Video

Much like how we can observe bacteria in petri dishes under a microscope in real time, we're all probably being scientifically monitored by some ageless giant titan race eons ahead of ours under some cosmic microscope that travels across time and space. Like a Russian matryoska doll, I bet everything is inside of everything else.

News at eleven: overly intellectual people think being smart is what's most important. Quelle surprise. If aliens came, I don't think sending in a hyper-rational borderline autist to represent humanity is the best way forward, but be my guest. Wait till I'm gone though.

"Everytime you do this experiment, some one is going to end up with 10 consecutive heads" that is not how probability works. It is a probability, not a scheme/policy. There will be times when multiple people end up with 10 consecutive heads, and then there will be times when nobody ends up getting 10 consecutive heads.

This hasn't aged well lol

Ahh the ego of Neil .. don’t forget the ancient people and everything he believes stands atop thousands of years of our ancestors .. and they have seen everything and did not have scientific tools and had to study the planting season and the moon phases .. and after thousands of years noticed identifying properties .. but I’m sure he’s got it .. he stands with such a .. scientific fist .. that is the first way you can tell someone is wrong .. but no .. Neil is so smart .. I’m sure he’s got it all down lmfao

Why would of all discrete numbers you chose 12?

I would like the full clip that goes more into depth

What happen if they do create mass out of there amd it starts to grow within the collider ? Wont it be too late to shut down the machine. It will start to eat everything made of protons around it.

His answer is structured similarly to how dave chappelle structures his jokes to deliver his punchline

Not gonna lie he yapped like 2 mins between 😂

Neil Tyson's knowledge is amazing. He's smarter than Richard Dawkins.

I know almost nothing about physics, but I'm sure when Neil was asked who was right, Einstein or Newton, he said "Tyson, yes, Tyson is always right"... Then he held his hands like Mr. Burns and called everyone in the room idiots for not being him.

Except that last bit where he related astrology to narcissism cuz nah

I'm an astrologer. Its an art form. Much like using any symbol set to have a dialogue. Its not science, anyone who claims it is is doing a disservice to science and astrology. Also, it seems the only ppl interested in 'sun signs' are non astrologers. Additionally, not all types of astrology nor each of the hundreds of techniques work. Some have stood the test of time others haven't. If something fails I don't use it. Its not faith based. I don't know how it works, and frankly don't care. If I can make fairly accurate predictions and assessments I go with that. The zodiac isn't accurate. In fact, we have Greek manuscripts where astrologers debated whether or not to keep using the constellation names. The operative mechanism must be psychological because the tropical zodiac works just fine in the southern hem too

my vote is for meter north all day

Tyson is a pompous asshole but for once, I agree with him. I hope one day science separates itself from politics as well.

Youre a hater!

Somone sounds triggered jealous and salty lmao

My husband and I just had a discussion about this and decided to search what Mr. Tyson has to say about it… 😂

The problem with this statement is there is a alternative ending to the experiment where no one flips heads on the coin 10 consecutive times.

Obviously there is no science without philosophy. In fact, without philosophy the very words “knowledge” and “logic” exist in a vacuum of meaninglessness. (The degree for any scientist is Ph.D, except for those with a MD., for what is an obvious reason). The greatest learning in science without the study of philosophy makes one no more educated than the average auto mechanic. So they know a little about how things work. But it is also hypocritical. Both men try constantly to make philosophical arguments. Every time either of them wanders into territory foreign to their limited expertise, they stumble around in either history or philosophy with all the erudition of kindergartners. It would undermine their scientific work, except that the same incompetence in those other fields creates a protective barrier for each of them respectively.

Shrek’s Wife. Damn, she talks too much.

Meanwhile I thought myself to whistle really loud before I turned 26

Ask a question. Shut up. Let him answer.

Can I recommend these videos to you? "The Power of The Sun's Energy on Life, Health and Well-being." and "Vitamin D = Prevention is better than cure CANCER." --- czcams.com/video/pjje7tow5Ic/video.html - czcams.com/video/GXjuL_neEdA/video.htmlsi=vKTKyLmNq1wFK5jB

You are looking in any particular direction. 13.8 billion years away in the direction you are looking in, you see the back of someone's head. What are they looking at...? How far can they see in the direction they are looking...?

Lol so where does this man get his morality from? Who cares about right and wrong, truth and lie form an atheistic evolutionary materialist perspective?

Philosophy is what expands the imagination of what could be physically and neurologically possible. Science is there to examine it. The sad thing about that is that the person who proves it always takes the credit over the person who came up with the idea. Even if science proves philosophical theories completely wrong, it was the rules that these philosophical theories established that drove scientists to prove wrong.

Earth and Venus are closer to each other than mercury and Venus, so why doesn’t Venus prevent the moon from being tidally locked with earth? The moon should have a greater resonance than murcury.

