Thread: Is Michio Kaku wrong??

I have just watched Michio Kaku on a short TV interview and am afraid disagree with something he says.........

He was discussing types of civilizations and expressed the theory that at a certain level a race can be considered immortal because it can stop ice ages and other much larger events which would be able to effectively wipe our race out......

Now I am NOT going to have this out at the legend himself and appreciate it might just be 'one of those things' lurking around in Science classes even if just there for theory but I am afraid I have to disagree with the idea that a civilization can ever be literally immortal -

bigger things have bigger problems..........with there being an infinite universe these things are always in proportion.......so it doesn't matter what size you are - the fight is always the same...........

Is the term Immortal being too literally interpreted in my rough explanation? Or would someone out there agree that in an infinite universe (one with no known end) it is absurd to say that the bigger a race gets the more immortal it is?

I think that if you're spread over enough planets and star systems, there's no known events that could wipe you out all at once (other than the end of the universe). Even the collision of two galaxies shouldn't matter too much to individual stars.

Yeah, think about a civilization like Rome. Spread across Europe, there was pretty much no way a single event would kill all Romans, save the end of the world. A lot of smaller, more localized catastrophes, however, could easily spell the end for such a civilization. Rome, the prime example of this.

Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician

Yeah, think about a civilization like Rome. Spread across Europe, there was pretty much no way a single event would kill all Romans, save the end of the world. A lot of smaller, more localized catastrophes, however, could easily spell the end for such a civilization. Rome, the prime example of this.

I can go along with this one - the idea that localized catastrophes could spell the end for a civilization and not the race would make sense to me.

He was using the terms 'civilization' and 'race' in a very lose fashion unfortunately

Scientists should not be allowed to relax on TV :P

Mr Kaku's actual work in physics; http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/.../0/1/0/all/0/1.
I don't know how good it is. I might read some of it later.
The general consensus seem's to be that he is more of a PR guy than a physicist. Heck, we all got our roles to play.

Mr Kaku's actual work in physics; http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/.../0/1/0/all/0/1.
I don't know how good it is. I might read some of it later.
The general consensus seem's to be that he is more of a PR guy than a physicist. Heck, we all got our roles to play.

Thanks man!, Im quite a fan of Michio Kaku, though i do hear people out there say he is a popularizer in science nevertheless i do realize he is in one of the earlier developers of String theory. I always really wanted to know what his work actually was on.

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

Mr Kaku's actual work in physics; http://arxiv.org/find/grp_physics/1/.../0/1/0/all/0/1.
I don't know how good it is. I might read some of it later.
The general consensus seem's to be that he is more of a PR guy than a physicist. Heck, we all got our roles to play.

Thanks man!, Im quite a fan of Michio Kaku, though i do hear people out there say he is a popularizer in science nevertheless i do realize he is in one of the earlier developers of String theory. I always really wanted to know what his work actually was on.

He likes to sell books. He is not one of the big boys in string theory.

I own one book by Kaku, on quantum field theory. I am not likely to ever own two. I have several hundred science and mathematics books.

If Kaku said the sky was blue, I would go outside and check.

Originally Posted by DrRocket

He likes to sell books. He is not one of the big boys in string theory.

I own one book by Kaku, on quantum field theory. I am not likely to ever own two. I have several hundred science and mathematics books.

If Kaku said the sky was blue, I would go outside and check.

His contributions to string theory maybe has not caused a groundbreaking impact BUT, it is still pretty important right??
I infact own most of his science books including Hyperspace, Beyond Einstein, Parallel worlds, and in my opinion they were pretty fascinating for a non professional science guy(me).

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

Originally Posted by DrRocket

He likes to sell books. He is not one of the big boys in string theory.

I own one book by Kaku, on quantum field theory. I am not likely to ever own two. I have several hundred science and mathematics books.

If Kaku said the sky was blue, I would go outside and check.

His contributions to string theory maybe has not caused a groundbreaking impact BUT, it is still pretty important right??
I infact own most of his science books including Hyperspace, Beyond Einstein, Parallel worlds, and in my opinion they were pretty fascinating for a non professional science guy(me).

