That is so fucking brilliant!

Amazing 🙌

And vice versa

Isn't what you describe at the core of Einstein's Fear of Relatives?

Space is the ambient within where the whole universe exists. Space in and of itself can exist as being totally empty of any matter or material thing and still be as vast or perhaps infinite as the existing universe. Time however does not exist in empty space even as time does not exist in and of itself. Time is but a measure relative to the actions and interaction of all the matter in the universe.. so in a sense time is a measuring device and is unlike the reality of space.

"Hmm. Hmmmm.... I know some of these words"

LoL 🤣

Certain words formed in a certain sequence can form specific ideas

Go back to school

@@pauldirac808 There should be a period at the end of your sentence. See me after class.

😂

This is such gold considering the gravity of the conversation.

😂 ahhhhhhgggghhh c'mon! That's a good one! 🥁

You must have a very precise? accurate? protractor!

He was probably early into his Parkinsons at the time...

Andd

Very true! I can serve as a proof of your statement -- every words he uttered was crystal clear, I could understand every one of them. I just a bit bewildered when all these put together 😅 .... might be general relativity is true, the event cone of Mr. Smolin and mine are just not overlapped, unfortunately.

Delivery was bad, nonetheless funny

@@11indigo this isn't comedy central kid wtf is wrong wid u

Where he is sort of correct is around 4 minutes, in that we can only define any motion or existence of something measureable by subjective reference points. However I really don't see how that should advance a classical general relativity or "linear tidal mysterious space" over special relativity. And I don't see how the possible inherent flux of space should make a study of particle dynamics and respective force fields less important.

Because he has no idea how it all started

@@junkerjorg6310 That is for sure, but who does?

In perfect shape? Lol the little shrimp looks like he doesn’t even lift weights.

@@macysondheim He has recovered recently from a serious illness...

Really, I didn't understand a single word. Well, I understood the words, just not a single idea they represent.

@@mydogskips2I didn’t either, and I am betting most people who are not cosmologists, unified field theorists , etc., do either!

@@shathaway13 We who do understand the maths + are *skeptics*.. are able to see some major flaws in his ideas. Don't get me wrong. There are worse examples out there ... 🤐☺️

You are right, it is fascinating that it took less than a century. At the same time, you cant become president of the US if you dont believe humans descend from Adam and Eve!

The radicals have taken over and now empirical science is considered radical.

If time didn't change nothing could change therefore there could be no space. Without time it is impossible to perceive the existence of anything making time and space codependent.

@@MonteCarlo-rx4hu Time itself is change. How could time be dependent upon itself? It is a circular fallacy. It is like having a man lift himself up by his own bootstraps.

The one thing I would radically say is that space doesn't exist and time is not a measurement for observation... Hope Einstein would happy with my no cause & effect for things we can't see...spiritual... Hide & Seek.

I have to read it a few more times, but your explanation sounds brilliant to me!

1 You haven't at all understood The photoelectric effect. Which is not a hypothesis, but a verified science experiment. Which debunks your claim in the start about light. Which means you are poorly trained in physics, or had lousy sources bordering to the "alternative" fringes. (NOT meant as an insult :) Just take it as an advise or remainder to get better educated on the topic). Half-religious, wild speculations and fake news are everywhere today).. Something that annoys and worries scientists and skeptics more and more every month. 2a: Space is the definition of the LACK of matter present. In other words, something completely non-motional. 2b: All matter is ALWAYS in motion. Continuously. Non-synchronously. (A k a non-uniform, or if you like, "relativity"). Now it should be obvious to you that there are no "frames" in nature. Optical systems create frames because they can't suck in infinite data... :)

@@bobafeet1234 It rather sounds like the Dunning-Kruger effect. 😊 Someone smoking something or read something in a fringe magazine. No ability of skeptical inquiry.

He he.. it's not difficult at all. The reason why it appears confusing to most, is that the "popular science", christian fringe-mindsets and "physics philosophy" explanations have so little to do with reality and skeptical reasoning, that it can't really convince the reader or listener properly. It "convinces" only the new age buffoons. Because they are always only looking for the least testable option. The key points of astronomy in skeptical physics : 1 Space is the expression for the absence of something. It is where you haven't proved the occurrence of matter/energy. 2 Every locality is always in motion. There are a couple of ways you can cause change of direction or cause increased speeds ,but it is literally impossible without adding energy. No such things as a free lunch. 3 Energy can't appear or vanish magically.. 4 You can't have a cosmic beginning literally..The consequence of points 1 to 3 . There can be a big bang. In that case it is a local event. There is no such thing as a god or a beginning..

A drop out astrophysicist is a title almost as cool as astrophysicist

I read that same book a few years back too.

I've read this book forth in 2042. Amazing!

@@dodekaedius whats a book?

@@jayr.7209 - I heard they use to read books LONG ago. It's so weird how people use to read letters on paper bound together. Our ancestors were such simpletons 😁

@@sisu4134 its a lost art. . . LMAO 🤣🤣🤣

Lmao

Noice

Also, this may be the most appropriate definition of time. I. E. time=the interval between events.

Your time is dependent on your relationship with space, not your relationship with other matter. It is your interaction with space, or space’s interaction with you that dictates your clock.

Mm P pop Pollo 8o0 00PM pl 0opm ml poor pop p ppl 0

@@andrewfarmet4243 gorp snippet ring morphs

"we" may not get board...... however , he quite possibly would

Maybe not boring but I will get a headache trying to figure out what he is saying :-)

An object with a mass sinks into time a little, bending space and causing gravity. Gravity is essentially a tendency of objects with mass to go back in time.

That's what I've been thinking and debating for a few years now:) Time doesn't exist. There is only space. Since the beginning of the universe till now there is a constant movement. To measure the gaps between for example some past and present events people invented a descriptor "time", but it has no value itself, it's just a measurement. There is no time per se, there is only space and change.

I don’t disagree but if you call it a measurement what are you measuring?

