But when you dilate time 50 times, isn't it still interesting? Aren't the precise parts still precise? It's more interesting fast because the material propertie

But when you dilate time 50 times, isn't it still interesting? Aren't the precise parts still precise? It's more interesting fast because the material properties change, the speed of the springs and the motion of the flame front becomes important-- but that's still fascinating even when you can watch it happen. And you don't have to slow anything down to see that; controlled demolition, say, deals with the same sort of stuff on a large scale. When you're blowing up a building, what's happening in an individual explosive (hand packed fuel in a canister, with a dumb fuse...) too fast to see isn't important, but you need to pay close attention to the things that happen during seconds, perfectly human timeframes, because they become interesting and complex. Watching a single revolution of an engine in slow motion, you witness a marvel of engineering taking place before your eyes. But for decades (centuries?) before we understood them, people built engines by trial and error, and watching one of them in slow motion would not have been impressive. It would look sloppy, imprecise, unrefined. Engines today are amazing precisely because they are well understood very slowly, and in practice it mostly works to just say "and then that happens over and over again and that's what pushes you forward." That understanding is obvious on every scale, whether you're watching high-speed video or just hearing the engine note from outside. That's why I say that the interesting things are still interesting slowed down, and that "it's so fast!" is a red herring.