He is both a genius and the most humble person in the world. When I was 16 or 17, I emailed Edward Witten for high energy physics help, and the next day he responded with a lengthy e-mail full of advices.
I understood almost nothing but still got at least some vague sense of what the problems are in theoretical physics. It is such a wonderful thing to have these sorts of conversations available for the general public.
I always enjoy hearing Prof. Witten talk about Maths and Physics: the present conversation, BTW was (by far) the best I ever watched on the Internet, thanks to Director Dabholkar who asked high quality questions. And I'm always happy to see so many people interested in Physics (or in Science, in general...).
Very useful discussion on important aspects of the theoretical physics of the last half century from a 'giant' of the field. Moderator deserves praise.
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
A fitting line at the end there, as Dirac once said "God is a mathematician of a very high order and he used advanced mathematics in constructing the universe."
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
@@HArryvajonas Well, I have experimental evidence, I hope somebody listens someday. It's curious what Witten said about thermodynamics, maybe someone told him. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
@@cademosley4886 Well, I have experimental evidence, I hope somebody listens someday. It's curious what Witten said about thermodynamics, maybe someone told him thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
I like Edward and his calmness. His motivation towards discovering truth is admirable and there is no doubt that he and others are making significant steps along the road to discovery. I would caution anyone's expectation that this will ultimately lead to any exposure of the universes greatest secrets. Hubris is the problem. The greater can understand the smaller but the smaller can never fully understand the greater.
As a former student of string theory and supersymmetry, this is wonderful. I understand the criticism from the likes of Woit, Penrose and Weinstein, but the explanation that they (Witten) are building a tool is a useful analogy. I don't think people outside of physics can really understand just how much harder these things are than other realms of inquiry. Mathematics for instance, I love math, I've done some, it is comparitive far easier because it can be done in isolation without the need to be interwoven into some vastly complicated tapestry of ideas. Physics is like a symphony, there is so much more to do at once. Anyway, I am grateful for Witten's work, I just wish he would acknowledge the answer to the question at the end rests with the Creator. It is God's design for us to delight in His creation, the riddles left for us in physics are to my mind the most interesting of all.
That's such a mundane idea (a creator). Doesn't the completely bizarre rules of reality teach you something as simple as the man made Idea of a creator is kind of embarrassingly simple and of course raises the question of why reality can't just be what it is without a creator if the Creator can't be what it/she is without a creator/cause itself. And if that isn't enough evidence, how about how utterly horrific earth is. Horrifying death, suffering, torture etc happening every moment--to say nothing of the historical record. Great job, Creator.
@un-Lawyer Maybe it's your response that is simplistic and embarrassing. Because there is not heaven on Earth there can be no creator? Where does that weak logic come from? Is it possible there are things we will never be capable of understanding? Or maybe you have the answers.
@@Joel-ml5bg , I think to most people the core idea of a creator is that it's very hard for us to imagine the universe coming from nothing. But it should be so painfully obvious from quantum mechanics that our ordinary conception of the rules of reality are totally violated at the quantum level. e.g., we can't be in two places at once, we can't be two things so once, we can't be turning left and right at the same time, we can't instantly change something far away with no contact. So that being the case, the usual logical arguments for God a pretty damn meaningless. And it just seems extra silly to take this ancient notion about creation and cling to it despite this evidence and all the other evidence against every single revelation based religions. And I get this is hard for people because my rejecting religion/God, we are basically saying all our parents and ancestors believed in a lie. But it is what it is. I'm open to hearing a counter argument but this has been a subject of great interest to me for over 30 years and I've yet to hear anything very persuasive.
@@CrankyLawyer I'm not even making an argument for a creator. I'm questioning your total lack of logic. Feel free to answer any one or all of my three questions.
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
A waste of time because String Theory is an unprovable mathematical conjecture! String Theory is Witten’s fantasy hoax on the gullible & clueless public who read science fiction & believe it!
That was great to hear how the different papers had influenced his thinking on the subject. This interview really encapsulates a particular view of the history of these things.
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
You can tell witten is very much enjoying the interview, I dont know the other person, but seems like they share a very strong bond. I was laughing with them even though i mostly did not understand what they were taking about.😂
Being a leading figure in those early years of string theory must have been one of the most exhilarating experiences a human mind can have. 100x better than fame, fortune etc
This was done very well. As a layperson I don't understand the essentials of these theories but got a sense of the vastness of the connections that make these scientists know that there is something there. Unfortunately there are too many naysayers that do not have any intuitive notion however how little that they think that progress should be a program of immediate results. The way these two introduce the ongoing history and its compartmental successes indicates that there is something there that is worth pursuing even if it is not in their lifetimes. I think I get the gap between the mathematicians (who are rigorous) and the physicist in this area ( who have some feel for the physicality of the theory). Unfortunately this gap (not the Mass gap😊) has led to some animosity from a group of popularizers that the media has amplified to detriment of academic image. I think videos like this are not apologetic but get around the silliness of those who say knowledge should go in a new direction. Go 5 dimensions, Go 11 dimensions. Like Elvis fans not all 10^500 string theories can be wrong.
I remember 15 years ago, I made a silly “discovery” that the values of n so that S^n has trivial tangent bundles are exactly the same as the dimensions of the universe (1 time, 3 spatial, 7 curled) predicted by string theory. I sent an email to Dr Witten. To my surprise, he replied to me and showed me his opinion!
First of all: ‘Dimensions are curled’ : you have a lot of explaining to do if this is associated whatsoever with vector analytical curl. Also there’s a great gap in Type here. That is indeed an impressive equivalence if it’s actually correct! If the world’s structure doesn’t have any curled dimensions - because ‘curl’ doesn’t mean intrinsic - then this would imply that Whatever n is: perhaps the dimension if the intrinsic space that has supposedly trivial tangent bundle, which has which unit? Then that makes me wonder what 3 dimensional tangent bundle is existing as to model the intrinsic reality that itself could be time, Or in a different sense of intrinsic, a feature of magnetism itself, where ‘curled’ here could, again, mean truly seriously diverging things for reality. So that’s a good generational point for the concept of ‘curl’ Nor do I think your mathematical equivalences aren’t riddled with confusion as to the question of units (quanta - not to be confused with the field of research called ‘quantum mechanics’)
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
The gasp that came out of my mouth when I noticed this interview had popped up on my scream, made my wife ask “who’s died?” “No dear it’s just a new interview with Ed witten”
Oh Edward Witten! What are your thoughts on spacetime being doomed as fundamental? What are your insights about consciousness? What are your wildest speculations of reality no one knows about?
