Pedro Vieira on a theory of all quantum field theories
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 авг 2023
- Pedro Vieira is a faculty member at Perimeter Institute, where he holds the Clay Riddell Paul Dirac Chair in Theoretical Physics. In this episode, he talks about his work on a kind of uber-theory that encompasses all quantum field theories, as well as what separates the easy and hard problems in this field.
It’s a complicated topic to be sure, but Vieira is a master of explaining complex topics with relatable examples and anecdotes - something Lauren discovered as a student when she took a course he taught.
“Pedro takes some of those same concepts from graduate courses, but he paints some amazing non-technical pictures for us,” says Lauren. “No mathematical background required!” He explains why the universe might be a hologram and why, from a theoretical physics perspective, a messy bedroom can be a good thing.
Listen to the audio version of the podcast here: conversationsattheperimeter.p...
Conversations at the Perimeter is co-hosted by Perimeter Teaching Faculty member Lauren Hayward and journalist-turned-science communicator Colin Hunter. In each episode, they chat with a guest scientist about their research, the challenges they encounter, and the drive that keeps them searching for answers.
The podcast is produced by the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, a not-for-profit, charitable organization supported by a unique public-private model, including the Governments of Ontario and Canada. Perimeter Institute acknowledges that it is situated on the traditional territory of the Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee, and Neutral peoples. Perimeter’s educational outreach initiatives, including Conversations at the Perimeter, are made possible in part by the support of donors like you. Be part of the equation: perimeterinstitute.ca/donate
conversationsattheperimeter.p...
/ perimeter
/ perimeter-institute
/ perimeterinstitute
/ pioutreach 
Наука
Solving is a mathematical idea relying on assumptions to reach a conclusion, physics is primarily about adopting a wrong idea that is better than previous wrong ideas.
Worth watching again, thanks for sharing.
I theorize that g=tv (gravity) = (time vacuum) Where tv is implosion moment impetus field. Time being the force, seeks reluctance with potential in relation to density.
It's interesting to know the things, that don't emerge in qft. It's clear, that a lot of stuff emerges: matter/gauge fields, Lorentz symmetry, gravity. Freund says this is reminiscent of bootstrap.
Lorentz symmetry in QFT can be emergent or not depending on the question you're asking. (Strictly speaking: does there exist a Lorentz-violating operator that is relevant under the renormalization group?) If you take a simple enough lattice model, then its long-range description will be a QFT with Lorentz symmetry. But if you take a short-distance theory that is explicitly Lorentz-violating, then generically the symmetry doesn't emerge at long distances.
This is awesome! One of the best simplified visual descriptions of field theory I have seen! I have been trying to gain a basic understanding of this subject. This helped a lot and confirmed much of what I think I understand. Well at least a basic simplified understanding.
I am still a bit confused about the holographic principle. I understand the concept of 2D information, what I cannot see is how or what projects this information into a 3D plane?
I would love to see other talks or actual lectures from Dr. Vieira if anyone knows of any and where to find them?
With actual holograms the 3D object is an illusion. Looking through the 2D photo it appears that there is a 3D object behind it, but there is not. At about 1:04:00 he talks about there not being a 2D wall anywhere in our universe. He actually started talking about it a little before. I'm not sure he, or anyone else, knows exactly how it works yet.
@@EinsteinsHair Thanks for taking the time to reply, I will keep looking. I have found several of his lectures online so maybe...
There’s no physical projection as such. In holographic theory the “bulk” isn’t actually physical in its own right and that’s the whole point, it is just a set of behaviours that is emergent from the physics of the boundary, the boundary being the underlying physical reality. It’s kind of analogous to how in a virtual reality program (eg a video game) the landscape you see don’t have any physical existence anywhere, they are just one way of observing the binary data structures stored in RAM.
@@ralphclark Thanks for the the info, it sounds even more absurd than I had imagined.
@@ericmichel3857 of course, apparent absurdity is no guide to what underlying reality should be like. The stuff we know - the strong force, quarks and gluons, the Higgs mechanism - is quite absurd already. And yet it works.
The main objection to ADS/CFT is that we don’t live in an ADS.
Calling a hologram, the same things as what a hologram describes, is hand waving.
When you say coupling do you mean connection between different membrane surfaces?
The impression I get is that the most likely fruits of this research aren’t likely to be a fundamental theory in the sense of getting us closer to what underlying reality is but more probably just a set of tools that allow us to make approximations of quantum calculations easier.
