Phycisists - what ...
 

  You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more

[Closed] Phycisists - what on earth is this guy talking about? Is it voodoo science?

37 Posts
28 Users
0 Reactions
120 Views
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

In the world of photography there is a fairly well known video blogger known as the 'angry photographer'. He is, to say the least, a bit out there. In addition to his opinionated rants on camera equipment he is a self-confessed genius who has invented magnetism. Now of course he hasn’t but one of his idiosyncrasies is to talk in hyperbolic and complex language about the subject in order to convince you he’s smarter than you are. But, given that I am myself not smart enough to disprove his theories (though I am smart enough to seriously doubt them), I wondered if anyone else here can shed light on what exactly (or even vaguely) he’s saying in this video:


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 8:50 am
Posts: 10980
Free Member
 

He looks like my brother-in-law who is a prize idiot.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 8:52 am
Posts: 17273
Free Member
 

He looks like my brother-in-law who is a prize idiot.

What? There are prizes?

Where do I sign up?


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 8:54 am
Posts: 91000
Free Member
 

He's rambling incoherently. Packing as many flashy sounding words in as he can to try and show off, it seems - possibly to himself.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 9:23 am
Posts: 931
Free Member
 

A physics / science version of Russell Brand.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 9:47 am
Posts: 17779
Full Member
 

Prof Cox has a word for these people. He should be in Trump's team coming out with stuff like that.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 11:57 am
Posts: 6902
Full Member
 

High quality bolloxology there - delivered after his fifth bong of the day from the sounds of it.

I take it he's an excellent photographer? Because I can't see many people enduring that cabbagery just to see his work, unless it's outstanding.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 12:08 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

You'd have thought such a good photographer would have at least made use of a tripod.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 12:38 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

I take it he's an excellent photographer?

Actually the rumour is that he's not. He's quite a character to say the least. Extremely opinionated and he likes to validate his opinions by positioning them as 'cold hard facts'. He probably has around something like $100,000 dollars worth of camera equipment, achieved mostly by having at least two copies of everything he owns.

No one is really sure about him.....


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 2:07 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

[img][url= https://s4.postimg.org/ltimu3lul/Untitled.jp g" target="_blank">https://s4.postimg.org/ltimu3lul/Untitled.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://postimage.org/ ]image upload free[/url][/img]


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 3:58 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

dude's nuts


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 4:08 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

LOL.

Utter bollocks. Possibly stoned, as has been diagnosed above.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 4:19 pm
Posts: 15
Free Member
 

absolute total ball cocks to the point where I can confidently say he is pulling your chain and or ill.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 4:47 pm
Posts: 299
Free Member
 

Shut up and take my money!!!


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 4:52 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

But, given that I am myself not smart enough to disprove his theories.....

Neither is anyone else by the look of things 😆


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 4:59 pm
Posts: 13601
Free Member
 

Still waiting for him to explain objects need magnets to appear solid lol


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 5:07 pm
Posts: 11402
Free Member
 

Star Trek had a good term for it, Technobabble. 🙂 usual had something to do with phase 😉


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 5:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

He's like a camp version of Colonel Kurtz.

Did he say that magnetism defined volume?


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 5:13 pm
Posts: 91000
Free Member
 

He doesn't really have any theories. He's just waffling without saying anything specific.

Real science isn't like this. It's based on equations, laws, formula and derivations. Even when Dr Cox is explaining it on telly, he says 'Einstein showed us this, Newton showed us that' - that's a way of citing their equations and theories.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 5:15 pm
Posts: 22922
Full Member
 

He's prolific though.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 5:28 pm
Posts: 3073
Full Member
 

Stopped after 20 seconds because he's a nut job. Watch some real science in action,maybe the latest episode of 'sky at night' then compare and contrast with that balloonatic above.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 33325
Full Member
 

