Comments by "Lepi Doptera" (@lepidoptera9337) on "Professor Dave Explains" channel.

  1. Her criticism is not valid. She just wants to throw the entire world under the bus because the world didn't indulge her narcissism.
    9
  2. You do realize that all of those passages, when taken out of context, read like a madman's diatribe, right? At most you are indicating to us that you have serious issues.
    9
  3.  @juronpilo6109  He is not your "opponent". He is an adult who tells you the truth about yourself. If you don't like what you see, well, man, then it's time to tell the man in the mirror to change and grow up. ;-)
    7
  4.  @juronpilo6109  Then you are approx. 35 years late with the growing up thing. Don't wait too long. Life is finite. ;-)
    7
  5. Why are you begging for attention? Is Mommy not home, kid? ;-)
    7
  6. I am sure you have seen a lot of power outlets and electrical boxes in your 36 years in the military. And that is all you have seen. ;-)
    7
  7. What was poor about the government response? And what happened to all that Republican talk about taking responsibility yourself instead of getting help from the government? ;-)
    6
  8. Fauci and the CDC did no such thing. Their communications were almost all immunology 101 textbook facts. Those facts are not convenient, for sure. Beats dying on the respirator, though, as millions of people could tell you if they were still alive. What "sexual books" did state boards add? Sexual books like Marquis de Sade's "Justine"? Desclos' "Story of O"? Nin's "Delta of Venus"? THESE are "sexual" books worth reading. I very much doubt you will find any of those in school libraries. You probably won't even find them in the fiction section of many actual libraries. I am delighted to report that mine has them, which I find surprising. Maybe the US is not quite as intellectually corrupt, yet, as I thought. ;-)
    6
  9. Education is accessible. When was the last time you went to the library and looked at a book on molecular spectroscopy? Never, right? The problem is not that education isn't accessible. The problem is that educating yourself is extremely hard work. Very few people are willing to put that much work in.
    6
  10. Yep. The interesting thing about it is that none of those folks are giving actual citations, though. At least Christian apologists will give you a meaningless bible passage. ;-)
    6
  11. That's a rather cool myth. A guy who can write a letter to the US president that actually gets read is not "anti-establishment". ;-)
    6
  12. @ One can not hate what does not exist. One can, however, hate the scammers that keep pushing Adult Santa for monetary gain.
    6
  13.  @StickmanA  Let me give you some more attention. You are begging so nicely. ;-)
    5
  14. Which one? There are so many of them and every theist hates all gods that are not their own. That's a lot of god-hating. ;-)
    5
  15.  @ritchie6162  Of course. Religion is basically child abuse. It is well known that abused children have a high probability to become abusers.
    4
  16.  @HavartiCamembert  Distance is meaningless in this case because it keeps changing. Most galaxies that we are seeing today are, for all practical purposes, infinitely far away. No matter what we do, we can not reach them any longer.
    4
  17.  @futureshocked  I have been in research for a while and I didn't notice any malice towards women in physics in the last decades. There are few enough of them and the ones I met were doing their jobs very well. Now, if you mean that academia is "testy", then you are right. If you take the challenge of your ideas personally, then you don't belong in research. This won't change with the addition of more female researchers, either. Science is NOT about being nice. Science is about being right.
    4
  18. Name ten such articles of the top of your head. You can't. End of story.
    4
  19. A scientist is somebody who works on science. Sabine works exclusively on YouTube content these days. She is a YouTuber.
    4
  20. What is there to explain? The man has frozen half his brain to death, similar to how Tesla has electrocuted half his braincells.
    4
  21. That's correct. The people who actually know science who comment on Sabine's videos keep pointing out trivial mistakes and outright lies. ;-)
    4
  22. The theologians actually agree with you there. "Day" is not to be taken literally. Nothing in the bible is, really. It's all up for interpretation. It's the least exact document in the world. ;-)
    4
  23. Physicists are not responsible for the awful choices of the Nobel committee. Sabine's problem is not that she is a woman. Her problem is that she is a sub-par theorist. You can easily verify this by reading her publications.
    4
  24. One has to be an adult to practice the methodology that you just outlined because it starts with the question "What could I have done wrong?". Only a person who can constantly admit that they might be wrong can hope to achieve success in science. "Skeptics" simply don't have the required maturity. They can never be wrong in their own minds and so they can never self-correct.
    4
  25. No, Dude, she is not even in the same universe as "right". Even her best physics videos contain grossly false statements. So do her science papers, at least on the subject of quantum mechanics, and I am pretty sure that her high energy physics papers are close to irrelevant (at least at this point). In general the angle of her presentation is always designed to rile up the anti-science crowd. Her headlines are generally just troll content.
    4
  26. Because that is the public perception among her audience, which consists mostly of people who have been deeply humiliated in high school science and who are now holding a grudge against everybody who is associated with teaching good science.
    3
  27.  @abdullahtaha5767  Or is it? I have read several professional textbooks on cosmology and I don't remember seeing any claim in them that the universe had a starting point. I have only heard that point made by religious idiots without science education. ;-)
    3
  28. Both. Almost all of her headlines are misleading and her physics content is often technically flawed.
    3
  29. Here are your simulated round flight tickets. ;-)
    3
  30.  @theteacher2000  No offense, but if you have trouble with "proving" your own existence, then your major problem isn't science. It's mental health. You have not managed to develop a normal human psyche, yet.
    3
  31. Look, you can never argue against "The devil put them bones in them hills and them galaxies in the sky!". You are basically talking to mentally deranged people here.
    3
  32. I am sure you can show me where that date is in the bible. Chapter and verse, please. ;-)
    3
  33.  @karstentopp  Ussher was an idiot. There is no date in the bible. They weren't even using a solar calendar back then, so there can't be. ;-)
    3
  34.  @ProfessorDaveExplains  Nothing a new EU law and another $30 billion fine won't fix, eventually.
    3
  35. So you are saying he is just a harmless lunatic? That, unfortunately, is not true.
    3
  36. What sets science apart from anything else is that it has an ultimate arbitrator: reality. Please validate Sabine on reality and let us know how it went. You will see that she keeps talking a whole lot of nonsense all the time.
    3
  37. Even her physics videos were questionable, at best. The simple fact is that one can't make a buck with physics. I could easily post a 100% correct quantum mechanics video on the internet, but I can guarantee that it wouldn't get more than three views. Why? Because people are not looking for actual science information. They are looking for entertainment. When were you ever entertained by high school science class?
    3
  38. Penrose has no clue about high energy physics either. He is a relativist. The two sub-fields are about as related as pharmacology and psychiatry are. Pharmacologists can make psychiatric drugs, but would you actually want them to treat patients with severe psychiatric disorders? If not, then you can't expect Penrose to give you an actual criticism of high energy physics.
    3
  39. Wow, that was a giant turd. ;-)
    3
  40. The term you are looking for is "willfully ignorant". :-)
    3
  41.  @cjdvise  Dude, you are a lonely guy who wants attention. I can give that to you. What you don't sound like is a guy who wants to "learn". "god did it" is as far from intellectual curiosity as one can get without major brain damage. :-)
    3
  42. So does Trump if you are into lies. ;-)
    3
  43. There is no gradual difference between being wrong and being a little less wrong. As soon as you declare yourself a Christian you have left the realistic level completely and entered a madman's paranoid dreams.
    3
  44. I have been in academia for quite a while. I didn't meet all that many horrible people. Certainly no more than on average everywhere else.
    3
  45. Not only does she realize this, but she actually cultivates it. She would not get a tenth of the views if she would try to convey actual science.
    3
  46. Truth in science has always meant the same thing: whatever you say has to describe reality correctly. That hasn't changed. It's just as valid for you, me and Dave as it is for Sabine. What she says simply does not reflect reality correctly. Please try to grow up.
    3
  47.  @electricman523  So you are all crackle and no substance. Sounds about right. ;-)
    3
  48.  @leepretorius4869  All religion works like a Nigerian Prince scam. Can you tell me why you are a supporter of that particular kind of scam?
    3
  49. I have been to the arctic. It's cold, cold and cold. You aren't missing nearly as much as you think.
    3
  50. The problem is that if you don't already know physics, then you won't notice her technical mistakes in her physics content, either.
    3
  51. Dude, please get help from a good shrink. :-)
    3
  52. There is nothing to debate. You simply ask them for their high school experience. That usually settles it for me. Once everybody understands that anti-science skeptics are basically just living out their educational psychoses, it's game over on the topic.
    3
  53. Most people are factually stupid. Sometimes this has consequences and often it doesn't, but that doesn't change the fact. It's also not important. I have a physics PhD but I am absolutely stupid about American football. I don't even know the rules. All I ever see when I watch a game is a cloud of athletic people running around randomly on a green field with lines painted on it. Why am I stupid about the game? Because I never had the intellectual curiosity to learn more about it. That is MY fault and has nothing to do with the game. The same applies to quantum mechanics and most people. They just didn't take the time to learn about it. What is important is that you don't try to appear knowledgeable about things which you never took the time to learn.
