Latest / Talking Science / The Theory of Everything – Physics' Greatest Unfinished Quest

Transcript

The Theory of Everything – Physics' Greatest Unfinished Quest · Talking Science

0:00
Right now, the physics keeping your feet glued
0:02
to the floor and the physics operating the smartphone
0:05
in your hand, they actively hate each other.
0:08
Oh, completely. It's like they're speaking two
0:10
entirely different languages. Right. They went
0:11
on two completely different rule books. And if
0:13
you try to combine them, the math that holds
0:15
our universe together literally blows up. Yeah.
0:18
It's arguably the ultimate scientific open secret.
0:21
The entire framework of our modern physical understanding
0:25
is supported by two distinct pillars, and those
0:28
two pillars, when forced into the same room,
0:30
completely repel each other. Welcome to today's
0:33
deep dive. We are pulling from a really fascinating
0:36
essay today by a theoretical physicist exploring
0:39
this decades -long search for a theory of everything.
0:43
And our mission today is to break down this grand
0:46
scientific mystery for you. And we're assuming
0:49
zero prior science background here, so don't
0:51
worry. Exactly. We want to take our time, keep
0:53
it unhurried, and really just understand the
0:56
biggest unsolved puzzle in the universe. Because,
0:59
well, here's where it gets really interesting.
1:02
Some of the absolute greatest scientific minds
1:04
of the last century, I mean the brightest geniuses
1:07
we have ever produced, have spent their entire
1:10
careers trying to solve this puzzle, and they
1:13
have just hit a brick wall. Yeah, it's still
1:16
genuinely, honestly unsolved. Which is wild.
1:19
Which is exactly what makes it so compelling
1:20
to explore, you know. We aren't talking about
1:23
a minor rounding error in a lab somewhere. We
1:26
are talking about a fundamental clash in how
1:28
the universe operates at its core. Okay, so if
1:31
the universe is running on two conflicting rule
1:33
books, where do we even begin? I assume we have
1:36
to like look at the individual rule books first
1:38
just to understand why the map of reality is
1:41
broken. Yeah, that's definitely the best place
1:42
to start. Before we can see the crack in the
1:44
foundation, we really need to understand the
1:46
two pillars themselves. Right. So let's look
1:48
at the first one. Albert Einstein's general theory
1:51
of relativity. This is, to put it simply. Our
1:54
theory of the very large. The big stuff. Exactly.
1:57
It's the framework that governs planets, stars,
2:00
entire galaxies, the life cycle of black holes,
2:04
and, well, the grand expansion of the universe
2:07
itself. So when you say it governs the very large,
2:10
we are talking specifically about gravity, right?
2:12
Yes, mostly gravity. But the source text makes
2:15
a huge point that... This isn't the gravity that,
2:19
you know, most of us picture in our heads. Not
2:21
at all. I mean, when most of us learn about gravity
2:23
in grade school, it's taught as a pulling force,
2:26
like an invisible magnetic tether that the Earth
2:29
casts out to hold the moon in orbit. Yeah, or
2:32
like a rope pulling an apple down from a branch.
2:34
Right, but Einstein completely reimagined that.
2:37
Gravity isn't a pulling force at all. It is the
2:40
literal bending and warping of space and time
2:44
itself by mass and energy. I know we always hear
2:47
that classic textbook trampoline analogy for
2:51
this, where space is a stretched out trampoline
2:53
and a bowling ball in the middle sinks down,
2:55
creating a curve. Sure, the trampoline. But honestly,
2:57
that always felt a bit too dimensional to me.
2:59
Like, we don't live on a flat sheet. That's a
3:01
very fair critique of the trampoline analogy.
3:03
It works for a basic visual. But to really grasp
3:06
what Einstein was saying, you had to think in
3:08
three dimensions. Okay, how I do that? So imagine
3:11
you are suspended. inside a giant room -sized
3:14
block of clear grid -lined gelatin. Okay, weird,
3:18
but I'm with you. That gelatin is space -time.
