Garrett Lisi on "The Portal", Ep.

[@AlexOfCR]

This is literally what I always expect the conversation to be like whenever a theoretical physicist joins a show. This is the first time it actually happened. Thank you, Eric

[@clv9056]

Definitely not too jargoned or scientifically bent. Keep em coming pls.🙏

[@NoName-zn1sb]

He almost insults me, eve as an amateur

lol

[@JuliaHelen777]

@@NoName-zn1sb And why is that? 🤔

@@JuliaHelen777 If you know about the concepts they discuss already, most of what they spoke about isn't that hard to follow. The amount of time spent talking about how they lost people felt a bit demeaning to me as well. I would personally have preferred if the train of thought had been kept, without so many of these interruptions.

[@sebacaine6974]

@ Right? Same here. Even if I wasn't familiar with e8 and spinors and the standard model, etc, I'd have been fine with doing some googling after the fact just to catch up with whatever the legitimate level of the conversation would have been. I guess it could be said if you really want that you can just aim for a lecture series over a podcast... but it does seem like a waste of their capacity to be holding themselves back worrying about losing people.

[@fttmvp]

This battle between Professor X and Magneto went a lot differently than in the comics.

[@taulguedi637]

What are you talking about? He is Dr. Eric Von Weinstein. He fought against Spiderman and the Fantastic Four.

[@hollywooda111]

No way youre getting a Magneto helmet over that hair!

@@hollywooda111 the hair is the helmet

[@handlesaretoopersonal]

When I heard about the portal being a thing back on jre like years ago, this is pretty much exactly what I was dreaming of.. I want nonconforming physicists for my under educated brain

[@mediathor7532]

Chris L Agreed, this is great!

[@guycomments]

that was only 7 months ago haha

[@handlesaretoopersonal]

@@guycomments haha, what's your point?

[@meltingzero3853]

@Andy Exactly what I was thinking.

[@MMAoracle]

Why haven’t you educated yourself?

[@nickandfam]

There is something deeply satisfying about listening to an honest and civil discussion about something the parties disagree about. Thank you Eric.

[@RichardMoore1947]

It struck me throughout the interview that Eric was confrontational and Garrett had to tell him that he had covered that ground in later papers. I have no argument with the confrontational aspect but a lot of problems that Eric was not au fait with Garrett's later work. In other words he was arguing from a position of ignorance and that is unacceptable.

[@Henry-em6pb]

I remember reading about Garrett Lisi in the Scientific American in the late 2000s. I was enamored with him then and I'm captivated no less now. Thank you for this great interview and discussion, Eric!

[@davidguthrie3739]

I’m not a physicist but once I started listening, I kept listening straight through. Although bits of the language are exotic and esoteric, it completely doesn’t matter. The narrative woven through this fascinating conversation is seamlessly coherent and unbroken. In the end, there aren’t many stories-just a few archetypes told in different ways with different names. Thank you for not dumbing down the content too much.

[@williamkoscielniak820]

I don't know jack about physics yet I've been engaged the whole time. My guess is that there are a lot of people like me who don't mind listening to conversations that go over their head. It's like I'm getting a sneak peak into conversations that I otherwise would never have access to.

[@crane3]

Much better than listening to politics where they tell us that tho think..

[@ascotclark]

This is correct

[@minimead368]

The only thing that would make this video better would be a glass of proper ale.

[@JD..........]

“The way this should play out for our listeners is like showing a an Opera in a foreign language to their own, to which you have nevertheless explained the plot, so that they can follow along and enjoy it” Holy damn Eric you nailed it on the head. This is exactly how I receive these science and math centered talks. I’m sure others agree.

[@ryderbrooks1783]

Eric your audience is more intelligent than you think. Stop worrying about “leaving us behind” and just follow the thread. I can rewind if I must.

[@sadface7457]

People on the discord are making show notes for those who need the gaps filling in.

[@nicknomski8399]

The gaps in my knowledge are similar to the gaps between subatomic particles. F***ing vast.

[@sadface7457]

@@nicknomski8399 At least it is not the gaps between integers which is infinite

[@imogenrex6286]

look Eric - I'm a musician - who meditates - don't patronise me - I can intuit with my right brain when the left is left behind!

[@InterstellarRanger]

@@imogenrex6286 Haha.. I was watching this while doing my classical guitar routines... love these comments

[@TendoTheDude]

Garrett: "My name is Garrett Li-" Eric: "I disagree"

[@benjaminandersson2572]

hahahaha.

