Sean Carroll on the Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics w/ Luke Robert Mason
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ม.ค. 2021
- Physicist Sean Carroll shares his insights into the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, how theoretical physics informs our understanding of reality, and what the human mind can comprehend about nature of the universe.
🎧 Full interview from FUTURES Podcast Episode #31.
👉🏻 Edited audio, transcript & show notes can be found at:
futurespodcast.net/episodes/3...
🎥 Recorded before the coronavirus pandemic on 21 January 2020 in London, United Kingdom.
🧠 Find out more: futurespodcast.net
🎧 Apple Podcasts: bit.ly/futurespodcast-apple
🎧 Spotify: bit.ly/futurespodcast-spotify
🎧 Stitcher: bit.ly/futurespodcast-stitcher
🎧 Deezer: bit.ly/futurespodcast-deezer
🎧 Soundcloud: bit.ly/futurespodcast-soundcloud
📝 Rate & Review: bit.ly/futurespodcast-review
-- CREDITS --
💻 Produced by FUTURES Podcast
🔴 Recorded, Mixed & Edited by Luke Robert Mason
🎥 Camera by Proud Business Productions
🙏🏻 Thanks to Oneworld Publications
-- SOCIAL MEDIA --
🐦 Twitter: / futurespodcast
📷 Instagram: / futurespodcast
📰 Facebook: / futurespodcast
#FUTURESPodcast #SeanCarroll #QuantumPhysics - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[UNCUT]"เศรษฐา" โดนบีบให้ลาออก เผยดีลลับ "ทักษิณ" ต้องต่อโปร ไม่งั้นเจอจุดจบ! I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XlH3k81dxmE/mqdefault.jpg)
The genuine excitement of Mason helps give such plasticity to the interview making Carroll even more captivating! It seems I finally understand quantum mechanics!! Do I?!
every next moment is a new universe, this is literally the progression of time, the branching of the universe and us branching along with it
Excellent interview
I completely agree with the Professor. The whole idea of “shut up and calculate” at a stroke limits our understanding of the universe. There’s so many questions that could be and should be answered if we all don’t shut up and scream out WHY.
Carroll is very good. His voice is excellent, his reasoning is superb, and he never says "Ahhh..."
There is no one quite like Sean Carroll that can inspire you to feel the awe and mystery that reaches from the deepest inner mind to the outer limits.
You feel awe and mystery when you are being told absolute bullshit? You would feel right at home in a Catholic mass. :-)
Great interview! I did not know that Steve Buscemi was a a physicist
I'm very impressed with the interviewer. Great job.
Me too, he gets the questions exactly right.
😄
I feel like the infinite copies of Sean Carroll is trying to understand the world and answer all these questions the best as he can. He really cares when we honestly try to understand the reality.
The problem is that there are as many copies of Sean Carroll who are saying that MWI is complete bullshit as there are copies who are selling it as the best thing since the invention of sliced bread. And there are copies of you who hate Sean Carrol. And then there are universes without Sean Carrol. Actually almost every possible universe does not have a Sean Carroll. Or a you. ;-)
One of the best, down-to-earth interviews with Sean (on awesome topics) that I've seen so far. Great job by Sean for his explanations and by the interviewer who did an amazing job!
Thank you for listening!
Very good interview, congratulations
I love Sean’s approach t this. He’s so no nonsense and factual. I’d love to have a philosophical discussion with him about what he thinks all this means. We are, it seems, inside a render-on-demand system (at a nuclear level) that seems to generate an infinite amount of possible histories for every particle in the universe. What does that? Why?
Few people have such clarity of thought. Thank you Professor - you are a delight to listen to.
I agree. while I understand what he is saying but its difficult to explain to another person
MWI suffers from physics violations, common sense violations and lack of evidence.
Very good interview
What a wonderful interview! big Prof Carroll fan, but you're delightful interviewer, too. Love your enthusiasm and passion, bravo.
Thank you for watching, Kieran!
This channel is criminally under-subbed!
I feel arrested by this comment! Thank you. 😇
Great discussion! Questions and answers were great. Thanks, Luke. One question. As I understand it, there are four models of the multiverse. Seems Dr. Carroll described the first one. But the third one consists of parallel universes along a dimension orthogonal to our space-time hypercube. How does that differ from Dr. Everett's many world interpretation?
Great interview, good questions and Sean is just the best
Great interview, and as always Sean can make the deepest knowledge seem so simple and understandable. Thanks.
I guess im asking the wrong place but does anybody know of a trick to log back into an instagram account?
