Sir Roger Penrose: Faith, Fantasy, and the Big Questions in Modern Physics

[@patarnababan6440]

I love Sir Roger Penrose cordiality as much as his thinking.

[@onehitpick9758]

Penrose is really onto something here. This makes more sense than anything I've heard in recent times.

[@Thomasp671]

Penrose is 87+ years old and a genius and smart as it gets !

[@stevebrindle1724]

Yes, the English, along with the Scots really are the cleverest people in the universe!

[@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858]

He's a genius... And he's smart!

[@quantumzoflyne]

91, and now Nobel Laureate, and still cognitively intact

[@Thomasp671]

@@quantumzoflyne Yep.... lol

[@ericgraham8150]

I really can't quite put my finger on it, but I just love listening and going down the rabbit hole that is his brain

[@jooky87]

An honest mathematician. Excellent talk highlighting the realization that not all mathematics is physics and vice versa. There’s still much to be discovered both physically and in theory.

[@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858]

Dewey Larson is a good place to start. Seek and FIND.

[@18890426]

@@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858 who?

[@cauchyh3879]

9:00 real start

[@onceuponfewtime]

thank god

[@agentxyz]

Thanks! 9 min intro, wow

[@StephenS-2024]

Thank you!

[@manusartifex3185]

Jesus loves you

[@abhishekshah11]

Thanks you're a hero

[@robertdobosz9681]

Please keep inviting Sir Penrose back for further talks!! It seems that his contrarian nature among his colleagues has paid off greatly!

[@NondescriptMammal]

Science is based on skepticism, even of existing scientific dogma itself, so it is always refreshing to see someone as qualified as Penrose to fill this role and keep us thinking in other directions than the usual consensus that marches in lockstep with the prevailing theories

[@brendawilliams8062]

@@NondescriptMammal you need Sir Penrose to figure out what the lockstep is.

[@jackhammer5468]

I wish Penrose would have heard the question of the young woman more clearly than he did. The question repeated to him by the moderator was not the question she asked. It was a good one I don't think he answered because he didn't hear the first part of the question that had to do with the extremely improbability of our big bang and asking wouldn't that make the othe big bangs even more improbable. It was a great question. I think his ideas about the extreme improbability of our universe was formed long before his ideas about there not being a first big bang. I too would have like to hear him square up those notions.

[@brendawilliams8062]

I am glad i stay at it. Thankyou for ccc

[@92587wayne]

This lecture is a perfect example of why it is said that many mathematicians go insane. Rodger's mind has a very high level of Entropy.

[@brendawilliams8062]

I believe it is a built upon intelligence. What is there to be crazy about?

[@franknimal9966]

The brain is an area of neurophysiology activity. Neurophysiology activity consists of electrochemical reaction. Thus at any given time, the brain state is defined by a subset of electrochemical reactions, derived from a large set of possible reactions. Consider the phenomenon of a. conscious thought. As at any given time the brain physical state consists of a collection of electrochemical reactions (events), it can be inferred that they are collectively responsible for the conscious thought. This means that at least in part, simultaneous events are responsible for thought. In other words, thought creates a connection between simultaneous events. This is in contradiction to the consequences of special relativity, which states that the fastest connection between events is the speed of light and thus excludes the possibility of connection between simultaneous events. Consider the memorizing of, say, the value 5. This would necessarily involve more than 1 point in space as, say, if it is assumed a single electron records 5 by taking a particular potential. Then it by itself cannot define (or know) 5, as its magnitude would be defined only with respect to another datum or event defined as a unit potential, thus involving at least 2 simultaneous events. Consider the experience of vision. While we focus our attention on an object of vision, we are still aware of a background and, thus, a whole collection of events. This would mean at least an equal collection of physical events in the brain are involved. Take the experience of listening to music. It would mean being aware of what went before. Like vision, it would probably mean that while our attention at any given time is focused at that point in time, it is aware of what went before and what is to follow. In other words, it spans the time axis. Many great composers have stated that they are able to hear their whole composition. Thus their acoustic experience is probably like the average person's visual experience. While focusing at a particular point in time of their composition, they are nevertheless aware of what went before and what is to come. The rest of the composition is like the background of a visual experience. Experiencing the composition in this way, they are able to traverse it in a similar fashion to which a painting is observed. In this sense, an average person in comparison can be seen as having tunnel hearing (like tunnel vision) when it comes to music, thus making it very difficult for him or her to reproduce or create new music. It can be seen that consciousness is a 4-D phenomenon. If it is a physically explainable phenomenon, such an explanation would involve EPR type effects and as such physical explanations at a quantum level will be involved. philpapers.org/rec/DESCAS

[@Chaos------]

electrochemical reactions. Wrong bucko. Theres quantum activity in the microtubules that you're completely ignoring.

