The Universe Speaks in Numbers: Robbert Dijkgraaf and Edward Witten in Conversation

  Переглядів 94,428

Institute for Advanced Study

Institute for Advanced Study

День тому

The Universe Speaks in Numbers - May 29, 2019
Physics and mathematics seem to be in a pre-established harmony, as Gottfried Leibniz observed long ago. New ideas generated by mathematical researchers have often proved to be essential to physicists trying to discover the most basic laws of nature. Likewise, physicists have often generated new insights into advanced mathematics. This event explores the astonishingly productive relationship between physics and mathematics and explores whether these disciplines might one day unify, perhaps leading to a giant structure that encompasses all the laws that describe the underlying workings of the universe.
More videos on video.ias.edu

КОМЕНТАРІ: 151
@robhernandez7322
@robhernandez7322 2 роки тому
I'm just a regular blue collar worker ,I was told once something to the effect- “you’ll never be bored watching a fire, watching waves crash or watching someone working” I’m going to add watching intellectual conversations to the list, I have no idea why the nuances of this conversation are important or even what they imply but it’s very interesting none the less..
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 2 роки тому
Physics was done by blue collar workers and socialists, there are only a handful of bourgeois types.
@ivankaramasov
@ivankaramasov 2 роки тому
I think that is a gift you have being able to enjoy intellectual conversations. You are probably a pretty intelligent person.
@Helmutandmoshe
@Helmutandmoshe 4 роки тому
It's so nice to see Ed Witten laugh and smile so much. He is such a wonderful man.
@spiralsun1
@spiralsun1 2 роки тому
You can’t help but like him. He has good social coping methodology. I wonder sometimes if Isaac Newton were alive today, if he would have been homeless. He was not as good at the social stuff. 😂🤷‍♀️❤️ The universe speaks partly in numbers, is encoded in numbers. Made with the coherent patterns of mathematics. But when we look at the graphs so beautifully rendered by our computer screens, it is easy to forget that the meaning of them is not in the pixels on the screen, not in the hardware or software of the computer. The meaning is in us. That speaks.
@Helmutandmoshe
@Helmutandmoshe 2 роки тому
@@spiralsun1 Another thing I admire about Witten is his embracing the mystery of consciousness - he knows we don't know what is going on at root there. If Newton were alive today? I have a feeling that the mathematical community would support him and tolerate him. They have a way of rallying around eccentric geniuses and "letting them be" while also making sure they don't fall through the cracks - for example John Nash or Paul Erdos.
@michaelcgrasso1986
@michaelcgrasso1986 2 роки тому
Easy to smile when you have no answers, reminds me of Kammalla of the current deranged administration...
@Helmutandmoshe
@Helmutandmoshe 2 роки тому
@@michaelcgrasso1986 One of the greatest minds of the last fifty years compared to Kamala. Brilliant.
@michaelcgrasso1986
@michaelcgrasso1986 2 роки тому
@@Helmutandmoshe the comparison is in the fact that both laugh when they don’t know or better they want to dismiss the answer, not comparing their intelligence. They are indeed at the opposite of the spectrum in that sense. Also, my comment was intended more generally to the scientific establishment. They respond in similar manner and they are venerated by people like gods. “Oh he laughs so beautifully!!!” 😂 tons of similar comments.
@shiftinggearsnpassingqueers
@shiftinggearsnpassingqueers 3 роки тому
I don’t think people realize how smart this guy truly is. He’s a piece of history witnessing it right now.
@PauloConstantino167
@PauloConstantino167 2 роки тому
do tell us how smart he is.
@nephronpie8961
@nephronpie8961 2 роки тому
He's a physicist who won the fields medal. And as said by someone on the internet: "Ed Witten has a brain the size of a planet".
@PauloConstantino167
@PauloConstantino167 2 роки тому
@@nephronpie8961 many have won that medal. what's special about his medal ?
@firstal3799
@firstal3799 2 роки тому
He is smart. But there are others as of better. But he is in top 50 thinkers of last 400 years
@ASLUHLUHCE
@ASLUHLUHCE 3 роки тому
"To me, it's implausible that humans stumbled by accident on such an incredible structure that sheds so much light on established physical theories, and also on so many different branches of mathematics, and that it's all an accident and it has nothing to do with real world."
@brendanfernes61
@brendanfernes61 3 роки тому
Did Ed say that?
