Edward Witten - What are Breakthroughs in Science?

  Переглядів 347,589

Closer To Truth

Closer To Truth

День тому

What is the nature of scientific breakthroughs? What are common characteristics among all the sciences? What are specific signs of breakthroughs in physics and biology? Breakthroughs as new ways of thinking, new systems of thought, new perspectives for seeing the world. What distinguishes breakthroughs from normal good science? What drives breakthroughs? How is science driven by breakthroughs?
Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Support the show with Closer To Truth merchandise: bit.ly/3P2ogje
Watch more interviews on breakthroughs in science: bit.ly/42mpZGe
Edward Witten is an American theoretical physicist and the Charles Simonyi Professor in the School of Natural Sciences at the Institute for Advanced Study.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/3He94Ns
Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

КОМЕНТАРІ: 1 200
@pauljohnson1664
@pauljohnson1664 Рік тому
I'm here because Eric Weinstein said: "I am terrified of this man!”
@0oABathingApeo0
@0oABathingApeo0 Рік тому
Same here
@Arian2953
@Arian2953 Рік тому
Same here!
@PorcelainKilt
@PorcelainKilt Рік тому
Plus 3
@luisramrod9121
@luisramrod9121 Рік тому
Eric Weinstein is a show man. 😂😂😂
@mas5589
@mas5589 Рік тому
So did I 😂
@pedroportela2134
@pedroportela2134 4 місяці тому
This man could easily be a Sherlock Holmes villain. The way he speaks, moves his hands....an eerie calmness
@k4fkaesqu3
@k4fkaesqu3 10 місяців тому
The fact that this man got a bachelor's in history (minor in linguistics) and went on to become one of the greatest physicists in human history is absolutely wild to me.
@ivankaramasov
@ivankaramasov 10 місяців тому
Not to mention, he is the only physicist ever winning the most prestigious prize in mathematics, the Field medal
@kokits
@kokits 8 місяців тому
easy...assume he never got a bachelor's in history (with a minor in linguistrics)
@zzzzxxxx341
@zzzzxxxx341 8 місяців тому
His father is a physicist, so he inherits his father's mind. Let's go!
@calumhughes2778
@calumhughes2778 7 місяців тому
Wow nice to know where me and my history degree with a minor in linguistics are headed career wise
@gacekky1
@gacekky1 7 місяців тому
Well, considering string theory is probably bupkis...
@shmookins
@shmookins Рік тому
I love how this man talks. No filler sounds (like 'ummm' and 'ahhh'), no repeating of words a few times during a sentence. Just clear continuous talking.
@johnsmithsu310
@johnsmithsu310 Рік тому
He is a good teacher 👍
@Michael-di6ss
@Michael-di6ss Рік тому
6:47 um
@davidcotuit
@davidcotuit Рік тому
Oh yes, isn't it just a sheer delight to listen to him speak!!!!
@osazeeoghagbon2628
@osazeeoghagbon2628 Рік тому
He is so precise... I would love to read his work...
@jjcooney9758
@jjcooney9758 Рік тому
You are too generous here. He is very well spoken but not above a pause or “filler sound”.
@colinbrown4903
@colinbrown4903 Рік тому
I saw him walking through the halls of my campus one day. Dude is so imposing even without speaking. What a legend.
@adjusted-bunny
@adjusted-bunny Рік тому
I saw him parking his SUV in front of a waffle house.
@colinbrown4903
@colinbrown4903 Рік тому
@@adjusted-bunny what a legend
@jackastor5265
@jackastor5265 11 місяців тому
He's a jackass that insists on pursuing theories that don't work and are not valid.
@personofinterest8731
@personofinterest8731 10 місяців тому
I'm here because I want to see what scares Erik Wainstein.😊
@bigbrotherisasob
@bigbrotherisasob 10 місяців тому
Why would you be imposed by him ? Get a grip. geez...
@kurt2612
@kurt2612 Рік тому
"To the best of our present understanding." This is the most important part of the entire conversation. Humility drives scientific discovery exponentially faster than arrogance. -me
@Old_Man_Bridge
@Old_Man_Bridge 6 місяців тому
There irony here was intentional, right? 😂
@kurt2612
@kurt2612 6 місяців тому
@@Old_Man_Bridge irony isn't exactly the right word, but yes
@Leopar525
@Leopar525 Рік тому
When he is saying we understood all 5 string theories are different aspects of the same theory, he means HE understood and then shared with the world
@vm-bz1cd
@vm-bz1cd Рік тому
what a treat to listen to (arguably) the smartest guy on this planet! 👏
@septopus3516
@septopus3516 Рік тому
Knowledge without application is trivia.
@deveryhenderson8335
@deveryhenderson8335 Рік тому
lol. i know exactly what you are. jew
@callmedeno
@callmedeno Рік тому
​@@septopus3516 Right... until the application is discovered, then the person who wasted time on trivia has somehow suddenly just given you knowledge.
@briarrose7016
@briarrose7016 2 місяці тому
Yeah, just ask him.
@mickeybrumfield764
@mickeybrumfield764 Рік тому
I'm glad we've got Dr. Kuhn to ask the questions.
@Jonnygurudesigns
@Jonnygurudesigns Рік тому
He could be the guest instead of the interviewer.. hes so well versed
@H3c171
@H3c171 Рік тому
@@Jonnygurudesigns you kinda have to be to engage in dialogue on topics such as the ones Edward Witten is known for
@pio7763
@pio7763 7 місяців тому
You don't have any idea what they are talking about 😂
@KhaledTheSaudiHawkII
@KhaledTheSaudiHawkII 7 місяців тому
@@pio7763same here. I didn’t even understand half of the questions 😂😂😂
@TheDavejmcknight
@TheDavejmcknight 2 місяці тому
Absolutely 💯
@Skeluz
@Skeluz Рік тому
What an amazing human. I absolutely love his almost religious notion of "our present understanding" knowing well that science is an iterative process that takes a long time to deliver the goods, so to speak.