None of those are actually science books. They are popularizations. I wouldn't buy them on a bet.

Kaku is important only to Kaku. (Well maybe his dog likes him too.)

Originally Posted by DrRocket

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

Originally Posted by DrRocket

He likes to sell books. He is not one of the big boys in string theory.

I own one book by Kaku, on quantum field theory. I am not likely to ever own two. I have several hundred science and mathematics books.

If Kaku said the sky was blue, I would go outside and check.

His contributions to string theory maybe has not caused a groundbreaking impact BUT, it is still pretty important right??
I infact own most of his science books including Hyperspace, Beyond Einstein, Parallel worlds, and in my opinion they were pretty fascinating for a non professional science guy(me).

None of those are actually science books. They are popularizations. I wouldn't buy them on a bet.

Kaku is important only to Kaku. (Well maybe his dog likes him too.)

really??i thought hyperspace was pretty evens in terms of the content on string theory as compared with "the fabric of the cosmos" , and i know that Greene's books are good. Ah well..

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

really??i thought hyperspace was pretty evens in terms of the content on string theory as compared with "the fabric of the cosmos" , and i know that Greene's books are good. Ah well..

I haven't read the book, bit I have heard him talk. It was pure bullshit.

I would not waste a nickel pn anyrhing that he has written. Stick to stuff by the A-team.

Originally Posted by DrRocket

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

really??i thought hyperspace was pretty evens in terms of the content on string theory as compared with "the fabric of the cosmos" , and i know that Greene's books are good. Ah well..

I haven't read the book, bit I have heard him talk. It was pure bullshit.

I would not waste a nickel pn anyrhing that he has written. Stick to stuff by the A-team.

Whatever Doc.
BTW i have a question for you, you are a Mathematician right?? Did you make any minor or major contributions to mathematics so far in your life?

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

Originally Posted by DrRocket

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

really??i thought hyperspace was pretty evens in terms of the content on string theory as compared with "the fabric of the cosmos" , and i know that Greene's books are good. Ah well..

I haven't read the book, bit I have heard him talk. It was pure bullshit.

I would not waste a nickel pn anyrhing that he has written. Stick to stuff by the A-team.

Whatever Doc.
BTW i have a question for you, you are a Mathematician right?? Did you make any minor or major contributions to mathematics so far in your life?

I did a llong time ago. But I worked in aerospace/defense for many years after that,

Originally Posted by DrRocket

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

Originally Posted by DrRocket

Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz

really??i thought hyperspace was pretty evens in terms of the content on string theory as compared with "the fabric of the cosmos" , and i know that Greene's books are good. Ah well..

I haven't read the book, bit I have heard him talk. It was pure bullshit.

I would not waste a nickel pn anyrhing that he has written. Stick to stuff by the A-team.

Whatever Doc.
BTW i have a question for you, you are a Mathematician right?? Did you make any minor or major contributions to mathematics so far in your life?

I did a llong time ago. But I worked in aerospace/defense for many years after that,

What field of mathematics did you give your contributions to?

Aerospace/defense?? Like government technology or what NASA stuff??

I agree with the general consesus- he is more of a science celebrity and dreamer than a real physicist. String field theory is real, as is his proffesorship, but I think the only place for a scientist is at work.
No I have never made any mathematical contributions in my life. In fact, I have never had a real job (dont worry- I'm not that old yet).

I agree with the general consesus- he is more of a science celebrity and dreamer than a real physicist. String field theory is real, as is his proffesorship, but I think the only place for a scientist is at work.
No I have never made any mathematical contributions in my life. In fact, I have never had a real job (dont worry- I'm not that old yet).

Originally Posted by 15uliane

I agree with the general consesus- he is more of a science celebrity and dreamer than a real physicist. String field theory is real, as is his proffesorship, but I think the only place for a scientist is at work.
No I have never made any mathematical contributions in my life. In fact, I have never had a real job (dont worry- I'm not that old yet).

Im not that old either, just gonna turn 17. So i guess im aslo still abit from getting my first job.

:-D