    3
  54. That's why I don't watch Sabine's videos. Too much posturing, not enough actually true content. ;-)
    3
  55. Yes, if your goal as a writer is to publish a new pulp fiction fantasy booklet every two weeks, that might be true.
    2
  56.  @chadman9355  Why not? What's the difference between god and Santa? Both are made up, neither brings presents.
    2
  57. But it makes good money for the grifting kind.
    2
  58. You are correct about the latter, but the first statement is, unfortunately, not true. These people are dangerous. Not one by one but in totality they are causing a lot of harm.
    2
  59. Can you tell me what was lucrative about LHC and its detectors for the 50,000-100,000 people who spent years to decades on building them? I was there. I didn't get rich. I didn't see any of my fellow researchers getting rich, either. There were no luxury cars on the parking lots of my university or the CERN parking lot. What in the world are you talking about? To me you sound like a total bullshitter. :-)
    2
  60.  @icantthinkofaname158  I have no idea what that is even supposed to mean. Of course all of the money for LHC came from governments. Why would a private investor build an accelerator of this size? The largest commercial accelerators I am aware of are the size of a few lab tables and they are mostly being used for medicine and in material sciences. I don't know what "prestige" means in this context. Does a project like this attract young people with an interest in science? Yes. Do these young people bring money? No. They can barely pay the rent. ;-)
    2
  61. So what's the truth in a talking donkey? Please explain. ;-)
    2
  62. All you will see in a lab is a complicated machine that you won't understand. That doesn't create an understanding of science, either. Our schools are set up to get children to think logically, but the problem is that many children simply can't do that. They are, most likely genetically, predominantly right-brained individuals. In such people emotions can easily override logical thinking. These children are not doing well in school when it comes to science and mathematics, which creates an educational trauma. In adults that trauma manifests in different ways, from indifference towards science all the way to denialism.
    2
  63.  @lurkmoar9066  I am afraid of people who can't think straight. They are dangerous. ;-)
    2
  64. Knowledge is neither finite nor infinite. It's simply hard work. We call those who are not willing to do that hard work "intellectually lazy". ;-)
    2
  65. Yeah, but Elon Musk is special. He made billionaire. No real scientist has ever achieved that. They do, on average, get into lower middle class.
    2
  66. A creationist is a chess playing pigeon. You can never get through.
    2
  67. Academia hasn't been toxic towards women for a long time and even if that was so, it's not the reason why Sabine Hossenfelder lack success in physics. She is just not good enough. You can easily see that by reading her publications.
    2
  68. I have no idea how we are supposed to make financial gains from academia. I have NEVER seen anybody who got rich from it. :-)
    2
  69. Sabine was always a troll. Her best physics videos are just as bad as her physics papers.
    2
  70. Dude, the first images from China that came out showed hospital personnel in full protective gear with full face masks. Are you high? What are you smoking? ;-)
    2
  71.  @jarlsparkley  What makes you think that there is no "public oversight" of academia? Would it be the fact that you have never been part of it? ;-)
    2
  72. @ You will never get any detailed answers out of "skeptics". They are not interested in details. They just want to take a sledge hammer to everything that is not their own level of bullshit. At the end... most science trolls on the internet are actually simple neurotics. They are people who have been deeply hurt by our education system and who are looking for "revenge" for what has been done to them. I have been observing this phenomenon for a long time, building on my own experience with stress in school. Our education system is built on the (correct) premise that children don't want to learn and that they have to be forced. In the past this was literally done with a cane, i.e. with physical torture. Today we use psychological pressure. On the surface tests and exams are meant to verify that a child has learned the material, but in reality these tests are psychological tools to inflict humiliation by comparing the performance of children against each other. They are also projecting a threat that "Mommy and Daddy won't love you anymore if you are not doing well in school.". This stress, exerted over a dozen or more years leads to PTSD in many people. We need to stop this. Children who don't want to learn should not be "motivated" this way. It is absolutely counterproductive. We need to develop better methods of teaching.
    2
  73. @ Yes, I know that paying attention in school was too tedious for you. :-)
    2
  74. This genre has a long history on daytime tv.
    2
  75. Yes, that was bullshit. ;-)
    2
  76. It should. It gave you things like WW II and the holocaust in the past.
    2
  77. Let's put it this way, it doesn't take much to have systems that satisfy reasonable criteria for life like the ability to reproduce and to adapt to environmental changes. Some of the classical criteria like "metabolism" are trivially dictated by thermodynamics anyway. Adaptation and, slightly more specific, homeostasis are basically already satisfied by something as trivial as a chemical buffer system, so it's not like we are defining life as something overly complex to begin with.
    2
  78.  @elormyaw6183  These are also the wrong definitions, because what is alive is not a human being or a tree. It takes the entire planet to form life and to sustain life and it takes the entire universe to make the planet. The true "requirements" are much, much more stringent than what the biologists are usually talking about. The universe is simply capable of high levels of local organization. Biological life is most likely just one of these emergent local phenomena.
    2
  79.  @St37One  There is nothing to disagree about. Anybody can tell you last week's lottery numbers but nobody can tell you next week's. That the universe is not deterministic is a trivial fact. No offense, but did all of you stop growing intellectually in kindergarten? I mean we can agree that they couldn't know the reason why the universe isn't deterministic (because of relativity) in the 18th and 19th centuries when this concept was the color of the season, but that it was always a horrible color is trivial to spot, isn't it? ;-)
    2
  80.  @ponponpatapon9670  That ghosts and demons and gods are responsible for things in this world are not new ideas. They are the oldest of all ideas. They are nothing but an expression of complete intellectual laziness. If the OP doesn't want to be called intellectually lazy, then he shouldn't be intellectually lazy. ;-)
    2
  81.  @circleo1992  Yes, and every god is either a delusion or a Nigerian Prince. I will give you this: deists are not making a lot of money with theirs. ;-)
    2
  82. Psychology is not natural science to begin with. It's a specialty of medicine, which is not so much about understanding as it is about healing the human body (and in case of psychology about healing the mind). "Theories" are completely irrelevant in that context. The only relevance is success in helping people.
    2
  83. Anybody who is searching for scientific answers can find them in the library. Another podcast won't make any difference. The problem is NOT that we haven't been communicating science enough. The problem is that 99% of mankind are intellectually lazy.
    2
  84.  @famenpamendetsroy  Then I will simply tell you that you are full of bullshit. A priest who tells me about the resurrection is not a scientist. There is no evidence for the resurrection (but plenty of evidence against it) and the priest himself doesn't believe that resurrection is possible without his special pleading for his particular Nigerian Prince. There is a total lack of honesty there. :-)
    2
  85.  @cwbrooks5329  English is not my first language, but what does my age have to do with the immorality of religion? All religions lie about reality for economic gain. Are you claiming not to know that?
    2
  86. Evolution is a fact. You can believe in Santa Claus if you want, but you can not believe in facts.
    2
  87.  @georgelionon9050  Yes, it is a bad thing when somebody is using unfair criticism of others to enrich themselves. In the past this would have been called highly amoral, but Trump has unfortunately normalized lying.
    2
  88. Why do you want to imagine something that doesn't exist? ;-)
    2
  89. NSAIDs treat both the symptoms and the causes of many types of painful conditions.
    2
  90. That's total nonsense. The folks who are making decisions about science funding in government are the same scientists who are doing the work. Your proposals get judged by people who want to make just as much intellectual progress as you do. This is not a game of political chicken, no matter how opaque it must look for the average person who hasn't played it.
    2
  91. That is exactly what Sabine is doing, though. She simply lies about it with a fake authoritative tone of voice. There is no there there once you dig through her crap.
    2
  92.  @ashedtogether  Nobody gives a shit about her personal experience. The world does not evolve around Sabine. She needs to grow up. Of course academia is brutal in the sense that somebody is always better than you. It is also paid for by TAXPAYER money, which means that a scientist is RESPONSIBLE for using it wisely. That takes a lot of hard work. Let me spell this out for you in bold, even though I hate screaming on the internet: THIS IS NOT A GAME. We don't get to do this exclusively for personal enjoyment. This is serious business and if you want the money, then you have to deliver.
    2
  93.  @ashedtogether  Yes, that's a lie. I have been involved in the grant money process and there was nothing junk about it. It was the hard work of dozens, hundreds and in one case thousands of professors, lab scientists and PhD students. If you think it is easy to get some money from a funding agency with some bullshit, then you are not thinking. That, exactly, was Sabine's problem. She wasn't getting enough grants because she was pushing bullshit. You can see it in her own publications. She just doesn't have it.
    2
  94.  @kw4093-v3p  Yes, religion was always a Nigerian Prince scam. So what? So nothing. ;-)
    2
  95. Of course a high school dropout will feel that way. You are projecting to cover for your failure in school. ;-)
    2
  96. All you need to "create" all of this is an empty three dimensional background and even the "three" follows from fairly simple stability arguments.
