I am finishing my PhD in physics in a few weeks. It has been several years since I saw or read any good pop science/physics material. I blamed that on the fact I might not be the target audience, since I already know the subjects. But this show proved me wrong! This is absolutely excellent. It actually tackles modern physics instead of "modern" from 150 years ago, as is usually the case. Clear explanations, good analogies, without compromising a lot. If anyone reading this is considering going into physics consider yourself lucky, because my first contact with quantum field theory was reading Peskin and Schroeder's An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory. A good book only if you already know QFT, which is never a good thing for anything that starts with "an introduction". What I'm saying is, this is good pop sci. It would have helped me a few years ago, definitely.
Wow!! I am so happy to hear that being said by an actual physicist. Also, I felt like i should mention this even though it wont be of any use to you: the MITOpencourse channel on TH-cam has a really awesome lecture series called 'Quantum Entanglement' by Prof. Leonard Susskind. Anyone who wants to start with QFT should go through that lecture series first. Its very well done.
This guy has a good energy level, enabling him to transfer knowledge in a comfortable and meaningful way. He seems to have the exact right amount of mass, as opposed to some of these other guys, who appear to be traveling at the speed of light.
this is the most interesting / entertaining / educational channel on TH-cam . *editing* the reason why i like him he makes it simple without the extra dumbing down .. I'm only a Med student not a physicist but i can enjoy & understand this ..
if u are interested for some deep knowledge about higher dimensions this guys working it out for few hundreds of years ..th-cam.com/video/-YopG9fjnSo/w-d-xo.html
I love how he patientetly guide us through a bunch of notions and theories that we really can´t grasp and can´t fully understand and still, at the end, we are able to follow his conclusions, sort of hahaha. Love the channel! Keep it up!
Who is "we"? I watch these videos because I find the concepts intriguing. And grasp is a funny word. I suppose its hard to wrap my head around the immensity of space, but I definitely understand the theory of what he's talking about. Otherwise I wouldn't bother watching. 🤔
This is the best TH-cam channel in the observable universe. MO’D makes me want to go back to school and get a physics degree. Plus, his art of explaining the complex in fairly simple terms is a service to us all.
I'm going to take university entrance exams this month.I've used Spacetime's videos to prepare for listening exams.I'm interested in space so I was able to study with joy!Thanks for your good videos!
The String Theorists are Ok because we haven't found a way to prove or disprove anything in the theory. It would have been great to disprove String Theory, but I thought that the biggest problem with String Theory is we can't figure out an experiment that would test the Theory.
The problem with String Theory is that it isn't "one theory". It's an mathematical attempt to describe all the fundamental particles as 1 dimensional strings. These strings can then vibrate in different ways, corresponding with the fundamental particles and interact accordingly. So on "larger scales", ie the scale of a proton, a string looks just like the fundamental particles we are used to. On the smallest scale it would act as these strings. There are many mathematical ways you could achieve this, over the years they narrowed it down to the consistent ones. Then they managed to mathematically unify those theories under what is now called M Theory. Why all that effort? Well, String Theory describes gravity as a particle, making it a potential unified grand theory. But, here comes the problem, String Theory is "background independent". It only tells us what a graviton would look like, if it would exist at a given energy level. A unified theory would have to do more than that. It would have to relate gravity to the other forces, not just tell us what it looks like.
Ginthian Shield - what is the point in String Theory if it cannot be tested? To me, unfalsifiable hypotheses are basically worthless to science, especially if you cannot apply the scientific method to it, rather its more just a mathematical philosophy. (A little off topic but) Freud is a really good example of this in psychology, where literally all his work is just trying to describe why the mind behaves the way it does, by first observing, and then forming conclusions from that. There is no proper way to prove his work right or wrong so should we actually let it hold any merit until we can find proofs for it?
The Standard Model has a problem with infinities. OK, we take all the zeroes and we replace them with little-itsy-bitsies. No more division by zero, no more infinities, problem solved. We don' need no furshugginer disprovability, you hear? Lotta pie in the eye. The problem is solved. Solved. Solved, you hear whutt I told you?
Even when he dies? It would still be his corpse, crudely propped up with old mops and gaffa tape. Two people moving the mops around to simulate hand movement and someone off screen doing a shitty voice over while a portion of his face slowly sloughs off halfway through filming. Ew. Gross. Why would you wish for that? Let the poor man rest in peace.
Every now and then on a rare occasion these episodes begin to make sense to me and it feels amazing and I appreciate the intelligence of these scientists infinitely more
I just started watching your channel, and am blown away. I am so intrigued by everything, everything in this area is new to me, and am literally watching everything to try and learn more. Thank you! Keep up the amazing work.
I once had a dream that Beavis was giving a lecture on Hilbert-space and higher dimensional metrics and in the context of the dream, he was the greatest intellect in the universe, and he was talking about Hilbert-space so as to accomplish something amazing, like backwards time travel so as to undo an event and save the universe. But he still talked like Beavis and laughed in the characteristic way. I like to think that was the true Beavis, that the dumb one in the Beavis and Butthead show was his dumber counterpart in another universe.
Null results are the best! Science works by falsification, and null results rule out huge chucks of theory-space greatly advancing our certainty. The Eötvös experiment, Michelson-Morley, and the double slit experiment were all intensely eciting because they let us put narrower constraints on the ways the universe can behave.
The greatest null result in history was when physicists tried to prove the existence of the aether by measuring the speed of light in different directions and finding it was always the same.
Naqaj: "That means the truth must be even more crazy." Does the universe being fundamentally information? Because, that view of reality actually predicts this result as extra dimensions would be superfluous.
It's so cool that Matt noticed my discussion with Iago Silva. Unfortunately it just ended there... I haven't gotten a response as of yet. ...and I don't always complain, I'm sorry for misunderstanding last time :x I love the channel! And this video was awesome like always.
XD LOL didn't expect him to point that out; I'm famous now ;) BTW, I _did_ post a reply to the last one/two convos - with a 2-4 days delay, meh... Just mentioning, cuz I noticed YT randomly fails to notify new posts sometimes (or, you just didn't care to keep at it XP either way, it's cool :) )
Watching this great backlog of content, this one is the best episode yet, imho. This null result really matters and sends many theories into “less likely” categories of possible answers. Also, String Theory again is both ‘safe for now’ and a null result. Imho, being a dedicated hard working fervent string theorist requires a significant level of faith, with so many null results which *could* have been spectacular empirical results otherwise.
Excellent show, excellent host. The world thanks you. But like your predecessor your enthusiasm energizes your voice. But dont forget, the faster you speak the less data is assimilated.
¡ there are beyond eternal dimensions in our space orb, or any space orb ! i guarantee the number of dimensions is unknowable to any supercomputer before, now, or ever no matter who designs it 。¿ why be concerned with count of dimensions ? it's only a fruitless endeavor 。
>spends 10 minutes talking about what might be the case >spends 30 seconds telling us that the data indicates that everything talked about in the first 10 minutes is absolutely not the case
@@sumahuma6054 oops. Maybe you misunderstood me or something lol yes, I agree the theory of special and general relatively might as well be fact at this point.
If the path of a photon is altered by the gravitational effects of a large mass near its path, is the path of a gravitational wave altered in the same manner?
Short answer: Yes. Slightly longer answer: Gravitational waves are like ripples in spacetime. If the fabric of spacetime is warped by a large mass, the ripples will follow the warped paths. Much longer answer that I only sort of understand: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/170410/do-gravitational-lenses-work-on-gravitational-waves
But it would have to, to make sense, wouldn't it? A ripple has to travel through "something". If that something is already rippled, it would have to build on itself, right?
I wonder about that one as well. Gravity is the force felt by traveling the curvature of space-time. In other words gravity is the path. We know that electromagnetism is self-interacting. So why not gravity as well?
Should we be comparing the photon to the gravitional wave or the graviton? Negative mass could make the gravity self-interesting. Negative mass repels while positive mass attracts gravitionally. Its different then negative and positive charges because opposites don't attract but that could still produce some interesting outcomes. Equal positive and negative mass objects would exert equal positive and negative gravity and remain equidistant from each other.
Thanks Matt, great episode as usual! One thing that surprised me about GW170817 was how identical the travel speed was between the gravitational wave and the gamma ray burst. I would have expected the gamma rays to arrive significantly later than the gw. Surely in 40Mpc of traveled space there must have been very low density sporadic concentrations of matter or dark matter, leading to a refractive index less than c. Is there such a thing as a refractive index for gravitation waves, identical with that of electromagnetic waves?
The problem is that since gravitational waves are thought to be self interacting wouldn't they also be effected canceling out much of whatever difference might arise otherwise?
W-- I-- L-- D-- !!! I wish I could say I can't wait to see these amazing sights, but at 55 I don't think I will see too much more new and exciting inventions .. but I Can say the amount of mind blowing things I have been party to, is awe-inspiring! So far it has been quite a ride! Thank You GOD Stay Safe everyone
Any chance you would do an episode on emergent gravity (/entropic gravity), the theory of Erik Verlinde? It would be immensely interesting to have it explained in this format.
