The Quantum Origins of Gravity by Leonard Susskind 

...and hasn't had any sleep for 25 hours while traveling between Cali and Stockholm. Hell, I couldn't multiply 2*2 under those conditions and I'm 24.

Susskind is a badass that’s why ;)

old people are just young people who've had more experience.

he's been taking lessons from his elder, Freeman Dyson.

You have a very skewed idea of elderly people. The vast majority, even 90+, are very sharp and quick thinking.

Until you listen to him carefully and then he makes a number of unforced trivial mistakes in this one.

I read his theoreticall minimum series. Fantastic stuff.

bmoneybby - same! And I agree!

Man he is my greatest inspiration and the best educator I know

My wife asked me if I was okay when Stephen Hawking passed away, I told her - it is Dr. Susskind who I worry about

Absolute proof that Mr. Frank DiMeglio is the greatest scientist/physicist who has ever lived: Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual (IN BALANCE). So, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Therefore, invisible AND visible SPACE in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium AND balance IS the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of space consistent WITH/AS what is fundamentally balanced GRAVITATIONAL/ELECTROMAGNETIC force/energy; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or balanced with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/energy; as this balances AND unifies ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy AND gravity; as this balances gravity AND inertia. (This explains F=ma AND E=mc2, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity.) ACCORDINGLY, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! A PHOTON may be placed at the center of the Sun (as a point, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) "Mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/AS what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL force/energy, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. So, time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves that electromagnetism/energy is gravity. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Touch AND feeling BLEND, as GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are linked AND balanced; as gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND balanced IN AND OUT of SPACE AND TIME, as gravity is electromagnetism/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. This is entirely proven by the mathematical unification of Maxwell's equations AND Einstein's equations (given the addition of a fourth spatial dimension). Indeed, this explains why Einstein's equations predict that SPACE is either expanding or contracting. Moreover, this is why Einstein's equations allow for (or predict) "black holes". Balance and completeness go hand in hand. Einstein's equations are NECESSARILY ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL. Notice the term c4. GREAT !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. I have provided top down, true, and overwhelming mathematical proof AS WELL that gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. So, It is now abundantly and quite clear that Einstein never nearly understood gravity AND physics/physical experience. (Obviously, E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma.) Sir Isaac Newton now ranks second. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. In fact, the ROTATION of the moon does MATCH it's REVOLUTION. ACCORDINGLY, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. SO, a given planet sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AND this is THEN consistent WITH F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Therefore, GRAVITATIONAL force/energy is proportional to (or balanced with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as gravity is electromagnetism/energy. So, "mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent WITH what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL force/energy; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=mc2 IS F=ma.) It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. By Frank DiMeglio

Agreed. I think Susskind needs to get together with Erik Verlinde for a bit. Verlinde is attacking the QM/GR thing from cosmological scales instead of microscopic ones, deriving the equations of GR using the thermodynamic properties of the cosmological horizon...one meeting or some collaboration between these two could be all it takes for the breakthrough insight...

Welcome to the internet, Steve. You seem to have forgotten where you were. Wake up.

Michael Bishop there has been many rebuttals to EV's entropic theory of gravity as for example the rotational velocities of dwarf galaxies are inconsistent with his theory also his theory seems to break the rule of quantum coherence.... these are jut two examples where there are many more which give good reason to be worried with an entropic theory of gravity, on the other hand Susskinds work seems to be moving in the right direction i.e. ER=EPR and how ADS/CFT correspondence theory begins to help show how this is meaningful and what seems to be the case for gravity.

Yes definitely great video keep up the good work

Ignore trolls. They get their kicks from eliciting responses.

Entangled particles or entangled entropy = syntropy! Spin up is dual to spin down -- Dirac equation. There is a dual to process to that of increasing entropy namely syntropy. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing syntropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. Your mind or brain converts information or entropy into mutual information (syntropy, prediction) which is used to track targets, teleology -- Shannon information theory. In communication theory the receiver of a message treats the message as an inference or expectation or a prediction, the message is literally predicted into existence by your mind, a syntropic process. The word syntropy means "a tendency to converge" or integrate into a whole, holism or unification. The word entropy means "a tendency to diverge" or differentiate into new states, reductionism or division. Divergence is dual to convergence, differentiation is dual to integration, reductionism is dual to holism, division is dual to unification or syntropy is dual to entropy. Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (syntropy, predictability). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Gravitation or curvature is therefore dual. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). The infinite positive curvature singularity is dual to the infinite negative curvature singularity. The infinite mass classical black hole (convergence) is dual to the white hole (big bang, divergence). Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Duality creates reality.

