Help


from Wikipedia
« »  
In the Beautiful Minds documentary she talks about how in science, " nothing is static, nothing is final, everything is held provisionally " and that " sometimes you have to abandon the picture ".
She demonstrates this with planetary orbits.
Kepler recognised that orbits were elliptical, not circles on circles on circles and he made things simple again.
She proposes that " our nice simple picture is getting messier and messier and messier " and the documentary ends with her telling us that we are all waiting for a new picture, " we need to picture cosmology, the evolution of the universe in a whole new way ", she says.
The documentary also looks at her schooling, the sexism and alienation she faced in a male-dominated field as an undergraduate, and also how she built and operated the radio telescope which she used to discover the pulsars.
By the end of her PhD she could swing a sledgehammer.
During the documentary she also talks about how being a quaker is an important part of her life and how quaker practice is similar to the scientific method.
" I find that quakerism and research science fit together very, very well.
In quakerism you're expected to develop your own understanding of God from your experience in the world.
There isn't a creed, there isn't a dogma.
There's an understanding but nothing as formal as a dogma or creed and this idea that you develop your own understanding also means that you keep redeveloping your understanding as you get more experience, and it seems to me that's very like what goes on in ' the scientific method '.
You have a model, of a star, its an understanding, and you develop that model in the light of experiments and observations, and so in both you're expected to evolve your thinking.
Nothing is static, nothing is final, everything is held provisionally.

1.854 seconds.