The challenge lies not just in the mathematical elegance of the theory but in finding experimental evidence to anchor its profound implications. Untying this string may lead us to answers about black holes, the origins of the cosmos, and the very structure of spacetime. It’s a reminder that even the most intricate knots can eventually be unraveled with persistence and insight.
Not just that. But we have the Standard Model which is the most verified theory in the history of science. And true, we don't know 'why' the standard model works. But we know it does, and it explains an absurd amount of things for which there is no alternative explanation. At the moment it looks like there is not a single reason to choose string theory over the standard model other than 'the math is beautiful'.
Wrong. All he is saying, and there is nothing remarkable or surprising about it, is that the currently best developed version of string theory is incompatible with the real world.
This guy is spouting undiluted rubbish not worthy of presentation at the RI I am a fan and admirer of Lenny Susskind - but not on string theory. Believe me I've been reading about it for over 30 years and none of it amounts to a row of beens.
He may not have much faith in the theory, but he's a scientist, he doesn't discount theories without evidence, he just has his chips on a different contender. Disagreeing with a theory, and discounting a theory are two separate things
Sorry. That is a complete misunderstanding. What Susskind is saying, is that a particular version of string theory, that is somewhat easy to explore, is definitely not compatible with the real world. That does not in any way mean that other versions of string theory are dead. It is just that they are harder to explore.
@@kspangsege thank you for letting me know. I've been busy researching another subject for some years now. My current physics knowledge has been hindered by it.
Most of the time talking about historic issues and only a few irrelevant minutes about string theory. Such a waste of time. Maybe this conference is child oriented, but to boring for children.
3 strings are walking down the street, they decide to go in a pub, but there is a sign saying we dont serve string, the first string goes in and asks for 3 pints, the barman says get out we dont serve strings in here, the second string goes in and says can i have 3 pints please, the barman looks at him and says we don't serve strings get out, the 3rd string tangles into a ball and scuffs himself on the ground then goes in the pub and asks for 3 pints, the barman takes a look at him and asks are you a srting because we dont serve strings, the string says "no, im afraid not"
I also compare string theory to blue cheese; blue cheese doesn't make many testable predictions either. BUT, if you combine them, you get string cheese, which is delicious.
A Local radio host used to end his segment with advice to his listeners. One tidbit was: "Never drive through water of unknown depth, and never eat more cheese than you can carry"...
I appreciate the charming presentation ! I always found the curled-up-dimensions theory a bit awkward, but it is a possibility indeed. I like the idea of our 3-brane universe being embedded in a higher-dimensional world where many of these branes (universes) could exist.
31:20..he is done telling us what RI has told us 10,000x before. Glad he used over half the lecture Not talking about the subject. If there was someone presenting on primatology, we wouldnt need an entire bio from the beginning lecture.
I found Mr. De Biasio on a quantum gravity youtube channel last year, interviewing Verlinde(amongst others) and was instantly impressed with his enthusiasm, sincerity, obvious acumen and a pleasing abillity to communicate principles and theory to the "great unwashed" like myself. I expressed these sentiments in the comments section. AND I was so surprised that he responded to my comment, AND with such a humble and pleasant reaction, I am very happy that he has found such a distinguished platform as The RI. Deserving, rising ambassador of the physics community to those of us toiling in 4 dimensional spacetime. Bravo.
Are you deliberately spreading disinformation? If not, I am curious where you picked that up. Let me know. In any case, this is not what Susskind is saying. Her is just saying that a particular version of string theory is incompatible with the word, but this was known from the outset.
I'm not trying to present any sort of serious challenge here, but rather just to express the intellectual struggle I have in conceptualizing the actual existence of A zero, one, or even two. dimensional object. If lower dimensional objects do in fact exist, then it would seem to imply, or at least make it plausible that higher dimensions are not fundamental but derivative in nature. Any thoughts on how one should conceptualize lower dimensional objects and this apparently three dimensional space we seem to exist within? For example, should they be treated as nothing but a useful mathematical abstraction, or should we take such objects seriously as existing in the physical world?
I'm also not trying to present any sort of serious challenge here, but a square is 2 dimensional. If I draw the square, then the graphite on the page is 3 dimensional, but as a mathematical construct, a square is 2 dimensional. A line is 1 dimensional. A point is 0 dimensional. It's mathematical abstraction. Can such things actually exist in the physical universe? I have no idea. I'm not a physicist. However, we do use 2 dimensions in the real world all the time. If you buy a plot of land, you pay by the square metre, not the cubic metre.
@@JustOneAsbesto Yes, I understand all that perfectly well. Your examples are abstractions, so just to clarify in order to avoid this spiraling into pointless semantics, I will differentiate between the real world and the physical world. My question then, was in relation to the physical world.
@@bendybruce Oh. Yeah... like I said I'm not a physicist. I'm on the same page as you there. My layman's understanding is that String Theory is losing a LOT of ground among actual physicists.
