![Insert Philosophy Here](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 169
- 170 647
Insert Philosophy Here
Приєднався 22 бер 2020
Adding philosophical depth to anything and everything. Philosophy isn't a kids' cartoon, neither should be your UA-cam philosophy channel. Rather than dumb down philosophy and make it cute, I'm here to dig deeper and apply it to serious issues. No clickbait or gimmicks, only attempts to make philosophy real for real people in real life.
The world needs more philosophy. More to the point, we all need to engage with the world with a more philosophical attitude.
I am a PhD philosophy professor specializing in social philosophy and personal identity. I have taught philosophy in higher education since 1998. In work and life, I love ideas, creativity, passion, and different cultures.
InsertPhilosophyHere.com - Adding philosophical depth to anything and everything. linktr.ee/dgilesphd.
The world needs more philosophy. More to the point, we all need to engage with the world with a more philosophical attitude.
I am a PhD philosophy professor specializing in social philosophy and personal identity. I have taught philosophy in higher education since 1998. In work and life, I love ideas, creativity, passion, and different cultures.
InsertPhilosophyHere.com - Adding philosophical depth to anything and everything. linktr.ee/dgilesphd.
Trump’s Racial Identity Politics - Philosophy of Election 24
First in a series inserting philosophy into the 2024 election.
The same old culture war is now directed at Kamala Harris.
#politics #kamalaharris #race
ko-fi.com/worldfusionradio
The same old culture war is now directed at Kamala Harris.
#politics #kamalaharris #race
ko-fi.com/worldfusionradio
Переглядів: 109
Відео
Why Trump?
Переглядів 2,2 тис.День тому
It's a simple question why do some people support Trump? The answer is fairly simple, though it's laden with complexities. Academia and the corporate media don't have adequate answers to why some people support Trump. That's why I wrote the book: dgilesauthor.com/why-trump/ #Politics #election ua-cam.com/video/iR2Wlcbjyb8/v-deo.html
What If the Universe Is Not Expanding?
Переглядів 2,5 тис.14 днів тому
The dominant paradigm in astrophysics is that the universe began in a “big bang,” and that the universe, the very fabric of space itself, has been expanding ever since. But does that paradigm of the expanding universe hold up in the face of evidence? Let's avoid groupthink and reason about the observable evidence. #astronomy #evidence #philosophy
New Book: Why Trump?
Переглядів 20421 день тому
Some say that a week is a lifetime in politics, and last week showed how true that is. Now the election can turn to focus on Trump. In this episode of the podcast, I read from the first chapter of my new book, "Why Trump? Why Some People Support Him-How the Rest of Us Can Respond." More information on the book and where to but it: dgilesauthor.com/why-trump/
Sigma Male Stoicism
Переглядів 161Місяць тому
The truth about sigma males and the connection with stoic philosophy. Article on bros: dgilesphilosopher.medium.com/the-problem-isnt-men-it-s-bros-f1dcfb56e322?sk=b4bf8689514564babf865777eb71e2c0 Follow up on bros: medium.com/@dgilesphilosopher/bros-i-forgot-to-include-c7d5c308aede?sk=51c1ce52026f49867f27e893f9a8b16c #knowledge
Why Philosophy Is Best Taught Chronologically
Переглядів 87Місяць тому
An important lesson I have learned from teaching philosophy is the importance of learning philosophy chronologically. Students benefit from learning how philosophy has developed by seeing how philosophers interacted with historical changes, and students gain understanding by appreciating how philosophers build on the ideas of their predecessors. A historical, contextual approach to philosophy a...
Left Wing, Right Wing, People, and Power - Chapter 1
Переглядів 71Місяць тому
A reading of the first chapter of my recent book, available for sale everywhere. dgilesauthor.com/left-wing-right-wing-people-and-power/ Left Wing, Right Wing, People, and Power #philosophy #politics #election
The Renaissance - Its Five Major Developments
Переглядів 141Місяць тому
I can't untangle all of the complexities of the Renaissance in a short video, but I can introduce the five main themes of how it developed. Art is only one of them. #History #Philosophy
The Fundamental Contradictions in Anarchism and Libertarianism
Переглядів 1712 місяці тому
A look at two ideologies that are shaping political discourse. Text transcript and reference links: insertphilosophyhere.com/the-fundamental-contradictions-in-anarchism-and-libertarianism/
PhilosoTechno - Augustine on Memory
Переглядів 732 місяці тому
Augustine is too often dismissed as a religious zealot, but he developed a philosophy of mind with a sophistication not matched for over 1200 years. This excerpt is from his realization that our mind is greater than we can comprehend. #Philosophy
What’s Right and Wrong About the Columbia Protests
Переглядів 1273 місяці тому
What’s right and wrong about the Columbia protests and what’s right and wrong about political action. Can we have an intelligent conversation about what’s going on at Columbia University? Probably not. I’ll try anyway, although a conversation requires willing and sincere participants. Referenced in this episode: • Ethics of Dissent and Protest (pod.co/insert-philosophy-here/ethics-of-dissent-an...