    2
  97. Sabine is not like Musk. Musk is successful and he knows how to deliver. Sabine is not successful and she didn't deliver anything other than nonsensical YouTube videos. ;-)
    2
  98. One of you favorite science communicators told you a lot of nonsense about physics. The only reason why you can't tell is because you don't know physics to begin with. :-)
    2
  99. Well, universities are schools and you sound exactly like the kind of person who doesn't like school. :-)
    2
  100. And there is another flavor of crazy. ;-)
    2
  101.  @GoogleJedi What's crazy about the Earth being destroyed according to the bible? The fact that it was never destroyed in reality. ;-)
    2
  102. Mathematics is fundamentally different from physics. I am not saying that to diss you guys. Mathematicians are undoubtedly some of the smartest people in the room. I learned some of my core physics intuition from mathematicians. Having said that, you can see the actual difference in the experimental physics lab section. All those gadgets cost a lot of money. The most a mathematician will ever need beyond an office, pen, paper, a whiteboard, a laptop and the library is supercomputer time. Physicists need equipment worth tens of billions of dollars. That creates a very different level of accountability to the taxpayer.
    2
  103. If you think that string theory is physics, then it only shows that you don't know anything about physics. Physics is what they do at CERN and other laboratories. Did you ever take the time to visit one of those? I can guarantee that you won't see any strings there when you do.
    2
  104. @ You are correct. They are really that stupid. ;-)
    2
  105. Islam is simply a stolen version of Judaism and Christianity. It doesn't even pass the novelty smell test, let alone the moral or the factual smell tests.
    2
  106. I don't know who it is that you talked to but it was not somebody who loves science. Very few people know what a scientific theory is because they have never worked with one.
    2
  107.  @horisview  That is horrible. It disrupts your sleep cycle.
    2
  108.  @titan9259  I feel you. Have you been near the equator? There you have the opposite situation... sunsets and sunrises feel way to rapid. And in Australia I got lost all the time because the sun was going around the wrong way in the sky... well... it was where it always was, of course, but I was upside down!
    2
  109. The reason why she talks that way is because she is suffering from narcissistic personality disorder. She differs in nothing from your average priest/preacher/conservative politician at this point. Her entire being has been reduced to delivering the lines that make her money and that give her power over the idiots who are listening to her.
    2
  110. You are correct. We only built LHC because Congress cancelled the SSC. Does the Higgs field give a hoot? No. ;-)
    2
  111. Just because you believe your own lies doesn't make you an honest person.
    2
  112.  @robertnorth1681  Well, in that case you are a true idiot and need to be treated accordingly. I agree. ;-)
    2
  113. I am not aware that Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are tenured professors. What did I miss? ;-)
    2
  114. Then we should be debating the merit of tenure (which I am critical of myself), but what does that have to do with Sabine's false explanations about quantum mechanics, special relativity and string theory? Now, let's say you remove tenure, how does that change the dependence of students on their advisors? The advisor is the person who brought the grants in to do the research. If a grant approves X, then the advisor is required to have a student do something that is at least closely related to X. You can't just take that TAXPAYER money and do with it whatever you want just because the student feels like doing something else. Unless, of course, you will require students to bring their own grant money and lab equipment. Now that will be interesting, won't it... then only the 100 times millionaire and billionaire kids will ever get a PhD. ;-)
    1
  115. The ancient Greek didn't treat their mentally ill very well. That's why you tried your hardest not to appear mentally ill back then. Tolerance is a double edged sword. Today some of the mentally ill think they can run the asylum.
    1
  116. We have learned to produce (or rather, gather) energy without them. There is nothing scary about a solar panel. It's flat, sit on your roof all day and will never try to bite you. It doesn't even bark. ;-)
    1
  117. Yogis are conmen who practice contortionism. ;-)
    1
  118.  @RevivalOfBuzzBuzz  What have you been drinking? ;-)
    1
  119. They can be separated by an arbitrary distance. The pattern never disappears.
    1
  120.  @soyoltoi  Krauss is simply referring to the fact that we can derive ALL of modern physics from a few rather trivial (and empirically well confirmed) assumptions. One of them is that at the fundamental level spacetime is completely empty. That is what the relativity principle says, after all: there is no material background. The world is, indeed, structured as if it was made of absolutely nothing.
    1
  121. And you ain't seen nothing, yet. There is stuff in the pipeline that will blow people's minds, especially in sensing applications. Not to mention that this is the year of the 116 inch tv. I remember that we grew up with 12 inch tvs...
    1
  122. I don't believe we do. Gold was used for bonding wires in the past, but today we mostly use aluminum. Gold has terrible diffusion properties. It tends to move to places where you don't want it, which in semiconductors is not a good thing.
    1
  123. I understand quantum physics just fine. It's just absolutely nothing like the stuff you keep hearing on the internet, which is indeed complete bullshit. That's the problem with self-publishing: there is no quality control, whatsoever. Every idiot can tell you his version of reality, no matter how braindead. This brings the average IQ of mankind down, not up.
    1
  124. So does that mean you also believe a little bit in Santa? :-)
    1
  125. Social science and hard sciences like physics, chemistry and biology have very little in common. That doesn't invalidate social sciences, but if you think that there is even a shred of resemblance between these fields, then you have never had the stamina to sit through Magnetism 101. ;-)
    1
  126. @ You can't lie in physics. At most you can be stupid enough to believe that nobody will catch you. ;-) As for social sciences... I really don't give a crap about the emotional reward behavior of the average college student. ;-)
    1
  127. I recently went into the nearest public library. There was not a single physics textbook in the physics section. Honest to god, not one. I would have expected at the very least one or two college level textbooks about classical mechanics, electrodynamics, quantum mechanics and optics. I wasn't even hoping to see an atomic, nuclear physics or general relativity textbook... but there was NOTHING. All I could find were nonsensical things like Hawking's layman's books and stuff like it. Not even Weinberg's "The First Three Minutes" was there, even though that's at least a somewhat useful classic. Not even one copy of Heisenberg's "Physics and Philosophy" or Feynman's "QED" for historical reference (the content of both books is questionable from a modern point of view, but you as a librarian are neither required nor expected to judge that). This is NOT a problem with academia. In comparison, the physics section of the university library closest to me has something like 15,000 physics textbooks and a hundred journals (with many more online), if I remember correctly. So, if you want to talk about a real crisis here, it's a crisis of the public library system.
    1
  128. Yes, but they are not happy people. I have known several of them. Cognitive dissonance is very uncomfortable.
    1
  129. Why would editing DNA scare me? Every time mommy and daddy have a baby they are basically making a random mashup of the DNA in their egg and sperm cells, which contain grandma's and grandpa's DNA. Why are you more scared of scientifically informed precise editing than of random dice throws? It makes no sense given the number of really awful hereditary diseases.
    1
  130. Schroedinger's cat is not proper physics. It is, however, proof that Schroedinger didn't understand quantum mechanics, despite his major contributions to it.
    1
  131.  @FizzleFX  Not sure about that, either. Schroedinger had a very weird style. Of the five papers that lead up to the Schroedinger equation only the SE paper is even borderline intelligible for my taste. It is clear what he was trying to achieve with Schroedinger's cat, of course, but he picked a really poor example and he failed to analyze it properly. It's a little bit like Einstein and EPR and the later Heisenberg. They all came so close to understanding quantum mechanics properly and then something in their minds reverted back to semi-classical thinking. Very strange, indeed. Hindsight is 20-20, of course. For us it's much easier to stand on the shoulders of these giants than it was for them to give us this view.
    1
  132.  @abdullahtaha5767  So you are basically jamming your god into anything that you don't understand. That's a god created out of your personal ignorance, then. That's usually how gods are being created. Zeus and Thor were created because people didn't know about electricity and lightning. ;-)
    1
  133. @ I am not sure the majority of mankind ever had any solid principles of either kind. I would not claim that we were better in the past, there are too many very serious examples in history that prove otherwise.
    1
  134. @ I am a humanist by heart, but I have basically given up on humanism. We are getting too close to becoming transhumans now. Genetic alteration will probably become the norm within two or three generations and we might see direct brain interfaces even before that. It's either that or AI will steamroll us anyway. There is simply not enough time to execute a humanist improvement of most of mankind before either of these changes will take place. As to the question whether we are psychopathic by nature... yes, we had to be. There was no surviving the past without that trait.
    1
  135. @ No, I won't bet my social security on that, either. I don't have a hound in this race anymore, anyway. It's getting late for me. I would like to see more of the future just out of curiosity, but I am not sure I want to live as a young person in the 21st century. Whatever transition may be coming might be anything less than smooth. But then, was my generation really safe? The second half of the 20th century wasn't exactly a safe place to be, either. It's not like we were acting smart and in the best interest of our children, were we?
    1
  136. I don't know what the "decay rate of Earth's magnetic field" is supposed to be. The field doesn't decay. It changes polarity and loses most of its dipole moment more or less periodically. That has nothing to do with radioactive decay. We are, by the way, NOT measuring the decay rate of long lived radioactive isotopes in a short amount of time. We are measuring the ratio between the number of observed decays vs. the total number of nuclei. If the decay rates were significantly non-constant, then the isotope ratios in old samples would be wrong, but they aren't. The world is consistent with constant decay rates.
    1
  137. Why are you lying about yourself? You have never seen the inside of a science classroom as a teacher. :-)
    1
  138. YouTube has only one interest: to increase ad revenue. You can't do that if you promote academically correct videos. They are boring like hell. Nobody wants to watch them.
