Is it me, or does this hippie seem a bit angry? Someone give the poor guy a joint...

That was a cool listen, "quality.

Ah, haha fuck, *quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Tymbrwulf.

Not a bad marriage of two ideas.

He's wrong, too. The profile of wavelengths of sunlight that get scattered and transmitted by the atmposphere would be nearly the same regardless of the existence or nonexistence of humans (except for the effect of greenhouse gasses and other pollution). And the longest wavelength of visible light is red, not violet. Then he digresses into some really wrong woo-woo around 4:10. I'll downvote this guy for being ontologically incorrect.

I up voted because at least he thinks for himself and tries to figure things out. Though he started to lose me and then completely lost me in the final seconds when he said "There's gotta be a deeper meaning".

Cringe...his comment about time is just plain wrong. He was really onto something when he said "time is not absolute," but then he makes the painful statement that the object moving near the speed of light experiences time more slowly. While it is true that the object experiences time in a frame that he is moving relative to differently, he will always experience time in his own frame in exactly the same way regardless of whether he is moving or not. That's the entire point of an "inertial frame" in special relativity - one result is that time always looks the same in his frame. It is times in other frames that he experiences differently.

Also (1) I agree with jwray - the color of the sky is related to the wavelength^4 term in the re-emission of electromagnetic radiation equations, and (2) don't get me started on the phenomenological lack of specificity in the overly broad comments about how we only see the world via electromagnetic waves/photons.

>> ^jwray:

He's wrong, too. The profile of wavelengths of sunlight that get scattered and transmitted by the atmposphere would be nearly the same regardless of the existence or nonexistence of humans (except for the effect of greenhouse gasses and other pollution). And the longest wavelength of visible light is red, not violet. Then he digresses into some really wrong woo-woo around 4:10. I'll downvote this guy for being ontologically incorrect.

*nochannel
*comedy

Dirty, dirty hippy....gtfo out of Science.

This video has been removed from all channels (Science, Comedy) due to invalid channel assignment - nochannel invoked by rembar. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

Adding video to channels (Comedy) - requested by rembar.

I'm a vision scientist.

"Wouldn't our brain have to go at the speed of light to keep up with all that light? Okay?"

facepalm

I don't know enough about some of the scientific things he speaks of. However my opinion of this man is that he has developed an admirable ability to capture and captivate an audience with an idea of personal truth that he holds within his mind. To those who call this man a dirty hippie, check your denigration of this man's excitable human spirit at the door and give him a thumbs up for understanding more about the science of the universe than 5 billion 999 million 999 thousand people that live on this planet. He teaches his audience in a few short moments to perhaps look beyond themselves and their simplistic view of the world around them.

To sum things up I will *promote and *quality

Invocations (quality, promote) cannot be called by albrite30 because albrite30 is not privileged - sorry.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts." -Daniel Moynihan