He described a flaw of humanity: Hubris. In his wise words, we have the tool to overcome it and it is simply: Listen.

@jkrofling9524

2 ай бұрын

Instead we cling to our prediction models.

@808bigisland

2 ай бұрын

A tiny little bit of hubris on a tiny planet in the galactic boondocks. Not worth contemplating.

Maxwell's equations are actually relativistic, discovered too early (because they worked!). They transform well only using the relativistic Lorenz transformation (discovered in order to make them transform). Einstein was a genius who understood how to change physics to adjust it to the Maxwell equations when everybody else (including Lorenz) wanted it the other way.

@edwardlewis1963

2 ай бұрын

Maxwell knew MATH. He happened to be friendly with FARADAY. Faraday was an experimentalist working in a LAB. When a math physicist and lab physicist are talking, good things happen. "Come on down to my lab and I'll show you right now." The math has to match the experiment.

@glynnwright1699

24 күн бұрын

@@edwardlewis1963 Faraday was 40 years older than Maxwell and was part of a completely different social group. He was also borderline senile by the time that they met. They were not friends, but they had mutual respect for each other. Maxwell was a very religious and humble man, it would be entirely counter to his personality for him to claim that his equations were primarily his own original thoughts.

Turok to win the Nobel prize for simplicity explaining !

Maxwell's Demon paradox was the starting point for the development of the concept of information in physics and math, as well as it is important for understanding of the concept of the observer deeply related with the problem of measurement in QM. understanding of the phenomenon of life as one of the most challenging cosmological problems is also deeply related with understanding and resovling Maxwell's Demon paradox on the scale of the entire observable universe.

England had numerous learned colleges, other than those at Oxford and Cambridge, long before Maxwell's birth. The classification of university was defined to exclude secular organisations, but much of the contemporary scientific research was conducted in those colleges and scientific societies. Many of them were based in London, and Maxwell spent a number of productive years at King's College where he was introduced to Faraday. The work of Dalton and Joule was facilitated by the Manchester Philosophical Society who provided access to laboratory facilities for Dalton.

1 Scotland had four Universities when England had two. Saint Andrews University was founded in 1412, Glasgow in 1451(2?), the other two I can't remember the exact dates, but at around the same time. 2 'Bright kids were encouraged to learn.' Bright BOYS were encouraged to learn.

@glynnwright1699

24 күн бұрын

Universities were designated theological institutions in England. England had many other academic institutions and, later, colleges that studied natural philosophy and engaged in experimental science prior to 1830.

Excellent stuff. One minor comment: Adam Smith did not reconsider economics "from the ground up". Instead he eloquently expressed and somewhat formalized early capitalist ideas. My proposed theory, the Economics of Needs and Limits (ENL) does fundamentally reconsider the field by going back to human nature and core environmental realities.

Well said, nice little short. Peace 😎 ✌️. Perception

_"Nature tells us how it works; we just have to listen."_ I watch a lot of science videos, and often feel at odds with the reductive-materialist worldviews of many physicists. It's refreshing to hear a different viewpoint.

@DrBrianKeating

2 ай бұрын

Thanks

Niel Turok is an amazing guest! I hope he makes some headway while he is still young enough, not many physicists are as practical as he is. 👍 Perimeter people earned a lot of nobel prizes, its no joke.

@user-li7ec3fg6h

2 ай бұрын

Well said. Thank you!

@blijebij

2 ай бұрын

I love his perspective to go from complex to lowest possible complexity. Economic principle is an intersting perspective!

What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Hopf Fibration of Eric Weinstein and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Spinors take two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length with each twist cycle of the hyper-tube (4D) being proportional to Planck's Constant.