    1
  139. We are sharing enough DNA with mice that mice are useful as lab animals in preclinical research. So are dogs and several species of primates. Pig tissue is genetically similar enough for implantation in humans. Did I mention that we even use phages in drug discovery? Phage display techniques allow rapid evolutionary screening for libraries with up to 10^11 different expressions while the human immune antibody library is only on the order of 10^9 in size. All this bs about genetic (dis-)similarity is just an expression of creationist Dunning-Krueger. It completely ignores the reality that ALL life on Earth is closely related with some biochemical functions that have been preserved for hundreds of millions of years.
    1
  140. You never had to think about it. It's of no importance. ;-)
    1
  141. Condolences.
    1
  142. We never asked people to have "faith". We asked people to pay attention in school, in science, history and civics class. The proper function of a polity is not a matter of having religion. It's a matter of the majority acting RATIONALLY. Once that requirement is not satisfied, all hell breaks out.
    1
  143. No, this is worse. This is going towards schizophrenia.
    1
  144. Well, the message they are sending to their "fans" is correct, though. The world will go to shit if these very people keep behaving the way they do. They do, indeed, not know anything and they are all wrong almost all the time. So, yes, the messages these folks like to hear are really just a reflection of their own failings.
    1
  145. Nobody has any relevant expertise outside of the fields they are practicing. I can't comment on anything but physics. Ask me a chemistry question and I won't know as much as a first semester chem student. That's not the problem. The problem is Dunning-Kruger... when people are overestimating how much they know about something they don't know anything about.
    1
  146. @ No, I really didn't know that. They didn't teach that in either of my two universities and when I got my PhD in physics nobody pointed out to me that I can just ask a chemist about chemistry. Why did I never think about that? It's genius. ;-)
    1
  147. Can you give us that citation for a 2005 study that 85% of physics papers are either fakes or very poorly done? See, physics is the only thing that Sabine has been trained in. She knows squat about anything else and I can tell that even within physics she doesn't know all that much.
    1
  148. @ Repeating bullshit doesn't convert bullshit to gold. It just creates more bullshit. ;-)
    1
  149. @ Only a thoroughly mad person will believe that planks of wood have intelligence. When did you go mad? ;-)
    1
  150. Where does this idea come from that academia was ever easy????? If anything, academic research today is easier than in the past thanks to technology and intellectual tools that didn't exist fifty, a hundred or even four hundred years ago. Read Copernicus "On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres" and you will see how this giant of science had to literally grind away for years on ideas that we can easily teach kids in kindergarten today because we have all these beautiful pictures of the planets and the sky.
    1
  151. Yep. Physics in particular hasn't been materialist since the early 20th century. We know that "matter" is just an emergent effect. Sadly almost everybody is still wrapped up in the false philosophical categories of the 18th and 19th centuries. We had modern physics for almost 100 years now and very few people have even noticed that is it NOT an extension of 19th century physics. Quite the contrary. The reason for that is our school system. We are still teaching Newton, which is 100% false at the ontological level.
    1
  152. What is off in a video that mentions "god"? The word "god" is already 100% off. As soon as you see that you can tell that you are dealing with a scam. ;-)
    1
  153. I have good news for you: you didn't inherit your Dad's mental disease. You will be fine.
    1
  154.  @diamondenchantmentx  The people who wrote the OT had no interest in the question "Where it all came from...?". They only had an interest in "Who is protecting us?". The OT is a political text in which religion is used to cause a cohesive tribal identity for the Jewish people. They key phrase is not "In the beginning... ", but "I am your god who brought you out of Egypt..." because the Jewish god differentiates the Jews from the Babylonians who believed in the Babylonian gods. The discussion about the scientific credibility of the Genesis account did not even exist until the 17th century, or so. It's a modern phenomenon that developed after the reformation.
    1
  155.  @karstentopp  I am sure you have evidence for that made up statement. Any day now, kid, any day now. ;-)
    1
  156. Yes, that was a lot of bullshit.
    1
  157. John Nash was a highly accomplished mathematician. Schizophrenia doesn't make all people who are suffering from it completely helpless. Some are functioning on a high level. Terrence Howard is clearly a high functioning actor... who simply can't keep imagination and reality apart.
    1
  158. Let me give you attention. ;-)
    1
  159.  @Quinellipe  The general initial response by everybody I know was to grab the protective equipment. I even helped a friend in a hospital to find some expired facemasks that were sitting around in a lab storage room. Dude, you need to lay off the psychoactive substances. You seem to be taking them in random order. ;-)
    1
  160. We all did. Titration is the seventh wonder of science. It's so simple that it can't fail, yet it always does. ;-)
    1
  161. People don't know what plastics are and they have absolutely no clue that there is an entire class of plastics that are, strictly speaking, proteins or at least very protein-like materials while other natural materials like cellulose are also polymers of a different makeup. You can basically reduce the entire "problem" to a lack of education.
    1
  162. We are at the point where we are getting confirmation that roughly half of our fellow human beings are mentally insane. This needs to be taken into account in the future or the democracy experiment will take a very dark turn.
    1
  163. There is a good reason to take his internet access away. ;-)
    1
  164. Please try to choose better science communicators. Hossenfelder is, for sure, not one. An example of a good science communicator is Dr. Becky.
    1
  165. Christians don't really believe in Jesus. That's just too hard an example to follow. They rather follow any mental turd that a preacher drops on them.
    1
  166. Your pastor is still a deeply dishonest person. He makes his living by forcing a religious lie on children. The only way he could escape that reality is by sobering up and becoming an atheist.
    1
  167. Even in a universe that is suitable for life we are just a chance byproduct. The mass ratio between the mass of the sun and the mass of the biomass on Earth is 1e15 or so. Life is, most likely, only an afterthought in the entire universe. Probably no more than one part in 1e16 to 1e20 or so (that's just my own rough range estimate). Intelligent life... oh, boy... 1 in 1e30 or worse?
    1
  168. @ You can't name either, can you? :-)
    1
  169. It isn't a probability density function. That's one of the few glaring mistakes that many standard QM textbooks are sharing. To get a probability out of the wave function we have to sandwich a projection operator inbetween the wave function and its complex conjugate that describes the spectrum of the measurement system (that formula is called the Born rule). If we work in a position representation AND we are measuring position with arbitrary resolution (which no actual physical system can do), then that projection operator happens to be a unity operator. It's a mathematical corner case of the calculus that gives us different quantum mechanical measurements that is being frequently misinterpreted as a property of the wave function. The SE uses a unitary operator to describe the dynamic, so the total integral over the wave function stays the same. That, however, is NOT about the probability of finding the system in some state of space. It's about the total number of individual copies in the quantum mechanical ensemble staying unchanged. We start with an infinite number of systems and we end up with the exact same number of systems.
    1
  170.  @leopoldmolitch4040  A sane person is not required to stay nice at the sight of endless insanity. Where did you get that "rule" from? Did you make it up yourself? And what are you gaining by discounting sanity because of the tone in which it is being expressed? Is that helping YOUR case? Hardly. At most you are beginning to sound like a troll yourself. Here, have some more attention. :-)
    1
  171. Not really.
    1
  172. Yes, that was complete bullshit. ;-)
    1
  173. Academia is primarily about teaching. If your problem is that we don't let anybody just teach any nonsense, then you are right. We do not. We have very strict requirements for teaching at this level... which are actually still not strict enough, if you ask me.
    1
  174.  @georgelionon9050  I don't know what "the science system" is supposed to be. There is academia that teaches and does research. Then there is the national laboratory system for physics that does only research. That's a much easier environment to work in as a scientist. Other countries have equivalents of that. In medicine they have teaching hospitals. Geologists are working for the USGS, which provides a public service relating to health and safety. Oceanographers might be working for NOAA, space scientists are at NASA etc.. Each of these have individual oversight and org charts. They are all, at the end of the day, striving for excellence and have to account to the US taxpayer. If you think that this isn't being taken very seriously, then you must be a Trumper who feeds on fake news.
    1
  175. In that case you weren't paying attention in science class. ;-)
    1
  176. It isn't behind a paywall. You can simply walk into a university library and find all the literature for free. I do agree that there are not nearly enough textbooks in the public library system, though.
    1
  177.  @stargazer7644  The rest of you get in the car or on the bus and you drive or take a ride to the nearest one. Society makes this material available for free, but it doesn't have to serve it on a golden platter.
    1
  178.  @wawawuu1514  The internet is NOT academia. Academia are universities and colleges. Plenty of them allow public visitors to their libraries. At most they ask you to pay an annual user fee on the order of a few ten to a few hundred dollars. Running a library is very expensive and books and journals get damaged by use. Librarians need to pay the rent and so we pay them salaries. Surprise. What these institutions will not ask from you is a per item fee that the publishers are making their money with.
    1
  179.  @wawawuu1514  Then none of this should a big deal. We are generating scientific knowledge worth tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars a year and we are making it available for non-commercial use for basically for free. If you want a commercial license, then academic institutions will charge you. Depending on what you want to license you may have to pay thousands or even hundreds of millions of dollars for it. This, too, is necessary because the exploitation of inventions is expensive, so if anybody without a commercial license could use it, then corporations would simply not use it... without exclusive licenses one simply can't make a business case for investing the additional product R&D cost.
