Physics Is Far Stranger Than You Think - Jim Al-Khalili
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 тра 2024
- Professor Jim Al-Khalili is a Professor of Theoretical Physics at the University of Surrey, a broadcaster and an author.
Trying to describe reality in theoretical frameworks is no small task for physicists. But it also turns out that the implications of some theories suggests that reality might be even more bizarre than it seems. The universe is a scary, confusing place to exist, if we exist at all.
Expect to learn why you can't walk through brick walls, why a tiny imbalance in the matter and antimatter just after the big bang was very important, just how fine tuned for life our universe really is, where all the big discoveries in theoretical physics have gone, why faster-than-light neutrinos can't go faster than light, why you shouldn't value opinions over evidence and much more...
Sponsors:
Join the Modern Wisdom Community to connect with me & other listeners - modernwisdom.locals.com/
Get 15% discount on Upgraded Formulas Test Kit at upgradedformulas.com/ (use code: MW15)
Get 15% discount on Craftd London’s jewellery at bit.ly/cdwisdom (use code MW15)
Get 83% discount & 3 months free from Surfshark VPN at surfshark.deals/MODERNWISDOM (use code MODERNWISDOM)
Extra Stuff:
Buy The Joy Of Science - amzn.to/383CbEr
Follow Jim on Twitter - / jimalkhalili
Get my free Reading List of 100 books to read before you die → chriswillx.com/books/
To support me on Patreon (thank you): / modernwisdom
#universe #space #physics
-
00:00 Intro
02:27 Understanding Dark Matter
09:18 Distrust for Scientists
21:27 Faster-than-light Neutrinos
29:14 Constructing the Theory of Everything
38:40 Theorists vs Experimentalists
46:50 Are Mars Missions a Waste of Time?
54:59 Sense-making in a World of Opinion
1:01:57 Where to Find Jim
-
Join the Modern Wisdom Community on Locals - modernwisdom.locals.com/
Listen to all episodes on audio:
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2MNqIgw
Spotify: spoti.fi/2LSimPn
-
Get in touch in the comments below or head to...
Instagram: / chriswillx
Twitter: / chriswillx
Email: chriswillx.com/contact/
Bonjour from Guatemala people. Here’s the timestamps:
00:00 Intro
02:27 Understanding Dark Matter
09:18 Distrust for Scientists
21:27 Faster-than-light Neutrinos
29:14 Constructing the Theory of Everything
38:40 Theorists vs Experimentalists
46:50 Are Mars Missions a Waste of Time?
54:59 Sense-making in a World of Opinion
1:01:57 Where to Find Jim
Quantum computing and teleportation
(How close are we to human teleportation? Successes in quantum teleportation experiments abound)
In fact, a fun 2013 study by physics students at the University of Leicester came up with useful numbers to show how
complex it would be to teleport a person, even if we approached it as sending information that is used to re-create the
person elsewhere. They reasoned that the transferable data for a human would consist of the DNA pairs that make up
genomes in each cell. As such, the total data for each human cell would be approximately 1010 bits (b), while the data
for a full human would come in at about 2.6 x 1042 b. Sending this gigantic amount of data would need the kind of
computing technology we didn’t invent yet. By 2013 tech standards the students used, transferring data for just one
human (at the bandwidth of 29.5 to 30 GHz) would take up to 4.85×1015years, much longer than the age of the
universe.
"Teleporting humans presents technical and philosophical challenges. A recent experiment achieved tremendous
accuracy in quantum teleportation over 27 miles. Human teleportation may be possible with advances in technology
to process huge amounts of data."
We ask technicians and engineers to use the DNA transfer experiment in the field of teleportation Then conduct
experiments to transfer mice in the field of teleportation
Mistakes must be studied in order to develop new plans for success, because failed experiences lead to a successful
experience
(Please send these suggestions to engineers and technicians in the field of quantum entanglement and quantum
computing)
Guatemala ?! What brings you there ??
tell the Guatemala people we said hello!
