A conversation between Lee Smolin and Stephen Wolfram
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2021
- Stephen Wolfram plays the role of Salonnière in this new, on-going series of intellectual explorations with special guests. Watch all of the conversations here: wolfr.am/youtube-sw-conversat...
Originally livestreamed at: / stephen_wolfram
Stay up-to-date on this project by visiting our website: wolfr.am/physics
Check out the announcement post: wolfr.am/physics-announcement
Find the tools to build a universe: wolfr.am/physics-tools
Find the technical documents: wolfr.am/physics-documents
Follow us on our official social media channels.
Twitter: / wolframresearch
Facebook: / wolframresearch
Instagram: / wolframresearch
LinkedIn: / wolfram-research
Stephen Wolfram's Twitter: / stephen_wolfram
Contribute to the official Wolfram Community: community.wolfram.com/
Stay up-to-date on the latest interest at Wolfram Research through our blog: blog.wolfram.com/
Follow Stephen Wolfram's life, interests, and what makes him tick on his blog: writings.stephenwolfram.com/ - บันเทิง
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA W2D2 | Summer | โหดจัด ซัดไม่เลี้ยง](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TJa9d7tpSP4/mqdefault.jpg)
holy holy... get me some more popcorn... Smolin and Wolfram that is TOP NOTCH ! thanks for this !
would be super awesome to have Sir Roger Penrose as a guest, perhaps to discuss Wolfram Physics Projects
This is incredible. These sorts of videos should be translated into every language and have 5 Billion views each. Maybe someday Humanity or its descendants will look back and be amazed.
Amazed at what precisely?
233222
@@PetraKann your wonderful replies
@@glitchp Apologise Mr glutchop
Best conversation I've ever heard with Smolin, and I've heard them all. Edit. This is one of the best conversations on TH-cam. Amazing conversation. Steven seems to understand things extremely quickly. Seems like an extremely brilliant man. Lee Smolin is a good physicist and a deep thinker. Seems like a great human. I was very sad to hear Lee has been having issues related to Parkinson's disease. Including pain and trouble moving his right side. I wish him all the best. It's terrible seeing a gentle soul suffering.
What a pleasure to enjoy this chat. Thank you!
I enjoyed this very much. Thank you for posting it publicly.
Wonderful interviews Stephen. Please do a lot more.
I've never seen one of these physics videos where they speak so technically very impressive.
This conversation is pure gold, a lot more people should see it
I have a great deal of respect for Lee Smolin, as well as Dr Wolfram. A great meeting, great discussion, and it's good to see Lee is open to listening to Dr Wolfram's ideas
Relevant detail: it is perhaps helpful to note that at position 19:32, the term mentioned is "Gurdjieff Work".
I don't understand much, if any of the physics talked about but I enjoy the talk with even my small grasp.
Wish I could speak the language fluently.
I’m also HS dropout, studied fluid dynamics making lighting effects, fractals using my Commodore 64. So lucky about meeting Bucky. Got into child education doing STEAM but always keeping up on things. Bucky had a genius vision that hasn’t been fully explored and the sticks and tension might be applicable in some way w your model @Wolfram
Thanks you both. And thanks Lee for the work at Perimeter, I hope to encourage some youth to pursue education, enlightenment there.
Would love it if timestamps for long videos were included
Thank you so much
This is nice. Thank you! Wolfram has a great personable personality. And Smolin too, much depth of thought and insight. // Philosophy was mentioned. To me philosophy is emergent in the mind at a higher level of considering the interpretation of physical things below.
this was such a great conversation thank you
Wonderful, thanks
Hidden gems, thanks for the upload.
I'm impressed by how easily Wolfram picks up on everything Smolin is saying ...
I had no idea Smolin was a HS dropout, or that he was influenced by (and had even met!) Buckminster Fuller.
Never heard of a Highschool dropout mathematician.
@@pascaljosiah6866 did you know they didn't even have high schools until recently 😐
Amazing. ....
Aleay appreciate discussions on time. The "time isn't real" narrative in current academics seems too simple
Good guy Stephen Wolfram.
What a lovely exchange about PHYSIK. I will have to read some of Lee.Smolin's papers.
Fun stuff!!!
Interesting chat
Steve: "Why is a geodesic dome a good pool cover?" Lee: "It's not"
Haha! Yep!
