Pythagoras was wrong! :-D

[asherasator]

There is extra liquid on the hypotenuse you can see it, it's overfilled. & when the largest area is filled the extra liquid goes in the other triangle corners.

[StarLord1996]

0:15 look at his face jajajajajaja¡¡¡

[nenuqa9808]

Como lo hicieron?

[KKHKISHZKH]

Oopsy! Lol! You'd think they'd have checked that when they filled it wouldn't you? :)

[osmiu]

hmmm . this must be the error in Einstein theory . because of that , the speed of light barrier had been broken !!!

[Shainkov]

no one say it yet. so...Fake and GAY

[Spetznaz]

OMG! the world was made with a wrong theorem! we have to rebuild everything!!!!

[felistrepidus]

Me encantó!! Jajajaja la cara del tipo!!!

[daniel29351]

David Guetaa ???



[Ultras7trikala]

Pythagoras was not wrong...

YOU WERE WRONG!!

[roadrunner80]

@Ultras7trikala you idiot can't discern difference between irony and seriousness!

[Eltsuman]

@roadrunner80 What's so ironic about this?

[locstarle1]

lol mais c'est quand même ... FASCINANT !

[locstarle1]

pour l'erreur 9/10, pour le calcul : 1/10 ... XD

[GiddyupHorsie360]

Hahaha

[fallllenangel]

I LOVE THIS VIDEO :D

[Tiago17avila17]

It had water in Yellow triangle, at first...

[Imeandmyselfable]

the thing is not thickness of squares, its about that triangle in the middle. at the start you see water in 1st two squares, buuut theres water in that triangle see for yourself...

[KBG06031990]

pythagoras is not false buddy,you are summing the volumes not areas,the thickness of the 3 squares are not the same,that's why it failed. :)

[mishraonline]

There was a little more water in the device. But since the top surface was spread along the hypotenuse it was not visible.

The same little amount of water was later dominant when it remained atop the tiny corners.

[Furtuim]

Look at the very intro, the fluid is above the triangle there too :)

[mpdotf]

man. i don't know why i have that feeling that your squares aren't really squares, take a look back at the dimensions

[hunter1801]

0:14 mfw Pythagoras was wrong

[hillsong1994]

0:00 there is a layer of water at the bottom of the biggest square, so u gt some excess water

problem solved

[RasenWeskers]

0:00 to 0:14 BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING....

0:15 BEST MOMENT EVER, what i ever saw !!!!

man rulezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!

[vincenzo2075]

your face GODDAMMIT



[JustinCompSpec]

A new face - OMG FACE!!!!

[gaBehcuoDsuoitneterP]

There's too much water to begin with. You can see it as it's turning.

[combatsambonyc]

There's too much water to begin with. You can see it as it's turning.

[bartjooh]

The yellow part is filled as well. don't fill it.

[PullarBearBear]

Priceless facial expression.

[leyburnhealeyman]

I've not read all the comments, so maybe someone has said this, Pythagoras was about area and not volume. This demonstration is about volume, though I'm not sure , what about volume. You can fool some of the people some of the time................

[gogolplex74]

look carefully at the biggest square

it's not actually a square

[SciFriSciFi]

@gogolplex74

You don't see it from precisely from the front, so it looks like it's not a square, but it actually is.

But the fact is that there's water behind the yellow part, because the water has to flows behind it,  when they filled it they could see when it was corectly filled because they didn't count the hollow space behind the yellow.

[Ahmedmega10000]

Hahaah! THe depth of the biggest square is less than the depht of the other two so that their volume doesn't add up!

[michalchik]

LOL

[Berntisso]

I'm shore that was not perfect squares.

[HannahSarock]

It doesn't mean that the theorem doesn't work ¬¬, there's obviously a mistake in the construction; area & volume are not the same thing

[thedarkness2231]

maybe u were wrong

[Hegna1]

There's a small bit of liquid along the c side before he even turns it. Plus I doubt they're perfect squares.

[bryanwangpengjun]

Look closely, at the beginning, the water level is slightly ABOVE the hypotenuse... that means the volume of the water was actually the squares of the legs PLUS the area of the triangle PLUS a small strip of water at the top. Obviously, this is not how Pythagoras' Theorem goes.

[ApostateAbe]

At 0:08, if you look on the left edge of the largest square, you can see a bubble (or extra fluid of some sort) leaking in.

