“Why I Went to WAR with Stephen Hawking!” Leonard Susskind (364)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 чер 2024
- Please join my mailing list here 👉 briankeating.com/list to win a meteorite 💥
What's really going on in a black hole? Why are there so many theories of everything? Did Leonard Susskind, one of the fathers of string theory, ever feel like an impostor? And why did he fight with Stephen Hawking?
Find out in this thrilling interview with none other than Susskind himself from 2020. Susskind is an American physicist and a professor of theoretical physics at Stanford University. He is also the founding director of the Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics. In 1995, Susskind was the first to give a precise string-theoretic interpretation of the holographic principle and the first to introduce the idea of the string theory landscape in 2003.
In this interview, we discuss Susskind's popular science book, The Black Hole War, which covers the black hole information paradox and the related scientific dispute between Stephen Hawking and Susskind himself. We also talk about other developments in modern physics and more!
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @drbriankeating
Key Takeaways:
Intro (00:00)
The difference between writing for broad and small audiences (05:41)
Impostor syndrome (08:43)
The first image of a black hole (18:40)
The horizon of a black hole and the existence of a singularity (21:13)
Mathematician envy (35:58)
Why are there so many theories of everything? (43:15)
Three things that would push him to believe in the Multiverse (47:32)
Audience questions (56:14)
Who would Lenny have for coffee? (1:04:41)
What would he put in his ethical will? (1:09:58)
Outro (1:16:41)
-
Additional resources:
📚 The Black Hole War by Leonard Susskind: a.co/d/a9WGKAc
Topic: Leonard Susskind's Discussion on Various Scientific and Philosophical Concepts
- The constants of nature and the laws of physics in different regions of the multiverse
- The search for life outside of Earth vs. fundamental particle physics
- The simulation hypothesis and the laws of physics as algorithms
- Variation in ways of describing and thinking about objective facts across civilizations
- Consciousness and its nature
- The impact of social media on science and public trust
- The challenges faced by scientists and the potential for ridicule
- The discovery of black holes and the triumph of observation and experimental physics
- The existence of singularities and the nature of the Big Bang
- Advances in computer science and artificial intelligence in understanding consciousness
- The desire to have discussions with scientists from the past
- The loss of interest in solving puzzles as one gets older
- Following curiosity and not blindly adhering to others' opinions in science
- Leonard Susskind's experience with Stephen Hawking and his frustration with Hawking's stubbornness
- Writing a book on the quantum mechanics of gravity
- Lenny's upbringing and rise to becoming a member of the National Academy of Sciences
- Hawking radiation and the black disc formed around a black hole
- Perturbations to a black hole's horizon observed through gravitational waves
- Doubts about cosmic singularities
- The importance of speaking out against evil tendencies in society
- Lenny Susskind's hobbies outside of physics
- Evaluation of theories and the role of mathematics in physics
- The gauge of string theory's worthiness of pursuit
- The multiple theories of everything and their potential equivalence
- The fascination with eternal inflation and the endgame of the universe
- Lenny's feelings of imbalance and discomfort in the academic world during his early years
- Violations of the laws of physics and the second law of thermodynamics
- The multiverse concept and its arguments against anthropic or fine tuning principles
- Differing opinions on the multiverse concept, including religious and scientific perspectives
- Environment-dependent laws of physics and the example of gravity's acceleration
Note: The sub-topics provided here are not exhaustive and may not necessarily follow the same sequential order as presented in the text.
📺 Watch my most popular videos:
Neil Turok • Why Neil Turok Believe...
Frank Wilczek • Nobel Prizewinner Fran...
➡️ Follow me on your fav platforms:
✖️ Twitter: / drbriankeating
🔔 UA-cam: ua-cam.com/users/DrBrianKeatin...
📝 Join my mailing list: briankeating.com/mailing_list
✍️ Check out my blog: briankeating.com/blog.php
🎙️ Follow my podcast: briankeating.com/podcast
Into the Impossible with Brian Keating is a podcast dedicated to all those who want to explore the universe within and beyond the known.
Make sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode!
