[avaldez_]

I think is the channel that attracts that kind of commenters. There's this video [1] where a extremely unprepared moderator insists in the question if we should get up the idea of the problematic "antimatter theory". Thing is, there's no such question, there's no problem with antimatter and even the guests (Smolin and Hossenfelder) insisted in that. But the moderator was annoyingly focused on trying to make a controversy in an already accepted theory. I think you won't find insightful comments in a channel clearly ill-equipped to discuss such topics.

[1] https://youtu.be/-2ngmVwXteE

[karmakaze]

I'm getting a bit of a sense of the making it controversial vibe here too. For instance I don't find Michio and Sabine's viewpoints in conflict. Theories can take a long time for confirmation and even a long time before they can even be considered science. Sabine has a problem with calling it science or believing in the 'existence of mathematics'. I have a problem with that because we have found mathematical anomalies to exist: singularities/black holes, cosmological constant/inflation. That dispute seems to be about where to put research resources, which comes down to personal convictions and how much support you can raise for them. Roger of course isn't having any of the controversy building: "What are we talking about here?"

The two points I found the most interesting were Michio's description of multiple things existing in the same space but we're only 'tuned into' one of them and Roger's theory of a continuous series of big bangs which he didn't care to discuss because it has nothing to do with multiverse(s).