Excellent interview. How time races by! I remember as a graduate student having Kip Thorne visit a physics class I was taking. As I recall, he was sporting long hair in a pony tail, but that was in the mid-70s. He inscribed my copy of Gravitation by MTW with a great comical comment and his autograph.
@Steven Meyer It is a great book and written on two tracks, a great format for such a book. My copy is buried in a corner of my office, but my recollection is that the inscription said: "Don't believe everything you read here." He was no doubt referring to the later chapters of the book.
Perception and physics don't go together. Indeed, nothing about perception is proved at all; it can't be proved because there is nothing 'physical' about it other than some one-way observations.
Whatever works. All we have is models and every model is provisional. As soon as a better model comes along, we will discard the old model. We never get to a truth that is final, exclusive, complete. Whatever model increases prediction, control and power is the one we will go with... So far, so good...
The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
The study of physics has been stalled for 60 years. So far, string theory has led us exactly nowhere. I think the next big step will require a new way of thinking and a new paradigm, and achieving those things is extremely difficult.
You are only correct in the sense of fundamental laws of nature, but physics in many many fields have been progressing very rapidly. We can not explain certain phenomena purely by fundamental laws because they are far far too complicated. The number of possible events explodes like a factorial. We can use more practical laws that can "average out" the events on the atomic scale.
Tyler, how has mankind really advanced since the 1940's? Computer and communication technology has exploded, allowing the design and manufacture of things never before possible, as well as handling vast amounts of data for airlines, insurance companies, etc. We have also seen incredible advances in biochemistry, including gene research. Other than those types of things, spending a day in Los Angeles in 1950 and spending a day in 2019 wouldn't be that different. We have not seen another Einstein rise in 1960, and yet another Einstein rise in 2010. We have not found a way to travel faster than light, or "travel" inter-dimensionally, or create artificial gravity, or create force fields, or pass a solid object through another, or 100 other things that would require a deeper understanding of physics. I think we will eventually achieve things that would be considered absolutely impossible today - labeled as being fantasies or magic or delusional. As I implied above, the "simple" stuff has been learned, and the next steps upward in physics are large and difficult. I am not sure the usual method of incremental advancements (standing on the shoulders of giants) will serve us as well as it has in the past. The next steps are probably too big for that. To get a taste of things to come, how do the UFO's that our military has been chasing around, sometimes almost every day for about a century now, instantaneously accelerate from zero to Mach 7? How do they turn invisible, sometimes to radar, sometimes to visible light, and sometimes to both simultaneously? How did they travel to Earth, either vastly faster than light, or inter-dimensionally? How do they navigate and sense their environment (without any visible sensors) when traveling close to the ground at 9000 miles per hour? How do they travel at those speeds in extremely non-aerodynamic craft, without turning white hot and melting and exploding, and without making any sound at all, including sonic booms? And how do they travel underwater at hundreds of miles per hour, making no splash when they enter the water at high speed, or when they leave the water? It's beyond our understanding, but in the end it's just physics (and some engineering). And we're not going to get there by creating more string theory.
Death Vader, you have made my point exactly. The things you list are achievements, to be sure. But they are only relatively small, incremental advances - observations that prove individual theories. They are not the substantial leaps that I refer to above. Regarding UFO's, can you please tell me precisely what was being filmed by the gun cameras of all those U.S. fighter jets, in the videos that were recently released by the U.S. Department of Defense, going as far back as 2004? Each of those flying objects had been locked onto by a ground-based or a ship-based radar, which then directed fighter jets to their locations off the U.S. East and West coasts. The jets then locked onto those flying objects with their own radars, guiding the jets close enough for the pilots to see the flying objects, chase them around for a while, and film them using both visible-light and infrared cameras. All of the flying objects were completely featureless - no visible engines, no visible sensors, no wings, no windows/portholes/doors. In most cases the objects were observed to hover, both on radar and visually. In some cases radar tracked the object(s) flying as high as 80,000 feet, to as low as 50 feet. And in most cases the encounter was ended by the flying object(s) taking off at speeds estimated to be between Mach 5 and Mach 9. That is faster than even the jet's missiles can travel. Can you please tell me the exact name of the man-made or natural object that can do all of those things, and the exact principals of physics that would enable such behavior?
Death Vader, check out these videos:"The aircraft flew in a manner that defied physics" ruclips.net/video/JnVMsHHY7RAS/видео.htmlenators were recently given a secret UFO briefing ruclips.net/video/2F_EF8kcEKwI/видео.htmlnterview with a Navy fighter pilot ruclips.net/video/EDj9ZZQY2kAD/видео.htmlept. of Homeland Security video of the San Juan, Puerto Rico airport - notice that the object doesn't slow down as it flies into, and then out of the ocean ruclips.net/video/E-M7-VNynAsT/видео.htmlhere are also videos of interviews with military radar operators, the original raw videos (with sound) of the UFOs, and other videos, but I am too lazy to find them right now.If those were not UFO's, then what did the military secretly brief the Senators about last week? Why would a secret meeting even be called at all? Senators are extremely busy and serious people, and the Pentagon doesn't screw around with them for no reason.If you are a scientist, you have an obligation to observe and analyze actual data. Ignoring it or saying "I don't know, but they are not UFO's" is the opposite of the scientific method.With respect, can you please tell me the exact name of the man-made or natural objects that can do all of those things, and the exact principals of physics that would enable such behavior?
GRT does not explain gravity but circumvents it but when you look closer it has similar problems as Newton gravity has in terms of actions at distance. Warping space is action at distance though we do not know what space is while Newton did not have to deal with the issue of space. So the question of action at distance was replaced with question what is space.
If spacetime warping were instantaneous, there would be no gravitational waves. Common solutions to Einstein's equation, such as Schwartzschild's, assume a _stationary_ distribution of matter and energy, so it may give the impression of action at a distance, but it is not.
@@ferdinandkraft857 Laplace incorrectly concluded that Newton gravity should be instantaneous or at speeds much higher than c. However one can look at Newton gravity as retarded potential with velocity c. The "spooky action at a distance" is spooky because we do not know what it is and via what medium and not because it supposed to be instantaneous . One could also say that warping of space in GRT is very spooky as well even if it happens at finite speed.
