I greatly admire the way Nima's mind works. I would have never been able to fully grasp some of the concepts he discusses, without his unique perspective and creative way of describing properties and concepts, as he so elequantly does. I can relate to him, which maybe the primary reason.
I agree. I was at a dinner at my cousins house and their friend who was there was a Harvard Astrophysicist who would be pacing and talking to himself. It makes sense to me, their minds are always firing but with deep concepts and reflection.
In essence this is the dawning of a brand new foundation to science....a new door is slowly opening.....and the research and the finding are indeed actual. If you notice that research and observations in only 4 dimensional space time is starting to hit a brick wall.....that's a tell tale sign that new branches in science need to open up.....❤
Nima's talk at Harvard SPS entitled "Chilloquium 2022" is reasonable starting place to think about these things with a concrete example. But the lecture I found most useful was back in July 2020 talk at ICTS String Seminars entitled "Spacetime, Quantum Mechanics and Clusterhedra at Infinity". I've had to watch all his recorded lectures on this subject over the last couple of three years - more than once. I don't understand all the maths, but I totally get his ideas now. Anyway, it seems like a very exciting time for us all to live through. Had it not been for the 'pandemic', I probably would never have had the opportunity to view these lectures. Mind you, I struggled with QM for years before this, there is so much terrible information out there, even from the physicists, that a layman can become totally confused by it. Lubos Motl, Anton Zeilinger, and Nima are all people who who get QM and can cut through the noise.
What a stupid comment. How do you know he has a deep insight. Nobody understands quantum mechanics. Unless you've made a break through. Please explain.
I completely agree, I think was Richard Feynman who once commented somewhat dryly that, "Anyone who thinks they understand Quantum Mechanics doesn't." There's nothing new here at all, nothing that hasn't already been well covered by people like Lee Smolin, (and many others,) in his excellent book, The Trouble with Physics. It's all very well jumping up and down, (and doing the eccentric scientist, "thing," to the hilt,) shouting we're on the verge of a great breakthrough we must be. The problems are real and well understood even by many laymen but neither of the two main approaches String Theory, (untestable by experiment,) and Quantum Loop Gravity seem to be taking things much further or to offer any such breakthrough. The discoveries, (basically just the Higgs boson,) at CERN and LHC have been to say the least, disappointing compared to what we were promised and again non of them seems to take things much if any further in explaining stuff like why there are no left handed Neutrinos, Dark matter and Dark energy and so on and so on.....................................
This guy is fantastic. What I like the most about his lectures is the simplicity in explaning the things that are hard to comprehend even for the most brilliant minds of our time, in a way that it can be understood even by a simple mind like my own. I enjoyed every second of this video.
Hey, I'm sure your mind is more complex and capable then you let on. You've communicated clearly without misspelling several words or jumbling ideas together. Quantum mechanics runs opposite and certainly contrary to our normal human intuition and thus one must develop a new set of senses to properly conceptualize/visualize what's going on. You should look up Leonard Susskind at Standford and his lectures theyve put online. He's really a master teacher of physics and math. I'm completely self educated and, as far as classical physics, have really developed an understanding that is simply not available on these trash popular science videos on UA-cam. "hey, I know! People are too stupid to understand the concept of inflation or a singularity so how about we explain it in terms of pepperoni pizza and ice cream! It'll be completely fuckin wrong but who cares!" - youtube popularizers of science
Me too! When you understand things so well, that you can stand in front of an audience of hundreds of people, to deliver such deep topics, with such a casual and natural manner, demonstrates a practical grasp and truly deep understanding, which would be appreciated by anyone with even a vague interest in such concepts.
Nima's best talk currently on UA-cam, for a "primed" general audience, which addresses these fundamental concerns in survey fashion, I think. This address is tighter & leaner, flows better, and fills in some gaps previously left unattended to, again and again (alas), in a way that makes Nima's argument more lucid in practical terms. Much less stuttering about, "um-um-um"-ing, and fewer hand waving gestures, too, than previously typical -- all to the good. I'd point others here first if you are recommending Nima to a friend with a good general background knowledge in the physical sciences who might be interested in these topics. It's good, too, to see that Nima has apparently managed to stay slimmed down for awhile now. I probably won't be here to get the professor's take on these matters 25-30 years hence, but I feel a bit more optimistic about others getting the chance.
Frederick J. .....Hey judge and jury, Try to be less critical. These guys can’t all be out of some cookie-cutter. They may have some, or much, of the same information, but they still think and act differently. Different genes; not robots. I’d rather each is able to be himself, rather than worry about whether the critical public is counting hm’s, um’s and ahs.
Nima Arkani-Hamed is a genius! Thank you! The intent herein is to offer for consideration, in the context of this talk, a new definition of space consistent with the CIG Theory, which has already offered a new definition of Matter. That new definition of Matter is: That which has mass, consists of the curvature of space-time and has an element of motion. While the current definition of space in its simplest form customarily is: "a boundless three-dimensional extent in which objects and events occur and have relative position and direction" As can be seen, since we have redefined Matter in the context of the curvature of space-time, we must also redefine "Space" as well, herein and as best I can, as follows: Space is that three dimensional extent in which objects and their events occur, wherein those objects of Matter are they themselves curved space-time, wherein the aforementioned space consists of and emerges via the unfolding of that Matter into various volumes and densities of Space by way of opportunistic rates of motion of Matter. In it's simpler form, Space is unfolded Matter, emergent from rates of motion. That's it and if I come up with a better definition or if someone else would like a try in the context of CIG Theory, please have a go at it. In this manner, a particle can become spatial and go through both slits in the double slit experiment. Any replies? Nima is the best.
El Shaddai means God Almighty in Hebrew It comes from the Hebrew word shad which means mountain The Arabic word for mountain is sana Sana means thread of summer in Japanese Sana means eternity in Sanskrit The Ancient Jews believed that the earth(cosmos in Greek) was flat Albert Einstein modeled the cosmos with an infinite flat sheet of space/time A black hole is an infinite pit in space/time An infinite mountain in space/time would be an infinite white hole. Dark Energy and Dark Matter can be explained by finite quantum spinning white holes(tachyons) that exist for a few planck instances. Some scientists believe that the big bang was a white hole If God is an infinite white hole than the Father would be the infinite singularity of the white hole, the Son would be the infinite tachyon, and the Holy Spirit would be the infinite tachyonic wave(space) Space does not expand: The cosmos is shrinking while space is constant. This means that the speed of light is shrinking each planck instant in a way that makes it appear constant If the cosmos is shrinking then the density of energy is increasing. This means that all energy will become a black hole because of Schwarzschild radius The beginning of the big bang had 0 entropy which means 100% of the universe was light The universe now has less than 5% light Conclusion the 3 dimensional cosmos is inbetween an infinite infinitely dimensional white hole and an infinite 0 dimensional black hole. (Taegeuk) Good does not need evil to exist Black Holes are not eternal because of Hawking radiation If you don't abide in Jesus Christ you will be deleted You have the choice to be loved everlastingly or to suffer infinite entropy as your last memory that seems forever because 0 time is eternal to a tachyon Please choose the Perfect Agape of God.