Have a look at the game Miegakure (4D puzzle game), been in development for years but I occasionally check on it. There was also a 4D simulator which allows you to roll cubes and spheres around, sometimes losing them in the 4th Dimension when they bounce in/through it. Having a corner of a dice 'floating' in the air, emerging out of nowhere apparently 'hovering' without support.
At this point it's more or less a given. We're well within the "Einstein was right" target...now it's simply a matter of showing over and over again just how right he was, to ever increasing decimal places.
Not so fast. GR contradicts QM and both claim to be empirically validated. Not possible. Blackholes cannot emit anything past the event horizon traveling at lightspeed and yet it is claimed that gravitational waves are doing this. Contradiction. Resolution is at this link www.flight-light-and-spin.com/simulator/relativity-orbit-solar-system.htm
Jon Bain what? When has an object “emitted” gravity? GR says gravity is a result of curved spacetime. The blackhole is an object that “curves” spacetime. It doesn’t emit it
This Episode was awesome and inspiring to see the newest insights to physics and astronomy! This channel is my favourite on TH-cam even being a classical musician, nothing is more interesting for me then sientific hints of the real nature of the universe. Great conductor Sergiu Celibidache also thought of the cosmos as everything it's vibrating an oscillating, very much as string theories and quantum fields...
You should check out bergsonism by Deleuze, iirc there are some ideas in there about matter being different waveshapes of time or something. It was definitely too hard for me to understand all of it when I read it, but as a musician I found lots of interesting ideas and inspirations in there (even if some of the ideas I got were from misunderstanding the text haha).
We can tell if there are other dimensions by measuring how strong gravity is vs how strong it's supposed to be assuming only the dimensions we know of exist. Gravity is exactly as strong as it should be = no extra dimensions.
Detail: All of this comes out of an ass... it's just a bunch of shit. That is not even a theorized form of detecting extra-dimensions... (it should be very small, subatomic instead). But what we see is just shit!! I never seen PBS Space Time go completely full of shit! But now I have... this is all just a bunch of bullshit
None of your videos are boring. I appreciate the content. I can see someone thinking science "boring" if "it's too hard to understand" for that person. 🙄
It doesn't even mean that, just that with the setup used, extra dimensions where not measured, in the one case measured. We can neither conclude that there are no extra dimensions, nor that they are. It's just new data we have
Kiritsu Exactly... We shouldn’t draw conclusions based on 1 experiment. But even if we do, this only disproof 1 specific property of extra dimensions, not the existence of these dimensions.
point to ponder. Acceleration due to gravity is vector quantity, but gravity itself is not a vector, so how can even inverse square law even applied to it. correct me please
11:43 This did not rule out the possibility of extra spatial dimensions. It only constrained extra dimensions where gravity is leaking into them. It doesn't say anything about extra spatial dimensions that aren't doing anything to gravity or light.
You'll never know how much I appreciate what this channel does. It doesn't treat it audience as children. I'm a college dropout, an ex-drug addict, and disabled. That doesn't make me any less capable of learning. This sort of information, is made accessible with content like this. I've always said, you could _theoretically_ gain a "PHD" equivalent, with Google alone. If you had the discipline. So it's technically possible for me to gather this information. That doesn't mean I'd have done it. This channel is *giving* ideas away, not just supplying them to people who ask.
I appreciate this comment but you CANNOT get a physics phd equivalent with Google alone lmao that's laughable. What he mentioned here is the most layman of layman, you wouldn't understand even the basic equations necessary to understand the math behind this.
@@ChappalMarungi It's laughably absurd, neigh impossibly difficult. It'd almost certainly never happen. Still, *in theory* are there not way's to pirate books required, bribe or find private tutors, get lesson plans, find forums to have work checked, find research papers etc?
@@ChappalMarungi I want to stress that I agree it's neigh impossible. Still, I can imagine a savant in year 2121, born in poverty, pulling it off. It'd make a 5 out of 10 film.
Is it okay for gravity to travel "pretty much" (11:12) the speed of light? Gravitational waves arriving 1.7s sooner than light itself seems like it might be a big deal. Is it just that light was slowed down on the way over by gases in its path whereas gravitational waves aren't slowed down by anything and so traveled at the speed of light in a vacuum? A fun way to think about it is that the wave of light was over 500,000km away from Earth by the time the gravitational wave had already reached us. On a separate note, when will we get to enjoy PBS Space Time in eye-wateringly beautiful 4K? Or at least 1440p? :)
I guess I'm a bit slow, but why does gravity have to be a force in the first place? If you've done an episode on why gravity needs to be a force equal to the others, I think I missed it. I thought the higgs boson was supposed to explain gravity, either by being the force carrier or the catalyst for the emerging property of gravity. Higgs gives matter mass, mass compresses/stretches space and we observe it as gravity. Gravity just seems to simply be an emerging property of space being compressed. So confuzzzed :S I'm just glad there are people smart enough on our little ball to slowly figure this out. Keep up the good work :)
In physics, force is basically anything that breaks law of inertia. If object diverges from inertial motion, it is by definition being acted upon by a force. Some forces are just a matter of perspective and go away when you pick the right frame of reference (for example, centrifugal force) and others don't.
For more detailed explanation. Because gravity and other forces are attractive, gravitational energy is negative: one has to do work to separate a gravitational bound system, such as earth and moon. This negative energy can balance the positive energy needed to create a matter, but it's not quiet as simple. The negative gravitational energy of the earth, for example, is less than a billionth of the positive energy of the matter particles the made is made of. A body such as a star will have more negative energy, and the smaller it is(the closer the different parts of it are to each other), the greater the gravitational energy will be. Buy before it can become greater than the positive energy of the matter, the star will collapse to a black hole, and black holes have positive energy. That's why empty space is stable! Bodies such as stars or black holes cannot just appear from nothing. But a whole universe can. =)
Since your socks are an entangled pair, the only logical explanation is that all dryers are powered by a black hole. One of the pair occasionally falls in and is converted to what I like to call Stocking Radiation.
Startling Surprise 🧠 Mandelbrot set, but more like this. Xn+1 = Xn2 + C Yn+1 = Yn2 + C Zn+1 = Zn2 + C -Xn+1 = -Xn2 + C -Yn+1 = -Yn2 + C -Zn+1 = -Zn2 + C If you have questions I can give more details if you don't understand. Take that information and overlap it together. Color it in with all that information, like the “3D” fractals, but now do it like my equation. Plain all 4 over one another, then fill in. Spin that in a 3D shape. This is where it gets crazy to do that in all 3 dimensions infinitely. You should have the shape of your atom. The mathematical shape.
Man, that result destroys a whole mess of wild cosmological theories I've heard. The 3+1 universe is certainly easier to wrap one's head around, but now we still have the open questions. I will say that I have a hard time believing gravity is a force like the others are forces. The geometric description is just so elegant. I get that it clashes with quantum mechanics, but I really don't think we're going to find a "graviton". I do have a question though. In Einstein's description of gravity, as I understand it, gravity isn't a force but rather a consequence of inertial movement along a geodesic through curved spacetime. How does this jive with the description of the arrow of time and its relationship with entropy? I never really see gravity and entropy discussed at the same time, even though they're both some of the only concepts that rely on a concept of time, as far as I know. Maybe I'm asking a nonsensical question, but it was a thought I had.
I want an answer to this too. Also, if gravity is not a force then is time not a "dimension" Idk anything about entropy, but maybe gravity is just curvature and time is just entropy. And that's it?
