According to loop gravity, the frame rate of the universe is 6 x 10^44 quantum intervals per second. That's 600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 fps.
Interestingly, there is a very important, but I fear, very underappreciated, part in this video: ===================================================== Do I believe in Loop Quantum Gravity? No, of course, not. There's no confirming data. But it's a fascinating idea and I'm very interested in finding ways to test it. If Loop Quantum Gravity is real, I'm sure we'll figure it out and, even if it's not, the journey will be fascinating. ===================================================== That's a very good, and very powerful description of what a scientific mindset should be.
And a good scientist is one who can tolerate and warehouse a lot of ambiguity, not feeling a need to have "the end-all-and-be-all answer" right now, being interested in seeing where things lead.
Dr. Lincoln, I don't know if you will ever see this, but I want you to know that your way of speaking and body language strangely make you easy to listen to and understand. I would not grasp these subjects as easily if it weren't for you. Thanks
LIGHT.. you understand quantum thing a majigs? Damn.. regular physics sometime has my head twisted but quantum gets me chasing my tail so much I am not sure if I am in front or in back.. I am glad you young fellas and gals understand this stuff.. at 66 I find it hard but then I will never need to use it.. But it is fun to learn about.. carry on!
"... your way of speaking and body language strangely make you easy to listen to and understand." What's so 'strange' about his way of presenting? He's personable, clear and concise.
Totally agree, on the contrast something about the good at PBS Spacetime just is so off-putting when he's explaining some of the material it doesn't help.
Totally agree! I cannot watch PBS Space and Time because the guy there makes it all about himself with his whole set of mannerisms and way of dressing, he is like screaming, "look at me" - very distracting and annoying. Dr. Lincoln is really easy to follow!
Ton Kroese I am a dummy and I’m having an issue understanding how this isn’t just basically false because entangled particles are by definition affected by something non-local?
I was at a cocktail party and I used diffeomorphism invariance in a sentence and I got slapped by a lady then ejected from the club. The bouncers used my head to open the door. Did I not use it properly?
I do love the idea. Although I don't know what's crazier, that space and time are quantized, or that they are absolutely continuous. Confirming either would truly blow my mind.
THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
I'm not sure if any of you are big readers but there is an amazing book on Quantum Space by Jim Baggot. He collaborated with some philosophical physicists and explains a lot about this subject. I could see a lot of parts mentioned in this video, great job on the understandable delivery!
What if General relativity is wrong is just somehow fit to explain those phenomena that we still have yet more data about? Quantum mechanics definitely can't fit with General Relativity. Loop quantum theory throw some of the Quantum Mechanics principles out. Or it can be the other way round where quantum mechanics is wrong about space time. But Im sincerely from my heart hope that general relativity will be wrong. It will create a lot of society problems ffs
@@ccpmustfall6445 It's not right to say it's wrong or could be wrong. It's not wrong, it describes our universe extremely well. However, it is incomplete. This means that there is a more general, higher order description of our universe. This description should "reduce" to general relativity under certain conditions. Just like general relativity reduces to newtonian gravity under certain conditions.
@@ccpmustfall6445 THE UNIVERSAL, CLEAR, EXTENSIVE, AND BALANCED PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 is F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE.) Accordingly, time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) SO, the EARTH (A PLANET) is a balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE form in fundamental RELATION to the UNIVERSAL fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is the Sun (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!!) Therefore, the Earth AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand !! This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA.) Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED in AND out of SPACE AND TIME, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This, in fact, explains the cosmological redshift AND the "black holes" as well. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Moreover, OBJECTS fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense !!!! "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!!! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma !!!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!!!! By Frank DiMeglio
@@ccpmustfall6445 THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
@@ccpmustfall6445 Agree. Maybe it's our perception of spatial dimensions that are wrong, and so gives a wrong generel theory explanation of spacetime gravity. Not saying spatial dimensions are only properties of particles like time dilation and spin. Or maybe.
But isn't the momentum, and therefore the wavelength, in a juxtaposition of states until it interacts with the measurement device? Why would you expect them to travel at different speeds before that interaction?
In this model of loop quantum gravity and quantization, what does the expansion of the universe mean? After a certain period of time, is there a quantum of space added with a new 'calculated amount of energy/information' out of existing spacetime and 'in between' it? Or is there actually inflation of the spacetime itself and wouldnt we measure the smallest unit of space exactly the same the same at different moments in time? If all our units refer to one another do we need to say everything is constant during inflation (and thus corrected), or nothing is?
The reason is that it is not so trivial. To find this "smallest bit", one has to define a new set of variables to represent the degrees of freedom of General Relativity. These are called "Loop Variables". Otherwise no consistent quantisation procedure is possible (or known at least).
The question is: how that theory would impact calculations about expanding universe as they rely on light red shift when coming from distant galaxies. LQG suggests light with different wave length will have slighly different speed in space.
I have a problem with this theory. My problem is based on how the theory is explained in the video. In logic, for something to be true, it must exist or be real. Using Discrete mathematics seems to ignore the "paper." This presumes the paper is not real. If the paper is not real and the equations exist on the paper then anything on the paper [the plane] cannot exist either. The existence of the equation is dependent on the paper. Applying this to real space and real-time, the plane is space-time. If you are removing the paper then you are removing the plane of space and therefore the equations that exist in space-time cannot exist. In logic, the deduction [possibility] and the induction [probability] have to agree. You cannot have truth in induction and have non-truth in deduction. Also, science is a system. For Loop Quantum Gravity to be real then it must exist within space-time and the science and philosophies too. Science is a philosophy. Mathematics is a philosophy. However, in reality, equations do not exist. Paper exists. My bias here is that I think there are only six dimensions in the universe. They are point, line, plane, the lesser infinity, and the greater infinity. The Lesser infinity is zero or undefined. Which I believe is living energy. The greater infinity is a number that has not been realized by Man. This is undefined too. I think it comes down to a person's fundamental belief in the universe. Do you believe the universe is a stationary thing and that particles suddenly without any reason acquire energy? And that an ultimate state of rest must exist? My thought is and this is my own theory, that formless Energy exists everywhere. Energy is infinite. And the universe is a finite thing that exists inside the environment of energy. I term this lesser infinity and greater infinity. I think Loop Quantum Gravity is going in the right direction but it ignores reality. Our universe is moving at the constant speed of energy. Because the universe is moving through the formless energy field it induces friction at the sub-atomic particle scale. Keep in mind that the thing that is actually moving is the matter. Energy does not move. Matter is finite. matter takes up space. Once you can measure it, the matter has gained enough energy to form photons through the Higgs Fields. I call the smallest form of matter ether. I do not know what that number is or how to determine it. I think that why gravity and the speed of energy are constant everywhere in the universe is because the universe is a big ball moving through an energy field that cannot be measured. I believe that we are never going to know what the greater and lesser infinity numbers are going to be. They are not measurable because they do not take up space or have mass. In the universe, mass and energy are exchangeable because there must be an equivalent amount of matter with energy to be measurable or to be an observable thing. [I used to think the universe was a torsal shape, however, I have moved to a ball shape] Second to my theory I think light does not actually move. I think the universe is moving and what we see is the friction or inducement of that friction. I call it 'the after-effect." I study psychology and if you study contour lines and how the human eye perceives them then you understand they do not really exist in the universe. Contour lines are the product of the human eye. It is a process known as lateral inhibition. I put a link here for lateral inhibition > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_inhibition The Loop Quantum Theory seems to want to ignore reality for the math to work. Sidenote, the part where I included my theory is so you understand where my biases are or how they are derived. But circling back to my second point. At the quantum level of the universe or quantum scale, it really comes down to what you believe as a scientist and a human being. I believe that energy is alive and has intelligence. It is a massive organism. However, if you believe the universe is just a dead thing and stationary and in a permanent state of rest. Since I subscribe to the previous belief, that theory makes sense to me. The second theory does not make any sense to me. I hope my words and my meaning are clear. Thank you.
