For those looking for an interview date, it's apparently 2012. Note that at around 7:00 he references a certain "last year" Nobel Prize (must be 2011 Physics: accelerating universe anomaly).

@socksumi

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, Krauss looks ten years younger so.

@daffymore

Жыл бұрын

01:36 This exact property of time is so interesting, it keeps me comin' back to Krauss, but TIME EQUALS THE DELAY IN TRANSITORINESS. He explained that in the Coincidence of Design, the moment stars, planets (matter) was able to form and stay in that form. That = Exactly what time is. He says it so brilliant, ofcourse Einstein was smarter than Krauss, but no one beats him on the phenomenom: TIME.

Please, please, start adding to the description of your videos the date (even just the year) of the production. For some people who value your efforts and are in the field of physics research is extremely crucial. Thank you.

@willpaterson1285

2 жыл бұрын

Crucial! Gosh I hope the folks at the LHC know exactly when this was filmed

@shootsbraw

2 жыл бұрын

It's also important to understand in terms of scientific timeline. Is this the latest we know? Was there a recent study which challanged thia paradigm?

@kylebowles9820

2 жыл бұрын

Just looking at Lawrence's face (Robert is practically timeless haha) it's between his books in 2013 "A Universe From Nothing" and 2017 "Greatest Story Ever Told So Far" ...I know that timespan is still an eternity in physics research lol Edit: CTT has dates for episodes but not "interview series" that I can find. I see this series on their website; oldest comment was 8 years ago.

@robertthomas4234

2 жыл бұрын

Look at the clothes and hair. This is 20 years old, and that's being generous!!

@cakershake

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for highlighting this! Knowing the dates of ANYTHING to do with science is so so SO important!

I appreciate this series because the interviewer is smart enough and up on developments enough to get the most out of his sources. Good for Robert Kuhn. Sometimes I even understand at least a bit of what is said, despite my cerebral feebleness . Lawrence Krauss is an agreeable explainer, always enjoyable to see/hear. Thanks, guys.

Everyone should read Ted Jacobson’s 1995 paper,”Thermodynamics of Spacetime: The Einstein Equation of State”. The key line is, “By analogy, the viewpoint developed here suggests that it may not be correct to canonically quantize the Einstein equations, even if they describe a phenomenon that is ultimately quantum mechanical.” Freeman Dyson said he had calculated that a detector sensitive enough to sense a single graviton would have so much mass that it would collapse into a black hole. He speculated that gravity is intrinsically classical. The search for quantum gravity may be fruitless. We need someone of the caliber of Kurt Goedel to show that. We’re still waiting for Goedel.

Theories that explain paradoxes that dont seem particularily relevent often introduce concepts that totally change how we understand the universe and do far more than explain away the initial motivating paradox

@NightmareCourtPictures

2 жыл бұрын

If you look into Wolfram's model of physics, i actually think his model is a true theory of everything because it does that what you said. It unites Gravity and Quantum Mechanics by emerging them from a notion of fundamental computation. When you think about the universe in this way...EVERYTHING changes and shifts in perspective that is truly mind-blowing. I've studied his model for about a year, and before that i studied Complexity Theory which led me inevitably to his model. When you think about the universe as a computation, those computations create systems that are complex and it's this complexity that emerges the bulk properties of spacetime, the bulk properties of quantum mechanics, AND it says something hard about the role of observers in such a universe when viewed as computation.

Understanding the "Scale" is forever changing............You know past benchmarks and must anticipate future ones from past measurements...no one can keep up with the rate of expansion otherwise.

Fascinating conversation that totally diverted my attention from noticing that it took place at Blue Lagoon!!!! I visited that magical place in June and just didn't make the connection until Mr. Krauss noted the location was Iceland- then, bam! The never-ending hot springs!!! If only a scientific epiphany had hit me as well, but I will leave that for bigger brains...

LKrauss here's why I appreciate you. your style of speech makes it possible and even easy to follow what you're saying for my non-physicist mind. some others in your field speak and my eyes gloss over.