@firstal3799
@firstal3799 2 роки тому
U can Google
@abhishekshah11
@abhishekshah11 4 роки тому
Ed Witten is an incredibly humble guy as well as a genius. Not that I understand his geniusness, but I will just take the word for it!
@billdrumming
@billdrumming 3 роки тому
The only physicist to win a fields medal. Beyond genius
@nishanjayaram7448
@nishanjayaram7448 3 роки тому
It'll always be a lifelong dream of mine as a physics student to meet Dr. Witten.
@erikpeterson25
@erikpeterson25 4 роки тому
Edward Witten is a fascinating man to listen to....i watched a history of his life not too long ago in an interview of him from his younger days on....his giant intellect is pretty awesome to see.
@RAJEEVSINGH240291
@RAJEEVSINGH240291 4 роки тому
Wonderful! Thank You IAS
@ryanchiang9587
@ryanchiang9587 4 роки тому
thanks you dr. dijkgraaf and dr. witten!!!!!!!
@huydo8605
@huydo8605 3 роки тому
Love you both. Hope someday, i could visit IAS, and dream about working at there.
@queendoubleboy
@queendoubleboy 4 роки тому
Thank you for this.
@YAS-dn6xn
@YAS-dn6xn 4 роки тому
Nice to see you again Dr. Witten. Always an inspiration
@flockpina7957
@flockpina7957 4 роки тому
Many Thanks!!
@queendoubleboy
@queendoubleboy 4 роки тому
Thank you for you. I love you.
@valentinakaramazova1007
@valentinakaramazova1007 4 роки тому
AdS table is very appropriate
@christophercatherwood2280
@christophercatherwood2280 4 роки тому
Graham Farmelo was utterly brilliant - he puts it in ways that non-scientists can follow.
@brendawilliams8062
@brendawilliams8062 2 роки тому
He is. I can see the hopscotch game. You are competing with you friend forwards and backwards. Your multiplication homework was set down close by. The wind blew the homework all around your hopscotch blocks. It starts falling into surprises around all the drawn blocks. Multiplying itself into rythums. You chase the papers to regain order.
@patrick815
@patrick815 Рік тому
We hear you Edward. Understanding is another question
@mcmcx5514
@mcmcx5514 4 роки тому
Smartest human alive. He is up there with Newton and Hooke.
@firstal3799
@firstal3799 2 роки тому
Tao is not.
@firstal3799
@firstal3799 2 роки тому
Feynman and Witten are both great. I cannot distinguish. Einstein was better. Newton was was better still.
@HuntmanC68
@HuntmanC68 3 роки тому
damn he must be so deep in his understanding that it becomes isolating when trying to communicate on any meaningful level with anyone.
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 2 роки тому
Nonsense. He's a very good communicator, and any good physicist understands what he is saying.
@rexdalit3504
@rexdalit3504 2 роки тому
Hunter, I wish you would (largely) ignore capitalized anna. Over the years, multiple experts in a wide variety of fields have suggested to me that they find difficulty in explaining their most far reaching ideas to their colleagues. While Witten certainly can communicate ideas to his peers well, that does not preclude the isolation of which you speak. Why not ask him directly? [ps For example the (multivariate functional analysis) mathematician Casper Goffman told me directly he felt this way, when I met him strolling around late one evening. It's hard to imagine Newton or Archimedes or Alexander of Macedonia didn't feel a certain intellectual distance from those around them... leading to some emotional isolation. Witten strikes me as emotionally integrated into his circumstances, only he might say for certain.]
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 2 роки тому
@@rexdalit3504 Witten is the clearest author in physics, he is clearer than other great physicists, like Polyakov (or most Russians, tbh) and he is not isolated at all. His works are classics, read and understood by everyone. The only stuff of his nobody fully understands is topological string theory.
@Za7a7aZ
@Za7a7aZ Рік тому
Witten is a giant but do not under estimate Dijkgraaf...hes a genious in his own right.
@brooktsui3559
@brooktsui3559 Рік тому
"I've accepted I'm presumably not a part of that generation." a little bit sad to see our hero getting older and older, though he is still one of the lion kings.
@cheapmovies25
@cheapmovies25 4 роки тому
1200 he mentions classical is about geometry where st is what makes the shapes and fractals and constructs the quarks and other particles
@throwaway692
@throwaway692 Рік тому
I love Ed. The Allan Holdsworth of Physics.
