Leonard Susskind: Richard Feynman and Intuitive Visualization vs Rigorous Mathematics

No video

Leonard Susskind: Richard Feynman and Intuitive Visualization vs Rigorous Mathematics

Рет қаралды 32,047

Күн бұрын

This is a clip from a conversation with Leonard Susskind from Sep 2019. New full episodes every Mon & Thu and 1-2 new clips or a new non-podcast video on all other days. You can watch the full conversation here: • Leonard Susskind: Quan...
(more links below)
Podcast full episodes playlist:
• Lex Fridman Podcast
Podcasts clips playlist:
• Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
Podcast website:
lexfridman.com/ai
Podcast on iTunes:
apple.co/2lwqZIr
Podcast on Spotify:
spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
Podcast RSS:
lexfridman.com...
Note: I select clips with insights from these much longer conversation with the hope of helping make these ideas more accessible and discoverable. Ultimately, this podcast is a small side hobby for me with the goal of sharing and discussing ideas. For now, I post a few clips every Tue & Fri. I did a poll and 92% of people either liked or loved the posting of daily clips, 2% were indifferent, and 6% hated it, some suggesting that I post them on a separate KZfaq channel. I hear the 6% and partially agree, so am torn about the whole thing. I tried creating a separate clips channel but the KZfaq algorithm makes it very difficult for that channel to grow unless the main channel is already very popular. So for a little while, I'll keep posting clips on the main channel. I ask for your patience and to see these clips as supporting the dissemination of knowledge contained in nuanced discussion. If you enjoy it, consider subscribing, sharing, and commenting.
Leonard Susskind is a professor of theoretical physics at Stanford University, and founding director of the Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics. He is widely regarded as one of the fathers of string theory and in general as one of the greatest physicists of our time both as a researcher and an educator.
Subscribe to this KZfaq channel or connect on:
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridman
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman

Пікірлер: 38

@lexfridman 4 жыл бұрын

This is a clip from a conversation with Leonard Susskind from Sep 2019. New full episodes every Mon & Thu and 1-2 new clips or a new non-podcast video on all other days. If you enjoy it, subscribe, comment, and share. You can watch the full conversation here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qZ1om9mHmLewhXk.html (more links below) Podcast full episodes playlist: kzfaq.info/sun/PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4 Podcasts clips playlist: kzfaq.info/sun/PLrAXtmErZgOeciFP3CBCIEElOJeitOr41 Podcast website: lexfridman.com/ai Podcast on iTunes: apple.co/2lwqZIr Podcast on Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8 Podcast RSS: lexfridman.com/category/ai/feed/

@willnzsurf 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for adding a lil bit extra to this conversation. It really helps fill in the gaps. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bL2RqNWpncuRYaM.html 💯

@thiagouriel2966 3 жыл бұрын

Instablaster...

@SilhSe 4 жыл бұрын

Leonard on Richards Personality, Thats the story I always 💖 to hear. Amazing! Thanks.

@nickpmusic 4 жыл бұрын

Great interview, clearly spoken and easy to understand.

@jrf9735 Ай бұрын

“Algebra is like sheet music, the important music is can you hear the music? Can you hear the music Robert?”

@lulumoon6942 2 жыл бұрын

Such content deserves all the views.

@iAmLyre 3 жыл бұрын

This guy is my hero

@brucewilson1958 2 жыл бұрын

This conversation reminds me of a story involving an early pioneer in Quantum Physics. Each morning he would have coffee on his wooden deck which was on the second floor of his home. Every morning, as he stepped from the house onto the deck he was hesitate for a short second. He knew that empty space inside an atom was nearly the entire reality. So, he should fall through the deck down to the ground, a floor below. Writing this I thought..Why did he trust the floor of the house? It has the same atomic reality? Either way, he never did fall through the deck. But, there is always tomorrow and a new possibility. Cheers.

@ZenCharlie 26 күн бұрын

The idea of dimensions higher than 3 terrified me when my brother first told me about it. I couldn't help but think that there were possibly 4th dimensional entities watching me and my brother having our conversation at night.

@flawns 4 жыл бұрын

I wonder if he ever get tired of being asked about Richard? or does it love reliving those moments?

@willnzsurf 2 жыл бұрын

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bL2RqNWpncuRYaM.html

@willnzsurf 2 жыл бұрын

He did a Ted Talk where he mentions Feynman.

@flawns 2 жыл бұрын

@@willnzsurf did you not ready my comment?

@willnzsurf 2 жыл бұрын

@@flawns yep, the video link I shared shows that he does not get tired of being asked about Richard & the stories he tells in that video shows in my opinion that he loves reliving those moments. Highly recommended.

@stefanxhunga1681 4 жыл бұрын

Leonard Susskind - Know One Interesting Discussion!

