Stephen Wolfram - What is a Theory of Everything?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 май 2024
- A 'theory of everything' is the ultimate workings of physics, the ideas and equations that undergird the physical universe at its deepest level. What can theory of everything explain? And what can it not explain? To have a theory of everything, what do you need? And if you get it, what can you do with it?
Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Watch more interviews on the Theory of Everything: bit.ly/3iRKQLj
Stephen Wolfram is the creator of Mathematica, Wolfram|Alpha and the Wolfram Language; the author of A New Kind of Science; and the founder and CEO of Wolfram Research.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
Apart from my children, finding out the advances in our knowledge of our universe is the only reason I want to live for many years
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
@@Yozhura ok 👍
Well said. Respect to your curiosity
The increasing complexity that we observe in ‘the mathematics of the smaller’ mentioned here reminds me of the increasing complexity that is demonstrated in The Mandelbrot Set, as well as the simplicity of its equation that generates such richness. I believe Stephen Wolfram is on to something.
Me too, when he spoke about simple rules underlining the nature of reality, I also thought about the Mandelbrot because I told my daughter about it today
Mandelbrot sets are simple, and result in patterns that are self-similar on an infinite number of scales.
@@suncat9 Simulation of the emergence of the universe in quantum computers
We propose to you the creation of sophisticated and fast quantum computers to simulate trillions of trillions of trillions of backward space geometrically in M- theory
And that is in order to discover a space that has the same physical laws in our universe among a huge number of multiverse in the spaces of M- theory.
Therefore, we ask technologists to create a quantum computer with fast data like light in addition to artificial intelligence
Send this request to physicists, technologists, and people working in quantum computing
Click on this link
ruclips.net/video/_9cTLESrIak/видео.html
That's exactly what it is really. That simple rules can create infinitely complex structures and these structures are fractal because it's invariant with scale...
Simple rules create small complex objects, which lead to networks of these small complex objects creating new set of complex rules...which lead to creating larger complex objects, forming a network of these large complex objects leading to even more complex rules....and it continues infinitely with more and more complexity.
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
I find Wolfram's thinking immensely interesting. Now he's talking about the way our universe may fit into what he terms the 'rulian'...the set of all possible computations, which would exist of necessity. He thinks this may both explain the uniqueness of our physical laws, as they're only one set of many, and show that our universe, and perhaps all others, HAS TO exist - answering your question of 'why anything at all?' I hope you talk to him again in the future.
From all the scientists Ive listened to, Dr. Wolfram is the only one that sounds sane and that he is on to something!
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
I hate when people say "one day" or "i hope in my lifetime" we will have a theory of everything. I want one ASAP.
Great interview with someone that I have the utmost respect for..........
Old interview...please mention the actual dates of the interviews...because things and theories can evolve over time...
thanks for this ... appreciate it ...
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
Wolfram is pure genius
Wolfram is going to nail it.
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
Not sure why it’s never mentioned in the video, but he is talking about the Wolfram Physics Project. Supposedly at a point now where many laws of physics can be derived from the computational model (irrespective of the specific rule used)
Those are cuts from longer interwiev, probably thats why He did not mention WPP, here.
Dr. Wolfram refers to models of universes. Where might I see one or more of these models, and how would I understand the details of the universe that is therein defined? And if one happened upon a model that truly represented our own physical universe, what would that model look like and how would we recognize it as ours? Is each model just another of these interesting hyper-graphical representations/mappings of points?
"Stephen, is physics the most difficult of subjects?"
~•~
Stephen: "Well, first of all: I eat difficulty for breakfast; secondly, no it's not. Higher order set theory, involving meta mathematical computation, is likely -at least nominally-, the most difficult of subjects."
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
He should always mention Ed Fredkin. Wolfram knows that Fredkin was probably his primary influence on this line of thinking!!
Richness is richness no matter how it came about. If it’s from simplicity then that’s even more stupendous.
A thing like, say, the Plank Length for instance... Necessitates the eventual computability of everything
The Universe is not infinite... So, the combinations needing to be calculated are finite, as well (the end)
Great discussion
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
@@Yozhura amazing 😆👍
Consciousness is the key. And consciousness is fundamental. It did not emerge from matter..it is the other way round.
The most intriguing thing to emerge from modern physics is the multi-verse theory which, if true, could mean each universe has its own unique laws and life forms. The possibilities are endless. My gut feeling is there are eternal universes, hence never one beginning (or one single big bang) and there is most likely a designer behind all of existence (not a designer as stated in holy texts) and consciousness is unique and cannot be destroyed.
Follow Jesus Christ
Not a single bit of evidence for a Multiverse, it's religion for atheists.
