Sean Hartnoll | From Black Holes to Superconductors - 1 of 2

Part 1 of a 2-part mini-lecture series given by Prof. Sean Hartnoll from the Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics.
Black holes have the remarkable property of irreversibility: if you fall into a black hole you can't get out (classically). This immediately suggested a connection with the other famous irreversibility in physics: the law of increase of entropy. Since the 70s, this connection between black holes and thermodynamic systems has been fleshed out in increasing detail and has lead to surprising conclusions. I will give an introduction to a recent body of work showing how black holes can in fact be used to shed light on exotic materials of interest in condensed matter physics, including the still-not-understood high temperature superconductors.

[@sarahzulfa]

Feels like watching a movie with immense of Physics. Thanks for bringing up this topic! I’m taking Superconductor and low temperature physics course now.

[@elifonkonsolakis2521]

the day prof Susskind told me that entropy is hidden information a brand new world was presented to my eyes, in this beautiful course we can enjoy an analogue way to analyze old principles with brand new starry eyes

[@metatron5199]

Exactly, this is why it seems that space-time is an emergent property due to some type of special quantum entanglement of space,time and energy which is pointing in the direction of something deeper than GR and QM which is very exciting since for so long the two seemed to be at odds with each other, but rather they they seem to be both part of something much deeper. Both QM and GR are just two different way of approximating this much deeper reality and its relationships that are still yet to be fully uncovered.

[@rafaelbendavid4041]

it's a truly brilliant idea. But then the question is WHERE or WHEN it is hidden?

[@elifonkonsolakis2521]

well, in a relativistic world, where time and spaces are a y and an x on a Cartesian plane, it should be possible to link the two ... too bad quantum mechanics get in the way and tell us that it's either one or the other - or is it?!?

[@cray3140]

Which version of Entropy are you talking about? Entropy to me would sound like destruction of the whole (evaporation as it where) where in one instance that has presence of an outside force makes perfect sense (entropy of water on Mercury) and at another point is observably absence (entropy of water which accumulates on a comet . . . . which clearly shows that entropy of substance occurs after a certain distance in plack units relative to the EMI emitted by the sun).. Stated a different way . . . . Is entropy possible at absolute 0? Child's approach to the concept but really - at absolute zero - does entropy of anything occur? In essence - Absolute 0 - the inverse of infinite sub atomic - or atomic freedom . . . . or did I miss something in our definition of that given?

[@GuitarsnSnooker]

Sexism

[@tommyhayfield9977]

Good subject matter and a great presentation...thanks for your effort.

[@vinm300]

Excellent lecture and very well presented , many thanks for uploading this.

[@johnjames5988]

Awesome. Loved it. Hope they do more.

[@meetghelani5222]

A great lecture, thanks SITP and Mr. Sean.

[@ElizabethHouck]

Awesome, Sean!

[@JackSarfatti]

Very nice clear introductory talk that non-scientists can understand.

[@andreizimin443]

I have truly enjoyed.

[@samiyehmahmoudian9673]

Great talk Sean as always!

[@MrKmanthie]

True dat! He just went in there & steamrolled right through the lecture. + he had a smart audience: makes it easier: no need for 1/2-baked analogies & anthropomorphizations (which is a no-no) to make undergrads have SOME idea of what he's talking about!! Bravo!! (no one in the audience came there in a short bus; LOL)

[@blackdeutrium746]

Great explanation sir !

[@marczimmerman8524]

Sean explains physics perfectly. Super job, Sean! I feel like I'm getting like 97%. Some physics teachers don't explain things so well. Maybe it's just me. Not sure. Maybe if I watch it 3x I could get 90% of it - not sure. Feynman's pretty good too, but Sean really explains things clearly.

[@jamesdagenhart8615]

Paul Rudd is such a versatile performer.

[@Sidionian]

Hahaha. Paul Rudd wishes he were half as good looking.

[@wordprocessbrian4497]

I tried to construct a model of vertices to represent forces of particles but ran into a rotating three radius vertice, transforming into a crystal crusted framework of tetrahedron space, but it collapses into a process. Helium Condensate. I used same model on blackhole geometry, and ran into the ERB as the event horizon, and a true vacuum state the collapsed event.

[@elifonkonsolakis2521]

It is always refreshing to learn from someone who values Prof Susskind legacy, we love him and his excellent "sons"

[@lucyfrye5365]

Why hello, professor. Does a melting heart also count as a phase transition?

[@brooktsui3559]

hahaha, man, he is indeed handsome

[@darkmath100]

29:50 I believe the specific term is "Cooper Pairs", at low enough temperatures electrons will stick to each other as opposed to repelling each other b/c they both have negative charge. Does anyone know how to describe the force that sticks them together. Is it just as simple as static electricity, the same stuff that makes a blanket stick to itself if it's staticky.

[@timmiltz2916]