@cheapmovies25
@cheapmovies25 4 роки тому
His condition has improved so much compared to early interviews
@jirikivaari
@jirikivaari 4 роки тому
Genius talking.
@ipadasher
@ipadasher 2 роки тому
Ed Witten, the smartest guy alive
@farainechikwira3592
@farainechikwira3592 4 роки тому
The way he speaks, makes him appear younger
@333robsta
@333robsta 4 роки тому
He looks like me trying to explain English grammar to my dog.
@redressingreason1529
@redressingreason1529 3 роки тому
That laugh 13:51 .
@kartikmessner2868
@kartikmessner2868 4 роки тому
Never knew Rick could talk so calmly..
@yanzhuozhoo
@yanzhuozhoo 4 роки тому
i want Borat to interview Edward...
@Smood47
@Smood47 3 роки тому
Fucking waste of time
@michaelhunte743
@michaelhunte743 Рік тому
This is a great meeting of minds! I think maybe Gauss's work on statistics highlights the underlying normal distribution of multiplication itself.
@Jekku1987
@Jekku1987 4 роки тому
Edward Witten says some areas are too abstract for him. I suppose I have no hope in hell. From a math and physics major.
@thepowerman8952
@thepowerman8952 3 роки тому
I think, being Modest, Witten meant too abstract to be of any conceivable use, ergo a waste of time. What say you?
@Jekku1987
@Jekku1987 3 роки тому
@@thepowerman8952 I'd caution against that reasoning for the simple fact that this line of reasoning has been used before and it proved not to be true. Indeed, GH Hardy, in his excellent book "A Mathematicians Apology" wrote: ""No one has yet discovered any warlike purpose to be served by the theory of numbers or relativity, and it seems unlikely that anyone will do so for many years." As we know with hindsight, this proved to be very incorrect. Indeed, many areas of number theory have many uses in cryptography and computing. Relativity is also used in all modern satellite technology. Another interesting example is imaginary numbers. I'm also fascinated they keep coming in my physics courses, especially spring mass systems, optics, and AC circuits. Keep in mind, the history of imaginary numbers is a very abstract exploration by Tartaglia, Cardano, and others. Yet this very abstract exercise has very many practical applications. I could go on, but I think the point is clear. It's fascinating how many seemingly abstract and disconnected areas of mathematics become intimately weaved into our physics, technology and world around us. So I would caution against the notion that certain maths is too abstract for use. I would also say, Edward Whitten is far beyond me in his understanding of all of these areas, so he's far more qualified to make statements on these matters. I must watch this video again, and maybe I can glean some insights into what he meant by the comment. Thanks for the reply!
@thepowerman8952
@thepowerman8952 3 роки тому
@@Jekku1987 I should have said "of _immediate_ use"! The maths you need becomes more abstract, in my limited experience, as the physical theory improves. Newton to general relativity, Bohr to quantum field theory. I wondered if Witten meant that much more abstract stuff could be useful in the future, but in his judgement not yet, therefore a waste of time for him to apply himself to it.
@annaclarafenyo8185
@annaclarafenyo8185 2 роки тому
He studied before the internet. The areas that are 'too abstract' are probably topos theory, higher categories, stuff like that.
@P-Drum
@P-Drum 4 роки тому
The Universe speaks in poetry.
@Metacognition88
@Metacognition88 4 роки тому
Ed is dope.
@myroseaccount
@myroseaccount 4 роки тому
If we were visited by aliens I'd send either Ed Witten and Frank Wilzcek to speak to them
@thepowerman8952
@thepowerman8952 4 роки тому
As smart as Wilczek is, Witten is by all accounts the smartest theorist alive. I'd send Witten or Tao.
@Diligently2U
@Diligently2U 4 роки тому
I would send one of its own simulated kind first.. That carries its genetic gene .. that is more recognizable visually and internally tested and proven to be one of them genetically.
@afifakimih8823
@afifakimih8823 4 роки тому
wooww,It's Ed Witten!! The giant of Theoretical physics!one of the smartest person alive today.!! We are fortunate that we hear A human like Ed Witten!!btw,He is a mathematician as well.only physicist who won field madel (Regarded as Nobel prize in Mathematics) in Mathematics.!!
@146maxpain
@146maxpain 4 роки тому
Fields medal is not the Nobel prize the Abel prize is.
