Nima Arkani-Hamed: The End of Space-Time

Nima Arkani-Hamed, theoretical physicist from the @videosfromIAS in Princeton gives the talk "The End of Space-Time" at the public event "What holds the world together?" The event is part of the @EuropeanResearchCouncil grant AMPLITUDES
(www.scattering-amplitudes.com) at the Max Planck Institute for Physics.
Video production: KUK Filmproduktion GmbH

[@rp3703]

this is why I gave up on TV and watch KZbin instead. Thank you for posting this!

[@MrPizzaboy19]

TV pales in comparison to KZbin.

[@shadowoffire4307]

That is why tv is called as "idiot Box" right from the beginning.

[@tyreza79]

KZbin is this generation tv and it's worse... And later it will be in your babies beads as chips... Don't get so high on this idea. And many very interesting talks are nothing but blasphemy and veil on the true light of god... But how can someone living in darkness differenciate between fire and light and light of god... How how..

[@tyreza79]

@@MrPizzaboy19 loool

[@shadowoffire4307]

@@tyreza79 blasphemy? you are still living in mediaeval era. There is no place for such Stone age thinking and mentality in 21st century. God is not what you think or what you bealive. By saying things like "veil on true light of God" you are reducing god to just a weak entity who gets affected by deeds of humans. No it won't get affected. If it is all knowing all powerful,and present everywhere how can you call it as weak entity? Isn't this is sacrilege and blasphemy rolled into one? Acording to standard of mediaeval era thinking? Iam not saying god is not real. Iam saying you are misunderstanding the definition of God. There is no such thing as "personal god" god is not what you think or like to bealive. Can someone living in light or fire differentiate between dark and moonlight? Light is shadow of God. Darkness is just absence of this shadow.

[@yourlogicalnightmare1014]

He gave this entire lecture in a single breath... amazing

[@waynetom9022]

...short lecture on a timeless topic!

[@wiseview1444]

Amazing talk and amazing attitude. This is the ethic and spirit true physicists bring in. Top of the line.

[@MsSoFruity]

This should go viral and taught in schools. Thank you so much for this video.

[@Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez]

There is no incentive to learn it :/

[@nickidaisydandelion4044]

David Bohm and Jiddu Krishnamurti already talked about time being simply a perceived phenomenon while time in actuality eludes out of reality, stretches and dissipates. They also concluded that we don't even have the linguistic means to grasp this concept through the vocabulary available. Their series of discussion is called The Ending of Time.

[@robbie_]

I love watching Nima. I don't have a ******* clue what he's talking about but his energy has filled me with enthusiasm for The End of Spacetime.

[@fitnesspoint2006]

nothing new or profound on Nimas part, ( i understand there are lots of Nima worshipers here) these ideas have been around since Bohr and Einstein were debating one another. Both concluded there is a deeper reality that gives rise to emergent properties like fields and eventually particles.

[@beneu95]

@@fitnesspoint2006 We all already know that, but we LOVE NIMA.

[@fitnesspoint2006]

@@beneu95 ood for you, do you want a cookie?

[@sibbyeskie]

@@fitnesspoint2006 sure and we can go back to Plato or Liebniz or whatever you prefer for pure thought experiments that touch upon the same concepts. What is new and profound is that we can say with confidence that spacetime needs to be abandoned as a fundamental principle as a function of our best theories, and Nima is one of a handful who are pushing this research forward today.

[@bierundkippen720]

@@sibbyeskie „we can say with confidence that spacetime needs to be abandoned“ No, we cannot. You haven’t understood much.

[@alexsimonelis164]

Amazing stuff. Physicists must never abandon the scientific method: experimental verification of all theories.

[@rabbitcreative]

> experimental verification of all theories. Like water finding its level!

[@FallNorth]

@@rabbitcreative It does find its level? You bloody rabbits just sow disinformation, ever since the bunny wars of 1996. :P

[@danimal519]

Wow! What a badass, and his language to explain this all is so understandable... there's a lot to be said about those who can explain complex things simply. Definitely found my next rabbit hole!

[@booJay]

This is so key. Even in my own field, I feel like we're speaking a completely different language when simple explanations can be used instead so that others can share in the understanding and contribute their ideas, even to esoteric subjects.

