Podcasts about James Clerk Maxwell

En el presente episodio tendremos ocasión de charlar con Artur Sala, licenciado en física por la Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, ensayista, conferenciante, investigador, escritor y divulgador. Ha escrito diversos libros, entre ellos su obra principal “Magna Ciencia”, dividida en varios volúmenes que realizan un recorrido de la física moderna. Artur ha otorgado conferencias en torno a la propia historia oculta de la ciencia, la censura del conocimiento y enfoques no ortodoxos en disciplinas como la física, la biología y la medicina. Charlaremos de “Ciencia Proscrita”, además de infinidad de apasionantes ámbitos vinculados. GUION DE LA ENTREVISTA: Presentación - 00:03:10 Ciencia proscrita - 00:12:06 Nikola Tesla - 00:20:38 Alquimia y ciencias sagradas - 00:33:13 Astrología - 00:42:22 Manipulación histórica y Anatoli Fomenko - 00:52:00 Metafísica y habilidades extrasensoriales - 01:06:34 Mitología comparada - 01:18:52 Despedida - 01:27:54 ARTUR SALA – WEB OFICIAL: https://www.artursala.com/ ARTUR SALA – CANAL YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/@artursala2 ARTUR SALA – CANAL TELEGRAM: t.me/artursala ARTUR SALA – MAGNA CIENCIA: MAGNA CIENCIA I: Un viaje por el conocimiento proscrito – 2020 MAGNA CIENCIA I: Addendum - 2020 MAGNA CIENCIA II: El verdadero origen de la vida – 2021 MAGNA CIENCIA III: La obra y legado de Wilhem Reich - 2023 LIVING UNIVERSITY OF TERRAIN - UNIVERSIDAD VIVIENTE DEL TERRENO: https://www.universityofterrain.com/ LIBROS Y AUTORES RECOMENDADOS POR ARTUR SALA: Andreas Faber-Kaiser (Periodista, investigador, ufólogo y escritor). “La vida secreta de las plantas”, de Christofer Bird y Peter Tompkis. Corentin Louis Kervran. Antoine Béchamp. Claude Bernard. Wilhem Reich. René Guénon. “Introducción a la alquimia de las plantas medicinales”, de Manfred M. Junius. Paracelso. “Las moradas filosofales”, de Fulcanelli. “La entrada abierta al palacio cerrado del rey”, de Ireneo Filaleteo. Mario Pérez Ruíz. Ramón Llull. “El universo holográfico”, de Michael Talbot. Platón. James Clerk Maxwell. “La Nobleza Negra”, de Jorge Guerra. Fernando Jiménez del Oso. André Malby. Luis Racionero. “Descubro y acuso”, de Eliseo Bayo. “Nueva Cronología”, de Anatoli Fomenko. René Adolphe Schwaller de Lubicz. "El árbol de los mitos", de José Luis Espejo y Diego Méndez. CANALES RECOMENDADOS POR ARTUR SALA: NEOKRONOMIKA – DIVULGACIÓN “NUEVA CRONOLOGÍA” DE FOMENKO: https://www.youtube.com/@NEOKRONOMIKA HERMANOS BAREA: https://www.youtube.com/@HermanosBarea IRU LANDUCCI – NUR PARA TODOS: https://www.youtube.com/@Nurparatodos FLIPPITYFLOP - LARA HERNÁNDEZ: https://www.youtube.com/@Flippityflop-es AUTORES Y LIBROS MENCIONADOS EN LA ENTREVISTA: John Dee. Isaac Newton. “Organón de la medicina”, de Samuel Hahnemann. Jacobo Grinberg. Robert Monroe. Ana María Oliva. Lloyd Pye. “El Kybalion”, de Hermes Trismegisto (Tres Iniciados). “El libro de Enoc”. DISCIPLINAS MENCIONADAS: ESPAGIRIA – Producción de medicinas a partir de plantas utilizando procedimientos alquímicos. ALQUIMIA – Disciplina filosófica que combina elementos de la química, la metalurgia, la física, la medicina, la astrología, la semiótica, el misticismo, el espiritualismo y el arte. ASTROLOGÍA - Estudio de la posición y del movimiento de los astros como medio para predecir hechos futuros y conocer el carácter de las personas. CÁBALA – Disciplina y escuela de pensamiento esotérico, relacionada con los esenios y las corrientes del misticismo judío. MITOLOGÍA COMPARADA - Estudio comparativo de mitos procedentes de diferentes culturas. EXPOSICIÓN DE MITOLOGÍA COMPARADA - ARTUR SALA Y JAVIER FERNÁNDEZ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Jx8L4sw0gg DEMOSTRACIÓN DE VISIÓN EXTRAOCULAR: ECLÉPTICOS WORLDWIDE – LO NUNCA VISTO: PARECE MAGIA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsBg3sdj_lI&t=9221s CANAL RECOPILATORIO DE ANDRÉ MALBY: https://www.youtube.com/c/Andr%C3%A9Malby MÚSICA DEL EPISODIO: GREENSLEEVES - Canción y melodía tradicional. CONTACTO: eliniciado@yahoo.com Este programa no tiene ánimo de lucro ni será monetizado, el único afán es la máxima difusión de cuestiones que nos atañen a todos.

PEMF History: A Timeline of HealingAncient roots:The use of magnetic properties for healing dates back to ancient civilizations, including the Greeks, Chinese, and Egyptians.Scientific foundations:19th-century discoveries in electromagnetism, notably by Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell, laid the groundwork for PEMF technology.20th-century advancements:Research in the mid-20th century explored PEMF's potential for bone healing and fracture repair.NASA conducted studies on PEMF to counteract the effects of space travel on astronauts' bone and muscle health. This NASA research has provided very valuable data concerning PEMF therapy.FDA approvals for PEMF devices have been granted for various applications, including fracture healing and certain types of depression.Modern applications:Today, PEMF therapy is used for a wide range of conditions, including chronic pain, inflammation, and sports injuries.Ongoing research continues to explore its potential for other health applications.PEMF Therapy: Healing at the Cellular LevelThe Power of PEMF: A Revolutionary Wellness TechnologyPEMF: From Ancient Origins to Modern HealingPEMF Therapy: The Future of Preventive WellnessCellular Wellness: Understanding PEMF Therapy#PEMFtherapy,#CellularHealth,#WellnessTechnology,#PainRelief,#PreventiveHealth,#Biohacking,#ElectromagneticTherapy,#RegenerativeMedicine,#NaturalHealing,#HolisticHealth, PEMF 101-MORE INFO AT: THE BH SALES KENNEL KELP HOLISTIC HEALING HOUR PODCAST & YOUTUBE@billholt8792PEMF 101: Grandpa Bill's Guide to Cellular Wellness

Discover the Power of Scalar Frequency Healing.   Have you ever wondered about the hidden potential of our bodies? Join us as we delve into the fascinating world of scalar energy. This revolutionary technology, pioneered by the brilliant minds of James Clerk Maxwell and Nikola Tesla, holds the key to unlocking our body's natural healing abilities.   This week, we're talking with Bradly Johnson, an experienced frequency practitioner. Learn how scalar waves, a unique form of energy, can penetrate our bodies, charging our cells and restoring our energy flow. We'll explore how these waves can help alleviate pain, reduce inflammation, and boost our overall well-being.   Feelings with Strangers   Socials https://www.instagram.com/feelings.with.strangers/   YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@FeelingswithStrangers   More on Brad Bradley Johnson Holistic Frequency Practitioner   Site www.fre-q.com   Telegram https://t.me/Frequency_Healing101 Spooky2 Recordings   YouTube https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2Z3LIVSW3jvoyol2VAKEl7KmipJs9CTG   Spooky 2 Discount Offer For a 5% discount coupon code, just enter: "PaulSpooky2" at checkout.

This week we speak to multidisciplinary independent researcher William Sarill, whose life has traced a high-dimensional curve through biochemistry, art restoration, physics, and esotericism (and I'm stopping the list here but it goes on). Bill is one of the only people I know who has the scientific chops to understand and explain how to possibly unify thermodynamics with general relativity AND has gone swimming into the deep end of The Weird for long enough to develop an appreciation for its paradoxical profundities. He can also boast personal friendships with two of the greatest (and somewhat diametrically opposed) science fiction authors ever: Phil Dick and Isaac Asimov. In this conversation we start by exploring some of his discoveries and insights as an intuition-guided laboratory biomedical researcher and follow the river upstream into his synthesis of emerging theoretical frameworks that might make sense of PKD's legendary VALIS experiences — the encounter with high strangeness that drove him to write The Exegesis, over a million words of effort to explain the deep structure of time and reality. It's time for new ways to think about time! Enjoy…✨ Support This Work• Buy my brain for hourly consulting or advisory work on retainer• Become a patron on Substack or Patreon• Help me find backing for my next big project Humans On The Loop• Buy the books we discuss from my Bookshop.org reading list• Buy original paintings and prints or commission new work• Join the conversation on Discord in the Holistic Technology & Wise Innovation and Future Fossils servers• Make one-off donations at @futurefossils on Venmo, $manfredmacx on CashApp, or @michaelgarfield on PayPal• Buy the show's music on Bandcamp — intro “Olympus Mons” from the Martian Arts EP & outro “Sonnet A” from the Double-Edged Sword EP✨ Go DeeperBill's Academia.edu pageBill's talk at the PKD Film FestivalBill's profile for the Palo Alto Longevity PrizeBill's story on Facebook about his biochemistry researchBill in the FF Facebook group re: Simulation Theory, re: The Zero-Point Field, re: everything he's done that no one else has, re: how PKD predicted ChatGPT"If you find this world bad, you should see some of the others" by PKDThe Wyrd of the Early Earth: Cellular Pre-sense in the Primordial Soup by Eric WargoMy first and second interviews with William Irwin ThompsonMy lecture on biology, time, and myth from Oregon Eclipse Gathering 2017"I understand Philip K. Dick" by Terence McKennaWeird Studies on PKD and "The Trash Stratum" Part 1 & Part 2Weird Studies with Joshua Ramey on divination in scienceSparks of Genius: The Thirteen Thinking Tools of the World's Most Creative People by Robert & Michele Root-BernsteinDiscovering by Robert Root-Bernstein✨ MentionsPhilip K. Dick, Bruce Damer, Iain McGilchrist, Eric Wargo, Stu Kauffman, Michael Persinger, Alfred North Whitehead, Terence McKenna, Karl Friedrich, Mike Parker, Chris Jeynes, David Wolpert, Ivo Dinov, Albert Einstein, Kurt Gödel, Erwin Schroedinger, Kaluza & Klein, Richard Feynman, Euclid, Hermann Minkowski, James Clerk Maxwell, The I Ching, St. Augustine, Stephen Hawking, Jim Hartle, Alexander Vilenkin, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Timothy Morton, Futurama, The Wachowski Siblings, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Leonard Euler, Paramahansa Yogananda, Alfred Korbzybski, Frank Herbert, Robert Heinlein, Claude Shannon, Ludwig Boltzmann, Carl Jung, Danny Jones, Mark Newman, Michael Lachmann, Cristopher Moore, Jessica Flack, Robert Root Bernstein, Louis Pasteur, Alexander Fleming, Ruth Bernstein, Andres Gomez Emilsson, Diane Musho Hamilton This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelgarfield.substack.com/subscribe

1. Snoopy, le chien de médiation qui fait des miracles à lʹInstitut Curie à Paris Snoopy, un setter anglais de trois ans, adopté à la SPA, est bien plus quʹun simple animal de compagnie. À lʹInstitut Curie à Paris, il travaille en tant que chien de médiation, ou auxiliaire de santé. Avec sa collègue humaine Elodie Labedade, infirmière d'éducation spécialisée à l'accompagnement des patient·e·s stomisé·e·s, Snoopy apporte réconfort et apaisement à son entourage. Son rôle et ses bienfaits font dʹailleurs lʹobjet dʹune étude scientifique. Stéphane Délétroz est allé à sa rencontre. 2. La Maison de la tourbière aux Ponts-de-Martel: une nouvelle offre dʹécotourisme en Suisse Cécile Guérin nous emmène sur le Sentier de la tourbière, lʹune des propositions dʹactivités de la Maison de la tourbière inaugurée en 2024 aux Ponts-de-Martel (NE). Dotée dʹun espace muséal présentant une approche originale sur la biologie des tourbières et leur histoire, la Maison de la Tourbière dispose aussi d'un centre de compétences pour les scientifiques et les étudiant.e.s. Avec Dylan Tatti, responsable du Centre de compétences marais de la Maison de la Tourbière, Léa Baume, étudiante en master de biogéosciences à lʹUniversité de Neuchâtel (UNINE) et à lʹUniversité de Lausanne (UNIL), et Yvan Matthey, spécialiste des tourbières, responsable du bureau dʹétude en écologie Ecoconseil. 3. "Comme par hasard": la nouvelle exposition de la Maison Poincaré à Paris La journaliste Charlie Dupiot nous emmène à la découverte de lʹexposition "Comme par hasard" à la Maison Poincaré à Paris, un musée dédié aux mathématiques dans le quartier latin. Lʹexposition met en lumière deux découvertes majeures de 1859: la théorie de lʹévolution de Charles Darwin et les recherches du physicien James Clerk Maxwell sur le mouvement aléatoire des particules. Par des expériences interactives, comme la "détanque", un sport combinant dé et pétanque, les visiteurs peuvent comprendre comment le hasard influence divers aspects de la vie et des sciences. Visite en compagnie de la médiatrice scientifique du musée Allegra Calabrese et le mathématicien Jean-Baptiste Aubin. Cette exposition est à découvrir jusquʹau 22 mars 2025 à la Maison Poincaré. 4. Le comment du pourquoi: les formes de sexes Toutes les formes de sexes sont-elles présentes dans la nature? La réponse de Marc Giraud, naturaliste, au micro de Sarah Dirren.

