Smart not nerd, creative and daring, not parrot, gets deep abstract insights without losing touch with reality. In one word, genius.

@lukewaidmann3678

15 күн бұрын

And humble through it all.

I first read his name in a book by Stephen Hawking, Blackholes and Baby Universes. Then I read Penrose's book Shadows of the Mind, then I got a Mammoth work by Penrose, The Road To Reality, more than 10 years on, I'm still finishing it up... It has been an extraordinary guidance... Thank you Sir Penrose.

@Cyberplayer5

5 жыл бұрын

Penrose also wrote a book called The Emperor's New Mind. It challenged the idea of Artificial Intelligence and weather it could do what human intelligence does.

@billshepherd5

3 жыл бұрын

Sir Roger.

@billshepherd5

3 жыл бұрын

Sir Roger

What a legend.

@robertflynn6686

3 жыл бұрын

Even more in 2020. Yes?

@alecodell2650

3 жыл бұрын

Seriously tho

@robertflynn6686

3 жыл бұрын

@@alecodell2650 no no. No-bel prize 2020

Sir Roger Penrose is as great as Feynman and Einstein. One of the GREATS.

@prototype8137

4 жыл бұрын

Lol. You do realize that the physics world and academia isnt what it is right? Its not about truth but about ego, pride and spinning narratives for public consumption.

@lorenyoungren9129

4 жыл бұрын

Roger penrose is the the greatest mind of this or last century.

@simesaid

3 жыл бұрын

@@prototype8137 while cognisant of the risk I may very well NOT receive any satisfaction, I nonetheless feel compelled to ask you "huh?". First, who, or what, comprises 'The physics world'? Moreover, in what context are you defining 'academics'? And, lastly (yet perhaps most importantly), were you attempting to communicate a point in the above post?

@barlart

3 жыл бұрын

@@lorenyoungren9129 Thank you, Loren

@barlart

3 жыл бұрын

@@prototype8137 I do realise that you have no mind to exercise. Are you a christian by any chance?

Sir Roger is without doubt one of our finest ever national treasures - long may he and his level headedness (considering the natures of the problem domains of the issues he tackles) remain with us. :)

I literally said out loud: "Wat een held", which is Dutch and translates to "What a legend", many times throughout this excellent insight into reality!

Dr Penrose as brilliant as ever! Thanks very much for this video.

Just *beautiful* 🔥 tnx alot ✨

Congrats!! He seems to be a very nice man.

damnnnnn this is hard for the layman..not complaining...he's certainly not patronizing :p

Watching this twice, listening to Sir Roger!! OMG!! having similar dislikes to a lot of current ideas as I do -- and making so much sense. And offering an interpretation that tracks beautifully with what we see all around us. Thank you very much for posting this lecture.

@brendawilliams8062

2 жыл бұрын

What do the string theorists do about Gauss?

@ianmarshall9144

Жыл бұрын

@@brendawilliams8062 ive heard peppermint tea helps

@brendawilliams8062

Жыл бұрын

@@ianmarshall9144 yeah, thx.

Well, we just need to know what energizes particles at the end / beginning of eons.

Love you Roger.

You need fantasy (imagination) to throw a conjecture up to nature and see the result. Popper said that long ago. Be bold first; then be humble enough to correct your error. A theory demands both attributes: boldness and humbleness. There's no induction; only a conjecture and deductions. The game of science never ends (cf. The Logic of Scientific Discovery).

Brilliant! (Sir) Roger never really got on with 'Powerpoint', but he is improving his visual aids a little.

I love Roger Penrose❤

Living Legend

I've read a lot of his work, to me, he's the finest mind I've had the good fortune to encounter in my entire, longish life.

@lepidoptera9337

2 жыл бұрын

I doubt that you have read his scientific work. You may have read some of the nonsense that he wrote since he kind of lost his mind.

@geoden

2 жыл бұрын

@@lepidoptera9337 Your are talking nonsense. Jealousy can be really nasty coming from the likes of you.