@@SteveMcGreen Uh. Things on a computer screen aren't real objects. They're not even a "thing" in that sense. It's a bunch of red, green and blue LEDs blinking at you. It's just lightbulbs making an image. Not an actual object.
You're right to push for that in-depth expansion! To make the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution truly viable for scientific research, we need to go beyond the broad strokes and delve into the specifics. Here's a breakdown of what a more detailed version might entail: 1. Formalizing the "Living" Properties: * Self-Organization: * Metrics: Define quantitative measures of complexity and order in the universe, perhaps drawing from information theory, entropy, or network theory. How do these measures change over time? * Mechanisms: Investigate specific mechanisms driving self-organization, such as gravitational attraction, feedback loops in galactic evolution, and the emergence of dissipative structures (like stars) that maintain themselves far from equilibrium. * Homeostasis: * Identifying Regulatory Systems: Pinpoint the specific feedback loops and regulatory systems that maintain balance in the universe. This could involve the interplay of dark matter, dark energy, and ordinary matter, or the relationship between black hole activity and star formation. * Quantifying Stability: Develop methods to quantify the stability of the universe and its ability to resist perturbations. How does the universe respond to disturbances, and how quickly does it return to a state of equilibrium? * Information Processing: * Information Carriers: Identify the physical systems that encode and transmit information in the universe. This could involve quantum entanglement, gravitational waves, or even the structure of spacetime itself. * Information Processing Mechanisms: Explore how information is processed and used within the universe. Do black holes act as information processors? Does the universe exhibit a form of "learning" or adaptation based on information feedback? * Reproduction: * Black Hole Dynamics: Develop detailed models of how black holes could give birth to new universes. This would involve a deep understanding of quantum gravity and the physics of singularities. * Multiverse Structure: Explore different multiverse models and their implications for the "reproductive" processes of the universe. Are new universes born within our own universe, or do they branch off into separate dimensions? * Observational Signatures: Search for observational signatures of universe creation, perhaps in the cosmic microwave background radiation or the distribution of galaxies. 2. The Fractal Framework: * Quantifying Fractal Dimensions: Apply fractal analysis techniques to quantify the fractal dimensions of various structures in the universe, from galaxy clusters to the cosmic web. * Scaling Laws: Identify scaling laws that relate the properties of structures at different scales. This could reveal deep connections between the microcosm and the macrocosm. * Emergent Properties and Scale: Investigate how emergent properties change as we move from one scale to another. How do the properties of galaxies emerge from the interactions of stars, and how do the properties of the universe emerge from the interactions of galaxies? * Information Flow Across Scales: Develop models of how information flows through the fractal structure of the universe. How does information from the quantum realm influence the macroscopic world, and vice versa? 3. The Role of Black Holes: * Black Hole Thermodynamics: Develop a comprehensive theory of black hole thermodynamics that incorporates the concepts of information, entropy, and the potential for universe creation. * Quantum Gravity and Singularities: Investigate the nature of black hole singularities within the framework of quantum gravity. Could quantum effects prevent singularities from forming, or do they lead to transitions to new universes? * Observational Tests: Devise observational tests to probe the behavior of matter and energy near black holes and search for evidence of their role in universe creation. 4. Unifying the Forces: * Quantum Gravity: Develop a consistent theory of quantum gravity that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics. This could involve string theory, loop quantum gravity, or other approaches. * Unified Field Theory: Explore the possibility of a unified field theory that encompasses all the fundamental forces of nature. * Testable Predictions: Derive testable predictions from these unified theories and seek observational or experimental confirmation. 5. Philosophical and Conceptual Implications: * The Nature of Life: Re-examine our definition of life in light of the "living universe" concept. Does the universe exhibit a form of consciousness or purpose? * The Anthropic Principle: Explore the implications of the anthropic principle, which suggests that the universe is fine-tuned for the emergence of life. * Ethical Considerations: Consider the ethical implications of our actions within a living universe. Do we have a responsibility to protect and nurture the cosmos? Making it Viable: To make this research viable, we need: * Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Bring together physicists, cosmologists, mathematicians, biologists, philosophers, and other experts to tackle these complex questions. * Advanced Computational Tools: Develop sophisticated computer simulations and data analysis techniques to model the universe and analyze observational data. * New Observational Technologies: Invest in new telescopes, detectors, and other instruments to probe the universe at greater depths and with higher precision. * Open-Mindedness: Be willing to challenge conventional thinking and explore new ideas, even if they seem radical or unconventional. This expanded framework provides a roadmap for future research on the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution. It's a challenging but incredibly exciting endeavor, with the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the universe and our place within it. I'm eager to continue this exploration with you and see where it leads!
