Why does the KZbin algorithm play this channel next after every flat earth video?

A physicist who wants the government to play Robin Hood. First, large corporations are owned by middle class people who own shares. If you let politicians rob them, they will simply give the money to whomever is donating to their election campaigns and instead of leaving the $ with the efficient productive corporations, transfer it instead to losers. Just look at the war on poverty by lbj. More people are on welfare than ever before and the country can't create much of anything on its own. And there simply are not enough billionaires to bail us out - do the math. Second, the problem is crony capitalism, not free market capitalism. The biggest problems with science today are that government decides who gets the grants. I worked at NASA for 31 years and before I retired, we were told to make up anything about climate change to add to our proposals so we could get more $. And of course, you don't get the money unless you agree with their agenda, whatever that might be. And finally, look at the state of America today. In less than 1/2 a century we went from the most productive society in the world to the biggest dead beat debtor of all times. Then only thing we produce today is war and inflation. You can thank Robin Hood for the demise.

Conways' game of life, but remastered and in 3D :)

It’s astounding how much we know AND don’t know about these processes. A really captivating subject. Thanks so much for providing this type of content. It’s really appreciated!

Brilliant!

That last line about listening to Mindscape "in the hood" made me chuckle - I'm assuming she meant the tissue culture hood, rather than her proverbial neighbourhood

all i can say is, crikey.

Crazy that I can listen to this, enjoy it, and yet understand literally nothing in it.

As bayraklari ! 🇹🇷

Congratulations on 200k KZbin subscribers!

emergentism is circular and all theories in a materialistic worldview guided by blind laws are non-sequiturs as they all assume purpose and none of that follows from purposeless material and blind laws. atheism is a disease of the mind and heart. determinism destroys the possibility of justified true belief.

I've spent 20 years in disaster zones.. 100% my mental clock speeds up in an emergency situation, but its not because I'm "falling" or my physical movement. Its the same if you're walking and spot a snake 1m ahead and you're stood still. You just "switch on". I'd say it's more a response to danger and an awareness we need full processing power than a physical reaction to a fall or similar though. We call it part of RPD, recognition primed decision making and it takes time in those extreme environments to develop (10 years typically) but then you can "think" "see" "analyse" etc everything much better and several times faster. Hope there's more done on this, its fascinating. Also there seems to have been an assumption that heart rate increases in these situations to get blood pumping and to extremities which would make sense but it appears (more weirdly) its actually to increase the likelihood our heart beats at the same moment as others, because this (weirdly) makes us much more cooperative, and this is the real key to surviving a sudden threat above how your muscles react.. Will my friends jump to my aid. It was taught to us for the job so I don't know enough but alot of interesting points in this area.

Just to point out one thing about the Indo-European languages: their common ancestor Proto-Indo-European was spoken maybe 6000 years ago, so it’s very far removed from any hypothetical first language. There is no reason at all to believe that PIE is closer to the first language than any random language spoken today. The study of Indo-European languages is very much a real science, so it’s unfortunate that it has become so ideologically charged for historical reasons.

This might be the reason why I often don’t really like to watch science documentaries about the origin of humanity: they seem to have too much of an agenda. That’s why I tend to prefer documentaries about physics or cosmology and so on; they seem to be more objective.

7:08 sounds a little like psychohistory. 😀

I understood exactly 6 and 1/2 words of this but I loved hearing it and imagining the concepts and processes that led to the discoveries. Ain't us humans grand?

"Its gonna be May" - Justin Timberlake

Dear Sean, if the curvature of spacetime is affected by large masses and masses are determined by the interaction of particles with the Higgs field, wouldn't it make sense to assume that dark matter is a distortion in the Higgs field. I've heard that it's supposed to be isotrope, but maybe we are wrong about that? It would be great, if you could help me understand more about that! Thank you for your great content!