[@Sprite_525]

*Eric* : “-do you actually believe what you’re saying right now? I mean, I think this is *_so cowardly_* .” ( at 27:00 he actually says that lol )

[@good_call]

Hahaha!!!!

[@ferventheat]

@@Sprite_525 yet Garrett agreed with him that it was.

[@Sprite_525]

hmmm - I think Garrett was just being agreeable, not actually agreeing. Otherwise he wouldn’t have said it. I’ve done that myself when a friend goes in a rant, I start catering to them as a temporary way to keep goodwill in the long run so they don’t ragequit

[@jameswhitaker2804]

I, for one, was both terribly lost at certain points, yet ridiculously excited to be brought into this conversation. I can’t speak for everyone, but this makes me want to sit down and watch this in slow motion to learn the ins and outs of each concept. Keep it coming. Don’t be afraid to leave us behind. If we care, we’ll keep walking even if we don’t know where we’re going. This is worth it.

[@geico1975]

WOW! Completely over my head, but I think having scientist go to a place to freely research what they want and how they want, simply because of their passion for it is excellent.

[@Self-Duality]

@51:35 Lisi: “You really need an infinite-dimensional geometric object to describe quantum field theory (QFT).” I grinned 😊💥💥💥💥💥

[@Self-Duality]

Lisi: “The universe is just one thing; it’s right there in the name” - “so particles have to be aspects of this one mathematical object.” Yes!!!! 😌💭💥💥💥

[@monkpato]

This was so frustrating to listen to, with Eric cutting Garret off continually and being so condescending and superior. I really like Eric, but he needs to get a grip on his ego. Around 42:00 Garrett gives a real breakthrough on the nature of gravity which catches Eric by surprise and rather than say, "I haven't thought of that before", he just redirects the conversation. When you try to always be the smartest in the room, you work yourself into a corner that doesn't let you learn, and keeps us from learning also.

[@Leopar525]

Very spot on comment

[@jackyoung4575]

Garret stated something that is unique to his theory, why wouldnt Eric react to the jump from talking about mutually agreed upon topics to talking about what exclusively Garret believes to be true

[@CheleChilindra]

Very not spot on... This convo explains stuff better

[@skre1170]

Eric blindly considers himself socially competent. He's not.

[@Jannikheu]

Garrett Lisi is certainly the enlightened person in the room here.

[@Koshmark]

Garretts patience is miraculous. I couldn't even finish the podcast 😔

[@nuggedt]

This was so hard to watch mainly because Eric treated Garrett exactly like the community that shunned him out in the first place. You may have some good points, Eric, as you always do, but so did Garrett and it's a shame you didn't treat him like someone who's opinion you value. He has a very valid perspective on the theoretical physics "crisis" and it seems the only reason you got him on here was to break down every single one of his points and ideas (whether they pertained to physics or not) in the most uncomfortable and belittling way. Your criticisms with respect to E8, although valid, are outdated. Even when Garrett himself tried to clarify and say he's writing a new paper on the issues and seemed quite open to ideas and collaborations, you simply downplayed it's relevance and moved on to the next "problem" you could fish out. I've been a supporter of yours since you were on JRE, and you out of all people should have learnt to respect other people's ideas even if they seem far-fetched to the mainstream dogma. I was quite excited for this podcast and you've left me very disappointed.

[@callmedeno]

What would you say is the main criticism with respect to E8 that is outdated?

[@nuggedt]

@@callmedeno I'm referring mainly to about 46:00 in when they discuss symmetries and bosons and fermions. Old school physicists do find it weird that bosons and fermions are included in a single superconnected field, and have cast a lot of doubt on E8 due to this. Yang-Mills, the heart of the standard model seems not to work well with this idea but I see it as sort of a non-issue that was mitigated about a decade ago, if I'm not mistaken, by use of a different superconnection (formally the Quillen superconnection on an associated vector bundle). One can then discuss a type of Quillen-Yang-Mills. There is still on-going debate between physicists however (not so much mathematicians) which is why I said Eric's criticisms were valid, although outdated. Eric did also discuss symmetry and symmetry breaking as well as embedding (if im not mistaken), and a lot of these issues have sort of the same story: the mathematicians find a solutions and the physicists claim it's not physical.