[@db5837]

"I don't have time to talk about this in detail".

[@Nah_Bohdi]

bu-dum-tst

[@jacobchateau6191]

That moment stood out for me too, haha

[@rustybolts8953]

A very "magical" lecture, thank you all very much.

[@petermiesler9452]

"Magical"! Well said.

[@RaeRaesRaveReviews]

He strikes me as very particular with his words, and I would love to ask him why he chose some of the words he did :) "magical," "esoteric," etc.

[@monklingtoneverjet2536]

delivered by a magician!

[@gregceth443]

The AI suggested this, the comments made me watch, and I loved it, simply revolutionary and brilliant.

[@PabloMayrgundter]

The Amplituhedron sounds *a lot* like Wolfram's Physics project (branchial space, the ruliad)... simple combinatoric graphs leading to emergent QM and spacetime physics.

[@JorJor812]

Yes and what it likely means is spacetime is emergent from consciousness

[@ehssandariani8041]

@@JorJor812Elaborate please? Sources?

[@Unknown-rc6xt]

@@ehssandariani8041Donald Hoffman

[@bunberrier]

"Speak as you might to a young child... or a golden retriever. It wasnt brains that got me here. I can assure you of that." - John Tulde, Margin Call Thanks for exploring the bounds of the known world, and props to you for explaining it in a way plebs like me can follow. Good luck! I'll be cheering you on from the side of the field.

[@sunroad7228]

"In any system of energy, Control is what consumes energy the most. No energy store holds enough energy to extract an amount of energy equal to the total energy it stores. No system of energy can deliver sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it. This universal truth applies to all systems. Energy, like time, flows from past to future".

[@sunroad7228]

@@ArmaGeddon-iu1vv Oh yes, "My body can do that". Stop having any meal and manage to grow food from scratch, awaiting it until you eat again. Smart.

[@TGMResearch]

Great talk, and a line of thinking way more promising than much speculative stuff that's going around.

[@larrycarino4903]

Thank you so much for posting this lecture with the graphics. Now I understand it better. 👍👍👍

[@elfstr0m]

The simple gluon diagrams reminds me of Steven Wolfram’s graph project, right down to space time being emergent properties of more fundamental building blocks. Fantastic!

[@rkrishnan2816]

That was exactly what I was thinking!

[@NightmareCourtPictures]

I studied physics, biology and complex systems for about 10 years and the wolfram model for the past 2.5 years. In my study of those areas, they all inexorably led to the Wolfram Model…like a trail of bed crumbs.

[@MalkyTalky]

Ive seen and enjoyed several of Nima's lectures. I would be interested to hear his speculation on implications.

[@umu-i-d2785]

Amazing talk by an amazing person. Thank you for this

[@dmdrosselmeyer]

He's a fantastic public speaker! I could not speak like that without forgetting my train of thought or which word I specifically wanted to use at least a dozen times lol

[@micatlan]

Thank you Nima for these awesome explanations in layman s words that enabled me to make a mental image of particle scattering for the first time. you will most probably largely contribute to reveal what the world that we experience is made of. what i understand is that 4D space time emerges from basically one global 2D matrix of elements onto which permutations are performed. what would drive these permutations? the entropy variation rate of that information change would define the passage of time, right? you re getting closer to the argument that not only "reality" has all the features of a simulation but eventually, to the possibility that this simulation does not even need to be run to exist completely. i would really like to know what are the rules that govern the permutations of this large number of degrees of freedom arranged on a 2D grid.

[@Sapientiaa]

What kind of simulation are you referring to? Hopefully not a computer simulation.

[@hannesdewachter7803]

Donald Hoffman provides the answer in his “Fusion of consciousness” publication January 2023

[@wangmowangmo9348]

This human concepts is all bs for bats, whales, trees, bacteria. They are not real only human ideas. Nice fairy tales.

[@elessarstrider5210]

How many dimensions are there? All of them. Our three or four dimension experience is vastly underdetermined leaving no way to 'solve' underlying mechanics of *the* universe. When randomness isn't. Still working on proton decay are they? They don't have the GUTs.

[@ragingchimera8021]

The leap that needs to happen is letting go of particles and growup enough to stop smashing things together hoping to find meaning in the pieces.