Just because something is a "cool idea" without any observational evidence doesn't mean scientists should be spending time on it. This state of physics saddens me greatly.
*_...not convincingly thought-about: Contrast/Compare quantum energies (particles, fields,), which 1. are vectorized probabilities over a space-time metric, 2. change value with object touch-close proximity entanglement, 3. change value depending on local space-time itself e.g. local-depth-of-gravity... we'd expect 10⁻³⁵ depends on the mass of the cosmos, etc...._*
What about two Planck-scale spacetimes moving relative to each other? How do they length contract/time dilate if there is no smaller distance/interval possible?
at 7:10 you say that LQG predicts that high energy (shorter wavelength) light travels more quickly through quantized spacetime than longer wavelength light. you sure about that?
Hi Don! Thanks for the great video! What about a video on delayed entanglement swapping? Or Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser? Or one discussing if the simultaneous collapse of the wave function of two entangled photons in a Bell's experiment doesn't imply that the Minkowsky's interpretation of relativity is wrong, and we should maybe adopt Lorentz ether theory? Thanks a lot!
THE UNIVERSAL, CLEAR, EXTENSIVE, AND BALANCED PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 is F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE.) Accordingly, time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) SO, the EARTH (A PLANET) is a balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE form in fundamental RELATION to the UNIVERSAL fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is the Sun (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!!) Therefore, the Earth AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand !! This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA.) Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED in AND out of SPACE AND TIME, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This, in fact, explains the cosmological redshift AND the "black holes" as well. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Moreover, OBJECTS fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense !!!! "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!!! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma !!!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!!!! By Frank DiMeglio
Can someone clarify the following please: It seems to make sense that photons of different wavelengths travel at different speeds, but there was no measure of such an occurrence. What if, the photons of increasing frequency covered more space but in an equal amount of time? Like the image at 7:50, these photons would be traveling in a spiral (3D waveforms - if that makes sense), but the one with a higher frequency would have larger spiral-rings, taking in more time to travel the same relative horizontal distance as the other particle with a smaller frequency. Wouldn't this explain how we observe all photons traveling at a constant speed of light but still allowing for the possibility of increased frequency particles to travel 'faster' as this theory predicts?
Explanation or citation needed! I have never seen any proof that Background independence + Diffeomorphism invariance implies spacetime is quantized. A citation at the very least is needed there @4:25. Also, Lincoln's pop science summary of diffeomorphism invariance is wrong or misleading at best. Diff. Inv. means coordinates play no role in determining physics (coordinates only change the numbers used, not the predictions), which is not at all the same as the locality idea Lincoln trots out for his cocktail party. In fact, most interpretations of QM imply that locality does not in general hold, which is the current best explanation for entanglement (see Susskind & Maldacena ER=EPR conjectures).
shortest distance or duration doesn't make much sense when you think of photons moving at the speed of causality and consider length contraction and time dilation relative to the photons. iirc the large hadron collider is supposed to be like 300 meters relative to the accelerated particles frame of reference.
Does this mean that there is a lower limit for wavelength (and upper limit for frequency)? How will that co-exist with constant speed of light when observer moves towards the light source with edge parameters, when its wavelength cannot be any smaller?
I'm a little confused. The speaker says that the idea that there is a minimum length, volume and unit of time is a result of LQG, but isn't there a smallest limit on these things in GR too? Planck length, plank time?
www.universetoday.com/50702/loop-quantum-gravity/ for the name. Follow the link Don provided in the description for a better explanation than that article. This is not the first time that quantized space and time has been proposed, that's been going on for decades. It crops up as a product of various theories that have tried to solve the singularity problems in cosmology and the problem in reconciling quantum theory and general relativity. As each of those theories hit inconsistencies without solution, the idea sort of takes a vacation until it appears in the math of the next theory. If LQG gravity is wrong, look for the next theory. If the real solution is ever found, then we'll know if quantized space and time are correct or not. If you prefer, different versions of quantized spacetime have been mathematically real but we haven't seen yet if any are physically real.
My favourite popular introduction to Loop Quantum Gravity is in the book "Reality is not what it seems" by Carlo Rovelli. (By the way, LQG is not wrong as the effect described in the end of the video *is not* a generic prediction of LQG.)
Why loops? We use loops to measure the intensity of fields! In gravity, we want to measure how much curvature is there. Think of the concrete example of the surface of the earth. Imagine you start moving from the North pole along a meridian keeping a flag in a given direction, say you have it at the beginning directed like the meridian. Then you arrive at the equator, you turn 90 degree and you move along the equator but you keep with you the flag without turning it. Then you turn again 90 degrees, you take a meridian and you go back to the North pole, always without changing the direction of your flag. But then, your are back at the same point but the flag is back pointing in a different direction: the angle between the initial and the final direction of the flag gives a measurement of the curvature. We use the same strategy to measure the curvature of spacetime, i.e. the gravitational field. This is a technique often use in quantum field theory, and the close path one consider to "compare the flag directions" are called Wilson loops.
I wonder how did we calculate Mercury's precession? As far as I know full GR equations aren't solved or simulated. If someone knows a paper that uses GR for simulation it would be much appreciated!
Ideas in LQG don't really make much sense without Rovelli's relational interpretation of quantum mechanics: it's not exactly as though space and time are "pixelated." In his words, to paraphrase, the picture of spacetime as granular polyhedra might be intuitive, but is no more real than the idea of an electron as a rotating storm (the current in the x direction and the y direction do not commute). The minimal length, area, volume, and time are the minimal that we can MEASURE. If we try to measure more accurately, reduce the uncertainty in space or time, we can increase the uncertainty in energy to a point where we end up with a horizon (in the GR sense) that prevents us from measuring what we were attempting to in the first place. Rovelli does not think there is an absolute state of the universe described independently of observers. All quantum states are described relative to observers.
So what if I am observing from a fourth dimension or higher? Could that then make the observations "true" even if it's different relative to observers in fewer dimensions?
@@mr.h4267 I agree with you, but relatively is just a limitation of measurement of an illusive absolute. People want to "believe" that absolutes don't exist, but that's silly (counter to science) when we haven't even measured to the point of the horizon yet at quantum levels.
