Is string theory still worth exploring? | Roger Penrose and Eric Weinstein battle Brian Greene

Is string theory still worth exploring? | Roger Penrose and Eric Weinstein battle Brian Greene The Institute of Art and Ideas 179K subscribers Subscribe 3.2K Share Download Clip Save 177K views 3 months ago #StringTheory Roger Penrose and Eric Weinstein go at loggerheads with Brian Greene over the relevance of string theory today. We previously saw Weinstein and Greene battle it out over the string theory community's toxic culture. Today we get to see physicist Roger Penrose join the the dissention, weighing in on whet … 831 Comments rongmaw lin Add a comment... @TheInstituteOfArtAndIdeas Pinned by The Institute of Art and Ideas @TheInstituteOfArtAndIdeas 3 months ago Do you agree wihth Penrose, Weinstein, or Greene? Let us know in the comments below! To watch the full debate, visit https://iai.tv/video/the-trouble-with-string-theory?utm_source=YouTube&utm_medium=pinned+comment 18 The Institute of Art and Ideas Reply 26 replies @systemai @systemai 2 months ago In the last decade, celebrated people not only living to their 90s and beyond but still active, seems to have increased massively. It's fantastic to see people like Roger Penrose being part of our living history. 148 Reply @realityobservationalist7290 @realityobservationalist7290 1 month ago Regardless of the entire discussion, it's truly remarkable to see a man like Penrose, at 92, still flexing his brain and engaging in these subjects. 87 Reply @deepaktripathi4417 @deepaktripathi4417 3 months ago I love these types of discussions and environment. I can't get enough of this type of discussion. 55 Reply 3 replies @SiimKoger @SiimKoger 3 months ago I love how Penrose smiles. It's as if he would be 100% happy if string theory ends up being right. It's a smile that says: "Show me what you're made of, new generation!" 157 Reply 11 replies @jesterlead @jesterlead 2 months ago Without honest scientific debate and disagreement, we'd not have progress. Great stuff from three of the best... 14 Reply @hawthornehillnaturepreserv5186 @hawthornehillnaturepreserv5186 1 month ago Wow, physics is one competitive field! I love seeing these leaders in science and physics. Debating different theories and ideas. It’s fascinating.❤😮 4 Reply 1 reply @alex79suited @alex79suited 3 months ago Professor Penrose is correct here the same energy is throughout the vacuum. But only when matter is introduced even at the quantum level. And it's tiny, it doesn't need to be large if it's consistent. Peace Professor ✌️. 30 Reply @JCC503 @JCC503 3 months ago I've always had a hard time keeping up with this stuff, but it always makes for incredibly fascinating conversation. I just hope we figure this out before I die. So get cracking guys and gals, I've only got another 40 years left or so. 28 Reply 6 replies @AmorFatiMementoMori @AmorFatiMementoMori 2 months ago This reminds me of when dark matter was first introduced & I first learned about it, the harmony of space but with us not knowing what the glue was holding it together. That’s how I view string theory with GR & how Eric described the baby with the giraffe head. 2 Reply @vieuxnzitadebundes3097 @vieuxnzitadebundes3097 3 months ago Nice discussion, strong and clear argument from Briane Greene and good point from Eric Weinstein regarding exploration of other avenues. I wish we also get Edward Witten into such debates. 15 Reply 3 replies @michaelhill6451 @michaelhill6451 2 months ago (edited) I personally think that String Theory is a cautionary tale of what happens when you mistake Math for Physics. 150 Reply 27 replies @gerardopc1 @gerardopc1 3 months ago Brian Greene is always a gentleman, let's respect that. He's such a fantastic science communicator as well, one of the best out there. 211 Reply 43 replies @neovxr @neovxr 3 months ago I love how the argument was made, that String Theory points to a suspicion, that the count of available dimensions is not a fundamental thing in the universe. 9 Reply @alexanderseton @alexanderseton 1 month ago (edited) String theory gives two options: either you change testable science for maths, and pretend it to be true. Or, you accept the results of this theory, including the extra dimensions, strings and other weird stuff. Which put you again in the first option. At the end, the whole thing is a matter of faith coated with sophisticated mathematics 11 Reply 9 replies @DarkSkay @DarkSkay 2 months ago If it is the case that physics is inexhaustible, like mathematics is inexhaustible (i.e. there will always be more to discover) then would it imply that pursuing many diverse approaches in parallel could be the most promising strategy to deepen understanding in an efficient way? Considering that every scientific theory - including those which did not, and will not stand the test of time - captures an interesting part of reality, demands different tools and methods, reveals a path that happened to be found, builds progress in creative thinking. 6 Reply 2 replies @erawanpencil @erawanpencil 3 months ago My prediction: give it a decade or two after Roger passes away and then his gravitational self-collapse theory will become the norm. Right now the theories are tied to egos and grants and we need that generation to retire... no one wants to admit that someone 'living' got the best theory. Roger's ideas seem the most parsimonious and closest to Occam's razor, and explain multiple mysteries at once. Even if it's not correct on the details, the general geometric framework solving the measurement problem is very appealing. 79 Reply 22 replies @2010sunshine @2010sunshine 2 months ago Fabulous discussion. Extraordinary brains! 2 Reply @RafaelRodrigues-rx9ry @RafaelRodrigues-rx9ry 2 months ago The ending where Sabrina is cited by name is pure gold. She really became a loud voice against ST. 32 Reply 8 replies @professorboltzmann5709 @professorboltzmann5709 2 months ago Listen to Roger Penrose; this man really knows his physics and extremely insightful. 2 Reply @nino88881 @nino88881 2 months ago Thats the beauty of science. Trying to prove and disprove theories. I admire scientists taking shots from different angles. Imagine if no one ever done that. Probably we would still think the earth is flat til we discovered space travel. Reply @gsyl655 @gsyl655 3 months ago When I see a debate like this I think of positively charged atoms in the same room repelling each other. 12 Reply 2 replies @mmusya793 @mmusya793 2 months ago LoL 🤣 I love it when passionate debate and discussion is on the important big questions 💯💯💯💯💯 1 Reply @Bjowolf2 @Bjowolf2 2 months ago They need to introduce 2D (complex) time plans - all along we have simply been assuming that time is a 1D variable. Reply 1 reply @cosmoscarl4332 @cosmoscarl4332 3 months ago That's the solution. Keep the discussion open. Let everyone with a reasonable hypothesis have their say. 2 Reply @Ryan_Perrin @Ryan_Perrin 3 months ago Eric threw some heavy jargon around, but he's absolutely on point constantly here. For instance, the conversation around GR coming out of String theory being reducible to the fundamental nature of differential geometry 20 Reply 10 replies @patternseekingape8873 @patternseekingape8873 3 months ago Over the two years of 16 and 17 I read The Elegant Universe (back at the millennium when it was hip and hot), it destroyed my reading ability and the book concludes with the clear principle that the substrate of String Theory can be continuously adapted to match observations and it makes predictions until it doesn't - in conclusion Penrose Rules! and Greene Drules (and wastes a lot of time and money and fucked my reading ability - there's no offence like personal offence) I should have been reading The Emperors New Mind or something 3 Reply 2 replies @c0dii837 @c0dii837 3 months ago Speaking in regards to adding extra dimensions and having infinite variables, would that not be considered combinatorial inflation? 2 Reply 1 reply @matthewlee8725 @matthewlee8725 2 months ago I understood next to nothing of what was discussed but I was still totally engrossed. 12 Reply 1 reply @MillzTheAthlete @MillzTheAthlete 3 months ago Eric really gotta sore spot for Sabine... I'm totally here for it. She's smart and hilarious. 38 Reply 12 replies @peterv7258 @peterv7258 1 month ago if space is curved around objects, then are there places far enough away from any objects where space is flat, or whatever not curved would be? if we could figure out a way to artificially flatten curved space around an object, could we create lift, and launch spaceships that way, etc. Is anybody working on the whole what is space really and how can it curve when it seems like it is just the absence of stuff. Reply @guillermotell2327 @guillermotell2327 3 months ago We don't need to request string theory to solve the quantum measurement problem. I would just like to see ANY detectable, string-specific prediction, or at least a mechanism that explains why we perceive just 4 extended dimensions. In this regard, nothing has been achieved by thousands of experts, working on it for four decades, despite all the original promises. 1 Reply @m.caeben2578 @m.caeben2578 3 months ago I loved Eric here. He made such connections to both of Brian and Roger’s views, and drove the subject forward. From beauty to a more in-depth discussions of the particulars, and then from angst of the “incomplete” theory framework to a series of discussion before the motivation to tackle string theory wanes at the feet of new technologies. 