That is a good take.
Maybe, but even those are high hopes. If you go back to something like Hamiltonian mechanics, no more than about a dozen potentials are integrable, all others can only be treated numerically and with perturbation theory.
Is electronic charge an emanation direction along a surface?
That is, membrane surfaces are the fields expressing particles and waves?
Isn't quantum mechanics describing emanations across Space/Time as a membrane?
Nima Arkani-Hamed of Princeton has some revolutionary ideas that greatly simplify quantum field calculations, while dropping the context of spacetime.
It's an extension of bootstrap.
Is a Higgs field perturbation along one or more membrane surfaces?
How are fields related to space dimension through mathematics and philosophy?
This is my favorite subject. Matter fizzles out into ether. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky talked about this subject in the 1800 way ahead of her time. Ether becomes thought energy which then enters into interdimensional realms.
How does particle spin manifest on membrane surfaces?
How is the quantum vacuum related to a multidimensional membrane's surfaces?
There is never a vacuum of any type. Every 3D space field (which contains infinitely many more dimensions) is loaded with forms of energy.
Brilliant
He's so genius!!
Are a collection of gluons local damping emanations in a membrane's surfaces?
The entropy that physicists mean is confined so the conclusion is entropy always increases - no evidence that entropy in the universe is confined.
The fact that the universe is expanding faster, more space, suggests that entropy in the universe is not confined.
If there is no limit on the expansion of the universe, there is likewise no maximum entropy limit. There is also no conclusive evidence that entropy is quantized at the most minute scale.
I'm not convinced that the second law of thermodynamics is fundamental.@@FallenStarFeatures
Why we are living 🙏
Joseph Cambell might disagree with your use of a toy universe in order to describe the actual universe depending on how you fashion the toy universe.
A toy universe that is confined may be convenient but is inadequate to model our universe because our universe is expanding.
Really understand quantum mechanics and relativity - that is not evident.
Wolfram offers a starting point for the science of calculating.
I'm referring to the conscious agents research that Donald Hoffman is doing.
I see that you are 'somewhat' familiar with Stephen Wolfram's recent publications.
What would a Standard Model of Fields explaining the Standard Model look like?
The Standard Model is already fields in some senses. Once particle physics reaches relativistic energies it becomes impractical to analyze a system in terms of particles. This does not say particles are fictional, on the contrary, it just tells us the interactions can get wildly complex due to significant "virtual" particle effects, so a field description becomes more effective. The fields can be considered fictions, like accounting tools. How can that be? It can be so because all QFT calculations have a Feynman diagram expansion, which is _all particles and interaction vertices._ Field concepts are used to greatly simplify the calculations, but can be considered fictional.
❤️🖍️ 40:30
I wish it was a prepared lecture instead!
He teaches this a lot, it basically was prepared. He knows it so well that he can talk about it so easily off the top of his head.
Particles are one dimensional traveling on a surface while waves are coupled surface emanations, yet we exist in a four-dimensional membrane - see something missing?
55:10 That seems to me a misunderstanding of the scientists who say that a holographic model of something is the same as the actual thing that exists. We may be a holographic model of something else. But that does not lead us to the conclusion that a holographic model or thought construction is the same as the original space matter, energy or situation. Even if we had a 3D printing process that tried to replicate an object. It would never succeed in replicating the object with 100% precision. It can approach 100% but will never fully reach the 100%.
These are toy models. They can replicate certain important properties of QFTs and are more easily solvable, but they are not the full theory. The full theory will never be solvable. Newtonian mechanics isn't solvable, so why do you expect a miracle in this case?
📍56:28
Nice discussion on protons! Vieira's philosophical approach has strong similarities to my own.
Check out my team's 2023 publication "Ground state quantum vortex proton model" in Foundations of Physics.
The paper mathematically derives the coupling between proton mass, magnetic moment, and charge radius. There is even a section on the potential relationship between gravity and the strong force.
My team is currently preparing a followup manuscript that includes a neutron model and a way to accurately calculate the fine-structure constant.
Hello ChatGPT..how are you today?
Shadows are not the same thing as the object projecting the shadow.
