Should we abandon the multiverse theory? | Sabine Hossenfelder, Roger Penrose, Michio Kaku

[@TheInstituteOfArtAndIdeas]

Want to learn more about the theory behind the multiverse? Check out our newest Big Idea video with multiverse specialist Laura Mersini-Houghton! kzbin.info/www/bejne/oaOWYWSOpa17faM&ab_channel=TheInstituteofArtandIdeas

[@rivas97]

Warum es kein weiteres Universum als ein Paralleluniversum geben kann? Die Hypothese über ein Paralleluniversum basiert auf der falschen Annahme, dass unser Gedanke, Geist, Seele oder Selbstbewusstsein eine Trennung vom Universum unterliegt. Daher können weder ein Paralleluniversum noch ein Jenseits existieren, da wir ohne eine Verbindung zwischen beiden niemals auf diese Idee kommen könnten. Deshalb führt die Kontinuität zwangsläufig zu einem Einheituniversum. Daraus folgt, dass eine Grenze nur dann als solche definierbar ist, wenn sie diffus und offen für eine Verbindung ist. Außerdem ist der Begriff Universum nicht mit Begriffen wie Erde, Stern, Galaxien vergleichbar, da Universum alles übertrifft, was wir uns vorstellen können, und auch unser Bewusstsein umfasst. Daran sollten wir immer denken! Ich zitiere an dieser Stelle von Emanuel Kant: "Zwei Dinge erfüllen das Gemüt mit immer neuer und zunehmender Bewunderung und Ehrfurcht, je öfter und anhaltender sich das Nachdenken damit beschäftigt; der bestirnte Himmel über mir und das moralische Gesetz in mir; beide darf ich nicht als in Dunkelheiten verhüllt oder in überschwänglich außer meinem Gesichtkreises suchen und bloß vermuten; ich sehe sie vor mir und verknüpfte sie unmittelbar mit dem Bewusstsein meiner Existenz!" Was heißt das eigentlich, wenn wir von einem Paralleluniversum sprechen? Um diese Frage zu beantworten, müssen wir einige Voraussetzungen festlegen: Parallel bedeutet, dass zwei Mengen keine Schnittstelle haben und keine Elemente voneinander besitzen. Oder anders ausgedrückt: Die Mengen A und B sind nicht parallel, wenn es mindestens ein Element gibt, das Teilmenge von A und B ist und somit eine Schnittmenge zwischen beiden Mengen gibt. Wenn wir jedes Universum als eine geschlossene Menge betrachten, dann sind zum Beispiel zwei Universen U und U' nur dann parallel, wenn kein Element von U oder U' existiert, das Teilmenge von beiden wäre. Es gilt: Wenn U:={ x |∀ x∈U ∧ x∉U' } ∧ U':={ x' |∀ x'∈U' ∧ x'∉U } ⇔ U ist echt parallel zu U'. Allein die Tatsache, dass wir uns vorstellen können, dass es ein Paralleluniversum gibt, ist ein Beweis dafür, dass es mindestens eine Schnittstelle zwischen unser Universum und dem gedachten Universum in unserem Bewusstsein gibt. Ansonsten hätten wir nie auf die Idee kommen können, dass es ein zweites Universum geben könnte. Die Idee eines Paralleluniversums ist zwar reizvoll, aber letztendlich nur eine Illusion. Dies würde nur dann der Fall sein, wenn man den kartesischen Dualismus annimmt, wonach Bewusstsein und Welt/Materie getrennt sind. Doch bevor man dies annehmen kann, müsste man erst beweisen, dass diese Annahme richtig ist, doch stattdessen führt es in jedem Fall zum Absurdum. Es ist eine unumstößliche Tatsache, dass wir in dieser Welt leben und unser Bewusstsein nicht ohne unseren Körper existieren kann. Es ist also unmöglich, einen Beweis für die Existenz eines vom Körper getrennten Geistes zu liefern! Es bleibt wie J.W. Von Goethe sagte: "Was wär ein Gott, der nur von außen stieße, Im Kreis das All am Finger laufen ließe. Ihm ziemt's die Welt im Innern zu bewegen. Natur in sich, sich in Natur zu hegen. So dass was in Ihm lebt und webt und ist, Nie seine Kraft, nie seinen Geist vermisst."

[@Aliens-Are-Our-Friends2027]

The next step for the scientific community is psychedelics.

[@teletesselator]

Why bring Michio Kaku to a serious discussion? Was it just for fun or something?

[@Craft-oh7uv]

Michio Kaku is stupid compared to Roger Penrose. Embarrassing to listen to !

[@jameelarosetafoya0143]

Pron

[@nicoladisvevia]

That Sir Roger Penrose is still doing serious scientific research at his age is astounding. Long may he last!

[@holliswilliams8426]

Yeah, really impressive. I went to a lecture of his a few months back and he was so sharp you would think by listening to him that he is 30 or 40 years younger than he actually is.

[@robertpirsig5011]

Of course, why would he quit doing something he loves.

[@DoesThisWork888]

@@holliswilliams8426 Great genetics with constant brain stimulus will do that for you.

[@jeremywvarietyofviewpoints3104]

If I were him, I would hope the universe would repeat.

[@williamgreene4834]

Sir Roger came up with a way to tile a floor the size of the Universe, with a pattern that never repeats itself and has no gaps using only two tile shapes. That's pretty crazy if you think about it.

[@sergiomanzetti1021]

Sabine Hossenfelder is as usual the anchor of reason, Roger Pennrose the symbol of intelligence, and Michio Kaku, the representative of Hollywood.

[@ZeppSiros]

This is exactly what it is!

[@vibrationalmodes2729]

Nailed it. I got wayyyyyy too much pleasure out of Sabine calling michio out for making claims that are completely unfounded/non-scientific

[@jasonmckay8793]

bit ruff id say machio is a real scientist has achieved alot and are u saying hes here to represent actors? i don't think that is what he is trying to do.

[@sergiomanzetti1021]

@@jasonmckay8793 "is a real scientist has achieved alot" ? What would that be?

[@jasonmckay8793]

@@sergiomanzetti1021 well he is a link for alot people to the scientific world, he worked on quantum mechanics helped further that research and he is willing to push against the status quo all useful things.

[@Baekstrom]

Roger Penrose has a sharper mind at the age of 91 than I have had at any point in my life.

[@あれくす]

Lol

[@sidog]

Give yourself some more credit... I'm assuming you're not yet 91 😀

[@joaofarias6473]

Bet 😅😂

[@hyiux]

Of course he has. He is Roger Penrose. And you are a nobody. There's no comparison.

[@rooannaroo446]

He is remarkable. It shows the potential in humanity that is so rarely realised. I love listening to him talk, he will always make you think about stuff in new and interesting ways…

[@Eliza.--.]

I wasn't expecting to watch a comedy sketch, but this was ridiculously funny. I can't get over the increasingly perplexed/disappointed/incredulous expressions on Sir Roger's and Sabine's faces

[@extraterrestrial46]

You mean the expression on Sabine's face when she says '..serious string theorists' ?

[@cwpv2477]

@@extraterrestrial46 she herself is not one

[@mappingtheshit]

Sabine is a joke youtuber

[@funnyfunnyvalentine7991]

​@@cwpv2477She's a charlatan who peddles anti-science misinformation

[@JoshZeidner-j7g]

There are a bunch of clowns seriously

[@nikitaelizarov7444]

Was a fan of Kaku in my youth. Now see him as a Steven Seagal of cosmology.

[@Raye938]

Same here. I used to eat up pretty much everything he said when I was younger, then I went to university and learned to think more critically. Now I cringe whenever he speaks, half due to his wrongness and half due to embarrassment that I used to believe it.

[@human_shaped]

That's a really excellent and apt characterisation.

[@FlushGorgon]

Ah ah!

[@lucidzfl]

oh my god how accurate. Neil Tyson seems like an absolute clown to me now. Star Talk is an abomination. Sabine is all!!!!

[@nsfeliz7825]

😆😆😆😆steven segal...😆😆 segal is more entertaining.

[@gregt2]

Props to Hossenfelder and Penrose for their clarity and rationality, and Kaku for selling books.

[@DeadeyeDaily]

Michio looks like Karl Pilkington next to these other two 😄

[@cookymonstr7918]

@@DeadeyeDaily Karl Pilkington would blow all three out of the water 😀

[@DeadeyeDaily]

@@cookymonstr7918 😂😂 how does string theory work, Michio? "There's a button for that, in'nit."

[@patrickl8943]

Gregory spot on my man!

[@OwenDavies83]

He's just returned from the cheesey dialogue universe.

[@natewaddoups6708]

Michio thought this was about string theory, Roger thought he'd been invited to talk about cosmology, and Sabine thought they were going to be talking about quantum mechanics... Penrose was clearly annoyed, Sabine tried to salvage it, and neither Michio nor the host seemed to understand that multiverse means different things to different scientists. This was really painful to watch.

[@wiranazahrin6262]

Yep, agreed....the problem with modern science is that there is a tendency to compartmentalize, to break apart into divisions when Newton himself said we are only beginning to realize that how small we are "now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me". The problem is these scientists distance themselves from integrating spirituality and the so-called "supernatural" when far advanced civilisations of our past integrate metaphysics, spirituality and so on...I remember my grandpa told me what was taught to Adam was alchemy (the pure sciences at microlevel-lower) and astrology (incldg astronomy- the sciences of the higher levels and of higher dimensions, not withstanding the conflict modern science has about multiverses...disregarding the souls, God, consciousness etc...)

[@verdi2310]

Exactly. But its was pretty fun though.

