The Portal Wiki

Theory of Geometric Unity: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Theory of Geometric Unity (view source)

Revision as of 05:36, 26 September 2025

27,479 bytes added ,  26 September
→‎2021
Line 502: Line 502:
}}
}}


{{#widget:Tweet|id=1403434464328355846}}
 
<!--
{{Tweet
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1404131506121961473}}
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1407313638311006210}}
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1403434469042704384
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1407833966678249473}}
|name=Eric Weinstein
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1407833968423079941}}
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1409697119846289413}}
|username=EricRWeinstein
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1413561361838186496}}
|content=Lastly, song, film, letters, poetry, wealth, luxury, aesthetics, pleasure, delicacies, laughter, eroticism, dance, etc often take on their greatest significance in times of war &amp; peril by sustaining us past the point of mental exhaustion &amp; defeatism.
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1445165323959693312}}
Expect MORE from the above.🙏
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1403434464328355846
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I may be confused, but I see a world dissolving in a rainbow of spectral Nihilism: anti-natalism, critical theory, post-modernism, equality of outcome, etc.
 
Great music doesn’t save the world directly. It viscerally reminds us of why humanity is worth saving. GU may fix this.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=JoeGibb40573081-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/JoeGibb40573081/status/1403427619647934466
|name=Joe Gibbs
|usernameurl=https://x.com/JoeGibb40573081
|username=JoeGibb40573081
|content=Lol while his brother is trying to save the world erics...
|timestamp=7:03 PM ¡ Jun 11, 2021
}}
|timestamp=7:30 PM ¡ Jun 11, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1403434465292996608
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=While @sapinker points out how many things got better, he doesn’t address the elephant in the room: The Twin Nuclei Problem.
 
@BretWeinstein focused on one nucleus. I’m focused on the other.
Almost everyone else is focused on *neither*.
 
So listen to some music &amp; pick a nucleus.
|timestamp=7:30 PM ¡ Jun 11, 2021
}}
|timestamp=7:30 PM ¡ Jun 11, 2021
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131507686363138
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Discontinuous innovation is always unlikely. But never impossible.
 
We are both skeptics. But this UFO story is weird beyond belief Michael. I can’t think of a single story to fit to these reports I’m hearing about.
 
I welcome your thoughts. As always.
 
Warm regards,
 
Eric
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131487692115972
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Dear @michaelshermer,
 
Thanks for this. Very sober. I myself also don’t find the authenticated videos so far released compelling. But I do find your challenge of “no isolated discontinuous innovation” quite interesting!
 
Might I propose a friendly debate among friendly skeptics?
{{Tweet
|image=michaelshermer-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/michaelshermer/status/1403837966305300481
|name=Michael Shermer
|usernameurl=https://x.com/michaelshermer
|username=michaelshermer
|content=Dear @EricRWeinstein Please see my argument for why UAPs cannot be foreign assets capable of physics & aerodynamics attributed to UAPs that if true would be decades or centuries ahead of us. History shows no nations/companies of comp development so lag.
https://quillette.com/2021/06/03/understanding-the-unidentified/
|timestamp=10:13 PM ¡ Jun 12, 2021
}}
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131494289760259
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=First of all, I am concerned that the paradigm of being scientifically or technologically “centuries ahead” is all wrong. This came up in a phone call with our buddy @SamHarrisOrg.
 
Q: How many centuries ahead is 1952-3 from 1900? I’d have guessed “many” (not .5) and been wrong. https://t.co/Fb9rWGAHNQ
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
|media1=ERW-X-post-1404131494289760259-1.jpg
|media2=ERW-X-post-1404131494289760259-2.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131496059805698
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Next challenge: doesn’t your line of reasoning prove that “Renaissance Technologies” is either a fraud or a front? Their Medallion Fund is otherwise a long term unbreached secret, discontinuous from any other know investment fund seemingly thousands of years ahead of competitors.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131496844165120
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Now I’ve had the odd question about Renaissance (front not fraud) for just this reason. But either way, it’s either a counter example to your claims on discontinuous innovation if it is merely a fund or a counter-example to your secrecy claims if it is our secret physics program.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131497641082880
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Next: there are really two metrics on innovations.
 
Metric I: How big the incremental jump in difficulty.
 
Metric II: How big the jump in what is unlocked.
 
The great fear is that a small jump measured by 1 leading to an ENORMOUS jump in as measured by II.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131498391871490
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=You are, to me, arguing powerfully that certain people can’t exist: Rodney Mullen, Edward Van Halen, Bob Beamon, Dick Fosbury, Hiroji Satoh, Satoshi Nakamoto, etc.
 