PhilosoTechno - Plato's Allegory of the Cave
Переглядів 673 місяці тому
First in series sharing great philosophers' words set to techno music. #Philosophy
The Czechs Brew Great Beer; They Don't Know How to Serve It
Переглядів 684 місяці тому
The Czechs Brew Great Beer; They Don't Know How to Serve It
Conspiracy Theories versus People Exercising Power [Podcast Audio]
Переглядів 424 місяці тому
Conspiracy Theories versus People Exercising Power [Podcast Audio]
New Book - Left Wing, Right Wing, People, and Power
Переглядів 1044 місяці тому
New Book - Left Wing, Right Wing, People, and Power
Book Release Announcement [Audio Version]
Переглядів 434 місяці тому
Book Release Announcement [Audio Version]
My First Clues About Social Injustice [Podcast Audio]
Переглядів 294 місяці тому
My First Clues About Social Injustice [Podcast Audio]
Subjectivity - Kierkegaard and Nietzsche
Переглядів 5365 місяців тому
Subjectivity - Kierkegaard and Nietzsche
People Aren't Stupid--They're Lazy Thinkers
Переглядів 1235 місяців тому
People Aren't Stupid They're Lazy Thinkers
Pt 1: Lazy Thinking. Pt 2: How to Have an Argument [Podcast Audio]
Переглядів 144 місяці тому
Pt 1: Lazy Thinking. Pt 2: How to Have an Argument [Podcast Audio]
Philosophies of Social Reform, Part 2 - Marx
Переглядів 2155 місяців тому
Philosophies of Social Reform, Part 2 - Marx
Philosophies of Social Reform, Part 1 - Mill
Переглядів 2015 місяців тому
Philosophies of Social Reform, Part 1 - Mill
Is Your Politics One of Principles or Pettiness? [Podcast Audio]
Переглядів 164 місяці тому
Is Your Politics One of Principles or Pettiness? [Podcast Audio]
The Curious Case of Taylor Swift [Podcast Audio]
Переглядів 534 місяці тому
The Curious Case of Taylor Swift [Podcast Audio]
Masterclasses, TEDx Talks, and the Rise of the Fluffpreneur
Переглядів 2166 місяців тому
Masterclasses, TEDx Talks, and the Rise of the Fluffpreneur
Masterclasses, TEDx Talks, and the Fluffpreneur [Podcast Audio]
Переглядів 104 місяці тому
Masterclasses, TEDx Talks, and the Fluffpreneur [Podcast Audio]
Economics is admittedly far outside of my expertise but I always leaned right starting from the mid-2000s or so because I worked for multiple VFX firms that went bankrupt because Californian mandates and regulations made it too expensive for them to compete there on a global scale. They ended up moving their headquarters to places like Canada, France, and even China because these progressive policies made it too costly for them to continue running a business. That affects even a lowly VFX engineer like me who is hardly a business owner in that I'm out of a job. "Supply-side economics" or what Democrats call "Trickle-down economics" always made sense to me at least in my position and lifestyle and career choice. I can't get paid if no one can afford to pay me because of all these regulatory and tax burdens which skyrocket the costs of running a business. Being forced to choose Trump makes me groan. He strikes me as a used car salesman willing to say whatever he needs to say to remain relevant and popular. I wish I had better choices. But I just think democrats these days are so completely detached from the very basic aspects of running a business that I'd still take Trump (among the worst possible choices I could imagine) any day over *any* democrat. I'm not in this for moral reasons. I'm in this because want to get paid and I want other fellow VFX programmers like me to be able to keep their jobs and not see them outsourced overseas in countries and states that offer more desirable and maintainable ways for business owners to run their business. It makes no sense to me to pay a custodian $16/hour as a simplistic example. That's more than I made, even adjusted for inflation, when I was a junior software engineer. I sometimes think democrats have this vision that companies are run by stingy scrooges that just take 90% of the revenue for themselves to buy yachts left and right, and so these mandates just make them release that money to employees. That hasn't been my experience. They go bankrupt, and we all end up being out of a job. On the contrary, I've seen my salary rise when payroll taxes are alleviated, for example. It's the opposite of the scrooge picture. The less burdens the state places on a business, the more it trickles down to us employees. The tighter of a chokehold the state enforces on businesses, the less bonuses we have, the harder it becomes to negotiate raises, the higher the likelihood that we get laid off or reduced from FTEs to part-time, and the higher the likelihood of the business shutting down... unless we're working for some gigantic invincible corporation like Google or Wal-Mart. "You (state) treat my employer well and he treats me well. You (state) treat my employer poorly and he treats me poorly." That's been my experience. There is a "trickle-down" aspect to it -- maybe not trickling down as much as I want but it's better than my worst experience when my employers aren't treated well by the state. Or let's even entertain the most extreme left-wing view that everyone in running a business is so corrupt, so stingy. Then these regulatory and tax burdens still come out of my paycheck either way because corrupt people aren't going to pay it out of their pocket. Either way I'm screwed. The only way I'm not screwed is if the state alleviates those burdens.
