String Theory, Quantum Gravity and Black Holes (Or, Are We Holograms?)

[@rdotthakidd2001]

Hey I’m a 20 year old kid who never had the money for school but I teach my self about these theory’s and I love to watch you alot Mr. Briangreen

[@reimannx33]

Stop fishing for compliments. Use of "theory's" in this context is wrong. Start with learning the basics of grammer first. Thanks to joy for correcting my typo.

[@pseudocalm]

First of all, how dare you talk #$^! to a young man enjoying physics content. Absolutely pathetic. Get lost. @@reimannx33

[@pseudocalm]

2nd, keep it up man. I'm 39 and have been teaching myself physics for over 10 years now. I would suggest that you keep exposing yourself to the highest level content you can sit through, and don't shy away from looking at the math any time it's shown, even if you don't know what it all means at first. I can tell you for a fact that these subjects start to really take shape in your mind over time either way, and it is possible to even get intuitive understandings for aspects of the math over time, with or without the ability to do a calculus problem on paper. But if you ever feel the desire to jump into the math, don't let anything hold you back. Especially grumpy idiots like ^ that guy with a chronic case of backpfeifengesicht, no doubt. (probably also don't start with string theory though, in terms of math, lol)

[@pseudocalm]

Oh yea, and something that helped me a LOT. Whenever you hear a statement that creates a question in your mind, or you don't understand something but you are able to formulate that confusion into the form of a question, ---- write it down! ---- You will be shocked at how often and quickly those questions get answered over time, if you have the wherewithal to jot them down or at least ask them out loud when they pop up. Sometimes I can be struggling with a concept or a line that a physicist says that throws me, for an hour, and then within 60 seconds of writing it down, my brain clicks and says "you already know the answer to this one, you just forgot x y z aspect of it" or "don't you remember so and so was explaining this in that video you saw 3 weeks ago, go find it." It's also educational fun to look back at your own questions from 1 year ago, 2 years ago, and you will realize just how much more interesting they have become over time, as you add to your base level knowledge.

[@reimannx33]

@@pseudocalmYou are a rambling, over the hill, "pseudo-physics" student rolling in past failures, and trying to convince self that denial is the best strategy. Quite the comic.

[@mmmao0630]

It’s great when both the interviewers and interviewees know their shit extremely well

[@Starlite4321]

Just gotta say this: something I really like about Brian Greene is that even though he has opinions on the topic his interview subject is discussing and could easily BE the one being interviewed at any moment, he carefully doesn't interrupted his guests and lets them say what they have to say in their own way. As obvious as it is that doing so is literally the POINT of interviewing guests, almost NO ONE who does it seems to be able to get out of the way. The great Terry Gross of course is the absolute master of interviewing and Brian Greene is just like her in this respect. Thanks Brian.

[@Blackbird58]

I'll watch it again-I feel compelled to try to understand some of this stuff but it makes my head hurt like nothing else I've ever encountered! Brian Greene is a RockStar!

[@Mars-l6f]

This video is LOVED by Physics students from St. Finian's College Secondary School Mullingar Co. Westmeath Ireland

[@rwitmer22]

Fun to watch Brian squirm/reach a bit. I like Juan's attitude: He's like, "Whatever." I love how modest and diplomatic they are when discussing these concepts.

[@macysondheim]

You mean these nonsense and unproven bogus speculations? None of what they are discussing has been proven in a lab. Green is an outspoken atheist, who’s gone on public record stating how he sees no place for God , Christ & the Bible being taught in public classroom. So why should be allow you Brian’s “theories” to be taught as fact? Atheism is being taught as standard religion in the classroom today, where young students are brainwashed into such concepts like “big bang” -A magical explosion which came from nothing, or that all humans are just holographs on a giant TV screen, or how we should spend our time workshopping men like Richard Hawkins, instead of Christ. (Richard Hawkins publicly stated how he wishes for the cross on the Bible to be replaced with a picture of himself… let that sink in for a second…)

[@MoshkitaTheCat]

Can’t get enough of this episode. Two brilliant minds.

[@bmx44forever]

energy = mass 1 light year = 5.88 trillion miles holographic universe = ephemeral universe permanent universe = quantum particles general relativity vs quantum mechanics = Brian Greene + Juan Maldacena

[@naim84]

I think it is fair to say that the smaller we go, the more complex the Universe is, and this phenomenon is relative across the board. I would suggest that the puzzle is infinitely long. If String Theory is the only mathematically possible explanation, these idea's should be pushed to exhaustion, or until someone develops a radicaly better theory. As it stands the scientific explanations are incomplete, and unsatisfactory, which leaves more space in the human mind to seek for alternatives.There is a balance and a breaking point but we're not there yet, therefore this cannot be deemed as unproductive time spent. Keep up the good work!

[@tehdebil]

Great discussion, Brian, you're an excellent interviewer asking the right questions in the right way that allows us laypeople to enjoy the interaction without dumbing it down too much

[@zstrizzel]

Hard to imagine anyone doing a better job of this interview.

