What is described as dimensions in this video is actually interaction between the dimensions. What is herecalled subatomic particles are actually vectors applied upon the fluids constituting the universe. this is not a solid conception but a view of perception.sub-dimensions and not real dimension. the unitary field is a place in space and time where everything is from everywhere and every time-stream. As time is not a fourth dimension but the surface tension between the fourth and the third.
I love these videos. It's interesting to see how we are evolving our understanding of the composition of the universe. The research being done is a testimony to the human drive for learning for the sake of learning. Beyond that, it offers questions into how accurate human perception is in truly defining our world. And though, at times, it may seem like the answer is to simply add more dimensions, I am sure that it will all add up, one day, to my getting my own TARDIS!
he says that the extra demenions are too small to see, but could'nt they also be too big to see? like an ant walking on a curled up newspaper and thinking that it lives in a 2 demensional world instead of 3? if so then could we make wormholes?
all i have to say is we need to keep funding nasa foreve, no they aren't making no progress. They are making progress everyday its just going to be a long time till we know if theres people like us on other galaxies and if theres other universe and what else is out there as it gets bigger and bigger
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
I'm trying one last time lol. The biggest objection by layman is the 11 dimensions. That is a stupid label just like "dark matter" is. It's not dark matter it's "gravity from an unknown source" [the black hole at the center of galaxies?]. Look up "degrees of freedom" The fundamental object in superstring theory is the superstring: a string with extra degrees of freedom that make it supersymmetric. Call the extra 7 spatial dimensions "degrees of spatial freedom" and be happy
all string theory models are quantum mechanical, Lorentz invariant, unitary, and contain Einstein's General Relativity as a low energy limit. Therefore, to falsify string theory, it would suffice to falsify quantum mechanics, fundamental Lorentz invariance, or general relativity. Hence, all string theory models are falsifiable and meet the definition of scientific theory according to Karl Popper's criterion.
@mishigreene It's fascinating that string theory is falsifiable BUT to constitute a convincing verification of string theory, a prediction should be specific to it, not shared by any quantum field theory model or by General Relativity meaning it easy to falsify but so far impossible to prove! So there goes Popper out the window.
Ok, well string theory and general relativity are already proven theories. Just because those are correct doesn't mean they test for string theory. Something you are forgetting is that a theory has to be testable. You act like you know what you are talking about, it's not to make a convincing verification. It is to make any kind of verification. The math doesn't matter unless it actually describes something. Besides that making extra dimensions makes little sense
Math is not the language of the universe, we explain the universe with math, but the universe consists of a lot more than just mathematics. Other than that, you can't just make up equations that fit the way we see the universe now, but you have to observe the universe and see if those maths actually describe the aspect you are studying correctly
@shamanis1227 The math must be what is called, "falsifiable." IF it can be proven wrong then it cannot be a theory. One needs the observation to prove the mathematical theory. String theory is falsifiable but not proven
Look, just because the math fits does not make it right. I can make many equations to fit certain observations and they would work but that doesn't mean they are actually true for all accounts. We make equations for things we can observe. String theory can never be disproven which makes it an unscientific theory. Like I know the gravitational equations work for our size, but on many different scales it may follow different rules. Say on a quantum scale
Truly grasping the concept of extra dimensions is just so difficult. I wonder if it's even possible for a human to understand what the other dimensions are like, and I'm not talking about just understanding the mathematics...
I agree it is very difficult. But we humans have imagination. So if a theory is presented in a way that we can grasp it becomes reality. Mathematics is the language of the universe and parsing it down to laymen s terms displays an understanding of it that is complete.
I'm Atheist, but I don't understand how some religious zealots discount science. If anything science is the study of what God has created. This video is a great example of Divinity in nature.
I think Einstein said "My understanding of God is my understanding of the Universe" (para phrased)
That is a very good question :) But it is not one I am concerned with, because our understanding of the universe (within science) is a limited one. We as humans believe that their must be a beginning, because we are born, live and die ... so the universe must be the same.
When I look up at the stars I just see beauty and am thankful to be able to witness it :)
@Joxman2k The claim that processes begin is logical to believe. But that's not the comparison that you are making. You are referring to an actual, ex nihilo beginning which is not logical by any stretch of the mind.
Point taken :) The truth is I do not have an answer. I do not know what came before nothing. I cannot imagine what happens after the universe expands so much that molecules themselves expand and dissipate.
... my answer is I Do Not Know. I can imagine, and postulate theories. I can even believe in a God if I want. But the reality is I do not know.
I believe that the universe is much weirder than any concept we as humans can come up with.
You are a lucky person to escape the ignorance of a limited universe. I have found that Creationists are more about political ends, and power of thought, then they are about truth and understanding :)
Have a great time interval of one rotation of the Earth :)
@Joxman2k correct, in fact the more we learn about the incredible complexity and vast amount of information and intricate systems and micro machines which comprise life, it only points more surely to a higher realm, in fact string theory posits more than 4 dimensions, the caricature of the back woods moron who discounts science, is an effect of secular propaganda; the idea is too shame folk into being atheist, and to STOP them from thinking deeply about these issues.
Well that is true, but then again a certain portion of the human culture is biased against facts and logical thoughts ....so ... life and understanding is open to them, but they chose faith in bullshit.
"Religious zealots" don't disregard science, they disregard unproven philosophies and theories, such as Darwinian evolution. A large amount of "religious zealots" love real science.
Since when did a few factional elements equal a whole, when there are many elements that are nothing more than fairy tales. Darwinian Evolution is nothing more than a belief system that hijacks the good name of real science in an attempt to make itself sound legitimate. There are so many unanswered questions and holes it is a joke to even suggest the theory as a possibility. In the future people will look back and laugh at the thought of Darwinian Evolution.
you are NOT correct in your assumption that Darwin's Theory of Evolution is just a belief system. If by unanswered questions you mean "God Created everything as God desired it 5,000 years ago" Then YES it is an unanswered question because it is a stupid one.
Faith and Fact do not exist together. The word "Faith" actually requires little or no facts to be true.
And the word 'fact' actual requires empirical evidence.
No, by unanswered questions I means things like "Where did the information come from?" something Darwinian evolution requires, yet cannot provide.
It's strange that you only attack "Young Earth Creationism" after your precise Darwinian Evolution is attacked. Is that because you cannot defend Darwin's theory, so you try to red herring the issue.
@iamTOTALLYredeemed well the origin of life is abiogenesis and has nothing to do with the theory of evolution.
As for new information in a species I would say the discovery of nylon-eating bacteria is a very good example. Nylon is a man made product that creates chemical byproducts that never existed until recently. We've found a certain type of bacteria that has evolved the ability to digest these chemicals.
