Talk:Michio Kaku/Archive 1

Archive 1

Today's Featured Article

This should be today's featured article! Anyone agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.160.89 (talk) 00:33, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

When I found this article years ago it was in pretty bad shape, full of vandalism and horrible writing. It's been greatly improved and think it should one day be a featured article. I don't edit much at all, but I'm very glad to see how greatly improved this article has become over a good number of years and my compliments to all the good editors who worked on it up to this point. Calicocat (talk)

Co-founder, or not?

Although he claims to be the co-founder of string theory, most historical accounts fail to mention any of his contributions.

OK, let's break this down. Does anyone have links to references detailing:

a) His claims to be the co-founder of string theory? b) discussions of the founders of string theory?

Since it says "most historical accounts", are there examples of accounts which do list him as a founder?

--NightMonkey 09:20, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

He makes the claim in a) on his personal page, already linked to in the article (in the left hand column of his page, when I entered.

Who are you? Please sign your posts, thanks. --NightMonkey 07:42, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

First of all it is not string theory that Kaku cliams to be the co-founder of, it is string field theory. Below are some weblinks that will take you to publications that implicate Kakus contributions to string field theory. I have heard Edward Witten (founder of m-theory - superstrings unified) mention many times of Kakus contributions to string field theory. Some of Kakus papers on string field theory can be found at his website http://www.mkaku.org/ click the articles page link and go all the way to the bottom of the page. Brian 06/04/2005 12:53 PM

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/M/Mi/Michio_Kaku.htm http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/mg18624957.300 http://trillian.com/bigban/bigbang.htm http://www.speakers.co.uk/speaker/MICKAK http://www.speakers.co.uk/Retro/5261.htm http://www.lovearth.org/mkaku.htm

Good references and if anyone has a question on this, just e-mail him and set it straight. In other words, do the research. Calicocat 01:58, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Added short phrase to help distinguish String Theory from String Field Theory. sigfpe Nov 11 2005

The bulk of this article is copied directly from http://www.mkaku.org/biography_education.htm. Is this plagiarism?

Since its string field theory that Dr Kaku claims to be the founder of, shouldn't all the references and their associated links to string theory be changed to string field theory??Thinkdunson (talk) 06:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Better picture available?

OK, this picture, taken from some television documentary broadcast, of him ice skating, is funny, but can't we find a better, more appropriate, more composed picture of him to be placed here? Also, the image page doesn't say anything about whether the uploader obtained permission to use this photo. Frankly, I think no picture is better than this picture. --NightMonkey 07:42, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

When I found the article there was no caption and I think it may have been selected deliberatly as an unkind shot of him...I don't know for sure. If it was a wider shot it would be more appealing, maybe like the famous photo of Einstein riding the bike. However, I don't really object to it now that it has a caption to explain why he's taking this pose... Calicocat 06:34, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ok, right now there is no picture available. I think that there should be a picture. I mean, you see him all over those science shows, but you don't always connect the name and face, you know? A picture would definitely help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.122.93.241 (talk) 04:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

He looked younger in his youth; but then again, even he could never change that; Simon Jon .W; "I", was quite the fan; thought he had died & gone to Eden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.253.188 (talk) 21:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Oh; by the way if anyone has contact with him; can they please pass on a message for "Mr Simon Winterbottom" [Of planet Earth not Wikipedia]; & message is; contact "Manchester University City [UK]", immediate; as a result of their "Wicker" [Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn] project; almost all of "Europe", thinks that life is a dream. We perhaps have till the summer "Kaku"; & after that; its "Genocide"; "World-Wide". {Ps.Euro-ism; Arthur & Grail/ Odin.again &. Internet Driven....} —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.249.108 (talk) 20:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC) I would like to clear up one facet of my message; "I", only warned the "gent" in question, because he is [a]; academic; & aware of certain "European" ecentricities; & [b]; he was born out of the pain & suffering, that the last world war caused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.133.192 (talk) 21:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Beyond Einstein

I'd like to see a page made for this book. I thought I would ask here rather than requesting it on the request pages... I'll add it to the list later if I don't get a reply here. -- NatsukiGirl\^talk 16:50, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I agreeWillbennett2007 (talk) 03:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems Einstein accepted a "God" (A higher intelligent power) of some kind. What about Kaku? Is he a strong atheist, a light atheist, an agnostic, or a theist? Shouldn't this be mentioned?Yottamaster (talk) 16:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Current picture

Too small. Is there a way to make it bigger? I know how to make pictures smaller with wiki-syntax, but it doesn't seem to work to make the picture bigger than the original. ike9898 14:40, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Cassini

