Why Wolfram Physics May Be the Key to Everything with Stephen Wolfram and Jonathan Gorard
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 май 2024
- Is There a Theory of Everything?
Stephen Wolfram recently announced the Wolfram Physics project, a way to find the fundamental theory of physics. But what exactly is Wolfram physics? Is it a theory of everything? And how does it describe General Relativity and Einstein’s work?
John Michael Godlier is joined by Stephen Wolfram and Jonathan Gorard to discuss the Wolfram physics project, and why it may be a beautiful path towards the fundamental theory of physics.
Wolfram Physics links: wolfr.am/physics
The announcement post: wolfr.am/physics-announcement
Participate: wolfr.am/physics-tools
Find the technical documents: wolfr.am/physics-documents
Want to support the channel?
Patreon: / eventhorizonshow
Follow us at other places!
Website: www.eventhorizonshow.com/
Twitter: / jmgeventhorizon
Instagram: / jmgeventhorizon
Music featured on Event Horizon
stellardrone.bandcamp.com/
migueljohnson.bandcamp.com/
leerosevere.bandcamp.com/
aeriumambient.bandcamp.com/ 
Наука
What do you think of the Wolfram Physics Project? Do you think it could be a path towards the fundamental theory of physics? Comment below.
I don't think so. This isn't a "theory" but a lot of conjectures.
@@pablosartor6715 the video is an hour and ten minutes long, did you watch it or have you been following the project?
@@EventHorizonShow yes, I've been following the project.
I haven't followed the project or watched the video (starting now) but it seems like a pretty extraordinary claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We'll see. I'm sure it's a great video anyway, wolfram is a beast.
Up to 49:55 - Amazing new way of looking at things. I love that people are exploring physics in fundamentally new and different ways. But how easy is it to build a theory from the granular back upwards? You would want to hope that your granular/tree/hyper-graph theory is correct(!), and that you have great tools, otherwise you will be going down some strange rabbit-holes. Be interesting to see where it goes. Maybe, if it doesn't turn out, an aspect of it will add something else to our collective knowledge that others can use/incorporate with Branes, Strings, Q*D/QFT etc... maybe..
Love the trippy space music in the background
Moments before im about to sleep you post this! Love watching event horizon before i sleep :)
Regards from Costa Rica! Thanks for these videos.
First time I heard about Wolfram Physics. Thanks for the indepth interview!
Please invite them again, this is extremely interesting
Excellent guests, really enjoyed that! Hope you can get them on again in future!
Thank you Dr. Wolfram for the insight that Euclid's very first axiom assumes a continuous universe. (If you cut and cut and keep cutting, will you ever reach a smallest size? No, assumes Euclid, since it's axiomatic that a point has no mass. But we know if you cut water in half and half and half again, eventually you will reach a water molecule below which you cannot go and still call it water.)
And yes, the Wolfram Physics Project is almost certainly on the right track. There must be discrete atoms of space,. They may be as small as 10 to the minus 100, but by the time they've conglomerated at the 10 to the minus 43 scale and larger, they begin to appear continuous to us (an example of a branchial brain observing a branchial universe, (a corollary concept of the Wolfram Physics Project concerning the nature and function of consciousness)).
And the idea of computation (rather than mathematics) as the most base fundamental, a kind-of machine language of the universe, is intuitively graspable and satisfying for those of us who grew up in the information age (and who are no good at math anyway). :)
Great episode
Math is hard, but I'm so happy folks like this get it. I love science.
You just need to want to get it. If you kick around enough you will eventually want to understand the numbers. You don't need to be brilliant just hungry. Life is a musical and we are to sing and dance as long as the music plays. Cheers.
Well guys you've done it again. Another great video per usual. It's amazing that no episodes disappoint. What does disappoint is the fact we still can't get a plug in so my Google assistant is A.N.N.A's voice!
Damn you John... I WAS about to go to sleep, now I have to listen to this first...
Keep up the the great work and thank you for all the awesome content.
Great episode. Interesting approach and I think it has a lot of merit. Digging deeper into it myself.
Why does his outro evoke a nostalgic wonder? Almost sad or longing but not quite. Maybe it stirs some of that childish wonder and mystery that I used to have but have lost to some degree. I’m not sure. Just decided to spluge what was on my mind.