First I would like to than Mr Khune and his gifted interviewees for their contribution to the common person the knowledge only they possess. No one can deny that his fabulous vocasts (videocasts) in 2021have enlightened many people across the world to the wonderful world of physics. I only wish I could understand a lot of what's being said by the bevy of heavy-hitters in worlds away prophets like Lawrence Krauss, but there is always something I take away from each interview from the very complex field of physics. We also all of you in science and all the health professionals in the world a great Holiday Season and New Year's celebration and a very good New Year 2022. Mr Khune, you make KZread a masterclass of learning possibilities. Thank you Mr Krauss for your bubbling contageous enthusiasm for the worlds away from ours and the star plans that defy the laws of physics at this writing.

I don't know where this was recorded, but what a strange venue for this discussion.

I thought the general consensus was about 100 billion galaxies in the universe. I guess that was a long time ago. Now, it's about 400 billion. Each galaxy can have 100-400 billion planets, if not more. And it all started in a singularity point. Truly mind-blowing.

@treesway2241

2 жыл бұрын

Completely agree

@superdog797

2 жыл бұрын

It didn't start in a singularity. If you meant the non-technical definition of a singularity of "just a very small volume" that's fine. It wasn't a singularity though, which is infinitely small.

@oceaneuropa1117

2 жыл бұрын

Did you mean each galaxy can have 100-400 billion stars?

@LordTetsuoShima

2 жыл бұрын

For planets it's probably in the trillions for most galaxies the size of the milky way

@treesway2241

2 жыл бұрын

@@LordTetsuoShima I get this terrifying feeling when I imagine just the sheer number of planets that exist. When I imagine all the different types of extraterrestrial life and what lies beyond the scope of current science I feel sad because I know that so much is out of our reach in terms of both distance and understanding.

Lot of wisdom popping off Lawrence Krauss in this chat

Good discussion. Thanks 🙏🙏🙏

What was before the beginning.? And what was before that...and before that..? It's truly mind boggling. It'll drive you nuts to think about it.

Very nice discussion, much appreciated. The Gravity question.

Q : How does quantum gravity effect the space/time continuum ? Thank You .

I'm confused by what you mean Einstein relied on great experiments to come up with General Relativity and that science does not come from people thinking in a room. Einstein was renowned for his "thought experiments" which requires thinking in a room and that is what he used to describe General Relativity to the people around him and support his hypothesis. The experimental data that came after is what validated his hypothesis and what transformed General Relativity into our best understanding of the Theory of Gravity. A better way of putting it is that thinking is what gives you a hypothesis and experimenting is what validates your hypothesis to make it a theory.

@EverythingCameFromNothing

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe he’s referring to the experiments conducted by others that helped Einstein come up with his ideas? 🤷

@fletch88zz

2 жыл бұрын

I'm not an expert but I think Einstein was in the right moment of time to expand on Maxwell's work and Einstein's "thought experiments" were extensions of real world experiments around electric and magnetic fields (light), at least in regard to special relativity. I could be wrong.

@kylebowles9820

2 жыл бұрын

Thought experiments are hopelessly unconstrained; he did a lot of work besides GR and talked to a lot of scientists to get inspiration from as well.

@johnd9031

2 жыл бұрын

Einstein assumed the speed of light was constant and that came from Maxwells Equations.

@DougSweetser

2 жыл бұрын

One key story was actually a discussion he had with a house painter. The painter had fallen off the roof. He told Einstein that as he fell, he did not feel gravity. Landing was a different story. Einstein thought about the house painter's physical experience quite a bit as he eventually developed the principle of equivalence. He did create specific thought experiments that are all connected to not being able to tell the difference between gravity and being in an accelerating reference frame. I know of no story in Abraham Pais's book "Subtle is the Lord..." a scientific biography of Einstein that would give credit to lab experiments on the path to GR. Rather, this is just a little verbal imprecision by Krauss. The precision of the perihelion data was already there. Einstein was giddy for a few days when he saw the Schwarzschild solution to the GR field equations was able to get that result. Clearly that was after. There is some question as to how good the 1919 solar eclipse data was to make the case for GR over Newtonian gravity.