I stupidly lost the account password. I would love any tricks you can offer me
@Wilson Alvin Instablaster ;)
@Nikolai Archie thanks for your reply. I found the site thru google and Im trying it out atm.
Looks like it's gonna take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Nikolai Archie It did the trick and I actually got access to my account again. Im so happy:D
Thanks so much, you saved my account!
@Wilson Alvin no problem :)
Fascinating, puts our certainties in perspective, personally I feel better when physicists get busy with quantum and dont build bombs!
I am dying to sit down and have a few beers with Sean Carroll and pick his brain!
Some really great questions and cutting to the heart of debates and understandings here! Wow.
Really appreciate your comment. So grateful that Sean is such an adept communicator - it made my life and an interviewer much easier.
@@LukeRobertMason His debate against William Lane Craig has made him a legend for me alone. Let alone his great ability to separate prejudiced wishful thinking from reality. I'm not convinced of many worlds yet but I do see how it is definitely a possibility. He stands up there with Sam Harris and I'd love for a new 4 horseman conversation video with Sean's keep interjections included.
Would love for this guy to review the Loki show.
I wonder what the book title might be?
We move ahead, step by step,
Wow that guy is smart, just keeps talking without missing a beat .
Was not Newton, it was Galileo and Descartes which brought classical mechanics. The previous Aristetolean position was however more in line with quantum mechanics. The reason we are stalling in physics is because one side winning the debate unfortunately suppressed the other side. It should have not been a zero sum game (Karim Jbeili). That scientists still act like it is bad to try to figure quantum mechanics is a result of Descartes' tradition of mental repression. Everett follows the Heraclitus view of multiple worlds, whereas currently the universalist view is of Paramides. George Devereux also made a case for observer-observed interaction as a unit. In that sense the worlds are not so much as parallel as there is a loose blurry frontier in between them in a continuum.
Like commented and subscribed 👍
Great interview, you should have Sabine on too about her new book
if we exist in many parallel universes then it would follow that many of those would be nearly identical to ours and others would be farther and farther "away" in probability, diverging more and more. If this is true, we're probably existing in a "bandwidth" of universes simultaneously, not in just one at a time. It would feel like one, but what feels like our one self would be in this case an amalgamation or gestalt of selves, with differences between them too small to feel.
What’s the book’s name
This is only complicated if you do not accept high beings and extra dimensional hierarchies.
I you understand the necessity for intelligent design and study from that stand point the fact that particles behave (and I mean that literally) in any fashion, then it is quite easy to track and understand the why and how.
Sean and i hang out..we go way back.....
Please feel free present your research to KFTV
Nothing about quantum fields - are they the same as the wave function?
Quantum fields have wave functions, but it's not the core concept. The scattering matrix is.
Sean's face in the beginning lol
You said it! "complementarity and taboos". George Devereux was big on Complementarity , and taboos management is from Lacan and Karim Jbeili. Indeed, the culture is Paramidean and not Heraclitean. These early 1900 jewish scientists were at the frontier of the Oriental and Occidental thoughts.
The universe is both being recorded and the recording devise doing the recording.
22:55 At least it's keeping us here on this planet? Doesn't the very existence of this planet (and everything else huge that's lumped together) rely on gravity? :D
24:48!!!! He's coming to get you Barbara!
The world is where consciousness goes...
this is great,all the words are everything I have read as late.Jung had something that they revoke or discarded from one theory,it was synchronicity.All I heard is they wanted to aliminate it from the road they traveling
In another universe, another version of me didn't find this half as interesting as I did.
My lifelong teacher , Jiddu Krishnamurti, says the observer and the observed are one and the same.
You need a better teacher.
Me thinks perhaps what need are linguistic translators, or a least the tools they use to decipher Language Syntax and Semantics when faced with with the nonsense that they hear from people speaking in some obscure dialect, not Physicists, since Nature seems to be speaking her Language and all we hear is gibberish so we fake it by resorting to Probabilities and settle for the answers we get.
Nature is speaking the language she always has we just don’t know her language. We have tried Math and it leads us to Probability theory which is useable but imprecise.
