Comments by "bruzote" (@bruzote) on "Veritasium" channel.

  1. That we do it is not crazy. What is crazy is the desperation part you mention. The unwillingness to even see what is obvious.
    52
  2. Questions like this are really a measure of how much you worry about what the interview wants to hear and what you do about it.
    52
  3. They don't use magnetic fields. They use the smell of nonna's home cooking.
    24
  4. That approach to thinking is the opposite of Occam's Razor. You're saying the most likely solution is the most complex one, in which another universe must exist with highly intelligent creatures that have the ability to simulate a universe. Why not just then look at a glass of milk and assume it's really an alien masquerading as a glass of milk? In both case, your hypothesis would not be inconsistent with the known facts, and thereby you have a genius "solution" explaining your observations.
    7
  5.  @jykox  - Quantum entanglement does not require a Higgs boson from what I understand. I believe you are conflating the vague HYPOTHESIS that entangled Higgs bosons confer mass with the concept that ANY particles can be entangled. Yes, entangled particles can manifest characteristic changes simultaneously, but that does not necessarily mean that the speed of light does not exist.
    6
  6.  @FiferSkipper  - You should watch the Veritasium episode in which a college physics professor bets Derek that Derek is wrong about something. It might teach you humility. Sometimes, even if you know what you know it does NOT mean what you know applies to a situation for which you lack familiarity.
    6
  7. You're not understanding what the outcome is you're trying to reproduce. You're simply trying to get certain types of phenomena, including amplification of the input. You don't need to show the same exact field each time. If you did, it might suggest your findings ONLY apply to your test object, not rotating fluid spherical shells in general.
    6
  8.  @frankwijnans444  - The most common? Define common. BTW, I have three scientific degrees, including one in physics, so don't assume it's your eigenvalue jargon that prompted my response, just your questionable use of the word "common".
    5
  9.  @totalchoaspunk1757  - Efficient at destroying engines that were never designed for it.
    4
  10. No more than the trust in other critical parts. Still, for a numerical reference, aircraft passenger seatbelts are rated to handle a roughly 3000 lb force. The biggest leap of faith is making sure your buckle is closed properly. That requires trust in yourself more than the belt IMHO.
    3
  11.  @TheGamingScientist27  - You clearly have not watched enough Hollywood movies. A person can even fall 30 feet and still instantly stop by grabbing a ledge, ladder, or rope, as long as they let a loud "Oomph!" to balance the deceleration forces.
    3
  12.  @romanbucharist4708  - Some of the best are willing to do the hard work of finding a statistician to review the statistical analysis. Better to get it right the first time than have a reviewer skewer you - or a letter to the editor prove you messed up.
    3
  13.  @Trip_mania  - You're splitting hairs. After all, if you want to be reductionist, year senses don't sense pressure, they sense stretching due to lack of equal pressure on both sides. Your ears just sense the tension, not even the differential. So, if magnetic direction could affect the torque on cellular molecules and that were transduced into a signal, one could sense magnetic field direction.
    3
  14. Sounds like the Onion "person on the street" opinions.
    3
  15.  Science Revolution  - You are either a highly dedicated troll or you''re in need of a nice cup of chamomile tea.
    2
  16.  Science Revolution  - You did your math wrong there, fella. You would end up with net ZERO force. Also, how do you explain neutron star mass?
    2
  17.  @Tristoo  - The pilot knows a thing or two about seat belts and he knows HIS helicopter has seat belts that reliably work.
    2
  18.  @derptyderp5287  - HA! =:-D
    2
  19. Don't get too cocky. We often think we understand something...until we realize we don't. ;-) If you have not learned that yet, wait until you experience more challenging problems to eventually teach you that lesson.
    2
  20.  @TheRealThomasPaine1776  - Sometimes, a 10% increase in the supply of a commodity can collapse the market price. Consumers go to the cheapest seller, so the sellers have a price reduction race to the bottom. Flip it around, and consumers have no choice but to pay top dollar since they can't shop around. So, yeah, 10% reduction in use of a product can destroy profits in a market. Not market volume but profit for the producers. Of course, the same profit collapse for the producers is a massive savings (profit) for the consumers, people who typically need the money a lot more than the barons collecting most of the profit from a common market.
    2
  21.  @channelsixtysix066  - I gave that a fleeting thought, but didn't buy into it. Maybe I need to revisit that idea. I had always been taught in physics that they represented unmanifested reality. Sorry, but that's not a "real" answer for me. Maybe there is some other way I will find a suitable relief to my being irked by these imaginary numbers.
    2
  22. I am laughing as I imagine this happening (after unintentionally installing the windmill backwards) during a well-attended demonstration of the original idea. That would look funny. Slightly forward, then back. Oh, wait, forward! No...back.
    2
  23.  @Cryseris  - I believe the video includes a comment that it is not only possible, but has been done! That is a bit mind-bending to me as well. I am humbled by these sailcraft videos.
    2
  24.  @darthmaul197  - Sorry, but the half-life was experimentally shown to be AT LEAST THREE EARTH YEARS, IF NOT INFINITE. So, all that means is that IF photons decay, they do NOT decay in three years or less. But, they might not decay at all!
