Talk:What Is Life?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have seen the suggestion that Schrödinger, had he been more familiar with organic chemistry, probably would have known and used the term "polymer" rather than "aperiodic crystal" in his book. I'll try to find the source of this suggestion. --JWSchmidt 18:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
In the content description, we should probably use the term also used by Schrödinger. But a section on the present perspective on this book is still missing and such a suggestion should be mentioned there. I could try to write such a section, but maybe you have a better overview on this topic. Markus Schmaus 22:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
It is in Chapter 5 of The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology by Horace Freeland Judson. Judson says that Crick was excited by "What is Life?" because it suggested that exciting discoveries could be made in biology. With respect to Schrodinger using the term "aperiodic crystal", Judson quotes Francis Crick, "I don't suppose the man had ever heard of a polymer!" --JWSchmidt 02:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
- It is perhaps worth noting that the term 'aperiodic crystal' resurfaced some 40 years later with the discovery of quasicrystals. According to the current terminology and views, two kinds of crystals exist: the traditional ones which are periodic and some recently discovered ones which are not. The class of aperiodic crystals includes now quasicrystals, composites and incommensurate phases. The mechanism of quasicrystal forming is still discussed and a certain perplexity remains. Some mathematicians insist that the use of the adjective 'aperiodic' here is incorrect and it should be replaced by 'nonperiodic'.
- Obviously Schroedinger's meaning is rather different but as the words are the same, the temptation to find some connection is strong.
195.96.229.104 (talk) 13:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Indian mysticism
Why "indian mysticism", what the hell is that? Why you can't write hinduism or hindu philosophy or much better word. Indians don't know what indian mysticism is, it is something mysterious to them, nobody else knows what that is, why do we use such words. To avoid using word like hinduism, hindu thoughts that are much better defined? Good job, keep it up.
- "Indian" civilization includes "Hinduism" which most educated Indians, especially Hindus, rightly regard as a vast, poorly defined, much misunderstood, and often disputed territory. As such, it is better for non-Hindus and especially non-Indians to say "Indian" rather than "Hindu" - especially in matters of philosophy. Anyway "Indian mysticism" links to the pertinent ideas.Vendrov 08:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- It is absurd to say that what Upanishads teach is mysticism, philosphy is better word for that. You may find it 10 times harder to understand what is the meaning of mysticism. Also, hinduism is neither disputed, nor misunderstood by hindus themselves, you won't find single hindu who will say he is confused as to who he is or what hinduism is. As Voltaire said, using mysticism for hindu philosophy was an attempt by Christian missionaries to dilute the importance or recognition of those philosophical thoughts. While the German philosophers enjoyed and learnt a lot from hindu philosophy, the western media still has Christian biasSkant 21:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC).-skant
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Gibbs Free Energy
why is the article Gibbs Free Energy linked from this one at the top? --Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 10:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)