Before He Died, Einstein Wrote THIS on his Blackboard

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks for watching everyone! Check out the accompanying video on Parth's channel: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3upe6Shjs9pkKc Subscribe to Parth here: www.youtube.com/@ParthGChannel

[@Myrrdhin83]

The last equation at 7:05 looks like the description of Ricci curvature for the Ricci tensor =0 using a smooth manifold and local coordinate. I believe. see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature in the definition section.

[@SpotterVideo]

What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone. 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.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?

[@____uncompetative]

6:42 it isn't "Killing" it is: field-op as he was working on a _Unified Field Theory_

[@jermsbestfriend9296]

That tetrad thing was done. Look at veirbeins

[@wesleyschouw]

Chris what is your email. I can explain this.

[@mrnice4434]

I think the worst part about EInsteins death is that we don't know his final words because he said them in German and his nurse could not speak German. Not that he would have said something ground breaking but still it's sad

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

I didn't know that! Thanks for sharing, although it is very sad!

[@randybaumery5090]

"Mein Gott. Es ist voller Sterne!"

[@krisstroda759]

Bis dann und danke für all die Fische

[@julesbrunton1728]

He said "scheisse, nicht quadratisch, gewürfelt"

[@neonblack211]

@@krisstroda759 hahaha even i know what that means

[@JenniferEliseAtchiso]

My mother was a book keeper for Einstein while he was in Princeton.

[@jpraise6771]

Any extra information you could share with us?

[@kurtgodel28]

​@@jpraise6771 I actually cooked a dish for Einstein. He said: "it tastes delish, bro".

[@8________________D-]

I bet your mother also made Frosted Flakes 🐅

[@GetawayFilms]

@@kurtgodel28 Lies, there's no way he called you 'bro'... He always said 'dude'

[@Ronaldo-ib8kd]

​@@GetawayFilms nah blud always said "blud"

[@elck3]

Yes, I’d definitely be interested in a more in-depth video on the math!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks!

[@aura-audio]

@@ChrisPattisonCosmo I second this motion! I'm no mathematician, but some of the math explained in this video was intriguing because I've seen some similar math in my other classes.

[@autisticdaemon]

Side note: The photograph of "the doctor who did Einstein's autopsy" is Dr. Thomas Harvey. He ended up practicing medicine in my small hometown in northwest Missouri. He was my doctor from the time I was a kid until I was 18, in 1986. If you asked, he would show you slides of Einstein's brain that he took. 🤣

[@judemorales4U]

Wow Warren, that's really cool!

[@ifrazali3052]

Wow

[@portcityengineering]

😅😂

[@jonmacneil1350]

Such a quirky link to Einstein, pretty cool..

[@karpabla]

His brain was removed without permission. It shows once again that many doctors are more interested in medicine that in persons.

[@JohannSwart_JWS]

He did not die of heart failure. He had a previous condition called an aortic aneurism. It was fixed surgically, but eventually came back and killed him. I know, because I have the same condition. But fortunately nowadays we have very hitech endovascular stenting technology, which saves lives. Including mine.

[@-in-the-meantime...]

My mothers father "triple A'd" at 51. What were the symtoms etc, if I may ask, that helped discover your condition?

[@JohannSwart_JWS]

@@-in-the-meantime... Zero symptoms. It was an accidental discovery during a routine examination. Just in time, fortunately.

[@Flexximilian]

It does not say "KILLING" it says "field-op", short for field operator if you ask me. I am not a mathematician, nor a physicist, but I can imagine B describes a matrix, metric or tensor operator applying some transformation on a field.

[@FlamingFretboard]

I was about to comment this. I agree it's clearly "field-op" for field operator.

[@ludwigbear]

I agree. Either field op or field up

[@keithrainbow]

Yep exactly what I read at first glance.

[@XEONvE]

yup I see field-op too. this guy is clearly not a science major, probably didnt even pass highschool. most of the board equations were in my first and second yrs. He just another trash youtube making shit up for a living.

[@Edouard16]

Yes I stopped watching the video and wasting my time after he said "Killing". After 7 minutes I had learned nothing.

[@zdzislawmeglicki2262]

The two important GR developments that followed Einstein were Newman-Penrose formalism that expresses Einstein equations using spinors, and the other one was Ashtekar formalism that used connection symbols as fundamental variables instead of the metric. This, in particular, allows for consistent quantization of GR. Then there was an older Einstein-Cartan theory that added torsion terms to curvature on the left side and spin on the right. I wonder if anything on Einstein's blackboard would relate to the above.

[@cosmicHalArizona]

Well that clears it up

[@elck3]

I can’t believe no one has done this breakdown before. Wow!