In the 1860s, James Clerk Maxwell argued that light was a wave of electric and magnetic fields. But it took over four decades for physicists to put together the theory of special relativity, which correctly describes the symmetries underlying Maxwell's theory. The delay came in part from the difficulty in accepting that light was a wave, but not a wave in any underlying "aether." Today our most basic view of fundamental physics is found in quantum field theory, which posits that everything around us is a quantum version of a relativistic wave. I talk with physicist Matt Strassler about how we go from these interesting-but-intimidating concepts to the everyday world of tables, chairs, and ourselves.Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/03/04/267-matt-strassler-on-relativity-fields-and-the-language-of-reality/Support Mindscape on Patreon.Matt Strassler received his Ph.D. in physics from Stanford University. He is currently a writer and a visiting researcher in physics at Harvard University. His research has ranged over a number of topics in theoretical high-energy physics, from the phenomenology of dark matter and the Higgs boson to dualities in gauge theory and string theory. He blogs at Of Particular Significance, and his new book is Waves in an Impossible Sea: How Everyday Life Emerges from the Cosmic Ocean.Web siteGoogle Scholar publicationsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Este episodio coincide con la semana del Día Mundial de la Radio, y en él os hablamos de los avances científicos que fueron necesarios para llegar a la radio, al aparato, porque el desarrollo fue rapidísimo. Treinta años antes de los primeros experimentos de Marconi la gente ni siquiera imaginaba que las ondas de radio pudieran existir: fueron una serie de descubrimientos, primero teóricos y después experimentales, los que convirtieron la radio en una realidad científica lista para ser transformada en tecnología. Hoy os contamos esa historia, de la mano de sus dos protagonistas más importantes: James Clerk Maxwell y Heinrich Hertz. Si os interesa el asunto de las fuentes naturales de radio podéis escuchar dos episodios de nuestro pódcast hermano, La Brújula de la Ciencia, que dedicamos en exclusiva a ellos. En el capítulo s07e26 hablamos de las ondas de radio que produce nuestro planeta y en el s08e21 hablamos de la radio que nos llega del espacio exterior. Este programa se emitió originalmente el 15 de febrero de 2024. Podéis escuchar el resto de audios de Más de Uno en la app de Onda Cero y en su web, ondacero.es

"Easy Physics" is a podcast that delves into the bizarre and fascinating world of this amazing science. Join us as we use humor and plain language to explore many foundamental principles, and learn about each one of them in a few minutes. From particles that exist in multiple places at once to the immensity of the cosmos, we'll take a lighthearted look at the most mind-bending concepts in physics.If you like this podcast, please consider buying me a coffee at https://ko-fi.com/jccrvn! Your donations allow me to continue this amazing project!Note: This podcast is generated and spoken by AI. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Con Alberto Aparici viajamos a la prehistoria de la radio, para conocer la historia de los otros padres de la radio, dos personas sin las cuales ni siquiera habría existido la idea de construir un aparato de radio: James Clerk Maxwell y Heinrich Hertz. ¿Cuál fue el experimento de Hertz para poner en práctica lo que eran únicamente ideas en la cabeza de Maxwell? ¿Qué son las ondas electromagnéticas y cómo funcionan? Con todo esto, acabamos hablando de la relación entre nuestras cocinas de inducción y los principios físicos de las ondas de radio, y de las ondas de radio que existen en la naturaleza. 

Con Alberto Aparici viajamos a la prehistoria de la radio, para conocer la historia de los otros padres de la radio, dos personas sin las cuales ni siquiera habría existido la idea de construir un aparato de radio: James Clerk Maxwell y Heinrich Hertz. ¿Cuál fue el experimento de Hertz para poner en práctica lo que eran únicamente ideas en la cabeza de Maxwell? ¿Qué son las ondas electromagnéticas y cómo funcionan? Con todo esto, acabamos hablando de la relación entre nuestras cocinas de inducción y los principios físicos de las ondas de radio, y de las ondas de radio que existen en la naturaleza. 

Allan Maxwell is an engineer who has dedicated himself to researching microwave background noise using a device powered from his radio station. He inadvertently gets an extraterrestrial being from Andromeda on his three-dimensional television screen. Using his computer, Maxwell is able to translate the being's thought patterns into English. Both are conducting illicit experiments; Maxwell should not be using the radio station's power, and the being is not allowed to use equipment for exploration. The being asks about the human's "holes in face", whereupon Maxwell explains the purposes of his nose and mouth. The being explains that it is a "nitrogen cycle" life form, that there is "no death in our dimension", and that wars are "... forbidden. Reason we are not allowed to contact you, you are danger to other galaxies." The two have further enlightening philosophical conversation, in which no epistemological basis is given for the Andromedan's affirmation that Maxwell's "brain waves" will "go on" subsequent to the death of his carbon-based body. The being explains, "electromagnetic forces underlying all ... electromagnetic force intelligent" and "Infinity is God. God, infinity, all the same", in response to Maxwell's query regarding whether the being believes in God as an intelligent force. Maxwell appears to accept the Andromedan's explanations as the knowledge of a superior being. Much of this interaction, along with Maxwell's earlier discussion of Faraday with his wife, is a play on James Clerk Maxwell, the father of electromagnetic theory and his predecessor Michael Faraday, as is the alien's reference to quaternions when stating that its species uses "4 dimension numbers" to identify themselves rather than names. In the evening, Allan reluctantly leaves the radio station to be feted at a banquet. He leaves the channel open to the extraterrestrial being who warns, "Do not increase power levels." DJ Eddie Phillips, who is substituting for Allan's brother Gene "Buddy" Maxwell, after being told not to, turns up the power to full, causing the extraterrestrial to be transmitted to Earth as a three-dimensional electromagnetic being. The 'Galaxy Being', as it is dubbed, wreaks inadvertent havoc, killing Eddie and injuring several other people by burning them with natural radiation. The extraterrestrial encounters Allan in person, who convinces it to turn down the heat, and then guides it back to the transmitter shed. They are soon cornered by local authorities, who accidentally shoot Allan's wife, Carol. The Galaxy Being then uses beneficial radiation to heal the wound. When the Galaxy Being emerges, the authorities attempt to kill it; but it protects itself by destroying the bullets in flight, again with radiation. As a warning demonstration (and perhaps to prevent other aliens from coming), the Galaxy Being destroys the transmitter tower. The crowd is told, "There are powers in this universe beyond anything you know ... there is much you have to learn. Go to your homes. Go and give thought to the mysteries of the universe. I will leave you now, in peace." At this, the crowd disperses. The Galaxy Being then chooses not to return home inasmuch as it has violated a law forbidding contact with Earth. So, after first reassuring Allan that "There is no death for me," answering his concerns that it would disintegrate, the Galaxy Being reduces its microwave intensity which causes it to fade out from the Terran realm. Its last words as it vanishes into another putative dimension are "End of transmission".[2][3] Closing narration

