Timestamps and Sponsors: - MyHeritage: Buy a DNA kit here: bit.ly/TOE_MH Use the coupon code TOE for free shipping. As an added bonus, you can start a 30-day free trial of MyHeritage's best subscription for family history research - and enjoy a 50% discount if you decide to continue it. - Masterworks: Skip the waitlist and invest in blue-chip art for the very first time by signing up for Masterworks www.masterworks.art/theoriesofeverything. Purchase shares in great masterpieces from artists like Pablo Picasso, Banksy, Andy Warhol, and more. See important Masterworks disclosures: www.masterworks.com/cd 00:00:00 Introduction 00:02:50 Artificially intelligence "world government" 00:06:23 Introspection for self-knowledge (limits and power) 00:09:02 Buddhism and Taoism (for language) + suffering 00:09:54 Will humans survive? 00:10:44 What progress has been made in the study of language rules 00:13:02 Recursive "merge" 00:26:08 Dolphin and sperm whale languages (complexity measure?) 00:29:32 Philosophy of science 00:32:54 Symbol grounding problem and grounding moral philosophy 00:41:20 "Science is like a drunk at a lamppost" 00:42:36 Mind-body problem is misconceived 00:51:21 Sabine Hossenfelder on "ChatGPT Understands Language" 00:55:00 Modern language models refute Chomsky's approach to language 00:58:56 Bare phrase structure theory (inclusiveness condition) 01:01:09 Intentionality and Searle's Chinese Room Experiment 01:05:45 Generative grammar and metaphysics (Langan's CTMU) 01:07:52 Consciousness creating reality? 01:11:59 Does Universal Grammar hold up to "Bayesian modeling"? 01:13:28 AGI Scaring Chomsky 01:14:56 Linguistic successors of Chomsky 01:16:11 Human language capacity vs. arithmetical capacity (is it related?) 01:20:23 "You can't know anything for certain" and Nihilism
Suffering comes from greed called Lobha. Not from non-greedy desire called Chanda. Desire associates with greed only if desire is associated with attachment (called Raaga in Pali).
I spent a couple years reading and studying Noam Chomsky back around 1995-6 and then I quoted and used Noam Chomsky for my policy activism work at University of Minnesota - Twin Cities. I then included Noam Chomsky in my master's thesis and I received a nice long reply from Noam Chomsky in 2001. I saved his email reply and I post it into youtube comments because he's a prominent public figure - a public intellectual. I don't agree with everything Noam Chomsky says but most of it. hahaha. In fact Noam Chomsky's latest statements have emphasized Music as a probable origin of human language - and this is what I have emphasized to him also. My latest email reply I received from Chomsky said that he wished he had the time to study noncommutativity.
I swear, so many people are sleeping on this channel and are unaware of how much value such discussions brings to the world...youre so underrated Kurt, but you will blow soon!
It's a good channel but he has a lot of shallow guests like Bernardo Kastrup and various others with silly theories of reality that are just descriptive and a waste of time; either bring a model with a testable hypothesis or a interpretation of history that offers some insight into the current problem not a useless tautology.
@@connectingupthedots, if you're only interested in materialism, this is the wrong channel for you. Both mathematics and philosophy have vast areas unrelated to materialism. Our grasp of physical sciences is really only a few hundred years old. If our knowledge base survived into the far future, 10,000 years from now, it would barely be recognized.
Chomsky's mind at 90 plus, is simply amazing. I speak as an octogenarian with some experience in mental challenges. As an ex-math teacher on the secondary level, I'd recommend George Lakoff's book titled Where Mathematics Comes From (Hint: metaphors) that reinforces Chomsky's theory that it's an offshoot of language "faculty". Amazing, amazing person. He could still make mistakes, of course.
The Chomsky documentary, Manufacturing Consent, should be mandatory viewing in every high school curriculum. It opened my eyes to Noam and understanding media propaganda.
I happened to read the original book some thirty years ago, and still do keep regularly getting back to it. That very reading changed my entire world view for ever, just like the sort of initial enlightenment I’d already experienced more than a decade prior, around age 15, when being taught Plato’s ‘’Allegory of the Cave’’. Noam’s irreplaceable lucidity and sharpness of thought, coupled with such a genuine humility, are a unique treasure for humankind.
