Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Infinite Regress 4 (2022-07-25) ​

0:00:00 Music
0:00:18 professor restart yeah okay
0:00:20 so
0:00:21 so let us stress that i think it is a
0:00:23 very important point which will help us
0:00:25 in various regresses and show various
0:00:28 things that should be impossible and is
0:00:30 it this this evidence is ba is is
0:00:33 depending upon the necessary ethicity
0:00:35 part
0:00:36 meaning the refutation of uh
0:00:39 of a vicious circle of the circularity
0:00:44 is clear there's no problem
0:00:47 check the issue of certainty a is
0:00:49 created by b and b is created by a
0:00:52 and then you see it's only a necessity
0:00:53 path which is what will will show that
0:00:56 this is impossible then then a has to be
0:00:59 it exists to exist and non-existence
0:01:01 in existence are non-existent at that
0:01:03 same time but the same would be because
0:01:05 of the necessary part not because the
0:01:06 goal but most importantly the issue with
0:01:09 the with the infinite series that's the
0:01:12 crucial one and that's depend upon
0:01:15 being the uh that the series being uh
0:01:18 being a middle in the sense of being
0:01:20 condition conditioning and conditioned
0:01:23 and this is very clear in the in in
0:01:26 the
0:01:27 evidence of
0:01:29 israel
0:01:30 but by that the the
0:01:33 the infinite this
0:01:36 infinite regress or whatever series is
0:01:38 called that this one is allegedly being
0:01:42 go having no limit and going forever
0:01:44 etcetera uh number wise on the solemn
0:01:47 without limit limitless that's the most
0:01:48 important point
0:01:50 that is supposed to be an explanation
0:01:52 so it's a middle
0:01:54 but on the other hand
0:01:58 it is it is not a middle so a legend is
0:02:00 not a middle having no end if you have
0:02:02 no end there's not a middle but there's
0:02:04 a contradiction in terms and this is for
0:02:06 the evidences that that is that is
0:02:08 condition that is conditioning or a
0:02:10 condition for e that's trivial because
0:02:12 we are looking at e and taking the
0:02:14 series starting from e going backwards
0:02:16 but that it is conditioned by something
0:02:20 otherwise not exist yes each member of
0:02:22 it is necessary what's it just take it
0:02:24 out it's gone
0:02:25 so to create a contradiction but with
0:02:27 using the idea of the middle and doing
0:02:29 this this this uh this trick you see
0:02:32 sometimes things if you formulate them
0:02:33 properly the evidence becomes easy and
0:02:36 almost straightforward if you don't
0:02:37 follow me probably you you go and you
0:02:39 will not be able to catch that
0:02:41 the crucial point which gets you to the
0:02:43 evidence but the from this evidence is
0:02:45 clear the conditional the necessary
0:02:47 condition conditionality is that is the
0:02:49 the crucial thing to that to negate the
0:02:51 infinite the infinite regress or the
0:02:53 limitless regress
0:02:55 so
0:02:57 based on that all these universal events
0:03:00 must end into
0:03:04 the whole universe must end
0:03:06 in into uh and to uh
0:03:09 into a uh
0:03:11 a starting point
0:03:12 or starting being
0:03:14 a point of start it can't go to
0:03:17 even with time
0:03:19 let's look at let's let us let us look
0:03:21 at time now now it will help us uh in
0:03:25 the case of conditioning the evidence is
0:03:27 clear but let us look at a time as it is
0:03:30 about
0:03:31 the issue which has been raised by some
0:03:33 philosophers and also has been adopted
0:03:35 by me that it's possible to have
0:03:37 infinite many events in the past
0:03:40 which are not cows are connected to each
0:03:42 other
0:03:45 and many many philosophies by the way
0:03:47 entire past and present and many uh uh
0:03:51 barely any mother calamine some people
0:03:53 following every time here they said it
0:03:55 is possible to have uh
0:03:58 events going in the past
0:04:00 forever
0:04:02 infinitely many in numbers
0:04:06 is that possible is not possible because
0:04:08 they say it is not a causal chain so
0:04:10 there's no problem but let me show you
0:04:12 how to refute that and show that
0:04:13 certainly not possible
0:04:16 let's assume that we have uh for example
0:04:18 just to follow the
0:04:20 the events let's say take very simple
0:04:22 fundamental event very simple trivial
0:04:24 event almost that is that's
0:04:27 that's a bell ringing at 12 noon
0:04:30 which has ranked today at 12 00.
0:04:34 and it rank at 12 uh for 24 hours before
0:04:37 or 12 noon etc etc obviously if you go
0:04:40 millions of years back uh the the length
0:04:43 of the day would be shorter but we fixed
0:04:45 the we let's fix the length as 24 hours
0:04:48 it will not be noon until noon
0:04:51 in matarova but this is the secondary
0:04:53 point and we are just assuming that it
0:04:55 is this event
0:04:57 behind this another event
0:05:02 and this goes
0:05:03 with and an example given by mia that
0:05:06 allah is active and it is clear he is
0:05:09 continuously creating so he's created
0:05:11 infinite many universes before ours
0:05:14 uh for ours
0:05:17 but here here you see where you catch
0:05:19 the the fallacy in that and the
0:05:20 impossibility the impossibility is
0:05:22 caught by the the bill
0:05:25 ringing today
0:05:28 at noon
0:05:30 yes it's not caused by the building the
0:05:32 day before but it could not have ranked
0:05:34 three at noon unless the
0:05:36 one
0:05:38 at noon the day before has rank
0:05:42 as i would not have had this related to
0:05:44 the so the unidirectional strict
0:05:46 direction of time
0:05:49 so there's
0:05:50 the the ringing of the previous bell for
0:05:52 this day let's call it
0:05:55 today's build let's call it number zero
0:05:57 and the bill of yesterday is called
0:05:59 minus one because you're going back so
0:06:01 it's more convenient to use minus one
0:06:02 but doesn't matter you can use password
0:06:04 but as it's more habitual to use the
0:06:07 index in negative because you're going
0:06:08 back and forth back back and back and
0:06:10 back so it is it's natural and this is
0:06:13 pleasing to use minus one
0:06:15 but minus one would could have not rank
0:06:18 unless the one minus two already ranked
0:06:20 before
0:06:21 there's a necessary that it's arranging
0:06:23 before just recently it's not sufficient
0:06:25 as it doesn't it's not causing that but
0:06:27 it's necessary it must have passed
0:06:29 before
0:06:30 and now from the evidence you'll come to
0:06:32 the conclusion
0:06:35 that it cannot be going for a for
0:06:37 infiniti
0:06:39 if the time span between them is fixed
0:06:41 like for 24 hours or whatever number of
0:06:43 hours effects or number of seconds is
0:06:45 fixed
0:06:46 it can't be because this will diverge
0:06:50 so the only way or
0:06:52 the only way for such such uh for this
0:06:54 bill bill number zero bell number minus
0:06:57 one build number minus two for that to
0:06:59 converge as it must be
0:07:00 is to terminate
0:07:03 so it has to go to an initial bill
0:07:05 they will there must be a first bill
0:07:08 ringing and the first universe created
0:07:11 which we can assume is ours no reason to
0:07:13 think but it could be maybe maybe maybe
0:07:15 a number 17 in the series on above cut
0:07:17 the alone it doesn't matter but it must
0:07:20 end with one
0:07:21 there's no escape from that
0:07:25 applying that to the time itself time
0:07:27 must go to a zero
0:07:31 if you count time uh
0:07:34 so i set a negative number if you start
0:07:36 from today conventionally
0:07:38 regarding the clock the clock time now
0:07:40 is zero and going backwards with minus
0:07:42 like in in the temperature let me give
0:07:44 the example of temperature we start
0:07:46 temperature was defined and that
0:07:48 convenient point was was a was uh the
0:07:51 freezing point of water in the surgery
0:07:53 uh in the sergius
0:07:55 setting and fahrenheit is a bit
0:07:57 different but it doesn't matter in the
0:07:58 celsius like zero and then we go to
0:08:00 negative temperature and then by
0:08:02 experimentation and observation it was
0:08:04 clear that we we go negative negative
0:08:07 but until the moment the more negative
0:08:09 become the more difficult is to cool
0:08:10 down until it seem asymptotically
0:08:13 we will go to a certain point which is
0:08:16 calculated as 273 i think point 14 or
0:08:19 something like that seems to be as a
0:08:21 limit always slightly more than that but
0:08:23 it's impossible to go any further and
0:08:25 there's an absolute zero which we can
0:08:27 only we could we may reach only
0:08:29 asymptotically
0:08:31 we cannot reach there the same is with
0:08:33 time
0:08:36 so if we have a time series even if the
0:08:38 number is infinite then the distance
0:08:39 between the must shrink change ring
0:08:41 string and go to zero
0:08:43 or if the distance is fixed
0:08:45 like the clock strikes at 12 more then
0:08:48 it has to terminate it's impossible
0:08:50 it does not fit with the
0:08:52 with the strict nature of time being at
0:08:55 being unidirectional and going for going
0:08:57 in one direction
0:08:59 so the i think this with this evidence
0:09:02 the same evidence for for uh but uh
0:09:05 generalized and it's rated probably that
0:09:07 it depends
0:09:08 it's the
0:09:09 the the power of the proof relies on the
0:09:12 conditionality not on the causality
0:09:18 the the vicious circle is not a problem
0:09:20 this is finite anyway and this is
0:09:22 internal contradictory both in
0:09:24 conditional theoreticality we don't need
0:09:26 to bother the main problem is that it's
0:09:28 infinite one
0:09:30 why it is a problem the infinite one
0:09:31 because our mental optic mental meant
0:09:34 optical capability is having a horizon
0:09:36 we have a limited horizon
0:09:39 and then
0:09:40 it is very easy to deceive one by
0:09:42 pushing things until it's until they're