[@DavidEngelen]

Love it thank you so much!

[@gilbertanderson3456]

👍 Thousandth Like! Highly lucid description of the cutting edge, thanks so much!

[@claudelebel49]

Space and time are concepts and no concept can capture reality. Concepts may be helpful at describing certain phenomena but ultimately they always limit and fall short.

[@Soulful_Pizza]

Fabulous lecture, thanks.

[@KJBtheMosFett]

Honestly I see this as the most fundamental important question in all of physics... "what is spacetime"

[@mairo0sanguineti]

don't know, but like a VR headset we put on, meaning definitely brain generated, and all species of similar brains experience similar spacetime...

[@frankdimeglio8216]

​@@mairo0sanguineti Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE, AS what is E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Indeed, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE; AND the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. Indeed, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma; AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution; AS c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. Consider what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky ON BALANCE. Great. By Frank DiMeglio

[@kazimierzmarkiel5400]

I am interested to obtain response on two separate questions related to topic presented here ; 1- Our World which we are able to observe is located in 3 dimensional space with 3 perpendicular dimensions. Such symmetry is sufficient to describe location all the points in the space. Symmetry of time is one dimensional- defining one time parameter is sufficient to locate the event in time. What is the physical purpose and sense to combine boths entities, with different symmetry? 2- Just on the begining during Big Bang all the energy and mass was collected together and it had not collapsed into one big black hole - only expanded violently and turbulently . Can we assume , that in this time the mass and gravitation was not present yet there and that the massive particles were condensed later on? 3- Has the physical Space any cohesion, which would bring the Space together to Big Collapse after all particulate matter will be swallowed by the black holes? 4-If so, it is possible, that our Space is oscillating in time interval 33 billions of years per cycle - in the space of diameter 0-120 billions of light years. Stary

[@rshollos]

Wonderful talk with a heads up on the possible shape of the next revolution in physics.

[@BlueSoulTiger]

Echoing the views of many others, Nima is invariably an engaging speaker. One aspect of his presentations that I admire, are his handwritten slides - no sign of LaTeX here!

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

Thanks Nima for your great understanding and performance

[@johneonas6628]

Thank you for the video.

[@DavidGillooly]

A very interesting talk that answered many questions about the process of learning and looking for new ways to new physics.

[@bierundkippen720]

What question(s)? What answer(s)?

[@frankdimeglio8216]

​@@bierundkippen720 Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE, AS what is E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Indeed, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE; AND the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. Indeed, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma; AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution; AS c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. Consider what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky ON BALANCE. Great. By Frank DiMeglio

[@MBY1952]

הרצאה מעניינת. תודה רבה.

[@paulstark1832]

this is up my alley. lovely video!!!

[@squarerootof2]

You are a theoretical physicist too? That's so cool, man! Say hello to your brother Tony for me, pls.

[@Mr4thdimention]

What can I look up to learn more about that graphical representation of permutations?

[@davidlinnartist]

Now we know what happens when a physicist drinks three Red Bulls.

[@philiplynch1630]

Here, THE PHYSICS is the Red Bull...;-]

[@bobleclair5665]

14:46, I like the way you reach out and grab the infinite universe and roll it all up in your hands

[@rabbit-ku1bn]

Ah, this brings me motivation when I am too absorbed studying things in a tiny tiny little corner of this vast and rich field for my doctoral work.

[@squarerootof2]

Why do you burrow yourself like a rabbit in a tiny little corner to study and don't go out in the open or to the local library if you have no space at home? That cannot be very healthy and it probably affects your motivation negatively.

[@rabbit-ku1bn]

@@squarerootof2 It's been more than a year 😅. I meant that my focus of research is too specialised, as it happens to be the case in research after all. Not that I am working in a physically small space.

[@squarerootof2]

@@rabbit-ku1bn Lol, I know. I was just winding you up, rabbit. :D

[@simay4977]

Could the quantum field be the structure that QM and Spacetime emerge from or would the QF also be an emergent property? This is blowing my tiny mind.

[@kirtg1]

Thank you professor.