This video had an impact on me that helped me understand quantum computing better I figured I'd share the insight. As a software engineer I've certainly learned to model using binary, where you have 1 or 0 but not both. However since IBM offered up free credits to use one of their quantum computers? I have explored this but with q-bits you have 1, 0 AND a third state- BOTH. So about 20 minutes into this lecture he is careful to point out that a liquid IS a true THIRD state- however tempting it is to look at a liquid as merely a composite of both solid and gas matter phase state. So, now, I think I see the error I've made with trying to look at that 'third' state of a q-bit. I've been thinking of it as a composite of both 1 and 0, which is painful heh. I think I might want to look at that this 'third' state with q-bits now as what a liquid is - having BOTH properties - of a solid AND a gas (by analogy) YET - as he states at about 20:00 as for liquid matter phase states? They ARE INDEED a true NEW state, not solid, not gas yet comprising both qualities of a gas and a solid... So - thanks to that one tiny point about a liquid being a TRUE 'stand alone' matter phase state? I'm thinking I can borrow from this and NOW look at that third state regarding q-bits of the 'both' as a true - STAND ALONE - NEW state of media. And viola - all of a sudden, as with a liquid - an entire new domain in physics opened up with hydrodynamics - I can only imagine the analog here to that third state of a q-bit. I would anticipate just as liquids opened up the entire field of hydrodynamics ? This THIRD state in q-bits? I would anticipate by analogy a brand new domain for computer science opens up as analog to hydrodynamics. The GRAND irony here is heh- as I compare that third state of a q-bit by analogy to water? since water has properties of both solid and gas? Where that third state with q-bits has properties of both 1 and 0 ? The first program I ever saw as a child was in Fortran and it modeled? Hydrodynamics heh - in the early 1970's. Heh heh.... So - anyone else out there struggling to grasp that third state for q-bits - maybe looking at it by analogy to what water is- compared to solid or gas? Might help. Eh, I've been warned before the danger of seeking a 'perfect' analogy but I wonder if this is a proper analogy to consider. I never would have guessed this video would help me find a way to finally grasp that 'third' state of media as with q-bits. I dare say as MUCH as I want to intuit a liquid as MERELY compose gas and solid matter phase state? I forever will be looking at liquids different, since they stand alone as their own unique matter phase state. SO tempting though to look at liquids as merely a transitional state between solid and gas. Hmm - a true blue phase state they are? Maybe that's how I need to look at q-bits- that third state as a 'transitional 'state of media hmmm... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[@brendawilliams8062]

I think I’ll watch. Lasers and quantum is drawing a line in the sand for my interest.

[@shohamsen8986]

In material science there is a crystallization hypothesis that says at sufficiently small temperature everything crystallizes into a solid. Are we sure that the quantum liquids will never undergo a phase transition to a solid at some low temperature? How low have we tested this?

[@timmiltz2916]

While I have certainly heard about and read about Heisenberg's Principal of Uncertainty? It wasn't until I put it up against the CERTAINTY that classical physics models (and does so well) that I realized the ESSENCE of Heisenberg's thesis here. While it was staring me in the face all these years - I mean he's got the word UNCERTAINTY right there, I didn't realize this is the CRUX- the foundation FOR quantum mechanics and that is - if we can not be certain, we must turn to probability to model.

[@tricky778]

If the matter that forms the black hole collapses quickly then it will have more energy in it than if it formed from the same matter at rest, so it will have more entropy (for example, matter-antimatter pairs forming and annihilating at once, never escaping, like the triplepoint of a substance)? Could this be a possibility? And if blackholes require more energy to overcome the repulsive forces of subatomic scales then won't they all have a higher entropy in proportion to the threshold energy to overcome those forces?

[@cray3140]

Speed of light - is exactly relative too the space-time the light is in . . . which I believe is why light "bends" around a star where space-time is more compressed - than the space-time around the star (or galaxy - or other body) where space-time is less compressed. Light takes the shortest path "relatively speaking" the same as anything in the EMI . . . sans interaction with something that alters the path of that wave . . . . even when quantified down to a photon . . . . The Photon (in theory) follows the fabric of space-time . . . . at it's shortest distance (sans interference, reflection/refraction/detraction) . . . so it seems we can derive the path light takes is the least compresses space-time relative the center of mass it is near. Entropy . . . . Entropy, the measure of a system's thermal energy per unit temperature that is unavailable for doing useful work. Because work is obtained from ordered molecular motion, the amount of entropy is also a measure of the molecular disorder, or randomness, of a system. If Entropy exceeds the speed which Gravity flows towards the black hole (realizing that the force of the black hole exceeds infinity - relative too its area) . . . . then how would it be possible for Thermal Dynamic's move faster than the planck units of space-time carrying it towards the black hole? Possible candidate? The entropy is a component of what gets destroyed at or in vicinity of the event horizon as it enters (but not leaves) the black hole . . . . but . . . . what we see and assume is escaping the black hole (or evaporating due to thermal dynamics) is in reality remnants of the destruction of "something" as it is destroyed by planck unit of space-time fed into the black hole . . . . where what we assume is coming "from" entropy of the black hole is actually remnants of E=MC Squared - where some of the destroyed matter enters (given planck in = < planck out) and where friction or friction as a result of super heated matter gets ejected?

[@max_mel1]

what is missing is the discussion about charge transfer insulators. xps measurement give hints about this. a full theory has somehow to be connected to the charge transfer Energy and hubbard energy

[@naimulhaq9626]

As we approach a BH event horizon, time slows down and 'stops' there. So when other materials fall into it ( like a star or planet sucked up), they don't enter it but are spewed out the poles, perpendicular to the plane of accretion, accompanied by a strong magnetic field. GR says when space-time transform into each other, t=0 speed=c, but for a proton with mass speed approaches c but not quite c, similarly a BH at t=0 the BH spins at rate approaching c. The mass of BH reside in the surface of the sphere and not at the center (called singularity) as the solution of GR claims. There is no center of the sphere. The volume of the BH is infinite (?!).

[@cray3140]

It just seems to me the understanding breaks at the event horizon. A becomes sub components of A at the event horizon. If we were to pixel A - and if the tip of the A were pointed perpendicular to vector as A entered the event horizon . . . in theory does not the tip of "A" get annihilated before the "-" between the two legs of the triangle - and then doesn't the left or right leg "/" or "\" get annihilated only as the vector of entry is computed - where for instance if the "/" is closer to the BH per vector of approach the entire "/" might be consumed before the "-" which might be consumed before the "\"? The entire "A" may (or may not) be consumed . . . . but what is consumed will no longer resemble an "A" unless the "A" being considered is the absolute smallest element of a Planck Unit of said A that is possible . . . . an infinitely small element of "A" which becomes annihilated / separated from an A - even if the rest of that A which now might resemble an H gets ejected?

[@donotwantahandle1111]

So a black hole which has 10^22 times the entropy of the Sun has a super current, an ordered condensate, flowing around the surface?