[@GarrettLisi8]

@@nuggedt Thank you

[@KeithLarsen]

Let me start by saying, I hope there will be a next time that Garret is on this show, that was the most interesting conversation I've seen about fundamental physicals I've seen in a long time, good work, and thank you! Now the criticism... I work in Computer Science, and this same type of conversation happens in CS all the time. Science minded folks typically have very low EQ, and this makes any conversation a battle of insecurities. The modus operandi seems to be this, if one didn't come up with the idea then one has to attack it. And if you don't have quality criticisms, then use ad hominem. I think Eric could have done a much better job of criticizing Garrett by offering counter points, or maybe explore the counter points that Garrett made, like his paper from 2010, or maybe get deeper into ideas Garrett is yet exploring. However, when Garrett made a counter point, Eric deflected and moved on to something else. Eric, you need to try that interview again, it could have gone way better. Try approaching it from a collaborative approach next time, or try to explore Garrett's ideas that you obviously don't understand and don't want to understand. Its clear to anyone watching that you let your emotions / arrogance get in the way from what could have been truly great, and maybe game-changing.

[@charc4819]

As someone commented, it's highly unpleasant to watch this as despite Eric's *words* to the contrary it's unmistakable in the entirety of Eric's demeanor that he *genuinely* dislikes Garrett. The whole 'my nemesis' rubbish is fooling no one after this dialogue. The patronising, the passive aggressiveness, the dismissiveness, the put downs. When I first came across Eric, I was pretty impressed. I thought this man clearly has some interesting things to say. One of the many, many minds in the world that it is worth checking out more. But very disappointingly, the more I listen to him (and I have watched quite a bit of his online content now) the more my initial opinion of him is being tempered. On so many metrics (ie. not just the side of his character that is revealed here) my regard for Eric and his thoughts has downgraded. :(

[@deand_walkabout8040]

By being out of my depth, but fighting to keep my head above water, I came closer to being able to swim. Thank you for your trust enough to throw us in the [shallow] end. 😅

[@carlwalters6048]

Eric please have even more complex discussions than this. The trend is the audience wants more complex discussions, personally this is not at the edge of my Appetite but entices me in to want to hear about more complex things, In a non-mathematical abstract conversational way. Also even without understanding the maths behind your conversation the audience can still build a fairly good mental picture around the essence of the concepts you touch on. I would literally listen to this and more for 10 hours straight. Breathtakingly interesting! Thanks

[@abstractnonsense3253]

Mesmerising podcast! Thank you Eric and Garrett.

[@steveDOTdigital]

I love these two going “purist” at/on each other. So much intellectual joy!

[@kristiankp]

Beautiful podcast and I really enjoyed Garrett and his way of thinking and being very open minded to criticism. No need to dumb it down! Please talk to each other as if we aren't here. I love listening to your intellectual conversations and I feel that listening to you really broadens my imagination and how to have a constructive debate and converse in an eloquent way. As a 21 year old I very much appreciate what you guys give to me!

[@TheMongolianMage]

Omfg, I've been waiting for an in depth interview with this guy since I heard of E8 theory.

[@nicholibaldron8171]

YES!!!!

[@sadface7457]

The simplified version is more confused because your like how does a shape related to particles, the you realise it's a group, the shape just encodes the symmetries, the group is just a types of "numbers" like the complex numbers are a group.

[@andrewshortt4338]

Thank you both for being bold enough to push and live at the edge of understanding...

[@RonnieD1970]

Eric... Eric... Erick... ERIC!!! You dont have to keep issuing an apology every time you 'think' you lost your audience. This was a GREAT conversation (reminded me of Krauss & Green discussion on string theory). Stop with the 'low expectations' of our ability to keep up. I never took a physics class but taught myself watching Stanford, MIT, Crash Course, Khan Academy, Fermi Labs, Minute Physics, Bozeman Science, etc etc etc coursework classes on youtube, Twitter and FaceBook. So even ordinary guy like me can follow.

[@sadface7457]

It's not problem being a little lost when your are in an entirely different universe of idea.

[@rfplus]

Brilliant discussion, possibly best Portal yet.

[@sadface7457]

Wait for the penroes interview as it is this interview without the artificial limitors.

[@Gnolomweb]

boring and unproductive.

[@sadface7457]

@Evan Moyer You have to be careful. That's a suicide mission.

