Actually not. Progress is self accelerating. Hence, the progress made in the next ten years will dwarf everything we have achieved in the last ten years.
Indeed, it is too good to be true in a sense. For all of human history and millions of years, we were born in arguably the most exciting stretch of all time. Of course things might get exponentially more interesting going forward still but to witness this transition as it is unfolding is truly a marvel in its own right
The podcast and this channel are great for keeping up with up-to-date topics and groundbreaking finding in the hard sciences. I appreciate the Simons foundation for funding these ventures and disseminating this awesome information to us in these easily digestible formats. Also check the Into the Impossible podcast/show from Brian Keating for more information like this, it's fantastic for science nerds like us.
00:13 Detection of gravitational waves in 2015 01:48 Pulsar timing array measures pulsars to directly detect gravitational waves. 03:21 Gravitational waves from violent collisions of super massive black holes 05:01 Quantum devices teleport energy, revealing the mysterious world of the quantum vacuum. 06:26 Hoda's quantum teleportation protocol allows information to be sent without using energy. 07:53 Quantum energy teleportation and James Webb Space Telescope observations advance physics 09:37 Early discovery of massive and bright red galaxies challenges cosmological theories. 11:30 Black holes as seeds for galaxies You Can't Judge A Video By Its Cover. you can by its first few chapters and certainly by its last.
Two reasons why this might be the case: 1) It's statistically unlikely to happen with macroscopic particles. If we could get it to work with macroscopic particles we could get other quantum properties to work which would completely overshadow quantum teleportation. 2) It's not classical teleportation. As the object is not teleported but the information of the object is, and that information can only be extracted through the classical communication of the original measurement which is slower than light.
Black holes are based on a mathematical misconception. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. Most people don't know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is one aspect of dilation. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from our own galactic center. It can be shown mathematically that dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate that we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. This is the explanation for dark matter, the missing mass is dilated mass. Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in "large clusters of stars" which is basically a very low mass galaxy. For a galaxy to have no/low dilation it must have very, very low mass (or low mass in its center). It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter. For the same reason binary stars will always have predictable rotation rates. What we see in modern astronomy has been known since 1925. This is when the existence of galaxies was confirmed. It was clear that there should be an astronomical quantity of light emanating from our own galactic center. It wasn't until the 1960's when television and movies started to popularize black holes did the concept slowly became mainstream.
Is this “quantum energy” what Nikola Tesla theorized existed all throughout empty space? Edit: Also, for these initial experiments/in general in order to send information through entangled atoms do they both need to be the same material? Could a carbon atom transmit the information to say a gold atom? Also how can we predict/tell what pockets of zero point energy will be entangled together? Meaning, is one carbon atom uniquely linked to another specific carbon atom (think their QR codes match) OR is it that ANY carbon atom is forever entangled with every other carbon atom that exists? Also, my last question is (and this seems like the biggest bottleneck to me) how do we, humans, organize our understanding of this to intentionally decide the destinations of this information we beam into these entangled particles? Also, is it possible that our radio waves give off some resonant energy frequencies that tickle the zero point energy particles and might be, unbeknownst to us, transmitting some kind of quantum data elsewhere in the universe or perhaps even beyond our (3D) dimension? Is what we are witnessing hints at the base code of the universe; between this and quarks and muons and all that kind of stuff? I don’t really know what I’m talking about, just a bunch of questions I’m asking to try and grasp the concepts . Any academic paper recommendations or lectures or podcast interviews from experts in the field would be super helpful if anyone ever bothers to read this gargantuan post.
"Beyond "Standard Model" Physics"... Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? 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. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. 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 Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== 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 production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. 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, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. --------------------
8:20 Is this not “information teleportation” as apposed to energy teleportation? With the slide of hand being that information did not travel, but rather an “isolated” assumption was made about particle b based on our understanding of quantum entanglement?
These are some amazing discoveries! I'm especially intrigued by the teleportation of energy. Can this be done faster than the speed of light, and if so, why doesn't this violate the consequence of Einstein's theory of relativity that no information can travel faster than the speed of light, or does it?
I love how the scientists working on gravitational waves who were interviewed seemed to barely contain their excitement at the discoveries made! Their eyes truly sparkle!
7:20 him explaining this part is just like explaining how a crypto blockchain transaction works. The world is all connected but on different classifications and dimensions. Never ceases to amaze me. God is great.
Can you please add non-atuto-generated subtitles? We can teleport quantum information at no cost but non-auto-generated subtitles are impossible? Especially considering how many schientists have thick accents in English that are nard for native speakers, let alone for ESL. Pretty please!?
Spin is the only way to distort space something like elastic nets. Through the lines connecting the net you get vibration or frequency. Frequency is the measure of the distorted net lines connecting mass. Mass as such cannot spin. The spinning effects of mass is the energy frequency supplied by the lines connecting each like electricity through the wires. Ones higher energy is transferred the core of mass spin faster than the surfaces creating an absorption of the energy. That's why the core of earth spin faster than the surface material. This leads to concentration of the mass at the centre especially heavy metals leading to further CG at the centre. Mass distribution is spiral like galaxy shape because of net distortion distribution patterns. Compression and raryfication is a method of controlling the net using different frequencies. Like changing the frequency of electricity through the wires. Because the core and outside spin at a different rate they can create gravity a frequency of global normal scale.
SR wrong due to reference frame mixing and bad math. GR follows as incorrect. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics.
In 1936, Einstein and Nathan Rosen submitted a paper to Physical Review in which they claimed gravitational waves could not exist in the full general theory of relativity because any such solution of the field equations would have a singularity. The journal sent their manuscript to be reviewed by Howard P. Robertson, who anonymously reported that the singularities in question were simply the harmless coordinate singularities of the employed cylindrical coordinates. Einstein, who was unfamiliar with the concept of peer review, angrily withdrew the manuscript, never to publish in Physical Review again. (Wikipedia)
Your one of the few people who know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is one aspect of dilation. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from our own galactic center. It can be shown mathematically that dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate that we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. This is the explanation for dark matter, the missing mass is dilated mass. Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in "large clusters of stars" which is basically a very low mass galaxy. For a galaxy to have no/low dilation it must have very, very low mass (or low mass in its center). It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter. For the same reason binary stars will always have predictable rotation rates. What we see in modern astronomy has been known since 1925. This is when the existence of galaxies was confirmed. It was clear that there should be an astronomical quantity of light emanating from our own galactic center. It wasn't until the 1960's when television and movies started to popularize black holes did the concept slowly became mainstream. Dilation also explains the CMB, if the WMAP satellite was positioned outside the bounds of our galaxy it would record a background radiation of zero or near zero.
I have a naive question: The further away we look, the more in the past we look. But there is a limit to how far we can see, because of the limitations of the "observable universe", as things further away can not be seen anymore. Doesn't that mean that we can never see too close to the beginning of time even with a better telescope than James Webb?
It is so refreshing to see people genuinely curious and in love with their chosen field. To see adults as excited as children when talking about their respective field is wonderful 👍🦘🦘
all the major breakthroughs have been theoretical, now we comfort ourselves with the mechanical confirmation of things asserted on paper a long time ago, by a more philosophical brand of scientist, the ones who were mystical in the end.
