Yang-Mills and Mass Gap (Millennium Prize Problem!)

The Yang-Mills and mass gap problem is another one of the elusive millennium prize problems - a set of seven problems given in the year 2000 by the Clay Mathematical Institute, and solving one of them can earn you a million dollars. The Yang-Mills problem is one of them.
The mathematical framework on which quantum mechanics is based is not elementary. There is no concept of what we would call velocity or the trajectory of a particle. Instead, particles are indistinguishable from waves. You can imagine a particle in quantum mechanics as simply a region of space with some properties. Now, in school you probably learnt of the concept of a plane, a region on which it’s possible to draw figures like lines, triangles, circles, or other interesting types of curves. Similarly, you can make 3-Dimensional space, which differs from a plane by having an extra dimension - height. Usually, the three dimensions of length, breadth, and height comprise space.
The problem is phrased as follows:
Yang-Mills Existence and Mass Gap: Prove that for any compact simple gauge group G, a non-trivial quantum Yang-Mills theory exists on R^4 and has a mass gap Δ is greater than zero. Existence includes establishing axiomatic properties at least as strong as those cited in Streater & Wightman (1964), Osterwalder & Schrader (1973) and Osterwalder & Schrader (1975).
-----
Music: www.bensound.com/royalty-free-...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Dr Turtle - Which that is this?
(freemusicarchive.org/music/Do...)
(creativecommons.org/licenses/...)
-------
Images:
Panoptik [CC BY-SA 3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/b...)]
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Joel Holdsworth (Joelholdsworth) - Non-Derived SVG of Radiate_gluon.png, originally the work of SilverStar at Feynmann-diagram-gluon-radiation.svg
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Original:No machine-readable author provided. NekoJaNekoJa assumed (based on copyright claims).Vector:Johannes Kalliauer [CC BY-SA 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...)]
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...
------

[@kinertia4238]

Hey guys, I have a pretty awesome announcement: I have officially joined Twitter! From now on, I'll be posting updates and announcements of new videos at twitter.com/Kinertia42, along with a bunch of other stuff you may find cool. If I had more than 2000 subs at this point, then I could make a common community post, but apparently KZbin doesn't allow that, so I'm gonna be posting and pinning this comment everywhere. I've been posting to this channel a lot less lately, but I find it awesome that a pretty large number of people are watching and commenting on these videos - so here's to reaching (at this time) 275 subs! Really nice, huh? Since a lot of people seem to really love this channel, I'd like to say just one thing to our small but growing community: I'm working on a ton of new stuff right now, including cool new video styles and something which will (hopefully) turn out to be awesome. Above all, thank you guys for watching!

[@SpotterVideo]

Conservation of Spatial Curvature (both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. .

[@Hermetics]

spread the stupidity! ;)

[@youtubeshorts2911]

The proof for the problem is trivial and is left for the reader as an exercise.

[@jonbrand5068]

I agree it sounds as though that's what is said just near the end of this video, why is that exactly?

[@matt13r1]

The answer is 6

[@avindaniels2212]

copy past comment... boring

[@matt13r1]

@@avindaniels2212 the answer is 6!!

[@disgruntledwookie369]

That's a meta joke right there

[@5wplush243]