#intotheimpossible #briankeating #leonardsusskind - Наука та технологія
Was Stephen Hawking right or wrong about the Black Hole information loss paradox? And Please join my mailing list here 👉 briankeating.com/list ✉️ for more resources from this episode!😅
😂😂😂😂
Well, what do you mean by "information"? If you are asking if the black hole changes in size when mass falls in then yes.. Information escapes the black hole. If by "information" you mean reconstructing something after it's fallen in then I say probably not.
is a black hole required ?
information exists with in a conscious brain before it is transcribed to an external medium.
what becomes of that information at death?
why is this only a "black hole" paradox?
I think if a little of what is within the building blocks is within the black hole Stephen Hawking maybe wrong.
Hi, if i understand its an open question, no concensus about that. Amazing talk.
So grateful that Professor Susskind released his Stanford 101 courses on youtube as well as many of his lectures for all eyes to see. That's more than 200 hours of freely available content. Shows he is not only a talented researcher but also an incredibly skilled teacher. Also, grateful Nick Zentner from University of Central Washington released his 101 classes and ongoing studies on youtube. As a committed hiker, I feel less stupid whenever I stumble on a stone, watch the next ridge, or contemplate the stars at night. Puts things physical in perspective.
Where can I watch?
@@ImmortalExploreron UA-cam
Absolutely love this intelligent conversation between two public intellectuals, each of whom has a sense of humor and cares more about knowledge than ego.
Im glad to see him interviewed again. I hope he will do more, there is a big audience eager to hear him talk more
This interview is from 2020 as stated in the description.
Penrose said several times that Hawking was “bullied” into changing his mind. I’ve always wondered about the details behind that remark.
Penrose believes black holes destroy information.
The answer is in Salome by David Liebe Hart
Leonard Susskind is a great communicator of science. His Demystifying the Higgs Boson talk is fantastic.
Stephen lived with MND for over 40 years, and never lost himself. That's truly heroic.
Always enjoy hearing Dr. Susskind interviews. He’s such a talented teacher.
He’s so talented, in fact, that even a computer scientist like me can watch his lectures and understand the big picture of the Universe as described by General Relativity.
Love your work Dr Brian Keating, and always a pleasure to hear from Prof Leonard Suskind 👏🇦🇺
That was awesome, hands down one of the most likeable and interesting physicists as well as being a living legend - what great chat that was!
I think Prof Suskind is one the most remarkable personalities I have come across not only in terms of brilliance and clarity of thought but also a teacher. His humility humbles us all .I wish his all the success in his endeavors and hope he will be honored with a Nobel Prize which he rightly deserves .
Great interview and great guest, than you Dr Brian!
Have you ever thought of inviting Samir Mathur ? His Fuzzball conjecture seems like a very interesting resolution of the black hole paradox.
Thanks very much for the recommendation
A legend who after so many years of fundamental physics gifted an entropic principal . I salute his courage in looking the world around us.
Thank you for a good channel.
Roger Penrose tells us that information is not lost, but it is removed. all information is imbedded in space time, where else would it be? What changes is the size of space time, but the ratio of information to space time stays the same. For example when information is remove so is the portion of space time that the information resides in, both fall into the black hole. Imagine 10 teacups, in each teacup resides a marble.The rule of the teacup universe is that each teacup must contain a marble... there are no exceptions to this rule. The job of monitoring the teacup universe is given to Lenny Susskind. On his rounds he has to make sure there is no contravening of the teacup rule. One teacup is removed leaving 9 teacups; no rules have been contravened.... all is well, and so on for all the teacups. Lenny does not find a single teacup empty; the ratio of marbles to teacups haven't changed, the universe has not lost information, it has simply reduced in size.
Roger Penrose proposes this is what happen to information and eventual all information and it equivalent space time will lie behind the event horizon. Of course eventually the black holes evaporate leaving an empty universe of marbles of unmeasurable size.
Around 25:00 give or take, I love Susskind's unwavering commitment to the 2nd law of thermodynamics!
So refreshing thank you!
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
I'm a high school teacher. Hearing him talk about why he likes to explain things really resonated. If you really want to get better and understanding your craft, throw in some teaching. You'll find out pretty quickly in what areas you should be confident, and in what areas you might be fooling yourself.
Thank you,
What a pleasure to listen to this interview with Leonard.
Leonard Susskind has an amazing intellect and is a phenomenal communicator. I did not want this episode to end. I hope you have him on over and over again!