[@surrealestate06]

Pining for the fjords! Wonderful conversation. My brain hurts. I am neither a mathematician, physicist nor an academic but I see real value in these discussions. Thanks!

[@BryceChudomelka]

It doesn't get much better than this. Lisi's paper really inspired me. Thanks Eric!

[@Otsego]

I think my issue with this conversation is not Eric's combative form of discussion. Every good argument needs a Devil's Advocate, a baked in Quality Assurance if you will. For me Eric seems convinced that Lisi's theory is fundamentally flawed. He pretends to be pointing out problems that Lisi will have to address (something that is very helpful) but really no matter how Lisi tries to address the problems Eric simply comes back to "but that's probably wrong for 'reasons'". Lisi on the other hand is convinced not that he knows the answer but that he has found an incredible amount of breadcrumbs that he is following. The most interesting parts of this conversation come when Eric doesn't just say no but gives an alternate solution. In any case, what a terrific conversation. Please give us much more of this.

[@the.taxil.hoax.]

Thank you for a beautiful conversation. I'll be honest, I was close to turning off after 15 mins as a solid 95% of what you're both talking about went flying over my head, but I stayed with it. Mainly because I could feel what you were both trying to get at. I guess at a core, the eternal search for the truth of our being and problems with institutionalised science and its grasping for control at the determent of genuine progress and new ideas. My personal understanding of the science and mathematics on display here and other podcasts of yours are completely out of my comfort zone but I persist as I connect (I think) with your overarching idea of 'The Portal' and what you're trying to achieve. Thank you Eric for this podcast, as I said above, I truly believe in your quest of the bringing together of great minds and the thrashing out of proper ideas in these interesting times we live in.

[@amydias5459]

it felt like you just brought this guy on to showcase what he's wrong about - and I didn't get a very good showcase of his idea's and opinions

[@GarrettLisi8]

Yah that bothered me too

[@GarrettLisi8]

I was tempted to steer the convo towards criticism of Eric's own work in this area, but I didn't feel like being catty that way so just rolled with it.

[@stormbreak13]

@@GarrettLisi8 I don't think there's anything wrong with respectfully pointing out PERCEIVED errors in a chain of thought. If Eric was wrong in his observations, it wouldn't be "catty" to correct him, and exploring areas where two great minds disagree is often where the greatest leaps in progress are made.

[@GumbyTheGreen1]

@@stormbreak13 I think he did point out errors pretty well. But Eric didn't want to hear it so there wasn't much more he could do. This is a recurring problem and it's my main gripe with Eric - he often brings on these brilliant people just to hit them over the head with his own pet theories and strong opinions, and it's a strange thing for a host to do. And Garret's right that mentioning the errors in Eric's work would have been catty since this discussion was supposed to be about Garrett's work.

[@cmag8924]

@@GarrettLisi8 That's a bit of a problem with him as a podcast host. I often get the feeling he wants to get his points across, instead of listening...I think he should have given you at least the possibility to give a TED talk level overview of your latest progress and insights.

[@BK-en1uo]

Garrett: "But I'm going to publish a paper. ( _Unlike you, Eric_ )"

[@GarrettLisi8]

:)

[@TeachingsForFun]

Hahahha this is savage

[@lopezb]

Give him a break...thay have different styles! I'm sure this contact will inspire Eric to write things down, but it HAS to come from within.....

[@URMyTorment]

5 days ago.....

[@BK-en1uo]

@@URMyTorment TBD

[@gm_solo]

Garrett is amazingly stoic and self resolutory, to a fault. Absolutely love the man. One of the best to come from the academic system.

[@georgesvan]

Yes it hurt a bit as a listener, mainly by Eric's Assumption's and interjection's as a host...

[@DavidHeggli]

So glad I found The Portal! This is exactly what I was missing on mass media - and KZbin for that matter! Love the clarity and efficiency of your language Eric. And I‘m totally fine with the level of your interviews. Keep it comming! 🤓

[@ksln]

It has been a while since I've understood so little of what's being said, but still been so entertained. Good discussion.

