10:22, the naked man in the background wandering in the water and nearly falling over as they are trying to hold a serious talk about quantum physics! 🤣🤣🤣🤣

His collar and tie is are entangled.

The most prominent physicists in the world have stated repeatedly that quantum physics simply isn't fully understood. It seems the more you learn the less you know.

Chiara provided an extremely comprehensible explanation of what differentiates general relativity from the quantum realm and why they are still being experienced as non-compatible.

Excellent... latest information on Quantum theory by all great admired scientists in one go is really a treat for we viewers....and is helpful in analysing & understanding the TRUTH... nicely presentated.. thanks 🙏

What's the naked guy doing in the water at 10:22?

I'm now completely entangled in this!

This video has left a couple of questions that will stay with me: did the man in the river ever take the plunge, and was he completely naked?

P.A.M. Dirac, who gave us an axiomatic quantum mechanics, wrote not that one should not ask certain questions but rather that the questions that one may meaningfully ask must be meaningful in the context of the physical view of the world. It is unreasonable to critique a physical view of the world because what is meaningful in that view is not what is meaningful in another view of the world, especially one that is narrower - as, for example, classical physics is narrower in its scope than quantum physics. What counts in science is the view that is consistent with all the data.

General Relativity: TDR = (Temp/5)^2 seconds (+1c^3 == +1ºC) Temperature is an aperture to BB weight/temperature, the larger the aperture the higher the temperature, so ... 12Planck == +1c^3 == +1ºC But, The ligo experiment demands the aperture stay the same but the underlying energy density doubles so ... Energy Density = Particle Count / (4/3*Pi*12Planck^3) A Ligo style interfered Higgs Reaction would be described as ... ED = 2*(Particle Count) / (4/3*Pi*12Planck^3) So we get +1ED == +1c^3 == +1ºC So aperture temperature and size are directly proportional to the "Photonium" particle count per cubic. Halve the ED and the photon rises towards our visible space (Entropic Expansion). Double the ED and the photon drops away from our visible space towards the BB hyper space (Entropic Collapse). Energy Density is directly proportional to the Skin compression if the particle is stable. M.B.Eringa Jul 2022 References: Garret; Stephen Hawking;

Who is the naked guy in the background at 10:25?

Awesome videos thanks...

5:17 - No, the particle is never actually IN two positions at the same time. That superposition state is a definite, well defined quantum state that does not correspond to a position eigenvector. Therefore it is in NO position. When you make a measurement of position, you force it into a position state. Since it's not already in one, it has to pick one, and that choice is random, though influenced by the "distance" the current state is from all of the position eigenstates. It's more likely to choose a "closer" one; less likely to choose a "more remote" one. But it is not IN a position until you make the measurement, and then it is in exactly ONE position. It is never, ever, EVER the case that a quantum system is in multiple eigenstates of an observable at any instant in time. This is mis-phrased way to often, and it promotes confusion and "mystical thinking" on the part of the public.

It is not really difficult to say why the standard (Copenhagen) Interpretation is wrong, as 't Hooft says here: it implies that we cannot know anything about a system in the tiny regime until we perform a measurement. In other words, it justifies ignorance of what is actually happening. Not only that, but it hides this justification of ignorance through a set of axioms that must not themselves be questioned or investigated, axioms like Born's Rule (interpreting the square of the Schrödinger equation as a probability distribution), instead of deriving the probability distribution as Stefan, Maxwell, and Boltzmann defined black-body temperature as a abundance versus speed (probability) distribution. Other axioms (unexplainable premises) of the Copenhagen Interpetation include the duality of particle and wave, the nondeteriminism of particle trajectories, ignoring any interaction with the environment surrounding the experiment (including measuring devices), and the apparent collapse of the wave function upon measurement/observation. It is strange that another interpretation of quantum mechanics (due to David Bohm and published in 1952) eliminates the need for mystery or ignorance in the physics of the very tiny regime. For example, by simply adding the intial positions of the particles to the state of an experiment, Bohmian Mechanics successfully provides deterministic trajectories for the particles. In hindsight, we can see that the wave function describes only part of the state of an experiment: the part determined by the geometry of the apparatus. Many of the mysteries that physicists accept in quantum mechanics are due to this omission of the initial positions of the particles. I say the success of this interpretation due to Bohm is strange because it has been so widely ignored. The reason is simple: Bohm had briefly been a member of the Communist Party, had been called up before Senator Joseph McCarthy, and had been exiled from Princeton University and the USA. As one-time friend Robert Oppenheimer pointed out, Bohm's physics were excellent, but he was a politically dangerous man. He urged physicists to have nothing to do with him, and they have listened all too well. Einstein famously wrote in letters that "God does not play dice with the universe" and that quantum mechanics was "incomplete". Einstein argued that the rules for even tiny particles must be consistent whether the particles were observed or not. He criticised the idea that the quantum realm couldn't be described definitively, saying "it is this view against which my instinct revolts." He was right, but his comments apply only to the Copenhagen Interpretation, forced on physicists in 1927 and held religiously ever since, not to the precise and successful equations and ideas of quantum mechanics. And John Bell, the famous Scottish physicist who showed that the "hidden variables" interpretation was incorrect, approved of Bohm's work as soon as it was published, pointing out that Bohm had repeated the work done a quarter of a century earlier by Louis de Broglie, but was able to add a kind of hidden variables, actually particle positions, to standard quantum theory, and to obtain a fully realistic and deterministic version of the theory.