@@jakesmith6337 What do you mean by "measure"? You are just comparing two things that change.

@@SolidAir54321 It seems to me your measuring time, but if it, time, doesn’t exist, ( which I wonder about also) what are we measuring, we have to call it something 🤔

How does something change without time?

Ehhhhh..... I dont really like the show. I think he is asking the wrong people the right questions. Seems like he asks scientists .... "spiritual" questions. Which they respond with material answers. Like asking a dog what its like to be a cat. I think he is looking for people with academic credentials rather than people with experiences. I think he should interview these people with PROFOUND strange experiences that are unexplained....... yet documented and witnessed by others. I think the show will be better at that point.

@@syriouskash537 the whole purpose is to find the deeper truths of existence. Of course he is going to stay scientific. If your looking at this as a spiritual thing you’ve got it all wrong, it’s a philosophical thing

@@stevedv629 You cant find truth if you only stick to one truth teller. You should ask the Sun Moon and the Stars if you want to find the truth about the cosmos. Not just the moon. Cause I'm sure the sun will have a different spin on things. And will ALSO be telling the truth. See my point?

@@syriouskash537 no

@@stevedv629 Too bad

You two should have a baby together🤣

not pretentious like so many other theoretical physicists.

I know, right? "Causation is time." (5:22) Love that!

@@paulteller8383 ...well..... All theoretical physicists (today) tend to be very pretencious,unlike those who work at/with for example advanced engineering, geology, biochemistry,who are real scientists.

@Roberto These people are like clergies ,but of postmodernist/alternative /pseudoscience forms or branches.

Yy , 😂 up t6j in

No, you can't, that's how a human experiences time. You may use your imagination to try to get past the sequence but experientially you will be dealing with time in the way you describe as long as you're human. We experience it directly through the aging process. "The order of events is clear", agreed and nothing could be more obvious.

You're right it's just the logical order of causality. "Time passing" is an illusion that was created by the harnessing of our planet's rotations for tracking the day and year's passage".

@@slingshotchicken4695 He's actually right, it's your imagination that's compromised.

It’s intuitive to me that it’s just emergent, or an accounting parameter. It’s almost like the Einstein accelerating frame of reference. Without something to reference yourself to (arrangement to measure), then there’s no way of telling time exists

Me too. Continue!

If general relativity predicts a block universe, but quantum mechanics doesn't (necessarily), and quantum mechanics is apparently the more accurate theory, what kind of universe does QM create? A growing block universe? Does it side more with presentism? Something else altogether?

Read his books

I had the same experience at 5 years old, just as you say: looking out my bedroom window at the stars. Maybe this is more common than I thought. For me the idea of infinity and my inability to grasp it created sort of an existential crisis.

Me too now that I think about it space is infinity big but then is it small

The thought of being outside or beyond the edge of the Universe is preposterous. To even question it IMO is lunacy. Nothing can not exist. Nothing is still something if you have the idea of it. The Universe is literally everything that can exist.

From my research on gravity it seems to me that there are TWO kinds of acceleration. One kind is real, meaning if there is a force on an object then it will be considered to be accelerating, and it will have weight. The other kind is an illusion, or an apparent acceleration. If you have weight, but feel as though you're standing still, then objects that are actually standing still will seem as if they are accelerating instead of you. Anytime an object has weight there will be a force on it, whether or not the object is observed to be accelerating, traveling at a constant speed, or standing still. Anytime an object does not have weight then there will not be a force on it, whether or not the object is observed to be accelerating, travelling at a constant speed, or standing still. Apparent acceleration can also mean an object has real acceleration but is actually standing more still than you. Or in other words it will have less force on it than you. My research also seems to indicate that the idea of apparent acceleration is not taught in schools. According to Einstein, to stand still with a static weight, you are accelerating up from a force at 9.8 meters/sec/sec. Less force upward less acceleration, and you will be falling with apparent acceleration, with a lighter than static weight. Free fall, would be no upward force, you are then weightless with an apparent downward acceleration at 9.8 meters/sec/sec. Brian Greene tells Alan Alda there is no gravity in free fall. NIST WTC FAQ 31 "the upper section came down essentially in free fall." Shyam Sunder John Gross "gravity was the driving force." kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e5pjYKaX2tGpl6c.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jriiZM6SvbGmo4k.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/g951a7Fmrqeqh5s.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fdt8f8Km1auYqp8.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/la2afMp7tdSYZ3k.html

It could be limited, but also "go on forever," if it looped around on itself. However, by best measurements today, we cannot tell if it will loop around on itself, or if it just goes on forever. It's definitely much, much larger than the furthest out that we can look -- scientists have figured out that much.

When I Heard the Learn'd Astronomer By Walt Whitman When I heard the learn’d astronomer, When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me, When I was shown the charts and diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them, When I sitting heard the astronomer where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room, How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick, Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself, In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time, Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.

@@jamescarew8136 to W.W.

Well done. I wish I could understand. I have 2 degrees and one of them a masters. I can accept something I don't understand. Eg. a black hole. It is assumed it is a singularity. But perhaps it is not. Perhaps it has a surface immediately beyond the event horizon. Assumptions are made that are only theoretical and seem never to be provable.

Yes, brain hurt...I think it's about time to stop this philo-madness. It doesn't sound "profound" anymore, it nearly sounds ridiculous. Help my brain connect with my mind here: Where is all this "expanding space" expanding into? Anti-space? Conversation like this, even if they have more than 400 years of philosophy, (because let's get grounded here, it's all mental-matters, not our actual experience), it all sounds like a black hole for our common sense, interpreted as "profound deep inquiry". Do people actually get paid to sit on their couches and drool in their own thoughts. Strange occupation.

@@hittitecharioteer It is treated as a singularity because that's how it behaves. A pole in space where the supremacy of the speed of light is overcome by gravity. Physics is a lot different in its neighborhood, especially at the event horizon, beyond which not even light can escape.