@Đeath Vader " I would like to first hear..." - I don't have any. know that I don't know unlike those who still think they know only because they haven't pushed deep enough to see they really do not know.
I don't remember there being any major validation of String Theory, ever. The Large Hadron Collider seems to be invalidating it at this point due to a lack of expected ST particles within the LHC's operational energy range.
I know I've seen this episode on youtube just 2 years ago. I'm going to guess all the Kip Thorne trolls comments just made them delete and now put up a fresh version.
There could conceivably be an infinite steps to our description of reality. An infinite Chinese dolls, but such descriptions would have less and less variations from the previous description as we zoom in to greater and greater accuracy?? But, then again our current description could be way off and we would need a huge jump in variation initially??!! I think!! Until we find the right description then the convergence to perfect accuracy would begin??!!
Here's my question and idea, ... what relates those steps? If there is a mathematical, or at least workable whatever, gradient to those steps .... then we can unify and understand on those steps. It's probably some fractal algorithm. Start from us and plot big and small and extrapolate ... dimensions come out of it in there.
There is no data to suggest that the layers are similar. Newtonian physics suggested that gravity was an attractive force. Relativity suggests that gravity is a warpage of time and space, and quantum physics has concepts such as super position that make no sense in either Newtonian or Einsteinian model of physics. Remember that in science it's impossible to know if the model we choose to describe natural events is "really" true. We simply invent a model and then try to find exceptions to the model to find out where the model needs to be either refined or completely blown up and redone as a new model.
Don E the equations of Newtonian physics still apply today but out understanding of gravity has changed!! Their still similar our understanding of gravity today is just a correction of Newton’s ideas!! The equations remain!!
Imagine a person walking on a well-worn path in a dense forest. They are comfortable with the familiar route and the predictable surroundings. Suddenly, a new path emerges, leading to uncharted territory with unfamiliar sights and sounds. This new path represents a new scientific discovery that challenges their existing beliefs and understanding. Just like in the forest, humans can find it difficult to leave their comfortable path of established knowledge and venture into the unknown of new discoveries. It can be unsettling to confront ideas that go against what we have always believed to be true. This discomfort can lead to resistance and skepticism towards accepting these new findings. Furthermore, factors such as limited exposure to new information, fear of what is not understood, and adherence to traditional ways of thinking can all contribute to the hesitance in embracing new scientific discoveries. However, it is crucial to remember that science is a journey of exploration and discovery. Just as the forest continues to grow and change, so does our understanding of the world through scientific advancements. It is important for individuals to stay curious, open-minded, and willing to challenge their own beliefs in order to continue growing intellectually.
An infinity of perfections establish that the physical laws of nature are beyond the mind of man to comprehend, and yet, humans never stop talking about it. On the other hand, the moral law of nature is so simple, "Do not enrich yourself upon the misery of another," and yet, these two sinners have never said a word about it.
Yes but what if reality is actually ugly and inelegant? I don't believe that, but on what objective basis do they assert the primacy of "elegance"? Intuition? Isn't this just a roundabout appeal to theism with a substitute word?
I think it’s just because it seems to have worked pretty well so far, but I agree, there is no known reason why the rules that govern the universe should be elegant. I think that is why he said it is merely a rule of thumb and not a principle - he knows, and pretty much all scientists know, that there is no solid reason for this beyond a general intuition and something of a track record.
I don't know where it came from" Simplicity is the purest form of genius. complexity is indulgence in ego-mania" I don't know where this statement came from. It I make it up or did someone says this. someone please tell me where this comes from.
Dig the topic. Great brain food. My string theory would be putting 6 strings on a guitar and exploring space and time by playing as many elegant notes as I can within my own universe of my mind body and soul. Some mind bending fun. Keep up the great conversations and excellent discussions...really digging it !!
Now there are numerous string theories, not just one. Too many are heavily invested in proving some form or aspect of one of them for it to be abandoned. Per Occam's razor, the one with the fewest assumptions should have the best chance but I don't know which one that is since there are many, many of which overlap. Witten's M theory likely is key, but he even chided the M might stand for "Magic".
As all forms of systematic investigation into the nature of "reality" (including physics, evolutionary biology, cognitive science, psychology, linguistics, semiotics, etc. -- not to mention all forms of realism in the arts) have progressed from their earliest beginnings to the present, the insistence on probing more and more deeply, and also more critically, into the most intimate details of the world around us invariably leads to more or less the same sort of impasse made famous by quantum physics, but applicable in many other domains as well, beyond which both scientific and artistic representation begin to break down. Ultimately what we come up against is the same sort of dilemma noted by Bohr, our inability to separate the object of research from the tools employed to study it. Thus, the dilemma faced by artists such as Cezanne, Picasso, Braque, Mondrian, etc. when critically probing the mysteries of a landscape or table top is not fundamentally different from that of quantum physicists struggling to understand the nature of sub-atomic particles or cosmologists grappling with the dilemmas posed by black holes, dark matter, dark energy, or struggling to reconcile quantum physics with general relativity. from antacticstructures.blogspot.com/2018/12/some-thoughts-on-evolution-and.html
I love the way humans try to answer the puzzle of the universe as if they are the pinnacle of it. Let me reveal the truth, in fact, it's not a puzzle at all, it's just....