I'm trying to find referenceable material about Kaku's (npov)gasbaggery(/npov) about the 'dangers' of the Cassini probe -- I recall he went on a number of talk shows including Science Friday on NPR and basically shouted down anyone who disagreed with his supposed casualty figures. Zero sharp 03:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC) 08/

I know this is an old post but he also appeared on Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell on 08/22/97 and made a statement that he thought NASA's figure of 2500 deaths from a Cassini disaster (and an area of only 2 square miles affected) was a gross misfigure. He suggested the number would have been in the 250,000 range. I have this show taped and reviewed it before posting. He does make that claim. --96.18.71.195 (talk) 05:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Two hundred fifty thousand?! That is a truly alarmist claim. Normally, I support Kaku, but this appears to not have been one of his better moments. -RadicalOne•^{Contact Me}•_{Chase My Tail} 21:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject Japan

Since Mr. Kaku is an American, does he really fit under the coverage of the Japan wikiproject? Deyyaz ^{[ Talk | Contribs ]} 01:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Nope Musungu jim 21:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure. While he is American, he is of direct Japanese descent, and I believe he speaks fluent Japanese. I don't know how often he visits, or what his involvement in Japan entails, so unless we have credible sources to verify, it is an open question.Spirit469 (talk) 06:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Added

Added link to 2057 TV show on discovery chan. Number301 10:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Wrong link?

"Parallel Worlds: The Science of Alternative Universes and Our Future in the Cosmos" - redirects to bad page.

Fixed. – Mipadi 11:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

LHC mini black hole fears

Michio Kaku refutes the Internet rumors about catastrophic mini black holes from the LHC and explains why this feat of science will help us explore the "mind of God." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fermi08 (talk • contribs) 13:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Dr Michio Kaku

Why is the page not called this ? about vision of the future shows his title. also his website. Machete97 (talk) 23:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Because that's not his name. His name is "Michio Kaku", "Dr. Michio Kaku" is a title. モーモー^?_{talk to moo} 21:17, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally Albert Einstein, Carl Sagan, Brian Greene are all also Ph.D.'s but their pages have their name not their title.Willbennett2007 (talk) 03:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Is this Radio quote really notable?

The (unreferenced) sentence: 'He is quoted as theorizing about the possibility of time travel, as a post-op transsexual and mating with the past self becoming your own father and mother. Dr. Kaku's statement in this regard: "well, you're in deep doo doo if that happens."' does not appear to me to be worthy of putting in an article about Dr Kaku. He was just commenting on a scenario from Heinlein's story "All You Zombies" anyway. Jezcentral (talk) 13:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

External link removal

The reason I went ahead and removed most of the links is because most of them seem to be unnecessary. Why do we need links to every single interview he's ever given? What the hell is "2057 TV Show" and why are we linking to it here? What it so significant about a three-line bio about him on the "guests webpage at Coast to Coast"? (I just removed that link because he's not even listed there.) I'd like to see some justification for the links, and really to get this section back in line with WP:EL. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 20:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I completely disagree. Why remove valuable and useful external links? What is wrong with having a good, rich external links section in the article? One of the strengths of any article is its external links resources, so why make the article weaker? I've read the policy article on external links and see no reason why these links have been removed. Put them back and please stop edit waring with me over them. Just because you think they are "unnecessary," does not mean other readers will, so why take resource away from others? Other editors wanted those links there and worked to research and include them, don't take that work and trash it. Restore the links or I will. If there are specific links you think need not be included, then provide those and your reasons for removing each. Your wholesale removal of them all is ridiculous and not in keeping with the letter or spirit of the project. Calicocat (talk) 04:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Settle down. Read WP:ELMAYBE and you'll see that "Long lists of links are not acceptable." Sixteen links is very long, and is therefore unacceptable. There is absolutely no reason why we need to link to Kaku's MySpace or Facebook page, since they're not directly important. If he was a band and he used his MySpace to keep in touch with his fans, that'd be one thing - but here it's excessive. We also don't need to link to every interview and talk that he's given. If there's anything important in those links, then it should be incorporated into the text. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 04:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the links in question, but we don't need to link to every interview he's ever had. Unless it has some specific bearing on some particular facet of the article or his career, it's probably not significant enough. People often use Wikipedia as a starting point for information, and if someone really wanted to know his Myspace or Facebook or whatever I assume they'd find it easily enough without Wikipedia. Just my two cents. Cocytus [»talk«] 05:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

