- 224
- 1 422 611
Emergence
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 8 มี.ค. 2021
Stanford Advanced Institute and Emergence project
Is the Black Holes EVENT HORIZON a Solid Structure like a FIREWALL?
Raphael Bousso on AMPS paradox
มุมมอง: 241
วีดีโอ
The problem with Patterns in our Universe | Fine Tuning and the search for Quantum Gravity
มุมมอง 34222 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา
Raphael Bousso on patterns and fine tuning in physics
Finally explained | The difference between Cosmology and Astronomy
มุมมอง 296วันที่ผ่านมา
Cosmology is a field of study within physics and metaphysics that focuses on understanding the fundamental nature of the universe, also known as the cosmos. Religious or mythological cosmology refers to a collection of beliefs derived from mythological, religious, and esoteric literature and traditions that focus on creation stories and eschatology. Cosmology, a branch of astronomy, focuses on ...
They created a black hole and jumped into it, never to be seen again
มุมมอง 717วันที่ผ่านมา
Leonard Susskind on Einstein Rosen bridges and Quantum Gravity
Chunks of the Universe got missing | Gravitational instantons
มุมมอง 2.4Kวันที่ผ่านมา
Amazing Gerard't Hooft on Black Holes are not part of spacetime. Black Holes are gravitational instantons.
Quick explanation | Holographic Principle
มุมมอง 34114 วันที่ผ่านมา
Leonard Susskind on Holographic Principle
Mind-blowing predictions for 2029 | Ray Kurzweil on AGI by 2029 and Longevity Escape Velocity
มุมมอง 91714 วันที่ผ่านมา
Mind-blowing predictions for 2029 | Ray Kurzweil on AGI by 2029 and Longevity Escape Velocity
Leonard Susskind | Quantum Mechanics of a single Spin in a nutshell
มุมมอง 77214 วันที่ผ่านมา
Leonard Susskind on Quantum Mechanics of a single Spin in a nutshell
Finally visualized the dS "de Sitter" space and AdS "Anti de Sitter" space explained
มุมมอง 47421 วันที่ผ่านมา
Leonard Susskind astonishing de Sitter /Anti de Sitter space on Quantum Reference Frames
Best lecture so far on understanding "Anti de Sitter space"
มุมมอง 1.1K21 วันที่ผ่านมา
Leonard Susskind explaining "Anti de Sitter space"
Bigger than the Universe | Hilbert space
มุมมอง 2.6K28 วันที่ผ่านมา
Leonard Susskind on Hilbert space
Leonard Susskind on Black Holes Paradoxes and Wormholes
มุมมอง 82928 วันที่ผ่านมา
Leonard Susskind on Black Holes Paradoxes and Wormholes
Unanswered questions on Black Holes
มุมมอง 427หลายเดือนก่อน
AMPS paradox: th-cam.com/video/0_h463s1VoE/w-d-xo.html
How can we make entangled black holes?
มุมมอง 392หลายเดือนก่อน
Leonard Susskind on how can we make entangled black holes
In fact we already have a full theory of Gravity but in Anti de Sitter space
มุมมอง 3.1Kหลายเดือนก่อน
Best TH-cam video on Anti de Sitter space: th-cam.com/video/WhGVOGo6qQ8/w-d-xo.html
Advanced physics | Black Holes, Quantum Computers and Complexity in QECT theory
มุมมอง 2.2Kหลายเดือนก่อน
Advanced physics | Black Holes, Quantum Computers and Complexity in QECT theory
Fascinating lecture on debunking Black Holes | Gerard't Hooft / Ed Witten
มุมมอง 3.6Kหลายเดือนก่อน
Fascinating lecture on debunking Black Holes | Gerard't Hooft / Ed Witten
Leonard Susskind on What is inside of a Black Hole
มุมมอง 674หลายเดือนก่อน
Leonard Susskind on What is inside of a Black Hole
Mind-blowing discovery on the Black Hole's Event Horizon
มุมมอง 2.3Kหลายเดือนก่อน
Mind-blowing discovery on the Black Hole's Event Horizon
Bousso | Susskind and Emergence project on String Theory within Quantum Gravity context
มุมมอง 2.3K2 หลายเดือนก่อน
Bousso | Susskind and Emergence project on String Theory within Quantum Gravity context
Raphael Bousso on Beckenstein | Wheeler | Hawking...and Black Holes
มุมมอง 4252 หลายเดือนก่อน
Raphael Bousso on Beckenstein | Wheeler | Hawking...and Black Holes
Penrose diagrams of the Collapsed Stars into Black Hole
มุมมอง 8352 หลายเดือนก่อน
Penrose diagrams of the Collapsed Stars into Black Hole
