Angels and Demons - a thread in the Pop Culture forum

The Nucleus » Nucleus Discussion Forums » Forum » Thread » Post and Replies

Angels and Demons post and replies

Return to the Angels and Demons thread
Login to post to this thread

Anyone read this? - Jan 20, 2005 at 2:09AM
Alysson My chair 196 Posts	So I read the DaVinci Code about a month ago and it was GREAT! So I figured I'd read the "prequeal" Angels and Demons. Anyone read this? Wow, there's a lot of physics in this book. not necessarity accurate, but still an interesting read. Any thoughts? -al Login to reply

Replies to Anyone read this?

Re: Anyone read this? - Jan 20 2005 11:30AM
Admin AAPT 107 Posts	I know it's not physics related, and don't mean this to be a thread-jack, but I heard they have signed on Tom Hanks to play Langdon in the Davinci Code movie.... what the hell are they thinking? I mean, he's not even close to what I had pictured. I was thinking more Clive Owen, or possibly Gabriel Bryne. Dodge this. Login to reply \| Condense

Re: Anyone read this? - Jan 20 2005 11:30AM

Admin
AAPT
107 Posts

I know it's not physics related, and don't mean this to be a thread-jack, but I heard they have signed on Tom Hanks to play Langdon in the Davinci Code movie.... what the hell are they thinking? I mean, he's not even close to what I had pictured. I was thinking more Clive Owen, or possibly Gabriel Bryne.

Dodge this.

Login to reply | Condense

Re: Re: Anyone read this? - Jan 20 2005 9:05PM
Alysson My chair 196 Posts	Ahh, Gabriel Byrne...he's so dreamy. Oh , did i say that outloud. Yeah he'd have been good. i read a comment that sums up my thoughts on Tom Hank's role...."Does he really have to be in EVERY movie?" I started reading the DaVinci Code after I hear about the casting, but my vision of Langdon still doesn't really look like Hanks. -al Login to reply \| Condense

Re: Re: Anyone read this? - Jan 20 2005 9:05PM

Alysson
My chair
196 Posts

Ahh, Gabriel Byrne...he's so dreamy. Oh , did i say that outloud. Yeah he'd have been good. i read a comment that sums up my thoughts on Tom Hank's role...."Does he really have to be in EVERY movie?" I started reading the DaVinci Code after I hear about the casting, but my vision of Langdon still doesn't really look like Hanks.

-al

Login to reply | Condense

new discussion - Jan 27 2005 8:39AM
Alysson My chair 196 Posts	Holy moly that book was great! If you haven't read it yet, i highly recommend it. its basically a science vs religion mystery suspense thriller. i won't give away anything And it gets better. My b/f and I decided our next big trip is going to be to Rome, so we can see all the places. I can't wait to go to the vatican. I guess I could have been one of those original Illuminati in a previous life because I believe in science and religion, not either/or. What's your stance on science and religion? I know not everyone on here is Catholic, but what is your opinion on the topic? (admin: if this is not an appropriate topic, then do your admin thing:) -al Login to reply \| Condense

new discussion - Jan 27 2005 8:39AM

Alysson
My chair
196 Posts

Holy moly that book was great!  If you haven't read it yet, i highly recommend it.  its basically a science vs religion mystery suspense thriller.  i won't give away anything

And it gets better.  My b/f and I decided our next big trip is going to be to Rome, so we can see all the places.  I can't wait to go to the vatican.  I guess I could have been one of those original Illuminati in a previous life because I believe in science and religion, not either/or.

What's your stance on science and religion?  I know not everyone on here is Catholic, but what is your opinion on the topic?

(admin:  if this is not an appropriate topic, then do your admin thing:)

-al

Login to reply | Condense

Re: new discussion - Jan 27 2005 8:42AM
Admin AAPT 107 Posts	Hey Al, I certainly don't have a problem with the discussion, as long as folks don't start cursing at each other or anything - I'd recommend starting a new thread with a different title, though, if you want to get it rolling. Dodge this. Login to reply \| Condense

Re: new discussion - Jan 27 2005 8:42AM

Admin
AAPT
107 Posts

Hey Al,

I certainly don't have a problem with the discussion, as long as folks don't start cursing at each other or anything - I'd recommend starting a new thread with a different title, though, if you want to get it rolling.

Dodge this.

