Logo

    214 | Antonio Padilla on Large Numbers and the Scope of the Universe

    enOctober 17, 2022
    What platforms help streamline hiring and finances?
    How does Indeed assist employers in hiring?
    What is the concept of Tetration in mathematics?
    How does holography relate to entropy and information?
    Why is Graham's number significant in mathematics?

    Podcast Summary

    • Streamline processes for better outcomes with platforms like Indeed and Rocket MoneyUtilizing platforms like Indeed for hiring and Rocket Money for financial management can save time, lead to better outcomes, and expand our thinking with large numbers

      While we are always striving for improvement, the most effective ways to achieve certain goals, such as hiring or managing personal finances, don't involve endless searching. Instead, utilizing platforms like Indeed for hiring and Rocket Money for financial management can help streamline processes, save time, and ultimately lead to better outcomes. For instance, Indeed, with its massive reach and advanced matching engine, can help employers find high-quality candidates quickly and efficiently, while Rocket Money can help individuals save money by identifying and canceling unwanted subscriptions. Additionally, the existence of big numbers, even those seemingly too large to have physical relevance, challenges us to expand our thinking and pushes the boundaries of our understanding. Tony Padilla, a theoretical cosmologist and author of "Fantastic Numbers and Where to Find Them," explores these concepts and more in his new book.

    • The power of exponentials in mathematicsExponentials allow us to create incredibly large numbers through repeated multiplication, such as Google (10^100) and Googleplex (10^Google), expanding the potential for growth and calculation.

      Exponentials and the concept of repeated multiplication leading to larger numbers, like Google and Googleplex, are fundamental ideas in mathematics that can lead to incredibly large numbers. These numbers, while seemingly enormous, are just the beginning of a chain of ideas that can grow much larger. Google, named after a number created by mathematician Edward Kasner and his nephew Milton Sirotta, is a one followed by 100 zeros. Googleplex, a larger concept, is a one followed by a Google number of zeros. This recursive idea of making larger numbers by creating bigger numbers and repeating the process is the power behind the calculational capabilities of mathematics. While these numbers are vast, they pale in comparison to real-world sizes and scales, such as the universe, which is about 10 to the 26 meters in size and contains 10 to the 80 particles. These numbers are much smaller than a Google or Googleplex. The beauty of mathematics lies in its ability to create and manipulate such large numbers, demonstrating the power and potential for growth and expansion.

    • Understanding Vast Numbers in the UniverseThe universe contains numbers beyond our comprehension, from a Googol to 10 to the 88th power, revealing vast differences in scales and important concepts in physics.

      The universe and the world around us contain vast numbers that are beyond our everyday understanding. For instance, Google's 1 followed by 100 zeros, also known as a Googol, is much smaller than the estimated number of particles in the universe, which is around 10 to the 88th power. This demonstrates the vast differences in scales in nature, from the human scale to the subatomic world. While these numbers may seem abstract and beyond our reach, they hold significant importance in physics and reveal remarkable ideas and concepts. To bring these numbers into our world, we need to think beyond our current understanding of the universe and consider the possibility of a larger universe beyond the cosmological horizon. The differences between mathematics and physics lie in their motivations and applications. While mathematicians may find beauty and elegance in numbers, physicists seek to understand the physical world and uncover the underlying principles of nature. Despite the differences, both fields play crucial roles in expanding our knowledge and understanding of the universe.

    • Mathematicians and Physicists: Different Approaches and PrioritiesMathematicians focus on intricacies and details, exploring abstract concepts, while physicists look at broader picture, decoupling microscopic details. Both share a fascination with unraveling the universe's mysteries.

      While mathematicians and physicists both delve into complex concepts, their approaches and priorities differ significantly. Mathematicians focus on the intricacies and details, often exploring abstract concepts for their own sake and generating enormous numbers. Physicists, on the other hand, tend to look at the broader picture, decoupling microscopic details that don't impact larger phenomena. This anecdote about a frustrating proof experience illustrates the mathematician's emphasis on every detail, contrasting with the physicist's more relaxed attitude. Moreover, mathematicians discover new, massive numbers using innovative methods and notations. For instance, Donald Knuth, a computer scientist, developed a new notation to describe numbers beyond our conventional mathematical language. These enormous numbers serve philosophical purposes, sparking curiosity and deep thought. However, despite their differences, both fields share a common thread – a fascination with unraveling the mysteries of the universe, whether it's through understanding abstract concepts or observing larger patterns.