One of the nastiest side comment I’ve read of Bakunin was from Walter Kaufmann. He said Hegel would have been unimpressed with Marx and Bakunin in the way they used his ideas. On the other hand, German thought has brought some of the best but also some of the worst ideas we are living with today.
Kaufman wasn't entirely wrong in that.Not sure Hegel would be pleased with anyone's use of his ideas, being how he was. I agree with you about German thought. My most favorite and least favorite thinkers are German.
An excellent video. Groupthink is one of the problems discussed by Lee Smolin in his book 'The Trouble With Physics' when talking about deluded (my word) string "theorists". This word certainly applies to modern cosmologists. I would like to recommend to everyone a free (pdf) paper (use your favorite search engine) 'A Bang into Nowhere' by Constantine Antonopoulos in which he explains how and why space cannot expand. That space/the universe is not expanding is explained in the book 'The Static Universe' by Hilton Ratcliffe.. And because the universe is not expanding we need an explanation of what causes redshift - and it is worth noting that there have been no independant measurements which confirm that all galaxies are increasing their distance apart over time. Edwin Hubble neither directly measured a recessional velocity nor (later) believed it was cause of redshift, and no one has directly measured a recessional velocity in the nearly 100 years since Hubble published his paper. The cause of redshifted galactic light has been called "tired light" because the light has decreased in energy on its journey to us - either in proportion to the distance, the interactions on the way and/or a combination of both and/or something else. Several mechanisms are discussed in Ratcliffe's book such as CREIL by Jacques Moret-Bailly. And Lyndon Ashmore has a book called 'Tired Light', and there are many other ideas out there. That there is no agreed upon mechanism for tired light among non-big-bangers should not be a problem as modern cosmologists with their lack of dark matter, dark energy and initial anti matter (or a mechanism to explain why matter "dominates") literally cannot account for over 95% of the contents of the current universe.
Thankyou! Trump is a manifestation and even in his apparent decline is still a tool for those who do not want to share in our democracy.
Thank you. We all need to respond to this movement intelligently and constructively by focusing on the real causes..
I pulled the trigger (metaphorically man) and bought the book. I no longer accept the dominion of any Caesar. I insist upon non-theocratic--democratic republics--with temporary power granted by the populace. I recognize no king, no theocrat, no mob boss, no corporation and no oligarch as having dominion over any free society. The American experiment must evolve for the many and the one. I am here to un-other as many as possible.
Very well said, and I totally agree with you. It's all about power and the question of whether power is concentrated in the few or circulated among the many. Thank you for purchasing my book and for the feedback.
I’ve always thought they like him because they want to be like him. They want to get rid of political correctness. They want to make fun of disabled people. They want brag about grabbing P. They want to have multiple wives. They want to be famous. They want money. Above all they want to lie to people and have zero accountability. Alpha men look up to his antics. Women love alpha men. Until they have to live with them.
It's not complicated at all!! They're weak minded fool's!! They are the same kind of people that drink poisoned coolaid from their cult leaders!! If trump passed out poisoned coolaid, they would drink it with a smile and make their children drink it too!! There will always be people like trump who know how to fool people and fools that will follow evil people like trump!! It's really sad, but just a reality!! Trump knows what he's doing, and he wants to take as many fools to hell with him as he can!! I just thank the universe that I'm not one of those fool's!!!!
I’m not sure that I agree that trump is a “symptom” of anything. I’d still be interested in checking it out even if I disagree which I think I do so far. It sounds like the book is taking that supporting him is bad axiomatically which is not very good logic, but again I’d check it out
The book seems to be about how we should debate people that support him thats the response
Yes, although I prefer the term "discuss."