[@nathanbradforth3408]

Eric and Garat. I have no physics education apart from my own teachings through my love of science, had I not seen both of your theories, I would have been a lost viewer but I am so entriqued and urge both of you to work together because you bring the best out of each other and it's truly beautiful to which I force myself to understand because I believe in both of you over all others

[@nathanbradforth3408]

Garrett sorry

[@flowerpt]

So funny that I read as much as I could on Garrett's work a couple years ago, I enjoy listening to the Portal, and then you guys are good friends. I often forget names so I was well into the show before I realized, "oh, it's the E8 guy!" Awesome. Oh, and, yeah, we know what the Higgs field is. :P

[@Hamarinnn]

Best portal yet! Keep it up... Big respect to the people trying to push boundaries.

[@neurostreams]

This has 100% been my favorite episode. I remember listening to it, the podcast, with Garrett back in December. When I saw this posted to KZbin, I was excited that Garrett was back again for a second discussion with updates on his work. But then I realized it was the same episode from December. Why not push the streams out across all platforms at once? Would love to hear Garret back on the Portal again.

[@r.d.9332]

Just like Eric said: it was like listening to an opera piece in a foreign language. Didn't get much but saw that it was good. Thanks for your endeavour of setting ourselves up for endeavours!

[@dm0527]

Eric, please keep stuff like this coming. I'm less educated than your typical consumer, probably, and definitely far less educated than you and your guests, but just because I don't have a Ph.D. after my name doesn't mean I don't get a lot of what you're discussing in these podcasts. This type of content plus reading voraciously is how a lot of us self-educate. I loved this episode of The Portal and look forward to more like this!

[@NyssaWoznicki-y5e]

I am thrilled to have found this! Two brilliant men with brilliant ideas. I’ve been rooting for Garrett Lisi’s E8 theory for a long time. It’s brilliant and I love hearing him talk about it! I can’t wait to learn more!

[@jr8209]

Classic matchup. The Hair vs the Stare! (Eric has a lovely mop and Garrett I presume is known for his ability to look at things for longer than average.)

[@nicknomski8399]

1:03:00 is a classic confrontation, about 15 seconds

[@JasonAStillman]

My favorite portal podcast so far. I was so excited, more than any new Netflix release I could imagine. Would have loved another hour...No need it dumb down, but I get it. Love you Eric and Lisi!!

[@theseasnakewhisperer8649]

This is the most important podcast ever recorded in recent days.

[@harryheart6018]

"ever" ... "in recent days". Not how time works, bruh.

[@ChilsonTV]

@@harryheart6018 hahah got him

[@nicolebelanger4745]

Im an artist and do not necessarily get all that you are talking about but do get some of it so please do not stop these discussions because you fear you are over most of our heads. You are giving me access to information I would never have been privy to so keep it up please.

[@ryPish]

I know a little about physics, a little about math, and a lot about rap battles. This was a rap battle, and Eric has been BTFO. Every question, every comeback of his was out rapped. Garrett was ready for what was coming at him, his delivery was on point, every punchline was nailed.

[@as.if_0077]

Came here after vinay uppal sir shared this

Worry not, Eric! I was able to follow this conversation fully and completely, and I found it engaging as all get out! ..... When you guys say "boson," you're talking about boatswains, right?

[@sadface7457]

A boson is just a particle that is connected to an excitation in a field.

[@rfplus]

Do bosons whistle?

[@shanebakerstudios]

I know I don't understand everything they are talking about. That's EXACTLY why I listen to this podcast. I'm in the gym right now listening to this to build my physical muscles. I'm listening to this to build my intelligence muscle. Thank you for creating this mental gym.

[@dr.tetraminflakes3187]

ya don't dumb it down, keep going,

[@AngelaDurden]

I love The Portal. Have only just discovered it. What I like best is the rough-and tumble-yet-respectful conversation style. "Here's what we agree on but we disagree on this..." is on full display. Love it.

[@KALLAN8]

This is an opera of physics and mathematics. It's like listening to Jazz, it's a conversation in a different language that makes complete sense and I was able to follow the plot 100%. Well done Eric and Garrett!

[@Jchil9123]

I knew that this would be a gift after listening to the intro! Awesome job, this was fascinating. More of this kind of podcast please! The only problem is, it isn’t an hour longer.

[@timjosling9298]

Eric needs to give his guests space to expound their ideas and not endlelessly interrupt after 1/3 of a sentence.

[@robertblake1228]

Not only was Eric rude, he is also lisping for abt the full podcast.

[@craighane2015]

Agreed. Learn from Joe Rogan how to really interview a guest.

[@Fuego958]

He can get excessively competitive.