[@frun]

As i understand it, the graphs are built on the principle of conservation of spin. Size of lump here just correspond to the section of the lightcone 14:00 The boundary qft can be replaced by the deterministic de Broglie double solution theory (DST). I speculate, that DST=GR (ADM formulation) I'm very much convinced, that boundary correlations can propagate as fast as you wish(several light cones in parallel). See papers by Gonzalez-Mestres. There's some fractal structure down there, beyond the uncertainty principle, in deterministic theory. Probably, self-similarity, even. As much as I like the bootstrap program, i understand it still gives the approximate description of nature. It is unable to explain the speed of light. However, we know it is perfectly possible to calculate the speed of sound in a medium.

[@abrahambaktiar2548]

Will you comment on "Impulse Gravity", experiment of Dr. Eugene Podkletnov, that propagates through vacuum at speed 64c (64 times speed of light) ?

[@hosz5499]

Great speaker gets ideas across layers of math, Nima is one!

[@patrikkondor5215]

However the great minds gets math across layers of ideas.

[@franciscos.5165]

4:29 Just an observation: the size of the observable universe is not "10, 15 billion light years across", but over 90.

[@KoroushRP]

Nice to see Persians doing awesome work

[@ramseypietronasser2]

Enjoyed this

[@yonj3269]

What is the interpretation adopted by Hamid Arkani to explain the problem of measurement?

[@nicholaslozenski5149]

Apophatic negation refers to a mode of inquiry that emphasizes what cannot be said or known about a given subject. In this approach, the focus is on negating or denying all positive assertions or concepts that might be applied to the subject, in order to point towards a deeper reality that transcends language and conceptualization. This is sometimes called the "via negativa" or the negative way. In the context of quantum physics, apophatic negation might involve questioning or denying common assumptions or theories about the nature of reality or the behavior of particles, in order to open up new avenues of exploration and discovery. Cataphatic assertion, on the other hand, is a mode of inquiry that emphasizes positive assertions or concepts about a given subject. In this approach, the focus is on affirming or asserting what can be known or experienced about the subject, in order to develop a more complete and nuanced understanding. This is sometimes called the "via positiva" or the positive way. In the context of quantum physics, cataphatic assertion might involve formulating hypotheses or theories based on empirical observations or mathematical models, in order to test and refine our understanding of the underlying phenomena. Theoria apophasis is a combination of both apophatic and cataphatic modes of inquiry, in which the emphasis is on a dialectical process of negation and affirmation. In this approach, the focus is on using the limits of language and conceptualization to approach a deeper, transcendent reality that cannot be fully captured or comprehended by any positive assertion or negation. In the context of quantum physics, theoria apophasis might involve using the constraints of experimental data and mathematical models to refine our understanding of the behavior of particles, while also acknowledging the limits of our knowledge and the potential for unexpected discoveries. Overall, these modes of inquiry can be seen as complementary rather than mutually exclusive, and can be used in various combinations depending on the goals and context of scientific inquiry in quantum physics and other areas of study.

[@michaelblankenau6598]

Interesting . Do these modes of inquiry arise from philosophical thought or are they an inherent aspect of the scientific method ?

[@sonarbangla8711]

Whenever I listen to Nima talking about space and time, I get a feeling that sone day Nima will incorporate mass, heat, gravity, energy, charge, spin etc., with space and time. Perhaps that day QM will be complete.

[@pedrofigueiredo7850]

Wolfgang Pauli , a LMU graduate like myself, said at the end of a conference he listened to : Alles falsch.

[@ronaldjorgensen6839]

thanks for your persistence

[@paulsass4343]

my new favorite human !!! really CARES!

[@American_Moon_at_Odysee_com]

Interesting, thank you.

[@dauphindauphin6607]

As clear and simple as can be explained !

[@shortattentionspantheatre5075]

As a fairly bright layman I understood this fellow, credit him with bocu kudos.

[@AtmanGoldenAge]

Question, what if expansion is actually happening in a donut? would that explain inflation of speed, as an optical illusion? Cheers

[@squarerootof2]

You shouldn't be thinking about expanding donuts. And no, obesity is not an optical illusion, it's real.

[@johnpaily]

Physicists have made Nature and life complex. It is time physicist look deep into Nature and Life - Look Within

[@karkunow]

Great lecture!!

