the redhair guys, is he our Numberphile friend? with more hair and beard? (can be good to have names of the people in your videos :) )
anyway, I wanted to say that your videos, brady, are realy dangerous ! When I start looking your videos I cannot stop, and all my day is over... so you are shorting the 4th dimension (time).............
How come the space between branes, or, if we are the only brane, how come all of the space in the other dimensions are completely empty except for our intersection? If we are simply located on a membrane in a high dimensional space how come nothing randomly travels trough our intersection and how come no force suddenly picks us off our membrane?
There is another possible way to look at it which is more likely "String Theory Models" are most likely wrong. Mathematics is strong because there is something called proof and then there is conjecture. String Theory is conjecture in the world of mathematical proofs and it is unproven in the physical world of experimentation. Yet for over 40 years, it is the self-proclaimed best candidate for unification.
I believe that our brains are only desinged evidently to detect 3 dimensional world plus time thus making space-time) Well evidently if one cannot see somethyng it does not nesesarily mean it is not there, and i thus believe that all dimensions are curled up in a cilynder and this this makes a single cilynder that is composed of ten dimensions that are vibrations of a single string which is the eleventh dimension.
@Cabb3s If you like physics and you like math, quit social science and try physics. It should be a no brainier, There is more money and less BS in it. Probably even more potential to do good for the world. I like social science also but I chose science and don't regret it. Make no mistake though, its hard,
I love people passionate in their work. When people tell me physics or any other field of science is boring I usually suspect that the problem lies with their teacher. Reality is so unbelievable, in my eyes it's impossible to be boring
On a scale, 2d would look like an infinetly small 1d line along the linear dimension that extends orthagonally into 2d space. Other lines couldn't see it.
On a tv screen, 3d would be an infinetly small 2d point on the screen that extends orthagonally through 3d space. Cartoons can't see it.
In real life, 4d would be an infinetly small 3d point that extends orthagonally though 4d space. Humans can't see it.
@wwwleo1 the point is, is that u cant see more than one dimension of the string unless u look closely. obviously if u look at string now u already know it has one than more dimension because u have examined one before, but if its far away u cant see more than one, even tho u know others are there
I wonder if some of these extra dimensions might help explain virtual particles, how an electron can be at two places at once, and some of the other QM mindbending out there...
KornSarum, please visit wiki. A degree of freedom, is just another variable in an equations to describe reality. You can move, with out moving. Heat, is energy coming toward you and cold is energy leaving you. A moving wave of energy. No matter how you spin it, if it is a variable in an equation, it is a quantifiable dimensional property.
in theory, a fourth-dimensional object would cast a three-dimensional shadow when in light. I just don't understand how a three dimensional shadow works.
If gravity might work through extra dimensions and there is a theory that dark matter exists (due to the sum of matter / gravity ratio) is in not possible that in fact dark matter is where extra dimensions exert their effect through gravity?
P.S. I am a data analyst/developer and not a physicist so what I have just said could be complete bovine excretia...
With respect to ‘Degrees of Freedom:’ Here are some dimensions you haven’t warmed up to yet. One would be temperature, or compression, magnetism, centripetal forces… Are these not dimensions? Imagine the infinite and complex partial differential relationships these degrees of freedom can have with each other. I suspect you live in Edwin Abbott’s FLAT LAND!
@markakroll Temperature is characterized by speed, which is not another dimension. Compression is characterized by distance between molecules or atoms or other particles. Magnetism, gravity etc. are forces, and not dimensions. Its not that simple.
I will try to suggest a dimension you seem to miss. I know, it will turn your world upside down! I can describe a means in which I can PULL you whilst PUSHING you at the same time. This is possible thanks to a dimensional property. It is called TORQ. So get a grip! Because it is real. The extended version, temporally speaking is SPIN.
You're right, Einstein proposed 11 dimensions of reality, 10 spatial and 1 temporal. I believe that they either have made a mistake, or are not considering the 0th dimension. Techically, with us living in a 3 dimensional world, we are actually privy to 4 spatial dimensions: the point, the line, the plane, and the solid. So in the highest spatial dimension in string theory, the 9th dimension, there are actually 10 spatial dimensions being referred to. Numbering is the real issue here.
@SkullXII Not sure what Vamp is telling you. All 5 string theories operate with 9 spatial 1 time, M theory, under which all 5 can make sense, utilises 10 spatial and 1 time. You probably heard a lecture on M theory.
Ok. So seriously now. All of this leads to one single question. (And I think it's pretty obvious to everyone who has watched this video.) Are there any prostitutes in these other dimensions? Will I be able to pay for sex with my hard-earned money in these yet-to-be-discovered places?
And if the answer is no, then why are we wasting our time on this?
RE Extra Dimensions: How about the 5th and 6th dimensions∫ being that of:
"CHANGE" (either the process of or the fact of) and another dimension of "POSITION". They are no less abstract for a dimension than "time" or "extremely small wrapped within itself". I enjoy your excellent programs.
WHY DO THESE PROFESSORS SOUND SO EXCITED ABOUT PHYSICS?.. AND MY TEACHERS SEEM ANNOYED BY IT.. THATS WHY I DONT LEARN SHIT!!!.. WISH SIXTY SYMBOLS COULD TUTOR ME :(
@LewisDwayne Get yourself some good grades, teach yourself with the same enthusiasm, and apply to Nottingham University! Then you actually can be tutored by them :)
@DaveyGMart IM ACTUALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND PHYSICS.. I LIKE IT BECAUSE IT MAKES ME THINK ALOT.. LIKE MATH.. AND TY ILL BE LOOKING FOR IT WHEN I GRADUATE :D
I feel sorry for anyone who doesn't have teachers that protray Physics for what it truly is. I was lucky to have awesome Physics Chemistry and Biology teachers in Highschool that imparted their way of thinking and passion. I think its a crime that some kids are denied that (in religous school for example being brainwashed that science is a bad thing)
In the future, when we explore and traverse distant space, what coordinate system and origin will we use? Since space is expanding and matter moves around and gets destroyed, how can we devise an near absolute-position coordinate system? Currently we use Earth-centric relative distance.
Maybe, by the time we are able to travel to other stars, smart and friendly beings will share with us an already established billion year old system of navigation.
michelson-morley - neither proved nor disproved something. they proved that they use the wrong degree of the scale dimension in order to fake-disprove something.
double slit "experiment" - working with the wrong ratios because deliberately disregarding the degrees of the scale dimension ...very funny.
people who don't regard the scale dimension as a full dimension that lets time vanish if one tries to find more and more degrees - dumb.
