Why Space Itself May Be Quantum in Nature - with Jim Baggott

Sdílet
Vložit
  • čas přidán 14. 05. 2019
  • Loop quantum gravity aims to unify the theories of general relativity and quantum mechanics, as explained by Jim Baggott.
    Subscribe for regular science videos: bit.ly/RiSubscRibe
    Buy Jim's book "Quantum Space": geni.us/7cLy
    Quantum gravity is the holy grail for modern theoretical physicists - a single structure that brings together the two great theories of the 20th century: quantum mechanics and general relativity. One widely-known solution is string theory, which emerged from particle physics. In this talk, Jim Baggott will describe the other approach known as Loop Quantum Gravity. This theory starts from general relativity, borrows many ideas and techniques from quantum mechanics, and predicts that space itself is quantum in nature.
    Watch the Q&A: • Q&A: Why Space Itself ...
    Jim Baggott is an award-winning science writer. He trained as a scientist, completing a doctorate in chemical physics at the University of Oxford in the early 80s, before embarking on post-doctoral research studies at Oxford and at Stanford University in California.
    This talk was filmed at the Ri on 12 February 2019.
    ---
    A very special thank you to our Patreon supporters who help make these videos happen, especially:
    Darren Jones, Dave Ostler, David Lindo, Elizabeth Greasley, Greg Nagel, Ivan Korolev, Joe Godenzi, Lester Su, Osian Gwyn Williams, Radu Tizu, Rebecca Pan, Robert Hillier, Roger Baker, Sergei Solovev and Will Knott.
    ---
    The Ri is on Patreon: / theroyalinstitution
    and Twitter: / ri_science
    and Facebook: / royalinstitution
    and Tumblr: / ri-science
    Our editorial policy: www.rigb.org/home/editorial-po...
    Subscribe for the latest science videos: bit.ly/RiNewsletter
  • Věda a technologie

Komentáře • 1,4K

  • @doronron7323
    @doronron7323 Před 4 lety +186

    I've watched RI lectures since I can't remember (I'm 64). Jim carefully talked his presentation through in such a way that I heard and could digest every word. Perhaps the sound effects weren't necessary, but otherwise he managed to avoid any other dramatic concessions. For an interested layman, I've never seen a better lecture on this or any other subject. Thank you.

  • @allurbase
    @allurbase Před 5 lety +549

    If you already listened countless talks about general relativity you can skip to 38:00

    • @thinkbolt
      @thinkbolt Před 5 lety +28

      You can skip it altogether, I'd say.

    • @ferusgratia
      @ferusgratia Před 5 lety +7

      Thanks, I was just about to post the same thing.

    • @dirkryan5962
      @dirkryan5962 Před 5 lety +24

      well that's just GREAT! i was at 36:24 when i read this. and considering i already had a decent understanding (for a non-physicist) of everything up to that point, it makes it sting just a little bit more. i almost aborted the mission because i wasn't hearing anything i hadn't already heard somewhere else. [note to self: read a few comments before committing to a 30+ minute presentation about quantum physics.]

    • @fascistpedant758
      @fascistpedant758 Před 5 lety +48

      How dare he present information that you people at the center of the universe already know? Physicists should consult with you when preparing public lectures.

    • @dirkryan5962
      @dirkryan5962 Před 5 lety +6

      @@fascistpedant758 i know, right?

  • @RogerRosenquist
    @RogerRosenquist Před rokem +9

    He has a wonderful talent for making these extremely difficult concepts (somewhat) understandable while putting the listener at ease about not totally understanding it.😊

  • @AndyinMokum
    @AndyinMokum Před 5 lety +18

    As a layman, I found your lecture fascinating. The sound effects were quite alarming; especially for someone who's profoundly deaf in one ear. What sounds I can hear, are extremely distorted and Dalek like. Needless to say, I jumped quiet a few times 🤣.
    I'll have to watch the video a few more times. Some of the concepts you introduce, are really hard to get one's head around. They simply don't comport to our everyday perception of space and time. As I said, the lecture was fascinating, thank you for sparking my curiosity 😀.

  • @anthonypacheco6482
    @anthonypacheco6482 Před 5 lety +5

    Someone somewhere is working hard to truly push this information into a new era of experience and conductivity! We can help by learning and pushing toward our own goals, no matter how small or large they may be! Cheers to the Roaring 20’s as they happen!
    So excited to see where all of this information heads 🧘🏽‍♂️🕰❤️

  • @Li.Siyuan
    @Li.Siyuan Před 5 lety +16

    Thank you for this; I've been looking for years for a clear explanation of LQG and now I've found it!

  • @JFJ12
    @JFJ12 Před 8 dny +1

    The first time I could follow a scientific explanation from start to finish and able to understand it all the time.

