This is mind-blowing: the Universe at the smallest scale.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 бер 2024
- The manifestation of the quantum gravitational field becomes evident when observing phenomena at the Planck's length scale. Hence, the tiniest constituent of our cosmos, which is not even perceptible, must exist at the scale of Planck's length.
- Домашні улюбленці та дикі тварини
I had given up trying to understand the basics of all things quantum but this lecture makes me want to try again. Many thanks!
brilliant lecture and all done without notes, what a star!
This has been the best explanation I've ever heard on this subject. You know your subject when you can explain it at the primary school level. Thanks!
Actually the ability to understand something and the ability to explain it are not tightly connected. It turns out that the ability to explain is not as common as the ability to understand, and the ability to explain to someone not an expert in the given field is even less common. Explaining high-level science to non-science people is a rare ability that is its own sort of genius. This guy is a communicative genius among scientific geniuses.
This is how progress works. Decades ago, a man blew the minds of hundreds. Now, it has potential to blow millions.
U mean atomic bomb?
Wait a minute -- I could swear I read from Feynman that electrons don't actually spin, that it's just a name given to some property.
I think this was beyond excellent. Fantastic!!
THanks for the science
Thanks for this easy to understanding lecture ❤
Very Good Professor Tong.
I do agree with you that we need to go back to basics, to find answers to these questions.
There has just been published, a book called ' The Two Monopole Particle Universe ' by Tony Norman Marsh on Amazon and Kindle, which gives a radical, yet Logical alternative to the standard model.
This is well worth consideration, considering the standard model is plainly fundamentally flawed, and there is at this present time, no feasible alternative on offer. Kind regards,
Tony Marsh.
Fundamental building blocks 😂😂😂 Oh the hubris!
Three cheers for Science may there be unimaginable more . . .
“Before time existed” is a nonsensical statement. You need time for there to be a “before”.
Yes, he should have been more clear. We need a better and more concise way of communicating “a causal chain leading to the thing that we traditionally interpret as a singularity but probably isn't, where such causation occurs in a more abstract space not necessarily within the cohesive spacetime we're familiar with”. It's not the concept that's nonsense, it's the confused belief that time and causality are fundamentally different things. It may be the case that time is not fundamentally inextricable from space, as Einsteinian relativity is just an approximation.
He forgot to explain that those quantum fluctuations are actually very small, not large, as in the computor simulation.
Carlo Rovelli said take a walnut to the size of the universe and the Plank length is a million times smaller. He says at around this size are the gravity quantum loops that literary constitute space and time. (If I understand him correctly)
@@dfearoso they don't know this through experiments they only know this through math. Correct?
The bulding blocks of the universe is the hot dence point and its characteristics we know little about..
The big bang is still a theory.....
The easiest person to fool is yourself
I am use to seeing this on RI, the Royal Institution. I presume that this is an authorised copy. Emergence seem to be hosted by "Stanford Advanced Institute and Emergence" which sounds a bit short as a statement, not quite a sentence, or a strange title.
There is no such institute at Stanford. And it’s odd to see videos lifted directly from other sites with not only no credit, but not even an intro or background on the speakers. Hmmm.
The source: ua-cam.com/video/zNVQfWC_evg/v-deo.html
@@bachan74 Exactly-and no credit given to RI or Cambridge or David here. The talk itself is excellent. It’s the way it’s presented here uncredited or even introduced, and by a sketchy channel that appears to be impersonating a non-existent institute at Stanford, that is concerning. Also no mention that this talk, as good as it is, is 7 years old. There’s been a lot of progress in particle physics and cosmology worth mentioning in that time.
It is true because a great man said so. It is true because a theory was proposed that would give an outcome and that outcome was discovered to be true. It is true because no other explanation exists except the one. The falsies of physics is mind blowing.
"These are the equations that describe electromagnetic forces.You can see that they match these equations..."
But we can't see. We have a wide view of the floor, half the audience, and the speaker, but not the board.
Yet, when we get to his opinion at the end, there's the board!
I've seen these problems with the board, and a laser pointer if the speaker uses one, for many years.
Perhaps your people are happy with how you do this?
"Well, the audience doesn't understand the maths, anyway. After all, this was not the presentation of a paper for a group of theoretical physicists. Why frighten the Public with tensor fields?"
I don't know what you think, really. That was my imagination speaking, as I am still annoyed that I could not see the equation as your speaker referred to it in his brief discussion of Unification. Do you have Director who understands physics? Please show formulae when the speaker speaks of them. In the theoretical stuff, the maths is our only chance to glimpse an understanding, and we can always pause to read the equations, but not if they aren't shown.