The reason we can't perceive more than three dimensions is more than likely because we have two eyes, as we wouldn't even be able to perceive depth (or z, if you will) with one. The reason we can't simulate it is because we've no idea how it should be simulated. That tesseract amused the hell out of me, as theoretically it's a nice representation of the 4th dimension, but in truth, it's still only 3. ^_^
@Lemau You are confusing the biology of stereoscopic vision with the mathematics of dimensions. A person born blind in one eye is obviously well aware of depth, as infact is a completely blind person. By your logic a spider "perceives" 8 spacial dimensions! A tesseract is the 3D shadow of the fourth dimensional cube, just as a square is a 2D shadow of a 3D cube. You cannot of course produce a real 4d object in this universe.
@Tossphate I'm not confusing them. I'm saying that even IF we could prove them mathematically, we can't prove their existance. Also, by my logic, a spider should be able to perceive -9- dimensions using 8 eyes, although from a logical point of view (i.e. a 3-dimensional one, ^_~) every eye SHOULD be on a different dimensional axis, which in case of the spider, isn't true. Thanks for the clarification on the tesseract though. That makes sense to me. ^__^
@Lemau even if we had one eye we could easily percieve 3 dimensions (actualy 4 if you count time). we move our head in 3 dimensions. the reason we cant percieve other dimensions is because we don't interact with them.
I still don't understand extra dimensions and I can't say that I even want to. I already get headaches without thinking about them so I'll just stick to the space alien explanation
Dimensions are another human thing, space is more likely based on volumes, the presence of matter expands space, lowers it's density, voilà, gravity is a "vaccum".
Time? Lower density means it takes longer to travel in space, higher density, faster.
As for electromagnetism, that could be something purely virtual, or something which is string based... well not really strings, otherwise the universe would be infinitely complex, more likely volume based.
If you had an absolutely low-level unified theory of maths which was perfectly accurate you would inadvertently prove the universe is a simple, virtual realm, however if you can't be perfectly accurate even when you hit the bottom from things affecting us outside the universe, then we're one of many realms... nightmare-tier challenge, go to our host dimension.
i'm only 15 and i'm crap as science so i don't know if i'm being stupid here.
but if you're saying that in order to see/understand other dimensions you need to 'zoom in' because they're too 'small' to understand. what if there are other ones that are vast. i.e he said about the cable if you look at it from a distance it looks like a line with one dimension, but if you get closer you can see the other dimension. could it not be the same with a larger one?
I dont understand why people can dislike this video, if they dont like hpysics then why watch it in the first place. Anyway i love it keep making more haha
Bit of a complicated way of describing the extra dimensions. Try searching for "imagining the tenth dimension" and you'll find a set of videos I find to be more intuitive.
Awesome video as usual but the thought of extra dimensions kinda gives me an idea of wht if the force of gravity actually is a major force in these dimensions & weakly interacts with ours as a secondary force plus wht if Dark matter particles also lie in these dimensions as well hence interacting via gravity only! since we can not detect it any other way!
@Shockszzbyyous This is a question many people ask here and the great thing is is that they are really true. We are 3-dimensional creatures... and by that they really mean we can only understand 3 dimensional objects. 'smaller' dimensions cant be seen becuase they are too small for us to detect, and by that we will see absolutly no length in that direction(like what they say in this video). But the opposite thing can be said too! the big space a lower dimension happens to be in(see next message)
@Shockszzbyyous....,the smaller and more dimensional we get in comparison whit the object we are observing. The bottom-line is this: if we observe a very very distant planet so that we see it in 2-dimensions. We can actually only conclude by logical thinking that the object is not really 2-dimensional. for example we see that the outer-circle is more distant(in 2d perspective) from a smaller circle to the middel. Becuase we see the object from our 3-dimensional perspective we can see the surface
@Shockszzbyyous ...from our 3-dimensional perspective we can surely say about the object(i said see, sorry) that the 2-dimensional surface is curved into the 3th dimension. Now comes the important thing! If we were 2-dimensional observers we coudnt make that logical statement becuase we would not see the object in a direction that opens up the possibility for us to make this statement!
So i would say...yes also lower dimensions can not be fully understanded by us and are therefore hidden.
I know there trying, but the way i see it physicists these days just think up these theory's to explain the world, but then when bits of it don't work they just invent new things to make the theorys possible like extra dimensions, Higgs bosons and dark matter bit of a mess really!
Why is it frightening to imagine trying to piont in a way that you cannot see; if it is possible and is proven to be safe, then it is a good thing to try out
honestly I'd consider time simply an element of the fourth dimension. If you think of a comic book as a two dimensional universe, what they would perceive as time is only a semblance of third dimension.
I'm wondering if time can really be considered a dimension.
To me, a dimensions such as (X,Y,Z) allow for an infinite amount of freedom in either direction. A dimension reaches from -∞ to +∞.
But time had an absolute beginning(Big Bang), a zero point. Like with Kelvin it has only positive values from this point. This leads me to believe that it's more of a fundamental force of nature.
We can travel to the future but not the past, by employing Relativistic tricks. Such as traveling through space quickly, or Hanging out in a gravity well. Relativity shows us that time is tied to motion and gravity.
Some say that if one can travel faster than light, then they would travel back in time. Such as light speed travel inside the twisting space around a rapidly spinning black hole. But I don't think that would happen. They'd just be propelled into the future that much faster...
Although nothing in physics says "Time can't be reversed". The formulae do seem to work when run backwards.
But some absurdities come up when this is done. Take the dual slit experiment as an example. When run in reverse, the light wave MUST travel from the detector to the light source by definition. But when the wave passes through the slits, an interference pattern is created a second time, which indicates the light came from many directions and not the source. Which we know to be false.
I believe that the phone charger cable analogy would have been better used to describe the difference between three vs. two dimensions rather than the difference between two vs. one dimensions.
fold a piece of paper directly in half each time, how many times can you fold it before you can't fold it no more, it you force it the piece of paper breaks, this may follow the same rule as the fabric of space time, fold it one to many times and space time breaks down or more like rips like that piece of paper.
Wait a minute a wire appearing like a line in the distance has to do with size not dimensions. We can not talk about a dimensions being small. All we can say is that the object is small. I mean if dimensions do have a size can you please tell me what size is the X dimension or Y or Z? Also there is no such a thing as 2 dim. object. All objects exist in a universe with n number of dimensions. So the universe has n dimensions and everything in it inherits that number of dimensions.
So there is no such thing as 2 dim. object. This is just an abstract concept in our minds. Isn't it a bit cherry picking when you say that something exists in one dimension and not another? Can you tell me what object does not exist in the time dimension?
The real questions are "How do we know if something is a dimension or not? How many are they? Do they exist in the universe or the other way around? Is an axis of a spin a dimension?" Wow I wish I studied maths instead of architecture.
When you refer to something as a two dimensional object, it means that either its length, width or depth in inconceivable, making it look like it only has two spacial dimensions.
Not being a native English speaker it just dawns on me that the word dimension has two separate meanings in English. Dimension may mean either size of an object in meters or an "axle of existence". It makes better sense when you have two separate words for two separate things.