Regarding constructor theory, here's my first General Realtivity "constructor rule" for the Velocity Higgs Mechanism ... Skin Theory - The Higgs velocity mechanism General Relativity: TDR = (Temp/5)^2 seconds (+1c^3=+1ºC) Lorentz Gamma: TDR = V/c Vc: TDR = ?(V-c)?/c == (Temp/5)^2 seconds ? ... So for the Muon G2 result we have ... +3x10^8m/s == +1c^3 == +1ºC Which implies Zero Degree Celsius space has a stationary in situ energy potential = the Speed of light (i.e. A distance to the the zero line of the BB space). 1c from our 3d space potential. 1c from the Velocity addition over c of the collision (**Into the BB weight space??). 1c from the depth into the BB weight space temperature aperture. This implies the exhibited temperature should be half input temperature because of BB space redshift. (**a c^3 distance??). M.B.Eringa Jul 2022 References: DrDon; Garret; Stephen Hawking;

Quantum physics is like International banking. 1. A transaction that leaves a record in New York can have a corresponding, inverse transaction and record in Shanghai. The one transaction or process creates spooky action at a distance. 2. A process can pass through several pathways, evading taxation. 3. A process can cascade causing a financial crash or explosion, destroying assets. 4. Phenomena that are not readily visualised in the normal world may arise, like negative interest. 5. Imaginary gains are possible, which can be represented on a two axis basis involving the square root of minus one. Against this theory: losses are not imaginary, however large. Then you have Nouvelle Vague theory, which I heard In A Bar: If a wave hits you hard enough, it feels like something bigger than a particle!

It's mindblowing what humanity has and can achieve, and then there are politicians, making us wade through frozen treacle to achieve it.

Philip is on the Ball! He is correct...no need for magic.

@10:05 ... I didn’t know Jon bon Jovi was doing physics ...

The laws explaining how a body works doesn't equal the laws governing the cells, even though the cells make up the body. Quantum mechanics/physics is a look at the micro why should it have to explain or match the macro? (I know the example of the body vs cell is not the best it might not even be accurate or entirely falls I just needed padding for my question)

Good show, shame that the audio is....... 😬Not good. I hope your theories are better 😅

I always find it difficult to boil these discussions down to useful information. For example, given today's technology we know this about quantum mechanics: It's not directly observable, it's difficult to run experiments on the quantum level and just what the heck does the quantum level look like as it relates to the space/time continuum. We do know that at the quantum level things move at the speed of light, therefore they don't experience time, thus they don't experience causality. Frankly, I'm not even sure these things are true, but I don't think anyone knows, for sure, whether or not they are true.

"Objective collapse theory" describes what happens to the naked swimmer's most precious body part when he gets in the water at 10:33

I would think that the constant and maximal nature of the speed of light and its consequences for space and time in Einstein's special relativity are as strange to most non-physicists as anything we read about in quantum mechanics.

Lol, gerards tie is really bizarre, a fine metaphor for quantum mechanics hehe

Thanks sir penrose

At around time 5:07 the Dr says that a particle can be in 2 places at the same time, what I think of it is that light is too slow with 300000/km/s to be the one that conects as in information if they belong to a group say one star must joint some how with other stars around its group and at the same time are entangled from

I checked my bank account on a quantum computer. It said I probably don't have £1m.

