|
ashpanash posted:Tier A: I just started listening to his podcast and it’s interesting and good IMO. Are there any other science related podcasts similar to his? Specifically I like the long form no-bullshit format and that he has doesn’t have a loud and obnoxious personality. I tried listening to Star Talk once and I just don’t like the 2-3 guys sitting around talking and joking to each other loudly format at all.
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 13:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:38 |
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I just started listening to his podcast and it’s interesting and good IMO. Are there any other science related podcasts similar to his? Specifically I like the long form no-bullshit format and that he has doesn’t have a loud and obnoxious personality. I tried listening to Star Talk once and I just don’t like the 2-3 guys sitting around talking and joking to each other loudly format at all. On Youtube there's Cool Worlds with Prof. Brian Kipping. I love his voice and delivery, it's so soothing, and he's very hard-science - being a legit astronomer after all.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 14:01
|
|
|
Yeah, his team is looking for the first confirmed Exomoons. Pretty neat.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 14:23
|
|
|
There's some more neat Mars helicopter news. Perseverance captures the sound of the Ingenuity helicopter.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 15:24
|
|
|
Bug Squash posted:Even if it was close, it might not be worth their time. Just because some crackpot thinks it's interesting doesn't mean it would be high up on NASAs priority list. You can realistically only get so much science done before the rover breaks, and checking out some haematite globules to shut up some weirdo, while satisfying, should probably come after anything a real scientist deems more important.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 17:44
|
|
|
Newly released navy UAP video. https://twitter.com/JeremyCorbell/status/1393281339525255168 We also had this New Yorker article giving an overview of the last couple of years: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/05/10/how-the-pentagon-started-taking-ufos-seriously And there's apparently a 60 Minutes piece coming out in the next few days. Ratios and Tendency fucked around with this message at 02:38 on May 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 02:12
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:On Youtube there's Cool Worlds with Prof. Brian Kipping. I love his voice and delivery, it's so soothing, and he's very hard-science - being a legit astronomer after all. I’ve watched a few of his videos now and you’re 100% spot on about his soothing voice. Thanks for the recommendation. I just wish he made audio only versions too so I could fall asleep to his voice. And I’ve been going through Sean Carol’s podcast backlog and the way he talks about his quantum mechanics interpretation does sound kinda weird. The way he talks about “being a good Everettian” (direct quote from several of his podcasts on quantum mechanics) sounds a bit… cult-like. Granted he does recognize that the MWI isn’t the only interpretation and has on more than one occasion said (paraphrased) that he’d go wherever the data goes, so it’s not like blind faith in it but still. You don’t hear about people talking about being a good Newtonian.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 16:33
|
|
|
Is the MWI even testable? Does Carroll present a means by which the MWI can be falsified?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 05:27
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Newly released navy UAP video. So what ... is this, actually? From the angle, it's hard to imagine it's some trick of the light or optical illusion, but I've got a hard time imagining any kind of drone that would have that particular shape and be able to sink like that. Some kind of... balloon? Boris Galerkin posted:I’ve watched a few of his videos now and you’re 100% spot on about his soothing voice. Thanks for the recommendation. I just wish he made audio only versions too so I could fall asleep to his voice.  You're welcome!