Shownotes and Transcript Intelligent Design may not be an idea you are familiar with but it has interested me since I was a child.  I find it impossible to accept that the world we live in and the complexity of human beings is all based on luck and chance. There has to be an intelligent designer.  Stephen C Meyer is one of the most renowned experts on this very topic and his recent appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience has made many people question the theory of a universe without God.  At what point did intellectuals decide that scientific knowledge conflicts with traditional theistic beliefs? Is it even statistically possible for such complexity to just appear? What about the question of who is this intelligent designer?  Stephen Meyer will help you view the world around you with a brand new perspective. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge in the philosophy of science. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. In 2004, Meyer ignited a firestorm of media and scientific controversy when a biology journal at the Smithsonian Institution published his peer-reviewed scientific article advancing intelligent design. Meyer has been featured on national television and radio programs, including The Joe Rogan Experience, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, CBS's Sunday Morning, NBC's Nightly News, ABC's World News, Good Morning America, Nightline, FOX News Live, and the Tavis Smiley show on PBS. He has also been featured in two New York Times front-page stories and has garnered attention in other top-national media. Dr. Meyer is author of the New York Times bestseller Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design and Signature in the Cell, a Times Literary Supplement Book of the Year. He is also a co-author of Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism and Theistic Evolution: A Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Critique. Connect with Stephen... WEBSITE           https://stephencmeyer.org/                            https://www.discovery.org/                            https://returnofthegodhypothesis.com/ X                         https://x.com/StephenCMeyer?s=20 BOOKS               https://www.amazon.co.uk/stores/author/B001K90CQC Interview recorded 13.12.23 Connect with Hearts of Oak... WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/ PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/ SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/ TRANSCRIPTS   https://heartsofoak.substack.com/ Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts....  SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/ *Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast. Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20  Transcript (Hearts of Oak) Dr. Stephen Meyer. It's wonderful to have you with us. Thank you so much for your time today. (Stephen C Meyer) Thanks for inviting me, Peter.  No, it's great to have you. And people can find you on Twitter @StephenCMayer. It's on the screen there. And also discovery.org, the Discovery Institute. And you obviously received your PhD in philosophy of sciences from England, from University of Cambridge, your a former geophysicist, college professor, and you now are the director of Discovery Institute, author of many books. The latest is Return of the God Hypothesis, Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe, and the links for those books will be in the description. But, Dr. Meyer, if I can maybe, I think I remember as a child, church loyalty, being at church and getting a stamp for attending. I remember asking for a book on creationism then, and we may touch on different creationism, intelligent design. I mean, it was 10 or 11. And I remember being fascinated by this whole topic of how God can be seen in the world around us. Maybe I can ask you about your journey. What has been your journey to being one of the, I guess, main proponents on intelligent design? Well, I've always been interested in questions at the intersection between science and philosophy or science and  larger worldview questions or science and religion the questions that are addressed about, you know, how do we get here and what is, is there a particular significance to human life, what is the meaning of life, in the early part of my scientific career I was working as a geophysicist as you mentioned the introduction and in the city where I was working, a conference came to town that was investigating that intersection of science and philosophy, science and belief, and it was addressing three big questions, and they were the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the origin and nature of human consciousness. And the conference was unique in that it had invited leading scientists and philosophers representing both theism, broadly speaking, belief in God, and scientists and philosophers who rejected theism and who affirmed the more common view among leading scientists at that time, which was materialism or sometimes called naturalism. We have the New Atheist Movement with their scientific atheists and people of more of that persuasion. So it was, let's look at the origin of the universe from the standpoint. What do the data say, what do you theists say about it, what do you non-theist materialists say about it, and it was a fascinating conference and I was particularly taken by the panels on the origin of the universe and the origin of life because surprisingly to me it seemed that the theists had the intellectual initiative that the the evidence in those about the origin of the universe, and then about the complexity of the cell and therefore the challenges it posed to standard chemical evolutionary theories of the origin of life that in both these two areas, both these two subjects, it seemed that there were powerful, theistic friendly arguments being developed, in one case about the, what you might call, a reviving of the ancient cosmological argument because of the evidence that scientists had discovered about the universe having a beginning. And in the other case, what we now call the theory of intelligent design, that there was evidence of design in the cell, in particular, in the digital code that is stored in the DNA molecule, the information and information processing system of the cell. And was it that time? And still to this day is something that undirected theories of chemical evolution have not been able to explain. And instead, what we know from our experience is that information is a mind product, which is a point that some of these scientists made at this panel, that when we see digital code or alphabetic text or computer code, and many people have likened the information and DNA to a computer code, we always find a mind behind that. So this was the first time I was exposed to that way of thinking. I got fascinated with that. A year later, after the conference, I ended up meeting one of the scientists on the Origin of Life panel, a man named Charles Thackston, who had just written a book with two other co-authors called The Mystery of Life's Origin. He was detailing in that book, he and his colleagues were detailing sort of chapter and verse the problems with trying to explain the origin of the first cell from simpler chemicals in some alleged or presupposed prebiotic soup. And the three authors showed that this was implausible in the extreme, given what we know scientifically about how chemistry works versus how cells work. And over the ensuing year, he kind of mentored me and I got fascinated with the subject and ended up getting a fellowship. A Rotary Fellowship to study at Cambridge for a year and then ended up extending on. I did my master's thesis and then my PhD thesis both on origin of life biology within the History and Philosophy of Science Department at Cambridge. And while I was there, I started to meet other scientists and scholars who were having doubts about standard Darwinian and chemical evolutionary theories of life's origin. And by the early 90s, a number of us had met each other and connected and had some private conferences. And out of that was born a formal program investigating the evidence for intelligent design in biology, in physics, in cosmology, and in 96, we started a program at Discovery Institute. You were very kind to me to call me the director of the whole institute. I direct a program within the institute called the Center for Science and Culture, which is the institutional home. A network of scientists who are investigating whether or not there is, empirical scientific evidence for a designing mind behind life in the cosmos and and the program just continues to grow, the network especially continues to grow, we've got fantastic scientists from all around the world now who are sympathetic to that position and I would mention too that it's a position that's kind of reviving an ancient view going back to certainly the time of the scientific revolution. In particular, we've discovered back to the scientific revolution in Cambridge where I had been fortunate enough to study. There's a, in the college that I was part of, St. Catherine's, there was back in the 17th century, one of the founders of modern botany, who was also one of the first authors of what's called British National Theology. His name was John Ray. Ray was the tutor of Isaac Barrow, a mathematician who in turn tutored Newton and so this whole tradition of seeing the fingerprints of a creator in the natural world is something that was launched in Britain, particularly in Cambridge there were other figures like Robert Boyle who were in other places but the Cambridge tradition of natural theology was very strong from that time period in the 17th century, late 17th century, right up to figures like James Clerk Maxwell, the great physicist in the late 19th century who was critical, sceptical of Darwinism and articulated the idea of design. And I think that's now being revived within contemporary science. There's a growing minority of scientists who see evidence of design in nature.  Now, the understanding of intelligent designer, that's a new thinking, but through the millennia, that's been the norm. Individuals have viewed the world through the lens that there is a God, and that has helped them understand and see the world. But there must have been a point, I guess, when intellectuals decided that scientific knowledge conflicts with that that traditional belief, that traditional theistic belief. Yeah, that's a great way of framing the discussion, Peter. There's a historian of science in Britain named Steve Fuller, who's at Warwick. And he's argued that the idea of intelligent design has been the framework out of which science has been done since the period of the scientific revolution at least and that the the post Darwinian deviation from that, denying that there's actual design and only instead as the Darwinian biologists say the appearance or illusion of design, you may remember from Richard Dawkins's famous book the blind watchmaker, page one he says biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose. And of course, for Dawkins and his followers, and for Darwinians from the late 19th century forward, the appearance of design is an illusion. And it was thought to be an illusion because Darwin had formulated an undirected, or had identified an undirected, unguided process, which he called natural selection that could mimic the powers of a designing intelligence, or so he argued, without itself being designed or guided in any way. And that's kind of where we've engaged the argument. Is that appearance of design that nearly all biologists recognize merely an appearance, or is it the product of an actual guiding intelligence? And that's why we call our theory intelligent design. We're not challenging the idea that there has been change over time, one of the other meanings of evolution we're not challenging even the idea of universal common descent though some of us myself included are quite sceptical of that, the main thing we're challenging with the theory of intelligent design is that is that the appearance of design is essentially an illusion because an unguided undirected mechanism has the capability of generating that appearance without itself being guided or directed in any way and that's, to us the key issue. Is the design real or merely apparent? You may remember that Francis Crick also once said that biologists must constantly keep in mind, that what they see was not designed, but instead evolved. So there's this, the recurrence of that strong intuition among people who have studied biological systems. And I would say, going back all the way to Aristotle, you know, this has been, the Western tradition in biology has been suffused with this recognition. That organisms look designed, they look like they're designed for purpose, they exhibit purpose of behaviour. And now in the age following Watson and Crick, following the molecular biological revolution of the late 50s and 1960s and 70s, we have extraordinarily strong appearances of design. We've got digital code. We have a replication system. We have a translation system as part of this whole information processing system. Scientists can't help but use teleological wording to describe what's going on. We see the purpose of nature, of all of the biological systems and subsystems. And so what we've argued is that, at least at the point of the origin of life, there is no unguided, undirected, or there is no theory that invokes, that has identified an unguided, undirected mechanism that can explain away that appearance of design. Many people don't realize that Darwin did not attempt to explain the origin of the first life. He presupposed the existence of one or a few very simple forms. And so he started it effectively with assuming a simple cell and then said, well, what would have come from that? We now know, however, that the simple cell was not simple at all and displays this many very striking appearances of design that have not been explained by undirected chemical evolutionary processes. Dawkins himself has said that the machine code of the genes is strikingly computer-like. And so you have this striking appearance of design at the very foundation of life that has not in any way been explained by undirected processes. Well, I want to pick up on a number of that, the new discoveries, how things have changed, the complexity. But I can go back, you're challenging, I guess, hundreds of years of new thinking that the complexity of the universe simply points to luck and chance. And I guess there's a statistical side of that, whether that's even possible. We look around and we see things just working perfectly. And I wonder whether it's even possible for a chance element to make all those things come together and make the world as it is. Well, in my book, Signature in the Cell, which was the first of the three books that I've written on these big topics, I look at the argument for the chance origin of life and even more fundamentally, the chance origin of, say, DNA and the protein products that the DNA codes for. And one of the first things to take note of in addressing the chance hypothesis is that no serious origin of life researcher, no origin of life biochemist or biologist today reposes much hope in the chance hypothesis, it's it's really been set aside and the reason for that, I explained the reason for that in in signature in the cell and then do some calculations to kind of back up the thinking that most origin of life biologists have adopted and that is that the cell is simply far too complicated to have arisen by chance. And you can, and the large biomacromolecules, DNA and proteins, are molecules that depend on a property known as sequence specificity, or sometimes called specified complexity. That is to say, they contain informational instructions in essentially a digital or typographic form. So you have in the DNA you have the four character chemical subunits that biologists actually represent with the letters A, T, G, and C. And if you want to build a protein, you have to arrange the A's, C's, G's, and T's or the evolutionary process or somehow the A's, C's, G's, and T's must have been sequenced in the proper way so that when that genetic message is sent to the ribosome, which is the the translation apparatus in the cell, then what comes out of that is a properly sequenced protein molecules. Proteins also are made of subunits called amino acids. There are 20 or so, maybe as many as 22 now, protein-forming amino acids. And to get the protein chain that is built from the DNA instructions to fold into a proper functional conformation or three-dimensional shape, those amino acids have to be arranged in very specific ways. If they're not arranged properly, the long peptide chain, as it's called, will not fold into a stable protein. And so in both cases, you have this property of sequence specificity that the function of the whole, the whole gene in the case of DNA or the whole protein in the case of the the amino acids, the function of the whole depends upon the precise sequencing of the constituent parts. And that's the difficulty, getting those things to line up properly. Turns out there's all kinds of difficulties in trying to form those subunits, those chemical parts, out of any kind of prebiotic chemical environment that we've been able to think of. But the most fundamental problem is the sequencing. And so you can actually run, because there's, if you think of the protein chain, you have 1 in 20 roughly chances of getting the right amino acid at each site. Sometimes it's more or less because in some cases you can have any one of, there is some variability allowed at each site, but you can run numbers on all this and get very precise numbers on the probability of generating even a single functional protein in the known history of the universe. And it turns out that what are called the combinatorials or the probabilities associated with combinatorials, the probabilities are so small that they are small even in relation to the total number of possible events that might have occurred from the Big Bang till now. In other words, here's an example I often use to use to illustrate, if you have a thief trying to crack a bike lock. If the thief has enough time, even though the combination is hidden among all the possibilities, and then the probability of getting the combination in one trial is very small, if the thief has enough time and can try and try and try again, he may crack it by sheer chance. But if the lock is, we have a standard four-dial bike lock, but if the thief encounters a 10-dial bike lock, and I've had one rendered by my graphic designer to get the point across, then in a human lifetime, there's not enough opportunities to sample that number of possible combinations. If you've got 10 dials, you've got 10 to the 10 possibilities, or 10, that's 10 billion. And if the thief spins the dial once every 10 seconds for 100 years and does nothing else in his entire life, he'll only sample 3% of those total combinations, which means it's much more likely that the thief will fail than it is that he will succeed by chance alone. And that's the kind of, that's the, so the point is that there are, there are degrees of complexity or improbability that dwarf what we call probabilistic resources, the opportunities. And that's the situation we have when we're talking about the origin of the first biomacromolecules by reference to chance alone. Only it's not just that you would with those events, you know, all the events that have occurred from the beginning of the universe until now could only sample about one, I think I've calculated about one ten trillion trillionth of the total possibilities that correspond to a modest length protein. So it's like the bike thief trying to sample that 10-dial lock, only much, much worse. You know, it turns out that 14 billion years isn't enough time to have a reasonable chance to find informational biomolecules by chance alone. I mean, is the whole scientific argument that removes God, is it just an attempt by science to play God, because whenever we are told that scientific principles break down and no longer exist at the very beginning, for instance, and it doesn't make sense, but we're told that that's just how it happened and you have to accept that. And it seems to be people jumping over themselves with a desperation to try and remove the idea that there is an intelligent designer. Well, I tend to think that the questions of motivation in these debates are kind of a wash. I think as theists, we have to, I'm a theist, okay, I believe in God. In my first two books, I argued for designing intelligence of some kind as being, of some unspecified kind as being the best explanation for the information, for example, in the cell or the information needed to build fundamentally new body plans in the history of life on earth. So, but in my last book, I extend that argument, I bring in evidence from cosmology and physics and suggest that the best explanation for that, the ensemble of evidence that we have about biological and physical and cosmological origins is actually a designing intelligence that has attributes that, for example, Jews and Christians have always described to God, transcendence, as well as intelligence. For example, no being within the cosmos, no space alien, and some scientists have proposed even Crick, Francis Crick in 1981 in a little book called Life Itself floated the idea that yes we do see evidence of design in life. The origin of life is a very hard problem, we can't see how it could possibly have happened on Earth so maybe there was an intelligent life form from space who seeded life here. He was subsequently ridiculed a bit and said, I think he was embarrassed that he'd floated this and said he would not, he foreswore any further speculation on the origin of life problem. It was too difficult, he said. But in any case, back to your question, I think the whole question is. Oh, I was finishing a thought, and that is that the evidence of design that we have from the very beginning of the universe and what's called the fine-tuning of the laws and constants of physics and the initial conditions of the universe, the basic parameters of physics, which were said at the beginning, are exquisitely finely tuned against all odds. And no space alien, no intelligence within the cosmos could be responsible for the evidence of design that we have from the very beginning of the universe because any alleged space alien would itself have had to evolve by some sort of naturalistic processes further down the timeline, once you have stable galaxies and planets and that sort of thing and so no being within the cosmos could be responsible for the conditions that made its future evolution possible nor could a space alien to be responsible for the origin of the universe itself. So when you bring in the cosmological and the physical evidence, I think the only type of designing intelligence that can explain the whole range of evidence we have is one that is transcendent, that is beyond the cosmos, but also active in the creation, because we see evidence of information arising later, and information, as I've mentioned, is a mind product based on our uniform and repeated experience.  