Roger Penrose on Spacetime, Quantum Theory, and General Relativity (Part 2) | Closer To Truth Chats

[@emergentform1188]

I could listen to the great Penrose all day long. Legend. Thank you so much for giving him a soapbox!

[@notanemoprog]

100%

[@wesboundmusic]

200% ! (y)

[@schmautzeramehanyn7645]

Exactly the way I am feeling!

[@jeremiahlethoba8254]

Who is a non scientist or just never studied science here...I always find it fascinating when I find people not in science interested in science. It gives me hope for small talk at parties, that I can be free to get carried away without people losing interest😂 🍺

[@ChrisHanks_ColonelOfTruth]

This interview is an ABSOLUTE TREASURE. So much history here! Glad you turned Sir Roger loose on the details of his rich and storied evolution as a thinker and scientist. Wonderful stuff!

[@robertfinlay656]

This is the single best article I have ever seen on KZbin over all the years

[@TH-ph7gg]

Hard to get enough of Penrose. And this youtube channel does an excellent job of presenting him.

[@fredk9999]

Ditto

[@hireality]

Roger Penrose is the greatest scientist alive today.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

along with his colleague Professor Basil J. Hiley (who had collaborated with Bohm and Penrose also).

[@owen7185]

Agreed

[@sesanjoseph8805]

Bcos you don't understand a thing he's saying.

[@SpotterVideo]

What happens if we add one spatial dimension to Dr. Penrose's "Twistor Theory"? If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle? Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics? What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Sir Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model. Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? 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. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules.

[@cgmp5764]

We are lucky to have such a deep mathematical thinker who has contributed so much and has more to follow.

[@hhumca]

What a great man Penrose. Thank you.

[@johnnisshansen]

This will be among the best 'closer to thruth' ever made. Roger is fantastic. And so the toastmaster.

[@ckotty]

Brilliant exchange Great conversation 👋🏽👋🏽👋🏽

[@markcarey67]

Sir Rog is the boss

[@math.physics]

"In the video, Sir Roger Penrose presents a fascinating perspective on the current state of our understanding of the fundamental nature of the universe, particularly in regards to the intersection of spacetime, quantum theory, and general relativity. He highlights the ongoing debates and unresolved issues within the scientific community, such as the apparent incompatibility of quantum mechanics and general relativity. His argument for the need for a new theory, one that unifies these seemingly disparate concepts, is compelling and thought-provoking. One of the most striking elements of Penrose's discussion is his emphasis on the importance of considering the role of consciousness in our understanding of the universe. He suggests that the current frameworks of physics and cosmology may be incomplete without taking into account the subjective nature of perception and experience. This idea is both intriguing and challenging, as it pushes us to re-examine some of our most basic assumptions about the nature of reality. Overall, Penrose's presentation is a reminder of the ongoing quest for knowledge and the importance of being open to new perspectives and ideas. It is a call to continue pushing the boundaries of our understanding and to seek a deeper and more complete understanding of the universe." The comment above is from Chat GPT, it is the answer to my question: "Can you write an articulated and thought-provoking comment on the KZbin video: Roger Penrose on Spacetime, Quantum Theory, and General Relativity - closer to truth chats ?" The direction we are heading is really astounding.

[@ronaldogilley4274]

Sir Roger the GOAT👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

[@natmanprime4295]

penrose is one of those thathas gone so far into pure maths that hes "wrapped round" into philosophy

[@kennethwilliams4169]

i want part 3!

[@peterhall6656]

This is one of the best insights: 24:30 to about 28:00. Penrose's comments on the guassianity of the cosmic background radiation versus the second law of thermodynamics is not something you find in pop culture explanations.

[@DrZedDrZedDrZed]

I write about this in my upcoming book! I dunno why its not brought up more. It's basically the HEART of the mystery. He does kinda of dismiss inflation there for a second, but if you take it seriously, inflating spacetime serves as the only way to increase entropy in such a hot/homogenous early universe. Increase the size of the container, and you for allow difference to begin unfolding. There's something profoundly important about the relationship between global expansion and local contraction that we're not picking up on, not to mention gravity's inability to play a significant role in such a hot/dense/high entropy state universe. I think about this constantly!!!

[@livedierepeat420]

Happy New Year!🎊 thanks for the amazing content 💪

[@Carfeu]

Incredible how he describes his Nobel idea as a creative unconscious thought

[@skepticalobserver7484]

On most interviews with brilliant scientists I end up wishing the interviewer would shut the hell up. Not so here! Great job by the interviewer of getting as much out the guest as possible. It helps that Penrose is a great talker as well.

[@RadoslavFicko]

If the amplitudes of gravitational waves are also the Fourier image of the wave function,then the gravitational group velocity - the combination of waves of similar frequencies and wave vectors is a package (a particle that has its own momentum and energy) of different states of the passage of time? Past, present and future in one package?

