Physics, Philosophy, Free Will and Relativism

[landloper1986]

einstein himself knew that his theory wasnt the ultimate theory. because it was only applicable on like 99,9% wich in physics mean that the theory is flawed. but useful enough to be incorperated and used,

the problem with physics is the language spoken. for instance newtons laws and the laws of electromagnetism and wavefunctions. are incompatible with eachother.

this is not because nature made these diffrent laws. it is how people understand them ,interpret them and translate them.

[landloper1986]

the conservation of matter and energy is only applicable in our dimension. if you start to look at time as a dimension(wich we cant because we are stuck in our dimension) and time superimposes our universe. everything happens at the same time. and when our universe is endlessly big. and there is an endless number of universes. where everything happens at the same time. then matter and energy are utterly relative.

it is only absolute because we ourselves are bound to our timeline.

[landloper1986]

i did see a video conference of you being really green

[lauragabriel]

How do you guys record this? It's very cool. Do you guys use Skype?

[Pikukat]

Hmm, sorry to lower the tone, but... Stefan is hot in a unique way

[NoWitnessesNoRegrets]

"Quantum physics cannot hurt you"

Tell that to 200.000 Japanese.

[landgabriel]

Meaning is subjective. Without the individual consenting to the meaning of words, there is no meaning. So the statement 'I turn into a reptile' is false or true, depending on whether or not the speaker or listener agrees to the definitions of the words.

[otakurocklee]

No effect on perceptual reality?

Microchips... quantum tunneling... Quantum physics has a daily perceptual impact on our lives.

[Jcolinsol]

I have to say it: philosophy is not science.

Science is detailed observation. Science measures a portion of what can be observed.

Philosophy is supposition. It is guesswork, based on reason, not on observation.

The model is not the subject, reason is not observation.

[Boxmanboxman]

Did anyone else laugh near 2:35 when Stef spoke.

[Boxmanboxman]

If anything I learned I don't want to be a physicist.

[ikemkrueger]

30:20 3D=2*2D. Two papers. Two "2D"-objects. One of them makes x*y, the other ony y*z. That for all points.

[ikemkrueger]

5:56 It's just about the metaphor/abstraction. Using System A (quantum physics) to describe System B (life).

The question is, how well it works and how accurate it is!

[ProjectBlaze420]

lol you guys are funny. good video. should talk about telescopic evolution and the double slit theory. peace

[jazzsaxdude]

The stars and black holes are largely unrelated to the Big Bang. Only a very massive star will collapse into a black hole when it can no longer sustain nuclear fusion. Even then, black holes will eventually evaporate away, leaking all of its energy out.

I think the theory you are alluding to is called the "Big Crunch". A scenario that is possible if gravity were causing the Universe's expansion to slow down, but its not. The expansion is accelerating.

[AllWalksofLife]

@jazzsaxdude

That would only happen if there were enough matter in the universe to reverse expansion. This is called the oscillating universe theory, and from what I understand, it's a model which has been discarded.

[Slavestorms]

How's this for a theory?

The Suns release energy. "Black hole" events absorb energy. When the event reaches a critical point it creates a "Big Bang"

Here we are 16 billion years after the last one. It could occur again tomorrow or not again for trillions of years.

We just don't know enough about these events because our time in history is so short & we can't bounce signals directly off of them. We observe the space around them

Magical universes don't seem plausible even though numbers work

[jazzsaxdude]

It isn't letting me post the links for some reason, but find the article on NASA's page titled "The Observer in Modern Physics"

And find a youtube video on "The Double Slit experiment"

[RLore18]

If the essense of the basketball is modified by the fact that an almighty human being is looking at it, what physical process has occurred?

Has the man altered the basketball by thinking about it? Do the light particles which bounce off the basketball not cause alteration unless they are absorbed into a human being's retina? How can that work when the light does not reflect from the retina back to the basketball, or if it does, in tandem with the other light source?

[jazzsaxdude]

So if you imagine a basketball.. alone in the far reaches of space, far enough away from any observer, the basketball has no physical qualities at all. Its quantum information takes the shape of a probability wave. And, though less probable than existing in our universe, it may exist in another for a given point in space and time. Particles pop into and out of our universe, disappearing for an instant into another universe. *Heisenberg principle. So, no new matter is necessary for new universes.

[jazzsaxdude]

The bit about multiple universes and the conservation of mass/energy:

Multiple worlds theory was invented in order to help explain the strange quantum phenomenon involved in quantum decoherence. *Google "double slit experiment" It is the conscious observer that actually collapses a wave function and causes it to decohere. I think there is a great deal of philosophy can can already be discussed just based on that fact.