I admire Nima always, but I pay particular attention to when he says, “We don’t know.” Hey Nima, you should just read the UTUBE comments to find your missing information. There are people here who know it all !
+Shirley Mason Good one! But, in our hearts, we know that what is "broken" by the "collider" is energy. Quantum energy is measured how? Space/Time theory does not explain gravity -- that, as mentioned is "dead". We can discuss the "mass" as the total energy of the body; e.g., the Earth or Moon, and measure the gravity when the electric forces are the unit of measure.
+Lindsay Forbes Yes, the energy which is transported to the "City" is "Dark", and is only observed when it accomplishes "Work". Ergs, Joules, Watts :) What lights the Milky Way? The combined energy of every single atomic particle of our individual existence, along with the mass of the Earth, our Sun and Solar System; combined with the spiraling energy of our "Local Group", join with all the rest of the star systems that are 'lighted' to show the Dark Energy's passage into, and which lights the center of our galaxy. That is the "Power" and the return "Currents" magnetically stabilize the various systems spiraling in those orbits, with all the rest. Whatever "Chaos" our system encounters has been encountered untold numbers of times in the past, and will be so in the future that we, "Ants" can conceive ...
OK. Let's start with the basics. 1) Let's say that we exist within a 4D environment called Space-Time(ST), and that everything within this ST is constantly on the move with a "c" magnitude of motion. Thus if your direction of travel was set to be across space only, rather than being across both space and time, or across just time, your speed would be measured as being the speed of light, aka "c". 2) We are always confined to the present time, or real time. Thus we are 3D entities. However, we exist within a 4D environment. Laws of physics must also exist outside of our present time, but they would be different from those that we are familiar with, since they would include extension across time. Thus outside of our present time, events would be 4 dimensional. Funny enough, if you analyze the outcome of 1 & 2, you end up with 1) Einstein's Special Relativity phenomena, and 2) You end up with all of the strange quantum mechanics effects.
+NEWKNOWLEDGE Well, first we have to define our terms. Let's start with "Space"? What is its definition, in the absence of matter/mass? If "Space" is curved outside of a mass, then what is "Space" composed of that can be curved by the presence of a mass? How did Einstein form the putative "Space/Time Continuum" in a Universe that was empty of all mass (Ric=0)? What is "Time" as an entity? "Time" is the *measure* of duration -- and "Duration" is a convenient concept of Human kind, and not an object, like a hammer, per se. Besides that, what "Time" can exist in an empty Universe, and no distance or real process to measure seconds, minutes, hours or any measure of reality with only empty space, and no instrument to tell time ... Even in our 3D Universe, there is no "Time", and as you mentioned -- there is only *NOW!* No "4D environment." Funny, about laws-of-physics being "outside" of our *NOW. :)* You must be talking about the *TAO* and that others refer to as *GOD* and about those *LAWS OF OUTSIDE?* Remember Pascal's Wager, and stay safe ...!
Interesting man, interesting topic. Capable of explaining very complicated areas of physics so that anyone can sort of understand. It seems like every time I watch one of these lectures when the camera pans out to audience the average age of people attending these kinds lectures has to be at least 60 years old. Personally I'm 62 so I would fit right in age wise at least with the audiences. There is at least one exception to this: Richard Feynman's audiences were very young. This could have something to do with the fact, however, that a lot of his lectures were given to students trying to pass one of his physics courses so perhaps this doesn't really count as an exception. But it makes me wonder why young people are, on average not very interested in physics.
In between 1:10 and 1:11 he said while he could state the geometrical problem to a high school student, he wouldn’t expect the student to solve it, as he hadn’t been able to solve it. I didn’t hear him state the problem. What’s the geometric problem to be solved?
I like the metaphor of reaching base camp. If paradox is intrinsic to rational qua empirical analysis, it too may need to be let go, along with space time, prior to an attempt for the summit, all things being equal.
to encapsulate this without wandering about "Proving " every detail, and then moving forward with some clarified hypothesis would be effective method of making some point, other than chasing red herrings across the sea of mathematical equations and formulas. is my observation.
I hope Nima Arkani-Hamed realizes what a badass he is. I don't think there's any chance of it going to his head- these ideas are so enormous that humility is sort of forced upon you, no matter how smart you are.
It is not Einstein's ideas. Those ideas belong to Lorentz and Pioncare. Their misguided interpretation belongs to Minkowski. Einstein copied all of them.
Fully understanding of the space and universes, has to be explained by different types of tools ⚒️ which we have available to used them to bring the enough sense’s to the subjects, which we are talking about.
Allow me to also couple a few things in a loose manner. Amplitude relates to the volume of this modified Feynman diagram. What happens to the circumference of the circle when the volume doubles? You know, holographic universe and stuff?
What's new in this talk is two real particles produce two other real particle, while what's going on in the point of contact, called the virtual box, involves combinatorics of white and black vertex points. Interesting insight, but how the foundations of QM are not shaken by dark matter and energy remains unexplained.
I have a DUMB question concerning all these super collider experiments. when they smash two protons together in these enormous energy head-on collisions how can they know what came out of the process were particles that were inside the protons? How do they know that the particles themselves were not created out of the energy that they put in to the collisions and not particles that were composed of the protons themselves?
Since all particles made of mater are made of energy and we don''t really know what energy is; this is NOT a dumb question. I hope some day we find better methods and answers.
The phenomenon of resonance is most likely where we will find answers to the most intractable problems. Concerning the question of what happened before the Big Bang, there is no known law which prohibits a resonating wave from spontaneously appearing in the quantum soup. In fact, as the quantum soup has no time or space, the spontaneous appearance of a resonance wave in the soup must be expected from shear randomness.
An E8 crystal, made of metamaterial i.e. nanodiamond with nitrogen voids, may be able to recreate the pre-Big Bang resonance frequency. I predict that such a crystal may allow us to open up a parallel universe, or trigger a Big Bang like event, or create energy/mass in a controlled way.
Best Hamed talk yet. Is it me or does positive geometry/amplituhedron concepts map on to Anirban Bandyopadhyay's FIT/GML (Fractal Information Theory from Geometric Music Language) with all the triangulated geometric singularities combining QM/GTR?