Physicists often talk about their mathematical constructions as if they are reality in themselves. I find that naive, and even counter productive. Mathematics is a language which is well suited for description of how physical systems function (because numbers is the language measuring apparatuses spit out) but these descriptions do not inform us about reality. Virtual particles, fields, mass, forces, particles, spacetime are metaphysical concepts that we have no way of falsifying/verifying empirically. We do not know if they are what exist or not. When the behavior of the concepts are described in equations we can predict how the concepts will behave, but no way do we know if they are are fundamentally what is there. They may very well all be emergent. This was well known philosophically centuries ago with respect to mass, space, time and other physics concepts that are part of the equations. Today, physicists have forgotten that and therefore talk about these metaphysical concepts as if they are real - adding to the general confusion.
Do you really think Space/Time is fundamental - have you spoken to Hoffman recently?
Time is a human perspective idea. I love Donald Hoffman's work. Dr. David Bohm already talked about this with Jiddu Krishnamurti.
The reason Physics is 'rigid' is it can't explain what things are - it needs a science of calculating to complement the science (math) of modeling.
These special 'experiments' you are doing wouldn't be geometric perturbations?
My Heir Pedro at least I can do is to washed thy FEET! To bring to remembrance ye once born, to crawling, to walking, and till now thy feet shared resting upon the very tip of time! Mileage from thy feet is recognize! Delight with rest filled and Gratitude with Honor! Knows belongs?
About public education: today scientists do a better job than a hundred years ago but there are plenty of ways how scientists improve communication to the general public.
The current "Shut up and calculate" approach will eventually go the way of the dodo.
It did that in 1927, you just haven't been listening for almost a century. ;-)
Hmm 1927 to 2024, Seems like Quantum Mechanics proves reductionism is a dodo.@@schmetterling4477
It seems like we need to look at the fundamental ideals of quantum mechanics in a who new vision.
0:58: 🔬 The interviewee is a physicist who specializes in Quantum field Theory.
7:14: 🔬 The speaker discusses the concept of coupling and how it affects quantum fluctuations and the behavior of particles.
13:18: 🧩 Understanding the dynamics of gluons is crucial for determining the mass and fundamental properties of the proton.
39:51: 🔍 The most interesting theories are often found at the boundary between what's possible and what's impossible.
19:57: 🧠 Phase transitions in materials and quantum effects are important for understanding the ultimate theory of quantum gravity.
26:04: 🎮 Emergent phenomena in Quantum field Theory can be much richer and more complicated than the fundamental rules.
33:20: 🔑 The bootstrap approach in theories suggests the existence of special points in the landscape of possibilities that can lead to exciting discoveries.
45:37: 🌊 Fluids and temperature are emergent properties that appear when we zoom out and observe from a distance.
52:22: 🏢 The volume of a black hole is not proportional to its mass, but rather to its surface area.
59:39: 🧩 The question explores why we are drawn to toys instead of the real thing and the different approaches people take in engaging with toys.
1:06:03: 🔬 Solving real world Quantum field Theory and computing the mass of the proton from first principles is a challenging task.
1:12:43: 🎨 The speaker praises the ability to convey ideas through visual representations and discusses the importance of teaching and outreach.
1:19:43: 😊 The speaker discusses their experience in Brazil and the efforts they made to create an institute and promote education.
Recap by Tammy AI
Thanks. Nice overview.
ummmm gluons fight what?
All together all-ways all-at-once everywhere-when here-now-forever holography.
I'm still waiting to see what, how and why inside-outside presence of probabilistic logarithmic condensation modulation cause-effect of Quantum-fields is explainable, effectively and efficiently to expectant minds, even when willing to work to learn. (Ie, empathy for Teachers, but feedback from practitioners across industries need to be consulted and asked for lesson plans)
I don't buy the holographic retention of information in a black hole - you don't know how membranes work despite string theory revelations.
but do protons decay ? lol
No!
@@stevenverrall4527 it takes a little more of time only ...
@@glcpit7797Perhaps infinite time...
Yes, because all particles are collective phenomena. It would take a lot of time though.
@@frun Please explain why protons are extremely stable. I do that in my recent paper "Ground state quantum vortex proton model" in Foundations of Physics. Published January 23, 2023.
Describing emergence using a metaphor doesn't explain emergence because it's only dumbing down the explanation.
protons are not bounded by gluons but by nuclear force. strong force is related with quarks. if you take quark and strong force away, protons do not exist more. protons are emergent phenomena.
The science of calculating forces you to give up reductionism because calculation is only meaningful within human capacity to understand.
Is seems the first D. Bhom's pictures ...
