I don't think it's a bad thing in general. I just don't think you should sacrifice properly mastering classical physics for getting some vague overview of the philosophy of quantum mechanics.

I think you're right in that raising the minimal understanding of the universe is a great goal. But I really think that there are some things that can't be sacrificed. For a start, physics is already a sufficiently broad, deep subject that even taking the current AP physics course, you're lucky if you manage to…

Right, of course part of our current problem isn't science proficiency as much as it is science enthusiasm. But I think it's a bad idea to sacrifice one for the other for a couple of reasons. Firstly (and probably less importantly) , it's gonna end up producing less scientists, and more "science enthusiasts". Not that…

Right. Because these things (relativity, QM, etc. ) didn't come into being from a vacuum. They came into being by people thinking very hard about those first principles, and modifying/codifying them in different ways. Without knowing those principles, those modifications are completely obfuscated, as is any intuition…

Right, sorry. Feynman's actual science lectures are definitely not for the layman. I meant more his public awareness talks lectures, rather than his pedagogical talks. I didn't mean to undermine his work, as he was a great teacher of hard science as well as a great explainer of scientific ideas to the layman.

As much as I like Henry, I can't help but think that this view is a little short sighted. The way I see it, if you want to teach QM and relativity to high schoolers, you have two options. 1) You can teach it to them in a Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman way... which means getting an overview of the topic, a basic…

Pull quote for the TV Spot:

Right. Cf the state of the Big Two comic book publishers. That's what happens when fans become creators.

It's always hard to say with these things where the responsibility lies, moviemaking being such a collaborative effort, but I personally tend to blame the writers for the script, and the director for everything else... it's not fair I know, but it's not like I'll go see a movie based on who the casting director is!

Not my ideal "moderate 3rd party" either!!

Well, I mean just the fact there the *is* a new Star Trek movie is the best thing to happen since DS9. And it's a perfectly entertaining movie. My comment was really more to the fact that alot of people (I'm on the fence on the matter), felt like the new movie wasn't quite true to the themes and aesthetics the ST…

JJ Abrams: "I was never a big Star Trek fan".

I was really hoping for a Farscape-esq looney toons parody!

Yeah that's the one! You're right, their quote is very ambiguous, but I think that, given the source, you put your finger on it when you said "White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant Men" as who they meant.

Yeah, I know that, but the division still seems very sharp! It'd be interesting to see this done with Mark Newman's maps. It'd give a much more representative view of what's going on.

Sorry, I rather mangled the original quote there. It was basically a statement expressing surprise that the electoral makeup of America was shifting away from, as you say, "White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant Men", and towards something else.

I was just discussing with some friends the chances that this election would teach both sides to head closer to the middleground, and entertain a little more room for discussion and debate...