@lepidoptera9337

2 жыл бұрын

@@geoden What jealousy are we talking about? That may be your default emotion, it sure isn't mine. :-)

@geoden

2 жыл бұрын

@@lepidoptera9337 Sir Roger is old. Not mentally deranged. I have read many of his works. The Road To Reality was the most challenging and demonstrated the power of his mind to me. You said he'd lost his mind, I can only assume such a remark comes from ignorance of the man or jealousy of his world-wide fame. Go spread you pestis elsewhere.

@lepidoptera9337

2 жыл бұрын

@@geoden I agree. He is old. Old people develop strange ideas. It's not his fault that it happened to him and nobody blames him for it. You just have to accept that the young Roger Penrose does not exist anymore. It is generally a good idea to treat the output of elderly scientists with as much skepticism as that of young scientists. They do not know better. In many cases they know less and have developed quirky ideas. That doesn't take anything from their former accomplishments away. Peace!

19:33 Wow, EPIC tangent, and then expertly finds his way back

Who is watching after he got Nobel prize in physics?

@ingenuity168

3 жыл бұрын

Me

@alexwilson8034

3 жыл бұрын

Glad it helped show his genius to the world! Been watching him for about 5 years, welcome!

@MATT-ll2zf

3 ай бұрын

No. He was a genius from the time he introduced Singularity theorems

@boogieman6529

2 ай бұрын

Nobel prize has become a prize

@AyushSingh-mn8ed

2 ай бұрын

Ur Susskind biography vdo is awesome ❤

Does he do his own illustrations. They are true art.

I love this dude!

Amazing!

Long live the great platonist of our age.

@epajarjestys9981

4 жыл бұрын

why do you call him a platonist? do you even know what platonism is?

@antoniocotarodriguez5732

3 жыл бұрын

​@@epajarjestys9981 Why did you ask that question? is a subtle ad hominem fallacy, if you want to learn about the relation of platonism and Penrose read the first chapter of his book "The road to reality"

Thank you

Thanks! Sir Roger is always entertaining. Quantum Mechanics: the theory stating that not only can Mother Nature *_not_* make up her fiddling mind, but *_also_* that, whatever she decides, she then interferes with herself! But that's neither here nor there... [rim-shot] Thanks again! Rikki Tikki.

@alexbuckley4378

Жыл бұрын

You are so full of yourself

@DarkShroom

Жыл бұрын

mother nature does not exist imo, the universe is not inteligent

Sir Roger Penrose brilliant brain

Proofs and Principles determine the abstract or reality of faith or fantasy.

Penrose is getting old. Not much time left for the Nobel prize, which he deserves.

@RARa12812

3 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately his work cannot be experimented and proven

@tnekkc

3 жыл бұрын

@@RARa12812 Obama got a nobel prize:(

@charliec244

3 жыл бұрын

@@tnekkc Not in physics. However Penrose is a legend. Weiss said in Nobel Minds 2017, physicists do this because they're looking for an answer. Not for a Nobel prize.

@charliec244

3 жыл бұрын

@@tnekkc Updated now. HE GOT IT! for 2020!!! Well deserved.

@tnekkc

3 жыл бұрын

@@charliec244 That's great news! Thanks for tell me.

Penrose is a genius of the 20th century, in the same league with Einstein, Plank and Feynman. Too bad the string theorists and Copenhagen crowd are too proud to give him the attention he deserves. No doubt, in 50 years his insights will be recognized and memorialized.

@schmetterling4477

2 жыл бұрын

He got a Nobel prize in physics. What more does he need to get? A ticker tape parade? :-)

Is it possible the particle splits into a positive and negative pair and creates a z-wave traveling in a spiral motion? This would look like a wave, with frequency and wavelength

He is legend 🥳🥳🥳...he got Nobel prize 2020....

43:00 As a lay-person I would have a ton of questions. The most important are, a) what mechanism makes a copy of the entire universe in the branching moment, in the time of 1 Planck time? b) where does the newly copied universe go if the other branch dies? or c) where does the newly copied universe go if the other branch doesn't die? All I can find as answers is "it just branches" and "the new universe just is there, somewhere, undetectable". That is the sorry state of QM, and it's no wonder physicists had no progress in QM for 50 years.

