by RArvay » Mon Feb 08, 2016 7:04 pm
A more contextual quote from the Amazon site is this:
Turning to cosmology, he argues that most of the current fantastical ideas about the origins of the universe cannot be true, but that an even wilder reality may lie behind them. Finally, Penrose describes how fashion, faith, and fantasy have ironically also shaped his own work, from twistor theory, a possible alternative to string theory that is beginning to acquire a fashionable status, to "conformal cyclic cosmology," an idea so fantastic that it could be called "conformal crazy cosmology.
How I envy your personal acquaintance with Sir Roger!
I was first attracted to his public statements when he showed the courage, in a video taped interview, to discuss what I consider the fulcrum of modern physics, the question of definition of our internal experience of consciousness. While he did not of course answer the exact question, he showed a willingness to consider the question, something that many eminent physicists avoid like the plague, which I find perplexing.
Penrose speculated that the physical nature of consciousness lies outside of both quantum and relativity theories, perhaps in what he called, the gap between them.
To be sure, he is not given to mystical theories, but neither is he afraid to venture into areas that some may disparagingly refer to as "wild" science.
If I find myself unable to understand his book, I am eager to hear it explained by minds greater than mine-- which is a large number of minds!
.
A more contextual quote from the Amazon site is this:
[quote]Turning to cosmology, he argues that most of the current fantastical ideas about the origins of the universe cannot be true, but that an even wilder reality may lie behind them. Finally, Penrose describes how fashion, faith, and fantasy have ironically also shaped his own work, from twistor theory, a possible alternative to string theory that is beginning to acquire a fashionable status, to "conformal cyclic cosmology," an idea so fantastic that it could be called "conformal crazy cosmology.[/quote]
How I envy your personal acquaintance with Sir Roger!
I was first attracted to his public statements when he showed the courage, in a video taped interview, to discuss what I consider the fulcrum of modern physics, the question of definition of our internal experience of consciousness. While he did not of course answer the exact question, he showed a willingness to consider the question, something that many eminent physicists avoid like the plague, which I find perplexing.
Penrose speculated that the physical nature of consciousness lies outside of both quantum and relativity theories, perhaps in what he called, the gap between them.
To be sure, he is not given to mystical theories, but neither is he afraid to venture into areas that some may disparagingly refer to as "wild" science.
If I find myself unable to understand his book, I am eager to hear it explained by minds greater than mine-- which is a large number of minds!
.
