On 1/12/2017 1:49 AM, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> So I wrote a bunch of stuff in response (included below in case you're
> interested).  But in retrospect I think that my issue is that there are
> multiple definitions of "information" at play here, and the video
> switches between them.  Here's some possible ways to define "information":
>

[Snip]

>
> I dunno, maybe I'm just being unnecessarily grumpy about nit-picking
> this.  Information *is* a really cool and current topic in theoretical
> physics, and the video does give semi-correct introductions to some of
> the relevant ideas in an entertaining way.  I just wish it was more
> concerned with being accurate.
>
>

I don't know how you could be bothered analysing it. It reeked of 
misdirection and false assumptions, as you show. And their presentation 
is too polished for what it is.

I got the impression I was watching two conmen.



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message