For reference, this is the edit in question. The majority of them are to interviews he gave for magazines or whatever, but they really don't need to be here. I think the list also violates WP:FANCRUFT. This isn't supposed to be a fan site; it's meant to be a neutral article. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 05:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Calicocat, please read over WP:EL, and most importantly WP:ELNO points 1, 6, and 10, as well as WP:LINKFARM which states that long lists of links are not acceptable here. Generally the external links sections should be very limited to links that are official sites of the subject or contain information which is directly relevant to the subject and cannot be inserted into the article for technical reasons such as brevity or copyright infringement. ThemFromSpace 18:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Obviously it is correct to say that we don't need to link to every interview he ever gave. However how many is to many? What is too long? In my humble opinion, having only 10 links for a person of Dr. Kaku's stature is way too few. While no one could question Dr. Kaku's notability, the vast majority of this article is unsourced. I would think someone of this stature would have MORE references. The Carl Sagan article has over 60 references. Hawking 58. Einstein over 130. So I don't see how one can argue the Kaku article has too many? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willbennett2007 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

There's a difference here between references and external links. You're thinking of references; this conversation was about external links. Also it happened more than nine months ago, so you're a little late to the party. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 01:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Hi, I recently cleaned up the "External links" section in accordance with our guidelines and there were some reliable sources which don't belong in the section but could be useful for anyone who wishes to expand the article, so I'm listing them here.

• Michio Kaku interview with The Young Turks
• Michio Kaku interview at BBC News Hardtalk Extra
• Michio Kaku Interview at KUOW-FM, March 2006
• Michio Kaku Profile cover story: "Fish Out of Water" in Cosmos Magazine, August 2005
• Michio Kaku interview by Keith Olberman, August 18, 2008.
• Michio Kaku interview at BotService
• Talk: Physics of the Impossible at the Royal Institution of Great Britain (Ri)
• RSA Vision webcasts - Dr Michio Kaku on "The Physics of the Impossible"
• Audio: Michio Kaku in conversation on the BBC World Service discussion programme The Forum

ThemFromSpace 22:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

You know, I went ahead and made the exact same edit several weeks back, and someone reverted me. But whatever, as long as it gets done. I support this removal. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 22:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Criticism section

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There's a lot of criticism floating around from real scientists about this guy, shouldn't there be a relevant section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.120.168.149 (talk) 08:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Please elaborate on the criticism, which "real scientists" are criticizing, and so forth. I've seen no such talk, and am dubious of the claim given how you've phrased it. ~ Jess (talk) 04:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Dr. Kaku is a distinguished scientist who has published well-known text books in his field and he is a tenured professor in theoretical physics. He is not "this guy" at all and ad hominem remarks about him won't cut it in this article, save them for whatever brain-dead blogs attract flies. Calicocat (talk) 04:12, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how "this guy" is ad hom. You might be taking him and yourself a little too seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.120.91 (talk) 23:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I am not aware of any significant criticism of Dr. Kakus work from physicists, other than the usual healthy debate one finds in science Willbennett2007 (talk) 01:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I just finished listening to some of "this guy's" prognostications on a PBS interview; he may be even more out of touch than Kurztweil. Making such insane predictions about the year 2100 is disgraceful to the profession. Goes to show that simply owning a doctorate doesn't grant a license for credibility. Especially his comment that the basis of everything is physics, while he knows that the basis of what he has done is mathematics - string (field) theory is nothing but mathematics. If it is not, I would very much appreciate direction to any direct, _empirical_, current evidence substantiating string (field) theory. And I don't mean what they _think_ they _might_ find at the LHC. Should Wikipedia become a forum for acolytes/worshipers of populist scientists? There have been excellent examples of populist scientist; see C. Sagan. Why give these nuts anything more than an honest but _short_ page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.20.4.127 (talk) 05:55, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

This article definitely needs a Criticism section. I have read numerous blogs criticizing his bold and controversial statements relating fields beyond his specialization. This includes: geology, biology, medicine, genetics, and climate change. I will try to look up specific references for each of these in the next few days and post my results here in the Talk Page first. We can put together a fully referenced criticism section and then move it into the article. Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 14:24, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Please note that blogs are almost never reliable sources; you'll need academic journals, high quality newspapers or magazines, etc. Note, too, that we will need to be careful to distinguish between "scientific disagreement" and "criticism", which are pretty different. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:28, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Reputable academic journals would never publish Kaku's articles about geology, biology or climate change, much less a rebuttal to these. There is no scientific disagreement because Kaku is not an expert within these fields and therefore his claims do not follow the rigorous scientific method (if they did, he would publish in scientific journals in these fields). I also believe that blogs authored by respected published scientists in the fields in question are quite valid, especially those hosted in reputable exclusive blog-hosting websites such as the AGU [1]. -Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Such a blog actually could be a source in this case. The specific requirements are "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." As long as you can show (here on the talk page, not in the article) that said scientist is an expert, then it would be okay.