What a great conversation! I loved listening to your logical podcast on quantum cosmology. 😊😊
Incredible dialogue with very talented physicists. Totally agree and understand , is like a fresh air for intellectual curiosity. Thanks
Wicked interview thank you.
Good episode Brian
❤ Brian, I love your channel and you! I have since the first time I saw your channel.
Beautiful starting by Susakind
I'm a baby boomer whom fitted in despite my humble beginnings. Lucky was me to have countenance enough to work my way into the system and enough nous to take advantage. Now I'm 70 and haven't needed to work for a living since I was 40; 30 yrs of freedom, watching and thinking and indeed finding my own path leads me to be contrary. Now my consciousness leads me back to the days when we 1st saw geometry in the structure we see.
This is a great interview, with very deep and candid thoughts on everything. Thank you so much, Brian and Leonard!
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
*The world is a much more complex and dangerous place than a holodeck:(* Already signed up:)
The correlation of electrons outside and inside a black hole would be lost. Might as well pass one through a polarizer and the other not.
Local hidden variable (LHV) math just needs to compare one result vs another without regard to the total, and you get a curve that fits experimental graphs better than the QM cos prediction graph... especially near the 0's where the error bars are highest. ( A+B=2C; A/C+B/C=2; a=A/C; b=B/C; a+b=2; (b-a)/b and (a-b)/a depending on whether A or B is larger; in the case of a quantum experiment in units of quarter-turn, (x-(2-x))/x or (2-x-x)/(2-x) ; ( 2x-2)/x or (2-2x)/(2-x) depending if x > 1 or < 1; where 0 is 0 degrees, 1 is 90 degrees, and 2=180 degrees. ) It's a multi-part equation, but ever so simple. The more accurate the experiment the better this curve fits.
atomic nuclei are outside of space and cause the curvature of space; things like electrons and photons travel through space, and are not outside of space - I don't see why it's so hard to get to this conclusion. The nuclear cross section of an atomic nucleus measures smaller than it really is - since, like black holes, photons get lensed around the nucleus and only when heading directly head-on into the particle does it really 'see' and react to the forces outside of space. A black hole is really just a super large nucleus, so if an electron falls into a nucleus, is it still valid to call it entangled/correlated with any other electron?
That two nuclei take a lot of energy in order to actually interact is because space has a sort of surface tension (quantified as the strong force). The strong force between black holes is almost irrelevant though.
The universe happens to be a perpetual motion machine; there is no absolute tend towards entropy, because curved space causes matter to fall together and become coherent and structured; while at a certain limit that organized matter becomes radioactive and throws itself back out into the universe, only to be collected later. Black holes emit more than just 'hawking radiation'; but I'll save that rant for another day.
It's too bad he's not more available to toss ideas at; but then my ideas are so foreign they're of course just from a noob who knows nothing about anything, and should be ignored. *shrug* At least noone will scoop my theory before I have the experiment(s) done.
This was great!
Thanks for interviewing one of my personal "heroes"
I like his physics videos, he is good at explaining
It's a blessing for Hawking not to experience all these. Otherwise his whole achievement as a theoretical physicist would have come to a waste. Or maybe he could come up with a better theory. So far, I think Roger Penrose is the most reasonable physicist. Rather than proposing a multiverse system, he goes for cyclical universe. We'll never know, but I do believe that there is no such thing as the absolute beginning.
Leonard is always a great guest.
Brian knows what to ask.
🎉❤
I realize that nothing within the universe can violate the second law of thermodynamics, but to say that the universe itself cannot violate the second law of thermodynamics seems like a category error.
Love this.
He really put you back into place Brian. You kept asking him stupid personal questions about god and his jewish heritage and you clearly irritated him, it is also clear how he feels politically towards you
The Hawling temperature is a Planck equation, kind of equation. So, if meter/s^2 ~ The Hawking Unruh Temperature, includes Planck mechanics, then G, Newtonian mechanics is in the T too. 🌊
Dr.Susskind, try FPV as a hobby. It doesn't need to be to be with quadcopters or flying wings... Just try it with rc cars. A crawler would be the perfect first candidate, because they're slow, but go over almost anything, so you can sit down and explore.
What I would recommend is Walksnail as the video system and ExpressLRS as the radio link.
Anyway... In case of any questions, be free to ask me. 😊
Prof Susskind's TTM books are brilliant! Reminds of Roger Penrose's books.
