本集简介
双语字幕
仅展示文本字幕，不包含中文音频；想边听边看，请使用 Bayt 播客 App。
我记得在推出这个播客之前曾有过疑虑：如果没人听怎么办？
I remember the doubt before launching this podcast: What if no one listens?
如果我在浪费时间怎么办？
What if I'm wasting my time?
如果你在创业时也曾有过这种感受，Shopify 就是那个将不确定性转化为动力的合作伙伴。
If you've ever felt that way about starting a business, Shopify is the partner that turns uncertainty into momentum.
他们为数百万家企业提供支持，占美国所有电子商务的10%，从Allbirds到Gymshark，再到刚刚起步的品牌。
They power millions of businesses and 10% of all US ecommerce from allbirds to gym sharks to brands just getting started.
绝不让任何人掉队。
No straggler left behind.
Shopify的AI工具能为你撰写产品描述。
Shopify's AI tool writes your product descriptions for you.
它能提升你的摄影效果。
It enhances your photography.
它能从数百个模板中为你打造一个精美的店铺。
It builds you a stunning store from hundreds of templates.
别再被来回切换不同平台的混乱感困扰了。
Forget about the dormative haze of bouncing between separate platforms.
Shopify 将库存、支付和数据分析整合在一个平台上，展现出真正的商业专家风范。
Shopify puts inventory payments and analytics under one roof with the propriety of a true commerce expert.
他们屡获殊荣的 24/7 客户支持意味着你从不孤单。
Their award winning 20 fourseven support means you're never alone.
那标志性的紫色 Shop Pay 按钮，是其结账流程的基石。
And that iconic purple shop pay button, it's the backbone of their checkout.
这是全球转化率最高的结账体验，将弃购购物车转化为实际销售。
The best converting on the planet, turning abandoned carts into actual sales.
现在是时候用 Shopify 将那些‘如果’变为现实了。
It's time to turn those what ifs into with Shopify today.
立即前往 shopify.com/toe 注册，享受每月 1 美元的试用。
Sign up for your $1 per month trial at shopify.com/toe.
就是 shopify.com/toe。
That's shopify.com/toe.
我一直以为我不喜欢波函数坍缩，我的意思是，量子理论实在太混乱了。
I always thought that I didn't like the collapse of the wave functions being I mean, so con quantum theory was terribly confused.
你看，你有薛定谔方程这样美妙的理论。
You see, you've got the beautiful was think of the Schrodinger equation.
薛定谔，我的意思是，薛定谔本人其实也很困惑。
The Schrodinger I mean Schrodinger was just confused.
我的意思是，他明白自己为什么困惑。
I mean he he he understood why he was confused.
我的意思是，他完全把握住了要点。
I mean he he was absolutely on on the ball.
但很多人确实感到困惑。
But but lots of people were confused.
总之，我就不深入讲这个故事了。
Anyway, let let me not go into that story.
你说，取第二个量子系统。
You say take a second quantum system.
你如何描述它？
How do you describe it?
你取的是波函数，或者希尔伯特空间中的向量，这难道不是一种假的波函数吗？
You take the wave function or vector in Hilbert space or something, isn't it a fake wave function?
检查一下波函数。
Check the wave function.
它如何随时间演化？
How does that evolve in time?
薛定谔方程。
Schrodinger equation.
所以它根据薛定谔方程随时间演化。
So it evolves in time according to the Schrodinger equation.
这就是世界随时间演化的方式吗？
Is that the way the world evolves in time?
不是。
No.
它并不会。
It doesn't.
因为你作弊。
Because you cheat.
你说，不。
You say, no.
不。
No.
你到了某个阶段，然后进行了一次测量。
You've got to a certain point and you make a measurement.
测量意味着什么？
What does making a measurement mean?
我不了解人们。
I don't know people.
人们对测量有着奇怪的想法。
People have funny ideas about making a measurement.
问题是，我认为‘观察’这个词悄悄地渗入了进来，有点太过
The trouble is the word observation I think crept in there a little too
太隐蔽、太早了吗？
Too sneakily too early?
我觉得是太隐蔽、太强烈了。
Too sneakily too strongly, I would say.
因为人们认为，这种观点的几位主要支持者之一是维格纳，尤金·维格纳。
Because people think as many one of the big proponents of this view was Wigner, Eugene Wigner.
实际上，当我还在普林斯顿的时候，我确实和维格纳谈过这个问题。
And I actually when I when I was in Princeton I did talk to Wigner about it.
我和他共进了一次长时间的午餐谈话，讨论了这个议题：意识是否会让波函数坍缩？
I had a long lunch talk with him, and I talked about this issue of does the wave consciousness if you like collapse the wave function?
因为那正是维格纳的观点。
Because that was the Wigner view.
他对这一观点的坚持，并没有我预期的那么绝对。
He was not so dogmatic about that view as I was expecting.
他说这是一种观点，一种看法。
He was saying it's a it's a a view, but a point of view.
我认为出于很多原因，这其实没有道理。
I don't think for many reasons it really makes sense.
但尽管如此，我认为很多人，甚至冯·诺依曼，似乎也有这种想法。
But it was nevertheless, I think a lot of people, even von Neumann, seemed to have that sort of idea too.
很多人认为，是意识主体在观察系统，从而以某种方式改变了规则。
A lot of people had the idea that it was a conscious being observing the system which somehow changes the rules.
你改变波函数，用某种基底来表示它，然后给出振幅，接着观察这些复振幅，将它们平方
You change your wave function and write it down as a as a in terms of its certain basis, and then you give the amplitudes, and then you look at these complex amplitudes, square them
是的。
Yes.
是的。
Yes.
取模的平方，就得到了概率。
Square the modulus, and that makes your probabilities.
那么他们会怎么说呢？
So then what would they say?
不想让你偏题，但他们会说是什么在观察观察者呢？
Not to take you off track, but what would they say is the what observes the observer?
我可没这么说，你知道的。
And I don't say any of that, you see.
我不在乎他们怎么说。
I don't care what they say.
我不知道他们怎么说，因为那不是我的观点，而且我认为这是错的。
I don't know what they say because it's not what I say, and I think it's wrong.
所以，尽管我认为意识与此有关，克里斯蒂安，但方式完全不同。
So although I think consciousness has relates to it, Christian, it's in a completely different way.
并不是意识导致了波函数坍缩。
It's not what collapses the wave function.
导致波函数坍缩的是物理规律。
What collapses the wave function is physics.
所以物理学中存在某种东西使波函数坍缩。
So there is something in physics which collapses the wave function.
薛定谔方程，整个量子理论都是错误的。
The Schrodinger equation, quantum theory as a whole is wrong.
不是爱因斯坦错了。
It's not Einstein was wrong.
量子力学是错误的。
Quantum mechanics is wrong.
我现在如此直白地说，是因为这是一个非常明显的问题。
Now I say this very blatantly because it's a blatant topic.
我的意思是，爱因斯坦和薛定谔要礼貌得多。
I mean, Einstein and Schrodinger were much more polite.
他们说这是不完整的。
They said it was incomplete.
嗯。
Mhmm.
好的。
Okay.
不完整就是错的。
Incomplete means wrong.
但你直话直说。
But you're telling it like it is.
是的。
Yeah.
你得改它，让它就是错的。
You've got to change it so it's wrong.
但说它不完整是更礼貌地表达它错了的方式。
But incomplete is a more polite way of saying it's wrong.
好的。
Okay.
它们没问题。
They're fine.
我有时候也应该礼貌一点。
I I should be polite sometimes too.
所有观看的人都是观察者，而你所发布的内容被称为观察者理论。
Everyone who's watching is an observer, and what you've published is called observer theory.
你最新的发现是关于什么的？
What's your latest discovery about?
关于观察者理论，这到底是什么意思？
About observer theory, what's that about?
它主要是探讨如何定义什么是观察者。
It's it's about the question of sort of characterizing what it means to be an observer.
你知道，当我们讨论什么是计算时，我们已经有了一种理解方式。
You know, we have for example, when it when it comes to asking what does it mean to do a computation, we have a way of understanding that.
我们从图灵机出发，知道它们等价于许多其他计算模型，我们对什么是计算有了概念。
We start from Turing machines, we know they're equivalent to lots of other kinds of computational models, we have this notion of what it's like to do a computation.
所以我一直对‘作为观察者是什么感觉’感兴趣。
So I've been interested in what is it like to be an observer?
我为什么要关心这个？
Why do I care about that?
我关心这个，是因为在我们的物理项目中，理解我们作为观察者是什么样子已成为至关重要的事情，因为看起来，我们作为观察者的特性决定了我们所感知到的物理定律。
I care about that because in our physics project, it's become an essential thing to understand what we're like as observers because it seems to be the case that what we're like as observers determines what laws of physics we perceive there to be.
能够描述我们作为观察者是什么样子变得非常重要。
It becomes important to be able to characterize what are we like as observers.
因为如果我们是与现在不同的观察者，我认为我们会感知到与我们现在所感知的不同的物理定律。
Because if we were observers that are different from the way we are, we would perceive, I think, laws of physics that are different from the laws of physics that we perceive.
所以事实上，我认为最终的图景将是：物理定律之所以是现在的样子，是因为我们是这样的观察者。
So in fact, I think in the end, the picture is going to be that the laws of physics are what they are because we are observers of the kind we are.
这就对‘什么是物理学基本理论’这一问题提供了一种不同的重新思考方式。
So it's a of a different reframing of thinking about what does it mean to have a fundamental theory of physics.
这是一种物理学理论，它必须是适合像我们这样的观察者的理论。
It's a theory of physics that is the theory that has to be the way it is for observers like us.
不可能存在另一种理论，让上帝可以发明一个不同的宇宙理论。
It couldn't be the case that you could kind of wheel in another theory, that God could have invented a different theory of the universe.
对于像我们这样的观察者来说，物理定律必然就是现在这样的。
For observers like us, it is, I think, inevitable that the laws of physics are the way that they are.
好吧。
So okay.
那么，我们该如何理解什么是观察者，什么是像我们这样的观察者呢？
So how do we understand what what is an observer what is an observer like us?
对。
Right.
那么，像我们这样的观察者是什么？
So what is an observer like us?
首先，我们必须问，观察者在做什么？
So first, we have to kind of ask, what is an observer doing?
世界是复杂的。
The world's a complicated place.
我们的思维是有限的。
We have finite minds.
作为观察者，我们的目标是将世界的复杂性简化，设法将其压缩进我们有限的思维中。
The goal of us as observers is to take the complexity of the world and kind of find a way to stuff it into our finite minds.
从某种意义上说，这表明世界充满了细节，但这些细节无法全部容纳进我们有限的思维里。
And in a sense, what that's doing is it's saying there are lots of details in the world, but they're not gonna fit in our finite minds.
我们必须以某种方式压缩对外部世界的感知，使其适应我们有限的认知能力。
We somehow have to compress what we're seeing in the outside world so that it fits in our finite minds.
另一种理解方式是，我们需要在不同事物之间建立等价关系。
Another way to think about it is we've got to make equivalences between different kinds of things.
比如，我坐在这里盯着这台摄像机，我的视网膜上落满了各种光子，形成了复杂的图案，但我的大脑感知到的只是：‘前面有个东西。’
Like, I'm sitting here staring at this camera, the retina of my eyes, there are all kinds of photons falling that are kind of making some elaborate pattern there, but all that my brain is perceiving is, Oh, there's this object in front of me.
因此，我在进行大量等价处理，从这些原始的物理现象中提取出某种信息——尽管光子的排列方式千差万别，但都会让我感知到相同的东西。
So I'm doing many equivalences, and what I extract from this sort of the raw physicality of what's going on is something that has many different arrangements of photons that would lead me to perceive the same thing.
你意识到，这不仅是人类观察者的共同特征，也是我们所使用的所有测量设备的共同特征。
And what you realize is that that's a common feature not only of us human observers, but all the measuring devices we use and all these kinds of things.
关键在于，世界充满细节，而我们只关心测量其中的某一个特定方面。
It's all about there are lots of details in the world, we just want to measure a particular thing.
