3 ms·

I don't like Sabine Hossenfelder's videos because they're too short. When I want to relax after work by playing a game while listening to someone drone on on yo

I don't like Sabine Hossenfelder's videos because they're too short. When I want to relax after work by playing a game while listening to someone drone on on youtube on a deep and esoteric subject, her videos end way too soon, and with an advertisement for her sponsor. I just want to hear some rambling boffin expound for an hour in the background on some matter that can't possibly raise more than a few hundred views. I decided I don't like popular science videos any more. Boo.

TexanFeller 2y ago
Sean Carroll is my go to guy for long form physics and philosophy discussions that have some depth but are still accessible. His October AMA on the Mindscape podcast is over 4 hours, but I haven't listened to it yet.
- YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
  Thanks for the recommendation. I'll give it a go.
Timwi 2y ago
> When I want to relax after work by playing a game while listening to someone drone on on youtube on a deep and esoteric subject Angela Collier is the answer to your plea.
- sterlind 2y ago
  I want to like Collier, but she has a patronizing, gatekeeping edge to some of her videos that I don't like. She also spends nearly as much time talking about science communication as she does actually communicating science. Like for example, her QCD video was about how explaining QCD to laypersons is impossible. She dunked on Feynman diagrams, first as not being real math, then because its antimatter notation makes laypeople think antimatter is time-reversed matter. ...which it is, iiuc, as far as the calculations of quantum field theory are concerned. Also that QCD is misleading because color charge isn't actual colors, as if viewers are doomed to take the color-wheel analogy literally. But this is a cynically pessimistic view to have as a science communicator. PBS Spacetime has covered QCD. Feynman's QED book teaches the layperson how diffraction, lensing, magnetic repulsion etc. work in terms of Feynman diagrams he shows you how to work through! Why not teach science, rather than spread snark? Why not bring the audience up to you, rather than talking down to them?
- YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
  Thanks, I'll try here too.

TexanFeller 2y ago

Sean Carroll is my go to guy for long form physics and philosophy discussions that have some depth but are still accessible. His October AMA on the Mindscape podcast is over 4 hours, but I haven't listened to it yet.

YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll give it a go.

Timwi 2y ago

> When I want to relax after work by playing a game while listening to someone drone on on youtube on a deep and esoteric subject Angela Collier is the answer to your plea.

sterlind 2y ago
I want to like Collier, but she has a patronizing, gatekeeping edge to some of her videos that I don't like. She also spends nearly as much time talking about science communication as she does actually communicating science. Like for example, her QCD video was about how explaining QCD to laypersons is impossible. She dunked on Feynman diagrams, first as not being real math, then because its antimatter notation makes laypeople think antimatter is time-reversed matter. ...which it is, iiuc, as far as the calculations of quantum field theory are concerned. Also that QCD is misleading because color charge isn't actual colors, as if viewers are doomed to take the color-wheel analogy literally. But this is a cynically pessimistic view to have as a science communicator. PBS Spacetime has covered QCD. Feynman's QED book teaches the layperson how diffraction, lensing, magnetic repulsion etc. work in terms of Feynman diagrams he shows you how to work through! Why not teach science, rather than spread snark? Why not bring the audience up to you, rather than talking down to them?
YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
Thanks, I'll try here too.