When I went to hear Chomsky I recall feeling my mind literally expand - I was exhausted for days lol 😂 Seriously, this man has a depth of knowledge that’s extraordinary and quite literally mind bending
These interviews are beyond nourishing. What a joy to be able to have access to this man's thoughts and what great interviewing and questioning from you Curt, really bringing the best out of Noam. Inspirational how he keeps going, because he wants to help so much. He's like a bodhisattva.
Can you please do another one? This is for eternity!! Pleaaaaaase. He is always talking about politics, and these are one of the few interviews where he’s actually talking about other things, and this is such a valuable service to humanity.
Thank you so much. I've spoken to Noam Chomsky about nine times actually. ru-vid.com/group/PLZ7ikzmc6zlORiRfcaQe8ZdxKxF-e2BCY Browse the titles and see which appeals to you most. - Curt
Thanks to both the presenters for having Professor Chomsky on the show, Prof Chomsky himself for his quiet certitude; and everyone who asked a question for P Chomsky; I can only hope that the neoliberal Götterdämmerung leaves us all pens, paper and through the gasps for breath perhaps a leftover of this Epochen will retain the desire for learning like was evidenced by all who participated in this Chomsky "Take-Out" on the conscious mind. Engaging; and it actually inspired me and broke my LONG writer's block for anything but short pieces and poetry! Nothing plagiaristic, just a phrase jumped out at me, all the way up here in Canada! I look forward to all the research I'll have to start doing on a few subjects I'm relatively unfamiliar with. Thank you all again, and thank you for your time, as well. Herzlich Glückwünschen
It's gonna be very interesting if there's a conversation between Noam Chomsky, Rupert Spira and Bernardo Kastrup - I think this pairing hasn't been done before. Thanks for the amazing content and all the hard work you put in those videos and prep work behind the scenes, Curt! ❤🙏
With respect I don't think Rupert and Chomsky would be able to find much common-ground to operate in, Bernardo on the other hand, I would pay to hear that.
@@herbalfleece8821 I absolutely agree that Rupert and Chomsky have zero common ground, but the reason why I added him into the mix is that only Rupert can add those extra invaluable insights. So, the main point of conversing would rather go between Bernardo and Chomsky on analytical grounds, while Rupert may add his amazing insights in key moments, which I'm sure would enrich the conversation.
@@lavalavalavalavalava Absolutely! And I don't expect any of them to shift their point of view as result from this conversation (especially given the fact it's their work of a lifetime), and that's not the point. They have contrasting ideas, and when there's contrast, the subject becomes better defined for the viewers to discern.
Rupert along with Sam Harris (more names escape me now) could be a great contributor to helping these existential crises of our time. What happened to the idea that putting the greatest minds, in their respective fields , together to form some kind of collective priority for each “problem “ . Then once there’s a more tangible and clear vision for the future of our species and what we need to collectively address and collaborate on. I feel like everyone, on some level, knows that we are in a very difficult time in our history and that we need to do “something” to insure our future. But, no one knows what to do about anything other then either go on living in ignorance or attempt to make a positive impact in the lives around them…. No one person can have the information and wisdom to seek out the truth and the toxicity of our collective cultures and political systems etc… Every aspect of our existence has problems to address but without the greatest minds of our time, we are surely doomed, right? Is it possible to have an alliance of some sort that would allow for these philosophers, scientists, scholars, historians, etc to work together?
According to my experience of Buddhism, suffering and desire need to be seen a lot more differentiated. Buddhism differentiates between 1) Suffering from suffering (that what Noam referred to), 2) Suffering of not getting what we desire, 3) Suffering of fearing to loose what we desired and finally got - and the subtle one, 4) Suffering from the subtle disappointment of our expectations of achieving happiness after getting the so desired substances, things, fame, fortunes and relationships
@TheoriesofEverything I will be listening to this again and again.. Curt, the work you're doing is incredibly important. Also, thank you for your continued interest in the UAP phenomenon. The world needs curious people on this subject who are also critical thinkers and scientifically minded. ..and we need those people to be visible in order to help guide the thinking of our populace. It needs it. You are doing exactly that. 🙏 thank you again. Peace to you.
Oh jeez oh man, good to hear Chomsky's insights but my god what a jarring and shameless plug of the con that is masterworks at 21:12. when you said "masterworks is the Higgs Boson in your investment portfolio" I actually lol'd.