@@FelixBat You're assuming there is a pre big bang state. Absolutely no evidence. You say there's no evidence about God but then make an assumption that has absolutely no scientific evidence.
You "feel" they are not omnipotent. Who cares about your feelings! I want truth, not Mr. Flibble's feelings. The fact is we know God intervenes in his creation because if he didn't the world would be pure evil. But good is always fighting this evil in a never ending battle. We intuitively know this moral situation happens in our minds where we are presented with a choice to do good or evil and most of us choose to do good on a daily basis otherwise this world would be completely chaotic. But put the moral law up to your face and ask yourself how many times have I lied. If everyone lied about everything how then could society survive if everyone's life is an entire lie? Well you are starting to see how the world is going into self destruction mode with all the lying going on. The Bible says this evil. Anyone with common sense would see this is objectively true. The Bible gave the moral law well before Plato, Socrates and all these other guys who gave ethical standards of good.
@@FelixBat There is still no evidence and just saying it's possible is a bogus copout. I didn't call it a religion physicist Sabine Hossenfelder did in a 15 minute long video explaining why.
@@MountainFisher rubbish. the multi verse is growing in strength. now shut up.
Where is the whole interview ?
What about the Aether Physics Model such as an Aether quantum dynamics model that developed by David Thomson and Jim Bourassa?
I've read their paper. It's total garbage.
Rule 30 of AC resemble 1st zero of zeta function which contain next following zero so on, link to fine structure constant by Sir Michael Atiyah's Todd function for TOE.
This is such a great channel.
Why?
What have you learned about life, spirituality, divinity, existence, consciousness, being, God from following this channel you claim to be great?
S3RAVA3LM I learn new questions worth asking in nearly every video.
@@FelixBat you know to little to even speak on anything. I know far more than you do about everything -- meaning, symbology, origins, intent etc.
You have a lot of work to do
@@FelixBat says who?
You don't know anything.
If I provided evidence you couldn't comprehend, what good would that be.
Go ahead, be arrogant.
Every comment you ever make has no value.
You're worthless.
@@S3RAVA3LM you don’t have to learn anything to enjoy it, i enjoy this channel very much because I find it interesting,
What do you learn from watching the Simpson or a game of football?
Nothing you may still enjoy it
And I have learned about new theories ideas I have not heard before
I'm fascinated by what my physics hero Stephen Hawking asked, What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?If there's a TOE,will it be so compelling that it will bring about its own existence?I don't know whether or not we can ever answer that. But I'm proud to be a human bcz only we as humans are able to ask these questions.
@@FelixBat how can you be so confident?
What breathes fire into the equations and makes them to describe the universe " comments uttered allegoriclly to awesome dynamics of universe wasn't a cue for an existence of a creator, as same token principles apply for a overseer, he's acting agent on matter and execute plans no matter who you're you need a kind of template therefore the question begs 'where is parts come from' since no one can create themselves, creations needs essence, and Sarte put it nicely existence preceed essence...
@@suatustel746 then you're an existentialist.
@@soubhikmukherjee6871 spot on absolutely, but there're Christian exixtentials contrary to Sarte, heidegger, Camus, and his name Karl Jasper, strange guy with strange notions?????
Have you ever experienced anything bringing itself into existence, all of our experiences show that every effect has a cause, right?
A Theo-ontology, like Aristotle explained, is the highest thinking level, the "crown of knowledge" , because only from here the entire structure of thinking can be seen and over-viewed!
The following proves Spinor Theory is correct.
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford
When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. (More spatial curvature). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are actually a part of the quarks. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" make sense based on this concept. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons.
Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?
Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons
. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves.
A theory of everything contains "What is a theory of everything?" in particular.
i dont think that the people pursuing them finds that to be a problem
It would be nice to have a definition, rather than an assumption that everyone should assume we know.
@Al Garnier it seems to me an attempt to unified the quantum world with our outside macro physical world. Or how they relate to each other. Am I right ??
Cantors Paradox :)
Neutron decay cosmology. The neutrons which invert at black hole formation re emerge via marangoni effect in deepest voids of space where they decay after 14ish minutes into amorphous atomic hydrogen. This decay is an increase in volume of 10^14 times. This is where expansion comes from.
The topology which explains this also explains the chirality and baryon problems.
The other thing we need consider is using not a perfect fluid but a thixotropic one for Friedmann equation matrix.
2:40 in the computer program analogy; the universe could be an ongoing program development based on the simplest 'basic rule' of 'one' and zero'. Its obvious complexity can developy from simplicity; just look at all the complexity that arises on earth from just the averaged energy from the sun. To me its obvious that no single proton/proton fusion in the sun can be linked to any specific molecule movement in earth's weather, much less the complexity of conscious thought...
