The Quantum Rival to String Theory - Ask a Spaceman!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ก.ค. 2024
- Full podcast episodes: www.askaspaceman.com
Support: / pmsutter
Follow: / paulmattsutter and / paulmattsutter
Why do we care about loop quantum gravity? Is it a viable path to uniting quantum mechanics and general relativity? What does it mean for spacetime to be discrete? I discuss these questions and more in today’s Ask a Spaceman!
Follow all the show updates at www.askaspaceman.com, and help support the show at / pmsutter !
Keep those questions about space, science, astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology coming to #AskASpaceman for COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF TIME AND SPACE! Music by Jason Grady and Nick Bain.
00:00 Background Independence
05:34 Quantum Nature of Spacetime
10:48 Consequences of Loop Quantum Gravity
15:33 Issues with Loop Quantum Gravity
19:15 Strengths of Loop Quantum Gravity - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[#SHORTS CLIP] ครูอึ้ง กรรมการอึ้ง ฮ่าๆ l ซานิเบาได้เบา l One Playground](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qeBTuMJs4t0/mqdefault.jpg)
This is the most appropriate amount of seriousness for theoretical physics
Nice analogy and editing. Bravo! I particularly like the part about no infinitely dense singularities.
Best overview of quantum gravity I heard so far, brilliant!
He should be careful with time not existing my friend may no be able to collect social security. While I think quantum loop gravity has half the solution to the universe, the absence of time is a problem. Half life is accurate. Thomas Bram author of The Woven Sun.
Thank You for honest view on this subject. If I could, I have proposition for episode - beta plus decay. The magic of how lighter proton coverts to heavier neutron and shuts off positron and neutrino.
Dude, there are not that many brilliant people out there , but there are even fewer than can explain so coherently and without losing rigor than you. You are the best science communicator, hands down. Sorry Brian green, Brian Cox, Neil degrasse, Sabine H et al.
In Ch88 of "Gravitation" by Misner Thorne and Wheeler. You'll find the words "Nothing moves in spacetime". And MTW discuss "fixing" this by adding additional dimension(s). GR is inadequate as a framework for describing the evolution of the cosmos. Same for QM as it fails at describing gravity. Each has some insight just as LQG does.
Because our notion of time has an intuitive feel to it doesn't mean that "time" is a concept that we insert by hand. If you can't identify what the word "time" refers to, maybe it isn't real. I tend to agree with Rovelli. Time is a useful fiction.
This was so well done. I enjoyed it immensely. Subscribed for more.
Thanks for that great insight in Loop Quantum Gravity. Really like the way he speaks and articulates the things. I like theoretical physics very much. I did engineering as i had no knowledge about how to study and get into this field. Thanks Paul for making things simple 👍
Why do we need a theory of quantum gravity? What problems is it supposed to solve? Is there something peculiar about Quantum particles that doesn’t add up?
We can predict the bending of light via general relativity when it passes massive bodies. When you compare Newtonian physics to General relativity, we are talking about scales of physics infinities.
Space time must be extremely small if we perceive continuity at the “Quantum Level”
"Hamiltonian"? Not a bad joke. That was an EXCELLENT joke! I laughed my butt off the moment you said it!! Nice, very nice!
I think space and time are smooth and not chunky,not pixelated,I think that space goes smaller than the Planck unit but at that point physics change into concepts that we can not yet or maybe never understand,my intuition tells me it's all fractal in ways with variations at each level but repeating for sure,time speeds up at the smallest scales and slows down at the biggest scales.
If so inclined, you might check out Nassim Haramein's unified field theory.
Smaller than the Planck length???
Nassim Haramein, considered a quack by many, has an absolutely gorgeous unified field theory that should be fun to check out by open minds.
This was really good. Thank you.
Excellent like always, Paul. We ( the whole family) enjoy your videos. I hope one day you will come to New Zealand for a conference or conversation. We will be there. Thanks.
I tried to understand it but all I understood is that there is some xyz theory that is possibly wrong and doesn't just follow the laws of normal physics
Rest all went over my head 😅
At about 17:30, what you are talking about is the correspondence principle.