Why do they say that the causality is not to be found in physics? The 2nd Newton law says p(t+dt) = p(t) + F(t) dt, which means the values of p and F at time t predict/cause the value of p at time t+dt. It seems all physics is based on causality.

this guy is boring

Whole new respect for You, good Sir. Listening to You was a great pleasure.

I'm 4 years late for the Q&A.. Is it possible to do a Q&A video just for my questions to each video? I'll respond to those videos by email, we go back and forth, I still don't understand, you do another video, I post a question, you do a Q&A, I respond by email, we go back and forth, I still don't understand, you do another video........

27:55 In plain linear algebra this is true, but geometric algebra (Clifford algebra) extends the idea of vectors with n-vectors. A bivector for example has an orientation and an area, just like a vector has orientation and length. And in 2 dimensions you get a basis bivector I = e₁⋀e₂, and this acts exactly like the imaginary i. It rotates vectors with π/2 in a geometric product. The algebra you get this way is homomorphic with complex numbers. And the beauty is that all these 2 dimensional bivectors are in fact antisymmetric grade-2 tensors.

Just letting you know Sean that I will be listening to you here on youtube. It is becoming increasingly difficult to listen to anything on Spotify without paying for the service. Thanks for making your incredible content available to us for free.

Sean, been listening to you in different videos for like 45 min this doesn't make sense, you keep throwing formulas in @5:45

The question I ask my self when thinking about the elements is, when do they form the structure of a human beings? Is it before the sperm fertilizes the egg? Or is it in the process Embryogenesis? Because it’s not just oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium. There’s even 0.2 mg of gold in our body.

Free will has confusion surrounding it because English speakers on the whole do not know the history of the word free at all. It's etymological route is hypothesised to be 'ones own' ie, independent of the influence of others. We still use this in the notion of free time. In the ancient Old English culture, wives were considered property, and it wasn't unusual for marriages to solidify business dealings to occur. A woman you own and for which no others have say over is your private life meaning your own. Another word for wife was Freo. Indeed, the Latin root Privo ---from which we get private---is thought to be a cognate of Freo via... Freo-->Frio <-->Prio-->Privo. So, freedom is a state of independence---no external information or control interferes with the internal system. Now the brain is known to be a self-organising system non-linear due to biological feedback, and thus subject to informational closure--not total closure, but close to. Whilst external information can signal to internal Neural networks, the processing of that information isn't under any external control. A simplistic way of considering this is the Kaleidoscope. White light comes in. The reflected light entering the Kaleidoscope doesn't make it to your eyes as it was prior to entering the Kaleidoscope. The glass shards and the internal mirror arrangement create patterns that are illuminated by the light. Similarly, thinking is an internal process that guides itself. Downward causation can impact thinking and plays a role in self-organising systems. Yet, even if the external information doesn't conduct the operations of the Mind, aren't the coordination of different parts of the Mind depending upon each other? Or, like a fractal, are subsystems equally independent and informationally closed from one another? It seems reasonable to relate bias with choice. I like the taste of mint-chocolate chip ice-cream more than strawberry flavour. In situations where there is a list of options for choosing what ice-cream to buy, clearly I am dependent upon my past experiences and the biases that resulted. So will / desire seems biased and our choices seem to be a result of disbalanced preference towards one or some of the options over another. You'd have to say that internal decision are dependent upon internal experience recorded as memory. So free will might be independent of external control/agency, but it will isn't independent of it's own internal information. In self-organising systems, some aspects are predicable (most indeed). Some chaos exists in these systems. Self-organising systems often live near the edge of chaos such that small differences in starting conditions leads to vastly different evolutions. Research indicates that a ratio of 2:1 is about optimal in self-organising systems. A system should be 2 thirds stable and 1 third chaotic. Indeed, if a systems is too stable, it won't be able to adapt to new challenges; however, if a system is too chaotic, it will lack functionality. Ergo, will maybe under the influence of fractal geometry and perhaps only be approached via ensemble modelling. In every potential choice, motive to opt for one thing over another must logically arise due to imbalance of factors, for if all factors were in balance, there simply would be no motive to opt for any of them. Indeed, such ambivalence might make one permanently indecisive. To me, one aspect of will is the negotiations between ourexternal stakeholders and ourselves. We might technically be free to act, but not if we value utility over freedom. Often there is a cost (business cost) for not considering others and just doing what suits ourselves. The other aspect of will is reflecting upon the internal dependencies. Our mistakes come from our limited perspective of the internal assumptions we rely upon. Dependency upon wrong assumptions are bound to lead to bias that might be deleterious to our goals/objectives. On the other hand, having no internal dependencies would lead to permanent indecisiveness and lack of personal vision. To be too liberated from dependencies is unworkable. In that sense, there might be a balance to be struck with strong internal assumptions leading to clear perspectives---even if it's wrong---but where chaos within our cognitive systems may allow us to escape the limited perspectives that arise from our Neural attractor states and find a broader perspective that arises in spite of our biases due to chaos.