[@hochathanfire0001]

Thanks Brian for not shying away from the nuance involved with the field 😤😎.

[@PlanetXMysteries-pj9nm]

"Your videos always leave me in awe and eager to learn more about the mysteries of the universe. Thank you for fueling my curiosity. "

[@ThomasMurphy-p2f]

Maldacena is brilliant, and Brian adeptly accesses his wisdom.

[@atticuswalker8970]

do you want to help me find a reason to discredit an idea to unify gravity. I have had no luck finding one yet. so far everything fits.

[@Blue-ik8ij]

​@@atticuswalker8970Einstein's theory of gravity is just not consistent with quantum mechanics. And can't be made most probably because the underlying principles in both the theories are radically different.

[@atticuswalker8970]

@@Blue-ik8ij but the observations as fact. do support most of the current theory. so people have faith in them. forget to stay objective. refuse to consider my idea that fits everything we can observe.

[@atticuswalker8970]

@@Blue-ik8ij I can tell you how it works and you can reject it on principle. but not with reason or observable fact. odds are you will just stop trying to use faith to persuade me. or just not respond out of fear of feeling stupid if you are wrong. call me stupid. like Republicans do. when I am just trying to help

[@ThomasMurphy-p2f]

I'm not sure how to interpret your question, so I'll just mention some impressions strengthened by the interview. I've come to regard quantum to cosmic phenomena as ubiquitously emergent experience of boundlessly evolving complexity. In other words, probabilistic quarks underlie everything from energetic potential to materialization hosting wildest imaginings. Both his ADS/CFT equivalence and the holographically entangling ER = EPR realization point to this. Juan's elucidation of complexifying black holes strikes me as vividly describing ubiquitously emergent quarks, underlying all of perception. Universal emergence is detectable as the forces of nature. Among them gravity, readily observable in macroscopic specificity, attenuates to undetectability at probabilistic quantum scale. The holographic imagery inspires a lucid vision of the emergence of the evolving complexity of universal experience. Tom Murphy

[@onioni111111]

Dear professor Greene, how does a string maintain the same vibration indefinitely without becoming a different string? What determine how it will vibrate?

[@whatilearnttoday5295]

Glad to see Holographic Universe Theory getting some side-ways mentions.

[@hibou-cool2]

Trying to learn through this amazing content! This is a hobby for me, I don’t expect to become an expert, but it’s so fascinating. I truly appreciate people like Brian Green that are socializing sciences, and feel grateful to have access to this library of content. I cannot believe how much fascinating it would be for someone that put the effort to learn the mathematics… maybe someday! Thank you

[@judymiles7186]

I'm with you! These World Science Festival videos are educational and many are exciting to learn from. You do not have to have the "mathematical formalism" to learn from this particular video. That's the point.

[@judymiles7186]

@@EdruezziHow quaint of you, or is it simply pure narcissism?.

[@VladiArd]

Maldacena me llena de orgullo como nos representas en el mundo, realmente un icono para mucho, un abrazo desde nuestra querida patria!

[@schmetterling4477]

He is also 100% wrong. At least he is not going to start WW III like Trump will. ;-)

[@pantelischristidis4198]

I liked Brian,s comment that juan Maldacena was diplomatic about loop quantum gravity

[@Photonphantom]

Hello everyone, i dont want to show off but , I'm 11 and very interested in learning theories describing our universe so thankyou for this discussion .

[@KroumAntov]

Thank you for this video discussion and your position. We need to continue to push the frontier of knowledge further.

[@steliosp1770]

Thank you for the stream/video Brian. Have a great weekend!

[@johnkechagais7096]

The limit of information within a surface is that of an event horizon for a black hole. the holographic principle would rely on there being a limit of mass that can be within a specified volume before it collapses to a black hole. The curvature limit of space aligns with the information basis of QM.

[@sheph1145]

I like Brian Greene, I do. However, the best part of this watch was the fact that string theorists are slowly going on the back foot, defensive. 40 years and not a single prediction. All the great leaps forwards had instant or rapid applications. How much longer will this be the focus? I'm not saying bin it. I'm just saying maybe it's time to start at the basics again ❤

[@hochathanfire0001]

Juan kept it simple, and to the point. I appreciate that 🔥😊.

[@slayerxyz0]

Thank you for this interview. This is probably the most interesting and understandable conversation I've seen on string theory and AdS/CFT for someone without a formal understanding of modern physics.

[@sergeyyatskevitch3617]

Less interruption would do nicely. This way Dr. Maldacena, would have a better chance to present his thoughts.

[@marfmarfalot5193]

Gotta stay on track its not like that

[@peterpalumbo1963]

As to string theory, the progression from loop quantum gravity to string theory to general relativity is pretty fantastic.