I would say being able to digest a chemical that's never existed before is new info.
Yet the origin of life and DNA is still required for Darwinian evolution, so it's still a big question that needs to be addressed and answered.
The Nylon-eating bacteria certainly is a good example of evolution, where creatures adapt to survive in their environment, but as far new information, the bacteria did not produce any new information, it simply rearranged existing.
This maybe so, but it is yet to be repeated, and Darwinian theory starts with the assumption that life already existed... so how did this life come about? Through a natural process of cause and effect, or by divine intervention, or something else?
For Darwinian theory to even be considered a possibility it needs to explain how brand new information has been added into the genome, not just information that has been rearranged. As far as I know, there is no evidence for it.
Within observable evolution there are only two out of the three resulting affects on the information within a genome the first being a lose of information as is true in the majority of cases, and the second being a rearrangement of information (like in the cases of our friend the nylon-eating bacteria). These two both function within an already existing gene pool. However the third is when completely new additional information is added to a genome.
The third is required to climb the ladder of complexity. And it is this variation that is required for Darwinian evolution to be a viable theory of the origin of species.
@iamTOTALLYredeemed The nylon-eating bacteria is an example of gaining new information. Never before was any living animal required to digest these products because they simply did not exist. The information needed is therefore new.
It happened because a particular gene was duplicated, and the duplicated gene then mutated in favor of digesting these chemicals. That leaves the old gene in the genome, and also adds new information.
The frame shift mutation was a speculation by geneticist Susumu Ohno, however this was later found to be false. By the early 1990’s, scientific research revealed that several types of bacteria have the ability to digest nylon due to a mutation that had caused a loss of function in a protein-degrading enzyme. This loss of genetic information resulted in the enzyme feeding on nylon and this loss was passed from one bacterium to another via plasmid tranfers.
I just want to add that even if evolution is ever proved wrong, it would still be a better explanation for the origin of species than any creation hypothesis.
There is paper that was published in 2007 that describes a series of studies by a team geneticists led by Seiji Negoro of the University of Hyogo, Japan.
That's a matter of opinion, but either way, many of the scientific observations that are used by the proponents for Darwinian Evolution can very easily also be used to support intelligent design.
I want to thank you for having a civilized and -for lack of a better word- 'calm' discussion with me. haha! People can be extremely immature. And that goes for both sides.
@iamTOTALLYredeemed the theory of evolution is not the theory of abiogenesis. Evolution is how species change across time through interactions with their environment and others.
loosing information- Blind cave Characins Astyanax Mexicanus fish is the same as it's aboveground counterpart, except it has no eyesight from living in the dark for generations.
Russian scientists changed foxes to become domesticated, and they started exhibiting more doglike physical features as their neurology changed
I do not attack stupid. Because stupid is, well stupid. I "attack" /question smart, because the first step to understanding is saying "I don't know". I like debating smart things because ....
" I respect all viewpoints and I like a good debate. Honestly debating an issue will either give you a renewed sense of the correctness of your viewpoint, or an expanded understanding of it. Both are good"
Current physics is getting silly, it's all well and good describing a particles behaviour in terms of its 'vibration' but what makes it 'vibrate' in a different way to the other particles in the first place?
The whole field is crying out for a 'Eureka! Can't believe we never noticed such a blatant solution before!' moment. It always comes to you when you least expect it ;-)
Actually I take that back... my bads. Eureka doesn't happen in a moment. It is like a drop of water discovering the flow of a leaf, water discovers itself then drips on the ground and trickles towards the stream, the stream becomes the river, the river becomes the lake, the lake becomes the ocean.
No matter where we are on the journey I respect the process..
@SeanAxion12 it depend on our assumption , if this string has simple harmonic motion which mean the restoring force equal to its displacement, then frequency depend on spring constant (k) and string mass (m) , as we knew that k depends on the restoring force of the spring (Hooke' Law) (note: I used mechanical classic ), CMIIW
@SeanAxion12 I believe Brian said so himself in the video, he said that much like in an instrument, the space that the string moves in (dimension) governs the frequency of it.
@SeanAxion12 Most likely the dimension into which the energy vibrates. Now you can come back saying perhaps the frequency determines the dimension not visa versa and my answer would be, "yup"
you know every strings has their own frequency, if our universe really on a string, could it be that different fruequency make a different universe, for example 1 Hz universe, 2 Hz universe etc ( the simple assumption)? note : those are my simple mind.
... meant only for installing fear and control. Man has outnumbered himself, and we either must pursue our manifest destiny to travel the stars in search of a new home. We must colonize or collapse. Either way, both will be accomplished, the race will fall, and nothing will matter in the end but empty space in empty spaces.
I've meditated and have seen the universe at 16, and already have ascertained the pessimism and devout hatred towards humans that a late Mark Twain had. There are billions of realities, and ours is one of destruction, false innocence, and arrogance. An end will come that will be nothing but a new start for a race that has put hope and pride in a false God for far too long, and the mass knowledge of this era will be lost and outnumbered by the trillions of mind bending Bibles out there...
@TheCrappyaccount no actually it's theoretical but you are correct, that lacking any observational support, it is nothing but theory. Testing string theory may be impossible. Presently the best support [not proof] is that the mathematics works whereas in let's say "quantum loop gravity theory," it doesn't. But why do you sound so angry?
@mishigreene Actually, I think what @TheCrappyaccount was trying to do is differentiate theory from hypothesis. By the meaning of the world "theory" most commonly used by scientists, string theory wouldn't yet qualify as a theory, but is instead a hypothesis. Once there is evidence to support it, it's a theory, but not until then. I guess I can't speak for another person, but I've made the same argument to those outside of the community who use hypothesis and theory interchangeably.
@TheSmilingSkeptic One drug, called pertuzumab, extended survival without tumor growth by 6.1 months—considered an important gain—when added to the blockbuster breast-cancer medicine Herceptin and chemotherapy, compared with Herceptin and chemotherapy alone. The study, sponsored by pertuzumab's developer, Roche Holding AG and its Genentech unit, involved 808 patients diagnosed with so-called HER2-positive breast cancer who hadn't been previously treated for the disease.
@TheSmilingSkeptic theory is mathematically correct but not provern by observation. If you reread all of this blog you'll see i have attempted to explain all of physics to hobbyists from black holes to ghosts to receptors etc. I'm tired of people 2nd guessing stuff upon which they are clueless. bye
@mishigreene Well, at this point, no, the theory is not mathematically correct at this time. The math only works in ten dimensions plus time, i.e., eleven dimensions. Until we have actually observed those dimensions, we can't be religious about it and accept it as a theory. I'm a proponent of superstring hypothesis, so you certainly don't need to get so angry, but language is important. We can't put it on the same level as other theories like evolution or the heliocentric solar system theory.