@pdcdesign9632
@pdcdesign9632 8 місяців тому
That's completely the opposite of a religious statement 😮. Religions have already figured out the answer 😅 u
@AllforOne_OneforAll1689
@AllforOne_OneforAll1689 5 місяців тому
Lol yep
@theconiferoust9598
@theconiferoust9598 5 місяців тому
@@pdcdesign9632i think the original poster meant that they perceive his notion of "not knowing" as a sacred part of reality.
@TheDavejmcknight
@TheDavejmcknight 2 місяці тому
Well done 🎉
@TheDanielmeeks
@TheDanielmeeks Місяць тому
You mean the same Guy who when asked about other theories on the topic said they are merely “other words” not theories. He is against science being iterative by pushing them off as not worth entertaining.
@snotsbuttwax
@snotsbuttwax Рік тому
5:09 I love that "Oh. Ok."
@aminzahedim.7548
@aminzahedim.7548 Рік тому
Please more of Prof. Witten on the channel; he’s greatly elaborate, very precise, and uncanny at foreseeing what questions might be forming in one’s head 👍🏻👌🏻🙏🏻
@travislankford9254
@travislankford9254 Рік тому
I could listen to Dr. Witten talk ad nauseum. Fascinating mind and how he can convey incredibly complex topics in terms relatively understandable to others. More Dr. Witten please :)
@paviad
@paviad Рік тому
I second that!
@Jonnygurudesigns
@Jonnygurudesigns Рік тому
3rd 👍
@navigator1819
@navigator1819 Рік тому
He also speaks very fast
@sabinaducree995
@sabinaducree995 Рік тому
@ NAvigator Iturned the Speed down to 0,75 & it s quiet okay
@pgknippel
@pgknippel Рік тому
All meat, no salad!
@jdghgh
@jdghgh Рік тому
I watched this video without understanding anything being said. I knew this after only a couple minutes, and continued to watch regardless, as well as knowing that I wouldn't understand the rest.
@Bilbus7
@Bilbus7 2 місяці тому
Same homie
@18_rabbit
@18_rabbit Місяць тому
@@Bilbus7 it would behoove u to pick up a primer on physics or just one part of it, like what i did at age seventeen, i spent many evening hours in summer on the old basic little book about Theory of Relativity. The basic mental mechanisms needed to grasp that book are really good for the mind etc. Physics, ie the raw basics that are not too hard to get, really should be pushed more in highschool, ie kids should be urged to try to take the class. It's a lot easier than most ppl think, ie that intro type course (no advanced maths at all, virtually no maths at all) But this vid, yeah u need to know the basics of the development of physics history, real easy to learn that by just looking up online! Otherwise u r kinda wasting your time watching vid like this probably, though ican't imagine, bcuz i was steeped in this stuff a bit over the long haul, and i'm over fifty now, so in my gen in america, u were suposed to be scientifically literate, at least basic level.
@paulahaddon4913
@paulahaddon4913 9 місяців тому
He is truly mesmerising, his voice is so soothing. I could listen to this beautiful man all day.
@albiestandley7248
@albiestandley7248 10 місяців тому
I love listening to this man talk!!!
@spinnetti
@spinnetti Рік тому
I didn't think somebody that smart could dumb down his thoughts simple enough for us normal people to grasp - well done! :)
@Arpsie1
@Arpsie1 11 місяців тому
I actually think that IS a sign of intelligence, Einstein said if you don’t understand something simply you don’t understand it
@Kivas_Fajo
@Kivas_Fajo 10 місяців тому
I understand it the other way. You have to be so smart and understand it thoroughly, otherwise you couldn't dumb it down for "normal" people to understand. Like...and this is in no way comparable intelligence wise, but only if you understand IT thoroughly you can make it understandable for Average Joe. As always, if you are not well versed in a topic, how on Earth will you be able to communicate it to people that hear that topic for the first time?
@rossmeldrum3346
@rossmeldrum3346 10 місяців тому
That's where the problem lies, if you can't get the concept across, what good are you as a teacher, no matter how smart you are.
@Kivas_Fajo
@Kivas_Fajo 10 місяців тому
@@rossmeldrum3346 Yes, your problem. You just have to accept that there are people on the planet who are so smart, that you cannot be taught, because compared to them, you're the village idiot metaphorically spoken. So, yes there is a problem, but no, it is not the teachers fault his students are normal people other than him.
@stephenscharf6293
@stephenscharf6293 7 місяців тому
@@Arpsie1Absolutely Correct. Not on the level of this subject, but when I was teaching Design for Six Sigma to my "students" in Biotech, most of whom were PhDs, as I became more experienced, I could convey the same key principles with fewer words and simpler sentences. It made me more *effective* as a teacher.
@michaelzumpano7318
@michaelzumpano7318 Рік тому
OMG, Dr. Witten is so clear, concise and comprehensive! He gave us a 1000 foot view of the landscape of String/M Theory in 12 minutes! And he completely destroyed his critics in the process. It might take a hundred years for everyone to appreciate what an incredible body of work he’s developed.
@yeti9127
@yeti9127 Рік тому
You mean “what an incredible body of work he is.” 😅
@troyezell5841
@troyezell5841 Рік тому
He did not “destroy” his critics, he simply explained himself, and M theory is his team’s creation so he should be able to explain it. No doubt the guy is incredibly intelligent but not worthy to be idolized.