[@antonioprando8380]

firstly, recent research has shown that Einstein’s theories of relativity hold up when tested against the gravitational pull of the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy. this is an exciting development in the field of astrophysics and could lead to new discoveries about the nature of black holes and the universes.. secondly, the time it takes for humans to accept new ideas can vary widely depending on the idea and the context in which it is presented. some ideas are quickly embraced by society, while others as E.V. take generations to gain widespread acceptance. this is often due to factors such as cultural norms, political climate, and the availability of information. however, it’s important to remember that progress is not always linear, and that even ideas that were once considered radical can eventually become mainstream...

[@Prabhakar-gf2oq]

Thank you both Dr. Green and Dr Valmaldeseana for the wonderful discussion . Being a non physics person I did not understand a lot of things disxussed but certainly stimulated my interest .May be further discussion will help me to understand string theory better .Please keep up the good work!

[@Dr.CandanEsin]

I have an enormous respect to Dr Green, though it may be underestimated that there is non-native English-speaking audience. Frequent interruptions and self-reflecting suggestive questions distract me heavily. Being a medical doctor not a physicist these presentations fulfill my curiosity. Would it be possible to let guests present their opinions a little more uninterrupted and free flowing?

[@Ali-e5h1b]

48:03 - This is juicy. It sounds like some of the branes and fields persist in transmitting information fwd / bwk in time, and via entanglement (location).

[@bigbear7567]

I always enjoy listening to your guest. Great video as always!!!!!

[@oldoddjobs]

I would love to hear what Maldacena has to say on these topics

[@tpot725]

Thank you both!

[@TheMemesofDestruction]

1:10:57 - Groovy! ^.^

[@radical137]

I was hoping for a more ambitious exploration of ER = EPR. ADS to CFT is frickin brilliant. I know Juan is on to something good but he might be feel the a bit nervous revealing a fairly radical idea. All I can say is, "Go for it!" and don't stop, keep following through with the idea and explore it all the way through. Haters are gonna hate.

[@malihemohamadi3697]

Thank you very much for the great Video

[@rocky5152]

My word what a bunch of aholes in the comments section. Why cant people be respectful to each other? Just because you hide behind a fake name doesnt give you any right to be so rude to each other. Ill just watch this excellent program and ignore the aholes from now on. I encourage others to do the same.

[@DavidJohnson-pp4sy]

Well said. But that's the price of anonymity.

[@rustysim]

Juan is legendary too

[@JustinBerthelot-k9n]

Great job guys . Loved watching this tonight . Thank you for your knowledge and wisdom . Helping us all to understand and experience the greatness of your life's work it is greatly appreciated.

[@canalterapia6938]

Very good intervew!! Did you like??? Like it

[@petermountain5852]

Hey Brian. If entropy of a black hole is determined by its surface area and not its volume then it sounds to me that space/time is indeed "flat" (2D). Therefore using entanglement (photon spin), there is nothing stopping us from shooting photon through the event horizon and "reading" what is inside when the corresponding photon (our side) changes after some event inside the event horizon.

[@DevilMaude64]

I have been binge-watching your videos and I have been learning so much. I have a rather trivial question: what does the artwork behind Prof. Greene represent? Thank you for bringing knowledge to the masses.

[@jp7357]

I find virtual particles appearing and affecting the electron magnetic moment amazing, I find reality being based in 10 dimensions less shocking. I find the analogy you gave in a different talk that the size of a string compared to an atom is similar to a size of a tree compared to the size of the universe … omg …

[@life42theuniverse]

I had a thought. When space of a black hole collapses, what happens to plank constant? How can you squeeze more energy into the same/smaller space? Expel it into parallel complex space?

[@250txc]

Get out of here ...

[@Robinson8491]

I saw ER=EPR in a 1994 book by Tim Maudlin, and he said it was already tentatively mentioned a couple of times by some professors in the eighties. But of course there is a difference between an idea and having it worked out

[@robhappier]

HI @Robinson9714 ! What do think of my idea? Gravity = The Spaceless and Timeless Vacuum Energy State of Matter!!! :)

[@0.618-0]

Fantastic Discussion! Thankyou. How does the ADS CFT paradigm apply to the similarities displayed between the Two-Slit Experiment and Gravitational Lensing?

[@center__mass]

thank goodness for Brian trying to get blood out of a stone here

[@ywtcc]

I find the dimensional reduction argument to be interesting. In computer science, everything can be expressed one dimensionally - as an arbitrarily long string of bits, given an appropriately complex interpretive device. My thought is if the language we describe the universe in has this property, then perhaps a theory of the universe may also have this property - that dimensionality starts at one, then can be added or removed for interpretive convenience. Another interesting property of this computer science language, is that everything is based on logical bits. On the expressive side, this is simply the ability to hang two different symbols on a string, and on the interpretive side, this implies logical differentiability between two meanings. In physics, these differentiable meanings don't show up as simple two state binaries, but as complementary pairs. These kinds of precision/accuracy trade offs, and uncertainties, are the hallmark of scientific (rather than purely logical) reasoning. I'm not even sure it's possible to have a theory of everything physics, but I think it helps to think about a theory of everything scientific as perhaps the next best thing. We might actually get to the meta theory first.