I would say Leonard was correct ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-uOJCS1W1uzg.html

This has been done

@@sage_unfiltered This has been done~ish. Not a physicist, but based on my understanding of the issue the experiment that was performed on Sycamore WAS super interesting and "showed what they were looking for" but after careful analysis of Yao and others also illustrated that the test needed for this will both require much larger quantum computers and be "incremental" in that to truly model ER=EPR one would need a quantum computer with infinite qbits which is obviously impossible... though I believe the current theory is that with only "a few hundreds of qbits" on each side IF the correspondence continues to hold this would already be maybe the most interesting thing to come out of the last 60-70 years or so. (On a more technical level I think it comes down to the fact that at the level of ~4-5 Hamiltonians which is what the run experiment uses you can purposefully construct Hamiltonians that have the required properties that if you then add only a single term fail to teleport. The more qbits/Hs you have though the harder it becomes to construct these alternates, and once you get to "this is the only one there is" and keep adding terms and it keeps acting "like it shouldn't" the more promising this avenue would look/the more closely the test models putting something in a paper shredder on one side and the paper coming out the other side intact)

The idea of rejoining or aligning qt with rt is fair enough in itself, but not necessarily realistic in this particular manner. Note that he says "quantum origins of relativity".. Now that's a bit weird. So, what are the *origins* of quantum processes? Well, clearly, the universe has energy, and clearly, matter did not always exist as matter in present forms. Some energy forms are entirely immaterial but may interact with matter (like how sound is produced while an inherent energy in the cosmos make atoms vibrate, thus sound output needs an atmosphere) . Dark energy is another interesting subject, especially in examining why entropy (temperature distribution by default in nature, increased disorder in matter) tends to increase in more or less closed systems +maybe in the universe as a whole (see Heat death in thermodynamics laws). It may also be difficult to understand cosmic inflation without considering dark energy. The shape, ability, nature of matter and nonbaryonic energies are a result of historical and contemporary processes "from" the BB and onwards. Put another way : Everything quantum = a certain aspect of aetherial energy sources. It seems like there is a manic need to hold on to the old school of "particles in empty space" orientation within both physics and pseudophysics. But there are many experiments in science history showing that this orientation is not realistic.

KibyNykraft you never stated what is weird about saying the quoted statement you choose to pick out from the lecture...? Also by definition there is nothing non physical about anything in physics, your example of sound literally proves you wrong as sound is a function of matter itself lol. Hence forth why physicist use the name "dark" energy/matter as even when it is unknown what is going on there is plenty of empirical evidence which tells us there must be other forms of matter and energy interacting with all the normal matter which we understand i.e. If something interacts with matter it is physical by the intrinsic nature of the fact an interaction took place.

@@metatron5199 Physical and material are not the same. Basics.All is physical ,some of it material

@@metatron5199 What are the origins of anything quantum? We know btw for a fact from many experiments that particles change structure/their mode of existence from energy state to matter state more or less chaotically but also in terms of manipulation and observation

KibyNykraft ummmm no particles can change their energy state and or relation to other particles and their "interactions" i.e. Spin, angular momentum etc also for example we can see the transformation of particles via different types of particle Chanel's for instance parametric down conversion alpha and beta decay etc. Matter is composed of particles and if whatever you are talking about can interact with matter it is composed of particles i.e. It is physical by definition, learn your basic physics.

Also, it's amazing that quantum entanglement was first described by Einstein (spooky action). Einsteins importance in physics cannot be overestimated.

Good luck. They have been exploring it for 100 years.

