Video

This marks the Seiberg Witten solutions to Donaldson invariants

Anybody who thinks that Mickelson and Morley proved that Light Velocity is invariable should not be taken seriously.... and if they dedicated their career to String Theory then they should not even be mentioned.

3! = 6 there, I just proved my genius, no need for any silly projectors

This guy must have had a very unique childhood.

String theory is a mathematical conjecture not a physics theory.

Pure genus at work.

What an absolute genius.

Always wondered who that guy was using all-caps on the internets. Well, now we know.

Is it possible to have the handouts uploaded please ?

Too bad the sound is so low. Hard to hear.

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. .

Professor, could you give us access to your lecture notes, or make them available in some other way?

Anyone else here from Joe Rogan?

Great , thanks

Thankyou

Lecture 1and 2?

The negative sign is missing at the first term @2:07:35. For Hermitian conjugate, I need complex conjugation on the coordinate from @2:28:00. The correction will be given in the next lecture.

Awesome

Must mean something? In real Math-Physics theory perhaps.

Looks changed over the years... but the voice and tone did not haha.

his powerpoint skills are amazing!

We missed 30 min in the middle due to my laptop problem, during which I talk about the geometry of AdS_{d+1}

At the last part of the lecture from 2:31:00, my explanation does not make sense. (Sorry...) This part is explained at the beginning of the next lecture (czcams.com/video/mFvUAkRB14E/video.html)

Sorry, but I made lots of mistakes in this lecture. The corrections are listed as follows. To get supergravity approximation, we need to have g_s Q_i >>1 where g_s is not so big that we can ignore higher loop correction @1:31:00 The R-symmetry of N=(4,4) is SO(4) x SO(4) so what's written is wrong! @1:54:30 The factor of 4 comes from the T^4 direction (5678) where 1-5 open strings can move, so what I said is wrong @2:05:05 and @2:13:10 The Cardy formula can be applied for the regime Q_P >> Q_1 Q_5 @ 2:21:55

@25:30 D7-branes are dynamical indeed, D9-branes are not.

You know when some vídeo are important when It have few views from the monkeys of CZcams

From 44:00, the recording of the blackboard is frozen due to my computer problem, unfortunately.

The NS vacuum |0;k>_NS is fermionic due to the bc ghost, precisely speaking at 2:12:00. At 2:20:00 \Gamma^\pm_0 = (\psi^1 \pm \psi^0)/\sqrt{2}.

Precisely speaking, holomorphic cotangent bundle of the Teichmuller space at 47:44. Similarly, holomorphic tangent vector at 1:54:54. \delta j = e dj + de j + 2\kappa d^2 e at 1:10:40 (sign was wrong.).

Sorry, the window is smaller than usual today due to my stupidness.

Corrections: {Q_B,b_0} =L^X_0 + L^g_0 at 1:11:39. (without -2) L^g_0 = −1 + b_{−1}c_1 + c_{−1}b_1 + ... at 1:16:07

I told you a huge lie at 2:05:30. This is totally wrong. If Im f_{i+1} = Ker f_i , it is called an exact sequence. They have to be equal. Don't trust this unreliable lecturer.

I am very sorry, but I keep mentioning that symplectic geometry is initiated by Legendre in 1808... (for instance, 2:55 20:30 ) I meant Lagrange, not Legendre. Please do not be misguided by my wrong information... You could take a look at my lecture note drive.google.com/file/d/1JI1c3llcK8GEonJ40eYr2C3Jx58eHNMY/view for the correct reference.

Lecture 1 was not recorded. There were requests from students to record this lecture series, and students voluntarily record this lecture series. For lecture 1, you can refer to sections 1 and 2 of the course notes. drive.google.com/file/d/1SKcqzWTequydafxDShAR0wFx2OGCu86_/view

Sir , where is the lecture 1?

Thank you so much Dr Satoshi. Where can I find the lecture notes please ?

Thank you

Thank you

Thank you

At 1:30:50, the metric of the Poincare disk is not correct. The denominator should be squared (1-x^2-y^2)^2 instead of taking a square root. (Anyway, this is the answer to the student's private question.)

The situation during 20th century theoretical physics, that we are all facing but not many realize or agree to accept, is that "theoretical physics cannot been done with only maths although maths have to be invoved ". That's why i describe 20th century as a lost century concerning theoretical physics...a huge lost of time, personally i put the blame to the 3 world wars and the bureaucratic organisation of research globally. Unfortunately the same silly think is still on going...i will never lose not even one sec of my life studying string theory... but every now and then i watch some lectures just to get ungry...a very helpful emotion that boosts my research :-)

There was a problem in my laptop, but we missed only a few minutes. Mid-break during 35:10-55:00

What was the "elegant" lecture/paper by "Manim" (sp?) Witten alluded to around @41:50 and the paper presented by "Singer"(sp?) ... FOUND IT: it was Manin, Yu, "Quantum strings and algebraic curves" p.1286 of the Proceedings.

In which year this video has been recorded

Video in the stone age

The answer is wrong for the question around 7.05. Fermionic theories surely can have states of half-integer spins.

Greatest mind after Einstein

Role model ❤️

Comment "One of the most important talks in 21st century" was made by Andrey Losev

Sorry, but I miss the first 5 min due to the technical problem.