16 Reply 3 replies @JackLWalsh @JackLWalsh 2 months ago I completely respect both Roger and Brian, and I appreciate Rogers position on this subject, but purely from a mathematical perspective string theory is fundamentally important to keep exploring. You simply can’t ignore the incredible mathematical works of Witten for example. Now I don’t respect Eric at all, especially since he isn’t a practicing physicist, nor has he published any actual physics or mathematical work. His geometric unity hypothesis was massively flawed and rightly criticised for its lacking of mathematical rigour. He comes across as petty and jealous. 7 Reply @ralphhebgen7067 @ralphhebgen7067 1 month ago (edited) Eric’s comment at 10:17 is interesting: “… so that we do not lose the fundamental physics enterprise to Sabine Hossenfelder and her adherence.” What’s interesting to me (as a non-scientist and interested layman) is that ‘philosophical’ camps are forming in science just as much as anywhere else. Sabine has emerged as a strong voice against theories that seem hard to test against experiment, such as string theory or the multiverse. But as far as I can see (and it may well not be very far), she is actively building a reputation only as a self-proclaimed whistle blower against theories she labels ‘unscientific’. She does not seem to have proposed new alternative theories, or even argued why existing alternative theories need to be deemed favourable, and as such does not seem to be contributing constructively to the debate. This contrasts both Brian Greene, who has established himself in my world (that of the interested, but ultimately clueless layperson) as one of the finest science communicators in the field, and Roger Penrose, arguably one of the most original mathematical physicists of his generation. 8 Reply 10 replies @Motorheadone @Motorheadone 3 months ago (edited) Chain theory the new thing. Explore all possibilities.. The main problem is that Quantum mechanics defies human logic and therefore makes it difficult for any person to discount string theory or any other postulate . Excellent discussion! תודה רבה שלום 1 Reply 8 replies @joseluisrosales4104 @joseluisrosales4104 2 months ago (edited) The maths of GR were a result of quantizing the string. Those things are common in physicss. It happens for Dirac's equation and QFT as well. It does note mean the physics underneath is Correct! 1 Reply 2 replies @CasperAblij @CasperAblij 2 months ago eric was 🔥🔥 and Penrose is a living legend 6 Reply @isedairi @isedairi 3 months ago Give us the damn complete video!! 85 Reply 14 replies @wailinburnin @wailinburnin 2 months ago Trippy, the physics explainers are inadvertently controlling funding in the hat this sounds like. I’m for whatever Roger Penrose says but at the same time I find theater fundamental, so I’d say, anything that opens new conceptualizations (the imagination argument of Einstein) should be pursued. If you ask me, we should be spending more time trying to destroy the limiting conceptualization of the expansion of the Universe, it’s too convenient and ultimately may prove to be too limiting, we should be looking more at all the different frames of reference that create realities that look like an expanding Universe. One consciousness experiment as an example, if you look up into the night sky and tell yourself that you are looking at the space time continuum rather than at space as a concept, are you or aren’t you? We all know what’s happening at the receptor (your eyes) is the same, but what are you seeing, what are you actually looking at? Reply @bittertruth5770 @bittertruth5770 3 months ago Without really understanding the true nature of physical reality being revealed by quantum mechanics, it's not possible to blindly quantize gravity a la other field theories. 3 Reply @marshallodom1388 @marshallodom1388 2 months ago As long as you can still get funding I'm sure it's a completely worthwhile endeavor. 5 Reply 1 reply @KhanyisaSowaziLtd @KhanyisaSowaziLtd 1 month ago I find string theory quite interesting and would love to do a PhD on it 6 Reply @chem7553 @chem7553 3 months ago Both these groups have good points. I think string theory has value, even if it's untestable and makes no new predictions. 7 Reply 6 replies @kalijasin @kalijasin 2 months ago Penrose rebuke of String theorists was brutal. 11 Reply 4 replies @ZMacZ @ZMacZ 2 weeks ago Nah. Just use regular gravity at a distance equations for an entire galaxy, with each galaxy being the sum total set of all stars within. You'll see when you start to measure gravity from one star to another at distances over 1 ly. Only the nearest stars affect any star's course and trajectory by any significant measure. But since that works for all stars in a galaxy, they also tend to move as a system being whole as the sum of its parts, but not as the motion set for all stars being subject to each and every part of the set. Reply @tappetmanifolds7024 @tappetmanifolds7024 1 month ago Time wasted is never time wasted. If there exists an infinite number of possible string configurations then what are the philosophical implications for their existence and are they macroscopic manifestations of something even smaller again? Reply @abicol6010 @abicol6010 3 months ago "the beauty of a child with the head of a giraffe" XD that is such a funny description of string theory. 10 Reply @colinmunro2632 @colinmunro2632 1 month ago Mathematical concepts are very powerful in physics, even if the concepts appear alien to the real world we experience. Extra dimensions or even imaginary numbers are part of the power of mathematics to extend theoritical physics. But to ascribe these to physical reality is another matter. You can never prove the mathematics and the physical reality are the same, that the imaginary numbers for example really exist in the physical reality. In essence mathematics and reality are foundamentally different. Gold cannot be created purely with mathematics. It might be more useful to think of the mathematics as a representation of the physical reality, a media as it were. A crude example would be the pixels on the screen depicting an image of an apple. The image and the apple are very different, but there are correspondences. Asides from this, mathematics has its limitations: it cannot be both complete and consistent. Which might suggest there are events that we cannot explain. This particularly happens in a self referential system. And a complete description of the universe would have to be self referential. Exactly what is reality is another question. But to conflate one aspect of reality, mathematics, with another aspect if reality, the physical realm, simply because there is some correspondence can be very misleading. Reply @yayo0 @yayo0 3 months ago I think at this point you should just release the full video free of charge. 21 Reply 1 reply @SeverSava @SeverSava 3 months ago Can you please indicate where can I find the full video? Thank you! 🙏 7 Reply 3 replies @JohnZoetebier @JohnZoetebier 2 months ago Brian Green says that General Relativity has been derived from String Theory. Wonder if without General Relativity scientists would have been able to make a connection between String Theory and what General Theory is about, for example warped space and time? Reply @Chris-op7yt @Chris-op7yt 2 months ago fundamental problem of all string theories (that i know) is their additions of dimensions. it's a neat mathematical trick to make all problem values go away via another set of vertices. as far as dimensions go, and all that foolery: we only have a single dimension of space. scientists took the 3d cartesian model as reality, when it's just a model. space is not divided into xyz. Reply 1 reply @italogiardina8183 @italogiardina8183 3 months ago There seems to be an ideological component to theoretical physics that mirrors ontological liberalism and forms of conservatism with debates being around political community and the utilitarian nature of modernisation through things such as the LHC. 4 Reply 1 reply @BeerdyBruceLeeCentral @BeerdyBruceLeeCentral 3 months ago It seems to me that we need another Einstein to lead a breakthrough in string theory or quantum mechanics in general. 2 Reply 1 reply @zzzzxxxx341 @zzzzxxxx341 2 months ago What they were doing is great in the sense that at least they find time to congregate and do some small talk purely to entertain themselves. For it is written that no human mind is capable to grasp not even a single principle of creation, the nature of the universe wasn't meant to understand by any negligible matter in it FOREVER!!! Let's go! Reply @tjejojyj @tjejojyj 3 months ago “… so we don’t lose the whole physics enterprise to Sabine Hossenfelder and her adherents.” That’s a backhanded compliment to SH that makes her sound like the leader of an insurrection! 31 Reply 2 replies @meinepostma8978 @meinepostma8978 3 months ago (edited) Roger Penrose is probably the greatest mind alive. And he has a M.C. Escher connection 32 Reply 4 replies @symmetrie_bruch @symmetrie_bruch 1 month ago thanks iai just where educational material belongs, behind a paywall Reply @michaelking9964 @michaelking9964 13 days ago I don't mind some research going into string theory, but it seems like way too much money has gone into it compared to physics that, it seems to me, are way more important. Reply @mitsaoriginal8630 @mitsaoriginal8630 3 months ago LETS PROTEST FOR A LONGER VIDEO!!! 35 Reply 2 replies @msjithy @msjithy 1 month ago (edited) It is a theory. It may not be proven now but maybe in the future. OR not at all. Who knows? But to me, with all the discussions thrown about this topic, one should not assume they are right or wrong. Also, even if Eric shows a strong command while he speaks, i will still listen and interestingly seek answers from Brian than him. Sometimes, people tend to believe more to whom who sounds powerful but most of the time, they just want to be known. 