As a side note, though, we still want to avoid having a "Criticism" section. WP:NPOV says that it's always better to integrate criticism into other sections, to avoid giving it undue weight. If there's no easy way to do so, a criticism is possible, but it's not preferable. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dr Kaku parents were both Buddhists

Reference BBC 4 TV Programme on 'Cosmic Time' screened 28th January 2010.

Dr Kaku specifically talked in the programme with regard to his parents being Buddhist, showing scenes of Japanese Buddhist Temple in the programme and how he was also brought up in Christian background in the Physics debate about whether the universe is Eternal or Finite ... IT IS VERY RELEVANT to both Physics & Buddhism and the way he put it over in this programme. I therefore recommend putting an edit in for this. Peter Dorey 17:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Dorey (talk • contribs)

This article does not concern Buddhism, so such an edit would be pointless. If you can find a valid source for what you are trying to say, go ahead and take it to that talk page. Thank you. -RadicalOne•^{Contact Me}•_{Chase My Tail} 19:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I think List of Buddhists would be a better place. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I was not aware such an article even existed. -RadicalOne•^{Contact Me}•_{Chase My Tail} 19:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Better in what respect? To put MK on that list? There is nothing in this article suggesting that he is a practising Buddhist, so unless and until there is, he doesn't belong on that list. His parents certainly don't belong there unless they have their owm articles. – ukexpat (talk) 20:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, agreed. I was just saying that if you're looking for a place to list him, List of Buddhists is better than the Buddhism article itself. He really shouldn't be listed anywhere without an accurate source to back it up. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 22:07, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

If you read his books and listen to the radio and tv with him on it, it clearly states that he was raied a Presbyterian, and that his parents were raised as Buddhists but must have converted as adults in the US. Go read the first chapter of parallel worlds. He did mention on Coast to Coast AM on January 29, 2010 that his theory could explain the connection between Christianity and Buhddism as he mentioned vaguely in Parallel Worlds. 129.100.209.114 (talk) 21:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Citations??? – ukexpat (talk) 21:58, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Read the first chapter of Parallel Worlds Carowinds (talk) 20:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Fringe Theories

Dear Qwyrxian, "time machines, multidimensional space and, ... parallel universe" as discussed in his book to me represent fringe theories which is fine. Now that I better understand the Fringe Theory Tag I am going around to many other scientists to ensure they are properly classified as well. There seems to be little equity in how this tag is used... Globalreach1 (talk) 04:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think you read the article carefully--Kaku doesn't advocate those theories, or say that they are likely; rather, he is specifically looking at "popular" science ideas, and considering whether or not they may be possible in the future. Furthermore, if you look at the article on the book, you'll see that he specifically declares a number of them impossible, and says that some others could take humans thousands to millions of years to develop. Plus, the point of the book is actually to show people the actual scientific issues connected to some of these pop culture ideas (like discussing Einstein's equations indicate time travel is theoretically possible, albeit likely practically impossible). This in no way makes him a supporter of fringe theories. You're of course welcome to look at other scientists and see if the label needs to be applied, but it looks like you need to look a bit more carefully at what the scientists claim--it's one thing to look at a strange theory and say "Could this ever be possible?" and another thing to say "This thing I say is true, even though 95% of other scientists think I'm wrong". Also, be very careful that you are not being pointy--that is, don't go adding this tag just to prove the tag is incorrect on another article.

Unless someone else says that Kaku's pop culture work counts as fringe, I don't believe this description should remain. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Dear Qwyrxian here are some other items which any "Mainstream" physician would say is clearly not mainstream, I'll post this on the Fringe Notice Board for discussion. thanks for your input, Globalreach1 (talk) 05:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Physics of the Impossible

Physics of the Impossible is an exploration into the science people dream about. Kaku explores things that people think are quite impossible.

Hyperspace

Hyperspace is about the four forces of the universe and higher dimensions.

Parallel Worlds

Parallel Worlds talks about the possibilities of the existence of parallel worlds. Kaku also talks about black holes and other frequently asked matters of advanced physics.

Beyond Einstein

Beyond Einstein is a resource for people wanting to know more about physics. Kaku mostly talks about Einstein and his quest for the Theory of Everything.