The admiration for Witten by Atish is evident. M-Theory is trully misterious and probably will remain so untill a "new Ed Witten" comes to light. I´m glad to see Witten still so powerfull, clear and working at his 70´s. Fast thinking, fast talking and great memory. Nice interview ICTP.
BPS (Bogomolny-Prasad-Sommerfeld) states satisfy certain energy bounds, which are derived from the topolology of the vacuum manifold of the theory. An example in ordinary field theory are instantons.
@@youtubesucks1885 Thank you… Even though I listened to the whole conversation I only understood perhaps 20%…. And those were mainly the filler words .
My understanding of these extremely complex subjects is very low, but, same as other people said in the comments section of this channel I enjoyed a lot watching the professor Witten (and the interviewer). It is an example for me: of the smartest people on Earth, how humble he is, how intellectually active on his seventies. I am wondering whether watching this is wasted time due to my lack of background in this type of physics, but for some reason, I feel that surely it is not.
David Olive was my supervisor for a while, while Salam asked me to learn Chern Simons. They both had a very high opinion of Witten. I didn’t realise Witten had travelled to London to explicity speak to Olive around 2 decades before he rehighlghted Olive's work on duality and that he, Witten, had been skeptical previously. That was about 5 years after I had left physics, so I wasn't even aware when Witten started marketing duality. One other comment intrigues me. Witten says that Sidney Coleman showed him several serious papers that were almost entirely unknown. This says something about how some important work is left unadressed, unrecognised and wasted.
Witten's 4D knot theory of dynamic space time in physics is self interact graviton g*m^2=137.036*e+=(k*e^2/e-)*g*m^2 which's by graviton g*m^2 oscillating between quantum black hole at Planck scale l=g*m/c^2=(h*g/2pi*c^3)^0.5 which deduce ch=2pi*g*m^2=8pi*g*(m*c^2/2)^2/c^4 : solution of GR field equation, proton scale pl=g(p)*(4pi*pm/3)/c^2, Atom scale A^2=g(p)*pi*me/128.4980143*c^2 generate strong force g(p)=g*m^2/pm^2=g*(pl/4.1888*l)^2=1.13*10^28, EM force between proton[pm=1.672621868*10^-27 kg], electron[me=9.10938*10^-31 kg] in Atom[A=5.29177282*10^-11 meter] by k*e^2=g(p)*pm^2/137.036=ch/(2pi*137.036)[e+]=me*(c/137.036)^2*A[e-]=4pi*g(p)*pm*me*137.036/128.51991 which can reproduce Dirac's quantum field deduce 0.001161409725=1/(2pi*137.036) : anomalous electron magnetic moment of (g-2)/2 factor from potential energy of positron e+=ch/(2pi*137.036)=k*e^2 which can turn into quantum gravity 2pi*k*e^2*137.036=ch=(2*A1*137.036*pm*c^2)*(4pi*A*137.036)=En*L produce photon r=En=ch/L=chR=me*(c/137.036)^2/2=13.6*e[1.602*10^-19], deduce weak force unite g(p) with k*e^2 by pm/me=1836.1527=4pi*137.036^2/128.51991=1/(4*A1*137.036^3)=(pi/(128.4980143*A*137.036))^0.5, deduce (me/pm)^2/137.036=2pi*0.001161409725*(me/pm)^2=128.4980143*A/3.1415926=2.16*10^-9=0.00116592026 - 0.00116591810 = (0.001165920+((61-41)+(57-25))*10^-9/2) - (0.00116584719+6845*10^-7+154*10^-8+92*10^-9) : discrepancy of muon magnetic moment of (g-2)/2 factor between experiment data, theoretical prediction from Fermilab at 8/10/23, 85.73% ratio between muon[105 mev=(3*137.036/2)*0.511], electron[0.511 mev=me*c^2=g*m^2*137.036/A] decay from strong force by 14.27=A/(3*137.036*(A-A1))=128.51991/(3*137.036*(128.51991-128.49801421207))=128.49801421207/3^2 where A1=a8(128.4980143/128.51991)=5.2908712*10^-11 meter : vibration of 3 two dimensional Schwinger-Dyson quantum field ch=2pi*l*m*c^2=2pi*pl*pm*c^2/4.1888=2pi*A*me*c^2/137.036 by ADS/CFT duality from 3 quantum black hole l, pl, A^2 which can compose q unique extra 6 dimensional Calabi-Yau manifold fits our universe cause Einstein's Brownian motion we can observe, deduce 2^(1/6)*ch=125 Gev : Higgs boson from super symmetry 1/137.036=e^2/(2*ch*p)=k*e^2/g*m^2 unite QM with GR, ch=111.44 Gev[1.602*10^-19/c^2], p=8.85418782*10^-12, u=4pi*10^-7 : permittivity, permeability of free space ch=2pi*g*(137.036*up*e-/l)*(137.036*up*e+/l) which's quantize Maxwell equation for EM wave.
Well, I discover that Witten changes totally his mood when he speaks to a person who speaks the same language of him. As a semi-formed mathematician I do not exactly speak the same language of them... But seems very interesting... In fact, I am thinking in last months to "do a Witten" and go into theoretical physics, Time will say it to me.
A probability experiment that can give a value that string theory tells can prove and improve our understanding of nature at microscopic level and connect to the macroscopic level.
A theoretical physicist wins a field medal.... There is nothing more than this to say about his legacy... To the people who are arguing down there is a quote by Hilbert “Physics is becoming too difficult for the physicist ”
Except he's a sheep that has pushed string for his whole life which is basically a deadens, he singlehandedly hijacked modem physics and is responsible for ruining thousands of careers so it you ask anyone who knows will tell you he has done absolutely nothing
Public? He doesn’t owe anybody anything. If he spares some time to public shows, that would be his utmost generosity. Scientists of his calibre are demonized in the popular culture, really. It is better for him not to descend to the level of apes.
He does have a very distinctive speech pattern. I wonder how much this is determined by how his mind works or if it's just a superficial habit. Fascinating man though, also comes over as absolute gent as well.
What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Hopf Fibrations of Eric Weinstein and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton.