[@davidcortner4959]

Oh my yes! Do go on with more analysis of this. It's fascinating!

[@thecaribbeanbookworm5066]

I’ve seen the collaboration video of you and Parth G over at Parth’s channel initially and then came to check this one out. I really want to see more coverage on this topic! I belief I read somewhere that Einstein was also interested in a grand unified theory. So I’d love for this to be explored in both a historical and technical context. Also, I immediately subscribed as I saw that you’re a researcher interested in the areas I find fascinating as well (cosmology and GR). I hope to see more of your content. Cheers!

[@hu5116]

Fantastic and thanks! I have for years pondered from time to time what Einstein might have been working on in his last days, and now you have (or are) providing it! As it appears no one else has delved into this, PLEASE CONTINUE! This is something that needs to be done for mankind. I might suggest some image processing enhancement: it looks like those pictures (and the desk pics) could be enhanced considerably with some basic image processing. I’d be happy to give that a whorl, although I’ll bet if you called up MathWorks and asked for their support to enhance the images for you, I believe they would be thrilled to do it (you just can’t buy that kind of PR in the science, math and engineering world). Fantastic venture, all the best, and let us know if we can help!

[@EJBert]

I remember this iconic photo and the disarray on his desk. All I know was that Einstein was still working on Unified Field Theory at the time of his death. Great idea for a KZbin video.

[@bigjukebox3370]

i think the "killing" part is a "field" + something. The first letter doesn't really resemble a "k" that much, and that would explain the "e"-like loop after the "i". The stuff behind the "field" looks like a "-" and then "eg" or "eq" to me. Of course the dash could just be accidental or something, but who knows. My best guess would therefore be: "field-eg" - but i don't know whether this helps much at all 💀 (maybe it is meant as e.g. as in for example) (Further, what i declared as a "d" could also be a "t", but it looks a little bit more like a "d" to me, and i thought "field" would make a little bit more sense than "fielt") hope it helped :)

[@MaitreBart]

I see "field" too

[@lambertmeertens2877]

"field equations"?

[@martynfletcher2054]

I agree, it's "field".

[@TomBagwell]

Same. I see "field eq".

[@Kamla5abi86]

Yep it says field IMO as well. Definitely not killing lol.

[@TerryBollinger]

Chris, I wonder if the original film negatives still exist somewhere. Assuming good camera focusing, those would generally have higher resolution than modern digital cameras.

[@malcolmcooke2024]

Actually not true digital out resolves film 35 mm film has only around 20 mm grains on a slow film, digital cameras on average for quite some time have higher pixel count and resolver finer due to better lenses

[@TerryBollinger]

@@malcolmcooke2024I stand corrected, thank you!

[@ThomasGutierrez]

@@malcolmcooke2024 Good point. However, I think the resolution issues limiting the analysis in the video are digital compression artifacts. The original photos would likely be higher resolution than those analyzed here.

[@TrunkMonkey42]

This would depend on linear resolution of the sensors and film and angular resolution of the lenses and how they are aligned and their quality. Digital sensors also have some other algorithms that would improve things like luminance and color resolution such as with HDR or you could post process raw sensor data. Typically 35mm film translates to about 2K HD resolution where you can distinguish the film grain; though, the digital sensor might be much higher resolution running various algorithms. Large format negatives would provide much higher resolution. There are also addition issues with the angles of the camera to the object being being imaged and curvature and warping in the film and quality of the chemicals used in the film and the film's development and storage. Plus there is digital post processing of images.

[@malcolmcooke2024]

@@TrunkMonkey42 Hi if you could get hold of the original neg would have to have it scanned by oil drum scanner to get any quality result with detail. Having worked with both I would take the digital cam files any day for fine detail,

[@kevingrant5904]

I’m taking a GR course soon so I can dabble into some this. You have peaked my interest in A.E board

[@davidpescod7573]

This was an incredibly fascinating video, Chris. You and your colleagues have put much time and effort in analysing what Einstein was talking about during his last lesson. You may already know, but I’m mentioning for others who may not, that Einstein visited NottinghamUniversity on 6 June 1930. The lecture was due to start at midnight last 7pm and Einstein was to arrive at the university at 4.30pm. However Einstein stopped off to visit Isaac Newton’s house and birthplace on the way so arrived at Nottingham University just thirty minutes before the lecture was due to start. A section of the blackboard (No offence intended) Einstein used remains, showing Einstein’s calculations, but it is evident that the address was delivered in German. Even the chalk he used is still preserved, although it was “borrowed” by a student. Fortunately that, too, has been returned to the university. Einstein’s visit to Nottingham was recorded by the organiser of the visit, Professor Granger, who reported in “The Daily Telegraph” that ‘He was a remarkably serene and august person . . . I thought he looked with his wonderful hair, like a mixture between an amiable lion and one of those calm looking pandas that we see in zoos,’ I wonder if it is possible to locate all the boards upon which Einstein wrote If anymore exist? Your description, together with colleagues, of the contents of the “last” at Princeton University, which exists, if I’m right, only as photographs, was absolutely fascinating. Thanks so very much Chris to you and everyone else involved. If collectively more can be revealed of what Einstein was wanting to communicate I think many will be very interested

[@davidpescod7573]

Sorry for the errors!