Hearing Chomsky talking about Pierce is fantastic. Two of the most gifted minds the Americas have every produced and influential beyond their years. Great interview
Dear Curt, I love your discussions, thank you. Noam is on another level from his knowledge of language and communication, through his philosophy of science, his examinations and explications of the manipulation of media by the oligarchy, to the utter humanity of his position on disenfranchised groups, in particular the Palestinians.
I'd love to see more questions and sharing on "inner speech" that Noam talks about - the basis of how we talk/communicate internally. Somatic therapists and explorers use this type of communication with inner communication systems of the body such as Bonnie Bainbridge Cohen. And introspection is the place where one can explore this inner communication that is pre-language and non-language based and based on the sensory nervous system and feeling systems of the body. How Bonnie Bainbridge Cohen and others work on developing collective progress of the species is by sharing the experiences of people as they explore their inner world so we can build a collective picture of that inner world. Introspection in isolation can only take us so far.
Noam is the Galileo Galilei of this century. Please invite him more and more and discuss pure scientific topics like this. He is old and his every minute is so precious for us. Bring him more and more and love you Kurt for asking the good questions.
Intellectual concepts and speech are just like a small boat on the huge ocean of the collective mind and ‚behind that‘ is the ultimate reality which cannot be thought or talked about. This is where the gates of NOW as timeless time and HERE as spaceless space can lead us.
before the dude shouts in the end, that it's your 9th time here. I was wondering why Chomsky interviewing with this guy a lot, and to be honest his questions are awesome , I didn't know some of them even exist . , and of course the dude is SHARP , Chomsky on 1.5 speed is amazing.
I agree with you that Noam Chomsky is a brilliant thinker and that his work is essential for understanding the world we live in. His work on Universal Grammar has had a profound impact on our understanding of language, and his work on media propaganda has been instrumental in exposing the ways in which the media is used to manipulate public opinion. I also agree that the Chomsky documentary, Manufacturing Consent, should be mandatory viewing in every high school curriculum. It is an eye-opening film that exposes the ways in which the media is used to control our thoughts and beliefs.
The way I talk about science, I think of it as a social institution, rather than as a coherent philosophy. The "drunk at a lamppost", I would say is referring to a narrow view of empiricism. It's unflattering, but I think Noam is mostly correct in his assessment. I expand on empiricism a little by conceptualizing the process as a dialog, or interrogation, through observation and experimentation with "the universe"/"objective reality". The game is to get as much accurate information out of the exchange as possible, and from this information, to build theories of reality, largely in an attempt to get more information out of the dialog, but also with applications anywhere accurate, testable theories and predictions are of use. The problem is noted here, it's not a coherent philosophy, so much as it is a method for theory production and validation. Whatever philosophy you have to acquire to produce better theories is the correct one, until the next observation shows it isn't. Whatever the universe tells you is truth, even though it clearly doesn't speak your language. I think of science in a similar way, but that's more of a social institution that reflects the empiricism of its participants. Due to the philosophical versatility of empiricism, scientists seem to be able to believe everything and the opposite, and still make progress by continually proving themselves incorrect, incomplete, contradictory, and vastly superior to alternative methods of theory production when asking some of the hardest questions. Put enough of these drunks on the case and they'll find more keys in the dark than you asked them to! Which is to say, it happens to be quite an effective method, when scaled up to a social level. Interestingly, people seem to be vastly better at producing theory when engaging in these kinds of social games, as opposed to any individual effort. If science is a drunk under a lamppost looking for a key, then individual philosophy must be a passed out drunk, dreaming about what's behind the locked door.
Very important correction re: Buddhism says the cause of suffering is desire. This is incorrect. The cause of suffering (2nd noble truth) is reactivity to either pleasurable or unpleasant objects of/ experience. One side of it is attachment (e.g. to pleasurable experiences) and the other is aversion (pushing away from), it is those two things that cause suffering. Desire per se is not the cause of suffering.
Chomsky is incredible at this age. His argument that LLMs can learn impossible languages that human beings can't is on point. Given a meaningless grammar, an LLM can learn meaningless patterns and as a result output meaningless patterns. What is there to understand from a meaningless grammar though? All it is is a model that approximates arbitrarily closely, where the delta depends on the training data.