Kindly write a paper and send it to a Journal if you think you have something interesting to say. Stop wasting your time writing long youtube comments out of context. You welcome
@@youtubesucks1885 Based on the six thumbs up above, at least six people disagree with you. Apparently, it was not a waste of time for them. If you have a specific constructive criticism of what is in the article, I will be glad to look at it.
@@SpotterVideo If I had a solution to the confinement problem in non-abelian gauge theory in four-dimensions, I would publish it and not write it in the UA-cam comment section. I mean you are better than these minions of Woit Hossenfelder and Weinstein. Try to put you ideas into math who knows what will happen
At the end. Witten say it's as if the universe was created by a mathematician. How interesting. A virtuoso in music might say it was might have been by a musician. The list goes on. But in any case, Witten is truly a virtuoso in his field.
I feel incredibly honoured that I was offered the wonderful opportunity of being part of the effort to give the final form to this historic video. (Just to introduce myself, I am a string theory postdoc at ICTP and I frequently collaborate with Professor Dabholkar.)
This was entertaining, I did not understand the vast majority of it but it gave me the strong feeling that there is a great deal I can still learn (after I learn a bunch of prerequisites for it first), I am young and while I'm not the smartest it brings me joy that people are studying plausible mathematical structures that may underlie how the universe works and how to explain it precisely and consistently. Even if string theory does not turn out to be the most fruitful approach (which it very well may) I would be surprised if some of the related mathematical dualities that may have roots in more physically grounded correspondences do not turn out to be useful. Thank you for the video.
Now it may be asked why these hidden variables should have so long remained undetected. ~Bohm Well, obviously the extra dimensions have to be different somehow because otherwise we would notice them. ~Green If you ask a physicist what is his idea of yellow light, he will tell you that it is transversal electromagnetic waves of wavelength in the neighborhood of 590 millimicrons. If you ask him: But where does yellow comes in? he will say: In my picture not at all, but these kinds of vibrations, when they hit the retina of a healthy eye, give the person whose eye it is the sensation of yellow. ~Schrödinger What we see depends on light entering the eye. Furthermore we do not even perceive what enters the eye. The things transmitted are waves or - as Newton thought - minute particles, and the things seen are colors. Locke met this difficulty by a theory of primary and secondary qualities. Namely, there are some attributes of the matter which we do perceive. These are the primary qualities, and there are other things which we perceive, such as colors, which are not attributes of matter, but are perceived by us as if they were such attributes. These are the secondary qualities of matter. Why should we perceive secondary qualities? It seems an unfortunate arrangement that we should perceive a lot of things that are not there. Yet this is what the theory of secondary qualities in fact comes to. ~Whitehead
Dr. Witten's eloquence and articulation often evoke the same sense of awe that comes from reading Nietzsche, his words seamlessly blending science with poetry. As he ages, especially following the recent passing of Dr. Daniel Dennett (whose work had a profound impact on my questioning of the religious indoctrination I experienced in my youth), I can't help but wonder how much longer Witten will continue to shape the intellectual landscape. I hope that before his time ends, we might witness the emergence of a digital intelligence that possesses his remarkable grasp of mathematics and physics. The thoughts he would have on such a creation would be both insightful and deeply thought-provoking.
''the emergence of a digital intelligence'' is typical of the non-sense b-s of these 'experts'. In 40 years, string theory has not produced a single verifiable prediction in the real world of physics. Theoretical physics has suffered terribly as a result of the monopoly of resources by string theory culture and fanatics. Common-sense and truthfulness must return to physics.
Planck-length scale. They are not made of constituent parts, as they are fundamental. Any current theory of physics you accept also does not go below some fundamental posited unit, and so the base unit can never be described as being “made of something.” Since it makes up matter, some will say it to be “made of energy,” but matter is not exactly the same concept as energy, and even if it were exact equivalence that is more of a semantic trick than a sensible statement. Though, even the idea that anything we can conceive of must be “made of” something is just macro level colloquial intuition.
@@pookz3067 Well, not too quick. You said: "...even the idea that anything we can conceive of must be “made of” something is just macro level colloquial intuition." Which is a contradiction. As one can also say that the every idea that there are some ultimate fundamental units in existence is an anthropocentric concept to begin with. More importantly. Let's assume that we have two distinct fundamental units that are supposedly simple and without parts; now the question is, what makes the first unit different than the second one? There should be some attributes in place that makes them different in one way or another, logic 101, otherwise the whole argument would collapse. Now, if one responds to that by saying that they're all identical as they're fundamentally speaking ultimately simple units, then why not calling them just one single unit being shared in infinite time and space continuum? And if one comes up and say that they're different units, but their difference has nothing to do with them being composed of constituent parts, then the question arises that, what are those differences? Yet another question is, that WHERE exactly the boundaries, or borders for one units begins, and where it ends? And what's the nature of the in-between spaces between such so-called simple units? To even make it more absurd, we can bring the notion of time into this, and ask if all such units engage with one another, and if so, are they dynamic within time? And is that time a continuous or discrete in nature? ...
Yes in condensed matter physics and GR it is of practical use, which is astonishing considering the gap between theoretical physics and the current ability of experimental physics.
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
If there is anything problematic about String Theoretical Vibration analysis of apparent circumstances, it is in the congruence of functional interpretation that goes back and forth from students to teacher in the usual cycles of teaching-learning coincidental correspondences, cause-effect.., which is why learning by doing apprenticeship is slightly different in practice to absorbing conventional studies and word recognition. Because Semantic symbology analysis is "across all observation" that begins with childhood memory transfers, that are much more visceral than industrial scale educational programs are suited to. To catch up with the leaders of knowledge requires an overhaul of teaching language and experience in "artistic" symbology, which is to say, restore some sort of feedback mechanism equivalent to the apprenticeship style of eyes and ears study of actions that make the words, sights and sounds in reciprocation-recirculation recognition of amplitude-frequency temporal superposition wave-packaging.
KNOWING The phase waves of light All OF, will help string theory advance but also charges of the AFOREMENTIONED need to be known as well as CMB interactions on the AFOREMENTIONED are different depending on an areas temp , complex things dimensions ???
Dimensions of space can be individually studied and in relation to other dimensions. Can we relate the higher dimensions like study any two dimensions like x and y or x and z or y and z?.
WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET. SPACE IS 3D AND THERE IS NOTHING MORE. IN MATH YOU CAN HAVE ANY D AND THAT IS USELESS. YOU ARE LIVING IN SPACE WHICH IS DYNAMIC AS WELL. ATOMIC LEVEL IS NOT APPLICABLE TO NEWTONIAN LEVEL LIKE EARTH AND OTHER OBJECTS. THEY THINK THAT WHAT HAPPEND AT ATOMIC OR QUANTUM LEVEL IS THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE WHICH JUST CANNOT BE PROVED. YOU CANT CREATE ENERGY OUT OF NOTHING. SO IT SIMPLY CANT START FROM A SINGLE POINT AND BECOME UNIVERSE. MAKES NO SENSE AND WHAT IS OUT THERE ALSO DO NOT MAKE SENSE. ------------- SO NOBODY KNOWS AS HUMAN BEING IS WAY EARLY IN TIME CAPSULE. MAY BE ONE DAY ( IF THEY SURVIVE LIKE 50000 OR SAY 250K YEARS FROM NOW) MIGHT GET SOME ANSWERS. MY 2 CENTS.
Your repetitions of this comment dismiss out of hand the many contributions and advancements Witten's work has generated across the domains of physics and math. WRT string theory specifically, your dismissively and childishly worded criticism only carries water within the context of modern academic success. Yes, Witten is fortunate to have a rare seat that affords him an opportunity to prioritize exploration without the usual constraints of pragmatism. Outside of that, to dismiss his work wholesale in the manner you have requires a mind that can 1) understand the qualities of the underlying math that lead Witten to perceive such significance and 2) articulate where and how the significance and/or Witten's perception of the same is misguided. I doubt very much you're capable of either, let alone both.
He’s a brilliant theorist and mathematician, of the highest order on things technical in string theory. Probably the preeminent physicist of our time. His unification of seemingly competing branches of string theory into M theory theory or Super String theory is his crowning achievement. And it stunned the physics community. And still does. However, on the sobering side, string theory has effectively run “out of gas” in explaining the world and unifying QFT and relativity. String theory some say was a grand but ultimately fruitless detour to the final knowledge of grand unification. Most here know the critiques of string theory by Penrose, Weinstein and others. Funny though that we live in a world where QFT and relativity co-exist; so there must be an ultimate solution to how they live and function together. As Einstein said, there must be “something deeply hidden.”
He is both a genius and the most humble person in the world. When I was 16 or 17, I emailed Edward Witten for high energy physics help, and the next day he responded with a lengthy e-mail full of advices.
Can you share it? Very curious
My cat watched this entire video along with me and it may be the first time that our understanding of the content was at the same level.
I understood almost nothing but still got at least some vague sense of what the problems are in theoretical physics. It is such a wonderful thing to have these sorts of conversations available for the general public.
Yes, indeed! ❤-❤ Very Grateful to Stanford and Professor Witten! 🙏🏼😊
the interviewer also understood almost nothing :)
@@superdanu i understood what a dog feels like when his watching TV
So, here we are, watching and listening to the smartest guy on this earth.
Thank you for this conversation. Anytime Witten speaks I feel blessed to hear him. One of a kind.
Even though he’s completely wrong???
@@onceanoptimistnownot3868 ??? even though he isnt???
Witten is a priest, not a scientist. As evidenced by your comment.
@@danhoward7697 I guess you dont understand linguistics or undertones.
@@danhoward7697 What a profoundly stupid person you are.
I always enjoy hearing Prof. Witten talk about Maths and Physics: the present conversation, BTW was (by far) the best I ever watched on the Internet, thanks to Director Dabholkar who asked high quality questions. And I'm always happy to see so many people interested in Physics (or in Science, in general...).
Very useful discussion on important aspects of the theoretical physics of the last half century from a 'giant' of the field. Moderator deserves praise.
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
most soothing voice in physics
Some People say Edward Witten uses this calm and soothing voice so he doesn't upset the Gods.
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
ASMR
Witten is a priest, not a scientist.
Nah Sabine Hossenfelder has the most soothing voice, if you're in to strong German women telling you how it is.
Thanks for the sub titles, this makes a difference in clarifying the speech.
A fitting line at the end there, as Dirac once said "God is a mathematician of a very high order and he used advanced mathematics in constructing the universe."
When renowned famous physicists consider you the main man, you know you’ve got it going on! Einstein of our time!
Hence, man.
I love that I see him here first instead of some famous podcast! Seems more authentic for some reason?
Witten is an absolute legend. Great upload.
What has String Theory produced?
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
A lot of Popperrazzis asking this question. 😉
@@HArryvajonas Well, I have experimental evidence, I hope somebody listens someday. It's curious what Witten said about thermodynamics, maybe someone told him. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
@@cademosley4886 Well, I have experimental evidence, I hope somebody listens someday. It's curious what Witten said about thermodynamics, maybe someone told him thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
From all accounts, for all of his AMAZING genius, he's widely considered a GREAT person too. One of the smartest humans to ever live.
I like Edward and his calmness. His motivation towards discovering truth is admirable and there is no doubt that he and others are making significant steps along the road to discovery. I would caution anyone's expectation that this will ultimately lead to any exposure of the universes greatest secrets. Hubris is the problem. The greater can understand the smaller but the smaller can never fully understand the greater.
As a former student of string theory and supersymmetry, this is wonderful. I understand the criticism from the likes of Woit, Penrose and Weinstein, but the explanation that they (Witten) are building a tool is a useful analogy. I don't think people outside of physics can really understand just how much harder these things are than other realms of inquiry. Mathematics for instance, I love math, I've done some, it is comparitive far easier because it can be done in isolation without the need to be interwoven into some vastly complicated tapestry of ideas. Physics is like a symphony, there is so much more to do at once. Anyway, I am grateful for Witten's work, I just wish he would acknowledge the answer to the question at the end rests with the Creator. It is God's design for us to delight in His creation, the riddles left for us in physics are to my mind the most interesting of all.
That's such a mundane idea (a creator). Doesn't the completely bizarre rules of reality teach you something as simple as the man made Idea of a creator is kind of embarrassingly simple and of course raises the question of why reality can't just be what it is without a creator if the Creator can't be what it/she is without a creator/cause itself. And if that isn't enough evidence, how about how utterly horrific earth is. Horrifying death, suffering, torture etc happening every moment--to say nothing of the historical record. Great job, Creator.
Jeez, this must be a comment w/ the most bombastic begining and the lamest of endings. Some f*****g "creattor". A proper clown.
@un-Lawyer Maybe it's your response that is simplistic and embarrassing. Because there is not heaven on Earth there can be no creator? Where does that weak logic come from? Is it possible there are things we will never be capable of understanding? Or maybe you have the answers.
