one of the many amazing things about this series is how brilliant Robert has to be even to talk with these folks and keep asking them the right questions! Sometimes they look at him like, How did you understand what i just said well enough to ask me that follow-up?

@raphaelklaussen1951

2 жыл бұрын

Robert Kuhn is one of the most highly-educated men in the US. The guy is fantastically knowledgeable in many fields, from biology to business to politics.

@TheZooman22

2 жыл бұрын

Yes! I was thinking the same thing, that is what gives this series so much power and direction.

@michaelhodsdon

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly what I was thinking as I was watching this.

@Sowboi1985

Жыл бұрын

I was about to comment the same thing and saw this at the top. He really knows what he’s talking about and I’m sure has learned so much along the way in his episodes, talking with the most intelligent experts on the planet

A quite smart and educated man interviewing a humble and careful genius.

@lordemed1

3 жыл бұрын

Lee Smolin is not as 'careful' as you may assume. Thorough, perhaps. After all, he goes against many of his colleagues by thinking time is fundamental, not emergent. :-)

@Pussik

3 жыл бұрын

My problem with these sudoscience programs is that they never really explain the problem directly. Always mask it by saying "its too technical" or just talk around it. Anyway, my regards to Lee.

@schmetterling4477

3 жыл бұрын

@@lordemed1 That's pretty bad for him because there is absolutely no physical evidence for that.

@nealbeard1

2 жыл бұрын

How can these programs be pseudo science? They are obviously pretty basic for theoretical physicists but for the "smart others" they are enough

@jd35711

2 жыл бұрын

i think that’s accurate

Wow. What a time to be alive; to have this info in the palm of our hands.

@skydweller2049

2 жыл бұрын

Geometric Genesis 🤯

Lee Smolin is a great thinker.

@micpin6810

Жыл бұрын

He just thinks. No useful results though.

@manasraj5640

Жыл бұрын

@@micpin6810 thinking does not have a goal, especially it's usefulness. It's the work of the engineer mindset whose goal is usefulness, which is very important too.

@micpin6810

Жыл бұрын

@@manasraj5640 Sure I agree. But looks like thinking has limit as well.

@mitchellhayman381

Жыл бұрын

​@@micpin6810 physics has gotten into a very difficult situation. Since the late 70's, the smartest people have been working on supersymmetry and string theory. A lot of interesting mathematics, but it seems we can't get our universe in de sitter space. It's also looking like supersymmetry might not be a correct way of thinking about the fundamental forces. Physics has not advanced much in a hundred years. There's a crisis in physics that I don't know can be solved. Maybe the best we can do is mathematical approximations of reality. The idea that there's a fundamental theory is very appealing to physicists. Maybe we aren't smart enough to properly understand the question? Maybe there's just no explanation, even though the question seems to make sense?

@micpin6810

Жыл бұрын

@@mitchellhayman381 Yes I agree. I think the problem is summed up by this great quote from none other than a giant of 20th century physics. "Physics is becoming so unbelievably complex that it is taking longer and longer to train a physicist. It is taking so long, in fact, to train a physicist to the place where he understands the nature of physical problems that he is already too old to solve them" - Eugene Wigner

What I'm always amazed by is that the great thinkers of the past, including right up to early 20th century with Einstein, were more or less working with pen, paper and deep thought. No computers or advanced machinery. They didn't have the huge advantage of deep space astronomical evidence or massive computational power. Of course one could argue that theory starts on paper versus the application coming later.

at 8:23, "which is composed of what exactly" .. friends that was priceless!

"Space is dynamical, which evolves, just like anything else evolves......the building" - Lee Smolin He said it in a nonchalant manner, with a straight face, and somehow the conversation kept going without a glitch or pause and, more importantly, without a question from the interviewer.

awesome interview

Why so few subscribers? This is a fantastic channel.

@wakjob961

6 жыл бұрын

leigh wiggin and a fantastic TV show on WCNY/PBS.

@acetate909

5 жыл бұрын

Agreed, the amount of amazing intellectuals he interviews is amazing. I only wish they were longer clips but I'm not complaining.

@Oceansideca1987

4 жыл бұрын

Leigh Wiggin right

@suntzu7727

4 жыл бұрын

@@ThalesPo 99% of the people will tell you that 99% of the people are idiots.