Thank you Nima, for giving some of us more to ponder in this area. Still trying to get my head round space /time and inside/outside of same. Will let you know when I've got it all figured out. Meanwhile thanks for a great lecture.
electricity does, the electron, which is a particle, but why would anyone, or thing in the natural world move harder, longer, or more complicated than necessary. Unless you count the three guys who change a lightbulb, one to hold the bulb, and two to spin him around.
He oversimplifies "quantum tells us there's no determinism" end of story. But quantum just shows us we can't predict a fixed future. It doesn't mean the future is not fixed. Determinism arises from either/and time dilation, or simultaneity in relativity - both point to determinism and don't work without it. It's also not clockwork determinism, it's 4dimensional structure determinism.
Okay..... we exists within a 4D environment known as Space-Time, however we are also confined to the "NOW" time, thus we are confined to a mere 3D reality. So you have two realities. One is 3D, and the other is 4D. And on top of that, you obviously end up with two different sets of laws of physics. Take the famous 2 slit light experiment for instance. Which set of laws of physics are in control of the experiment, is what determines whether you will see particle behaviour occur, or wave behaviour. And of course the 4D space-time reality, and its own set of laws of physics, also explains things such the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment, and its results that were witnessed in 1999.
It seems like a lot of incorrect conclusions can be drawn from a flawed set of axioms, using a flawless mathematical method. And don't anyone dare suggest he's building perfect houses on sand. He knows everything, don't you know... Typical physics type.
So now we are finding what Plato knew, that geometry was the key to unlocking the secrets of the universe. We are also finding that the geometric nature of the theory of the amplituhedron suggests that the nature of the universe may be described with geometry, and that space and time are emergent from this geometry. This has been known since ancient times through what now know as sacred geometry and other esoteric knowledge. This universe arose from information from math and geometry, this goes to show that our physical world is a virtual reality simulation that is not fundamental. This geometry is somehow vibrating as it is the medium for light or photons, matter then is condensed light that is vibrating slower. Among many others that have seen this hidden geometry and math or hidden variables are: Steven Kaufman, Brian Whitworth, Jason Padgett, David Bohm, Buckminster Fuller, Nikola Tesla, and Nassim Haramein, Tom Campbell
So it is not the end of space-time rather another starting of another space-time idea as your conclusion. However when a vibration start then time start too in this case vibration is gravity its need medium which is space-time.we can give another name of space-time but effect is same
In "The Future of Fundamental Physics -- Nima Arkani-Hamed -- Cornell Messenger Lectures" hr say that two spaceships accelerating to light speed with a cable between them that the cable would snap. This contraction is in the direction of acceleration, so if these spaces ships were traveling side by side, it would not snap. I am sure he knows this. If one were following the other hr would be correct. He should have made this clear.
The idea that quantum and the fundamental physics of the universe need to be combined as one, may be the incorrect type of thinking. Its possible that they do have different rules and I see nothing wrong about that. Quantum could be just another layer of physics with different properties and rules. We just don't have the tools to examine and understand Quantum.
Bud Bradley The problem is, where do you define the crossover between the quantum and gravitational regimes? And How do you describe phenomena that occur at very high energy densities, where both space-time distortions (high energy and quantum mechanics (small scales) are relevant?
+Bud Bradley - Along with +John Smith's argument please note "connections" between what at first appeared to be "different" but were actually deeper dives aka Emergent relationships. Take Newton, it would be all well and good to say leave that as a distinct "system" because it works great for rocket and planet motion, etc. But when it comes to clock variance with gravity Newton can't help you out - but Einstein saw the relationship. Other examples abound in Thermodynamics, and other "systems." Einsteins equations aren't needed to calculate firing cannon balls, but go a long way toward understanding how to keep GPS accurate due to satellite velocity, difference in gravitational attraction, and the fact Earth is not gravitationally homogenous due to differences in density (affects orbit perturbation) we have a viable easy to understand "system." Short cuts are used all the time to design practical items like buildings, cars, radios and TV's, but they won't tell you why Pi is an irrational *non-repeating* number, why in electronics the square root of negative 1 (an otherwise impossible number to arrive at in the course of every day experience) *just works*, or why the natural logarithm *appears* to constrain biological systems. Physicists are driven to understand why the relationship between quantum mechanics, gravity, and time can be defined but not cross correlated. Just like the search for the Higg's Boson - it made a lot sense it should exist, but until it was discovered affected reliance on any particular theory why constituent "particles" had mass and the masses measured. Hope this helps...
The trouble is one rule set describes a completely different universe than the other, and yet they're supposed to describe the same universe. To make it concise: Indeterminism eventually bubbles up (even if one would like to pretend it conveniently stays on its own "layer"). This philosophically undermines the whole system and that's why almost no serious physicists are comfortable with the separation.
Shouldn't tiny black holes evaporate? Measuring the remains would surely be a landmark! Hawking - Susskind debate all over again! Maybe the information can be resolved from the aftermath.
Micro Hadron collider at the microscopic level is the first thing I would think of several powerful tools that we have on the shelf for the next generation Hadron collider.
1:17:46 After well over an hour of concentrated effort by Dr. Arkani-Hamed, first questioner out of the box reveals that he doesn't even understand that the title of the lecture was meant figuratively and not literally. Ouch.
I had a total of 3 questions which i made at the beginning of the lecture just by looking at the title. I knew the content of the lecture expect for the part where he mentioned combinatorics. My other 2 questions were little more technical which i asked him outside the hall & that was about co-relating Quantum spin of a particle to string field theory & how it speculates or explains through feynmann diagram? & can spacetime be discrete? LQG is taking that approach to understand Quantum gravity. I didn't want to go too technical & too over the topic but I wasn't too off. Also i wanted him shed some light on Entropy, Spacetime & QM.
The Thumbnail for the video is a bit weird, so i've first read "The End of Spartacus" , my bad I guess, but im here either way. P.S. Hm interesting concepts , I guess he is right about coming on to the hard problems from a different angle, yea very interesting.
Would it be possible to measure inside a black hole by creating it with particles that are all entangled with a partner and then measure properties of the partners outside the black hole? It is not understood how the mind affect the collapse of the quantum mechanical wave function, I think.
John Długosz very similar to his Messenger Lectures from a few years ago. Instead of complaining, pick up some math and try to help move the ball farther down the field!
How did you operationally measure that they're complaining? I'm asking since science is, like, totally awesome or whatever and that experiment is the final arbiter of truth or something.