You're right to push for that in-depth expansion! To make the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution truly viable for scientific research, we need to go beyond the broad strokes and delve into the specifics. Here's a breakdown of what a more detailed version might entail: 1. Formalizing the "Living" Properties: * Self-Organization: * Metrics: Define quantitative measures of complexity and order in the universe, perhaps drawing from information theory, entropy, or network theory. How do these measures change over time? * Mechanisms: Investigate specific mechanisms driving self-organization, such as gravitational attraction, feedback loops in galactic evolution, and the emergence of dissipative structures (like stars) that maintain themselves far from equilibrium. * Homeostasis: * Identifying Regulatory Systems: Pinpoint the specific feedback loops and regulatory systems that maintain balance in the universe. This could involve the interplay of dark matter, dark energy, and ordinary matter, or the relationship between black hole activity and star formation. * Quantifying Stability: Develop methods to quantify the stability of the universe and its ability to resist perturbations. How does the universe respond to disturbances, and how quickly does it return to a state of equilibrium? * Information Processing: * Information Carriers: Identify the physical systems that encode and transmit information in the universe. This could involve quantum entanglement, gravitational waves, or even the structure of spacetime itself. * Information Processing Mechanisms: Explore how information is processed and used within the universe. Do black holes act as information processors? Does the universe exhibit a form of "learning" or adaptation based on information feedback? * Reproduction: * Black Hole Dynamics: Develop detailed models of how black holes could give birth to new universes. This would involve a deep understanding of quantum gravity and the physics of singularities. * Multiverse Structure: Explore different multiverse models and their implications for the "reproductive" processes of the universe. Are new universes born within our own universe, or do they branch off into separate dimensions? * Observational Signatures: Search for observational signatures of universe creation, perhaps in the cosmic microwave background radiation or the distribution of galaxies. 2. The Fractal Framework: * Quantifying Fractal Dimensions: Apply fractal analysis techniques to quantify the fractal dimensions of various structures in the universe, from galaxy clusters to the cosmic web. * Scaling Laws: Identify scaling laws that relate the properties of structures at different scales. This could reveal deep connections between the microcosm and the macrocosm. * Emergent Properties and Scale: Investigate how emergent properties change as we move from one scale to another. How do the properties of galaxies emerge from the interactions of stars, and how do the properties of the universe emerge from the interactions of galaxies? * Information Flow Across Scales: Develop models of how information flows through the fractal structure of the universe. How does information from the quantum realm influence the macroscopic world, and vice versa? 3. The Role of Black Holes: * Black Hole Thermodynamics: Develop a comprehensive theory of black hole thermodynamics that incorporates the concepts of information, entropy, and the potential for universe creation. * Quantum Gravity and Singularities: Investigate the nature of black hole singularities within the framework of quantum gravity. Could quantum effects prevent singularities from forming, or do they lead to transitions to new universes? * Observational Tests: Devise observational tests to probe the behavior of matter and energy near black holes and search for evidence of their role in universe creation. 4. Unifying the Forces: * Quantum Gravity: Develop a consistent theory of quantum gravity that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics. This could involve string theory, loop quantum gravity, or other approaches. * Unified Field Theory: Explore the possibility of a unified field theory that encompasses all the fundamental forces of nature. * Testable Predictions: Derive testable predictions from these unified theories and seek observational or experimental confirmation. 5. Philosophical and Conceptual Implications: * The Nature of Life: Re-examine our definition of life in light of the "living universe" concept. Does the universe exhibit a form of consciousness or purpose? * The Anthropic Principle: Explore the implications of the anthropic principle, which suggests that the universe is fine-tuned for the emergence of life. * Ethical Considerations: Consider the ethical implications of our actions within a living universe. Do we have a responsibility to protect and nurture the cosmos? Making it Viable: To make this research viable, we need: * Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Bring together physicists, cosmologists, mathematicians, biologists, philosophers, and other experts to tackle these complex questions. * Advanced Computational Tools: Develop sophisticated computer simulations and data analysis techniques to model the universe and analyze observational data. * New Observational Technologies: Invest in new telescopes, detectors, and other instruments to probe the universe at greater depths and with higher precision. * Open-Mindedness: Be willing to challenge conventional thinking and explore new ideas, even if they seem radical or unconventional. This expanded framework provides a roadmap for future research on the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution. It's a challenging but incredibly exciting endeavor, with the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the universe and our place within it. I'm eager to continue this exploration with you and see where it leads!
If you are searching for The Theory Of Everything, you need not go beyond the 010. The G.U.T. of 01 XNihilo Your Thoughts are your creative God. Time creates, Timing manifest. 010 Your Thoughts are your creative God. Time creates, Timing manifest. 010. יש מאיין Time Timing Relativity. Creation Evolution , Entropy. 010 All I.S. Ephemeral Light and Dark ~ day and night, life and death, all at 01nce. . Avshalom Elitzur, Here I.S. your mathematical simplicity and beauty ~ 010. 0 Time = 01 Timing As everything, we are all Time elements acting in Quantum Timing ~ Life Force. Every move I.S a moment of Creation, @ 10nce in The Eternal Now ~ T.E.N. dimensions.