3:21
If you place a heavy lead weight right in the
3:23
center of that gelatin, it doesn't just pull
3:26
the surface down. It pulls all the grid lines
3:29
inside the block toward it from every single
3:32
direction. Oh, wow. Okay. Yeah, the space itself
3:35
is thicker, denser, and curved toward that massive
3:38
object. So if I flick a little marble into that
3:41
block of gelatin, it's not being pulled by the
3:43
lead weight like a magnet. It's just following
3:45
the natural curve of the grid lines that have
3:48
been warped by the weight. Precisely. The Earth
3:50
orbits the sun simply because the sun is so massive,
3:53
it has warped the space -time gelatin around
3:55
it, and the Earth is just rolling along that
3:57
invisible three -dimensional curve. That is wild
3:59
to think about. And this theory is an absolute
4:01
masterpiece. I mean, when you promote general
4:03
relativity at anything massive in the cosmos,
4:06
it delivers predictions of just... breathtaking
4:08
accuracy. And the source text emphasized how
4:11
smooth this all is, right? Like the math relies
4:14
on space and time being a continuous, orderly,
4:17
and beautifully predictable fabric. That word
4:20
continuous is vital here. General relativity
4:23
demands a universe that curves elegantly, with
4:26
no sharp edges or jagged breaks. It's a flawless,
4:29
flowing, geometric landscape. Okay, so if general
4:32
relativity perfectly explains the cosmos and
4:35
the elegant geometry of space, why do we even
4:38
need another rulebook? Where does Einstein's
4:40
map stop working? Well, it stops working when
4:43
you zoom in. Like how far? Really, really far
4:45
in. Which brings us to the second pillar, quantum
4:48
mechanics. If general relativity is our theory
4:50
of the very large, Quantum mechanics is our theory
4:53
of the very small. Right, atoms and stuff. Exactly.
4:55
It governs the microscopic world of atoms, electrons,
4:58
and the subatomic particles inside them. And
5:00
this is where things get weird. Deeply strange.
5:03
Down at the scale of the truly tiny, the rules
5:06
of reality change in ways that, frankly, defy
5:09
all human intuition. In our everyday world, things
5:12
are certain. A baseball is exactly where it is.
5:16
It has a specific speed and a specific location.
5:19
But in the quantum realm, particles don't behave
5:22
like solid little baseballs. The text mentions
5:25
they behave like waves. What does that actually
5:28
mean for the listener who is just, you know,
5:30
sitting at their desk or driving their car right
5:32
now? Look at the solid dashboard of your car
5:35
or the desk in front of you. It feels completely
5:38
still. It feels absolutely certain. Definitely
5:41
solid. But if you were to zoom in. to the atomic
5:44
level of that plastic or wood, you wouldn't find
5:48
tiny, solid, perfectly still dots. You would
5:51
find a chaotic storm. A storm? Yeah, quantum
5:55
particles exist in combinations of multiple possibilities
5:57
at once. It's a world that operates on probabilities
6:00
rather than absolute certainties. Wait, so you're
6:02
saying a particle isn't definitively in one spot?
6:05
It has a high probability of being in one spot,
6:07
but it could also spontaneously be found somewhere
6:09
else. It's smeared out like a cloud of chance.
6:11
That is just so hard to wrap my head around.
6:13
There's a famous concept called the double slit
6:15
experiment, where a single particle, when fired
6:19
at a barrier with two slits, actually passes
6:21
through both slits at the exact same time. Both
6:25
at once? Yeah, interfering with itself like a
6:27
wave of water would. It only chooses a solid
6:31
location when we force it to interact with a
6:33
detector. OK, that feels entirely like science
6:36
fiction. If the tiny building blocks of everything
6:38
are just jittery, unpredictable probability clouds,
6:41
how does anything solid exist? Like, how does
6:44
my desk hold up my computer? Because when you
6:46
add up trillions and trillions of these probabilistic
6:48
particles, the weirdness kind of averages out
6:51
and you get the solid, predictable world we live
6:54
in. Oh, I see. It is totally counterintuitive
6:57
to the human brain, which, you know, evolved
6:58
to deal with medium sized objects like rocks
7:01
and trees. quantum mechanics is stupendously
7:05
successful. So it actually works. Even if it
7:08
sounds like magic, this theory underpins all
7:10
of modern chemistry and electronics. Wait, the
7:13
smartphone in my pocket right now relies on this.
7:15
Absolutely. The microscopic transistors inside
7:18
your phone's microchips only work because engineers
7:21
know exactly how to manipulate the probabilistic
7:24
wave -like nature of electrons. No way. If quantum
7:28
mechanics were wrong, your phone would be a completely
7:30
useless brick of metal and glass. And what's
7:33
fascinating here is that both of these theories,
7:36
general relativity for the massive and quantum
7:39
mechanics for the microscopic, are among the
7:41
most... successful ideas humans have ever produced.
7:45
Yeah. They have been verified to an accuracy
7:48
that just beggars belief. OK, let's unpack this.