    1
  180.  @kujojotarostandoceanman2641  It has been around for a long time. They used to call it "the Gaia theory". I wasn't much of a fan of it because it sounded like new age nonsense, but if you really think about it, no species can survive without a very large number of other interconnected species. Even the most primitive life relies on a chemical or physical energy source that is provided by abiotic processes (like fusion in the sun) and different chemical sources (and sinks for waste products). So, yeah, life is one of those phenomena for which the usual divide-and-conquer strategy of science only gets us so far. It is a complex emergent phenomenon and we have to learn to analyze its complexities.
    1
  181. Her publications on quantum mechanics are complete nonsense. That's on the public record. I kind of doubt your statement about her intelligence. She may have an ability to manipulate math formally, but she lacks basic understanding of what it means and, more importantly, she doesn't have physics intuition. That's simply not enough to be a good physicist. If you want to see what the top people in the field look like, listen to Witten and Arkani-Hamed. There is an alternative explanation... if she knows what all of this means, then she doesn't mind lying, which is at least a moral flaw.
    1
  182. If that was "the only problem", then she would already be disqualified from modern physics. It hasn't been running on "hard determinism" since 1905.
    1
  183.  @St37One  Relativity tells us EXACTLY why the universe is not predictable: we have constantly energy flowing in from spacelike separated regions of spacetime. The point in time when we detect this energy (aka "event") is the first (and the last time) this energy can be detected. Nature won't and it can't give us a "heads up" for future events in general. A macroscopic example of this is NASA's "seven minutes of terror" video. During a Mars landing the radio signals from Mars are delayed by something like ten minutes. The actual atmospheric entry sequence, parachute deployment and ignition of landing engines/crane deployment for the lander payload are all over by the time the signal arrives. The ground controllers have no way of influencing these events, but they make a world of a difference to the folks who built the rover: if something goes wrong, they won't have a job for the next five to ten years (well, they have to start over from scratch). If it succeeds, then they will have a toy on Mars to play with. This is an example of non-determinism. The local future does not depend on the local past and present at all. It can not be influenced by any means imaginable and it can't be predicted with any formula from physics. It is like this all over the universe all the time on all temporal and spatial scales. "What happens next" is simply not fully predictable.
    1
  184. We teach the single, double and n-slit diffraction function in the same lecture in first year university level physics. All of it takes maybe half an hour.
    1
  185. Physicists, chemists and biologist aren't saying anything about social problems. These are not our fields. We don't have the tools and we don't even have any interest in social problems. If you want cheaper housing for the poor, then you have to hire some architects and a construction company. The physics department does NOT design multi-story housing and we do NOT have earth moving equipment. You also need to stop drinking. It makes you delusional about the separation of roles in a modern society. :-)
    1
  186.  @holyvoltage2762  I didn't read it. Why would I? :-)
    1
  187.  @s1nd3rr0z3  No such thing. There is only evolution and then there are intellectually lazy fools. ;-)
    1
  188.  @circleo1992  What's the difference between a deist and a theist? One has a d and the other a th in the name of his psychotic break. ;-)
    1
  189.  @cjdvise  Yes, and if they had started with something other than Nigerian Prince scams, then you might be living on a beautiful planet approx. 800 light years from here now. ;-)
    1
  190. Sorry that it runs in your family. :-)
    1
  191.  @charliep.9107  Either way I suggest you keep your distance.
    1
  192. Rogan makes his money with this kind of shit. And a lot of money it is. You can't expect him to give up on the money. He is a grifter. ;-)
    1
  193.  @Puukko79  Have you ever been to a psychologist? They will try to make you feel better, not tell you theories of how your brain works. :-)
    1
  194.  @Puukko79  What about "psychology is not science" did you not understand just now? Are you suffering from reading recognition problems? ;-)
    1
  195.  @Puukko79  And now you are feeling sorry for yourself. A Jungian would tell you now that you need to grow up. I am not a Jungian. I am a Freudian. I will let you blame your Mom for not giving you enough attention. ;-)
    1
  196. And gravity and that earth is not flat. Every time that line comes up you are dealing with one of three: a troll, an idiot or a genuine conman. ;-)
    1
  197. There are no particles. Quanta are small amounts of energy. When we detect one we get a "click" in a detector. The "clicks", i.e. when and where these detectors absorb a small amount of energy seem random. We therefor start to collect statistical information (histograms) about them. In the limit of large numbers these histograms become probability distributions. The theory predicts these probability distributions as the product between a wave function, its conjugate complex and a Hermitian projection operator that represents the absorption spectrum of a physical measurement system (the detector). What happens is that almost nobody who makes these videos actually knows WHY the formalism looks the way it looks. For that you would have to read Heisenberg's matrix mechanics papers, where this is somewhat laid out in a language that still relates to physics and that will give you a bit of physics intuition about what is happening. A few years later a mathematician called von Neuman generalized the relatively straight forward physics and math in Heisenberg's papers to an abstract mathematical formalism that comes from functional analysis (the mathematics of linear operators and function spaces). At that point the connection to measured quanta of energy disappears from the textbooks and is replaced with a general notion of "quantum mechanical state". You also lose a sense that this "state" means the state of a quantum mechanical ensemble, i.e. an infinite repetition of the same experiment. Instead it starts looking like as if the wave function relates to an individual system. That is complete nonsense. It was never constructed that way, neither by Heisenberg nor by von Neumann. It's just easy to loose sight of the translation between physical measurements ("clicks") and mathematical formulas.
    1
  198. Electrons don't orbit. You are being deceived by images which do not represent reality.
    1
  199.  @phirah79  Science simply doesn't care about the lies called "gods". What it does is to lay bare the difference between an honest person called "scientist" and a liar called "priest", "preacher" etc.. The honest person provides ample evidence, the priests, preachers etc. only provide bullshit. Say it ain't so. ;-)
    1
  200.  @famenpamendetsroy  Show me one resurrected dinosaur. How about a common house cat that came back from the dead? Anybody in your family that got resurrected, yet? How about ANYBODY at all for which you have actual evidence? Nothing. Zip. Zilch. It's like the resurrection is a fairytale, like Little Red Riding Hood. Oh, wait. The resurrection is a fairytale. And that's OK. There is nothing wrong with fairytales. Where the lies start is when somebody claims that a fairytale is reality. :-)
    1
  201. @ It's a fact. I have antivaxxers in my own family. I don't know how many times they have had COVID, already, must have been four or five by now. They never learn, no matter how crap they feel. They are more afraid of "the spikes" than they are of the disease. It's completely irrational.
    1
  202. Elon Musk is a prime example of an emotionally incomplete individual. He is probably on the extremely functional end of the Asperger's spectrum.
    1
  203.  @HAARGLaga  Elon Musk is undoubtedly intelligent, but he is clearly not mentally stable. One thing has nothing to do with the other, unfortunately.
    1
  204. Here, let me give you some attention for spewing nonsense. ;-)
    1
  205. Lying about Jesus is NOT compatible with being honest about nature. It doesn't matter that you don't mean to lie or that you believe it is within your special religious liberty rights to lie. You are still lying. The reason why we are not persecuting religion is to keep the peace. It is NOT because we believe that there is a morally justified version of it. There isn't. If you want to actually become as morally upright as you believe you are, then you have to leave this mind virus behind.
    1
  206.  @cwbrooks5329  It means that even though humanists know that all religion is a scam we are not trying to eradicate it with laws and government action. So you agree that as a religious person you are acting immorally. In that case, what is your reason for that immorality, exactly?
    1
  207.  @cwbrooks5329  What supposition did I make, exactly? Christianity lies about the resurrection. That is what it makes money with. These are simply the facts. If anybody is immature here, then it is you. You can not admit that I have you in a corner from which there is no escape. You know it. I know it. Everybody who reads this knows it. Take care. And please stop lying. ;-)
    1
  208. Yes, but he was still under the influence of his invisible friend.
    1
  209. Let me give you some more attention, Mike. You are begging so nicely for it. ;-)
    1
  210.  @Skivv5  All religion works exactly like the Nigerian Prince scam.
    1
  211. There are no particles in nature. There are only people who can't remember the eight word sentence "A photon is a small amount of energy." that they were taught in high school science class.
    1
  212.  @stupidteous  We are teaching the basics of quantum mechanics in high school. Have been for almost 50 years. :-)
    1
  213. They may have been. The garden of Eden is a symbol for the bliss of early childhood. His parents may have covered him with a dino blanket or maybe he had a dino toy when he was very little. ;-)
    1
  214.  @TomHawks-k8l  What is not? The symbolic character of the garden that stands for early childhood? That's completely obvious once you actually read Genesis 3 with both eyes open. You have been in Eden. You talked to the snake. You ate the fruit. OK, maybe you didn't eat quite as much as I did, though. ;-)
    1
  215.  @MarshallMadrigal-j2h  That is an often repeated falsehood. You are welcome to read the bible. You will find that it does not contain any scientific content, but it is full with politics. The Abrahamic religions, in particular, came out of late iron age politics. That's the reason why they are so useless: the conditions that created them haven't existed in almost 2000 years.
