Quantum Gravity Breaks Causality -- And You Can Compute With It
Check out my course about quantum mechanics on Brilliant! First 30 days are free and 20% off the annual premium subscription when you use our link ➜ brilliant.org/sabine.
If you flip a light switch, the light will turn on. A cause and its effect. Simple enough… until quantum gravity come into play. Once you add quantum gravity, lights can turn on and make switches flip. And some physicists think that this could help build better computers. Why does quantum physics make causality so strange? And how can we use quantum gravity to build faster computers? Let’s have a look.
The paper on indefinite causal structures is here: arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0701019
🤓 Check out my new quiz app ➜ quizwithit.com/
💌 Support me on Donatebox ➜ donorbox.org/swtg
📝 Transcripts and written news on Substack ➜ sciencewtg.substack.com/
👉 Transcript with links to references on Patreon ➜ / sabine
📩 Free weekly science newsletter ➜ sabinehossenfelder.com/newsle...
👂 Audio only podcast ➜ open.spotify.com/show/0MkNfXl...
🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜
/ @sabinehossenfelder
🖼️ On instagram ➜ / sciencewtg
#science #sciencenews #physics
Anyone else coming from the "my dream died" video? I'm here Sabina, watching "indefinite causal structures".
Yeah, we watched the future video first.
me too... Bing watching her science videos
Yes! She got me curious 😅
Me too
same
"What came first Chicken or egg?" Depends on how close the blackholes are.
I guess that both chicken and the egg popped into existence at the same time. Like particle - antiparticle. The egg needs to be incubated by a chicken anyway. Sounds like a promising scifi story
The egg. Because dinosaurs (which laid eggs) came before birds
Even if the question is sharpened to "which came first, the chicken or the _chicken_ egg," the answer depends on whether "chicken egg" (EC) is defined as "an egg laid by a chicken" (ELC) or "an egg that will hatch into a chicken (if it hatches)" (EHC). A chicken preceded the first ELC, and an EHC preceded the first chicken.
@@brothermine2292 Or if eggs are meant in general, those existed long before chicken. Or even a specific egg.
I was thinking about how silly we all are being, but then I thought about how QM keeps throwing these mind benders at us. I guess Newtonian mechanics also caused problems but now no one bothers with Newtonian inconsistencies as we are taught that from birth.
3:23 -- They actually covered this in episode 2 of season 1 of Star Trek: Voyager, "Parallax." As they flew by a singularity, they picked up a distress call from a ship near the event horizon. The crew later learns that the distress call was actually sent by themselves, and they were viewing a time-delayed mirror of their own ship. The singularity had nudged the effect before the cause, so they picked up their own distress call.
Ha! I remember that!
"If we draw space on the vertical and time on the horizontal axis..." But you didn't! 😲
I did not notice, but thinking about it, we so often have time horizontally..
ugh, dang, sorry about that!
@@carlbrenninkmeijer8925🛌?
@@SabineHossenfelder No problem, there's another world in which you did get it right... 😄
@SabineHossenfelder have u done the dishes?
If math problems can be calculated in different order and have two or more correct answers at the same time, I have some calculus exams I want to retake.
Well, that's quadratic problems 😅
@@maxstirner6143 but all the quadratic equations are following the order of operations.
I think you mean you have some old exams you want re-graded.
Well, this beats science fiction for sure. And it boggled my mind, and two Easter eggs fell from the table at the same time!!
It's finally completed: kzhead.info/sun/Zpereb1rmWd6hok/bejne.html
two eggs fell up to the table from the floor 😳
Or … you can have eggs Benedict for breakfast while your guest can have green eggs and ham
@@johnpayne7873 Green eggs and ham... a thing that is desirable or undesirable, until one tries it.
Einstein taught us that both the egg falls to the table, and the table falls to the egg. it's all relative. now we learn that the egg can both be falling towards the table, and from the table...
"Quantum-typical behavior only shows up if you measure quickly enough" I have never heard that qualifier before and it makes the whole video worthwhile! Thanks once again, Dr. Hossenfelder!
Dr Hossenfelder, you "hearted " me! I am officially chuffed...
Quantum behavior occurs no matter how slowly you measure; you just don't see it unless you measure quickly enough.
@@ericlipps9459 The only thing you _can_ see is quantum behaviour, if quantum physics is truly the law of physics. The aspects of quantum behaviour you report having observed may vary with how long you wait.
Now don't go down the Dark Matter rabbit hole again...
