Here’s an experimental project I’m involved in: a prospective web-based video series in which I talk to groups of people about exciting science topics. All very new and untested, but did one recording session, and would love to get feedback.
The topic we tackled was neuroscience, and in particular the idea of brain-machine interfaces. I had three guests, all of whom (unlike me) know something about the field. There was Philip Low, a computational neuroscientist and Founder/CEO of Neurovigil; Crystal Dilworth, a molecular neuroscientist and PhD student at Caltech; and Ricardo Gil da Costa, a cognitive neuroscientist at the Salk Institute. My job was to ask non-expert questions, which shouldn’t have been that hard since I am a complete non-expert.
This is the “main” part of the show, in which we talk about how brains can interface with machines.
Then we have a couple of “supplements.” Here we are talking about brain spying:
… and here we’re trying to decide what it means to be a cognitive neuroscientist. (Are there neuroscientists who don’t work on cognition? Of course there are, duh.)
I think it would have been much better as a one to one interview Three guests were not needed. As the video was quite short each guest would have enought to say on there own.
Hopefully will only get better. I believe there is an unquinchable thirst for technical knowledge out there, and Professor Carroll knows the right questions to ask and quinch that thirst.
Improve the audio and limit crowds or risk showboating.
This is very good stuff.
Why so tentavive/insecure? You are Sean Carroll for whomever-is-deity-of-the-day’s sakes! I have been writing a book for the last 20 years -should be out shortly … like in the next 25 years or so- about that ultimate brain machine and I am glad they are working on it … essentially it is a polygraph THAT WORKS! It will certainly not make a lower form of life like man better but it WILL/MUST make it ‘less’ bad. That is all we need or needed ever! To curb the savages’ detrimental actions and not try to make man a better animal. They wuz looking at it from the wrong angle …
PS: Also I just read yesterday that Dr. Stephen Hawking stated he can prove there is no god … see same book of mine … I proved just that 15 years ago to many scholars and outright greater than great geniuses … I therefore include another post/comment I wanted to send you professor Carroll to help you when you meet the ‘regurgitators of all things excremental’ like the idiots you scolded on that stage with Michael Shermer -religious debate-. Of course you had to go and do it again and state perfectly what needed to be said … you sir have some talent a la Campbell … Joseph of his first name. Mankind is sure better with a specimen like you.
Question included in my next comment.
To: Dr. Sean Carroll
From: Roland Chiasson
rolandc123@hotmail.ca
Extremely dear sir,
You, sir, are one of my 5 favorite humans –and I know them all- do not mean to make you blush but you are like Joseph Campbell in stature and perfection. Except Joseph talked about inanities and totally unscientific things … still he was so good he was worth listening to. You are the best –bar none- speaker I have seen … amazing.
Did not mean to flatter you so but these things had to be said and as a writer of a book of/on Truth -mathematical Truth that is- I was not trying to butter you up so I could ask this question.
Of course, I do know the answer … already … but please see if you can arrive at the same answer I have which differs from another great man – Dr. Stephen Hawking-. That famous boiled egg and the chicken question: who is on first? … sorry could not resist ….
Notwithstanding that happenstance of a chicken appearing whole out of thin air in an infinite universe I have a biological question that begs to point that the chicken is/was, can only be first.
Dr. Hawking arrived at the egg being first –obviously wrong because it differs from mine- so please can you ponder on this for a whole half of a minute next time you go to the john.
If you arrive at the same answer as you-know-who-from-angleland then I will whether set you straight and correct you or I will want/need to see an essay from your point of view –minimum 15 words essay and maximum 29 words … should suffice … remember brevity being …
I really admire you –always will (even if you are wrong- please do not fret as I do not have a xmas list to take you off of- in case you would side with the rolling-wunderkind there … ).
P.S. your presence at the debate with Michael Shermer was –insert superlative here- . A tip for you if you care. Being as great as you are I will give you this freebie –you can use it- but not the rights to authorship (part of my book): when dealing with ‘religiously defective’ humans, you still can say that you cannot prove if there is a god or not but add this part and say that you can now prove there is no GOOD GOD … just tell them Rolly said so … just look around … the most magnificent Universe is all around us and we are stuck with a demented, sickly blood thirsty deity … some god if you ax me …
@Roland: That’s hilarious considering Sean is my mortal enemy in 11 dimensions of space, sometimes 26. 😀
What’s wrong with you people? This is the most mush, mush bunch of comments I’ve seen in a long time.
Fantastic Sean. I like the editing, which allows succint video, and I disagree with another viewer’s comment that the editing seems ‘invasive’. Similarly I like the split into 2 or 3 short clips rather than (say) one 20min clip. I think brevity is important – there are many educational videos / podcasts / etc etc etc available online but the 30-60min duration requires severe prioritising, compared to a quick 10mins to jump on your site to watch this video series. I don’t think the multi-person format is problematic unless it triggers too much joke time. I love your work!
@Sean I was going to post something similar before BobC preempted me. I have often wondered how do you have time left for research after working on so many outreach projects. I understand that it’s ultimately your decision how you spend your time but don’t you think sticking to your core area offers the highest return on investment?
I couldn’t concentrate on the content because I was too sympathetically concerned for the lady in the middle of the couch.
Her personal ‘space’ was continually being violated, not only by a steadily encroaching armpit, but by the many spurious and menacing hand-gestures, which due to their proximity, unpredictability and hamfisted composition, would have dealt serious distraction were they to connect.
It was positively uncomfortable watching her regularly having to cower away from the performance, just to attempt to maintain some dignity.
Give them individual seats so that boundaries can be imposed, if they cannot be respected.
@Tony: Well, just that one long one. Seriously. Ive got a knife with his name on it. It also has a magnifing glass and 4 kinds of philips heads. 😀
I imagine that at Sean’s level, you can’t really go much further without more data to either prove or refute hypotheses. How long did it take from initiation to receipt of the Planck CMB data? That probably gave him enough work for a few months; and then back to down time. How long did it take CERN to confirm the Higgs results? By the time data is either confirmed or denied, he has already written a book on what it means if the Higgs is confirmed or denied and the plan of action to take for each possibility.
Right on Gizzele.
Sorry left out an L.
Tony: Eh! Dont worry. It happens. 🙂
Its Gizelle. Z included. :/