Re: Should I Major in Geology


"don findlay" <don@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1113780158.964393.41270@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Stuart wrote:
> >
> > I think geology is an excellent degree. Geology itself involves other
> > physical sciences like chemistry, physics and biology. For that
> reason,
> > geologists are among the most well-rounded scientists.
>
> You missed astronomy Stuart, which is the biggest 'round' of all




This is an interesting competition of sorts. Which discipline requires
the most diversity to master?

I claim that the 'winner' of such a comparison would in fact
be the loser, the least desired situation. For many reasons.
The winner wouldn't really be a 'discipline' of its own, but
a synthesis of most others. And many would inherently struggle
in some aspects or another. But the primary weakness of
such a subject would be in efficiency, as in the very least
efficient of all as it requires the most information or input.
..
Wouldn't the ideal discipline be one that requires the
least amount? And turns the tables by instead providing
the most insight into other fields.

A supra-science that gives the student the most understanding
of other areas while being as close to isolated from the
others as the 'winner' is diverse.

Such an imaginary discipline would in essence be the
complete opposite of the conventional winner, while
also defining the ideal in potential.

Well...I constantly prattle on about complexity
science because it is in fact the imaginary or
perfect discipline I'm trying to convey.

And I cannot fathom how anyone that has a curious
mind, anyone that is in wonder of the natural world
would not want to explore such a field if for no
other reason then just in case it's true. Once the
core concepts sink in you'll suddenly realize
just how backwards, exactly backwards,
conventional methods are. When it comes to
understanding the physical universe classical
approaches are still mired in Dark Age
thinking.

Exactly backwards. Which means, of course, the
conclusions are also the reverse of the classical
scientific views. You look at reality and its complexity
and conclude life and intelligence are a fluke.
You end up with a world view that has 'uncertainty'
as an axiom. Incredible!

For example, just one, a conclusion that flows naturally
from the new way is that the only 'fact' in the universe
that is indisputable and defines absolute rationality
is the notion of a God.


Put that in your pipe and smoke it~ It's true, and I can
win a debate with all comers. Once you realize just what
objective determinism cannot fathom and why, and the
significance to the big picture the newly revealed 'laws'
have, you'll wonder how you could have lived in
such darkness and emptiness for so long.



Jonathan




"The Moon upon her fluent route
Defiant of a road,
The stars Etruscan argument,
Substantiate a God.
If Aims impel these Astral Ones,
The Ones allowed to know,
Know that which makes them as forgot
As Dawn forgets them now."


By E Dickinson








An Introduction to Complex Systems
Torsten Reil, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford

"The multidisciplinary approach taken by its students has revealed
a surprisingly high degree of applicability of the concepts
to the different fields."
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~quee0818/complexity/complexity.html


Dynamics of Complex Systems

"The study of complex systems in a unified framework has become recognized
in recent years as a new scientific discipline, the ultimate of interdisciplinary
fields. Breaking down the barriers between physics, chemistry and biology
and the so-called soft sciences of psychology, sociology, economics, and
anthropology, this text explores the universal physical and mathematical
principles that govern the emergence of complex systems from
simple components."
http://www.necsi.org/publications/dcs/


Chaos at UMD

"This realization has broad implications for many fields of science, and it is only
within the past decade or so that the field has undergone explosive growth.
It is found that the ideas of chaos have been very fruitful in such diverse
disciplines as biology, economics, chemistry, engineering, fluid
mechanics, physics, just to name a few. Chaos is a multidisciplinary
science" http://www.chaos.umd.edu/



The Endless Universe:
A Brief Introduction to the Cyclic Universe

Paul J. Steinhardt
Joseph Henry Laboratories, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA

"In this context, a new paradigm has been recently proposed by Paul Steinhardt
(Princeton) and Neil Turok (Cambridge) - the cyclic universe - that turns the
conventional picture topsy-turvy.(Perhaps the model should be called an old paradigm
since it reinvigorates ancient cosmic mythologies and philosophies, albeit using the
tools of 21st century physics.) In this picture, space and time exist forever. The
big bang is not the beginning of time. Rather, it is a bridge to a pre-existing
contracting era. The Universe undergoes an endless sequence of cycles in which it
contracts in a big crunch and re-emerges in an expanding big bang, with trillions of
years of evolution in between. The temperature and density of the universe do not
become infinite at any point in the cycle; indeed, they never exceed a finite bound
(about a trillion trillion degrees). No inflation has taken place since the big bang.
The current homogeneity and flatness were created by events that occurred
before the most recent big bang. The seeds for galaxy formation were created
by instabilities arising as the Universe was collapsing
towards a big crunch, prior to our big bang."
http://wwwphy.princeton.edu/~steinh/cyclintro/



s






> >
> > The hardest part, at least for me, is that because geology is also a
> > descriptive science, it has its own jargon, and it takes a while to
> > master that.
>
> That's because you weren't paying attention when 'planet spin'/
> rotation/ growth/ overriding/ etc were being talked about.
>
>
> > I ask, "Why would you want something that is easy ?"
>
> (Stuart gets lots of fun, struggling with the above, don't you
> Stuart... but copes, provided he has analogues like bunsen burners,
> pots of soup, air, and inflated balloons, in order to understand
> complicated concepts like convection. He struggles a bit with the
> notion of conduction in the mantle and time as a control on the
> relative rates of the two, but otherwise he's ok. Passes his exams at
> least, which is all that can be asked of a bloke.
>
> > Stuart
>
> Who are you anyway? What happened to your badge? Why don't you go the
> next step and get an alias? ("soon, ..soon..")
>





.