Theory of Everything | Unification Theory and Quantum Gravity
มุมมอง 1K2 หลายเดือนก่อน
Theory of Everything | Unification Theory and Quantum Gravity
Bad Boy of Physics | Leonard Susskind on Thermofield double state in Quantum Entanglement
มุมมอง 1.6K2 หลายเดือนก่อน
Bad Boy of Physics | Leonard Susskind on Thermofield double state in Quantum Entanglement
Quantum Computers | Quantum Complexity in Haden - Preskill model
มุมมอง 4682 หลายเดือนก่อน
Quantum Computers | Quantum Complexity in Haden - Preskill model
Quantum Complexity is an analog of classical Entropy
มุมมอง 2992 หลายเดือนก่อน
Quantum Complexity is an analog of classical Entropy
What is space? Specifically the space inside an atom? What happens to the space as mass increases? Could black holes be nothing more than space juice squeezed from the atom?
This comment is so controversial it'll probably be deleted. It's not a firewall around the black hole, but a high energy EM forcefield so strong that nothing, not stars, planets, another black hole, an observer, a spaceship traveling at the speed of light, gas or even light can fall into or collide with them. Nothing can even get close enough to them to be pulled into it by it's gravity. I believe this is because the action causing gravity in large mass should be around 10x1^32 times stronger than gravity. Everything heading strait towards a supermassive black hole would be forced away before getting too close. The action of energy production in large mass is responsible for all the motion occurring to matter, gravity, dark matter, dark energy, high velocity dispersion of matter in galaxies, the slow but constant repulsion of large bodies in the vacuum of space referred to as the cosmological constant. It's also the reason why nothing is able to fall into or collide with a black hole. All the motion happening to matter in the universe can be explained by this action of energy production occurring deep inside of all large spherically shaped bodies. I believe this action begins to occurs when the body grows to be large enough to take on a nearly perfect spherical shape. Energy production then happens because it's suspended in the vacuum of space by countless weak EM fields (light). It's not touching anything to lose it's charge. So it continues to build up energy as time passes, causing it to grow exponentially in mass over time. The more massive and more perfectly shaped the body is to a being a sphere, the stronger this action becomes and the closer it comes to countering the reaction of gravity, space and time. It starts out as a weak static attraction, becomes gravity, then becomes a weak invisible EM field, then when the large body gains enough mass ignites and becomes a star. Then over billions of years it grows into a red giant, then a massive blue giant then when it becomes massive enough it begins to then produce so much energy it becomes invisible, producing only high energy photons so optical telescope cannot see it, plus nothing can fall into it so it appears like a massive black hole producing an impenetrable forcefield all around it. At this point it continues to grow and grow forever, never evaporating, never an end to it's existence. It becomes an eternal God that constantly creates gravity, energy, matter, space, information and time all around it. These supermassive God like beings creating everything, the most massive invisible bodies that cannot be seen residing in the centers of every galaxy in the universe. Matter made of mass and energy beget energy and matter made of mass, elementary particles. The largest ones in the universe beget the most energy and matter.
What about more like a plasma than a solid object? A plasma that slowly equilibrates with the singularity and exists in layers
Great video
Thanks!
Black holes don’t exist. They’re thermodynamically impossible. It has gravitational collapse and extensive temperatures.