[@franknimal9966]

If you read to the end you will see that what I am saying is that QM level explanations would be needed in the least

[@tseikkisnelkytkaks9013]

There is no contradiction between emergent phenomena and special relativity. Probably the workings of the brain do utilize quantum phenomena, but the point you're making here is just plain wrong. You are using an insane amount of words to say that emergence such as consciousness arising from the brain is not explainable or calculable using a deterministic theory such as special relativity. It is not, but there is no contradiction either. :)

[@vermouth310]

I wonder how many honest people there were in the audience, that were lost very early in the lecture?

[@muzzletov]

u lookin for company?

[@davidjames5517]

Penrose demolishes the 26 Dimemsions concept underpinning string theory...and is told by Susskind, father figure in string theory, "you are completely right and totally misguided." As Penrose almost says: WTF!?!

[@cseeger1]

It would appear that Roger Penrose and Lawrence Krauss have the same tailor.

[@waldieschmidtke9630]

True,...... the tie probably got through the split light experiment, like his cat analysis ...... 2 cats appear and a third with a colour lol

[@pjmclach]

Penrose has the best pictures

[@vinm300]

....and draws them himself I believe.

[@prostytrol]

Center for Human Imagination, use your imagination and provide elderly presenters with big button pointer or at least a clapper...

[@luminography]

and for clumsy younger presenters!

[@luminography]

such as yours truly

[@gerhardmoeller774]

Penrose is a genius but.... Luddite... Check out other talks of his. These young ”Drs” don't help the old buzzard very much.

[@johnsmith1474]

Arthur Clarke Center needs to get it's shit together. When you have a man of this caliber speaking, GET A FREAKING REMOTE FOR THE AV THAT WORKS FOR HIM!

[@c23e]

He has a good mind but always is chaotic when using slides, print outs, projectors and anything technical. You would think either he spent an hour getting used to equipment or organisers would do a rehearsal with him. I suppose it adds to the view of the chaotic boffin.

[@Carfeu]

I hate math but I love this man

[@brendawilliams8062]

I am amazed that one may comprehend the square root of ten being multiplied or divided by 1001032155. Then subject to the same multiplication or division with 1000564416 into strings using deminsions.

[@ashoknaganur8551]

In double slit experiment after expanding electron formed in the slit it contracts and by dark matter becomes wave it behaves like super conductor kinetic energy increases and electron formed according to me s.c black hole double slit experiment etc are examples

[@erikschiegg68]

How much is the universe cooling by expansion, if you consider the universe as a gas?

[@ericgraham8150]

Sir Penrose, I'm freely available for hire to handle any future button pushing you need for you lectures.

[@tagorian]

Despite of mounting evidence , why are western scientists afraid to admit it - the ancient East was further ahead in their understanding of consciousness. The vibrato of the universe as well as of each microtubule in the brain is what Om intendeds to aid . Those Indian books need to be relooked at .

[@brendawilliams8062]

Don’t you think it’s best applied to the medical doctors?

[@jondor654]

Hopefully Sir Roger will not anytime master that buzzer, as I detect an inverse correlation to his scintillating brilliance

[@SSimonMr]

Herman Potočnik alias Hermann Noordung Potočnik's book Das Problem der Befahrung des Weltraums - der Raketen-Motor (The Problem of Space Travel - The Rocket Motor) in Berlin (1929) described geostationary satellites (first put forward by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky) and discussed communication between them and the ground using radio, but fell short of the idea of using satellites for mass broadcasting and as telecommunications relays (developed by Arthur C. Clarke in his Wireless World article of 1945). The wheel-shaped space station served as an inspiration for further development by Wernher von Braun (another former VfR member) in 1952. Von Braun saw orbiting space stations as a stepping stone to travel to other planets. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Poto%C4%8Dnik

[@DaveLH]

What the Five Perfect Solids are good for are D&D dice.

[@brendawilliams8062]

Thankyou

[@lkd982]

1:21:56 "... so it's a experimentally perfectable testable theory" Really?! And how exactly could we test whether a massive black hole was formed in a "previous" "aeon", which is how he prefaced that conclusion about testability?