For those who( like me ) found this a bit tough to follow, here's a little information on what is being talked about in the video. A basic description of the Standard Model Of Particle Physics A description of the four fundamental sources:- 1. Gravity(Self-explanatory) 2. Electromagnetism(Self-explanatory) 3. Strong Nuclear Force( the biding force of atoms) 4. Weak Nuclear Force( force resulting in radioactive decay The Unification of the Fundamental Forces:- The fundamental idea behind the four forces is that scientists believe that at the instant of creation I.e. the big bang the four forces were actually unified to form one single force. Two forces had already been unified by three scientists(Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, and Steven Weinberg) around the year 1979 and this was done using the electromagnetism force as well as the weak nuclear force to form one electroweak theory which occurs at temperatures at around 10^15°C. Unification with Quantum Theory Each force has an exchange/transmission particle. Electromagnetics:Photons, Weak Force:Gluons, Strong Force:W-Z Bosons And Gravity: Gravitons(unconfirmed). Elaboration with basis as Quantum Mechanics:- Particle has no velocity or trajectory but is described(defined arbitrarily) as a point in space(Hilbert space; An n-dimensional space where inner product can be worked out). Another basic element: A field is a region in which "stuff plays out" e.g. electromagnetic field. Fields involve/interact with other particles therefore a quantum theory must involve fields as well. However, when fields are incorporated in an Hilbert space, they behave the same as operations on particles. This makes sense as "burst of energy" in a field are described as "excitations of a field" or a particle. Theories in regard to this field are known as Quantum Field Theories(QFT's) and specific QFT's are collected into Gauge theories which states that- If you create changes in particles, space(hilbert operations) remains same creating a symmetry. An apology to wave mechanics is given at 5:30 to understand symmetry using phase difference. A brilliant idea to "shift the universe" along with fundamental mathematical operations is used to explain Gauge Invariance. A Explanation of Quantum Electrodynamics Basics of Electromagnetic theory with maxwells equations and basic ideas of oscillating perpendicular fields. QED is stated but not explained making this segment slightly pointless(??) The lead up to Yang-Mills Theory Questions asked: Do QFT's exist for all 4 fundamental forces? And any gauge theory of physics has to satisfy a Yang-Mills Theory. Yang-Mills theory attempts to explain particles in the form of Non-Abelian Lie Groups. Group: A way of defining symmetry( but in reality something far more complex). Explained using commutative. Lie groups are mentioned but not explained(understandable as they are very complex for the layman). Hurdle: The strong and weak force were carried around by the particle which have mass(QED had only massless photons). Moreover, the exchange particles only worked for a very short distance and had mass. Enter QCD:- The parameter of Quantum Chromodynamics(QCD):- 1. It must account for a mass gap( a minimum energy state vacuum must have for particles to exist). It( for some not-mentioned reason) explains why the strong force acts for very short distances). 2. Must have quark confinement(can't see individual quarks). It must explain why individual quarks can't be witnessed and are always int eh form of protons and neutrons. 3. Chiral symmetry breaking(mentioned but not explained). Yang-Mills Theory: "A four-dimensional Hilbert space with a mass gap. Prove that this kind of Yang-Mills theory exists for every gauge theory. " Consequences: A QFT would have to be created for every single gauge theory thereby quantifying/combining all Gauge Theories( a step towards a complete GUT). Correct me where I'm wrong and please link your sources. I'd love to get to read more about this( and where you managed to learn it) Errors in video:- 1. 2:25 Spelling of "Schrödinger" ;D

[@kinertia4238]

This is an absolutely brilliant summary of the entire video and problem.

[@sagayamr2842]

5W Plus H you are awesome

[@jeschr3462]

@@kinertia4238 Yes I agree. 5W plus H well done. People get too caught up with trying to find the grand unified theory and don't appreciate or realize that Yang Mills mass gap problem was the predecessor to String theory and M theory.

[@matt13r1]

The correct answer is 6

[@entropy1484]

Neek

[@Dominator046]

I found your channel after looking up the Millennium problems. Was shocked to see such quality content with under a hundred subscribers. Please keep this up.

[@giljorge7479]

Exact same

[@4pharaoh]

Everyone is different of course but I found this video perfectly paced and extremely well done. Of course there were times when I paused to scratch a note for future reference, and further investigation, but I appreciated that you stayed on topic. Great work.

[@wuschelbeutel]

Great job! The video quality in combination with your knowledge+understanding and your ability to communicate it well to a laypereson audience is great.

[@albertgerard4639]

yo its crazy you made this video

[@venderednev]

Thanks a lot for making this video. This is the first clear explanation of an important millenium dollar problem. Keep making these amazing videos. Good luck.

[@timv6141]

Great video. Great pacing, explanation and visuals. Thank you

[@IshanBanerjee]

Amazing work . I was actually researching on this topic . After watching your video it's all clear . Subscribed 👍

[@SnortingMagic]

“The answer is 6” 🤔😂

[@douglasstrother6584]

42

[@xxnotmuchxx]

69

[@anthbenit2576]

No, the answer is 42.

[@toptrivia9996]

@@anthbenit2576 i dont get it ? What the question ? N how calculate it ?