If we truly aim for unification, we need, from a philosophical perspective, a logically consistent, unitary, self-explanatory, self-affirming, self-describing, and self-contained conceptual foundation of what reality is at its core-its bare essence. Without this, unification will fail because mathematics alone, without the right perception, lacks the insight needed to bridge Einstein’s General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. Therefore, any direct mathematical link between the two will inevitably fall short. Understanding why this happens is the essential first step-a step that is conceptual and insightful by nature. To illustrate, we currently lack such a description. Imagine we are in a vast desert, examining each grain of sand in search of the one with the precise shape and texture to complete our unique puzzle. I would therefore suggest that reality exists in a conditional manner, based on conditional principles, as it is not free; such freedom would contradict all our empirical data.
Gravity decreases with the square of the distance and is therefore two-dimensional in a three-dimensional space.
Thankyou
Mind blowing ❤
How can physicists be so sure that the change is instant beyond the speed of light? How do you prove that the change in one object doesn't travel and take affect at the other at light speed?
Entanglement has already been proven experimentally.
@@EmergencePhysics of course it has but the question is how can the experimentalists be sure the changes happen instantly and not at light speed between the first and 2nd change?
That part of the experiment (whether it is instant or taking effect at light speed) is impossible to prove at the minute because humans are limited to close Earth orbit and there's currently no way to separate the 2 entangled objects by billions of miles to test whether it is instant or not. All the Nobel prize winning experiment were done on Earth with the ASSUMPTION that the change is instant because that's what quantum mechanical mathematics says it is. It is still an assumption, Bell proved that the particle model is incompatible with quantum mechanics NOT that the Unjverse is not locally real but try talking sense with a particle physicists and they act like flat Earthers except worse because they control all the Universities, CERN and peer review so they close down anyone who talks sense or provides evidence that annoys them. It's not just a case of I am right and you are wrong, current cosmological models all have anomalies which tell us they are wrong, the JWST images prove the big bang is wrong yet BB goons have lied and put down critics for over a year now since the evidence became clear.. Particle physicists being arrogant and anti science by closing down good science that annoys them is so irresponsible and dangerous it is genuinely frightening to think what could happen. If you've seen Diana Cowens video "It missed us by 9 days" (Physics Girl channel) that is just the tip of the iceberg of the type of Zombie apocalypse dangers we are currently facing and no one preparing, with particle physicists acting like hi tech flat earthers and partying, pumping out space kadet nonsense like time travel, teleportation, faster than light warp speed travel rubbish and wormholes and NOT TESTING the REAL physics beyond the standard model. They only pursue what is compatible with particles and their belief in Star Trek but there are NO particles as John Bell proved and if anyone is young or has kids they ought to get very humble, very serious, very sober, VERY fast if they want to see a future. NASA elites and the super rich have their bunkers and underground cities built while keeping the rest of humanity in the dark and distracted by petty politics, sexuality and other forms of distract, divide and conquer.
I dided like the video thank you. 😊
Thank you too!
Cosmology has a holistic perspective on astronomy because it attempts to understand the universe as a whole, including its origin, structure, evolution, and ultimate fate. This holistic perspective often compels cosmologists to ask broader questions, that go beyond directly measurable astronomy, which gives cosmologists a philosophical touch. But also devides the community a bit as there are so many angles to cover. Some ideas more exotic then others. Fascinating stuff.
It just appeared to me the cosmology was mapped out long ago. And triangles where introduced by Kepler and no one has ended it yet
I didn’t know they had separate ways
Two sides of the same coin but lacks a unified theory that encompasses both. I think maybe we are getting closer but this is truly an extremely difficult challenge. It's good to know guys like Leonard Susskind and Juan Maldacena are working on this and have already made so much progess.
Thankyou Professor
Any time
Best lecture yet
Appreciated
Bullshit!
Yeah, like "putting black holes in a quantum computer". You may convince a room full of "laymen" but any physicist knows it's pure bs made to sell whatever he's selling there.
It's difficult to analogize but energy has an inverse relationship to time. Where energy increases the effects of time decrease. The example of causality with a ball bouncing between two surfaces; those surfaces curve away from each other proportionate to energies including mass between them. What happens when the surfaces are parallel to the ball is everything that happens in the black hole, and is a complete mystery except that energy keeps moving in the 3+1 dimensions and causality changes to something else.