He did alright here. Of course, his most relevant question was ignored. ("can we measure anything or is this philosophy?").

Agreed. His ability to ask the right questions is crucial to the value of these interviews.

Lol, feels that way a lot. Do not let advanced nomenclature confuse you, it is the science that makes such verbally confusing results to many. All he was stating was a unfalsifiable theory, a theory that is also paradoxical. When you deal with theorhetical physics you are basically dealing with leading theories and field experts start tossing their lots in one of those theories, or create another. To prove any of these claims you would need a time-machine, and since we do not have those available at our current level of advancement, it becomes an unfalsifiable theory. We cannot prove or disprove many theories but especially ones that took place Billions of years ago. This is why many competing theories exist, from a big bang to creation, neither are falsifiable, the existence of one theory does not disprove the other although only one may be true. If we knew the answer then that would be all that existed, the other hypothesis would disappear.

Nonsense is always unfalsifiable. Paradoxes point at fundamental problems all the theoretical experts ignore.

@@Chicken_Little_Syndrome Everything is unfalsifiable till it isn't. Paradoxicality in the nuances of our origin is almost a given. There must be some sort of uncaused causation, rather it be the paradoxical nature of an infinite intellect as this uncaused cause, or matter, time, space and energy being derived from nothing. With humans we are limited to finite reasoning, paradoxes exist within this finite. Nonsensical is the expected outcome from trying to understanding concepts not limited to our own rationale. If you are a Christian then the pathway for falsifiability will eventually be met with the creators inevitable arrival, I am sure the burden of evidence will be met when that occurs. From a Big Bang devoutee, we would still need to invent time-travel. I digress of course lol, but the main response is there.

Lol.

He leans because of gravity 🤣

Whenever Lee starts to think hard he starts moving his upper body.

Keeping within the tme frames and Event horizon.

He's bending space and time

Heavy brained

Lex Fridman had a great conversation with him about a year ago on his podcast.

This is the first space I have seen him as well.

Refreshing in the sense of at least some recognition that progress in physics has stalled. Maybe recent events may spark a new revelation... ?

@@grahamswinerd idk maybe dude

@Edward Williams I assume he means that by acknowledging that physics has been running into a wall as of late, it might open the way for new ideas. I have heard an increasing amount of respected physicists questioning String Theory and the idea of a Theory of everything as being dead ends or not leading to answerable questions.

That we aren't ultimately connected? We are all made of existence.

@@olh_hlo What do you mean? They ended with a question, but you with an answer that makes no sense to me unless you mean we are only made of matter, maybe? Do you think a thought is made of matter, then too, and our thoughts are not really part of us but emerge and submerge back into our brains without existence? Is that what we mean by spirits? Your attempt at philosophy seems poetic, though, unless you mean something else.

We hate your New Age religion of scientism.

Or like China.

I know you are China.

Mostly fascinating....I think it's about time to stop this philo-madness. It doesn't sound "profound" anymore, it nearly sounds ridiculous. Help my brain connect with my mind here: Where is all this "expanding space" expanding into? Anti-space? Conversation like this, even if they have more than 400 years of philosophy, (because let's get grounded here, it's all mental-matters, not our actual experience), it all sounds like a black hole for our common sense, interpreted as "profound deep inquiry". Do people actually get paid to sit on their couches and drool in their own thoughts. Strange occupation.

Stupid riddle that waste resources cannot be proven like chicken and egg. Chicken is the only logical answer. Egg needs fertilization and incubation to become chicken. OLDEST SCAM of "RnD" for getting paid.

joseph Freetimer look deeper my friend….free inquiry has brought about all your/our conveniences…

@@johngrono what do you mean by this?

@@josephfreetimer1736 it’s not the most straightforward concept to explain, but I’ll do my best: Imagine a graph, or perhaps better, a map, drawn on a grid fixed so that every location (point on the graph) has a location defined in reference to coordinates on that grid. Now, imagine lengthening all the edges of the grid’s squares, so that the graph/map/whatever you’re imagining drawn on it stretches along every axis. That’s what expansion of space in the universe is like, except that the matter within the space (everything physical) is ‘confined’ by the attractive forces (electromagnetic, gravitational, strong, weak) it feels and imposes on all the rest of the matter local to it - such as, for example, the attractive force the sun and the earth have on each other as they orbit - keeps the material within the universe “locked” into relative positions with respect to other matter, so that although the fabric of space within which it is contextualised expands, the matter experiences only the slightest of affects, which are dwarfed by the much stronger affects of the forces, due to fields such as the gravitational field which drives change in their relative positions. This is general. Actually you are (at all times) being pulled outwards in all directions simultaneously by the expansion of space, however the attractive forces (predominantly electromagnetic and strong) between your constituent atoms, and the subatomic particles within them keeps you whole. Without these, you would spread out into a diffuse cloud (albeit imperceptibly slowly) as the universe you are imbedded within gradually expands. Note that this gradual expansion is radically slower and less impactful than the rapid expansion the universe likely underwent in its inflationary phase (according to our most likely theories). Source: studied physics/maths. Hope that clarifies. Feel free to ask me any other q’s you have.

Yes actually you are correct. As a child I looked at a clock and wondered if I could stop time, or by concentrating on the second hand, slow it down. Obviously one cannot, becauuse it is the movement of the hand from one point to another that we take to represent time. That is how space and time are related. But to go further, don’’t think in terms of material things - ultimately there are only patterns of energy. The clock is a mechanical pattern, the solar system is a gravitational pattern, and so on. Ultimately all “material” objects are just patterns of energy (as far as physicists can determine at this “time”). Then Smollin’s point of view makes sense, that causality is just patterns of energy interacting. Whether one billiard ball striking another, or running into a friend and talking about the football game - in which case the patterns are the stored memories in your brain interacting.

Not a measurement as it will change depending on the effects of entropy on different types of mass. Its just the process of mass moving toward entropy.

