Edward Witten - What are Breakthroughs in Science?
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- What is the nature of scientific breakthroughs? What are common characteristics among all the sciences? What are specific signs of breakthroughs in physics and biology? Breakthroughs as new ways of thinking, new systems of thought, new perspectives for seeing the world. What distinguishes breakthroughs from normal good science? What drives breakthroughs? How is science driven by breakthroughs?
Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Support the show with Closer To Truth merchandise: bit.ly/3P2ogje
Watch more interviews on breakthroughs in science: bit.ly/42mpZGe
Edward Witten is an American theoretical physicist and the Charles Simonyi Professor in the School of Natural Sciences at the Institute for Advanced Study.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/3He94Ns
Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
I'm here because Eric Weinstein said: "I am terrified of this man!”
Same here
Same here!
Plus 3
Eric Weinstein is a show man. 😂😂😂
So did I 😂
This man could easily be a Sherlock Holmes villain. The way he speaks, moves his hands....an eerie calmness
or Villain in one of Hercule Poirot
The fact that this man got a bachelor's in history (minor in linguistics) and went on to become one of the greatest physicists in human history is absolutely wild to me.
Not to mention, he is the only physicist ever winning the most prestigious prize in mathematics, the Field medal
easy...assume he never got a bachelor's in history (with a minor in linguistrics)
His father is a physicist, so he inherits his father's mind. Let's go!
Wow nice to know where me and my history degree with a minor in linguistics are headed career wise
If he did that there would be no Karl Marx or Noam.Chomsky. Now there is no Einstein, Dirac and Feynman
I love how this man talks. No filler sounds (like 'ummm' and 'ahhh'), no repeating of words a few times during a sentence.
Just clear continuous talking.
He is a good teacher 👍
6:47 um
Oh yes, isn't it just a sheer delight to listen to him speak!!!!
He is so precise... I would love to read his work...
You are too generous here. He is very well spoken but not above a pause or “filler sound”.
I saw him walking through the halls of my campus one day. Dude is so imposing even without speaking. What a legend.
I saw him parking his SUV in front of a waffle house.
@@adjusted-bunny what a legend
He's a jackass that insists on pursuing theories that don't work and are not valid.
I'm here because I want to see what scares Erik Wainstein.😊
Why would you be imposed by him ? Get a grip. geez...
"To the best of our present understanding." This is the most important part of the entire conversation.
Humility drives scientific discovery exponentially faster than arrogance. -me
There irony here was intentional, right? 😂
@@Old_Man_Bridge irony isn't exactly the right word, but yes
When he is saying we understood all 5 string theories are different aspects of the same theory, he means HE understood and then shared with the world
what a treat to listen to (arguably) the smartest guy on this planet! 👏
Knowledge without application is trivia.
lol. i know exactly what you are. jew
@@septopus3516 Right... until the application is discovered, then the person who wasted time on trivia has somehow suddenly just given you knowledge.
Yeah, just ask him.
String theory is a wack job evidence-less theory
A universal truth was spoken at 12:20 - the one about critics of a theory not working hard on a competing theory or suggesting one.
That said, the subject of the interview understands the importance of peer review.
I watched this video without understanding anything being said. I knew this after only a couple minutes, and continued to watch regardless, as well as knowing that I wouldn't understand the rest.
Same homie
@@Bilbus7 it would behoove u to pick up a primer on physics or just one part of it, like what i did at age seventeen, i spent many evening hours in summer on the old basic little book about Theory of Relativity. The basic mental mechanisms needed to grasp that book are really good for the mind etc. Physics, ie the raw basics that are not too hard to get, really should be pushed more in highschool, ie kids should be urged to try to take the class. It's a lot easier than most ppl think, ie that intro type course (no advanced maths at all, virtually no maths at all) But this vid, yeah u need to know the basics of the development of physics history, real easy to learn that by just looking up online! Otherwise u r kinda wasting your time watching vid like this probably, though ican't imagine, bcuz i was steeped in this stuff a bit over the long haul, and i'm over fifty now, so in my gen in america, u were suposed to be scientifically literate, at least basic level.