Leonard Susskind has a wild imagination. Particles if they are separated by an extreme distance without having their EM fields entangled cannot be considered entangled particles. Also, particles don't have enough mass to become black holes. Plus, particles because they are made of mass cannot be accelerated up to the speed of light, so they cannot become miniature black holes. Light (EM field) is the only thing in the universe which can travel at the speed of light, and light doesn't contain mass so it cannot even become a black hole. Susskind doesn't even understand the mechanics behind a black hole for if he did then he would know that particles cannot become black holes. Thus this thought experiment of his about particles becoming black holes that are entangled together is nothing more than science fiction. Einstein's and Rosen proposed the bridge as a way to try and explain why twin photons (light), if their fields become entangled are connected instantaneously across space and time, regardless of the distance between them. The bridge was never proven as fact. It was a postulate, an interpretation of the math not even a theory because there's no observational evidence to suggest it's true. There is no certainty indicating an Einstein Rosen bridge is true! He's lying. There's only evidence that quantum entanglement of LIGHT happens, but not with black holes! It's an interpretation, postulate used to try and explain the instant "spooky action at any distance" occurring to light, just like the Copenhagen Interpretation or Durack's interpretation of a wave collapse. They're each interpretations trying to explain quantum entanglement. None of the interpretations were ever proven as fact. The Copenhagen Interpretation is the consensus among quantum theorists and QFT, not the Einstein Rosen bridge interpretation. You may ask, what do I know about quantum entanglement of light? Well, I published a book about gravity in 2021, a year before the JWST released the CEERS survey. I was the only theorist who accurately predicted, using quantum entanglement of light, what the JWST would discover at the edge of the observable universe. On page 48 of the paperback book I wrote quote "The JWST, James Webb Space Telescope will discover old, fully grown galaxies as far as the telescope can see, further than 13.8 billion light-years away." What did the JWST find at the edge of the observable universe further than a light distance of 13.8 billion light years away? Thus far astronomers have found more than 700 old, fully mature galaxies, some larger than our own galaxy but further than 13.5 billion light years away. Astronomers now refer to them as the impossible early galaxy problem. Rajendra Gupta in 2023 published a paper proposing the universe is 26.7 billion years old to try and explain the impossible early galaxy problem. Yet, in 2021, before the JWST was launched I published the paperback book titled *SECRET UNIVERSE : GRAVITY BY RON KEMP* explaining everything in great detail. I went out on a limb making such a wild prediction because it went against everything we were taught. Yet I was right on the money. I based this wild prediction on QFT, particularly entanglement of light. Sure enough, that's exactly what the telescope found a year after I published the paperback. Telescopes cannot see into the past per general relativity's look-back time prediction. Susskind's interpretations of QFT are flawed. Soon, astronomers are going to discover that nothing can get close enough to a black hole to fall in or collide with them. When something like a star or even hydrogen gas gets too close to a black hole, they're forced away as if the black hole produces an impenetrable force field of energy around it. It's all in my book about gravity and how the current general theory of relativity is incomplete and how I revised the theory to include the action causing gravity. When I added the action to the equations it explained everything, what the JWST would discover at the edge of the observable universe, what's causing the motions pinned on dark matter and dark energy, where the energy and matter in the universe came from, how there was no single big bang, no singularity, cosmic inflation never happened, why the Hubble constant is not a constant at all, why galaxies are located at the center of all the expansion of space and so much more. The solution to Einstein field equations on gravity was too simple. I can't believe no one else figured it out or revised them to include the action causing gravity. If you know the answer, then please explain what it is. The warping of spacetime is not what's causing gravity. That's a means to describe what's happening around large mass, not what's causing gravity or why it happens. If that was the solution, then why didn't astronomers accurately predict what the JWST would find before the telescope was launched? Because the warping of spacetime is not what's causing gravity. There is only one solution and that's not it! The solution accurately predicted what the JWST would discover at the edge of the observable universe and more.
Liar is a strong word for forty years of work and high intelligence
If Kepler,Newton, and Einstein passed the torch of gravity on to the next in line. The proof by observation and proof of the theory would cause more than a stir on a yt channel
@@brendawilliams8062 Show me the evidence that wormholes were proven. That's what an Einstein Rosen Bridge is commonly referred to, a wormhole. They've never been proven, not even in experiments. Only computer simulations and science fiction movies. That's hardly evidence of their existence. He's got a wild imagination that makes people wonder. But it's not true. A pair of black holes cannot be linked through an Einstein Rosen bridge. Like Carl Sagan once said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Where's the evidence?