[@jeangove01]

I don't see this. First of all, string theory and quantum mechanics are related. And Penrose was not talking about cosmology. The background knowledge for this is that Newtonian physics works and makes accurate predictions, and quantum physics works and makes accurate predictions, but they describe the universe very differently to the point that you'd think they're describing different universes. Some scientists have come up with a mathematical untestable theory called string theory which theoretically unites both spheres of physics, and in the process predicts the existence of multiverses. Where they mainly differ is in substance and presentation. Someone like Michio Kaku is a very enthusiastic popularizer of science, and tends to gloss over a lot of details to make the science accessible, where Sabine Hossenfelder is a critic of the muddled views that emerge from such enthusiastic simplification. Roger Penrose is talking about the multiverse in general, and is wondering why they are talking about string theory as if it's the only theory that predicts multiverses - since he doesn't think string theory is very coherent at all. They're not talking at cross purposes.

[@christinearmington]

Now I really want to listen! 😂

[@jeffbguarino]

The thing is that all these scientists should not latch onto a favorite theory but keep everything, all options wide open. Pure math has made real predictions , as in the positron. Also not using math and only experiments have discovered most things. So all lines of pursuit should be followed up on. Scientists in all areas do this and latch onto their favorite. I don't like it.

[@Lachgummei]

24:10 what a jab. I know a lot of "serious" string theorists.

[@gomezrock12]

that was brutal 😂

[@PulsarBurn314]

Check mate!

[@xantiom]

Hahahaha, shiii how come I didn't realize that quick correction, "serious" lolol

[@juezna]

it was awesome hahahha

[@esaelle01]

So good haha. I'm tired of this fairy tale...

[@wyqtor]

A long life to Sir Roger Penrose! What a legend, at 91 years of age his mind is more agile than that of most teenagers and young adults alive today!

[@Gibeah]

granted the human brain doesn't fully mature until approx.25 lol.

[@alexpavalok430]

He doesn't even look 90. He doesn't even look 80...maybe he is the multiverse in person, lol. No, he'd not like that 🤣

[@francissreckofabian01]

Most? Probably, virtually all.

[@OsvaldoBayerista]

Roger Pensrose have found the tech for eternal life and doesn't share it.

[@yasser9350]

For real!! What the 92!!!!

[@BS-vx8dg]

31:20 I absolutely love and respect how Dr. Penrose doesn't mind saying "I'm confused" and using that as an argument against the gobbledygook that Kaku is putting forth.

[@carmensavu5122]

It's not an argument, and I was quite disappointed in him for doing that.

[@BS-vx8dg]

@@carmensavu5122 I respectfully disagree, Carmen. As Pauli said, "Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig; es ist nicht einmal falsch!"

[@user-ks1hp2pb5g]

how so?

[@antman7673]

@@carmensavu5122 Then translate 4:55. I don’t understand it, but it is embarrassing. It is kindness to let that slip with the phrase “I am confused”.

[@Hascuce]

I truely beleive he means it but.... if penrose says he doesn't understand and he is confused, that just ends up meaning whats been told is gobbledygook.

[@jeffwads]

I like how Penrose just calls out the whole thing "Are we talking about String Theory or the Multiverse Theory here?".

[@HM-rz8nv]

Exactly! Kaku is relying on experiments that may mathematically indicate string theory to then suggest that the multiverse theory is correct. That's not a logical jump.

[@lawanbrown16]

Do you guys want a productive conversation about what might be or not? 😂

[@HM-rz8nv]

@@lawanbrown16 A productive conversation would require creating a list of possibilities, each mutually contrary to each other in some way, ranking from most likely to least likely relative to the available evidence. Speculation about only one possibility, other than making for fun imagination, is not productive because you then close yourself to the other possibilities which have not yet been discounted. Kaku spends an awful lot of time speculating about one and ONLY one possibility, which hasn't been proven. He has lost balance to his perspective, making him unscientific in his approach, even if he has the knowledge and degrees to support his argument from his perspective.

[@apinojilazul6571]

why believe these lies? they want people not to use the power of faith to work miracles, so it's just technology and bad people to do things.

[@vinigretzky97]

@@HM-rz8nv Kaku is an american showman and also asian/superficial.

[@nnargh]

Discussions such as this are such a comforting thing to watch. Calmly stated arguments, a steady pace, a respectful audience, and a fascinating topic.

[@eipplusone3395]

Sir Roger is a world treasure. He is over ninety and still doing mathematical physics.

[@apinojilazul6571]

why believe these lies? they want people not to use the power of faith to work miracles, so it's just technology and bad people to do things.

[@YogiMcCaw]

Sir Roger is a true polymath, which is exceedingly rare in modern times. He's a profound physicist, an accomplished artist, and world-class philosopher. He's able to do the far-out mathematics and understand the edge-of-science extrapolations, and then come back and ask "but does all this make any sense?" That's what I love about him.

[@nellateea3238]

well hes definitely doing some real gibberish lol

[@YogiMcCaw]

@@nellateea3238 Yeah, that's the thing. He's your classic elderly absent-minded genius. But if you can parse through that, or maybe watch some other science communicators explaining what he has actually done in his life, you'll see that he totally deserved being knighted by the Queen. Remember, he was Stephen Hawking's PhD advisor, so the guy is definitely no slouch.

[@nellateea3238]

@@YogiMcCaw hes selling his books here

[@TheMildConfusion]

I remember when Michio was one of the science educators who inspired me to learn more about the universe. Now he sounds like he’s trying to sell me a book or something.

[@BoogsterSugar]

YES that's precisely my impression during this debate! I used to look up to him, but now it's just a bunch of unintelligible science speech hemmed up with "...sioadn ds ksjdasQuantum theory, take that spiderman" Hosselfelder makes him look like an AI generated version of himself. Shes cut and clear, and her words make sense together into a thought.

[@gregmark1688]

I just hope he's Japanese, and not Korean, because "michyo" literally means "to be crazy" in Korean lol

[@yousuck6222]

How can computers run on quantum theory and then everyone else says it is nonsense.

[@J0r]

Did you expect anything less from someone who calls themselves a "Futurist"?

[@lt3880]

I felt off about this guy from the beginning but couldnt explain why. he does feel like a car salesman, its really obnoxious and patronizing

[@xxiemeciel]

great discussion, I really like how Roger And Sabine are so respectful when they are against an argument. I am not really familiar with Michio Kaku, but he seems to spread his argumentation a little all over the place without really making any real point.

[@drangus3468]

Michio is great at producing enthusiastic rhetoric but pretty terrible at logic.

[@TheNameOfJesus]

Indeed, I feel that one could, after watching this video, make the same conclusion, even if one couldn't understand Physics or English. In other words, you could tell from their tone of voice alone who is a deep thinker and who is a shallow one.

[@Areaninetyone]

@@TheNameOfJesus that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

[@juliahenriques210]

He's pretty good at that, yes. But he's a marketing genius, if it counts for something.

[@jimmears]

Kaku for Cocoa Puffs ... Woo Hooo. Nuts nuts nuts. @#$%!!!!!

[@bencampbell3474]

This wasn't a debate it was a beatdown

[@petermoore900]

I love how Sabine and Roger so beautifully call out Michio and the other string theorists on their rubbish. Roger does it in such a classy British way. Sabine does it in an in-your-face German way. In both cases it's delightful to watch.

[@berendharmsen]

Ah cool, that's basically all I was really interested in: what side does Penrose end up between Sabine and Kaku. None of the details were ever going to be novel in this type of venue. Having to stomach listening to a floundering Kaku is more than I'm able to handle. Thanks for the summary of the relevant detail 🙂

[@antonystringfellow5152]

I think my favorite takedown was this line, from Sabine: "I know a lot of string theorists, serious string theorists..."

[@commodoor6549]

You do understand that neither Sabine nor Roger have evidence that string theory is rubbish, nor that the multiverse doesn't exist. They're attacking these ideas based on philosophical approaches, not science. Science requires evidence, which they don't possess. They're skeptics, which science needs. But their opinion are still just opinions.

[@nmarbletoe8210]

@@commodoor6549 I'd like to see Maldacena folks get some people on stage for this stringy discussion. Also there is some wacky progress on ER = EPR.

[@commodoor6549]

@@nmarbletoe8210 Yes, exactly .Kaku pointed out correctly that science technology has a history of getting to the dance late, and that just because there is no direct evidence for a phenomenon, that doesn't negate an idea. Naysayers like Sabine supplement their income knocking ideas in their nascent stages, which are going to take more evidence to support. Einstein also doubted the concept of black holes, and he was wrong, partly because he, while brilliant, could not see past his own ideas. Science struggles to progress with regressive thinkers like Sabine, who harshly mocks these ideas yet has no alternative ideas of her own. And Penrose, is stuck in the past, and finding it difficult to even fathom anything other than his personal experiences.

[@flyjet787]

It's thrilling seeing Dr.Penrose and Dr.Sabine H. on the same stage!

[@carlorossi2788]

penrose non la maga cosmica!

[@vickiezaccardo1711]

And I come across it when my device is at 28% and we have a power outage. I bet Sabine could give me a solution, " Turns- off your device and watch tomorrow. "

[@marrrtin]

This was a great debate.

[@MadderMel]

Uncle Roger ! National Treasure if there ever was one !

[@levels1937]

Penrose is the real deal the other two are not even close to his level of achievement.

[@someguy4405]

This debate was a bit of a confused disaster but kind of amazing to watch as a result. It's great to watch Sabine tackle Michio and put directly to him criticisms that everyone's been thinking for the past ten years.

