New Lecture @ SLAC by Nima Arkani-Hamed

Nima Arkani-Hamed is a top theoretical physicist, in this lecture he discusses new areas of mathematics that he and others are working with, which seem to hint at some deeper structures that may be more fundamental than Quantum Mechanics and Spacetime, and may result in a new, more generalised perspective on these two pillars of physics. It's a challenging talk, but I think it's worthwhile trying to digest it.

Spacetime and quantum mechanics are the pillars of our modern understanding of fundamental physics. But there are storm clouds on the horizon indicating that these principles are approximate, and must be replaced with something deeper... In this talk I review these paradoxes and describe indications for a new picture where spacetime and quantum mechanics will be seen to emerge hand in hand from more primitive principles, making contact with new areas of mathematics.

Nima Arkani-Hamed is a top theoretical physicist, in this lecture he discusses new areas of mathematics that he and others are working with, which seem to hint at some deeper structures that may be more fundamental than Quantum Mechanics and Spacetime, and may result in a new, more generalised perspective on these two pillars of physics. It's a challenging talk, but I think it's worthwhile trying to digest it.

Thanks. I found that interesting. In case anyone is teetering on the brink of watching it, it is definitely aimed at a lay audience and the delivery is very un-dry.

I thought his response to a question about consciousness and the role it plays in quantum measurement was interesting (at about 1:24:25). He cut the questioner off quite abruptly and asserted that "there is nothing interesting going on in the foundations of quantum mechanics ... everything there is fully, completely understood within the ordinary logic of quantum mechanics."

As he is actually arguing that the foundations of quantum mechanics - like those of space-time - lie in the field of "amplituhedron theory" that he is working on, I assume his vehemence is directed against any role of consciousness in the process.

Thanks. I found that interesting. In case anyone is teetering on the brink of watching it, it is definitely aimed at a lay audience and the delivery is very un-dry.

I thought his response to a question about consciousness and the role it plays in quantum measurement was interesting (at about 1:24:25). He cut the questioner off quite abruptly and asserted that "there is nothing interesting going on in the foundations of quantum mechanics ... everything there is fully, completely understood within the ordinary logic of quantum mechanics."

As he is actually arguing that the foundations of quantum mechanics - like those of space-time - lie in the field of "amplituhedron theory" that he is working on, I assume his vehemence is directed against any role of consciousness in the process.

I sort of doubt it... I think he's fully accepting that to learn anything one has to measure... I just think he (and others) are sick of the endless stream of crappy papers making useless claims about QM. Some of the most conservative theoretical physicists are quite willing to discuss consciousness in different ways... some even suggesting a possible role for it in quantum error correction, IIRC because some new theoretical work is suggesting that the off-diagonal/gauge stuff that is current chucked away, might actually be important in some way that has not yet become clear.

I thought the mention of Grothendieck's and his Theory of Motifs was really interesting... never hear of him before... but now that I've done a little reading on him, I'd think most people on here would be interested in him, he's certainly unconventional :-)