一个典型的例子是，你有一团气体，里面有许多分子在四处碰撞，而你试图测量气体的压力。
So a quintessential example would be you've got a gas that's got a bunch of molecules bouncing around, you're trying to measure the pressure of the gas.
你该怎么做呢？
How do you do it?
也许你只是在容器侧面放了一个活塞，然后问：气体分子对活塞施加了多大的力？
Well, maybe you just have a piston on the side of the box, and you say, How hard is the piston pushed by the molecules in the box?
有无数种不同的分子构型撞击活塞，它们从各个方向冲击，但测量压力时，唯一重要的是活塞所受的总作用力。
And there are all kinds of different configurations of molecules hitting the piston, and they go this way and that way and the other, but all that matters in measuring the pressure is what the aggregate force on the piston is.
因此，我们将这些不同的分子构型视为等价，从而推断出我们关心的那一个关键量——活塞所受的力。
So, there are all these different configurations of molecules that we equivalence together to deduce that one thing that we care about, which is the force on the piston.
因此，当我们思考自身时，观察者的基本特征就是我们在进行大量的等价归纳。
And so, we think about ourselves, the fundamental feature of an observer is we're doing lots of equivalency.
我们把世界的许多不同状态视为等同，认为这些细节之间的差异无关紧要。
We are taking many different states of the world and saying, We don't care about the differences between these things.
我们只是提取事件的本质，而这正是我们作为观察者所关注的。
We're just going to extract the essence of what's going on, and that's what we as an observer are thinking about.
现在，当我们想象一个计算过程正在进行时，会发现我们总是在生成世界的新状态。
Now, it's interesting to see when we imagine a computational process going on, we're always generating fresh states of the world.
我们从一个世界状态出发，计算出下一个世界状态，再下一个，如此继续。
We're going from one state of the world, we compute the next state of the world, the next one, and so on.
我们总是在生成世界的新状态。
We're always generating fresh states of the world.
另一方面，当我们作为观察者时，实际上是在做相反的事情。
On the other hand, when we are being observers, we're sort of doing the opposite.
我们不是生成世界的新状态，而是试图将大量世界状态等同起来。
Instead of generating fresh states of the world, we're trying to equivalence together lots of states of the world.
我们试图说，有许多事物在某种意义上是不同的，但为了我们的目的，我们会将它们视为等同的。
We're trying to say there are lots of things which we might think of which in some sense are different, but we are going to treat them for our purposes as equivalent.
你可能会问，仅凭了解这些类型的等同关系，你怎么能推导出任何有趣的东西呢？
Now you might say, How could you deduce anything interesting from knowing about these kinds of equivalences?
事实证明，这类等同关系的概念对于推导出我们所谓的物理定律至关重要。
It turns out the notion of these kinds of equivalences is critical to deducing what we can think of as physical laws.
因为从某种意义上说，物理定律是试图以我们大脑能够理解的方式解释宇宙的某个方面。
Because in some sense, a physical law is an attempt to explain some aspect of the universe in a way that we can understand with our minds.
我们可以说，宇宙只是做它该做的事，里面有许多小东西在运动，但我们却没有对正在发生的事情给出任何叙事性的解释。
We could say about the Universe, Oh, it just does what it does, and it has all these little things going around in it, but we don't have any narrative explanation of what's happening.
物理定律的本质在于，我们希望将宇宙的行为转化为某种能够契合我们思维的描述。
The nature of physical laws is we want to take what the universe does and we want to somehow get a description of it that sort of fits in our minds.
例如，当涉及到像充满分子、不断碰撞的气体时，能够契合我们思维的是某种整体性的描述，比如压强、温度之类，而不是这些分子的详细运动。
For example, when it comes to something like, I don't know, a gas with a bunch of molecules bouncing around, the thing that fits in our minds is some aggregate description that talks about pressure and temperature and things like this, not the detailed motions of those molecules.
因此，对我们来说，我们谈论的是气体定律。
So for us, we're talking about the gas laws.
而对于底层系统而言，它包含着无数分子在不断碰撞。
For the system underneath, it's got all these molecules bouncing around.
我们只能以气体定律的层面来讨论事物，这一点非常重要，因为如果我们能以分子层面来描述，就会对世界发生的事情得出完全不同的结论。
It's important that we are only able to talk about things at the level of the gas laws, because if we could talk about things at the level of molecules, we'd come to quite different conclusions about what's happening in the world.
因此，这对于热力学第二定律等概念来说是至关重要的。
So this is essential to, for example, the second law of thermodynamics.
热力学第二定律说的是什么？
What does the second law of thermodynamics say?
它基本上说，事物随着时间的推移会变得更加无序。
It basically says things tend to get more random over time.
这有什么应用呢？
What's the application of that?
如果你有一些机械运动，比如前后推动某个物体，这代表物体内部原子的非常有规律的运动，但这种有规律的运动往往会磨耗成分子的随机运动，也就是我们所说的热。
If you take some mechanical motion, you're pushing something backwards and forwards, that's a very systematic motion of atoms in the thing, but that systematic motion tends to get ground down into random motion of molecules that we call heat.
一旦事物变成了热，就很难再变回有规律的运动了。
And once you have things as heat, it's hard to get them back into systematic motion.
你不会看到那些随机碰撞的分子突然整齐划一地排列起来，开始有规律地推动木块或其他东西。
You don't find that all those molecules that are randomly bouncing around suddenly line themselves up and start systematically pushing the block of wood or whatever it is.
所以，事物趋向于变得更加无序。
So there's this tendency for things to get more random.
但从单个分子的角度来看，情况并非如此。
But from the point of view of the individual molecules, that's not what's going on.
从单个分子的角度来看，它们只是遵循某些运动定律。
From the point of view of the individual molecules, they're just following certain laws of motion.
如果你愿意，甚至可以逆转这些运动定律。
You could even reverse those laws of motion if you wanted to.
分子只是在做确定性的事情。
The molecules are just doing definite things.
只有从我们这样计算能力有限的观察者角度来看，我们才会说：我们无法追踪所有这些细节。
It's only from the point of view of observers like us with our kind of bounded computational capabilities that we say, We don't know how to follow all of those details.
对我们而言，分子的行为应当被视为随机的，我们所能推断的只是它们的平均特性，比如平均温度、平均压强等等。
For us, what the molecules are doing should just be considered random, and all we should be able to deduce is something about their average properties, like their average temperature, their average pressure, whatever else.
因此，我们相信热力学第二定律或气体定律是正确的，这源于我们作为此类观察者的本质。
So the fact that we believe that the second law of thermodynamics is right or that the gas laws are right is a consequence of the fact that we are observers of the kind we are.
如果我们是那种能常规追踪每一个分子运动的观察者，我们会说：你什么意思，这里有什么随机性？
If we were observers who routinely traced every motion of every molecule, we would say, What do you mean that there's randomness in what's going on?
根本没有什么随机性。
There's no randomness.
我能看到每一个分子在做什么。
I can see what every individual molecule does.
所以，从某种意义上说，这正是一个例子，说明我们作为这种类型的观察者，才导致了我们感知到这类规律。
So, in a sense, that's an example of a place where being an observer of the kind we are is the thing that causes us to perceive laws of the kind we perceive.
如果我们能追踪每一个分子，能进行所有计算来推断每个分子运动的结果，我们就不会说：‘哦，这只是随机的。’
If we were an observer who followed every molecule, could do every computation to figure out what would happen with every molecular motion, we wouldn't say, Oh, it's just random.
你只能观察平均值。
You can only look at the averages.
我们会专注于分子层面正在发生的具体细节。
We would be concentrating on the details of what was happening at the level of molecules.
所以这是一个例子。
So that's an example.
顺便说一下，同样的情况似乎也发生在时空和量子力学中。
By the way, the same exact thing seems to happen in space time and in quantum mechanics.
对我来说，令人惊叹的领悟是：在二十世纪的物理学中，有三大理论：广义相对论——引力理论、时空理论；量子力学；以及本质上是统计力学的理论，其核心成果就是热力学第二定律，即关于大量组分系统如何运作的理论。
And the thing that for me is spectacular realization is in twentieth century physics, there were three big theories: general relativity, the theory of gravity, the theory of spacetime quantum mechanics and essentially statistical mechanics whose prize exhibit is the second law of thermodynamics, the theory of how systems of very large numbers of components work.
我认为，二十世纪物理学的这三项基本成就中，人们曾一度以为热力学第二定律或许可以从更基础的层面推导出来。
Those three basic achievements of twentieth century physics, I think one had thought that maybe the second law of thermodynamics was derivable from something lower level.
也许仅凭力学定律，通过数学推理，就能推导出热力学第二定律。
Maybe just from the laws of mechanics, could answer mathematics, you could deduce the second law of thermodynamics.
19世纪的人们曾这样认为，但到了20世纪初，他们逐渐放弃了这一想法，热力学第二定律成了一个悬而未决的谜题。
People had thought that in the 1800s, by the early 1900s, they were kind of giving up on that idea, and it was just like a mystery that was left hanging out there.
但有些人仍认为，热力学第二定律或许能从某种比已知理论更根本的原理中推导出来。
But there was some thought that the second law might be somehow derivable from something more fundamental than already known.
而对于广义相对论和量子力学，人们从未这样想过。
For general relativity and quantum mechanics, that really hadn't been the thought.
至少我一直以来的理解是，我们只是恰好拥有了这些物理定律。
The thought had been, at least the way I always thought of it, we just happen to get those laws of physics.
我们所处的宇宙，由于我们无法理解的原因，恰好具备了这些特定的物理定律。
The universe we live in, just for reasons we don't understand, happens to have those particular laws of physics.
但现在，我认为我们可以说得更多了。
Well, I think we can say more than that now.
我认为我们可以这么说，而且这确实令人惊讶——我们居然能够这样说：这三个成就都是因为我们是这样的观察者所导致的结果。由于我们是这样的观察者，我们必然只能感知到具有这些特定规律的物理世界。
I think we can say, and it's really surprising that we can say this, but I think we can, that all three of those kind of achievements are consequences of the fact that we are observers of the kind we are, that it is inevitable that we have to perceive the physical world to have those particular laws because we are observers like we are.
如果我们是不同类型的观察者，就会观察到不同的物理规律，但我们之所以观察到这些规律，正是因为我们的观察方式就是这样。
If we were different kinds of observers, we would observe different physical laws, but we observe those laws because we're observers like we are.
关于这一切如何运作，还有更多可说的，但我研究观察者理论的初衷，是试图刻画观察者究竟是什么。
Now, there's more to say about how this all works, but the thing that I was trying to do with my efforts in observer theory is to characterize something about what observers are.
这一切都关乎这些等价关系。
It's all about these equivalencings.
这一切都在于将世界的复杂性压缩进有限的思维中，通过将世界的多种状态等同起来，只关注我们真正关心的那些特征。
It's all about taking the complexity of the world and stuffing it in a finite mind by equivalencing many different states of the world to say, All we care about are these features.
这是其中一面。
That's one side of it.
然后还要能看清，像我们这样的观察者究竟具备哪些特性。
Then being able to see how you flow through from what characteristics do observers like us really have.
顺便说一句，这些特性中的许多都是我们习以为常的东西，以至于我们从未真正意识到，它们其实是我们自身的重要特征。
And by the way, many of those characteristics are things so obvious to us that we've never really called them out as things that we actually should say, Yes, this is a feature of us.
一个非常重要的例子是，我们相信自己在时间上是持续存在的。
So an example which turns out to be really important is we believe we're persistent in time.
我们相信自己有一条从过去延伸到未来的经验线索，而且这仍然是我们。
We believe that we have a thread of experience that goes from the past to the future, and it's still us.
然而，在我们对物理学的模型中，例如，在每一个时间点上，我们都是由不同的空间原子构成的。
Well, really, in our models of physics, for example, at every moment in time, we're made of different atoms of space.
因此，在某种意义上，每一个相继的时刻，我们都是不同的自己。
And so, in some sense, it's always a different us at every successive moment.