Great hair, man...
what would be your interptation of these ufo's as of lately and description how they move around here or dive into the water,and why our cameras all show them but never anything thats able to be interpable.Hey,Im hearing you talk about it as I write,that happens alot lately and there it is again,you talking everything I been hearing,reading,mostly reading on paralel.I hear things about planes sometimes and the rocket launch year or so ago,but it was the woman in the 911 twin tower talking on the phone saying she was stuck in this stupid building.Other time I just talked away about plane over and over and passing over,pass the airport and out to sea,next morning it was on headline with two fighter jets flying beside and story was their oxygen left...bye
another time I was writing review on an airline,walked away from the computer and then someone spoke...while I writing,they lost another plane.It happen to be the 2nd Malayasian commericial airline going down at the time.Take time to listen easier and not bust out to able particle fixiate on my conscious
I don't believe in many world theory what you picture as many world I see it as one single world. What I mean is what you describe as different world is a single world to me you don't need to think of it as different world.For exemple you describe every part or point of a wave function as different world I see it as a single wave function that is part of a single world it's just your interaction with the wave function that make it appears as a single particle.
The world is not where consciousness does not go..
shapeshifting
jung,transfixed?
Sean Carroll says that consciousness is not fundamental. Whether or not this is true, experience is fundamental to whatever has value, including ideas about the world and judgements about what is fundamental. It is only in relation to life that something can have value, and this means that apart from experience, or its prospect, there is nothing of any significance. The idea that fundamental reality excludes consciousness is, on one hand, an expression of life and its value, since it is an idea about the world and a judgement about what is fundamental. On the other hand, if consciousness is not fundamental then something that is apart from experience must be so, and this elevation of what cannot possibly have any value is a commitment to insignificance. This means that what is said contradicts what is implicit in the act of saying it.
It might be suggested that the significance of the world lies in its being insignificant, and that all attempts to make it appear meaningful are illusory. But seeing the world as insignificant would also be illusory, as this, too, is an attempt to discover the meaning and significance of things. The important implication of these comments is that enquiry itself exemplifies significance and, therefore, the world that is examined must also be significant. In this light, experience is fundamental: if we accept that the world is significant we accept that it has value, and experience is fundamental to whatever has value.
Does black paper have consciousness? It works perfectly fine as an "observer". :-)
@@lepidoptera9337 Thanks for your reply. However, my comment refers only to observers who do have consciousness,
@@briannelson326 And my comment refers to physical reality, rather than silly pseudo-philosophical games.
I find anything Carrol says riddled with monology.
To him it's more about being peppered with dollars. He is cashing in on physics bullshit.
The existence of an uncountable number of different world systems was a given in Buddhist teachings.
"Physicists have convinced themselves they never WANTED to understand quantum mechanics."
--Carrol (2022)
"Our science is anti-intellectual by nature: all it seeks is the measurement of things!"
--Nietzsche (1885)
That sounds very cool, but if you read the actual papers, then you will find that physicists had understood quantum mechanics around roughly 1927 to 1929. Did Carroll read those papers? Probably not. :-)
@@schmetterling4477 . Understood (I think). In what sense would you say it was 'understood' in your view?
@@jamesbarlow6423 In every sense important to physics. If that doesn't tickle your spiritual senses, there is always the book with the talking donkey. ;-)
All "consciousnesses" observe the same, acting as one, with no "consciousness" left in some parralel world now just a possibility forever, nobody to observe, collapse..
Simplistically speaking, space and spacetime are possible places a particle can occupy and possible momentums. .
A quantum wavefunction has operators that allow you to calculate possible places where a particle can occupy or calculate its possible momentum. How is that different from the properties of space/spacetime?
Can someone explain the justification for thinking the Many Worlds Interpretation is true, starting with the hydrogen atom wavefunction? Or is this just a misinformation campaign?
The justification, as I interpret what Sean Carroll says, is Occam's Razor: all other things being equal, the simplest solution is the correct one. The Everett "many worlds" interpretation does not require something magical or weird happening when we observe something like an electron. Instead, we ourselves are part of the quantum mechanical system and so we are part of the probability distribution of where the electron appears. That said, the problem I have is this: wouldn't that mean an infinite number of worlds? Even if talking about just the region of probabilities greater than say 90%, at what level of granularity is that region divided? It probably has something to do with the Plank constant, but that is such a tiny number, that could be a heck of a lot of possibilities.
The electron is in superpositon of the atom, the other world's are already there before observation. After observation you become entangled with the atom through decoherence, brancing different version's of you seeing the electron in the positon you observe.
Most people who have been able to recognise the 3 Laws of Math-Physics by "doing sums", have an Actual Intelligence feel for "things as they are" in natural quantization. Renaming the functional elemental components of empirical shaping laws, of Math-Physics, the perceived cause-effect analysed by eye to be time-timing sync-duration projection-drawing objectives identification of phase-locked coherence-cohesion phenomena.