[@studham1]

Eureka is the edgar allen poe reference @ 46:15

[@realcygnus]

superb content!......Lenny's legacy

[@JackSarfatti]

Yes, it's good.

[@TheMemesofDestruction]

1:18:25 - Lenny be Trolling ^.^

[@jeanqnguyen4542]

ER.. I'm in love.... I'm hallucinating I thought I was earring in Susskind's ER +complx ,maybe just high on empty stomach

[@RickDelmonico]

Even if a particle could travel backward in time, information could not. Retrocausality will be replaced by something more sophisticated. There are no perfect symmetries, there is no pure randomness everything is an approximation of something else. Information may appear in a digital form but meaning never does. Spacetime is built up from approximations, not discrete ones and zeros, and the only constant may be ratios. Quantum entanglement and geometry; if we think of a particle as being at one pole of an expanding sphere that is not perfectly symmetrical, this surface would would be "rippling" like the surface of the ocean (in the audio world this is called dithering), at the other pole is the entangled particle's pair and it is a property of the sphere that gives the illusion of connectivity. This is not a physical geometry, it is a computational geometry. Is spacetime a product of entanglement? Renate Loll believes that time is not perfectly symmetrical. Her computer models require causality. Possibly some form of quantum random walk in state space. If a photon is emitted by an electron inside of a clock on Earth and it travels to a clock four light years away, time stops for the clock on Earth and time jumps forward eight years for the distant clock also, the electron that will capture the photon becomes infinitely large relative to the photon but the electron that emitted it does not become infinitely small therefore, time is not perfectly symmetrical.

[@naimulhaq9626]

A BH is a quantum phenomenon, for a start Sean did a very good job. That in the last 3 years he didn't publish any more lectures is testament to the difficult topic,particularly when you cannot verify or observe. It is quite possible that the liquid body of BH , not being a hologram or a point in the center of a singularity, suspected for long, along with Sean/Maldecena's concept of duality will need more concrete elaboration. Also the huge spin of BH is not explained, which should be possible in view of super-conducting property of the high current.

[@cray3140]

I think the "in a vacuum" experiment is a perfect crystal lattice . . . and in a if framed in a perfect crystal lattice perfect symmetry is implied.

[@elceedee]

Did Leonard Susskind ask a question at 30:46 ??!

[@elceedee]

NM,.. Confirmed later on

[@ar_xiv]

+elceedee haha I caught that too

[@kentdavidge6573]

'

[@YlmazDALKIRANscallion]

Yes, he is. Mr. Sussking is a lecturer in Stanford Insitute also.

[@MrKmanthie]

SusskinD

[@Bdix1256]

If the temperature of a black hole is less than the temp of the surrounding universe would it ever really get smaller until the temp of surrounding space is less than that of the black hole?

[@cray3140]