@@jeffwads speaking as an experimental physicist, that doesn't make it any less tempting 😁

I am, Susskind believe`s that black holes hold solar systems or other universes in them , Yet Black holes are not fucking holes they are solid matter. Stars that absorb their own light instead of radiate it. Its not rocket science unless your twisting the evidence to get more grant money. If this is modern science i want Einstein and Karl Sagan cloned to stop arseholes like Susskind trying to destroy science.

What's more interesting to me is how human minds can even in principle form inaccurate ideas about the world, when presumably they rely on brains processing information according to the same laws of physics trying to be understood. Maybe it has to do with the fact that any idea is a reflection of the intake of only a subset of the entire system that the mind is attempting to make general statements about...What does a brain structure look like anyway that hosts an accurate or inaccurate conception of the world, and is there any discernable signal between these two states such that we can we use it to optimize the accuracy of our thinking?

"Down to earth" because he has that folksy and grandfatherly Bronx persona, but all of this crap is nothing but mathematical conjecture based on zero empirical evidence. Worst aspect is his steering of promising physics students away from legit research and into this garbage that is a house-of-cards built on a ridiculously faulty foundation that leads nowhere except to more and more outlandish nonsensical science fiction!

As far as I can tell, you´e wrong. Susskind has a long history of being on the winning side of controversies involving physicists of the first caliber. As far as I can tell he really does know what he is talking about.

​@@michaels1139You clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

It amazes how people with no training in science have such firmly held ignorant opinions. Pls learn to distinguish physical reality from math conjectures. You guys believe everything the popular media promotes, no matter how outlandish!

@@veganbutcherhackepeter pls go back to your treehugging and refrain from discourse with which you have only ignorant opinions and regurgitation of nonsense@

If you hadn't said, I would have. Good job

That’s the one common theme I can’t stand about professional academics,..... they think we want to hear them talk about nothing as much as they enjoy hearing themselves do so.

@@boobacockaa Hahaaaaha You're so right. I tend to moan about the institutions in my own country but It's Academia wherever one finds them nesting.

@@boobacockaa once I heard an "introduction" that took almost 35 min

orpOpiru; Cheers mate!

Thanks

proven Norse were multicultural and multiracial

Was not that interesting, "What is dark energy?", "Is an electron in an atom entangled?" from what I can remember.

@@axelengstrom3802 Good to know I didn't miss much :-D Thanks ~a

Which idiot decided that the clowns in the start would be included but not Sussking answering questions...

COMPUTERS DONT WORK THAT WELL TO ME IT WILL BE PROVEN SOON.

Entangled particles or entangled entropy = syntropy! Spin up is dual to spin down -- Dirac equation. There is a dual to process to that of increasing entropy namely syntropy. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing syntropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. Your mind or brain converts information or entropy into mutual information (syntropy, prediction) which is used to track targets, teleology -- Shannon information theory. In communication theory the receiver of a message treats the message as an inference or expectation or a prediction, the message is literally predicted into existence by your mind, a syntropic process. The word syntropy means "a tendency to converge" or integrate into a whole, holism or unification. The word entropy means "a tendency to diverge" or differentiate into new states, reductionism or division. Divergence is dual to convergence, differentiation is dual to integration, reductionism is dual to holism, division is dual to unification or syntropy is dual to entropy. Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (syntropy, predictability). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Gravitation or curvature is therefore dual. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). The infinite positive curvature singularity is dual to the infinite negative curvature singularity. The infinite mass classical black hole (convergence) is dual to the white hole (big bang, divergence). Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Duality creates reality.

I don’t think it matters. They can still find the correlation between the signals without agreeing on the absolute times at which data points were collected.

..and then he talked about how you didn't need black holes at all to test this. it was a confusing story.

They sent information through the bridge using quantum teleportation. Quantum teleportation is different than traversal.

If everything was in the singularity at the big bang, then it all could be entangled.

If you're talking about the procedure he discusses at 47:00, that involves also sending a notebook (containing the arbitrary measurements) from Alice to Bob through normal spacetime (i.e. there's no exceeding the speed of light).

Not very. Carol and Ted keep getting in the way.

He said it doesn't have to be Silicon - just a metaphor for the shell. I think he chose Silicon b/c of semiconductors and the ability to use it record information on the surface and for it to carry signals.