  • @garyrafiq9561
    @garyrafiq9561 Před 5 lety +34

    The closed captions (subtitles to you Brits) are great and error-free! Thank you, Royal Institution, for the captions, and the caption representation of the sound effects is helpful. Nothing wrong with those sound effects if they make the lecture interesting.

    • @TheRoyalInstitution
      @TheRoyalInstitution  Před 5 lety +11

      We try our best to make our videos as accessible as possible, thank you for your kinds words.

    • @cmwh1te
      @cmwh1te Před 4 lety +3

      The sound effects should have at least been normalized in post production. Absolutely awful. Completely attention-breaking and pointless.

    • @Daniel-sYouTube
      @Daniel-sYouTube Před 4 lety

      @@TheRoyalInstitution If we can wish for anything, a de-esser at the end would have helped to on all the sssss sounds ;)
      Other than that, great talk!

    • @ShonMardani
      @ShonMardani Před 8 měsíci

      I am Shon Mardani, this is my Unifying Theory Of Everything, please let me know what you think,
      [GOD] Created NOTHING, a Void Point in Space.
      NOTHING Attracts [neighboring] Space, as the Only Law of The Nature, that gave the NOTHING its Property to be the GRAVITATIONAL PARTICLE (GP).
      Fast Moving Space into GP, Creates its own GP at the [vacated] Space and attracts the Surrounding Space.
      Propagation of the GPs in Cyclic Patterns Creates EVERYTHING.
      The Patterns' Frequencies in addition to to the Direction of GP Propagation are Observed as the Properties of the Matter, including Weight/Mass/Gravity, Magnetism, Electricity, Heat, Light and Color.

  • @MrTommy4000
    @MrTommy4000 Před 4 lety +34

    I guess the first half rehash is unavoidable, but the second half was highly effective in guiding me towards a better understanding of the big picture. Cheers to all involved in producing this little gem !

  • @danievdw
    @danievdw Před 4 lety +5

    Really enjoyed the way Dr Baggot covered all this. Very interesting.

  • @eggsandwine
    @eggsandwine Před 5 lety +21

    "...have you heard the new album of Cosmic Metronome, Jim..."
    Brilliant! Thank you mr Baggott and RI for another excellent talk.

  • @steveray65
    @steveray65 Před 4 lety +39

    "To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour." William Blake

  • @SirRelith
    @SirRelith Před 2 lety +26

    This was such a fantastic explanation. I've watched several videos on loop quantum gravity and I believe this one to be the best so far.

    • @jonathonjubb6626
      @jonathonjubb6626 Před 2 lety +1

      Yeah but it's all a bit contradictory, it's still - this should work cos every other explanation is even worse/less believable...

    • @vhawk1951kl
      @vhawk1951kl Před 2 lety

      You understand that' quantum' is the Latin word for how much?

    • @jasonking1284
      @jasonking1284 Před rokem +1

      I'll believe it when they make their first warp drive....

  • @Quantumdemetrio
    @Quantumdemetrio Před 5 lety +19

    I almost wanted to hit the desk for him at least once! hahaah, I love this talk. thanks so much for sharing....
    love it.. again and again....

  • @lyonzeelyonzee7554
    @lyonzeelyonzee7554 Před 5 lety +3

    LOVE ALL THIS STUFF ..GREAT VID....

  • @Khazam1992
    @Khazam1992 Před 5 lety +5

    Can we do an experiement like projectile using Quantum Gravity/Space ?
    it seems fun to trace the path of a particle on the Quantized Space :)

  • @macbuff81
    @macbuff81 Před 4 lety +10

    RI is a great institution! Humanity at its finest :) I was never really good at physics in high school, but I feel I have gained great insight and understanding by watching these really intuitive lectures. Brian Cox had similar great lectures and TV series. SciShow and similar CZcams shows are similar great resources. I wish I had them when I was in high school in the 90s. Then again it's never too late to learn.
    I'm currently pursuing a master's in public health and I love it though it would be even better if I had scholarship :) It is nice to see how biology, physics, chemistry and psychology intersect. To understand the universe and use that understanding to make a difference.
    I would love to see a lecture live in person someday.

    • @joshyoung1440
      @joshyoung1440 Před rokem

      Intersect... eh.. They're really all subsets of physics

  • @Robyzed57
    @Robyzed57 Před 5 lety +11

    WOW Dr. Baggott, thank you so much for the crystal clear explanation. I see Smolin changed his mind about Time, much to Professor Rovelli's annoyance, I suppose. Furthermore, as a layperson, I just hope one day to see string theorists and LQG supporters publicly confront each other, comparing ideas instead of filling square meters of blackboard with math....as I must confess I'm still unable to understand the substantial differences between the two approaches to the problem.

