Thoughts On Physics - Part 7 - Conclusion
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 มิ.ย. 2024
- This is the final video in a series where I describe an alternative interpretation of physics. One that is local and real, and where the universe isn't just infinite in size, but also infinite in scale. Where space-time is real, and everything is just motion.
I just restate what this idea is, and why I think it's worth listening to.
And I offer some commentary on why I think that ideas like this aren't often considered by physicists. Which, in my opinion, comes from the assumption that there exists a bottom floor of reality. That the limits to what physicists can measure are in fact real physical barriers in the universe.
This is of course just speculation. I am not a physicist, so watch this with a heavy dose of skepticism.
Twitter - / lathamincubator
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to support this project you can do so at
Patreon - / lathamincubatorproject
Paypal - www.paypal.com/ncp/payment/EF...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:00 - Introduction
04:27 - Heliocentric Models And Perspectives On The Universe
14:58 - Roger Penrose's Cyclic Cosmology
21:01 - Conclusion
27:55 - Final Words - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 มิถุนายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/P3WkqO9gKjo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for doing this series of videos. I would love to discuss more of this.
Since you are fond of it, I'm sure all physicists world-wide will instantly recognize your brilliance, and award you the next 20 Nobel prizes, after quickly correcting all text books, and updating all lecture material. You will known as the last, and greatest; the guy who gave us the true TOE. How, oh but HOW, will you cope with all the planet-wide adulation?
Most of this video is me venting a lot of snark after having worked on this project so long. It wasn't necessary, and the arguments could have been made better. So here's a less inflammatory version of this video essay:
There's a saying about the field of quantum mechanics that researchers should just "shut up and calculate". That is, to not try to philosophize or overly worry about the nature of the universe, just stick to the data. It's not really a part of the standard model, but it is an ethos that a lot of quantum physicists believe in, at least to some degree.
And this has resulted in a very accurate model of the universe that has tremendous predictive powers.
But I think that this has led to a fundamental flaw in the theory. As it means that the physicist then becomes an absolute frame of reference in the universe. Because, if we just go by what the data alone says, then it intrinsically means that the center and focus of the universe in this model is on the measurements that a physicist can make. All of objective reality must be processed through that singular vantage point.
If an infinite scalar dimension exists, then the physicist is not at the center of the universe. Their position would be relative, not absolute. Which means that the measurements and data would have to be processed and understood as coming from a particular person at some scale using a part of the universe to measure another part of the universe. It would mean that physicists would need to philosophize and worry about what their measurements mean.
I believe that this issue can be seen in the inability for the physics of the quantum scale and cosmological scale to be united. Which I think demonstrates that the problem comes from how quantum objects and the cosmos are assumed to exist within a universe that has a bottom floor to it.
And I think this issue is demonstrated in a number of interpretations of the universe that some physicists come up with where they really are at the center of everything. Either because each of their decisions creates infinitely many real parallel universes. Or that super space physicists created an entire computer simulation universe just for them to live in. Or that the physicist can actually create and manipulate the universe around them with their own thoughts.
I believe these are all symptoms of a model that centers the universe around the perspective of the physicist.
And I think it sabotages the efforts of good scientists. Like Roger Penrose's model of cyclic cosmology. Penrose tried to think of an infinite scale to the universe, but appears to have still centered the universe around the physicist. Because in his model, even though there's an infinite scale, only our universe could exist. In this model there would be nothing above our universe at infinitely larger scales.
This, even though his model rests on the idea that a completely empty region of space above our scale would be identical to our universe at the smallest scales before it's creation. So in this infinite expanse above our universe another large scale universe should exist, according to this model.
But it can't, because the standard model of physics says there's a bottom floor to reality. Which I think is wrong, and can only be corrected by trying to think of the universe in ways that don't put physicists at the center of everything.