If nothing moved, there would be still time, place a clock in vacuum, time still ticks

@@ivanmenezes640 but if nothing moves,then clock also doesnt move and doesnt show passage of time... So,if nothing moves (including clock) how would you know the passing of time? Thats the question

Wrong while it's not possible for all things to stop moving.

You’re not very good at pretending to look intelligent or knowledgeable lol. Stop embarrassing yourself.

​@@jaredf6205 Thank you Jared for your opinion, which is a human right. But if you really are knowledgeable in science, particularly in astrophysics, then you should have understood the meaning of the interview of Dr. Smolin with Dr. Kuhn. In that context you should have understood my argument, which was directed to Dr. Kuhn, although it is a public discussion about scientific problems, and not about your profession in hospitality. So, about you accusing another fellow human about pretension of being intelligent and knowledgeable, and even you issue the threat with sweetness to stop self-embarrassment of discussing scientifically about scientific problems with scientific arguments, which you do not understand. So, I cannot accuse you for "lol" ignorance, because ignorance is not a fault, but it is simple that if I do not know something, others can know it better. So, in your case if you do not know something you have the right to express your opinion, which is not scientific. You do not know that the great Newton, meanwhile became famous for his laws of motion in his main work, "Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica", it is not publicized or it is spoken very little, that Newton was conducting experiments and he was a proponent of Alchemy, which was based on utopic delusions of discovering the Philosopher's Stone. In that context, the scientific contribution of Newton is well accepted in our planet Earth, but also it is understood the restrictions of his scientific steps in his thinking that our planet Earth is the "lucky one", as Leibniz was stating in his "Philosophical Essays", that God created our planet Earth as the best world. So, my arguments in scientific view of such restrictions in scientific knowledge of Newton and Leibniz, were in the European religions endorsed, stating that "we are the center of the Universe". The idea that we are the center of the Universe is not true, and it is proved by the existence of other extraterrestrial civilizations, which for I do not need to go in further discussions. If your opinion would have been associated with a question, I would have understood better your point of view, but with your accusations I do not know what kind of point of view you come from. Wish you a long and happy life.

@@civilizedvisualpresence7843 Doubling down on foolishness is pathetic. You should have taken that man's advice.

@@timhallas4275 I agree with the man's advice if they are a scientist, but not like that specific man that you speak about, who's profession is in hospitality and not in science. Have a long and happy life, and forget about your frequent foolishness in friendship of your circle. I play the piano for pleasure and not as my profession, so if you are jealous of my piano, you can discuss about music, but not about science.

@@civilizedvisualpresence7843 “…and it is proved by the existence of other extraterrestrial civilizations, which for I do not need to go in further discussions.” Seems legit.

Imagine Him High....

lol x infinity there :), cause wtf is he on about!!

There’s a fun channel on KZfaq called something like drunk history ... the host gets the guest close to tipsy before starting the show

Oh man… I’d love to talk to him after a couple of drinks 🍻 he’s so clear and obviously intelligent, but his viewpoint and mine are exactly opposite in terms of what time is ✨🌌✨

Actually, you will move ten meters.

Your on a rock being dragged along by a gas giant at roughly 200km a second your movement is relative

Ba ba bouey

Wow....that long.

or at least those who consider themselves physics communicators.

all he did was pump the brakes on the extra dimension/multiverse/hologram wow factor.

Here here

@@DrDeuteron which needed doing

Creation has to do with spirituality. Con(with) science.........conscience.

Good

Doesn't that violate special relativity? Depending on the speed at which your traveling the amount of time you experience to travel the same distance is different right? And as you approach a large mass or travel away from it, time either slows down or speeds up. This is why our GPS satellites have to account for quantum effects.

So at a quantum level the farther you are away the more events have to occur before you arrive. Could it be that time emerges from these events? I believe Carlo Rovelli wrote about this in Quantum Gravity.

Indeed. Even the scholar was giving a good amount of hand gesture. Very intellectual individual.

good luck briefing the animator :)

Good suggestion, but they had neither the time nor the space . . . .

@@robrobski exactly

Use brain

Hey! Movement across distance is more velocity and speed. Time is causality and entropy. These two only move in one direction: Cause to effect and unbalanced energy to balanced - more or else. One thing they discuss here is whether spacetime is just an emergent property of particles and events and thus not a "thing" in the same way particles are a "thing". So yeah... spacetime might just be a concept of understanding and not a "thing".

@@emersonkyle6039 - When I say time is a measurement of movement I mean that a clock measures an incremental number of movements (mechanically, atomically) or prior to that it was the movement of the sun with respect to the earth. It’s a measurement of something from point A to point B not a measurement of time itself. The same goes for space. Space is not a thing, it’s the absence of a thing unless you put something in it (space). I get what you’re saying and like you suggest, it might be conceptual. I just don’t subscribe to scientific conceptual understanding without proof. It’s like the value zero. Zero has no value and is literally nothing. Conceptually we can make a temperature zero but that’s only because we create a baseline and then create negative numbers. The convention of zero and negative numbers have value to us but that doesn’t make them any more real. Thanks for the response. I enjoyed thinking about it in my free time (haha).

​@@derekboyt3383 I enjoy thinking about these things too in my free time. Fun to ponder!

And mass (gravity) bends space time, this has been observed as time slowing. We can tell by measuring the speed of light being affected when measuring start light at solar eclipses. So for what he’s saying to be true, you’d have to assume speed of light isn’t constant and limit in universe as well. Or this is about as deep as my head can wrap around this listening with a beer in my hand. Interesting idea. Whoops didn’t mean to reply was just trynna post 🤭🤷‍♂️🤦

@@32kirby32 Speed of light is not constant everywhere in universe, it is affected by the environment that light pass through. It cannot go faster than is limit in the void, but it can go slower... :) (No beer in my hands, but my knowing of things is pretty much yours... if not lower) :P

You live an hour away as the crow fly’s, at what speed? There is no circumstance where you live X amount of time from location Y. It’s not possible.