[@WindRipples-]

@@davidpescod7573 It's ok David, we forgive you in your selfless pursuit of youtube commentary for the education of others.

[@travislovelace7619]

Did you know he married his cousin and wrote in his diary that he was sexually attracted to the daughter they had together?

[@idk9558]

I aint readin allat

[@hyperduality2838]

Action is dual to reaction -- Sir Isaac Newton or the duality of force. Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Positive curvature (synchronic lines) is dual to negative curvature (enchronic lines) -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Curvature or gravitation is dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Sine is dual to cosine -- the word "co" means mutual and implies duality. Sinh is dual to cosh -- hyperbolic functions. Time dilation is dual to length contraction -- Einstein, special relativity. Space is dual time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@TerryBollinger]

I already made this comment over on Parth's channel, but I'll reiterate here that Einstein's focus here on tetrads is deeply fascinating. Einstein was aware of his impending death and seemed to focus on priorities towards his last few days. Thus, I would be surprised if this blackboard did not represent what he thought was one of the more interesting problems to be resolved In the case of tetrads, It sounds as though his focus was on whether the vast space-time structure of general relativity could be broken up into smaller components that, presumably and as you and Parth noted, would make GR more amenable to quantization. Even if the tetrad approach did not pan out for Einstein, his interest in a more bottom-up approach, as represented by tetrads, is a deeply fascinating and potentially highly productive spacetime research direction.

[@awatercolourist]

What you see as “killing”, I see as field and some indecipherable marks 🙂

[@LuisAldamiz]

I read something as "field" or "fiall" and then scribble. For me the first letter can't be a "k" but an "f" in any case, and it's followed by an "i" another vowel (e, a?) and only then the first "l" (clear) and another letter, which could be an "l" or "d" or...

[@awatercolourist]

@@LuisAldamiz Hi Luis! I’m still sticking with field; mainly out of stubbornness 😂. But also because I can’t see the the stem of the letter k.

[@bozo5632]

Exactly what I see. "field" looks very clear to me. I don't think it could be Killing.

[@awatercolourist]

@@bozo5632 Thanks

[@Flexximilian]

It's field-op, as per my earlier comment. Op is short for operator.

[@guidotoschi7284]

Thanks for the interesting material. I think that the "V" sign under the first two of the three indices of the "little gammas" in the first line of the blackboard indicates that the object is antisymmetric in those two indices (it's a 2-form). Today, when writing tensors in components, it's customary to put them between square brackets, like gamma_[ij]k. Besides, Einstein didn't use its convention of "summation on repeated indices" in those equation because it was not allowed: he wasn't using the "eta" metrics with two tensor indices eta_ij, but a "clever" eta with one index that kept track of the signature, eta =(-1, 1, 1, 1) (or whatever your preferred signature), which is not a tensor and whose index therefore has no real meaning. In fact, in some of those equation we see repeated indices (even more than two times) on the same level (lower or upper): in that case you must specify the summation.

[@ronaldderooij1774]

I think this blackboard still exists with the same text on it. So you can photograph it yourself. I also think that this blackboard is only useful in combination with his last notebook (the paper one, not the electronic version, of course!).

[@feynmanschwingere_mc2270]