[@nUrnxvmhTEuU]

Confrontational discussion is an interesting discussion. Eric leads the discussion very well imo.

[@unitedtaps]

This was great. Eric you were right in your analogy of taking us to a foreign Opera and helping us get the story outline even if we don't understand every detail. I loved it.

[@sanaru02]

This is what I want the future of the portal to look like. If I am remembering correctly, you mentioned earlier that we have dumbed down conversations from our intellectuals. This is the opposite of that and I love it. Keep up the great work :D

[@coder-x7440]

This was great! Thank you for knowing when to just let go of the break Eric! This is what we want. How tragic it is that the world’s most renowned physicists are only ever brought together to play patty cake with the general public. So much more insight and advancement would occur if you all did what you just did. Hold each other to the fire, and forge stronger theories. I for one loved the opera!

[@s-g-j]

It sounds like Eric didn't do his homework on Garrett's body of work. Need to do a redo after that happens.

[@GarrettLisi8]

Yes was annoying. He hasn't updated his knowledge since 2008. I suspect he just got too busy.

[@garyshearer0]

@@GarrettLisi8 eric was a little too combative for some reason. it was unpleasant.

[@tatianaantoinette9086]

Eric's impetus for The Portal is his frustration with the academic system which thwarts true genius and intellectual exploration. The goal of the Portal is to break through "idea suppression" found in academia, etc.

[@tatianaantoinette9086]

He is tenaciously "big brother"ing to Garrett Lisi and to his own brother Bret in both podcasts which is annoying because most of us are fascinated with Bret and Garrett's theories and want to hear much more. I only know of Garrett's theories from 10 years ago. I'd really like a re-do of the podcast to dig deeper into his insights at current date.

[@jordieclive]

@@GarrettLisi8 Would be very interested to know your thoughts on eric's geometric unity? Also would you make any ammendments to your original e8 paper?

[@letsif]

I'm not a physicist or a mathematician and had no trouble watching all the way through. I'm a layman who is intensely interested in the subjects you discuss and crave more. Always more..... Thanks for posting.

[@tomc4132]

Hey eric I dont know the specifics of what you two were talking about but I could still follow along. So I dont think your losing to many people. I mean this is the type of conversation we come here to hear.

[@danchatka8613]

Thanks for explaining things like "foxbase". This is internal physics jargon that few outsider will understand. The few seconds spent on these explanations helps many listeners maintain their tenuous grip on the conversation and keep listening.

[@9SmartSand6]

Gareett: "I'm unusually confident I'm on the right track." Eric: "Oy."

[@leojames7331]

Hey Eric. I'm not a physicist or a scientist but I'm here because I want to understand more. I never felt left behind at any point, I felt like my brain was being challenged to keep up but thats different. That's what I want. thats why I'm here! For the casual listener who's playing on their phone or the guy that came here for an easy answer or quick fix; yeah they might have got lost but I'm listening to every word and relishing becoming more informed :)

[@atolliver91]

I can’t believe I listened to the whole show...jeeeeezzz...

[@hectorprx]

Please keep moving ahead of me , so I can strive to catch up. That is why I watch and listen. Thanks for the mental stretch.

[@sebastianrubio928]

Defintely the best one so far! Need more of these same type of discussion, actually would it be fun to see phycists with different theories going at eachother lol.

[@lkd982]

Absolutely fascinating. 26:13 onwards. When summarising a quote from Douglas Adams, tongue in cheek, Garrett is basically referring to the idea that in reality/physics there is at least the possibility that "Aesthetics precedes Theory". The tension between beauty and reality in physics/knowledge unintentionally then becomes the underlying theme of the discussion. Even though of course these Scientists are repelled by the idea that reality might be simply an anthropic convenience, Garrett says later that he would be lost without choosing his mathematical options based on their beauty. Both men continually refer to the standards of theory in terms like elegance, unity, consistency. What isn't aesthetic about all that? - even equality, or agreement itself, is aesthetic, before anything else. The concept of agreement come from ideals of verbal argument. Now we're getting somewhere. It's understandable to call the Aesthetic attitude "cowardly", as Eric does, part of the conventional way of seeing science as a "brave adventure" etc - rather than whatever it might actually be, right? It's possible that physics actually precludes that anthropocentrism, adventure, isn't it? :)

[@____uncompetative]

