Timestamps and Sponsors: - Brilliant: brilliant.org/TOE for 20% off 00:00:00 Introduction 00:01:53 The philosophy of physics 00:04:18 Physics without numbers 00:20:20 Truth and mathematics 00:29:08 Pythagoras didn't scorn irrational numbers 00:31:31 Geometry is at the core of reality 00:39:11 Sometimes the data is incorrect (efficiency of detectors) 00:45:02 Bell's theorem, quantum mechanics, non-locality, and realism 00:50:38 Superdeterminism and Retrocausality 01:27:08 Quantum Foundations (five books to become an expert) 01:31:10 "Beables" - What physically exists? 01:33:57 The Mathematical Universe is a confusion 01:38:31 Spatialize time? Or temporalize space? 01:46:37 Against Occam's Razor, Feynman, and Backward Time 01:56:56 Time is not an illusion 02:01:50 Quantum mechanics with observers 02:08:36 Classifying different quantum theories (and thoughts on Penrose) 02:16:25 Overview of Pilot Wave Theory (Bohmian Mechanics) 02:20:18 Philosophy vs. Physics vs. Math 02:28:53 Consciousness is the hardest question 02:32:28 Disproofs of functionalism and computational consciousness 02:37:15 Wolfram 02:38:56 Arrow of time (entropic / thermal time) 02:41:49 Bergson, Einstein, and Bohm 02:44:48 Bell was the sweetest man (personal stories from Tim) 02:50:54 Causation, Pearle, and keeping your mind sharp

@ernieb820

Жыл бұрын

Bro I just got off work and was watching the latest stream. And you set it to private when I was in the middle of it. Now I have to wait days to finish it while you edit it....

@Farmer_26

Жыл бұрын

curt i have always wanted to get your opinion on dmt/ psychedelics being a mental gateway to another Dimension or perhaps something or somewhere else, with all that one takes away from a properly done experience and with so many that have won the Nobel prize or major inventors have admitted to using these substances Many that have these experiences seem to have the same experience of a entity relaying a message or messages At one time these substances were a big part of past cultures yet for a long time these substances were suspiciously kept from us and demonized Would love to get any thoughts you might have on the subject Btw I’m not advocating the use to anyone as these things must be used extremely cautiously and can have negative effects if used improperly

@bogdangherghe3252

Жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/hpl1tcOknZjTibw.html Get Jack Sarfatti................................

@lucjosts7076

Жыл бұрын

Hey what's up with the interview with Steven Greer? Was looking forward to that yesterday (and this is the only way I can message you). You got some great guests besides. Keep it up man.

@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler

Жыл бұрын

The more you zoom in or zoom out the more the fact that you live in a kaleidoscope fractal reality becomes apparent.

Decided to finally go to university at 25 to study physics because of your videos Curt. Maybe I’ll amass enough knowledge to be interviewed someday. Believe me if I do I’ll come back and reference this comment and channel. Thank you for inspiring me Curt.

@TheoriesofEverything

Жыл бұрын

Wow I'm so glad! I'll hold you to that :). Come back and let us all know, friend.

@robertrozier2940

Жыл бұрын

Awesome! Thinking of doing something similar at age 48! It’s never too late !

@jwlafferty

Жыл бұрын

You almost make it sound like 25 is old to go back to university. I went back at 25 to be a lawyer (though I was getting too old to go back). Best decision I could have made federal appellate clerkship, elite firms, live on a tropical island now, etc.) If you think you're too old to go back to school, place yourself 5-10 years out and ask yourself whether you'd be happier doing what you currently do at that age or doing what you could go to school for.

@avb5335

Жыл бұрын

@@robertrozier2940 do it! I’m currently in PA school at 40 and our oldest person is 47…. It’s never too late, until you’re 6 feet under. Don’t reach 50 and have regrets of not starting at 48. Good luck, friend, and may you have a wonderful March!

@Iam590

11 ай бұрын

The Observer is the Universe itself ✌️

This guy is different. He's thinking outside the box. I never heard some of these perspectives before especially describing reality without numbers or numbers are labels or coordinates and so on. Maybe never would have known about this guy if it wasn't for TOE. Thanks so much.