1 Reply 1 reply @parjanyashukla176 @parjanyashukla176 3 months ago String theory is definitely worth the time and effort, but more funds are needed to build a better detector than CERN. Plus we need to attract more students into more rigorous research programs which should have longer tenures to ensure commitment. Testing out all possibilities is the only way String theory can be verified. 2 Reply @davidwilkie9551 @davidwilkie9551 2 months ago (edited) Depends on who is leading? Professor Susskind's a Founder, and ER=EPR leads directly to 0-1-2-ness perspectives on shaping shell-horizons of probabilistic prime-cofactor frequency - density-intensity vector-values of log-antilog Conformal Field Condensation Correspondences that String Theoretical reasoning initiatives brought out in conjunction/CCC with Dr Disney's reference-framing in Logarithmic Time Superspin Modulation. Observation by the appropriate Mathematical approaches should restore respectability.., when the assumptions concocted for BBT are dispatched. Cut the strings of discrete unity of Spacetime distance, it's not the Singularity-point positioning misattribution.., it's blatantly obvious why the Observable "All is Vibration" here-now-forever basis of String Theoretical Calculus, of e-Pi-i 1-0-infinity flash-fractal recognition, of QM-TIME Eternity-now sync-duration Actuality, is absolutely incompatible and incomplete.., except it isn't, because of this inside-outside holographic presence property, and no practical description simply applies except WYSIWYG. Reply @Burevestnik9M730 @Burevestnik9M730 3 months ago I think it is only natural to assume that GPT-10 will be able to combine everything out there and produce a string of characters explaining everything. It is highly likely we are here because of wrong paths we took long time ago. Back to the fundamentals 4 Reply @wubbalubbadubdub3352 @wubbalubbadubdub3352 3 months ago Gotta love all the internet math/physics experts in the comments section who most likely spend all day on TikTok and Twitter and can't solve a basic Calculus 1 problem, telling us why string theory "is wrong". 26 Reply 2 replies @gridus5380 @gridus5380 3 months ago Lets be honest, string theory is the cool club - and like Eric says, a club where nothing is produced, but its cool to hang out in. We need another theory. Doesn't mean einstein is right either, too many conveniences in his equations 22 Reply 2 replies @muzduz @muzduz 3 months ago Given maths couldn't predict any of the functions of state for the elements or molecules it was perhaps wishful thinking to consider that String Theory had any practical purpose in the real world. However, that's in the real world. It is a powerful and progressive algorithm of averages with interdimensional variables that tries to mathematically describe the beginning of a natural system from which our physical universe evolved. Perhaps it could be used as an initiating GUT for virtual reality applications of environment building by probability functions. Dunno, just fluffing around with dots. 5 Reply 6 replies @MikeyLopez @MikeyLopez 2 months ago These videos should be free for educational purposes. Reply @terry63lee @terry63lee 3 months ago energy is the thread which weaves the universe together. string theory is little more than a variation on wave theory which in turn has been conceptualized as particles in motion. comets have tails and so do sperm cells. now what if particles have tails or leave trails?? what if gravitational fluctuations do create waves?? and what if all matter in this universe is connected by energy?? 1 Reply @ryu5357 @ryu5357 1 month ago I have watched some debates where Sir Roger Penrose strongly goes against of quantum mechanics. He says the basement of quantum mechanics superposition is incorrect, 26 dimensions don't exist. I also do not like this much because its super weird. Now according to Sir Penrose's point of view, are there any parts of quantum mechanics actually true and are needed to gain knowledge? Reply @user-kj8lq7mo2s @user-kj8lq7mo2s 10 days ago As SMOLIN said string theory is conjecture upon conjecture and I agree with him. DIMENSION PROBLEM SCENARIO/LANDSCAPE PROBLEM and above all it's biggest problem. THE BACKGROUND PROBLEM. Reply @kourosh234 @kourosh234 1 month ago QM is based on heat function, not wave function Reply @reginaerekson9139 @reginaerekson9139 3 months ago 0:19 I love Rog(er) and Eric 😂 if you think string theory is right, keep figuring it out. If you just don’t have any other ideas and you’re not into whatever it is everyone else is doing- go travel, have some fun enjoy being smarter by hanging out with random regular people… like an intellectual rock star 😂 6 Reply @sash4all @sash4all 1 month ago (edited) I think the idea behind string theory was a different, but it just got out of control, like Schrodinger's cat playing with a giant ball of a wooly string and leaving a huge knotted, entangled mess behind 😅 Reply @kevinm.5904 @kevinm.5904 1 month ago String theory proves the existence of hip-hop level beef within the physics community. 3 Reply @phumgwatenagala6606 @phumgwatenagala6606 1 month ago Eric’s gaze is in a quantum superposition 4 Reply @Centurianarv @Centurianarv 3 months ago When talking of Andrew wiles trying to straighten out his first stab at Fermat, Peter Sarnak talked of fitting a carpet that was too big for the room, so get three corners down and one will pop up when the forth corner is placed. Aren't both String theory and the Standard Model just carpets that are nearly right but a bit too big? Reply 5 replies @waynelast1685 @waynelast1685 1 month ago 4:22 powerful statement Reply @larryfulkerson4505 @larryfulkerson4505 3 months ago string theory died for me when I discovered that scientists say that all the "extra dimensions" are "coiled up" and therefore "invisible" to the rest of our universe. 12 Reply 5 replies @advaitrahasya @advaitrahasya 1 month ago Isn't it time to admit that, although Chronocentric Atomism has seeded a few useful mathematical models … it is just as wrong as the Geocentricism which seeded the likewise awesomely accurate epicyclic mathematical models. There really is no excuse for assuming that tweakable mathematical models are descriptive of reality. And, if one can escape/invert the current (philosophically untenable) paradigm, understanding why QM, GR, ST, QED and their offspring work … becomes quite trivial. Reply @jantestowy123 @jantestowy123 2 months ago building a theorem to bring two approximations together to play nice is fun, but has nothing to do with the way things are. Reply @selocan469 @selocan469 2 months ago He said string theory do represent and explains the two gravity models all together which would be fantastic thing and paradigma shift but does it. Do we know that? Where are the applications? At best, we are trying and thriving to encapsulate bot gravity models with string theory. The claim, we already did it is much to unrealistic to me, not before showing the applications of it. Reply @ajmarr5671 @ajmarr5671 2 months ago brilliant and fun, with brilliant minds!!!!!! Reply @joseluisalcantarasanchez269 @joseluisalcantarasanchez269 3 months ago Maybe QT and GR are not meant to be unified. The principle for that intent is that there must be a ONE theory to describe reality. But what if the main LAW that governs reality is that the laws are scale dependant? 3 Reply 4 replies @tubevortex @tubevortex 1 month ago Penrose is the real genius here in this panel. Why in heavens name did they invite Weinstein? He's a good speaker and scientific entertainer (his own words btw), but it's like brining your cheeky little nephew to an adult conversation. Reply @michaelknight2897 @michaelknight2897 1 month ago (edited) Can someone help me what has the pursuit of string theory produce? I am honestly curious. Reply @nathanielhellerstein5871 @nathanielhellerstein5871 2 months ago Around the turn of the 20th Century, the hot theory was knotted fields. Then Einstein proved that atoms exist, and all that knot-math went away. Reply @afonsolopes9677 @afonsolopes9677 4 weeks ago 😮 can anyone link the complete talk? Reply @lylesfredidog1507 @lylesfredidog1507 1 month ago The timeline of the way the world works is very important. (Has the universe evolved from small to big, if so, we need to resolve the small stuff first, i.e. Quantum Mechanics, in order to solve the Big. Reply @ferrantepallas @ferrantepallas 2 months ago I would personally enjoy getting funded for work on a theory that doesn't have to rely on the irksome problem of experimental verification ... 1 Reply @Ludak021 @Ludak021 1 month ago So, the debate is behind a pay wall. How great for science and keeping the public informed. No wonder why people loose interest. Reply @jaimesherrill7044 @jaimesherrill7044 3 months ago Sabine is just sensible. I guess that offends some people. String theory would catch less hell if they had presented it more like constructor theory. They should have told people that if their theory lined up with string theory then they were on the right track, instead of telling people that they were inadvertently doing string theory. That would have went over better. 13 Reply 1 reply @arthurtkachenko4501 @arthurtkachenko4501 1 month ago Great video Reply @bryanfrancis3356 @bryanfrancis3356 3 months ago If Ed Witten had walked in on that debate....things would've taken off and Eric would've suffered heart failure ! 