Agreed, these technicians in this video are really doing assumption-laden double and triple interpretations of data that could mean many, many different things. They talk so confidently but there are some really basic, and I mean really basic, issues science hasn't figured out. Like what's a measurement, and why is the CMB aligned with our solar system lol. ...An astronomer tried to impress Gödel at Princeton way back when with a detailed astronomical discovery, and at the end he merely replied, 'I don't believe in empirical science, I only believe in a priori truths.'
I'd also recommend Anton Petrov if you're interested in such news. His videos can feel very raw, but he gives information on almost every discovery that happens and he does so very quickly.
Science and technology are progressing in every field, religion also supports science. Islam gives importance to science. There is science in the Quran, for example, the moon and the sun move in an orbit, all the stars and the moon exist at a certain point and it is Allah Almighty who does this.
@@Showboatbergeryes it is! I’m a physics major as my university! To do the kind of stuff shown in this video would be my dream. I love physics and chemistry. My two favorite subjects in the world. If you like math (or can work to learn to like it) and you like learning and understanding the world, physics is the way to go.
I get my degree in physics with a minor in chemistry in 2027! So exciting to hear from people from the past who were in this field as well. I hope you thought your degree was worth it. Such a wonderful industry, learning for the sake of learning and pushing technology.
There was a small mistake at 1:30. The speaker said "you have to go to much much lower wavelengths" However, in the video, it pans to bigger wavelengths. The speaker probably meant to say lower frequency, as frequency and wavelength are inversely correlated. Great video nonetheless!
@@Rodrigoviverosa its called quantum entanglement. (Its not really teleportation. If you and your friend have one tomato and one strawberry but dont know who has which, when you look what you have, you find out what the other person has as well, even if theyre far away.)
@AndreTJones Ayy, hell yeah mate. I'm someone who's at the end of their physics degree after deciding to switch careers. I'm trying to go for a doctorate at this point. One thing to know is if you plan to go to grad school, start talking to professor about it right now. You wanna have all your essays done at least a year before you graduate because their application deadlines are waaayy too early, just something i wish i had known going in. But also, physics is amazing. If you're going in blind i think the best thing you could do to prepare is learn algebra and calculus. Almost everything in undergrad physics can be expressed in calculus and already having experience in the underlying math is incredibly useful for easily understanding the physics. Anyways, i wish you luck mate! It's a fun ride.
I like how y'all keep up with the modern standards. Less and less people are now reading magazines and the such but these videos are the perfect evolution to that. I love them!
Videos like this give me hope. Even though I can't grasp any of the underlying principles (as a non physicist) its great to see we are having some progress in the eternal search for answers.
I absolutely love how physicists are willing to accept new data and re-define their theories based on these new discoveries. … unlike some archeologists … 🧐
I think gravity was stronger in the early days of the universe. The space time was more flexible. Little mass curved it more. This allowed big galaxies and supermassive blackholes to be created in less time than it needs today. Also the density of the matter in the early universe slowed the time.
The ever increasing expansion of the universe proves you to be right. In fact, if we assume that since the dawn of the universe no energy has been created nor destroyed, we can assume that gravity will eventually reach a point of unsustainability, and the universe will freeze in time.
Feynman speculated once that maths might not end up being the language in which to articulate a theory of everything. I took that quote seriously and ended up overwhelmed. It’s a picture of the universe in terms of concepts, analogy and primarily inductive science. But the key to studying it is not letting bulls*t into your calculations, which is exactly what Physicists have to do all day, too.
TOE Idea: Short version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test): The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe. The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. NUMBERS: (AND ZERO POINT ENERGY): 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe (including 'space' which is energy itself, 'time' being the flow of energy), and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.). And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well. * While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'. Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time? Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's). Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'. * Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.
You have written an extensive text about all these important ideas, but that are given no context beyond the video mentioning gravitational waves and quantum vacuum. You share conclusions about the most fundamental concepts of study of reality. Please, if you so wish to understand reality, share with us the thoughts in a more structured way of a published article, going from a simpler prerequisite and context of your thoughts, up to what you're writing here. Simpler said: a paper. With that you'd move closer to achieving tests. If you already wrote and published a paper, I beg to give its name and other ways to find it. It's already the second long comment that my intuition struggles to tell wether it are the most profound hidden gems (pun), or the most absurd jargon and trips.
@@fatitankeris6327 Here is the longer version of the TOE idea, followed by a post with my gravity test for the TOE idea, followed by the current math for the TOE idea for you and others to peruse: THEORY OF EVERYTHING IDEA: Revised TOE: 3/25/2017b. My Current TOE: THE SETUP: 1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism. 2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them. 5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them. FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO: 6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field. 7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field. 8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality. 9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons. 10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. 11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks. 12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". It's the force that makes the sine wave of EM energy go from a wide (maximum extension) to a point (minimum extension) of a moving photon and acts 90 degrees to the EM forces which act 90 degrees to each other. When the EM gets to maximum extension, "gravity" flips and EM goes to minimum, then "gravity" flips and goes back to maximum, etc, etc. A stationary photon would pulse from it's maximum extension to a point possibly even too small to detect, then back to maximum, etc, etc. (The 'stationary photon' does not really exist, it is mentioned basically only to help describe what a stationary photon would do.) 14. I also believe that a pulsating, swirling singularity (which is basically a pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon) is the energy unit in this universe. 15. When these pulsating, swirling energy units interact with other energy units, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 16. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up. 20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true. 26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught? DISCLAIMER: 27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
@@fatitankeris6327 GRAVITY: WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS): Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way. a. Imagine a 12 hour clock. b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions. c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions. (The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.) d. Direct a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields. e. Do this with the em fields on and off. (The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.) f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects. (Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.) (And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.) (An alternative to the above would be to direct 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space. Maybe I could concentrate the Sun's 'em' into a high powered laser. Might even work with the correct set up breaking the Sun's 'em' down into single 'em' energy frequencies acting like a single energy frequency laser. A high energy laser powered by the Sun. Cool, or actually pretty hot. More than one way to build a laser.) 'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done. 'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. (But hey, might even still get a Sun powered laser, which of course could even be utliized in outer space for various agendas.). This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward. * And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................) But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions. * Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be? So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true? But also: Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides? (Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?) * Added note: Suggestion: 'IF' society did not want to do the gravity test, one suggestion might be to at least create a model as if it were true, then see how that model matches with observations and predictions. It might be possible to discern the theory of everything without actually generating a gravitational black hole (which would definitely prove the TOE idea as being really true).
@@fatitankeris6327 MATHEMATICS FOR TOE IDEA: The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows: The formula has at least 3 levels to it: 1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable. 2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle. 3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it. 4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects. 5. In addition, I am operating in a realm where one plus one does not always equal two, and often does not. While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'. Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time? Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's). Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be. And I never said it would be easy. But now I will say that putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'.
@@fatitankeris6327 * Note also: While I am 'Charles Brightman', I am not the 'Charles Brightman' many think I might be. (Professor of Physics). I just like to study and think a lot.
The amount of assumptions turned fact from summaries of theories never proven preached as the most rational doctrine of reality never known is astounding in the modern day scientific mind. We've convinced ourselves of fantasy while claiming it science when in reality its just a religion.
