Roger Penrose on Twistor Theory | Eric Weinstein | The Portal Clips
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 05. 2020
- "It's like you have to say, "this I believe", and in general people won't say it. " - Eric Weinstein
In this Portal podcast clip, Eric Weinstein and Roger Penrose discuss Twistors and Twistor Theory.
Please give this clip a LIKE and SUBSCRIBE for more clips every Saturday.
--LINK TO THE MAIN EPISODE:
• Roger Penrose on "The ...
Clip Start: 01:04:57 (bit.ly/3bVNPNF)
Clip End: 01:22:40 (bit.ly/2XmlOcN)
--SEND US A CLIP SUGGESTION
forms.gle/RtGuJ1TkLWo2D1CU9
--CLIP SUGGESTION CREDITS:
afke.
--WEBSITE:
ericweinstein.org/
--TWITTER:
/ theportalclips
--INSTAGRAM:
/ theportalclips
We're trying to share important messages in bite-sized packets. If you enjoyed this clip, please share the video, it really does help a lot.
--SHARE THIS VIDEO:
• Roger Penrose on Twist...
--QUOTES FROM THIS VIDEO:
"In part I see you as part of a dying breed of people who are willing to go down with the ship for the privilege of commanding it as it's captain."
"I find that what's very disturbing to me is that the political economy of science means that fewer people are willing to make strong speculations, strong predictions, to explore things that don't give them the flexibility in case things that don't work out to say, well it could be like this, it could be like that."
#ericweinstein #twistortheory #rogerpenrose - Věda a technologie
It's going to be a horrible day when Roger dies. I knew he was old, I mean you just have to look at him, but I really never thought he was close to 90. Such a fantastic mind with such a connection to the human condition that he can describe such exotic concepts in a way that even an idiot such as myself can understand. He truly is precious
you dont need to write the eulogy...he ain't dead yet bruh🤣
Eric, your humanity is an infinite complex sphere. Thank you for it all.
So incredible to see Professor Penrose win the Nobel Prize.
One of the greatest minds.
Did the work earn it, or his name, though?
@@Scorch428 probably deserves more prize money tbh
THE CLEAR, BALANCED, AND UNDENIABLE PROOF OF THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA:
E=mc2 IS F=ma. With the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE AND the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE, a given PLANET (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) necessarily sweeps out EQUAL AREAS in equal times in accordance with perpetual motion AND the UNIVERSAL fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is then CLEARLY proven to be gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE. Importantly, BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.
Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. TIME CLEARLY necessitates and proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Great.
OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. Notice the black space of THE EYE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. Now, carefully consider what is the semi-spherical, translucent, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE SKY. Great. E=mc2 IS F=ma. It is CLEAR. The BALANCE of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential. What is THE EYE is ALSO the body ON BALANCE. Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great !!! The EARTH/ground CLEARLY constitutes what is the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE. Now consider what is the blue sky. The Earth is ALSO BLUE as water. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Now, VERY CAREFULLY consider what is BALANCED BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE. Great !!!!
Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution; AND the Moon is necessarily fixed or basically constant in it's form and shape.) "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) E=MC2 IS F=ma as what is the middle distance in/of SPACE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. So, gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Great. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Beautiful. Ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great.
THEREFORE:
E=MC2 AS F=MA CLEARLY PROVES (ON BALANCE) WHY AND HOW THE PROPER AND FULL UNDERSTANDING OF TIME (AND TIME DILATION) UNIVERSALLY ESTABLISHES THE FACT THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY:
A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Indeed, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Great. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. I have mathematically unified physics/physical experience, as I have CLEARLY proven that E=mc2 IS F=ma in what is a truly universal and BALANCED fashion.
By Frank DiMeglio
@@frankdimeglio8216 I cant stop reading this in peridots voice from steven universe
it fits so well
Sitting at 130 degree angle is prerequisite to learn this language.
