Quantum physicist Juan Maldacena on the new quantum-reality theory (21-02-2016)

Juan Maldacena, a quantum physicist at the Institute of Advanced Study (IAS), on a new quantum-reality theory. He is often called 'the new Einstein'.

More videos with Juan Maldacena



No video? Please use the latest version of Safari, Chrome or Firefox. Internet Explorer might cause problems.
What is your field of research? (00:00:00)
Everything is build from the small number of particles? (00:02:53)
The speed of light is constant, time is not? (00:07:33)
How did the universe form? (00:09:37)
What happens when you connect these theories? (00:16:33)
Why do you yourself ask these questions? (00:20:14)
Are you sure you are going to find the answers? (00:22:16)
How do you make people understand these theories, since it is so difficult? (00:24:04)
For a lot of people string theory is not understandable? (00:25:23)
What makes a physical theory true? (00:26:34)
What is meant by string theory? (00:27:42)
Are you researching a theory of your own? (00:29:04)
Can you explain how a hologram works? (00:31:05)
Can you call it your lifework? (00:36:39)
Can your explain things like time, space...? (00:43:48)
Why do you want to have an explanation for how life started? (00:47:55)
How do you deal with nearly impossible questions?  (00:49:02)
When did you ask yourself this question for the first time? (00:50:03)
Who challenges you to find the answers? (00:51:21)
What kind of awareness is there on the other side of your frontier? (00:52:50)
For you as a child, where did it all start? (00:55:28)
What did you do to explore as a child? (00:56:36)
What did your parents say about it? (00:58:46)
Your job is thinking...? (00:59:38)
How does your thinking process works? (01:00:50)
Is it hard to stop thinking? (01:02:47)
What do you do when you're not working? (01:03:40)
Mathematics is like an instrument to you? (01:06:47)
What are the things you are not good at? (01:08:08)
What's the story about The Valley and Romeo and Julia? (01:10:22)
automatically generated captions
00:00:00 Interviewer: I will ask a lot of questions, but I prefer it to be like a conversation, so interrupt me if you like.
00:00:14 Juan Maldacena: Right, good.
00:00:16 Interviewer: The first thing, can you introduce yourself?
00:00:18 Juan Maldacena: Yeah, I'm Juan Maldacena, I'm the Carl Feinberg professor here at the Institute for Advanced Study.
00:00:22 Interviewer: What exactly is your field of research?
00:00:28 Juan Maldacena: My field of research is in trying to understand the fundamental laws of nature,
00:00:33 trying to develop theories that connect space-time and quantum mechanics,
00:00:39 and the main objective is to understand the beginning of the Big Bang.
00:00:43 Interviewer: Well, that's a big question.
00:00:48 Juan Maldacena: Yeah.
00:00:48 Interviewer: Did you say the laws of nature?
00:00:50 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. Physics is about studying the laws of nature, so how nature works.
00:00:56 Through the years we've learned a lot about how nature works,
00:01:00 and currently we have theories that are incredibly successful.
00:01:05 One of the theories is the theory that describes gravity.
00:01:08 It was originally developed by Newton, and then improved by Einstein.
00:01:12 Einstein gave us the current equations that govern the behavior of space-time.
00:01:19 We'll discuss perhaps a bit more about what space-time is made of,
00:01:23 or what the theory of Einstein tells us about space-time. That's one very successful theory.
00:01:29 It explained things like the expansion of the universe, the formation of black holes..
00:01:36 Its phenomena that before the theory was introduced, were ..
00:01:39 People didn't even think about them. On the other hand we the whole set of theories that describe matter,
00:01:54 the behavior of matter and the structure of matter.
00:01:57 These theories were rational,
00:01:57 especially rational quantum mechanical study being developed in the beginning of the 20th century.
00:02:03 The quantum is very important for the description of matter.
00:02:08 It's what keeps matter stable and prevents it from collapsing. Prevents atoms from collapsing, and so on.
00:02:15 This theory, well, it was further developed through the 20th century
00:02:20 and it's now come to what we call the standard model of particle physics.
00:02:26 Interviewer: Particle physics.
00:02:28 Juan Maldacena: It's basically the basic structures, the basic constituents of matter.
00:02:33 Matter is made out of little, small particles that behave according to the so-called quantum mechanics.
00:02:42 What is remarkable is that this list of constituents is very small.
00:02:46 So a very small number of particles make up all the matter that we see.
00:02:51 Interviewer: Really? So everything is built up from just a small number of particles?
00:02:58 Juan Maldacena: Yes, small number of kinds of particles.
00:03:01 We have the particles, the electron is one of them, and then we have the particles that make up the nuclei,
00:03:09 the nuclei of the atom. Within the nuclei are some particles called quarks, but they are small, little particles.
00:03:14 For most of matter they are made out of just two kinds, so-called up and down quark.
00:03:21 Then there are some particles that mediate the forces within them. The photon, electromagnetic waves, and so on.
00:03:28 Then the weak force and the strong force.
00:03:32 The strong force keeps the nucleus together, and with these particles and these forces we can describe all of matter.
00:03:39 Interviewer: You know that, or you think so?
00:03:42 Juan Maldacena: No, well we know it experimentally,
00:03:46 and the latest experiment was the experiment in the large hydro collider, which discovered the so-called Higgs boson,
00:03:56 which was one of the missing particles in the standard model.
00:04:00 Now we have whole set of particles that describes everything.
00:04:04 I briefly told you about the particles that make up most all named matter,
00:04:08 but there are other unstable particles which are similar, but the structure gets replicated a few times,
00:04:17 and while so now we have a complete set of particles with a logically consistent theory that uses the structure of
00:04:25 something called relativistic quantum mechanics.
00:04:28 [crosstalk 00:04:30] Relativistic quantum mechanics,
00:04:30 there's quantum mechanics plus the principle of special relativity. We can discuss perhaps special relativity a little
00:04:37 more. Let me discuss perhaps these theories a little more.
00:04:44 Interviewer: Yes, that's okay.
00:04:45 Juan Maldacena: Then I can go on into discussing perhaps the more current issues.
00:04:53 First, well we have these notions of space and time. Right?
00:04:59 In principle space and time seem totally disconnected from each other..
00:05:02 The very intuitive notion of space, while time looks a little more mysterious to us, and a bit ..
00:05:09 Certainly different from space.
00:05:12 The first point I'd like to explain is why physicists talk about space-time, why they put these two words together.
00:05:18 Why don't they talk about space temperature, space I don't know. Price of [solar 00:05:27] or whatever.
00:05:25 They talk about these two things because the way you perceive time depends on how you are moving through space. If you
00:05:36 have two observers moving relative to each other, the two observers perceive time differently.
00:05:44 If you have a clock here, another clock that is moving,
00:05:48 the second clock will appear to this observer as moving slower than the clock here that's at rest.
00:05:54 The other observer will see the other clock also moving slower.
00:05:58 This can happen because space and time sort of get mixed by motion.
00:06:06 This is the consequence of a principle, which is the principle that light,
00:06:13 the speed of light is constant for these two observers. This is something that is not totally intuitive.
00:06:20 You have one observer that is stationary and you have a light beam that travels this way,
00:06:25 and you have another observer that moves in this direction, naively,
00:06:30 according to your intuition you will expect that this observer should see the light moving slower. Right?
00:06:35 If instead of talking about the light beam we were talking about the train, that would be the case.
00:06:42 But it turns out that experimentally the speed of light is constant, so it is the same for all observers.
00:06:50 Interviewer: Oh really, so compared to the train?
