Leonard Susskind: Richard Feynman and Intuitive Visualization vs Rigorous Mathematics

[@lexfridman]

This is a clip from a conversation with Leonard Susskind from Sep 2019. New full episodes every Mon & Thu and 1-2 new clips or a new non-podcast video on all other days. If you enjoy it, subscribe, comment, and share. You can watch the full conversation here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qWibmamMaLZ_i6c (more links below) Podcast full episodes playlist: kzbin.info/aero/PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4 Podcasts clips playlist: kzbin.info/aero/PLrAXtmErZgOeciFP3CBCIEElOJeitOr41 Podcast website: lexfridman.com/ai Podcast on iTunes: apple.co/2lwqZIr Podcast on Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8 Podcast RSS: lexfridman.com/category/ai/feed/

[@willnzsurf]

Thanks for adding a lil bit extra to this conversation. It really helps fill in the gaps. kzbin.info/www/bejne/bIjEpqWubcpgZ9E 💯

[@thiagouriel2966]

Instablaster...

[@nickpmusic]

Great interview, clearly spoken and easy to understand.

[@TheStudioManila]

Leonard on Richards Personality, Thats the story I always 💖 to hear. Amazing! Thanks.

[@iAmLyre]

This guy is my hero

[@douglasstrother6584]

Matt Sands did most the writing and translation from Feynmanese into English for "The Feynman Lectures on Physics".

[@lulumoon6942]

Such content deserves all the views.

[@Greg-z3b]

+1 for having Landau & Lifshitz Volume 2 on the bookshelf!

[@brucewilson1958]

This conversation reminds me of a story involving an early pioneer in Quantum Physics. Each morning he would have coffee on his wooden deck which was on the second floor of his home. Every morning, as he stepped from the house onto the deck he was hesitate for a short second. He knew that empty space inside an atom was nearly the entire reality. So, he should fall through the deck down to the ground, a floor below. Writing this I thought..Why did he trust the floor of the house? It has the same atomic reality? Either way, he never did fall through the deck. But, there is always tomorrow and a new possibility. Cheers.

[@jrf9735]

“Algebra is like sheet music, the important music is can you hear the music? Can you hear the music Robert?”

[@flawns]

I wonder if he ever get tired of being asked about Richard? or does it love reliving those moments?

[@willnzsurf]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/bIjEpqWubcpgZ9E

[@willnzsurf]

He did a Ted Talk where he mentions Feynman.

[@flawns]

@@willnzsurf did you not ready my comment?

[@willnzsurf]

@@flawns yep, the video link I shared shows that he does not get tired of being asked about Richard & the stories he tells in that video shows in my opinion that he loves reliving those moments. Highly recommended.

[@stefanxhunga1681]

Leonard Susskind - Know One Interesting Discussion!

[@sumtensor]

I think the closest thing to something being truly 2 dimensional, is content displayed by a screen, like a computer screen. It is not light bouncing off some 3d object that can be approximated as a 2d object, but pixels sitting in a single plane emitting light. It is the only thing I can think of that doesn't have any depth at all.

[@tnana1234]

Thanks susskind for your kind words ... Will you consider writing qft notes with rigour, math and ontological notes?

[@emersonvolkova6715]

Love the new intro music! Has a desolate “Last Of Us” vibe.

[@mikesahle1193]

Thank you 🙏 direct ☝️might be my answer ☝️great 👍🎥👋☮️

[@michaelwhite9907]

I visualize there being only 1 dimension as a point (the size of a Planck length), which mean there's no ability to move (just stuck at that point because there are no other dimensions -- or degrees of freedom of movement -- to move into, or 'through', from that point); and there being 2 dimensions as being able to move from that point (that one dimension) either forward, backwards, left or right (but not up and down) through a plane of space with a thickness of a Planck length. Once there's a 3rd dimension (a degree of freedom of movement to move up and down), then movement can occur as we see and experience everyday; and ('kinetic') time occurs once there's movement (or at least once there's an ability for there to be movement) through a dimension(s) beyond only 1 dimension. And (it seems) if there were to be only one dimention, then there would only be 'potential' time (potential, but not actual ability, to move) at that point. Vibrating strings may be 'moving' (vibrating) within that point (that one dimension) with no ability to move within the 2nd or 3rd dimensions (i.e., left/right and up/down) outside the Planck legnth that the point is contained, but the strings of energy can vibrate in the higher dimensions turning 'inward' so to speak, into the other dimensions.

[@Douae1111]

how do you imagine the point, because a one dimensional point has to be infinetly small to have one dimesion wich means that the point you imagined is surely bidimensional.

[@maxwellsequation4887]

Can't like it It's on 269 likes Preserve it

[@willnzsurf]

🌴😎💯

[@willnzsurf]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/bIjEpqWubcpgZ9E

[@nikhilchouhan8734]

I love how sure leo was about 2-d creatures lol.

[@InnocentFormalities]

Sssiiiiiccccckkkkkk

[@anacrusa4431]

first, an do'm not a bot

[@Cynry]

A bit disappointed by Susskind's answer on our ability to visualize abstract concepts, get me in, Lex, I'll teach ya :D

[@tnana1234]

Stop promoting a ponzi scheme !

[@rajeev_kumar]

There are no such things as 4-D space or n-dimensional space, these are just abstract mathematical concepts and have no use in real world physics. Abstract mathematics cannot be used in real world physics.

[@oxxjhoxxoo1761]

The set of { matrix 2x2 } is a 4 dimentional space.

[@Cephlapodninja]

Wow your dumb whatever are you using in your real life please explain Ideas and theories are not some diagrams on paper that have no merit in the real world And they will simply never hold true value to anyone who doesn't bother to think how to use them Instead of complaining about how they are useless.

[@epicmarschmallow5049]

Abstract mathematics is used in real world physics. All of relativity is formulated in 4 dimensional space. Quantum mechanics is formulated in an infinite dimensional Hilbert space

[@andrewlow7487]

@@oxxjhoxxoo1761 I would argue no not at all in any way! a 2x2 matrix still describes a 2D world, it simply describes a linear transformation between a 2D vector (two coords) into another 2D vector. You can't add up the column space and the row space to say that oh... it's 4D. Imagine the 2D matrix [0 -1] [1 0] which describes a 90 deg rotation counterclockwise about the origin. so multiply this with the i unit vector [1, 0]. You get [0, 1]. Multiply this with the j unit vector [0, 1]. You get [-1, 0]. So you can see that this 2x2 matrix is actually a description of a 2D space transformation. It's composed of two 2D vectors. That doesn't in any way make the matrix "4D"! A 4D vector would be [a, b, c, d]. A 2x2 matrix does not and cannot contain a 4D row or column vector so how can you possibly say it's 4D??

[@andrewlow7487]

@@epicmarschmallow5049 Exactement! altho i would say relativity is formulated in 4D in that it's space-time, it's not like it's 4 _spatial_ dimensions.