Unless you've had a few too many and now sit at 129° and you wouldn't even know it.....or care😄
Right side dominance
That’s acute comment
@@1LStudios 😄
I canot haha this comment too bad :)))
Thank you Rodger Penrose is one of my heroes in mathematical physics and cosmology in general and thank you for interviewing him. I always enjoyed listening to him. For those that haven't, is books the emperor's new mind, The Road to Reality are excellent reads both for those that are interested in that sort of thing
Had to laugh at the transcription for Poincaré: Ponka Ray
Penrose is like the adult in the room (the room being physics) for studying an application of physics and math that correlates to the real universe, and real observations. While most theoretical physicists today would much rather explore applied fiction as a sort of art, because there are no wrong answers when it comes to writing fiction or creating art. So it's okay to dump all your hard problems, all your mathematical inconsistencies into a bucket called "many worlds". Even dark matter often serves as a catch-all sort of patchwork excuse to paper over the incomplete descriptions of behaviors in quantum and cosmological phenomena as they are tested or observed... And in the case of string theory, it's easier to complete a mathematical formalism if it doesn't have to be constrained by the real quantities of observation. The whole point of finger painting is that there are no wrong answers, there are no techniques, no rules of color theory that you must adhere to no matter what. And in my opinion, just because a finger painting turns out to be very beautiful, with great symmetry and proportions and so on, doesn't imply that it's a more accurate description of reality than a finger painting that is less symmetrical or beautiful. I think some physicists like Sean Carroll and others also sometimes fall for the temptation of another excuse -which is that quantum phenomena are fundamentally just strange, so they don't have to make sense" ... The obvious problem with that of course is that something can be strange AND make sense, it can be strange AND be consistent with observation. It's just a lot harder to solve real world problems than fictional ones... And because of things like this, theoretical physics is becoming more like an extension of the humanities, where it's more important to follow your feelings, where you are rewarded more for the creativity in your artistic expression than you are for solving currently unknown aspects of real physics.
thank you Eric and Roger!! Grateful for your minds offerings to this world
"Once again, the language is designed to be hostile to the newbie." Yeah. That.
Well, actually it's designed to make sense and be intuitive to non newbies (regardless from what newbies think)
@@rv706 You mean like cult rhetoric devised by an idiosyncratic yet charismatic leader with their own private army of established inductees?
@@davidbeddoe6670: No, I was talking about mathematical language.
Should we lower the learning curve
It's really not. It's more intuitive to think of the complex numbers as a two-dimensional plane because that's the simplest way to put the information into a familiar graphical depiction. It's only in really high-level applications of mathematics that there is ever the rare situation where calling that space a line is a useful mental axiom.
This is brilliant...thank you very much.
Ikr, all those people complaining have to get over themselves
Man, I wish I wasn't dumb.
You are not dumb if - like me - you suspect that this garbage video is fake intellectualism, and the speakers actually dishonest.
Bob Loosemore...correct, it's Sophistry.
Agreed. This is what happens when mathemeticians get too high. “Like woh man, what if the universe is a complex sphere projection.... duuuude”
spend a couple years learning it, intellegence is a muscle.
Greg James tell that a dog ;)
A fascinating conversation. Thank you, Eric.
F...ing great.
@@naimulhaq9626 🤣
I wish they actually had talked about twister theory. I was looking forward to that, but Weinstein's constant sidetracks and interruptions made sure that was all fckd up.
Karl P ...."twister theory"?....was that the one invented by chubby checker?
@@remlatzargonix1329 Yeah, invented last Summer. Or was it last year?
Im pretty sure they did speak about it. Maybe its just in terms you aren't able to follow with. (I can't exactly either)
they are, that's what you do when you're trying to understand someone's ideas, you interrupt and ask clarifying questions
Here's a different video: What is Twistor Theory? | Roger Penrose, czcams.com/video/j16eVLDt2HI/video.html
That chair looks so uncomfortable to sit in.
This was really dense, had to rewatch. Will rewatch definitely.
They lost me on complex transformations, haven't gone through that
Great 👍
The take away seems to be that since we are observing from a mobile planet, in a mobile solar system, in a mobile galaxy there seems to be a need to account for lorrentz contractions of what we observe. The spherical objects remain spheres but anything else will be distorted beyond recognition at distance.
"it's a triple coincidence" ... "all the best are" ... fucking hilarious - thanks Eric - keen wit !
Eric Weinstein’s comments at Minute 4:40; 7:40 and Minutes 9:54-10:00 hit the NAIL ON THE HEAD!! (I think Dirac’s instincts set physics theory back A LOT - even though he had very intriguing math, that enhanced spin options! - I think it was often just an entrance often into a ‘rabbit-hole’) … Eric states, in my opinion, THE OBVIOUSNESS at minute 15:27-15:30 as Penrose then advocates ‘rabbit-holes’ as realistic and reasonable options (since we have nothing better!) …and Eric is spot-on at minute 17!!..Every grad should watch these segments of this video, and then watch Edward Teller’s short video about attending an Einstein lecture - where Teller comes to the same conclusion - as has Eric 20years later! Basically, we are in a misguided ‘we’re stumped’ direction in theoretical physics
I believe !