What about the newest theories that go deeper than space-time? Objects like the tetrahedron. Supposedly, the permutations of the vertices of the tetrahedron give rise to space-time.
Its as if we continously evolve our ability to understand, to know reality in an increasingly better way. I go back and forth with the words better and truthful. Is the truth equivalent to or better than what benefits us most? I think ultimately truth is best, but for whatever reason we must construct it through an unavoidable filter of subjectivity. So even truth is never without interpretation.
i hated the fact this guy was so interesting while the audience members in the background indicated he was embarrassingly bad with their body language... he obviously has very little experience in the limelight... but I loved his talk... been nice if those people in the back right bottom row hadn't been there and done that... it was distracting
They hit the wall of physics.
Dam, I hate it when then happens. - Quotes from the Salmon Family.
Not yet.
No, how do we know initial inflation has ever happened?
Whichever the design of car tyres, ride it for a year all becomes egg. Likewise the smallest can only be one type.
Hello from Kazakhstan. The Dark Universe requires a lot of money from the budget: an experiment that sheds new light on the Universe will help save costs. We can create an educational and practical device and practically master Einstein’s theories of relativity or obtain, for example, new physics: Postulate 1. Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta. Postulate 2. The gravitational field controls the frequency and speed of light in a vacuum.
This is determined experimentally using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope (based on Michelson's experiment 1881-2024). Using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope, the straight-line speed of vehicles can be measured. There is a company in China that makes (fiber optic angular velocity meter) they will be able to create a hybrid device.
If an apple is falling then u shoot laser at it will the rate of fall change if yes, why? If not, why? But if an atom is falling n u shoot light at it what happens?
Physics is almost done in spacetime.
Gotta step outside ala Nima....
It seems like Nima Arkani-Hamed has important ways of explaining emergence patterns from the quantum field but I can never quite tell what he is referring to before he launches into equations.
Universe-in-Quanta = Light = Electromagnetism ~ Thought ~ 01 GPS ~ Gravitational Propulsion System ~ Gravity = Infinity Squared = Information Systems = Ouroboros ~ 010 Time
Perhaps you're right, but...
You've just given away to the layman the secrets that the best scholars take decades to understand.
Tsk, tsk.
Someone from the Society of Cosmic Dharma Physicists may contact you...
what Tsk stic means? OR
What's the meaning of life, tsk tsk@@davidchildress7150
I took me a millennia to get to connect Quantum Mechanics to the CREATION process, Evolution and entropy. From 0 we com to 01 we go. 010 = Infinity Squared.
Maybe the equation just describes the working mechanics of the LHC
I still have this idea that gluons/strong force is what is currently termed Dark Matter…..
It’s only a weird thought that this tiny, thought-to-be-localized effect, would be “amplified” in places where matter is “clumped together”(in places where galaxies and galactic groups occur.)……
I’m merely a musician who has a deep interest in all things Science !!!!
😊😺💛🎹🎛🎚🎸
LHC will sit on a historical museum.
I have a very cogent theory of everything, very compelling, im not telling anyone though cos it would spoil things.
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.
How can something, a quantum vacuum be called nothing ?
The antinode of something.
@@user-ln9dh2bq8j word salad
What then is a particle? Is it a bundle or persistent vortex in the 3D quantum field just like you can detect similar little vortices in a swimming pool?
The fields are made of particles that interact with each other. The ripples are just the particles moving against each other according to each respective force.
A great presentation 😊 however a bit British centered ( other nationalities over sighted), a bit over optimism ( standard model explain only 4% of Universe) and certainly confusing between Knowing and Believing (Inflation is still a theoretical hypothesis).
It took place at the RI in London.
21:12 I thought we were made of stars lol
What if dark energy and gravity are the same underlying thing and matter changes the function of it from repulsive to attractive?
Cool!
not
If Faraday discovered electromagnetism, why is the unit of measure of an electromagnetic device such as a loading coil or a transformer measured in Henry's? And speaking of Quarks, what happened to the Strange, Charmed, Top and Bottom Quarks?
Henry was the scientist who discovered em induction independently right around the same time Faraday was doing his work and it's (the Henry) a unit of induction over time in the same way a Farad is a measure of capacitance over time and is named for Faraday.
So was there a field before bigbang?