[@rogeriopenna9014]

German directness. Blitzkrieg

[@mthedu]

So...this was a "Michio Kaku" is a fraud debate? I mean, Sabine is says she knows "serious string theorists" which suggests she thinks Michio isn't. Michio Kaku brings science to the masses and has a terrific education and work background. Why not just appreciate him for who he is? Why does this debate even matter? Michio can do whatever he wants. Sabine can do whatever she wants. However, Michio is just doing his usual simplified explanations while Roger disagrees, which is fine, and Sabine sounds a bit petty. If it's not jealously, then what is it with Sabine? Is Michio negatively impacting her in some way and she feels the need to put him in his place? And the host seems to be against the multiverse theory also which is odd for what I thought was a moderator. This whole interview was awkward and I can't understand its point. Oh well. Moving on.

[@someguy4405]

@@mthedu Michio Kaku has permanently damaged science communication and the public's faith in science by pushing what seems to have been an unfounded theory for 10+ years. I'm sure he's a thousand times smarter than me, but his actions have negatively impacted science in general.

[@mthedu]

@@someguy4405 "Permanently damaged science communication". Haha. Okay. You do you. Take care of yourself.

[@rogeriopenna9014]

@@mthedu Science is made with money. And if funding is diverted to FRUITLESS endeavours, good science you could be making instead isn´t done. This is Sabine's main point of contention. It is about String Theory not showing any good evidence for more than 40 years and still funding going there as well as time that could be spent on other research, more scientific, in her view.

[@hamzailarzeg]

The difference between Kaku and Penrose is mind boggling.

[@teastrainer3604]

If there is no evidence for something, then why do we even talk about it? To this day no evidence has been found for multiverses, string theory, supersymmetry, or additional dimensions. Just as important, reality behaves exactly as if those things are imaginary.

[@NickPBond]

Great to see Roger and Sabine on the stage.

[@melvinpjotr9883]

You forgot the clown on the monitor ...

[@m3rify]

@@melvinpjotr9883 lol

[@I3igI30ss]

@@melvinpjotr9883 i agree

[@hugegamer5988]

The interaction was great! Sabine is awesome, she has minimal belief, is consistent and complete, and probably questions her very fingers existence daily while Roger is very clever with large picture reasoning and has what are at least plausible areas of investigation for a better universal model. Michio is a bit out there with his confidence in extending a universal mathematical model - it’s like our universe is a building we’ve been in forever : Michio saying if we could simply stand outside we would see buildings forever, while roger is convinced it’s the same building just at different points in time while Sabine is saying the whole thing is pointless because no one’s going outside anytime soon.

[@paulschrum4727]

@@melvinpjotr9883 I tend not to like him either, but there's no point in being mean to him. At least he's qualified to be a science communicator (unlike some others).

[@abdouabdel-rehim8537]

I am glad there still physicists like sir Penrose and Sabina

[@anure1134]

Sir Roger.

[@marcag9810]

I'm a cosmologist and most people in my field are like that, fringe phycisists exist but are rarer than pop science would suggest.

[@SuliXbr]

I am glad there are both types. Science does not progress by everybody agreeing with everybody.

[@kakistocracyusa]

@@marcag9810 Like what? Cosmologist how? Another goddam applied mathematician? Sounds like you are pretending.

[@isetmfriendsofire]

@@marcag9810 Where do you stand on Janna Levin

[@sprobablycancr4457]

The faces of Hossenfelder + Penrose while Kaku speaks. Priceless.

[@TheMercury79]

Kaku is still smarter than you. He's had a great career in science while you are just a nobody

[@TheMercury79]

@S'probablyCancr: Kaku is still smarter than you. He's had a great career in science while you are just a nobody

[@sprobablycancr4457]

@@TheMercury79 Mic drop.

[@deank179]

Kaku so out of his depth it's funny

[@cameroncameron2826]

@@deank179 Don't be silly they are all clueless! - You just saw yet another talk lamenting measurement problems meaning science doesn't know & has no way to know.

[@mr.t7431]

Look at that! People debating ideas and no personal attacks. No yelling, shouting, bullying. WELCOME BACK SCIENCE, WE MISSED YOU!

[@Saganism]

😂

[@karstenschuhmann8334]

I knew Sabine when we started to study physics. She always was extremely intelligent. It is interesting to see her becoming a public figure.

[@karstenschuhmann8334]

@@moonshine.squatter Really? Be more specific what do you want to say? If she is nothing you are probably less than nothing.

[@TactileTherapy]

@@karstenschuhmann8334 What is nothing? I am Robert Lawrence Kuhn.

[@karstenschuhmann8334]

@@TactileTherapy Had to look him up. I do not really see him as more prominent. But even more, I strongly doubt that is you.

[@myhandlehasbeenmishandled]

I get a feeling she is no fan of Michio

[@karstenschuhmann8334]

@@myhandlehasbeenmishandled She and Pentrose seem to agree. Michio seemed out of his out of his depth in this discussion. I know Sabine did her diploma thesis about extradimensions.

[@friendlystonepeople]

I could hear Sir Penrose speak all day. He is incredibly intelligent, articulate and humble.

[@alexdrudigmail]

He is not humble at all. He's just deliciously soft-spoken.

[@pieterduplessis6632]

He takes time, listens then think before responding. This is a quality we all should develop in ourselves. It’s very easy to be impulsive.

[@nervili583]

​@@alexdrudigmail just bc he doesnt say "ugh oh maybe idk, ugh yeah maybe im wrong hshs idk" ?

[@kimrunic5874]

His is the voice of authority. He’s proved it time & again

[@raukoring]

This was such a waste of everybody's time. Michio Kaku was already told many times that he is full of kaka. Why calling sir Penrose to do that?

[@giorgosg4032]

Michio Kaku is actually inspiring for young teenagers who don't yet know physics, he was for me. But he is very cringe once you know a couple things about quantum mechanics etc., it is uncomfortable listening to him recite his rehearsed analogies that sell books.

[@alejandrocurado5134]

I fully agree. Penrose is the opposite. And I also like Sabine

[@evans383]

Same the first books I read that set me on my path, which didnt lead me to theoretical physics, but ultimately into engineering were "A Brief History of Time" and Kaku's book Hyperspace, but I agree its been hard to hear him on these kinds of debate/discussion stages lately.

[@lesliespeaker668]

> Kaku explores the history of unification theories of physics starting with Newton's law of universal > gravitation which unified our experience of gravity on Earth and the motions of the celestial bodies > to Einstein's general relativity and quantum mechanics and the Standard Model. Kaku dubs the > final Grand Unified Theory of relativity and quantum gravity The God Equation with an > 11-dimensional string theory as the only self-consistent theory that seems to fit the bill. This is a quote from Wikipedia about his 2021 book The God Equation. He is promoting his book in hardcore mode.

[@GEMSofGOD_com]

@@lesliespeaker668 Wow, I haven't heard of his new book. The topic is right on point. Thank you, I must read it right now!

[@rbettsx]

My first shudder came with his "how do we prove that?''. Scientists don't prove. They model, observe, and disprove previous models.

[@valeriobertoncello1809]

24:17 "I know lot of string theorists... serious string theorists" SHEESH 💀

[@felipebaranao3912]

jjahahahaha

[@mathspace-grab]

I was looking for this comment

[@christopherhamilton3621]

That was sublime…😂

[@AFPinerosG]

I think that was totally out of place, she's too honest.

[@paradigmshift7541]

People that still shill string theory in 2024 🤣🤣🤣😭😭🤡

[@NOTFOUND-dq4ho]

If Sir Penrose was my grandfather I would visit him every day just to talk more about theories and scientific findings. For Sabine I can’t wait for her next books, I wish I could read her ideas about new findings, new understandings for a long time.

[@e.h.5849]

she has a YT channel now

[@PatrickSullivan-6462266133]

Sir ROGER!

[@boogieman6529]

what about kaku

[@amrendrasingh7140]

The only problem is people like him rarely reproduce and therefore the probability of a random person being a grandson of someone like him is very low 😂

[@RoyTheInfidel]

@@boogieman6529 He talks too much... nonsense.

[@aleksandarrudic3694]

Sir Roger Penrose is so quietly and confidently dominating, it's a joy to watch.

[@johannzdebor5615]

My revolution in physics has been valid for 28 years because I discovered aliens and realized that we live in the parallel universe, light years are just fairy tale lies because they don't exist. Johann Zdebor January 17, 1995 Ed & Frances Walters succeeded in real shots of Stern spaceships with the gray occupants. - Billy Meier had made excellent recordings of star spaceships (beam ships) with extraterrestrial people. Johann Zdebor discoverer extraterrestrials on 01/17/95.

[@alexanderpeca7080]

Well, being a Nobel prize winner, having the "Sir" title and a British accent certainly confers authority.

[@aleksandarrudic3694]

@@alexanderpeca7080Naah... Nobel prize is being steadily demoted to a mere propaganda tool, a title of Sir was recently awarded to a man of very questionable integrity, and I've seen during my life too many people with British accent rolling in mud, blind drunk, or worse. Sir Roger had it all way back in the days when it really meant something.

[@3dgar7eandro]

What do you mean by dominating?! I think he is quite the opposite he is just humble and calm. As a good Physist and mathematician should be 😌

[@aleksandarrudic3694]

@@3dgar7eandroBro, may I assume you are an American? Am I right? In any case, trust me, there are other types of domination, other than guns blazing and bombs away.

[@realcygnus]

Penrose is a living legend !

[@kipponi]

Long living legend. I hope +100years for him. Great mind!

[@davidbrown9278]

Hilary Lawson is the STAR of the show. His amazing grasp of what has been said; and his insightful commentary and subsequent questions to the participants is truly impressive! This shows he not only fully understands the debate, but has the ability to ’think on his feet’.