@Thesamdeman22

7 жыл бұрын

For you, I would say look at PBS SpaceTime's videos - there are a lot of videos on what quantum realism might physically be.

@brendawilliams8062

2 жыл бұрын

QM to me is looking for a straight optical line and uses the natural cross of the spin to do it.

Congrats to 🎉NOBEL laureate physics 2020 Roger Penrose..

I tripped out on this...class! Extra dimensions ahoy!!

PLEASE make a post on the relation between DIV GRAD at finite density charge sources and the relation of this to gravitational curvature for finite density mass distributions. For zero charge density DIV GRAD X=0, while for mass the mass on a rubber sheet model suggests negative (Gaussian) curvature in the surrounding vacuum, suggesting DIV g

11:35 a**(b**c) = a**(c**b) = a**(b*c)..... so actually it largely depends on c OR b (but not on a)... c and b are the same but i must admit i'd forgot that algebra before the last slide myself :) .... by the time i got to the end of the talk though woah, was very cool, he touched on some really cool physics

Date and place of the lecture?

Naive question: if only 4 dimensions can manifest simultaneously, if a known dimension curled up at the same time that a hidden dimension manifested, would we even know? Could this help explain quantum mechanics?

It is difficult to criticise a lecture given by such a distinguished ( and charming) theoretical physicist as Roger Penrose because I have no doubt that I am listening to one of the greatest living scientific minds. As a trained physicist myself I am familiar with the difficulties faced in explaining advanced topics to a predominantly lay audience but I think he probably lost many with such a muddled and ill prepared presentation. Fortunately, Penrose explains his ideas much better in print than in a lecture theatre; I have read many of his books and they are terrific. It is a great shame that such a rare opportunity to listen to such a great scientist ended up as a disappointing event.

@ceejayc6502

3 жыл бұрын

But didn't it come together for you near the end?

I was so happy that Roger Penrose won the Nobel.

@DarkShroom

Жыл бұрын

for literally nothing compared to the stuff he can talk about

33:46 Best Moment^^ The little mermaid could have been saved by a beam-splitter and quantum mechanics ;)

You could see better into a black hole by shooting light into it whilst taking a picture of it with X-rays; or at least measure it's intake velocity and if it has spin.

3:30 it is the quintessence - the fifth (quinte) element (essence)

Anyone keep count of the number of things he would come back to in a moment, that never got back to?

@alk1495

4 жыл бұрын

😂

@justinchoir525

3 жыл бұрын

I will count them up. Be Back in 3

@joeroganjosh9333

3 жыл бұрын

Is it my imagination or is he, at the end of every sentence saying “and this is key....” ? But of course everything he’s saying is key.

I haven't a scooby what's going on but gosh i love listening to clever people 😁

There is someone in my house down stairs but my door is locked, I don’t know what else to say. I was tucking my kids good night then saw this 🤷🏻‍♂️

Please, make a intro animation a little bit quiter. It jump-scares me every time. And thanks for the videos.

@ggrey5990

7 жыл бұрын

Maybe consider being a little less jumpy?

@waldemarsha252

7 жыл бұрын

I wish I could... I wish I could...

@waldemarsha252

7 жыл бұрын

Yes... and when you got two spoons of sugar in your tea instead of one, as you ordered, just stir it as for one... Just be ready for this and don't complain. They post videos not so often and usually when you remember about the intro is when you've already clicked the thumbnail, and then you have a split second to reach the speaker (because you can't do this before the player is loaded, which is exactly when the intro starts) and turn the right knob (becase there's sometimes not only volume one) down, only to regulate it back to your usual comfortable volume level two seconds later. Sometimes I remember, sometimes I don't, and I believe there's peple who experience the same thing. It's not the end of the world but that intro is a bit too loud for no apparent reason.

@waldemarsha252

7 жыл бұрын

I'll just stop here. Thanks.