    • Repeated Operations Lead to Large NumbersMathematicians use compact notations like exponentiation and tetration to represent giant numbers, which came from repeated multiplication and repeated exponentiation respectively, such as Graham's number derived from Ramsey theory.

      Multiplication is a result of repeated addition, exponentiation is a result of repeated multiplication, and the concept of repeated exponentiation, known as Tetration, can lead to extremely large numbers when represented using arrows in mathematical notation. Mathematicians use such compact notations to represent giant numbers without listing all the digits, as it's impractical with a finite number of symbols. Graham's number, an extremely large number, is an example of the power of such notation in mathematics. It came about as a result of a problem in Ramsey theory, which aims to find order in chaos by identifying patterns or cliques within seemingly disordered systems. Graham's number itself represents a significant level of order and structure within the realm of very large numbers.

    • 8-bit representation of Graham's number defies human comprehensionGraham's number, a massive mathematical concept, exceeds our ability to grasp and calculate its size, illustrating the depth and complexity of mathematics

      There are mathematical concepts, like Graham's number, which are so vast that they challenge our ability to comprehend them. Graham's number, a truly gargantuan number, requires complex mathematical notation and tricks to write it down. If someone were to try and picture it in their head, they would be attempting to store an enormous amount of information, which would result in their head collapsing into a black hole. This number's size is so immense that even calculating the number of digits is not feasible. The discussion also touched upon the concept of Tree 3, a number linked to a game of trees where the goal is to create unique trees without repeating previous ones. The size of these numbers and the complexity of the concepts surrounding them highlight the vastness and intrigue of mathematics.

    • The Game of Trees: Understanding Mathematical LimitsThe Game of Trees is a mathematical game demonstrating the finite length of proofs in mathematics, with tree number 3 being a beyond-human-comprehension limit.

      There is a mathematical game called the game of trees, where players draw trees using seeds of different types, and the length of the game is determined by how many moves it takes before a previous tree appears in the drawing. The game is guaranteed to end, and the length of the game depends on the number of seeds used. Surprisingly, even with three seeds, the game can only last for a very large, but finite number of moves, known as tree number 3. This number is beyond human comprehension and even surpasses the size of Graham's number. The game of trees is used in proof theory to understand what can and cannot be proven in mathematics. Despite being able to describe the concept of tree number 3, it is impossible to calculate it in a down-to-earth sense as it is beyond the capabilities of the universe. The game can be played as fast as space-time allows, but even with advanced technology and AI, it would still take an extremely long time to reach tree number 3. In essence, the game of trees demonstrates the limitations of our understanding and the vastness of mathematical concepts.

    • Pondering the existence and nature of infinite numbers and the universeThe universe's potential infinite existence raises questions about AI continuation, Poincare recurrence, and the independent existence of numbers.

      The concept of infinite numbers and the nature of the universe raise profound philosophical questions. The speaker discusses the possibility of artificial intelligence continuing to exist and create beyond the heat death of the universe, but the universe may undergo a Poincare recurrence, resetting itself before the game of trees can be completed. The speaker also ponders whether numbers only exist to describe physical phenomena or if they have an independent existence. The biggest number anyone has thought of may be unimaginable to others, and the distinction between a number's existence and our knowledge of it remains a subject of debate.

    • The uncanny ability of mathematics to describe the universeIn a vast universe, even questions about doppelgangers can be formulated using mathematics, highlighting its remarkable ability to describe the unknown.

      Despite the vastness and complexity of the universe, mathematics, a human creation, has an uncanny ability to describe it. However, as we delve deeper into the realm of extremely large numbers, even those beyond the number of particles in the universe, we can still formulate meaningful physics questions. One such question is the doppelganger question, which ponders the inevitability of identical beings in a universe much larger than ours. This idea arises from the possibility that our universe could be much larger than what we currently know, potentially even a googolplex in size. In such a universe, doppelgangers would be an inevitability due to the sheer number of possible combinations of particles. This connection between cosmic numbers and hilariously large numbers highlights the remarkable mathematical nature of our universe and raises intriguing questions about its potential boundaries. FedEx, with its fast delivery and simple returns, ensures that your packages reach their destinations efficiently, allowing you to focus on the bigger questions of the universe.

    • The universe contains a finite number of possible arrangements of atomsDespite the vastness of the universe, the number of possible arrangements of atoms is finite, making it statistically inevitable that we will encounter doppelgangers of ourselves and everything else.