I know very little about Wolfram's actual work, but nonetheless I intuitively sense that he's right.
I like his conclusions and agree that it might be very embarrassing simple. The fact that we are being led by two mind powering theorems, one of science and the other of belief, allowing no third intuition if it not fits the one or the other, dominating human history since men could think, write and read.
Now, with social media and internet the third party has arisen, like an open market of ideas, and is revolutioning to rethink many wrong statements of the past, and because some are better in rhetoric they get the credit for picked up theories and made their own.
The simplicity lays in the ambitious will to complete, to finish, to have result no matter how. This has made both groups successful in convincing their followers. But the third-party of amateurs, of exotic thinkers, are making their way in the two groups helping refresh thoughts, and other ways and views. Meaning, we're not so donkey like we look like.
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
A descrption of simle rules would help.
Imagine a checkerboard with a few checkers on it. For each square on the checkerboard, check its surrounding 8 squares. A simple rule might be - if a square contains a checker and has 4 or more neighbors (checkers in surrounding squares), pick it up. If it doesn't have a checker and has 4 or less neighbors, put a checker there. Then go through all the squares again using the same rule, Repeat repeat repeat... See what patterns emerge. Of course this is done easier and simply with a computer program, and you can watch the results on the screen. For more info, you can read Wolfram's huge book, A New Kind of Science, or check Cellular Automata at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_automaton A famous example of CA is Conway's Game of Life.
@@kennywrites thank you
@@jamesruscheinski8602 You're welcome!
Awesome
Could simple rules be related to mathematical objects?
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
Maybe there is no ultimate rule.
the theory of Everything is so simple. there are only 5 questions, which will form a 12 stages, when all these combine, form a CODED of information.
then going back to the 5 questions and decoding the information.
I know I SOUND CRAZY, and none sense but it is true.
Do we know our universe well enough to tell if the model is exactly our universe?
In God's humor, fundamental rule, "Let there be light."
maybe so ... in darkness there is no distinction ... when light came about it brought with it distinction ... as 0 as distinct from 1 so darkness is distinct from light .. and as we know .. with just one distinction we can derive infinity ... many 0s and 1s in many combinations ..
mmm
Good "interview". 😁
It becomes more complicated because science has eliminated the only possible truth of everything which is an aether model. And when you eliminate the truth you have to come up with lies to explain things. Then you have to tells lies to cover for those lies and that's where complexity comes from. Let us go down and confuse their language (understanding/comprehension/perception).✌️
what makes you think there's an aether? could u clarify what u mean by it just in case I'm thinking of something else
@@kashu7691 a medium by which all observable and unobservable phenomenon are possible. The seen and the unseen.
@@FelixBat should probably be mr. Feeble but do a thought experiment of how you would create a universe or existence and think in terms of frequency, vibration and energy. And you'll realize that with just energy, more precisely a dielectric magneto energy being pumped into a true vacuumous void you can achieve physicality. Sorry about calling you feeble but you seem a bit argumentative.
@@johnzientek735 that's so imprecise, and not even what scientists mean when they use that word. Like, by your definition no one threw that idea out, that medium through which we experience is just what we call the universe. If I'm misunderstanding you it's because you're too vague, could you please elaborate?
@@johnzientek735 I'm hoping to challenge you to think really hard about what your proposing and to realise that you *cannot* be certain about any absolute truths of your existence by definition
The network may be the Net of Indra.
Even if Stephen Wolfram finds the rules for our particular physical universe (consisting of space, time, matter, and energy), he will NOT have found a "theory of everything." Consciousness exists, and it is not a computation, set of rules, or an algorithm. To quote the father of quantum physics, Max Planck: "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness."
Mathematicians and physicists assume a mathematical existence in their 'theories of everything', however, when they can describe the cause and stability of the mathematics they are using, I think they will be on to something.
Wolfram just assumes a relationship among many points ... these relationships then bring about the physics that we have discovered so far ..
"Cause ans stability of mathematics"? What does that mean?
@@ferdinandkraft857 Thanks for asking! Let me draw a couple analogies, perhaps it will explain my point of view.
First one, Relative to gravity, most mathematicians and physicists can describe the mathematics of gravity, however they can not tell you the cause of gravity (Some may say it’s due to the warpage of space-time, but it is the prior density of mass energy that causes the warpage of space-time, warpage is the effect. For cause, physicists and mathematicians need to describe the cause of mass energy. This is what they will ultimately need to have a theory of everything.
