sign him up, should i use rushes, flagship business events or st. petersburg international economic form is in full swing. we'll take you through the latest deal. then discussions from the countries of northern capital shocking evidence emerges in france regarding bodies donated for scientific research. many were then sold for use in military experiments and crashed and sicilians voice their anger after a mafia don dubbed the people. slayer walks a free decades after killing more than a 100 people, including one young victim, was recently strangled and then dissolved in half a dozen. you're uplifting headlines. this is our international. i'm shawn thomas. i'll be back with another look at your headlines and let's say about an hour watching us with the

ah, to still visionaries, nissan. chevry not our universe is full of unsolved and powerful mysteries. and one of the darkest thing, black holes do. recent advancements in science should at least some light on them. while to talk about this, i'm joined by 20 twain noble prize winner in physics, sir roger penrose. sir roger penrose physicist mathematician, philosopher 2020 noble prize winner and physics. so great to have you with us, today's sir roger. right, so when reacting to your noble prize, wait, you said that the black holes have become an increased importance in our understanding of the universe. so let me ask you as a lay person,

why is the study of black holes so important? well, there's more than one reasons. important partly because there's such strange things where used to, you know, space continuing more or less, it's like. and to find these strange objects, which seem to be so different where you, if you got to close, you might fall in and never be able to escape. and it's very strange phenomena. they are important for other reasons. one of the reasons has to do with a entropy, i have to explain what entropy means. it's more or less randomness. and there is a thing called the 2nd law of sermons. and i mix which tells you that things get more and more random as time goes on. we have to keep the entropy down. this is how we exist. that's where we get structure, structure forms and structure can be propagated,

and we want to keep the entropy down all the time. now in black holes, this is where it ends up and why we have a universe which is interesting and complicated is really because poly because of the black holes, because this is where ultimately the entropy goes down the black hose and we can then live off the residue, which is the low entropy of the rest of the universe. this is a simplified picture, but in this sense, although it's indirect, black holes are absolutely central to our existence. well, ok, at the center of a black hole lies what's called the singularity, right? whereas gen, city and mass become infinite and the theory of relativity which explains how gravity governs our universe breaks down in the center of a black hole. and the gravity conditions there are 2 extreme for the theory of relativity to work. as far as i understand, you know, what kind of

a theory about the universe will hold its own at the heart of a black hole, where we don't know, what you would seem to need is a theory of quantum gravity. now you see there's an interesting story here because when you're not prove my theorem and then i would that was to do with black holes. and this is to do with a single is in the future. you could fall into the singularity and it's the end. the opposite side of this picture is the beginning. we have in the big bang, we have another singularity. and when i did my work, stephen hawking picked up on it and developed it mainly for because manji and he was more interested in the singular she in the past. and i remember i was in princeton in the united states, and we were going to a conference and i was, we had to go and separate cars from princeton. and i noticed in one of the cars in

the back seat with jim peebles, jim p was going up, and i thought, oh, i'll take my chance and ask jim, why don't cause manages, think of all these complicated cars, the singularities that you get in the future. we know many solutions of the onsite equations in a very complicated and you cause of ologist don't seem to talk about them. and he looked at me and he said, because the universe is not like that. rather, my gosh, the snotty. is it? because the microwave background is, oh, very, very regular. all over the sky toes is the big bang. was very, very smooth and regular and not like the singular she's in the future, they're very different. so if we are to have a theory of quantum gravity which explains the singularities, it's a very, very, very strange theory, which has to be different in the future from in the past. and that's lot like the

quantum mechanics. we know all the theories, the physics apart from a statistical theory. this is the statistical phenomenon of the 2nd law summons and nomics. everything seems to be symmetrical in time, backwards or forwards. what's the difference? so i thought this is very odd. there must be some very strange theory which explains the difference. for many, many years i tried to think of a strange theory, constant mechanics. i didn't get anywhere but my student, paul todd, had a different way of thinking about the beginning. i'm sure the bus is a little myself, but he really worked it out. but the main point is, according to polls, idea is that you could extend the universe to before the big bang that just to say are a big bang. is the continuation of the remote future of what i call a previous eon. now, the word eon. i like to spell that a, a e. o, and that's one of the spellings. it's