Listen, stop making believe you are "in the loop" It is "string theory" because Susskind, Greene and others say STRING THEORY. To split hairs makes you into a Bill Gaede. Language is not importent if you understand mathematics at a conceptual level. You sound like a lawyer in scientists clothing. You, like so many other dorks, effectively changed the conversation from a scientific one into an, "I'm a scientist and I split hairs." If you are a physicist, I'm the queen of Sheeba.
Physicists seem to have this propensity for twisting language that is actually detrimental to the cause of science. Take for example people such as Einstein and Hawking using God as a metaphor. Or in this case, sticking "theory" after superstring.
It's a theory, alright - a philosophical one (a conjecture). But scientific theory it ain't.
@valorisback interesting..but here is what I believe ghosts are: they are the souls that aren't ready to die yet, who long still for the contact with humans, and despair in that longing for it will never really be fulfilled.
I try to send a series of a few to a friend and it saysI have shared too many recently and wont send the one I tried to, along with a letter I wrote on it..????wazzup wid dat......
Ok, just throwing this out there... but I came to the conclusion a while ago when I was pulling an all nighter with my friend (so I might of been delusional) but I said that what if, what we see as "Ghosts" are actually beings from alternate dimensions that are capable to slip into our dimension for a split second? I don't know... Just a thought.
@JayashriV While 11 dimensions seem not in the realm of reality, Smolin's "Quantum Loop Gravity" theory is flawed by inability to calculate or reproduce predictions made by the standard model known to be true and accurate such as mass, spin and charge of the elementary particles. If Smolin was correct the universe would fall apart. Trying to unite Strings with QLG starts the unification attempt from the beginning. The 3rd possibility, that the strings warp space-time, is better model.
The problem is that all these experiments are sterile, thoughtless.
Greene talks about CERN "Slamming particles together, as if:
1- Humans could control the non-Human.
2-Scientist think that non-Humans (including "animals," , plants, etc. hv no sensations & feel no pain.- & that, they, the scientists can do whatever they want with them.
Well, the last CERN experiment sure scared them. They couldn't hold the particles! The particles arrived before they were sent out!
The problem is that all these experiments are sterile, thoughtless.
Greene talks about CERN "Slamming particles together, as if:
1- Humans could control the non-Human.
2-Scientist never consider that non-Humans (including "animals," , plants, etc. have no sensations & fell no pain.- and that, They, the scientists can do what ever they want with them.
Well, the last CERN experiment sure scared them. They couldn't hold the particles! The particles arrived before they were sent out!
How typical for scientist (Physicists / astronomers ) to usurp KNOWLEDGE, pretending it's only an "idea / theory & claim that they were the ones that
thought it up!
In fact, it wasn't a sudden "brain flash" in the 20th c., it didn't come out of a vaccum, had been present all those years, with the EXPERENCING / Seeing of "Entities fr other Dimensions ('ghosts" & angels ), Spiritists, Native "Magic" practices, Hawaiian Huna, Healings, etc.
This is NOT a new idea. It isn't even an idea, but KNOWLEDGE...TRUTH.
The of the Serpent /Energy, Multiple & Parallel Universes, The Void, Particles/Waves/Atoms, the Origin of Humanity (NOT Adam & Eve), et all, has been known for Millennia..by the Ancients, Egyptians, Shamen, Tribals, Wiccans, & Wisdom Schools...all those with the Old Knowledge.
@ajhrockerboy6 Stephen Hawking is actually a very nice guy. He is not an atheist but rather an agnostic. "Chopping down religion" is not his style. Formalized religion, because there are so many becomes irrelevant. Assuming there is a G-d do you really think the almighty cares what "religion" you are?
instead of killing ,spoiling lives,destroying ,sending under earth ,hells ,if some place is given far away from india .and some thing are done for better to improve the qualities of humans and souls .so that every one can live .
every one was not born with the god and nature's grace of good qualities and the good fate to have good inteligence ,wisdom ,and circuimstances not to commit ever any mistakes and sins
request and pray ---every human every soul either good or bad ,angle or evil ,sinner,demon , god or devil every one want to live as a good humanbeing --please save
in india ,tamilnadu ,human souls are taken under earth ,under rocks ,even to several thousnds kilometers under rocks,taking old revenges ,vengenes ,conspirancies ,polatics and given different shapes .in sevrages and made like aliens .taking under earth and beating and burning .please save to every one,every molecules and request to bring all the souls ,creatures from under earth to on earth .and requests to request not to spoil souls and humans.please save from pains sufferings .please save .
Any informatics programmer could explain and solve the extensively sought UNIFICATION theory between Quantum (strings ) universe and Relativity universe.
They are NOT parts of the same program.
Quantum Universe is the "container" environment in which "Relativity Universe " unzips (big bang ) and runs.
Strings -quantums = the bios of a computer,
Relativity Universes = programs running on BIOS (DOS) environment
Any informatics programmer could explain and solve the extensively sought UNIFICATION theory between Quantum (strings ) universe and Relativity universe.
They are NOT parts of the same program.
Quantum Universe is the "container" environment in which "Relativity Universe " unzips (big bang ) and runs.
Strings -quantums = the bios of a computer,
Relativity Universes = programs running on DOS environment
Dumbest idea I ever heard. Nothing in life is as stupidly intricate and without purpose as tiny curled up dimensions. Everything seems to work smoothly. When I hear crap like this I think of the original observers of the sky and made up intricate patterns in which the stars and planets moved around the earth. Think bigger
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
I like Brian Greene and I have one of his books, however sometimes physicists don't pay attention to what they are saying "Left-right back-forth, up-down" ??? there is no such thing in space, even if he is trying to simplify things to the "average" population. "Special theory of relativity", no, sorry it's the "Theory of Special Relativity"
@MrKnnknn While both descriptions are permissible since "theory" is the noun, "special" and/or "general" being the adjective, you are incorrect; the formal name is "general theory" or "special relativity," not your attempt at splitting hairs. Indeed, as abbreviations, STR and GTR are commonly used. In addition, the sign of an excellent teacher is one who can TEACH and that equates to beginning with stating what the student already knows, then expanding that knowledge. "left-right..."
“Pure Meta Physical Voodoo” that’s what Physics has become, the so called “smart guys” are working for Goldman creating “credit default swaps” and bankrupting the world, and we are left with these new age voodoo spiritual prophets who have sacrificed Evidence for elegance and in the process have destroyed physics and truth with it for the last 3 decades.
