yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

How Einstein, Heisenberg and Gödel Used Constraints to Rethink the Universe, with Janna Levin


3m read
·Nov 4, 2024

I became interested in this phenomenon of constraints inspiring creative outbursts. And if you look at the last century, there were three really profound examples of that.

I would say the earliest that I found incredibly interesting was the limit of the speed of light leading Einstein to the theory of relativity. Where a lot of other scientists wanted to remove the limit, they wanted to say there is no limit to the speed of light. That doesn't make any sense. That's impossible.

Einstein actually, despite the word relativity, adhered to a very strict absolute. And that absolute was the speed of light. He took that to be his guiding constraint. And by sticking to it rigidly, he said I'll give up anything else but the speed of light, the constancy of the speed of light. And by doing so, he gave up on the absolute nature of space and time.

I mean, that's just much harder to let go of intuitively and a much greater violation of our common sense, but it was right. And so, this was an example where this tight constraint led to a creative outburst. From this one constraint, you could trace the line, not only to the relativity of space and time but the expansion of the universe; the existence of black holes; the ideal that the entire space has a shape, all of these things burgeoned from this really tight constraint.

Another great example is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. So, Heisenberg begins to believe that we can't precisely know the location of a particle and its motion and its momentum. And this seems to violate what we believe that things objectively exist, that there should be no such limit, but he takes it very seriously.

He doesn't just say oh, it's often cast in this way; oh, disturb a particle when we observe it, therefore we can't also know its momentum once we've located it because, in the process of measuring it, we've somehow disturbed it. That's not really true. That's much deeper than that.

Heisenberg took very seriously that this was profound, that in some sense, the particle doesn't have a location or a momentum, that in some sense the particle doesn't really exist in the old-fashioned way we used to think it existed, like a marble exists. So, by taking it that much more seriously, it leads to the discovery of the deeper phenomenon of quantum mechanics and that incredibly strange world that, even though we don't actually understand it, even today, we verify experimentally over and over again it's the most well tested paradigm in all of physics, and yet it's the one we understand the least.

My third example would be Gödel's limit theorem. So, the great mashing notation Hilbert sent out a call to all mathematicians just to confirm that all mathematical facts could indeed be proven within the context of mathematics. It wasn't the case that he wanted every infinite proof; that's obviously impossible, he just wanted to prove that the proofs existed.

It seems like a sort of meta-level question. It is, it's a meta-level question, can we prove that all facts are knowable? Is a simpler way of saying it? And Gödel comes along in the 1930s and proves that even in the context of something as basic as arithmetic, that there are facts among the members that can never be proven to be true or false.

There are literally facts we can never know in the context of mathematics. And that was a real blow to this idea of a mathematical theory of everything. We've recovered from that blow, and it turned out to have profound consequences, and the profound consequence was the invention of the computer and AI.

So, you can trace Turing's creation of the idea of a machine that can think directly to his work on the limit theorems and the fact that there are certain things we could never know. And that limit is severe. And from that thinking about that limit, he was able to imagine how to mechanize thought, begin to think about making machines that think, and to begin to think that we're just machines that think, and therefore there could be an artificial intelligence just like there's a biological intelligence.

More Articles

View All
Discovering Homo Naledi: Journey to Find a Human Ancestor, Part 3 | Nat Geo Live
Lee: Extraordinary people doing extraordinary things. By the end of a 21-day excavation, we had discovered the richest early Hominid site ever discovered in the history of the planet. This site is one mile away from the site of Sterkfontein. It’s less tha…
Multiplying using area models and the standard algorithm
What we’re going to do in this video is multiply the numbers 352 and 481, and we’re gonna do it in two different ways. But realize that the underlying ideas are the same. So first, let’s just appreciate that 352 can be rewritten as 300 plus 50 plus 2, or…
Warren Buffett: 90 Years of Wisdom Summed up in 16 Minutes
And yeah, Ben Franklin did this and my old boss Ben Graham did this at early ages in their young teens. They just—Ben Graham looked around and he said, “Who do I admire?” You know, and he wanted to be admired himself. He said, “You know, why do I admire t…
Showing a potential client our video wall at The Jet Business!
So, you’re going to earn a profit of a million. This video wall is the exact width and length of the passenger compartment of a G700 and a Global 7500, from the galley door to the LA door. We can compare every single airplane, full-size, GR section, and f…
Can We Fix Climate Change? | Explorer
We can’t really fix climate change. We can mitigate it. We can get to work on it. We can spread it out. We can make things better. What we got to do is stop burning fossil fuels immediately, as soon as we possibly can. Then there’s a strange effect that …
The Rules for Rulers
[Ominous music plays] Do you want to rule? Do you see the problems in your country and know how to fix them? If only you had the power to do so. Well, you’ve come to the right place. But before we begin this lesson in political power, ask yourself: why d…