00:06:53 Juan Maldacena: Yes, so if instead of a train we had a beam of light, the two observers,
00:07:00 one is stationary the other is moving, both would see the light going at the same speed,..
00:07:04 so the light would be moving this way .. This happens because the rate of ..
00:07:12 How time and space are perceived by the two observers are different.
00:07:16 The price you have to pay for this constancy of the speed of light is that time is now relative.
00:07:22 In the theory of relativity the speed of light is absolute, but time is relative.
00:07:28 Time is relative to who's measuring it.
00:07:32 Interviewer: I can try to understand what you are saying. What I hear is that you say the speed of light is constant.
00:07:46 So time is not constant.
00:07:52 Juan Maldacena: Right, time is relative.
00:07:55 The flow of time depends on how you are moving through space-time, so it's similar to let's say space, right?
00:08:03 So we are standing in space, there is some direction we call forward and some direction we call go right.
00:08:11 But if you have another person who's looking in a different direction what's forward to him
00:08:15 and what's to the right is different. So it's exactly the same but for two moving observers.
00:08:21 You have two moving observers but one calls time and space is different from what the other calls time and space.
00:08:29 That's why is more convenient to think about space-time as something that's both time and space,
00:08:37 and that thing is the same for both.
00:08:41 What one calls time and space is different,
00:08:44 but space-time is the same. It's the universal structure in which particles move.
00:08:57 The laws of physics have to have this symmetry of the constancy of speed of light
00:09:05 and the fact that the laws of physics should be independent of how you're moving.
00:09:09 When you combine quantum mechanics and this principle of special relativity,
00:09:15 you get the modern theory of quantum physics.
00:09:17 Well you get the structure, which is called quantum [field 00:09:21] theory,
00:09:21 and used in special cases of the structure, putting in which particles you have and the interactions and so on.
00:09:28 You get the models for particle physics and they are incredibly successful
00:09:32 and they describe all the experiments that you can do..
00:09:36 Interviewer: In the beginning you raised the big question, how did the universe ..
00:09:46 Juan Maldacena: Let me first say a few words about general relativity.
00:09:56 According to our intuition, so space is sort of absolute and there is some [inaudible 00:10:03]
00:10:02 in space where particles move and objects move.
00:10:09 That's probably the theory of [mutant 00:10:13] we learned in school, that planets move and so on.
00:10:14 They are moving in some space that was preexisting and it's not affected at all by the motion of these planets.
00:10:20 But in the theory of [inaudible 00:10:25] what Einstein postulates is that space or space
00:10:29 and time because they have to come together because of the principle of special relativity.
00:10:33 They are actually structured that is dynamic because it can be bent by the presence of matter. He further says that the
00:10:42 force of gravity is due to this bend in our space-time. This is a new, very interesting conceptual idea.
00:10:54 Again, it describes gravity as we see it, and it describes deviations from Newton's gravity.
00:11:01 It describes new things that were not known at the time of Einstein, like the expansion of the universe,
00:11:09 the formation of black holes in extreme circumstances.
00:11:13 Well, some of it's predictions are have now been confirmed, like the discovery of gravity waves, very recently,
00:11:20 just a week ago it was announced.
00:11:23 Interviewer: Yeah, I saw that, were you excited about it.
00:11:25 Juan Maldacena: Yeah, that's really exciting, very interesting.
00:11:28 Interviewer: Did you know about that they were going to announce this?
00:11:33 Juan Maldacena: Yeah, there were rumors that they were going to announce it.
00:11:37 Of course the experiment had been going for a couple of decades.
00:11:42 Interviewer: For a couple of billion years.
00:11:45 Juan Maldacena: Well, the gravity waves were going on for a long time,
00:11:49 but the the experiments trying to detect them also took a lot of effort.
00:11:54 We're getting [dramatic 00:11:57] confirmation of both Einstein's theories.
00:12:00 Moreover, the [seasons 00:12:02] of black holes.
00:12:03 This theory of special relativity of general relativity, well Einstein the other equations,
00:12:09 but then there was a lot of research trying to understand the solutions of equations.
00:12:13 The physical interpretation of the solutions. For example, black holes were really only understood in the ‘60s.
00:12:24 Even theoretically.
00:12:24 Then understanding them better then led to understanding what things you should look for in the sky,
00:12:29 and some objects in the sky were recognized as probably endings of black holes,
00:12:35 and now we have this guy with the world detection which appears to come from the coalition of two black holes.
00:12:43 Interviewer: You think so?
00:12:46 Juan Maldacena: That’s a model to describe it. The only announce one coalition.
00:12:53 Probably they see more, it will become more and more convincing..
00:12:59 Interviewer: Yeah. Because this is the first one. It’s a question of time that more of this [crosstalk 00:13:04]
00:13:03 Juan Maldacena: You would hope.
00:13:05 Interviewer: Yeah.
00:13:06 Juan Maldacena: That’s all about Einstein theory of relativity.
00:13:11 Einstein theory of general relativity is a theory where space time is dynamical. It’s something that moves.
00:13:16 It’s not the starting thing. It’s an actor in physics. It’s not the stage in which physics happens.
00:13:24 It is the stage for all particle physics. For all the matter and so on.
00:13:29 You have the space time and then matter moves in that space time.
00:13:32 Also space time reacts to the presence of matter, and it moves itself.
00:13:39 Through cosmology, this expansion of the space time is very important.
00:13:44 Space time expands and it cools because of that expansion.
00:13:47 Expansion of space time is very important for getting to the universe.
00:13:53 What it is and structure of matter to what it is. This expansion is important for cooling the universe
00:13:59 and then further the force of gravity creates the structures that we have in the universe.
00:14:04 Such as galaxies and planets and so on. It’s important for explaining nature as we said..
00:14:13 Theory of relativity in some sense is incomplete. Because it [crosstalk 00:14:21]
00:14:20 Interviewer: Incomplete?
00:14:21 Juan Maldacena: Incomplete.
00:14:26 In the sense that if you start out with some initial conditions which are reasonable, the system evolves
00:14:33 and creates so called singularities. You can solve the equations.
00:14:37 You find situations where the curvature of space time becomes infinite.
00:14:41 This happens for example when black hole collapses.
00:14:45 In the interior of the black hole, there’s a region with infinite space time curvature.
00:14:50 Space time becomes so curved, and so … The force of gravity somehow becomes infinite there.
00:14:56 If you were to fall in there, you would be ripped apart.
00:15:04 We don’t have a theory that … The current theory is like general theory
00:15:08 and particle physics do not explain what happens in that situation.
00:15:12 Interviewer: Are you looking for the explanation?
00:15:18 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. Those are the theories we have..
00:15:21 I think maybe we can make a small bit of smile [crosstalk 00:15:25] Maybe I want to tell them to be quiet.
00:15:30 Interviewer: We were at the point that you were trying to connect the theories.
00:15:36 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. The Einstein theory works very well for many, many things we observe.
00:15:43 The equations themselves fail in some situations. One situation is when matter collapses in a black hole.
00:15:49 The interior of the black hole, we got the region with very high curvature.
00:15:55 If you were to fall in there, you would be ripped apart.
00:15:57 The equations don’t allow us to [the eye 00:16:02] what happens to matter when that happens.
00:16:04 Another interesting situation is if you evolve the equations backwards,
00:16:06 and you try to find out what happened in the very beginning of the big bang. Also the current theories don’t explain.
00:16:12 It cannot explain what happened. Again the expansion would be so rapid,
00:16:18 that space expanding so rapidly you couldn’t … You cannot … The eye what happens.