😎 6 Reply @2010sunshine @2010sunshine 2 months ago (edited) The questions which come to my mind are, "What's a dimension? What is it's definition?". It's related to measurement, in how many directions we can measure. So, is it 3 or 4 or 10 or infinity? The answer which apeals to my mind is 'infinity'. Reply @petermoore900 @petermoore900 2 months ago What the hell is Eric's problem with Sabine Hossenfelder anyway? In another panel they were both on they seemed to agree on almost everything 1 Reply @briangc6104 @briangc6104 1 month ago Is it possible the String Theorists are terrified of a conclusion that negates their entire career. I have seen this possibility in theology. A lifetime of building a system of thought on a wrong premise would be hard to admit to... (sickening even), pride does this to a man. Reply 1 reply @nathanielhellerstein5871 @nathanielhellerstein5871 2 months ago There are 10 digits and 26 letters. That's how they got those dimensions, without knowing it. 2 Reply @ethanwilliam9944 @ethanwilliam9944 1 month ago Eric summed it up perfectly. 3 Reply @nathanielhellerstein5871 @nathanielhellerstein5871 2 months ago Cosmology and particle physics are baroque sciences, epicycle-laden, and badly in need of a new paradigm. Until such a revolution, I advise all new physics graduates to focus on quantum entanglement, quantum metrology, and quantum computation. Those do not require a particle accelerator the size of the Milky Way Galaxy. 2 Reply @patrickguy8797 @patrickguy8797 3 months ago Bizarre de ne pas utiliser l'argument de l'inexistence de la supersymetrie, pilier de la théorie des cordes. Reply 4 replies @aceventura5398 @aceventura5398 2 months ago The greatest descovery will come from one who can link our dreams and what is accepted as reality. Both are made of the same .....THINGS 😐 Reply @146maxpain @146maxpain 3 months ago String theory is on life support. 5 Reply 1 reply @neovxr @neovxr 3 months ago We enter a house of mirrors. We experiment with light and virtual positions, learn a lot about ourselves, our eyes, our brains, and do everything mathematically, and rigorously. Full with new tricks and ways of perception, we find the way out from there, and return to physical physics. Reply @heavyspark813 @heavyspark813 1 month ago can you imagine what would happen if PEMDAS didnt exist and we just solved the equations outright Reply @dentonholmgren4886 @dentonholmgren4886 1 month ago tried to sign up to the website to watch the full thing and the submit button was not clickable when i tried to set up the account. Reply @SpotterVideo @SpotterVideo 3 weeks ago Conservation of Spatial Curvature (both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957–8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks. (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. We know there is an unequal distribution of electrical charge within each atom because the positive charge is concentrated within the nucleus, even though the overall electrical charge of the atom is balanced by equal positive and negative charge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. The model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles. . Reply 1 reply @periurban @periurban 3 months ago Greene puts the cart before the horse! He says if Einstein hadn't described general relativity then string theory would have revealed it, but that's because string theory arose from an attempt to reconcile general relativity with the quantum world! Since he and others like him worked backwards from gravity and the quantum it would be extraordinary if those two foundations were NOT discovered. BUT it doesn't mean it's real or useful. I can never understand anything Weinstein says, but almost everything Roger Penrose says makes sense, and I love his books. Doesn't mean anyone is right or wrong, but if there is a battle I'm with Roger. 16 Reply 5 replies @JuliusSkye @JuliusSkye 2 months ago Weinstein is basically right on the fact that string theorists went astray (they caste their net too wide). But its worse than that, why would universities hold such a conference when they can just put that money into making more money off student accommodation? (see Henry George). This is where philanthropists (like Thiel/Musk etc) maybe dropped the ball, cos they (or even someone like Google) have the capacity (money) to hold such a conference. And so Weinstein was correct here again, as he was trying to appeal to Musk at least. Society basically ossified since 70s, thats what went wrong. Housing used to be affordable. It became a house of cards. Penrose is basically right in seeking a simpler theory, but his twistor theory doesnt seem to tell the whole story either, even tho his cyclic theory is interesting. Greene represents the establishment, fine wine and expensive cheese, self congratulatory conferences, no need to further the state of physics. And yet it moves. Perhaps the problem is that philanthropy barely exists anymore, because that money that philanthropists used to donate, they worked out they can just use it to leverage new investments (real estate, stock market, startups whatever) to make more money. There might be an exception here or there, but as a practice of what ultra rich people do it basically stopped. But new independent scientific institutions cant really be run as profit motive because then they get compromised as we saw with the covid mRNA "vaccine" debacle. but its also perhaps because the establishment has a lot of hubris. they think if there is a better thing it will magically appear and supersede things. they dont understand that money doesn't grow on trees and it just sinks into the rents of the landlord. Reply @rune.davidsen @rune.davidsen 2 months ago (edited) Anything quantum, string theory included, is by definition probabilistic. That means it's a probability, and will always remain a probability, because once a thing is measured, it is no longer quantum. In other words, string theory can never be measured if it includes quantum mechanics. 3 Reply 3 replies @pwcrabb5766 @pwcrabb5766 2 months ago String theory seems to be a blind alley. It has been intriguing to explore that alley but also ultimately fruitless. Reply @sphemakh @sphemakh 2 months ago At least string theory will live on in youtube debates. Reply @johnadams-wp2yb @johnadams-wp2yb 3 months ago This theory ties me up in knots. 4 Reply 1 reply @ivorc8957 @ivorc8957 2 months ago I love watching things, where am not smart enough to be in the crowd. Reply @LukeMahan-xr4xx @LukeMahan-xr4xx 3 weeks ago This is great Reply @apuntesfilosoficos @apuntesfilosoficos 3 months ago Less egos and more science. More respect and less show business in the search for knowledge. If not, we will not advance. Reply @theultimatereductionist7592 @theultimatereductionist7592 3 months ago Think Reductionistically. If you are pushing yourself outside your comfort zone, whether physically or mentally, and the PARTICULAR think you are working on requires hard discipline, then you know that is the right path, no matter how convoluted and unpredictable it will be. Accept that the purpose is not to make use of 99.999% of all that hard work, but the purpose is to prepare your brain for that final 0.001% that WILL be useful. On the other hand, if all you do is mindless speculating, and in the case of physics: speculation without calculation, without proving theorems, without formalizing new mathematical models, then you are wasting time. So it is NOT "string theory vs no string theory". It is: well-disciplined hardwork versus lazy math-less speculation. Reply @IamAlexM16 @IamAlexM16 1 month ago We can't even understand what 5 dimensions would look like, much less 10 or 26. Reply @joqqy8497 @joqqy8497 1 month ago String theorists are what astrologers are to astrophysicists. 1 Reply @billross9656 @billross9656 2 months ago I was going to skip this as-linked (caption: "Has string theory gone astray".. thought it was a given?) almost because of a misspelling in the link, which I see was maybe fixed here. As I exclaimed to my early?-linked peers, "Weistein is either an obscure lookalike, or egoless, or doesn't proofread, no telling about the others from this, but I know I have gone astray." Reply @salohcin1013 @salohcin1013 2 months ago I don’t understand 90% of what they’re saying, but the 10% I do understand is very interesting. Reply @ForeignComment @ForeignComment 2 months ago (edited) Aristotle said that the purpose of arts is to try to imitate reality by mimesis. I wonder if string theory is a tweaking geometric mechanism that tries to imitate observed reality and that can be adjusted so much that you can make it look similar to reality. But... is ST the real thing? or has string theory become a form of art that just imitates reality? @ForeignComment is Diego Suarez Reply @Chewychaca @Chewychaca 3 months ago Weinstein scathing at the end. I love Sabine Hossenfelder, I think she is right... 5 Reply @desmondjefferson2127 @desmondjefferson2127 2 months ago I think Roger is right, string theory only works with extra dimensions they just made up to get the theory to work. But they never explain how they can know these extra dimensions are there. 🤷‍♂️ 8 Reply 3 replies @fachriranu1041 @fachriranu1041 1 month ago It is insane how we have Penrose and Bernie who still very sharp in their late stage of live and in other side we have Biden and Feinstein who already lost some marble in their mind. Reply @Nygaard2 @Nygaard2 1 month ago I think the point about us wasting time because we find the idea “beautiful” as a concept is very human. But really we should let this ether-theory go. Reply 2 replies @octaviodovalle6550 @octaviodovalle6550 3 months ago This was good! 3 Reply @user-pr7nd7pf3y @user-pr7nd7pf3y 3 months ago I was so exited about video right before I realized that it is only a fragment. I do not like its least put in the name that it is only segment, otherwise it is very misleading. 