不知为何，我们感知到自己拥有一条连续的经验线索，这对我们来说似乎非常显而易见，但其实这是一种假设。
Somehow, we have the perception that we have this continuous thread of experience, something that seems very, very obvious to us but is nevertheless an assumption.
我们拥有连贯经验线索这一点并不明显。
It's not obvious that we would have a consistent thread of experience.
我们可以想象自己是一种在每一刻都不同的外星智慧。
We could imagine being some kind of alien intelligence that was different at every moment.
就像人类的代际更替，每一代都有各自独立的经验，我们可以想象这种情形被某种方式压缩了。
It was like we have successive generations of humans, and each one has its own separate experience, we could imagine that was somehow compressed.
很难想象在这种情况下会是什么样子，即我们对自己没有任何记忆。
It's very hard to think it through what it would be like to be in that situation, where we don't have any sort of memory for ourselves.
我真的不知道这会如何运作。
I don't really know how it would work.
这是一种有点像科幻小说的情景，值得深入思考。
That's kind of a science fiction type scenario that would be interesting to think through.
但我们相信每个人都有自己持续而独特的经验线索，这一点并不简单。
But the fact that we believe we have this persistent, unique thread of experience for each of us is nontrivial.
也可能我们不是以单一线索体验事物，而是存在多条线索。
It could also be the case that we could, instead of experiencing things in a single thread, there could be multiple threads.
你可以想象，在同一个大脑中，或许存在多种意识，这么说吧。
Could have, you know, one one could sort of imagine what it would be like to have sort of multiple consciousnesses in in in the same brain, so to speak.
你能想象那种情况是什么样的吗？还是说，由于你本身就是这样的观察者，以至于根本无法想象？
Would you be able to imagine what that's like, or is it part and parcel of you being the kind of observer that you are that you can't even imagine it?
我觉得真的很难想象。
I think it's really hard to imagine.
我一直在尝试想象这些事情。
I've been trying to imagine a bunch of these things.
我的意思是，想象一种与我们截然不同的智能会是什么样子，这确实是一个非常有趣的挑战。
I mean, I think it's sort of a a very interesting challenge to imagine sort of what it would be like to be an intelligence, very alien compared to us.
实际上，我确实做过一些这方面的尝试。
And, you know, I I made some attempts along those lines, actually.
我觉得我取得了一点进展。
And I would say I made a little bit of progress.
但我觉得这是一件非常难以理解的事情。
But I would say that's a really difficult thing to wrap one's brain around.
我觉得这算是一个附带的话题，但我一直主要熟悉的是西方关于事物和哲学的思考传统。
I think one of the things this is sort of a side point, but I've been mostly familiar with the Western tradition of thinking about things and philosophy and so on.
多年来，人们一直告诉我，你所做的事情与各种东方哲学有共鸣，这让我很好奇。
And I've been curious because people have been telling me for years, oh, the things you're doing resonate with various kinds of Eastern philosophies and so on.
我一直想弄清楚这到底是怎么一回事。
And I've been curious to try to understand how that works.
你知道吗，我最初的调查发现，确实有一些东西听起来和我长期以来所谈论的内容非常相似。
And, you know, my initial investigation say, yes, there are there are things there that that sound an awful lot like things that I've long been talking about, so to speak.
布莱恩·格林教授，能与您交谈是我的荣幸。
Professor Brian Green, it's an honor to speak with you.
从年轻时起我就一直在研究您的工作，随着年龄增长，这依然是我的荣幸。
I've been researching you since I was young, and also as I've gotten older, it's an honor.
谢谢您能来。
Thank you for coming on.
谢谢。
Thank you.
非常感谢。
Thank you so much.
过去一年您在做什么？您希望在今年接下来的时间里实现什么目标？
What have you been working on in the past year, and what do you hope to accomplish in the next year in this year?
嗯，最近我一直在研究一些奇怪的东西，我甚至有点不敢谈这些。
Well, yeah, I've been working on some strange things of late, which I'm almost afraid to talk about.
但既然它们已经发表了，我想我完全不应该有所保留。
But since they've been published, I I guess I shouldn't at all hold back.
但这听起来有点古怪。
But it sounds a little kooky.
这听起来像是过去三十年里我收到的那些电子邮件和疯子来信里的内容。
It sounds like the kind of things that I received in, you know, emails and crank letters for the past thirty years.
这涉及到质疑光速是否真的是信号传输的极限。
It it has to do with questioning whether the speed of light really is the limit for signal transmission.
我们都知道，任何学过基础物理的人都知道，狭义相对论早已确立：在局部范围内，光速是信号传输的绝对极限，这自爱因斯坦以来已有无数实验证实。
And we all know that as anyone who's taken basic physics that it's spectralativity, that it's an absolutely well established fact that, locally, the speed of light is the limit for signal transmission, obviously, going back to Einstein and a gazillion experiments since.
但某些不寻常的语境下，像弦理论这样的理论却提出了不同的可能性。
But there are some unusual contexts that theories like string theory suggest.
这些语境暗示，空间的整体形态可能是非平凡的，也就是说，它可能并非无限延伸。
And those contexts suggest that the overall shape of space might be nontrivial in the sense that it might not just sort of go on forever.
空间可能会弯曲回自身，于是你可以问：如果宇宙的形状是环状的，或者至少我们所处的维度是环状的，会怎样？
Space might curve back on itself, and you can ask yourself, what if the universe is in the shape of a loop or at least our dimensions that are looped?
当你朝一个方向一直前进，走得足够远时，你会回到起点。
That as you go out in one direction, you go far enough, you'll come back to your starting point.
于是我们开始研究在宇宙中信号可以绕行整个宇宙并到达目的地的传输方式。
And so we began to study signal transmission in universes with the signal could go all the way around the universe and route to its destination.
我们发现，在某些情况下——我很乐意详细说明——信号沿着这种不寻常的路径传播，反而比那些看似更直接、不经过闭合曲线穿越时空的信号更快到达目的地。
And we found in certain circumstances that I'd be happy to elaborate that you could have signals going in that unusual trajectory that would get to their destination faster than the signal that would seemingly be the quicker one moving right through the space time without traversing these these closed curves.
因此，我们发现存在一些信号，它们能以快于光速的速度从这里传到那里。
And so we found that there are signals that can go from here to there faster than the speed of light.
这与宇宙的拓扑结构有关，而不是光速可变？
This is related to the topology of the universe and not the variable speed of light?
是的。
Yeah.
这并不是光速可变类型的研究。
This is not a variable speed of light type of contribution.
正如你所提到的，一直以来都存在
As you know, as you're making reference to, there's been
整个
a whole
一个行业，许多物理学家多年来一直在研究光速是否可能随时间变化，即光速是否存在时间依赖性。
industry that various physicists pursued over the course of many years, wondering about whether the speed of light might vary through time, a temporal dependence to the speed of light.
非常有趣的想法。
Very interesting idea.
我真的不知道这方面的证据有多少，同样，我所谈论的内容也没有太多证据。
I really don't know that there's much evidence for it, nor is there much evidence for what I'm talking about either.
这就像在玻璃房子里扔石头。
So this is like throwing stones in a glass house.
但不管怎样，你说得对。
But be that as it may, you're right.
这一切都与空间的拓扑结构有关。
It all has to do with the topology of space.
如果这种拓扑结构是非平凡的，如果空间中存在不可收缩的环路，那么就允许信号具有性质上不同的轨迹。
And if that topology is nontrivial, if they're noncontractable loops in that space, then that allows for qualitatively different trajectories for signals.
当您考虑这些因素时，会发现信号的净速度可能超过光速。
And when you take those into account, you find that the signals can have a net speed that's faster than the speed of light.
而且，这听起来有点离奇。
And moreover, it starts to sound a little bit kooky.
但当您深入理解狭义相对论时，就会明白：如果信号能以超光速传播，那么根据某些观察者的参考系，该信号可能在其发出之前就已到达目的地。
But when you take special relativity, you learn that if signal can go faster than the speed of light, then there are observers according to whom that signal may arrive at its destination prior to the time at which was a MIPID.
事实上，我们确实发现了这样的例子。
And indeed, we find examples of that.
换句话说，我们发现了可以向过去发送信号的例子。
In other words, we find examples where you can send a signal into the past.
而且，我再次犹豫是否要这么说，但您问了我最近在研究什么，所以我感到必须完整而诚实地回答。
And, again, I hesitate saying this, but you asked me the question of what I've been working on lately, so I feel I need to answer fully and truthfully.
我之所以犹豫，是因为这一直是那些试图推翻爱因斯坦、成为新的爱因斯坦、寻找狭义相对论漏洞的思考者的游乐场。
I hesitate to say this because this has sort of been the playground of kind of thinkers who wanted to upset Einstein and become the new Einstein to try to find some flaw in the special relativity.
但这并不是狭义相对论的漏洞。
This is not a flaw in the special relativity.
这是当狭义相对论应用于具有这种非平凡拓扑结构的宇宙时的一个特性。
It's a feature of the special relativity when applied to a universe that has one of these nontrivial topologies.
所以，闭合类时曲线并不违背广义相对论。
So a closed time like curve doesn't go against general relativity.
哥德尔有一个包含闭合类时曲线的解。
Godel had a solution that has closed time like curves.
你是在建议对广义相对论进行某种修正，还是只是想说：看啊？
Are you suggesting some amendment to general relativity, or are you just saying, look.
时空的实际结构或形状是不同的？
The actual structure of space time or the shape of it is different?
所以你并不是在提出新的定律。
So you're not proposing new laws.
不是。
No.
不是。
No.
没有新的定律。
No laws.
对。
Yeah.
所以，你知道，闭合类时曲线这个概念本身就非常复杂。
And so, you know, the whole notion of closed time like curves is is a tricky one.
这是一种完整的轨迹，它在离开之前就回到了起点。
That's that's one where there's a full trajectory that gets back to its starting point prior to when it departed.
而在这些理论中，我们并没有真正发现这类结构。
And we don't exactly find those kind of structures in these theories.
所以，如果我向太空发送一个信号，并以某种方式将其传送到过去，而过去的人接收到信号后又向我回传，那么返回的信号总会在我发出信号的时刻或之后到达。
So if I send a signal out into space and send it somehow into the past and then someone in the past gets that signal and fires back toward me, the return signal will always get to me in at least no time.
换句话说，我不会在发出信号之前就收到它。
In other words, it won't be that I get the signal prior to I the moment when I admitted it.
因此，这将允许一些有趣的现象，比如，我们一直担心的问题。
So this would allow for interesting things such as, you know, we've always worried.
嗯，担心可能说得太重了。
Well, worried was probably too strong a word.
我们一直注意到，如果我们发现宇宙中存在智慧生命，而且它们相距非常遥远，我们该如何交流呢？
We've always noted that if we discover intelligent life out there in the cosmos and it's very far away, how are we gonna have a conversation?
对吧？
Right?
我们发送一个信号。
We send out a signal.
嘿。
Hey.
你们最近怎么样？
How are you guys doing?
那我们该怎么办？
And what do we do?
我们得等上十万年甚至一百万年，才能收到回信。
We wait, like, a hundred thousand years or a million years for the return signal.
到那时，我们已经完全忘记了我们正在进行一场对话。
And by that point, we've forgotten that we're in a conversation at all.
但在我现在描述的这些宇宙理论中，这些具有非平凡拓扑结构的宇宙里，你可以向太空发送信号，对方能收到并回应。
But in the theories that I'm describing now with these universes, with these nontrivial topologies, you can send a signal out into space, and the person can get it and respond.
而你几乎在瞬间就能收到回复，时间短到难以想象。
And you will receive it in in virtually no time, in as little time as as one can imagine.
因此，你可以与任意遥远距离的人进行实时对话。
And so you can have a real time conversation with someone who's at an arbitrary distance.
所以我认为这非常惊人、令人难以置信，而且相当美妙。
So I think that's pretty startling and mind boggling and kind of wonderful.
谁知道呢，如果这些想法中任何一个恰好是正确的，它将使那些在通常情况下根本不可能的对话成为可能。
And who knows if any of these ideas happen to be true, it would allow for conversations that in the more usual setting would just be impossible.