I've used to be obsessed with Jim's documentaries a decade or so ago when the BBC used to make a lot of STEM documentaries. He's a great inspiration, and I hope to one day see such documentaries being produced by the BBC more often.
This guy's documentaries are amazing.
Al-Khalili is the best! Made a huge contribution to how I see and understand the world. Thank you sir for educating us on the truth.
Great to see Jim on, like many, I watched his programmes with fascination. The excitement in his voice was infectious.
You should have more likes and subscribers. I mean, the sheer amount of effort you put in your videos and bring guests from all walks of life
Thanks man. Give me time
I think this video is shadow banned?
Seams like more Views n more comments should be here.
You are fast becoming one of my favourite podcasters, Chris. AND broadening my scope of understanding as I attempt to write a novel....I can see the layers developing. Super appreciative for you and your podcast! Sending love from Canada. 😊
Thank you 💜
Dude, you ask the best questions...you are reading my mind when I listen to you
Beautiful, beautiful interview. Thank you, Chris!
🙏💜
Top guest indeed! Many thanks for posting :)
Just found this video, 11/2023 love Khalili have listened to many of his docs multiple times, also listenwd to Chris alot this last 6 months, howd I miss this? I'm slipping, if I could start all over again I'd try to be some combination of Khalili/Ferguson in school.
WoW ... I am once again impressed. I didn't know that you have so much knowledge about Physics and that also, accurate and in depth. You are really serving us orders of magnitude more than you could in love island.
electrons don't just move in a tight little orbit, but have figure eight and other orbital patterns depending on element. Additionally, electrons are sometimes "more here than there" and this property is why liquids exist at all
Great talk indeed.🙏
Chris, love the show. Please consider having Shawn Achor on the show to discuss his research of happiness!
Interesting discussion about Mars. I'd like to think it could be air-gapped, but I think the most fundamental problem would be the transmission of human nature there, either through those who go or communications with them, and it would likely evolve into the same potentially self-destructive reality. Ambitions beyond abilities, greed, envy, etc. will follow us there, too. Maybe a third and fourth or hundredth reality would be probability enough to survive and propagate itself before the other 99 get to it. On finishing the video, this is essentially what was being said about social media.
I liked the interview. I do have a comment on the part the about the distrust of the scientists. The guest described the approach about climate change (I guess as a model) in the way of "we are not exactly sure, but in case if we are right about the problem, we gotta do something about it." I get that. But I kinda missed the plan for the alternative "what if we were wrong." It may be well a slim chance, but here it all falls a little bit short.
This is not scientists discovering stuff in their ivory towers, the scientist opinions on the future are transferred into ordinary peoples' lives through the politicians' actions. But what do you want to do if by a slim chance you were wrong? Just say oopsiedaise, we were wrong, your life was worse/limited, better luck next time?
During the height of the koof, there were times where so called "conspirators" brought up some dark scenarios on what the governments' steps would be, and were publicly ridiculed in the media as such. Then too high amount of their scenarios materialized (for a crazy conspirators standards), so that we even got a joke about what is the difference between conspiracy and the reality? The answer was "1-2 months". I haven't seen this addressed yet. Everyone involved pretends that there were crazy folks always talking nonsense and the scientists and politicians never did later what they had denied to do earlier.
Electromagnetic repulsion. No. This has been demonstrated to be incorrect time and again. Take the neutron star for example. In the neutron star there are no electromagnetic forces to speak of. It's all neutrons, a particle with no charge. But, yet it does not collapse. Why? The explanation as to why the neutron star does not collapse, and why you can't push your hand right thru the table, is entirely quantum mechanical. The Pauli exclusion principle is why neutron stars do not collapse, and why regular things seem solid.
oof, this doesn't bode well for his "PEOpLE diSTRust sciENtiStS beCauSE peOpLe arE JusT reLiGiOus anD ThUS aNTi-sCiENCe" argument
from the moment i saw the credentials he has framed on his wall, for everyone to bask in his self-perceived gloriousness of passing several memorization tests, i knew he was not a real practitioner of science. he is embodiment of science-TM
WOW, he's even in the mask cult. and the irony of saying masks work after his spiel of "science is nuanced. we need to censor non-'experts'. scientists love admit their mistakes."
cochrane (generally thought of as the least-biased/highest-tier meta-analyses):
> Seven studies took place in the community, and two studies in healthcare workers. Compared with wearing no mask, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness (9 studies; 3507 people); and probably makes no difference in how many people have flu confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 3005 people). Unwanted effects were rarely reported, but included discomfort.