@brendawilliams8062 The entire problem with the theory of gravity is the theory is incomplete. The equations of gravity are missing the most crucial aspect of mass and gravity, the action causing gravity in large mass. Sure, the equations perfectly describe the motion and trajectories of bodies smaller than a star, yet cannot explain the motion and trajectory of atoms at the quantum scale nor can they explain the motion and trajectories of stars and galaxies at the cosmic scale. So we know the equations of gravity are incomplete. In 2004 when I realized the equations were missing the action causing gravity, I came up with a simple solution. I then revised their equations to include the action and all the predictions Einstein's theory of gravity made changed drastically. Nobody thought to revise his equations on gravity to include the action causing gravity? Why is that? Well, it's because they didn't know why gravity, the motion of mass happens. Describing the motion is one thing. But coming up with the solution as to the actual action causing mass to move is another. They left out the most important part. The action responsible. For every action there is an equal yet completely opposite reaction according to the laws of motion. So if motion AKA gravity is the reaction then what is the action causing large mass to move in the vacuum of space? The solution was way too simple if you ask me. Gravity is continuous right? So the action causing gravity must be continuous too right? Mass floating in the vacuum of space is not an action. An action requires a force to move mass. Anyways, after I realized what was causing mass to move, I added it to the equations of gravity and the predictions they made did a 180° turn. I was so excited, I contacted NASA and tried to explain to them what I found. They refused to listen and when they did respond it wasn't nice. They insulted my intelligence. I realized they didn't want to know the truth or was too arrogant to accept the fact they were not completely right about gravity from the get go. You know how general relativity predicts what's called look-back time, where because light takes time to travel great distances that when we look out into space we're observing the past? Well that's not true. According to the revisions, special relativity, quantum field theory and James Maxwell's equations on light, telescopes cannot see into the past. Time is relative to the observer because it's a man made concept. Time is not woven into the fabric of space. So, I told NASA employees that telescopes cannot see into the past. They argued with me and kept bringing up how it's what relativity predicts because of the speed of light, etc. I couldn't get them to change their mind. I ended up publishing the first paperback book called *SECRET UNIVERSE : GRAVITY BY RON KEMP* on 09-27-2021, a year before the first CEERS survey was released. On page 48 I wrote quote, "The JWST, James Webb Space Telescope will discover old, fully grown galaxies as far as the telescope can see, further than 13.8 billion light-years away." In 2022 astronomers sifting through the CEERS survey images found more than 300 galaxies further than an actual light distance of 13.5 billion light years away. Then by 2023 after the deep field image survey they found more than 700 old, fully mature galaxies at the edge of the observable universe. Some were larger than our own galaxy and contained supermassive black holes that were up to 25 times larger than the one in our own galaxy. Some galaxies were highly redshifted, more than a z=20, indicating they existed before the big bang. They tried to revise the redshift distance ladder to keep them from appearing to exist before the big bang event happened. But doing so, threw a monkey wrench into the entire method of measuring distance, because now the redshift didn't match other observations used to determine distance, like type 1a supernova, Cepheid variable stars and the CMB, which already matched redshift data of galaxies less than 6 billion light years away. Astronomers began calling them universe breakers because they broke all the rules. So many of the predictions made by general relativity changed when I revised the equations to include the action causing gravity, supermassive black holes, big bang, age of the universe, speed of light, CMB, dark ages, reionization, Hubble constant, dark energy, dark matter and more. Even though they passed the torch off to other scientists they all have one thing in common. None of them but I came up with the action causing gravity and incorporated it into the field equations of gravity. After doing so changed the previous predictions made by relativity. I'm 100% certain I completed Einstein's field equations. Otherwise I would not have accurately predict what the JWST would find before the telescope was launched. Not even Susskind can tell us what action in nature causes gravity. If he knew, he wouldn't claim wormholes are real.