I'll be looking forward to hoverboards once they figure it out..!! 😂 🤣

@TactileTherapy

2 жыл бұрын

you can come ride mine when they do lol

@newmankidman5763

2 жыл бұрын

Cristina Gomez, do not forget not to use it on water, as taught to us by "Back to the Future" lol, although I do think that it would work on water just as well

@CristinaG

2 жыл бұрын

@@newmankidman5763 We are SOOO overdue such fun, lol..!!

@CristinaG

2 жыл бұрын

@@TactileTherapy Hoverboard race..!! ✌

@TactileTherapy

2 жыл бұрын

@@CristinaG see you at the finish line 🗣

It is deceptive of this channel not to add a date for a science video. Science knowledge is evolving exponentially. This interview is old and out of date and to load it 1 day ago… without the date for context is deceptive.

When was this interview?

The most intuitive way to explain how or why a particle like a photon (or electron, etc) might behave as an uncertain location particle while also like a polarizable axial or helical wave ''packet'', given that everything in the universe from electrons to solar systems are in orbit with something else pulling them into polarizable axial or helical apparent waves depending on the orientation of their orbits as they travel thru space is that they’re in orbit with an undetectable dark matter particle pulling them into polarizable axial or helical apparent waves as they travel. And given that we know we’re in a sea of undetectable dark matter but don’t know where it’s disbursed, we can imagine that they’re in orbit with an undetectable dark matter particle pulling them into polarizable axial or helical apparent waves as they travel where the speed of their orbit determines the wavelength and the diameter is the amplitude which would explain the double slit, uncertainty, etc. No?

The smallest construct in the known universe is a "point" a zero volume container. Points can be infinitely close, yet unable to affect each other - points are discrete

Two words sum up why humanity needs a theory of quantum gravity. Warp drive. If we want to be a truly interstellar species, we must be able to modulate gravity as easily as we currently modulate electromagnetism. A giant leap may come soon. When JWST focuses on quasars and other exotica, we will get some shocking clues into the nature of a theory of quantum gravity.

Please give us production date (at least year). Thanks

I have a working theory. I have no one I can talk to about it. I’m starting to think the answer is actually really really simple: Gravity isn’t as fundamental as we think it is, and is simply a consequence of physics. The weakest of the 4 gets eliminated first. I can visualize a working model, but haven’t done the math yet.

@sus-eo7qz

2 жыл бұрын

😵

@chadwcmichael

2 жыл бұрын

@@crewmendotnet My theory as I understand to right now is that it’s actually magnetism that is responsible for what amounts to “quantum gravity” and that gravity is simply a consequence of mass. If you break matter down as far as logic goes, you can break a given thing down small enough to create a magnetic semimonopole, giving you NL, NR, SL, and SR. These would attract each other as legitimate building blocks for particles like muons. Other monopole particles would align with bigger magnetic fields, like a compass needle. As that mass takes shape, gravity comes into play.

I don't think I've heard a deal definition of what is "Quantum Gravity". On the macro level we say that gravity is the bending of space/time in the presence of matter. When we get down to the quantum level do quantum fields exist as they do at the macro level? Do we even know enough about the quantum level to that matter even exists at the quantum level or is there only energy which would not necessarily bend space/time? If I shoot a laser from here to the moon does the laser bend space along it's path? I think we don't know enough about the quantum level to even assume that such a thing as quantum gravity actually exists as we define 'gravity'.

@evanjameson5437

2 жыл бұрын

you are correct--the entire quantum theory is actually unprovable and just a hypothesis about a speculation..

@UnforsakenXII

2 жыл бұрын

We definitely do have several requirements as to what quantum gravity should be. There are many models that we look at for example JT gravity, lower dim. gravity which is roughly a chern simons theory but not really and even string theory. Nonetheless, any model is just as Evan said: unprovable. But we don't do physics to prove things just to model/predict and get a rough idea that satisfies our ego for the question at hand. : p

@quantumrobin4627

2 жыл бұрын

LQG is a bizarre theory of gravity, you should check it out, it’s background independent

@richie3602

2 жыл бұрын

lasers don’t bend space as photons have no mass

@UnforsakenXII

2 жыл бұрын

@@richie3602 Photons have energy and therefore contribute to the stress energy tensor and thus bend space : p

Brilliant !!!

