The quantum age | Curt Jaimungal interviews Michio Kaku

Michio Kaku and Curt Jaimungal discuss the future of computing and the quest for a theory of everything. Will a new generation of computing enable us to uncover the mysteries of the universe?
Watch the full talk at iai.tv/video/the-quantum-age-...
In his new book, Quantum Supremacy, Kaku argues that the next generation of computers will resolve the deepest mysteries at the edge of physics and solve our biggest global problems like climate change, world hunger, and incurable diseases. Quantum computers have the power to solve problems in seconds that classical computers would take eons to deal with. Join Michio Kaku and Curt Jaimungal in this exclusive interview as we enter the Quantum Era and unlock the mysteries of the universe.
#theoryofeverything #quantumphysics #stringtheory
Famed futurist and co-founder of String Field Theory, Michio Kaku has spent his career inspired by the search for a grand unifying theory of everything - carrying on Einstein’s quest to unite the four fundamental forces of nature. His latest book is Quantum Supremacy: How the Quantum Computer Revolution Will Change Everything.
The Institute of Art and Ideas features videos and articles from cutting edge thinkers discussing the ideas that are shaping the world, from metaphysics to string theory, technology to democracy, aesthetics to genetics. Subscribe today! iai.tv/subscribe?Y...
For debates and talks: iai.tv
For articles: iai.tv/articles
For courses: iai.tv/iai-academy/courses

[@classicalmechanic8914]

It is true string theory has no rival. No other theory has attracted so much attention without a single experiment.

[@vaibhavsati538]

because it's the most promising of all

[@Thomas-gk42]

🤣

[@classicalmechanic8914]

@@vaibhavsati538 Can you support your claim with experimental proof?

[@vaibhavsati538]

@@classicalmechanic8914 what's my claim?? That it's promising? I didn't state any facts. I just said it's promising as Michio stated it combines Quantum mechanics and general relativity. You got a better theory?

[@classicalmechanic8914]

@@vaibhavsati538 There is no need for string theory to explain the connection between quantum mechanics and general relativity. The main problem is connecting flat space time of special relativity with curved space time of general relativity. Special theory of relativity is compatible with quantum mechanics while general relativity is not compatible with quantum mechanics.

[@marcobiagini1878]

I am a physicist and I will explain why our scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated by the brain and that the origin of our mental experiences is physical/biological . My argument proves that the fragmentary structure of brain processes implies that brain processes are not a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness, which existence implies the existence in us of an indivisible unphysical element, which is usually called soul or spirit (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations). I also argue that all emergent properties are subjective cognitive contructs used to approximately describe underlying physical processes, and that these descriptions refer only to mind-dependent entities. Consciousness, being implied by these cognitive contructs, cannot itself be an emergent property. Preliminary considerations: the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what exists objectively are only the single elements. In fact, when we define a set, it is like drawing an imaginary line that separates some elements from all the other elements; obviously this imaginary line does not exist physically, independently of our mind, and therefore any set is just an abstract idea, a cognitive construct and not a physical entity and so are all its properties. Similar considerations can be made for a sequence of elementary processes; sequence is a subjective and abstract concept. Mental experience is a precondition for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and cognitive constructs, therefore mental experience cannot itself be a cognitive construct; obviously we can conceive the concept of consciousness, but the concept of consciousness is not actual consciousness. (With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams). From the above considerations it follows that only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, and consequently the only logically coherent and significant statement is that consciousness exists as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because we know that there is a correlation between brain processes and consciousness. This indivisible entity is not physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties; therefore this indivisible entity can be identified with what is traditionally called soul or spirit. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience. Some clarifications. The brain doesn't objectively and physically exist as a mind-independent entity since we create the concept of the brain by separating an arbitrarily chosen group of quantum particles from everything else. This separation is not done on the basis of the laws of physics, but using addictional subjective criteria, independent of the laws of physics; actually there is a continuous exchange of molecules with the blood and when and how such molecules start and stop being part of the brain is decided arbitrarily. Brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a subjective abstractions used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole (and therefore every function/property/capacity attributed to the brain) is a subjective abstraction that does not refer to any mind-independendent reality. Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. However, an emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess; my arguments prove that this definition implies that emergent properties are only subjective cognitive constructs and therefore, consciousness cannot be an emergent property. Actually, all the alleged emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective/arbitrary classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described directly by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option is possible; in this case, more than one possible description). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes. Emergence is nothing more than a cognitive construct that is applied to physical phenomena, and cognition itself can only come from a mind; thus emergence can never explain mental experience as, by itself, it implies mental experience. My approach is scientific and is based on our scientific knowledge of the physical processes that occur in the brain; my arguments prove that such scientific knowledge excludes the possibility that the physical processes that occur in the brain could be a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness. Marco Biagini

[@Timre23.1]

Mate you sure know alot about the brain without having studied neurology..