God forbid someone pursue a line of thinking. Isn't the fundamental purpose of the scientific method to accept all theories and disprove all that don't bare out? If so, then the most valuable asset the scientific method has is a diversity of ideas. Discouraging the ideation of possible theories is contradictory, while rigorous analysis of said theories is the express purpose of the scientific method. Therefore you can critique the theory but you should not attack an individual for proposing a theory. The act of considering a topic scientifically and then sharing one's thoughts is of paramount importance to advancing any science. Shitting on someone for engaging in the act is reprehensible. If you want to critique theoretical claims, that is productive. Being a sarcastic twat isn't.
@@lathamincubatorproject Yes, these videos were you drinking too much of your own cool-aid. :-)
@@da-rj5cs It is fundamental to science to start with observation. The only observation this guy made was that he wasn't willing to actually look at the evidence because it is way too complicated for his intellectually lazy mind. So he replaced the scientific method with poetry in motion. ;-)
Very interesting perpective. Seems to be a new way of looking at hidden variables vs entanglement. Makes me try to thing of other ways to trst for this. Worth a look considering how QED has stagnated after yhe failure of super symmetry.
There are no hidden variables. There are only people who don't understand physics. QED has nothing to do with supersymmetry. QED is the quantization of the electromagnetic field. Supersymmetry involves the entire zoo of the standard model. At least try to get the technical terms right.
🤔I've always wondered if Dark energy is a space curvature, a property of the time-thread of spacetime being shorter/ longer, depending on nearby mass, or no nearby mass ( intergalactic etc ).
So an opposite or repellant gravity.
( as in, when there is gravity near masses ,
time slows down & parallel lines converge.
But in "empty" spacetime ( intergalactic etc)
the time "thread" is the opposite of near mass,
so parallel lines DIverge, & time speeds up.)
This could also ( maybe ) account for the Huuuuge inflation after the B.Bang.
Since there were no atoms, "matter", there would be no mass around, leaving spacetime to inflate, time speed up & so parallel lines to diverge , but with nothing to pull it "flat".
Till matter started forming clumps, so "flattening" everything out.
Its like i see "particles" as us seeing single instant dots of continuous "threads".
So spacetime is a 4D woven "fabric".
"Spin" being the direction of "twist" of the thread.
Speaking of Virtual particles , & where they pull their short-term energy from,
and where is it going to show any is missing.
Just like when you pull a thread in ,eg,a shirt, it pulls an extra loop here,
but it pulls tighter from somewhere else along the fabric.
So those virtual particles are making a fabric "pucker" further down THAT thread.
So time-space "fabric/ woven solid", reaching out in EVERY direction for ever ( like the thickest woven fabric, closer together than plank length, each thread closer than plank time )
with "particles" threaded on throughout it, at different tightnesses on them, different distances apart,
different lengths of the 4D time thread, from plank distance to plank distance, etc.
Just something i thought makea sense
😁🌏☮️
Sean Carroll in an interview, made an important comment on "alternative interpretations" or "theories" of physics put forward by non physicists: There are so many brilliant ideas WITHIN physics already that the ONLY way to bring ANYTHING to the table is to study the subject and publish. Physicists are quite open to new ideas but sense BS from far away ...
The same Sean Carrol that pushes the "multiverse". Sean is not being genuine. It may not be on purpose though.
Most academic fields are shielded by gatekeepers. While peer review may have started as a good idea and likely still has a function in the future it must be altered to allow for new ideas. We also have to consider funding which is what Eric Weinstein focuses on. He has also spoke of another factor. The government itself. The govt has grown into a self perpetuating organism. It seeks to protect its future and it does not always consider what its citizens want or what is good for them.
Also, look at the idea of the Aether for a moment. It was a long proposed medium which allowed for the transmission of light, or at least its offshoot, the Luminiferous Aether was. It is claimed that the Michaelson-Morley experiment disproved it. Its just not true. The experiment was flawed in concept and design. It was claimed anyway.
Today look at what we have. Why can light travel through vacuum? It has to do with 2 constants. Electric permittivity and magnetic permeability of free space. These we "supposed" until actually measured. So they exist. In what substance? Fields? Invisible Aethers in their own right. Dark matter and Dark energy. No different.