[@mervcharles8365]

I have been obsessing over why the need to include gravity in quantum mechanics. Looks like everything breaks down when gravity is introduced and at the quantum level gravity plays close to no role at all (except for at the start of the universe, blackholes, and a few other areas). Was hoping Sir Penrose would help me understand it better but he doesn't believe that gravity should be brought into quantum mechanics. Such a great discussion. I just ordered "The Road to Reality" & "The Emperor's New Mind" and can't wait to read them.

[@raymondfung1612]

Really well done. Though it would be great if we can all give some thoughts to Nobel Prize Winner Professor Roger Penrose’s suggested changes to the Big Bang theory. On the back of Professor Penrose’s idea, I was thinking: after the last proton decay into radiation, only electromagnetic waves left, ie. a system of pure energy. At this point, the universe (being an isolated system) reached the maximum entropy. Lets assume Mass is fundamental to the existence of space time, and with no mass, there is no more space time, there shouldn’t be any volume measurable by our standards. Conversely, without time, wavelengths of electromagnetic waves become meaningless as well. Interestingly, at this point, with no space time, what was supposed to be the state with maximum entropy suddenly also becomes the state of having the lowest entropy. The condition equals to the condition described in 10^-43 second “Planck Epoch”. At Planck Epoch, the system has a pile of energy. It’s also has both maximum and minimum entropy. As prescribed by the second law of thermodynamics and the uncertainty principle, the stochastic nature and the need to get out of the state of minimum entropy suggest the pile of energy would have convert into mass on a stochastic basis (remember e=mc^2)(in a similar fashion as we observe the exact location of any particles). Space time suddenly re-emerge at large scale. The energy that spread across the volume of space that didn’t convert into mass became background radiation. Now, the trick I would like to suggest is that the expansion process isn’t continuous as what was suggested in the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis theory. It’s more like it suddenly happened in a blink, and mass was distributed like the distribution of water droplets on a mirror after a splash, some big, some small, unevenly across the newly re-emerged space-time, with some energy didn’t turn into mass and become background radiation we observed. What is suggested here maybe is a plausible alternative to the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis theory. Some food for thoughts to provoke thinking. Cheers

[@baskin9794]

Yes I agree

[@koonigallery2107]

If a photon behaves as a wave and is pure energy, how can it travel in a wave 🌊 without having additional force or loosing some energy? Because the up down movement must take some force even if it doesn't have mass. Are the spacial/gravitational fields sandwiching the photons along there trajectories? Also If you do the double split experiment 100 times, do all the particles always get detected in the exact same places, or are they randomly detected? Thanks

[@RadoslavFicko]

If Bohr's momentum quantization condition is rmv= hn/2Pi, then the closed surface quantization is 4(Pi)r^2= (hn)^2/Pi(P^2), then it can be written that Rab-1/2Rgab=(8PiG/c^4)Tab=Pi(P^2)/(hn)^2. ???? Can that if spacetime is flat, it commutes (AB-BA)=0 and curved spacetime does not commute (AB-BA)=kC=RnbydAn????

[@shabzone]

Does plank constant remain constant through the eons or does it expand with each cycle as well? I think he kinda dodged the question about how the cold end of an eon transitions to the hot beginning of another?

[@laurentdrozin812]

Yep, I never understood how that works.

[@livedierepeat420]

the constant remains the same, as it has thru our journey. in the next verse, the laws of physics may be different and require a new measurement constant. what ignites the next universe from the cold 🥶 end? Entropy and the second law of thermodynamics says that cannot happen. So that my friend, is the 64k dollar question. 👍

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Planck's Constant can just be thought of as the "average energy of light" but when Planck converted it to joules he canceled out one of the seconds terms, thereby covering up the inherent noncommutative time-frequency that is nonlocal protoconsciousness. This is why Penrose focuses on the de Broglie-Einstein Relation so that Planck's Constant x frequency = Mc(squared).

[@hmimouabderrahim3628]

Sir Rog..🌟👍

[@NothingMaster]

The most ironic bit here is that we think we understand all there is to know about spacetime, where in reality we know very little. Is spacetime ultimately a physical entity? Does it emerge from a more fundamental reality? Or is it (and it’s curvature) a mere mathematical/GR tool, describing the outward/observable workings of gravity? How long might we remain satisfied with Wheeler’s circular (albeit pragmatic) assertion that: “Matter tells spacetime how to curve; spacetime tells matter how to move.”?

[@michaelvandijk6490]

Could there be more then one temporal dimension?

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

check out the de Broglie Law of Phase Harmony and also Alain Connes. Penrose relies on the noncommutativity of Alain Connes. Essentially the future overlaps with the past in what Penrose calls "fundamental time." It's a pre-space process as pure algebra or protoconsciousness.

[@michaelvandijk6490]

@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 Still learning here. Noncommu-- seems the easy way out. Took in some Susskind btw. No anti-deSitter-space and no positive-curved space....can there be extra temporal dimensions (besides the one that we know and the three spacial ones)?

