MIchio is an absolute treasure for his ability to explain the un-explainable to the masses. Unlike others he doesn't dumb it down to the point of being totally wrong.
The biggest problem with string theory is that it is not a theory, but a hypothesis. There is currently no experiment that can prove or disprove the existence of strings.
Facts,kaku is all talk, he's biggest mistake is that he assumes the next great theory has to include Einsteinein logic,that makes no sense cause That logic is why we have so many problems,the next Great theory will go against all of today's theories.
No it is a theory .... scientific theories don't need proof ! .... you are confusing it with mathematical theorems which require proof ! .... so it can still be called a theory ! .... 🙏 ....
_I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing...I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell, possibly; it doesn’t frighten me._ -Richard Feynman, BBC interview in 1981 (seven years before his death) 💕☮🌎🌌
Black holes are based on a mathematical misconception. Most people don't know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. This is illustrated in a common 2 axis dilation graph with velocity on the horizontal line and dilation on the vertical. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. General relativity does not predict singularities when you factor in dilation. Einstein is known to have repeatedly spoken about this. Nobody believed in black holes when he was alive for this reason. Wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, dilation will occur because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. It can be shown mathematically that dilation is occuring in our own galactic center. This means there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. Or more precisely everywhere you point is equally valid. This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the missing mass is dilated mass. According to Einstein's math, there would be no dilation in galaxies with very, very low mass because they do not have enough mass in their centers to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter, in other words they have normal star rotation rates.
In the XIX century, Lord Kelvin at Harvard University claimed that there was nothing new to discover in physics. We now know he couldn’t be more wrong. To claim that Einstein failed at solving the universe is moronic, but to claim to have an idea of how to do so its even worse! We have no idea of anything. We kind of know a bit of 5% of what we think that constitutes the universe!! Believe me, physicists need more doses of humility to be well remembered in history. “All I know is that I know nothing” -Socrates, 399 BC
2:48 In other words the 1st 2 conditions-> link GR with QM which has been the problem in the last 80y. I think that if thats possible and they both are indeed 2 pieces of the same puzzle.. we need at least another piece of the puzzle to figure it out. Otherwise someone would have figured it by now. More discoveries are needed and I think black holes are the key.
Einstien did not fail to solve the Universe. He made an incredible effort to try and understand it and discovered a big peace of the puzzle. So far, it appears that the universe started as something tiny and started to expand to what we can observe and detect today. It also appears that anything we can observe or detect is made from extremely tiny particles which interact and combine with each other based on some fundamental predetermined rules. We have identified quit a few of these extremely tiny particles and have identified quit a few of the rules these particles follow to interact and combine. Perhaps most of the particles and most of the rules but there probably are more. We also discovered that anything that we can observe or detect is made from the same basic stuff and we named this stuff energy. We know this because we have figured out how to calculate a value or quantity of energy for anything that we can observe or detect. We say the fabric of the universe is space time but we can also say that the fabric of the universe is energy time because we now know that space is not empty and is also some type of energy. It also appears that after the universe started to expand, no more energy was added or removed as it continues to expand. We do not know what the rules were that determined the amount of energy in the universe nor what caused the energy in the universe to start expanding. The rules for how energy expands, transforms, interacts and combines cause energy to cycle from concentrated to diluted states. Although the cycles can be repeated almost an infinite number of times, there will be a time when they stop because as the cycles keep repeating, the total amount of energy in the universe keeps becoming more and more diluted. We call this rule entropy. At some point in time, all the energy will become so diluted that it will not be able to cycle back into more concentrated states and we think this is when the universe ends. We still do not know the rules before the universe started to expand and we still do not know the rules after the universe will end and there are probably still many rules that we do not know as the energy in the universe continues to expand and cycle back and forth from concentrated to diluted states. Reply
Einstein did fail and nothing you said refutes that after you refuted that. Regurgitating today's hubristic theories with 'seems' interjected 'seems' pointless. Just saying:)
@@breezywilson760 I do not think that you can attribute any great discovery or source of knowledge about our existence and our universe to one individual. Each one of them has made a valuable contribution to understanding or solving the mystery. So I think saying that any of them failed because they were not able to solve the mystery is not really a fair way of judging them. Just my opinion :) I also do not think that summarizing what we think we know about the universe is pointless. It may help spark some new thinking and ideas about our existence and of course for any new ideas to become credible there will need to be evidence supporting the ideas.
