The Battle for REALITY: String Theory vs Quantum Field Theory

  Переглядів 187,365

Arvin Ash

Arvin Ash

День тому

Get 4 months extra on a 2 year plan here: nordvpn.com/arvin. It’s risk free with Nord’s 30 day money-back guarantee!
REFERENCES
Quantum Field Theory: • Quantum Fields: The Mo...
String theory and loop quantum gravity: • Quantum Fields: The Mo...
Equations of the Standard Model: • The STANDARD MODEL: A ...
Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD): • The STANDARD MODEL: A ...
Quantum Gravity: • The STANDARD MODEL: A ...
Everything is a spring: • Everything, Yes, EVERY...
TALK TO ME ON PATREON
/ arvinash
CHAPTERS
0:00 Is String Theory Crazy?
2:19 Why am I in London?
3:28 String Theory and Quantum Field Theory differences
5:16 Why bother with String Theory?
6:52 Why does a graviton need to have no mass and spin 2
7:52 Why no Graviton in Quantum Field Theory?
8:47 String Theory solves quantization of gravity
11:20 Similarity and differences between QFT and String Theory
14:08 Why does String Theory need extra dimensions
15:01 Bottom line on String Theory
SUMMARY:
How is string theory related to quantum field theory? Quantum field theory (QFT) is a mathematical
framework that is close to a theory of everything. It describes nearly all particles and forces in the universe, and is consolidated into an overarching theory - the standard model of particle physics. But it is incomplete because it doesn't explain gravity. Enter string theory, which sounds crazy, mainly because it proposes a universe made of vibrating strings and with at least 10 dimensions! We only know of 4, the three spatial dimensions and time. It claims that at least 6 other dimensions are hidden from us. But it is popular because it has an answer explaining gravity in quantum mechanical terms.
String theory posits that the smallest building blocks of the universe are not point-like particles, but tiny, one-dimensional "strings" that vibrate at various frequencies and in different dimensions. Different combinations of frequency and dimensions describe all the different types of matter, forces and energy in the universe. There are several string theories, all related to a deeper overarching theory called M-theory.
Quantum field theory posits that all particles are excitations in fields that span the entire universe, and that forces are due to the interaction of these particles mediated by other particles called bosons.
Both theories in principle can mathematically describe all particles and forces. But we know quantum field theory works. This is not the case for string theory, but we continue to bother with it is because it can model particle that looks identical to the graviton, the theorized missing boson particle that could quantize gravity.
String theory models a particle with zero mass and spin of 2, which would be a graviton. It needs to have no mass because gravity propagates at the speed of light and has an infinite range. Only a massless boson particle could have such properties. A spin 2 is required to model an exclusively attractive force which is what gravity is.
Quantum Field Theory can also describe gravitons - as excitations in a theoretical graviton field. But the problem with trying to quantize gravity in quantum field theory is renormalization. This is the procedure of making a theory valid to infinitesimally small lengths. When we try to do this, we get infinities in the equations. So quantizing gravity using QFT, doesn’t work.
Unlike QFT, String theory solves the issue of quantizing gravity. But the price we pay is that is that we have to contend with 6 to 7 extra dimensions. This is a problem because these dimensions have never been detected.
Scientists have come up with explanations about where the missing dimensions might be. One is compactification. It's like floss - from far away, it looks like a thin 1D line. But as you look at it more closely, we can see it is 3 dimensional.
Another solution to the missing dimensions is that there could be super dimensional membranes in a 4th dimension isolated from us. We would have to exist outside of our local brane to see these extra dimensions.
If we could detect these extra dimensions, It would be significant evidence indicating that string theory is likely a superior model of the universe, and that QFT is an approximation.
But there are some similarities between QFT and String theory. The amplitude in QFT corresponds to the number of particles, just like the amplitude of the vibrations in string theory also corresponds to the number of particles.
#stringtheory
#quantumfieldtheory
Why does String Theory need all these dimensions? because its mathematics does not work in 4 dimensions. It only works if we allow the strings to vibrate in at least 10 dimensions. Note that extra dimensions could also be theorized in quantum field theories, but we have not needed them to make the theory work. The math works fine as long we ignore gravity.

КОМЕНТАРІ: 712
@ArvinAsh
@ArvinAsh 2 місяці тому
Thanks to our sponsor, we could make this video. Please support us by clicking the link: Get 4 months extra on a 2 year plan here: nordvpn.com/arvin. It’s risk free with Nord’s 30 day money-back guarantee!
@redhammer1917
@redhammer1917 2 місяці тому
I remember when this channel had 530 subscribers that's when I subbed this channel had grown more than any other channel I have seen it's unreal 😮
@OfficialGOD
@OfficialGOD 2 місяці тому
String theory - if you need 10 dimensions to make the math work, it is right off the bat delusional as Penrose said. Quantum field theory - if you need infinities to make predictions right, it's more delusional than string theory.
@saftheartist6137
@saftheartist6137 2 місяці тому
Maybe the “Tube Hypothesis” could further string theory and possibly quantum field theory? - tube hypothesis proposes that the fundamental strings in string theory are tubes (possibly two-dimensional) that facilitate vibration, by channeling the flow of spacetime.
@81giorikas
@81giorikas 2 місяці тому
What are the particles that make a quantum harmonic oscillator.
@alfadog67
@alfadog67 2 місяці тому
It was a fun way to incorporate NordVPN into your science!
@beautimous7347
@beautimous7347 2 місяці тому
I'm absolutely sure we will find the other missing dimensions in the same place my dryer loses my socks.
@Mulavi
@Mulavi 2 місяці тому
Check your local paper, or online, for the next Single Sock Symposium (SX3) in your area. The best place to find that matching single sock you've been looking for that you lost through the dryer wormhole.