Wasn’t the nobel award for physics awarded to a woman working at the LIGO observatory in Louisiana? Kinda sucks to make it seem like its all a British achievement
It makes perfect sense that Einstein would predict they would never bee seen, because he knew of just stellar sources and the existence of black holes and neutron stars andnsuch were really hypothetical at the time, and indeed for most processes the gravitational waves produced are really really weak.
Thanks to Quanta Magazine, for sharing videos so interesting, giving me the chance to understand in some way, things too far from the limits of my culture.
Quanta Magazine, you are doing a much needed scientific journalism that is accessible enough for the layman. While other channels do a great job. at explaining some major concepts of science, few inform us with the latest research. You fill that gap and we are grateful for that.
Who else remembers the ‘wormhole in a lab’ overly sensationalized and purposefully misleading video/article Quanta Magazine put out at the end of 2022 and now, still, can’t trust a word they say? 🙋🏻♂️
IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING: SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW: Consider the following: a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics). b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand. c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary. d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above. e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality? f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon? And electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. Why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe? Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above. Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?). g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent? h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How?
Your questions approach a boundry of human understanding itself. Concerning that last statement (Existence and Inexistance). I think that some of these questions are, such, about the human mind and what it made science to be. I think I had most of the same questions as you about the 4D space-time, though. And the answer to those to me, intuitively, seems to connect to interdependence playing a major role in warping combined with conservation. I can't tell wether you read and studied and understood all of the field theory involved, or just the terms and surface understanding of concepts. I haven't yet. I think that would be a useful tool to dive into the mathematical theory first to allow a firmer grasp of these otherwise loose concepts of fields, which caused you to raise these space-time questions in the first place. Basically: delve into the math first (lots of exhausting reading, study) and come back to your valid questions later. I must say that we do have descriptions at least, so there's not a "we have no idea" state, we do have ideas...
@@fatitankeris6327 You seem to be judging me without even knowing me nor what I might know. As far as 'Existence and Non-existence', 'if' my current theory of everything is true, currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test, but 'if' true, then I can potentially answer all those items above. Can you? From my files: THE UNIVERSAL SHELL: Existence and non-existence, side by side for all of eternity: "IF" my Theory Of Everything is really true, (that what is called 'gravity' is a modality that is a part of the currently recognized 'em' photon, 'gravity' acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other, 'gravity' actually causing the sine wave pattern of 'em'), AND "IF" my view of space and time are correct, ('space' being energy itself [which is the 'gem' photon], 'time' being the flow of energy), then I could see where it might be possible that the inner spherical shell of the universe could possibly be made up of the 'gravity' modality of the 'gem' photon which is 90 degrees to the electrical modality of the 'gem' photon, which are both 90 degrees to the magnetic modality of the 'gem' photon, the magnetic modality existing both inside of and outside of the inner shell, the complete 'gem' photon interactions making up the entire spherical shell of all of existence itself. And then of course, non-existence would exist beyond existence. So, existence and non-existence might possibly exist side by side for all of eternity. It all depends upon whether the gravity test for my TOE is really true or not and whether my view of space time is correct or not, and whether the universal spherical shell exists as I believe it might or not. But 'if' true, and as no photons (currently 'em', 'gem' in my view) would be absorbed nor reflected by the spherical universal shell, then when we look at the blackness in the night sky that is beyond the light of the stars and galaxies, we might actually be perceiving in part the limits of existence and the universal shell of existence itself, with non-existence beyond. I am inside of a vast eternally existent universe, filled with everything in existence, and yet, somehow, I feel so alone. An existent universe unto itself alone with nothingness beyond.
@@fatitankeris6327 "Your questions approach a boundry of human understanding itself." I like to ask questions here on the public internet to create cognitive dissonance in entities' sub-consciousness so as to help guide society to greater truths. Also from my files: WHO AND/OR WHAT AM I? DO 'I' EVEN EXIST? Consider the following: a. I am a human as defined by humans. b. I am an energy based quarkelectronian as modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy and I am made up of matter and interacting energy. c. I am a being of 'light', 'if' my current theory of everything is correct whereby the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in this universe, including space, time and numbers. (Currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test). d. "I" do not even actually exist but eternally existent space time exists as me, currently in the forms as above. * I exist and yet "I" simultaneously do not exist, dependent upon perspective. But yet, do "I" not truly exist in absolute truth reality as only eternally existent space time exists as all things in absolute truth reality? * "I" can mentally change between perspectives thereby experiencing existence from those various perspectives. "My" mind continues to expand, but is it truly 'my' mind that is expanding or is it eternally existent space time's mind that is expanding? In absolute truth reality, it would seem to be the later. * 'To Be or Not To Be'. I am both, 'I Am and I Am Not.' But I Am Not it appears more than I Am. * Consider also: If asked the general question, 'What do you know?'. My current answer would be, 'Not much compared to all that can be known.' (I Am Not, More than I Am). It's humbling. * Is it truly any wonder that the flow of energy in the universe affects species? We are the universe experiencing itself. * Question: If 'I' never actually existed in the first place, how could 'I' ever die? * Added Note: Now, 'assuming' the above is correct, that 'I' do not even actually exist but that eternally existent energy exists as 'me', and that 'my' consciousness, memories and thoughts are actually the universe acting through the form of 'me': a. I have yet to acquire any 'new' knowledge via this supposed connection that cannot be explained by 'normal' means. (In other words, besides things I learned or intuited). Even my theory of everything and other ideas are due to study and critical thinking. Nor can I magically fluently speak a language that I have not already learned. (In other words, no magical connection with the 'universal consciousness' at this time can be noted). b. I have yet to be able to manipulate reality with my mind alone, my physical body is necessary to manipulate reality. c. While I can imagine being elsewhere in this universe, it does not appear that I can actually take just my mind actually there. (My mind is where my body is). d. Doesn't mean I will stop trying, just have not noticed the above as occurring as of yet.
@@fatitankeris6327 "Basically: delve into the math first..." Do you even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants even exist that you utilize in your mathematical formulas? If not, maybe it's you who need to learn more fundamental items concerning reality?