(Copy and pastes from my files): Consider the following: * There are 3 basic options for life itself, which reduce down to 2, which reduce down to only 1: a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity. b. We die trying to truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity. c. We die not trying to truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity. * 3 reduced down to 2: a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity. b. We don't. And note, two out of the three options above, we die. * 2 reduced down to 1: a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity. b. We truly don't have any conscious existence throughout all of future eternity. (And note, these two appear to be mutually exclusive. Only one way would be really true.) And then ask yourself the following questions: 1. Ask yourself: How exactly do galaxies form? The current narrative is that matter, via gravity, attracts other matter. The electric universe model also includes universal plasma currents. 2. Ask yourself: How exactly do galaxies become spiral shaped in a cause and effect state of existence? At least one way would be orbital velocity of matter with at least gravity acting upon that matter, would cause a spiral shaped effect. The electric universe model also includes energy input into the galaxy, which spiral towards the galactic center, which then gets thrust out from the center, at about 90 degrees from the input. 3. Ask yourself: What does that mean for a solar system that exists in a spiral shaped galaxy? Most probably that solar system would be getting pulled toward the galactic gravitational center. 4. Ask yourself: What does that mean for species that exist on a planet, that exists in a solar system, that exists in a spiral shaped galaxy, in an apparent cause and effect state of existence? Most probably that if those species don't get off of that planet, and out of that solar system, and probably out of that galaxy too, (if it's even actually possible to do for various reasons), then they are all going to die one day from something and go extinct with probably no conscious entities left from that planet to care that they even ever existed at all in the first place, much less whatever they did and or didn't do with their time of existence. 5. Ask yourself: For those who might make it out of this galaxy, (here again, assuming it could actually be done for various reasons), where to go to next, how long to get there, how to safely land, and then, what's next? Hopefully they didn't land in another spiral shaped galaxy or a galaxy that would become spiral shaped one day, otherwise, they would have to galaxy hop through the universe to stay alive, otherwise, they still die one day from something with no conscious entities being left from the original planet to care they even ever existed at all in the first place, much less that they made it out of their own galaxy. They failed to consciously survive throughout all of future eternity. 6. Ask yourself: What exactly matters throughout all of future eternity and to whom does it exactly and eternally matter to? Either at least one species truly consciously survives throughout all of future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous succession of ever evolving species, for life itself to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Our true destiny currently appears to be: 1. We are ALL going to die one day from something. 2. We are ALL going to forget everything we ever knew and experienced. 3. We are ALL going to be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place. Currently: Nature is our greatest ally in so far as Nature gives us life and a place to live it, AND Nature is also our greatest enemy that is going to take it all away. (OSICA) * (Note: This includes the rich, powerful, and those who believe in the right to life and the sanctity of human life. Nature is not biased other than as Nature. Nature does what Nature does in a cause and effect kind of way.)
Please bring physicist Tom Campbell on your show and all these so called hard problems of consciousness would be understood. It’s amazing to see so many intelligent people are completely lost within the paradigm they don’t see the subset they don’t see the superset it’s amazing all very very intelligent human beings but they’re completely searching in the wrong place it’s pretty fantastically funny. This is a virtual reality everybody wake up
His string of examples has a huge issue. He talks about how gr replaced newton, which specifically was not nested, then somehow from that just instantly moves into the assumption of nesting, which his evidence doesn't support. He goes on under the assumption that we have to get gr our of whatever comes next, but his example of newton specifically wasn't that at all. It was a total replacement, which seems far far more likely to continue happening.
The best way to describe the word elegance in this sense from my point of view, if the math flows like music in someone's inner voice. I think that's true in alot of aspects of life. Life is all about the flow of connections.
_You should, in science, believe logic and arguments, carefully drawn, and not authorities...I am not sure how I did it, but I goofed. And you goofed, too, for believing me._ -Richard Feynman, letter to Beulah Elizabeth Cox, a student at The College of William and Mary, 1975 By the end of this century there will be a theory of everything (ToE) uniting the two powerful but incomplete theories of general relativity and quantum mechanics (and thus ST and LQG). Edward Witten’s M theory is the *closest* we have now to that ToE. 💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌
Witten's theory isn't testable, so it has more in common with metaphysics than physics. ToE will require particle experimenters to build an accelerator with a radius equal to one light year or so, in order reach energies over 10^12 TeV. This M theory involves some baroque mathematics, which is pleasing to its creators
@@marcellisrobinson _The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following:_ The test of all knowledge is experiment. _Experiment is the_ sole judge _of scientific “truth.”_ -Richard Feynman, _The Feynman Lectures on Physics (FLP), the New Millennium Edition, 1 Atoms in Motion, 1-1 Introduction,_ p 1 Quite right! 👏 👍
To understand the universe, it’s dynamical laws and structure we must give up old paradigms that have been shown to be critically flawed. By accepting the electromagnetic/ plasma model of the universe we can start developing realistic models and give up silly ideas like black holes and the Big Bang
old paradigms are surrendered only when a new paradigm arises which explains the world better than the old; despite the yt videos you've seen, the electric universe model has in no way done this.
J Burnett oh on the contrary. The evidence from radio and microwave that confirms the electric / plasma universe is indeed the right paradigm. it models correctly many of the observations the gravity only paradigm cannot. If you are not too old you will live to see the paradigm change to the correct model of the universe. Dork matter science is dead. The observational evidence will show that we have been chasing unicorns for all these decades.
The universe is a space-time creation. Without space, there is no time. Without time, there is no space. Outside the universe, there is no time. Time is caused by the space from the expansion of the universe. You cannot go back in time since the universe is expanding. You can only go from back in time to the present in this universe. When God created the universe, he created time for us to enjoy til we leave the universe by our deaths.
the never ending story, men trying to figure out our Creator, this should show everyone of the unfathomable power of our almighty heavenly Father they will never understand his power he is the most high and I just except that i will never know even the very beginning of God's power because it is so far beyond our feeble mind's that it's scary but I do realize that men that don't even believe he exists will never wrap their heads around this reality.
@@jimmyjennings4089 Well, instead of simply reveling in your creator (which doesn't answer any questions at all) why don't you explain HOW he did it? Provide some useful information instead of shutting down inquiry by claiming no one can understand it.
Hank I say science is starting to realize that this universe and everything in it had to be created and even DNA is a design and. is created by a higher power it's just where you're willing to look for the answer, if you don't want to be criticized for being an immoral person your obviously not going to look for a higher moral Creator because that will put a funky crimp in your lifestyle, not saying that is your situation but it is for the majority that want to shun the truth, good luck friend hope you look in the right direction in time.
@@jimmyjennings4089 Again, simply claiming you know the answer does no good at all if you can't demonstrate it. Your argument is no different than someone who said we are all just a simulation in a computer of a more advanced race. If you need to believe stuff like that to make it through the day then fine but don't pretend there is any useful information there. Do you have any useful, verifiable information to share?
Hank I've verified my information all I can do is tell others of it, just like any other thing in this existence it's up to you if you choose to believe it or not, for instance I could tell you I just walked back over a hill and had to run from a bear you can't see over the hill but if I tell you that you shouldn't go over the hill because there is a bear you have to make the choice you may ask me to offer you the proof but again I would just say i guess you're going to have to go and find out for yourself, there are plenty thick skulled people in this world that will only believe for themselves if they experience something, well I'm here to tell you that it is a fact that your going to experience what is lying beyond this existence and your going to find out I'm telling you the truth just as you would about the bear, that's the best I can give anyone unless you have been there and done that good luck with your journey my friend.
