Video

Thats my grandpa❤❤❤❤❤

Can you summarize for the layperson who is also suspicious re. the underlaying assumptions but who is much less technical. Do we preserve some notion of cause and effect? What is observation, what is a particle anyway? What is an event? What is a point in time or space? Are we not talking about phenomenon that are spread out in space and time and described by classically or at least large scale familiar notions of physical properties that are no longer relevant on the quantum scale? Do we not need an entirely new language to discuss the nature of reality when mass-energy-time-space all begin to meld into one indistinguishable soup that is displaying the oneness of a unified field? What Bell may have proved is just that classical notions no longer apply. Where do we go from here? Its a mess.

Consistent… is it complete? … Wow wow wow …WOW TP… absolutely genius.

Tim, stop trying so hard to have it both ways. Forbidding counterfactuals contradicts free will, and that's okay. Stop panicking about Hitler. Also, the correct response to the conspiracy objection is that the objection is not valid. To paraphrase Sabine; it's made up rubbish. There is nothing unscientific about having brute constraints in one's theory- do not kowtow to those who insist otherwise.

there isn't a functional Attosecond microscope/camera alraedy???

Would like to see the slides!

Please salvage the audio with postproduction!

I have a potential solution: Meaning and being are different ways of looking at graphs. Reality is a hypergraph. Being is the internal structure of a node plus the relationship between the node and the network it is embedded in. Meaning is just the relationship between a node and the network it is embedded in. Being is a prerequisite for meaning, because a node has to exist in order to be embedded in a network. Meaning is a prerequisite for information, because meaning motivates the encoding and decoding process. The relational nature of these states and the observation of the systems should be defined in terms of the conversion of meaning into information. If you look at the various schools of philosophy, they are deeply concerned with meaning but don't quite have meaning nailed down. Wittgenstein's private language argument gets at some of this- you can't know the meaning of a word unless there's some shared context in which the word's referent can be learned. Heidegger's notion of Dasein's existence defined by Being-In-The-World gives another perspective on the same thing. Meanwhile Claude Shannon developed information theory without considering meaning, because it was too difficult. He defined information in terms of entropy. I think my definition of meaning in terms of graphs allows for the possibility of a reconciliation between information theory and complex systems that will show how meaning is converted into information and back into meaning by physical systems. It's also agnostic about the nature of consciousness. Though I favor the notion that consciousness is a rather trivial problem describing types brain states.

What happen with the interaction free measurment thing in this framework????

Fascinating talk, I've been interested in IFMs since my PhD days, and I'm looking forward for the next developments of this wonderful technique

This sounds similar to what Susskind and collaborators have been working on, which in a recent talk at IAS on DSSYK_infinity, he said: " A clock is a fluctuation". The analogy goes as: The future state that is being 'pulled back' (as in mathematics, here evolved backwards), and the initial state that is being 'pushed forward' (here evolved forward), define the existence of a clock that can measure this state. Outside these bounds of the existence of the clock (observer state), this state is not measured by it.

Conservation of Spatial Curvature: Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. ------------

That was excellent!!! If we take the environment into account then the conservation laws are obeyed for each particle individually and entangled environment.

The hydrodynamics of a thixotropic dielectric super fluid will spontaneously evolve QFT from brownian motion. It happened infinity ago. Neutron decay cosmology is the process which has kept it going ever since

Can a perfect resistor made from LK99 prevent electricity to escape and instead channel it towards a path of thin film copper with zero loss? Thanks

I feel like all the arguments for why qm needs to be fundamentally right or non deterministic is just a lack of imagination, and the same with the discourse around covariance and simultaneity, absolute simultaneity is fine, it isn't even in conflict with our current theories, it just isn't determined by current theories. But if you could teleporting to another galaxy and back, it seems absolutely absurd to suggest that the velocity upon departure or return has anything to do with when you arrive. The least absurd assumption is that if you do something lile that you will the earliest arrive after you left, and if you assume one definition of simultaneity and then calculate everything with respect to that definition you can indeed never time travel without teleporting to the past, and just considering subliminal physics, you cant break causality even if you are sloppy about simultaneity, but if you sticn to one coordinate system you dont ruin anything at all, and the right answer to what happens is always consistent with using a single definition for the regimes we have tested so it should be for regimes we have not tested either, that means that if you suddenly discover superluminal travel the assumption is that the consequence with respect to a single definition of simulteity should be the results you should look for bekng conserved as causal, and therefore you simply need a foliation to deal with superluminal travel, therefore any objective collapse or theory to explain entanglement classically must have a foliation, or absolute simultaneity. And that isn't in cinflic with experiment, the benefits of lorentz symmetry in particles physkcs is overblown, because the approximate physics that are lorentz symmetric are generic to models where space time lile structure emerges. It is not an issue at all to break lorentz symmetry, nothing breaks as long as you do it responsibly.