@mal2ksc

7 жыл бұрын

It is you who should consider making a change, rather than Ri. Figure out how to send your browser's audio through a dynamic range compressor. It may exist in your sound driver settings, or you may need to find software. Fou can have it turn up the soft parts or turn down the loud parts, but either way it flattens things out. This sorta wrecks good music, but it works well on speech.

While "Inflation" is a assortment of assumptions (inflatory field that never been seen /etc) - this (at least) based on known & tested theory (General R). Evaporation of Black Holes implies particles with mass as well, not just photons. Still, definitely interesting idea how to deal with infinite size/time of expanding Universe...

@suivzmoi

6 ай бұрын

it doesn't matter if some Hawking Radiation has mass. assuming there is baryon-antibaryon symmetry, then every massive particle emitted will be annihilated by its respective anti-particle also produced by the same black hole leading to both their conversions to photons somewhere outside the black hole. if there are masses remaining near the "end" it won't be because of black holes but in spite of them, from all the stars that escaped black holes and never had the opportunity to became ones themselves.

“ The Unified Theory”is the first theory published in this subject! I am the pioneer!

Random Maths Historian: "The concept of infinity has challenged and often destroyed the minds of the greatest mathematicians Roger." Roger: "Has it? Would you mind awfully holding my beer for a moment? Won't be long..."

@brendawilliams8062

Жыл бұрын

I don’t see strings and branes either. Somethings are just there to allow one the amusement, wonder , and the enjoyment of investigation.

Awareness is known by awareness alone.

Merlin apologizing for infinity cracks me up

Fall through. You're here with me, moreover you're at home, Roger. DOS

Would it be logical if positive and negative charge represent two extra dynamic dimensions within our three dimensional Universe of continuous energy exchange? This is an invitation to see an interpretation of the mathematics of Quantum Mechanics as a geometrical process of energy exchanges that forms what we see and feel as the passage of time! In such a theory the Planck's constant ħ= h/2π is a constant of action in the process that forms the continuum of time. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆p×≥h/4π represents the same uncertainty we have with any future event with the future unfolding photon by photon with each new photon electron coupling or dipole moment! With classical physics representing processes over a period of time as in Newton’s differential equations.

This talk is so scattered and goes in all sorts of directions and then pulls back to go into another.

Infinite°°

Humans and nature abhor a singularity, hence strings and aeons (aka kalpas), and ? uncertainty principle and half-lifes (aka MTF). Penrose has good ideas, worth hearing.

I believe chemical element #120 (8s2) is inside the center of stars and chemical element #119 (8s1) could possibly be inside of the center of black holes or even what dark matter might just be.

@brendawilliams8062

2 жыл бұрын

If you don’t get the numbers. Wouldn’t you always be looking for something else. Looks that way from every way.

@charlesbrightman4237

2 жыл бұрын

@@brendawilliams8062 Since the above post was from 4 years ago as of this post: Go to my KZread page, under 'DISCUSSION', 'SORT BY', select 'Newest first' to pull up all the entries. (For some reason the YT page does not show all my entries unless one selects 'Newest first'). You will find my theory of everything idea, the potential completion of the periodic table of the elements, spacetime info, etc.

@brendawilliams8062

2 жыл бұрын

@@charlesbrightman4237 Drear Mr. Brightman. I do not know chemistry. I am a hobby number theory enthusiast. May the best of fortune come your way. Thankyou. Sincerely

@charlesbrightman4237

2 жыл бұрын

@@brendawilliams8062 Well, since you are a number theory enthusiast, maybe you would like to know how numbers themselves potentially actually exist. (On my YT page, but posted here as well): (copy and paste from my files): 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have). And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well.

@brendawilliams8062

2 жыл бұрын

@@charlesbrightman4237 I. Will try again. But it looked like particle physics. I do not want to know that. I want to just to be a pencil and paper person.

is that Andrew Hodges in the corner at 7:15

Love Penrose! We think alike me thinks.

