Sir Roger Penrose on collaborating with Wolfgang Rindler on Spinors and Space Time

Sir Roger Penrose, the British scholar who won half of the 2020 Nobel Prize in physics “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity,” gave a transatlantic talk over Zoom at noon Thursday, Sept. 2, 2021, titled, “Spinors, Space-Time, and Working with Wolfgang Rindler.”

The Nobel laureate and the late UT Dallas physics professor Wolfgang Rindler, who was one of the most prominent experts in theoretical relativistic cosmology and general relativity, enjoyed a 2-year collaboration during the writing of their 2-volume work, “Spinors and Space-Time,” first published in 1984 by Cambridge University Press.

Rindler, whose research dealt with the origin, evolution and structure of the universe, was instrumental not only in the founding of the Department of Physics at UT Dallas, but also in the rise of scientific research at the University. Dean David W. Hyndman of the School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics introduces Sir Roger Penrose and reads the audience questions to Sir Roger Penrose.

At UTD Physics, we're dedicated to fostering a dynamic environment where exploration knows no bounds. Our world-renowned faculty are research-active experts in atomic, molecular and optical (AMO) physics, astrophysics and cosmology, biophysics, experimental condensed matter, geophysics, high-energy physics, nanotechnology, plasma physics, quantum information science, remote sensing and aerial vehicles, space sciences and theoretical condensed matter, at the forefront of groundbreaking research.

Our students embark on a journey of discovery, delving deep into the mysteries of the universe and forging connections between abstract concepts and real-world applications. Our program empowers individuals to thrive in their pursuit of knowledge.

Experience the excitement firsthand at our department colloquium, where leading scientists converge to share cutting-edge research in a manner accessible to all.

[UTDScience]

Experience the excitement firsthand at UTD Physics' colloquium, where leading scientists converge to share cutting-edge research in a manner accessible to all.
Ignite your passion for physics and join us in shaping the future of science: utd.link/colloquium

[ArwenAreYouOK]

This here is a dadgum outstanding lecture.
There ain't nobody who can put their foot where Sir Roger Penrose's foot's put. Greatest to ever...

[ExhumedPutrifact]

What an amazing lecture to access on Youtube!

[Andospar]

Loved the presentation! Thank you for sharing.

[rudypieplenbosch]

Wow, he even created his own diagrams for Spinors, his mind is all about geometry, amazing 👏. It's amazing where he shows the spinor analogy between gravity and electromagnetism, while this symmetry is not clear when looking at it from a tensor perspective.

[makanani]

Would love to have just one conversation with Mr. Penrose.

[brendawilliams]

The twisters are very nice. Thankyou for sharing.

[rubenramosbalsa]

Amazing video!! A gift to the audience

[onemediuminmotion]

The reason that (e.g. "microscopic" and "quantum" ) size scales are only physically defined as purely relative to each other, i.e. in terms of their role in emergent diversity of "structure" native to (as only possible at) these various self-relative (such as our "macroscopic") size scales is the fact that the most elementary geometry of the SUM's* self-relative motion is that of the horn toroidal fluid vortex (HTV), which is more or less spherical and circular, i.e. as a hypersphere. If we wish to construct (approximations of) other geometric structures, such as a cube or other straight-edge polyhedron, we can do so by arranging multiple (more than one) of these simple particulate HTVs into a lattice** whose outer surfaces become closer and closer approximations to perfectly straight lines and flat planes the greater the number of HTV's of a given standard baseline "size" that we incorporate into the lattice.

This 'purely self-relative' function of size scale in structure is perfectly described by the Fourier Series. And this carries right down to the 'quantum mechanical' scales where the self-relative motion (accelerating/acceleration-) flow trajectories of an otherwise scale uniform medium begin to take on (i.e. non-uniform) 'structure' as such. It is at this 'wave/particle-transition' scale also that we first 'see' elementary "particulate" HTVs (a.k.a. "mass particles") "in motion" -- i.e. with-as-through the flow-geodesics of the surrounding 'empty space' SUM -- "with respect to each other"

*'scale-uniform medium' -- a.k.a. "spacetime"

** NOTE - thereby "also" affecting the "network" structural principle as being "distributed - in - space - over - time"* * *

* * * (thereby "also" phenomenologically manifesting "extension in space [over time]")* * * *

* * * * NOTE: I also refer to this emergent [physical/phenomenological, if you will] "proliferation of structural diversity" in terms of, and by means of, the ("otherwise") SUM's self-relative motion as ""the bifurcational proliferation of complementarities".

[michaelwalsh]

I have met a few spinners too. Awesome, tremendous lecture! Many thanks for sharing.

[SeekHunt]

Not too long ago I searched whether gravity can be modelled as transverse waves or not. I hadn't considered many of the implications here at all, including the potential bridge to tensor networks.

[rhcpmorley]

Astonishing maths. But if Space (in this context) is the dimension of [relative] Position (hence xyz axis) and Time (in this context) is the dimension of Change (hence 'rate'); why isn't Spacetime simply the dimension of Changing [relative] Position aka Motion? Or, being reference frame specific, actually the dimension of Constant Motion, [Spacetime-time the dimension of Constant acceleration, Spacetime-time-time the dimension of increasing acceleration etc (over to the mathematicians again)]. I don't get it. Either way, Spacetime is abstract...and abstract's can't 'cause' anything. They can only model and predict...?

[sonarbangla]

Quantum mechanics is represented by the complex plane/sphere and real line is representing classical world. Reimann's stereographic projection of the plane on the sphere represents Hilbert's infinite dimensional quantum universe of Maldacena.

[ticthak]

In 15 or 20 seconds of exposition, Dr. Penrose clarified cyclic cosmology at the end there on a point I've had struggles with for some years now.

[timelsen]

Weyl curvature is tidal like negative Gaussian curvature in the R and T manifold subspace in the vacuum about a mass, while Ricci curvature is overall volume contraction when the mass density is within the volume considered. This is why the vacuum is Ricci flat. Net dilation or contraction of space requires the region to contain some mass density distribution. Since mass is always a positive density distribution it must be the case that Ricci or mean curvature is always positive. Please correct me on any errors for the big picture most generally. I love Rodger Penose and his geometric leanings. Many students are dissuaded from deeper geometric thought, as streamlined yet more superficial algebra is more highly recognized due to fast answers.

[Spiegelradtransformation]

is math powerful enough to describe a piece of ART.

[silberlinie]

Can we please use Wolfram's Mathematica and
its excellent graphics capabilities to produce a
nice clean colored visualization of this structure?
1:26:25

[ElwoodAndersonNV]

We seem to have at least three theories of the formation of the universe, Penrose's CCC theory, the expansion theory of Guth, et al, the space-time theory of Richard Lewis that proceeds from the general theory of relativity, and string theory explored by many physicists. And, we're still wrestling with how quantum mechanics can be reconciled with the general theory of relativity. The only theory that claims to not require extra dimensions and a cosmological constant, and tries to explain what dark matter and dark energy are is the Richard Lewis theory. Yet, we don't see any questioning of the claims of Richard Lewis by the proponents of the other theories, or by physicists not strongly identified with any of these theories. We have had videos of Guth and Penrose discussing their theories, but none of Lewis and the other theorists. It's time the video makers give us such videos.

[Killer_Kovacs]

We would require the capability to detect folds in space time for the negative of a particle to be observable.
57:02 this part seems important
The similarity of a spinnor and an atomic orbital is striking.
Couldn't a hypersphere be positive on the exterior and negative on the interior; vice versa?

[FrancisTSYu]

Do you know that we are living within an energy conservation dynamics universe? If you do, then you may have the answer.