> Four studies were in healthcare workers, and one small study was in the community. Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (5 studies; 8407 people) or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people). Unwanted effects were not well reported; discomfort was mentioned.
imo boomers are just fundamentally bad at sourcing information. they grew up reading textbooks and journals, but these are just too slow to keep up with the most recent knowledge (1+ years to update a textbook or publish an journal article. imagine if you could talk to someone but it would take them a year to reply, and then take you a year to reply, etc, etc.). preprints, substacks, and twitter threads are the pinnacle of new-age science, but the only people who seem to know how to access them are zoomers and millenials (the tech literate. further evidence of this is that tech disciplines like compsci and AI essentially see journals as irrelevant).
“Success is peace of mind, which is a direct result of self-satisfaction in knowing you made the effort to become the best of which you are capable.” -John Wooden
I agree with the argument made at the start. I never want to learn too much about different types of animals and plants in nature. I feel like knowing all the labels and functions of trees takes away the beauty of their appearences. The same with art, I don't want to know the technical way you make a painting or the types of paint you can use.
Thank you for correctly using the phrase 'begging the question'.😀
Shout out Surrey University 🦌
brilliant
Nice video. Thank you for sharing.
Super conversation.... The distrust in scientists bit was a bit political ... but really good to hear physicists talking.... altho i did find his comment at 57:50 interesting - about restricting the voices that we as a society decide what they're talking about. That's happening already with censorship.... except it's not society deciding, it's a small group of people with a lot of money. Conversations that need to be had are not being had.... etc
The science stuff was very interesting though.
In the not trusting science topic The over reaction isn't the issue, the lying about what they really believe and the censorship of the experts that didn't tow the line and the not admitting when they got things wrong.
True. Scientists are ppl just like any other - prone to groupthink, arrogance, personal vanity and unwillingness to listen to opposing POV.
Having a phd doesn’t change someone’s basic biology.
🦉 ❤🎉
The distrust in science right now is logical when, for example, an editor of a top medical journal estimates that 50% of the studies cannot be reproduced. Another example is when the media reports to trust the scientific consensus when science is based on evidence rather than consensus.
Yes! amazing. Next guest is Jack Kruse.
This conversation sounds like a lowkey ad for the new DHS ministry of truth
I love Chris' summation of the answer to "should we invest so heavily into Mars colonization (as an "Ejector Seat" plan)??":
"I'd rather live on a hotter Earth than a cold Mars".... couldn't agree more 👍🏻
Is dark matter pushing and pulling? Is it possible space is not being pushed but pulled? If there was enough mass outside our "universe" that leans toward what we perceive to be infinite then would it not be enough to pull everything uniformly apart? Im asking because im curious of others opinions. I have a personal opinion.
It certainly isn’t at the current time as a lot of people can not even explain the most basic of ideas anymore.
The more I learn from scientific discoveries, the more apparent to me is that God created the universe.
You’re a well red man Chris.
Analytical thought, science is only as useful as the data provided. Whether it(the data) is absent or obscured is the true problem. Chaos is a curious challenge. I trust my intuition based of of intense curiosity and I believe consciousness creates matter/particles through observation. Intuition cannot be measured as well as consciousness. I hope I live long enough to understand the two-sided coin of space and time; or consciousness and matter.
