The machine code of the universe is discrete | Stephen Wolfram and Lex Fridman
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2020
- See full episode (Lex Fridman Podcast): • Stephen Wolfram: Funda...
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
CONNECT:
- Subscribe to this UA-cam channel
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridmanpage
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman - Наука та технологія
James Franco asking serious questions
No.
Diff shirt, slurry speach, overuse of the word beautiful. Franco confirmed
Fine. Yes.
Cannot be unheard.
Due to multiple blood stains on his old shirt, Agent 47 had to purchase a new shirt
I was just thinking how he resembles agent 47.
"purchase*. What is that big box over there?
I'm guessing you've never played the games, or watched the films......bad reference.
@@KC-cb7ov no you werent lol
Tobias bro I was playing Agent 47 when you was an idea in your dads ball sack.
Really love this channel
What had me really wondering is when Stephen Wolfram suggested those voxels (3-D "volume pixels" = voxels) might be 10^-100 m in size, while it's been said that anything smaller than a Planck length would make no sense, so why go even 65 orders of magnitude smaller than that?
Make no sense according to what rules? Maybe those rules do not explicitly apply here?
The only way to make it crisp and clean is to always return to 0. Wow, math has always been about relationships to me. " The individual doesn't know anything". Love that.
What does the quote signify?
Simplicity generating complexity is exactly what Terence McKenna spoke about in his Novelty Theory, concluding that the Universes modus operandi is a continuous state of Hyper-Complexification.
Lol I just watched the same McKenna lecture. Cool to see someone else who has a similar range of intellectual exploration
"I have deep faith that the principle of the universe will be beautiful and simple."
-Einstein
Wolfram's theories are all based off of von Neumann's cellular automaton complexity theory and replicators. The euphoric moment in automaton theory was seeing how certain subsets of base rules cross a line/barrier to reach complexity which results in infinite complexity, not a gradient. I've read Wolram's A New Kind of Science and I love that he is expanding on von Neumann's work but it is still in infancy. The "particles" he is referring to are analogous to the grid of a cellular automaton.
This can be seen in all sorts of computer simulations that start with really simple rules and create really complex things.
Neil Degrassi Tyson was asked what is the most beautiful discovery in science physics and he answered e=m×c^2 because it's simple yet it explains some of the most complex and vast things that we know about the universe
One of the best clips I saw...
The new shirt looks good bro
A tie and a cap. Tremendously perfect.
I'm a huge fan of your UA-cam Channel and would like to see you to a video on the Sun not being visible in outer space ( only through an atmosphere)
According to Burkhard Heim, the smallest geometrical unit is the Metron, planks lenght squared. He dedicated his whole life trying to formulate a unified quantum field theory.
OMG, the world is changing. You have a different shirt :D
😅
This is not the world I remember. This is not a world I want to live in...
Cap, I can deal with. Other than white shirt? Where even are we! Lord have mercy on our souls.
Uku Kudu something went wrong in the universe algorithm
This TimeLine is absurd!
Was this filmed in a state penitentiary?
@@sdi87hhk Indeed, science is known, quasiscience is believed
@@sdi87hhk yeah I agree, it is something that is done. But so is quasiscience, even though they fail to follow the method and only believe in models.
Lies lies lies !
Guy @ 1:24 shares a cell with the unibomber and Ted Bundy .
Does this resolve the measurement problem? Also, does the Planck length relate to this somehow?
it does ya. The idea behind the measurement problem, is that approximation implies an emergent theory. Hypergraphs are basically just rules, that generate complex structures, and these complex structures create complex networks that at a phase transition creates even more complex rules themselves. In essence, the measurement problem is an emergent problem dealing with how close we can actually analyze these elements in the universe.
In addition, the emergence of complex structures are statistically one way or one-way invariant ...meaning simple rules can easily create complex structures...but working backwards is an exponentially complicated problem. It's like looking at the forks in a tree and it's branches. There is only one single trunk of the tree...but there are millions of little branches, branching out as they do in forks. If you were to assign a number to each fork and write that on a little slip of paper...number 1 being the fork where the trunk of the tree diverges into 2 or 3 branches, and you were to assign all the branches their own little forks, up to a million of them...then take these slips of paper and throw them in a hat...you will statistically always pick a number that is one of the outer most branches...and it's probabilistically unlikely to get the number you picked for the trunk.
