I think I have to sit still for a moment, while my brain reforms as a solid… There are no words to describe how incredible it is, not only to live in a time when these concepts are within the reach of humanity's knowledge, but where common people, like me, can take part of some of this knowledge from our homes, for free, on an otherwise slow Sunday afternoon…

Robbert Dijkgraaf can explain it in a way 99 % of you will not understand it. Be grateful he does it in a simple way instead of having critic.

Thanks for posting GreshamCollege. Wonderful lecture!

a great lecture. probably the first time I have had someone kind of pull everything together in an understandable way.

If you accept that there is only one electron in the universe, and that it can travel in any direction through time; and we also accept that the interaction between particles splitting and recombining is Dark Energy, then could that single electron that is propagating itself throughout space time account for Dark Matter?

@WoundedEgo

7 жыл бұрын

I hope Monsanto doesn't mess with our only electron.

@tylerlofall1879

6 жыл бұрын

Dale Mason if that was true wed use up the 1 electron on 1 molecule of water... dark mater is any material outside of our spectrum, but not created as a void

Black holes are an extrapolation of a purely mathematical model. It does not necessarily exist in physical reality, even not if you happen to have a very big mass in the center of the galaxy.

@SFgamer

8 жыл бұрын

Wrong. What do you think is in our galaxy's center? And how our galaxy is even formed? Just because it's never been seen, that doesn't mean that it is non existent. We know they're out because of physics . The math just shows us the mechanics behind it.

@fsommen

8 жыл бұрын

No sir, black holes are a mathematical phenomena that follows from the Schwarzschild solution of the Einstein equations, called Schwarzschild radius. So first there was the mathematics and it is and remains a model.

@SFgamer

8 жыл бұрын

fsommen And that mathematical model turned out to be an actual *physical* thing that occurs in space. If you ever watch "_The Universe_" on the science channel, you'll know. That is where I mostly got my knowledge in this area. It's a scientific fact that they're out there. Now white holes are a truly theoretical and hypothetical model. I admit that it's never been physically observated, but, it is probable that they are out there. Now, we can say that there are mathematical constructs and physics written out for this.

@fsommen

8 жыл бұрын

Of course very dense matter can be mathematically approximated by the black hole model, but it is and remains just a model.

@SFgamer

8 жыл бұрын

fsommen Matter that's been compressed to an extreme point can bring forth a black hole. This is demonstrated in a dying star. Black has even been reproduced in the Hadron Collider. Earlier in the thread you said that black holes doesn't exist as an physical entity, but only as an math or physics model. What's been produced in the HC contradicts your statement.

Exceptional presentation. So much to appreciate in this work.

thank you for being here for us

Superb lecture. Absolutely superb.

A+ for the lecture and posting it here! A BIG F* for the majority of comments! Seeing the state of the comment system these days we may just as well abolish it all together......

@Johntub3

10 жыл бұрын

I totally agree, brother.

@claudiot.crameri3195

6 жыл бұрын

Mind the rings around Uranus !

@RozarSmacco

5 жыл бұрын

Modern-Spineless-Leftist: “WAAAHHHH, people are saying/thinking things I DONT LIKE!!, Mommy!!” Sorry, FASCIST, the people WILL have FREE SPEECH/Free commentary If these words and ideas hurt your delicate spineless sensibilities then go do something else.

@jamesdolan4042

5 жыл бұрын

Being spiteful or a madonna does not help

@D3cyTH3r

4 жыл бұрын

Its so much worse now. Every other comment seems to take the same format i.e. "Me: Can you make a space car that flies in space? Elon Musk: Yes". And it gets worse, read the comments on any popular vid and its just hordes of kids repeating how cool and awesome it is -there's no intellectual debate anymore, there's no thought provoking questions. If its a mirror of the intellectual capabilities of the emerging generation things look very worrying indeed.

Professor Robbert Dijkgraaf is GREAT!!! Thanks for uploading!!! : )

Extraordinary presentation, both speech and illustrations.

in the beginning was the word... data..

MIND BLOWN !

I am honored to have met you...^_^ Thanks again for answering my questions in such a brief matter.

Absolutely well done and definitely keep it up!!! 👍👍👍👍👍

3:19 for lecture

My first words spoken as a baby were "data" and "matter".

@Ghostly-00

7 жыл бұрын

mine was ball XD

@claudiot.crameri3195

6 жыл бұрын

Mine was crack

brilliant! just brilliant! thank you Prof., thank you Gresham; for the first time some real understanding of how this holographic analogy applies for those of us not fluent in math. would have loved to have seen those slides he ran out of time for btw. any chance?

