The (Simplest) Model That Explains Everything

Welcome to Theories of Everything's "Rethinking the Foundations of the Physics: What is Unification?" series featuring Latham Boyle.

Latham Boyle is a theoretical physicist known for his work on cosmology, quantum gravity, and the early universe, particularly in the context of exploring new models of the Big Bang and time symmetry.

LINKS MENTIONED:

Timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
01:31 - Latham’s TOE (The CPT-Symmetric Universe)
04:41 - New Particles
10:09 - What is Unification?
23:05 - The Early Universe
28:36 - Inflation
34:42 - The Early Universe (continued)
39:25 - New Symmetry
47:02 - Primordial Perturbations
56:16 - Dark Matter
01:03:02 - Model Predictions Outlined
01:14:39 - Arrow of Time Explained
01:24:24 - Gravitational Entropy Calculation
01:55:22 - Conclusion and Summary
02:12:22 - Outro / Support TOE

TOE'S TOP LINKS:
- Become a YouTube Member Here:

SPONSORS (please check them out to support TOE):

Other Links:

#science #physics #podcast #universe #theoreticalphysics #theory #bigbang #singularity

[IamPoob]

I've always preferred reducing and simplifying

[TheMikesylv]

Simplest solution is usually the right solution

[russelldicken]

The more details I get of this theory the more it makes sense. Maybe that’s just me, but it looks right.

[nunomaroco]

Hi, incredible talk, if it's correct it's super interesting 🤔

[sonicasx]

This picture is incomplete. The expanding mouths of the cone must merge with each other. Because in the quantum world, the concept of time is virtual, there is a real timelessness and you cannot explain this without including the waves going back in time on this side of the mirror. John Cramer's interpretation of the process says exactly this. The mirror moves from the universe in time. Waves going backwards have to shake hands with waves going forward in time in this universe. This is purely information time, not real time. Here we are not talking about things ontologically, but the time of information that represents things. We are talking about potential existence. If you are a materialist, you can never understand quantum physics, it is in the breadth of reality. You can't resist it eventually disappearing from your hands. You will definitely understand the value of this saying "it from end". There is no way out of this... If you are conditioned that there is no program, you cannot find the program. Try to leave the secular perspective and look at it from this perspective.

[shawns]

The fundamental phenomenon of dilation explains dark matter/galaxy rotation curves. Mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". A graph illustrates its squared nature, dilation increases at an exponential rate the closer you get to the speed of light. A time dilation graph illustrates the same phenomenon, it's not just time that gets dilated.
Dilation occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. This includes the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers.
The mass at the center of our own galaxy is dilated. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us.
Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has been confirmed in 6 very low mass galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have no dark matter. In other words they have normal rotation rates. All planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates for the same reason.

[stephensmith]

Ironically, Sir Arthur Eddington writes (page 200 in Space, Time and Gravitation) about finding mirrors of sort: “… all through the physical world runs that unknown content, which surely be the stuff of our consciousness. Here is a hint of aspects deep within the world of physics, and yet unattainable by methods of physics. And moreover, we have found that where science has progressed the furthest, the mind has but regained from nature that which mind has put into nature.”

[js]

Cosmic inflation is a cyclical process

[markphc]

I dislike all the untestable inflation models, but neutrino oscillation requires them all to have mass in the standard model

[Iophiel]

"Has anyone ever noticed prior to you that the singularity at the big bang was an analytic one?" Yes... but they tend to abuse undergrads if they bring it up.

[petrimuinonen]

I'm afraid these guys are not handling the analyticity of crossing singularity any better than Stephen Hawking did in his day. Hawking tried it with an imaginary time but failed.

I think it was Peter Woit in a recent interview who really well and in detail explained what happens to the wave function if one tries a work-around using imaginary time, and how it irremediably messes up other parts of theory, related to e.g. parity conservation if I recall it right. Will have to look it up and bring the link here if allowed

[rotatingmind]

Why do all left-handed and right-handed leptons have the same mass except the neutrinos?

[theboomerperspective]

Blud needs to start taking speaking classes, that was absolute hell to go through

[synthclub]

Finally some synth based laden music intro to underpin the dark brooding frontiers of theories of everything I can get behind. 🎶

[thetruthexperiment]

Saying “what if science is wrong” will always be one of the funniest things a person can say. Obviously newtonian physics is a correct model in terms of moving objects within reach. Obviously Relativity is in part correct. But even a child knows science doesn’t “know” everything. I don’t think Newton considered the laws of physics to be a “theory of everything” though I’m sure he was searching for it. Nobody ever made a believable case for the big bang. It has always been a place holder. A lazy place holder. A very very very very lazy place holder. If that hasn’t dawned on you from the first day you took an interest in cosmology then you’ll just believe whatever you’re told no matter how flaccid it is. Someone wanted to be the first to put a start date on the universe and hardly anyone even talks about the nuances of the theory because they don’t want anyone to think hard about it.

[KaliFissure]

Time is a compactified dimension one single Planck second in size.
This is why we can't move in time.
This is why there are limits of lambda and event horizon.
This is why there is conservation, a closed system at every moment.
And these limits in density of time mean density of energy which is density of space.
A gradient from minima to maxima density... sounds like gravity to me.
And according to limit theorem the closure <<< is between them.
In at event horizon
It in deep void.

Neutron in at event horizon
Takes EinsteinRosen bridge
Neutron out at minima, lowest energy density point of space where the quantum basement is lowest and easiest to penetrate.
Then the neutron decays into amorphous monatomic hydrogen, proton electron soup, Dark matter.
The decay from neutron 0.6fm³ to 1m³ of amorphous hydrogen gas is a volume increase of around 10⁴⁵.
Expansion.
Dark energy.

And then this amorphous hydrogen stabilizes and coalesces and falls towards an event horizon.

Loop

Neutron decay cosmology is inevitable. 🖖

[gariusjarfar]

In the universe, spin, in the atomic world, spin, seems there's a connection between both regarding a theory of unity.

[billschwandt]

That "mirror" looks a lot like a magnetic plane of inertia.

[spiralsun]

He mentions Penroses ideas about singularity but these all apply to existing universes. Which is circular like saying all life comes from previous life. Because every time you do the math it looks that way. BUT you have to look far beyond those iterations to the origin. And that definitely means singularity and infinity. There’s no other way anything could exist. Certainly not a symbolic universe where mathematics works like it does. Being a mathematician, he was trained in fearing and dispelling infinities. His theories reflect that. What we need to know is ultimately where, original and destination. They seem to be the same thing in different forms. Like in human development as I say in my first book “The Textbook of the Universe: the Genetic Ascent to God”. We shouldn’t confuse the symbolic aspects of the Big Bang with the functional.

[corrupted_realm]

The dimensions are probably fractal based on the observation point on the complex disc that can be mapped infinitely. This can be observed using fractals and calculus to zoom in/out indefinitely.