Comments by "Lepi Doptera" (@lepidoptera9337) on "New Evidence against the Standard Model of Cosmology" video.

That's cool and all, but this isn't her work, to begin with. She just reports on other people's efforts.
30
@humeanrgmnt7367 If they were doing that by faith instead of testing, then the rockets would blow up on the pads, kid. :-)
20
@brontehauptmann4217 What is "scientism"? A word you made up to feel better about having failed high school science class? :-)
15
@humeanrgmnt7367 Challenger didn't blow up on the pad, but it is a good example of where faith based reasoning "Nothing ever went wrong too badly, so we have faith that nothing will ever go wrong in the future, either!" gets you. Faith is an accident bound to happen.
14
@brontehauptmann4217 What's the religious dogma in science?
9
@humeanrgmnt7367 You still haven't told me what those beliefs in science are supposed to be. NEXT!
8
@brontehauptmann4217 Next up: flat earths and no sign of climate change. :-)
7
@brontehauptmann4217 Yes, but why would I have faith in a guy who threatens to throw the overwhelming majority of all dead people into a fiery lake for eternity? That's not what nice people do. :-)
5
@SilverAlex92 I have a PhD in high energy physics and I have read her publications. Her work is virtually irrelevant. :-)
2
@allykat5899 No, there isn't. Good luck with playing Chopin, though, since you already know how it's like to play the piano without learning it. ;-)
2
So what did you learn here?
1
Well, they clearly didn't tell you as a kid that you are not very intelligent. ;-)
1
@fermansmith6042 I don't care about her. She is trolling the internet with physics just as well. If you haven't noticed, the only way to be successful as a YouTuber is to pick controversial topics and then to be on the wrong side of them. Nothing here sells that is not borderline fake news. That's just the nature of the human beast. I am sure she got started out on the right side of things, but in order to create following and hits she had to pass over... and she did.
1
@fermansmith6042 She is "different" from other physicists? How many physicists do you know? I mean, real ones that are working in labs and theory departments every day? Not the ones that are selling books on YouTube. The most special thing about her is that she takes cheap shots at her own profession on YouTube. She is perfectly allowed to do that. Physicists are big boys, we can stand up for ourselves and trust me, she isn't moving even one cent of science funding one way or the other with these public comments. That's not how this works. Look, this is entertainment. It's here to titillate. As long as you don't think that you are being taught something real about physics and science in general, it's all good.
1
@fermansmith6042 I am a PhD, but it doesn't matter. Physics, science in general, is probably best compared to an apprenticeship. It's not just the theoretical knowledge that you are being taught in classes. It's the work on a variety of problems, usually collaboratively in small and large groups, that make you "a scientist". It's the (lifelong) learning from others in your field. That's no different from being a goldsmith or an NFL player or any other kind of specialized professional. Either you can make pretty jewelry or play the game or you can't. One can not really communicate that to others. Even the lingo is subtle and different enough from "normal language" that communication with people who are not familiar with it is limited. The physics community has its own sets of concepts about reality that can not even be found in other sciences. I know about a dozen active scientists from other fields who are utterly flustered by the way physicists "think" about the world. I tried explaining some in person... with little success. Well, neither do I understand how a chemist can figure out a 40 step reaction without ending up with useless chemical "mush". They can. I can't. I can do my stuff, which they can't. That's why we have different job descriptions. This is not to say that physics is something special. You can find this phenomenon also among musicians, authors and artists. Ask someone how they compose a serious piece of music and you will get a bunch of textbook answers which will do absolutely nothing for you to replicate that achievement. You won't even be able to write a simple melody that way. Human experiences are unique that way and physics is one of these experiences. If you want it, then you have to live it. Peace!
1
That's not evidence against anything at this moment. It's just not enough evidence for some things.
1
If you are distorting a perfectly even colored surface, what you get is the image of a perfectly even colored surface. NEXT!
1
@michaeljorgensen790 I would suggest you learn some basic thermodynamics. One can't increase the temperature of radiation by focusing it.
1
@michaeljorgensen790 OK, that was a wall of personal attacks against me with zero understanding of physics. You want to pull rank? I am not an optical engineer. I am a PhD physicist and I still remember my thermodynamics classes. Chew on that, kid.
1
@SilverAlex92 If you don't know that her work is irrelevant, then it only means that you were intellectually lazy to read it. If you don't know why we are doing the kinds of experiments we are doing, then you simply have physics DK. I really don't care about either your intellectual laziness or your physics DK, kid. I will give you all the attention that you clearly didn't get from your Mom, though. :-)
1
@allykat5899 We do a lot of it at university. It takes five to eight years 24/7/365 to become a scientist. You should try it sometimes. I sure did. :-) And no, I can not communicate to you what it means to actually understand science any more than a concert pianist can explain to you what it's like to play Chopin for a thousand people or an NFL quarterback can tell you what being in the last two minutes of the Super Bowl game is like.
1
@allykat5899 Exactly, Picasso, you will never know what science actually is... unless you put the five to eight years in and then some. That was the entire point. ;-)
1
You weren't asked to believe it. You were asked to understand it... and then you failed.
1
@ThomasSmith-os4zc That's a good start to understanding it. Now add blood, sweat and tears and time, lots of time... that's the recipe for success in science. :-)
1
Just because you are proposing the opposite of the majority doesn't make you right. :-)
1