So the process of simple things moving into complex things, like tree trunks growing branches is a one way process. The measurement problem is a result of this one way evolution of simple things becoming complex things...where our inability to measure these objects is because the objects and their rules emerge from simpler rules and simpler structures, which cause non-linear behavior at phase transitions.
Quantum randomness is just criticality behavior and it's really as simple as that.
About the Plank Length, tbh no...I don't think the plank scale has much to do with anything really. The idea is that all there is that exists is a very simple rule, and a number of elements that are effected by these rules...this rule creates relationships between these elements, and a large number of elements with these relationships create networks...when that network becomes complex enough it undergoes phase transition (criticality) and new complex behavior emerges. This complex behavior are just newer more complicated rules....and those more complicated rules create even more complex objects that create even more complex networks until again...phase transition/criticality to create even more complex behaviour ...this is the fundamental idea of emergence...an nowhere in there is the need for plank and his constants as far as i know. All that exists is the rule, and everything else emerges from the evolution of this rule being iterated over and over and over again.
Baseball caps with suits break the 3rd law of cool.
@@Teabonesteak Which law you sk? The 3rd law or cool! The 3rd law can't exist without the second law you see?
A movie film is only 24 frames per second, and it gives a visual illusion of seamless continuity.
It takes 44,100 audio samples per second to create CD quality sound.
But wait, why is every point not connected to every other point? Also, what has determined which points are connected to which other points? Is there a minimum or maximum number of connections? Can points be created or destroyed? Do specific combinations of connections make specific "particles"? Are connections limited by the set of available particles? Is every point the same? Does it depend on the number of connections? Are there unconnected points? How far can a connection be? Is there distance between two connected points?
This is a rather interesting concept. Not the discretization talk because that’s the essence of essentially all numerical algorithms and it’s continually been discussed as to whether or not space is discrete. But, the concept of if there exists a discretization scheme, it is characterized by the connectivity of its elements in a hypergraph. Although I have no idea how to actually fit that into any other laws of physics. First and foremost would be trying to analyze quantum phenomena as that would be on a similar scale. Furthermore, I have no clue where 3-space would arise from either. The best you can get would be something like looking at the topological genus of the graph.
I enjoyed his talk with Stephen wolfram
Thought provoking! The connectedness underlying the entire universe, unfolding into infinate physical space-time, with infinate possibility all predetermined by the nature off realities algorithm.
At 7:10 when he says "it's not right", how would he know whether it is right, or not? How does he know about the "fact" that space itself is of a discrete nature in our universe? As far as I know, none of this has been proven yet. Is there any evidence pointing towards this being the case?
I like that. Emergent in the sense that the physics and formulas behind a pixel LED can't tell you anything about what a resulting image might look like.
@BiggestFoot I was just expressing my own framing of it. No need to be a dick.
My brain literally exploded in this talk. :D Thanks... ;)
@Sharmageddon Yeah but the bits were definitely discrete and not continuous chunks though, I am not sure if that's good or bad (figuratively). :D
Love the hat Lex!!
so essentially, space itself could be formatted like a CD or the memory on a computer, we perceive space as linear and continuous but the true reality is that the information or energy that manifests an object could be stored randomly at any 'location'. Or to think of it another way- the dimension that this reality rests upon has no space and no time- therefore it would be just as efficient to pull energy to manifest my laptop from a point light years away as it would to pull energy from the immediate vicinity. It explains quantum entanglement I suppose.
And the maximum information of any 3D object can fully represented by the surface area of its quantized voxels.
Everything is particles. Beyond that, everything is energy/information. This means that if everything is energy/information, then everything is 'connected.' If you consider this, quantum entanglement actually makes a lot of sense.
Would I be right in saying that modern physics is actually leaning towards admitting that the old aether theories were on the right track?
@@CONFINEDful
Maybe leaning towards it. Giving little hints and suggestions here and there. But coming out right and admitting it ????