Login to reply | Condense

Re: Re: new discussion - Jan 27 2005 10:35AM
Alysson My chair 196 Posts	ok...starting new thread -al Login to reply \| Condense

Re: Re: new discussion - Jan 27 2005 10:35AM

Alysson
My chair
196 Posts

ok...starting new thread

-al

Login to reply | Condense

Re: Re: Re: new discussion - Feb 01 2005 7:51AM
atomcorrall 23 Posts	The Incas regarded the Sun as their God. A source of all life (energy). Many Gods have been given physical explanations(fire, wind, etc). Our concept of God has evolved and continues to change through time. God in some religions is a mystery beyond the reach of scientific method, however. "Faith" becomes the the basis for belief. Perhaps God (not Jesus or man-made Gods) may one day be understood in a manner analogous to the concept of mathematical limit. A dios Login to reply \| Condense

Re: Re: Re: new discussion - Feb 01 2005 7:51AM

atomcorrall
23 Posts

The Incas regarded the Sun as their God. A source of all life (energy).
Many Gods have been given physical explanations(fire, wind, etc). Our concept of God has evolved and continues to change through time.
God in some religions is a mystery beyond the reach of scientific method, however. "Faith" becomes the the basis for belief.
Perhaps God (not Jesus or man-made Gods) may one day be understood in a manner analogous to the concept of mathematical limit.
A dios

Login to reply | Condense

Re: Re: Re: Re: new discussion - Jan 27 2008 4:30PM
James Kotsybar 11 Posts	I have to agree that God evolves. A deus indeed! Login to reply \| Condense

God's Rays in PT - Feb 02 2005 10:59AM
Gary Society of Physics... 293 Posts	I read them both and have to say that I was disappointed (Sorry to be a wet blanket)...I was especially aghast at the bad physics in Angels and Demons, but even without that problem I had trouble appreciating the books, even though I like to see writers try to mix science and religion, since that's where the really profound questions, and sometimes, answers, are. By the way, there was a very interesting article (God's Rays) in the January Physics Today on this topic by Bryce DeWitt, noted quantum gravity guy, just deceased...you should check it out... NSF Program Director (on assignment from the AIP and the Society of Physics Students to serve as the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program Director at the National Science Foundation) Login to reply \| Condense

God's Rays in PT - Feb 02 2005 10:59AM

Gary
Society of Physics...
293 Posts

I read them both and have to say that I was disappointed (Sorry to be a wet blanket)...I was especially aghast at the bad physics in Angels and Demons, but even without that problem I had trouble appreciating the books, even though I like to see writers try to mix science and religion, since that's where the really profound questions, and sometimes, answers, are. By the way, there was a very interesting article (God's Rays) in the January Physics Today on this topic by Bryce DeWitt, noted quantum gravity guy, just deceased...you should check it out...

NSF Program Director (on assignment from the AIP and the Society of Physics Students to serve as the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program Director at the National Science Foundation)

Login to reply | Condense

Re: God's Rays in PT - Mar 09 2005 8:42PM
atomcorrall 23 Posts	DeWitt's article was very nice. Login to reply \| Condense

Re: God's Rays in PT - Jul 25 2008 1:23PM
Felix Lin 24 Posts	Thanks for the recommendation. I'll keep my eyes open for that. Login to reply \| Condense

Re: Anyone read this? - Jul 25 2008 1:31PM
Felix Lin 24 Posts	I read the whole thing in one sitting a few years back. The problem with the way science is treated in books of this sort is that the details are (perhaps of necessity) glossed over. The result is that the scientific process becomes some sort of "rival priesthood" to religion. I am intensely uncomfortable with that presentation, even though Dan Brown takes pains to stress differences between the two. The way he winds up resolving the plot twist three fourths of the way through also sort of feels like a cheap shot. You can see it coming on a metatextual level, but it still screams "agenda" in a way that something arising more from the story itself would not. It's not a bad read, but I can see why it did not attain the fame that The DaVinci Code did. Post edited July 25, 2008 at 1:33 PM EST. Post edited July 25, 2008 at 1:33 PM EST. Login to reply \| Condense

Re: Anyone read this? - Jul 25 2008 1:31PM

Felix Lin
24 Posts

I read the whole thing in one sitting a few years back. The problem with the way science is treated in books of this sort is that the details are (perhaps of necessity) glossed over. The result is that the scientific process becomes some sort of "rival priesthood" to religion. I am intensely uncomfortable with that presentation, even though Dan Brown takes pains to stress differences between the two.

The way he winds up resolving the plot twist three fourths of the way through also sort of feels like a cheap shot. You can see it coming on a metatextual level, but it still screams "agenda" in a way that something arising more from the story itself would not. It's not a bad read, but I can see why it did not attain the fame that The DaVinci Code did.

Post edited July 25, 2008 at 1:33 PM EST.

Post edited July 25, 2008 at 1:33 PM EST.

Login to reply | Condense