Відео

I think this video is infuriatingly dull, unoriginal and provides no real arguments, insight or wisdom. It certainly contains no original thinking. It is rather a rather plain historical summery presented as a "new" alternative narrative, when in fact it's the same old run of the mill narrative. A discourse that is, and has been, repeated since the 1930s. Yes, we know the Copenhagen interpretation breaks locality and realism. Yes, the theory is incomplete. This sales pitch pretending like it is new "insightful" wisdom, lacks both originality and authentic thought. It irritates me incredibly, that this is the quality of arguments being presented at lectures. It seems to me, the argument being put forward here is; Bohr was not a good guy, because he couldn't argue his case and Einstein was a lone genius, so we should not buy into "wave function collapse". Come on, that's no argument at all. And I don't understand why some people think, that non locality and non realism is impossible to swallow, but the existence of many parallel worlds, is totally fine. Or 10 extra dimensions for that matter. What I see going on here, is people that still 100 years after most of the greatest minds in physics have tried to prove Bohr wrong, and have failed and inadvertently in doings so, have strengthened the Copenhagen interpretation, still cannot let go of our subjective understanding and experience of the universe - and worse yet, will come up with silly, narrow-minded and lame arguments to maintain that the world is mechanistic and deterministic. You are the ones that desperately try to cling on to old dogmas and thought patterns. Like those who tried to maintain the earth in the center of the solar system. I'm sure quantum physics is fundamentally wrong, and so is special and general relativity, and probably Newtonian physics as well, and at some point in a distant future we'll move beyond them all. But I have a hunch, that the parts about non locality and non realism are right, and that in the this century we'll find out:)

At 37:37 Adam misspeaks and says that for thousands of years civilization in Western Europe believed the Sun was at the center of the universe and Earth went around it before Copernicus removed Earth from the center. Obviously, he meant to say Earth was at the center (as his slide shows) and the Sun went around it. Subsequently, he then points out, Darwin removed humans from the center of biology. There is a counterpart to these ideas from Galileo presented in intro physics textbooks called the "relativity principle" - the laws of mechanics are the same in all inertial reference frames. Newtonian mechanics relied heavily on Galileo's relativity principle and Einstein generalized it to “the laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frames” in creating special relativity (SR). We continue this trend in our book, "Einstein's Entanglement: Bell Inequalities, Relativity, and the Qubit" Oxford UP (2024), where we use the relativity principle with the quantum reconstruction program to bring quantum mechanics (QM) into the fold. This solves the mystery of entanglement without violating locality (as in Bohm’s pilot wave), statistical independence (as in superdeterminism or retrocausality), intersubjective agreement (as in QBism), or the uniqueness of experimental outcomes (as in Many Worlds). Let me summarize that here. In 1996, Carlo Rovelli wrote: “[Q]uantum mechanics will cease to look puzzling only when we will be able to *derive* the formalism of the theory from a set of simple physical assertions (‘postulates’, ‘principles’) about the world. Therefore, we should not try to *append* a reasonable interpretation to the quantum mechanics *formalism*, but rather to derive the formalism from a set of experimentally motivated postulates. The reasons for exploring such a strategy are illuminated by an obvious historical precedent: special relativity. ... Special relativity is a well understood physical theory, appropriately credited to Einstein’s 1905 celebrated paper. The formal content of special relativity, however, is coded into the Lorentz transformations, written by Lorentz, not by Einstein, and before 1905. So, what was Einstein’s contribution? It was to understand the physical meaning of the Lorentz transformations.” What Einstein did to produce a “physical meaning of the Lorentz transformations” was to bypass causal accounts of the light postulate, i.e., everyone measures the same value for the speed of light c, regardless of their relative motions. At that time, people were trying to explain the light postulate causally using length contraction via the luminiferous aether. Einstein gave up such “constructive” attempts, writing: “By and by I despaired of the possibility of discovering the true laws by means of constructive efforts based on known facts. The longer and the more despairingly I tried, the more I came to the conviction that only the discovery of a universal formal principle could lead us to assured results.” So, instead of finding a causal mechanism for the observer-independence of c, Einstein said it had to follow from the relativity principle. That is, since c is a constant of Nature according to Maxwell's electromagnetism, the relativity principle says c must be the same in all inertial reference frames. And, since inertial reference frames are related by uniform relative motions (boosts), the relativity principle tells us the light postulate must obtain. So, SR is a “principle theory” (Einstein’s terminology) because its kinematics (Lorentz transformations) follows from an empirically discovered fact (the light postulate). And, importantly, the light postulate is justified by the relativity principle. Given this “historical precedent” Rovelli suggested using principles of information theory to render QM a principle theory and in 2001, Lucien Hardy produced the first so-called reconstruction of QM via information-theoretic principles. The empirically discovered fact that gives us the finite-dimensional Hilbert space formalism of QM is Information Invariance & Continuity (wording from 2009 by Caslav Brukner and Anton Zeilinger). If you couch that physically, it means everyone measures the same value for Planck’s constant h, regardless of their relative spatial orientations or locations. Let me call that the “Planck postulate” in analogy with the light postulate. Since h is a constant of Nature per Planck’s radiation law, just like c is a constant of Nature per Maxwell’s equations, and since inertial reference frames are related by spatial rotations and translations as well as boosts, the relativity principle says the Planck postulate must be true just like it says the light postulate must be true. This means quantum information theorists have rendered QM a principle theory, just like SR, exactly per Rovelli’s 1996 challenge. And, since this is a principle explanation of the Bell-inequality-violating correlations rather than a causal explanation, it does not require non-local, superdeterministic or retro causal mechanisms, neither does it require violating intersubjective agreement or the uniqueness of experimental outcomes. This is totally analogous to the fact that SR does not require a causal mechanism to explain the light postulate (e.g., length contraction via the luminiferous aether). Thus, we see that QM may be included in the idea that no place or species or perspective in the universe is privileged.