By the way if an object's length, width or depth is inconceivable that simply means that YOU can't conceive it. I am pretty sure that an example of 2D object cannot be given. Even the ink on the paper has SOME thickness.
Let's not talk about representations. Lets talk about the real world. Since Einstein we live in 4D universe, 3 spatial and 1 time dimensions. Everything we know of is 4 dimensional since it exists in this universe, no exceptions. For representation purposes we sometimes have to omit some dimensions but this is just our mind's limitation, they don't actually cease to exist. Actually the latest fashion requires 11 dimensions to function. What i ask is what are they? How do we know when we see one?
But phisicaly, it has the depth of the layer of material with which was drawn. Otherwise you'd be telling me that is a matter of perception and not of the object itself. Then we have that 1 and 2 dimension objects are just imaginary.
That's right, they're imaginary objects. You might remember doing geometry early in school and drawing '2D' objects and finding there area and so forth.
2D objects are often hypothesized to represent things like surface area and so on, where depth is not a factor. For example, painting something. You may be concerned only with the surface area of an object you want to paint, and not the actual thickness of it.
No, 2D objects do not exist in our world, but they are often used for such things.
There is now universal law in physics that says the universe has to have a certain amount of dimensions. If string theory at some point can explain the universe better (or can unite quantum mechanics and relativity) and can make accurate predictions then most physicist would accept it. We used to think that it is impossible for a single particle to be in different places at the same time but the fact that it can is one of the counter intuitive things about reality we have to accept.
Isn't a line actually two dimensional? Because one is the "length " and the other is the width of the line.Even if the line was only a particle wide, it would still be 2 dimensional unless it's width would be infinitely small.
The three dimensions are made up of three 'lines' or dimensions. The X axis is one dimension, Y is another, and Z is the third. So a line in Spatial Dimensions is a single dimension. In Spatial Dimensions, to have a point, you actually need two dimensions, X and Y, which creates a plane on which the point can be recorded.
Can someone qualified please answer my question: Why is time considered a "dimension"? It has nothing to do with the other dimensions, shouldn't it just be considered a separate entity?
In relativity there is "space-time". If two events occur separated by space (distance) and time then observers travelling at hugely different velocities might do tests to find the separation of the two events.
What happens is that although they all agree on a "space-time" interval, they get a range of answers for "space" and "time", where they appear to be trading between the two i.e. close in time, far in space versus far in time, close in space. This completely intertwines time and space.
I dont think we may be able to "see and test" these other dimensions. Analogy: we are on one side of the computer monitor interacting with youtube (or any website). We are bound to be on this side. Even tho we can assume what youtube is created in (what programming language), we can interact with it, test things on it, predict future events etc - there is no way to see the code behind it that makes it run. We are "stuck in the experiment" so to speak.
We can possibly test the idea, but I agree that I doubt we will be able to "see" them given their size (100 billion times smaller than a proton I believe). Keep your eye on the LHC, if it "doesnt" see gravitons, it should prove they exist.
Thanks a lot. This video help greatly in explaining my questions when I was read "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking. Now I really understands what a string theory is and what a p-brane is.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I know there trying but the way i see it physicists these days just think up these theory's to explain the world in which we live but then when bits of it dont work they just invent new stuff the to make the theorys possible like extra dimensions, Higgs bosons and dark matter bit of a mess really.
When Faraday got an electric current seemingly from nowhere (a bit of the explanation didn't work) he invented a new effect he called induction. This is now the basis of all generators.
Some of the authors I have read suggest that the force of Gravity may be just as strong as the other three forces, but the "total force" isn't felt because it "leaks" off of our 3/4d brane. It has to do with the theory of strings being open or closed loops.
It is theorized that most matter is open loops, anchored to our brane at the ends; and the Graviton is a closed loop and "free" to pass through our brane and others as well.
Thank you so much for clarifying for the lay people that Extra Dimensions doesn't mean Parallel Universe.
When I became an "Arm Chair Physicist," it took me a bit wrap my mind around it, get and keep it sorted.
If you really want to warp your mind, some have posited that one of the six higher dimensions could very well be a second time dimension and not a spacial one...
How come we use 3 dimensions to describe the common space around us? This video explains that just because we can't see something, doesn't mean it isn't there... But what makes something we can see, there? Is viewing the world around us in 3D a little old fashioned, considering reality is infinite and dynamic in every way?
Quite right, viewing it in 3d is old fashioned. As you pointed out it's dynamic which means it changes in time. Within physics we now treat time as another dimension. As for further dimensions, they don't matter for the lives of most people, they are not even needed for many physics topics, so I think 3d (+ time) is here to stay. As to "What makes something we can see, there?" I'll leave for philosophers but if I see a cricket ball heading for my head, I'll duck!
I wonder if what we perceive as matter is actually a three dimensional cross section/ representation of a higher dimensional wave.
Hard to explain what i mean.
But i guess kind of like how a CD waveform is made of 44.1k samples per sec, but if you look at one sample it looks like a square, its also only made of 2 dimensions height and width, im wondering if what is energy/mass in our dimension is just an infinitely small 3d cross section of what is a wave of energy in higher dimensions.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Many people have reported experience with the astral. All humans have an astral body as well as a 3D body, the two are usually coincident but separate slightly during sleep. Ghosts are just people in the astral where they find things as solid as we do but other things are different. Don't know why we see them. Science is steered away from discovery of other dimensions, at least so our findings are controlled and measured. This means science is really a religion and is not free and open.
And 9/11 was an inside job and the world is ending in 2012 and I've been probed by aliens and the Illuminati is controlling the whole world and fairies and unicorns are real.
You should look into this stuff, its all true. You want evidence, you say? Who needs evidence, evidence is for the evil cult of science, real free thinkers accept anything anybody tells them.
the 2012 theory is very broad and has many offshoots, all i know is that there are several major co-incidences that point to an event of some nature occurring at this time, good or bad.
BUT 9/11?
you would be a moron NOT to believe its a conspiracy, the FACTS prove it.
the same goes for the Illuminati.
you're just closed minded and cant accept possibilities that dont fit in with youre "normal" and media focused reality. other realms of existence exist. you're probs an atheist lol
Dynamic Symmetry takes flight, my flying saucer concept comes directly from this type of thinking. Search for Geobat or Geobat Flying Saucer Original Video. You will actually see a flying object that derives from a basic geometrical relationship that has been undiscovered for thousands of years! It's so simple, the military literally visited me to verify my aircraft design. Flying saucers are coming! Inventor, Jack M. Jones
I use a Sony Z7. As a second camera I also sometimes borrow a Z1. Also if I need something from a few extra angles, I recently got a Sony HandyCamHDR-XR105 for holidays, so I use that too... and my brother-in-law gave me his little Oregon Scientific camera to use when I need one that may be "expendable".