[@EWischan]

Why are people still giving this guy a platform?

[@EuphoricDan]

We all keep watching.

[@linesandlines612]

It’s the Einstein hair do, he can babble about anything with that.

[@user-kn7yu6pi3z]

The link between the two equations lies in the realm of quantum gravity and string theory. The Einstein Field Equation (Rμν - 1/2Rgμν = (8πG/c^4)Tμν) describes the curvature of spacetime, while the string theory equation (E = mc^2 + (α'/2) ∑_n (α_n α^n + α'^2_n)) describes the energy of vibrating strings. 1. String theory attempts to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity (gravity). 2. The vibrating strings in string theory give rise to particles with mass and energy, which in turn affect spacetime curvature. 3. The Einstein Field Equation can be seen as a low-energy approximation of the more fundamental string theory equations. With this in mind, we can propose a connection between the two equations by introducing a new constant, λ (lambda), which represents the string length scale: λ^2 = α' / (8πG) Using this constant, we can rewrite the string theory equation in terms of the Ricci tensor and scalar: E = mc^2 + (1/2) ∑_n (α_n α^n + λ^2 Rμν + λ^4 R) This equation shows how the energy of vibrating strings (E) is related to the curvature of spacetime (Rμν and R). To further bridge the gap between the two equations, we can use the stress-energy tensor (Tμν) from the Einstein Field Equation to describe the energy and momentum density of the vibrating strings: Tμν = (1/λ^2) ∑_n (α_n α^n + λ^2 Rμν + λ^4 R) This equation demonstrates how the stress-energy tensor, which describes the distribution of energy and momentum in spacetime, is related to the vibrations of the strings and the curvature of spacetime. In summary, the link between the two equations lies in the connection between the vibrating strings in string theory and the curvature of spacetime in general relativity. The proposed equations above demonstrate how these two concepts are related, providing a glimpse into the unification of quantum mechanics and gravity. E = mc^2 + (1/2) ∑_n (α_n α^n + λ^2 Rμν + λ^4 R) Here are a few suggestions for a name for this equation: 1. *Unified Energy-Curvature Equation (UECE)*: This name highlights the equation's role in unifying energy and curvature concepts from string theory and general relativity. 2. *String-Geometric Energy Relation (SGER)*: This name emphasizes the connection between string theory and geometric curvature, as well as the equation's focus on energy. 3. *Quantum Gravitational Energy Spectrum (QGES)*: This name underscores the equation's relevance to quantum gravity and its description of the energy spectrum of vibrating strings. 4. *Curvaton Energy Equation (CEE)*: This name plays off the idea of the "curvaton" field in cosmology and emphasizes the equation's connection to curvature and energy. 5. *Harmonic Unification Equation (HUE)*: This name captures the equation's role in harmoniously unifying different theoretical concepts and its connection to harmonic vibrations of strings. Tμν = (1/λ^2) ∑_n (α_n α^n + λ^2 Rμν + λ^4 R) Here are some suggestions for a name for this equation: 1. _String-Stress Unification Tensor Equation (SSUTE)_: This name highlights the equation's role in unifying the concepts of string theory and stress-energy tensors. 2. _Vibrational Energy-Momentum Tensor Equation (VEMTE)_: This name emphasizes the equation's connection to the vibrations of strings and the description of energy and momentum density in spacetime. 3. _Geometric String Tensor Equation (GSTE)_: This name underscores the equation's geometric nature and its connection to the curvature of spacetime. 4. _Quantum String Stress-Energy Relation (QSSER)_: This name captures the equation's relevance to quantum gravity and its description of the stress-energy tensor in terms of vibrating strings. 5. _Harmonic Stress-Energy Tensor Equation (HSTE)_: This name highlights the equation's connection to harmonic vibrations of strings and its description of the stress-energy tensor.

[@antoniodiogo1292]

String theory doesn't have an rival, it doesn't mean it's an final theory! It is what we got for mow!

[@sung-ryulkim6590]

Ah, the Steven Seagal of Physics

[@Simon-xi8tb]

lol im dead

[@PuppetMasterdaath144]

The odds that you're not braindead is 0%

[@adaptivealph8052]

Who factchecks the fact that string theory has challengers and is most likely wrong? 😂

[@neoepicurean3772]

Kaku's answers are as deep as a tinker's bath.

[@sonarbangla8711]

Jaimungal, without any algorithm that involves 'error correction' QC function will remain an illusion.