[@ywtcc]

So, as an axiomatic starting point, one might propose two experimentally differentiable symbols A, B such that when measured dA*dB>=c, where c is some constant. c represents an admission of some amount of unknowability, however small in comparison to the scales of A and B. I think this admission of a non zero c in physical logic is essential to engaging in the most precise, comprehensive scientific reasoning. I suppose the idea I'm playing with is that Heisenberg's insights have deep metaphysical meaning - it gets to the heart of observability, which is critical to experimental verification, and quantitative differentiability, or the ability to be interpreted. In a way, it describes science as a game of chasing a will o' the wisp of unknowability. It's the paths described by the chase that are the product of this activity. Catching a will o' the wisp was never going to happen, that wasn't the point. We knew it was this kind of game when we started, or else it would have been a solved mathematical problem, instead of a scientific problem.

[@MilkonDvD]

Love Brian greene

[@MrJPI]

At 20:50 Juan says: "It might be the world is not quantum mechanical at those (Planck) scales". Doesn't that arose doubt that string theory has wrong (or uncertain) starting point when it tries to quantice the near Planck scale strings using QM?

[@andreavarini9531]

Hello everyone. I am a Hp guy from nowhere. First of all thank you to Brian to be an ambassador for the scientific fiend to the latest opinions of the world concerning all matters of the latest theories of the being of everything. Without him we would feel much poorer for the communication of the latest theories of the reality. Although my opinion is that we are overcomplicating the description of the nature of the universe. Obviously Einstein made his mistakes, but his general theory of relativity stands by the method of proof. All these theories remain theories and dreams to me. I understand dreaming is necessary to eventually prove anything new, but this seems like a stretch. String theory does not seem like the answer since the nature has always been proven to be simpler to what we believe it is since Copernicus. Do we have the courage to consider sharper, new creative, simpler new theorems nowadays? I do not think so. Let's at leats consider new solutions to be proven by young, new generation ideas to be proven according to the mathematical method. We have new great technological instruments that can be exploited. Thank you for your consideration & good day to everyone.

[@Alex-js5lg]

"Nature has always been proven to be simpler to what we believe it is" - uhhhhh... quantum superposition/fluctuations, wave-particle duality, dark energy, chaos theory, epigenetics, consciousness... what comparable theories are these concepts "simpler than"?

[@williambunting803]

That was interesting listening, thanks to both of you. A little frustrating in that when I hear talk about the inside of Black Holes, in the thinking that Gravity is a property of the energy interactions within the Higgs Field, gravity cannot exist inside Black Holes to any depth, and so there is no singularity. Gravity ends at the Higgs Field event horizon of a Black Hole at one end and at the Quark energy event horizon at the other. What it also says is that where energy is applied to a particle to accelerate it to near the speed of light, the Kinetic energy accumulated by the particle is visible as “phantom” matter so where this matter can be “created”, at the LHC for instance, a small LIGO module in close proximity to the Proton Beam should be able to detect an increase in Higgs Field energy as a Gravitaional Variation relative to the background Field Energy. Depending on the arrangement I think that the laser should exhibit a red shift as the protons in the beam approach the speed of light. In the so doing this might also demonstrate that Dark Matter might be explained as Phantom Matter, or variations in the Deep Space Gravitation due to variations in Higgs Field Energy Intensity Gradient.

[@gregoryfsifuentes]

Thanks brian😅

[@j_t_p]

This conversation was certainly stimulating at a personal level but they seemed oblivious to what is happening elsewhere. Its pretty abstract but at least acknowledged the effects of COVID to these type broadcasts in previous episodes was a factor. Not so much right now with the world turned upside-down concerning the Israel-Hamas turmoil. Must be the "multiverse effect" that Brian Greene and thier hosts have no idea about. What planet do they live on? Would like to go there - things are getting heated up here, right now. Nice show.

[@darbrad3952]

Great talk. Thank you

[@darwinlaluna3677]

Thank you

[@markoszouganelis5755]

Thank you Science! 🌈

[@rokubilly]

Juan Maldacena lives somewhere on the boundary of the Universe. My head is spinning.

[@Pawleto9450]

HEY Dr. Bryan Green I follow you a lot. Here I have heard you saying as a physics major in your first degree the instructirs did not mention quantum entanglement. How about the EPR was it inclusive in the curriclum back then?

[@betauser6233]

Funny how my first science book was The Elegant Universe lol so I actually learned string theory and quantum before newton 😂

[@Ali-e5h1b]

Technically, you learned it after him. You might have learned it at an earlier age, but without time travel you did not learn it before him.