@@jimmyjennings4089 Sure, and I can tell you I rose from the dead and can heal people by touching them and you have the choice to believe me or not... it is up to you. Plenty of thick skulled people may not believe me without seeing for themselves but, whether you believe me or not, my claim provides no useful information for you if you can't test it.
Music, the tri-cord, and the muse 4th being the alien. 264 notes leading tones. Not to mention simi-tones in multiple of 11s , 22,33,44,55. Mysteries abound. Hidden is found.
"The common perception is that we understand relativity theory, we understand quantum theory. We know they have to be integrated but pretty much we know all that's going on...". RLK Never a more naive and arrogant statement have I EVER heard in my life. This is why he dropped out of science and got into philosophy.
What if there is one source for all the motions and movements in the universe and we are witnessing the universe playing out its plan: that the universe is expanding at the speed of light in all points in space and at every moment in time. This is the common key into understanding quantum mechanics, gravity, consciousness, religion and the desire for having a doctrine of creation, intelligent design, as well, this is the underlying mechanism of the new atheist and the simulated universe as the computer running the program has one power source. Here's a kickstarter campaign that goes into this: www.kickstarter.com/projects/568849833/our-reality-a-new-way-to-look-at-the-universe-and-ourselves?ref=project_build#
@Đeath Vader I have and this is a thought experiment (What if ...) which gives another view on gravity and the hypothetical graviton and mass bending space. Using the same data points and equations, there is another understanding to both gravity (the geometrical, weak equivalence principle) and the pilot wave theory. So, if one uses the same data points and equations, then one interpretation is just as valid as the other interpretation.
@Đeath Vader What does creationist have to do with it? The universe expands AT the speed of light, not at any other speed, faster nor lower. The question becomes, can this force be directly detected, even though this thought experiment eliminates 17 quantum fields that permeates throughout the entire universe, explains the collapse of the wave function, entanglement, entropy as zero and the anthropic fine-tuning of the universe?
@Đeath Vader Using this thought experiment: What if at all planck points in space and in all planck moments of time, the universe is pulsating (discretely) and expanding in all directions at the speed of light and when one force from one point meets the next point moving towards it, creates equal and opposite forces that cancels each other out to 0 gravity. However, when the forces interfere with itself, such as from a shift of phase, interacts with itself and creates interference. The amount of interference prevents equal and opposite forces from being 0. That is, the same effect as a large body that bends the direction of light, this large body is nothing more than a large body of interference, blocking the force and not attracting matter. In effect, this “interference” is not this rigid, matter of our everyday experiences and perceptions. Not even the same quality as "information" or the simulated world. However, one does still feel the same effect from jumping off a cliff, or being hit by a train, as we are still in an existence and creation of interference. Remember in a simulated world, it has one power source for running the computer program. In my thought experiment, hopefully, we are not bound to this perception, but have the ability to travel through the force, ie. going through the electrical wires from our simulated virtual world into the world of realness that created the computer simulated world.
Excellent interview. How time races by! I remember as a graduate student having Kip Thorne visit a physics class I was taking. As I recall, he was sporting long hair in a pony tail, but that was in the mid-70s. He inscribed my copy of Gravitation by MTW with a great comical comment and his autograph.
@Steven Meyer It is a great book and written on two tracks, a great format for such a book. My copy is buried in a corner of my office, but my recollection is that the inscription said: "Don't believe everything you read here." He was no doubt referring to the later chapters of the book.
Time will take us all
Drown us in its ways
wonderful memory
Yes, it's a repost, but some videos are worth reposting -- like this one. I'd love to have a beer with either of these guys.
Agreed.
one of the best talks...clear, focused, embued with wisdom.
Are they just reuploading old videos over and over?
probably edited out a car passing by playing an mgm song.
Time is a flat circle
@@innertubez Whatever you say, Rust.
@@innertubez with a minute hand and an hour hand
That's what I'm thinking. Look at how old they are to judge what year it was.
Perception and physics don't go together. Indeed, nothing about perception is proved at all; it can't be proved because there is nothing 'physical' about it other than some one-way observations.
Whatever works. All we have is models and every model is provisional. As soon as a better model comes along, we will discard the old model. We never get to a truth that is final, exclusive, complete. Whatever model increases prediction, control and power is the one we will go with... So far, so good...
exactly, and when we send things into space we use newtons laws, funny how the bullshit artist einsteins theories are not used.. funny that...
Long time no see.
The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
That's just a damn shame.
The study of physics has been stalled for 60 years. So far, string theory has led us exactly nowhere. I think the next big step will require a new way of thinking and a new paradigm, and achieving those things is extremely difficult.
You are only correct in the sense of fundamental laws of nature, but physics in many many fields have been progressing very rapidly. We can not explain certain phenomena purely by fundamental laws because they are far far too complicated. The number of possible events explodes like a factorial. We can use more practical laws that can "average out" the events on the atomic scale.
Tyler, how has mankind really advanced since the 1940's? Computer and communication technology has exploded, allowing the design and manufacture of things never before possible, as well as handling vast amounts of data for airlines, insurance companies, etc. We have also seen incredible advances in biochemistry, including gene research. Other than those types of things, spending a day in Los Angeles in 1950 and spending a day in 2019 wouldn't be that different. We have not seen another Einstein rise in 1960, and yet another Einstein rise in 2010. We have not found a way to travel faster than light, or "travel" inter-dimensionally, or create artificial gravity, or create force fields, or pass a solid object through another, or 100 other things that would require a deeper understanding of physics. I think we will eventually achieve things that would be considered absolutely impossible today - labeled as being fantasies or magic or delusional. As I implied above, the "simple" stuff has been learned, and the next steps upward in physics are large and difficult. I am not sure the usual method of incremental advancements (standing on the shoulders of giants) will serve us as well as it has in the past. The next steps are probably too big for that. To get a taste of things to come, how do the UFO's that our military has been chasing around, sometimes almost every day for about a century now, instantaneously accelerate from zero to Mach 7? How do they turn invisible, sometimes to radar, sometimes to visible light, and sometimes to both simultaneously? How did they travel to Earth, either vastly faster than light, or inter-dimensionally? How do they navigate and sense their environment (without any visible sensors) when traveling close to the ground at 9000 miles per hour? How do they travel at those speeds in extremely non-aerodynamic craft, without turning white hot and melting and exploding, and without making any sound at all, including sonic booms? And how do they travel underwater at hundreds of miles per hour, making no splash when they enter the water at high speed, or when they leave the water? It's beyond our understanding, but in the end it's just physics (and some engineering). And we're not going to get there by creating more string theory.