[@n0nenone]

@@toptrivia9996 42 is the answer for everything.. I'm 42 too

[@zakirreshi6737]

Amazing you covered all topics in just 10 minutes 👍🏻👍🏻

[@uhbayhue]

Such advanced concepts explained beautifully. Thank you!

[@kinertia4238]

Glad you liked it!

[@TrevorsRoom]

You have a very good way of simplifying math and physics buddy

[@oofusmcdoofus]

Well thought and high quality! Subbed.

[@noobyfromhell]

7:17 commutativity isn’t required for something to be a group

[@deepstariaenigmatica2601]

Man, this is great content. Keep going brother.

[@MrCreeper20k]

9:34 "So what is the real reason for this being a millenium prize problem? Its because mathematicians are really touchy about being unable to prove something" That literally made me laugh out loud hah. Awesome channel.

[@matt13r1]

Dude the answer is 6

[@828ok]

Best video on the problem. Good job!

[@Epicurean999]

Please Please I repeat once again PLEASE do not stop making such Awesome videos.AND Sir your Lucid way of explaining is Impeccable💘💘💘...redundant but PLEASE don't stop uploading such videos.Subs will come gradually😊

[@thesecretformula1337]

This is a great video that really clearly lays out the basics of gauge theory and how we got to where we got to. I have the 'Secret Formula' but have decided humanity is insufficiently wise to wield these tools yet! Once the world is ready I will share it 👍

[@legendsoflife3955]

Wow , what quantum physics is made up for took me to understand more than 2 yrs but you explained it just in few minutes .what a greatness And thanks for the clue ...

[@lillegitimate]

Everything was presented nicely and easy to follow, very nice.

[@DharambirPoddar]

Awesome and meaningful video!

[@IshanBanerjee]

Such amazing editing

[@GOPALS1967]

Beautifully explained

[@johannsebastianbach9003]

It will take a lifetime and dedication for this to be solved

[@beimein3244]

Explaining 3 requirements to win prize was a nice touch, but I don't think that mathematcians want simply a proof. The motivation is probably because creating novel proofs often helps generate new areas of study. For mathematical physicists even moreso-- they know that they're mathematics might lead us to a deep understanding of physics, and maybe even a unifying one. Mathematicians know that your math might turn into Relativity or Electromagnetism or Quantum Mechanics, and I think mathematical physicists would love to contribute to science in that way.

[@4pharaoh]

Just noticed: According to my standard particle chart The W & Z Bosons (@7:42) have their masses swapped (Z is actually the heavy one)

[@ika5666]

So many preparatory notions have to be introduced to the general public in order to present at least a flavor of the mass gap problem in quantum Yang-Mills theory.

[@shohamsen8986]

Good video, loved the animation. Loved the last bit where you said physicists don't really care and Mathematicians are touchy. I don't know if its true for this case, but its true in general.

[@user-zj6tr9ju8m]

I will not kill your time on the procedure, the answer is hence proved.

[@dyer308]

You are brilliant!!!!!

[@aaronoconnor9780]

This was a fantastic video

[@sudarshchaturvedi7011]

Extremely good material, but so less subs, may you cross a million soon😇😇😇

[@shubhangsharma_x9767]

Hmmmm....feeling good to be the 100th subscriber....

[@darkenviado3446]

Finally some great quality science content from india. P.S. you've gained a new subscriber and there are many more to come you are about to get famous

[@aryamanmishra154]

Correction: Hilbert space is infinite dimensional function space with a specially defined inner product which are basically definite integral. You said they are n-dimensional with inner product property which is rather an abstract inner product space.

[@JohnDlugosz]

I thought Hilbert Space was anything with an inner product defined (it has to follow certain identities; you can't just call something "inner product"). It can have finite or infinite dimensions.

[@gekkkoincroe]

I can't understand a thing in the video despite it was so simplified guess I'll study more haha.

[@jackheinzel8803]

Yeah Hilbert space can have any dimension. It does have to be a vector space over the field of complex numbers, but also a notion of an inner product and it must be complete, ie. limits exist and you can do calculus

[@yashwanthsai5182]

Amazing explanation

[@larsf3157]

Which animation program do you use?