@user-ed6cm5he3m 5 ай бұрын

+1 for having Landau & Lifshitz Volume 2 on the bookshelf!

@emersonvolkova6715 3 жыл бұрын

Love the new intro music! Has a desolate “Last Of Us” vibe.

@miselfis 4 ай бұрын

I think the closest thing to something being truly 2 dimensional, is content displayed by a screen, like a computer screen. It is not light bouncing off some 3d object that can be approximated as a 2d object, but pixels sitting in a single plane emitting light. It is the only thing I can think of that doesn't have any depth at all.

@mikesahle1193 4 ай бұрын

Thank you 🙏 direct ☝️might be my answer ☝️great 👍🎥👋☮️

@tnana1234 7 ай бұрын

Thanks susskind for your kind words ... Will you consider writing qft notes with rigour, math and ontological notes?

@michaelwhite9907 3 жыл бұрын

I visualize there being only 1 dimension as a point (the size of a Planck length), which mean there's no ability to move (just stuck at that point because there are no other dimensions -- or degrees of freedom of movement -- to move into, or 'through', from that point); and there being 2 dimensions as being able to move from that point (that one dimension) either forward, backwards, left or right (but not up and down) through a plane of space with a thickness of a Planck length. Once there's a 3rd dimension (a degree of freedom of movement to move up and down), then movement can occur as we see and experience everyday; and ('kinetic') time occurs once there's movement (or at least once there's an ability for there to be movement) through a dimension(s) beyond only 1 dimension. And (it seems) if there were to be only one dimention, then there would only be 'potential' time (potential, but not actual ability, to move) at that point. Vibrating strings may be 'moving' (vibrating) within that point (that one dimension) with no ability to move within the 2nd or 3rd dimensions (i.e., left/right and up/down) outside the Planck legnth that the point is contained, but the strings of energy can vibrate in the higher dimensions turning 'inward' so to speak, into the other dimensions.

@Douae1111 Жыл бұрын

how do you imagine the point, because a one dimensional point has to be infinetly small to have one dimesion wich means that the point you imagined is surely bidimensional.

@InnocentFormalities 4 жыл бұрын

Sssiiiiiccccckkkkkk

@willnzsurf 2 жыл бұрын

🌴😎💯

@willnzsurf 2 жыл бұрын

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bL2RqNWpncuRYaM.html

@maxwellsequation4887 4 жыл бұрын

Can't like it It's on 269 likes Preserve it

@nikhilchouhan8734 Жыл бұрын

I love how sure leo was about 2-d creatures lol.

@anacrusa4431 4 жыл бұрын

first, an do'm not a bot

@Cynry Жыл бұрын

A bit disappointed by Susskind's answer on our ability to visualize abstract concepts, get me in, Lex, I'll teach ya :D

@rajeev_kumar 2 жыл бұрын

There are no such things as 4-D space or n-dimensional space, these are just abstract mathematical concepts and have no use in real world physics. Abstract mathematics cannot be used in real world physics.

@oxxjhoxxoo1761 Жыл бұрын

The set of { matrix 2x2 } is a 4 dimentional space.

@Cephlapodninja Жыл бұрын

Wow your dumb whatever are you using in your real life please explain Ideas and theories are not some diagrams on paper that have no merit in the real world And they will simply never hold true value to anyone who doesn't bother to think how to use them Instead of complaining about how they are useless.

@epicmarschmallow5049 Жыл бұрын

Abstract mathematics is used in real world physics. All of relativity is formulated in 4 dimensional space. Quantum mechanics is formulated in an infinite dimensional Hilbert space

@andrewlow7487 Жыл бұрын

@@oxxjhoxxoo1761 I would argue no not at all in any way! a 2x2 matrix still describes a 2D world, it simply describes a linear transformation between a 2D vector (two coords) into another 2D vector. You can't add up the column space and the row space to say that oh... it's 4D. Imagine the 2D matrix [0 -1] [1 0] which describes a 90 deg rotation counterclockwise about the origin. so multiply this with the i unit vector [1, 0]. You get [0, 1]. Multiply this with the j unit vector [0, 1]. You get [-1, 0]. So you can see that this 2x2 matrix is actually a description of a 2D space transformation. It's composed of two 2D vectors. That doesn't in any way make the matrix "4D"! A 4D vector would be [a, b, c, d]. A 2x2 matrix does not and cannot contain a 4D row or column vector so how can you possibly say it's 4D??

@andrewlow7487 Жыл бұрын

@@epicmarschmallow5049 Exactement! altho i would say relativity is formulated in 4D in that it's space-time, it's not like it's 4 _spatial_ dimensions.

@tnana1234 7 ай бұрын

Stop promoting a ponzi scheme !