@MegaSingularity Over the past three decades physics has cannibalised itself due to the increased understanding and research of quantum physics and the behavior of the universe on a sub-atomic level. For example, take a look at CERNs results of apparent 'dimension-hopping' neutrinos that appear to bust special relativity wide open. Many models describe the same phenomena and surely enough over the next five decades new ones will replace them with greater understanding and elegance.
Trust me, university classes build up on what you know, and this particularly the case in physics. You need a solid understanding of the math appropriate for the subject, and everything that comes before. Courses on cosmology/GR are taught assuming you at least know Classical Mech, SR, E&M. Most people in physics majors struggle with these classes, and they have a solid background.
Besides, MIT has a bunch of physics courses online, and only students with bad teachers check them.
with the warping of spacetime does that mean that everything in our galaxy will eventually go down the drain so to speak of the massive black hole at the center of the galaxy?
@boogiebuddy01 Actually, there is evidence that black holes exist in various stages depending on whether they are "eating." Our own super massive black hole, the one in the center of the milky way shows evidence that it is feeding again. It will eat until it burps a quasar that pushes the remaining galaxy outward. Then the cycle repeats so yes eventually you'll be food.
[Quran 41.12] So [Allah] decreed them as seven heavens (one above the other) in two days and revealed to each heaven its orders. And We [Allah] adorned the lowest heaven with lights, and protection. Such is the decree of the Exalted; the Knowledgeable.
[Quran 65.12] Allah is the one who created seven Heavens and from Earth like them (of corresponding type); [Allah’s] command descends among them so that you may know that Allah is capable of anything and that Allah knows everything.
@nabilj45 allah did it hmm so islam can explane all there is but it cant get its head around sumthing as natural as homosexuality equlity of sexz an not cuting bits off childrens bodys were as the hindus story explanes all pretty well but without the 3 problums i just mentiond or at lest alot less homophobia sexism an kidy cuting then islam has go look up honduisn ull probly change ur fath im not a hindu but its better for mankind then ur shit im a nature worshiper a naturalist basicly
Any Muslim for the last 1400 years could have told anyone that there are 7 universes. The lowest one is the one we see. It’s by far the smallest. The size of our universe compared to the one above it is about the size of a ring, and the universe above it is the size of a desert. The second universe compared to the third universe is the size of a ring and the third universe is the size of a desert. Each universe above the other is again that much larger till you get to the 7th universe.
@nabilj45 the path u follow has no sense nor science .. dont comment on scientific videos which u nor ur foolish scholars understand. and dont try to use science to convert islam scientific like the biggest fool in the universe zakir naik
Modern physicists should first read Kepler's harmonie of the worlds book 5. The vibrations of the strings will be proved to range about 3 and a half octaves, enough for 10 dimensions and+1 time as quantum phase OR time as linear. This means that membrane theory is correct if also taking in the mathematicians final result (constrained by deterministic numbers) that there are an infinite number of infinities. So there is the multiverse. But in practical human terms, we can manage pretty well with
What is out there that we do not have the eyes to see, the nose to smell, the ears to hear, the skin to touch, the tongue to taste? What is out there we do not have the ability to sense?
@myirish429 Here's one example. High frequency sound. You cannot sense it being present but your doggie can. Your ability to "sense" is limited by your "receptor's sensitivity limitations You cannot see radio waves but they are there
of course there are additional dimensions!...i've seen more that most, its kinda crazy that there is a huge gap of human intelligent. between the Sumerians and Einstein and many beginning scientists lol. I must say we have de-evolved. lol
Part 4 Don't get hung up on "names" "Dark Matter" is a stupid name. in 1934 it sounded "cool" and was coined byFritz Zwicky in 1934 when Boris Karloff horror movies were the thing [think Twilight Zone music] "Gravity of an Unknown Source" would be a far less confusing label. Dark Energy is also a stupiid name and coined to be in vogue with DM. A better term "Acceleration Forces acting on matter in the universe probably created by the big band or inflation." Get it, or an I unintelligible?
I cannot find fault in what you said because you really didn't say anything. In an intellectual, high brow tone [actually quite hollow] ,,you merely complained. That sir is what annoyed ,me. Physics is right down into what is "energy." If all matter is a condensed energy and electron clouds are so distant from the nucleus, why are things solid? You cannot poopoo something without presenting reasons why. Referring back to lack of unified big/small theory is too easy. Say something.
@mishigreene PART 2 I'm actually sick of all this myself. Applied physics and quantum physics is far cooler than cosmology and theoretical physics any day. But even I a "disinterested" grad student can shoot off a better bitch session than yours. HERE. oscillations in "space-time" are the "strings" to which Greene calls strings. Those "vibrations" warp ST resulting in surrounding "gravity. That G is what holds stuff together. The Higgs boson is not as heavy as they think but merely a cont
@mishigreene Part 3 "clumping" of warped ST, a "gravity clump." That why people err calling G one of the 4 primary forces. It is really only there if energy [strings] are present to create it. The problem with what I just said it the mathematics of it is so complicated as to rival string theory and all the other crap they are working on. THE MATH MAY prove my model correct or that of Prof Greene or Elmer Fudd but it's the math that's the answer. NOT YOUR COMPLAINTS AMEN BROTHER!
@christphert Yes. My sense is that this is getting toward the limit of how well you can possibly explain & understand it without getting into the math. "The Elegant Universe" is worth a read too if you enjoy trying to understand this stuff (and who wouldn't??).
This whole concept was created to explain the anomalous behavior of gravity on the subatomic scale. However, we've never had a workable theory of gravity to begin with. We've tweaked one equation that works pretty well on our scale... but when applied to the scale of solar systems, the accuracy goes down. On the scale of galaxies, it's wildly wrong.
So to salvage a broken theory, we invent dark matter on the one end, and string theory on the other. Both are ad hoc and unscientific.
@zapproowsdower are you a real knowledgable guy or a fruitcake huckster like Bill Gaedes. If you're are real, you have an in depth knowledge of tensir calculus which helps explains this. "We invent dark matter." You include yourself. So how did "we" invent D.M.? Or what is your theory? Alternative theories subject to peer review are always welcome. Where's yours? DON'T ACT THE BIG SHOT UNLESS YOU KNOW SOMETHING. Otherwise stick to Baseball, beer and sex!! UR a "wannabee."