Great show and something I’ve never heard of. I’ll have to look more into the Wolfram Physics Project. Thanks again JMG.
nice and interesting conversation, thank a lot
great interview
Good interview, thanks for sharing
Once I saw Steven Wolfram in the title I new it will be good. This channel is so awesome. Relaxing, engaging and fun... what a delightful combination :-)
I love the podcasts usually, but it seems this gentleman forgot basic physics
Love the people you've have on recently
Interesting interview. I love the questions John asks he's really good at asking the perfect questions. I learned quite a bit from this episode thanks.
Thanks Strick. How’re you doing?
@@EventHorizonShow Doing pretty good enjoying the content y'all have been putting out. How have you guys been doing?
Came for the unknown, stayed for the outro.
What?
Thats the only thing spinning in my head mid through all of this
it is the outliers who keep things honest .. thank you Stephen and Jonathan for the work you do …
Excellent!
Just kicking my feet up brother 🤙💫
I have been intrigued by Nick Bostrom's concept of a simulated world. Getting more insights into how computation universe might operate is somthing I'm always looking forward towards. Also finding out Stephen Wolfram worked with Richard Feynman blew my mind!
Wolfram went to graduate school at CalTech, where Feynman was his Ph.D. thesis advisor.
I find this theory does not necessary define the universe as a simulation. Simply the laws behind the universe are discrete. That's what they are. They don't require somebody outside this universe running a simulation on some kind of a supercomputer.
@@u.v.s.5583 Exactly this framework does not require any form of external simulator it is simply a statement about the underlying rules of the the universe if anything a simulation is an attempt at mimicking this formalism and the nice prospect is that this could be computationally tested unlike a number of perpetually WIP "theories of everything".
@@goodcat1982 Not sure what you're talking about. Which movie?
@@robertschlesinger1342 Yep. I listend to him on Lex Friedman's podcast. He's doing quite amazing things. Feynman would be proud.
Under my point of view, this is one of your best interviews. It is great!
Great CH!!!
Highly interesting video, I'll definitely look further into Wolfram physics. New ways of looking at things are precisely what drives progress.
This channel is awesome.
I love the way you do commercials and adds versus everyone else. I also enjoyed the show. Keep up the good work.
Do you have a podcast? It’s be so much easier to listen on the go. Thank you.
How. Did the first program begin
One of your best episodes.
Thank you. More of this discussion to come.
thanks again, your the only pod/broadcaster that pretty much always gets my full attention from beginning to end. Thank you for continuesly making me realize how little i know wich makes life a bit better in turn. I came across this subject few times but never before gotten to understand what the wolfram project was and now i do.
Great video !
I have heard Wolfram talk about this a number of times but I am still struggling to get my head around it.
You my friend, are not alone in your thinking 😆
It goes something like this. All that exists is a rule and a set of unique elements. The rule acts upon these elements, and the network changes and grows. Iterate this rule over and over and eventually the network these elements create a complex object. Have enough complex objects, and they themselves create a complicated network...which emerges it's own set of complex rules...These complex rules create more complex objects, which create more complex networks, which creates more complex rules...this process goes on and on at all scales, and really because of this emergence, then actually no unique elements exist...it's just the rule, and everything emerges from the rule.
The cool thing about the rule, is that it's ridiculously simple...and all that's happening is it's being iterated over and over and over again...and that's it.
You should look up Complexity Theory, and Network Theory. These two fields will help you understand how simple things create emergent behavior. All Wolfram is doing, is formalizing complexity theory to all aspects of physics
@@NightmareCourtPictures thanks for this that helps a lot.
Thanks for another amazing episode Event Horizon/JMG.
What about a future episode about the limits of the periodic table & island of stability & potential super materials besides graphene.
Greetings from the Netherlands. :)
Hi. Table periodically present CH. 1️⃣1️⃣ 8️⃣. Evolutionists Univere =New entrances elements Chemicals...
Very good podcast!
What a treat this is
Thats the most interesting Video to Listen to Form me dir a Long Time. Ty.
Godier always ask the type of question I also think about!