@alfadog67
@alfadog67 2 місяці тому
Your socks are in superposition, waiting to be measured.
@beautimous7347
@beautimous7347 2 місяці тому
@@alfadog67 then they must also be entangled because I'm missing whole pairs.
@beautimous7347
@beautimous7347 2 місяці тому
@martinblank-th2kx does that mean my socks disappeared at light speed?
@debrainwasher
@debrainwasher 2 місяці тому
Since your dryer lives in a symmetrical spacetime-system (see Noether theorem), eradication of your socks would violate conservation of energy (aka mass). There are three things, that hold in symmetrical systems - otherwise our universe would collapse: i) conservation of energy, ii) conservation of momentum, iii) Pauli's exclusion principle. Every single known physical law obeys these basic principles.
@harper626
@harper626 2 місяці тому
but the idea that a graviton being a force carrier conflicts with the idea that gravity is not a force but a twisting of space-time.
@Johnny-bm7ry
@Johnny-bm7ry 2 місяці тому
@harper262 what you are saying is exactly the problem physicists are trying to resolve. General Relativity says gravity is warping of spacetime due to mass and energy. QFT says fundamental forces, of which gravity is one, is mediated through particles. We need a new theory to reconcile the two descriptions.
@HunnidTheTrapper02
@HunnidTheTrapper02 2 місяці тому
But QFT says nothing about gravity. That's the problem. Gravity isn't a force but can be described in terms of gauge fields. In QFT gauge fields correspond to force carriers and so gravity is assumed to be a force. However, there is no trivial way to quantize gravity and that's where the problem lies - providing a quantized field-theoretic description of gravity ​@@Johnny-bm7ry.
@cephalosjr.1835
@cephalosjr.1835 2 місяці тому
That’s not what the issue is. You can write down a perfectly good theory of quantum gravity in 2 dimensions, so whatever intuitions we have about general relativity aren’t really a problem. The problem is that quantized general relativity in 4 dimensions is nonrenormalizable. You need to include an infinite number of free parameters to get results that aren’t obviously unphysical infinities. This is a huge problem and physicists really don’t like it.
@NPC2358
@NPC2358 2 місяці тому
Does the earth still have gravity if one day suddenly stopped spinning around (Rotation) ??
@HunnidTheTrapper02
@HunnidTheTrapper02 2 місяці тому
@@NPC2358 yes. All it needs is mass.
@Paul_Ch52
@Paul_Ch52 2 місяці тому
Ok. This is one of those videos I will need to watch a few more times if there is any hope for me to almost understand. Thanks for the rabbit hole, Arvin.🙂
@namonef
@namonef 2 місяці тому
6:51 this is my first time seeing a string theory equation
@chriskennedy2846
@chriskennedy2846 2 місяці тому
Don't worry, you haven't been missing much. String Theory has nothing to do with reality and everything to do with the University system collecting billions of dollars in tuition $$$ from physics students. I can't imagine how cognitively compromised I would have to be before I would agree to pay an institution that much $$$ for a degree in science fiction.
@ika5666
@ika5666 2 місяці тому
and it is not one, just a misleading complicated formula one of many one can write.
@kashu7691
@kashu7691 Місяць тому
@@ika5666looks fine to me, it’s an amplitude of genus g written as a sum over moduli. standard.
@ika5666
@ika5666 Місяць тому
@@kashu7691 I see it, but it is not the "string theory equation".
@kashu7691
@kashu7691 Місяць тому
@@ika5666 i would say it is, perturbative string theory is entirely equivalent to the set of all its amplitudes
@FabianReschke
@FabianReschke 2 місяці тому
The Nord VPN Placement was hilarious :D
@drasiella
@drasiella 2 місяці тому
Is this some kind of stock app joke Im too ReVanced to understand?
@LowellBoggs
@LowellBoggs 2 місяці тому
Great job on the commercial insertion!
@condor6222
@condor6222 2 місяці тому
​@@drasiella it was one of arvin's smoothest segues
@willywonka4340
@willywonka4340 2 місяці тому
"warp!" 😂
@christopherellis2663
@christopherellis2663 2 місяці тому
Nerd VPN
@rhouser1280
@rhouser1280 2 місяці тому
Me watching not understanding any of this but really interested
@iyannariel
@iyannariel 2 місяці тому
SAMEE. I'm only a physics undergrad so I watched twice in a row trying to understand
@DavidAllen_0
@DavidAllen_0 2 місяці тому
Same here 😅 I watched it and understood approximately 14% of it. Saving this video and coming back to it when I get a little older
@ZdzichaJedziesz
@ZdzichaJedziesz 2 місяці тому
Fizyka pozwala wznieść się wyższy poziom niezrozumienia 😁
@FLPhotoCatcher
@FLPhotoCatcher 2 місяці тому
That reminds me of a Brian Regan joke about string theory.
@4w0ken
@4w0ken 2 місяці тому
I see an arvin upload , i click real quick
@StandardLoop
@StandardLoop 2 місяці тому
The visualizations are very helpful
@iyannariel
@iyannariel 2 місяці тому
So cool! Thanks for the detailed explanation 😊
@hardikparekh1003
@hardikparekh1003 2 місяці тому
Like always, brief, concise and to the point description of comparison between QFT and ST.. Request you to make similar video describing the comparison between QFT and LQG (Loop Quantum Gravity).
@PestOnYT
@PestOnYT 2 місяці тому
Arvin, the image I have is more like that extra dimensions are rather the properties of a given point in space-time. Meaning 4 for space and time; 2 for electromagnetism; 1 for temperature; 2 for the strong and weak force; etc. BTW: As gravity is not a force but a gradient of bend space-time, I don't think a Graviton is necessary.