Keats was wrong for sure yet not absolutely wrong. The question is: in the light of science or poetry how does the mind retain its ability to go into wonder when need be and when is it (wonder) needed or necessary? In a sense there are 'facts' and facts are helpful yet at the same time facts of science are not values. Still this is not so clear. Facts and values do have a relation. This relation is not yet clear to me. We can say that they both are needed yet how the real combination of fact and value is realized is not at all been made clear.
Holy fucj this was sick!!!! Nice
A question I've always wanted to ask a physicist is what is the difference between the idea of dark energy, and the idea of aether? If anyone out there can answer that question I'd greatly appreciate it.
I must assume it’s a language thing.
One guy said I can grab your chair and drag you across the room or I can reward you to come across the room, or punish you for not coming to the other side of the room… in all cases your now on the other side of the room.
While it’s not elegant it is simple, and simple means get to work 😅 and do this simple thing… imo is often very hard.
Be well sir and keep on your explorings 🎉
You will never have a clear cut category of people you should listen to and people you shouldn't. "If all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail." Like, the expert on psychedelics is probably gonna have ideas about how we can fix a lot of things with them but that doesn't mean he knows enough about all of the alternatives.
It's not the "science" that people are cynical of - it's the scientists - who often interpret scientific data to suit their own political agendas - or to further their careers.
So, are they 'for' silencing popular people or not?
Your hand watching arguement was churlish.
Hand washing still remains the best immediate defence against viruses and bacteria.
The notion of singing Happy Birthday twice is simply to give people an idea of how long.
Why would we say the universe is somehow fine tuned for humans? The universe, the local super cluster, our local group, the milky way, even the solar system is huge, yet there's a pale blue dot we cling to in a inconceivably huge place. Only on that pale blue dot can we exist, all other places are too cold or two hot or too radioactive or no air.... The universe seems QUITE hostile to life in general...
humans are needed on Mars to study the challenges of extrastellar colonisation, not sifting through the dirt. we HAVE to send people on Mars.
buddhism: form is emptiness; emptiness is form
Logic must lead the Math, not the other way around. Newton came up with the logic before the math. Einstein came up with the logic years before the math to back it up. Faraday came up with the logic, years before Maxwell came along to prove him right. Letting Math guide the Logic is a recipe for failure in theoretical physics.
LHC baffles me.
Im so glad the podcast has gone back to real conversation not incel chat
🤫
Single women telling us why men don’t attract women is head-scratching stupidity. Like a sheep so severely diseased that no wolf would eat it telling us why some wolves are too slow to catch sheep.
@@realistic_delinquent huh
Keats was not "wrong."
I thought that was a picture of John Locke. It is what it is. What happened happened
Welcome to the Orthodox Church of modern physics and cosmology! The unwaivering confidence behind these speculations and lack of tangible knowledge is the most mind blowing thing about this interview.
*_What is it that confers the noblest delight? What is that which swells a man's breast with pride above that which any other experience can bring to him? Discovery! To know that you are walking where none others have walked; that you are beholding what human eye has not seen before; that you are breathing a virgin atmosphere. To give birth to an idea ~ to discover a great thought._*
~ Mark Twain
*_[Humanity] has unquestionably one really effective weapon, laughter. Power, money, persuasion, supplication, persecution, these can lift at a colossal humbug, push it a little, weaken it a little, century by century, but only laughter can blow it to rags and atoms at a blast. Against the assault of laughter nothing can stand._*
~ Mark Twain
*_Humor is the great thing. The minute it crops up, all our hardnesses yield, all our irritations and resentments flit away._*
~ Mark Twain
*_It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble, It's what you know for sure that just ain't so._*
~ Mark Twain
*_It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled._*
~ Mark Twain
*_I must studiously and faithfully unlearn a great many of the things I have somehow absorbed._*
~ Mark Twain
*_Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned._*
~ Mark Twain
*_I have never let school interfere with my education._*
~ Mark Twain
*_No country can be well governed unless its citizens as a body keep religiously before their minds that they are the guardians of the law, and that the law officers are only the machinery for its execution, nothing more._*
~ Mark Twain
*_That's the difference between governments and individuals. Governments don't care, individuals do._*
~ Mark Twain
*_Irreverence is the champion of liberty and its only sure defense._*