但不，不，这并不是对广义相对论的修正。
But, no, no, it's no amendment to general relativity.
根本定律没有任何改变。
There's no change at all to the fundamental laws.
这就是这种方法有趣的地方。
That's the kind of fun thing about this approach.
你知道，如果你跑过来说，好吧，让我们现在改变过去我们所熟知的物理定律，做一些调整。
You know, if you come along and say, well, let's now bend the laws of physics as we knew it in the past, change it in some way.
当然。
Sure.
显然，你会得到一些新的效应，但这一切都取决于它的实用性。
Obviously, you're going to get some new effects, but then it all depends on the utility of it.
取决于这种修改、这种改变是否合理？
Depends on was that amendment, was that change at all reasonable?
所以我们根本没有改变物理定律。
So we're not changing the laws of physics at all.
我们只是在考虑某些自然的空间形状，比如弦理论等统一理论中常见的类型，过去人们研究过的理论，只是在新的背景下审视传统物理，而不是在传统或新的背景下创造新物理。
We're just considering shapes of space that are very natural in certain unified theories like string theory, you know, type theories that people studied in the past, and just examining conventional physics in a new setting as opposed to new physics in either conventional or new setting.
这些和虫洞有关吗，还是说这是两回事？
Is any of this related to wormholes, or is this separate?
这与人们通常所理解的虫洞绝对是不同的。
It is definitely separate from wormholes in the conventional way that people think about wormholes.
但在某种意义上，两者有着深刻的关联。
But there is a deep association in the following sense.
如果你正在研究一个信号穿过空间中的圆形维度，比如，科学上最有效的方法之一就是想象将这个圆剪开并展开成一条直线，然后进行全局的恒等映射。
If you are looking at a signal that's traversing, say, you know, a circular dimension of space, one of the most profitable ways scientifically of studying that is to imagine cutting that circle and opening it up into a line, say an infinite line, and then just having global identifications.
将零点与二πr、四πr、六πr等点一一对应。
Point zero identified with two pi r, identified with four pi r, with six pi r, and so forth.
通过这种方式，你实际上得到了一个圆，因为这些对应关系，但你已经把它展开成了更常规的形状——一条直线。
And in that way, you effectively have a circle because of those identifications, but you've unraveled it into a more conventional shape, a line.
当一个信号从零点移动到二πr时，实际上在某种意义上，这个信号就像是穿越了一个虫洞并回到了起点。
And then when a signal goes from zero, say, to two pi r, what's really in some sense happening is the signal is then, in essence, jumping through a wormhole and going back to its starting point.
因此，你可以用虫洞的语言来重新表述我所讨论的一切，但虫洞在这个故事中并不像在某些其他应用中那样关键，在那些应用中，你会开始担心诸如虫洞是否可穿越之类的问题。
And so you can reframe everything that I'm talking about using the language of wormholes, but wormholes are not as essential to the story as it might be in certain other applications where you start to worry about things like, well, is the wormhole traversable?
它是否会保持足够长的时间开放，让人或信号真正通过？
Will it stay open long enough for someone to actually go through or for a signal to go through?
在这种情况下，虫洞更像是一种分析情况的数学技巧，而不是整个概念的核心。
In this case, a wormhole is really more of a technique, a mathematical technique for analyzing the situation as opposed to being fundamental to the whole idea.
所以今年，你的计划是什么？
So this year, your plans are what?
继续研究这个理论？
To work on this theory some more?
或者
Or
是的。
Yeah.
我想我们肯定会继续推进，你知道的？
I think we're gonna definitely pursue you know?
听好了。
Look.
顺便问一下，这个叫什么？
I what is this called, by the way?
抱歉。
Sorry.
这个有没有一个名字，或者有论文可以参考？
Is there a name for this or a paper that people can look up?
是的。
Yeah.
我们已经写了几篇关于它的论文。
We've written a couple of papers on it.
最新的一篇论文标题是《回到未来》，《物理评论D》的编辑最初把论文退了回来，说我们很喜欢这篇论文，但你们得改标题，因为这种标题我们从没用过。
The the most recent one has the title back to the future, which the editors at Physical Review D initially sent the paper back and said, we like the paper, but you gotta change the title because it's like, we just don't have titles like that.
我得说，用‘生气’这个词可能有点过，但我们就回信说，好的。
And I have to say, I kind of took a little bit offense is too strong a word, but, you know, we wrote back to him and said, sure.
这有一个文化梗。
There's a cultural reference.
这挺有趣的，但并不仅仅是为了文化梗而文化梗。
It's kind of fun, but it's not just a cultural reference for a cultural reference's sake.
我们真正讨论的是一种能够从我们这里传回过去、再进入未来的信号。
We truly are talking about a signal that can travel from us back to the past and then into the future.
因为正如我之前所说，返回的信号总是以非负的时间到达我们这里。
Because as I said before, the return signal always gets to us in a non negative amount of time.
所以这确实是‘回到未来’。
So it's it's back to the future.
这简直是对我们所讨论内容的完美描述。
It's like a perfect description of what we're talking about.
值得一提的是，Physical Review D 的编辑们最终说，是的。
And to their credit, the editors at Physical Review D finally said, yeah.
好吧。
Okay.
你说得对。
You're right.
这行得通。
It works.
因此，这篇论文以这个听起来或许有些松散但确实精准描述了我们所讨论内容的标题被接受了。
So the paper was accepted with that somewhat perhaps loose sounding title, but one that really does have a descriptive approach to what we're talking about that's spot on.
所以，是的，如果人们想了解技术细节，可以参考这篇论文。
And so, yeah, if people wanna see the technical details, that would be at a a paper to look at.
至少在这里多伦多，你有一个活动即将举行，如果我没记错的话，是在1月26日。
And you have an event coming up at least here in Toronto on January 26, if if I'm not mistaken.
所以，当这篇内容发布、你看到它的时候，距离那个活动大约还有一周时间。
So that's about a week from now when this is being published, when you're seeing this.
你能给我介绍一下这场活动以及观众的情况吗？
Can you tell myself a little bit about that in the audience as well?
是的。
Yeah.
当然。
Absolutely.
活动将在罗伊·汤普森音乐厅举行。
So the it's a talk at Roy Thompson Hall.
展开剩余字幕（还有 480 条）
我从未去过那里，但至少照片看起来像是一个非常美丽的场地。
I've never been there before, but at least the pictures look like it's a quite beautiful venue.
我将带领观众经历从宇宙开端到现今，再延伸至科学所能触及的最遥远尽头——永恒。
And it's a journey that I'm gonna take the audience on from the beginning of time up to the present and out toward the farthest that science can take us toward the end, toward eternity.
我带领观众进行这段旅程的部分目的，是为了阐明一些指导宇宙在最大尺度和最长时间尺度上演化的关键科学思想。
And my point in taking the audience on this journey will be partly to illuminate some of the key scientific ideas that that guide the cosmological unfolding on the largest of scales and the largest of time scales.
但我也希望让人们从这种最宏观的视角中，感受到科学对我们在这个宇宙秩序中位置的阐述。
But I also wanna give people a sense of what science says about how we fit in to this cosmic order from this broadest, this largest perspective.
我们将探讨恒星和星系的形成，以及熵与生命之间相互作用与制衡的关系。
And so we will be covering the formation of stars and galaxies, a little discussion about how entropy and life interplay and play off of one another.
当我们抵达当下，我们将把目光转向未来，观察当熵占据主导地位时，一切在足够宏大的时间尺度下如何走向终结。
And then once we get to the present, we'll turn our attention toward the future and see how it all comes crashing down when you look at sufficiently large time scales as entropy gains the upper hand.
我将在当晚的结尾，谈谈如何以更人性化的方式解读这种对宇宙的宏观理解，以及这种视角如何可能为我们长期以来关于意义与目的的追问带来启示——这些追问无一不以某种方式困扰着我们所有人。
And I'll conclude the evening with some remarks on how one might interpret this large scale understanding of the cosmos in more human terms and how it is that perhaps this perspective can shed light on the age old questions of of meaning and purpose, which occupy all of us in one way or another.
那么，它如何揭示意义与目的呢？
So how does it shed light on those on meaning and purpose?
客观地说。
Well, objectively.
所以，你当然应该来参加这场讲座，但我很乐意现在就大致谈谈这个话题。
So well, you should come to the the evening, but I'm more than happy to discuss it now in in in broad strokes.
你说客观，但我觉得客观上可能并没有一个明确的答案。
So, look, you said objectively, and I would say I I don't know that objectively there is an answer.
我认为，最终每个人都在进行一场主观的探索，试图理解自己的人生和存在。
I think it is ultimately the subjective search that each human being is ultimately on to try to make sense of their life, make sense of their existence.
但对我而言，这种视角——我发现它也引起了众多人的共鸣——向我们揭示了我们自身的存在是多么难以置信地 improbable：在DNA碱基对的无限可能组合中，在分子构型的无限可能中，在从宇宙诞生至今所有量子过程的无限可能结果中，任何一个微小的偏差都可能导致宇宙走向完全不同的结局，使我们根本不可能存在。而我们，却在这令人震惊的极小概率下，真实地存在着。
But what this perspective does for me, and I found that it resonates with many people, it it shows us how unbelievably astoundingly unlikely our own existence is Against the spectrum of possible combinations of base pairs of DNA, against the spectrum of possible molecular configurations, against the spectrum of possible outcome of quantum processes, right, that that stretch from the beginning until today, that each of them could have turned out one way versus the way they did in yielding a universe in which we wouldn't be here against these astounding odds we're here.
对我来说，这正是寻找意义或目的最富有成果、最具吸引力且最令人满足的起点。
And to me, that's the beginning of the most fruitful, compelling, and satisfying approach to finding some sense of purpose or meaning.
因为与其向外寻求宇宙——正如许多哲学和宗教所做的那样——期待宇宙赐予我们终极的答案、终极的意义和终极的目的，
Because rather than looking out to the universe, which we see in many philosophies and frankly many religions, looking out to the cosmos to bestow upon us some ultimate answers, some ultimate meaning, some ultimate purpose.
这种对宇宙时间线的理解以及我们自身存在之不可思议的低概率性，将聚光灯转向了我们自身。
This understanding of the cosmological timeline and the astounding unlikeliness of our own existence turns the spotlight inward.
它将聚光灯转向一种认知：我们不仅存在，而且拥有由我们精妙的结构所赋予的能力，这多么令人惊叹。
It turns the spotlight to a recognition of how astounding it is not only that we exist, but we have the powers that our articulate arrangement endows us with.
看看我们能做什么。
Look what we can do.
我们可以进行这场对话。
We can have this conversation.
我们可以探寻过去。
We can figure out the past.
在我们所知的其他生命形式中，能这样做的是少数。
There aren't many other life forms that we're aware of that can do that.
我们可以想象未来。
We can imagine the future.
同样，很少有生命形式能够发展出可检验的科学，从而洞察尚未发生的未来事件。
Again, not many life forms have been able to work out a testable science that can give us insight into things that haven't yet happened to the future.
人类心智能够做到这一切，创造世界的美，揭示世界的奥秘，体验这一切的奇妙——对我来说，正是在这里，一种深刻的感恩之情油然而生。
And the power of the human mind to do all that and and to create beauty in the world and to illuminate mystery in the world and and to experience the wonder of it all, to me, that is where a deep kind of gratitude emerges.
这种感激之情源于人类自身的存在，而不依赖于我们是否能留下持久的遗产。
And that gratitude is for the mere existence of human beings, and it's not dependent upon whether we're gonna have some lasting legacy.
它仅仅聚焦于我们确实存在这一事实，以及我们能够做到这些事情的能力。
It rather is just focused on the fact that we're here at all and that we can do the things that we can do.
随之而来的一种欣赏，对我而言，无论这一切多么转瞬即逝，都深深令人信服且满足。
And with that comes an appreciation, which for me is deeply compelling and satisfying regardless of my understanding of how evanescent it all is.
当人们说——或者有些人说——物理学正处于危机中时，他们具体指的是什么？你可以选一个人，因为我想这有多种不同的解读。
What is specifically meant when people say or some people say, and you could pick a person because I'm sure there are many different interpretations of this, that physics is in crisis?