Death Vader, you have made my point exactly. The things you list are achievements, to be sure. But they are only relatively small, incremental advances - observations that prove individual theories. They are not the substantial leaps that I refer to above. Regarding UFO's, can you please tell me precisely what was being filmed by the gun cameras of all those U.S. fighter jets, in the videos that were recently released by the U.S. Department of Defense, going as far back as 2004? Each of those flying objects had been locked onto by a ground-based or a ship-based radar, which then directed fighter jets to their locations off the U.S. East and West coasts. The jets then locked onto those flying objects with their own radars, guiding the jets close enough for the pilots to see the flying objects, chase them around for a while, and film them using both visible-light and infrared cameras. All of the flying objects were completely featureless - no visible engines, no visible sensors, no wings, no windows/portholes/doors. In most cases the objects were observed to hover, both on radar and visually. In some cases radar tracked the object(s) flying as high as 80,000 feet, to as low as 50 feet. And in most cases the encounter was ended by the flying object(s) taking off at speeds estimated to be between Mach 5 and Mach 9. That is faster than even the jet's missiles can travel. Can you please tell me the exact name of the man-made or natural object that can do all of those things, and the exact principals of physics that would enable such behavior?
Death Vader, check out these videos:"The aircraft flew in a manner that defied physics" ruclips.net/video/JnVMsHHY7RAS/видео.htmlenators were recently given a secret UFO briefing ruclips.net/video/2F_EF8kcEKwI/видео.htmlnterview with a Navy fighter pilot ruclips.net/video/EDj9ZZQY2kAD/видео.htmlept. of Homeland Security video of the San Juan, Puerto Rico airport - notice that the object doesn't slow down as it flies into, and then out of the ocean ruclips.net/video/E-M7-VNynAsT/видео.htmlhere are also videos of interviews with military radar operators, the original raw videos (with sound) of the UFOs, and other videos, but I am too lazy to find them right now.If those were not UFO's, then what did the military secretly brief the Senators about last week? Why would a secret meeting even be called at all? Senators are extremely busy and serious people, and the Pentagon doesn't screw around with them for no reason.If you are a scientist, you have an obligation to observe and analyze actual data. Ignoring it or saying "I don't know, but they are not UFO's" is the opposite of the scientific method.With respect, can you please tell me the exact name of the man-made or natural objects that can do all of those things, and the exact principals of physics that would enable such behavior?
GRT does not explain gravity but circumvents it but when you look closer it has similar problems as Newton gravity has in terms of actions at distance. Warping space is action at distance though we do not know what space is while Newton did not have to deal with the issue of space. So the question of action at distance was replaced with question what is space.
If spacetime warping were instantaneous, there would be no gravitational waves. Common solutions to Einstein's equation, such as Schwartzschild's, assume a _stationary_ distribution of matter and energy, so it may give the impression of action at a distance, but it is not.
@@ferdinandkraft857 Laplace incorrectly concluded that Newton gravity should be instantaneous or at speeds much higher than c. However one can look at Newton gravity as retarded potential with velocity c. The "spooky action at a distance" is spooky because we do not know what it is and via what medium and not because it supposed to be instantaneous . One could also say that warping of space in GRT is very spooky as well even if it happens at finite speed.
@Đeath Vader Yes, you are correct but this is not what I am talking about. It's about action at distance and what is its nature in case of gravity.
@Đeath Vader Warping space. Right, what causes it? Mass, but how? This is circular thinking.
@Đeath Vader " I would like to first hear..." - I don't have any. know that I don't know unlike those who still think they know only because they haven't pushed deep enough to see they really do not know.
What about the Planck lenght? Doesn´t this imply there is a limit on this level?
@@fatmaramadan6928 People say all the time, it is the fundamental smallest action unit in the universe?
@@fatmaramadan6928 errr this is quantum physics. This is the smallest of quantum physics. Lol you have no clue.
An infinity of nested laws of physics reeks of "turtles all the way down", it isn't an elegant metamodel at all, it's grotesque.
The universe is what it is and doesn't give a rats ass what any of us think about it.
@@wntu4 it cares about me Dave. I exist. Thanks universe!
I don't remember there being any major validation of String Theory, ever.
The Large Hadron Collider seems to be invalidating it at this point due to a lack of expected ST particles within the LHC's operational energy range.
I know I've seen this episode on youtube just 2 years ago. I'm going to guess all the Kip Thorne trolls comments just made them delete and now put up a fresh version.
What is the Quantum Formula for gravity? G=Ehhhhhh2
I don't understand the type of person who would be genuinely interested in this topic, and also make fun of a mans speech. Shame on you.
wow those plots are so impressive in the background. we must have interrupted their analysis for this photo shoot.
"Quick, get the plots out, they're here! (While typing) La-la-la, la-la-la, science stuff, science stuff, la-la -- Oh! I didn't see you come in!"
There could conceivably be an infinite steps to our description of reality. An infinite Chinese dolls, but such descriptions would have less and less variations from the previous description as we zoom in to greater and greater accuracy?? But, then again our current description could be way off and we would need a huge jump in variation initially??!! I think!! Until we find the right description then the convergence to perfect accuracy would begin??!!
Here's my question and idea, ... what relates those steps? If there is a mathematical, or at least workable whatever, gradient to those steps .... then we can unify and understand on those steps. It's probably some fractal algorithm. Start from us and plot big and small and extrapolate ... dimensions come out of it in there.
There is no data to suggest that the layers are similar. Newtonian physics suggested that gravity was an attractive force. Relativity suggests that gravity is a warpage of time and space, and quantum physics has concepts such as super position that make no sense in either Newtonian or Einsteinian model of physics. Remember that in science it's impossible to know if the model we choose to describe natural events is "really" true. We simply invent a model and then try to find exceptions to the model to find out where the model needs to be either refined or completely blown up and redone as a new model.
