David Finkelstein - Why is the Quantum so Mysterious?

Watch more interviews on quantum theory: shorturl.at/gjnrR
Particles at two places at the same time-superposition. Particles communicating instantly with no respect to distance-entanglement. How to make sense of such weirdness? Quantum mechanics is how the world works at deepest levels. But nobody has any idea why.
Register today for free subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/3He94Ns
Support the show with Closer To Truth merchandise: bit.ly/3P2ogje
David Ritz Finkelstein was an Emeritus Professor of Physics at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Finkelstein obtained his PhD in Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Get free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[@guaromiami]

"Gentlemen, the restaurant's been closed for the past three hours."

[@mother3crazy]

😂😂😂

[@wmpx34]

Sir, this is a Wendy’s

[@lebucheron9815]

Sounds like my wife being purposely loud to wake me up when mad about something I did. Please record somewhere calm next time 😅

[@longcastle4863]

The guest is just the kind of person one would want as his or her mentor and dissertation supervisor in graduate school. Very captivating presentation!

[@user-xn4wq4sv3r]

Pleasure to listen...❤

[@pikiwiki]

Clear narrative from the interview subject. Pleasant to listen to

[@kamesh7818]

Clear narrative and clarity, awesome. thanks for sharing such series/discussions, very interesting.

[@johnkeck]

Brought up some interesting ideas in the last 30 seconds

[@cyrusramsey4741]

The problem with Quantum physics is that it only describes the results of what's measured not what's happening before those measurements.

[@lwss1617y]

This interview is fascinating!!!

[@Bill..N]

How can anyone not like David? Brilliant comments and always on the mark. QM is almost certainly in need of revisions, BUT not most of it.. Simply offered, the "mystery of QM" is directly relational to the ignorance of the observer.. Peace to all!

[@James-ll3jb]

😅

[@robotaholic]

I've watched this channel for years and I love it. I just skip to 2 or 3 minutes in just to skip the long winded meandering question and let the guest speak.

[@deistdean486]

“If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you understand quantum mechanics.” Richard Feynman's hard of hearing cousin.

[@Drbob369]

Good work

[@nunomaroco583]

Amazing talk, very interesting....

[@dr.satishsharma1362]

Excellent.... thanks 🙏.

[@rkgki]

How do we get used to the idea of time and space being quantized? A little at a time. : )

[@rochford59]

Wish l had teachers at school with the captivating way he explains a subject...l'd be a Genius today,well slightly more educated than l would be now!🤔

[@courtlaw1]

I have no idea what this man is saying, I just like the way he says it.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

space - time might be uncertainty of time and energy (from quantum mechanics) producing virtual particles? which expands when particle measured out of quantum wave function?

[@leviconnermusic]

Sound guy: "hey can we set up a mic over here in the kitchen?"

[@skipsroxooo]

Great discussion as usual, but what is up with all the distracting background noise??!! Way more of a bug than a feature.

[@saeiddavatolhagh9627]

In the expanding universe it looks as if space is being created in regions of cosmos away from matter. If space is truly quantized as it seems to be in units of Planck length, then the time associated with the creation of a quantum of space must be quantized too and in units of Planck time. This must have enormous implications for physics because more space should be able to hold more information, which may well be the basis for the rise of complexity with time in the universe that embodies the cosmic evolution. I wonder what you think of this.

[@stephenkagan]

Spacetime is curvature... Waves of water and whirlpools are made of molecules but the wave and whirl is not reducible to molecules. Reductive absurdum. The question is what is space? All these fields and their emergent particles participate in a larger context we call Spacetime. Is Spacetime really a "field" or the underlying way all the other the quantum fields overlap interact and 'interfere' with each other?

[@tekannon7803]

Background noise?

