Wolfram Physics Project: A Discussion with Jim Gates
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 май 2020
- Jim Gates and cohorts join Stephen Wolfram and Jonathan Gorard for a conversation about the Wolfram Physics Project, Adinkras and more. Begins at 7:05
Originally livestreamed at: / stephen_wolfram
Stay up-to-date on this project by visiting our website: wolfr.am/physics
Check out the announcement post: wolfr.am/physics-announcement
Find the tools to build a universe: wolfr.am/physics-tools
Find the technical documents: wolfr.am/physics-documents
Follow us on our official social media channels:
Twitter: / wolframresearch
Facebook: / wolframresearch
Instagram: / wolframresearch
LinkedIn: / wolfram-research
Stephen Wolfram's Twitter: / stephen_wolfram
Contribute to the official Wolfram Community: community.wolfram.com
Stay up-to-date on the latest interest at Wolfram Research through our blog: blog.wolfram.com
Follow Stephen Wolfram's life, interests, and what makes him tick on his blog: writings.stephenwolfram.com 
Наука
Find the notebook for this session here: www.wolframcloud.com/obj/wolframphysics/WorkingMaterial/2020/JimGates-01.nb
Dither the lab about the newly considered stationary observer but with intrinsic unexplained weak gravity.
Guys, this is history happening right here.
Wow something new in physics is finally happening. This could be historic
Wow... I'm happy that i'm able to see this!
Imposing constraints is one way to reduce the dimensionality. If the constraints do not apply everywhere, i.e. are bounded, this in a sense changes the amount by which the dimensionality changes. These bounds are an essential part of fractional derivatives.
Love it, keep them coming please 🙏
Sweet, curious. Gates! gonna watch it now.. will leave a comment when i am done!
Thnx again
Amazing!
Assuming the Hypergraph equivalence to the Adinkra graphs. Does this mean that each white or black node is a fermion or boson that equals some sub graph of the hyper-graph? Also are isomorphisms of the adinkra’s something like Feynman Diagrams ?
Are there super Weyl curvature tensor manifolds to match with the time reversibility of the Riemann curvature tensor manifolds ? Essentially deciding on the direction of the cycle as was said the dashed line can go both ways. Or would it be like a super position of the arbitrary decision of where the dashes go ?
I think from this, it means that to have a "spin structure" on a discrete manifold you need to define an ordering of the lines coming out of every vertex. And these can have 2 orientations. Which is related to the Z2 structure. i.e. this might be a way to add a Z2 grading to the discrete graph which approximated a super-manifold. That is just my guess. :)
1:01:15 - And back to Category Theory. ^.^
@50:35 to 50:45 is the “Higgs Boson” highlight of this discussion,...
Hands Down! Lol
BEWARE:)...Jim Gates is THE MAN.
Kind Regards,
...The Sound Of Ones Own Voice
Why do they apply spinors to super symmetry ? Shouldn’t there be a left handed and right handed spinor and then also an anti symmetric set of left and right handed spinors ? And that would be the full set of super symmetric spinors ?
The better answer to the question 'increasingly more general computationally reversible equation' goes:
< >
< >
< >
etc.
@1:40:16 to 1:40:22 is the second light hearted
“Higgs Boson” highlight in this discussion.
Kind Regards,
“Who wants the last beer?” -Andre “The Giant”
@ 11:01 in video: "... something is missing ... supersymmetry ..." I have conjectured that string theory with the infinite nature hypothesis implies supersymmetry and no MOND, but string theory with the finite nature hypothesis implies MOND and no supersymmetry ... perhaps I am wrong. However, in any case, I say that Milgrom is the Kepler of contemporary cosmology (on the basis of overwhelming empirical evidence) - it is not possible that Kroupa, McGaugh, Sanders, and Scarpa are deluded about MOND. Consider the following idea: Measurement is a natural process that separates the boundary of the multiverse from the interior of the multiverse. All measurement occurs in terms of quantum information, but quantum information is merely an approximation derived from Fredkin-Wolfram information.