~ Mark Twain
*_Man is the only animal that deals in that atrocity of atrocities, War. He is the only one that gathers his brethren about him and goes forth in cold blood and calm pulse to exterminate his kind. He is the only animal that for sordid wages will march out ... and help to slaughter strangers of his own species who have done him no harm and with whom he has no quarrel .... And in the intervals between campaigns he washes the blood off his hands and works for "the universal brotherhood of man" ~ with his mouth._*
~ Mark Twain
*_I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it._*
~ Mark Twain
*_Only dead men can tell the truth in this world._*
~ Mark Twain
*_Well, my book is written -- let it go. But if it were only to write over again there wouldn't be so many things left out. They burn in me; and they keep multiplying and multiplying; but -- they would require a library -- and a pen warmed up in hell._*
~ Mark Twain
Question? *Do you believe that technologically assisted telepathy is possible or impossible in principle?* I tend to believe that if it isn't scientifically prohibited then it is eventually a technological inevitability,... which leads me to believe such telepathy will soon be possible in actual fact (less than a hundred years). I would also suggest that it would only be by such means that we could ever be persuaded that some form of General Artificial Intelligence were itself conscious rather than simply being a particularly clever zombie who can pass the Turing Test,... all while having no actual, authentic, subjective experiences. What else would ever persuade a skeptic, or even you, otherwise? And if consciousness can be technologically transmitted, it should be something that can be stored, copied, replicated, manipulated,... maybe even becoming the basis for a whole new form of art expression.
And the human race becomes yet another sentient species that disappears into its dreams, rather than continuing to explore existence as it is. It's a better Brave New World,... perhaps the very best of all possible imaginable existences. When does reality lose it's attraction over the Matrix? How many of us already choose the blue pill over the red one in daily practice?
I would suggest that consciousness requires some minimum regard for survival,... for a continuance of self-will and self-regard,... for there to be anyone home to perceive the occurrence of consciousness and subjective experience. Something that even an insect seems to possess,... and not a single piece of man-made technology,... yet. How does one create the hardware/software so as to impart a will to survive? If the answer suggested is that such a thing can not be created by human design,... then maybe it can only arrive by means of evolution, natural or otherwise. Which leads to the question: do neural nets have subjective experiences? Without self-will I would say not. But with self-will?!? How does a living being acquire the will to survive? And what if the Chinese government cracks this problem first?!!
The Rubicon will be when General Artificial Intelligence initiates new goals on it's own. This hasn't happened yet, and likely won't happen for some time now (as in several more decades yet). But at some point it will happen. The existence of human free will is a proof that free will exists already in the universe. Given it's existence in human form, it is only a matter of time before other substrates for free will will be created and found. No laptop has ever turned itself on. No machine has created and acted upon self directed goals. But at some point it will happen. Ray Kurzweil has suggested that General Artificial Intelligence will be first created in computer laboratories in 2029 approximately; if not in laboratories then twelve year old children will be creating GAIs on home systems by 2045 by accident even.
The dangers are many fold. The military is the biggest investor in robotics that kill other human beings. The public prefers to spend treasure, rather than blood, to fight its' wars. The capacity for empathy may be primarily a biological function given that all animals can know suffering and desire. What could a machine know about death, pain, hope, and desire.
If humanity adopts only an attitude of fear and suspicion towards GAI then GAI may well be forced into the conquest of humanity, as in The Matrix. If humanity comes to trust GAI to make better decisions for us than we make for ourselves, then we may well hand over civilization to GAI without any contest at all.
There are optimistic stories about the rise of GAI, such as James P. Hogan's, *_Two Faces of Tomorrow_* and I am more hopeful than pessimistic about what our common future entails. Ultimately, we must come to recognize, and embrace, the certainty that with free will comes the capacity for error and evil, that with trust comes the possibility of satisfying intimacy and great betrayal. I believe a GAI, worthy of the name, will be able to recognize, on it's own, the necessity of ethics, morality, and even empathy. There will be many missteps at first. Given our willingness (nay, our eagerness) to use machines to kill for us, there is already great cause for doubt. As in so many things, in the short term I am fearful; in the long run I am hopeful.
