No, Einstein Didn’t Solve the Biggest Problem in Physics
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ก.ย. 2024
- Check out my course to learn more about interference, the uncertainty principle, and Bell's theorem on Brilliant! First 30 days are free and 20% off the annual premium subscription when you use our link ➜ brilliant.org/....
A lot of people have asked me to talk about the video “Did Einstein Crack the Biggest Problem in Physics…and didn’t know it?” It’s a discussion between Brian Greene and the scientists who supposedly used a quantum computer to open a wormhole. But what does this have to do with Einstein?
🤓 Check out my new quiz app ➜ quizwithit.com/
💌 Support me on Donorbox ➜ donorbox.org/swtg
📝 Transcripts and written news on Substack ➜ sciencewtg.sub...
👉 Transcript with links to references on Patreon ➜ / sabine
📩 Free weekly science newsletter ➜ sabinehossenfe...
👂 Audio only podcast ➜ open.spotify.c...
🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜
/ @sabinehossenfelder
🖼️ On instagram ➜ / sciencewtg
#science #sciencenews #physics #quantumphysics
In Brazil we have a saying: "If my grandmother had two wheels, she would be a bicycle."
Meaning that rearranging things for your argument's sake doesn't change what those things are. I believe it applies here. Great video! ❤️
😂👍👍👍
in brazil? nah its from an italian chef in a tv show
@@yehezkielpurba4149actually the idiom has been around a lot longer than that Italian chef you’re referencing. A version of it was even used in Star Trek 3 in the 80s by Scotty.
falou brasil n[os aparecemos.
@@Zulmofo ‘Aye, and if my Grandmother had wheels she’d be a wagon.’😂
5:35 Sabine predicted this would happen. This is one prediction more than string theory ever managed to get right.
It is not a prediction of String Theory. The idea came out of AdS-CFT duality which had string theory ideas, but is independent of string theory, and it morphed into a quantum gate logic idea. It's purely a quantum information result. Entanglement simulates a nontraversable wormhole --- also the converse if they actually had a minimal nontraversable wormhole... which they may have, but that's not something easily "seen" or measurable yet.
@@AchrononmasterFine words that sum up to very little the way you strung them together. You should consider rereading the comment you replied to.
But the girl counting 9 qubits on her fingers (4:41) was too much, I laughed really hard. Mathematics (9) and physical proof (girl), all happening in this very Universe! 😁
Please do the whole world a favour and debunk all these hyped up b.s panels/lectures before they get millions of views.
Thanks so much. I'll see what I can find...
I'd say it will be better for Sabine to wait a little bit, prepare as she only can, then and only then Destroy the f**k out of 'em... Asmongold's farming tactic, that has been proven the most effective in terms of resounance and view farming, goes as follows: Hyped news --> cover rapidly with hype but mantaining skepticism pretty high --> wait for the gigaflip of the situation u already are expecting --> at top hype drop a 2 to 4 hours long video reaction on the matter with a balance of "technical & down-to-earth" way of interaction in Live streaming (u need others content to react otherwise u really can't physically). The audience is going to digest that contet Live or Bit by bit slowly on yt, and this way the algorithm tends to suggest "not so new" videos in Home and Suggestion Bar.
With Sabine's actual numbers this kind of moves could make her channel blow up so much that the entire yt would pick up on this kind of news, making it finally mainstream and not "taboo argument".
@@SabineHossenfelder What do you think is the difference between string theory & Weinsteins GU in a sense, that they both try to describe the finer/underlying structure of the universe using mathematical constructions, if any?
@robertm3561 And since some tuition ought to be a thing, how much will you pay for the answer?
@@aaabbb-py5xd The question exists and carries valuable information, thus you should pay me, if the answer sucks/no answer imo.
5:58 Getting ghosted by a magazine is crazy.
Probably because what she said was legit, but also bad for business.
@@pierrecurieAnd if it's bad for business; that's the quickest way to irritate academic administration!
It´s a kind of scientific inqusition. Her articles includung th ones in quanta magazin are always accurate interesting and valid.
They proved the following theorem of Einstein: "90%ofl all Internet content is crap".
Best Belly laught I've had in days !! THX
Exactly.🤣
Applicable to this chat forum as well?