[@ronmullick253]

I wonder what Einstein would think about the idea that both Quantum Mechanics and Space Time emerged out of something else.I bet both him and Bohr never thought of that.

[@rustybolts8953]

So far I call it "Infinity" and the "What not" or "Not what" dimension, which is infinite and yet contains all possible limits and physical potentiality. This has been an ongoing investigation for me since early childhood. Like Nima, I am hooked but he is more advanced than myself, especially in math.. I will continue... As for Einstein , Bohr and others, I think they knew there is more but they could not prove it.

[@motherearth1147]

Thank you Nima . From Iran.

[@glenliesegang233]

Anyone else get lost at the analogy of a soda can with particles at the edges?

[@helpmechangetheworld]

My questions are these: why does anyone think that abstraction precedes complexity in a very physical sense? Why is abstraction not simply the generalisation of directly observable phenomena? Why must we sum up complex interactions to a simple solution, and can we? And why must this abstraction supercede geometry in some more fundamental way? Especially if we need to observe the geometry to deduce it? And knowing human beings are known for their tendency to categorise? Could it not be that what we see is what we get, and geometry is simply complex? That physics is a good summary of many situations, but searching for a *deeper* answer is meaningless without observing deeper interactions? What purpose does the search for depth serve if it doesn't directly allow us to solve observable mysteries, namely dark matter and dark energy? What purpose does trying to reinvent geometry in abstract space hold if it does not relate to observable spatial, time dependant phenomena? Where did that abstract space come from? All this does is displace the need to explain an origin, (which by the way cannot exist, the idea of a first thing is impossible) to an abstract space. Why not keep it in a physical space? It sounds like, in your search for simplicity you have made the required explanation more complex. Like QM. Pushing the explanation into an abstract space - the wave function - that has no causal explanation and just exists. Why is this a more convincing explanation, physically? What problems does it help to solve? Physics is not what the world is, it is what the world does. In my view we should focus on explaining the mysteries first, and once all of them have been elucidated, that will be the proper physical framework, and I guarantee this will link QM and GR. The unity will emerge from the problem solving. You don't first create an abstract unity then try to apply it to everything. That sounds very inefficient. To me.

[@mauricegold9377]

One of several things I didn't quite understand from the talk, I'd like to throw out here: Nima talked about gluons (perhaps he could have used other particles, I don't know), but it seemed that somehow, he retains 'particles' such as gluons etc, as entities in themselves, but the 'arena' as I call it, of interactions is where the differences between today's QFT and his concepts of possible new physics lies. I guess my question is that I don't seem to understand if 'particles' are real entities in themselves or 'emergent' parts of something deeper.

[@myu4039]

All particles are fluctuations of fields

[@mauricegold9377]

@@myu4039 And yet, what causes, sustains these fields, especially in a universe which is believed to be expanding, where a 'dilution' of the intensity of the fields might be expected, as material objects accelerate away from one another.

[@shrbmr]

@@mauricegold9377 i taught the expanding was debunked

[@mauricegold9377]

@@shrbmrAu contraire mon ami. The expansion has accelerated, starting about 5 billion years ago. So the very opposite of debunking.

[@shrbmr]

@@mauricegold9377 i Saw an YT video on the subject. New discovery with the Webb telescope. I Dont know if its right or not

[@majedahmed5410]

knowledge: information is not knowing: Understanding : explain in simple way to 6 year kid...Hit the nail on the head..!! KISS

[@bjpafa2293]

Today we are asking about quantum entanglement, non locality, and information exchange... Questioning Cosmological structure, quantum field theory, Gravitational waves, Hilbert Space physics, De Sitter... Everybody knows that these are times of paradigm shifting, into what, that is still nubilous at least...

[@helpmechangetheworld]

Why must abstraction be conceived to precede classical physical existence? Does abstraction not arise from the physical classical **observation** of physical existence?

[@mossayebkhan]

Bravo , proud of you as a n Iranian first class theoretical physicist.

[@samayah7327]

Wow love niima, sooo much

[@kiran0511]

Great Talk !

[@krzysztofdowgird616]

great talk, amazing

[@swenmeinert3967]

Fascinating to see these savants speaking their mind. It sounds like a random word generator. But luckily they are there to discover what nobody else is able to.