[@calebhaines3794]

43:30 Amazing drawing

[@brendawilliams8062]

His geometric ideas are very deep in the richness and implications. The more you know then the more you see

[@pedrodanielpfaff5386]

I am looking for the programs I loaded down on modern physics .What happened?

[@OnCharmLee]

I do not agree with Kanto's infinite theory that there can be countless infinities of different sizes in infinity. There is only one infinity.

[@REALSLIK]

I used to think the same thing but take calculus and you might see it differently. Infinity is not a number but a process. If two functions approach infinity but one does so faster, then it's the "bigger" infinity. Also look up big o notation.

[@nissimlevy3762]

Unfortunately for you mathematics is not a matter of your opinion. His mathematics rests on a solid, rigorous foundation. If you write a paper showing where his proofs are wrong then the mathematical world will listen to you.

[@elilauffer]

"it's very hard to bore a photon" what if it's tunnelling? Pun intended :P

[@elilauffer]

academic.oup.com/jxb/article/68/13/3321/3897356

[@elilauffer]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/pX-9oKmbabSHqqs

[@elilauffer]

what about a Big Bing! (Hameroffs term) www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001800010002-1.pdf re: questions

[@omeander]

What makes Conformal Cyclic Cosmology presume that the stacking of aeons proceeds in a columnar or linear fashion rather than being circular? Kepler and Desargues regarded the two "ends" of a "straight" line as meeting at "infinity" so that the line has the structure of a circle. In fact, Kepler actually thought of a line as a circle with its center at infinity. This would allow the CCC model to be represented with a bit of fantasy in the shape of an infinite double ouroboros, Thus allowing the observer to eternally return as observer to observe the cyclic circularity of a self-creating autopoietic universe.

[@nissimlevy3762]

The Navel Of Creation: A Loop In Eternity

[@omeander]

@@nissimlevy3762 Beautifully said an Omphalos (navel) of the Ouroboros...as the Ouroboros may be used to illustrate not just spatial scales as was done by Martin Rees, but also temporal ones, so as to establish an intimate link between the microcosm of the ever present now and the marcocosmic confluence of past and future eternity , symbolised by the ouraborus, as tail and head meet to complete the cycle..

[@brendawilliams8062]

You have to understand a torus.

[@18890426]

@@brendawilliams8062 why? Any significance?

[@brendawilliams8062]

@@18890426 if it is to me. I am not an educator. Authority Or representative

[@sixpooI]

lol @ susskind impression 33:18 =D

[@NathanOkun]

"Einstein thought he had made an error, but he was mistaken." A joke phrase that is literally true concerning the Cosmological Constant... Go figure!

[@schmetterling4477]

That's not the real problem with Einstein. The real problems are in those cases where he was clearly wrong and he never thought that he could have been mistaken.

[@brendawilliams8062]

@@schmetterling4477 it must have taken influence to make him relent to the idea.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@brendawilliams8062 To relent to what? The cosmological constant is simply one possible modification to GR. It pops out of the math, so do others that are less well known but that you can find easily in the textbooks. During Einstein's time there was no evidence for the cosmological constant. Today we may have evidence, but the statistical significance is being questioned, right now. Einstein simply didn't have any criteria on which to base a rational opinion. That's all there is to it.

[@brendawilliams8062]

@@schmetterling4477 all mathematical logic may serve mankind with useful purposes. When you start trying to put two ideas or more to the task of an identical outcome then people think this one or that one is dead. The idea they all survive doesn’t seem logical.

[@brendawilliams8062]

You are going to have a problem with 10013648 when you see a 1003234 and 1003236. I don’t know how that constant came about up a 125 line?

[@OnCharmLee]

Schrödinger's cat paradox should be understood to occur in the process of accumulating energy with minimum granularity.

[@brendawilliams8062]

Without 111 then a lot of prexisting maths would be voided. It has more than one use.

[@dougmarkham]

I like Roger's idea that space conformally rescales infinitely into the future as a result of the decay of all matter leaving only massless radiation. What I don't understand is how that conformal rescaling causes new matter to be created leading to the restarting of time and the reexpansion of space-time, and re-emergence of gravity. Does anyone know how this happens in Roger's model?

[@Voivode.of.Hirsir]

Doug James, I told my father about the CCC hypothesis and he was wondering the same thing...

