why is eastern europe not this enlightened poland,romania,ukraine,hungary,bulgaria and serbia

Thank you!

Witten is absolutely brilliant, and listening to him is captivating; you know you are in the presence of sheer brilliance! Amazing, beautiful discussion! 🙋🙏

Consiciousness can only be experienced. For example, if you had a tooth pain. Million Scientists with their Test tube(Deduction/induction via empiricism) can tell you there is no evidence of tooth pain. You will reject their scientific method because you are having direct experience of this pain. I have direct experience of existence. All i know with certainty is my experience ("Cogito Ergo Sum"). I know with certainity that this existence can only come from pre-existing Self-Sufficient/Perfect Existence(Allah the most Exalted).

Conservation of Spatial Curvature (both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. The model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. .

HaHa he does resemble Einstein

😂😅😅

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

😂

😂😂😂😂

Me too

Same here

It was a strategic plug

Same here. Very effective referencing.

Same

Yeah, giant egos never looked good, anyway.

Lol you named all white men, lol yes we are so lucky. I wonder how many women could have discovered the answer. If only they where allowed to have academic careers 50 years ago. How many people of color could have been smarter than Einstein the cousin lover or Hawking the Epstein friend. How many genius’s never met their potential do to them being a woman or not white.

This man is an alien among us. 😳

humble shmumble

Humility is a luxury of the highly successful. If you're not highly successful, you don't have that luxury.

😮

Especially Witten. He is the smartest man alive.

lol

@@ElectronFieldPulse still hasn’t done anything for string theory

Please don't forget Steven Weinberg

@@ElectronFieldPulse Do you know Pierre René Deligne?

Magic

Oh yes, exactly what I was thinking! You made me laugh 😂

Haha :) probably true

Yes. ❤️‍🔥

Yes, this man is the next evolution of human beings. Incredible and awe inspiring person.

Would I be close by saying that Edward Witten wastes not one word and that his excitement in his field is expressed in every word, every gesture. I had not heard of this fellow until today 7:03:2023. I am only a grade student from 1972. And know nothing of string theory but was fascinated by this wonderful interview, thank you.

​@@Solarlube Today is my first time of hearing about him too

His entire career is a scientific buzzword …

@parmenides2576 You make for a clown that people can laugh at while farting.

@@parmenides2576you don’t know what you’re talking about. Put some respect on his name

You love to imagine that

L0ve by⁶

One of the funniest things I’ve heard, was that many great physicists, when conversing about M theory, often would ask, in deference, “What does Ed think” ?

@@blokin5039 tell that to your mother.

@@blokin5039 Sorry, but my mother does not have any children with extra chromosomes.

@@blokin5039 I'm sorry that you were born with extra chromosomes lolz, but that's your mom's fault.

@@narek323 ahhhhhhhhh no

Yeah, his brain is scary. You can see it in Wittens eyes, this guy is deep.

@@karlkarlsson9126 Scary only for the frail minded.

Didn't he(Edward ) have a strong knowledge of mathematics before the age of 22?

He didn’t get out of first gear in this interview.

If you ever meet someone like this and you want to make them laugh say Does pondering if a question is really hard to solve or just impossible keep you up at night sometimes too? Smart people instantly relate and warm up to you because that is a curse when you debate giving up or pushing on uncertain if you’re wasting your time like a cat chasing a laser dot thinking he’s gonna get it.

His theory can't be expiremented. Being the smartest in the world is not like him. Nothing he says can become technology. So it is useless.

His insights is unlikely to get by ordinary mind

@@prabhakarbohara7663 his IQ is super high.

He is barely a human being

@@BoRisMc He is the best human being.

@@soubhikmukherjee6871 It has to be at least 180,possibly higher.

That eloquence is unusual and speaks for his tremendous intelligence.

For real. It’s still impressive but I’d be more impressed by someone who’s parents weren’t scientists

@@leevasha5719 Lol seriously? It doesn't matter what your parents were-to achieve what Ed has, you pretty much have to be one of the smartest guys out there.

Ed once said he learned calculus by himself when he was eleven, then found mathematics boring.

​@@Tyrosine0910 I mean it does matter to some extent. If your parents were the slave labor plucking cobalt out of the ground and you were strapped to their back, much bigger hill to climb to get to Witten level than if your parents were scientists. It's still climbing everest, but you definitely started a few base camps up than others.

​@p stew that's an extremely ignorant way to think. Are you saying blue collar people are not smart enough? 🤔 that they are so stupid they couldn't produce a genius 🙄

You have more than half his intelligence already.

it's just an act. anyone can learn to talk like that and seem smart.

@@KissSlowlyLoveDeeply-pm2je Yikes. Good luck on your insecurity over your own intelligence journey, big guy. You probably don't have the slightest clue about Witten's accomplishments. This guy is a titan of mathematics and physicists. Trying to understand a fraction of what he understands would lead you to crying yourself to sleep. Get real.

Do you remember the name of that documentary?

What is it called?

And yet, if you read the comments, virtually all of them are complimentary and deferential.

hahaha so true, there is people in youtube claiming they have theory of everything, claiming there is only one force, electromagnetic. and so on. and of course people saying einstein is overrated, lol.

@@feynmanschwingere_mc2270 First of all, no one was comparing Schrodinger to Einstein. Second, Schrodinger made accomplishments not only in theoretical physics, but also in biology.

Nowadays these 10 dimensional supersymmetric fancy fictions have no proof. So after every two year a new particle is discovered, better say invented to defend their quantum mechanical highly nonlinear unfalsifiable unobserved non-science !