I edit on Avid Media Composer.
The same applies to all my other channels (sixtysymbols, nottinghamsceince, bibledex, etc)
the redhair guys, is he our Numberphile friend? with more hair and beard? (can be good to have names of the people in your videos :) )
anyway, I wanted to say that your videos, brady, are realy dangerous ! When I start looking your videos I cannot stop, and all my day is over... so you are shorting the 4th dimension (time).............
docsharp00 3 days ago
Salvia is a good way to "see" what they mean by these so-called extra dimensions.
MrLeonardfalkland 1 week ago 2
@MrLeonardfalkland Hahahah, this is true.
DeepSpaceVoid 1 week ago
How come the space between branes, or, if we are the only brane, how come all of the space in the other dimensions are completely empty except for our intersection? If we are simply located on a membrane in a high dimensional space how come nothing randomly travels trough our intersection and how come no force suddenly picks us off our membrane?
Hedning1390 2 weeks ago
There is another possible way to look at it which is more likely "String Theory Models" are most likely wrong. Mathematics is strong because there is something called proof and then there is conjecture. String Theory is conjecture in the world of mathematical proofs and it is unproven in the physical world of experimentation. Yet for over 40 years, it is the self-proclaimed best candidate for unification.
BinaryStars100 2 weeks ago
Read Flatland and Sphereland
Veggiepunch 3 weeks ago
I believe that our brains are only desinged evidently to detect 3 dimensional world plus time thus making space-time) Well evidently if one cannot see somethyng it does not nesesarily mean it is not there, and i thus believe that all dimensions are curled up in a cilynder and this this makes a single cilynder that is composed of ten dimensions that are vibrations of a single string which is the eleventh dimension.
nicoeste8765 3 weeks ago
@nicoeste8765 That is a reasonable belief. We will just have to wait and see ifthe experiments support or refute it.
michalchik 3 weeks ago
Man, i am stuck in social science and read almost no physics what so ever, yet it is the one subject that i truly enjoy, that and math i guess. FML
Cabb3s 1 month ago
@Cabb3s If you like physics and you like math, quit social science and try physics. It should be a no brainier, There is more money and less BS in it. Probably even more potential to do good for the world. I like social science also but I chose science and don't regret it. Make no mistake though, its hard,
michalchik 3 weeks ago
I love people passionate in their work. When people tell me physics or any other field of science is boring I usually suspect that the problem lies with their teacher. Reality is so unbelievable, in my eyes it's impossible to be boring
RustlessPotato 1 month ago
On a scale, 2d would look like an infinetly small 1d line along the linear dimension that extends orthagonally into 2d space. Other lines couldn't see it.
On a tv screen, 3d would be an infinetly small 2d point on the screen that extends orthagonally through 3d space. Cartoons can't see it.
In real life, 4d would be an infinetly small 3d point that extends orthagonally though 4d space. Humans can't see it.
tucense 3 months ago in playlist More videos from sixtysymbols
The excitement in the Seth Green lookalike is really contagious, now I can't sleep...
belliebum12 4 months ago 5
Comment removed
LeconsdAnalyse 4 months ago
terrible edditing
MrCuppcake 5 months ago
@MrCuppcake awful spelling
fishybishbash 2 months ago
but even the thinest string still has Dimensions
wwwleo1 5 months ago
@wwwleo1 the point is, is that u cant see more than one dimension of the string unless u look closely. obviously if u look at string now u already know it has one than more dimension because u have examined one before, but if its far away u cant see more than one, even tho u know others are there
happygofloppy 1 month ago
I wonder if some of these extra dimensions might help explain virtual particles, how an electron can be at two places at once, and some of the other QM mindbending out there...
rogerdotlee 6 months ago
Sort of makes you wonder what it would be like to live in a Universe with only 2 dimensions of space but also 2 of time.
DavidMTRutten 7 months ago
KornSarum, please visit wiki. A degree of freedom, is just another variable in an equations to describe reality. You can move, with out moving. Heat, is energy coming toward you and cold is energy leaving you. A moving wave of energy. No matter how you spin it, if it is a variable in an equation, it is a quantifiable dimensional property.
markakroll 7 months ago
in theory, a fourth-dimensional object would cast a three-dimensional shadow when in light. I just don't understand how a three dimensional shadow works.
Mob720 7 months ago
@Mob720 I imagine it would have the same visual effect as a black hole
Eric0728 7 months ago
I can watch sixty symbols all day fam
Ghostdog162 7 months ago
If gravity might work through extra dimensions and there is a theory that dark matter exists (due to the sum of matter / gravity ratio) is in not possible that in fact dark matter is where extra dimensions exert their effect through gravity?
P.S. I am a data analyst/developer and not a physicist so what I have just said could be complete bovine excretia...
jagara1 7 months ago
With respect to ‘Degrees of Freedom:’ Here are some dimensions you haven’t warmed up to yet. One would be temperature, or compression, magnetism, centripetal forces… Are these not dimensions? Imagine the infinite and complex partial differential relationships these degrees of freedom can have with each other. I suspect you live in Edwin Abbott’s FLAT LAND!
markakroll 8 months ago
@markakroll Temperature is characterized by speed, which is not another dimension. Compression is characterized by distance between molecules or atoms or other particles. Magnetism, gravity etc. are forces, and not dimensions. Its not that simple.
KornSarum 7 months ago
I will try to suggest a dimension you seem to miss. I know, it will turn your world upside down! I can describe a means in which I can PULL you whilst PUSHING you at the same time. This is possible thanks to a dimensional property. It is called TORQ. So get a grip! Because it is real. The extended version, temporally speaking is SPIN.
markakroll 8 months ago
The red head guy is SOOOOOO HOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
aurestest 9 months ago
@aurestest
¬_¬ hands off, MINE :D pahah.
MYV382N 7 months ago
I have, the wierdest boner
maximum1212 9 months ago
this rocks my brain. i love it
vkotis 9 months ago
I remember hearing in a lecture that there might be 10 dimensions of space, and 1 of time, according to string theory. What's the deal with that?
SkullXII 9 months ago
@SkullXII
You're right, Einstein proposed 11 dimensions of reality, 10 spatial and 1 temporal. I believe that they either have made a mistake, or are not considering the 0th dimension. Techically, with us living in a 3 dimensional world, we are actually privy to 4 spatial dimensions: the point, the line, the plane, and the solid. So in the highest spatial dimension in string theory, the 9th dimension, there are actually 10 spatial dimensions being referred to. Numbering is the real issue here.
vampiracy 9 months ago
@vampiracy Ahh, thanks for clearing that up mate.