Well explained Lawrence, bravo.

If "zero" is the phonetic spelling for the number 0, then you could evaluate the synthetic proposition, 0 is the number "0", when "zero" is a single syllable phonetic expression for 0, like æ for ae and a distinction between materialism and idealism, would imply a corresponding analytic proposition, leaving relativisms foundation, Godel's first incompleteness theorem, unaffected by axiomatic system Y, from which the natural numbers can be enumerated and the first natural number is 0, but this interpretation would have to be disclosed in the theoretical notes to exclude Kant's undecideable synthetic apriori proposition interpretation of 0 and the same classification could be applied to law of non-contradiction compliant math to separate it from the rest, including set theory, Zermelo Fraenkel set theory and from these, topology, measure theory and Lebesque integration, for instance.

Love Dr.Krauss 😍

The blue lagoon: nice place to hang out in the pools. Especially when its really cold outside.

There's one thing that I've worried about and that is does our brain have the ability to understand how quantum physics works which begs the question if we're no different than the rest of the living creatures who go through the same loop in the process of life. Do we need a bigger brain which can contain more memory to help connect the dots easier.

When does micro become a macro? Is there a measurable moment when this change occurs?

The great Lawrence Krauss. It’s always fascinating to listen to you.

Just awesome

What caught my atention are these words. “What was once large now at the begining it was wery small” answer is somewhere in those words.

Good ideas are a lot ‘easier’ to come by than good experiments

I think the tools and experiments we need to understand quantum mechanics are so radically different that they aren’t considered by scientists as relevant. The only quantum state that we have direct access to is our own consciousness, and I seriously don’t mean this to sound metaphysical, but the answers we seek are inside which is to say they may be in the poorly understood function of our own minds.

@perfectoid8376

2 жыл бұрын

What do you mean by quantum state of consciousness?

I’ve been casually wondering about this for decades and this video explained it to me in minutes.

Very interesting. Go Carleton Ravens.

"...our entire observable universe, all the 400 billion galaxies we see work, was contained in regions smaller than the size of an atom..." With such a model of universe, even mathematics can't handle it: "...when you try and apply the laws of quantum mechanics to the dynamics of space and time you come up with nonsense, mathematical nonsense..." Usually, mathematics can handle many things that physical laws don't even allow. But here even mathematics breaks. Could we maybe consider that the model might be wrong?

@Theninjagecko

2 жыл бұрын

Seems it could be wrong... maybe the big bang is an influx of matter from another universe?... or maybe our universe contracts before big banging again, but not to the size of an atom but larger.

@qwerther44

2 жыл бұрын

I know zero but instead of matter expanding I think of it as places where space expands so fast it tears. The matter isn’t expanding faster than light, the tear is, thus exposing the matter - for lack of a better term - underneath.

Tell me about electromagnetism and the Aether

If it all started with a singularity presumably gravity - if it existed then - would be infinite so expansion couldn’t happen? Perhaps gravity evolves? Just asking.

@wildman2012

2 жыл бұрын

Gravity blinked: Boom!

when krauss says quantum particles have many states at once, that's superposition right? but i've heard elsewhere on youtube that superposition is merely the potential for many states, but that the quantum particle is only actually in one state, which is unknown until measured which collapses the probability. i feel like i'm getting very conflicting takes on that point

@DarthRagnarok343

2 жыл бұрын

The Science Asylum explained this in a video last month. You should look it up, he does a really good job.

@peabody3000

2 жыл бұрын

@@DarthRagnarok343 yea i'm a fan

I have put those together all ready 4 yes ago I finished my research

So, what happens when an atom is split, as in an atomic explosion? Can gravity and quantum mechanical issues be examined in the first milliseconds? kg

Yes, that is correct. The distance is infinity. This planet, the stars, the universe and everything else (is) the anatomy of ourselves, including (all) life forms.

