It then has links to a few of her articles, but the ones I sampled were on topics in training and personal development, sprinkled with neuroscience. No QM.
The related skill is communicating science to a broad public in a way the public understands. That’s what she did at Spektrum and what she does in that video. The room in which she’s holding that lecture is a proper university hall at the Technische Universität München.
The lecture doesn’t say something that would damage her reputation among academics.
Your stereotypical patterns don’t work well in her case.
Your stereotypical patterns don’t work well in her case.
I’m not accusing Birkenbihl of peddling woo. The original comment posted by Roho does come from a book of woo, and Roho associated her name with the idea.
As I say, I’m not going to search two hours of video in a language I hardly know to find out what Birkenbihl said on the subject; so I do not know if Roho’s attribution to Birkenbihl is accurate. I can imagine something of the sort being said in a popular exposition of the reception of quantum mechanics. But whether she said anything like it or not, the idea expressed in the quote is a poor one, especially so in the context it was quoted from.
Well, I don’t want to argue about this too much, so just to clarify:
Birkenbihl quoted Bernie Siegel with “If you want to change somebody’s beliefs, he acts like an addict.”, in the context of the famous Max Planck quote that new scientific ideas prevail not because they are accepted, but because those who oppose them die out. In this context, I found the idea interesting, therefore I placed the quote here.
She did not mention that esoteric book. But I searched for the quote in order to provide a source, found it in that book, was mildly amused by it, but thought too little about it.
As it reads in the book, Bernie Siegel sounds somewhat sulky, too, that people do not accept his ideas about medicine. Me, I have no idea what they are. But in this context, the quote is indeed rather unhelpful (to put it politely).
The talk about quantum physics was OK, although nothing to write home about. She happily declares that she knows next to nothing about it, then claims that nobody understands it, which is of course wrong. She did not mention some very important concepts (decoherence, Feynman paths). At least, there was “many worlds” and no “wave function collapse”, which is not so bad for a talk from the 1990s.
The related skill is communicating science to a broad public in a way the public understands. That’s what she did at Spektrum and what she does in that video. The room in which she’s holding that lecture is a proper university hall at the Technische Universität München.
The lecture doesn’t say something that would damage her reputation among academics.
Your stereotypical patterns don’t work well in her case.
I’m not accusing Birkenbihl of peddling woo. The original comment posted by Roho does come from a book of woo, and Roho associated her name with the idea.
As I say, I’m not going to search two hours of video in a language I hardly know to find out what Birkenbihl said on the subject; so I do not know if Roho’s attribution to Birkenbihl is accurate. I can imagine something of the sort being said in a popular exposition of the reception of quantum mechanics. But whether she said anything like it or not, the idea expressed in the quote is a poor one, especially so in the context it was quoted from.
Well, I don’t want to argue about this too much, so just to clarify:
Birkenbihl quoted Bernie Siegel with “If you want to change somebody’s beliefs, he acts like an addict.”, in the context of the famous Max Planck quote that new scientific ideas prevail not because they are accepted, but because those who oppose them die out. In this context, I found the idea interesting, therefore I placed the quote here.
She did not mention that esoteric book. But I searched for the quote in order to provide a source, found it in that book, was mildly amused by it, but thought too little about it.
As it reads in the book, Bernie Siegel sounds somewhat sulky, too, that people do not accept his ideas about medicine. Me, I have no idea what they are. But in this context, the quote is indeed rather unhelpful (to put it politely).
The talk about quantum physics was OK, although nothing to write home about. She happily declares that she knows next to nothing about it, then claims that nobody understands it, which is of course wrong. She did not mention some very important concepts (decoherence, Feynman paths). At least, there was “many worlds” and no “wave function collapse”, which is not so bad for a talk from the 1990s.