Tag Archives: Interviews

Creating Christ Tjtus

Episode Twenty Four – Creating Christ Archaeology with Warren Fahy

Play

Today we have an interview with Warren Fahy, the co-author of Creating Christ. We have talked about Creating Christ before, when we interviewed the books other author, James Valliant. You can find that interview here.

Today we are focusing on the archeology of Creating Christ, although we will cover a few other issues as well. We cover some stuff that is not covered so much or at all in our previous Creating Christ interview. Meaning that you should definitely listen to this one, even if you have listened to the other one. Or should that be, especially if you have listened to the other one?

What is Creating Christ? Some of you may not know. It is a book that shows the Roman origins of Christianity. Not simply the fact that the Roman Empire morphed into the Catholic Church, but the thesis that the Romans created the religion!

It might sound radical, but the book makes a very compelling case for how this must be true. If you have not read it, you really should. You can get it from Amazon here:

Creating Christ
Buy from Amazon

 

You really should listen to that interview first, as it gives a really in depth coverage of the book. Or, you can read the book first.

Please note that the Amazon Kindle edition is currently not available. As far as I can tell, this may be due to some disgruntled customer complaining about the books technical issues. Which I can assure, having owning a copy of it in Kindle, do not exist!

Apparently one customer complaint can cause items to go under review and be taken off the Kindle marketplace. If so, this policy should change!

I have given them some polite feedback on this. You can too, if you want. But, please be civil. Incivility helps nobody, least of all Creating Christ or its authors!

We have not presented the transcript of this in web page form. Instead, you can listen to the audio or download the PDF transcript.

However, there may be mistakes in the transcript. Any mistakes in transcription represent our own errors or a transcription error we missed.

Click here to download the PDF transcript.

Bill Gaede

Episode Eighteen – Introducing the Ideas of Bill Gaede

Play

Today we are going to discuss Bill Gaede, his philosophical and scientific ideas and some of the reasons they are important.

Please note that not everything we say here necceasirly represents the views of Bill Gaede and represent our own views. We are presenting his ideas in the wider context of our own knowledge.

Click here to download the PDF transcript. This episode’s transcript has no illustrations.

Episode Transcript

[Editorial: Please note that this may not exactly match the audio. However, there should be no significant differences.]

Introduction

Metaphysics of Physics is the much needed and crucial voice of reason in the philosophy of science, rarely found anywhere else in the world today. We are equipped with the fundamental principles of a rational philosophy that gives us the edge, may make us misfits in the mainstream sciences but also attracts rational minds to our community.

With this show, we are fighting for a more rational world, mostly by looking through the lens of the philosophy of science. We raise awareness of issues within the philosophy of science and present alternative and rational approaches.

We are your hosts and guides through the hallowed halls of the philosophy of science. Dwayne Davies, my husband, is the founder, primary content creator and voice for Metaphysics of Physics. I am Ashna and I help out however I can. You can find out more about us on the About page of the website.

You can also find all the episodes, transcripts, subscription options and more on the website at metaphysicsofphysics.com.

Hi everyone! This is episode eighteen of the Metaphysics of Physics podcast and today we are discussing the works of Bill Gaede and its importance.

Who is Bill Gaede?

Bill Gaede was born n 1952 in Argentina and spent much of his earlier life as an engineer and programmer.

He is, unfortunately, apparently best known for his Cold War industrial espionage conducted while working at AMD (Advanced Micro Devices). It seemed that at the time he sympathized with Communism. As a result, he provided the Cuban government with technical information pertaining to the semiconductor industry.

[Editorial: Unfortunate because his scientific work is much more interesting and this earlier stage of his life seems to encourage people to think he is a crank. Which is isn’t]

He later turned himself over to the CIA. Which lead to him working with the FBI in counter-espionage operations. As a result, he was prosecuted and convicted. I believe he was sentenced to 33 months in prison but only served 3 years. He was later deported.

If you want to know more about this, El Crazy Che on Netflix discusses it.

El Crazy Che Bill Gaede

We have not seen El Crazy Che as of yet, but we hear it is quite good.

If we did not bring this up, someone else would. Let us be clear, we are aware of this stuff. But, as we understand it his political views have changed and he became disillusioned with Communism.

But, more importantly, none of this really has any real impact on his views regarding philosophy of science and his scientific views. Which we are about to get to.

[Editorial: I am not sure how much Gaede considers his work philosophy or whether he would call himself a philosopher of science. But, his criticism of physics and other areas of science is philosophical. So, he does engage in some philosophy of science. So we are calling him a philosopher of science, even if he himself might not do so.]

Starting in the late nineties, he started devoting much of his time to a criticism of modern physics and the development of the Rope Hypothesis. His criticism is largely centered around the fact that modern physics is irrational and does not offer a proper physical interpretation of reality. And is, thus, really not physics. Which is very true. We will see more of these criticisms in this episode and the following ones where we start covering the “What is Physics” video.