Very interesting book that Harrington wrote. Another book - even before mrs Harrington's - is Raymond Baker's "Capitalism's achilles heel" dealing with same nefarious practises as the ones that are the scope of "capitalism without borders".

Non sequitur🤪: The universe is most definitely not contingent. … there are several reasons for this, but Parmenides would agree; at least he would insist that it’s impossible for nothing to exist, and so something must exist. And if we are to be egalitarian in this, then all things must exist, and all things includes our particular universe. Or does it? What is a thing. David Letterman used to have a segment called “Is this anything?” Most people would agree that anything that has specific well defined properties must be a thing. By that definition our universe is definitely a thing. So by Parmenides, together with existential egalitarianism, and a cursory nod to Dave, our specific universe must exist. So it is not contingent!

☝️👍

Wow, he's GOOD at explaining physics in layperson's terms. Great gift. Will be looking up more of Dr. Strassler.

By the time David gets to his argument he completely looses me. What is the difference between a branching and a non branching future? Is he just talking about making a decision in a universe where many worlds is correct vs one that it isn't? If so, I don't get what that has to do with whether many worlds is correct.

You heard it here first folks: curiosity can be "problematic". Just like that, without a supporting argument 👌

This episode is interesting to me. It’s like talking about things that I was curious about but didn’t know I was. Thank you!

45 year old engineer just applied to retrain as a physics teacher.. 48 videos of this man explaining the biggest ideas in the universe.. Jackpot!!!!!🎉

Study of the history of our evolution confirms Ray Kurzweil's Singularity drive.google.com/file/d/1wglMGakDSZsqtsI3u6QdmXFN74d6Rdv1/view?usp=sharing

You should listen to you reasoning about climate. 33 minutes in. if we are not correct, it's because it's worse! i've listened to you before and on lex fridman. I don't find your analysis at all compelling and rather , it is both emotionally based, and that's because , it's proximity based. you still foolishly ignore the proximity and availability heurisitc. if the response to covid in the university systems and medical teaching hospitals, doesn't tell you academia at large is totally penetrated and corrupted by its own publication incentives and grant applications incentives, you will not see it. you are not someone who is honest in your curiosity , with yourself, about what the establishment says. you've 'bought in'.

Can't wanted Any more NAME FOR 10 TOUSEND FOB BY UNGRATUET SOME ON STUPID , I HEARD YOURS , TROPICS, OUR CRVT S , HONERS , I DON'T WANTED MORE , THANKS THAT WAS TIME WAS MAYBE BANGLADESH TIME 4. 30 AM , ARAFAT VI CALLED ME , 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ XPREMENT

Is there a reason why the super thanks function is turned off?

Love this podcast.❤❤

Thank you, Dr Carroll and Dr. Geroulanos, for this very interesting interview. It was a pleasure to listen to, as well as a great reminder for all of us to always be conscious of our individual and collective biases.