[@pierrecurie]

Pedantry: 9:07 1) non abelian groups - I'm pretty sure U(1) is already well studied and understood (it's electromagnetism), and does _not_ have a mass gap. 2) simple groups - I'm guessing a proof for every Lie group is too complicated, so they settled on the easier subset of just the simple ones. Do we even have a full classification of _every_ Lie group? We do have a full classification of the simple ones though. 3) R^4 - physicists typically work in 3+1 dimensions (+1 for time), but the millennium problem simplifies that to just plain old R^4

[@behnamasid]

So the solution is already out there, we just need to prove it.

[@jacobleider4591]

God damn it’d be so funny if they find a counterexample. That’d show physicists not to skimp on rigor lol

[@danielkirk4755]

Nice explanation. For what it's worth I think the real reason this is a millennium problem is that it's a hard problem and it's solution would inevitably mean creating some exciting new techniques that would open up many new opportunities to advance maths and physics. Certainly mathematicians don't like being stumped but a million dollars is a lot to shell out only for pride 😆

[@gogigaga1677]

INCREDIBLE EXPLAINING

[@adityaghosh1675]

Which video editing software do you use?

[@kinertia4238]

I use the Adobe suite - mostly after effects and illustrator.

[@216syed]

A mass gap is the difference in energy between the ground state and the first excited state of a particle. In the case of the quantum Yang-Mills equation, the mass gap is the difference in energy between the ground state and the first excited state of the Yang-Mills field. There are a number of ways to prove the existence of a mass gap in the solution to the quantum Yang-Mills equation. One way is to use the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This principle states that there is a minimum amount of energy that can be associated with a given uncertainty in momentum. In the case of the Yang-Mills field, this uncertainty principle implies that there is a minimum amount of energy that can be associated with a given uncertainty in the Yang-Mills field. This minimum amount of energy is known as the mass gap. Another way to prove the existence of a mass gap is to use the fact that the Yang-Mills equation is a quantum field theory. This means that the solutions to the Yang-Mills equation are quantized. This quantization implies that the energy of the Yang-Mills field is quantized. The quantization of energy implies that there is a minimum amount of energy that can be associated with the Yang-Mills field. This minimum amount of energy is known as the mass gap.

[@axz60]

How the fuck did you manage to explain all this in 10 minutes?! you crazy guy! well done!

[@shanestewart9045]

I solved this one this morning. Its based around nautical mile. the answer is x=y pretty simple stuff. I am not pulling your chain. My attempt at a joke. I don't don't know how to publish my work.

[@nishittomar4770]

Sahi video hai Bhai!!

[@NovaWarrior77]

thank you!!!

[@NomadUrpagi]

I love your content. Your accent however is hard to listen to. Great effort man

[@matt13r1]

The answer is 6! There problem solved.

[@MinMax-kc8uj]

I don't know any of this stuff, but I do know that Quantum Electrodynamics graph. That graph is correct. It has polynomial solutions in it to.

[@christiandefeo256]

Good content keep it up

[@shi-t]

I hope there is a subtitle, I'm really not good at listening.

[@JohnDlugosz]

I never realized that experiments in particle physics use pipettes and beakers and basically all the same stuff as a biology lab! Somehow I always pictured lots of electronic devices instead.

[@quashawnchadwick2334]

Just subscribed!

[@aniketeuler6443]

Very nice content 😄👏👏👍

[@user-Sherlane97_]

Is is possible to change the Mass Gap from 0 to +/-?

[@questforenlightenment441]

Very nice video

[@sonarbangla8711]

The only explanation of the mass gap that comes to my mind is gauge invariance refers to a change of dimension. In other words, mass is emergent, like space, time, energy, charge, spin etc.

[@shashankphysicsmaths7108]

Explain in a way that can teach undergraduate student these things.

[@kenichimori8533]

Linux language distribution difficult is Yang-Mills and mass gap problem = l1+l2+l3=Language.言語。源(Source Code)is Yang-Mills and mass gap problem solution.

[@Jesulovesme]

U videos are excellent

[@Jesulovesme]

U r from?

[@kinertia4238]

I'm from India :)

[@Jon.B.geez.]

The final comment represents a complete misunderstanding of physics and lack of appreciation for mathematics. It is widely believed that solving Yang Mills equations can lead into novel insights about quark confinement on the physical side, and of both instantons and monopoles on the mathematical side. So don’t let this video discourage you everyone, solving the Yang mills equations can indeed lead to great insights furthering our understanding of the universe

[@quashawnchadwick2334]

Why is it easy to conceptualize particles as excitation in field, but describing this mathematically is really really difficult.