1) Background independent and 2)Diffeomorphism invariance (what happens at a point does not involve what is happening elsewhere) seems to quantize space and time, but how do you assimilate QFT and the single probability wave function for the entire QF and the Higgs boson responsible for generating 'mass'? However, even if we can verify the difference between the short wave length and long wave length of a gamma ray burst, the simulation of mass, still needs to be proved (possibly with strings). Just like the transition from non-life matter to life(due to self-organizing property of matter) , physicists are discovering how the QF might have the self-organizing property to self-simulate conscious observer that turns the field into Higgs as in the double slit experiment of QM, observation turns the field into particles. Implying divine purpose, as part of the experiment, within our QF.
Before you even get down to Planck scales, wouldn’t the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle come into play? How are you even going to localize something to that size?
P.S. This is amenable to physical examination in laboratory conditions at present. A lead ball suspended on a strong chain from the ceiling of the laboratory can serve as a test body; at radius r=27,6 cm, ball mass is m=1т. According to the formula for the gravitational potential, the energy of quanta/photons of the field (photons are characterized by different parity and helicity, and it is not quite accurate to say that a photon has an integer spin equal to one) at a distance r from the center of gravity of the test body to the detector (practically on the surface of the ball) =66,3 keV. The flow: J= 0,45*10-8 quanta/сm2c; this is a measurable flux for modern world-class gamma detectors.
can you explain for us the transactional interpretation of QM (TQM) and why it may explain some weird experiments like the Afshar experiment (a video about this test alone would be great) thanks
is it possible that the reason why loop quantum gravity predicts that higher frequency photons travel faster is because of the higher number of oscillations per distance, or is this not how the wave actually works? because it would take more string to model a sinusoidal wave of high frequency for a given distance than it would for a lower frequency, so more total distance if you factor in the infinitesimally small oscillations added up. not sure if this reasoning is flawed due to inaccuracies or misleadingness in our representations of light waves.
It makes perfect sense to me that space and time are not infinitely divisible. When you get down to the planck length then space and time fluctuations must seem so extreme that time must go backwards for a very short time sometimes. Could this explain why particle and antiparticle pairs pop in and out of existence in the vacuum of space?
Is the problem with quantum gravity equating to much quanta to gravity when quanta should more be equated to the bucket gravity is influencing? Essentially Quantum Gravity is an analog as a whole effecting (or not per the quantum effects) the digital bucket of quanta? I would look at it as the Flatland Thought Experiment. You have a particle on Flatland as a point, the quantum effect show on Flatland, but continue up as an unseen area above Flatland. The particle point is the quanta that Quantum Gravity affects.
What if we live a in not one universe but a universe where 2 universes collided. One governed by gravity. The other governed by particle physics. So there really isn’t a GUT. Maybe these two universes collided and started the ball rolling. Separately these would universes would never have inflated but remained ginormously small.
So, in LQG dimensions have a fundamentally smallest size. That engenders the following question for me: Apparently the universe is expanding and this proposed thing, dark energy, is part of this expansion. In this expansion are the grains’ “size” increasing, or is the count of quanta increasing in some productive process?
So since you seem to be saying mass changes space time, by altering those limits of reality. Since velocity obviously effects length and time; does it also effect the limits of volume and area around a moving body?
Does the quantization of space at planck length indicate a particle, like quantum of electromagnetic field indicates photon? If so, would quantum of space be graviton particle?
One thing I haven't been able to understand, is does that smallest volume stack like cubes, with all the implications in terms of lengths in different directions, or is it different from that?
It's almost 4 years later (sorry), and when I tried to click on the "Further reading" link, it's no longer working, at least not for me. Is there any alternative, or has the content been moved elsewhere, or what have you?
One thing is not so clear. Everybody says that when many particles get squished together the gravity is so intense that the black hole is created. But what about the strong force? Shouldn't it be the dominant effect at those distances? I never heard any scientist mention this (possible) effect about the black hole? What is the reason? Thanks!! Giovanni
Dr. Lincoln, you mentioned in your Strong Force video 2 years ago that you were describing nuclear physics and not particle physics. You indicated that you would make another video describing it in the context of the particle world. Can you please do so?
I'm wondering -- if gravitation waves can be detected from inside the event horizon (can they? maybe I misunderstood), does it mean that one can "modulate" the amplitude/frequency from inside the event horizon and thus pass some information to the outside?
Off topic. I don't get how light can transmit a force to an object. Can you make, or is there already, a video about that? On topic. Can we even measure 10^-43 seconds? How close can we get?
With special relativity and QED / quantum field theory compatible at same velocity, can there be a quantum acceleration for quantum gravity and general relativity? How could quantum be accelerated for general relativity / gravity? Does acceleration have to come from time for quantum gravity and general relativity?
Perhaps I've missed something, but unless observation of a distant gamma burst were to happen at the very instant of the arrival of any wavelength of light that were to reach us from it would it not be possible that our observations were in fact different wavelengths released at different points in time but arriving at the same time (due to the 'faster' wavelength being released at a later point in time and 'catching up' on the journey) being misconstrued as light of all wavelengths travelling at a constant pace? Observing the end of such a burst is one possible solution, to see if lower-frequency waves continued to be received after the higher-frequency ended, however in either case we can also interpret it as gamma bursts beginning at a higher energy and becoming gradually lower and lower in its energy releases over time. The main solution to correct for this would of course be to observe multiple bursts from different points of origin, correcting for background radiation and comparing the hypothesized phase shift in energy over time, but again this proves imperfect as each burst is likely impossible to be uniform from one to the next, meaning we cannot simply observe them, but instead we would need to manually create one from a distant place (likely half a light year away would be sufficient), observing the energy output at the source and again when it reaches a detector placed elsewhere *outside of any atmosphere* (perhaps a satellite orbiting the moon), then comparing those observations. These theories are not impossible to test, they simply require technology we do not yet have access to.
there is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it. try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find everything falls or flies off and nothing sticks to or orbits it. to claim the existence of a physical law without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not ''science.'' gravity is a myth.
wouldn't quantized space mean you can only jump to the "next pixel", similar to how lines are drawn on screens? over long distanced, shouldn't we be able to detect "rounding errors"?
Does Loop Quantum Gravity predict 3 space like dimensions and one time like, or does that have to be built in? Does LQG give rise to the usual set of particles and masses, or does that have to be built in?
the quantization of space and time are 2 of many errors derived from laws of physics we have today. we can use these ideas for now, but always knowing that reality is not discrete.
Since Annotations don't exist anymore in the way you are using them, could you use cards instead when you refer to an earlier video. Also like to see more like this please. Also, if you don't agree with Loop Quantum Gravity, what is your position, and is there an end in sight to unification of QM & GTR? Also, I can't find this series as a playlist. Could you also make a play list of your Quantum Mechanics videos please?
I might be dumb but can someone think this over with me. The last point about different wavelengths of light traveling at different speeds. Wouldn’t the particle traveling a higher wavelength assuming the particle moves along the path of the wavelength. Wouldn’t it technically need to travel faster and cover more distance. It’s like two people running one is zigzagging and the other just making slight turns. For them to travel at the same distance there guy zigzagging would need to travel faster.