Professor John Archibald Wheeler's _Participatory Anthropic Principle_ is referred to in _Geometric Unity_ kzbin.info/www/bejne/kGjVlWNqgN9_mck and in Figure 6 in §12.6 on page 59 of his draft paper, where _d_ = 4 or (1, 3) for anthropic reasons. geometricunity.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/Geometric_Unity-Draft-April-1st-2021.pdf However, the _Aesthetic Anthropic Principle_ is an even stronger version of this, which can be interpreted as saying "any observable Universe must be founded on truth and beauty, yet disguise these qualities to provide an intriguing mystery, which is rewarding to any curious technologically advanced sentient beings, who must inevitably evolve within it, to reify it from just one of many mathematical multiverses, to what feels to them to be a tangible reality in terms of the qualia they indirectly attach to their experience of its phenomena within their emergent consciousness." Were our Universe not an intriguing mystery to us and the pursuit of its truth not rewarded by beauty, we might lose motivation to reify it into tangible reality, and it would remain just another unrealised probability.

[@yoko3891]

Eric “let me explain the entire podcast before you listen to it” Weinstein

[@jrd33]

Congratulations, Eric. You tried to do a hard thing here and it succeeded better than I would have expected. Onwards and upwards!

[@redghost289]

28:52 Eric: We don't mean a theory that could explain everything. Garrett: Right. Love is still gonna be a mystery. Eric: Oh god, you really did that?

[@mattpiper266]

What it mean? I don’t get it

[@abstractnonsense3253]

@@mattpiper266 He was just being sarcastic

[@gerardaygun2115]

@Leonardo gonçalves Ed witten....?

[@abstractnonsense3253]

@Leonardo gonçalves Edward Witten won a Fields Medal, the equivalent of the Nobel Prize in physics. You can read the wikipedia page about him for a summary.

@@abstractnonsense3253 Just to make it clear, the Fields medal is for math only.

[@tylermurch]

I appreciate that this podcast doesn't hold back intellectually. It only encourages me to research further and look things up on my own.

[@xrobfrankx]

This was awesome, you could have went way deeper and more technical. I cant do high level math but I have no problem visualizing the geometry. We all understand the abstract of the standard model and qft. You guys did not have to explain all that stuff. It's the geometry that we have never been exposed to. I love this, I hope more people are exploring this stuff. I am a dummy and I had no problem following. Finality is critical. Please keep creating content. why does the sm map so perfectly to e8, this has to be the right track

[@iangillham9647]

Amazing, couldn’t follow all of it, but could follow enough. I think it is a great thing to have this sort of conversation in the open, for all of us.

[@dasaggropop1244]

i wish weinstein would finally bring a paper out. at least lisi has something you can critizise...

[@patrickmorales4692]

I think this is why I struggle with some of his claims.

[@onetwothree4148]

He's not going to publish a paper because his theory doesn't have any novel answers. Just another theory and he's frustrated bc he knows the basic premise that he is on to- the establishment of a defined frame of reference- is relevant and totally overlooked.

[@Mart-Bro]

He's recently announced he has a paper in development that he's gonna release

[@ericprincen3345]

Good episode, Eric. I didn't follow the all of the technical details but I followed the conversation.You do a fantastic job at providing context so expertise is not required to get something valuable from the conversation. Thank you for doing this.

[@acetate909]

"...I told you in '08 about these [criticisms] and you didn't take me seriously..." when Garret didn't immediately change the trajectory of his research after being warned seems like a fatal insult to Eric. It felt like half of this discussion consisted of Eric pushing Garret to admit defeat with E8. This was less of a discussion and more of an unnecessary intervention. The other half of the conversation was mostly Eric hitting pause on Garret to "hand walk" his audience through a topic even thought the podcast started with a declaration of no "hand walking". This was not a comfortable podcast to watch. Eric's ego produced null results in this _experiment in conversation._

[@monkpato]

Yes, that was very much the subtext of the discussion. This episode has made me lose a lot of respect for Eric.

[@malikonodinite704]

High Eric, despite having great lagoons to navigate in order to properly understand the complex ideas discussed with Lisi, you must not believe that complexity is an obstacle for viewership. The intuitive and embodied knowledge acquired, through conversation, develops great understanding in order to further the sense-making that is sought after in these forums. Props and encouragement on my part. You are one of the great thinkers and teachers of our times.