You do know what would happen if they did that? Everything would change. For the better of course. But the powers that be do not want that.
This takes us back to Tesla. Everything is energy. The aether is unlimited, free, energy. Until "they" find a way to bottle it and make us pay for it. Like water. Free everywhere else. Until it's bottled.
How would you even know if space was discontinuous?
So, dose the rule that describes the universe have to describe the common features of physics which give rise to the behaviors of all phenomena we witness in the universe? Galaxies; black holes, light; variations in space density; dark matter; the behavior of electromagnetic attraction and gravity, and the behavior of particles? Everything? In one equation?
Again ! , as usual , this channel is amazing !
Lex , sorry but I'll keep repeating this in my comments , please bring on Andreas Antonopoulos ! 🙏🏼😅
"Can we just pause on that.. That's such a beautiful idea!" haha, love it! you crack me up, bro. #lexclips
*Obviously space/time is quantized, for if this is not the case, movement from one place to another would be impossible. - If the distance between A and B can be divided infinitely, it stands to reason that in order to traverse from point A to B, one must pass through an infinite series of points, in which case one would never arrive. - Knowing that we do arrive in locations we set out to reach, it becomes rather easy to deduce the fact that space/time must be quantized at some level.*
It goes by pretty quick if you got some good tunes.
But a distance can easily be divided ad infinitum. There are infinite discontinuous values in between 0 and 1. I dont think your assertion is quite as sound as it appears. Though I appreciate the attempt at a simplistic, philosophical approach.
@@Henry-kv7zl if that were true, it would be impossible to get anywhere.
That problem is known as zeno's paradox and it's already been solved for about 300 hundred years. Calculus provides a model that is consistent with movement in continuous space. Whether the ideias of calculus and real numbers actually exist in nature is up to debate, but it is consistent within itself, and is really useful to make predictions/inference about the real world.
@@gustavosantiago1543 you're kidding! I didnt know that! ..... jokes aside none of that is relevant to wether or not space is actually continuous and I just provided a rather solid case for it not being continuous.
Is this in any way related to Max Planck's idea of space and time?
This theory points directly to certain orders of emptiness (and dependent origination) as discussed in Buddhadharma. The signless-ness at root in this theory being one order of emptiness; "space-of-all-possible-rules" being an interesting concept similar to the alaya of Dzocghen. Could be very, very interesting to see how this plays out in coming years. Hopefully we can cut out the woo-woo of the pseudo-quantum-mysticism nonsense so prevalent online and get some hard science on this.
I know it is propositive idea of space:
So, how Is that an object occupies this granular space?
Or does it infiltrante everything?
How this works with the relativity of space-time with respect to different observers?
One of the most profound things I’ve learned, from L. Susskind, is his proof that if you add a photon to a black hole its surface area increases by one square Planck unit. Wolfram’s ideas here seem related.
I obviously want to know how Wolfram's idea relates to Verlinde's. Is Verlinde's approach sort of a special case of Wolfram's approach?
Existence is simply a bunch of points related to eachother in 3D. Attached to strings flowing these related points through the 4th dimension. obviously
Existence is the denial of non-existence... So that the entire existence depends upon the existence of not only non-existence but also upon the existence of denial
Outside? I like it
@@klam77
You caught me. We don't watch videos with sexy women, we watch Lex Clips instead. Helps to keep the testosterone levels low, especially when this video was filmed outside
You guys found something really cool, if only I could figure out what it means or what it can be applied to :^)
GenericName awesome thank you! :)
Haha, the analogy of social networking is so something similar to my past effort to describe biological neural network to non technical community.
Lex- We need a link to where we can purchase that NASA hat from!
Gracias
I've thought about this before, like how to quantize space itself? Bubbly foam where individual bubbles are around size of Planck length? Gotta try building up properties of universe emergently from that scale in the math if we can so we can look for testable hypotheses
The plank length is 10 to the minus 34 how do you go that order of magnitude smaller and still have coherence with understandable measurement?
You would just take it on faith, I think, if it seemed a natural part of a structure that worked in macro space. Sort of like analytical continuation. Or perhaps like us being able to say a lot about quarks, while admittedly hopelessly unable to ever isolate one.