Don E the equations of Newtonian physics still apply today but out understanding of gravity has changed!! Their still similar our understanding of gravity today is just a correction of Newton’s ideas!! The equations remain!!
Imagine a person walking on a well-worn path in a dense forest. They are comfortable with the familiar route and the predictable surroundings. Suddenly, a new path emerges, leading to uncharted territory with unfamiliar sights and sounds. This new path represents a new scientific discovery that challenges their existing beliefs and understanding.
Just like in the forest, humans can find it difficult to leave their comfortable path of established knowledge and venture into the unknown of new discoveries. It can be unsettling to confront ideas that go against what we have always believed to be true. This discomfort can lead to resistance and skepticism towards accepting these new findings.
Furthermore, factors such as limited exposure to new information, fear of what is not understood, and adherence to traditional ways of thinking can all contribute to the hesitance in embracing new scientific discoveries.
However, it is crucial to remember that science is a journey of exploration and discovery. Just as the forest continues to grow and change, so does our understanding of the world through scientific advancements. It is important for individuals to stay curious, open-minded, and willing to challenge their own beliefs in order to continue growing intellectually.
An infinity of perfections establish that the physical laws of nature are beyond the mind of man to comprehend, and yet, humans never stop talking about it. On the other hand, the moral law of nature is so simple, "Do not enrich yourself upon the misery of another," and yet, these two sinners have never said a word about it.
Yes but what if reality is actually ugly and inelegant? I don't believe that, but on what objective basis do they assert the primacy of "elegance"? Intuition? Isn't this just a roundabout appeal to theism with a substitute word?
I think it’s just because it seems to have worked pretty well so far, but I agree, there is no known reason why the rules that govern the universe should be elegant. I think that is why he said it is merely a rule of thumb and not a principle - he knows, and pretty much all scientists know, that there is no solid reason for this beyond a general intuition and something of a track record.
give the man a beer!
I don't know where it came from" Simplicity is the purest form of genius. complexity is indulgence in ego-mania" I don't know where this statement came from. It I make it up or did someone says this. someone please tell me where this comes from.
That doesn't answer the question the question. where did this come from. I don't know if I made this up
Dig the topic. Great brain food. My string theory would be putting 6 strings on a guitar and exploring space and time by playing as many elegant notes as I can within my own universe of my mind body and soul. Some mind bending fun. Keep up the great conversations and excellent discussions...really digging it !!
Genius !! iiaahh !
inspired ! Waayhay!
em cee waayahay
I don't understand the type of person who would be genuinely interested in this topic, and also make fun of a mans speech. Shame on you.
Maybe you're not as smart as you think you are.
String theory still a thing?
Now there are numerous string theories, not just one. Too many are heavily invested in proving some form or aspect of one of them for it to be abandoned. Per Occam's razor, the one with the fewest assumptions should have the best chance but I don't know which one that is since there are many, many of which overlap. Witten's M theory likely is key, but he even chided the M might stand for "Magic".
As all forms of systematic investigation into the nature of "reality" (including physics, evolutionary biology, cognitive science, psychology, linguistics, semiotics, etc. -- not to mention all forms of realism in the arts) have progressed from their earliest beginnings to the present, the insistence on probing more and more deeply, and also more critically, into the most intimate details of the world around us invariably leads to more or less the same sort of impasse made famous by quantum physics, but applicable in many other domains as well, beyond which both scientific and artistic representation begin to break down. Ultimately what we come up against is the same sort of dilemma noted by Bohr, our inability to separate the object of research from the tools employed to study it. Thus, the dilemma faced by artists such as Cezanne, Picasso, Braque, Mondrian, etc. when critically probing the mysteries of a landscape or table top is not fundamentally different from that of quantum physicists struggling to understand the nature of sub-atomic particles or cosmologists grappling with the dilemmas posed by black holes, dark matter, dark energy, or struggling to reconcile quantum physics with general relativity.
from antacticstructures.blogspot.com/2018/12/some-thoughts-on-evolution-and.html
I love the way humans try to answer the puzzle of the universe as if they are the pinnacle of it. Let me reveal the truth, in fact, it's not a puzzle at all, it's just....
(Copy and pastes from my files):
Consider the following:
* There are 3 basic options for life itself, which reduce down to 2, which reduce down to only 1:
a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
b. We die trying to truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
c. We die not trying to truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
* 3 reduced down to 2:
a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
b. We don't. And note, two out of the three options above, we die.
* 2 reduced down to 1:
a. We truly have some sort of actual conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
b. We truly don't have any conscious existence throughout all of future eternity.
(And note, these two appear to be mutually exclusive. Only one way would be really true.)
And then ask yourself the following questions:
1. Ask yourself: How exactly do galaxies form? The current narrative is that matter, via gravity, attracts other matter. The electric universe model also includes universal plasma currents.
2. Ask yourself: How exactly do galaxies become spiral shaped in a cause and effect state of existence? At least one way would be orbital velocity of matter with at least gravity acting upon that matter, would cause a spiral shaped effect. The electric universe model also includes energy input into the galaxy, which spiral towards the galactic center, which then gets thrust out from the center, at about 90 degrees from the input.
3. Ask yourself: What does that mean for a solar system that exists in a spiral shaped galaxy? Most probably that solar system would be getting pulled toward the galactic gravitational center.
4. Ask yourself: What does that mean for species that exist on a planet, that exists in a solar system, that exists in a spiral shaped galaxy, in an apparent cause and effect state of existence? Most probably that if those species don't get off of that planet, and out of that solar system, and probably out of that galaxy too, (if it's even actually possible to do for various reasons), then they are all going to die one day from something and go extinct with probably no conscious entities left from that planet to care that they even ever existed at all in the first place, much less whatever they did and or didn't do with their time of existence.
5. Ask yourself: For those who might make it out of this galaxy, (here again, assuming it could actually be done for various reasons), where to go to next, how long to get there, how to safely land, and then, what's next? Hopefully they didn't land in another spiral shaped galaxy or a galaxy that would become spiral shaped one day, otherwise, they would have to galaxy hop through the universe to stay alive, otherwise, they still die one day from something with no conscious entities being left from the original planet to care they even ever existed at all in the first place, much less that they made it out of their own galaxy. They failed to consciously survive throughout all of future eternity.