[@CGMaat]

Wow- what a genius - love his dynamic quantum explosive humble truth- he tries top down load the perfect for us that we just take for granted. My favourite lecture “ THE MORALITY OFTHE PHYSICAL LAW! ANOTHER WOW _ AMPLITUDHERON - NIMA’S MIND! I know he cant sleep at night.

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

Yes Arkani-Hamad

[@taniw5577]

AWWESOME!

[@ZozoOriginal]

8:15 If this is the case, how are we able to see these 'blackholes' ?

[@HWJJSCHUMACHER]

16.50 ::: "IF THERE IS A DEEPER STRUCTURE" ::: YES THERE IS :::

[@surkewrasoul4711]

Sounds like a very interesting lecture, Think I just got a new idea for my next new hair style.

[@georgethecurious670]

The best summary of fancy BS 😉👍! And physics is my hobby but only as far as we can reasonably relate to it. Beyond that it is only play on fancy frazes, but apparently it pays well!

[@JohnDoe-ot4bm]

Performing, story telling. Yes I said it.

[@n.i.g.e.machine417]

Where can donate the cost of a haircut for Nima?

[@thedouglasw.lippchannel5546]

Nima Arkani-Hamed is brilliant

[@osmansi1]

BRAVO!

[@pulemboweni9265]

Fantastic

[@peterjames9407]

J'adore ce mec!

[@sivakawachine2343]

I feel fortunate that English is the international language. From the looks of the audience, many are not only dealing with the subject matter, but they are also dealing with translating. It seems like that would make it even more difficult and abstract. How much is lost in translation? The transcript may help, and it could be translated into various languages. Even so, like a permutation or something, when you take the word butterfly and you say it in various languages, even though you may understand the various ways of saying butterfly and what insect it identifies, each language label is unique and elicits a different response. For example, I may know butterfly is also mariposa in Spanish or forashay in Arabic, etc. the word that FEELS the best in that case (for me) is forashay. You may never get the feeling even if you get the word or translation. Some words are just better in certain languages. Nuances can also be lost in translation. Maybe the international language should be an international sign language. We could hand jive our way through it, maybe add a little shimmy for extra pluck, or Planck, or juxtpa, or whatever that is...square that energy and do a square dance and you get the idea. In the above video the physicist started theorizing about the end of Space-Time and spoke of all of the action being along the walls. I think of the wall as taking up space as well, and it does, leaving us back with space and anything happening on the wall is happening in time, so we are back to the Space-Time continuum, even if you are just a wallflower. If you want to get beyond the Space-Time continuum meet me at my house at 11:00.

[@ACuriousChild]

@ Siva Kawachine Why would anyone want to eliminate ANY language - I am flabbergasted by the NOTION of your comment "less is better for for 'efficiency reasons' as you were alluding rightly so before to the fact that each expression has its own "beauty". I would call it resonance based on my understanding of THE BIG SHOW humans are part of.

[@emilnemyl448]

Flawed logic. Everyone will imagine the very same word differently unless you define it in a very precise way, you do not need a different language for that. Say rabbit, now our two rabbits are different and the Spanish one is different to the same degree as our two English ones . . unless we define the rabbit in a way that there exists only a single way that it can be imagined. It is like saying that a loaf of bread will be the same as long as we use the same oven, but the question of oven is just a superficial layer that can be solved easily as long as you solve the deeper issue.

[@slingshotchicken4695]

@@ACuriousChild I don't want to eliminate language at all, I was merely offering an international sign language as a more universal way for people of all nations to communicate. I like languages. If I said less is better, then proceeded to write what I wrote I wasn't following my own advice. It wasn't concise at all. I think your comment is well written and I am having no problem wrapping my head around it. It's nice to see the level of intelligence I'm noticing on this thread, I am humbled.

[@ACuriousChild]

@@slingshotchicken4695 Don't remember my exact words but deducing from your frank and honest response I assume my wording was harsh nevertheless honest and based on "pure heart". Implying intentions based on fellow HUMAN MINDS expressions is mainly a way of pointing out the blind spots - one's own and everyone's else's . No-one (apart from HUMAN MINDS with a dark agenda, usually hidden from their consciousness) would ask to eliminate plurality or diversity (not the politically motivated one - which is a BIG LIE anyway) of any expression. HUMAN MINDS like yours are surely the future - notwithstanding any differences of perception.