[jazzsaxdude]

So because we observe the photon going through one slit or another, but can prove that it actually went through one, the other, both, and neither all at the same time, physicists needed "room" and "time" enough for the photon to take all possible paths. It turns out that the math requires 11 dimensions for this to happen.

[jazzsaxdude]

What is meant by another universe splitting from an existing one, is to say that another quantum result could have happened in any observable event. For instance, when you watched this video, you altered your quantum wave function (you could have just as easily passed by this video). Because of decoherence, it is necessary to create a universe where you did not watch the video. Everything else is exactly the same. The same goes for profound events as well.

[jazzsaxdude]

There are universes where the South won the Civil War. There are universes where anti-matter and matter exactly annihilate each other equally instead of a one in a billion chance of matter winning and matter doesn't exist at all.

So really, the "new" universes are just models for quantum possibilities. They are virtual spaces and times for all quantum information that hasn't been collapsed by an observer.

[modelmark]

there is a deflation/inflation debate in physics as well as in economics. I thought the latest development in physics was that the expansion of the universe is actually increasing. I think they actually brought back Einstein's cosmological constant to explain that (and changed its sign). Strangely the view in economics also tends that inflation is accelerating with all the bailouts going on.

[nathanjonessr]

nit-picking is for people with hair!

[Meanie83]

Ok, last response for now.

Why do you limit yourself to your reality. The fact that we don't know unicorns now, doesn't mean that they never existed. This is of course just an example. It could very well be a symbol, like most ancient mythological things are symbols. There is a lot of empirical facts to be found in paleoanthropology and religious texts once you understand that it is mostly symbolical.

I do agree with you that there is a lot of rubbish out there and that it is hard to filter it.

[Meanie83]

At around 22min you guys talk about different universes. I presume(from my layman pers.) that you talk about dimensions. On this subject it is also interesting to look at Harameins sollutions to the standard concept of dimensions. As a strong rationalist as yourself, I recommend you look in to this. He also applies the concepts to not only macro level, but micro level, and everything in between. Fact is, current science doesn't explain where a large chunk of energy is coming from.

[Meanie83]

"Quantum Physics is bunk"

According to Nassim Haramein who presented his unified field theory. This is extremely worthwile to check out if you're interested in physics and philosophy. Google his name, or search here.

[Doodsrsly]

I don't feel comfortable with the idea that certain scientific research is meaningless because it doesn't have obvious applications from the outset. Evolution, besides impacting the philosophical community, also has purely scientific applications that are removed from theological circles. I'm sure while a Genetics Engineer might contemplate the implications, it has nothing to do with his research in the lab. And I'm sure while chemists were discussing the shapes of molecules, they weren't thinki

[Doodsrsly]

ng of the applications of such esoteric things. I could be wrong, though.

[CollectivistEpicFail]

Nassim Haramein has resolved the Unified Field Theory without resorting to fictitious dimensions. Watch his DVD "Crossing The Event Horizon". If anyone will be in Philadelphia for Stefan's debate on July 5th, message me and I will provide you a copy of the video.

[diomedes39]

that "theory" is wrong. he just says a bunch of new age stuff and people listen

[CollectivistEpicFail]

Do you have proof that his theory is wrong? There is plenty of observable evidence in nature to back up his claims, as extraordinary as they may be.

[modelmark]

Thanks for the book tip. It is actually also available from Audible as an audio book, for the audio book fans.

[Kunjaku]

It would have been interesting if time/entropy direction were correlated with the philosophical implications of determinism, but the whole video is fairly convoluted and is all over the place.

Another recommended read for people who aren't averted by math may enjoy Roger Penrose's "Complete Guide to the Universe"

[Kunjaku]

Conservation of matter is resolved with a classical interpretation of inflation theory. A 'point' of infinite density already contains an infinite or finite amount of matter/energy. As this infinitely dense point of energy expands, it merely changes state ie, symmetry breaking of natural forces, matter's dominance over antimatter allowable through CPT, etc. Nothing is created (or destroyed) in the process.

[An0nym0usPunK0930]

What kind of impact would uncertainty principle have in newtonian-level of the universe?

And randomness is not free will. Randomness offers no room for freedom.

[clemonsx90]

The uncertainty principle only concerns sub-atomic/individual particle systems. At the large (classical physics) scale the uncertainty principle only contributes to the internal properties of matter (because matter is made of particles).