00:16:27 The equations themselves, the curvature becomes infinite, and the equations fail. The reason … Yeah?
00:16:34 Interviewer: If I try to imagine of course what’s happening inside your head trying to connect these theories,
00:16:41 what happens?
00:16:42 Juan Maldacena: The main reason for these inconsistencies is the fact that they … Einstein’s theories so called
00:16:47 Classical Theory, which is a good theory when things are very big.
00:17:00 Basically very short distances, you have to take into account the quantum.
00:17:06 The same way that matter of long distances can be described, also classically.
00:17:09 When you go to short distances, you have to describe it using the quantum mechanical description.
00:17:14 Space time is similar.
00:17:16 When you go to very short distance in space time, you also would need quantum mechanical description.
00:17:22 For matter, when we go to short distances, we go to the atoms, the elementary particles and so on. For space time,.
00:17:28 we should go again to something that will be atoms of space time. I think that the [crosstalk 00:17:35]
00:17:35 Interviewer: What is that?
00:17:35 Juan Maldacena: We think that we went to such a theory, we could do this. We could perhaps understand the big bang..
00:17:42 Or, the situations which we cannot understand [crosstalk 00:17:46]
00:17:45 Interviewer: Define the atoms of space time.
00:17:47 Juan Maldacena: I can’t define the atoms of space time. We’re trying to find what they are.
00:18:02 One idea that is wrong, is the idea that there would be atoms at each different locations in space, and so on.
00:18:08 Space time is not like continuing matter.
00:18:10 Because, one important property that was understood theoretically is that,
00:18:18 when you have the number of configurations in original space time, that number configurations,
00:18:24 does not grow like the volume. As it would with only matter.
00:18:28 The number of atoms somehow wherever they are, of space time,
00:18:31 we know that their number grows like the area of the surface.
00:18:34 Rather than the volume. That’s an interesting property of this so called atoms of space time.
00:18:46 By atoms of space time I mean, well basically vague idea but I try to motivate it in this way.
00:18:53 The search for a theory that describes space time at the quantum mechanical level. Using the laws of quantum mechanics.
00:19:00 The laws of quantum mechanics are laws which are intrinsically probabilistic.
00:19:06 That’s the main difference from the laws of classical physics.
00:19:09 Classical physics, if you know the initial conditions, you can then calculate what would happen in the future..
00:19:16 [crosstalk 00:19:17]
00:19:16 Interviewer: Because you cannot do an experiment you mean?
00:19:18 Juan Maldacena: No, in quantum mechanics you can do experiments.
00:19:21 The results you can prepare the initial conditions always in the same way.
00:19:26 The results of the climates will be different each time you experiment, you’ll get a different answer.
00:19:31 All you can predict according to quantum mechanics is not the precise answer of the experiment,
00:19:39 but the probabilities for the different answers. You do an experiment, it’s like flipping a coin.
00:19:49 You can calculate and you can say, maybe I’ll get 50% one result. 50% of the time one result and 50% the other.
00:19:58 Or maybe it’s 30, 70 and so on. Quantum mechanics allows you to calculate those percentages.
00:20:05 Quantum mechanics doesn’t allow you to give definite answers to some questions. It is intrinsically this way.
00:20:15 Interviewer: That’s a rather big question you ask yourself.
00:20:18 Besides the part that you are this scientist trying to research this.
00:20:26 I’m also interested why is it you asking this question? What’s your … Why do you ask this question?
00:20:39 Why do you do this?
00:20:41 Juan Maldacena: Certainly I’m not the first to ask this question. This question was asked many years ago.
00:20:48 Probably Planck was the first to realize that there was a connection between the quantum and gravity.
00:20:54 At some point gravity would fail, and calculated what distance scale you would [inaudible 00:21:01] was a century ago.
00:21:04 Since then, people have had various ideas by thinking about this problem.
00:21:13 It’s a problem that is hard to access it fundamentally directly.
00:21:17 This distance in which the quantum is important is super tiny.
00:21:20 It’s much smaller than the smallest distances we can see today will accelerate this.
00:21:25 By a group of people who are trying to investigate this from the theoretical point of view,
00:21:36 trying to find the structure of mathematical theory that would put these two things together. We’re trying to do
00:21:43 something similar to what Einstein did when he joined special relativity with Newtonian gravity.
00:21:50 He realize that the theory of Newton was not consistent with this idea that the speed of light is the maximum speed of
00:21:57 propagation of signals. That it should be the same for all observers.
00:22:03 Putting those two things together, he managed to create the structure. The structure of general relativity.
00:22:07 Here we are trying to replicate that from theoretical points of view,.
00:22:11 try to find the connections between the quantum and space time, and [crosstalk 00:22:17].
00:22:15 Interviewer: Are you sure you’re going to find the answers or [crosstalk 00:22:20]
00:22:23 Juan Maldacena: No. We’re not 100% sure, but we’re confident that we have a high probability.
00:22:30 The equation is so interesting, that we should try to investigate it.
00:22:35 Interviewer: You know that you’re on the right path?
00:22:38 Juan Maldacena: Yeah.
00:22:40 What gives us some confidence that we’re in the right path is that, we’re not investigating this in the vacuum
00:22:49 or without … We now have some very concrete theories. The nicest one is the theory of strength theory.
00:22:59 That is a theory based on the construction that works very nicely in some situations.
00:23:05 That manages to join the quantum with space time.
00:23:10 Is a theory under construction, and a theory which is continued to be developed and we’re trying to understand it.
00:23:17 Interviewer: Strength theory.
00:23:18 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. Strength theory. It seems to connect the quantum with space time in a very interesting way.
00:23:24 By investigating strength theory, people have found very interesting mathematical relations. That are true mathematics.
00:23:34 They found the connections between different physical theories.
00:23:38 For example, between the theory of strong interactions and some theories of space time.
00:23:46 The fact that the disconnections were found,,
00:23:49 gives us some confidence that at least the structure that we’re investigating is interesting and [great 00:23:56]
00:23:55 and it could be the answer to this question of quantum gravity.
00:23:59 Which is really the main question we’re trying to answer.
00:24:03 Interviewer: Do you work in a group of people who are on the same level theoretically?
00:24:12 Juan Maldacena: Yeah.
00:24:13 Interviewer: How is it for you to … Now you have to explain it to me, and I don’t understand.
00:24:24 You have to transfer your thoughts or your ideas to people who don’t understand.
00:24:29 Because it’s so difficult even for yourself, it’s difficult. How is that?
00:24:35 Juan Maldacena: Well, for us it’s difficult to find the equations,
00:24:40 but I think what I’m trying to compare is the problem we’re trying to understand
00:24:46 and I think the problem is understandable.
00:24:48 It’s just joining two theories of physics that are out there, and putting them together.
00:24:56 They are not completely compatible with each other.
00:24:58 In the history of physics, when there were two kinds of theories that were not quite compatible,
00:25:02 and you find a structure that puts them together, it might be the right structure.
00:25:06 Interviewer: This theory might be the strength theory?
00:25:09 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. The strength theory is the main tool and the main thing that we’re investigating.
00:25:15 We think that it is not the right structure. It’s probably close to the right structure..
00:25:20 It could be the stepping stone to the right structure. [crosstalk 00:25:25]
00:25:22 Interviewer: For a lot of people, the strength theory is un-understandable,
00:25:26 but you all have to understand this theory just to use it as a possible?
00:25:34 Juan Maldacena: Yeah.
00:25:35 Strength theory might sound complicated,
00:25:38 but it’s something that someone who’s doing his PhD in physics can learn in a year, a couple of years,.