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 05:50
|
|
|
when they say splash mark bearing range at the end what does that mean? did they shoot it ?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 06:05
|
|
|
Sjs00 posted:when they say splash mark bearing range at the end what does that mean? did they shoot it ?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 06:14
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:So what ... is this, actually? From the angle, it's hard to imagine it's some trick of the light or optical illusion, but I've got a hard time imagining any kind of drone that would have that particular shape and be able to sink like that. Some kind of... balloon? It's travelling into strongly gusting winds and the US navy are familiar with balloons I believe so that seems unlikely. They surveyed the area where it hit the water and didn't find any debris either. Sooo we don't know hence unidentified. Here's the 60 Minutes piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBtMbBPzqHY and extended interviews: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygB4EZ7ggig Ratios and Tendency fucked around with this message at 08:22 on May 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 07:09
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Newly released navy UAP video. That looks like a balloon or gas. Lame. E- or a drone Vorik fucked around with this message at 08:44 on May 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 08:41
|
|
|
adoration for none posted:Is the MWI even testable? Does Carroll present a means by which the MWI can be falsified? I don't think so? MWI is generally just the more "natural" interpretation so it tends to be favoured by most physicists. A future theory of everything might make it clear which of the interprations are correct, but then again might not, and we're a long way from finding that. Relativity implies Eternalism (where past and future already exist), which is slightly tricky to mesh with the various wave-form collapse interpretations. With MWI it's a lot simpler, the future (and possibly the past) is just a giant tree of futures rather than a single trunk. But again, none of that is actually proof, and I'm confident that lots of people have come up with reasonable arguements to the contrary. Of course there also a subset of physicists who argue that since there's no meaningful difference on the outcomes on the theory for the different interpretations, we should all ignore the question. That's just huffing Karl Poppers farts in my opinion. Bug Squash fucked around with this message at 09:24 on May 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 09:00
|
|
|
Bug Squash posted:Of course there also a subset of physicists who argue that since there's no meaningful difference on the outcomes on the theory for the different interpretations, we should all ignore the question. That's just huffing Karl Poppers farts in my opinion. It's also the correct argument, hth 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 10:02
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
None of that poo poo is 👽. Just dumb as rocks and paranoid servicemen looking at balloons or gas or inverted reflections and losing their poo poo.. gtfo with that. Cool Worlds did a good episode on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le7Fqbsrrm8 And for this new footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAfiJqUHDg0 Vorik fucked around with this message at 11:31 on May 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 10:25
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:It's also the correct argument, hth It's a fundamentally incurious arguement that expects humans to be happy with a set of equations for predicting the future rather than an understanding of the universe. It's not that it's a "wrong" view, it's just not compatible with why humans do science.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2021 15:27
|
|
|
Bug Squash posted:It's a fundamentally incurious arguement that expects humans to be happy with a set of equations for predicting the future rather than an understanding of the universe. I understand why it's not satisfying and why we don't want to be stuck with this situation forever, but in the absence of testable predictions or detectable differences we simply can't meaningfully tell what's going on so all discussion on the issue is basically wild rear end guessing.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 21:33
|
|
|
Also saying "a set of equations for predicting the future rather than an understanding of the universe" begs the question of what you'd actually consider understanding the universe.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 21:34
|
|
|
adoration for none posted:Is the MWI even testable? Does Carroll present a means by which the MWI can be falsified? There are alternative models to quantum mechanics and both the Copenhagen interpretation and the MWI in modern physics. At least one of these alternative models is not compatible with both interpretations and could lead to an experimental falsification at some point. It's a major focus of research in the area of QM alternatives to find some kind of experimental approach to the problem. (but yeah, as always, I wouldn't get my hopes up)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:Appropos of nothing, here's my personal rankings of some popular scientists/physicists, from worst to best. This list is not exhaustive. Going back to the last page, but I feel like while he doesn't seem to be well known in North America, no list like this is complete without including Brian Cox. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Cox_%28physicist%29
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 01:19
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Going back to the last page, but I feel like while he doesn't seem to be well known in North America, no list like this is complete without including Brian Cox. Cox is ok but not thaaaaat special IMO. Better than Kaku when he's wandering outside his actual field of expertise though, since apparently he makes sure to hire someone who knows the topic to check everything is ok.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 02:13
|
|
|
