Eruptions' 1,000th Post!
Well, I find this a little hard to believe, but this is the 1,000th post on Eruptions. Since May 2008, over Wordpress, Scienceblogs and Big Think, I've now written more posts than I care to admit. Along the way, a community was built around this blog - the real testament for Eruptions - and it has become a part of my (almost) daily routine. Thanks to all of you for reading and double thanks for everyone who has commented on the blog, emailed me any tips and made this the interactive experience that it is. I don't see Eruptions ending at any point in the near future, so here's to the next power of 10 (although it might be a while before we get there)!
So, I ask you - what has been your favorite moment on Eruptions over the last 103 posts? It doesn't necessarily have to be a specific eruption, but something that really hooked you onto the blog or just stands out in your memory. If you feel like strolling down memory lane, check out the Eruptions archives.
Research in plant neurobiology shows that plants have senses, intelligence and emotions.
- The field of plant neurobiology studies the complex behavior of plants.
- Plants were found to have 15-20 senses, including many like humans.
- Some argue that plants may have awareness and intelligence, while detractors persist.
Most people think human extinction would be bad. These people aren't philosophers.
- A new opinion piece in The New York Times argues that humanity is so horrible to other forms of life that our extinction wouldn't be all that bad, morally speaking.
- The author, Dr. Todd May, is a philosopher who is known for advising the writers of The Good Place.
- The idea of human extinction is a big one, with lots of disagreement on its moral value.
Since the idea of locality is dead, space itself may not be an aloof vacuum: Something welds things together, even at great distances.
- Realists believe that there is an exactly understandable way the world is — one that describes processes independent of our intervention. Anti-realists, however, believe realism is too ambitious — too hard. They believe we pragmatically describe our interactions with nature — not truths that are independent of us.
- In nature, properties of Particle B may depend on what we choose to measure or manipulate with Particle A, even at great distances.
- In quantum mechanics, there is no explanation for this. "It just comes out that way," says Smolin. Realists struggle with this because it would imply certain things can travel faster than light, which still seems improbable.