I agree with the third speaker. QM is not a theory, by definition, because it does not give an explanation - but it works. What is an explanation? A logical picture that a human brain recognises. It is therefore a metatheory. And when we try and bring the metatheory back down to earth - we have an interpretation. QM then escapes again into metatheory land, because we can't have interpretations in theory land. Hence incomplete.

Why is the name Martinus Veltman missing is this video?

14:10 Bell's theorem depends on giving free will to the experimenter. If our world is deterministic, or if the experiment is not statistically independent of the experiment, then Bell's Theorem does not apply.

Thank you for this nice video

4:10-4:28 I think, it's last updated information about quantum mechanics

it's impossible to hear what theyre saying!

@20:00 Sorry but gravity cannot predict the outcome of a gravitational system exactly neither. It's called the 3 body problem and we don't really have a solution for that (except making an infinite amount of calculation).

Nobel prize winner Gerard 't Hooft talks of ‘real’ particles. Until science also comes to the conclusion of our ancients that all objects exist only IN consciousness, which is the only reality, it will continue to be haunted by the ghost of _Maya_ and ask if the moon really exists. Schrodinger whose groundbreaking wave function concept and life outlook that were influenced by _Vadanta_ had this to say: _Vedanta teaches that consciousness is singular, all happenings are played out in one universal consciousness and there is no multiplicity of selves … The multiplicity is only apparent. This is the doctrine of the Upanishads. And not of the Upanishads only. The mystical experience of the union with God regularly leads to this view, unless strong prejudices stand in the West._

Great video and interviews... Also, shouldn't have used Quantum sound. It's good and bad at the same time, though more likely to be bad.

How Can One Seperate Observation From Reality?

​Modern Quantum Physics has shown that reality is based on probability: ​ A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80. The probability of just one (1) functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119,000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79,000,000,000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by un-directed random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that un-directed random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34,000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42,000,000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30,000,000,000,000 cells in the human body.) Of all the physical laws and constants, just the Cosmological Constant alone is tuned to a level of 1/10^120; not to mention the fine-tuning of the Mass-Energy distribution of early universe which is 1/10^10^123. Therefore, in the fine-tuning argument, it would be more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the multi-verse is not the correct answer. On the other hand, it has been scientifically proven numerous times that Consciousness does indeed collapse the wave function to cause information waves of probability/potentiality to become particle/matter with 1/1 probability. A rational and reasonable person could therefore conclude that the answer is consciousness. A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse would all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely irrational and unreasonable hypotheses are what some of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in because of a prior commitment to a strictly arbitrary, subjective, biased, narrow, limiting, materialistic ideology / worldview. Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic, subjective, biased, incomplete ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millennia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by observation of the universe and discoveries in Quantum Physics.)

4:00 - The whole "is the moon there" line of reasoning is inadequate in my view. You can't not look at the moon. You may not look with your eyes at any particular moment, but the moon's presence leaves traces on the environment that you could look at later, in principle. That's enough. The cases where you can't be sure whether something's really there or not are ones where there is no possible way, even in principle, to later confirm whether it was or not. That just makes the moon cliche totally inapplicable.

There’s more than one way to travel faster than light according to the Minkowski formalism. I suggest one way is associated with wavelike behaviour, and the other way with particle-like behaviour, but I won’t say which is which at this stage. I will go a lot further and suggest that if we don’t realise that there is more than one way to travel faster than light, then we are wasting our time trying to understand quantum mechanics. Perhaps I do indeed go too far too quickly with this last point, but we need new ideas.

Thks

But surely we interact with our environment and as a consequence any wave functions , probabilities etc collapse and become definite quantities?

"Quantum" is pure-math relative-timing identification, ie Theoretical Time Duration Timing, or Polar-Cartesian self-defining logarithmic condensation Conception in GD&P, "Artist's" projection-drawing terminology.

How can anything be knowable if we do not know what is perceiving the data aka consciousness?

The young lady at 15:00 was around at the time of T-Rex

14:30 min. I am also a Bohmian, the Copenhagen interpretation is an idealistic concept.

Geez. What would physicists talk about if it weren't for quantum absurdities? It seems plausible to say that quantum phenomena does not have a classical corollory to describe. The ingrained desire ultimately to understand nature solely with classical concepts born out of our macroscopic experiences seems to be the barrier to further development and understanding.

Ok I'm a composer jazz pianist who loves physics so forget me but isn't the problem with Quantum mechanics that it's trying (very successfully) to describe what are essentially higher dimensional phenomena from a our limited space time continuum. It's clearly not wrong just limited. Spooky necessarily.

he got a point tough

Keep in mind, it’s simply a theory. All scientific theories are provisional - never true. Always potentially superseded. So all these odd counter-intuitive consequences are likely artifacts of a model that is ultimately not true to reality.