Albert Einstein is, by far, the greatest scientist of all time. He created an original proof of the Pythagorean Theorem at the age of 10; read and understand Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and Kant's Critique of Practical Reason by the age of 11, taught himself integral and differential calculus by the age of 14, wrote his first scientific paper (that was published) by the age of 16. He had perfect scores on the math and physics sections of the Entry Exam to the Zurich Polytechnic in Switzerland (named the ETH), but due to poor scores on French and history he wasn't accepted that year into the ETH. However, it's important to note that the youngest the ETH accepted any student was 18 and Einstein took the exam at 16 years old. Before the age of 23 Einstein had received the entire foundations of Statistical Mechanics and Thermodynamics from first principles, a Herculean feat of genius and diligence. Unfortunately, Einstein isn't more famous for this work (a trilogy of papers between 1901 and 1904) because J.W. Gibbs had already done it but Gibbs work hadn't yet been widely translated into German so the Germam physics community didn't know. From 1905 to his death I'm 1955 Einstein revolutionized science in a way that hadn't been seen in the history of knowledge. The closest historical analog is Isaac Newton in 1666 but the mathematics in Newton is child's play compared to Einstein. Einstein started the quantum revolution in 1905 with his earth-shattering paper on light quanta and then shattered physics again in the same year with his mind-bending paper on Special Relativity which gave us spacetime and relativistic kinematics. Einstein then quantized the radiation field, proved the duloung-petit law, discovered wave-particle duality in 1909, Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission (the LASER), gave us Bose-Einstein Condensates and Bose-Einstein Statistics, Quantum Entanglement, Wormholes, and several other amazing discoveries. Most science historians believe Albert Einstein should have won at least 10 Nobel Prizes. Let that sink in. When polled in the year 2000 by the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) which physicist was the greatest in history, the top living physicists in 2000 voted Albert Einstein number one. Without Einstein, we wouldn't have modern technology, including the GPS! Heck, Einstein even managed to solve the Tea Leaf Paradox in his spare time before he died, and this was a mystery that eluded many of the greatest minds of the past several centuries. For any history buff, he is the GOAT scientist and well deserving of being synonymous with genius 👑🐐.

[@crossthreadaeroindustries8554]

Super interesting you are breaking ground on the genius who break new ground. So appreciated, fascinating.

[@louislesch3878]

He wrote a bunch of stuff on the bedsheet of his deathbed too. It seems likely that he continued what he was working on the blackboard to his bedsheet.

[@garyz777]

What great energy, humor and technical information. Just a delight to watch. Kudos, Chris, I'm subscribing!

[@suds5214]

I studied quantum physics at university in the early 80's and this short taught me so much about something I loved to study. Thank You.

[@GH-oi2jf]

Einstein was not at Princeton University. He was at the Institute for Advanced Study, in Princeton.

[@Inkling777]

Fascinating! Perhaps you should work what you done into a book on the theme "The Last Days of Einstein." That photo would look great on the cover.

[@picksalot1]

Image analysis tools that can make the writing look clearer, improve resolution, rotate the blackboard virtually so it's easier to read, etc. are probably available.

[@Jowanoofy_ZO]

Dis vid just want entertainment not scien

[@simonlinser8286]

Probably but I'm on my phone and wouldn't know...enhance enhance!

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

Yes, yes. Plz do the video on that gamma thing.

[@davidblauyoutube]

7:04 The first equation looks like an orthogonality condition for two vector fields lambda-sub-alpha and lambda-sub-beta, given the presence of the Ricci curvature tensor R. The data at the bottom suggest that the three-index lowercase gammas are Christoffel symbols coming from expanding the summation on the left. The equation is essentially reproduced here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature#Definition_via_local_coordinates_on_a_smooth_manifold

[@insouciantFox]

Yes that's what I was going to say. It's odd to see the symbols as γ and not Γ

[@monoamiga]

We're all super-interested in detailed math explanation! Please please please!!!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks!

[@maxvaessen]

Cool stuff guys! Very interesting. Keep it up!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks!

[@group6915]

Keep going Chris... fascinating

[@johng7602]

please do another detailed video. also more about Einstein!

[@mariodegroote6756]

well i cant figure out whats on that blackboard, im just an old street guy, but, that was an amazing content. thats for sure, respect!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks so much!

[@Baekstrom]

The music in the background is so low I thought I was imagining it, but it is definitely there.

[@louislesch3878]

Also, did he have a secretary? Maybe you could piece together the last couple of days that he spent in his office and who was in there according to his secretary’s visitor logs.

[@dathyr1]

So Einstein's Knowledge is still a mystery to us even today. Great video to watch. Take care.

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thank you!

[@justice929]

Chris Hirata, studied Einstein very well, IQ of 220, PhD for Princeston graduated Caltech at very early stage. Father has masters in math, Chris at the age of 8 surpassed his father in math, so yes, if one is a super genius... not a mystery..

[@awesomefeldmanfamily]

This is such an interesting mystery with such an interesting story!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks Dovi!

[@paulkohl9267]

Hmm, I disagree with the video. The "v" marks are likely from Einstein (his handwriting is on the board) from torsional GR with antisymmetric metrics (cf. the last chapter of his classic book "Relativity: The Special and The General Theory"). Underdiacritic marks on the board either seem to be implying different spaces (greek) or symmetrization of indices with the v mark.

[@BlackbodyEconomics]

Did you by chance look at Einstein's other handwritten works in figuring out the symbols on his board?

[@mikesch0815]

Interesting topic! Gladly more!