Like Elon Musk🤣

@@colors6692 ??? Musk is a dumbo with lots of money.

He already has what he is going to say lined up. There is generally no pausing and only a few "um's" (probably him realizing he wants to filter something down even more.) Match that with the speed at which he talks while recalling dates and names 40 years ago, yeah, pretty wild.

@@TheVaged I mean, this is his life work. Whenever you are tasked with talking about something you dedicated your life to, it's going to be easy to have all the answers. He's probably answered some variant of all of these questions many times over at this point as well. Not to take anything away. The guy is an absolute genius. Just saying that I think it's weird how people try to read into how he speaks during an interview as the evidence of his genius rather than just... you know... his math and physics contributions lmao. People are so weird when it comes to evaluating the intelligence of others. They bark up the wrong trees.

what makes you think he's a human?

He was History AND Journalism major.

@@feynmanschwingere_mc2270 Fortunately for us he did not go on to law school.

.....

thats is exactly how you feel when you hear a real genius, real genius put so much effort on making things clear and everyone understand, fake genius make you feel stupid.

No doubt, yet thought as we ordinarily know it has limitations. In one area he is a genius I agree. But we would have to live with him in his household to see how that genius manifest itself when interacting with the variables of life and all that entails. If we look at Gurdjieff's and others insights into the structure of the human being, as a first approximation he suggest that the human being is connected or in touch with what we would call reality via three centers, thinking center, feeling center, and the moving-instinctive-sexual center (often call the 'gut'). For a person to have wisdom the three centers need to be equally developed and balanced. One of the best sources to approach this subject would be The Dramatic Universe in four volumes by John G Bennett or maybe a more readable book would be Deeper Man by JGB. Or as a less technical approach, just to get a different point of view that is in this direction check out Anoop Kumar's tube videos and what intelligence involves as a comprehensive wisdom.

@fineasfrog - Thay sounds like a very unscientific way to look at humans. In my opinion, a better description is that brains have evolved over millions of years, and they started as an amiglyda like structure. Over time, more and more of a frontal cortex developed, which put more fine control of the animal as it acted as a brake so to speak, to the more base region of the brain. So, it's like a very complex rube Goldberg machine that still works to satisfy the more basal region.

​@@fineasfrog Without a doubt individuals like Edward have offsets or deficits in other areas of their lives but that's also up to them. Hyper-specialized humans can do a lot to advance knowledge even if it means sacrificing part of themselves to do so and that aught to be respected. I can't imagine what it's like for anyone to be in a relationship with him as I imagine it would be pretty limited in a lot of ways. It all really depends on how much time he consciously applies to work on other aspects of himself. I've seen/heard of extremely smart people (especially those with close to video graphic memory) becoming agoraphobic eventually.

Not so rough.

Yes.

I'm not taking away from Witten's genius. If you were following the science research community prior to the JRE podcast, you would confirm that Eric did accurately call him the "Boogeyman" of physics. He does have the accolades, sheer mathematical prowess and disarming ability to explain it in a common tongue. However, when the physics overlords like Witten and Kaku base their intellectual reputations and careers on certain theories, models and grand explanations, this affects both the following generations of scientists and how research dollars are allocated, the result is research getting locked into string theory, supersymmetry, twister theory (with Penrose) and the like. Eric also alludes to this slightly, then pivots to introduce his own models built on differential geometry (his favorite buzz word). It's great that we aspire towards these great scientists, but physics feels less free today.

To me, a non mathematician non physicist, the answer lies at 10:17-10:45. Breakthroughs happen a bit at a time. Knowledge builds on knowledge. What is discovered by some is already intuitively understood by others and therefore quickly built on leading to other larger implications and opportunities.

Absolutely. Even if it doesn't end up describing our universe, string theory will have been such an important stepping stone, what with AdS/CFT correspondence and so on. There's so much hate towards people developing the mathematics who haven't taken the time to understand it themselves (not that I have either, yet), but it doesn't *have* to represent our reality to be an important mathematical theory if nothing else.

Wait, before you criticize string theory or the people working in it, where the hell is YOUR degree? Do you even have the qualifications to give yourself the right to pass criticism about ideas you don't even understand?

And M-theory. I like that one too

@@narek323 appeal to authority is pointless. String theory came like an elephant went back like a mouse.

@@davidregi7571 Where did I appeal to authority? I did no such thing. I question your credentials though, which is a valid way of vetting people and their uneducated remarks based on their knowledge and expertise, which you seem to lack.

And Bill Nye.

@@bruceli9094 No, bill nye is not even a physicist.

@@bruceli9094 No, Bill Nye is a good teacher, but he is nowhere near as brilliant as Witten. It is like comparing the fastest sprinter in your neighbourhood to the olympic gold winner on 100 m.

Witten is deeper, von Neumann broader--I mean in terms of accomplishments.

These kinds of comparisons are meaningless

Lmaoooo

There are no Aliens. Space is the final frontier, but it's made in a hollywood basement. Neil A is A l i e n . If you can find it, try watching A funny thing happened on the way to the moon. As soon as you hear Theory it just means psudo science. These people full of their own pride add to the nonsense!

Can anyone translate Crazy?

@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836 He's not a politician.

@@narek323 So much the better. Most politicians are Morons. Lol.

@@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836 No, what I mean is that he does not have the credentials to practice politics. It's an asinine idea to say that scientists or engineers specializing in their own fields should divert their attention away from their subjects of research, and start working on politics.