[@kinertia4238]

Because the physical visualization is a simple picture, and not nearly as accurate enough as the math.

[@shivrajpatil1770]

Listening your English makes me feel i have wasted my life. Need to work more on it.

[@aiseop31415]

So what you study exactly? In which university you are in? What you want to be in future🤨

[@quitecomplex6441]

Hypothetically, what if someone showed it wasn’t the case by constructing a counter example? Or doing a proof by contradiction. Would they still get the money?

[@kinertia4238]

Yes. Even finding a single counterexample would be enough to claim the prize.

[@babakyousefi5262]

I think we need to first understand what makes the particles and space.

[@wdobni]

i'm not a mathematician but my impression is that physics is getting further and further away from reality as it wanders along in the swampy reeds of abstract algebra .... no amount of weirdness and abstruse strange imagining is ever too much or too bizarre that it cannot be taken completely seriously and represented with some kind of wavy lined symbology and a dozen new rules and definitions

[@kishansinhsarvaiya1156]

What's about Higgs field...

[@matt13r1]

Forgot that the answer to this problem is 6.

[@TheBlurayHacker]

gret video

[@KingHim00]

I found the answer to this will be uploading it soon

[@Alienami]

It's all music to my ears.

[@muhammadibraheem2850]

Feynman was right "nobody understands Quantum Mechanics".

[@CiroSantilli]

I think GUT is only EM + weak + strong, not gravity: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory With gravity it's Toe: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

[@mrajkishor331]

Godel's theorem states that in any reasonable mathematical system, there will always be true statements that cannot be proved.

[@replayreviews6339]

In case anyone is wondering. The answer is 6...🤷‍♂️

[@johnmcclure5051]

Is the 1 million dollars given free of federal or state taxes?

[@tiffanyfish5761]

杨振宁yang is 101 years old now🎉

[@oliverwashbrook8834]

I want to try and tie that bow!

[@estayabonparada7453]

most scientists know this prize can't be handed out anymore

[@suhanigupta7946]

Multiply both side by hundred

[@nsfeliz7825]

so its the mathematicians complaining about qcd, not the pnysicists. for them its not real till you havd formal math proof rather than physical proof??

[@rs-tarxvfz]

Take and egg, boil it eat it. Hence proved...

[@the_sophile]

👍👍👍

[@shubhang-sharma]

I’m the 99th subscriber....

[@shubhangsharma_x9767]

pss 1 good bro...so iam 100th..

[@jeschr3462]

Very interesting stuff. But you speak too fast for a subject so complicated.

[@leonardharris8884]

Where do i collect my mil

[@calvingadson7863]

for the next problem in line after me

[@estayabonparada7453]

anyone can collect it at this point

[@johnsmother3743]

Bubble thought

[@suspendedsuplexchannel1000]

It's because someone wanted to teach physics to mathematics

[@zackyezek3760]

What if the proof is negative? That is, somebody provides an explicit counter example or proof by contradiction? A lot of modern theoretical physics is built upon shaky math and even shakier conceptual foundations. Just look behind the curtain on how calculations in QED & friends really work. It's so full of hacks to assign finite sums to non convergent series that such chicanery isn't even considered a "real" problem anymore. So i really wouldn't be shocked if some larger conjectures in this space that 'everybody' expects to be true actually aren't. We've known for 60 years that something must replace QFT equations at some energy extreme, because assuming that is the only way to actually calculate anything with them- that's what "renormalization" really is mathematically.

[@mikaelzurich6166]

Please add subtitle to this video. Your video is very informative but it's hard to listen through your accent.

[@matt13r1]

He's wrong the answer to this is 6.

[@matt13r1]

The answer is 6!!

[@creationanimation4743]

Right anyone wanna solve this with me and split the prize, hmm?

[@doodelay]

Not getting to the point fast enough

[@lamalamalex]

6

[@kenichimori8533]

Mathematics millennium is $1,000,000

[@chinmaykrishna6485]

3:57 I think you forgot Feynman's Path Integral Formulation.