[@stephenzhao5809]

2:04 ... what are the implications if what we think of as space and time are quantized and then come in small pieces I mean we've sort of gotten used to the fact that atoms work and how they work and even though there's so much space there the electrons repulsed so things seem like they're hard even though they're mostly empty space we get our hands around understanding that but how can we ever get our hands get our minds around understanding space itself and time being not continuous 2:35 DF: very slowly namely you practice first there are really levels of quantum theory now ... there's classical physics then under it is this more accurate more delicate theory that we call quantum theory it seems very likely I should this has not yet passed preview have not yet bee subject to experimental test this could be pi in the sky but I see a lot of internal consistency to this suggestion that beneath the existing quantum theory is a deeper one which is even more quantum and has less commutativity more order dependence a fuller application of the revised logic that Heisenberg and Bhor suggested yesterday ( 3:22 and in this deeper or deep as quantum theory that space and time itself comes in pieces) right I call the name was already provided by professor Mahan of Yale University back in the 40s people saw everything was falling apart into lumps maybe time comes in lumps let's call it the chronon. 3:43 so like we have the the photon for light and the graviton 【which is a string theory term, being totally different from Loop theory】 for gravity we now have the chronon for time 【so-called chronon is infinitesimal, INS, which makes time continiuousness and nonsese to quantum mechanics, because there are different levels of spacetime as CMB - Cosmological Model of Bible - suggests: 】

[@MartinUToob]

So, the "chronon" is an extension of the.....Standard Model?

[@SpotterVideo]

Conservation of Spatial Curvature: Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? 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 Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (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 Charge" 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 Gluons. 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. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== 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 production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. 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, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. 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. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) 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? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. --------------------------

[@dogsbollox4335]

Spooky action at a distance ,infinite or finite ?

[@SpotterVideo]

@@dogsbollox4335 Since we do not fully understand 4D space, I have no answer. I wish I did.

[@JohnDoe-vp9ey]

Descartes once said that a vacuum is only between the ears of Pascal (who put forward the idea of vacuum)

[@davidrandell2224]

SR wrong due to reference frame mixing and bad math. GR follows as incorrect also.

[@DayInTheLifeOfAl]

How can those brainiac’s even think with the noise of Megatron being assembled in the background!

[@keppela1]

I know, with half a million subs, time to hire a sound engineer!

[@r2c3]

in Parmenides, Plato also covers Zeno's attempts to solve the nature of space and motion with his "proof by contradiction " where he argues in favor of the discrete nature of space and the illusion of motion 🤔

[@mikel4879]

r2c3 • And Plato is wrong. There's no such thing as a REAL discrete unit aka "quantum". "Things" don't "move" at all in ( the non-existent ) "time". "They" move only in "space"= CAUSALLY changing position with respect to the continuous interdependent causal background ( evidently, you should understand what "space" is in REALITY, because in itself, by itself, isolated from anything else, "space" does not exist! ) Etc. Any so-called "individual entity" ( a so-called "particle", a protein, a human body, a star, a Galaxy, etc ) is nothing but a place of local entropic causal convergence existing or taking place in a "sea" of continuous emergent causal substrates, at any level micro and macro that can be observed or imagined.

[@r2c3]

@@mikel4879 I agree with your "continuous interdependent causal" nature of reality but cannot accept the "lical entropic causal convergence" nature of structured information that we experience in present time because order seems to be sustainable in some way that we might not understand at this point...

[@tom-kz9pb]

If is best not to state things as fact that are not agreed upon or clearly understood. Most physicists do not take the position that "time does not exist". There may be KZbin videos proclaiming this, in overstated clickbait, but it seems like the majority view is that it is a superficial reading of special relativity. I think the real gist of special relativity is more that time and motion in space are interwoven as "spacetime", rather than being completely separate. Physics in general has reached a point of weirdness where it is impossible to be sure when you are listening to great sophistication or total bullsh*t. Much like religion or poetry. Weirdly enough, just in the past few weeks, I was thinking about Zeno's paradox, about an arrow not being able to reach its target, because it would have to traverse an infinite number of half-distances. It seemed to me that this suggested quantized space. I wondered why no one seemed to have thought of this. But now from the above post, I see that someone, Plato, did actually think of this, a very long time ago. But I think the jury is still out, even after thousands of years, and even with modern physics, as to whether Plato was wrong or right.

[@r2c3]

@@tom-kz9pb "it's best not to state things as facts that are not agreed upon or clearly understood" you're absolutely correct and I totally agree... the problem arises when you're told what facts are by someone who has access to resources that might not be available to you directly... in this case, you'll never be 100% confident of what the facts are because information that will be served to you will first be interpreted or evaluated by a third party that might or not be aligned with your own interests...