Until science can consider that we live a virtual reality, it will not resolve general relativity and quantum mechanics. A virtual reality allows for both GR (macroscopic things) and QM (microscopic things) simultaneously. This is what a VR is. Information that is essentially non-local, entangled, and in superposition. Able to give the appearance of space, time, and matter from one perspective (GR) and be spaceless, timeless, and matterless from another perspective (QM). The VR model also explains all religious and spiritual experiences. Its not that difficult to understand once you come out of "Plato's Cave".😊

Our perception of reality is what is flawed, not any interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Skin theory is conflicted by design. A Higgs mechanism tries to describe boundary conditions of space itself. When we have our great God of Plus we can do the math without ever having to describe why the power potential exists in the first place. All those QM theories work with compressed space physics, which is General Relativity, there is no conflict only misunderstanding. B-)

Lee Smolin! If time is fundamental, space: locality and non-locality are both emergent. Einstein forgot he took space to be fundamental, and thought time was emergent.

Is Gerard 't Hooft in the audience of Chiara's presentation?

Those are the modern heroes.

I like the thoughts of Phillip Ball, especially his recognition relating to the problem of words founded in empiricism. However, this seems to be self tripping in that when he says... 'We know more, now'. Actually we don't 'know' more, if knowledge is justified true belief. We have reason to believe more, is more accurate, but we may be completely wrong. At best, our work clusters around experiments done today. The rest of our belief structure is based on assumptions about the earlier universe that happens to coincide with our theories. But now our theories are showing significant deviation from experiments - for example, much/most of the universe appears to be dark energy and we have no empirical way of exploring this.

10:40 some kind of nature/entanglement in the background here? WTF??

What does quantum physics explain? Quantum physics is a subject that explains dualistic behavior of quantum particles (photons/electrons)

It's a physics love-in. Don't take the brown acid.

There is no way around the fact that physics can only study the behaviors of nature & that all of those behavioral properties are filtered by our perception & that includes any & all "enhancements" via instrumentation. Just bc the outside world & our notions of it are corelated, which btw it would have to be for our sensory apparatus to be of any use whatsoever, doesn't make it(perceptions) the thing in itself(the outside world) that is in question. & Its all quite easy to forget. & even many "experts" indeed do. The map is NOT the territory yet we expect to extract(literally reconstitute) the territory from the map(an abstraction). We just ignore natures ONLY given(experience) & then say the meal is really only a menu. Clearly its mostly just our narratives that need an upgrade 1st & foremost.

The Noble Laureat is unable to explain what Quantum Physics is, yet calls it beautiful and perfect. If you notice the moment you catch him out with Quantum Physics not being quite right, he will throw in the human interpretation excuse.

Quanta of light gives an indeterministic picture because the are not actually local pieces of momentum traveling around space, any classical substitution for quantum mechanics must deal with this fact, the deterministic substitution must contain the shifts in momentum of coupled massive particles with a deterministic picture that does not try to localize the force carriers in terms of classical deterministic paths, such as the original conception of the photon, i would rather think of atoms and fermions as embeded in a sea of radiation that produces these shifts in momentum like a classical wave theory, and our measuring devices are consisting of atoms that must shift between harmonic energy levels for us to see a spesific packet of momentum, we cannot measure a photon, we can only measure its effect on a fermion, that means we cannot determine anything between shits between states, apart from statistically determining the lamb shit amd other features of the systems inregularities on avrage, to provide exact mechanics that predic these irregularities is dependent on a classical model to underly the first principles of quantum mechanics.

There are things assigned to “quanta” that should have been assigned to photons. It’s curious to see scientists prefer mysticism over mechanics.

4 30

When someone needs to talk critical about Quantum physics it should be Lee Smolin...

For 300 years academics have distorted mathematics and science so only they can understand it, but have lost the unity that pythagoras and co already have known for thousands of years...

The problem with quantum mechanics is that it arbitrarily attributes quantization to matter and energy (i.e. fields), rather than to measurements (interactions between fields), even though it's not required by the wave equations.