00:25:46 and they can [crosstalk 00:25:47] That’s right...
00:25:53 Interviewer: Maybe [crosstalk 00:25:54] Can you explain to me what [crosstalk 00:25:56]
00:25:55 Juan Maldacena: There is … It’s like playing the piano.
00:25:58 You’re not going to be able to play the piano in five minutes.
00:26:01 Someone can tell you, oh you have to press keys and so on but you won’t be able to play the piano
00:26:08 or to produce nice music.
00:26:08 Interviewer: It sounds awful.
00:26:10 Juan Maldacena: Here also, it takes a while to get familiar. To familiarize yourself with the ideas.
00:26:18 One reason we have this is because you really have to learn a lot of the physics that precedes it.
00:26:24 You have to learn well general relativity, you have to learn well particle theory of interacting particles.
00:26:32 You have to do this.
00:26:34 Interviewer: Isn’t it a fact that if different people from different backgrounds come together
00:26:41 and discuss this strength theory, that in the event that they all know what you’re talking about,
00:26:51 or understand the strength theory, doesn’t make it then true?
00:26:57 Juan Maldacena: No. What makes a physical theory true, as a physics theory of physics is comparison with experiment.
00:27:05 Interviewer: If you all understand the strength theory and then you think it’s true, you understand what it means,
00:27:12 it took some years but different other people took some years and they understand strength theory.
00:27:18 Juan Maldacena: Strength theory today is a mathematical structure.
00:27:21 It’s a mathematical structure which has some physical interpretation.
00:27:26 We don’t yet know whether it’s the right theory of physics.
00:27:28 We think it’s in the right track, and we’re motivated enough to continue stirring it. That doesn’t make it true.
00:27:38 That just makes it a very interesting mathematical theory.
00:27:41 Interviewer: Can you explain to me what is meant by this strength theory?
00:27:45 Juan Maldacena: Well,
00:27:49 mainly strength theory is a theory which some laws that can describe space time at the quantum mechanical level.
00:27:58 Using the laws of quantum mechanics. That it reduces to Einstein theory for big distances. That’s its main advantage.
00:28:09 Now, maybe you are asking why is it called strength.
00:28:12 Well, this comes in the fact that [man 00:28:18] formulation of the theory,
00:28:19 you have little tiny vibrating loops of strength.
00:28:23 Instead of having particles which are point like, as we have in theory of particles, or innate particles,
00:28:32 the elementary objects are a little strengths. One dimension objects.
00:28:37 That’s … Using those,
00:28:41 you can describe ripples of space time interacting. All those gravity waves that we discussed before in the experiment,
00:28:49 when they interact in a quantum mechanical way. They can do so in a way that’s not generating any inconsistency.
00:28:57 Interviewer: Is there a theory of your own which you are investigating or researching?
00:29:09 Juan Maldacena: I’ve been researching some relationship between strength theory and particle physics.
00:29:19 There’s a relationship which is part of this connections that I was describing before.
00:29:24 That the strength theory led to.
00:29:25 This is a connection between theories of gravity in the interior of the space time,
00:29:32 and the theory of particles on the boundary of the space time.
00:29:36 In this relationship, the idea is that the so called atoms of space time in the interior,
00:29:42 are like particles on the boundary. That’s roughly one way to say.
00:29:47 Another analogy people make sometimes is the idea of the hologram.
00:29:51 That you can … A hologram is a two dimensional photographic plate. That when you illuminate it in the light,
00:29:58 you see three dimensional picture.
00:30:00 The idea is that you can have the dynamics of this particle on the boundary or space time so far away.
00:30:08 Can have an alternative description as objects moving in the interior. Subject to the force of gravity.
00:30:15 Interviewer: The atoms of space time are reflected or projected?
00:30:23 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. The real atoms would be on the boundary. The real elementary particles, another thing.
00:30:31 Then we’ve got some effective description … approximate description in terms of a space time in the interior.
00:30:38 In this picture, space time is … This is just an approximation.
00:30:41 It’s an approximation to the dynamics of lots of particles.
00:30:47 In the same way that properties of microscopic objects come from similar approximations, like the scarcity of water
00:30:55 or just the behavior of water waves and so on.
00:30:58 It comes from the collective motion of many of the concentrated molecules.
00:31:07 Interviewer: The thing you’re explaining to me how it works this hologram again? As simple as possible.
00:31:12 Juan Maldacena: This idea is the idea that you can describe gravitational physics,
00:31:19 or dynamics of space time at the quantum level. Which is something we don’t understand too well how to do it.
00:31:24 In terms of theory of particles. That lives on the boundary of that space time.
00:31:29 The theory of particles is very similar to the theory of particles we use for particle physics.
00:31:34 Or, some similar to the theory we use in the quantum mechanics. That’s a disconnection.
00:31:45 It connects for example black holes, to come on systems of particles that find the temperature.
00:31:56 If you assume … It’s a conjecture that these two things are related. It’s a conjecture that people work a lot on
00:32:05 and they found lots of ideas that this correct at least in very specific cases.
00:32:11 It’s a conjecture a conjecture between two let’s say mathematical theories.
00:32:16 One is the mathematics of strength theory in the space times, or quantum mechanical dynamical space times.
00:32:23 That’s described through strength theory, and ordinary theories of particle physics.
00:32:29 Many cases we can approximately describe each of the two sides, and then check mathematically that they’re correct.
00:32:35 The idea is to understand this further.
00:32:42 To understand better how space … What this implies for space time,
00:32:47 and how to build better theories of space time. In particular how to solve some of the problems we have with black
00:32:54 holes.
00:32:54 Black holes are understood reasonably well with the theory of Einstein’s … With Einstein’s theory of relativity.
00:33:09 Black holes have also give rise to some quantum mechanical effects.
00:33:11 More precisely once you take into account quantum mechanics.
00:33:15 Black holes can start to emit some kind of radiation Hawking discovered.
00:33:19 He discovered this theoretically, and it’s called Hawking radiation.
00:33:25 This implies that black holes are they form, and then they start emitting this radiation.
00:33:32 They emit a kind of soft glow.
00:33:36 Just to highlight how surprising this radiation is,
00:33:41 black holes were called black because they don’t emit any light. Anything that goes in has to fall in
00:33:48 and nothing can be emitted.
00:33:50 Interviewer: Can get out?
00:33:51 Juan Maldacena: Cannot get out. This radiation is something that is somehow getting out.
00:33:56 You can even have the [inaudible 00:33:58] situation of having a white black hole.
00:34:00 You have a black hole which is very tiny.
00:34:04 The size of the wave length of light, or the size of a bacteria roughly speaking.
00:34:09 That black hole will look white to our eyes. These black holes don’t form naturally in nature.
00:34:15 Black holes that form naturally in nature, are very big and have a very low temperature.
00:34:20 If you could form such a tiny black hole, theories predict that it should look white.
00:34:25 Here you see that there’ll be little conflict between Einstein’s theory of relativity,
00:34:29 in the beginning of a conflict you see it. One says it should be black, and the other one says it should be white.
00:34:36 Interviewer: White hole.
00:34:37 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. This is different from what people call a white hole, but this is a white black hole.
00:34:43 Here you see the beginning of some slight conflict between the two, and if you go deeper in,.
00:34:54 there are some laws of thermodynamics that should apply to any option that emits thermal .. This radiation is thermal.
00:35:03 It gets emitted at a certain temperature. That’s why you needed to make it very small, to make it look white.
00:35:11 Because the temperature becomes higher. The smaller the black hole is.