@@ninja250r2008m just to offer a bit of help (a nudge? in approximately the right direction) Entropy is simplest understood as "chaos". Physicists termed it "entropy" in dissertations about Order and Chaos in Systems regarding Thermodynamics, so that's probably the subject you'd find most helpful... Basically, as Time progresses "forward" entropy generally increases... (Simplified Conceptual) Think of your system like building a house. The system will naturally "settle" into a certain order as you build, due to equilibrium. (This is the short-cut explanation for why the solar system and the Milky Way generally resemble discs instead of wonky spheroids)... BUT left to itself, the house will start to corrupt and fall apart eventually... as entropy enters. (Basically, everything systemically put together, falls apart sooner or later.) I'm willing to go out on the limb and quietly suggest Time as three dimensions, being logically the required minimals for interlacing so thoroughly with three-dimensional space to give us the universe as we understand it. Time works everywhere. What's tougher to "wrap your head around" (still baking my noodle years into it) is that we (humans) can't yet measure time the way we can measure space... You can take a ruler or tape-measure that's "theoretically" long enough, and measure anything spacially. It's so many yards, feet, or meters (etc) long, tall, and wide... three spacial dimensions. BUT even a clock or a specialized radiological decay counter doesn't measure Time. It's only feasible (so far) to measure the RESULTS of Time Passing... like the seconds measure "ticks" of gears working inside an old pocket watch or mechanical clock... the "oscillations" of a crystal in a newer digital time-piece... even the particles streaming out of a specific sample of specific purity of radioactive material decaying at a known rate ONLY ever measure the RESULTS of time passing. We can't technologically quantify how FAR in time it will be when the sun next sets a direct beam of light through a certain window in your house (for instance) from exactly the moment I type this period. That doesn't stop it being a dimension, and the same as space, it's more or less just "sitting there" while we pass through it. In fact, it doesn't stop us seeing "results" no matter what "hypothetical vector" we take in passing through it... since we only measure results of that passing. AND super-gravity, from say... ultimately dense objects, can really F*** things up and make them difficult to understand... but I'm still just working on it. I don't think we're going to find "gravitons" either. I have a suspicion (lately) that gravity is kind of a consequence of existing or "expressing" in any material sense. SO whenever particles show mass, they show gravity... just on such an infinitesimal level that we struggle to measure, quantify, or factor it into work. BUT that's just more theory, too. ;o)
@@wellrose17 Okay... bear with me... and I'll try to get it so you understand it. Essentially, a "dimension" is a measureable linear field. In studying dimensions, we use "lines" to represent dimensions... so we have something visual to diagram and measure... and quantify with numbers. So 2D or 2-Dimensional means two linear measureable fields, and we'd represent that as two lines crossing at right angles (usually)... A 2D object then, is a flat plane... like a piece of paper... Somewhere here, it's important to point out that in Physics (especially Astro Physics) we tend to assume everyone knows that dimensions and planes are generally considered "infinite" unless otherwise specified. It doesn't always look that way in diagrams and pictures, but we're "supposed to" put little arrows at the ends of lines to indicate the intention, sort of a symbol of "infinite in that direction"...without having to write it out or draw lines all the way across everything else. It just avoids clutter. BUT assuming most of us already know that, some folks forego the arrows for neatness and move on. 3D or 3-Dimensional means we now include a third line intersecting with the original two, also at a right angle (usually) to both of them, and is conventionally going to indicate space around you in general terms... Normally, the base three dimensions are Height (up and down, vertically), Width (sideways, left and right), and Depth (forward and backward). Those three spacial dimensions can be measured easily with a measuring tape... say in inches, centimeters, miles, kilometers, Astronomical Units, etc... Hope that helps. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 thank you for explaining that. I get it. I just watched this th-cam.com/video/BFrBr8oUVXU/w-d-xo.html entanglement, holographic & it was amazing.! So information is spewed from the horizon continuing on via quantum entangled universe?
Starting to do the same eye rolling. Every test we have done has shown Gravity is an Effect, a measurement of the curvature of SpaceTime and thus not required to be a force or be limited to a minimum size like in Quantum Mechanics. In Relativity the effect of gravity can reach infinity in a singularity thus can be infinitively small. As Mat said gravity not being a force would make many physics people sad. This probably includes him. In other video he covers majority of physics people don't think the Big Bang started with a Singularity anymore. The reason many physics people don't believe in a singularity is they need Gravity to be a force for current work in Quantum Mechanics to reach the truth. They also state Gravity causing Singularities violates Quantum Mechanics where all objects have a minimum size they cannot get smaller than. But actual data keeps showing Relativity is true and thus Singularity possible. The Bias towards Gravity as a Force shows in the current terms used. Dark Matter which actually includes solutions that have no matter involved and thus should be named something like Unexplained Gravitational Effects in Galaxies. Dark Energy with include solutions that don't involve energy when it is better described as, Unexplained reason for observed increasing rate of expansion in the Universe. Sort of understand the short hand as the better description is wordy but it's still a misleading lie in effect. I think there is a bit of a Bias against Deism as you can't rule out Deism if the Big Bang is a singularity does not mean Deism is true eather. Claims that the Big Bang proves there is a God unset some even though the Big Bang does not prove an existence. But an infinite age ever looping Universe to some rules out the action of a God or the Universe having a intelligence. I think the question did something start all of this is still valid then though.
@@RedRocket4000 infinity is just an aspect. Infinite temperature would make matter behave just like Bose-Einstein Condensation. The same as for passing the speed of light would make for an infinity boundary of velocity an object could get. The infinitesimal entropy death of the universe doesn't imply on God or bullshit. It actually goes in accordance to the experiments, the entire universe would get into a superfluid medium and probably explode into another Big Bang and so on. This Big Bang of this universe probably came from the heat death of another and there are infinite Big Bangs exploding throughout the 5th and 6th dimensions, one planck unit different than another.
@@RedRocket4000 There is a Technological Singularity coming in the future decades, as technology advances exponentially, this is inevitable. And A.I. will probably become a God-like entity like in sci-fy movies... because these movies were based on expert's predictions... we don't need much to simulate the entire Calabi-Yau Manifold of 12-D.
Depends on what type of dimensions are referred to. String theory extra dimensions are not rolled out for the reason he gave in short they are small. Extra Large everywhere dimensions were ruled out. This is for the meaning of dimension referring to things that effect things we observe like Length and Time, things we use to describe what we can observe. Dimensions confusingly is also used to refer to things that are not in normal Space/Time in example Hyperspace ideas or spiritual ideas. This data said nothing about those as this result could not test those ideas.
such gravity leaks are considered impossible on the macroscale, but possible on the microscale... so when we talk about very small particles and their actual real weight are still impossible to detect, and the stability of matter would get weaker as we go smaller... particles would sweep in and out of existence by teleporting through extra-dimensions. There we could detect such chaotic and as predicted in many theories we could prove the existence of these dimensions through the mathematical description of an observed behavior that is like a shadow of extra dimensions in this one and can be detected with much necessary precision as to be scientifically proven.
kind of... coulomb law has singularities, because it considers a particle to be a point with finite charge. You get infinite forces when you consider particles occupying the exact same spot.
Robert Lorrison not really. a kugelblitz is a gravitational singularity caused by lots of photons in one area. I think he's asking about a purely electromagnetic singularity
The mass of proton and electron should be so dense to form black hole ... I think after big bang when electromagnetic force get born it that time it was in singularity
Isn't that because those light come from the actual merging event, and the gravitational waves are generated seconds before the merge (due to strong interactions from the rapid binary rotation)
My guess is that the GRB is from the atoms of gold and other heavy elements as they formed. The two neutron stars threw off gobs of neutronium as they spiraled in; it took a fraction of a second for the neutronium to decompress and fragment into ordinary-sized nuclei.
Joseph Marsh - Gravity waves can travel through matter with no effect, while light energy is slowed. Similar to why neutrinos can be detected just before the flash of a supernova.
THE THEORETICAL, TOP DOWN, CLEAR, SIMPLE, AND BALANCED MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA OF NECESSITY: Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Very importantly, outer “space” involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. NOW, carefully consider what is THE SUN; AS it does (and it must) exist in both time AND SPACE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!! E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy !!!! Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Carefully consider what is THE MAN who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!! (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!! ACCORDINGLY, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE !!! Carefully consider what is THE EYE. GREAT. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This CLEARLY explains the cosmological redshift AND the black hole(s) !!! AGAIN, gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!!! Think QUANTUM GRAVITY !!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE !!!! Great. By Frank DiMeglio
Have any of you ever had the experience of looking into the future while sleeping? This has happened to me a lot in the past. It's a little difficult to explain, but I try: When I am half asleep, I dream (or feel that something will happen in the next few seconds) and it actually happens. I heard my mother say something once, half asleep, and a few seconds later, she really said it.
Question: Could the possible reason for the Zero extra dimensions be due to the fact that our measurements and the location of the event lie at the same point (or very close) in that 4th dimension? I.e. if us and the merger happen at the same point in the 4th dimension, the energy dissipation to that dimension would be negligible and therefore might look like no extra dimensions to us (as 3+1 dimensional observer).
Well the effects of that extra dimension would have also shown up relating to the amount the universe is expanding between us and the event so they couldn't have been too close, ie because there is hubble constant expansion and the event happened in another galaxy. This is assuming the theory being tested was true. I'm no expert though
I don't think so. The decrease of intensity is proportional to 1/D^k, with D being the distance to the source and k being the number of dimensions wherein the impulse is spreading out. Since the merger happened in a galaxy far, far away (140 million light-years to be precise), that decrease in intensity should be well measurable, regardless of how long it took the impulse to cover that distance, as its speed does not affect how it spreads out.
"5th dimension" is that near this flavor town i hear about? do they have toyotathons in flavor town. are toyotathons bleeding in from the 5th dimension?
No, to the best of my knowledge time is a byproduct of entropy. That is to say that the only reason we can conceive of or observe time is because things around us do stuff, and they do it in a clearly observable direction. It only ever goes in that direction (as far as we currently understand it) because entropy cannot currently be reversed, to the best of our knowledge.
Yeah. It works if the parallel universes are just layers of 3d space stacked one on top of the other and separated by nothing, instead of being a smooth transition
2:30 i dont think your hypercube was rotating properly. i was under the assumption that the 3d shadow of a rotating hypercube looks much more like it is continuously turning itself inside out
6 ปีที่แล้ว +2
I guess it would depend on the alignment of the axis of rotation, and that a rotation that is aligned with the imaginary axis would cause the warping to be 0... But I don't have the mathematical background to support my intuition.
The reason you get the image of the hypercube turning itself inside out is because you're rotating it in all 4 dimensions. Here he's only rotating the hypercube in 2 dimensions. Think about how you can rotate a cube in 2 dimensions, and then how you can rotate the cube in 3 dimensions. You can do the same rotations with a hypercube and it would have the same rotational appearance as the cube. But when you rotate it in 4 dimensions, you see it as turning inside out.