What an amazing human. I absolutely love his almost religious notion of "our present understanding" knowing well that science is an iterative process that takes a long time to deliver the goods, so to speak.
That's completely the opposite of a religious statement 😮.
Religions have already figured out the answer 😅 u
Lol yep
@@pdcdesign9632i think the original poster meant that they perceive his notion of "not knowing" as a sacred part of reality.
Well done 🎉
You mean the same
Guy who when asked about other theories on the topic said they are merely “other words” not theories. He is against science being iterative by pushing them off as not worth entertaining.
I'm glad we've got Dr. Kuhn to ask the questions.
He could be the guest instead of the interviewer.. hes so well versed
@@Jonnygurudesigns you kinda have to be to engage in dialogue on topics such as the ones Edward Witten is known for
You don't have any idea what they are talking about 😂
@@pio7763same here. I didn’t even understand half of the questions 😂😂😂
Absolutely 💯
This guy and his father practically put a halt to the progress of physics. If you're in the know, you get it.
He is truly mesmerising, his voice is so soothing. I could listen to this beautiful man all day.
Please more of Prof. Witten on the channel; he’s greatly elaborate, very precise, and uncanny at foreseeing what questions might be forming in one’s head 👍🏻👌🏻🙏🏻
I didn't think somebody that smart could dumb down his thoughts simple enough for us normal people to grasp - well done! :)
I actually think that IS a sign of intelligence, Einstein said if you don’t understand something simply you don’t understand it
I understand it the other way.
You have to be so smart and understand it thoroughly, otherwise you couldn't dumb it down for "normal" people to understand.
Like...and this is in no way comparable intelligence wise, but only if you understand IT thoroughly you can make it understandable for Average Joe.
As always, if you are not well versed in a topic, how on Earth will you be able to communicate it to people that hear that topic for the first time?
That's where the problem lies, if you can't get the concept across, what good are you as a teacher, no matter how smart you are.
@@rossmeldrum3346 Yes, your problem.
You just have to accept that there are people on the planet who are so smart, that you cannot be taught, because compared to them, you're the village idiot metaphorically spoken.
So, yes there is a problem, but no, it is not the teachers fault his students are normal people other than him.
@@Arpsie1Absolutely Correct. Not on the level of this subject, but when I was teaching Design for Six Sigma to my "students" in Biotech, most of whom were PhDs, as I became more experienced, I could convey the same key principles with fewer words and simpler sentences. It made me more *effective* as a teacher.
I could listen to Dr. Witten talk ad nauseum. Fascinating mind and how he can convey incredibly complex topics in terms relatively understandable to others. More Dr. Witten please :)
I second that!
3rd 👍
He also speaks very fast
@ NAvigator Iturned the Speed down to 0,75 & it s quiet okay
All meat, no salad!
5:09 I love that "Oh. Ok."
OMG, Dr. Witten is so clear, concise and comprehensive! He gave us a 1000 foot view of the landscape of String/M Theory in 12 minutes! And he completely destroyed his critics in the process. It might take a hundred years for everyone to appreciate what an incredible body of work he’s developed.
You mean “what an incredible body of work he is.” 😅
He did not “destroy” his critics, he simply explained himself, and M theory is his team’s creation so he should be able to explain it. No doubt the guy is incredibly intelligent but not worthy to be idolized.
Its a joke, he spends a lot of time talking about something that cannot be proven or understood. Its just words. String theory is a failure.
Glad he is sharing. Otherwise this would be a setback
what a strange understanding of science your comment suggests. String theory is untestable , unobservable framework in which at every hurdle the maths was adjusted to make the theory fit , furthermore the addition of multiple dimensions to further overcome any hurdles is equally fallible .
Listening to Prof. Witten is an adventure in common sense thinking. I could listen to him all day. Thanks for posting.
His sense is not common. And neither are adventures, or else they wouldn't be fun.
Another 🤡 pretending he's understanding him
Math is pure common sense. By definition.