I love Carlo Rovelli, as a layman I avoid to make comments. But I have read 4 of his books and "The order of time " has helped me to understand how the nature of time is emergent.I had seen a lot of videos and I had read a lot of articles about quantum mechanics and about general relativity so I was somehow familiar with their concepts,so I could understand the concept of the books. I think loop quantum gravity is a very cool and realistic theory!
@@StevenLeMieux THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
This video made me wonder. If space is quantized would there not have to be a binding force to hold the bits of it together? If space flows faster than C at the black hole event horizon would that set lower bounds on the energy content of the binding force? Before it the video concluded that there was no observed difference of light deflection travelling through space I was wondering if there would be a quantization of angles as well --the "Planck Angle" --a smallest possible degree.
So which comesfirst, gravity or mass. Or does spacetime dictate where mass clumps and we just see it as mass warping spacetime. Maybe we're just looking at it backwards.
Can you possibly try to remove some of the mic noise please? Everytime the noise gate kicks in, it's really noticable as the hiss cuts out. Alternatively, don't use the noise gate! :) Thanks
Or use a noise filter on the whole recording (the one where you sample the noise first, then subtract that noise imprint from the rest of the recording). TYVM :)
If u travel from point a to point b, you need to first travel half of that and then another half and so on into infinity making movment nonexistent. So does this confrms quantized space and time?
Dear Mr.Don Lincoln, If Einsteins General theory of Relativity is true in Quantum level, when two black holes collide , the resulted spacetime distortion should affect all the sand clocks in earth(Gravity based clock)...If the distortion is too small also, The cumulative distortion from the past unknown black holes collision make our solar system spacetime frame fast or slow...Please explain, my understanding is right or wrong? I thought if we create a very accurate quantum gravity based clock can detect Black holes collision...But how should we design quantum gravity clock...
The relationship between the shininess of a surface and its roughness is a function of the wavelength of light reflecting off of it, and the "size" of irregularities in the surface. Thus we can say that light (or any wave) will interact in a predictable (specular reflection) manner when its wavelength is large compared to the resolution of irregularities, and the interactions will be more random (diffuse reflection) if the resolution of the irregularities is large compared to the wavelength of the light. Similarly, rolling a very large ball down some stairs, the large ball's path will be more predictable, as if it's rolling down a smooth surface, compared to rolling a very small ball down those same steps. If there's a limit to size, that limit is the resolution of the field, right? On par with the space between steps or the size of irregularities in a surface. This means that particles with a longer wavelength, and of course objects made with multiple particles, will behave in a "smooth way" when interacting with the field, and particles with wavelengths closer to that resolution should be... bumpy... in their behavior. Although, this would also be true if the resolution of the field were limitless, to some extent.
I was under the impression that one measurement had shown that a very, very distant GRB had indicated a one or two second differential in the arrival time of two different frequencies of light from the source. Did I just imagine that?
Sorry the ignorance, but if the smallest bits of space-time can bend or stretch in relation to another bit of space time, then they can't be the frame of reference of existence
wait a minute, if space and time are discrete, then how does light travel between these discrete units?does the light just teleport to next unit of space like energy levels of electrons? if it does, then what is speed? is it just the rate of how fast you can skip to next descrete unit?
Great video Dr. Lincoln. Question: recognizing that it may be outside the parameters of LQG mathematics/theory, but if space & time are quantized, and those minimum values are constant, and spacetime is expanding, then what is happening,; are the quanta of space/time getting infinitesimally larger or are quanta being "added" onto the universe like tiny bricks or some other phenomenon?
Dr. Lincoln, would you explain - maybe a silly - problem? If space is quantized, why a diagonal of a square is longer than its sides and not equal to them like is a number of diagonal elements of a square matrix equal to its number of columns/rows? Thank you!
I'd say: that's because of Diffeomorphism-Invariance! if it were as you say, distances in one direction would differ from distances in another. hence, the grid drawn in this video is inaccurate representation of this theory. it's just the numbers that get quantized, doesn't mean space is made of voxels!
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
According to loop gravity, the frame rate of the universe is 6 x 10^44 quantum intervals per second.
That's 600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 fps.
...and If that number was seconds it would be way longer than the age of the universe
@@TheDaddyO44 Ooh that's an interesting point!
How did you calculate what represents a frame?
@@mcw0261 I'm guessing he did 1 divided by the minimum time mentioned in the video.
so the universe is a simulation?
Does this mean we can finally measure coastlines???
It seems...
TripAdvisor has some great reviews of beaches if that's what you are looking for :)
Hotel?Trivago
Is this a fractal question? I'd love to hear more. :)
No.
Interestingly, there is a very important, but I fear, very underappreciated, part in this video:
=====================================================
Do I believe in Loop Quantum Gravity?
No, of course, not.
There's no confirming data.
But it's a fascinating idea and I'm very interested in finding ways to test it.
If Loop Quantum Gravity is real, I'm sure we'll figure it out and, even if it's not, the journey will be fascinating.
=====================================================
That's a very good, and very powerful description of what a scientific mindset should be.
I totally agree
agreed!
"I'm very interested in finding ways to test it."
And a good scientist is one who can tolerate and warehouse a lot of ambiguity, not feeling a need to have "the end-all-and-be-all answer" right now, being interested in seeing where things lead.
I can't thumbs up this enough. So many folks have lost sight in this and treat Science as Religious Gospel and Dogma.
Dr. Lincoln, I don't know if you will ever see this, but I want you to know that your way of speaking and body language strangely make you easy to listen to and understand. I would not grasp these subjects as easily if it weren't for you. Thanks
LIGHT.. you understand quantum thing a majigs? Damn.. regular physics sometime has my head twisted but quantum gets me chasing my tail so much I am not sure if I am in front or in back.. I am glad you young fellas and gals understand this stuff.. at 66 I find it hard but then I will never need to use it.. But it is fun to learn about.. carry on!
"... your way of speaking and body language strangely make you easy to listen to and understand." What's so 'strange' about his way of presenting? He's personable, clear and concise.
Totally agree, on the contrast something about the good at PBS Spacetime just is so off-putting when he's explaining some of the material it doesn't help.
I feel the same way about these talks, light. I am indebted to Dr. Lincoln as well.
Totally agree! I cannot watch PBS Space and Time because the guy there makes it all about himself with his whole set of mannerisms and way of dressing, he is like screaming, "look at me" - very distracting and annoying. Dr. Lincoln is really easy to follow!
The only thing more mind-blowing than LQG is trying to imagine the sort of cocktail party that Don frequents.
This made me laugh waaayyy more than it should have.
Diffeomorphism Invariance for dummies: what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.
Ton Kroese I am a dummy and I’m having an issue understanding how this isn’t just basically false because entangled particles are by definition affected by something non-local?
@@stevedaniales4695 it's not causal
Actually, what happens in X stays in X. Lol Now replace X for anything and you have a grand unified theory for that saying
Thank goodness someone finally did a video on Loop Quantum Gravity!
Why is it so important that someone did a video on this?