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
I kinda barely sorta understood quantum computing at one point a few years ago when I watched the Microsoft lecture for programmers on the subject, but now this... thanks Universe for refreshing my feeling of ignorance again! Well, maybe the Universe doesn't agree with quantized gravity, so at this point I should be thanking only the writers of the interesting paper.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
3:48 "If A was flipping a switch and B was the light turning on" - That's where the error lies. Yes, A and B are in super position of |A before B> + |B before A> but not |Switch before Light> + |Light before Switch>, more like |Switch labeled A before Light labeled B> + |Switch labeled B before Light labeled A>. Quantum gravity doesn't break cauasality, it just puts it into superposition. It can still be useful in quantum computing (because +3 and *7 arent dependent/caused by each other) but normal quantum computers can do this anyway, just a bit less efficient. (Altrough I wouldn't call holding a black hole in superposition near the quantum computer very efficient too).
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
I sincerely believe people are interested in Sci-Fi out of pure boredom. We desperately crave for something completely new, something that has never crossed our mind... but at the same time, not too crazy so we could still reasonably believe it could be real. This stuff fits the bill way better than any Sci-Fi I've ever seen.
That makes sense, the human mind seeks variation and repetition, focus, balance, contrast etc. Same principles as visual design and music design, both being reflection of the human mind, would also be reflected in literature and storytelling which is also an art.
Some people learn about science fiction first. Do they learn about science from boredom? I think rather it is because science fiction is the verb, the application to science’s noun.
@@isaackellogg3493 Well put. Even in the age of corrupt, sell-out, discredited science I can still sign that belief. What a time…
It seems you've never read the great sci-fi authors...
@@TartempionLampion I’m pretty sure I’ve read all the greats. But… better tell why you read them?
It sounds like a strong argument against space being quantized. Maybe this is the reason why we do not have a working quantum gravity theory
In fact, this is why I was looking at this to begin with!
I feel the same. A physical theory should START with causality and build itself up from there...
Maybe it only seems like space exists.
@@user-fc8xw4fi5vwhy? We shouldn't ignore possibilities because they are unintuitive.
@@user-fc8xw4fi5v If it makes you feel better, these phenomena would probably only actually (as in not involving only virtual particles) occur inside an event horizon of some sort. . . .
I am glad you are here Sabine. Thank you to you and your staff for all the work that goes into these videos.
Since time near a black hole passes slower, light near a black hole must also move slower which means that your light cone curves towards the vertical where it approaches the black hole. A cannot influence B because there is not (in B's local time-slowed space) time for a signal from A to reach it.
When you touched the little Einstein's head and inserted the funny noise I had to laugh out loud so bad that now I needed to tell you about it. Keep up the great work, Sabine.
Yet another sign that the models being internally consistent to some degree and having some mapping onto reality doesn't mean they are real. A result like this means we need new models.
thats why we call them models
there can be no complete model or theory, there is always a limit to their applicability.
No, a result like this means we need to test the models. Just because a model is unintuitive to humans doesn't make it automatically wrong. Reality is under no obligation to behave in a way our brains accept or like.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
Interesting that this further demonstrates how at odds Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity are with each other. My instinct would say causality seems to important to violate. I'd like to see what our current best theory of quantum gravity (string theory) would say about this phenomenon.
General Relativity has possibly of time travel in it. So it not in conflict with Quantum Mechanics having the same.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
You mentioned the limit of the speed of light, but what if that’s not a constraint and some things move faster than the speed of light? The parameters would be faster than we could see and faster than we could measure. Although once dead, Schrodinger’s cat would always be dead.
Yes that's right! if the speed of light limit can be broken, then all kinds of computing limits also go out of the window.
It would be neat if the speed of light limit was removed in the calculations to determine if the experimental results can be explained. Entanglement would suddenly be untangled and string theory would be a string rather than bits of strings.
@@Napafoodie Essentially this is done in the pilot-wave Bohmian version of quantum mechanics. The results of Bell test measurements are explained by each particle being associated with a "pilot wave", a field throughout space, that can change instantaneously. Actually, when the particles are interacting, the number of these non-local fields increases exponentially with the number of particles. It's not a very satisfying interpretation of QM; you basically give up everything we expect from a physical theory, in order to regain the ability to think of particles as tiny billiard balls.
Tbf we say the speed of light is maximal specifically to preserve causality in relativistic equations.. If c was fixed (as we have experimentally-verified it is) without being maximal, there would be no way of reliably reproducing causality.. You can do an easy proof of this using time dilation. I have a hard time really understanding conceptually what a "velocity larger than c" would even mean
Alternatively, if something traveling no faster than light travels through a wormhole from point A to point B, it could exert an influence at B even if B is outside A's future lightcone. Einstein & Rosen understood that General Relativity allows wormholes. (ER 1935.) So it surprises me that they didn't write about whether wormholes might explain entanglement.
