Видео

All that potential embedded in the algebra sounds like implicate order. Sounds like...what is the sound of the implicate order? For Basil, perhaps the pitter patter of equations running along. DB felt the vibrations of '"something moving " And what is osmotic momentum?

The truth Hz. Some similarities to Wigner crystals on Graphine.

AI doesn't know about two-way derivatives yet. Hilarious!!

Not 1964, but 1984: Generalization of the twistor to Clifford algebras as a basis for geometry Bohm, D. (Birkbeck Coll., London (UK)); Hiley, B.J. (Birkbeck Coll., London (UK)) 1984

"interruption please" - never heard someone answer a raised hand like that.

"WHY ARE WE NOT FUNDING THIS" -Family Guy

Nope. This lecture demonstrates how one of the original failures of early 20th century physics has led directly to the raging garbage fire that is the current state of the subject.

This is a send up, surely, Bennett Hill does quantum mechanics?

Thank you.

I watched this video the other day and I literally can not stop thinking about it. Maudlin is breath taking in his logic and his words are like poetry. 🤣It is like a comedy that he was rushed at all speaking on such profound 🤯 subject matter.

Nice.

Copy of the slides?

what einstein really told us is that "instantaneous" implies geometry. i find it interesting & intuitively "natural" to try to interpret non-locality in a geometric framework so that what appears to be "instantaneous action at a distance" is really a local event in a more fundamental geometry & associated dynamics.

Who is this guy a hoax ? A lot of artifact he contrives to show how smart he is ??!!

If consciouness is related to quantum phenomena, we probably shouldnt give AI access to a quantum computer.

Arnolfini in Bristol. Amazing talk!

28:44 who is he?

26:58 who is he?

The word "consciousness" is very very over rated. Better would be "thinking" because that gets rid of the magic or religious connation. Same for the word "quantum" due to its woo-hoo connation. I wish he would leave these words out then people wouldn't think its a crazy Sci Fi theory. I believe microtubules is the answer to "thinking" mainly because single celled creatures such as amoebae remember things and are quite crafty but have no neurons at all - so what are they using to think? Answer microtubules, they have millions of them in their flagellar and elsewhere. Should be easy to test, don't know what researchers are playing at, I'd find out the answer quickly. Sadly I'm too old now - lol.

lol, judging by the questions the audience got no idea what she just said :D

Great experiment idea!

Even watching Professor Penrose talk about twistors, I never felt it was necessary for spacetime geometry to be nonlocal. I really like this theory though.

Which one is the main reality of the camera's camera 😮 22:19 22:19 22:19

There are two words she left unspoken: Kochen & Specker. Why? Because she cant unless she admits that Superdeterminism is a Superconspiracytheory.

Penrose speaks like a graduate student explaining how he came up with a novel solution to his instructor's homework assignment.

Oppenheimer really emerges as the tortured anti-hero of the era.

And there is another guy who doesn't understand physics trying to teach physics. ;-)

Why is he so desperate to prove to everybody that he doesn't understand physics? ;-)

maudlin's hexapla!

This physicists became mambo jambo club of supercazzole. Happy that Machine Leaning is going to wipe out all science. The act of the faluire fundamental science.

37:40 - Tortoise Coordinate. ^.^

BTW, the curl of a circle is zero.

Jack Tuszynski, PhD, recently conducted an experiment with a computational model of a microtubule. His team simulated shining a light into a microtubule, sort of like a photon sending an exciton through a plant structure. If the light lasted long enough before being emitted-a fraction of a second was enough-it would indicate quantum coherence. Specifically, Tuszynski’s team simulated sending tryptophan fluorescence, or ultraviolet light photons that are not visible to the human eye, into microtubules. After conducting the experiment 22 times, Tuszynski reported that the excitations from the tryptophan created quantum reactions that lasted up to five nanoseconds. That is thousands of times longer than some had expected coherence to last in a microtubule. It’s also more than long enough to perform the biological functions required.

The third sentence may be well revised as: 'a scalar field is an <omnipresent physical efficacy represented by an> assignment of real numbers to space-time points'.

gigachad

gooooooooood

I ain't a scientist but it doesn't take science ta prove yer perty cute!!! Smart too.

Excellent

Excellent

Thank you for posting.