4D objects rotate in all the same ways as 3D ones, plus another axis. The only way to demonstrate that axis of rotation is that sort of inside-out motion. A cube can rotate the same way as a square on a piece of paper, but the cube can additionally rotate in a way that the square can't. The shadow of a cube rotating on the piece of paper looks like the rotating square, but the cube rotating in the other way will look like a wierd, inside-out-y "hyper-square" rotation.
Take a look at "Visualizing 4D Geometry - A Journey Into the 4th Dimension". Awesome video series that shows how projection from higher to lower dimensional space works and why it works that way. The short answer is easy to see for yourself. Pick up an object and put it in front of a flash light so that you have it's shadow on the wall. That is a 3D object projected into 2D representation, try rotating it in various directions. Even something as simple as a cube produces a remarkable variety of projections in lower dimensional space.
You only get the "inside out" rotation if the rotation involves the 4th axis. If the 4th axis remains static, the hypercube rotates like any 3D objects do.
"One single master equation. Unification of the great and small! I hear the notes, but the arrangement is wrong; I'm starting to doubt but I can't give up now I'm so near~!
one thing is to integrate 4 dimensions of reality and call it "Spacetime" another is to keep describing reality through more than 4 dimensions. Think about that before even stating the word "unification"... because unification of what?! There you go!
Yes but if they don't have branes they could still exist.... kind of like some orange-haired leaders have no brains but somehow they also still manage to exist!
I feel the video illustrated very well a scientist's train of thought when designing an experiment, and also explained quite well the experiment's methodology.
Hello Morjdk. My rotation is perpendicular to the galactic plane therefore you must take my west vote. I might have lost all of my heat in impact events, but my sense of direction is still as acute as ever. Your pal, Uranus.
So, 3D modeling software have this whole thing going on. Some use XY-plane as the basic plane and height must be the Z-axis. Others say X is lateral and Y is vertical, therefore Z must be forward. Having only 2D doesn't mean you're stuck to the floor =)
@@francescosorce5189 you found a loophole to prevent your head going up your own arsehole. Ever wondered he might have wanted you to use the steps to get it out?
I am finishing my PhD in physics in a few weeks. It has been several years since I saw or read any good pop science/physics material. I blamed that on the fact I might not be the target audience, since I already know the subjects. But this show proved me wrong! This is absolutely excellent. It actually tackles modern physics instead of "modern" from 150 years ago, as is usually the case. Clear explanations, good analogies, without compromising a lot. If anyone reading this is considering going into physics consider yourself lucky, because my first contact with quantum field theory was reading Peskin and Schroeder's An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory. A good book only if you already know QFT, which is never a good thing for anything that starts with "an introduction". What I'm saying is, this is good pop sci. It would have helped me a few years ago, definitely.
Wow!! I am so happy to hear that being said by an actual physicist. Also, I felt like i should mention this even though it wont be of any use to you: the MITOpencourse channel on TH-cam has a really awesome lecture series called 'Quantum Entanglement' by Prof. Leonard Susskind. Anyone who wants to start with QFT should go through that lecture series first. Its very well done.
As someone who isn't _yet_ a PhD in physics, have you ever considered the effects of plasma physics in the universe?
Even if you think you know the subjects you will always be amazed at what you can still learn.
Shut it, Grandpa
So, in order to convince oneself a hypothetical dimension, setting the rules to fit that desire is good science to you?
"There are these theoretical objects called... brains."
Yes. I've felt the exact same way for years.
Branes
@@andromedaiscoming185 bird brane.
@@andromedaiscoming185 #/Whoooooooooooosh!!
@@altareggo r/wooooosh (5 o's)
@@andromedaiscoming185 good pun
This guy has a good energy level, enabling him to transfer knowledge in a comfortable and meaningful way. He seems to have the exact right amount of mass, as opposed to some of these other guys, who appear to be traveling at the speed of light.
In a 2D world, are there Line Earthers?
What a great coment xD
You made my 2D week.
Lol
Chiming in from Line Earth. The Earth is a dot. That is all.
@@zantar04 reductio ad absurdum
this is the most interesting / entertaining / educational channel on TH-cam .
*editing*
the reason why i like him he makes it simple without the extra dumbing down .. I'm only a Med student not a physicist but i can enjoy & understand this ..
asem al balawe да
Check out flammable maths, scishow space, steve mould or standup maths :)
if u are interested for some deep knowledge about higher dimensions this guys working it out for few hundreds of years ..th-cam.com/video/-YopG9fjnSo/w-d-xo.html
t. gobold
The Science Asylum is great too and it's very undersubscribed!
Don’t jump to the conclusion,still a lot out there
I love how he patientetly guide us through a bunch of notions and theories that we really can´t grasp and can´t fully understand and still, at the end, we are able to follow his conclusions, sort of hahaha. Love the channel! Keep it up!
patiently*
Who is "we"? I watch these videos because I find the concepts intriguing. And grasp is a funny word. I suppose its hard to wrap my head around the immensity of space, but I definitely understand the theory of what he's talking about. Otherwise I wouldn't bother watching. 🤔
“If you can’t explain it in simple terms, you don’t understand it well enough.”
This is the best TH-cam channel in the observable universe. MO’D makes me want to go back to school and get a physics degree. Plus, his art of explaining the complex in fairly simple terms is a service to us all.
Half of the stuff on this channel is over my head, so I get really excited when I actually understand it.
I'm going to take university entrance exams this month.I've used Spacetime's videos to prepare for listening exams.I'm interested in space so I was able to study with joy!Thanks for your good videos!
"The String Theorists are OK ...for now" LOL
The String Theorists are Ok because we haven't found a way to prove or disprove anything in the theory. It would have been great to disprove String Theory, but I thought that the biggest problem with String Theory is we can't figure out an experiment that would test the Theory.
The problem with String Theory is that it isn't "one theory". It's an mathematical attempt to describe all the fundamental particles as 1 dimensional strings. These strings can then vibrate in different ways, corresponding with the fundamental particles and interact accordingly. So on "larger scales", ie the scale of a proton, a string looks just like the fundamental particles we are used to. On the smallest scale it would act as these strings. There are many mathematical ways you could achieve this, over the years they narrowed it down to the consistent ones. Then they managed to mathematically unify those theories under what is now called M Theory. Why all that effort? Well, String Theory describes gravity as a particle, making it a potential unified grand theory. But, here comes the problem, String Theory is "background independent". It only tells us what a graviton would look like, if it would exist at a given energy level. A unified theory would have to do more than that. It would have to relate gravity to the other forces, not just tell us what it looks like.
Ginthian Shield - what is the point in String Theory if it cannot be tested? To me, unfalsifiable hypotheses are basically worthless to science, especially if you cannot apply the scientific method to it, rather its more just a mathematical philosophy.
(A little off topic but) Freud is a really good example of this in psychology, where literally all his work is just trying to describe why the mind behaves the way it does, by first observing, and then forming conclusions from that. There is no proper way to prove his work right or wrong so should we actually let it hold any merit until we can find proofs for it?
No point people remember the earth is flat! I’ve already mentioned this come wake up
The Standard Model has a problem with infinities. OK, we take all the zeroes and we replace them with little-itsy-bitsies. No more division by zero, no more infinities, problem solved.
We don' need no furshugginer disprovability, you hear? Lotta pie in the eye. The problem is solved. Solved. Solved, you hear whutt I told you?
This channel should never change the host.
This channel should never change the topic.
So they should make a WestWorld host from him?
Gabe was good too.
Even when he dies? It would still be his corpse, crudely propped up with old mops and gaffa tape. Two people moving the mops around to simulate hand movement and someone off screen doing a shitty voice over while a portion of his face slowly sloughs off halfway through filming.
Ew. Gross. Why would you wish for that? Let the poor man rest in peace.
I am not Sean Lock ...
I tried this out! I'm able to detect five extra dimensions! Thanks for the video!!
People slept on this comment. 😂
I love it how you always manage to end your video with the word "spacetime" :D .. great content and lucid explanations!! I love this channel
Null outcomes are underrated
Because they usually make poor headlines, and poor research grant applications
Agreed.
I was actually relieved at the end, when he said that observations disproved this hypothesis, cause i understood almost non of it ! 😅
Are they ever! The Michelson-Morley experiment is an excellent example.
Cause neutrinos... change mass through their paths while never changing direction and
Every now and then on a rare occasion these episodes begin to make sense to me and it feels amazing and I appreciate the intelligence of these scientists infinitely more
insane in the 3-brane
That is the best band name.
insane in the brane!
*sigh* Have we forgotten Cypress Hill already? Better call Dr Greenthumb
*i am brane*
I just started watching your channel, and am blown away. I am so intrigued by everything, everything in this area is new to me, and am literally watching everything to try and learn more. Thank you! Keep up the amazing work.
I love how every episode ends with the word spacetime
Normal zombie: BRAAAAAIIINS
200 IQ zombie: BRAAAAAANES
JohnnyPrimeOne Boltzmann’s BRAAAAAAIIIIIINS!
Zombie who had a great summer 50 years ago: BRYYYYAAANS!
