Archimedes and the Quest for the Theory of Everything

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 9 лют 2025
  • Twenty-three centuries ago Archimedes showed how complicated physical phenomena, such as his Law of Buoyancy, can arise from a few basic assumptions. His seminal work has led to attempts to explain the entire cosmos from a few elementary physical principles. This talk will trace the history of this quest for a Theory of Everything and describe some of the unexpected roadblocks it has encountered in the 21st century.
    Chris Rorres, Ph.D. is Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at Drexel University and Lecturer of Epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Rorres has appeared in many documentaries explaining Archimedes¹ discoveries, inventions, and continuing influence. His web site on Archimedes, established in 1995, is visited by hundreds of thousands of students and scholars each year.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 23

  • @Dlszczech
    @Dlszczech 12 років тому +6

    I used a lot of this information on a college presentation. Thanks!

  • @PetraKann
    @PetraKann 12 років тому +5

    Einstein's biggest mathematical influence when he was formulating his relativity laws was Greek Mathematician Karatheodoris
    “You ask me to answer to all sorts of questions, but noone has ever wanted to know who my teacher was, who showed me the way to higher mathematical science, thought and research. I simply say that my teacher was the unrivalled Greek Konstantinos Karatheodoris, to whom we owe everything…
    (Einstein in the 1950s prior to his death)

  • @TheZENTproductions
    @TheZENTproductions 12 років тому

    Well that was mind blowing.... Who had to watch this for Math Appreciation?

  • @davidmannock3622
    @davidmannock3622 12 років тому +2

    This talk was for generalists and was probably aimed at an undergraduate level audience.While it had interesting historical and philosophical points, to my mind it fell short of the mark. "I do not know, because I do not know", can be interpreted in both subjective and objective frames. From a personal perspective you could say, "I do not know, because I do not know, because I do not know", implying that you as a person do not have the answer.

  • @davidmannock3622
    @davidmannock3622 12 років тому +1

    Axioms. Well, at a simple level of mechanics they are fine, but as we delve deeper and deeper into the unknown using bigger computers we find many systems consist of a series of components forming the whole. For this reason, we may find that there are still basic physical laws to determine the outcome, but that not all of the physical laws have either been accounted for in our model of reality, or that there is a sliding scale in which not all physical laws apply equally in similar circumstances

  • @permanentrecordsvids
    @permanentrecordsvids 12 років тому +3

    54:04 - No physical laws have addressed consciousness, yet we all know we have it ---- first time I heard a science guy admit that.

  • @davidmannock3622
    @davidmannock3622 12 років тому +1

    Speaking for a generation or for all mankind, or simply objectively as one member of the above groups, you may be saying that you do not know yourself, but are not implying that no one in that set or subset does not have a physical answer to the problem. I had understood that the universe was essentially cyclic collapsing, exploding and expanding repeatedly.

  • @davidwilkie9551
    @davidwilkie9551 7 років тому +1

    Some self confirmation of "those who know need no explanation, and for those who declare not to know, no explanation is possible". Murray GellMan is correct, of course.

  • @PoojaDeshpande84
    @PoojaDeshpande84 11 років тому +4

    I personally would have preferred that someone took a small video of the big bang rather than a single picture...

  • @wesleymercer7496
    @wesleymercer7496 11 років тому +1

    Minute marker 34:28 + 2;00min
    Note to self: pay attention to Newton's laws as I reinvestigate Inertia.

  • @davidmannock3622
    @davidmannock3622 12 років тому +1

    Whether you look at life, the universe and everything from the perspective of a Star Trek episode or not, you should realize that mankind has been asking the same questions and dealing with the same political situations and different types of emotions, since we landed from the mother ship. We repeat the same behaviour with every generation. Only the technology changes. We have the ability to learn and adapt, but not the ability to change physical laws. We can only recast them in a new light.

  • @Pinhead101
    @Pinhead101 11 років тому

    thanks for the info. I must google his work

  • @wesleymercer7496
    @wesleymercer7496 11 років тому +1

    My Lord sayeth to me " I think, Therefore I AM."

  • @dedanoe
    @dedanoe 9 років тому +1

    29:00 no no no... the object that sinks in water and the water suppressed occupy same volume and therefore the ratios of their densities are proportional with their weights. w1/r1 = V = w2/r2

  • @davidmannock3622
    @davidmannock3622 12 років тому +1

    Although we view ourselves as physical entities in a physical universe, is consciousness physical? Hmm!

  • @Jahanana19
    @Jahanana19 12 років тому +1

    Anybody else here for math appreciation? I count 2 so far

  • @mannysotojr.5340
    @mannysotojr.5340 10 років тому

    the search continues

  • @dedanoe
    @dedanoe 9 років тому

    the original is: ΤΑ ΜΕΓΕΘΕΑ ΙΣΟΡΡΟΠΕΟΝΤΙ ΑΠΟ ΜΑΚΕΩΝ ΑΝΤΙΠΕΠΟΝΘΟΤΩΣ ΤΟΝ ΑΥΤΟΝ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΕΧΟΝΤΩΝ ΤΟΙΣ ΒΑΡΕΣΙΝ
    my translation is: the things reciprocal by magnitudes exert no imbalance on each other which puts them in equilibrium

  • @annedeane
    @annedeane 11 років тому

    We teach children about Archimedes - Check out the first Overnight Camp Half-Blood: Vancouver, BC/Point Roberts, WA Branch, search under Camp Demigod and join us this summer - Theatrical Combat training by the swords woman who trained the Lord of the Rings actors...

  • @MrAri2008
    @MrAri2008 11 років тому +1

    Hevreka.............

  • @Cordone824
    @Cordone824 12 років тому

    3:55 Archimedes Screw, thank me later

  • @casteight
    @casteight 12 років тому

    HA! Fifth comment