Free Documentaries Online

AT DOCUMENTARY-LOG.COM YOU CAN WATCH HUNDREDS OF THE MOST INTERESTING, POPULAR AND FULL-LENGTH DOCUMENTARIES.
NO REGISTRATION OR ANYTHING ELSE IS NEEDED! VISIT US EVERY DAY TO WATCH FREE ONLINE DOCUMENTARIES!

Documentary Updates by Email

    Sign up to get new documentaries to your Email

  • Twitter


  • Recent Comments...

    • The Cosmic Landscape

      1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (7 votes, average: 3.86 out of 5)
      Loading...

      This is actually a video lecture featuring Dr. Leonard Susskind, the author of the book by the same title (“The Cosmic Landscape”).

      Dr. Susskind explores the latest researchers done in the field of Cosmology and talks greatly in length about what modern string theory is all about. The doctor asks in this video: “Can science explain the extraordinary fact that the universe appears to be uncannily, nay, spectacularly, well designed for our existence?”

      Dr. Leonard Susskind is a Professor of Theoretical Physics at Stanford. He is regarded as one of the frontrunners to the idea of the string theory and on his own, has introduced the idea of a “relativistic string”, which he will have also discussed in this video.

      please share:
      Published on December 21, 2009 · Filed under: Cosmology, Physics
    • me

      What you have here is just the first 10 minutes of the full doc.
      to see all, go to
      http://fora.tv/2007/01/24/Cosmic_Landscape

    • Jack Kebek

      Sorry all, this must be my bad :/

      Nevertheless, Prof. Susskind is a master when it comes to walk on the very narrow path of logic.

    • ResearcherTony

      The theory is and always will be dead in the water. You mind is over simplifying the problem at hand. Can the anthropic principle explain the existence of human creations without giving credit to man. Will multi-universes still create so much variety that even manmade cars could naturally come into existence even without man to make them. Your mind has a mental block stopping you from seeing such simple answers, because your over simplify the problem so it seems to be workable.

    • yogi-one

      The Anthropic principle is not pure science. Susskind even says so when he says that he is not a strict believer in the scientific method (or that he is open to a redefinition of the scientific method).

      So while that’s OK, the fact is that if you can’t run the scientific method on it (hypthesize, test, get results, repeat until either the hypothesis is proved wrong, or modify the hypothesis or the testing procedure to be more accurate, or it becomes a theory because it works every time it is properly tested), it ain’t science.

      What it is is a science philosophy, that is to say, philosphical thinking based on scientific discoveries. I like it philosophically. I find the idea of multiverses and the kind of natural diversity he talks about totally plausible. But plausibility is not the standard for science, only rigorous testing and/or proof is.

      Therefore, without the testing, the anthropic principle remains in the realm of philosophy. It’s science-based speculation, not actual science.

    • Sondi

      I’m not easily impressed. . . but that’s imsrpesing me! :)