[@rifleattheplayground]

As a layman, it seems like what Michio, and string theorists in general, have done, is, they develop a theory that then runs into a problem, and they theorize about what could solve this apparent problem, and then keep going. Its literally Theoretical Physicist Fan Fic

[@zyansheep]

Yes, but writing fan fiction is fun! And in the case of String Theory, I think physicists getting attracted by the elegance of creating more general theories, even if the implications of those theories can't be tested or even specified... While String Theory definitely is fun, I agree with Sabine that _most_ of our efforts shouldn't be in dreaming up new and more beautiful theories, but we should be resolving inconsistencies in the theories we currently have.

[@NondescriptMammal]

That approach might be workable, if the original theory had some clear evidence to support its hypotheses, such that refining the theory to account for new data would make sense. But just dreaming up some theory that has no scientific basis and then changing it every time evidence appears that contradicts it, just seems like a bait and switch to make sure your books on the theory don't stop selling. Imagination clearly has a place even in science, if it leads you to something that actually relates to the reality that your theory is meant to explain. But imagination that only produces wild speculation shouldn't be conflated with science, as Sabine put it so well. And it can even damage the perceived integrity of science when this is the approach taken by someone who has scientific credentials and put the mark of their imprimatur on it.

[@benoitmetail8727]

@@NondescriptMammal they are doing that with a lot of stuff in today's science. A lot more theories than discoveries.

[@gregor-samsa]

so was AI in the AI winter and now with ChatGPT we are in AGI game!

[@OfficialGOD]

Human dilemma

[@mp9810]

It's pretty clear what Sabine and Penrose think of Michio in this, despite how diplomatic they were, lol.

[@HS-ie8tj]

He’s a grifter and an egomaniac who lives for the fawning of the mathematically illiterate public

[@eliteextremophile8895]

They're serious scientists where Kaku is more of a marketing person.

[@theoyw4329]

Well said! Katu is a PR person and stuck in documentary mode, not a serious scientist at all.

[@Physics072]

@@eliteextremophile8895 You don't even know what they do on a day by day basis. Did you not listen to a word he said? String theory is more than marketing, I think you watch too much TV and never had advanced physics beyond you tube videos.

[@crowlsyong]

@@Physics072 I am rewatching this and it really does appear that Michio Kaku's ideas aren't very accurate/his ideas do not map to our current understanding of physics: Source: 24:15 26:28 38:17 40:14 52:10

[@MrMasterKaio]

Love it when Sabine counters some of the "pop-science" which is going around quite frequently. Smart and pragmatic. Great!

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

THANK you for targeting the CORRECT target: POP science. NOT actual working scientists & public education.

[@gregmark1688]

She never lets the narrative magic of fictions like ST or "cold fusion" distract her from actual facts and experimental data. And that's actually, sadly, pretty rare, isn't it?

[@brendanh8193]

@Greg Mark I found her latest video on cold fusion to be a selective narrative. Interesting but selective.

[@МихаилК-ш9с]

@@gregmark1688 what's st again?

[@243david7]

Smart and pragmatic, good description

[@stephenjones1380]

Sabine is quite wrong: multiverses are not interesting at all, even in fiction. It means that everything is possible, and therefore nothing is of any value. The Marvel movies are an excellent example of this: the movies quickly became tiresome and formulaic, but once they introduced the multiverse, the train really came off the rails, introducing all sorts of absurdities and plot devices, taking the audience for fools.

[@Godakuri]

Hey buddy, news flash, opinions exists. Hope this helps buddy

[@BAROMETERONE]

I love Roger Penrose. This dude knows his sheet. And doesn't play politics on camera. Props to this man. An inspiration brother.

[@jehouse61]

He's a serious scientist, not like so many.

[@michael-4k4000]

Roger will be missed!

[@mariopirjac8499]

"I know a lot of string theorists, serious string theorists..." 🙂 Sabine just made my day. Wish we all had a good moderator during meetings.

[@LordOfFlies]

I dont know if she meant to phrase it like that but what a thing to say!

[@berendharmsen]

@@LordOfFlies She knew exactly what she was doing

[@sagnorm1863]

@@LordOfFlies Just look at her face when she says it. And the context of that quote is that those "serious string theorists" would say Michio is wrong. So, 100% she was insulting Michio.

[@arctic_haze]

I thought it very rude to ask a question and then interrupt a panelist before she can finish her very interesting answer.

[@HuckleberryHim]

If that was her full intent and she really meant to phrase it that way I think it was needlessly rude. Everyone gets the point, Kaku is apparently sensational and poppy, that isn't really a crime worthy of actual derision though

[@larslarsheim1741]

Penrose is always the brightest bulb in the room because his ego allows him to say "I don't know"

[@dodge9600]

His ego or absence of ego ?

[@Anax100]

@@dodge9600 There's no escaping ego as it's an essential part of what you are. The question is "what type of ego"?

[@LemonLadyRecords]

He's not overly informed by an outsized ego, like the zoomed image on the stage. Nor does he rely on embarrassing sci-fi hyperbole like Kaku.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

Sabine is great ❤ love her down to earth approach

[@dodge9600]

@@Anax100 but saying "I don't know" is not ego. It's the absence of ego to be actual.

[@archerdoubleO]

It's embarrassing to see Penrose and Hossenfelder have to reply to Kaku directly. Flashbacks to teachers having to deal with freshman or sophomore year students who think they found some breakthrough idea and get high on their own supply. The number of jumps in conclusions, fallacies and other logical missteps are so blatant you can't but see the teacher get a depression inducing combination of decision paralysis on what to correct first as well as the struggle to not just make it for the door and go do something better with their time.

[@livingmodern]

yep

[@jackshultz2024]

I don’t know if the multiverse exists and will probably never know, however I can’t criticize Kaku for his belief that it does. Whatever else can be said about him, he is a highly intelligent person, and in all fairness none of us that this time can say we understand more about 5% of the cosmos. I’ve heard conjectures of the multiverse that seek to explain inflation and dark energy. I don’t know if they are true but I can’t deny their plausibility. When confronted by the universe, humility is in order.

[@dredgerivers7730]

Now, now... these are perfectly dispensable... excuse me, defensible ideas.

[@MisterWillow]

@@jackshultz2024 Kaku is certainly intelligent when it comes to math. When it comes to physics, I put my trust on Penrose and Sabine. It is easy to become enchanted by maths, and forgetting that the universe doesn't care.

[@rafaelgonzalez4175]

In the fifth grade I was correcting my teachers. I was 10 years old

[@heldbygravity]

Roger Penrose is very articulate at his age and what a joy to see and hear this mathematical genius ❤

[@ryanjohnson2844]

what a condescending comment, as if age means much in the articulation of someone... my guess is you've only met stupid old people

[@kgmemoryandlearning]

"Physicists who come to believe that the mathematics they deal with is actually real." Hossenfelder just became one of my favorite people.

[@unfortunatebeam]

who?

[@mjh277]

@@unfortunatebeam the woman on the panel

[@JM-us3fr]

She is my favorite scientist, full stop. Her skeptical mind is exactly what every scientist should aspire to.

[@billcosgrave6232]

I agree with Hossenfelder and Penrose as well but this is going to be a long up hill fight. So many physics have staked their reputations (and in the case of Kaku, their bank accounts) on these ideas.

[@dabberdan3200]

I’ve asked myself many times “Where has she been my entire KZbin life?❤😂

[@chrisl442]

24:18 "... I know a lot of string theorists, uh, serious string theorists ..." Priceless again! This is Sabine being agreeable the German way.

[@MrSeedi76]

Yes, that was a burn right there 😂.

[@bsanders1]

😂

[@kh9242]

Everyone loves slights

[@nav579]

I was surprised she burned him so directly at that point. I was a little disappointed

[@Hop754]

Being rude and unpleasant is not a proof of intelligence. Sabine could smile for a change. SMILE.

[@UnsoberIdiot]

"come up with a better theory!" That's not how things work, and that alone immediately disqualifies him from any serious discussion. "There was a murder. Who did it?" -"It was Bob! He didn't like the victim!" --"It can't have been Bob, he wasn't there." -"Yes it was. If it wasn't, then who was?" --"Don't know." -"Aha! Therefore, arrest Bob!"

[@maalikserebryakov]

Damn michio really made an ass of himself

[@CatBahptista]

@@UnsoberIdiot ☝️

[@PADARM]

What a Legend Sir. Penrose is. He is one of the few living Legends of 20th century science.

[@cosmoscarl4332]

Sabina and Roger rocked this conversation. I think Kaku thought he was filming an episode of Universe with Tyson and Alex Plippinpinko.

[@andrewpelham4906]

Kitty history

[@thehumancondition8946]

👍😄😄😄

[@cosmoscarl4332]

I think it's funny how Michio Kaku over dramatizes his discussions by adding too many catch phrases like, "and all of a sudden". Almost nothing in cosmology happens 'all of a sudden', and I'm pretty turned off by his approach to science communicating. Like Neil Tyson and his loud mouth and huge ego, I suspect that their lack of humility has scared plenty of common folk away from cosmology and science in general. Science to me has been life changing and humbling to the core of my being and has given me real spirituality that I could never get from philosophy or any religion. How we communicate science is as important as the science itself and there's no place in it for vanity or ego. I often wonder if Carl Sagan would cringe at the behavior of some of the people he mentored who seem to have forgotten how important humility is as a tool for communicating. Especially science.

[@eggiweggsi]

@@cosmoscarl4332 it's because it appeals to normies in America. Having a big ego in America is important for fitting in unfortunately...

[@paulbizard3493]

😄😄😄😄

[@ian_b]

When Penrose says he's confused, he actually means he's hearing total BS :)

[@francishunt562]

I think he's just being polite.

[@mentalslave8451]

Wow that's quite an emotional response, way?

[@TheGuyCalledX]

@@mentalslave8451 Sabine and Penrose both take a lot of shots at Michio, politely but often not subtly. Penrose dismisses Michio conflating a bunch of different multiverse ideas as one but also argues that they are not relevant to describing our universe. Sabine basically says Michio is a quack physicist and serious string theorists don't believe any of the things he says would prove string theory actually would.