@Bob Trenwith lol snowflake, please don't cry when glib remarks are met with glib remarks. After all, such a response is perfectly conformant with the nature, or if u prefer, the genetic defect, of "free world" speech. Strange that ur not used to it yet, boi, u seem the type perfect for the receiving end
@@N0Xa880iUL Lamestream cosmology is 100% fiction and 0% truth. The only thing it gets right is that the universe is expanding. Beyond that there is no figure or fact they get right.
@@brendawilliams8062 If you want precise calculations based on scientific principles, instead of metaphysical nonsense (which you get from the mainstream), you have to come to me. The internet mediocrity principle however dictates that you will shrug off my comment as nonsense. Internet IDs could solve that problem.
@@SkyDarmos you are a scientist! Congratulations. I explore pi. I have a numbers theory addiction. I am not a scientist. Thankyou. Your channel looks great.
At 3:45 Dr Arkani-Hamed says that physics is either 400 or 2000 years old, depending on where you start counting. Newton was 400 years ago. Is he referring to Euclid as the beginning of physics 2000 years ago? Euclid was a physicist? Interesting idea.
Usually particle physicists are referring to Democritus as he was the first recorded person to come up with the theory that the world is made from indivisible particles (i.e. particle physics) which he called "atoms".
Chris: but that is a specific theory of physics, not physics as field, Thales is the one to be credited for the development of physics as research of nature in an empirical and non-mythological way. Of course he could have got precursors but they remain unknown. Aristotle himself considered Thales to be "the first philosopher", i.e. what we now call "scientist". His main work was in the fields of geometry and astronomy, conceptualization of causality and ultimate origin (arché). Of course he was a pioneer, so some of his ideas, such as "water" being the principle of it all, sound now weird, loosely magical and obsolete, but so does much of "science" before Descartes. Democritus is two centuries more recent than Thales, who lived around 500 BCE, so he should be more advanced, just as Einstein is compared to Newton.
Thanks Luis, Just to be clear I wasn't arguing for Democritus being a better choice than Thales I was just saying that he is the traditional choice of particle physicists.
Only in the Copenhagen interpretation determinism is gone. There is no evidence that it is the right interpretation. It's just the most comfortable one.
Could we be in a Hadron collider all ready they said that there is a radiation like bubble on the outer most spacecraft we sent out reported a high heating and radioactive energy that surrounds our solar system. We wouldn't know if we were going near the speed of light all ready and to go the speed of light is to stand still.lol
Im a chemist and pretty well rounded in science overall, but I dont understand this stuff at all :O. And he goes to say a high schooler should understand this XD
Sorry, but i'm not convinced at all by the talk ! The lecture is quite long but with very few explanations. He said interesting things but that could have been summed up in15 minutes. Top ! His presentation is voluntarily cheap in "genius mode" : "You know, I'm a genius, a pure spirit so I'm above materials things !" His page on Wikipedia is rather thin.
He should write a book but he thinks it's a waste of time. it's not, u might not find the holy grail but u might be able to inspire the next person to find it.
That would require a cohesive thought that can span several hundred pages. It seems his desire for making these speeches is in trying to figure out the purpose of his life's work. I don't think he has a clear path right now and is only slowly coming to grips with the fact that String Theory is, in fact, a dead-end path.
Why does he say the size of the observable universe is 10 billion light years when the diameter is actually 93 billion light years? He just failed physics 101.
This guy literally adds nothing new. His talk about "end of spacetime" is bs. I watched a bunch of his lectures and the only thing he does is give a lecture in history of what we already know. He just talks and talks and never clearly states his thing about the end of spacetime. Maybe I'm wrong
Quantum entanglement of all proton in universe via gravity make uncertainty in QM by h/(2*3.14)=g*(2.17*10^-8)^2/c, dynamic space time from Planck to proton scale create strong force by quantum black hole of proton from 8.85*10^-16=4.18*(6.67*10^-11)*((2.17*10^-8)/(1.67*10*10^-27))^2*(1.67*10^-27)/(299792458)^2.
I think that the young girl sitting in the first row eating candy somehow knows that in just five, or maybe six decades, that all of these other annoying people will finally, at last be gone.
Some people are just so smart that their brain thinks way too fast to even speak....this guy is one of those people.
I greatly admire the way Nima's mind works. I would have never been able to fully grasp some of the concepts he discusses, without his unique perspective and creative way of describing properties and concepts, as he so elequantly does. I can relate to him, which maybe the primary reason.
I agree. I was at a dinner at my cousins house and their friend who was there was a Harvard Astrophysicist who would be pacing and talking to himself. It makes sense to me, their minds are always firing but with deep concepts and reflection.
In essence this is the dawning of a brand new foundation to science....a new door is slowly opening.....and the research and the finding are indeed actual. If you notice that research and observations in only 4 dimensional space time is starting to hit a brick wall.....that's a tell tale sign that new branches in science need to open up.....❤
Nima's talk at Harvard SPS entitled "Chilloquium 2022" is reasonable starting place to think about these things with a concrete example. But the lecture I found most useful was back in July 2020 talk at ICTS String Seminars entitled "Spacetime, Quantum Mechanics and Clusterhedra at Infinity". I've had to watch all his recorded lectures on this subject over the last couple of three years - more than once. I don't understand all the maths, but I totally get his ideas now. Anyway, it seems like a very exciting time for us all to live through. Had it not been for the 'pandemic', I probably would never have had the opportunity to view these lectures. Mind you, I struggled with QM for years before this, there is so much terrible information out there, even from the physicists, that a layman can become totally confused by it. Lubos Motl, Anton Zeilinger, and Nima are all people who who get QM and can cut through the noise.
Thanks for recommending this!
I appreciate the titles. I’ll check them out.
This man is absolutely incredible. Extraordinarily deep insights and yet extremely humble.
Great talk!
What a stupid comment. How do you know he has a deep insight. Nobody understands quantum mechanics. Unless you've made a break through. Please explain.
@@74wrighty everyone has their own interest and they may be different then answering a video question.
@@74wrighty I agree, your comment is stupid.
I completely agree, I think was Richard Feynman who once commented somewhat dryly that, "Anyone who thinks they understand Quantum Mechanics doesn't."
There's nothing new here at all, nothing that hasn't already been well covered by people like Lee Smolin, (and many others,) in his excellent book, The Trouble with Physics.
It's all very well jumping up and down, (and doing the eccentric scientist, "thing," to the hilt,) shouting we're on the verge of a great breakthrough we must be.
The problems are real and well understood even by many laymen but neither of the two main approaches String Theory, (untestable by experiment,) and Quantum Loop Gravity seem to be taking things much further or to offer any such breakthrough.
The discoveries, (basically just the Higgs boson,) at CERN and LHC have been to say the least, disappointing compared to what we were promised and again non of them seems to take things much if any further in explaining stuff like why there are no left handed Neutrinos, Dark matter and Dark energy and so on and so on.....................................