Thanks for raising the issue on the Fringe board, I think that's a good place to get more opinions. I've added my follow-up there. Of course, if there are any other watchers here, we'd love to hear your input. I admit, I haven't read the book in question, so it's possible that I'm wrong.

editing Academic career section

This section needs some heavy editing. The entire first paragraph as well as the list of forces should be deleted as it adds nothing new to the article. The following paragraph should be moved to the intro paragraph if it is to remain. We may want to state Kaku's fields of research in chronological order and the academic institutes he has been associated with during this research. The section currently looks like a list of topics in physics stating that Kaku was the first at many things but without giving specifics. It doesn't even matter if he was the first or not as long as he did significant research in the field. Also, it may be a good idea to move the list of pop-science books to another section as these don't have anything to do with his academic career as a physicist. Maybe we can split the Bibliography section into a Text books section and Popular science section. Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 14:35, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I removed the previous unsigned section whose heading consisting of a false quote attributed to Michio Kaku, speech not present in the linked Youtube video. This was followed by extremely contentious language verging on ethnic slur, and was in clear violation of Wikipedia's emphatic policy regarding biographies of living persons including talk pages. AveVeritas (talk) 04:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Popular Science.

Under the section 'Popular Science', the first line states "Kaku is most widely known as a popularizer of science" but someone has added [Citation Needed] after it. I don't know what citation could be added, as the rest of the section lists his many books, radio and television appearances. He really is the popular face of science, he is almost a household name, and the wikipedia article really serves as its own citation. How many other scientists are as popular, in name face and media appearences? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.216.118 (talk) 15:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Albert Einstein comes to mind. And I'm adding an obvious citation. --Σ ^talk_contribs 22:39, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Japanese Immigrant Parents

If his "His father was born in California" and "His grandfather came to the United States to take part in the clean-up operation after the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake". Then how is he the son of "Japanese immigrant parents". Webmanoffesto (talk) 07:46, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Matters of faith

is he an atheist, anagnostic, deist, or does he associate with a religious identity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.90.157.166 (talk) 06:42, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

He's a Presbyterian.

"His own religious influences were contradictory: his parents were Buddhist, but he was raised as a Presbyterian. Yet modern physics seems to accommodate both views." [2]

Seniortrend (talk) 04:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

It just says he was raised Presbyterian; he might not be anymore. At the end of that article it says "Kaku described his belief eloquently: 'I would say that I lean toward the God of Einstein and Spinoza; that is, a God of harmony, simplicity and elegance, rather than a personal God who interferes in human affairs ...'

That doesn't sound like a Christian god to me. --Jak86 (talk)(contribs)(email) 12:47, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, that sounds a lot more like the Deist God of the Enlightenment than a Christian God. References to such should probably be in his own words. Again, as this is a biography of a living person, all statements must be reliably sourced.Spirit469 (talk) 06:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The only 'source' of his Pantheism I was able to find related to the fact that he is the son of Japanese immigrants, "so he probably had some Shinto/Buddhist influences... and he's a scientist. Therefore Pantheism!". I would hope whoever labeled him as this on this page has better sources than the ones I found based on racist stereotype nonsense.Absurdist313 (talk) 18:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Dec 2013 reverts

I've once again reverted this change for a number of reasons. First, it's really poorly sourced. The text is written rather unencyclopedically - text like "Two experiences during his childhood helped shape him into who he is now" and "Kaku's idea of God is in line with Albert Einstein and philosopher Baruch Spinoza. A supreme being that created the cosmos. A supreme being created the laws that govern the universe but does nothing afterwards." is really not what you would expect to see on Wikipedia. It reads much like a fansite, with a lot of puffery - and Wikipedia is not a fansite. Please don't readd these changes until they've been made more neutral. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 03:21, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

The live call in show farce

I removed "The program is formatted as a live listener call-in show, focusing on "futurology," which he defines as the future of science." since it is blatantly untrue. Callers are asked to record their messages and Kaku pretends to respond to them in real time on his canned radio show. Huw Powell (talk) 01:21, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Criticism

There are many scientists who strongly criticize Kaku's methods for popularization of science and explaining physics concepts to the layman. Could we make a section about this if enough references are compiled? Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 20:47, 26 May 2013 (UTC) I would gladly provide references to the inaccuracies he spreads, and can even explain the faults of these explanations. but you would have to compile it, as I have no experience in wikipedia.