@@charlesbrightman4237Concerning your last comment, about my "advice" to delve into the math, I realize that we weren't talking about the same things, I'm sorry for thinking so simply. But, consider: Just like you likely can't understand the following just from being the universe *So wie Sie es jetzt nicht verstehen können, was ich jetzt schreibe, allein darausfolgend, dass Sie das Universum sind (unless you do know "German")* so is math an additional knowledge for you to think about your questions of reality physics, natural philosophy. You wouldn't be thinking anything like what you do now if you hadn't learned English either, as that allowed you reading to learn, mature, and come to present form. So studying it isn't bad advice considering your interest in the "scientific" form of world seeing. I apologize for not recognizing that the topic is deeper, not only scientific, but also philosophic, as we humans call that (is philosophy the same science?). (btw, you seem to question a lot of human-made, even English-language-made aspects while using them yourself, like what are numbers, beings, etc. We'd have to agree that we will recognize language as something existing for communication's sake, ok? We both used words like "science", and defining every word would chain out of control, pardon my tone.) So you grasped what you are on most fundamental of levels, such that it could be said that you are me, I am you, and we are all, and all are we. And yet we are all "seperate" in some way that we itself (as human intellects, humans) describe. You are part of the universe, likely even the whole of its interactions (me too), discovering yourself. What you want is understanding of everything you are? Meaning that you want to be able to simulate yourself by the concept called "understanding"? Your "wants" themselves are the only moving force then. Imagine if they were removed. You wouldn't want to know any of this. Do you see them as "primitive human brain chemistry" or an emergent property of the universe (a deep property of the fields to create a being like you with ability to "want" to understand)? *I ENJOY WRITING WITH YOU, so I'm sorry if I seem to not answer directly or talking too much, I hope we could restart if so, as I have a lot to talk about, and maybe a different perspective could offer us both something. It just seems that you hit a dead end, partially due to being the human you are.*
So gravitational waves first proposed: Oliver Heaviside in 1893 - that's a win for physics. The 1916 Albert Einstein put his 50 cents worth in a bit later, and now we have seen it. noteworthy yes, new no. Quantum entablement passing energy by information, I'd say that's new, good work physicists JWST well that's case of damn we don't know what the hell we are seeing here it doesn't make any sense, -> this one is new, because it poses knew questions. amazing only in showing what we don't know
We don't know anything--seems to be as surprising to some scientists as it is for every humble person who meets arrogant scientist. Lol. The universe is sense perception, it does not exist per se. I've ruined all scientific explanations for the universe. You are welcome.
We are living in times that in a few centuries will be seen as crucial for humanity
Actually not. Progress is self accelerating. Hence, the progress made in the next ten years will dwarf everything we have achieved in the last ten years.
1900s will be considered as the dumb ages.
One where mechanics and technicians out ran logical interpretations
i really like that.
not really. we will be considered the confused age. as long as science thinks light and gravity are two different things that don't interact.
Hope so.
I could watch these discoveries literally non-stop, what a blessing it is to have been born in such a fascinating timeline.
@@Davethreshold the speed of light isn't a limit that can be broken, its literally just the speed particles travel when they dont have rest mass
As a famous researcher often says "What a time to be alive!!"
MissMinutes vibes there :)
ok boomer
Indeed, it is too good to be true in a sense. For all of human history and millions of years, we were born in arguably the most exciting stretch of all time.
Of course things might get exponentially more interesting going forward still but to witness this transition as it is unfolding is truly a marvel in its own right
The podcast and this channel are great for keeping up with up-to-date topics and groundbreaking finding in the hard sciences. I appreciate the Simons foundation for funding these ventures and disseminating this awesome information to us in these easily digestible formats. Also check the Into the Impossible podcast/show from Brian Keating for more information like this, it's fantastic for science nerds like us.
This is all so exciting to an old guy like me who earned his physics degree in 1978! Thanks for sharing and explaining the physics so well!
00:13 Detection of gravitational waves in 2015
01:48 Pulsar timing array measures pulsars to directly detect gravitational waves.
03:21 Gravitational waves from violent collisions of super massive black holes
05:01 Quantum devices teleport energy, revealing the mysterious world of the quantum vacuum.
06:26 Hoda's quantum teleportation protocol allows information to be sent without using energy.
07:53 Quantum energy teleportation and James Webb Space Telescope observations advance physics
09:37 Early discovery of massive and bright red galaxies challenges cosmological theories.
11:30 Black holes as seeds for galaxies
You Can't Judge A Video By Its Cover. you can by its first few chapters and certainly by its last.
That second story should be a way bigger deal
Two reasons why this might be the case:
1) It's statistically unlikely to happen with macroscopic particles. If we could get it to work with macroscopic particles we could get other quantum properties to work which would completely overshadow quantum teleportation.
2) It's not classical teleportation. As the object is not teleported but the information of the object is, and that information can only be extracted through the classical communication of the original measurement which is slower than light.
God bless these channels. Please never stop with these. They are unendingly fascinating and tells us the continuing story of humanity.
Black holes are based on a mathematical misconception. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. Most people don't know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote -
"The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is one aspect of dilation.
Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from our own galactic center.
It can be shown mathematically that dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate that we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. This is the explanation for dark matter, the missing mass is dilated mass.
Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in "large clusters of stars" which is basically a very low mass galaxy. For a galaxy to have no/low dilation it must have very, very low mass (or low mass in its center). It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter. For the same reason binary stars will always have predictable rotation rates.
What we see in modern astronomy has been known since 1925. This is when the existence of galaxies was confirmed. It was clear that there should be an astronomical quantity of light emanating from our own galactic center. It wasn't until the 1960's when television and movies started to popularize black holes did the concept slowly became mainstream.
I can’t wait to finish my degree in physics. As an undergrad. It seems a long way from now for me to be able to do research like this.
It's funny to think aliens already figured this stuff out.
Teleportation of comic energy !
Most interesting.
We are able to know all these thro this wonderful video.
Just blissful.
Cant wait for 0 ping quantum internet
What a time to be alive while these incredible discoveries are taking place 🙏🏾
Is this “quantum energy” what Nikola Tesla theorized existed all throughout empty space?
Edit: Also, for these initial experiments/in general in order to send information through entangled atoms do they both need to be the same material? Could a carbon atom transmit the information to say a gold atom? Also how can we predict/tell what pockets of zero point energy will be entangled together? Meaning, is one carbon atom uniquely linked to another specific carbon atom (think their QR codes match) OR is it that ANY carbon atom is forever entangled with every other carbon atom that exists? Also, my last question is (and this seems like the biggest bottleneck to me) how do we, humans, organize our understanding of this to intentionally decide the destinations of this information we beam into these entangled particles? Also, is it possible that our radio waves give off some resonant energy frequencies that tickle the zero point energy particles and might be, unbeknownst to us, transmitting some kind of quantum data elsewhere in the universe or perhaps even beyond our (3D) dimension? Is what we are witnessing hints at the base code of the universe; between this and quarks and muons and all that kind of stuff? I don’t really know what I’m talking about, just a bunch of questions I’m asking to try and grasp the concepts . Any academic paper recommendations or lectures or podcast interviews from experts in the field would be super helpful if anyone ever bothers to read this gargantuan post.
"Beyond "Standard Model" Physics"...
Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.)
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree.
String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring?
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine.
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules:
“We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr
(lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958)
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics?
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. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. 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 Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry.
Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.
Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change.
=====================
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 production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. 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, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length )
The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge.
Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms.
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?
Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles?
I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.
--------------------
Something good to write down
Do these thoughts find a place of structure in any papers, perchance? Please send if so.
Shout out the animation team, great work!
7:27 I am not intelligent enough to grasp this concept, but the animation is beautiful 😀
Waterloooo! Im in the Math Physics and this is great! An alumni making discoveries! Amazing!
*teenage me:* “Einstein was relatively revealing.”
*classmates:* 😐💭 (…okay?)
*physics teacher:* 🪦🥀🐦⬛
8:20
Is this not “information teleportation” as apposed to energy teleportation?
With the slide of hand being that information did not travel, but rather an “isolated” assumption was made about particle b based on our understanding of quantum entanglement?
Why quantum physics has to be always so wild?!
These are some amazing discoveries! I'm especially intrigued by the teleportation of energy. Can this be done faster than the speed of light, and if so, why doesn't this violate the consequence of Einstein's theory of relativity that no information can travel faster than the speed of light, or does it?