The title "Buddhism Meets Ai" has nothing to do with the actual video. Buddhism was mentioned only once or twice and was only one of the short questions. What does that mean?
@@TheoriesofEverything no no no, it's great, these premieres make sure that I watch the video, but sometimes waiting is hard haha. Good job anyway, love your work!!!
Mathematical Linguistics is another interesting subject. The Science of abstracting and formalizing quantities and patterns can be applied to grammar in order to identify and formalize its components.
Indeed especially his endorsement of segregating the unvaccinated. "Noam Chomsky argued that those who remain unvaccinated should be segregated, saying that obtaining food after they had "the decency to remove themselves from the community" was "their problem." After the left-wing linguist was asked what separation of the unvaccinated would look like on a practical level, Chomsky said the unvaccinated should remove themselves from the community for the safety of others and make arrangements to get food without coming into contact with others.
I don't know about all that. I just see him actively encouraging intellectual engagement every where he goes. I don't have to agree with all his particular opinions on every topic to appreciate this. @@nwogamesalert
A pity that Noam never got in touch with Buddhism and/or Advaita Vedanta. There is so much knowledge about the conventional and ultimate reality, about all the dependent arising of our ‚material world‘ from ‚no-thing‘, about the imputation of words and mental concepts of perceptions, sensations and feelings in order to remember and predict, in order to create time and space in a timeless and spaceless ‚underlying’ reality.
there is a question we are not asking, and it is that we are not going to be able to recognize if this chatbot is going to create new ideas or is it going to steal them from some computer before known, is it the end of privacy? everytime you use a free ap you are giving away most of your info
You or Noam are likely aware, but I saw a talk recently by Bob Coecke on the "ICTP: Quantitative Life Sciences" (see: _Compositional Intelligence_ ) channel concerning work done by Coecke, along with Mernoosh Sarzadeh and Stephen Clark, based on unifying Roger Penrose's sort of visual tensor representations as used in quantum computing and Jim Lambek's grammar algebra that essentially finds a homology between UG-type grammars and a class of restricted neural networks. I thought it might have been pertinent to the discussion with AI - specifically as a sort of rebuttal to Noam's own view on its discontinuity.
The fact that introspection has indeed limits, should not be glossed over. This is the biggest mystery of the world hiding in plain sight! How does the unconscious become conscious?
chomsky mention Language models make errors and Hallucinate: yes they do, but there are develoments and tecniques addressing this problem with ''grounding'', the models as they are will be used for their ability to process language, that's what these language are modelling.
Thank you! Nothing seems more important for me these days than, admittedly, Listening to this Man! Mr. Dr. Prof. Noam Chomksy. Thank you! One has one's work, if lucky. But then... a bout of Learning...? before a rip-roaring or slow movie. `Cause when Descartes' name comes up, the feel is as with Galileo and many, many others...the work is not finished! Much is said there, don't miss the many jewel... Man is failing! There is much to do...
Could someone comment here the name of the person who wrote the article quoted by Noam Chomsky at 19:47 . The link to article or DOI will also help. Thank you.
Recursive merge ? Might have been useful to have had a definition. I know you prefer your listeners to have a Phd in physics but must one also have one in linguistics?
You should interview physicist Thomas Campbell author of a theory is everything based on consciousness and simulation VR hypothesis which is currently being tested experimentally with novel quantum mechanics
I spoke to Thomas Campbell twice :) ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kko-hVA-8IU.html is Part 1 and Part 2 is also on the channel here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5nyXBX1fHpo.html.