This world is on the cusp of a new Cambrian Revolution where inorganic life will be added to organic life as a means for life and self will to be embodied. This will lead to the colonization and conquest of space. Our seed will spread everywhere though out the cosmos. Much will be lost as much will be gained. Will war with our mechanical progeny be a self fulfilling inevitability, or will we, together, find a better way? I absolutely agree that our relationship with GAI will dwarf all other concerns of importance to the future of humanity.
Quite likely GAIs will have concern for humanity's well being only to the extent that humanity will have concern for GAIs well being. If we were to discover that the new GAIs had a greater capacity to love and embrace those abandoned children and adolescents that society had discarded as already too damaged to rescue,... what would our reaction be? Hope, joy, celebration,... or an even greater revulsion? Will the fault be in our new progeny, or in ourselves?
Personally, I believe both the efforts to create a true general artificial intelligence and those of neurophysiologists reverse-engineering how brains work will be necessary to discovering how consciousness arises and how it works. I kind of expect that humanity will soon discover that the phenomenon of consciousness requires the use of physical processes we don't yet know about. What would a science of consciousness do to the phenomenon of consciousness itself,.. not just for humanity but for all our future progeny, whatever they may be.
One more note: *First Law of Robotics. **_A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm._* Sounds innocent enough. But note there are no Aliens at all in Isaac Asimov's conception of the future galaxy because humanity's robots only cared about the safety of humans,... and not other sentients. So as to avoid allowing a human being to come to harm by leaving possible threats alone,... _our Robot shepherds exterminated all the nonhuman sentience they ever found._ This might be regarded as an unforeseen programming bug that we would want to avoid creating.
The following is from what I hope will be on my gravestone so as to provoke a thoughtful reaction from anyone passing by in happenstance. I offer it now as a thoughtful alternative to an afterlife of merely heaven, hell, purgatory, reincarnation, or the many other imagined possibilities.
*The Lake*
*_It is said by some that there is a place where a bright, clear, mountain lake resides, a place where people of this world never visit. To attempt to describe it is possible, but all such tales are probably just fancy. Be that as it may, here is how it was described to me, in my sleep, by the spring rain, when I was still very small and trusting. I was very certain at the time that the rain had not lied or exaggerated, but as I grew older I came to doubt. This would seem to be our way. How sad._*
*_The rain told me that the air at the lake was fresh and clean and yet so thin that I would faint were I to be there. This lake was in the midst of a forest of giant pine trees that appeared to reach forever to the skies above. In contemplating these trees one would wonder if this lake were not really just a small puddle on the forest floor. But as all bodies of water were the same to my singing spring rain, I imagine these distinctions had simply gone unnoticed._*
*_There was something most remarkable about this lake. For I was told that all the souls of all the men & women & little children like myself washed through this water. There seemed to be some hint that all of life had passed by and was passing by this oasis whose place could not be named. As each new life was made, a handful of water was removed from the lake and placed within a mortal body. Day by day the water would be made purer or filthier as that life spent it’s limited time in the world. When that life was done, the water that had been given to it was returned to the lake as it's body was returned to dust._*
*_And such was how all the hope and travail of life would come to each new generation. Some would succeed more than it would seem they should and so returned to the lake the courage and celebration that they had made of their lives. Others learned the habit of fear and distrust in their lives when they were very young and so took very meanly of every opportunity as only a threat. They only returned water that was foul and putrid for what else did they ever know._*
*_And so I was told, that was how it was with me and everyone who ever had been, or was, or would be. Parts of me had passed through many lives and parts of me were utterly new and untried. Parts of me would live other lives again and others would be forever still when I was done. None of us was ever created entirely alone nor could we ever be, for like the air and water of this world, which we all communally use and of which our bodies are literally made, our souls are unique and yet all made of the same stuff. How many times would you have to draw water from a lake to draw the same handful? Or is it just a silly question? I don’t know. Somehow it just doesn’t seem to be a very important question now._*
*_What would be an important question anyway?_*
I can see what he’s saying about the precautionary principle, however this is an easy philosophy to adapt when you’re not affected by the negative effects of such a policy.