[kkrrok]

the guy in the video made a mistake of it

[ahhhhjjjj]

The look on his face: "FUCK! I've been lied to for years!!!!!!"

[PyhaMikrofoni]

in the beginning, that triangle is filled too.

[kissofcherrydrpepper]

I KNOW WHY.... Not looking at this mathmatically, but scientifically, the liquids must have flowed through extra gaps, releasing the liquid into the bigger square, so this then means that there was extra liquid in the pipes that moved it from square to square.

Well maybe there is not liquid in the pipes then...

Well, actually, after looking right after the first millisecond of the video, as he turned it tat fraction of a second, it liquid moved the bigger square immediately.

Thanks.

[AznRomancexD]

The waterline was already above the triangle at the beginning.. It was obviously designed to fool people, nothing else.

[RandomNinjaOfEvil]

Roflss!!

[BigDirtyD96]

you can see at the beginning that the water line is over the triangle

[E1craZ4life]

Either the biggest square is slightly smaller than it's supposed to be, or there's slightly more water than there should be.

[zambi007i]

the biggest square is constricted at the joints of the two other ones. obviusly it has a lesser volume. nothing of a trick or whatsoever!

[SomeWeirdFreak]

His expression is like he just found out Santa isn't real

[MW2XGAMEPLAYS]

At that projectory, due to the angle and positioning sir, YOU are wrong and the technology at which the pace was moving is impossible. WRONG! YOU SIR ARE WRONG!

[DragonStyler3117]

the triangle itself shouldn´t have liquid in it!

[alexawong2010]

explicación : cm3 ≠ cm2 

[ultramarinetoo]

Cute!

[fwesh1]

you can obviously see that there is liquid INSIDE THE TRIANGLE before right as he begins to spin it, the theorem does not include the area of a triangle

[coolmanjack1995]

@fwesh1 yea thats definitley the reason, if the liquid was only in the squares it would work, but the extra in the triangle puts it over the edge

[simenjk]

How do you know that the triangle is right?

Is a*a + b*b = c*c?

[wendyverdades]

so we've established that perphaps over time the structure warped and is no longer composed of right triangles? It would only take one of nine of those sides to become warped or twisted?

[MrIbrahimO]

at 0:00 u can see the water level is a little above the triangle's tangent, it should barley fill the two bottom squares

[E1craZ4life]

@MrIbrahimO Three things:

1.) The tangent is the ratio of the leg opposite a select angle over the leg adjacent that angle.

2.) That side is called the hypotenuse.

3.) It's "barely," not "barley."

[MrIbrahimO]

@E1craZ4life your arrogance won't impress me till you write composed sentences and solve math equations in my first language,

[E1craZ4life]

@MrIbrahimO What does that mean?

[oSiL3nTKiLLZx]

U should get noble prize

[alodapotato]

the water isn't suppose to go into the triangle

[mangatope]

that's weird. it works on other videos :O



[naidootr]

The "square" that ends up at the bottom is not cut propoerly

[onelifelefttodie]

The look on his face!!

[GuyMcpersonLol]

anyone else notice the fanny pack?

[BoneBaron]

.......people you dont have to explain it mathematicaly.

at 00:1 you can see that the liqiud flows out of the yellow triangle, which means the volume was messed up

[tomomersey]

To that I say: LOL!!!

[MusicFreakthe4th]

i lol'd at the face xp

[icemickiejamesfan]

maybe the squares there aren't in the same length but if it words let make your own theorem that could be cool i would name it

SUPER FAIL THEOREM

[webmastertool]

Most likely it's due to human error in designing the device.

[donneke666]

@webmastertool or maybe due to thermal expansion of the liquid and/or thermal shrinkage of the solid materials

[monster762]

@webmastertool Right, you can see some excess liquid in the big square at the start.

[Crabbi5]

Ey! an area is two dimensional. You know. Completely flat :) ,, but the water is three dimensional. LOL ^_^ that is two different things.

[anticorncob6]

@Crabbi5 That's not the flaw. If the sides were a, b, and c, and a^2 + b^2 = c^2, and the depth was n, the formula for the sum of the volumes is this:

n(a^2) + n(b^2) = n(c^2)

n(a^2 + b^2) = n(c^2) and since a^2 + b^2 = c^2, we get n(c^2) = n(c^2), which is an identity. Maybe perhaps the depth isn't the same all over.

[Crabbi5]

@anticorncob6 i think it's because the water is behind the yellow triangle :p lol!!!

