Physicist Reacts to String Theory Explained - What is The True Nature of Reality? By Kurzgesagt 

Sound is great now. Also enjoy that you talk a lot yourself. I hope that you understand that it doesnt make the videos to long, but rather more intresting and engaging. Good work as always!

I've discovered your channel not so long ago and I must say that I enjoy it very much. Its great to hear a commentary from someone "in the field". Although it would be great if you commented on videos from other channels beside kurzgesagt, maybe PBS space time? Ok, now to the topic of string theory. When I first started exploring world of theoretical physics by watching pop science programs (many of them featured Brian Greene and Michio Kaku) I was enamoured with string theory. It has something magical to it, the idea of dimensions beside our everyday four. Also how this so neatly explains problems with connecting GR to QM. But after I've delved deeper into this subject it came to me that it is indeed magical ... because as I see it string theory lost touch with reality. For 20 years proponents of string theory have been saying that the final answer is right over the corner. Yet this corner never seems to end. Kaku had this famous bet that by 2020 there will be Nobel prize for string theory. He had to forfeit it. Nevertheless he is still, one must say, religiously advocates it. You can see that string theory is losing support and even its most ardent supporters are doing a little backpedaling or rather moving to the offshoots of ST. Like ADS/CFT correspondence, holographic principle. Those are great ideas stemming from ST, there is also plenty of mathematics that came from researching ST, but the core idea is loosing its support. Same with supersymmetry (on which ST heavily relies). In the advent of LHC first run there was great hope, even certainty, that LHC would find SUSY, but so far nothing. Many says that we just haven't got enough energy in those collisions but what if we won't find anything at 13 TeV, 100 TeV, what then, can we still say that we need to go higher? When can we say that this idea failed? Same with ST, there should be moment when we can say - it was great theory but it failed and we have to move on.

People who are experts in this madness never fail to amaze me, because its beyond me. I have a simple understanding of almost every field of study that presently exists, but my brain doesn't have the specs to understand it at a master level. No matter how much I study it, even after 25 years, I can't understand it at that level. This stuff is very complicated, lots of crazy numbers and abstractions, and my Brain.exe just crashes when I try to touch them beyond a surface level. So people who can do it are very impressive to me.

Conservation of Spatial Curvature (both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature) Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree. String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring? What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine. Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules: “We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr (lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957-8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958) The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics? When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry. Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Mesons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other. Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change. ===================== Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons? Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension? Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons . Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase. Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length ) The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge. Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter? Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles? I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.

Hey Dylan, these plank particles couldn't be force field particles like magnetic force and strong force? Just a layman question. So the rules over particles with protons, neutrons and electrons are dictate by these sub-quarks particles interaction on this frequency hidden area. If only there was another particle without mass like light in these lower scales with a smaller bandwave.. At least that we know of.

Thank you for making chapters for the vid! editing is getting better.

I've asked this around but would string theory replace the stranded quantum theory such as the electron cloud model?

I want to hear your thoughts on this. What if gravity was the cumulative "tugging" of particles on quantum fields? Quantum fields are not seperate from the fabric of spacetime, they are simply different "characteristics" of it. We already know the maths for how far reaching different "forces" can get: strong force doesn't reach very far, while electromagnetism reaches comparatively far, etc. So what if particles "tug" on their quantum fields? We probably haven't noticed it because of how small these things are but its possible that quantum fields are much like spacetime, in the sense that in the presence of a particle they warp and contract, however the particle itself in this analogy IS the clumped up form of the field. We should be able to predict how these different fields contract based on the forces they are susceptible to. For instance, the gluon cloud in a proton makes up most of the mass of the proton itself. There are also the quarks which have a decent amount of mass, but don't compare to the overall energy (or mass) of the gluons. We know how "strong" the strong interactions between these gluons are and we know the maths for their "sphere of influence", which is very small, the size of a proton. We also know that the electromagnetic force of the quarks reaches far outside the proton itself. Influencing electrons that are comparatively MILES away. So, in a simple hydrogen atom, what would be the cumulative tugging on these fields, electrons included, and does that at least come close to the theoretical gravitational influence of that hydrogen atom?

You put link for wrong video.

Hi dylan , you are making good videos. You are making entertaing videos. Keep it up. Unfortunately the Quantum VDN doesnt work on my computer even though i do have Windows.

My Sheppy is just glued to myside

Love your videos i just get so lost when you're talking, need to really pay attention 😁

Dogs Is The best parts of theses Videos Lol

14:25 they totally nailed Leonard Susskind (guy in the middle)

Unrelated comment. Why does he look like the chiseled version of itadori from jujutsu kaisen?

You look so miffed in the thumbnail lol XD

watching this through the vpn!! pretty cool

Calabi-Yau manifolds babyyyy!!! Algebraic manifolds are sick!

Crimson chin in the thumnail lad

Great stuff :)

Have there been any updates on the fixing those error ratios in the quantum computing world? On a scale of 1-10, how complicated would you say this problem has been for the Aussies when compared to other quantum computers across the world? It's all that delicious Bundaberg soda, right? That the inspiration? Keep up the great content.

I tried to install Qal and couldn't Windows 10 seems to be 100% sure it's a virus and won't let me near the thing. :(

When are you going to do a science asylum reaction?

I never thought that I was a simp until I saw him 😌

Watched dozens of vids on string theory and can't find one that addresses the problem of slack string around my waist I feel myself and trousers have been let down.

i enjoy these videos a lot

I would if had windows

Are you scared of rokos basilisk

If a small Blackhole forms in the hydron collider can it be stopped ?

thanks for explanation. Being most realistic ... i am concerned more about coming winter, you know. However, this is not worst. More concerns are about coming '1929' scenario (economic collapse). The evidence is real: all coutries are printing more money, which is not a solution.

Have Dylan ever reacted to the Anime scenes of " Omni-Man Destroys the Flaxan Planet " from the show Invincible?

Well done good video.

Get premium. No ads

Why are all the "smart people" men? Hello to the background bunny!!

Please play the "game" known as "space engine". It's the entire universe ( w procedural generation that can be turned off and on), and it's awesome

Your jaw is so chiseled

Gorgeous German Shepard

Coffee or tea wanka?

The original video IS 4 years old so maybe things have changed since then?

Time is soo illusive because people think it's one thing, where as it's more like a table of elements, imagine studying atoms not knowing there are many different types of atoms X.X

This dude is literally a living meme.. giga Chad

Wtf this ain’t Logic

I misread that as Racist reacts to string theory.... haha

Bran has the best story.

I stopped watching Kurzgesagt videos because they make assumptions about how they think things work. You seem to like doing react videos to their videos, but I personally think you could do better to put out your own information maybe debunking myths about these topics. But do what you will. If you are interested in discussing how outdated and inaccurate I believe science and physics in particular is, let me know.

a little less teeth bleaching and a lot more thinking adn then perhaps this video would be at least mediocre and not the total crap that is

I've taken DMT and yes, there are DEFINITELY other higher dimensions.