That's a version of "Sturgeon's Law": 95% of everything is shit.
Certainly applies to media engagement with String Theory.
Nah, that's the quote from Newton
Ability to call bullshit when I mean bullshit. Epic!
Quantum Mag's loss is our gain. Freedo to call-out these scientist must feel liberating. However, I am very disappointed with these gentlemen.
Totally agree!
Quanta magazine. Their mathematics articles are very useful.
Sabine: I have watched, as you have, Brian flounder with his pet for decades. A man who doubles down on doubling down.
He is so consumed with being the Carl Sagan of his time: "famous for being famous".
The science world most wants to know if he got too much or too little attention as a child.
And how to make certain it doesn't happen to any one again
He's not just doubling down, he does it in 26 dimensions.
Man, when I first saw a video of Brian over a decade ago it didn't resonant with me.
And I haven't watched anything with him in it ever since
@@WayneLynch69 There is a Carl Sagan of our time: Neil deGrasse Tyson. He actually had contact with the OG Carl. They were both astrophysicists, and not string theorists. Most importantly in the present context, NDT is less prone to hyping up wild speculation as fact.
@@pierrecurie Man, You clearly haven't seen all the stuff he is talking around. Yes, he managed to get "new" Cosmos tv show production (and that's mostly done fine), but apart from that, he is also sooo ful of himself, "know it all", pushing his opinions to everything way out of his experise.
A quantum wormhole between Greene and Kaku?
My thought.
Nice
Yep
😂😂
And narrated in real time by Neil deGrasse Tyson. Man, these people really got inflated their (former) TV fame from various documentaries and tv shows into their ego.
Science isn't a system of strong opinions, it's a system of "show your work which can survive criticism and replication by others". There is no place for confirmation bias in science. The world is the way it is if we like it or not -- it's not obligated to conform to our beliefs.
no thats empiricism. science is beyond that: its dwelling amongst the phenomena and making successful predictions, its successful gambling, its investigation, its knowledge chasing. its always beyond the mechanical and tangible. its individualistic. i recognise i'm going against mainstream opinion
A new career in comedy awaits
why was my reply deleted??? i wasnt rude in any way, i just had a differing opinion
Bot.
ok, 2nd attempt: i call that empiricism. i think science is more than that: its dwelling amongst the phenomena and making successful predictions, its successful gambling, its investigation, its knowledge chasing. its always beyond the mechanical and tangible. its individualistic. i recognise i'm going against mainstream opinion PLS DONT DELETE ME
"Everyone has a wormhole in a quantum computer until they take a Hossenfelder to the Face." - Mike Tyson
I SO appreciate you pushing back on unsubstantiated "scientific claims." ... Society thinks just because someone has a PhD that their claims must be valid, but scientists make mistakes just like everyone else.
"scientists make mistakes like everyone else", duh, that's how science advances. Anyone who understands science understands that making mistakes is the reason that the scientific method exists, so we can systematically learn on mistakes and keep building on proven ones. That's the whole point of the scientific method, otherwise it wouldn't be necessary.
The layperson somehow got this image that scientists are portraying themselves as perfect. It is weird, no scientists would _ever_ say that, that is not science, that can only come from religious and dogmatic who don't _get_ that science is not a system of beliefs, it is a empirical system of proving everyone else (and themselves) wrong.
More importantly, THEY LIE about things that will advance their self-interest just like anyone else. Sometimes they are lying to themselves as well as everyone else, and sometimes they are simply being PAID to lie. I discounted everything James Hansen said for the longest time simply because he was getting the "rock star" attention that used to be reserved for the ASTRONAUTS at NASA (you know them, the people who actually risked their lives to advance humanity? Those guys ...) without really having taken any personal risks.
Turns out SOME of what he said was true, and some of it was outright hyperbole. Like so many others.
They make much less and more subtle mistakes usually though.
I get annoyed by those that think that studying math or physics for 8 or 10 years puts you at the same level of everybody else.
It's self reassuring bullshit.