As a software engineer, these race conditions regarding computations sound like Lovecraft-level nightmares
Happy Easter! That was interesting. Thanks!
Sabine - you must know about the 3 Body Problem Netflix series and the plot device they use of quantum entanglement. Pretty please do a video on what it is and why it can't be used as a FTL communications method. Thanks.
Hmmm I saw a video from PBS space time on the matter... and actually it could be used for FTL communication if... and it's an IF so big it would shadow the entire earth... if the theory of quantum gravity allows for non-linear solutions to the Shrodinger equation. So yeah it's a huge if...
information is not transmitted, with quantum entanglement. the status cannot be checked before sending, and after checking there is no quantum entanglement.
The particle is never present at two places simultaneously. The particle's potential position exists in a superposition of states meaning that in theory the particle could be found anywhere (within the bounds set by c) at the instant of measurement. Aside from the instant of measurement, the particle could be said to exist everywhere, or nowhere.
Bold of you to assume. If you do not measure the position at both places it exists simultaneously, then you are measuring a number (less than two) at which it does exist simultaneously. Just because it does not exist simultaneously _at those two specific locations_ does not necessarily disqualify there being two other, non-measured positions of which you’re unaware, at which the particle _does_ in fact exist simultaneously. “I have looked in both Chicago and New York, and in neither of them have I found any Eiffel Tower. I have therefore experimentally disproved the theoretical existence of any Eiffel Tower anywhere else in the universe.” Can you guarantee you are the only observer? Again, bold of you to assume. Let me know what noise the spherical cow makes.
@@isaackellogg3493 It's not bold, it's basic quantum physics. When the particle is not measured it exists as a waveform; there is no particle to exist at two places at once until measurement, at which point is can be said to exist instantaneously at one specific location. You appear to be making some analogy with the macro world, which is clearly futile.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
@@Ardwick-Crome but the Nobel Prize of 2023 implies a continuous (unseen to us) observer to collapse the universe from the generalized quantum foam. Therefore there is in fact a second location at which the particle exists at a definite position.
@@isaackellogg3493 That's completely wrong. All I can advise is that you read up on the fundamentals.
This sounds very metaphysical. I've broken my head on this and I can only understand this if I imagine there are different realities, each with their own gravity fields and particles. Entanglement would mean, realities are synced up. In the end you can only realise in which reality you live, when you observe it... because you can only observe 1 reality at a time.
Possibly both the many worlds theorem and the novikov consistency principle are true. But you would never be able to tell because the act of observing your reality may define the reality you inhabit.
everything that depends on observation is unrealistic, by definition (subjective). that is, one cannot talk about quantum effects as real, they are relative "observations". but they manifest themselves precisely by comparing the results "without observation" and "with observation", and we can talk about the "non-locality" of quantum effects, smearing, and the absence between observations. Really, the absence of what?! in mathematics, there is such a concept as "disposable uncertainty", the interaction of matter on detectors, in many senses, is similar to L'Hopital's rule.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
We need a longer video on this!
Or shorter if the mass is in the wrong place...
Fascinating! It feels like a Star Trek episode! Thanks, Sabine! 😊 Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
"The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many" -- The Spock duality. Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
I was wondering, what problems does the following idea run into? The gravitational field of a particle in superposition exists in all positions that the particle could be in, but it's strength is weighted by how likely the particle is to be in that position.
That's actually kind of a neat idea
Wonder if you could work dark matter into that as well. A little bit of extra gravity where it's unlikely to be.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
@@hyperduality2838 is this to say that one issue with the idea is that it leads to causality loops?
@@piershanson1784 The neuroscientist Karl Friston talks about causality loops! "The brain is a prediction machine" -- Karl Friston. Making predictions to track targets, goals and objectives is a syntropic process -- teleological. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! "We predict ourselves into existence" -- Anil Seth, neuroscientist, watch at 56 minutes:- kzhead.info/sun/pLyceJZuhGmGhIU/bejne.html The Einstein reality criterion:- "If, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict with certainty (i.e., with probability equal to unity) the value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element of reality corresponding to that quantity." (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen 1935, p. 777) Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:- www.iep.utm.edu/epr/ According to Einstein reality is predicted into existence -- a syntropic process, teleological. If you accept causality loops then your brain/mind is converting effects into causes, thinking is the action of converting your perceptions, observations, measurements or intuitions into ideas and conceptions (causes). The world or matter effects your mind and thinking leads to the creation or synthesis or causes. Effects are dual to causes. Action (thesis) is dual to reaction (anti-thesis) -- Sir Isaac Newton or the Hegelian dialectic. Forces are dual -- attraction is dual to repulsion.