@johntexas8417

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah it is

I feel like this channel desperately needs a marketing overhaul and perhaps a video design one as well. It may not be *absolutely* necessary but it'd REALLY help the channel grow, improve and evolve. A few ideas off the top of my head include adding another interviewer (for video diversity), figuring out something original to add to each interview (maybe a certain question you ask everyone), and creating a new series of videos. You usually produce amazing content with very interesting/unique interviews with people most have never heard of before, on topics many never have adequately explained to them. Anyway, just the thoughts of a longtime subscriber.

I have his book. Changed my life.

@077di6

4 жыл бұрын

how

@johntexas8417

3 жыл бұрын

Interesting Christian. Guess what? Science, most especially QM's and QP's has changed my life too for the vast better

@jamesbentonticer4706

3 жыл бұрын

@@077di6 maybe it inspired him to become a physicist himself.

If you tube had existed when I was younger I would have seen these guys as heroes and wanted to be a physicist. No doubt

Wow, this was a really profound interview! Loved the ideas about the emergence of quantum space and its relation to geometry and general relativity.

The interviews with this guy are seriously interesting, I've been hobbyist researching quantum mechanics for years yet still found some interesting nuggets after listening.

This is gold.

I think I got a lot out of this careful interview!! Very good

highly underrated video

This 9 minutes of interview really blew my mind....

Nice explainer from Smolin, and good stuff of course.

@bombdottcom111

4 жыл бұрын

Yes he does well explaining :)

I love this channel

@Bondokill

Жыл бұрын

Cool

Love lee Smolin

Fascinating! Matter is also an emergent property so perhaps this idea is really onto something.

Great video and discussion- I'd love to see more. Why isn't there space if there is no geographic pattern to it? Why can't it be random? Because everything is connected?

beautiful 👍

Where can we get the whole interview? Thanks!

I am amazed by the clarity of their thought process 👍👌

Coming up with a theory of quantum gravity that is testable, and also figuring out why quantum entanglement works the way that it does - are, in my opinion, the two areas that will drive the next great leap in theoretical physics. Loop Quantum Gravity has an edge, in my view, because it is studying the emergence of space and time - whereas string theory, as originally conceived, starts with space and time as a given. Hopefully, we'll see some interesting experimental results in our lifetime - that points toward one theory or the other.

@r.davidsen

Жыл бұрын

This is a truly underrated comment! A quantum theory that can be measured is the key. So far, all measurements will collapse pretty much every quantum state.

That final zoom in lol. I had heard there is life on all the planets in this solar system as other ‘levels’. Around this earth too. This fundamental loop quantum gravity stuff seems to allow for that.

I wonder if there is a difference between the "large" and "the small" in that beyond a certain "smallness" (Plank?), it's similar to entering a black hole in which the rules are 'bent' toward quantum mechanical physics. The trick then would be to look at the warping of time and space at this horizon... i.e. to find the scale at which the laws change... ?

When did this interview occur? Does anyone know?

7:00 So, are we experiencing the gaseous phase of space, or the liquid phase, or the solid phase? Or is it something less common?

Geometro Genesis - the creation of the Geo Metro.

I really should start reading a publication by Lee Smolin. Can someone recommend a book of him?

So we're other aspects of the nodes like a compressed plasma?

Can quantum wave frequencies and energy amplitudes be relativized?

Sounds much better than String Theory. How does it handle Dark Matter (or, rather, the problem that Dark Matter theory proposes to answer)?

hmmm interesting

Im going to have to watch this 100 times. Im a doctor and Im thinking about studying physics for my next career. However, I would love to study its application such as engineering rather than conceptualization. Any recommendations?

@r.davidsen

Жыл бұрын

If you do not like conceptualization, then do not study quantum physics. It's all theoretical. It's all about probabilities. It has very little application in relativistic space. So far, the only thing I can think of are quantum computers, which stores its data in qubits instead of bits. A qubit is a state of superposition, meaning the binary code can be both 1 and 0 at the same time. Superposition is a probability, as famously said by Schroedinger: a cat can't be both alive and dead at the same time, but the possibility of it being so is still true in theory, as a mathematical probability. This is why computers, which mostly deals with calculations, is the only application for this kind of "physics". Quantum physics is, to sum it up: a failed reality. It can never come true, as it will always remain a probability.