In order to follow the law of conservation, I have a gut feeling that it's possible there's a whole bunch of bubbles interacting with each other on a grand medium like oil in water where the density's separate the oil in perfect little circles and they can absorb each other and move and maybe black holes are grand recycling machines in the universe and the laws of conservation of matter aren't broken, they take a form of matter and they convert it to other forms of matter but it doesn't gain or disappear, it just alters, maybe into gas form or plasma who knows, they could travel through the black hole 🕳️ into another universe bubble and recycle ♻️ energy there still with the universe, or it could transfer to a different far off region of the same universe bubble? Maybe in different bubbles they all run by the same base laws but maybe in every bubble the factors to the power and the interactions of those base forces are randomly jumbled up, and there's many bubbles that are unstable, but through natural selection, you would come across stable bubbles but it would be like nature and evolution or if babies survive to past birth and childhood to adult hood... Idk just a random theory but of course nothing answers how that started I don't understand how we will ever figure that out and honestly I'm okay with that. I've found peace with finding that it's okay to not find the answers for everything, for certain things, maybe that's the point. It's probably impossible for us in our human perspective to figure out these questions and that's okay, nature has it's ways and I'm sure it will all work out in the end or else why would it function the way it does. Nature is very therapeutic for me. Observing the seasons as I hike with my dogs, how trees get recycled by fungi, interconnection within ecosystems. It all can teach us things about other things if we look at those things with the right Perspective.
Interesting
How do you feel about the idea that at some point in he far distant future all particles will eventually decay into photons, at which time the vast universe full of infinitesimal energy photons becomes indistinguishable from an infinitesimal universe full of very high energy photons, ie a new Big Bang?
I am compelled to question the definition, understanding, consistency of... space. I don't think we uderstand the 'fabric' of space itself. So, with that postulated, 'space-time' is pretty much undefined.
Hey! Quick different (but related topic) question; How do "regular" singularities work with Planck Scale lengths?
A "singularity" is "basically" ONE PLANCK LENGTH?
I understand only half of what you are telling us but it is fascinating. And there seem to be boundaries of what we can explain currently.
Really like your work
I always pondered on this question, if gravity is an effect of matter warping the fabric of space doesn't that mean that they are separate entities? we have quantized matter so we want to do the same with space but if they appear to be fundamentally different things. almost like they exist within there on dimensions that cant interact, only effect each other. so maybe asking how to quantize gravity is not the right question. and gravity is not really something you can quantize because its just the effect of these separate dimensions influence on each other.
Like a symbiotic relationship within a ecosystem that creates a healthy balancing effect within the natural environment? I like the way you are theorizing. Even if it leads you down a unpredicted road. That's the best form of doing hypothetical theories in my opinion. The point is to think of slightly different ideas and see if the idea gets you anyway sane, and that idea your considering is exactly something I have considered too about gravity. Since Gravity has proven to be such a confusing aspect to every astrophysicist. It's even caused this effect where they are convinced their gravity is correct so the math is telling them there is a ton of dark matter and energy in the galaxies that they haven't been able to find, no matter how many machines they build to find dark matter and I'm not saying I wouldn't believe that dark matter might be incorrect but it makes me ponder about "maybe we have gravity right to an extent but we need to figure out there is more layers to gravity, like gears in a car. (There's the gravity we know, then think of the complexities of all sorts of things interacting within an entire galaxy, I'm sure there is more to that then just using the base method we use for our solar system and stuff, like think of all the complex forces that interact over such massive different things in a galaxy. There's not just gravity, there's temperature differences, spin velocity, different masses and all types of interactions within a galaxy of different mass fluctuations then there's electromagnetic charges, gas clouds, static charges, density differences, the effect multiple galaxies can have on each other, and just the entire galaxy inside itself probably having some sort of full effect on itself, it's probably some stuff that's so immense and so grand that it's hard to fully calculate ot comprehend. Because you'll probably have to factor in multiple things influencing the gravity and not just the gravity alone and who's to say the calculation for the mass of each object is fully correct which could make a equation seem off when it might not be? -Then you got another gear when you zoom way into small stuff and that form of gravity must be completely unique and maybe if we get a aspect of gravity like that, then maybe it will fit within what we see? Idk)
It's popular right now to suppose gravity is a mere effect from causes. I think this likely. This being the case, the grand universes of universes is a black hole, rather, a whirl pool, causing the weightlessness in space. The black hole theory, instead of the big bang theory, is out there as well. A big maybe. And fun.