00:35:15 Small black hole is hotter than a bigger black hole.
00:35:18 I should make the black hole smaller,
00:35:23 it gets hotter. If you apply it with the laws of thermodynamics as we usually understand them,
00:35:31 they seem to hold for such black holes.
00:35:35 They are … They seem to be in some conflict with another fact that we know from general relativity.
00:35:40 Which is that if you solve the Einstein’s equations in black hole, there is a surface that we call the horizon.
00:35:46 Which is a surface basically right on the outside, and the inside. It’s an imaginary surface.
00:35:51 It’s not a real surface. It’s kind of point of no return.
00:35:58 If you cross the horizon, in the interior, you cannot send anything to the outside. You cannot even escape.
00:36:06 You’ll be doomed to fall in the singularity. You don’t feel anything when you cross the horizon.
00:36:12 It’s a perfectly reasonable surface. That’s what Einstein’s theory predicts.
00:36:23 This fact seems to somehow be in some conflict with this thermal properties of black holes,
00:36:29 and how to fully resolve this conflict. Is one of the things I and some other people are working on.
00:36:40 Interviewer: Is it something that you can call your life work?
00:36:44 Juan Maldacena: I would say that I’ve been mostly investigating this relationship between the interior
00:36:53 and the boundary. Also, trying to understand these problems with black holes. These problems with black holes.
00:37:01 The aspects of black holes.
00:37:03 Interviewer: Is this like your life researching this? Or is this just a job?
00:37:16 Juan Maldacena: It is a passion and I would like to really find the problem, and find a solution to the problem.
00:37:30 I hope it gets solved soon.
00:37:32 Interviewer: Are you close?
00:37:34 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. We seem to be close. Hopefully yes.
00:37:38 Interviewer: What I try to imagine, is because it’s also theoretical. You must have a big imagination.
00:37:52 When you think about it, what do you see?
00:37:55 Is it … And I don’t want you to explain the theory, but how do you represent this in your head? In your brain?
00:38:08 In colors, or in shapes, or in?
00:38:11 Juan Maldacena: Yeah.
00:38:12 Probably in terms of …By the way, we imagine formulas and their properties,
00:38:17 and we make a little mental image for these formulas.
00:38:21 We … For example, already for Einstein theory of relativity you have to imagine space time as some kind of membrane.
00:38:28 Interviewer: How do you imagine that?
00:38:31 Juan Maldacena: I imagine it same for classical space time for example, as a membrane
00:38:35 and the quantum one a membrane that is fluctuating. Those are the kind of mental images that we …
00:38:41 Interviewer: Sorry, a membrane?
00:38:42 Juan Maldacena: Well, space time is like a membrane that has certain shape. Has some dynamics of the shape can change.
00:38:51 If you get very close, this membrane has some oscillations and some structure.
00:38:58 That’s what we have at short distances. That’s a picture of the smallest standard for how to think about this.
00:39:09 One of the interesting things that we’ve been trying to understand and many people have begun to notice is that,
00:39:20 there is some connection between a certain property of quantum mechanics called entanglement.
00:39:26 Entanglement is a funny kind of correlation you can have in quantum mechanical systems. Which in some sense stronger
00:39:36 than classical correlations.
00:39:40 Before we discuss the fact that in some quantum mechanical systems you cannot predict the answer to certain experiments.
00:39:45 You might sometimes find 50% chance of one, or 50% chance of the other.
00:39:54 You’re going to have systems where you have two particles, and they’re separated.
00:40:00 You’re going to experiment here and you have 50% chance of each outcome.
00:40:03 You can do another experiment here and it’s again 50% chance of any outcome.
00:40:09 It might turn out that the outcomes of the two experiments are correlated. Let’s say the experiment is like flipping
00:40:18 a coin, it comes out heads here and it also comes out heads here.
00:40:21 If it comes tails here, it also will come out tails here. They’re perfectly correlated.
00:40:26 That’s an example of a classical correlation.
00:40:28 Entanglement is the fact that you can also measure another property at the same time.
00:40:35 If this coin which is not heads or tails but it’s the color, this is another analogy.
00:40:39 If the property is quantum mechanical that cannot be measure at the same time as the original property.
00:40:47 That’s one of the features also. Quantum mechanics.
00:40:50 That sometimes you can have two properties which you cannot measure at the same time. You can ask this coin whether
00:41:01 it’s heads or tails.
00:41:02 Or whether it says it’s black or white but you cannot ask where it’s black, and where it’s heads or tails.
00:41:08 It’s not a perfect analogy, or a classical variables are not of this kind. They’re mutually incompatible.
00:41:16 You can do that with this quantum let’s say properties, and again you can have two particles so that,
00:41:24 if you now measure, not only whether it’s heads or tails, but also black or white,
00:41:29 you have the same perfect correlation with the other.
00:41:34 That some kind of correlation that is not possible in classical physics, but it’s possible in quantum physics..
00:41:40 We think that [crosstalk 00:41:43]
00:41:41 Interviewer: Even though there’s a big distance?
00:41:42 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. Even though there is a big distance.
00:41:45 Again, with classical correlations, we can have these correlations because the two … You prepare the two kinds first,
00:41:51 and then you take them apart. Then you look at it. In classical physics, there’s no problem with this correlation.
00:41:58 What is interesting is that you can have correlation between variables that are mutually incompatible locally.
00:42:04 By compatible I mean that you either measure one or the other, but nevertheless you have a correlation.
00:42:10 Sometimes [inaudible 00:42:17] surprising property quantum mechanics, when it was noticed,
00:42:19 it was noticed in that paper by Einstein [inaudible 00:42:22] in the 1930s. Then while this was property,
00:42:29 and now it’s quite central notion for quantum information theory and people are using it in more practical ways.
00:42:39 To build … I mean, it would be essential for building quantum mechanical computer systems.
00:42:45 It also seems to be connected with the connections in space time.
00:42:50 Things that are closer to getting space time are more entangled with each other.
00:42:57 In some sense when you have the quantum field theory vacuum. The vacuum in the theory of particle physics.
00:43:06 If you want to split it in two parts,
00:43:08 the fundamental degrees of freedom are quantum variables that describe it. Are quite entangled with each other.
00:43:19 We think that in some circumstances if you take two separate systems, and you entangle them very strongly,
00:43:26 so you could also generate some kind of quantum connect. You can generate geometric connection between them.
00:43:32 In some cases. In some sense, through the entanglement is connected to the connectivity of space time. You can, yeah.
00:43:47 Interviewer: I want to try to get back to the beginning again.
00:43:58 Because it’s rather difficult and I doubt you told me a lot about it. I try to recapture a little bit if I’m right.
00:44:13 I would like to ask you to give definitions of the ingredients. Definitions for normal people.
00:44:31 What is time, what is space and what is relativity?
00:44:35 Juan Maldacena: Okay, good. Let’s start with time. Time is what the clock measures.
00:44:44 Now, this sounds like a circular definition,
00:44:48 but of course what’s not obvious is that different blocks made in different ways measure the same time.
00:44:54 It turns out if you have different kinds of clocks, and you make them,
00:45:01 they will all measure the same … They’ll measure the same … They’ll give the same answer.
00:45:05 That you can synchronize clocks and they stay synchronize and so on.
00:45:10 It looks like there is something that is being measured by these clocks.
00:45:14 This something is the abstraction we call time.
00:45:17 We have the time we feel psychologically which is not a perfect clock,
00:45:21 but certainly agrees with more precise physical clocks. All clocks that measure time are made of physical particles,
00:45:30 and that’s how we measure time. That’s how we define it.