So . . . Since Spin is determined at the point of measurement (quantum we determine the axis by the measurement we choose to use - and our measurement does determine our answer because what we are measuring is infinity/x where x is being observed) . . . . don't we bias spin by our measurement . . . or . . . can we combine the physical spin of "+" and "-" by vector / space-time . . . example (though not theoretical) the variances of what is true North in Granite in the Pacific Ocean. Spin = exactly vector / or * vector / space-time (physically observed by @ some geologist) . . . over a period of time where the Macro clearly affects the Micro? Not trying to treat this as trivial . . . . trying to understand . . . . within a degree of accuracy . . . . how do you determine A if A = far < what you can measure? Yes, Yes - this is where the physically observable yields too the theoretical of asthmatically probability - but if I determine by my measurement . . . . how can X not = X since I measured for X? This is simpelly re-stated as - the guy with a hammer will find nails - it may not be all the nails - and everything nailed may not have been a nail (especially if they have Blue Cross Blue Shield who won't fix cataracts unless you exceed 20/40 . . . and have to drive every night - thankfully you don't drink and drive). But I think you get the point. A will always equal A if you only know how to measure for A even when B and C are present . . . . but since they are smaller than A - and BC/BS gives you BS rather than Cataract Surgery - you are stuck looking at and only seeing A (and hopefully not hitting anyone on the way home from work - yea yea - it's 90% divided highway I'd have to cross a median and in many places breach a concrete wall to kill anyone but myself - and that clearly is cheaper than cataract surgery so really - whose harmed but the decedent . . . . probabilistic-ally speaking?) An other way of stating this is: If I am only capable of measuring (or thinking too measure) Z as it relates to A . . . . then every measurement of A = Exactly . . . Z (or to the degree of variance we allow A by Z to provide)? Side Question (I don't assume anything and neither should anyone else) - Exactly - what is the speed of light in planck units at our Sun? Now . . . Exactly . . . . what is the speed of light in planck units at the surface of the Earth? . . . . and equally . . . . what is the planck unit of the speed of light half way between our solar system and Alpha Centauri . . . . similarly . . . . what is the speed of light at the center of the Milky Way verses at the surface of the Sun? Since we have "physically observed" time dilation at satellites verses the surface of the Earth does it not make sense that a planck unit (and space-time) become less compressed at points with less gravity than those with more gravity (e.g. Milky Way BH - smaller Planck Unit than Earth Solar System Sun . . . . even though a Planck Unit and the Speed of light are both considered a constant? Light and / or the Planck Unit may indeed be constant - given the compression of space-time caused by mass . . . . but were we able to emphatically observe Planck Unit A verses Planck Unit B - at given Distances to a mass - then clearly we would see that at a point of mass the Planck Unit - and Space-Time both become compressed and run faster as compared to the same measurement where less mass is present? If Space-Time is "NOT" curved then how can a Planck Unit of time in orbit around the Earth (as already measured) not be the same as a planck unit of time at sea level on the Earth . . . which will clearly be moving slower than time at the surface of our Sun . . . . which will clearly have a larger planck unit of time than the Black Hole at the center of our Milky Way? This is me kind of asking us . . . . when we prove our own theory by using our own theory . . . . but ignore what we chose to make a measurement easy . . . . aside from earning a Knowable Prize . . . . did we do anything except confuse 1+/-X Grad Students - or turn off 10*Xpower children who still look at it with open eye's - devoid of personal ties? Trying not to insult (and this doesn't reflect anything of the presenter or presentation) - but if we ignore what we can observe (accurately and measurably) to prove a mathematical physical theory . . . other than dupe the Knowable committee did we actually achieve anything beyond stroking our own ego? (can't re-read any of this - No idea what CenturyLink actually allowed to be posted - and - my eye's are so old they quit working over 2 hours ago . . . just hoping that someplace someone will realize - a measurement of insanity based on an insane unit where i =/not insanity will give you "insane" output. Schrodinger's Cat was clearly dead long before we looked inside the box - and I'd hypothesize that Schrodinger's Cat was really pissed off about being locked in a box with plutonium (or other element known to eventually kill it . . . though thankfully not being stuck listening to the waves from my college speakers loudly blaring LOUD ROCK causing it's ears to either bleed - or not to bleed - which was a determination the volume was just too loud - laying on the floor twitching just didn't count . . . Ok, Ok, it was actually the neighbor's cat and the sound was actually slightly red shifted due to time*space/time . . . doesn't that equal space?). If we considered the box "presence" or "absence" of a black hole and used the golden mean +/- some other variable - we would have a better than 50% chance of "guessing" which cat lived. That's probably what had Eisenstein so perturbed - I would further postulate that both Einstein and Schrodinger were equally right - and - equally wrong - but since Schrodinger's answer was commercially applicable what was wrong was over looked as errata and what was wrong with Einstein's postulations was overlooked similar to what is overlooked in mathematical equations first postulated by Aristotle. The only thing wrong with borrowing or basing your concept on the guy before you . . . is . . . not mathematically removing - or - experimentally removing . . . or . . . hypothetically identifying . . . . the error of the guy before you . . . . who by the way worked up his theory with a stubby pencil, a lot of paper and a lot of erasers. You . . . . have a computer capable of computing millions of times what he could have considered in a single life time. It just seems to me there is a break between Mathematically possible - and - Physically Observable Reality . . . . (as a whole it's known as - and in no way reflects this presentation - if you don't understand how what you are theorizing works then garbage in will always equal garbage out). Again - appoligies for the "absence" or proof reading this. I'm old enough I'm "REALLY" looking forward to cataract surgery. I quit being able to read this with both eye's a couple of hours ago - and right now I get the enjoyment of combining both letters to get a probability of one - while using a 27 inch monitor @ 150% magnification. I kinda feel like an Adam Sandler Character - or someone else "what - are you blind"? Well Maybe . . . OK - CENTURYLINK HAS REPEATEDLY "DUMPED _ INTERRUPTED _ TRUNCATED _ AND ERASED" THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO GET ACROSS . . . . Go Net Neutrality. Reality - if the 25% of the nation that lives in rural America doesn't get reliable *and un flipping jacked up* internet - there is a 100% chance that 1 in 25 Einstein will end up washing dishes. Thankfully - we have 25% * populace / Einstein to waste . . . . Net Neutrality - hell I'd accept reliable net at this point.

[@shaytirosh5571]

Sean explain clearly and it is possible to follow. There are few mistakes: 1. dE/dT=S it is the second law of thermodynamics not the first. 2. Thermodynamics has no time aspects therefor ds/dt>0 is an aspect in kinetics. 3. It seems Sean heading to claim that (Black holes) BH are suspected to have (superconducting)SC state since they are sharing similar relaxation mechanisms. However there are many relaxation phenomenons that are inverse proportional to temperature which are not SCs and certainly not BHs for example fluorescence.

[@antoniolewis1016]

1. No, that's the law of conservation of energy. Energy into system (dE) = heat increase (TdS) 2. Thermodynamics has time aspects, see second law of thermodynamics 3. See the next video

[@naimulhaq9626]

Antonio: I am surprised no one asked the question 'how do you throw a pebble into a BH', because at the event horizon t=0 for anything thrown in, even if you throw the pebble with speed c, similarly nothing can come out, even the Hawking Radiation comes out from event horizon. Materials sucked in by BH are spewed out as ejected as matter/waves accompanied by a magnetic field.

[@misssweethearted]

great lecture, very clear and explained nicely; he's also very handsome!

[@cray3140]

I'm having trouble understanding how looks have to do with concepts. I suppose the packaging of the presenter in some fashion affect the over all estetic. Has anyone measured that . . . . Oh wait - yea, there's been a lot of sales research on that. I suppose this means - if you have a thought - get someone cute to present it and X < 50% will automatically approve of the concept devoid of what it says . . . Great Lecture +1 - Clearly and nicely explained +1 . . . . He's cute? Really ? ? ? are we in Jr High? ? ? and / or . . . who really cares.

[@JohnVKaravitis]

37:50 And microwaves? Point-Set-Match, Sir. 1:25:26 For the diffusion equation, isn't it the second derivative w/r/t time == a constant times the Laplacian?

[@cray3140]

I saw a question from someone on this thread - See comments under this thread. kzbin.info/www/bejne/q5qqkHiqi7aoa9E I've been having issues with an ISP dropping TCP connections to the comments board of youtube where if I try to edit it occasionally it works. By occasionally - normally it just locks up, then occasionally 5 attempts to correct the comment get pasted in which leaves me with having to just delete it and re-write it or leave it as is if it's not just completely hosed up. It's been giving me fits. The answer to that person's question which was brief is I was trying to describe how and why the math and electric theory the presenter was showing didn't add up. What I didn't realize at the time is he was describing a theoretical model where the math and flow of electricity was know to not add up and was over looked in favor of creating a thought problem. Just couldn't follow why have a problem where it takes that kind of hack to make it work. If we needed to manufacture additional matter within the black hole to keep the potential energy constant it should have come from a parallel universe - or - the structure of positive matter building outside the black hole he wanted to levitate via magnetic function needed to occur entirely outside but ring the black hole so that we didn't have magnetic field lines exceeding the speed of light and failing to follow the path of least resistance.