Text version of the video: medium.com/the-movement-blog/trumps-racial-identity-politics-12f04c7db2cd?sk=152840884544b35bd1779581560e21a0
Before I read the book I will venture a guess that the answer Mr. Giles proffers is rooted in America's history with slavery and its wealthy southern white supporters. Today, it is the ultra-wealthy "Christian" white supremacists (UWWS) who continue their mission to revitalize slavery that has taken on a different but easily recognized complexion, one of enslaving America's entire working class. Working class MAGA supporters who vehemently believe he will be their savior somehow cannot perceive that Trump is today's standard bearer for the UWWS and, if he is elected, will do everything possible to further ensure their entrapment in a system designed to keep their wages low, prevent the growth of labor unions, prevent any semblance of universal healthcare, lower taxes for the wealthy, and keep all of us in a state of being barely able to hang on to a wildly corrupted "American Dream". Winning a lottery will be our only way out.
Your guesses are pretty accurate, and I venture that you will find much useful information in my book. I hope you will share your thoughts once you have read the book. - Dr. Giles P.S. - You have an interesting channel.
Mass insanity?🤔
Too easy an answer and not accurate. People have clear reasons for supporting Trump. We need to acknowledge that whether or not we agree with their reasons.
@@InsertPhilosophyHere I'm not so sure. I've attempted to communicate with some of these people & it's like talking to a very angry wall!
@@roywhitman7109 I don't deny that, They aren't interested in real conversation. The last chapter of my book is devoted to that problem they have and how we can respond to it.
@@InsertPhilosophyHere Thanks!
For more on the right-wing paradigm, see my book, "Left Wing, Right Wing, People, and Power." dgilesauthor.com/left-wing-right-wing-people-and-power/ Text version of the video transcript: medium.com/the-movement-blog/trumps-racial-identity-politics-12f04c7db2cd?sk=152840884544b35bd1779581560e21a0
because they are idiots!
If you’re looking for a diatribe against Donald Trump, this book is not for you. If you’re looking for a hagiography extolling Trump, this book is not for you. This book is for you if you want to understand why people support Trump and similar right-wing politicians and what it means for the future. Stepping away from the partisan bickering of America’s political duopoly, Why Trump? takes seriously the question of why people support Trump. What do these people see in Trump and why? Avoiding oversimplification, I provide a serious historical and philosophical analysis of the dynamics at play in the support of and opposition to Trump and offers concrete proposals for moving politics beyond its current morass of antagonism. Get more info and get the book: dgilesauthor.com/why-trump/
I'll never understand why people vote for him.
That's why I wrote the book. There are clear reasons why some people support Trump, and in their minds there are good reasons. When we understand that, and what those reasons are, political landscape and how we can respond to the right wing become clearer.
Because whitey is still sick that a black man was in the WH, then the blacks got on board when covid money was foolishly handed out.
Haven't read it yet but the premise, as expressed, has been my experience for more than 50 years. He may be on to something.
I hope you will read it, because we need more clarity about the political landscape, and we need more conversation about how we want our society to be.
Good show, just subscribed Mate.
Much appreciated!
Why have all the presidents been related to the monarchy?
To which monarch was Obama related? Or Trump?
Most people of western European origin can trace their line back to some form of royalty
The next book you should write is “why they hate Trump”. I’ve never heard a legit answer to that question. They always Just start become unhinged and start screaming out a bunch of slurs.
I addressed that question in my previous book: dgilesauthor.com/left-wing-right-wing-people-and-power/
No, we dont start screaming slurs at trump, theres many reasons, the main reason why i hate him is, hes advisors and election specialists all told him, that the electiomn was fair, and that he lost, but he still chose to say it was rigged, that broke the Usa, and lead to events like jan 6th, and now, i am deeply afraid of whta his supporters mightdo if he loses again
He tells it like it is & explains his policies. THEN ACTUALLY DOES IT WITH NO COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE OPPOSITION
Thanks, it's what I do, and I appreciate the support. We are working for a higher form of political dialogue instead of the oppositional politics we see from both sides..
@@InsertPhilosophyHere “Higher form of political dialogue” I hope you understand that your ethereal point is not possible when one side is advocating policies which have over the course of time led to destruction, tyranny and the complete collapse of economies.
Of course the reactionary right aren't interested in constructive dialogue. That doesn't stop the rest of us from having a higher form of political dialogue.
Rottenness
Why America first ?
Nationalism based on the myth of American exceptionalism. I discuss it at length in the book.
I have read that the nazis initially built the gas chambers to murder people with disabilities. Then realised they could use them to murder Jews.
Why do some people support Trump? Hatred.
Soul sickness
Hatred of what?