@markofdistinction6094
@markofdistinction6094 2 місяці тому
I remember taking calculus in college. We were assigned the problem of rotating the y=1/x function around the x-axis to form a cone. Then calculate both the volume and surface area of the cone from x=1 to infinity. The result was a cone with a finite volume, but an infinite surface area. In other words, you could fill it with paint, but couldn't paint the inside. My point : Just because the math says something .... doesn't mean it reflects reality.
@mrcool7140
@mrcool7140 2 місяці тому
Math can reflect reality, as you say, to a very high degree. One might even say it's unreasonable effective at it. 😏 Just never try to work infinity into those equations. 😂
@portugalforme1198
@portugalforme1198 2 місяці тому
Until you define what you mean by 'Reality', you can't say whether math is an accurate description of it or not. If your definition of reality includes the role of the (human) observer, then you have to use math to describe consciousness....good luck with that ...
@jeffreyspinner9720
@jeffreyspinner9720 2 місяці тому
...and I thought before I stopped using my DDCs, like Blender to make computer graphics, that was hard... ukposts.info/have/v-deo/r2CTop-eiGdoq3k.html What's the point now that Sora and stuff like that does the same thing with a few prompts.
@jeffreyspinner9720
@jeffreyspinner9720 2 місяці тому
@@portugalforme1198 Whoa, whoa, whoa. The brightest mathematicians in the world held a conference to put Mathematics on a firm footing. THEY FAILED. I know that ppl like Bertrand Russell was there along with Kurt Gödel* IIRC, etc., so until the machine intelligence informs us what the world is really, we are just less hairy talking apes, and I'm not joking. So what reality are you talking about, bud? _______________________________________________ * ...and not because of his "Incompleteness Proof," btw. Mathematics itself is flawed... Don't tell me that my adv degree in Applied Mathematics and Statistics doesn't make me an Au'thor'i'ty on the subject (read like it's from South Park). Remember very few ppl know the logical fallacy of "Appeal to Authority," so I can get away with saying that.
@maeton-gaming
@maeton-gaming Місяць тому
well yueah, that's why nothing in nature can accurately be pointed to as being "Quantum" because quantum is ahuman agreed upon abstraction of natures true mechanics ;)
@denissavgir2881
@denissavgir2881 2 місяці тому
I have an idea on how to visualize string theory's extra dimensions. As it's been said that it's impossible for our brains to visualize extra dimensions, this can bypassed by the assertion that the extra dimensions are compactified, so the visualization can remain 3D. Each of the extra compactified dimensions can be visualized by giving an object extra visual properties but keeping their 3D location the same. Imagine a ball. You can visualize it moving through the first 4 dimensions by moving it around and watching it in motion. Then imagine a 5th dimension: moving through a color gradient from blue to red. So now you can move a ball through regular 4D space (its motion being the 4th dimension), and you can move it back and forth through the 5th by changing its color from red to blue or back. You can then add additional visual properties to represent further dimensions. Imagine a conversation between 2 particles: "Hey, I'm here where you told us to meet, at the exact coordinates and at the right time, but I don't see you", "Your x,y,z is correct, and I'm still here. However, you need to come bluer to me. You're too far away off in the red. Come bluer and you'll see me" "Oh ok, I see you now. I must've taken the wrong turn at purple". If you take away an object's innate visual description and give it to the coordinate system, you can represent another dimension by having it represent another dimension's gradient by making it be an arrow that can point in various directions, each direction representing a point on that dimension's gradient. Like an arrow on a speedometer pointing to numbers, it could be pointing at its representive coordinate for that dimension. So if the 6th dimension were represented by a fuel fage, those particles can extend their conversation: "let's go for a stroll. We can keep our x,y,z coordinates, stay in the blue, but we can take a stroll from full to empty and then back. 1 lap". Since motion in the extra dimensions doesn't affect the x,y,z coordinates, this should work, as it remains conistent with the 3D world, borrowing some of its attributes to represent motion in dimensions we can't see, the same way that worldlines on a spacetime diagram borrow the Y dimension to represent time.
@godspeed5428
@godspeed5428 2 місяці тому
U r the first one to have a similar idea as mine.. Honestly I don't like this.. I thought that was an original idea of mine which only I thought of.. Feeling odd to see someone with similar thought process.. My idea was just the same.. It's like we all are living in red 3D space with yellow and other colours 3D space overlaying ours.. . Imagine we living inside a Rubik's cube with each face colour emitting that color light and we living in red 3D face.. All 6 sides emitting thier colour .. They are the other dimensions we can't access coz we are not just colour blind in our eyes but colour blind in our bodies as a whole.. And some higher being who is not colour blind can see us all 6 coloured beings with his eyes... Just like we can see video games character but they can't see us or know of us..
@theotormon
@theotormon Місяць тому
@@godspeed5428 I have also considered the possibility that qualities associated with sensory experience could be considered as dimensions and formalized mathematically. Though I hadn't considered it in nearly so much depth as OP. It would certainly jive with the idea that consciousness plays some role in physics.
@ero-
@ero- 4 дні тому
Wow! I appreciate your knowledge 😮
@denissavgir2881
@denissavgir2881 2 дні тому
@@godspeed5428 makes sense
@denissavgir2881
@denissavgir2881 2 дні тому
@@ero- thanks
@Mikey-mike
@Mikey-mike 2 місяці тому
Excellent, Arvin.