7:51
Well, I mean, because here's where the plot thickens.
7:54
We have this perfect, unbroken rulebook for the
7:57
big stuff with its smooth, elegant curves. And
7:59
we have a perfect, unbroken rulebook for the
8:01
tiny stuff with its jittery, fluctuating probability
8:04
clouds. Why can't we just staple the two rulebooks
8:07
together and call it a day? I wish we could.
8:09
Like, why is there a contradiction at all? Because
8:11
the rule books don't just describe different
8:13
things. They describe the actual nature of reality
8:16
in fundamentally incompatible ways. And you see
8:20
the mathematical explosion when you try to force
8:22
them to talk to each other. The source calls
8:25
this the great clash. Walk me through the actual
8:28
mechanism of this clash. Like, why does the math
8:30
literally blow up? So let's go back to how they
8:33
view the fabric of reality. General relativity.
8:36
Our gravity theory demands that spacetime is
8:39
smooth and continuous. The gelatin. Exactly.
8:42
To calculate gravity, the equations need exact
8:45
coordinates. They need to know precisely where
8:48
point A is and precisely where point B is to
8:51
measure the elegant curve between them. Okay,
8:53
that makes perfect sense. Gravity needs a reliable
8:56
map with exact distances. But what do we say
8:58
quantum mechanics says about exact points? That
9:00
they don't exist. That they are jittery clouds
9:03
of probability. There you go. Quantum mechanics
9:06
says that at the smallest possible scales, reality
9:08
isn't smooth at all. It is restless. It is seething
9:12
with random, violent fluctuations. Wow. So if
9:15
you take the equations for gravity. which demand
9:18
an exact distance between point A and point B,
9:20
and you plug in the quantum reality, where point
9:23
A and point B are constantly boiling, shifting,
9:25
and jumping around, the equation just panics.
9:29
Because it's trying to measure a definitive curve
9:31
across like a boiling pot of water. Worse than
9:34
that, actually. In mathematics, when you try
9:37
to calculate the force of gravity at a quantum
9:39
distance, a distance that is essentially fluctuating
9:42
down to zero, you end up trying to divide by
9:44
zero in the equations. No, no. And as anyone
9:47
who remembers middle school math knows, when
9:49
you divide it by zero, the result is infinity.
9:51
The math literally spits out untameable infinities.
9:55
It just completely stops making sense. The two
9:57
theories simply refuse to agree. The source text
10:00
uses a really fantastic analogy for this. It
10:02
says it's like having two flawless maps of the
10:05
exact same country, but they're drawn to completely
10:07
incompatible rules. And you have absolutely no
10:10
way to lay one map over the other. Exactly. Which,
10:12
I mean, that raises an existential question.
10:15
If the maps contradict each other, does this
10:17
mean reality itself is broken? Well. We can confidently
10:21
say reality is not broken. Thank goodness. The
10:23
universe exists, right? It functions perfectly
10:25
well. The stars shine, the planets orbit, and
10:29
the atoms hold together. Therefore, it has to
10:32
be human mathematics that is failing to capture
10:35
the whole picture. We're just missing something.
10:37
Yeah. We have discovered two deeply profound
10:40
truths about the universe, but we are missing
10:43
the translation key that shows how they are actually...
10:47
The exact same truth. So what does this all mean
10:50
for the listener? I have to be honest. I am interacting
10:52
with human sized things all day. Sure. I'm not
10:55
a jittery atom and I'm not a swirling galaxy.
10:58
If I have one map for the big stuff and one map
11:00
for the small stuff, does this clash actually
11:03
matter in the real world? Or is this just an
11:05
abstract headache for theoretical physicists?
11:08
For the vast majority of physics and certainly
11:10
for everyday human life, no, you won't notice
11:12
it. You use the big theory for big things and
11:14
the small theory for small things. And you just
11:16
never have. to cross the streams. Exactly. You
11:18
just keep the rule books on separate shelves.
11:20
But the universe is not just full of ordinary
11:22
things. It has extreme places. Okay. Places where
11:25
the streams absolutely must cross. To find where
11:28
the math breaks in reality, you need an environment
11:30
that is extraordinarily massive. Meaning it is
11:34
immense gravity, Andy, extraordinarily tiny at
11:38
the exact same time. Wait, let me think about
11:40
this. Nothing in my daily life is super heavy
11:42
and microscopic simultaneously. No. The only
11:45
place I can think of where something massive
11:46
gets crushed down that incredibly small is a
11:49
black hole. That is the perfect example. Yeah.