This also points to a common disease of scientific thinking, where the theory gives you a seemingly self-consistent construct of axioms, consistent with the formalism of euclidian geometry, which solves some of the dynamics, but cannot identify the cause, and typically contains paradoxes resulting from that choice of construct. Just as non Euclidean geometry subsumes and explains some of the paradoxes that cannot be resolved from within the Euclidian deductive framework, a similar issue as Plato’s cave metaphor is happening in many dead-ends of science and physics. The escape question is always, what makes possible, that which I see on the surface? The popular methods of scientific reasoning, typically circular formalism itself, are paramountly guilty of baking in hidden assumptions that blind a model to higher causes, as if “what works” is the finish line, rather than seeking the higher organizing principle behind the described phenomena.

Wow, he has identified the hidden annoying ambiguity in scientific work. This is so refreshing and badly needed to be raised to the first pages of the process guide for physics composition, if such a guide existed. I am awestruck by the ontological clarity this presentation provides, a solution to circular reasoning headaches long endured. Physics is hard enough without getting tied in a knot of circular reasoning. Maybe now we can get some traction on uncracked paradoxes. The map is not the territory, and neither is the math. So glad someone pointed this out. This feels like the science of science, thou hast spoken, ahmen.

I would like to hear a newer version, this is from 2013. She made new suggestions about testing SD, might be interesting.

Nice talk. But how come the video editor filled 75% of the screen space with a useless still image? Must have a fetish for the backs of old bald guy heads.

Cant read

great talk. Watching close-up screen as he paces like a caged tiger makes me sea-sick. no stable point as the shrubbery flies by.

Wowow… wow

what the hell is wrong with this video?! the people aren’t moving, but the presentation is

The whole idea of the measurement experiment (9:23) assumes that the spin of electrons resembles the spin of classical objects. This means that we have some spatial components x, y, z and the only problem is that we cannot measure them at the same time (even two) because the next measurement "destroys" the previous one. Meanwhile, "spin" only shows the electron's sensitivity, exactly in the direction of the magnetic field lines (the measurement indicates that electrons deflect towards one or the other pole). If we rotate the magnets by even a small angle, the electrons will immediately "adapt" to the new direction (a rotation of 30 degrees from the "vertical" will cause the probability of "staying" in this deflected "stream" to drop from 100% to approximately 93%). A rotation of 90 degrees (e.g. from "up-down" to "left/right") changes this probability to 1/2. I don't know what any "memory" related to the previous measurement would result from. The first measurement selects two opposite directions (in relation to the field poles), subsequent changes in the measurement direction change the number of electrons in the new beam, depending on how much we change the direction of the magnetic field. ​