This is his work which we are most interested in here on Metaphysics of Physics. He has a lot to say in this area and quite a lot of it is very good. We do not agree with all his conclusions, but the essentials of his arguments against modern physics are all very good and highly worth exploring in detail.

In our view, he is one of the most objective and rational critics and philosophers of science we know of. There is a great deal he says which we have said for a long time. It is extremely impressive to see someone else saying this stuff. Especially given he does not have the philosophical background in Objectivism which we do. It would be impressive even if he did.

It is not easy doing what we and Bill Gaede do. Philosophy is not easy, just ask anyone who does a lot of it. It requires a lot of high-level abstraction and integration. Which you then have to learn how to apply.

thinking

Rational thought s not easy, it can take a lot of time and effort.

Rational philosophy requires a lot of sound ideas, all well integrated into a coherent whole. While rejecting mainstream philosophy and its largely irrational ideas. Usually after having already implicitly accepted many of them. Which requires you to reason your way out of those ideas and to untangle them from your better philosophical ideas.

So anyone with a fair grasp of a decent number of rational philosophical ideas has achieved something rare and difficult. And it is important to recognize this and give people credit for that. Whatever other errors they make or evasions they might be guilty of.

What About His Work?

What do we think of Bill Gaede’s Rope Hypothesis? It is extremely intriguing and as far as we have studied it, it seems entirely plausible. It offers a physical interpretation of a great many things in physics. Such as gravitation, light, electromagnetism and so on. The key word here is physical. It offers an explanation in terms of the actions of physical entities.

But isn’t that what physics already does? No, not modern physics. Not really. It offers non-physical “explanations” for things which in fact explain nothing. For instance, take how General Relativity describes gravity as the curvature of space-time. What is space-time? Blank out, it offers no real explanation.

Does this matter? Does physics need to explain things in terms of physical objects?

Yes! It most certainly does. Since physics is supposed to explain the fundamental nature of the physical world.

[Editorial: It is a shame that I have to point this out. Since physics is all about the study of the physical world!]

Newlyweds at the beach.

April News and Future Plans

We have some news! Lots has been going on here at Metaphysics of Physics, even if it looks like things have been relatively quiet. We have been working on stuff you know about and some behind-the-scenes stuff you might not know about. But, what is all this? Let’s find out, shall we?

Wedding

Before we dive into all the planning and updates for the official MOP business that has been going on, let us share some exciting personal news.

As some of you will already know, Ashna and I were recently married, making us a husband and wife philosopher duo! Pretty neat huh?

This took place on the 3rd of March, my birthday. Which means that I have no excuse for forgetting my anniversary! Or for Ashna forgetting my birthday. 😉

It was a small affair, held at a lodge by the beach. After the ceremony, we went off to take pictures by the beach.

The day after that, we flew to sunny Australia for a honeymoon. We had a great time and managed to catch lots of  sun. A lot more sun than we would have in cold Auckland, New Zealand, that is for sure!

Later on, we will post some of our photos.  We have some sweet and fun ones, so stay tuned if you want to check that out.  For now, here is one:

Newlyweds at the beach.

Newlyweds at the beach.

Paid Membership Content

This month we are launching our subscription service. This gives you access to our weekly articles as well as some other perks. The articles will cover all sorts of topics, ranging from expanding on topics covered in the podcast to topics you will not see discussed on the podcast!

The first three articles will appear on the 20th of April. After that you can see them weekly, if you subscribe.

The articles will be accessible for the small fee of $2 per month. That is in US dollars, but still pretty reasonable even if you do not happen to live in the US. There is also a $5 tier available for additional perks.

Consider this your way to support the show, if that is what you want to do. Since not only do you get the bonus articles if you subscribe, but your support ensures we can keep producing the freely available podcast episodes as well. Or maybe you want to be more involved in the show, then you can check out the other perks and join us here.

Join Us

Newsletter

We are also finally starting our newsletter. The monthly newsletter detailing our creative updates, upcoming topics, behind the scenes tidbits and commentary. As well as exclusive deals, special offers, and giveaways on the merchandise.

A few of you have already signed up and might be wondering where your newsletter is. Well, your wait is nearly over.

Later this week we will be sending out the first. If you sign up you should get this by the end of the week. Normally we will be sending these out closer to the start of the month.

If you subscribe, you get this newsletter. Unless you opt out of receiving it.

Podcast and Article Release Schedule

There is only one further podcast coming out in April, on the 18th. What is it about?

Well, we have been hearing a lot of good stuff about Bill Gaede of late and have been watching some of his videos. We are very impressed with the rational approach he takes to physics.

So, we will be going over a video starring Bill. The video is titled “What is Physics”. Let’s see what he has to say and what all the fuss is about! So, stay tuned!