@@elessarstrider5210 Depends on the BRAAAAAIIIINS
@Walt First real six string theory?
I once had a dream that Beavis was giving a lecture on Hilbert-space and higher dimensional metrics and in the context of the dream, he was the greatest intellect in the universe, and he was talking about Hilbert-space so as to accomplish something amazing, like backwards time travel so as to undo an event and save the universe. But he still talked like Beavis and laughed in the characteristic way. I like to think that was the true Beavis, that the dumb one in the Beavis and Butthead show was his dumber counterpart in another universe.
Null results are the best! Science works by falsification, and null results rule out huge chucks of theory-space greatly advancing our certainty. The Eötvös experiment, Michelson-Morley, and the double slit experiment were all intensely eciting because they let us put narrower constraints on the ways the universe can behave.
The greatest null result in history was when physicists tried to prove the existence of the aether by measuring the speed of light in different directions and finding it was always the same.
Yea but null results are not that exciting. Physicists love new mind bending ideas.
But that's exactly what they got. This null result threw out the idea of extra dimensions. That means the truth must be even more crazy.
Excellent comment, that's exactly what this is all about.
Naqaj: "That means the truth must be even more crazy."
Does the universe being fundamentally information? Because, that view of reality actually predicts this result as extra dimensions would be superfluous.
Best Spacetime episode I’ve ever seen. Well done!
Space time journal club is the best idea ever I love these videos!
"Brilliance, wit, and/or whining. That's what it takes." I need that on a T-shirt
I could sit and listen to the PBS Space intro song for hours
"There are these theoretical objects called brains"
-Matt O'Dowd 2018.
Abram Thiessen
this objects that you talk about in hadron physics in atiny tiny diameters not in the dimensions of space
I know. I just thought that the audio was funny out of context.
Brane Soup.
Quantum Mechanics Composer - Way to get the joke.
@@alimibrahem8120 I think the ceiling lamp in your apartment was destroyed by a joke flying over your head
Looks like you lost a thumb to an extra dimension there at the 11:51 mark...
L6rd 6f Cr6ws why is my Butthole hurting like a thump is stuck in it
Reminds me of ‘Black Hole Thumb" ... you know... by Thoundgarden.
Great pickup. Direct evidence the Matt is a quantum hitchhiker!
[screams and runs away in fear]
Damn
I agree this show is the best out there. It’s real contemporary science explained in just the right level of detail to back it up
Out of topic but, in case someone missed it, a new dwarf planet has been discovered in our solar system !
I call him Steven.
Would probably take a few more rounds of confirmation but yeah, we might have to rethink planets again.
Name it Pluto
How big and at what orbit?
You should at least give us a better bone to chew :D
This is the most interesting education channel on TH-cam .
BTW a new dwarf planet has been discovered in the solar system.
It's not nice to use the word "the" when it is only known to you.
I watch PBS Space Time when I want to learn less of what I already dont know.
Ahahaha learning disproving theories might not sounds as interesting, but there’s a lot of value to it. Funny comment though. 😅😆
So much bullshit in one video... I think I am done for a long time now...!!!
Gave me a stroke trying to understand this comment
@@OpportunisticHunter Hm..... so its turtles all the way down then? Who knew?
@@OpportunisticHunter only, it's not bullshit
Friendship ended with String Theory
Now quantum gravity theory is my best friend.jpg
It's so cool that Matt noticed my discussion with Iago Silva. Unfortunately it just ended there... I haven't gotten a response as of yet.
...and I don't always complain, I'm sorry for misunderstanding last time :x I love the channel! And this video was awesome like always.
Thanks for the closure
Certainly it's not closure for me :x
You probably didn't wine and dine Silva enough before suggesting they go to a private room with you...
I am surprised Matt takes his time to go through all these comments! good job Rubbergnome lol
XD LOL didn't expect him to point that out; I'm famous now ;)
BTW, I _did_ post a reply to the last one/two convos - with a 2-4 days delay, meh... Just mentioning, cuz I noticed YT randomly fails to notify new posts sometimes (or, you just didn't care to keep at it XP either way, it's cool :) )
Watching this great backlog of content, this one is the best episode yet, imho. This null result really matters and sends many theories into “less likely” categories of possible answers. Also, String Theory again is both ‘safe for now’ and a null result. Imho, being a dedicated hard working fervent string theorist requires a significant level of faith, with so many null results which *could* have been spectacular empirical results otherwise.
I know about the Fifth Dimension. I love most of their songs.
Anyone else is using these videos to fall asleep? His voice is soothing.
Excellent show, excellent host. The world thanks you. But like your predecessor your enthusiasm energizes your voice. But dont forget, the faster you speak the less data is assimilated.
"Let's get a little bit more technical."
Oh shoot.
¡ there are beyond eternal dimensions in our space orb, or any space orb ! i guarantee the number of dimensions is unknowable to any supercomputer before, now, or ever no matter who designs it 。¿ why be concerned with count of dimensions ? it's only a fruitless endeavor 。
>spends 10 minutes talking about what might be the case
>spends 30 seconds telling us that the data indicates that everything talked about in the first 10 minutes is absolutely not the case
The audience can't appreciate a negative result without the background to understand the question it has answered with 'no'.
aka "a teachable moment".
Yes, this is good...it demonstrates more broadly how the theoretical and observational aspects of physics interact, enriching one another.
Tracy H it was not a negative result. It made me smile, knowing that General Relativity still holds up to over 100 years worth of testing.
@@sumahuma6054 oops. Maybe you misunderstood me or something lol yes, I agree the theory of special and general relatively might as well be fact at this point.
Awesome video. This is one of my favorite channels on TH-cam. Keep it up!
If the path of a photon is altered by the gravitational effects of a large mass near its path, is the path of a gravitational wave altered in the same manner?
Short answer: Yes.
Slightly longer answer: Gravitational waves are like ripples in spacetime. If the fabric of spacetime is warped by a large mass, the ripples will follow the warped paths.
Much longer answer that I only sort of understand: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/170410/do-gravitational-lenses-work-on-gravitational-waves
Pretty sure that gravity doesn't curve the path of itself like that.
But it would have to, to make sense, wouldn't it? A ripple has to travel through "something". If that something is already rippled, it would have to build on itself, right?
I wonder about that one as well. Gravity is the force felt by traveling the curvature of space-time. In other words gravity is the path. We know that electromagnetism is self-interacting. So why not gravity as well?
Should we be comparing the photon to the gravitional wave or the graviton?
Negative mass could make the gravity self-interesting. Negative mass repels while positive mass attracts gravitionally. Its different then negative and positive charges because opposites don't attract but that could still produce some interesting outcomes. Equal positive and negative mass objects would exert equal positive and negative gravity and remain equidistant from each other.
Thanks Matt, great episode as usual! One thing that surprised me about GW170817 was how identical the travel speed was between the gravitational wave and the gamma ray burst. I would have expected the gamma rays to arrive significantly later than the gw. Surely in 40Mpc of traveled space there must have been very low density sporadic concentrations of matter or dark matter, leading to a refractive index less than c. Is there such a thing as a refractive index for gravitation waves, identical with that of electromagnetic waves?
Dark matter does not interact with light though, right?
How about the gravitional red shift at the source -the two massive neutron stars. Wouldn‘t that also have delayed also the gamma ray signal?
The problem is that since gravitational waves are thought to be self interacting wouldn't they also be effected canceling out much of whatever difference might arise otherwise?
It does, there's gravity warping space.
Yep gravitational lensing it's only indirect but there is an effect
I understood what he was saying all the way to 6:34! New personal best!
W-- I-- L-- D-- !!!
I wish I could say I can't wait to see these amazing sights, but at 55 I don't think I will see too much more new and exciting inventions .. but I Can say the amount of mind blowing things I have been party to, is awe-inspiring! So far it has been quite a ride!
Thank You GOD
Stay Safe everyone
You say that now and then by the time you're 70 you're on alpha centauri swearing at your agri-bot for pouring manure on your house
Any chance you would do an episode on emergent gravity (/entropic gravity), the theory of Erik Verlinde? It would be immensely interesting to have it explained in this format.
Wow. This is one of the only Space Time episodes I can understand. But I can't stop watching all of 'em. Thanks, Dr O'Dowd.
Imagine playing Extra-Dimensional Angry Birds. Those chickens wouldn't grasp the gravity of the situation, but I'd still be waving as they fly by!
My god thats hilarous
1907: 3d chess
2018: 4d angry birds
Pretty sure this comment is from 2009.
Holy crap this was one epic play of words my friend
Have a look at the game Miegakure (4D puzzle game), been in development for years but I occasionally check on it. There was also a 4D simulator which allows you to roll cubes and spheres around, sometimes losing them in the 4th Dimension when they bounce in/through it. Having a corner of a dice 'floating' in the air, emerging out of nowhere apparently 'hovering' without support.
Einstein validated once again, baby. 😎
At this point it's more or less a given. We're well within the "Einstein was right" target...now it's simply a matter of showing over and over again just how right he was, to ever increasing decimal places.