27:55 The geometry of space in general relativity theory turned out to be another field, therefore the geometry of space in GR is almost the same as the gravitational field.” (Smolin). In "GR was QG" there is no problem with empty (~ geometric, mathematical) space-time, since the real variable gravitational field of any physical object is identified with the phase space. When the gravitational field is space-time in the Planck system: F(G)/F(e)=Gm(pl)^2/e^2=1/α, that is, gravity~strong interaction*. This assumption follows from the Schwarzschild solution: the gravitational radius (or Schwarzschild radius) is a characteristic radius defined for any physical body with mass: r(G)=2GM/c^2 Consequently: 2E(0)/r(G)=F(pl)=c^4/G=ε(pl)/r(pl): with indicating the mutual quantization of the mass (energy) and space-time: m(0)//m(pl)=r(G)/2r(pl)=n,where n-total number of quanta of the system; the tension vector flux: n=[(1/4π)(Gћc)^-½]gS ( const for all orbits of the system: n=0,1,2,3....). Moreover, the parameter r(0)=r(G)-r(pl)=(2n-1)r(pl), defining the interval of the formation of the system, at n=0, when r=r(G)=0 (for example, the state of the "universe" before the Big Bang) turns out to be a quite definite quantity: r(0)=-r(pl). In the area [(-rpl) - 0 - (+rpl)] there is an implementation of external forces, "distance": (-rpl)+(+rpl)=0 (≠2rpl). On the Kruskal diagram of the hyperbole r=0 corresponds to the true Schwarzschild feature, the features V and VI are not even covered by the global (R, T)- space-time and correspond to the "absolute" vacuum; then the singular areas above and below the hyperbolas r=0 can be formally treated as the energy source (external forces). That is, the frightening "true singularity" is actually a superconducting heterotrophic "window" between the proto-universe (the source) and physical bodies**. P.P.S. As a fundamental theory, GR has the ability with just one parameter: r(G)/r=k to predict, explain new physical effects, and amend already known ones. Photon frequency shift in gravitational field Δw/w(0)=k; the angle of deflection of a photon from a rectilinear propagation path =2k, the Newtonian orbit of the planet shifts forward in its plane: during one revolution, a certain point of the orbit is shifted by an angle =3πk, for a circular orbit (eccentricity е=0); in the case of an elliptical orbit - for example, for perihelion displacement, the last expression must be divided by (1-e^2). ------------------- *) - GR/QG predicts a new physical effect: w/w(pl)=k; expression for gravitational radiation from a test body. This is amenable to physical examination in laboratory conditions at present. **) - From this, generally, from Einstein's equations, where the constant c^4/G=F(pl), one can obtain a quantum expression (as vibration field) for the gravitational potential: ф(G)=(-1/2)[Għ/с]^½ (w)=-[h/4πm(pl)]w. Final formula:ф(G)=-[w/w(pl)]c^2/2, where ф(G) - is Newtonian gravitational potential, r(n')=nλ/π=(n+n')2r(pl)l , the corresponding orbital radius, w - the frequency of the quanta of the gravitational field (space-time); - obviously, the quanta of the field are themselves quantized: λ=(1+n'/n)λ(pl) = 2πc/w, where n'/n - system gravity unpacking ratio, n'- the orbit number (n'=0,1,2,3…). Obviously, on the horizon [r=r(rG), n'=0] the "door" is closed, however, the quanta [λ=λ(pl)] can go out singly and form the first and all subsequent half-orbits (n'=1,2, 3 ...) during the time t(0)=r/c=2nт, where т=1/w, т=((1+n'/n)т(pl), spending part of their energy on it each time. And it is this mechanism that provides the step-by-step formation of a variable gravitational field: variably accelerated expansion of spacetime as a phase space: |a|=g=πc^2/L, where L is the length of the phase trajectory (of course, the quanta coming through the "window" are also rhythmically restored). The phase velocity of evolution v'/π= r(pl)w/π; m(0)=(c/2G)rv', where v'=v^2/c. The angular momentum: L(p)=|pr|=n^2ћ [const for all orbits of the system; at n=1: L(p)=ћ] and moment of power: M(F)=dL(p)/dt(0)=nћw/2=-E(G)=E*, where t(0)=r/c, E*- energy of self-action. According to GR / QG, gravitational field [E(G)=-E*] is characterized by a spontaneous flow: J*=(v'/π )(1/4π) g^2/G, where v'/π- phase velocity of field evolution. Entropy (here: a measure of diversity/variety, not ugliness/disorder) of the system: S=πε(pl)r(t)=(n+n')k, where k is the Boltzmann constant. Obviously, on the horizon entropy=min and with fundamental irreversibility, information is preserved (+ evolves, accumulates). Accordingly, m=m(pl)/(1+n'/n), where m=ħw/c^2, is the quantum of the full mass: M=n'm [<m(0)]. The parameter mλ [=m(pl)λ(pl)=m(w)λ(w)=m(e)λ(e) ] covers the entire spectrum of particles. Thus, m(0)=(n+n')m, where 2∆m=nm - mass defect; M/2∆m=n'/n: on the horizon m(0)=2∆m, M=0. That is: ф(G)=-Gm(0)/r=-[G/2r(pl)]m. Can be tested experimentally in the laboratory at the moment. {The experimenter needs only two parameters; the mass (gram) of the body under study m(0) and the distance from its center (centimeter) r: so the energy of the quanta of the field ε(eV) ~1.83(m/r); the radiation flux J*[erg/cm^2•sec]~7.57•10^-27(m^3/r^5). For example: A lead ball suspended on a strong chain from the ceiling of the laboratory can serve as a test body; at radius r=27,6 cm, ball mass is m=1т. The energy of quanta/photons of the field (photons are characterized by different parity and helicity, and it is not quite accurate to say that a photon has an integer spin equal to one) at a distance r from the center of the test body to the detector (practically on the surface of the ball) =66,3 keV. The flow: J*=4,5•10^-9 quanta/сm^2sec; this is a measurable flux for modern world-class gamma detectors. (On the Earth's surface, the frequency of the quanta of the Earth's gravitational field: w=2.57*10^34 Hz (~2.7 J); the flow: J(G)=0.3 MW/cm^2).}