Science is a way to not fool ourselves.
Carl SaganRead
The prediction of nuclear winter is drawn not, of course, from any direct experience with the consequences of global nuclear war, but rather from an investigation of the governing physics.
Interpretation
This quote highlights that the concept of nuclear winter is based on scientific investigation rather than firsthand experience.
Carl Sagan emphasizes that the idea of nuclear winter, which refers to the severe climatic effects following a global nuclear war, is not derived from actual experiences of such events but from a thorough understanding of the underlying physics. This insight serves as a reminder of the need to rely on scientific inquiry to comprehend potential catastrophic outcomes.
In practice
In a climate change conference, one could reference this quote to highlight the scientific basis of the consequences of nuclear warfare.
Science is a way to not fool ourselves.
In more than one respect, the exploring of the Solar System and homesteading other worlds constitutes the beginning, much more than the end, of history.
How smart does a chimpanzee have to be before killing him constitutes murder?
The hole in the ozone layer is a kind of skywriting. At first it seemed to spell out our continuing complacency before a witch's brew of deadly perils. But perhaps it really tells of a newfound talent to work together to protect the global environment.
There is a reward structure in science that is very interesting: Our highest honors go to those who disprove the findings of the most revered among us. So Einstein is revered not just because he made so many fundamental contributions to science, but because he found an imperfection in the fundamental contribution of Isaac Newton.
The simplest thought, like the concept of the number one, has an elaborate logical underpinning.
If we estimate dignity by immediate usefulness, agriculture is undoubtedly the first and noblest science.
If African farmers can use improved seeds and better practices to grow more crops and get them to market, then millions of families can earn themselves a better living and a better life.
If you just have a single problem to solve, then fine, go ahead and use a neural network. But if you want to do science and understand how to choose architectures, or how to go to a new problem, you have to understand what different architectures can and cannot do.
The physicist is like someone who's watching people playing chess and, after watching a few games, he may have worked out what the moves in the game are. But understanding the rules is just a trivial preliminary on the long route from being a novice to being a grand master. So even if we understand all the laws of physics, then exploring their consequences in the everyday world where complex structures can exist is a far more daunting task, and that's an inexhaustible one I'm sure.
Considering their impact, you might expect mosquitoes to get more attention than they do. Sharks kill fewer than a dozen people every year, and in the U.S. they get a week dedicated to them on TV every year.
In my relativity theory I set up a clock at every point in space, but in reality I find it difficult to provide even one clock in my room.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.