这句话到底是什么意思？
What's meant by that?
你得去问他们，因为我不认为这是真的。
You'll have to ask them because I don't think it's true.
我想，人们可能有不同的理解，比如我们陷入了停滞。
I guess that there's different interpretations one could have, either that, we're stuck.
我们在基础物理学上没有取得太大进展，或者他们认为某些物理学家在某些方面做错了。
We haven't gone very far forward in fundamental physics, or they might think that individual physicists are doing things in the wrong way for some reason.
但你知道，我一遍又一遍地说，路遥知马力，日久见人心。
But, you know, again and again, I'm gonna keep saying the proof of the pudding is in the tasting.
你知道的吧？
You know?
我所看到的其他替代方案，对我来说并不那么令人印象深刻。
The alternatives that I've seen, offered up are not that impressive to me.
在评论区，我粗略浏览了一下，人们说当人们提到物理学处于危机中时，他们并不是指整个物理学。
In the comment section, I had a a brief skim through, and they were saying that when people say physics is in crisis, they don't mean physics as a whole.
他们指的是基础物理学，而这个播客则聚焦于应用物理学的成功，比如核磁共振成像和激光等，以反驳停滞不前的说法。
They mean fundamental physics, and that the podcast focused on the successes of applied physics, like MRIs and lasers and so on, to counter the claim of stagnation.
所以把工程成就归功于物理学，如果我们探测到了希格斯玻色子，当然很了不起。
So attributing engineering feats to physics, and that if we detect the Higgs boson, sure, that's cool.
这很棒，但它只是对一个旧理论的验证。
It's wonderful, but that's a confirmation of an old theory.
这并不是一个全新的理论突破。
It's not a novel theoretical breakthrough.
你如何回应这些评论？
How do you respond to those comments?
不。
No.
我的意思是，我同意。
I mean, I agree.
我能说什么呢？
What what can I say?
在基础物理学领域，我们已经很久没有出现过任何被实验验证的突破性进展了。
In fundamental physics, we've not had any breakthroughs that have been verified experimentally for a very long time.
这确实是事实。
That's just true.
这无可争辩。
Can't argue with that.
再说一遍，大多数物理学并不是基础物理学。
Again, most physics is not fundamental physics.
如果你查看美国物理学会的会员名单，统计其中从事量子场论或引力等研究的人所占比例，会发现这只是很小的一部分。
If you look up the membership roles of the American Physical Society and figure out what fraction of them are doing quantum field theory or gravity or whatever, it's a small fraction.
外面还有很多更有趣的物理学研究。
There's a lot more interesting physics out there.
你个人可能对这些不感兴趣。
You might you might personally not be interested in it.
那很好。
Good for you.
这没问题。
That's fine.
但这些研究确实在进行中。
But it is going on.
这正是大多数物理学家从事的工作。
That's what employs most physicists.
你会不会说，对‘基础物理学正处于危机中’这种说法的反感，部分源于你对物理学的热爱，以及你希望向他人传达这种热爱？而‘物理学正处在危机中，兄弟’这种说法，通常是由那些不了解其背后真正原因、身处领域之外的人提出的。
Would you say that part of the distaste for the phrase, hey, fundamental physics is in crisis stems from your love for physics, your desire to convey that adoration to other people, and this whole meme of, hey, physics is in crisis, bro, is typically expressed by people as you see outside the field who lack a clear understanding of the reason behind what they're saying.
他们只是盲目追随反叛的潮流。
They're just jumping on the bandwagon of being iconoclastic.
嗯，我认为，你知道，大多数人
Well, I think, you know, everyone Most
我最好的想法大多不是在采访中产生的。
of my best ideas don't happen during interviews.
它们是自发出现的。
They come spontaneously.
大多数时候是在淋浴时，或者我散步时。
Most of the time in the shower, actually, or while I'm walking.
在我使用Plod之前，我经常失去这些想法，因为当我写下一半时，它们就消失了。
Until I had plod, I would frequently lose them because by the time I write down half of it, it's gone.
我以前试过语音记录，比如Google Home，但它总是在中途把我打断。
I tried voice capture before, like Google Home, and it just cuts me off in the middle.
这太让人沮丧了。
It's so frustrating.
我的大多数想法并不是那些十秒的简短语句。
Most of my ideas aren't these ten second sound bites.
它们是深思熟虑的。
They're ponderous.
它们冗长啰嗦，而且我会绕来绕去。
They're long winded, and I wind around.
它们是发散性的。
They're discursive.
它们长达五分钟。
They're five minutes long.
苹果备忘录，甚至谷歌留念，里面的语音转文字效果都很差。
Apple Notes, even Google Keep, the transcription there is horrible.
但Plaud让我想说多久就说多久，而且不会打断我。
But Plaud lets me talk for as long as I want, and there's no interruptions.
它能准确地记录下来。
It's accurate capture.
它将所有内容整理成清晰的摘要、关键要点和行动项。
It organizes everything into clear summaries, key takeaways, action items.
我甚至可以稍后回来，说：嘿。
I can even come back later and say, hey.
我之前谈论过的关于意识和信息的那个话题是什么来着？
What was that thread I was talking about regarding consciousness and information?
事实上，这一集下面就有剧情摘要，我现在就正在用它。
In fact, this episode itself has a plot summary below, and I'm using it right now over here.
我的个人工作流程是启用了他们的自动流转功能，所以每当我做笔记时，它都会给我发邮件。
My personal workflow is that I have their auto flow feature enabled, so it sends me an email anytime I take a note.
看。
Look.
我只需一按，它就能立即启动，像现在这样，无需延迟就开始录音，这一点被严重低估了。
The fact that I can just press it and it turns on instantly, like right now, it's starting to record without a delay, is extremely underrated.
顺便说一下，这个是Note Pro，而这个是Note Pin。
This, by the way, is the Note Pro, and then this is the Note Pin.
我两个都有。
I have both.
全球有超过一百五十万人使用Plaud。
Over 1,500,000 people use Plaud around the world.
如果你的工作依赖于对话或对话后产生的想法，那么它值得你了解一下。
If your work depends on conversations or the ideas that come after them, it's worth checking out.
那是 plaud.ai/toe。
That's plaud.ai/toe.
结账时使用代码 toe 可享受九折优惠。
Use code t o e for 10% off at checkout.
而且他们对任何事情的意见都受到欢迎。
And it's welcome to their opinion about everything.
我不会限制谁有资格对事情发表意见。
I'm not gonna gatekeep who gets to have an opinion about things.
我只是希望人们对事情的意见尽可能有根据。
I just want people's opinion about things to be as educated as they can be.
这就是为什么我努力推出自己的单人播客和其他项目。
That's why I try to offer up my own solo podcast and other efforts.
如果我有一个非常合理的论点，指出物理学家们工作得不好，那么说物理学正处于危机中是有道理的。
I think it would make sense to say that physics was in crisis if I had a very sensible argument that physicists were working badly.
我们正在做错事。
We're doing the wrong thing.
我们正在犯错误。
We're making mistakes.
如果说在量子力学的基础领域有什么可论证的，那就是我们长期以来忽视了量子力学的基础。
If anything, I think that in the foundations of quantum mechanics, that's an argument that you can make, that we've been ignoring the foundations of quantum mechanics for a long time.
但在粒子物理、量子场论和量子引力领域，我没有看到证据表明这种态度是对物理学家实际工作的正确回应。
But in particle physics, quantum field theory, quantum gravity, I don't see evidence that that is the right attitude towards what physicists are actually doing.
所以当我研究这个问题时，我发现物理学的危机有三个方面。
So when I was researching this, I could see that the crisis in physics is threefold.
首先是所谓的巨大停滞，我们刚刚提到过；其次是巨大分裂，我稍后会谈到；还有就是巨大的沉默。
So there's what I call the great stagnation, which we just referenced, and then there's the great schism, which I'll speak about shortly, and then the great silence.
所以，物理学的大停滞在于，长期以来没有新的发现能够像达成共识那样，指引我们超越标准模型或广义相对论。
So the great stagnation is that there haven't been new discoveries that have pointed the way to physics beyond the standard model or general relativity in a way that resembles a consensus.
好的。
Okay.
太好了。
Cool.
这只是一个方面。
That's just one element.
另一个方面是大约在八十年代，尤其是九十年代出现的分裂，这个分裂很多人都没有意识到。
The other is the a schism that happened approximately in the eighties or so, or especially in the nineties where the field is split and many people don't realize this.
有些弦理论家甚至直言，弦理论是唯一的出路。
So there are string theorists who literally say string theory is the only game in town.
我原来不知道弦理论家会这么说。
I didn't know that string theorists say that.
我以为这只是非弦理论家用来攻击弦理论家的说法，意思是‘你们都这么想’，但实际上他们自己根本不会这么说。
I thought that that was just a claim from people who weren't string theorists to lob at string theorists to say, hey, you you all think this, but they would never say that.
但我跟卡姆伦谈过，他在播客中明确说了两次，这是唯一的玩法。
But I was speaking to Cumrun and and he he explicitly said twice in the podcast, it's the only game in town.
因此，这也带来了由弦理论家来评估新想法的环节。
So this this also then has this element of trial by string theorists where new ideas are also evaluated by string theorists.
我这里特指基础物理学。
And I'm speaking specifically about fundamental physics.
所以我同意。
So I agree.
整体而言，物理学并没有危机。
There's no crisis in physics as a whole.
说这种话非常愚蠢，尤其是看看凝聚态物理就知道了。
It's quite foolish to say that, especially just look at condensed matter physics.
它正在蓬勃发展。
It's it's booming.
如果你想贡献一些新的东西，那正是最好的去处。
And if you wanna contribute something new, that's like the that's the great place to be.
但自八十年代以来，弦理论家们那种轻蔑和傲慢的态度，导致了一些人失去了工作。
But it's partly this derisive and and supercilious attitude by the string theorists since the eighties that have cost people jobs.
这在一定程度上也是彼得·沃伊特批评的内容，尽管他的批评更多集中在数学层面，指责弦理论被过度炒作。
And this is in part the what Peter Woit is talking about with his critiques, though his tend to be more mathematical about overhyping string theory.
不过，大多数时候，问题出在弦理论的文化上。
The majority of the time though, the issue is with the string culture.
也就是说，弦理论有着傲慢、缺乏好奇心以及压制替代性思想的历史。
So that is to say that there's a history of its arrogance and its incuriosity and its suppression of alternative ideas.
这就是分歧所在。
That's the schism.
那么，要不要让你对此发表一下看法？
And then the well, how about I let you comment on that?
你有看到这一点吗？
Do you see that?
是的。
Yeah.
我的意思是，确实有一些弦理论家真诚而诚实地相信，在量子引力和统一理论方面，弦理论是唯一的出路。
I mean, I would say that there absolutely are string theorists who sincerely and honestly believe that when it comes to quantum gravity and unification, string theory is the only game in town.
这并不一定正确。
That is not necessarily true.
我应该说，我并不认同他们的观点，但我理解他们为什么这么想。
I I don't agree with them, I should say, but I get why they think that.
正如我所说，我觉得我在播客里已经解释过这一点了。
You know, as I said, I think I I explained in in my podcast about this.
我们并没有解决物理学的所有问题，然后转而去研究量子引力。
It's not as if we fixed all the problems of physics and moved on to trying to do quantum gravity.
在二十世纪八十年代中期，由于非常充分的理由，没人对量子引力感兴趣。
In the mid nineteen eighties, nobody was interested in quantum gravity for very good reasons.
普朗克尺度非常大。
The Planck scale is very large.
引力是一种非常微弱的力。
Gravity is a very weak force.
我们无法让引力子相撞并观察会发生什么。
We can't collide gravitons and see what happens.
似乎很难对量子引力获得任何良好的理论把握。
The prospect of getting any good theoretical handle on quantum gravity seemed unrealistic.
我应该说，是八十年代初。
The the early eighties, I should say.
弦理论出现了，并以一种非常出人意料的方式，解答了量子引力的一些令人困惑的方面。
String theory came along and offered an answer to some of the puzzling aspects of quantum gravity in a very unexpected way.