[@benjaminlott5632]

Yes!more on this please.

[@PADARM]

This video was too short. please do another one. the subject is fascinating!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thank you!

[@iamlrrrruleroftheplanetomi1799]

Best video that I didn't know I wanted to watch.

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks! :)

[@iamlrrrruleroftheplanetomi1799]

@@ChrisPattisonCosmo nah thank you lol

[@w8biatvrepeater638]

It appears that he was going to use the Epselon tensor to write that equation more compactly.

[@walterlyzohub8112]

It’s been over half a century, a breakthrough is long overdue.

[@phillipotey9736]

Looks like he's delving into black holes in that "unexplained" part.

[@europaeuropa3673]

Looking at his office it appears Einstein was not a perfectionist because perfectionists spend all their time trying to look perfect. Instead he was a very intelligent, detailed person.

[@gretchenchristophel1169]

Thank you for bringing this to light...fascinating subject. I have always loved physics, and the ideas/concepts that define our universe. I can't "do" the higher math, but I do have a grasp of the theories presented generally. BTW...is one of those equations the recipe for Wienerschnitzle ? 🤣 Just sayin' 🤗

[@DanBeech-ht7sw]

The maths is beyond me, unfortunately

[@CosmologyNews]

This was a very cool video. I'd love more of this sort of content!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thank you! :)

[@annaclarafenyo8185]

The part you pointed to and said "Please someone explain" is just projecting the Ricci curvature along the direction of a Killing vector and then writing it out in terms of the metric. If you can't understand this, how the heck did you figure out the rest of the board? Also, the little down arrows are probably an indication that the two indices involved are antisymmetric (or symmetric, but I think antisymmetric as symmetric tensors are everywhere with no adornment).

[@annaclarafenyo8185]

There is another comment which explains that the little v below the index that you misinterpreted is Einstein's way of writing "project out the symmetric part". I am not sure if this is true, but it makes sense in context.

[@schrodingerscat7218]

Cool. I was pretty close. The re-writing with tetrads looked to me like some induced metric. But the lamda notation threw me. And the bottom left looked like QM to me which it was, sort of. I have seen this blackboard before and I always wondered what those equations were. Thanks a lot for doing this, you guys.

[@hyperduality2838]

Alive is dual to not live -- the Schrodinger's cat superposition. Being is dual to non being creates becoming -- Plato's cat. Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Positive curvature (synchronic lines) is dual to negative curvature (enchronic lines) -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Curvature or gravitation is dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Sine is dual to cosine -- the word "co" means mutual and implies duality. Sinh is dual to cosh -- hyperbolic functions. Time dilation is dual to length contraction -- Einstein, special relativity. Space is dual time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@schrodingerscat7218]

@@hyperduality2838 Born to Kill on your helmet and a peace sign on your body armor. Explain yourself or stand tall before the man. It's the duality of man, the Jungian thing, sir.

[@hyperduality2838]

@@schrodingerscat7218 Gravitation is equivalent or dual (isomorphic) to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence, duality! Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is dual.

[@hyperduality2838]

@@schrodingerscat7218 What is the Jungian thing? Duality means that there is a 4th law of thermodynamics:- Synchronic lines are dual to enchronic lines. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Entropy is dual to evolution (syntropy) -- Janna Levin, Astrophysicist. If evolution has a purpose, goal or target then it is syntropic or teleological. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy). Your mind is syntropic as it creates or synthesizes goals, targets and objectives. Mind (the internal soul, syntropy) is dual to matter (the external soul, entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. Homology (convergence, syntropy) is dual to co-homology (divergence, entropy). Subgroups are dual to subfields -- the Galois Correspondence. Making predictions to track targets, goals & objectives is a syntropic process -- teleological.

[@schrodingerscat7218]

@@hyperduality2838 My neighbour drives a dually. He has two dogs, Yin and Yang.

[@Unkl_Bob]

hahaha .. The broken blackboard frame is merely a tear in the photograph !!!!! .. not a break in the thick wood .

[@Melpheos1er]

How awesome would have it been had he wrote "I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this, which this blackboard is too narrow to contain"

[@hectorpascal]

Would certainly be cool to get conFERMATion that a solution leading to Unification actually existed! :)

[@iananderson33able]

3:50 Einstein was aggravated AF and PISSED 💀

[@SystemsMedicine]

Well, for whatever it's worth, Einstein had recently checked out a group theory book from a library at the IAS. [I don't remember which one. Also, he was still writing equations while in his hospital bed, supposedly about the unified theory he was after. Clearly he was still seeking a tensor style geometric unification, as opposed to, say, an operator theory approach; however, presumably all such approaches will have equivalent formulations in any putative (correct) gr-qm theory.] Cheers.