0:09:45 behind the horizon then you can your
0:09:46 full self you fool yourself that they
0:09:49 they are never end or they have no limit
0:09:51 the limit is just behind your horizon
0:09:53 that's it and the rationalization this
0:09:55 way will show you that the limit is
0:09:57 there even if you pretend or claim it's
0:09:59 not there it's there
0:10:01 you are mistaken
0:10:03 it is that must be there
0:10:06 but also but there may be one escape
0:10:08 route which uh
0:10:10 penrose and the hindus may try to use
0:10:13 what the escape wrote they claim the
0:10:14 universe is is
0:10:16 periodical and going infinitely
0:10:21 from universal universe and in backward
0:10:23 and forthward without end and beginning
0:10:27 and then they interpret that
0:10:29 most likely they will debate the
0:10:30 additional times the direction of time
0:10:32 is here yes is from uh according to
0:10:35 bellows it must have been like a
0:10:37 blank size
0:10:38 Music
0:10:40 or extremely small usually it is set as
0:10:42 a blank size uh black hole
0:10:45 and this one starts expanding expanding
0:10:47 expanding
0:10:49 and then obviously
0:10:50 the expansion slows down must slows down
0:10:54 and then it starts shrinking shrinking
0:10:56 and going to the black
0:10:58 hole and etcetera etcetera for all it
0:11:01 ends is like that both sides
0:11:04 and then they say that the direction of
0:11:06 time is nothing down the direction of
0:11:08 the expansion
0:11:10 and
0:11:12 and they say our feeling of time as one
0:11:14 is dictated by our perception and
0:11:17 dictated by second law of terrible
0:11:18 dynamic which is the state in the
0:11:20 related to the expansion so the time is
0:11:22 just expanding some kind of expansion
0:11:24 parameter
0:11:25 so the time reversed
0:11:27 obviously we cannot have any image what
0:11:30 if we have been after the slowing down
0:11:32 and starting before the crash
0:11:34 or the crunch the big crunch
0:11:36 not the big crunch or the super crunch
0:11:38 because it's actually uh it goes only to
0:11:40 a black hole it doesn't go to zero if it
0:11:43 goes exactly zero it will be a super
0:11:45 crunch like a
0:11:46 big crunch like a big back
0:11:49 big bang starts from singularity one
0:11:50 point singularity
0:11:53 by by physical evidence and so on but
0:11:55 penrose is arguing about that but we
0:11:57 will go to excellent outside but leave
0:11:58 the experience aside whatever
0:12:00 experimental side maybe
0:12:02 he can he cannot escape from that
0:12:04 situation
0:12:06 so the direction of time is a change so
0:12:10 there's no problem with every desire but
0:12:11 but still the problem is still there
0:12:14 how is the problem is there
0:12:16 definitely we are in one of these
0:12:18 universes and we have start counting
0:12:20 from here
0:12:22 good i would let's give our events the
0:12:25 number zero for example
0:12:29 allegedly according to when rose and the
0:12:32 hindus it
0:12:33 emerged from black hole whatever hindus
0:12:35 they don't have a black hole they they
0:12:38 they didn't they didn't express any
0:12:40 details about the emergence but
0:12:43 i think they they claim uh uh
0:12:46 when when it when they the time of the
0:12:48 end of the universe comes
0:12:50 then
0:12:51 it ends disappears i think shiva
0:12:54 destroyed it completely and elated
0:12:56 including himself but somehow
0:12:58 mysteriously uh vishnu is still
0:13:01 available and who is sleeping now he
0:13:03 wakes up and will create the universe
0:13:05 then it goes to sleep and it goes like
0:13:07 that something like that something like
0:13:08 a funny story
0:13:10 it is
0:13:11 it sounds funny because it looks like
0:13:13 like a child story but it is as good as
0:13:17 bad as a black hole expanding and
0:13:19 shrinking and going back to black
0:13:21 just changing the name from shiva to
0:13:26 shiva to the crunch and the black hole
0:13:28 expanding is this vishnu or something
0:13:30 like that
0:13:31 call it whatever you wish
0:13:34 so allegedly there was a universe
0:13:36 behind us
0:13:39 but we could construct
0:13:42 or imagine
0:13:45 a bell
0:13:46 or an announcement let us say put the
0:13:49 announcement the moment the black hole
0:13:50 starts expanding
0:13:52 it
0:13:54 that's the direction of time indicative
0:13:56 of a direction of time
0:13:57 is going from there to us and we are
0:13:59 late
0:14:00 and someone screaming there i'm starting
0:14:06 and the previous one also someone
0:14:08 screaming
0:14:09 i'm starting actually we have that we
0:14:11 hear that screaming we see it in black
0:14:13 and
0:14:14 allegedly according to those we see we
0:14:16 see the announcement in the
0:14:18 in the in the
0:14:20 in the anomalies of the background or
0:14:22 their
0:14:24 radiation in the cosmic rays
0:14:27 cosmic background cb
0:14:28 cbr that could require crown radiation
0:14:31 this is that's the announcement
0:14:34 but this announcement in our universe
0:14:39 could not have happened
0:14:40 unless the announcement in the previous
0:14:42 one has been made and that one could not
0:14:45 have been happening at least announced
0:14:47 before that could have been made and
0:14:48 then we're back to the same
0:14:50 situation as we have come with this
0:14:53 so here is the numbering of universes
0:14:55 which is obviously and it is so the
0:14:58 situation that one emerges and the other
0:15:01 one disappears and emerges the other one
0:15:03 and so on is giving a
0:15:05 fundamental direction of numbering
0:15:07 so the one minus one minus two minus
0:15:10 three minus four
0:15:11 it's impossible for this conditional
0:15:13 series to go because it's conditional
0:15:15 that announcement in our universe could
0:15:17 not have happened before the one before
0:15:19 university has been announced and one
0:15:21 previously could not happen
0:15:23 and leicester one before has been
0:15:25 announced so we extend
0:15:27 at infinitum is not possible by the by
0:15:30 by the infinite by the impossibility of
0:15:33 of regress without limit so there must
0:15:35 be a limit but the limit of this number
0:15:37 minus one minus two minus 3 is divergent
0:15:40 if they go infinitely long
0:15:42 so they have to break somewhere how
0:15:44 large it will be is relevant quadrillion
0:15:46 quad 10 to the 400 i don't care but it
0:15:49 ends well set and number
0:15:54 that one
0:15:55 we re renumber again that one we call
0:15:57 zero and then we become the number ten
0:15:59 to the one one hundred doesn't matter
0:16:01 which number we have
0:16:02 but we remember by by adding this one as
0:16:05 usual we can turn it again by shifting
0:16:07 the scale but this is then will be the
0:16:10 starting one number zero really that is
0:16:11 31. we started here zero because we have
0:16:14 nothing better to do but now we
0:16:16 recognize that we are actually number
0:16:17 ten to the hundred is okay i don't know
0:16:19 if we are number two to the hundreds
0:16:21 whatever it is or number one
0:16:23 or never zero either maybe we have a
0:16:25 starting one there's nothing before
0:16:27 but it has to be having a start
0:16:30 so it's impossible
0:16:32 so the pen was universal even with the
0:16:34 reversal of direction of time it doesn't
0:16:36 save the day
0:16:38 it has to be that's not
0:16:42 it's impossible so these have been
0:16:44 refuted hindu penalties universe
0:16:46 definitely refuted
0:16:50 by necessity and this is the an amazing
0:16:53 power of the human mind whatever it is
0:16:55 may be created by a divine as a
0:16:58 projection of his infinite mind or it is
0:17:01 emerging from the universe
0:17:03 to its own mechanism
0:17:05 under the reflecting the laws of the
0:17:06 universe wired according to the law of
0:17:08 the universe in general there may be
0:17:10 misfits there may be birth defects and
0:17:13 so on but the general is like that shows
0:17:15 that is amazing power you could say our
0:17:17 human mind although our horizon may be
0:17:20 limited various things are limited
0:17:21 because we are limited in many senses
0:17:24 but the fundamental power of it a matter
0:17:26 of
0:17:27 contradiction non-conviction is almost
0:17:29 absolute
0:17:30 it constructed this question which look
0:17:32 like behind the horizon
0:17:34 we cannot see them but we can
0:17:36 rationalize about them
0:17:38 if reason exists or there's any
0:17:39 rationality whatsoever otherwise nothing
0:17:41 can be rationalized
0:17:43 or understood nothing can make any sense
0:17:47 so that's it that's not
0:17:49 necessarily saying i exist and will
0:17:51 exist at the same time
0:17:53 it has to terminate there
0:17:56 and this is because of
0:17:58 noticing that this is not only the issue
0:18:00 of causality chain of causality is the
0:18:03 chain of conditionals
0:18:05 that's what it what the proof is all
0:18:07 about and hanging about
0:18:10 someone may come with the following uh
0:18:12 maybe some atheists will come with that
0:18:14 because they they try to find all kinds
0:18:16 of of refutation they say but according
0:18:20 to that uh the the sine function or the
0:18:23 cosine if we draw them in the x axis
0:18:25 they are periodical both sides at
0:18:27 infinitum et cetera
0:18:30 that your evidence refutes that same
0:18:32 idea it doesn't refute that that's
0:18:34 that's perfectly fine if we accept the
0:18:36 actual infinite even mathematical term
0:18:38 because
0:18:39 how how how how is sign calculated let's
0:18:42 look at the sign around zero for minus
0:18:44 pi to plus pi how it is calculated it's
0:18:47 calculated there by certain mathematical
0:18:49 equations working there
0:18:51 and then we just set forth so the
0:18:53 calculation between minus 5 so plus pi
0:18:57 is not conditioned by the calculation
0:18:59 from my minus 5 to minus 2 pi no it's
0:19:02 independent that's calculation same
0:19:03 equation and the same equation applies