I've ordered his book bearing the same title as this lecture, to read and try to digest at a slow rate. But this all seems to be lots of theories trying to make sense of our world/universe's reality. Not sure how much all of this is proven, provable or true - he ends up with oscillating universes. Theoreticians will be theoreticians!

Heh... "The strings are fine..." But the violin has a problem? Or is it the violinist? I really hope I live long enough to see all of these theories resolved or reconciled. I know I likely won't, but it's certainly an interesting thought to have one final explanation of... everything. A far more interesting thought is what people's reaction to that might be.

Pure genius after Einstein

String theory is a mathematical explanation not a physical theory, all those dimensions, and how to test what does not make prediction? Absolutely agree, however it is ironic to me that the more conventional conception of physical dimensionality is more similar to this than it seems anyone gives it lack of credit for. 3 spatial dimensions is a mathematical convention and convenience as far as I'm aware there is no evidence for this as a physical theory, and I'm equally unsure as to how you would test such a thing as with the case of string theory.

It boggles the mind that a man of such intelligence has never noticed that the double slit is not a quantum experiment. How do we know? It's trivial: Planck's constant does not factor into its description anywhere. It's like calling an experiment that has no electric charge anywhere an electrostatics experiment.

❤hi❤ ### Concept Simplification and Background Until now, quantum mechanics has primarily been a theoretical and experimental field focusing on understanding the fundamental nature of the universe at the smallest scales. The equations and models developed, such as Schrödinger's equation for wavefunction evolution and Feynman diagrams for particle interactions, have provided deep insights but also come with limitations. For instance, Schrödinger's equation describes how the quantum state of a physical system changes over time without considering the probabilistic nature of particle interactions depicted in Feynman diagrams. Meanwhile, Feynman diagrams offer a method to calculate probabilities of particle interactions but don't directly account for real-time dynamics in quantum states. ### Existing Formulas and Their Limitations 1. **Schrödinger's Equation**: Describes how the quantum state of a system evolves over time. \[ i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \Psi(r,t) = \hat{H} \Psi(r,t) \] Limitation: Does not incorporate probabilistic interactions between particles directly. 2. **Pauli Spin Matrices**: Used for calculating spin dynamics, essential for understanding quantum states of particles like electrons. \[ \sigma_x, \sigma_y, \sigma_z \] Limitation: Focuses on intrinsic properties of particles without detailing how these properties evolve due to interactions. 3. **Feynman Diagrams**: Visual and mathematical representation of particle interactions in quantum field theory, used to calculate the probabilities of different interaction outcomes. Limitation: Primarily a tool for prediction and calculation, not real-time observation or interaction. ### Our Proposal: A Novel Integration We propose a groundbreaking framework that integrates the real-time observational capability of attosecond pulse technology with the foundational principles of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. This integration aims to overcome the limitations of existing models by allowing for the direct observation and manipulation of quantum states at unprecedented timescales. ### The New Formulas in Detail Our conceptual approach introduces: 1. **Dynamic State Vector Evolution**: \[ |\Psi(t + \Delta t) angle = \hat{U}_{\text{atto}}(\Delta t) |\Psi(t) angle \] A modified evolution operator \(\hat{U}_{\text{atto}}\) incorporates real-time data from attosecond pulses, allowing for the observation and prediction of quantum states' evolution. 2. **Real-time Feynman Interaction Integration**: Incorporating a computational model that dynamically integrates Feynman diagram interactions based on real-time observations, adjusting quantum state predictions accordingly. ### Uniqueness and Novelty This approach is unique and novel because it: - **Bridges Theory with Experimental Observation**: By integrating attosecond pulse measurements directly into quantum mechanical models, it bridges the gap between theoretical predictions and experimental observations. - **Allows Real-time Quantum State Manipulation**: Provides a framework for not just observing but actively manipulating quantum states in real time, a significant leap beyond current quantum mechanics approaches. - **Incorporates Probabilistic Interactions Dynamically**: Dynamically adjusts for probabilistic interactions between particles, providing a more comprehensive and accurate model of quantum dynamics. ### Meaning and Potential Benefits to Mankind This groundbreaking framework could revolutionize multiple fields, offering: - **Quantum Computing**: More efficient algorithms and error correction techniques, significantly improving computational power and capabilities. - **Materials Science**: The ability to observe and manipulate atomic and molecular structures in real time, leading to the development of new materials with tailored properties. - **Medicine and Chemistry**: Enhanced understanding of chemical reactions and biological processes at the quantum level, potentially leading to breakthroughs in drug discovery and treatment methods. ### Conclusion By integrating attosecond pulse technology with quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, we propose a novel framework that overcomes existing limitations, offering a deeper understanding and unprecedented control over the quantum world. This innovation opens up new avenues for research and technology development, with profound implications for computing, materials science, and beyond, marking a significant step forward in our quest to understand and harness the fundamental laws of nature. Inspired by discussions with OpenAI's language model, ChatGPT.