Thanks!
Thank you, brother
I love the advice, cant expect others to tell you what to think. Gotta figure it out yourself, understand it yourself. Nothing else to it
Yes… try to figure it out yourself, but in the end you still need to prove your conjecture to the scientific community.
Thanks
@51:00 I agree with Lenny about those cultural arguments being unscientific. But (a) that does not make them wrong, and (b) he's forgetting the anthropic arguments are unscientific too, because they rely upon anthropology, they are anthropocentric, violating perhaps the most cherished notion in science, observer independence. (Don't tell me QM is observer dependent, that'd also be baloney, since what QM has is that measurements are context dependent, but that's not observer dependence). Suppose humans never came to be, but all the other life did. Sure, we'd not be around to make the Anthropic arguments, but you can then see there is no "because" - the other paramount principle of science you see, the principle of causality. You cannot throw that one away.
It'd be sad if a old old school working class leftie turned to postmodernism. But I guess he half has in thinking Baraka Obama is someone to be admired. No neoliberal has ever been a decent politician, left-wing nor right-wing nor centrist. They're all scum of the earth, or, to be charitable, either ignorant or frauds. Are we saying these days you get points merely for not starting too many new wars or color revolutions? Ah... nevertheless, I love Lenny, he's my hero, his wife was feeding him trash NY Times bestseller list crap. Can't be blamed. I was fooled once.
Impressive interview, full of scientific and human wisdom. The remark "...follow your nose" is absolutely central, a great choice in the opening "overture". Congratulations!!!
(With Prof Susskind's permission, I would only add ... and do not forget to keep on training your nose).
Yes… follow your nose, but in the end you still need to prove what your nose finds to the scientific community.
Agreed!!! Although your observation (re)opens up the old doors of the sociology of Science and the psychology of scientists. In the end, despite one's efforts, others may be those who demonstrate fully what one's nose found, thus convincing the scientific community.
@@lwss1617y That sometimes occurs. Hopefully by publishing first you get a significant share of the credit.
“You can find the oil either by drilling where it is or all the places where it isn’t”
We give too much credit to folks in this field. We make them celebrity status. People idolize them. In the end what do they really acvomplish? NADA!!!!
i'd venture to say that they accomplish much more than other celebrities.
The Penrose/Hameroff idea of Orch OR is pretty interesting, even if it's ineffable as yet.
Book is on the table! Thanks ❤🎉
Hope you like it!
Splendid gentleman 😊
Does anyone know a good way to get schooling assistance. I'm a cnc machinist but I really want to go back to school for quantum chromo dynamics and compressed matter physics. I'm super interested in catastrophic quantum vacuum brake down by means of braking the schwinger energy density limit. I know there's a few way to do this one using high frequency microwaves and micro casimir cavities. the other way I know of is by using non equilibrium cold plasma.
We have not measured Hawking radiation. We have nor seen any black holes explode.
So Susskind did not understand CCC. A bit sad. Note Susskind validates CCC against at least the entropy problem, since information cannot be lost, Penrose's next Aeon has exactly the same entropy as the previous. Right? The entropy of a cosmological spacetime does not ever change, it is a constant (unless Fred Hoyle was right).
The answer is in Salome by David Liebe Hart
He seems like a very nice person. I also like his very reasonable support for the multiverse and the anthropic principle, far too much stupid criticism of those things in my opinion. I like how he said that the objections to the multiverse and anthropic principle are basically political or cultural rather than scientific.
@48:00 interesting that CPT-Symmetric proposal undermines Lenny's case here for eternal inflation multiverse. In fact, CPT-Symmetry does a lot more than give flatness, isotropy and small +Λ, it also looks on track to get dark matter ν right. (little-one joke there).
Let's agree to disagree
Why isnt leonard working on UFOs what are we doing here. Give him a youtube channel and a ufo and lets get smart.
😅😂😂😂😂
One of those things is a lot easier to get than the other. And there is a reason for that.
I like the guests and the interviews. I absolutely dislike you interrupting the flow of the conversation asking people to subscribe!
There are many Creative Physicists, nearly as many Theories... still, few concrete answers. Hawking & Susskind are Two Of Them...... I tend to lean toward Prof, Susskind in many matters e.g. the Conservation of Information and others.