@TheoriesofEverything

Жыл бұрын

I'm glad!

@James-ll3jb

8 ай бұрын

"Our science is fundamentally anti-intellectual by nature. All it does is MEASURE things!" ~ Nietzsche

Tim just blows my mind. I’ve been listening to this podcast over the course of many days now because I need to rest my brain in between sessions. This guy is just amazing thank you for having him on and thank you Tim for coming on.

@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885

Жыл бұрын

He's awesome but I don't agree with him.

Feels unreal to listen to this in such an easy manner. With just a click. And understanding it... Thank you Curt, you are doing one of the most incredible things that can be done; spreading the area of highest states of consciousness. I hope to do that in my native language, in my own way too, and you are a big contributer of it.

Now *this* is a foundational thinker! Thank you, both! 💥💥💥

@colinadevivero

Жыл бұрын

Outstanding

@hamletwinston7239

Жыл бұрын

When will Curt be interviewing you on the CTMU? You tend to explain it in a more digestible way than Langan

@Self-Duality

Жыл бұрын

@@hamletwinston7239 Even if Curt were to invite me (not happening), I’m afraid I would decline - I am, at least for the foreseeable future, a pure presenter and interviewer, not an interviewee. I do not enjoy being interviewed 😌💭

@hamletwinston7239

Жыл бұрын

@@Self-Duality roger that!

@Self-Duality

Жыл бұрын

@@hamletwinston7239 I will be inviting and interviewing guests on the channel soon - stay tuned!

Tim Maudlin is brilliant with zero pretension, a rare quality.

New podcast fan here! Ive recently decided to apply to go back to uni and study philosophy of science. Ive been binging your podcast and the guests you have on are seriously impressive! Thank you for keeping me interested in physics.

“I don’t have any problem with integers… if you have something to count.” Nice 😂💭

I'm more of a conceptual thinker and struggle with math, Tim Maudlin is perfect for this. He clearly explains things in simple and precise ways, and half way through the podcast I've realised who he reminds me of, he has the same mannerisms and speaking style as Steve Jobs.

Finally! A robust thinker who refuses to pander to paradigm and platitudes. I was literally laughing out loud along with him. While I don't pretend to understand it all, Tim Maudlin demonstrates a refreshing separation between ideas and thinkers - much like beables and observers! He inspires me to learn. Brilliant!

@ryanrobin12

Жыл бұрын

Refuses to pander to paradigms, platitudes, presuppositions, and parsimonious pontifications!!

Math has never been the subject for me but I still enjoyed hearing Tim speak. Very interesting and entertaining guy.

As a Greek it makes me happy to hear personalities like this loving and knowing so much about the Greeks.

Amazing ! Maudlin is a illuminating, comprehensive thinker. We need Philosophy of Physics. Waiting for Borcherds episode as well 🎉

@1SpudderR

Жыл бұрын

? Philosophy on “Why so much is unknown” and complimentary degree .. “Why we Make assured decisions on the little we appear to know” Or in a “Nutshell” Philosophy Of Non Physical!?

Curt, I really appreciated the questions which you asked during the John Bell section at 51:00 as they really helped to clarify the concepts of Bell's work. Thank you.

@j.lagunascortez4113

Жыл бұрын

Z

Good job Curt, really enjoy the direction the channel is heading in. You can hardly find this level of erudite discussion anywhere else!

@ryanrobin12

Жыл бұрын

I like your usage of ‘erudite’! Tim is quite ADROIT at navigating complex ideas

I’ve seen a lot of podcasts in my day… some would say I have a KZread problem, I’ve seen em all. And this, unquestionably, is the best one I’ve ever seen. The way they blend high level theoretical physics with words that are actually understandable… god da**n art. This interview was like watching to people dance around an abyss

I am not a math guy, but I could listen to Mr. Maudlin all day. The problem with math is that it involves layers of abstraction that require the student to be up to speed on the current layer. Mr. Maudlin keeps the conversation grounded in reality so that there is always a solid frame of reference to build from.

Eye opening, thank you Curt Jaimungal and Tim Maudlin.