@mo0on487
@mo0on487 3 роки тому
@@146maxpain Whats the fields medal then?
@146maxpain
@146maxpain 3 роки тому
@@mo0on487 the field's medal is an encouragement prize for young mathematicians. They only give it to mathematicans under 40 years old.
@perfectoid8376
@perfectoid8376 2 роки тому
@@146maxpain yea but the fields is slightly more prestigious. The reason the abel prize is called the Nobel prize of math is because is awarded every year unlike fields medal which is awarded every 4 years
@goldenskeptic6309
@goldenskeptic6309 4 роки тому
Why has virtually no one ever heard of this guy?
@billdrumming
@billdrumming 4 роки тому
Golden skeptic he’s our Einstein. He’s also the only physicist to ever win a fields medal in mathematics.. the other guy to watch out for is Juan Maldecena. themindoftheuniverse.org/play?id=Juan_Maldacena
@billdrumming
@billdrumming 4 роки тому
Hi Brother is Matt Witten, TV writer .. wrote House. Ed’s father was also a theoretical physicist
@aufdermitte7143
@aufdermitte7143 4 роки тому
@Nissim Levy Tyson has a phd in physics so he must have done at least some minimal contribution to physics, but certainly nothing compared to what people like Witten have done.
@aufdermitte7143
@aufdermitte7143 4 роки тому
@Nissim Levy Yeah, I completely agree that Tyson's superb scientific reputation in the popular media has nothing to do with his factual contributions to physics (the same could be said of Michiu Kaku for example), and what you commented shows that he gave up any research ambition he ever had, what I said was that to earn a phd in any field you have to spend at least two or three years writing a thesis that according to some senior researchers gives a novel contribution to the field, whether that contribution is significant or not is another issue.
@YAS-dn6xn
@YAS-dn6xn 4 роки тому
see the elegant universe by Brian Greene. Witten is a genius
@amishaggerty
@amishaggerty 4 роки тому
Smartest person alive.
@cmhardin37
@cmhardin37 4 роки тому
By several standard deviations.
@cymoonrbacpro9426
@cymoonrbacpro9426 4 роки тому
John Smith now you need to define “intelligence” to validate your statement.
@Helmutandmoshe
@Helmutandmoshe 4 роки тому
Certainly a good candidate for that. One of the top few for sure. There are a handful of other mathematicians that are right up there with him.
@AtTheEast18
@AtTheEast18 3 роки тому
Although that may be true up until his 40's or maybe even in his 50's, its probably not the case today considering his age. Immense genius overlap generations throughout history so i wouldn't be surprised if a genius of the same order or greater would show up. within the next 5-10 years.
@robertx8733
@robertx8733 3 роки тому
In terms of IQ he is not the smartest
@krii3
@krii3 4 роки тому
7:43
@user-pu8ch3ih1u
@user-pu8ch3ih1u 4 роки тому
A key to dark matter or no time for energy exchange short version Energy exchange limit or limit for two point to interact. it is a bit hard to write down this thought for me. if two points have relative speed more then speed of light, they not able to interact. but they can interact through the third point. (exactly like dark matter) 1)You know how space can expand faster then light? And it also can curve? soo, it most likely can curve true it selfe. and this how it not interacting with it selfe. (in black holes space curveture length is extremely small) 2) How many time need for Sun to exchange energy with you? soo every energy exchange take some "time". There for if two point have speed difference more then C, they will have no "time" to exchange energyx, have no "time" for exchange to occure. Even if they will share same place. also you may see it as, FLT parts in more then one place at a "time" compare to us. For FLT part we in less then one place at "time". (why mass go up) it more about interaction limin then about speed of light. can be tested, if we will represent a third point. long version -dark matter in our galaxy, (most likely particles emitted by central black hole) is particles that moving faster than light. (most likely you do not "belive" in this) if i assume it is correct, then big amount of hydrogen on edge of galaxy, is where this "dark matter particles" decay after losing speed. (decay like new particles from hadron collider) -parts of dark matter alredy found, but we do not about it. (perseption(particles from hadron collider)) -particles found with hadron collider behave like a dark matter after loosing speed. -most likely there is a energy exchange speed limit in betwen two points (not sound speed), most likely it is a speed of light. (that about why we do not see dark matter, but see it interction with other(slower for it/faster for us) particles) -particles from hadron collider will be stable if placed in faster then light speed. whant to tell more, I hope this is enough to contact me. the key is a energy exchange speed limit (i want my Nobel for showing you dark matter) Best regards, Dynin A.I.