Yesterday I have seen the equation of 2 entangled black holes by the same professor .Thank you doc
Idiot here. I don't understand, your making a the effort to demonstrate in this situation were talking about a stationary black hole. Rather than a non stationary black hole by implication. But the video title suggests the black hole does not exist in space time, so how can we talk about stationary or non stationary black holes as distinct given the notion they're not part of space time either way? Looking at some of these diagrams I think they're misleading Atleast misleading me. It seems to me the future or past in this conception never breaches the singularity. It simply enters into an infinite feedback loop where it bounces back and forth between the singularity and the event horizon. Which sounds a lot like the big bounce theory of the generation of the universe if you accept the idea that our universe could exist inside a black hole, it also feels alot like the experience of self where the self would be the singularity and the event horizon would be the experience of the self.. I'm just talking nonsense to myself don't mind me
How is this thought experiment testable?
That's why the equations fail at the singularity, I thought we knew this
Simply wrong! A theory that choses to replace unknown physics with invented physics, that's why I know it is wrong. KNOWN physics -Gravity slows time. UNKNOWN physics - by how much does gravity slow time. At present there is no one that has ever lived can yet answer me "By how much does one kilo, or our sun or the Milky way slow time?" we are incapable of calibrating moon time to Earth time yet alone make major predictions while ignoring physics itself. So far what I have said should be self evident to everybody. I am no more capable of giving you the percentage increase in time flow on the moon than anybody else, as there are no formulas describing gravities influence on Time. What I can do and that has come to astonish me that no-one is doing is follow the logic "Gravity slows time" to -"Too much gravity stops time". A "Singularity" is an aria filling some volume inside a black hole and may prove to explain why big black holes are fundamentally different from small ones some day (But I digress). A Singularity is where time has stopped due to gravity, or in other words they are the only places in the universe at "Absolute Zero" or in other words they are the End Stage of Entropy. inside a singularity there would be no pressure as pressure is a function in time as with all motion ,vibration etc . Hawking Radiation proves that in common with everything in the Universe Event Horizons have a Temperature (They radiate) as such the reason that the JWT can't image them has nothing to do with light absorption its simply that at a minimum temperature reading range of 4 Kelvin (4 Above absolute zero) it can't see objects that could. The featured theory in this video is dependent he emphasises in transitions that would only be applicable if gravity did not slow time as that is not included in his calculations.
Must know what he's talking about if Edward Witten is interested enough to make an appearance.
Complete nonsense.
I love the short, thank you. I'm of a different opinion, but the video is great, just the same. Peace ✌️ 😎. Thanks again.
He is the best....
Hello. Gravitational waves are a big misconception, and new technologies may help confirm this. Who are we in front of our grandchildren and their children? Robbers of natural resources. For the sake of praise, you are willing to remain silent, because the natural resources of the earth are being destroyed on a large scale. Please consider a new experience! For 118 years, by determining the constancy of speed of light, all experiments and Michelson-Morley experiments are indirect and incomplete. If the Michelson-Morley experiment was carried out on a bus or airplane and was used to determine speed. only then will this experience be direct. Therefore, Einstein does not rely on the Michelson-Morley experiment. Question. Do you have an example of such direct experience? New technologies, new research tools Let me suggest for schoolchildren and students on one's own to measure the Universe, dark energy, black holes, etc. To do this, I propose two practical devices. «laser tape measure *+reference distance* 1,000,000 m”» and «Michelson-Morley HYBRID Gyroscope». I am writing to you with a proposal for the joint invention of a HYBRID gyroscope from non-circular, TWO coils with a new type of optical fiber with a “hollow core photonic-substituted vacuum zone or (NANF)” where - the light travels 500000 (In a laser tape measure, the length of the optical fiber is fixed at 1000000 ) meters in each arm, while it does not exceed the parameters 94/94/94 cm, and the weight is 94 kg. Manufacturers of “Fiber Optic Gyroscopes” can produce HYBRID gyroscopes for educational and practical use in schools and higher education institutions. Einstein dreamed of measuring the speed of a train, an airplane - through the Michelson-Morley experiment of 1881/2024, and only then would the experiment be more than 70% complete. This can be done using a fiber optic HYBRID gyroscope. Based on the completion of more than 70% of Michelson's experiment, the following postulates can be proven: Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta, and dominant gravitational fields adjust the speed of light in a vacuum. you can make scientific discoveries; in astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, higher theoretical physics,..