    • @williamchurcher9645
      @williamchurcher9645 Před 4 lety +1

      He said there were three approaches to get quantum mechanics and relativity to work together. One way s to just start again. Another is to assume quantum mechanics is correct and try and make gravity and relativity emerge from it: this is string theory. String theory says all particles are made up of strings vibrating in different ways. It also suggests a multiverse, where different universes like ours have different landscapes for the strings to vibrate on. For example, imagine in ours the strings wiggle on a flat table, in another the table is at an angle, causing the strings to wiggle differently, in another they wiggle on a wobbly surface. These different methods of vibration lead to different particles and different laws of physics.
      Another, third method, is to quantise gravity: this is loop quantum gravity. Einstein's relativity assumes space is infinitely divisible, but quantum mechanics doesn't like this: the Planck length is the smallest length possible. This LQG makes a new framework for what space and time is, (that graph network thing he talked about) and tries to make quantum mechanics appear out of it.

    • @PazLeBon
      @PazLeBon Před 4 lety

      stop wasting minds on string theory altogetherId say, its little more than fantasy make believe

  • @nickb9237
    @nickb9237 Před 5 lety +22

    Loved this presentation, I put it at 1.25x speed like the other comments suggested, not sure why everyone is griping about the SFx, I can’t watch regular science shows anymore, I only digest lectures from theoretical physicists. Loop quantum gravity is an alternative to string theory , I recommend Brian Greene’s “the elegant universe” for more on gravity and quantum mechanics. Thanks for posting this RI.

    • @forbiddenera
      @forbiddenera Před rokem +1

      Because you're laying in bed deep in thought enjoying the lecture while you drift off and are suddenly assaulted and jolted by a distorted sound effect of someone screaming.

  • @davidwright8432
    @davidwright8432 Před 5 lety +4

    If there's one thing that gets me mad, Jim, it's 'Don't worry about ...', since usually, that's exactly where I do want to go. Not understanding it, means it's what I need to find out about. That aside, an interesting and well-presented talk; thanks. And yes, Jim, I've bought several of your books, the latest included. Be bold, bloody and brave with the next one - and put the damn math in!! I'm sure I'm not the only one with that feeling. Hawking's editor who said every equation halves the sales, was an - ok, let's just say, was misguided.

  • @Dr10Jeeps
    @Dr10Jeeps Před 5 lety +25

    Excellent lecture! I loved every minute of it. A hearty thank you to Dr. Baggott and the RI. I can't recall ever meeting a RI lecture I didn't enjoy.

  • @ShadowZZZ
    @ShadowZZZ Před 4 lety +17

    His melancholy is delighting.

  • @thomascasey8171
    @thomascasey8171 Před 5 lety +1

    Fascinating and kept making me think fundamentally matter, energy are all comprised of momentum from the big bounce. (like the idea of a bounce instead of a bang) The particle/wave paradox seems like a clue. Nice to see that the singularity and it's associated mathematical infinity's are bogus (irreducible quanta). That always bugged a friend of mine and turns out he was right.

  • @wmpmacm
    @wmpmacm Před 8 měsíci

    This is no surprise to me after all I have read about quantum mechanics and fields, etc.. Physicists have been working towards this for years. Nice to see it getting explained.

  • @KilgoreTroutAsf
    @KilgoreTroutAsf Před 5 lety +36

    For those familiar with history of physics, loop quantum gravity starts at 36:00

  • @maxkorn3910
    @maxkorn3910 Před 3 lety +3

    This is unimaginably awesome lecture where things I could not understand in the past were described so simply and clearly that I understood them all. Woah, just wow!

  • @carlkerstann8343
    @carlkerstann8343 Před 3 lety +2

    Excellent explanation of where physics stands and how we got here.

  • @mariuszw5766
    @mariuszw5766 Před 3 lety +1

    Stunning. Absolutly stunning. The way you do the trick Sir is excellent. This is how you recognize a great mind!!! I'm a physicist myself as a graduate years ago and must say some ideas I' ve never even heard of.

  • @HeliumXenonKrypton
    @HeliumXenonKrypton Před 5 lety +9

    Really great video and explanation of LQG !! Thanks for this clear and helpful video.

  • @hellstormangel
    @hellstormangel Před 5 lety +6

    god damn those audio fx effects

  • @whatsonchannelB
    @whatsonchannelB Před 2 lety +1

    15:24 jeeez thanks for scaring my dog LOUD

  • @pawelmiechowiecki7901
    @pawelmiechowiecki7901 Před 2 lety +1

    Beautiful lecture, storytelling, narrations - very engaging.

  • @coreyeaston6823
    @coreyeaston6823 Před 5 lety +11

    This guy officially melted my brain.