So star trek right around the corner? Quantum teleportation sounds like synthesizing.
After I just rewatched Oppenheimer this was the first thing I wanted to watch
I love how the scientists working on gravitational waves who were interviewed seemed to barely contain their excitement at the discoveries made! Their eyes truly sparkle!
Amazing. Thank you so much for doing this. Perfection series
7:20 him explaining this part is just like explaining how a crypto blockchain transaction works. The world is all connected but on different classifications and dimensions. Never ceases to amaze me. God is great.
Can you please add non-atuto-generated subtitles? We can teleport quantum information at no cost but non-auto-generated subtitles are impossible? Especially considering how many schientists have thick accents in English that are nard for native speakers, let alone for ESL. Pretty please!?
I love that Einstein is still being proved right
Spin is the only way to distort space something like elastic nets. Through the lines connecting the net you get vibration or frequency. Frequency is the measure of the distorted net lines connecting mass. Mass as such cannot spin. The spinning effects of mass is the energy frequency supplied by the lines connecting each like electricity through the wires. Ones higher energy is transferred the core of mass spin faster than the surfaces creating an absorption of the energy. That's why the core of earth spin faster than the surface material. This leads to concentration of the mass at the centre especially heavy metals leading to further CG at the centre. Mass distribution is spiral like galaxy shape because of net distortion distribution patterns. Compression and raryfication is a method of controlling the net using different frequencies. Like changing the frequency of electricity through the wires. Because the core and outside spin at a different rate they can create gravity a frequency of global normal scale.
I love that Caitlin has a piece of art on the wall behind her that looks like the JWS telescope
So cool to know. Thanks!
SR wrong due to reference frame mixing and bad math. GR follows as incorrect. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics.
thanks for the video!
Due to gravitational waves expanding and shrinking space time it is therefore possible for space time to disappear or evaporate.
It sounds like an interesting idea but I don't understand your reasoning here.
Fantastic😮
In 1936, Einstein and Nathan Rosen submitted a paper to Physical Review in which they claimed gravitational waves could not exist in the full general theory of relativity because any such solution of the field equations would have a singularity. The journal sent their manuscript to be reviewed by Howard P. Robertson, who anonymously reported that the singularities in question were simply the harmless coordinate singularities of the employed cylindrical coordinates. Einstein, who was unfamiliar with the concept of peer review, angrily withdrew the manuscript, never to publish in Physical Review again.
(Wikipedia)
Your one of the few people who know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote -
"The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is one aspect of dilation.
Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from our own galactic center.
It can be shown mathematically that dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate that we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. This is the explanation for dark matter, the missing mass is dilated mass.
Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in "large clusters of stars" which is basically a very low mass galaxy. For a galaxy to have no/low dilation it must have very, very low mass (or low mass in its center). It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter. For the same reason binary stars will always have predictable rotation rates.
What we see in modern astronomy has been known since 1925. This is when the existence of galaxies was confirmed. It was clear that there should be an astronomical quantity of light emanating from our own galactic center. It wasn't until the 1960's when television and movies started to popularize black holes did the concept slowly became mainstream.
Dilation also explains the CMB, if the WMAP satellite was positioned outside the bounds of our galaxy it would record a background radiation of zero or near zero.
I have a naive question: The further away we look, the more in the past we look. But there is a limit to how far we can see, because of the limitations of the "observable universe", as things further away can not be seen anymore. Doesn't that mean that we can never see too close to the beginning of time even with a better telescope than James Webb?
It is so refreshing to see people genuinely curious and in love with their chosen field. To see adults as excited as children when talking about their respective field is wonderful 👍🦘🦘
"this is one of the most important sounds in the universe" ... *Proceeds to talk over it*
*Holy shit you can make font bold by putting it in asterisks??*
@felnuts intro sound familiar
1:38 lower wavelengths or frequencies?
Is it possible galaxies poured out of black holes? Like they're the hawking radiation?
all the major breakthroughs have been theoretical, now we comfort ourselves with the mechanical confirmation of things asserted on paper a long time ago, by a more philosophical brand of scientist, the ones who were mystical in the end.
Agreed, these technicians in this video are really doing assumption-laden double and triple interpretations of data that could mean many, many different things. They talk so confidently but there are some really basic, and I mean really basic, issues science hasn't figured out. Like what's a measurement, and why is the CMB aligned with our solar system lol. ...An astronomer tried to impress Gödel at Princeton way back when with a detailed astronomical discovery, and at the end he merely replied, 'I don't believe in empirical science, I only believe in a priori truths.'
@@erawanpencilcoming from someone with 0 qualifications in the field.
Can you give an example I'm not sure what you mean
The history of astro physics =
"this is how it is " until it isn't .
YOU ARE SEARCHING AN UNI-VERSE IN QUANTA. WILL YOU FIND IT ??
So let there be almighty Afsar Abbas No doubt relativism with pm aabaas
I smell double slit experiment with gravitational waves coming.
That will be epic😮
Love that I can get up to date physics information like this
I'd also recommend Anton Petrov if you're interested in such news. His videos can feel very raw, but he gives information on almost every discovery that happens and he does so very quickly.
Science and technology are progressing in every field, religion also supports science. Islam gives importance to science. There is science in the Quran, for example, the moon and the sun move in an orbit, all the stars and the moon exist at a certain point and it is Allah Almighty who does this.
@@ResetAll-ni4dp It is actually the Lord Jesus Christ who does all of this.
This is all so exciting to an old guy like me who earned his physics degree in 1978! Thanks for sharing and explaining the physics so well!
Is pyhsics fun?
@@Showboatbergeryes it is! I’m a physics major as my university! To do the kind of stuff shown in this video would be my dream. I love physics and chemistry. My two favorite subjects in the world. If you like math (or can work to learn to like it) and you like learning and understanding the world, physics is the way to go.
I get my degree in physics with a minor in chemistry in 2027! So exciting to hear from people from the past who were in this field as well. I hope you thought your degree was worth it. Such a wonderful industry, learning for the sake of learning and pushing technology.
Not even in his 50s…
@@StonedmeWouldn’t he be in his 70’s?
There was a small mistake at 1:30. The speaker said "you have to go to much much lower wavelengths" However, in the video, it pans to bigger wavelengths. The speaker probably meant to say lower frequency, as frequency and wavelength are inversely correlated. Great video nonetheless!
Non of us were confused
@@LBTennis I guarantee you one out of the 62k people who watched this video was.
@@TheMajorpickle01Indeed, i was like wtf😂
Yeah i was so confused about that.
Me too lol, just listened to that part and directly went into the comments to find out if I am dumm or that was a mistake in the video 😂
The quantum energy teleportation is mind blowing!!!
I need to undestand more from this... where can I learn?
@@Rodrigoviverosa
Same, bro lol
Maybe that quantum transference operates through the super ethers, which are less dense and much finer.😊
@@Rodrigoviverosa its called quantum entanglement.
(Its not really teleportation. If you and your friend have one tomato and one strawberry but dont know who has which, when you look what you have, you find out what the other person has as well, even if theyre far away.)
@@williamgidrewicz4775babe wake up new boson dropped
The animations in this video were fantastic. Props to whoever made those.