@@UniversalSouls Its one of the theories to unify quantum theory and General Relativity. To explain gravity.
PBS Space Time has one too.
have you heard of the youtube search field? there's a lot of them
I was at a cocktail party and I used diffeomorphism invariance in a sentence and I got slapped by a lady then ejected from the club. The bouncers used my head to open the door. Did I not use it properly?
...huh
And where exactly was your gaze directed at the time you uttered diffeomorphism invariance?
try again! never diffeomorphism invariance give up!
Check your tensor fields :^>
@@RME76048 Probably looking at her fundamental bits.
I do love the idea. Although I don't know what's crazier, that space and time are quantized, or that they are absolutely continuous. Confirming either would truly blow my mind.
THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
Good question. Maybe this doesn't need to be solved with advanced mathematics, but just with some simple philosophy.
If there are small particles, space should be the same thing.
I strongly suspect that space is quantized
@@ThomasJr Why?
I'm not sure if any of you are big readers but there is an amazing book on Quantum Space by Jim Baggot. He collaborated with some philosophical physicists and explains a lot about this subject. I could see a lot of parts mentioned in this video, great job on the understandable delivery!
Thanks!
Please don’t let it end here. Quantized space time deserves more videos!!!
What if General relativity is wrong is just somehow fit to explain those phenomena that we still have yet more data about?
Quantum mechanics definitely can't fit with General Relativity.
Loop quantum theory throw some of the Quantum Mechanics principles out. Or it can be the other way round where quantum mechanics is wrong about space time.
But Im sincerely from my heart hope that general relativity will be wrong. It will create a lot of society problems ffs
@@ccpmustfall6445 It's not right to say it's wrong or could be wrong. It's not wrong, it describes our universe extremely well. However, it is incomplete.
This means that there is a more general, higher order description of our universe. This description should "reduce" to general relativity under certain conditions. Just like general relativity reduces to newtonian gravity under certain conditions.
@@ccpmustfall6445 THE UNIVERSAL, CLEAR, EXTENSIVE, AND BALANCED PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY:
Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 is F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE.) Accordingly, time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) SO, the EARTH (A PLANET) is a balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE form in fundamental RELATION to the UNIVERSAL fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is the Sun (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!!) Therefore, the Earth AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand !! This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA.) Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED in AND out of SPACE AND TIME, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This, in fact, explains the cosmological redshift AND the "black holes" as well.
GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Moreover, OBJECTS fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense !!!! "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!!! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma !!!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!!!!
By Frank DiMeglio
@@ccpmustfall6445 THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
@@ccpmustfall6445 Agree. Maybe it's our perception of spatial dimensions that are wrong, and so gives a wrong generel theory explanation of spacetime gravity.
Not saying spatial dimensions are only properties of particles like time dilation and spin.
Or maybe.
7:05 I think here exists an error, from what I've read they predict higher energy light travels slower.
I think it is appropriate that they use footage of Adderall to illustrate the concept of discrete mathematics.
Paul Erdos would approve
dude one of the bottles was m. amphetamine and another one was 60mg Morphine lmao. These fermilab quacks are zooming
Add er all!! Add er all!! :D
I saw that too....orange tablet, amphetamine salts 20mg lol...
But isn't the momentum, and therefore the wavelength, in a juxtaposition of states until it interacts with the measurement device? Why would you expect them to travel at different speeds before that interaction?
Is the LQG minimum length the same as the Planck Length? Or is it a different idea?
Yeah it is the Planck length
Dr. Lincoln, thanks for the awesome video. I love learning about our amazing universe, and I really enjoy your presentations. Go physics!
At 6:17, what does it mean to add mass and energy? Are we adding the two parts together or adding them into an equation?
does the theorem require discrete mass/energy ？
In this model of loop quantum gravity and quantization, what does the expansion of the universe mean? After a certain period of time, is there a quantum of space added with a new 'calculated amount of energy/information' out of existing spacetime and 'in between' it? Or is there actually inflation of the spacetime itself and wouldnt we measure the smallest unit of space exactly the same the same at different moments in time?
If all our units refer to one another do we need to say everything is constant during inflation (and thus corrected), or nothing is?
I must say I was missing an explanation for the "loop" in loop quantum gravity !??!!11!
The reason is that it is not so trivial. To find this "smallest bit", one has to define a new set of variables to represent the degrees of freedom of General Relativity. These are called "Loop Variables". Otherwise no consistent quantisation procedure is possible (or known at least).
Is that smallest length related to the Planck Length (also, Planck time, etc.)?
TheTwick yup, thats it
How did the physicists conclude that it's the smallest possible length? Can you guide me to some easy to understand sources? Thanks.
Isn't this a description of a quantum dot?
No.
A quantum voxel
What year is "Don't forget! Uli's Goodbye Cake! 2:30pm" from?
The question is: how that theory would impact calculations about expanding universe as they rely on light red shift when coming from distant galaxies. LQG suggests light with different wave length will have slighly different speed in space.
I have a problem with this theory.
My problem is based on how the theory is explained in the video.
In logic, for something to be true, it must exist or be real.
Using Discrete mathematics seems to ignore the "paper."
This presumes the paper is not real.
If the paper is not real and the equations exist on the paper then anything on the paper [the plane] cannot exist either. The existence of the equation is dependent on the paper. Applying this to real space and real-time, the plane is space-time. If you are removing the paper then you are removing the plane of space and therefore the equations that exist in space-time cannot exist.
In logic, the deduction [possibility] and the induction [probability] have to agree. You cannot have truth in induction and have non-truth in deduction.
Also, science is a system. For Loop Quantum Gravity to be real then it must exist within space-time and the science and philosophies too.
Science is a philosophy. Mathematics is a philosophy.
However, in reality, equations do not exist. Paper exists. My bias here is that I think there are only six dimensions in the universe. They are point, line, plane, the lesser infinity, and the greater infinity.
The Lesser infinity is zero or undefined. Which I believe is living energy. The greater infinity is a number that has not been realized by Man. This is undefined too.
I think it comes down to a person's fundamental belief in the universe. Do you believe the universe is a stationary thing and that particles suddenly without any reason acquire energy? And that an ultimate state of rest must exist?
My thought is and this is my own theory, that formless Energy exists everywhere. Energy is infinite. And the universe is a finite thing that exists inside the environment of energy. I term this lesser infinity and greater infinity.
I think Loop Quantum Gravity is going in the right direction but it ignores reality.
Our universe is moving at the constant speed of energy. Because the universe is moving through the formless energy field it induces friction at the sub-atomic particle scale. Keep in mind that the thing that is actually moving is the matter. Energy does not move. Matter is finite. matter takes up space. Once you can measure it, the matter has gained enough energy to form photons through the Higgs Fields.
I call the smallest form of matter ether.
I do not know what that number is or how to determine it.
I think that why gravity and the speed of energy are constant everywhere in the universe is because the universe is a big ball moving through an energy field that cannot be measured. I believe that we are never going to know what the greater and lesser infinity numbers are going to be. They are not measurable because they do not take up space or have mass. In the universe, mass and energy are exchangeable because there must be an equivalent amount of matter with energy to be measurable or to be an observable thing.