[wetalmorker]

Stef, you don't look at all like my anus, as it is lumpy, and hairy, and brown. ;)

I'm just an uneducated man, but being a machinist, I can grasp the idea that 3d entities can be described by 2d info.

Our customers send us paper drawings (2d), with lots of lines and descriptive notes and dimensional data, from which we create 3-dimensional components.

I lost interest in physics when I realized the similarity of atomic structure to our solar system's. That was all I needed to know.

[sumadartsan]

"I lost interest in physics when I realized the similarity of atomic structure to our solar system's. That was all I needed to know." Except that the model turned out to be inacurrate.

[wetalmorker]

Hey sumadartsan!

Pick an atom. Carbon, hydrogen, tungsten, hell I don't care. You can even pick your own solar system. Show me one that does not have a sun (nucleus), with neutrons, protons and electrons rotating about it, just as our planets and their various moons do.

That's all I need to see is one. You have a whole universe to pick from. Show me.

[Mattprole]

He's just saying the analogy turned out to be flawed since the atomic nuclei does not behave much all that much like a solar system.

[wetalmorker]

Matt, I like that you know you are a prole, BTW.

Should we expect that at vastly different levels of scale, that solar systems would behave like atoms? I don't know, I'm just wondering. I can't stop a train as quickly as I'd stop a Corvette, so I think the laws of inertia must have something to do with this behavioural anamoly.

Still, the structure is eerily similar.

A blade of grass flutters at a high frequency, in a breeze, but the oak tree gently sways. It all depends on scale.

[Doodsrsly]

Actually, electrons don't behave like planets at all; planets rotate around the sun in elliptical orbits and behave in a deterministic fashion. An electron has different orbitals around a nucleus. There are 1s, 2s, 3s, . . . 2p, 3p, 4p,... ect. These are different shells the electrons can take, depending on the atom they're connected to. Higher energy electrons are in the higher orbitals, i.e.. 3,4,5 and so forth. But, the crux of it is that electrons are random: they can't be found in strictly

[Doodsrsly]

one spot.. This is a reply to wetalmorker, if you haven't noticed.

[Doodsrsly]

Furthermore, trying to find WHERE an electron is, is futile. I am by no means a physics major, my area is Chemical Engineering. However, I'm vaguely aware that Heisenburgs uncertainty principle states that if you try to measure the position of an electron, it affects it's position entirely.. And therefore, turns your attempt on its head.

[wetalmorker]

Hey Doods,

Maybe I should clarify myself. In my original comment I stated that I am uneducated. Don't know the first thing about electrons. Come to think of it, I don't know anything about neutrons and protons, either.

I'm just saying that I recognized early on that I, personally, would never be able to wrap my mind around physics, so I lost interest.

I can, however understand why a blade of grass behaves differently than a mighty oak, even though they have the same physiology. K?

[robzrob]

Anybody get the book Will held up? I keep scanning the clip but can't find it.

[robzrob]

Ok - go it.

[gminton88]

The book WIll held up is called "The Fabric of the Cosmos" by Brian Greene. The other one he mentioned is called "The Elegant Universe," also by Brian Greene.

[robzrob]

Thanks, gm.

[PsyogiBottoms]

I will definitely have to endeavor to make the next Barb-a-Que lol

If my Fascist masters allow me to leave my pen that is. ;?P

[PsyogiBottoms]

I don't believe there is a 'God' hanging out making decisions - obviously. But this theory supports the fracture or contamination of perfection and explains why our own systems are corrupted or imperfect. (So the reasoning went with Plato)

Einstein believed that when the answer was found it would be both simple and elegant just as E=MC2. I believe this as well. Random chaos is the soup from which possibility leaps, just as life from our cosmos. Without it the system could not be dynamic.

[PsyogiBottoms]

This would support Plato's idea of perfect or ideal forms or solids. That life here on Earth that we see and experience may only be a distorted shadow or reflection of a more complex dimension or existence. Not elsewhere, but outside our perception. The laws that govern our world (experience, empirical evidence, et al) are by nature flawed or imperfect as there is a 'higher' realm i.e, Heaven? From which the truer state exists.

Just as a 2 dimensional being could not 'see' or experience a 3rd.

[PsyogiBottoms]

...becoming static itself. Like infinitely large solid object we travel through - you'd experience 'events' as you came upon them, but in the larger picture they are still or static.

The speed of expansion exceeds the speed of light - thus our perception is relative to the speed of light, but there maybe more beyond our perception. (Does that make sense?)