00:45:35 It’s an abstraction but this is the thing that all these clocks are measuring. What is space?
00:45:44 Space is somehow the distance between the … Let’s say the nothingness that exists between two objects.
00:45:55 Now, it’s what’s missing when you go into a crowded bus. That’s space. What’s this relativity?
00:46:08 Let’s first discuss special relativity.
00:46:10 Before when I was discussing time, I said that all clocks measure the same time.
00:46:15 That is only true for clocks that are stationary. If you have a clock here.
00:46:19 Another clock here, and both stay at rest relative to each other,
00:46:23 then they will measure the same time. If you have a clock here. Another clock moving, they will measure different time.
00:46:32 Relativity, special relative that’s how different is this other time the clock measures.
00:46:37 It’s a simple law for how to find out how to.
00:46:46 The theory of relativity is the theory that postulates the speed of light. It’s constant. It’s absolute.
00:46:54 If you could also have call it absolute something.
00:47:00 What’s relative is time, but that doesn’t mean everything is relative.
00:47:05 Interviewer: This envisioning what is light?
00:47:07 Juan Maldacena: Well, you could replace light by other things like gravity where it’s also propagated the speed.
00:47:15 More precisely, I should have said it’s the maximum speed of propagation of signals.
00:47:20 The idea is that there is a maximum speed for the propagation of signals.
00:47:27 So happens that light propagates at this speed.
00:47:29 If you had a massive particle, it would generally propagate at a lower speed.
00:47:35 If you try to push a massive particle to move it faster and faster and faster,
00:47:39 you could not make it move faster than this maximum speed. Which is also coincides with the speed of light.
00:47:45 Interviewer: That’s why it’s absolute?
00:47:47 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. Different observers would measure exactly the same speed.
00:47:52 Interviewer: Why do you want to have an explanation for how life started?
00:48:05 Juan Maldacena: Well, it’s not an explanation about how life started, but how the beginning of space time started.
00:48:11 How time originated and what happened at the beginning of the big bang.
00:48:18 We’re trying to understand it because that’s something we don’t know.
00:48:22 Science is always about pushing the boundaries.
00:48:26 We don’t … It’s not just the fact that we don’t know how it happened,
00:48:31 but even we don’t have a theory that is [self 00:48:36] consistent that could describe it.
00:48:36 We are even trying to find theories that could in principle describe the big bang,.
00:48:43 then we’ll have the problem of finding .. That’s the way the big bang actually happened. Yeah.
00:48:50 That’s why we think the problem may be solved by thinking about it, and finding the theory
00:48:55 and then perhaps making some new predictions that we could test experimentally.
00:48:59 Interviewer: Yeah, but all the time the same question arises again. What happened before the big bang?
00:49:07 Questions like that. How do you deal with this almost impossible …
00:49:11 Juan Maldacena: The idea is to make a theory, and maybe you can make a theory which has a time before.
00:49:21 Maybe you can make a theory where time actually starts in the big bang,
00:49:26 and does not have any meaning before … Sort of the question doesn’t have a meaning.
00:49:32 We don’t know what the right answer is. That’s what we’re trying to find out with this concept.
00:49:38 People imagine now maybe there was a time before, and somehow we went through a big bang. These are just words.
00:49:45 They are not self-consistent equations where you can have such a thing.
00:49:52 If you try to make a theory where the universe was contracting, and then expanding again for example,
00:49:58 they violate some principles that we think should be true in the theory of quantum gravity.
00:50:04 Interviewer: When did yourself ask this question for the first time?
00:50:09 Juan Maldacena: I guess as I started learning more about physics.
00:50:16 I started recognizing where the boundaries of physics were, and there are boundaries of physics in many directions.
00:50:24 In the direction of very complex systems, in very different directions.
00:50:28 This is one of the directions in which we see a boundary. I wanted to go to the frontier in this direction.
00:50:38 I guess the physics they’re trying to roll was expanding. Push the frontier further and further away.
00:50:44 Interviewer: Right now you are as a frontier?
00:50:47 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. This is certainly one of the frontiers.
00:50:50 Interviewer: What do you see when you look ahead?
00:50:53 Juan Maldacena: I see confusion. I see lack of understanding.
00:50:59 The idea is to find patterns in this confusion, and to move forward.
00:51:07 To understand things that we currently don’t understand [crosstalk 00:51:11] bit by bit.
00:51:12 Usually you advance one step at a time, and get a little further, and a little further, and.
00:51:19 Interviewer: Do you feel something like a competitor?
00:51:24 Or, something like a challenge or something which challenges some things … Some works.
00:51:34 Somebody who challenges you to try to find it. Something like that.
00:51:41 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. Certainly we were trying to find this answer, and we really want to get the answer.
00:51:48 Sometimes you feel, sometimes its close.
00:51:51 Then you realize maybe I made a mistake, and you … It’s all happening also personally,
00:51:58 but within a community of researchers who’s trying to find this.
00:52:02 You criticize the ideas of others, and others criticize your ideas and this way you make progress.
00:52:08 Because it’s a difficult problem
00:52:10 and you need the … You need insights from many people that know different aspects of theoretical phases of physics in
00:52:20 general and can inform this.
00:52:22 Interviewer: Is it possible to think of something like an entity who is on the other side of this frontier?.
00:52:29 Or, maybe not an entity but [crosstalk 00:52:33]
00:52:32 Juan Maldacena: Well, there might be another intelligence in our universe who has already figured out this.
00:52:36 He has figured this out, and has understood these problems. At least it’s not known to us.
00:52:43 Interviewer: When you are on the frontier like the west was [won 00:52:58] here in the United States.
00:52:59 You don’t know what’s out there, but you go there and you find things.
00:53:03 It’s because you didn’t know that there were Indians, and there was another Coast and another ocean.
00:53:10 There is some awareness on the other side of the frontier. Only we don’t know.
00:53:17 What kind of awareness is on the other side of your frontier?
00:53:20 Juan Maldacena: Well, by awareness you mean the Indians.
00:53:23 Well, you’re putting too many anthropomorphical things that were not present in this discussion.
00:53:31 We only known intelligence in the universe, only known being that is trying to understand the universe.
00:53:38 We are just expanding.
00:53:41 When I say expanding the frontier,
00:53:43 it’s just understanding the questions that they’re understanding laws of physics better.
00:53:47 These entities are very simple things.
00:53:50 One of the features of physics is that I think is amazingly interesting,
00:53:55 is how simple the fundamental physics laws are.
00:53:58 Of course you might say, if it takes a couple of years to understand it, and you need to study or maybe more,
00:54:05 maybe you need to understand, study physics for five years to understand.
00:54:08 Then,
00:54:08 why are you saying they are simple? They are simple in the sense that the actual laws that govern the emotional zone,
00:54:13 are really simple. You don’t have to come up with rules and lots of books and so on.
00:54:20 It’s been very different than the laws that you find in the senators,
00:54:27 and people produce where there are exceptions here and there.
00:54:33 Here there’s a very simple statement, and this is followed by everything we know.
00:54:40 Interviewer: It’s true?
00:54:40 Juan Maldacena: It’s true to the extent that we’ve been able to experimentally verify,
00:54:47 and the statements have simple learning language which is unfamiliar. A language which takes a long time to learn.
00:54:53 That’s what takes a long time. It’s just to learn this language in which the formula is the laws..
00:54:58 Once the laws are formulated, they’re in a very simple way. Once you [crosstalk 00:55:04]
00:55:03 Interviewer: Which one do you like the most?
