EXTREMELY helpful:D thank you

The professor is over theoretizing a very simple concept.Happiness should come naturally and DIFFERENTLY to everyone, since each human being is different.
Paranthesis: it is not a coincidence, that we will not find great philosophers concocting theories about love, which as happiness is(hopefully) a state that comes naturally.
There were a number of ideas that caught my attention:
-Mother nature does not care if we are happy or not.In fact, some of the skills we have make us unhappy. <- Evolution DOES care about our happiness.It's just not so "in our face" about it as the Harvard professor.If we are not happy, we don't engage in projects, we don't protect our teritory(this is about the caveman) thus we get crushed by others who are productive.In addition it is a proven fact that sad people are much less appealing to the opposite sex, so to be able to flourish you should/need to be happy.Conclusion: mother nature cares, just not in a cheesy way.
-Happiness is sometimes hard to achieve.We can easily get caught up in the "hedonic tredmill" <- I totally agree.If you stay and make plans about how to be happy(like Kevin did in "Home alone".You imagine the robbers to be depression and you mining your life to make it sadness-proof) you won't be happy.People have to understand that you should plan your career, your daily exercises, your business strategies BUT you should never stop and plan your love life or your happiness.These things come anyway and all the heavy planning scares them off.
-Moments of happiness.<-Why is he talking about moments of happiness? That should be a constant state.Even if not eternal than at least a week long?People who chase "moments" of happiness are going to become drug addicts or will end up doing reckless things because "they are in it for the moment".and that's not bad, if you do it occasionally and keep in mind that it is not pristine happiness.
-The ways to achieve happiness are by using your virtues, being grateful, savouring the moment.<-I believe these things to be way too generalised.Recently I read about the Stanford experiment, you can Google it, but basically it is an experiment on how the environment affects behaviour.This is not going to be the most realistic example(fortunately:D) but it will be very plastic: if i am locked in a basement for a year getting cold soup each day through a small window, when i am let out i will be happy just to see te sun.I guarantee that i will not be thinking about my love life or my virtues the moment I am released:P
I agree that every beautiful experience should be enjoyed.I also believe that everybody does it.
I believe that in the end, we should listen to Mary Poppins , too.She is not a Harvard professor, but at least she doesn't take something simple and turn it into a cavalcade of charts, examples and quotations.She said: A spoonfull of sugar makes the medicine go down./In every job that must be done, there is an element of fun.Find the fun and snap!, the jobs a game.
-"Acceptance"<- If there is somethig more you can do to improve your state, it is not natural to accept anything.bare in mind that there is a fine line between "trying to improve and being happy with that and obsessing with making it better.The second option "breeds" sadness.

The thing this video lacks is the presence of our crowning glory: the brain.It is the most powerful weapon of human kind.Also, an appropriate quote from the movie 'Felon' :"the only prison is inside your head".if happiness can be induced artificially(eg. Prozac) than obviously chemistry is involved so i would have expected the professor to illuminate us in that matter, too.

Conclusion: The researchers are overthinking what they should try overfeeling.

Note: I expressed my personal opinions only and do not wish to bash/offend a world renowned professor.