“Just as beauty shines in the world, we can recognize the brilliance of...” — Dejan Stojanovic Quote

“Just as beauty shines in the world, we can recognize the brilliance of the esthetics of science and philosophy in the most significant scientific achievements.”

“SPACE IN THE UNIVERSE”

“Hope without love is hopeless.”

“There can be no time before the Big Bang, but time and space are logical consequences of our Universe appearing after the Big Bang (or a different event) or any other universe.”

“Zero is the enslaved time, enslaved past, and future in the present of Zero. Zero is the end of recording: the time that contains all time and an absolute multitude within itself. Time, an eternity, is smaller than a moment, than a second, than a fraction of a second; it is not measurable. Time does not exist. Eternity does not have measure; its only measure is Zero, into which it goes to sleep. That is why an instant is longer than an eternity: an instant has a duration.”

“It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.”

“Frequentemente me perguntam: "Você acredita que existe inteligência exraterrestre?" Respondo com os argumentos padrões - há muitos lugares no espaço, as moléculas da vida estão por toda parte, emprego a palavra bilhões, e assim por diante. Depois digo que ficaria espantado senão houvesse inteligência extraterrestre, mas que ainda não há absolutamente nenhuma evidência convincente de que ela existe.”

“We are built to be effective animals, not happy ones.”

“Unfortunately, I didn't change the world today, but I did try to pass the torch.”

“In the statistical gargon used in psychology, p refers to the probability that the difference you see between two groups (of introverts and extroverts, say, or males and females) could have occurred by chance. As a general rule, psychologists report a difference between two groups as 'significant' if the probability that it could have occurred by chance is 1 in 20, or less. The possibility of getting significant results by chance is a problem in any area of research, but it's particularly acute for sex differences research. Supppose, for example, you're a neuroscientist interested in what parts of the brain are involved in mind reading. You get fifteen participants into a scanner and ask them to guess the emotion of people in photographs. Since you have both males and females in your group, you rin a quick check to ensure that the two groups' brains respond in the same way. They do. What do you do next? Most likely, you publish your results without mentioning gender at all in your report (except to note the number of male and female participants). What you don't do is publish your findings with the title "No Sex Differences in Neural Circuitry Involved in Understanding Others' Minds." This is perfectly reasonable. After all, you weren't looking for gender difference and there were only small numbers of each sex in your study. But remember that even if males and females, overall, respond the same way on a task, five percent of studies investigating this question will throw up a "significant" difference between the sexes by chance. As Hines has explained, sex is "easily assessed, routinely evaluated, and not always reported. Because it is more interesting to find a difference than to find no difference, the 19 failures to observe a difference between men and women go unreported, whereas the 1 in 20 finding of a difference is likely to be published." This contributes to the so-called file-drawer phenomenon, whereby studies that do find sex differences get published, but those that don't languish unpublished and unseen in a researcher's file drawer.”