This guy is fantastic. What I like the most about his lectures is the simplicity in explaning the things that are hard to comprehend even for the most brilliant minds of our time, in a way that it can be understood even by a simple mind like my own. I enjoyed every second of this video.
Hey, I'm sure your mind is more complex and capable then you let on. You've communicated clearly without misspelling several words or jumbling ideas together. Quantum mechanics runs opposite and certainly contrary to our normal human intuition and thus one must develop a new set of senses to properly conceptualize/visualize what's going on. You should look up Leonard Susskind at Standford and his lectures theyve put online. He's really a master teacher of physics and math. I'm completely self educated and, as far as classical physics, have really developed an understanding that is simply not available on these trash popular science videos on UA-cam.
"hey, I know! People are too stupid to understand the concept of inflation or a singularity so how about we explain it in terms of pepperoni pizza and ice cream! It'll be completely fuckin wrong but who cares!" - youtube popularizers of science
I'm happy for you but I do not understand anything.
Me too! When you understand things so well, that you can stand in front of an audience of hundreds of people, to deliver such deep topics, with such a casual and natural manner, demonstrates a practical grasp and truly deep understanding, which would be appreciated by anyone with even a vague interest in such concepts.
Ditto: I always enjoy hearing Nima. His enthusiasm is part of the reason.
As a graphic designer, I love that he just took photos of his whiteboard and nothing else no silly ppt presentation.
Nima's best talk currently on UA-cam, for a "primed" general audience, which addresses these fundamental concerns in survey fashion, I think. This address is tighter & leaner, flows better, and fills in some gaps previously left unattended to, again and again (alas), in a way that makes Nima's argument more lucid in practical terms. Much less stuttering about, "um-um-um"-ing, and fewer hand waving gestures, too, than previously typical -- all to the good.
I'd point others here first if you are recommending Nima to a friend with a good general background knowledge in the physical sciences who might be interested in these topics.
It's good, too, to see that Nima has apparently managed to stay slimmed down for awhile now. I probably won't be here to get the professor's take on these matters 25-30 years hence, but I feel a bit more optimistic about others getting the chance.
Frederick J. .....Hey judge and jury, Try to be less critical. These guys can’t all be out of some cookie-cutter. They may have some, or much, of the same information, but they still think and act differently. Different genes; not robots. I’d rather each is able to be himself, rather than worry about whether the critical public is counting hm’s, um’s and ahs.
Yeah , 78 has 13 steps. He has his own personal take. Wonderful lecturer.
I agree.
Nima Arkani-Hamed is a genius! Thank you!
The intent herein is to offer for consideration, in the context of this talk, a new definition of space consistent with the CIG Theory, which has already offered a new definition of Matter.
That new definition of Matter is: That which has mass, consists of the curvature of space-time and has an element of motion.
While the current definition of space in its simplest form customarily is:
"a boundless three-dimensional extent in which objects and events occur and have relative position and direction"
As can be seen, since we have redefined Matter in the context of the curvature of space-time, we must also redefine "Space" as well, herein and as best I can, as follows:
Space is that three dimensional extent in which objects and their events occur, wherein those objects of Matter are they themselves curved space-time, wherein the aforementioned space consists of and emerges via the unfolding of that Matter into various volumes and densities of Space by way of opportunistic rates of motion of Matter. In it's simpler form, Space is unfolded Matter, emergent from rates of motion.
That's it and if I come up with a better definition or if someone else would like a try in the context of CIG Theory, please have a go at it.
In this manner, a particle can become spatial and go through both slits in the double slit experiment.
Any replies?
Nima is the best.
It always makes my day to see a new Nima talk on UA-cam!
a real treat.
There aren’t many ways I’d rather spend my Friday evening.
El Shaddai means God Almighty in Hebrew
It comes from the Hebrew word shad which means mountain
The Arabic word for mountain is sana
Sana means thread of summer in Japanese
Sana means eternity in Sanskrit
The Ancient Jews believed that the earth(cosmos in Greek) was flat
Albert Einstein modeled the cosmos with an infinite flat sheet of space/time
A black hole is an infinite pit in space/time
An infinite mountain in space/time would be an infinite white hole.
Dark Energy and Dark Matter can be explained by finite quantum spinning white holes(tachyons) that exist for a few planck instances.
Some scientists believe that the big bang was a white hole
If God is an infinite white hole than the Father would be the infinite singularity of the white hole, the Son would be the infinite tachyon, and the Holy Spirit would be the infinite tachyonic wave(space)
Space does not expand: The cosmos is shrinking while space is constant. This means that the speed of light is shrinking each planck instant in a way that makes it appear constant
If the cosmos is shrinking then the density of energy is increasing.
This means that all energy will become a black hole because of Schwarzschild radius
The beginning of the big bang had 0 entropy which means 100% of the universe was light
The universe now has less than 5% light
Conclusion the 3 dimensional cosmos is inbetween an infinite infinitely dimensional white hole and an infinite 0 dimensional black hole. (Taegeuk)
Good does not need evil to exist
Black Holes are not eternal because of Hawking radiation
If you don't abide in Jesus Christ you will be deleted
You have the choice to be loved everlastingly or to suffer infinite entropy as your last memory that seems forever because 0 time is eternal to a tachyon
Please choose the Perfect Agape of God.
Great talk. Intriguing to imagine how Space-Time locality can be reduced to a special case of a more fundamental concept ..
I admire Nima always, but I pay particular attention to when he says, “We don’t know.” Hey Nima, you should just read the UTUBE comments to find your missing information. There are people here who know it all !
+Shirley Mason Good one! But, in our hearts, we know that what is "broken" by the "collider" is energy. Quantum energy is measured how? Space/Time theory does not explain gravity -- that, as mentioned is "dead". We can discuss the "mass" as the total energy of the body; e.g., the Earth or Moon, and measure the gravity when the electric forces are the unit of measure.
Got a good idea about Dark Energy 😎
+Lindsay Forbes Yes, the energy which is transported to the "City" is "Dark", and is only observed when it accomplishes "Work". Ergs, Joules, Watts :) What lights the Milky Way?
The combined energy of every single atomic particle of our individual existence, along with the mass of the Earth, our Sun and Solar System; combined with the spiraling energy of our "Local Group", join with all the rest of the star systems that are 'lighted' to show the Dark Energy's passage into, and which lights the center of our galaxy. That is the "Power" and the return "Currents" magnetically stabilize the various systems spiraling in those orbits, with all the rest.
Whatever "Chaos" our system encounters has been encountered untold numbers of times in the past, and will be so in the future that we, "Ants" can conceive ...