This guy is hypnotizing to listen to. So clairvoyant.
Monotone 🤦🏼♂️
I wish he was my teacher. Brilliant mind with gentle soul.
This guy is brilliant and modest. He credited others many times but avoids taking credit for his own contributions, but uses the royal “we” as much as possible, unless precipitated by the interviewer.
And he is right to do so, many of his contributions relied upon the work of others or collaboration with others.
Nevertheless, it took a brilliant mind to bring those ideas together and build upon it.
I love listening to this man talk!!!
6:15 "One theory, many solutions.. The universe is described by one solution to this theory. Roughly speaking there are some equations and you solve them...A solution is an approximation to a quantum state which really describes the universe." This is was the most important statement in the interview, IMHO, because too often theoretical physicists don't talk enough about theories and their relationship to other moving parts of the physics endeavor, like solutions and experiments.
No way I could ever have a conversation with this guy.
Me too. Following this to some extent. Realizing I’ll need to repeat many times. Amazing.
I am bamboozled but entertained, educated and in awe at the same time.
This man is the reason why I am not worried about the world domination of super intelligent AI. He's at least GPT-11 level
*GPT-12 releases later that year*
Damn
I'd be curious to know what he thinks about that
@@jtx5014 ... I don't think solving these physics problems is a brute force calculation problem ...
Imagine being in 1890 with a 2023 super computer ... Would you be able to come up with Einstein theories?
There is a creativity and imagination component in there ... I don't know how computers would achieve that; It would make the computation to be very very complex trying out models that are improbable, et c.
@@jtx5014 Listen to Eric Weinstein talk about it. String theory/quantum gravity does not work and is a failure. In fact Weinstein believes this guy put many many people's careers through a shredder. Witten is basically the monster in the room, literally.
how do you know hes not an AI
Edward is less of human and more of a mathematical expression himself ...the iron man of maths.
The Man in the Iron Math.
Math iron the man of@@DrizzySinceTime
Wonderful, thank you!
This man is a noble soul. His clarity of speech and his analogies are mesmerising. Please bring him on again fora 3 hour discussion on string theory and its possibilities
Possibilities≠reality.
I met a guy very similar to Witten at a social event. It was just an informal gathering of strangers around the same age there to find/make new friends. He was sitting off to the side wanting to join in but he was intimidated. I introduced myself and 'attempted' to start a conversation - talk about difficult. Everything was math, his work, his teachings, the advanced math/calc/physics books he's had published for college students etc. I wanted to help make him feel comfortable so I asked if he could teach me some baby algebra. (I hate math) he looked up, with one of his of books in hand and said, "I'm not sure I can". Turns out he was right. He lost me at the letter x.
There was an interesting article asking Air Force fighter pilots if they could fly a Cessna 172. Three said no and one said he could probably do it but not safely. It's crazy how the math professor and pilots were so advanced they couldn't do the fundamental basics of their profession.
* of course they could fly the small plane once they were familiar with it. And obviously my arithmetic instructor could figure a way to stoop down, way down to my pea brain level and convey those horrific rudimentary algebraic formulas.
Interesting and worthwhile video.
Thank you
This viewer might not understand any of this but is just content and grateful to witness genius articulated so masterfully
His first degree was in history and linguistics, and he wanted to be a journalist and politician. Perhaps why he's so good at framing a narrative and bringing people to his way of thinking.
Can you imagine him asking Joe Biden a question from press row?......c'mon man!
This man is very intelligent.