But it will be done

For photons they are just quantized waves, in the sense that their sources and sinks to to speak only being able to get existed or relaxed by increments of amplitudes that is absorbed from the entire wavefront, and fermions are different they are the sources and sinks and they have a physical structure that is alway localized, but they also have a dominant frequency associated with them as a sort of pilot wave, when you produce some electron beam for example you will have a coherent beam associated with it of these pilot waves as well as the particles themselves that can account for the interference effects, and an structure of coupling to the angular momentum homding degrees of freedom in the vacuum that can account for all spin entanglement, positon entanglement or momentum entanglement is trivial. All of it is pretty easy to explain in a classical world. The difficult part is to having to prove things about the structure of electrons from large numbers, it is actually harder in some sense to do than to explain the economy by studying atoms, exaggeration but its close, to for example give an example of a process that selects a spesific orientation for an uncertain spin measurement is extremely complicated.

But i don't thing there are ever any superpositions, i think the nature of superpositions are different, for example in the double slit, for leptons i just need some guiding wave, and for photons i just need a wave and everything is satisfactory, for entanglement i just need a more complicated wave and a vacuum where the angular momentum associated with the fields is realised by a condensate of superluminal matter. Then there really is no superpositions at all, but electrons and photons are not quite particles either, the nature of superpositions in that case is a bit different, but a spesific quantum state always corresponds to a preparation not a spesific state, there are infinite possibilities for the actual state of an identical quantum state, much like the fancy prepared state but up a notch. The origin of the interference for photons for example is quite simple, there really is a real physical wave but the wave collapses upon absorption, somewhat like a soap bubble, pop, but until its incriments of energy is actually absorbed it is just like a little bit of a strange classical wave, so it just goes through both slits and interferes and as long as the amplitude times the size of the front is not altered a lot the interference will persist evennfor weak light, this is because the numbers of "layers of soap bubble" are small so to speak and then doing anything to it to try to get some observable effect on either slit you will destroy the coherence of the wave, the superpositions just never existed in the first place, when this wave hits the right kind of atom or metal in some photo multiplier it will get absorbed even if its amplitude is small, sych that the classical interaction between and electromagnetic wave and an atom transferring that amount of energy would be absurd, but because the energy of the em wave is stored in the rotation of real degrees of freedom in the vacuum and so is the state of the atom and constitutents the entire energy spread across the wavefron can spontaneously be absorbed by an atom such that the entire wavefront that is not localized collapses very quickly, this only works with absolute simultaneity, and it only works this way for massless "bosons", for charged and massive particles it has some interial and charge that has to be locally conserved, but these particles can have a more pilot wave lile solution to their origin of interference phenomenon, and it isn't that hard to get done, especially when the rest of the fields are constructed like this with superluminal degrees of freedom made up of actual matter making up the angular momentum and energy of the fields.

And i have never heard any practical differences between many worlds and whatever else inside a single branch and therefore i see absolutely bo reasons for buying into it, it just seems like adding in infinite junk to explain why quantum mechanics isn't deterministic as a framework, by claiming the equation is self sufficient.

That has always been a problem for me in many worlds all kinds of local conservation laws demand that the branching might as well have happened already, and the branches are really just parallel worlds all along, but then the motivation falls apart, but then again i cant for the life of me see what the motivation was in the first place either, precisely because of concerns like this, it seems to me that if such a suggestion is more natural, that all the branching actually doesnt happen, that the best many worlds tyoe lf branching is having two identical worlds that don't have the same origin seoeratley identical up to some measurment, but then why have any branches at all, why not just say every instance lf an experiment as a determined outcome, but similar quantum states are distriduted in a certain way in the single branch. This view has just as much grounding, even without considering where the determination comes from. Many worlds seems to me just to be motivated by refusing to answer a question about where an outcome comes from, and instead saying there can be all outcomes. There is nothing bjt the difficulty of an alternative to motivate it, it is like saying i should lay on the couch all the because i don't want to go golfing, i don't think anything about golfing really has anything to say about whether i should lay on the couch.

I don't like the covariance argument because ultimately it is fine to consider foliation as well, ultimately the problems in quantum mechanics make a lot more sense if there is absolute simultaneity.

