Elegant Universe TV show streaming Video

[Integral]

Here is a link to the PBS web site. where you can watch the Nova shows.

You get to see and hear the String Theory Pioneers.

 

[Dysprosium]

Hey thanks, Integral...this stuff is great!

 

[Sonty]

this is a tv station? it really goes on air not just over the net? where cand you get it and how exactly is it called?

 

[Integral]

PBS = Public Broadcast System
It is the only commercial free, publically supported TV network in the US.

It does not offer the pablum shown on the big three commercial networks, but shows more esoteric subject matter. Yes, this show was broadcast on Tuesday night at 8:00 pm. Since I work a 6pm-6am graveyard shift I am not able to watch it live. This streaming video is great!

 

[Chaim]

Thanks

Originally posted by Dysprosium
Hey thanks, Integral...this stuff is great!

Ditto.
I live in Australia, don't have a video or cable TV, so this is the only way I could easily see it. It's great to finally see and hear these theorists who I've read about for years and to feel 'connected' with fellow seekers, etc.
Thanks PBS, thanks NOVA, thanks Quicktime, thanks physicsforums, thanks www.,[/URL] thanks mathematicians and physicists and special thanks to the Al-mighty Creator of this somewhat 'elegant', sometimes strange, sometimes dimly 'understood' but fascinating and challenging universe. :smile:

 

[Rimbaud65]

Brian Green

Superstring theory is fascinating. Last night I watched the first hour of The Nova show online. I'll watch the rest as fast as I can, tonight probably. At the same time I'm reading 'The Elegant Universe', so together it'll be a full dose of superstring theory.

Can this theory be the unified theory long sought? Intriguing.

 

[KLscilevothma]

Thanks ∫, it is so cool! I've watched 3 clips already and forwarded it to my two physics teachers. I'll watch the rest of the clips later.

 

[lethe]

in the second to last clip, about 1/3 of the way in, they showed an interview with a guy that they claimed was e. witten. he didn t look or sound like witten to me. i think they made a mistake. did anyone else notice this?

 

[Brad_Ad23]

I believe the supposed Ed Witten you refer to is consistent throughout the whole program. And it does sort of sound like him too.

Anyways, while M-theory holds promise, I am still opposed to it for the simple reason it is still a theory of interactions taking place in a background spacetime. A theory of everything, and of true unification should be able to tie it all into a dynamic spacetime. LQG takes care of the dynamic spacetime bit, but is lacking in other areas. Ultimately, these two fields should converge together.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Brad, take a look at Urs' threads on this forum. There is at least one species of M-theory that has a dynamic spacetime.

 

[Brad_Ad23]

Yes, I just did a search. That particular varient of M-Theory looks promising, but as Urs himself said, it isn't quite background independent. By the very mathematical nature M-theory is formulated in, it has to be background dependent. To change this, is a step towards that union of LQG and M-Theory I mentioned. I suspect, we need to take a bit more steps in understanding the actual physics before we can truly formulate such a theory. In particular, we need to extract something meaningful and common in physics out of both M and LQG theory.

 

[lethe]

Originally posted by Brad_Ad23
I believe the supposed Ed Witten you refer to is consistent throughout the whole program. And it does sort of sound like him too.

i think this guy in chapter 3 is ed witten:


i think this guy in chapter 6 is not ed witten:


he is right before halfway of the 6th segment of the third hour. am i just going crazy? i don t think he looked like ed witten or sounded like him at all...

does anyone else notice that these guys don t look the same?

Edit: pictures removed. Img tag is not enabled

 

[Brad_Ad23]

Different lighting and angles...they could be the same guy.

 

[ranyart]

Originally posted by lethe
i think http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~jhannon/witten.jpeg .

i think http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~jhannon/notwitten.jpeg is not ed witten.

he is right before halfway of the 6th segment of the third hour. am i just going crazy? i don t think he looked like ed witten or sounded like him at all...

does anyone else notice that these guys don t look the same?

This is a deliberate action for the observer in order to Understand 'M-Theory'..everybody is everybody else!..or we are all Ed Wittens!

It is about OBSERVER DEPENDENCE, from where you look from?

Will (not the will from Lost-In-Space )..the REAL Ed Witten please step forward?

 

[notevenwrong]

It's not Ed Witten, it is Paul Steinhardt,
a physicists at Princeton who does
cosmology

 

[lethe]

Originally posted by notevenwrong
It's not Ed Witten, it is Paul Steinhardt,
a physicists at Princeton who does
cosmology

whoa... OK, thanks.

so that s a pretty egregious error, don t you think?

 

[lethe]

Originally posted by notevenwrong
It's not Ed Witten, it is Paul Steinhardt,
a physicists at Princeton who does
cosmology

google turned up lots of pictures of paul steinhardt. clearly you are correct

i should have known this. i have seen paul steinhardt lecture, i just forgot what he looks like.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

the next step is to interview lee smolin about lqg in this programme.