Maybe we could open a different page devoted to fallacies of pop science - and refer to these. unsigned comment added by MrWorshipMe (talk) 12:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I wish we could, indeed. In my listening to his radio shows, it has become obvious that I - not much more than a layman - know more about general science topics than Mr. Kaku does. Huw Powell (talk) 01:23, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Japanese name

He's an American and was born and grew up in the US. Is there evidence of him actually using the listed Japanese forms of his name, including surname-first, or is this OR? - David Gerard (talk) 22:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Removed as OR - David Gerard (talk) 09:21, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Good remove. No evidence that he has ever used a Japanese form.--ukexpat (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Early Life & History

The end of the second paragraph is not cited and seems like original research. Phrases such as "he attracted the attention of physicist Edward Teller, who took Kaku as a protégé" need to be substantiated, hopefully by sources other than his books. Wataimi (talk) 01:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Books and Bibliography

Is it necessary to list popular science books by him when they are listed again under full bibliography? Hto0501 (talk) 03:21, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Brasil/Brazil

Why is 'Brasil' spelt with an 's' instead of a 'z'? 86.185.217.91 (talk) 14:43, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

I would surmise that is the way it is spelt (spelled) on any map published in that country.W8IMP (talk) 05:56, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

It is spelt with "s" because the event "Campus Party Brasil" has been happening in Brazil since 2008. "Brasil" is spelt this way in Portuguese - Brazilians speak Portuguese. If you click on the article about the event you'll read about it. But there is also the possibility of translating it to English: "Campus Party Brasil" - Campus Party Brazil...

This is a link to the official site: http://www.campus-party.com.br/2014/edicao-2014.html--Justana (talk) 17:11, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Put it in italics as the title of the event: Campus Party Brasil. The linked page is rather inconsistent. Vsmith (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Policy advocacy and activism section

That first statement is not entirely backed up by the citation. It first mentions skepticism of global warming, but the linked article says nothing about global warming, climate change, or any of the iterations of the phenomenon in question. It was also from a 1992 article, when the concept of "climate deniers" didn't even exist in parlance yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.187.68.131 (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Military service

The statement that "However, the Vietnam War ended before he was deployed as an infantryman" is incomplete and cannot be correct. The Vietnam war ended in 1975, he could not have finished training after that, we would have been over 28. In any case the end of the war would not automatically mean the end of his training.Royalcourtier (talk) 05:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Early life and education

"As a Freemason Kaku was born in San Jose, California, to Japanese-American parents.[1]" Edited for clarity: "Kaku was born in San Jose, California to Japanese-American parents who belonged to the Masonic order." Even better, "Kaku was born in SJ, CA, to J-A parents..." and then lower down in the biographical paragraph introduce the fact that they were freemasons. I don't know anything about Kaku beyond what I've skimmed here, and the reference is vague (do I need to watch a BBC program to see if they're really freemasons?!...) so I'm simply putting it down in the 'Talk' section (instead of making a bolder edit.) Cheers ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by SylvstaB. (talk • contribs) 04:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Removed "As a Freemason" bit as rather absurd. The phrase was added a few hours earlier by an ip. Vsmith (talk) 12:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Missing pronunciation

First name...how is it pronounced?

(/ˈmiːtʃioʊ ˈkɑːkuː/ Kortoso (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michio Kaku. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v10/i6/p1823_1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080311084702/http://www.apexstuff.com:80/bt/200702/cover.asp to http://www.apexstuff.com/bt/200702/cover.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:24, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

help

please can someone add Dr. before his name and add Japanese American in the introduction he is japanese.

References

 Not done Firstly, we don't add academic titles to people's names in the lead; compare MOS:DOCTOR. Secondly, Kaku's father was born in California and thus was a natural-born citizen of the US; Kaku himself also was an American citizen from birth. I see no indication that Kaku ever held Japanese citizenship. The sources describe his parents as Japanese or Japanese-American, not him. Huon (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Japanese-American is a self-identification based on cultural association. Thus being a second generation, third, or fourth generation Japanese-American is a valid and common condition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.214.5 (talk) 14:02, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

science communicator

I understand if people don't like this edit by me. It seems like popularizer of science and science communicator are more or less the same thing. I noticed that Neil deGrasse Tyson and Carl Sagan are both called science communicator rather than populizers of science. So I figure we should use the same term for similar personalities, unless there is some actual difference in these terms. --David Tornheim (talk) 04:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Cassini comments

I am currently watching an interview with Dr Michio Kaku, and he does eventually make some remarks on the successful probe Cassini. It is a C-span interview, here is the timestamp. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeJpMaqGe1k&t=1501

This is in contradiction to the current article stating "He has yet to comment on the successful mission." With no references. DnaK (talk) 05:41, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Add UFO section?