它是一个有限的理论。
The it's a finite theory.
在弦理论的思想实验中，你可以让引力子相互碰撞，并得到一个非常明确的答案。
You can collide gravitons together in the string theory thought experiment and get a very perfectly well defined answer.
而其他理论，你根本做不到。
And other theories, you just can't.
你能说什么呢？
What what can what can you say?
因此，这给了人们非常积极的理由，推动这一理论向前发展。
So that gave people, you know, very, very good optimistic reasons to push the theory forward.
而弦理论的另一点是，尽管它在提出可被实验验证的预测方面显然失败了，但它在理论层面依然保持着活力。
And then the other thing about string theory is that even though it clearly has failed in making experimental predictions we could test against data, it also clearly has kept itself alive on the theoretical side.
新的想法不断涌现。
New ideas keep coming in.
AdS/CFT 是一个很好的例子，还有对偶理论和 M 理论，以及各种形式的全息原理，这样的例子还有很多。
ADS, CFD is a is a perfectly good example, but d brains and m theory, and various versions of holography, there's lots of examples that you can give.
沼泽地猜想如今可以说是这样一个新想法。
The swampland idea is is arguably such a new idea right now.
所以它并没有彻底失败。
So it hasn't crashed and burned.
你知道，许多理论起初看起来很有希望，但随后就彻底崩溃了。
You know, many theories will look promising, and then they will crash and burn.
弦理论一直存在，令人沮丧的是它无法与实验数据连接，但其理论思想的丰富程度极高，这值得认真对待。
String theory has remained, frustrating because it doesn't connect with data, but the number of theoretical ideas is enormously rich, and that's worth taking seriously.
我现在确实对您刚刚表达的观点有几分同情，但我会用不同的方式来表达。
Now I do have a little bit of sympathy with the view, that you just expressed, but I would express it differently.
我的意思是，这种观点通常的表达方式明显只是酸葡萄心理。
I mean, I think that the way that it often gets expressed is just clearly sour grapes.
这明显只是在发牢骚，觉得别人不喜欢我的想法。
It's clearly just being curmudgeonly, and people don't like my ideas.
因此，我要声称他们对科学整体的态度也不够端正。
Therefore, I'm gonna claim that they don't, have a good attitude towards science more generally.
我不认为这是一种有效的论证方式。
I don't think that that's a valid way of arguing.
但我会这样论证：正因为实验没有给我们指导，我们就应该对哪些理论喜欢或不喜欢保持一点谦逊，因为我们总是会欺骗自己。
But the way that I would be able to argue it is, look, Precisely because experiment is not guiding us, we should be a little humble about what theories we like and don't because we can always fool ourselves.
当实验无法纠正我们时，我们总是会误导自己。
We can always trick ourselves when experiment is not there to set us straight.
所以这是一件非常困难的事，但我想说的是，作为一门学科，你们仍然应该投入一些资源到那些你们认为很可能错误的物理研究路径上。
And so that's a it's a very difficult thing to do, but what what I would argue is that you should nevertheless, as a field, put some resources into approaches to physics that you think are probably wrong.
对吧？
Right?
因为你自己也可能错了。
Because you could be wrong yourself.
所以，如果真有一个人掌控着物理学领域所有的职位、经费和实验资源，我会强烈主张，即使在基础物理、统一理论和量子引力这样的领域，也不该只把资源投入到弦理论中。
So if if there was someone out there who was allocating all of the jobs and all of the grants and all of the experimental work in physics, I would argue very strongly that even in the area of fundamental physics and unification and quantum gravity, they don't just put it into string theory.
他们也应该把资源分配给其他领域。
They should certainly put it into other areas as well.
但问题是，这样做有困难。
Here's the problem with that.
根本不存在这样的人。
There is no such person.
并没有一个像教皇一样的理论物理权威，来决定谁有资格进入核心圈子。
There is no such, you know, pope of theoretical physics who decides who gets to be in the college of cardinals.
相反，你面对的是各个物理系。
Instead, you have physics departments.
对吧？
Right?
而物理系招聘教职员工，而且在理论物理领域并不经常招聘。
And physics departments hire faculty members, and they don't hire them very often in theoretical physics.
也许，如果你运气好的话，每五年才招聘一位新教职员工。
Maybe, you know, if you're lucky, once every five years, you're hiring a new faculty member.
那么，你会故意聘用一位你认为很可能错误的研究方向的教职员工吗？
So are you going to intentionally hire a faculty member working on an idea you think is probably wrong?
即使这样做对整个领域有好处，比如保持多样性、让各种想法得以延续，但你自己也不会这么做。
Even if it would be good for the field because it, you know, maintains diversity and keeps ideas alive, you yourself are not gonna do that.
这可能对你的院系并不有利。
It's probably not good for your department.
因此，学术界有一种倾向，就是把太多资源押在主流方向上，过于保守和传统，因为你并不知道什么最终会成功。
So there is a, an academic tendency to bet too much money on the leading horse, right, to be a little bit too conventional and conservative, because you you don't know what's gonna turn out right.
跟随主流做法更容易。
It's easier to go with what is in the mainstream.
因此，我坚信这必然导致了对其他可能性的扼杀。
So that absolutely, I would argue, has the effect of cutting off alternatives.
所以我认为，一方面从实质性的智力角度出发，我们有理由对这些替代方案持怀疑态度，但另一方面，我们仍应比现在做得更好，支持一些针对它们的研究。
And so I think both that there are good substantive intellectual reasons to be skeptical of the alternatives and that we should nevertheless do a better job than we do of supporting some work on them.
那么从实际操作的角度来看，我们该如何实现这一点呢？
So practically speaking, how could we do how could how could that be achieved?
在数据匮乏的领域中，应该如何在不同的研究项目之间分配资源？
How should one allocate resources between different research programs in a data starved field?
少数派该如何做呢？我不知道。
How could the minority I don't know.
这是一个非常好的问题。
I that's a very good question.
但既然我不是物理学的教皇，我也不必回答这个问题。
But since I'm not the pope of physics, I don't have to answer it.
我的意思是，我觉得某种程度上，我不知道。
I mean, I think it's somehow I don't know.
奖学金、奖项、科研经费，我真的不知道。
Fellowships, prizes, grant money, I really don't know.
是的。
Yeah.
所以，如果我理解得没错，你的意思就像是说，所有的树都源自相同的起源。
So if I see what you're saying, it's akin to saying trees are all born of the same birth.
它们最初都是脆弱的幼苗，甚至可能只是单薄的幼株。
They they're they're fragile sapling at first and maybe even a flimsy seedling.
如果有人声称，除了弦理论之外没有其他替代方案，或者至少没有发展得这么完善的，那我们怎么知道呢？
And then if someone was to say there are no alternatives to to string theory or at least none that are as developed, well, how do we know?
因为可能存在着其他幼苗，但弦理论这棵树正在茁壮成长，它的枝叶遮蔽了其他可能性，这取决于学术体系的运作方式。
Because there could be saplings, but there's the tree of string theory, which is growing its leaves and then just preventing the growth of others because of however the academic system works.
所以，这是对的总结吗？还是我理解错了？
So is that a a fair recapitulation, or am I misguided?
对。
Yeah.
不。
No.
我认为这基本上是正确的方向。
I think that's basically on on the right track.
你知道，我换种说法就是，这有点像博弈论的问题。
You know, yet another way I would put it is it's it's a game theory kind of thing.
在许多游戏中，最佳策略被称为混合策略。
In many games, it turns out that the best strategy to use is what's called a mixed strategy.
所以在任何特定情况下，你可能会认为有一件事绝对是最好的选择。
So in any particular case, you might think that there's one thing to do that is certainly the best thing to do.
但如果你一遍又一遍地做那件事，人们就会摸清你的套路，你就容易被利用。
But if you do that thing over and over again, people are gonna figure out what you do and you are exploitable.
所以即使有一件事是最优的，你最好的策略仍然是主要做那件事，但也做一些其他事情。
So even though there is something that is the best thing to do, your best strategy is to do mostly that, but also some other things as well.
我认为这适用于在物理学或其他学术领域保持不同学科的活力。
I think that applies to, you know, keeping different fields alive within physics or within other academic areas.
这非常棘手，因为如果你像罗杰·彭罗斯这样的人，在晚年开始涉足其他领域，你已经获得了诺贝尔奖，那么人们就会说你中了‘诺贝尔诅咒’，因为你现在有点太玄乎了。
It's so tricky because if you're someone like Roger Penrose and then you start to branch out in your later years, you have a Nobel Prize, then you're told you have Nobel's curse because now you're a bit too woo.
这是一条很难走的绳索。
It's a tough rope to walk.
罗杰·彭罗斯是一位极其杰出的数学物理学家，他对这一领域做出了至关重要的贡献。
Roger Penrose is a brilliant, brilliant mathematical physicist who's made absolutely central contributions to the field.
因此，他提出的那些其实并不太有前景的想法，反而获得了远超其应得的关注。
And as a result of that, ideas that he has that are not that promising actually get way more attention than they otherwise would.
所以，我不认为他作为一名著名且受人尊敬的诺贝尔奖得主物理学家会因此处于劣势。
So I don't I don't think that he gets any disadvantage from being a famous, respected Nobel Prize winning physicist.
我认为，他得到的尊重比如果某个无名的博士后提出完全相同的想法时要多一些。
I get I think that he gets a little bit more respect than the idea itself would if some nobody who is a postdoc proposed exactly the same idea.
我明白了。
I see.
我明白了。
I see.
喜剧演员史蒂文·赖特说过，有人问他：你能告诉我现在几点吗？
Steven Wright, a comedian, said, someone asked me, can you tell me what time it is?
我说：能，但不是现在。
And I said, yes, but not now.
那么，你对‘厚此刻’的概念是什么？
So what is your idea of the thick present?
哦，这是个好笑话。
Oh, it's good joke.
好笑话。
Good joke.
跟时间有关。
Involving time.
‘厚此刻’是某些哲学家提出的一个概念。
Now the thick present is an idea of some philosopher.
我现在想不起来是谁了，但这个观点认为时间具有延展性，使得两个事件可以同时发生，但其中一个在另一个的未来或过去。
I don't remember who, right now, that time has an extension that show that there can be two events which are at the same time, but one is to the future of the other of the other way around.
所以作为一个技术概念，它很清楚，但要微妙的是，它是否违背了相对论？
So as a technical idea, it's clear when it's it it it's to be subtle though, does it violate relativity?
我认为它对相对论提出了挑战。
And I think it challenges relativity.
违背相对论和挑战相对论有什么区别？
What's the difference between contradicting relativity and challenging it?
理解某事和不完全理解它。
Understanding something and not quite understanding it.
是的。
Yeah.
所以你和一些朋友一起发明了一种叫做双特殊相对论的理论。
So there's something that you have invented called doubly special relativistic theory.
和一些朋友一起。
With some friends.
对。
Yes.
那是什么？它是否违背了洛伦兹不变性？
What is that, and does that violate Lorentz?
它扩展了洛伦兹不变性。
It extends Lorentz invariance.
双重特殊相对论的思想是，让我们回到特殊相对论。
The idea of doubly special relativity is that well, let's go back to special relativity.
在特殊相对论中，我们有一个尺度，一个速度，它是不变的。
In special relativity, we have one scale, one velocity, which is in variance.
所以当我们运动时，如果你朝那个方向运动，我朝这个方向运动，我们会经历伽利略相对性，我们的长度和时间测量会相互变化。
So when we travel, if we were traveling, you're going that way, I'm going this way, we have a relativity Galilean relativity whereby our length and time measurements change relative to each other.
但在双重特殊相对论中，我们施加了一个约束：不仅光速在费米子之间的变换下保持不变，能量也是如此。
But in doubly special relativity, we impose the constraint that not only is the speed of light fixed under those transformation between Fermions, but so is in energy.
因此，如果我们测量某个粒子的能量，我们可以在你的测量和我的测量之间进行转换，这种变换会更加复杂，使得存在两个长度尺度——一个速度和一个能量，它们都是不变的。
So that if we measure a energy of some part of them, It it's trans we can transfer between your measurements and mine, and the transformation will be more complicated in such a way that there are two length scales or one velocity and one energy, which mean variance.