I thank your community contribution!

so what he was trying to say with that? inconsistent talk

@WildBillCox13

6 жыл бұрын

I think he was saying that scientific complacency is ill-considered when we don't understand 96% of everything.

@erik9549

6 жыл бұрын

That even ppl like you never die.......

skip to 5:39 befor that is useless talk

@jayrajganatra8782

8 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@Spiegelradtransformation

7 жыл бұрын

Thank you !!!

@factfinder6723

7 жыл бұрын

Useless? Excuse me? Getting a feel for the background of the speaker is an incredibly important part of a lecture.

@theresechristiansen9769

7 жыл бұрын

agreed

@tootsrr1

7 жыл бұрын

Yeah it's because you are thick put up your own You-tube Video LMAO

Very good, give a good understanding of actual theories frontier to non mathematical versed public

loved this lecture, learned a little, loved the way he illustrated some stuff - helped me understand some concepts better that i wasn't so clear on, kinda lost me near the end though, which is great, gives me something more to chew over. Well worth the watch all in all.

Not even the slightest hint that there are major problems with string theory, quantum gravity, conceptual problems with multi-dimensional thought, conceptual problems with a "discontinuous Universe at the smallest scale", major conceptual problems with Inflation, ... . This was a presentation that was too slick and almost propagandistic for my taste. There was just way too much flag waving,hand waving, self-congratulatory back slapping. In short I think it was an intellectually dishonest "lecture".

@theresechristiansen9769

7 жыл бұрын

I disagree: self inflation has a few problems not major ones at all. The conceptual problems exist in the difficulty of expression rather than the mathematics -as of even two weeks ago from this date there is huge work in the arena of quanta/self inflation and CoBR.

@bluestarfractal5434

7 жыл бұрын

V K, there is ALWAYS "huge work in the arena of Inflation..."! I am a mathematician. Would you explain how and when mathematics came to be accepted as evidence in science please!

@MeanBlueHippo

7 жыл бұрын

I think he was just sharing some theories that may prove useful one day to find out the truth, weather it be wrong or not, you don't move forward by not thinking about these sorts of things. So stay in the comfort of facts or dream big, you don't have that much time on this earth.

@nmarbletoe8210

6 жыл бұрын

I think you need to move past lectures for the general public, where everything is presented as a story, and up to lectures to college and grad students.

@nmarbletoe8210

6 жыл бұрын

e.g., Susskind in a Stanford lecture, "Is it important to consider theories where the photon has no mass? Yeah, because the photon has no mass!"

The very space-time concept, on which theories of relativity are founded, has been mathematically, theoretically & experimentally proved as baseless and openly challenged on the basis of published scientific articles; see it on World Science Database in my profile. Gravity has been shown to be an electromagnetic force as foreseen by Maxwell in the published article 'Revised Foundation of Theory of Everything: Non-living Things & Living Things' (at vixra, General Science Journal in my profile).

I've been wondering, is it possible to measure the speed of time? To be specific, an object moving very fast will experience time slower than an object sitting on your desk. So is it possible to measure time relative to yourself if you were moving very very fast through space compared to the time of a person standing at sea level on earth?

Though Djikgraaf says its very general... he takes us through a journey that's gives you the idea of evolution and need for quantum gravity... Loved the session .. cheers!

I don't know anything about physics, but I think it is interesting that the first man said that time is what prevents everything in the universe from happening at once, and space is what prevents it from happening in [the same area], and that more mass in one area slows the time in that area like some sort of compensation. I feel like it relates to entropy somehow, like the universe has a set distribution it is trying to reach, and it compensates by slowing time in a massive area, but I don't know why because I don't anything about physics. It's like time is an integral of gravity or something, when you affect gravity it changes time in a way that seem weird, but it isn't.

awesome talk! awesome dude!

is this singularity smaller than a plank length? is this plank length squared or cubed?

Nice animation depicting time as the fourth dimension. Much easier to visualize the concept now.

QFT is a "Tangential" idea that applies at the BH boundary (?) ..or at the nuclionic boundary where the electron is oscillating in and out of existence, because the definition of a tangent geometrically follows the continuous line of the function.

it was an eye opener for me to why we need to think at quantum level!

Thanks for the info. That is what is puzzling, if large mass is required to bend space, then how is that we are freely able to move in space?

Thanks for the info. I will check it out.

Excellent lecture - very clear for my pea brain to sort of digest

Fantastic overview of the modern science !

I like the analogy of the old map with the sea monsters we are still very young and still learning

,However I can see many similarities with his geometry and explanations with what professor Keshe has put into practice at the experimental level.May I ask this simple question?Why is it that Dr Mehram Tavakoli Keshe practical applications of his understanding of the structure of the universe and the matching Math. behind it is not at all mentioned as often as are other physicists interpretations of the same?