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@michaelvandijk6490 yes it's the fifth dimension. It has to do with the quantum measurement problem. If you study quantum physics professor Basil J. Hiley - he has talks on youtube. Roger penrose goes into this also. All of western modern math is "commutative geometry." Alain Connes explains that the truth of music is actually noncommutative. He's the only scientist to explain this. I also realized this truth of music from my private music training - taking adult music theory when I was 15 years old. What this means is that the geometric dimension is zero but it's the 5th dimension as pure time or what Connes calls "primitive time." Math Professor Louis Kauffman calls it "primordial time." The math is nonlocal and so it's before the "collapse" of the wavefunction. It's the "inner cross products" of the matrices. The concept is actually very simple but since people learn by rote then they don't realize this concept. In music theory the Perfect Fifth is 3/2 as C to G overtone but Western music theory created irrational magnitude commutative geometry. This means that 2/3 as the Perfect Fifth is also C to F as the undertone but this was not allowed in Western music theory since it is noncommutative to 3/2 as C to G. Western music theory is taught as the Perfect Fifth PLUS the Perfect Fourth equals the octave. This means 3/2 PLUS 4/3 = 2. For this math to work there was a lie about the foundation of reality - Philolaus flipped his lyre around to cover up the fact that a different root tonic had to be used. This is also found in how the Perfect Fifth has noncommutative exponentials. So when trying to line up the octave for the music scale you get the Pythagorean Comma at 7 octaves with 12 Perfect Fifths (for the 12 music notes of the scale). This means that 3 is to the 12 while 2 is to the 19th. But when you put it back into the same octave scale then the inverse is noncommutative so it is 3 to the (1/19th) and 2 to the (1/12th). Only Alain Connes points out this noncommutative truth and this means again the noncommutative ratios are more dense then the irrational magnitude geometric continuum. Essentially Time is cubic due to the imaginary number used as the noncommutative phase. So each time a measurement is taken in quantum physics this changes the order of the time via the imaginary number. Normally in physics this "negative frequency" as a time-reversed signal is just squared as the probability (thereby canceling out the negative frequency for an amplitude squared probability). So as per Leonard Susskind - what noncommutative means is that the foundation of reality is a holographic wormhole with the future and the past overlapping via this 5th dimension. This was known to the nonwestern ancients doing alchemical meditation also.

[@michaelvandijk6490]

@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 okay, started with Hiley and ended up at M-theory. Structurally more dimensions...yes...explicitly one more temporal one...no. Can't wrap my mind around M-theory, how do they get it stable and working in our normal everyday universe.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@michaelvandijk6490 No it's not M-theory. Noncommutativity is it's own deal. OK String theory does rely on noncommutativity at the foundation yet. So I guess it is connected. Actually this is all quantum biology - Basil Hiley goes into this as does Penrose. The protoconsciousness is accessed through meditation. Eddie Oshins figured this out when he worked at SLAC.

[@Tore_Lund]

Does information pass from the previous universe in Cyclic Conformal Cosmology? Does Photons of the old Universe imprint on the Quantum states for the the next Big Bang? I do understand that an universe with only photons have zero length in any direction, as per Einstein, but is the distribution of photons absolutely homogeneous to achieve true "zero" volume as well? (That is if Penrose is not arguing that it doesn't matter as the absence of matter is enough to make the notion of volume meaningless and that the initial universe does not only has a single quantum state). If there is some divergence, ie. the CMB might also show a remnant of that, thought the light from it itself, is from the much later reionization. Is the initial state of Big Bang "special" in CCC?

[@gregoryhead382]

G = {(1.49049161 u) (electron radius)^2(electron radius/s^2)/(m_e)^2} is a guesstimate to symmetry.

[@theborg9293]

Could a black hole towards the end of its life, after its evaporated enough ( via hawking radiation) and lost enough mass, become something different ie bounce back into normal space like a temperature phase change

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

In noncommutativity the quantum time-reversed signal is also an antigravity force that balances out the gravitational singularity. This is called an Instanton or eternal black hole. Nobel Physicist Gerard 't Hooft had a debate with Penrose about this on a livestream. They actually agree but just describe it a bit differently. The "bounce back" depends on whether you are perceiving it from internal to the event horizon - in which case it is negative frequency and not negative energy.

[@gavilaR8DR]

@ShawnRyanShowOfficial please get Sir Roger Penrose on your show

[@SuperBlinding]

Does everything in the universe want ( if that is the right word ) to be instant or at least at the speed of light ?

[@notanemoprog]

Well I know that I do!

[@michaelplis3783]

You certainly get that impression from this discussion. All matter breaks down to massless partials. Time becomes irrelevant, and therefore, space becomes irrelevant. The universe forgets its size and energy somehow condenses. Then a new big bang occurs new universe is born.