How many at CERN are currently willing to m move to China???
ri déjà vu, still great
If any 1 wants a physics theory that makes all other physics theories obsolete, my theory, matter theory, is for sale, satisfaction guaranteed.
From T.O.E. T. G.U.T.
I'll tell you a better idea. Rather than looking at everything from the lens of a supernova (they happen all the time and create black holes, which lead to galaxies and star formation, not the universe), looking more into the Quantum Fields. Common sense should dictate with the HCB Great Wall, amongst countless other supermassive objects, Lamaitre's theory is bunk.
Todays certainty's are tomorrows ùncertainty's......some remarks border on arrogance
This is clearly Woody Allen's least funny stand up routine...
I took Biology not knowing to get my degree I had to take Organic Chemistry and was blown away at how many compounds are _only_ made by living organisms. I went on to get a degree in Organic Chemistry. I have to wonder if he knows how the 20 amino acids to make a protein all have to be left-handed, just means the Hydrogen atom is on the left side. That's not the new mystery, but the amino acids must be hooked together with the H electron spin down only. We were blown away, many of us knew there had to be quantum processes for life forms and even simple processes to function because we cannot replicate them in the laboratory. Just means we cannot form a protein from scratch. We need Life forms to do that.
So despite hype to the opposite they are no closer to creating Life in the lab than Miller/Urey were in 1953 when they subscribed to the idea that if you just have all the "building blocks of Life" and the right conditions in one place then Life will form. Does electron spin down sound that simple? Here is the kicker, scientists who ought to know better still use the primordial ooze, tide pools or deep sea vents story as the possible birthplace of Life, but they know proteins cannot form underwater.
So much for the reductionist theory for the formation of Life religion. Cannot even define Life let alone how it came to be.
I don't know...ribosomes always looked pretty wet to me. I agree that the hypotheses, at least in their pop-science analogy form are hopelessly reductionist and simplistic. Plants crave Brawndo. It's got electrolytes. Whatever. People are stupid. Proteins are created, they hook up, they fold into absurdly complex shapes, they grab useful stuff and let it go, they screw up and make angry cows. People who are slightly less stupid find this amazing, as you and I do. They study it. They write a paper. An idiot journalist misquotes them and misrepresents their work as solving the mystery of life. Or they themselves make a really bad analogy to try to convey what they are doing. Because people are stupid, and you have to add exciting sounds and explosions. But they're not going to stop trying to refine the current models into better ones. Why should they give up? The blood clotting cascade is like a galaxy of complexity, and is convoluted and redundant. But it's not irreducible. When it ceases to be cool, people will cease trying to explain it. If their work is falsifiable is rigorous, I say go for it. Space chimps were once just science fiction. Now they practically ring the planet. They shoot down asteroids. They don't give a damn about the exclusion principle.
@@amarissimus29 When I say proteins cannot form underwater by piecemeal process. There is no process that can write code without intelligence behind it. You have ID people as diverse as Steven Meyer, a theist, to people like David Berlinski that I'm not sure what he thinks, seems like a halfass agnostic. It doesn't seem to matter to him, he just hates fairy tales masquerading as science. I laughed my ass off when I heard him say that. I'm not sure he believes in Intelligent Design, but he just cannot find something better, but he'll let us know if he does.🤣
I like listening to some of Berlinski's interviews, but as a speaker he could use an injection of enthusiasm. Damn even talking about his own book, The Devil's Delusion at Socrates In The City he sounded bored.He wrote the book as a counter to Dawkins' "sloppy philosophy" in his The God Delusion. To be honest I only ever took one semester of philosophy, PH 101 Art of Critical Thinking.
I told my son to take it and he wouldn't be sorry. He said he started hearing bullshit all over the place afterwards.🤣
“ we need life to form it”. You created a chicken and egg problem. Same problem exists for any supernatural being, be it the Christian God or other. We need life to form that from the knowledge we have today, but the question remains unanswered so this is mere speculation until proven otherwise
@@coolestdude11111True or false?
If something exists now,
then something has always existed.
Psalm 90:1 Lord, you have been our dwelling place throughout all generations. Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
The reason we can conceive the idea that eternity is from everlasting to everlasting is because of the image of God is somehow woven into our very being. It shows a monumental leap of understanding and has been an understanding across cultures and peoples for millenia.
Did you know that the majority of primitive cultures have been Monotheistic?
We exist in one dimension of time, think of the edge of a plane with a second dimension of time. A Being in such a simple state could be eternal.