@@Joel-ml5bg , I think to most people the core idea of a creator is that it's very hard for us to imagine the universe coming from nothing. But it should be so painfully obvious from quantum mechanics that our ordinary conception of the rules of reality are totally violated at the quantum level. e.g., we can't be in two places at once, we can't be two things so once, we can't be turning left and right at the same time, we can't instantly change something far away with no contact. So that being the case, the usual logical arguments for God a pretty damn meaningless. And it just seems extra silly to take this ancient notion about creation and cling to it despite this evidence and all the other evidence against every single revelation based religions.
And I get this is hard for people because my rejecting religion/God, we are basically saying all our parents and ancestors believed in a lie. But it is what it is. I'm open to hearing a counter argument but this has been a subject of great interest to me for over 30 years and I've yet to hear anything very persuasive.
@@CrankyLawyer I'm not even making an argument for a creator. I'm questioning your total lack of logic. Feel free to answer any one or all of my three questions.
Thanks for this interview with the greatest mind on the planet. Great to hear Mr Witten.
I think that's Penrose.
That is Chris Langan and his CTMU.
Nice. This will be a ~1hr well spent. Thank you, Dr. Witten!
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
Witten is a priest, not a scientist.
A waste of time because String Theory is an unprovable mathematical conjecture! String Theory is Witten’s fantasy hoax on the gullible & clueless public who read science fiction & believe it!
@@danhoward7697time will tell the truth.
Witten is extraordinary!! His ideas In theoretical string theory will melt your mind. His intelligence is a bit intimidating to say the least.
May god bless Mr. Witten with many more years full of health, prosperity and scientific achievements.
Curious question: Is Professor Whitten a believer, and if so, what religion does he follow? 😊
@@khaldalshmry560 I wouldn’t know or care to be honest.
That was great to hear how the different papers had influenced his thinking on the subject. This interview really encapsulates a particular view of the history of these things.
Thank you for sharing. From Argentina...! Thanks a lot.!!
He is getting the recognition he deserves. It's time people start knowing who this guy is as he is in the same league as Einstein, Newton and Dirac.
The way he remembers every date and names are extraordinary!! 😮😮
Much awaited inspiration. Thank you both from the bottom of my heart.❤👍
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
You can tell witten is very much enjoying the interview, I dont know the other person, but seems like they share a very strong bond. I was laughing with them even though i mostly did not understand what they were taking about.😂
He was his student.
He was his student and they both worked on a paper together as well recently.
Being a leading figure in those early years of string theory must have been one of the most exhilarating experiences a human mind can have. 100x better than fame, fortune etc
beautiful thought
THAT IS NOT PROVEN AND PURE HYPOTHESIS. NOBODY REALLY KNOWS.
This was done very well. As a layperson I don't understand the essentials of these theories but got a sense of the vastness of the connections that make these scientists know that there is something there. Unfortunately there are too many naysayers that do not have any intuitive notion however how little that they think that progress should be a program of immediate results. The way these two introduce the ongoing history and its compartmental successes indicates that there is something there that is worth pursuing even if it is not in their lifetimes. I think I get the gap between the mathematicians (who are rigorous) and the physicist in this area ( who have some feel for the physicality of the theory). Unfortunately this gap (not the Mass gap😊) has led to some animosity from a group of popularizers that the media has amplified to detriment of academic image. I think videos like this are not apologetic but get around the silliness of those who say knowledge should go in a new direction. Go 5 dimensions, Go 11 dimensions. Like Elvis fans not all 10^500 string theories can be wrong.
Beautiful conversation...
Excellent conversation and inspirational to listen to Professor Witten.
I remember 15 years ago, I made a silly “discovery” that the values of n so that S^n has trivial tangent bundles are exactly the same as the dimensions of the universe (1 time, 3 spatial, 7 curled) predicted by string theory. I sent an email to Dr Witten. To my surprise, he replied to me and showed me his opinion!
I, also observed this about a year ago. What was Witten's reply like?
I lost my email account together with the email from him. I remember he said it’s a coincidence(not exactly his words). 😄
Ma boy bagged a whitey 🎉
Id revisit your theory witten is entropy incarnate
First of all:
‘Dimensions are curled’ : you have a lot of explaining to do if this is associated whatsoever with vector analytical curl.
Also there’s a great gap in Type here.
That is indeed an impressive equivalence if it’s actually correct!
If the world’s structure doesn’t have any curled dimensions - because ‘curl’ doesn’t mean intrinsic - then this would imply that
Whatever n is: perhaps the dimension if the intrinsic space that has supposedly trivial tangent bundle, which has which unit?
Then that makes me wonder what 3 dimensional tangent bundle is existing as to model the intrinsic reality that itself could be time,
Or in a different sense of intrinsic, a feature of magnetism itself, where ‘curled’ here could, again, mean truly seriously diverging things for reality.
So that’s a good generational point for the concept of ‘curl’
Nor do I think your mathematical equivalences aren’t riddled with confusion as to the question of units (quanta - not to be confused with the field of research called ‘quantum mechanics’)
I had to keep rewatching and finally after the 50th time I still didn’t know what he was talking about
Well, it does require prerequisite knowledge lol
This video made my day.
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
Witten is a priest, not a scientist.
The gasp that came out of my mouth when I noticed this interview had popped up on my scream, made my wife ask “who’s died?”
“No dear it’s just a new interview with Ed witten”
Love this, not a clue what’s being said mostly, but I feel smarter listening to EW. Thank you
Oh Edward Witten! What are your thoughts on spacetime being doomed as fundamental? What are your insights about consciousness? What are your wildest speculations of reality no one knows about?
I would love to see a podcast with Witten, Roger and Eric hosting it.
I met Dr Witten in 2014 when he received Kyoto Prize. Phenomenal person.
I love you comment, the fact that the F is capital indicating a proper noun has me cracking up. I'm so petty.
@@conancimmerian5066 Oh, thanks for pointing out -- corrected. Now it's a proper adjective ;)
The admiration for Witten by Atish is evident. M-Theory is trully misterious and probably will remain so untill a "new Ed Witten" comes to light. I´m glad to see Witten still so powerfull, clear and working at his 70´s. Fast thinking, fast talking and great memory. Nice interview ICTP.
I also couldn’t stop chuckling when I realized the BPS spectrum could be physical . Now if I only knew what it all means .