6. Ask yourself: What exactly matters throughout all of future eternity and to whom does it exactly and eternally matter to?
Either at least one species truly consciously survives throughout all of future eternity somehow, someway, somewhere, in some state of existence, even if only by a continuous succession of ever evolving species, for life itself to have continued meaning and purpose to, OR none do and life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things.
Our true destiny currently appears to be:
1. We are ALL going to die one day from something.
2. We are ALL going to forget everything we ever knew and experienced.
3. We are ALL going to be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place.
Currently:
Nature is our greatest ally in so far as Nature gives us life and a place to live it, AND Nature is also our greatest enemy that is going to take it all away. (OSICA)
* (Note: This includes the rich, powerful, and those who believe in the right to life and the sanctity of human life. Nature is not biased other than as Nature. Nature does what Nature does in a cause and effect kind of way.)
Loop quantum Gravity seems the answer and a big bounce rather then big bang. For all we know there may even be negative energy and a Musha Drive.
or you could be an imbecile on the internet typing shit
aeaaah or eeeeeeaaah ?
@Gil Monteverde a bit of nasal sound at the end
Sabine Hossenfelder: Lost in Math - how beauty leads us astray
What current theory or theories come after “string theory?” The Elegant Universe. Great title for a book!
Please bring physicist Tom Campbell on your show and all these so called hard problems of consciousness would be understood. It’s amazing to see so many intelligent people are completely lost within the paradigm they don’t see the subset they don’t see the superset it’s amazing all very very intelligent human beings but they’re completely searching in the wrong place it’s pretty fantastically funny. This is a virtual reality everybody wake up
His string of examples has a huge issue. He talks about how gr replaced newton, which specifically was not nested, then somehow from that just instantly moves into the assumption of nesting, which his evidence doesn't support. He goes on under the assumption that we have to get gr our of whatever comes next, but his example of newton specifically wasn't that at all. It was a total replacement, which seems far far more likely to continue happening.
Infinity is the only true "dimension". Everything else is just fattening up the magnitude of the grant recipient.
Lord,let me not see more Kip Thorne disrespect by people who you would think know better by even being here.
The best way to describe the word elegance in this sense from my point of view, if the math flows like music in someone's inner voice. I think that's true in alot of aspects of life.
Life is all about the flow of connections.
_You should, in science, believe logic and arguments, carefully drawn, and not authorities...I am not sure how I did it, but I goofed. And you goofed, too, for believing me._ -Richard Feynman, letter to Beulah Elizabeth Cox, a student at The College of William and Mary, 1975
By the end of this century there will be a theory of everything (ToE) uniting the two powerful but incomplete theories of general relativity and quantum mechanics (and thus ST and LQG). Edward Witten’s M theory is the *closest* we have now to that ToE. 💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌
Witten's theory isn't testable, so it has more in common with metaphysics than physics. ToE will require particle experimenters to build an accelerator with a radius equal to one light year or so, in order reach energies over 10^12 TeV. This M theory involves some baroque mathematics, which is pleasing to its creators
@@marcellisrobinson _The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following:_ The test of all knowledge is experiment. _Experiment is the_ sole judge _of scientific “truth.”_ -Richard Feynman, _The Feynman Lectures on Physics (FLP), the New Millennium Edition, 1 Atoms in Motion, 1-1 Introduction,_ p 1
Quite right! 👏 👍
He followed that up with, "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman" (1985). The best chapter, perhaps, "Cargo Cult Science".
Ps, due respect to Karl Popper's epistemology.
It ends with DNA, which is a property of the structure of space if you wind entropy backwards to the beginning.
How stoned were you when you made that comment?
o> aiy!
To understand the universe, it’s dynamical laws and structure we must give up old paradigms that have been shown to be critically flawed.
By accepting the electromagnetic/ plasma model of the universe we can start developing realistic models and give up silly ideas like black holes and the Big Bang
old paradigms are surrendered only when a new paradigm arises which explains the world better than the old; despite the yt videos you've seen, the electric universe model has in no way done this.
J Burnett oh on the contrary. The evidence from radio and microwave that confirms the electric / plasma universe is indeed the right paradigm. it models correctly many of the observations the gravity only paradigm cannot.
If you are not too old you will live to see the paradigm change to the correct model of the universe. Dork matter science is dead. The observational evidence will show that we have been chasing unicorns for all these decades.
Computer scientists are going to make all the breakthroughs in the future, not physicists, as we live in a sim.
In that case all physicists will easily become the greatest computer scientists.
@@manishsingh-vk8if no physicists will become bean counters, as all they are nowadays are mathematicians.
Comments over a beer-A+
there's a dimension right in front of you. you just cant see it without the right tools.
Smith&Wesson. Dynamite ...
@Đeath Vader
you're trolling, or have no idea.
@Đeath Vader
you need a tool to understand what im talking about.
@Đeath Vader
i suppose thats a better word to use. sorry, i got my phd in youtube physics class.
The universe is a space-time creation. Without space, there is no time. Without time, there is no space. Outside the universe, there is no time. Time is caused by the space from the expansion of the universe. You cannot go back in time since the universe is expanding. You can only go from back in time to the present in this universe. When God created the universe, he created time for us to enjoy til we leave the universe by our deaths.
Listening to this Mandelbrot me to a state of deep thinking. It’s true, I wouldn’t Fibonacci about it.
I heard string theory was debunked...?
. . . b e s t c h a n n e l o n l i n e . . .
the never ending story, men trying to figure out our Creator, this should show everyone of the unfathomable power of our almighty heavenly Father they will never understand his power he is the most high and I just except that i will never know even the very beginning of God's power because it is so far beyond our feeble mind's that it's scary but I do realize that men that don't even believe he exists will never wrap their heads around this reality.
@@jimmyjennings4089 Well, instead of simply reveling in your creator (which doesn't answer any questions at all) why don't you explain HOW he did it? Provide some useful information instead of shutting down inquiry by claiming no one can understand it.
