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. .
@@wrathofgrothendieck When a carpenter frames up a house, can you look at the house and calculate how many pieces, of siding, and sheetrock, and shingles will be needed to finish the job?
Still it is good people work on it. Whenever we have the capability to test it's predictions, we don't have to start from scratch in creating the mathematical framework.
When you come up with richer field theoretic constructions ask again. String theory is worthwhile as a geometric playground alone independent of any physical relevance.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces Sure, anything can be worth something. The question isn’t binary whether something has or does not have value. The real test of the value of any theoretical construct is do you get more out of it than you put into it, and by that measure STT is a pretty spectacular failure except for the bank accounts and book deals for its most ardent proponents. Hossenfelder, Penrose, Weinstein should all just shut up?
@@mensrea1251 If one is to stop funding string theory, they should stop funding every aspect of the sciences that doesn’t directly correspond to the real world. Nobody makes this argument about pure mathematics. Apart from its mathematical value, even if string models don’t reflect reality, they give us a wonderful tool for probing and understanding the structure of field theories generally. In some cases this allows us to better understand even realistic field theories. The only issue with string theory models is that some have dishonestly marketed it as the end all-be all. In some ways it is, but far more robust experimental work needs to be done well before we could hope to test any string-theoretic features. Honestly the experimental side of particle physics has been far more disappointing in the past few decades. In summary, yes. The Hossendelder acolytes are bad and should learn more field theory.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces Penrose and Weinstein are Hossenfelder fanboys? Really? I fail to see how admitting an area of inquiry may be less fruitful than originally promised and focusing on alternatives and redeploying finite resources accordingly is the same as saying let’s “stop funding every aspect of the sciences”. You seem to enjoy drama and hyperbole as much as Kaku.
Don’t worry. Their math is complicated and shit, but take it from a Physics PhD at a top ten. I’ve even studied under Gary Horowitz, a pioneer string theorist. Most of us just say he’s a genius mathematician. Nanotech and condensed matter are the fields that have applications behind 12 math nerds understanding and cheering each other on. Plus too they’re like, testable fields. String theory is worth learning about, but until it is testable whatsoever, a lot of us in condensed, AMO, and soft matter view it as math and not really an empirical science.
Strings 2023 was awesome. Edward Witten is wonderful.
Yes, the conference is amazing. It is really nice to meet Prof. Edward Witten in the String conference!
So inspiring...🦾🦾🦾
Is there a full version of the talk
I would like to be a student of Witten
When and where is his next conference? :D
Was this at melbourne? I had the chance to go but decised not to... shame
Nice to meet you Jiayue!
It is really nice to meet you in the String conference!
so ed witten has tremendous parallel processing combined with memory and single core processing lol
u feel smarter just standing next to this guy.
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.
.
I did'nt read the whole thing, but I appreciate you taking time out for writing this
In a millennia, when we finally understand the laws of quantum gravity, it will most likely be in computational terms.
@@wrathofgrothendieck When a carpenter frames up a house, can you look at the house and calculate how many pieces, of siding, and sheetrock, and shingles will be needed to finish the job?
@@SpotterVideo I don’t think so
@@SpotterVideogive me your discord I'm a physics freak too
witten ' huge ding dong ' witten!"
ed
In all humility, I'd suggest to look into other theories.
Good Luck.
Quite silly measuring yh smartest human alive with a scale based on strings game. There are people out there changing the world for real.
String theory more like string hypothesis for it has never been tested let alone proven
Still it is good people work on it. Whenever we have the capability to test it's predictions, we don't have to start from scratch in creating the mathematical framework.
It’s 2023. Why is string theory even a thing?
When you come up with richer field theoretic constructions ask again. String theory is worthwhile as a geometric playground alone independent of any physical relevance.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces Sure, anything can be worth something. The question isn’t binary whether something has or does not have value. The real test of the value of any theoretical construct is do you get more out of it than you put into it, and by that measure STT is a pretty spectacular failure except for the bank accounts and book deals for its most ardent proponents. Hossenfelder, Penrose, Weinstein should all just shut up?
@@mensrea1251
If one is to stop funding string theory, they should stop funding every aspect of the sciences that doesn’t directly correspond to the real world. Nobody makes this argument about pure mathematics. Apart from its mathematical value, even if string models don’t reflect reality, they give us a wonderful tool for probing and understanding the structure of field theories generally. In some cases this allows us to better understand even realistic field theories. The only issue with string theory models is that some have dishonestly marketed it as the end all-be all. In some ways it is, but far more robust experimental work needs to be done well before we could hope to test any string-theoretic features. Honestly the experimental side of particle physics has been far more disappointing in the past few decades.
In summary, yes. The Hossendelder acolytes are bad and should learn more field theory.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces Penrose and Weinstein are Hossenfelder fanboys? Really? I fail to see how admitting an area of inquiry may be less fruitful than originally promised and focusing on alternatives and redeploying finite resources accordingly is the same as saying let’s “stop funding every aspect of the sciences”. You seem to enjoy drama and hyperbole as much as Kaku.
Don’t worry. Their math is complicated and shit, but take it from a Physics PhD at a top ten. I’ve even studied under Gary Horowitz, a pioneer string theorist.
Most of us just say he’s a genius mathematician.
Nanotech and condensed matter are the fields that have applications behind 12 math nerds understanding and cheering each other on. Plus too they’re like, testable fields. String theory is worth learning about, but until it is testable whatsoever, a lot of us in condensed, AMO, and soft matter view it as math and not really an empirical science.
They unravel manifolds and complex structures. Nothing about the universe. Just math gibberish
Ah yes, manifolds. The ultimate abstract mathematical object with zero conceivable applications to reality. Of course
You are wise.
Bullshit. This is a dead end.
So much effort for a theory of nothing
who is still funding this nonsense?
Nobody. All the PhD students who are fool enough to chase it professionally TA until the day they graduate.
Smartest human being alive
String theory the biggest dead end in physics.
Only thing he lacks is common sense.