[I used to think the universe was a torsal shape, however, I have moved to a ball shape]
Second to my theory I think light does not actually move. I think the universe is moving and what we see is the friction or inducement of that friction. I call it 'the after-effect."
I study psychology and if you study contour lines and how the human eye perceives them then you understand they do not really exist in the universe. Contour lines are the product of the human eye. It is a process known as lateral inhibition.
I put a link here for lateral inhibition > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_inhibition
The Loop Quantum Theory seems to want to ignore reality for the math to work.
Sidenote, the part where I included my theory is so you understand where my biases are or how they are derived. But circling back to my second point. At the quantum level of the universe or quantum scale, it really comes down to what you believe as a scientist and a human being. I believe that energy is alive and has intelligence. It is a massive organism.
However, if you believe the universe is just a dead thing and stationary and in a permanent state of rest. Since I subscribe to the previous belief, that theory makes sense to me. The second theory does not make any sense to me.
I hope my words and my meaning are clear.
Thank you.
What's the consequence of loop quantum gravity's smallest time being larger than a Planck second?
We would all finally have justification for getting to work late
Thank you for this contribution to internet knowledge. Too many wanna be experts pushing out material. Nice to see an actual expert make a clear video
Just because something is a "cool idea" without any observational evidence doesn't mean scientists should be spending time on it. This state of physics saddens me greatly.
*_...not convincingly thought-about: Contrast/Compare quantum energies (particles, fields,), which 1. are vectorized probabilities over a space-time metric, 2. change value with object touch-close proximity entanglement, 3. change value depending on local space-time itself e.g. local-depth-of-gravity... we'd expect 10⁻³⁵ depends on the mass of the cosmos, etc...._*
What about two Planck-scale spacetimes moving relative to each other? How do they length contract/time dilate if there is no smaller distance/interval possible?
at 7:10 you say that LQG predicts that high energy (shorter wavelength) light travels more quickly through quantized spacetime than longer wavelength light. you sure about that?
Hi Don! Thanks for the great video! What about a video on delayed entanglement swapping? Or Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser? Or one discussing if the simultaneous collapse of the wave function of two entangled photons in a Bell's experiment doesn't imply that the Minkowsky's interpretation of relativity is wrong, and we should maybe adopt Lorentz ether theory? Thanks a lot!
THE UNIVERSAL, CLEAR, EXTENSIVE, AND BALANCED PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY:
Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 is F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE.) Accordingly, time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) SO, the EARTH (A PLANET) is a balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE form in fundamental RELATION to the UNIVERSAL fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is the Sun (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!!) Therefore, the Earth AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand !! This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA.) Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED in AND out of SPACE AND TIME, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This, in fact, explains the cosmological redshift AND the "black holes" as well.
GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Moreover, OBJECTS fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense !!!! "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!!! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma !!!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!!!!
By Frank DiMeglio
Can someone clarify the following please:
It seems to make sense that photons of different wavelengths travel at different speeds, but there was no measure of such an occurrence.
What if, the photons of increasing frequency covered more space but in an equal amount of time? Like the image at 7:50, these photons would be traveling in a spiral (3D waveforms - if that makes sense), but the one with a higher frequency would have larger spiral-rings, taking in more time to travel the same relative horizontal distance as the other particle with a smaller frequency. Wouldn't this explain how we observe all photons traveling at a constant speed of light but still allowing for the possibility of increased frequency particles to travel 'faster' as this theory predicts?
Explanation or citation needed! I have never seen any proof that Background independence + Diffeomorphism invariance implies spacetime is quantized. A citation at the very least is needed there @4:25. Also, Lincoln's pop science summary of diffeomorphism invariance is wrong or misleading at best. Diff. Inv. means coordinates play no role in determining physics (coordinates only change the numbers used, not the predictions), which is not at all the same as the locality idea Lincoln trots out for his cocktail party. In fact, most interpretations of QM imply that locality does not in general hold, which is the current best explanation for entanglement (see Susskind & Maldacena ER=EPR conjectures).
shortest distance or duration doesn't make much sense when you think of photons moving at the speed of causality and consider length contraction and time dilation relative to the photons. iirc the large hadron collider is supposed to be like 300 meters relative to the accelerated particles frame of reference.
Does this mean that there is a lower limit for wavelength (and upper limit for frequency)? How will that co-exist with constant speed of light when observer moves towards the light source with edge parameters, when its wavelength cannot be any smaller?
I'm a little confused. The speaker says that the idea that there is a minimum length, volume and unit of time is a result of LQG, but isn't there a smallest limit on these things in GR too? Planck length, plank time?
I have two questions: Why is it called "loop" quantum gravity? And if it is wrong does it mean that space and time are not quantized. thanks!
www.universetoday.com/50702/loop-quantum-gravity/ for the name. Follow the link Don provided in the description for a better explanation than that article.
This is not the first time that quantized space and time has been proposed, that's been going on for decades.
It crops up as a product of various theories that have tried to solve the singularity problems in cosmology and the problem in reconciling quantum theory and general relativity. As each of those theories hit inconsistencies without solution, the idea sort of takes a vacation until it appears in the math of the next theory.
If LQG gravity is wrong, look for the next theory. If the real solution is ever found, then we'll know if quantized space and time are correct or not.
If you prefer, different versions of quantized spacetime have been mathematically real but we haven't seen yet if any are physically real.
My favourite popular introduction to Loop Quantum Gravity is in the book "Reality is not what it seems" by Carlo Rovelli. (By the way, LQG is not wrong as the effect described in the end of the video *is not* a generic prediction of LQG.)
Why loops? We use loops to measure the intensity of fields! In gravity, we want to measure how much curvature is there. Think of the concrete example of the surface of the earth. Imagine you start moving from the North pole along a meridian keeping a flag in a given direction, say you have it at the beginning directed like the meridian. Then you arrive at the equator, you turn 90 degree and you move along the equator but you keep with you the flag without turning it. Then you turn again 90 degrees, you take a meridian and you go back to the North pole, always without changing the direction of your flag. But then, your are back at the same point but the flag is back pointing in a different direction: the angle between the initial and the final direction of the flag gives a measurement of the curvature. We use the same strategy to measure the curvature of spacetime, i.e. the gravitational field. This is a technique often use in quantum field theory, and the close path one consider to "compare the flag directions" are called Wilson loops.
Leslie Winckle believes in LQG.
"Think of the children, Leonard"
“I could have dealt with lactose intolerant short kids but not this Leonard, this is unacceptable.”
LQG vs M theory
@@friendlydragon8999 LQG Vs. String Theory
I wonder how did we calculate Mercury's precession? As far as I know full GR equations aren't solved or simulated. If someone knows a paper that uses GR for simulation it would be much appreciated!
And numerical solutions are always possible, you can just google it.