Is quantum gravity about how gravity attracts wave frequencies and amplitudes of energy?

What about the undefined diade of the big and small beyond the light?

I agree.

And no conclusions were made.

But what causes the "proto quanta" to transition to "our universe" what causes the "phase transition" is it just given enough "time" all possibilities will occur?

Does quantum energy have gravitational attraction?

But can you produce any testible hypothesis?

Took me couple of time of listening to the intervju before i got it. Maybe thats why few subs

There is a classical model which will supplant QM. Photons physically are the entire probability sphere. An electron shell implodes and creates a low pressure shockwave which propagates at c in all directions. Which atom is in the right condition to absorb/detect that wave is the question. The resonant chamber has to be the right size. There is also a physical process which maintains fine tuning. Each neutron which contacts event horizon becomes vacuum energy and then Hamiltonian for Hamiltonian re emerges in lowest energy points of space. Conservation. Event horizons are one way pressure release valves venting energy pressure from highest energy pressure conditions to lowest energy density points of space.

The space -time coordinates exist in the quantum vacuum independent of black holes and quasars. Gravity is a variable of the quantum velocity squared. The unifying theory that brings together general relativity and quantum mechanics is space divided by the plank scale multiplied by the speed of light. How many times do I have to explain this?

@vjnt1star

6 жыл бұрын

lol, they just dont get it, do they?

But what are these actual "nodes" delineating actual tiny volumes of space. What they?

Oh my goodness, I almost have it....

What other phases can space become?

That got crazy at the end

You can see in Lee's bodylanguage the resistance to comprehend the gravity. Pity that may be its mere psychological barrier that stays in between understanding gravity better.

@patinho5589

3 жыл бұрын

Come on...

I think the availlibilty of instruments are the key... the problem is those instruments are super expensive, trust & funding become the greatest challanges...

@AAaxxxxxx84

3 жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/lpODx7Oxn67Vk7g.html

The quantum SEEMS so "strange" to us because we deluded ourselves into believing that we know what this reality is, based on our observations of the macro world. It is important that we don't allow our minds to become "trapped" in any dogmatic worldview or belief system, be it religion, materialism, etc.

@andsalomoni

3 жыл бұрын

Quantum mechanics seems strange only to those who think that reality is newtonian. We shouldn't forget that quantum effects can only be revealed at our macroscopical scale, in the sense that every quantum experiment is made with macroscopical scale experimental apparata. Quantum phenomena are about a "quantistic behaviour", not about micro- or macro-objects. The "macro world" is quantistic, we have to find how, when and in which ambit.

@jamesbentonticer4706

3 жыл бұрын

@@andsalomoni proper use of the words ambit and apparata. Nice

@nansir

3 жыл бұрын

Or even worse, the belief that money is real #ResourceBasedEconomy #EndTheMonetarySystem

1:11 glitched out

Smolin should inform himself about the results of Nima Arkani Hamed - in particular his lectures with titles including phrases like „Space-Time is doomed“, and btw for Space-Time being doomed then so is Loop Quantum Gravity. Actually what Nima Arkani Hamed means by „Space Time is doomed“ is just „Space Time“ is emergent.

Of course there are more fundamental things that can't be seen , like feelings , they bit inherited in matter like they are in us who are matter, but the way the are inherited are in a different arrangement of their components just like us are an arrangement of the components that are also inherited in animals or trees but in a different way

Aren’t they still trying to get gravity electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces to fit together ?

La geometría del espacio a nivel subatómico. La media volá.

Lee Smolin real scientist

So space itself, which is described as a platform for everything to sit, is made of other independent geometric objects networked appropriately. If that is indeed the case, I am not surprised.

@HardKore5250

6 жыл бұрын

Shean Crane differences in other universes

@HardKore5250

6 жыл бұрын

Simulations all the way down

Time would seem to be the processes related to the activity of photons.

@vrus91

2 жыл бұрын

Light moves at the speed of causality.