所以这另一种说法是，存在一个所有观察者都认同的宇宙速度上限，同时还有一个宇宙长度上限，因此普朗克长度在某种程度上也是基本的？
So it's another way of saying that that there's a universal cosmic speed limit, which all observers agree on, but then also a universal cosmic limit to the length, so the Planck length is somehow also fundamental?
是的。
Yes.
尽管我试图保留 h bar 在讨论中。
Although I'm trying to keep h bar in the game.
所以我正在努力决定，到底是能量不变还是长度不变。
So I'm trying to I I wanna pick whether it's an energy that's invariant to the length that's invariant.
我不希望假设 h bar 等于一。
I don't wanna assume that h bar equals one.
而你所决定的是，不变的是我们通常所说的普朗克能量与我们通常所说的普朗克光之间的比值。
And what which you decide is that the what's invariant is the ratio of the what we usually call the Planck energy to what we usually call the Planck light.
为什么你不想把 h bar 设为一？
Why is it that you don't wanna set h bar to equal one?
是不是有什么
Is there something
你觉得会丢失？
that you feel like is lost?
是的。
Yes.
因为如果我们想要一个能够解释普朗克常数ħ的理论，那么这个理论就不能假设ħ等于一。
Because if we have if you wanna have a theory which explains h bar, this can't be one in which h bar equals one.
嗯。
Uh-huh.
那么，是什么促使你和你的合作者开发出这个理论的呢？
So what led you and your collaborators to develop this?
简而言之，是萨比娜·哈森费尔德。
Sabina Hassenfelder, to be to be short.
我们之前有一个理论，我们称之为双特殊性理论。
We had a previous theory, which we've called which was doubly speciality theory.
但我们并没有完全理解它。
And we we didn't understand it completely.
萨比娜发现，如果这个理论要涵盖双特殊性，那么某个场论中就必须存在非定域性。
And Sabina saw that there would have to be non locality in some field theory if that theory was going to encompass doubly speciality.
所以我们当时是四个人一起合作。
And so we then and this was four of us.
我们每年会聚在一起工作几次，在普雷默，我们几乎同时意识到，回答萨宾娜的方法是让同时性成为相对的，也让局域性成为相对的。
We were working together couple of times a year at Premier, And we realized more or less simultaneously that the way to answer, Savina, was to let simultaneity be relative and also let locality be relative.
因此，某个相互作用是局域的还是非局域的，取决于你离被观测系统是近还是远。
So whether to whether some interaction took place locally or nonlocally was dependent on whether you were close to the system being observed or far from it.
嗯。
Mhmm.
那么萨宾娜对‘局域性本身是相对概念’这个观点有什么看法？
So what does Sabine say to the concept that locality itself is a relative concept?
她不喜欢这个想法，我们一直存在分歧。
She didn't like it, and we had we continue to have disagreement.
我认为她至今仍然不同意我们的观点。
And I think she continues to to disagree with us.
她的反对意见是什么？
And her disagreements are?
你可以有一个理论。
Are that you can have a theory.
现在我们称它为经过这些修正的理论。
Now we call it a theory with these amendments.
我们称之为相对局域性，因为这是一个更精确的描述。
We call it relative locality because that's a more precise description.
好的。
Okay.
说到相对性，有一种叫做时间的a系列和b系列的概念。
Speaking of what's relative, there's something called a and b series of times.
我从来记不清哪个是哪个，但其中一个认为时间位置是相对的。
I never remember which is which, but in one of them, the the one says that that relate relative time position.
所以我谈论你的昨天、我的未来或狗的过去，这些都相对于狗在某个时刻的状态。
So I talk about your yesterday or my future or the dog's past, and those are relative to the dog at some moment.
狗的过去并不意味着另一个时间点的整个未来。
The past of the dog is not to say that full future at another time.
这是一种观点，如果可以的话。
And the this is one view, if that's okay.
另一种观点是，根本不存在时间。
And the other view is the view that really there is no time.
所以，我认为我说反了。
So that there is only I think I'm saying it backwards.
在一种观点中，我们称之为A观点，尽管我不确定这个图表是否准确——你可以成为他人未来战争的观察者，我们允许这一点，也就是说，在理论中，我们允许将相对时间视为真实存在的事物，但它们是相对于某个观测者而言的，如果这能说得通的话。
The in the one view, let's call it the a view, although I'm not sure that this one's chart, the you can be an observer to the future of another's war, and we allow that, that is we allow ourselves in the theory to discuss relative times as realistic real things, but relative to an absorb, if that makes sense.
这和你所说的‘厚时间’有关吗？
And is this related to your thick thyme or no?
需要‘厚时间’才能使其自洽。
It needs thick thyme to make it consistent.
你听说过尼古拉斯·吉森斯或尼古拉斯·吉森森吗？
Have you heard of Nicholas Gissens or Nicholas Jissensen?
哦，当然听过。
Oh, sure.
当然。
Sure.
那么，他对厚时间的概念是什么？
Well, what is his concept of thick thyme?
这有什么不同吗？
Is it different?
我觉得没有，但我没有研究过。
I don't think so, but I haven't studied it.
好的。
Okay.
那么给我解释一下，为什么厚时间需要，或者为什么A系列或B系列需要厚时间。
So explain to me why thick time need or why a or the b series needs thick time.
我们能回头再谈这个吗？
Can we come back to that?
当然。
Sure.
观众现在可能已经注意到了这一点，我在介绍中已经提过，那就是动作的移动。
Something that the viewers may notice by now, and I've already mentioned it in the introduction, is the movement.
你提到过，你不想隐藏这些内容。
And you mentioned that you don't want to hide any of this.
嗯，这很难做到。
Well, this would be hard to.
是的。
Yeah.
你能解释一下吗？
So can you explain?
你所看到的是由于多巴胺摄入过量而导致的帕金森症状代偿过度，而在采访的语境下，这样做是合适的。
What you're seeing is an over compensation for Parkinson coming from taking a bit too much dopamine, which is in the context of being interviewed, a good thing to do.
为什么？
Why?
因为另一种设置下，过渡非常迅速。
Because the other setting, it's a very quick transition.
我认为这是一种相变。
I think it is a phase transition.
顺便说一下，我正在研究大脑以及相关的脑区。
By the way, I'm doing some work on the brain and the regions of the brain which are relevant.
似乎存在一个阶段，大脑的控制功能会停止。
It seems to be that there is a phase where things cease in in the control of the of the brain.
是的。
Yeah.
还有一个阶段，事情会失控到疯狂的地步。
And a phase where things go uncontrollably nuts.
好的。
Okay.
你希望处于两者之间的某种临界状态。
And you want to be in a kind of critical state between them.
对。
Yes.
而多巴胺正是让你达到这种状态的关键。
And that's what the dopamine allows you to reach.
是的。
Yeah.
所以现在，你是处于临界状态，还是被推向了其中一个方向？
And so right now, you're in the critical phase or you're pushed off to one of those directions?
我严重过度补偿了。
I'm in I'm in I'm way overcompensated.
哦，那这意味着随着时间推移会好转吗？
Oh, but does that mean that with time it will get better or
随着时间推移，情况会好转的。
with time it gets okay.
我是说，今天一整天的时间里。
With time throughout this day, I mean.
它马上就要来了。
It's coming right up.
哦，好的。
Oh, okay.
你会看到它发生，因为临界阶段，就像大多数具有临界阶段的物理系统一样，是由临界振动引起的。
And you'll see it happen because the critical phase, as in most physical systems that have a critical phase, is see is a cause of critical vibrations.
所以你会看到我正在让它发生，但半小时后，我的状态就会进入临界规模，然后就会结束。
So you'll see I'm making it happen, but you'll see half an hour from now my things going critical with critical scale, then it'll be over.
这仅仅影响你的身体，还是会影响一切？
Does it just affect your physical body or does your It affects everything.
好的。
Okay.
你的精神状态或意识状态如何影响它？
How does your mental state or your your state of consciousness affect it?
它让我几乎没有执行功能了，听起来是这样。
It makes me I don't have much of an executive function than it sounds to.
嗯。
Uh-huh.
所以这是我能做的最糟糕的事吗？我反应过度？
So that's the worst thing that I can I can overreact?
是的。
Yeah.
那你能不能谈谈，你研究物理学——更准确地说，从事物理学研究——是如何受到影响的，包括你的合作？
So why don't you talk about how your how you studying physics well, it's more like researching researching physics has been impacted, your collaborations even.
变得更不规律了。
It's more irregular.
和我的合作者们一起工作时是这样。
That is working with my collaborators.
我时有时无地参与，我们常用‘时断时续’这个词。
I'm on more and we use the words on and off.
但我不确定。
So but I don't know.
你得去问他们。
You have to you have to ask them.
不过，我不确定我是否想知道答案。
Although, I don't know if I wanna know the answer.
我很高兴我们仍然能合作。
I'm glad to have still collaborate it.
实际上，我们几年前通过电话简短地聊过。
When we talked actually, we talked a couple years ago on the phone briefly.
我不知道你是否还记得。
I don't know if you recall.
但我当时问你有没有看过几何统一理论，因为那时我打算采访你，并且正在概述一些问题。
But I was asking if you had taken a look at geometric unity because I was going to be interviewing you at that time, and I was giving an overview of some of the questions.
你提到埃里克是位亲密的朋友。
And you mentioned Eric is a dear friend.
是的。
Yes.
他必须是。
He has to be.
他不是你的挚友。
He's he's not your dear friend.
他不会成为你的朋友。
He's not gonna be your friend.
是的。
Yeah.
好的。
Okay.
所以你能谈谈这一点吗？
So could you please talk to that?
还有几何统一性。
And then also geometric unity.
赫里克很好，作为研究者，他的优势无疑是他的执着，他非常聪明、反应极快，能够数年如一日地专注于一件事。
Herrick is well, his we his strength as a researcher is certainly his his commitment and his he's extremely smart, extremely quick, and he can go at something for years and years and years.
如果你试图在物理学或任何领域做出原创性工作，这一点非常重要。
And that's very important if you're trying to do original work in physics or anything.
所以请思考一下。
And so think.
这种多年坚持一个想法或主题的品质罕见吗？
Is this quality of going forward on a single idea or a single theme for years rare?
是的。
Yes.
所以对我来说，当我阅读你的作品时——你可能不知道，我的背景是电影制作。
So it seems like for me, when I was reading your work by the way, you don't know this, but so my background's in filmmaking.
数学和物理，然后我拍了一部电影。
Math and physics, and then I did a film.
好的。
Okay.
那部电影是什么？
What was the film?
这部电影是一部喜剧情剧，叫《我很好》。
Film is a dramedy, so comma dramedy called I'm Okay.
这是一部以多伦多为背景的电影。
It's a heavily Toronto based film.
哦，那我可能认识里面的一些人。
Oh, so I may know people from it.
是的。
Yeah.
因为我认识不少人。
Because I know a lot of some people.
对。
Yeah.
所以拍摄时，我和摄影师、录音师一起在车里，我们一直在听你的书。
So when I was filming it, and I had the cinematographer in my car and the sound recordist in the car, we would be listening to your book.
哦，真棒。
Oh, wow.
是的。
Yeah.
其中一个是。
One of them.
拍摄期间有一两个是。
One or two of them during the filming of it.
不管怎样，这是一段有趣的经历，因为他们会问我，什么是Kali Biao流形？
Anyhow, that was a fun experience because they would ask me, what's a Kali Biao manifold?
他们不会那样发音，但会问，那是什么？为什么它和背景独立性有关？
They wouldn't pronounce it like that, but they would say, so what is that and why does that have anything to do with background independence?
为什么背景独立性重要？
And why does background independence matter?
为什么引力和曲率有关？
Why does gravity have anything to do with curvature?
什么的曲率？
Curvature of what?
空间？
Space?
不。
No.
不是空间的弯曲。
Not curvature of space.
是时空的弯曲，这和空间不同。
Curvature of space time, which is different than space.