      The number of possible arrangements of atoms in a given volume of space, including a human being like Sean, is finite. This means that if we travel through the universe, we will eventually encounter repetitions of the same arrangements. Despite the vastness of the universe, the number of possibilities is much smaller than the number represented by a Googleplex. Therefore, it's statistically inevitable that we will encounter doppelgangers of ourselves and everything else in the universe. This concept, known as the finite number of possibilities, is a result of quantum mechanics and the fact that matter and energy can only exist in certain discrete states. The implications of this idea can be explored further by considering what constitutes a copy of a person, from a superficial resemblance to an exact quantum state match. While it may be impossible to measure someone's quantum state precisely without destroying them, the principle remains that there are only a finite number of possibilities, and we will eventually encounter repetitions of every arrangement in the universe.

    • Theories explaining the vast size of the universeQuantum mechanics' eternal inflation and gravity's limit contribute to the universe's seemingly infinite size, per ongoing theories

      The universe's size may be explained by the concept of eternal inflation in quantum mechanics. This theory suggests that the universe expands rapidly due to quantum jumps of an inflaton field, creating new gargantuan universes recursively. The universe's size could be vast due to this ongoing process. Another factor is the existence of gravity and black holes, which provide a limit on the number of possibilities in a finite space. These concepts, combined with quantum mechanics, offer explanations for the seemingly infinite possibilities within the universe. Ultimately, the universe's size remains a mystery, but these theories provide intriguing possibilities.

    • Understanding possibilities through holography and entropyThe holographic principle suggests that the information about the possibilities in a given space is stored on the edge or surface, rather than the interior. Entropy, a measure of the number of possibilities, plays a crucial role in this understanding, particularly in relation to black holes.

      The world around us has fewer possibilities than we might initially think due to global constraints like gravity. This concept, known as holography, suggests that the information about the possibilities in a given space is not stored in the interior, but rather on the edge or surface. Entropy, a measure of the number of different ways that the same macroscopic observables can be achieved, plays a crucial role in this understanding. Black holes, with their high entropy for their size, are a prime example of this principle. When considering the number of possibilities in a given space, it's essential to calculate the entropy, which is determined by the hidden information or bits contributing to the different possibilities. Ultimately, this holographic principle challenges our understanding of the nature of information and the constraints that shape the possibilities in our universe.

    • The Holographic Principle: Equivalent Descriptions in One Dimension LessThe Holographic Principle suggests physical phenomena can be described using different mathematical languages, with or without gravity, and still yield the same results, but its application to our universe with a positive cosmological constant is uncertain.

      The holographic principle is a theoretical concept in physics that suggests the description of a physical system can be equivalent, regardless of whether it includes gravity or not, and in one dimension less. This principle was inspired by the study of black holes and their ability to store information. While there are examples of this principle in action in certain toy universes, its application to our own universe is still uncertain. The holographic principle proposes that gravity may be connected to dimensions living on the boundary of space, but we currently lack a complete theory to describe the real world in terms of this one dimension lower. Essentially, the holographic principle suggests that physical phenomena can be described using different mathematical languages, with or without gravity, and still yield the same results. However, its applicability to our universe with a positive cosmological constant remains an open question. Ongoing research continues to explore the potential of holographic ideas in our universe.

    • The mystery of the universe's small and positive energy density and the cosmological constantScientists are puzzled by the small energy density of the universe and the accelerating expansion caused by the cosmological constant. Calculations suggest a larger vacuum energy than observed, leading to a significant discrepancy. Possible explanations include the anthropic principle, which suggests the universe's properties allow for intelligent life.

      Our universe's energy density, which is surprisingly small and positive, poses a mystery that scientists are trying to solve. The cosmological constant, which is responsible for the universe's accelerating expansion, is a significant part of this puzzle. The energy of empty space itself, known as vacuum energy, is believed to be the cause of this acceleration. However, calculations based on quantum field theory suggest that the actual vacuum energy should be much larger than what is observed, leading to a huge discrepancy. This mismatch is a significant problem in physics, as the universe would have been destroyed if it had the large vacuum energy predicted by theory. The number 10 to the minus 120, which is the lower limit of the number of possible chess games, coincidentally matches the cosmological constant in Planck units, leading some to speculate that chess might hold the key to understanding the universe's small numbers. The favorite explanation for this discrepancy among scientists is the anthropic principle, which suggests that the universe's properties must allow for the existence of intelligent life, and the small vacuum energy is one of those properties. Overall, the small numbers in the universe, particularly the cosmological constant, reveal that there are still many mysteries to be unraveled in physics.

