Here is my review as I watch the video:
1:00: Whats up with his voice and the music?
2:00: no science to now.
4:40: something about chemistry. our mood is related to the precense of certain chemicals and so our thoughts can affect the state of the brain. there is the logical flaw it might be the other way around and the deeper flaw the common view in neuroscience would be the state of the brain IS our thoughts.
5:20: more stuff about dopamine & stuff that make us happy.
5:40: we need validation. stuff about mirror neurons. they are now called "emphaty neurons". we are told they are what allow us to self-reflect; CITATION NEEDED.
7:30: "Memories are restored through protein synthesis". Since there as of now does not exist any widely accepted theory of human memory this come as a surprice; it is ofcourse trivially true in the sense the brain synthesize proteins as part of its function as do all other cells.
8:00: "when we are not being self-aware, most of our actions are impulsive". tautology.
11:00: just a lot of loose stuff about the brain. now we have come to brain waves. the discussion is full of statements which are hard to make sense of. "the transfer of information between neurons become optimal when their activity is synchronized". what does that mean? the narrator jump from this description to an explanation of cognetive dissonance without any support, a clear sign of woo.
12:00: enough of that stupid music already!
12:10: apparently there is a connection between how neurons work and evolution because: "evolution can be seen as the same process where nature tries to adapt or resonate with it's enviroment". pseudo-science. evolution is not "nature" but gene pools that adapt. the mechanism is (primarily) natural selection on discrete changes. there is no resonation. how, by the way, is enviroment not nature? what is the enviroment of "nature"?
12:30: nature became self-aware through evolution. This is just getting worse and worse.
13:00: religion gets mixed into it. apparently religion is justfied because science does not answer "why" questions.
14:00: some babble about how the two hemispheres are very different and are engaged in an argument. the left is apparently very narrow-minded and the right is trying to make it change it's mind.
15:10: consciousness is different regions of the brain interacting. who would have thought. as far as the video says anything, it can all be condensed to simply saying the brain is conscious.
16:00: because we have senses and the senses provide input "nothing is external". no better than saying because dogs sniff each others asses all dogs are connected.
17:00: because we are all connected, this is a new paradigme for morals. selfish gene get a bit of random bashing. we are assured this is all scientific.
19:00: it is nearly impossible to tell what is being said. as best as i can understand, it is a number of platitudes expressed in a very convoluted way. the current platitude is, translated to english: we may disagree, but if people are nice to us, this might make us change our mind.
20:00: we are all a global network in some way which is not clear. therefore we need to overcome our differences.
21:40: NOW we are getting to the quantum physics. we are going to hear how relativity and quantum physics can be unified. if he mean special relativity and first quantization, i hope he is aware that was done by dirac around 1940 :o).
22:00: "quantum physics has inspired pseudo-scientific theories". lol
24:00: description of relativity and its consequences.
24:20: first serious mistake in the physics. the author first say two events seperated in space cannot be said to be simultaneous in any ultimate way under relativity. this is true. Then, no more than 10 seconds later, he says if we push a rod that is 10 light-seconds long in one end it take 10 seconds for the other end to move. This, he apparently, think implies the rod does not exist in its entirety. notice any logical problem caused by this example is due to our assumption there is an ultimate frame of reference where the pushing and the movement of the rod can be expected to be simultaneous; but the author just told us there is no such frame of reference. Secondly, the rod will consist of atoms and their interaction is determined by electric fields which change at the speed of light. a more narrow analysis show this assumption implies the movement of the rod cannot be instantaneous.
This is a basic mistake in relativity and stem from the narrator not understanding the theory of relativity.
25:00: now we are off to quantum physics.
25:30: there are different interpretations of quantum physics.
26:00: off to the brain again. since our brain consist of quantum particles there must be some connection to quantum physics. same argument can be used for cars.
28:00: holy shit. Literally of nowhere, the narrator conclude "As De Broglies equations apply to all matter, we can fundamentally establish that C = hf where C stands for consciousnes, h stands for plancs constant and f stands for wavelength.".
WHAT THE FUCK???
A conclusion of this is conciousness is measured in units of energy.
28:10: The video has just gone totally off the rails. now the narrator tell us the current C is the sum of all C's to the present moment. No explanation is given.
28:15: technobabble that make no sense.
28:20: technobabble now include terms from the wikipedia page on relativity. supposedly this is how they are connected.
30:00: antimatter is now brought into the discussion.
31:00: antimatter now brought in to explain consciousness. the arguments are purely linguistic with no care to what the underlying terms used actually mean, what levels of energy they operate on and so on.
33:00: now we are getting to the theory of everything. the music become even more untollerable.
33:40: "de broglies equations show all reference frames are quantized". they do no such thing. the closest thing of a quantization of space and time would be quantum loop gravity and similar theories.
34:00: heaping some more technobabble on top of the above statement we arrive at an "explanation" why there are more matter than antimatter.
34:30: we are asked to look at things through the eyes of a photon. some deep misunderstandings of what various terms mean is held out as an "explanation". it is impossible to really critize the idea because every sentence is silly.
36:00: the last 5 minute has been pure undiluted nonsense. To take just the current quote, "gravity is only a force when interpreted relative to an oscilating frame of reference.". mind this is just thrown out with no reason to suppose it is true and no qualifications. questions: what, in the above, does "gravity", "force", oscilating" and "frame of reference" mean? Supposedly, very few of these terms can have the same meaning as in physics. The narrator continue: "this can be explained by a logarithmic spiral curve being reduced to a spiral curve by the reference frame making objects spin and move in orbits". what the hell and how? is what is oscilating in this case?
we have reached time-cube levels of derp.
37:00: after some talk of growing apples, the narrator can now conclude there are no forces indepedent of reference frames. why? amongst other things, this leave the question why the forces translate in a predictable way between reference frames. I still cannot tell what a reference frame is, I can only assume it is something different than in relavitiy.
38:00: "A quantum is independent of any notion of space and time. a quantum can occupy all of its possible quantum states simultaneous". pure nonsense. one of the difficulties of quantum mechanics is EXACTLY it relies heavily on a particular parametrization of time and space. that is one of the reasons unification with GR is hard. Also, the quanta do not occupy states simultaneously. it is in a superposition. The discussion is made harder by me not understanding what a "quanta" is supposed to be in the above.