String theory does not explain how consciousness and conscience function and how life-force emerges from quantum field. what is the source of our life-force ? Space right ? if so, all particles are nothing but transformation of Space right ? like the wave of the seas ? both are same. right ?
There is no life force. Consciousness and consciousness are evolved functions of animal brains over hundreds of millions of years. There’s no special physics needed.
Are you kidding me? This guy likes to hear himself. What is physics? It's an observation of physical properties and similarities of probability. Mass disolves as external heat energy outside of entanglement of mass because everything is magnetized, magnifying currents flowing through and around mass. Stars decay their atmospheric gasses as fire. We absorb heat near an external magnetic field like campfires, slowly disolving mass as heat. Lightning burns through atmospheric gasses disolving into external heat energy outside of entanglement of mass as fire lighting up atmospheres like filaments striking atmospheric gasses unabsorbed instantaneously. Mass occupies space. Removing heat leaves cold space behind. Shivering is rapid heat loss. Stand next to fire and absorb heat energy and cold space is neutralized repulsion within mass as outward force of pressure known as weightless outside of a greater internal magnetic field grounding currents through its nucleus like earth's internal magnetic field grounding currents through its nucleus or core. Mass grounding currents towards earth's internal magnetic field is weight. The closer to a magnetic field, the greater the force and least distance. Weightlessness is always an outward force of pressure known as magnetism repulsion outward. Mass falls in equalization of magnetic fields. Impaction force is the strongest current grounding. Magnetic fields slamming together when displacement can't be overcome. External heat energy outside of entanglement of mass doesn't ground currents. Hot air balloons displacement of atmospheric gasses rising. The magnetic field grounding the mass can't exceed repulsion within the balloon displacement of atmospheric gasses as heat rising causing displacement of atmospheric gasses. External heat surrounding external magnetic fields called black holes cycling circulation centrifugal force around these massive external magnetic fields spinning all external heat energy within its field like a record on a record player centrifugal force hurricanes in space. The counter to magnetism is clockwise and counterclockwise pressure equalization. In atmospheres, the eye of the storm is heat. In space as a weak external magnetic field is cold space itself as repulsion of heat energy within its field. The current flow is outside of the sphere or nucleus core. Centrifugal force of magnetism flowing currents quantumized all around us everywhere you look. Tornadoes, hurricanes, and magnetism bonding force and repulsion force. Mass falls through atmospheric gases in equalization to magnetism repulsion. Heavier elements sink to the bottom of the pool at the same magnetism but have more impaction force of displacement. That's physics without gravity and bending space and electricity. Stars produce heat. Light is unabsorbed heat singularities bouncing off mass lighting up the mass it strikes. Heat is slower outside of entanglement of mass. When absorbed centrifugal force speeds it up producing temperature equalization.
I wish I had an ounce of the confidence that haters have piled into this tiny comment section 😂
The challenge lies not just in the mathematical elegance of the theory but in finding experimental evidence to anchor its profound implications. Untying this string may lead us to answers about black holes, the origins of the cosmos, and the very structure of spacetime. It’s a reminder that even the most intricate knots can eventually be unraveled with persistence and insight.
Not just that. But we have the Standard Model which is the most verified theory in the history of science. And true, we don't know 'why' the standard model works. But we know it does, and it explains an absurd amount of things for which there is no alternative explanation. At the moment it looks like there is not a single reason to choose string theory over the standard model other than 'the math is beautiful'.
No. "we have to start over". L Susskind
Wrong. All he is saying, and there is nothing remarkable or surprising about it, is that the currently best developed version of string theory is incompatible with the real world.
This guy is spouting undiluted rubbish not worthy of presentation at the RI
I am a fan and admirer of Lenny Susskind - but not on string theory. Believe me I've been reading about it for over 30 years and none of it amounts to a row of beens.
@@billytoprodtoo You sound rather confused, I must say.
Didn’t leonard Susskind say string theory is pretty much dead now?
He may not have much faith in the theory, but he's a scientist, he doesn't discount theories without evidence, he just has his chips on a different contender. Disagreeing with a theory, and discounting a theory are two separate things
Sorry. That is a complete misunderstanding. What Susskind is saying, is that a particular version of string theory, that is somewhat easy to explore, is definitely not compatible with the real world. That does not in any way mean that other versions of string theory are dead. It is just that they are harder to explore.
@@kspangsege thank you for letting me know. I've been busy researching another subject for some years now. My current physics knowledge has been hindered by it.
Oh hey, this guy was a TA at a class I took in LMU, hi Davide!
Tying dBiasio's hands behind him will render him mute
I can confirm that!