OK. Let's start with the basics.
1) Let's say that we exist within a 4D environment called Space-Time(ST), and that everything within this ST is constantly on the move with a "c" magnitude of motion. Thus if your direction of travel was set to be across space only, rather than being across both space and time, or across just time, your speed would be measured as being the speed of light, aka "c".
2) We are always confined to the present time, or real time. Thus we are 3D entities. However, we exist within a 4D environment. Laws of physics must also exist outside of our present time, but they would be different from those that we are familiar with, since they would include extension across time. Thus outside of our present time, events would be 4 dimensional.
Funny enough, if you analyze the outcome of 1 & 2, you end up with 1) Einstein's Special Relativity phenomena, and 2) You end up with all of the strange quantum mechanics effects.
+NEWKNOWLEDGE Well, first we have to define our terms. Let's start with "Space"? What is its definition, in the absence of matter/mass? If "Space" is curved outside of a mass, then what is "Space" composed of that can be curved by the presence of a mass? How did Einstein form the putative "Space/Time Continuum" in a Universe that was empty of all mass (Ric=0)?
What is "Time" as an entity? "Time" is the *measure* of duration -- and "Duration" is a convenient concept of Human kind, and not an object, like a hammer, per se. Besides that, what "Time" can exist in an empty Universe, and no distance or real process to measure seconds, minutes, hours or any measure of reality with only empty space, and no instrument to tell time ...
Even in our 3D Universe, there is no "Time", and as you mentioned -- there is only *NOW!* No "4D environment." Funny, about laws-of-physics being "outside" of our *NOW. :)* You must be talking about the *TAO* and that others refer to as *GOD* and about those *LAWS OF OUTSIDE?*
Remember Pascal's Wager, and stay safe ...!
😇 Say thanks to you for your unique video, it truly is much valued and I really value your hard work !👍
Interesting man, interesting topic. Capable of explaining very complicated areas of physics so that anyone can sort of understand. It seems like every time I watch one of these lectures when the camera pans out to audience the average age of people attending these kinds lectures has to be at least 60 years old. Personally I'm 62 so I would fit right in age wise at least with the audiences. There is at least one exception to this: Richard Feynman's audiences were very young. This could have something to do with the fact, however, that a lot of his lectures were given to students trying to pass one of his physics courses so perhaps this doesn't really count as an exception. But it makes me wonder why young people are, on average not very interested in physics.
Well that was easy to understand.
I love the thumbnail. Like he’s calling his shot like babe Ruth
Yea, another Nima lecture. Thanks for sharing.
In between 1:10 and 1:11 he said while he could state the geometrical problem to a high school student, he wouldn’t expect the student to solve it, as he hadn’t been able to solve it. I didn’t hear him state the problem. What’s the geometric problem to be solved?
Same! The equation below was a hint but still not enough
Scatter amplitude
I like the metaphor of reaching base camp. If paradox is intrinsic to rational qua empirical analysis, it too may need to be let go, along with space time, prior to an attempt for the summit, all things being equal.
Don Hoffman approves
Haha
You had me at triangle. You lost me after triangle.
to encapsulate this without wandering about "Proving " every detail, and then moving forward with some clarified hypothesis would be effective method of making some point, other than chasing red herrings across the sea of mathematical equations and formulas. is my observation.
"The End of Spacetime" finally, now bury it, deep.
I hope Nima Arkani-Hamed realizes what a badass he is. I don't think there's any chance of it going to his head- these ideas are so enormous that humility is sort of forced upon you, no matter how smart you are.
It is not Einstein's ideas. Those ideas belong to Lorentz and Pioncare. Their misguided interpretation belongs to Minkowski. Einstein copied all of them.
Fully understanding of the space and universes, has to be explained by different types of tools ⚒️ which we have available to used them to bring the enough sense’s to the subjects, which we are talking about.
Allow me to also couple a few things in a loose manner.
Amplitude relates to the volume of this modified Feynman diagram.
What happens to the circumference of the circle when the volume
doubles?
You know, holographic universe and stuff?
When the volume of a sphere doubles, it's diameter increases by 2^(1/3).
When the area of a circle doubles it's circumference increases by 2^(1/2).
What a genial physicist Nima
What's new in this talk is two real particles produce two other real particle, while what's going on in the point of contact, called the virtual box, involves combinatorics of white and black vertex points. Interesting insight, but how the foundations of QM are not shaken by dark matter and energy remains unexplained.
dark matter is a big problem I guess
Slow down playback speed to 0.75. Much easier to follow.
Yesss this is more my speed lol
Thanks. I kept worrying that he was going to have a panic attack.
I have a DUMB question concerning all these super collider experiments. when they smash two protons together in these enormous energy head-on collisions how can they know what came out of the process were particles that were inside the protons? How do they know that the particles themselves were not created out of the energy that they put in to the collisions and not particles that were composed of the protons themselves?
Since all particles made of mater are made of energy and we don''t really know what energy is; this is NOT a dumb question. I hope some day we find better methods and answers.
The phenomenon of resonance is most likely where we will find answers to the most intractable problems.
Concerning the question of what happened before the Big Bang, there is no known law which prohibits a resonating wave from spontaneously appearing in the quantum soup. In fact, as the quantum soup has no time or space, the spontaneous appearance of a resonance wave in the soup must be expected from shear randomness.
An E8 crystal, made of metamaterial i.e. nanodiamond with nitrogen voids, may be able to recreate the pre-Big Bang resonance frequency. I predict that such a crystal may allow us to open up a parallel universe, or trigger a Big Bang like event, or create energy/mass in a controlled way.
I agree. But doesn't positive geometry/amplituhedron most closely map to Anirban Bandyopadhyay 's FIT/GML's fractal logic space. So many similarities.
Is there anybody who can formulate this “high school geometry” problem he was talking about around minute 1:30 into the talk.
Great talk. Thank you
I think the screen prjection says, "The End degrees Fahrenheit Space- Time".
Haha
Best Hamed talk yet. Is it me or does positive geometry/amplituhedron concepts map on to Anirban Bandyopadhyay's FIT/GML (Fractal Information Theory from Geometric Music Language) with all the triangulated geometric singularities combining QM/GTR?
The green-red triangle "problem" at 1:08 it is not explained exactly what the problem is. What is the problem?
The triangle was just sad and he wanted you to confort him. :(
Thank you Nima, for giving some of us more to ponder in this area. Still trying to get my head round space /time and inside/outside of same. Will let you know when I've got it all figured out. Meanwhile thanks for a great lecture.
Don't waste your time.
Great lecture Nima .
Great talk!
