[Spoilers] Season 12 Discussion Thread

[Itwasdestined]

From Vulture
Should The Big Bang Theory’s Sheldon and Amy Win a Nobel? 7 Physics Laureates Weigh In
The Big Bang Theory, a sitcom about smart people not being able to eat food correctly, will conclude next month after a tremendously successful 12-season run. But if you’ve only tuned in to the final season on a casual basis, you might not even realize it was ending, as the show has generally eschewed big narrative wrap-ups, minus one development: The married theorist team of Sheldon (Jim Parsons) and Amy (Mayim Bialik) are in contention to win a Nobel Prize in physics for their discoveries within super asymmetry. However, a couple of experimental scientist punks (played by Sean Astin and Kal Penn) are trying to claim the Nobel as their own for accidentally proving the concept, and since at present only three people can receive a Nobel for a discovery, only one of the pairs will be able to call themselves winners.
Since Vulture is a pop-culture website and not, uh, a string-theory website, we have absolutely no place offering expertise about which duo should be the rightful recipient of the prize. So we did the only reasonable thing we could think of: Reach out to a bunch of actual Nobel physics laureates and ask for their very legit, very respected, very intelligent opinions on the subject. Knowing our inquiry was all in good fun, seven laureates were nice enough to weigh in on television’s hottest STEM showdown. Here’s what they had to say when it came down to a theorists vs. scientists debate, with some interviews condensed for clarity.

Interesting read. Also interesting that these real physics laureates seem more able to ignore the science reality of super asymmetry more than forum members in discussing this. There was no 100% consensus but quite a few seemed to skew toward the experimentalist over the theorist which adds fire to Shamy missing out. (Also could be why the writers kept Leonard away from experimenting with the theory. Couldn’t let him in on potential success!). Seems these laureates are following the story quite closely.

On a side note, the bit that annoys me most in this story outside all the “its dominating the season, too much Shamy, bad science, blah bkah” complaining is this whole sudden transformation of Amy Farrah Fowler into a world renowned physicist after 7 years of focusing on her celebrated expertise in neurobiology.

Considering this early interaction between neurobiologist Amy and theoretical physicist Sheldon way back in season 4 Zazzy it has never passed the smell test for me this season

“Sheldon: I brought Amy here to show her some of the work I’m doing.

Amy: It’s very impressive, for theoretical work.

Sheldon: Do I detect a hint of condescension?

Amy: I’m sorry, was I being too subtle? I meant compared to the real-world applications of neurobiology, theoretical physics is, what’s the word I’m looking for? Hmm, cute.

Leonard and Howard together: Oooh!

Sheldon: Are you suggesting the work of a neurobiologist like Babinski could ever rise to the significance of a physicist like Clarke-Maxwell or Dirac?

Amy: I’m stating it outright. Babinski eats Dirac for breakfast and defecates Clarke-Maxwell.

Sheldon: You take that back.

Amy: Absolutely not. My colleagues and I are mapping the neurological substrates that subserve global information processing, which is required for all cognitive reasoning, including scientific inquiry, making my research ipso facto prior in the ordo cognoscendi. That means it’s better than his research, and by extension, of course, yours.

Leonard: I’m sorry, I’m-I’m still trying to work on the defecating Clark Maxwell, so…

Sheldon: Excuse me, but a grand unified theory, insofar as it explains everything, will ipso facto explain neurobiology.

Amy: Yes, but if I’m successful, I will be able to map and reproduce your thought processes in deriving a grand unified theory, and therefore, subsume your conclusions under my paradigm.

Sheldon: That’s the rankest psychologism, and was conclusively revealed as hogwash by Gottlob Frege in the 1890s!

Amy: We appear to have reached an impasse.

Sheldon: I agree. I move our relationship terminate immediately.

Amy: Seconded.”




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chucky]

Just now, Itwasdestined said:

Interesting read. Also interesting that these real physics laureates seem more able to ignore the science reality of super asymmetry more than forum members in discussing this. There was no 100% consensus but quite a few seemed to skew toward the experimentalist over the theorist which adds fire to Shamy missing out. (Also could be why the writers kept Leonard away from experimenting with the theory. Couldn’t let him in on potential success!). Seems these laureates are following the story quite closely.

On a side note, the bit that annoys me most in this story outside all the “its dominating the season, too much Shamy, bad science, blah bkah” complaining is this whole sudden transformation of Amy Farrah Fowler into a world renowned physicist after 7 years of focusing on her celebrated expertise in neurobiology.

Considering this early interaction between neurobiologist Amy and theoretical physicist Sheldon way back in season 4 Zazzy it has never passed the smell test for me this season

“Sheldon: I brought Amy here to show her some of the work I’m doing.

Amy: It’s very impressive, for theoretical work.

Sheldon: Do I detect a hint of condescension?

Amy: I’m sorry, was I being too subtle? I meant compared to the real-world applications of neurobiology, theoretical physics is, what’s the word I’m looking for? Hmm, cute.

Leonard and Howard together: Oooh!