[@davidwilkie9551]

Tornadoes are embedded in Hurricanes and Vortices in Tornadoes, it's a principle of physics. The vortices are said to shed from the Tornado as they are higher energy and although it should be possible to demonstrate mathematically how the same energy transfer applies to Black Holes and Superconducting information, in "sync" or apparently static positioning relationships to do with the "Vacuum". Ie, although the system may look like an object, it is a dynamic constant within the entirety.

[@LocalMarksFishing]

The adverts are a killer. You can't fall asleep to this. You'll be constantly skipping through ridiculously long adverts to often.

[@richardcarew4708]

There are actually room temperature superconductors readily available... it's AuPt.. gold platinum alloy that forms as molten rock cools... the various constituents precipitate out as the mix cools.. first is carbon, which cools the mix and between 3800° and 3500° C silicon carbide is also created, both are semi metals.. with 4 electrons in the outer valence orbit. . So they create double double covalent bonds... and they remain closely packed.. as they move up with the molten rock.. next is Al2O3, aluminum oxide.. 3500°.. between that and the melting point of platinum are some of the trace elements of the platinum group.. and the heavy elements like tungsten.. and at 1768°.. platinum precipitates out.. and cools enough to attract gold.. 78 and 79 proton electron pairs.. and they create a magnet field... so AuPt is slightly magnetic.. depending on the mix.. it's forming down where diamond forms... it's really really hot. Most metals are vaporized at that temperature... because they don't have metallic bonds, but, instead they have double double covalent bonds, like diamond .. they are 10 on the Moh's scale of hardness... and they conduct heat like diamond.. I can use a diamond hole saw and hold the metals in my hand.. it doesn't get warm even... it's a superconductor for heat and magnetism.. it's available in most river rocks.. everywhere... I use my camera and Snapseed HDR to get a close look... and they are almost all AuPt in one form or another... of course if you don't know what platinum looks like.. and most people don't.. including myself.. even with a lifetime of chemistry and physics... my father taught reactor theory at the graduate level while I was in high school. . My brother was a research scientist at UCSD.. in bio medical engineering... I started finding AuPt dust when I went out to my mines around Arizona.. and I started looking for it.. and I predicted it... and in the dust I separate it with a magnet... it's the only gold stuff that sticks to a magnet... ya can't miss it... I melted it the first time with a plasma cutter... 1768° C requires special equipment, or hydrogen/oxygen torches... plasma cutters are the cheapest.. even oxy acetylene with a cutting torch... very high heat... and I got a couple shiny places... but no joy... The metals are 10 on the Moh's scale of hardness and it can be used as is, and machined like steel and aluminum... the metal from melting has metallic bonds Double double covalent bonds create a room temperature superconductor... and it is not rare or hard to find... AuPt has gone unrecognized because of the tremendous enthalpy imposed by the high melting point of platinum... we use it in the laboratory for crucibles.. ==>> and institutional ignorance.. we learn a lot of misinformation... and it looks very much like it's done on purpose So... I am working on several ideas.. using AuPt with the magnets... and... it does all kinds of unusual things... a magnet hanging by an unmagnetic AuPt rock... and it hangs at an angle between the planetary gravity field... and the AuPt

[@richardcarew4708]

So... I have photos of my diamonds and the beta emissions from the C14, stimulated by laser light.. it's a few small LEDs... and when I bring two close together, those electrons on the facing surfaces create a plasma... in standard atmospheric pressure... a plasma.. because they are moving at light speed... if they were slower than light... my photographic development brings in near and far infrared and ultraviolet... and I can actually see perturbation in atmosphere as, for instance, alpha particles are in the picture... I see them as a sort of dark mist... moving less than 300Mm/sec²... .. alpha particles glow blue.. as they leave the source... beta emissions are reddish orange... and diamond usually is just carbon... nothing else is solid as it forms.. and only silicon binds at this high temperature 🌡 As I was trying to melt AuPt dust.. it becomes a super liquid at just below 1768... very very cool.. it's gold colored like 24k gold.. which is what half is.. it's not half and half.. it's all of both, and this < 300 micron dust flows like water.. looks like a liquid...it's still separate particles... for another 2 seconds.. ... One of the problems with calculation based on "facts" that are not actually true is==>> it skews all the other measurements... and the BB theory is not really true... it was brought to us by a catholic priest... in 1927... about the time Hubble found other galaxies... smashing everything into one of my dots... in even a small, closed Universe is ==>> impossible.. the first law of anything is ==>> two "things " with the same energy cannot occupy the same space.. diamond is about as close as solid matter can be forced... it's the same thing as gawd made the heavens and the Earth... in 6 seconds or less... ex deus... it's not true.. that's called magic...and there's no such thing as magic.. for sure.. .. For more information [e-mail] Peace ✌☮

[@richardcarew4708]