Yes, hes just like us, always seeking answers and wanting to know more
a lot of words....very little said
JMG!!!!!!
maybe phrase the concept of the progression of computation can be interpreted as time should be phrased a little bit differenty. as we learn from stephen, the universe is all about causal consistency. but causality itself implies time in "if A is true and b is also true, THEN C must be true"
the logical vector is perhaps responsible for the emergence of time. so what it really is, is preserving causal consistency. and the reason for thinking the universe is in essence mathematics, is actually its underlying principle, logic itself.
This was fascinating wow deeply thought provoking, will be interesting and it sounds like quantum computation will offer good ways of testing this framework.
So the number of nodes of the hyper graph changes ?
And what powers/motivates/causes the changes of states ?
Geometry is an emergent phenomenon of hyper graph topology ?
I'm at 11:00 - how does idea of geometrical distance arise in such context? Clusters of highly-connected points?
I love listening to this and the feeling of half understanding. Who am I kidding, way less than half. Still really enjoyable.
I too enjoyed it even though I was completely lost by the second sentence 😂😁😊😁👌😊😂😁😂😊
I just thought about this:
What if the mere presence of the fluctuating pairs of particle/antiparticle generates a kind of "pressure", and this "pressure" dissapears when actual stable matter is present? The outer "pressure" around stable matter would push everything towards the center of this stable matter, in the effect we call gravity. In this model, gravity doesn't even need to exist. It would just be a consecuence of the presence of stable matter. And you don't even need to curve space or something like that, haha. *mindblow*
EDIT: could this also be applied to magnetism maybe? Something like the magnetism as a consecuece of alignment of this pair of particles produced by stable matter.
The problem with wolframs hypergraph explanation is I'm not sure it can explain gravity waves which we know exist and can observe.
I know you’ve touched on this topic in previous videos but I think Scholz’s Star passing trough the Oort Cloud and its ramifications could make for an interesting video.
Despite much of the science going over my head this was a facinaiting listen.
Im early here. Regards from Argentina! I always go to bed listening to all these amazing science and great ideas! Thanks Mr
Godier
Ps. This theory is so elegant! Hope a lot of science can be achieved witj this new paradigm
Glad the channel helps you sleep.
Event Horizon it’s the voice!!!!
@@EventHorizonShow yes it does! I kind of dream away thinking about everything I grasp from the great content. I love all the stuff on the fermy paradox. Thanks again!
Me too. I like isaac as well but he speaks too fast to keep up. Hey, I have some emergence videos you may like as well. I got emerging heart beats with my simulator.
It's not a pun. It was the result of intuitive steering from our subconscious connection with the universe's knowledge database. It's like the way most scientists come up with new ideas - it just pops into their head from the mist while doing something completely unrelated (and usually mindless or repetitive). That's the universal consciousness speaking to the subconscious area of their brain.
Paused to think how could iv not watched yett... and then It dawned on me it's the new one haha
Thanks again JMG ... team and guests this is one if the few things I still look forward to
Glad you enjoy the show! Any guests you’d like John to speak with?
@@EventHorizonShow Get Sean Caroll back on to talk about his new "Biggest Idea's In The Universe" stuff. I think it'd make a good episode getting to know the "why?" behind the series.
@@EventHorizonShow🎉you guys managed to get everyone i could of think of over the years 🎉
got em
This methodology of building up models, as oppose to finding fundamental laws. Reminds me of a discussion I once had with a Lead Programmer of the Pros & Cons difference between bottom up and top down design approaches?
Didn't matter bc the project was late anyway. LOL
David Evans And over budget, didn’t do what it was supposed to do.
Is this real? Another video from the Event Horizon? WOW!
My favourite 😊
Emotional status: very happy
"...there's a very important thing that a lot of people who study physics, but don't come from mathematics don't appreciate: That physics is not mathematics and mathematics is not physics. One helps the other."
----- Richard Feynman
Yeah I barely understood any of that. Big respect to scientists who can actually work enough of this out to theorize about ways that things could potentially work. I’m more of an artistic person but I seriously appreciate science. It takes all kinds!
"Sometimes science is more art than science, Morty" - Rick Sanchez
Such an interesting topic with minimal info. You should interview thad Roberts hes been talking about quantized space for years.
17:24 Atoms shrink, space seems to expand.
Johnathan very smart guy
Oh yes.