BPS (Bogomolny-Prasad-Sommerfeld) states satisfy certain energy bounds, which are derived from the topolology of the vacuum manifold of the theory. An example in ordinary field theory are instantons.
@@youtubesucks1885 Thank you… Even though I listened to the whole conversation I only understood perhaps 20%…. And those were mainly the filler words .
I would love a talk between Witten and Jim Simons on Mathermathics
My understanding of these extremely complex subjects is very low, but, same as other people said in the comments section of this channel I enjoyed a lot watching the professor Witten (and the interviewer). It is an example for me: of the smartest people on Earth, how humble he is, how intellectually active on his seventies. I am wondering whether watching this is wasted time due to my lack of background in this type of physics, but for some reason, I feel that surely it is not.
David Olive was my supervisor for a while, while Salam asked me to learn Chern Simons. They both had a very high opinion of Witten. I didn’t realise Witten had travelled to London to explicity speak to Olive around 2 decades before he rehighlghted Olive's work on duality and that he, Witten, had been skeptical previously. That was about 5 years after I had left physics, so I wasn't even aware when Witten started marketing duality. One other comment intrigues me. Witten says that Sidney Coleman showed him several serious papers that were almost entirely unknown. This says something about how some important work is left unadressed, unrecognised and wasted.
I was neighbors with Mr Dirac, and I had no idea who he was until much later. Lol, he was just a normal elderly man living a very quiet life.
Witten's 4D knot theory of dynamic space time in physics is self interact graviton g*m^2=137.036*e+=(k*e^2/e-)*g*m^2 which's by graviton g*m^2 oscillating between quantum black hole at Planck scale l=g*m/c^2=(h*g/2pi*c^3)^0.5 which deduce ch=2pi*g*m^2=8pi*g*(m*c^2/2)^2/c^4 : solution of GR field equation, proton scale pl=g(p)*(4pi*pm/3)/c^2, Atom scale A^2=g(p)*pi*me/128.4980143*c^2 generate strong force g(p)=g*m^2/pm^2=g*(pl/4.1888*l)^2=1.13*10^28, EM force between proton[pm=1.672621868*10^-27 kg], electron[me=9.10938*10^-31 kg] in Atom[A=5.29177282*10^-11 meter] by k*e^2=g(p)*pm^2/137.036=ch/(2pi*137.036)[e+]=me*(c/137.036)^2*A[e-]=4pi*g(p)*pm*me*137.036/128.51991 which can reproduce Dirac's quantum field deduce 0.001161409725=1/(2pi*137.036) : anomalous electron magnetic moment of (g-2)/2 factor from potential energy of positron e+=ch/(2pi*137.036)=k*e^2 which can turn into quantum gravity 2pi*k*e^2*137.036=ch=(2*A1*137.036*pm*c^2)*(4pi*A*137.036)=En*L produce photon r=En=ch/L=chR=me*(c/137.036)^2/2=13.6*e[1.602*10^-19], deduce weak force unite g(p) with k*e^2 by pm/me=1836.1527=4pi*137.036^2/128.51991=1/(4*A1*137.036^3)=(pi/(128.4980143*A*137.036))^0.5, deduce (me/pm)^2/137.036=2pi*0.001161409725*(me/pm)^2=128.4980143*A/3.1415926=2.16*10^-9=0.00116592026 - 0.00116591810 = (0.001165920+((61-41)+(57-25))*10^-9/2) - (0.00116584719+6845*10^-7+154*10^-8+92*10^-9) : discrepancy of muon magnetic moment of (g-2)/2 factor between experiment data, theoretical prediction from Fermilab at 8/10/23, 85.73% ratio between muon[105 mev=(3*137.036/2)*0.511], electron[0.511 mev=me*c^2=g*m^2*137.036/A] decay from strong force by 14.27=A/(3*137.036*(A-A1))=128.51991/(3*137.036*(128.51991-128.49801421207))=128.49801421207/3^2 where A1=a8(128.4980143/128.51991)=5.2908712*10^-11 meter : vibration of 3 two dimensional Schwinger-Dyson quantum field ch=2pi*l*m*c^2=2pi*pl*pm*c^2/4.1888=2pi*A*me*c^2/137.036 by ADS/CFT duality from 3 quantum black hole l, pl, A^2 which can compose q unique extra 6 dimensional Calabi-Yau manifold fits our universe cause Einstein's Brownian motion we can observe, deduce 2^(1/6)*ch=125 Gev : Higgs boson from super symmetry 1/137.036=e^2/(2*ch*p)=k*e^2/g*m^2 unite QM with GR, ch=111.44 Gev[1.602*10^-19/c^2], p=8.85418782*10^-12, u=4pi*10^-7 : permittivity, permeability of free space ch=2pi*g*(137.036*up*e-/l)*(137.036*up*e+/l) which's quantize Maxwell equation for EM wave.
Dewey Larson's _Reciprocal Systems Theory of Space and Time_ is the ACTUAL unified theory you've been searching for.
I can understand every word individually, but completely get lost when they are put together
I love how the ratio of Edwards head to his body explains his unmatched intellect.
Critics: Wit 0/10
Edward: Wit remains absolutely immeasurable, so we have to settle for 10/10.
Literally Witten. 💯.
🇺🇸
I wish Ed would do more interviews, this is such a treat.
I love the way scientists plod along…even when they hit a wall, there is an excitement for breaking through.
Well, I discover that Witten changes totally his mood when he speaks to a person who speaks the same language of him. As a semi-formed mathematician I do not exactly speak the same language of them... But seems very interesting... In fact, I am thinking in last months to "do a Witten" and go into theoretical physics, Time will say it to me.
A probability experiment that can give a value that string theory tells can prove and improve our understanding of nature at microscopic level and connect to the macroscopic level.
Finally he is back on a new interview on yt…
He seems very comfortable & having a good time.
Thanks for the upload
A theoretical physicist wins a field medal.... There is nothing more than this to say about his legacy...
To the people who are arguing down there is a quote by Hilbert
“Physics is becoming too difficult for the physicist ”
I know you meant it as a compliment but this can be interpreted differently too lol
Except he's a sheep that has pushed string for his whole life which is basically a deadens, he singlehandedly hijacked modem physics and is responsible for ruining thousands of careers so it you ask anyone who knows will tell you he has done absolutely nothing
Where are all the great findings regarding string theory?
