Tim Palmer: Non-Locality, Universe on a Fractal, Quantum Mechanics

Tim Palmer joins Curt Jaimungal to discuss the progress and persistent challenges in fundamental physics, touching on topics such as the successes of the Standard Model, the unresolved issues of quantum mechanics and general relativity, and the potential implications of quantum entanglement and non-locality for our understanding of the universe.

Timestamps:
00:00 - Current State Of Physics
02:13 - General Relativity And Quantum Mechanics
19:47 - Non-Local Universe
29:13 - Impossible Worlds
34:36 - Bell’s Theorem
41:05 - Infinity
53:03 - Tim’s Theories
57:00 - Tim’s Book
01:03:17 - Local Laws Of Physics
01:05:59 - Fractals And Invariant Sets
01:08:07 - Billiard Balls And Infinity
01:22:38 - Cosmology
01:29:14 - “Something Deeper About Our Universe”
01:37:22 - Outro

Support TOE:

Follow TOE:

Join this channel to get access to perks:

Links Mentioned:

#physics #science

[TheoriesofEverything]

Timestamps:
00:00 - Current State Of Physics
02:13 - General Relativity And Quantum Mechanics
19:47 - Non-Local Universe
29:13 - Impossible Worlds
34:36 - Bell’s Theorem
41:05 - Infinity
53:03 - Tim’s Theories
57:00 - Tim’s Book
01:03:17 - Local Laws Of Physics
01:05:59 - Fractals And Invariant Sets
01:08:07 - Billiard Balls And Infinity
01:22:38 - Cosmology
01:29:14 - “Something Deeper About Our Universe”
01:37:22 - Outro

[johnomalley]

I always enjoy the respectful and thoughtful interviews conducted by Curt Jaimangal. Thanks for all your interviews!!!!

[harryschmidt]

Curt, in my humble opinion, is the best science interviewer on youtube.

[patrickgravel]

Tim Palmer is great at analysing the different theories, and putting them into simple concepts. Geometrical, linear and so on. Brings some important facts into perspective. Awesome.

[glenn]

Curt whilst I don’t understand lots of your content I really really appreciate what you are providing for us on your channel.
Sometimes I listen/watch a full podcast and other times I dip in and out of your content.
It’s so stimulating and I really just want to let you know that you are providing gold standard quality content.
I understand that you may be reluctant to accept praise but even so you should be pretty proud of your achievements in producing this channel.
When you have any tough times just remember that there are plenty of people around who really appreciate your extraordinary efforts.

[jumpstar]

I love Tim, I think he is a really great guy. One of the freshest minds in physics that I know.

One of the things I like about his approach is the implication that there may not be a fixed set of physics. (Well from a local perspective of course).

So if that is true we would be much better exploring things empirically using something like ML.

At least that way even if we don't understand it, we can still use it.

And there is always the possibility we can fill in the gaps in formal descriptions later.

Whether that is an interesting pastime or not is also debatable of course, although I'm sure it would appease the purists.

If we don't use the new tools we have we could easily miss interesting phenomena and subtle effects that more traditional methods would struggle to account for or find.

Thank you so much for the interview and posting it. I really enjoy listening to his thinking.

[npayne]

Great discussion. Very substantive and thought provoking. Thanks for creating this.

[nunomaroco]

Hello from Portugal, very interesting ideas from Tim Palmer really like it....

[cuddywifter]

You should talk to Tim's friend, Prof Basil J.Hiley (former colleague of David Bohm).

[demon_lover]

I could barely keep up but that was a really sharp engagement. Congrats to both.

[Vherok]

I can hardly wait for Tim's next book. Thank you Curt for the excelent interview.

[mikestaub]

Curt and Dwarkesh are the two best interviewers in the world today.

[wyattmojaver]

Great as always thank you very much for very hard work
Really appreciate it ❤

[KL-niju]

Awesome episode Curt!!!! This relates perfectly to my fascination du jour

[larry]

Thank you Curt for what you do. I'm no where near smart enough to understand these videos at the 1st go around. It's so interesting hearing different perspectives on these topics. I feel like your videos bridge the gap from the extremely smart to us normal thinking people.

[marcustopinka]

Wow Kurt - you asking him the first 3 questions about language really elucidated things! Great job

[e.r.]

Once again, great interview. Great Tim Palmer.