The cat made the measurement! Duh!

Very wise guy (intelligent too, of course)

True nature of particle is "cyclic machine". The larger cycle the larger energy

Frankly, I blame Bohr for the loss of decades of progress in physics. "Shut up and calculate" may as well be "stop thinking".

Everett interpretation is specifically the rejection of the Born rule axiom and the equivalent treatment of a measurement device as somehow non-quantum. "Many worlds" is a misnomer; there is only one wavefunction. It is a simplification of Copenhagen, not added assumptions and complexity. It's Occam's razor taken to QM. The illusion of the Born rule under Everettian QM is a solved problem, btw.

"Whose land we occupy" - what is he talking about? The land is currently legally owned in 2023. It's not owned by anyone else at this point in history.

childish nonsense

16:38🙋

however, 3D printing has been a total 100% flop and failure, in my end of medicine (oral surgeon, this time civilian) , in producing digital dentures. the patient and dentist eventually shave it down enuf to fit (with a lot of paste product daily several times applied) in their mouth and look fairly esthetic however talking or eating with them has been a 67% speech failure effecting their life credibility (,i.e. accusation of drunk in public from speech impediments) and a 99% failure when attempting to chew, eat, swallow, when asked if they take them out to eat , even at resteraunts .. "a yes affirmation saddens me ) the old fashioned method of dental lab produced perfection. its brought my 35 years of oral surgery to a height of business because these flawed dentures wreak havoc on the facial muscles tussues and tm joint. im constantly replacing the temporal mandibular joint because of unlevel occusion among many other flaws within the prothetic construction. these poor denti-cal recipients are being lab- ratted out, literally costing them their quality of life, health, weath, and beauty 😢😢😢😭😭😭😭i retired im 60. now I can't stand the fact that the med industry is perpetually a revert in tech and abandonment of well the equivalent of pyramid building tech... these folks can't eat!!!!!!! i couldve helped people another 15 years but the dental industry has corrupted to butchery practices, compared as ""solved"" when doc holiday came along. and theyd be lucky to have him today rest his worthy soul🎉 the dentists today are psychopaths destroying people for a living I'll take no part in it. goodbye world I tried ,,another Messiah who came to the rescue gets flushed down the toilet. you know The gods came in 2017 and have sent 7 saviors annually to collect the worthy 144k planty of seats left on the ark it's not too late!! 🛐🕉️☸️☮️☯️☪️🪯✝️☦️✡️✡️🔯♾️⚕️&🦎&👽&🤖&👹&👻&∞♾️🌎's

Its all a BIG fat lie!! we will never go back to the moon if we ever even went their the first time.. This is just their way (NASA) to such more money from the people..

Can You Please provide the slides of this lecture?

Biggest mistake in physics for the past century: thinking that a probability distribution equates to reality. Statistics cannot represent reality, only potential realities. It’s sad that physicists are still not grasping this fact out of sheer stubbornness.

Kubrick's movie say's humans needed a godlike (obelisk) intervention to become self aware, that is complete and utter bullshit.

Hopeless lack of understanding what measurement is. Likewise for Bell inequalities. Only repeats what others say.

very nice talk

Quantum mechanics works just fine. What doesn't work well are the minds of people who have trouble understanding it. ;-)