[anticorncob6]

@Crabbi5 Maybe some. The area (volume?) of water is a^2 + b^2 + 1/2ab assuming you're right. when the water flows into the big square, there is a little bit left over. That can't possibly be as big as 1/2ab, more like 1/20ab. If there's water behind the triangle, then it can only be a little bit.

P.S. you sent that at 10:00 a.m. which is schooltime. Are you homeschooled or you're an adult or you had a snow day or you skipped or something else?

[Crabbi5]

@anticorncob6 I think i was ill that day,, so i was home from the school :)

But some of the water have to be behind the yellow triangle :p

Pythagoras was not wrong. Only an idiot would argue that :3

[anticorncob6]

@Crabbi5 "If there's water behind the triangle, then it can only be a little bit"

"But some of the water have to be behind the yellow triangle" Don't make that :p look at me, I mentioned it in the comment before!

Go to wikipedia and type "Hyperbolic geometry". You see the sum of the angles of a triangle isn't always 180 degrees, and, Pythagoras's theorem doesn't apply. In curved space, only an idiot WOULDN'T say he was wrong!

[kestoriaccia]

puahauahauauahauaha ur an idol!!!

[banana1337kivi]

hahahahaha

[glitchmaster8000]

the measurements were probably wrong for one side so that when he turned it it didnt add up...ps ur face is epic

[richnobes]

lol at the guy's face at the end :D

[MrJasonalcee]

Just because you draw a box doesnt make it a right angle triangle...LoL...Nice try tho

[kingoflayups]

Lol...The water didnt only filled the 2 squares, it also filled the triangle...thats why it over flowed when he turned it over... Pythagoras is right!

[ABigOneLikeDaddys]

Please dial ... 1 800 EVA PORATE

for details.

[ahotbanana]

Is there any proof that the triangle shown is actually a right angle triangle?

[kenmaster45]

I've always had a hard time telling Fred and George Weasley apart.

[jpeter200]

the fluid "square" fluid reservoirs have depth, i.e. they are not acutally 2 dimensional. they have a depth, while this maybe small, its still enough to make a difference in this demonstration. or maybe its magic. probably magic....

[anticorncob6]

There are over 300 proofs that the Pythagorean theorem is true and noody has found a flaw to any of them so yes his theorem does apply.

Reasons I can think of that the water didn't all flow in:

1) the triangle wasn't really a right-triangle

2) the squares on each side weren't really squares

3) the glass isn't the same distance from the wall everywhere

[IamBOXBOY]

@anticorncob6 Actually..it looks like it just had too much water to begin with.

[anticorncob6]

@IamBOXBOY I paused the video at 0:00 and I didn't see any extra water. However I did come up with reasons 4 and 5 it didn't all flow in.

4) Some of the water was in the right triangle or somewhere else

5) according to Einstein space is curved so a^2 + b^2 > c^2

and space is curved so little on our scale the extra water wouldn't even be the size of an electron so reason 5 is probably wrong (and engineers would have a very hard time making buildings)

[IamBOXBOY]

@anticorncob6 Hahaha ya i doubt it's number five. If you look closely thought before he turns it you can kinda see a thin purple line above the yellow triangle. But this might just be a shadow.

[anticorncob6]

@IamBOXBOY The purple line can't be a shadow because if the shadow points up than the light source must be on the floor which is pointless. I agree with saying that it's water.

Whatever the reason is, we do know for sure that the Pythagorean theorem always works as long as we are in Euclidean space.

[Dudebobmac]

Here's a mathematical proof.

3 squared + 4 squared = 5 squared

9 + 16 = 25

25=25

WOAH 0.0 I JUST PROVED THE PYTHAGOREAN THEOREM.

[Fuglebolle]

@Dudebobmac You've only proved that the pythagorean theorem holds for a triangle with sides 3, 4, 5.

However, the pythagorean theorem claims to hold for every right-angled triangle meaning that you have to prove the relationship between the lengths on a general right-angled triangle.

Still, doing this is not much of a problem.

[EdPelto]

lol, Maybe they had some trouble expressing the Irrational value of the literal physical measurement of the hypotenuse of the other 3 sides of the big square.

No, no, wait....

It is more likely that it is a problem with consistency of measurement in the 3rd dimension.

Wait... don't get too excited yet, cuz I really don't think that is the problem either.

See, there's a guy adding water behind the wall there.