Just as a Tesseract is distorted shadow of a 4th dimensional obj. our existence may be only a distorted vision of a more complex system.

[willmoyer333]

you should be in on a future one!

[PsyogiBottoms]

I would really enjoy that. Stef and I are about the same age with very similar paths to the truth. I am more of a 'creative' by nature so I struggled through a degree in Art History, Religions, and Physics to come upon the same conclusions philosophically. (but it was much more difficult I think) lol

I've always thought 'outside the box' and questioned everything against empirical evidence - I don't seem to run into the same contradictions as others oddly. It all makes sense to me most the time.

[PsyogiBottoms]

OH I wish I could have been apart of this conversation - I have studied, and contemplated, Physics since I was a child. I think I could have added some clarity. Errr.

It doesn't appear as though you got anywhere in this discussion (maybe there was no where to go).

The Order to Disorder concept is based on the premise of how we can remember the past but not the future - though it may be static - as we move through space/time.

The Quantum issue is that light slows to a stop as you dial out...

[robzrob]

Always love the jokes, but would love to hear some more serious stuff like this - perhaps done Stef-style, ie going over it several times to make sure it's clear. (Not a criticisn - I really need the 'several times' sometimes!)

[Mattara]

I enjoyed this refutation of quantum quackery and mysticism and the distinction made between structural and property emergency.

Even strictly philosophically, QM could not provide free will. If your actions are not caused by who you are or reality itself, but in principle unpredictable and random, no personal responsibility could exist.

[RuddODragonFear]

This video seems very familiar and nice. I like it.

[OpineTime]

The Elegant Universe and The Fabric Of The Cosmos are both very interesting and easy to understand books.

PBS produced a Nova Special on The Elegant Universe, which I found to be a fun watch. It can be found at the PBS website, enjoy!

[PsyogiBottoms]

I'm glad someone gets to see this video.

Ever since Google took over YouTube it has gone to complete shit! WTF is wrong with this company?????

I've been sitting here all morning for hours waiting for this video (and any others) to download - literally hours!!!!! Very frustrating.

I have a 1.5 m/s connection - tested it twice, only site that is slower than molasses in a winter snow storm.

HEY Google, try re-investing some profits back into your company - this site sucks ass now.

[RuddODragonFear]

happens to me too when i'm in hq mode. switch to lq and you'll see that the video plays shittily but steadily.

[PsyogiBottoms]

This is in lq mode - it is just GoogleTube, taken too much profit and leaving their customers to suffer.

[TheNewRenaissance]

I would strongly recommend that both of these people study the science of emergent systems. You can't deduce the behavior of a sand dune from a single grain of sand. But the dune is still based on the properties of the grains of sand.

[stefbot]

Cool - perhaps you could join us on our next call! :)

[TheNewRenaissance]

Might be interesting. Have you ever considered the work of people like Dean Radin? I used to be rather dogmatic about the 'new mystism' just masquerading as science; and much of it really is. But the fact that Dr. Radin is an experimentalist with statistical evidence to show has opened my mind to the possibility of a physics of non-local conscious mind.

[hkweasel]

emergent intelligence != conscious intelligence

[TheNewRenaissance]

This is likely correct. But what do we really know about this thing we call 'consciousness'? As organic beings tied to a specific set of physical processes we have an extremely limited perspective on the subject of consciousness, a single example to study.

[joshv89]

I have no idea what these 2 are talking about but hey ill just rate this vid as 5 stars....

[Ghastendee]

I like this debate thing, but I felt that both could have been a little more prepared. Some questions were answered with "i´m not sure" or "i dont know" but still, great discussion!

[hkweasel]

Much enjoyed, except for the lack of metal bikini-clad beauties.

To be clear, this would require the introduction of a third party.

[willmoyer333]

I don't see why...

[ks100001]

I think the idea of 2D-info is like describing a ball by describing the shape of the surface. The surface is 2D, but it's around a 3D object.

Like boxes and wrapping.

That's the thing - a black hole is the box that we can never open.

I also think that the talk about parallel universes is useless fantasy.

It's a form of "woulda, coulda, shoulda."

I'd like it if the theoretical physicists stayed in this universe - which is interesting and full enough of mysteries without inventing more.

[TheNewRenaissance]

Not really, first review the classic 'double slit' experiment - though there are a number of interpretation options. Second is the question in cosmology about the missing mass in the universe. There are questions that could be used for falsification testing of the multiple worlds model. If something is non-falsifiable it then is in the la-la world of theology.

[JahLoveOnline]

thanks for the vid stef and will.