@LKRaider
@LKRaider 4 роки тому
Андрей Дынин are you saying dark matter is basically tachyons?
@ajjohn185
@ajjohn185 4 роки тому
didn't the double slit interference pattern explain
@jamidgull5664
@jamidgull5664 4 роки тому
Greatest physicist like Newton...
@146maxpain
@146maxpain 4 роки тому
That is not true. Newton was way better then Witten will ever be.
@perfectoid8376
@perfectoid8376 2 роки тому
@@146maxpain true but it's not because ed is less intelligent than newton it's because the course of the field has changed a lot.
@hihowareyou0000
@hihowareyou0000 2 роки тому
👏💯❤👍😉
@Kelvin-ed6ce
@Kelvin-ed6ce 4 роки тому
oh dear, I have the same nervous tics as Ed Witten.
@firstal3799
@firstal3799 2 роки тому
You migh be as smart
@CoolGuy-fg3xv
@CoolGuy-fg3xv 4 роки тому
Ed wittens biggest problem is time
@robertpirsig5011
@robertpirsig5011 4 роки тому
Isn't that everyone's problem?
@thirumalmurugesan2587
@thirumalmurugesan2587 4 роки тому
Mr Ed appear little nervous .. :)
@abz998
@abz998 4 роки тому
Experts at his level turn into politicians once their productive years are over.
@shaunking3978
@shaunking3978 3 роки тому
Joaquin Phoenix...
@LKRaider
@LKRaider 4 роки тому
The field is in a standstill for over 40 years, and even with minds such as Wittens we cannot move the needle forward. It's time to procure new grounds of exploration and concede the current toy theories have been just that: giant mens little toys.
@bilalhussein9730
@bilalhussein9730 3 роки тому
High energy is at a standstill but other areas of physics have had tremendous progress. As Phil Anderson liked to point out a 'theory of everything' in the string theorist's sense would in fact explain very little that's interesting in physics.
@Perrydog101
@Perrydog101 Рік тому
Eric Weintstein just told Joe Rogan that this gentleman is the brightest person on the planet.
@user-pu8ch3ih1u
@user-pu8ch3ih1u 4 роки тому
(unifying theory + key to darm matter adn fater the light communcation) i want to share with you, something i wasted my time on. The “First rule” of this universe. Eh…. it sound strange, but stay with me for a second. It deep, it really deep. This rule is - when energy exchange between two relative points occur, it happens along the path of least resistance. Everywhere, every time. The depth here - everywhere, every time. Even in black holes, the guide for evolution, for human behavior, every energy exchange, every time. Understanding this depth allow me to predict tomorrow much more precisely. Just think about it, how you move through your life, how the brain works. the behavior of animals and insects, any science. This rule in the core of absolute all. No one else can show it to you now. I want to shout about it from the highest bell tower! It will help people to move forward!
@abz998
@abz998 4 роки тому
What you're referring to is quite obvious but unfortunately we don't have the tools to explore it. Maybe this is the real end goal of number theory.
@nevessl998
@nevessl998 4 роки тому
It could be the holographic result of some quantum principle in which the emerging result is to facilitate forward motion of whatever kind.
@millerfour2071
@millerfour2071 2 роки тому
16:40
@edwardolvera5280
@edwardolvera5280 4 роки тому
que pendejadas, esa permanente necedad de querer comparar matematicas y fisica, No se porque Witten se presta a estas comparaciones
@Gringohuevon
@Gringohuevon 2 роки тому
no it doesn't
@spiritualblessings9584
@spiritualblessings9584 4 роки тому
Uh.
@sunilprinja9913
@sunilprinja9913 3 роки тому
If the universe were only created by a mathematician then we would all be in trouble....
@firstal3799
@firstal3799 2 роки тому
No bloody mathematician can design the universe.
@Viriyascybin
@Viriyascybin Місяць тому
Anyone else here because of Eric Weinstein?
@dnavas7719
@dnavas7719 4 роки тому
He looks uncomfortable
@alijassim7015
@alijassim7015 4 роки тому
He looks both comfortable and uncomfortable at the same time. Usually Prof. Witten does not even laugh.