11:51
We know black holes exist. They are formed when
11:54
giant stars collapse in on themselves. Right.
11:57
And at the very center of a black hole, at the
11:59
singularity, you have an unimaginably huge amount
12:02
of matter. The entire solar system's worth of
12:05
mass crushed down into a microscopic, vanishingly
12:09
small point. So because it is incredibly massive,
12:11
general relativity insists it has to be involved.
12:14
Yeah. But because it is microscopically tiny,
12:16
quantum mechanics kicks the door down and says,
12:18
no, I have to be involved. Yes. You desperately
12:21
need both theories to understand what is happening
12:24
at the center of a black hole. But when you try
12:26
to use them together, they fail you. That's crazy.
12:30
Take time, for example. What happens to time
12:32
at the center of a black hole? General relativity
12:35
says immense gravity slows time down, bending
12:38
it smoothly. But quantum mechanics says at that
12:41
tiny scale, time itself should be jittery and
12:44
fluctuating. So does time stop? Does it like
12:46
fragment into pieces? Does it boil? We literally
12:49
do not know. The equations give us infinity.
12:52
They give us pure nonsense. Wow. And another
12:55
perfect example of this clash is the very first
12:58
instant of the Big Bang. The birth of the universe.
13:01
Nearly 14 billion years ago. The entire cosmos,
13:04
all the matter and energy that currently makes
13:06
up hundreds of billions of galaxies, was compressed
13:09
into something unimaginably dense and incredibly
13:12
tiny. So it's the exact same problem. Massive
13:15
gravity, microscopic size. Right. To understand
13:17
these frontiers, scientists desperately need
13:19
a missing puzzle piece. They need a single theory
13:21
that unites gravity with the quantum world. And
13:24
what do they call that? This sought -after solution
13:26
is known as quantum gravity. Quantum gravity.
13:29
A single theory of everything. But since we don't
13:31
have it, we are essentially blind. If we don't
13:34
find this theory, are we permanently locked out
13:37
of understanding our own cosmic origin story?
13:39
Are we just never going to know how the universe
13:41
was actually born? Until we solve this contradiction,
13:45
those extreme frontiers remain deeply shrouded
13:48
in mystery. We can rewind the clock of the universe
13:51
back billions of years with astonishing precision.
13:55
But when we get to that final fraction of a second
13:58
at the very beginning, it breaks. Our greatest
14:00
theories fail us precisely where we need them
14:03
to shine. That is equally terrifying and incredibly
14:06
exciting. It means the book isn't finished. And
14:08
the source text highlights that physicists haven't
14:10
just thrown their hands up, right? They are actively
14:12
trying to build bridges between these two worlds.
14:14
They absolutely haven't given up. Physicists
14:16
have proposed some incredibly bold, wildly imaginative
14:21
ideas to try and bridge this gap. And the most
14:24
famous of these proposed solutions is something
14:27
that has saturated popular culture. String theory.
14:30
String theory. Yes, it sounds like something
14:33
out of a sci -fi movie. I hear the term all the
14:35
time. But how does it actually attempt to fix
14:38
the contradiction between smooth gravity and
14:41
jittery quantum mechanics? To understand string
14:44
theory, we have to entirely rethink what a particle
14:46
is. Traditionally, physics has thought of the
14:49
most basic building blocks of reality like electrons
14:52
or quarks as tiny dots, little zero -dimensional
14:56
points of solid matter. String theory makes a
14:59
wonderfully imaginative suggestion. It says,
15:02
what if we zoom in on those tiny points and find
15:05
out they aren't solid dots at all? What if they
15:08
are actually incredibly tiny, one -dimensional
15:10
vibrating strings of pure energy? Wait, back
15:13
up. I need to push back on this because it's
15:15
a stumbling block for a lot of people. Sure.
15:16
If an electron or a quark is a physical piece
15:19
of matter, how can it just be a vibration of
15:21
energy? Like what is actually vibrating if there's
15:24
no physical dot? It's a great question. And it
15:26
requires letting go of our everyday idea of stuff.
15:29
In string theory, the energy is the stuff. The
15:32
string itself is the fundamental unit of reality.
15:35
The source provides a fantastic analogy here
15:37
to help visualize it. Think of a guitar string.