[@OLIAMOROW]

I guess the takeaway, between the lines, is that people's feelings and careers actually DO get hurt... maybe we have to solve for incompatible incentives and social dynamics if we're to crack the bigger problems of reality and understanding.

[@fortynine3225]

Kaku also embraced the String Theory age lol The guy is a futurist basically. Futurists always get some thing right and lots of stuff very wrong. They often get rediculed many decades after they make their wonderful predictions. That is why they get away with their ''not any time soon'' predictions.

[@146maxpain]

String theory is on life support.

[@TheCosmicGuy0111]

Oh boy

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

One process would be more logical that one electron. One explanation would be that the exchange of light photon ∆E=hf energy is continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons, as an uncertain ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π probabilistic future unfolds. The Future is relative to our actions with the Planck Constant h/2π being a constant of action within a geometrical spherical 4πr² process that forms the characteristics of 3D space and continuum of time ∆E ∆t ≥ h/2π. It time to go back to r² and the three dimensional physics of the Inverse Square Law!

[@UniversalSovereignCitizen]

String theory is frequency. Light has frequency. There are far more spectrums of light than we perceive. When our science opens to the fact that all is frequency and, the appropriate method of mathematics... We will travel the universe. Universal Sovereign Citizen

[@glennpaquette2228]

Does anyone take him seriously?

[@keithmetcalf5548]

Yea I feel a lot of misinformation/disinformation through Michio. But I feel that about most ppl on youtube so...

[@squeakeththewheel]

Some years ago he gave a keynote talk at a physics conference and a Nobel Laureate stood up and said something like "that's nonsense."

[@rahalinedophy]

@@squeakeththewheel And that's right, every sentence from Maku is nonsense. As a person who knows the string theory, I can't believe someone says "The supersymmetry is string symmetry", NONSENSE!!!!!!!!!!! And what he says about Qcomputer is wrong too. Nonsense.

[@hanifsanjaya9393]

@@rahalinedophy do u make contributions to the theory or just know it? i mean u just criticised someone who actually does the works

[@rahalinedophy]

@@hanifsanjaya9393 If you believe him, absolutely, you never studied string theory.

[@DmitriyAveryanov]

I think reading his books 20 years ago was more fun... Now, it's a bit embarrassing.

[@Wowzer123]

Wow, two of the people most responsible for the spread of QUANTUM WOO. When are you going to have Depak Chopra on?

[@davidvernon3119]

I just popped open the comments to give my opinion that Michio is a quack. In reading through the comments I see that this is the consensus view…

[@user-ov5nd1fb7s]

If you are not a physicist on that level, which you probably aren't. It would be very interesting for you to explain how you reached that conclusion about something you don't understand. This is like joe 6 pack yelling at the TV at a football game, as if he can do better.

[@thstroyur]

​@@user-ov5nd1fb7s Here's a simple sanity check: is quantum computing/information Kaku's field of expertise? If not - why does he get to speak on it as such? He'd be better off spending his time helping sort out the swampland with the others...

[@user-ov5nd1fb7s]

@@thstroyur he is certainly not an expert in quantum computing. If you don't like the questions, look at the interviewer. Kaku didn't write these questions.

[@davidvernon3119]

@@user-ov5nd1fb7s so i am either a PhD physicist or a “Joe 6 pack”? You don’t see room for anything in between? That is what people who went to college call a false dichotomy. Try harder.

[@sobekviasoul]

Framing this as a way to censor speech better is wild

[@scottbuckingham5626]

I agree about the chat bot gpt at the moment it's is basically a search engine

[@janklaas6885]

📍11:30 2📍 14:56 3📍 10:29

[@ericparrish1515]

Scissors beats string

[@robbyr9286]

that reply rocks!

[@erocanosoul4578]

One string, two strings, three strings, four

[@user-ov5nd1fb7s]

How can people say without the same breath that too much brain power went into string theory and also that Michio is talking nonsense? If string theory was nonsense, then the people working on it would not amount to significant brain power. This is a simple proof that what many people below wrote simply doesn't make any sense. A bunch of armchair historians who have absolutely no education in physics heard somewhere that Michio is talking nonsense and they repeat it. Those people should seriously look in the mirror.

[@squeakeththewheel]

Some years ago he gave a keynote talk at a physics conference and a respected Nobel Laureate stood up and said something like "that's nonsense." Saw it with my own eyes.

[@rahalinedophy]

But he is nonsense, everyone studied string theory would agree that he doesn't know some bias in theoretical physics nowadays and always says something wrong. You should know that he was a theorist decades ago, superstring theory was even not born at that stage. And he did not follow the advanced string long long ago.

[@user-ov5nd1fb7s]

@@squeakeththewheel So? Scientists on that level can disagree with each other. I don't see how that relates to some guy who has no science background, let alone be a world class scientist disrespect Kaku.