  • @Daimo83
    @Daimo83 Před 4 lety +3

    I'm dying for some lectures that cover the subject from something higher than high school level. If he was my professor I would really fall out with him for telling me numerous times not to try to conceptualise important things.

  • @glenbirbeck4098
    @glenbirbeck4098 Před rokem

    Great lecturer who knows about microphones and good audio.....brilliant !

  • @markuskeller4281
    @markuskeller4281 Před 9 měsíci

    Thank you Jim!

  • @theseagull8842
    @theseagull8842 Před 5 lety +4

    At one point you mentioned that the loops are not in space but are space. 2 questions - what is in between each loop,
    and what is in between from where you are looking and the loop you are observing?

    • @MightyDrunken
      @MightyDrunken Před 5 lety

      There is nothing between the loops. It is how they are connected which makes up the "fabric" of spacetime. Drawing everything in the same place looks confusing.

    • @briandeschene8424
      @briandeschene8424 Před 5 lety

      The Seagull88
      Maybe try this?: Light is quantized into photons and yet can usually be perceived and measured as an uninterrupted beam. But since proven to be existing in quanta, must be going on and off in between each photon quanta. If space itself is ever proven to be quantized, asking what is in between is nonsense since there would be no “place” to be “in between”. Best way I can perceive an answer. (shrugs)

    • @georgeR3Roadster
      @georgeR3Roadster Před 4 lety

      @@briandeschene8424 Haramein explains ( but I just mention this !! I do NOT say that I am a believer of his theories !! ) how the Planck quantas are related one to another ..... and how they should interact .... fascinating stuff everywhere !!!

  • @milantrcka121
    @milantrcka121 Před 5 lety +59

    We need an audio peak compressor.

    • @KuroSilence
      @KuroSilence Před 4 lety +1

      And a de-esser with some noise cleaning, these frequencies are pretty annoying...

    • @shiitakestick
      @shiitakestick Před 3 lety

      you can get an equalizer app .

    • @traviswessels5814
      @traviswessels5814 Před 3 lety

      What about dark matter and you have to take an account dark matter an expansion of space and time

    • @traviswessels5814
      @traviswessels5814 Před 3 lety

      And also take an account that particles do have mass

    • @traviswessels5814
      @traviswessels5814 Před 3 lety

      I should correct that some particls have mass

  • @dogone7262
    @dogone7262 Před 4 lety +1

    Space-time & energy-matter... Got it! Good talk!

  • @JustJanitor
    @JustJanitor Před 5 měsíci

    Glad I found this youtube channel. This was great to listen to

  • @BeyondWrittenWords
    @BeyondWrittenWords Před 4 lety +4

    55:24 'a single proton contains about 10^65 quantum of volume'. Quite a lot. And proton is small as hell.

  • @chrisnoecker5287
    @chrisnoecker5287 Před 5 lety +1

    wish there was more context and explanation -- for example, its clear as mud how Einstein concluded space-time was curved based off his thought experiments involving relative motion....

  • @haroldkatcher1369
    @haroldkatcher1369 Před 2 lety +1

    The explanation that the gluon network holding the colored quarks together "snap" doesn't explain why quarks can't be separated. The explanation that the force needed to separate quarks would be enough to create a similar particle kind of does.

  • @MartinHodgkins
    @MartinHodgkins Před 4 lety +7

    Try Milo Wolff Wave Structure of Matter.

  • @ChiefVS
    @ChiefVS Před 5 lety +6

    Definitely one of the best RI Talk I've heard!

  • @fromAZto09
    @fromAZto09 Před 5 lety +2

    Regarding the lightning bolts experiment, it's easier to imagine you staying at first in the middle between them, and starting to run the same time they hit. Think about the fact that photons are speeding away from the left bolt, and you are trying to run away from them (towards the right bolt) at a fraction of their speed. This means you have time to cover some small distance before they hit you. On the contrary, the photons from the right run in the opposite direction, thus they will reach you a lot faster.
    I stopped for a while to think about this - because I'm not that bright (pun intended) - and I hope that this will help some other people as well.

  • @trespire
    @trespire Před 2 lety +2

    Lord of the Rings reference was spot on.
    Sadowfax was like a force of nature, riden by Gandalf one of the Ainur a race of beings from before the creaton of the World, also a fundamental power.
    J.R.R Tolkein was a master story teller.

  • @n3r0z3r0
    @n3r0z3r0 Před 5 lety +22

    Extremely good explanation! Thank you so much! I would love to see more lectures with Jim.