Headed to a whole lot of study on this s*** yet but I was winter survival School in the US military start my flying career. One of the first thing was to build temporary shelters with the things we had with us, we got there with a parachuted on the ground.. this became the shelters we built from, shelters. With the technology we got today we could do the same thing and get in the ground are you going to be safe from all this stuff falling out of the lunar sky possibly multiple layers of shelter I'm talking about temporary tents to get a chance to dig into the ground and set up the cables for power may not always happen on the first trip.. I'm not saying we're parachuting in I'm just saying use that thought process to set up the first Outpost.. it's only going to be a survival base, temporarily. Temporarily and also have drop a cable in the side that's going to make it from that side of the planet and hook it up to some dish like structure that will suck in power from the Sun..or use whatever kind of material we're going to use for solar energy or whatever power we got available. To maintain the base.. you guys are over engineering this thing it's going to be simple at first don't get wrapped up around the axle. If they're sending up an unmanned ship. We can set up an unmanned Base equipment. Until we get enough resources up there yes the cable and some other products to formula to launch plan back. I can see my voice texting ain't working too well I'll try to come back and edit it properly.. I'm glad people are actually trying to crack this nut it ain't that difficult. Anyhow, thanks for the nice presentation. Ham intrigued more than intrigued. This could be done you can crack this not easy. I kind of like Mars better.. might be wasting a lot of resources on the moon doing a real Target should be Mars or one of the other satellite moons from one of the Giants.. besides the moon's wobbling and following. I .like the idea the position L3. In any survival situation you need water the most important thing. And therein lies the answer.. I'm sure you guys already know that answer. And where is it all the water, in this solar system and how did we end up with all the water? Riddle me this Batman where did all those megaliths come from. It wasn't from ancient caveman🙀 I used to fly with John Lear and in the L-1011, interesting guy.. he was unafraid to share his thoughts with me. . sorry he died young. Sorry to see spent the millennial in a cave which was a gold mine and I was sitting on Waikiki Beach for a week then.

Everyone insists on waves, being there at all; Why? The problems start due to waves acting in superposition. Remove the waves from everything and no other levels of explanations need to be introduced. That kind of physics works at all scales and levels, as was achieved by Randell Mills. Three items have been successfully developed using that theory.

Start at 1:22

Would have been better if the cameraman had kept his focus on the screen rather than the futile wide-angle shot.

Miss Richard and Art on MID from yesteryear great great radio

Is RCH still alive? Why have we not heard anything from him about any of the Mars Perseverance Rover videos that have shown literal and undeniable ghost towns on Mars.

That's how presentation should be, a real guide for students to think how they can conclude from the characterization and understand the reason. Thank you jin woo

i have restaurant on moon. cheese dishes good, but atmosphere bad

I really wanted to listen to this discussion, however, I could not get past the first few minutes of the speakers poor public speaking skills. Practically, every sentence was followed or preceded with an “umm” or “aaah”. The speech cadence was equally annoying. Sadly, I couldn’t continue…

Correct Michael we have been on mars and the moon for the last 50 years

Amazing talk! Learned a lot.

How does a Right Handed Top Quark Decay?

Need to fix the volume on this video. It's too low to hear. Easy fix in video editor. Thanks for uploading!!

This was helpful a lot for me. Thank you!

A superb lecture!

I have a proposal and bet to you.... Place 10 times biger structure than ISS above the Van Allen for 10 years without maintenance first. If that works.... Well than you may go back to the moon. We haven't no infrastructure to built on the moon! Every 5 years we have problems with our conventional machines how can you convince me that this will be possible? Better yet once you have solved the health and hunger problems... spend just small amounts of that....

Dr Reed rocks the Casbaugh!

I'm actually glad for the idiot questions/trying to outwit the speaker......as he just owned that first one!

Loved this rarely talked about realitivistic jets from both black holes and neutron stars...comparisons and differences! Well worth a watch

The guy that asked the 1st question.....what a frigging dick! and troll....I did NOT appreciate his distraction!

Found this browsing and found a lotnof very useful information, thanks so much for posting this it will be very helpful in choosing my path to a major in physics.

All Ready Have Moon 🌚Base on the Moon Are Government Have Top Secret Program DARPA also Gone Mars Richard C.Hungland On Mars 1962 60 Year ago Before Apollo 11 not go back 2025 Aliens Living There 👽

Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. (More spatial curvature). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are actually a part of the quarks. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" make sense based on this concept. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons.

it's statistics. All physics is only statistics. And it do what statistics do - predict

I am glad I found this. Learning what we can about our universe is so cool. =)

can they do smelting or extrusion in a vacuum?

The lunar bases idea I grew up with but I never new until recently that anything could have really become of them except by the ufo community over the last 20 years, and of course sy fy imaginings. The transparency and release of scientific data has never occurred.

I don't put ANYTHING past our govt/rulers through the years they have operated in so much secrecy.

This was extremely interesting and knowledgable. Thank you for sharing the insightful talk. I have to present on TCOs for a class soon so I greatly appreciated the simplified crash course explanations.

QM is just fine by most physicists. The "objections" are philosophical and not scientific. Nowadays there is a cottage industry of complainers, people with books to sell, get some attention, it brings in $ and gives them a feeling of importance. Some physicists get grants and something to publish.

Thanks for this talk. It's difficult to find many online lectures about this period in our history.

video it not clearly