The Doom of Space Time (Dinner at the University of Oxford) - Nima Arkani-Hamed

[@Raw799]

Look, I'm a bus operator in Los Angeles. I love science, exploration and philosophy. Any attempts in furthering my knowledge in these respective fields have been earned by many hours of reading and rereading. Thank you for providing such mind blowing content. I look forward to listening to all your uploads. Gracias!

[@nasrinmotlagh9068]

👌

[@nasrinmotlagh9068]

I live in OC maybe one day I hop into your bus and talk about Nima, he is very enjoyable. I agree with you 💯

[@jessewallace12able]

I like it!

[@climbeverest]

I love him!!

[@X-boomer]

having listened to many talks about string theory, quantum geometry and loop quantum gravity, I think this Nima Arkani-Hamed is either the only person who really understands what it all actually means or else he is the only person who can adequately explain it.

[@ubah1337]

+Ralph Clark There is no possible way of adequately describing anything 'quantum' without introducing its mathematical formalism, thus i'd go with neither

[@X-boomer]

+Ma Te I have been shown the mathematical formulism. any fool can do that. That's not what I meant by "mean".

[@inspiration1883]

Ralph Clark Do you think he is a genius ? I like him, when he talk he makes everything so easy to understand.

[@X-boomer]

Yes, NAH easily qualifies as a genius. Another guy to watch is Erik Verlinde who is working in the same field, although he tends to speak to a more mathematical audience. Sean Carroll is the best at explaining abstruse theoretical physics concepts to non mathematicians. I also want to mention that Roger Penrose is thrilling and easy to follow. Look up his mindblowing lectures on Conformal Cyclic Cosmology.

[@inspiration1883]

Ralph Clark thanks for your suggestions.

[@fungiside]

An accessible peek at the future of theoretical physics. Well worth watching, but best watched after the previous two videos.

[@shirleymason7697]

I totally enjoyed this, and in some strange manner benefitted from, though I have no science background.

[@Maxinator11-11]

Nima's enthusiasm and personality make the topic fascinating.

[@jayabalamurugan974]

Space-time is in conjunction with the intensity of different degree of gravity. Different space-time in different gravitational zone.no space-time if there is no gravity/levity.nima's fantastic lecture .

[@afifakimih8823]

This guy is purely brilliant...!!

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

Thanks regards from all of you , thanks Nima for your perfect explanation and hard work around subjects, and scientifi Ways of teaching to the others, I’m proud of you, all the best . Thanks

[@雪鷹魚英語培訓的領航]

It's encouraging to hear that there are a ton of areas of inquiry that scientists know are a gold mine for exploration.

[@grantbayliss6128]

I don't understand much of what he is saying, but I am so grateful that he does.

[@nbob6186]

Some nice insight here, emergent time is one of my favourite questions. Unfortunately I haven't got a clue how one even does physics in this paradigm. It's easy to write down periodic or fractal states, but it doesn't seem possible to describe systems that are non-deterministic but do not evolve.

[@jalalkhosravi6458]

he considers all aspects of knowledge for his talking that is great

[@shirleymason7697]

Some of you commenters are so brilliant, I wonder that you were not invited, instead of Dr. Armenia-Hamed, to give the talk. I'm sure he would gladly take the break and step aside.

[@dontgetmadgetwise4271]

LOL Well said Shirley.

[@biller2000]

I am very happy to hear that people are starting to think beyond the theory of relativity and they are also challenging Einstein‘s theories, because I think he himself would want us to move beyond his ideas, and to rearrange ideas into something that is beyond what he could have conceive and comprehend in his own mind. I get the feeling people are afraid to challenge his ideas and push beyond them. I think we have gotten stuck!

[@BrandonSL500]

Didn't get any of it. Need the dumbed down version with animation :)

[@villageidiot2254]

This video is from 8 years ago!!?? Wtf YT algo? Trying to keep me delayed?

[@TheMrasifali]

This is a real-life Cisco Ramon!

[@walterbishop3668]

It takes some balls to have an speech in front all these people .

[@motherofallemails]

Why, are they better than him?

[@BarriosGroupie]

He's a lecturer by profession

[@robertflynn6686]

I believe Nima is 100% correct on those comments . Quantum gravity. I think John von Neumann had spelled out the ways to do the transitions you discussed in the older dinner. Its the altering of logics. Neumann claimed classical is limited to boolean algebraic logics of observation. Transitions to quantum cases is done at the limits of noneuclidean logics of observation. Makes logics = observations. quantum logics was developed by Neumann and Birkhoff. All of this was written in book called 'quantum geometry'. What alters logics for gauges from/to affine connection limits comes next. Finally logics* for joining quantum logics and gauges to other nonboolean logics limits at zero or infinity. It may be infinite dimensional cases such as ' infinite lie-backland ' algebras for logics* at superlow temperatures not high energy. Logics should come in at limits before the mathematics is designed. Math, logics, circuitry, and physics are all interdependent with geometries and observations. Thats how I see the next step into the Planck domains beyond classic or quantum physics ; its at infinite or zero boundaries or limits,, where laws come and go as to lagrangian formulations is concerned.