    1
  216. Wow, that was a lot of bullshit. ;-)
    1
  217.  @georgelionon9050  If your nest is dirty then you might be right, but nothing about physics is dirty the way Sabine makes it appear. Her argument about high energy physics being at an impasse was discussed among high energy physicists when she was still in Kindergarten. She didn't discover the energy desert problem and she has done nothing to solve it. That string theory is "not even wrong" was also known long before Sabine was ever a name in the public's eye. It has nothing to do with theory. It's a trivial consequence of the weakness of gravity. It simply doesn't give us anything to describe beyond the level of general relativity. There is no reproducibility crisis in physics, either. We have literally spent billions of tax payer dollars to validate major results. Her understanding of quantum mechanics is trivially wrong. She hasn't even read the literature up to 1932 for all I can tell and the publications with her name on it are not worth the paper they have been printed on. Whenever she talks about nuclear energy and renewables or the climate she gets major facts wrong, which shows that she hasn't even spent ten minutes on research.
    1
  218.  @jarlsparkley  I am an experimental high energy physicist. I was there when they designed LHC and its detectors. I talked to the theorists about these problems. I sat in dozens of science talks where these problems were discussed seriously by people who actually understand them. I have read approx. 2000 pages of detector design proposal documents front to back (plus some of the design documents of the SSL, which was the way better machine) and as a result I got to design one of the central elements of one of the world's largest high energy physics detectors. Unlike Sabine I have actually accomplished something of lasting value in physics. ;-)
    1
  219.  @jarlsparkley  The reason why I can tell that Sabine is lying is because I am one of the people she is lying about. Now let me give you some more attention, lonely kid. You are begging for it so nicely. ;-)
    1
  220.  @jarlsparkley  All you are spelling out here is that you don't know anything about physics. :-) The existence of an energy desert, for instance, is not a problem. It's a highly likely fact. An adult simply accepts facts instead of complaining about them. That string theory is not even wrong is also just an EXPERIMENTAL fact. Theory doesn't change nature. Theorists can't make gravity stronger just because it would be more convenient for experimentalists. Let's say somebody discovers the correct theory of quantum gravity tomorrow by chance. It would be EXACTLY as untestable as string theory. That you don't understand this makes you the very kind of fool that Sabine is making money with. ;-)
    1
  221. You know what Jesus said? You are the first. All we other people know is what anonymous guys wrote about him who never actually met the man. ;-)
    1
  222.  @BooksRebound  So you are the anti-religious guy who knows what Jesus said? Cool. I think I must be on the internet. ;-)
    1
  223.  @BooksRebound  I am aware that that is not what they mean. They truly mean that what the books say is literally what was said 2000 years ago. The books are written by the holy spirit, after all. You didn't know that? Then you never had Catholic religious education. :-)
    1
  224. The electron is a quantum of energy. It is neither a particle nor is it a wave. Dirac pointed this out around 1930, but nobody was paying any attention to the obvious solution of a false dichotomy fallacy: it's neither. It's something completely different.
    1
  225. Chomsky differs very little from Sabine Hossenfelder. Both have a huge ego that they can't back up with actual knowledge.
    1
  226. Can you please explain to me what you mean by "breakthrough" in physics?
    1
  227.  @AMC2283  No, but if we can make life from scratch ourselves then the miracle of creation will have become nothing but an exercise of advanced science, which will prove once and for all that god is, at most, an alien, and not a supernatural being.
    1
  228. The common good doesn't work against the natural order. The only places worth living are those where people still value the common good. How do I know? I was born in one of those places where they don't. Thank god my parents got us out of that hellhole.
    1
  229. @ I see. I can agree with some of that. Yes, at least half of mankind seem to be unable of logical thinking and a few percent are incapable of any kind of altruistic behavior. As to the problem of leadership in democracies... we will have to find structures that are resilient against ill-will. So far we have not.
    1
  230. @ The natural order is evolution. Human evolution has mostly tended towards altruism because otherwise small tribes can't survive. The other extreme, psychopathy, however, is also needed for survival, so humans produce both, altruists and psychopaths.
    1
  231. @ Only if by "order" you mean the order of the grave. Evolution is the order of life. Admittedly, one has to pay a very heavy price for it.
    1
  232. Real science is also drama free, apart from the deadlines which cause a lot of sleepless nights. Sabine is simply putting a drama queen performance. If you think that you can lie in science to get funding, think again. A typical proposal for a large experiment has to be validated by hundreds of people during multiple meetings and usually years of constant science communication. The amount of proper technical criticism that is being thrown at every single sentence of a proposal is unimaginable to the average person. It is not just "quite impossible" to dispute facts in physics, but it is entirely impossible. We are the people who were and are creating the observational evidence for your "engineering facts".
    1
  233. @solaire7046 Material science is more chemistry than physics. It usually tries to solve a practical problem with commercial value. That has absolutely nothing to do with the question what spectrum the physical vacuum has. Knowing that has ZERO practical and economic value. That's why you have to beg the government for money. You will surely not get any from a venture capitalist for the question what the mass of the lightest supersymmetric partner is. :-)
    1
  234.  @ProfessorDaveExplains  I think he made a joke. ;-)
    1
  235. If there is one thing I noticed about men of faith is that they generally don't know where the bible defines sin and what it actually means. The pope does, by the way, but then... the chances that the pope is an atheist are close to 100%. ;-)
    1
  236. Religions thrive on misery. Get India out of poverty and all that nonsense will go away.
    1
  237. Nobody does these experiments. They have no use in real physics.
    1
  238. This is not just stupid. It's actually mental. And, yes, there are plenty such people. The folks standing behind Trump during rallies are all of that kind. Count them. ;-)
    1
  239. Yes, but an intelligent person might consider that while Elon Musk talks about Mars a lot, maybe that is not exactly where SpaceX is really going. Not everything a person says has to be taken for granted. One can be skeptical about these kinds of statements. That doesn't mean Elon Musk doesn't know exactly what he is doing there... it's just not "going to Mars". That's just a front for something far more sinister. The world is currently in a new cold war and a new nuclear arms race which will include nuclear weapons in space as a fourth element in addition to the classical nuclear triad. If you think about it... Musk doesn't even hide that, he just tells you indirectly by talking about the fact that Earth won't be a safe place any longer (and it basically hasn't been since the 1950s!)... exactly because of the things that he is doing for the US government.
    1
  240. No, you don't. The average scientist doesn't spend a waking minute on that. They just do their jobs as they always have and always will. Worst case the big mushroom clouds will appear for a few minutes over the globe and then we have to start over, hopefully with a lot fewer idiots, most of whom will have learned a valuable lesson for life. ;-)
    1
  241. And there is the Russian troll bot. ;-)
    1
  242. No, they aren't different. Quantum mechanical effects are NOT restricted to "small thing" and the usual notions of physics (energy, momentum, angular momentum and charge) work exactly the same.
    1
  243.  @garymckee1287  Bullshit always is... it completely removes all impetus to pay attention in school. ;-)
    1
  244. Wrestle away, kid. Your failure to grow up means nothing to me. ;-)
    1
  245. Relativity. You can't derive that from non-relativistic quantum mechanics.
    1
  246. Cool story, bro. ;-)
    1
  247. Sane people are playing funny pranks and they are making good jokes. This stuff isn't even funny. Jerry Lewis as the nutty professor, that was funny. The "science talk" in "The Big Bang Theory" is funny. The science-ish banter between Spock and Bones on Star Trek, that was funny. This is simply a man with a serious mental health problem putting himself on display on the internet. That is not funny.
    1
  248.  @PerpetualAbidance  You are correct. You didn't add anything to anything here. ;-)
    1
  249. Science isn't controlled by capitalism. It's mostly funded out of federal tax dollars and under control of government agencies. Most of the US R&D budget goes into medicine, if I remember correctly. Physics is a small side note in the budget.
    1
  250.  @ertymexx  In the US and Europe it's the voters. In Russia it's Putin. In China the man's name is Xi. ;-)
    1
  251. How much have you been drinking? ;-)
    1
  252.  @georgelionon9050  If somebody sounds like a drunk I tend to ask how much they have been drinking. I grew up in a wine town. I have seen a lot of drunks as a kid. They behave exactly like many people on the internet. :-)
    1
  253. Sabine isn't fighting a culture war. She is simply a science troll.
    1
  254.  @kypekka  That is unfortunately true.
    1
  255.  @Archimedes_1  Every one of her videos about quantum mechanics is complete nonsense and clickbait. ;-)
    1
  256.  @Archimedes_1  Is she occasionally correct by chance? Yes. Sound of one hand clapping. All of her titles are clickbait. ;-)
    1
  257.  @Archimedes_1  Pick a title that is not clickbait. :-)
    1
  258.  @Archimedes_1  Decoherence is not the correct explanation for what happens in quantum mechanics. You can't understand it from that angle. ;-)
    1
  259.  @Archimedes_1  So you want to hear the mainstream view, rather than the correct view? OK, that's not science, kid. That's fanboyism, at best. ;-)
    1
  260.  @efalien5926  I didn't ask you to trust me. None of us ever did. We asked you to pay attention in science class so that you would know enough about science that people like Sabine could not lie about it to you. Were you paying attention? No, of course not. ;-)
    1
  261.  @Archimedes_1  Yes. You read it on Wikipedia, so it must be true. How old are you and what did you do with the intelligent person that used to live inside you once? ;-) It is the incorrect view and you COULD easily understand that with high school physics, IF you wanted to. But that is not what you are doing here. You are NOT applying high school science to quantum mechanics. You are using a Wikipedia quote as a reason why you didn't actually think about QM yourself. What you are basically telling me is that your main criteria for deciding which way to run is by following the crowd, even when you can see that the crowd is running towards the cliff. That is absolutely nonsensical behavior for an adult person. We tried to teach you better in school in all matters, not just science.
