5 ms·
Sean Carroll explains the biggest ideas in the universe – Full Interview [video] (2025)
- WCSTombs 22d ago(2025).
- deleted 19d ago[deleted]
- layer8 19d agoThis is based on the eponymous video series that Sean Carroll published on his YouTube channel during the pandemic (playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrxfgDEc2NxZJcWcrxH3jyjUUrJlnoyzX https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrxfgDEc2NxZJcWcrxH3j...). He since has written an in-depth three-volume book series on these topics: https://preposterousuniverse.com/biggestideas/ https://preposterousuniverse.com/biggestideas/. (He recently also completed the third volume, Complexity and Emergence, but it will only be published next year.)
- eis 19d agoI can wholeheartedly recommend Sean Carroll's Mindscape podcast if you want to listen to interesting topics related to Physics, Philosophy, Quantum Mechanics and Science in general: https://www.youtube.com/@seancarroll/videos https://www.youtube.com/@seancarroll/videos He has a talent for explaining complex topics in easy to understand terms and avoids the trap of outrage and controversy driven social media tricks like some others in the field.
- giglamesh 19d agoThank you! I will never click on a you tube link without a solid prior recommendation. I really appreciate "complex topics in easy to understand terms" and look forward to checking this out.
- layer8 19d agoYou don’t even have to click on a YouTube link, the podcast is here: https://preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/ https://preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/
- iammjm 19d agoCame here to say exactly this. Mindscape is great, with lots of interesting guests and topics. And new episodes come fairly frequently, 1-2 a month i think
- eis 19d agoHe actually publishes a new episode every Monday! Once a month he publishes a special AMA episode which covers a lot of listener (Patreon subscribers) questions and usually is 3-4 hours long! I'm always looking forward to these especially :)
- syspec 19d agoIt's good, but man he is pompous. Every question anyone asks is answered some form of "your question is stupid"
- Trasmatta 19d agoI've never once gotten that impression from him
- goatlover 19d agoAre you confusing Caroll with someone else? I've listened to many of his podcasts and talks. Never heard hims say anything like that.
- AaronAPU 19d agoThat is really interesting. To me he does sound very pompous. I still like him, but he treats most questions like the person should be ashamed of having asked something so foolish. Different interpretations of the same personality I suppose.
- Jach 19d agoI don't have a great sample size but I've never thought he was being dismissive or implying something was a stupid question or someone should be ashamed of asking. However I do still think he sounds pompous, purely as a matter of the way he speaks. It's the pace, the cadence, and how he hangs on or stresses certain syllables and words. It's a recognizable style, not unique to him. Leonard Susskind has a similar one, though I'd say not as extreme. You get a more extreme form listening to various philosophers. (An example as parody here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leQ1bczMu7c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leQ1bczMu7c) It usually doesn't bother me, as I can filter out the information from the presentation, but I still notice something. Reading is better than listening in part for not needing that layer of filtering.
- AaronAPU 19d agoThat makes sense. There is a certain honesty to it, not to throttle your speech for tact’s sake. He expresses the level of confidence he has.
- thisisauserid 19d agoI can just barely recommend it. The physics is great but for a 3 hour AMA it's about 51% politics and basketball.
- sbuttgereit 19d agoIn all honesty I think this is an unfair characterization. I've listened to his podcast for a fair number of years and I think you're exaggerating quite a bit. Mostly the episodes are specific topics with a guest who's area of research/specialty is the topic and which stay pretty well on-topic. Most of the AMA episodes are in the area's where Carroll specialize: physics and philosophy of science. It -occasionally- veers off into politics or basketball, but it's nowhere close to 51% politics and basketball. I think the most recent AMA did have more basketball than usual, and admittedly more than I like. And I am not a fan of his politics nor do I consider his political positions especially thoughtful or insightful. But those diversions are more occasional distractions than some majority of the AMA content. And in a 3+ hour Q&A format its not surprising that he's asked about those areas where his regular listeners know that he has a particular interest or position.
- josh-sematic 19d agoSeconded. I truly consider that podcast a gem of our culture. I know of no comparable resource for generally curious people willing to try and think deeply about things.
- __rito__ 18d agoNot that much ground covering, but you should listen to Steven Strogatz's podcasts - The Joy of x, and The Joy of Why!
- briHass 19d agoI'll add that it's my favorite podcast to listen to while falling asleep - if you do that with podcasts. Sean uses high quality audio gear (and he ships/loans similar to his guests), so the audio is almost always top notch. He also must do what I would consider to be the bare minimum of editing to normalize volumes. So many podcasts are unlistenable to me for bedtime, because of mismatched volume levels of host/guest or poor quality audio for the guest (through zoom or whatever). He also tends to speak in a smooth tone, with obvious inflection for emphasis (i.e. not monotone), but not irritatingly chipper or fake sounding like some other physics podcasters.
- mercer 19d agoone of my biggest pet peeves is podcasts/youtube videos that would be perfect to listen to while resting, if not for some loud and obnoxious intro/outro music. Or a too-loud background muzak track. If I want muzak I'll go to the supermarket or stand in an elevator.
- __rito__ 18d agoI go through chosen episodes from it regularly, and I can vouch for its quality. The podcast covers a niche that is not common. But all the episodes are not equally good, of course, and much depends on the guests. I really liked the Carlo Rovelli episode (#2), the Tyler Cowen episode (#19), Kip Thorne (#24), Steven Strogatz (#41), etc.
- mattrcarroll 19d ago[dead]
- deleted 19d ago[deleted]
- at1as 19d agoHe's a very underrated science communicator. We need more people like him pulling physics into the cultural zeitgeist through a positive lens. Too much of the science that breaks into the mainstream (AI being the obvious example) is framed primarily from a negative viewpoint (or, remember the "LHC will spawn a blackhole that engulfs the earth" talk, instead of a focus on the incredible science behind it)
- WhitneyLand 19d agoHow is he very underrated? I mean, I otherwise agree with the sentiment of your post but I feel like most people are rating him pretty well.
- at1as 19d agois he broadly known? Sure, his books have done well - but have they really reached a very broad set of people? As a science educator, I think the only true household name at present is probably Neil deGrasse Tyson
- raffraffraff 18d agoIn America?
- fasterik 19d agoMindscape is roughly in the top 20 science podcasts (also #3 in physics) and his books regularly make the NYT bestseller list. So he's definitely popular, but perhaps still underrated relative to the quality of his content. His approach is more idiosyncratic than the most popular science communicators. He focuses mostly on the topics that interest him and isn't averse to getting technical in certain discussions. I think that naturally limits his audience, for better or for worse.