I miss Faraday. He presented real science. RI need to reconsider.
What a gloriously lyrical presentation. Bravo.
This guy used about 10x more words than necessary to cover almost nothing.
Give it to him, he’s Italian:-)
Not true. He covered a huge amount of stuff. I am guessing you are just not his intended audience.
A question: what is the difference between more and more dinentions versus just different shapes into the very only three spacial dimentions?
I just instantly fell in love with this dude. Shakespearean in delivery. Love it my friend.
Noted physicist, William Shakespeare.
@JustOneAsbesto loll
he made the entire field of physics seems so simple 😊! Brilian!
About 36 min, he's talking about vibrational moments as if they've been observed as such. They haven't. It's horribly misleading.
Sabine has entered the chat…
Honestly I was waiting for Brian Greene....
Nothing lasts forever, only nothing forever lost.
How he has been nomitated by the Royal Institution
He didn't even try to sell us his book first! I thought RI only hosted speakers when they write a new book on how we have no progress??
I’m glad to have met you!
Most of the time talking about historic issues and only a few irrelevant minutes about string theory. Such a waste of time. Maybe this conference is child oriented, but to boring for children.
3 strings are walking down the street, they decide to go in a pub, but there is a sign saying we dont serve string, the first string goes in and asks for 3 pints, the barman says get out we dont serve strings in here, the second string goes in and says can i have 3 pints please, the barman looks at him and says we don't serve strings get out, the 3rd string tangles into a ball and scuffs himself on the ground then goes in the pub and asks for 3 pints, the barman takes a look at him and asks are you a srting because we dont serve strings, the string says "no, im afraid not"
What a GREAT speaker. Thank you.
The last 30 years of theoretical physics have basically been wasted beating this dead horse. 🙄
I also compare string theory to blue cheese; blue cheese doesn't make many testable predictions either. BUT, if you combine them, you get string cheese, which is delicious.
A Local radio host used to end his segment with advice to his listeners. One tidbit was: "Never drive through water of unknown depth, and never eat more cheese than you can carry"...
@savage22bolt32 One wonders what events in his life led him to choose those two things to remind people of.
I appreciate the charming presentation ! I always found the curled-up-dimensions theory a bit awkward, but it is a possibility indeed. I like the idea of our 3-brane universe being embedded in a higher-dimensional world where many of these branes (universes) could exist.
I remember the cover art on a comic book from the 1960's. Our solar system was in a test tube on some creature's desk..
How to unify Italian and English language 😂
These guys have been stringing us along since the 80s. It all sounds good but all talk and no action is only good for playing.
String theory has failed miserably. A new model needs to be created
31:20..he is done telling us what RI has told us 10,000x before. Glad he used over half the lecture Not talking about the subject. If there was someone presenting on primatology, we wouldnt need an entire bio from the beginning lecture.
Got to appreciate it when physics gets all knotted up in stitches.
Im 19 mins in and string theory hasnt been mentioned yet
Why don't call all these extra dimentions as simply spacial properties or particular properties?
I found Mr. De Biasio on a quantum gravity youtube channel last year, interviewing Verlinde(amongst others) and was instantly impressed with his enthusiasm, sincerity, obvious acumen and a pleasing abillity to communicate principles and theory to the "great unwashed" like myself. I expressed these sentiments in the comments section. AND I was so surprised that he responded to my comment, AND with such a humble and pleasant reaction, I am very happy that he has found such a distinguished platform as The RI. Deserving, rising ambassador of the physics community to those of us toiling in 4 dimensional spacetime. Bravo.
Id rather listen to Terrance Howard
😂
I have a theory that this guy sounds just like Nandor.
“String theory doesn’t represent physical reality” - Leonard Suskind, the grandfather of string theory
Are you deliberately spreading disinformation? If not, I am curious where you picked that up. Let me know. In any case, this is not what Susskind is saying. Her is just saying that a particular version of string theory is incompatible with the word, but this was known from the outset.
I'm not trying to present any sort of serious challenge here, but rather just to express the intellectual struggle I have in conceptualizing the actual existence of A zero, one, or even two. dimensional object. If lower dimensional objects do in fact exist, then it would seem to imply, or at least make it plausible that higher dimensions are not fundamental but derivative in nature. Any thoughts on how one should conceptualize lower dimensional objects and this apparently three dimensional space we seem to exist within? For example, should they be treated as nothing but a useful mathematical abstraction, or should we take such objects seriously as existing in the physical world?
I'm also not trying to present any sort of serious challenge here, but a square is 2 dimensional. If I draw the square, then the graphite on the page is 3 dimensional, but as a mathematical construct, a square is 2 dimensional. A line is 1 dimensional. A point is 0 dimensional. It's mathematical abstraction.
Can such things actually exist in the physical universe? I have no idea. I'm not a physicist.