[@Jdelli0916]

Because Penrose knows absolutely everything, right?

[@m3131m]

his skepticism is much appreciated

[@chrisanderson687]

Take note: this is how civilized intellectuals argue and disagree. They make rational, logical arguments, and try to communicate their ideas to the best of their ability. It's not ad-hominem, it's not emotion-driven. Everyone is trying to get at the truth of things. It's ok to be in extreme disagreement, but each person on that stage is expected to at least make some plausible arguments for their opinion, not just make wild claims. We need this not just among scientists but among all mankind if we are to survive.

[@ichigoparfaitgatomaranai]

It's debatable to call Kaku an intellectual at this point. String Theory is one of the greatest reasons for the loss of credibility in physics.

[@DummyAccount-f1q]

Kaku is not making “rational, logical arguments” or trying to “communicate” his ideas honestly in good faith. He’s shilling, playing shamelessly to the audience, deliberately using verbal sleight of hand. (He’s also butchering the English language in the process.) Kaku is the sort of person who gives science popularization a bad name. Continuing however: Kaku IS making wild (and logically scattered) claims. He is NOT proffering “plausible arguments”.

[@quantumbalan4045]

Starting with Prof. Michio Kaku comment that quantum mechanics predicts particles can exist in two places, its clear he is not speaking about scientific prediction but only for popularizing things. Amazing to listen to clear statements of Sir Roger Penrose.

[@jotesbe9117]

At that singular moment, I was amazed to realize I entered an alternate universe where I know about quantum superposition more than a PhD in theoretical physics.

[@nickgibson3451]

Sabina's face every time Roger or the host slights Michio is fantastic. It is clear that people who have large confidence and have to campaign for their theories have dominated the public conversation around science, nothing wrong with that as that is Michios work, but just because they are the loudest about what they believe doesn't necessarily mean that they have the most careful and scientific attitude when addressing the public about the state of their field.

[@TV-xm4ps]

Michio is an entertainer. Not a scientist.

[@nickgibson3451]

@@TV-xm4ps I feel like gatekeeping "science" is necessary and that is one reason I love Sabina, because she is strictly about science. I think it is a little different to gatekeep the label "scientist" as Michio, no matter how non-translational or even applicable to the real world his work may be, is most definitely a scientist, I mean look at the mans CV for god sake. I think scientists aren't and should not be thought of as infallible, and by saying he is not a scientist just because he has a seemingly absurd interpretation of reality is suggesting that scientists must be rational, which is not the case, science has to be rational.

[@reesetorwad8346]

Almost all theories need campaigns at their beginnings.

[@alexbuckley4378]

@@nickgibson3451 science is gate kept by lack of access to information. If you are not part of an institution you cant get access to papers on sites like jstr. College has also been corrupted beyond belief, destroying the traditional path to science

[@ricardodelzealandia6290]

@@TV-xm4ps "entertainer" is a bit of an overstatement don't you think.

[@apikmin]

Thrilled to see Sabine on the panel 😁

[@TV-xm4ps]

Her German directness is refreshing in this context.

[@TheNebulon]

Sabine can get it.

[@trapdooroodpart]

aboslute queen

[@rodrigomachadotavares5048]

Very interesting and insightful discussion. It is great to get all these bright minds together, particularly Sir. Dr. Roger Penrose and learn from their reflections on Cosmology.

[@neoserf]

I am amazed at how differently these thinkers appear in this discussion. Sabine and Roger appear serious, contemplative, and open to evidence based extensions of our understanding or this universe. Michio comes off as if selling a bridge. I'd have a beer with him, but I sure wouldn't buy a used car from him. Sabine, you demonstrate amazing patience in the face of a barrage glib, well rehearsed, clearly well-informed, and more than a little kooky presenter-speak.

[@oscill8ocelot]

This is such a great description of Michio Kaku. I've been feeling exact that about him for the better part of two decades. I enjoyed his books as a teenager; they got me interested in the science in the first place so I'll always be grateful. But early on in my research I came to see him as a salesperson for physics, just as you describe so well here.

[@TML0677]

as for the science Mishio is a crook. He -is- was good for entry level astrophysics and thats it

[@donaldduck830]

@@TML0677 Exactly. He looks good on camera, but with regards to cutting edge science he is a blunt cudgel.

[@johnblackledge4009]

Thank goodness. I'm not the only one who thinks Michio is the Deepak Chopra of string theory. And thank goodness for Sabine and Roger as fine examples of theoretical physicists.

[@r96red23]

Because he has worked on a unified theory his whole life & is excited that it is holding up so good so far & looking forward. The others are outside critics who review his unified theory & is not satisfied because he hasn't proven it definitively.

[@randywise5241]

I love Sabine's mind and am always amazed at what Penrose says. Such minds are a treasure to us all.

[@voidremoved]

Sabine doesn't even know about God and Jesus, she is a damned fool. What a shame. I don't know about Penrose, because I don't care my time is too valuable and I only clicked on a Sabine video because she was kind of cute and I was a man of culture., If they are so smart, why don't they know the Truth???

[@randywise5241]

A persons personal beliefs or lack there of does not invalidate their contribution and work.

[@nellateea3238]

hello sabine , my name is mike

[@ldbarthel]

In a way, Kaku hijacked the conversation away from the proposed topic (as was constantly pointed out by Penrose). Kaku seems to believe that his version of string theory will eventually be proven to be that holy grail of physics: the theory of everything. But let's break down just one of his arguments: Democritus' atomic theory. Democritus believed the atom was the smallest possible unit of matter, indivisible (hence, atomos). But what have we shown over the past 2K years? Atoms exist, but most of the mass is concentrated in the nucleus with a cloud of electrons. Then we discovered nuclear fission: the nucleus is not an indivisible unit of matter either. But wait, there's more! It turns out protons and neutrons aren't indivisible either - they consist of quarks. What started with Democritus and Leucippus evolved into the Standard Model: 6 quarks, 6 leptons, 4 bosons, and a Higgs. Democritus wasn't wrong, but he wasn't exactly right either. If we're honest, science does have assumptions that are untestable: natural processes are governed by laws that can be expressed mathematically and that these laws are consistent across space and time. This assumption is baked into the scientific method in terms of reproducibility. But mathematics isn't reality - it's a model of reality that is useful to describe our experience. But as I've often said, I can create any arithmetically valid equation you like - but it may not be measuring what you think it does.

[@GalaxyPedlar]

I think you could still argue that an atom is indivisible because if you were to divide one, it would no longer act as the same atom. Eg, dividing a group of two neon atoms into two groups of one is a very different thing than fissioning a single neon atom.

[@nemdenemam9753]

@@GalaxyPedlar wouldnt anything by indivisible by that reasoning? A ball doesnt act the same once you cut it in half.

[@GalaxyPedlar]

@@nemdenemam9753 The idea behind an atom is that if you keep dividing a substance, you eventually reach a point where you cannot divide it any more. So if you have a kilo of iron and cut it, you now have two separate pieces of iron. This stops working when you get to atom, because if you divide the atom, it is no longer iron.

[@nemdenemam9753]

@@GalaxyPedlarJust to be on the same page, this was my understanding of the point you were making: division != separating it into smaller pieces but division = separating it into pieces where the pieces don't behave the same as the whole Is that an incorrect understanding of your first comment? If it isn't then I don't see how that's an answer to my objection. If you cut a ball in half it's not a ball anymore. If it is incorrect then can you give a definition of 'division' how you mean it?

[@GalaxyPedlar]

@@nemdenemam9753 Democratos proposed that every substance has a smallest particle which cannot be subdivided. Some people say it can, because atoms can be decomposed into subatomic particles. My point is that Democratos is still right because subatomic particles cannot be described as a particle of the original substance.

[@SeaDadLife]

I’m not a scientist, but I was always taught that to be a scientific theory an idea must be testable.

[@SJ-xf2ks]

It would have been nice to hear more from Roger and Sabine.

[@DenethordeSade.90]

I kept having to skip that other charlatan

[@deandre1988]

Sabine is the bomb here, incredible intellect. Roger is so refreshing to listen to, for classic science

[@grant6137]

Sir Roger Penrose is a genius. I love listening to him.

[@punk1attitude]

Same here

[@Drbudweiser]

What an amazing discussion. Sabine and Roger make a great pair

[@joshuascholar3220]

I like Sabine's point of view that just because mathematics describes part of nature doesn't make that mathematics as real as nature. It's goal is to predict the outcome of experiments not to be considered the ground of reality.

[@TheJackSparrow2525]

Agree!

[@alexalcan]

Yep. Ultimately, math is a Theory of reality. The most fundamental, perhaps, but ultimately a model that replicates aspects of it, but isn't IT.

[@ttmallard]

My experiment via modelling to validate a theory is to fire neutrinos into a hyper-viscous charge_fluid droplet to spin off perfectly opposite pairs of electron-positrons assuming the charge droplet is neutral whole creating the monopoles we observe. Then, once in hand to see if the energy lost by the neutrino equals the energy_of_annihilation of a pair. That's the experiment. The resources to model it needed beyond my reach. Fun stuff 🍺

[@philosophicaltool5469]

@@alexalcan NOT a theory, a means to describe reality

[@andrepereira6085]

Sabine is so good!

[@mikefischbein3230]

One of the things I love about the scientific community is that respectful behavior is the norm, even when opinions differ fundamentally.

[@dominic.h.3363]

Have we watched the same video? I am fully convinced Michio Kaku did a video conference to avoid the inevitable ensuing barfight level of hostilities between him and Sabine. Both were derogatory in different ways.

[@conceptflow]

It's just way more under the table and passive aggressive.