Consider what Lee Smolin put on a slide in a talk on April 17, 2019 (17:30 in video)
"Niels Bohr: ...Nothing exists until it is measured. .... When we measure something we are forcing an undetermined, undefined world to assume an experimental value. We are not measuring the world, we are creating it. ... Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real."
Lee Smolin Public Lecture Special: Einstein's Unfinished Revolution, April 18, 2019, Perimeter Institute
ruclips.net/video/r-L690pQhuo/видео.html
Is Niels Bohr's assumption that "we measure something" basically correct or basically incorrect? Does the multiverse measure itself? Do experimental physicists falsely assume that free will exists?
Uncertain geometry implies fermions are existential mass uncertainties and bosons are coupling cyclotomic residues from the observer being in uncertain motion adding relativistically to the lab frame of inertial non-motion.
Hi, I do not speak English. I am Spanish. is there any way to see the theory and the youtube videos in Spanish? many thanks.
Hi, I'm a physics undergraduate student, or at least the equivilent of that in my country. This seems like something that feels "at home", whatever that may mean. What I'd like to ask is what classes, or rather what direction would I need to take to better understand the things youre talking about. I'm asking because I"ll have to pick most of my classes on my own next year and I'm currently undecided for the most part.
To better understand the questions involved with string theory, supersymmetry, and the Wolfram Physics Project, it is necessary to have a good understanding of quantum field theory (QFT) and general relativity theory (GR). You should make inquiries to experts in QFT and/or GR. Also, my guess is that Milgrom's MOND is the key to a new paradigm for the foundations of physics. I suggest that you ask advice from Milgrom.
www.weizmann.ac.il/particle/milgrom/
"MOND: Scale invariance at low accelerations - an alternative to the dark Universe" May 11, 2020
ruclips.net/video/tFH1-H-pCxc/видео.html
@@DavidBrown-om8cv Thank you for the reply. I've already decided to pick those two courses for next semester.
@@Domzies I wish you great success in your study of physics. My guess is that experimental tests of general relativity theory are crucial for the Wolfram Physics Project. I recommend that you ask advice from Prof. dr. sc. Tomislav Petković, retired, University of Zagreb, Department of Applied Physics, email:
tomislav.petkovic@fer.hr
Amazing math. Way over my head. The only thing I understood was Fourier transform. I think one can get from a digital information foundation to the "only waves" physical universe Stephen Hawking wrote about via the Fourier transform.
For those that read my paper. It's gone through sacramento state. NASA and Congress. I've been looking to have it get a publication reference status. But need a connection.
My favorite part of the presentation is Jim calling Stephen “Jonathan” more than once and Stephen struggling not to be a dick about it.
"These are basically just spinners" Eric Weinstein has entered the chat
He'd enter to say you misspelled spinor lol
I was astounded by The Primordial Particle System.
The nodes in the causal graph aren't photons or gluons passing along the data?
Or a pair to get a wavelength.
You're lucky. I could never find a quantum mechanics book with math when I was kid.
Fractional dimensions still conjures up how you figure out a Newtownian inelastic collisions in 3d: project onto the shared 2d plane and then solve the 1d force equation on the axis between objects.
Dimensions (edges per node) are quantized...sounds like a reasonable rule.
@2:10:56 to 2:10:57 is the third “Higgs Particle” Highlight within this discussion.
Sincerely,
Divine Omnipotence
Hey I sent two emails to you recently lol, I should probably participate in an event like this if it happens again : ( maybe this event was inspired by my emails! lol.... idk.... sorry about the emails.
Jim Gates is the guy who talks about simulation theory though nice! just what my emails were about! uh, and this is the guy I learned that it's far more likely that we ARE in a simulation than not being in a simulation, simply because of the amount of simulations we will end up creating on our own timeline in the future!
I wonder why he thinks that though, I wonder if he thinks what I think...: "we need to create more preferable situations when we (the universe itself...) find ourselves conscious and experiencing things, to outweigh the bad.
that's the meaning of life. "
Interpolated and extrapolated matrix?
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW
my brain hurtz
lol
Stanford edu