Not so fast. GR contradicts QM and both claim to be empirically validated. Not possible. Blackholes cannot emit anything past the event horizon traveling at lightspeed and yet it is claimed that gravitational waves are doing this. Contradiction. Resolution is at this link www.flight-light-and-spin.com/simulator/relativity-orbit-solar-system.htm
Jon Bain what? When has an object “emitted” gravity? GR says gravity is a result of curved spacetime. The blackhole is an object that “curves” spacetime. It doesn’t emit it
@@jonbainmusicvideos8045 I think you confuse partricles with gravitational waves there buddy.
This Episode was awesome and inspiring to see the newest insights to physics and astronomy!
This channel is my favourite on TH-cam even being a classical musician, nothing is more interesting for me then sientific hints of the real nature of the universe.
Great conductor Sergiu Celibidache also thought of the cosmos as everything it's vibrating an oscillating, very much as string theories and quantum fields...
You should check out bergsonism by Deleuze, iirc there are some ideas in there about matter being different waveshapes of time or something. It was definitely too hard for me to understand all of it when I read it, but as a musician I found lots of interesting ideas and inspirations in there (even if some of the ideas I got were from misunderstanding the text haha).
Finally a new episode, I've been waiting many light years!
So you've been waiting n * 9.461 * 10^12 Km | n>0 Λ n c N?
I did not know it is possible to wait for a distance.
@@phillipschulze168 this was a wordplay, not a physical statement. I should have highlighted the word "years" for party *poopers* like you!
I'm going to download to watch on my journey to catch Oumuamua 😊
@@phillipschulze168 The Millennium Falcom completed a race in under 12 Parsecs....so I assume it is possible
I will pretend like I understand this
I will pretend I believe you.
I was actually relieved at the end, when he said that observations disproved this hypothesis, cause i understood almost non of it ! 😅
I understood everything completely..I think ??! 😜
We can tell if there are other dimensions by measuring how strong gravity is vs how strong it's supposed to be assuming only the dimensions we know of exist.
Gravity is exactly as strong as it should be = no extra dimensions.
Detail: All of this comes out of an ass... it's just a bunch of shit. That is not even a theorized form of detecting extra-dimensions... (it should be very small, subatomic instead). But what we see is just shit!! I never seen PBS Space Time go completely full of shit! But now I have... this is all just a bunch of bullshit
None of your videos are boring. I appreciate the content. I can see someone thinking science "boring" if "it's too hard to understand" for that person. 🙄
It doesn’t mean there are no extra dimensions out there, only that gravity doesn’t lose energy there.
Yeah, it also doesn't mean there is no God, just that he doesn't surf on gravity waves to steal their energy.
It doesn't even mean that, just that with the setup used, extra dimensions where not measured, in the one case measured. We can neither conclude that there are no extra dimensions, nor that they are. It's just new data we have
Kiritsu Exactly...
We shouldn’t draw conclusions based on 1 experiment. But even if we do, this only disproof 1 specific property of extra dimensions, not the existence of these dimensions.
point to ponder. Acceleration due to gravity is vector quantity, but gravity itself is not a vector, so how can even inverse square law even applied to it. correct me please
True, it's making an assumption that gravity interacts in higher dimensions the same as in our 3 physical and 1 time
11:43 This did not rule out the possibility of extra spatial dimensions. It only constrained extra dimensions where gravity is leaking into them. It doesn't say anything about extra spatial dimensions that aren't doing anything to gravity or light.
congrats. you understand context. 🙄
You'll never know how much I appreciate what this channel does. It doesn't treat it audience as children. I'm a college dropout, an ex-drug addict, and disabled. That doesn't make me any less capable of learning. This sort of information, is made accessible with content like this. I've always said, you could _theoretically_ gain a "PHD" equivalent, with Google alone. If you had the discipline. So it's technically possible for me to gather this information. That doesn't mean I'd have done it. This channel is *giving* ideas away, not just supplying them to people who ask.
I appreciate this comment but you CANNOT get a physics phd equivalent with Google alone lmao that's laughable. What he mentioned here is the most layman of layman, you wouldn't understand even the basic equations necessary to understand the math behind this.
@@ChappalMarungi It's laughably absurd, neigh impossibly difficult. It'd almost certainly never happen.
Still, *in theory* are there not way's to pirate books required, bribe or find private tutors, get lesson plans, find forums to have work checked, find research papers etc?
@@Bluemilk92 Haha ok yea, if we look at it that way, alot of conviction could probably help in getting one
@@ChappalMarungi I want to stress that I agree it's neigh impossible. Still, I can imagine a savant in year 2121, born in poverty, pulling it off. It'd make a 5 out of 10 film.
With optical astronomy, we could hear the thunder of our universe. Now with gravitational astronomy we see the lightning that drives it. {●.●}
@DC Perry Now we need to detect the Hammers that wields the thunders and lightnings of the universe.
Is it okay for gravity to travel "pretty much" (11:12) the speed of light? Gravitational waves arriving 1.7s sooner than light itself seems like it might be a big deal. Is it just that light was slowed down on the way over by gases in its path whereas gravitational waves aren't slowed down by anything and so traveled at the speed of light in a vacuum?
A fun way to think about it is that the wave of light was over 500,000km away from Earth by the time the gravitational wave had already reached us.
On a separate note, when will we get to enjoy PBS Space Time in eye-wateringly beautiful 4K? Or at least 1440p? :)
I think that the light is emited when they merge, but the gravitational waves start before that when they are merging.
ioxsoft It’s both of your explanations.
So time really stands still for someone traveling at 100% lightspeed and the entire universe ahead becomes a single 2D flat sheet. That is so weird.
Mukul, 4K isn’t beautiful, you can’t see it, it’s a scam, humans can barely ascertain more than “standard definition” it’s just marketing.
My favourite channel that I cannot comprehend.
The clothes dryer is obviously a portal for socks
If i had to explain the content of this video in own words... i couldn’t.
Thank goodness. I'm incredibly relieved by these results.
I guess I'm a bit slow, but why does gravity have to be a force in the first place? If you've done an episode on why gravity needs to be a force equal to the others, I think I missed it.
I thought the higgs boson was supposed to explain gravity, either by being the force carrier or the catalyst for the emerging property of gravity. Higgs gives matter mass, mass compresses/stretches space and we observe it as gravity. Gravity just seems to simply be an emerging property of space being compressed. So confuzzzed :S I'm just glad there are people smart enough on our little ball to slowly figure this out.
Keep up the good work :)
This is what I also want to know.
In physics, force is basically anything that breaks law of inertia. If object diverges from inertial motion, it is by definition being acted upon by a force. Some forces are just a matter of perspective and go away when you pick the right frame of reference (for example, centrifugal force) and others don't.
Gravity and other force of nature are the reason why earth, sun, animals and pretty much everything we can see exist today!
For more detailed explanation. Because gravity and other forces are attractive, gravitational energy is negative: one has to do work to separate a gravitational bound system, such as earth and moon. This negative energy can balance the positive energy needed to create a matter, but it's not quiet as simple. The negative gravitational energy of the earth, for example, is less than a billionth of the positive energy of the matter particles the made is made of. A body such as a star will have more negative energy, and the smaller it is(the closer the different parts of it are to each other), the greater the gravitational energy will be. Buy before it can become greater than the positive energy of the matter, the star will collapse to a black hole, and black holes have positive energy.
That's why empty space is stable! Bodies such as stars or black holes cannot just appear from nothing. But a whole universe can. =)
super helpful
4th spatial dimension: *exists*
Gravity: "aight imma head out"
🤣
Synchronous events and parallel existence is VERY RELATED. Personal experiences lead me to this awesome THEROY, but MY personal TRUTH.
Oh you can also go to these diemensions, it’s called DMT have fun everyone ☺️
Seek The light 🙌😂🌵👁🌵
Dimensional Mental Travels 😜
Joe rogan has entered the chat.
That's a whole nother dimension altogether
Go away joe rogan
Disappointing. I was hoping that we finally might locate wherever it is that my socks go when they disappear in the dryer.
Since your socks are an entangled pair, the only logical explanation is that all dryers are powered by a black hole. One of the pair occasionally falls in and is converted to what I like to call Stocking Radiation.
Startling Surprise 🧠
Mandelbrot set, but more like this.
Xn+1 = Xn2 + C
Yn+1 = Yn2 + C
Zn+1 = Zn2 + C
-Xn+1 = -Xn2 + C
-Yn+1 = -Yn2 + C
-Zn+1 = -Zn2 + C
If you have questions I can give more details if you don't understand.
Take that information and overlap it together. Color it in with all that information, like the “3D” fractals, but now do it like my equation. Plain all 4 over one another, then fill in. Spin that in a 3D shape.
This is where it gets crazy to do that in all 3 dimensions infinitely.
You should have the shape of your atom.
The mathematical shape.
Man, that result destroys a whole mess of wild cosmological theories I've heard. The 3+1 universe is certainly easier to wrap one's head around, but now we still have the open questions. I will say that I have a hard time believing gravity is a force like the others are forces. The geometric description is just so elegant. I get that it clashes with quantum mechanics, but I really don't think we're going to find a "graviton".