We really need to get Witten and Weistein together to talk, debate, prognosticate, whatever. Please
That would be like putting prime years Mike Tyson in the ring with a high school boxer. Weinstein is so far away from Ed Witten's level that they don't really even belong in the same room. Witten is a humble, soft spoke super genius who has single-handedly revolutionized our current understanding of physics and Weinstein is basically a completely mediocre physicist who's mostly now just a loud mouth self promoter. I doubt Witten would even consider him worth bothering with.
one of the few (if not only) Theoretical Physicists that is equally adept in mathematics. That is powerful given he not only has imagination as a physicist but the tools via math to explore his own theories
I love how matter of fact and unassuming this man is. For him, it really is all about understanding how nature works, there is no inkling of self-praise or even the notion that he deserves credit. When he says in 3:25 that “we” understood the 5 theories to each be special cases of an underlying theory, well, there is very little “we”, and a lot of “I” in this statement… . M-theory is one of Ed’s great contributions to string theory, and yet he makes no reference to himself. I love listening to this man, even though I never understand more than the first few words of what he is saying… 😂
Watching it after Eric Weinstien video with Joe Rogan. Eric says "Edward Witten is the Michael Jordan of Theoretical Physics if only Michael Jordan could play better basketball".
Weinstein is smart enough to say interesting things, but not smart enough to make actual contributions to physics. But he is sufficiently narcissistic to play games with dummies so that he can have his name mentioned at the same time as people like Witten, when he otherwise wouldn't be discused.
A well spoken man that masks the fact that partical physics hasn't come up with anything meaningful since 50 years. "Models and theories" that can't be experimentally falsified.
Spot on.
Wow Einstein, he says it even himself that the theory is not well established and if it hasn't already existed, he wouldn't look for something like it in his own.
Uninformed people like yourself should think more and speak less.
Really ? I think you haven't been paying attention. How about QCD, Superstrings, Quarks, Flux conduits , dark energy, dark matter, ....... The list goes on and on. Do some reading !
Witten uses String Theory to address one fundamental question about Particle Physics, which is (on my very humble opinion): what is /are the real shape / shapes of what we call 'Particles'? Considering them as dimensionless points (as the Standard Model does) makes Math stumble, and this is a fact. So, even if I'm not a big fan of Complex Geometries, I recognise that answering this question looks like a pivotal point in our understanding of the Universe. Is this feasible? Is it beyond our reach? Is Math the best (the only...) way to explore this aspect of reality? A great week to everybody 😊.
Interesting way of “defining the problem” about “geometry of particles” but not necessarily going with the string theory path to enlightenment. Some QM advocates of orthodoxy would definitely get twisted up about that and what is real.
@@Mentaculus42 That of course was my personal view: I can't say I ever heard Witten make any statement of that kind. But you can find him in countless lectures showing how transforming a dimensionless point into a multidimensional vibrating ribbon makes gravitons pop up and particles pass trough Feynman diagrams in such a way that they never were able to do when they were ‘points’. His only argument in favour of strings thus is that applying QM to them is rewarding and makes things ‘smoother’ from a Mathematical point of view. His Math is hard to argue against (not to mention to match it) and I’m curious to see were this path will take us. Nice talking with you, have a nice day 😊.
This man is legendary
Why
🤡
I really love all the experimental confirmation of the uh, the er, the um. . .
Great interview. Very interesting to watch, though admittedly a lot of it was over my head. That mic drop at the end though!
Theories that have no base in reality are the best.
Who are you to tell if they describe reality or not?
@@youtubesucks1885 I am Jedad.
String Theory hasn’t made any prediction. Neither has it made a singular version that is our Standard Model.
From where did you take these false informations? O.o
Actually, string theory has made a prediction. That the universe has more than 4 dimensions. But they don't care.
Never let string theorists forget string theory failed that most elementary test: no experiment has ever detected more than 4 dimensions.
That is a clue as to why string theory has produced nothing.
He specifically addresses this in the video, explicitly stating that it is not a well substantiated theory. He also goes on to explain why it shows great theoretical promise and should be developed more. And he points out, very aptly in my mind, that those who critique strong theory aren't developing any other theories that can resolve quantum mechanics and gravity. So what point do you think you are making? Or are you just parroting uninformed talking points on a subject you know nothing about?
He explained things very well easy for a average person can comprehend Thanks
very interesting stuff
One of those people I would want to meet and just listen to.
Every time I hear this man speak I get the impression that somewhere deep down he has nearly all the answers, he's just very careful about which parts he's willing to share with us mortals.
