actually the multiverse just proved google exists and in universe 8675309 it actually has good results like they did in the mid early to mid 2000s and no ai overview!!
Multiverse or universe: humans argue since the dawn of quantum mechanics (kopenhagener deutung, vs. Everett parallel worlds and others) . Most physicists and philosophers know this is a matter of interpretation. Willows results do not change anything about that. So to say Hartmut Neven is talking nonsense is actually nonsense :) we still have no proof, but we also have no proof of the opposite.
if it can proof the time-space equations, solve them, evolve human from 3 dimensions to 4th dimensions, yes it is possible to even prove more than that, the question really is, possible? to gain power to exit the 3rd dimension to 4th... then my friend. we will have a new era ahead of us.
I was surprised how closed minded the hosts were to the MWI of quantum mechanics. As if they we almost too embarrassed amongst their peers to consider this could be a potentially valid interpretation. It is certainly mathematically consistent...
There are many possible interpretations with consistent math, with no actual evidence for any. Saying you can prove the MWI is real is like saying you can prove which god is the real one. You can't, there's no evidence.
Wow you're dumb. There's no way of knowing if MWI is true, it can be a useful way of thinking, but out of the many interpretations that also are mathematically consistent, you can't prove this is it.
@@kyleyoung2464there's evidence of superposition, and the measurement problem. If it were so clear, it would be easy to rule out, but surprisingly it's not. It is more reasonable that we exist if you consider all possible branches of history. People have a problem with this because it messes with their concept of a soul, others because we do not see the other branches, and there's an explosion of universes beyond crazy. To me it's not crazier than the the seemingly fine-tuned and practically infinite universe that evolved us and we are part of.
As to Vedral's statement: Schrodinger made it clear how he was opposed to QM, in his Dublin lectures. Also, his cat paper was a joke to say nature was not like QM.
We always knew for years there's a multiverse. The problem with the quantum computer google is making, its going to lead to some problems. Where did this tech come from? That's what we really need to ask.
"[the] new Willow chip has completed a task in 5 minutes that a classical computer would take 10 septillion years to complete" Oh dear, Google said last time that it would take a classical computer 10,000 years to beat the previous version (Sycamore). Within a short time, a classical algorithm ran _faster_ than Google's quantum chip.
I love the positivity and playfulness of these two podcasters. With that in mind, I wish that I had never listened to examples of podcasts by LLMs trained on podcasting. Every time that I listen to the back and forth of real human beings, they sound a lot like the podcasting chatter by an LLM podcaster simulation thingy. 🤖💡🤖
How come you guys didn't question whether the correlation between slower brain aging and healthy lifestyle is causal, and if it's causal, then in which direction?
So they used AI to guess the brain's ages then the result was tested against blood samples? Or was the brain age measured in some other form and then that set trained the AI and then that ai looked into the blood samples?
If many worlds is the correct interpretation of quantum mechanics, as David Deutsch maintains, then ANY evidence of QM is evidence of the quantum multiverse. You might as well ask if the double-slit experiment confirms the quantum multiverse. It seems to me that's what he meant by saying there was as much evidence for many worlds as there is for dinosaurs.
@robertsouth6971 0D is discrete (countable infinities) and non-zero dimensions are continuous (uncountable infinities). It's the difference between dimensionless and dimensional. No separation and separated by space-time. Zero entropy (negentropy) and entropy. Perfect information preservation and 2nd law of thermodynamics. If 0 = 0+0i then 0D = 0D+0Di. Zero is a whole number and a real number, just non-natural is all. Our subatomic structure is 0D. Quarks have no internal structure (indivisible), since negative dimensions aren't considered whole dimensions, and no spatial or temporal extension whatsoever. Just like Leibniz's monads :D
I viewed this as I hadn't come across New Scientist on RUclips before, but had to grit my teeth doing so given the click-baity multiverse title. It cheapens the computing achievement, and NS in general.
People in this podcast are seriously out of touch with the scientific community. Many worlds is pretty much dominant now, to still suggest that it's nonsense or there isn't evidence for it is extremely uninformed.
Saying the MWI is true is like saying god is real. He could be! But it's unprovable. You're the out of touch one if you seriously think ant man is actual science 😂
I found this video really difficult to watch, as the stripey wall background, chair fabric pattern and the christmas jumper pattern started to make me feel dizzy and slightly nauseous, like travel sickness, especially when they were moving around. Anyone else experiencing similar problems with the visuals?