[@gerardbiddle1808]

The discussion here reminds me of Aquinas’ question of “How many angels can sit on the tip of a needle?” 🙂😇 26:39 !! I guess as many as you like! Maybe we are now in the metaphysical??? 😁. Thank you both for this marvellous discussion. I look forward to the black hole description of entropy in the black hole to disentangle the connection between Einstien’s connected geometry dilemma. 1:18:43 ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️. Have a joyous Thanksgiving weekend and festive and inspirational Christmas season. 💥💥💥💥💥👏👏👏👏 1:24:50

[@virupakshawalla5734]

Science is defined new mythology. Mathematics formula the mantras.

[@stenblann9784]

Entanglement is a necessity to monitor and maintain uniformity across the expanding universe, a homeostasis mechanism in a delta universe. A simple, as yet incomprehensible, instantaneous response system without which the universe as we know it would probably not exist???

[@KristianMangieri]

This one is a banger! He is so sharp

[@roelrovira5148]

Brian and Juan, we now have a working Quantum Theory of Gravity that is testable and complete with reproducible empirical experiments with the same results if repeated over and over again and again, confirmed by empirical observations in nature with 7-Sigma level results, guided by empirical laws and physical/mathematical equations that are predictive and precise. FYI: Quantum Gravity or Quantum Gravitation have three types that are equivalent to and manifested by Quantum Gravitational Entanglement - a Quantum Entanglement at Macroscopic Cosmic Scale namely: 1. Quantum Anti-Gravity = Spin Up Quantum Entanglement State; 2. Quantum Neutral Gravity = Superposition Quantum Entanglement State; and 3. Quantum Gravity = Spin Down Quantum Entanglement State. More detailed information could be found on the published papers 2 years ago in London, Paris, and Zurich, online and at the two scientific Journals ACADEMIA and REAL TRUE NATURE or alternatively, you can google the name of the author ROEL REAL ROVIRA

[@s4ulyaniv35]

"You're a physicist Brian" ⚡️

[@NoLuv4Hoz]

Just like your favorite rapper's favorite rapper, Juan Maldacena is probably your favorite physicist's favorite physicist. Hear ye him!

[@schmetterling4477]

He's not nature's favorite physicist, though. ;-)

[@AdamGNordin]

Professor Greene compose music, by stretching my intuitive creativity past the speed of light inside 2 black holes at the same time insanity is locked down in a different universe than where our stars is observed.

[@ariessweety8883]

Smh UGH🤯😵‍💫💥FANTASTIC!!💥💥

[@fisheromen18]

this discussion feels like a response to all the hate mail string theory has been getting lately haha

[@goodphone156]

Thank you Brain to bring the physics to us!!

[@miguelalonsoperez5609]

14:00 I’m happy to hear the generational acceptation of intrinsic probabilistic nature of things. I’m 48 years old, not so young but enough to have born in the post-2nd quantization era (and after Franco’s dictatorial regime in Spain, of course!). I grew with Nature articles and other reviews about quantum physics, and when I finally studied QM basics I was conceptually receptive to its core assumptions. But I can imagine how difficult should be on early 20th century to accept undetermined nature of physical laws. And yet we still all have some discomfort with that idea, despite theoretical acceptation: we are beings that want to find exact rules. I think is a mater of survival, the most accurate you predict the position of a predator or the evolution of weather the most chances to survive 😊 Perhaps is something like that, our instincts prefers certainty

[@schmetterling4477]

Why are all you people uncomfortable with Pythagoras? Quantum mechanics is basically the use of Pythagoras for the modelling of the data of a Geiger-Mueller counter. It drops out of a trivial dozen page argument that uses little other than high school level math. ;-)

[@miguelalonsoperez5609]

@ I think you’re totally lost, but keep on trying… 😂

[@schmetterling4477]

@@miguelalonsoperez5609 I am simply feeding a pigeon, my friend. :-)

[@miguelalonsoperez5609]

@ I don’t know exactly what this expression means, but reading another post you wrote on Poincaré group and twin paradox in special relativity, it seems a copy-paste from a source bad understood.

[@DaveRx]

Aguante Juancito, capo!

[@Eye_Exist]

Question: what evidence we have for everything breaking down into 1-dimensional strings? and what evidence do we have for extra dimensions? if we have none, then what validity does string theories have?

[@250txc]

Sounded with Mr. Green was picking Mr. Maldacena brain on subjects of Mr. Green concern...

[@David_7171]

Modest guy. Who’s leading the field of theoretical physics.

