Comments by "Hallands Menved" (@Hallands.) on "Veritasium" channel.

  1. ScottyNeedsIt I'm willing to concede the earth is flat on one condition: Flatearthers must realize that the flat earth is wrapped around a globe...
    11
  2. Joel Nobody Nobody appreciates my joke!
    2
  3. Of course silence can't drive you crazy! Are you crazy? :)
    1
  4. All very well and good, but that wasn't backspin !
    1
  5. That was nice! First sensible tings I've heard about the universe since ... ever, actually. The Hitchhiker Guide to the Universe is by far the funniest book I've ever read, and one of the few I've read more than once. Another is V. A. L. I. S by Philip K. Dick
    1
  6. Name one valid way for light to detect »direction«. Since light can’t know if it's coming or going, we can safely assume the speed to be the same in all direction.
    1
  7. I think the main realization is that »there can be only one« wave function…
    1
  8. Sloppy agriculture...
    1
  9. Thank you!
    1
  10. If the numbers of decimals are given, the set of real numbers is no less »countable« than the set of natural numbers…
    1
  11.  @noellundstrom7447  Get what? I pointed out a semantic weakness with the term »countable«, did you get that?
    1
  12. Remember when they money grifters tried to sell everyone on the motto »greed is good«?
    1
  13. 😂❤👍🏼
    1
  14. Nice catch!
    1
  15. But wait a second: Does the experiment necessarily break any of the general rules? Isn't it possible that spin and emission are linked in a way that precludes the freedom to emit randomly in both directions equally?
    1
  16. Why the dislikes? He only made one error. All the rest made perfect sense.
    1
  17. Tremendous loss of jobs…
    1
  18. Wait… If peripheral stars are orbiting too fast for the assumed mass of the galaxy, the galaxy must have a greater mass — or that would be the least cumbersome explanation. I can’t see why it would matter whether the extra mass be visible or not, but I suppose that’s my ignorance. But moseying on, aren’t neutrinos supposed to be so weak in their interaction that they mostly pass right through earth, hitting nothing? They don’t weigh much, I know, but how many are there? Can’t they account for some of the dark matter?
    1
  19. If the multi-world concept is just for convenience, in what way is it then »better« than the Copenhagen understanding? Does it allow for better predictions? Also how do you reach the conclusion that after the collapse/split, all connections are broken (as you stated) and there will never be any interaction between the two alternate worlds? If that is to be the case, there is no uni-verse, rather an immense, indeterminable multitude of multi-verses of which we can’t know anything, but equally of no consequence for our (my?) universe, right? This is what makes me lean more towards Bohr. If everything exist as both a potential wave and a potential particle, measurement would still cause a collapse, but a new GUT would be looking for a theory in which the potential of both the wave and the particle property were preserved (perhaps as a form of resonance in the surrounding world) thus still potentially interacting locally, if only to – ever so slightly – influence the outcome of other interactions as a feeble ghost of former existence, so to speak. I also think that the very concept of »entanglement« speaks against multiverses: a. How is the entanglement broken? (seems necessary to allow for a completely new, separate universe) or b. If the entanglement isn’t broken (which seems the more sensible interpretation) how can we think of the newborn universe as separate from ours (mine?), seeing how they’d still remain entangled?
    1