Indeed bro ❤
@@EsdrasOlivaresPcmasterracetalking a lot of shit for someone that knows nothing about what they’re talking about
Thanks sir Witten from Ethiopia
Hats off to the interviewer 😮😮😮
IMO Witten owes the public more screen time
Public? He doesn’t owe anybody anything. If he spares some time to public shows, that would be his utmost generosity. Scientists of his calibre are demonized in the popular culture, really. It is better for him not to descend to the level of apes.
Woah. Absolutely not. Keep Witten away from television screens and social media - the mind-rot of mankind.
He does have a very distinctive speech pattern. I wonder how much this is determined by how his mind works or if it's just a superficial habit. Fascinating man though, also comes over as absolute gent as well.
You can watch his talks. He seems to have an incredible eye for structures. He can see them where most other people are only seeing a confusing fog.
Every word has a meaning. Every word may not mean the same to the other people in conversation.
What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Hopf Fibrations of Eric Weinstein and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common?
In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit).
Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant.
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature.
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton.
Kindly write a paper and send it to a Journal if you think you have something interesting to say. Stop wasting your time writing long youtube comments out of context. You welcome
@@youtubesucks1885 Based on the six thumbs up above, at least six people disagree with you. Apparently, it was not a waste of time for them. If you have a specific constructive criticism of what is in the article, I will be glad to look at it.
@@SpotterVideo 6 thumbs up from random people. Well, that is what I call a scientific debate. Rly putting your ideas to a test
@@youtubesucks1885 We would like to see your solution to the problem.
@@SpotterVideo If I had a solution to the confinement problem in non-abelian gauge theory in four-dimensions, I would publish it and not write it in the UA-cam comment section. I mean you are better than these minions of Woit Hossenfelder and Weinstein. Try to put you ideas into math who knows what will happen
Professor Atish, that's a beautiful T shirt 👕🧠🔥🔥
At the end. Witten say it's as if the universe was created by a mathematician. How interesting. A virtuoso in music might say it was might have been by a musician. The list goes on. But in any case, Witten is truly a virtuoso in his field.
The inaudible phrase at 9:08 is "pioneered things" in case subs can be updated for future reference.
I feel incredibly honoured that I was offered the wonderful opportunity of being part of the effort to give the final form to this historic video. (Just to introduce myself, I am a string theory postdoc at ICTP and I frequently collaborate with Professor Dabholkar.)
Probably the only person I would have been starstrucked of.
Thank you both for this Great interview.
Greetings from Norway.
Witten is a priest, not a scientist.
@@danhoward7697 I know. Did I say anything else?
A well spoken genius
Thanks sir, I am also a mathematician. ❤❤
Edward witten is just amazing beautiful mind
Very enjoyable. Didn't understand most of it.
This was entertaining, I did not understand the vast majority of it but it gave me the strong feeling that there is a great deal I can still learn (after I learn a bunch of prerequisites for it first), I am young and while I'm not the smartest it brings me joy that people are studying plausible mathematical structures that may underlie how the universe works and how to explain it precisely and consistently. Even if string theory does not turn out to be the most fruitful approach (which it very well may) I would be surprised if some of the related mathematical dualities that may have roots in more physically grounded correspondences do not turn out to be useful. Thank you for the video.
Now it may be asked why these hidden variables should have so long remained undetected.
~Bohm
Well, obviously the extra dimensions have to be different somehow because otherwise we would notice them.
~Green
If you ask a physicist what is his idea of yellow light, he will tell you that it is transversal electromagnetic waves of wavelength in the neighborhood of 590 millimicrons. If you ask him: But where does yellow comes in? he will say: In my picture not at all, but these kinds of vibrations, when they hit the retina of a healthy eye, give the person whose eye it is the sensation of yellow.
~Schrödinger
What we see depends on light entering the eye. Furthermore we do not even perceive what enters the eye. The things transmitted are waves or - as Newton thought - minute particles, and the things seen are colors. Locke met this difficulty by a theory of primary and secondary qualities. Namely, there are some attributes of the matter which we do perceive. These are the primary qualities, and there are other things which we perceive, such as colors, which are not attributes of matter, but are perceived by us as if they were such attributes. These are the secondary qualities of matter.
Why should we perceive secondary qualities? It seems an unfortunate arrangement that we should perceive a lot of things that are not there. Yet this is what the theory of secondary qualities in fact comes to.
~Whitehead
Good physicists are fundamentally good people
Everything in the world is connected. This would mean even the landscape on the planet has logical and scientific reasons.
Insane that Witten hasn’t been on Lex F yet.
Bros on another level
I hope atleast dwarkesh or curt jaimungal interview him in long-form so his knowledge is shared.
Lex will ask him about things and people Ed doesnt want to adress
No one outside the scientific community would have a clue what he's talking about.
Both are Jewish so it's only a matter of time
I can understand every word individually, but get completely lost when they are put together
Dr. Witten's eloquence and articulation often evoke the same sense of awe that comes from reading Nietzsche, his words seamlessly blending science with poetry. As he ages, especially following the recent passing of Dr. Daniel Dennett (whose work had a profound impact on my questioning of the religious indoctrination I experienced in my youth), I can't help but wonder how much longer Witten will continue to shape the intellectual landscape. I hope that before his time ends, we might witness the emergence of a digital intelligence that possesses his remarkable grasp of mathematics and physics. The thoughts he would have on such a creation would be both insightful and deeply thought-provoking.
''the emergence of a digital intelligence'' is typical of the non-sense b-s of these 'experts'. In 40 years, string theory has not produced a single verifiable prediction in the real world of physics. Theoretical physics has suffered terribly as a result of the monopoly of resources by string theory culture and fanatics. Common-sense and truthfulness must return to physics.
I just learned with this comment that Daniel Dennett passed away :(, he was influential in my atheism
Can mathematic analysis be improved to mathematical design by evolving the terms used and this helped to touch higher dimensions?
So simple and elementary, a child could understand.
Can someone tell me how long a string is and what the string is made of ? Thank you .
Depends on the shoe size.
Just a theory.
How many balls of string does it take to reach the moon? Just one but a very big one.
Planck-length scale. They are not made of constituent parts, as they are fundamental. Any current theory of physics you accept also does not go below some fundamental posited unit, and so the base unit can never be described as being “made of something.” Since it makes up matter, some will say it to be “made of energy,” but matter is not exactly the same concept as energy, and even if it were exact equivalence that is more of a semantic trick than a sensible statement. Though, even the idea that anything we can conceive of must be “made of” something is just macro level colloquial intuition.
