esoteriic.com

Some two or three weeks have passed since my last article. Laziness and busy-ness (not business) have consumed my time, I've had plenty ideas for articles but little motivation to type one out. Well, I've found some motivation after having an interesting lunchtime discussion at my university's research club. Highbrow conversation start to finish = I'm happy.

There was talk of physics, computing, philosophy and a brief pejorative monologue of the Sun newspaper.

There is only so much that I can take in a discussion about about mundane topics such as football / drinking / activities at the weekend / pseudo-philosophy / gossip before I want to rip my ears off and smash my head in with a brick. University isn't a harbour of vast intellectualism that people may expect it to be. Most conversation on campus is dull, it covers every mundane and transient topic under the sun. Doesn't matter whether you listen to the janitors, the students, the lecturers or professors, most the conservation is inane chat. I agree that humans are social creatures so they crave social interactions, even introverts need dialogue with other people. Simple conversation can be enjoyable but it is rarely stimulating.

A shock to my system was that even PhD students in physics consider themself too cool to talk about physics. LOL WUT? A room full of some of the uncoolest people on the planet believe that talking about physics is somehow beneath them? Reality check needed. It is a bit late to act as one of the cool kids and not talk anything remotely intellectual at this stage in life for me. I suppose I may be expecting to much from other "intellectuals".

However, despite the inanity of the transient conversation that I endure on a daily basis the dialogue over lunch today was of greater substance. Yay. The conversation started off between myself and my office mate discussing the computational problems I've been having with my PhD project. Things are never simple in that regard, we spent a good 30 minutes talking about possible tests I could try. This is entirely useful conversation for me and should at least be something stimulating for the other person. A central theme in the conversation was symmetry. Something I've highlighted in previous articles as an interesting and important topic, it has a central role in physics and is completely necessary for the universe to be deterministic (well behaved) to any degree.

At the table next to us two gents sat down, drank coffee and one of them provided a pejorative monologue of today's topics in The Sun newspaper: "Don't worry lads, the Sugababes have taken their clothes off in the desert." Needless to say I was amused. Tabloid newspapers and gossip = dull. It turns out that the older gent had listened to the conversation about my PhD project, he was curious to hear more about it. So I did my best to explain the problem using the table and two cans (one of coke and the other dr pepper).

If the two drinks sit on the table untouched for 5 minutes then we expect the mass of the drinks cans to be the same at the beginning and after 5 minutes. If they're not then there is a problem. If we imagine that the cans could slide around on the table (ignore friction etc) then we don't expect one can to move faster than the other, nor do we expect the cans to move faster depending upon their position on table. These are the sort of ideas I need to consider when running my simulations. Explaining my project in simple terms and using analogies helps to improve my own understanding plus it is gratifying to talk with others that are genuinely interested in what I'm studying.

The conversation concluded with a brief philosophical discussion. The other two gents that sat next to us were taking philosophy as part of their degree program. They were tired after a barrage of supposed rationality: cultural relativism leads to subjectivity therefore we can make any moral code an absolute. They were as disparaging of that idea as I am. I seldom meet people that understand the problem of defining absolutes within a construct. Morality is a construct. Theists may be particularly hard headed about accepting morality is a human construct as their morality is phenomenological but atheists that hold their particular brand of morality up as an absolute are more disgusting. One day people will admit perplexity in philosophy and their understanding of the universe, at least I hope so.