@jackastor5265
@jackastor5265 11 місяців тому
Its a joke, he spends a lot of time talking about something that cannot be proven or understood. Its just words. String theory is a failure.
@ramkumarr1725
@ramkumarr1725 7 місяців тому
Glad he is sharing. Otherwise this would be a setback
@MarkTill-vt3ku
@MarkTill-vt3ku 4 місяці тому
what a strange understanding of science your comment suggests. String theory is untestable , unobservable framework in which at every hurdle the maths was adjusted to make the theory fit , furthermore the addition of multiple dimensions to further overcome any hurdles is equally fallible .
@iliutacristian8322
@iliutacristian8322 Місяць тому
This guy and his father practically put a halt to the progress of physics. If you're in the know, you get it.
@JJG-om9fw
@JJG-om9fw Рік тому
I wish he was my teacher. Brilliant mind with gentle soul.
@harryseldon362
@harryseldon362 Рік тому
Listening to Prof. Witten is an adventure in common sense thinking. I could listen to him all day. Thanks for posting.
@brooklyna007
@brooklyna007 Рік тому
His sense is not common. And neither are adventures, or else they wouldn't be fun.
@pio7763
@pio7763 7 місяців тому
Another 🤡 pretending he's understanding him
@StoufSto
@StoufSto 5 місяців тому
Math is pure common sense. By definition.
@aarrvindmbd1974
@aarrvindmbd1974 Рік тому
Edward is less of human and more of a mathematical expression himself ...the iron man of maths.
@DrizzySinceTime
@DrizzySinceTime 9 місяців тому
The Man in the Iron Math.
@johannesschmitz6370
@johannesschmitz6370 6 місяців тому
Math iron the man of@@DrizzySinceTime
@rocketretro7200
@rocketretro7200 5 місяців тому
I am bamboozled but entertained, educated and in awe at the same time.
@stoictraveler1
@stoictraveler1 Рік тому
Wonderful, thank you!
@cowboybob7093
@cowboybob7093 Рік тому
A universal truth was spoken at 12:20 - the one about critics of a theory not working hard on a competing theory or suggesting one. That said, the subject of the interview understands the importance of peer review.
@phantom5573
@phantom5573 Рік тому
We really need to get Witten and Weistein together to talk, debate, prognosticate, whatever. Please
@tim4pele
@tim4pele 11 місяців тому
That would be like putting prime years Mike Tyson in the ring with a high school boxer. Weinstein is so far away from Ed Witten's level that they don't really even belong in the same room. Witten is a humble, soft spoke super genius who has single-handedly revolutionized our current understanding of physics and Weinstein is basically a completely mediocre physicist who's mostly now just a loud mouth self promoter. I doubt Witten would even consider him worth bothering with.
@jcforrester2
@jcforrester2 8 місяців тому
Me too. Following this to some extent. Realizing I’ll need to repeat many times. Amazing.
@SiriusSRX
@SiriusSRX 7 місяців тому
Please get more interviews with Edward Witten
@robertschlesinger1342
@robertschlesinger1342 Рік тому
Interesting and worthwhile video.
@itzed
@itzed Рік тому
No way I could ever have a conversation with this guy.
@yesssirr987
@yesssirr987 Рік тому
This guy is hypnotizing to listen to. So clairvoyant.
@joelg9700
@joelg9700 Рік тому
Monotone 🤦🏼‍♂️
@CR-rb1fx
@CR-rb1fx Рік тому
Watching it after Eric Weinstien video with Joe Rogan. Eric says "Edward Witten is the Michael Jordan of Theoretical Physics if only Michael Jordan could play better basketball".
@simpaticode
@simpaticode Рік тому
6:15 "One theory, many solutions.. The universe is described by one solution to this theory. Roughly speaking there are some equations and you solve them...A solution is an approximation to a quantum state which really describes the universe." This is was the most important statement in the interview, IMHO, because too often theoretical physicists don't talk enough about theories and their relationship to other moving parts of the physics endeavor, like solutions and experiments.
@birgirkarl
@birgirkarl Рік тому
This man is the reason why I am not worried about the world domination of super intelligent AI. He's at least GPT-11 level
@colinbrown4903
@colinbrown4903 Рік тому
*GPT-12 releases later that year* Damn
@thomasmarliere2505
@thomasmarliere2505 11 місяців тому
I'd be curious to know what he thinks about that
@jtx5014
@jtx5014 11 місяців тому
Yes, he is brilliant, but the physics community has been working on this for 70 years...but they are the brightest we have. We are NOT too far away from Quantum AI computing, which will probably solve this mystery...it's going to take super mega processing power to shorten the time needed to solve this massively complex problem. It's hard for humans to grasp such huge concepts... like get your mind around trillions of galaxies and multiple universes overlapping in different dimensions. There is a biological limitation to what we can comprehend in a given time frame... That's why it's still currently unsolved. We need to focus on building the most powerful AI to make these breakthroughs faster.
@wayando
@wayando 11 місяців тому
​@@jtx5014 ... I don't think solving these physics problems is a brute force calculation problem ... Imagine being in 1890 with a 2023 super computer ... Would you be able to come up with Einstein theories? There is a creativity and imagination component in there ... I don't know how computers would achieve that; It would make the computation to be very very complex trying out models that are improbable, et c.
@jackastor5265
@jackastor5265 11 місяців тому
@@jtx5014 Listen to Eric Weinstein talk about it. String theory/quantum gravity does not work and is a failure. In fact Weinstein believes this guy put many many people's careers through a shredder. Witten is basically the monster in the room, literally.