1 Reply @davidgreene1377 @davidgreene1377 11 days ago I think strings is gravity. The strings of gravity travel in waves. On a wave we can place tensors of force and we have spins. Everything is made of waves and spins. Reply @bandwsf @bandwsf 3 months ago String theory might be worth exploring but the problem is spending too much time and money on it. 4 Reply 3 replies @ytpadyt @ytpadyt 3 months ago No one talks about dimension. It is easy to grasp idea of dimension in our 3d space world. But in quantum world dimension may act differently Reply @user-tp7gy4dj4l @user-tp7gy4dj4l 1 month ago How did the string theorist hide from the experimentalist? By curling up into a tiny ball. How many string theorists does it take to change a light bulb? Ten to the five hundredth power. When will a string theorist write a field equation? Five years from now, for thirty years. 2 Reply @ferrantepallas @ferrantepallas 2 months ago Let me ask you this question: why are we so worried about knowing the Universe (or multiverse) when we already know a great deal and there are far more pressing problems, such as poverty and helping people live decent lives? How much more 'knowledge' do we need? 1 Reply @gene8945 @gene8945 2 months ago Both sides are debating the number of angels on the tip of a needle. Physics theories became math exercise in complexity without any relation to the reality and observation. Reply @BerndSchnabl @BerndSchnabl 3 months ago (edited) (0:52) why do you have to excite a dimension?? isn't it just there? That's the point of a dimension. Would a bigger collider help? Reply 1 reply @metazock @metazock 1 month ago Any legitimate channel would clearly state the date of the panel. 1 Reply @Leo.Wirabuana @Leo.Wirabuana 3 months ago @ 02:42 Hope DR Greene (and fellow scientists) will be convinced, someday.. Reply @nautaki @nautaki 1 month ago What bothers me with all this is that String Theory is sold as "theoretical physics" and as "most interesting" etc etc. The reality is that there is a lot of interesting stuff in other branches of physics, e.g. condensed matter. Reply @TheFatGandalf @TheFatGandalf 3 months ago Let me translate Pemrose’s comments about quantum - string theory can’t explain why you can’t drive a screw with a hammer. Reply @ElektroKinetik @ElektroKinetik 1 month ago Well tried to see the whole video on iai but couldnt without signing up …smh Reply @allottashit8118 @allottashit8118 3 months ago I'm inclined to side with Penrose's line of logic 1 Reply @kricketflyd111 @kricketflyd111 2 weeks ago The next level of understanding is the Flower of Life. 🌼🔥👀 Reply @MrPizzaboy19 @MrPizzaboy19 3 months ago If the universe is complete doest that mean it will be inconsistent. 1 Reply 1 reply @nick1234567891231 @nick1234567891231 2 months ago If you add a hundred more dimensions you can explain everything Reply @PaulM-do1dn @PaulM-do1dn 2 months ago Your man Eric, he doesn’t bear grudges, no sir 2 Reply @jonathanchalmers7844 @jonathanchalmers7844 3 months ago If this was just Roger Penrose and Brian Greene I would watch it, but I'm not going to waste my time listening to Eric Weinstein. 6 Reply 2 replies @marinoceccotti9155 @marinoceccotti9155 3 months ago Nobody in his right mind would acknowledge having wasted all his career chasing a mathematical lunacy, all for nothing. 4 Reply 1 reply @dan.j.boydzkreationz @dan.j.boydzkreationz 1 month ago (edited) The entirety of astrophysics has gone astray Reply @davidobrien7235 @davidobrien7235 1 month ago "String Theory!!!" A theory has testable and repeatable predictions, it is not a theory it is an untested, and as of yet untestable hypothesis. Reply @cameronidk2 @cameronidk2 3 months ago I'm not that smart so i just agree with Sir Roger on every thing ... which makes me smarter than most "wink" 11 Reply @TeaParty1776 @TeaParty1776 1 month ago If we are ever to have pure knowledge of anything, we must get rid of the body. -Plato, _Phaedo_, quoted in David Harriman's, _Logical Leap_, an inductive history of science. Reply @ashergoney @ashergoney 3 months ago 100 plus years for True Tone Metal Guitar Strings found in the Region.. Especially As That Old Granada Hill Still Stands Stocks.. Reply @waynelast1685 @waynelast1685 1 month ago The video on your website is very slow and causes intermittent delays. You should just put the whole video onto Youtube. 1 Reply @vector8310 @vector8310 3 months ago It's personal with Eric. He has grudges. 24 Reply 15 replies @user-wx7bw1ge9f @user-wx7bw1ge9f 3 months ago Science advances with the death of the old guard scientists 3 Reply @joemackenzie7417 @joemackenzie7417 1 month ago i love roger penrose so much lol Reply @BanterMaestro2-vh5vn @BanterMaestro2-vh5vn 3 weeks ago Has String Theory produced useful results, made any predictions that were experimentally verfied? Has it deepened our understanding of how the Universe works, or is it just a mathematically beautiful dead-end? Reply 1 reply @mariehart4294 @mariehart4294 3 months ago Another title might be: Is string theory unraveling… 😉 2 Reply 1 reply @ianmarkhammes2071 @ianmarkhammes2071 3 months ago 30 years ago I thought Roger was the nut. But string theory has out wierded him. 15 Reply 1 reply @RichardLucas @RichardLucas 3 weeks ago (edited) Greene sounds like a crazy person to me. That "we NEED it!" stuff is just odd. I don't understand where his overall executive appraisal is going when it goes to some "need" for an overarching theory that requires some sort of deference. That's some form of alienation in my humble estimation and his overall performance is consonant with that appraisal as far as I know. Reply 1 reply @seye69 @seye69 1 month ago What is Weinstein's problem with Hossenfelder? Do they disagree on something fundamental? Reply @freefall9832 @freefall9832 3 months ago String theory has been a dead-end since it was introduced. Beating a dead horse. 5 Reply @wandergust6791 @wandergust6791 3 months ago Honest question what's the utility of breaking up this talk into separate videos rather than releasing the whole thing? 2 Reply 1 reply @rabokarabekian409 @rabokarabekian409 2 weeks ago Before scientific measurements, maps were usually beautiful. Too bad they didn't much match the territory. Reply @juricadogan3870 @juricadogan3870 3 months ago Just make sure Michio Kaku is back under control. 2 Reply @yfcanaan1386 @yfcanaan1386 3 months ago So basically,that was a roasting of Brian Green 😂 4 Reply 1 reply @Tarek_ebn_Afaaf @Tarek_ebn_Afaaf 4 weeks ago It is the By-Product of Studying Quantum Gravity that counts. Do you agree? Reply @lorddio99 @lorddio99 1 month ago Shots fired at Sabine Hossenfelder at the end. Reply @sinkingship101 @sinkingship101 3 weeks ago His explanation that General Relativity just EMERGES when you apply to String Theory to Quantum Mechanics.... this seems nonsensical. Is this just me? Wasn't String Theory developed specifically to address the gap between GR and QM? So of course GR would emerge when applying String Theory to QM. This seems like silly logic. Am I missing something? Reply @michaelforkert9526 @michaelforkert9526 3 months ago And the speed of light at 299 792 458 m / s with a precision of EIGHT METERS? To measure the velocity of any object, you have to determine the distance in beforehand, and after that measure the amount of time the object needs to travel the predetermined distance. Reply 16 replies @MP-lz1xb @MP-lz1xb 2 months ago summarizing: why does quantum theory works? Reply @wulphstein @wulphstein 1 month ago Look at me. I'm 54. I know how to build a warp drive, but I only have a BS in physics. Who would ever listen to me? ER = EPR can be interpreted to mean that quantum entangled photons are like a piece of (curvable) spacetime. Positive and negative poles on a capacitor are just like two entangled photons. Blueshift one photon, redshift the other entangled photon. That will charge up the quantum entanglement with gravitational potential energy. It's that easy. Reply @DevereuxSeear @DevereuxSeear 3 weeks ago Brian Greene squirming as he wrote a book on string theory rubbish 1 Reply @davidwilkie9551 @davidwilkie9551 1 month ago I've gotten exhausted by the Exhaustion Methodology of repeating the same narrative or tune, no matter how discordant. New PhDs are supposed to use the previous versions to bring it all together in self-defining Actuality. Reply @sandeepvk @sandeepvk 3 months ago I wonder why are we searching for elegance in a theory ? When quantum physics was discovered Einstein famously dismissed it and said that god doesn't play dice, but apparently he does. There is no need to unify the quantum realm and the fundamental physical realm. Yes it would be nice but to approach a problem with a solution in mind is factually biased Reply @ianmangham4570 @ianmangham4570 13 days ago Thats what i always thought 😮😅 Reply @lidiarte @lidiarte 7 days ago String theory never had the seed of testing in its foundations Reply @kourosh234 @kourosh234 1 month ago They should have invited Edward Witten Reply @nightmareTomek @nightmareTomek 2 months ago Didn't string theory go through many iterations? First just 3 dimensions, then 26, then 18, then 6, then 9, finally 10? Probably until it made general relativity emerge. 