@jayp3570

Жыл бұрын

wow.... what are the chances of seeing you here. Should play Dixit soon.

Hey where did the Greer video go, I was only able to watch half then u made it private!!!

In my opinion, history will show that Tim Maudlin is the most influential philosopher of science of the next revolution in physics. Love to see him here on TOE as his work does not get enough attention.

@curtjaimungal

Жыл бұрын

Thanks. I think so as well.

@TheMahayanist

Жыл бұрын

We're doomed if that's the case. He doesn't even understand the distinction between ontology and epistemology. Scary.

@robertpaterson5477

Жыл бұрын

What work exactly? He just talks about physics. So what?

@pmcate2

Жыл бұрын

@@TheMahayanist @1:25:35 seems pretty clear that he knows the difference between ontology and epistemology

@arosalesmusic

9 ай бұрын

I think it is Dr Donald Hoffman and Bernardo Kastrup actually.

One of the best podcasts so far! Thank you Tim and Curt.

Amazing. Tim succinctly addressed some of the most hotly debated questions and issues with precision and clarity, and without showing a lot of personal bias toward any particular view, which is refreshing. His ability to frame things consistently from a mathematical and logical standpoint across multiple topics is outstanding. This is the first time I've had extended exposure to his commentary, and I'm really motivated to check out his writings and other presentations. Curt Jaimungal does a spectacular job of asking probing and precise questions and following up in a critical and informative way. Bravo.

@TheoriesofEverything

Жыл бұрын

Thank you! Hopefully you enjoy some of the other podcasts on the channel as well.

Great interviewer, He asks a question and then gets out of the way of the expert.

I don't want you to take this the wrong way because i am thrilled that you're covering the alien/UAP phenomenon... But fundamental physics is why i keep showing up. Great show.

Maudlin is never uninteresting. Always fascinating to hear. Thanks for sharing.

Great stuff. Your question about entropic time versus relativity time is one I ask all the time and have yet to hear a good treatment!

have to write a paper for my consciousness class at Uni, but cant wait to dig into this episode. only 5 minutes in and i already know that i will revisit this one lots of times

@paulsmart2416

Жыл бұрын

relatable comment

Thanks! One of your best interviews yet. Can’t wait for part two.

Wonderful conversation, Kurt. It is so helpful for you to frame the questions. Tim is one of my very favorite guests :)

@TheoriesofEverything

11 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it! - Curt

Excellent podcast! Thanks for Tim's answer to the question about entropic time.

Excellent interview; can’t wait for part 2! Question for Tim: I don’t think I’ve heard you comment on any of the mysteries or big ideas related to astronomy (for example, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Dirac’s Large Number Hypothesis, Mach’s Principle). Could you please share any insight you have on these topics, and do they have any influence on how you think about foundations of physics?

Best discussion I’ve heard in a long time. This guy is on the right track. Finally, someone who thinks like I do.👍. Love this one ❤

Excellent episode! Regarding Superdeterminism Tim pushed hard on the “statistical independence is indispensable for science” angle, but he didn’t address Hossenfelder’s response that “people aren’t particles” so violations of SI shouldn’t be expected to apply outside of strictly quantum phenomena. On the one hand, this reply seems like a convenient dodge-if QM is fundamental, the (S)determinism of it should be expected to apply at all levels where RCTs are regularly employed (and this would fit with Hossenfelder’s skepticism about “free will” in general). However, on the other hand, there really does seem to be something sufficiently different going on with QM that requires some explanation that breaks with one or another of our standard scientific assumptions, so the idea that, surprisingly, SI *doesn’t* apply for QM shouldn’t seem so out-of-bounds dismissible. Some sort of macro-level emergence might, for example, make it possible for SI to apply for most or all of science *outside* of the peculiar realm of QM proper? By any interpretation on offer, some aspect or other of our preferred intuitions seemingly must go, and exceptionalism regarding SI at the QM level isn’t obviously worse than any of the others? Would love to hear Tim address this in the sequel!