@lopazio
@lopazio 8 місяців тому
This is the pinnacle of our current Human intelect
@Mr.Wednesday.
@Mr.Wednesday. 3 місяці тому
This viewer might not understand any of this but is just content and grateful to witness genius articulated so masterfully
@countofst.germain6417
@countofst.germain6417 Рік тому
This man is very intelligent.
@beatonthedonis
@beatonthedonis Рік тому
His first degree was in history and linguistics, and he wanted to be a journalist and politician. Perhaps why he's so good at framing a narrative and bringing people to his way of thinking.
@xxxxxx-ow2hp
@xxxxxx-ow2hp 6 місяців тому
Can you imagine him asking Joe Biden a question from press row?......c'mon man!
@_N0_0ne
@_N0_0ne Рік тому
Thank you
@douglas31415
@douglas31415 10 місяців тому
Great interview. Very interesting to watch, though admittedly a lot of it was over my head. That mic drop at the end though!
@piplus2
@piplus2 Рік тому
I like his last sentence 😄
@felinefriend6101
@felinefriend6101 11 місяців тому
one of the few (if not only) Theoretical Physicists that is equally adept in mathematics. That is powerful given he not only has imagination as a physicist but the tools via math to explore his own theories
@riskybusiness3413
@riskybusiness3413 8 місяців тому
I met a guy very similar to Witten at a social event. It was just an informal gathering of strangers around the same age there to find/make new friends. He was sitting off to the side wanting to join in but he was intimidated. I introduced myself and 'attempted' to start a conversation - talk about difficult. Everything was math, his work, his teachings, the advanced math/calc/physics books he's had published for college students etc. I wanted to help make him feel comfortable so I asked if he could teach me some baby algebra. (I hate math) he looked up, with one of his of books in hand and said, "I'm not sure I can". Turns out he was right. He lost me at the letter x. There was an interesting article asking Air Force fighter pilots if they could fly a Cessna 172. Three said no and one said he could probably do it but not safely. It's crazy how the math professor and pilots were so advanced they couldn't do the fundamental basics of their profession. * of course they could fly the small plane once they were familiar with it. And obviously my arithmetic instructor could figure a way to stoop down, way down to my pea brain level and convey those horrific rudimentary algebraic formulas.
@donfuan76
@donfuan76 11 місяців тому
A well spoken man that masks the fact that partical physics hasn't come up with anything meaningful since 50 years. "Models and theories" that can't be experimentally falsified.
@peterjefferson3963
@peterjefferson3963 9 місяців тому
Spot on.
@ruspa86
@ruspa86 8 місяців тому
Wow Einstein, he says it even himself that the theory is not well established and if it hasn't already existed, he wouldn't look for something like it in his own.
@stupidguy97
@stupidguy97 6 місяців тому
Uninformed people like yourself should think more and speak less.
@billcook7483
@billcook7483 3 місяці тому
Really ? I think you haven't been paying attention. How about QCD, Superstrings, Quarks, Flux conduits , dark energy, dark matter, ....... The list goes on and on. Do some reading !
@theGoogol
@theGoogol Рік тому
One of those people I would want to meet and just listen to.
@zzzbyyy
@zzzbyyy 8 місяців тому
fascinating stuff
@ramkumarr1725
@ramkumarr1725 7 місяців тому
Really inspirational to see the smartest person. I bought the Little Book on String Theory by Gubser.
@ameremortal
@ameremortal Рік тому
This man is legendary
@silas0403
@silas0403 8 місяців тому
Why
@pio7763
@pio7763 7 місяців тому
🤡
@Twenty-Seven
@Twenty-Seven Рік тому
Imagine sitting in that study on a slightly rainy day with the blinds drawn, looking out on a small town with large trees gently blowing in the wind, just reading your favorite science fiction book series. Abject tranquility in my opinion.
@lunam7249
@lunam7249 Рік тому
the non witten man is a billionaire, capable of rearrange his envoironment to his desires
@caseymead9399
@caseymead9399 Рік тому
Fascinating
@shyamfootprints972
@shyamfootprints972 2 місяці тому
This man is a noble soul. His clarity of speech and his analogies are mesmerising. Please bring him on again fora 3 hour discussion on string theory and its possibilities
@xoh_spaceboss
@xoh_spaceboss 2 місяці тому
Possibilities≠reality.
@allweknowisfalling7322
@allweknowisfalling7322 Рік тому
Every time I hear this man speak I get the impression that somewhere deep down he has nearly all the answers, he's just very careful about which parts he's willing to share with us mortals.
@zoomingby
@zoomingby 7 місяців тому
Speak for yourself. We're all mortal, we just choose to spend our time differently. He's not immortal and you're not "mortal." He decided to be great and you haven't.
@allweknowisfalling7322
@allweknowisfalling7322 7 місяців тому
@@zoomingby I mean fair point if you would suggest that everyone shall capitalize on their abilities as best they can, but it's not like I can just decide to be a genius lol, so I disagree.
@zoomingby
@zoomingby 7 місяців тому
@@allweknowisfalling7322 So your supposition is that people who reach the top of their fields are necessarily geniuses?
@allweknowisfalling7322
@allweknowisfalling7322 7 місяців тому
​@@zoomingby We must note that 'genius' is not fully measurable and that there are some people who reach the top of their fields through illegal measures or unfair advantages, but otherwise it's mostly true, so yes.
@seventeen9718
@seventeen9718 7 місяців тому
​​@@zoomingbyIndeed we all do choose to spend our time differently; it seems you choose to spend your time being an abrasive a*hole. Awesome!
@jessewallace12able
@jessewallace12able Рік тому
I want the whole world to listen to this man and be quiet for 5 minutes.
