Comments by "" (@kunibald128) on "Angela Collier " channel.

  1. Idem. I think I just find Angela's rants on whatever topic to be very relaxing for some reason.
    70
  2. Thank you Angela, these plots are really terrible and this video was liberatory.
    19
  3. Well done Angela, we very much need people like you who can combine intelligence and knowledge with empathy and an actual understanding of the difference between good and evil. I really hope that many people will hear your message loud and clear.
    18
  4. Indeed. And in fact not only science communicators, but also many professional astrophysicists (I am one of those) use the expression "dark matter" not to refer to a list of observational evidence, but rather to refer to a broad (although vastly unsettled) theoretical framework that could explain them: specifically, invoking some so far unknown form of matter, as opposed to theories of modified gravity or modified dynamics, which are commonly regarded as alternative to dark matter. Most of the confusion probably arises from the fact that Angela is adopting her own definition of the expression "dark matter" (which to me personally sounds perfectly reasonable and after you accept it the whole reasoning is flawless), but does not really match its most common usage.
    16
  5. ​ @amentrison2794 You would still like a school teacher to be a decent role model. If I were a high school student, I would not enjoy being taught science by a notorious science fraudster.
    7
  6. Thank you for the additional context. The results shown here do seem quite inconclusive when it comes to the magnitude, so I am happy to learn that there are also complementary experiments with a focus on that.
    5
  7. ​  Exactly! Also strings, as the elementary constituents of matter, are unbreakable, so all the problems related with the resistance of the cable are automatically solved. We just need to wait ten more years XD
    4
  8. Also ChatGPT is technology, not science. It is very ordinary that people have discussions about technology (denoting an interest in what they might do and how) and not at all comparable to having discussions about science (denoting curiosity about the nature they happen to be a part of).
    4
  9. I love that you specified "almost", as "it depends" being or not a good answer to a question is itself somewhat dependent on the circumstances.
    2
  10. Hi. It seems that what you are missing are the basic laws of physics.. But your question is not stupid, so let me try to explain. Yes the cable must rotate together with the Earth or otherwise it will wrap up and fall down. And yes at some initial stage you will certainly need some energy to assemble the cable in the right configuration and make sure it has the right velocity. Once the set up is complete, however, you do not need further power, because the relevant forces balance each other out and the system is in equilibrium. More in general, you should keep in mind that you do not need to apply forces, or consume power, "just to keep the speed constant". A force is needed when you want to alter the state of motion of an object, for instance to accelerate or decelerate it, but not if you just want to keep its speed constant. This is the first law of dynamics. The situation gets more complicated in many everyday situations because of air resistance (to overcome that you need power even just to keep the speed constant) and this complication is why the principle is not immediately obvious and it took Galileo and Newton to figure it out. In space you have no air resistance and applying laws of dymamics is relatively easy. Hope this helps!
    2
  11. And the beginning as well!
    2
  12. I think you are raising a very interesting point about the instability of the intermediate steps. This sounds like a formidable problem to me, it would be nice to hear if anyone has any suggestions on how to possibly overcome it.
    2
  13. One small correction: I think that the pi mesons were already known before the advent of the Standard Model, so they should perhaps go in the category of "previous observations which are successfully accounted for by the new theory". All the other examples are correct (as far as I can tell). Thank you for the interesting and enjoyable video!
    2
  14. "Couple things:" Proceeds listing three things.. Me: "I was not expecting the Spanish Inquisition!"
    1
  15. I totally agree, awesome and compelling indeed. I guess that was meant to be a dinosaur's foot.
    1
  16. The AI clones having a videoconference is indeed probably the dumbest idea among all the hilariously dumb ideas you have covered in your videos so far.. perhaps only paralleled by the alcaline water with lemon. Love this series about awfully embarassing and yet socially normalised forms of stupidity, keep it up! :)
    1
  17. I loved the point where Angela imagined that perhaps in two generations from now it will be socially acceptable to send your AI clone to visit your grandmother.. I wonder whether she was also realising that in precisely two generations from now she would run the risk of being the grandmother in question!
    1
  18. Angela, I think this is brilliant. I am impressed by your ability to communicate how amazing all of this is in a way that is accessible to everybody. I am also totally with you when it comes to admiring D. Lynden-Bell. One small correction, if I can: at minute 06:00 you say very correctly that n represents "the amount of the gas you have", but in the written version I think you should erase the word "density" (you probably had a lapsus, having in mind some other version of the equation without the V on the left-hand side). I hope this does not qualify for Mann-Gell effect :) I actually think you can prevent some potential confusion with very small editing. Keep up the very nice work!
    1
  19. You mean "unnecessary precision". The accuracy was lacking entirely.
    1
  20. Someone here may find it interesting to notice that the reason why the measured duration of Jupiter moon eclipses depends on whether the Earth is on the approaching or receding side of its orbit (relative to Jupiter) is identical to the reason underlying the Doppler effect. In its essence, the Doppler effect goes about arrival times and emission times and applies equally well to any sequence of events (including moon eclipses), as long as the information about the events in question is propagated at a finite speed. The most known formulation of the Doppler effect in terms of wave frequencies is essentially just a corollary of that.
    1
  21. That elliptical galaxy looks like a disc galaxy to me :) Or at least I think I can see some dust lanes..
    1
  22. By the way string theory is also down the stack.
    1
  23. Sun has left the chat.
    1
  24. Half an hour after watching this I am still in denial that some dudes actually wrote a paper and got it published to gift humankind with this nonsense.
    1
  25. I want a space elevator to lift a giant glowing violin plot for everyone to see!
    1