@gftgft8435
@gftgft8435 4 роки тому
some woman in the audience was having braingasm
@power9k470
@power9k470 2 роки тому
Yeah.Too happy listening to Witten.
@davidwilkie9551
@davidwilkie9551 4 роки тому
If e-Pi-i is self-defining "physical" properties of continuous creation connection functional Principle, ..cause-effect existence, then Pi^Pi is suggested to be "completeness" of universal sync positioning/integration of Zero Difference, probability ONE, because it's the ultimate expression of antilog Ln-> Curl, and so the Actuality positioning, .dt, here-now-forever. (Major Prep's T-shirt Formula suggested Pi² = g..?, ie same Principle) Is "too much" over-specific mathematical language a diversion of attention off continuous creation connection Principle => Mathematics/Everything? Because in assessing the meaning of particular modules and abstractions, the fundamental proportioning/measuring methodology is assumed to be constant and immutable, so therefore the expectations that Spacetime is not the the source of "Emergence", and that is logically inevitable because it's Quantum Operator Fields Modulation Mechanism Mathematics-> probability ONE here-now-forever.., cause-effect existence Eternity-now.
@146maxpain
@146maxpain 4 роки тому
Unfortunately string theory is not generally accepted as physics. The reason is it lacks experimental verification.
@thepowerman8952
@thepowerman8952 4 роки тому
This is what happens when you let a history major loose in the physical sciences. Witten needs to get a grip.
@thepowerman8952
@thepowerman8952 4 роки тому
@CVK Friend, I was joking.
@LKRaider
@LKRaider 4 роки тому
The Powerman tbf, it wasn't funny
@davidwilkie9551
@davidwilkie9551 4 роки тому
The Elementary Physics of Time Duration Timing holographic/mathematical substantiation is physically quantifying the mathematical abstractions of material coherence in quantum-modulation compositions, ie the mathPhysics cause-effect of Spacetime? If it's accepted that the Actuality of Time Timing Cosmology was developed by astute observation of natural phenomena to serve as a means of predicting the past to navigate to future destinations, then it's practical development mathematically and geometrically is automatically a combination of measurement, mapping, materials and Geometry in all the applications necessary to Civilization. The diversity of applications and necessary specializations linguistically is due for revision, always. The universe is constant "mathematically analytical" creation, the calculus of timewave connection principle. The only difference between Mathematics and Physics in practical terms is the approach, either from the numerical/measurable patterns in phenomena or the reiteration of the general context of those concepts in qualitative and quantitative pre-operative observations, both together are the dualistic possibilities of differentiation and integration of this relative timing connection. (This would be a philosophy to mathematical pre-analysis of circumstances.., or, Math-Phys-Chem and Geometry in Spacetime is The Calculus in principle)
@cymoonrbacpro9426
@cymoonrbacpro9426 4 роки тому
*Mathematics is not the source of physical phenomena* Physics is not mathematics. Mathematic is the language used by the physicist to describe the phenomena. *Nervous giggles of uncertainty and the implications* God (nature) does not care what Mathematicians/physicist think how the universe should be. *Maybe purpose and intention is more fundamental then mathematics or Physics.* The question should be; what generates intent and purpose?
@Slimm2240
@Slimm2240 4 роки тому
Awkward dialogue
@nioniosospeed550
@nioniosospeed550 3 роки тому
These idealistic interpretations of mathematics are hurting science. Especially Dijkgraff is really pushing this beauty of maths idea which is what I referring to.