Expanding universe seems like a mathematical trickery.
You are correct. Physicist Sabine Hossenfelder says that physicists care more about their clever mathematical theories than in the evidence and data. She left academic physics for that reason.
I’m no physicist but could it be that when we look out, we still see the after effects of an expanding universe but is currently stopped or maybe even collapsing outside our “light” vision? Like the snap back of a stretched rubber band that hasn’t snapped back to where we are (but coming)? Or maybe the universe is so vast that the farthest our ability to see is still so minuscule in the comparison that we are unable to see whatever is going on (expansion, static, collapsing) with any real certainty? Like our ability to see through a very foggy morning that your entire community was scooped up (quietly of course) and moved 600 miles North/South/East or West and you would have no idea what’s going on past your ability to “see”, but your town looks the same. So nothing changes. You assume your home, neighborhood and town are the same? Anyway that’s what I was thinking.
There are several possibilities that fit the evidence, but the theory of a continuing expending universe is not one of them.
I have always had this idea that space between objects is zero in the sense that the only thing separating two objects is time. In this universe, space is a 3D singularity. Moving forward in a space singularity loops back upon the original position and future self. This means that there are timelines extending out from the singularity in all directions. The thing that gives space depth is not space itself, but time. Space or the energy contained in it is simply interacting with its self at a given intersection of future timelines. Time itself is an emergent property of a 3D singularity. Imagine an electron in this 3D singularity at t=0. The electron moves forwards to t=1 and interacts with its self. The electron collides with itself. No collision actually occurs, instead the electrons repel each other in different directions/timelines. However, because the electrons were travelling in the same direction there is a net difference in energy. The electron AT t=1 gains energy while the electron FROM t=0 loses energy. The lesser energy electron is now moving backwards relative to its prior direction of movement. Therefore, the lesser energy electron will interact with a higher energy electron at t=2 that is moving forward. The net result is that the electrons will repel each other and there will be some energy exchanged. Replace the electron with a wave moving in all directions and we'll observe many complex wave interactions occurring as t increase. Many timelines will form branching out from the singularity and intersecting in all directions. This is the space we perceive and it is responsible for the red shift of light. As photons intersect through timelines, self-interacting destructive interference occurs. The net result is a loss of energy overtime that manifest as increased wavelength. Space being a singularity also makes quantum physics more intuitive. As we zoom in on the very small, t approaches 0. In this domain interactions occur faster than we can physical perceive and our interacting with these particles to perform science in anyway changes their timelines and obscures their physics. The double slit experiment is a perfect example of space being a singularity. A photon does not enter one slit, it propagates as a wave in all directions. From our emergent perspective, we perceive this as a wave of probability. But from the perspective of the singularity, the wave interactions are due to underlying physics we emergent beings cannot observe. When we attempt to observe the photon, timelines become entangled before the photon wave enters the slits and the photon can no longer interact with itself. Even if we observe which slit the photon comes out of, we have effectively erased all the timelines where the photon would self-interact beyond the slits. Photons themselves give strength to the idea that space is a singularity. How can a photon move at a constant speed and oscillate if it is not interacting with itself? Try to imagine how a photon can interact with itself which would result in an oscillating wave. Self-interference!
Very interesting
I now do not know what to believe. Very confused. Even Einstein took the red shift noted by Hubble to mean the galaxies were receding. What else could anyone conclude?
In 1929, it was a reasonable assumption. But decades later, knowing what we now know, we have to change our assumptions.
Imagine not being able to articulate that a large portion of matter in the observable universe is moving away from what seems to be an epicentre when time is reversed and you just call it space expansion 😂
Are you sure tho, you need to check that the numbers for densities you are referencing does not come from a model of how the universe should look today, given it evolving simultaneously over the entire space. You must be sure that the distributions you reference are from direct observations of what we see, not what we think is there assuming isotropic light velocity.
"be sure that the distributions you reference are from direct observations of what we see" They are.
Yeah, need to look for myself at the data, but distance is not so simple, because yes, if light has travelled towards us for 8 billion years, the distance it travelled at the time for each little piece of space was 8 billion light years, but that is not the distance now, the earlier a distance was travelled the larger it is now. Still this error is not that important, we should see less density now than earlier. But there is some subtlety in this because the very close neighbourhood might be more or less dense than other regions, so you have to look at scales that are isotropic in density, and there is a problem because this measure can only tell you anything if that isotropy and uniformity is there, now thats kot a huge issue, it would be great to prove that either the density of galaxies has to have been non isotropic and unform or the expension is not there, but there are other issues, a simple one is the size of galaxies and the matter in gas, or conversions between dark matter and normal matter that might habe occoured, there is a huge amount of styff to consider, and these concerns are just off the cuff, first you have to make sure that 1 your arguments are sound, and 2 that your claim is true, that the prediction from the expanding model is not reflecting the densities over time.