@mishigreene Yes I'm very knowledgable about these things. No, I don't need to provide an all-encompassing theory to point out the deep flaws of another theory. Care to point out a fl
hello bill maher
edgaristtod 23 hours ago
science is just expansion on the belief that induction is real. true spiritualism is the belief that induction isn't.
kirbykidsmith 1 day ago
What is described as dimensions in this video is actually interaction between the dimensions. What is herecalled subatomic particles are actually vectors applied upon the fluids constituting the universe. this is not a solid conception but a view of perception.sub-dimensions and not real dimension. the unitary field is a place in space and time where everything is from everywhere and every time-stream. As time is not a fourth dimension but the surface tension between the fourth and the third.
khundun 1 day ago
a fantastic talk!
CalumnMcAulay 2 days ago
I love these videos. It's interesting to see how we are evolving our understanding of the composition of the universe. The research being done is a testimony to the human drive for learning for the sake of learning. Beyond that, it offers questions into how accurate human perception is in truly defining our world. And though, at times, it may seem like the answer is to simply add more dimensions, I am sure that it will all add up, one day, to my getting my own TARDIS!
Peytonp8 3 days ago
he says that the extra demenions are too small to see, but could'nt they also be too big to see? like an ant walking on a curled up newspaper and thinking that it lives in a 2 demensional world instead of 3? if so then could we make wormholes?
bluexepnos 6 days ago
all i have to say is we need to keep funding nasa foreve, no they aren't making no progress. They are making progress everyday its just going to be a long time till we know if theres people like us on other galaxies and if theres other universe and what else is out there as it gets bigger and bigger
yoyoyo313412 1 week ago
I believe sound is a dimension! you can't see it but its there. Everything around us has a certain resonant frequency.
RVNmuzik 1 week ago
Cool, if the math doesn't work just add more dimensions (which no one can see)
zacharycat 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
lightandbeautiful 1 week ago
Fail. Damb android keyboard!
mattysimsoficial 2 weeks ago
I'm sorry, the date says February 2005...why is that only up to now they uploaded
mattysimsoficial 2 weeks ago
I'm trying one last time lol. The biggest objection by layman is the 11 dimensions. That is a stupid label just like "dark matter" is. It's not dark matter it's "gravity from an unknown source" [the black hole at the center of galaxies?]. Look up "degrees of freedom" The fundamental object in superstring theory is the superstring: a string with extra degrees of freedom that make it supersymmetric. Call the extra 7 spatial dimensions "degrees of spatial freedom" and be happy
mishigreene 2 weeks ago
all string theory models are quantum mechanical, Lorentz invariant, unitary, and contain Einstein's General Relativity as a low energy limit. Therefore, to falsify string theory, it would suffice to falsify quantum mechanics, fundamental Lorentz invariance, or general relativity. Hence, all string theory models are falsifiable and meet the definition of scientific theory according to Karl Popper's criterion.
mishigreene 3 weeks ago
@mishigreene It's fascinating that string theory is falsifiable BUT to constitute a convincing verification of string theory, a prediction should be specific to it, not shared by any quantum field theory model or by General Relativity meaning it easy to falsify but so far impossible to prove! So there goes Popper out the window.
mishigreene 3 weeks ago
@mishigreene
Ok, well string theory and general relativity are already proven theories. Just because those are correct doesn't mean they test for string theory. Something you are forgetting is that a theory has to be testable. You act like you know what you are talking about, it's not to make a convincing verification. It is to make any kind of verification. The math doesn't matter unless it actually describes something. Besides that making extra dimensions makes little sense
shamanis1227 2 weeks ago
Its funny how the more educational videos i watch, the dumber i become as it becomes clear how little of i know..
98765432123456789000 3 weeks ago
Math is not the language of the universe, we explain the universe with math, but the universe consists of a lot more than just mathematics. Other than that, you can't just make up equations that fit the way we see the universe now, but you have to observe the universe and see if those maths actually describe the aspect you are studying correctly
shamanis1227 3 weeks ago
@shamanis1227 The math must be what is called, "falsifiable." IF it can be proven wrong then it cannot be a theory. One needs the observation to prove the mathematical theory. String theory is falsifiable but not proven
mishigreene 3 weeks ago
@mishigreene
Look, just because the math fits does not make it right. I can make many equations to fit certain observations and they would work but that doesn't mean they are actually true for all accounts. We make equations for things we can observe. String theory can never be disproven which makes it an unscientific theory. Like I know the gravitational equations work for our size, but on many different scales it may follow different rules. Say on a quantum scale
shamanis1227 3 weeks ago
@shamanis1227 didn't u read my post addressing falsifiability? I will expand on top.
mishigreene 3 weeks ago
This is complete garbage.
ajhrockerboy6 3 weeks ago
Truly grasping the concept of extra dimensions is just so difficult. I wonder if it's even possible for a human to understand what the other dimensions are like, and I'm not talking about just understanding the mathematics...
BobHope88 3 weeks ago
@BobHope88
I agree it is very difficult. But we humans have imagination. So if a theory is presented in a way that we can grasp it becomes reality. Mathematics is the language of the universe and parsing it down to laymen s terms displays an understanding of it that is complete.
:)
:p
Joxman2k 3 weeks ago
I'm Atheist, but I don't understand how some religious zealots discount science. If anything science is the study of what God has created. This video is a great example of Divinity in nature.
I think Einstein said "My understanding of God is my understanding of the Universe" (para phrased)
Joxman2k 1 month ago 17
@Joxman2k Perhaps...maybe divine powers made the Big Bang start. We'll never know, will we?
RuneDrake314 4 weeks ago
@RuneDrake314
actually the only thing that matters is that you recognize a beginning. Divinity is a force.
Joxman2k 3 weeks ago
@Joxman2k And what began the divinity that began the beginning?
craigdavid00 3 weeks ago
@craigdavid00
That is a very good question :) But it is not one I am concerned with, because our understanding of the universe (within science) is a limited one. We as humans believe that their must be a beginning, because we are born, live and die ... so the universe must be the same.
When I look up at the stars I just see beauty and am thankful to be able to witness it :)
:P
Joxman2k 3 weeks ago 5
@Joxman2k The claim that processes begin is logical to believe. But that's not the comparison that you are making. You are referring to an actual, ex nihilo beginning which is not logical by any stretch of the mind.
craigdavid00 3 weeks ago
@craigdavid00
Point taken :) The truth is I do not have an answer. I do not know what came before nothing. I cannot imagine what happens after the universe expands so much that molecules themselves expand and dissipate.
... my answer is I Do Not Know. I can imagine, and postulate theories. I can even believe in a God if I want. But the reality is I do not know.
I believe that the universe is much weirder than any concept we as humans can come up with.
:)
:P
Joxman2k 3 weeks ago 3
@Joxman2k I am religious and I couldn't agree more, you sir, are awesome. I've been trying to tell creationists that for years.