[@capoeirastronaut]

"There is no future. There is no past. Do you see? Time is simultaneous, an intricately structured jewel that humans insist on viewing one edge at a time, when the whole design is visible in every facet." -Dr Manhattan

[@naimulhaq9626]

I am not smarter than Newton, Einstein, Feynman etc., but I am fortunate enough to have heard Nima speak, who gave me the insight all the great men dreamed to hear, but did not.

[@dlwatib]

Well, the visualization of Space as empty is obsolete. It's filled with dark energy, much more dark energy than all the visible energy and matter in the universe. What if Time is a force generated by Space that pushes us forward away from the past and into the future? Not only is Space curved around heavy objects, but Time turns those curves into spirals.

[@Apollyon-sz9sn]

Entropy is the causation of time, that is understood, you obviously don't understand what this talk is about.

[@cobblebrick]

Ever heard of Minkowski space? I suggest you start from there

[@zaidsserubogo261]

How is variant change and invariant change taught at undergraduate level?

[@slyy4096]

Was pleased to hear I'm not alone. * forget what you knew * respect Tegmark e.g. / keep open mind Is there a name for a space of orthogonal radii? In 2D it's toroid. Perhaps it's hypertoroid. Imagine smallest/fastest piece as 1 revolution per tick (Planck time e.g.), info about last tick can't be lost, so it instantly develops orthogonal direction (extra dimension, perhaps relative time), which can be slower. And as it starts rolling (creating dimensions) anything, but reasonable, can emerge. Harder to project it all in mind, easier to build simulation program tho.

[@AndyNastas40403]

It provides a tractable of "mirror symmetry"

[@ANGEL-eh6pd]

Thank you

[@ANGEL-eh6pd]

Well, I'm just curious about connecting connecting the theory to the human personality. Just curious about the connections.......

[@numbstuffpeoplesay9309]

@@ANGEL-eh6pd yes. Game theory Stanford experiments Decentralisation of economic relationships.

[@Etimespace]

i just wonder. Did i found out how universe works?!?

[@jimmyfaulkner1855]

Doesn’t this disprove materialism? Matter is concrete objects that have volume in space and time. If space and time are not fundamental then matter is also not fundamental. Hence, materialism is false?

[@numbstuffpeoplesay9309]

If you mean determinism by saying materialism then yes . Matter is not fundamental.

[@lucyoriginales]

Is this just our “time”, right?

[@alistair_maldacena]

Bostrom sitting up front and center... I would love to hear a conversation between him and Nima!

[@alistair_maldacena]

@@ProxyAuthenticationRequired Haha yes, very likely. But Bostrom would make no distinction. The simulated Bostrom would simply be all the Bostrom there ever was.

[@lucyoriginales]

😱😱 😱 😱 😱 Omg! My brother Nima is been set at a nursing home? 🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭🤭

[@gammaraygem]

"a point has no dimensions. A line is made up of points." then i understood everything and ventured into understanding Consciousness. The one super radical thing that needs to be done, is that theoretical physicists have to commit the ultimate crime: they need to find the vantage point of pure Consciousness. In themselves. If they understand QT, they will have to come round to this position at some point. Stop this ever rattling instrument they use (thought) and come to complete inner silence and pure awareness. From this unbiased observation, a new matth will emerge that makes it all simple. For now, they are wasting a lot of time.

[@JJRiot]

I've been exploring space and the lack thereof within Non-duality. That quote at the top is an incredible pointer

[@bobs2809]

This is what Emanuel Kant said a few hundred years ago.

[@numbstuffpeoplesay9309]

which work?

[@michaelhoulahan8300]

Nima love you🌹💋🙏

[@mba321]

Back when people were still allowed to be within 6 feet of one another.

[@ronaldpokatiloff5704]

quantum gravity is projecting 3D objects from inside a sphere. Then time is the projection speed of forming mass inside an empty dark and airless spherical enclosure, after the big bang.

[@djtan3313]

Wow

[@god_damn9661]

when u are in the wrong place at 5:10 the guy bottom left: i came here for dinner...wtf this guy is telling us... ...i wanna eat dude come on...hey bring some chicken fingers for me and a glass of quarks and a dish of strings for Nima!!!!!!!!!!

[@emilianocorradi4079]

Awesome

[@danohyeah5893]

it's kind of awkward without a blackboard and projector.

[@pfekk]

I find 14 bilion years old and at the same time be 92 billion light years across rather an odd comparison. Forteen billion years old is undersrandable, the word across implies a radius or an diameter or a circumference and an edge. When I went to school, I was told there was no edge to the observable universe.

[@mstreech]

There is no known edge. The 92 billion light years is due to the universe expanding faster than the speed of light so overall size in the macro universe is not an accurate representation of age strictly speaking.

[@schmetterling4477]

Then you were told wrong. You would be correct that the age of the universe is, more or less, the only physically somewhat meaningful number if we apply a reasonable level of physical realism to the situation. The distances are not actually measurable, but the local cosmological time is. Be that as it may, the observable universe is finite both in space and time and always will be.