[@cujimmy1366]

So is Space and Time like packets of Quantum information.

[@silentbullet2023]

one feels like turning mass into energy on that special person's face who kept noising in the background.

[@piehound]

Plenum . . . that's a new one on me.

[@patientson]

Energy and Frequency

[@keppela1]

Wow, never heard of this guy, but he should be on the Brian Greene-Sean Carroll circuit.

[@snappycattimesten]

He died in 2016. RIP.

[@keppela1]

@@snappycattimesten Ahh, sorry to hear that.

[@Filip-ci3ng]

Damn noise in the background

[@arielperez797]

If this were true...then that implies that consciousness comes in quanta too? Since it is tied to space-time.

[@umzaum]

Разве кто-нибудь сомневается в существовании квантов времени и пространства? Начиная с трактатов древних греков, людям было понятно, что мироздание состоит из первичных неделимых кирпичиков. Но если эта идея неделимости была осуществлена в представлениях о атомах и из этого по необходимости родилась новая физика, то с какой целью физикам нужна идея квантования времени и пространства? Сегодня эта идея просто не нужна, наука и технологии вполне удовлетворительно обходятся непрерывностью времени и пространства. Но я верю, что обязательно придёт время, когда эти представления о квантовании времени и пространства потребуются для дальнейшего развития науки и научных представлений о мире. Например, для объяснений сверхъестественных явлений...

[@blijebij]

yes you are right, and its allready being done, holographic principle for example.

[@davidrandell2224]

Light is a cluster of expanding electrons. Particles, objects, matter. E=mc^2 simply a classical equation: light has momentum. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics.

[@SaintBrianTheGodless]

photons, not electrons

[@davidrandell2224]

@@SaintBrianTheGodless All Standard Theory/Model was replaced with Expansion Theory: So no photons, energy, waves, spin, fields etc.

[@Robinson8491]

I love it and this thinking, but it always seems so handwavy and first level thinking. "There's a graviton, so perhaps there is a chronon'. You don't have to be an expert physicist for this. I would like them come to the more deeper reasoning for this, the killer argument that made them say 'yes this is what I think it should be, or is very likely (or at least makes it rigourously plausible)' Also isn't Plancks constant about everything inside spacetime, and thus doesnt necessarily say anything about spacetime itself? Just like thermal time is unrelated to proper time? Is there a factor of plancks constant in general relativity, anyone? I do like to hear more from this David Finkelstein, he sounds very knowleable and well-read

[@infinitygame18]

Ra Very Good Keep it up, Fundamental nature of mind is that it start loving After understanding & meditation is something very Secret & Secred Connection to All your True Identify beyond your Chaterer mind, All Is One God, Reach The Extreme Possibility Before Mind Die in Reality

[@catherinemoore9534]

Behind these 'new' suggestions about the nature of reality, what's left of our 'reality'? It's not there, is it? It's all in the mind isn't it? What and where is reality?

[@djelalhassan7631]

Yes, there are possibilities of happenings out there and they only happen when we consciously observe them within the Consciousness of the Universal Consciousness.

[@kitstamat9356]

If spacetime is made of atoms, what is in between of them?

[@blijebij]

@@halcyon2864 I don't want you as teacher rofl!

[@blijebij]

@@halcyon2864 xD

[@blijebij]

@@halcyon2864 hahaha i totally agree ^^

[@charleswood2182]

Were time flowing particles, and with everything else in motion: where then the necessary irreducible, a relativistically absolute invariance necessary as foundation for any presumption of fixed reference frames? Hint. It's you, a singular personal identity.

[@ingenuity296]

Time to us is different from time in other planets, galaxies or the black holes. It's just a matter of perspective.

[@4D2M0T]

But from wherever we are our perspective of time will be the same, it will seem to pass at the same rate, therefore could time be a sense? We can have hallucinations of other senses like visual and auditory but we can also have hallucinations of time, some schizophrenic ppl have these hallucinations and they can also be drug induced similar to other sensory hallucinations.

[@longcastle4863]

@@4D2M0T Interesting. So if we were near the event horizon of a black hole and were able to still be alive, that almost infinite interval between one second and the next that we were caught in would seem to us to be as brief as any other second we ever experienced in our lifetimes?