Great explanation, I lost it about when talking about the string theory. I just don't get it from then on. When I hear him talking about it, I doubt if he is sure about this as well.

Bravo, i have watched , re watched shared shared & studied some more Bravo, Professor Robbert Dijkgraaf, You sir are one brilliant mind & great teacher.Salutations from Southeast Texas

Thanks for the tip, I'll never know how I got through life all these years without that advice. Why don't you get a show like Dr. Phill?

I do not feel this adequately answers my questions, but I do thank you for replying.

This lecture is excellent.

Question : When empty space contains (zero-point) energy, how can Space expand; where does that new energy come from ? Or does the zero-point energy of space decrease slowly in time ?

Here's a question I've always had in mind...Do photons need a universal fabric to travel along our universe? And, does the universal expansion mean that our atoms at a certain point will be expanding size>>>since they collapse at black hole gravitational pull...???

But how do we know we are on top or middle or bottom of it?

@36:30 If the surface of any black hole holographically contains all of the information about a universe - can't that information be 'read' by using a powerful enough scanner/microscope? thus gaining access to all information in the universe?

Why is it called spacetime and not timespace? What is the difference between the direction of the two

Awesome. In the true definition of that word. You explain your content well. I've been looking to fill in the gaps of my understanding and have found myself with more than enough to consider (I in fact grasped my hair more than once) . This video I will watch again. Congradulations.

Well, I agree. There is something about us which looks for a way to visualise difficult things to try to understand them better. To get a really good understanding in this kind of area though, you need a good grounding in math, and at least some physics also. Not too many people are able or have an inclination to be like this. It was one of Richard Feynman's laments that some just wanted the big picture and couldn't (or wouldn't) use math. I'm optimistic that we will make progress though.

Im confused, if there is + there is -, matter antimatter, if there is time there should have anti-time also negative charge is this make sense

where's your model of the atom? just wondering since you don't use the typical one.

is it possible that there are pressure waves in space-time itself ? would this move galaxies in waves like a cold front on earth?

A gret amount of mass is required to bend space correct? so it means space is extremely dense?

Brilliant lecture! actually showed a new way to understand gravity and space-time. I always felt quantum phenomena were more fundamental than space-time simple by their nature... after all gravity increases as a mass increases, so gravitation depends on the amalgamation of particles, or quanta which must have a property that creates the force of gravity... and that entropy theory put everything in a new light

If you can't get smaller structures does this mean that the universe is pushed in one direction ? I mean there is no side to the universe , but if it can only be observed in the same way in one direction then it doesn't have another direction , is it possible that 1 particle exests in 2 universes at the same time for them to exist if the big bang pushed everything like a sphere , but we can't get to the other end of the sfere ?

Right again! your two for two....nice job.

Wow what a great teacher

You can measure the difference in time measurements from different reference frames. Note that in your second sentence you want to be careful: In your reference frame time always runs normal for you even if your reference frame (and you) are moving with respect to a clock on your desk. So you will think the clock on your desk runs slow as it flies past you and someone at rest with your clock will think your watch runs slow as you fly by.

Very interesting lecture.

question. If we built a line of super fans 2 km high from the north pole to the south and blew the air in the opposite direction to earth's rotation what if anything would happen

the picture is in dutch, as is the one preceding it.. standaardmodel is dutch for standard model

@FlockOfHawks

5 жыл бұрын

i never would have guessed ;o)

Well, he does have a point. What is an "atomic atom"? And also: 1. The spin exceed light speed, is that on the "outer shell" or near the center of this "inner atom"? 2. What plains of existence are you using, when referencing "it exist at 50 million volts"? 3. Where would one need to generate this "voltage level" in order to monitor communications between planets? 4. What is "communication between planets"? 5. What is Hyper Jump Light Speed?

Statistical Probability of Entanglement in big objects is the term. Also to bind the universe as one, we need to entangle it, but if we spead it very much, we create new probability distributions, so it becomes less likely to gain randomlike statistical entanglement, also the Universe itself can make less and less accurate measuring of it's components when they spead thousands of light years. This measurement uncertainty generates expantion probability. Expantion probability generates vacuum.

ooh I'm gonna use that term sometime!

Is/are there any real evidence to support the "one electron" theory? It sounds well... sound, but I have never heard of it before and would like to know if there is any real mathematical/observational proof, or if it has been disproven.

Great Vid and i learned alot

Daja-vue happened to me one time in Barcelona Spain. I knew what was around the corner before I turned the corner.. Really strange... Good point Yousef.

whats the difference between wrong and quite wrong?