@michaelcgrasso1986
@michaelcgrasso1986 2 роки тому
"The Universe Speaks in Numbers." The title is so misleading but it is a mistake made by the entire scientific world and consequently by everyone else. Indeed in the interview they never speak of the universe in Numbers but of mathematics. They are too separate things! Mathematics explains relationships between "objects," and has nothing to do with a pure 'number-based theory' as believed by the ancient civilizations and mostly recognized by Pythagoras saying "All is Number." The universe DOES speak in Numbers, and mathematics in physics is only the beginning of the story. The universe is indeed based not only on numbers but by a very specific mathematical structure. We know already, and confirmed in countless of ways, that the Fibonacci sequence of the base-10 is the basis or foundation of many natural structures, such as found in plants, flowers etc etc. Even the stock market, which is the result also of the collective human emotions, is affected by it! We also know as a fact that the golden ratio or phi, which emerges, not coincidentally, from the Fibonacci sequence also is found to be fundamental in innumerable physical phenomena from the micro to the macro scales of the universe. It was obvious to me that if so many natural phenomena were based on the 'outer-dimension' of the Fibonacci sequence, the same mathematical structure would have to be fundamental in some way in the "inner" phenomena of nature as well, such as the atomic structure, the genetic code, etc. However, the inner dimension of nature was to be found in the inner-dimension of the Fibonacci sequence. The Fibonacci sequence in digital root indeed produces a 24-repeating pattern (ad infinitum). How can it be possible that no one is looking into this amazing property of the Fibonacci sequence? That's what I asked myself many years ago. I knew the answer. Science has DECIDED without any scientific basis that numbers were an invention of the human mind and not an intrinsic property of the universe as instead practically all ancient civilizations believed or better, knew. The first step in the evolution of the discovery of the Fibonacci based Menorah Matrix was finding that to be complete the 24 repeating pattern required a second (female) 24-structure. Indeed when a second 24-repeating pattern is added to the first (staggered like bricks) all adjacent digits of the tow sequences sum 9 (1 next to 8, 2 next to 7, etc) and the digits 9 always paired in the two repeating sequences. I thought, this amazing property, which is based on duality (male and female), which also reflects how nature is structured, cannot be wasted by nature, it must relate to the inner workings/structures of nature. Subsequently I found amazing properties of the two (named X and Y) sequences of 24 repeating patterns, such as that the Fibonacci sequencing (third digit is the sum of the previous two digits) worked also in the 24-repeaing pattern (in digital root). Moreover, the pathways of the sequencing were also produced across the two staggered sequences! The pathways motion from X to Y, then back from Y to X and continuing ad infinitum, designing a regular crisscrossing pattern, which in three dimension form the basic "points' for a spiral pathway! Furthermore, the dual-24 pattern motioned in the opposite direction as well. Indeed, to motion backwards, the subtraction operation is adopted! In other words, moving backwards the third digit is the difference of the two previous digits! The inner-dimension's subtraction always gives a "positive number," normally such as 7-1=6 but also when in the form 1-7, because in this case 9 is added to 1, thus 1-7 (1+9=10) - 7 = 3. This subtraction method is confirmed by the fact that it works both in the linear and crisscrossing patterns. In addition, the crisscrossing/spiral pathways is calculated opposite to the linear sequencing: Moving forward the sequencing is by subtraction and moving backwards by addition (perfect symmetry again). The spiraling pathways of the 24-repeating pattern produce both torus and dual-torus dynamic pathways, which is another fundamental propriety found in nature at all scales. This cannot be expanded on here. The next step in the formation of the Menorah Matrix was the discovery that when the digits of the base-10 are raised to power, they all produced repeating patterns ad infinitum as well! Among the nine digits, the largest repeating pattern produces six digits. When these digits from the power-repeating patterns are added to the X and Y 24-repeating patterns it forms a structure of 24 + 288 = 336 digits, or one dual-sequence of 24 + 24 = 48 digits plus six dual-sequences derived from the power repeating pattern for a total of seven dual-sequences. This 1+6 structure and much much more that cannot be added here for space was a perfect match to the biblical 7-branched Menorah, from which the name Menorah Matrix (MM) stems from. The original sequences X and Y are placed at the center of the six-repeating dual sequences, which is supported by mathematical properties that also cannot be explained here. The central lampstand in the Menorah is indeed the source of the other six in the biblical Menorah, just like in the MM. After years of studying this I found the MM structure to predict the atomic and subatomic structures as explained by quantum mechanics. However, the MM predicts, contrarily to QM, three subquarks to each quark, instead of the necessity for the "colors" of quarks. The pathways of the X and Y sequences predict the indivisibility of the electric and magnetic forces. The MM also provides a prediction for the DNA's dual helix and the 64 codons of the genetic code and predicts the mathematical limit to 20 universal amino acids out of the 64 codons. The Menorah Matrix predicts the dimension and ratios of the Earth/Moon's blueprint and the tropical and sidereal cycles (365.242 and 365.256, respectively) of the Earth to the third decimal digit as well. These and many, many more empirical correlation provide more than enough evidence that nature is indeed based on numbers and that the MM is the basis for the Theory of Everything. Studies should be continued in this direction by the scientific community, which will take as to a quantum leap in the understanding of nature and for technological development. For more detailed information, the basis of the MM theory (about 50 pages) can be found on Academia and Research Gate. In comparison, the book that is in the workings will be 500-600 pages long to cover the different aspects of the MM and the inner-dimension properties of the base-10 number system, which also connect perfectly to geometry.