One way is mathematically via the models of quantum mechanics (complex vector spaces) and general relativity (differential geometry).

An intuitive approach would be to think about walking. I walk from my bed to the door. These are two distinct points in space and time, i.e. where I am is a distance away from where I'll be, and when I am is a distance away from when I'll be. Now add in a magical observer a light year away, who watches me walk to the door by analyzing the light that bounced off me. It takes a year for the light to get to the observer, adding another distance in both space and time. Relative to the observer, that event (which caused the information on the light that informed the observer to exist) is happening right now (since they are seeing it right now). Relative to me, it happened a year ago, likely in a very different place from where I am then. What relativity says is that both people (or frames of reference) are correct; time and space are relative to the observer. Now what can we say about the relations of these two people? If I wanted to tell the observer something, causing a thought process in them, light would have to travel to them. The relative amount of time it would take IS the amount of space between us, and so the two are isomorphic (can be mapped onto one another 1 to 1). This is how space and time are combined into spacetime, and their relation is entirely constituted by causality, specifically its sequencing (how long it takes for information to travel). Hope that helps a little.

space and time are simply dimensions. If you want to meet me at a place (space) you need to know the time, conversely if I say meet at 12 noon, you say where (which location or space). one cannot exist without the other, hence the definition space-time. If the sun were to suddenly be switched off or cease to exist, it would take 8 minutes until we realise it. at which point it is too late. 8 minutes of unaware bliss... cause and effect, with space-time.

@Gourav Gupta In order for information to inform, it needs a time and place to inform. If this were not so, who is going to receive the information? Eliminate space first, and just propagate information through time. Is the entire universe now aware of this information for the rest of time? Where did it come from? Where does it apply? You dont get a lot of info without the spatial coordinate. Now eliminate time. Does my entire timeline now have the information? If that's so, could I use that info to change my future, creating paradoxes? When is this info applicable? Without the time coordinate, information will either be paradoxical or unusable.

I could be wrong, but I think he’s just simply saying that time preceded the Big Bang. Where as space did not. Extrapolating; could really lead towards other dimensions / Universes.

I agree both relativity and quantum mechanics seem fine with block universe. The more important thing is to explain how time can be experienced in a stationary 4 dimension universe. If it's possible to experience a single instant of time and have human feelings, then that should be enough to explain block universe. Because it means we are just experiencing moments of time that are infinitely thin in the time dimension. We aren't moving through them in any order it all happens within a static universe.

Space just is . And its three dimensional . On Earth as well . Time zones . To your last statement , because something will always exist . And this something recycles its self for infinity .

😅nice!

Lol!

goal mood

Hahaha

Being crushed by the weight of simplifying it for a less sophisticated mentality. He is in pain.

It's not a KZfaq channel. "Closer To Truth: Chats" is a KZfaq channel. These are old (in many cases decades old) clips from Kuhn's TV show.

@@b.g.5869 if old to one observer is new to a fresh observer, then old is new....

Not with those stupid ads!

@@downhillphilm.6682 My main point is simply that this is a clip from a 20-something year old interview from a television show, not a personal KZfaq video by Robert Kuhn. Also, it old is still old whether it's "new to you" or not, particularly when discussing physics, where 20 years changes a lot. A lot of these episodes are very dated.

@@b.g.5869 This is not a 20 year old interview, it's from 2013/2014. Anyway, our understanding of Space and Time has not been changed in the last 20 years.

Yes, a level 5

There can't be nothing. Nothing, by definition, doesn't exist. To exist one must possess attributes. To have attributes one needs identity. The Pauli exclusion principle is the physical manifestation of the concept of self identity. No two members of a group can possess all the same qualities as another member without actually BEING that other member. If A-B=zero then A=B.

How do you know there could be nothing? Only meaningful questions have answers. How do you know it's a meaningful question?

There have been multiple addressals to your question and many other fundamental concerns about existence in this channel itself. So many great physicists, mathematicians, philosophers worth listening to

@@KaliFissure That’s just semantics. Rephrase the question as “Why is there something, rather than the alternative?”

0 1 and -1 are all the same thing.

He’s describing a static universe where time is simply a perception as we move through space configurations, so at any given point there are potentially a variety of paths available to the next configuration. Causality requires a time dependent relationship where one event impacts the next but Barbour is getting at Hume’s observation that causation is simply an association of matters of fact which require an inference. In that way the events may be independent & just appear correlated by how we move through the configurations. It’s possible, but perhaps much less probable, to take a different path. Please interpret the words path, move, & take metaphorically.

The etymology of relativity, of relate, is "carry back". Things in space relate at lightspeed, not with simultaneity. Without chronicity, the "march of time", there is no space. " Space is measured by time, not time by space."(Urantia Book, p1439). Lightspeed is not mph, but the source of those miles. The universe of space is a time-related phenomenon. Check my video, " Ten to the 43rd Worlds per Second" on my channel.

At first I read that as Justin Bieber

@@winkywacky6173 - -Very good. Some beings use light to levitate & also to move in space without the gravity thing. They do it by controlling the light mathematically in theory, by half-ing the formula thus cancelling the time. It's complicated.

Is time physical ? If time is physical what are the physical properties of time ? What are they ? Since time has the ability to bend . And effect the decay rate nuclear isotopes , which are physical .

"Oh it's just Timey wimey stuff" -DrWho when trying to explain how it works to a companion hah,

@@adastra. you missed out the wibbley wobbley theory

@@dirtyrotter I deeply hope that scientists discover some new quantum field/particles, and call them timey and wimey, and they have characteristics wibbley and wobbley.

😂

Great idea! We could bottle the time particles and save it for those busy days!