15:40
Okay, I can picture that. If you pluck a guitar
15:42
string one way, it vibrates at a specific frequency,
15:45
and you hear an A note. If you change the tension
15:48
and pluck it differently, it vibrates differently,
15:50
and you hear a C note. Right. It's the exact
15:53
same physical string, just vibrating in different
15:55
patterns. So just like... Plucking a guitar string
15:58
differently gives you different musical notes.
16:00
Different vibrations of these microscopic strings
16:03
give you all the different particles that make
16:06
up you, me, and the stars. Precisely. In string
16:10
theory, the universe is like an unimaginably
16:12
complex symphony. One type of vibration gives
16:15
you an electron. A different vibration gives
16:17
you a photon of light. And crucially... Wonderfully,
16:21
yet another vibration naturally produces the
16:23
graviton. The graviton? What's that? The theoretical
16:26
quantum particle that carries the force of gravity.
16:29
Stringvery naturally weaves gravity into the
16:32
quantum world without the math blowing up into
16:34
infinities. Wow, that sounds incredibly elegant.
16:39
It replaces a universe of disjointed, conflicting
16:41
particles with a universe of unified strings.
16:44
It is very elegant. But the source text doesn't
16:46
just stop at string theory. It mentions that
16:48
this isn't the only horse in the race. There's
16:51
another theory trying to solve this called loop
16:53
quantum gravity. Yes, and we really need to give
16:56
loop quantum gravity its due, because scientists
16:59
are attacking this from multiple, vastly different
17:02
angles. How is it different from strings? Well,
17:05
if string theory tries to fix the problem...
17:07
By changing our definition of matter, turning
17:09
particles into strings loop. Quantum gravity
17:12
tries to fix the problem by changing our definition
17:15
of space. Changing space itself. How do you even
17:18
do that? Well, remember how general relativity
17:20
relies on space being a smooth, continuous sheet
17:23
of gelatin. Yeah. Loop quantum gravity says,
17:25
what if Einstein was wrong about that specific
17:28
detail? What if space isn't continuous? What
17:32
if space is quantized? Meaning space itself comes
17:35
in tiny individual chunks. Exactly. Think of
17:38
a digital photograph on your computer screen.
17:41
If you look at it from a distance, the image
17:43
looks perfectly smooth and continuous, right?
17:46
The colors blend seamlessly. Right. But if you
17:49
zoom in far enough... you realize the image isn't
17:52
smooth at all. It is made of thousands of tiny,
17:55
discrete, individual square pixels. Ah, okay.
17:58
So loop quantum gravity is saying that if we
18:00
zoom in far enough on the empty vacuum of space,
18:03
it isn't a smooth sheet. It is made of tiny,
18:05
individual, discrete loops or pixels of space
18:08
woven together. That's it. Space itself has a
18:12
minimum possible size. And if space is made of
18:14
discrete pixels, then things can't fluctuate
18:17
down to zero distance. There is a hard limit
18:19
to how small things can get. Oh, which fixes
18:21
the mass. Exactly. Yeah. By introducing a minimum
18:24
size to the fabric of reality, the mathematical
18:26
infinities that usually plague quantum gravity
18:28
simply disappear. The math stops blowing up.
18:32
If we connect this to the bigger picture, we
18:34
have these two brilliant theories. We have string
18:37
theory playing a cosmic symphony of energy, and
18:39
we have loop quantum gravity revealing the hidden
18:41
pixels of space itself. Both very compelling.
18:43
Both sound mathematically sound. Both seem to
18:46
solve the contradiction. So why isn't one of
18:49
them just taught as hard fact in textbooks? Why
18:51
is it still a search for a theory of everything?
18:55
This raises an important question about the ultimate
18:57
roadblock in modern physics. And it comes down
19:00
to the fundamental non -negotiable reality of
19:03
the scientific method. Which is? An idea. No
19:06
matter how intellectually elegant, no matter
19:08
how beautifully the math works out on a chalkboard,
19:10
only becomes established science when an experiment
19:14
can physically check it. You have to be able
19:16
to prove it in the real world. You need evidence.
19:18
You have to test it. And here we hit a colossal
19:21
obstacle. The scales at which theories like string
19:24
theory or loop quantum gravity differ from ordinary,
19:27
everyday physics are so extreme that we simply
19:30
cannot reach them. They're too small. The strings
19:32
in the space pixels are theorized to be so...
19:34
unimaginably small that testing for them would
19:37
require energies that are truly mind -boggling.