A light of a star that is 8 billion light years away did not take 8 billion years to reach us, I think your assumption is wrong. The big bang is thought to have happened 13.8 billion years ago, but we can see stuff that is 47 billion light years away. This is presumably because those galaxies were closer when light from them started the journey towards us. But, the space in between us meanwhile got larger, so they are further away now.
"A light of a star that is 8 billion light years away did not take 8 billion years to reach us." You might want to rethink that unless you can prove to physics your brand new definition of "light year."
@@InsertPhilosophyHere light year, a distance light travels in a year through space.
Quick quiz: how long does it take for light to travel one light year???
@@InsertPhilosophyHere They wouldn't need to prove that to Physicists because that's the accepted understanding that you are critiquing. I think you raised an interesting point in the video, if studies really do show that densities are remaining consistent, a lot of cosmology would have to be completely reworked! I really do encourage you to learn about why the current theories lead us to think that light that left a galaxy 8 billion light years away, took 8 billion years to reach us, but is currently thought to be 47 light years away because space has expanded that much over those 8 billion years.
@@Condorosa " a lot of cosmology would have to be completely reworked." It does, and in some areas, they are willing to do the rework, but they still strangely, almost religiously, cling to the expansionist dogma. You allude to one of the mental gymnastics and tortuous contortions that some have come up with to cling to the dogma. When you throw out the laws of physics and logic itself, you can conjecture anything, huh?
We see the Universe through dirt, but dirt needs to be cleaned. ❤ ❤ ❤ (for 119 years) By determining the constancy of speed of light, all experiments and Michelson-Morley experiments are indirect and incomplete. If the Michelson-Morley experiment was carried out on a bus or airplane and was used to determine speed. only then will this experience be direct. Therefore, Einstein does not rely on the Michelson-Morley experiment. Question. Do you have an example of such direct experience? New technologies, new research tools Let me suggest for schoolchildren and students on one's own to measure the Universe, dark energy, black holes, etc. To do this, I propose two practical devices. «laser tape measure *+reference distance* 1,000,000 m”» and «Michelson-Morley HYBRID Gyroscope». I am writing to you with a proposal for the joint invention of a HYBRID gyroscope from non-circular, TWO coils with a new type of optical fiber with a “hollow core photonic-substituted vacuum zone or (NANF)” where - the light travels 250000 (In a laser tape measure, the length of the optical fiber is fixed at 1000000 ) meters in each arm, while it does not exceed the parameters 84/84/84 cm, and the weight is 24 kg. Manufacturers of “Fiber Optic Gyroscopes” can produce HYBRID gyroscopes for educational and practical use in schools and higher education institutions. Einstein dreamed of measuring the speed of a train, an airplane - through the Michelson-Morley experiment of 1881/2024, and only then would the experiment be more than 70% complete. This can be done using a fiber optic HYBRID gyroscope. Based on the completion of more than 70% of Michelson's experiment, the following postulates can be proven: Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta, and dominant gravitational fields adjust the speed of light in a vacuum. you can make scientific discoveries; in astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, higher theoretical physics,... (We are not looking for ether, we will see the work of gravitational quanta) The result is a «theory of everything» in a simple teaching device and a new tape measure for measuring the universe.
It could be that the frequency of light naturally shifts in the direction of red over time? Or what if everything in the universe is uniformly shrinking in on its self while the space between remains the same? this would seem as though everything would be getting further apart. Although you may have just debunked that idea in this video as well.
Some physicists theorize that light waves lose energy over time and distance and thus shift to the red. I don't believe that theory is widely held, but it would explain the observed redshifts. Some theorize an oscillating universe in which there is a period of expansion followed by a period of contraction, perhaps back into a singularity and then the cycle begins again. The reality remains, though, that no observed data supports an expanding universe. It was an assumption based on a misinterpretation of redshifts.
Do you have a source for saying all surveys find no difference in galactic number density with redshift or is it just the images?
Images have citations listed on them. But yes, all surveys have yielded the same results. None to the contrary.