Does a particle simply move in the direction of least resistance?
electricity does, the electron, which is a particle, but why would anyone, or thing in the natural world move harder, longer, or more complicated than necessary. Unless you count the three guys who change a lightbulb, one to hold the bulb, and two to spin him around.
He oversimplifies "quantum tells us there's no determinism" end of story. But quantum just shows us we can't predict a fixed future. It doesn't mean the future is not fixed. Determinism arises from either/and time dilation, or simultaneity in relativity - both point to determinism and don't work without it. It's also not clockwork determinism, it's 4dimensional structure determinism.
Okay..... we exists within a 4D environment known as Space-Time, however we are also confined to the "NOW" time, thus we are confined to a mere 3D reality. So you have two realities. One is 3D, and the other is 4D. And on top of that, you obviously end up with two different sets of laws of physics. Take the famous 2 slit light experiment for instance. Which set of laws of physics are in control of the experiment, is what determines whether you will see particle behaviour occur, or wave behaviour. And of course the 4D space-time reality, and its own set of laws of physics, also explains things such the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment, and its results that were witnessed in 1999.
The human being is so special, the one of his kind. I mean the most smartest human ever be born
We will also understand where gravity and acceleration of any mass merge into common principles.
It seems like a lot of incorrect conclusions can be drawn from a flawed set of axioms, using a flawless mathematical method. And don't anyone dare suggest he's building perfect houses on sand. He knows everything, don't you know... Typical physics type.
Don Hoffman and Hamed are like a 21st century Copernicus and Einstein, respectively.
As always, a very interesting talk by Nima. BTW, the kid in the front seat must have an IQ>250.
So now we are finding what Plato knew, that geometry was the key to unlocking the secrets of the universe. We are also finding that the geometric nature of the theory of the amplituhedron suggests that the nature of the universe may be described with geometry, and that space and time are emergent from this geometry. This has been known since ancient times through what now know as sacred geometry and other esoteric knowledge.
This universe arose from information from math and geometry, this goes to show that our physical world is a virtual reality simulation that is not fundamental. This geometry is somehow vibrating as it is the medium for light or photons, matter then is condensed light that is vibrating slower. Among many others that have seen this hidden geometry and math or hidden variables are: Steven Kaufman, Brian Whitworth, Jason Padgett, David Bohm, Buckminster Fuller, Nikola Tesla, and Nassim Haramein, Tom Campbell
So it is not the end of space-time rather another starting of another space-time idea as your conclusion. However when a vibration start then time start too in this case vibration is gravity its need medium which is space-time.we can give another name of space-time but effect is same
In "The Future of Fundamental Physics -- Nima Arkani-Hamed -- Cornell Messenger Lectures" hr say that two spaceships accelerating to light speed with a cable between them that the cable would snap. This contraction is in the direction of acceleration, so if these spaces ships were traveling side by side, it would not snap. I am sure he knows this. If one were following the other hr would be correct. He should have made this clear.
Glad that his public speaking has improved. He has overcome his speech impediment.
The idea that quantum and the fundamental physics of the universe need to be combined as one, may be the incorrect type of thinking. Its possible that they do have different rules and I see nothing wrong about that. Quantum could be just another layer of physics with different properties and rules. We just don't have the tools to examine and understand Quantum.
Bud Bradley The problem is, where do you define the crossover between the quantum and gravitational regimes? And How do you describe phenomena that occur at very high energy densities, where both space-time distortions (high energy and quantum mechanics (small scales) are relevant?
+Bud Bradley - Along with +John Smith's argument please note "connections" between what at first appeared to be "different" but were actually deeper dives aka Emergent relationships. Take Newton, it would be all well and good to say leave that as a distinct "system" because it works great for rocket and planet motion, etc. But when it comes to clock variance with gravity Newton can't help you out - but Einstein saw the relationship.
Other examples abound in Thermodynamics, and other "systems." Einsteins equations aren't needed to calculate firing cannon balls, but go a long way toward understanding how to keep GPS accurate due to satellite velocity, difference in gravitational attraction, and the fact Earth is not gravitationally homogenous due to differences in density (affects orbit perturbation) we have a viable easy to understand "system."
Short cuts are used all the time to design practical items like buildings, cars, radios and TV's, but they won't tell you why Pi is an irrational *non-repeating* number, why in electronics the square root of negative 1 (an otherwise impossible number to arrive at in the course of every day experience) *just works*, or why the natural logarithm *appears* to constrain biological systems.
Physicists are driven to understand why the relationship between quantum mechanics, gravity, and time can be defined but not cross correlated. Just like the search for the Higg's Boson - it made a lot sense it should exist, but until it was discovered affected reliance on any particular theory why constituent "particles" had mass and the masses measured. Hope this helps...
The trouble is one rule set describes a completely different universe than the other, and yet they're supposed to describe the same universe. To make it concise: Indeterminism eventually bubbles up (even if one would like to pretend it conveniently stays on its own "layer"). This philosophically undermines the whole system and that's why almost no serious physicists are comfortable with the separation.
Yet... Isn't the "volume" of a amplituhedron "spatial" -- just like a volume is spatial -- ?!
No.
Is this somehow connected to the E8 mathematical structure?
No.
Shouldn't tiny black holes evaporate? Measuring the remains would surely be a landmark! Hawking - Susskind debate all over again! Maybe the information can be resolved from the aftermath.
Micro Hadron collider at the microscopic level is the first thing I would think of several powerful tools that we have on the shelf for the next generation Hadron collider.
It needs to be bigger to go smaller ????
16:25
Wow, I can’t believe we have very smart people without accents that keep you from understanding a word they say. Cool‼️👍🏻
In all seriousness, it helps to change the speed setting for this video to .75. Even then, though...
James Lucas ...... and his parents escaped Iran during bad times - physicists also, I believe. I think Nima was born in U.S. Info on internet.
Actually he has an American accent.
1:17:46 After well over an hour of concentrated effort by Dr. Arkani-Hamed, first questioner out of the box reveals that he doesn't even understand that the title of the lecture was meant figuratively and not literally. Ouch.
Reminds me of the affirmative action dullards warming seats in college class, waiting for their periodic free money checks.... I lived it.
I had a total of 3 questions which i made at the beginning of the lecture just by looking at the title. I knew the content of the lecture expect for the part where he mentioned combinatorics. My other 2 questions were little more technical which i asked him outside the hall & that was about co-relating Quantum spin of a particle to string field theory & how it speculates or explains through feynmann diagram?
& can spacetime be discrete? LQG is taking that approach to understand Quantum gravity. I didn't want to go too technical & too over the topic but I wasn't too off. Also i wanted him shed some light on Entropy, Spacetime & QM.
The Thumbnail for the video is a bit weird, so i've first read "The End of Spartacus" , my bad I guess, but im here either way.