But as to the motivation issue, I kind of think it's a wash. I think theists have to acknowledge that all people, including those of us who are theists, have a motivation, maybe a hope that there is a purposeful intelligence behind the cosmos. I think there's a kind of growing angst in young people. Harvard study recently showing that over 50% of young people have doubts about there being any purpose to their existence. And this is contributing to the mental health crisis. And so I think all of us would like, to be possible, for there to be life after death, for there to be an enduring purpose to our lives that does not extinguish when we die or when eventually there's a heat death of the universe. I think theism, belief in God, gives people a sense of purpose in relation, the possibility of a relationship to our creator. That's a positive thing. I think there's also a common human motivation to not want to be accountable to that creator and to have moral, complete moral freedom to decide what we want to do at any given time. And so oftentimes theists or God-believers, religious people will say, well, you just like these materialistic theories of origins because you don't want to be accountable to a higher power. That might be true, But it's equally true that the atheist will often say, well, but you guys just need a cosmic crutch. You need comfort from the idea of a divine being, a loving creator, father, whatever, you know, the divine father figure. And Freud famously critiqued or criticized religious belief in those terms. So I think that those two kind of motivation, arguments about motivation are something of a wash and that what I've tried to do in Return of the God Hypothesis is set all of that aside, look at the evidence that we have, and then evaluate it using some standard methods of scientific reasoning and standard methods of evaluating hypotheses, such as a Bayesian analysis, for example, that come out of logic and philosophy. And set the motivation questions aside. And my conclusion is that the evidence for an intelligent designer of some unspecified kind is extremely strong from biology, and that when you bring in the cosmological and physical evidence, the evidence of fine-tuning and the evidence we have that the material cosmos itself had a beginning, I think materialism fails as an explanation, and you need to invoke an intelligence that is both transcendent and active in the creation to explain the whole range of evidence. Well, let me pick you up on that change, because initially there is a change from someone who believes the evolutionary model, big bang, there is no external force. That step from there to there is an external force, there is intelligent design feeding into the universe we have. And then it's another step to take that to there is an intelligent designer, now there is a personal God. And that step certainly, I assume, is frowned upon in the scientific community. Tell us about you making that step, because it would have been much safer to stay, I guess, in the ID side and not to make the step into who that individual is. Tell us about kind of what prompted you to actually make the step into answering that who question.  Right. Well, I've been thinking about this question for 35, 36, I don't know, since the mid-80s when I was a very young scientist. And it was at the conference that inspired it, because at the conference, there were people already thinking about the God question, especially the cosmologists. At that conference, Alan Sandage announced his conversion from scientific agnosticism he was a scientific materialist to theism and indeed I think he became Christian, and he talked about how the evidence for the singularity at the beginning of the universe, the evidence that the material cosmos itself had a beginning was one of the things that moved him off of that materialistic perspective, that it was clear to him that as he described it, that the evidence we had for a beginning was evidence for what he called a super, with a space in between, natural events, nothing within the cosmos could explain the origin of the cosmos itself, if matter, space, time and energy have a beginning and as best we can tell they do and there are multiple lines of evidence and theoretical considerations that lead to that conclusion and I developed that in return of the god hypothesis, it is the evidence from observational astronomy and also developments in theoretical physics converge on that conclusion. And if that's the case, if matter and energy themselves have a beginning, and indeed if space and time themselves have a beginning, then we can't invoke any materialistic explanation to explain that. Because before there was matter, before the beginning of matter, there was no matter to do the causing. And that's the problem. There must be something. For there to be a causal explanation for the universe, it requires a transcendent something. And when you also consider that we have evidence for design from the very beginning in the fine-tuning of the initial physical parameters of the universe, the initial conditions of the universe, the initial establishment and fine-tuning of the physical laws, then you have evidence for that transcendent something being a transcendent intelligent something. And if something is intelligent, capable of making choices between one outcome or another, that's really what we mean by personhood. I mean, this is very close to a, the idea of a personal gun, now that entity may not want to have anything to do with us, but we're talking about a conscious agent when we talk about evidence for intelligent design, and then we have further evidence I think in biology with the presence of the information and information processing system inside cells. And so when you bring all that together, I think you can start to address the who question. So after I wrote Signature in the Cell and Darwin's Doubt, a lot of my readers were asking, OK, that's great. We have evidence of a designing intelligence, but who would that intelligence have been? Is it a space alien, something imminent within the cosmos, like Crick and others have proposed? Or is it a transcendent intelligence? And what can science tell us about that question? So I thought it's a natural question that flows from my first two books. I would stipulate that the theory of intelligent design, formally as a theory, is a theory of design detection. And it allows us to detect the action of an agent as opposed to undirected material processes. We have this example that we often use. If you look at the faces on the mountains at Mount Rushmore, you right away know that a designing intelligence of some kind was responsible for sculpting those faces. And those faces exhibit two properties which, when found together, invariably and reliably indicate a designing intelligence. And we've described those properties as high probability and what's called a specification, a pattern match. And we have evidence of small probability specifications in life. If something is an informational sequence, it's another way of revealing design, so that we can get into all of that. The point is, we've got evidence of design in life, but, the cosmology and fine-tuning allow us to adjudicate between two different design hypotheses, the imminent intelligence and the transcendent one. And I thought, well, let's take this on. It's a natural, it goes beyond the theory of intelligent design, formally speaking, and it addresses one of the possible implications of the evidence of design that we have in biology, that maybe we're looking at a theistic designer, not a space alien.  I just want to pick one or two things from different books. Signature in the Cells, you have it there behind you. And when you simply begin to look at the complexity of cells. You realize that they are like little mini cities, that actually everything, so much happens within. And I guess we are learning more and more about everything in life. And you talk to doctors and they tell you that they are learning more and more about how the body functions. And there's a lot of the unknown. But when you look at that just complexity of, we call it the simple cell, which isn't really very simple, that new research and that new understanding, surely that should move people to a position that, this is impossible, that this level of complexity simply just happens. So tell us about that, just the cell, which is not simple.  Yeah, that's the sort of ground zero for me in my research and interest in the question was this origin of life problem. That's what I did my PhD on. And I think it's really interesting. We could have debates about the adequacy of Darwinian evolutionary theory. I'm sceptical about what's called macroevolutionary theory. But set that all aside. Darwin presupposed one or a few simple forms. And in the immediate wake of the Darwinian Revolution, people like Huxley and Heckel started to develop theories of the origin of those first simple cells. And they regarded the cell in the late 19th century as a very simple, as Huxley put it, a simple homogenous globule or homogeneous globule of undifferentiated protoplasm. And they viewed the essence of the cell as a simple chemical, it's coming from a simple chemical substance they called protoplasm. And so it kind of, and they viewed it as a kind of jello or goo, which could be produced by a few simple chemical reactions. That viewpoint started to fall by the wayside very, very quickly. By the 1890s, early part of the 20th century, we were learning a lot more about the complexity of metabolism. When you get to the molecular biological revolution in the late 1950s and 1960s, nobody any longer thinks the cell is simple because the most important biomacromolecules are large information-bearing molecules that are part of a larger information processing system. And so this is where I think, and in confronting that. And so any origin of life theory has to explain where that came from. My supervisor used to say that the nature of life and the origin of life topics are connected. We need to know what life is in order to formulate a plausible theory of how it came to be. And now that we know that life is much more complex and that we have an integrated informational complexity that characterizes life, those 19th century theories and the first origin of life theories associated with figures like Alexander Oparin, for example, from the 1920s and 30s. These are not adequate to explain what we see. But what's happened, and this is what I documented in Signature in the Cell, is that none of the subsequent chemical evolutionary theories, whether they're based on chance or based on self-organizational laws or somehow based on somehow combining the two, none of those theories have proven adequate either. This problem of sequence specificity or functional information has defied explanation by reference to theories that start from lower level chemistry. It's proven very, very difficult, implausible in the extreme. Here's the problem. Getting from the chemistry to the code is the problem. And undirected chemical processes do not, when observed, move in a life-friendly, information-generative direction. And this has been the problem. So the impasse in origin of life research, which really began in the late 70s, was documented by this book I mentioned, the mystery of life's origin and books, another book, for example, by Robert Shapiro called, Origins, A Sceptic's Guide. That impasse from the 1980s has continued right to the present. Dawkins was interviewed in a film in 2009 by Ben Stein, the American economist and comic. And very quickly, Stein got Dawkins to acknowledge that nobody knows how we got from from the prebiotic chemistry to the first cell. Well, that's kind of a news headline. We get the impression from textbooks that the evolutionary biologists have this all sewed up. They don't by any means. This is a longstanding conundrum. And it is the integrated complexity and informational properties of the cell that have, I think, most fundamentally defied explanation by these chemical evolutionary theories. And I think that's very significant when you think of the whole kind of evolutionary story. Darwin thought that if you could start with something simple then the mutation selection, oh, he didn't have mutations, but the mutation, sorry, the natural selection variation mechanism, could generate all the complexity of life. You'd go from simple to complex very gradually. Well, if the simplest thing is immensely complex and manifest a kind of complexity that defies any undirected process that we can think of, well, then you don't have a seamless evolutionary story from goo to you. Because I guess when you're Darwin's doubt, the next book you wrote, I guess when Charles Darwin wrote Origin of the Species, he assumed it was settled. But science is never settled. There are always developments. And yet it seems, oh, that's sacrosanct, and that cannot be touched and must be accepted. Yeah, and what I did in the second book was show or argue that the information problem is not something that only resides at the lowest level in the biological hierarchy, at the point of the origin of the first cell, but it also emerges later when we have major innovations in the history of life as documented by the fossil record, events such as the Cambrian explosion or the origin of the mammalian radiation or the angiosperm revolution. There are many events in the history of life where you get this sudden or abrupt appearance in the fossil record of completely new form and structure. And we now know in our information age, as it's come to biology, that if you want to build a new cell, you've got to have new proteins. So you have to to have information to build the first cell. But the same thing turns out to be true at the higher level. If you want to build a completely new body plan, you need new organs and tissues. You need to arrange those organs and tissues in very specific ways. And you need new proteins to service the new cell types that make the organs and tissues possible. So anytime we see the abrupt appearance of new biological form, that implies the origin of a vast amount of new biological information.  And so in Darwin's doubt, I simply asked, well, is there, can the standard mutation natural selection mechanism explain the origin of the kind of information that arises and the amount of information arises? And I argue there that no, it doesn't. That we have, there are many, many kinds of biological phenomena that Darwin's mechanism explains beautifully, the small scale variation adaptation, that sort of thing. So 2016, a major conference at the Royal Society in London. First talk there was by the evolutionary biologist Gerd Müller. The conference was convened by a group of evolutionary biologists who think we need a new theory of evolution. Whereas Darwinism does a nice job of explaining small-scale variation, it does a poor job or a completely inadequate job of explaining large-scale morphological innovation, large-scale changes in form. And Mueller, in his first talk at this 2016 event, outlined what he called the explanatory deficits of Neo-Darwinism, and he made that point very clearly. And so it's, I think it's a new day in evolutionary biology, the word of this is not percolating so well perhaps but that was part of the reasons I wrote Darwin's doubt is that within the biological peer-reviewed biological literature it's well known that the problem of the origin of large-scale form, the origin of new body plans is not well explained by the mutation selection mechanism. At this 16 conference, the conveners included many scientists who were trying to come up with new mechanisms that might explain the problem of morphological innovation. Afterwards, one of the conveners said the conference was characterized by a lack of momentousness. Effectively, the evolutionary biologists proposing new theories of evolution and new evolutionary mechanisms had done a good job characterizing the problems, but had not really come up with anything that solves the fundamental problems that we encounter in biology when we see these large jumps in form and structure arising. And in Darwin's Doubt, I didn't just critique standard neo-Darwinian theories of evolution, but many of these newer theories as well, showing that invariably the problem of the origin of biological information and the form that arises from it is the key unsolved problem in contemporary evolutionary theory.  Mueller and Newman wrote a book with MIT Press called On the Origins of Organismal Form, which was a kind of play on the origin of species. Darwinism does a nice job of explaining speciation, small-scale changes within the limits of the pre-existing genomic endowments of an organism, but it doesn't do a good job of explaining new form that requires new genetic information. And these authors, Newman and Mueller, listed in a table of unsolved problems in evolutionary theory, the problem of the origin of biological form. That's what we thought Darwin explained back in 1859, and instead we realized that the mechanisms that he first envisioned have much more limited creative power and much more limited explanatory scope. So that's what my second book was about, and also I think it's still, this is still very much right at the cutting edge of the discussion in evolutionary biology. We can explain the small scale stuff, but not the big scale stuff. Let's just finish off with actually disseminating the information, because all of this is about taking issues which are complex and actually making it understandable to the wider public. And I guess part of that is, I mean, obviously being on the most popular podcast in the world, Joe Rogan, I was like, oh, there's Steve Meyer and Joe Rogan. And taking that information and that turbocharges that. So maybe just to finish off on the ability to disseminate this, because I think in the US, the ID movement is more understood, where I think maybe in Europe, it's certainly it's more misunderstood and not as accepted where there is an acceptance in the States. But tell us about that and how being on something like podcasts like that turbocharge the message. Yeah, well, I can tell you, you know, now that I'm getting introduced at conferences and things after The Joe Rogan Experience, it's as if I never did anything else in my life. No, that's the only thing people care to mention. I mean, he's got a monster reach. He's extremely, his questions on the interview were very probative. Of course, slightly to moderately sceptical, maybe more, but I thought they were fair. I thought it was a great discussion and it was a lot of fun. And, you know, we've had not only, I think he gets something like 11 million downloads on average for his podcast. We couldn't even believe these numbers when we were told them. But there have been over 25 million derivative videos that social media influencers and podcasters have made about the Rogan interview, analysing different sections of our conversation. So, yeah, that was a huge boost to the dissemination of our message. But one thing I realized in our conversation that there's a simple way to understand the information argument. And that's one of our tools in getting some of these ideas out is distilling some of these things that we've been talking about at a fairly deep level to a more understandable level. So let me just run that argument, that argument sketch or the distillation of the argument by your audience. And then they would talk about some of the things we're doing to get the word out. Our local hero in the Seattle area here is Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft. And he has said, like Dawkins, that the digital code in the DNA, that the DNA is like a software program, but much more complex than any we've ever created. Dawkins, as I mentioned before, says it's like a machine code. It contains machine code. Well, if you think about that, those are very suggestive quotations because what we know from our uniform and repeated experience, which is the basis of all scientific reasoning, is that information always arises from an intelligence source. If you have a section of software, there was a programmer involved. If you have a hieroglyphic inscription, there was an ancient scribe involved. If you have a paragraph in a book, there was a writer involved. As we're effectively broadcasting, we're transmitting information, that information ultimately issues from our mind. So whenever we look at information, an informational text or sequence, and we trace it back to its ultimate source, we always come to a mind rather than a material process. All attempts to explain the origin of life based on undirected material processes have failed because they couldn't explain the information present in DNA, RNA proteins. So the presence of that information at the foundation of life, based on our uniform and repeated experience about what it takes to generate information is therefore best explained by the activity of a designing intelligence. It takes a programmer to make a program, to make a software program. And what we have in life is, from many different standpoints, identical to computer code. It is a section of functional digital information. So that's a kind of more user-friendly sketch of the argument but the point is some of these some of these key ideas that are that make intelligent design so, I think so persuasive at a high scientific level if you actually look at the evidence, can be also explained fairly simply and so we're generating a lot of not just Joe Rogan podcast interviews but coming on many many podcasts and that sort of thing but also we're generating a lot of YouTube video short documentaries that get some of these ideas across and for your viewers, one that I might recommend which is on of any it was out on the internet it's called science uprising and it's a series of 10 short documentary videos, another one that we've done called the information enigma which I think would would help people get into these ideas fairly quickly, the information enigmas I think it's a 20 minute short documentary it's up online and we've had hundreds of thousands of views so we're doing a lot to sort of translate the most rigorous science into accessible ideas and disseminate that in user-friendly ways. The best website for finding a lot of this compiled is actually the website for my most recent book, Return of the God Hypothesis. So the website there is returntothegodhypothesis.com. Okay, well, we will have the link for that in the description.  Dr. Stephen Meyer, I really appreciate you coming along. Thank you so much for coming and sharing your experience and understandings of writing and making that understandable, I think, to the viewers, many of them who may not have come across this before.  So thank you for your time today. I really appreciate you having me on, Peter.

