D

@Kaju_Nut @DeivonDrago I thought they understood that if it is massless then it has to be fields. And that went all the way back to Fresnel who basically came up with the Shrodinger equation.

It is only with relativity that we understood that action at a distance doesn't work and nature has to be described via local fields. No, Gauss' law and Poisson equation don't "explain" inverse square law any more than Coulomb's law. What the field picture explains is not "which equation" but "why that equation." What is true is that we did have Maxwell's field equations prior to Einstein, even though it was not understood that fields are the only viable language.

People in the comments:

@Kaju_Nut @DeivonDrago Also, didn't Einstein use Newton to guess what the equation should be? He built it to generalize Newton.

@Kaju_Nut @DeivonDrago I think it's technically true, but Columb's law was also inverse square before they realized that EM was a field theory. No? And Gauss' Law and the Possion equation explain the reason it is inversely square. And they do the same for gravity. So I don't understand this.

@AlecStapp @Ed453164711 @ArnabDatta321 Ilya came from Israel

@Ed453164711 @ArnabDatta321 great example

The US tech industry would be a shadow of itself without immigrants. First 10 examples that come to mind: 1. Elon Musk (South Africa) 2. Andrej Karpathy (Czechoslovakia) 3. Sergey Brin (Russia) 4. Jensen Huang (Taiwan) 5. Satya Nadella (India) 6. Ilya Sutskever (Russia) 7. Sundar Pichai (India) 8. Lisa Su (Taiwan) 9. Fei-Fei Li (China) 10. Sanjay Mehrotra (India)

@pmddomingos What? They probably use it more than experimentalists. So much simulations and also mathematica. Experimentalists at least spend half the time with the lab equipment.

The only scientists left that don't use computers are theoretical physicists.

@bsgross606 @Gillimoto @TaylorLewan77 The magician who says "I learned the trick of catching bullets in my mouth from the hills of Nepal" but really it's a trick gun. Same thing. They have this "special learned power" which everyone calls magic but it's a trick. No one thought they were Harry Potter 😂

No, that’s kind of the whole point Stevie makes. Because Copperfield is a magician and his audience knows he’s doing tricks. Oz makes false claims that he can read body language and distances himself from magicians while using the same tricks and gimmicks. It’s an ethical debate about where to draw the line in deceiving an audience. I realize a 5hr video is a lot to watch but he discusses all this stuff thoroughly and solely based off your questions, I think you’d find it very interesting.

Don’t know Pablo but I know what I saw that day… had to be magic. Don’t take this from me Pablo.

@pablofindsout I really enjoyed that 5 hour doc. It was cool to see how Oz does it. But I don't get why he has to call him a fraud. Everyone knows even his "I can read facial cues." Is a shtick. It's part of the story of a "mentalist." No one actually believed it. But suspension of disbelief.

@pablofindsout How is it a hoax? Unless you believed in magic obviously there was a trick. And "magic" doesn't mean real magic. Like how a magician "practiced for years the fine art of catching a bullet in their mouth." There's a trick. But still cool!

Oz the Mentalist, exposed: @PabloTorre and Stevie Baskin break down how viral tricks get engineered with pre-show "meta-deception" and "a fake Google page" in disguise.

@SPORTSandTV1 @pablofindsout @PabloTorre How is it a hoax? Unless you believed in magic obviously there was a trick. And "magic" doesn't mean real magic. Like how a magician "practiced for years the fine art of catching a bullet in their mouth." There's a trick. But still cool!

@pablofindsout @PabloTorre its always entertaining to see a good magic trick.. and sometimes magic is so good, you’re just DYiNG to know how its done. Thats fine. But why do people take it personally lol? Like its magic. of course theres a trick to it. Next, do an episode exposing pro wrestling. lol

@Andandandwhat @screwthewilpons @pablofindsout How is it a hoax. Unless you believed in magic obviously there was a trick. And "magic" doesn't mean real magic. Like how a magician "practiced for years the fine art of catching a bullet in their mouth." There's a trick. But still cool!

@screwthewilpons @pablofindsout If you want to know how Oz does his tricks, the guy from Pablo’s podcast put out a full documentary exposing Oz on YouTube. It’s long but well worth the watch. In short Oz is a complete hoax youtu.be/FnwcU-XDyJ4

When I say "changed" I don't mean that the Schrodinger equation was replaced. Just like how GR didn't replace Newton really. But there have been a ton of developments, both theoretical and experimental.

When you learn the more advanced quantum information science and know about the recent experiments, you will understand. I personally think that the people on the panel do not have the expertise to discuss that. Even regular quantum physics has changed a ton since 1926.

@Samuel_Gregson I really don't like the way you guys cover quantum physics in your debunking videos. It's not like any other science. It's extremely weird for many different reasons.

@WKCosmo @Quasilocal It's cool but isn't that X and curated by who you follow?

@Quasilocal WTF

Lol @WKCosmo made the top of "Today's News" 😂

@DBashIdeas @n_koss @AlbertEinstein It's also funny because the three most famous and actually useful metrics (or spaces) in general relativity is Minkowski space (flat regular, no gravity). Schwarzchild (black hole, sun). And the metric of Friedman who was also Jewish, and that's the metric for cosmology!

@DBashIdeas @n_koss @AlbertEinstein He really wrote a beautiful letter to Einstein from the battlefield. Really worth reading!

Einstein’s yahrtzeit is 26 Nissan, obviously.

@michael_nielsen Quantum Control via geometry is so cool! I was reading the paper yesterday!

A partial list of my past projects: michaelnotebook.com/projects.html

@Samuel_Gregson I really liked Griffiths conversational style. So that book was really enjoyable to read. But it felt almost like a popular book because it was so nice to read but also didn't derive as much from first principles.

@Samuel_Gregson I really liked the book and read it over and over again! But I read it in parallel with my undergrad elementary particle physics course which used The Standard Model by Grossman and Nir and I felt that gave more context to WHY things happen than Griffiths did.

Had a great time discussing our favourite educational and inspirational physics resources with Nazir - The Caribbean Bookworm. We get into undergraduate/postgrad books (mostly), toys, TV shows and more. Come and critique ours and share yours! Link: youtube.com/watch?v=Ptcx1Z…