The problem with simulating the universe with quantum mechanics (not necessary quantum computing, which might be able to simulate non-quantum systems [fundamental universe mechanics]), is that quantum mechanics is not fundamental, you wont be able to simulate the delta Planck force gradients (gravity) [Planck length differentials], because quantum mechanics is bound to meter space where Planck lengths are normalized as a constant (because mass observer scale from these Planck vortices). A photon is just the spin reorientation of these Planck vortices, it's not a fundamental object, it requires a Planck field (a vortex network of spin states) to traverse as a (delta spin state) caused by the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum on local intersect. Therefore, a photon = spin reorientation of vortex, not the vortex it self, however spin reorientations can be inverse and locally intersecting, causing a canceling of photon momentum, and a bifurcation of vortex angular momentum (inflation of meter space within non-warpable general relativistic backdrop space) no inflation theory required, only the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum, on local intersect, within a 3d velocity field. Doppler effect occurs for a moving observer in a Planck field, but that's not the same as redshift correlating with meter space inflation, the photon momentum is settling down into Planck vortices, rather than the perception of it being stretched. Do to the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum on local intersect. A photon = spin reorientation of Planck vortex * number of Planck vortex, not the vortex itself, however spin reorientations can be inverse and locally intersecting, causing a canceling of photon momentum, and a bifurcation of vortex angular momentum. This is (how) waves cancel out, the heat in the early universe occurred everywhere, it cancels out over time, more Planck vortex form over the same non-meter general relativistic backdrop volume, which inflates the perceived distance relative to compositionally bound observers in meter space (quantized mass observers shrink with the Planck vortex bifurcation, because Planck vortices are the scale factors for that quantized mass). "Inflatons" is pseudo physics. In fact, the volume of the cosmos itself might be losing pressure, and length contracting on a much larger scale, within a much larger flux tube in 3d non-warpable space (general relativistic backdrop space). No need to add inflation theory to general relativity, because it's not a physical explanation based in energy conservation within the detectable universe. The only thing needed to complete and solve general relativity, is the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum on local intersect, forms the curvatures of the velocity field within non-warpable 3d space. All Planck lengths differentials are weighed in this space, and differentials in length cause curvature in their alignments within this space, which is extra bisector reflections that dilate arrival times, therefore speed differentials and bisector reflections cause the (Planck force differential = gravity gradients) and curvatures. The weight factor for fundamental flux speed of all Planck vortices = it's specific length / universal constant delta computational time.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
i will save viewers 23 minutes and 56 seconds. NO. not even maybe.
The hero we need
Haha. beet me and I think thousands of others to it
Thanks. I wish you are doing this all channels I watch regularly 😂
Thank you
Praises
actually the multiverse just proved google exists and in universe 8675309 it actually has good results like they did in the mid early to mid 2000s and no ai overview!!
Wtf it's a song. 😂
Let me explains this. Traditional computers use bits, quantum computers use q (pause) bits.
…proceeds not to explain what any of that means.
Wave probability amplitude scaled on every base state represents every probability until it is measured.
Multiverse or universe: humans argue since the dawn of quantum mechanics (kopenhagener deutung, vs. Everett parallel worlds and others) . Most physicists and philosophers know this is a matter of interpretation. Willows results do not change anything about that. So to say Hartmut Neven is talking nonsense is actually nonsense :) we still have no proof, but we also have no proof of the opposite.
Unknowable, untestable, ill-defined, not science.
if it can proof the time-space equations, solve them, evolve human from 3 dimensions to 4th dimensions, yes it is possible to even prove more than that, the question really is, possible? to gain power to exit the 3rd dimension to 4th... then my friend. we will have a new era ahead of us.
The only way to say it in a non-contradictory manner is "univalent universe" like in homotopy type theory.
So the jokes on them :D
I was surprised how closed minded the hosts were to the MWI of quantum mechanics. As if they we almost too embarrassed amongst their peers to consider this could be a potentially valid interpretation. It is certainly mathematically consistent...
And math has usually been far more precise
I agree. A bunch of laughing idiots jeering and catchphrasing without seriously discussing the issue.