[vanikaghajanyan]

1:22:38 In RT the main invariant is the 4-interval (a mathematical description of the constant c), however, it could offer another invariant value based on another physical constant.
1.From Kepler's third law follows: M/t=v^3/G, where M/t=I(G)=[gram•sec^-1] is the gravitational current. By the way, in SR: I(G)=inv; this follows from the Lorentz transformations: m=m(0)/√(1-v^2/c^2) and t=t(0)/√(1-v^2/c^2). Hence, obviously, we have I(G)=m/t=m(0)/t(0)=inv.
2.Comparing with Einstein's equations of 1915, we find a=-c^3/16πG. Strictly speaking, in order to determine the constant a, it was necessary to make a transition to the Poisson equation. Thus, a rigorous derivation of Einstein's equations can be given. 
The transition to the non-relativistic limit allows us to determine a constant factor for the integral of the gravitational field according to: R[(0)^0]=(4πG/c^2)p; Δφ=-pc^3/4a=4πGр.
However,
3.Therefore, the Poisson equation can be written as: ∆g(00)=8πGT(00)/c^4, where g(00) is the time component of the metric tensor (for a weakly curved metric the time component of the energy-momentum tensor: T(00)~=pc^2).
This equation is true only in the non-relativistic case, but it is applicable to the case of a homogeneous and isotropic Universe, when Einstein's equations have only solutions with a time-varying space-time metric. Then the energy density of the gravitational field:  g^2/8πG=T(00)=pc^2 {=(ħ/8πc^3)w(relic)^4 !};
where the critical density value determining the nature of the model is: p=(3/8π)H^2/G. Hence it follows: g~πcH. And according to the strong equivalence principle: g=|a*|=πcH.
{w(relic)^2=πw(pl)H !}.
4.However, а*=-2πcа/M(universe), what is
In the case of the Universe: (~ the "dark" constant~inv), where M(universe)=E/c^2 is the full mass of the Universe, and the total energy E is spent on creating a phase-quantized space-time:
m(pl)w(pl)=8πM(Universe)H.
Expansion is a special kind of motion, and it seems that the Universe is a non-inertial frame of reference that performs variably accelerated motion along a phase trajectory, and thereby creates a phase space.
5.That is: Δφ=-pc^3/4a=
рс^3/2M(universe)H^2. 
And
Δφ=4π[с^3/Gm(pl)w(pl)]H^2=
4πH^2; which is evidence of a phenomenon: spontaneous Lorentz transformations. 
Thus;
Δφ(0)/Δφ=w(pl)^2/H^2~6, 4*10^121, where Δφ(0)=4πw(pl)^2; the best prediction.
Addition 
On the self repel.
0.“Giving the interval ds the size of time, we will denote it by dт: in this case, the constant k will have the dimension length divided by mass and in CGS units will be equal to 1, 87*10^-27", Friedmann, (On the curvature of space, 1922). 
1.[The ds, which is assumed to have the dimension of time, we denote by dт; then the constant k has the dimension Length Mass and in CGS-units is equal to 1, 87.10^ ± 27. See Laue, Die Relativitatstheorie, Bd. II, S. 185. Braunschweig 1921.]
2.Apparently, the following expression takes place:  μ(0)ε(0)Gi=1, which means that Gi=с^2 where i is inertial constant, i=1, 346*10^28[g/cm]; or k°=1/i=7, 429*10^-29[cm/g]:  
k(Friedmann)/k°=8π; where k°=r(pl)/m(pl).
3.For clarity, let's draw an analogy.
In electrodynamics, a circular conductor detects the properties of two conductors with currents flowing in opposite directions, since for each section of a conductor with a current on the opposite side there is a reverse current flow.
Thus, the conductor is self-repelled by the magnetic force: F(m)=μ(0)I(e)^2, where I(e) is the electric current. 
4.Then the force of inertia is: F(i)=(1/i)[I(G)^2], where I(G)=mw. That is, the expansion of the mechanical system is due to the inertial force of self-repelled (it is clear that this is not an anti-gravitational force).
5.In the case of the Universe; the gravitational current flowing along the phase trajectory: I(universe)=M(universe)H, respectively, the inertial force of self-expansion:
6.It is clear that this approach is also valid for bodies moving in the same direction: then the inertial force of attraction will "appear", and this is not a gravitational, and even more so, not a "dark matter" effect.
{For example, when stars rotate around the center of galaxies.}
P.S. The motion of the particle in orbit is equivalent to a closed current, and the current creates an inertial moment, defined by the formula: M(i)= I(G)S, where I(G) is the current strength, S is the area streamlined by the current. Then Planck's constant can be interpreted as a quantum of inertia moment: ħ=I(pl)S(pl).
Appendix 