Speak for yourself. We're all mortal, we just choose to spend our time differently. He's not immortal and you're not "mortal." He decided to be great and you haven't.
@@zoomingby I mean fair point if you would suggest that everyone shall capitalize on their abilities as best they can, but it's not like I can just decide to be a genius lol, so I disagree.
@@allweknowisfalling7322 So your supposition is that people who reach the top of their fields are necessarily geniuses?
@@zoomingby We must note that 'genius' is not fully measurable and that there are some people who reach the top of their fields through illegal measures or unfair advantages, but otherwise it's mostly true, so yes.
@@zoomingbyIndeed we all do choose to spend our time differently; it seems you choose to spend your time being an abrasive a*hole. Awesome!
Fascinating
fascinating stuff
I like his last sentence 😄
Imagine sitting in that study on a slightly rainy day with the blinds drawn, looking out on a small town with large trees gently blowing in the wind, just reading your favorite science fiction book series. Abject tranquility in my opinion.
the non witten man is a billionaire, capable of rearrange his envoironment to his desires
AMAZING VIDEO 💗💗💗💗💗💗
Really inspirational to see the smartest person. I bought the Little Book on String Theory by Gubser.
I want the whole world to listen to this man and be quiet for 5 minutes.
Why, string theory is a failure.
Even string theory was quiet for decades without any major victories! Ba dum tss!
Why?
Thank you two a lot! 4:53 used to say it was magic mystery or matrix but really M was for membrane it was just a question of whether membranes are one facet of the theory which I think is what most people believe or the whole theory should they derived from membranes which it competing (Bob: how would it be membrane what is a string relative to a membrane because the string is one dimensional) membranes in the sense were supposed to be two-dimensional surfaces. 5:18 the term M theory is really used in two senses so we now understand that there's an overaching theory that has the five traditonal string theories as limiting cases and that theory is often called M theory. 6:39 more complicated than that, a solution is an approximation to a quantum state which is what really describes the universe but anyway the idea would be that um there's one theory but what the universe actually looks like depends upon which solutions of the equation is appropriate for describing (okay let's talk about the number of solutions because we hear this term banning about 10 to the 500 that's 10 with 500 zeros, which is a number we don't have a name for so which is hugely more than the number of particles in universe etc so because that has to do with the geometric shapes?) 7:18 so, first of all the standard model of particle bit physics is a little complicated actually the ideas are simple but the implementation that we see in the real world is a little complicated with a lot of bits and pieces and the only reason that something simple as simple as string theory can reproduce the complexity of the standard model is that there are extra dimensions and the topological complexity of the extra dimensions generates the details of the strandard model ( 7:49 okay) so ❤💚💙the theory really would not work without the complexity of the extra dimensions but the complexity of the extra dimensions turns out to be such that there are vast vast numbers of possibilities to the best of our present understanding for what form the extra dimensions might take. 8:04 Bob: and these are topological uh is structural (EW: a very large part of it is topological let's think of it as topological) EW: I'd like to make an analogy however Einstein's theory is one theory but it doesn't predict the details of the solar system to get the solar system you need to know the masses and composition really or the planets and the sun and the asteroids and you also need to know the initial conditions 8:29 so nobody really asks Einstein's theory to predict exactly what the solar system would look like we only use Einstein's theory to predict how the solar system will evolve, given what we observe as the initial conditions because we understand that the solar system depends on the initial conditions and by now we've been able to take make observations of distant solar systems so we know there are different solar systems out there and you couldn't really I mean without feeding in the fact that we're in this particular one you wouldn't know which solution of Einstein's equations you wanted to take now the traditional view of physicists is not to think of the whole universe in that way 9:05 so Einstein instead very much that there should be a unique answer determined only on logical rounds for all dimensionless numbers that measure in nature now again your viewers might not know what I mean by dimensional's number some things you measure depend on the units where you measure them like it takes a year for the earth to go around the sun that's a very interesting number because it just depends on how we define the year 9:29 now a more interesting number is that it takes about twice as long for Mars to grow on the sun is the earth and that does not depend