Тёмный

Lecture by Douglas Hofstadter: Albert Einstein on Light; Light on Albert Einstein 

Uppsala universitet
Подписаться 15 тыс.
Просмотров 19 тыс.
50% 1

Lecture by Douglas Hofstadter, Indiana University, given on 18 December 2017 in Siegbahnsalen at Uppsala University’s Ångström Laboratory.
“Where does deep insight in physics come from? For those who view physics as a highly rational science grounded in strict mathematics, it is tempting to think that it comes from the purest and most precise of reasoning, following ironclad laws of thought that compel the clear mind completely rigidly. And yet the truth is quite otherwise.
One finds, when one looks closely at any major discovery in physics, that the greatest of physicists are the most daring and are constantly being guided by blurry, instinctive, nearly irrational mental forces. Albert Einstein ideally exemplifies this thesis.
In this talk, I will discuss the eternal mystery of light, which, over the course of millennia, was puzzled over, pondered on, and slowly worked out by a series of great minds, and finally, in the nineteenth century, was definitively settled with clarity and rock-solid certainty. And yet one day in the early spring of 1905, quite out of the blue, came an absurd-seeming new suggestion from an unknown Swiss patent clerk, third class, clashing violently with that rock-solid piece of collective wisdom. How did the brazen patent clerk come up with this crazy idea? How it was received by the physics world? What was its eventual fate? And what can we learn about the workings of the human mind from this twisty story filled to the brim with ironies?”

Опубликовано:

 

5 окт 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 29   
@francescgarcia7340
@francescgarcia7340 Год назад
This is a true gem. Thank you so so much for sharing!
@Silvertestrun
@Silvertestrun 5 месяцев назад
Thank you!
@rajchowdhury3006
@rajchowdhury3006 5 лет назад
Cleared many popular nisconceptions,ossum lecture
@John-lf3xf
@John-lf3xf 5 лет назад
the spelling in this comment is astounding
@soumitralahiri9393
@soumitralahiri9393 2 года назад
Awful spelling, but awesome lecture indeed!
@Chris.4345
@Chris.4345 Год назад
ossum possum
@bonob0123
@bonob0123 5 лет назад
Hofstadter's Brilliance : Insufferability ratio = 1.0001
@barissannan2731
@barissannan2731 3 года назад
simply wonderful!!!
@alimurreza
@alimurreza 4 года назад
Amazing talk!
@Achrononmaster
@Achrononmaster 2 года назад
While we sipped on our cups of tea/ Doug showed us analogy/ Each surrounded by a cloud/ of meanings that ring true and loud.
@brettmangel36
@brettmangel36 Год назад
1:55 to skip the intro
@anywallsocket
@anywallsocket 3 года назад
ironically modern QFT doesn't have any rigorous definition of a localized 'particle', as an excitation of the associated field.
@schmetterling4477
@schmetterling4477 3 года назад
It's not the first time that otherwise smart people fell for the corpuscular\stoff hypothesis. It happened before to Newton and during the days of the phlogiston.
@anywallsocket
@anywallsocket 3 года назад
@@schmetterling4477 "particles" are clearly digestible thoughts, whereas "waves" clearly aren't. more precisely, particles are aspects of humanly digestible "positions", and perhaps vectorless masses. whereas waves are humanly digestible "momenta", and perhaps vectorless energies. so i agree it's not surprising.
@rgaleny
@rgaleny 7 месяцев назад
IF RESONANCE MATTERS, WHY ISN'T IT USED IN FUSION REACTORS?
@cizbarca
@cizbarca 6 лет назад
Am I the only one missing sound?
@HeadphoneTaco
@HeadphoneTaco 5 лет назад
My audio is working fine, now. Is yours?
@Eldooodarino
@Eldooodarino 2 года назад
Ideal gas particles don't bash into each other. They're point particles. They bash into the walls.
@voidshell6273
@voidshell6273 2 года назад
His German is flawless!
@orsoncart802
@orsoncart802 Год назад
Gott im Himmel! 😁 Seriously though - *excellent*! Thank you. 👍👍👍
@GodEmperorSuperStar
@GodEmperorSuperStar 3 года назад
Unpopular truth beats popular untruth.
@schmetterling4477
@schmetterling4477 3 года назад
Unfortunately for all of us, Einstein was absolutely wrong about the particle nature of light. I wonder if he may have come close to admitting his mistake in the end, at least to himself. The answer what quanta are is, of course, trivial. Quanta are (irreversible) exchanges of energy between one part of a physical system and another. What "one part" and "the other part" are, is an arbitrary choice made by the physicist analyzing the situation. Is it therefor surprising that nature won't give us a unique answer? We are not even asking a unique question!
@LoganMarcosSchmidt
@LoganMarcosSchmidt 3 года назад
Lol trivial ok edge lord
@schmetterling4477
@schmetterling4477 3 года назад
@@LoganMarcosSchmidt Ah, and there is the random internet person who didn't pay attention in science class.
@ericsu4667
@ericsu4667 4 года назад
The actual gravitational deflection of light predicted by Schwarzschild metric is about 2.1 arc seconds from a star to the earth. It is not 1.74 as claimed by Albert Einstein. Click on "70. Gravitational Deflection from Schwarzschild's Metric" on this website. sites.google.com/view/physics-news/gravitation
@davidwilkie9551
@davidwilkie9551 2 года назад
Amateur observations on quality professional expertise commentary are unnecessary and not justifiable. (Personal rule not to make personal comments about personality)
Далее
The Human Story Lurking behind the Hofstadter Butterfly
1:22:41
Einstein lecture by Douglas Hofstadter
1:30:56
Просмотров 38 тыс.
V16 из БЕНЗОПИЛ - ПЕРВЫЙ ЗАПУСК
13:57
Analogy as the Core of Cognition
1:08:37
Просмотров 323 тыс.
Life and work of Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
54:44
Просмотров 75 тыс.
Douglas Hofstadter: The Nature of Categories and Concepts
1:29:16