Physicist Explains New Approach To The Fundamental Laws In Physics

NOTE: The perspectives expressed by guests don't necessarily mirror my own. There's a versicolored arrangement of people on TOE, each harboring distinct viewpoints, as part of my endeavor to understand the perspectives that exist.

THANK YOU: To Mike Duffey for your insight, help, and recommendations on this channel.

Support TOE:

Follow TOE:

Join this channel to get access to perks:

[audiodead]

I just see constructor theory as an attempt to see the world in a more abstract way. By doing so, we (in theory) see new patterns that were previously lost in the detail. It (implicitly) assumes that the detail of the 'laws of nature' are not 'fundamental'. It probably helps to know that the inventors of constructor theory are advocates of the multiverse idea.

[DTSkywatch]

I hope the people that understand all she is saying appreciate this type of content appropriately. Wish i was one.

Edit: To be clear i think it is good to make discussions like this available online definitely not complaining. Even if i cant understand it i appreciate that its provided so others smarter than me can.

[nick.g]

Such a gifted Physicist. Thank you for featuring her on your podcast and keep up the great work.

[alexjbriiones]

Constructor theory seems to be a new framework for testing different physical theories. If David Deutsch is involved in creating Contractor Theory then there is genius behind it and Chiara is one of the smartest women in physics. Just notice how well-formed her explanations and thoughts are. She is scary smart.

[TheGrammarOfDesign]

Constructor Theory is how Physics finally appropriates Philosophy Itself. First they changed the meaning of
qualities into quantities, then they turned nothing into something, and then they changed the meaning of function
intoto forms, and now they have changed the meaning of possible and impossible to what is a possible or impossible
human invention, a machine. What philosopher's mean by 'Can't', is more akin to Zeno's Paradox Applied to Geometrical Forms,
Or Aristotle's Infinite Regress Critique Of Plato's Geometrical Forms. If conceivability were not our guide, then what could be?

[myboloneyhasafirstname]

I did not absorb Physics for Non-Majors in college, and I sure as heck can’t grock this presentation. I’m glad that she does this work and that others can understand what this is about, even if not all agree.

[TheIgnoramus]

“An exercise in agreed symmetry and local observables in both theory’s, and looking for a deeper structure (connecting formalisms)” - I’m all for it.

[SmirkInvestigator]

I will never understand what she’s talking about but do enjoy watching her explain her work

[NeilEvans-xqik]

Brett Hall explains these ideas with great lucidity and competence.

[brandonb]

This is physically happening in a device called the Thunderstorm Generator; there s some low energy quantum process happening in the vacuum to the Carbon atoms…?
Johanna James has two good YT videos with the explanation of the geometry and the physical results.
Pretty cool! ✌🏼🤔

[dukimanx]

I encourage everyone to read “Origin of Mass and the Nature of Gravity” By Haramein, Guermonprez and Alirol. It's all there.

[miikalewandowski]

Would be interesting to hear if also theories that have been proven as false are still valid in constructor theory.

[temp]

The thumbnail looks like the Mandelbrot dot.

[jasonwilliams]

Time is all at once

Jas THAT bloodline

[ericmichel]

I'm not really sure what she is on about, but she sure is cute, and with that Italian accent, it doesn't really matter.

[attilaszekeres]

Nay, nay, a thousand times nay! I unequivocally, unabashedly, and indubitably refute this specious, preposterous, and ridiculous farce of a "theory" so-called! The very notion that such twaddle could even be considered within the rarefied halls of our hallowed halls of science, let alone be afforded an iota of credence is an affront to the very fabric of logic, reason, and the scientific method upon which our great edifice of knowledge is built!

[JohnScott-elgm]

I dont mean to be rude this lady alot smarter then me however she not really good at explaining the theory i watched full video . I hope you get someone else to try explain it another time because am interested

[rockyb.]

This seems a very interesting philosophy, but this is not physics.It feels to me as category theory feels in mathematics, it is one more level of abstraction into theoretical physics, but detached from physics (more a philosophy). Where are the calculations that show a common principle in physics abstracted from constructor theory? is as if constructor theory needs our current laws to even say anything. I feel that constructor theory is another way of postulating a lot without actually doing anything.

[invisiblecollege]

Just as long as this isn’t another string theory. That has wasted a lot of money and brain power. UAP’s is where it’s at

[cagc]

sorry for the non related comment but she is really attractive to me, i loved her hair, made her look like the style of steve vai in crossroads, really rocky xd