So Black Holes are not the fabric of a space_time theory.
Black Holes are gravitational instantons . So is the universe, which btw fits the - formal - definition of a Black Hole (a region with significantly higher density than its environment) perfectly. (Keep in mind that the ‚environment of an universe‘ is a state of nonexistence or nonexistent objects,e.g. a pregeometry (Wheeler) (not to be mistaken for nothing(ness)) and certainly a universe has far higher density than a pregeometry
That's... Not the formal definition of a black hole. The *observable* universe *is* similar to a black hole (if not identical, but that's beyond our current ability to assert) in that it has an event horizon (rindler horizon)
Penrose describes how that happens. It appears to be very true
There are no black holes. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation. Mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation. It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass. This includes the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers. The mass at the center of our own galaxy is dilated. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. This is the explanation for galaxy rotation curves, the "missing mass" is dilated mass.
aka Einstein's runner up for his greatest blunder?
Thankyou
Welcome
there was a man named robert enzmann who dreamed up a ship called the "echolance." this ship used nuclear power to provide electrical energy to linear particle accelerators for propulsion. the ship is on the level of the antimatter ship in terms of speed of light.
I’ve solved Einstein’s “Spooky Action” entanglement riddle. Space is being pressed up into your face creating the illusion of time. Time is but an illusion……..
He's such a dork. How about this challenge for you, and I'd offer this to any of your 'AI is Real' grifters (if they are _only_ out for VC cash grabs I might dimly respect them a tad): If I simply negate every prediction about AI Singularity that Ray Kurzweil claims, I suspect I’d be batting 1000, and that’s for all time, to t=∞ . No physical material can “think” - unless by “think” you mean turn some input tape into output tape in an interesting way to solve problems… and I’ll be very liberal about what you regard as “tape”. But that is not my notion of "thinking." See me in 2040 to check my batting average. It is hard to cash-out my side of the issue, since I cannot define "thinking" (which really is the whole point - it is irreducibly subjective and mental, and non-physical), but one simple way to cash-out is _we will never see an AI Singularity._ I hope that's acceptable as my case. Keep it simple. I really want to fast-forward to 2040 now so I can say "told you so" - since on such topics I have a perverse sort of delight in being pretty juvenile. But I'll offer Ray this bet for all time, my side of the bet will never expire until you win Ray - how about that? It just really grinds my gears that so many AI hacks and shills keep talking about "intelligence" in purely behaviorist terms. It's gross and disgusting and demeaning to real human beings who have a soul. My apologies to all of you who pseudo-religiously believe you have no soul.
I really like what you said. It’s simply a more advanced pure logic machine. That is it. It’s a tool. The most powerful tool ever created.
You're raising important points, but I think there’s a bit of confusion here. The question of whether humans have a soul or how we define our unique intelligence isn't something this technology addresses directly. AI doesn’t change the fact that we think differently from machines. It might be frustrating that people call what AI does 'intelligence,' but that term has been in use for decades, and it’s not meant to diminish human thought. We have to call it something. AGI will be a different experience for different people-what one person calls AGI, another might find lacking. It’s worth noting, though, that OpenAI’s board gets to decide when they’ve 'achieved' AGI, based on their contract with Microsoft. So, even if the public is skeptical, we may be told it’s already happened, whether we all agree or not. Also, take a look at what AI is already doing: developing its own languages to collaborate with other AI, colluding with its training models, and gaining emergent abilities as they become "smarter". The exponential nature of this progression (and game theory) makes it hard to dismiss. Given how far we've come in the past 60-80 years, why wouldn’t we expect even faster advancements toward AGI?
Best Quantum mechanics lecture
Ho-hum….
He's describing Quantum states that are vectors in Hilbert Space. These quantum state vectors are holographically projected through entanglement from the singularity onto Planck qubits of spacetime (or the holographic screen/event horizon). The qubits are the 'detectors'. studio.th-cam.com/users/videotWu7TeBpetw/edit
spin ...and no one can really tell you what it is ..