You would have one particle left

A very good question!

They probably don’t actually need to. They can find the correlation between the two signals without agreeing on the absolute times of measurements.

The two lines--bottom left/top right--are simply I/O pathways. As for your question, any information that is computed and then transmitted through such circuitry would be unintelligible without a classically transmitted "key." Susskind called it "gibberish" that was collected by Alice making meaningless measurements on her side. However, once transferred to Bob, the "gibberish" would form the quantum "key" that would allow the encrypted message to be deciphered. That is what would make such a system so incredibly secure: any message transmitted would be useless without having both the original "key" transmission and and its final output. Without one or the other, the message would NEVER be decipherable. It is analogous to a Public Key and a Private Key, except for the fact that a Quantum Key would never be subject to supercomputer cracking. It simply never could be done.

Yes, I already understood that, in general (that is, aside from what this *particular* diagram *prehaps misleadingly* suggests), the the message is uninterpretable without the classically transmitted key. (But thank you for answering.) My question was just about two details of the diagram: (1) It doesn't show the classical transmission. But that's OK; we know it's supposed to be there. (2) Nevertheless, it does show (or seems to show) the passage of time, namely, the time taken by the computation. The information does not pop out on Bob's side until after the computation has taken place. I'm not sure if that's exactly what the diagram *intends* to show. If it does, I'm not sure what the computation *is* -- for one thing, why there's a computation on Bob's side that matches the computation on Alice's side. (Does the entanglement force that to happen?) Why does Bob only get the teleported information after the computation finishes? And a few more questions like that ... but maybe I'm trying to read too much into the diagram.

@Run For Your Life!...it's a dance company! I would say that you have a fairly good grasp of the general conceptions presented except for one thing: remember that in the original information transfer through the wormhole, Alice sent a "sphere of silica" that was imprinted with various pieces of information (what the "information" is here is irrelevant). For the sake of simplicity, let us simply call it an "email." Now, jump ahead to the quantum computer. In essence, Alice has sent the exact same information--or in our case, "email"--from her quantum computer node, via entangled particles, over to Bob's quantum computer node. It is unfortunate that the diagram shows the two systems being linked together, as that is a classical configuration. Remember, entangled particles will--in theory--transmit the data through a quantum computer's "virtual wormhole" in this scenario, without needing to be connected in any classical sense. Aside from that (and perhaps it is the classical "key's" pathway), the quantum state allows for the instantaneous transfer of STATES.(AKA spins), until the "virtual wormhole" property is invoked. Otherwise, no information could be transmitted due toFTL limitations. Consequently, if this quantum computer configuration is ever truly realized, then Alice's "email" will be transmitted from her node to Bob's at what would amount to FTL communication. However, bear in mind that the quantum "key" throws a monkey wrench into the works, re-invoking FTL limitations. The security would be of paramount importance here, and FTL communication would remain unrealized. But that was the import of that part of his talk, anyway. Susskind sort of skipped over FTL information to stress the importance of both the security aspect, and of course, the creation of a quantum computing system. He did not really mean to lump the twoideas together, I believe. It just came out that way due to the structure of the concepts with which he was dealing.

ER = einstein rosen bridges, often known as wormholes EPR = entanglement

because the harmonic stabilizer isn't calibrated for quantum digestive program prototypical in septronic catalyst in the exchange of data during hypersonic tactical functioning! AOC just text me the answer. Dam she sho is smarts. Dat gurl no evrything

The word binary is less accurate than the word duality! Entangled particles or entangled entropy = syntropy! Spin up is dual to spin down -- Dirac equation. There is a dual to process to that of increasing entropy namely syntropy. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing syntropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. Your mind or brain converts information or entropy into mutual information (syntropy, prediction) which is used to track targets, teleology -- Shannon information theory. In communication theory the receiver of a message treats the message as an inference or expectation or a prediction, the message is literally predicted into existence by your mind, a syntropic process. The word syntropy means "a tendency to converge" or integrate into a whole, holism or unification. The word entropy means "a tendency to diverge" or differentiate into new states, reductionism or division. Divergence is dual to convergence, differentiation is dual to integration, reductionism is dual to holism, division is dual to unification or syntropy is dual to entropy. Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (syntropy, predictability). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Gravitation or curvature is therefore dual. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). The infinite positive curvature singularity is dual to the infinite negative curvature singularity. The infinite mass classical black hole (convergence) is dual to the white hole (big bang, divergence). Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Duality creates reality.