Deary, deary me. 🙄
There's only one part of that incomprehensible load of bollocks that made [i]any[/i] kind of sense, and that was the bit about light being bent by magnetism, which is true, it's how cathode ray tubes work.
The rest is a classic case of "if you can't blind 'em with science, baffle 'em with bullshit'. And my bullshit 'o' meter was reading fifteen on a scale of ten!
It's people like him who get others believing in stuff like chemtrails and HAARP, and all that crap.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 9:13 pm
Posts: 10315
Full Member
 

it's how cathode ray tubes work.
I think cathode ray tubes are actually beams of electrons being bent by magnetic fields and then converted to light


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 9:21 pm
Posts: 4675
Full Member
 

There's only one part of that incomprehensible load of bollocks that made any kind of sense, and that was the bit about light being bent by magnetism, which is true, it's how cathode ray tubes work.

Can you bent light with magnets?

CRT's are beams of electrons bent by electric fields.


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 9:25 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Basic A Level physics innit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetism


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 9:28 pm
Posts: 10315
Full Member
 

oooo, you've come to play


 
Posted : 17/02/2017 9:31 pm
Posts: 33325
Full Member
 

CRT's are beams of electrons bent by electric fields.

I was always led to believe that a strong magnetic field could bend light, but I'm happy to stand corrected on this, photons carry no charge, and so can't be directly affected by magnetic or electromagnetic fields.
Basic A Level physics innit.

Could be, I dunno, I only got as far as CSE physics, I'm not some smartass university type.


 
Posted : 18/02/2017 9:09 pm
Posts: 3073
Full Member
 

I know that gravity can bend light, because Matthew McConaghy told me.


 
Posted : 18/02/2017 9:15 pm
 poah
Posts: 6494
Free Member
 

I know that gravity can bend light, because Matthew McConaghy told me.

did he play Einstein ?


 
Posted : 18/02/2017 10:53 pm
Posts: 7076
Full Member
 

Has he just got a liquid which is magnetic, sandwiched between two layers of glass?

And the refractive index of the liquid changes depending on the local magnetic field, which in turn gives you different levels of refraction (reflection?), and hence the funky patterns?

Kind of neat, but nothing to do with what he's talking about.

More plausible explanation:


 
Posted : 18/02/2017 11:18 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

I know that gravity can bend light, because Matthew McConaghy told me.

I think technically gravity bends space/time not light; light still travels in a straight line through the curved space/time hence it looks like it's being bent. This was how I understood it but I am probably wrong.


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 8:32 am
Posts: 3073
Full Member
 

Very good, extra kudos if you didn't use google first


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 8:39 am
 MSP
Posts: 15473
Free Member
 

I think is is confusing the theory of "time and relative dimensions in space"


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 9:13 am
Posts: 34376
Full Member
 

Did he say that magnetism defined volume

I understand you can define volume by how it reacts to magnetism. (permeability)

but I suspect that's not what he's talking about!


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 9:21 am
Posts: 7076
Full Member
 

He's talking utter rubbish. It's a Trumpian version of physics.

Very good, extra kudos if you didn't use google first

Sorry to disappoint, I had to google it to even figure out what he was taking pictures of.


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 9:33 am
Posts: 11
Free Member
 

He kept saying coherence which seemed ironic to me.


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 3:34 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Very good, extra kudos if you didn't use google first

Assuming you meant my knowing about gravity bending space/time, yes, I did know that already. I've read a lot of popular science books so I get the basic principles of these concepts but that's as far as it goes.


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 4:30 pm
Posts: 7076
Full Member
 

It has nothing to do with gravity.

Remember when you messed around with iron filings and a magnet in primary school?

Well it's like that, only instead of using iron filings, he's using a liquid with something like iron filings in it. That lets him play around with reflection and refraction to make some pretty patterns.

But the stuff he was talking was total cobblers.


 
Posted : 19/02/2017 5:23 pm

6 DAYS LEFT
We are currently at 95% of our target!