SkullXII 9 months ago
@SkullXII Not sure what Vamp is telling you. All 5 string theories operate with 9 spatial 1 time, M theory, under which all 5 can make sense, utilises 10 spatial and 1 time. You probably heard a lecture on M theory.
meucunt1 9 months ago
Ok. So seriously now. All of this leads to one single question. (And I think it's pretty obvious to everyone who has watched this video.) Are there any prostitutes in these other dimensions? Will I be able to pay for sex with my hard-earned money in these yet-to-be-discovered places?
And if the answer is no, then why are we wasting our time on this?
realjoefriday 10 months ago
@realjoefriday Hahahahaha! Golden!
CRISNCHIPS12398 9 months ago
RE Extra Dimensions: How about the 5th and 6th dimensions∫ being that of:
"CHANGE" (either the process of or the fact of) and another dimension of "POSITION". They are no less abstract for a dimension than "time" or "extremely small wrapped within itself". I enjoy your excellent programs.
David Houtz
davidehoutz 10 months ago
good vid. the camera tricks were corny though.
TuplaPekka 10 months ago
WHY DO THESE PROFESSORS SOUND SO EXCITED ABOUT PHYSICS?.. AND MY TEACHERS SEEM ANNOYED BY IT.. THATS WHY I DONT LEARN SHIT!!!.. WISH SIXTY SYMBOLS COULD TUTOR ME :(
LewisDwayne 10 months ago
@LewisDwayne Get yourself some good grades, teach yourself with the same enthusiasm, and apply to Nottingham University! Then you actually can be tutored by them :)
DaveyGMart 10 months ago
@DaveyGMart IM ACTUALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND PHYSICS.. I LIKE IT BECAUSE IT MAKES ME THINK ALOT.. LIKE MATH.. AND TY ILL BE LOOKING FOR IT WHEN I GRADUATE :D
LewisDwayne 10 months ago
@LewisDwayne Because Physics IS exciting!
I feel sorry for anyone who doesn't have teachers that protray Physics for what it truly is. I was lucky to have awesome Physics Chemistry and Biology teachers in Highschool that imparted their way of thinking and passion. I think its a crime that some kids are denied that (in religous school for example being brainwashed that science is a bad thing)
insoms 10 months ago
@insoms LOL.. I AGREE WITH YOU.. IM A CATHOLIC AND GO TO CHURCH FOR MY CONFIRMATION.. AND I HATE RELIGION... AND YES PHYSICS IS VERY VERY EXCITING..
LewisDwayne 10 months ago
Van Gogh's eyes are clearly focused in additional dimensions. Profoundly thick witted.
spawndonitis 11 months ago
It's all in how you look at things
flowertrue 11 months ago
my penis must be hidden in these "extra dimensions", that accounts for why its so small. Thats what i tell the ladies at least.
Terr0c1ty 11 months ago 28
The laws cannot be broken. The law of gravity for instance cannot be broken because it affects everything to some extent.
Supdude1964 11 months ago
I cant point in the direction of time, so it must be another dimension beyond the 3 that we're familiar with.
leerman22 11 months ago
@leerman22 well actually, anywhere you point is the direction of time.
cptIdiot 10 months ago
Extra Dimensions maybe don't interact with us directly but are affected by gravity... sounds just like Dark Matter. Do I see a coincidence there?
Talon3000 11 months ago
extra dimensions do not exist.
CelticReject 1 year ago
theres space alien that would come through and eat your grandmother =O
alexanderhulse 1 year ago
weird angles != extra dimensions :P
AntiProtonBoy 1 year ago
it is not creativity that makes up this universe and all that is, it is logical pure and simple, only logic matters if you know what I am saying.
onthecuttingedge2005 1 year ago
In the future, when we explore and traverse distant space, what coordinate system and origin will we use? Since space is expanding and matter moves around and gets destroyed, how can we devise an near absolute-position coordinate system? Currently we use Earth-centric relative distance.
Maybe, by the time we are able to travel to other stars, smart and friendly beings will share with us an already established billion year old system of navigation.
Well, maybe... :)
fegolem 1 year ago
I feel like I've just experienced a few extra dimensions first hand by just watching the effects on this video...
sunburntalkene 1 year ago
I love those videos! I'm learning something while beeing home sick
Iamgercornholio 1 year ago
michelson-morley - neither proved nor disproved something. they proved that they use the wrong degree of the scale dimension in order to fake-disprove something.
double slit "experiment" - working with the wrong ratios because deliberately disregarding the degrees of the scale dimension ...very funny.
people who don't regard the scale dimension as a full dimension that lets time vanish if one tries to find more and more degrees - dumb.
screezwiitz 1 year ago
I'm dizzy...
tiger55331 1 year ago
The reason we can't perceive more than three dimensions is more than likely because we have two eyes, as we wouldn't even be able to perceive depth (or z, if you will) with one. The reason we can't simulate it is because we've no idea how it should be simulated. That tesseract amused the hell out of me, as theoretically it's a nice representation of the 4th dimension, but in truth, it's still only 3. ^_^
Lemau 1 year ago
@Lemau You are confusing the biology of stereoscopic vision with the mathematics of dimensions. A person born blind in one eye is obviously well aware of depth, as infact is a completely blind person. By your logic a spider "perceives" 8 spacial dimensions! A tesseract is the 3D shadow of the fourth dimensional cube, just as a square is a 2D shadow of a 3D cube. You cannot of course produce a real 4d object in this universe.
Tossphate 1 year ago
@Tossphate I'm not confusing them. I'm saying that even IF we could prove them mathematically, we can't prove their existance. Also, by my logic, a spider should be able to perceive -9- dimensions using 8 eyes, although from a logical point of view (i.e. a 3-dimensional one, ^_~) every eye SHOULD be on a different dimensional axis, which in case of the spider, isn't true. Thanks for the clarification on the tesseract though. That makes sense to me. ^__^
Lemau 1 year ago
@Lemau even if we had one eye we could easily percieve 3 dimensions (actualy 4 if you count time). we move our head in 3 dimensions. the reason we cant percieve other dimensions is because we don't interact with them.
kght222 1 year ago
I still don't understand extra dimensions and I can't say that I even want to. I already get headaches without thinking about them so I'll just stick to the space alien explanation
espulu 1 year ago
Time should be called the fork-bomb dimension.
HWGuyEG 1 year ago
It's Seth Green this is cool video though it answered some questions that I had
LegallyMoi 1 year ago
Dimensions are another human thing, space is more likely based on volumes, the presence of matter expands space, lowers it's density, voilà, gravity is a "vaccum".
Time? Lower density means it takes longer to travel in space, higher density, faster.
As for electromagnetism, that could be something purely virtual, or something which is string based... well not really strings, otherwise the universe would be infinitely complex, more likely volume based.
HWGuyEG 1 year ago
If you had an absolutely low-level unified theory of maths which was perfectly accurate you would inadvertently prove the universe is a simple, virtual realm, however if you can't be perfectly accurate even when you hit the bottom from things affecting us outside the universe, then we're one of many realms... nightmare-tier challenge, go to our host dimension.