I was reading the title like: "...with Roger Penrose... Penrose? ROGER F*CKING PENROSE?!" Instalike.

And I'm having difficulty already with just learning javascript... What with having to deal with cats...

Ha style icon❤❤🎉🎉

Gravitating bodies reduce entropy. That means the total entropy of the universe remains constant and the 2nd law of thermo is wrong

has anyone read Walter Russel?

Certainly seems (to my simple mind) that he's on about a curiously finite 'infinity' at 13:40...

No overhead projector? :P

@akumar7366

4 жыл бұрын

Wow I miss it as well.

Mathematical Connection @14:30, "getting used to that idea", rougly equivalent to the Banach-Tarski Conjecture in principle of shaped and functionally counted infinity, similar to the probabalistic antilog of the exponential, or hireachic dominance of the "musical effect" of temporal superposition. (Natural beauty?) Professor Susskind's comment is equivalent to this lecture from another conceptual beginning, that of the "amorphous" Quantum Fields Mechanism. (Or so it appears to myself) Still in the same context as above, the caused-effected eternally quantized-coordinated phase-state of the universe is a basis for comprehension of QM as it is presented by the double slit experiment, a state of co-existing cofactors of primes in duality that can be extended to the infinite limit of Calculus and reciprocals in unity, ..by rational steps of superimposed coordinated calculation (QM mechanism), ..in an infinite spectrum of irrational-functional shaped-dimensional "strings". (Something like the "hair", or not, proposed for black holes) If the observations of phenomena begin with the Unitarian property of time, the Universe is a Mathematical spectrum of quantum information. (Combining the lectures of Profs Tegmark and Rovelli) Fortunately, Faith and Fantasy failed to dominate the Quantum Fields Mechanism in Temporal Superposition Fact.(?) In any reasonable Fashion.

Thank you for you Sir-vice... Omg that was lame 😢 Forget that, Sir Roger...my mind can't hold a moth to your flame, can't see the forest for the stems and seeds.

They should add Nobel Laurate to the title

I were having a pint with a gentleman once, when I came back from the loo he were being auled out and they put im in the ambulance. Away they did drive him, all screaming and fussing. Never saw him again. Reminds me of this fellow. G'day . . .

subtitles

What a glory to be alive at the same time as Penrose, Hawking, Dawkins, and more!

@himalayantongue

Жыл бұрын

Dawkins? Hahaha nice one

@vitormauch7367

Жыл бұрын

@@himalayantongue Ikr? Pfft Dawkins my arse.

I just like to rave on when I see a great thinker so don't take any notice of this comment. I believe from my observations that Schrodinger's equation does apply to the classical world but is not seen because the classical world exists in time, whereas the quantum world doesn't. For example, If we think of a male as being representative of a particle and a woman as a curvaceous wave-field of intangibility, then when the male conceives a daughter, his essential being is transformed into her. She becomes a male him. Likewise when the woman has a son, he becomes a female variant of her essential being. Boys will be just like their mums even if they have never met. Likewise for daughters and dads. Then we have the time-idea of death as going into another realm or dimension. As we are scientifically unaware of what awaits us on 'the other side'. we have failed to make the connection. But if we look downwards at our pre-existence in the womb, we see that we were of a completely different pattern in terms of: We were upside down. We were alone. We were in the dark. We drank water not air. We were fed all our needs. All these parameters had to die or be inverted for us to be born. We became one of many. We now breathed air. We walked upright. We were in the light. So if we take 'time' out of the classical world and look at the dimensions of life all in the same field, then we see that when certain criteria are met our classical world can become an extension of Schrodinger's super-position if we understand a few spiritual principles about life, death, and intimacy. That's enough for tonight I thinks.