a word which i looked it up in the dictionary to make sure it was no, the millionaires or some length of time. it's an indefinite length of time. so i'm calling an infinite venture time. so our eon began was a big bang. and we'll continue to this remote future. there was an eon, i say, prior to ours is remote future, became our big bang. and signals can get through. and 2 types of signals which we have explored. i and colleagues. one was when with my armenian colleague, he goes to joe and look for signals, gravitational way of signals, from collisions between super massive black holes. the waves coming out from the previous eon. we could see that we believe reducing an a polish group also looked and they also conclude that they see them. nobody pays any attention because this

is not the usual cosmos here. you were in the book where you're quite skeptical about the current application of quantum mechanics in physics, which seems to be quite in vogue right now. and you say that in the real world, quantum mechanics doesn't make much sense. hans schrodinger's cat being a paradox. but even it's hard to grass with, you know, paradoxical nature, all the, it was non locality, superposition and other mind blowing aspects this met. does that mean? it's necessarily wrong. i think you're talking about my book, the fashion faith and fantasy, the physics of the universe. yes, i do press express 6 skepticism, but let me talk about the face that is the quantum mechanics. and what i'm trying to say, as you mentioned, misreading are cats and schroeder and self was trying to say that there is a problem with quantum mechanics. people tend to interpret a little differently from shooting himself strutting or saying ok. according to his

own equation. he was saying, well, according to my equation, as mentioned trading talking, you could have a catch, which is dead and alive at the same time. and he's really saying, using this example, this is ridiculous and did you couldn't have a dead and alive cash at the same time. the consequence of his own equation is that you have a cat which is dead and alive at the same time. quantum mechanics is inconsistent with itself. this is sometimes people say quantum mechanics is the best area of physics we have ever had this sound why they say this, but syria is inconsistent with itself. and i don't think a theory that good should be self inconsistent. now you see, since quantum mechanics work so well, people don't like to use the word inconsistent. they like to say, oh it's, it's amazing horace, incomprehensible, mysterious, see?

but i say it can't be quite right. and this is what direct says, this is what i'm saying. and much schroedinger says it's not quite right. ok, so i get your point is approval and ampro will and you're saying the same thing about the string theory, which is also quite popular nowadays offers the variance attached to go parallel universe latin world view. but for you, it doesn't hold up because of lack of hard experimental evidence. so is it just our current limitations in our experiments? or is the string theory completely approval? g? i think there's a big difference between things here and in quantum mechanics. string theory has no evidence of sported. quantum mechanics has an enormous amount of evidence supported . so there is no comparison. she, i don't st like string theory very much you. when i 1st heard about string theory, i did like it. it was explained to me by linda susskind and i thought it was

a very beautiful idea. and i was quite taken but. but when i learnt it had to have a space time that was 26 dimensions. i said, okay, know when they got it down to 10 dimensions. so no, that's wrong. this is 4 dimensions. one time through space. and if you tie up the other ones into a little ball and because too small to see, that doesn't help. it's not, doesn't work very well. i don't think it works. so i formed the idea quite early that that theory is not correct. whereas quantum theory is certainly correct to a large level. it's, it's, it's a loss. it's, it may not be completely correct, but at one end of the scale it is very, very close to be correct. you have to say, what is it that makes it not quite correct? where that is where gravity comes in. so what i say is the union between general relativity economy mechanics is not that you bring the machinery of quantum

mechanics to bring it into the fold of cause i can know it's an even handed marriage that has to be give on one side and on the other side, sure, i'm son theory. when you look at tiny little spaces tend to minus 33 centimeters. okay. maybe you have to quantum gravity plays a role. there may be in the singularities. yes. you both sort of problem comes in that the main place where quantum mechanics and gravity have an effect on each other is the effect of gravity on quantum mechanics. it's the other way around. and this is to explain the collapse of away function. so i think we should, we need to study how they into play with each other, but don't have the view that quantum mechanics must be left in tex, you must say, take the view the quantum mechanics. but the yield in the circumstances of the collapse of the way function to gravity. we're going to take a short break right now when we're back or continue talking to 2020 noble prize

winner and physics. sir roger penrose. ah ah who make no certainly no borders and the blind number t's as emerge. we don't have authority. we don't the whole world needs to take action and be ready. not a joke. people judge crisis we can do better, we should be better. everyone is contributing each in their own way,

but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever. the challenge is paid for the response has been massive. so many good people are helping us. it makes it feel very proud that we need together in the ah

me. what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy foundation, let it be an arms race is on often very dramatic development. only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very political time. time to sit down and talk the is your media a reflection of reality in a world transformed what will make you feel safer? type relation, community you going the right way? where are you being that somewhere which direction? what is truth?