    • @TheRoyalInstitution
      @TheRoyalInstitution  Před 5 lety +6

      Have you seen the one he gave about Mass? It's also very good - czcams.com/video/HfHjzomqbZc/video.html

  • @impCaesarAvg
    @impCaesarAvg Před 5 lety +8

    Jim mentions the Queen Elizabeth Engineering Prize as being awarded 'today'. The award to Parkinson, Spilker, FrueHauf, and Schwartz was announced 12 February 2019. This lecture and that announcement were simultaneous -- unless you're moving very fast.

    • @lucasthompson1650
      @lucasthompson1650 Před 5 lety +2

      I wasn't moving very fast, the rest of you were moving very fast! 😋

  • @marcelifirlej1557
    @marcelifirlej1557 Před 4 lety +1

    To continue your research, I have impression particles maybe are made by gravity-loops, because mass is making deficit of space-time around it. However, does it consuming or restructures gravity knots when moving through the space as Earth around the Sun? How then the space curvature is constructed and have acceleration effect?

  • @Temp0raryName
    @Temp0raryName Před 5 lety +1

    Is this video quantumly linked with the other one you just posted? Are any changes I make here shown there instantly too?

    • @davefried
      @davefried Před 5 lety

      Mark Pendragon simply posting this question changes the related video. spooky action at a distance.

  • @michaelgilbert3684
    @michaelgilbert3684 Před 2 lety +3

    Greatest lecture ever heard. Brings everything into perspective!!:)

  • @gaslitworldf.melissab2897

    A WORK IN PROGRESS:
    I've listened to so many scientific lectures and enjoyed them thoroughly. I find that the majority readily admit that they don't have *absolute* answers, but they do know how to reason.
    The people who are obnoxious are the non-scientists that support science (as if it is infallible). Nothing is infallible, bc the human mind is imperfect. So, I take it as it is, an impressive work in progress (that often makes life better).

  • @joeltarnabene5026
    @joeltarnabene5026 Před 2 lety +2

    A sidenote. It seems to me that particle physics is the real interpretation of the universe, while relativity is an approximation on the macro scale. Just like Newton's theory of gravity was a more imprecise approximation before that. I think we need to abandon relativity and try to extrapolate new macro theories from quantum mechanics.

  • @LockSteady
    @LockSteady Před 4 lety +2

    13:22 my favorite bit

  • @World_Theory
    @World_Theory Před 5 lety +4

    15:50 The thunder effect is pushing the words of the speaker into the noise floor. Needs subtitles badly. There were missed words.
    (Edit: On second thought, it might not have anything to do with the noise floor; it could just be a software thing. But the point still stands.) (Edit2: Clarification: There are subtitles available, but it looks like they're based on the audio from the video, and are therefore useless, as they include the sound effect as well.)

    • @TheRoyalInstitution
      @TheRoyalInstitution  Před 5 lety +1

      Unfortunately they were embedded into the presentation, we didn't add them in afterwards.

  • @MarcoAurelio-zu7sd
    @MarcoAurelio-zu7sd Před 4 lety +87

    If I were to take the diplomatic route, I'd say that as a speaker this guy is a great writer.

    • @2ndAveScents
      @2ndAveScents Před 4 lety +5

      Zzzz oop thing about public speaking....it absolutely is.

    • @ITSME-nd4xy
      @ITSME-nd4xy Před 4 lety +12

      You’re too generous. He’s one of the best scientific dancers I’ve EVER seen! He dances around topics, with such fluidity....
      Frankly, he’s an entertainer who’s memorized stories of science. Better to stay away, if you desire to learn. Nothing like that in his performances.

    • @danielc.freteval5685
      @danielc.freteval5685 Před 4 lety +2

      Yeah because you can surely do better. Right?

    • @amandayorke481
      @amandayorke481 Před 4 lety

      Well, actually, there are points where I'd wish he'd go slower. I bet even regular physicists get slightly boggled when they consider the implications of ordinary on ordinary observations like the simultaneous lightning strikes NOT being as simple as they appear.

    • @amandayorke481
      @amandayorke481 Před 4 lety +1

      Don't know what happened to my grammar there!

  • @markthnark
    @markthnark Před 2 lety +2

    If Alan Partridge studied physics...

  • @nivlakhera9
    @nivlakhera9 Před 2 lety +1

    Incredible lecture , RI is fantastic

  • @jakelabete7412
    @jakelabete7412 Před 5 lety +28

    As usual, excellent treatment with all the depth you can get without going numerical (or symbolic). Good job Jim. By the way I could do without the sound effects - it cheapens the exposition and may startle some.

    • @Josecannoli1209
      @Josecannoli1209 Před 5 lety +4

      Jake LaBete the sounds effects are dumb and make it seem like they think we are dumb

    • @jonnamechange6854
      @jonnamechange6854 Před 4 lety

      But the sound effects help us to understand what a bolt of lightning is. Lightning is just the same as the Big Bounce. I've finally nailed this subject.