Second analogy, The fact that they all mentally accept 2+3=5, however, they assume numbers as stable values over and in time (to enable them to predict past events like the big bang and future events, like where planets will appear in the future as examples of extrapolations assuming the stability of numbers).The numbers and equations are accepted as platonic numerical truths and relationships without question. As well as the “=” sign, which platonically exists, always as a stable relationship on opposite sides of the “=” sign. This is also accepted as a truth in chemistry and biological reactions as well, all assume and accept that there is the relationship to the opposite sides of the “=” sign equation.
Mathematicians, physicists, and science all appear to accept these assumptions about the platonic existence and stability of mathematics without consciously realizing they are doing it. It's this cause of the stability, over and in time, that I am interested in understanding.
TOE - theory of everything - will go ok if we point out the fundamental properties.
That will be done about the philosophy of the whole Nature, start with the definition of the whole Nature...
i don't know much about the theory oif everything
all i know is that it's rated insane and gives 12 stars upon completion.
If and when we have the mathematical keys to our universe in our hands, will we be free from what makes our lives a tragedy with its inevitable suffering and death? And I bet that if people had to choose between the what and how of the universe and the meaning of life... well, I know what my priority would be. However impressive physics is, it is a small part of our universe... I want to know why I exist and love and suffer first and foremost.
Catherine Moore, I have the same issue. Sometimes they say that they are looking for the ultimate basis of reality. Ultimate means the end, not the beginning, so I agree with you that the important stuff happens here in the reality of everyday life. This is where we live and die, and this is the ultimate reality, not some mindless particles.
Some random thoughts inspired by your comment... You exist because of an act by your parents. You love and suffer because emotions evolved as a way to reinforce memories of things we did that help us get old enough to reproduce and continue the species. We ask these questions because we're a social species and we communicate and bond via stories and we want to create our own story of our lives, giving it meaning as we perceive it. We can reduce suffering by being empathetic and treat others as ourselves, and by acquiring healthy habits which help us now and in our later years. We can possibly eliminate death by better understanding the biological switches that shut cells off after a number of cell divisions. For example, see the book Lifespan by Dr David Sinclair. Also see www.calicolabs.com/ which is a sister company of RUclips, both owned by Alphabet (Google).
IMO, we dont need TOE to end death and suffer.
We need only to take our consiousness out of our bodies and put them in to artificial platform.
This solves so many problems.
@@jareknowak8712 I agree and I think it has a good possibility of happening in the future. We need to live long enough to get to that future so learn about anti-aging and rejuvenation to get to the time of artificial platforms. And won't just be one platform per person, can me many! Send allt he copies of yourself to all different places and link together so all copies of yourself have the same experience. That would be kind of cool! :D
@@realitycheck1231
By the time we will be able to do it, computer failures will be long forgotten.
Crashes can also be avoided by duplicating systems, You can duplicate Yourself on a second, backup system.
Besides, computers will be something completely different than today.
Over time, You will be able to move from old platform to another, new one, like from Win98 to Win10, or from Pentium to i7, obtaining immortality.
Transfer of consiousness to artificial platforms, and getting rid of our bodies, solves so many todays/tommorows problems, that it should be nr1, or at least very high, in the hierarchy of "To Do List" for Science.
Excuse my English.
Natural constants = observers limits. Perspective for any point amongst the omniverse
Simple and complicated are coexisting truths. Why either one of the two should emerge from the other?
Even if the Software was easy, the Data Volume and Data Handling would anything Else but easy.
Actually plenty of experts kind of guessy state that a genius like Einstein need to come along for a working theory of everything. So thats 200+ years from now. There was also a expert who stated that our brains are not big enough and it is never going to happen LOL. 200+ years is so far away we talking here about futurology, one can make all sort of claims about THAT future without it having any consequences since we all be dead and gone by then..just like this video... anyway if this universe and its physics is part of something bigger like Kaku one of the fathers of string theory recently stated ''a digital simulation OF PURE THOUGHT''. Information in a idea! That is right! A symbolic universe. Then a mystical genius is going crack it all..not a materialist atheist physisist. cheers!
I GUESS / I THINK / I DON'T KNOW/ MANY UNIVERSES/ MAY BE / THESE ARE SIMPLY THE KEY-WORDS OF FAILING.
An ultimate 'Theory of Everything' is very simple. It's getting a physicist to answer an email and open a dialog which is harder than one might think. Mr. Kuhn should interview me if he'd like to be "closer to truth."
Really? What is you ToE, how does it leads to General Relativity at the macroscopic limit and to QFT in the microscopic limit, and what are its new predictions?
@@ferdinandkraft857 My ToE addresses one simple mistake made a hundred years ago.
@@richardmarcus3340 ... which nobody noticed except you... Riiight.
@@ferdinandkraft857 Correct... and you can be as condescending as you wish. History is full of instances we discovered we were wrong. All the knowledge we've accumulated and there's STILL a crisis in cosmology. The physicists themselves admit we can be wrong about certain things, but you know better... Riiight?