I heard a rumor, that scientiests are also just humans and humans are flawed, thats why we even have modern science to mitigate human error, we just need to remember that scientists are humans too :D
@@MultiAndAnd No one thinks that. I know I'm dumb as rocks. Sabine called out liars and grifters. Intelligence doesn't negate lying and grifting, rather it facilitates it. I'm guessing you've studied math or physics for 8 or 10 years and are above everybody else because you're very good at manipulating.
Perhaps they proof: Einstein's statement. IMAGINATION IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN KNOWLEDGE. But they do not really realize what he meant.
Proof by contradiction.
1. Let's assume knowledge is key
2. Fail
3. QED
I imagine you're right.
Sabine may be the single most important scientific fact checker today. Take! My! Money!
Blackwater erik ??
I really like that, despite your strong opinions on topics like string theory, you still make sure not to misrepresent any information from the other side of the argument. That should honestly be the standard, but for most people nowadays, it's not.
Years of working in publicly funded research taught me that the endless challenge of seeking funding often leads to less than honest claims which are not always exposed later after the money has been approved and yes, getting published is absolutely critical for most science careers.
Something very similar was stated by Sabine in a video on the process of going where the money is (speaking of research grants) One has to appreciate her style of calling out things as she sess them to be. She makes a lot of sense. I love her no nonsense style.
In other words, it's kind of like telling everyone you worked out your home grown "theory of everything" on your Casio calculator and when it comes out completely wrong, instead of going back to the drawing board on your theory, you say "Well, I'll just go get a bigger calculator".
I fell down the hyperbole hole- arh but then I popped out the other end
You can prove anything with String Theory but nothing can prove String Theory itself.
Because it us just a mathematical self-referential model that can produce any results based on the parameters you pass in.
String theory is not a theory, because can be experimental proof. We would build a particle smasher as big as our galaxy to get Planck's scale and Planck's mass.
Further, it's a fundamental law of mathematics that any logical system cannot prove itself without producing contradictions. You'd need a superset of said system to prove its simpler cousin.
Like Epicycles. With the right parameters you can draw Homer Simpson.
Kind of like philosophical systems. That was one thing I got out of my year and a half in uni.
I'm so glad they've finally been able to create a wormhole without rupturing space-time, scientists rupturing space-time is getting quite annoying.
Thanks
Thank you so much!
String theorists are turning into the villains of Physics. I can already imagine Christopher Nolan working on a movie with some main character based on Ed Witten
That would be actually incredible... please pitch this to Chris Nolan!
Eric Weinstein also needs a role in this, not sure which one. And Sabine in Physics cat-suit 🙂
its like seeing grownups discussing santa.
*"its like seeing grownups discussing santa."*
... You're not a "Santa denier," are you?
@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLCSanta deniers when they find presents under the christmas tree: "Uhhhmm, ahhh, ehhmm, idk, must have been science!!"
Physicists seem to be good at inventing impossibly complicated theories that can never be proven. This is very important work and needs more funding.
With hundreds of Millions at stake!
Can we stop the recent wave of string theory apologism? It's pretty clear that string theorists are still just trying to find funds for their stupidity.
Thankful for your honesty and work. Despite all our technology, we still are plagued by a constant tsunami of bullshit.
All the great physicists of the 19th century wouldn't believe their eyes if they lived to see this lol
Right or wrong Sabine is the only popular scientific thinker today who isn't afraid to go against the grain on a subject IMHO
Thanks, really appreciate that!
Going against the grain in a ratio of 80/20 with/against is probably the best way to get far in life, if you pico your battles carefully
She really has next to nothing to lose anymore. Calling out the scientific community on it's identifiable rent seeking activities is an important public service.
@@SabineHossenfelderInformation systems may be ideal for proving quantum gravity. Recent developments in holographic theory and quantum gravity (e.g., the AdS/CFT correspondence) suggest that gravity might emerge from deeper informational principles. Gravity may be an emergent phenomenon that arises from the deeper structure of informational reality. If gravity is an informational interaction, it could serve as a bridge between quantum theory (where information plays a central role) and general relativity.
Interesting thoughts!
It appears that Brian Greene is practicing woo science now. All show, not much go.
He wasted his career on the string "theory".
I think the way they did that press conference for a research paper says a lot. The only other time I've seen something like that was the "discovery" of cold fusion.