HWGuyEG 1 year ago
1:00 - 1:46 are you fucking serious?
holy shit please stop editing videos now
PoseLucas 1 year ago 4
omg seth green
narutokony 1 year ago 60
@Purerockband
He gave up his soul, thats how.
Phage0070 1 year ago
The ginger scientist guy is so awesome!
FutureComputing 1 year ago
so when you look at a dimetion are you just looking fored , with time , then whats behined is your missing dimetions
wazroady 1 year ago
@wazroady that only applies for this dimension. the third
sabaths1fan 1 year ago
That explains the red lectroids from the fifth dimension.
Mikes1800 1 year ago
i'm only 15 and i'm crap as science so i don't know if i'm being stupid here.
but if you're saying that in order to see/understand other dimensions you need to 'zoom in' because they're too 'small' to understand. what if there are other ones that are vast. i.e he said about the cable if you look at it from a distance it looks like a line with one dimension, but if you get closer you can see the other dimension. could it not be the same with a larger one?
EdIsSuperman 1 year ago
I dont understand why people can dislike this video, if they dont like hpysics then why watch it in the first place. Anyway i love it keep making more haha
BenPsOhYeah 1 year ago
Bit of a complicated way of describing the extra dimensions. Try searching for "imagining the tenth dimension" and you'll find a set of videos I find to be more intuitive.
JesperCheetah 1 year ago
@JesperCheetah
Except that guy is wrong.
omegapoint777 1 year ago
@omegapoint777
How so?
JesperCheetah 1 year ago
The extra dimensions are all in inner space. One must look inside. this requires courage that may be lacking elsewhere.
haleybump 1 year ago
omg seth green
thumbs up if you agree
narutokony 1 year ago
9 dimensions. So cats can also exist in all dimensions?
counterclockwise123 1 year ago
Oi you forgot the 11th dimension.
DeanFirefly 1 year ago 3
@DeanFirefly That's Superstring theory.
twostringguitar 1 year ago
annoying angles >:(
jimpikles 1 year ago 92
@jimpikles RRRReally annoying
TixTipx 1 year ago
Comment removed
krstcmjns 1 year ago
@jimpikles You can be happy that those "extra dimensions" have been made visible for you.
They are not necessarily pleasant because we humans are not used to more than 3 and more than that make us feel uneasy. ;)
1p2o3i 9 months ago
@jimpikles You mean, annoying dimensions.
DJBassEnergy 5 months ago
i really like his beard
adilhasnain 1 year ago
Awesome video as usual but the thought of extra dimensions kinda gives me an idea of wht if the force of gravity actually is a major force in these dimensions & weakly interacts with ours as a secondary force plus wht if Dark matter particles also lie in these dimensions as well hence interacting via gravity only! since we can not detect it any other way!
cultpython 1 year ago
but you say that a dimension can be so small you can precieve it right, what if it were so big that we couldn't precieve it either?
Shockszzbyyous 1 year ago
@Shockszzbyyous This is a question many people ask here and the great thing is is that they are really true. We are 3-dimensional creatures... and by that they really mean we can only understand 3 dimensional objects. 'smaller' dimensions cant be seen becuase they are too small for us to detect, and by that we will see absolutly no length in that direction(like what they say in this video). But the opposite thing can be said too! the big space a lower dimension happens to be in(see next message)
ytkoekie2000 1 year ago
@Shockszzbyyous....,the smaller and more dimensional we get in comparison whit the object we are observing. The bottom-line is this: if we observe a very very distant planet so that we see it in 2-dimensions. We can actually only conclude by logical thinking that the object is not really 2-dimensional. for example we see that the outer-circle is more distant(in 2d perspective) from a smaller circle to the middel. Becuase we see the object from our 3-dimensional perspective we can see the surface
ytkoekie2000 1 year ago
@Shockszzbyyous ...from our 3-dimensional perspective we can surely say about the object(i said see, sorry) that the 2-dimensional surface is curved into the 3th dimension. Now comes the important thing! If we were 2-dimensional observers we coudnt make that logical statement becuase we would not see the object in a direction that opens up the possibility for us to make this statement!
So i would say...yes also lower dimensions can not be fully understanded by us and are therefore hidden.
ytkoekie2000 1 year ago
It began in 1907 when Minkowski tried to understand
SRT using 4D space
Nobody knows what Minkowski negative space really is
Trying to understand it, Kaluza in 1921 created 5D space Nobody knows what it is too
So
If we don't know what 1+1 = 2
how can we know what 5 + 4 = 9 ?
And if we don't know what is 4-D how can we another 10-D, 11-D. . . ..etc
Israel Socratus
socratus1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I know there trying, but the way i see it physicists these days just think up these theory's to explain the world, but then when bits of it don't work they just invent new things to make the theorys possible like extra dimensions, Higgs bosons and dark matter bit of a mess really!
asdasdasdasdasdas98 1 year ago
Why is it frightening to imagine trying to piont in a way that you cannot see; if it is possible and is proven to be safe, then it is a good thing to try out
SabretoothSnowMan 1 year ago
honestly I'd consider time simply an element of the fourth dimension. If you think of a comic book as a two dimensional universe, what they would perceive as time is only a semblance of third dimension.
Vennificus 1 year ago
I'm wondering if time can really be considered a dimension.
To me, a dimensions such as (X,Y,Z) allow for an infinite amount of freedom in either direction. A dimension reaches from -∞ to +∞.
But time had an absolute beginning(Big Bang), a zero point. Like with Kelvin it has only positive values from this point. This leads me to believe that it's more of a fundamental force of nature.
V
L00NGB00W 1 year ago
V
We can travel to the future but not the past, by employing Relativistic tricks. Such as traveling through space quickly, or Hanging out in a gravity well. Relativity shows us that time is tied to motion and gravity.
Some say that if one can travel faster than light, then they would travel back in time. Such as light speed travel inside the twisting space around a rapidly spinning black hole. But I don't think that would happen. They'd just be propelled into the future that much faster...
L00NGB00W 1 year ago
Although nothing in physics says "Time can't be reversed". The formulae do seem to work when run backwards.
But some absurdities come up when this is done. Take the dual slit experiment as an example. When run in reverse, the light wave MUST travel from the detector to the light source by definition. But when the wave passes through the slits, an interference pattern is created a second time, which indicates the light came from many directions and not the source. Which we know to be false.
oww
L00NGB00W 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Gawd damn. Heady shit.
Anyone interested, I would recommend "An Elegant Universe," by Brian Greene. It's a book, and it's a NOVA series on PBS.
heyandy889 1 year ago
Gawd damn. Heady shit.
Anyone interested, I would recommend "An Elegant Universe," by Brian Greene. It's a book, and it's a NOVA series on PBS.
heyandy889 1 year ago
Gawd damn. Heady shit.