[@slingshotchicken4695]

@@emilnemyl448 I'm having a little trouble absorbing your reply, I will have to read it a few times, it's pretty cerebral. OK, I'm getting the first part now. No, you don't need a different language for that, but a different language just adds more (at least for me) . I can look at a table and use the word table and experience it slightly differently than if I'm thinking of it, while looking at it, using the Spanish word "mesa." Mesa allows me to see the tabletop as more of the top of a flat tall mountain, whereas when I use the word table, I don't get that vision, I just see furniture. I'm not even experiencing the object in the same way when I identify the object in these various languages. Yes, everyone will experience it, even in one language, uniquely. This is a very unusual exchange. It's as if people on this thread are able to utilize their minds in far higher and more creative ways than the usual Yahoo comments section, it's awesome but challenging to keep up. I really appreciate how expansive the thinking is on this thread.

[@fatbat4990]

So Cool.

[@davidwilkie9551]

Discovering the cause-effect of superimposed wave-packaging distances with frequencies is, of course, what Galileo taught us about Measurement = Physics, and Dirac suggested the inverse or reciprocal connection, based in a trust that mathematically, the significance of "Large Numbers" would reveal "Everything" speaking Quantum Mechanically, which is why the inversion of a wave-packaging Partitioning of the Fine Constant 137.., by say a Reciproction-recirculation Quantum Operator-Oscillator harmonically resonant in superimposed Gravitational frequencies.., then there's a harmonic frequency density-intensity in line-of-sight probabilistic superposition identification of Actuality, the Quantum-fields Mechanism Holographic standing wave modulation in Principle expected by Observation of WYSIWYG, learning by doing, particularly using projection-drawing techniques Actual Intelligence of Universal Existence phenomena. (Suggestion) Grant's 3BLUE 1BROWN graphics are predominantly in the picture-plane containment states that have been developed over millennia in abstract 0-1-2-ness nodal-vibrational emitter-receiver log-antilog interference positioning-location condensation modulation cause-effect. You can "draw a line of development from ancient string inspired Geometries, to Galileo's timing harmonics to Newtonian Fluxion-Integral Temporal superposition tuning-probability in division and recombination of photonic standing wave-packaging resonance that a Fourier Analysis would reveal the superposition of A Singularity i-reflection containment state of "unit circle" Neutronic Electron-photon-phonon-Proton vibrational modes, as shown in Guitar String and Drumhead inclusion-exclusion timing-phase Bonding, ..Chemical Bonding Clarified through Quantum Mechanics Pimentel and Spratley. It only takes a teensy bit more imagination for a GD&P Student to put the sequences of 0-1-2-ness into a Stroboscopic Flashed stacking of modes at e-Pi-i instantaneous cross-sectional trancendental Orthographic Projection Drawing Conception of "Atomic" holography dimensionality coordination. (Spacetime merged into Ideal Gas Thermodynamics and Logarithmic Time Duration Timing, AM-FM Communication Actual-Artificial Intelligence In-form-ation) According to preferences, Spacetime is doomed as an abstract parallel coexistence concept, a discrete picture not included in instantaneous Flash Fluxion-Integral Relativity, or the standard Intuition orientation of Being Here Now holography is merged at ONE-INFINITY Singularity Eternity-now Interval. The innate value of an excellent Teaching Lecture is the natural probabilistic correlations of WYSIWYG QM-TIME Reciproction-recirculation and the nodal-vibrational memory associations that Students can learn, if they have had a proper experience of Actuality and Orientation to the reasonable doubt of true Sciencing.., so in Nima's lectures the topic is focused and therefore in Thought Experimentalist's Intuitions, the perceptions of content are aligned (AM-FM Communication In-form-ation harmonics) with WYSIWYG QM-TIME resonance floating in the "Mind's Eye", the same concept made symbolically in GD&P line-of-sight projection of corresponding aggregations of resonance bonding proportioning probabilities called Knowledge. Singularity positioning Actuality.