BICEP2 and the B-Mode detection for primordial gravitational waves. That was another hype without enough scientific scrutiny. Science corrects.
"I can say bullshit when I mean bullshit." - love this.
My part-time neighbor here in Alaska refers to scientists as High Priests.
Brian Greene might be the Pope.
I still think that’s a bad analogy because at least scientists try to get some sort of evidence for their theories compared to religion.
Sounds like your neighbor might be a flat earther
You are doing such an important public service, I hope that your audience gets bigger and bigger. I'm doing all that again to share it in my networks. Thank you for your work.
😊
I trust you realize we are lucky to have you.
If you're obsessed with differential geometry and never had much time for algebraic topology, number theory, complex analysis, or group theory, Einstein is the man! He ushered differentiate geometry into physics land. Pigs can pop it's just rare that birds get angry enough IRL to do it. Anyone who has owned a parots knows that birds are pretty chill...
Never piss off the seagulls, they will crap on you every time.
And even there, some would say that Poincaré and Hilbert are the real inventors of theory of relativity (for the math side at least)
The tiny violin... almost spit out my coffee laughing.
Yes😂
Bryan Greene is getting to be more out of control than Michio Kaku these days
same career...
😂
Ouch!
Quantum Grifting?
@@mcpr5971😂😂
Thank you for calling out the bullshiters.
Another Wonderful debunking by Sabine of how drunk on theoretical abstraction completely unhinged from physical measurement and physical reality some sectors of physics have become.
How to explain this is an interesting question, and the answer has to be the usual corrupting incentives, (money, fame, and the other things that we chase because they're so obviously desirable and rewarding). The truth might be more elusive and requires a whole lot more humility to say nothing of boatloads of hard work to achieve, but money and fame pay immediately and highly.
I see the same corrupting incentives in my sector of science where we have people touting $50,000 a year amyloid antibodies as wonderful disease modifying Therapies that reduce cognitive decline by approximately 20 to 25%. About half of what you can achieve with diet and exercise. Perhaps we should add to the definition of homo sapiens that it is a species easily seduced by bulshit.
It was essentially the same as "Tom from Idaho recently opened the first wormhole by connecting one end of a room with a blue portal to an orange portal on the other end of the room. He was quoted as saying, 'oh man, this is so cool. "
I gave up on the World Science Festival a few years back when it started to become obvious they had little interest in actual science and just went after politics and trends...just like how the history channel used to be about history, but then went down the whole conspiracy route...
@@dwavenminer me too
Clickbate, citations, noticed by the NY Times... Reputation? We all need a course in bullshit detection. Lovely podcast, Sabine!
Thank you so much for your work. How about once in a while using your platform to talk about solid research being done at smaller institutions or other unexpected places, that doesn't make it into Nature because it is from unexpected places or in fields not flashy enough for Nature and the likes?
A computer simulation, even if it's based on well tested theoy, only produced hypothesis that needst to be tested by experiment. It's appaling that senior physicists are ignorant of such a Philosopy 101.
In response to a previous video of Sabine's about string theory someone posted an excellent joke which bears repeating.
I got home from work early the other day. I found my wife in bed, and a naked string theorist hiding in the wardrobe. I knew he was a string theorist because he said he could explain everything.
😂
Four hours of Brian Greene discussing Computational Universe / Quantum Gravity. Wonderful bedtime stories. Puts me to sleep in under five minutes.
Immense respect for Sabine
Yes!
Ever since years ago, first watching Brian Greene on String Theory, I've always been left with the impression that he's Harry from Third Rock from the Sun, and keeps getting conflicting messages from "The big giant head"
Sabine is right where she needs to be.
The stock animation with the tiny violin on white background was such a funny way to introduce String Theory into the video. Multiple chuckles generated.
No one should claim, that TH-cam is not good for something. Well done Dr. Sa🐝, that you have sharpened your sting.
Once upon a time, I was perusing in Barnes & Noble when I came across Brian Greene's book on String Theory. As a Physics Major at that time, I thought: hmm, I have time. So I spent some hours skimming it while spending a fortune on Starbucks white mochas. Read enough not to invest further time nor money, and returned the book to its shelf. Best decision EVAR!
Brian Green and friends have a hard time admitting their theory of anything explains a universe that's not this one.