My man!
I ❤Leonard Susskind.
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
@@DrBrianKeating That there are many lessons to learn from the old timers and that the holographic principle is in good hands, especially in the realm of celestial holography.
Great interview. People say never meet your hero’s. That might be more about us than the hero’s.
The fact he came up with string theory within a day of another scientist just reinforces my suspicions that consciousness and mind is outside of the body as well within, which leads me to the belief or suspicion of a soul. The us patent office is filled with this phenomenon . Also I can no longer dismiss countless other examples paranormal phenomena. The atheist arguments are getting very hard to believe.
from the relation Frequency=mass=energy , Ive always thought of frequency as fundamental to matter and energy. In this regard I think there is definitely some truth to be gained in that regard, .. Modern string theory as it stand is pretty wobbly, but the sentiment behind it is genious. And if you understand the context, string theorists are more or less trying to find a consistent framework, that gives rise to all the behavior we see on particle scale. If they succeed with this at some point, I think there will be tremendous insights to be derived from the string models.
Where did you get the idea that frequency = mass?
@@karagi101 i misinterpreted de broglie
3:00 "Apparently no one has read the whole back and no one understands it, so why did you write it?".
Well that's nonsense. I read the whole book and it got me interested in physics. 20 years later, I'm now familiar with Hermitian operators, and fourier transforms, and Riemann curvature tensors and all sorts.
Plenty of people get something out of popular science books, and in some cases it does lead people to pursue the topic in greater mathematical detail. And for those who just end up having the book on the shelf, in order to impress guests, well... if he got to put his daughter through college, everyone's happy. All seems fine to me!
Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler in the background.
Brian, you should interview iconoclastic Prof. Alexander Unzicker, whose physics videos are available at his UA-cam channel Unzicker's Real Physics. Dr. Unzicker is not convinced that black holes even exist. So you might want to have him debate Susskind on the subject. Unzicker is not shy about, in person, confronting iconic physicists regarding their ideas. He has done so with Ed Witten (at one of his lectures) and with David Gross (in an interview).
I found Hawking’s book very easy to read and understand, it was ok. Maybe I’ll read it again, it’s been over a decade.
Talking about time and space " listen to even the humble for they too have their storytime"
Physicists should start to read the works of Burkhard Heim…
I remember once Hawkins falling asleep at an interview yet kept speaking. What an amazing man.
When Susskind talked about "speaking out" about some ethical consideration towards the end of the interview, what was he referring to?
I always liked Hawking for his very useful views as a perfect example of learning by exclusion. It appeared to me what ever he stated was almost exactly the opposite of reality. A person almost always wrong.
I respect Leonard Susskind as a scientist but I think he is a little naive, about the dishonesty and corruption of his fellow scientists in the field. first of all their is dishonesty in almost every field of human endeavor especially when money and stature are involved.
Can two neutrons form a black hole? Or how many are needed?
Me too. Besides Richard Phelps 😂.
Thanks. I can see deep study's by AI will raise ,not answers but more answers without obvious clear questions and this will start another chase your tail situation.
Perfect... Steven said it exactly right... information gets lost in black holes.... they have already found the important answer...namely the singularity point of the universe yet they continue on rabbit black holes to find another answer than what was found in that singular point.... God.
In my hand I hold a rock, ancient, maybe older than the flood, a crystalline rock cut in facets, one side shows a star system and in it a solar system. At the squared off end the head of a cat, on another side an ancient horse; and on the other side geometry. Information from long ago stored on a crystal. Is it from our stone age or from another age? Was it a museum piece in a land once upon a time? Wonders me now we can store information on crystal structure if there is more to see! It came to me out of history and belongs to me.
Hello from Kazakhstan. We can create an educational and practical device and practically master Einstein’s theories of relativity or obtain, for example, new physics:
Postulate 1. Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta. Postulate 2. The speed of light, regardless of the source, within the “framework of the dominant gravitational field” This is determined experimentally using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope (based on Michelson's experiment 1881-2015). Using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope, the straight-line speed of vehicles can be measured.
WAR?! Wow…that’s serious.
😅 i don't know why a serious channel like this needs such headlines.
Whenever god is invoked as a solution to how we're here, it always requires an explanation of how god got here. God's god's god is as subject to nature as we are. Unless you can prove the existence of some or other being-- it really isn't necessary to pretend there is one.