[@blengi]

Roger should upgrade his CCC to a conformal cyclic inflationary multiverse. My failed abiogenesis simulation which accidentally seems more like a cosmological model, implies similar conformal eons which transition to inflationary behaviour depending on the density and size of other universes in the vicinity in a quasi cyclic way. The sim also implied that the internal structure and equilibrium of a black hole is basically equivalent to the average external state outside a universe thermodynamically and blackholes are perhaps somewhat connected to this external state too ie universes might subtly communicate information between one another. In fact the inside of a black could act like a separate multiverse implying there multitude of multiverses in some sort of metaverse, among a bunch of other interesting things at all scales....

[@shadowofthenamelessking]

Interesting.

[@ExistenceUniversity]

It's still just 1 UNIverse.

[@sesanjoseph8805]

The look on the face of Robert Kuhn is a comedy in itself.😂

[@mark.J6708]

Wonderful and insightful "chat" will finish later and watch again, my favorite part is him talking about infinity and time.... it has been fun (on my part) to have been called quite an idiot who understands nothing when I have said both time and infinity have a start and a stop point... it is the most logical explanation for the way things are as well as the concept of passing eons... and isn't is fascinating to ponder the possibility that we could possibly see or discover "echoes" I call them of past eons... if you contemplate the idea that our universe could be a probability matrix of incomprehensible processes (to us for now anyway)... then all such exercises have a start and a finish... the 5Ws behind all that are the real great questions. What a great channel, unbelievably pleased to have stumbled across it. Thanks again for what must be both fun and hard work laying out your shows and conversations. As we said when I was young, freaking outstanding.

[@LuciFeric137]

Is this current or another edit?

[@CloserToTruthTV]

We filmed this a little earlier this year!

[@notanemoprog]

In the Block Universe everything is current!

[@TheGrahamBrechin]

This might sound mad, but could it be possible that our observable universe is actually contained within a black hole? .... perhaps the missing matter and energy are outside of our host black hole?

[@DrZedDrZedDrZed]

Yes, and yes. It's not so mad. But don't be so sure its actually "within" it. If you take many of GR's predictions to their logical conclusions, then there's a view where nothing every truly falls INTO a black hole, but only ever remains on its surface. But obviously, black holes have mass, grow, and eventually evaporate from our perspective outside of them but to any of the infalling matter, it crosses the boundary of the event horizon infinitely far into the future (and the moment it does so, it reaches the singularity) paradoxically at the same time as anything else to ever be consumed by the black hole. It's both perpetually stranded, and instantaneously consumed, leading one to think that black holes might be hyperobjects who's entanglements between their interiors and surfaces lead to new dimensions of freedom "within" them.

[@OfficialGOD]

This is epic

[@PetraKann]

Why?

[@OfficialGOD]

@@PetraKann love listening to Roger Penrose's views and am so glad he is still with us. My teacher unfortunately passed away from COVID, but it's great to see that his teacher is still going strong ❤️

[@PetraKann]

@@OfficialGOD Thanks for your response. Was your teacher injected with mRNA or DNA Gene Modulation Therapies? These are interesting times Mr GOD

[@winslowpippleton7157]

Where is part 1?

[@ethigrown]

Previous epoch

[@aviecenna8579]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y5a8pIaYrJydoJo

[@SuperBlinding]

Where-ever part 1 is.

[@josephwhitesell7553]

It was burned with the library of Alexandria.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

who knows where anything is, it's a mystery.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

The big bang wasn't the beginning stated by Penrose -- nor is nature the Cause which some believe. Nature is a mixture of different laws, ultimately all working as one, in unison; although salutary for the whole, the higher or superior beings are unaffected whereas the lower deal with strife or evil. And gravity Penrose believes to be fundamental whereas he says everything else is random. He's introducing the "accidents" far to soon. 31:40 Finally we get at the meat off it. Been quite dry up til this point. Thank you Closer to Truth, and Penrose taking the time to do the interview.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

thank goodness you know, maybe tell sir roger as soon as possible before the universe implodes, jospeh wood in the comment above yours would probably like a collaborator for his nobel.....

[@esorse]

The area of a square equals the product of it's base and height, or 'a squared' = a x a = a^2 for "x" multiplication and a^3 = a x a x a, where the 'square root' of a^2 = √a^2 = (a^2)^(1/2) = a, is the square's straight line segment side occupying a one dimensional, non-negative, real numbered * ray starting at zero with infinity and an arrow opposite, called ℝ≥ 0 Ray, that Minkowski includes with the Complex Plane's imaginary number = √-1 to define space-time, however the result maybe non-sensical, since the law of non-contradiction : nothing is it's opposite, subject exponent operation has inconsistent opposite arguments for a single entity : i = √-1 = (-1)^1/2 . * In the non-negative real numbers with the identifier, ℝ0 , geometrically represented by a straight line starting at zero with infinity and an arrow opposite, instantiated - discrete natural - number two can be written, (1, 3), meaning it is the 'open interval' of uncountably infinite real numbers from one to three exclusive - not including one and three ; real numbers includes rational numbers, that can written as a ratio, x/y, for x whole numbers like 0, 1, 2, ... and y natural numbers 1, 2 3, ... where "/" means divided by and irrational numbers that can't, who have a possibly infinite non-recurring sequence of numbers after the decimal point, like Euler's number, e, approximated to two decimal places by 68/25 = 2.72.