@santerisatama5409

Жыл бұрын

The numbers etc. math that Sabine etc. use, is obviously non-local, as the language can speak of both more than luminan and less then luminal. Assuming full reductionism, which is what determinism means, also math would be reducible to what ever hidden variables everything is supposed to be determined by. That should clarify the issue of non-locality. As for "hidden variables" and measuring problem, it's becoming quite obvious that QM is a mathematical artifact in Plato's Cave Mechanics, and numbers - which we would like to liberate from - play entropic role in regard to simple computational algorithm, that generates the (not-so)hidden variables, from which e.g. rational numbers can be defined.

An example of Occam's Razor. What would you rather do when navigating your way to the store? A. Find the longest way to the store. Or B, the shortest route? I think Occam was trying to express a quantitative concept in a qualitative way.

Very refreshing and sober, this guy. He knows his limits, which is good. Yes: stay away of all fashionable speculative theories that won't ever be falsifiable, like explanation of consciousness, or that the universe, and the human brain, is "just a computer", and all that. It all seems to come from some vacuous fantasy that computer science is the mother of all science, which may come from the fact that it's where the money is these days.

@ineffige

Жыл бұрын

I would add that he has amazing talent to explain complex things easily, he must be a great teacher, I will try to find his books

@EvilEyEbRoWzz

Жыл бұрын

... it can just as easily be said to be falsifiable as it is unfalsifiable.. we don't know our limits yet !

@patrickirwin3662

Жыл бұрын

✅

@ryanrobin12

Жыл бұрын

Yeah

@danielash1704

Жыл бұрын

The idea of the flow down a pipe can be just like the toilets water spin now in a plasma Hallows in center don't split appart of the field can join in on the first similarity in volumation Bearden one the other liquids and lite light is at a fast rate but slower of light refraction to the eye of the observed metering important

What happened to the Greer interview? I'm so confused

watched a big chunk of the live podcast with Steven Greer WOW riveting! I am waiting on tenterhooks to see it pop up on this channel to watch the end! Massive respect Curt for your interviewing prowess, your self control, your politeness, your dogged questioning and your talent in getting hold of THE best guests to pique our interest and our curiosity!

This was so good! thank you for the great interview and for working to understan Tim's points of view and have him explain things ... very valuable to me.

Curt, what happened to the podcast with Dr. Steven Greer? It was cut-off and it said the video was no longer available.

@SUPERFunStick

Жыл бұрын

I didn't even get that. It switched automatically to another video of Carl Sagan testifying on climate change in 85 and acted like that interview never existed. I'm frustrated and creeped out in equal measures

@DarkSleuths

Жыл бұрын

@@SUPERFunStick lol the live was simply over. Curt then makes them private or deletes them and edits them to upload on the channel later in the day

@emzywillrich7243

Жыл бұрын

@@DarkSleuths I hope that is the case. It was spooky and quite a few of us were watching!

@emzywillrich7243

Жыл бұрын

@@SUPERFunStick I will see if I can find it today. It was really weird the way it happened.

@SUPERFunStick

Жыл бұрын

@@DarkSleuths I can definitively say you are wrong. It's been nearly 24 hours without the video and no response from Kurt for some reason. So strange.

Why did the Greer Interview suddenly become unavailable? Did he say something out of school?

@bunnyban5365

Жыл бұрын

Steven greer is always out of school lol the guy can't even spell science

An astonishing conversation. This is just one of the greatest attributes of KZread - I can click on this channel and benefit from hearing the voices and points of view from some the greatest minds on the planet. What a gift!

@TheoriesofEverything

Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much

Great interview! Tim Maudlin is always a fascinating guy and a clear thinker!

Maudlin is brilliantly clear about abstruse topics, and as a crazy bonus, that kid interviewing him is brilliant as well.

Tim's discussion of the importance of the Ontology of physics is VERY important! We must specify "what exists" in our proposals and the necessitation of that existence.

Absolutely fantastic talk about a fascinating subject that I'm struggling to understand. Will have to go over it a few more times. Thanks.

I’m a KZread aspiring scholar lol but this guy said so much that I’ve realized on my own. Numbers don’t exist, they’re a human construct. We created numbers to categorize and map energy signatures. Geometry just is, it’s an apparent pattern that can’t be denied.