Thank you Stephan, Johnathon and E.H !
😎
Can you please please get Sabine Hossenfelder on the show ?
Yes will ask her, we’d be glad to.
Event Horizon but she should only sing her music. No physics! /s
I have a crush on Sabine ....it's how she says einshteien that gets me going lol
my problem with this idea is that the motions of points seemingly have to have their own rules, which in turn would mean more underlying foundations. Why not come to the conclusion that reality is fractal?
This was very interesting. I'm no physicist but this idea seems so elegant. Almost so much that it's surprising no one came up with it sooner. It'll be very interesting to see where this project goes. The idea that gravity, relativity, quantum mechanics, all of it just comes from one simple rule applied over and over again to a system of related points is just so ingenious.
I don't think this is what he said at all. He's basically saying that reality and the universe is running like a computer does, hence the talking about a computational approach. But his approach, whilst I'm not saying it's wrong, just that I'm yet to be convinced by any proof, or any predictions, seems to be to be allow anything to be described that has already been proven and so grafting every scientific discovery into his framework. I too am interested to see where this goes, but the problem with having a framework where anything is possible, just as I could write a new computer program tomorrow that is completely different to any other before, it allows anything and everything to be possible. Sure that is an elegant solution, but I don't see how that can be used to predict the current state of the universe, how it works, or make predictions that experiments can confirm. I found this interview very frustrating because I wanted to learn so much and all I really got was justification for why he's doing this and very little on what this actually means, but then I guess he wants people to sign up for his Summer Classes to find out. Sadly I won't be doing this, he needed to give me more than this. Can you honestly say you know more about Wolfram Physics than you did before, beyond that it think the universe is run more computationally than by any other of the theories we have before?
@@mattpotter8725 I said it was ingenious not likely to be true. Also, I wasn't just referring to the interview but wolfram's announcement page. He effectively does describe there that he believes that space and matter are made up of a number of related points that have a specific rule applied to them over and over again. In doing so you can create structures that appear like 2d planes, or 3d shapes. Picking the right rule and the right collection of starting related points you can end up with structures that look similar to the shape of our universe, and even goes so far as to claim that he discovered that relativity and quantum mechanics just happen to appear within these structures.
So it is what he said, just not directly from here. I posted this here though because this interview is what inspired me to go and read the announcement page in the first place. I agree to an extent though that Godier could have done a better job setting the scene for this one and getting Wolfram to actually fully describe what his theory was.
Again, just to be clear, I'm not saying I think his theory is likely to turn out to be correct. I'm really not qualified to say that. What I am saying is that it's a really clever idea I'm surprised no one ever explored before. I like it for the same reason I like Einstein's theory of relativity. Not because it's true (though it did turn out to be very true in that case), but because it's really really clever, and also kind of beautiful. For all I know wolfram's idea will end up going nowhere, will be completely discredited, and be a huge embarrassment for him. That won't make it any leads ingenious or interesting tho.
I hope that clears things up a bit buddy. Have a good one :)
25:48. How do these structures relate to Roger Penrose's spin networks? Or do they relate at all? I figure there must be some connection, but I'm just a humble horror writer.
The Wolfram Physics Project is the most important computational work being done imho and the ramifications will likely take decades to unpack. Particle physics is and has been stuck in gluon molasses for almost 100 and def 50 years, since standard model really.
This is because it is a simplification of the true physical system. The fix is easy though. All probability should be turned into actual activity but fluid flow and so partial and mixed vector regions. Not probability but percentage.
A photon becomes an actual sphere which has radius expanding at c with membrane of sphere the wave components as we usually measure. Membrane thickness is wavelength.
Bohmian reasons decide which atom of detector unit will burst the energy bubble. Phase relations might have to line up. And change to part of the bubble affects the entirety as it is a singular object/process. You can’t burst half a bubble nor half burst a bubble.
The wave if it hits resonant chamber of matching size becomes entrapped. Detection.
Collapse of wave.
If photons are ejections of electron energy why do they have both a positive and negative component?
Because we live on minimal single sided surface and so 4pi, two orbits, are needed to complete a world line.
ruclips.net/video/JUkeObmJf1I/видео.html
Neutron decay cosmology is inevitable. Geometry requires it.