    1
  262.  @Archimedes_1  Sabine has not dedicated her life to understanding what quantum mechanics is. She is simply repeating a lot of the standard nonsense about it and you can't differentiate her statements from real physics that actually describes nature. ;-)
    1
  263.  @aquathewise7838  Griffiths tells you openly in his textbook that he doesn't understand quantum mechanics and then he uses the entire book to prove that statement to you. If you haven't thought beyond what can be found in Griffiths, then you won't understand it, either. ;-)
    1
  264. Yes, that is part of what drives Sabine in her grudge. She didn't get funding because she wasn't good enough. ;-)
    1
  265. Mathematicians don't get funded much because mathematics is extremely hard. There are just not that many really good mathematicians.
    1
  266. Maybe not, but they did believe that a man who had recently died was going to come back to life to save them from the Roman Empire. How did that work out? :-)
    1
  267.  @uppercumberlandrams9824  2000 years of longing for a dead man is your definition of success? I'll drink to that. ;-)
    1
  268. And that's fine. Science is a story. It's a very particular kind of story which tries to get as many details right as possible, but it is still a story. The problem with stories is that they have to be evaluated for their truth content and most people are either too busy or not intelligent enough to do that bit. They take stories the like at face value, which invites some storytellers to abandon the truth in their stories and to make them all about self-promotion and ultimately economic gain. Sabine is one of those who fell for that kind of storytelling.
    1
  269. Nobody gives a frell about all the nonsense you believe. It simply ain't so. ;-)
    1
  270. It didn't have to. We are teaching it correctly around 10th grade or so. ;-)
    1
  271.  @ONEisN0THING  We are teaching it in Europe, as well, and I am sure they also have it in China and in India. That should cover most of the important bits of the world. ;-)
    1
  272.  @ONEisN0THING  I am sure you just don't remember. It was that important to you back then... ;-)
    1
  273.  @ONEisN0THING  I did. The double slit is a simple wave experiment from 1801. We are teaching it in high school. You can do it at home in your bathtub and it takes about ten minutes to make a good double slit for light with a pen knife and aluminum foil. You are simply a boring troll. ;-)
    1
  274.  @aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaab1  And by "the big part of life" you mean being a man without education and girlfriend who pretends to know something about life on the internet? Dude. ;-)
    1
  275. Can you show me evidence for bias in high energy physics?
    1
  276.  @norbertjendruschj9121  Be my guest. The only way to stamp out religion is to call it for what it is: a mental disease and a scam.
    1
  277. @ A safety cone was create by humans for a purpose. So was the bible. Of course we know the purpose of the bible. It's a mostly political document full of PTSD. ;-)
    1
  278. "Energy is the ability of a system to perform work on another system.". We teach that in ninth grade or so. Are you telling us that you were unable to retain 13 words in ninth grade? Is your IQ lower than 55 or something? ;-)
    1
  279.  @AJ_Meyers  There is nothing wrong with clicking on these videos. The more trash content you click on, the less effective YouTube advertising becomes. While Google is making short term money with these ads, the advertisers will, eventually, learn that they are wasting their money on online advertising. Indeed, If you have the bandwidth, run a thousand YouTube videos on your computer daily by random clicking. You will cause significant economic damage to the people who are funding all of this bullshit.
    1
  280. @ The two of you are fighting over what to do with a grifter like Sabine. The best cause of action would be to completely ignore her, which is what I do. I am only here to tell folks who are wasting their time on her that they are engaged in an idiotic waste of time. ;-)
    1
  281. @ You could also read Sabine's physics papers and you would notice right away that there is no there there. ;-)
    1
  282. @ There is no here here, either. ;-)
    1
  283. In the past every physics lab used to have regular "visitors" who were trying to convince professors and students that Einstein was wrong. Today these folks have moved to the internet.
    1
  284. Name three false science articles off the top of your head. ;-)
    1
  285.  @PabloRocha-yv2vz  String theory is not even theoretical high energy physics. It can not make any predictions about the spectrum of the vacuum. Theoretical physics is the mathematical description of measured physical phenomena. String theory makes currently no contact with any measured phenomenon.
    1
  286.  @PabloRocha-yv2vz  A hypothesis has to be testable. String theory is not testable right now, hence it doesn't even rise to the level of a hypothesis. Physicists call these things "not even wrong".
    1
  287.  @PabloRocha-yv2vz  No, it's not. ;-)
    1
  288. Publish or perish only applies to the 1% of grad students who want to become professors. It's of no importance whatsoever to anybody who isn't trying to get tenure. I don't know why you would feel pressure unless you were planning on (a usually crappy) academic career. You were either never in academia or you completely misunderstood how the system works and what it actually does.
    1
  289. Nobody shoots anything here. And no, most light does not pass through the slits. That's one of the reasons why nobody with half a mind teaches quantum mechanics with the double slit.
    1
  290. Is another person actually listening to what you have to say a scam? No. It's the best thing that can happen to you as a human being. Most people just never get to experience it. :-)
    1
  291. Howard doesn't come from a good background. He did experience social stressors in his youth that may have made him mentally ill, though, or made an existing psychiatric condition worse. He claims that he had an abusive father who was beating him and who stabbed a man in front of him when he was two years old. Whether that is a genuine memory or not can be debated, but in either case we are not talking about a man with a happy childhood here. It clearly left marks on a man who was most likely born as a schizophrenic.
    1
  292. Because they changed the projection on you. All the projectors are installed in the FEMA camps. :-)
    1
  293. The electron is not a particle. ;-)
    1
  294. Trump has very little interest in science and it's unlikely that he will meddle much with the science budget except for red meat topics concerning race and sexuality. You won't see much of a change in fundamental areas like high energy physics. I kind of doubt they will touch the healthcare related R&D, either. Too many of their donors in the pharmaceutical industry depend on that research. :-)
    1
  295. It's not people who believe that. It's the lizard people. ;-)
    1
  296. @ No, nothing will make your statements logical. They are total nonsense. :-)
    1
  297. Sabine is not a sociologist and she has absolutely no working knowledge of your field. I have no idea why you would even take her seriously.
    1
  298.  @sarahcasm7893 Academia doesn't work that way, fake sociologist kid. You need to stop listening to fake news. ;-)
    1
  299. Yeah, that's also not how it works. In science you only listen to nature. That, of course, requires a special pair of ears and some serious brains. ;-)
    1
  300.  @juliesharp5077  We certainly didn't teach you that in school. You must have picked it up in church or some other anti-intellectual place. ;-)
    1
  301. Wow, somebody is sour. ;-)
    1
  302. Best one on YouTube as far as I can tell is probably Dr. Becky. She is giving a good example on how science should be communicated. Admittedly, astronomy is, to some extent, easier to explain and to understand than high energy physics and relativistic field theory. Everybody can, to some extent, understand that stars are large spherical arrangements of gas and plasma and that they are moving according to the laws of physics. Stay away from anybody who tries to explain quantum mechanics to you on the internet. Almost all of them are almost entirely wrong. They are simply repeating a bunch of old misconceptions over and over again.
    1
  303. String theory didn't fail to live up to its promises. It's one of the most interesting pieces of mathematics that is around and it seems to converge rapidly with what the mathematicians call the Langland's program. The total expenses on string theory are a tiny fraction of the total science budget. If you are spending one buck a year of your taxes on theoretical physics, then it's probably a lot. ;-)
    1
  304. You can't believe in science. Nobody ever asked you, either. We were asking you to pay attention in science class so that people like Sabine couldn't lie to you about it. You didn't. That is YOUR problem.
    1
  305. The last theory to be introduced into physics was quantum mechanics, around 1930. We don't need a new theory. Quantum mechanics is (by design) correct. If you don't know why that is so, then you still have to learn a lot about it.
    1
  306. I have been to the Arctic. It's a strenuous trip. You are cold, you feel sick, the protective clothing is weighing you down like a ton of brick and the sight of the ice desert is depressing. Go with Robert Scott's desperation "Good God, what an awful place this is.". That is exactly what it is. The only experience worth having for me was the silence. I could hear the blood rushing through my ears like as if it was Niagara Falls. It was that silent. Just me, ice (occasionally cracking) and the prospect of death if our technology and support systems happened to fail. I don't want to go back there, ever.
    1
  307.  @GetMoGaming  Because I was on government tours for a science project. If we could have done the same experiment in the tropics I would have greatly preferred that but the necessary physical conditions can only be found in the arctic regions of this planet.