Boom.

from the thumbnail i read his name as smegol

It's your Strange perception of creation as a "strange" phenomenon.

There must be a "line" somewhere, everything can not be emergent property of other stuff for start, but if we take into account that now is 2021 and we did not se much progress in this direction can we now assume space is not emergent property of something else ? If not do we have some theory what is fundamental, can we imagine some experiments to detect and confirm it ? Where did strings go ?

@schmetterling4477

3 жыл бұрын

Why would space not be emergent? It has three dimensions and not seventeen. That it has such a property, that alone tells you that there is something that we don't know, yet, that sets that number to three. And why does there have to be a fundamental theory? Just because somebody said so a long time ago?

@mmenjic

3 жыл бұрын

@@schmetterling4477 I don't know I am just asking as you are but I think there is end somewhere it would be strange that everything is infinite in a sense that everything emerges from something else and there is no end to it. That would mean we can not know anything fundamentally we can just search and discover further and smaller stuff and probably will get bored from it and then stop :)

@schmetterling4477

3 жыл бұрын

@@mmenjic I don't find physics boring. You are only speaking for yourself there. Now, can everything be known? No. But then... I have never seen a contractual obligation signed by the universe that it will reveal all of its content to us. So if it doesn't, so what? So nothing. We will simply have to grow up and learn to live with partial information.

@mmenjic

3 жыл бұрын

​@@schmetterling4477 Haha no it is not boring I just want it all :)

@schmetterling4477

3 жыл бұрын

@@mmenjic And you can't have it all. That's life.

So,quantum foam is made of that? Or?

Can you have space without time? He seems to be suggesting that you can. Or at the very least he's excluding time on purpose to try to get at the foundational geometry of space.

Logic = strong .

At 0:50 the interviewer says "one is a description of the very small and one is a description of the very large". No, that's not true. Relativistic effects become obvious to us on very large scales, yes, but they EXIST on all scales. When synchronising clocks on satellites, or even within a laboratory, you are faced with relativistic effects. Quantum effects become obvious to us on very small scales, yes, but they EXIST on all scales. Photons travel for billions of light years, yet their journeys are quantum events. They don't turn "classical" after the first hundred kilometers.

WHAT? Somebody run that by me again. It's almost as if a thunderbolt landed next to me in the High Street and nobody seemed to notice

Time time time. Do we have enough time to figure out time?

Srsly the current frontier of understanding is that known 3d space is emergent and in fact real universe is made out of nodes in triangular propagating shapes, analogically to any 3d geometry that we have from 30+ years? I cant grasp the fact how little they know.

here is the where the spacetron comes in !!!!

Why are they talking about Quantum Gravity isn't it really Quantum Space ?

@claudegray2759

6 жыл бұрын

Well as I'm sure you know there's no such thing as gravity as distinct from space.

That was some deep shit.

All the possible geometries of space is just that: possibilities. All geometries of space can't be measured relativistically, only calculated. That's the problem with quantum physics.

Geometric Unity da god

Robert was far better interviewer the then!❤

The Universe is background dependant, and doesn't work with general Relativity. Speed is physics, so you have to get rid of time as a dimension. The 3D geometry comes from rotations of a 2D geometry like you can spin a torus to get a sphere of least resistance with the hole in the torus, and that would be an electron. There was no Big Bang so you have an infinite 3D matrix structure already anyway.

@pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591

6 жыл бұрын

I started to study physics at the age of 11, and now I'm 54. It was my own study from scratch, an independent look at nature from the outside. Although I started studying at the age of 11, I didn't start my own theories until I had an Amiga computer. Then I decided to start writing everything from scratch, and I mean from nothing. I wanted to start the universe from nothing, and work upwards towards nature, and biology. It took me 3 years to figure out what nothing was, and I came up with 1 + -1 = 0. Then I had more physics from zero than I started with so that is good. 1 is a filler, and -1 is a hole, and together a hole, and a filler makes zero. You can reverse that to 0 = 1 + -1 but you have to give zero a scale. 0(1) = 1 + -1 and 0(2) = 2 + -2. So zero has scale, and you can build physics from it. It changes the big bang into a matrix of holes, and fillers. The fillers spin around the holes so you get a torus with a rotational hole which is a spherical area of least resistance, which is an electron. Gravity is a filler, and magnetism is a hole. You work out all of physics, and biology by rotating torus to change the direction, and scale of the area of least resistance. You end up with a chaos of Lego... holes, and fillers that align themselves from chaos.