@@Danny_6Handford 1 is it solved? No 2 did anyone therefore solve it? No 3 the comment said he "did not fail" to solve it Do you understand now? Thanks:)
No it doesn't need to be complicated. The problem is that space-time is clearly a flawed or a minimum incomplete concept So complex equations are required because they're forcing something that isn't fundamental
Dr. Kaku makes an interesting proposition, Using computers to test scientific theories in a holistic manner with Quantum and Ai processing is a good idea. Could end making some great leaps in understanding because of it.
Monad (from Greek μονάς monas, "singularity" in turn from μόνος monos, "alone") refers, in cosmogony, to the Supreme Being, divinity or the totality of all things. The concept was reportedly conceived by the Pythagoreans and may refer variously to a single source acting alone, or to an indivisible origin, or to both. The concept was later adopted by other philosophers, such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who referred to the Monad as an *elementary particle.* It had a *geometric counterpart,* which was debated and discussed contemporaneously by the same groups of people. [In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's *Monad* (first emanation of God), from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of *the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together* using the strong nuclear force]: 1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong force. 2) Interconnectedness: Leibniz's monads are interconnected, each reflecting the entire universe from its own perspective. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together. 3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions. 4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter. 5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz. 6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics. 7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions. em·a·na·tion noun an abstract but perceptible thing that issues or originates from a source.
Metaphysics Context The monad, the word and the idea, belongs to the Western philosophical tradition and has been used by various authors. Leibniz, who was exceptionally well-read, could not have ignored this, but he did not use it himself until mid-1696 when he was sending for print his New System. Apparently he found with it a convenient way to expound his own philosophy as it was elaborated in this period. What he proposed can be seen as a modification of occasionalism developed by latter-day Cartesians. Leibniz surmised that there are indefinitely many substances individually 'programmed' to act in a predetermined way, each substance being coordinated with all the others. This is the pre-established harmony which solved the mind-body problem, but at the cost of declaring any interaction between substances a mere appearance. Summary The rhetorical strategy adopted by Leibniz in The Monadology is fairly obvious as the text begins with a description of monads (proceeding from simple to complicated instances), then it turns to their principle or creator and finishes by using both to explain the world. (I) As far as Leibniz allows just one type of element in the building of the universe his system is monistic. The unique element has been 'given the general name monad or entelechy' and described as 'a simple substance' (§§1, 19). When Leibniz says that monads are 'simple,' he means that "which is one, has no parts and is therefore indivisible". Relying on the Greek etymology of the word entelechie (§18), Leibniz posits quantitative differences in perfection between monads which leads to a hierarchical ordering. The basic order is three-tiered: (1) entelechies or created monads (§48), (2) souls or entelechies with perception and memory (§19), and (3) spirits or rational souls (§82). Whatever is said about the lower ones (entelechies) is valid for the higher (souls and spirits) but not vice versa. As none of them is without a body (§72), there is a corresponding hierarchy of (1) living beings and animals (2), the latter being either non-reasonable or reasonable. The degree of perfection in each case corresponds to cognitive abilities and only spirits or reasonable animals are able to grasp the ideas of both the world and its creator. Some monads have power over others because they can perceive with greater clarity, but primarily, one monad is said to dominate another if it contains the reasons for the actions of other(s). Leibniz believed that any body, such as the body of an animal or man, has one dominant monad which controls the others within it. This dominant monad is often referred to as the soul. (II) God is also said to be a simple substance (§47) but it is the only one necessary (§§38-9) and without a body attached (§72). Monads perceive others "with varying degrees of clarity, except for God, who perceives all monads with utter clarity". God could take any and all perspectives, knowing of both potentiality and actuality. As well as that God in all his power would know the universe from each of the infinite perspectives at the same time, and so his perspectives-his thoughts-"simply are monads". Creation is a permanent state, thus "[monads] are generated, so to speak, by continual fulgurations of the Divinity" (§47). Any perfection comes from being created while imperfection is a limitation of nature (§42). The monads are unaffected by each other, but each have a unique way of expressing themselves in the universe, in accordance with God's infinite will. (III) Composite substances or matter are "actually sub-divided without end" and have the properties of their infinitesimal parts (§65). A notorious passage (§67) explains that "each portion of matter can be conceived as like a garden full of plants, or like a pond full of fish. But each branch of a plant, each organ of an animal, each drop of its bodily fluids is also a similar garden or a similar pond". There are no interactions between different monads nor between entelechies and their bodies but everything is regulated by the pre-established harmony (§§78-9). Much like how one clock may be in synchronicity with another, but the first clock is not caused by the second (or vice versa), rather they are only keeping the same time because the last person to