Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
sciencenaturetechnology
97 Posts 75 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

    I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

    Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

    Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

    #science #nature #technology

    Link Preview Image
    coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
    coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
    coreyspowell@mastodon.social
    wrote last edited by
    #2

    I also have to point out that the most expensive space telescope (JWST) cost about $500 million/year. We spent 1000x that much on AI development in 2025.

    Data collection is essential for discovery...and it's remarkably cheap compared to many other things we do routinely.

    #science #nature #history #tech

    coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC harleck@tech.lgbtH gimulnautti@mastodon.greenG bobthomson70@mastodon.socialB 4 Replies Last reply
    0
    • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

      I also have to point out that the most expensive space telescope (JWST) cost about $500 million/year. We spent 1000x that much on AI development in 2025.

      Data collection is essential for discovery...and it's remarkably cheap compared to many other things we do routinely.

      #science #nature #history #tech

      coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
      coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
      coreyspowell@mastodon.social
      wrote last edited by
      #3

      I've also seen smart people tie themselves into knots trying to defend the original claim.

      "He just means big science is expensive."
      "He just means that AI can help with data analysis."
      "He just means that string theory is a dead end."

      But that is not the claim, and the efforts to justify it only make the argument even stranger.

      tobyhaynes@mstdn.caT reedmideke@mastodon.socialR abesamma@toolsforthought.socialA xchaos@f.czX revk@toot.me.ukR 9 Replies Last reply
      0
      • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

        I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

        Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

        Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

        #science #nature #technology

        Link Preview Image
        valentine@flickering.styleV This user is from outside of this forum
        valentine@flickering.styleV This user is from outside of this forum
        valentine@flickering.style
        wrote last edited by
        #4

        @coreyspowell
        People like Elon Musk will tear down others' accomplishments, because he could never equal them.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

          I also have to point out that the most expensive space telescope (JWST) cost about $500 million/year. We spent 1000x that much on AI development in 2025.

          Data collection is essential for discovery...and it's remarkably cheap compared to many other things we do routinely.

          #science #nature #history #tech

          harleck@tech.lgbtH This user is from outside of this forum
          harleck@tech.lgbtH This user is from outside of this forum
          harleck@tech.lgbt
          wrote last edited by
          #5

          @coreyspowell

          Link Preview Image
          2026 Webb Images/Science

          Explore this photo album by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope on Flickr!

          favicon

          Flickr (www.flickr.com)

          sorry for the edits. JWST images are as good as we've even been.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

            I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

            Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

            Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

            #science #nature #technology

            Link Preview Image
            attoparsec@clacks.linkA This user is from outside of this forum
            attoparsec@clacks.linkA This user is from outside of this forum
            attoparsec@clacks.link
            wrote last edited by
            #6

            @coreyspowell It's nothing less than a complete rejection of inductive science!

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

              I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

              Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

              Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

              #science #nature #technology

              Link Preview Image
              gnoll110@ruby.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
              gnoll110@ruby.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
              gnoll110@ruby.social
              wrote last edited by
              #7

              @coreyspowell

              I put any stagnation of physics etal, down to 45 years of Reaganomics.

              ...verses, say Dengonomics.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                I've also seen smart people tie themselves into knots trying to defend the original claim.

                "He just means big science is expensive."
                "He just means that AI can help with data analysis."
                "He just means that string theory is a dead end."

                But that is not the claim, and the efforts to justify it only make the argument even stranger.

                tobyhaynes@mstdn.caT This user is from outside of this forum
                tobyhaynes@mstdn.caT This user is from outside of this forum
                tobyhaynes@mstdn.ca
                wrote last edited by
                #8

                @coreyspowell
                Progress relies on understanding.
                Science is built on hypothesis / observation / analysis and identification of the success or failure of the hypothesis.

                Elon Musk demonstrates clearly that he has no idea what science is. Much as he has demonstrated that he has no idea what software engineering is.

                reinald@nrw.socialR 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                  I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                  Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                  Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                  #science #nature #technology

                  Link Preview Image
                  dpiponi@mathstodon.xyzD This user is from outside of this forum
                  dpiponi@mathstodon.xyzD This user is from outside of this forum
                  dpiponi@mathstodon.xyz
                  wrote last edited by
                  #9

                  @coreyspowell I've been hearing this one since back in the sci.physics days. It verges on a conspiracy theory.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                    I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                    Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                    Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                    #science #nature #technology

                    Link Preview Image
                    rudicron@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                    rudicron@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                    rudicron@mastodon.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #10

                    @coreyspowell
                    "As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message."

                    - Ur-Fascism, Umberto Eco

                    xchaos@f.czX 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                      I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                      Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                      Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                      #science #nature #technology

                      Link Preview Image
                      thriftwicker@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                      thriftwicker@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                      thriftwicker@mastodon.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #11

                      @coreyspowell I recently read that owning and posting shitty fascist claptrap on a giant, ai oozing, propaganda mill of a social media platform does much worse for physics than telescopes or colliders ever could.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                        I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                        Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                        Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                        #science #nature #technology

                        Link Preview Image
                        0f4d0335@infosec.exchange0 This user is from outside of this forum
                        0f4d0335@infosec.exchange0 This user is from outside of this forum
                        0f4d0335@infosec.exchange
                        wrote last edited by
                        #12

                        @coreyspowell I agree with the sentiment (anti-intellectualism and ai are bad), but I've heard from reputable scientists that physics and other science fields have stagnated due to compounding reasons (mostly related to poor funding). What's off-putting about your claim is that 1) you're basing "his claim" from a summary on Twitter (ad hominem), and 2) you've made us beg some questions without building much context other than "some smart people." I think you do not address issues with not just the data but the arguments, which AI can certainly help with cross-textual analysis (and there have been studies, which I don't think you'll find convincing so I'm not going to go look everything up). I don't think from the context (a twitter post) that anyone wants to cut scientific spending in research, but there certainly people who have and will.