@@richardmarcus3340 If you had anything you'd have it published instead of complaining about emails in this crackpot-ridden comment section.
I think he is wrong, we are dealing with a multi dimensional universe and it may occur at quantum scale and a multi verse. Our reality deals in time scales we have difficulty understanding which may involve state changes at the very end and beginning which repeats infinitely, we live in a self perpetuating engine of sorts that deals in very large time scales
"I am that I am." That's pretty simple, yes?
It's the simplest possible expression of identity, being, and recursion.
Is theory of everything experiencing a kind of entropy?
yes ... computational irreducibility would be a form of entropy ..
Like the guy above said, computation goes through a sort of complexity entropy where computation reaches a homogenous complex state....in which all possible computations that could be performed have been performed, and it cycles through these maximally complex states forever, and is susceptible to complexity bounces (like entropy bounces), where statistically it can revert back to a simple, less complex state.
Consciousness is the final theory
How? Consciousness is emergent.
consciousness is the key to everything and it is fundamental. there will never be a theory of everything because the multi-verse theory is gaining strength and that essentially puts a spanner in the works so to speak as each universe would probably possess its own unique laws.
@@Dion_Mustard I appreciate your opinion but I could not disagree with you more.
Consciousness is not a computation, set of rules, or algorithm. Max Planck, the father of quantum physics: "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness."
@@Dion_Mustard Yes
If we discover a theory of everything, Science will die , it sounds as the beginning of a new religion with a fixed set of axioms. But human curiosity is more complex than a set of rules for the Universe, the eagerness for the objective truth will motivate us to investigate more deep and discover new laws that exits under the Axioms that form “the theory of everything”. The theory of everything is the engine that moves us to investigate, to ask, and to know absolutely everything.
Follow Jesus Christ
@@jayrodriguez84 no me
@@jayrodriguez84 follow me
Universe is not computational, it's executional, it's robot
Might need simplest rule for complexity and diversity?
Conway’s Game Of Life ✌️
I honestly don't know.
Wolfram's Ruliad has potential but there's three major errors in his statements. First, the 'Ruliad (and the accompanying principles) are NOT "everything" since he leaves out Consciousness (that is, Aristotle's "Being-In-Itself", the Ousia of the Stoics, the "One of Plotinus", the "Tao, the Substance of Spinoza, the Sat-Chit-Ananda of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta, and the Emptiness of the Buddhists going way back to Nargajuna and beyond.. Second, Consciousness (per R. Penrose), is non-computable. In short, Wolfram is hung up on computability, and we can prove to ourselves that there's an Essence (Rigpa) that exists in a state transcendental to computations and the mind. No problem. Access "Mahamritunjaya mantra - Sacred Sounds Choir" and listen to it for 5 min per day for at least two weeks. Enjoy the Sat-Chit-Ananda, the state of Pure Being, the Absolute Third, this Pure Consciousness (Brahman) is Absolutely Continuous, but engulfs discreteness much as the waves on the ocean's surface are discrete, but also part of the continuous Ocean..
Great interview. I think Universe is made up of microscopic mass, electric and magnetic charge particles. They are responsible for all known particles, forces, motions etc. Since space is also made of these particles, study of space could lead us to the beginning of the universe and its subsequent evolution. To evolve and diversify universe does not strictly bind itself to any law. Therefore it will not be possible to combine various force or theories into one ToE. We should adopt bottom up approach. All you have to is start from 3 microscopic particles which cannot be individually detected but thier combin presence and effects are everywhere.
Any theory of everything would need to include biology and physics both.
I think I know his favorite word
Seems like a very old interview.
Physicists are not known for their fashion sense 😉
@@theliamofella At least he is rich enough to hire a stylist in his company. This stylist can point out the roughest weak points to him and his employees when they appear in public.
@@silberlinie Simulation of the emergence of the universe in quantum computers
We propose to you the creation of sophisticated and fast quantum computers to simulate trillions of trillions of trillions of backward space geometrically in M- theory
And that is in order to discover a space that has the same physical laws in our universe among a huge number of multiverse in the spaces of M- theory.
Therefore, we ask technologists to create a quantum computer with fast data like light in addition to artificial intelligence
Send this request to physicists, technologists, and people working in quantum computing
Click on this link
ruclips.net/video/_9cTLESrIak/видео.html
@Rolax Fermi
Your suggestion to use both AI and quantum
computers to simulate a huge number of universes
according to the spaces of M-theory is correct.
Thus, we may be able to obtain a universe with
the same properties as ours.
And then to study this one. This is, as you know,
a big project.