At 15:30 or thereabouts Penrose talks about Twistor vs String Theory which is what I came to this video hoping to hear about.
Roger seems like such a legend
They both are
I so wish I knew what these guys were talking about 😂. Seems so brilliant
Same
It is very beautiful indeed. Learn maths with 3Blue1Brown just for fun. You will thank me.
What's supposed to be the easiest part to understand? And the most complex? It's difficult to follow because I don't know where to start.
This probably won't make any sense if you don't have an undergrad in physics/math at least tbh.
Is it probably because these new or foreign shapes come out from a place unfamiliar to the current understanding or perspective of the space/area
Surely the light cone should be getting narrower as it goes back in time? ...
For an event in the past to affect you right now, the further back in time something happens, the further distance in space that event can be from you. It has had more time to reach you. So the cone is wider. Just as if you go forward in time, the further way things you can affect become. The cone has zero size now, and grows in space either direction away from you in time.
A twister is different from a vortices?
What in the actual Ef is going on. Going to have to watch this more. lol
Penrose theory of mind is where I'm leaning as a Christian who see the pressure for us to marry ourselves to something before computational tech comes along and does for us if we like it or not ,if it's right or not.
The entanglement leaves room for transfer of data behind the veil in a more eternal dimension
How can participate and meet this beautiful community?
The Portal. I don't have a mathematical cell in my brain, and at 75 I am unlikely to grow one, but here I am! 💜
Person of interest never give up on knowledge and information it’s always amazing
@@personofinterest8731 Still tryin, mad respec
This is the best interview of Penrose I've ever seen by some way..
3 months ago? 🌪🌪🌪 aha! thats where that idea lives. good stuff.
1936 10/8 ... was that you 😏 this is nuts... the good type
Been speaking English my whole life and watching makes me realize how little I know.
Justin Moore maybe because their trying to explain the nature of the universe? Do you think that might be why it’s a bit hard to explain. Shut it with all this chat it might be fluff talk for your pea sized brain but no one gives a shit
@Justin Moore Elon Musk is a very poor speaker.
@Justin Moore The subjects Musk talks about are inherently interesting. Tesla, Space X and his various companies produce incredible feats of engineering. However, Elon Musk is a relatively poor speaker (certainly compared with these two). You impugned the work of Roger Penrose because he is extremely fluent when speaking in highly technical jargon, which is ridiculous.
To accuse Roger Penrose of "lacking intellect" is the most stupid thing I have read in a very long time.
@Justin Moore I appreciate eloquence and precise language. I appreciate people who can articulate their ideas, especially when those ideas are complex. When somebody has a large vocabulary and is fluent in their speech a lot gets said and with more detail and nuance. You cited Elon Musk as a contrast to these two and he is not a good example of a good speaker. And as for "efficiency", Musk's speech has so many pauses and hesitations that it takes him a minute to say something which others can say in 10 seconds.
And if you think that Roger Penrose is an obfuscatory charlatan then you clearly know little of the man or indeed the history of 20th century physics.
Look at the gyre diagram Yeats used, or a triskelion. Then skin up.
Such brilliant Sophistry...
Be interesting if there was a cosmic erosion or an erosion of space-time which can cause these coincidences although tough to prove that concept. Could be shooting photons at an object. Then have that object move at fixed rates. Then again the definition of move may be hard to perceive. Or even the use of aerosols as well. Tough concept to probably experiment on.
Did he even finish just ONE sentence.
Asks 1 question
Penrose: well damn youve put me in a position
complex numbers but what about prime number combinations in an exponential generator they produce combinations that may appear in the real plane as goop but in the complex plane as the universe staring back at you
Oh Eric, what I would give to have met you when I was young.
How is this man sat at a 130° angle? 😂
Seriously can't get over it... It looks so unnatural
Is he short? Could be that the chair is too big for him to have his feet on the ground and also sit up straight.
Dinglebarriez I’m glad I’m not the only one lmao
CWtheBEASTT I don’t even know but it just looks so odd haha
He definitely looks turtley enough for the turtle squad
Dropping f-bombs all over Sir Roger Penrose is rather like taking a dump on stage during Pachelbel's Canon in d.
people do that at weddings
Yea I hold Roger Penrose in such esteem that it makes me cringe. He’s so proper and brilliant I would try to project my best self.
Oh please, he said it once and tentatively at that (does he say it more in the full episode?)
@@parkerstroh6586 No, he didn't. It was just doubled as the end of the talk where EW said it was copied to the beginning.