In this episode Neil takes us to Edinburgh, Scotland in the late 1800s to meet a forgotten scientific hero, the physicist, James Clerk Maxwell.To help support this podcast & get exclusive videos every week sign up to Neil Oliver at Patreon.comhttps://www.patreon.com/neiloliver Websitehttps://www.neiloliver.com Shop - check out my shop for t-shirts, mugs & other channel merchandise,https://neil-oliver.creator-spring.com Instagram – series Instagram account is called, ‘NeilOliverLoveLetter'https://www.instagram.com/neiloliverloveletter Neil Oliver History Podcasts,Season 1: Neil Oliver's Love Letter To The British IslesSeason 2: Neil Oliver's Love Letter To The WorldAvailable on all the usual providershttps://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/neil-olivers-love-letter-to-the-british-isles Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

(NOTAS COMPLETAS Y ENLACES DEL CAPÍTULO AQUÍ: https://www.jaimerodriguezdesantiago.com/kaizen/184-la-utilidad-de-lo-inutil/)¿Es o no maravilloso este fragmento de una entrevista al escritor Álvaro Cunqueiro? El saber está comenzando a ser considerado en todas partes, no como un bien en sí mismo, sino como un medio. No nos gusta pensar que alguien esté disfrutando de la vida, sin más, por mucho que sea ese disfrute. Sentimos que todo el  mundo debería estar haciendo algo útil. Y no hay duda de que el conocimiento «útil« es muy útil. Ese conocimiento ha hecho el mundo moderno. Sin él no tendríamos máquinas, ni automóviles, ni trenes, ni aviones. Aunque tampoco publicidad, ni propaganda. Ese conocimiento moderno ha supuesto una mejora increíble en la salud y, a la vez, nos ha enseñado cómo borrar ciudades enteras del mapa con una bomba. Todo lo que distingue a nuestro mundo del de tiempos pasados tiene su origen en el conocimiento «útil». Y aunque seguramente parezca que estoy hablando de nuestros días, esto que te acabo de decir es casi literalmente, lo que decía Bertrand Russell al principio de aquel texto que cita Cunqueiro. Y que fue escrito en 1935. En aquel artículo, Russell defendía el valor del conocimiento que nos parece inútil. Decía que podía llevarnos a una vida más rica y a tener un mayor sentido de propósito; que podía hacer que las cosas desagradables lo fueran un poco menos, y que las agradables lo fueran más. Además de que, ese conocimiento que hoy nos parece inútil, puede ser muy útil mañana. Y es que, en el fondo, de lo que hablaba Russell era de la importancia de la curiosidad intelectual y del placer de aprender por aprender. Y de eso, precisamente, vamos a hablar un poco hoy, sin demasiado rumbo, en otro de esos capítulos de ideas a medio conectar que me salen de vez en cuando, sea o no útil. ¿Te gusta kaizen? Apoya el podcast uniéndote a la Comunidad y accede a contenidos y ventajas exclusivas: https://www.jaimerodriguezdesantiago.com/comunidad-kaizen/

Desde que nació nuestro universo ha seguido un flujo irreversible, con una tendencia natural a desordenarse. Pero el tiempo no es una magnitud absoluta: nuestro paso del tiempo está marcado por la entropía, es decir, recordamos el pasado, pero no recordamos el futuro. Esto es lo que nos plantea Jorge Mira, catedrático de electromagnetismo de la Universidad de Santiago de Compostela en este reportaje para Muy Interesante. El tiempo no es absoluto, la mayor revolución en el concepto físico del tiempo llegó en la transición del siglo xix al xx, como un proceso derivado de la publicación de las leyes fundamentales del electromagnetismo (ecuaciones de Maxwell, concebidas por James Clerk Maxwell {1831-1879}). Escucha el episodio de hoy donde hablamos de cosmología en este interesante reportaje. Utiliza el código CIENCIADIGITAL y obtén tu descuento en Muy Interesante, sigue con este link https://bit.ly/3TYwx9a Déjanos tu comentario en Ivoox o Spotify, o escríbenos a podcast@zinetmedia.es Comparte nuestro podcast en tus redes sociales, puedes realizar una valoración de 5 estrellas en Apple Podcast o Spotify. Texto: Jorge Mira Dirección, locución y producción: Iván Patxi Gómez Gallego Contacto de publicidad en podcast: podcast@zinetmedia.es Ejemplar número 505 de la revista Muy Interesante

Jenny and Annie take listeners on an enlightening journey through Scotland's rich astronomical history and its contemporary role in space exploration. The episode begins with a reflection on the timeless human fascination with the night sky, highlighting how stars have guided people through history. We delve into Scottish contributions to astronomy honouring the people who helped the world to understand the stars. Enter a lot of men named James: James Gregory. James Short and James Clerk Maxwell. We celebrate the life and discoveries of Mary Somerville, a polymath who greatly advanced our understanding of the solar system. Somerville's work in translating complex mathematical theories into accessible language is highlighted, alongside her role in predicting the existence of Neptune and her advocacy for women's suffrage.We also explore Scottish folklore related to the stars, especially that of the Far North of Scotland. We look at how ancient Scots used celestial phenomena to predict weather and navigate the seas. The episode emphasizes the deep-rooted connection between Scottish culture and the night sky.From Spaceports to satellites, what is Scotland's future in the stars?Independently made in the Highlands, Stories of Scotland is gratefully funded through listener support on Patreon. www.patreon.com/storiesofscotland Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Foundations of Amateur Radio If you walk into your radio shack and switch on a light, the result is instantaneous, one moment it's dark, the next it's not. What if I told you that as immediate as it appears, there is actually a small delay between you closing the circuit and the light coming on. Likely the distance between your switch and your light is less than say 10 meters, so the delay is likely to be less than 33 nanoseconds, not something you'd notice unless you're out to measure it. What if your light switch is 3,200 km away? That's the length of the first transatlantic telegraph cable in 1858. Let's start with the notion that between the action of closing a switch, or applying a voltage at one end of the cable and it being seen at the other end takes time. If we ignore the wire for a moment, pretending that both ends are separated by vacuum, then the delay between the two ends is just over 10 milliseconds because that's how long it takes travelling at the speed of light. One of the effects of using a cable is that it slows things down. In case you're curious, the so-called Velocity Factor describes by how much. A common Velocity Factor of 66 would slow this down by 66%. This means that there is a time when there is voltage at one end and no voltage at the other. There are a few other significant and frequency dependent things going on, we'll get to them, but before we go any further, it's important to consider a couple of related issues. Ohm's Law, which describes the relationship between voltage, current and resistance in an electrical circuit was first introduced in 1827 by Georg Ohm in his book: "The Galvanic Chain, Mathematically Worked Out". Initially, his work was not well received and his rival, Professor of Physics Georg Friedrich Pohl went so far as to describe it as "an unmistakable failure", convincing the German Minister for Education that "a physicist who professed such heresies was unworthy to teach science." Although today Ohm's Law is part and parcel of being an amateur, it wasn't until 1841 that the Royal Society in London recognised the significance of his discovery, awarding the Society's oldest and most prestigious award, the Copley Medal, in recognition for "researches into the laws of electric currents". I'll point out that Ohm only received recognition because his work was changing the way people were starting to build electrical engines and word of mouth eventually pressured the Royal Society into the formal recognition he deserved. I also mentioned the speed of light in relation to the delay between applying a voltage and it being seen at the other end, but it wasn't until 1862 when James Clerk Maxwell published a series of papers called "On Physical Lines of Force" that light speed was actually derived when he combined electricity and magnetism and proved that light was an electromagnetic wave, and that there were other "invisible" waves, which Heinrich Rudolph Hertz discovered as radio waves in 1888. How we understand transmission lines today went through a similar discovery process. Your radio is typically connected to an antenna using a length of coaxial cable, which is a description for the shape the cable has, but the nature of the cable, what it does, is what's known as a transmission line. If you looked at the submarine telegraph cable of 1858, you'd recognise it as coaxial cable, but at the time there wasn't much knowledge about conductance, capacitance, resistance and inductance, let alone frequency dependencies. James Clerk Maxwell's equations weren't fully formed until 1865, seven years after the first transatlantic telegraph cable was commissioned and the telegraph equations didn't exist until 1876, 18 years after the first telegram between the UK and the USA. In 1854 physicist William Thomson, was asked for his opinion on some experiments by Michael Faraday who had demonstrated that the construction of the transatlantic telegraph cable would limit the rate or bandwidth at which messages could be sent. Today we know William Thomson as the First Lord Kelvin, yes, the one we named the temperature scale after. Mr. Thomson was a prolific scientist from a very young age. Over a month, using the analogy with the heat transfer theory of Joseph Fourier, Thomson proposed "The Law of Squares", an initial explanation for why signals sent across undersea cables appeared to be smeared across time, also known as dispersion of the signal, to such an extent that dits and dahs started to overlap, requiring the operator to slow down in order for their message to be readable at the other end and as a result, message speed for the first cable was measured in minutes per word, rather than words per minute. Today we know this phenomenon as intersymbol interference. It wasn't until 1876 that Oliver Heaviside discovered how to counter this phenomenon using loading coils based on his description of what we now call the Heaviside condition where you can, at least mathematically, create a telegraph cable without dispersion. It was Heaviside's transmission line model that first demonstrated frequency dependencies and this model can be applied to anything from low frequency power lines, audio frequency telephone lines, and radio frequency transmission lines. Thomson worked out that, against the general consensus of the day, doubling the line would actually quadruple the delay needed. It turns out that the length of the line was so significant that the second cable laid in 1865, 560 km shorter, outperformed the original cable by almost ten times, even though it was almost identical in construction, providing physical proof of Thomson's work. It has been said that the 1858 transatlantic telegraph cable was the scientific equivalent of landing man on the Moon. I'm not sure if that adequately explains just how far into the unknown we jumped. Perhaps if we blindfolded Neil Armstrong whilst he was landing the Eagle... I'm Onno VK6FLAB

中央存款保險公司：https://link.fstry.me/3KeSvSQ —— 以上為播客煮與 Firstory Podcast 自選廣告 —— ------------------------------- 活動資訊 ------------------------------- 「社會人核心英語」有聲書課程連結：https://15minsengcafe.pse.is/554esm ------------------------------- 15Mins.Today 相關連結 ------------------------------- 歡迎針對這一集留言你的想法： 留言連結 官方網站：www.15mins.today 加入Clubhouse直播室：https://15minsengcafe.pse.is/46hm8k 訂閱YouTube頻道：https://15minsengcafe.pse.is/3rhuuy 主題投稿/意見回覆 : ask15mins@gmail.com 商業合作/贊助來信：15minstoday@gmail.com ------------------------------- 以下有參考文字稿～ 各播放器有不同字數限制，完整文稿可到官網搜尋 ------------------------------- 每日英語跟讀 Ep.K612: Library Book Returns Home After 119 Years in Remarkable Condition A remarkable story unfolds as a long-lost book finds its way back to the New Bedford Free Public Library in Massachusetts after an astonishing 119 years. The book in question is "An Elementary Treatise on Electricity" by James Clerk Maxwell, a scientific text that was checked out on February 14, 1904. The incredible journey of this book finally came to light when a librarian at West Virginia University Libraries stumbled upon it during the sorting of a recent book donation. 一個驚奇的故事展開，一本失而復得的書在經過119年後回到了麻薩諸塞州的新伯福免費公共圖書館。這本書是詹姆斯·克拉克·麥克斯韋爾的《電學初論》，是一本科學文獻，於1904年2月14日被借出。這本書的驚人旅程最終在西維吉尼亞大學圖書館的一位圖書館員在最近的一次書籍捐贈整理中被偶然發現。 The curator of rare books, Stewart Plein, immediately recognized the significance of the discovery. Notably, the book had not been stamped "withdrawn," indicating that it had not been discarded despite its overdue status. Realizing that the treatise belonged to the New Bedford library, Plein reached out to Jodi Goodman, the special collections librarian, to share the exciting news. Olivia Melo, the director of the New Bedford Public Library, marveled at the book's pristine condition, suggesting that it had been well-preserved and possibly passed down through generations. 稀有書籍館長斯圖爾特·普林立即意識到這個發現的重要性。值得注意的是，這本書並沒有被蓋上“撤銷”印章，表示儘管超過了歸還期限，但本書並沒有被廢棄。普林意識到這本論文屬於新伯福圖書館後，便與特藏圖書管理員喬迪·古德曼聯絡，分享了這個令人興奮的消息。新伯福公共圖書館館長奧利維亞·梅洛對這本書的完好狀態感到驚嘆，表示它被保存得很好，並且可能是代代相傳。 Although the cranberry-colored copy of Maxwell's treatise is not considered a rare edition, it provides a valuable glimpse into the time when humanity was still exploring the potential of electricity. Published in 1881, just two years after Maxwell's passing in 1879, the treatise captures the curiosity and wonder of an era embracing the possibilities of this emerging force of nature. Melo acknowledged that while the library occasionally receives books overdue by a decade or so, the return of a book after a century or more is a truly exceptional event. 盡管這本麥克斯韋爾論文的紅莓色版本不被認為是稀有版，但它提供了一個寶貴的視角，讓人窺見人類仍在探索電力潛力的時代。該書於1881年出版，僅在麥克斯韋爾於1879年去世後的兩年問世，記錄了一個時代對這種新興自然力量的好奇和驚奇。梅洛相信，雖然圖書館偶爾會收到逾期十年左右的書籍，但一本經過一個世紀以上才歸還的圖書確實是個非常特殊的事件。 The story of the book's return serves as a testament to the enduring value of printed books in an age dominated by digital information. Melo emphasized that printed books possess an irreplaceable quality, providing a tangible connection to the past and ensuring their longevity. Reflecting on the significance of the returned treatise, she expressed appreciation for the printed word's ability to transcend time. In terms of late fees, it was noted that the library's maximum late fee limit is $2, underscoring the symbolic nature of the book's return rather than any financial implications. 這本書回歸的故事證明了在數位資訊主導的時代中，印刷書的恆久價值。梅洛強調印刷書籍具有不可替代的性質，能夠提供與過去的有形連結並保證它們的長久存在。回顧這本回歸論文的重要性，她對印刷文字跨越時間的能力表示讚賞。至於逾期費用，據悉該圖書館的最高滯納金限額為2美元，這也強調了本書回歸的象徵意義，並非關於任何財務影響。 Reference article: https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/library-book-electricity-returned-after-119-years-good-shape