Hank I say science is starting to realize that this universe and everything in it had to be created and even DNA is a design and. is created by a higher power it's just where you're willing to look for the answer, if you don't want to be criticized for being an immoral person your obviously not going to look for a higher moral Creator because that will put a funky crimp in your lifestyle, not saying that is your situation but it is for the majority that want to shun the truth, good luck friend hope you look in the right direction in time.
@@jimmyjennings4089 Again, simply claiming you know the answer does no good at all if you can't demonstrate it. Your argument is no different than someone who said we are all just a simulation in a computer of a more advanced race. If you need to believe stuff like that to make it through the day then fine but don't pretend there is any useful information there. Do you have any useful, verifiable information to share?
Hank I've verified my information all I can do is tell others of it, just like any other thing in this existence it's up to you if you choose to believe it or not, for instance I could tell you I just walked back over a hill and had to run from a bear you can't see over the hill but if I tell you that you shouldn't go over the hill because there is a bear you have to make the choice you may ask me to offer you the proof but again I would just say i guess you're going to have to go and find out for yourself, there are plenty thick skulled people in this world that will only believe for themselves if they experience something, well I'm here to tell you that it is a fact that your going to experience what is lying beyond this existence and your going to find out I'm telling you the truth just as you would about the bear, that's the best I can give anyone unless you have been there and done that good luck with your journey my friend.
@@jimmyjennings4089 Sure, and I can tell you I rose from the dead and can heal people by touching them and you have the choice to believe me or not... it is up to you. Plenty of thick skulled people may not believe me without seeing for themselves but, whether you believe me or not, my claim provides no useful information for you if you can't test it.
I don't remember Stephen Hawking jokes being amok on his vids. But people just go mean on Mr. Thorne.
Given amok time ....
@Gil Monteverde There are jokes and then you have insults and putdowns. Most Kip Thorne were the last.
Elegance is in the mind of the beholder. Nothing elegant about the heat death of the universe (second law of thermodynamics). ^^
That's not Kip Thorne. Only I am Kip Thorne.
Music, the tri-cord, and the muse 4th being the alien. 264 notes leading tones. Not to mention simi-tones in multiple of 11s , 22,33,44,55. Mysteries abound. Hidden is found.
keep of the drugs numbnut
Eeeaah?
Leon Willett Aeeeuh.
Eeeeaah!!
very distracting when kip make the sound "EH" does he have speech impairment, (stuttering,stammering ,turrets ect...)
It's turtles, all the way down.
ehhhh.....
I don't understand the type of person who would be genuinely interested in this topic, and also make fun of a mans speech. Shame on you.
Gary Wilson I’m not make joking on him I respect him more than you thought .
So to sum it up. Science has no idea how the earth began or how life began or what consciousness is. You’re welcome.
Only Conciousness is fundamental, Conciousness is the computer...
Kyran McCourt Huh?
Read Eccl 8:17 for the reason man can't figure it out. "Guidelines searching for laws...". You are staring into the face of God's wisdom & infinity.
I think I love Kip Thorne!!!(no homo!)
iiayee .
"The common perception is that we understand relativity theory, we understand quantum theory. We know they have to be integrated but pretty much we know all that's going on...". RLK
Never a more naive and arrogant statement have I EVER heard in my life. This is why he dropped out of science and got into philosophy.
@Kytsche There are known "unknowns", and then there are "unknowns" that we don't even know that we don't know. I'd say that a huge part of reality.
uuuhhhehh!! uuhhheh!
What if there is one source for all the motions and movements in the universe and we are witnessing the universe playing out its plan: that the universe is expanding at the speed of light in all points in space and at every moment in time.
This is the common key into understanding quantum mechanics, gravity, consciousness, religion and the desire for having a doctrine of creation, intelligent design, as well, this is the underlying mechanism of the new atheist and the simulated universe as the computer running the program has one power source.
Here's a kickstarter campaign that goes into this: www.kickstarter.com/projects/568849833/our-reality-a-new-way-to-look-at-the-universe-and-ourselves?ref=project_build#
@Đeath Vader I have and this is a thought experiment (What if ...) which gives another view on gravity and the hypothetical graviton and mass bending space. Using the same data points and equations, there is another understanding to both gravity (the geometrical, weak equivalence principle) and the pilot wave theory. So, if one uses the same data points and equations, then one interpretation is just as valid as the other interpretation.
@Đeath Vader What does creationist have to do with it? The universe expands AT the speed of light, not at any other speed, faster nor lower. The question becomes, can this force be directly detected, even though this thought experiment eliminates 17 quantum fields that permeates throughout the entire universe, explains the collapse of the wave function, entanglement, entropy as zero and the anthropic fine-tuning of the universe?
@Đeath Vader Using this thought experiment: What if at all planck points in space and in all planck moments of time, the universe is pulsating (discretely) and expanding in all directions at the speed of light and when one force from one point meets the next point moving towards it, creates equal and opposite forces that cancels each other out to 0 gravity. However, when the forces interfere with itself, such as from a shift of phase, interacts with itself and creates interference. The amount of interference prevents equal and opposite forces from being 0. That is, the same effect as a large body that bends the direction of light, this large body is nothing more than a large body of interference, blocking the force and not attracting matter. In effect, this “interference” is not this rigid, matter of our everyday experiences and perceptions. Not even the same quality as "information" or the simulated world. However, one does still feel the same effect from jumping off a cliff, or being hit by a train, as we are still in an existence and creation of interference.
Remember in a simulated world, it has one power source for running the computer program. In my thought experiment, hopefully, we are not bound to this perception, but have the ability to travel through the force, ie. going through the electrical wires from our simulated virtual world into the world of realness that created the computer simulated world.
String cheese theory dictates y'all rub them crystals on my 5th eye down at burning man
infinity is the pulse of being - me
Home improvement. Ehhhhhhhh!
I don't understand the type of person who would be genuinely interested in this topic, and also make fun of a mans speech. Shame on you.
SimUnit[] Politicians = new SimUnit[All_Politicians];
for (int x = 0; x < All_Politicians; x++)
{
Politicians[x].RektWorld();
}
Aaayyyy
666 Likes... coincidence? or omen! ;)
They haven't got a clue.
Theoretical physics lacks a principle which has not yet been discovered.
Get a civilian job and you'll find reality real quick scientist
So basically nobody knows what the hell they are talking about.
What a bunch of nonsense lmao