I'd pay to see either.
Who has in the interview delivered more, Eric or Roger?
Check out 3Blue1Brown's quaternion explaination with stereographic projection. Instead of quatiernions, Penrose here decribes 4D space as being the same as C^2. C^2 is the cartesian product of two complex planes C x C. There is a popular diagram of C^2 where it is generalized in two dimensions. Every line in this diagram is actually a plane embedded in 4D space. If you take all of the "slopes" in this diagram of where they look like lines, this is just an infinite set of planes that all intersect at only the origin in 4D space. These planes intersect the unit sphere in 4D space along the sphere's hopf fibers. These fibers can then be projected stereographically to the entirety of 3D spcae.
The auto generated subtitles are much better than the manual English (US) ones, whoever did them was half asleep i think.
Did space-time come out if the big bang or did just matter come out of it? It would make more sense if matter came out
If your calling the numbers out then the caller names them.
Time and space is only relevant to matter, so whenever matters was introduced than so was time.
Essentially time is just a measurement of movement of matter.
For Humans, Existence seems to be that can be 'visually' represented by 3 orthogonal vectors + 1 inertial vector is a cognitive bias that merges by the belief that Existence is dependent on the observation from a single local observer ...
If you add X > 3 nonlocal observers, it ends up that the 3 + 1 way of modeling doesn't feet the system 'properties' ... it (3 +1) can apply for every single non-local observer in some particular phases from its phases states but not for all the entities merging in that system ...
By trying to describe How Existence works for a single self ... The apes seem to ignore How existence works for all the selves ...
unless all the selves are the same one running at different locations of a higher dimensional surface
@@NoahHornberger That's - psychologically - out of the processing potential for a single human brain or nervous system ... but mathematically a consistent structure ... that can be - partially - tested through machine learning techniques ...
But One of the issues could be how to design a unique attractor in software space for 'the senses' (data collectors/processors/compilers) and 'functions' (NN algorithms) of the WWW machine networks nodes ... and set an architecture capable of mirroring ( modeling ) itself and its dynamics in software space ... and the recursions between the real-time processing of the global network and its 'inner' model' ...
I suspect that there is not enough technological infrastructure and collective organization for such kind of mega-experiment ...
But maybe somebody finds a more simple and less expensive design or emulation through virtual machines in a sandbox environment ...
Does this give legitimacy to Vortex math or the Rodin coil?
The other way around.
@@nighthawkviper6791 OK, but why? Is his math off? Because there has to be an equation for Vortex's forming.
@@AmericanJobsFactory Fibonacci Sequence and The Golden Ratio. Vortexes form at the centerpedal convergence of dielectric permitivity and electromagnetic permeability creating the hyperboloid hourglass shape of which ascending/descending vortexes flex form to the inertial plane.
@@AmericanJobsFactory No, his equations and models are spot on. "Vortex Math" has been around since before twistor theory LOL And seeing the time it was published; I would guess he copy-and-pasted Ken Wheeler's Field Theory and has a good understanding of the Fields that make up the universe. Tesla, Walter Russell, Charles Proteus-Steinmetz, Moray, Pointing, Faraday, JC Maxwell, and Westinghouse all published and thoroughly understood vortex math and the Fields that control it.
@@AmericanJobsFactory You can start with Magnetohydrodynamics if you'd like to learn something real.
I felt so bad confusing spinnor SU-19a with the Lorentz transformation of spin half non zero with the multiple spin states and the reverse integer of the flux capacitor. What a noob I am!
lol
Penrose is the man!
The ferrocell might be proving the "twister".
I'm still waiting for quantum physicist to pick it up and try to explain it.
Kevin König Ken Wheeler, his channel is theoria apophasis, I think explains what you’re looking for. Check it out 👍
@@stcroixatlast
Haha yes you are right but Ken is hardly a quantum physicist.
Call him that and i fear he will punch you in the nose XD.
I'm half through his book. Nice theory. Would be cool if it's accurate. Certainly seems to make sense to an idiot like myself.
I understood no shit yet enjoyed very much.
1:06 - "Well we had this twist of newsletter...." ---- Is this a pun?
Twistor newsletter
There should be some sort of term unification among the different disciplines
The fourth dimension needs to be a spacial dimension
Lovely stuff Eric. Roger is something else eh?
A god among apes.
What hes saying a shere "that reflects all light in all ways" and an empty dark space between and inside a partical that space and time want to get to
What is hilarious is string theory always comes up and that these higher dimensions are unrealistic, but Eric works in 14 dimensions, and penrose in 6. Ironic.