[@zagyex]

Is that explained in Big Bang cosmology? Not really, there are some ideas. The same applies to CCC

[@dougmarkham]

@@zagyex Yes, well I've heard ideas such as: quantum fluctuations in the quantum foam could start big bangs and lead to inflation. What interests me specifically in light of the CCC theory is that: as mass decays leaving only massless particles like photons, time ends, distance goes with it ie, leading to the collapse of space into perhaps a singularity or close to it. Now, that implies that the concentration or density of the massless particles will go through the roof. I was wondering: at the point where all mass remaining in the universe finally decays, that means frequency and hence time goes to zero. Now, if 'c' (speed of light) = distance travelled by a photon/time, and time goes to zero, then obviously the math breaks. Whether the conformal contraction of space is gradual (as mass and time gradually decay away), or if if time goes only after the last subatomic particle decays, at some point, the constant speed of light has to be violated as distance left approaches zero (the singularity). Does that somehow convert massless subatomic particles back into super hot big bang primordial plasma?

[@zagyex]

@@dougmarkham I am really not an expert, but as I understand this, photons experience no time even now. And no distance. So in a sense photons are already infinitely close together from _their perspective_ . But particles with mass create a frame of reference where there are distances. So the boundary is gradual for the particles as their frame of reference disappears ?

[@TheDavidlloydjones]

@@zagyex Yes. Of course. And vice versa. Thank you for asking.

[@scenFor109]

I like the notion that 'matter' in a black hole is a pulsating super conductor. #EndGlobalApartheid

[@brendawilliams8062]

Yeah try that one with electrical engineers They got that one. Thank goodness.

[@alextravine9422]

Good timing if i do say so

[@walternullifidian]

The history of the universal aeons is like a punctuated equilibrium, or a punctuated steady state.

[@LAEXCITOSAAPARECIDA]

Do people that live in deep space (without the influence of strong local gravity all the time like we do) have greater quantum consciousness? Does the full moon being on the opposite side of the Earth from the Sun become crazy making because of an unsettling gravity overlap?

[@brendawilliams8062]

That is up for debate. So I read.

[@declinescore]

If history tells us that every model is wrong and we openly admit that the current theories are crazy and we have difficulty understanding them, then shouldn't we return the idea of expanding our minds? I have to admit that the answer that Roger gave to the question relating to poetry and the Arts was somewhat lacking.

[@greedyfirstalgorithmlast26]

Ah, but Sir Roger with Dawkings and others have had to create a new private £18,000-a-year university Because like the USA the schools do a shit sorry education and China, India and Mexico all turn out Great Graduates, while USA universities turn out illiterate stubborn Business/ Wall Street thieves. The only Science taught is basic Standford University (Next town south of me) where Murder Science ( Weapons of Mass Murderers-American Dream, murder every one else then live in Peact) Professor Richard Dawkins - New College of the Humanitieswww.nchlondon.ac.uk/faculty/professor-richard-dawkins/ About Professor Richard Dawkins. Professor Richard Dawkins lectures for the Science Literacy Core Module at New College of the Humanities. A prize-winning evolutionary biologist, Richard is one of Britain's best-known academics and was the inaugural Professor for Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

[@brendawilliams8062]

The bullet he mentions may have had merit. I mean however the small the possibility was it exist.

[@tonymccann1978]

9:06 Roger starts speaking

[@junevandermark952]

One of my elderly acquaintances, whose parents were Atheists, said that until she went to school, she had never heard the word "Jesus," and didn't have a clue what the kids were rambling on about. If information is not put in to the thought processes, there isn't any way, it can be preached back out.

[@brendawilliams8062]

The brain is conscious.

[@junevandermark952]

@@brendawilliams8062 The human brain is only conscious, because the conscious cells that built the brain in the embryo in the womb, were conscious. Everything that lives ... IS conscious. Humans are just not at all special.

[@junevandermark952]

@@brendawilliams8062 This podcast, from my perception, is phenomenal. I hope you take the time to listen and watch and learn, as did I. The most important lesson from 83,000 brain scans | Daniel Amen | TEDxOrangeCoast kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6Szg6aKYtGgrZo

[@brendawilliams8062]

@@junevandermark952 there must be air that makes them special.

[@melaniehazel6559]

If the pyramids were the representation of a 3d cube dropping into 2d....what would happen if we threw it back exactly where it came from?

[@TheDavidlloydjones]

They might get irritated.

[@brendawilliams8062]

That is a hard one. Would it tilt setting on a concave mirror with 3 legs?