on the unit in which we measure time there's a factor of two between the period of the orbit of Mars and the one of the earth that's a dimensionless number but it's a dimensionless number that depends on the solar system and the difference in different solar system 👍to get something a little more interesting we might take the ratio of the electron mass to the proton mass either mass by itself as a number depends on the units in free measure mass but the ratio of the electon to the proton is one of those dimensionless numbers for which Einstein said there should be a completely unique answer Einstein imagined that the universe should be described by a unique system of equations that would have a unique answer for all obserbable dimensionless quantities now what we have in string theory with the present understanding is a unique system of equations but it's not close to having a unique answer with our present understanding at least 10:31 we're not absoutely sure that our present understanding is definitive but the best understanding we have now does not point to an unique answer so it points to something a little bit more like the solar system Einstein's theory is unique but it had many solutions 10:47 Bob: ... personally I think that having discovered how quantum mechanics and gravity can work together consistently it's our duty to explor it more if string theory had not been discovered I personally think taht I would not have tried to discover something like it because I would have no idea where to begin in reconciling quantum mechanics and gravity but it's kind unnatural to ignore the fact that there's an extremely rich theory that people actually have discovered that can make this work and it doesn't just make it possible for gravity and quantum mechanics to work together but it forces them upon you if you start trying to use string theory to describe a quantum theory that you think maybe doesn't have gravity gravity is literally forced upon you because of the way it pops out of the equations so it's extremely unnatural not to notice this and not to take it seriously that doesn't mean it to the everybody's cup of tea or that everybody should work on it with that said though I've noticed that generally speaking the critics don't seem to try very hard to work on the competing theory or to suggest one. יִשָּׂא יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ וְיָשֵים לְךָ שָׁלוֹם
This is the pinnacle of our current Human intelect
Please get more interviews with Edward Witten
It's amazing the levels of thinking and thought that humans can reach. And the variability between people. This guy sounds like ai, yet another person can sound like a toddler.
Brian Green says M is actually an upside down W for Witten
Brian Greene is wrong. Get with the times.
Ha! I love that.
This is the only CZcams video I’ve watched, and I slowed down to .75 to get a tenuous grasp
Love Ed Witten. No chaff!
Witten’s explanations are very simple and clear - a byproduct of having a very well-organized, internal structure for thinking through these ideas. I was a little surprised by hearing him say the “M”, for membrane is 2-dimensional. I’ve been trying to fathom what a many-dimensional membrane would be for along time. I imagined that it would be 10 (or 25…?) dimensional for string theory (n-1 dimensions for a surface), but I tried to fathom it as an n-dimensional “function” of geometric structures. In just the way a cell’s membrane is a 2-dimensional interface that can connect to other 3-dimensional cells, I’ve been trying to imagine (n-1)-dimensional “surfaces” that connect n-dimensional objects: universes in the case of string theory.
In any case, I like thinking about it, because I imagine the Universe as a black box of “parallel” computation, and a membrane for it - similar to a cell’s membrane - could be a sort of inter-universal communication modality that permits the synthesis of higher forms out of Universes. The fact that our Universe has organisms that think about higher math and generate algorithms leaves me with the notion that models like string theory can be conceived as data points for transcendental processing, solutions in the enclosed computation of our Universe that can be funneled into the megaplex of a trans-Universal synthesis… A fun idea - obviously outside the scope of realism - but it gives a voice to the nagging background chatter that any good math-oriented metaphysician must have that any metaphysical organizing principles we suppose to exist are embedded in a deeper space of possible organizing principles.
It’s hard to even ask the question of how the latent space of possible category-nerves (or whatever high-level concepts of math organization we are inclined to use) can funnel discrete organizing principles into the production of a Universe. There is no reason whatsoever to think our Universe is geometrically or topologically unique, which means it’s every bit as likely that Universality Classes exist for the geometric patterning of Universes. There is also no reason to believe that systemic closure for our Universe is absolute. But it opens all sorts of twisted questions about what kinds of influence extra-Universal “inputs” might have on our Universe’s patterns of expression.