@wakjob961

6 жыл бұрын

Pincho Paxton ever write a paper that was published?

@pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591

6 жыл бұрын

I never send anything to publishers, that's like sending your invention to some inventors.

The thumpnail lpoks like when the alien jumps Dallas.

please send your talking in writing, It will better to understand

Why is the quantum so strange? Still waiting for an answer.

Okay, the Quantum World IS strange. But WHY? This is description, i do believe, not prescription.

Gravity is a super energy molecule. Its invisible to us. These molecules interact with all the other energy and most particles at virtually all times. Think about magnets and how they attract opposites. Gravity particles attract to our bodys for example, but they are able to attract the particles in our bodys with a force but still weigh down on us and everything else at the same time. The earths core is a big factor.

Indeed an unfathomable God and there I was thinking space must exist full stop. How wrong I was cause I was trying to tie God down

The fundamental nature of reality are two: energy and information (intelligence), everything else is emergent phenomenon. Time and Space are the same thing, two sides of the same coin, one cannot exist without the other, they has to co-exist, co-evolve, like ... like ... chicken and egg.

Can you make a black hole we can throw jerks into that attack nerds???

@jamesbentonticer4706

3 жыл бұрын

Lol that would be sweet.

Lee Smolin isn't quantum. However, he is strange. That is, relatively strange to resurrect Einstein.

Strange =movement by precarious No. 4.5/5.0. My opinion.

Maxwell started...surely?

The universe is quantum to God

Fascinating that Lee Smolin believes space is emergent, but time is fundamental. But what is 'fundamental'? Oh my god! haha

Gravity has disproportionate influence on large bodies. Theory of everything is impossible.

Consider the following: What is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'photon'. 'Gravity' would be the force that makes the sine wave of em expand and contract and would act 90 degrees to the em forces which of course act 90 degrees to each other. This is possibly also why: a. This Earth has a magnetic field basically 90 degrees from the Earth's surface currents which are both basically 90 degrees from the direction of gravity. b. This spiral galaxy possibly has a magnetic field on each side of the plane of matter which would be 90 degrees from the electrical plane of matter, which would both be 90 degrees from the direction of gravity which would be towards the center of the galaxy and come together in a gravitational black hole. And also consider the oscillation effects of these three interacting forces: (and might possibly be only a singular force with three different modalities): 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. 1 singular photon (or 1 singular force), with 3 components (or 3 modalities), with 6 most reactive maximum positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence, 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics 'works' in this universe. Also possibly why there are things like 6 quarks, 6 neutrinos, etc. A test for the gravity portion of my latest TOE idea is as follows: (I would do this test myself but do not currently have the necessary resources to do so.) a. Imagine a 12 hour clock. b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions. c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions. (The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.) d. Shoot a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields. e. Do this with the em fields on and off. (The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal effects.) f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects. (Including the utilization of ferro-cells so as to be able to see the actual energy field movements.) 'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done. 'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what gravity is not, which is still something in the scientific world. Science still 'wins' and moves forward. Do the test and tell the world what is found out either way.

