scientific-discovery

Creation signifies, above all, emotion, and that not in literature or art alone. We all know the concentration and effort implied in scientific discovery. Genius has been defined as an infinite capacity for taking pains.

Just for a second, think, how mysteriously vast the universe is! And you the humans exist only in a tiny fraction of that vastness. You__ realize how insignificant you are if you compare yourself with the vastness of the universe. Your universe is everything that is out there. Your little 3 pound brain has access to only a microscopic percentage of that unfathomable everything. You childishly boast your greatness as a so-called advanced species while you only see a very small strip of what__ really going on in the universe.

... and I submit to you, that science, scientific discovery, especially cosmic discovery, does not become mainstream until the artist embraces the fruits of those discoveries.

I independently produce scientific advancements to share with everyone, and that is over seven billion people!

Memorizing and regurgitating are not science. Real science is a constant investigation of the unknown.

The highest heaven is not in the sky, it is in the human mind.

Don't study science. Play with it.

In Science don't confound Normal static electricity To ecstatic eccentricity. Here is what I found: Electric charges As they rise up your hair In contrast with a discharge, Rarity leaves you up in the air!

I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.

The products your life must have could be in the form of scientific discoveries you have made.

Think of a "discovery" as an act that moves the arrival of information from a later point in time to an earlier time. The discovery's value does not equal the value of the information discovered but rather the value of having the information available earlier than it otherwise would have been. A scientist or a mathematician may show great skill by being the first to find a solution that has eluded many others; yet if the problem would soon have been solved anyway, then the work probably has not much benefited the world [unless having a solution even slightly sooner is immensely valuable or enables further important and urgent work].

Oppenheimer__ theorizing was so startlingly original _ so far in advance of the corroborating observations and so far off the beaten track of astrophysical research _ that his colleagues_ ignorance cost him the recognition he deserved.

It is almost impossible for contemporaries to judge the true value of discoveries, or to give the proper position to the men of their own time who make these discoveries. The Surgeon-General of the Public Health Service expected the greatest results to flow from his commission of medical officers, but the conclusions of the Board turned out to be all wrong, while he did not notice the report from his own subordinate, Dr. H. R. Carter, which turned out to be pure gold and was one of the great steps in establishing the true method of the transmission of Yellow Fever.

In some strange way, any new fact or insight that I may have found has not seemed to me as a __iscovery_ of mine, but rather something that had always been there and that I had chanced to pick up.

Science is never rigid, it is flexible. It can bend towards any direction that ultimately tends to do good to humanity. Religion must learn the same. And the moment any religion learns that, it would become the most scientific religion in the world.

It is not easy to convey, unless one has experienced it, the dramatic feeling of sudden enlightenment that floods the mind when the right idea finally clicks into place. One immediately sees how many previously puzzling facts are neatly explained by the new hypothesis. One could kick oneself for not having the idea earlier, it now seems so obvious. Yet before, everything was in a fog.

Do you know how big snakes get? Or how many grains of sand are in the deserts? Or what lurks at the bottoms of the oceans' floors?"..."No.""Well, if you can't answer those simple scientific queries, then what makes you think that mankind is smart enough to discover vampirekind's existence?