00:55:04 Juan Maldacena: Well, I think the general relativity is the most beautiful theory.
00:55:09 Because it translates physics into geometry. This is a very nice theory.
00:55:16 We don’t know how to make such a beautiful theory out of quantum mechanics. Maybe it will exist at some point.
00:55:27 Interviewer: For you as a child for example, what led to this position you have right now on this frontier?
00:55:38 Where did it start?
00:55:40 Juan Maldacena: Well, as a child I was watching my father for example fixing the washing machine,
00:55:47 and trying to learn how to do it myself. Again, understanding how everyday objects work.
00:55:56 Like the washing machine, the car, the radio and so on.
00:56:01 You learn a little bit about technology and how technology exploits the laws of physics.
00:56:08 That got me interested in understanding the laws of physics which underlie technology. Seeing how far they understood..
00:56:17 What things are known, what things are not known, and [crosstalk 00:56:22]
00:56:21 Interviewer: How did you do that as a child?
00:56:22 Juan Maldacena: Well, as a child I was mostly interested in technology and how things worked.
00:56:27 Then, when I was in high school I got a little more interested in the laws of physics and chemistry.
00:56:35 and [crosstalk 00:56:37]
00:56:36 Interviewer: What did you do to explore as a child?
00:56:40 Juan Maldacena: Mainly taking things apart and seeing how they worked. That’s basically the process.
00:56:48 Interviewer: Yeah? Putting them together again?
00:56:50 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. I was taking them apart, putting them together.
00:56:52 Just learning how to fix the household appliances.
00:56:56 Interviewer: That’s practical. I mean, if you try to find out how it’s made and why it works. Of course, I guess?
00:57:09 Juan Maldacena: Right. I was always curious in understanding how things work. I mean, how does a TV work?
00:57:15 How does a radio work? What’s the actual principle it uses.
00:57:21 Interviewer: Do you know now?
00:57:22 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. I think I know the basics. I wouldn’t know all the details..
00:57:27 I guess the technology which I again [crosstalk 00:57:30]
00:57:30 Interviewer: You know, you can … You know how a television works because you understand the physics inside?
00:57:40 Or is it like comparing it to the laws of physics?
00:57:52 Juan Maldacena: Well, the TV or any simple … Any machine,
00:57:59 even simpler perhaps is better to think out the simpler machine first.
00:58:02 Has different parts, and they work together to … Each part is there for a reason,
00:58:08 and they work together to make the machine work.
00:58:19 Most of our everyday machines are … Television is made out of electronic circuits.
00:58:22 They’ll move currents around, and they do … They show the light on the screen and so on..
00:58:29 That makes a television work, and you have to understand how this [crosstalk 00:58:35]
00:58:34 Interviewer: Does a child who was your age did that?
00:58:38 Juan Maldacena: Well, maybe I was perhaps from eight to 12 would be doing this thing of taking machines apart
00:58:45 and putting them together
00:58:47 Interviewer: What did your parents say about that? Don’t do it again?
00:58:51 Juan Maldacena: No. My dad liked to do this himself, so.
00:58:57 Interviewer: Taking things apart you learned from your father?
00:58:59 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. That’s right..
00:59:00 Interviewer: What [crosstalk 00:59:02]
00:59:01 Juan Maldacena: My mother liked to give things fixed, so. My dad always liked to fix things.
00:59:10 He was very practical, and he liked the challenge of fixing.
00:59:14 Sometimes,
00:59:14 you don’t know how it works so it’s nice to have to fix something that you don’t know exactly how it works..
00:59:19 Then you manage to understand how it works [crosstalk 00:59:23]
00:59:22 Interviewer: When you are on the road, and your car has a problem you can fix it?
00:59:26 Juan Maldacena: Well, I was able to do that in the past. Now, cars got more complicated. I don’t know.
00:59:33 This car hasn’t broken down recently, so I can’t tell for sure.
00:59:37 Interviewer: It all started at a young age, and it’s almost you inherited from your father.
00:59:50 Now you are here at Princeton Advanced Studies Institute.
00:59:52 In a position where you are allowed to think as much as you can?
01:00:08 Juan Maldacena: Right. I’m encouraged to think and do research all the time.
01:00:14 Interviewer: Is it too simple to say that your job is thinking?
01:00:21 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. It’s thinking. It’s discussing.
01:00:23 Its learning what other people are thinking and reading what other people write. Trying to make a progress.
01:00:30 Interviewer: Are you thinking all the time?
01:00:31 Juan Maldacena: Well, I mean no. I’m reading what other people write.
01:00:38 I’m listening to other people’s ideas and presentations, and discussing with my colleagues..
01:00:45 We are writing formulas, and [crosstalk 01:00:51]
01:00:48 Interviewer: Can you decide, now I start thinking? Or does it happen? Or, how does it work? This thinking process.
01:00:56 Juan Maldacena: I guess the thinking normally you try to … This problem sounds very vague and grand.
01:01:04 We try to think on very concrete problems where we can make progress.
01:01:08 There are the questions that are extremely interesting, but almost impossible to solve.
01:01:12 There are questions which are perhaps too easy to solve. We try to be in between.
01:01:16 Try to find the most difficult or interesting questions that you can actually say something useful about.
01:01:20 Lots of thinking is trying to focus on such questions.
01:01:24 Try to imagine very simple toy models, or simple models where we can say something new.
01:01:31 Interviewer: Maybe a few easy answers together might solve a more difficult answer?
01:01:37 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. This thing that I was saying before. You do a step at a time.
01:01:41 We have to figure out where we do the next step.
01:01:43 Next step is in something we more or less know, but moves us in the right direction.
01:01:48 From which we can get a better view of what the next step would be.
01:01:52 Interviewer: When do you do your best thinking?.
01:01:55 Juan Maldacena: Well, I think during the day and [crosstalk 01:02:03].
01:02:00 Interviewer: Is all that you are the way [inaudible 01:02:04] For example, when you’re outside, or.
01:02:06 when you’re in the shower [crosstalk 01:02:10]
01:02:07 Juan Maldacena: It’s mostly I would say in my office, talking to other people.
01:02:14 Normally when you talk to other people, you get new ideas.
01:02:20 and usually many times ideas come together in this [crosstalk 01:02:25]
01:02:25 Interviewer: Those colleagues are gone and then you have to write down the idea?.
01:02:29 Or, do you have to [crosstalk 01:02:32]
01:02:30 Juan Maldacena: We write them together, and we certainly write articles with other people. This is important.
01:02:38 Most of my … Are with other people. We are collaborators.
01:02:42 Interviewer: Yes. Once someone said it’s hard to sit. It’s hard to sit and not to think.
01:02:57 It’s so hard to shut down your thinking. How do you think about that?
01:03:03 Juan Maldacena: Well,
01:03:04 it’s something … I guess you have to be a little obsessive sometimes to work on these problems.
01:03:11 Because you want to think of these problems and you have to know other things.
01:03:14 It’s easy to get distracted and think about something else. When you’re not making progress.
01:03:18 If you’re trying to solve a problem and you’re not making progress, it’s easy to get distracted.
01:03:25 Sometimes you need to keep trying to find solutions to that problem you initially set out to do.
01:03:31 Being slightly obsessive about it. Then you can make some progress.
01:03:35 Interviewer: You are obsessive?
01:03:36 Juan Maldacena: Slightly, yeah.
01:03:41 Interviewer: When there’s something distractive, what is your distraction?
01:03:46 Juan Maldacena: Well, it could be some other interesting idea in some other slightly different field.
01:03:54 Sometimes it’s good to be distracted. Maybe the problem you’re trying to solve was bad, and so it’s a balance.