0.If, for example, the displacement current is defined as a physical quantity equal to the ratio of the amount of charge Δq that has passed through a certain cross-section during a certain time Δt to the value of this time interval: I(e)=∆q/∆t, then we are talking about the interaction of charges and a site streamlined by current, however, the formula It does not reflect this fact: the presence of a cross-section is ignored here.
1.This was due to the fact that the reference frame and coordinate system can only be associated with material objects, since the implementation of a reference system for an "immaterial cross-section" is allegedly impossible.
2.But now that it is already known that 4-space itself has dynamic properties, it is time to reconsider this point of view from the point of view of the relational principle?
3.Although, it is better to introduce a strong principle of general covariance: the observer is always involved in an unavoidable measurement process.
It seems that there have never been any problems with QM already within the framework of GR (for example, in the case of the Schrodinger Cat).
4.A live cat breathes and, accordingly, emits gravitational waves according to the formula GR with intensity: I(G)=(2G/45c^5)(M^2)(l^4)(w^6), where M is the mass of the cat, l is its characteristic size, w is its frequency breathing.The frequency of gravitational radiation should be on the order of w~ 2π/т where т is the characteristic time of accelerated mass movement (pulsation, rotation, collision, non-spherical explosion).It is clear that the dead cat is not breathing and I(G) =0. {By the way, a "smile" without a cat can be detected according to Einstein's equations. Raising one of the indices, substituting I=k and summing, we find: R=-(8πG/c^4)T, where T=T(n) is the trace of the energy-momentum tensor (~ "gravitational memory.").}
5.In principle, all this lends itself to a certain (improbability) constant measurement without opening the "black box", since gravity is not shielded [w=w(m)]. Moreover, the behavior of the radiation source is also controlled, since it emits only in an excited state.
6.{Why didn't Einstein use this argument? He wasn't sure about the reality of gravitational waves and assumed only the presence of hidden parameters…}
7.Then, the formula of the moment of inertia can be rewritten: M=mI(S), where I(S)=Sw is the current of 4-space, more precisely, the flow of the front of a gravitational or light wave ( in fact, this is a relativistic expression of Kepler's second law). 
8.Since the interaction of a gravitational or light wave with a material particle leads to the transfer of energy-momentum to the particle, the phenomenon is described by the symmetric formula: E=I(G)I(S). 
9.Obviously, in the quantum description of the phenomenon (M=ħ) the formula looks like this: ε(pl)=I[G(pl)]I[S(pl)]
{=m(pl)w(pl)*S(pl)w(pl), where I[S(pl)] is the quantum expression of Kepler's second law}. 
10.Moreover, I[S(pl)]=ħ/m(pl): is a quantum of the inertial flow Ф(i) = (½)S(pl)w(pl) = h/4πm(pl). {Magnetic flux is quantized: = h/2e, Josephson’s const; and the mechanical and magnetic moments are proportional.}
11..This approach* leads to the quantization of gravity: in QG, it is a constant in the basic formula of the quantum expression of the Newtonian gravitational potential:
ф(G)=-(1/2)[ħ/m(pl)]w=-Ф(i)w.
It is clear that we are talking about gravity/inertial induction.

*) - The disciple will notice that electrodynamics has achieved great success, compared with mechanics, thanks to the introduction of the concept of current, and will write down Kepler's law as follows: I(G)= mw=v^3/G, where I(G) is the gravitational current: I(G)=[g•sec^-1]. By the way, Maxwell's realization of the displacement current effect is the culmination of all (mechanics+electrodynamics) classical physics.

[trucid]

I really feel like Tim Palmer's work is underappreciated in the physics community.

[bryandraughn]

It's about time someone who's very smart considers something besides "big numbers" as the ultimate explanation for sentience in the universe.
The universe is still young, the earth spawned life when it was very young.
Creatures like us have every reason to suspect that we are a normal product of the universe and not a one time fluke.
It's one thing for a complex system to occasionally form. It's quite another for a complex system to form, and then to become more and more complex in short order. It's worth looking into at least. To assume that we completely understand everything about how life came to be is crazy.