Fabulous
imho... big props to anyone who is confident (and smart!) enough to buck the old guard.
Michael Ferguson Hear, hear! Any system based on a priori axioms, definitions, and postulates richly deserves to be bucked. Indeed, all of the greatest advancements in human history were achieved through bucking the old guard.
@@joeltraten5967 But the important thing to remember here is that those advancements were shown to be correct. We don't hear about the mavericks who bucked the old guard but were completely wrong. There are plenty of people claiming "They laughed at Einstein and they laugh at me, therefore I'm as smart as Einstein".
No disrespect to Stephen Wolfram intended though, I've been visiting his site for a while now and I'm hoping that one day I'll actually understand some of it.
@@joeltraten5967 While that is true, it's not an indication that proposed alternatives to the existing paradigm are likely to be true just because they are alternative.
Not really. Any old idiot can buck the old guard. It's doing that and being right that's the key.
I hear ya- the problem with bucking the old guard, is that any new perspective with advanced thought- ruffles ego’s attached to old premises, and they buck back hard...
A crazy idea; when speaking about space (i.e. the Universe), we consider it as having three dimensions as in up and down, left and right, and back and forth. Disregarding time in this case, when one is in space, no matter which way one goes, one can go in any direction but the motion is basically only forward. Within short distances, of course, one can move in the three cardinal directions within the dimension of time yet how do the three other (or two other) dimensions apply?
Stephen Wolfram is a pretty good score for Godier.
U are saying that its like he scored the best girl in the classroom 😁
I'm joking :)
Nobody puts baby in the corner! Don't put limitations on John! Lol
I'd like to look at it as EH being a good platform for Wolfram.
I actually don't like this episode at all. A lot of useless informations, a lot of talking but nothing to say...
One of the, actually it is worst episode at the EH ever!
Gman k Of course, no good hosts will publicly say that stuff because it might make others potential guests shy away from his show.
Best to leave the opinions to us fans!
As much as I love your content you bring us John, I equally love the skit dynamic you introduce at the end in in some intermissions between you and your progressively controlling AI assistant
This talk reminded me of a song called "down in it" by nine inch nails.
It is what it is, except when it isn't, which it's not, so it is.
super interesting!
Glad you think so!
Really, really interesting! 😮
I'm going to follow those ideas to see where it gets to. I really hope Kuhn isn't right this time.
Thanks, JMG! Stay safe, everybody! 🖖😊
Stephen Wolfram's bedroom probably has a sign on the door: 'The Wolfram Suite'.
Space should be made of something since it is stretched by mass.or get torn in by black holes..
To us dummies... is a quick answer that the hyper-graph is a step forward from Feynman diagrams? Math that can tame exponential/factorals of entanglement?
This episode was pure nerdgasm. Thanks!
Very interesting and worthwhile interview. Stephen Wolfram's relevant papers may be found at arXiv.org , paper# 2004.08210 and on his website. Jonathan Gorard also has a few relevant and interesting papers on the arXiv as well. Their researches are novel, thought-provoking, and worth continued consideration.
What if space is infinitly divisible but everything in it isnt. How could we ever understand space then how could we measure it being limited by our devices that are made from non infinitly divisible particles?
This one hurt my brain
Is there a Cliff Notes explanation of what his theory is? I learned a lot about what he disagrees with and why, but I'm not clear on what his new physics actually is. I admit I'm not a genius, I'm just a printed circuit board designer and a guitar player, so I'm sure this is a bit over my head. But at least with Relativity and Quantum Mechanics I have a working understanding of what those theories are suggesting. Clearly string theory turned out to be a dud when they could find no evidence for Supersymetry, but at least I could understand the concept. After watching this I have no more of an idea what he's suggesting about our universe than when I started the video. Could somebody please throw me a bone?!
If anyone is interested, subscribe to wolfram's RUclips channel for live working sessions where SW and his team work on this project live and in real time multiple times per week. It is extremely fascinating.
Regarding the bucket reference:
Isaac Newton's rotating bucket argument (also known as Newton's bucket) was designed to demonstrate that true rotational motion cannot be defined as the relative rotation of the body with respect to the immediately surrounding bodies. -WIKI
Timecube guy next?