[@Michael-tq6xm]

And...

[@porkyappleyard641]

You are wrong in the conclusion. Its actually 2.71.

[@esorse]

My Samsung phone calculator's returning 2.72 for 68/25.

[@porkyappleyard641]

@@esorse Roger Penrose is my best friend and confirmed its 2.71.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Study math professor Louis Kauffman on how the origin of the imaginary number is actually due to noncommutativity. The irrational magnitudes actually were created from the wrong music theory.

[@daithiocinnsealach1982]

I respect his grasp of physics. It's his grasp of Iron Age metaphysics that gets me.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

What?

[@daithiocinnsealach1982]

@@S3RAVA3LM He said at the beginning "well, I can go on lecturing about this forever because nobody will ever prove me wrong." Figure it out for yourself.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

@@daithiocinnsealach1982 ah, thank you for sharing -- and Penrose went on to say he ought prove himself wrong. A little condescending. I study the Ancients texts and metaphysics -- if they were here today, there'd be an apocalypse: the shaking down of the..."new" constructs so truth and Reason be rectified once again.

[@ianmarshall9144]

@@S3RAVA3LM Really , i forgot they had cell phones , had been to the moon , had medical scanners , planes , trains and cars , they had figured it all out and it produced fuck all , since Newton though , well it speaks for itself , enough said .

[@aminomar7890]

52:00 the interpretation of equivalent principle is incorrect, it’s very likely that gravitational field interacts with each particle independently regardless of its location to other particles in the same object, so that is why all objects fall at the same rate (that explains potential energy,….. too) probably it’s a properly in each particle that triggers as soon as it enters the gravitational field, to understand so-called superposition that will take time (here means complete understanding ) but connecting both levels (subatomic and cosmological levels) will help a lot. to concise: the current understanding of space,time,….. gravity is incorrect. there is a lot of work to do regarding the foundations of physics (much harder) that could take up to hundreds of years of continuous scientific hard work by real scientists. (Physics reached its limits “no place for patching techniques anymore “).

[@FAK_CHEKR]

A little light just went on. I’ve had this idea that time is derived from motion. Time is not a thing in and of itself. It is only a way of describing motion. What then is space? I’ve been stuck on that. Penrose says that without mass you have no ruler, no concept of size (space). Aha. Space is derived from mass. Time is derived from mass in motion.

[@GehresWeed]

The universe is not expanding, We're just shrinking.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

googlescholar "biological annihilation" - you are correct.

[@espaco2023]

👏👏👏

[@stevecoley8365]

Hello fellow organic lightship commanders.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

ahoy matey, arhar!

[@pantelischristidis4198]

In short. There is a spring and a winter for the universe too

[@paviad]

What happens just after a reduction occurs? Does it stay reduced? Does it gradually expand again to be in a superposition?

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

As if our universe could be on either end and yet relative to us our size never changes.

[@frun]

State collapses after measurement. Yes, it does. No.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

it's noncommutative so it can't be repeated once it collapses. Actually due to noncommutativity there is no need to use any wavefunction that collapses. Read Professor Basil J. Hiley for details. In mainstream physics it's called the "No Cloning Theorem" in quantum physics.

[@markscott684]

I love the prior eon theory , but what started the first one 😂

[@channelwarhorse3367]

g = G Me/r^2(1e-/+Ef/Eo) unity physics to limited series, impressive knowledge of math/physics. Learn to lift the water molecule while generating electricity, compared to a proton, gravity propulsion compresses space while expanding it like the water molecule upon freezing. Applying such equations and knowledge to climate change, the heating of one pole at 9.83 g, equator is 9.79 g will up-fall biogenesis indifference over acceleration of infinity under power of DNA. The current generations need to move forward to greater physics, Sir Roger Penrose, Closer to the Truth plainly put honestly.

[@HWJJSCHUMACHER]

P=fc2 (power=frequency times c square)

[@HWJJSCHUMACHER]

@@shrivardhanpatil9014 IF YOU DONT KNOW WHAT FREQUENCY MEANS ::: SORRY I HAVE NO TIME FOR THIS

[@HWJJSCHUMACHER]

@@shrivardhanpatil9014 NO NOT YOU !!!