I've pondered this too, and take the view that space/time and all the matter and energy held within it were actually 'part of' or properties of space/time itself at the time of the Big Bang, but they condensed out into the other particles that we see now. Take QCD and QED, these are quantum fields throughout space/time so why could gravity not work on a similar kind of principle ie. QGD?
Any large of objects of mass (eg. planets and stars) bend the fabric of space/time so that massless particles like photons follow that curve (eg. like in the lensing effect of large galaxies in between us and other the light from further away galaxies). However for everything else that interacts with the Higgs field ie. particles which are given mass, we can see gravitational waves between them but only in the extreme cases eg. neutron stars orbiting very close to one another before colliding. So is there an exchange of force particles, ie. gravitons, or a quantum gravity field within space itself here? These energy levels are way too high for us to smash things together in particle accelerators so we cannot know unless we figure out another way to test this. But if everything since the Big Bang is exchanging energy between the different quantum fields within space, and the Big Rip when it comes is just another quantum field that comes to dominate them all, why could this not happen in all the other (multi)verses out there.
Great topic. Loved it!
If you're ever in the mood to go waaaaaay out into left field. I'd be interested in hearing your take on Stephen Wolfram's attempt to describe the Universe as a hyper-network of computationally irreducible automata (or something like this). Seems really whacky to me, but entertaining nonetheless.
So, SpaceTime expands, universe adjusts, dark energy modulates, Galaxies shift, dark matter torques, stars roll, planets follow, and as the planet Earth falls through space it presses us against it as a speeding car carries a bug that was on it at the start but if we fell from high it would be like a bug impacting a car on the freeway, and all those transitions occur at a rate where every foot of distance requires another billionth-of-a-second for light/information to traverse giving a collating variance of time interlocking through a Roget's Palisade Illusion caused by the particle/wave duality of photons interfacing with various light absorbing objects, such as eyes and plants, and probably the blackness of spacetime, itself, since we know that black absorbs more light than any other color and white, like starlight, actually repels light.
And gravitation is just the warpage of space by masses occurring at variant temporal states relative to everything else by particle wave variance relative to bodies that can effect light.
I just don't see Q-Grav having a place to occur in reality.
Remember that gravitation is specifically related to temporality and energy and mass.
"... a little, tiny nugget of stuff." The ultimately tiny snot ball.
Cool video! Was LQ Gravity tested by measuring how long photons of different energy levels took to arrive at Earth from a very distant object? Doesn't LQ predict that the "pixelation" of space time should alter the different photons speed slightly?
GR fails for galactic star rotation curves, perhaps at the low energy LQG is a better description than GR? That might be the reason that you don't get GR for low energy?
Here's a thought: String theory, vibrating strings and loop quantum gravity are to the Higgs field what the three gauge theories (weak, qcd and qed) are to the quantum field. The Higgs field is the stage that the quantum field floats on.
still wondering, string vs other background independent approaches (such as EDT, CDT, GFT, regge calculus, causal set)😀
I really like the stage analogy 🙂
Cameltonian
LQG is a useful model, based on an incorrect interpretation of spacetime, IMO. GR doesn't tell us how spacetime is curved. It tells us what we will measure, when we measure spacetime with matter having the properties on the RHS of Einstein's equation.
Does a graviton exist or is gravity from spacetime interacting with mass?
Yes Paul, you have the right questions. The thoughts around your questions ''also'' questions the questions around the thoughts, not an easy task. The the old fashion and pure ''scientific approach'' has been lost for many people in science since the middle of the 20th century. Money and a celebrity status is the main goal for many. A diploma hanging the wall doesn't mean that person is a scientist. Science is a way of thinking, a well educated scientist may not have the right way of reasoning and may not be. Why? Because the truth is not hidden, it is there, and what we miss is the correct-interpretation. Today there is no money for a free thinker and an open mind analysts. And it is Sad, and that is reality. A famous or infamous celebrity may have millions and millions of likes, a scientist may be just a thousand or less, the ratio is disturbing. Keep going Paul, Live long and prosper.