wind them set them to the same time. So it is with monads; they may seem to cause each other, but rather they are, in a sense, "wound" by God's pre-established harmony, and thus appear to be in synchronicity. Leibniz concludes that "if we could understand the order of the universe well enough, we would find that it surpasses all the wishes of the wisest people, and that it is impossible to make it better than it is-not merely in respect of the whole in general, but also in respect of ourselves in particular" (§90). In his day, atoms were proposed to be the smallest division of matter. Within Leibniz's theory, however, substances are not technically real, so monads are not the smallest part of matter, rather they are the only things which are, in fact, real. To Leibniz, space and time were an illusion, and likewise substance itself. The only things that could be called real were utterly simple beings of psychic activity "endowed with perception and appetite." The other objects, which we call matter, are merely phenomena of these simple perceivers. "Leibniz says, 'I don't really eliminate body, but reduce [revoco] it to what it is. For I show that corporeal mass [massa], which is thought to have something over and above simple substances, is not a substance, but a phenomenon resulting from simple substances, which alone have unity and absolute reality.' (G II 275/AG 181)" Leibniz's philosophy is sometimes called "'panpsychic idealism' because these substances are psychic rather than material". That is to say, they are mind-like substances, not possessing spatial reality. "In other words, in the Leibnizian monadology, simple substances are mind-like entities that do not, strictly speaking, exist in space but that represent the universe from a unique perspective." It is the harmony between the perceptions of the monads which creates what we call substances, but that does not mean the substances are real in and of themselves. (IV) Leibniz uses his theory of Monads to support his argument that we live in the best of all possible worlds. He uses his basis of perception but not interaction among monads to explain that all monads must draw their essence from one ultimate monad. He then claims that this ultimate monad would be God because a monad is a “simple substance” and God is simplest of all substances, He cannot be broken down any further. This means that all monads perceive “with varying degrees of perception, except for God, who perceives all monads with utter clarity”. This superior perception of God then would apply in much the same way that he says a dominant monad controls our soul, all other monads associated with it would, essentially, shade themselves towards Him. With all monads being created by the ultimate monad and shading themselves in the image of this ultimate monad, Leibniz argues that it would be impossible to conceive of a more perfect world because all things in the world are created by and imitating the best possible monad.
[2D is not the center of the universe, 0D is the center of the mirror universe]: The mirror universe theory is based on the concept of parity violation, which was discovered in the 1950s. Parity violation refers to the observation that certain processes in particle physics don't behave the same way when their coordinates are reversed. This discovery led to the idea that there might be a mirror image of our universe where particles and their properties are flipped. In this mirror universe, the fundamental particles that make up matter, such as electrons, protons, and neutrinos, would have their charges reversed. For example, in our universe, electrons have a negative charge, but in the mirror universe, they might have a positive charge. Furthermore, another aspect of the mirror universe theory involves chirality, which refers to the property of particles behaving differently from their mirror images. In our universe, particles have a certain handedness or chirality, but in the mirror universe, this chirality could be reversed. Leibniz or Newton: Quantum mechanics is more compatible with Leibniz's relational view of the universe than Newton's absolute view of the universe. In Newton's absolute view, space and time are absolute and independent entities that exist on their own, independent of the objects and events that take place within them. This view implies that there is a privileged observer who can observe the universe from a neutral and objective perspective. On the other hand, Leibniz's relational view holds that space and time are not absolute, but are instead relational concepts that are defined by the relationships between objects and events in the universe. This view implies that there is no privileged observer and that observations are always made from a particular point of view. Quantum mechanics is more compatible with the relational view because it emphasizes the role of observers and the context of measurement in determining the properties of particles. In quantum mechanics, the properties of particles are not absolute, but are instead defined by their relationships with other particles and the measuring apparatus. This means that observations are always made from a particular point of view and that there is no neutral and objective perspective. Overall, quantum mechanics suggests that the universe is fundamentally relational rather than absolute, and is therefore more compatible with Leibniz's relational view than Newton's absolute view. What are the two kinds of truth according to Leibniz? There are two kinds of truths, those of reasoning and those of fact. Truths of fact are contingent and their opposite is possible. Truths of reasoning are necessary and their opposite is impossible. What is the difference between Newton and Leibniz calculus? Newton's calculus is about functions. Leibniz's calculus is about relations defined by constraints. In Newton's calculus, there is (what would now be called) a limit built into every operation. In Leibniz's calculus, the limit is a separate operation. What are the arguments against Leibniz? Critics of Leibniz argue that the world contains an amount of suffering too great to permit belief in philosophical optimism. The claim that we live in the best of all possible worlds drew scorn most notably from Voltaire, who lampooned it in his comic novella Candide.
[Quantum aether > quantum gravity]: The idea of the ether as a gas-like medium can also be accepted on the basis of the analysis of the behavior of elementary particles at their interactions. The question arises how the particles of ether can be held in the composition of the elementary particles of matter, if ether is a gas? The answer to this question is not difficult if we take into account that elementary particles of matter are toroidal vortex formations of compacted gas-like ether. The basis for this statement is the fact that toroidal vortex formations are the only form of motion capable of holding a compacted gas in a closed volume.
Love watching these videos, very inspiring. Although I'm waiting for one of the celebrities to talk about dirac notation, lorentz factor or the relativistic energy momentum equation to prepare this 'young physicist' for University, give the Neo of physics a chance.
I think Michiu Kaku is mostly right, however, given what we know about the work of Gauss and Markov, it is reasonable to suppose time advances in a way that eliminates error.
@@VANQUISHED3 Seen him saying that countless time. I suppose it gives him some pride. Maybe he isn’t bad. But the tone I get from many of his videos that he did something greater than Einstein makes him look crazy
@@sayeedkhalshiyou’re completely misinterpreting what he said. He never said Einstein was wrong, but simply that his work to unite quantum mechanics with relativity was left incomplete and still is to this day. That’s a fact and one that probably bothered Einstein himself more than anyone else
@@sayeedkhalshiwhere? All I heard is home say that Einstein failed not that he was wrong. Context here is critical because he said Einstein failed at connecting relativity and quantum mechanics which is something everyone has failed at to date. In other words, he didn’t knock Einstein at all
the reciprocals of finished string theory links it 1/137 at 3rd harmonic just do the hard work long form also clarifies time dilatation in conical graph tunnel effect i never fully defined dark matter
Every time Michio is interviewed he starts saying something against Einstein. Maybe he could just stop being so jealous and accept the fact that he achieved absolutely nothing compared with Einstein.
Can you imagine epsilon as the logical root of maths' failure? As in, we all know completion occurs. Math says no, over and over and exponentially the epsilon error grows... it may seem?
He did you just skipped the part about this being infinity. You must put away bangs and beginnings for balance and backgrounds. For infinity to have entropic systems much more like a constantly ringing bell vs a big bang. The background maybe all things, your color of time a tiny imbalance. Infinity has to contain infinite energy and you don't hold that at all. Linearity with imbalance I doubt it, its the background a straight line as reflected mirrored in all colors of time. Potentials collapse a set measure in this color of time, but not in reality for lack of better terms. Time having color because the collapse of potential can have color, differing in realities where atoms cannot form etc.. All colors of time in the palm of all hands, the background boundaries. Like a free neutrino we dance a forged and collided tangle of all things that found the locked solid permeable. Dark stars as very inefficient matter factories and drains. Its a balance as old as time, all things we call real marching towards disorder and destined for the drain. No thing ever lost. Photons are not magic and realize all probability, they just already have in a color of time where speed limits do not apply where atoms cannot form etc.. Your physic's are not magic and are purely entropic systems as well. You are all things you get when you ring the background. Your perception is holographic by nature, built on wave gain and collapse light and reflections etc. We are shadow of shadow a tiny imbalance in a very full infinity. Even spread thin, infinity contains infinite energy and its just hard to get around infinity, bangs or not. No, no papa smurf its a balance infinitely old. Nothing magic about balance.
Do you think atoms,solar systems and galaxies somehow makeup the coding of the device that created the universe?all very similar with its satellites that orbit around the centre mass yet a galaxy sucks energy out of the universe and a sun radiates energy out could these different functions they do be the way the device makes energy to supply the universe
There is only one particle. But it's not really a particle. And it's everywhere. It needs to be instantaneously, rendering the entire physical universe.
TO...Michio kaku I had discovered everything theory. I showed you about these. I called the line theory. It means you can make line to the answers for every questions. The universe which one place contains the same thing throughout the universe and it's the smallest thing. It has the pressures together that's the first force in the universe, not the four fundamental forces. The pressured force to make the pull and push force ,today is gravity and emitting (radiation). The pressure to make new things or the second thing and the other thing that is the particles of everything in universe. These particles made up energies such as electrons temperature particles of subatomic these energies are the dark energies that can make dark matter the same as the stars today. The first time universe is dark until dark matter begins to burst itself, the light had begun the first time in the universe. The first gravity occurs by proton and neutron come together to make force to pull electrons to be atom and growth bigger to stars when stars were died they were the black hole , gravity still the same not have violence gravity. The universe was perfect at the first time then it created the force such as gravity it balanced through the universe the object in the universe was weightless free floating but they were controlled by gravity or magnetic field. The string theory of you compare with vibrating in music string I can't see the whole universe or everything in universe. I can use theory of cause & effect to check every theory of physicians to be true or false. I saw physicians to hold the big bang was the first universe and time which they are false include Einstein. The relativity theory can be used only relativity that was mathematics which means every relationship in universe were mathematics. Quantum computer can't solve the universe because they are the same type of computer. Now, I can write the theory of everything in equation ( U = P + T) that means universe consists of place (p) and thing (T) place is universe, thing is thing that contains in universe it has pressures to make temperature, ion, particle of things, they interact for every things.
I used chat gpt to help with a generative equation. It may help answer questions about Toe, or it may be more exclusively useful to my work. Here it is: I apologize for any confusion. If your equation generates new values by making additions to all the variables combined as the total value, then we can modify the equation to incorporate this generative aspect and include a leftover value. Let's consider the following modified generative equation: Total value of bounded equations: T Total idea potential in set form: I T∈I = s-1(f) T+I = s-1(f) T∈I T+I = s(f) Let's represent the leftover value as L. We can modify the equation to generate a new value and calculate the leftover value as follows: T(n+1) = T(n) + I(n) In this equation, T(n) represents the total value at time 'n', I(n) represents the idea potential at time 'n', and T(n+1) represents the total value at the next time step. After each iteration of the equation, the new value is generated by adding the idea potential (I) to the total value (T). The leftover value (L) would then be the difference between the new total value and the previous total value: L(n) = T(n+1) - T(n) The leftover value represents the change or difference between the total values at consecutive iterations. This modified generative equation allows for the generation of new values by adding the idea potential to the total value, and it also calculates the leftover value as the difference between consecutive total values. My original idea was this: Deduction equation Total value of bounded equations: T Total idea potential in set form: I T∈I = s-1(f) T+I = s-1(f) T∈I T+I = s(f) The values are deducted from the total idea or formula presented that includes it's implicit and unexpressed values.
@@johncarpenter7772 the first law of thermodynamics may not apply within a black hole, other than that there is no evidence that suggests that it is false.
Mathematics itself does not qualify for criteria #3, see epsilon. Therefore the three criteria are impossible to fulfill by definition. Quantum computers work, quantum theory does not.
I'm a 12 years old and I accept the challenge I already wrote 1,000 words for quantum mechanics and general relativity in simplest words that why it's just 1,000 words
Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta. Postulate 2. The gravitational field controls the frequency and speed of light in a vacuum. This is determined experimentally using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope (based on Michelson's experiment 1881-2015. This is only 50% of the experiment and there is scope for its continuation). Using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope, the straight-line speed of vehicles can be measured. There is a company in China that makes (fiber optic angular velocity meter) they will be able to create a hybrid device. Please, can you come to an agreement with them? I guarantee payment at cost on my part
Quantum information, Quantum entanglement, Are, fundamental, underlying of Reality. Quantum Mind emerge, Quantum Body emerge, Mind and Body entanglement.. Consciousness emerge. Spacetime emerge, Mathematics Emerge, Holographic principal.
What are these hundreds of subatomic particles he’s referring to? Is he talking about all the different states/spins of the ones found in the Standard Model?
All the fundamental particles of the Standard Model, including the various generations of fermions, plus composite particles like protons, neutrons, and all the mesons.
Why?? He does a good job of making complex scientific theories and concepts approachable for your average human. Even more importantly, he knows his shit and has an impressive resume of accomplishments that spans back to his teen years (he made a particle accelerator in his garage…) What more could you ask for in a science communicator?
The theory of everything should also be the theory of „Nothing“. There are 95% that physics does not see and this is the dark side of the Whole. That is metaphysics