@jackastor5265
@jackastor5265 11 місяців тому
Why, string theory is a failure.
@MeenPo786
@MeenPo786 10 місяців тому
Even string theory was quiet for decades without any major victories! Ba dum tss!
@silas0403
@silas0403 8 місяців тому
Why?
@aaronrobertcattell8859
@aaronrobertcattell8859 Рік тому
very interesting stuff
@alexlucassen8489
@alexlucassen8489 7 місяців тому
Great man
@ralphhebgen7067
@ralphhebgen7067 6 місяців тому
I love how matter of fact and unassuming this man is. For him, it really is all about understanding how nature works, there is no inkling of self-praise or even the notion that he deserves credit. When he says in 3:25 that “we” understood the 5 theories to each be special cases of an underlying theory, well, there is very little “we”, and a lot of “I” in this statement… . M-theory is one of Ed’s great contributions to string theory, and yet he makes no reference to himself. I love listening to this man, even though I never understand more than the first few words of what he is saying… 😂
@SmogandBlack
@SmogandBlack Рік тому
Witten uses String Theory to address one fundamental question about Particle Physics, which is (on my very humble opinion): what is /are the real shape / shapes of what we call 'Particles'? Considering them as dimensionless points (as the Standard Model does) makes Math stumble, and this is a fact. So, even if I'm not a big fan of Complex Geometries, I recognise that answering this question looks like a pivotal point in our understanding of the Universe. Is this feasible? Is it beyond our reach? Is Math the best (the only...) way to explore this aspect of reality? A great week to everybody 😊.
@Mentaculus42
@Mentaculus42 Рік тому
Interesting way of “defining the problem” about “geometry of particles” but not necessarily going with the string theory path to enlightenment. Some QM advocates of orthodoxy would definitely get twisted up about that and what is real.
@SmogandBlack
@SmogandBlack Рік тому
@@Mentaculus42 That of course was my personal view: I can't say I ever heard Witten make any statement of that kind. But you can find him in countless lectures showing how transforming a dimensionless point into a multidimensional vibrating ribbon makes gravitons pop up and particles pass trough Feynman diagrams in such a way that they never were able to do when they were ‘points’. His only argument in favour of strings thus is that applying QM to them is rewarding and makes things ‘smoother’ from a Mathematical point of view. His Math is hard to argue against (not to mention to match it) and I’m curious to see were this path will take us. Nice talking with you, have a nice day 😊.
@bendolan681
@bendolan681 8 місяців тому
Einstein and Rudy Giuliani talking String Theory is wild
@dimitriosfromgreece4227
@dimitriosfromgreece4227 Рік тому
AMAZING VIDEO 💗💗💗💗💗💗
@David_7171
@David_7171 Рік тому
Brian Green says M is actually an upside down W for Witten
@carlz28
@carlz28 Рік тому
Brian Greene is wrong. Get with the times.
@shmookins
@shmookins Рік тому
Ha! I love that.
@jedadruled984
@jedadruled984 Рік тому
Theories that have no base in reality are the best.
@youtubesucks1885
@youtubesucks1885 Рік тому
Who are you to tell if they describe reality or not?
@jedadruled984
@jedadruled984 Рік тому
@@youtubesucks1885 I am Jedad.
@Clintessential369
@Clintessential369 7 місяців тому
This is the only UKposts video I’ve watched, and I slowed down to .75 to get a tenuous grasp
@kennethread5637
@kennethread5637 10 місяців тому
He explained things very well easy for a average person can comprehend Thanks
@stephenzhao5809
@stephenzhao5809 Рік тому
Thank you two a lot! 4:53 used to say it was magic mystery or matrix but really M was for membrane it was just a question of whether membranes are one facet of the theory which I think is what most people believe or the whole theory should they derived from membranes which it competing (Bob: how would it be membrane what is a string relative to a membrane because the string is one dimensional) membranes in the sense were supposed to be two-dimensional surfaces. 5:18 the term M theory is really used in two senses so we now understand that there's an overaching theory that has the five traditonal string theories as limiting cases and that theory is often called M theory. 6:39 more complicated than that, a solution is an approximation to a quantum state which is what really describes the universe but anyway the idea would be that um there's one theory but what the universe actually looks like depends upon which solutions of the equation is appropriate for describing (okay let's talk about the number of solutions because we hear this term banning about 10 to the 500 that's 10 with 500 zeros, which is a number we don't have a name for so which is hugely more than the number of particles in universe etc so because that has to do with the geometric shapes?) 7:18 so, first of all the standard model of particle bit physics is a little complicated actually the ideas are simple but the implementation that we see in the real world is a little complicated with a lot of bits and pieces and the only reason that something simple as simple as string theory can reproduce the complexity of the standard model is that there are extra dimensions and the topological complexity of the extra dimensions generates the details of the strandard model ( 7:49 okay) so ❤💚💙the theory really would not work without the complexity of the extra dimensions but the complexity of the extra dimensions turns out to be such that there are vast vast numbers of possibilities to the best of our present understanding for what form the extra dimensions might take. 8:04 Bob: and these are topological uh is structural (EW: a very large part of it is topological let's think of it as topological) EW: I'd like to make an analogy however Einstein's theory is one theory but it doesn't predict the details of the solar system to get the solar system you need to know the masses and composition really or the planets and the sun and the asteroids and you also need to know the initial conditions 8:29 so nobody really asks Einstein's theory to predict exactly what the solar system would look like we only use Einstein's theory to predict how the solar system will evolve, given what we observe as the initial conditions because we understand that the solar system depends on the initial conditions and by now we've been able to take make observations of distant solar systems so we know there are different solar systems out there and you couldn't really I mean without feeding in the fact that we're in this particular one you wouldn't know which solution of Einstein's equations you wanted to take now the traditional view of physicists is not to think of the whole universe in that way 9:05 so Einstein instead very much that there should be a unique answer determined only on logical rounds for all dimensionless