Ideas in LQG don't really make much sense without Rovelli's relational interpretation of quantum mechanics: it's not exactly as though space and time are "pixelated." In his words, to paraphrase, the picture of spacetime as granular polyhedra might be intuitive, but is no more real than the idea of an electron as a rotating storm (the current in the x direction and the y direction do not commute). The minimal length, area, volume, and time are the minimal that we can MEASURE. If we try to measure more accurately, reduce the uncertainty in space or time, we can increase the uncertainty in energy to a point where we end up with a horizon (in the GR sense) that prevents us from measuring what we were attempting to in the first place. Rovelli does not think there is an absolute state of the universe described independently of observers. All quantum states are described relative to observers.
Thanks. That is at least beginning to make some sense to me.
So what if I am observing from a fourth dimension or higher? Could that then make the observations "true" even if it's different relative to observers in fewer dimensions?
@@mcw0261 Yes.
Aren't *all* measurements relative to the observer?
@@mr.h4267 I agree with you, but relatively is just a limitation of measurement of an illusive absolute. People want to "believe" that absolutes don't exist, but that's silly (counter to science) when we haven't even measured to the point of the horizon yet at quantum levels.
Why would it imply that light with shorter wavelengths travel faster? Can someone explain?
Makes more sense than string theory, great video!
string theory is a dead end
I miss your old intro music...
BUT I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS!!!
1) Background independent and 2)Diffeomorphism invariance (what happens at a point does not involve what is happening elsewhere) seems to quantize space and time, but how do you assimilate QFT and the single probability wave function for the entire QF and the Higgs boson responsible for generating 'mass'?
However, even if we can verify the difference between the short wave length and long wave length of a gamma ray burst, the simulation of mass, still needs to be proved (possibly with strings).
Just like the transition from non-life matter to life(due to self-organizing property of matter) , physicists are discovering how the QF might have the self-organizing property to self-simulate conscious observer that turns the field into Higgs as in the double slit experiment of QM, observation turns the field into particles. Implying divine purpose, as part of the experiment, within our QF.
Before you even get down to Planck scales, wouldn’t the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle come into play? How are you even going to localize something to that size?
I'm not entirely sure 'time' in Loop Quantum Gravity is how we experience it.
does Planck length imply that spacetime is granular?
P.S. This is amenable to physical examination in laboratory conditions at present.
A lead ball suspended on a strong chain from the ceiling of the laboratory can serve as a test body; at radius r=27,6 cm, ball mass is m=1т.
According to the formula for the gravitational potential, the energy of quanta/photons of the field (photons are characterized by different parity and helicity, and it is not quite accurate to say that a photon has an integer spin equal to one) at a distance r from the center of gravity of the test body to the detector (practically on the surface of the ball) =66,3 keV.
The flow: J= 0,45*10-8 quanta/сm2c; this is a measurable flux for modern world-class gamma detectors.
can you explain for us the transactional interpretation of QM (TQM) and why it may explain some weird experiments like the Afshar experiment (a video about this test alone would be great) thanks
Zeno: "Told ya!"
From Einstein's equation's one can obtain a quantum expression (as vibration field) for the gravitational potential: фG= - (1/2)[Għ/с]^1/2(w) = - (1/2)[w/w(pl)]c^2.
By the way, to this expression for the gravitational potential: "Containing all information about the gravitational field." (Einstein), you can come according to the classics (G), SRT ©, and De Broglie's hypothesis (h), - without GR and QM.
is it possible that the reason why loop quantum gravity predicts that higher frequency photons travel faster is because of the higher number of oscillations per distance, or is this not how the wave actually works? because it would take more string to model a sinusoidal wave of high frequency for a given distance than it would for a lower frequency, so more total distance if you factor in the infinitesimally small oscillations added up. not sure if this reasoning is flawed due to inaccuracies or misleadingness in our representations of light waves.
It makes perfect sense to me that space and time are not infinitely divisible. When you get down to the planck length then space and time fluctuations must seem so extreme that time must go backwards for a very short time sometimes. Could this explain why particle and antiparticle pairs pop in and out of existence in the vacuum of space?
Is the problem with quantum gravity equating to much quanta to gravity when quanta should more be equated to the bucket gravity is influencing? Essentially Quantum Gravity is an analog as a whole effecting (or not per the quantum effects) the digital bucket of quanta?
I would look at it as the Flatland Thought Experiment. You have a particle on Flatland as a point, the quantum effect show on Flatland, but continue up as an unseen area above Flatland. The particle point is the quanta that Quantum Gravity affects.
What if we live a in not one universe but a universe where 2 universes collided. One governed by gravity. The other governed by particle physics. So there really isn’t a GUT. Maybe these two universes collided and started the ball rolling. Separately these would universes would never have inflated but remained ginormously small.
So, in LQG dimensions have a fundamentally smallest size. That engenders the following question for me:
Apparently the universe is expanding and this proposed thing, dark energy, is part of this expansion. In this expansion are the grains’ “size” increasing, or is the count of quanta increasing in some productive process?
So since you seem to be saying mass changes space time, by altering those limits of reality. Since velocity obviously effects length and time; does it also effect the limits of volume and area around a moving body?
Does the quantization of space at planck length indicate a particle, like quantum of electromagnetic field indicates photon? If so, would quantum of space be graviton particle?
One thing I haven't been able to understand, is does that smallest volume stack like cubes, with all the implications in terms of lengths in different directions, or is it different from that?
He explains diffeomorphism invariance as locality. How does this reconcile with entanglement of matter, e.g. the spin of two electrons?
It's almost 4 years later (sorry), and when I tried to click on the "Further reading" link, it's no longer working, at least not for me. Is there any alternative, or has the content been moved elsewhere, or what have you?
One thing is not so clear.
Everybody says that when many particles get squished together the gravity is so intense that the black hole is created.
But what about the strong force? Shouldn't it be the dominant effect at those distances?
I never heard any scientist mention this (possible) effect about the black hole? What is the reason?
Thanks!!
Giovanni
Dr. Lincoln, you mentioned in your Strong Force video 2 years ago that you were describing nuclear physics and not particle physics. You indicated that you would make another video describing it in the context of the particle world. Can you please do so?
I'm wondering -- if gravitation waves can be detected from inside the event horizon (can they? maybe I misunderstood), does it mean that one can "modulate" the amplitude/frequency from inside the event horizon and thus pass some information to the outside?
whats the equation at 5:49
idk
Off topic.
I don't get how light can transmit a force to an object. Can you make, or is there already, a video about that?
On topic.
Can we even measure 10^-43 seconds? How close can we get?
4:09
Then superposition??
With special relativity and QED / quantum field theory compatible at same velocity, can there be a quantum acceleration for quantum gravity and general relativity? How could quantum be accelerated for general relativity / gravity? Does acceleration have to come from time for quantum gravity and general relativity?