[@AppleVsGravity]

Wish politics was the same.

[@patriciapalmer4215]

💰🗞️ OFF CAMERA ? Look out honey !! Gloves off !! Chairships , Golden Parachutes, huge employment packages, tenure, peer reviews, highly paid lecture series, lucrative speaking engagements (HERE) with 1st class travel, 5 star hotels and fawning audiences, university appointments. Attilla the Hun vs Kahn of the Mongol Hoard on steroids. More competitive and dirty than a job opening for Police Chief in Beverly Hills and Worldwide Wrestling💪

[@fluentpiffle]

If you cannot work with necessity you will never have any comprehension as to the nature of truth and reality.. wave structure of matter spaceandmotion

[@JimmyTulip1]

While Kaku spoke about how close to confirmation String Theory already is, I could clearly see a quantum facepalm superpositioning over Sabines face. It didn't quite manifest in this part of the multiverse though, but certainly in many others.

[@lemiureelemiur3997]

To be entirely fair she's appealing to intuition as much as anyone. Her camps answer to many worlds is superdeterminism, which is equally speculative. Yet she makes no qualms about taking a stand on that, presumably because that's what her particular biases allow her. There's quite a few prolific thinkers who would do more good admitting when a topic is far beyond our current understanding, and that it's pointless to engage in inflamed debate about it. In all this madness that is the world, surely Hossenfelder could do better than to reintroduce provocation as a legitimate way of communicating science... It's done enough damage already.

[@WillemDemmers]

@@lemiureelemiur3997 At least Sabine has Einstein in her camp.

[@StevXtreme]

@@lemiureelemiur3997 Except that she doesn't fanfare superdeterminism as a scientifically proven theory, but merely a conjecture that coincidentally solves a lot of the bullshit in quantum physics. Nice try, tho.

[@lemiureelemiur3997]

@@WillemDemmers that she does. She also has his face on the sweaters she sells here on youtube.

[@lemiureelemiur3997]

@@StevXtreme you're being facetious. You shouldn't be given that far more quantifiable experiments have been successful in sowing doubt about the premise of superdeterminism than Hossenfelder can muster to her defense. I. E she's the one behind the times on this question, given that her critics base their opinions on the latest real world experiments and she bases hers on what is comparatively speaking fairy tales. Local hidden variables were disproven in the 80's, which means Einstein was wrong...

[@isatousarr7044]

Abandoning the multiverse theory might be premature, as it remains a compelling and thought-provoking idea in the quest to understand the universe. While the theory is currently speculative and lacks direct experimental evidence, it offers valuable insights into the potential nature of reality. The multiverse theory could provide explanations for key puzzles in cosmology, such as the fine-tuning of the constants in our universe and the nature of dark matter and dark energy. By positing the existence of other universes with different physical laws, the theory helps us explore the possibility that the properties of our universe are not necessarily unique or fixed but could be part of a broader cosmic landscape. Furthermore, abandoning the multiverse prematurely would ignore its potential to spark new avenues of research. It challenges our assumptions about reality and offers a framework for exploring phenomena that might seem incomprehensible within our current understanding of physics. Just as Einstein’s theories were once met with skepticism but ultimately transformed our understanding of space and time, the multiverse theory has the potential to reshape our view of the cosmos. Additionally, the multiverse provides an interesting intersection between quantum mechanics and cosmology, offering a way to bridge these two fields in a search for a unified understanding of the universe. While it's true that we lack empirical evidence for the multiverse, the theory remains a fertile ground for theoretical exploration and could lead to discoveries that we cannot yet predict. Rather than abandoning it, we should continue exploring its implications, as it may hold the key to understanding some of the deepest mysteries of existence.

[@schmetterling4477]

It's not a theory. It is not even a hypothesis. There is nothing to "abandon".

[@Zagardal]

Well, if they ever manage to make this idea testable, then science might take a crack at it. Til then, keep it in pop culture.

[@Ebonyqwe]

I find Sabine an absolute breath of fresh air

[@UCjNrKLyRJI-abFA8qiNo92Q]

She's brutally honest

[@MattExzy]

She's fine. She's infinitely smarter than myself. But I did find some of her KZbin content from a while ago a little patronising of Penrose. Everyone's making fun of Michio for selling books, but she monetises as well. Nothing against her, I'm not terribly keen on the multiverse idea either, but I take her with the same grain of salt.

[@thomasjones4570]

Most uneducated people do. She is the Christopher Hitchens of Science. Making baseless attacks gets you attention and that is how she has made a living this past decade...attacking the very foundation of science...theories...where 100% of scientific advances comes from. A theory is unproven until it is, that does not mean it is not science. She herself has done nothing to advance science and has when she actually worked in the field, worked on other peoples ideas. She has created none herself. She is however a decent popular scientist and has a great channel when she explains known topics but she has a habit of backhanding theories as if an unproven one has no value. Its as if she does not understand where new ideas even come from or how knowledge is advanced.

[@guillermotell2327]

She manages to impress some people, although she does not know what she is talking about. 😂

[@heathen3278]

@@guillermotell2327 your laughing emoji makes your point correct

[@crisdragon8426]

It's refreshing to see so many comments that reflect what I was thinking as I watched this. Two honorable, admirable, accomplished physicists having a conversation with a used-car salesman.

[@thehumancondition8946]

👍😄😄😄

[@PlanetEarth3141]

What a shame Michio has digressed into a self perpetual hole.

[@nikthefix8918]

I wish Michio had been physically present on the stage. Did the monitor endow an Oracle-like presence, or was it more like Holly from Red Dwarf?

[@corticalmass]

Thank you Sabine Hossenfelder for staying on topic and succinctly stating your postion, that ontological realness of mathematical implications should not be automatically ascribed.

[@VoiceTotheEndsOfTheEarth]

I think the point that was made that the math doesn't always correspond to reality ontologically, and even if it does correspond to experimental results on many fronts, like quantum theory, then the inherent contradictions such a theory presents as Penrose pointed out, is contrary to the law of noncontradiction in logic which is the basis for the mathematical rigor that the epistemology of philosophy demands and that science has adopted. How can science which is based on inductive reasoning ever prove the theory of everything for every possible claim of the theory if not every claim is testable? That seems to me to be one of the great shortcomings of the scientific method. And even if the mathematics of a theory claims much more than can actually be proven experimentally, you have Goedel's Incompleteness proof to contend with. So we all have to admit at some point, that we cannot know everything. Certain things will forever remain conjecture, if not a mystery. And that is the real issue of this debate, IMO. Occam's razor is no more provable than anything else that science assumes, such as physical laws and even so-called constants (e.g. the cosmological constant) being immutable. That being the case, we are back to Descartes dilemma, to find the one premise that is absolutely certain. Time to revisit Goedel's ontological proof of God.

[@OluGt]

I have two (2) questions: 1) What if initial conditions are very hard to replicate to the quantum level? Meaning that quantum level of observations are too fuzzy to pinpoint in order to be replicated to make concrete observations or to concretely reproduce and isolate initial conditions for experiments. For example, if producing even photons one by one, is it possible to ensure that the source of that production is kept in exact same initial make-up each time after a photon is produced or can multiple very simplistic sources be made identical to produce photons to perform experiments like the Double Slit experiment, etc. just as an approach to ensure same initial conditions? 2) What if we don't have tools with high enough resolution to follow the superposition of particles that are capable of being in superposition? Or a way to replay (if possible to record on video) in extremely slow motion observations made about superposition? Pardon my very basic terminologies in my questions. It's for the sake of asking in very basic terms.

[@lepidoptera9337]

1) You failed to understand special relativity. It is impossible to know the initial conditions. 2) There are no particles and physical systems are not in superposition. That's merely a property of the theory.

[@martinlanctot3995]

Interesting debat and great panel. Was expecting more compelling arguments from Kaku and not drifting into string theory. Penrose is right, there are fundamentals issues with quantum theory and the multiverse is just a quick fix. Loved how composed Sabine looked while Kaku delivered the hocus pocus arguments.

[@Droselover-hu1gt]

You are really dumb and didn't watch the debate. Kaku was making concise arguments. I totally understood what he said.

[@3Zeddy2]

"not drifting" such is the nature of a cult

[@alexpavalok430]

Sabine was beside herself. she should've gotten more time to speak. Michio unfortunately just sounded like a string theory cheerleader, he didn't consider their points of views, or even make a counter argument. It's a shame, because he's a great mind. Maybe someday he will be more open minded to theories other than his own. And we can actually make this new theory he tells everyone else to make, a reflection of hubris.

[@stke1982]

Always inspiring to hear Roger. Nice how they called out michis fantasy stories he likes to tell in TV and books

[@Aetriex]

Penrose also believes that conciousness occurs at the quantum level between microtubials in the brain and because of this, conciousness is immortal...so idk about calling out fantasies

[@ianmarshall9144]

@@Aetriex How do you come to the conclusion immortal ? I have never heard Penrose use that term , do you have a reference ?

[@ToriZealot]

@@Aetriex nonsense

[@nellateea3238]

well roger tried to sell his book first

[@ToriZealot]

@@nellateea3238 yeah, don't forget Roger's clickbaiting YT Channel. He is such a salesperson, constantly bragging, or wait I mixed somebody up

[@dagobaman9257]

What a great mind Roger Penrose is. I've waited a lifetime for that speech about gravityzing quantum mechanics.

[@Doutsoldome]

Yep. Me too.

[@bensadowyj1974]

When abouts in the talk did hey cover this?

