Why general relativity would’ve been discovered without Einstein | Sean Carroll
In the intriguing video “Why General Relativity Would’ve Been Discovered Without Einstein,” physicist Sean Carroll explores the collaborative nature of scientific discovery and the evolution of ideas that culminated in the formulation of general relativity. He argues that while Einstein is rightfully celebrated, the groundbreaking theory could have emerged independently due to the collective contributions of various scientists and the intellectual context of his time.
Carroll emphasizes that advancements in physics are often a tapestry woven from the insights of many thinkers, including Newton, Maxwell, and others who laid the groundwork long before Einstein. He details the transition from classical mechanics to the principles of relativity, underscoring the paradigm shifts necessitated by Maxwell’s equations and the nuanced understanding of space and time.
Throughout the discussion, Carroll highlights the importance of acknowledging the social dynamics of scientific progress, suggesting that genius exists within a network of ideas and innovations. He asserts that Einstein’s contributions are monumental, yet the mathematical framework of general relativity would likely have been uncovered by others, signaling a fascinating interplay between individual brilliance and collective intellectual growth. This thought-provoking perspective invites us to appreciate the intricate web of science beyond the “great man” narrative.
Watch the video by Big Think
Author Video Description
“Consciousness is fundamental. It’s a fundamental property of the world that we inhabit, a fundamental property of the universe.”
Subscribe to Big Think on YouTube ► https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvQECJukTDE2i6aCoMnS-Vg?sub_confirmation=1
Watch Sean Carroll’s Full Interview with Big Think ► https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TBNJyztai0
What does it mean to be conscious, and why does it feel like something to be you? Neuroscientist Anil Seth argues that consciousness isn’t a mysterious spark but a deeply biological process, one that depends on prediction, perception, and the body’s constant negotiation with the world.
In this conversation with philosopher Jonny Thomson, he explores how our brains don’t passively observe reality but actively construct it.
0:00 Einstein — underrated?
1:00 The network of genius
1:16 Classical mechanics
1:48 Space and time
2:21 Electromagnetism
2:59 The speed of light
4:20 Spacetime
5:38 Special theory of relativity
6:31 Inverse square law of gravity
7:56 General theory of relativity
9:07 Schwarzschild solution
10:12 Quantum field theory
13:22 Quantum mechanics
16:16 Why physics is a conversation
Read the video transcript ► https://bigthink.com/series/the-big-think-interview/sean-carroll-einstein/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=youtube_description
———————————————————————————-
Go Deeper with Big Think:
►Become a Big Think Youtube Member
Get exclusive classes and early, ad-free access to new releases without leaving Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/@bigthink/membership/
►Become a Big Think Web Member
Get the entire Big Think Class library, premium print issues, live events, and more.
►Subscribe to Big Think on Substack
Get all of your favorite Big Think content delivered to your inbox.
https://bigthinkmedia.substack.com/subscribe/
———————————————————————————-
About Sean Carroll:
Dr. Sean Carroll is Homewood Professor of Natural Philosophy — in effect, a joint appointment between physics and philosophy — at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, and fractal faculty at the Santa Fe Institute. Most of his career has been spent doing research on cosmology, field theory, and gravitation, looking at topics such as dark matter and dark energy, modified gravity, topological defects, extra dimensions, and violations of fundamental symmetries. These days, his focus has shifted to more foundational questions, both in quantum mechanics (origin of probability, emergence of space and time) and statistical mechanics (entropy and the arrow of time, emergence and causation, dynamics of complexity), bringing a more philosophical dimension to his work.
About Big Think
Big Think is the leading source of expert-driven, actionable, educational content — with thousands of videos, featuring experts ranging from Bill Clinton to Bill Nye, we help you get smarter, faster. Get actionable lessons from the world’s greatest thinkers & doers. Our experts are either disrupting or leading their respective fields.
Video “Why general relativity would’ve been discovered without Einstein | Sean Carroll” was uploaded on 11/07/2025 to Youtube Channel Big Think


































If I have seen further than others, it was by standing on the shoulders of giants.