[@Talleyhoooo]

Garret might be one of the most groundbreaking scientists in the forefront of theoretical physics and you completely wasted a valuable opportunity to interview him because you can't get over yourself and your manic theories.

[@tomfeldmann1704]

Great episode! I'm not a physicist, nor a mathematician, I remember concepts of calculus from 20+ years ago, this conversation should be accessible to any curious person.

[@ZachMatics]

Still waiting for your theory of everything, Eric.

[@mattpiper266]

Zach Mitchell ikr why is no one talking about this

[@LordPerique]

I wonder if there is an intersection between simulation theory and a unifying theory of physics. Then again my understanding of these concepts is solidly undergraduate so what do I know lol

[@dnavas7719]

He did it already. It’s called “Geometric Unity”

[@andybaldman]

He's too busy snorting coke off the asses of hookers in Rogan's secret inner-circle club. He's having too much fun to do anything serious right now.

[@williamgreene4834]

@@andybaldman "Snorting coke off the asses of hookers" is a country song I think,

[@lopezb]

A great conversation! Really fun and inspiring. It is amazing and difficult and hard....."almost as hard as learning to surf!" I loved this conversation especially because you were both obviously having such fun.

[@Do.Ra.]

Really loved this conversation. That I understood almost none of didn’t detract from that for some reason

[@slsteinman292]

Eric & Garrett: I admire your bold, mutual commitment to the free exchange of ideas ...especially within an increasingly specialised and exclusive domain. You've each taken a fresh look at physical reality and have come to somewhat different notions of what exactly it is and how it all works together. You're both brilliant, obviously, but I was just thinking that maybe you haven't gone back far enough in your rethinking of the universe. I'd suggest returning to the hydrogen cycle for a refresher. (I'm nobody, btw.)

[@alexmartos9100]

Don’t be afraid to go down the rabbit hole Eric! Who cares if I can only really understand half of what you say.

[@michaelbarbieri1398]

I wonder if I listen to enough conversations like this will I start understanding what they're saying the same way you can learn a new language by total immersion

[@nfevelo]

Our brains and intelligence are heavily reliant on pattern recognition. How could we not be biased to find the math and its patterns beautiful?

[@InterstellarRanger]

That! ...my thought too..

[@leedufour]

Thanks Garrett and Eric.

[@mediathor7532]

30 mins in, this is awesome!

[@wesb8159]

Awesome does not begin to describe this conversation. Very Important, and very interesting. Spread the word. This podcast will create new neurons.

[@jamesbraine]

Ohhhh this guy. I remember watching and enjoying a video he was in. His theory is very interesting.

[@JamesCairney]

You mean, you were watching a video with Marion Kerr, and this dude was messing about with a paraglider slagging off string theory, I saw that too, good video so it was.

[@CapitanZeppelin]

Please keep doing this stuff, it was amazing. I’ve followed your podcast from it’s inception, and this was by far the most interesting episode to me. Looking forward for the Sabine Hossenfelder one. PS: never dumb down anything;)

[@georgesvan]

"The problem with the world isn't how little they know, it's how much they know that isn't so"...

[@williamcowan5954]

I love hearing two smart people talking like this. I felt like I am on the verge outstanding something profound but constantly being lost the whole time.

[@____uncompetative]

"The fermion content of the standard model looks messy at first sight. A single generation of quarks and leptons makes up five representations of SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1), with peculiar fractional hypercharges (and electric charges). But this structure fits grand unified theories - based on SU(5), SO(10), or E₆ - perfectly. For example, in SO(10), a generation of quarks and leptons, plus a right-handed neutrino, fits neatly into a single irreducible representation. It is hard to believe that this is an accident." - Professor Edward Witten en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything

[@craighane2015]

I have been reading the comments below about Eric's conduct. He needs to read them and learn from them. Yes, he is brilliant, but he needs to learn from Joe Rogan how to conduct an interview. IF this were a debate Lisi won by a large margin.

[@alskdjf-ol6bl]

You should see the interview Eric did with James oKeefe. Eric is straight up seething in it

[@johnalley8397]

Eric, please consider inviting Cohl Furey to the portal. I would love to hear your discussion about her work into octonian based algebras as generators of fundamental symmetries. I cannot believe you actually had this discussion with Lissi. Loved your prefacing exposition. Summoned to my mind exactly the "Every equation halves your sales" maxim. Screw that maxim. Loved this.