  • @Biga101011
    @Biga101011 Před 5 lety +12

    47:00 knot quantum gravity could possibly be the greatest misleading physics term if they went with that.

  • @jooky87
    @jooky87 Před 5 lety +1

    Great talk, excellent speaker and summary of the current state. Basically we still need to convert spacetime from a continuous to a quantized geometric space.

  • @mmaximk
    @mmaximk Před 3 lety +1

    Thank you for giving me an intuitive model for loop quantum gravity - and for delivering that model in excellent banter!

  • @lfsheldon
    @lfsheldon Před 5 lety +9

    Clarity where I have never seen it before!

  • @stanislavavramov8767
    @stanislavavramov8767 Před 5 lety +137

    some horrific sound effects there

    • @jerryranelli6630
      @jerryranelli6630 Před 3 lety +1

      @Sunamer Z më nnk p bb

    • @chewyjello1
      @chewyjello1 Před 3 lety +3

      I fell asleep to my CZcams channel doing it's auto-thing. That scream sound effect was not pleasant to wake up to.

  • @RonJohn63
    @RonJohn63 Před rokem

    59:34 Dividing by such a small number means that _S_ is *GINORMOUS.*

  • @thepacificnguyen3107
    @thepacificnguyen3107 Před 2 lety

    wonderful ... can't help but absorb every single word in this lecture. Trigger my imagination further into the realm of quantum physics.

  • @kindlin
    @kindlin Před 5 lety +6

    Save yourself a half hour and skip ahead to 35:46, if you already have a cursory understanding of special relativity, general relativity and the inception of Quantum Mechanics.

  • @AwesometownUSA
    @AwesometownUSA Před 4 lety +12

    Jim “Don’t look for them, you won’t find them” Baggott

  • @DanielSmith-nf2kt
    @DanielSmith-nf2kt Před 4 lety +1

    I'm not expert on this and don't know how the super computer works mathematically but didn't we quantize the space ourselves when we put the gluons and quarks on a lattice for lattice quantum chromodynamics which could give the appearance of quantified space?

  • @VijayGupta-lw7qz
    @VijayGupta-lw7qz Před 9 měsíci

    Equivalence of gravity and acceleration: In picophysics first we explain formation of particles with its constituent space and Kenergy, and consequent interaction among themselves and space and quants.

  • @Age_of_Apocalypse
    @Age_of_Apocalypse Před 5 lety +10

    Jim Baggott, many Thanks: Great lecture!

  • @85zer0cool
    @85zer0cool Před 4 lety +3

    if space has gravity waves, space would be like a 3d ocean's top in my head. those waves should overlap even over themselves. would that create a "void" inside space? since the "void" would be "empty" it would not be able to break through the "fabric" of space, creating a outward expanding pressure inside the void. the void could still be shaped by gravitational effects causing it to be lumpy, smooth or both. could this be "dark energy" or "dark matter"?

    • @williamchurcher9645
      @williamchurcher9645 Před 4 lety

      (1) why should a wave overlap with itself? What does that mean? (2) the waves would not create a void, no. It's just rippling. Does the ocean surface create a void? You can only have a large ripple in one direction or a large ripple in another, or no ripple at all (constructive and destructive interference). (3) dark matter seems to be a particle, so you would have to have a stationary gravitational wave, which now that I think about it, is an interesting idea, but I'm quite sure it isn't a viable candidate for dark matter.

  • @ongbonga9025
    @ongbonga9025 Před 4 lety +1

    Fascinating. The immediate problem that springs to mind with this theory is the apparent expansion of the universe. If space is quantum in nature, what is expansion? It can't be the increasing in volume of one quantum of space, otherwise Planck's constant isn't so constant. So are new quanta of space being created?
    Another question I have is... if space is quantum in nature, does energy occupy space, or displace it?

  • @zanyarebrahimi4563
    @zanyarebrahimi4563 Před 6 měsíci

    It was a very useful yet beautiful presentation of loop quantum gravity.

  • @augustosantiago6769
    @augustosantiago6769 Před 5 lety +11

    To anyone complaining for little details as the sound effects... Why don't you just say Thank you Jim for your time and the lecture? Those people who ONLY criticize instead of being grateful are usually the ones that never contribute with anything in this world, but are always ready to find mistakes and wrong in what the other are doing. If you are so perfect, why don't you do a presentation as this one? It is very easy to criticize, but hard to recognize the effort and contribution of others...
    Very sad reality :-( Please, do not criticize now my English, it is my third language :-)

    • @milantrcka121
      @milantrcka121 Před 5 lety +1

      Well said!!!

    • @ANOLDMASTERJUKZ
      @ANOLDMASTERJUKZ Před 4 lety

      Ditto that: baby!