What we are talking about in this months subscription articles? This stuff:

April Schedule for Subscription Articles

19th April

  • What is Color? Clearing up Chromatic Confusion.
  • More on Thought Experiments
  • Atheism or Anti-religiosity?

26th April
Reviewing A Rational Cosmology, Part Two

Blog Posts

What about free blog posts? Well, we have not released very many of these lately. But, we plan to remedy that and give you lots more to read. Even if you don’t want to subscribe for the paid articles (but we think you should).

You can expect to see the following over the next few weeks:

  • Wedding and honeymoon photos.
  • Some interesting metaphysical posts found on Facebook.
  • More Creating Christ content which has been released by third parties.
  • Part two of our “Life 3.0” review.
  • And more!

Stay tuned over the next few days and weeks to see some of this.

Interviews

We are always looking for more people to interview! If you want to talk to us about physics, philosophy of science, any of the other sciences or anything relevant at all, let us know. Reach out to us at contact@metaphysicsofphysics.com

We have an interview with Warren Fahy coming up. Many of you may know him as the author of the books Fragment and Pandemonium.

If you have not read these books, you really should. They are wonderfully creative works, filled with thrilling events and novel biological ideas. Find out more here.

Fragment by Warren Fahy

Fragment, filled with strange creatures and fascinating biology!

In the interview, Warren and I will be discussing biology and the theories contained with these books. As well as some of the archaeology of Creating Christ.

There is enough here for two interviews and this is probably what will happen.

Recorded Lectures

Some of you may recall that we plan to record longer lectures and then sell them for a small fee (probably a few dollars). Well, I have decided the topic of the first few and over the next few months I plan to try get it recorded.

The first will be a master list of logical fallacies, with lots of examples. And the second will be on the nature and importance of mathematics.

Stay tuned for updates on how these work out over the next few months!

That is about it for the updates today! We hope you are excited to see all of this and will stay tuned! We sure are excited!

Please consider joining our subscription service so you can read all the bonus articles. It helps support the show and ensure you get ongoing quality content.

Farewell for now and may you have rational premises!

Boltzmann

Episode Nine – An Interview with the Physicist Juanma

Play

Today we interview the Spanish physicist Juanma on physics, the role of philosophy in physics and what can be done to improve the state of modern physics.

Episode Transcript

[Please note that this may not exactly match the audio. However, there should be no significant differences.  Also, note that the audio may of poorer quality than previous episodes, so you might want to keep this in mind.]

Hi everyone! This is episode nine of the Metaphysics of Physics podcast.

I am Ashna, and I your host and guide through the hallowed halls of the philosophy of science. Thanks for tuning in!

With this show, we are fighting for a more rational world, mostly by looking through the lens of the philosophy of science.  We raise awareness of issues within the philosophy of science and present alternative and rational approaches.

You can find all the episodes, transcripts and subscription options on the website at metaphysicsofphysics.com.

Today we have an interview with Juanma, physics and mathematics researcher, Objectivist and a fellow student of the philosophy of physics!

Dwayne originally performed this interview. But, for various reasons we won’t go into here, his segments were rerecorded by myself.

The audio may be of lower quality than normal. This is due to the fact that the interview was performed over Skype and the connection was of fairly low quality.

For the most part, the audio should be of acceptable quality, but if parts are less clear there is a transcript which may help to clarify parts of the audio which might be difficult to make out.

Note that the transcript includes the answers Juanma prepared in advance and does not include extra commentary improvised during the interview.  This extra content is nice, but it is not crucial. You should be able to get the gist of the answers provided to the questions from the transcript.

But, without further ado, let us start the interview.

Interview

Juanma, please introduce yourself to our audience.
I am Juanma, my name is Jaun Manuel.  I am a Spanish physicist and I majored in theoretical physics.  And then I spent a year doing research in the foundation of quantum mechanics.

And now I am living in London doing an MSc course in quite a different thing, which is the physics of complex systems.  And I am also interested in philosophy and quantum mechanics interpretations.  Which has been my motive even since I got into the science world.

1) What did you study and why?
In Madrid, I could have chosen mathematics or physics. In the end, I decided to major in physics.

I decided this quite early during high school. I decided this quite early during high school because the thing that most resonates with me is discovering and understanding natural phenomena.

I mean, I love mathematics, but I felt it was too far from the real world.  So, in the end, I wanted something a little bit more hands-on, even if I have always been more inclined to the more fundamental and theoretical side.

2) What are the right reasons to pursue an academic career in physics or other sciences? What will enable you to make it?
Well, first of all, being quite the vocational career, so it takes a lot of dedication and interest. This is not a job that you can forget about once you get home, for example.

Many scientists spend many more hours at work than they would normally have to, and some keep working even at home, even at night.