0:19:05 there
0:19:08 this this one is not conditioned for
0:19:09 this
0:19:10 we don't need to have the calculation
0:19:12 between minus two pi but minus pi to
0:19:15 calculate the con the the mechanical
0:19:17 actually but originally it's maybe a
0:19:20 little bit funny originally how did the
0:19:23 these cosine and sine functions which
0:19:25 are if you draw them nowadays
0:19:27 how did they start originally they
0:19:28 started originally actually uh in
0:19:31 trigonometry by considering uh
0:19:34 triangles with the with the them
0:19:40 which have uh uh
0:19:42 which have a uh what they call it
0:19:44 perpendicular one one the
0:19:47 the opposite is perpendicular on the
0:19:49 adjacent and then the connection is
0:19:51 called hypersonics or something like
0:19:52 that
0:19:54 and then by dividing for example the the
0:19:58 opposite
0:19:59 by the hypotenuse we define the cosine
0:20:04 yeah this the sign maybe it's the sign
0:20:07 it's the sign it's the sign because the
0:20:09 sign of zero three that collapse it will
0:20:12 be zero so
0:20:14 so that uh the opposite divided by the
0:20:16 hypotenuse is the
0:20:18 sign that's originally how these things
0:20:21 were defined
0:20:24 etc
0:20:26 etc
0:20:30 then some intelligent mathematician
0:20:32 noticed that
0:20:33 under the angle which we are studying at
0:20:35 between zero and ninety nine two is the
0:20:36 extreme almost limit and the daily the
0:20:39 the triangle will collapse in a line but
0:20:42 but some mathematicians in the united
0:20:47 need to states ourselves from 0 to 90
0:20:49 degree we can go over 90 degree all what
0:20:51 we need obviously is to shift this
0:20:54 opposite to the other side
0:20:56 but then the adjacent will be going to
0:20:58 the left so we give it a minus sign and
0:21:00 then we calculate trending nice we know
0:21:02 how to read them and then we can do this
0:21:04 in the other quadrant and then in the
0:21:06 other quadrant and that will complete
0:21:08 the cycle and then we get this equality
0:21:10 so that's
0:21:11 that full cycle you can calculate either
0:21:14 by three by using the triangles or later
0:21:17 on when analysis developed and it turns
0:21:19 out this function is is infinitely often
0:21:22 differentiable as analytic and we can
0:21:24 expand it in power series and the power
0:21:26 series is for us it converges not only
0:21:28 for these
0:21:29 x between minus five it converges
0:21:31 everywhere
0:21:32 marvelously
0:21:34 and
0:21:35 when you study it there
0:21:37 it works
0:21:39 it gives that policy
0:21:41 almost miraculously amazingly but it's
0:21:43 not it's how things are connected
0:21:45 internally by logic and said
0:21:47 mathematical fundamental definition and
0:21:50 axioms that's it
0:21:52 so
0:21:53 the previously
0:21:55 is based on the calculation in in is
0:21:58 enough to have the calculation minus
0:21:59 five plus actually is enough to have the
0:22:01 calculation just in a small neighborhood
0:22:04 around zero that we have the infinite
0:22:05 series and then we calculate so we don't
0:22:07 need the calculation there it's not a
0:22:09 condition for calculating here no
0:22:11 so this can be calculated and then we go
0:22:13 and infinitum if we allow ourselves
0:22:15 according to most mathematician that
0:22:17 this is that is at least mathematically
0:22:19 in them in the mind the actual infinite
0:22:22 exists and what
0:22:24 and if you are cautious you know this is
0:22:26 only potential like the brower the the
0:22:28 the party umbra uh
0:22:30 of uh
0:22:32 mr brower and the intuitionist
0:22:34 mathematician essentially they say no no
0:22:36 this is this is only
0:22:39 procedural to create more and more
0:22:41 there's no actual infinite even in the
0:22:43 mind that's fine i don't mind either way
0:22:47 so this is not conditional
0:22:49 the periodicity between minus pi and
0:22:51 minus 2 pi is not the condition for the
0:22:54 predictive or even the values no they
0:22:56 are completely independent
0:22:59 so that's the difference so we can't
0:23:01 draw that and it doesn't create any
0:23:03 contradiction but that penrose universe
0:23:05 or hindu universe
0:23:08 and that
0:23:09 and and
0:23:10 and that
0:23:12 in the case of universes according to
0:23:14 the rose
0:23:16 and the hindus cannot exist like that
0:23:18 because of the conditional
0:23:19 conditionality
0:23:20 and the same audio with events with
0:23:23 infinite events with without any
0:23:25 beginning cannot be so time and all
0:23:28 events will go down to zero
0:23:30 and all what we can say the time begins
0:23:33 at zero plus because we can go from
0:23:35 finite times until guess is zero and if
0:23:37 you use the old-fashioned language of
0:23:38 infinitesimal quantities where it's zero
0:23:42 but not zero itself but infinitesimally
0:23:44 close to zero which is symbolized in the
0:23:46 language of limits which is more
0:23:48 desirable language but by the way the
0:23:49 language of the emphatical quantities
0:23:52 which have been forsaken by by
0:23:54 mathematician like almost
0:23:56 let us say almost like
0:23:58 middle of the 20th century for the
0:24:00 middle class most books about analysis
0:24:03 if you get a grab an old analysis or
0:24:05 calculus book you will find them working
0:24:08 freely and
0:24:09 liberally with the infinitesimally say
0:24:12 assume epsilon is infinitesimally small
0:24:14 quantities and things like that
0:24:17 that has been or replaced by strictly
0:24:19 and more consistent by limits but that
0:24:21 language can be justified and there's
0:24:23 even they called non-standard analysis
0:24:25 and there are books about that check for
0:24:27 nonstandard analysis you will find books
0:24:29 available
0:24:30 if you like that approach you can't do
0:24:31 it in that approach time
0:24:35 comes to the come up to infinite
0:24:37 distance to zero or go to the limit
0:24:40 which will then uh zero shim with
0:24:42 symbolizes zero plus meaning zero coming
0:24:45 from the right but zero itself
0:24:48 it's the point it's not time
0:24:50 it's the limit of time it's called the
0:24:52 point of eternity's eternity our human
0:24:54 mind usually does not
0:24:57 cannot comprehend that the point of
0:24:58 eternity is a point
0:25:00 we always imagine it is extended
0:25:03 extended that's it this is only the
0:25:05 imagination which
0:25:07 is getting to its limit is unable to
0:25:09 continue is the best to say it is a
0:25:11 point
0:25:13 has no extension
0:25:15 according to the way we in the visualize
0:25:17 things in our mind but we know logically
0:25:20 what it is
0:25:21 it is the limit of time the beginning of
0:25:24 time just slightly above that and that's
0:25:26 why why we get also when we start the
0:25:28 universe there get the singularity so
0:25:31 the question the old question
0:25:33 is
0:25:34 is time and the universe eternal
0:25:37 no because eternal is something which is
0:25:39 in eternity
0:25:43 are they ancient like kadeem in arabic
0:25:46 only if you mean they started just
0:25:48 inviting
0:25:49 but they are not kadeem because
0:25:51 usually something which exists without
0:25:54 beginning the quote unquote in eternity
0:25:58 so the only the necessarily existing
0:25:59 being sitting there is whatever it is we
0:26:02 did not establish is it a divine or it
0:26:05 is just a natural aspect that's how to
0:26:07 establish one other reasons
0:26:10 that that that entity exist in eternity
0:26:16 everything else starts after that and
0:26:18 jumping out of eternity into into time
0:26:22 is a singular process that's the reason
0:26:24 when you go with the big bank it has to
0:26:26 start with singularity but the
0:26:28 automatically calculated show that all
0:26:30 theories we shall will have inflation
0:26:32 generally any
0:26:33 they have that it can be shown
0:26:35 mathematically that in the center of the
0:26:37 inflation there must be a singularity
0:26:39 and the civility is actually
0:26:41 the most vicious side it is it's an
0:26:44 essential singularity i think it's even
0:26:46 worse because
0:26:48 someone could ask him okay we came to a
0:26:50 time until we reach the zero plus and
0:26:52 zero is eternity what's about negative
0:26:55 time axis there's no negative time axis
0:26:57 doesn't exist
0:26:58 it does not exist it's impossible
0:27:01 negative time negative absolute time is
0:27:03 impossible it's a contradiction
0:27:07 if you go to the absolute scale
0:27:11 of time
0:27:12 we start usually with the relative scale
0:27:14 because how we start we start from here
0:27:16 zero under minus transform but after the
0:27:18 observation and all of these things
0:27:21 we get at the age of the universe until
0:27:23 the big bang or close to the big bang is
0:27:25 how much is it 13.8 or something or 0.7
0:27:28 billion years fine
0:27:31 and what's the time behind that no time
0:27:32 behind that
0:27:34 get that out of your mind
0:27:37 let's say that's your your limited
0:27:39 mental optics deceiving you this is an
0:27:41 optical delusion meant optical delusion
0:27:45 and mathematical isn't there and this is
0:27:47 also having mathematical examples look
0:27:50 for example at the at the logarithm
0:27:52 if you look at the the definition the
0:27:55 the mean of the graph as a real uh real
0:27:57 variable but by the way it can be
0:27:59 extended into the complex plane in a
0:28:01 unique way
0:28:02 but let us
0:28:04 consider it on the on the
0:28:06 on the
0:28:07 on the legal plane
0:28:10 then it is divide defined
0:28:12 the positive numbers
0:28:14 and then when we go down towards zero it
0:28:17 becomes negative negative the logarithm
0:28:19 instead of negative negative negative
0:28:21 until it goes to infinity
0:28:23 so it is only in the limit so it's not
0:28:25 divided even it's not defined at 30 plus
0:28:28 and what happened with the negative the