After reading social media for over 20 years, it has become painfully clear that many are not willing to see past the 'virtual reality' of the language they speak. I suspect Aristotle was in the correct realm when he engaged in his philosophy. Later many Catholic theologians followed the same philosophy as the good ones walked an entire spectrum of Catholic human behavior that was mapped along the 10 Commandments based on Aristotelian etherical imperatives expressed in Roman Catholic Language. But all authentic religions seem to agree on Natural Law. There are 10 Commandments 3 Commandments toward God 7 Commandments toward Humanity - the Noahide Covenant already agrees with the Hindu and Buddhist philosophies. They mirror the very structure of the language we speak: There are eight parts of speech in the English language: noun, pronoun, verb, adjective, adverb, preposition, conjunction, and interjection. All 10 Commandments would need to be properly balanced within the lively virtues: chastity, temperance, charity, diligence, patience, kindness, and humility. Aristotle posits 10 categories of existing things: substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, time, position, doing, having, and being affected. Each of these terms was defined by Aristotle in pretty much the same way we would define it today, the one exception being substance. But this would be true regardless of genetic background - Plato regarded democracy as little more than mob rule by another name-perhaps without the violence, at least at first. The distributism model of G.K. Chesterton that awakens reciprocal financial benefits along ALL PEOPLE seems to be the the only authentic democracy: African, American Indian, Asian, Australian, European, Indian, Melanesian, Micronesian & Polynesian. Peace
Question anything interesting? You've been following in the new cycle lately that bears on topics of interest? Question, anything that I should have asked that you'd be willing to share with me? Question, have you reconsidered your position on mandatory vaccination? Question, given the free exchange of information is necessary to solve the world's problems and move forward together. Do you have any suggestions for how to improve free speech on the web?
There's huge debate about what is going on under the hood in LLM's. It's not known whether their behavior is purely superficial statistical patters or whether they may have developed some kind of underlying representation. Does Chomsky admit the possibility that such systems could be converging on some kind of underlying grammar despite arriving by a totally different route from normal children learning language.
Hey Curt, I respect Chomsky but some of the definitions and understanding of Buddhism are out right wrong here. I would love if you could interview someone from Swami Sarvapriyananda (from Advait Vedantic philosophy), and then someone Buddhism, thanks
The disembodied "voice" in consciousness (thought) is not a part of the physical realm and does not "mix" well with it. The connection between thought and the physical realm is illusory.
Why is Buddhism in the title? Chomsky would never mention Buddhism if the interviewer didn’t bring it up, and even when it’s brought up, Chomsky has nothing to say about Buddhism.
Hi Michael. Maybe I could ask you here on such neutral and inconspicuous territory (though it's an odd choice still, only chosen for convenience)-- Do you think that Dhammarato's emphasis on constantly changing thoughts to wholesome status is excessive, and strays into potential aversion? And/or positive psychology at the expense of "actual" dhamma which functions largely via transcendence through deep familiarity with the 3 characteristics, not through such constant thought involvement?
@@NothingTheGreat I will say that Dhammarato, like most Dhamma teachers, focuses on one (very important) aspect of Dhamma because most people teach the aspects that worked best for them. The Buddha taught for 45 years to tens if not hundreds of thousands of people so his teachings are broad, deep, and take many forms. The language he chose depended on the audience and occasion for the discourse. For this reason, we have inherited a wealth of Dhamma within which almost anyone can find a formula that works to lead the mind to liberation here and now. My only criticism of Dhammarato is the same I have for every Dhamma teacher I meet: he teaches what works for him as if it’s the whole or only teaching and criticizes or dismisses those teachings of others. In reality, whatever liberates the mind is Dhamma. The Buddha summarized Dukkha as “the five aggregates [when] afflicted by clinging.” Therefore, whether we are replacing unwholesome thoughts with wholesome thoughts or utilizing the three characters to disenchant the mind from the aggregates, if the mind is able to break its attachment/identification with form, feelings, perceptions, thoughts/images, and sensations, then that is the Dhamma that ends Dukkha. The Buddha did not argue about metaphysics. He didn’t confirm or deny things like rebirth. He just wanted us to see how ephemeral everything that arises is, so that we can break our enslavement to all that is conditioned. As Buddhists our duty is to absorb what is useful in the teachings to accomplish that end.
It still blows my mind that this well-respected mentor did what he did during the pandemic. I'll never forget it. Antithetical to everything he stood for. Everyone should be aware of this hypocrisy.