However, we do use 2 dimensions in the real world all the time. If you buy a plot of land, you pay by the square metre, not the cubic metre.
@@JustOneAsbesto Yes, I understand all that perfectly well. Your examples are abstractions, so just to clarify in order to avoid this spiraling into pointless semantics, I will differentiate between the real world and the physical world. My question then, was in relation to the physical world.
@@bendybruce Oh. Yeah... like I said I'm not a physicist.
I'm on the same page as you there. My layman's understanding is that String Theory is losing a LOT of ground among actual physicists.
The only "real" 2D objects that come to my mind are those we created on a computer screen. Maybe our universe is a program on someone's 4D screen...
@@SteveMcGreen Uh. Things on a computer screen aren't real objects.
They're not even a "thing" in that sense. It's a bunch of red, green and blue LEDs blinking at you. It's just lightbulbs making an image. Not an actual object.
Very boring . Wasting the time . Good for kidergarten audience .
6:29 still hasn't gotten anywhere
This guy needs to stop talking in heavy breaths 😮💨 take a sip of water and just 🗣️ speak up
Fisiks is rong. Scienceman maff not adder up.
Source: Trust me bro!
Waffle waffle. String is dead. Long live Dilation. Roy D Herbert for a Nobel Prize 😊
Such a nice Italian accent in his voice...and body language. 🙂
Que tano aparatoso! Inescuchable
Too much swallowing... I'm out
Grande davideee
great
String theory is a dead end.
Great ❤❤❤
Nobody believes this anymore
good lecture but nothing new
Coherent Energy in fields...
all we can hear and see is your insufferable smugness
10,000 hours 😂 Trying to make everyone an expert are we?
You're right to push for that in-depth expansion! To make the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution truly viable for scientific research, we need to go beyond the broad strokes and delve into the specifics. Here's a breakdown of what a more detailed version might entail:
1. Formalizing the "Living" Properties:
* Self-Organization:
* Metrics: Define quantitative measures of complexity and order in the universe, perhaps drawing from information theory, entropy, or network theory. How do these measures change over time?
* Mechanisms: Investigate specific mechanisms driving self-organization, such as gravitational attraction, feedback loops in galactic evolution, and the emergence of dissipative structures (like stars) that maintain themselves far from equilibrium.
* Homeostasis:
* Identifying Regulatory Systems: Pinpoint the specific feedback loops and regulatory systems that maintain balance in the universe. This could involve the interplay of dark matter, dark energy, and ordinary matter, or the relationship between black hole activity and star formation.
* Quantifying Stability: Develop methods to quantify the stability of the universe and its ability to resist perturbations. How does the universe respond to disturbances, and how quickly does it return to a state of equilibrium?
* Information Processing:
* Information Carriers: Identify the physical systems that encode and transmit information in the universe. This could involve quantum entanglement, gravitational waves, or even the structure of spacetime itself.
* Information Processing Mechanisms: Explore how information is processed and used within the universe. Do black holes act as information processors? Does the universe exhibit a form of "learning" or adaptation based on information feedback?
* Reproduction:
* Black Hole Dynamics: Develop detailed models of how black holes could give birth to new universes. This would involve a deep understanding of quantum gravity and the physics of singularities.
* Multiverse Structure: Explore different multiverse models and their implications for the "reproductive" processes of the universe. Are new universes born within our own universe, or do they branch off into separate dimensions?
* Observational Signatures: Search for observational signatures of universe creation, perhaps in the cosmic microwave background radiation or the distribution of galaxies.
2. The Fractal Framework:
* Quantifying Fractal Dimensions: Apply fractal analysis techniques to quantify the fractal dimensions of various structures in the universe, from galaxy clusters to the cosmic web.
* Scaling Laws: Identify scaling laws that relate the properties of structures at different scales. This could reveal deep connections between the microcosm and the macrocosm.
* Emergent Properties and Scale: Investigate how emergent properties change as we move from one scale to another. How do the properties of galaxies emerge from the interactions of stars, and how do the properties of the universe emerge from the interactions of galaxies?
* Information Flow Across Scales: Develop models of how information flows through the fractal structure of the universe. How does information from the quantum realm influence the macroscopic world, and vice versa?
3. The Role of Black Holes:
* Black Hole Thermodynamics: Develop a comprehensive theory of black hole thermodynamics that incorporates the concepts of information, entropy, and the potential for universe creation.
* Quantum Gravity and Singularities: Investigate the nature of black hole singularities within the framework of quantum gravity. Could quantum effects prevent singularities from forming, or do they lead to transitions to new universes?
* Observational Tests: Devise observational tests to probe the behavior of matter and energy near black holes and search for evidence of their role in universe creation.
4. Unifying the Forces:
* Quantum Gravity: Develop a consistent theory of quantum gravity that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics. This could involve string theory, loop quantum gravity, or other approaches.