@BrettHar123

6 жыл бұрын

+Charles Brightman The degrees of freedom and the properties of both the electromagnetic field and the gravitational field are well known, and observed over large orders of magnitude. The EM field is specified using Maxwell's equations, the free field corresponding an EM wave, quantized to a real photon, has two degrees of freedom. With charges, there is an extra degree of freedom which corresponds to independent electric and magnetic field strengths. This was discovered by Maxwell in 1869, and is still correct today. It even contained and lead to the Special Theory of Relativity. Later, using quantum mechanics, it was discovered that for a complex wavefunction of a charged particle , if everywhere in space it was multiplied by an arbitrary phase e^(igФ(x)), in order for the equation of motion be be unchanged, the Ч(x) -> Ч(x) - igA(x) where A(x) is an 'electric' potential and the particle must have a conserved charge of +g . This is known as the principle of gauge invariance. This example shows that charge is conserved when all complex number wave functions, combine to make quantum probabilities, |Ч*(x)Ч(x)| are unchanged by arbitrary changes of phase. Full electromagnetism arises from using relativistic wave functions combined with Aц ={1..4} the electromagnetic four-potential and the gauge invariance under arbitrary changes in potential. Why am I telling you this? Well, the main reason is that the nature of the electromagnetic interaction, was worked out in 1869 by Maxwell, after a many years of experiments by Ampère, Coulomb, Faraday and Maxwell. It was so exact, it lead to the Special Theory of Relativity by Einstein and Poincare. It fitted well with the new quantum mechanics, which showed at a microscopic level that a simple symmetry, that of a circle, generated the whole theory. Quantum Electrodynamics is the most precise theory known to physics, predicting the magnetic moment of an electron to 11 decimal places. The point being, that it is not possible for someone to come up with a 'better' theory of electromagnetism on their own, from pure speculation. The gravitational field is another type of gauge theory, one where the observations are unchanged by arbitrary changes of space-time coordinates. It has taken at least a century since Einstein and Hilbert found the form of General Relativity tensor equations [G] = 4пG[T] relating the gravitational field (as space-time curvature) to the energy-density of matter and energy [T], to really understand what they mean, and the radical redefinition of 'space' and 'time' they represent. It also took a century for technology to develop to the point of detecting gravitational waves, which agreed exactly with the theory. The layperson has no hope to come up with an alternative to this. It takes literally a lifetime for people to truly understand GR.

@charlesbrightman4237

6 жыл бұрын

Reckless Abandon That is all well and nice. But then: 1. What exactly is 'gravity' and how does it come to be? 2. Found any 'gravitons' that modern science claims to exist yet? 3. What exactly is 'space'? 4. What exactly is 'time'? 5. What exactly is the 'energy unit' of this universe? 6. What exactly is 'temperature'? 7. Modern science claims that 'speed' is distance divided by time. Modern science claims that 'time' varies. So, if 'time' varies, what does that do to all the physics formulas and physics constants that utilize 'time' in their equations? Basic math would seem to indicate that if 'time' varies, then 'speed' and/or 'distance' would also have to vary. And oh, ps, do the test and prove me wrong.