OMG - Aliens have attempted to replace Lex - but missed his uniform look!! BRING HIM BACK you barstewards!!!
10^-100 meters? 🥺
Planck scale commited suicide
One doesn’t need to “know” the answer of 2+2=4 to understand the nature of the Cosmos. All one Organism, no separation
The guy from cash cab has really blossomed into an intellectual as of lately
SUIT + CAP: OMG!
What if... Particles are mere processes when waves in fields interact, and that we see "discrete" pixels of space just because those interactions can only happen at the anti-nodes?
In that case, mr Wolfram is on the wrong track. But he has interesting ideas nontheless. He is absolutely correct that one can describe the same phenomena in multiple ways. Just because of that, I think we should investigate as many ideas as possible, and collect them all, and evaluate them by their usefulness in a practical sense. If it leads to new solutions to problems, it's useful. Otherwise it's not.
Pixel?
@@ableone8956 Or spacetime atom if you prefer that. Any name that indicates a discrete entity will do.
Love the cap!
There is a correlation that is not discussed because the knowledge is not taught. The 20 days of the Maya and Chinese are the same sequence and function as the 20 standard amino acids (in their self formed alphabetical order), and the primordial elements Tin - Ytterbium. This also aligns with the Miller Urey experiment in such a profound way as to not be ignored. the day of electricity day #8 is glycine, and the trecena of Glycine ends on valine and the next trecena is Alanine or Batz, the first day. The relationship of the days mirror the relationships of the amino acids precisely. the days are the oldest science in the world and we have had them for AT LEAST 7,000 years. The issue is 'religion'.
5:57 Space, a background theater 🎭 on which the universe operates.
what people are failing to see is that physics has always been based on simple concepts, the complexity is from trying to compute the results mathematically.
I think there is a name for this minimum space already: plank length. Am I wrong?
Is it poossible to say that existence is the set of all possible mathematical expressions plus the impossible expressions. Or is that asking too much?
Is there a way to calculate the scale at which space starts acting like a continuum instead of a discretized set (if that's the right term)?
Edit: I should stop writing down hot takes when it's this late, this is exactly what they talked about next. Although, not at a very detailed level, ironically.
So a proton is about 10^-15, and the universe is at a resolution of about 10^-100? Sounds plausible that a proton should see this as a continuum.
What's the risk that all this is just a function of the computing approach, though?
I think Occam would put the burden on whoever brought the infinitely long decimal expansions to the party, just so they could stick an infinite number of labels all over the place.
@@facejets Well, I think there's an issue of a qualitative difference rather than a quantitative difference. An infinitely divisible universe is not the same as a discrete-space universe, and honestly, I'm not sure that one is "simpler" than another.
@@jimluebke3869 How do you mean "infinitely divisible universe"?
@@jimluebke3869 Do you mean like a real vector space?
@@facejets Well, reality / space, like what they're talking about here, except they're claiming it's discrete.
Him : That is awe-inspiring stuff!
Wolfram: well yeah, butt... you don't get to fit all these parameters into the universe,
Nelson : Ha-Ha
How does the holographic principle plays a part on this?
If the equations must keep growing and not just abruptly end they should include a factor of irrational number. It seems like the equation would grow into something like a fractal since we see repeat patterns in nature , but never two exact data points in the same spacetime. Also I would think it would have to include the golden ratio in the equation since that pattern is found so often and fractals have similar repeat patterns.
Dynamic reference creation - relational relativity.
Principle, product or attribute of. What is space ? No better question what gives rise to volume. Answer magnetism.space resides in the volume of magnetism .
Even at 1.5x speed Lex is still a slow talker
It’s good, that means he thinks before he talks. You don’t see that too often anymore.
I love wolfram
I gave "A New Kind of Science" as a Bar-Mitzvah gift once. I hope that wasn't wrong.
Come on Lex, keep up! :P
? To discuss: universe is AI and quantum behavior is how the world is learning or learned just the right mass etc. ? Is it possible?
So space is RAM, fields are global variables and forces are local variables?
