The problem I see here is that the video author is assuming that all the problems created are actually philosophical in nature. The big problem is the human mind and our nature.

We have been selected to first, fight or flight at any unknown variable. Second, evolution plays its core tenet: survival of the fittest (which has a part to play in all these examples). Third, you have resources--which in turn go back to number two. Lastly, reproduction comes into play.

Sillma and Crosswords touched on this. We have to figure out a solution to force a change in our predisposed evolution. Whether that be a biological or technological (or both) solution. What would any such society do about sociopaths? They, by definition, will not understand "being good".

I hope we can get to a semi-Utopian like society, but it will be a mammoth undertaking. The changes he talked about are far easier in comparison (physics and astronomy--oh, and since when was quantum mechanics not messy ). The Utopian change will require an upheaval at every facet of society: government, trade, religion, decisions, structural, biological, technological, industrial, etc...

/I'd like to live in a nice paradise, but this approach would require too much from the one source that made it in the first place.

Horkeimer always sounded like a demented pirate to me. And that computerized rendition of Debussy hurts my ears.

But upvote for astronomy goodness!

Hey AMZ. We have a no self-linking policy here. Which means you can't submit a video here that you submitted to youtube yourself. Because of this, you're about to be banned. If you want to stay a member of the site you should *kill the video quickly.

I'm telling you this because normally we ban self-linkers who are trying to generate business for something their selling. You seem like you might just be into astronomy. Which is cool with me. Feel free to ask me any questions you might have. Or read the FAQ in the upper right-hand corner.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'timescape, timelapse, night sky, astronomy, photography' to 'timescape, timelapse, night sky, astronomy, photography, clint mansell' - edited by enoch

Yes.

I all seriousness though, Its pretty safe to say we have a pretty good idea of how a lot of things work in physics, astronomy, cosmolgy, etc... (and a lot we dont.) However dark energy / matter is still is a theory. An explanation of something we haven't observed directly but something indirectly that we don't understand (like the orbit of stars in a galaxy) and it is a possible explanation of what we are seeing. Its not uncommon for science to put forth a theory or hypothesis of something that is proven in mathematics before its actually discovered or observed. Black holes being the most well known case of this. It was first proposed in 1783 by Henry Cavendish that there are stars so massive that light could not escape. This is different then what we know what black holes are today, but the concept is the same.

Also, its highly unlikely that a fundamental understanding of something is flawed because these standard models work very well with everything else. Its quite possible that the reason this stuff isnt visible is because it exists in a higher dimension than the 4 that we perceive. Something that gets into string theory.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

I am alone on this?

I dont know if its a matter of letting the community decide, or having the powers that be decide. Its more a case of having a set guideline as to what should constitute a channel. In the other thread, Krono mentioned how the line between tags/channels/playlists has been blurred over time, and I think this is a result of that. If that is the case, then why have any of it? Each thing has its own purpose and should serve a certain function.

Tags: Used to make youre video visible to certain keyword searches.
Channels: Displays videos of a certain broad themes governed by a standard which is moderator controlled to preserve quality.
Playlists: Personal, user customizable lists of videos of your choice.

The Wilhelm Scream is nothing but an obscure movie reference about a reused, signature scream. What purpose does it serve for it to have its own channel? It fits quite well in the Obscure or Movie channels. Does the traffic to those videos warrant its own channel? Sure it may just be a spot out there on the internet, in its own little corner not harming anything, but then where do you draw the line? How about an Astronomy channel in addition to Spacy, or Physics in addition to the Science channel. Christian and Jewish channels in addition to Religion? I post a lot of things from the Sixty Symbols series, why dont I have a channel for that? Do you see my point? If you let the number of channels get out of control with subtopic channels that are covered in a broader "parent" channel, then you'll just have a giant mess of channels that frankly aren't really needed, and annoying to go through when choosing channels when submitting a video.

A site like this needs standardized topic channels. If someone wants to make a list for a more specific single topic, thats what playlists are for.

"It's sort of like the GPS of astronomy"

What?

It's baffling how bad analogies scientists can come up with, especially in science documentaries on BBC etc. Sometimes it gets so confusing that even a person who's studied the subject has a hard time following what they're talking about. Almost every damn sentence starts "it's kind of like..." and it's another very far fetched analogy that neglects dozens of details and misleads the less educated viewer.

Hi, I'm Gabe_B, so named because my first name is Gabe and my surname begins with a B. I'm creative like that. You can expect other creative gems from me, like taking other's pieces of videographic art and submitting it here to express my own sense of self.
I'm an English teacher in Korea, and like most of my kind I drink too much and have bandwidth to spare. I love astronomy, evolutionary psych, clever people, nerdy girls with good bodies, and interesting videos about religions.
I live on the 30th floor of a 2 year old apartment building in Seoul with a nameless cat and a Californian girl. I majored in Religion and Film for my BA and think The Sift is one of the greatest things on the net.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'sixty symbols, earth, radius, astronomy' to 'sixty symbols, earth, radius, astronomy, occultation' - edited by choggie

I hear where you are coming from, but not all TV sucks. I rather like things in my line of interest, especially in luscious 1080 HD..... there is a dearth of physics, astronomy, car rebuilding, killer concerts and movies.

And yes tons, tons of pure crap.

"How could someone so bad at math be so interested in Astronomy?" <- That is exactly how I feel too!

^ Yup. See also the excellent writeup on Bad Astronomy.

The telescope in use is rather interesting. Designed by the late Thomas Back (RIP) from Ohio, in a project coordinated by a guy in Germany, with a lens built by a Russian Company (Lyktarino Optics "LZOS") which make a special kind of glass made by nobody else in the world. The glass attempts to emulate the properties of natural fluorite crystal. The company LZOS used to make cold war military spy satellite lenses, and then switched to amateur astronomy optics once that dried up.

The lenses are famous for their (quality overall), and especially for their very natural reproduction of color.

The lens used here is worth probably $25,000 to $30,000 dollars, and weighs probably 40 pounds.

Here's the performance leading up to the interview:

http://www.videosift.com/video/Pink-Floyd-Astronomy-Domine-1967-plus-funny-interview

My physics teacher for astronomy was one of my favorite people. Everything came alive and everything got really big (or small, depending on your perspective). Glad you have the opportunity to bring people into the sphere of the amazing.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
Bachelor's degree in physics, Master's degree in theoretical physics. I don't want to go through 4 years of hell as a PhD, so now I'm teaching astronomy to kids and physics to College students.