Is the peoples deep interest in chemical experiment viral videos (e.g. liquid nitrogen in a pool) related to being shooed away from understanding real science?
In a more clarifying note, I'm referring that it is a consequence of the deep necessity the human has for understanding Nature.
No. What does liquid nitrogen have to do with "real science", and since when do people get shooed away from it?
Those videos are the sciency equivalent of fidget spinners.
Liquid nitrogen in a pool is "stimulating" and generates an interesting physical effect. However, the point here in relating it to science is that there is some science behind it that gets the attention from people.
My argument is: people are naturally fascinated by this, but they're put away by the strict laws, mainly mathematical laws, put forward by this.
Not that mathematics isn't interesting, but you won't incentivize people to go to a spitting contest by saying how you spit correctly. People want to see the strongest spit.
I think that's all there is to it. If you can incentivize people into partaking on this endeavour (understanding chemical effects, in this case), you can bring much more value to science and people that are interested in it. You can, for example, explain interesting effects to people even though they're looking at a clear liquid (most acids).
I'd agree that people are naturally interested in understanding the world, but the barriers to rigorous science you mention are present in every field that requires practice and dedication to master. Which is every field.
Most people just aren't interested in doing the work to master anything, and that's okay. You can still enjoy playing with a drum, doodling, or tossing a ball around without it being a gateway to the deeper mysteries of those fields.
The biggest difference is that science and science related content is much more capable of being hilariously impactful and dangerous.
As such, it's easy for a moderately proficient person to do an experiment in their backyard that would have been cutting edge 300 years ago, and safely do things that we've all been properly taught are absolutely not safe.
People like novelty and mastery. People doing science video often convey a lot of expertise in addition to showing something new that's also pretty, loud or just "bright colors".
I'm pretty sure there could be a long muse about the intersection of the notion that babies are natural scientists, and calling someone an iPad baby.
I have this shirt.
I've never been shooed away from understanding real science. Who's doing the shooing?
I just like cool shit. I don't put that much thought into it.
Almost certainly no. This is the gateway for "the algorithm" to start recommending pop science and science communicators, and from there, a seed will sprout for people to get interested in "real science"
A lot of scientists are not great communicators. I am much better over text than I am in person... I never shoo anyone away in person but I also understand that in social settings most people only ask what I do out of courtesy rather than genuine interest.
People enjoy the way certain people share their passion. This is a bit overdone for gaming channels focused on kids e.g. pewdiepie but there's also the dude building a hut with Neolithic tools, or tasting rations, trying new foods, or just reacting to fried rice (uncle roger), gardening, or powerwashing. Nilered shares his passion for chemistry in a way a lot of people enjoy but for better or worse I don't think it is about understanding Nature as much as it is connecting with a fellow human.
PhDs are philosophy degrees because whether on purpose or not theses are filled with the personal philosophy of the writer wrapped in the paper of whatever research.
I don't believe so, I think it has to do more with seeing something novel that you don't get to see every day. Like, not many people have the means to fill a house with elephant toothpaste, so when someone does that it makes for a pretty entertaining video.