I do have a question though. In Einstein's description of gravity, as I understand it, gravity isn't a force but rather a consequence of inertial movement along a geodesic through curved spacetime. How does this jive with the description of the arrow of time and its relationship with entropy? I never really see gravity and entropy discussed at the same time, even though they're both some of the only concepts that rely on a concept of time, as far as I know. Maybe I'm asking a nonsensical question, but it was a thought I had.
I want an answer to this too.
Also, if gravity is not a force then is time not a "dimension"
Idk anything about entropy, but maybe gravity is just curvature and time is just entropy. And that's it?
@@ninja250r2008m just to offer a bit of help (a nudge? in approximately the right direction)
Entropy is simplest understood as "chaos". Physicists termed it "entropy" in dissertations about Order and Chaos in Systems regarding Thermodynamics, so that's probably the subject you'd find most helpful...
Basically, as Time progresses "forward" entropy generally increases... (Simplified Conceptual) Think of your system like building a house. The system will naturally "settle" into a certain order as you build, due to equilibrium. (This is the short-cut explanation for why the solar system and the Milky Way generally resemble discs instead of wonky spheroids)... BUT left to itself, the house will start to corrupt and fall apart eventually... as entropy enters. (Basically, everything systemically put together, falls apart sooner or later.)
I'm willing to go out on the limb and quietly suggest Time as three dimensions, being logically the required minimals for interlacing so thoroughly with three-dimensional space to give us the universe as we understand it. Time works everywhere.
What's tougher to "wrap your head around" (still baking my noodle years into it) is that we (humans) can't yet measure time the way we can measure space... You can take a ruler or tape-measure that's "theoretically" long enough, and measure anything spacially. It's so many yards, feet, or meters (etc) long, tall, and wide... three spacial dimensions.
BUT even a clock or a specialized radiological decay counter doesn't measure Time. It's only feasible (so far) to measure the RESULTS of Time Passing... like the seconds measure "ticks" of gears working inside an old pocket watch or mechanical clock... the "oscillations" of a crystal in a newer digital time-piece... even the particles streaming out of a specific sample of specific purity of radioactive material decaying at a known rate ONLY ever measure the RESULTS of time passing.
We can't technologically quantify how FAR in time it will be when the sun next sets a direct beam of light through a certain window in your house (for instance) from exactly the moment I type this period.
That doesn't stop it being a dimension, and the same as space, it's more or less just "sitting there" while we pass through it. In fact, it doesn't stop us seeing "results" no matter what "hypothetical vector" we take in passing through it... since we only measure results of that passing.
AND super-gravity, from say... ultimately dense objects, can really F*** things up and make them difficult to understand...
but I'm still just working on it.
I don't think we're going to find "gravitons" either. I have a suspicion (lately) that gravity is kind of a consequence of existing or "expressing" in any material sense. SO whenever particles show mass, they show gravity... just on such an infinitesimal level that we struggle to measure, quantify, or factor it into work. BUT that's just more theory, too. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 I'm being completely genuine, define a demention for me please. I am so drawn to this topic but lack the education.
@@wellrose17 Okay... bear with me... and I'll try to get it so you understand it.
Essentially, a "dimension" is a measureable linear field.
In studying dimensions, we use "lines" to represent dimensions... so we have something visual to diagram and measure... and quantify with numbers.
So 2D or 2-Dimensional means two linear measureable fields, and we'd represent that as two lines crossing at right angles (usually)...
A 2D object then, is a flat plane... like a piece of paper...
Somewhere here, it's important to point out that in Physics (especially Astro Physics) we tend to assume everyone knows that dimensions and planes are generally considered "infinite" unless otherwise specified. It doesn't always look that way in diagrams and pictures, but we're "supposed to" put little arrows at the ends of lines to indicate the intention, sort of a symbol of "infinite in that direction"...without having to write it out or draw lines all the way across everything else. It just avoids clutter. BUT assuming most of us already know that, some folks forego the arrows for neatness and move on.
3D or 3-Dimensional means we now include a third line intersecting with the original two, also at a right angle (usually) to both of them, and is conventionally going to indicate space around you in general terms...
Normally, the base three dimensions are Height (up and down, vertically), Width (sideways, left and right), and Depth (forward and backward).
Those three spacial dimensions can be measured easily with a measuring tape... say in inches, centimeters, miles, kilometers, Astronomical Units, etc...
Hope that helps. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 thank you for explaining that. I get it. I just watched this th-cam.com/video/BFrBr8oUVXU/w-d-xo.html entanglement, holographic & it was amazing.! So information is spewed from the horizon continuing on via quantum entangled universe?
I roll my eyes every time someone calls gravity a force .
Starting to do the same eye rolling. Every test we have done has shown Gravity is an Effect, a measurement of the curvature of SpaceTime and thus not required to be a force or be limited to a minimum size like in Quantum Mechanics. In Relativity the effect of gravity can reach infinity in a singularity thus can be infinitively small. As Mat said gravity not being a force would make many physics people sad. This probably includes him. In other video he covers majority of physics people don't think the Big Bang started with a Singularity anymore. The reason many physics people don't believe in a singularity is they need Gravity to be a force for current work in Quantum Mechanics to reach the truth. They also state Gravity causing Singularities violates Quantum Mechanics where all objects have a minimum size they cannot get smaller than. But actual data keeps showing Relativity is true and thus Singularity possible.
The Bias towards Gravity as a Force shows in the current terms used. Dark Matter which actually includes solutions that have no matter involved and thus should be named something like Unexplained Gravitational Effects in Galaxies. Dark Energy with include solutions that don't involve energy when it is better described as, Unexplained reason for observed increasing rate of expansion in the Universe. Sort of understand the short hand as the better description is wordy but it's still a misleading lie in effect.
I think there is a bit of a Bias against Deism as you can't rule out Deism if the Big Bang is a singularity does not mean Deism is true eather. Claims that the Big Bang proves there is a God unset some even though the Big Bang does not prove an existence. But an infinite age ever looping Universe to some rules out the action of a God or the Universe having a intelligence. I think the question did something start all of this is still valid then though.
@@RedRocket4000 infinity is just an aspect. Infinite temperature would make matter behave just like Bose-Einstein Condensation. The same as for passing the speed of light would make for an infinity boundary of velocity an object could get. The infinitesimal entropy death of the universe doesn't imply on God or bullshit. It actually goes in accordance to the experiments, the entire universe would get into a superfluid medium and probably explode into another Big Bang and so on. This Big Bang of this universe probably came from the heat death of another and there are infinite Big Bangs exploding throughout the 5th and 6th dimensions, one planck unit different than another.
@@RedRocket4000 There is a Technological Singularity coming in the future decades, as technology advances exponentially, this is inevitable. And A.I. will probably become a God-like entity like in sci-fy movies... because these movies were based on expert's predictions... we don't need much to simulate the entire Calabi-Yau Manifold of 12-D.
JINXtheGamer ... Fall out of your chair. Feels like a force was responsible for the bum hitting the floor, eh???
r/iamverysmart
It may be based on a null-result but I think this was the best episode. Thank you.
thank god, I been fiending for my space time!
So are extra dimensions totally ruled out or just gravity leakage into other dimensions?
Depends on what type of dimensions are referred to. String theory extra dimensions are not rolled out for the reason he gave in short they are small. Extra Large everywhere dimensions were ruled out. This is for the meaning of dimension referring to things that effect things we observe like Length and Time, things we use to describe what we can observe. Dimensions confusingly is also used to refer to things that are not in normal Space/Time in example Hyperspace ideas or spiritual ideas. This data said nothing about those as this result could not test those ideas.
They are predicted to be only found on the extremely small scale of the universe... not macroscopic like a black hole.
such gravity leaks are considered impossible on the macroscale, but possible on the microscale... so when we talk about very small particles and their actual real weight are still impossible to detect, and the stability of matter would get weaker as we go smaller... particles would sweep in and out of existence by teleporting through extra-dimensions. There we could detect such chaotic and as predicted in many theories we could prove the existence of these dimensions through the mathematical description of an observed behavior that is like a shadow of extra dimensions in this one and can be detected with much necessary precision as to be scientifically proven.
@@OpportunisticHunter what do you think of the kaluza-klein theory which also has to do with extea dimensions but with electromagnetism?
THE BEATYFULL SYMPHONY.. OF THE UNIVERSE... CREATED BY SOUND AND LIGHT.. 🙏🙏🙏
actually it is a Frequency = sound and light
@@jairodduarte8627 OFFCOURSE IT IS.. 🙏🙏🙏
Are singularities possible with other forces like electromagnetism?
kind of... coulomb law has singularities, because it considers a particle to be a point with finite charge. You get infinite forces when you consider particles occupying the exact same spot.
Wouldn’t a kugelblitz fall under that category?
Robert Lorrison not really. a kugelblitz is a gravitational singularity caused by lots of photons in one area. I think he's asking about a purely electromagnetic singularity
@@KohuGaly Aren't electrons fermions, ant therefore can't occupy the same state?
The mass of proton and electron should be so dense to form black hole ... I think after big bang when electromagnetic force get born it that time it was in singularity
Do gravitational waves experience a doppler shift due to expansion of the universe?
yes. All waves traveling at lightspeed experience redshift and blueshift.