The age-old question, what came first, the chicken or the egg? They're both cause and affect. The switch didn't turn on the light, I did because of my need to have more light in the room so I can see where the light switch is
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
@@hyperduality2838are you in the right channel?
Has the potential to solve P=NP. All problems that can be checked efficiently could also be solved efficiently. We can effectively check all routes of a maze simultaneously, only keeping the outcome that exits first.
Thank you for the video.
I have a question I hope someone can help me with. There is an implication the objects being in different places at the same time affects the gravitational field. Yet, in certain configurations electrons don't dynamically affect the far electromagnetic field. E.g. The electron in the ground state of hydrogen. Why can't there be a similar mechanism when it comes to gravity. I.e. Only the average gravitational field is observed because some mechanism is preventing the system from radiating gravitationally.
Scientific Nonsense is my favorite kind of nonsense.
Fascinating. My own thinking on QM had already led me to suspect that the next big insight would be that "causality can work backwards in time," and that "the real experts" would soon start acknowledging this. Reverse causality makes a great number of otherwise counterintuitive QM experimental results suddenly very easy to explain.
Thanks for the great Video. Sounds like people might be figuring some pretty cool stuff out. 🤓🙏
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
One of these days, we're going to look back on this and realize how stupid we were.
I really hope this will happen in my life time
This is, once again, the best explanation I've heard for why we don't have quantum gravity. I feel the universe can tolerate many things, but breaking causality is not one of them.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
It's just a hunch, but entangled causality sounds like something that could create the time arrow in the first place.
🎉 I love your thought provoking youtubes like this Sabine !!! 🎉
04:34 vayne with guinso in league of legends can relate to that, you hit and ur guinso/ W stacks stack up due to guinso b4 the actual hit fleis/reaches enemy and u can even dmg enemy instantly like that iots like riflemen hitting people in wc3
4:00 That doesn't make any sense - in your example, the black hole would be in a superposition of these locations, but once a gravitational interaction occurs, then the wavefunction would collapse and it would be in a definite position - no causality breaking required. The problem instead would lie in what is happening in wavefunction collapse which in my view is still the crux of where our understanding of QM goes awry
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
@@hyperduality2838 hahahahaha Kant and Yoda in one reply
@@JoeyFaller It gets better. The neuroscientist Karl Friston talks about causality loops! "The brain is a prediction machine" -- Karl Friston. Making predictions to track targets, goals and objectives is a syntropic process -- teleological. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non teleological physics (entropy). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! "We predict ourselves into existence" -- Anil Seth, neuroscientist, watch at 56 minutes:- kzhead.info/sun/pLyceJZuhGmGhIU/bejne.html The Einstein reality criterion:- "If, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict with certainty (i.e., with probability equal to unity) the value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element of reality corresponding to that quantity." (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen 1935, p. 777) Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:- www.iep.utm.edu/epr/ According to Einstein reality is predicted into existence -- a syntropic process, teleological. If you accept causality loops then your brain/mind is converting effects into causes, thinking is the action of converting your perceptions, observations, measurements or intuitions into ideas and conceptions (causes). The world or matter effects your mind and thinking leads to the creation or synthesis or causes. Effects are dual to causes. Action (thesis) is dual to reaction (anti-thesis) -- Sir Isaac Newton or the Hegelian dialectic. Forces are dual -- attraction is dual to repulsion. Antinomy (duality) is two truths that contradict each other -- Immanuel Kant. "May the force (duality) be with you" -- Jedi teaching. "The force (duality) is strong in this one" -- Jedi teaching. The master is dual to the apprentice -- the rule of two -- Darth Bane, Sith Lord.
@@JoeyFaller Main stream science has ignored Immanuel Kant for over 200 years! "Philosophy is dead" -- Stephen Hawking. Stephen Hawking accepted the metaphor of Schrodinger's cat which is metaphysics! Alive is dual to not alive. Being is dual to non being create becoming -- Plato's cat. Philosophy is therefore not dead -- Hawking is using antinomy!
@@hyperduality2838 define dual
I can't help but wodner... what if Causality is something our brains make up to make sense of their own existence and reality around us?
There's evidence supporting that. If thermodynamics/entropy didn't exist, there wouldn't be an "arrow of time", just time and space
Just Fantastic; mind blown! Wir Lieben Dich, Sabine!