The complexity of the English language alone, in the USA, is unprecedented in its scope of failure to understand one another. With slang, accents and other forms of grammar (and lack there of) seems to have become the biggest obstacle in communication between all people. Family members are more likely to have a different understanding of grammar and vocabulary and more inclined to speak with inside common knowledge. Then someone from the West coast might struggle with clarity when speaking with a person from the east coast. Misunderstanding is the most crucial factor that ended my marriage. A person who couldn’t be bothered by using grammar or even using words that he had heard spoken by other people but didn’t fully understand the meaning of the word or the correct context. Somehow he didn’t understand why I didn’t understand what he was trying to convey which inevitably led to arguments and fights over words! Is there any correlation between this idea and what happens when people are constantly talking over each other and saying things they don’t mean but mean something that they don’t say? Social media is obviously not a friendly and or helpful tool for communicating with plenty more problems than just being unable to communicate properly. But in public communication with people at the gas station or the bank or whatever, it’s nearly impossible for everyone to exclude the emotional defense that they carry around like a default reaction to a interaction that they don’t know how the other person couldn’t possibly understand or if they understood “me” then why are they not helping me or sympathizing about the issue….. Do individuals have such diverse experiences that they’ve now developing their own personal perception of what their words mean, by definition?
I would answer, "yes" to most of that. It is exacting work to produce a sentence that conveys precisely the meaning desired by the speaker/writer, even amongst well-read individuals. Most words in any natural language have multiple denotations and multiple connotations, many of which shift over time, and which depend upon context set by the surrounding sentences, by socially conditioned expectations, and by tone of voice and gestures indicating when the intent is to posit an idea to explore as opposed to declaring something expected to be accepted as truth. (Anti-)social media makes it all worse because the medium is explicitly engineered to reward "engagement", not consensus and understanding. Add to that the anonymity of posting, and the situation is similar to how people behave once they are behind a tinted windshield -- they act in ways far more pointlessly aggressive than they might normally. As to your last question... while it is often claimed that no two people experience "blue" the same way, it hardly matters as long as the two people are shown the same color -- they aren't sharing nerve impulses, they are experiencing the same external stimulus and assigning it the same symbol. If some people are encouraged to yell "fake news" at anything that causes discomfort, there is no way to develop a shared vocabulary. The same goes for those who don't have the ability to hypothesize -- every statement has to be literal and explicit and involving themselves before they can even begin to imagine it being true for others.
All mentions of his friendship with the owner of a certain island were deleted on the community post for this interview. Weird, wonder how that happened...
@@TheoriesofEverythingI'm... Constantly surprised by your level of community engagement. Have always loved the channel, even when I'm not a huge fan of specific guests.
Everything... (ask)... Is there anything that exists & ever stop moving (completely), even a thought exists Answer that & you will understand (Everything), it's that simple
@@nicbarth3838 actually I’m saying the complete opposite. I’m extrapolating Chomsky’s analogy about the drunk man looking for his keys across the street from the light to humans in general. I mean come on bro, none of us know anything for certain, but it’s cool how we can confide in others that can produce the narratives of life. Happens everywhere in every country in every language.
@@Doberdobax ah sorry about that attack when Ive heard other people comment something similar its been from a sense of superiority but now that you replied im not geting that from you at all.. well thats embarrasing oh well ill try to not do that again, I dont try to call people out so I must have been frustrated about something in my life at that point. I agree with what your saying and I think its still valuable that these talks are happening, I started to branch out and consider idealism a little more about the origin of materialism, however im right now and have been even as a kid but without the concepts or vocab a materialist in that I thought that concioucness comes from something in my head, but now im on the physicalist road because materialism doesnt awnser it much and idealism while it does is unsatisfying, so I can only say its a combo of both or something else who knows but its nice that more hypothesis can get some attention because in the early 2000s if you said that you wanted to discuss concioucness and the science of how to indirectly quantify it you would have been laughted out of the room let alone to discuss idealism as underlying some of our scientific GUI so to speak that we interact with to test experiments and replicate research not that I would understand the ramifications of that. But yea glad this stuff being talked about because the awnser could lie in some composide of all these hypotheses or for all I know materislism has these awnsers but were in so much of in the begining of neroscience compared to so many other fields that we cant comprehend how close to infancy this field is.
@@nicbarth3838 I assume you’re younger than me so I just wanna give you a bit of advice; don’t think of ideas in concepts anymore, be open-minded but critical and patient about new information and do some deep diving into Alan Watts, I think you’ll love him. Have a great day or night my friend❤️
The interviewer is being unfair in asking Professor Chomsky, a renowned specialist in reductionist linguistics, about matters related to trans-personal human experience. Parts of this interview was akin to asking Mother Teresa about scientific theories and details having to do with a “black hole” or quarks as well as other subatomic particles/waves.