Great great answers. And no fall back on complicated equations or mathematical symbology! Teaching science with cultural awareness and popular assumptions addressed is so very important.
There are no singularities/black holes. Einstein repeatedly spoke about this. He wrote in 1939 - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (he was the first to raise the issue of Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to dilation/gamma. It's the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This doesn't mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass. This includes the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers. The mass in our own galactic center is dilated. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they don't have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have no dark matter. In other words they have normal rotation rates.
Is there a geometric explanation for Planck's Constant? Dr. Roger Penrose has suggested instead of trying to create a particle called the "graviton" to explain gravity, why not try to describe subatomic particles in terms of spatial curvature, as in the twist in a piece of real thread. What if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Dr. Roger Penrose? It can be "chiral" by having either Right-hand or Left-hand twist. It can be "Quantized", based on the number of twist cycles. If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle? Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics? What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Dr. Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model. Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. 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.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Can the conversion of twist to writhe cycles and vice-versa help explain "neutrino oscillations"? Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of twisted tube (neutrino), and a twisted tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay) Within this subatomic model gravity is produced by a very small higher dimensional curvature imbalance within atoms, which causes all atoms to be attracted to all other atoms. This extremely weak attraction reveals the very small scale of the curvature imbalance. This produces the curvature of spacetime on a larger scale like the solar system which is required to counterbalance this small imbalance in the individual atoms.
2:24 quantam theory is not about probability. Then what's thermodynamics and quantam mechanics is alike. But now quantam mechanics has probability amplitudes rather than probability
(DK) = David Kaiser ; (JN) = Josef Navrátil (DK) Superposition or ability (JN) ability mathematical? Or real?, (DK) quantum objects (JN) all objects? Or just one? (DK) to be in multiple states at once. (JN) What that is a state, and how many states does the Universe register? And how many does it need? (JN) Only a few questions are concentrated here, but the answer will be in a thick book, right? (?) If not, and the answer is simple, then here it is. This will certainly be of interest to readers here. I will also add a question: what is quantization and what is quantized?
But we should also appreciate that shows how it's wrong at a fundamental level, and that is time dilation and length contraction (the Hilbert space is warped and curved). Observational evidence (along all vectors) informs science, not just the cherry picked vectors, all contradictions must be canceled before you can claim accuracy. Science is key.
Quantum mechanics is nothing more than a probabilistic mathematical framework based on the misunderstanding of the nature of light, and the misinterpretation of the double-slit experiment. Maybe that's why it's "probabilistic"... The MATH may be useful for replicating technology and chemical reactions, but it has no bearing on reality itself, because the theory is founded on the fallacy of quantum state superposition, which is irrational. Probabilistic math is so good because it provides a powerful way to model uncertainty, make predictions, and analyze complex systems where exact outcomes are difficult or impossible to determine. It excels in handling randomness, quantifying likelihoods, and producing results that align well with experimental data, making it invaluable across science, engineering, and real-world applications, and of course in quantum mechanics...
Nothing like telling a story without evidence. That is, explaining Quantum theory without the 'loose' analogies relied on to get the message across, badly.
Why does he start so well and then admit he focuses on magical thinking in this uncaused event of the Big Bang. Why not address findings of Modern Scientific experimentation - why to the Harry Potter thing, at least why at the start of the presentation. We cannot travel backwards in time to do experimentation in the past, and epistemologically, Oberservational Science is far too weak to drawn any conclusions.
Great great answers. And no fall back on complicated equations or mathematical symbology! Teaching science with cultural awareness and popular assumptions addressed is so very important.
We’re glad you enjoyed the explanation!
Excellent answers and very good crisp questions. Thank you
Thanks, I'm glad you found the explanations helpful!
There are no singularities/black holes. Einstein repeatedly spoke about this. He wrote in 1939 -
"The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (he was the first to raise the issue of Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to dilation/gamma. It's the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This doesn't mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass. This includes the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers.
The mass in our own galactic center is dilated. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves.
Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they don't have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have no dark matter. In other words they have normal rotation rates.
Is there a geometric explanation for Planck's Constant?
Dr. Roger Penrose has suggested instead of trying to create a particle called the "graviton" to explain gravity, why not try to describe subatomic particles in terms of spatial curvature, as in the twist in a piece of real thread.
What if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Dr. Roger Penrose? It can be "chiral" by having either Right-hand or Left-hand twist. It can be "Quantized", based on the number of twist cycles.
If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle?
Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics?
What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Dr. Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model.
Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”?
In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit).
Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant.
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.)
If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature.
Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Can the conversion of twist to writhe cycles and vice-versa help explain "neutrino oscillations"? Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of twisted tube (neutrino), and a twisted tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay)
Within this subatomic model gravity is produced by a very small higher dimensional curvature imbalance within atoms, which causes all atoms to be attracted to all other atoms. This extremely weak attraction reveals the very small scale of the curvature imbalance. This produces the curvature of spacetime on a larger scale like the solar system which is required to counterbalance this small imbalance in the individual atoms.
Q.M. stand for probabilities.
G.R. stands for possibilities.
2:24 quantam theory is not about probability. Then what's thermodynamics and quantam mechanics is alike. But now quantam mechanics has probability amplitudes rather than probability
(DK) = David Kaiser ; (JN) = Josef Navrátil
(DK) Superposition or ability (JN) ability mathematical? Or real?, (DK) quantum objects (JN) all objects? Or just one? (DK) to be in multiple states at once. (JN) What that is a state, and how many states does the Universe register? And how many does it need?
(JN) Only a few questions are concentrated here, but the answer will be in a thick book, right? (?) If not, and the answer is simple, then here it is. This will certainly be of interest to readers here.
I will also add a question: what is quantization and what is quantized?
From 0 to 0 ~~ the Potential of 010 ~ T.E.N. dimensions of mechanical physics.
Every move is a moment of Creation, Evolution and Entropy.
gravitons with a mass 10^-70 could work well
fajrul fx youtube channel sir make a video about fisika its local language which means physics and i think he can help you a little
❤🎉
Quantum Mechanics is no other than Ephemeral Illusion of yes and no, switching, Lighting 010.... Light and Dark.
But we should also appreciate that shows how it's wrong at a fundamental level, and that is time dilation and length contraction (the Hilbert space is warped and curved). Observational evidence (along all vectors) informs science, not just the cherry picked vectors, all contradictions must be canceled before you can claim accuracy. Science is key.
Quantum mechanics is nothing more than a probabilistic mathematical framework based on the misunderstanding of the nature of light, and the misinterpretation of the double-slit experiment. Maybe that's why it's "probabilistic"... The MATH may be useful for replicating technology and chemical reactions, but it has no bearing on reality itself, because the theory is founded on the fallacy of quantum state superposition, which is irrational.
Probabilistic math is so good because it provides a powerful way to model uncertainty, make predictions, and analyze complex systems where exact outcomes are difficult or impossible to determine. It excels in handling randomness, quantifying likelihoods, and producing results that align well with experimental data, making it invaluable across science, engineering, and real-world applications, and of course in quantum mechanics...
Creation I.S. at 10nce 010 Evolution X Entropy.
Nothing like telling a story without evidence. That is, explaining Quantum theory without the 'loose' analogies relied on to get the message across, badly.
Why does he start so well and then admit he focuses on magical thinking in this uncaused event of the Big Bang. Why not address findings of Modern Scientific experimentation - why to the Harry Potter thing, at least why at the start of the presentation. We cannot travel backwards in time to do experimentation in the past, and epistemologically, Oberservational Science is far too weak to drawn any conclusions.