None of this makes it easy for a regular individual to learn what science actually has to offer. I appreciate those scientists who have the consideration to say "from this point forward this is speculation" or "this is our interpretation", (not necessarily supported by anything other than the scientists preference). It makes it easier for one such as myself to identify what points scientists agree and disagree upon. Perhaps if the drama could be turned down just a bit? Times like this it's too bad we have to compete with one another through a Capitalist system when all we want is to learn something.
so right!
This is why many believe climate change is a scam.
We're so lucky to have you, Sabine!
My favourite part is where the Guardian puts 'baby' in quotation marks and not 'wormhole'..
Thanks, didn´t notice that😁
If the only place your theories work is the simulated reality you created, maybe reality is trying to tell you something.
More useful strings on a dead Guitar than Green and Kaku.
So, this was more about money and less about science
‘Aye, and if my Grandmother had wheels she’d be a wagon.’ Lt. Commander Montgomery Scott. Chief Engineer, USS Enterprise. Maybe they’ve all disappeared up their own wormhole.
Thank you for watching it so I don't have to. I got as far as the mention of wormholes and switched off.
Love the tiny violin that shows up when string theory is mentioned. Lol
Thanks Sabine! As I just said to my wife, mailing a recipe for a cake to a friend is not sending the cake itself however many ingredients the recipe contains!
Watching Brian Greene come to the understanding that string theory is a fool's errand with each Science Festival talk.
Why is he given so much screen time?
@@drbuckley1 Because he is the host of Science Festival? Which he does a great job at as a science communicator, usually. I'm specifically mentioning the moments where he almost reluctantly pushes for testable string theory predictions and visibly strains while he doe so.
He is learning.
finding a place where one manages to get compensated while retaining the ability to say bullshit when they mean bullshit is some of the most contented working people i know. myself included.
Thank you for giving us such a (a bit depressing, I must say) glimpse on the misconduct that reigns in what is supposed to be an intellectual enviroment where Science and Honesty ought to rule above all other goals
Didn’t Hume and Kant warn us about getting lost in abstract reasoning that isn’t confirmed by experiment and observation?
We need 1000 more "washed up" physicists on TH-cam teaching us the TRUTH about the BS in academia. THANK YOU SABINE!
This was a sharp attack. Sabine is not playing around.
Bravo! I have always revolted against stupid "therories" without actual PROOF.
The truth is that none is making any progress on unified theories since 25 years at least. Neither LQG nor string theory are maintaining their promises.
Money corrupts everything, including science.
1:02 the tiniest violine in the world. 🤣🤣🤣 i have to find a clip of that
hihi...
"Ancient-astronaut theorists... think otherwise." Sensational science shows catapulted many of these people into fame far exceeding what they were used to. People can get addicted to it just like a drug, and it can be just as harmful. Protecting one's time in the spotlight has caused more than one scientist to make a fool of themselves.
6:28 The issue isn't that no one understands quantum mechanics, but that everyone understands it differently. 😅
Listening to Brian Greene reminds of "the Universe... what a concept." Being so full of it is such an art! 💀
I love this woman. " Like using angry birds to prove that pigs can pop". The world would be vastly different if everyone could to know.. look at things for what they really are and describe accordingly.
Green and his string theory are a failure
What did I read about string theory decades ago? Oh yes, it's not even wrong!
Thanks!
Thanks from the entire team!
I watched that few days ago and called them out as scammers trying to get more funding.
I feel good that Sabine has the same opinion abt this.
Science is not for defrauding states out of their tax income.
Also, these people give conspiracy theorists and anti science a good argument for their madness.
I believe Warren Buffet (or Peter Drucker?) once said (and I am very loosely paraphrasing here): if you can't understand someone's business model in two minutes, its either too complicated or its bullshit. I believe that even when sophisticated maths are required, most scientific theories or at least posited hypotheses should be understandable by a listener with a basic understanding of the material (not even an expertise in the material). Richard Feynman, Neils Bohr, and many other famous scientists who have formulated new hypotheses not only have the maths to describe them, but also seem able to explain the phenomena using language and visual models that make implications of the maths understandable to a listeners with less expertise. Hiding behind unclear jargon or sleights of hand in the maths should be firable if not ethical offenses.