[@4D2M0T]

@@longcastle4863 no that's not what I'm saying. In the circumstances you describe that almost infinite time would still be almost infinite but from our perspective an infinite amount of seconds will pass an eternity, while we wait to be annihilated. But I didn't even finish high school 25 years ago so take what I say with a grain of salt 😊

[@longcastle4863]

@@4D2M0T Okay, noted, but still you raise some interesting ideas. Makes me want to pay attention, if I can, to just what is our experience of time passing in dreams. Kant says that space and time may not actually exist, but are more likely just the template our brain creates upon which we organize our sensory perceptual experiences of the world around us.

[@ingenuity296]

@4D2M0T Right. Especially at traumatic times, an experience might seem like longer or shorter.

[@NothingMaster]

Do those aggravating cafeteria sounds come in quantum-like chunks, too?! For the love of science, couldn’t you have done this video in a quieter setting? 🤔🧐

[@matishakabdullah5874]

A quantum = a bit of the universal computer.

[@eddenz1356]

Simulation hypothesis?

[@longcastle4863]

I sometimes think a problem we have is always seeing reality in terms of whatever our latest technology is. Once the Universe was thought of as a wound up watch. My guess is that in a hundred years the simulation hypothesis will seem as stale as an old hat on a rack.

[@dominicmccrimmon]

I had thought quanta were artifacts created by math to allow manipulation. Not really discrete, but a way of breaking things to look at them and get answers. I might misunderstand. Show us all again the David Finkelstein quanta (recordings). It's okay to show the recording date. It's the scientific thing to do.

[@vanikaghajanyan7760]

6:00 This can be tested experimentally. The gravitational radius (or Schwarzschild radius) is a characteristic radius defined for any physical body with mass: r(G)=2GM/c^2 Consequently: 2E(0)/r(G)=F(pl)=c^4/G=ε(pl)/r(pl): with indicating the mutual quantization of the mass (energy) and space-time: m(0)//m(pl)=r(G)/2r(pl)=n,where n-total number of quanta of the system; the tension vector flux: n=[(1/4π)(Gћc)^-½]gS ( const for all orbits of the system: n=0,1,2,3....). Moreover, the parameter r(0)=r(G)-r(pl)=(2n-1)r(pl), defining the interval of the formation of the system, at n=0, when r=r(G)=0 (for example, the state of the "universe" before the Big Bang) turns out to be a quite definite quantity: r(0)=-r(pl). In the area [(-rpl) - 0 - (+rpl)] there is an implementation of external forces, "distance": (-rpl)+(+rpl)=0 (≠2rpl). On the Kruskal diagram of the hyperbole r=0 corresponds to the true Schwarzschild feature, the features V and VI are not even covered by the global (R, T)- space-time and correspond to the "absolute" vacuum; then the singular areas above and below the hyperbolas r=0 can be formally treated as the energy source (external forces). That is, the frightening "true singularity" is actually a superconducting heterotrophic "window" between the proto-universe (the source) and physical bodies*. As a fundamental theory, GR has the ability with just one parameter: r(G)/r=k to predict, explain new physical effects, and amend already known ones. Photon frequency shift in gravitational field Δw/w(0)=k; the angle of deflection of a photon from a rectilinear propagation path =2k, the Newtonian orbit of the planet shifts forward in its plane: during one revolution, a certain point of the orbit is shifted by an angle =3πk, for a circular orbit (eccentricity е=0); in the case of an elliptical orbit - for example, for perihelion displacement, the last expression must be divided by (1-e^2). GR/QG predicts a new physical effect: w/w(pl)=k; expression for gravitational radiation from a test body. This is amenable to physical examination in laboratory conditions at present. ----------------------- *) - From this, generally, from Einstein's equations, where the constant c^4/G=F(pl), one can obtain a quantum expression (as vibration field) for the gravitational potential: ф(G)=(-1/2)[Għ/с]^½ (w)=-[h/4πm(pl)]w. Final formula:ф(G)=-[w/w(pl)]c^2/2, where ф(G) - is Newtonian gravitational potential, r(n')=nλ/π=(n+n')2r(pl)l , the corresponding orbital radius, w - the frequency of the quanta of the gravitational field (space-time); - obviously, the quanta of the field are themselves quantized: λ=(1+n'/n)λ(pl) = 2πc/w, where n'/n - system gravity unpacking ratio, n'- the orbit number (n'=0,1,2,3…). Obviously, on the horizon [r=r(rG), n'=0] the "door" is closed, however, the quanta [λ=λ(pl)] can go out singly and form the first and all subsequent half-orbits (n'=1,2, 3 ...) during the time t(0)=r/c=2nт, where т=1/w, т=((1+n'/n)т(pl), spending part of their energy on it each time. And it is this mechanism that provides the step-by-step formation of a variable gravitational field: variably accelerated expansion of spacetime as a phase space: |a|=g=πc^2/L, where L[=πr^2/r(G)] is the length of the phase trajectory (of course, the quanta coming through the "window" are also rhythmically restored). The phase velocity of evolution v'/π= r(pl)w/π; m(0)=(c/2G)rv', where v'=v^2/c. The angular momentum: L(p)=|pr|=n^2ћ [const for all orbits of the system; at n=1: L(p)=ћ] and moment of power: M(F)=dL(p)/dt(0)=nћw/2=-E(G)=E*, where t(0)=r/c, E*- energy of self-action. The gravitational field is characterized by a spontaneous flow: J*=(v'/π )(1/4π) g^2/G, where v'/π- phase velocity of field evolution. Entropy (here: a measure of diversity/variety, not ugliness/disorder) of the system: S=πε(pl)r(t)=(n+n')k, where k is the Boltzmann constant. Obviously, on the horizon entropy=min and with fundamental irreversibility, information is preserved (+ evolves, accumulates). Accordingly, m=m(pl)/(1+n'/n), where m=ħw/c^2, is the quantum of the full mass: M=n'm [