@christopherwalls2763
@christopherwalls2763 2 місяці тому
Thanks for the info
@Age_of_Apocalypse
@Age_of_Apocalypse 2 місяці тому
Very, very interesting video! Thank you Arvin Ash! 👍👍👏
@BharatWantsPok
@BharatWantsPok 2 місяці тому
Thanks for this video
@idduboyinaramu2414
@idduboyinaramu2414 2 місяці тому
I was literally blown away by the way of your explanation😮👏
@SANG0I
@SANG0I 10 днів тому
As doctor who knows absolutely nothing about physics, but loves to learn about it, this video was amazing!!! Keep it up!
@GRay-fp2kb
@GRay-fp2kb 2 місяці тому
Mathematically algebra is the driving force for working of QFT i.e its evolution into geometrical realities/topology and it is in the geometry of spacetime that gravitation arise. Can these be reconciled for example by an in depth description of how algebra (i.e.arrangememt of numbers as matrices and their interactions) give rise to a force which drives differential geometry? Or how these two branches of maths are connected at a more fundamental level? Would much like a video from you on this or allied topics.
@effectingcause5484
@effectingcause5484 2 місяці тому
Uniting quantum mechanics and relativity will only lead to more questions, it won't be the theory of everything we hoped for. A true theory of everything must be able to account for all of the fundamental constants of nature. If a theory can be used to derive the values of all fundamental constants of nature, then we will finally have the Theory of Everything.
@terapode
@terapode 2 місяці тому
Nice explanation, easy to understand.
@vladimirlegrand2917
@vladimirlegrand2917 Місяць тому
The argument consisting of saying that "all other forces considered fundamental have a quantum model therefore the force of gravity must also have a model at the quantum scale" is untenable. Let us imagine that we are underwater beings having arrived at the stage of civilization, we could also begin to postulate that the Archimedean thrust, which raises objects in the water according to their density, must be the result of a fondamental quantum interaction to discover. However, we know that it is an emerging force.
@Mr-wv1tu
@Mr-wv1tu 10 днів тому
"Let us imagine that we are underwater beings having arrived at the stage of civilization, we could also begin to postulate that the Archimedean thrust, which raises objects in the water according to their density, must be the result of a fondamental quantum interaction to discover". What a crock of sh*t! It's just flim-flam. Nonsense. It doesn't mean anything. Get a book, and start reading, kiddo! Right now it's just pathetic, get educated.
@saftheartist6137
@saftheartist6137 2 місяці тому
How about “Tube Hypothesis” - tube hypothesis proposes that the fundamental strings in string theory are tubes (possibly two-dimensional) that facilitate vibration, by channeling the flow of spacetime.
@objective_psychology
@objective_psychology 2 місяці тому
🤨
@ChinnuWoW
@ChinnuWoW 2 місяці тому
String Hypothesis*
@kamcashman
@kamcashman 2 місяці тому
A little late to the party but at 11:14 i like the birth date and date of death for each forefather of mathematics and science being exactly true to fact. That's why I like arvinash
@rudiklein
@rudiklein Місяць тому
Exploring theories, even when they eventually don't give us all answers, is never a waste. It enriches our knowledge and often points us in a new direction.
@user-ft3ed5wv7w
@user-ft3ed5wv7w 2 місяці тому
GOOD, thank you for this explanations. I like the comparison 👍 And only crazy ideas leads to new knowledge, by falsifying or proving.
@MessedUpSystem
@MessedUpSystem 2 місяці тому
Actually, String Theory is a type of Quantum Field Theory, it is a QFT of D scalar fields living on the 2D world-sheet of the string
@haushofer100
@haushofer100 2 місяці тому
Indeed. At many places "QFT" should be replaced with "Standard Model". It also depicts a bit old fashioned idea of string theory being a TOE, while most papers nowadays on string theory are about holography in which string theory is used as an embedding and calculational tool. Nice animations, though 😋
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 2 місяці тому
No it isn't. Because unlike 4d QFT, the "2d QFT" isn't the same as the actual theory, it's a description of a particular thing inside the theory, in a particular limit.
@MessedUpSystem
@MessedUpSystem 2 місяці тому
@@annaclarafenyo8185 ST is NOT the Standard Model, but it IS a QFT. Standard Model =/= Quantum Field Theory. QFT is just a theory of fields living in some arbitrary space-time, and String Theory is precisely that, a theory of 26 (for bosonic) or 11 (for superstring) scalar fields (the string coordinate functions) living on the 2D world-sheet traced out by the string. Yes, this looks kinda artificial since the world-sheet should be a submanifold of the background space-time, but that's only in the Nambu-Goto picture. In the Polyakov-Susskind picture, the world-sheet is it's own entity, and the background geometry actually emerges from condensates of gravitons. So yes, String Theory is indeed a Quantum Field Theory, just not a 4D Standard Model theory.
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 2 місяці тому
@@MessedUpSystem No. It's not that. You can't describe the full string theory with those 10 scalars (NOT 11, it's never 11) any more than you can describe the standard model fully using 4 scalars on worldlines. This is a mistaken point of view, please don't fall into it. The 'fields' of superstrings are best thought of in string field theory, or in holographic reconstruction, never as the coordinate fields. The coordinate fields are the analog of Feynman/Schwinger coordinates, they describe the path of the string, not the physical content of the theory..
@haushofer100
@haushofer100 2 місяці тому
@@annaclarafenyo8185 The excitations in the 2 dimensional conformal field theory which string theory is (a QFT) play the same role as the excitations in the 4 dimensional QFT we call the standard model. In the standard model you have quantum fields which have their own excitations, giving different particles falling in some representation of the Lorentz algebra. In string theory the fields are the internal degrees of freedom, i.e. the bosonic and the fermionic ones, and these excitations fall in different representations of the Lorentz algebra, which can be translated to particles in space time (one of the curious aspects of string theory: worldsheet excitations become spacetime particles, which is non-trivial!) Every representation has its own beta-function, which in a conformal field theory should vanish: this restriction gives you the equations of motion of the particles in space time. You can go one step further on the quantization level and consider string field theory in which you can create and annihilate whole string apparently, but that's something I never studied.