Agreed. Another one is using the expanding surface of an inflating balloon as an analogue to explain the expansion of the universe. That one introduces the same confusion as the rubber sheet in that it mixes up the dimensions in a confusing way. The image of the expanding balloon probably did my understanding of an expanding universe more harm than good.

I love it. Thank you, Professor.

So that was my question from the beginning. It is assumed that space curves because of mass. We are unable to bend the space around us. If we so we can teleport ourselves easily. Does that mean it requires tremendous amount of mass to bend space? It obviously means space is a thing, so what is space made up of?

I don't know much about quantum physics and mathematics, but I still found this interesting!

My question was, what is the amount of mass required to bend space?

i wonder if the force pushing things apart could be related to the force that pushes fish food flakes apart when you tip them in the same spot on to the pond water ?

Well, I had a stab at both questions. The first and more difficult question as to whether photons 'need' some sort of field is thought unlikely amongst main-stream physicists. For many decades, it was thought that such a field was required (as sound needs air) but the early Michelson/Morley experiments showed this was not so. No experimental data has refuted this. As to myself, I am a retired physicist with wide interests. What is 'Mechatronics'? Thanks.

Are you comfortable that Mark, the earliest of the Synoptic gospels to be written, doesn't contain any physical resurrection until the addition of the so-called second ending by a different author (everything past 16:8); and that the gospels that come after it describe the physical resurrection in greater (and different) detail the further they are chronologically from the event?

Or, if we study the characteristics of sound waves we can speculate that the tree does make a sound but exactly what kind of sound can not be determined until a comparible similar event can be physically observed (hearing another tree fall).

I like your questions. Your second question about expansion is easier to answer. The forces which hold atoms together are very powerful and operate at close range. Gravity and other forces are quite insignificant in comparison. So, no - It is not expected that atoms will themselves expand given time. It's true that the incredible forces inherent in black holes will crush anything, but the two scenarios are not related in this way (as far as we can tell!)

I should've checked! TY!

That was quite a lecture.

Very informative video, really liked it :=)

Dense with what? no idea, if something can be bent, it obviously ought to have some density. You can bent an entity in space but if space itself can be bent it ought to be a thing and it ought to have some density. If that is the case, it contradicts our movement from Drawing room to the Kitchen. Correct?

because the Hubble constant has units of (km/s)/parsec or whatever, ie, velocity/length. why is that? well, because every region of space is expanding. so, if I choose to look at 1 meter of space, it will expand some amount per unit of time t. The actual expansion is quite slow, but let's just say I wait long enough so that the 1 meter expands to 1.1 meters, a 10% increase. Now choose instead to look at 100 meters of space. in the same time t, what will it have expanded to? Will it have

Mark, that is also how I understand the process to be occurring. However, it seems like there is a 50/50 possiblity of a matter or anti-matter particle being captured by the black hole. Thus, the sum effect should be negligible since there is just as much matter as anti-matter that enters the black hole. So, I still don't understand why the black hole evaporates from Hawking radiation.

Thank you !!

Dijkgraaf holds a lot of lectures here in the Netherlands, needless to say, they are always stunning

Amazing lecture

"Think" is the key word. We still have the Hebrew and Greek text and the Hebrew fits well with the dead sea scrolls so we are not worried about the text. Dr. James Strong printed a concordance to the King James Translation so we can look up any word and get the definitions in English so we are not that much worried about the translation. I hope this helps.

I didn't say quantum mechanics is hard to understand, though I think that the requirement of studying a few years worth of mathematics to be able to even read the language in which quantum mechanical theory is written is an indication that it is by no means easy. I'm not sure why you wanted to rephrase the second part of my post but I completely agree with what you and I said.

On the other hand though, inside a galaxy, we do not have informational loss among it's components, we have some overwiring though on the edge of the galaxy, just because it is more likely for an entanglement to occur inside the galaxial gravitational system than the outer space that lacks coordination in motion, and the most of the other galaxies dilute and fade away.

Very interesting. Thanks!

I don't understand your question: I don't refer to any particular model. How can you say 'The typical one'?

Great lecture! Thanx for the upload

I dont have time to watch the whole video can someone summarize it for me?

Of course, the overall gravitational system, cannot change at once, because of inertia. We have to mind that gravity affects only a small percentage of particles for a tiny fraction of a second, then the pairs break, and new pairs are joint, joint because of the natural statictical engagement-entanglement.

thank you so much.. this was some serious nerdporn!

if the essence was an entirely planned outcome, then the existence was designed with parameters such that only that outcome could exist. Even disregarding the infinite recursion we have just introduced by claiming a designer, we by definition establish the lack of purpose prior to design; therefore, the first design has no purpose. Furthermore, since the first design is purposeless, all subsequent designs are seen to be arbitrary.