But does not take away the fact that some geniuses have taken giant leaps for mankind
Because it’s science, not art. Without Shakespeare, Macbeth does not get written; without Einstein, relativity is still discovered
Its a bummer that at 1900's people lived 40-50 years.
Brilliant and incredibly inspiring approach on how to seriously understand not just physics but any relevant topic. It is always about bunch of people interacting around a given issue of interest.
George Basalla, an historian of technology, has an interesting book dubbed as “The Evolution of Technology” in which one chapter address how modern states, in particular, used the strategy of creating “the single genius” that represent the national ingenuity and so forth. But that is always about propaganda. Reality is rather complex and resist any form of reductiionism.
Indeed, sound great and fascinating! First scientific revolution was against scholasticism whereas the second scientific revolution was against mechanical paradigm in physics. And if Newton’s time and space were absolute Einstein’s time and space became relative. But ultimately if the Ancient and Medieval science tried to reveal angelic world and spoke about levitation the Modern and Postmodern science reveal demonic world and speak about gravitation.
Einstein was Swiss. Germany rejected him due to his religion. So now Germans can't claim him. Einstein was also anti-zionist. So Israel can't claim him either. All hail the Swiss genius Einstein
10:45 isn't that true for all of science….that's what makes it special that even if we were to forget all of the knowledge about these all of this knowledge would again will be discovered in time…..(Unlike all religions no offense to anybody❤)
Been following monsieur Carroll for a long time. If you want to learn science without BS, he's your guy! He's not one of those who claim to know everything. Very open minded thinker which is refreshing.
Nice shoes!
so this is the ''scientist '' who believes in 129 genders and his lab is no other than place called Starbux in his hood,
First of all…..HOW DARE YOU!!!
Imo: Einstein was masterful technical explainer, visionary, and debater. While relativity certainly would exist without Einstein, there's still a reason why Einstein holds the status that he does
While it's fun to think everyone is just as smart as Einstein, Heisenberg, Newton, etc. there's no real evidence that is true when it comes to breakthroughs in science. Truth be told, we don't know what hasn't been discovered because someone hasn't discovered it. It's like proving a negative, can't be done. If Einstein hadn't proposed the Theory of Relativity, we have no way of knowing if anyone would have ever proposed – at least not in its current form.
I admire them for finding the words to explain what they felt, without having a previous word thread to follow. It is difficult to explain when there are no words yet to describe it.
and then there's Sean Carroll standing, I mean sitting, at the vertex of this confluence of ideas doing a fabulous job of explaining it all. Thank you thank you thank you!
I didn't think he was bad at math compared to mere mortals, just not a adept at the mathematics as some of his contemporaries who ran with his theories.
here is a fantastic lecture By Dr. Renn about the history of GR. its emphasize Einstein's collaborators and their critical roles in shaping the theory formation
Did this interview need to zoom in/out with every punctuation?
Lorenz Minkowski and Schwartzschild contributed very much to the theory of relativity both special and general relativity.But Einstein had the ability to combine all these ideas with his own unique vision
Carrol sounds bitter in this video… easy to say that if they didn’t do it someone else have done it and even to argue that sooner after Einstein or newton some other scientific would have done it just because they supported themselves in conversations from others… it is like saying that anyone could have written what Shakespeare wrote just because he used English and other la used it too.
I completely agree. Science and engineering thrive in a positive feedback loop, driven by great minds communicating, debating, and building on each other’s ideas. Progress rarely happens in isolation—collaboration, challenge, and dialogue are essential. Even pivotal individuals, the "key pegs in the arch," rely on the broader intellectual ecosystem to refine and validate their contributions.
AI fits right into this dynamic. It’s not a replacement for human ingenuity but an amplifier—like being in a room full of intelligent people. The tool is only as powerful as the interface and the mind guiding it. When used well, it accelerates insight, surfaces connections, and sharpens thinking. The real magic still happens through human curiosity, rigor, and interaction.