I can’t wait to finish my degree in physics. As an undergrad. It seems a long way from now for me to be able to do research like this.
Just ask the professors right now, you don’t need to be a graduate student to do research
@@koktszfung tbh. I haven’t taken physics just yet. Starting college at the age of 45
it flies by !
keep on going, amazing job for dedicating yourself to the future
@AndreTJones Ayy, hell yeah mate. I'm someone who's at the end of their physics degree after deciding to switch careers. I'm trying to go for a doctorate at this point. One thing to know is if you plan to go to grad school, start talking to professor about it right now. You wanna have all your essays done at least a year before you graduate because their application deadlines are waaayy too early, just something i wish i had known going in.
But also, physics is amazing. If you're going in blind i think the best thing you could do to prepare is learn algebra and calculus. Almost everything in undergrad physics can be expressed in calculus and already having experience in the underlying math is incredibly useful for easily understanding the physics.
Anyways, i wish you luck mate! It's a fun ride.
I like how y'all keep up with the modern standards. Less and less people are now reading magazines and the such but these videos are the perfect evolution to that. I love them!
I look forward to these every year and its one of my favorite things to do during Christmas
Energy teleportation is crazy stuff. Oh dayam
“The Universe is *much* weirder than anything we could dream up.”
Videos like this give me hope. Even though I can't grasp any of the underlying principles (as a non physicist) its great to see we are having some progress in the eternal search for answers.
I love these year-end summaries, keep up the great content
It's already 2 years since James Webb Telescope was launched??? It still feels like yesterday to me!
Physics: the art that most reminds us that a child knows as much as Einstein.
Erica is beautiful
I haven’t understood 70% of what they said in the first 2 minutes but I want to know what it means damn
You can read a book:
COSMOLOGY FOR THE CURIOUS
I suspect that the data & images from JWST will revolutionize Cosmology.
"The Infrared Catastrophe", perhaps?
Why is this the only one of these videos without captions?
It has them now - I think sometimes they're autogenerated by Google and it takes some time
beautiful
the second almost made me cry for the playful inventivness
the third made me remember how beautiful science is
the first made me ohm
I absolutely love how physicists are willing to accept new data and re-define their theories based on these new discoveries. … unlike some archeologists … 🧐
So Star Gate SG-1 was a documentary after all!
PBS SpaceTime lookin thumbnail ya got there
JWST : our previous theories have been thrown in the circular file. 📝🏅. 🚽
The JWST proves God's creation
@@Showboatberger We already knew. 🎉
I think gravity was stronger in the early days of the universe. The space time was more flexible. Little mass curved it more. This allowed big galaxies and supermassive blackholes to be created in less time than it needs today. Also the density of the matter in the early universe slowed the time.
The ever increasing expansion of the universe proves you to be right. In fact, if we assume that since the dawn of the universe no energy has been created nor destroyed, we can assume that gravity will eventually reach a point of unsustainability, and the universe will freeze in time.
Do you think people in the 60s though the same but for regular bits and computers
Feynman speculated once that maths might not end up being the language in which to articulate a theory of everything. I took that quote seriously and ended up overwhelmed. It’s a picture of the universe in terms of concepts, analogy and primarily inductive science. But the key to studying it is not letting bulls*t into your calculations, which is exactly what Physicists have to do all day, too.
0:05 Low-Frequency Gravitational Waves
4:20 Quantum Energy Teleportation
8:44 Discoveries from the James Webb Space Telescope
“one of the most mysterious sound in the universe” and begins to explain lol
Martin Martinez 😎👍🏻Now you have a fan👌🏻
2:08 Either he doesn't believe in Physics or he doesn't understand the word incredible!
TOE Idea: Short version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test):
The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe.
The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other.
NUMBERS: (AND ZERO POINT ENERGY):
'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time, my gravity test has to be done which will help prove or disprove the TOE idea), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe (including 'space' which is energy itself, 'time' being the flow of energy), and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, the 'gravity' modality acting 90 degrees from the 'em' modalities, which act 90 degrees to each other, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows:
Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction.
Then:
1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe.
(And possibly '0', zero, as possibly neutrals are against other neutrals, even if only briefly, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have. This would also be the maximum potential energy point or as some might call it, the 'zero point energy point'.).
And also how possibly mathematical constants exist in this universe as well.
* While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'.
Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time?
Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's).
Putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'.
* Note also: Nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and mathematical constants can exist and do what they do in this universe from the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SMPP). While the SMPP has it's place, I believe we need to move beyond the SMPP to get closer to real reality.
You have written an extensive text about all these important ideas, but that are given no context beyond the video mentioning gravitational waves and quantum vacuum. You share conclusions about the most fundamental concepts of study of reality. Please, if you so wish to understand reality, share with us the thoughts in a more structured way of a published article, going from a simpler prerequisite and context of your thoughts, up to what you're writing here. Simpler said: a paper. With that you'd move closer to achieving tests. If you already wrote and published a paper, I beg to give its name and other ways to find it. It's already the second long comment that my intuition struggles to tell wether it are the most profound hidden gems (pun), or the most absurd jargon and trips.
@@fatitankeris6327 Here is the longer version of the TOE idea, followed by a post with my gravity test for the TOE idea, followed by the current math for the TOE idea for you and others to peruse:
THEORY OF EVERYTHING IDEA:
Revised TOE: 3/25/2017b.
My Current TOE:
THE SETUP:
1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism.
2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.).
3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them.
4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them.
FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO:
6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field.
7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field.
8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality.
9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons.
10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary.
11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks.
12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do.
THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA:
13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". It's the force that makes the sine wave of EM energy go from a wide (maximum extension) to a point (minimum extension) of a moving photon and acts 90 degrees to the EM forces which act 90 degrees to each other. When the EM gets to maximum extension, "gravity" flips and EM goes to minimum, then "gravity" flips and goes back to maximum, etc, etc. A stationary photon would pulse from it's maximum extension to a point possibly even too small to detect, then back to maximum, etc, etc. (The 'stationary photon' does not really exist, it is mentioned basically only to help describe what a stationary photon would do.)
14. I also believe that a pulsating, swirling singularity (which is basically a pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon) is the energy unit in this universe.
15. When these pulsating, swirling energy units interact with other energy units, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe.
16. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate.
17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure.
18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons).
THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY:
19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up.
20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency.
21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies.
NOTES:
22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well.
25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true.
26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught?
DISCLAIMER:
27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
@@fatitankeris6327 GRAVITY:
WARNING: (CONTAINS EXISTENTIAL MATTERS):
Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way.
a. Imagine a 12 hour clock.
b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions.
c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions.
(The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.)
d. Direct a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields.
e. Do this with the em fields on and off.
(The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results, cancelling out the em modalities of the laser, thereby leaving behind the gravity modality.)
f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects.
(Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.)
(And note: if done right, it's possible a mini gravitational black hole might form. Be ready for it. In addition, it's possible a neutrino might be formed before the black hole stage, the neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.)
(An alternative to the above would be to direct 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space. Maybe I could concentrate the Sun's 'em' into a high powered laser. Might even work with the correct set up breaking the Sun's 'em' down into single 'em' energy frequencies acting like a single energy frequency laser. A high energy laser powered by the Sun. Cool, or actually pretty hot. More than one way to build a laser.)