They all exhibited the “a little unlocks a lot” paradigm with Zero-Day exploits that were each decisive.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131499197157376
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=And that brings us to theoretical physics. Beginning around 1982 , the son of the world’s top employed anti-gravity researcher(?!) of the 1950s turned in what may be the most impressive 15yr output in the history of the subject by my estimation. How can I begin to explain this?
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131499977318403
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=It’s not physics exactly. But Edward Witten w support from a small number of folks rewrote Quantum Field Theory as geometry. If Einstein geometrized gravity, then Witten geometrized Quantum Field theory (everything else).
 
Now, all that change has so far unlocked exactly nothing.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131500753182720
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=But it’s not that nothing happened in physics. While we were pretending that string theory was working, Witten &amp; Co revolutionized our mathematical framework. Think of it as an enormous amount of unrealized gains. Pent up genius &amp; power looking for its 1st application to the 🌎.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131501512433665
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If you gave us E Witten, J Simons, I Singer, CN Yang, M Atiyah, D Quillen &amp; G Segal, in a quiet program in 1975, I could argue that they didn’t need much more. In fact you don’t need all 7 but for the sake of argument I can make the case using this. But Witten is the main engine.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131502275776512
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Now let me show you how I could get discontinuous innovation if I were China or Russia. I don’t know those systems as well so I’ll use the US example.
 
We know most of the top minds. We pretend that there is a lot of subjectivity about this for social reasons but China wouldn’t.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131503064289281
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If I thought like CCP, I’d create a lavish secret theoretical physics program modeled on the Russian Sharashka system. The key would be to get it to look like something else. A boring Tech company or some weird Chinese fund to disguise the reason for the secretive lavish campus.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131503827685378
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=[Digression: If the US were smarter, we’d do it by setting up a mythic secret $B hedge fund that employs top differential geometers, theoretical physicists &amp; ML experts by a national lab &amp; an off brand university w/ inexplicably strong geometry &amp; physics. But enough crazy talk..]
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131504586838016
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If CCP could today repeat what Witten (&amp; friends) did building off Geometric Quantum Field Thy, the US would have Zero clue what it unlocks. Even by your own incrementalist theory. It might unlock absolutely nothing. Or passage to the stars via additional degrees of freedom. 🤷‍♂️
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131505350201345
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=One last point. I released such a theory. Could well be wrong.
 
But I can tell you I should have received a call from DOE. Because calls are cheap and relevant trained PhDs are *very* finite. The US should track every geometer, General Relativist, and Particle Theorist working.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131506121961473
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=You don’t have to take a position on me or GU. You can ask Wolfram or Lisi or Barbour or Deutsche or anyone outside the system whether such calls are placed. They are not. No one *in* the system believes in wild discontinuous change from *outside* the system. As per your article.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131506876928003
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Which is to say we’re not monitoring. Maybe we think that’s a waste of taxpayer dollars. Maybe we think that a Grisha Perelman of physics is impossible.
 
How much does a phone call cost if a researcher is wrong vs not bothering if they’re right? Price the Type I &amp; II error. Nuts.
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
|timestamp=5:40 PM ¡ Jun 13, 2021
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1407313638311006210
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=France just opened up and  I’m honored to have been invited to give the first in person GU presentation post COVID at Centre de Physique Théorique in Marseille. It’s on 6/22 at
8am ET/5am PT.
 
Join Zoom Meeting</br>
https://univ-amu-fr.zoom.us/j/95582769808?pwd=TkZRaFJpdjZEUXVySlV1K3hKMTlhQT09#success
 
Meeting ID: 955 8276 9808</br>
Passcode: 674264
|timestamp=12:24 PM ¡ Jun 22, 2021
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1407833970436419584
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I’m quite concerned now given John’s 2020 call.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1407833964723773442
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I have two bits of information about JE that are not public.
 
1) An interchange from McAfee on Epstein.
 
2) Knowledge that Epstein was asking after me in a late email just before he died. I have no idea why. There is no more contact about Epstein than one meeting about 20yrs ago.
|timestamp=10:52 PM ¡ Jun 23, 2021
|media1=ERW-X-post-1407833964723773442.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1407833966678249473
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=With that said, there now is nothing I know of again on Epstein that is private. There is no benefit to harassing me further. All Epstein information is now public.
 
