is by #citations. At least
> that is the way that many scientists themselves use (unfortunately).
> Cory Przybyla wrote:
>
>> In "Hyperspace" by a brilliant physicist named Michio Kaku, (Chapter
>> 13),
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:38 MST