    • The enigma of the cosmological constantResearchers explore modifying Einstein's theory of gravity to explain why we don't observe a large vacuum energy engine despite its constancy

      The cosmological constant, which is a form of vacuum energy in the universe, is unique due to its constancy. While other sources of energy and momentum are localized and drop off over time and space, the cosmological constant remains constant. This consistency sets it apart and poses a question as to why we don't observe a large vacuum energy engine. To address this, researchers are exploring the idea of modifying Einstein's theory of gravity on a global scale, where it interacts with constant sources differently. This could potentially allow for the screening away of large vacuum energy and the observation of the observed amount of acceleration. The process of developing such a theory involves turning ideas into equations, and requires consistency with quantum mechanics and relativity. This is a complex and challenging area of research, but offers a potential solution to the mystery of the cosmological constant.

    • The debate over a finite or infinite universeSome theories propose a finite universe with a set information to avoid problems, challenging quantum field theory's infinite degrees of freedom. Personal preference for a finite universe, but more research needed.

      The nature of the universe, whether it's finite or infinite, is still a topic of debate among scientists. However, some theories suggest that focusing on changes only on a global scale, such as space-time as a whole, can help avoid certain problems. The idea of a finite universe with a finite set of information is linked to the cosmological constant and the concept of a horizon with a finite entropy. This notion challenges the traditional understanding of quantum field theory and its infinite number of degrees of freedom. The speaker expresses a personal preference for a finite universe, but acknowledges that it's a matter of intuition and that more research is needed to fully understand the implications of quantum gravity and the role of infinity in the physical description of reality.

    • Exploring the complexities of finite and infinite realmsThe concept of infinity raises questions about the size of the universe and the nature of existence, leading to a complex and thought-provoking discussion.

      That while the concept of infinity can be intriguing, it also raises more questions than answers. If the universe is finite, then it has a specific size, but who determined that? The conversation then shifted to the nature of Alex, with questions about whether Alex is 0 or 1, and if these questions disappear with the concept of infinity. Ultimately, the speakers found comfort in the idea of a finite universe, as it provides a sense of coziness and familiarity. In the end, the discussion highlighted the complexities and mysteries of both finite and infinite realms. Thanks, Tony Padilla, for joining the Mindscape podcast and exploring these thought-provoking ideas with us.

    Recent Episodes from Sean Carroll's Mindscape: Science, Society, Philosophy, Culture, Arts, and Ideas

    289 | Cari Cesarotti on the Next Generation of Particle Experiments

    289 | Cari Cesarotti on the Next Generation of Particle Experiments

    As an experimental facility, the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Geneva has been extraordinarily successful, discovering the Higgs boson and measuring multiple features of particle-physics interactions at unprecedented energies. But to theorists, the results have been somewhat frustrating, as we were hoping to find brand-new phenomena beyond the Standard Model. There is nothing to do but to keep looking, recognizing that we have to choose our methods judiciously. I talk with theoretical physicist Cari Cesarotti about what experimental results the modern particle physicist most looks forward to, and how we might eventually get there, especially through the prospect of a muon collider.

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/09/16/289-cari-cesarotti-on-the-next-generation-of-particle-experiments/

    Cari Cesarotti received her Ph.D. in physics from Harvard University. She is currently a postdoctoral fellow at MIT. Her research is on particle phenomenology theory, with an eye toward experimental searches. Among her awards are the Sakurai Dissertation Award in Theoretical Physics from the American Physical Society and the Young Scientist Award at the 14th International Conference on the Identification of Dark Matter.


    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    288 | Max Richter on the Meaning of Classical Music Today

    288 | Max Richter on the Meaning of Classical Music Today

    It wasn't that long ago, historically speaking, that you might put on your tuxedo or floor-length evening gown to go out and hear a live opera or symphony. But today's world is faster, more technologically connected, and casual. Is there still a place for classical music in the contemporary environment? Max Richter, whose new album In a Landscape releases soon, proves that there is. We talk about what goes into making modern classical music, how musical styles evolve, and why every note should count.