Gravity is the Singularity. Spacetime is the Singularity. It is all tied together: wave-particle duality, the thermodynamic arrow of time, redshift, blueshift, dark energy, dark matter, and black holes, are actually all manifestations of relative infinity. Gravity can be described as the path of matter through spacetime relative to the speed of light in relation to the Singularity (i.e. the speed of light in a vacuum. The Singularity is infinitely dense and infinitely vast, encompassing all observable spacetime and beyond). All matter in an infinite universe warps spacetime and concurrently alters the path of all other things. Since on a fundamental level all matter and energy resides within the Singularity, all matter and energy is its own cause and effect as well as the cause and effect of everything else. E=MC^2. Matter and energy can't be created or destroyed because they are fundamentally infinite. Observational physics is relative. Infinite physics is fundamental. If you can't think on scales of infinity you will literally never understand. An apple in your hand warps spacetime as demonstrated by Einstein, but what scientists can't seem to wrap their brain around, is that any object that warps spacetime alters the path of every other object in an infinite universe, instantly. Everything is connected. You all want an explanation of how GR and quantum mechanics are compatible, you got it. The Singularity is the unifying factor. Wave particle duality is a reflection of the effect of observation on the particle level. Perpetual observation of the interactions of light with our environment persistently impacts the trajectory of all particles and sets the parameters of relativistic physics. Quantum entanglement is a reflection of the interconnected nature of reality. The reason one particle can persistently affect another across indefinite distances, is because of the fundamental nature of gravity. All cause exists relative to infinite effect. All effect exists relative to infinite cause. Observational reality is always infinitely far away from a "singular point" of infinitely high energy/information density (the relative past), and infinitely far away from a "singular point" of infinitely low energy/information density (the relative future). This is what establishes a frame of reference for relative observation. You can never reach either "point" through the passage of time relative to observation. No matter WHAT you do, each is infinitely far away. Light is essentially stretched from infinitely high energy to infinitely low energy. This is why light redshifts in accordance with the thermodynamic arrow of time. In other words, Dark Energy is the tension between the "point" of infinitely high energy density and the "point" of infinitely low energy density. If you were to approach a black hole, you would never reach the event horizon from your relative perspective. The event horizon would recede into the distance relative to your position and motion through spacetime. From the perspective of an Earth observer, you would freeze at the event horizon, which is the Earth observer's relative moment in time. From your perspective, you would proceed into the relative future. Nothing is truly improbable or probable, and every relative calculation is always infinitely inaccurate. Every proof ever written, every word ever spoken, is infinitely inaccurate due to the relative nature of math and language as tools for conceptualization, computation, and communication of information. We know the Universe is infinite because our language and mathematical symbols are arbitrary and relative to our experience. I can make a 2 character language such as binary code, a 37 character language, or a 998,000 character language... All the way on to infinity. This is because all language exists as a tool for describing relative infinity. I can use our standard, base ten mathematics... Or I can create base 100 mathematics, or base trillion mathematics, using completely unique symbols that I can make up, all the way to infinity. This is because all math exists to describe relative infinity. The Mandatory Asymmetry Principle: Before we get to the Mandatory Asymmetry Principle, let's start with the Infinite Precision Principle. Both can be explained quite simply, using the basic geometric analogy of a square. The Infinite Precision Principle dictates this: take a square. You measure it with a ruler, you get exactly one inch per side. Great. Moving on, right? Not so fast. You decide to amp it up a bit and measure that square to the nearest 10,000th of an inch. You measure again, and this time you get 1.0001 inches. Your initial measurement appeared accurate, but a higher degree of precision found this to be untrue. The Infinite Precision Principle states this: no matter how accurate you think your measurement of the dimensions of an object are, there is always infinite room to improve upon your measurement. No matter how many times or to what degree of precision you magnify your measurements, a higher degree of precision will eventually prove your initial measurement inaccurate. The Mandatory Asymmetry Principle, when understood as it proceeds from the initially described principle, is as follows: take two sides of the square from the previous example. Let's say each side measured in initially at exactly 1 inch, then 1.0001 inches with the higher precision measurement. You amp it up again- this time the nearest billionth of an inch. This time, the measurements are as follows: A) 1.000100002 inches, B)1.000100003 inches. So at a higher level of precision, you realize you never had a perfect square to begin with, at all. The Mandatory Asymmetry Principle states this: if any given measurement of the dimensions of an object relative to observation, appears to be symmetrical, a higher degree of precision will eventually prove it is not. Key insight: there is no such thing as a perfect square, or a perfect hexagon, a perfect pyramid or a perfect sphere. Implications: every single object existing in our Infinite Universe is unique, and nothing can be measured perfectly in relative terms, ever, by anyone. For every object in the universe to be unique, the universe must be infinite. You can't measure the speed of light any more than you can measure the sides of a square. Because the only thing that is real, is infinity. Imagine the entire observable Universe is a basket with 2 apples and 4 oranges. We live in an orange, and we can't see what lies beyond the basket. Now, imagine the entire Universe is an infinite number of baskets, each with 2 apples and 4 oranges. There are infinite baskets, infinite apples, and infinite oranges. Basic logic dictates there are half as many baskets as apples, and twice as many oranges as apples. The basket is like our observational bubble. Every phenomenon we observe happens inside the basket. The ratio of apples to oranges is like our physics. We can define the physics within our basket in relative terms and convince ourselves the description is accurate. Or, we can define the physics of the infinite Universe in terms of the frequency of apples and oranges relative to infinity.

That's my take on it all! I have literally been called delusional and an arrogant narcissist just for putting this idea out there, to your point. I think it makes perfect sense.

@@ericfarina9609 very good!

@@PedroFinGuitar I hope it makes some sense. I know I am not an expert. But I believe the Mandatory Asymmetry Principle is logically unassailable and that the implications are extraordinary. Language and math as tools for conceptualization, communication, and computation always leave infinite room for improvement no matter how you construct them. As language and math are the conceptual tools on which physics is based, the implications extend directly to our understanding of physics. A true understanding of the Singularity unites Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity with ease.