[@BenAroundo]

Show off.

[@cosmichappening1712]

Yeah, but is gravity a force or the curvature of space-time?

[@vanikaghajanyan7760]

@@cosmichappening1712 The gravitational field obeys the local equivalence principle and therefore it can be geometrized. Other physical fields do not have this property. However, the gravitational field does not obey the global equivalence principle and it can be excluded and thus the metric can be reduced to the form of an inertial Cartesian system only in an infinitesimal 4-volume in the vicinity of the event R. That is, the gravitational field cannot be geometrized either, since real gravitational fields are variable in space and time, and therefore it is impossible to exclude them by converting time coordinates everywhere and always, and, conversely, generate them by selecting appropriate non-inertial reference frames.

[@themathsandscience1777]

What is the future with quantum theory?

[@itzed]

I guess it depends on how many clumps of chronons are thrown at us.

[@davidrandell2224]

QM classicalized in 2010. Forgotten Physics website for facts not fantasies.

[@blijebij]

@@itzed xD

[@clausbacher]

In about 60 years you will understand, if you will survive the big problem that is around the corner.

[@NotNecessarily-ip4vc]

The Greeks banned the number zero for 1500 years. This literally blocked them from being able to invent calculus. Newton and Einstein both consider zero (and it's geometric counterpart zero-dimensional space) to be "not-necessary". It's kind of silly how mad people are at 0 and 0D (which are necessary). 🤷‍♂️ Leibniz has the correct math and physics (where 0 and 0D are necessary).

[@DaleClark1000]

Wait a minute... we know how big the photon is?????

[@pieternooten]

Wait. The sound of someone smashing plates, cups or whatever in or on or off whatever in the distance is way too distracting! For these kind of interviews one needs a dynamic microphone instead of a condenser mic.

[@oposkainaxei]

Why this whole series has miserable sound? Can‘t be that difficult…

[@CYBERLink-ph8vl]

Is it seed youngest or oldest part of tree? Your most youngest photograph is the most oldest one. Consciousness comes prior to everything before big Bang, before evolution and even before that consciousness was there. We are not universe becoming pure awareness,we are pure awareness becoming universe,matter doesn't becomes conscious it's consciousness that is becoming matter and then complex matter. Science scares away from this fact. And has still stuck to materialism a 20th century relic. Like how a ret"a'rded child who grows up to become adult but still attached to his toys.

[@michaeltrower741]

Who's banging dishes around in the background?