Next time conduct the interview at a nudist colony.

The strangest thing about this discussion is definitely Kraus’ voice.

Mass units, proton/neutron get their mass from the charge components which are supposedly “nullified” or “cancel out” in quark construction. These charge pairs don’t cancel, they become a photon of 2pi Planck length wavelength trapped over their own Schwartzchild radius. m=E/c^2. Mass is energy in orbit giving it angular momentum = inertia. Check the math. How this has been overlooked for so long…. Please explain why I am wrong because the math says this is how it is.

Good ideas are the start of a series of tests. The tests guide further research by successes and failures. That is the nature of science. The key is the amount of rellevent data one has to the problem combined with the genius and spontanaiety of response to each experiment. The biggest impediment to good science is the expectation of a certain result… if it tricks the scientist into not understanding the results of the experiment.

Is time quantum? How does the square with the theory that gravity is a result of the delta flow of time caused by that influencing mass?

Could it be that gravity itself arises from some quantum function, as yet undiscovered? After all, our abilities to measure, locate, etc. are reduced to probabilities at that scale.

Makes you think 💃🏽

People swimming back in the good old days? Great channel, maybe this is an old video, still great channel....

Absolutely mind-boggling. Extremely fascinating, though. I resonate with the 'coin flipping' analogy. After all, without the proper PERSPECTIVE and REFLECTION... one cannot make any legitimately intelligent distinction. If I shove my face into my laptop's screen, the image upon the screen does not change, but my PERSPECTIVE sure to bloody hell does! Therefore, it's truly about how far or how close one is looking at their data. Too close = not great. Too far ALSO = not great. But, with the proper FOCAL LENS, sure, maybe you'd be onto something. Interesting. Must give us pause.

Is that the Blue Lagoon near Keflavik, Reykjavik, Iceland?

I have a theory, the universe isn't actually expanding, everything inside the universe is slowly losing energy and shrinking proportionally to everything else. That's what's causing galaxies to look like they are red shifting away because the distance in between them is increasing but only because the matter itself is decreasing.

To say that it becomes important at the beginning of the universe sounds like a red herring to me. If you're inside the universe than everything is relative and you're not going to notice the expansion or contraction of the universe because you are expanding along with it. You would have to be outside of the universe to see that it is expanding or contracting and is that even possible?

You can't have a fluctuation without the gravity of matter slowing down time and shrinking distance. Matter and energy cannot make or direct themselves.

@wthomas7955

2 жыл бұрын

If my understanding is correct gravity curves space, thereby increasing distance and slowing down time.

@JungleJargon

2 жыл бұрын

@@wthomas7955 Right, more distance in what seems to be a smaller space. That's what makes life made of matter and the fluctuations possible.

Quantum gravity with dark energy comes out like this; all matter in the Universe around itself excite quantum space for expansion (pulsing by quantum oscillations of waves). But at the same time, the bodies, opposite each other, create wave interference with the expansion of the quantum space, for this reason, the pressure of the quantum space between the bodies will decrease, as a result of which the quantum gravitational attraction of the bodies arises ....

Did this guy set up an interview at a waterpark? Was he like, oh im taking my kids to the waterpark ill be free then?

What I don't like is the math tells us one thing but the fact is we don't really know whats going on... why do they ignore spooky action at a distance? For me this is as mind blowing as a black hole as it defies everything in physics. Yet these scientists just carry on their rhetoric of shut up and math.

While quantum mechanics might be about phases and phase shifts, the classical and relativistic physics (including gravitational waves) might be about condensed matter? If so, ought not the mathematicians explore different methodologies to combine the two? Of course the mathematics would break down and the results would be nonsensical because the two fields are incompatible to start with. Just as Newton had to invent calculus to describe gravity, mathematicians may have to invent a new field of mathematics to unify these two. Why am I pointing out something so obvious?