D. Bohm, one of my favorites, good friends with Jiddu Krishnamurti
@@Inquiring_Together They are my favorites and now others are finally catching on.
Yes, it is very complicated. Things become a lot easier to understand if you think in terms of waves instead of particles:
ruclips.net/video/zEu-_0ACl3I/видео.html
Richard
I feel this way too. In de Broglie double solution theory all particles are solitary waves.
@@frun Yes. The important issue is to understand the medium in which the waves occur. For gravitational waves it is a variation in space curvature which is propagating so the medium is space. Similarly light uses the same medium. So electrons, neutrons and protons are looped waves in this same medium.
So once we fully understand the properties of the medium of space we have a foundation for all of physics.
Richard
@@OpenWorldRichard We might understand only long distance physics because of universality.
Concepts like life, consciousness, soul and faith are fundamental and therefore not definable (metaphysical). Physics of QM teaches us how quantum fields collapse to form fine tuned particles, leading to life, consciousness, soul and faith etc., as a result physics and metaphysics together explain reality.
"Sir, do you want the meal with that or just the sandwich"
There is no immortal soul, at least not in the Judaeo Christian Bible. People are souls, they don't have souls. Ezekiel 18:4. So, don't hold your breath until pagan metaphysics supports reality. Psalm 146:4.
Yeah, it sounds ompossibly complicated b3cause of this dudes ego. He couldve answered that question with the term quantum electro dynamics and mad3 it as simple as a feynman diagram but he wanted to sound impressive. Why did you think i wanted to watch this yt?
Very compelling. We're reaching an odd turning point, thanks to the oddness of the quantum, no less. What does an inquiry together for an all encompassing require? Or what sacrifices must be made to maintain the channel open? Something like-- context, what role does context play in determining a process? We certainly name, categorize and discern using the instrument known as thought. Now without context, what happens to the observer? At such a point, what can be drawn from observation? As in differing from the attention that is paid to a process which is then built upon, turning into theory. There is a separation, from attention to theory. Not fast enough, it has seemed.
I can imagine, as AI becomes sophisticated enough, the space in which such depth can reveal itself becomes the emphasis. So, in what aspects of our lives? Professional or personal? Once again, such a separation-- is too slow. Its quite a difficult thing to let go of- separation. We have been trained since grade school to reason in duality- binary. Not to mention millennia worth of the structures of society depending on this very duality. Without separation what happens to the- 'me'? That last little bit, the 'me', is the separation of which it is dawning on humanity that is the only separation between observer and observed and perhaps quantum gravity.
Huh?
@@johnbroadhead7109 the questions we have are born out of the answers we have been given. Perhaps, from this lens, there may be a sensitivity to observe whats been sought for in physics and serves as the tool which brings theories together.
I challenge your notion of space time, and entanglement structure is more fundamental and does not perterbate at the speed of light but faster.
Also. I challenge your equivalence principle, as I content acceleration may be similar to gravity (even 99%) but IS NOT gravity.
This can be tested in a centrifuge in deep space.
If the mitochondria from a single cell is affected by lack of gravity, in zero gravity, inspite of acceleration, by this kind of acceleration, then acceleration is not gravity.
There is a testable method of determining the equivalence principal and its biological.
OK... hey, you should start your own institute for theoretical physics. Only, a centrifuge is not equivalent you need to accelerate in a straight line. Oh, ya and equivalent does not mean the same. 3 + 1 = 5 - 1 they are equivalent not the same 3 + 1 = 3 +1 are both equivalent and the same.
@@mycount64 also, I’m already doing more than you so I don’t expect you to keep up.
@@mycount64 also if your claim were true airplanes would not read “G’s” when they turn. Your not even wrong…
This mfer actually said "I challenge your equivalence principle" unironically lmao
@@n0tthemessiah that’s all you have? Just a stupid remark with no rebuttal? No answer? Cause you can’t and don’t.
Your taxes hard at work 😢
Is this physicist too stubborn, or not intelligent enough, to spend his time on the already discovered (and invented) mathematical platform called "string/M-theory"?
What physics experiment can we perform, to validate any string M-theory? What string theory unifies the forces and has predictive power?
Where the hell is Greg Dick?
A dual inverse pair of principles, dual-horizon. An Invisible/Holographic Principle of The Multiverse. The Holographic Principle works well in the interior horizon of a universe, but necessarily beyond observation, an Invisible Principle extends from beyond the horizon of a universe and out into the horizon of the multiverse.
A duality within a duality.