A phantom ship cannot sink.
Magnetism is opposing vortexes... Everything is it's opposite at the exact same time!
IF YOU LIKE IT THEN YOU SHOULDA PUT IT ON A RING
White/chalk board please
Please no
Huh?
You shouldn’t ever say fuck in front of Roger Penrose. I don’t know why, it’s just the rule.
Ken L. wheeler. He has a free book on magnetism you can get at archive.com 4 FREE he has a grand unified theory that most people can comprehend. I highly recommend it. These paths of thought will lead you there eventually.
Eric interviewing Stan Tenen would be amazing
Where can i learn about this 'Twister theory of Moires?'
Twister?! I hardly know her!
You bitter?
Yea, bit him too
Hatecha
Put your hand on red
Ken wheeler field theory.
hahaha
@@bogdy72000 I'm more of a c.p. steinmetz "fan"; ken wheeler is the only person creating literature that's not in the religion of relativity. Steinmetz was so fantastically brilliant.
@@odnewdylee oh really ?! ken is a liar and a thief
ropehypothesis.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/The-Rope-Hypothesis.pdf
Lmao dat photographer
These English transcriptions running along the bottom are outrageously poor quality. With such high level discourse, surely we are entitled to an accurate transcription. I understand that this is for the benefit of deaf people - but this totally deprives them of the ability to make any sense of an already difficult subject.
U r entitled to nothing....
Erick, have you read Ken Wheeler on magnetism?
So, TOOL was right?
How do twister theorists explain the "illusion" of flowing time? I can see how these ideas make sense mathematically in a Lorentz-invariant world, but WTF?
String theory doesn't seem to be a contender for a quantum gravity theory because a quantum gravity theory has to answer the question: what is spacetime made of? Twistor theory is the closest to answering "what is spacetime made of". But it falls short because "twisters" cannot be experimentally detected or isolated. It is the same situation with Loop Quantum Gravity. Those loops cannot be isolated either. But it is worse than that. Neither of those theories are compatible with big bang expansion. You would expect that, whatever spacetime is made of, that such "atoms of spacetime" require an "expansion" parameter because the big bang "expanded" from a point.
Someone needs to come up with a quantum gravity theory that answers the question: what is spacetime made of/what are the atoms of spacetime. I would suggest calling it, the Expanding Graviton. The Expanding Graviton has three primary characteristics. 1) Expanding Gravitons are the carriers of the physics constants. 2) Expanding Gravitons are equivalent to wave functions; thus wave functions and their operators are real things; and now they are a manifestation of gravitons. 3) Expanding gravitons expand spherically, at the speed of light, with radius r = ct. Where in physics have we seen something that looks like an expanding sphere? Two places. First, the derivation of time dilation. Second, two slit interference pattern.
A proper quantum gravity theory should have an experiment associated with it. I would suggest that quantum entanglements between photons, are (Captured) Gravitons; it's not really an Expanding Graviton if it is captured between two photons whose positions can be controlled with optical fiber, lenses, mirrors, etc. I would also comment that it takes a tiny amount of energy to capture a graviton; if you add up all of the gravitons in the universe, then that number of gravitons multiplied by the capture energy of a graviton should equal DARK ENERGY. More importantly, if a quantum entanglement IS a graviton, then we can do experiments on it.
Someone needs to create a quantum gravity theory that looks like the outline above.
So, twistors are a mathematical transform which work for both relativity AND quantum mechanics?...Without having to resort to extra dimensions? Sounds more elegant than string theory if true...
I like hows hes keeping up but yes.. Hes 1000000 no.. 1% right
Toroidal flux?
It's flux on top of the flux inside the flux for flux sake
Looks very ELECTRIC
An interesting way to view the UNIVERSE.
@@johnquinn7794 John, have you investigated the electric universe theory?
Fyi, Thunderboltproject.com
Thomas Jelf Jr Yes. I looked into it about 2 years ago and was amazed at how everything makes sense. It really seems to be a complete and unified explanation because it’s scaleable and can be physically tested in reality.
1+1 =
Sean Caroll: 2
Roger Penrose: Let's see if I can put it to you simply.
Sean Caroll: if you examine the wave function and believe my voodoo woo woo we've come to understand that we may live in a universe where the answer indeed is 2,1 via borrowing 0,1 from a parallel universe, buy my new book and listen to me talk about absolutely nothing.
Roger Penrose: in which group are we adding?