What is he talking about with the tetrahedron and rubbing two sticks together? Fire and Smoke... what!?

@ceejayc6502

3 жыл бұрын

It is kind of a metaphor... the original "4 elements" which were eventually corresponded with 'fundamental' 3D shapes, back then they thought there were 4... turns out there were 5. A mathematician may help clarify what i just muddled through. Edit: Google: The five Platonic solids

I love Rogers mind, but he is talking to scientists here, not carpenters like me. 🙂 Just a wee bit over my head.

Wouldn't there still be mass in the form of the scalar fields even when the last proton decays into photons? We now have direct evidence for the Higgs field. Unless it is at a false vacuum why would he expect it to collapse?

If I had a son I would want him to be just like Roger Penrose.😷

I am the Ewok and he is C-3PO.

You get smoke then fire sir not fire and smoke

As someone who just listens to these talks out of interest, I feel like he was all over the place.

Interesting. TIME REQUIRES CLOCKS! If you go into a space for ANY reason where MASS HAS NO EFFECT, such as at the end of our universe when only photons exist, then, because photons are moving at the speed of light and have NO TIME (thus are stopped or nonexistent clocks), the concept of infinite time DISAPPEARS (no clocks = no time) and you can now GO PASSED TIME INFINITY (in effect). Second, without mass, physical dimensions also have no more meaning (waves are diffuse) and so gravity, which requires clumps of mass, also disappears. Thus, SCALE DISAPPEARS and a nearly-infinitely-large space at the end of one "eon" (using Penrose's term) can be considered, for the next eon, nearly-infinitely-SMALL without changing anything. His stacked cylinders in the last picture should have been a series of stacked rings, each ring thickness in the time dimension being very long, but the WIDTH (space axes) of each ring growing enormously at each step, WITH NO EFFECT ON ANYTHING DUE TO THIS WIDTH CHANGE -- nobody in each eon sees anything different than in the smaller previous eons since everything is scaled up in proportion!!!!!!! It takes a mind like Penrose's, who can handle Penrose Tiling in 5 axes, to realize such things. Wow!!!

@ericgraham8150

4 жыл бұрын

That's like saying height requires a ruler. A clock is just a measuring device. Like a ruler.

@nathanokun8801

4 жыл бұрын

@@ericgraham8150 Not in this case. If only photons and such massless particles exist, they are all moving at the speed of light and time has STOPPED for them, which means that there is NO LONGER ANY SUCH THING AS TIME (if you can'r measure it in any way, it does not exist) and thus THERE IS NO LONGER A CONCEPT OF INFINITE TIME, EITHER (the same kind of thing as "the immovable object hit by the unstoppable force"). No matter how long it takes, the photons can wait it out just like no time had passed at all. Eventually through pure random action, this timeless period will end (how, I couldn't say, but our universe started somewhere due to something, didn't it?) and it will flag the start of the next cycle.

@ericgraham8150

4 жыл бұрын

@@nathanokun8801 Hmm. I'm not quite convinced, but let's keep this going another round. I feel like one issue, is that we don't really know exactly what time is. There is much disagreement over whether time is a fundamental force, or whether it is an emergent property. A clock can be anything, you can have a light clock. And time could be measured by the distance that a light photon travels in a year. We already use light to measure vast distances in space, yeah? So why would time stop for photons? Also, Gravity doesn't just work on mass, it works on *everything* - all bodies, all mass, and importantly it even works on particles such as photons. Remember, black holes exert gravity so strong that it actually pulls light particles back in. As long as their are still particles and photons, time could indeed be measured, as far as I understand it. What do you think?