numbers that measure in nature now again your viewers might not know what I mean by dimensional's number some things you measure depend on the units where you measure them like it takes a year for the earth to go around the sun that's a very interesting number because it just depends on how we define the year 9:29 now a more interesting number is that it takes about twice as long for Mars to grow on the sun is the earth and that does not depend on the unit in which we measure time there's a factor of two between the period of the orbit of Mars and the one of the earth that's a dimensionless number but it's a dimensionless number that depends on the solar system and the difference in different solar system 👍to get something a little more interesting we might take the ratio of the electron mass to the proton mass either mass by itself as a number depends on the units in free measure mass but the ratio of the electon to the proton is one of those dimensionless numbers for which Einstein said there should be a completely unique answer Einstein imagined that the universe should be described by a unique system of equations that would have a unique answer for all obserbable dimensionless quantities now what we have in string theory with the present understanding is a unique system of equations but it's not close to having a unique answer with our present understanding at least 10:31 we're not absoutely sure that our present understanding is definitive but the best understanding we have now does not point to an unique answer so it points to something a little bit more like the solar system Einstein's theory is unique but it had many solutions 10:47 Bob: ... personally I think that having discovered how quantum mechanics and gravity can work together consistently it's our duty to explor it more if string theory had not been discovered I personally think taht I would not have tried to discover something like it because I would have no idea where to begin in reconciling quantum mechanics and gravity but it's kind unnatural to ignore the fact that there's an extremely rich theory that people actually have discovered that can make this work and it doesn't just make it possible for gravity and quantum mechanics to work together but it forces them upon you if you start trying to use string theory to describe a quantum theory that you think maybe doesn't have gravity gravity is literally forced upon you because of the way it pops out of the equations so it's extremely unnatural not to notice this and not to take it seriously that doesn't mean it to the everybody's cup of tea or that everybody should work on it with that said though I've noticed that generally speaking the critics don't seem to try very hard to work on the competing theory or to suggest one. יִשָּׂא יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ וְיָשֵים לְךָ שָׁלוֹם
@pgknippel
@pgknippel Рік тому
Love Ed Witten. No chaff!
@christinemontes4171
@christinemontes4171 9 місяців тому
I wish Witten would explain why I get a grasp of string theory while he's speaking and then do a mind dump within a moment. That is the real M Theory that needs explanation! 💫
@games-do9gt
@games-do9gt Рік тому
I agree with everything he said, but I thought of it all first and better.
@0ptimal
@0ptimal Рік тому
It's amazing the levels of thinking and thought that humans can reach. And the variability between people. This guy sounds like ai, yet another person can sound like a toddler.
@innosanto
@innosanto Рік тому
He asked the question I was wondering if anyone asked Ed Witten.
@willmartin34
@willmartin34 4 місяці тому
During his lectures I never heard so many accurate. Correctly connected multi facited coplex equation So eloquently unified. A great great mind
@Yzjoshuwave
@Yzjoshuwave Рік тому
Witten’s explanations are very simple and clear - a byproduct of having a very well-organized, internal structure for thinking through these ideas. I was a little surprised by hearing him say the “M”, for membrane is 2-dimensional. I’ve been trying to fathom what a many-dimensional membrane would be for along time. I imagined that it would be 10 (or 25…?) dimensional for string theory (n-1 dimensions for a surface), but I tried to fathom it as an n-dimensional “function” of geometric structures. In just the way a cell’s membrane is a 2-dimensional interface that can connect to other 3-dimensional cells, I’ve been trying to imagine (n-1)-dimensional “surfaces” that connect n-dimensional objects: universes in the case of string theory. In any case, I like thinking about it, because I imagine the Universe as a black box of “parallel” computation, and a membrane for it - similar to a cell’s membrane - could be a sort of inter-universal communication modality that permits the synthesis of higher forms out of Universes. The fact that our Universe has organisms that think about higher math and generate algorithms leaves me with the notion that models like string theory can be conceived as data points for transcendental processing, solutions in the enclosed computation of our Universe that can be funneled into the megaplex of a trans-Universal synthesis… A fun idea - obviously outside the scope of realism - but it gives a voice to the nagging background chatter that any good math-oriented metaphysician must have that any metaphysical organizing principles we suppose to exist are embedded in a deeper space of possible organizing principles. It’s hard to even ask the question of how the latent space of possible category-nerves (or whatever high-level concepts of math organization we are inclined to use) can funnel discrete organizing principles into the production of a Universe. There is no reason whatsoever to think our Universe is geometrically or topologically unique, which means it’s every bit as likely that Universality Classes exist for the geometric patterning of Universes. There is also no reason to believe that systemic closure for our Universe is absolute. But it opens all sorts of twisted questions about what kinds of influence extra-Universal “inputs” might have on our Universe’s patterns of expression.
@breckenmurkins9464
@breckenmurkins9464 11 місяців тому
Whole lot of nonsense, do you think a person is gonna read that and understand what youre saying? Like bro, type better
@kadourimdou43
@kadourimdou43 Рік тому
String Theory hasn’t made any prediction. Neither has it made a singular version that is our Standard Model.
@youtubesucks1885
@youtubesucks1885 Рік тому
From where did you take these false informations? O.o
@ArnoldSommerfeld
@ArnoldSommerfeld Рік тому
Actually, string theory has made a prediction. That the universe has more than 4 dimensions. But they don't care. Never let string theorists forget string theory failed that most elementary test: no experiment has ever detected more than 4 dimensions. That is a clue as to why string theory has produced nothing.
