🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Dec.11.15.24.48.1992.2096@ruhets.rutgers.edu> bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner) writes:
>hall@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Hal F Lillywhite) writes:
>
>>In article <pi*r^2> jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr) writes:
>
>>Right.  And this whole thing started with a report of some English 
>>prof claiming that scientists are not good at literature.  
>
>To be fair the report was of an English prof who asked "are there any
>scientists who write literature"  (maybe it was "novels") which is
>not at all the same thing.

     I'm coming into this discussion a bit late, and don't have the
prior postings available.  But in my own experience, physicist have
a better understanding of literature than people in the humanities 
understand science.  I recently was at a dinner with someone who had 
written a book on Zeno's paradox.  I had to explain to everyone that
an infinite series *can* have a finite answer - to people who were
discussing what infinite meant to different cultures.

     As for scientists who write literature - sure there are scads!

     Loren Eisely:  One of the best writers in English IMO.  Read his
           autobiography, "All the Strange Hours."

     Jacob Bronowski"  "Ascent of Man", some philosophy and a play or
           two I think.

     Timothy Zahn:  Went to write science fiction, so maybe not "real"
           literature.

     Erwin Schroedinger:  Wrote about Life, etc.

     There are a few more SF writers....

               Kieran Mullen