speaker at 2019 ufology world congress? - https://www.theufologyworldcongress.com/home

comments on fox news in 2019 - https://video.foxnews.com/v/6088215683001#sp=show-clips "Michio Kaku says the burden of proof has shifted to the government to demonstrate UFOs don't exist" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.211.70.89 (talk) 09:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes his understanding of basic science goes straight out the window when arguing for alien space ships as it must! Also how he does not investigae the actual data which when it is (even excluding the convientently cut out sections of videos, and sound of the pilot comments) show that it is not alien spoace craft and clearly shows its speed, size etc and are things such as birds, planes, meteors, space debris.--HalloHelloHalloHello (talk) 23:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I was Mike's Roomate at Berkeley and informtion about his war service seems misleading (updated with many changes)

Updated to include information from Michio's best friend at Berkeley: "I was Mike's Roommate and the Info about his war service seems wrong. I knew Michael Kaku, also known as Michio Kaku (shortly after leaving Berkeley, Michio reverted to his Japanese first name) very well as we were fellow grad students at U.C. Berkeley. I met him in the Fall of 1968 and knew him until 1971 or so. This information about his war service seems wrong: "In 1968 during the Vietnam War Kaku, who was about to be drafted, joined the United States Army, remaining until 1970. He completed his basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and advanced infantry training at Fort Lewis, Washington." It seems,in retrospect and after communicating with another close friend, Daniel A, that this information, is roughly correct. Apparently Michio did “serve” at Ft. Benning in Summer 1968 before coming to Berkeley that Fall. His close friend, Daniel A., also a grad student in physics, "noticed him right away, at the Prelim exams (see below), because he had a buzzcut and wondered why (when long hair was in style) he would do that. It was an Army haircut."

In October, 1968, Mike Kaku was a roommate of Daniel A.-another Berkeley Physics grad student but from NYCity--(If you are reading this Mike, Dan has my email address) and lived across the hall from me in a graduate dorm on Haste St. in Berkeley, California. Almost directly across from our grad hall (the top 2 floors of a university dorm) was the famous People's Park. Mike had come from Harvard U. where he probably served in the ROTC. Again, Daniel A. has set me straight and indicated that Michio Kaku had been in ROTC, "and I believe, writes Daniel A., "it required two summers at 6 weeks each, and also occasional strutting around on the campus on weekends or early mornings)."

In 1969-70, he and I were flatmates (with 2 other grad students) at a two bedroom apartment at 2020 College Way. He was a full-time student in Physics at UC Berkeley. He lived in the same house as me at 106 Ross Circle, North Oakland from 1971-72. I was studying History at Berkeley, also working on my Ph.D. He's a great guy but I am astonished to hear about his military service because I never saw him in a uniform, and he was a full-time student then at Berkeley, and he never spoke about any military service. He spoke, however, to Daniel A., "several times in great detail about his experiences at those summer camps." In fact, as I remember, I had to walk through his room in North Oakland to get to my room. Mike had very bad eyesight and wore glasses, when he drove, as thick as an old coke bottle at its base. I cannot imagine him in the military. He was too intelligent to be in military intelligence. He's an extremely bright guy and extremely nice too. It seems, now, however, that he was in some sort of reserve service but he never talked about it to me, although he talked to Daniel A. about it, and I never saw him in a uniform, ever. We all were anti-Vietnam War as most students were and most people in the Bay Area too.

By the way (responding to another thread), I believe he is Japanese-American and not of Tibetan descent. His mother and father spoke Japanese when they came to our rental house in North Oakland.

I do not mean to diminish Mike K. and his achievements in any way; maybe someone's recollections are wrong (they seem to have been but have been corrected by Daniel A. so thanks to him!) but I'm sure mine are not (not wrong, perhaps just incomplete). I think he graduated from Berkeley with his Ph.D.in only 4 years (very quickly) so I further doubt that allowed any time for the military (but see above, about the summers and early mornings and weekends). His very close friend, Daniel A., a fellow Physics grad student, once told me that Mike had to take a Physics test developed and administered by the Berkeley Physics Department prior to their first year. The same test had been used for a number of years. Mike received the highest test scores anyone had ever recorded on the test, ever, quite an achievement for a Department full of Nobel Prize winners. Again, Mike is a great person and probably amongst the smartest peoplw I have known. Michio, according to Daniel A., liked to quote another very smart Berkeley physics grad student at the time, who said that the difference between the most successful theoreticians and the less successful ones was simply “ass-sitting power”: who could sit the longest to work on a problem. I personally recall Michio used to do very long calculations of equations on computer paper that was continuous and folded out from a box; I asked him about this and he told me that the calculations were so long, he couldn't fit them on anything else. He also patiently explained to me (Michio even then had a knack for expaining complicated things in a simple way) that high energy physics was really all math.