[@daringumucio2779]

I know he was attempting to unify GR with Maxwell’s Electromagnetism as his first step of unification. Would examination by the two of you from that perspective help make anymore sense of his rewritten equations?

[@troyjason3426]

The word you see is not killing, the word is field. In front of the word 'field' is the number 3.

[@soerenraudonis]

2:55 Short hint : it’s not the camera ( you can’t, even today ) achieve better resolutions than on wet film, it’s the reproduction, the coping aka conversion loses that cause the problem

[@Chirality452]

Actually, he wasn't trying to develop what today researchers mean by quantum gravity. He was working on a geometric unification of gravity and E&M field using a non-Riemannian geometry that included curvature and torsion. I think the lambda's were related to a type of gauge transformation that he was using in this theory. If you want to see the broader context of his final work check out appendix 2 of the fifth edition of his The Meaning of Relativity. The part where he is listing the number of components is the breakout between the symmetric and anti-symmetric components of this theory. Old theory refers to GR. I hope that helps.

[@hyperduality2838]

Subgroups are dual to subfields -- the Galois Correspondence. Absolute time (Galileo, Newton) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality! Time is a dual concept. The future is dual to the past -- time duality. Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Positive curvature (synchronic lines) is dual to negative curvature (enchronic lines) -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Curvature or gravitation is dual. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Sine is dual to cosine -- the word "co" means mutual and implies duality. Sinh is dual to cosh -- hyperbolic functions. Time dilation is dual to length contraction -- Einstein, special relativity. Space is dual time -- Einstein. "Always two there are" -- Yoda.

[@nevinsonlotterman5492]

Albert Einstein was up to something

[@zisumevoli96]

GIVE US THE MATHS! Please

[@Lumynex8335]

well about the camera, it was not digital, this pixilation is very likely the cause of bad digitalisation

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Yes that's a very good point, thanks :)

[@andremartel828]

Interesting. Good catch.

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks! :)

[@stevedriscoll2539]

What could be more fascinating than the final equations and notations by this genius. I know Freeman Dyson said that a lot of what Einstein was working on in his latter years (at Princeton) was "garbage", but it turns out that contrary to popular opinion among his peers that he had become "out of it" with respect to accepting the then implications on quantum electrodynamics it seems the modern state of physics has shown that he was correct about two things: the cosmological constant and his claim that QED was "incomplete" as a theory.

[@jozsefizsak]

This is so great!

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

Thanks :)

[@markwrede8878]

Abundances distribute properties which may be understood as meaningful through multiplication. The separation of primes, however, causes the number line to become two-dimensional when assessed through multiplication. The sequential differences so described among primes has finite limitations, which would make quantization an inevitable feature of any universe containing iso-similar abundances.

[@monoamiga]

Thank you, Parth, for correctly pronouncing "Minkowski".

[@janick01ify]

Thank you Chris for correctly pronouncing Parth

[@KaliFissure]

If gravity creates a slight curve to every part of space, creating geodesics, then the universe doesn't expand outward, it expands inward into itself via gravity. All paths are paths inward/downward Neutron decay cosmology because topology and geometry rule. 🖖

[@KaliFissure]

Time is a compact dimension, and all convolution are in space, and because light is still always one Planck per Planck second, the thing is the medium is more dense. Thus you travel slower Making it appear as if time slows

[@christianadam2907]

It does not say killing, it says field + something, maybe eq for equation. But definitely not killing

[@LaNwamNi]

Are you sure about "Killing"? I can see "field" followed by some indecipherable squiggles. I can see other "k's" elsewhere on the board that are clearly different to this one.

[@LuisAldamiz]

Me too, with doubts but the first letter seems an "f" in any case and not a "k".

[@realCevra]

03:50 rather that photograph shows the room during renovation process when they had removed the book shelves on the left of the board already which couldn't be removed without damaging the board that were somehow attached to it on that side. the contents of the board however are uninteresting, they show some thoughts about the state of science that was discussed for another 40years without much progress, you won't find any secret revelation in it

[@michaelholt7994]

He also had a book on his desk,written by immanuel velikovsky he was endorsing.

[@David_7171]

I just love how he kept working hard on physics until the day he died at 76.

[@steveforbes7718]

I took physics in school and did well enough. I even taught astronomy at a local college when I was younger. I haven't really paid much attention for years to all of this so, I'm going to demonstrate my ignorance here for certain. At the 06:45 mark there is a word that you believe is "killing". However, what I perceive is a letter "B" in a box followed by the what my feeble brain sees as "field~ng". No matter how I look at it I do not see the word "killing". I've done a lot of writing for decades and I just do not see what you see. FWIW

[@mbmillermo]

A fifth is a fifth of a gallon. A quart is a quarter of a gallon.