He never explained why the Gravity Waves beat the light of the event.
Isn't that because those light come from the actual merging event, and the gravitational waves are generated seconds before the merge (due to strong interactions from the rapid binary rotation)
My guess is that the GRB is from the atoms of gold and other heavy elements as they formed. The two neutron stars threw off gobs of neutronium as they spiraled in; it took a fraction of a second for the neutronium to decompress and fragment into ordinary-sized nuclei.
Joseph Marsh - Gravity waves can travel through matter with no effect, while light energy is slowed. Similar to why neutrinos can be detected just before the flash of a supernova.
These are actually so good! Thank you.
In summary, the gravitational wave detection shows that there are no extra dimensions beyond 3 plus 1 spacetime dimension.
THE THEORETICAL, TOP DOWN, CLEAR, SIMPLE, AND BALANCED MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA OF NECESSITY:
Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Very importantly, outer “space” involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. NOW, carefully consider what is THE SUN; AS it does (and it must) exist in both time AND SPACE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!!
E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy !!!!
Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Carefully consider what is THE MAN who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!! (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA ON BALANCE !!! ACCORDINGLY, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE !!! Carefully consider what is THE EYE. GREAT. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.
BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This CLEARLY explains the cosmological redshift AND the black hole(s) !!! AGAIN, gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!!! Think QUANTUM GRAVITY !!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE !!!! Great.
By Frank DiMeglio
Have any of you ever had the experience of looking into the future while sleeping?
This has happened to me a lot in the past. It's a little difficult to explain, but I try:
When I am half asleep, I dream (or feel that something will happen in the next few seconds) and it actually happens. I heard my mother say something once, half asleep, and a few seconds later, she really said it.
Did she perhaps repeat herself?
Sharp. Very sharp - and the explaination is simply superb. Thanks for this series.
@PBS Space Time
Are there 3+2 models?
I love these videos, but often there’s a point where I’m watching, and focusing on the concepts, and then I start to smell toast...
I love this program and Matt is the best!
Question: Could the possible reason for the Zero extra dimensions be due to the fact that our measurements and the location of the event lie at the same point (or very close) in that 4th dimension? I.e. if us and the merger happen at the same point in the 4th dimension, the energy dissipation to that dimension would be negligible and therefore might look like no extra dimensions to us (as 3+1 dimensional observer).
I also want to know
Well the effects of that extra dimension would have also shown up relating to the amount the universe is expanding between us and the event so they couldn't have been too close, ie because there is hubble constant expansion and the event happened in another galaxy. This is assuming the theory being tested was true. I'm no expert though
or in other words: hubble expansion + measurements of Ligo and light = zero extra dimensions = theory false
I don't think so.
The decrease of intensity is proportional to 1/D^k, with D being the distance to the source and k being the number of dimensions wherein the impulse is spreading out.
Since the merger happened in a galaxy far, far away (140 million light-years to be precise), that decrease in intensity should be well measurable, regardless of how long it took the impulse to cover that distance, as its speed does not affect how it spreads out.
This is my new favorite headcanon.
Oh thank god.
If there was positive result you would have to change your channel's name to "PBS Space time & 5th dimension".
PBS Space Time Etc? :)
With Marilyn McCoo and group?
"5th dimension" is that near this flavor town i hear about? do they have toyotathons in flavor town. are toyotathons bleeding in from the 5th dimension?
Very good explanation, I understood absolutely nothing, but it sure spin my head and knocked me out of my element while I'm drunk. Thank you.
Does the existence of time cause gravity, or does the existence of gravity cause time; and how would you test for it?
No, to the best of my knowledge time is a byproduct of entropy. That is to say that the only reason we can conceive of or observe time is because things around us do stuff, and they do it in a clearly observable direction. It only ever goes in that direction (as far as we currently understand it) because entropy cannot currently be reversed, to the best of our knowledge.
Gravity is caused by the curvature of time due to energy. Time's existence does not cause gravity but gravity wouldn't work without time.
I'm glad someone else sees it! Gravity is a result, similar to speed.
All foundations lie one upon the other. There is no first fundamental atribute.
Does it bother anyone else when people use the term "dimension" to refer to parallel universes?
Yeah. It works if the parallel universes are just layers of 3d space stacked one on top of the other and separated by nothing, instead of being a smooth transition
Same here lol, always has.
It bothers me more when people refer to time as a dimension.
I can't sleep at nights.
Even seen it referred to as such on official science channels on social networks. We can thank decades of bad science fiction for that.
probably the most practical video of Space TIme xD
It might be of help that I mension there's a spelling mistake in the thumbnail
Edit: *mention, it's fixed now
Might it be of help to mention there is a spelling mistake in your text?
Think that's a joke bro
I see what you did there.
Ok good one. *Wondering why i even bothered to mension
mension
Hey. I'm planning to start a Flat Universe Society. Could you maybe make t-shirts with a nice FUS logo or "the Universe is flat" on them?
Prodigiousness Professor. Thank you as always perfect.
2:30 i dont think your hypercube was rotating properly. i was under the assumption that the 3d shadow of a rotating hypercube looks much more like it is continuously turning itself inside out
I guess it would depend on the alignment of the axis of rotation, and that a rotation that is aligned with the imaginary axis would cause the warping to be 0... But I don't have the mathematical background to support my intuition.
The reason you get the image of the hypercube turning itself inside out is because you're rotating it in all 4 dimensions. Here he's only rotating the hypercube in 2 dimensions.
Think about how you can rotate a cube in 2 dimensions, and then how you can rotate the cube in 3 dimensions. You can do the same rotations with a hypercube and it would have the same rotational appearance as the cube. But when you rotate it in 4 dimensions, you see it as turning inside out.
4D objects rotate in all the same ways as 3D ones, plus another axis. The only way to demonstrate that axis of rotation is that sort of inside-out motion. A cube can rotate the same way as a square on a piece of paper, but the cube can additionally rotate in a way that the square can't. The shadow of a cube rotating on the piece of paper looks like the rotating square, but the cube rotating in the other way will look like a wierd, inside-out-y "hyper-square" rotation.
Take a look at "Visualizing 4D Geometry - A Journey Into the 4th Dimension". Awesome video series that shows how projection from higher to lower dimensional space works and why it works that way. The short answer is easy to see for yourself. Pick up an object and put it in front of a flash light so that you have it's shadow on the wall. That is a 3D object projected into 2D representation, try rotating it in various directions. Even something as simple as a cube produces a remarkable variety of projections in lower dimensional space.
You only get the "inside out" rotation if the rotation involves the 4th axis. If the 4th axis remains static, the hypercube rotates like any 3D objects do.
Now, if only someone could teach flat earthers to think 3D-like.
The earth is a globe.
I asked one, how they explain planet formation without spinning and roundness and our other "heresies"
the dude answered extremely briefly: "creation"
There are plenty of Christians that accept the fact that the earth is a globe. I'm one of them.
You can't "teach" them anything, that's the problem.
I finally found a video about higher dimensions without stupid people criticizeing the video.
Finally.
hold my beer...
It doesn't rule out the possibility for extra macro dimensions, just the fact that gravity can move freely in +3D
That's what I was wondering. It seems that this doesn't prove that extra dimensions don't exist, only that gravity operates in 3(+1).
"One single master equation. Unification of the great and small! I hear the notes, but the arrangement is wrong; I'm starting to doubt but I can't give up now I'm so near~!
one thing is to integrate 4 dimensions of reality and call it "Spacetime" another is to keep describing reality through more than 4 dimensions.
Think about that before even stating the word "unification"... because unification of what?! There you go!
wish i lived on your block to drink coffee with you often man. awesome math here. openening minds man good stuff.
Let me save u fellows time.....”NO EXTRA DIMENSIONS DETECTED”
Yes but if they don't have branes they could still exist.... kind of like some orange-haired leaders have no brains but somehow they also still manage to exist!
I feel the video illustrated very well a scientist's train of thought when designing an experiment, and also explained quite well the experiment's methodology.
That's what you WOULD say, 7th dimension!!
Can't upvote in two dimensions. Take my North vote.
Hello Morjdk. My rotation is perpendicular to the galactic plane therefore you must take my west vote. I might have lost all of my heat in impact events, but my sense of direction is still as acute as ever. Your pal, Uranus.
In two dimension we would just be electron clouds because up and down quarks wouldn't exist.
I upvote with the quaternion 1/sqrt(4)+1/sqrt(4)*i+1/sqrt(4)*j+1/sqrt(4)*k
One of the stupidest comments I've read
So, 3D modeling software have this whole thing going on. Some use XY-plane as the basic plane and height must be the Z-axis. Others say X is lateral and Y is vertical, therefore Z must be forward.
Having only 2D doesn't mean you're stuck to the floor =)
So glad I found this DIY tutorial
Just look up.. then 90 degrees from that direction... then 90 degrees from there.. then, 90 degrees from there...
I can just go back and forward...
you should specify "don't ever look in the same direction"
@@francescosorce5189 you found a loophole to prevent your head going up your own arsehole. Ever wondered he might have wanted you to use the steps to get it out?
quality comment
I looked up, forward and then down. Wow, there *are* only two dimensions. Thanks, Wankstein.