[@DerMacDuff]

Awekward atmosphere because of this "dinner" theme.

[@sagellivokin]

It's completely unnecessary.

[@bombus2660]

Believing in space time might be like us once believing that the earth was the centre of the universe whilst trying to explain the movement of the planets.

[@bombus2660]

Oh, please do explain.

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

Some areas of science, is private

[@davidwilkie9551]

AdS Cosmological Constants.., the cause-effect, conformal coincidence of i-reflection/(turning insideout=> instantaneous reciprocal, temporal "mathematical" logic function), inflection = total internal reflection/interference, the Quantum Operator projection drawing wave-package of temporal Superposition-point Singularity cause-effect of e-Pi-i resonance imaging. (An idea partially derived from the Prof's Amplitehedron (de)conception of de Sitter Spacetime? Fun to Imagine..) "Emergent Time", as terminology, can only apply to the effective continuity of structures observably, not to the mechanically implied time duration timing eversion of the Singularity/i-reflection multi-phase continuous creation => vanishing point, the functional delay-> distributed connection of modulated QM-Time, here-eternally-now. (And it's almost the same approach, adding +/-symmetry of metastable stasis, to self-define a description of Entanglement) WYSIWYG continuous creation (partial idea from Fred Hoyle), re-badged -> Timespace. (Same old thing really)

[@MrMollytov]

time to shave

[@da10w4]

UH, UHM, Uh, UHM

[@AA-vs9kh]

🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷

[@DerMacDuff]

STRING THEORY

[@tac6044]

Umm ah umm ahh ahh umm

[@dong.7519]

finally kept it real.. 😉😉😉 I still want my bottle and strippers. .

[@JonathanLangdale]

He's wrong. Super-determinism, if true, destroys his argument. To not even reference it in this talk is stunning.

[@JonathanLangdale]

Ah yes, I see what you're saying. I never thought about it that way. You make a great point, I don't know what I was thinking. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me.

[@JonathanLangdale]

An observer in a super-deterministic system is a limited observer. It is obvious that they cannot know all information about the system. This is like saying a black hole can observe & know itself, which it cannot do. Super-determinism is as much speculation as is non-super-determinism. This is obviously a fundamental and as of yet unanswered question. I am free to speculate that he is wrong and that super-determinism will be measured. There is an experiment devised to test for this using distant cosmological objects. Bell mentioned that his experiment would be impacted if the observer had no choice about setting up the EPR experiment. Arguably, the laws of thermodynamics are evidential support for it. That we cannot predict specific quantum outcome beyond probability is indirect experimental data that we love to suggest deterministic is false because we're in love with the illusion of free will. Despite clear experimental data of human choice being determined by initial conditions that show we have no free will, we continue to reject this. So why would determinism be different? Assuming they successfully performed the cosmological experiment and it showed determinism is true, people would still reject it.

[@georgert]

Jonathan Langdale I am feeling annoyed that the universe decreed that I would be annoyed by reading your comment about a totally speculative concept.

[@JonathanLangdale]

I'm not at all annoyed because it could not have been any other way.

[@numbstuffpeoplesay9309]

He did say something about superdeterminism- around 9:00 he said : we would never be able to measure the observables unless we have a God-like view to the outside of the Universe.

[@AndyNastas40403]

9:03 Jordan Peterson

[@Igdrazil]

Sooooo much BULLSHIT!!! A mad man lost in his video game...

[@rubine2000]

He says nothing

[@jonathonjubb6626]

but he didn't say anything. Well nothing that advanced the state of my knowledge anyway....

[@smittymcjob2582]

his point was: The abstraction called space-time may in fact be what is hindering efforts to reconcile gravity with quantum physics. His suggestion was to maybe look for an abstraction that reduces to space-time under some simplifying assumptions and one that hopefully is obviously related to quantum physics. His point was to suggest a possible path forward to people working towards a solution. I agree that it would be useless to someone like you just waiting to see what them people looking for a solution can come up.

[@Aluminata]

String -ahh...umm...Theory - it's a,uh, ahh... good yarn.

[@Maxinator11-11]

I suppose he never went to Toastmasters to become a perfect professional speaker - he focuses on content.

[@owenpeter3]

I'm sure he can write better than he can speak, at least I hope so.

[@noureddine7729]

@Stephen Crowley you are pathetic

[@1OldWriter]

I gave up one him as he himed and hawed at the beginning. I understand about being nervous but he came off as stupid no matter how intelligent he really is. I consider this kind of speaker a waste of my time.

[@shirleymason7697]

Ed Parachini .......WOW ! I can't believe you said that ! You let your petty annoyance focus on delivery, rather than hear/feel his spontaneity, and his brilliance in arranging thoughts so others, not on his level, will gain something. You try that !

[@shirleymason7697]

Ed Parachini ........the man is not a twit nervous.

[@dontgetmadgetwise4271]

Shirley, please don't let Ed waste YOUR time. As it also did mine! :P

[@timc9372]

Just F*** off Trumper !!