Longtime watcher of the show, but first time coming back to the videos in a few months. Not a huge fan of the new editing style - I find it rather distracting. Maybe the graphics could be toned down 50%. Don't want to hate though - love the content and have always found your explanations of complex subjects really approachable
I can grasp the concept of a big bounce, since the universe would only be able to get so small, but how does loop quantum cosmology explain the big crunch part of the cycle ? Would we experience our perception of "time" in reverse ?
Just revisiting this video. Could spacetime be made up of Planck particles which could quantize spacetime?
Yes.
bro, i could never be as confident as theoretical physicists. there's a certain belief associated with each of these imperfect theories... I can't imagine picking one and running with it for years to the point of getting funding to study a huge maybe... That takes serious existential balls
Great, thanks. 😀
Quantum gravity with dark energy comes out like this; all matter in the Universe around itself excite quantum space for expansion (pulsing by quantum oscillations of waves). But at the same time, the bodies, opposite each other, create wave interference with the expansion of the quantum space, for this reason, the pressure of the quantum space between the bodies will decrease, as a result of which the quantum gravitational attraction of the bodies arises ....
Perhaps we are chasing our tails here. General Relativity is a hugely successful theory. as is quantum mechanics. Perhaps gravity is not a force, but a description of the structure of space time. All the other forces depend on particles to mediate the force. Gravity does not. These are different things.
I liked your video even though my brain loops puff
The mind-blowing thing is that it's not mass or distance or time that is quantized, it's the angular momentum which happens to combine mass, distance and time into one quantity.
I've always had trouble imagining how space could be quantized, and yet we can zoom in on a star and see its disk. The difference among angles that different photons take to reach us is so small, it's hard to see how the angle would be not continuous. And smooth angle on a quantized space is just nonsense... to me anyway.
In term of having one law that will explain the universe or quantum gravity, quantum loop gravity offed a very good chance. At the point of singularity or when the universe was young it must have expanded in a field some force must have been pushing from outside the universe. But gravity had to act like it was controlled by time. Or influence by time.
How does Erik Verlindes emergent gravity fit into this?
dope video
You explaining the hand moving in lil movements that aren't smooth moving through space time. Not to bring drugs into it but if anyone ever had lsd or mushrooms know what I'm talking about. I wonder since it messes with your reality receptors ur slightly seeing this fabric or ur just seeing a small part of it?
That threw me for a loop.
Gravity question - is there any fluctuation in gravity as we orbit the sun? (Is the universe filled evenly? Can we measure the great attractor?)
What is the tidal effect upon a glass of water?
Someone hurt my feelings so I'm taking my graviton and going home to tell on you whaaaa uuhh whaaa!
Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta. Postulate 2. The gravitational field controls the frequency and speed of light in a vacuum.
This is determined experimentally using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope (based on Michelson's experiment 1881-2015. This is only 50% of the experiment and there is scope for its continuation). Using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope, the straight-line speed of vehicles can be measured. There is a company in China that makes (fiber optic angular velocity meter) they will be able to create a hybrid device. Please, can you come to an agreement with them? I guarantee payment at cost on my part
We don't have a quantum theory of gravity... but WHY are you assuming that there must be a quantum theory of gravity? First people refused to accept quantum behaviour; now you're refusing to accept something which does NOT have quantum behaviour. Either position is ideological and not physical.
Maybe space doesn't follow our rules and that's why they can't work it out?
Hi there DrSutter quantum loop eh? Midnight here atm in Ireland 00:00 22222 Hmm odd! 🙃
I'll be up for another couple of hours! 🤔🤫
Whoever’s editing your videos is doing a largely good job although the Lord Privy Seals are getting to be a bit much.
So receiving prime numbers is not good enough for you (Contact) - you want to receive a quantum message - answer this, is there sub-space?
what about ER = EPR?
FPQS - Frames per quantum second.