[@calebhaines3794]

How might this play an extraordinary role in interacting with the very fabric of the universe . . . if weather = X then weather protection = X1

[@PauloConstantino167]

FUNCTIONAL FREEDOM BABY

[@LO-gg6pp]

You clickbaited Sir Rogers lecture

[@michaelspooner9160]

I am like a space-lion at this lecture.In space-suit on the moon.A tranquilizer feature may also be a part of the suit as I may be confused and try to escape lecture environment or actual moonscape.The mexican program may actually attempt a space walk with lion.

[@brendawilliams8062]

Get knee deep in some of the thoughts with equations then I can get you.

[@nrrgrdn]

@8:20

[@willschmitz7438]

Well, Bots, Come!

[@jamesemcguire]

Why talk about very large numbers? Never heard of infinity being raised to a power?

[@iaindelacroix4999]

Get a remote with big fucking buttons !

[@РодионЧаускин]

Robinson Kevin Lewis Edward Taylor Kimberly

[@intothevoid2046]

nice hat

[@divisorplot]

symmetry broken symmetry thank ST UV therefore double U XYZ characteristic function chromatic number chi Xi . how about a funny bow and string method string theory cave man particle wave ST symmetry ring ring ring ring. agni/Ignatius carl jung symbols of transformation masters corrupted works pride [?]

[@simongleaden2864]

09:04 to skip the tedious introduction.

[@williamfitzpatrick6369]

Um Uh Jeez

[@stewartbrands]

So called "black holes" are only hypothesised by a few people. That doesn not meant they exist or could exist. It is like physic's superhero. Completely speculative. The salary for those sitting around speculating them is real and comes from your tax dollars.

[@pauldavidhaynes8243]

Hes great and probably will go down in history as great as Einstein, but damm he's far from smooth to listen too at times..

[@austinlevan5885]

Hes old and trying to speak to an audience who are not physics phds or experts in his field?

[@pauldavidhaynes8243]

@@austinlevan5885 I love him, but I dont think he's ever been a brilliant public speaker. Age is against him now, I guess he was abit better when he was younger.

[@rd264]

why is roger saying all this?

[@nwogamesalert]

Why does an opera singer sing?

[@friedrichschopenhauer2900]

I hate these intros.

[@nwogamesalert]

Yes they are boring, but it is the only part I understand. The rest is a bit like modern Jazz or twelve tone music in my ears, sometimes I even listen to it.

[@schmetterling4477]

It is obvious that Penrose doesn't know much about the history of quantum mechanics. The double slit experiment wasn't the reason why it had to be developed. Atomic and molecular spectra were. Thermal radiation was. The photoelectric effect required it. Technically, and this is quite a bit more troublesome for Penrose, the double slit experiment is not even a quantum experiment. It works with water waves just as well. It works with sound waves. It works with any kind of wave phenomenon and it does not, at any time, require Planck's constant for its explanation. That alone should give a physicist pause to call it a quantum experiment.

[@brendawilliams8062]

Triangulation is the reason for the discrepancies in their proper use.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@brendawilliams8062 Random assemblies of words are the sign of the troll. ;-)

[@brendawilliams8062]

@@schmetterling4477 I am not a troll. I am trying to learn something.

[@schmetterling4477]

@@brendawilliams8062 What's the question? ;-)

[@brendawilliams8062]

@@schmetterling4477 I do my own research. I don’t have any particular goal. I comment a lot. Sometimes I get extra yt help.

[@johnmiller7453]

gay

[@gerhardmoeller774]

Not that there’s anything wring with that!

[@gerhardmoeller774]

Also... He introduced himself as Dr. Blah blah..... Only podiatrists, optometrists, chiropractors, and PhDs in ”education” feel the need to impress others with the title Dr.

[@0ooTheMAXXoo0]

Or, if you are not trying to impress anyone you just use the titles for descriptive purposes, like when you are doing introductions.

[@johnmiller7453]

@@gerhardmoeller774 Of course not Kramer

[@janklaas6885]

🇺🇳58:25 😒

[@qqqqqqqqqq7488]

The absolute worst description of the double slit experiment that i have EVER heard.

[@DJThorb]

great stuff but very hard to handle the lecture. He is absolutely terrible at it.

[@NondescriptMammal]

For sure. He goes on so many little tangents that it's incoherent and incomprehensible. I really enjoy his writings and his novel approach to science, but he gives a terrible lecture.

[@rsb3609]

Way too much babbling by SIr Penrose..... It is time to stick to painting pictures.

[@patrickbrennan2864]

What a bunch of rambling disconnected nonsense