@DanielHendriks77
@DanielHendriks77 4 роки тому
Einstein was a genius. This is just a very very smart guy
@OBOTROYNYUSA
@OBOTROYNYUSA 4 роки тому
Not to discount Einstein, but the mathematical abilities of Witten exceeds any physicist, dead or alive, and in the case of Einstein several orders of magnitude. Even more remarkably, he has an immense phenomenological insight in high energy physics. You would gravely mislead yourself when judging these people if you dont have "at least" a solid working knowledge of relativistic quantum fields and the related math (differential topology of manifolds, representation theory, spinors and supersymmetry, renormalization group ideas, and dare I say more stringy mathematics.)
@jayare2620
@jayare2620 3 роки тому
And you are an idiot?
@DanielHendriks77
@DanielHendriks77 3 роки тому
​@@OBOTROYNYUSA He is a mathematician. Only a small percentage of people know him. What theory from where the predictions has been confirmed has he developed? Is he famous for some kind of principle? Nobody will remember him after few hundred years.
@markw.965
@markw.965 3 роки тому
I will defend my distant relative. He has the #1 position in terms of citations in theoretical physics!!!
@firstal3799
@firstal3799 2 роки тому
No. Witten is better technically but he didn't have any new insights. What I like about Witten though , apart.from.his.technical genius is his good intuitive understanding of the direction of the field But again no new fundamental insights
@NothingMaster
@NothingMaster 4 роки тому
Pointless robot-like regurgitation.
@aliqasim4956
@aliqasim4956 4 роки тому
Later you will find God.
@Bandit19990
@Bandit19990 4 роки тому
So You don't believe then? because there's no evidence for a God yet, is there?.
@chiptoothrecordlabelgroup
@chiptoothrecordlabelgroup 2 роки тому
Math is logic. Quantum field theory is propaganda.
@NothingMaster
@NothingMaster 4 роки тому
Universe doesn’t speak in numbers or tongues for that matter. Numbers are human inventions, to make sense of a Universe that just is. Numbers could only prove to be ex nihilo a priori if they could explain the WHY of the Universe, not just the WHAT of it.
Dirac Conversation: Edward Witten
46:00
Int'l Centre for Theoretical Physics
Переглядів 63 тис.
"The Universe Speaks in Numbers - Backstory" - Graham Farmelo
34:15
Institute for Advanced Study
Переглядів 32 тис.
Мама и Чебурашка 🤪#shorts
00:33
INNA SERG
Переглядів 1,2 млн
Nonomen funny video😂😂😂 #magic
00:29
Nonomen ノノメン
Переглядів 58 млн
MINHA IRMÃ MALVADA CONTRA O GADGET DE TREM DE DOMINÓ 😡 #ferramenta
00:40
Leonard Susskind: My friend Richard Feynman
14:42
TED
Переглядів 887 тис.
How This Pen Changed The World
9:17
Primal Space
Переглядів 368 тис.
The genius of Edward Witten | Cumrun Vafa and Lex Fridman
9:01
Lex Clips
Переглядів 313 тис.
Roger Penrose | The Next Universe and Before the Big Bang | Nobel Prize in Physics winner
29:53
The Institute of Art and Ideas
Переглядів 277 тис.
Is string theory a failing model? | Eric Weinstein and Brian Greene go head to head again
10:36
The Institute of Art and Ideas
Переглядів 469 тис.
Conversation: Salam, Sciama, Witten and Budinich
49:00
Int'l Centre for Theoretical Physics
Переглядів 350 тис.
Riddles of Reality: From Quarks to the Cosmos
59:55
World Science Festival
Переглядів 501 тис.
Quantum Fields: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe - with David Tong
1:00:18
The Royal Institution
Переглядів 6 млн
Nima Arkani-Hamed: The End of Space-Time
49:43
Max-Planck-Institut für Physik
Переглядів 197 тис.
Q&A - Quantum Fields: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe - with David Tong
15:49
Мама и Чебурашка 🤪#shorts
00:33
INNA SERG
Переглядів 1,2 млн