If we are able to find an absolutely wealthy sponsor
who considers it fascinating to unravel the plans
of God for the unfolding of our universe, than,
the project can be done.
There may be no time in the universe... So computations conclusion should be wrong
computations operate in iterations ... which would not necessarily be a one to one relationship with time ..
AS BEEN SAID IN IN THE 1990'S
EVERYTHING STARTS WITH E
NOW LETS START IT WITH THE WORD OF
AND+AMEN ECC 7+8
If there is a toe then there are infinitely many TOEs. A toe not the toe. Toes are blueprints for reality, a lossless compression of reality to small blueprint.
We know the answer, everybody of us. 42
Original.
We know that.
What we do not know is: What was the question?
In other words, Windows 10 is mostly bloatware.
Not the Enterprise LTSC edition.
@@moonzestate Simulation of the emergence of the universe in quantum computers
We propose to you the creation of sophisticated and fast quantum computers to simulate trillions of trillions of trillions of backward space geometrically in M- theory
And that is in order to discover a space that has the same physical laws in our universe among a huge number of multiverse in the spaces of M- theory.
Therefore, we ask technologists to create a quantum computer with fast data like light in addition to artificial intelligence
Send this request to physicists, technologists, and people working in quantum computing
Click on this link
ruclips.net/video/_9cTLESrIak/видео.html
(Watched)
This guy is definitely on to something; however, watching the way his scientific mind works, it makes me a little skeptical that scientists are the ones to discover these basic rules.
@@tonyb5492 all I'm saying is scientists are trained to break things down into little pieces and this requires a different kind of mindset to find the primal rules of physical reality. I think a scientist or other thinker could do it, but probably requires the right kind of mindset which if you ask me would be a not so active one. Actually it seems amazing to me that it hasn't happened yet. The rules seem obvious, but converting it into scientific utility seems more problematic.
@@rafeller9057 Which rules are obvious?
@@bozo5632 I'm not really in the head space to give you a list right now and of course it wouldn't be all inclusive because I'm just not that guy, but I would say an obvious one would be that energy fields and matter always follow the path of least resistance, or that there's a fundamental drive towards continued existence. From the latter, one might wonder what was the first uncaused moment of creation, I would add a third fundamental which is everything just is and always has been. It's all matter of matter and energy. No magical metaphysical. All phenomena are physical. Everything happens in the only way it can happen. Okay this is harder than I thought, but I would love to see a gathering or symposium of people who try to come up with some of these primary rules. Do you have one or two for us bo zo?
Oh I thought of one more, everything is not either this or that it's a little bit of this and a little bit of that. :)
What is theory of everything (TOE)?
Answer: The final theory, ultimate theory, or master theory is a hypothetical single, all-encompassing, coherent theoretical framework of physics that fully explains and links together all physical aspects of the universe. Finding a TOE is one of the major unsolved problems in physics. String theory and M-theory have been proposed as theories of everything. Over the past few centuries, two theoretical frameworks have been developed that, together, most closely resemble a TOE. These two theories upon which all modern physics rests are general relativity and quantum mechanics. General relativity is a theoretical framework that only focuses on gravity for understanding the universe in regions of both large scale and high mass: stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies, etc. On the other hand, quantum mechanics is a theoretical framework that only focuses on three non-gravitational forces for understanding the universe in regions of both small scale and low mass: sub-atomic particles, atoms, molecules, etc. Quantum mechanics successfully implemented the Standard Model that describes the three non-gravitational forces - strong nuclear, weak nuclear, and electromagnetic force - as well as all observed elementary particles.
General relativity and quantum mechanics have been thoroughly proven in their separate fields of relevance. Since the usual domains of applicability of general relativity and quantum mechanics are so different, most situations require that only one of the two theories be used. However, the two theories are considered incompatible in regions of extremely small scale - the Planck scale - such as those that exist within a black hole or during the beginning stages of the universe (i.e., the moment immediately following the Big Bang). To resolve the incompatibility, a theoretical framework revealing a deeper underlying reality, unifying gravity with the other three interactions, must be discovered to harmoniously integrate the realms of general relativity and quantum mechanics into a seamless whole: the TOE is a single theory that, in principle, is capable of describing all phenomena in the universe.
In pursuit of this goal, quantum gravity has become one area of active research. One example is string theory, which evolved into a candidate for the TOE, but not without drawbacks (most notably, its lack of currently testable predictions) and controversy. String theory posits that at the beginning of the universe (up to 10−43 seconds after the Big Bang), the four fundamental forces were once a single fundamental force. According to string theory, every particle in the universe, at its most microscopic level (Planck length), consists of varying combinations of vibrating strings (or strands) with preferred patterns of vibration. String theory further claims that it is through these specific oscillatory patterns of strings that a particle of unique mass and force charge is created (that is to say, the electron is a type of string that vibrates one way, while the up quark is a type of string vibrating another way, and so forth).