                        Partially what frustrates me -- isn't your post but just the uncritical support it received despite the ad hominem, which is just not super helpful and an echo chamber. Let's just say we'd rather fund humans do the research and call it a day without having to raise our blood pressure over someone we don't like.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
                        • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                          I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                          Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                          Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                          #science #nature #technology

                          Link Preview Image
                          stargazersmith@social.linux.pizzaS This user is from outside of this forum
                          stargazersmith@social.linux.pizzaS This user is from outside of this forum
                          stargazersmith@social.linux.pizza
                          wrote last edited by
                          #13

                          @coreyspowell
                          To those in the know, Musk exposes his ignorance with such stupid talk. To those not in the know, he exposes his arrogance.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                            I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                            Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                            Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                            #science #nature #technology

                            Link Preview Image
                            mastodonmigration@mastodon.onlineM This user is from outside of this forum
                            mastodonmigration@mastodon.onlineM This user is from outside of this forum
                            mastodonmigration@mastodon.online
                            wrote last edited by
                            #14

                            @coreyspowell

                            What is slowing discovery is a poorly conceived really big spaceship money pit.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                              I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                              Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                              Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                              #science #nature #technology

                              Link Preview Image
                              jstevenyork@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              jstevenyork@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              jstevenyork@mastodon.social
                              wrote last edited by
                              #15

                              @coreyspowell
                              And his plan that relies on huge constellations of giant AI satellites somehow ISN'T "expensive hardware?"

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                                I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                                Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                                Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                                #science #nature #technology

                                Link Preview Image
                                oddhack@mstdn.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                                oddhack@mstdn.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                                oddhack@mstdn.social
                                wrote last edited by
                                #16

                                @coreyspowell you could build a whole lot of Superconducting Super Colliders and JWSTs for the cost of one gigantic "AI" fraud company.

                                trisweb@m.trisweb.comT 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                                  I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                                  Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                                  Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                                  #science #nature #technology

                                  Link Preview Image
                                  kanamauna@sauropods.winK This user is from outside of this forum
                                  kanamauna@sauropods.winK This user is from outside of this forum
                                  kanamauna@sauropods.win
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #17

                                  @coreyspowell

                                  He also believes we live in a simulation. I assume that he thinks that the simulation is being run to study us and thus all that physics stuff is just “background” decorations on the fish tank.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                                    I've also seen smart people tie themselves into knots trying to defend the original claim.

                                    "He just means big science is expensive."
                                    "He just means that AI can help with data analysis."
                                    "He just means that string theory is a dead end."

                                    But that is not the claim, and the efforts to justify it only make the argument even stranger.

                                    reedmideke@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                    reedmideke@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                    reedmideke@mastodon.social
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #18

                                    @coreyspowell I mean, he's the guy who, despite being head dude of the largest satellite operator in the world, argued satellites couldn't be a problem for astronomy because they'd be in darkness at night… so yeah, I'd agree there's a much more straightforward explanation for his apparently nonsensical statements https://mastodon.social/@reedmideke/113817738470795433

                                    hermannus@stegodon.nlH 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                                      I've also seen smart people tie themselves into knots trying to defend the original claim.

                                      "He just means big science is expensive."
                                      "He just means that AI can help with data analysis."
                                      "He just means that string theory is a dead end."

                                      But that is not the claim, and the efforts to justify it only make the argument even stranger.

                                      abesamma@toolsforthought.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      abesamma@toolsforthought.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      abesamma@toolsforthought.social
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #19

                                      @coreyspowell trying to defend this man's stream of weird takes is a thankless, exhausting and fruitless endeavour. Idk why many still do it.

                                      bweller@mstdn.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                                        I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                                        Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                                        Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                                        #science #nature #technology

                                        Link Preview Image
                                        flaki@flaki.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                                        flaki@flaki.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                                        flaki@flaki.social
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #20

                                        @coreyspowell billionaires:
                                        no need to look inside, there's no point, introspection is dead

                                        also billionaires: there is also no need to look outside

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • coreyspowell@mastodon.socialC coreyspowell@mastodon.social

                                          I keep seeing versions of this post, which imply a bizarre misunderstanding of how we know the world.

                                          Do people imagine that if we'd never observed galaxies or neutrinos or exoplanets or the cosmic microwave background, we could have *imagined* these things & that would be just as real?

                                          Or that we've magically reached the point, just now, where we no longer need to observe the world?

                                          #science #nature #technology

                                          Link Preview Image
                                          hopeless@mas.toH This user is from outside of this forum
                                          hopeless@mas.toH This user is from outside of this forum
                                          hopeless@mas.to
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #21

                                          @coreyspowell

                                          That post sounds like it came out of a particular 2026 AI crevasse, the speculations of the LLM are more impressive to it than doing the work to find out the ground truth from actual reality. Until you tell it to stop guessing and instrument so we can find out what actually happens.

                                          Humans know by bitter experience, reality beats everything, and one word that definitely came from the heart of your problem in reality, is worth more than all the LLM's speculation.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups