Edward Witten: "What's (Relatively) New in Two-Dimensional Gravity”

Institute for Pure & Applied Mathematics (IPAM)

Подписаться 32 тыс.

Просмотров 9 тыс.

50% 1

Green Family Lecture Series 2017
"What's (Relatively) New in Two-Dimensional Gravity”
Edward Witten, Institute for Advanced Study
Abstract: The talk will be devoted to explaining two relatively recent mathematical developments involving what physicists know as topological gravity in two dimensions. These results have not yet become well-known.
Among physicists, Maryam Mirzakhani, in her PhD work of roughly a decade ago, discovered a beautiful new proof of the Virasoro and KdV formulas for intersection theory on the moduli space of Riemann surfaces - formulas that reflect the relation of this intersection theory with matrix models of two-dimensional gravity. Much more recently, Pandharipande, Solomon, and Tessler (with later work by Buryak and Tessler) defined a version of intersection theory on the moduli space of Riemann surfaces with boundary and found a generalization of the Virasoro and KdV equations. Their results fit naturally in an extension of the matrix models to include vector degrees of freedom, as shown recently by Dijkgraaf and the speaker.
Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics, UCLA
December 1, 2017
For more information: www.ipam.ucla.edu/programs/pub...

Наука

Опубликовано:

1 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 12

@ShermerHighSchool 6 лет назад

Dr. Witten is a Giant amongst Giants!

@stanhootzz1904 6 лет назад

Thank you fer the post.

@enlongchiou 5 лет назад

Ch=(2*3.14)gm^2, 2 dimension space, 1 dimension oscillating time.

@hammadurrehman9371 4 года назад

Good

@paulmichaelfreedman8334 6 лет назад

I've been watching videos of many scientists , expecially Sean Carrol, who is on the frontier of theorital physics. Then I say HOLY CRAP to this, A whole new look at gravity. And I was just saying in another thread that even ed witten wasn't smart enough for quantum gravity, but I take it back. We're not worthy, all hail the Ed!

@enlongchiou 3 года назад

GR field solution 8*3.14*g(m*c^2/2)^2/c^4=2*3.14*g*m^2=ch=2(4*3.14*(A*137.036)^2*pm*c^2) 2D quantum gravity to ch=E*L=(2*A*137.036*pm*c^2)(4*3.14*A*137.036)=13.6*e/10973731 to E=chR=13.6*e, R=1/(4*3.14*A*137.036)=1/L=10973731 for light spectrum of EM wave, m=2.17647*10^-8(kg) is Planck’s mass, g=6.67408*10^-11 is gravity constant, pm=1.67262*10^-27(kg) is proton’s mass, pm*c^2=0.938*10^9*e is proton’s energy, e=1.602*10^-19 is unit of charge, h=6.62607*10^-34 is Planck’s constant.

@frankdimeglio8216 2 года назад

UNDERSTANDING THE COSMOLOGICAL REDSHIFT, THE SUPERGIANT STARS, WHY THE FALLING MAN FEELS NO GRAVITY, AND GRAVITATIONAL TIME DILATION ON BALANCE: Consider what is THE SUN. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Consider the speed of light (c). NOW, consider TIME (AND time dilation) ON BALANCE !!! Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE!!! Consider what is THE EARTH/ground ON BALANCE !!! Objects AND MEN fall at the SAME RATE…..!!! Great !!!! (The sky is blue, and THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE.) E=mc2 IS F=ma. This ALSO (CLEARLY) proves why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. CLEARLY, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites (ON BALANCE), as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND necessarily proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). E=mc2 is taken directly from F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. I have mathematically unified physics/physical experience, as this ALSO CLEARLY explains what is the fourth dimension AND c4 from Einstein's field equations. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Consider what is the BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE. (Finally, ALSO consider, ON BALANCE, the black “space” AND the dome that are associated with what is THE EYE.) Accordingly, ON BALANCE, a two dimensional surface OR SPACE is FUNDAMENTAL and essential regarding what is the ultimate MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION of physics/physical EXPERIENCE !!!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE, as BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio

@146maxpain 6 лет назад

The main problem with Witten is that he's pre internet. Back in the days when you did a study like his and you didn't get a definition you were screwed.

@hectarsavoie8166 5 лет назад

that is interesting, I wonder if we can study how different lectures were in the 80s compared to now with wikipedia access :P. I also find modern lectures much more ''fun'', you see cute little diagrams and faces all the time.