@@MountainFisherwithout the Bible, you would have no evidence for the existence of the Christian God. Religion is faith based, which means belief without evidence. You claim science is like religion yet no scientist worth there salt is saying we Know how life started. Science evolves based on new evidence. Religion doesn’t because it makes a claim and says it’s true no matter what. Science does not. We show the evidence, and see how accurate our claims are at predicting future actions. If you are claiming God is eternal and everlasting, why can’t the universe also be? Cultures have created thousands of Gods over all of human history to explain the unexplainable, just like you are using religion today. We used to think a god was responsible for the rising and setting of the sun and moon, tides, storms, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, drought, etc. we now know what the cause of most natural phenomena so we no longer attribute a god to them.
Today, many. Christians including you are claiming because science doesn’t have an answer for the origins of life or the universe? It must be God. We simply do not know.
Christianity didn’t exist until a few thousand years ago while humans have existed for ~ 100k years. All those previous humans are damned to hell since they didn’t even know they had to repent? Accept Jesus as their savior, or numerous other things depending on which sect of Christianity you adhere to. The fact there are even different sects of Christianity casts more doubt to me as even the same religion can’t agree as to what precisely we need to do or what God commands. Religion changes to reflect cultural attitudes. Even Christianity has evolved to fit more modern principles because not many would follow Old Testament principles today so the New Testament was created. It’s quite curious most people just so happen to be born into the correct religion as most religious people of any type including Christianity are born into that specific religion.
I am more convinced by the "electric universe" theories that explain things simply and don't require the invention of theoretical things that have never been observed in reality. There is too much of that here. Can you make it all work without it..?
at Cern They hoped to find the meaning of nothingness and they found it
Reality is an information process, set in motion and sustained by God for a purpose. Religion's attempt to explain the purpose no longer works because religious leaders failed to incorporate what science discovers and decode scripture in harmony with what nature teaches. The big problem with scientism is: believers assume the equations describing Reality solve themselves. Looking down into smaller and smaller elements of Reality is like doing the same with the Mandelbrot Set, but a lot more expensive. I suspect the next big breakthrough won't come from a trillion dollar super collider but from a designer trying to make a more real game for a hundred dollar PC.
The Buddha beat them to it by 3000 years." Examine Buddhist iconography and life's fundamental field is displayed in black and white. A two dimensional field.
Nope
It’s so obvious (not).
Life eternally actualizes infinite potential, because only Eternity can fully embrace Infinity.
Everyone already knows all this.
This highlights one of the biggest problems in science. The use of "is" instead of "the best known model" or other qualified language.
Nothing very special about his hand wavy explanations, and there didn't seem to have any point to the talk.
I might be the only one capable of doing the equation of everything, and it is such an annoying chore.... I don't want to do it... yet here I am
Sure😂 I think you forgot to take your medication
Yeah back to bed for nap time lil buddy
@@migkiller49 what medication? since when do you think you know me? maybe you are the one that needs medication
@@alexbenzie6585 I don't know what you are saying, your comment is very weird, what do you mean "back to bed for nap"? so weird, I don't even nap, whatever man...
@@NeroDefogger shhh bb it ok the delusions will go away one day
Like Susskind said about if there are fields or particles...."every serious physicist i know, knows that at the bottom line there are only particles" . I think at least this scientist at this lecture should not speak deterministic and absolute like as his opinions are proved facts, while no one can be sure. Great lecture otherwise.
Prodigy is a great band !!!!!
RIP Keef Flint 💛
If Susskind really did say that, he was most definitely joking. You happen to have a link to wherever you heard him say such a thing?
Physics cannot explain why the building blocks should exist. Even if they could explain the reason behind the existence of the building blocks, they could not explain the reason behind the reason for the existence of the building blocks.
You should not seek the answer from either physicists or priests.
A one-eyed man explained the basic building blocks of reality, this way:
The most basic building blocks are 1) paradox, 2) circular definitions, 3) double negatives,
4) randomness, 5) perversity, caprice, confusion and madness.
I believe that, in my humble opinion, we may one day achieve a conceptual explanation for the foundation of reality. However, it will likely be impossible to prove empirically. The reason is Reality might be holistic from nature, so the smallest and biggest scales are then one and the same.
uProton, dowNeutron
- quark nomenclature
No
Human beings are not fully equipped to understand True Reality.. Accept that we are constructed and designed with limits.. The Divine consciousness will reveal itself in due time.. Connect with the Beautiful Supreme Reality before that happens, in order to succeed
At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.
Jesus never said that!!!
