/sci/ - Science & Math

Beats me. Can you tell me what you think?

Bump

has lenny ever been "right" about anything?

>>10532019
I think its a pretty interesting interpretation, I'm not nearly smart enough to say if it's right or wrong.

that's one small step for a man, one giant leap for Susskind

>>10534675
kek. anyhow he admitted that Juan Maldacena did most of the work

There's a video in Susskind's string theory series on YouTube where he introduces the idea to have a string of length pi and then demurs greatly regarding the origin of the idea to have a string of that length. Even now, has he come clean about that idea, and his fascination with "complexity?"

>>10532019

>>10534864
"Complexity" refers to computational complexity theory. His argument is that the theory of computation is one of the keys in understanding the realization of physical phenomena. I'm not smart enough or well read in the firewall problem to tell you his exact argument, but it does "feel" legit.

>>10534920
Yeah. I use it to refer using M^3 to compute amplitudes. Computing amplitudes is important physics because that is what you compare to your experiment.

>>10534835
fuuuuuu I should have said one small step for Feynman

anyhow to make an unironic response since nobody has yet, ER=EPR has always faced the problem that the wormholes tend to be unstable or cause their endpoints (in this case, entangled particles) to gain some repulsive force between them that doesn't exist. so it's definitely _wrong_ so far, but they're working on trying different things. i saw an interesting paper by Horowitz et. al that proposes a new way to nucleate wormholes which seemed to be one of the many attempts at resolving these issues:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.02187.pdf
but anyhow ER=EPR at the moment i think is not even in the realm of "possibly works", it's "might work in the future" at best

>>10534873
why are leftoids so regressive?