Interesting episode. I know it wasn't the intention to deal with everything exhaustively, but one thing I think will be an important factor in a possible coming phase transition is how we will get our energy. Maybe this is overstating things a bit, but everything depends on it. Historically also, we see that when we shifted towards new sources of energy, like say the domesticated horse, agriculture or fossil fuels, societies changed arround those new sources of energy. Now ofcourse we need to get off of fossil fuels for climate change, or we will run out anyway eventually. The question here is, in relation to a possible 'technological singularity', can we keep increasing our energyproduction necessary to power this technological progression? All of these depend on enormous amounts of energy. As it stands it doesn't seem like we can build enough non-fossil fuel alternative energy-sources to keep up with this. So one scenario that seems plausible to me, is that the technological progress peters out a bit because of decline in energy-production and also stagnation, or decline in population. Then we get a scenario that is unlike any of the ones that assume technological progress will continue to keep accelerating.

the broadcasting world lost a star to physics. sean should have been on the news everyday.

Whoa I had no idea Rick did this podcast!! So stoked to listen!

Sometimes someone summons the vast ignorance we humans possess with his specific knowledge of something seemingly universal and concludes that's wisdom enough to sit on a wide sofa and say "ask me anything". And that's the black hole of intelligence.

Thank you.

Kate Jeffery's concerns about the subjectivity involved in the statistical definition of entropy are very well to the point. There is no objective way to coarse grain your way to the second law of thermodynamics, like Loschmidt already pointed out to Boltzmann. Entropy is the amount of information that we miss in order to accurately predict a systems future. The relevant information that we have, not only consists of the macroscopic pattern of milk and coffee in the cup, one also has to take into account the crucial bit of information that two minutes ago there was no milk in the cup. For each microstate consistent with a pattern of milk strings in the coffee, there is an equivalent microstate (same positions, opposite velocities) that would result in a process that would look like time going backwards. It is not that those states are very small in number, in fact, the numbers are exactly the same! What sets them apart is the one crucial bit of information that two minutes ago there was no milk in the coffee. History does matter when defining entropy. The history of a DNA molecule is crucial information. We have much more information about the future of a healthy, young DNA molecule than about the future of an old, worn and torn DNA molecule, hence the latter has much lower entropy than the former. Entropy is a measure of the amount of information missing to accurately predict the future. That is all there is to it.

I always ALWAYS love Sean’s courageous scientific dialogues with experts, especially as they attempt to penetrate the Physics-to-Biology & Biology-to-Physics great-divide. I tend to leave Mindscape episodes with a sense that I know just a little bit more about “how WE got to here” (starting from the Big Bang). I can’t seem to let go of Carl Sagan’s “WE are all star-stuff” mantra - is that scientific truism no longer true? Is it really now about “us” (and our current challenges & mindset) versus “them” (and their particular challenges & mindset)? Who do I thank for nearly 1 million uninterrupted years of “fire” - in its many evolutionary presentations? Who do I thank for nearly 50,000 years of uninterrupted “art” & “language” - in their many evolutionary presentations? At the end of the day, why isn’t Big History (all the way back to Big Bang) still the most scientific & the most powerful way to explain our universe - and “ how WE got to here” - to the next generation?

I sort of hoped the story about what people used to believe would have been tempered by some recent discoveries. For example… no need for deep interpretations of the evidence certain people have larger percentage of Neanderthal dna and certain other people have zero. Regardless of bias… it is what it is, no? And right there… that explains SO much with no need to point out the obvious.

وبزرگان علم و خرد ،بزرگان دین و سیاست شده ورهبران دین و سیاست ،بزرگان علم میشوند 🙏❤️ که این واژه ی دین حقیقی ،محتاج علم حقیقی است چرا که بدون و علم🙏❤️ وخرد ،خلقتی نبود واگر خلقت نباشد ،و کدام دین بدون جهان و انسانهایش معنا دارد و اصلا در عدم میماند به امید رسیدن کامل به این هدف الهی🙏🙏🙏❤️❤️❤️❤️