It’d be useful if IAI could produce interviewers with some basic understanding of the subject matter at hand. You sent a 9 year old pop sci Girl Scout to sit down with Gerard effing t’Hooft - im appalled. I’m a general contractor yet I have deep interest in all things physics therefore I have deep interest in learning and have learned all I can- I’d love to talk to this guy, are you kidding me? This happens all the time with pop sci garbage

I despair when physicists bang on about reality and NOT ONe has the balls to define it

When they say that Physics is beautiful what do they mean? They mean Chiara Marletto

Is Chiara the symbolic child of Marc Bolan ?

Gerard 't Hooft is true genius. Only such could manage to have his shirt collar that way. I don't know how he did it.

I think theres a neked guy int he background of all this quantum discussion 🙄

Particle physics is like building a brick building and then busting it apart with a super-collider, then classifying the different brick-pairings left over, as new particles. Quantum is figuring out what will happen when you send particles into the ether medium and trying to calculate what will happened to them, while trying to cover up the fact that the ether medium exists, and all particles are made from the ether medium or photons.

10:55 a lost naked man from the future dropped in the river

Is there a naked dude wading in the water behind Tim Maudlin?

There was a naked man in the back ground trying to pick a fight with an alligator, was that crocodile Dundee?

If you replace the word "particle" with the word "fact" then you will have a different view on quantum "mechanics". The so called "entanglement" in terms of "facts" is quite simple really. The same fact may manifest itself in a number of places and times being still the same single fact.

"We have a classical intuition" … which? The view we have of the physical world changes with time. Our forerunners were not stupid, they only had a different way to see the world, and then another classical intuition. The classical intuition doesn't exist, quantum mechanics in not counterintuitive, it is inconsistent.

Er, at 10:22 there's a naked dude coming out of the water for a minute behind Tim Maudlin. I'm not kidding. Gotta be one of the weirdest photobombs I've ever seen, especially given the subject matter.

Highly intelligent people talking total nonsense.

You will never describe reality if you assume quantum mechanics can be fixed.

If moon loosing the lights and gravity, earth will not be survive

The inability to understand QM is due to our limited consciousness. Our consciousness is so weak, easily disturbed manipulatable, and cannot think other than one thing at a time. What we are not conscious is fuzzy !! We can never be conscious of two things at the same time!!!

Gérard T Hooft might know how to interpret quantum physics but he doesn't know how to button up his collar. I've got my collar buttons sussed, it's just the quantum physics I'm not sure about. Everyone is gifted in different ways.

Long story which already more than 200 books published, and available

The problem with quantum mechanics is you can’t fracking see it.

Tim Maudlin wants to impose his metaphysics on physics on scientific results.

There just isn't enough creativity in the physics community to make any real progress. You really need to outsource to get some new ideas to explain the mechanisms of physics and do something useful (like invent a warp drive).

"Of cause the moon is there!" Incredulity is not an argument. Reality is proceedurally generated by our observations. Objective materialism died in 1927. All attempts to resuscitate it have failed.

Vibrational Frequency Averaging is my idea...particle frequency cancellations or amplifications determine Quantum position! Macroscopically we tend to experience only the average of the result.

The moon, cannot be ignored, because most lovers, has memory under its lights

Is there some quantum vortex sucking in the collars of quantum professors?

What I think of is that light is to slow at 300000km/s to be the one the form of comunication say from even the nerest star it would take so long to comunicate one to another and matter entangles from north to south and viceverse so to comunicate the time must doubles so we need light that multiplicate the SERIE PHI some how multiplicates and goes over and over way to fast, Ithink that Neuton was with a fraction of a second wrong by thinking it was instantaneous and Einstein is 13.7BLY mistaken with time, cause light must to be almost instantaneous that we dont read it yet but maybe we will and is this fasteness of light is why they see 1 atom in one part and at the same time they see it some where else, they see in one side whene it stops in one side and the second position is whene stops in the other side where the particle acts as marbles in a band that moves in one direction and then reverses it, thats what it does the enrgy that goes in and returns back out the system as the sun does every 22 years in black spots in the sun 11 years to the in and 11 years to the out doing a complete cicle of 22 earth years. In other earths in yellow belt the time that takes them is of 21 years that is the very half cause must to be others of 20 that is low and 22 that is high so 21 is like the ecuator and from there is UP and is DOWN

Chiara Marletto certainly made my brain unsharp. It was in a superposition in which it was simultaneously pondering double-slit experiments and going, "My God, what a babe."

What on earth is going on in the background??? Are those teepees?

I think he doesn’t understand non locality.

so how do these geniuses explain steel turning into dust? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rNKbja-d37XKhoU.htmlm56s they just do not understand it? Probably