Perhaps I've missed something, but unless observation of a distant gamma burst were to happen at the very instant of the arrival of any wavelength of light that were to reach us from it would it not be possible that our observations were in fact different wavelengths released at different points in time but arriving at the same time (due to the 'faster' wavelength being released at a later point in time and 'catching up' on the journey) being misconstrued as light of all wavelengths travelling at a constant pace? Observing the end of such a burst is one possible solution, to see if lower-frequency waves continued to be received after the higher-frequency ended, however in either case we can also interpret it as gamma bursts beginning at a higher energy and becoming gradually lower and lower in its energy releases over time. The main solution to correct for this would of course be to observe multiple bursts from different points of origin, correcting for background radiation and comparing the hypothesized phase shift in energy over time, but again this proves imperfect as each burst is likely impossible to be uniform from one to the next, meaning we cannot simply observe them, but instead we would need to manually create one from a distant place (likely half a light year away would be sufficient), observing the energy output at the source and again when it reaches a detector placed elsewhere *outside of any atmosphere* (perhaps a satellite orbiting the moon), then comparing those observations. These theories are not impossible to test, they simply require technology we do not yet have access to.
Fermilab does a great job in public education with these videos. Thanks a lot!
there is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it. try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find everything falls or flies off and nothing sticks to or orbits it. to claim the existence of a physical law without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not ''science.'' gravity is a myth.
wouldn't quantized space mean you can only jump to the "next pixel", similar to how lines are drawn on screens? over long distanced, shouldn't we be able to detect "rounding errors"?
Does Loop Quantum Gravity predict 3 space like dimensions and one time like, or does that have to be built in?
Does LQG give rise to the usual set of particles and masses, or does that have to be built in?
the quantization of space and time are 2 of many errors derived from laws of physics we have today. we can use these ideas for now, but always knowing that reality is not discrete.
Thanks for making this a year in a advance of PBS doing a piece on it!
If time is quantized, how quickly must an object be moving for you to perceive the smallest interval of time?
Photons with high energy travels faster or slower with respect to photons with lower energy in LQG?
Since Annotations don't exist anymore in the way you are using them, could you use cards instead when you refer to an earlier video. Also like to see more like this please. Also, if you don't agree with Loop Quantum Gravity, what is your position, and is there an end in sight to unification of QM & GTR? Also, I can't find this series as a playlist. Could you also make a play list of your Quantum Mechanics videos please?
I might be dumb but can someone think this over with me. The last point about different wavelengths of light traveling at different speeds. Wouldn’t the particle traveling a higher wavelength assuming the particle moves along the path of the wavelength. Wouldn’t it technically need to travel faster and cover more distance. It’s like two people running one is zigzagging and the other just making slight turns. For them to travel at the same distance there guy zigzagging would need to travel faster.
I guess, quantization comes from loops in general. You can have one complete loop, two complete loops, etc. even if they are made of continuous flows.
I love Carlo Rovelli, as a layman I avoid to make comments. But I have read 4 of his books and "The order of time " has helped me to understand how the nature of time is emergent.I had seen a lot of videos and I had read a lot of articles about quantum mechanics and about general relativity so I was somehow familiar with their concepts,so I could understand the concept of the books. I think loop quantum gravity is a very cool and realistic theory!
Great thanks! Prof. Rovelli says that in the equation of quantum gravity there is no time. What do you think about it? Thank you
Time is a subjective relative experience of counciousness. Their not independent their interlinked and symbiotic. Think super position.
@@StevenLeMieux THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
C4 proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
This video made me wonder. If space is quantized would there not have to be a binding force to hold the bits of it together? If space flows faster than C at the black hole event horizon would that set lower bounds on the energy content of the binding force? Before it the video concluded that there was no observed difference of light deflection travelling through space I was wondering if there would be a quantization of angles as well --the "Planck Angle" --a smallest possible degree.
So which comesfirst, gravity or mass. Or does spacetime dictate where mass clumps and we just see it as mass warping spacetime. Maybe we're just looking at it backwards.
Can you possibly try to remove some of the mic noise please? Everytime the noise gate kicks in, it's really noticable as the hiss cuts out. Alternatively, don't use the noise gate! :) Thanks
Or use a noise filter on the whole recording (the one where you sample the noise first, then subtract that noise imprint from the rest of the recording). TYVM :)
If u travel from point a to point b, you need to first travel half of that and then another half and so on into infinity making movment nonexistent. So does this confrms quantized space and time?
what about imaginary time?
Does this mean there's a smallest spacetime interval as well? A what's the difference between diffeomorphism invariance and locality?
Dear Mr.Don Lincoln, If Einsteins General theory of Relativity is true in Quantum level, when two black holes collide , the resulted spacetime distortion should affect all the sand clocks in earth(Gravity based clock)...If the distortion is too small also, The cumulative distortion from the past unknown black holes collision make our solar system spacetime frame fast or slow...Please explain, my understanding is right or wrong? I thought if we create a very accurate quantum gravity based clock can detect Black holes collision...But how should we design quantum gravity clock...
Who knows what the music in the beginning?
The relationship between the shininess of a surface and its roughness is a function of the wavelength of light reflecting off of it, and the "size" of irregularities in the surface. Thus we can say that light (or any wave) will interact in a predictable (specular reflection) manner when its wavelength is large compared to the resolution of irregularities, and the interactions will be more random (diffuse reflection) if the resolution of the irregularities is large compared to the wavelength of the light.
Similarly, rolling a very large ball down some stairs, the large ball's path will be more predictable, as if it's rolling down a smooth surface, compared to rolling a very small ball down those same steps.
If there's a limit to size, that limit is the resolution of the field, right? On par with the space between steps or the size of irregularities in a surface. This means that particles with a longer wavelength, and of course objects made with multiple particles, will behave in a "smooth way" when interacting with the field, and particles with wavelengths closer to that resolution should be... bumpy... in their behavior.
Although, this would also be true if the resolution of the field were limitless, to some extent.
I was under the impression that one measurement had shown that a very, very distant GRB had indicated a one or two second differential in the arrival time of two different frequencies of light from the source. Did I just imagine that?
Sorry the ignorance, but if the smallest bits of space-time can bend or stretch in relation to another bit of space time, then they can't be the frame of reference of existence
How about a video on emergent gravity.
wait a minute, if space and time are discrete, then how does light travel between these discrete units?does the light just teleport to next unit of space like energy levels of electrons? if it does, then what is speed? is it just the rate of how fast you can skip to next descrete unit?
Can you explain causal set theory?
Why does infinity not go in both directions?
How does the idea of smallest lenght and smallest time, combine with lenght contraction and time dilation ?
Great video Dr. Lincoln. Question: recognizing that it may be outside the parameters of LQG mathematics/theory, but if space & time are quantized, and those minimum values are constant, and spacetime is expanding, then what is happening,; are the quanta of space/time getting infinitesimally larger or are quanta being "added" onto the universe like tiny bricks or some other phenomenon?
Anyone else gets the idea that these smallest space-time units are like bits leading into our universe being a simulation?
If we were to be a simulation. Then small scale measurements would reveal some very strange results...
Much like Quantum Mechanics..
Dr. Lincoln, would you explain - maybe a silly - problem? If space is quantized, why a diagonal of a square is longer than its sides and not equal to them like is a number of diagonal elements of a square matrix equal to its number of columns/rows?
Thank you!
I'd say: that's because of Diffeomorphism-Invariance! if it were as you say, distances in one direction would differ from distances in another. hence, the grid drawn in this video is inaccurate representation of this theory. it's just the numbers that get quantized, doesn't mean space is made of voxels!