Anyone interested, I would recommend "An Elegant Universe," by Brian Greene. It's a book, and it's a NOVA series on PBS.
heyandy889 1 year ago
what would an extra dimension look like? very cool videos, thank you :)
Akira0ws 1 year ago
I believe that the phone charger cable analogy would have been better used to describe the difference between three vs. two dimensions rather than the difference between two vs. one dimensions.
Obelix516 1 year ago
If the cable has one dimension it would be invisible would it now?
Obelix516 1 year ago
fold a piece of paper directly in half each time, how many times can you fold it before you can't fold it no more, it you force it the piece of paper breaks, this may follow the same rule as the fabric of space time, fold it one to many times and space time breaks down or more like rips like that piece of paper.
onthecuttingedge2005 1 year ago
HAHA
z for our american friends and he points at his middle finger :))
either coincidence or just a nice joke :D
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
FREE DIMENSIONS!
TheRockabillyBarber 1 year ago
i just realized that i can 'point' in 4th direction (e.g time) by just existing!! o_O weird !!
solomsolomol 2 years ago
yes but you can only point one way :).
nintendowns 1 year ago
Wait a minute a wire appearing like a line in the distance has to do with size not dimensions. We can not talk about a dimensions being small. All we can say is that the object is small. I mean if dimensions do have a size can you please tell me what size is the X dimension or Y or Z? Also there is no such a thing as 2 dim. object. All objects exist in a universe with n number of dimensions. So the universe has n dimensions and everything in it inherits that number of dimensions.
hla27b 2 years ago
So there is no such thing as 2 dim. object. This is just an abstract concept in our minds. Isn't it a bit cherry picking when you say that something exists in one dimension and not another? Can you tell me what object does not exist in the time dimension?
The real questions are "How do we know if something is a dimension or not? How many are they? Do they exist in the universe or the other way around? Is an axis of a spin a dimension?" Wow I wish I studied maths instead of architecture.
hla27b 2 years ago
When you refer to something as a two dimensional object, it means that either its length, width or depth in inconceivable, making it look like it only has two spacial dimensions.
aaronz101 2 years ago
Not being a native English speaker it just dawns on me that the word dimension has two separate meanings in English. Dimension may mean either size of an object in meters or an "axle of existence". It makes better sense when you have two separate words for two separate things.
By the way if an object's length, width or depth is inconceivable that simply means that YOU can't conceive it. I am pretty sure that an example of 2D object cannot be given. Even the ink on the paper has SOME thickness.
hla27b 2 years ago
Yes, I know that, but it means that the object does not represent a third dimension, of course everything we see really has three dimensions.
That's why when you draw what you'd call a two dimensional square, you would only be concerned with it's width and length, not its depth.
aaronz101 2 years ago
Let's not talk about representations. Lets talk about the real world. Since Einstein we live in 4D universe, 3 spatial and 1 time dimensions. Everything we know of is 4 dimensional since it exists in this universe, no exceptions. For representation purposes we sometimes have to omit some dimensions but this is just our mind's limitation, they don't actually cease to exist. Actually the latest fashion requires 11 dimensions to function. What i ask is what are they? How do we know when we see one?
hla27b 2 years ago
But phisicaly, it has the depth of the layer of material with which was drawn. Otherwise you'd be telling me that is a matter of perception and not of the object itself. Then we have that 1 and 2 dimension objects are just imaginary.
Dante396 2 years ago
That's right, they're imaginary objects. You might remember doing geometry early in school and drawing '2D' objects and finding there area and so forth.
2D objects are often hypothesized to represent things like surface area and so on, where depth is not a factor. For example, painting something. You may be concerned only with the surface area of an object you want to paint, and not the actual thickness of it.
No, 2D objects do not exist in our world, but they are often used for such things.
aaronz101 2 years ago
There is now universal law in physics that says the universe has to have a certain amount of dimensions. If string theory at some point can explain the universe better (or can unite quantum mechanics and relativity) and can make accurate predictions then most physicist would accept it. We used to think that it is impossible for a single particle to be in different places at the same time but the fact that it can is one of the counter intuitive things about reality we have to accept.
omegavalerius 2 years ago
free dimensions.
DoctorJay2012 2 years ago
Isn't a line actually two dimensional? Because one is the "length " and the other is the width of the line.Even if the line was only a particle wide, it would still be 2 dimensional unless it's width would be infinitely small.
Bugglesfan79 2 years ago
yes,but particles don 't only have width and length,they also have height so we always end up to 3 dimensions
frizstyler 2 years ago
The three dimensions are made up of three 'lines' or dimensions. The X axis is one dimension, Y is another, and Z is the third. So a line in Spatial Dimensions is a single dimension. In Spatial Dimensions, to have a point, you actually need two dimensions, X and Y, which creates a plane on which the point can be recorded.
calrain145 2 years ago
a point is actually one dimensional
Gitars5 2 years ago
We use lines to indicate direction, not something physical.
xxmtgxx 2 years ago
Can someone qualified please answer my question: Why is time considered a "dimension"? It has nothing to do with the other dimensions, shouldn't it just be considered a separate entity?
tjd07x 2 years ago
In relativity there is "space-time". If two events occur separated by space (distance) and time then observers travelling at hugely different velocities might do tests to find the separation of the two events.
What happens is that although they all agree on a "space-time" interval, they get a range of answers for "space" and "time", where they appear to be trading between the two i.e. close in time, far in space versus far in time, close in space. This completely intertwines time and space.
chrisofnottingham 2 years ago
BTW, I'm not really qualified but it's still true :)
chrisofnottingham 2 years ago
k thanks, that kind of makes sense, ive heard of that idea before.
tjd07x 2 years ago
I dont think we may be able to "see and test" these other dimensions. Analogy: we are on one side of the computer monitor interacting with youtube (or any website). We are bound to be on this side. Even tho we can assume what youtube is created in (what programming language), we can interact with it, test things on it, predict future events etc - there is no way to see the code behind it that makes it run. We are "stuck in the experiment" so to speak.
shagster1970 2 years ago
We can possibly test the idea, but I agree that I doubt we will be able to "see" them given their size (100 billion times smaller than a proton I believe). Keep your eye on the LHC, if it "doesnt" see gravitons, it should prove they exist.
Neutrinoghost 2 years ago
Thanks a lot. This video help greatly in explaining my questions when I was read "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking. Now I really understands what a string theory is and what a p-brane is.
BuggttiVeyronW16 2 years ago
@BuggttiVeyronW16 if you "really" understand string theory from a book and a youtube video then you sir are the next einstein.