[@TerryBollinger]

54:33 Penrose "what I'm saying is that [the principle of superposition and Galileo's principle of equivalence] are incompatible with each other." Yes, but only if one arbitrarily assumes the precision of the spacetime fabric is independent of the energy contained within it. If the smallest grains of spacetime are instead energy-indexed Schrödinger wave functions - that is, if the smallest units of bendable spacetime are adjacent and overlapping sets of particle and energy relationships free even from trivially small, super-asymmetric acceleration effects - your concept of gravitationally-induced objective reduction should emerge for any gravity field that converges and thus squeezes (accelerates) adjacent granules. However, gravitational divergence reductions would be rare due to competition, like sloths attempting to outrace jaguars. Angular acceleration via force bonding easily comes in first and is the link to why particles exist in the first place. Linear acceleration, including the geodesics blocked by the Pauli exclusion in stars and planets, comes in second. [2022-12-16.22.58 EST Fri]

[@abdulazizsafdari4003]

it's not consievable that a mass creates a curve in something which is nothing, all empty..

[@Paine137]

Your brain remains in the 19th century.

[@Raptorel]

I think I have a better mechanism for getting rid of mass than what Penrose is proposing that I haven't heard discussed: Higgs field tunneling. The Higgs field is currently at a value of 246 GeV in terms of its potential energy. In principle this value could be bigger if the field value would be at zero (it's at 125 GeV currently, the value of the Higgs boson). If we wait for "infinity" there is a non-zero probability that the Higgs field could fluctuate to the zero value, albeit at a very high potential energy. With the Higgs at zero, all the massive particles in the universe would have zero mass. In other words, if you wait for long enough, it will just happen that the Higgs will fluctuate to a zero value thus rendering all the mass in the universe at zero and thus creating the conformal conditions that Roger Penrose is talking about. You don't need any kind of mass decay, black hole destroying information, anything like that. All that has to happen is for the Higgs field to fluctuate to zero all over the universe, a quantum process with non-zero probability, in other words something guaranteed to happen. It gets even better: because the Higgs has fluctuated to zero, this means it has a ton of potential energy (if you look at the profile of the Higgs field you will see that the potential energy at zero field value is very high). It won't stay there for long - it will fall back to a local minimum, a new false vacuum (like we have now). As it drops to this local minimum, all that potential energy will be injected in the regular quantum fields - the ones that we are made out of - quarks, leptons etc. A new Big Bang will ensue. Remember, the Higgs field will have this high potential energy EVERYWHERE in the Universe - it will look like a singularity for all intents and purposes - it will be a moment in time when the Higgs settled down to a new local minimum, exciting all the other fields, exactly what we observe as the Big Bang.

[@notanemoprog]

The ultimate diet!

[@Tore_Lund]

That's the scary twist, can reach us at any instant now!

[@Carfeu]

Dude just won a Nobel prize with a KZbin comment. 😅 One question: how do you wait long enough if you don’t have clocks?

[@Raptorel]

@@Carfeu you have clocks until the Higgs field tunnels. The clocks dissapear whenever mass disappears, meaning whenever the Higgs tunnels all over the Universe.

[@Paine137]

Insightful comment but Penrose would likely push back and remind us all again of gravity, as it is its inversive meddling with entropy that permits conformal cycles. Staying within his proposed model, Higgs tunneling also wouldn’t allow for Hawking Points to imprint, as one example, because tunneling would effectively wipe away any gravitational signature of prior aeons.

[@Quwucuqin]

Bro himself is a primordial blackhole

[@beautheory6047]

I may have found the bridge to make this all sensible before I even heard of Penrose! Everything I propose accords with his propositions. kzbin.info/www/bejne/eWPLgH53q9Rqmbs

[@Self-Duality]

A phrase that keeps ringing in my mind from Lex’s interview with Penrose: “We have to gravitize quantum mechanics.”

[@notanemoprog]

How about Ptolemyzing both instead

[@donnacabot3550]

E(J)=mc2

[@Dysolus]

Team CCC theory over team String theory for me

[@1974jrod]

I have a hard time taking anyone serious that believes the cat is both in the box and not in the box at the same time. Not saying Penrose says this, just making a logical statement.

[@stewartthomas4193]

Leonardo da Vinci said "The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions " Plato shared with us wisdom he learnt from Egypt, wisdom that was a death sentence in Greece, Rome (Christianity) ..Pythagoras, Socrates and later Hypatia of Alexandria. Plato in his dialogue "The Republic " tells the parable of "The Cave " Plato starts by telling us of prisoners being held in a underground den, let us examine this den via the geometry of Bernhard Riemann and Felix Klein..Klein bottle..3rd and 4th dimensions. Plato tells us that the prisoners are bound up unable to move their heads, let us examine this bondage via the psychology of Erich Fromm..socialisation of consciousness..aware-unaware. Plato tells us that the prisoners mistake shadows for substance, let us examine this mistake via the philosophy of Thales,Hume and Kant..synthetic a priori judgement..not thing in itself. Plato tells us that one of the prisoners is released, let us examine this release via the wisdom of T Lobsang Rampa..stilling the mind and conscious astral travel..leaving the cave/body. Plato tells us that the prisoners will reject this release, let us examine this rejection via the psychology of Stockholm Syndrome..Plato quotes Homer..forgive them for they know not what they say. Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds. Mathew 23 13 31.