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/09/09/288-max-richter-on-the-meaning-of-classical-music-today/

    Max Richter trained in composition and piano at Edinburgh University, at the Royal Academy of Music, and with Luciano Berio in Florence. He was a co-founder of the ensemble Piano Circus. His first solo album, "Memoryhouse," was released in 2002. He has since released numerous solo albums, as well as extensive work on soundtracks for film and television, ballet, opera, and collaborations with visual artists.


    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    AMA | September 2024

    AMA | September 2024

    Welcome to the September 2024 Ask Me Anything episode of Mindscape! These monthly excursions are funded by Patreon supporters (who are also the ones asking the questions). We take questions asked by Patreons, whittle them down to a more manageable number -- based primarily on whether I have anything interesting to say about them, not whether the questions themselves are good -- and sometimes group them together if they are about a similar topic. Enjoy!

    Blog post with AMA questions and transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/09/02/ama-september-2024/

    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    287 | Jean-Paul Faguet on Institutions and the Legacy of History

    287 | Jean-Paul Faguet on Institutions and the Legacy of History

    One common feature of complex systems is sensitive dependence on initial conditions: a small change in how systems begin evolving can lead to large differences in their later behavior. In the social sphere, this is a way of saying that history matters. But it can be hard to quantify how much certain specific historical events have affected contemporary conditions, because the number of variables is so large and their impacts are so interdependent. Political economist Jean-Paul Faguet and collaborators have examined one case where we can closely measure the impact today of events from centuries ago: how Colombian communities are still affected by 16th-century encomienda, a colonial forced-labor institution. We talk about this and other examples of the legacy of history.

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/08/26/287-jean-paul-faguet-on-institutions-and-the-legacy-of-history/

    Jean-Paul Faguet received a Ph.D. in Political Economy and an M.Sc. in Economics from the London School of Economics, and an Master of Public Policy from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He is currently Professor of the Political Economy of Development at LSE. He serves as the Chair of the Decentralization Task Force for the Initiative for Policy Dialogue. Among his awards are the W.J.M. Mackenzie Prize for best political science book.


    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    286 | Blaise Agüera y Arcas on the Emergence of Replication and Computation

    286 | Blaise Agüera y Arcas on the Emergence of Replication and Computation

    Understanding how life began on Earth involves questions of chemistry, geology, planetary science, physics, and more. But the question of how random processes lead to organized, self-replicating, information-bearing systems is a more general one. That question can be addressed in an idealized world of computer code, initialized with random sequences and left to run. Starting with many such random systems, and allowing them to mutate and interact, will we end up with "lifelike," self-replicating programs? A new paper by Blaise Agüera y Arcas and collaborators suggests that the answer is yes. This raises interesting questions about whether computation is an attractor in the space of relevant dynamical processes, with implications for the origin and ubiquity of life.

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/08/19/286-blaise-aguera-y-arcas-on-the-emergence-of-replication-and-computation/

    Blaise Agüera y Arcas received a B.A. in physics from Princeton University. He is currently a vice-president of engineering at Google, leader of the Cerebra team, and a member of the Paradigms of Intelligence team. He is the author of the books Ubi Sunt and Who Are We Now?, and the upcoming What Is Intelligence?


    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    285 | Nate Silver on Prediction, Risk, and Rationality

    285 | Nate Silver on Prediction, Risk, and Rationality

    Being rational necessarily involves engagement with probability. Given two possible courses of action, it can be rational to prefer the one that could possibly result in a worse outcome, if there's also a substantial probability for an even better outcome. But one's attitude toward risk -- averse, tolerant, or even seeking -- also matters. Do we work to avoid the worse possible outcome, even if there is potential for enormous reward? Nate Silver has long thought about probability and prediction, from sports to politics to professional poker. In his his new book On The Edge: The Art of Risking Everything, Silver examines a set of traits characterizing people who welcome risks.

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/08/12/285-nate-silver-on-prediction-risk-and-rationality/

    Nate Silver received a B.A. in economics from the University of Chicago. He worked as a baseball analyst, developing the PECOTA statistical system (Player Empirical Comparison and Optimization Test Algorithm). He later founded the FiveThirtyEight political polling analysis site. His first book, The Signal and the Noise, was awarded the Phi Beta Kappa Society Book Award in Science. He is the co-host (with Maria Konnikova) of the Risky Business podcast.