what is in a world corrupted. you need to this end. ah, so join us in the depths. will remain in the shallows. ah the ah! and we're back with twine twine, nobel prize winner in physics, sir roger penrose. you have a rather daring theory of your own about human consciousness, which is rooted in quantum mechanics. and one of your points is that human thinking is not a series of executed algorithms, which means that any attempts to actually create a truly functional artificial intelligence using current computing powers are doomed. so in your view, artificial intelligence that is equal to

a human brain is an impossible thing, right? do i get it correctly? you have it right here if you have it, right? i mean, i don't know what artificial tells reduce and you know, they can play just very well. the play go very well after my ideas about never mind . but it's, it's sure it can do computation. we know that. i mean, they can do arithmetic much better. i mean, my father's brothers big machine were trying to have it did arithmetic, that can do arithmetic much better than i can. but it's not. that's not the point. what does you see this dates back to when i was a graduate student in cambridge graduate student? yes, now undergraduate, i think many when i was not a graduate, yes. you see i was just pure mathematics. i was doing algebra, geometry that i, when i was a graduate student and i got interested in physics and in mathematical

logic, those are 2 subjects. and i went to lectures by herman bonnie ungenerous activity that was not my subject but interesting, very good lectures. wonderful expositions, he made another course on quantum mechanics, 5 pulled iraq, beautiful, completely different style. beautiful. and i got my understanding of quantum mechanics from direct the 3rd course was a course man, christine, and mathematical logic. and i had been very puzzled by girls theorem. you see, i taught them seems to prove that there are things in mathematics that you cannot prove. i thought this is not very pleasant. i don't like the idea. i went to the course of the scene. i learnt about turing machines. i learned about computability . i knew what that meant. i then about girdle, sir. he described a theorem. he says, if you have a system of logic where you have rules and procedure axioms the rules of procedure

and provided you believe that. so method of proof within that system always give you the truth. so that say you follow the rules and the rules, cellular true? is it, do you believe it's true? you believe is true if you believe the axioms? genuine. if you believe the rules of procedure only give you choose from own truths . ok. so if it proves it's true, i believe it. now, if you have that point of view, what does girl do? he shows a statement which says, in certain sense, not provable. now, you see, go through the procedures and you say yes, if you trust the rules. this statement is true. yes, you cannot prove it by those rules. now those rules you could put on a, she knew about turing machines. this algorithm existence show you,

there are the same as computers. that means that this computational system, if you believe that what it says is true, if you believe all the segments, then you must believe the thing beyond its scope is true. how does it do that? it does that by understanding it understands what the rules mean. i mean, it doesn't because it doesn't have understanding. that's what i regard as the difference. what does your consciousness do? that is not done by the algorithm exist and understand what it's doing. now what is understanding? i don't know what understanding is, but whatever it is, here's something which is not following an algorithm. so it's not a computational procedure. then i started to say, well, what can it be? how does it, it's something in the world. is it some mistake mrc or use that comes in from? who knows where that gives us some serious. so this enables us to understand things

. there's a confusion, computational device cannot do. i didn't believe that. i thought ok, what's going in our brains is material is just like the materials my computer is lack of material. this lamp is like everything else is organized differently perhaps. but it's still the same physical stuff. ok. how do we see non computable things in the world? of course, now we know we can compute not we, not us, but some people good people can compute what's black holes going around each other, swallowing each other. the signal is produced and gravitational ways if you build lago detector. now the nobel prize, you can see the signals which follow what the calculation, cellular black spiraling into each other. do. sure. you can do general attributed with a on a computer. what about quadrant mechanics? yeah, you can put shredding this equation on the computer. then i go back to direct 1st

lecture, what was his 1st lecture? he gave a talk where he talked about the superposition principle. he said, ok, an electron can be here, or an electron can be here, or it can have a state where it's here and here at the same time, he takes this piece of chalk. it breaks it into, i think he dip exit, do he says a piece of sharp 1st living why short can be here are to what kind of big picture to here and here and the same time my mind wanders. i look out of the window. i'm thinking about something else. then he finished his explanation. he comes back, i have a vague memory. he's saying something about energy. i have no idea what he said. he goes on and talks about quantum mechanics. so i'm left with his puzzle. one of the faces that makes a big piece of chalk behave differently from an electron. the massive explained it to me, but i didn't understand. so i go, i'm thinking that must be where the problem lies. something about the collapse of