Charge *

Locally conserved change cant be a thing in many worlds, or the worlds would have to have been different before the branching.

Local conservation of charge, sure that is nice.

Genius

Mind bogglingly fascinating . I loved it .

Keep the game lit fam🔥🔥

Conservation of Spatial Curvature: Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. .--------------------

I swear this dude taught me this [subject] in 2007-2008 this is crazy, thanks for sharing and keep up teaching Yakir, Big Respect 👍👍

This seems like the temporal Born rule I've been looking for in the first few minutes. Let's see till the end! I'm stuck at probability current/quantum flux and hope this will give some clarity

Wow Doctor, you look awesome! You're very blessed, Sir!

Conservation of Spatial Curvature: Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3D sine wave into subatomic particles. .------------------------

Legend

Never heard of this guy before my lecturer mentioned he was on radio 4's life scientific. He was quite insistent on us listen. This guy is top class and I'm really proud to go to the same university he studied at. Thanks for posting this 👍🏼

Figuring out what Schrodinger equations is, everyone understands quantum mechanics: faculty.pku.edu.cn/leiyian/en/article/7733/content/2289.htm#article

Dr. Davies, give me at least one Bible verse that "exudes" or "smells" of quantum mechanics. I'm 75 years old and I'd like to receive your valuable response here in the southern hemisphere, where I live. I believe that the Bible fully fits the truths that are part of the universe.

Physicists can be divided into many groups, some reject Everett, some reject Bohm etc., yet others like Susskind, 't Hooft, Maldacena find Copenhagen rational, even though the small and the big are yet to be explained (Schrodinger's cat isn't a quantum but a classical object. Davies doesn't talk of Hilbert space of infinite dimension, but thinks entropy is infinite, yet he fails to discuss QC function which solves infinite complexity to produce the universe, life and consciousness.

I loved the overall insights on measurements v unitary … lovely Paul. I’m not certain that anyone should be very certain about inflation as we are still struggling with the low entropy problem and nothing in the best fit inflaton can be checked for the low entropy described. Wait to see if CCC 8’ low variance circular markings are more widely verified in CMB data. One 3-5 sigma verification invalidates inflation

Very interesting. Thank you.

59:34

I was very moved about the lecture. From a Korean student who is interested in superconductors

앙기모띠

Paul Davies the thief?!

(sorry for the spam!) but CMB and Blackholes are sci-fi and not real objects. There are all type of "stars" shining in the Universe from microwave, photon (our one), UV, infra red (proxima), X-Ray (the centers of Galaxies) and the MONSTERS Gama Stars which galaxies orbit; some of this can be officially verified through NASA; these dinosaurs are so out of touch

No spring needed for this one i think. But i think its funny to start arguing about how clocks work at the end of a meeting, 🤣

The force apolied by the wheel is along the tangent of the wheel, tooth 1 and tooth 2 habe the force applied to it in different configurations and with a spesific direction of rotation, the shape of the gear has to do with it being long enough to work but skewed enough for tooth 2 to fin in between the teeth when the pendulum is all the wsy to the left side, thisnis a drawing so we might as well say its stylistic but the idea is from the right side stoppers freedom of movement as the pendulum swings left i think. If the gear was square i don't think it would fit for en entire cycle.

Bill ksnt completely wrong, in a pendulum clock the pendulum is driven by the gear, in the following way, as ilustrated the pendulum is pushing the gear slightly, against its momentum slowing it down a bit, when it slips, it will ram into the gear tooth 2 it will reach its maximum height on the left and be pushed to the right from the moment of contact until the slip, the point is that the force from the left and the force from the right is not the same integrated over the distance, and the force is small compared to the inertia of the pendulum because of the small diameter of the windind. the shape of the gear teeth has to do with the angle at which it intersects the stoppers, its about sliding smoothly and not slipping too much mostly, the shape of the levers on top however... Those are the important shapes, they are at different angles, the force from the left lever is directed mostly into the axel at the top while the lever on the right has a force applied to it by the wheel that provides a lot more torque on the pendulum. Thats how it works. It is driven and stays close to a certain amplitude, true fax. Next time you see a fancy pendulum clock, look at the levers they are always assymetric with respect to the driving wheel even if they are symmetric with respect to the pendulum.

nature has no problems going from small (its QM) to large (its cosmology); so by scientific reason the problem has to be the limits of the limited Wave Mechanics which lazy academics refuse to stop and return to a proper component mechanics

Gravity is a conserving force, it doesn't do anything to entropy without dissipation either.