'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done.
'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. (But hey, might even still get a Sun powered laser, which of course could even be utliized in outer space for various agendas.).
This test can speak for itself. It will either be true, partly true, or not true at all. It will either show what gravity truly is, might be, or is not. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
* And note: Whether my gravity test or another's, a gravitational black hole would have to be formed to prove the concept as being really true. A gravitational black hole that 'if' self fed itself, could literally wipe out this Earth and all on it, possibly this solar system, possibly put a black hole in this section of our galaxy, and potentially even causing a ripple effect in this galaxy and surrounding universe. But hey, if it does, no worries. Nobody would be left to prosecute those who did so. (Possibly famous last words: "Hey, it worked. Ooooppppssss.................)
But as NASA has already proven that low gravity conditions over a prolonged period of time is harmful to the human species, and large rotating space ships won't really work for space bases on planets and moons, those space bases probably being needed somewhere along the way out of this solar system and galaxy, we need to figure out what gravity truly is and see if we can generate artificial gravity so as to have smaller space ships and proper gravity conditions for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, at least all human life will most probably die and go extinct one day. Currently, no exceptions.
* Added note: Just trying to save at least 1 single species from this Earth to exist beyond this Earth so that life itself from this Earth has continued meaning and purpose to. Gives me something to do while I exist, otherwise, what is it all and everything for? Even if my TOE idea were correct, but if it did not help species survive beyond this Earth, what good would it ultimately be?
So, are you feeling lucky? Doing nothing and at least the entire human species eventually dies and goes extinct with a high degree of certainty. Doing a gravity test, (mine and/or another's), and there is at least a slim chance of literally wiping out this entire Earth and all on it, and possibly more. Do you and other's truly want me to prove my TOE idea as being really true?
But also:
Questions: Are at least some black holes in this universe due to a species who were trying to discern what 'gravity' truly was, came up with a test to do so, were successful, but the black hole generated (to prove what gravity truly was) self fed itself and wiped them and at least their entire planet out? What species might have existed where a black hole now resides?
(Since all of life itself is ultimately meaningless in the grand of scheme of things anyway, do the gravity test and see what occurs?)
* Added note: Suggestion: 'IF' society did not want to do the gravity test, one suggestion might be to at least create a model as if it were true, then see how that model matches with observations and predictions. It might be possible to discern the theory of everything without actually generating a gravitational black hole (which would definitely prove the TOE idea as being really true).
@@fatitankeris6327 MATHEMATICS FOR TOE IDEA:
The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows:
The formula has at least 3 levels to it:
1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable.
2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle.
3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it.
4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects.
5. In addition, I am operating in a realm where one plus one does not always equal two, and often does not.
While in bed one morning after a restful nights sleep, and assuming the above is correct, I mentally went 'inside' the 1 (the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself). I still saw with my mind the 3 different interacting modalities, the 6 maximum modality points, the '9' including and being the neutral points in the middle which faded into a 6 (as each maximum modality point came towards zero), that 6 fading into a 3 (as each modality came together), which turned into a 1 (which was the '0' point), but '0' wasn't zero. So, '0' is not really '0' but is something, not nothing. '0' is a relative '0'. But then here again, the zero point energy point is the maximum potential energy point for any and all modalities of the 'gem' photon. '0' is '1' and '1' is '0', this is the '1' inside the '1'.
Now I just have to come up with some tests to test this idea of the zero point energy point being '1', a maximum potential energy point of the singular pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon itself. The maximum potential energy point not really being potential energy per se, but the neutral point of kinetic energy. Tapping into here would be tapping into the 'zero' point energy point of eternally existent ever flowing energy. But then again, tapping into here, 'if' distorted what makes up space and time itself (assuming that 'space' is energy itself [the 'gem' photon] and that 'time' is the flow of energy), could it alter or even destroy the very fabric of space itself? What would occur if even only a single pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon were to explode? What potential ripple effects could occur with the rest of space and time?
Hence also why I try to think some things all the way through so as to try to identify potential issues before the test. Unexpected, unintended, potentially dangerous or even deadly consequences. If nothing else, it keeps my mind active. The mind, use it or lose it, but using it could also lose it, permanently. (My own and other's).
Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be. And I never said it would be easy. But now I will say that putting the 'zero point energy point' into actual practice could be deadly. Warning: Proceed with Caution. The last words of human existence on this Earth might be, 'Hey it worked, ooooppppppsssssss.............'.
@@fatitankeris6327 * Note also: While I am 'Charles Brightman', I am not the 'Charles Brightman' many think I might be. (Professor of Physics). I just like to study and think a lot.
The amount of assumptions turned fact from summaries of theories never proven preached as the most rational doctrine of reality never known is astounding in the modern day scientific mind. We've convinced ourselves of fantasy while claiming it science when in reality its just a religion.
Dang that's crazy
Great video. Thank you for Breakthroughs series
Waiting for mathematics one.
I absolutely do not understand a lick of the teleportation bit, can anyone simplify?
Wasn’t the nobel award for physics awarded to a woman working at the LIGO observatory in Louisiana? Kinda sucks to make it seem like its all a British achievement
I wonder if space-time is actually dark energy.
Forgetting how cool we’re finding our universe to be, this video, the teaching, and the visuals are all so amazing thank you
It makes perfect sense that Einstein would predict they would never bee seen, because he knew of just stellar sources and the existence of black holes and neutron stars andnsuch were really hypothetical at the time, and indeed for most processes the gravitational waves produced are really really weak.
Thanks to Quanta Magazine, for sharing videos so interesting, giving me the chance to understand in some way, things too far from the limits of my culture.
Pulsar timing array is absolutely crazy ingenious invention! Who came up with it?
Quanta Magazine, you are doing a much needed scientific journalism that is accessible enough for the layman.
While other channels do a great job. at explaining some major concepts of science, few inform us with the latest research. You fill that gap and we are grateful for that.
Who else remembers the ‘wormhole in a lab’ overly sensationalized and purposefully misleading video/article Quanta Magazine put out at the end of 2022 and now, still, can’t trust a word they say? 🙋🏻♂️
Pretty sure their "teleportation" easily false into this category as well 🤔
Where can I find the papers and people you read and interviewed for this video?
I understand nothing from this video but I watched it all, fascinating time we living in.
There is no cosmic time. So, in cosmic scales, formation of supermassive blackholes are not limited by that non existent cosmic time.
Masahiro Hotta seems like a Nobel Prize contestant. Crazy stuff!
I am also coming to give this thoery 👾
IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING:
SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW:
Consider the following:
a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics).
b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand.
c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary.
d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above.
e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality?
f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon?
And electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. Why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe?
Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above.
Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?).
g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent?
h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How?
Your questions approach a boundry of human understanding itself. Concerning that last statement (Existence and Inexistance). I think that some of these questions are, such, about the human mind and what it made science to be. I think I had most of the same questions as you about the 4D space-time, though. And the answer to those to me, intuitively, seems to connect to interdependence playing a major role in warping combined with conservation. I can't tell wether you read and studied and understood all of the field theory involved, or just the terms and surface understanding of concepts. I haven't yet. I think that would be a useful tool to dive into the mathematical theory first to allow a firmer grasp of these otherwise loose concepts of fields, which caused you to raise these space-time questions in the first place. Basically: delve into the math first (lots of exhausting reading, study) and come back to your valid questions later. I must say that we do have descriptions at least, so there's not a "we have no idea" state, we do have ideas...