[@infinitygame18]

Why is the Quantum so Mysterious? Quan☯tum

[@patientson]

Richard Finemann

[@ywtcc]

The vacuum catastrophe might be the most important problem in physics. QM and GR aren't just a little in disagreement when it comes to the vacuum, they're in disagreement by a factor of 10^120! The quantum mechanical view of the vacuum does not appear to be valid at the scale of general relativity. My bet is that this contradiction requires a theory of dark energy to resolve.

[@blijebij]

It shows we have a big hole in our understanding there. It is indeed an insane misjudgement. You could be right.

[@longcastle4863]

Why words like “catastrophe”? Is there any benefit to such, what seem to me, hyperbolic words, when wouldn’t saying “vacuum problem” amount to the same thing? I’m thinking of this from a layperson’s perspective. Are people running around in panic waving their arms in the air and screaming orders at subordinates or what?

[@jareknowak8712]

If Time and Space are particles, can they still be dimensions?

[@shadowoffire4307]

"Quantum mechanics: the science that proves that, sometimes, even the universe doesn't quite know what it's doing." We are the universe and we don't know what we are doing we just go on creating and shaping Reality it just happens like how dreams happens. We automatically creates dreams and we don't have control over it. We think we have free will and controle most powerful cocktail but a actually we dont have both. We just don't have it.

[@SaintBrianTheGodless]

an untestable possibility that no scientist would acknowledge, yet it is still a possibility, and not acknowledging that is a good thing I think.

[@peweegangloku6428]

If space is quantized, or better yet spacetime is quantized i.e. made of pieces that are expected to be large enough to show up in experimental tests, will those pieces not occupy a space? If so, of what space are they a piece of and which space do they occupy? A piece of anything has to occupy a space. I like the fact that he said this could be a pie-in-the-sky.

[@Bill..N]

I think David pointed out that there was ONLY spacetime, and the idea of nothingness or a total vacuum is a fallacy.. He suggested it was FILLED with energy and should be called the "Fullness" NO?

[@peweegangloku6428]

@@Bill..N I think you should watch the video again. He was very clear that spacetime is made of particles (quantized). How did he call it? "Cronome"?

[@dorfmanjones]

But there is no space that acts as a receptacle for these 'pieces'. When you say 'occupying a space' you are inferring an apriori container. But space/time is emergent. If you're adding a number to a progression, it doesn't necessarily mean that you have to make room for it first.

[@peweegangloku6428]

@@dorfmanjones Your analogy with numbers is mismatched unless you say your "number to a progression" is metaphysical, and in that case your space or spacetime will be metaphysical. But if you are dealing with anything with a physical quantity, it definitely will have to take up space. This is exactly true with numbers. If you were to write numbers in progression on a board, in whatever shape or form, they will obviously take up space. The same is true if you were to write them in a note book or anywhere else. The only time numbers will not occupy a space is when they are treated metaphysically, other than that, numbers do occupy space. So again, as long as it is a particle, it occupies not an apriori space but a physically observable space. And that makes his theory incoherent.

[@kaminioppenheimer1355]

​@@peweegangloku6428 Let's consider the possibility that metaphysical "space" ("non-space") is not exclusively non-physical, not strictly opposite of physical space in a dualistic sense, but rather inclusive of the physical and spread throughout the physical, while remaining distinct from it and beyond it. And that there is some subtle interface between physical and metaphysical, composed of something subtle but substantive like consciousness. In this situation, quantized space/spacetime could both occupy "space" and not, simultaneously, paradoxically. Logically, everything is made of something subtler than itself, smaller than itself, less grossly physical than itself, ad infinitum. No thing is made of nothing, even though we may call everything beyond the vanishing point "nothing", or "vacuum", or non-space. (When the supposed primal seed of reality inexplicably appeared in "the void", the void was voided of its apparent voidness.)

[@gmonorail]

motion picture

[@Maxwell-mv9rx]

Quantun theory is undertimate not still determinist. If quantun theory is unpredictable links It space time is unfundamental theory,?

