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

  1. 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
  2. That's why I don't watch Sabine's videos. Too much posturing, not enough actually true content. ;-)
    3
  3. Yes, if your goal as a writer is to publish a new pulp fiction fantasy booklet every two weeks, that might be true.
    2
  4.  @chadman9355  Why not? What's the difference between god and Santa? Both are made up, neither brings presents.
    2
  5. But it makes good money for the grifting kind.
    2
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8.  @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
  9. So what's the truth in a talking donkey? Please explain. ;-)
    2
  10. 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
  11.  @lurkmoar9066  I am afraid of people who can't think straight. They are dangerous. ;-)
    2
  12. 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
  13. 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
  14. A creationist is a chess playing pigeon. You can never get through.
    2
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. Sabine was always a troll. Her best physics videos are just as bad as her physics papers.
    2
  18. 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
  19.  @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
  20. This genre has a long history on daytime tv.
    2
  21. Yes, that was bullshit. ;-)
    2
  22. It should. It gave you things like WW II and the holocaust in the past.
    2
  23. 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
  24.  @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
  25.  @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
  26.  @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
  27.  @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
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30.  @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
  31.  @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
  32. Evolution is a fact. You can believe in Santa Claus if you want, but you can not believe in facts.
    2
  33.  @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
  34. Why do you want to imagine something that doesn't exist? ;-)
    2
  35. NSAIDs treat both the symptoms and the causes of many types of painful conditions.
    2
  36. 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
  37. 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
  38.  @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
  39.  @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
  40.  @kw4093-v3p  Yes, religion was always a Nigerian Prince scam. So what? So nothing. ;-)
    2
  41. Of course a high school dropout will feel that way. You are projecting to cover for your failure in school. ;-)
    2
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. Well, universities are schools and you sound exactly like the kind of person who doesn't like school. :-)
    2
  46. And there is another flavor of crazy. ;-)
    2
  47.  @GoogleJedi What's crazy about the Earth being destroyed according to the bible? The fact that it was never destroyed in reality. ;-)
    2
  48. 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
  49. 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
  50. 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