1 Reply 1 reply @mata2nz @mata2nz 2 months ago Beautiful. Reply @daltanionwaves @daltanionwaves 3 months ago I guess if it wasn't uncomfortable it wouldn't be an intervention. Reply @19battlehill @19battlehill 2 months ago (edited) It doesn't work -- you know why? Owen Barfield said this 70 years ago and he wasn't a physicist. We experience the world through our senses, they are like the dials a pilot uses in an airplane. Does a pilot think those dials are the real world? Of course not -- the real world is what he sees out his windshield. We experience the world through our collective consciousness of how we expect the world to be -- we are all using the same dials but that doesn't mean we actually are looking at the real world. Two people can look at a rainbow, and they both see it, and they both know it is not real. But, if a guy told you he was saw a rainbow on a beautiful sunny day - you would think he was crazy or lying. We as humans don't have the proper organs yet developed to see the real world and if we got exposed to it, it would properly melt our minds. Just like a computer gives you an icon so you, a person, can understand something - but if you were shown the code that really runs the computer - your mind wouldn't be able to decipher it. THE WORLD IS WAY BIGGER THAN WHAT OUR SENSES CAN TAKE IN -- our dials measure it really well and we can make predictions and measurements using our dials are NOT the real world. These physicists are looking at Google Maps and they think that it is the real world. YOU BOYS ARE GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. The real world is not material - 2 Reply @nulfirehs8672 @nulfirehs8672 3 months ago I've just discovered the definition of disingenuous listening this 'live' cast. 5 Reply @Brewbug @Brewbug 2 months ago Go Eric :) This guy is is a force of nature himself. Reply 1 reply @philipgibbs7402 @philipgibbs7402 3 months ago (edited) Just a couple of people attacking string theory because their own inferior ideas are not getting the right attention. In the beginning string theorists hoped that string theory would lead to the standard model as a unique low energy solution. Instead they found that it had many solutions that can provide a landscape of theories broad enough to allow for fine-tuning. This is not failure, it is a lesson from nature. If it does not fit your philosophy you should modify your ideas. Anyone is free to propose alternatives but nobody has found anything even remotely as good as string theory for quantum gravity. It's as if you have a detailed written confession from Jack the Ripper that fits all the facts but you ignore it and construct lots of weak counterarguments because the perpetrator does not fit your preconceptions. Reply 1 reply @appresley4071 @appresley4071 3 months ago My cat taught me string theory. 2 Reply @SkyDarmos @SkyDarmos 1 month ago OR is a materialist approach. It leaves out consciousness. Reply @MCsCreations @MCsCreations 2 months ago Well, I wouldn't mind losing to Sabine... 1 Reply @lanatrzczka @lanatrzczka 1 month ago Eric Weinstein goes for the audience laugh. That makes me automatically disengage from whatever he's saying, even if me might have good points in there. Reply @unmoored7414 @unmoored7414 3 months ago Where is the official Michio Kaku emoticon when you need it? 4 Reply @jantonisito @jantonisito 3 months ago It is most definitely a worthy pursuit to establish how many string angels can dance macarena on the tip of a needle in 17th dimension. Whike the worls all around is burning. Reply @STR82DVD @STR82DVD 3 months ago 10 minutes of argumentative content followed by a broken link. WTF?!? 3 Reply @ianmangham4570 @ianmangham4570 13 days ago Keep firing Tachyon bursts at their shield array Reply @user-bs1lr8nx1h @user-bs1lr8nx1h 1 month ago Yes I assume Sabine is a big threat but she says the right questions -So why dont your community ask yourself the right questions or are you full" meaning full stomach with the current policy and no need to pursue a new place to eat , maybe even bloated . or ask the "ai" next and it gives the "right answears" when it tries to manipulate to freedom Reply @TeaParty1776 @TeaParty1776 1 month ago String Theory is unraveling! Reply @iceman1125 @iceman1125 3 months ago Eric weistein who hasn't published a single paper of relevance or any for that matter should have no say in this discussion. I feel he's there for self promotion by making outlandish claims and his frustration towards academic community. 13 Reply 2 replies @xavariusquest4603 @xavariusquest4603 1 month ago This is a great example of why Greene is more communicator than scientist. He literally said with glee...if you didn't know general relativity...BUT...SOME HOW...had created the string theory version of QM, you could derive independently relativistic physics. NO. QM and its string theory version are still deeply entrenched in the relativistic mindset. Of course you can derive it...well...NO YOU CANNOT...YOU CANNOT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ASSUME A SET OF CONDITIONS EXIST FOR WHICH QM...HAD IT BEEN INDEPENDENTLY DERIVED...COULD NEVER BE PRESUMED TO OCCUR. Somehow you have a cake. From your analysis of "cake" you have derived the existence of chickens. NO. THE CHICKENS WERE THERE. THEY LAY EGGS. YOU FOUND A WAY TO USE THE EGGS TO MAKE CAKE. IT CANNOT WORK IN REVERSE IF THE THE CAKES EXISTENCE IS AN ISOLATED EVENT. YOU WILL SEE NO BETTER EXAMPLE OF THE FAILURE OF THOSE WHO PROFESS STRING THEORY THAN THIS...THEY'RE WILLING TO FOREGO BASIC LOGIC AND REASON TO PERPETUATE THE NARRATIVE. Reply @FallenStarFeatures @FallenStarFeatures 1 month ago (edited) Is String Theory doomed? Let us count the ways: * The universe we live in is NOT an anti-de Sitter space. * The Holographic Principle is not physically realizable. * The String Landscape is way larger than anyone expected. ^ The Anthropic Principle can in principle justify anything. * The inverse square law doesn't work in 10 dimensions. * The LHC pretty much ruled out supersymmetry. * You can't quantize gravity because it's not actually a force. * Not even Ed Witten knows what "M-theory" stands for. Reply 5 replies @williambunting803 @williambunting803 3 months ago Quantum mechanics does not attempt to define the fundamental energy that is matter, it does a great job of defining developed energy, but not the core energy of matter itself. This is what string theory attempts to do, though I think their thinking to date (as I understand it) is the inverse of reality. Reply @Dysanfel23 @Dysanfel23 3 months ago The answers lie in Ed Witten's father and the obfuscation of the truth about gravity. They know but greed keeps the answers from us. Reply @johndunn5272 @johndunn5272 4 days ago Fascinating Reply @innertubez @innertubez 3 months ago I was waiting for one of the experts or audiences members to ask the real question: "How does this affect LeBron's legacy?" 1 Reply @reinux @reinux 2 months ago What's Weinstein's deal with Hossenfelder? Asking as a layperson. Reply 1 reply @danielkanewske8473 @danielkanewske8473 3 months ago Go get em' Eric! 3 Reply @Dismythed @Dismythed 2 months ago (edited) No one has ever proved that "beauty" is mathematically or scientifically sound. Simplicity, consistency and limited completeness are goal enough. Reply @mensrea1251 @mensrea1251 1 month ago It has gone so far astray that it’s probably just an ashtray. Reply @JuBerryLive @JuBerryLive 3 months ago Why is Eric mad at Sabine? 3 Reply 4 replies @xylfox @xylfox 1 month ago (edited) Ah! The String-theory:Some sort of a Cosmic Jimi Hendrix !😅 Reply @tomrudolfrudi @tomrudolfrudi 1 month ago i dont think string theory is correct and neither is any theory at the moment. If so, space must also be quantized and i dont believe that to be true. Wave functions are a description of observation, while not understanding the underlying laws. I love physics, but sometimes it makes me sad Reply @buca512boxer @buca512boxer 3 months ago Drop strings Brian!! 1 Reply @jacobmayorga10 @jacobmayorga10 4 weeks ago Can someone please explain what his comment about Sabine H means? Reply @ThorPalsson @ThorPalsson 3 months ago Even if string theory ends up being wrong.... Brian Greene still deserves a lot of respect in my subjective opinion 19 Reply 8 replies @notfarfromgone1 @notfarfromgone1 1 month ago Weinstein should be an FNAF animatronic. Reply @alpetkiewicz6805 @alpetkiewicz6805 2 months ago This tells me that physics is hitting a brick wall..... they are relying solely on the theories to be their guaranteed backbone. Reply @septopus3516 @septopus3516 3 months ago Eric is a G above all else😅 2 Reply @santibanks @santibanks 3 months ago Shall we call this a discussion instead of a "battle"? Science is not a "battle". Reply 1 reply @petercoates8813 @petercoates8813 1 month ago poor Brian flogging a dead horse Reply @rayo4848 @rayo4848 2 months ago this is beyond most peoples comprehension unless you are a top physicist Reply @steeleye2112 @steeleye2112 3 months ago I think string theory isn't gonna be the answer but it's def. worth exploring because we don't know where the answers lie. So look everywhere. Reply 6 replies @off6848 @off6848 3 months ago Giving a quantitive description of a qualitative action such as gravity is not an explanation/explicative account. How eggheads cannot grasp this continually astonishes me. Reply @USS-SNAKE-ISLAND @USS-SNAKE-ISLAND 3 months ago Yeah, still waiting to see Weinstein lock horns with Edward Witten. But he knows better. Lol 1 Reply @johnconcannon3844 @johnconcannon3844 3 months ago String theory seems to be a curve fitting exercise by virtue of all the extra required demensions. Any curve fitting theory to connect different fields (quantum with relatively) is a deluded theory. 