Lowlsnail 3 weeks ago 2
@Lowlsnail
You are a lucky person to escape the ignorance of a limited universe. I have found that Creationists are more about political ends, and power of thought, then they are about truth and understanding :)
Have a great time interval of one rotation of the Earth :)
:P
Joxman2k 3 weeks ago 4
@Joxman2k correct, in fact the more we learn about the incredible complexity and vast amount of information and intricate systems and micro machines which comprise life, it only points more surely to a higher realm, in fact string theory posits more than 4 dimensions, the caricature of the back woods moron who discounts science, is an effect of secular propaganda; the idea is too shame folk into being atheist, and to STOP them from thinking deeply about these issues.
metanosis 2 weeks ago in playlist String Theory
@metanosis
Well that is true, but then again a certain portion of the human culture is biased against facts and logical thoughts ....so ... life and understanding is open to them, but they chose faith in bullshit.
:)
:P
Joxman2k 2 weeks ago
@Joxman2k
"Religious zealots" don't disregard science, they disregard unproven philosophies and theories, such as Darwinian evolution. A large amount of "religious zealots" love real science.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 1 week ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed
"Religious zealots" by definition EMBRACE unproven philosophies and theories because of faith. Right?
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a scientific theory, which means predicting and observing phenomena based on a hypothesis through experiments.
Religious belief, while compelling to many is based on Faith, which by definition means lack of observable, predictable results about a phenomena.
It is trust when none is warranted.
:)
:P
Joxman2k 1 week ago
@Joxman2k
Since when did a few factional elements equal a whole, when there are many elements that are nothing more than fairy tales. Darwinian Evolution is nothing more than a belief system that hijacks the good name of real science in an attempt to make itself sound legitimate. There are so many unanswered questions and holes it is a joke to even suggest the theory as a possibility. In the future people will look back and laugh at the thought of Darwinian Evolution.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 1 week ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed
you are NOT correct in your assumption that Darwin's Theory of Evolution is just a belief system. If by unanswered questions you mean "God Created everything as God desired it 5,000 years ago" Then YES it is an unanswered question because it is a stupid one.
Faith and Fact do not exist together. The word "Faith" actually requires little or no facts to be true.
:)
:P
Joxman2k 6 days ago
@Joxman2k
And the word 'fact' actual requires empirical evidence.
No, by unanswered questions I means things like "Where did the information come from?" something Darwinian evolution requires, yet cannot provide.
It's strange that you only attack "Young Earth Creationism" after your precise Darwinian Evolution is attacked. Is that because you cannot defend Darwin's theory, so you try to red herring the issue.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 6 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed Are you talking about a species gaining new information? Or the beginning of information?
aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy 6 days ago
@aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy
Both
iamTOTALLYredeemed 6 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed well the origin of life is abiogenesis and has nothing to do with the theory of evolution.
As for new information in a species I would say the discovery of nylon-eating bacteria is a very good example. Nylon is a man made product that creates chemical byproducts that never existed until recently. We've found a certain type of bacteria that has evolved the ability to digest these chemicals.
I would say being able to digest a chemical that's never existed before is new info.
aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy 5 days ago
@aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy
Yet the origin of life and DNA is still required for Darwinian evolution, so it's still a big question that needs to be addressed and answered.
The Nylon-eating bacteria certainly is a good example of evolution, where creatures adapt to survive in their environment, but as far new information, the bacteria did not produce any new information, it simply rearranged existing.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 5 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed Yes I agree life needs to begin in order for evolution to take place. But they are two different things.
And yes you have it when you say rearranged the existing. That's exactly what evolution is. DNA has been the same since the beginning of life.
aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy 5 days ago
@aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy
This maybe so, but it is yet to be repeated, and Darwinian theory starts with the assumption that life already existed... so how did this life come about? Through a natural process of cause and effect, or by divine intervention, or something else?
For Darwinian theory to even be considered a possibility it needs to explain how brand new information has been added into the genome, not just information that has been rearranged. As far as I know, there is no evidence for it.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 5 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed Can you please specify what you mean by new information?
aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy 5 days ago
@aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy
Within observable evolution there are only two out of the three resulting affects on the information within a genome the first being a lose of information as is true in the majority of cases, and the second being a rearrangement of information (like in the cases of our friend the nylon-eating bacteria). These two both function within an already existing gene pool. However the third is when completely new additional information is added to a genome.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 5 days ago
@aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy
The third is required to climb the ladder of complexity. And it is this variation that is required for Darwinian evolution to be a viable theory of the origin of species.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 5 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed The nylon-eating bacteria is an example of gaining new information. Never before was any living animal required to digest these products because they simply did not exist. The information needed is therefore new.
It happened because a particular gene was duplicated, and the duplicated gene then mutated in favor of digesting these chemicals. That leaves the old gene in the genome, and also adds new information.
aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy 4 days ago
@aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy
The frame shift mutation was a speculation by geneticist Susumu Ohno, however this was later found to be false. By the early 1990’s, scientific research revealed that several types of bacteria have the ability to digest nylon due to a mutation that had caused a loss of function in a protein-degrading enzyme. This loss of genetic information resulted in the enzyme feeding on nylon and this loss was passed from one bacterium to another via plasmid tranfers.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 3 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed Can I ask where you got your information from?
I just want to add that even if evolution is ever proved wrong, it would still be a better explanation for the origin of species than any creation hypothesis.
aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy 3 days ago
@aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy
There is paper that was published in 2007 that describes a series of studies by a team geneticists led by Seiji Negoro of the University of Hyogo, Japan.
That's a matter of opinion, but either way, many of the scientific observations that are used by the proponents for Darwinian Evolution can very easily also be used to support intelligent design.
iamTOTALLYredeemed 3 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed Alright cool I'll take a look.
I want to thank you for having a civilized and -for lack of a better word- 'calm' discussion with me. haha! People can be extremely immature. And that goes for both sides.
aPpLeJuIcE37RainLucy 3 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed the theory of evolution is not the theory of abiogenesis. Evolution is how species change across time through interactions with their environment and others.
loosing information- Blind cave Characins Astyanax Mexicanus fish is the same as it's aboveground counterpart, except it has no eyesight from living in the dark for generations.
Russian scientists changed foxes to become domesticated, and they started exhibiting more doglike physical features as their neurology changed
kelbykross1 4 days ago
@iamTOTALLYredeemed
I do not attack stupid. Because stupid is, well stupid. I "attack" /question smart, because the first step to understanding is saying "I don't know". I like debating smart things because ....