He crossed my path once. Seemed to know who I was. Interested in GU. That’s it. John and I have no recent contact.
|timestamp=10:52 PM ¡ Jun 23, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1407833968423079941
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=GU is now public. I have no more information as to its connection to Epstein other than he wanted it taken to Villard house. I’d like to talk to relevant physicists quickly given its role in the story. I give my permission to release *any* Epstein security video of me. Thanks.
|timestamp=10:52 PM ¡ Jun 23, 2021
}}
|timestamp=10:52 PM ¡ Jun 23, 2021
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697134467641351
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=And I think NDT is enforcing a dangerous “Copernican” consensus that we are too insignificant to even monitor or visit, to go along with “We’ve had Nukes for 70 years without losing a city. I wouldn’t worry. What could possibly go wrong.”
 
This is just a human rationality flaw.🙏
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697117359144969
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I subscribe to an unpopular position. Consider 3 kinds of 🌎:
 
A) Ones with no life or at least no life within striking distance of the source code (ToE).
 
B) Worlds that are on the verge of gaining the source code but are confined to a terrestrial surface.
 
C) Root level access.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=mishaperiphery-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/mishaperiphery/status/1409618467024560129
|name=Misha Mansoor
|usernameurl=https://x.com/mishaperiphery
|username=mishaperiphery
|content=I see your point, but I would ask, wouldn’t there be a difference between basic recognition and categorization, and actively studying and interacting?  One would assume that other species would still be resource and time limited, therefore forced to prioritize their attention?
|timestamp=9:03 PM ¡ Jun 28, 2021
}}
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697119053615115
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Now, if you can jack into the cosmos as ‘Root’ it MAY facilitate stuff that’s unimaginable (e.g. dimension hacking) yet only one remaining big upgrade away from being able to fuse nuclei. Which is where we are now.
 
I’d guess all civilizations that are Root care about each other.
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697119846289413
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=The following is pure speculation (Tutored by experience w/ GU):
 
I think we sent a signal to the cosmos in 1945 and then on Nov. 1, 1952. Fusing Nuclei is what you do JUST before you become root. If this is right, we let the cosmos know “Earth is root adjacent” w/o awareness.
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697120748113923
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Is there anyone in the cosmos listening? Perhaps not. But we are all acting as if living on a terrestrial surface with the ability to fuse nuclei is some totally normal thing due to &lt;70 years of good luck. Which is insane.
 
Now what if I’m right in the above and the cosmos cares?
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697121628921860
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=The idea of a newly space-time-faring unwise civilization with fresh root level access is a nightmare. And no one but no one on earth takes this seriously anymore. After 1952 fundamental physics went on progressing normally for ~20yrs. So after that it’s been~50yrs of stagnation.
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697122434260992
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=In those ~50yrs we learned to stop worrying. About Fusion-weapons, interstellar travel, a cosmos that listens or even our ability to progress to the end. In 1984, physicists were talking about the end of physics without irony. They then failed, while failing to report failure.
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697123281489928
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So they told another story: “String theory didn’t fail!! It may take 100s of years to figure it out!” That is “If we String Theorists can’t make progress, a Theory of Everything is now far over the Horizon for everyone else.” But that’s not logically necessary. I say we’re close.
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697124225208320
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=It makes sense to worry about *every* small boutique  program: Lisi, Wolfram, Barbour, LQG, Tegmark, ConnesLott, Octonions, amplitudhedron, etc. Our science/defense establishment doesn’t seem to get this idea: after 50yrs of no progress it seems too abstract to practical men.
|timestamp=2:15 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697128490831877
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I learned from my buddy @SamHarrisOrg that he thought 👽 would be Millenia ahead of us.
Look at Nov 1, 1952 from Nov 1 1902: you don’t have powered flight, know what relativity or the quantum is, know that neutrons exist, know about anti-matter, etc.
 
From ‘02, ‘52 IS millennia.
|timestamp=2:16 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
|media1=ERW-X-post-1409697128490831877-1.jpg
|media2=ERW-X-post-1409697128490831877-2.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697130122338306
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Well, we may or may not have a major update in our future. And if it unlocks dimension hacking, looking glass matter, VEV/potential hacking, multi-temporal pseudo-Riemannian metrics, Dark Chemisty, Dark Light, additional families, RaritaSchwinger fields, etc then we get upgraded.
|timestamp=2:16 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697130961281025
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=And I believe all at once.
 
What does that mean? I honestly don’t know.
 
But Imagine you sent a chainsaw, a Bugatti, Ibogaine, “My-1st-Crisper”, and an F-18 to a badly behaved 5yr old child for a birthday present w a simple card: “Enjoy!” We’d worry specifically b/c immaturity.
|timestamp=2:16 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697131846242308
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=That’s what NDT has most wrong. He thinks we are far behind anything that could visit us, but that ISN’T backed up by science. He’d have to explain why we aren’t “root adjacent” right now or that root buys us nothing. Well?
 