All lies and make believe. The earth is flat!

Great question for the wrong person

So superficial. Go study vedic astrology and you will realize how idiot you are.

String Theory is unproven garbage, don't lump that in with Einstein / Newton.

Non of that made any sense... He used Pluto and its moon as a REFRENCE ?

omg,...thank you. i hope all actors read this. i'm an actor but i am...rational.

One person aren’t fair. Neuman, Dirac, Einstein, Feynman, Russell, so I think we need more than one.

Tim horn said it will hit in 2029

I don't think Mars cares about me, (without any real reasoning, because I'm not a believer) BUT I do kind of think (without reason) that the stars are emitting what CERN (who is probing the fundamental structure of the particles that make up everything around us) is emitting. The "God particle". I do not believe in any God, but I have a radical belief that these particles could be fundamentally changing how we think during the star cycle. I'm definitely butchering how science would try to term this, but I somewhat believe it, based off of myself and others "Astrological signs" I don't want you to think I don't believe in science. If anything I'd like you to believe I am a failed Nicolaus Copernicus. But rather than Copernicus I'd love to be told I'm wrong, because I put no real work like he did.

I'm just fucking fuming. I would just love to ask these two panelists: "tell me one scientific theory which discovery did not depend on an metaphysical assumptions." They are in a dead end. There is none. There never will be. Neil said here that: "frontiers of science do not need philosophy." What the fuck is this guy talking about. Its just so absolutely delusional. The very reason, you are cabable of talking about: "scientific progress" or "evidence from the naturel wolrd" was because we created a thought to see if nature behaved a certain way or not... All of this science that he is defending, is grounded in, well who would have tbought, in philosophy!!! The very idea of darwinian evolutions, is, oh my god, an idea!!!!!!! Grazy, absolutely crazy I know. So blinded by ignorance these people. Darwinian evolution is a model humans created, and we use it model the behaviour of nature. We have no idea what nature herself is, that is creating this behaviour of natural selection. And we never can! Because its the why game. And Niel then thinks that darwinian evolution is not an idea, and at the same time we can evolve further with science, without the use of new ideas. WTF is this guy talking abaout! Omfg, please, maybe he should do his OWN reaearch into a field which he knows nothing about before talking stupid fucking nonsense and deluding millions, literally, millions of people around the world. Jesus. He is actually against science, not for it. That is tje fucking tradegy of these people. God damn...

I have no patience with a belief in astrology. It's in the same league as believing in ghosts, flying saucers, etc.

20th Century, Von Neumann.

Hoy! Philosophy is the mother of all sciences

Isaac Newton would have figured out relativity because he truly understood what he was doing just like einstein truly understood what newton was doing. the genius of newton is to think of geometric shapes such as conic sections as dynamic rather than static forms. That's the genius of understanding that lead einstein to work out relativity. Being able to let go of the idea that matter is really matter but instead think of the world as sets of measurements from which you imagine a conceptual space that you relate cause and effect to is very intelligent. getting to the inverted pendulum problem in dynamics, that's not something that most people would get to. Then you're working with linear algebra concepts that are very trippy.

Yikes lmao

Where to find full video?

Science can't obsolete philosophy. For science can't justify it's hypothesis or assumptions against all false ideas. Science can't say why it's basic assumptions are true and all other assumptions are false. For example one such hypothesis is matter is made up of tiny particles called atoms. Science can't say why it is true and creation story is false. Nobody can see atoms with bare eye. Only computer generated models or man made models can't make atoms real and God fake. Philosophy can defend science with its logic that is dialectics against creation story. Science does not have its own logic. For logic science is forever indebted to philosophy. Therefore science can't obsolete philosophy.

He cannot believe in it, because he hasn't studied it. He doeo have a clue on what astrology is. Also you need to know about mithology to understand the connections between planets. A planet does nothing to you. It's all the planets together, all positions, all aspects. Astrology has nothing to do with how a planet will influence you. It's a transpersonal discipline.

It’s a bb pellet dumbass not an actual bullet.

Strawman. On both sides. This isn’t the real discussion around astrology. Astrology is not egocentric because it is not about your personality. Americans have taken that and ran with it because America is egocentric. Astrology is basically a different calendar system and observation of tendencies within that calendar system. Based on the stars and lunar cycles, rather than agricultural and industrial cycles. literally going with the cycles of the earth rather than the cycles of infrastructure. I’m tired of this dichotomy of astrology versus science while astrology is continually rebranded as a Myers-Briggs type eugenic bias. it’s propaganda. But that’s America for you. Create fake hype around mysticism, wait for it to catch on, and then lump it in with actual historical knowledge and philosophy. It is all noise.

“naturally selected(for survival or extinction)” teams with another “naturally selected for survival or extinction “ to make another no longer “naturally selected for survival or extinction”