Wow!
As a History and Science nut, this was super cool!
That was just fascinating. I would have thought David Hilbert and Emmy Noether may have gotten a mention. "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants" (Newton in a letter to Hooke)
Wow man. Very interesting people.
8:02 1959?
[📄]: "Can 2D¹ and 2D² Models Achieve a Theory of Everything for 3D Reality?"
Theorem: A 2D^n model cannot fully describe 3D reality without contradictions.
Proof by topology:
– 2D manifolds cannot embed all possible 3D field configurations
– The hairy ball theorem shows you can't comb a sphere smooth – requires 3D to express
– Knot theory: Knots exist in 3D but not 2D, yet particles show knot-like quantum numbers
Proof by information theory:
– 3D configuration space has information content scaling as L³
– 2D description scales as L²
– The ratio L³/L² → ∞ as L increases
– Information loss is inevitable
■■ Contradictions in 2D Models Despite Experimental Success
Newton's mechanics (effectively 2D phase space per degree of freedom) makes accurate predictions but contains:
1. Singularities: Point particles create infinite self-energy
2. Action at a distance: No mechanism for force transmission
3. Measurement ambiguity: Position and momentum can't both be definite
Einstein's relativity (4D but geometrically 2D² when including symmetries) predicts well but has:
1. Singularities: Black holes, Big Bang
2. Information paradox: Information loss at horizons
3. Quantum incompatibility: Can't be quantized consistently
■■ Why 3D¹ and 3D² Are Necessary
For 3D reality, you need:
– 3D¹ (cubic) for basic structure: length × width × height
– 3D² (nine dimensions) for complete dynamics: 3 position × 3 momentum × 3 phases
This isn't speculation – it's dimensional analysis. A complete description of a 3D quantum system requires exactly 9 real parameters per point (complex wavefunction in 3D = 6 real numbers + 3 phase relationships).
The fact that physics has succeeded with lower-dimensional models is remarkable but comes at the cost of paradoxes and incompleteness. Full 3D¹ and 3D² models are mathematically sound, even if practically challenging.
—
Here's a focused argument for university physics departments:
[📄]: "The Dimensional Inadequacy of Phase Space for Quantum Reality"
■■ The Core Problem
Physics describes 3D quantum systems using 2D phase space (position-momentum) per degree of freedom. This creates a fundamental mathematical inadequacy:
For a single particle in 3D:
– Classical mechanics: 6D phase space (3 position + 3 momentum)
– Quantum mechanics adds: Complex amplitudes (×2 for real/imaginary)
– Total parameters needed: 12 real numbers per point
– What we use: 6D complex ≈ 12D real (seems adequate)
But here's the crack:
Quantum entanglement shows that reality is fundamentally non-separable. For N entangled particles, we need:
– Full description: 3^N × 4 parameters (quaternionic)
– What we use: 3^N × 2 parameters (complex)
– Missing: Half the phase relationships
■■ The Observable Consequence
This shows up in the measurement problem:
1. Schrödinger evolution is unitary (reversible)
2. Measurement appears non-unitary (irreversible)
3. The "missing" information goes into unmeasured phase relationships
If wavefunctions were quaternionic rather than complex, measurement would be:
– Selection of visible components (i)
– Encoding of j,k components in environment
– Total information preserved
■■ Why This Matters
Current physics succeeds by making brilliant approximations:
– Newton: Reduced 3D to tractable 2D phase space
– Einstein: Extended to 4D spacetime (still geometrically 2D²)
– Quantum: Added complex phases (halfway to quaternions)
Each step revealed new physics. The next step – quaternionic quantum mechanics – could resolve:
– Why exactly 3 spatial dimensions (i,j,k)
– Why measurement seems irreversible
– Why entanglement can't be cloned
■■ The Testable Prediction
In a triple-slit experiment with quaternionic analysis:
– Standard QM: 3 interference peaks
– Quaternionic: 7 peaks (1 primary + 3 secondary + 3 cross-terms)
The extra peaks would be subtle (~1% of primary intensity) but detectable with modern single-photon counting.