Anyone know the name of Lee's best paper ? (The one he mentioned)
@45:00 the mathematicians are making the terminology obscure the physics (the geometry). When you "throw away" half the Lagrangian you are eliminating a redundancy, if it is a conjugation then physically that is always an inversion (or reversion) in the geometric algebra, so you are saying with things reversed nothing changes, so that is a redundancy and if it is simpler in form to throw half of it away (sacrificing the symmetry) to get simpler functional forms, then it is valid, provided if when you come to computing things you restore the symmetry (e.g., by taking scalar parts of the full geometric products or what-have-you).
@GRUMMLER Chirality
I wish I'd have dropped out of high school so I could be a genius like Lee Smolin.
John Denver wrote a song called "What One Man Can Do" about Buckminster Fuller.
Wish I could understand what they're talking about...
Humbling.....Dunning-Kruger realization here.
The 14 minutes conversation, I know Philip Goff says Russellian Monism was "rediscovered" fairly recently.
Stephen, do some heavy macro doses of psychedelics and you will see how to solve these
Wolfram: “where does the difference between past and future come in in that kind of interpretation?” 1:35:02
Smolin: “sometimes I get confused about it” 1:35:17 “I haven’t made that work the way I would want it to.” 1:35:31
Uh huh.
A theory that *does* make it work had already been put forward in PhilSci and PhilPapers.
Is Gravity ? ~ Space-Time Extracting Space-Time from Matter to Further Expand Space-Time ?
I don't know, but it sounds a lot like what they were talking about, and I like that.
Question: do you think the Universe could exist without observers?
@@____uncompetative Is every particle an Observer ? Is what ever can be as small as the Planc Length and as small as the Planc Time an Observer ? So ~ Is Everything an Observer = If it is, then the Universe cannot Exist with out Observers.
@@theknowledge.6869 To clarify, I was asking if the Universe that we have, that we observe, is the way it is so that consciousnesses exist at some point in its history.
Intuitively, evolution precedes entropic heat death, but one would assume that if evolution failed universally to produce life/consciousness/observers then the universe would still have existed without observers. However, my recent thinking has been that of the problem of bootstrapping reality being resolved by a more advanced form of life (which could be us in the far future, assuming we escape the great filter and don't nuke ourselves, we don't necessarily have to assume we are not special, and alien life evolves past our level of IQ), and as we may beget Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) at some point in the next 100 years, we may gain the IQ through them to resolve a Theory of Everything and the expertise and means to harness its insights into bootstrapping creation, if it turns out we need to travel back in time to set the initial conditions a particular way to ensure our own evolution and history are not only possible, but inevitable. Time may prove to be imaginary and something observers construct out of the patterns of the present hypergraph they see at any one moment. There could be a now, and no past, and no future, with an entropic arrow and our memories being what make us observers label something that was computed and no longer exists or can be accessed as "the past". I have heard Stephen Wolfram talk about the hypergraph being zero dimensional and without time, although he has constructed a meta-take on this substrate which involves causality and commonly refers to time like familiarities where they impinge on Einsteinian models of relativity. So, I don't know ultimately, but am open to the possibility of a Final Anthropic Principle:
www.physics.sfsu.edu/~lwilliam/sota/anth/SAP_FAP.htm
Lee's Three Roads to Quantum Gravity is quite the read...
the first invention that will come from understanding gravity better and q.m. will be like the early bicycle airplane invention, it will use ideas and materials that exist and then be refined for decades then two bike mechanics will invent an airplane using these bike parts and ideas (metal spokes become wires to hold wings etc) the question then becomes ... what tech or materials or spins or energies now can be controlled or modelled that can lead to small inventions that perhaps cannot be seen at the time but will lead to anti gravity, or harnessing gravity, and i have been thinking about this for 40 years and i think it will be similar to the surf board, what made surfing take off was the lightness of the foam core fiberglass covered boards, did u know that the boards used in a competition are even thinner than normal boards, well at some point someone is going to invent a way to surf on gravity waves, and i have been thinking about this as i said for 40 years, somehow a material or a spin or a surface or flux state will lead to a invention like skipping a rock across a pond that will be the first step in gravity and time travel. big things start with simple innovation with what exists for example .. Inventor Karl von Drais is credited with developing the first bicycle. His machine, known as the "swiftwalker," hit the road in 1817. This early bicycle had no pedals, and its frame was a wooden beam. The device had two wooden wheels with iron rims and leather-covered tires.
Who gave it one thumb down!?
0:45
hello
Two highly neuro-divergent individuals who understand the universes more than most of us, gods amongst men. I don't understand why in particular philosophy and psychology fails to update itself with the understanding that these men bring.