@poloska9471

2 жыл бұрын

Good thinking, though I'm sure someone somewhere out there with a PhD is working on the exact problem/idea you mentioned as we write this.

In time decay would help with less reistance from gravity. So if gravity had less restance, The expansion of the universe would had the ability to expand faster..

Why did the singularities of supermassive black holes sound like big bang’s in the making?

Ive heard mathematically they have made a recent discovery .. Gaussin Field ?

"We can understand almost all of nature without ever understanding quantum gravity", glad he cleared up how the 95% dark sector of the universe is an understood theoretical non issue that unification won't impact ....

@robertoalexandre4250

2 жыл бұрын

Quantum mechanics is outside of Einstein's time-space wherein dark matter and energy come iinto place because their gravity and expansive effects fit into a mathematica model. Or is he, we or I missing something? There are two seemingly contradictory physics at work. String theory is an act of faith and I think quantum physics, in its indeterminancy and uncertainity is also.

@superdog797

2 жыл бұрын

Quit being pedantic. Or worse, deliberately obtuse. He just means to reiterate the point he and other physicists like Sean Carroll have made: we've come up with a theory that explains, predicts, and describes virtually everything that occurs in our daily lives, and even obscure technological fields like space travel, geophysics, biophysics, and virtually all current forms engineering (maybe with the exception of quantum engineering - does that even exist?). Sure it's important to keep in mind that there's a lot of Dark Matter or whatever in the universe but it is irrelevant to all forms of current technology - certainly much more than 95% of human experience.

He reminds me of Barry Kripke from the big bang theory.

When is the beginning of the universe might be like asking where is the beginning of a circle? Nevertheless, my pet notion is that our universe is "digital" (the Planck constants being the individual "bits") and there was no "zero". And time is a quantum "click" that arises out of the fact that matter/energy transitions from one state to another in quanta. In our universe, time is one way. The concept of time wouldn't make sense if it weren't one-way, it's a kind of "valve" that prevents anything from happening in reverse. Gravity might be positive and negative, but time is always positive - at least on the macro scale (which may be quite small, anything more than a few nanoseconds, say). But there may be other universes where it isn't (or wasn't) and they either didn't develop into anything or quickly evaporated into nothingness (or maximum entropy). A kind of natural selection where universes that didn't have fluctuations of energy or one-way time or weren't quantized (or were quantized too small or too big) became extinct. Our universe is probably one of the very few "Goldilocks" universes that survived. There may be multitudes, but they either don't coalesce into something that clumps into existence or they are simply void without form. But (if that's the case) then that begs the question: what is the nature of this multitude of universes and pre-universes or universe "ingredients"? And how did that all get "started" (if that word means anything, that is)?

Where and what about another 1/2 of the universe - the antimatter? Without taking antimatter effect on universal existence into account physics is incomplete - the universe without particle-antiparticle entanglement. What has happened after the universal matter-antimatter decoupling?

Sound is off

something like that

So from my layman understanding, there are two reasons why quantum gravity is important. (1) We need an explanation for how a particle that interferes with itself in the double slit experiment curves spacetime, and (2) We need an explanation for how the hot, dense quantum-sized early universe turned into the large relativity-sized one we have today.

“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don’t know the answer.” EXISTNC

@ 7:38 an old man walks into Lawrence's head and is never heard from again.

What did he explain?

I know this location, it's in Iceland

Lawrence is speaking in a flow here. Probably because he has answered similar questions many a time earlier. Usually on his podcast he ho hums and pauses mid sentence quite a bit. Probably because his mind is occupied

I doubt physics will advance much until Quantum Gravity and String Theory are discarded.

Maybe the whole thing is just electromagnetic.

Create universes in a laboratory I suppose you have to go to uni to be able to imagine that

👍🎊Happy New Year 🎉👌 ✌🏻👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏✌🏻

Descriptions are not explanations

Q : Does Anti Gravity exist in the Quantum Universe ?