    1
  308.  @GetMoGaming  The best part of it was the flight. We saw blue ice on enormous icebergs. That was very pretty. Once on the "ground", though, it was a horrible experience. Cold, cold and cold. Most people got sick and there was no place where one could really warm up. One can, of course, "survive" arctic summer in tents... but it ain't fun. No matter how many layers of insulation you wrap around yourself, you are still working and (worse) sleeping inside your fridge's freezer compartment. There are very few people who actually enjoy that. They do exist, but I think it was one guy who was like that out of literally hundreds who were working on that site during that season. Everybody else was just doing "the job" that had to be done and we all wanted to get out of there. I went for a tropical vacation afterward. I had to compensate. Hawaii is much, much better.
    1
  309. She knows that as well, she just doesn't care.
    1
  310. Energy is the ability of a system to perform work on another system. You can't remember 13 words from high school? What's your IQ, kid? Somewhere in the low 30s? ;-)
    1
  311. What does that have to do with the Higgs mass? ;-)
    1
  312.  @titan9259  That's probably still OK. Try North of Greenland on a cold day. We had as low as -30 degrees C or something and wind chill on one day. I thought I would die as soon as I got out of the shelter. Admittedly... one can probably get that as well in Arkansas. ;-)
    1
  313.  @titan9259  Never been to the Caribbean. Looks like a fun place for most part. Not Cuba and Haiti, of course.
    1
  314. Which god? We invented so many of them. ;-)
    1
  315. That's the problem. Sabine is only listening to her own words and she generally thinks that they are awesome. ;-)
    1
  316. Why would a real scientist spend time with a mentally ill person? Scientists are not psychologists. They are neither trained nor licensed to deal with these kinds of people.
    1
  317. Let me give you a theological pointer: to god laying down 6, 66, 666, 6 million or 6 trillion varves would be the same. If anything, 6 million is a very, very small number for an infinite being, which to me is indication that they were not made by a god, at all. ;-)
    1
  318.  @v0nman  I was making a joke. Your total lack of a sense of humor did not fail to show up promptly. ;-)
    1
  319.  @micnorton9487  Why would humans ever live in space? That makes no sense whatsoever. Transhumans will be living in space. Transhumans adapted to space won't need air, water, food and gravity, which gets us rid of all the pesky metal cans that we have to lug around in space just to stay alive.
    1
  320. Yes, but that is not what Sabine is saying. She is telling everybody to stop the presses completely, including experiments to "rethink" what we are doing. That's not how it works. We are "rethinking" what we are doing every day eighteen times. It just so happens that "rethinking" doesn't get you new data in experimental physics. Only a bigger machine gets you new data. She knows this. Anybody who believes that she is just naive is naive themselves. Sabine is a person with a serious narcissistic personality who only thrives on one thing: the manipulation of people. She has no interest in physics whatsoever.
    1
  321. That religion was always a scam was well known. You don't have to have science to see it for what it is.
    1
  322. @ Religion is a fact. Its the fact that there are a lot of idiots in the world that will fall for any nonsense and pay up. :-)
    1
  323. Stepping up the public education system won't help. All you are creating that way are even more students who will fail in school and who will hate everything intellectual. Imagine being called a loser for 12 years in a row. That leaves a mark and a distaste for everything related to learning. So what's the solution? There isn't one. We can simply not run democracies with the person of average (i.e. insufficient) intelligence. We will either have to wait for a genetic or technological brain update (human 2.0) or we will have to get used to totalitarian governments all over the world (which will probably lead to a nuclear war in the end and a reboot of human civilization).
    1
  324. They don't have to be the size of the wavelength. They can be much wider.
    1
  325. Why are you telling us that you can't think? ;-)
    1
  326. I don't know how old you are, but I can assure you that "dumb people" have been around way before the internet. They were just not as vocal as they are today, but if you actually talked to "the man on the street" about science in the 1970s for instance, you would have amazingly ridiculous "conversations". Plenty of people believed in things like satellites causing bad weather. I must have heard that at least half a dozen times in a few years back then. After that I mostly gave up on talking to people who didn't have higher education. It was completely pointless. The basics were just not there. One couldn't even get started with a rational explanation because the disconnect between the person's impression of reality and reality was in the way.
    1
  327.  @lukew6725  People's personal responsibility was to pay attention in school. Not many took it seriously enough.
    1
  328. Why did you ever? Did it never occur to you that you are simply watching a person with a grudge against scientific institutions for not giving her tenure for her sub-par work? It was totally obvious.
    1
  329.  @jenny3096-p4b  It was to the folks with a physics education and especially to those of us who were in the field of high energy physics. The field had the very discussion she accused it of not having like 40 years ago. She consistently tried to make some of the most intelligent people in the world look like doofuses. That's the sign of a person with narcissistic personality disorder. Sabine's case belongs in the psychology and not in the physics department. Physicists can't help her. We are neither qualified nor certified to do that.
    1
  330. @jeffafa3096 The problem with physics on the internet is not restricted to Sabine. Most YouTubers either oversimplify the actual facts to the point where they present a completely false mental model (this is especially the case for everything related to quantum mechanics) or they are completely uneducated about the subject matter to begin with and they basically just regurgitate hearsay in a game of telephone. Either way you are not getting useful information. This, by the way, is not even restricted to the internet. I would make the same statement about most layman books (Hawking in particular wrote some horrible mental models into his layman books that the physics world is still trying to exorcise from the public's memory... with little success.) I only know a few domains well enough to talk about them. Physics is one, electrical engineering (at the circuit board level) another. I do not talk about chemistry, biology and ice fishing in any level of detail. I simply don't know enough about them. What I can tell you is that Sabine often enough misrepresents physics badly enough to disqualify her from being a good source. Of course some of what she says is correct, but the context in which she puts those snippets is designed to garner attention and to increase her view count. So where do you find "the truth"? In the physics library and the laboratory... in form of a full time 24/7/365 physics career. I hate to break it to you, but physics is no different from playing the piano. Either you can play the piano or you can't. No pianist in the world can tell you how one plays a Chopin piano concerto in Royal Albert Hall. Either you do or you don't. There is no trying and there definitely is no "peeking in".
    1
  331. Kuhn is an idiot. There are no such things as paradigm shifts in science. What actually happens is that humans become mentally less flexible with age. Beyond a certain age most people simply can't change their habits and mental models (for non-scientists: belief systems). That's why there seem to be these rapid step-wise changes in science. What you are really observing there are old professors retiring. That's all.
    1
  332. Everybody who lives in a democracy does because the exact same phenomenon has now taken over politics.
    1
  333. Maybe. Maybe not, sarcasm notwithstanding. You have to keep in mind that you have at least half a dozen unhinged politicians with their fingers on the big red button, right now. That's not my definition of fun.
    1
  334.  @michiasayalew846  Please read up on Noether's theorem. Time and energy are intimately intertwined. I am not sure why you believe that suffering from cognitive dissonance makes you a good person... or at least a better person than the really crazy apologists/creationists etc.. You are merely rationalizing your level of crazy. There are no ghosts, spirits, souls, god, angels, demons. None of that. It's all just total nonsense from pre-scientific times.
    1
  335. If you follow an evil idea, then you are evil. There are no excuses.
    1
  336.  @Doty6String  We don't know what Jesus actually taught. We only know what people who never met him wrote about him in a language that he didn't speak. Yes, Paul was definitely a liar and so were the four Evangelists. You can find plenty of evidence in the text for that. The bible then ends on the ravings of a self-serving madman. There is nothing there that passes an intellectual smell-test and one can easily debunk that the text has any moral value. The leading social problem in the Roman Empire was slavery. The bible does not mention even once that slavery needs to be abolished. Quite the contrary. The NT tries very hard to appease the Romans on the matter.
    1
  337.  @Quick_And_Nerdy  One can't teach stupid people. We have a phrase for that "One can lead a horse to the water but one can't make it drink.". Eventually, I am afraid, we will have to resort to the law to solve this problem. Distribution of unsubstantiated claims will have to become punishable, with severe fines and jail sentences for repeat offenders. This will remove most of the incentive from this business model.
    1
  338.  @Quick_And_Nerdy  Free speech does not include lying or there wouldn't be so many people in prison for fraud. ;-)
    1
  339. Her opinions about physics are no better. She keeps telling people a lot of nonsense in her videos that is just not so.
    1
  340. The bodily resurrection is a key dogma in Catholicism. Anything and everything that you have seen about heaven and hell and souls on tv and in the movies is NOT Christian belief. It's just feel-good fiction. Why is this such a big deal? Because Protestants don't know what Christianity really is? No kidding. ;-)
    1
  341. There is no belief in science. In science you either know the facts or you don't.
    1
  342. A civil war is being fought by roughly equally sized factions. Sabine is just a troll who is messing with uneducated people on the internet.
    1
  343.  @rsbah  Click on every single one of her YouTube videos and leave a one line comment like "Best science YouTuber ever!". That's what all the SEO bots do. ;-)
    1
  344. You have a point. But let's say we would make an actual online science course for you. Would you really watch fifteen 90 minute episodes to learn the basics of e.g. electromagnetism or quantum mechanics? These kinds of lecture series are online. You can see how many people are watching them. Now imagine taking five years worth of these classes (six to eight a year!). That is what it takes to learn a hard scientific discipline these days. Plus all the homework, exams and three to five years for a PhD thesis. Very few people have the stamina for that much suffering. ;-)
    1