@andrewbreding593
@andrewbreding593 2 місяці тому
It's a bit theoretical and not always my speed but I want to say Arvin gives a kind accessable summation of the status quo. I think your a unique voice in the field and I like your rigorous introductions to these topics. I keep hearing how strings are dead in predictions so there's no experimental data. So maybe there's something here for me
@bogoodski
@bogoodski 2 місяці тому
Actually watched the ad because the lead into it earned it
@NorthernChev
@NorthernChev 2 місяці тому
I actually stopped watching another video just to click on this when I saw the notification.
@alfadog67
@alfadog67 2 місяці тому
Same 😂
@EnvirotekCleaningSystems
@EnvirotekCleaningSystems 2 місяці тому
I'm sad that Newton died 10 years before I was born, but I'm also sad that Einstein wasn't as far ahead of his time as I thought. But, maybe Nord allows for time travel too. lol
@thedeemon
@thedeemon 2 місяці тому
Are you saying you're 296 years old? :))
@honkoff99
@honkoff99 2 місяці тому
This proves that Einstein invented a time machine, went back to Newton's time, then brought Newton back with him to the 20th century. Unfortunately, Newton kept blathering away the whole trip back, so Einstein forgot to stop and kill baby Hitler.
@saranshranjan8563
@saranshranjan8563 2 місяці тому
Great explanation 👏👏👏
@dipling.pitzler7650
@dipling.pitzler7650 2 місяці тому
It is amazing how scientists like Arvin Ash can intellectually pop into the strange world of QFT/ ST and still be able to pop out back into reality translating their findings so that "normal" people "nearly" can understand!
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 2 місяці тому
He's just doing propaganda against string theory.
@thesuncollective1475
@thesuncollective1475 2 місяці тому
So basically we are not any closer
@gregcampwriter
@gregcampwriter 2 місяці тому
The thing I always wonder is what gets the mattress vibrating in the first place? In my case, it takes an alarm clock that can't be ignored.
@Video2Webb
@Video2Webb 2 місяці тому
You are so good at this! Love your channel.
@stanimirborov3765
@stanimirborov3765 2 місяці тому
Like many other vids..but especially this one, learned and memorised some things very easily..was veeeery goodly explained!!
@brianwright9215
@brianwright9215 2 місяці тому
Arvin, you're getting better and better. So happy for you. Thanks for the video 🙌🏿❤️
@chadbailey3623
@chadbailey3623 Місяць тому
String theorists just keep changing the target for all their models.
@steveb5210
@steveb5210 2 місяці тому
Thanks!
@ArvinAsh
@ArvinAsh 2 місяці тому
Thanks so much!
@surendrakverma555
@surendrakverma555 2 місяці тому
Thanks Sir for the excellent explanation
@jackieow
@jackieow 2 місяці тому
It could be the extra dimensions are levels of spirality (coiling) and levels of spirality within or upon other levels of spirality. And also the clockwise vs. counterclockwise chirality of the coiling. Wind a rubber band enough times between two hooks, and if the twisting doesn't break the rubber band you eventually start to see hypercoiling.
@jimmyfaulkner1855
@jimmyfaulkner1855 2 місяці тому
Could you do a video analysing the relationship between Quantum Field Theory (QFT) and Loop Quantum Gravity?
@mrhadley8197
@mrhadley8197 2 місяці тому
One question I have never seen answered in these videos about string theory. Why does gravity have to be quantized and part of a unified theory? Is there a reason for this other than it would be tidier?
@Kelnx
@Kelnx 2 місяці тому
QFT and the Standard Model are really great but it does seem like we still have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of reality. It could be that we'll never truly understand it, we'll just make better and better models which leads to more and more discoveries and eventual engineering concepts. That's probably the most exciting thing about physics; it's a never-ending pursuit towards understanding. There is always going to be something new.
@UniverseSpeck
@UniverseSpeck 2 місяці тому
Great video and breakdown. Quantum Field Theory makes more sense to me. It's how I envision things. I don't like string theory because it describes a string in a singular point of space. I just don't think that's right. That being said, I'm not a physicist or mathematician and I like everyone have a lot of questions. There's no doubt we are missing a lot of the pieces of the puzzle. I think someone will have to come along and really throw a curveball idea to help us make some progress like Einstein did. There's a lot of problems: 1. Dark Energy - Expansion of the Universe caused by who knows what 2. Dark Matter - Massless gravitational phenomena holding galaxies together but we can't figure out what it is. Right, makes sense... 3. Quantum Gravity - How gravity works on the quantum level. My feeling with this is that if we proved that gravitational waves exist, doesn't that inherently prove there is a gravitational field? Sorry I'm a novice 4. Time and Space- I for one really struggle with time and space. What even is time? We describe it as a dimension, but to me it's less a dimension and more a law of change/entropy. The more space things occupy or warp, the slower time/entropy occurs. Weird dude. 5. A million other things we don't know.... Anyway, I have to get back to my life, its a funny world. Someone smarter than me will figure it out.
@SuperMarioOddity
@SuperMarioOddity 23 дні тому
kudos for using about four animations for the entire video
@vibehighest
@vibehighest 2 місяці тому
love this
@frontech3271
@frontech3271 Місяць тому
8:26 - Holograms can appear to move as Time allows everything to move - giving the perception of three dimensions.