There are many possible interpretations with consistent math, with no actual evidence for any. Saying you can prove the MWI is real is like saying you can prove which god is the real one. You can't, there's no evidence.
Wow you're dumb. There's no way of knowing if MWI is true, it can be a useful way of thinking, but out of the many interpretations that also are mathematically consistent, you can't prove this is it.
@@kyleyoung2464there's evidence of superposition, and the measurement problem. If it were so clear, it would be easy to rule out, but surprisingly it's not. It is more reasonable that we exist if you consider all possible branches of history. People have a problem with this because it messes with their concept of a soul, others because we do not see the other branches, and there's an explosion of universes beyond crazy. To me it's not crazier than the the seemingly fine-tuned and practically infinite universe that evolved us and we are part of.
IBM has a processor with 433 qubits. The latest D-Wave processor, called the Advantage2, has over 4,400 qubits.
But how error-prone are they?
@@danellis-jones1591 more prone obviously. but what does it have to do with multiverses?
As to Vedral's statement: Schrodinger made it clear how he was opposed to QM, in his Dublin lectures. Also, his cat paper was a joke to say nature was not like QM.
Yes people seem to fail to understand that point. Basically in reality large things don’t work the same way as very very very small things.
We always knew for years there's a multiverse. The problem with the quantum computer google is making, its going to lead to some problems. Where did this tech come from? That's what we really need to ask.
Would be great to address the state of peer review on those studies
Santa is a quantum being.
Able to be in multiple places at the same time.
"[the] new Willow chip has completed a task in 5 minutes that a classical computer would take 10 septillion years to complete" Oh dear, Google said last time that it would take a classical computer 10,000 years to beat the previous version (Sycamore). Within a short time, a classical algorithm ran _faster_ than Google's quantum chip.
Pretty sure you've got that backwards.
I love the positivity and playfulness of these two podcasters. With that in mind, I wish that I had never listened to examples of podcasts by LLMs trained on podcasting. Every time that I listen to the back and forth of real human beings, they sound a lot like the podcasting chatter by an LLM podcaster simulation thingy.
🤖💡🤖
How come you guys didn't question whether the correlation between slower brain aging and healthy lifestyle is causal, and if it's causal, then in which direction?
So they used AI to guess the brain's ages then the result was tested against blood samples? Or was the brain age measured in some other form and then that set trained the AI and then that ai looked into the blood samples?
I’m really enjoying what you’re contributing!
If many worlds is the correct interpretation of quantum mechanics, as David Deutsch maintains, then ANY evidence of QM is evidence of the quantum multiverse. You might as well ask if the double-slit experiment confirms the quantum multiverse. It seems to me that's what he meant by saying there was as much evidence for many worlds as there is for dinosaurs.
I did not know Alanis had a vlog
0D is the dimension between the set of all possible positive dimensions and the set of all possible negative dimensions.
The number of dimensions is infinite, but it's the counting numbers. No negative numbers, no zero, and no fractions.
@robertsouth6971
0D is discrete (countable infinities) and non-zero dimensions are continuous (uncountable infinities).
It's the difference between dimensionless and dimensional. No separation and separated by space-time. Zero entropy (negentropy) and entropy. Perfect information preservation and 2nd law of thermodynamics.
If 0 = 0+0i then 0D = 0D+0Di.
Zero is a whole number and a real number, just non-natural is all. Our subatomic structure is 0D. Quarks have no internal structure (indivisible), since negative dimensions aren't considered whole dimensions, and no spatial or temporal extension whatsoever. Just like Leibniz's monads :D
When are we going to get dynamic Qbit leangths?
This video having only 100 likes is crazy
science is not generally branded lol. take us seriously, we are not dumb
So - Blue Sky research - or should that term be reserved for IBM?
How is a Qbit created, manipulated and stored?
it is not "stored", it is a physical object (f.e., superconductive circuit). what is stored and manipulated is its state
I thought the "multi-verse" was first mentioned in the ancient Hindu rigvadas.
So many bots
Very superficial / generic coveridge of Willow. Nothing new learned!
Reliability seems not a factor just "speed'?? Really?
I wonder which Level we are in.
not even 1
The music in the background doesn’t help. I had to leave
My kind of people
What's more interesting is whether a functional quantum computer actually exists, who cares where it's pulling energy from.
it is pulling it from the same place your TV set and vacuum cleaner are
I viewed this as I hadn't come across New Scientist on RUclips before, but had to grit my teeth doing so given the click-baity multiverse title. It cheapens the computing achievement, and NS in general.