FutureComputing 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Who the fuck thinks up this shit and if its right then theyre genius.
tjd07x 2 years ago
@jasmith101 nice comment actually explained this video for me.
asdasdasdasdasdas98 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I know there trying but the way i see it physicists these days just think up these theory's to explain the world in which we live but then when bits of it dont work they just invent new stuff the to make the theorys possible like extra dimensions, Higgs bosons and dark matter bit of a mess really.
asdasdasdasdasdas98 2 years ago
Comment removed
cavincio 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When Faraday got an electric current seemingly from nowhere (a bit of the explanation didn't work) he invented a new effect he called induction. This is now the basis of all generators.
cavincio 1 year ago
HUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
DUUUHHHHRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
uhhhrrrr REEEEEEEHHRRRR
IAmRodyle 2 years ago
Some of the authors I have read suggest that the force of Gravity may be just as strong as the other three forces, but the "total force" isn't felt because it "leaks" off of our 3/4d brane. It has to do with the theory of strings being open or closed loops.
It is theorized that most matter is open loops, anchored to our brane at the ends; and the Graviton is a closed loop and "free" to pass through our brane and others as well.
jasmith101 2 years ago
0:50 to 1:04...
Thank you so much for clarifying for the lay people that Extra Dimensions doesn't mean Parallel Universe.
When I became an "Arm Chair Physicist," it took me a bit wrap my mind around it, get and keep it sorted.
If you really want to warp your mind, some have posited that one of the six higher dimensions could very well be a second time dimension and not a spacial one...
jasmith101 2 years ago
LMAO at 6:26
IRisingFuryI 2 years ago
A wire is still 3 dimensional, isn't it?
skottydude 2 years ago
Of course.
BiosElement 2 years ago
yes, yes it is it has lengh, diamiter and,..i'm hgoing to say cricumfrance, correct me if im wrong, but it still exist in 3D
Keimori12 2 years ago
The wire is 3d but he's taking about the "surface" of the wire (as said at 2:16) . The surface is 2d and like a tube.
cavincio 1 year ago
How come we use 3 dimensions to describe the common space around us? This video explains that just because we can't see something, doesn't mean it isn't there... But what makes something we can see, there? Is viewing the world around us in 3D a little old fashioned, considering reality is infinite and dynamic in every way?
BurningFeetMan 2 years ago
Quite right, viewing it in 3d is old fashioned. As you pointed out it's dynamic which means it changes in time. Within physics we now treat time as another dimension. As for further dimensions, they don't matter for the lives of most people, they are not even needed for many physics topics, so I think 3d (+ time) is here to stay. As to "What makes something we can see, there?" I'll leave for philosophers but if I see a cricket ball heading for my head, I'll duck!
Neil Butcher (bloke on bench).
NButcher137 2 years ago
nice video, good explanation regarding the thin wire and the extra dimension that could be contained within high magnification.
Not a big fan of the video effects when it was tilted too much, i found myself twisting my neck around, hah!
Warrickneff 2 years ago
lol, space aliens that come in and eat your grandmas
screaming4moreramen 2 years ago 25
that feathering wasnt that pretty :P
JaksProductions 2 years ago
I wonder if what we perceive as matter is actually a three dimensional cross section/ representation of a higher dimensional wave.
Hard to explain what i mean.
But i guess kind of like how a CD waveform is made of 44.1k samples per sec, but if you look at one sample it looks like a square, its also only made of 2 dimensions height and width, im wondering if what is energy/mass in our dimension is just an infinitely small 3d cross section of what is a wave of energy in higher dimensions.
TheCynicalAtheist 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Many people have reported experience with the astral. All humans have an astral body as well as a 3D body, the two are usually coincident but separate slightly during sleep. Ghosts are just people in the astral where they find things as solid as we do but other things are different. Don't know why we see them. Science is steered away from discovery of other dimensions, at least so our findings are controlled and measured. This means science is really a religion and is not free and open.
rollsthepaul 2 years ago
And 9/11 was an inside job and the world is ending in 2012 and I've been probed by aliens and the Illuminati is controlling the whole world and fairies and unicorns are real.
You should look into this stuff, its all true. You want evidence, you say? Who needs evidence, evidence is for the evil cult of science, real free thinkers accept anything anybody tells them.
WalkViking 2 years ago 4
you're ignorant
you think everyone who believes such things are just idiots who cant think in a factual and scientific way and just believe what they want to hear?
you're forgetting that many of the things you just took the piss out of are backed up by you're ever so precious science and factual evidence.
postmasterw00t 2 years ago
the 2012 theory is very broad and has many offshoots, all i know is that there are several major co-incidences that point to an event of some nature occurring at this time, good or bad.
BUT 9/11?
you would be a moron NOT to believe its a conspiracy, the FACTS prove it.
the same goes for the Illuminati.
you're just closed minded and cant accept possibilities that dont fit in with youre "normal" and media focused reality. other realms of existence exist. you're probs an atheist lol
postmasterw00t 2 years ago
lol dont start mixing science with bullshit astral stuff.
animalnt 2 years ago 9
@animalnt just a joke...
snavemailliw 1 year ago
why is that guy at 0.11 wearing a false beard?...a ginger one at that.
AnotheFamousItalian 2 years ago
Symbol showed hypercube (tesseract) but we didn't hear anything about it in the video :(
The very small dimension definitely blew my mind thought. I hadn't heard that one before.
Ph0Xy 2 years ago 2
thought the same thing!
colinstu 2 years ago
Great video.
guitardbucket 2 years ago
Dynamic Symmetry takes flight, my flying saucer concept comes directly from this type of thinking. Search for Geobat or Geobat Flying Saucer Original Video. You will actually see a flying object that derives from a basic geometrical relationship that has been undiscovered for thousands of years! It's so simple, the military literally visited me to verify my aircraft design. Flying saucers are coming! Inventor, Jack M. Jones
merlin5520355 2 years ago
delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol
~excellent vid !
mrblisterfist 2 years ago
Another really good vid, I'm enjoying your channel guys! How come it's called sixty symbols?
ManyMoonsMal 2 years ago
@ManyMoonsMal: Check out the main sixtysymbols website for some stuff about the name and project, etc.
Thanks for watching us!
sixtysymbols 2 years ago
@sixtysymbols you still havent told me what cameras you use!Do it noww :/
JaksProductions 2 years ago
@JaksProductions: Seeing you asked so politely! :)
I use a Sony Z7. As a second camera I also sometimes borrow a Z1. Also if I need something from a few extra angles, I recently got a Sony HandyCamHDR-XR105 for holidays, so I use that too... and my brother-in-law gave me his little Oregon Scientific camera to use when I need one that may be "expendable".
I edit on Avid Media Composer.
The same applies to all my other channels (sixtysymbols, nottinghamsceince, bibledex, etc)
sixtysymbols 2 years ago 4
@sixtysymbols wow nice! Z7 is my favourite compact camcorder, and you can change its lense ehh? :)
I commented on one of your videos asking if it was Z7, but I got no reply.
I dream of that camera, too bad it costs like £3000... :(
btw I use after effects ;)
JaksProductions 2 years ago