Proof that cow flap happens in an innumerable variety of essences and flavors. A great Francophone philosopher once said: "You can brush a turd all you want, but it will still be a turd." Well presented, thank you.
String theory and astrology have equal evidentiary support
🤣
I would argue astrology has more 😂
@Consoneer at least astrology makes predictions 😆
Sabine is right on this one. I have observed for a while the migration of string theorists toward quantum entanglement. Nothing wrong with that. However ER=EPR is utterly unproven conjecture. They even "forget" that EPR, because of the threat of quantum entanglement, accused quantum mechanics of being "incomplete."
Cheers to you for bringing this into the spotlight, and jeers to Quanta for treating you like that. Keep it up, you're doing great work on this channel.
💯
Are you saying this is all a byproduct of a broken publishing system?
I am shocked! 😲
No, really, that whole publishing system is ripe to be replaced. Elsevier & Co. are the problem, not the solution.
String theory actually died a long time ago
To be able to tell bullshit is bullshit feels great, recommend...though gets you easily some enemies.
Calling a wormhole a hole seems wrong. Maybe a cosmic hard drive
I stopped taking seriously all those string people years ago. This Quanta magazine story makes me sad also.
3:00 this whole segment is so stupid. All they're really showing is two squiggly clumps and a diagram of a wormhole. It doesn't actually demonstrate anything they're talking about.
I guess we need to thank that magazine for pushing you to create your TH-cam channel. They made sure we're getting well-grounded science news at a much cheaper cost than a magazine subscription, and without any editor shenanigans.
I created some negative mass just now. I wrote down the mass of something and then put a negative sign in front of it. I'm just waiting for the "science communicators" to pile on and start spreading the great news.
Be sure to don't forget to check your email from the Nobel Prize!
I used to watch people like Greene because they told me what I wanted to hear. I now watch Sabine's videos because they are the equivilent of a splash of cold water in the face.
Exactly, that´s hwy her channel is that intetresting in opposite to all those echo chambers.
Hi, Dr. Hossenfeld, I do appreciate your knowledge and your critiques. I've looked at, and listened critically to, the video about which you speak.
I myself found it quite interesting. The title does not say Einstein did solve the biggest mystery in science, it was simply put into question.
Furthermore none of the physicist said that he did. Brian said they were "presenting" mathematical "idea", "potentially" using quantum computer to bring string theory, particularly entanglement and quantum gravity together, "if" real we can "kind of" simulate and touch. Such statement as: we "believe" there is a connection, "if" these ideas are correct, "it has not taught anything about quantum gravity", these are first and baby steps, this "may" lead to a huge break through I don't know.
I didn't hear any claim that Einstein did solve quantum gravity. Physicists were very careful of making bold claims of certainties merely based on quantum computer simulations.
To me personally they are on the right track. We should not interfere and let them work. All of humanity will benefit a little now, but greatly in the future. Faster than light speed communication and travel is on the horizon!
Nice to see someone responding thoughtfully rather than jumping on the "let's trash Brian Greene" bandwagon like most of the replies on this thread. I have also seen the original video and I think there is a degree of mis-characterization going on here.
@@nickrr5234
I know right, this is madness. I respect both Dr. Hossenfeld and Brian Greene. Both are brilliant scientists. I was just trying to keep an open mind toward them both. I appreciate both their thoughts, ideas, and content. I mean of course no one agrees with everything, not even between scientists. But, these two are some of my favorite and actually most reasonable and sound.
If they are on the right track, they should be able to reason a bit more than they did, namely nothing. Sabine is right with her claim, that ST works not (and did never) in the laws of nature we observe, but in a sc. "DeSitter"-space. It´s like ghost busting and I agree, we can let them work, but not with money of others. Funded science must be reasonable, and ST is more a theory of nothing (Avshalom Eltizur, physicist) than a theory of everything.
Lets talk about science like Richard Feynman, not like Brian Greene.
We need to stick to the scientific method. Experiment, then draw your conclusions. Just because your math is logically sound doesnt mean it will fit in the real world.
Not saying Brian Greene is subpar or anything like that. But we need to recapture the magic of discovery, not just computation.