* Unified Field Theory: Explore the possibility of a unified field theory that encompasses all the fundamental forces of nature.
* Testable Predictions: Derive testable predictions from these unified theories and seek observational or experimental confirmation.
5. Philosophical and Conceptual Implications:
* The Nature of Life: Re-examine our definition of life in light of the "living universe" concept. Does the universe exhibit a form of consciousness or purpose?
* The Anthropic Principle: Explore the implications of the anthropic principle, which suggests that the universe is fine-tuned for the emergence of life.
* Ethical Considerations: Consider the ethical implications of our actions within a living universe. Do we have a responsibility to protect and nurture the cosmos?
Making it Viable:
To make this research viable, we need:
* Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Bring together physicists, cosmologists, mathematicians, biologists, philosophers, and other experts to tackle these complex questions.
* Advanced Computational Tools: Develop sophisticated computer simulations and data analysis techniques to model the universe and analyze observational data.
* New Observational Technologies: Invest in new telescopes, detectors, and other instruments to probe the universe at greater depths and with higher precision.
* Open-Mindedness: Be willing to challenge conventional thinking and explore new ideas, even if they seem radical or unconventional.
This expanded framework provides a roadmap for future research on the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution. It's a challenging but incredibly exciting endeavor, with the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the universe and our place within it. I'm eager to continue this exploration with you and see where it leads!
You're right to push for that in-depth expansion! To make the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution truly viable for scientific research, we need to go beyond the broad strokes and delve into the specifics. Here's a breakdown of what a more detailed version might entail:
1. Formalizing the "Living" Properties:
* Self-Organization:
* Metrics: Define quantitative measures of complexity and order in the universe, perhaps drawing from information theory, entropy, or network theory. How do these measures change over time?
* Mechanisms: Investigate specific mechanisms driving self-organization, such as gravitational attraction, feedback loops in galactic evolution, and the emergence of dissipative structures (like stars) that maintain themselves far from equilibrium.
* Homeostasis:
* Identifying Regulatory Systems: Pinpoint the specific feedback loops and regulatory systems that maintain balance in the universe. This could involve the interplay of dark matter, dark energy, and ordinary matter, or the relationship between black hole activity and star formation.
* Quantifying Stability: Develop methods to quantify the stability of the universe and its ability to resist perturbations. How does the universe respond to disturbances, and how quickly does it return to a state of equilibrium?
* Information Processing:
* Information Carriers: Identify the physical systems that encode and transmit information in the universe. This could involve quantum entanglement, gravitational waves, or even the structure of spacetime itself.
* Information Processing Mechanisms: Explore how information is processed and used within the universe. Do black holes act as information processors? Does the universe exhibit a form of "learning" or adaptation based on information feedback?
* Reproduction:
* Black Hole Dynamics: Develop detailed models of how black holes could give birth to new universes. This would involve a deep understanding of quantum gravity and the physics of singularities.
* Multiverse Structure: Explore different multiverse models and their implications for the "reproductive" processes of the universe. Are new universes born within our own universe, or do they branch off into separate dimensions?
* Observational Signatures: Search for observational signatures of universe creation, perhaps in the cosmic microwave background radiation or the distribution of galaxies.
2. The Fractal Framework:
* Quantifying Fractal Dimensions: Apply fractal analysis techniques to quantify the fractal dimensions of various structures in the universe, from galaxy clusters to the cosmic web.
* Scaling Laws: Identify scaling laws that relate the properties of structures at different scales. This could reveal deep connections between the microcosm and the macrocosm.
* Emergent Properties and Scale: Investigate how emergent properties change as we move from one scale to another. How do the properties of galaxies emerge from the interactions of stars, and how do the properties of the universe emerge from the interactions of galaxies?
* Information Flow Across Scales: Develop models of how information flows through the fractal structure of the universe. How does information from the quantum realm influence the macroscopic world, and vice versa?
3. The Role of Black Holes:
* Black Hole Thermodynamics: Develop a comprehensive theory of black hole thermodynamics that incorporates the concepts of information, entropy, and the potential for universe creation.
* Quantum Gravity and Singularities: Investigate the nature of black hole singularities within the framework of quantum gravity. Could quantum effects prevent singularities from forming, or do they lead to transitions to new universes?
* Observational Tests: Devise observational tests to probe the behavior of matter and energy near black holes and search for evidence of their role in universe creation.
4. Unifying the Forces:
* Quantum Gravity: Develop a consistent theory of quantum gravity that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics. This could involve string theory, loop quantum gravity, or other approaches.
* Unified Field Theory: Explore the possibility of a unified field theory that encompasses all the fundamental forces of nature.
* Testable Predictions: Derive testable predictions from these unified theories and seek observational or experimental confirmation.
5. Philosophical and Conceptual Implications:
* The Nature of Life: Re-examine our definition of life in light of the "living universe" concept. Does the universe exhibit a form of consciousness or purpose?