Great

they tried those imaginary theories just to try to deny the existence of god “Allah”, but Allah exists and created all of this perfectly

6:22 i am honestly shocked that phds need to be told this/arent already doing this. Maybe this is the problem with public funding- people convince themselves that exploring what is in their mind is worth more than exploring what is…ie the market forces naturally push participants to find solutions to real life problems

It seems to me that our theories in physics aren't really about the things in themselves ; they are theories about the ways we observe and conjecture about the world. This statement may seem tautological but pay attention to the subtlety of the argument here, which in many ways is Kantian epistemology. We observe and conjecture based on our observations and we gauge how valid our conjectures based on their predictive power. When a conjecture is deemed sufficiently valid we think that it must correlate with the objective reality of the object or effect being observed. But our models never fully map to our observations - there are limits to what we can observe and limits to what we can express into a model ; therefore we can never be certain that our models are in actual correlation to the aspect of the objective world they purport to address; we can only deem our models to function "sufficiently reasonably", to paraphrase Leibniz. And because that is all we can assert, we must also admit to the fact that our models are correlated to the human mind and to human senses. Therefore, our theories are as much about us as they are about the world, and we need to remain conscious of this limit. Quantum theory starts to make sense if you consider it as an artefact of human thought and many of our scientists are fooled into unwittingly making quantum theory its own critical object. There are classic Taoist tales about this topic ; for instance, "The Sage points at the Moon ; the Fool looks at the finger". Or "Two pupils were talking, fascinated about the way reflections we trembling on the surface of the pond ; the Master approached and told them 'It is your minds that are trembling' "

@deltalima6703

2 ай бұрын

Lot of words no substance. Typical philosophy.

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

Ай бұрын

Think for yourself - find the apt questions and answers. The Daoist examples - I discovered - in Zen teachings. Mmmmm. Good to relate - to the human side of thinking and apprehension of reality and the examples we use - to make sense - of it all. Still think that philosophy - will not explain the deepest truths - it is experience alone and integrated - within ourselves - which will count in the end. Thank you for your note. Fare thee well.

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

Ай бұрын

@@deltalima6703 Your reply - could be seen as rude or even dismissive - but definitely - not interesting. Explanation please. Is one - such a hard-boiled scientist ..... ? There are also these Sense - that smack the aspirant - in Dharma talks ? Fare thee well.

That was a really great conversation from which a lot can be learned. Please keep the conversation going. Imho I think more people would be happy to hear more. Your channel is terrific. Because both sides are so competent here. This is so helpful to be able to penetrate deeper into the secrets of the universe and recognize the laws of nature. Thank you very much.

@DrBrianKeating

2 ай бұрын

Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list

@user-li7ec3fg6h

2 ай бұрын

​@@DrBrianKeating Many thanks for your friendly answer. One of these is openness towards other people, which was explained using Scottish university policy. Striving to stimulate everyone's thirst for knowledge, answer all questions and involve others. Of course, other people with different professions also have different training and perspectives, but there is also masterful observation and work there. I have often seen that almost everywhere there is something to learn that can make things in the world more clear. Then I am happy about the reference to the role of the laws of nature. Which doesn't speak against wild theories, because they too are part of our nature and can explain a lot. Just thoughts are one thing, but what surrounds us is another. It's so exciting to realize how the world we live in is created and works. A lot of things are not yet understood, but they already allow us to make better medicines or use better materials. New methods for understanding and exploring. Something that can expand our understanding and further improve the lives of many. I also really appreciate the mention and appreciation of Faraday and Maxwell. Faraday also because of the way in which he shared with the world the discovery and study of the laws of nature. These are the true heroes of humanity. You also live in a society in which many people do good work that is valuable for everyone. But what such experts can do in their field can only be done by a few who, in addition to having such a clear head, also have the perseverance to continue creating knowledge despite all odds (in German science = Wissenschaft means literaly create knowledge = Wissen schaffen). I'm always amazed at what good thinkers and experts there are everywhere and especially among academic experts. It's educational and it's not for nothing that many people find getting to know more so invigorating and great. This can help societies mature and improve. May be the more people in society learn to think more finely, the better it would probably be. Science also shows what is possible when we as humans remove obstacles and work together peacefully. Besides that I wouldn't naturally never presume to know what theories are necessary. But sticking to observation and nature was often a good way to go. Our world is such a wonderful place and it would be so great to be able to know and understand even more about it.

5:03 kaos managed ceases to be kaos if everything is useful - like an orchestra or jazz.