[@SaintBrianTheGodless]

I'm confused. Why do we talk always of time, which is a measure of change, and not change itself. As in, why is there change at all? What permits change to happen? Why is the Universe dynamic and not static? I realize if it were, the question becomes tantamount to "why do things exist at all?" but it still pulls at me. Time is a measure of things changing, but at the smallest level, it seems we're made of things that do not themselves change, except as to the order in which these changeless things are arranged. If Reality has existed forever (as it must have)(her I mean the overall reality in which all universes exist, the meta-reality, or perhaps the inflationary multiversal reality) then it follows that Reality has always been dynamic and not static. Then again, at that large a level, perhaps all these concepts fall apart. All I know is, reality is a mystery and it's fascinating to me.

[@michelprins]

quanta costa ;P

[@user-vn4zo6rc1x]

The Q remains whether science watches TV, maybe I've watched teletubbies too many X soa

[@marcus3502]

A history lesson followed by I dont know

[@breakawaybooks4752]

Because at the end of the day, it's little more than dogma.

[@viralsheddingzombie5324]

No, there is no graviton.

[@brendangreeves3775]

Time is a measure of relative change, but change ( an event), concerns transfers of energy. However, energy is transferred at resonant frequencies, and , in that sense, time is not continuous. Continuous progress is impossible, since an infinite number of infinitely small changes, would be necessary - an impossibility.

[@bozo5632]

I can't walk to the toilet because it would require infinitely many infinitely small movements.

[@brendangreeves3775]

Nature is fundamentally relational. A finite number of movements is possible in a relational sense.@@bozo5632

[@panmichael5271]

That background racket, if you possess superstitious tendencies, would suggest that all this talk of spacetime quantization is merely noise! 😏

[@stellarwind1946]

The code of the matrix is what you’d see at the Planck scale of the universe.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

What are quantum'tists after - what are they looking for, what are they hoping for, what are they searching for, what are they dreaming for? 'Quantum' is a reification for all ‐ all things and non things ‐ being merely particles. Quantum is quantity; quantity is measure; measure implies objectivity. Where did you find consciousness, or love, or imagination, or aspiration, or creativity, or intellect, or nous, or Wisdom, or reason, or Principles, or Laws, or the Subject(Atman) under a microscope?

[@tomjackson7755]

Thank you for proving that you have no clue what you are talking about yet again.

[@credterfe]

Breakthroughs in the understanding of reality:- there is an absolute zero temperature ( - 273 K ) which cannot decrease further, energy comes in packets ( E = h v ) rather than being a continuum, speed of light independent of relative motion, gravity according to mass and square of radius , DNA and the triplet genetic code , sun as an LED lamp , earth only 48000 years old (these two're mine), etc.

[@shramanaascender]

Time doesn't exist 😁

[@EverythingCameFromNothing]

I have no time for this 🤪

[@mikel4879]

Shramanaa • You might take it as a joke, but what you said is true. "Time" ( = the perception = the notion, of "time" ) is made up by and "exists" only in your biological brain.

[@bozo5632]

You said that before.

[@harryelise2757]

Yes it does,we are it. Intelligent , Time.

[@shadowoffire4307]

Yes we mistook measurement of change and happening of events as time. Huge stupidity actually. We see everything in perspective of our senses again huge stupidity.

[@adrianwright8685]

"the Quantum" ? come on, at least be literate!

[@AyomipoFasoranti]

You the contemporary philosophers of science should stop bothering yourself on the issues revolving around consciousness and quantum physics. Their philosophical description and scientific explanation will be put forward shortly. It will prove Einstein's theory of relativity (how E=MCs). A unified theory of consciousness from the African holistic worldview. Hence, Postmodern Science is in view to exemplify all incomplete philosophies of the global world, the philosophy of everything. Iré o

[@brothermine2292]

"Postmodern Science" is an oxymoron.

[@AyomipoFasoranti]

@@brothermine2292Wait for the solution to the limitation in modern science (the mind-body problem) to be explained scientifically, and then you will understand the long-standing intellectual transitional traditions.

[@brothermine2292]

@@AyomipoFasoranti : Why me, and not you too?

[@AyomipoFasoranti]

@@brothermine2292 Because you need to understand more. Anything else?

[@brothermine2292]

@@AyomipoFasoranti : You haven't demonstrated your own understanding. And since you think I need to wait until some event related to scientific explanation of consciousness occurs, why don't you need to wait for the same event?

[@Amar-bl5no]

What the fuck are those crashing plates and broken glass sounds...??