Whole lot of nonsense, do you think a person is gonna read that and understand what youre saying? Like bro, type better
Edward Witten is without Doubt, the most Intelligent Human Being on the Earth !!!! I have never heard such a clever Scientist explaining everything with such incredible knowledge. It's Wonderful to listen to Him !!!!
First time learning anything about this and i swear i somewhat understand it 🧐
They lost me with "String Theory is obviously a major breakthrough in physics. . . "
Everyone is stroking his ego. Let his work speak for itself
Great man
I agree with everything he said, but I thought of it all first and better.
Weinstein called Witten the Voldemor of Physics - the one everyone terrified about (and ruined careers of many physics by luring them into String Theory which seems to be a dead end)
I just commented that we need a debate or discussion with Eric Weinstein and Witten.
That would be epic.
@@phantom5573 No it would be dumb, because Eric Weinstein isn't even a physicist anymore. He literally ADMITTED in his sham "Geometric Unity" paper (which was hilariously ridiculed by real scientists as complete rubbish) that he's not a physicist, he's an "entertainer" now.
A "debate" between him and Witten would mostly be Witten patiently trying to teach Weinstein the math of current M theory while Weinstein makes dumb faces and huffing noises but without any rebuttals because he isn't smart enough to understand.
Then Witten would go back to quietly revolutionizing physics while Weinstein would go on Joe Rogan and loudly announce to the world that he won the debate.
Weinstein is a clown.
@phantom5573 excellent idea, and maybe after that we can get Ronald McDonald on the show to debate Witten
You're a dummy, go back and watch JR again.
This time bring an adult with you, and QUIT PULLING YOUR SISTER'S HAIR!!
After 10 secs my brain started to melt. I hear the words he's saying but have no understanding of what he's saying.
Search for rockwell automation retro encabulator.
That's basically what he is doing in physics.
So next time I think I easily figured something out, I shall listen to this interview and remind myself to be happy that I can put my trousers on in the morning without falling over 😬
Best episode yet🐦🐦🐦
During his lectures I never heard so many accurate. Correctly connected multi facited coplex equation
So eloquently unified. A great great mind
Dr. Kuhn, It would be extremely valuable to science if you could facilitate a dialogue between Eric Weinstein and Ed Witten. This may be extremely difficult, but the internet is making rapid scientific breakthroughs possible by bringing people together. Brian Keating may be able to help as well.
no man. just because weinstein yaps on all over the internet doesn’t mean people like witten need to waste their time on discussing this stuff. the only alternative eric proposes is GU which has gone nowhere.
Weinstein will hide under the table quaking in fear
@@kashu7691 And string theory has? Not vying for GU necessarily. I just want open discussion and exploration of physics and metaphysics
@@InterfaceGuhy i think string theory has advanced our understanding of theoretical physics and as a framework its very powerful. no one has found any use of GU yet
@@kashu7691 I’m not a physicist so I really don’t have much to say about it. But in my understanding, there has been lots of development in the field by “string theorists” but the theory itself is metaphysically bankrupt. Personally I think the next breakthroughs will come from a unification of Wolfram and Weinstein’s frameworks
He asked the question I was wondering if anyone asked Ed Witten.
This man is so smart,! He rarely does interviews because he has to dumb down his theories and calculations for us mortals!
If aliens ever visit us,this is the guy you want representing our planet!
Id like to know when(what year) were these videos recorded?
So as to get an idea about the relevance of these opinions.
As long as string theory has no experimental validation you cannot call string theory a breakthrough or even a theory but more a speculation/hypothesis. I am sorry string theory fans but the emperor wears no clothes.
Has partical physics come up with experimental validation though?
Don't interrupt him...let him talk! There's absolutely nothing you could ask or add that would be worth the lost seconds of his consciousness stream.
I was astonished by the interruptions. But Edward very politely but sharply rolled with it. The interviewer probably had a time window in mind and wanted to check his boxes on main points. Edward could have kept going for quite a while and I would have enjoyed it regardless.