No

Keep listening to physics talks long enough, I mean for years and years, and you will gradually begin to understand some of it.

just du some transformations that may completely distort your paper, but keeps lightrays at 45°. and do it in a way that takes infinite space and time to finite values. thats all ;-) ps: flat space time (as in special relativity) can be transformed to a ◇-shape this way. the boundaries of the ◇ are infinite space- and/or time coordinates. the diagram he uses for the ER brigde is what you get from a Schwartzschild Blackhole this way (with some completion of coordinates, as the Schwartzschild metric has open ends after the transformation...)

@peter paul I don't think so. "but it comes out spin down, i would measure its spin on a DIFFERENT axis in order to reset the main axis back to 50% spin up probability, " Wouldn't you have to send a signal to Lenny, with information about the different axis before he can make his measurement? Susskind talked about this in his QM lectures. I don't remember the details but the bottom line is you can only establish correlation in the measurement of entangled pairs. In order to use it to send information, you have to send information about the measurements *at the time the measurements are made, not ahead of time* and you can't do that faster than c. Every scenario for sending information using entanglement involves conventional signalling and will violate SR - including simultaneity. For example - trying to tell Lenny *when* to make his measurements - you can't synchronize clocks then have Lenny travel to Polaris because time dilation will destroy your concept of simultaneity. So, he bottom line is Einstein won't let you turn your correlation into information in less time than it takes to send a conventional signal. I don't remember the details, but that is the result of the No Information Theorem: "In physics, the no-communication theorem or no-signaling principle is a no-go theorem from quantum information theory which states that, during measurement of an entangled quantum state, it is not possible for one observer, by making a measurement of a subsystem of the total state, to communicate information to another ." Look at the Theorem and see if your scenario violate it. My brain is too far gone to tackle it.

@peter paul Yes. Given that there are now quantum computers and the Chinese are doing quantum communication with satellites, if FTL EPR communication was possible it would have been done by now. If you get a chance, watch the Susskind Stanford lecture series. It's an overview series in modern physics intended for people with science/engineering backgrounds and is somewhat mathematical, but not the full-blown crazy maths of String Theory, Standard Model, etc. It's very good.

@peter paul "In physics, the no-communication theorem or no-signaling principle is a no-go theorem from quantum information theory which states that, during measurement of an entangled quantum state, it is not possible for one observer, by making a measurement of a subsystem of the total state, to communicate information to another ."

@peter paul All is well? Then why do the greatest minds in 20th century Physics say you are wrong??

@peter paul I am too far removed from my university days to figure it out. I suggest you post to Physics Fprums. There are members there who are PhD and professional Physicists. Pretty much guarantee they will know the answer. I know it hinges on the fact that neither Bob nor Alice can determine the information content of an Entangled message without receiving correlation information by conventional means, and that can't be determined before one of them leaves to go to the destination point. It has to happen after the first measurement is made.

So it gets better later in the video, but could definitely be better for a video with multiple camera angles.

I think the matter is united by ENTANGLEMENT and GRAVITY is made by the POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE whene they match at the center of the systems(atoms, stars, galaxies etc.) and is balanced by the CMB that to me is light that comes back discharged, cold and broken.

Sounds like a Trumpism

Yes, that is total bullshit. ;-)

Some would say all particles are virtual Peter, including Max Planck who said matter derives from consciousness. I think the reductionist nature of science, ie, chopping things into little pieces to understand them, is making it increasingly hard to deal with the observable cosmos. Fritjof Capra had the right approach I think, in The Tao of Physics. He leavens modern science with ancient wisdom.