@Anmol-lh7bm
@Anmol-lh7bm 2 місяці тому
well it's my own personal thinking what if we have to change something in physics and in something else like how we perceive the virtual particles
@jellymop
@jellymop Місяць тому
String theory is pretty. But what has led to? What breakthroughs in physics has it brought? Is it just elegant maths? Is maths reality or just approximation?
@dimitriosfromgreece4227
@dimitriosfromgreece4227 2 місяці тому
THANKS FOR THE VIDEO BROTHER 💙🙏💙🙏💙🙏💙🙏
@michaelrenouf9173
@michaelrenouf9173 2 місяці тому
The Nord VPN grift/ad was genius placement lolol
@kevinvanhorn2193
@kevinvanhorn2193 2 місяці тому
Half a century of failing to connect with experiment strongly suggests that this is not a fruitful research direction. Time to try some other ideas. I agree with Sabine Hossenfelder that it makes sense to focus on resolving known experimental anomalies and logical inconsistencies -- whether or not that ultimately ends up taking us back to something like string theory.
@MOHNAKHAN
@MOHNAKHAN 2 місяці тому
Your videos are awesome & to the point to the main Subject...
@KeithCooper-Albuquerque
@KeithCooper-Albuquerque 2 місяці тому
Excellent video my friend!
@amirguri1335
@amirguri1335 2 місяці тому
Hi Arvin. I've heard gravity described as both a force and the natural result of spacetime curvature. Are these views consistent with one another?
@bryanspears6161
@bryanspears6161 2 місяці тому
Hi @ArvinAsh. Does Roy Kerr’s work on black holes contradict general relativity? If I recall correctly, he says that singularities are not necessary in black holes
@feynstein1004
@feynstein1004 2 місяці тому
11:16 The timelines of Einstein and Newton are switched. I did a double take when I saw that Newton lived well into the 20th century 😂
@andreybobzhenko1018
@andreybobzhenko1018 2 місяці тому
11:16
@feynstein1004
@feynstein1004 2 місяці тому
@@andreybobzhenko1018Thank you for the correction
@steviejd5803
@steviejd5803 2 місяці тому
Dear Arvin, we enjoy all your videos, thank you so much for taking the time to educate us on these complex subjects.
@Paladin1873
@Paladin1873 Місяць тому
I'm a psychologist, not a theoretical physicist, so I concentrate on the reasons for human sexual attraction. I call it the G-String Theory.
@ArvinAsh
@ArvinAsh Місяць тому
I'm not sure that applies to both sexes equally, does it doc?
@Paladin1873
@Paladin1873 Місяць тому
@@ArvinAsh These days I'm not so sure. 🙄
@Cianan-vw1lb
@Cianan-vw1lb 2 місяці тому
This caused me to rewatch Matt O'Dowd's discussion (PBS Spacetime) of a graviton detector where the Schwarzschild radius emerges.
@NunoPereira.
@NunoPereira. 2 місяці тому
At 11:14 the dates indicated are changed
@honkoff99
@honkoff99 2 місяці тому
Actually, in the String Theory of the universe, these dates are correct. The strings pull you back and forth through time, like a yo-yo.
@donporter8432
@donporter8432 Місяць тому
I've got to make myself understand this!
@jonh8488
@jonh8488 2 місяці тому
Was the field (web) there all along ? Or does it appear as part of the physical world ?
@Yezpahr
@Yezpahr 2 місяці тому
Ok, kudos for the sneaky sponsor message, I'm not even mad.
@AkbarAli-lc7vy
@AkbarAli-lc7vy 2 місяці тому
Make a video on Russell's paradox and set theory.
@vadymkvasha4556
@vadymkvasha4556 2 місяці тому
Thank you for new video, always a pleasure!
@noneinparticular2338
@noneinparticular2338 2 місяці тому
Takes a brave man to take on Feynman. Good effort but how many dimensions can be invented to square the numbers ?
@markconnell4898
@markconnell4898 2 місяці тому
So then string theory is fundamentally at odds with general relativity? String theory is predicated on the presumption that gravity is a force. General relativity, on the other hand, describes it as the curvature of space-time. This would seem to require some heavy lifting by string theory just to get off the ground (so to speak).
@kevincloud574
@kevincloud574 Місяць тому
Can you talk about thermodynamics in relation to computational processing?
@thedeemon
@thedeemon 2 місяці тому
From what I've heard in Susskind's lectures, String Theory must give QFT in its limit similarly to how quantum mechanics gives us classical mechanics in a limit. They do not oppose each other, ST just serves as a basis for QFT. Or as some other people formulate it, "ST is a QFT in such and such setting". I'm not familiar with details though, ST is way above my level.
@misterlau5246
@misterlau5246 2 місяці тому
String Theories are Quantum Field Theories. Just in standard model we use this Hilbert space with tetravectors. We obtain points which form a distribution. It resembles our wavefunction. Putting 2D objects there is cool because it allows more degrees of freedom to distribute energy... And the characteristic of modeling a particle which is a boson with a non repulsive counterpart.
@FruitLoops_
@FruitLoops_ 2 місяці тому
Question: Why don't we consider mass itself as a consequence of the excitation of the gravitational field (space time)?
@user-dp9ch8xb5q
@user-dp9ch8xb5q 2 місяці тому
From a philosophical point of view, it seems that there is a supergravity that transcends the entire physical framework
@mosquitobight
@mosquitobight 23 дні тому
"Limited physical significance" -- in other words, the generals haven't figured out how to use it to make a new weapon. That's probably a good thing.
@kayakMike1000
@kayakMike1000 Місяць тому
Standard model is PARTICLE PHYSICS. Subatoic particles like quarks and bosons. QUANTUM physics is different, mostly studying how probability waves interact with echother.
@MuktiArno
@MuktiArno 2 місяці тому
@ArvinAsh what do you think of Nassim Harramein's work? Is he's blowing hot air, or do you think he's on to something?