@@fatitankeris6327 You seem to be judging me without even knowing me nor what I might know. As far as 'Existence and Non-existence', 'if' my current theory of everything is true, currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test, but 'if' true, then I can potentially answer all those items above. Can you?
From my files:
THE UNIVERSAL SHELL:
Existence and non-existence, side by side for all of eternity:
"IF" my Theory Of Everything is really true, (that what is called 'gravity' is a modality that is a part of the currently recognized 'em' photon, 'gravity' acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other, 'gravity' actually causing the sine wave pattern of 'em'), AND "IF" my view of space and time are correct, ('space' being energy itself [which is the 'gem' photon], 'time' being the flow of energy), then I could see where it might be possible that the inner spherical shell of the universe could possibly be made up of the 'gravity' modality of the 'gem' photon which is 90 degrees to the electrical modality of the 'gem' photon, which are both 90 degrees to the magnetic modality of the 'gem' photon, the magnetic modality existing both inside of and outside of the inner shell, the complete 'gem' photon interactions making up the entire spherical shell of all of existence itself. And then of course, non-existence would exist beyond existence. So, existence and non-existence might possibly exist side by side for all of eternity. It all depends upon whether the gravity test for my TOE is really true or not and whether my view of space time is correct or not, and whether the universal spherical shell exists as I believe it might or not.
But 'if' true, and as no photons (currently 'em', 'gem' in my view) would be absorbed nor reflected by the spherical universal shell, then when we look at the blackness in the night sky that is beyond the light of the stars and galaxies, we might actually be perceiving in part the limits of existence and the universal shell of existence itself, with non-existence beyond.
I am inside of a vast eternally existent universe, filled with everything in existence, and yet, somehow, I feel so alone. An existent universe unto itself alone with nothingness beyond.
@@fatitankeris6327 "Your questions approach a boundry of human understanding itself."
I like to ask questions here on the public internet to create cognitive dissonance in entities' sub-consciousness so as to help guide society to greater truths.
Also from my files:
WHO AND/OR WHAT AM I? DO 'I' EVEN EXIST?
Consider the following:
a. I am a human as defined by humans.
b. I am an energy based quarkelectronian as modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy and I am made up of matter and interacting energy.
c. I am a being of 'light', 'if' my current theory of everything is correct whereby the 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in this universe, including space, time and numbers. (Currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test).
d. "I" do not even actually exist but eternally existent space time exists as me, currently in the forms as above.
* I exist and yet "I" simultaneously do not exist, dependent upon perspective. But yet, do "I" not truly exist in absolute truth reality as only eternally existent space time exists as all things in absolute truth reality?
* "I" can mentally change between perspectives thereby experiencing existence from those various perspectives. "My" mind continues to expand, but is it truly 'my' mind that is expanding or is it eternally existent space time's mind that is expanding? In absolute truth reality, it would seem to be the later.
* 'To Be or Not To Be'. I am both, 'I Am and I Am Not.' But I Am Not it appears more than I Am.
* Consider also: If asked the general question, 'What do you know?'. My current answer would be, 'Not much compared to all that can be known.' (I Am Not, More than I Am). It's humbling.
* Is it truly any wonder that the flow of energy in the universe affects species? We are the universe experiencing itself.
* Question: If 'I' never actually existed in the first place, how could 'I' ever die?
* Added Note: Now, 'assuming' the above is correct, that 'I' do not even actually exist but that eternally existent energy exists as 'me', and that 'my' consciousness, memories and thoughts are actually the universe acting through the form of 'me':
a. I have yet to acquire any 'new' knowledge via this supposed connection that cannot be explained by 'normal' means. (In other words, besides things I learned or intuited). Even my theory of everything and other ideas are due to study and critical thinking. Nor can I magically fluently speak a language that I have not already learned. (In other words, no magical connection with the 'universal consciousness' at this time can be noted).
b. I have yet to be able to manipulate reality with my mind alone, my physical body is necessary to manipulate reality.
c. While I can imagine being elsewhere in this universe, it does not appear that I can actually take just my mind actually there. (My mind is where my body is).
d. Doesn't mean I will stop trying, just have not noticed the above as occurring as of yet.
@@fatitankeris6327 "Basically: delve into the math first..."
Do you even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants even exist that you utilize in your mathematical formulas? If not, maybe it's you who need to learn more fundamental items concerning reality?
@@charlesbrightman4237Concerning your last comment, about my "advice" to delve into the math, I realize that we weren't talking about the same things, I'm sorry for thinking so simply.
But, consider: Just like you likely can't understand the following just from being the universe *So wie Sie es jetzt nicht verstehen können, was ich jetzt schreibe, allein darausfolgend, dass Sie das Universum sind (unless you do know "German")* so is math an additional knowledge for you to think about your questions of reality physics, natural philosophy. You wouldn't be thinking anything like what you do now if you hadn't learned English either, as that allowed you reading to learn, mature, and come to present form. So studying it isn't bad advice considering your interest in the "scientific" form of world seeing.
I apologize for not recognizing that the topic is deeper, not only scientific, but also philosophic, as we humans call that (is philosophy the same science?).
(btw, you seem to question a lot of human-made, even English-language-made aspects while using them yourself, like what are numbers, beings, etc. We'd have to agree that we will recognize language as something existing for communication's sake, ok? We both used words like "science", and defining every word would chain out of control, pardon my tone.)
So you grasped what you are on most fundamental of levels, such that it could be said that you are me, I am you, and we are all, and all are we. And yet we are all "seperate" in some way that we itself (as human intellects, humans) describe. You are part of the universe, likely even the whole of its interactions (me too), discovering yourself. What you want is understanding of everything you are? Meaning that you want to be able to simulate yourself by the concept called "understanding"? Your "wants" themselves are the only moving force then. Imagine if they were removed. You wouldn't want to know any of this. Do you see them as "primitive human brain chemistry" or an emergent property of the universe (a deep property of the fields to create a being like you with ability to "want" to understand)?
*I ENJOY WRITING WITH YOU, so I'm sorry if I seem to not answer directly or talking too much, I hope we could restart if so, as I have a lot to talk about, and maybe a different perspective could offer us both something. It just seems that you hit a dead end, partially due to being the human you are.*
stunning animation!
So gravitational waves first proposed:
Oliver Heaviside in 1893 - that's a win for physics.
The 1916 Albert Einstein put his 50 cents worth in a bit later, and now we have seen it.
noteworthy yes, new no.
Quantum entablement passing energy by information, I'd say that's new, good work physicists
JWST well that's case of damn we don't know what the hell we are seeing here it doesn't make any sense,
-> this one is new, because it poses knew questions. amazing only in showing what we don't know
We don't know anything--seems to be as surprising to some scientists as it is for every humble person who meets arrogant scientist. Lol. The universe is sense perception, it does not exist per se. I've ruined all scientific explanations for the universe. You are welcome.