@SamChaneyProductions

Жыл бұрын

I agree that we created numbers but I think you're losing it when you believe that somehow geometry or "energy signatures" are not a human construct. Every concept, anything that can be put into words, is a human construct. It only seems like some of them are fundamental to reality because they are fundamental to the way we think about reality, and thus how we view reality, but our view of reality is nothing close to reality itself

@brianboyle2681

Жыл бұрын

@@SamChaneyProductions as Wittgenstein understood

What happened to the Greer show? I was watching it live, but couldn’t stay to see it.

@bunnyban5365

Жыл бұрын

Greer sent his alien friends to shoot their energy beam particles to disable their interview

Just wanted to say thanks (to both of you) for doing this. I've come across Tim's writing on the Internet from time to time but never seen him or heard him speak. For me, his thinking is really clear and compelling, exactly the kind of thing I'm looking for when trying to understand physics and the universe. From insisting on ontology and mathematics as opposed to handwaving theories to all these little comments that make you go "ah, that's right" (what were Alice and Bob doing 10 minutes before they met in RQM, physics and time are still happening even though you've reached thermal equilibrium, etc.). This was great.

TOE is hands down the best science/math/physics/consciousness/UFO show out there, great job Curt!

Excellent interview and discussion, I think it is the best out there of Tim Maudlin, who has had many recent interviews. Tim is right that foundational questions are not forefront in physics research, and the delayed Nobel to Clauser, Aspect and Zeilinger brought foundational questions of QM to the surface again. Personally I think there is no measurement problem, when one learns QM and the mathematics it is not a problem. I suggest reading original papers by Born, Heisenberg, Dirac, Fermi, etc and Sakurai’s modern texts. Schrödinger and Einstein clearly had issues with QM, including the whimsical articles on the cat, which is a macroscopic classical object, not a quantum state. Gravitationally-induced collapse has no physical basis, and Everett many wolds is fiction. But nonlocality and acausality exist in the quantum world.

An important perspective! Wave function collapse only happens because of the assumptions we make about what constitutes a measurement: check out weak measurement theory. The wave function COLLAPSE is epistemic; not the wave function.

@farhadtowfiq6767

Жыл бұрын

Taking into account also the wave function of the measurement system there is no Wave Function Collapse/Jump, or at most nothing higher than an order of the Plank constant.

@michaelperrone3867

Жыл бұрын

@@farhadtowfiq6767 That's a good way of looking at it

@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885

Жыл бұрын

Professor Basil J. Hiley says there's no need to use the wave function nor any need for a wave function collapse - rather use noncommutative time-frequency nonlocality.

@michaelperrone3867

Жыл бұрын

@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 I still don't fully understand what you mean by that, but I'd love to discuss it some time and learn.

@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelperrone3867 Thanks for your interest Michael. This is the lecture to learn from: Alain Connes - Temps et aléa du quantique on the Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques (IHÉS) dated 42,888 views Apr 14, 2015 there's no comment section. That's the lecture that Professor Basil J. Hiley is currently writing a paper about - how noncommutativity is applied to physics. haha. I told him about this lecture. Also if you watch Alain Connes' lecture on music theory - "Music of Shapes" - there's a few versions of it on youtube. My academia edu site book "strange vibrations" - the final chapter - goes into the "ontology" of this stuff. Essentially antigravity is inherent to being alive. So ontology originally meant the number 1 as Light being turned around. B.G. Sidharth also figured this out. Physicist B.G. Sidharth points out, light has mass due to noncommutative spacetime (noncommutative phase). "Therefore, the underlying geometry behind the superluminal nature of a particle is simply the noncommutative geometry." And Professor B.G. Sidharth again: "Returning to the mass of the photon, it can be argued that this is a result of the non commutativity of spacetime at a micro scale."

This is an enormously informative and enjoyable video. Thanks!

The CTMU interpretation of “mathematical reality” is called the “nonterminal processing domain”, in which exist the processors of physical objects (display elements).

Wonderful job. So well presented-thanks!

I don't last very long watching your discussions with guests and in fact more that once I've wondered "Why is he giving that nonsense a platform?". But this discussion with Tim Maudlin was exceptionally good, not because I particularly agreed with everything, but because it was grounded. Thank you.