His thoughts are at best an interesting diversion and at worst, complete blathering! He should be on Ancient Aliens 👽. Never have I heard someone spew out enormous generalizations with quite the same amount of self importance than Mr. Wolfram!
I don't ever see the criticisms for lex. I'm a dumb dude...to see someone talk about alot of smart people shit in a way I can grasp it. I like it. It's like taking calculus which is abstract to me and describing it like it's a painting. I can see a painting.
I think all the weirdness is just a few bored kids playing around with chat bots.
The point of creation is the first pixel of space
Wolfram’s idea isn’t it. All you need to do is hear him bring up the example about 10^-100m. There is nothing stopping the universe from having differences in energy of 10^-10000000 Joules, so although Wolfram may believe he has come up with a model for potentially describing the universe perfectly.. it will never be perfect.
LEX GIVE THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT, put on the ol' mans suspenders~~~~ "Clean Crisp..."
I don't know what all the fuss is about. Just because something is arguably better doesn't mean it will be adopted. We prefer vector algebra to quaternions because its easier. What little I've read of this subject nowhere does Wolfram's ideas make solving the problems easier. In fact his idea just seem to be a suggestion for a language which could be used to solve all types of problems, that doesn't mean anyone wants to learn his language or reformat our understanding to fit within the context of his ideas. At the very least he would have to show how his ideas lead to new solutions. For the record I've not spent much more than an hour reading Wolfram's paper, it certainly shows he's a smart guy, but his idea is what we might refer too as a golden hammer (a tool to solve all problems). He and others are welcome to have fun using their hammer and if they show that they can build faster others will take notice.
This isn't engineering; he's looking for deep truths. But if we know the reasons why everything is the way it is, we might find a few shortcuts here or there.
Maybe it's just to show what's possible and these things can be calculated for us with a computer one day
Central Universe! Bank on this idea!
with 5 things the universe was created. you can name them on 1 hand.
earth air fire water space, this is all. the nature of creation is such that the further you see... the more you see, but it remains 1 thing
Stephen should talk to Donald Hofmann about pixels points user interfaces and a new kind of reality.
u need him back on lex to talk about the ruliad
Does any other scientist besides him think this is correct or at the very least on the right track? I want to hear other scientist comment on his model.
He skipped peer review where he'd get feedback and calls that system "corrupt" without saying why. He's largely ignored and then says he deserves better.
The metaphor I just read says he writes the equivalent of "If you assume that rabbits eat grass, look how amazing it is that we can theorize THIS rabbit is eating THIS grass." It's an interesting bunch of ideas but his claims aren't corroborated by the Quantum scientists that read his book.
I always liked M theory.
Take 4g of shrooms then meditate alone in a safe place. Prepare for enlightenment.
I like to eat 7 to 10 Gs... to get a little insight into the world
@@theapotheosisofgdot2294 Sounds like you're ready for the DMT...
nope, only for some people like other mentioned
Beware of the dangers of unearned wisdom
So he's saying that space at the fundamental level is granular, pixelated (or voxelated). If true, it would allow for an accurate description of the fabric of reality. Could be, who knows.
Nah, he can’t describe energy differences of 10^-100000 Joules, so he won’t ever have a complete picture
Respectfully: What do you mean fabric of reality and how is it related here
@@tonyfrank9099 I thought they were talking about Lego; a grid like, small scale structure of everything. But I watched Lex on the other podcast and it has nothing to do with it. From what I've listened, this guy is using some kind of game of life to describe emergence of complexity, space, time, etc... 'Fabric' is just a generic term used here and there when talking about space, same with 'reality'. What I meant, wrongly, is that space is made up of tiny voxels. Personally I doubt that's the case, but I like the idea of complex patterns emerging out of basic rules, but of course the theory is far more complicated than that, and I don't understand it at all. I have my own opinions on the matter, but that's for another run.
Antigravitation is in any tiny point we pick. Think simple.
This is good stuff. So much meat to chew here. This guy is onto something.
Space is analogue... No matter how convenient it would be if it was discrete.
Lex the day walker. Love it.
"It's not right" - Stephen Wolfram
Wolfram's *discrete* count: 999,999,999
My dog has emergent properties
space is time
The universe SDK
We're emergent objects of a functional universe.