    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    AMA | August 2024

    AMA | August 2024

    Welcome to the August 2024 Ask Me Anything episode of Mindscape! These monthly excursions are funded by Patreon supporters (who are also the ones asking the questions). We take questions asked by Patreons, whittle them down to a more manageable number -- based primarily on whether I have anything interesting to say about them, not whether the questions themselves are good -- and sometimes group them together if they are about a similar topic. Enjoy!

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/08/05/ama-august-2024/

    Support Mindscape on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/seanmcarroll

    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    284 | Doris Tsao on How the Brain Turns Vision Into the World

    284 | Doris Tsao on How the Brain Turns Vision Into the World

    The human brain does a pretty amazing job of taking in a huge amount of data from multiple sensory modalities -- vision, hearing, smell, etc. -- and constructing a coherent picture of the world, constantly being updated in real time. (Although perhaps in discrete moments, rather than continuously, as we learn in this podcast...) We're a long way from completely understanding how that works, but amazing progress has been made in identifying specific parts of the brain with specific functions in this process. Today we talk to leading neuroscientist Doris Tsao about the specific workings of vision, from how we recognize faces to how we construct a model of the world around us.

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/07/29/284-doris-tsao-on-how-the-brain-turns-vision-into-the-world/

    Doris Tsao received her Ph.D. in neurobiology from Harvard University. She is currently a professor of molecular and cell biology, and a member of the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, at the University of California, Berkeley. Among her awards are a MacArthur Fellowship, membership in the National Academy of Sciences, the Eppendorf and Science International Prize in Neurobiology, the National Institutes of Health Director’s Pioneer Award, the Golden Brain Award from the Minerva Foundation, the Perl-UNC Neuroscience Prize, and the Kavli Prize in Neuroscience.

    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    283 | Daron Acemoglu on Technology, Inequality, and Power

    283 | Daron Acemoglu on Technology, Inequality, and Power

    Change is scary. But sometimes it can all work out for the best. There's no guarantee of that, however, even when the change in question involves the introduction of a powerful new technology. Today's guest, Daron Acemoglu, is a political economist who has long thought about the relationship between economics and political institutions. In his most recent book (with Simon Johnson), Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity, he looks at how technological innovations affect the economic lives of ordinary people. We talk about how such effects are often for the worse, at least to start out, until better institutions are able to eventually spread the benefits more broadly.

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/07/22/283-daron-acemoglu-on-technology-inequality-and-power/

    Daron Acemoglu received a Ph.D. in economics from the London School of Economics. He is currently Institute Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is a fellow of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the Econometric Society. Among his awards are the John Bates Clark Medal and the Nemmers Prize in Economics. In 2015, he was named the most cited economist of the past 10 years.


    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    282 | Joel David Hamkins on Puzzles of Reality and Infinity

    282 | Joel David Hamkins on Puzzles of Reality and Infinity

    The philosophy of mathematics would be so much easier if it weren't for infinity. The concept seems natural, but taking it seriously opens the door to counterintuitive results. As mathematician and philosopher Joel David Hamkins says in this conversation, when we say that the natural numbers are "0, 1, 2, 3, and so on," that "and so on" is hopelessly vague. We talk about different ways to think about the puzzles of infinity, how they might be resolved, and implications for mathematical realism.

    Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/07/15/282-joel-david-hamkins-on-puzzles-of-reality-and-infinity/

    Support Mindscape on Patreon.

    Joel David Hamkins received his Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of California, Berkeley. He is currently the John Cardinal O'Hara Professor of Logic at the University of Notre Dame. He is a pioneer of the idea of the set theory multiverse. He is the top-rated user by reputation score on MathOverflow. He is currently working on The Book of Infinity, to be published by MIT Press.


    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    Related Episodes

    43 | Matthew Luczy on the Pleasures of Wine

    43 | Matthew Luczy on the Pleasures of Wine
    Some people never drink wine; for others, it’s an indispensable part of an enjoyable meal. Whatever your personal feelings might be, wine seems to exhibit a degree of complexity and nuance that can be intimidating to the non-expert. Where does that complexity come from, and how can we best approach wine? To answer these questions, we talk to Matthew Luczy, sommelier and wine director at Mélisse, one of the top fine-dining restaurants in the Los Angeles area. Matthew insisted that we actually drink wine rather than just talking about it, so drink we do. Therefore, in a Mindscape first, I recruited a third party to join us and add her own impressions of the tasting: science writer Jennifer Ouellette, who I knew would be available because we’re married to each other. We talk about what makes different wines distinct, the effects of aging, and what’s the right bottle to have with pizza. You are free to drink along at home, with exactly these wines or some other choices, but I think the podcast will be enjoyable whether you do or not. Support Mindscape on Patreon or Paypal. Mattew Luczy is a Certified Sommelier as judged by the Court of Master Sommeliers. He currently works as the Wine Director at Mélisse in Santa Monica, California. He is also active in photography and music. Mélisse home page Personal/photography page Instagram Ask a Somm: When Should I Decant Wine? See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    25 | David Chalmers on Consciousness, the Hard Problem, and Living in a Simulation