[@nyworker]

We go from the world of QM indeterminacy to our determinate world. But they're baffled. Like turning Galileo's telescope around and being baffled looking through the other end.

[@hollies4806]

👍👍

[@revisionfour]

No mention of IonQ and Trapped Ion Quantum Computing? Kaku knows so little.

[@user-gr3oo5ux9x]

Life itself is a dreamt up scenario and also does not exist

[@worthlessendeavors]

PSI is the fact checker

[@hanifsanjaya9393]

hell yeah, all the next Einstein in the comment

[@the-rf2dq]

sting theory has no rival in... reality ?.

[@NomenNescio99]

He obviously doesn't know very much about cryptography. Quantum should be able to attack some classes of ciphers, but there are many that are resistant to quantum computing. This is a sign of laziness, as with his background in mathematics he should be able to understand this with nothing more than a quick glance at the topic. Meanwhile, I really have to put a effort into understanding things like elliptic curve cryptography etc.

[@classicalmechanic8914]

If there were scientific factcheckers, Michio would be censored for his unfalsifiable claims that cannot be experimentally proven.

[@user-ov5nd1fb7s]

Michio is a very accomplished world class physicist. You should consider that you might not be in a position to make such strong claims.

[@classicalmechanic8914]

@@user-ov5nd1fb7s Scientific method in physics is based on experiment. String theory is not based on any experiment. The main problem is how can a person advocating for a theory that cannot be proven even become "world class physicist"?

[@classicalmechanic8914]

@@user-ov5nd1fb7s In physics, claims must be supported by experimental evidence. Falsifiability and experimental evidence are pillars of modern science. If your theory cannot pass falsifiability or experimental confirmation, presenting it as fact is misinforming scientific community.

[@classicalmechanic8914]

@@user-ov5nd1fb7s Physics is based on experiment. Math does not need an experiment. This is the main difference between math and physics.

[@ericparrish1515]

Weave me alone

[@rahalinedophy]

What he says about Q-computer is absolutely wrong.

[@rolestream]

I love Dr Michio but he sounds old and scared in this video. =( A little bit too defensive. A little bit too reliant on an appeal to his own authority.

[@rahalinedophy]

He has one or two good works from decades ago, but his understanding of string theory and supersymmetry, QM, and blablabla, is just fashion, every student who studies the textbook hard in theoretical physics is better nowadays.

[@algeboy]

This expert is misleading. Quantum computers need to be programmed so don’t escape software and today the only quantum advantage is period finding and that is only on asymptotic scales.

[@FuegoJaguar]

there is no distinction between stage 1 and 2 so i don't think this person knows anything about computation actually

[@antoniodiogo1292]

Mother nature is everything! What a fuc...are you talking about? We just try to explain nature! Everything we got is the nature of the universe and try to explain all the processes that govern it all! Our technology came by just watching, understand and replicate it...lol😂

[@Revolutarian]

Tnu

[@nyworker]

Digital Computers-->Quantum Computers-->Ouija Board

[@linesandlines612]

The age of enslavement.

[@mattgordon9179]

What is a quantum computer? Its a chandelier with super cooled pipes in it. Yeah right! A quantum computer is what a quantum computer is and in twenty years time it may look totally different than an old school chandelier. Makes you wanna laugh at his description.

[@linesandlines612]

Noodle theories.

[@georgesos]

Really? Him again? You offend your subscribers. We are not idiots.

[@particleboy7757]

Giving even a sentence to a man is a joke. An undergraduate physics major would have provided a far better interview

[@ericschambion6838]

OMG, what a fucking disaster ! Curt and Michio. What the hell is the IAI thinking ?

[@JBroMCMXCI]

If I didn't know Kaku had already built a career spouting utter nonsense I'd think he was suffering from dementia.

[@mattgordon9179]

What is it with this guy. I all ways feel that he just talks at everyone like a chat bot and never really engages in a two way conversation. There's some great young minds out there that will supersede this guy but he rabbits on like we have never heard this stuff before and hasn't changed in the last 15....20 years or so. He couldn't answer a simple question about how the media talks about these issues and instead go's on about how it all works. A lot of this is still theory. It's been said that if you invited Einstein and Van Gough to a party at your place, they would stand on your couch in gumboots and pee on the couch. No social skills.

[@Kronzik]

Michio Kaku is such a hack, so tired of hearing his same 10 catch phrases.

[@ericparrish1515]

Spaghetti sucks

[@florencebaendes2853]

Yo mom 😂

[@ElijahBodden]

Talk about an overglorified tape recorder. This guy's a hack who parrots incorrect ideas about things he understands way less than he pretends he does