[@joshuabarlow9048]

The difficulty of combining QM and Gravity is that they combine in the First Cause Causal choice matrix. Energy/mass in spacetime is shape not force. Your problem is the shape of mass/energy in space time is dependent on future choices made. The problem your having understanding the concepts of Relativity and QM and so chasing a sensible matrix of QM with Gravity is your not understanding the only force being applied is in the First Cause Causal choice matrix and QM and Relativity are shape matrix not force matrix. You might find matrix formulations to more accurately represent the shapes, but you can't get there abandoning Orientation around First cause causal choice which includes you as a conscious actor as genesis of force. The mathematical unification of QM and Relativity is in the testing of Choice as a force of creation. We get this simply by noting the matrix describing first cause choice can be Relative or Newtonian if choice isn't a force of creation. The matrix of physics must be a probability density if choice is a cause. This is tested on both sides with overwhelming evidence. QM is a matrix that shows all information at origin, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent Origin. Whatever formula's you use this is your limit. Non local/ Local description of action is just poor phrasing. You understand QM and Relativity - You don't like that it doesn't mathematically combine so say you don't understand what's causing it.

[@mudarisalanshori7802]

Sangat menarik kajian seperti ini 👍

[@fluxfaze]

Dreams are my Philotic Parallax Instantaneous Communicator, allowing myselves to communicate across multiverses as we seek to understand The Why.

[@paulgannon2338]

I think Robert J. Lang could help with determining shapes. He lives in Altadena CA. He is associated with NASA/JPL in Pasadena CA.

[@mohammadrahimjamshidi79]

AI, in order to improve its performance and prevent undesirable consequences, must continuously interact with “effective rules and stable principles in the realm of existence”. X Mohammad Rahim Jamshidi

[@julandazachary2776]

Great Discussion ‼️🔥💯

[@brendawilliams8062]

Both Scientist are awesome Thank you

[@julandazachary2776]

@@brendawilliams8062 I absolutely concur

[@virupakshawalla5734]

No idea what they are talking about but I like it. Show the maths ❤🙃

[@sandeepkumarkhuntia8839]

Consciousness is the origin of Space and time. Similarly consciousness is the origin of quantum mechanics.

[@darwinlaluna3677]

I am fully aware , my friend brian, trying to test me to show to ur friend,

[@thorsteinssonh]

Is modern understanding of QM that the observer or observation / wave function collapse is due to entanglement ?

[@schmetterling4477]

No, it isn't. It's that only in a modern false understanding of quantum mechanics. ;-)

[@j.lo.5784]

about the area beeing proportional to entropy: it's a bit confusing. Is it always the minimal area (sphere)? how about a space having spikes? then you could have infinite area and infitie entropy.

[@timothy8426]

Heat waves are expelled force of pressure known as decay. Heat expands. Heat is lost by all mass. Heating filaments produce light. Heat is decay of pressure singularities that are outward force. Heat and cold don't mix. Heat accumulates in mass or is refracted as light in resistance. Conservation of maximum momentum velocity in resistance is constant cosmic speed limit of thermaldynamics. Black holes are devoid bubbles of thermaldynamics. Thermaldynamics circling around these bubbles accumulates the thermaldynamics in proximity space. The cold resistance is neutralized in mass. Gravity doesn't work. Vibrations settle into the weakest point of resistance. Proximity mass vibrates towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Mass occupies space as neutralized resistance within it. Mass, no matter the size of the area, is in equalization to resistance within it. Mass occupies space as neutralized resistance and passes through resistance in equalization to resistance. Mass falls in equalization to resistance in atmospheres. Unless acted upon by other thermaldynamics. Only thermaldynamics can disrupt thermaldynamics. Pressure equalization. We know that pressure is equal. If not, it moves to other areas. Density can't exceed resistance within occupational space. Space is cold resistance needed to gelatin thermaldynamics as mass. Physics works. Gravity doesn't work. Galaxies are formed around these bubbles of pure fabric of space itself devoid of thermaldynamics. Thermaldynamics moves through space as singularities waves. When resistance can't be overcome, it becomes particles. Unification of unidirectional flow split by resistance into magnetic fields. Electricity is forced pressure of heat loss rapidly. Lightning is pressure of heat burning through the atmospheres as light, sound, and plasma from vaporized gasses colliding with atmospheres. The gasses burnt from rapidly rising heat create a void that rapidly fills producing thunder. The light is produced by dissolving gases into singularities quantization. Basic heat frequencies vibrate from repulsion from cold space itself. We occupy space. When we lose heat, we vibrate rapidly. We call it shivering. Vibrations. Teeth chatter from heat loss. All mass is heat in resistance and is equal in quantum magnetic fields of forced pressure cycling circulation patterns as mass in equalization to resistance. Equalization of pressure. Force. Heat is the only force universal. All mass loses heat. We vibrate through space as space itself within mass in equalization to resistance until thermaldynamics is lost or accumulates. Magnetic fields show repulsion to forward momentum propulsion from repulsion, reducing distances according to their mass cycling thermaldynamics circulation patterns. We are vibrating through space at our cosmic speed limit in resistance presently. Mass occupies space as it is now. Resistance passing through mass as mass vibrates through space in forward momentum is equalization to resistance within now. If mass was sped up, resistance would strip away our thermaldynamics faster in decay than we could replenish. We would decay or age faster. Stars decay as heat loss as waves of thermaldynamics singularities pass through space until resistance can't be overcome by absorption or refraction as light appears. Light is thermaldynamics singularities hitting resistance. Static electricity. Strikes as sparks. Electricity is forced pressure strikes. There is only positive strikes. Clockwise and counterclockwise. One and the same. There are no negative strikes. There is heat and cold. Pure space bubbles are pure cold. Heat and cold don't mix. Thermaldynamics surrounding these bubbles generate neutralized resistance within as outward pressure of force as energy we call weight. Table of elements proves hypothesis. Hydrogen under extreme pressure expands cold resistance into equalization as helium. More equalization of pressure. More weight. Electrons are electricity strikes. Heat strikes as outward pressure in equalization to resistance as we pass through space and its fabric exchanges within us or mass. Thermaldynamics singularities are the cosmic speed limit in resistance as constant cosmic speed in all masses. The energy of thermaldynamics in elements increases the strikes against resistance within and without entanglement of mass. Thermaldynamics is the variable pressure control system. Galaxies prove hypothesis. Mass is the weakest point of resistance. Circulation cycling patterns created spheres. We know that Vibrations settle into the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Earth is our greatest mass of neutralized weakest resistance. We vibrate towards it. Gravity doesn't work. Otherwise, giant mass here would pull on us. But it doesn't even move your hair. Resistance is always equalization to mass. We pass through space as cold resistance within mass point to point timed interactions of force. Space itself doesn't move. Thermaldynamics moves through space as repulsion to forward momentum propulsion from repulsion. Perpetual motion. Unification of unidirectional flow of thermaldynamics is repulsed by resistance to forward momentum propulsion from repulsion into splitting up into magnetic fields quantization to particles, and accumulation starts forming elements. Table of elements proves hypothesis. Hydrogen under extreme pressure expands into helium. Resistance increases as equalization to pressure of forced redirected trajectories of thermaldynamics into cycling circulation patterns around occupational space itself. Cold resistance bubbles are thermaldynamics blown outward. Spheres are proof of pressure in equalization to resistance. Round planets. Round circulation patterns of galaxies. Density can't exceed resistance within it as occupational space. Space doesn't bend, rip, move, or fold. It is Alpha and Omega. Perpetual motion of physics. It's not fantasy. Physics works.