A heavy ball on a rubber sheet attracts other balls, because of downwards gravity and not curvature. Well done, you've explained gravity with gravity.
It is an analogy
Sabine should do a video on why we should ban the rubber sheet analogy. It is generally the case that the alteration of the space is not what causes the apparent deflection, but the effect on the proper time of the moving object. Time distortion is not shown in the 2-D rubber sheet. The using gravity to explain gravity isn't the half of it.
I keep saying this but nobody pays attention so I'll say it again. What if you're looking in the wrong place? Perhaps gravity is quantized not as point excitations in a field like other quantum fields, but as vectors or tensors of infinite length. Edit: to put it another way, we think of quantum "particles" as point excitations in a quantum field, but what if gravity involves lines instead of points? So mass creates a perturbation in the "fabric" of spacetime, but this perturbation is not point-like, it's vector-like, and these lines add up to describe the geometry of spacetime in a an area. These vectors could be quantized as well, and there could be ways of testing this idea, but they're hard to think of, since it is impossible to have a "neutral" gravity zone, since all of spacetime is warped by mass. I also think this is a way to get around the 3-body problem. Essentially you model space as a fabric with ripples in it instead of modeling gravity as a force. Of course this is easier said than done.
Do the maths, proof it. Cant help you with this, too stupid in this regard 😢
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
An infinitely long loop would seem to have infinite energy, and if the energy is more localized along the line, wouldn't that just be a particle again?
@@kindlin you're right that if the vector has to propagate at the speed of light, you're probably left with points again. I'll need to think about this some more
@@ConsciousExpression Glad to help you get the critical thought juices flowing. Honestly, I didn't follow most of your post, but whenever infinity appears, you can be pretty sure something went wrong with the assumptions going into it.
Oh great. So now not only can it be on and off at the same time, but now might be stuck in last Tuesday.
not Tuesday, but there is an idea called Last Thursdayism (alternately Last Tuesdayism) is the idea that the universe was created last Thursday. (yeah, I basically stole all that from rationalwiki)
Great episode 😊
So beyond my level of education and intelligence probably but the little bits I do understand are so cool for a layman to see. Thanks a lot for sharing your knowledge.
Holographic Universe that allows for entropic decay as the cause of gravity? Or the reason why gravity doesn't exist as we define it?
As an old person suffering from chronic vertigo, I assure you that my constant efforts to keep from falling over and breaking my hip testify to me the reality of a force called gravity.
but can it run Crysis
Hahahhahahhah, that’s what it’s swondering
Only if you have the Existential Crysis DLC.
You know that moment after eating the mushroom..when the “this is meant to be” thoughts start to emerge? (I like when the smoke comes out the chimney.) Happy Easter!🐰
Love this video! It's indeed exciting! Just something to think about: tiny particles are always part of bigger particles so they will always influence everything they are connected with.
I’m not all that convinced the universe cares as much about causality as we do. If locality is more of a strong suggestion than an immutable law, I would think causality (which is essentially locality applied to time) has similar exceptions.
If that’s true that opens the door to some form of ftl theoretically. Especially if we could ever find a way to manipulate mass etc.
Violating causality causes *logical * paradoxes, it's not for physical reasons we care about it.
@@ObjectsInMotion don’t we already know of quantum effects though that violate causality? That’s what they’re trying to make quantum batteries out of, the indefinite causal order
@@bradysmith4405 No, locality will not allow.
@@ObjectsInMotion It is not a causal relationship that leads to logical paradoxes, but inadequate assumptions, conflicting assumptions, and category substitution. There is no paradox, which consists solely in the absence of a causal relationship... especially in theories in which time is not absolute.
0:59 schrödinger used the cat to disprove superposition.
tried
He wanted to show the absurdity of the concept in daily life.
Well, I haven’t read his original work, but I hope that at the time he was trying to draw attention to this problem in the current understanding of quantum mechanics.
@@edwardlulofs444 Yes he presented it as a thought experiment, to point to the need for some more explanation of the transition from microscopic quantum to macroscopic classical. The point being that a cat in this superposition would be absurd (in contrast with modern popularizers who say "QM says the cat is alive and dead, isn't that a cool bunch of nonsense!"). The issue was resolved in my opinion in the 1930s as von Neumann developed a more detailed model of measurement that shows how lost information leads to a collapse of superpositions into ordinary statistical mixtures (decoherence). Some people prefer to say it isn't solved (they are drawn to a sense of mystery and 60 year old quotes about "nobody understands quantum mechanics", they feel better approaching physics if "no one understands it").