[@danielfrancis3660]

I've never known a guest to talk so long without interruption

[@HarryNicNicholas]

you need to get out more (try tjump's channel).

[@frankbevan413]

Roger or Sir Roger ?

[@willnzsurf]

🌴😎💯

[@TheSergius80]

Plot twist: our own remote future became the Big Bang.

[@chrisgarret3285]

Maybe but not our big bang, only the next one

[@sevenstarsofthedipper1047]

Or, maybe Our remote past was the Big Bang?

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Fundamental Time has no spatial dimension and is eternal noncommutative nonlocal process in pre-space.

[@mindseyeview7411]

Uhhh are there any jobs I'm thinking Science Cheerleader 💖🌌💞🎶

[@stancatalina8163]

a stone is. h spacer😊

[@ChrisTad-cl9xc]

Who is here in 2024?😂

[@tomorrow9310]

If you were to take energy and mass and light out of the equation you would still be left with the LAWS OF NATURE ergo even with out physical reality NATURE EXISTS and LAWS EXIST and INTELLIGENCE EXIST

[@zdcyclops1lickley190]

Why a theory must be able to be shown as false, and never can be proved to be true. To be proved true all possible wats to test the theory must be known. This is not even possible. To show a theory false or incomplete only takes one observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory to show it is wrong and must be replaced or modified. Any current theory could have doubt cast on it by a single result that the theory cannot account for.

[@mcmg-museudacriacao.melind405]

We artists are never mentioned for the possibility of discussions such as mind , enlightenment , consciousness , creation ... and we are the court jesters , however to define what Penrose thinks ... about his theories ... which leaves us doubtful of veracity. .. uses Escher to illustrate his scientism. make no mistake because at any moment you will have to bow down to our reign and drink from our source.

[@joshua3171]

muonic fields

[@prescottlange]

This interviewer is constantly interrupting. Roger is barely able to get a word in edgewise.

[@stepheneurosailor1623]

Hi👳‍♀️

[@KpxUrz5745]

Hi!!!

[@JungleJargon]

It probably doesn’t even get as far as to swap time with distance.

[@JungleJargon]

Instead of invoking dark matter and dark energy, do some thought experiments in general relativity and you will understand that rate of time and the measure of distance are relative to the amount of matter and mass there is in the vicinity. The speed of light literally depends on these two variables of time and distance. As you observe a galaxy you are actually seeing differing rates of time and differing measures of distance. The result is that you are seeing differing speeds of light (because of the rate of the passing of time and measures of distance) relative to where we are since the measures of time and distance are both dependent on the amount of matter and gravity there is in the vicinity. (The speed of light isn’t actually changing, the measures of time and distance are changing *which effectively changes the speed of light as we observe it over GREAT distances.)* The result is that distance is greatly expanded (not expanding) where there is no matter between us and distant galaxies (causing redshift) eliminating the need for dark energy and the movement of the outer spiral arms of galaxies is at a faster rate of time causing them to move faster as we observe them eliminating the need for dark matter. This also means that plasma jets shooting out from the center of galaxies isn’t seven times the speed of light. It’s that the distance is expanded and the rate of time is faster the less matter there is in the vicinity. There is no such thing as a nonsensical infinitely expanding universe or an imaginary inflaton and there is no such thing as imaginary invisible dark matter. Distance is *merely* greatly expanded between the black holes in galaxies (causing the redshift) so the universe is not infinitely expanding as is claimed. An infinitely expanding universe is nonsensical. Not only is distance greatly expanded where there is no matter between galaxies, time runs at a much faster rate where there is no matter. Distances within the galaxies are vast so when we observe another galaxy, we are literally observing differing rates of time and differing measures of distance still within the limits of other galaxies, not to mention the *extreme* distances *between* galaxies where there is no matter to dilate time and distance. That means the distances between the galaxies are greatly expanded, (not expanding) and time between the galaxies is running at a much faster rate *which allows for us to see fully formed distant galaxies in the first place.*

[@therick363]

Copy paste cherry picking Present scientific evidence that disproves the evidence of dark matter.

[@scottmagnacca4768]

How many mushrooms did you eat?

[@HarryNicNicholas]

thanks for that, i filed it.

[@JungleJargon]

@@HarryNicNicholas You got it from me.

[@joemaccoy2900]

Amazing video and thank you for breaking it down!! Despite the economic downturn, I'm so happy I have been earning $22,000 returns from my $6,000 investment every 7 days.

[@jasomsilver]

Same here lol, my previous profit withdrawal with Mrs Victoria Eyk was over $18200 and it's still counting high.

[@waltercox673]

@@jasomsilver Wow! How's that possible please I'll appreciate your assistance on how to go about it.

[@barbaraducan7295]

I have heard a lot about investments with Mrs Victoria Eyk and how good she is, please how safe are the profits.