Sheldon: Are you suggesting the work of a neurobiologist like Babinski could ever rise to the significance of a physicist like Clarke-Maxwell or Dirac?

Amy: I’m stating it outright. Babinski eats Dirac for breakfast and defecates Clarke-Maxwell.

Sheldon: You take that back.

Amy: Absolutely not. My colleagues and I are mapping the neurological substrates that subserve global information processing, which is required for all cognitive reasoning, including scientific inquiry, making my research ipso facto prior in the ordo cognoscendi. That means it’s better than his research, and by extension, of course, yours.

Leonard: I’m sorry, I’m-I’m still trying to work on the defecating Clark Maxwell, so…

Sheldon: Excuse me, but a grand unified theory, insofar as it explains everything, will ipso facto explain neurobiology.

Amy: Yes, but if I’m successful, I will be able to map and reproduce your thought processes in deriving a grand unified theory, and therefore, subsume your conclusions under my paradigm.

Sheldon: That’s the rankest psychologism, and was conclusively revealed as hogwash by Gottlob Frege in the 1890s!

Amy: We appear to have reached an impasse.

Sheldon: I agree. I move our relationship terminate immediately.

Amy: Seconded.”




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Loved it!

[joyceraye]

15 minutes ago, vonmar said:

There is going to be an audience on the 30th.  They are pre-taping it in case the cast has trouble making it through the taping without breaking.

I'm hoping they get some usable material at the last taping.

Yes there's going to be an audience for the showing of the pre-taping so they can record the laughter. I hope there is laughter and not crying.

[vonmar]

Just now, joyceraye said:

Yes there's going to be an audience for the showing of the pre-taping so they can record the laughter. I hope there is laughter and not crying.

If I understand correctly they are going to handle the final tape night like any other taping, they just want the pre-tape as back up.

[Kev0821]

28 minutes ago, joyceraye said:

We don't even know the title for number 22.

While we have to wait for the official press release, the reported title is "The Maternal Conclusion."

[joyceraye]

8 minutes ago, vonmar said:

If I understand correctly they are going to handle the final tape night like any other taping, they just want the pre-tape as back up.

Wow ! So they're going to do a live taping after all ? Great ! 

[vonmar]

2 minutes ago, joyceraye said:

Wow ! So they're going to do a live taping after all ? Great ! 

That was my understanding, 

[joyceraye]

4 minutes ago, Kev0821 said:

While we have to wait for the official press release, the reported title is "The Maternal Conclusion."

Thanks !! A useful one for speculation until we hear more.

Is someone's mother dying, making up her mind about something, or is someone concluding she should become a mother ? Is Denise getting on with repopulating the Earth ? Or is there a combination of all those ? Will Beverly and Mary make friends ? Will Amy's mother be annoying ? I do hope there's someone who can tell us, even after all this time. I fear the chances are low, judged by the difficulties ticket holders seem to have had getting in 

[chucky]

23 minutes ago, joyceraye said:

Yes there's going to be an audience for the showing of the pre-taping so they can record the laughter. I hope there is laughter and not crying.

Yeah, the cast may not be the only ones crying!

2 minutes ago, joyceraye said:

Is someone's mother dying, making up her mind about something, or is someone concluding she should become a mother ? Is Denise getting on with repopulating the Earth ? Or is there a combination of all those ? Will Beverly and Mary make friends ? Will Amy's mother be annoying ? I do hope there's someone who can tell us, even after all this time.

All very good questions needed answered!

[Sah]

3 hours ago, joyceraye said:

We've had no spoilers from the last one, which tells me we've stopped getting them. We don't even know the title for number 22. They're not letting anybody in but VIPs by the sound of things and there's no audience for the making of the last one which is going to be all pre-taped.

I agree. I think mostly VIP from here on...last one is pre taped and performed in front of live audience per usual on that Tuesday. Prob all VIPs, cast/crew member families and the like. 

Edited April 17, 2019 by Sah

[chucky]

Good Morning folks. It's such a beautiful Wednesday morning!

[Die Zimtzicke]

13 hours ago, vonmar said:

Should The Big Bang Theory’s Sheldon and Amy Win a Nobel? 7 Physics Laureates Weigh In

I thought this was a really great article, with a lot of good information from them. Best one from Vulture in a long time, in my personal opinion.,

12 hours ago, Itwasdestined said:

Interesting read. Also interesting that these real physics laureates seem more able to ignore the science reality of super asymmetry more than forum members in discussing this. There was no 100% consensus but quite a few seemed to skew toward the experimentalist over the theorist which adds fire to Shamy missing out. (Also could be why the writers kept Leonard away from experimenting with the theory. Couldn’t let him in on potential success!). Seems these laureates are following the story quite closely.

YES! Great point.

[chucky]

For me personally, I don't think any of them deserve to get a Nobel Prize. That's just my own opinion. Everyone has their own opinion which is the way it should be. 