I have the solution to your twister theory Mr Penrose I can roll back wavelength to the particle radius
Forgot to actually define a twister.
scared of liking the vid and ruining the number of likes
Complex numbers are no more esoteric than planes. Roger should have a look at Geometric Algebra and Geometric Calculus. QM needs complex numbers only because it needs to describe the plane of spin (Zitterbewegung), in all equations: Schrödinger, Pauli and Dirac. Roger should have a look at the real spinor formulation of Geometric Algebra. Cheers!
And if you were a surgeon you'd tell everyone that they needed surgery.
@@johnbarnesNnaptown Well, twistors fascinated many scientists. Complex numbers and quaternions fascinated even more scientist. When you do not fully understand something, you can be fascinated by it. But if you know what complex numbers, quaternions and twistors are, something a kid in secondary school could fully understand with Geometric Algebra, the fascination disappears.
@@AndreaCalaon73 Yeah, and they could prescribe chemo or radiation therapy but once explained a kid in secondary school would agree that surgery is the way to go.
@@AndreaCalaon73 You understand that you ask a prominent scientist that spent likely all his life in that to look into basis of some subjects? How ignorant can you be.
@@odyseuszkoskiniotis6266 Dear Odysseus (what an important name!). If you abstene from insults, we can interact. Let me ask you: Do you know these subjects? I DO. So, are you in a position to comment? Do you know what Geometric Calculus is? Most people do not.
Well, Roger is almost 90. So to grasp how smart this guy is, 99% of what he's saying is above everyone's head here...and this is him in the cognitive decline years. Jesus.
I think the dicussion goes off the rails when Roger basically says the structure of the world is more complex than what we observe as a 3D world (and what we need to understand is how why can only see a 3D projection of reality). Why does Eric get in between this and become Papal about it? After this it regressed into a string theory bashing session.
So there exactly the same in other words what your looking at and the other astronaut is looking at are the same. What am I missing? So 720 degree's
Right Hand Rule
Lol
The idea that we look out at the world, at stars far away is all completely wrong. The light from stars or light that is reflected off matter enters my eye and heads to my brain. Everything I see that I think is outside of me is really just being constructed in my brain.
Wow, how dumb do you have to be to neglect reality. Am I writing this comment from Warsaw - city you probably didn't even fucking know about, because you brain programmed that? See ya 🤣
Eric, PLEASE buy your own space, set up a team of professionals, and get this thing the recognition it deserves. Dark lighting, please. The conversations you're facilitating, here, have already earned a more artistic container.
Watched this and was completely lost, spent days watching hours of videos just to come back and be merely able to follow along at a low level.
Nice 🙂
I wish somebody to explore the triality. Something what Tesla would like very much. 3, 6, 9 Triality comes in 9th dimention, they stopped at 26 because 27th is where 9breed triality would come and scare the shit out of them or pushed them back to the root 9th ;-) They are scared of it. Science is naturally focused on traditional decimal & binary systems. They didn't explore the trinary system - they have hard time thinking in terms of this system - its seems unnatural to them. Even logic didn't explore well the trinary because more natural for humans is true false without the third option state - they only accept true and not true - the third option seems confusing.
They are exploring nonperfect duality with pentagons but crystal structures show that it isn't producing all possibilities forms from itself. But Penrose knows well the crystal structures and maybe will come up with the analogy in future.
Its exciting to see such great people still.
I would like it even more if the Weinstein wasn't a fighting communist (what scares the shit out of me). The most dangerous ppl are the smartest people applying their understanding from one field into another without any caution... my own stupidity is the other thing that scares the shit out of me - what is a true lifesaver in the grand scheme of things.
And the ganashdihagen is held up by the ramistan.
A twister is simply 1 half of a magnetic field. Look up ken wheeler.
Jeez!! I wish Weinstein would let Penrose talk for 60 seconds without interrupting him. FFS!!
🤦♂️
Roger Penrose may be smarter than Einstein. LOL
You might not think that if einstein had appeared on podcasts, lol.
Zachary Christy ....but then again, he might!
Einstein changed everything. These dudes are on a podcast.
Reality is a very personal thing it seems. I've always suspected that I am the center of the universe and it turns out this is so. ;)
I don't want to disappoint you. But l have to tell you, 'I am the centre of universe'.
Noice
You are all clearly wrong, because I'm pretty sure I am the center of the universe
Telling Penrose to shut up and sell out means that I will never watch again.
Listen carefully. He got a Nobel prize today. And no prize for guessing which one among the two got it.
Cryptography.