01:04:06 Interviewer: Or, you can say this is what you’re good at, and you make progress and solutions or answers.
01:04:16 Is there also an area in which you are able to find the answers? The opposite of your talent?
01:04:31 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. I’m not sure. Fashion..
01:04:43 Interviewer: Yeah. You cannot describe that into one [crosstalk 01:04:50]
01:04:49 Juan Maldacena: That’s right.
01:04:51 Interviewer: I mean in your character.
01:04:56 If you are obsessive in finding answers in this theoretical field, but it’s also
01:05:04 when you find it you can write it down in one line. Then it’s true..
01:05:09 Unlike political laws with all the kinds of … What is the area in which [crosstalk 01:05:17]
01:05:18 Juan Maldacena: I think the process is not that you write down a formula and then it is true.
01:05:21 Normally in physics, the process is that for some physical theory to be true, you have to be compared to experiment..
01:05:28 Interviewer: I’m sorry [crosstalk 01:05:30]
01:05:30 Juan Maldacena: It’s checked against experiment. Then we become more sure that it’s probably true.
01:05:36 Can always be some other experiment that contradicts it.
01:05:40 As many experiments that agree with it, you feel more and more confident..
01:05:43 Interviewer: Yeah. I’m sorry to say that, then I say that it’s true [crosstalk 01:05:47] They agree on it.
01:05:48 Juan Maldacena: Yeah.
01:05:50 Many times … A lot of our work sometimes is to … There are some mathematical relations like … The reason for this
01:06:00 is that some of our work is mathematics, is because the laws of physics are written in this mathematical language.
01:06:09 Sometimes even laws which are in principle simple like this equations of Einstein, which are simple to write down,
01:06:16 but they’re very difficult to solve.
01:06:18 You need your computers, and with time engineers, ideas to solve the questions,
01:06:27 and …Once you find for example some solution of the equation, you can check that it is the solution.
01:06:31 Then it becomes a true solution. That’s an example way. That’s where you could say, well its mathematics.
01:06:38 It’s within the … If you assume the questions are the correct description of physics,
01:06:43 this is a solution of the equations.
01:06:45 Interviewer: Correct me if I’m wrong,
01:06:48 but mathematics is like an instrument for you to understand what you need to understand. What you want to understand?
01:06:56 Juan Maldacena: Exactly. Before we were talking about the language in which these laws are written.
01:07:00 This is a language that is fairly mathematical..
01:07:04 You need to know enough mathematics to be able to understand the [crosstalk 01:07:08]
01:07:07 Interviewer: I can imagine that this mathematics, you are talented for using it.
01:07:15 It’s a way to look around you and follow your obsession.
01:07:22 There are also very much a lot of areas in which mathematics just doesn’t work.
01:07:30 Then you … Which areas are that, that you cannot use math?
01:07:40 Juan Maldacena: There are many areas I really like where we don’t necessarily use math.
01:07:45 If I want to learn the piano, math is not very useful.
01:07:50 Or if I want to play soccer, I learned to play soccer but math is not very useful.
01:07:56 You just have to practice playing soccer.
01:07:58 If I want to cook [data 01:08::01] in my lunch or cook a nice meal, math is also not very useful..
01:08:06 There are lots of areas but [crosstalk 01:08:08]
01:08:08 Interviewer: What are the things which you are not good at?
01:08:11 Juan Maldacena: Playing soccer, and sports.
01:08:17 Interviewer: Do you like it?
01:08:20 Juan Maldacena: I do it sometimes.
01:08:22 Interviewer: Is that an aspect of mathematics as well? That you can like it?
01:08:31 Juan Maldacena: If I like mathematics because of some aspect?
01:08:36 I like some aspects of mathematics because first it’s a nice tool to describe physics and,
01:08:44 I certainly like it’s interesting.
01:08:47 While mathematics is also a subject on its own and it’s huge, I know a little bit of mathematics,
01:08:53 and I write down the mathematics I think would be useful for this problem.
01:08:59 Sometimes people need to learn, invent some new mathematics to solve these problems.
01:09:05 Interviewer: Yeah. For example, I’m much more comfortable when I talk to people, trying to understand people.
01:09:17 I’m not comfortable when I talk with other people about mathematics.
01:09:21 Because it’s not my thing, or my talent, or … I choose the things in which I’m comfortable,
01:09:33 and that’s what I’m doing right now.
01:09:34 I’m [firmly 01:09:36] interviewing people, trying to have that person at work.
01:09:39 Juan Maldacena: Right. That’s true.
01:09:44 We all know what our strengths are, and we try to do an activity where we can really use our talents.
01:09:51 Yeah, certainly I would be a very bad interviewer. To know what the other person is thinking or trying to guess it.
01:09:59 Yeah, we all do these various talents.
01:10:04 Our natural … Well, we develop some talents and I guess through part of our lives, we continue developing them
01:10:11 and we get better at those areas.
01:10:13 Interviewer: Anna, told me about … Because I don’t want to forget that one.
01:10:29 Two stories she told about the mountain and a valley, and about Romeo and Juliet.
01:10:37 Juan Maldacena: Okay.
01:10:41 Interviewer: Do you think it’s interesting to tell that? For understanding your theory?
01:10:52 Juan Maldacena: Yeah. I’m trying to remember what the story about the mountain and the valley was.
01:10:56 Interviewer: That if you live in a mountain … a valley,.
01:11:01 and you have no reason to go up on the mountain because you cannot go [crosstalk 01:11:07]
01:11:06 Juan Maldacena: Oh, yeah. This was … I think the original question was, was this useful for anything?
01:11:12 Or, what are the technological applications of this research, or this area of research?
01:11:22 This area of research doesn’t have a direct technological application that we know of.
01:11:29 We do it because we want to know wand we want to understand.
01:11:34 An analogy is that to think that we have, let’s say, a town that lives in a valley.
01:11:39 The valley’s fertile and they grow corn, and their grow food in the valley.
01:11:44 There’s a nearby mountain and there’s mountains surrounding the valley.
01:11:49 Someone might decide to go up the mountain just to see what’s there. The expedition of going up the mountain might be
01:11:56 totally useless for growing better corn, or you’ll not plant anything nice in the mountains.
01:12:01 Certainly going up the mountain might give you better view of the valley.
01:12:07 Might help you understand where this valley is located. It might allow you to see another valley.
01:12:13 This is not guaranteed. Maybe there are all mountains, and there are no other valleys.
01:12:16 It’s certainly part of the curiosity of seeing where we are,
01:12:21 and to extend the frontier to really understand better where we are sitting in the universe.
01:12:32 This is one direction in which we can go and certainly that’s where we … I mean,
01:12:36 it’s like a mountain that it’s there. We’re trying to go to the summit
01:12:39 and try to understand the summit is understanding the big bang singularity..
01:12:43 Is understanding the beginning of the big bang. I will try to climb this mountain the whole way. [crosstalk 01:12:50]
01:12:49 Interviewer: Are you on the mountain?
01:12:52 Juan Maldacena: Well, we don’t know. Because we don’t have a view of the mountain from outside.
01:12:55 We only know that we are climbing. I think we are confident we are climbing. We are not going down.
01:13:00 There must be a summit.
01:13:02 Interviewer: It’s a nice one.
TV Get inspired and watch tv episodes of The Mind of the Universe, made by Dutch public broadcaster VPRO
  • Browse through over 30 hours of interviews
  • Download the interviews, including subtitles
  • Remix, re-use and edit under CC-BY-SA license
  • Start exploring