    • @OneTrueCat
      @OneTrueCat Před 3 lety +1

      Because if nobody tells him the sound effects were grating and obnoxious, he won't know that people didn't like them. Constructive criticism isn't a bad thing.
      People can know there's a problem without being able to deliver the solution. You'd be absolutely livid if your car broke down, and you took it to a mechanic who fixed it, but now the turn signal activates a horn in the cabin every time it lights up, and the mechanic told you that if you don't like their fix, you should do it yourself.

    • @augustosantiago6769
      @augustosantiago6769 Před 3 lety

      People can criticize and being nice at the same time. At least thanks him for the presentation, then... Suggest him the improvement.

    • @OneTrueCat
      @OneTrueCat Před 3 lety +1

      Thanks isn't necessary for criticism to be warranted or polite. I couldn't enjoy it with the sound effects, and I don't feel that thanks are in order, but it's also not rude or incorrect to not thank someone for something you didn't need or enjoy.

  • @subliminalvibes
    @subliminalvibes Před 5 lety +39

    Very interesting, thanks!
    ** LOUD AND UNNECESSARY SOUND EFFECTS WARNING TO HEADPHONE USERS **

    • @craigwall9536
      @craigwall9536 Před 5 lety +3

      A couple more of those and we're talking Class Action suit.

    • @pete540Z
      @pete540Z Před 4 lety

      Snowflakes complain about anything. Just ignore them.

    • @julianBraga
      @julianBraga Před 4 lety

      @@pete540Z lots of 'em here tonight! Pity.

  • @MrGoatflakes
    @MrGoatflakes Před 5 lety +1

    13:05 that was exactly what I thought of when I read it :P

  • @neoness1268
    @neoness1268 Před 7 měsíci

    Wonderful lecturer 👌👌👌👌👌✨✨✨✨✨

  • @mjtonyfire
    @mjtonyfire Před 4 lety +11

    20:40 tough crowd

    • @MendTheWorld
      @MendTheWorld Před 4 lety +1

      Throughout, actually; and it makes me wonder why. i can’t blame it on the audience. it must be in the delivery. i’m very sympathetic, though, as whatever intangible speaking skills he lacks, i lack as well. Whenever i’m speaking and try to evoke a particular response, i nearly always fail. i think his success rate in this lecture was pretty close to 0.000
      There HAVE been a few times, though, when things have magically worked as planned. It’s unpredictable, however.

  • @JackLee7223
    @JackLee7223 Před 4 lety +3

    It certainly explains Xeno's paradox perfectly.

    • @MechanoRealist
      @MechanoRealist Před 4 lety +1

      No it doesn't, because Zeno's paradox of Achilles and the tortoise is essentially a joke.
      It's like Schrödinger's cat, a thought experiment to highlight that something so obviously ridiculous shouldn't be taken seriously.
      Any yet some people still do... 😂

    • @PazLeBon
      @PazLeBon Před 4 lety

      @@MechanoRealist that seems flawed to me anyway, that entanglement. because they only confirm the rule itself after observation.
      i.e observe A, therefore the other is B. Observe it, confirms it's B.But until we observe it it could be an unobserved A. How am I wrong?

    • @pismar2
      @pismar2 Před 2 lety

      I found this video looking for an answer to this paradox.. If we assume space and time are continuous then they both consist of infinite monads of nothingness.. infinite points of no dimension (space) and infinite moments of no duration (time)

  • @ingvaraberge7037
    @ingvaraberge7037 Před 2 lety +1

    If there is an analogue to photons, called gravitons, that transmit gravity the way photons transmit electromagnetism, and a black hole is a place where light can not escape from, then how can gravitons escape from it, so that its presence can be felt by other objects in the universe?

  • @lovesbelovedgarden629
    @lovesbelovedgarden629 Před 4 lety

    I loved it! I need to investigate these knot theories. Find the Logos in them!

  • @dahdahditditditditditditda7536

    Thanks for the great video. What impact might be impressed by LQG on the topic of quantum entanglement ?

  • @janhoogendijk8604
    @janhoogendijk8604 Před 4 lety +3

    Thanks to all life forms to bring us knowledge. Time is a stream of unchangeable changes that propagate in all dimensions.

  • @rohitchat5538
    @rohitchat5538 Před 2 lety

    Thank-you so much to know about general relativity principal .. based on sir Einstein theory ..bluedown coc and down cok .. phsyics and the particles.. 🙏🙏 sir Jim for your so Amazing to know learned from you .. Photons neutrons .. analytical information..

  • @VijayGupta-lw7qz
    @VijayGupta-lw7qz Před 9 měsíci

    Time: In PicoPhysics we have two related chronological parameters. While time is distance between events; Samay is distance between Instants. All events constituting an instant are simultaneous. The kenergy konservation is studied with reference to instant.