@@johnnywilliams8733 "* [11:25-27] This Q saying, identical with Lk 10:21-22 except for minor variations, introduces a joyous note into this section, so dominated by the theme of unbelief. While the wise and the learned, the scribes and Pharisees, have rejected Jesus’ preaching and the significance of his mighty deeds, the childlike have accepted them. Acceptance depends upon the Father’s revelation, but this is granted to those who are open to receive it and refused to the arrogant. Jesus can speak of all mysteries because he is the Son and there is perfect reciprocity of knowledge between him and the Father; what has been handed over to him is revealed only to those whom he wishes."
Have a lovely day!!!
Keep religion out of science.
I'm pretty sure you have no connection with that guy, whoever he is, but I will ask just to make sure, is there any chance I talk talk to that guy and prove how little he knows about everything?
The universe is not this complicated. The universe is made from just one particle which has 3 states left spin, right spin and no spin.
play @ .85 speed. take a breath buddy
Grand Unification = Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but these intellectuals will never admit it. Sad 😔
dude needs to work on not saying uh.
i believe uhright
Fake enthusiasm
Equations do not "govern" our universe. Equations are man's inventions - they are man's feeble attempt trying to best describe the universe.
What is he talking about? The EU has given 50 billion dollars to Ukraine to get its citizens killed instead of negotiating peace. The US has given Ukraine 100 plus billion dollars for the same and spends 1 trillion dollars a year on "defence" which they don't need. This talk really brings out where are priorities are, starving people all over the world, trillions on weapons to defend ourselves from nothing real.
And think of the grand space telescope swarms we could build for that humanity got their priorities wrong
You are quiet right ❤❤
What is he talking?? What are you talking about? A false equivalence perhaps? Putins apologists are even on physics videos.
Instead of negotiating peace? What does "negotiating peace" look like to you, and how did the EU have the power to prevent negotiations? What does this have to do with this talk?
@@wolfumz he’s one of Putins word salad trolls trying to be an apologist for the war he’s forced onto Europe. These trolls appear literally everywhere, from dog grooming to physic’s lectures.
Little do these aggressor bonded cowards know, people whom are interested in physics are typically much more intelligent than they are.
Dear Professor, quantum vacuum fluctuations occurs because there are laws of Physics in the vacuum space. What would happen if there is no laws of Physics?
We don't know anything
Speak for yourself.
-He said on his computer, made by other people. 😄
It’s better to not know anything than to make stuff up
The more you know, the more you know that you DONT really know anything
@@alexbenzie6585you dont know shit bro stfu
unification theory this is a good analogy for the One Triune God
I love coming to UA-cam for secular discussions of theoretical physics, chemistry, astronomy, geology, biology, evolutionary development, paleontology and genetics, organized by and for scientists, scholars, researchers and science advocates, whose entire careers and, arguably, worldviews, pivot around rational inquiry and objectively geared conclusions defined by empirical observation and carefully controlled experimentation.
Almost inevitably, someone posts a comment obliquely targeted from theological metaphysics toward a diminishment or humbling, replacement or erasure of modern science and the revered model of Baconian scientific method, and a universe whose existence justifies itself, without a god or other religious model of cosmology.
Then a low, angry groan rises from deep within the ancient encephalic impulse I inherited from a thousand thousand generations of evolution--nurturing, testing, shaping, winnowing and generally enabling the compound complex of cerebral cortical reasoning of our species, and intelligence I believe includes deductive and inductive assessment, intuition & counter-intuition, application by multiple subjects of multiple objects, honed by irony, empathy, the concepts of zero & cipher, an irrepressible curiosity for solutions to problems, a reverence for wonder and the far side of every horizon, all bundled under a strange, indecipherable entity we call sapient, volitional, singular & self-aware personhood.
Summarized it might be called secular humanism, an abbreviated name I find wonderful. But it is not metaphysical, religious or theological in any way. I wish so much these discussions could be appreciated for their truth and wonder quotients alone, and not as diving boards from which, or chopping blocks on which, science might be deserted or decapitated by its nemesis--authoritarian, patriarchal, theologically received wisdom as possessed and distributed by a self-selected group of men who have steadily been losing credibility with the world of free thinkers--the billions of human beings now born into liberal, democratic societies populated by highly literate and self-propelled citizens of the world.
Sapere aude--transire suum pectus, mundoque potiri.
Come listen with us to discoveries of science, by scientists, but please resist the urge to evangelize for a god.
Science is not magical beliefs