@@iyziejane thank you. The history of physics is useful.
I have no idea what you're talking about since I never took physics, but still subscribed because you rock ❤
This videos always blow my mind, I can't understand the math but it's amazing just to think about what the consequences would be, what I can't really understand is when quantum physics ends and when physics begin, I mean, how is it possible that the smallest parts of the Universe behave differently than the Universe of which they're the foundation?
Future Sabine sent me :)
There is no reason that time cannot go in reverse, it's just our perception. If time could reverse with sufficient spacetime distortion, wouldn't causality be preserved, if say it's within a black hole?
Nothing will change. Richard Feynman dabbled in this even as a child. And, there is nothing inside black holes, where the place of matter is occupied by an infinite space on the event horizon... We can assume that a black hole is an overgrowth of a neutron star standing on the edge of the birth of the local universe
@@ruby_linaris I don't think that is accurate at all.
@@maladyofdeath This was done by the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics. (about the direction of time). and the shape of black holes follows from the geometry. not only light cannot move in a black hole, but also any matter. it is possible that there is a question about gravity in the center of a black hole, but it will not be possible to measure it, and its external of BH manifestation generates "measurable" gravity.
Hi Sabine, great video as always! This one left me with some questions though: If it's the case that which event influenced which is dependant on the superposition of something, does the eventual measurement determine which one caused the other? Can that happen after the events unfold? If so, does this cause the breaking of causality that you mentioned? And if that's the case, how do some things happen instead of others? Is it randomness? Or do we just not know? I'm sorry if I'm not formulating these questions properly. This is the best I could come up with.
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
Good video as always
We just got a quantum computer at SURF. It's still being set up. Now we just need to figure out in which utterly stupid and wasteful ways it can be used, for instance, to improve duckface in selfies, create cringy images of princesses with big booties and filler-swollen lips or anything just as utterly useless but able to dump millions of kilotons of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. Sometimes I hate my job, really.
I know that feeling….
Be a rebel and do something useful when your boss isn’t around!
Humanity will never lack finding small answers for big questions
Your reaction is so ridiculously over-blown. I can't even tell if you're being serious. It doesn't seem like you know a single thing about quantum computers, so really, I don't even know how you've gotten to be so upset.
@@jaylewis9876 It's not us, we do research. It's what the private sector will do once they put their hands on quantum technology. It's the same with AI, it was used to crack the Sars-cov-2 spike protein... and to transform you into a cute animated furry on zoom. Yeah, people should be allowed to have choices... but these choices limit the choices of others.
David Hume made the argument that causality is an abstraction. It's not a metaphysical feature of reality but a practical way for us to organize the world.
I believe Kant said something similar - causality was one of the filters through which we perceived things.
But this makes no sense. We are free to organize our life, but we're not free to determine causal connection.
@@Thomas-gk42 If you wear pink sunglasses, you will see the whole world as pink.
@@markdowning7959Nope. Green things would seem grey, blue things purple etc...
@@markdowning7959 Haha, fits well with Sabine's shirt and her last sunglasses short-vid.
Sabina you got me, for 5 minutes and 50 seconds before I remembered the date. Well done.
When I watched your quantum vortex video I wondered if it would be possible to store and process information in it's waves.
That was a great reminder, I would've regreted not watching this!
So you can solve the nonabilean hidden subgroup problem with this! That's amazing!
Causality loops:- Cause (matter) is dual to effect (mind) -- causality. Causes in the external world effect your mind, in turn causes in your mind can effect the external world. Effect is dual to cause -- retro-causality. Your mind is converting effects into causes -- a syntropic process, retro-causality. Thinking is the process of converting effects from the external world into concepts and hence causes which can influence the outside world of matter -- retro-causality or syntropy. Mind (syntropy) is dual to matter (entropy) -- Descartes or Plato's divided line. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. External is dual to internal. The external world influences or effects your mind which then converts theses effects into causes -- effects becoming causes is retro-causality in action -- causality loops. Measurements or perceptions (effects) become conceptions (causes) -- retro-causality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
@@hyperduality2838 Thank you very much.
6:27 "It can be convincingly proved that reality cannot be represented by a continuous field at all. It seems to follow from quantum phenomena that a finite system with finite energy can be completely described by a finite set of numbers - quantum numbers... A purely algebraic theory is required to describe reality." (Einstein, January, 1955).
4:11 yeah, the causal relationship can be altered.
Mass in 2 locations has 2 half integer spin meson fields dragging on higgs field. This makes intertial particle reference a moire field instead of a point to point interaction. Its just a switch from digital to analog computing.