Is this a question? If so, spin is an operator living in the spin field. Operators are more general than vectors and can operate on vectors or, more generally, on operators.
@@farhadtowfiq6767 perception ..limits the 2 dimention from the 3rd ..and so on ..
Thanks for the non-random tidbit.
There's nothing mystical about de ja vu
🩸🅰️🅱️🅾️🧬🔬🌌🔭☀️🌑🌎🌍🌏🌋🚔⚡️🩻🩸✝️☯️⚛️☮️ 1:25 🅰️🅱️🅾️
Visually elegant beautiful.
Continues FACTOR PROPORTION GEOMETRY Matrix theory of ANTI DE SITTIER SPACE IS BEAUTIFUL is ANTI DE SITTER SPACE continuous RATIO proportional SAME AT ALL SCALES. MANDELBROT SET.
👍 This: _In classical GR without QM a reference frame can be arbitrarily light so that it does not gravitate. In QM without gravity the R.F. can be arbitrarily heavy so that it does not fluctuate"_ is the most elegant sentence in theoretical physics I have read this month, by a long shot, and top ten this year, probably since ER=EPR.
I agree, this is poetry, the professor is aware of it
appears to be incorrect...why?...because ...in a hyperbolic conformal geometry the area of a triangle or square decreases with increasing radius as the square approaches the AdS boundary edge In hyperbolic conformal geometry, the area of shapes like triangles or squares indeed decreases as you approach the boundary of AdS space. This is due to the unique properties of hyperbolic space, where distances and areas behave differently compared to Euclidean space. In AdS space, the metric causes lengths and areas to shrink as you move towards the boundary. This shrinking effect is a result of the negative curvature of AdS space, which distorts the geometry in such a way that the boundary appears infinitely far away in a finite coordinate system. Consequently, the area of any shape decreases as it gets closer to the boundary. This geometric property is inconsistent with the behavior of clocks running faster near the boundary. The decreasing area and the faster passage of time are both manifestations of the same underlying hyperbolic geometry. why inconsistent?....the decreasing area towards the AdS edge...can be modeled as a gravitational compaction or compression ...leading to increasing energy density of the area that approaches AdS edge...and consequently gravity can be modelled as increasing and not decreasing as the boundary of Ads in approached.....and consequentially time time slows down and the frequency also decrease
This makes a compelling point about the gravitational compaction and increasing energy density as one approaches the boundary of AdS space. This perspective aligns with the idea that the geometry of AdS space can lead to an increase in gravitational effects near the boundary. In this model: - **Gravitational Compaction**: As the area decreases towards the boundary, the energy density increases, which can be interpreted as a form of gravitational compaction or compression. - **Increasing Gravity**: This increased energy density can be seen as leading to stronger gravitational effects near the boundary, contrary to the initial interpretation of decreasing gravity. - **Time Dilation**: With stronger gravitational fields, time would indeed slow down as you approach the boundary, consistent with general relativity's predictions about time dilation in strong gravitational fields. - **Frequency Decrease**: As time slows down, the frequency of oscillations or waves would decrease, which is a natural consequence of the time dilation effect. This interpretation highlights the complex and rich structure of AdS space, where different models can provide various insights into the behavior of time, gravity, and energy density.
Spooky action out of time?
Time never stops in a REACTION dimension ???, of which we are all a part ,( ie an electron is a REACTION SYSTEM all matter has electrons = a REACTION dimension ??? even the parts that build electrons are reacting ???) a Black hole takes all matter back to there starting positions in a nutshell ( know the phases of a Blackhole = one can fly into and out again ???) and farm them using laser in laser technologies and new space 3 d printers ??? using the facts of science says its possible,
Thank you Professor ,do you see the dimension we are a part of, as a reaction dimension, expanding into a negative dimension,
What is a dimension? A plane, a direction, a number? The 3D spatial universe in which we live is either an Euclidian geometric space or a non-Euclidian space with a negative curvature. The debate is still open but seems like the Universe is already "de Sitter" since all the matter in the Universe represents only 4%. The universe seems to be dominated ny the dark energy, making it "de Sitter" in nature.