A woman is now behind bars after officers say she was caught with 20 pounds of cocaine Tuesday evening in Fresno County. On Feb. 14, 1904, someone curious about the emerging possibilities of a key force of nature checked out James Clerk Maxwell's “An Elementary Treatise on Electricity” from the New Bedford Free Public Library. It would take 119 years and the sharp eyes of a librarian in West Virginia before the scientific text finally found its way back to the Massachusetts library. Buzzfeed published a list of AI-generated Barbies from 'every country' on July 7. It went viral as Twitter users pointed out racial and cultural stereotypes and inaccuracies. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A woman is now behind bars after officers say she was caught with 20 pounds of cocaine Tuesday evening in Fresno County. On Feb. 14, 1904, someone curious about the emerging possibilities of a key force of nature checked out James Clerk Maxwell's “An Elementary Treatise on Electricity” from the New Bedford Free Public Library. It would take 119 years and the sharp eyes of a librarian in West Virginia before the scientific text finally found its way back to the Massachusetts library. Buzzfeed published a list of AI-generated Barbies from 'every country' on July 7. It went viral as Twitter users pointed out racial and cultural stereotypes and inaccuracies. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Yes, this episode is in English, for change! And with a good reason! Guest is professor John Ellis!During the LHCP (Large Hadron Collider Physics) Conference 2023, which was held in Belgrade few weeks ago, we had an opportunity to talk to professor John Ellis, one of the most prominent particle physicists who is active in the field of theoretical and experimental particle physics at CERN and other prominent research institutions for more then 50 years. Half a century! Professor Ellis is a British theoretical physicist born in 1948 and currently holding the Clerk Maxwell Professorship in Theoretical Physics at the King's College of London, which is the professorship held by James Clerk Maxwell himself in the 19th century. His activities in CERN are wide-ranging. Currently he is chair of the committee to investigate physics opportunities for future proton accelerators, and also a member of the extended CLIC (Compact Linear Collider) Steering Committee. His career goes way back to the beginning of the Standard Model of Elementary Particles, and even now, he is one of the figures which are dealing with all kinds of different topics which are going far beyond the Standard Model.After 2012, when the Higgs particle, Higgs boson, was experimentally confirmed, a lot of new issues and problems occurred, including the detection of dark matter particles, gravitational waves, etc… John is one of the people who work extensively on new solutions, experimental as well as theoretical, to deal with the problems beyond the ruling paradigm, or normal science, in particle physics, in Kuhnian sense, and he is trying to tackle and figure out the direction in which particle physics should go in the near, but also far future – in the next decade, but also in the next few or even several decades. We had a conversation with him about the future of particle physics, crisis in particle physics in a Kuhnian sense, about some new experiments which are ongoing or will be built in the near future at CERN and also Oxford University (project AION), we talked about the dark matter and the connection between particle physics and cosmology, as well as astroparticle physics problems, about the unification of theories and “theory of everything” (a term which, btw, John himself coined) and several more topics from John's rich experience and work. Support the show

Venus has more volcanoes than any other planet in the Solar System - more than 1,600! An extreme greenhouse effect warms the planet's surface up to 870˚F - hot enough to melt lead. Winds there reach the speed of 450 miles per hour in the middle cloud layer -- faster than the speediest tornadoes on our planet. The pressure on Venus's surface is 90 times higher than that at sea level on Earth. And recently, this incredible place has become even more intriguing. In the toxic Venusian atmosphere, there's something that might mean the existence of life! In 2017, a group of scientists from Cardiff University started to use the James Clerk Maxwell radio telescope in Hawaii. The main idea was to search for phosphine gas - it would be a sign of life on Venus. When the data came back, and the researchers analyzed it, they were shocked and even checked the results several times! So if you've always wondered if there's life on other planets, check this out. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Foundations of Amateur Radio A is for Antenna, the eyes and ears of any amateur station. You'll spend eighty percent of your life attempting to get twenty percent improvement for any antenna you'll ever use. B is for Balun, bringing together the balanced and unbalanced parts of your antenna system. C is for Coax, the versatile conductor that snakes into your station, one roll at a time. D is for Dipole, the standard against which all antennas are measured, simple to make, simple to use and often first in the many antenna experiments you'll embark on in your amateur journey. E is for Electron, source of all things RF, the beginning, middle and end of electromagnetism, the reason you are an amateur. F is for Frequency, the higher you go, the faster it happens. G is for Gain, measured against a baseline, you'll throw increasing amounts of effort at getting more, one decibel at a time. H is for Hertz, Heinrich to his mother, the first person to transmit and receive controlled radio waves in November of 1886 proving that James Clerk Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism was correct. I is for Ionosphere, the complex and ever changing layers that surround Earth which led radio amateurs to discover HF propagation in 1923. J is for JOTA, the Jamboree On The Air where radio amateurs, guides and scouts come together on the third full weekend of October to share global communications. K is for Kerchunk, the sound caused by the local repeater that brings a smile to the operator and a grimace to the listener, created by pushing the talk button and not saying anything. L is for Logging, the only way you'll ever remember who you spoke to and when and the perfect excuse for bragging to your friends after you managed to collect contacts all over the globe. M is for Modulation, adding information to a radio signal by varying the amplitude, frequency, or phase. N is for Net, a social excuse for getting on air and making noise with your friends. O is for Oscillator, making repeating currents or voltages by non-mechanical means. P is for Prefix, the beginning part of an amateur callsign that identifies your country or region of origin. Q is for QRP, the best way to make just enough noise to make yourself heard, low power is the way to go! R is for Resonance, the point where a circuit responds strongly to a particular frequency and less to others, used every time you tune a radio or an antenna or both. S is for Shack, the space you call home, where you live your radio dream. The size of the corner of the kitchen table, the back-seat of your car or a purpose built structure with never enough space, no matter how much you try. T is for Transceiver, a single box that contains both a transmitter and receiver that share a common circuit. U is for UTC, Coordinated Universal Time, the only time zone that radio amateurs should use for any activity that goes beyond their suburb. V is for VFO, the Variable Frequency Oscillator that provides radio amateurs with frequency agility, the means to listen anywhere, any-time. W is for Waterfall, which displays radio signals across multiple frequencies at the same time. X is for XIT, Transmit Incremental Tuning, changing your transmitter frequency whilst listening on the same frequency, helpful when you're trying to break through a DX pile-up. Y is for Yagi, or Yagi-Uda antenna, the most popular directional antenna invented in 1926 by Shintaro Uda at the Tohoku Imperial University in Japan and popularised to the English speaking world by his boss Hidetsugu Yagi. Z is for Zulu, the last word in the phonetic alphabet that every amateur should know and use. 73 is for best regards. Saying goodbye is hard to do, this says so without fanfare and clears your station from the air. I'm Onno VK6FLAB

From the Ministry of Truth punishing citizens for thought crimes to big brother watching your every move via technology, writer George Orwell warned against a totalitarian society that would rule every aspect of the individual's life.  Orwell's novels Animal Farm and 1984 remain literary classics and are just as relevant today as when they were published, in the mid-twentieth century.  Are you interested in learning about Ayn Rand's Objectivism? Check out our FREE ebook:

OUTLINE of today's show with TIMECODES Speaker fight is another sign we're in a Fourth Turning characterized by fights over failed institutions2:07 Fox News is getting angrier and angrier — Insurrectionists!9:19Kevin McCarthy's long history with the World Economic Forum.11:40UN/WEF/WHO/BlackRock — global governance versus global government18:22 Bret Baier attack Chip Roy for not being Trump enough, but Roy lays out what they're fighting for27:09Trump vows to wage war on the drug cartels — OK Boomer. War on Drugs has failed for 51 years (including 4 years under Trump) and the Feds are partners in crime33:45That Trump's interview with Playboy where he said the drug war was an ignominious failure and called for drugs to be legalized41:51 Psychedelic Pharmakeia. Is DMT a gateway to another dimension, another world? The trips are vivid, realistic and share details between users. Medicinal Mindfulness seeks FDA approval for extended state intravenous drip version of DMT that will induce longer trips.48:17 Anthony Hopkins' message about addiction on his 47th anniversary of sobriety55:22 James Clerk Maxwell, one of the greatest physicists of all time, who gave us Maxwell's Equations (relating electricity and magnetism) always saw God as part of the equation59:19 Trump pressured Twitter to censor the account of Paul Sperry, the journalist who first published the name of the so-called impeachment whistleblower.1:11:50 Jan6: BIPARTISAN FRAUD committed against Trump supporters1:17:35 Biometric bum rap. Man wrongly jailed by AI mismatch on facial recognition1:23:11 Biden mumbles another insanity about patches, the world and our jeans1:30:55 A bill has been introduced in Missouri for the 2023 legislative session to make gold and silver legal tender, allow for a state depository for precious metals that can be used to pay via check or card drawn on the metal1:34:36 6G to use the human body as an antenna and as power. Join the Matrix1:44:16 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) resumes this year with cars again taking center stage as big toys1:47:44BMW big innovation? A car that changes color1:54:33Multiple car manufacturers are looking at hydrogen to satisfy "emissions" demands. But they don't realize the issue is centralized control2:00:32If you can't find a way to recharge your car, why would you buy a hydrogen car?2:04:22 Engineers are experimenting with batteries made using wood. Did you know batteries have MASSIVE CARBON input in addition to rare minerals?2:10:35 DC Comics Has Pregnant Joker Giving Birth — No Joke. When the world becomes Arkham Asylum, how do you top that?2:18:09INTERVIEW Author James Bovard, jimbovard.com. The endless expansion of TSA, IRS and other bureaucracies — now with a focus on biometrics2:27:51The Fourth Amendment and the War on Drugs.2:34:57 Biden's bloated IRS will “skewer taxpayers”.2:43:54Why there's no protection against excessive fines when it comes to the bureaucracy.2:47:54 Julian Assange's case.2:55:23Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here:SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation through Mail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silver

OUTLINE of today's show with TIMECODESSpeaker fight is another sign we're in a Fourth Turning characterized by fights over failed institutions2:07 Fox News is getting angrier and angrier — Insurrectionists!9:19Kevin McCarthy's long history with the World Economic Forum.11:40UN/WEF/WHO/BlackRock — global governance versus global government18:22 Bret Baier attack Chip Roy for not being Trump enough, but Roy lays out what they're fighting for27:09Trump vows to wage war on the drug cartels — OK Boomer. War on Drugs has failed for 51 years (including 4 years under Trump) and the Feds are partners in crime33:45That Trump's interview with Playboy where he said the drug war was an ignominious failure and called for drugs to be legalized41:51 Psychedelic Pharmakeia. Is DMT a gateway to another dimension, another world? The trips are vivid, realistic and share details between users. Medicinal Mindfulness seeks FDA approval for extended state intravenous drip version of DMT that will induce longer trips.48:17 Anthony Hopkins' message about addiction on his 47th anniversary of sobriety55:22 James Clerk Maxwell, one of the greatest physicists of all time, who gave us Maxwell's Equations (relating electricity and magnetism) always saw God as part of the equation59:19 Trump pressured Twitter to censor the account of Paul Sperry, the journalist who first published the name of the so-called impeachment whistleblower.1:11:50 Jan6: BIPARTISAN FRAUD committed against Trump supporters1:17:35 Biometric bum rap. Man wrongly jailed by AI mismatch on facial recognition1:23:11 Biden mumbles another insanity about patches, the world and our jeans1:30:55 A bill has been introduced in Missouri for the 2023 legislative session to make gold and silver legal tender, allow for a state depository for precious metals that can be used to pay via check or card drawn on the metal1:34:36 6G to use the human body as an antenna and as power. Join the Matrix1:44:16 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) resumes this year with cars again taking center stage as big toys1:47:44BMW big innovation? A car that changes color1:54:33Multiple car manufacturers are looking at hydrogen to satisfy "emissions" demands. But they don't realize the issue is centralized control2:00:32If you can't find a way to recharge your car, why would you buy a hydrogen car?2:04:22 Engineers are experimenting with batteries made using wood. Did you know batteries have MASSIVE CARBON input in addition to rare minerals?2:10:35 DC Comics Has Pregnant Joker Giving Birth — No Joke. When the world becomes Arkham Asylum, how do you top that?2:18:09INTERVIEW Author James Bovard, jimbovard.com. The endless expansion of TSA, IRS and other bureaucracies — now with a focus on biometrics2:27:51The Fourth Amendment and the War on Drugs.2:34:57 Biden's bloated IRS will “skewer taxpayers”.2:43:54Why there's no protection against excessive fines when it comes to the bureaucracy.2:47:54 Julian Assange's case.2:55:23Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here:SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation through Mail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silver

To be Christian, especially in this confusing cultural moment, requires the intentional cultivation of our minds. An exemplary model of someone who took this calling seriously is James Clerk Maxwell.         For a gift of any amount this month, I'd like to send you a very helpful and concise book, What Does It Mean to Be a Thoughtful Christian? by scholar David Dockery. We've also developed a video series on the Christian mind, with teachers such as Alisa Childers and Dr. Kevin Vanhoozer. To learn more, please visit colsoncenter.org/January. 

