[aarond0623]

He's had a couple of misleading videos over the last few years that finally made me unsubscribe. Specifically the lightbulb with a 1 light second wire and the more recent video about light taking infinite paths.

There was also the Waymo ad and the Rods from the Gods video where he couldn't bother to use a guide wire to aim.

[deadso]

What was wrong with the 1 light second wire and the light taking infinite paths videos?

[aarond0623]

The first one was portrayed in a clickbait "everything you know about electricity is wrong" way. There have been several response videos to it that lay out why it's misleading that explain it better than I can, but suffice to say that the lightbulb does not turn on immediately like he claims.

There second one takes a mathematical model for the path integral for light and portrays it like that's actually what is happening, with plenty of phrases like light "chooses" the path of least action that imply something more going on. Also, the experiment at the end with the laser pointer is awful. The light we are seeing is scattering from the laser pointer's aperture, not some evidence that light is taking alternate paths.

[ChadNauseam]

> suffice to say that the lightbulb does not turn on immediately like he claims

Many people said this, but he set up an experiment to test it and the light does turn on instantly as claimed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI_X2cMHNe0

> There second one takes a mathematical model for the path integral for light and portrays it like that's actually what is happening

I know nothing about this. Is there a more accurate mathematical model available than the one he uses? Otherwise, I think it seems sensible to portray our best mathematical model as "what's really going on". And I didn't get the sense that light was "choosing" anything when watching the video, I got the sense that the amplitudes of all possible paths were cancelling out except for the shortest path (or something along those lines)

[evanb]

There are many equivalent formulations of quantum mechanics, the one the above post takes issue with is the path integral formulation. But because you can show an exact mathematical equivalence it makes all the same predictions as, for example, Hamiltonian evolution.

The words people like to use for the path integral is a sum over histories---that corresponds tightly with the ingredients in the path integral. So in this formulation it's what's "actually happening". But in other mathematical formulations other words are more appealing and what someone claims is "actually happening" sounds different.

[keeda]

+1 I would like to know too. Especially the experimental demo of infinite paths -- I'm a complete noob in quantum physics, and the video made sense of so many topics I "learned" in college but never managed to grok. It'd be good to know what the alternative explanation is.

[QuadmasterXLII]

Private equity baby! not just for shitting up your dentists and toy stores anymore

[teaearlgraycold]

The 1 light second wire video is kinda set up to bamboozle you. But it's still correct and taught me about EM.

[javier2]

Especially the way he (or the team) responded to the criticism they got for doing those «sponsored content» pieces put me off hard enough to unsubscribe.

[ww520]

Yeah, the light propagation videos are just high on misleading theories.