(Words are meaningless without the prior experience of Actuality)
This is why all the talk in this world is utterly demoralising and demotivating without an upbringing that includes thoroughly shared hands-on Actual Intelligence experience.
This is to say in summation, that typical "framing" questions asked by "innocent" Inquiriers, based solely on rote learning, makes the real-factual content under discussion almost irrelevant to the actual cause-effect Principle that phenomena are composed of, and so making perfectly good theory into disassociated abstractions out of verifiable context (?). Ie the problem with "Nobody knows" is fundamentally in Correspondence with the Uncertainty Principle.
The fact that everyone could be aware of the containment of Singularity positioning as Math-Phys-Chem and Geometry here-now-forever resonance formatting floating in Absolute zero-infinity pure-math relative-timing ratio-rates Perspective Principle, is only an expectation of pulse-evolution differentiates integrated metastability condensation modulation with No Boundaries, confined to the Holographic Imagery hypersurface of Reciproction-recirculation wave-packaging In-form-ation.., "it's all-ways all-at-once in your Imagination", composed of AM-FM continuous time-timing modulation-quantization.
Therefore, think for your Self, holistically. (Take no man's word for it, at RI)
And there is the bullshit, again. ;-)
There is nothing mysterious about consciousness. Just because we cannot explained it as yet, does not make it mysterious. Consciousness is an emergent property of complex brain computations. Another factor that may contribute to the feeling of "mystery" is that consciousness is private. Consciousness of individual A cannot be directly experienced by other individuals (as yet). The world outside is real and completely independent of our consciousness. Our brains decode and interpret the information provided by real world out there. Our brain interprets electromagnetic fields of certain frequencies as colour red, yellow, blue, or as temperature. Other frequencies are not detected and do not enter consciousness. Our consciousness does not get information about magnetic fields. But it does get information about mechanical disturbances in the air of certain frequencies, interpreted by the brain as sound. In sum, reality is out there, but the information our consciousness makes use of is that reality as captured and translated by our brain. Colours are not in Nature, they are in our brain. If a tree falls in the wood and no one is there to hear it, it makes NO sound. It creates a disturbance on the ground and in the air, that propagates in waves....but for sound, a brain is needed. Other organisms capture different information from the environment and translate it differently. To think that the reality out there is exactly what we experience is very naive, a view from the childhood of humanity. Today we know better. Can machines be conscious? Of course they can, if we know how to build them! Our brains obey the laws of Physics. Billions of human brains have developed in history, all conscious (animals as well). They all developed obeying the laws of Physics. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason why computers cannot be conscious. Our present ignorance does not mean physical impossibility, or anything mysterious, or cryptic, or transcendent beyond the physical world.
Does the world exist within us or we are in the world? What is this ‘I’?
@@narasimharao5577 "I" is the recognition of an individual as a self. We are in the world. We capture world information through our senses. Our senses can detect some of the information in the world, not all of it (e.g., we cannot feel magnetic fields, or electromagnetic waves beyond a certain range). This information is interpreted by our brain (as colour, sound, etc).
First change Quantum to miniaturisation. Then ask for the Scientific evidence which will be supplied in negative quantities by the copious earful and the gutfull.
IOW it's purely hypothetical. The reason it is proto-rubbish is that it is predicated entirely on Maths and Maths deals solely in the abstract. 1 + 1 = 2 applies to oranges, musical scales, bathtub rings ad nauseum. None of the maths make it any more real, nor does it subtract from it in any sane Universe. Maths exists only in the human mind.
It has no interface with reality.
Altogether Hypothetical Physics is a complete waste of any bright minds that get sucked into its wormhole.
When you realise that Einstein after E=MC² understood he had exhausted his capacity to contribute he then reprised a previously rejected concept, called it Relativity and because the world was delighted to have a new, approachable 'genius' they went along with it. The entire peer review of this amounts to a telegram telling a Cali observatory to drop the experiment - which would only support Newtonian Physics when they later realised that photons have mass. Then you should get angry with the misuse of resources - almost as profound as the wastage belief in the supernatural has achieved. We should have built a telescope the size of the moon by now.
The biggest ideas in the universe surely come from tenured professors.
Gravity is not a force and therefore gravity is not quantum nor ever will be.
Many World's is not scientific but rather is a religion.
"It's turtles all the way down."
P.A.M. Dirac
MWI debunked.
Not a very curious guy. Must be an American.