@billlyons7024

Жыл бұрын

I like Kurt but I am also frequently baffled about his apparent acceptance of extraordinary claims with little or no evidence, sometimes even just hearsay. For some people, being "open minded" means accepting anything without evidence, but that isn't logical. Its foolish to believe in things for which there is no evidence.

What an amazing intellectual ride. Thank you Curt!

My professor in college. Loved him!

Steven Greer interview? I was looking forward to listening once I finished college

On the numbering of spatial dimensions, it doesn’t sound like the cardinality is even important. You just need a naming convention, and perhaps using numbers is a nice way to do it so as to not prioritize one dimension over another

On the way of understanding time as not a spatial dimension, time added with space is a conserved quantity.. as you move more through one you must move less through the other. Traveling at the speed of light through space implies not moving through time, and vice versa. That is represented as a sign discipline such as +,+,+,- which means 3 space dimension and one time dimension, and some metric and coordinates for distancing.

This was so so so helpful in understanding interpretations of QM

@TheoriesofEverything

Жыл бұрын

I'm so glad!

Love Dr. Maudlin.

Greer interview got cut off, it’s Real. Omg

Question for Part 2: In agreement that violations of Bell inequalities are best explained by giving up Bell locality, do you give preference to any particular physical mechanisms which deliver this non-local influence? Without knowing the details of Bohmian Mechanics, I assume it’s the guiding wave that delivers the non-local influence. But how? Is it a ripple in the guiding wave that travels instantaneously?

Perfect timing.

Thank you curt. Your hard work is appreciated

Wow Curt ! This is great , Tim maudlin is fantastic . Looking forward to this one. Thanks , keep up the good work.

Gorgeous to see the challenge to chronocentricism, Tim! Now … if atomism can be dispelled too, the gorgeous simplicity from which all the complicated stuff emerges can be revealed to physicists ;)

I can't like this discussion enough. Thank You!

Wow I really like him and his thinking so much! I’ve seen him on IAI, he’s so good at explaining/communicating

@DavidDavoDavidson

Жыл бұрын

What is IAI

@JBSCORNERL8

Жыл бұрын

@@DavidDavoDavidson it’s a platform that interviews philosophers, scientists etc

Wow that introduction was a mouthful haha

His thoughts about the complexity of the mind body problem really highlights how little Noam Chomsky understands the issues involved, having so confidently handwaved it away on his TOE appearances

Truly Fascinating... ❤️... Thanx' a lot... 😊

One of the most useful and organized education videos of all time. Especially for someone who is a beginner in understanding; - in the Quantum world... Can you ask couple more hundreds of questions to him?

very useful conversation. i enjoyed very much especially the first part where he talked about the numbers, mathematics and the physics. mathematics has always been a mystery for me. mathematical reality vs physical reality. but i find it difficult to understand his views on the conscious. do we have any proof that matter is fundamental? it would be great if you could have a lengthy talk with nima arkani

Tim Maudlin has many views I never heard of. He's so interesting!

Hey Curt, where did the Live with Dr Greer go?? I was watching it and then it said unavailable 😫

The best talk I have heard in a long time.

Questions for Part II: (Curt - these are based on the ISSI talk Tim references in this video re his presentation of discrete space-time geometry) Regarding your discrete space-time geometry, 1. How strong is the basis for the assumption that resolving nonlocality in space-time requires a preferred foliation? 2. Is there an explanation related to the space-time structure for clocks ticking at different rates?

On the topic of 'quantum mechanics with observers'. Is it possible for the "observer effect" to have occurred in the early universe? I was thinking that a correlation of entangled particles 'observed itself' by accidentally defining the parameters of the Planck mass. is something like that possible?

Curt should invite Stephen Wolfram, Eric Weinstein, David Albert, and Tim Maudlin...and give them a couple hours.

@TimothyOBrien6

Жыл бұрын

That would be one for the ages

difficult to hold a conversation with an extremely well. informed person on the topics they know about

Thank you, Curt, and thank you, Tim.

This man is a brilliant philosopher.

Sorry, Curt, this time it is the guest that spoke the first new word to me. 😅😇 Recalcitrant!