0:28:29 negative axis is impossible to define
0:28:31 because it's the inversion of the
0:28:32 exponents and there's no way to get it
0:28:35 negative ever
0:28:36 without
0:28:37 demolishing the fundamental principles
0:28:40 of mathematics calculations and the
0:28:42 principles of reason and logic
0:28:45 so the negative axis has to be cut from
0:28:47 the
0:28:48 from the axis
0:28:50 we cannot talk about negative numbers
0:28:52 when we are in the domain and we extend
0:28:54 even if extended
0:28:56 amazingly you can extend it to the
0:28:58 complex plane that you will define the
0:28:59 logarithm for a plus i b i is the square
0:29:02 root of minus one so called imaginary
0:29:04 unit
0:29:05 you can define and go everywhere until
0:29:07 you come to the
0:29:08 negative axis
0:29:11 it has to be cut out of that
0:29:15 and it turns out in the complex when it
0:29:17 is infinitely periodical so you have to
0:29:19 have like infinitely many layers and so
0:29:21 on and there and the people who study
0:29:23 complex analysis uh and go through the
0:29:26 to the areas called romanian surfaces
0:29:28 and things like that
0:29:30 they they enjoy working with these
0:29:32 infinite layers out i will connect them
0:29:34 and so things like that but this is for
0:29:36 those
0:29:37 courageous guys who love differential
0:29:39 geometry and the money and geometry and
0:29:41 things like that
0:29:42 so to try their imagination there but if
0:29:45 it's done with strict mathematical
0:29:46 principles it can be done safely but
0:29:50 no way to have the
0:29:51 to have the negative access you have to
0:29:54 cut the plane there there's no way you
0:29:56 have to cut the plane
0:29:58 even if they connect
0:30:01 things from the top of the plane to the
0:30:03 bottom of the lane by over bridging
0:30:06 but negative axis is not there and the
0:30:08 over bridging is is essentially like
0:30:10 jumping over an infinitely deep well the
0:30:13 value will jump by two pi or something
0:30:15 like that
0:30:17 mathematics is very consistent and tears
0:30:19 with these things in a rational way if
0:30:21 we do it's restrict principles of limits
0:30:24 and and observing the limits properly
0:30:30 so
0:30:32 so
0:30:33 this imagination of negative time
0:30:35 imagination events without beginning all
0:30:38 chains of causes
0:30:40 for chains of conditionals going back
0:30:45 without without beginning
0:30:48 is a
0:30:50 mental optical and thinking this is not
0:30:52 contradictory is because the proof is a
0:30:54 little bit deeper
0:30:55 you don't see it immediately
0:30:57 but it is is
0:30:59 as impossible as the
0:31:02 square circle but square here so you see
0:31:05 it immediately that one is a little bit
0:31:06 behind the wall you have to go behind
0:31:08 the wall and dig and ah there's there's
0:31:10 something like a square circle lurking
0:31:12 there but hiding
0:31:14 hiding behind chains hiding behind the
0:31:17 nice formulation hiding behind
0:31:20 deceptive expressions
0:31:22 internal contradictory definitions
0:31:24 things like that
0:31:28 so if
0:31:30 i would say that the the the evidence
0:31:33 over the c9 this information is
0:31:36 irrefutable which also fits with our
0:31:39 direct feeling
0:31:41 is irrefutable number one
0:31:44 secondly
0:31:48 it is it is essentially depending upon
0:31:50 the conditionality so it gives us a
0:31:52 wider scope than what usually useful
0:31:55 it proves for us that that the time
0:31:58 is
0:31:59 going to a zero absolute zero of time
0:32:03 and the point in the exact point at the
0:32:04 time goes up to zero plus
0:32:07 meaning infinite is very close to the
0:32:08 absolute zero and the absolute zero is
0:32:10 called eternity it's a point
0:32:13 in this scheme
0:32:14 in another scheme
0:32:16 you may make a transformation it becomes
0:32:18 infinitely long but this will be another
0:32:20 complete scheme mathematical scheme but
0:32:22 it's equivalent to one point
0:32:25 like those who working with the
0:32:26 projection and then and projecting the
0:32:29 sphere onto the plane
0:32:31 the north pole of the sphere if you uh
0:32:33 if you unwrap the sphere and and stretch
0:32:35 it one the north pole becomes the
0:32:37 infinitely far away circuit becomes
0:32:39 farther one point becomes infinitely
0:32:41 many as your imagination for you is
0:32:44 infinitely many point but actually that
0:32:46 infinitely far away horizon is actually
0:32:49 only one point
0:32:50 but with the way you presented it you
0:32:53 fools the eye to think it's like a
0:32:54 circle as many points and becomes bigger
0:32:57 and bigger
0:32:59 where it goes ultimately into one point
0:33:04 may be counter-intensity but this is if
0:33:06 you follow the mathematics and the logic
0:33:08 and the strict principles of rationality
0:33:10 correctly
0:33:11 if you don't follow them then you end
0:33:12 with nonsense and contradiction
0:33:14 of who you are supposed to be avoiding
0:33:19 so
0:33:20 in the scale of absolute time which
0:33:22 which gave us uh the best experimental
0:33:25 estimation of the beginning of the big
0:33:27 bang around the big bang is 90 is 13.7
0:33:30 or 43.8 or something like that
0:33:34 billion years of our years now whatever
0:33:37 whatever that may be modified originally
0:33:39 it was like 20 billions and more and
0:33:41 then shrunk more by more precise but
0:33:44 it's it was never infinite it was always
0:33:46 getting slow smaller and smaller by more
0:33:48 precise measurements and so on but
0:33:50 that's it and you went to the beginning
0:33:53 of existence
0:33:55 and the entity which started everything
0:33:57 which is in eternity
0:34:00 that entity there
0:34:02 is the beginning of everything which
0:34:04 starts beginning with now what's the
0:34:06 type of the entity
0:34:07 and
0:34:09 what's it we we discussed i think
0:34:11 several sessions back there
0:34:13 and made mockery of uh
0:34:15 poor hawkins about his uh
0:34:18 his
0:34:18 flipping of one space axis
0:34:22 you cannot blame him because the
0:34:24 adjoining adjoining space
0:34:27 to
0:34:29 time to space
0:34:30 but making distinct either by the matrix
0:34:32 or by the um
0:34:35 what
0:34:36 would call it like the the cook recipe
0:34:38 in iliad time the cook recipe was to
0:34:41 multiply the
0:34:42 the the spa the
0:34:44 the time axis with the imaginary
0:34:46 constant square root of minus one it's
0:34:49 called i with i then it is you give it a
0:34:52 similar nature
0:34:53 and then to make the same the dimensions
0:34:55 like that cos bases in meters and it's
0:34:57 nothing meters you multiply the certain
0:34:59 constant
0:35:00 which is having having a dimension of
0:35:03 speed
0:35:04 the best thing to take is take the speed
0:35:06 of light so ict
0:35:10 declared to be like like a space axis
0:35:14 and this will lead to a very elegant
0:35:16 formulation of things but obviously you
0:35:18 might mention we're not happy with that
0:35:19 having because this space is supposed to
0:35:21 yield how come the survivors remind us
0:35:23 the better is to do it more
0:35:24 systematically by the by by
0:35:27 not multiplying with i but the metric
0:35:30 the usual matrix which we have in space
0:35:32 is having uh in front of the time part
0:35:34 is uh the different sign minus sign this
0:35:37 had obviously the bad result that there
0:35:39 are certain distances in
0:35:40 in in space are impossible to calculate
0:35:43 they become
0:35:44 the square of the distance become
0:35:46 negative and then the distance is
0:35:48 imaginary which does not make sense but
0:35:50 physio physicists try to make sense say
0:35:52 these two places or two events an event
0:35:55 is a point in space time another event
0:35:58 they are space-like separated there's no
0:36:00 way to communicate with it it's
0:36:02 impossible to communicate
0:36:05 and then they have this called light
0:36:06 coin all these things
0:36:09 initially it was a convenient
0:36:10 description for the certain
0:36:12 transformational laws especially taken
0:36:13 from electrodynamics
0:36:16 but then it developed and then and then
0:36:18 became axiomatic that the space-time are
0:36:20 like that really and the other
0:36:23 and the other one to be used for for for
0:36:26 the physical and this generalization
0:36:28 this way
0:36:30 is a good approximation in locally
0:36:33 maybe in our area here of universe and
0:36:35 maybe our area in time like for a
0:36:37 thousand years million years but is no
0:36:39 good if we go to the big bank
0:36:41 and that's the reason when you go back
0:36:44 uh
0:36:45 issues of
0:36:46 certain certain prediction of relativity
0:36:48 theory
0:36:50 will fail some of them started to fail
0:36:53 but there is decision is not finally yet
0:36:55 eliminated that it has failed however
0:36:58 while conclusions of quantum mechanics
0:37:00 none of them failed
0:37:03 none of them failed
0:37:05 because quantum mechanics works with
0:37:06 absolute time
0:37:08 it doesn't have these funny things time
0:37:10 is separate the completely similar
0:37:11 tissue all together
0:37:13 space is the is the is maybe the the
0:37:18 uh
0:37:19 let's call it the the
0:37:22 stage of the theater on which all events
0:37:23 are happening
0:37:25 and it may be also part of this part of
0:37:27 the happening itself maybe it's part of
0:37:29 the of the physical reality in the sense
0:37:31 that it is what's happening
0:37:33 is like
0:37:34 the reality is like a circus
0:37:36 a circus you have the you have the show
0:37:39 and so on when the show is over the
0:37:40 circus is folded and loaded and
0:37:43 disappears when you go after after a
0:37:45 week you want to check you don't find
0:37:46 anything
0:37:47 neither neither show nor the circus
0:37:50 that's the nature of space most likely
0:37:52 it's part of the physical reality part
0:37:54 of the material universe
0:37:56 but hawkins was forced to make it