Wait a minute...loop quantum gravity DOESN'T include general relativity? This is the first time I'm hearing that. Can you clarify?
So, in my vast ignorance, I suggest that we do not understand the nature of space. Space, alone. Thus, we are not 'there' yet.
what if a civilization make a a set of "quantum computers" that are entangled.
they at random sends it in an arbitrary speed to a location with intelligent life. lets say you then send the i formation of an engin going 99% lf the speed of light and the direction to travel then the 2 civilizations meat up in the middle thank to the pair of computers. wouldent this fuck up causality!?!?
Maybe the Big Bang is the result of some kind of unknown particle, I'll call the Genesis Particle, with gargantuan mass or energy, in an infinite vacuum that became unstable and decayed into all the matter the universe is made of today. I got this idea from black holes. If the mass of a giant star can collapse down to a singularity then why couldn't a single particle of some kind, with all the mass and energy of the universe, have been the point of origin for the Big Bang? Also if such a particle existed it might have incorporated the 4 know fundamental forces of nature in a grand unification of the strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetism and gravity.
String Theory was not a waste of time. Geometry is the key to Math and Physics.
What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles?
Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: "A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good." Ernest Rutherford
The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics?
When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Force" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry.
Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.
Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons?
Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?
Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons
. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process.
Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.
1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface
137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.
The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist. The model grew out of that simple idea.
I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.
If there are quanta of space time, maybe Gregg Graffin is wrong, and we CAN buy more time! Or he can be right that there is "no time" to buy... Where is that dang Excedrin bottle?
Did anyone see my cat?
If you can buy more Time (or Space-Time) , please inform us here of how that is done. And, whether credit cards are acceptable for that purchase. Thanks
"It's wrong, but it's better than nothin."
This intuitively feels wrong, but I am bad a math. My only qualification to make such a bold statement of skepticism is that I am from Ohio.
deerpst!
Man... i wish you yourself understood quantum loop theory so you could actually explain. You said time isn't present in equations. But you couldn't explain why and how that is. Like why it's insignificant. Thus this just means you don't know yourself what you talking about :D although this comment made me very interested in this theory now. Cause I've heard time and time again that time is an illusion. Thus maybe this theory could confirm that and explain why that is. Maybe understanding it would bake it possible for conciousnes to then see through illusion thus- stop the time upon ones wish - stop the time around you so you have more time to make perfect next action so you wouldn't waste any time in your existence thus utilising all the time that is available to ones physical body so not a drop would ever get wasted :D
paul. paul, please. can we have more ads? i am almost able to follow what you are saying, we need more ads paul. please.
All of these theories seem to have some sort of insight which is not quite right or complete. We job is to take these insights and put them together to form a more accurate and complete theory.
is QLG in 3D? can scientist cut it n sell it like energy?... or it describes a god-like power without time? cant b created nor end?... QLG theorists r christian?
If I asked an insightful person to describe what a house is made of, he or she would take a careful look and discover that a house is made of plaster walls, wood, insulation, shingles, nails. But if I ask a theoretical physicist what a house is made of, he would pull out string theory and start calculating 5 or 10 dimensional superstring geometry, but that wouldn't help me build a house.
Likewise, if I ask a person with insight what spacetime is made of in terms of measurables, I would expect them to tell me that there is some connection between spacetime geometry and virtual photons/particles that probably have a mathematical description in terms of wave functions of the form e^i pi + 1 = 0. But if I ask a theoretical physicist, he will talk about string theory and loop quantum gravity.
Why do physicists not describe what spacetime is made of in terms of things that we are experimentally familiar with like virtual particles and physics constants?
🌈🧩🪷💎🛸🎼🙏
God interfaces our universe through gravity.
Hamilton.
I thought string theory gives you general relativity , and is completely consistent with it.
There's no evidence. What testable predictions have been proposed?
Paul, l can easily design a quantum theory of gravity, l really can. Of course it would be ludicrously unfeasible but l reckon l could do it the next time I'm thinking about stuff, and who knows, the theory might even involve aliens. Statistically it's about bloody time that at least something involves aliens.
you seem to have been doing a lot of thinking .
Why do people, always show that awful picture of Einstein with his tongue?!