@@InsertPhilosophyHere you would need to calculate the number density across time and account for observational biases where less luminous galaxies are only detected at lower redshift in order for this to constitute evidence. It's cool that you have found this seeming trend but I don't think it's time to throw out the whole big bang theory until there is solid evidence that you are correct
Do you think though, that even if the universe isn't expanding, some sort of “big bang” happened? I say this mainly because of the empirical evidence that the Cosmic Microwave Background gives us about the properties of the universe billions of years ago
We can't rule it out, but it also can't be postulated with absolute certainty. Astrophysicist Dr. Borchardt has argued against the Big Bang hypothesis (thescientificworldview.blogspot.com/2024/06/big-bang-theory-falsification-no-24-290.html), and he makes solid arguments based on evidence. For me, the issue is less the Big Bang than it is science's failure to consider evidence and instead clings to theory. I'm with physicist Sabine Hossenfelder who critiques theoretical physics' turn away from evidence, What we have in physics today is the tail wagging the dog--fudging data and multiplying entities to support theories--rather than how science should work--theory adapting to evidence. The CMB is a prime example. It, in and of itself, is ambiguous, yet astrophysics insists that it can only be explained by one hypothesis--theirs.
Redshift needs to be rethought.
Not sure. Someone came in, posted several bits of nonsense and then the posts disappeared. He must have deleted them.
@@InsertPhilosophyHere OK, it's possible.
When you were analysing those graphs did you account for the telescoping that happens because the universe is expanding? The red to blue graph look like a fan, but that’s not what the actual shape of the universe, the fan should constrict as it goes back in time because the universe was smaller. If you do that then yes the universe was more dense, at least it seems to be from eyeballing it. But that’s why it’s so important to label your axes. Did you also account for the fact that more stars are made as the universe goes on? So we would expect density to increase with time, but it at the very least stays the same.
No one suggests that the "actual shape of the universe." However, it is the data of all the observations, and the observations do not show the density of galaxy distribution required for the expanding universe theory to be true. Creation of stars are irrelevant because stars are within galaxies and the issue is galaxy distribution not stellar distribution. Changing the subject doesn't solve the central issue. Distance equals time, and the labels in the maps of distance to galaxies means as those galaxies were that amount of time ago. That is an inescapable reality that no mental gymnastics can avoid.
It's bizarre how some people will just make up stuff to hide the flaws in their theories. Scientists are as bad as religious fundamentalists in that. Maybe you can just say angels are pulling at the corners of the universe and making it get bigger? It would make as much sense as your dodge of the facts. "You can't see the angels pulling the fan." LOL!
@@idar.4987 That's too harsh, but the human frailties that distort religion also distort science. Scientists say they don't need philosophy, so they don't learn critical thinking outside their narrow analytic perspective. They really don't know Ockham's Razor.
I thought the theory was that at first, the first 6-8 billion years, gravity held in check the dark energy that has more recently been expanding the universe
Great presentation
Thanks. That is one of the workarounds that has been proposed. To the credit of some astrophysicists, they are sincerely trying to account for the data anomalies, but they will eventually have to jettison the assumptions made about red shift and continual expansion. Imagining additional entities is not a good strategy.
True, the theory never made enough sense to be held as passionately as they cling to it.
Old world cosmogony is very bizarre in how many across the world that will denounce their own mother before they let go of this . We do anthropically plagerize ourselves then prescribe but this was older than the great debate and at that time they were warned how anthrosphy gets computed into theosaphy next iteration by what they wanted . We are repeating ancient world time mistakes by math mapping dark matter spirits in the sky with a methusela equation monds theory of lazy light on deck if it fails. Anylitical phylospher blakes multi verse is more like multi galaxies. Qauntom many world is more like phase state many elements on planets lol
No quest for eqaul measure above all else even if one must re allocate affinities when they stagnate Even in granted deterministic on paper to population species ordering where experts argue over the slightest variation we are forced to make up our own marduk basisn mind model. We have youth clearing out safe spaces for abused orcles to speak safely. They are measuring devine right blood in nephew justifying why you can skip direct reproduction by measuring 72 genders on harmons, melanin in skin races as completly different species. 1900s structuralism is very much a problem threatening the west right now rooted in classrooms
Good to see someone doing thinking about this. As you explain, the evidence says one reality very clearly, but the so-called experts decide they prefer something else to be true. How political is science anyway? Because this sounds so much like politics.
All human activities have some elements and tensions that we could call "political." Within science, as everywhere, there are egos and identities involved, and that causes people to be resistant to change their beliefs.
@@InsertPhilosophyHere Good explanation, thanks.
If it's not expanding (which I thought I had convincing math for to explain the redshift) then you have to come up with an explanation for "The Dark Energy Survey Supernova Program: Slow supernovae show cosmological time dilation out to z∼1" which is a new paper on archivx
Mind you the paper is mistitled, and it's not time. Dilation but is probably light propagation delay... But then at z=1 the galaxies are moving away at 1 light month per month.... Or the speed of light...