" I respect all viewpoints and I like a good debate. Honestly debating an issue will either give you a renewed sense of the correctness of your viewpoint, or an expanded understanding of it. Both are good"
You sir seem like to question. I like that.
:)
:P
Joxman2k 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Current physics is getting silly, it's all well and good describing a particles behaviour in terms of its 'vibration' but what makes it 'vibrate' in a different way to the other particles in the first place?
The whole field is crying out for a 'Eureka! Can't believe we never noticed such a blatant solution before!' moment. It always comes to you when you least expect it ;-)
SeanAxion12 1 month ago
@SeanAxion12
Why did you discount your view sir.? You need to speak up.
Joxman2k 3 weeks ago
@Joxman2k
Actually I take that back... my bads. Eureka doesn't happen in a moment. It is like a drop of water discovering the flow of a leaf, water discovers itself then drips on the ground and trickles towards the stream, the stream becomes the river, the river becomes the lake, the lake becomes the ocean.
No matter where we are on the journey I respect the process..
Joxman2k 2 weeks ago
What governs the frequency of the string?
SeanAxion12 1 month ago
Comment removed
eldazh 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SeanAxion12 it depend on our assumption , if this string has simple harmonic motion which mean the restoring force equal to its displacement, then frequency depend on spring constant (k) and string mass (m) , as we knew that k depends on the restoring force of the spring (Hooke' Law) (note: I used mechanical classic ), CMIIW
eldazh 1 month ago
@SeanAxion12 I believe Brian said so himself in the video, he said that much like in an instrument, the space that the string moves in (dimension) governs the frequency of it.
Asuperl33tninja 1 month ago
@SeanAxion12 Most likely the dimension into which the energy vibrates. Now you can come back saying perhaps the frequency determines the dimension not visa versa and my answer would be, "yup"
mishigreene 1 month ago
@SeanAxion12
just people who observe. The frequency of a string has its own laws.
:)
:P
Joxman2k 1 week ago
@SeanAxion12
The violinist?
:)
:P
Joxman2k 1 week ago
you know every strings has their own frequency, if our universe really on a string, could it be that different fruequency make a different universe, for example 1 Hz universe, 2 Hz universe etc ( the simple assumption)? note : those are my simple mind.
eldazh 1 month ago
@eldazh nope
mishigreene 1 month ago
Comment removed
eldazh 1 month ago
Comment removed
eldazh 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mishigreene did you mean frequency has not effect to the dimension? how could be? every vibrating energy has their own frequency
eldazh 1 month ago
... meant only for installing fear and control. Man has outnumbered himself, and we either must pursue our manifest destiny to travel the stars in search of a new home. We must colonize or collapse. Either way, both will be accomplished, the race will fall, and nothing will matter in the end but empty space in empty spaces.
LetsPride 1 month ago
I've meditated and have seen the universe at 16, and already have ascertained the pessimism and devout hatred towards humans that a late Mark Twain had. There are billions of realities, and ours is one of destruction, false innocence, and arrogance. An end will come that will be nothing but a new start for a race that has put hope and pride in a false God for far too long, and the mass knowledge of this era will be lost and outnumbered by the trillions of mind bending Bibles out there...
LetsPride 1 month ago
Wow!
MGR1900 1 month ago
@BiggrWiggrthnmrNiggr So basically because you don't understand it it must be a hoax?
cjs2964 1 month ago
This is not theoretical physics, this is hypothetical physics.
TheCrappyaccount 1 month ago
@TheCrappyaccount It is theoretical physics cause the mathematical design exists.
LoveHjerten88 1 month ago
@TheCrappyaccount no actually it's theoretical but you are correct, that lacking any observational support, it is nothing but theory. Testing string theory may be impossible. Presently the best support [not proof] is that the mathematics works whereas in let's say "quantum loop gravity theory," it doesn't. But why do you sound so angry?
mishigreene 1 month ago
@mishigreene Actually, I think what @TheCrappyaccount was trying to do is differentiate theory from hypothesis. By the meaning of the world "theory" most commonly used by scientists, string theory wouldn't yet qualify as a theory, but is instead a hypothesis. Once there is evidence to support it, it's a theory, but not until then. I guess I can't speak for another person, but I've made the same argument to those outside of the community who use hypothesis and theory interchangeably.
TheSmilingSkeptic 1 month ago
@TheSmilingSkeptic One drug, called pertuzumab, extended survival without tumor growth by 6.1 months—considered an important gain—when added to the blockbuster breast-cancer medicine Herceptin and chemotherapy, compared with Herceptin and chemotherapy alone. The study, sponsored by pertuzumab's developer, Roche Holding AG and its Genentech unit, involved 808 patients diagnosed with so-called HER2-positive breast cancer who hadn't been previously treated for the disease.
mishigreene 1 month ago
@TheSmilingSkeptic I'm at Stanford call me when you know what you are tal;king about.
mishigreene 1 month ago
@TheSmilingSkeptic theory is mathematically correct but not provern by observation. If you reread all of this blog you'll see i have attempted to explain all of physics to hobbyists from black holes to ghosts to receptors etc. I'm tired of people 2nd guessing stuff upon which they are clueless. bye
mishigreene 1 month ago
@mishigreene Well, at this point, no, the theory is not mathematically correct at this time. The math only works in ten dimensions plus time, i.e., eleven dimensions. Until we have actually observed those dimensions, we can't be religious about it and accept it as a theory. I'm a proponent of superstring hypothesis, so you certainly don't need to get so angry, but language is important. We can't put it on the same level as other theories like evolution or the heliocentric solar system theory.
TheSmilingSkeptic 1 month ago 7
Listen, stop making believe you are "in the loop" It is "string theory" because Susskind, Greene and others say STRING THEORY. To split hairs makes you into a Bill Gaede. Language is not importent if you understand mathematics at a conceptual level. You sound like a lawyer in scientists clothing. You, like so many other dorks, effectively changed the conversation from a scientific one into an, "I'm a scientist and I split hairs." If you are a physicist, I'm the queen of Sheeba.
mishigreene 1 month ago
@TheSmilingSkeptic
Thank you very much.
Physicists seem to have this propensity for twisting language that is actually detrimental to the cause of science. Take for example people such as Einstein and Hawking using God as a metaphor. Or in this case, sticking "theory" after superstring.
It's a theory, alright - a philosophical one (a conjecture). But scientific theory it ain't.
ZPSBestProfileName 1 week ago
Imagine this, Imagine that where is your empirical evidence and observation.