Uhhh… Simplicity/ complexity Next iteration The following oddity: The first attempt to model the distribution of galaxies with a fractal pattern was made by Luciano Pietronero and his team in 1987, and a more detailed view of the universe's large-scale structure emerged over the following decade, as the number of cataloged galaxies grew larger. Pietronero argues that the universe shows a definite fractal aspect over a fairly wide range of scale, with a fractal dimension of about 2. -Wikipedia Weird The Mandelbrot set has a Hausdorff dimension of … 2 - Wikipedia

4:15 What blows my mind is that the general public is not really convinced about the importance of listening to the nature - they think it’s like rainbow energy and hugging trees and invoking the spirits or something. This point of view (that the only valid source of information can only be the nature) is significantly different from 1) every religion 2) the mainstream theoretical (material, Marxist, equation and calculation based) science, and 3) incoherent, brain-dead esoteric lunatism (e.g. astrology, ghosts and transcendency). Those are the 3 fallacies of intellectual discovery. TRUELY listening only to the nature is, indeed, the way to go!

And when someone does finally hear the music you wonder why he dances. Cf. Presentist Fragmentalism. Jeezuz.

This is the greatest interview.

@DrBrianKeating

2 ай бұрын

Agreed

😀

100% . A real scientist .

I've seen lectures with Neil Turek and he feels more grounded than a lot of what I've seen. When he point out the important of listening to nature, I belive he lead our focus to the essence ...that it is the only way to understand the universe as it works, not as we belive it works. We can't think it up, or use programed supercomputers to simulate, ...we can only interpret nature, and by this; -learn something about it. The computer-simulations can easily be overused and get weight that can distract us from what the real nature/univers shows us. That said... it's a cool thing those simulations. I just don't belive it's proff of the real world. Only visualizations of how theories can work out.

Neil mentioning Scottish greats Adam Smith next to Maxwell, for me has won the sincerity prize. Adam Smith's ideas of personal and economic freedom are missed dearly nowadays, and Maxwell is seriously underrated in physics. So then; Neil must be for real. I just hope that in his quest for simplicity he goes all the way and do away with all the other dead ends as well; There is no Dark Matter, just a galactic optical illusion. There is no Dark Energy, only our incorrect human interpretation of what causes galactic redshift. And there is no deeper understanding to be gained in looking for more elementary particles. I am sure we will find some given higher energies, but they are irrelevant. The only true fundamental theory is Einstein's Special Relativity even if Albert literally omitted literally half of the complete theory. It is simply the acknowledgement that motion distorts the grid and as per dual reflexivity the grid influences the object that is moving in, to an equal extend. in slightly different terms; speed contracts frontal spacetime and wraps these continuous fieldlines as orthogonal integers (quanta) of energy (inverse space) and mass (inverse time, as per Penrose) around th speeding object, defacto forming a smaller scale energymass grid around the speeding object. it is not unliike the standing eddy-like waves like Maxwell proposed. The reverse being true as well ofcourse; move inside the energymass grid (with speed expressed as J/kg, charge density) and you will contract it frontally, while generating emergent spacetime around you. Think spacetime around our star as it moves through the energymass dominated grid forming our galactic plane. This is the essence of physics on any scale.

1 predicted gravitational constant gradient according to projective unified field theory = (-0.0123456789.. c^3/(2 pi Universe mass)) unifies the 🌎 ((-0.0123456789.. m/s)^3 /Earth mass) to The Universe asymptotically. 🌃

Neil Turok is out (* from being under), of control.

I agree with Neil. Simple and look at the facts so you can see through the obfuscating constructs of physics. And here is how you do it: Use the continuous theorems / proofs of physics - which are Noethers theorem and the No Hiding Theorem to error correct quantum theory. These theorems are at the tautological roots of reality and thus have broad precedence over quatum theory which is arbitrary collection of non-proof principles. What results is the correction of the discontinuities of quantum theory that is contiuous. Ie work out the deeper continuity behind the apparent discontinuity of quantum theory. Then unification of QM with the continuously defined GR becomes possible. See - easy and simple. Dont say i didnt tell ya. :)

