Artificial Intelligence

Sean Carroll: Quantum Mechanics and the Many-Worlds Interpretation | Artificial Intelligence Podcast

Sean Carroll is a theoretical physicist at Caltech and Santa Fe Institute specializing in quantum mechanics, arrow of time, cosmology, and gravitation. He is the author of several popular books including his latest on quantum mechanics (Something Deeply Hidden) and is a host of a great podcast called Mindscape. This conversation is part of the Artificial Intelligence podcast.

This is the second time Sean has been on the podcast. You can watch the first time here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-NJrvyRo0c

INFO:
Podcast website:
https://lexfridman.com/ai
iTunes:
https://apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify:
https://spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS:
https://lexfridman.com/category/ai/feed/
Full episodes playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4
Clips playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOeciFP3CBCIEElOJeitOr41

EPISODE LINKS:
Something Deeply Hidden: https://amzn.to/2C5h40V
Sean’s twitter: https://twitter.com/seanmcarroll
Sean’s website: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/
Mindscape podcast: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/

OUTLINE:
0:00 – Introduction
1:23 – Capacity of human mind to understand physics
10:49 – Perception vs reality
12:29 – Conservation of momentum
17:20 – Difference between math and physics
20:10 – Why is our world so compressable
22:53 – What would Newton think of quantum mechanics
25:44 – What is quantum mechanics?
27:54 – What is an atom?
30:34 – What is the wave function?
32:30 – What is quantum entanglement?
35:19 – What is Hilbert space?
37:32 – What is entropy?
39:31 – Infinity
42:43 – Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics
1:01:13 – Quantum gravity and the emergence of spacetime
1:08:34 – Our branch of reality in many-worlds interpretation
1:10:40 – Time travel
1:12:54 – Arrow of time
1:16:18 – What is fundamental in physics
1:16:58 – Quantum computers
1:17:42 – Experimental validation of many-worlds and emergent spacetime
1:19:53 – Quantum mechanics and the human mind
1:21:51 – Mindscape podcast

CONNECT:
– Subscribe to this YouTube channel
– Twitter: https://twitter.com/lexfridman
– LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lexfridman
– Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lexfridman
– Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lexfridman
– Medium: https://medium.com/@lexfridman
– Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/lexfridman

Please follow and like us:
error

Comments (18)

  1. I really enjoyed this conversation with Sean. Here's the outline:
    0:00 – Introduction
    1:23 – Capacity of human mind to understand physics
    10:49 – Perception vs reality
    12:29 – Conservation of momentum
    17:20 – Difference between math and physics
    20:10 – Why is our world so compressable
    22:53 – What would Newton think of quantum mechanics
    25:44 – What is quantum mechanics?
    27:54 – What is an atom?
    30:34 – What is the wave function?
    32:30 – What is quantum entanglement?
    35:19 – What is Hilbert space?
    37:32 – What is entropy?
    39:31 – Infinity
    42:43 – Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics
    1:01:13 – Quantum gravity and the emergence of spacetime
    1:08:34 – Our branch of reality in many-worlds interpretation
    1:10:40 – Time travel
    1:12:54 – Arrow of time
    1:16:18 – What is fundamental in physics
    1:16:58 – Quantum computers
    1:17:42 – Experimental validation of many-worlds and emergent spacetime
    1:19:53 – Quantum mechanics and the human mind
    1:21:51 – Mindscape podcast

  2. Great convo but many worlds is absolute nonesense

  3. 15:35 there is not a Persian golden age it was Islamic golden age plus there is a high possibility that Ibn Sina was Turkic

  4. Interesting themes, but I subjectively find the "I'm talking in my sleep" interviewer voice literally unbearable.

  5. Dude, Sean Carroll IS NOT the Bob Ross of Theoretical Physics. Bob Ross, for all his greatness, was a terrible painter. Falling in love with art from watching Bob Ross paint is like falling in love with Physics from watching Oprah.

  6. Lex sounds like he's bored and interested at the same time. It's amazing.

  7. this is a nice contrast to the JRE podcast with him

  8. Great comedic value here . Like accelerating while remaining perfectly still .

  9. From Carl Sagan;

    Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.”
    Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
    Arguments from authority carry little weight — “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
    Spin more than one hypothesis. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof in this Darwinian selection among “multiple working hypotheses,” has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
    Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will.
    Quantify. If whatever it is you’re explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging.
    If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) — not just most of them.
    Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler.
    Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are untestable, unfalsifiable are not worth much. Consider the grand idea that our Universe and everything in it is just an elementary particle — an electron, say — in a much bigger Cosmos. But if we can never acquire information from outside our Universe, is not the idea incapable of disproof? You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.

  10. Wow Sean explains multiple ideas here that I’ve had explained many times before that never sunk in until he described them here. Thank you both for this episode

  11. Whatever the host is huffing, I'll take some.

  12. All science is built on logic.
    Logic did not come from nothing.

  13. Hey Lex, constructive comment. Could you try to cut your questions a little shorter? You tend to repeat the same thing in several ways, when the meaning was already captured at least one repetition in. Even if it's a bit of an incomplete thought, I'd prefer you let the other person speak once it's clear what the underlying question is

  14. Now people won't laugh at us when we say we attend the universities of Instagram, YouTube, and Reddit.

  15. Sean Carroll is so easy to listen to. And these were (a better articulated) the kind of questions I'd like to sit and ask him. Thanks !

  16. Thank you for having a 'science podcast' guys. Both of you. I wish there would be more detailed 'how to' when it comes to math and physics. I read a lot of books, listen to a lot of audio books, and hope to some day come forward into this realm. I dislike how ancient the school system is compared to what you guys are working with.

  17. Awesome interview.

Comment here