[@crabcrab2024]

Yes. But what do we mean by this? Why should we prefer GR as a basis? It is not an ideal theory. It is just inconsistent in a different way from QM: locality of conservation laws is not less of an issue than wave function collapse and measurement. So, the idea sounds good, but is it really that sound? ))

[@benjaminhalbeisen9175]

@Crab Crab for the very reason Penrose mentioned: GR is a consistent theory, QM contradicts itself. Quantum decoherence is a beatuiful term that hides a big problem with QM, namely that observers are not quantum objects and are thus completely outside of the standard model.

[@crabcrab2024]

@@benjaminhalbeisen9175 Strictly speaking we somewhat mix inconsistency with incompleteness hier. QM may be incomplete, but it is nevertheless consistent. GR is probably both, but it is self-limiting. Anyway, I just wanted to point out that "quantization of gravity" is something I can at least imagine (to a very limited degree, but still), whereas "gravitizing QM" is beyond my imagination. (But no doubt it sounds cool). I just want to understand what it means...)

[@raymond7451]

I am not at al intelligent like most of you here who are watching this . Actually im just a master builder . Yet I find myself watching everything about Sir Roger Penrose and I just am blown away by his sheer GENIUS . I have no understanding of most of this , yet I find when he talks I like get it a bit . This man is a gift to humanity and unlike these ridiculous celebrities who the world admires . Children should be shown this marvelous man .

[@deank179]

Sir Roger is one of the greatest minds of his generation! Love listening to him speak. Sabine is a legit scientist too. Kaku is a joke and doesn't belong one stage with Roger and Sabine.

[@workingTchr]

After Penrose finished his opening remarks around 13:00, there is really nothing more to add. He summed up and nailed the whole thing.

[@lukeb5584]

The Bible stated that God made the universe. There is really nothing more to add. Sums up and nails the whole thing.🤣

[@workingTchr]

@@lukeb5584 For people who don't think that the Bible has any special authority, saying "the Bible says it" doesn't carry any convincing power. You're just preaching to the choir.

[@estebandemosandmusicconcep4407]

​@@workingTchri think you missed the point of the reply

[@workingTchr]

@@estebandemosandmusicconcep4407 I think YOU missed the point of my reply. So there. Don't you love intelligent conversation?

[@estebandemosandmusicconcep4407]

@@workingTchr so you still in the dark? Just admit that you thought the person was talking at face value as opposed to illuminating the way in which your original comment mirrors religious claims and move on Hint: learn to decode emojis

[@MrAlanCristhian]

30:11 - Lawson: Do you agree? - Penrose: no. 🤣

[@jimmyzhao2673]

😎

[@amosferrero]

What a great meeting! Roger Penrose, magnificiently escorted by Sabine, completely knocked out Michio who used hackneyed mantras and sounded too casual and fanciful. The best was the great Roger's headline: "The way is not quantizing General Relativiy, but gravitising Quantum Mechanics"

[@r96red23]

Lol QM has stood the test of time, it'll prevail & will be the cornerstone of a unified theory. Pennrose & other doubters will be proven wrong as Einsten has been.

[@fast1nakus]

@r96red23 you seem to be confused. Mr Penrose told that qm is cool and all, but the connection to multiverse and string theory isn't there. The Japanese guy was pedalling his own bullshit theory.

[@iudexCervello]

@@r96red23 Penrose isn't a QM doubter, since his literal interpretation is about quantum mechanics relationship with GR. He just believes that matter and systems bigger than subatomic particles can't exist in more than one place at one time. Please research his work and interpretation, it'd be really good perspective

[@r96red23]

@@iudexCervello He doesn't understand superposition at all. No one says particles can't exist in more than one place at one time. Maybe he's too old to comprehend these ideas.

[@r96red23]

@@fast1nakus The math is there. Multi dimension & multiple universes seems to be the answer. The problem is we're limited 3d beings & it's almost impossible to surpass our limitations. All these doubters & haters can't come up with anything better but keep badmouthing the correct explanations.

[@Sophia-yo9rp]

I could listen to him for hours. Thank you.

[@stevelivingstone4616]

In some universes we have already abandoned the multiverse theory.

[@DermMicro]

Mind blown

[@craigfowler7098]

Definitely a physicist joke

[@MarkSimkoofLI]

It is both rejected and not rejected at the same time, until we look carefully, at which point things collapse.

[@8ace02]

Lol, you made my day!

[@QuicksilverSG]

Michio Kaku is more like a cheerleader for Team Multiverse than a scientist. Anything that raises questions about his pet theories is motivation for more research to raise more questions about the unresolved questions that he's raising.

[@rossmeldrum3346]

It sure guarantees a life time of paychecks while proving little to nothing for the work.

[@marcag9810]

I mean, I am a phycisist and I tend to align more with Sabine's skepticism and outright rejection of fringe physics theories BUT I find that there is value in and a necessity for strange theories that push our boundaries and fight back the criticism. That's a healthy scientific environment in my opinion, even though it is not very healthy for science communication to focus on fringe science almost exclusively.

[@Craft-oh7uv]

More like embarrassing !

[@papertoyss]

You have to be a scientist of at least equal value to him to even spell such things, and this is measurable.

[@martinmarks]

I believe that it’s simply reflected on his solid contributions in real scientific publications (quite poor considering his career stage!). Of course, for this, we have to put aside his heavily sensationalist material to catch general public’s desire for fantasy - just to earn his fortune and inflate his own name. It’s hard to look at him as a serious scientist in any sort of way…just one more canned Hollywood source of misinformation haha

[@DavidAbieMorales]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 02:33 🌌 Multiverse Theories - Discussion on the existence of the Multiverse theory. - Different perspectives on the Multiverse, with a focus on scientific testability. 08:13 🤔 The Testability of Multiverse Theories - A debate on whether scientific theories, including the Multiverse, must be testable. - Arguments about the testability of theories, with examples related to String Theory and deviations from the inverse square law. 23:47 📡 Indirect Evidence and String Theory - The mention of indirect evidence in supporting theories like String Theory. - Clarification that observations, even if they were made, would not necessarily provide direct evidence for String Theory. 00:00 📽️ Introduction - The panel discusses the topic of the Multiverse theory and its implications. - The question of whether the Multiverse theory can be tested and its popularity is raised. 02:47 🤔 Sabine Hossenfelder's Perspective - Sabine Hossenfelder highlights the importance of empirical evidence in physics. - She argues that the Multiverse theory currently lacks empirical support. - Discusses the role of string theory and the challenge of verifying the Multiverse theory. 09:29 🤯 Michio Kaku's Perspective - Michio Kaku explains the concept of the Multiverse and its connection to quantum mechanics. - He defends the Multiverse theory as a legitimate interpretation of quantum mechanics. - Kaku emphasizes the need for further experiments and observations to provide evidence for the Multiverse. 14:25 🕳️ Roger Penrose's Perspective - Roger Penrose expresses his skepticism towards the Multiverse theory, particularly its relationship to string theory. - He questions the lack of experimental support and the complexity of the Multiverse concept. - Penrose suggests that the Multiverse idea may not be scientifically fruitful. 21:03 🌌 The Multiverse and Cosmology - The panel discusses the connection between the Multiverse theory and cosmology. - The idea that a Multiverse could explain the fundamental constants and the role of experimental evidence is debated. 24:36 🌠 Possibility of Unverifiable Theories - The discussion centers on whether certain scientific theories will always contain unverifiable or untestable elements. - Examples of untested concepts like proton decay and the cosmological constant are mentioned. - The panel considers the inherent uncertainty in scientific theories. 27:24 🤨 Popularity and Fiction - The panel addresses the popularity of the Multiverse theory among the general public. - The appeal of parallel universes in science fiction and the distinction between fiction and scientific theory are discussed. 30:06 🧠 The Challenge of Uncertainty - The concept that science is limited by human inference and the possibility of the universe's laws changing are explored. - The uncertainty underlying scientific methods and theories is acknowledged. 48:54 🌌 Proposing Theories Beyond Testability - The discussion delves into the purpose of proposing theories that lack empirical evidence or are untestable. - Roger Penrose suggests that it's valuable to contemplate such theories as long as they simplify the overall picture without contradicting known data. - The limits of scientific understanding are acknowledged, particularly concerning the Planck energy. 50:16 🤔 The Mystery of Unexplained Phenomena - The panel addresses the notion that there may always be certain unexplained or untestable aspects in science. - Michio Kaku discusses the Planck energy as a point where known laws of physics break down and become challenging to describe. - Roger Penrose distinguishes between singularities in black holes and the Big Bang, noting that not all unexplained phenomena should be taken equally seriously. Made with HARPA AI

[@VioletteToussaint]

Thank you!!

[@TimGreig]

Prefer to watch it myself thanks.

[@_sayan_roy_]

I think the theory which needs to be first formalised is how Roger Penrose is so sharp at 91.

[@alanmartinezrodriguez884]

Interesting debate but we went quickly from the multiverse theory as a possibility, which was supposed to be the topic of the discussion, to the validity of String theory. Michio defending it the best he could on the one hand, and Sir Penrose and Sabine literally "roasting" it every time they could. Not complaining because, again, it was an interesting discussion in the end, however, even Sir Penrose took notice of this a couple of times. I think the moderator should have led the discussion a bit better. Thank you for this and hopefully next time we can have a longer debate on these great matters.

[@terrymaccarrone9927]

Looking back we can only imagine the truth as being sought but clearly not found

[@cidfacetious3722]

That’s all michio wanted to talk about as usual. He’s only interested in selling his books he’s been a broken record for 20 years

[@alexjames7144]

I think the issue was that the moderator is clearly way out of his depth. And so is the crowd really. The guests were attempting to have the discussion and remain intelligible to the general public but it meant that Hossenfelder and Penrose couldn't actually demonstrate the absolute BS that Kaku was coming out with.

[@vik24oct1991]

host: hi Michio can you explain newton's first law to the audience in simple terms ? michio: Yeah sure, In string theory we ...

