Physics in Trouble: Why the Public Should Care
In this Microsoft Research program, American theoretical physicist Lee Smolin, author of “The Trouble with Physics,” states that physics has lost its way amid failed experiments and wasted funding. He cites repeated unsuccessful attempts by scientists to develop a “theory of everything,” or a single model to explain the theories of all the fundamental interactions of nature.
(December 1, 2009) Leonard Susskind discusses the equations of motion of fields containing particles and quantum field theory, and shows how basic processes are coded by a Lagrangian. Stanford University: www.stanford.edu Stanford Continuing Studies Program: csp.stanford.edu Stanford University Channel on YouTube: www.youtube.com
Keep talking about quantum-relativity,fool computer scientistist with that fantasy,I will be more rich..
unsuccessful attempts? Isn’t that what science is about? Failing again and again and then finding the correct answer.
The theorist will get the boon of data that will be coming in the next few decades of all the new measurements and cataloging we are now undertaking in all fields and the pendulum will swing the other way. this discussion is not macro enough, i fail to how hitting a momentary wall and having certain uncertainties is any kind of a problem.
Ethical principles underlying science …OMG what crap! This is so stupid I almost vomited. No more of this torture.
This is because of lack of philosophy and too much out of context math ideas.
I know this goes over 500 char., but it takes a little more to break it into lay terms.
Theory 2: I am generalizing a bit here. I am putting the various Quantum Mechanics into one hat, but it essentially explains what you’ve asked. Quantum is the physics of the very small. In Quantum world, particles behave in what we would think would be a very irrational way. They can disappear, reappearing in other locations, and some behave differently under observation. Very generalized, but there it is
chris, The truth is, there are 2 theories explaining the universe and nature, and it breaks down to a gravity and energy thing, which is more difficult to explain.
Theory 1: Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity – It is pretty darn close to universally correct. The problem is when you get below a milimeter from a gravitational object (we will use Earth) The General Theory falls apart. The equations no longer work.
I’ve tried watching this twice but it is just too painful. Can anyone do a summary in 500 chars? I gather form “more info” that science hasn’t managed to come up with a TOE yet. Presumably there is more to this talk than that.
All these comments that are attacking the messenger/speaker…
Are you really that UNscientific? Don’t you all know that it’s stupid and holds no relevance as to negate what the speaker is saying?
Just hear him out first, but attacking him personaly is grade school immature.
Ignorance knows no bounds…
People like physicists are make things happen (ex; Engineering, TV, Radio, Cars, Airplane, Computer, and etc), and can be enjoyed for people like you. BRAVO!!
Can somebody tells me this modern physics (Quantum Mechanics) is really investigate the nature of gravity (only) or else. I haven’t taken this quantum courses yet. Wow i didn’t know the Q Gravity theory really gave birth into a complex different theories.
Well, Scientists never really were good public speakers to begin with.
The 1st Scientist to ever be a truly entertaining public educator who made science interesting even for laymen was Carl Sagan.
Hey alnot01,
I only said it is philosophically unsophisticated. May be he is a great scientist, but the philosophical implications… well, I think are really naive.
I retract myself saying it’s bad science, but I don’t retract saying its bad philosophy. There are good scientists who also are good philosophers (of physics). He is getting into philosophical issues that are highly debatable. Even if the physics, ceteris paribus, were right.
You will then love Ananda M, Bosman only for advance minds
You must learn about Ananda M. Bosman he talk about Hadronic Mechanics which is the binding force of the molecules, 10 to the -13cm
Typical physicist. Can’t even tie his tie properly, can’t stand still while taking, waves hands around excessively, makes many grammatical errors when he speaks. Babbles on and on without actually ever saying anything. I suffered through the first twelve minues in which time is said absolutely nothing of substance. I wouldn’t hire this guy to dig a ditch.
distinguished scientists, working at the frontiers of science, who can’t fucking figure out how to properly record and instructional video without fucking up the audio.
BRAVO!!
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Consider … the laws of nature, our environment, and the conditions in which we journey through life may readily be understood by discovering and uncovering the underlying law of nature (singular).
Does it exist? What could it be?
The most effective and efficient approach we can take to understanding the way of all things is to question, seek out and identify this single, fundamental, underlying law of nature upon which all laws are based.
Unlikely?
What of Star-Trek’s communicator?
The poor quality microphone Mr. Smolin had attached to his lapel during this talk has resulted in soundtrack in which his voice is now louder (when his head is tilted downwards) and then less clear (when his head is erect). Unfortunate and poor production values.
the most boring leacture I have ever listened to. It is no so much the subject but the long sentences and non-sense of this man is not nice to listen too. To be a brulliant scientists you have to have more than the knowledge;you have to have the ability to convey it in a through and communicative way especially a subject like physics or theoretical physics.
Most of the powerful minds I encountered as a student were mediocre teachers. Their writings were much clearer, and said all that they had to say on the subject. Over coffee and beer, they disdained polished teaching as taking time away form research, and as salesmanship over substance. Smolin is cut from the same cloth, but had the decency to move his career to a think tank. He is quite aware that his concerns nowadays are mostly philosophical. Unlike philosophers, he knows a lot of science.
Viewers, read his book The Trouble with Physics. It is a cry from the heart, by a man who is watching his beloved spouse wither and die because she has lost the plot. String theory is hegemonic, and does not speak directly to astrophysical and particle accelerator evidence. Theoretical physics has bitten off more than it can chew properly. String theory is too ambitious given the present state of techology. We should stick to GUTs and quantum gravity. AND RESPECT DATA!
this was not as interesting as i was hoping for.
i usually love reading lee smolin’s theories but this was more of a history of physics lecture.
oh well…
I just read that the NSF people have been watching porn. But I didn’t expect to find a YouTube video that shows dozens of them watching such a hardcore porn.
Close again…however, there are interesting circumstances that do not have relavancy to black holes or hydrogen..that being the branes supplied from M-Theory that our universe is contaiend within…the place where energy starts in order to become matter. The branes functions are clearly visible in hadrons as a protons mass is not entirely made up of the quarks it contains, there is more energy too it… the same energy that is released through decay as photons (quanta of elctromagnetic energy).
For the last one and a half years I have practically spent my free time watching and studying the series of lectures by Prof. Susskind. Thank you Stanford. I am greatful to you Leonardo.