  • @michaelcoulter8477
    @michaelcoulter8477 Před 4 lety +19

    at 52:51 "Fluctuations in quantum space create the appearance of time."
    How can you possibly have fluctuations without having time to begin with?

    • @michaelcoulter8477
      @michaelcoulter8477 Před 4 lety +1

      @@johnmpjkken3261 Seems nonsensical. Light moves through space. Light of a given frequency has so many oscillations per second. Therefore there is time in open space.

    • @justynpryce
      @justynpryce Před 4 lety +1

      I mean, you'd have to ask him to elaborate. Time to you means what it does to you, to him it may mean something entirely different. If quantum fluctuation are independent of time, as they would have to be otherwise space-time couldn't be a field, then I don't see why fluctuations couldn't be the cause of time. I'm not saying he's right, but I am saying he isn't instantly wrong because your understanding of time is different.

    • @certaindeath7776
      @certaindeath7776 Před 4 lety +1

      quantum fluctuation may be a ripple of what was there before our universe caused time.

    • @MathTutoringHelp
      @MathTutoringHelp Před 4 lety

      I'm sure he really understands what he's talking about. You would probably have to ask him yourself.

    • @PanicbyExample
      @PanicbyExample Před 4 lety

      well you aren't supposed to have infinites either so lots of these ideas are based in mathematical proofs not so-called observably persistent illusions

  • @sebastianelytron8450
    @sebastianelytron8450 Před 5 lety +11

    Best Ri lecture ever? Certainly a contender.

    • @tncorgi92
      @tncorgi92 Před 5 lety +6

      Could have done without the sound effects though.

  • @cheopys
    @cheopys Před 2 lety

    Baggott's "Interpretation of Quantum Theory" is the clearest book on the topic I have ever read.

  • @karimshah2650
    @karimshah2650 Před 4 lety

    Very insightful lecture. After listening this lecture one idea bothers me that matter has gone so lower scal like from atom to quarks bt space time is yet not. How come this possible? I think there must be deeper parts of space time as well.may be just a thought

  • @TheGrassyKnole
    @TheGrassyKnole Před 5 lety +23

    No need for the sound fx/ naive graphics. but otherwise excellent.

  • @edmundtan8506
    @edmundtan8506 Před 4 lety +5

    i will come and pick that up XD hahah

  • @johnjaksich3914
    @johnjaksich3914 Před 3 lety

    Mr. Baggott is rather gifted at explaining QM -- I suggest picking up his book, The Meaning of Quantum Mechanics. Very good expositor of QM--

  • @sparhopper
    @sparhopper Před 4 lety

    Not 1 mention of Branes?! That's Amazin'.

  • @gayatrirai7773
    @gayatrirai7773 Před 3 lety +6

    This is an amazing lecture ^‿^

  • @elischrock5356
    @elischrock5356 Před 4 lety +3

    He says "there are no infinities in nature." Then he says "maybe the universe began with a bounce rather than a bang."
    Pardon me if I am missing something, but the bouncing universe cosmology implies an infinity of Time... right?

    • @dadsonworldwide3238
      @dadsonworldwide3238 Před 4 lety

      Now cant be if it is infinty before now.lol

    • @wiseguy8799
      @wiseguy8799 Před 4 lety

      It implies that time isnt even in the equation. "Frozen time issues" basically space with out mass outside of quantum would be so small in distance time is irrelevant. And its sort of an oxymoron like the quotes at the end implies.

    • @sinephase
      @sinephase Před 4 lety +1

      if time is a consequence of inflation, then the start of the "bounce" is without time, and time starts again in the next cycle. It could be an infinite cycle but I don't think that's the kind of infinity he's talking about.

  • @aprylvanryn5898
    @aprylvanryn5898 Před rokem

    I love how the falling man's scream was doppler shifted

  • @cmgweb6951
    @cmgweb6951 Před 5 lety +2

    Reference to Kansas! I'm in!

  • @AdilKhan-gd2sc
    @AdilKhan-gd2sc Před 5 lety +3

    If time exists then is it also quantum in nature? A time particle ? A time wave? A time field?

    • @lucasthompson1650
      @lucasthompson1650 Před 5 lety +2

      "Time is just one damn thing after another." 😎

    • @agimasoschandir
      @agimasoschandir Před 4 lety

      “People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but **actually** from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly… time-y wimey… stuff.” -- The Doctor
      Well, someone had to put it in

    • @agimasoschandir
      @agimasoschandir Před 4 lety +1

      Or an emergent property of the expansion of space

    • @pismar2
      @pismar2 Před 2 lety

      Ιn all cases continuum implies infinity which leads to paradox... a whatever small period of time would consist of infinite moments of no duration...