* The Anthropic Principle: Explore the implications of the anthropic principle, which suggests that the universe is fine-tuned for the emergence of life.
* Ethical Considerations: Consider the ethical implications of our actions within a living universe. Do we have a responsibility to protect and nurture the cosmos?
Making it Viable:
To make this research viable, we need:
* Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Bring together physicists, cosmologists, mathematicians, biologists, philosophers, and other experts to tackle these complex questions.
* Advanced Computational Tools: Develop sophisticated computer simulations and data analysis techniques to model the universe and analyze observational data.
* New Observational Technologies: Invest in new telescopes, detectors, and other instruments to probe the universe at greater depths and with higher precision.
* Open-Mindedness: Be willing to challenge conventional thinking and explore new ideas, even if they seem radical or unconventional.
This expanded framework provides a roadmap for future research on the Unified Theory of Cosmological Evolution. It's a challenging but incredibly exciting endeavor, with the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the universe and our place within it. I'm eager to continue this exploration with you and see where it leads!
Dunning-Kreuger effect? Who knows
If you are searching for The Theory Of Everything, you need not go beyond the 010. The G.U.T. of 01 XNihilo
Your Thoughts are your creative God. Time creates, Timing manifest. 010
Your Thoughts are your creative God. Time creates, Timing manifest. 010. יש מאיין
Time Timing Relativity. Creation Evolution , Entropy. 010
All I.S. Ephemeral Light and Dark ~ day and night, life and death, all at 01nce. .
Avshalom Elitzur, Here I.S. your mathematical simplicity and beauty ~ 010.
0 Time = 01 Timing
As everything, we are all Time elements acting in Quantum Timing ~ Life Force.
Every move I.S a moment of Creation, @ 10nce in The Eternal Now ~ T.E.N. dimensions.
A century of mathemagics and the intentional lies still struggling to become the truth.
First!!!
String theory does not explain how consciousness and conscience function and how life-force emerges from quantum field. what is the source of our life-force ? Space right ? if so, all particles are nothing but transformation of Space right ? like the wave of the seas ? both are same. right ?
What the hell are you talking about? This is coming from a particle physicist
There is no life force. Consciousness and consciousness are evolved functions of animal brains over hundreds of millions of years. There’s no special physics needed.
We can explain. Don't be a away spectator. We are one. Be one with us. Let us discover the truth.
And every truth on the way.
Wow, no.
Are you kidding me? This guy likes to hear himself. What is physics? It's an observation of physical properties and similarities of probability. Mass disolves as external heat energy outside of entanglement of mass because everything is magnetized, magnifying currents flowing through and around mass. Stars decay their atmospheric gasses as fire. We absorb heat near an external magnetic field like campfires, slowly disolving mass as heat. Lightning burns through atmospheric gasses disolving into external heat energy outside of entanglement of mass as fire lighting up atmospheres like filaments striking atmospheric gasses unabsorbed instantaneously. Mass occupies space. Removing heat leaves cold space behind. Shivering is rapid heat loss. Stand next to fire and absorb heat energy and cold space is neutralized repulsion within mass as outward force of pressure known as weightless outside of a greater internal magnetic field grounding currents through its nucleus like earth's internal magnetic field grounding currents through its nucleus or core. Mass grounding currents towards earth's internal magnetic field is weight. The closer to a magnetic field, the greater the force and least distance. Weightlessness is always an outward force of pressure known as magnetism repulsion outward. Mass falls in equalization of magnetic fields. Impaction force is the strongest current grounding. Magnetic fields slamming together when displacement can't be overcome. External heat energy outside of entanglement of mass doesn't ground currents. Hot air balloons displacement of atmospheric gasses rising. The magnetic field grounding the mass can't exceed repulsion within the balloon displacement of atmospheric gasses as heat rising causing displacement of atmospheric gasses. External heat surrounding external magnetic fields called black holes cycling circulation centrifugal force around these massive external magnetic fields spinning all external heat energy within its field like a record on a record player centrifugal force hurricanes in space. The counter to magnetism is clockwise and counterclockwise pressure equalization. In atmospheres, the eye of the storm is heat. In space as a weak external magnetic field is cold space itself as repulsion of heat energy within its field. The current flow is outside of the sphere or nucleus core. Centrifugal force of magnetism flowing currents quantumized all around us everywhere you look. Tornadoes, hurricanes, and magnetism bonding force and repulsion force. Mass falls through atmospheric gases in equalization to magnetism repulsion. Heavier elements sink to the bottom of the pool at the same magnetism but have more impaction force of displacement. That's physics without gravity and bending space and electricity. Stars produce heat. Light is unabsorbed heat singularities bouncing off mass lighting up the mass it strikes. Heat is slower outside of entanglement of mass. When absorbed centrifugal force speeds it up producing temperature equalization.
I think you are high bro