[@misssmith8221]

At point 6:48 of this video, the word I believe you misunderstood wasn't "Killing" but rather "Field". I believe Einstein categorized different parts of his explanation inside boxes around the relevant equation to that specific investigation. "Field" may have been the topic header to identify/ describe the contents of the equation box area he was working on at the time. It's understood that college students do favor the use of cliff notes, summaries, and headers. Else they would have gotten lost in a board full of nondescript equations which seemed to flow into adjacent formula work areas. Individual equation boxes were separate from other equations as each reached a point of not requiring further investigation or a deeper dive into their function.

[@kwgm8578]

Bingo! It is "field." Then there is a scribble to the right that identifies the field, but I can't read it. As for the Tetrad, is there an ellipses (...) between the two vectors, meaning that an n-dimensional array can be represented by a product or sum of Tetrads? If these are true, I believe that Big Al was explaining his work to someone else, going from the Tensor field to his equations in modern notation. Of course Herr Professor Dr. Einstein knew the modern formalisms. Don't forget, he was very bright! 😉 Thank you for the Gedankenexperiment! It feels good to wake up the geriatric brain now and again. 🙏🏼

[@Athiril]

The original negative or print reproduction may have more detail, especially if it was medium format (it does look pretty clean in grain even at size shown on KZbin)

[@BKNeifert]

I think you'll go far though. I know people better than I know math, and this has the quality people like in a video. God bless! I have to be honest, I wouldn't even know how General Relativity doesn't fit into the laws of Quantum Mechanics.

[@Tore_Lund]

When Einstein got famous, it was custom to varnish his blackboards after a guest lecture. His last scribbles might be in a museum? I mean who would dare to wipe it? NB. Photographers in 1955 had 100 megapixel cameras, i.e. film. so trace the original Nb#2: he was active to the end, his last letters to colleagues might give a clue. Good guess one dimensional GR lends itself to QM and strings!

[@johnluiten3686]

I was thinking it might look like my old board-“Custodian, do not erase!” ;-)

[@simonvengure1385]

The heading seen in 7:07 seams to be "field..." to me. Perhaps he described some sort of field wirh the name of the 4d vektor matrix written next to it (like "field v_lp" or sth.) This theory allines with the stuff that stands in the second row: some sort of derivitive of lambda for the variable of s. Here the indices are not readable unfortunatly. Over all i have the feeling, that he explained sth to a student, because the exact equation seem to be quite "fundamental" when we talk about relarivity. I dont see any creazy integrals or sth, but simple operator logic. But I could be definetively wrong!

[@Myrrdhin83]

The last equation at 7:05 looks like the description of Ricci curvature for the Ricci tensor =0 using a smooth manifold and local coordinate. I believe. see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature in the definition section.

[@julesbrunton1728]

That could be true but look what these guys do at 7:50. Notice anything wrong with the path of the planet past the sun? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for these guys to answer any hard questions intelligently

[@wdtripps44]

I think the open book on the pile on the desk is a Velokoski book

[@JackRainfield]

Killing looks more like a 3 surrounded with a square followed by the word "field" to my eye. Or it could be a capital B in a square followed by field. I lean toward B in a square because just up to the right is a capital A in a square that looks very similar in design.

[@Flexximilian]

Yup, it's block B field-op (op is short for operator). Next to it is block A. Maybe he intended to use them in later calculations, or simply added these component markers out of habit. I don't see an "A" or "B" on right side of the board, although A seems to be repeated in the first line on the right? But the shadow makes the end of the line unreadable...

[@JackRainfield]

@@Flexximilian I bet if someone played with that shadow part in Photoshop, boost contrast etc. that someone who is familiar with Einstein's previously published equations could probably make out what it says.

[@matthewspartan8754]

Whoa 😮it looks like he was working on Teleparallel gravity again!

[@danlewellyn6734]

"So long, and thanks for all the fish!"

[@pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591]

He was probably trying to add the Aether back into Relativity, and that would look like quantum gravity.

[@soilmanted]

I thought Einstein died from an aortic aneurism, not heart failure. Am I wrong?

[@deathstrike]

I wonder if one day, if we truly invent time travel and could go to a particular time frame with Einstein in it, what would we ask him? Or even better if we could actually take him out of that time frame and "rebuild him" (advanced medical science) to be his old self, I wonder with the advanced technology of the time, what could he do with it? A fully healed Einstein, Hawking, Dirac, I couldn't even imagine how far science would have advanced had these geniuses just had a little more time......

