SETI Institute
SETI Talks archive: http://seti.org/talks
Prof. Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Canada, author and theoretical physcist, will talk about the evolution of laws in our universe.
Dr. Smolin’s main contributions to physics have been so far to the quantum theory of gravity, to which he has been a co-inventor and major contributor to two major directions, loop quantum gravity and deformed special relativity. He also contributes to cosmology, through his proposal of cosmological natural selection: a falsifiable mechanism to explain the choice of the laws of physics. He has also contributed to quantum field theory, the foundations of quantum mechanics, theoretical biology, the philosophy of science and economics. He is the author of more than 150 scientific papers and numerous essays and writings for the public on science.
He also has written four books which explore philosophical issues raised by contemporary physics and cosmology. These are Life of the Cosmos (1997), Three Roads to Quantum Gravity (2001), The Trouble with Physics (2006) and Time Reborn (2013).
Source
am sure lee must be somewhere on the spectrum to be able to ponder so deeply.
This doesn't solve the problem. You're just proposing a "meta"-set of laws that govern the evolution of our current laws. Then you can ask the same question… why these meta-laws? Then you'll need a "meta-meta" set of laws to govern the meta-laws… infinite regress.
The multiverse is a silly quibble without the slightest clue or a scrap of evidence.
Genesis said 3000 years ago, in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
Powerful intellectual beings originated too, called angels and demons.
Word and information closely related.
20th Century, cosmic background radiation and red shift of galaxies demonstrated expanding universe and contemptuously name the Big Bang by atheist physicists in outrage at the destruction of their belief that the universe was eternal.
This entire universe, matter/energy/space/time came into being at that moment.
It is a work of art, there was an artist.
It can be understood to a certain extent and seems to follow rules.
He is so ignorant of the biology of perception it is a waste of time watching this.
In truth, we have senses which pick up information from our inner self and our environment. They sample a small part of the sound spectrum and hear by that, they sample a small part of the electromagnetic spectrum and call it seeing and most of us can do this in colour, in other words detect differences in the spectral range.
This is then coded and recognised in the brain – three moves removed from knowing ANYTHING in itself.
So what is the cause of the FIRST universe and why would it have laws that would have the ability to create black holes?? Where did he laws of the FIRST universe come from?Also the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics allows an 'out' for the Newtonian problem of a deterministic nature of the universe. By observation we effect the outcome of a interaction. So we can have the power of choice and affect change to our environment. However none of this allows for a naturalistic cause for any universe. You need an Intelligent Designer, as pointed to in this talk by referring to a cause to the laws outside the box of the universe.
No high Archy intelligent is using radio waves to transmit on anymore just like truckers don't use CB sets anymore I bought a CB set and all I heard was noise and every is it
Please excuse my naivety, I have a high-school level of education but there are tons of questions I have about this theory. If the laws of the universe evolved, what is the catalyst to the change, at what rate do this occur and how does this happened in a manner that sustains orderly laws? Also, if we can observer the birth of a planet thousands of light years away, can we trust our assumptions and calculations? Again, green but willing to learn
I just like making another comment when I did 6 months ago because I got nowhere
The mathematical mechanism "projecting" the real imaging process of temporal superposition as evidential knowledge, is not the illusion, the delusion of "understanding", ..belief in an internal perception derived from recalling systematic wordings, is. The process of evolution, (by theorized reprojection/reflection), is a constant testing of perceived integration with existential knowledge. (Being, or "annealing"?)
Time IS…, constant dynamic continuity, (now), infinity-eternity, containing all change etc etc.
There's a delusion that the natural world is complete, which is impossible because of shifting relationships held together by mathematical "illusion", that is actually illustration, of a resonance-gradient of order in psudo-random chaos.(?)
Bad just bad !
Thank you Lee and PI Inst., Thank you Canada for the love and hugs hope to see you soon, Peace and love, Doug.
If every black hole is a new universe something weird must be(??) happening when
they merge…
In fact universes do emerge from black holes. We are inside of one. What created the first black hole? Answer: the last one that will ever be formed. Gospel of Thomas: Jesus said, "Have you discovered, then, the beginning, that you look for the end?
Time is what a conscious mind, or soul if you will, is experiencing when it jumps into the ocean of potential energy waves, we call the universe.
Philosophically, a principle is invariant, but laws can evolve because of the nature of probability.
___
Professor Smolins ideas of a "revival" of Time were a good basis for "re-searching the field".
If the laws of physics are evolving how can we assume that the results of a hypothesis of an experiment can be depended on?
There's a new book out called 'Now: the physics of time' that can help define time in his view. Also the book The thermodynamic universe:exploring the limits of physics' can help too.The book 'String theory and M-theory: modern introduction' , is recommended as well. Syntropy, retrocausality, and supercausality in a more plastic B-theory of time put in an evolutionary algorithm would make these phenomena likely possibilities if a ground state and precedence principle were added with Hamiltonian-like degrees of freedom and fluctuations.