Think of the relationship of Iran to nukes for example.
|timestamp=2:16 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697132680945664
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Iran is now Nuke adjacent. And their facilities and scientists keep running into mysterious problems.  Why? Surely not because Iran is too insignificant to her more advanced neighbors. That would mirror NDT’s argument. My argument is that root level access to nuclei *suffices*.
|timestamp=2:16 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1409697133603606534
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Am I saying “Aliens are here”? Of course not. But the “Root Adjacency Hypothesis” is not properly discussed almost anywhere. Which defies all explanation.
 
Perhaps everyone else is right &amp; I’m wrong. Absolutely! But it’s common for the world to make a crazy dumb idea a consensus.
|timestamp=2:16 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
|timestamp=2:16 AM ¡ Jun 29, 2021
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1413561365545947137
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=But in standard Relativity theory as an effective theory, I don’t think about FTL. Sorry.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1413559042539089922
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I don’t believe in FTL travel.
 
FTL is an implicit appeal to travel *within* Relativity theory. Presumably traversing the spacetime manifold of Einstein faster than his theory allows.
 
The goal is to ask what theory is *beyond* Einstein & might it allow us the *illusion* of FTL.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=JJmschulz-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/JJmschulz/status/1413556422483316737
|name=Jason Schulz
|usernameurl=https://x.com/JJmschulz
|username=JJmschulz
|content=Can you describe faster than light travel in practical  layman's terms?
|timestamp=5:51 PM ¡ Jul 9, 2021
}}
|timestamp=6:01 PM ¡ Jul 9, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1413561361838186496
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=An example: In GU, relativity theory is recovered from the Observerse which is constructed around two separate spaces X and Y. Einstein’s Spacetime (a signature (1,3) 4-manifold with pseudo Riemannian metric) is recovered from observations of Y by X.
|timestamp=6:11 PM ¡ Jul 9, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1413561363629105152
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Another example. Some see spacetime as the commutative limit of a non-commutative manifold. That would be beyond relativity.
 
Others see topology changing operators that allow agents to change spacetime topologically. Again that would be beyond the usual relativity theory.
|timestamp=6:11 PM ¡ Jul 9, 2021
}}
|timestamp=6:11 PM ¡ Jul 9, 2021
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1445165323959693312
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=My friend &amp; work colleague, Jesse Michels over at @AlchemyAmerican, is starting his podcast/video series.
 
As the original producer of ThePortal, he interviews me here about its start, GU, etc.:
 
https://youtu.be/ZTIO-xAP0Dw
 
Give him a subscription and let’s see where he takes this.
|timestamp=11:13 PM ¡ Oct 4, 2021
}}
 
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1461031567149600768}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1461031567149600768}}
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1475348234746798082}}
 
-->
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1461031567149600768
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Wanted to thank the High-Energy theory group in the physics department at @uchicago for the invite to visit &amp; speak on GU in the Kadanoff center. Thanks in particular to my colleague Savdeep Sethi for a lovely visit over a couple of days.
 
Great Folks + Chalk + Slate = Happiness.
|timestamp=6:00 PM ¡ Nov 17, 2021
|media1=ERW-X-post-1461031567149600768-1.jpg
|media2=ERW-X-post-1461031567149600768-2.jpg
|media3=ERW-X-post-1461031567149600768-3.jpg
|media4=ERW-X-post-1461031567149600768-4.jpg
}}
 
 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1475348594223763456
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Still, it is striking to hear this is being discussed by Elizondo and others.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1475348233035530241
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Wow. I’ve never once seen these quotes.
 
And what have I been warning about? Either 4 or 6 extra temporal dimensions. Same deal.
 
No more arrow of time. Time would become a higher dimensional whirlpool. But this is a fringe area of respectable physics. Not crazy enough to ignore.
|timestamp=6:10 AM ¡ Dec 27, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1475348234746798082
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Is there anything to this? Don’t know. I spoke to Hal Puthoff about it. Didn’t get much of a reaction. But secrecy is secrecy. And I respect that given what would be at stake.
 
But strong GU predicts 7 or 5 total *temporal* dimensions as the most likely total number. A big shift.
|timestamp=6:10 AM ¡ Dec 27, 2021
}}
|timestamp=6:11 AM ¡ Dec 27, 2021
}}


=== 2022 ===
=== 2022 ===
Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/22457"