Doesn't really matter. It's a bit like evolution really. You don't need to know the origin of life to know whether or not life evolves.

Y'know, I gets the feelin' that, in the article, when he takes issue with the Big Bang Theory, he's just giving a quick rundown on what he's trying to work out. His equations and all that what-not are probably somewhere else, and are still being worked on by him.

But what does the title say of this thread? So maybe it's the fault of the OP then that this kid is getting negative comments thrown at him for no reasoning of his own. So maybe we should have the original title changed then because it is really misleading.


Exactly. He even said he is still working on his theory and when he is ready he will bring it out. So as you can see he didn't even bring it out and he is still working on it. I see this all the time on the Discovery channel. Scientists or who ever make claims that they are still proving it, but when they talk they talk as if it was true.

First of all, it's pi , not pie.
Being able to memorize digits of pi, perform advanced mathematical calculations does NOT mean that he can express himself or his ideals prescicely.
What good is intelligence if one cannot communicate with the rest of the team members of a project? What sort of working environment will he have? Will he learn self-discipline?
Will he learn to interact socially and professionally?
As for the carbon issue, he assumes all life is universally carbon based. :shrug:

It's hard to argue that he should be treated differently because he is 12 and has a disability with the argument of "how were you like when you were 12" when the next sentence says he is teaching college math.

They should train the [censored] out him; make him into a real-life http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mentat.

Instead of taking part in this beautiful scientific argument, I'm going to make a terrible joke.

10 years later...
Jake's Colleague: Hey Jake, do you have those calculations I asked you to do?
Jake: Yeah, they're right over there next to the time travel calculations.
Jake's Colleague: Thanks- Hey wait, TIME TRAVEL!?
Jake: Oh, that's just something I worked out over the weekend. Wanna go play some Halo?

Most intelligent post in this thread.

LOL, yeah pie, sorry, thanks for the clarification. I am no genius. .

He assumes all life is universally carbon based? Don't alot of people think this? Are you saying not all life is carbon based? I don't know, I can't say what is true, becaue I haven't lernt this. Someone is teaching him this. Is it wrong?

Did a quick search about carbon life, and it seems that all life has to have carbon. If there is no carbon then there is no life. So to say that is wrong seems to be impling theories that have been accepted by the scientifc community, so then he is correct then in that assessemnt of all life having carbon.

Your statement of saying "he assumes all life is universally carbon based" then having the shrug emoicon, suggests you are saying that what he said about carbon life is not true. So can you please prove this statement? This is even worse than saying the big bang was wrong in which his case he didn't say, but you are making a statement for carbon life.

He has many years ahead to develop in other skills, disapproving him at this stage of age is what made medievel and many social problem. Of course if he can overcome such discrimination he will be even better man than anyone of us here.

There are life forms not of carbon based? Praytell could you give an example?

Also, if such life form exist. Is there a theory that tells it could evolve to carbon based life form?

"Life" is, of course, defined as the standards to which we, at least in this galaxy/universe, must live by.

For all we know, there are completely different elements and even states of matter, just to name 2 examples, in other galaxies.

Hopefully you see why astronomy is such a touchy, uncertain field of science.

Honestly, if we all had to prove everything we know, most of us would be stuck in school until we were old and gray. Without seeing his actual calculations and his set of givens it is impossible to 'prove' him wrong. I will say that this reminds me of when a kid calculated that an asteroid would hit the Earth and NASA was like, "Dude, you're wrong" and the kid was.



The ability to quote Pi to 100 digits is memorization. It's like a baby that knows the Presidents. Impressive, but not related to intelligence.

Oh, and not all life has too be carbon based. Carbon is a great building block though, so I'd be surprised if most life isn't.

Anyways, kudos to the kid for thinking about things and not automatically accepting what he's told. Other than that, I don't see much here.

More accurately, life that we know of needs carbon. And we're still http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/02dec_monolake/ things that change how we view the requirements for life.

:huh:

could you...elaborate?

Not to mention its debatable if physics can work differently in different regions of the galaxy/universe. There is some evidence for it, though still debated topic. Universe is a weird place.

My curiosity is mostly from the existence of visible light, which indicates that somewhere atoms or molecules are changing their energy levels with electrons, which, because both lights are similar as to be visible, suggest similar molecules.

And I'm not speaking to argue, if it is different over there it doesn't really change what is here, only how to look at it, but as we (on a whole) progress deeper into particle physics and their structure I am interested what stems the idea.

I'd just like to chime in for a sec, despite not being to knowledgeable on the subject. Your flaw seems to be that you believe humans know absolutely everything about the universe we inhabit. Indeed we know about as much as we can know but we humans need a lesson in humility as an entire race fast I think.

The reason carbon works so well for life is because it is so versatile (4 electrons to bond, generally) and of relatively low energy costs when combining. It is not impossible to form other life, or so I would imagine, just harder.

Interesting stuff from a 12 year old, but I don't buy it. Theories of nucleosynthesis currently explain elemental abundance (including carbon) , and since only a vague idea was detailed in the article, this gets a big whoopie from me. I would have liked to have heard what his professors at IUPUI had to say about it.

However, I'll congratulate the kid for being astute enough to think of such things at such a young age.

I don't know all the science of course, but for someone that age, and with Aspergers he gives a great explanation that I could follow easily. Its seems to be a very good point about the current big bank theory...

...Wow. I can't wait to see what this kid accomplishes in his lifetime.

I wonder when this kid will go from innovative to stingy upholder of the status quo. Will having this head start mean they go through the lifestages of a scientist faster?

And so would anyone else. Without modern society and its structures, many would have difficulty living out their lives.

Autism and Asperger's were brought up because the kid has been diagnosed with Asperger's, which, as I mentioned previously, is an autism spectrum disorder. Essentially it's the "low end" of the autism spectrum, in terms of overall difficulties. However, it is likely that without the help of some well-trained psychologists, the kid would never have broken out of his "shell" as much as he has done thus far. Hopefully he continues to do so.

People with disabilities do need extra protection. For example, the Americans with Disabilities Act covers all sorts of things to level the playing field for individuals with disabilities - both inside and outside the workplace. Ramps for wheelchairs? ADA. Elevators? ADA. Non-visual testing for college? ADA. And that's not even getting into mental disorders and the ADA.

Plus, even calling someone "normal" is entirely culturally subjective. What is considered normal, for example, in the Castro District in California is not going to be considered normal in Birmingham, Alabama.

I get what you are trying to say, but ignoring the issues raised by autism and ADHD and simply calling people "normal" is likely doing them a disservice in the long run.

This. Very much this.

Cynical much?

And if not he'll be writing it.

I'm wondering when he's going to burn out. It's more likely than you think.