Follow Jesus Christ
@@FelixBat Christ abolished death on the cross. He offers you and everyone eternal life through faith in him and repentance. That's the greatest gift you could ever receive and it's FREE.
@@FelixBat It's universally accepted that Christ lived and was crucified. The question amongst scholars is did he resurrect proving his diety. And there is overwhelming historical evidence from multiple sources that he did indeed. Not to mention the Sanhedrins have an official document stating that he was crucified due to "sorcery". In other words he was doing things of supernatural origins. We believers know it wasn't sorcery but instead acts of divinity because he is the messiah.
Quantum loop theory and every other theory of everything all have these 3 things in common :
Not testable
Not falsifiable
Not observable
My question then is how could you put your faith in that?
The toroidal field …. The theory of everything….
Windham Hypothesis ∞ |∞/×| ∞x The x symbol doesn't transfer or copy as an italicized subscript _x_.
The fundamental reason why a reality has to exist, is because of the fact that it has to exist. If death didn't exist this would contradict everything logic means.
I guess this theory is begin rotating in human brains long time ago. Simple rule sound like "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Also kabbalah tree of life looks like hypergraph ;)
Laplace's Demon only know.
😵💫
jesus! when his dad adresses him like mum oorahorraa
The universe had a beginning, therefore it needs a beginner (God). And all of our experiences every effect requires a cause
Our particular has to have consciousness in it somewhere: some qualium, some quantum of sensation. Looks to me like deviations from homeostasis, or maybe the breaking by stress of homeostasis... something like that. Generalized to all particles; simple, complex, low energy, high energy, and all points between.
A theory of everything does not include consciousness except if consciousness is part of the elements which constitute a universe (Chalmers theories for example)
@@francesco5581 Yeah; i'm suggesting that some violations of homeostasis might solve the hard problem. Anyone who thinks there is a hard problem must demand a TOE include a solution. Clearly, i think there is a hard problem.
@@mediocrates3416 I think that only in the panpsychism model we need a TOE to include the consciousness factor. In other cases it's out of his mission .
@@francesco5581 Then it isn't a problem👍👍🍻
To form a theory of everything you'd have to know much.
We know that we can spend a life time searching and still know little.
What is a theory of everything? Summeraizing everything from an understanding of all. Which would require enlightment, wisdom & spirituality -- which none of you obtain.
And again, the Ancients gotten further than modern man.
I think in terms of spirituality, there are profound physical implications due to its ties with consciousness. And in that regard, the ancients may have gotten further than modern man. But it is foolish to throw out statements like these. It is clear that the ancients could not describe the mathematical nature of our universe. And while a theory of everything would have to explain consciousness, it would also have to explain the mathematics that underlay our observations. Also, we just don't know what the ancients did, so what is the point of claiming objectively false statements regarding these unknowns with such certainty. Wasn't specifically talking to you alone, but I hear this kind of thing all the time.
@@donutstix22 Not true. The Ancients could describe the Sacred Occult -- which modern man refers to as mathematical nature of universe, whom can hardly give detail or insight regarding it.
The mathematics that underlay our observation?
You must be referring to Metaphysics.
Yes we do know what the Ancients did -- at least to some degree; still learning about the mysteries, however we know the human temple was a major acknowledgement, unlike with the modern man who completely ignores spirituality, the ancients were entirely about it.
-- what would we know of without our senses, and interaction with nature, forces, qualities, energies. It's also our beings relations in life that we greatly learn.
@@S3RAVA3LM What is the sacred occult, i tried to look it up and couldn't find anything. You say modern man refers to this as the mathematical nature of the universe and can hardly give detail or insight regarding it, I don't understand how you come to this conclusion. Modern man has a great deal of insight into the nature of the universe.
And no I was not referring to metaphysics, I was trying to step around an argument about whether math is invented or discovered. I agree with your last 2 sentences completely, I'm not sure how my comment could suggest otherwise. And with regards to the Ancients, we don't know anything relevant or conclusive to them discovering a theory of everything, unless this is what you refer to as the Sacred Occult which I have no knowledge of at the moment.
@@donutstix22
I think it's up to the person, depending on their Spiritual journey to find and flip those stones over for themselves. I can't tell you what you don't want to hear.
If modern man has the understanding of the universe that you desire -- that's great.
I don't care for the materialists. And from the little that I've learn from them who think they have some explanation -- I'm not that impressed.
Men claiming to know how the universe works without knowing who or what they really are doesn't add up for me.