Why is he not referencing the Planck length (10 to -34m iirc)....the holes in the net of space-time, but in 3D (maybe 4D since it also ties in with the shortest period of time). I envision space as all these little spherical voids touching, but due to quantum exclusions they cannot merge. A photon of such a small wavelength has too much energy to exist at that size without becoming in effect a kind of quantum black hole (not gravitationally speaking tho’...although...), so it is the smallest size anything can exist at in our universe. We do not know of any particles anywhere near that minuscule since below proton sizes all you have are packets of vibrating energy. But these guys know infinitely more about that than I......so why not discuss it.....unless it comes up in later I guess.
If they are little spheres, what fills the gaps between them?
Imagine being the universe, designing and becoming a human with limited ability to understand your creation, then attempting to understand infinity using math that was created by humans..
Interesting. So the universe is one big bag of pints and each pint is connected to another pint like a drinking friend network and .so my Friday night
pints of Guinness are connected to my next Thursday night pints of Ale..so the space i inhabit is kind of like continuous pints and this can be
measured by indiscreet numbers ( of embarrassing incidents I presume) This explains my universe up to now.... Oh. he said points and discrete numbers..i need to cut down on the pints to understand the points.
Lex is so cute and intriguing
So why cant we spend less money on military and more on figuring this out.
Coz the profit can be made in the short term...
Have a goosey at human history
@@mokkaveli if you arent elite, how do you know?
We really need to push a petition to end the ridiculous military spending: 13 aircraft fleets while all other nations combined only have 9; 3 of which aren't even nuclear powered as all of ours are.
And bases in so many other nations as well as all the other spending: we spend the same amount as the next 7 highest military spending nations combined.
It's absurd, utterly pointless. And smacks at the obvious: to keep the military contracts of various private producers in business.
Of which I'm okay with to an extent if it were done on more technologically advancing things like space, energy R&D like the Wendelstein 7x project in Germany and the global project that the US is included that's being conducted in Switzerland: ITER.
Create a major Vaccination and antiviral and cancer program that can make fast steps in treating various viruses like HIV, and various cancers.
A medical project that studies methods to regrow nerve tissues to help people who have lost ability to use their limbs or to walk etc.
Musk's idea of launching internet providing satellites.
A housing program that reduce the disaster that is the out of control rent and housing prices.
An actual universal healthcare program in this country that essentially all other nations even some poorer nations have.
Let's stop acting like a 3rd world Banana Republic.
I mean sure, one very good item came out of the ridiculous over spending on our military: GPS. Imagine if it was targeted toward such uses instead of sprayed out like a fire hose primarily on weapons and a few sprinkles eventually go to something civilly useful.
Its actually impressive that he can talk for 4+ hours and barely mention any of the amazing discoveries of other scientists
He's trying to construct a model of the universe from an information-centric perspective. I'm not saying he's right, but don't see how most of the standard model can be helpful in that endeavor. Good to know? Yes, as a way to test the hypothesis. When reasoning from first principles - always a dangerous pursuit - checking against reality too early can be just as bad as never checking at all. If his intuition turns out to be correct, and if we can develop practical applications from it, then it will open the door to K3, which practically assures 'human' suvival at least until the Iron Epoch. If not, then there have been plenty of lunatics.
Scott Helms what the heck is k3
@@zerosumgame9071 : Kardashev level 3. K1 and K2 are doable without a seriously improved understanding of the universe. They would just have to be seriously spread out.
@@helmsscotta what do you think is the barrier to k3?
@@trouncerrredits : Sorry. I don't even remember what I was thinking about at the time.
6:36
This guy sitting here acting like he invented Planck units.
😆
LMAO my thoughts exactly
Ahh a planck unit is a unit of ? Defined by 5 measurement of what ? Riddle me this, if the whole universe fit into a single planck unit at the point of the big bang how is what doc wolfram proposes a planck unit. My guess is you brag about how you completed your doctorate in 12 parsecs hahar.
Ted Johansson I did some poking around and eventually came to that conclusion too
@ Ted & Holden sorry if i was rude but it is important we don't lose good ideas to misconceptions.