I always wanted to be a plumber, but I could never get the weekend off to do the course!
You should have gone for politician, you don't need a qualification for that.
Reality is such that we will never know all, however comprehensible reality is. It is easy to escape with 'I don't know', but to pretend to know what singularity or a big bang is and then admit 'I don't know' is not acceptable. Neither is it a mark of greatness to deprive Nambu what credit is due to him. Even though we don't know how to prove divine design, we cannot avoid admitting there was a design, it is a mark of greatness whoever can admit it. Avoiding it is cowardice.
One thing that most eminent physicist recognise is that the second law can never be overturned…… and observation constantly confirms that.
So any theory that claims to sideline entropy isn’t based on observation but rather theoretical assumptions.
The reality is that entropy allows for a dynamic universe which presently causes work to be done and provides useful energy. Without entropy we wouldn’t be here………
Scientists never say “never”.
Why reupload?
One of the greatest scientist’s of our time just told us 5+15 = 23
@ 4:34 of the podcast.
2005 I wrote that book - let me do the arithmetic that would be 15 years ❤❤❤ maybe this was recorded in 2020?
Obviously a mistake, but that was cute …
Great guest..
2005= if you added frome 2005 =18 if you account it 2005 It is 18
2005+10= 2015+6=2021+2=2023=
Leonard is Leonard's worse enemy. He peers with blinders
New viewer and subscriber from Greece. 🏛
Interesting stuff Brian! 👌
Welcome!
In his defense, he did the math in his head
HIs ability to have an affair from a wheelchair might have been Hawking's greatest achievement
You never know, it can only make sense.
The Simulation Hypothesis assumes that consciousness can only be created by computation and thus excludes all other possibilities that are uncomputable. My Anti-Simulation Hypothesis states that since there may be infinitely many other possibilities for consciousness to emerge other than by computation alone, the probability of living in a simulation is close to zero.
Perhaps Penrose is right about the universe as a perpetual motion engine, if the overall energetics of the universe as an isolated system is in some way similar to the never-ending energy of quantum particles
The universe is a lot of things, but it's certainly not an isolated system. Technically it's not even a system. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 is that because parts of the universe eventually travel apart at faster than causality? Anyway, where does all the energy in the universe go, if not within the same universe?
@@joebenham27 The problem is that in the classical definition of systems systems are exchanging energy, momentum, angular momentum and charge with each other. This is what causes their evolution. The universe can't exchange anything with another system, so technically we can't really say that it evolves. This is sometimes denoted with a trivial formula Hpsi_universe=0, i.e. the Hamilton operator applied to the wave function of the universe is zero. This is intellectual nonsense because we can't even assign a wave function to the universe... one can't make an ensemble of universes (i.e. an infinite repetition of the "universe experiment"). So the way we usually understand physics (as a divide and conquer strategy) just doesn't work on "the whole".
Very interesting very educational. Question, we know The Cosmos existed before the big bang and time is man made; why did S Hawkins say time started at the big bang?
And
What would happen if the universe stopped expanding and retracted regarding gravity? Would it effect any planits axis?
Ty
2:30 In Pearlman YeC SPIRAL cosmological redshift hypothesis and model 'Black-Hole illusion Resolution' hypothesis, we conclude the appearance of Black Holes represent PAST not ongoing hyper-density. So in a sense past information that was there, is no longer there. They are the residue of where the galaxies themselves originated Hyper-Dense! reference Pearlman YeC SPIRAL
Don't anger Lenny, Brian. LOL! I have no doubt he can turn you into a perpetual motion machine.
Challenge accepted
Considering the whole set doesn't have external resistance, wouldn’t the whole be perpetual?
Yes, but it would be irregular.
Smart chap
Why do so many scientist still refuse to consider CGJUNG was obviously on to something with the inner universe rather than the Freudian world
Maybe because scientists deal in evidence while Jung and Freud dealt in unproven conjectures.
Singularities don't exist, and information is not lost in a "black hole". Aka a plasmoid. The density of which is far lower than most people estimate.
1:03:38 it just stuck me that consciousness is non-evolving. It is what it is. Probably always has been. So I think he’s right that computers will reveal something for us…but my bet is that it will be that we possess something that is not engineer-able.