无论如何，这次采访本身，能见到你，真是我的梦想。
Anyhow, this interview itself, just meeting you, it's a dream.
我以前在车里听你讲话。
I would be listening to you in the car.
我从未想过，不仅能亲自见到你，还能和你握手、这样与你交谈。
I had no idea that I could ever, not only see you in person, but shake your hand and speak to you like this.
所以谢谢你。
So thank you.
不客气。
You're welcome.
但这对我来说非常非凡，因为我只是住在这里。
But that's that's extraordinary to me because I just, you know, I just live here.
而且我感觉不太好，帕金森病会让人变得平等。
And I don't feel very well, the Parkinson's has a way of leveling things.
嗯。
Mhmm.
我会说，现在一切都成了疑问，每一次采访、每一次谈话都像是站在边缘的体验。
I would say everything is now in question, every interview, every talk is every is is a experience sort of on the edge.
嗯。
Uh-huh.
意思是说你并不
Meaning that you don't
我不依赖名声。
I don't I don't rest on reputation.
我不能。
I can't.
嗯嗯。
Uh-huh.
但我现在正在做的工作是我最喜欢的作品。
But the work that I'm working on now is my favorite work.
我对此非常印象深刻，这话说出来有点奇怪，竟然会对自己的作品感到印象深刻。
It's very I'm very impressed with it, which is a funny thing to say that you're impressed with your work.
但是
But
那这项工作是什么？我们不妨现在简单概括一下？
And that work is why don't we just briefly outline it now?
我们稍后再回到这个话题。
We can come back to it later.
嗯，那是十年前我们谈论的内容了。
Well, that's ten years ago, what we were talking about.
你目前正在做的工作
The work that you're working on
现在是什么？
now is what?
嗯，我会，我会，是的。
Is well, I'll I'll yeah.
为什么不呢？
Why not?
我会在它发表成论文之前告诉你。
I'll tell you before it's in published paper.
但总的来说，我一直在研究的是将时间的真实性这一概念进行延伸，首先，我是时间真实论者，让我们先澄清这一点。
But what I've been working on, broadly speaking, is extending the notions of time as real and well, first time a realist, so let's get that out of the way.
好的。
Okay.
我不相信我感兴趣的是那种存在现实主义者和那些把物理学当作……的物理学。
I'm not I don't believe I'm not interested in physics, which is there is realistic people, and there are people who make physics to
主观的？
Subjective?
几乎是主观的。
Almost subjective.
像贝叶斯那样吗？
Like Bayesian?
是的。
Yes.
但贝叶斯是这一思想的数学实现。
But Bayesian is the mathematical realization of this idea.
好的。
Okay.
所以你不是贝叶斯主义者吗？
So you're not a Bayesian?
我肯定不是贝叶斯主义者。
I'm certainly not a Bayesian.
我是个地道的传统实在论者。
I'm a good old fashioned realist.
我相信这一点。
I believe this.
世界有它本来的样子，我感兴趣的就是弄清楚那是什么。
There is a way that the world is, and I'm interested in knowing what that is.
对大多数人来说，现实主义意味着某种外部且客观的东西。
Realism to most people means something's external and objective.
你指的是这个意思吗？
Is that what you mean?
是的。
Yes.
但同时，我相信世界必须通过观察者所见的语言来理解。
But at the same time, I believe that the world has to be understood in a language of what observers see.
但对我来说，非常重要的一点是，存在许多观察者。
But it's very important that, to me, that there are many observers.
因此，爱因斯坦让你可以只拥有一个观察者和另一个观察者，并讨论他们所见之间的关系。
And so you Einstein is allows you to just have an observer and another observer and talk about their relations between what they see.
爱因斯坦是个现实主义者，但他使用的是我们记不起名字的这种东西的方法。
Einstein is a realist, but he is using the methods of this thing that we can't under we can't remember the name.
所以听起来似乎存在客观和主观的元素。
So it sounds like there are objective and subjective elements.
你所说的是一些人认为只有主观元素，而你并不属于那一类。
And what you're saying is that there are some people who believe there are only subjective elements, and you're not one of those.
不。
No.
我想说的是，我们可以讨论、记录并利用他人的观察，以及我们自己的观察。
I'm I'm I'm saying that we can we can talk about and record and work with other people's observations as well as your own observations.
所以
So
它们对你来说都是真实的。
and they're all real to you.
嗯。
Mhmm.
这只是一个词而已。
And I just it's just a word.
这是卢西安总是自称的称呼，卢西安·哈迪。
It's which is loose it's what Lucian always calls himself, Lucian Hardy.
哈迪。
Hardy.
是的。
Yeah.
对。
Yeah.
好的。
Yeah.
明白。
Okay.
在这种情况下，‘真实’是什么意思？
What does real mean in this instance?
因为你刚才说这对你来说是真实的，这在我看来是主观的。
Because you said it was real to you, which to me sounds subjective.
是的。
Yes.
这真遗憾。
That's unfortunate.
真实的意思是我对构成世界以及世界本质的东西感兴趣。
I real means that it's I'm interested in what makes up the world and what the world is.
我相信，如果你把我从这个世界中移除，世界依然会是原来的样子。
I believe that if you took me out of the world, it would still be the same.
但你仍然可以在不同观察者所见和描述的内容之间做出有趣的转化。
But you still have can make interesting transformations between what one observer will see and describe and what another observer will see and describe.
我明白了。
I see.
萨比娜是我最近非常非常欣赏的人。
Sabina is the one I'm a recent strong, strong fan of Sabina.
好的。
Okay.
萨布丽娜。
Sabrina.
她喜欢说的一点是，物理学中的每一个问题都是一个翻译问题。
And one of the things that she likes to say is that every problem in physics is a translation problem.
弦理论派和圈量子引力派之间的争论——令人难以置信的是，这种争论至今仍在继续——在她看来就是一个翻译问题。
That's the the the argument between string people and loop people, which unbelievably we still have going on, is a translation problem for her.
场和粒子之间是有区别的。
There's a there's a difference between a field and a particle.
量子场就像是电磁场的类比。
A quantum field is the analog of, let's say, electromagnetic fields.
你知道，它们最初被设想为时空的函数，在时空的每一个点上都有一个值。
You know, these are the way they're initially conceived were initially conceived as as a function of space and time, which has some value everywhere in space and time.
明白吗？
Okay?
那就是一个场。
That's a field.
比如电场在空间的任意一点和任何时刻都有一个特定的值。
Like an electric field has some value at any particular point in space and at any time moment of time.
爱因斯坦和其他人发现，你可以对这些场进行量子化，因此场的激发以离散的包或量子形式出现，称为光子、胶子或弱玻色子。
What was discovered by Einstein and others is that you can quantize these fields, and so the excitations of a field come in packets or quanta called photons or, gluons, or weak bosons.
嗯哼。
Mhmm.
所以量子场论的想法是量子理论和经典场论的结合。
So this idea of quantum field theory is a combination of quantum theory and classical theory of fields.
因此，传统上人们的做法是描述量子及其相互作用。
And so, traditionally, what people have done is describe the quanta and their interactions.
你知道的？
You know?
现在，将粒子物理和标准模型与引力耦合的根本问题就深藏其中。
Now what there is a sort of very fundamental problem lying at the root of coupling particle physics and the Standard Model to gravity.
这个问题如此严重，以至于通常被忽略。
And the problem is so extreme that it's usually ignored.
明白吗？
Okay?
这个问题至少六十年前就已经为人所知。
This problem was known about for at least sixty years.
这个问题早已广为人知，可能已经有七十年了。
It's been well known about, probably seventy years.
但因为它太过严重，人们已经习惯了忽视它。
But it was, it's so extreme that people have grown used to ignoring it.
问题如下：
The problem is the following.
当你有一个场，也就是一个在空间各处都有取值的函数，并且你对其量子化，使其激发以能量包的形式出现时，你会发现，量子化后的场在真空中实际上是在波动的。
When you have a field, right, some function that takes values everywhere in space, and you quantize it so that its its excitations come in packets of energy, you find that the field when quantized is actually fluctuating in the vacuum.
因此，真空根本不是空的。
So the vacuum is not empty at all.
真空充满了这些被称为场的零点涨落的现象。
The vacuum is full of these what are called zero point fluctuations of the field.
因此，人们从二十世纪四十年代、五十年代起就明白了，场的所有可能激发态实际上都存在于真空中，不断地剧烈抖动。
And so people understood this, you know, going back to the nineteen forties, nineteen fifties, that every possible excitation of the field is actually sitting there in the vacuum and, sort of jangling away.
问题是，如果你把所有这些零点涨落的能量加总起来，结果是无穷大。
The problem is that if you add up the energy of all these zero point fluctuations, it is infinite.
明白吗？
Okay?
玻色子，比如传递力的粒子或希格斯场、希格斯粒子，对真空能量有正的贡献，而费米子，比如电子、中微子或夸克，则有负的贡献。
So and bosons like like the force carrying particles or the Higgs, field, Higgs Higgs particle, bosons contribute positively to the vacuum energy, and fermions like the electrons or neutrinos or quarks contribute negatively.
无论你加入哪种场，都会对真空能量产生无穷大的贡献。
In each case, whatever field you add, you get a infinite contribution to the vacuum energy.
由于标准模型中费米子比玻色子多，实际上你会得到负无穷的真空能量。
Because there are more fermions than bosons in the standard model, actually, you get negative infinity vacuum energy.
现在，如果你不考虑引力，这没什么关系，因为真空的总能量无关紧要。
Now when you this is fine if you don't include gravity because the total energy in the vacuum, it doesn't matter.
它是守恒的。
It's conserved.
当我做实验时，你会看到一些真空进入，一些真空出去。
And when I do an experiment, you know, I have some vacuum coming in and vacuum going out.
所以差异在于。
So the difference.
能量是守恒的。
Energy is conserved.
所以我看到的只是我加入的额外能量，也就是那个差值。
So all I see is the extra energy which I added in the the difference.
在引入引力之前，你对能量的绝对值是不敏感的。
So you're not sensitive to the absolute value of the energy until you add gravity.
当你引入引力时，引力会对总能量做出响应。
When you add gravity, gravity responds to the total energy.
这正是为什么宇宙学被用来发现宇宙学常数——即真空中的能量。
And that's actually why cosmology was used to find the cosmological constant, which is the energy in the vacuum.
我们是通过观察我们所能观测到的最大可能体积内的总能量来发现它的，这样规模尽可能大，并测量其能量。
The way we found it is by looking at the total energy in the largest possible volume we can see so that it's as big as possible and measuring its energy.
我们发现，这种能量确实存在，并且正在改变宇宙的膨胀。
And what we found is that the energy is there, and it's changing the expansion of the universe.
因此，这就是真空能量被测量的方式。
So that's how the vacuum energy has been measured.
实际上，这是通过利用它对引力的影响来实现的。
It's actually by using its influence on gravity.
但问题是，我们测量或称为宇宙学常数的真空能量非常小。
So but the trouble is that the vacuum energy we measure or call the cosmological constant is really small.
对吧？
Right?
它不是零。
It's not zero.
它是正的且很小，但绝对不是无穷大。
It's positive and small, but certainly not infinite.
如果它是无限的，宇宙学就完全说不通了。
If it were infinite, cosmology would make no sense at all.
你试着写出爱因斯坦方程。
You you try and write down Einstein's equations.
你会发现宇宙会在普朗克时间内重新坍缩。
You find the universe would recollapse in a Planck time.
这太荒谬了。
It's just ridiculous.
那么人们都做了些什么呢？
So what have people done?
你知道，自四十年代以来，我们就一直面对着一个严重的问题：将量子场与引力结合毫无意义。
You know, there was this terrible problem staring us in the face ever since the forties, that coupling quantum fields to gravity makes no sense.
明白吗？
Okay?
你只是试图把一个无穷大塞进爱因斯坦方程里。
You're just trying to put an infinity into the Einstein equations.
关于 Bayt 播客
Bayt 提供中文+原文双语音频和字幕，帮助你打破语言障碍，轻松听懂全球优质播客。