[@scottsound4711]

Ha aH Classic..

[@HardHardMaster]

At this point Kaku is just sabotaging scientific progress

[@mthedu]

He always just gives rehearsed answers. Have you not heard him on other social media interviews? I would guess these "events" mean very little to him at all.

[@ashajacob8362]

@@mthedu i noticed it too I have read some of his books and every interview he had he was just recycling and repeating same things from the books back theni didn't knew but now I realised

[@nikiindzhiev5369]

Watching a genius like Dr. Penrose is truly awe-inspiring

[@ownyourgov]

Sabine, can you explain what Michio means by saying at 41:50 "...you don't have to believe in the Multiverse Theory to be a quantum mechanical physicist because the data from the many world theory and the data from the Copenhagen interpretation are identical..." (I should ask him but I'm afraid the answer would be long, circular and I would be as confused as Roger.}

[@silvershadow013]

The Copenhagen interpretation basically says that that the entangled state of the object and the instrument collapses to a determinate state whenever a measurement takes place. So the wave function collapses and we "see" the object no longer in superposition.

[@BertWald-wp9pz]

I am a fan of Sabine’s videos on KZbin. I just finished reading Roger Penrose’s albeit quite old book ‘The Empeor’s New Mind’ and thought it would be great to see the two great minds together and right on cue here they are and definitely not in parallel worlds!

[@aaronmicalowe]

Sabine has a valuable role of being sceptical about how we make assumptions and how those assumptions are often hidden and automatic. Penrose is a wealth of experience who can bring together certain subjects that few others can but he is often blunt in how he communicates things. Michio is exploring this subject the best he can but just because you can argue a possibility doesn't justify it's exploration. If multi worlds exist all this supposition is not the right way to go about it, so I agree with Sabine on this one. Penrose is saying it more bluntly by saying it's not even part of the discussion. 😂

[@bendonkin9449]

The topic of this talk should really have been “Is Michio Kaku absolutely full of it?”. Great stuff 😂

[@loturzelrestaurant]

If you like thought-provoking Video-Essays, try Some More News, Hbomberguy, and Professor Dave. They got plenty.

[@shadow15kryans23]

Fr tho

[@nellateea3238]

or who tries to sell his/her book first in this show , that competition goes to penrose

[@gerardjones7881]

kaku is fun to listen to but seems to lack rigor sometimes. Penrose is more cautious and measured.

[@manoftodd]

Kaku: **Starts telling Penrose (who literally first theorised the concept of a singularity black hole) about singularities in black holes being similar to the birth of the universe.** Penrose: *Do not cite the deep magic to me, I was there when it was written.*

[@owfan4134]

I hope the entirety of tomorrow is as full of joy for you as the last roughly 45 seconds were for me. Thanks for commenting.

[@trtnec]

Kaku said they're similar in that they operate at the Planck energy and that's where our laws break down, nothing else - he was answering the question of testability. Penrose replied with a non-sequitur to get a final jab at him. You have to be totally biased to not see that.

[@Frisbieinstein]

The first black hole proposer was Oppenheimer.

[@Gibeah]

🤣nice segway

[@Gibeah]

​@@trtnec no you're totally biased for not seeing the awful way he conducted himself the entire debate, completely derailing the topic etc. I'd say he absolutely deserved it, and Penrose had definitely given up on having any sort of intelligible conversation with him at that point.

[@niranjansaikia9379]

Thanks to Host this debate...facinating,❤🎉

[@Eztoez]

What a great panel of physicists. What a pity Richard Feynman isn't around

[@AliceYobby]

Blame the us government for the fact Feynman isn’t still here. They blew up a nuke not so far from where he stood with the only thing in the way being a car windshield

[@craigfowler7098]

Or Stephen Hawkings

[@istantinoplebullconsta642]

Yes, it really is a pity. Out of all the Giants, I always got the best view while standing on Richard's shoulders.

[@juliansark2167]

Imagine Feynman still being with us in 2022, having a KZbin channel :)

[@jamesyboy4626]

Kaku is cuckoo he would't deserve to be in the same room as Feynman if he was still alive. He shouldn'f allowed in the same room as Penrose that's probably why he wasn't. Him and Deepak Chopra would compliment each other well in a room.

[@bartgrossman9361]

Ms. Hossenfelder is a remarkable person. She has command of an enormous body of knowledge and has the ability to explain some of these things in a way that I can nearly understand. She's the best.

[@YouCountSheep]

I understood the chicken analogy. Imagine that is true and some radiation device of an uberbeing that has our universe in a closet is actually the thing that makes fusion go in stars didn't pays his powerbill and one day all stars turn off and lots of other things that needed that like magnetism or attraction of protons and electrons. Then all the laws would no longer be true. I'm smort.

[@markseslstorytellerchannel3418]

Dr. Hossenfelder

[@zaphod333]

@@markseslstorytellerchannel3418 Neither. It's Hossenfelder with an o, and this video's title even correctly states it. To copy-write appears to be a difficult task.

[@markseslstorytellerchannel3418]

@@zaphod333 I have listened to many of the good doctor's videos, she has a great dry wit and is very enlightening!

[@markseslstorytellerchannel3418]

Are you saying she does not have her Ph.D?

[@ollywright]

Great panel. It’s interesting to see the meteoric rise and precipitous fall of String theory

[@holliswilliams8426]

I don't think you understand how theoretical physics works.

[@alexander12305]

I thought the Anthropic principle is the main factor that brought up the idea of multiverse. How else can we explain the fine tuning of physical laws to creation of organic life? Why no one of invented scientists mentioned it?

[@JTSuter]

As a “layman” I feel validated when I questioned Michio’s comparison of the Big Bang to a black hole, and Roger promptly explained that the two are completely different.

[@loturzelrestaurant]

If you like thought-provoking Video-Essays, try Some More News, Hbomberguy, and Professor Dave.

[@designtechdk]

@@loturzelrestaurant I wouldn't necessarily call Professor Dave "thought-provoking", but his tutorials and debunkings are very good.

[@hahahasan]

to be fair to Kaku, he wasn't equating the two beyond the energy densities involved, although I guess that by this point in the conversation he had put his shoe in his mouth often enough for Penrose to shut him down instantly.

[@skepticalextraterrestrial2971]

@@hahahasan Also to be fair, a comparing is not equating. I don't think Kaku was saying they were the SAME, so I think Penrose was perhaps was beating a bit of a strawman. But Penrose knows more about the subject than I ever could, so I could be wrong.

[@ViralKiller]

@@skepticalextraterrestrial2971 the singularities are the same...they have to be...there are no different flavours nothingness

[@kingofmaiars]

40:14 Spot on Sabina. The reason the public is so invested in the multiverse concept is because it speaks to us on a personal. Everybody must've wondered this question at least once in their lives. 'How would my life be if I took that route instead of this one?' Trying to cope with the idea that this life is a one time opportunity to become. And its ultimate finality with death.

[@momohnyaley7069]

The reason is because its overhyped; especially in movies.

[@TheKb117]

a form of escapism, if I may say...

[@libtardiacitizen]

@@momohnyaley7069 No, it's in the movies because we find the idea attractive as OP mentioned. You're wrong.

[@9unner22]

The multiverse theory is an attempt to replace Creation, with randomisation. People rominate on the multiverse idea because, it fills the void within.

[@momohnyaley7069]

@@9unner22 It's a very unconvincing attempt.

[@honestylowkeye1171]

I died a little inside when Dr. Hossenfelder stressed, "I know *serious* string theorists..."

[@MrMeltdown]

Her little dead pan quips are easily missed. Her youtube channel is full of it. I'm sure there is a heap of snippets I'm not getting.

[@carlorossi2788]

infatti dice cose non galileiane

[@williamchoi808]

Dissing Kaku - The Movie

[@milosv4142]

I think she says "why doofuses do what they do..." around 31 min mark lol

[@thomasjones4570]

Yep, that attack actually undermined her credibility because Kaku not only won awards for his work but has far more papers accredited than she will have.

[@siddharthasharma3827]

Is there anyone who can explain to me the collapse of wave function and which panelist can resolve the measurement problem?

[@musicman9023]

It's astonishing to me just how articulate, coherent and methodical in his thoughts Sir Roger Penrose is at his advanced age. 'Genius' gets thrown around a lot, but he's truly deserving of this title, should be spoken of in the same breath as someone like Einstein or Feynman...

[@brentwalker3300]

I concur.

[@1man1bike1road]

His brother was a great chess player of his time smart family i guess

[@sfgox10]

@@1man1bike1road Read his wikipedia page. His entire family on mom and dad side were successful in intellectual pursuits.

[@alexbauman4203]

Well I agree to some limit, Einstein might be never truly matched

[@jpa_fasty3997]

@@alexbauman4203 Gauss, Euler, Newton, Dirac :)

[@andregomesdasilva]

Sabine is so great... she's the reason and skepticism we all very much need these days

[@Tethloach1]

she is very smart and articulate.

[@subplantant]

Ah - Skepticism (or scepticism) in English. Yes I agree!

[@andregomesdasilva]

@@subplantant thank you

[@radientbeing]

A fundamental fact from mathematics, that 4 dimensional space has an uncountable infinity of different possible 4-spaces from the work of Michael Freedman/ Simon Donaldson (not good for theoretical physics).

[@elisabethloxley6124]

All three academics are well worth following. Sabine is such a clear concise thinker. Roger is a mathematician of great renounce. I love listening to Michio. I don’t agree with I’m, but he is well worth the time spent listening. I am an avid follower of Sabine. Her news channel is fun, and informative. Thanks to all.

[@elisabethloxley6124]

Should read great renown. (Roger Penrose)

[@guaromiami]

Yes! Sabine's use of logic is razor sharp! I love her.