[@feynmanschwingere_mc2270]

Albert Einstein is, by far, the greatest scientist of all time. He created an original proof of the Pythagorean Theorem at the age of 10; read and understand Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and Kant's Critique of Practical Reason by the age of 11, taught himself integral and differential calculus by the age of 14, wrote his first scientific paper (that was published) by the age of 16. He had perfect scores on the math and physics sections of the Entry Exam to the Zurich Polytechnic in Switzerland (named the ETH), but due to poor scores on French and history he wasn't accepted that year into the ETH. However, it's important to note that the youngest the ETH accepted any student was 18 and Einstein took the exam at 16 years old. Before the age of 23 Einstein had received the entire foundations of Statistical Mechanics and Thermodynamics from first principles, a Herculean feat of genius and diligence. Unfortunately, Einstein isn't more famous for this work (a trilogy of papers between 1901 and 1904) because J.W. Gibbs had already done it but Gibbs work hadn't yet been widely translated into German so the Germam physics community didn't know. From 1905 to his death I'm 1955 Einstein revolutionized science in a way that hadn't been seen in the history of knowledge. The closest historical analog is Isaac Newton in 1666 but the mathematics in Newton is child's play compared to Einstein. Einstein started the quantum revolution in 1905 with his earth-shattering paper on light quanta and then shattered physics again in the same year with his mind-bending paper on Special Relativity which gave us spacetime and relativistic kinematics. Einstein then quantized the radiation field, proved the duloung-petit law, discovered wave-particle duality in 1909, Spontaneous and Stimulated Emission (the LASER), gave us Bose-Einstein Condensates and Bose-Einstein Statistics, Quantum Entanglement, Wormholes, and several other amazing discoveries. Most science historians believe Albert Einstein should have won at least 10 Nobel Prizes. Let that sink in. When polled in the year 2000 by the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) which physicist was the greatest in history, the top living physicists in 2000 voted Albert Einstein number one. Without Einstein, we wouldn't have modern technology, including the GPS! Heck, Einstein even managed to solve the Tea Leaf Paradox in his spare time before he died, and this was a mystery that eluded many of the greatest minds of the past several centuries. For any history buff, he is the GOAT scientist and well deserving of being synonymous with genius 👑🐐.

[@allangibson8494]

The original film would have the same resolution as modern digital cameras. 35mm 100ASA camera film has a resolution of about 3000 - 5000 pixels per inch (a bit more random because they aren’t actually square but a grain). Film scanning and internet reproduction tends to downscale the resolution significantly however as does the common use of JPEG compression algorithms. People who complain about poor resolution in old films are actually looking at 1980’s film to video transfers - the original film stock had much higher resolution. That said - every thing shot on video tapes from the mid 1960’s or video to film transfer from the 1950’s on is irretrievably low resolution…

[@kemico1272]

6:48 That word is not killing, it is field and then 3 characters I can't read

[@pauljs75]

For light to bend in a gravitational field it's speed has to change, but since it's always measured as constant - the time dilation relative to that gravity has to be in the correct proportion. Since velocity (speed) is some aspect of a 3D vector, then time too would progress differently over each point in 3D space in relation to a gravitational field. A lot of other physics properties are also in proportion to the speed of light, so to unify them you need to account for the gravitational influence on things in that space. Might have been trying to tie down the differences between gravity and inertia a bit better (the properties of acceleration are effectively the same despite being associated with differing phenomena), but dealing with the complexity of vectors he just wasn't having it yet. Unfortunately he ran out of time before he could look into these properties more in-depth and maybe figure out yet another nuance.

[@RP-mb7yl]

That's the weekly lunch menu at Princeton

[@nazukeoya]

"I wish the photographer had a digital camera to use because the photo size is so small at 4MB" Film photography actually has a larger pixel density than modern digital cameras. You just need to scan the original film to get a very high resolution digital image.

[@TerryBollinger]

On Einstein's tetrads: When interpreted in terms of data structure complexity, the representational equivalence of tetrads to global spacetime makes sense because each tetrad _already_ fully captures the classical concept of infinitely precise orthogonal dimensions. But that's the problem: If spacetime is _already_ fully defined at the arbitrarily small tetrad level, global spacetime becomes little more than a scaling up of what already exists. One way out of this conundrum is to stop assuming tetrads have complexity equal to spacetime. Instead, define them to approach the fully orthogonal behavior of spacetime asymptomatically, and only when networked. Such tetrads would be more rule-like than spacetime-like.

[@BagelMachine]

I never would have guessed it was a recipe for brownies

[@ChrisPattisonCosmo]

I bet they'd be relatively good if we made them!

[@alfreddaniels3817]

The story of the bottle of Scotch sounds pretty unbelievable to me.