19:40
How colossal are we talking? Like, could we build
19:43
a bigger particle collider, like the Large Hadron
19:46
Collider they have at CERN in Switzerland? Could
19:48
we just build a bigger one to smash particles
19:51
harder and find these strings? The collider at
19:54
CERN is a 17 -mile ring and a total marvel of
19:57
human engineering. But to probe the unimaginably
20:01
tiny scales where string theory operates, the
20:04
math suggests you wouldn't need a collider the
20:06
size of a city. Okay. You would need a particle
20:09
collider roughly the size of our entire galaxy.
20:11
The size of the galaxy. Yeah. We simply do not
20:14
possess the technology or the ability to harness
20:17
the sheer cosmic energy required to run the experiments.
20:21
So to be incredibly clear here, these aren't
20:23
answers yet. Not definitively, no. They're just...
20:26
really beautiful, mathematically coherent candidates
20:28
essentially sitting on a shelf, waiting for human
20:31
technology to catch up like millions of years
20:33
from now. That is the harsh reality. They remain
20:36
fascinating, serious, but fundamentally unproven
20:39
proposals. The decisive experiments are for now
20:42
completely beyond our reach. I can imagine some
20:44
people hearing this and feeling a bit let down.
20:47
It almost sounds like a defeat. Like, oh, the
20:49
scientists actually have no idea what they're
20:50
doing. But it shouldn't be framed as a defeat
20:53
at all. The source text makes it very clear this
20:55
isn't an embarrassment. It's a wonderful, honest
20:58
illustration of how science actually works in
21:01
real time. Right. Science isn't a dusty textbook
21:04
of finished facts that physicists quietly guard
21:06
in a tower. It is a living, breathing, messy
21:10
process. The unification of quantum mechanics
21:12
and gravity is a real open frontier. And the
21:16
smartest people alive haven't cracked it, which
21:18
means there is still room for a massive paradigm
21:20
shift. Precisely. It's entirely possible that
21:24
string theory and loop quantum gravity are both
21:26
slightly wrong. And the ultimate answer will
21:29
come from a direction no one has even thought
21:31
of yet. Like a completely new idea. It might
21:33
require an intellectual leap as revolutionary
21:36
as Einstein's was a century ago. A young student
21:39
listening to this right now might be the one
21:41
to figure it out in 30 years. That's amazing
21:43
to think about. This frontier is exhilarating.
21:46
It is a constant reminder that for all our technological
21:49
mastery, nature still holds a magnificent puzzle
21:52
at its very foundations. Which brings us to the
21:55
end of our deep dive today. If there is one thing
21:58
to take away from the sources we've unpacked,
22:00
it's that the theory of everything is not a trophy
22:04
currently sitting on a shelf in a physics lab.
22:06
Definitely not. It is a profound dream that human
22:09
beings are actively reaching for. The dream of
22:12
a single unified description of reality, stretching
22:16
all the way from the largest expanding galaxy
22:18
down to the smallest subatomic particle with
22:21
absolutely no contradictions at the seams. Exactly.
22:24
We have two of the greatest theories ever devised,
22:26
general relativity and quantum mechanics, and
22:29
we have the humbling fact that neither can be
22:31
the final word. Somewhere out there, beyond the
22:34
reach of our current math and our current machines,
22:36
lies a deeper, hidden truth that naturally contains
22:40
them both. And finding, it would arguably be
22:43
one of the crowning achievements in the history
22:45
of human thought. But I want to leave you the
22:48
listener. with one final provocative thought
22:51
to mull over, building on everything we've just
22:53
discussed. Oh, I like this. We've talked extensively
22:56
about how the universe operates on fundamentally
22:59
different incompatible rules, depending on how
23:02
closely you zoom in, from the smooth geometric
23:05
gelatin of gravity down to the jittery, pixelated
23:09
probabilities of the quantum world. But what
23:12
does that say about the limits of our own human
23:14
perception? That is a profound philosophical
23:16
question. If zooming in changes the rules of
23:19
reality completely, what happens if we could
23:22
zoom out? If we ever manage to step back far
23:25
beyond the scale of the cosmos looking at the
23:27
entire universe from the outside, might we find
23:29
yet another set of rules waiting to contradict
23:31
everything we think we know? It's entirely possible.
23:34
When you look at that magnificent edifice of
23:37
modern physics, remember that its foundations
23:39
are still a glorious, beautifully flawed work
23:42
in progress. Thank you so much for joining us
23:45
on this deep dive. Keep questioning the everyday
23:47
things, keep wondering about the impossible,
23:49
and never stop looking at the universe around
23:51
you.