TED Community » pierre vanderpol

More About Me

I'm passionate about

design, music (Glenn Gould), bouddhism, humanism, quatum theory, stephen Hawking, Karl Sagan, Arthur C.Clark

Talk to me about

You or your ideas

My TED Story

Introduced by a friend in year 2008, I am a TED lover :))
I support Matthieu Ricard association http://karuna-shechen.org/
and like his TEd Talk on the habit of happiness.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +0.20 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A comment on Conversation: why our universe has laws of physics?

  Jul 15 2011: Hello! "assuming that The death is the finish of life." Reversed argument. Your assume THERE is something after life. Prove it. No one ever measured dead people coming back to life in modern times. Dead people live in imagination and photo-albums.
  Then: Where is heaven? telescopes do not show a place with dead people in the sky having a good time. You ASSUME heaven exists. Prove it. S.Hawking: "there is no heaven". "THE END OF TIMES". You assume it. In the "self-reproducting inflationary universe" by Dr. Andrei Linde,(google the pdf, page 102) "the universe is IMMORTAL". If this is right, you wait in vain. "BEGINNING OF OUR UNIVERSE": Again, you assume. Andrei Linde´theory makes "the existence of an INITIAL big bang IRRELEVANT". See P.104: "all parts of the universe were created simultaneously in an initial big bang singularity. The necessity of this ASSUMPTION, however, is NO LONGER OBVIOUS". "We ASSUME the universe was created at the same moment". "HARMONY ": Again, you ASSUME. Linde´theory: "each domain has DIFFERENT LAWS OF PHYSICS"."According to that scenario, we find ourselves inside a domain with our kind of physical laws, not because domains with alternative properties are impossible but because our kind of life cannot exist in other domains": Domains with different laws of physics ? WHAT HARMONY IS THAT? Religion will always fail in front of science because science is self-correcting in time (based on observation). And proving the existence of gods is pointless. It has NO INFLUENCE on our experiments, tested with the same outcomes or probability again and again. If god exists it is a passive observer in a universe without beginning, self-reproducing in infinite chaotic variations. It is your personal belief to see a creator out there and I respect it. I do not hold the truth and no one here does. Our universe is much stranger than we think. The only certitude is that we will die. May you all be happy and free from suffering, that´t what matters !
• +2

  A reply on Talk: Greg Stone: Saving the ocean one island at a time

  Mar 6 2011: First, please keep an appropriate language !
  We are tedster and have to respect each other, whatever the topic.
  
  So I flagged you Adrian.
  
  Second, writing a few post to express you opinion i s OK,
  but your strategy to artificially create controversy by spamming the whole discussion to get the whole coverage is not in the spirit of this website.
  
  Discussion is not speech monopoly.
  defending your view in a couple of post is OK, 20 or 30 is not anymore....
  
  It is a very cheap strategy to overflow the forums, search engines, whatever the topic and whatever party you defend, and no matter how right (or wrong) you are.
  
  That sounds so much like a PR campaign and like opinion orientation strategy...
• +3

  A comment on Talk: Brian Cox: Why we need the explorers

  Jun 24 2010: Long live Carl Sagan...