 

[dongoku]

hey guys... I'm new here, but i thought i'd post a link to dl the show instead of streaming it. just incase it goes down or something one day...
if this isn't allowed I'm sorry and i'll remove them asap

http://members.optusnet.com.au/donchichio/string.html

hope that works!

 

[MadMan]

I watched it beffore I even found this site! It was so great I was up all night thinking about it... Truely amazing...(and educational) what channel is pbs is on?

 

[Loren Booda]

Ed Witten is a very gracious, soft spoken family guy with a personality physicists and mathematicians would be proud to emulate. I hope that his work will eventually yield revolutionary yet basic concepts and formulas that can be appreciated by the general public toward constructive ends.

 

[lethe]

Originally posted by Loren Booda
Ed Witten is a very gracious, soft spoken family guy ...

i didn t know he had a family, but he does have a wife. i have met her, and she s kinda nutty.

 

[lumidek]

Photographs

Hey guys,

you might find our Harvard High Energy Theory photogallery useful. There are many well-known physicists among faculty and visitors (Strominger, Vafa, Coleman, Arkani-Hamed, Randall, Georgi, and others; Schwarz, Maldacena, Horowitz and many other visitors), but look at the postdocs and the students, too.

http://schwinger.harvard.edu/~motl/PeoplePixWeb/
http://schwinger.harvard.edu/~motl/PeoplePixWeb/visitors.html

Best wishes
Luboš Motl

 

[Niels Bohr]

I read the three transcripts, very interesting. I look forward to the results of the tests in the atom smasher to see if any physical evidence exists for Superstring Theory, such as loss of energy to other dimensions or the supersymmetrical particles (I think this is what it's called).

Regards,

Niels Bohr

 

[The_Professional]

Originally posted by dongoku
hey guys... I'm new here, but i thought i'd post a link to dl the show instead of streaming it. just incase it goes down or something one day...
if this isn't allowed I'm sorry and i'll remove them asap

http://members.optusnet.com.au/donchichio/string.html

hope that works!

Thanks for posting that. I was trying to figure out how to save it in Real Player, I'm glad I won't have to resort to "alternative" means

 

[MythioS]

Can someone answer a question for me about something that was in this show. When they get to the part where the two physicists were trying to get both of the equations to match on the chalkboard, did they say that they somehow found these other dimensions or more so that the other dimensions were required in order for the string theory to function? Because for some reason i remember the latter in which case this theory is more here-say and simply a means to get some equation to work right?

MythioS

 

[ranyart]

Originally posted by MythioS
Can someone answer a question for me about something that was in this show. When they get to the part where the two physicists were trying to get both of the equations to match on the chalkboard, did they say that they somehow found these other dimensions or more so that the other dimensions were required in order for the string theory to function? Because for some reason i remember the latter in which case this theory is more here-say and simply a means to get some equation to work right?

MythioS

Technically one can ask what came first?..the dimensions or the Maths?
Some of the abstract mathematics of string theory do not conform to our everyday experience, for instance in order to accommodate more than the usual three-dimensions, there are Mathematical extensions..all the way up to infinite (Wittens latest paper).

Some time ago there was a general consensus that 26 dimensions was pretty much suitable for the avialable 'string' Mathematics, but if the current trend continue's then there will not be enough Dimensions in our Universe to accommodate the coresponding predicted Mathematical Dimensions!

Of course the spacetime dimensions (theorized as 9+1 until Ed Witten thought of another dimension, and then 9+1 became 10+1 spacetime's).

There are about 12 Time zones graphed onto the surface of the globe, this is for each individual nation to define their own existence with their neighbours and stops Airlines from landing planes at the same time and such!, this is a human construct for ease of correspondance, it is not a consequence say of the proximity of the Earth within the Solar System along the Galactic Arm!

 

[lethe]

Originally posted by MythioS
Can someone answer a question for me about something that was in this show. When they get to the part where the two physicists were trying to get both of the equations to match on the chalkboard, did they say that they somehow found these other dimensions or more so that the other dimensions were required in order for the string theory to function? Because for some reason i remember the latter in which case this theory is more here-say and simply a means to get some equation to work right?

MythioS

yes, that is exactly how it happened. string theory gives you quantum gravity, for free. some people felt that this was such a compelling argument, that they were willing to listen to what other things that the theory was trying to tell them. one of them is that it must have 10 spacetime dimensions.

the number 10 is, as you say, just the number that makes the equations work. in this sense, string theory is more constrained than other quantum theories. other quantum theories put no restriction on what dimensions you must live in (although renormalizability may have something to say to this question)

 

[Hyperreality]

For some odd reasons, even after downloading QuickTime player from the specified URL (links provided on the PBS), I still can't watch the video. Everytime when the QuickTime player functions came out, it automatically closes all the windows.

What do I do?

 

[tenzin]

I think the PBS special sucked

It was so hoakey and cheesey. Not to mention that many of the things they say are completely stupid. There are plenty of intellegent people out there but no more great thinkers. Physicists have forgotten how to think and become obcessed with the math.