If there was no smallest unit of space then Zeno's paradox regarding Achilles and the tortoise would be correct instead of a reducto ad absurdum mind experiment.
A modern Zeno would ask "Is there a shortest wavelength?"
John, as a man in his mid 60s that has witnessed almost all the milestones in the modern exploration of space, I realise that I am coming to the end of my time, possibly 5 or 10 years left to me. I was thinking that maybe you might do a video that lays out what is on the drawing board for the next 5 or 19 years that we oldies may get our telescopes out and search for before we join the stars again?
I always thought the way we can observe time flowing is by observing the universe expanding. It’s the physical representation of the flow of time.
How Stephen Wolfram Will Save the World - by Stephen Wolfram
Explaining the world and saving the world aint the same thing. Irreducibility gets in the way. Choice, the observer is necessary in Stephen’s model remember. That’s why there will be great resistance. Never mind the Ruleial space idea, which is a euphemism for the infinite potential of what could be crudely reduced to the word God.
What I got out of this is Simulation Theory + String Theory = Wolfram Theory
Sounds like Indra's Net en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra%27s_net
I found this interesting until I saw the reason why Wolfram didn't introduce his theories via normal peer review. He said he doesn't believe in peer review. He thinks it's a corrupt game.
That's a big red flag.
Spot on.
This is the kind of THC induced, physics sounding, psychobabble that gave Art Bell and now George Noory a woody!
@53:03 all I see are triangles would that be why they studied trigonometry in ancient times
I have one of the early hardcover editions of A New Kind of Science. True story: I was at a Barnes and Noble, and it was on the sale cart because the cover was torn, I think it was $25. Honestly, though, it's impossibly difficult to read - just from the standpoint of it being an extremely huge, heavy book, with thin, paper, and tiny print. It needs to be on a lectern. As a result, I could never get that far into actually reading it. It would probably have exceeded my understanding pretty quickly, though. I do understand the broad outlines of the idea, and find it fascinating.
I also remember the physics community being dismissive at the time, and it's sad that Dr. Wolfram dropped his research for a while. I hope this revived effort captures more people's imagination, and more interest in the physics community.
Also, thanks for making these shows. This is the second one I've listened to, and the interviews are great.
What about the Planck Scale of fundamental spacetime? Planck length, Planck Time, Planck Volume, etc.? That implies a discrete, finite unit of measurement; therefore space in and of itself can not be "smooth," or explained and described mathematically into smaller and smaller orders of magnitude. Eventually you can not subdivide a Planck unit of measurement. This idea is one feature that supports the "Simulation Hypothesis." I don't know... sounds like this dude is saying, "It's just turtles all the way down I guess, huh?" lol And yes the universe is expanding because as entropy occurs, or more time elapses, more spacetime is needed to satisfy the effects of entropy! The universe isn't contained in some type of "container" it creates its own boundaries as it expands. Picture pouring water into a glass which represents entropy. As more water is poured, more space is needed. The glass represents spacetime and in order to support the increasing amount of "water," the "glass" has to expand otherwise the "water" would spill all over the place and that would translate into spacetime simply disappearing. Spacetime doesn't disappear lol. Just because our human perception experiences the past as being "gone" it still exists. Just like the future already exists, we just haven't arrived there yet - and this all has to do with light. When we see a star, we are observing as it was millions of years ago. If the past simply disappeared, we wouldn't be able to see stars! And then once all of the black holes evaporate trillions and trillions of years from now and entropy has resulted in the "heat death" of the universe, all that will be left is quantum fluctuations - and that will be the spark that ignites the next epochs "big bang." Kind of like Penrose's CCC model. The CMB is an artifact of the previous epoch's "heat death." that's why physicists and cosmologists can not "see" past that moment and all laws break down, because it is merely an artifact!
That's the site that any question can be quantify? I use sometimes, BUT, there was no data for the question... To be fair it was some years back but I remember when he starter the Wolfram Question Formulation Engine, or whatever you wanna call it. I"m surprise that others don't know about this project. Specially scientists or people in the academy. And for what I know there's a focus on physic but it's pure base on math and data. If your question is not formulated right you can have some random data or not input for data because it couldn't find a right formula for your question parameters. Again, A personal experience, years ago.