0:37:58 independent as if it's like like like
0:38:01 like
0:38:02 the usual theater here or the royal
0:38:04 theater you go to the show the show ends
0:38:08 the actors go but the stage is there you
0:38:09 can visit the stage and maybe another
0:38:11 show will come
0:38:12 so he he went until zero and before the
0:38:15 big bang and he imagined that space is
0:38:17 still there and even to add insult to
0:38:19 injury he made the time one access which
0:38:22 then has to flip but who would flip it
0:38:24 he postulated the quantum fluctuation
0:38:27 by the way
0:38:28 considering quantum fluctuations
0:38:31 there is a
0:38:33 quantum fluctuation as a result of the
0:38:35 quantum indeterminacy
0:38:37 especially in the
0:38:38 in the approximate
0:38:41 in uncertainty between energy and time
0:38:44 and there's an article in wikipedia
0:38:46 called the quantum fluctuation i think
0:38:48 this is certain
0:38:51 it explains that
0:38:55 somehow i didn't feel the article is the
0:38:57 best way is written the best way i
0:38:59 didn't like it that much there are some
0:39:01 articles about certain areas of
0:39:03 mathematics or logic and so on
0:39:06 you feel when you read them that you
0:39:08 benefit more but this static is not bad
0:39:10 at least it shows clearly that he goes
0:39:13 over there discussing the vacuum
0:39:16 he's try i think he's trying to be
0:39:18 simple as much as he can
0:39:20 and does not want to indulge or he may
0:39:22 himself not knowing that the vacuum what
0:39:24 he called vacuum
0:39:26 as you call sometimes empty space if i'm
0:39:28 not mistaken
0:39:29 it's not an empty space it's full of
0:39:32 fields and so on it's part of the
0:39:34 universe so surrounded by universal bit
0:39:36 of the universe
0:39:39 so but let's let's forgive that he shows
0:39:42 that this quantum fluctuation like
0:39:44 particle
0:39:45 appearing and disappearing and so on
0:39:46 that's what the quantum progression is
0:39:48 all about is a result of
0:39:51 the
0:39:52 uh the
0:39:53 the
0:39:54 the indeterminacy addition between
0:39:56 energy and time which is not really
0:39:58 anything but if you develop if you
0:40:01 accept the
0:40:02 the assumption of the
0:40:04 theory of relativity and add time
0:40:06 strictly as one fourth coordinate with
0:40:09 the modification of the metric and
0:40:10 things like that then you have to turn
0:40:13 it into an operator and if you turn it
0:40:15 to an operator then it will be obviously
0:40:16 the corresponding one with whom it
0:40:18 doesn't commute is the energy
0:40:20 that's that's easy to show and based on
0:40:23 that we have
0:40:25 these quantum fluctuations
0:40:27 at least because it is an approximation
0:40:29 for that so fluctuation are the result
0:40:31 of
0:40:33 treating time as an operator
0:40:35 number one
0:40:37 secondly
0:40:38 a space also as an operator
0:40:41 and both
0:40:42 are
0:40:44 the
0:40:45 the stage of action or the circus of
0:40:48 action
0:40:50 so when you go to the point of eternity
0:40:52 before the before this time started then
0:40:55 there's no time
0:40:58 and possibly there's no space
0:41:00 almost certainly no space but that's not
0:41:02 relevant
0:41:03 so how come suddenly that whole can
0:41:05 posterior to four dimensional space
0:41:07 there
0:41:08 who should have appeared only with a big
0:41:10 bank and time which did not start
0:41:13 and to add in certainly there's a
0:41:14 fluctuation professor was there matter
0:41:17 at that time
0:41:18 you know this moment was their math
0:41:20 because i hear if you say like
0:41:22 like when you say matter
0:41:24 and energy energy can neither be created
0:41:27 nor destroyed
0:41:29 there is there is no there's no and
0:41:31 there's no energy there
0:41:32 there's no energy of the physical energy
0:41:34 we have in this universe
0:41:35 something else
0:41:37 but there's something else is not a
0:41:39 third dimensional space in which the one
0:41:41 of the one of them which was was like a
0:41:43 frozen like a frozen situation if it's a
0:41:45 frozen situation
0:41:47 at the point of eternity or something
0:41:48 follows your value there's no time
0:41:50 that's fine i agree with that so time is
0:41:52 frozen as well if it is frozen then
0:41:55 there will be no flock to it no
0:41:56 fluctuation how can be afflicted
0:41:58 this is you mean the singularity
0:42:00 no behind the singularity
0:42:03 before this so the singularity is like
0:42:05 after it happened behind the singularity
0:42:07 yeah behind the singularity in the
0:42:09 absolutely
0:42:10 the singularity is that what you what
0:42:12 you are approaching zero plus
0:42:14 but it cannot get to zero plus ever
0:42:16 because the singularity will change
0:42:18 singularity exists since ever does it
0:42:21 always exist the singularity
0:42:23 no it is it's the moment it's present
0:42:25 time it's a singular point
0:42:28 okay so it's the beginning
0:42:31 the kickstart thing of time
0:42:33 it's not the necessary existence
0:42:35 no it says in mathematics you can't
0:42:37 study but you you you cannot especially
0:42:39 that type of singularity which you have
0:42:41 the axis and the negative axis cut you
0:42:44 you cannot even do an integration around
0:42:46 it without without having a
0:42:48 discontinuity and you have to be
0:42:49 carefully consider how to do it because
0:42:51 the usual singularity is complex plane
0:42:53 you can do an integration around them
0:42:55 not across them if you go around it
0:42:58 and then you get certain values
0:43:04 okay
0:43:06 but you have we have to get really a bit
0:43:08 a little bit more in complex analysis
0:43:11 difference between polar singularity
0:43:13 essential singularity and even worse uh
0:43:16 cuts
0:43:17 in in the plane where you remove part of
0:43:19 the plane completely there's nothing
0:43:20 defined there it's impossible to exist
0:43:22 as a part of the definition in the way
0:43:24 it exists as numbers negative numbers
0:43:26 exist
0:43:28 but it's not a domain of the definition
0:43:30 of time
0:43:32 time and does not does not take negative
0:43:34 negative
0:43:36 real numbers or anything as as a value i
0:43:38 simply it's impossible by the definition
0:43:40 of time
0:43:42 if we start with time which we have now
0:43:43 and go until zero plus
0:43:46 the chaos that's that's all what we're
0:43:47 gonna get that's that's what professor
0:43:49 when they say the universe is of what do
0:43:51 they mean by that universe world
0:43:53 innocent
0:43:54 in a physical way and in a like no the
0:43:57 philosopher they they were they did not
0:44:00 they do not have this issue of
0:44:01 singularity they did not because uh the
0:44:04 issues of regress were not clear to them
0:44:06 as sharp as we did except that's
0:44:08 impossible without a beginning cause and
0:44:11 then they said uh
0:44:14 the the universe started
0:44:16 uh started with some say this universe
0:44:18 started is
0:44:21 at zero point but they were unable to
0:44:23 switch with zero and zero plus and zero
0:44:25 itself so they said the universe is is
0:44:29 ancient but still contingent neither the
0:44:31 creator
0:44:32 kadeem
0:44:34 and and they ended in various trouble
0:44:36 things because it was not done cleanly
0:44:38 you can't blame them at that time for
0:44:39 example the issues of limits were not
0:44:41 clear you remember the so-called paradox
0:44:43 of the arrow
0:44:44 which the greek was struggling with that
0:44:46 arrow
0:44:47 say if we shoot an arrow to someone then
0:44:50 it has it has to take time to go to the
0:44:52 half the distance
0:44:53 and then from that remaining distance
0:44:55 half of the half and half of the half
0:44:57 and and if you add all of that
0:44:59 because the time bits it will be
0:45:02 infinite so the arrow should not reach
0:45:04 you
0:45:05 but in reality it reaches so how to
0:45:07 explain that paradox is symbol for now
0:45:10 now kids may be in the middle school be
0:45:11 able to we tell you this is half plus
0:45:14 quarter plus plus plus it converges the
0:45:16 sum is exactly one
0:45:18 it's a total distance
0:45:20 and the time is finite because they did
0:45:23 not have a grasp of limits and how to
0:45:24 some infinite series and things like
0:45:26 that we have that
0:45:28 so we have progressed considerably i
0:45:30 said we should forget about that is the
0:45:32 universe
0:45:35 if it is a meaning or it is it is uh
0:45:38 have absolutely no beginning no it has a
0:45:39 beginning so it's not
0:45:42 but at beginning at a zero of time
0:45:44 zero plus to be more precise
0:45:48 anything in zero and absolute zero is
0:45:50 only one entity which is the which is
0:45:52 the uh the cause of the universe that
0:45:55 just what is the meaning is only so the
0:45:58 there is no escape the cause of the
0:45:59 universe what is it is the set of
0:46:01 mathematical equations and conditions
0:46:03 and so on
0:46:04 and the question that how can you set to
0:46:06 abstract mathematical that's low
0:46:07 mathematically because there should be
0:46:09 no material material
0:46:11 we see in the universe material is
0:46:13 created and energy converted and so on
0:46:15 exactly an equation professor can using
0:46:18 physics can't we prove at least that our
0:46:21 universe is contingent in a way that for
0:46:24 example the value yeah like why don't we
0:46:28 focus on this type of thing
0:46:30 that's the reason hulk that's the reason
0:46:32 hawkins went behind the behind the
0:46:34 singularity and tried to construct this
0:46:39 because anything after the singularity
0:46:40 the suladi and everything after is
0:46:42 contingent
0:46:46 but he wanted to connect to something
0:46:47 which is which is not divine because he
0:46:50 has a problem with the divine which is
0:46:52 uh which having some kind of overlaw
0:46:56 and came with this thing
0:46:58 then okay so