Literally the Google person said this and they proved it wrong. How is that click bait.
Thanks comments section for saving me 23 minutes of my time
What a ridiculous title
That's the point?? The Google dude said it and they disprove it?? What is your issue?
Why so? Dont be lazy and read on why they're saying this.
Huge waste of time
I second
Not at all. What mind-rot...
This video for quantum computer but talk about mutiunvirs and Elon Musk lol but no one quantum computer lol
Another failed Google project the works again.
Right😮
People in this podcast are seriously out of touch with the scientific community. Many worlds is pretty much dominant now, to still suggest that it's nonsense or there isn't evidence for it is extremely uninformed.
Saying the MWI is true is like saying god is real. He could be! But it's unprovable. You're the out of touch one if you seriously think ant man is actual science 😂
Poor animals always comes back to torture and death
Now that quantum is back in the lead. Do you think that classical has a snowflakes chance in hell of gaining it back again? LOL
Dude are you stupid? You can't run a browser on a quantum computer, they are a whole different beast, not just better computers.
Quantum computers do different stuff, they aren't better or worse
Well, 24 minutes just to say “NOPE”😂
A family man who has a secret mistress is definitely a proof of the existence of the multiverse. 😅
😂l
I found this video really difficult to watch, as the stripey wall background, chair fabric pattern and the christmas jumper pattern started to make me feel dizzy and slightly nauseous, like travel sickness, especially when they were moving around. Anyone else experiencing similar problems with the visuals?
I see what you mean about the visuals. It may help if you reduce the RUclips video quality to 360p or lower to blur and soften everything.
Are you an epileptic? Ofc it doesn't bother me because im not that fucking fragile.
Not a real scientist
The problem with simulating the universe with quantum mechanics (not necessary quantum computing, which might be able to simulate non-quantum systems [fundamental universe mechanics]), is that quantum mechanics is not fundamental, you wont be able to simulate the delta Planck force gradients (gravity) [Planck length differentials], because quantum mechanics is bound to meter space where Planck lengths are normalized as a constant (because mass observer scale from these Planck vortices). A photon is just the spin reorientation of these Planck vortices, it's not a fundamental object, it requires a Planck field (a vortex network of spin states) to traverse as a (delta spin state) caused by the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum on local intersect. Therefore, a photon = spin reorientation of vortex, not the vortex it self, however spin reorientations can be inverse and locally intersecting, causing a canceling of photon momentum, and a bifurcation of vortex angular momentum (inflation of meter space within non-warpable general relativistic backdrop space) no inflation theory required, only the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum, on local intersect, within a 3d velocity field. Doppler effect occurs for a moving observer in a Planck field, but that's not the same as redshift correlating with meter space inflation, the photon momentum is settling down into Planck vortices, rather than the perception of it being stretched. Do to the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum on local intersect. A photon = spin reorientation of Planck vortex * number of Planck vortex, not the vortex itself, however spin reorientations can be inverse and locally intersecting, causing a canceling of photon momentum, and a bifurcation of vortex angular momentum. This is (how) waves cancel out, the heat in the early universe occurred everywhere, it cancels out over time, more Planck vortex form over the same non-meter general relativistic backdrop volume, which inflates the perceived distance relative to compositionally bound observers in meter space (quantized mass observers shrink with the Planck vortex bifurcation, because Planck vortices are the scale factors for that quantized mass). "Inflatons" is pseudo physics. In fact, the volume of the cosmos itself might be losing pressure, and length contracting on a much larger scale, within a much larger flux tube in 3d non-warpable space (general relativistic backdrop space). No need to add inflation theory to general relativity, because it's not a physical explanation based in energy conservation within the detectable universe. The only thing needed to complete and solve general relativity, is the bisector reflection of inverse directional momentum on local intersect, forms the curvatures of the velocity field within non-warpable 3d space. All Planck lengths differentials are weighed in this space, and differentials in length cause curvature in their alignments within this space, which is extra bisector reflections that dilate arrival times, therefore speed differentials and bisector reflections cause the (Planck force differential = gravity gradients) and curvatures. The weight factor for fundamental flux speed of all Planck vortices = it's specific length / universal constant delta computational time.