A word about entropy.. it's absolutely a product of a closed Universe with a finite amount of energy... through what is called quantum foam, our Universe continues to create new hydrogen atoms continuously and all around us all the time... and our thoughts and ideas have a great deal of influence on the process.. it's sorta like Susskind's holographic Universe... but our Universe grows along the Fibonacci sequence... as all populations do... it's growth today is equal to the sum of the growth yesterday and the day before... that's why 1.16169 is part of the Planck length equation. 1.16169 × 10-³⁵... and as we go each iteration brings a slightly different ratio of the sequential Fibonacci numbers... like "i"... and that's why our Universe is fractal... and everything in it also grows along the Fibonacci sequence... it's not magic.. it's the way "stuff " fits together ❤ 😍.. entropy is not really the final solution for our Universe.. it's not finite at all... it's the definition of the word "eternal".. infinite in both time and space... it's a product of the passage of light through vacuum... and as light passes through light from different sources, it creates positive and negative interference.. like Feynman's double slit experiment... and when three sufficiently energetic sources are present, we get positive interference on the up waves, and negative interference on the down waves... and they create sub quark particles... quarks are toroidal vortices... and there are 3 types.. with more or less interchangeable components... it's the slight difference between them that create protons and electrons.. the most energetic toroidal vortices go from the equator to pole, and they have a life expectancy measured in fempto seconds .. they devolve into the next lower energy level, and the flow of energy goes from pole to equator.. slightly less energy is retained, but they also devolve quickly, to pole to pole.. the easiest and most stable configuration.. that's what up and down quarks are... and the way they go round and round has everything to do with how much energy they have at exactly E = Mc².. And the more things there are.. the more space is between them.. space is not something that requires a beginning nor an end... space does not require making.. it's not a "thing" .. it's the absence of things... So... space between stars and the space between atoms is exactly the same.. and the vacuum between atoms is sufficiently void to allow the creation of new hydrogen...hydrogen has one property none of the others have..==>> duration.. and the distance between atoms in a star are not as close as atoms of carbon in diamonds are.. and they create new hydrogen continuously... The Universe is flat.. it's the same in all directions... in my photographic development techniques I have Hubble deep space images.. I bring in near and far infrared and ultraviolet.. and I found the "missing " 80% of our Universe.. no dark matter needed... but the vortices of sub quark particles continues up the scale. Richard Feynman didn't know about fractal mathematicians.. and he thought the similarities between galaxies and solar systems and atoms was serendipity, accidental... it's not... and, unless we have accurate measurements for our calculations, we can Never get the correct answers to our investigation of the Universe we live in.. the starting point has everything to do with the result... and the very worst way to look for answers is with the idea that you already know enough... and, because we read it in a book... does not mean it's true ... Science is all about measuring the Universe we live in... and a closed mind is what allows the darkness of the catholic church and religion to continue to run our thoughts and ideas. As ye believe, so shall it be Peace ✌☮ Mass is interchangeable with energy.. they are different aspects of the same thing... it's the speed of rotation that determines how much energy they have... and they are, like all spirals, governed by the Fibonacci sequence.. and, they are sequential.. the higher energy component has a greater velocity.. and they move against each other so the lower velocity component is driven by the higher velocity component... and I think they are entangled... permanently... As a particle travels through space-time in linear motion.. we can only see it in one place.. a la Heisenberg.. so I think neutrinos are actually traveling faster than light speed... and my math indicates that rotational velocity is different... so as a particle rotates at less than 300Mm/sec²... it's not visible... as it reaches light speed, all of a sudden we can see it.. and we say it has mass... because all these sub quark particles and protons and electrons are going round and round really really fast... photons, not so much . But they are the same thing.. toroidal vortices .. which is how our Universe stores energy.. E = Mc².. a la Maxwell.. and now we have tied the speed of light to "mass".. and the vorticity is cumulative... so larger mass means greater vorticity at the same ratio.. it's not magic, is it?... it's simple mathematics. .. so the missing mass is actually not missing.. and vorticity has the exact same diffusion of energy.. according to the inverse square of the distance... it's the same thing as what you are calling the "force" of gravity.. it's not a force.. it's geometry... and the quantum gravity of vorticity.. Thanks for listening The StarFire Family wishes you Peace and Prosperity Ad Infinitum Peace ✌☮

[@richardcarew4708]

One more thing.. in my deep space images, because I create smaller and smaller cubits, or "voxels" with each iteration of HDR, I end up with cubits that are five orders of magnitude more information.. so the light from distant galaxies is red as they move away from us.. blue as they move towards us.. If the BB theory were true...the Universe would NOT be flat.. which means the same in all directions.. and there is no "preferred direction".. and my images show that to be the case.. they are evenly distributed throughout the images.. and I can see many orders of magnitude more galaxies than the standard acuity from NASA.. if everything starts at a single point, the galaxies on one side would be moving towards us, and on the other side, they would be moving away from us... it's not like that... they are all mixed together... and they are not moving uniformly... there are yellow and orange galaxies, moving sideways perhaps... and at least one very large, very pink cube.. no idea on that one.. ;;☆》.. and all those extra galaxies get smaller and smaller as they move further away. So my images show how far away they are, and their relative motion to us . And it appears to have a very very cubic structure... just like my diamonds 💎... and... it's not in a relatively young Universe.. something someone made a few years ago... and finite but growing.. it's been going on forever.. immer und immer Ad Infinitum Peace ✌☮

[@RJBenish]

Irreversibility: Time only gets bigger because space and matter also only get bigger.

[@davidwilkie9551]

"Everybody knows" It's always NOW, by default, as it's the only Absolute, THE self-defining wave-particle Entanglement format of Zero-infinity e-Pi-i 1-0-infinity instantaneous trancendental i-reflection Looping-Logarithmic resonance reference-framing containment flash, ie Superconduction of Black Hole Singularity positioning point-nothing in No-thing, potential Polar-Cartesian positioning in Black-body Holographic Principle vanishing-into-no-thing cause-effect Perspective, 3D-T, GD&P Physics Landscaped, oriented statement.