■■ Why This Preserves Newton and Einstein
This isn't replacement but completion:
– Newton's laws: Still valid for macroscopic (real-component dominated)
– Einstein's relativity: Still valid for spacetime geometry
– Quantum mechanics: Enhanced, not replaced
Think of it like upgrading from black-and-white to color TV – the original signal is still there, we just see more.
—
thats why real success moves past judgement, because experience remains.
Experimental physics is never a solo act. Theoretical physics is almost always solo act.
9:28 Yet they skipped past Planck and Schwartzchild and hard cutoff. Instead trying to fix broken singularities lol. The math has been there longer than I've been alive. XD A world half blind and a chunk willingly. You can map parts out, and the blind spots from some grouping imprints.
13:35 You also need the degeneracy pressures for mapping quantum onto black holes and quantum boundaries.
I used to believe this myth myself. It's unfortunate how prone we are to idolizing individuals instead admiring the nuanced contributions of groups. But I suppose that's instinct at play. Modern science education is doing a better job though. It occurs to me this tendency being enshrined in the noble committee is why it's limited to 3 individuals.
Love Sean, his podcast and books. It is awesome that you have him on. Let's go!
These are old videos, right? Why are we re-releasing them?
The rift in science right now makes newton and hooks quibble look like a crazy deep loving friendship.
Too many people just follow or repeat but few really question what Einstein said as if the theories are final. Which way is more 'interesting'?
All you can know is what you don’t know. Like he knows everything so he’s aware he knows nothing.
really like the time line showing how theories progress over time, adding more understanding brick by brick
Hmmm. Interesting how the contrast between the simplistic models of classical mechanics and the complex equations of quantum theory, sort of reflect the contrast between the "one genius" simplistic view of the development of physics versus the multi-genius approach to cooperative discovery of the equations that govern observed reality.
Science should never be taught without its chronological and logical development through history.
Facts are less important than the details of how they were arrived at. That study makes scientists, facts just make dead encyclopedias, not living scientists.
Einstein explained galaxy rotation curves/dark matter. A fundamental insight of Relativity is that mass that exists at Relativistic velocities is irrelevant from our perspective. Relativistic velocities are occurring in the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers. This means that they exist in a "non local" state relative to their outer regions. The mass in our galactic center is not just there, it's everywhere.
A common misconception is that mass and or energy increases as an object approaches the speed of light. It doesn't, that's why it's called "invariant" mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Hence the term "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light" Einstein repeatedly said that Relativistic dilation prevents astronomical concentrations of mass/singularities.
Relativistic dilation doesn't occur in galaxies with low mass centers. They don't have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. Therefore, they don't have dilated mass.
It has recently been confirmed in 25 dwarf and ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have no dark matter. In other words they have normal rotation rates. All such galaxies have normal rates.
If anyone falls for this rubbish, there blind as hell, it's the few individual geniuses that push us into the future, this is propaganda, absolute rubbish!
But no one did now did they? Give the man his due .
So it is not that time is an illusion, but that gravity is?
I take issue that you skipped Lorentz transformations, because great example how a wrong approach by Lorentz still gave some of the equations of special relativity.
Excellent video summary of the 20th century physics!
I buy this channel… I mean, I subscribe!
Team work makes the dream work 😎👍
Does anyone else hear Alan Alda when Carroll speaks?
Excellent descriptions
I need that flow chart. As a cognitive scientist and a physicist, it's the progression from one theory to another that I find most interesting
Perhaps Einstein was great at imagining, conceptualizing, and understanding the workings of nature/physics operates through what Terrance Deacon calls "teleodynamics." He was looking at the bigger picture of how systems work through the fields, as well as what constraints define their functions. Cause and effect reach far beyond what we typically measure, and each new discovery found further connections such as gravity not just a force acting on 2 objects but the spacetime warping effects of energy/matter.
i like how before science people just sat in their hot ass poorly lit squalor without soap or central ac or playstation2 for thousands of years.