P.S. Hm interesting concepts , I guess he is right about coming on to the hard problems from a different angle, yea very interesting.
thank you!
2:20 starts
Great talk. BTW power point no?
Well that was an amazing talk!
How far have you gotten with your new point of view whatever it is other than that there might be one
Casimir effect proves that virtual photons exist, for real!
You don't need to write down a single virtual photon to calculate the Casimir effect.
Introduction by Steven Spielberg
Would it be possible to measure inside a black hole by creating it with particles that are all entangled with a partner and then measure properties of the partners outside the black hole? It is not understood how the mind affect the collapse of the quantum mechanical wave function, I think.
Doubt it's the mind, its the measurement.
Haven't I seen this act before somewhere?
John Długosz very similar to his Messenger Lectures from a few years ago. Instead of complaining, pick up some math and try to help move the ball farther down the field!
Max Wall
Yes, I expect, but not with a narrative for general audiences quite this well organized and coherent.
How did you operationally measure that they're complaining? I'm asking since science is, like, totally awesome or whatever and that experiment is the final arbiter of truth or something.
@Bob Trenwith lol snowflake, please don't cry when glib remarks are met with glib remarks. After all, such a response is perfectly conformant with the nature, or if u prefer, the genetic defect, of "free world" speech. Strange that ur not used to it yet, boi, u seem the type perfect for the receiving end
I believe you.
It is not 10 billion light years, but rather 250 billion light years. The CMB is 42 trillion light years away.
I thought the observable universe was 14 billion light years in radius because we estimate the big bang to have happened 14 billion years ago?
@@N0Xa880iUL Lamestream cosmology is 100% fiction and 0% truth. The only thing it gets right is that the universe is expanding. Beyond that there is no figure or fact they get right.
Oh goodness. I just say hand me a number Duh
@@brendawilliams8062 If you want precise calculations based on scientific principles, instead of metaphysical nonsense (which you get from the mainstream), you have to come to me.
The internet mediocrity principle however dictates that you will shrug off my comment as nonsense. Internet IDs could solve that problem.
@@SkyDarmos you are a scientist! Congratulations. I explore pi. I have a numbers theory addiction. I am not a scientist. Thankyou. Your channel looks great.
This is where Animal from Police Academy ended up! Crazy!
At 3:45 Dr Arkani-Hamed says that physics is either 400 or 2000 years old, depending on where you start counting. Newton was 400 years ago. Is he referring to Euclid as the beginning of physics 2000 years ago? Euclid was a physicist? Interesting idea.
I'm assuming he means Aristotle
Thales of Miletus: he basically invented physics, which incidentally is a Greek word: physis = nature.
Usually particle physicists are referring to Democritus as he was the first recorded person to come up with the theory that the world is made from indivisible particles (i.e. particle physics) which he called "atoms".
Chris: but that is a specific theory of physics, not physics as field, Thales is the one to be credited for the development of physics as research of nature in an empirical and non-mythological way. Of course he could have got precursors but they remain unknown. Aristotle himself considered Thales to be "the first philosopher", i.e. what we now call "scientist". His main work was in the fields of geometry and astronomy, conceptualization of causality and ultimate origin (arché). Of course he was a pioneer, so some of his ideas, such as "water" being the principle of it all, sound now weird, loosely magical and obsolete, but so does much of "science" before Descartes.
Democritus is two centuries more recent than Thales, who lived around 500 BCE, so he should be more advanced, just as Einstein is compared to Newton.
Thanks Luis, Just to be clear I wasn't arguing for Democritus being a better choice than Thales I was just saying that he is the traditional choice of particle physicists.
when you do not know gravity mechanism , how do you see its effects in planck length.
You can't see in the Planck length/space/time. It's called the Planck limit for a reason.
We Live In Virtual Reality! It's all a fucking game...Prove Me Wrong Please...Tom Campbell Will Show This..
"Time" is sure problematic if you don't put Nima at 0.75.
Thanks
"Origin of horrible complexity",, Sounds like a good name for a few puzzle/adventure pc vid games I've played.
Possibly if you put too much energy into a small space, you get dark matter aka neutrinos.
The Restaurant at the End of Space-time 😅
Only in the Copenhagen interpretation determinism is gone. There is no evidence that it is the right interpretation. It's just the most comfortable one.
Could we be in a Hadron collider all ready they said that there is a radiation like bubble on the outer most spacecraft we sent out reported a high heating and radioactive energy that surrounds our solar system. We wouldn't know if we were going near the speed of light all ready and to go the speed of light is to stand still.lol
1:19:03 watch the fck out bro :'D
He is so possitive :D
Im a chemist and pretty well rounded in science overall, but I dont understand this stuff at all :O. And he goes to say a high schooler should understand this XD
Sorry, but i'm not convinced at all by the talk !
The lecture is quite long but with very few explanations.
He said interesting things but that could have been summed up in15 minutes. Top !
His presentation is voluntarily cheap in "genius mode" : "You know, I'm a genius, a pure spirit so I'm above materials things !"
His page on Wikipedia is rather thin.
Does every physicist have the "Physicist Hiar cut"
16:58 :)
They should be equal
Planks Constant Is Just The Beginning.
Next stop ... The end of taxation !!
my head hurts now
He should write a book but he thinks it's a waste of time. it's not, u might not find the holy grail but u might be able to inspire the next person to find it.
That would require a cohesive thought that can span several hundred pages. It seems his desire for making these speeches is in trying to figure out the purpose of his life's work. I don't think he has a clear path right now and is only slowly coming to grips with the fact that String Theory is, in fact, a dead-end path.
Why does he say the size of the observable universe is 10 billion light years when the diameter is actually 93 billion light years? He just failed physics 101.
They are all smiling.
What happens next is whatever you expect it to be.
Noise
This guy literally adds nothing new. His talk about "end of spacetime" is bs. I watched a bunch of his lectures and the only thing he does is give a lecture in history of what we already know. He just talks and talks and never clearly states his thing about the end of spacetime. Maybe I'm wrong
It's funny that someone so smart draws like an 8 year old
Quantum entanglement of all proton in universe via gravity make uncertainty in QM by h/(2*3.14)=g*(2.17*10^-8)^2/c, dynamic space time from Planck to proton scale create strong force by quantum black hole of proton from 8.85*10^-16=4.18*(6.67*10^-11)*((2.17*10^-8)/(1.67*10*10^-27))^2*(1.67*10^-27)/(299792458)^2.
I think that the young girl sitting in the first row eating candy somehow knows that in just five, or maybe six decades, that all of these other annoying people will finally, at last be gone.
That was dark John but a necessity for new ideas.