[@LizKemp-kw3cu]

tl;dr

[@k_a_bizzle]

Tell us how you REALLY feel.

[@jasonsmith373]

Poor Ole Albert...always conflicted.

[@GVbhkg]

สร้างสิ่อที่สร้างระบบสร้างสรรค์จรรโลงใจและโลกที่ได้☮️ลงเอยด้วยนี่เองคือหลักการที่เราหรือใครทั่วโลกได้ใช้สมองใช้หัวคิดให้เต็มที่เต็มเปี่ยมด้วยความที่เป็นผู้นำที่มีประสิทธิภาพมีประโยชน์มีประสบการณ์ที่แท้จริงอย่างได้บทสรุปที่เป็นไปในทางที่ดีทางเดียวกันจนติดเป็นนิสัยที่ดีและเป็นติดอยู่ในใต้สำนึกที่ดีที่สะสมมาตลอดเวลาและจะสืบไปด้วยความดีเอยขอให้มีสุขสมหวังได้ดั่งใจตลอดไปได้ดีได้☮️ด้วยกันคนทั่วโลกเลยนั่นแหละทำไมเราถึงเลือกคิดตามรับชมรับฟังรายการเช่นนี้ว่าด้วยมีความเข้าใจในการใช้ความเป็นมนุษย์ชาติที่พร้อมและสมบูรณ์แบบทุกประการ ทุกประการครับ ใชีขีสิตได้ด้วยดีอย่างครบครันทุกประการ😊😊🎉

[@gordoneldest8462]

Very boring, the interview is high jacked by the interviewer, we can NOT hear what the invite have to say which is very interesting, It’s a extremely annoying.

[@denisjudehaughton7363]

you keep talking about shorter distances and LHC but at shorter distances the velocity would be so slow (since time is fixed) you could actually sit there and observe a collision of the short distance results with the particle chamber wall element, no?

[@NM-er8wk]

Where are swizis? give Brian Nobel prize at least for his services!

[@Lasselucidora]

A short summary: "Please, please, say that string theory is fantastic, I am getting older and long for my youth."

[@Intact-gf5zz]

it is insane to think *anyone* could get that impression from this.. also, string theory *is* fantastic...

[@Lasselucidora]

@@Intact-gf5zz Someone could get that impression. That impression does not make me love these men less. More the opposite.

[@tevuelveloco]

Juan accent sounded familiar 🇦🇷👏🏻

[@philipmaxwell669]

A man and his twin brother say goodbye. The brother goes away to a distant star at a high percentage of the speed of light. The brother then returns. The story was always that the brother who ventured away and came back would age more slowly. However given that everything is relative, how does the universe choose? From each brother’s perspective the other seems to fly away at great speed and then return. Should they both not age at the same rate .?