@@S3RAVA3LMi think it's absurd to make claims about the nature of the universe with vague, meaningless words. You didn't answer my sacred occult thing, so I cant circle back to that, but i dont think modern man has the understanding i desire, in the sense that the modern man's understanding is incomplete, and in 1000 years it will probably still be incomplete. I don't take seriously anybody who believes they understand how the universe works, especially when they can't back that up, but that doesn't mean you can't form partial explanations. And it is incredibly easy to say offhand statements which don't have anything substantive to discuss, in favor or against. Which is what I was trying to get at. Rereading your comments though, I feel like you were baiting me and are trolling, in which case, touche.
His answer of 42 is not as important as the question.
Space & time put limits on gravitational free fall in Earth: 9.80662608008642202717156087273329 m/s^2
Windham Hypothesis ∞ |∞/×| ∞-x-
In other words, Linux is too complicated.
Is it possible for science to go smaller than planck time and planck space, perhaps dark energy, gravity or something else?
instagram.com/p/CPyUfUEB8JO/? 🖖
Who are we and why are we doing all this? Why should we think of all this? Definitely, there is something that is keeping us go on this search. Some motive, some fear, greed or whatever, let's not assume what it is. But there is something. Is it possible to totally come out of that driving factor? To see that whatever we think of ourselves is actually not true, so all the motives, goals, search and everything becomes invalid obviously and hence, we could never reach. That doesn't mean, whatever we are doing is waste, we should stop asking these questions and searching. Maybe, when we reach the final stage of this search, we reach the stage I am talking about and then it's a matter of second to become free of everything. Who are we? We don't know. It's just this, to see that we don't know, not necessary to find the answer, it's going to start the same loop all over again. It's very difficult to reach that stage where genuinely accept and see for ourselves naturally that we are not what we think of ourselves and then our needs and everything becomes invalid, we don't need to try to win over greed, anger or anything, every stops naturally, in fact it should be impossible to act get into that old lifestyle even if we try. That's how mind works, once it sees the truth clearly then it's done, over. I just had a glimpse of it for some little amount time sometimes. Everything that is happening around seems to be so wonderful suddenly. Rather than questioning anything, because there is no base for question to arise, you will feel it's a wonder the way everyone is behaving because they have a base to think, act the way they are doing. Can anybody imagine what I am trying to say here? It's not about spirituality or anything on that sort, purely intelligent or natural question we should think of.
That appears like an attempt to understand the universe by means of a re-engineering of it, because frightened by its actual increasing complexity.
@@FelixBat aha aha
E=C
Thrs the Theory of everything, sooner or later science will have to come in terms with this fact.
Please elaborate
@@jonathanheinz1931 Energy & Consiousness is the same.
Look up David Bohms pilot wave theory & listen to J krishnamurti videos you will understand.
@@Iam590 appreciate it man, I'll check it out
@@jonathanheinz1931 no problem, I hope you find the truth.
Also listen to Rupert spira he also explains these stuff well.
“In the beginning God SAID, let there be light”. We know the magic and mysteries of Acoustics, don’t we? So it’s God’s Will through His Word. Moreover, if there is some disease in one’s heart, it’s his God given Free Will.
Wrong channel mate, you ought to be on William Lane Craig's.
@@CriticalFaculty not very inclusive, are we?
@@saadabbas8976 This conversation is about science. Invoking unfalsifiable notions isn't scientific and hence my comment.
Follow Jesus Christ
For God so love the world that he gave his only begotten son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life
@@S3RAVA3LM Preach the gospel brother. I use to be on this channel searching for the truth. Turns out it is a channel design to do the work of Satan to deceive the masses with gibberish disguised as intellectual thought.
@@jayrodriguez84 they don't know any better.
I don't know what good preaching the gospel does, I do however greatly advocate Spirituality.
@@S3RAVA3LM That's not for you to decide on how effective it is to preach the gospel nor is it your job to save them. That's the holy spirit. Your job is to get get out the message. And that's the correct gospel of Jesus Christ, not a water down gospel or prosperity gospel. We are not called to speak about "spirituality".
@@jayrodriguez84 I'm not a Christian.
I don't advocate christianity as they don't know the Holy Spirit or what Spirituality is.
Christianity is a religion of the book -- NOT followers of Yeshua.
@@S3RAVA3LM I never once used the word Christianity. I said if you follow Jesus Christ and he is your Lord and Savior and you are born again, then you are commanded to preach the gospel.
electricity
The theory of everything should came from middle east , because it is the middle of earth
theory of everything is evolution, not physics
Mister don know his model wiers believe me only words .He liar
Lebron is the greatest athlete in all of sports ever.
Very obtuse.
Theory of everything is nothing, nothing at all!