By the way, readers will be surprised to know that he studied at home very little, maybe one or two hours a day, maximum. "At his office on campus," though, according to Daniel A, "he would be studying and working on equations all day, most every day." But when he studied he concentrated unlike anyone I've ever seen: you could march by in a brass band playing Mahler and he wouldn't have noticed. It was like he was in a trance. He's also a terrific humanitarian. I remember while at Berkeley in 1968-69 that Mike would rent out old movies, show them to Berkeley students for the cost of a movie ticket, and then take ALL the money he had earned and give it to poor people working in sweatshops in San Francisco. He has a heart of gold. For recreation, Mike loved to watch "Star Trek", as did the other 2 science students I shared lodgings with (two physicists,one being Michael, and one astronomer/astrophysicist). He watched reruns of it late afternoons; almost every day; this once created a problem with me since I liked to watch the Huntley-Brinkley newscast that aired at roughly the same time.

Years later, after I had shifted into law, and practiced in Honolulu, Hawaii, I regret to say I missed Mike K. giving a talk (maybe on the origins of the Gulf War?). He came to Hawaii to give this anti-war talk (mid 1990's?), and I saw a notice in a legal trade journal or the local newspaper about it but either I was too tired, or too intimidated, or both, to go. I regr et that. I had planned on asking Mike: do you remember 106 Ross Circle? and of course, taking him out to dinner and drinks. He's a wonderful person." Daniel A., however, remained in contact with him pretty regularly (including visits in Ithaca, NYC, and Ann Arbor) all the way up through the early 1990’s, including coauthoring a book “To Win a Nuclear War”, which is about how nuclear threatmaking, often directed against non-nuclear countries, has long been a centerpiece of US foreign policy. The book is obsolete only in that it discusses the “USSR”, but otherwise the ideas and evidence are still relevant. "But after the early 1990’s," continues Daniel A., "he [Michio] became rather famous as a media star explaining science in a particularly exciting way. He spent a lot of time traveling around."

It should be noted that in no way has there been any conscious misrepresentation of military service but a difference in recollections, normal in any human relationships especially after the passage of time, that has hopefully been corrected with the assistance of Michio's closest friend at Berkeley, his fellow grad student in Physics, Daniel A.

Ronald F. Movrich, Ph.D. (Berkeley)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2403:6200:8860:6087:b421:af7f:b2db:201c (talk • contribs)

@2403:6200:8860:6087:b421:af7f:b2db:201c: Hi Ronald, on Wikipedia published reliable sources are the only acceptable form of sources. Under no circumstances does Wikipedia allow for original research -- so whilst I don't doubt you knowing the subject as well as you clearly do, you are not a published reliable source. As such, nothing you've said can be used unless there is a published reliable source that can be used to corroborate the content you wish to add/clarify/change. Kind regards, —MelbourneStar☆^talk 04:38, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

The Universe is self renewing

The thought of a Quantum Singularity is a waste of time. You haven't taken into consideration "Dark Matter Or Dark Energy" Dark Matter has a Protron & and Electron as a core there "Positive and Negative" energy bind them. It's the Neutron orbits there core and can be positively or negatively charged. They push matter though space. That's why there is an expansion at the most distant universes. Gravity has no effect on "Dark Mater Or Dark Energy." They will push away anything within it range. But When a particle of Dark Energy meets an Neutron with a different charge like a magnet they combine. So Dark Matter is Created. And it occupies the missing 70% of our Universe. It can't be measured because it's nature has not been determined. It very well could be what holds a black hole open. And a wild thought it's Not The Nuclear force that keeps the electrons in orbit but Dark Energy. Scientists have only starting to talk about it. I have been yelling at the TV about Dark Matter for years. Just ask my Daughter if you bring it up she will roll her eyes back in her head because she would here me so years she was tired of it. But the very first time it was mentioned on the science channel. I went in and told her where did you hear it first. So this something I want others to ponder. It must be studied to find the true nature of it's existence. I would love to meet Dr. Michio Kaku he has a mind that thinks out side the box that is Science. No One Special Lee Sullivan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkmatter2020 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

'The GOD Equation': The Quest For A Theory Of Everything' - Michio Kaku 2021

Michio Kaku's book The GOD Equation: The Quest For A Theory Of Everything was released on April 6, 2021. 2601:589:4801:5660:542F:5E44:A075:BF4B (talk) 11:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)