@nathanokun8801

4 жыл бұрын

@@ericgraham8150 Penrose's point is that for a photon or any light-speed particle, time stops. That particle only knows when it began and when it ended, with, to it, no gap in-between. Thus, to it there is no time at all no matter how long "time" may pass (whatever that may mean) outside it. However, since there are no longer ANY particles with mass of any measurable density in this now-super-enormous expanded space (assuming the expansion rate keeps accelerating or even becomes constant at a large value) only the massless, clock-less photons matter. Thus, there is NO WAY WHATSOEVER TO MEASURE TIME: That is, no "events" happening to sub-light particles that might still have any kind of temporal "awareness" (the photons do not interact either). To sum it up: If you cannot measure something in any way, you can assume that it no longer exists, in this case "time" by any definition we use. If so, then, by changing the scale upward so that our expanded space at that "time" is considered a tiny point, then that point, inside it, is uniform everywhere, which is the definition of "order" or extremely low entropy; that is, an "ordered" region has all of the particles sorted out to be the same while a "disordered" region has them all mixed up. Since we only have photons, more-or-less smoothly spread out in this space, which can be considered all the same, in this space, then it, BY DEFINITION, becomes ordered. Penrose is using "definition judo" to change what, to us, would be maximum disorder (mixing) to minimum disorder when viewed at a larger scale. His way of allowing minimum entropy at the start of the next cycle so that it can continue to increase forever.

@nathanokun8801

4 жыл бұрын

@@ericgraham8150 Another concept here: If you have a jar filled with identical little balls, half green and half red, but otherwise identical in every way. If you start put with them stacked with the red ball in a layer on top and the green balls underneath, then the bottle is called "ordered". If you then shake it up, the balls mix up and the bottle is now "disordered" with a "higher" entropy value, as defined. Penrose thought: WHAT IF ALL OF THE BALLS WERE GREEN? Then shaking it up does the exact same thing as the red/green mix, but now, when you are done , as far as you can see, NOTHING HAPPENED AT ALL!!! How is this possible? Something is wrong with our definition of entropy when it comes to the universe as a whole, when it is looked at from far enough away to be a tiny spot, at which point it looks like the green-ball-only case and, bingo, entropy is now small again. Nobody else seems to have considered things like that before...

4:50 Penrose is great but time doesn't exist

Toroidal Field

I am angry with the big bang cosmologists who keep adding more and more crap and just keep saying "oh yeah it makes perfect sense", forgetting what they were saying with certainty just a few years ago. This makes more sense, and doesn't make me angry at all.

whoever disliked this video just needs to smack himself with a book repeatedly, any book would do.

@schmetterling4477

2 жыл бұрын

They are using the bible, already, but it doesn't seem to make them smarter.

Well that was not one of those easy to get lectures I must say

So reality is a blockchain?

Infinity can't be a physical thing so how can infinity possibly find its way into natural philosophy, physics. Theoretical mathematical hocuspocus has misled generations of physicists. Starting with Newton dismissing Buehls view of the sun as electrodynamic.

He might be brilliant (as everyone in the comment section likes to point out), but this lecture was a mess ^^ Jumping all over the place, barely any coherent order of things. Well, interesting non the less but probably hard for anyone to follow, who doesn't already have a basic understanding of the things he's talking about. Some of his arguments were also very poorly constructed. And turning his back to the camera all the time also didn't help ;)

@xBris

3 жыл бұрын

@Dirk Knight sure, it's just that there are sooooo many overly positive comments under this video that a little criticism was definitely warranted ;)

@JK-pd7jf

2 жыл бұрын

He's an old man, age 86 in 2017, might be a bit forgiven for some incoherent ramblings.

so many experts in the comments...

@lepidoptera9337

2 жыл бұрын

And now you are one of us. Welcome, fellow expert.

I understood almost none of this

he looks like gordon ramsay in disguise