    25 | David Chalmers on Consciousness, the Hard Problem, and Living in a Simulation
    The "Easy Problems" of consciousness have to do with how the brain takes in information, thinks about it, and turns it into action. The "Hard Problem," on the other hand, is the task of explaining our individual, subjective, first-person experiences of the world. What is it like to be me, rather than someone else? Everyone agrees that the Easy Problems are hard; some people think the Hard Problem is almost impossible, while others think it's pretty easy. Today's guest, David Chalmers, is arguably the leading philosopher of consciousness working today, and the one who coined the phrase "the Hard Problem," as well as proposing the philosophical zombie thought experiment. Recently he has been taking seriously the notion of panpsychism. We talk about these knotty issues (about which we deeply disagree), but also spend some time on the possibility that we live in a computer simulation. Would simulated lives be "real"? (There we agree -- yes they would.) David Chalmers got his Ph.D. from Indiana University working under Douglas Hoftstadter. He is currently University Professor of Philosophy and Neural Science at New York University and co-director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness. He is a fellow of the Australian Academy of Humanities, the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Among his books are The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory, The Character of Consciousness, and Constructing the World. He and David Bourget founded the PhilPapers project. Web site NYU Faculty page Wikipedia page PhilPapers page Amazon author page NYU Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness TED talk: How do you explain consciousness? See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    18 | Clifford Johnson on What's So Great About Superstring Theory

    18 | Clifford Johnson on What's So Great About Superstring Theory
    String theory is a speculative and highly technical proposal for uniting the known forces of nature, including gravity, under a single quantum-mechanical framework. This doesn't seem like a recipe for creating a lightning rod of controversy, but somehow string theory has become just that. To get to the bottom of why anyone (indeed, a substantial majority of experts in the field) would think that replacing particles with little loops of string was a promising way forward for theoretical physics, I spoke with expert string theorist Clifford Johnson. We talk about the road string theory has taken from a tentative proposal dealing with the strong interactions, through a number of revolutions, to the point it's at today. Also, where all those extra dimensions might have gone. At the end we touch on Clifford's latest project, a graphic novel that he wrote and illustrated about how science is done. Clifford Johnson is a Professor of Physics at the University of Southern California. He received his Ph.D. in mathematics and physics from the University of Southampton. His research area is theoretical physics, focusing on string theory and quantum field theory. He was awarded the Maxwell Medal from the Institute of Physics. Johnson is the author of the technical monograph D-Branes, as well as the graphic novel The Dialogues. Home page Wikipedia page Publications A talk on The Dialogues Asymptotia blog Twitter See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    AMA | November 2021

    AMA | November 2021

    Welcome to the November 2021 Ask Me Anything episode of Mindscape! These monthly excursions are funded by Patreon supporters (who are also the ones asking the questions). I take the large number of questions asked by Patreons, whittle them down to a more manageable size — based primarily on whether I have anything interesting to say about them, not whether the questions themselves are good — and sometimes group them together if they are about a similar topic. Enjoy!

    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    AMA | March 2024

    AMA | March 2024

    Welcome to the March 2024 Ask Me Anything episode of Mindscape! These monthly excursions are funded by Patreon supporters (who are also the ones asking the questions). We take questions asked by Patreons, whittle them down to a more manageable number -- based primarily on whether I have anything interesting to say about them, not whether the questions themselves are good -- and sometimes group them together if they are about a similar topic.

    Big congrats this month to Ryan Funakoshi, winner of this year's Mindscape Big Picture Scholarship! And enormous, heartfelt thanks to everyone who contributed. We're going to keep doing this in years to come.

    Blog post with questions and transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/03/11/ama-march-2024/

    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

    Logo

    © 2024 Podcastworld. All rights reserved

    Stay up to date

    For any inquiries, please email us at hello@podcastworld.io