the way function, which makes small things when they get too big. they can somehow exist in 2 places at once. the wave function collapse under the weight of gravity in some sense. so that was kind of a vague thought, but i'd nevertheless saw that this consciousness depends on that thing. there has to be in the brain somewhere, where the collapse of the wave function, whatever that physics is harnessed by the brain. now it's the opposite of what many people used to think. many people such as digna and i believe on norman, you're still believe that least possible that it's conscious being observing the system, the collapse is away function. so it's our conscious consciousness, which collapses. what we look at, we see my view is the opposite. it's not that it's what makes the consciousness is the collapse. does the other way around. i have no idea. no i had to. so i was

writing a book. now it took me a long time, actually take, galvanized myself to write the book. this is the emperor's new mind. eventually i did decide to write a book partly because i heard some of the, i think it was marvin mid scan, minsky and edward fred can talking about what computers could do in the future. and you have these 2 computers talking to each other. and as you walk up and to the computer, they already communicated more ideas with each other than the entire human race. and i thought, well, i know where you're coming from, but i don't have that view. i think understanding is something else, not the computer. and so i thought, well, i will try to explain my point of view and then i realize i have to learn about neuro physiology. so i have a section where i learned about it near it. i learned about the hodge can actually theory of no propagation and i think can i get enough coherence, you have to have

a quantum system to preserve itself up to a sufficient level that it actually does something in the brain nerves. well, the not a signal propagation it's electric field all over the brain says no, no, no, i go to the end of the book. i had to finish it. i did something i didn't really believe in. and that was the end of the book. otherwise, the, you know, rather disappoint, mentioned the end. nevertheless, a few people read my book as shooting, including still hammer off. now, still hammer off, was an anesthesiologist, anesthesiologists rest away because in the united states, i did an interview with him that we were talking about. oh, did you interesting this? no, he told me about microtubules. you see them yesterday stories that ok? the little juice. this is probably the solution to your problem. gosh, is this another crack pause?

i get crazy lesson from people that well i look it up to the microtubule real. yeah . it's real. so i thought this is very interesting. so i got to talk to him. he came during linda and we had long discussions. and then we had many other discussions, not only are they more promising than, than because it's small structures, but they're very symmetrical structures. so i was very impressed by the symmetry that you get in these little microtubules. and i thought there was a much better chance. so we then got together reformulated, our orchestrated objective reaction, orchestration reduction objects reduction theory which do it. i mean he does the biology and the neuro physics and all that stuff. i don't understand that stuff and i do the physics. he doesn't understand the physics very well, so we get together and compliment each other. well, professor, i mean sir roger,

it's fascinating listening to i had millions of questions prepared for you. but instead we, we have this brilliant lecture on your behalf on all existing theories and which of them stand ground in which not. and i thought this is much more interesting than me asking you silly question. so thank you so much for this wonderful insight into the martin into how our world functions beyond this dimension. so thank you very much. and if possible, maybe we can do this one more time. latisha enjoyed it. so mike was there, roger, thank you. take care of yourself. thank you. thank you. right. the ah

ah. when i was shot the wrong one all room just don't the room. yes. gave out the thing to come after an engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves well the party we choose to look for common ground in the kick in our summer solutions. every summer we talk about the solution and dwelling on the problems. you know, we've got answers, we've got pollution the,

we're segregated all along my social class. most people don't know. so in, in poverty by 1st, if you're born in 2 of 4 family, you're born into a minority family. if you're born into a family that only has a single parent that really constrains your live chances, people die on average. 15 years old, you born as a generational poverty. it's a, it's a fight every day to meet your needs and the needs of your family. me the the what would allow me to know one, julie ma'am, i can leave it in a while. on the largest record,

the harmonic duncan will not to heal our love are hell. yea, yea. yea. the one, the one who begin with the conduct of not the god, the car, the bill of nick is similar to the vehicle out them or not. i think going to my don't get through on this order for the game, but the i got to see if i get a model for your nice when i got home john to get possibly the.