Yes, I read about that paper, though I have not read it in its entirety. However, its conclusion that matter is traveling at the speed of light, if not faster, is another clear piece of evidence that the observed red shifts must be effects caused by something other than actual velocity.
@@InsertPhilosophyHere well within its own space it's not moving that fast.... But the total space plus the small difference as the light travels gives a small stretch. Z=1 isn't 1/2 the frequency
When one's calculations violate the laws of physics, one needs to change either one's calculations or one's beliefs in what are laws of physics. Neither is happening . . . yet.
Red shift, red shift no cogent explanation yet?
Nope, but the observed red shifts must be effects caused by something other than actual velocity. That astrophysicists aren't even looking for that explanation is baffling. It's as I explained, a resistance to change the paradigm despite the clear evidence./
@@InsertPhilosophyHere light expands and reduces in intensity on its way to us, hence redshift. It's illogical for anything to travel for billions of years without losing energy. Besides, what would the universe be expanding into? 😂
@@SciD1 True, and I've also read that studies have shown that light is also affected by passing through dust and gasses. We can't even imagine how much dust and gasses light must have to pass through in a billion light years distance. Also, if space is curved,, that may affect redshift of light. There are much better explanations for the observed redshifts than infinite expansion.
We don't know what effects traveling billions of light years has on light. One theory is that being a wave, light loses energy and thus redshifts. Not sure I buy that conjecture. But again and again, these attempts to defend the expanding universe assumption (EUA) are avoiding the reality that we do not see galaxies flying apart form each other as required by the theory. The only support for EUA is redshift and other evidence defeats it, including that space is flat, so thinks for mentioning that.
@@InsertPhilosophyHere I happen to completely reject the wave model of light, because a few colleagues and I have performed the double-slit experiment in a cloud chamber, or with the use of a smoke machine. What Young was interpreting as wave interference producing that fringe pattern, we have observed completely differently. The fringe pattern is not a result of wave interference, but rather individual reflected rays, rays simply reflecting off the separator, which is never a flat surface, at different angles, and off the opposite sides of both slits (four surfaces total). We were able to follow the path of light between the slits and the screen. This is also how we explain the supposed collapse of waves into particles. The detector is simply detecting individual reflected rays, and interpreting them as discrete particles, hence the HUGE confusion that led to quantum madness. That being said, what does this tell you about redshift? This, of course, completely contradicts quantum mechanics, and is why we have received a lot of hostility. We simply are unable to convince not only the scientific community, but the general public. The wave dogma is old and extremely hard to go against, especially with the enormous amount of technology humanity has been able to produce in the past 100 years or so. Many attribute that to quantum mechanics, of course. Quantum mechanics is nothing more than a probabilistic mathematical framework based on the misunderstanding and the misinterpretation of the nature of light, and the double-slit experiment. Maybe that's why it's "probabilistic"? The MATH may be useful for replicating technology and chemical reactions, but it has no bearing on reality itself, because the theory is founded on the fallacy of quantum state superposition.
I'll add it to my list of books to purchase.
Why do some people support Trump? Why has the subject of Trump become the dominant subject of US politics? The new book by Dr. Douglas Giles, Why Trump? Why Some People Support Him-How the Rest of Us Can Respond, considers those and connected questions by looking at American history to show that the phenomenon really isn't about Trump. Trump is a symptom more than he is a cause. Dr. Douglas Giles, a professor of philosophy at Elmhurst University, specializes in researching political movements and ideologies. Why Trump? takes seriously the question of why people support Trump. What do they see in him and why? Avoiding oversimplification, Dr. Giles provides a serious historical and philosophical analysis of the dynamics at play in the support of and opposition to Trump and offers concrete proposals for moving politics beyond its current morass of antagonism. Why Trump? shows there is little new in Trump or the things he says and does. His success in attaining power lies in his ability to harness a long-simmering feeling in a segment of the American population. Realizing that simple reality opens the door to a deeper understanding of the particular strain of US political culture that is behind the movement that currently takes Trump as its center of focus.
Frat boys gone wild. 😂
Listening to this, I can hear modern ideas of cognitive behavioral therapy. Never thought the two could be connected. Fascinating.
Thanks for your comment. So many of the ideas we hear about today have been influenced by philosophers. I enjoy showing people the many connections among ideas. Thanks for watching!
Isn't it related with fraternity? Sigma Chi, brothers... Where else could they have picked up this crap?
I don't know much about fraternities, so maybe. It's silly bros either way.
I really appreciate this. It's great to see this analyzed properly!
Thanks. I apply philosophy to anything and everything.