@tiberiusalexander6339
@tiberiusalexander6339 Місяць тому
He specifically addresses this in the video, explicitly stating that it is not a well substantiated theory. He also goes on to explain why it shows great theoretical promise and should be developed more. And he points out, very aptly in my mind, that those who critique strong theory aren't developing any other theories that can resolve quantum mechanics and gravity. So what point do you think you are making? Or are you just parroting uninformed talking points on a subject you know nothing about?
@warmoth68
@warmoth68 8 місяців тому
This man is so smart,! He rarely does interviews because he has to dumb down his theories and calculations for us mortals! If aliens ever visit us,this is the guy you want representing our planet!
@wizdumb9767
@wizdumb9767 9 місяців тому
First time learning anything about this and i swear i somewhat understand it 🧐
@thomasc4258
@thomasc4258 Рік тому
Everyone is stroking his ego. Let his work speak for itself
@boohoohooloo562
@boohoohooloo562 Рік тому
After 10 secs my brain started to melt. I hear the words he's saying but have no understanding of what he's saying.
@DataLog
@DataLog Рік тому
Search for rockwell automation retro encabulator. That's basically what he is doing in physics.
@ClownTrader1
@ClownTrader1 Рік тому
I appreciate this dudes attempt at asking this guy questions. I think I would just stutter into a stupor.
@alexanderkramer1146
@alexanderkramer1146 7 місяців тому
I worked a w a guy at Amazon who looked like a younger version of him and he always said things don’t change unless by force
@lukeguhy6450
@lukeguhy6450 Рік тому
Dr. Kuhn, It would be extremely valuable to science if you could facilitate a dialogue between Eric Weinstein and Ed Witten. This may be extremely difficult, but the internet is making rapid scientific breakthroughs possible by bringing people together. Brian Keating may be able to help as well.
@kashu7691
@kashu7691 Рік тому
no man. just because weinstein yaps on all over the internet doesn’t mean people like witten need to waste their time on discussing this stuff. the only alternative eric proposes is GU which has gone nowhere.
@bluemonstrosity259
@bluemonstrosity259 Рік тому
Weinstein will hide under the table quaking in fear
@lukeguhy6450
@lukeguhy6450 Рік тому
@@kashu7691 And string theory has? Not vying for GU necessarily. I just want open discussion and exploration of physics and metaphysics
@kashu7691
@kashu7691 Рік тому
@@lukeguhy6450 i think string theory has advanced our understanding of theoretical physics and as a framework its very powerful. no one has found any use of GU yet
@lukeguhy6450
@lukeguhy6450 Рік тому
@@kashu7691 I’m not a physicist so I really don’t have much to say about it. But in my understanding, there has been lots of development in the field by “string theorists” but the theory itself is metaphysically bankrupt. Personally I think the next breakthroughs will come from a unification of Wolfram and Weinstein’s frameworks
@fabiankempazo7055
@fabiankempazo7055 Рік тому
Weinstein called Witten the Voldemor of Physics - the one everyone terrified about (and ruined careers of many physics by luring them into String Theory which seems to be a dead end)
@phantom5573
@phantom5573 Рік тому
I just commented that we need a debate or discussion with Eric Weinstein and Witten. That would be epic.
@tim4pele
@tim4pele 11 місяців тому
@@phantom5573 No it would be dumb, because Eric Weinstein isn't even a physicist anymore. He literally ADMITTED in his sham "Geometric Unity" paper (which was hilariously ridiculed by real scientists as complete rubbish) that he's not a physicist, he's an "entertainer" now. A "debate" between him and Witten would mostly be Witten patiently trying to teach Weinstein the math of current M theory while Weinstein makes dumb faces and huffing noises but without any rebuttals because he isn't smart enough to understand. Then Witten would go back to quietly revolutionizing physics while Weinstein would go on Joe Rogan and loudly announce to the world that he won the debate. Weinstein is a clown.
@kylosun
@kylosun 8 місяців тому
​@phantom5573 excellent idea, and maybe after that we can get Ronald McDonald on the show to debate Witten
@seancaceres619
@seancaceres619 6 місяців тому
You're a dummy, go back and watch JR again. This time bring an adult with you, and QUIT PULLING YOUR SISTER'S HAIR!!
@JohnAutry
@JohnAutry Рік тому
Best episode yet🐦🐦🐦
@hughegentry8255
@hughegentry8255 3 місяці тому
I can't wait for the spin-off Young Edward. His Memaw must be a piece of work!
@meofamily4
@meofamily4 Рік тому
They lost me with "String Theory is obviously a major breakthrough in physics. . . "
@TBFI_Botswana
@TBFI_Botswana Рік тому
So next time I think I easily figured something out, I shall listen to this interview and remind myself to be happy that I can put my trousers on in the morning without falling over 😬
@SteveGouldinSpain
@SteveGouldinSpain 10 місяців тому
Oh the, "I'm right because you can't think of anything better" defense!!
@jamesruscheinski8602
@jamesruscheinski8602 Рік тому
planck length has something do with wave - particle duality and quantization?
@C-man553
@C-man553 Рік тому
Plank is the length at which space is no longer contiguous, locally. Spatial texture or graininess is inferred. I think!
@raisingawarenesslovepower9977
@raisingawarenesslovepower9977 Рік тому
"The Universe is a Carrier Wave" ....a foundational principle for string theory
@gene4094
@gene4094 Рік тому
The new breakthrough discoveries should have a practical effect On solving immediate problems. The most catastrophic problem for our planet is climate collapse from burning fossil fuels. The discovery of “negative refractive index meta materials”. This discovery will lead us to a new energy source in the nanotechnology field.