0:46:59 so basically he is he saying that these
0:47:02 values are chosen
0:47:04 so he admits like for example the
0:47:06 cosmological constant or whatever that
0:47:08 these ones are like kind of finely tuned
0:47:11 yeah yeah
0:47:12 you know he knows he is a physicist he
0:47:13 knows that he cannot escape from
0:47:15 physical penrose tried by claiming that
0:47:17 actually is not big bang it's a a
0:47:21 plank size
0:47:22 black hole which is which is the
0:47:24 shrinking of a previous universe and our
0:47:27 invasion will go expand and then shrink
0:47:29 and it goes like that we have shown
0:47:30 that's impossible
0:47:32 on the ground so you have the two
0:47:34 escapes either the penrose escape
0:47:46 which is before the big bang which is in
0:47:49 eternity and that's it
0:47:55 okay but does he prove that this thing
0:47:57 has a choice
0:47:58 it makes it
0:48:00 he's running away from anything at the
0:48:02 show that's the reason he said a quantum
0:48:04 fluctuation
0:48:22 if we cannot calculate it by equation it
0:48:25 means it's set there
0:48:27 it's not like pi
0:48:28 yeah
0:48:29 but i'm discussing just a model of of
0:48:32 of uh hogan's on its ground when it's uh
0:48:34 without discussing that even if that's
0:48:37 correct then still the fluctuation
0:48:41 yeah how can the fluctuation do this how
0:48:43 can just a fluctuate yes that's that's
0:48:45 the point fluctuation is not possible in
0:48:47 a in a in a in a frozen time frame
0:48:50 because it is it is essentially defined
0:48:53 by the that's the reasons i read this
0:48:54 article which is called quantum
0:48:56 fluctuation in wikipedia it's not the
0:48:58 best written one but it will give you it
0:49:00 is the whole explanation start with the
0:49:03 energy time uh uncertainty
0:49:06 necessarily all they have objection to
0:49:08 that but that's the way that
0:49:10 relativistic quantum mechanics the way
0:49:12 it's
0:49:14 defined so if you go if you then you say
0:49:17 some kind of quantum fluctuation but the
0:49:19 cultural recognition in the universe it
0:49:22 decides what is that quantum fluctuation
0:49:24 outside the universe or before the
0:49:25 universe at the point of eternity where
0:49:27 time did not start yet at zero
0:49:31 how about those people who tell you that
0:49:33 these logical laws maybe they are
0:49:35 functioning for our universe but beyond
0:49:38 that time they're not necessary through
0:49:41 the logical laws
0:49:43 logical laws
0:49:45 yeah like uh causality they say uh
0:49:48 before that we we say it it is it is not
0:49:51 a causality it is it's a
0:49:53 matter of necessity of reason
0:49:56 then this is it does not exist
0:49:59 so nothing can be irrational
0:50:02 but are they saying now it's like that
0:50:04 because it's like in a universe and
0:50:05 we're contingent blah blah blah we're
0:50:07 living in this situation we can't see it
0:50:09 like that but that doesn't serve the
0:50:10 problem of existence
0:50:13 it doesn't solve the problem
0:50:17 the problem of existence
0:50:19 yeah
0:50:22 and we show that it has it has to go to
0:50:24 a beginning which is which is which is
0:50:26 not caused
0:50:27 which is uh self-contained
0:50:31 which is not current because it's
0:50:33 impossible
0:50:34 it is the concept the concept of being
0:50:36 created does not apply to it that's
0:50:38 what's called necessarily existing the
0:50:40 question the only question remaining
0:50:42 what is the necessary even even a
0:50:43 physicist like hawkins even he doesn't
0:50:45 use the same negative existing he knows
0:50:47 that the time has to be started
0:50:50 what did start the time
0:50:53 actually professor taha who has some
0:50:54 videos on who's is comparing i guess
0:50:57 atheism from physics but he's he has a
0:50:59 meeting with because he studied thinking
0:51:01 and cambridge and oxford and met with
0:51:03 with always and discussing okay
0:51:05 uh
0:51:06 big bangers who started who started time
0:51:08 at big bang
0:51:09 uh hokkien answered himself we don't
0:51:11 know that yet but we are still
0:51:12 researching
0:51:14 under his
0:51:16 research produced that what what what he
0:51:18 roughly what i presented maybe he
0:51:20 presented more sophisticated but from
0:51:22 the from the design is clear he said we
0:51:25 started with four with four
0:51:27 space coordinates
0:51:30 and then one of them was flipped over
0:51:32 into time by quantum fluctuation
0:51:35 what do you mean four coordinates like
0:51:37 what what is there why is there four
0:51:39 coordinates that's it why is there
0:51:41 what's the necessity in there
0:51:43 why it is not maybe another theory will
0:51:45 say he would say okay maybe it is nine
0:51:48 ten
0:51:49 and six had been combactified away
0:51:52 how did they shrunk down there
0:51:56 or were they combactified for all
0:51:58 eternities
0:52:07 something with something which is a self
0:52:09 is unexplainable does not make any sense
0:52:11 in that context
0:52:15 he wants something mechanical something
0:52:17 which is not divine
0:52:19 because the moment say it is a choice
0:52:21 he's stuck
0:52:22 all his atheism is flown away that's the
0:52:25 point the same with penrose whoever said
0:52:27 he knew that this is
0:52:29 the solution of hawking will not work
0:52:31 he's a little bit more sophisticated uh
0:52:34 philosophically orientated and this is
0:52:36 also witnessed by the fact that he's
0:52:38 discussing that his theory is similar to
0:52:40 the hindus and previously
0:52:42 came to such something like that so he
0:52:43 has a little bit more
0:52:45 longer longer arm in philosophy so he
0:52:47 tried to hit the hindu escape but we
0:52:48 have seen that's that that can't be
0:52:53 it must be refuted
0:52:56 completely so everything is irrational
0:52:57 nothing is rational
0:53:00 the main problem with the mechanical
0:53:02 mechanical
0:53:04 is how how how they're starting with the
0:53:07 start the starting in the singularity
0:53:09 with the
0:53:10 singularity is clear because you cannot
0:53:12 go from non-entire no
0:53:14 zero time in time except by by infinite
0:53:17 jumps that's the singularity and having
0:53:19 infinite values and so on in the
0:53:21 equations somehow so it is like the end
0:53:24 of physics as you know it but you have
0:53:26 to have some starting it non-physical
0:53:28 some in some sense so he's trying to do
0:53:30 to get a physical explanation of
0:53:32 pseudophysical mathematical explanation
0:53:34 to something which is genuinely not
0:53:36 physical
0:53:37 the singularity everything all physics
0:53:38 and all equations break down
0:53:41 you can't handle certain things that's
0:53:43 regularity mathematically and so on but
0:53:45 you cannot get any physics
0:53:47 especially of this type of singularity
0:53:48 with a cut along the negative axis
0:53:53 in mathematics they handle that in
0:53:55 various issues but physics is not it
0:53:57 doesn't seem to be possible
0:54:00 besides that
0:54:01 from the moment of singularity the
0:54:03 universe kicks started let's say it was
0:54:05 kickstarted
0:54:06 it doesn't matter but it was kick
0:54:08 started with setting laws
0:54:10 which became activated just
0:54:12 infinitesimally after the absolute zero
0:54:14 of the similarity became activated and
0:54:17 but the problem we have the problem of
0:54:20 that the laws themselves even if we
0:54:22 assume the laws are necessary in some
0:54:23 sense
0:54:26 although someone could argue if we say
0:54:29 laws and we formulate them
0:54:30 mathematically we formally
0:54:31 mathematically laws as abstract things
0:54:34 as relations
0:54:36 can exist as relation as such only in a
0:54:38 mind
0:54:40 in any way
0:54:41 hanging in and nothingness they don't
0:54:44 exist
0:54:46 but i assume let's let's assume okay
0:54:48 somehow they have some kind of
0:54:49 unnecessary nature they are necessary by
0:54:52 themselves
0:54:53 and they complete it by itself somehow
0:54:55 fine okay let's assume that just to to
0:54:58 avoid an argument which is which is uh
0:55:00 maybe uh
0:55:02 still a philosophy is not advanced yet
0:55:04 to transfer it is that are these laws
0:55:06 really
0:55:09 were outside their mind accepted their
0:55:11 realization but they have to be
0:55:13 initially undermined which is again
0:55:15 immediately you go to to a personal god
0:55:18 let's assume they can exist somehow
0:55:20 okay
0:55:22 but but all the laws of physics
0:55:26 by necessity they they need the
0:55:30 boundary condition and and or initial
0:55:32 context because we are initializing
0:55:34 things initial conditions initial
0:55:36 parameters
0:55:38 there is no way to generate all
0:55:40 parameters by by from the equation and
0:55:42 natural constants no it's not right
0:55:45 there you have to put one or two
0:55:46 constants by hand
0:55:48 and you can put various numbers there
0:55:50 and get various developments of the
0:55:52 universe they would be vastly different
0:55:55 with the same law system
0:55:57 but they developed differently
0:56:00 whatever it is if you have a choice of
0:56:02 two things then you have to have a
0:56:03 chooser there's no way that one of them
0:56:05 will come into existence yet just that
0:56:07 by by uh brute force we're going back to
0:56:10 the fallacy that
0:56:12 it can't be
0:56:14 that this one came it just happened to
0:56:16 be to be sure
0:56:20 kind of thing like uh it is essentially
0:56:22 that is what we explained when we made
0:56:24 the statement and show that that the
0:56:26 most elementary case of causality is is
0:56:30 essentially uh
0:56:32 if it's postulated as such it's look
0:56:34 like an unsynthetic principle for
0:56:36 understanding but that's synthetic
0:56:38 principle is it is it just a principle
0:56:40 of the mind just the mind set it without
0:56:42 a no it goes to the analytics it's a
0:56:44 necessity of the mind
0:56:48 yeah in other terms we've proven that