@BrettHar123

6 жыл бұрын

1./ Gravity is really what we call space, once all redundancy is removed. It is a field which is used to measure the distance between points, the time passed as we go from A to B, it is fundamentally information about the world and its relations. It is the field that all other fields measure themselves with respect to, it encodes the amount of energy and momentum within any region, it is dynamic with respect to itself, containing information about itself. At the quantum level it comes in small chunks, with exact volumes and exact areas, but unlike say, a cube, the surface area and the volume are independent, so in fact each chunk is a block of curved 3d-space. It is an abstraction of measured properties of the world and expresses relations between other measured properties of the world. How does it come to be? It came to be when humans looked at the relationships between objects and then encoded these relationships in highly abstract and increasingly precise descriptions which arose through an iterative process of observation and refinement. If you mean, how does the world come to be, no-one knows. 2./ Gravitons as a concept are probably wrong. Gravitons are based on the assumption that weak gravity can be approximated by a linear, non-interacting spin-2 quantum field on a flat-space background. The approximation on the large scale is a good enough description of gravity waves, which have been found experimentally. Trying to build full gravity out of gravitons leads to increasingly implausible fixes as each stage of the calculation gives nonsense, another fix is found, and the eventual result is 10 dimensional String Theory unreality. [That's what Smolin calls Background Dependent]. The correct quanta of gravity, are most likely similar to the small chunks of space mentioned above. They may never be observed due to the tiny size, at the Planck length, but they do appear to have the properties that contain the reasonably well understood information contained in any region of space, and that contained on an event horizon of a Black Hole. 3./ Space: Answered in 1. 4./ Short answer, time is change. At the fundamental level, at the chunk level, everything is quantum, which means everything evolves from one state to the next, approximately over a time known as the Planck time. But different strengths of the gravitational field, different field energies at each place, different field propagation, all affect the transition rate, with respect to other places close by. Another way to think of this is at at each point in space (which really means how we distinguish one place from another) has its own imaginary clock, recording its own time (ie number of ticks) since the beginning of the universe. This doesn't mean the 3-d universe, which we can call the present, and is necessarily unobservable due to the finite speed of light, doesn't exist. It just means that each place has evolved at slightly different rates, but in a continuous way between points. In reality, the differences are tiny, and slightly slower around large concentrations of mass, like on a planet, or inside a star, or inside a galaxy relative to a void, the only places where it becomes really slow are either on the surface of a neutron star, or the almost frozen event horizon of a black hole. This is the reverse of the old 4-d space-time explanation, which particularly String Theorists with a inferiority complex, try to tell the public that somehow both the past, present and future all exist, and that their experience is an illusion. In order to treat gravity in a background independent way, a way was found to rewrite General Relativity as a 3-d space theory, evolving 'in time', rather than a great "4-d block" that classical (non-quantum) gives as a solution to everything at once. The justification usually trotted out is Special Relativity, but it turns out that such effects are present in the 3-d theory, with a finite signal propagation speed, and causality. The sleight of hand comes about because even in a 3-d ever changing world, the "present" (which really means everything which exists), is unobservable, and that we can only ever construct our model of reality from what we see in the past, and different states of motion, lead to different definitions of "simultaneous" events, in the past, which really only reflects the difference in "ticks" for different observers, not that there is not a well defined "now". The only people which cling to 4-d time, adhere to a strict metaphysics where subjective experience is given no weight whatsoever, (thus making 3-d and 4-d formulations of classical GR indistinguishable) and despite the quantum unknowability of future states, go through all sorts of mental gymnastics like many-worlds quantum theory, and I think there is a good argument that this is all a manifestation of Postmodernist nonsense, designed to deny any notion of reality whatsoever. 5./ The 'energy' unit of the universe is the 'Planck Energy' = 1.9561 GigaJoules ~ 500 kWh which is the energy contained in about 20 micrograms (about a bacteria) of matter. It is the mass of the smallest possible Black Hole and the heaviest possible subatomic particle. All other quantities such as Planck Energy, Length, Time, Temperature, are just using different units which are related by dimensional constants like c, G, h, k etc.. which come about because original units like kg, J, m, sec, K were defined independently before such quantities were known to be related. It does not make sense to ask why these constants have the value they have, they can all be called 1 in natural units. The constants which matter, are either particle masses in Planck Units, and relative strengths of non-gravitational forces. www.wikiwand.com/en/Planck_units. 1 Planck length is 1.616229(38)×10−35 m, 1 Planck mass is 2.176470(51)×10−8 kg, 5.39116(13)×10−44 s 6./ Temperature is the measure of random motion of large collections of particles, and is proportional to the energy of motion of the particles in different states of matter. Temperature is one of the properties like Volume, Pressure, Entropy, Work, Power which arose from studying transfers of energy between macroscopic objects, which were observed to satisfy the Laws of Thermodynamics, mostly worked out in the 19th century. Statistical Mechanics became the way to derive the "Laws" of Thermodynamics by taking average properties of large (10^26) number of atoms in everyday objects. Assumptions like equilibrium states, identical non-interacting particles, 'black' bodies, etc.. were used to derive the simple thermodynamic relations. One atom, or one particle does not have a temperature. The relation between temperature and radiation known as the Planck formula, does associate a wavelength of light to a given temperature, the "black body" temperature, which can be used to measure temperatures of objects in space, and the temperatures on Earth and throughout the atmosphere using orbiting satellites. Mathematically, it was noticed that thermodynamic equations "looked" almost like equations of evolution in time. Time is change, temperature is motion, zero temperature means no motion, which is no change and so no time. One of the greatest unifications of physics has only recently been found, the relationship between thermodynamics, entropy (disorder), information (order), gravity (relationships ie information about things), time, and energy. Information is measured in bits, quantum information is measured in qbits. It takes work (energy) to manipulate information, in order to erase information, it takes work, and heat (disorder) is produces. All information processes such as computation, biological processes, evolution, stellar nucleosynthesis, solar systems all ultimately derive their order from the collapse of gas clouds under gravity, and gravity is the only force which only attracts, generating heat (disorder) and clumps (stars and planets), in which order is created and disorder is radiated away to space. This process continues at each level, the sun radiates "order" in the form of high energy photons, these photons hit the earth and transfer order to any molecules lying around, and the heat radiates out to space at night. The energy balances, but the "order" builds up. Given the right conditions, such as the right temperature, plenty of water and atmosphere, this order builds up over time, and is responsible for atoms becoming molecules becoming DNA becoming cells, becoming plants, becoming animals, becoming humans. Evolution is not random, the order grows according to the environment, the order will continue to grow as long as the environment can support the accumulation, which will be as long as the sun remains stable, then it would burn it all away. However, except the order, the intelligence on the planet, will likely have anticipated the change and gone looking for a better source of order, most likely a massive, rapidly spinning black hole, and live off the order in the massive rotation, for eons before it slows down, before some other source will be found. www.closertotruth.com/topics/cosmos/deep-laws-nature/complexity-and-emergence 7./ See 1-4.