Renowned physicist Neil Turok, Holder of the Higgs Chair of Theoretical Physics at the University of Edinburgh, joins me to discuss the state of science and the universe. Neil Turok has been director emeritus of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics since 2019. He specializes in mathematical physics and early-universe physics, including the cosmological constant and a cyclic model for the universe. He has written several books including Endless Universe: Beyond the Big Bang and The Universe Within: From Quantum to Cosmos. Topics Include: Discussion of Niels Books The life and discoveries of James Clerk Maxwell and Michael Faraday What's wrong with physics today? Fundamental laws of the Universe in equations. Existential Questions on the meaning of life, advice to his former self, and things he's changed his mind on.  Make sure to watch the video for Neil's PowerPoint slides here:  Connect with Brian Keating:

Episode: 2269 James David Forbes and the contradiction of fire and ice.  Today, a story of heat and ice.

On today's ID the Future, philosopher William Dembski and host Casey Luskin explore the relationship between science and faith. What is science? What is faith? How does Christianity define faith? Dembski explains that faith in the Judeo-Christian tradition is not the opposite of reason; at the same time, faith possesses a relational component—trust in a just, gracious, and reasonable God—that goes beyond mere assent to propositions. As for science, Dembski describes it as a careful search for truths about the natural world, including truths about key elements such as the birth of our fine-tuned universe and the origin of living things. Dembski says that he is convinced that scientific discoveries, unshackled from atheistic blinders, point strongly to intelligent design as Read More › Source

Episode: 2214 John Edward Routh: Statics then and now.  Today, two textbooks.

Context is king: whether in language, ecology, culture, history, economics, or chemistry. One of the core teachings of complexity science is that nothing exists in isolation — especially when it comes to systems in which learning, memory, or emergent behaviors play a part. Even though this (paradoxically) limits the universality of scientific claims, it also lets us draw analogies between the context-dependency of one phenomenon and others: how protein folding shapes HIV evolution is meaningfully like the way that growing up in a specific neighborhood shapes educational and economic opportunity; the paths through a space of all possible four-letter words are constrained in ways very similar to how interactions between microbes impact gut health; how we make sense both depends on how we've learned and places bounds on what we're capable of seeing.Welcome to COMPLEXITY, the official podcast of the Santa Fe Institute. I'm your host, Michael Garfield, and every other week we'll bring you with us for far-ranging conversations with our worldwide network of rigorous researchers developing new frameworks to explain the deepest mysteries of the universe.This week on Complexity, we talk to Yale evolutionary biologist C. Brandon Ogbunu (Twitter, Google Scholar, GitHub) about the importance of environment to the activity and outcomes of complex systems — the value of surprise, the constraints of history, the virtue and challenge of great communication, and much more. Our conversation touches on everything from using word games to teach core concepts in evolutionary theory, to the ways that protein quality control co-determines the ability of pathogens to evade eradication, to the relationship between human artists, algorithms, and regulation in the 21st Century. Brandon works not just in multiple scientific domains but as the author of a number of high-profile blogs exploring the intersection of science and culture — and his boundaryless fluency shines through in a discussion that will not be contained, about some of the biggest questions and discoveries of our time.If you value our research and communication efforts, please subscribe to Complexity Podcast wherever you prefer to listen, rate and review us at Apple Podcasts, and/or consider making a donation at santafe.edu/give. You'll find plenty of other ways to engage with us at santafe.edu/engage.Thank you for listening!Join our Facebook discussion group to meet like minds and talk about each episode.Podcast theme music by Mitch Mignano.Follow us on social media:Twitter • YouTube • Facebook • Instagram • LinkedInDiscussed in this episode:“I do my science biographically…I find a personal connection to the essence of the question.”– C. Brandon Ogbunugafor on RadioLab"Environment x everything interactions: From evolution to epidemics and beyond"Brandon's February 2022 SFI Seminar (YouTube Video + Live Twitter Coverage)“A Reflection on 50 Years of John Maynard Smith's ‘Protein Space'”C. Brandon Ogbunugafor in GENETICS“Collective Computing: Learning from Nature”David Krakauer presenting at the Foresight Institute in 2021 (with reference to Rubik's Cube research)“Optimal Policies Tend to Seek Power”Alexander Matt Turner, Logan Smith, Rohin Shah, Andrew Critch, Prasad Tadepalli in arXiv“A New Take on John Maynard Smith's Concept of Protein Space for Understanding Molecular Evolution”C. Brandon Ogbunugafor, Daniel Hartl in PLOS Computational Biology“The 300 Most Common Words”by Bruce Sterling“The Host Cell's Endoplasmic Reticulum Proteostasis Network Profoundly Shapes the Protein Sequence Space Accessible to HIV Envelope”Jimin Yoon, Emmanuel E. Nekongo, Jessica E. Patrick, Angela M. Phillips, Anna I. Ponomarenko, Samuel J. Hendel, Vincent L. Butty, C. Brandon Ogbunugafor, Yu-Shan Lin, Matthew D. Shoulders in bioRxiv“Competition along trajectories governs adaptation rates towards antimicrobial resistance”C. Brandon Ogbunugafor, Margaret J. Eppstein in Nature Ecology & Evolution“Scientists Need to Admit What They Got Wrong About COVID”C. Brandon Ogbunugafor in WIRED“Deconstructing higher-order interactions in the microbiota: A theoretical examination”Yitbarek Senay, Guittar John, Sarah A. Knutie, C. Brandon Ogbunugafor in bioRxiv“What Makes an Artist in the Age of Algorithms?”C. Brandon Ogbunugafor in WIREDNot mentioned in this episode but still worth exploring:“Part of what I was getting after with Blackness had to do with authoring ideas that are edgy or potentially threatening. That as a scientist, you can generate ideas in the name of research, in the name of breaking new ground, that may stigmatize you. That may kick you out of the club, so to speak, because you're not necessarily following the herd.”– Physicist Stephon Alexander in an interview with Brandon at Andscape“How Afrofuturism Can Help The World Mend”C. Brandon Ogbunugafor in WIRED“The COVID-19 pandemic amplified long-standing racial disparities in the United States criminal justice system”Brennan Klein, C. Brandon Ogbunugafor, Benjamin J. Schafer, Zarana Bhadricha, Preeti Kori, Jim Sheldon, Nitish Kaza, Emily A. Wang, Tina Eliassi-Rad, Samuel V. Scarpino, Elizabeth Hinton in medRxivAlso mentioned:Simon Conway Morris, Geoffrey West, Samuel Scarpino, Rick & Morty, Stuart Kauffman, Frank Salisbury, Stephen Jay Gould, Frances Arnold, John Vervaeke, Andreas Wagner, Jennifer Dunne, James Evans, Carl Bergstrom, Jevin West, Henry Gee, Eugene Shakhnovich, Rafael Guerrero, Gregory Bateson, Simon DeDeo, James Clerk Maxwell, Melanie Moses, Kathy Powers, Sara Walker, Michael Lachmann, and many others...

In this episode Neil takes us to meet a great mind; a scientist whose work laid some of the foundations that have helped shape the world we live in. James Clerk Maxwell grew up surround by the soft rounded hills, lochs and handsome woodland in Dumfries and Galloway. From his country upbringing and a slow start at school he went on to dazzle on the scientific stage.Einstein and the scientists that followed all pay tribute to the great beauty of Maxwell's mathematics, his theorems, and the ground-breaking work he did showing that electricity, light and magnetism were all covered by the same fundamental and natural laws. Without him the world wouldn't be as it is today. To help support the making of this podcast sign up to Neil Oliver on Patreon.comhttps://www.patreon.com/neiloliverNew Videos Every Week Neil Oliver YouTube Channelhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnVR-SdKxQeTvXtUSPFCL7g Instagram account – Neil Oliver Love Letter https://www.instagram.com/neiloliverloveletter/?hl=en See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

உலகை மாற்றிய விஞ்ஞானிகள் Presented by Abdul Credits, ஆசிரியர்: திரு. ஆயிஷா இரா. நடராசன் அவர்கள் வெளியீடு: பாரதி புத்தகாலயம்

Magnetic fields have mysterious effects that can be dramatically counterintuitive, and they are ubiquitous throughout the Universe and can have influence on large scales. This lecture will explore how some of the exotic and energetic phenomena in the Universe can only be explained in terms of these magnetic fields that pervade space.A lecture by Katherine Blundell OBEThe transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/magnetic-universeGresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website. There are currently over 2,000 lectures free to access or download from the website.Website: http://www.gresham.ac.ukTwitter: http://twitter.com/GreshamCollegeFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/greshamcollegeInstagram: http://www.instagram.com/greshamcollege

Wanna know about nanotech's applications in the future CleanTech and HealthTech? The idea of a minute device intervening at the level of atomic scale was conceived a hundred years earlier by James Clerk Maxwell when he conceived his ‘demon' for selectively allowing molecules to pass through a door, thereby entangling physics with information (Theory of Heat, 1871).

In this podcast, Kris Vallotton sits down for a conversation with Ryan Collins, CEO of Bethel School of Technology, and discusses what the Lord is doing in the technology space and how spiritual intelligence is influencing science in the modern day. In this episode of Cultural Catalysts, Ryan shared how the Lord told him, “I am redeeming the tech space so that all would taste my goodness.” Have you ever considered the amount of faith it took to advance the most transformative inventions in the world today? Consider sitting with the discovery that light is an electromagnetic wave, knowing you would have to convince people that something completely invisible to the human eye was powerful enough to cause light to shine! This brilliant finding catapulted modern science and has been the foundation of inventions such as the light bulb, wifi, and radar. In a sphere of humanistic values and atheistic beliefs, the scientist James Clerk Maxwell ventured into uncharted territories believing that the seen world was made from the unseen and thus discovered electromagnetic waves (Hebrews 11:3). Ryan Collins, “So, how did humanity get to the point that we could operate in an unseen realm if we didn't know that it first existed? Unless, of course, a precedent was set in modern science in which humans thought and functioned in a hidden realm to pull unseen ideas and solutions into our natural world. Our modern world was built on the shoulders of Maxwell's spiritual intelligence.” Connect with Kris Vallotton: Website: https://www.krisvallotton.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kvministries/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kvministries/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/kvministries Additional Resources by Kris Vallotton: https://shop.bethel.com/collections/k...

Graham Farmelo is an award-winning biographer and science writer. Based in London, he is a Fellow at Churchill College, Cambridge and a regular visitor at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton. He was a lecturer in physics at the Open University, 1977-1990. Briefly the youngest tenured academic in the UK. Quickly specialized as a teacher, chaired the team that produced the Science Foundation Course in the late 1980s and conceived its inter-disciplinary science course ‘Science Matters'. Farmelo is author of 'The Universe Speaks in Numbers', published in May 2019. It explores the relationship between mathematics and the search for the laws of physics, and highlights the contributions of several theoretical physicists, natural philosophers and mathematicians, notably Isaac Newton, Pierre-Simon Laplace, James Clerk Maxwell, Albert Einstein and Paul Dirac. Farmelo's Dirac biography ‘The Strangest Man' won the 2009 Costa Prize for Biography[1] and the 2009 'Los Angeles Times Science and Technology Book Prize'.[2] The book was chosen by Physics World as the physics book of the year in 2009,[3] when it was selected as one of Nature's books of the year. Farmelo's 2013 book 'Churchill's Bomb' focuses on Winston Churchill's role in British nuclear research 1939-53, with hitherto unpublished information on its influence by Churchill's science adviser Frederick Lindemann. The book emphasizes conflicts between scientific opportunity and political direction. Farmelo is critical of Churchill's wavering attention and changes of policy as he aged. https://grahamfarmelo.com/ 00:00:00 Intro 00:02:12 Do we need a theory of everything? 00:04:33 Fundamental Physics is a small part of the whole field. 00:06:55 What is the mathematical language of the Universe? Intergers? Rationale numbers? Other? 00:10:10 We're at an odd time in physics! The standard model works better than expected! 00:16:21 Never say never! What is untestable today may be testable tomorrow. 00:17:04 Bridging Maxwell, Yang-Mills and Chern-Simons and the view of Ed Witten 00:24:19 Is there a role for "beauty" in physics and math? 00:26:50 What rubric could be used to grade candidates for theories of everything? 00:32:22 How to break the standard model. 00:38:41 Is string theory already falsified? What can it tell us now? 00:47:57 How do you engage young people to get inspired in physics today? Where should our resources go? 00:52:51 What mysteries are you currently most engaged with? What did Freeman Dyson mean to you? 00:58:14 Discussing Nima Arkani-Hamed. 01:04:00 What do you think about the work of Gerard 't Hooft?  http://briankeating.com/mailing_list.php 