0:56:50 the most primitive and
0:56:52 and
0:56:52 and limited and
0:56:55 the most fundamental and
0:56:56 really
0:57:02 sufficiencies or the even
0:57:04 in the form of causality only causality
0:57:06 if you go to that case i mentioned the
0:57:08 break coming emerging out of nothing
0:57:10 absolutely and causing nothing like that
0:57:12 it's just this this statement does not
0:57:15 make any sense it's just we're fooling
0:57:17 ourselves with terms like brick emerging
0:57:19 and so on
0:57:20 and putting them in a sentence which
0:57:22 sounds very intriguing and looks and and
0:57:25 you can claim i can't even i can't
0:57:26 envisage that understand it yeah you can
0:57:29 understand the sentence but does not
0:57:30 mean this is
0:57:31 make any sense or has any interest
0:57:33 internally contradictory i understand
0:57:35 the sentence that this square circle is
0:57:38 beautiful yeah it's attributing beauty
0:57:40 to the square of circle
0:57:42 i understand that very well but it
0:57:44 doesn't mean that
0:57:45 it's really accessed without any
0:57:48 any meaning at all
0:57:50 yeah linguistically somehow
0:57:52 as a reference to nothing i understand
0:57:58 so i think this is certain we should not
0:57:59 go back to it again but now we go to uh
0:58:02 to now we have then we have a sufficient
0:58:04 information about the universe
0:58:06 sufficiently well established to settle
0:58:08 the issue that will go either although i
0:58:11 would say all the observation until now
0:58:13 except maybe a couple of small animal
0:58:15 anomalies in the
0:58:18 cosmic background radiation
0:58:21 which battles claim his theory of the
0:58:24 recurrent or serga or rotating universe
0:58:27 or circular universe explain
0:58:30 but
0:58:30 but all other
0:58:32 uh
0:58:33 aspect of the cosmic vibration are
0:58:36 explained by the by their by by
0:58:37 inflation and inflation necessitates
0:58:40 by mathematical necessity that it
0:58:42 started with the singularity not with
0:58:44 the blank size uh black hole with
0:58:47 exactly with zero
0:58:48 with the singularity
0:58:52 okay professor how about we continue
0:58:55 this part for next week we complete with
0:58:57 this series yeah the week after next
0:59:00 year
0:59:01 yeah next week or the week after week
0:59:03 after next week next week i have some
0:59:05 family
0:59:06 okay occasions so we do it the week
0:59:08 after next
0:59:10 trauma
0:59:11 but try to try to
0:59:13 when someone put like like hawkins put
0:59:15 something like
0:59:17 things which he can't describe
0:59:18 mathematically like he described physics
0:59:20 in this side but got rid of the problem
0:59:23 with the beginning of time because he in
0:59:24 his brief history of time it's clearly
0:59:26 the development that the time has a
0:59:28 history and has a beginning that's clear
0:59:30 from from the observation with the small
0:59:32 exception of these small anomalies i
0:59:33 think this small animal is uh
0:59:37 due to
0:59:38 to misunderstanding or or
0:59:40 bad measurements
0:59:43 it's just a couple of others and he has
0:59:44 been responded to by all physicists who
0:59:46 are working with the cosmic
0:59:48 background radiation and they told him
0:59:50 clearly
0:59:51 the the bacterial inflation is firmly
0:59:54 established and these
0:59:55 these uh so-called anomalies may could
0:59:58 have other explanation and some of them
1:00:00 can be explained in certain aspects of
1:00:02 inflation and inflation anyway so even
1:00:04 for experimental side but even granting
1:00:06 that it is he may have an escape route
1:00:09 that is scheduled is impossible
1:00:14 is rationally impossible
1:00:16 because he all his discourse is based on
1:00:19 observation and certain analysis
1:00:21 mathematical
1:00:22 logical necessities
1:00:24 now he cannot go there and deny
1:00:27 the logic logical impossibility and the
1:00:29 rational impossibility for the current
1:00:31 universe that's fascinating not possible
1:00:34 whatever
1:00:36 chromatic is that so these anomalies
1:00:39 he may have even according to the
1:00:41 majority of history or almost every
1:00:43 physics symptom and couple of guys with
1:00:45 him
1:00:47 interpreted wrongly as evidence for his
1:00:49 recurring universe is the wrong
1:00:50 interpretation we must conclude that's
1:00:52 the only way
1:00:58 but also this fact and the nature of
1:00:59 time and all these
1:01:01 compelling forceful uh
1:01:03 measurements going through the big bangs
1:01:05 all of time
1:01:07 must force to review the
1:01:10 the formalism of theory related in which
1:01:12 time is treated almost equally like
1:01:14 space especially does the direction is
1:01:16 not cleared excess yes it is giving a
1:01:19 negative sign in the metric or opposite
1:01:21 different scientific than the others
1:01:23 leading to the issues of space like
1:01:25 simulation and so on uh yeah i
1:01:27 understand that that is not like space
1:01:29 completely but
1:01:31 lumping it you know in your space-time
1:01:33 minkowski space time
1:01:35 i think it says fundamentally float
1:01:38 it may be work as well as extended
1:01:40 approximation in any
1:01:42 limited region of space-time that's
1:01:44 meaning limited regional like for
1:01:46 example here around us and even in our
1:01:48 galaxy or the local cluster or maybe a
1:01:50 super cluster or something like that and
1:01:52 times going up maybe for uh
1:01:55 1 billion 2 billion years and maybe 1
1:01:58 billion
1:01:59 year 2 billion years forward so that but
1:02:01 this is only a section of space time the
1:02:03 moment we expand that try to get to the
1:02:05 beginning with anyways we'll get in
1:02:06 trouble we have to decouple
1:02:09 time from space
1:02:10 it should be the couple from the
1:02:12 beginning so the approximation here
1:02:13 doesn't that so regarding theory of
1:02:16 relativity as absolute
1:02:19 anyway i think that's refuted because
1:02:20 there are certain phenomena in quasars
1:02:22 and so on
1:02:23 uh they they explained explained by by a
1:02:27 quantum assumption
1:02:29 they don't contradict any quantum
1:02:31 assumptions but they they contradict
1:02:33 certain relativistic assumption and
1:02:35 gravitational theory assumption
1:02:37 so we can regardless quantum gravity and
1:02:39 various other things have been buried
1:02:41 and the reason has been valid for two
1:02:43 reasons i think one reason is that the
1:02:45 treatment of time is not proper in these
1:02:47 extreme situations
1:02:49 the direction of time has to be
1:02:50 respected there's no escape and secondly
1:02:54 uh
1:02:57 also there's another issue for example
1:02:59 that
1:03:00 if you put space and time like that and
1:03:02 make it a nurses work formally then you
1:03:04 can prove that the whole physical uh
1:03:07 phenomena must be besides so general
1:03:09 laws environment there are special uh uh
1:03:13 like like discrete the transformation
1:03:15 one of them is called parity that's
1:03:18 reflecting the space
1:03:19 the other one is called time reversal
1:03:21 reversing the direction of time
1:03:23 the third one is called charge
1:03:25 conjugation replacing particle with
1:03:26 anti-particle under opposite charge etc
1:03:31 according to general theory
1:03:32 the product of the three cpt
1:03:35 must be invariant
1:03:41 but
1:03:43 if if if one is is broken then the two
1:03:47 others will be broken in such way to
1:03:48 correct it
1:03:49 but we we faced
1:03:52 the odd problem that we have in certain
1:03:55 processes a
1:03:56 break at the invite the cp is broke
1:04:00 it should be absolute because the rest
1:04:01 of the the reversal of time is
1:04:04 impossible
1:04:06 but clearly
1:04:07 the if the cp is violated very minimally
1:04:10 then the the rivers the revisibility of
1:04:12 time is broken time is unidirectional
1:04:15 cannot cannot be reversed going negative
1:04:18 this is already there some elementary
1:04:21 processes of elementary particles are
1:04:23 hinting that
1:04:24 making the time so that it is it can't
1:04:27 go to the negative direction thus their
1:04:29 invariance and values of the laws is
1:04:32 wrong something is long in the role
1:04:34 but as expresses that only in extreme
1:04:36 small high energy ethic processes in a
1:04:39 weak interaction and in around about is
1:04:41 giving us a signal there's an error
1:04:43 there your theory is is going overboard
1:04:47 rewrite the theory or develop it
1:04:50 but physicists are not going to look
1:04:51 that way very much yet
1:04:53 because the formalism of
1:04:56 special relativity and the general
1:04:57 activity in four damages is very elegant
1:05:00 and easy very easy to
1:05:01 the moment you separate space and time
1:05:04 work with quantum mechanics and then
1:05:06 realistic then you have to separate a
1:05:08 certain factors and nobody knows how to
1:05:10 do that correctly yet
1:05:15 that's the reason
1:05:16 but i i i i say today that's
1:05:20 uh it's not a prophecy but i say
1:05:22 ultimately
1:05:24 even if our lifetime in the next
1:05:26 generation they will detect that that
1:05:29 we have we have to revisit the the
1:05:31 makers and morally experiment and also
1:05:34 the interpretation
1:05:36 of
1:05:37 the lawrence transformation lawrence
1:05:39 made the translation as a transformation
1:05:41 written explicitly
1:05:44 with clocks and and
1:05:45 measures and things like that done
1:05:47 properly
1:05:48 the one who lumped them in as in a space
1:05:50 is minkowski
1:05:52 that madam and that regarding the
1:05:55 regarding a space is really having a
1:05:57 physical reality that formed the four
1:05:58 the four right before the immune space
1:06:00 in that way it's a physical reality
1:06:03 that's the problem
1:06:05 calculation tool good approximation
1:06:08 maybe
1:06:10 nice representation certain areas maybe
1:06:12 but is it really representing something