@charlesbrightman4237

6 жыл бұрын

Reckless Abandon I believe we have had this discussion before and got no-where as you refused to do the above test. But, since I am waiting for my dinner to get done: 1. Gravity / space: What exactly is a 'field'? Quantum level comes in small chunks, what exactly are these 'chunks' made up from and how did they come to be? Then you say each chunk is a block of curved 3-d space. Which then leads to the question of what exactly is space that it can curve? Of which your last statement clarifies the problem, "no one knows". Hence, do the above test as it might allow us to know. 2. Gravitons: I agree, modern science is probably wrong about this one as I believe they are wrong about some other things too. 3. Space: You really didn't answer that one in #1 except for maybe in a circular kind of logic. What exactly is 'space'? For me: 'space' is energy itself, and currently for me, 'energy' is the pulsating, swirling photon that contains what is called gravity as well as the em forces. 4. For me, 'time' is the flow of energy, of which 'change' would certainly be similar. And I could show you in your mind how there might be more spatial dimensions than just 3 and more dimensions of time than just 1 if you are interested. 5. For me: the actual 'energy unit' is the pulsating, swirling photon of which makes up everything in this universe in a string theory kind of way. 6. Temperature: Modern science claims that the original singularity 'expanded and cooled' before matter even existed. So, 'temperature' must be something more than just interacting particles. Hence, for me, 'temperature' is interacting energy. As the pulsating, swirling, most probably literally eternally existing photon would be the energy unit of this universe, hence that would be the base temperature of the universe. All other higher temperatures come from interacting photons. 7. You side stepped the question. 'Speed' is distance divided by time. If time varies, then speed and/or distance would also have to vary, basic math.

ever notice that most smart men have receding hair lines? probably why I'm a DF.

@jamesbentonticer4706

3 жыл бұрын

You can't be that dumb if you are interested in watching videos like this.

Lee's down a semi 'rabbit hole' without inversion physics!!... and has not listened to Edward Teller compared to other academics in this field!! I suggest that Lee not examine 'Spin-Network' - but look to geophysics super-rotation of the inner core data (Mary Fowler's input) and Rob Clarke's wisdom...

You cannot unify gravity and quantum mechanics until you deconstruct algebra. There is no background. Only matter.

@jamesbentonticer4706

3 жыл бұрын

Then what is the stage that matter plays on?

The reason it and general relativity are weird is because they were both founded by the same erroneous equation from Max Planck's 1901 paper. The equation E=hv where E is energy in ergs, h is Planck's constant in ergs*seconds, and v is the frequency of light in Hertz or light waves per second. This is an unbalanced equation that cannot be correct and true when a unit analysis is performed. The unit analysis provides ergs=(ergs*seconds)*(light waves/second) which reduces to ergs=ergs*light waves which further reduces to light waves=1. This should never happen in a unit analysis, which proves the equation cannot be correct and true. There is another problem with this equation, as well. Both the energy and the frequency were both measured in a one second time interval during the blackbody experiment from which Planck derived h, k, and the equation E=hv. Thus, the value for E is actually 1 second's worth of light instead of being "the energy of a single light wave" or "the energy of a single photon." Thus, the equation should be E/1 second =h*(light waves/1 second. However, this equation is even more unbalanced, which means there is a problem with Planck's constant itself.