@@ericfarina9609 THE ULTIMATE, BALANCED, AND CLEAR MATHEMATICAL UNDERSTANDING OF PLANETARY ORBITS IN RELATION TO THE SUN, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Time DILATION ultimately proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, as C4 is a POINT that is ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL (ON BALANCE) as SPACE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Time DILATION clearly proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. E=mc2 IS F=ma. A planet AND a star thus constitute what is A POINT in the night sky. A given PLANET (including WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Time DILATION proves that E=mc2 IS F=ma. The rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. By Frank DiMeglio

And then few seconds of typing in comment section trying to be a smartass.

It is clear to those of us who are a little more enlightened.

Physicists know everything when they start, then they start to study the Universe, and it breaks them, every last one.

Wow. I looked up just a little bit ago and saw it at 8:26 and thought to myself, “boy, I sure am stupid for writing this and going to that website to make sure I write down the actual time I’d see it.”

Time dilation is a myth based on assumptions made while viewing some rather sophisticated yet flawed math. No experiment has shown that time passes more slowly while traveling faster or further away from a large source of gravity. All we have as a proof of time dilation is the the atomic clock. While the time difference that occurs in earth based clocks vs space station clocks appear to prove time dilation, that is a mistake. It could be a property of the cecium atom. It could be some other phenomenon yet to be explained. It is circular reasoning to use the math, thought experiments based on the math, and a single observable fact to confirm that which is known to be in error. Yes, Albert was brilliant, but his relativity theories are flawed. Like Newton before him, his theories are good enough for our purposes, but not totally accurate.

@@garyrolen8764 it’s funny how the flat earth you live on and the orb that I live on is the same planet.

@@rerawho so...., You've never heard of dark matter?

@@garyrolen8764 of course I have and I recognize a flat earther when I see their whacked opinions.

Reality is what already happened! Or did it!?!? 0=;,”????????

Modern science claims that all matter is made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy. BUT, do all things even actually exist, OR do ONLY quarks, electrons and interacting energy exist as all things???????? "I" exist and yet "I" do not exist, depending upon perspective. And how could "I" ever die if "I" never ever existed at all in the first place????????

@@charlesbrightman4237 Regarding black "holes" that he walks into around 4'30 , I suggest one reads through this article to see some of the problems with the contradictions in the rather postmodernistic or neo-esoteric version of speculation. milesmathis.com/black2.html It is kind of comical that one f ex claims that black holes are black because they do not emit anything ,and then say they emit x-rays (which is a form of photonic waves)..

@@KibyNykraft Without reading the article, I agree with you as far as stuff being emitted from a black hole. Either absolutely nothing gets emitted from a black hole, or an absolute something gets emitted from a black hole. Electromagnetism is something and not nothing. It's also like people claiming that outer space is empty. Nope. It is filled with electromagnetism in various electromagnetic energy frequencies at an absolute minimum. "The best way to deal with absolute truth reality is to deal with absolute truth reality. And if one is not dealing with absolute truth reality, then one is not dealing with absolute truth reality. Find and deal with absolute truth reality." (OSICA)

@@charlesbrightman4237 Personally I don't think it is "empty". Some of the things you mentioned is more or less suggested clarified in the article

Yes, but when Robert asked (who by the way is really getting better and better at asking the right follow-up questions) about the difference between the block universe and his( Lee's) concept I felt him getting a little uncomfortable when he had to admit he had to rip apart spacetime.

@@emmanuelpil His feelings about the facts do not diminish and are not the actual facts, and he admits those fact.

@@ZeroOskul Yes but the quantum theory of space-time in loop quantum gravity is really just a quantum theory of space. The spin network described by the theory cannot yet incorporate time. That's where the discomfort comes from.

If Sci-woo and waffle is your thing... How has he advanced engineering, I ask, as an engineer? More of a mathematical philosopher.. If anything, this type of mindset is the main cause of the fundamental physics rut... Too wishy-washy and abstract, not concrete enough... Here's the opposite approach from a good engineering standpoint, premised on do more with less.. Nature is conservative. The main conjecture is that either almost all or at least 50% of Positrons do not annihilate, but instead explain and simplify the Standard Model.. No way nature would waste the positron in my book... It's a self balancing system and the continuous attempt to re-balance permanent imbalances emerges the material universe we measure. -- Bottom-up Thought Experiment... Constraints: As few base forces and particles as possible to form a coherent, integrated 4D multi/universe model -- Subspace Field: Positive cells (fuzz ball, quanta, +1) held together by negative gas. Matter-energy field conserves momentum -- Matter-Energy: Matter is focused energy.. Energy is mobile matter.. Momentum conserves velocity.. Force changes velocity and/or direction -- Positron/Up Quark/Graviton (p+): Free, mobile out of place cell warps the field, radiating AC field cell vibration 'blip' spheres at C + 6 DC spin loops -- Electron/Down Quark (e-): Hole left behind warps the field, radiating AC field cell vibration 'blip' spheres of opposite phase at C + 6 DC spin loops -- Noton/Dark Matter (n+-): Exactly opposite phase close p+ and e- annihilate (ie. entangled pair created together (e_p) ), else a noton forms -- Nucleons: Proton: P=pep.. Neutron: N=P_e=pep_e.. Beta-: N-e>>P+e.. Beta+: P+e_p>>N+p.. Alpha: A=PNPN=PeP_PeP=(pep_e_pep)_(pep_e_pep) -- Heavier Fermions: Larger holes and chunks of subspace field rapidly disintegrate to p+s, e-s, n+-s and/or annihilate to regular = empty field -- Electrostatic Force: Recoiling blip spheres propagate. Opposite direction + and - blips form a vibrating AC bond, same sign = phase repel -- Instant-Off Long Force: AC (longitudinally blipping) subspace 'flux tube' as thin as 1 cell wide. Each cell and its -ve gas move in contrary motion -- Spin: e-s and p+s pull in the 12 surrounding cells, or -ve gas that pulls cells, that then bounce out, stabilising as a torus of 6 in/out (N/S) DC loops -- Strong Force: Spin loops merge and form flowing DC circuits between e-s and p+s -- Mass: Sum of the lengths of all strong force bonds + near electric field. Notons have compact strong force bonds, Protons' are long as 2 p+s repel -- Magnetism: Some spin-aligned atoms' p+s and e-s' strong bonds join in a shorter straight path. Energy conservation results in external force circuits -- Left Hand Rule: Magnetic circuit cells squeeze between field cells causing short range, lateral, perpendicular electrostatic blips -- Weak Force: Geometric structural charge balance instability. Possibly noton hits statistically tipping the balance -- Photon: Charged particles moving up and down (transmitter, atomic electron) form a radiating transverse wave blip pattern -- Double Slit: Laser light / particle centre's preceding, extended subspace distortion diffracts, interferes, forming wave guides observation destroys -- Dark Gravity: p+ traps 1 quantum of -ve gas so void cell size/gap grows (and matter's shrinks?) forming a macro -ve gas density gradient -- Bang Expansion: Loss of -ve gas to the multiverse?.. Bang ejector velocity petered out, magnified in time by outward momentum conservation -- Gravity Wave: Longitudinal wave where the entire field in a large region is effected in unison for a duration -- Big Ping: A dark crystal universe collisions' intense gravity wave forms e- & p+ pairs inwardly at C that annihilate or form notons, Protons, Neutrons -- Big Bang: Ping wave collides centrally? Field blast forms matter + a large hole (then Big/Dark Refill)? Fast -ve gas loss? Noton crystal exploded? -- Black Hole: Absorbs matter and energy. Noton crystal (with a core returning to empty field)? Large hole in the field traps anything entering? -- Frame Dragging: Entire sphere of subspace cells rotating around a point in unison -- Time: Cell to cell blips take a constant time. Gravity shrinks cells so light slows but locally measures C as circuits lengthen in space & time, adding mass -- This is not an aether theory, it's a matter-energy field, a quantised, relativisitic subspace medium. Forces and matter emerge from and are part of the field -- Makes more sense than making up bosons to carry force and mass, quarks that don't solve the anti-matter and dark matter problem, (anti) neutrinos, loads of fundamental fields, extra spatial and temporal dimensions etc, that ultimately don't tie relativity and quantum mechanics together properly or well... They should at least be honest and call their 'spatial dimensions' geometric/field dimensions or something.. Magic Space is not my cup of tea.