The principle of precedence in quantum theory is very simular to the theory of morphic resonance. So begins the new field of 'Evolutionary Physics', and I'm going to be one of its pioneers. By the way string theory has made the prediction that the universe was stitched together through 'TIME' including the laws of physics. B. G. Sidharth's theory and models of emergent laws, thermodynamics and fuzzy space-time fit well, even time can evolve too.
[01:02:41]: Nervous laughter on that 1!
Has he had a stroke?
It would be nice if Lee defined Time. Is it a quantity or a quality?
There is no difference between an evolutionary scientist and an interior decorator.
I'm so bitterly disappointed that Lee smolin is talking about literally some of the biggest questions in history, questions that have defeated the greatest of thinkers of any era. Questions that are so very magical and mystifying and where the fuck is the energy, enthusiasm the utter lack of any such qualities in his deliverance to the audience. speaking in a tone that you would discuss what you had last night for dinner, then you do not deserve to hold the position you do as you are simply stagnating scientific progress
I'm so bitterly disappointed that Lee smolin is talking about literally some of the biggest questions in history, questions that have defeated the greatest of thinkers of any era. Questions that are so very magical and mystifying and where the fuck is the energy, enthusiasm the utter lack of any such qualities in his deliverance to the audience. speaking in a tone that you would discuss what you had last night for dinner, then you do not deserve to hold the position you do as you are simply stagnating scientific progress.
Tom Stoppard quote is ridiculous. No, the entire future can't be figured out, maybe the atoms next few moves but then choices are made, paths taken which then send the atoms in a different direction. Its the same at macro level, events can be traced backwards forever and give a picture of what happened, but tracing events into the future is ok if in isolation but not when external events can change the picture. Which they can.
Your baby was 140 wen he was born
Gdfkch
for instance you can ask Billy Booth have you heard this before?
many concepts changed only lately like time concept, self-concept…
you can check, no one talked about this before 1996 actually even before 2007,
this is provable of course.
many old men became smart suddenlly!
Lora on:
http://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/Good-and-evil-are-human-concepts and Anonymous on
which wrote lately: Would Aliens Debunk Religion?, page3
you can see many old men became smart suddenly with a new theories!
his webpage was Your Religion & Aliens, About.com
all is documented of course not only this many other old men those pretend that it's their own ideas!
check the internet nothing mentioned about such a things before 2007, I did before only few words in Relativity theory and Quantum mechanics, actually nothing more than the old conception about time
for instance you can ask Billy Booth have you heard this before?
his webpage was Your Religion & Aliens, About.com this site disappeared.
all is documented of course not only this many other old men those
pretend that it's their own ideas!
check the internet nothing mentioned about such a things before 2007, I
did before only few words in Relativity theory and Quantum mechanics,
actually nothing more than the old conception about time
And how exactly is this an argument against determinism? I dont see how "Naturalism 2" allows free will or contradict determinism. When the laws of physics change there must be a cause for that change too. Most of this is bad philosophical what if reasoning. Only assumptions. I guess im just a "naturalist 3" because i think the laws of nature are more like habits and it would seem only logical if they havent always been like now but that doesnt lead to indeterminism. I just cant see how free will is granted by naturally changing parameters. Cause and effect, input and output, action and reaction. Why is this concept so hard to understand/accept for some people?
If its possible to put information into a black hole so that it is readable in the cosmic background radiation of the resulting universe then isn't it extremely likely that there is information in the cosmic background radiation of our universe placed there by beings from the parent universe?
Naturalism one says the universe is deterministic and can all be described by a mathematical equation. So what?
You can describe anything with an equation and then what you have is an equation. Is this the same as having the thing itself? Only if all you wanted from the thing was to know what it will do. I'm pretty sure you cant eat it.
What did he say at 28:04 ? "consult the ???"
He always bounces his hand like that during his talks, probably unawares.
this "inevitable resignation" is what we in many fields come to eventually – leaving the ego behind and embracing presence in life. LIFE ITSELF is the essential NOW we live.
Lee is a genius
Yesterday is just an illusion and tomorrow might never come. Now is the only real thing.
Who keeps refocusing the camera lens: blurring it, and then refocusing. Very annoying.
EVOLUTION! HA HA HA! Thats just plain silly. They call it "science" ha. The very definition of science is something that can be observed in a controlled environment over a period of time. Somebody please tell me that you have witnessed the evolutionary process. No you haven't. It simply is not science by the very definition of the word. The entire outer space and all of it's intricacies some people want people to believe its just random chance.i would suppose that the intricacies of a computer is random chance as well. Why do "educated" people want to complicate things. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.Genesis 1:1.
@ acceleratorplus Hawking says everything cancels out to be 0 so there is no primary field. Even string theorists can't agree.
@31:00 I have to believe that Lee is just messing with the 'audience'. As soon as you utter the word 'now', it is in the listeners past…, so the past has gone, the future has yet to happen and 'now' is always just gone into the past, in what 'time'
do we exist?