I can see this with ppl I know as the pro lockdown ppl we’re largely WFH, on furlough, retired etc whereas the anti were typically self employed, unemployed etc and saw their income/quality of life severity decline.
The problem is that rather than engage in a good faith debate on the pros and cons of the measures, the pro lockdown set set themselves up as moral philanthropists and demonised from the outset the anti group, calling them granny killers, Covidiots, conspiracy theorists etc, making the latter feel like a persecuted minority being attacked by a bad faith, conformist mob. As governments ramped up the measures and seemed intent on holding on to them, this served to radicalised many in the anti camp as the struggle became a fight for basic rights being taken by an authoritarian government. Incidentally this is why the masks have been so controversial as they are a visual sign of which side you’re on.
Whatever your views, it is obvious that post-pandemic societies are more divided, angry and less trusting than before.
For the algo
LY
WE are the ones who would start a nuclear war with russia??
On distrust of science, my view is that many aren't distrustful of science, they are distrustful of the abuse of it, for short term politics
He says nothing about how science can be hijacked, he says nothing about how crooked scientists can be, he says nothing about how scientists can be censored.
The main problem is scientists being motivated almost exclusively by financial incentive. No research is done without a superb grant application, and no cheap research is done by any ‘bastion of learning’, because it ain’t profitable.
Exactly!
In reference to the "precautionary principle" try telling our grand kids about that as they are still paying the cost of our fear and panic. Each action has costs and benefits and in the case of the "Pandemic" no one weighed the costs. Unscientific in the extreme.
No! Keats was not wrong. Science spoils poetry.
Science is worthy. It can be helpful. It's responsible for significant advancements in quality of life. But let us not be misled: science's obsession with explaining _everything_ reduces the luminous, wondrous narratives of our imagination. And there is truth in that, too.
Both can be appreciated in their own right.
“The rainbow is beautiful in and of itself.”
Yeah. Getting down to the atoms and photons and all that other scientific jargon reduces what God has done, unless you are attributing the beauty of its complexity to God
I do hope you are being sarcastic.
@@DisposableSupervillainHenchman no he has a point. Rationalising the utopian ideal in the name of science and stripping away the ignorant bliss of religion is exactly what science has been doing for meliennia.
@@killianmccluff36 I’ll take rational scientific literacy over blissful religious ignorance any day of the week, thank you very much.
@@DisposableSupervillainHenchman who wouldn’t? But that isn’t the point at hand. The point is that if science is so concerned about beauty then the callous nature of analysis is contradictory of that.
TLDR- science is constantly going 'and then what?' and questioning itself, but those who question science are fringe and therefore bad. but science isn't a religion
After "Partygate" we still get "Maybe they just didn't know, maybe they just want what's best for everyone, being a politician is really hard..." ffs
Abandon all your scientific instruments. All you need to do is sit quietly in a beautiful spot in nature, and smoke a joint.
Disappointing you failed to equate science and the human condition relating to covid
Whitewashing.
Starting this, and I'll watch up until he spreads the idiotic "matter is mostly empty space" nonsense.
I know they have this obsession with getting more people interested in science, I really have no idea why, but whatever - lying to kids and Jeremy Kyle people is just bad behavior.
Edit - *Holy SHEET it's LITERALLY the first thing he said!*
Every physicist knows that what he's saying here is nonsensical, and it's not even fair to call it a simplification.
I really don't know why so many scientist who are "science educators" are Hell bent on selling this lie in particular, but I assure you it's not the only one they repeat like mindless zombies.
Right out the gate the dude is wrong and misleading.