@raisingawarenesslovepower9977
@raisingawarenesslovepower9977 Рік тому
@@gene4094 Sounds great. Consider not referring to them as negative refractive index meta materials, but variable angle refractive index meta materials. By doing this we may categorize and catalogue the materials based on angle. Thank you for sharing negative refractive index meta materials with me and liking my comment.
@youtubesucks1885
@youtubesucks1885 Рік тому
@@gene4094 Climate change does not require breakthroughs in science but on the level of capitalistic practices.
@gene4094
@gene4094 Рік тому
@@youtubesucks1885 perhaps, but the energy attached to the in the vector field will refract the electromagnetic to a left handed rotation. This Nobel Prize for Physics is difficult to understand, but from my understanding of it is that that energy refracting strengthens the electromagnetic energy from a red shift to a blue shift. This discovery is being utilized in devices from electronics miniaturizations, computer, cloaking and others. Of course the military and private corporate entities will capitalize on these innovations and technologies. But the absolute most important thing is stopping the impending climate catastrophe.
@raisingawarenesslovepower9977
@raisingawarenesslovepower9977 Рік тому
@@gene4094 Wow! So many more possibilities! That is awesome! So not just 180 degree rotation of the right hand rule or torsion of right hand rule; both of which appear at first glance to be the left handed rule, but true left hand rule? I have to see this! Send diagrams to me.
@charleshultquist9233
@charleshultquist9233 Рік тому
Don't interrupt him...let him talk! There's absolutely nothing you could ask or add that would be worth the lost seconds of his consciousness stream.
@thomaskeenan2208
@thomaskeenan2208 Рік тому
I was astonished by the interruptions. But Edward very politely but sharply rolled with it. The interviewer probably had a time window in mind and wanted to check his boxes on main points. Edward could have kept going for quite a while and I would have enjoyed it regardless.
@chrisgriffiths2533
@chrisgriffiths2533 3 місяці тому
One Things for Certain, Witten's a Sharp Mind.
@vijay_r_g
@vijay_r_g Рік тому
Id like to know when(what year) were these videos recorded? So as to get an idea about the relevance of these opinions.
@seletarroots3258
@seletarroots3258 Рік тому
I believe this is the current maximum level of brain attainable in a human body.
@quantumkath
@quantumkath Рік тому
It should have been called W theory for Witten!
@aarrvindmbd1974
@aarrvindmbd1974 Рік тому
Nice 🙂
@jamesvegas702
@jamesvegas702 Рік тому
Im here after Rogan. I wanted to see the real Professor X. I tried my hardest but I dont have enough wrinkles in my brain to understand what I just watched.
@ramkumarr1725
@ramkumarr1725 7 місяців тому
Edward Witten is the Alma matter now. ♥️♥️🌹🌹
@maxwellsimoes238
@maxwellsimoes238 Рік тому
Guys not show why string Theory are itself true. Though phich Law string Theory not show up true reality. It is more questions than anwers in phich.
@VendPrekmurec
@VendPrekmurec Рік тому
The short answer is NONE or no breakthroughs since Schroedinger.
@AsG_4_
@AsG_4_ Рік тому
That floor is trippy!!!
@youfrancis
@youfrancis 10 місяців тому
IMPORTANT: At 5:48 : "The nomenclature is confused..." At 9:17 : "The dimensionless number..."
@146maxpain
@146maxpain 11 місяців тому
As long as string theory has no experimental validation you cannot call string theory a breakthrough or even a theory but more a speculation/hypothesis. I am sorry string theory fans but the emperor wears no clothes.
@followingnazarene
@followingnazarene 6 місяців тому
Has partical physics come up with experimental validation though?
@lureup9973
@lureup9973 Рік тому
Is it just me …. But if you were to give dr. Kuhn a pipe and deny him a haircut for a year, and wake him from a dead sleep, might you think you were waking Einstein?
@tylerg3679
@tylerg3679 6 місяців тому
Yeah the mustache and messed up hair.. you can tell someone made the comparison to him at some point and now he won’t fn let it go
Edward Witten - How Do Scientific Breakthroughs Happen?
15:44
Closer To Truth
Переглядів 272 тис.
🐩🐕
00:25
Янчик
Переглядів 1,9 млн
I Trapped Myself in a Box with Colored Smoke!
00:50
A4
Переглядів 16 млн
Roger Penrose - Why Did Our Universe Begin?
17:10
Closer To Truth
Переглядів 2 млн
Roger Penrose on quantum mechanics and consciousness | Full interview
19:34
The Institute of Art and Ideas
Переглядів 420 тис.
How This Pen Changed The World
9:17
Primal Space
Переглядів 448 тис.
Edward Witten - How is Mathematics Truth and Beauty?
6:37
Closer To Truth
Переглядів 210 тис.
The 7 Strangest Coincidences in the Laws of Nature
8:13
Sabine Hossenfelder
Переглядів 128 тис.
What works did Edward Witten do?
19:59
Phymaths
Переглядів 160 тис.
The genius of Edward Witten | Cumrun Vafa and Lex Fridman
9:01
Lex Clips
Переглядів 313 тис.
Edward Witten - Why the ‘Unreasonable Effectiveness’ of Mathematics
7:32
The Most Misunderstood Concept in Physics
27:15
Veritasium
Переглядів 13 млн
Hopf Fibration Explained Better than Eric Weinstein on Joe Rogan
9:42
Carlos Farias
Переглядів 2,4 млн