... yah, that's it

[mikkelbeatz]

pftt water filled out the triangle

[bubble11111111111]

fs there are like 80 proofs that pythagoras is true so stfu

[ShadowUnleashed]

0:14 "Zoinks! Lets get out of here, Scooby-doo!"

[abdmalayan]

its good



[SneakyTweaky]

0:14  muaahahahahahhhahahahahahhha

[TheAntiFascist2010]

@un4m3d4 You don;t understand what I am saying so why should I bother trying to expell the mindwash you have been lost in ever since tenth grade. The therom doesn't always work because the number one cannot be a prime number.

[Meutkill]

OH MI GAWD!!! HE HAS A FANNY PACK!!! HE IS INSTANTLY AWESOME!!!

[CuttlefishPi]

@Meutkill now we know the time space foam but your point still stands. 

[TheAntiFascist2010]

the pythagorean thereom is wrong because it only works some of the time and cannot explain a paradox that it creates which is known as infinite domain. Do some ressearch on the cult at pythagorea. the pythagorean brotherhood was a mess with beheadings and just basically a bunch of mindsick fucks.

[Diemedes]

@TheAntiFascist2010

What the hell are you talking about? The Pythagorean Theorem always works, provided you have a right-angled triangle on a flat surface. Give me one example in which it doesn't work.

The theorem's proof doesn't include a standard number system, it's very general. You can use whatever system you want, and you'll get the same answer. As long as you don't provide any evidence, your words are emptier than we thought a perfect vacuum was before QED came along.

[TheAntiFascist2010]

@Diemedes a = 1 , b = 1 , c =

[Diemedes]

@TheAntiFascist2010

c=?

[kolle147]

@TheAntiFascist2010 c = Error, Bluescreen, 0xFFFFFF whatever...

[Fuglebolle]

@TheAntiFascist2010 a = 1, b = 1, c = square root of 2

[TheAntiFascist2010]

@Fuglebolle that is not an answer to the equation you dimwit. What is the square root of two? 1.41421 35623 73095 04880 16887 24209 69807 85696 71875 37694 80731 76679 73799....

the square root of two is an irrational number meaning that it cannot be measured proving my case.

thank you once again to all you mathmagicians who don't get the simple fact that when working with rational whole numbers you cannot break the volume of the first number in the set.

[Fuglebolle]

@TheAntiFascist2010 Like many other theories, the Pythagorean theory does not apply to the rational number system. This is absolutely irrelevant to this video, as distances in the real world are in the domain of real numbers, not strictly rational, whole or what you call "rational whole". Whether you can measure these distances accuratly is irrelevant to their existence.

[TheAntiFascist2010]

@Fuglebolle The number doesn't exist. There is no place in time and space where they can. This is about three dimensions and space time.

[TheAntiFascist2010]

@Fuglebolle but I do understand what you are saying. there are spots between A and B but if you cannot define them with a definite value then your theory is useless so you need a new theory or you need a new perspective on the problem. Understand?

[Fuglebolle]

@TheAntiFascist2010 The square root of 2 IS a definite value. It's a unique irrational number.

The theory of real numbers are far from useless, it may be the most used math today.

A useless theory would be one where the hypotenuse of a right triangle doesn't exist, and where you can't determine the area of a circle (pi is irrational).

For applications in the real world, infinite precision is unnecessary as the physical methods in use are never infinitely exact (this may be a digresion).

[TheAntiFascist2010]

@Fuglebolle ok, to understand your side, in the set of real numbers every square root must exist?? Do you believe that the first number in a set, the number one sets the standard volume for all numbers following?

[Fuglebolle]

@TheAntiFascist2010 The completeness axiom (fundamental to R) implies that every square root exists within the set of real numbers.

I guess the number one could be said to be the first in the set of natural numbers (it's the lowest), but to define it as the first in the set of whole, rational and real numbers is a strange definition.

If 1 were to set the standard for rational numbers, this would mean that every rational numbers would be natural numbers, which is absurd by definition.

[thekillerhjkhjk]

@TheAntiFascist2010 root two CAN be physically measured, but it cannot be FULLY EXPRESSED.

you can measure root 2 by making a 1m^2 cube and measuring it's diagonal length

[pokestep]

@thekillerhjkhjk 1m^2 cube? 1m^3 cube or 1m^2 square, not 1m^2 cube.

[thekillerhjkhjk]

@pokestep my bad :P

[marceludayo]

Was the area of the triangle supposed to be counted? the conclusion doesn't make sense...