This women knows how to capture an audience I was hooked from "My dream Died" and now I am here. She is good.
PBS Spacetime had a video where rather simple math shows if you want to see gravitons above planck noise, you get mass arranged beyond than the Schwarzschild Limit... which begged an obvious "resolution": maybe to get QM to merge with SR, QM has to become continuous - not SR quantized. I don't think I've ever seen it even argued, let alone studied.
These apparent causality paradoxes are a result of the interpretation of space and time as a geometry that can be curved. But that's just an interpretation coming from the field representation of space-time, a *mathematical convenience* introduced by Marcel Grossmann to help Albert with his general relativity. As a mathematical description, it is not necessarily a physical interpretation. Physically, it's not space-time that curves. Instead, rulers and clocks change shape/rate. In this "ruler-clock" physical interpretation, these objects are quantum objects. Quantum-superposed rulers and clocks would produce interesting interference effects, but not break causality.
Thank you so much
Here from the "My Dream Died" video. Thank you, Sabina!
I do not think gravity is a quantum effect. It is probably a mass effect caused by the three forces. Most likely predominantly bij electro magnetism because of it's longer range effects and the similarity of the speed of light and the speed of gravity. You may be able to quantize spacetime somehow but I do not think it has any relevance for gravity except through the three forces.
Did you just get mixed up between horizontal and vertical? I'm surprised! Edit: I never knew why there was so much focus on quantum gravity before now! Thanks for answering that question!
I discovered you years ago when I felt that someone should question why physics was struck on string theory & dark matter. I have been a fan of yours for years & have always been ready to recommend you to my female friends (I am such!) that you were an example of a woman was really capable. Now, I am an engineer. So, I know only mostly Newton & Maxwell & such, but I had begun to run into some similar things in industry, to the point I began to suspect that my job was not to fix things but to reprove by an old company traditionally accepted way that I, too, had failed to fix it. ? Dana
On a macro scale might there be then two universes occupying space time simultaneously?
More likely that there's a superposition of infinite universes collapsing in our universe. Or in other words, our universe is the a lot of universes collapsing
Thank you.
3:55 - wait but the all you need is for space-time to also show those spacial simmetries along the time axis. I know in physics we thing like you turn the switch thus the light is on, all it means is the light turning on would mean you would soon see someone turn on the switch, but since it's in the past it's outside your influence so you would see it happening but can't reach it to prevent. All it means is that it's possible to know the answer ahead of time and I see no problem with that.
in special relativity class they gave us an example of causality breaking - if a gun fires a bullet sufficiently faster than the speed of light, directly straight up, when the bullet falls back to the ground it would hit the gun before it was even made.
Both wave-function collapse and space-time are relativistic: - 2 particles interact in isolation, collapsing their WFs from their POVs, but not from the POV of a 3rd particle outside the system. - 2 events can happen in different orders (or even for entirely different reasons!) from the POV of observers at different places and speeds. Mix the two and we get a purely relativistic system, where the state of reality depends on each observer, and is unique to it. Therefore, once the computational system is measured for its output, only 1 result should come out, so the exponential parallelization is actually linear parallelization (nice, but not impressive), which preserves causality
One might say that the superposition of positions is contingent on the effect of fixing said position on observable curvature of spacetime to be below observable. It's basically the mass observing itself... For computing purposes this means you can use the effect to compute correct answer faster as long as you know what the correct answer is beforehand. If you know a wrong answer, you can compute that one faster too.
Hi Sabine! Love your channel! This clip though confused me a bit. You say that one particle has been observed in two places at the same time. That would mean positive observations, like clicks on sensors. Counting for example in total two clicks each in a different place and at the same time is pretty... uhm... radical. How do you know it's the same particle and how do you know it's at the same time? Could you link to some example. If it's instead inferred positions, like the particle wasn't measured at A, B so it must have been at C or similar then it's not really worth while arguing of course. My best regards! :-)
I'm still waiting for the proof that causality is a thing that we even need to consider. People continuously proclaim that certain things must not be possible because it could possibly "break causality." In our observational experience, casualty is inferred to flow universally in one direction. But what exactly restricts the universe from doing it differently? Just because we haven't seen it, or we don't understand how it would work, doesn't mean it must be impossible.