    2
  25. No. Even in an optimal scenario, wind can only APPROACH the speed of light. Matter cannot travel at light speed. So in your hypothetical case, the car would still travel faster than the wind without hitting light speed.
    2
  26. I was looking forward to seeing the Tannhauser Gate.
    2
  27.  @AceStrife  - Once you have an agreement, some jackazz wants to be different so s/he can feel special. That's why the job of grammar cops is never done. It's why languages will ALWAYS be hard to learn and impossible to completely master.
    2
  28.  @funkyflames7430  - You think the pseudo-3-d moving image is sufficient. I think you are still either not understanding it fully or you are blind to the fact you are intuiting factors that are not even mentioned.
    2
  29.  @vsiegel  - He did not prove Feynman wrong. Prove he did.
    2
  30. I suspect it also has to do with hunting technique. If you're venomous, you're probably a hunter. A hunter in cold climates can't afford to envenom and wait for the death of its prey. It needs to pursue, kill, and eat. If the prey gets away, the predator might not find another prey soon.
    1
  31. I think you've got it backwards. Do you think wolves have all winter to wait for a prey to do die? They need to eat frequently to stay alive. Same with other predators in the cold. They need fuel, they don't have to be lazy ambush predators using venom.
    1
  32.  @MidnightSt  - I remember reading about some group of people that had a culture of paying attention to their direction (small-town Norse people in the boonies, or something like that?) Maybe you're good at that as well. They simply seemed to have a background process of paying attention and remembering
    1
  33.  @brettgoldsmith8584  - 2.9K upvotes who don't get that AFTER watching the video. :-b
    1
  34.  @xavierrodriguez2463  - All we know are correlations.
    1
  35.  Science Revolution  - Unless you can read minds, you should be wise enough to know you can't say why other people do things. Also, force is a human abstract concept. We decide what is a force and what is not. It's that simple. If we say gravity is not a force, it is not. For now, it is not clear to ME that Einstein proved gravity is not a force. However, I have never played with tensors, let alone relativity. I simply make my statement because everything I have heard suggests to me the models don't TREAT gravity as a force, but that doesn't mean we could not define it as one and model it similarly to others. Maybe we'll have an answer some day, but for now calling people liars is way out of line.
    1
  36.  @Free_Krazy  - I don't know why people are comparing automobile seatbelt latches to aviation latches. They operate differently.
    1
  37.  @tomothybahamothy  - No, they don't need a certain altitude to open. However, they DO need a certain altitude to functionally inflate. ;-D
    1
  38. I wonder if thinking about this concept (especially the speed of electrons) affects one's speculations about how bodily damage is done by lightning. I lazily assumed that a cascade of electron motion along the electric field induced by lightning can lead to collisional energy losses and heat generation within the human body hit by the lightning. So how is that damage created? I've never really known. Once again, I am surprised by lacking a certain knowledge I assumed I possess. While I feel embarrassed at hubris leading to simply assume I understood, I am excited at the prospect of learning about another area of knowledge regarding the magical universe around us.
    1
  39.  @derpy6653  - Randomness has NEVER been proven, despite the self-deceptions of those who generate probability distributions that would exist for truly "random" behavior and then are mapped to events with similar distributions. Then those doing so claim "If A then B means if B then A! If a random series of events creates this distribution, then this distribution forces me to conclude it can only be created by truly random events."
    1
  40.  @mariosspyrou1054  - Then it's not science.
    1
  41. My Dad used to run away from me, saying he was allergic to the son. I guess this is proof it's hereditary?
    1
  42. When I get tangled up in Christmas lights and fall over, I always end up with my head pointing north.
    1
  43. I believe your question is proof that this demonstration failed to achieve what the presenter claimed to do.
    1
  44. Considering how sensitive the standard should be to any loss of atoms, it was very inappropriate of the agency to let him handle this object. Life is full of examples of unnecessary activities like this when the people involved thought, "How could anything possibly go wrong?" The fact, something could, and nothing positive could come out of this tool getting to hold a round, shiny object and somehow thinking it is amazing!
    1
  45. That might just be a statistical issue, particularly since heartbeats have fuzzy start and end definitions.
    1
  46. Well, force diagrams applied to multiple points on a string/rope are a popular thing for solving such problems. Plus, you are referring to a test that has students with an IQ of 160 taking the test. The test is only for finding the best, not the average.
    1
  47. I have my suspicions that the issue is also one of metabolism and seasonal survival. Larger animals that survive the winter without hibernation must be hunters. Sitting around as an ambush predator doesn't work well in winter. If you're not using ambush, venom is not too important - you're pursuing your meal and need to get a good handle on it to get venom into it.. If you can pursue and take it down, though, you don't need venom! You already have the ability to kill. What about smaller predators, like insects? Well, two things. Larger insects survive in warmer temperatures. That seems purely seasonal driven. It's harder to become a deadly "venomous" spider or scorpion when your dose is irrelevant. I wonder if you normalize dose sizes inversely to latitude, the density of envenoming predators gets closer to an even spread across latitudes.
    1
  48. Scout was a euphemism for the guy nobody wanted to be around. ;-D
    1
  49. Hmmm, maybe apply a field from the outside instead of inside.
    1
  50.  @Mr.Unacceptable  - LEDs have filaments?
    1