[@davidwilkie9551]

Nomenclature is more trouble than mathematical complexity. Uncertainty can't be a principle, but Indefinite precision is, because it can be analyzed according to circumstances if coherent quantities are calculated. Whenever a musical instrument is played, the circumstances of its construction define the frequencies it emits according to its construction and tuning. The natural equivalent in the general universe is harder to recognize because the perspective requires assistance from technology, and that's often an additional distraction. Sounding an instrument is to sort out the collective, conglomeration, of prime number resonance structure. This is not a string at local dimensions. It is "pipelined" conduction of high frequencies between lower rates, and that's the mechanism involved in Black Hole Superconduction, except now the conductor is the entanglement of "empty" volumes of space - (Resonance) Voids, cluster chains and focused points. Eg, why is lightning traveling in zigzag at one third of light speed? ...and so on; modulated primes in interpenetrating wave bubbles. (?) Mathematical functions in the full quantum spectrum, are beyond ability and conventional language to image without showing the dimensional connection. .. so:- Pretty much a waste of time trying to describe concepts there can never be actual pictures of. It could be inferred that the BH structure should be a fractal arrangement of vortices that shatter like supercooled rubber when smashed with a hammer "to atoms" . And the BH spins-out a "Dark Dust" of self repelling Dark Matter in a Quantum Field that retains the attraction of gravity for ordinary matter. Ie the characteristics of Galactic collisions occurs that way according to Astronomy. The rest of the story is in the lecture videos, this is only a tentative suggestion.

[@fermibubbles9375]

shame there's no water in cali; sean looked thirsty all lecture

[@travisfitzwater8093]

This dude is in the wrong field: he should have been a movie star. Mr. Darcy; The dude in Twilight; and whatnot. Something with horses, buggies or swords and the like.

[@TheMemesofDestruction]

“Super Gravity Conductor”

[@tarasov9794]

You CAN compare apples and oranges! who IS this impostor?! :) 35:35

[@cray3140]

Are you talking about constants where we assume space = time and if we measure space in a planck then space=time=planck?

[@afifakimih8823]

A Young good looking physicist...i think he looks like Tom Crouse.Excillent Lecture.

[@davidwilkie9551]

If metals are conductors because of Quantum effects, then the specific effect is superimposed resonance. Because the observation of Resonance in music demonstrates the subdivision of frequency zones into number states, so the idea of 3D+T is only an apparent dominant probability that has infinite fractal octaves and directly proportional number ratios, (from the temporal point of view). The Periodic Table fits the pattern of number ratios in which the number of states is greater than the number of electrons, so the electron is free to move in the field, ..the one Prof Wheeler described in which the electron could be considered a single object/event shifting +/- in time, because that is exactly what is the case, a mathematical numerical imprint on time, (and the reverse is equated). Plus, (the idea belongs to Paul Dirac), the field with which particles and their sub particles are associated, shapes space in its own way. Atomic structure is self-similar (?) Or it's one infinite "vortex" of frequency transformation at an implied point, always now. But knowing the details by which we live is more important than unconscious experience, so these lectures are of central importance. Math/Physics is innately dualistic. If our purpose is to have a healthy global culture then the visualization/observation oscillation is the active process of civilization, by the scientific method.

[@nurlatifahmohdnor8939]

Page 93-1 Nickel + Titanium = Nitinol Shape Memory Effect Ridgway Banks is a name? 1973.

[@GuitarsnSnooker]

Poor fella susskins really distract him

[@valeriyaart487]

I just found out how gravity works! Call me

[@jeanqnguyen4542]

Intensely focused until he started mentioning doping, my mind started to over work propagating thought bubbles (lance Armstrong aw scandalous),(Russia ..so guilty )(I thought dope was a slang)(Wiki:is Doping in science a real thing= science pro doping ,cool ) (mm feeling hungry I’ll superconduct this bad boy after...

[@soccergalsara]

excuse me, but God I wish my professor was this hot.

[@syco999s]

excuse me, but God I wish my gf had your ball control !!!

[@nurlatifahmohdnor8939]

route = la-lu|an E.g.: Pavlov > ...loba Petrov > ...roba I find a name in a book. V.I.P.

[@dong.7519]

liar you think there is no one that could of thought about that liquid equation on there own. shame on your miniature mind . I disagree.

[@Oners82]

Why does he keep referring to zero temperature? It is impossible to get to absolute zero so I must be missing something!

[@metatron5199]

This is true, but for all practical purpose we need only to be very close to absolute zero to see quantum phenomena become very apparent in the system but as he is saying temperature is only one aspect of the total system being investigated so the other aspects, pressure and gravity or potential vs kinetic energy can be changed to still get similar phenomena/quantum states to a system that would be for all practical purposes would look exactly like a quantum mechanical system at absolute zero. This is why we can have high temp superconductors and why they are related to black holes not to repeat what this while vid is about.

[@Oners82]

Meta Tron Okay, so you agree that what he said was wrong.

[@metatron5199]

+Oners82 no I'm not agreeing at all, trying to clarify your hang up. Quantum phenomena can happen well above absolute zero. Black hole vacuum states can be very weird things.

[@Oners82]

Meta Tron So when you said, "This is true" you weren't agreeing??? Are you even aware of how stupid you sound right now? "Quantum phenomena can happen well above absolute zero." No shit Sherlock, did I say otherwise? NO. Nice red herring tactics fella.

[@metatron5199]

I explained why I agreed and than went on to further explain why that doesn't apply in this situation, not my fault you don't follow why this is.

[@lwehdhhd1368]

tThis all seems like guess work and seems to be reaching alot

[@qcislander]

I'm just as embarrassed by the comments here about "the hottie scientist" in this lecture as I am by people yakking about Amy Mainzer's lips, Janna Levin's eyes, or Fay Dowker's hips. Sure, people can be *really* attractive... but that's not why *these* people are on your screen.

[@cray3140]

Michael - thankfully - I'm legally blind . . . . I get to hear the concept of what they think and get to combine that with what I think. I would also add - I think if someone is tossing a bunch of internet troll stuff out - don't worry, they were just too cheap to buy a membership to some website they can pretend they are the woman or man they wished they were while drooling about what ever they wished they got to have . . . which in no way would affect their happiness 24 hours latter. Sure sure, it might effect ego for a bit longer - but in essence, superficial is superficial and that entropies as quickly as marriages between superficial entities. I would comment - this presentation surely did get more traffic than the Department head's presentations. Hmmm, I'd take the commercial artistic and commercially verified approach to sex sells - which I guess what you are trying to say . . . but I'd give that value the same value that Andy Warhol gave it and just walk on by . . . . and not even notice . . . . even if they were on fire =)

[@YlmazDALKIRANscallion]

Sorry but this lecturer - speaks fast - writes bad and - changes the subjects so much. So nobody understand him clearly. He can't teach well.