Cox's innocent boyish wonderment at everything gets tedious after a while, though it can be amusing to see him get mocked for it endlessly. I don't really see the point of having one star presenter feign omnicompetence across disciplines they're not especially knowledgeable in instead of inviting actual field experts.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2021 04:11
|
|
|
If I as a layperson who hasn’t taken a math class since high school calculus wanted to learn some of the foundations of poo poo like the Copenhagen interpretation and many worlds and just like the most basic poo poo from 100 years ago, are there some ok books I could read? I am open to learning math if I have to.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2021 08:45
|
|
|
I might recommend something like The Theoretical Minimum by Suskind et. al. (Books here) And also be sure to learn some linear algebra along the way.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2021 13:09
|
|
|
You’re going to absolutely need to learn calculus, linear algebra, and differential equations if you want to understand the mathematics and nitty gritty of things. But if all you’re looking for is a high level overview so that you could follow along in a conversation then the math isn’t necessary. Basically, do you want to be able to write down the Schrödinger equation and how to solve for it, or do you want to just know what it is and what it does?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2021 13:38
|
|
|
The latter. I just want to know what people are talking about beyond the pop-science level at which I usually encounter physics ideas.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2021 15:31
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:The latter. I just want to know what people are talking about beyond the pop-science level at which I usually encounter physics ideas. Try some of the physics lectures from the great courses.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2021 04:14
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:The latter. I just want to know what people are talking about beyond the pop-science level at which I usually encounter physics ideas. Minutephysics on YouTube? https://youtube.com/user/minutephysics Maybe pair with 3blue1brown for the raw maths involved.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2021 20:16
|
|
|
Vorik posted:None of that poo poo is 👽. Just dumb as rocks and paranoid servicemen looking at balloons or gas or inverted reflections and losing their poo poo.. gtfo with that. I remember when UAP news was posted on the USPOL thread, people were upset and dismissive and said to make a thread to talk about this if they wanted. THIS IS THAT THREAD. We have multiple navy pilots, pentagon officials, pictures, video (which is debatable but point stands), all saying they have seen something that defies their understanding of human vehicles. To be so dismissive and saying "Oh they're all lying or stupid and I know with almost 100 % certainty that any other "life" visiting is literally impossible" is such a loving lame and dogmatist view I'm very sad to see so prevalent here. Everyone here is working on the assumption that it is impossible and going from there which is loving no where. I and I'm sure others would like to be able to actually even talk about this without being completely dismissed with "it's balloons or gas idiot". Honestly it's extremely frustrating to witness. I am absolutely NOT saying what anything IS, I don't know, but I would like to see us able to even have a discussion. There's so much noise on this subject, and definite wackos out there, but I would love to have a space with goons and not loving reddit to discuss all this or post these official accounts. Edit: Are we really going to further stigmatize this issue and make a different "aliens and poo poo" thread for this? Fireant fucked around with this message at 00:41 on May 25, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 00:37
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:It's travelling into strongly gusting winds and the US navy are familiar with balloons I believe so that seems unlikely. They surveyed the area where it hit the water and didn't find any debris either. Sooo we don't know hence unidentified. I think it's pretty big news that his wingwoman came out to corroborate his story with the tic-tac. I've been waiting for a second person to do that in his group. It's no wonder people are hesitant when you see reactions like in this thread or the 60 minutes old man go "This makes you sound wacko". We can't even get past the "Is this even actually an unidentified thing?!" when we can't identify it. The fighter jet photos are interesting too:  If these are foreign country's tech I would think we'd want to find out what the gently caress that is.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 01:15
|
|
|
This person has videos that go over those footage and he gives a very credible explanation: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL-4ZqTjKmhn5Qr0tCHkCVnqTx_c0P3O2t The gist of it is that some of them are light blooming, the heat exhaust of a distant fighter. The ones that indicate a craft that appears to be rotating are rotating due to the rotation of the camera module that's watching them. Pilots, like other human beings, can sometimes suffer from bias, or simply make mistakes - even experienced ones. And also, the man interviewed in the 60 Minutes short might not have actually worked for the Pentagon. At any rate, presumably the Pentagon is taking it quite seriously now that it has been ordered by Congress to give a report on the footage. That report is coming up , sometime next month I think! We'll see then, because then we won't need to rely on various random people on the internet giving their takes, either pro or con. If the Pentagon has good reason to believe that it's some foreign actor's advanced drone technology then it would have good reason to keep mum; if it's actually a US government secret project, doubly so.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 01:39
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:This person has videos that go over those footage and he gives a very credible explanation: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL-4ZqTjKmhn5Qr0tCHkCVnqTx_c0P3O2t I've seen that video before. Explaining a possible answer for several things doesn't refute the original premise and it's still unidentified. You'd think someone official would say "Yeah our pilots misidentify faraway jets sometimes" but haven't heard that. It does explain the rotation part. Saying all these pilots are just wrong and especially the tic tac one is ridiculous. I think it's pretty compelling and this isn't a hard science thread where we have to irrefutably prove their stories. These guys are hardly rando internet people whereas the debunking videos are. I have a debunking of the debunking video I can try to find later. So you're saying the pilots are wrong, but that this poo poo is actually a foreign actor, it can't be both. It would be loving remarkable if any human had "crazy acceleration tech" so holy poo poo why aren't you guys talking about that then? It's like having 50 year into the future tech and no one gives a poo poo. I don't think we have that kind of tech honestly. Are we going to have to try to defend point by point why this actually might be loving real in this here space, aliens and poo poo thread?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 02:17
|
|
|
Fireant posted:So you're saying the pilots are wrong, but that this poo poo is actually a foreign actor, it can't be both. I'm not saying either of those things. I'm saying that the pilots and other Navy witnesses could be mistaken, and that these things - if not natural phenomena or equipment - might be secret technology by some Earthly entity, either foreign or domestic. EDIT: The part that doesn't add up is simply the physics. If the object, whatever it is, does not produce an exhaust trail, then we should look at explanations that involve optical illusions or equipment malfunctions. Why? Because it's not physically possible for an object to change direction or accelerate without pushing on something else. That's Newton's Third Law. The same for other ascribed powers, like "teleportation". Teleportation exists, but only on the quantum level. Why? Because instant-speed teleportation breaks relativity. EDIT2: The "Aliens and poo poo" in the title is because the thread initially came from a discussion in USPOL about the Fermi Paradox, which concerns the likelihood of other intelligent civilizations existing in the universe. It is a topic that we return to often in this thread, and many people who frequent this thread love to talk about it and there's a significant amount of scientific research discussing exobiology, how life forms, the lifetime of civilizations, probability, and so on. This is a different question from "is the earth being visited by extraterrestrials?" DrSunshine fucked around with this message at 02:30 on May 25, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 02:23
|
|
|
I think different people have different senses of what is plausible or implausible re: aliens and poo poo. I think it's plausible that there is, or was, or will be another civilization somewhere in space, maybe even in the Milky Way. I find the idea that the Earth is being visited by craft from another civilization extremely implausible, and I'd need evidence way, way less ambiguous than those videos in order to change my judgment from "it's probably not aliens" to "the most likely explanation is aliens." Those navy pilots aren't wrong: they're seeing something they can't identify that their instruments are responding to in ways they're trained to understand. It's not reasonable to expect any one person to rethink what their eyes tell them right then in the moment, especially when they lack relevant expertise in fields like optics, electronics, physics, etc that are all required to understand what's really happening in the videos.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 02:26
|
|
|
What about the four pilots that all saw the weird thing in front of them with their actual eyeballs? The lady pilot looked spooked to even be talking about it.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 02:53
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:I find the idea that the Earth is being visited by craft from another civilization extremely implausible Show your working. Mick West is wrong about the Flir video associated with the Nimitz encounter. If the object was just a jet that information would have been apparent to everyone involved due to the radar system they were drilling.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 03:27
|
|
|
The New Yorker had an article on UFOs recently.quote:Perhaps unsurprisingly for a Pentagon project that had begun as a contractor’s investigation into goblins and werewolves, and had been reincarnated under the aegis of a musician best known for an album called “Enema of the State,” AATIP was subject to intense scrutiny. The pro-UFO folks come across as nutty, but perhaps less so than popular depictions. The 'debunkers' like Mick West come across as :goonsay: rationalists. Regardless the topic is very fun and deserves a place in this thread.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 04:05
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:The latter. I just want to know what people are talking about beyond the pop-science level at which I usually encounter physics ideas. If you’re ok with videos I really like Sabine Hossenfelder’s no-nonsense style videos. She’s a theoretical physicist and has a short series of videos about 10 minutes each that goes over some of the key parts of quantum mechanics. She doesn’t go into too much detail, but it’s enough to get the gist and gives you search terms if you’re interested in zooming in. The Mindscape podcast mentioned above is also pretty informative and accessible if you’re ok with just listening as well. In particular this episode gives a pretty decent overview I think. I don’t have any book suggestions. Maybe try asking the physics thread.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 04:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:38 |
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Show your working. We know that airplanes and equipment errors exist, while we’ve never had any evidence that alien spacecraft exist, so you need something pretty definite to convince anyone to consider alien spacecraft to be the best explanation of the available evidence.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2021 04:09
|
|