1:06:14 of the depth of reality no
1:06:19 but that's a different issue and with
1:06:21 that it's it remains in the universal
1:06:24 scheme
1:06:25 even the staunch relative is like like
1:06:28 like
1:06:30 hawkins and so on and they know that
1:06:32 they have to go to uh to
1:06:34 towards the big bang and the time has
1:06:36 only one direction there's no way it can
1:06:38 be reversed and the time has to start
1:06:40 there
1:06:41 or the escape the escape of penrose is
1:06:43 impossible i think we can we can put
1:06:45 that to rest
1:06:46 it's already experimentally almost
1:06:48 motorized but i think
1:06:50 on philosophical and theoretical grounds
1:06:52 it must be portrayed it must be rejected
1:06:54 it should not be accepted
1:06:57 and that corrupt and the experiment will
1:06:59 prove maybe this web observatory will
1:07:01 bring some uh
1:07:02 issues which will because there's issues
1:07:05 with the hubble constant
1:07:06 and measurements that
1:07:08 some class of measurements brings one
1:07:10 value another class bring another value
1:07:12 and there's no way to reconcile these
1:07:15 unless there is some theoretical issues
1:07:17 have to be revisited and re-adjusted
1:07:19 because
1:07:20 in every calculation there is certain
1:07:22 assumption about space and time and in
1:07:24 the
1:07:25 expansion of the universe and the
1:07:27 passage of time and the red shift and it
1:07:29 is very complicated
1:07:31 and some one set of observation brings a
1:07:34 value
1:07:35 another sector then bring another value
1:07:37 and they are sufficiently simulated
1:07:39 there's no way to reconcile them
1:07:42 and that's one way they hope at least
1:07:44 the web will be
1:07:47 be able to
1:07:49 make more precise the measurements of
1:07:52 relying on very old stars and so on and
1:07:54 there's other measurements relying on on
1:07:57 the kosher power background radiation
1:07:59 and then see if they can fit or that
1:08:01 that one that other one can't be
1:08:02 corrected but it's only the level of
1:08:04 occurrence of both measurements is quite
1:08:06 well
1:08:08 it is
1:08:10 maybe this is a hint that
1:08:12 that some theoretical assumption must be
1:08:14 modified
1:08:15 and then we get them to to to fit
1:08:18 together
1:08:19 but islamic symmetric side oh which is
1:08:21 open experimental physicist should be
1:08:23 they should not be
1:08:25 diverted from their work by by
1:08:27 theoretician or philosophers they should
1:08:28 continue because this is it but in their
1:08:31 analysis of the data
1:08:33 certain assumptions going in a certain
1:08:35 theoretical
1:08:36 assumption are going on and then they
1:08:38 kind of if
1:08:39 data are not reconcilable
1:08:41 in this way
1:08:43 because the hubble constraint the
1:08:44 expansion rate of universe cannot be
1:08:46 different like that
1:08:48 based upon how you measure it so there
1:08:50 must be some some assumption here or
1:08:52 there which has to be revisited and
1:08:54 checked
1:08:55 and by reshaking it again and changing
1:08:57 this and doubting this assumption
1:08:58 doubting this subject noting this
1:09:00 assumption
1:09:01 you will get you will get ultimately to
1:09:03 say ah and i i i'm making conjecture now
1:09:07 that it is the relativistic aspect some
1:09:09 of these aspects has to be modified
1:09:12 uh
1:09:13 showing that the the
1:09:15 assumption is is a good approximation
1:09:18 and uh and the space-time structure of
1:09:20 minkowski is not a real world it may be
1:09:23 a good approximation but it's not the
1:09:24 real world
1:09:25 and that will will will
1:09:27 make the correction complete
1:09:29 eleventh synthesis that's only that's
1:09:31 only speculation
1:09:34 okay
1:09:40 but this is this is the
1:09:41 this is very intriguing
1:09:43 but as far as
1:09:45 physics got us to that by the way on all
1:09:47 these evidences we have done especially
1:09:49 with the conditionals and with the
1:09:51 infinite regress or regress without
1:09:53 limit more more or more more precisely
1:09:56 it can be infinite as long as it pushes
1:09:57 it doesn't matter
1:09:59 but all of these uh
1:10:01 we did not need to go to
1:10:04 the issue of actual and
1:10:06 and
1:10:08 potentially infinite
1:10:13 it may be very possible that may be
1:10:15 proven down the road that the actual
1:10:16 infinite in the physical reality cannot
1:10:18 exist maybe
1:10:20 but we don't need it
1:10:23 you see there what all we need that
1:10:25 there's a limit which is exist
1:10:27 that's it
1:10:29 that's all what we need
1:10:30 which forces sometimes finiteness
1:10:33 if we have a evidently divergent
1:10:35 diverging sequence then it forces
1:10:37 finiteness because otherwise it doesn't
1:10:39 converge
1:10:40 it must be finite and that repeating
1:10:42 itself and forever that's that's it or
1:10:46 in the case it must be like the time it
1:10:47 becomes it's shorter than going to zero
1:10:49 zero plus
1:10:51 but uh but finiteness in the
1:10:54 meaning of cardinality and numbering no
1:10:56 it's not that quite it may be proven to
1:10:58 be so and then things will be even nicer
1:11:01 but
1:11:02 uh additional evidence but i think we
1:11:04 don't this is i think this is this
1:11:06 approach help us into
1:11:09 in into
1:11:11 avoiding the question of the actual or
1:11:13 or or potential infinite both in the
1:11:16 mental uh
1:11:18 in the mental domain and the in the mind
1:11:20 domain are also in the
1:11:23 in the actual physical domain
1:11:25 we don't need to settle that question it
1:11:27 may be settled and we may have some
1:11:29 benefit to settle but not in matter of
1:11:32 of of proving uh the that
1:11:35 that the universe has a start
1:11:39 it necessarily it's out of time and
1:11:42 the entity which started space and time
1:11:45 and matalan energy uh
1:11:47 is is a necessarily existing entity the
1:11:50 only
1:11:50 question remaining is it is it a
1:11:52 mechanism
1:11:54 or it is a free agent
1:11:57 that's the only thing remaining and some
1:11:58 of its attributes and so on
1:12:00 is it unique not unique and so on that
1:12:02 we'll get to that inshallah
1:12:08 okay
1:12:13 okay until inshaallah what's today today
1:12:16 is 19
1:12:18 plus 14 meaning we'll be shooting well
1:12:20 in
1:12:22 in will be in martial because seven days
1:12:25 from now is 26
1:12:28 plus 7
1:12:29 33 that meaning uh maybe the fifth it
1:12:32 will be the fifth of
1:12:34 march something like that when we meet
1:12:36 yeah
1:12:37 something like the 5th of march let me
1:12:39 check quickly in the calendar
1:12:42 so it's not next week
1:12:44 so next because
1:12:51 march
1:12:52 the first saturday there will be
1:12:56 yeah it's the 25th yeah i calculate the
1:12:58 fifth of march
1:13:01 all meetings
1:13:03 that's prepared question and so on
1:13:05 and take a look it's interesting
1:13:06 although i didn't like that article very
1:13:08 much but maybe because i'm a little bit
1:13:10 biased
1:13:11 about anyone talking about the vacuum of
1:13:13 this empty and things that i'm not
1:13:14 saying clearly the ground state and
1:13:16 things like that but this is because of
1:13:17 my bias about
1:13:19 the language used by physicists in in a
1:13:22 relaxed not philosophical way but i
1:13:24 think the article is okay so to see
1:13:27 what's occur we see clearly that quantum
1:13:29 fluctuation of the actual exclusion of
1:13:32 the vacuum that's the quantification is
1:13:36 necessary it is a necessary result of uh
1:13:42 of the
1:13:44 energy time and an uncertainty and
1:13:47 obviously this is developed in the
1:13:49 context of relativistic quantum
1:13:50 mechanics which has all this
1:13:52 philosophical and this
1:13:54 possible deficiency in matter of lumping
1:13:57 time with space in that manner but still
1:14:00 within that approximation at least we
1:14:01 have such a
1:14:03 so
1:14:03 quantum fluctuation and
1:14:06 and the imagery is presented obviously
1:14:08 just
1:14:09 these imagery like like particles
1:14:12 emerging
1:14:14 around every particle there's a cloud or
1:14:17 like an electron or a proton is sending
1:14:19 particles and catching their backs and
1:14:21 they catch against one all these images
1:14:23 are taken from the microscopic well
1:14:24 nobody knows what's going on their
1:14:26 reality but it can be visualized like
1:14:29 that so don't be fooled by the
1:14:30 visualization
1:14:33 these are the parabol these are as
1:14:36 terrible and allegorical or rhetorical
1:14:38 it's it's a
1:14:40 reality which if you want to describe it
1:14:42 correctly and strictly we should stick
1:14:44 to the mathematics
1:14:45 but nobody
1:14:47 would be happy just to have mathematics
1:14:49 no nothing
1:14:51 no image and no picture in his mind
1:14:52 everyone wants to have a picture have
1:14:54 something picture or something but
1:14:56 presented with space and time so you can
1:14:58 enjoy and and even there are movies and
1:15:00 there's videos which show you that how
1:15:03 how it is bubbling and
1:15:05 appearing and all is the simulation it
1:15:07 is a simulation all that is just
1:15:09 allegorical and and metaphorical and
1:15:12 parables and so on
1:15:14 and the simulation
1:15:16 so don't don't don't be fooled but
1:15:18 there's a video which show you how the
1:15:20 how the condor flipped what she looks
1:15:22 like this is a simulation for that what
1:15:25 some physicists imagine that's it
1:15:28 that's it
1:15:29 using bubbles and things like that and
1:15:32 they call the forming universe the
1:15:33 space-time bubbles and all of this is
1:15:35 just
1:15:36 imaginary images
1:15:39 trying to understand a very complex
1:15:41 abstract
1:15:43 reality
1:15:45 which should be studied exclusively
1:15:47 mathematical but human beings need some
1:15:49 some pictures
1:15:57 Music
1:16:03 Music
1:16:33 a
1:16:34 Music
1:16:51 so
1:16:54 Music
1:17:04 you