[@wadecharagulaf6466]

@sharonmeyer2910 Same here, I started with $3,000 now earning $28000 bi-weekly profits with her trading program.

[@lawrencebart6099]

@sharonmeyer2910 Same here, I started with $3,000 now earning $28000 bi-weekly profits with her trading program.

[@aminomar7890]

Basically there’s a real problem with the current incomplete understanding of space, time, mass,… and gravity so how can they presume that they can make real progress in cosmology!

[@therick363]

It’s admitted that our understanding is incomplete….how do you close that gap? By doing science and experiments and investigating.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

i think they know that.

[@aminomar7890]

I bet that real scientists never look to science as a job to get money rather life style, their main goal is not money or to become famous or to show off but science itself is their life, that is ehy they dedicate their entire life for science. that is why governments must offer them proper living conditions that suits their value. it’s possible that governments or companies ask them help to solve scientific problems, so they get money because of that but in general their main motivation is their love to science and being their life not money itself. It so hard for real scientist to cheat in science even if that could meant starving to death ! science for real scientists is something sacred.

[@aminomar7890]

I talk from the perspective of a scientist, but from business perspective it is different, science means technology and means power and money. anyway I don’t talk specifically about this Video but in general, Penrose is good compared to others. real scientist looks for truth through science, money is just a tool (bad tool) usually cheaters, thieves,…. are better at making money than scientists. What gives value to money to compare it to science?! what gives value to this existence is mind (thoughts)!

[@aminomar7890]

Humans are irrational entities, they don’t know what is value and what gives real value to things ! it’s faked irrational world. many things are so valuable but no one of the irrationals is aware of it ! it is the planet of the apes no doubt.

[@logicalconceptofficial]

The truth is that Logic (The Source of Knowledge) is The One Who Makes X=X and that Logic is The One True God who makes the universe be the universe. If only people applied Logic to matters of theology and to the Torah they would understand that while the names are arbitrary (like the name “Logic”) The Formless Substance of Logic (that all forms and creations of Logic must be coherent with to be objectively logical) and Hashem, The Incorporeal God of Israel (the one who says “I will be who I will be” to the universe) are the same Source of Rationality. If you think God is a myth you are defying Logic because Logic is God and x ALWAYS equals x for eternity, that is why God is God, while everything is everything and nothing is nothing. The Source of Spacetime and The Objective Truth (Logic) is indeed The Source of Spacetime and The Objective Truth (Logic) just as it is self evident (tautological) that The One True God who is not a false god is The One True God who is not a false god as Abrahamic sages like Moshe and Mohammed clearly said. If you do not know God then you do not know The Source of Logical Proof and should study Logic, The Self Evident Source of Logic Proof before you ask anyone for the proof. If you do not know already that Logic is God then you must not recognize logical proofs and their origin when they are put in front of you and need to study what proof is before you ask God (Logic) or the rational minds that serve and devote themselves to this True God for “proof” of God. God is God and it is logically invalid to say that God is not God, just as x is x and it is logically invalid to say that x is not x. God (Logic) is Reason (Logic) because x=y when x and y both equal c, and thus Logic proves that Logic is both Reason and God. We must do what Reason demands, and we must not defy Logic, because we will be ungodly and will feel the wrath of The One True God if we are not logical, reasonable, and godly (all of which are synonymous terms).

[@Paine137]

Word salad.

[@russellbaxter6518]

Question. I may not know what I am even talking about but if scientist can see light from a billion years ago can they also see the Milky Way from 1 billion years ago. Sorry for the stupidity.

[@Paine137]

We’re in the galaxy and so its contents are closer. The Sun is about five billion years old and yet we see its released light after only eight minutes.

[@TurinTuramber]

Hello fellow meat machines.

[@Epoch11]

I ain't no meat machine I'm a mindful monkey

[@quantumkath]

Hello 👋

[@ypey1]

I prefer to be called meatbag thank you

[@quantumkath]

Now that I think about it, I prefer to be called measuring machine thank you

[@r2c3]

You might want to add conscious to the mix :)

[@Mikifh1234]

Like organisam reproduction all universe is reproductiv..next an next to ifinity...

[@alecwalsh9189]

Penrose looks baked as a cake

[@jumpingman6612]

hahah

[@daithiocinnsealach1982]

He's high on Jesus

[@bogdy72000]

priesthood in the church of science technology of belief bending concepts since ...

[@JungleJargon]

You’re not going to any physical thing through the singularity.

[@animalbird9436]

I have a pen I have a rose...... Ugh penrose. I hav~ a rose I have a pen. Ugh rose pen.... Pen rose rose pen ugh. Penrose rosepen

[@Srsbzns_5150]

Nowhere else have I ever heard the word singularity used more than among really smart ppl. Singularities are always at the center of a black holes. The universe started from a singularity. So I guess logic says we're in a blsck hole 🤔

[@yomommaahotoo264]

Yo - lemme axe you sumpmm. Why talk so fast?