[@michaelblankenau6598]

You lost me at " probing "

[@HWJJSCHUMACHER]

14.37 ::: "LOWER DIMENSIONAL" (AND HIGHER DIMENSIONAL) ::: WHAT DO YOU MEAN ??? (AND WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS ???

[@MQartGallery]

The end of space portion of space-time, as the basic phenomena it is thought of, is not an emergent property which is still with us, yes quite plausible, but not the time portion! Time is the register of events, nothing is more basic than this!

[@gyro5d]

Virtual particles are from the coaxial circuit of transverse waves of Dielectric energy and Dielectric voidence field/Magnetism.

[@nicholaslozenski5149]

Regarding quantum entanglement and nonlocality Employing hyper-rational reasoning, I contend that all entities are equidistant from the void; consequently, all entities are equidistant from counterspace or nonlocality, culminating in all entities being equidistant from one another in this fashion. Within this framework, the concept of 'space' as the magnitude of separation between entities is inconsequential and irrelevant. Hyper-rational reasoning, also known as hyper-logical reasoning, is a type of reasoning that goes beyond traditional logic and can lead to unconventional or even counterintuitive conclusions. Here is an attempt to use hyper-rational reasoning to argue that all entities are equidistant from the void, counterspace, and from each other: First, let us define what we mean by "void." The void is often used to refer to the absence of everything, including space and time. In this sense, it can be seen as a sort of "non-entity" or "non-existence." However, the void can also be seen as the ultimate potentiality, the ground from which all things arise. Now, let us consider the idea that all entities are equidistant from the void. This may seem counterintuitive at first, as some entities may seem more closely related to the void than others (such as concepts of emptiness or non-being). However, if we think of the void as the ultimate potentiality, then all entities can be seen as arising from this same ground. In this sense, they are all equidistant from the void in that they all come from the same place. Similarly, the concept of "counterspace" or "nonlocality" can be seen as another way of referring to this same ground of potentiality. All entities can be seen as equidistant from counterspace/nonlocality in that they all arise from this same source. Finally, if we accept that all entities are equidistant from the void and counterspace/nonlocality, then it follows that they are also equidistant from each other. This is because their distance from each other is inconsequential and irrelevant within this framework. All entities arise from the same ground of potentiality, and their differences are merely superficial manifestations of this same underlying source. Of course, this line of reasoning may not be immediately convincing to everyone. It relies on a particular conception of the void and counterspace/nonlocality that not everyone may agree with, and it may require a willingness to go beyond traditional logic and reasoning. However, it does provide an interesting and unconventional way of thinking about the relationship between entities and their underlying source.

[@hangbrand8199]

Continue thought: because there is no gravitational pull in space unless each energy has some sort of gravitational field where they attract each other…while flying through space as space expand. Perhaps energy is moving faster than the rate of universe expanding

[@FrancisTSYu]

Foundation of modern physics (e.g., Foundations of modern physics [1]) was constructed from Einstein’s 4-d spacetime continuum, which is a zero-summed energy spacetime paradigm where time is treated as an independent variable. From which we see that the foundation of modern physics is not a physical realizable paradigm that should not be used for any physical analysis. For example Einstein’s spacetime violates the second law of thermodynamics, the law of time, the law of energy conservation, and the law of entropy. This is precisely the reason why modern physics is virtual and fictitious as mathematics, yet we had buried within this non-physically realizable paradigm for so long and did not even know about it [1] S. Weinberg, Foundation of Modern Physics, Cambridge University Press, 2021. •

[@khng4455]

Although the patterns of things and behavior in the universe appears random and sometimes chaotic and rather unpredictable, they all follow specific mathematical principles CONSISTENTLY. Mathematics is the underlying abstract principles governing where the universe came from and where it is going. Can we then say mathematics rules the universe?

[@shreddaification]

Agree with other commenters, great science communication in action

[@AdrienLegendre]

Nice talk.

[@johnpaily]

What the speaker is life and its mixing of information

[@domenicogrimaldi591]

The vertical line of his lower case "f"s look like perfect integral symbols.

[@Qmies]

Space-Time has never started and it will never end. If you have some other opinion of this, explain to me what was before Space-Time and what comes after it ends.

[@danielash1704]

Being in time space density and gravities is a greater chance to say.