Right. An example: Big Bang theory says dark matter has to exist in a certain precise amount, so it exists; and the existence of dark matter proves the Big Bang theory. Typical circular reasoning.
@@williamschlosser Wrong. For a start, science doesn't prove things - that's a mathematical concept. It just provides evidence to increase or decrease our confidence in whether a particular theory is correct or not.
The big bang doesn't need dark matter to suggest that it is very likely correct - there's plenty of other evidence. However, if you want to explain the cosmic microwave background fluctuations, particulate dark matter does this better than any other explanation we currently have, so this is evidence for (but not proof of) the existence of dark matter. No circular reasoning.
Shtring theory is schtick. Who trades the family cow for entangled magic beans? The government, hoping that Jack can steal the singing harp.
I appreciate the stellar inclusion of the "worlds tiniest violin."
I also appreciate that while other indoctrinated "scientists" ignore Einstien's most important realization you are able to honorably recognize it.
That realization being that he still had much to figure out.
I personally believe we will find a socially acceptable answer playing by the rules of this causality by filling a small room with monkeys and providing abucuses.
I'm certain eventually Einstein himself will eventually emerge from the room wearing a cat suit, scolding us all for our misunderstanding.
I love what you do here. 🥰 Please keep going.
This morning, I'm listening to you and my amygdala (I dunno!) gives me two ideas connected.
"A paper published in Nature is worth a lot of money in grants..." (Sabine)
alongside:
"Da Vinci had a hella notebook. Back then, patronage and lopsided wealth distribution were more nakedly accepted." (Blinking)
... Thinking about it this morning, I think DaVinci didn't write his notebooks left handed because Da Vinci was a curious fellow... it was because he was protecting his income stream!!! 😏
...What do you do to get grants (or patronage)? ...You capture the imagination of your benefactors.
...With what?
...With whatever butterflies that dude is chasing these days! Heliocentric orbits? Geocentric orbits? Tantric orbits? Shortcut to cinnamon? Who cares! But you're gonna need an idea for that at the next meet-n-greet at the palace... or TED talk, as the case may be... Looks like history repeats...
So if mobs are a no-no, these days, then what are we gonna do about our perverse incentive structures?
I hope we figure it out before the abuses get much worse. For example, Ukraine is a hobby for Putin. He clearly imagines himself a candidate for the "Ivan the Terrible Medal" in the 2022-25 Imperial Games...
With all due respect: WTF???🫣
@@orangegummugger1871I agree that the most compelling motives are, very broadly, "higher purpose" or causes greater than ourselves... But I don't think that stuff applies to the ultra rich, does it?
...That is to say, I thought the consensus had landed on sociopathy as the best skill set for entrepreneurship...?
Thank you so much for your support, really appreciate it!
I enjoyed Professor Greene in the movie Frequency, not so much in his popular science books, so thank you for giving us insights into his professional life. Twenty years ago i asked a string theory expert at a Cambridge University dinner about the lack of progress in string theory and was told we needed more time.
He was correct, modern technology is not capable to observe and measure quantum systems down to the string level, not even to the quark level really. Except for quantum entanglement teleportation, the best they can do until technology improves and advances to that point is to possibly simulate quantum phenomena on quantum computers.
@@bnjm8868 And why dont they fund Sabine´s experiments proposaöls about testing superdeterminism? the technology is on the table, far away from the Planck scale. It´s scienmtific inquisition, I understand her anger very well.
Happy Birthday Sabine!!! Alles Gute zum Geburtstag!!!
I think that nowadays scientists reduced to desperation because they can't find anything new or concrete without shame have started to invent new discoveries. They have made the wrong calculations because there is Sabina who discredits them.
Sabine is correct. There are 2 fundamental problems with science.
One is pure economics. How to attract the most brilliant minds without creating a mafia-like hierarchies of grant distribution.
Second problem is the Plank scale. Below which no physical experiments are possible at this time.
So, what’s left? Well, math, of course. Physics is being replaced by math, as a fundamental instrument to understand reality.
Quantum mechanics appears to be on the life support. Yes, math is limited by the assumptions of those, who practice it. But. There’s no other option. Colliders are no longer useful.
Exactly!