String theory sounds pretty exotic. Yet, most of us would approach the idea through the principle of "vibration". The ultimate question however is what's vibrating? Literal 'strings'? Or is this another example of a mathematics in multiple dimensions that simply has no basis in ontological reality? Is "string theory" simply another story we tell ourselves (epistemology)? OR, is there a mechanism at play in the cosmos that literally consists of strings acting like "springs" transmitting vibration through space as energy or entangled with itself into "particles"?
I wish Witten would explain why I get a grasp of string theory while he's speaking and then do a mind dump within a moment. That is the real M Theory that needs explanation! 💫
The short answer is NONE or no breakthroughs since Schroedinger.
Guys not show why string Theory are itself true. Though phich Law string Theory not show up true reality. It is more questions than anwers in phich.
I appreciate this dudes attempt at asking this guy questions. I think I would just stutter into a stupor.
That floor is trippy!!!
It should have been called W theory for Witten!
Nice 🙂
Im here after Rogan. I wanted to see the real Professor X. I tried my hardest but I dont have enough wrinkles in my brain to understand what I just watched.
So can we alter the solution, or is it already defined?
"The Universe is a Carrier Wave" ....a foundational principle for string theory
The new breakthrough discoveries should have a practical effect On solving immediate problems. The most catastrophic problem for our planet is climate collapse from burning fossil fuels. The discovery of “negative refractive index meta materials”. This discovery will lead us to a new energy source in the nanotechnology field.
@@gene4094 Sounds great. Consider not referring to them as negative refractive index meta materials, but variable angle refractive index meta materials. By doing this we may categorize and catalogue the materials based on angle. Thank you for sharing negative refractive index meta materials with me and liking my comment.
@@gene4094 Climate change does not require breakthroughs in science but on the level of capitalistic practices.
@@youtubesucks1885 perhaps, but the energy attached to the in the vector field will refract the electromagnetic to a left handed rotation. This Nobel Prize for Physics is difficult to understand, but from my understanding of it is that that energy refracting strengthens the electromagnetic energy from a red shift to a blue shift. This discovery is being utilized in devices from electronics miniaturizations, computer, cloaking and others. Of course the military and private corporate entities will capitalize on these innovations and technologies. But the absolute most important thing is stopping the impending climate catastrophe.
@@gene4094 Wow! So many more possibilities! That is awesome! So not just 180 degree rotation of the right hand rule or torsion of right hand rule; both of which appear at first glance to be the left handed rule, but true left hand rule? I have to see this! Send diagrams to me.
I believe this is the current maximum level of brain attainable in a human body.
Edward Witten for president
planck length has something do with wave - particle duality and quantization?
Plank is the length at which space is no longer contiguous, locally. Spatial texture or graininess is inferred. I think!
For sure a brilliant mathe.-Genius,but on the other hand String Theory is nothing but an mathematical construct never beeing able to show any proof....But as i heard in US you have no choice as a theoretical Phy. then to study in that direction....Crazy but somehow typical in an US dominated world...In my eyes the title of this clip wants to hint in that direction....
Sad that you were indoctrinated like this.
Here come the physicists who studied at CZcams University to criticize Edward Witten
With the dissonant awareness of being a plebeian yourself, does this gratuitous appeal to authority stabilize your mood, or are you hoping to bloat your public image to the realm of "oh he's sensible alright; he knows better" through preemptive defence against questioning your deity?
P.S. Either way or a third, you're not simply, competent by association.
@@c-rlt730 that’s quite the extrapolation you devised there. Did my observation hit a little too close to home, or are you just projecting your inferiority complex in a sad and sesquipedalian manner?
Oh, those both were great expressions of “rapier wit”! Going to save them for future “plagiarism”. Please, More!
”Sesquipedalian” that’s a $50 dollar word, more please. What comes to mind is “PREMATURE ULTRACREPIDARIANISM” & “PSEUDO-INTELLECTUALATED [sic à la sniglet] SELF-IDENTIFIED ELITIST MOROSOPHISM”!