The non-dual state. Advaita Vedanta. Buddhism. It is accesible to the human condition, through profound states of absorbtion. In other words, the quantum levels are accesible.

maybe at first,there wasn't explosion but lots of particles or sth, shoot or move from the center of that initial thing, to all corners of that universe,probably sphere like and that's how interaction of those shooted things-lets' see it as balls- to other objects in initial universe has made these new universe as we know it...so sth/things else has shaped&expanded the universe as we see it now which means we maybe should be really looking for things on all corner for such particles that are escaping while expanding the universe ...

Einstein said: "A law is more impressive the greater the simplicity of its premise. The more different the priciples to which it relates. And the more extended its applicability". Therefore, thermodynamics is the one theory of universal content which will never be overthrown." Richard Feynman said if he could not teach a theory to a freshman class, it was lacking in sufficient rigor. Contrast that wih Roger Penrose' kitchen-sink gobbledegook. Penrose confoms to a model of physics which suggests that the discipline is capable of answering all questions of the universe.... as opposed to the absolute comprehensibility and sustainability of Anton Zeilinger's team parsing quantum entanglement. As razor-thin was his contribution, Carl Sagan nontheless knew thermodynamics utterly confuted his life-long insistence that "ETs" would answer all questions. His "contribution" to actual science was, "it's not at all clear that thermodynamics is universal". He knew he had to make a ROTFLMFAO attack on thermodynamics or have his sine qua non refuted. WTF OTHER "science" is cadged as : "it's not at all clear"?! Other than the "secrets" he alone is privy regarding undergraduate girls he is accused of inappropriately approaching, Kruass is nothing other than a 'physics beard' for Richard Dawkins. Impossibly , Kruass actually may have superior physics tO Dawkins, whom said (1st page Chapter 4, "The God Delusion") regarding Fred Hoyle's "Life originating on earth is as likely as a hurricane assembling a Boeing 747 out of a junkyard": Hoyle fails to sufficiently appreciate natural selection". HOWL!!!! SCREAM!!! DAWKINS THINKS NON-BIOLOGY RESPONDS TO NATURAL SELECTION...SUBVERTS 2LTM!!!

Gravity is a measure of energy density of space. Thus gravitational lensing is simple refraction. Light traveling through more dense medium. More energy dense because energy density is all there is. Neutron decay cosmology. Inevitable.

Is there anything that is not "quantum" in our universe? Is there anything that we have seen that does not come to us in "little packets"?

I’d like to hear someone stray away from the idea of time and move towards understanding the superposition that is here now. It is always, it is forever.

Excellent interview, but more admirable is that it concludes that the approach to new theories requires experimentation and demonstration as established by the scientific method. The idea that you only need paper and pencil to have a brilliant idea in discovering the secrets of the cosmos is false. Albert Einstein raised the Theory of Relativity using only his mind but his theories and that of many others are incomplete including Quantum Mechanics.

Supernova = Alien scientists trying to create a universe in their laboratory? 🤩

If you can’t make tiny universes how do you explain the grinch movie?

Quantum mechanics only seems strange to those who don't understand that what they call reality is a dream.

Is it a Panerai Luminor?

Quantum Mechanics is hard enough on its own without a bunch of naked people in the background distracting you.

Quantum is just a small part (pun). You’re never going to figure out there’s a bike if all you’ve ever seen is a rim. One also has to think about macro universe. Hopefully web telescope will get people thinking more about why space expands. Does existence of matter cause it?

Isn’t more momentum and/or polarity that creates gravity? How can one says “new” about the cosmos when it precedes any humans? Humans discover what is and nothing in this universe is new. Human needs to be mature, serious, Stoic and scientific in its search, not otherwise.

@giantopinionsports6119

2 жыл бұрын

The universe may change over time. There could've been changes in laws from just after the big bang to now.

Could be there is no gravity at quantum scales. This is much like there is no beetle behaviour at the molecular or atomic level of the beetle. So asking what is the beetle behaviour exhibited by each atom that makes up the beetle? Clearly there is none because it takes all the atoms of the beetle before behaviour materialises from the beetle. Similarly it takes a full universe before gravity emerges.