When are scientists going to figure out that the changes in the measures of time and distance due to the amount of gravity in the vicinity change the speed of everything including light? Understanding gravity and general relativity makes everything so simple. Speed is measured by time and distance so whenever time and distance are altered, the speed is altered. It's not complicated. *If you have a different size cubit you will change the size of the house that you build with it.* Lightspeed 186,000 miles per second is how we observe C with a constant rate of time and a fixed measure of distance. Another observer in another place in the universe with a different frame of reference will see light speed 186,000 miles per second too except the frame of reference is not the same since it is a different size of 186,000 miles and a different rate of time which alters the speed of light compared to our reference frame. The significance of this is that when we observe other galaxies in outer space covering great distances, we are not looking at a fixed measure of distance or a single rate of time because time speeds up and distance is stretched the farther away from the center of the galaxy that it is. If we look at something traveling near the event horizon of a black hole, it will look stopped to us because of how slow it is traveling. If we look at something traveling the opposite direction from us away from the black hole, it will be moving much faster and increasing with speed because the rate of time keeps getting faster and the measure of distance keeps stretching more and more the farther away from the center of the galaxy it is. This is the reason for superluminal motion and the faster than expected speeds of the outer spiral arms of the galaxies. Things appear to be going faster in outer space because they are going faster without breaking the speed of light because of the changes in the rates of time and the measures of distance in general relativity depending on how much gravity there is in the vicinity.

Come with me and you'll see a world with physics based on reality.

Yes the Universe tells you everything that you need to know.. not sure why he mentioned the Big Bang.

@redshiftdrift

2 ай бұрын

Turok mentioned the Big Bang because it doesn't explain observations. Cosmologists are not listening (they're not looking either), instead they maintain the Big Bang alive by inventing all sorts of crazy hypotheses, starting with the multiverse, dark energy, dark matter, etc...

You all are still not listening.

Start with the simple ‘concept’: Galilean relative motion; almost there. Where? “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics including the CAUSE of gravity, electricity, magnetism, light and well..... everything. Too simple for the modern brain. Sorry (NOT) to Turok!

Well said Neil Turok. Cosmology has the same problem: cosmologists make up all sorts of things when nature shows them they are wrong.

Hi Dr. Neil Turok, I am so pleased to see you back in the popular interview cycle, and that you are still working closely with Latham Boyle! This somewhat cryptic interview (no papers mentioned!) prompted me to look for what you have been doing since your excellent (yes, I'm biased) dual-universe work, which is the only plausible solution to the missing antimatter problem if you consider chirality. At least from their titles, your new papers look interesting indeed. I also hope you are still doing that work with the South African youth you mentioned a couple of years ago -- what a great idea!

@TerryBollinger

2 ай бұрын

First paper check: Real-time Feynman path integrals! Now _that_ is some truly interesting physics! This is the boundary region where folks can finally transition from dumb block universes that explain absolutely nothing (who made the block, and how?) to singular-reality structures that actually _predict_ something. Great stuff!

Good to see non-conformist scientists discussing the problem . . (with smiles on their faces no less ; )

The Higgs was found???

@MobiusCoin

Ай бұрын

Yes, in 2013

The problem with PHYSICS these days is that its TOO OLD....I mean those that are and claim to be at its forefront are too OLD. Look back at the great minds in history and what age they were when they made great advances... Einstein was 26...Maxwell was 34...Feynman was 32..Bohr 28... Let's look at todays Physicists that you interview.....THEY ARE ALL OLD MEN...WITH VERY LITTLE MOTIVATION TO THINK OUTSIDE OF THE BOX..... Even Eric is OLD.... You need to look at what the young minds are doing and stop trolling AARP Physicists.

@warriordx5520

2 ай бұрын

Damn right

@4pharaoh

2 ай бұрын

Being old is the result of the control. You must publish, but you can’t publish without review, you can’t review without the old guys putting their ok on it. It’s the control, that handicaps the young. Why some physicists doesn’t open an alternative website, where anything can be published is a mystery to me.

@raymond7451

2 ай бұрын

Im no physicist , but new talent is a must to progress . Like you I heaar the same guys rambling there stuff . Would love to see the next generation . Im 51 yrs old and own my business . Ive survived because Ive always looked ahead never back .