From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!stanford.edu!CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU!CSD-NewsHost!jmc Sun Dec  1 13:06:14 EST 1991
Article 1708 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca rec.arts.books:10821 sci.philosophy.tech:1198 comp.ai.philosophy:1708
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!stanford.edu!CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU!CSD-NewsHost!jmc
>From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: The Philosophical Foibles of John McCarthy
Message-ID: <JMC.91Nov27213412@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 28 Nov 91 03:34:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: SAIL.JMC.91Nov27213412
References: <1991Nov25.164015.13499@leland.Stanford.EDU>
	<1991Nov28.035030.9746@uniwa.uwa.oz.au>
Sender: news@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 13
In-Reply-To: infidel@maths.uwa.oz.au's message of 28 Nov 91 03:50:30 GMT

I have not worked on turbulence, have only a Scientific American level
knowledge of it and mentioned it only because Lighthill was a
hydrodynamicist.  A lot has been done with turbulence since 1974.

I don't fault the BBC for cutting that exchange, because I doubt that
they understood that Lighthill had taken an exotic position in his own
field.  Even if one of the editors had understood it, they wouldn't
have thought that very much of the TV audience would get the point.

--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.