[luminous]

From usatoday.com

'The Big Bang Theory': Behind-the-scenes secrets about that Shamy kiss and Howard's mom

Quote

During a recent set visit, the seven stars of TV's top-rated comedy – Johnny Galecki, Jim Parsons, Kaley Cuoco, Kunal Nayyar, Simon Helberg, Mayim Bialik and Melissa Rauch – shared revealing anecdotes about the CBS sitcom, just weeks away from its May 16 series finale.

full article

[bfm]

15 hours ago, Itwasdestined said:

Interesting read. Also interesting that these real physics laureates seem more able to ignore the science reality of super asymmetry more than forum members in discussing this. There was no 100% consensus but quite a few seemed to skew toward the experimentalist over the theorist which adds fire to Shamy missing out. (Also could be why the writers kept Leonard away from experimenting with the theory. Couldn’t let him in on potential success!). Seems these laureates are following the story quite closely.

Some points to consider, though:

1. They all answered to the question of which pair should be getting a Nobel, theorists or experimentalists who found evidence that supports the theory. I'm pretty sure this is about how the question was posed. I highly doubt the interviewer asked about the idea itself. Some of them may not even know that much about the idea, just what the interviewer presented. They're just answering a general hypothetical question. Only one of them said something about the idea and he seemed a bit "diplomatic", saying it is a plot vehicle. 

2. Only the ones who agreed to answer and whose answers fitted this nice little piece were included. We don't know if anyone or anything said was exclued.

3. I don't see a reason for a Nobel laureate to go against TBBT. Not sure I would've done it if I were one of them, maybe I'd say some side note which would probably be edited out.

[Chrismo]

3 hours ago, Die Zimtzicke said:

I thought this was a really great article, with a lot of good information from them. Best one from Vulture in a long time, in my personal opinion.,

 

A little better than the article about how the cast doesn’t fake eat very well

1 hour ago, chucky said:

For me personally, I don't think any of them deserve to get a Nobel Prize. That's just my own opinion. Everyone has their own opinion which is the way it should be. 

What I believe was done wrong was the storyline should of involved Sheldon and Leonard not Sheldon and Amy. It seems to be there would of been a lot of less complaining.

[hokie3457]

33 minutes ago, Chrismo said:

What I believe was done wrong was the storyline should of involved Sheldon and Leonard not Sheldon and Amy. It seems to be there would of been a lot of less complaining.

The thing is, it is a plot device to show S & A working together.  To have this amazing theory have its creation at their wedding.  To show S's growth into a more rounded person.  To show that S can be selfless and put another's interest (A's) ahead of his own. And finally, to give S what he longs for most the Nobel Prize, that he can share with A....(my opinion anyway). 

[veejay]

29 minutes ago, hokie3457 said:

The thing is, it is a plot device to show S & A working together.  To have this amazing theory have its creation at their wedding.  To show S's growth into a more rounded person.  To show that S can be selfless and put another's interest (A's) ahead of his own. And finally, to give S what he longs for most the Nobel Prize, that he can share with A....(my opinion anyway). 

He laughs best who laughs last. 🙂

[chucky]

1 hour ago, hokie3457 said:

The thing is, it is a plot device to show S & A working together.  To have this amazing theory have its creation at their wedding.  To show S's growth into a more rounded person.  To show that S can be selfless and put another's interest (A's) ahead of his own. And finally, to give S what he longs for most the Nobel Prize, that he can share with A....(my opinion anyway). 

Too much Sheldon! Sheldon may have changed for Amy, but not for the rest of the gang!

[Sah]

6 hours ago, Die Zimtzicke said:

I thought this was a really great article, with a lot of good information from them. Best one from Vulture in a long time, in my personal opinion.,

YES! Great point.

I agree with you 💯

[Sah]

2 hours ago, hokie3457 said:

The thing is, it is a plot device to show S & A working together.  To have this amazing theory have its creation at their wedding.  To show S's growth into a more rounded person.  To show that S can be selfless and put another's interest (A's) ahead of his own. And finally, to give S what he longs for most the Nobel Prize, that he can share with A....(my opinion anyway). 

Great plot device I think 😃

 

[Tensor]

 

3 hours ago, hokie3457 said:

The thing is, it is a plot device to show S & A working together.  To have this amazing theory have its creation at their wedding.  

It’s a bullshit plot device.  A Neurobiologists, with no formal training in string theory, possibly the most math intense theory in Physics,  would be incapable of any contribution, on the spur of the moment.  The math used for string theory, has won two people the Fields Medal and is used mostly, in theoretical investigations in Math.  Not something a neurobiologist would be able to look at and understand at first glance. 

 

[hokie3457]

6 minutes ago, Tensor said:

 

It’s a bullshit plot device.  A Neurobiologists, with no formal training in string theory, possibly the most math intense theory in Physics,  would be incapable of any contribution, on the spur of the moment.  The math used for string theory, has won two people the Fields Medal and is used mostly, in theoretical investigations in Math.  Not something a neurobiologist would be able to look at and understand at first glance. 

 

An extremely unfortunate choice at the very end to go down this road.....All in the name of Sheldon advancement.

[vonmar]

Kripke one last time...

 

[chucky]

1 minute ago, vonmar said:

Kripke one last time...

 

So long Kripke!  😢