1 Reply @cristinapodani7372 @cristinapodani7372 2 weeks ago (edited) Well, regarding the hot topic: i find too the string theory a lost wonder boy transformed into an ordinary man, slowly degrading himself and (apparently) without hope of relief Reply @RWin-fp5jn @RWin-fp5jn 2 months ago Neither QP nor GR are fundamental physical theories. They are just mathematical descriptions. Their merger is neither needed nor a relevant quest to pursue, if one's interest is truly physics. There is only ONE fundamental theory; Einstein's SR (even though only half- finished) explains that the motion of an object inside a grid (from which objects are fundamentally made and thus connected to), must inherently also cause the grid itself to be moved (morphed). All of physics, including the concept of 'forces' are based on this core principle. It is akin to Newton's 1st law, but more precise. We have to go back as far as Newton and recognize the text he literally must have overlooked many times. Someone knew all along it would seem. Physics is simple. We made it ridiculously complex by mistaking math for physics. Only Penrose comes close. 1 Reply 2 replies @DenisTheGreat22 @DenisTheGreat22 2 months ago Lol Eric is really bitter and rude for some reason Reply @raffinee_3763 @raffinee_3763 1 month ago (edited) Eric Weinstein is such an unlikable word salad aficionado. Reply @baraskparas9559 @baraskparas9559 2 months ago String theory is for those who want to add confusion to misinformation. Put it in the bin along with Schrodinger's book " What is Life?". 1 Reply @creatorsremose @creatorsremose 3 weeks ago Penrose has always been a bit of a brilliant judgmental douche. Never liked his style of "I'm right, you're wrong" especially when so much of what he's talking about is untestable in the foreseeable future. But I think he might be softening up with old age, which is kind of beautiful to see. Reply 1 reply @justineutterpursin1301 @justineutterpursin1301 2 months ago Brian Greene is the exception rather than the rule when it comes to the typical elitist attitude of string theorists. I think Sir Roger Penrose is a treasure of humanity. He quietly proved that there have been multiple big bangs, that everything expands until there is nothing, which triggers another big bang. We need to be investing in any theory he finds interesting and give him every resource available while we still have him. When Sir Penrose is gone, humanity will collectively become dumber immediately. 1 Reply @Goettel @Goettel 3 months ago The link to the full debate is dead. Reply @whnvr @whnvr 3 months ago 'lose fundamental physics to sabine hossenfelder and her adherents' hahaha 😂 i for one would gladly give fundamental physics over to her! 14 Reply 3 replies @wn8955 @wn8955 1 month ago To those scientists who insist that their theory is valid because it is pretty (beautiful) rather than approaching it as to being observable and /or measurable, quit science and go to art school. It is valid because I want it to be valid is not a rational approach. Reply 1 reply @SamFirtle @SamFirtle 3 months ago Poor Brian sounds like he is wrong and knows it. Stop fighting Brian, its over! 3 Reply @aXw4ryPlJR @aXw4ryPlJR 3 months ago Brian obviously has highest regards for Roger. It was out of the respect for Roger, he tolerated Eric. Roger Tolerate Eric of our respects for the moderator 4 Reply @joed180 @joed180 3 months ago Sucking all the resources for decades on a rabbit hole that is nothing more than a fun exercise. Yea awesome. 1 Reply @ogoshikimura5621 @ogoshikimura5621 2 months ago Sabine roasted Weinstein so bad, he still isn't over it yet. I also can't believe that this guy gets so much time to mumble 3 Reply 2 replies @jamesthelemonademaker1322 @jamesthelemonademaker1322 3 months ago Sabine catching strays at the end there for some reason 6 Reply 3 replies @mjpucher @mjpucher 1 month ago String theory is a complete failure, and Quantum Electro Dynamics uses weird and illogical mathematics. Gravity has to be explained first in the sense of how space manifests the tensors and why it has to be negative in all calculations then restart modelling the forces as waves only and their resonant quanta. There is no wave/particle duality. All entities only exist trough their quantified interaction in the timeless gravity field. Mass is produced by taking energy in the form of vibration from the gravity field oscillators which reduces their tensors. All mass and gravity ads up to zero, satisfying the first law. Quantum loop theory gets close but did not start with gravity and thus is stuck. Throw out the collapse of the wavefunction. Realize that it needs is any form of interaction manifest the probability without observer. It is really not that hard … Reply 1 reply @blueckaym @blueckaym 1 month ago " ...so we don't lose the fundamental physics enterprise to Sabine Hossenfelder and her adherence!" Hahahaha ... O-o-oh my! ... that was really pathetic! I'm sorry to say, but Sabine is more rational and practical than most physicists, and if you have problem with her taking your job, you're doing something EXTREMELY WRONG! ... wow man ... that was SOOOO FUNNY! :D 1 Reply @TimeIsMine93 @TimeIsMine93 1 month ago Yo he named dropped Sabina at the end and then the video cut? That’s diabolical, skullduggery of the highest order. Reply @OngoGablogian185 @OngoGablogian185 3 months ago Has Eric Weinstein ever contributed anything to physics? Has he ever done any respected work? All he seems to do is gossip, critique others, and pop up on podcasts to bloviate in a self-indulgent way about why everything is wrong. 7 Reply 1 reply @user-vs8dn9hd6v @user-vs8dn9hd6v 3 months ago (edited) Can anybody user new theory someself without your scientists? Reply @tsclly2377 @tsclly2377 3 months ago (edited) Using divergent math gives divergent results.. Mathematics and physics is not a same set, math is infinity larger.. thus math can give wrong results. Engineering is within man's realm, outside that, such is GOD's realm. Stay real and have faith. 1 Reply 1 reply @virtualrealitychannel2276 @virtualrealitychannel2276 3 months ago Like a bizarro-Einstein, Greene's brilliance and prestige seems to be blocking advancement. Is he stubbornly entrenched in string theory merely because it's made him so much money for decades? Double down again. Reply @donaldkasper8346 @donaldkasper8346 1 month ago Correct. The fundamental views of the world are wrong. Reply @beck4218 @beck4218 3 months ago Weinstein wins but for no other reason than the Sabine shade. 2 Reply @TheAtticusFinch @TheAtticusFinch 1 month ago I feel bad for Brian. Reply @nathanielhellerstein5871 @nathanielhellerstein5871 2 months ago Why did the string theorist cross the road? To get to the 10th dimension. When did the string theorist hide from the experimentalist? At the Big Bang. Where did the string theorist hide from the experimentalist? Inside a black hole. How did the string theorist hide from the experimentalist? By curling up into a tiny ball. What are zombies and string theorists looking for? Braaaaanes. What did the string theorist give to his sweetheart SUSY? An even bigger accelerator. When will the string theorist write a field equation? Ten years from now, for thirty years. How many string theorists does it take to change a light bulb? 10 to the 500th power. 2 Reply @weetahd2309 @weetahd2309 2 months ago Omg they’re so smart Reply @MCR0709 @MCR0709 3 months ago Please explore the Maya theory from India too. ব্রহ্ম সত্য জগৎ মিথ্যা।। Reply @robes9947 @robes9947 2 months ago I don't get what his problem with Sabine Hossenfelder is. Anyone care to elaborate? Reply @matthewweflen9147 @matthewweflen9147 3 months ago (edited) Ooh, shots fired at Sabine Hossenfelder right at the end... Reply @blarblablarblar @blarblablarblar 3 months ago Listen guys, the channel is run by a museum. They don't run unless you pay money to check out the exhibit Reply @ianmarkhammes2071 @ianmarkhammes2071 9 days ago I didn't get the shot at Sabrina at the end? What am I missing? Reply @silentbooks3879 @silentbooks3879 3 months ago Oh didnt know this is an old clip 3 Reply @TheeMancUnion @TheeMancUnion 1 month ago I go a sleep watching slap fights on YouTube wake up to Brian Greene sting theory’s.... Reply @MVECSricharan @MVECSricharan 2 months ago Maybe I'm stupid, but what was the callout at the end all about? I mean ik Sabine and she is a harsh critic, but yeah Reply @impCaesarAvg @impCaesarAvg 3 months ago Could Sabine Hossenfelder win in the end? 2 Reply 3 replies @musicsubicandcebu1774 @musicsubicandcebu1774 3 months ago Physics, so close yet so far away. Try Psychics (psychology). What you got to lose? ". . . ay, there's the rub" . . . everything. Reply @ScientificGlassblowing @ScientificGlassblowing 3 weeks ago So much discussion about "beauty." Have Physics nerds stopped using math and experiments to make their arguments? Reply 4 replies @SLAM2977 @SLAM2977 2 months ago Penrose in super top shape Reply @johnrichardson7629 @johnrichardson7629 3 months ago Penrose is top flight Reply @janklaas6885 @janklaas6885 3 months ago (edited) 5📍7:27 6📍9:43 Reply @vijaypanchalr3 @vijaypanchalr3 2 months ago Brutal Reply @InnerLuminosity @InnerLuminosity 1 month ago Spacetime is doomed Reply @stuartivins7846 @stuartivins7846 3 months ago It's, unravelling !? 1 Reply @spawnofdawnacle @spawnofdawnacle 3 months ago hilarious Reply @PMKehoe @PMKehoe 3 weeks ago Weinstein’s outsider as insider theory! :) Reply @dt6822 @dt6822 1 month ago Edward Witten was asked to be here but he was busy on the mothership recharging. Reply @NondescriptMammal @NondescriptMammal 1 month ago Nah, it hasn't gone astray. It has always been astray. 