@andrewbodor4891
@andrewbodor4891 14 днів тому
Light slows down going around mass chapter one EM waves go from one side of quantum nodes to the other side at one permissible speed; the “speed of light”. EM waves follow the aether threads around mass and the energy pulses appear as if the speed of light decreases. What actually happens is the EM pulse goes further around the mass and only appears to slow down. These quantum “nodes”, perhaps are series of open and closed strings which actually do the work of carrying the photon impulse energy. EM pulses carry the information given to them by the initiating energy pulse created by matter. They are frequency, wavelength and amplitude. Frequency times the wavelength equals the constant speed at which all EM pulses must move through the quantum nodes. (The strings) While the impulse is moving through the quantum thread it takes longer because the thread inside the the quantum node is stretched and compressed as it is pushed aside by the matter / mass. The impulse speed remains the same, only the distance of travel increases; thus the seeming slow down of the speed of light (EM pulses). Of course, after passing the distortion to the quantum node caused by matter / mass, the speed seems (only appears) to go back to the constant. While passing near the matter / mass it appears that the EM wave had undergone time dilation. Everything appears to have slowed down. The frequency that the EM pulse had going in has been reduced due to the energy loss involved in taking longer to go from one side of the quantum node to the other. The frequency decreased so the wavelength increased so the equation is balanced. F times W equals the speed of light. That same F / W combination continues after passing the matter / mass. While under the influence of the distorted quantum nodes, (strings) the EM pulse undergoes time dilation; energy is lost and the EM changes to a lower energy level, running internally slower than before. Time dilation had occurred. All energy of the atoms of the matter / mass at the center of the distortion react the same way to the altered quantum nodes. The compressed and stretched quantum nodes are present throughout all the matter, (including inside the atom between the proton, neutrons and electrons) and all energy of any kind, EM or even the strong forces have to travel further to do their work. The strong forces are not matter but depend upon the quantum space still in and about the atoms to remain as energy and not matter. The vibrations of the quarks take longer to travel from one side of the quantum nodes to the other. The energy undergoes a slow down and therefore the matter that they are associated with also slows down. The matter experiences time dilation. All energy moves through quantum nodes and are forced to take a longer time to go around matter / mass. A space ship traveling tangentially past a black hole outside the event horizon would appear to an outside observer to be standing still. The matter of the ship and its crew are being dragged along by the energy, the strong forces (quarks) vibrating and therefore moving, through the distorted quantum nodes. (The matter follows the energy and vibrations it is provided) The quarks vibrate at the same speed but take longer to finish one vibration cycle because the quarks have to travel further. Internally all appears normal to the occupants and craft; but an outside observer will observe the craft moving slower since it ( the quarks) are/is traversing a longer distance. Time is dilated. EM pulses traveling next to the craft inside the distorted quantum nodes would also experience time dilation, but directly since they are inside the nodes; whereas with the matter, only the energy (quarks) are traveling inside the nodes and the matter is dragged along for the ride. Whichever one, the pulses still travel at C; they appear to an outside observer to slow down only due to the greater distances they have to travel. Light pulses, photon packets, travel through the open strings of String Theory from one point to the next. ukposts.info/have/v-deo/qp-rZ2xtbIWhtXU.htmlsi=b_x-4LCcHM8Rs2xv A single string can carry more than one packet of photonic energy; the vibration of the string, the amplitude, would just be greater the more packets that are traveling in the medium of the string at the same time. Closed strings and open strings perhaps are organized so that open strings empty into closed strings and that closed string further empties into an open string, until encountering matter. Gravity has been modeled as a closed vibrating string. What happens if that closed string is elongated or stretched thin by matter that has pushed it aside (the aether or quantum nodes)? The closed strings and open strings of quantum space fight against the matter that pushes them aside and caused the strings to stretch and be distorted. This push I suggest is gravity. The extra dimensions of closed strings might lose some of their dimensions and cause time dilation of the matter? So gravity, because of the distorted strings, cause time dilation. - [ ]
@seaoflogic9924
@seaoflogic9924 2 місяці тому
Forgive me if this is a dumb question I am a regular blue collar guy…but at the end of the video it was mentioned that QFT could work with extra dimensions but it wasn’t needed because it worked as long as gravity was ignored…so doesn’t that mean that if QFT was reworked to include extra dimensions it could potentially include gravity?
@ArvinAsh
@ArvinAsh 2 місяці тому
Well, including additional dimensions in QFT essentially requires strings to make gravity make sense, so that's what String Theory really is. The extra dimensions only need inclusion to make gravity fit.
@shiyangwang5681
@shiyangwang5681 2 місяці тому
Gravity is not a force from outside,not like others: Gravity is the force from inside of you,your real love.
@user-cd4tl4zj1x
@user-cd4tl4zj1x 2 місяці тому
One is wrong, the other is not even wrong.
@StephenJohnson-jb7xe
@StephenJohnson-jb7xe 2 місяці тому
Perhaps the problem with detecting the extra dimensions is akin to trying to see colours with our finger tips we simply don’t have a way to “see” them as they don’t interact with us in a way we can see (other than gravity).
@CaptainPeterRMiller
@CaptainPeterRMiller 2 місяці тому
I am thrilled to see you back the The Sciences Pages. Here's to you ARVIN.!!!
@emergentform1188
@emergentform1188 2 місяці тому
Love it, hooray AA!