@@PrivateSi I don't think he's an engineer... but he HAS done at least one thing: Critical editing was invented around 400BC at the Great Library at Alexandria. This was around the time of Socrates and the invention of Socratic Argumentation. Critical editing lies in looking at a work and rewording it to make it better express the meaning it is intended to deliver. I reviewed, edited and revised this before posting. Critical editing can replace whole paragraphs of vagary with one sentence of solid description or remove a nonsense sentence and replace it with an informative paragraph... it can even omit whole chapters. Socratic Argumentation involves honest evaluation of one's own argument and a willingness to compare it to their opponent's argument and to be willing to accept parts of the opponent's argument and to reject parts of one's own if those parts show to better or worse describe the idea being argued over. In a normal argument, one generally makes a bold statement and defends it to the end even if it is shown to be inherently false. Two hundred years later, also at Alexandria, the scientific method was invented and this was done using the same essential rules of Critical Editing and Socratic Argumentation but based on claims about facts, and so leading to the invention of expermentation. 2,222 years later, give-or-take a week or a decade, Lee Smolin said: "What is good for scientists to do? "We have to be honest, we have to argue in good faith, we have to work from shared public evidence. "Because it is so easy to fool ourselves, we develop crafts. "Crafts of experiment, checking our experiments, checking our calculations over and over again to detect error. "And, indeed, the training of a scientist is primarily a training in the detection and elimination of errors. "It's not about ideas--lots of people have ideas and every once in a while there's a good idea--it's about showing that your ideas and other people's ideas are BAD ideas by finding errors. "And a scientist is somebody who has a degree that basically consists in demonstrating that they have control over... mastery over a craft for detecting errors."~LS Please do an image earch on your preferred search engine for: "For a civil engineer, there's no such thing as a little mistake." What Lee Smolin did for engineers is inspire and inform me to inform you and show you this picture. Your first mistake is assuming Lee Smolin was an engineer. Now go find ALL the mistakes in ALL of your drafts. That's what Lee Smolin did for engineers, and it was just for you.

there have been no non-predicted breakthroughs (Higgs, LIGO, or any quantum entanglement experiment confirming our ideas, as opposed to challenging them). Maybe LHCb or mu-g-2 can make a little GUT truth come to light?

@@DrDeuteron Personally, I'm with Sabine that we don't need to build yet another LHC....the money would be better used elsewhere. LHC has only discovered 1 particle since it's inception. Re: LIGO, also see Sabine's video on that. As for GUTs, my thought is that if we've spent the better part of a century trying to unifiy Quantum Mechanics with GR, well...we might think about other theories. And, I'm not convinced Everett's relative state formulation, Weinstein's Geometric Unity or Garret's E8 Quasicrystal are the answer, either. As for something that's really interesting in this area, check out the videos on The Primer Fields. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qc99ecl_zdSalJ8.html Cheers.

Excellent remark! Watching so many episodes for at least 5 years, I think Robert Kuhn purposely to not to be closer to truth. He tried his best to find arguments to counter each other. There are examples when a more definitive conclusion could emerge, he tried to suppress it.

@@cchang2771 Yeah, to me, it's starting to feel like an extended vanity project. This could go on as long as physicists have been trying to unify quantum mechanics with general relativity, and I'll wager, with as much success.

@@stephenscharf6293 I don't have any problem for the program itself. It is interesting and educational, I learned a lot from it. I just don't think he should call it Closer to Truth. I especially found his concluding statement at the end of every episode, that he is closer to truth, disingenuous..

I like it. Or combine some other letters, still in order, and you get "Spam." I already get plenty of that anyway. If only we could get rid of it faster, but it's just a matter of "Spime." Well, time and matter too, I guess. lol