Michael Faraday (1791-1867) fue un científico inglés autodidacta, de talante cálido, que adoraba divulgar la ciencia a todos los públicos. Especialmente les hablaba a los niños, a quienes encantaba con sus disertaciones sobre la vela, los imanes y las líneas de fuerza. Faraday, un gran ser humano de ciencia para quien la pobreza fue la inspiración para hacer grandes realizaciones a partir de ideas sencillas. Descubrió el Principio de Generación de Energía Eléctrica generando un movimiento relativo entre un imán y una bobina de cobre. Faraday, con su imaginación, transformaba un pedazo de tela raída en alfombra voladora. Créditos: En la locución: Orlando Cajamarca Castro. Director del Teatro Esquina Latina de Cali. Grabación - Juan Manuel Calderón Se agradece a Orlando Cajamarca Castro, director del Teatro Esquina Latina de Cali, la lectura crítica y locución de este relato y al técnico de grabación. Se agradece a Beatriz Londoño, Margarita Granada, Juan Carlos Granada y Gecko Gómez la lectura crítica de este relato. Dirección: Ana Cecilia Agudelo Henao Producción sonora: Gecko Gómez Cubides Diagramación: Sebastián Narváez Díaz Investigación y Presentación: Ana Cecilia Agudelo Henao Literatura consultada: Física. Feynman, Volumen II, Electromagnetismo y materia. Addison-Wesley iberoamericana. Capítulo 16, en pág. 16-14 se cuenta la respuesta de Faraday a quien preguntó: para qué servía su descubrimiento. BIOGRAFÍA DE LA FÍSICA, GEORGE GAMOW. BIBLIOTECA GENERAL SALVAT A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, James Clerk Maxwell, 1873 La otra cultura. Ernst Peter Fischer. Editorial Galaxia Gutenberg, primera edición 2003

Xin chào tất cả các bạn thính giả thân mến, rất vui khi chúng ta lại được đồng hành cùng nhau trong những phút sắp tới của chương trình Ngày này năm ấy, số ra thứ 6 ngày 05/11 ----------------- Ngày 6/11, Bộ Giao thông Vận tải sẽ bàn giao dự án đường sắt đô thị Cát Linh - Hà Đông cho TP Hà Nội để đưa vào khai thác ----------------- Danh ngôn cuộc sống: “Bạn chớ để cuộc sống trôi qua kẽ tay vì bạn cứ đắm mình trong quá khứ hoặc ảo tưởng về tương lai.” --------------- Sự kiện ngày 05/11: 1, Nhà toán học, vật lý học James Clerk Maxwell 2, Ca sĩ Kevin Jonas -------------- Giọng đọc: Phạm Kỳ, Hoàng Ngân, Quốc Đạt ★ Mọi thông tin xin liên hệ: ngaynaynamay1501@gmail.com

Skotlantilainen fyysikko James Clerk Maxwell julkaisi Maxwellin yhtälöt 1860-luvulla. Maxwell ei tehnyt kokeita vaan käytti hyväkseen aiempia teorioita ja havaintoja. Hän yhdisti sähkön ja magnetismin ja oivalsi, että valokin kuuluu tähän samaan ilmiömaailmaan. Myöhemmin lennätinalalla työskennellyt Oliver Heaviside yksinkertaisti ja muokkasi yhtälöt nykyiseen muotoon neljäksi yhtälöksi. Maxwellin yhtälöillä on valtava merkitys ihmiskunnalle. Niiden avulla hallitaan sähkömagneettista aaltoliikettä kuten esimerkiksi radioaaltoja, joita käytetään tiedonsiirtoon paikasta toiseen. Matkapuhelinten, radion, tv:n, internetin ja satelliittien toiminta perustuvat Maxwellin yhtälöihin. Albert Einstein käytti Maxwellin yhtälöitä kehittäessään suppeaa suhteellisuusteoriaa ja eri fyysikot muokatessaan hiukkasfysiikan standardimallia, teoriaa, joka kuvaa maailmankaikkeuden hiukkasia ja voimia. Maxwellin yhtälöistä ja James Clerk Maxwellista on haastateltavana Helsingin yliopiston emeritusprofessori, kosmologi Kari Enqvist. Toimittajana on Sisko Loikkanen.

Light & Shadows  A Way Of Life © 2021  VOL. ISBN 978-976-96768-4-8.mp3Because of the copious historical events and facts highlighted it appears that within the precincts of time light is infinite and ethereal.  Moreover, between the periods 1672 Isaac Newton advanced corpuscular theory, 1678, Christiaan HuygensFRS advanced wave theory, 1865, James Clerk Maxwell  advanced electromagnetic wave theory and 1900 Max Planck  advanced quantum theory. Now that I have establish context concerning this conversation as it relates to above explicitly suggest that within the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries it appears that the way of life exhibited by Newton, Huygens Maxwell and Planck seems to suggest that that this nuance activated their intellectual passions and imaginations simultaneously igniting them to the extent that they were inspired to investigate Light. It is also purported by Niranjan that Newton, Huygens Maxwell and Planck theories are some of the most important theories on light. Such reasoning also corroborates why light is not only present in painting and or photography but also deployed as a tool in science. Given the specificity and logistics of light I have accepted the theory that from ancient Greece to the present day, scientists have been studying light to try to penetrate the mysteries of its composition and how to measure it.  WORKS CITEDbyjus.com/physics/wave-theory-of-lightConceptualizing Light- Light and Shadow in Renaissance and Baroque Art. [Urvi Shah, UG-2, Roll No.:41] – Introduction to the Renaissance (wordpress.com)contrastly.com/working-with-shadows-in-your-photography/digital-photography-school.com/shadows-in-photography/digital-photography-school.com/the-importance-of-shadoen.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clerk_Maxwellexpertphotography.com/backlighting-photography/Gittens, William  Anderson  Author, Cinematographer Dip.Com., Arts. B.A. Media Arts Specialists' License Cultural  Practitioner, Publisher, Podcaster, CEO Devgro Media Arts Services®2015,Editor in Chief of Devgro Media Arts Services Publishing®2015Gregory Hallock Smith (2006), Camera lenses: from box camera to digital, SPIE Press, p. 4, ISBN 9780819460936 https: www.photoworkout.com/artificial-light-in-photography/ps://www.imagemaven.com/https: https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/lightandcolor/particleorwave.html //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_there_be_lighthttps://academy.wedio.com/https://courses.lumenlearning.com › chapter › the-nature-https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Lighthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_lighthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_(surname)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B8mer%27s_determination_of_the_speed_of_lighthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow#Cultural_aspectshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow#Photographyhttps://global.canon › technology › s_labo › lighthttps://lco.global › spacebook › light › light-particlehttps://lessknownfacts.com/https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu › primer › particleorwavehttps://onewayeventproductions.com/https://photographylife.com/what-is-diffraction-in-photograhttps://photonterrace.net/en/photon/historyhttps://physics.info › lighthttps://physicsabout.com › lighthttps://quizlet.com › science-chapter-10-and-15-test-quizl.https://shuttermuse.com/glossary/polarized-lighthttps://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lighthttps://socratic.org › https://tardigrade.in › questionhttps://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference...https://www.delmarfans.com/https://www.diyphotography.net/how-to-createhttps://www.format.com/magazine/resources/photography/lighting-in-photographyhttps://www.Support the show (http://www.buzzsprout.com/429292)

The Association of Old Crows (AOC) wants to make our podcasts the best they can be. To help us succeed, we'd like to hear your thoughts. Please take just a few minutes to complete our 2022 listener survey, because your opinion is very important to us. Thank you!Electromagnetic energy is a fundamental part of our universe. Humans discovered ways to use this energy for many purposes. From radio to TV, smartphones to Wifi. But electromagnetic energy also influenced another major sector: military operations. Along came the Crows, people who learned electromagnetic energy, applied it to military combat operations, and forever impacted modern warfare. Today, we begin the story of how the greatest scientific minds came to understand this natural phenomenon, how it changed the way we think, live and communicate, and how now electromagnetic spectrum operations, or EMSO, have influenced every major military campaign over the past 100 years.This episode takes you to the scientific roots of EMSO. We hear insights from Mr. Charles “Chuck” Quintero from the Johns Hopkins University of Applied Physics Laboratory, who discusses the evolution of natural philosophy from Sir Isaac Newton to James Clerk Maxwell to Heinrich Hertz. He tells the stories behind the great minds of scientists, physicists, and mathematicians and how they contributed to Maxwell's theories on electromagnetism and the impact it later had on the world of EMSO.To learn more about today's topics or to stay updated on EMSO and EW developments, visit our homepage.The AOC thanks BAE SYSTEMS for sponsoring this episode.

Undoubtedly one of the very greatest physicists – Einstein had his portrait on the wall to inspire him. His studies laid the basis for the Theory of Relativity and modern physics. Maxwell openly declared his Christian beliefs and throughout his life combined his commitment to his faith with the very highest levels of science.

Portraits of two scientists who changed our view of the world - Rosalind Franklin whose photograph illustrated the double helix structure of DNA, and James Clerk Maxwell, who was up there with Newton and Einstein. He pioneered our understanding of the kinetic nature of gases, studied the rings of Saturn and described the importance of electromagnetism.

En aquest capítol et parlem de quins invents s'amaguen al darrere d'aquests noms: John Boyd Dunlop, Sir James Dewar, James Clerk Maxwell, James Goodfellow, Alan MacMasters, William Cullen, Graham Bell. Tots ells tenen en comú haver nascut a Escòcia.Imatge destacada: Alexas_Fotos/ PixabayWeb on trobaràs els àudios de tots els capítols: https://www.spreaker.com/show/nessieFeed per subscriure's al podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/show/4537106/episodes/feedPer contactar amb nosaltres:email · buscantennessie@gmail.comWeb: https://buscantennessie.wordpress.comYouTube: http://bit.ly/YTNessieFacebook: http://facebook.com/buscantennessieTwitter: http://twitter.com/buscantennessieInstagram: http://instagram.com/buscantennessieSintonia del podcast:Forget By Fire: A Celtic Battle Theme, de MoustroAltres músiques:Folk Round, de Kevin MacLeodThatched Villagers, de Kevin MacLeodFiddles McGinty, de Kevin MacLeodLlicències Creative Commons

Science may be known for banishing the demons of superstition from the modern world. Yet just as the demon-haunted world was being exorcized by the enlightening power of reason, a new kind of demon mischievously materialized in the scientific imagination itself. Scientists began to employ hypothetical beings to perform certain roles in thought experiments—experiments that can only be done in the imagination—and these impish assistants helped scientists achieve major breakthroughs that pushed forward the frontiers of science and technology. Spanning four centuries of discovery—from René Descartes, whose demon could hijack sensorial reality, to James Clerk Maxwell, whose molecular-sized demon deftly broke the second law of thermodynamics, to Darwin, Einstein, Feynman, and beyond—Jimena Canales tells a shadow history of science and the demons that bedevil it.  In Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science (Princeton UP, 2020), she reveals how the greatest scientific thinkers used demons to explore problems, test the limits of what is possible, and better understand nature. Their imaginary familiars helped unlock the secrets of entropy, heredity, relativity, quantum mechanics, and other scientific wonders—and continue to inspire breakthroughs in the realms of computer science, artificial intelligence, and economics today. The world may no longer be haunted as it once was, but the demons of the scientific imagination are alive and well, continuing to play a vital role in scientists' efforts to explore the unknown and make the impossible real. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Science may be known for banishing the demons of superstition from the modern world. Yet just as the demon-haunted world was being exorcized by the enlightening power of reason, a new kind of demon mischievously materialized in the scientific imagination itself. Scientists began to employ hypothetical beings to perform certain roles in thought experiments—experiments that can only be done in the imagination—and these impish assistants helped scientists achieve major breakthroughs that pushed forward the frontiers of science and technology. Spanning four centuries of discovery—from René Descartes, whose demon could hijack sensorial reality, to James Clerk Maxwell, whose molecular-sized demon deftly broke the second law of thermodynamics, to Darwin, Einstein, Feynman, and beyond—Jimena Canales tells a shadow history of science and the demons that bedevil it.  In Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science (Princeton UP, 2020), she reveals how the greatest scientific thinkers used demons to explore problems, test the limits of what is possible, and better understand nature. Their imaginary familiars helped unlock the secrets of entropy, heredity, relativity, quantum mechanics, and other scientific wonders—and continue to inspire breakthroughs in the realms of computer science, artificial intelligence, and economics today. The world may no longer be haunted as it once was, but the demons of the scientific imagination are alive and well, continuing to play a vital role in scientists' efforts to explore the unknown and make the impossible real. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, I talk about new info on galaxy formation, James Clerk Maxwell, and the upcoming SpaceX mission!

En 1865 el escocés James Clerk Maxwell publicó un artículo bajo el título "Una teoría dinámica del Campo Electromagnético", donde presentó una teoría completa sobre los fenómenos electromagnéticos. Allí aparecieron por primera vez sus famosas ecuaciones, originalmente 20, aunque posteriormente Heaviside las redujo a 4, que eran capaces de explicar todos los fenómenos electromagnéticos. Este gran avance supuso la aportación más importante de la física desde los trabajos de Newton y entre sus consecuencias se encuentra la revolución de las comunicaciones y supusieron la base a las grandes Teorías de la física del S-XX. Hablamos de todo ello con Alberto Aparici, David Ibáñez y Vicent Picó. Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals