>> ^Lendl:

Is it me or is Neil really pissed off before they even start...?


Ya know--I wondered that myself. And did Bill Nye look upset that he didn't get as much applause as NDGT?

Alison Krauss could cover the Phone book and still get an upvote from me.

In reply to this comment by erlanter:
May I ask a stupid question hoping Sift wisdom will enlighten me? On dimming of light in front of stars as evidence for planets: wouldn't any object between the observer and the star cause that dimming? What else informs the observer of its "planet" status?

this is a good but long explanation about observing planet status

PART 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LvJnSk8WkU



PART 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ou6kkQHnPQ

Between parts 2 and 3 when Krauss is talking about the double slit experiment... I can't help thinking that the conclusion that he presents as "ridiculous" is just that. I mean, I'm sure someone somewhere has thought of this already but if when you're watching the particles, they behave as expected and they don't behave as expected when you're not watching them, I would think that the most logical conclusion is that whatever physical matter is involved with the act of observing ultimately causes the electrons to act predictably but no more than that.

I don't see how anyone can go from "Electrons act funny sometimes" to "alternate realities are plausible" in the same breath and take themselves seriously.

Not that I'm criticizing Krauss at all, I love the guy and I understand that he's just talking about some of the thoughts that some people have come up with. I just don't agree that the conclusion is at all reasonable or should even be considered.

I would however like to know how exactly they are observing the electrons, by what method and if there are multiple methods of electron observance, AND if all of the multiple electron observance methods have had the same results for the same test. I'd also like to know what is happening to the electrons when they're not being observed. We know the result when they're not being observed, but what about before the result.

"I would find it far more difficult to assume that all of this was a mere accident."

So you choose to "assume" that a magic sky god waved his hands (BTW, why does god need hands?) and created everything? Why? Why is that ridiculousness easier for you to believe? Because someone told you so?

"The laws of probability state that the universe has reached a level of complexity that is statistically impossible.

I can't imagine what "laws of probability" you are referring to, or how you are applying them, or if you are just regurgitating nutter dogma. Anyhoo, watch the last couple minutes of this video (Richard Feynman story). Actually, watch the whole thing. It's a great talk. Or don't.

"Sagan's folly is to assume that the universe is too complicated for God (or "a god") to have created. But, the sheer complexity of the universe is the primary reason man believes in God in the first place. The universe is simply so complex that a Designer MUST exist."

Sagan claims nothing of the sort. Your folly is to state your assumptions about Sagan here, as if the rest of us are as uninformed as you. And claiming the complexity of the universe as the primary reason for man's belief in god is patently ridiculous. Man created God LONG before he understood the complexity of the universe (not that we truly comprehend it even now), or that a universe even existed. Your god has become a "god of the gaps". As we learn, through science, more and more about the nature of our universe and reality, he will die just like the thousands of other gods man has created and abandoned over the millenia. Well... we can all hope. There will always be nutters in need of Teddy Bears.

"Occam's Razor says that belief in an omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient deity is much more logical than assuming the universe happened all by itself."

In your world, maybe. Using the ramblings writings of a 14th century theologian to support your silly beliefs is like quoting Sarah Palin to bolster your position on energy policy. Occam's Razor is a principle, not a scientific law, not that you would understand the difference. However, if you believe that an infinitely complex being creating everything as is (with all it's complexity) with a wave of his noodly appendage is the simplest explanation, rather than 13.7 billion years of cosmic evolution that began (possibly) with a simple quantum fluctuation, you either don't understand the concept of Occam's Razor (fewest assumptions for competing theories that predict the same results), or you choose to remain comfortably ignorant.

"But the only thing worse than a religious man's zeal to get people to believe, is the atheist's zeal to make people NOT believe."

Spoken like a true zealot.

Thanks for the promo!

In reply to this comment by moodonia:
*promote

Your video, Lawrence Krauss: The Weight of the Universe (3:23), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Here are the lyrics for you sing-alongers out there:

Lyrics:

[Michael Shermer]
Science is the best tool ever devised
For understanding how the world works

[Jacob Bronowski]
Science is a very human form of knowledge
We are always at the brink of the known

[Carl Sagan]
Science is a collaborative enterprise
Spanning the generations
We remember those who prepared the way
Seeing for them also

[Neil deGrasse Tyson]
If you're scientifically literate,
The world looks very different to you
And that understanding empowers you

Refrain:
[Richard Dawkins]
There's real poetry in the real world
Science is the poetry of reality

[Sagan]
We can do science
And with it, we can improve our lives

[Jill Tarter]
The story of humans is the story of ideas
That shine light into dark corners

[Lawrence Krauss]
Scientists love mysteries
They love not knowing

[Richard Feynman]
I don't feel frightened by not knowing things
I think it's much more interesting

[Brian Greene]
There's a larger universal reality
of which we are all apart

[Stephen Hawking]
The further we probe into the universe
The more remarkable are the discoveries we make

[Carolyn Porco]
The quest for the truth, in and of itself,
Is a story that's filled with insights

(Refrain)

[Greene]
From our lonely point in the cosmos
We have through the power of thought
Been able to peer back to a brief moment
After the beginning of the universe

[PZ Myers]
I think that science changes the way your mind works
To think a little more deeply about things

[Dawkins]
Science replaces private predjudice
With publicly verifiable evidence

(Refrain)

QA session after the lecture: http://www.videosift.com/video/Q-A-After-Lawrence-Krauss-Science-Religion

Full lecture is here: http://www.videosift.com/video/Hampshire-College-Dr-Lawrence-Krauss-Science-Religion

i think it's safe to put his in *comedy, too. krauss is a funny guy

Anyone know where I can find the debates between Krauss and Greene, regarding string theory.

Um... Crillep... You may want to consider reading some books about logic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

Also, there was this really good video a while back that touched on the beginning of the universe:
http://www.videosift.com/video/A-Universe-From-Nothing-by-Lawrence-Krauss-AAI-2009
Fascinating stuff.

Anyway... teapots and all that... proving a negative... etc etc...

>> ^joe2:
links in your description are broken (copy/pasted from a forum post it looks like)
can you fix the links? i'd like to download the original video, thank you!
edit - i found a link
http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Krauss-AAI09-720.mov


I've fixed the links and added the link to the small QT version as well:
Small: http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Krauss-AAI09-web-sm-new.mov
720p HD: http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Krauss-AAI09-720.mov

links in your description are broken (copy/pasted from a forum post it looks like)

can you fix the links? i'd like to download the original video, thank you!

edit - i found a link
http://c0116791.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Krauss-AAI09-720.mov