[marceludayo]

Is the are of the triangle were supposed to be counted? Doesn't make sense the conclusion.

[TheODEProject]

theres already water in the big rectangle^^ take a look at the moment he began to rotate the disc!

[paulmag91]

The face!!! :D

[xDbetoDx]

Well yeah, maybe someone already posted this but anyway I'm not reading all the coments!

- Pythagorean Theorem states that a*2 + b*2 = c*2

And since there's water inside the squares we see here we're now talking about VOLUME. Fermat's Last Theorem states that in the equation a*n + b*n = c*n can ONLY be true IF "n" non greater than 2. Therefore, been 3 (volume) greater than 2 (da -.-) this rotating-thingy has nothing to do with the Pythagorean Theorem so this doesn't prove it's wrong :D

[AkiThePirate]

@xDbetoDx Since the third dimension is a constant, that makes no sense.

[TheVoid15]

@xDbetoDx there's water behind the yellow triangle at the start.....nice try tho

[TheAntiFascist2010]

@xDbetoDx the pythagorean therom has a statiscal anomoly and one that itself creates. the reason for Pi. the infinite shrinking space. the reason the formula is false is because it doesn't work in a system where 1 is not prime. The integer system becomes comprimised with the use of decimals

[horseshavingfun]

I agree! The facial expression is the best part - priceless!

[KIFulgore]

Haha, what a look!

[beanisoner]

nuoh my gahd...

[YTMrVulcan]

The Pythagorean theorem does work. The missleading thing here is this:

In the initial position, there is also fluid behind the triangle, whereas the theorem only relates to the squares around the triangle.

[adefigeteapodonapate]

there was water in the triagle aswell lmao...

[DarkKnightBob1o1]

LOL awesome!

Did they put too much liquid in it?

[vincentmuyo]

@DarkKnightBob1o1 Yup. You'll notice there's some water behind the triangle. :D

[Petterkff1]

But Pythagoras is truely wrong in practice; from measurements of a and b, the formula a^2+b^2=c^2, will statistically overestimate c. More so if a and b is small and the measurments are noisy.

It is not really what we see in this video though :)

[SaiyanKirby]

I know it's a joke, but I think the reason it didn't work is because the square on the C side isn't a perfect square. The bottom two angles are visibly off.

[AkiThePirate]

Is that pocket protector?

[Rayden440]

lol the squares wasn't made properly.

[ekotar1]

notice how in the first frame, the liquid takes up the area of the triangle as well, then when turned, that amount of liquid is the spillover. idiots.

[ogskeetdizzle]

it's not built properly ppl can prove this theory even with lego lol.

[kevchern]

LOL, the WTF face HAHAHA

[halek30]

this guys face is awesome !!! it me and the whole class laugh

[Xjordanary]

bahahahahahahahhahahahahahahah­ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha­hahahahahahah

[affablegiraffable]

when the hypotenuse square is at the top the part covered by the triangle is full of water.

[affablegiraffable]

@affablegiraffable

nevermind i take that back

[iopppplinda]

it has to be a right triangle that´s an acute

[dethomega]

jajajaja que cagada esta su cara del mono ese.

[ricaminun]

He is happily turning the thingy then when that fails I like how his face is "OMFGWTF"

Maths and everything similar is LIES

[x11115]

probably made in mexico and the measurements are wrong.

[spaghetti335]

The face made it as awesome as it is, but it is a design flaw, and nothing more.

[tigergameF1]

his face is epic but there could be thousands of things wrong with this model

[pulsedrop]

FAIL

[rodhugginshammer]

1. Face. 2. Fanny pack. 3. Poor construction: no exactly right angle and/or varying depths

[bsphil]

Hahaha, sold it with the face at the very end.

[Truthiness231]

LOL, science demonstration equipment fail...

[OpenVega]

Hhahahahaha

[Eddythebandkid]

this is wrong though becouse there is no profe of the smaller squares are equal to the big one plus. it is 3D and that f's with things a little

[Richielynch753]

@Eddythebandkid

dude pythagoras therem says that the squares are equal, thats what it is :L and the fact that its 3d wouldnt matter so long as the depths are the same on each square

[qwerty00ape1]

hahhaah LMAO!!!!

hahaahah

5/5

good one man!

ehheh

[TheSilligirl]

LMAO

[hallowatsup1]

HIS FACE !!! Epic xD

[nunoe59]

haha, stupid bule...

[robba18]

ahahah nice expression