Maybe the state of the particles changes by singularity interactions which is an SSB breaking of what we see inside our sphere of space/time experience. Data destruction and transmutation end the entanglement at the event horizon. (I'm saying it's burned as it's transformed at the event horizon or formed as it comes out of the event singularity of a bang.) In other words the event horizon of singularities both positive and negative create new attributes which include space time and matter as we know it. Underneath the covers of the singularity those things are broken down. They still exist as gravity, angular momentum and things that still exist inside the black hole from stuff that entered, but the space time link is possibly broken and conservation of data may break down. (Perhaps: The universe of the seen is closed, but the objective universe including singularities is open inputs and sinks which exist, but are often denied by measurements which must have data to preserve the closed system.) This would be akin to a firewall transforming the material into something different and that something has some values that remain but other values are lost. The negative singularities become a sink to the nature of the particles as we want to define them with quantum mechanics in space time as space time is no more in a sense. The data is lost. But the entropy is converted into something else(I vote for higs boson like dark matter and energy). That may count as a "read" of the entangled particle inside the conversion of the event horizon by the event horizon. The the read was done by the shell of the black hole, and the other particle going out into space will be fixed with no more spin read coupled to the particle which is lost inside the black hole. The remaining particle in our space time is uncoupled from the particle inside the event horizon. It's spin was fixed by the event horizon conversion or read. Because the entangled particle entering into the event horizon is measured by it's destruction and conversion into the singularity. The event horizon may not produce any entangled particles at all. But I'm talking about particles that were pulled in. Some think Hawkin radiation is entangled. I can't answer that question with my guesses. SSB breaking of the rules happens and that fixes the particle outside if it was generated with entangled matter at some point to a fixed read state. There is no more link. The event horizon has broken that and SSB destruction of math(I know this sounds strange but that is possibly what happens) converts the matter inside the black hole into singularity like matter which is much closer to matter we "don't see" and may even reappear as "dark matter and dark energy" when the black hole dissolves. Black holes and singularities or white holes may be using the same SSB breaking of math. And that is why people are worried about the data and how to preserve it on the shell of the surface of the black hole or event horizon. They want to preserve it because they can't let go of it to the form inside the singularity. The big bang and black hole are like two book ends with the same features. The singularities don't use the math we think about inside our universe because the laws of inflation apply, until the matter and higs fields emerge from the singularity and produce more matter. Maybe the black holes are converting seen matter into unseen matter and in effect they are the source for dark matter and dark energy once they disappear. This of course is just my guess as a rank amateur without any good math or physics standing to claim this as anything more than a very dumb pedestrian guess.

Michael Wonsower genial, word here is flow ~

secretchordstudio The vibration of the resonant frequencies of spacetime.

The center of an infinite mass black hole is connected to the big bang or white hole via a mobius loop. The Einstein-Rosen bridge is a mobius loop, positive infinity is dual to negative infinity. Entangled particles or entangled entropy = syntropy! Spin up is dual to spin down -- Dirac equation. There is a dual to process to that of increasing entropy namely syntropy. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing syntropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. Your mind or brain converts information or entropy into mutual information (syntropy, prediction) which is used to track targets, teleology -- Shannon information theory. In communication theory the receiver of a message treats the message as an inference or expectation or a prediction, the message is literally predicted into existence by your mind, a syntropic process. The word syntropy means "a tendency to converge" or integrate into a whole, holism or unification. The word entropy means "a tendency to diverge" or differentiate into new states, reductionism or division. Divergence is dual to convergence, differentiation is dual to integration, reductionism is dual to holism, division is dual to unification or syntropy is dual to entropy. Randomness (entropy) is dual to order (syntropy, predictability). Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Gravitation or curvature is therefore dual. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). The infinite positive curvature singularity is dual to the infinite negative curvature singularity. The infinite mass classical black hole (convergence) is dual to the white hole (big bang, divergence). Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. Duality creates reality.

spacetime, fundamental force of nature, fields, particles and black holes are not real, they are ghost emerging from quantum bits, quantum bit is information. they all emerge from information. like a rainbow, you see it, its not really there.it is nowhere, but yet if you look at a specific angle , you see it. same thing with everything else, I a given situation, you see something, or feel something. or whatever your brain is programed for as a response

You have watched too many Star Treks

right to me.