I must, admit, I'd love it a lot to actively participate at such events, but I'm quite shy, if I'm sober. xD
I’ve always thought Lee was one of the smartest guys in theoretical physics
Watching this interview I couldn’t help but notice that Lee maybe in the early stages of Parkinson’s or some other similar neurological disorder
All the twitching and squirming and awkward movements while speaking are early warning sides
I’m not a doctor and I hope I’m wrong but my ex wife worked with the elderly suffering from alzheimer’s, parkinson’s, and similar disorders
Very sad
Seems it's Parkinson's indeed.
He does. He actually underwent surgery in Aug 2022 for a deep brain stimulation implant to manage his symptoms. He was interviewed in his hospital room next day and you can see an improvement.
@@quantummotion Glad to hear that.
Thanks for the info.
When multiple geniuses come to the same conclusion in different terms and explains the underthehood explanation of known physics. This conclusion is very likely true.
Spyroe theory, a concept for quantum gravity. The concept is, a human is destined to perceive through a specific shape as a collective. This specific shape is the shape that is the framework for all QM and GR movements. Watch the video on TH-cam. “Spyroe theory explainer”
did Smolin warn the host that he had been drinking? because he is NOT Lee today!!
Is lee suffering from a disease? Why is he twitching and closing his eyes?
He always do that
That’s just Lee Smolin.
He's got a few tics: It's just mild Tourrettes Syndrome.
Also, Check Slavoj Zizek ;)
Side effects of genius...thoughts infuse your whole being.
10:57
Question at 38:00 min: I will Introduce a new axiom or reintroduce/redefine the Vacuum Floor to begin with. I will define faces in a field…… and so on
On the issue of time, this rather dense lecture by David Albert, describes why the past is different from the future, based on a past hypothesis and the records we have about the past, wherein we have no such knowledge of the future. th-cam.com/video/sXb_46ldCH0/w-d-xo.html
I believe the epistemic view of time that Lee Smolin describes is a stronger version than the mere difference between microstates and macrostates, but as with Stephen's "observers" amounts to the same thing. The book by David Albert "Time and Chance", is one of the best descriptions of time, which respects our most deeply felt experience, and dispels the block universe without a present moment as an incomplete description of reality.
omg
Time, Godel Metric
very good
Longitude 127 Seoul Okinawa Soul Axis -- Bahai Faith Rael
Jesus Huh kyung young
Great aletheia
I need to have lunch w Lee, virtually even. We are inches from the grand unification.
WARE UFO?
Could dark matter be the microscopic remnants of evaporated black holes from previous aeons of the universe?
I think probably not. The cosmic microwave background provides pretty good evidence that dark matter existed back when recombination occurred. That's only a few hundred thousand years after the big bang. I think it's unlikely that so many black holes could be born and evaporate into enough dark matter on that time scale. If that did happen, I would expect the CMB anisotropies to be much larger than they are.
However, there's active research right now into whether or not so-called "primordial" black holes, which are black holes that formed in the very early universe and are still around today, could constitute some or all of the dark matter. The appeal of this hypothesis is that you don't need to suppose an entirely new class of matter that we haven't been able to detect.
"God can't do calculus."
Lol. Matched funding doublers.
No progress will be made in large scale cosmology until they rethink this obsession w s3 manifold.
Alright, could you elaborate please?
@@danwebb7144 I don't think he could elaborate.
@@danwebb7144 my issue w a simple spherical manifold is that if gravity is the metric of spacetime where is any variation of curve on sphere? And if black holes are indeed perforations of the manifold then shouldn't there be a perforation in manifold? That brings us to a toroid. Which seems more likely but we have yet to find a white hole.
@@d1psh1tc1ty i hadn't seen the comment so didn't reply
@@KaliFissure This is a pretty cool idea. If spacetime is the surface of a closed manifold, doesn't time go in a circle?
A nice conversation. However the brilliance of these men is actually preventing them to see and accept that the origin of physical complexities and paradoxes is always and without exception, a (quite basic) error in a shared human assumption of made a long time ago and institutionalized as such . You can't solve complexity at the demand side with more complexity on the supply side . You need to eradicate the complexity in the demand side first. We are not doing that. It all hinges on the physical interpretation of Einstein's SR and we need to involve Dirac's spinor math representing (electro) spin as was so beautifully animate by PBS on youtube channel recently. So I am very sorry but neither men are even close to the correct solution. Go back in time and fix where we went wrong....
Demand side? Supply side? Brah what are u even saying.
I hope Lee is going well. He seems like his health might be declining.