@@pookz3067 Thank you… very good explanation.
@@pookz3067 Well, not too quick. You said: "...even the idea that anything we can conceive of must be “made of” something is just macro level colloquial intuition." Which is a contradiction. As one can also say that the every idea that there are some ultimate fundamental units in existence is an anthropocentric concept to begin with. More importantly. Let's assume that we have two distinct fundamental units that are supposedly simple and without parts; now the question is, what makes the first unit different than the second one? There should be some attributes in place that makes them different in one way or another, logic 101, otherwise the whole argument would collapse. Now, if one responds to that by saying that they're all identical as they're fundamentally speaking ultimately simple units, then why not calling them just one single unit being shared in infinite time and space continuum? And if one comes up and say that they're different units, but their difference has nothing to do with them being composed of constituent parts, then the question arises that, what are those differences?
Yet another question is, that WHERE exactly the boundaries, or borders for one units begins, and where it ends? And what's the nature of the in-between spaces between such so-called simple units? To even make it more absurd, we can bring the notion of time into this, and ask if all such units engage with one another, and if so, are they dynamic within time? And is that time a continuous or discrete in nature? ...
Nice interview !!!
Very interesting, informative and worthwhile video.
Thank you for this video
Whether you like string theory or not, you have to respect Ed Witten.
From a theoretical physicist
Great conversation and location
Most enjoyable, thank you++
Are there practical applications/implications of his works? Any examples are welcome
Yes in condensed matter physics and GR it is of practical use, which is astonishing considering the gap between theoretical physics and the current ability of experimental physics.
Not every UA-cam video needs to take place in front of bookshelves.
Not every dumb statement should make it out of your head either.💯
Descartes is watching
If you want to know how string theory may be right with experimental evidence check this out. thermodynamicfields.wordpress.com/2021/09/26/example-post-3/
The GOAT
Where's his Nobel Prize????
If there is anything problematic about String Theoretical Vibration analysis of apparent circumstances, it is in the congruence of functional interpretation that goes back and forth from students to teacher in the usual cycles of teaching-learning coincidental correspondences, cause-effect.., which is why learning by doing apprenticeship is slightly different in practice to absorbing conventional studies and word recognition.
Because Semantic symbology analysis is "across all observation" that begins with childhood memory transfers, that are much more visceral than industrial scale educational programs are suited to.
To catch up with the leaders of knowledge requires an overhaul of teaching language and experience in "artistic" symbology, which is to say, restore some sort of feedback mechanism equivalent to the apprenticeship style of eyes and ears study of actions that make the words, sights and sounds in reciprocation-recirculation recognition of amplitude-frequency temporal superposition wave-packaging.
The joke at 14:50 is so sweet. It shows me that great physicists are funny people.
When renowned famous physicists consider you as the genius and main man, you know you’ve got it going on! Einstein of our time!
I understood only the parts that were in English such as “the, and, so, we, boundary” etc.
KNOWING The phase waves of light All OF, will help string theory advance but also charges of the AFOREMENTIONED need to be known as well as CMB interactions on the AFOREMENTIONED are different depending on an areas temp , complex things dimensions ???
Dr Witten’s voice has a magical touch. When he speaks, the stars in the nearby galaxies dance tango
Calculus, probability and statistics and big data will change the way physical formulas will be derived in microscopic level and macroscopic level.
Dimensions of space can be individually studied and in relation to other dimensions. Can we relate the higher dimensions like study any two dimensions like x and y or x and z or y and z?.
WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET. SPACE IS 3D AND THERE IS NOTHING MORE. IN MATH YOU CAN HAVE ANY D AND THAT IS USELESS. YOU ARE LIVING IN SPACE WHICH IS DYNAMIC AS WELL. ATOMIC LEVEL IS NOT APPLICABLE TO NEWTONIAN LEVEL LIKE EARTH AND OTHER OBJECTS. THEY THINK THAT WHAT HAPPEND AT ATOMIC OR QUANTUM LEVEL IS THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE WHICH JUST CANNOT BE PROVED. YOU CANT CREATE ENERGY OUT OF NOTHING. SO IT SIMPLY CANT START FROM A SINGLE POINT AND BECOME UNIVERSE. MAKES NO SENSE AND WHAT IS OUT THERE ALSO DO NOT MAKE SENSE.
-------------
SO NOBODY KNOWS AS HUMAN BEING IS WAY EARLY IN TIME CAPSULE. MAY BE ONE DAY ( IF THEY SURVIVE LIKE 50000 OR SAY 250K YEARS FROM NOW) MIGHT GET SOME ANSWERS.
MY 2 CENTS.
How many of Witten's works give predictions for measurable quantities, and how many of his predictions have been confirmed experimentally?
Witten is a priest, not a scientist.
@@danhoward7697 I hope that's a criticism.
Your repetitions of this comment dismiss out of hand the many contributions and advancements Witten's work has generated across the domains of physics and math. WRT string theory specifically, your dismissively and childishly worded criticism only carries water within the context of modern academic success. Yes, Witten is fortunate to have a rare seat that affords him an opportunity to prioritize exploration without the usual constraints of pragmatism. Outside of that, to dismiss his work wholesale in the manner you have requires a mind that can 1) understand the qualities of the underlying math that lead Witten to perceive such significance and 2) articulate where and how the significance and/or Witten's perception of the same is misguided. I doubt very much you're capable of either, let alone both.
@@APETWAT So, can you answer the question?
None
He’s a brilliant theorist and mathematician, of the highest order on things technical in string theory. Probably the preeminent physicist of our time. His unification of seemingly competing branches of string theory into M theory theory or Super String theory is his crowning achievement. And it stunned the physics community. And still does. However, on the sobering side, string theory has effectively run “out of gas” in explaining the world and unifying QFT and relativity. String theory some say was a grand but ultimately fruitless detour to the final knowledge of grand unification. Most here know the critiques of string theory by Penrose, Weinstein and others. Funny though that we live in a world where QFT and relativity co-exist; so there must be an ultimate solution to how they live and function together. As Einstein said, there must be “something deeply hidden.”
There is. Chris Langan's CTMU discusses it.
There is nothing "deeply hidden". We just need a very sharp microscope to see it. We can't build that machine, yet.
To see it from the outside.
I love the shirt Atish is wearing 😅