At 1:03:55 I agree with what you're saying, and I'm thinking about chaotic systems as an example no matter how "random" you make your decisions that slight bias in the actual experiment could have an effect on such a system. In addition to this whenever someone mentions statistics or probability or randomness I feel like I've lost a footing in trying to understand in what is being said. I'd be really interested in an interview with someone who deals with statistics/probability/randomness and how it relates to physics. I must also say Tim is very clear in the way he presents his ideas, a clear sign he has thought over things very carefully, thank you for this conversation.

I love this one because it really pushed me. If there's ever a subject Tim says he doesn't really understand (eg. from Rovelli) then there's something really funky with the fundamentals.

@LeeLightfoot

Жыл бұрын

the other version of "funky", not having a great bass line!

@timjohnson3913

Жыл бұрын

I love Rovelli, but I tried to understand his relational theory a few times and couldn’t wrap my head around it. Rovelli also says there’s no now on Alpha Centauri, and I just don’t understand this. Of course, Einstein taught us in 1905 that there is no notion of simultaneity between separated objects, but Rovelli seems to be saying something different such as there is no present elsewhere or something profound that I just don’t get.

@LeeLightfoot

Жыл бұрын

@@timjohnson3913 the confusion really makes me want to understand the situation!

Hey man what happened to the interview with Dr Steven Greer today I can't find it anywhere no matter how I search it

👏👏👏👏 Fantastic! Can't wait for part 2.

Let's go bros.

Delightful interview and talk. And Curt was nicely prepared as always. Within a tiny epsilon of an ideal podcast :) Kuhn on Closer to Truth had a far harder time than Curt (probably due to block universe questions that got Maudlin riled up a bit). 1:11:00 that excerpt from the book also applies almost 1:1 to stable diffusion/dalle2 etc. slightly interesting imho.

To make an observation you need to send something out and have it reflect back to you, light being the most common example. Problems arise when whatever you send out begins to mess with what you are trying to observe.

He knows a lot and speaks without complexes. Fresh air much needed.

*Maths Tegoffthemark :P Superb interview - Curt, you're bringing full truth-seeking back to the physics presentation circuit. Never fear any tentative outcome / current-conclusions -- keep exploring ever deeper. Grateful for your commitment to openness and honesty.

@TheoriesofEverything

Жыл бұрын

Thank you so much!

Just fantastic, great questions Kurt and Maudlin is one of my new philosophy/physics pinups. the guy is borderline vulcan.

22:00 mathematical vs physical reality; there are facts that we will never discover per Godel. 52:00 Bell's book 1:21:40 wave function, Schrödinger's equation 1:28:30 books to read on quantum mechanics 1:31:40 ontology 1:44:40 space-time light cone structure 1:48:00 physicists often don't follow Occam's razor; electric magnetic field vs Feynman -- less is not better 2:05:30 observers are physical systems of a certain kind; measurements = physical interactions; observer and measurement = derivative concepts; good quantum theories without needing observers; many worlds theory 2:08:35: quantum theories 2:21:40 "interpretations" of quantum are in fact separate theories 2:24:30 engineering and theoretical physics; 'shut up and calculate' 2:28:20 philosophy as foundation 2:33:20 consciousness functionalists, substrate independence, computation 2:50:00 intuitive, empathetic understanding of the world (Einstein)

Excellent video!

In terms of Carlo's relational interpretation and how it stands against the three criteria Tim mentions 1. Is quantum description of reality complete - relational quantum interpretation would say yes, the wave function describes the entire universe 2. Does it always evolve by the wave function? Yes on a universal scale there is only wave function evolution. 3. Does it maintain an objective state to the cat being dead or alive. No, relational quantum interpretation is saying that the cat can be dead to Bob but alive to Alice, the state depends on the specific interaction and there is no universal dead or alive state of the cat. In this way, it's in the same class of interpretation as many worlds, but is also quite distinct and different because rather than saying every possible event happens, it is saying that states of objects don't have to be consistent between observations it depends on the specific interaction only and not a universal state.

Glad it's not another CIA influenced UFO person (Elizondo, Gary Nolan, Avi Loeb) Actually a great guest on this episode