@bohanxu6125
@bohanxu6125 2 місяці тому
This is underselling quantum field theory. Any local (with other modest constrains) quantum theory are equivalent to a quantum field theory at low energy. In this sense, quantum field theory would always describe reality at low energy. This idea is Wilson's renormalization. This is similar to no matter what smooth function (with other modest constrains) you have, its behavior at low energy (global minimum) would always be like a 2nd degree polynomial. The 2nd degree polynomial would always describe such functions at low energy... similar to how quantum field theory would always describe such functions at low energy. The version of quantum field theory we have (core theory or standard model + naive gravity) can in principle already explain all daily phenomenon like biological, neuro science (and anything that is not made from billions dollars particle accelerators which is the reference for low/high energy)
@Firerace
@Firerace 2 місяці тому
I can't help feeling that they just keep adding strange ideas and mathematics to make their theory work out in the end but being completely unrealistic.
@ominollo
@ominollo 2 місяці тому
Just an idea: what about a video about the potential tests of String theory?🤔
@exup35
@exup35 2 місяці тому
Hi Arvin. I know it's not related to this video as such but the spin function of particles made me think. What would be the implications of a spinning universe before the big bang. After expansion would it still have spin/rotation? How would we know if we are still in a spinning expanding universe?
@lepidoptera9337
@lepidoptera9337 Місяць тому
You would see new terms in general relativity, for one thing. The idea has been explored, but if you turn those terms on, then some really strange physics starts happening in the x-ray and gamma-ray region, where the coupling between torsion and the electromagnetic field becomes strong. This hasn't been observed, so it stands to reason that nature is torsion free.
@surfacetension
@surfacetension 2 місяці тому
Has anyone ever considered that space-time isn't "the background upon which quantum fields exist" but, that, in fact, quantum fields ARE what makes up space-time?
@jazzlehazzle
@jazzlehazzle 2 місяці тому
Can you please make a 4D (3D volume + t) model of QFT fields that shows each field as a 3D volume with its spheres getting excited instead of a flat waving surface? That would show more of how the fields would actually look?
@anxious_robot
@anxious_robot 2 місяці тому
String theory is probably correct. We just don't have equipment or knowledge to prove it. It's a shame b/c we will waste decades before coming back to it only to find out it's right. This always happens in physics.
@ISK_VAGR
@ISK_VAGR 2 місяці тому
Arvin, super way to introduce your sponsor hahhaa
@chrisbero2
@chrisbero2 2 місяці тому
Did I miss something? Did String Theory actually make a testable prediction that wasn't already made by the standard model or QED? It seemed like interest in String theory was dying and really hasn't had any successful predictions but String Theory was just the darling of science communicators for 30 years. I love Collier's take on String Theory: ukposts.info/have/v-deo/o6mSk4KPmJWqknk.html&ab_channel=AngelaCollier
@Regalert
@Regalert 2 місяці тому
Forces have virtual particles in QFT. If virtual particles from different forces interact and create the gravity particle?
@hbofbyu1
@hbofbyu1 2 місяці тому
Was the canvas of the universe wrapped up with all matter before the big bang? Or did the big bang happen upon an already existing canvas?
@stevejeffryes5086
@stevejeffryes5086 2 місяці тому
If the motion of bodes in space-time is governed by the curvature of space time, does the graviton have any place in physics? One might come up with some mathematics to describe a putative graviton, but one can also come up with some mathematics to describe a tachyon, in which almost no one believes. On the subject of compactified dimension, I suggest that dimensions must define some type of extent and that an upper limit cannot be placed on extent. Thus, if a "dimension" is compactified it is not a dimension.
@user-ol1ez6ew8e
@user-ol1ez6ew8e 2 місяці тому
Great sharing, my friends.
The Trouble with Gravity: Why Can't Quantum Mechanics explain it?
16:04
Something Strange Happens When You Follow Einstein's Math
37:03
Veritasium
Переглядів 8 млн
🔥 Україна виходить у ФІНАЛ ЄВРОБАЧЕННЯ-2024! Реакція alyona alyona та Jerry Heil #eurovision2024
00:10
Євробачення Україна | Eurovision Ukraine official
Переглядів 278 тис.
Мы играли всей семьей
00:27
Даша Боровик
Переглядів 1,9 млн
Артем Пивоваров х Klavdia Petrivna - Барабан
03:16
Artem Pivovarov
Переглядів 7 млн
What Was There Before the Big Bang? 3 Good Hypotheses!
16:58
Arvin Ash
Переглядів 190 тис.
How Can MASS and ENERGY be the Same Thing? What, Where and Why is it?
15:45
5 New Scientific Discoveries in 2024
15:07
Sideprojects
Переглядів 1,3 млн
The String Theory Wars and What Happened Next
25:18
Sabine Hossenfelder
Переглядів 618 тис.
Quantum Fields: The Most Beautiful Theory in Physics!
14:31
Arvin Ash
Переглядів 870 тис.
How Molten Salt Reactors Could Revive Nuclear Power
19:21
Arvin Ash
Переглядів 184 тис.
The Surprising Truth About the Higgs Boson "Discovery" at CERN
15:31
The Trillion Dollar Equation
31:22
Veritasium
Переглядів 7 млн
What If Gravity is NOT Quantum?
18:31
PBS Space Time
Переглядів 1,4 млн
Распаковал Xiaomi SU7
0:59
Wylsacom
Переглядів 2,3 млн
Клавиатура vs геймпад vs руль
0:47
Balance
Переглядів 932 тис.
Samsung UE40D5520RU перезагружается, замена nand памяти
0:46
Слава 100пудово!
Переглядів 3,5 млн
The PA042 SAMSUNG S24 Ultra phone cage turns your phone into a pro camera!
0:24
3D printed Nintendo Switch Game Carousel
0:14
Bambu Lab
Переглядів 392 тис.
Subscribe for more Coding Tips! 🔥I wish I knew this When Istarted Programming #school #software
0:34