My supervisor, last year, was hoping for the family to go to sleep so he could keep doing research, after past, I don’t know, midnight.

cat nap long hours
If you want to go into the sciences, learn to catnap so you can better handle those long hours.

It takes so much dedication: it must be your passion, your job and your hobby.  Which is quite of a thing to request for an interest in life.

Yeah, it just becomes your life.  Everyone I have known who was taking a Ph.D. or just researching, have just turned science into their life.

Many jobs in this world, you can just forget about them once you are finished.  But, science, particularly theoretical and fundamental sciences, you can to go bed and then come up with something, wake up (or stand up), take a note and then go back to bed.

3) Alright, what are the things you did not like in academia?
In the end, even if it seems to be quite a free enterprise, to decide what you are going to research, you actually depend on other people’s approval just to thrive.

You can’t just do some research without telling your university, for example. Your university must approve of your research interests; your peers must accept your papers for publication.

This sometimes turns into compliance with the status quo, you know. And so some arbitrary ideas grow over time simply because it’s not easy to get a voice if you disagree with the mainstream. Even if you present loads of compelling evidence, bring lots of information, sometimes the world of academia is quite reluctant to accept it.

This, in turn, compromises the quality of the science you produce. That is an inherent thing in academia, it has been ever since universities were built and began being a thing in the scientific literature world.  So, I don’t think there is much we can do about that.

Ashna: What is it they say? Publish or perish? Well, they want you to publish stuff they think will bring in the funding. Which is fair, they obviously need the funding. But, less mainstream ideas might not be perceived as highly fundable ideas.

4) What are the things you liked being in academia?
Well, you rarely meet people that aren’t passionate about their job, so everyone is pretty much up for discussion, time permitting, of course.

You can just go downstairs to the cafeteria and find some coffee and some interesting talk. For half an hour, one hour, about your research interests.  So, you can share your passion with people.

You don’t usually find this in some other jobs. People are usually willing to forget about their jobs once they are done.  But, in science, since it is such a vocational thing, you are always finding someone, some peers. I love that.

Also, when you don’t push reviewers’ tolerance too much, you enjoy a lot of creative freedom and it rarely becomes monotonous.  Because you can always job back and forth between different research topics.

Ashna: Yeah, even the most irrational of them, say, Max Tegmark, are very passionate. I dont like what he has to say, but he is passionate.

5) Do you wish you had studied something different and if so, why?
Thinking back, had I known how academic research would turn out, I would probably have gone for something I can still be creative at, but something that doesn’t demand some gentle form of compliance.

There is also this Atlas Shrugged-related dilemma. I don’t know if your audience is familiar with Atlas Shrugged plot, I won’t disclose that much.  But, this dilemma is basically that that scientists get scorned and underestimated, usually poorly paid and discredited. While for example, pseudoscience gets more and more popular because people nowadays prefer being told what they want to believe rather than the blatant truth.

Engineering
Engineering is a more practical, hands on job than the theoretical sciences. You also are more likely to be paid for your overtime.

So that plays against science and for say, religious or pseudoscientific views.

I think it’s healthier for one’s emotional wellbeing to pursue a career where you get what you earn. I sometimes think that becoming a researcher somehow resembles becoming a nun…

It’s implicitly written in the terms of your job that you will dedicate as much as it takes of yourself to science and that what you get from becomes pretty much irrelevant. You have decided to put your whole life, all your time, all that it takes, into science.  And you are pretty much signing up for a contract where all your time, all your spare time, isn’t that valuable.

If you are about to publish some paper or if you are collaborating with someone, maybe you have to put in 18 hours. Well, that is a bit of an exaggeration, you have to put in a lot of hours into the day, perhaps sometimes skipping meals or coming home at past 10.

It’s just a scientist’s life. Nobody will see that, it is a strange thing.

If you get some other job, you might get paid for extra hours. In science, it is implicitly accepted that you will have to do some extra hours at some point. But you just won’t get paid for that. Simply because you are expected to be so committed to science that you are not expected to expect something else in return.

I would probably have gone for something which is more efficient in these terms. Where I can really get what I am working for and earn a decent amount to simply enjoy other aspects of life and not just let science absorb all of my time, all of my dedication.

I was about to move to naval engineering, which is something where I can see the results of my work in my hands, where I can touch the results of my work. Which I don’t think is necessarily worse than doing science.  But I also like to see where all of my work has got to.

So, looking back, I might have chosen something of the sort.

Ashna: Imagine how much better it would be if people lived in a world where we had greater respect for good science and more appreciation for how hard scientists work. I think they would be better off and might make more progress.
6) What do you think about string theory?
Ah well, to paraphrase The Fountainhead, “I don’t think of string theory”. No, really, I think the methodology adopted by theoretical physicists in the last century inevitably leads to arbitrariness and, what’s even worse, a complete disregard for understanding natural phenomena.