If the back hole is on the right and left at the same time, wouldnt both A and B get pushed up on the time line, making the causality effectively the same as without having any black hole around? If theres a wavefunction collapse i could understand that that one or the other order of causalities apply, but i dont understand how we could benefit from the supposed double causality when theyre still at a superposition
Another explanation (instead of only decoherence) for not seeing undead cats is: How would you look at one? The measurement apparatus would have to measure within this undead eigenstate (to not destroy the superposition of dead and alive) and that is a very complicated measurement as it cannot be easily separated to measuring the parts (i.e. body parts) of the cat. With a cat, it is especially difficult: The parts could be in addition at different positions, if the alive cat within the superposition actually moves around in the cat box. So where to position the sensors, which measure the superposition? For macro quantum objects not moving around, at least a quantum computer with attached quantum sensors could in theory measure such a large superposition state. But we should not expect to see a superposition state with bare eyes, bare brain and bare consciousness. As we are not made to experience such a state. The decoherence then actually distributes the quantum state over an even larger number of objects, which we would have to measure in the exact perfect way, so we would have to predict the interactions instead of assuming them as random. There are classical interactions, which we can avoid (e.g. vacuum, isolation of the experiment, ...) and quantum interactions, tunneling, vacuum energy, spontaneous processes (which can be reduced, but not to zero).
If you assume A + B, then you have the original state, but at a slower pace. Neither A nor B influence either, but can influence any event where their light cones overlap.
you can only view one result the wave state collapses depending where you are looking from and the state of (N)blackholes are not stable or something that can be used for compute 😅
3:47 for a good example I don't see the problem here. Either the spacetime-superposition collapses to position 1 and A (CAN) cause B or in position 2 and B (CAN) cause A. Note CAN because it's not as if a switch turning on a lightbulb will be inverted to a lightbulb flipping a switch by this. Causality is kept in every collapsed state (in this example). If we really want to break causality you'll have to bring up quantum wave interference pattern shenanigans (that I don't know how to calculate) for me to be certain.
I thought that sheet model makes looks to two dimensional. I rather think of abject in water. I like think of gravitational bodies as concentration of water pulling on the water around
first of all , you look great Sabine. I don't care if I get science or don't get science its still fun to talk about. Mr. X
Sibling rivalry seems to be a macroscopic superposition confounding causal relationships: each say the other started it.
Does this mean there is some way with this to break the "c" speed limit of information flow?
I’ve kinda had the idea that maybe entanglement/wave function collapse happens apparently faster than the speed of light because the two particles occupied the same spacetime. If spacetime was able to exist in a quantum superposition, that would maybe make this possible?
This sounds really like the basics for all the future science fiction stuff.
Like what?
Awesome!!! 🤯
2:33 yeah the differences in an area influence each other and that’s the push and pull of the many balancing or creating a stable range of differences. It’s not just 2 at once. Imagine a matrix of differences like a runic cube but with so many tiles that could change in so many ways it’s hard to see what’s close and what’s far and finding the path between is difficult if you’re zoomed in. If you zoom out and see you can see an overview of the whole matrix and see that many things are possible and maybe all is possible but our matrix currently is limited but the paths are still there even if we don’t see or our matrix/self/body/brain isn’t connected or aligned with like datapoints or info and our differences just seem imaginary but an inventor aligns the differences of the brain with the outside world and even brings the things of the mind into being because they found them within the fabrics of the universe. Imagine the unreal is just far and we learn and understand to align and reveal new portions of reality or even build a simulation that mimics reality but can expand differently but with less danger but actual data.
It's been shown, when a bulb lights up when you connect the battery, it isn't a circuit. In fact electrons stay pretty much where they are.
This could be extremely problematic for classical computers. Take NAND memory, for example. This memory design has several 2 feedbacks and relies on consistent execution of time with the inputs. If one end has significantly more time dilation than the other, that could corrupt NAND memory. Also, this could theoretically cause different CPU cores to proceed at different rates of time, and that could be really problematic for multi-threading in general.
Thanks! Pretty sure I do not understand it all but perhaps my causal order is just mixed up
This one went by pretty fast. I'm not sure if I've watched this yet? Thanks! (just to be safe: )
I think I underestimated the relevance of indefinite causal structures.
I’m in the Albert camp. ST is the “room” or “play ground” where the other phenomena (players) get to “play”. It’s not another “player”. It’s the “field” that the “players” get to play on with the ball. Don’t ask what the ball is…call the ball randomness, probability, statistics, chance? God does play dice and rigs the game too😂 God has great humor…Happy Easter
3:50 It seems to me the location of the Observer makes a difference as to the causal order that is observed. I suspect, but haven't yet thought about it much, that for any particular observer the causal order will be correct or what is expected even though a different observer might observe a reversal BUT the other observer sees a different orientation of the thing doing the causing and the thing caused. Different observers see different things but there's really no way for them to compare notes and see that it is different.