[@juliavixen176]

Each twin traveled a different interval of 4D spacetime between the departure and reunion -- where and when they are both at the same location in spacetime. (They traveled a different distance in time basically.) That's always the answer to these so-called "Twin Paradox" scenarios. In your question, _somebody_ needs to turn around. (At least one twin, but this still works if both turn around after different amounts of time and distance.) If nobody turns around, the twins will drift apart forever and never meet again. Two straight lines can only intersect once in a flat manifold. You need a closed path, like a triangle. Two sides of a triangle are always longer than the third side. One of the twins travels along one side of the spacetime triangle, and the other twin travels along two sides of the spacetime triangle. These are different amounts of time and space, so each twin's own clock counts a different number of seconds between their departure and reunion. To travel along two sides of a triangle, each side of this triangle represents an inertial reference frame if I didn't already mention this, that twin needs to change inertial reference frames. For a material object, a change in velocity is acceleration. There you go. One twin accelerated to turn around, and the other didn't. That breaks the symmetry. You can also do this with triplets rather than twins, have everyone stay on inertial paths, and then each sibling synchronizes their clocks when they cross paths, and you will still get the same differences in the amount of elapsed time when comparing everyone's clocks to each other.

[@schmetterling4477]

It's just a combination of Doppler effect and signal delay. Let each twin send out a one second clock tick signal. When the travelling twin is outbound both twins are receiving a slowed down clock tick (of the same frequency). As soon as the outbound twin turns around his clock signal becomes faster (it's blue shifted). This happens immediately. The stationary twin, however, keeps receiving the slowed down clock signal of the traveler for a long time because of the finite speed of light resulting in a delay until he notices that the traveler turns around. The stationary twin therefor gets the slowed down clock signal of the traveler for longer than the traveler. Hence the traveler will be aged less when the two clocks are back together at the end of the return. This has NOTHING to do with reference frames. It's a result of having to use the Poincare transformation which is valid for systems that are NOT in the same location to solve the problem and NOT the Lorentz transformation which is only valid for observers in the same location. We are simply not teaching the Poincare transformation enough (even though it is the actual fundamental symmetry transformation of flat spacetime).

[@philipmaxwell669]

@@schmetterling4477 Thankyou so much for your reply. I am going to have to go to university to understand it 😂😂. But I appreciate your reply and I will see if I can get my head around it more

[@schmetterling4477]

@@philipmaxwell669 You are not the only one struggling with it and you would not profit from going to university. Almost everybody who explains it explains it wrong because they went to university. This is a psychological effect that is based on the fact that what we teach (the Lorentz transformation) is NOT the actual physics of relativistic motion. That's the Doppler effect AND the signal delay. You can even hear that in the acoustic case. The direction of the motion matters (inbound higher pitch, outbound lower pitch) and the distance matters (delay in thunder vs. lightning) whereas the Lorentz transformation is independent of direction and distance. That we teach it from the Lorentz transformation angle has formal reasons (it's more useful to theorists who are dealing with equations of motion and field equations) but it does not lead to proper development of physical intuition.

[@miguelalonsoperez5609]

@@schmetterling4477 the twin paradox is not possible to be solved in Minkowskian flat space precisely because Poincaré group action. I saw many bizarre explanations about the tentative to solve the solve the problem in a theory that was formulated only to be local. It took 10 years of Albert Einstein’s life to solve the problem, and was general relativity the theory that gave him the solution. One of the twins is traveling with a different world line in the chart of the manifold describing both twins Universe. This chart provides complete information to integrate the path with its Levi-Civita connection derived from the metric. For example, on can choose the chart of Schwarzschild metric if twins are in some place far but around the Sun, so that gravity is weak and doesn’t account for important time contraction. If one of the twin remains in orbit and the other accelerates go get a trip at high speed around the Sun and then meet the departure point with his brother, the interval length of both twins world lines will be different and unequivocally determined by the chart. No symmetry is possible, one cannot reverse the chart.

[@sharinglanguage]

2 universes connected by entanglement from 2 back holes. But how can those 2 black holes be connected?

[@dougmarkham]

To me~~~perhaps to other people also~~~it's a bit strange trying to unite QM with GR because it's like going from walking the globe straight to building an aircraft capable of global supersonic travel. If it were me, my first goal would be to move from studying homogenous subatomic particles to a heterogeneous mix. Then I'd want to understand how you can get emergent behaviour ie, understand QM as a non-linear theory that can help see the quantum system of larger and larger scales of length. I wonder why people are trying to unite a theory that is used to explain things on a cosmic scale, when understanding the quantum physics of simple chemistry reactions would be easier?

[@schmetterling4477]

For starters, the two problems have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

[@magnushorus5670]

thank you for sharing these wonderful conversations, they really area gift

[@c130comm]

Roger is out there in a good way

[@Danielm103]

awesome!