[@JackSarfatti]

The problem is your lack of understanding of English. You are clearly not a native speaker. He speaks slowly enough, writes clearly and more important thinks clearly.

[@grandpaobvious]

That's why you're lecturing at Stanford, and he's writing comments on KZbin. Oh wait it's the other way around.

[@davidwilkie9551]

The Quantum Foam model of structure, tied to measured harmonic resonant ratios, that is also spinning orbital and the full conic section spectrum of orbits in the e-Pi temporal superposition fields, covers the face of Cosmology at macro scale and reciprocal micro properties. Measurement by timing is the phenomenon of conduction, ..within the "solid" axis of the cone of mass and matter into the reciprocal liquid distribution plane of geometric fields. A "hot" annular state of Pi liquidity/exclusion surrounds the "cold" solid state of exponential spin properties in these measured probability-foam structures, a complete 1-0D resonance vector state for which 1/1 = 1 unit quantum mechanism superposition. Ie all information is a "recirculation by duality", in a constant, continuous expression of mathematical law. The need to have at least a system or methodology for naming phenomena before assembling a coherent theory is the "chicken and egg" lost among the forest-trees situation, a matching of sight and sound in chaos. So the Quantum Fields Mechanism of observing the universal hologram at a phase-state vanishing point is basically the Quantum Chemistry of coherence shells (bubbles) in the amorphous clouds of spectra. Photons appear to be points, but it's the energy of the wave-particle in timed position, measured against the universal dynamic synchronous continuity of the Quantum Foam. Ie if WYSIWYG is equivalent in a measured-science format to the linguistic technique of onomatopoeia mimicry of sound, then the core function of recognition of phenomena is QM, and the process of reasoning etc is resonance in the whole so that "a" mind is a bubble of memory in memory foam(?), and quantum computation is integrated with evolution by holistic, coherent resonance, of q-bit alignment. (Psudo-randomness) _____ I expect the Prof to be far ahead on the implied circumstances of Black (and white) Holes in combinations with entanglement, conduction, and superconductivity in the greater context of Dark matter/energy and ghostly particles, so, be careful. _______ If comment policy is much the same, in effect, as that of the Teachers Assistant, these 2 lectures are a kind of "case specific" stand alone introduction to QM forms of speculation about BH boundary effects, and that can be generalised by a Technical Draftsman in the Polar-Cartesian format of logarithmicly condensed QM-coordinate probability dimensions of exponential time superpositioning, which in other terms, is Geometrical Drawing (symbology) and Perspective. WYSIWYG timing relationships. When performing the "Art" of Thought Experiment, in this quantisation guesstimate picture, the dualism of identification symbols, math-physical, condensed-exponential drawn wire-frames of timing-duration vector-length interference.., the idea is to "make sense" demonstrating the Correspondence of time resonance position in re-evolving half-life pulses, in the instantaneous Interval of timing. (Working in the same imaginary zone of meaning, as AdS/CFT spacings) Eg Big Bang models of the Universe assemble discretely imagined abstract physics interpretations that correspond to the Big Picture of holistic Total Internal Reflection, instantaneous positioning, String Theory Calculus and Pure Numerical Mathematics combined with a Theory of Limits, without the needed temporal recognition of actual circumstances. (The common failure in/of awareness of Actuality Reality, or, "I am you and you are me and we are all together" in this universal instant event) Mind stretch: if it's comprehensible that logarithmic time timing condensation is the apparent math-phys synchronisation of resonant probabilities, of time duration periods, (as in music etc), then it's understandable how the self measured reciprocals = entangled amplitude and frequency modulation phase multiples, that project the holographic interference image of Actuality. (Maybe? Idon't know what has to be spelled out or illustrated by an analogy of "mathemagically imagined pure relative time duration motion", when we all know what "Time" is, untill we have to explain..) ----- A Quantum Chemistry wave-packaging proportioning approach to inclusion-exclusion of prime-cofactor connection cause-effect, phase-locked coherence-cohesion e-Pi-i sync-duration of hyperfluid logarithmic condensation modulation interference positioning bonding.., it's all there in the format of Standard Model, Periodic Table and Solid, Liquid, Gas-plasma AM-FM Timing-spacing Communication suspended in circularity transversetrancendental to the Axial-tangential Apature of Eternity here-now-forever Superspin Supersymmetry Singularity-> Spacetime Temporal Fluxion-Integral Calculus floating point coordination. Eg the stories of "The Ancients" floating Granite Rocks around by levitation are seemingly fantastical, but so was magnetic levitation over Superconductors not long ago.., so it is possible to imagine what the application of the e-Pi-i sync-duration Modulation Mechanism is, as it applies to AM-FM Timing-spacing of Electron-photon-phonon-Proton oscillation holography in the Neutronic flat-space ground-state Singularity of Zero-infinity Kelvin, in Eternity-now Actuality Interval. The combination and permutations of sync-duration Elemental superposition spin-spiral probability wave-package envelope for superposition->piezoelectric interlocked crystallisation states of Granite reasonably fresh from the Volcanic site, ..well it's a Field of Study worth applying some Circuit Analysis to. As Einstein said, "the answer to your question is simpler than you think and the material to solve it is usually at hand". Ie hands-on Actual Intelligence cause-effect of Artificial Intelligence Theoretical techniques of Experimental Physics derived from Mathematical Disproof Methodology, applied rational and reasonable Timing-spacing coordination meaning of self-defining making, Philosophy. Quantum Foam, Fields of e-Pi-i relative-time-timing numberness dominance, fractal sequences in vortex Forms => "Spongeiform" phase-locked coherence-cohesion sync-duration resonances universal Centre of Time Duration Timing Conception-state.