Modern science has its roots in esoteric mysticism and occult studies. The decision to defer to data with no need to understand the underlying framework in a coherent fashion has led us to our current roadblock. The ancient arts passed down through the millennia by the Mystery Schools, secret brotherhoods and solitary mystics used to be called the Sacred Science. While its interest did involve our material world its primary focus was more toward perception, awareness and attention. It viewed the material world as one of many not the end goal or something to be used as a playground for an errant form of awareness to enact its fantasies within. The Copenhagen Interpretation along with a misinterpretation of Nietzsche has resulted in a culture that believes there is no objective truth, that things are what matter, that life is only here due to some random fluctuation in a multiverse of random fluctuations, and even that there is no meaning within existence. How inane.
25 years ago I had an interest in weapons systems. I designed a railgun that could be built from scrap and commercially available materials. There were no plans to build a full scale prototype because it would have still cost around 10 grand and I would have never been able to test something with a range of 10 to 100 miles not to mention the power consumption issue.
While I was at work a snoopy social worker had noticed my notebook and decided to remove it from my home and turn it in to the TBI. I had forgotten about it so never noticed it missing. One morning I got a visit at 6 a.m. by social services (we had 3 kids) and a special investigator with the TBI. He explained his presence and we sat down to talk.
He asked if that was my notebook. I said it was. He asked if I had a working model of any size and I did not. I told him it was just like a hobby interest for a bit, that I was not positive how well it would work and that it would cost money I did not have. He then informed me they had given the notebook to researchers who reported back that it was feasible and it was also illegal for me to build as it was essentially artillery. I was told not to pursue it any further and was surveilled for at least a year that I am aware of. Maybe I still am. Hi guys.
My point is an example of gatekeeping. While they had a good reason the fact is I would have gotten a visit if I designed a way to deliver energy in a creative fashion or many other possibilities. The hidden hands of the world do not want a well informed, free thinking, confident populace. You may see that soon yourself if we do not extricate our nation from an entrenched network claiming dedication to utopian agendas. The recent "anti-semetism" bill proposed is simply an offshoot of a call last year by the United Nations for platforms to monitor and limit so called "hate" speech. Its just their first move. I think the fact is that they never considered that people would use the net to do real research and some of this research led people to discover some quite distasteful facts regarding the activities and agendas of our so called leaders and corporations. In a recent interview Bill Gates claimed the number one threat to world security was "conspiracy theorists". Really? When i applied for the military 30 years ago it was called Intelligence Analysis. Maybe the real threat is people who long ago decided they had the right to rule over us and our destinies without ever consulting us for alternatives or just our thoughts on their ideas.
Sean Carroll has long decided to peddle complete nonsense to the masses because it is way more profitable than to teach real physics which almost nobody wants to hear about.
Space doesn't exist. Distance is just an emergent property from the probability of two objects interacting from one instant to the other. Since Gravity depends on space being real, what we model as Gravity is temporal curvature... increasing the probability of interaction the closer and object gets to a mass. The only real things are time and energy. Therefore, we are 2 dimensional beings imagining things that need not exist.
our culture recognizes the Void of space as the god of Khaos
no biggie
Whew. Thanks for the wakeup call! 😅
Yes, that was complete bullshit. ;-)
Spacetime is a made up word, Aether is the original name. If you think it's actually real.
Time is a measurement and therefore cannot be dilated etc. All clocks rely on some form EM to work and that mechanism can be affected by external factors, such as the gravity strength. So it's the clocks that change slightly not 'time'. I think Poincaré invented the mathematical modelling tool you call spacetime, Einstein stole his idea without credit, and later joked about that.
Space and time are interchangeable
@@Godplayzdice Would you like to buy a bridge?
@@digbysirchickentf2315 how about you buy a book?
@@Godplayzdice You shouldn't believe everything you read.
@@digbysirchickentf2315 it's not "belief". You read, you test and then evaluate yourself as true or false. The device that you are using to type is a semiconductor based device which was built on the physics developed by Einstein, Bohr, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, etc. Without them you'll not be watching a video like this and conversing with stranger across the planet.