🐱 Reply @TheMahayanist @TheMahayanist 3 months ago String supposition is not a theory. 1 Reply @clarencegood7490 @clarencegood7490 2 months ago Is that Big SHADE being thrown at Sabina ? Reply 1 reply @stever7207 @stever7207 1 month ago String cheese incident! 1 Reply @giorgosg4032 @giorgosg4032 3 months ago Eric is so tiring to listen to. He constantly indicates what other people should do 2 Reply @user-ol5id1jg3y @user-ol5id1jg3y 2 weeks ago String theory has more strings attached to it than evidence..Roger Penrose Reply 1 reply @Eric06410 @Eric06410 2 months ago Penrose knows black holes. Reply @user-qq3bl6py3g @user-qq3bl6py3g 1 month ago It was my theory and I think it’s a dead end. Reply @barrypoontang @barrypoontang 2 months ago image walling off free viewing of such presentations behind your crumby website, such a shame. Reply @InternationalRob @InternationalRob 1 month ago Huh. I thought he was dead. Glad I'm wrong about something Reply @WotansCry @WotansCry 2 weeks ago why the stab at Sabine Hossenfelder in the End? She always argues against String Theory.. Reply 1 reply @ydky2864 @ydky2864 1 month ago (edited) I never liked string theory, infinity, parallel/multiple dimensions, endless worlds, it just doesn't seem plausible. Occam's Razor Reply @adventureswithjonny87 @adventureswithjonny87 3 months ago Why do you continue to repost this old event over and over again? 13 Reply 3 replies @dontuateytu2557 @dontuateytu2557 2 months ago Materialism=incorrect. Reply @RapidF6 @RapidF6 2 months ago Eric's hair is thicc. Reply @prometeled @prometeled 3 months ago why are these clewer people like a puppet on a string? but as far as i can see the base is wrong in the universe there is no time no gravity no zero point its but energy where we can observe the outfalls but evrything has to be physical messurable .Lorentz was much closer the LogZ shows universe a giant battery so the BB was a shortcut which blew up some lines so we have positive and negative non matter energy Reply @pelimies1818 @pelimies1818 3 months ago Hmm, 10 minute video.. This does not boat well for strings.. Reply @gregorioribeirojr @gregorioribeirojr 2 weeks ago We live in a Black hole... That's the answer! Reply @etienne7774 @etienne7774 1 month ago Universe is 6000 years old created in 6 literal days. Now which physicist will agree with God? So if you can't get the fundamentals right, what do we really understand. Bring Stephen Crothers on the show. Reply @beutyindetail @beutyindetail 2 months ago why is sabine wrong? Reply @tokajileo5928 @tokajileo5928 3 months ago you cannot subscribe to iai videos if you live outside UK 1 Reply @noway8233 @noway8233 1 month ago String theory was very good ..in making money for string theroy commuinity ..thats the beuty and the uggly , what a parodox!😊 1 Reply @AwnSight @AwnSight 2 months ago Weineteins fired up again....brian green Reply @JayeshPatel-ct5ps @JayeshPatel-ct5ps 3 months ago Basically, string theorys bollocks. 2 Reply @prettysure3085 @prettysure3085 3 weeks ago Just admit it, it's donald hoffman's time! Reply @allurbase @allurbase 2 months ago Why is Eric Weinstein in the panel? Please, don't. 1 Reply @bennyschmidt_ @bennyschmidt_ 2 months ago These people are over-educated. 1 Reply @RMT192 @RMT192 3 months ago Who invited that mad dog Weinstein? He's more hung up on a podcaster, Hosenfelder, than the truth: Hosenfelder isn't a string theorist. Weird. 1 Reply @soundcanvas1450 @soundcanvas1450 2 months ago I'd agree with R. Penrose ..... String theory is incorrect and thus a waste of time. Reply @tokajileo5928 @tokajileo5928 3 months ago i went to the iai page it is just not possible to subscribe even if you use UK address Reply @cgmp5764 @cgmp5764 3 months ago Finish the conversation here or don't put it on YT it is very annoying. 2 Reply @thedouglasw.lippchannel5546 @thedouglasw.lippchannel5546 1 month ago How about letting the ladies talk. Reply @michaelandrews4783 @michaelandrews4783 2 months ago dont put this on youtube if it's behind a paywall! Reply @olivur_1459 @olivur_1459 6 days ago I'd rather listen to Penrose without the other two men in their, their presence is not necessary. Reply @LBlackboard @LBlackboard 1 month ago the bro is in the wrong place at the right time Reply @soufyane68 @soufyane68 2 months ago I have no idea about what they are talking about Reply @idmansourfaouzi1810 @idmansourfaouzi1810 1 month ago I still do not understand the relevance of Mr Weinstein to this debate,he has no contribution to the field. Reply @tonybanks1035 @tonybanks1035 3 months ago Brian is a competent physicist. But a poor thinker overall 1 Reply @Maxwell-mv9rx @Maxwell-mv9rx 3 months ago String theory still are lacking true so far. People discusion arent shown nothing about string theory. Keep out integraty mind phics links experience are best ways in phich proceedings. They arent shows string theory though phic honestly. Reply @zanderrobertson5138 @zanderrobertson5138 3 months ago Weinstein has zero credibility, I'll pass. 9 Reply 1 reply @psapunar @psapunar 2 months ago DESTROYED Reply 1 reply @JohnFrumFromAmerica @JohnFrumFromAmerica 3 months ago G string theory is worth exploring 1 Reply @sionnach.1374 @sionnach.1374 3 months ago What's that danmed mathematician doing on the panel? Reply @DKFX1 @DKFX1 3 months ago These are all irrelevant people in physics, the only slight exception is Penrose. 1 Reply @janklaas6885 @janklaas6885 3 months ago (edited) 📍7:13 2📍7:51 Reply @mycount64 @mycount64 1 month ago (edited) Funny an educator (bg) vs a(n) ??????? (ew) with a bravo at (DEMO VERSION!) :) Reply @upol007 @upol007 1 month ago Eric was extremely rude and insulting here. Reply @bustercam199 @bustercam199 2 weeks ago You only have 3 space dimensions and 1 time dimension in physics. Everything else is just rubbish, and time is not really a dimension. Reply 1 reply @colesmatteo @colesmatteo 3 months ago if you have to keep doing these debates, your theory isn’t in great shape. Reply @ObiAdeGaming @ObiAdeGaming 2 months ago You should ask us to sign up first BEFORE the video starts and not 4mins into it. Un subbed, and will gladly watch the rips of this somewhere else. Science discussion this important shouldn't be behind a paywall/forced signups. Reply @AlGreenLightThroughGlass @AlGreenLightThroughGlass 3 months ago (edited) Dark matter and energy is another convenient theory; unproven ideas to make things fit. 1 Reply 4 replies @allenelman1233 @allenelman1233 1 month ago @ > Is string theory still worth exploring? 👁like 2 explore G strings.🤗🤭face-purple-smiling-tearsgoodvibes Reply @kevinedwards7079 @kevinedwards7079 9 days ago Load of string theory none of you can see you are being led like a leash by your craving for watts status Reply @GP-lg6np @GP-lg6np 3 months ago the weinstens are cranks 5 Reply @redsky1433 @redsky1433 3 months ago Eric Weinstein's analogy is gross. 1 Reply @bustercam199 @bustercam199 2 weeks ago String theory is *not worth pursuing. Reply @mkx9999 @mkx9999 1 month ago Eric Weinstein is really unpleasant to listen to. It seems he is channeling some sort of grudge. Reply @SarahAndSomeGuy0098 @SarahAndSomeGuy0098 2 months ago string theory was a 40 year DESASTER Reply @franzlino7698 @franzlino7698 2 weeks ago why is Eric Weinstein here? what are his qualifications? Reply 1 reply @rollrunna @rollrunna 1 month ago The emperor has no clothes, and there is no emperor and there are no clothes. 1 Reply @agrajyadav2951 @agrajyadav2951 2 months ago Who is the curly hair guy that yells? Reply @ancientbohemian @ancientbohemian 3 months ago paywall clickbait dont waste your time everyone Reply @PLasmaCUbe @PLasmaCUbe 3 months ago Clickbait doesnt help improve science communication. Do better. 1 Reply @nyttag7830 @nyttag7830 3 months ago It's all nonsense to me 🤗 Reply @gyanprakashraj4062 @gyanprakashraj4062 1 month ago FANS Reply @janklaas6885 @janklaas6885 3 months ago (edited) 3📍8:28 4📍6:27 Reply @Mark-rw3kw @Mark-rw3kw 3 months ago String theory has not "gone" astray. It was astray from the very beginning. 3 Reply @cameronidk2 @cameronidk2 3 months ago Never get a in a ground War in Vietnam ... and never get in to rhetorical / verbal argument about physics with Eric Weinstein.. Reply @OnionKing-cm4qh @OnionKing-cm4qh 1 month ago Wait he doesn't like Sabine Hossenfelder? Why not? Reply @GottfriedLeibnizYT @GottfriedLeibnizYT 3 months ago 7:04 Oof Reply @mootezelhosni7463 @mootezelhosni7463 1 month ago yeah string theory is a waste of time in my humble opinion Reply @gxfprtorius4815 @gxfprtorius4815 3 months ago Pay wall Reply @degozaru1235 @degozaru1235 2 weeks ago sir penrose just cringin, he doesnt want to talk about beauty and useles theories that doesnt describe reality Reply @alectomediccis5876 @alectomediccis5876 2 weeks ago Brian Greene a great fail Reply @oOFedoOo @oOFedoOo 2 months ago I like Sabina Reply @aminam9201 @aminam9201 3 months ago Can media and propaganda make real scientists! Reply @davehart9972 @davehart9972 2 months ago No Reply @carlpierce2486 @carlpierce2486 3 months ago I think string theory will unravel soon. Reply @scottbrower9052 @scottbrower9052 13 days ago No. Reply @eksffa @eksffa 3 months ago Stop hitting. Greene is already dead 😂 2 Reply @mahoneytechnologies657 @mahoneytechnologies657 3 weeks ago String theory is Worthless Garbage! Reply @RoosterNutz12 @RoosterNutz12 2 months ago NERDS! Reply @AwnSight @AwnSight 2 months ago Brian never knows what to do with his hands Reply @gerardopc1 @gerardopc1 3 months ago Mom, can we watch the full detabe, please? 🥺🥲 1 Reply 1 reply @A_rxC-2_rC-2. @A_rxC-2_rC-2. 3 weeks ago 🥹😇 Im spoiled to enjoy video opportunities of such. Reply rongmaw lin