TheCrappyaccount 1 month ago
stuff is crazy interesting
boogiebuddy01 1 month ago
'querks' xD
deanarobo 1 month ago
"..and if we could calculate the allowed vibrational patterns, we should be able to calculate those twenty numbers and..." -the answer should be: 42.
delataylor 2 months ago
@valorisback interesting..but here is what I believe ghosts are: they are the souls that aren't ready to die yet, who long still for the contact with humans, and despair in that longing for it will never really be fulfilled.
kmjvt11 2 months ago
In the East they call it Chi.
In Star Wars it's called the Force.
hatetechstuff 2 months ago
I try to send a series of a few to a friend and it saysI have shared too many recently and wont send the one I tried to, along with a letter I wrote on it..????wazzup wid dat......
jennevaa 2 months ago
Brian , Your doing a great job but I'm thinking Bert form Sesame Street would be more entertaining. Give it some thought.
lightgearwire 2 months ago
Comment removed
ilifeform 2 months ago
Ok, just throwing this out there... but I came to the conclusion a while ago when I was pulling an all nighter with my friend (so I might of been delusional) but I said that what if, what we see as "Ghosts" are actually beings from alternate dimensions that are capable to slip into our dimension for a split second? I don't know... Just a thought.
Valorisblack 2 months ago
@Valorisblack Well there supposedly found proof of Alternative Univereses so I guess you can be right
Mitchx42 2 months ago
@BiggrWiggrthnmrNiggr If only you knew the jokes on you ;)
AduhAwas 2 months ago
Everyone. Read Brian Green's The Elegant Universe, and then read Lee Smolin's The Trouble with Physics. Decide for yourself.
I'm personally with Smolin on this one.
JayashriV 2 months ago
@JayashriV While 11 dimensions seem not in the realm of reality, Smolin's "Quantum Loop Gravity" theory is flawed by inability to calculate or reproduce predictions made by the standard model known to be true and accurate such as mass, spin and charge of the elementary particles. If Smolin was correct the universe would fall apart. Trying to unite Strings with QLG starts the unification attempt from the beginning. The 3rd possibility, that the strings warp space-time, is better model.
mishigreene 2 months ago
cont'd
The problem is that all these experiments are sterile, thoughtless.
Greene talks about CERN "Slamming particles together, as if:
1- Humans could control the non-Human.
2-Scientist think that non-Humans (including "animals," , plants, etc. hv no sensations & feel no pain.- & that, they, the scientists can do whatever they want with them.
Well, the last CERN experiment sure scared them. They couldn't hold the particles! The particles arrived before they were sent out!
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
cont'd
The problem is that all these experiments are sterile, thoughtless.
Greene talks about CERN "Slamming particles together, as if:
1- Humans could control the non-Human.
2-Scientist never consider that non-Humans (including "animals," , plants, etc. have no sensations & fell no pain.- and that, They, the scientists can do what ever they want with them.
Well, the last CERN experiment sure scared them. They couldn't hold the particles! The particles arrived before they were sent out!
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
Comment removed
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
cont'd
How typical for scientist (Physicists / astronomers ) to usurp KNOWLEDGE, pretending it's only an "idea / theory & claim that they were the ones that
thought it up!
In fact, it wasn't a sudden "brain flash" in the 20th c., it didn't come out of a vaccum, had been present all those years, with the EXPERENCING / Seeing of "Entities fr other Dimensions ('ghosts" & angels ), Spiritists, Native "Magic" practices, Hawaiian Huna, Healings, etc.
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
@EarthaKit2 big LOL
djalma15 2 months ago
Comment removed
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
Comment removed
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is NOT a new idea. It isn't even an idea, but KNOWLEDGE...TRUTH.
The of the Serpent /Energy, Multiple & Parallel Universes, The Void, Particles/Waves/Atoms, the Origin of Humanity (NOT Adam & Eve), et all, has been known for Millennia..by the Ancients, Egyptians, Shamen, Tribals, Wiccans, & Wisdom Schools...all those with the Old Knowledge.
cont'd
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
Comment removed
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
Comment removed
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
Comment removed
EarthaKit2 2 months ago
Brian Greene is better than hawking because he's not stuck up, conceited, and he doesn't chop down religion. fuck hawking. i hope he dies soon.
ajhrockerboy6 2 months ago
@ajhrockerboy6 Stephen Hawking is actually a very nice guy. He is not an atheist but rather an agnostic. "Chopping down religion" is not his style. Formalized religion, because there are so many becomes irrelevant. Assuming there is a G-d do you really think the almighty cares what "religion" you are?
mishigreene 2 months ago
@mishigreene well said
MultiHotNERD 2 months ago
@mishigreene agreed. so i guess he's an agnostic "deist".
ajhrockerboy6 2 months ago
instead of killing ,spoiling lives,destroying ,sending under earth ,hells ,if some place is given far away from india .and some thing are done for better to improve the qualities of humans and souls .so that every one can live .
bgupta2001 2 months ago
every one was not born with the god and nature's grace of good qualities and the good fate to have good inteligence ,wisdom ,and circuimstances not to commit ever any mistakes and sins
request and pray ---every human every soul either good or bad ,angle or evil ,sinner,demon , god or devil every one want to live as a good humanbeing --please save
bgupta2001 2 months ago
in india ,tamilnadu ,human souls are taken under earth ,under rocks ,even to several thousnds kilometers under rocks,taking old revenges ,vengenes ,conspirancies ,polatics and given different shapes .in sevrages and made like aliens .taking under earth and beating and burning .please save to every one,every molecules and request to bring all the souls ,creatures from under earth to on earth .and requests to request not to spoil souls and humans.please save from pains sufferings .please save .
bgupta2001 2 months ago
Top good
GustavoHdlpb 2 months ago
Chuck Norris could could kick ass in every dimension at the same time
wearetheom 2 months ago
there aint no quarks in my hot dog
wearetheom 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Any informatics programmer could explain and solve the extensively sought UNIFICATION theory between Quantum (strings ) universe and Relativity universe.
They are NOT parts of the same program.
Quantum Universe is the "container" environment in which "Relativity Universe " unzips (big bang ) and runs.
Strings -quantums = the bios of a computer,
Relativity Universes = programs running on BIOS (DOS) environment
advisor3000 2 months ago
Any informatics programmer could explain and solve the extensively sought UNIFICATION theory between Quantum (strings ) universe and Relativity universe.
They are NOT parts of the same program.
Quantum Universe is the "container" environment in which "Relativity Universe " unzips (big bang ) and runs.
Strings -quantums = the bios of a computer,
Relativity Universes = programs running on DOS environment
advisor3000 2 months ago
Dumbest idea I ever heard. Nothing in life is as stupidly intricate and without purpose as tiny curled up dimensions. Everything seems to work smoothly. When I hear crap like this I think of the original observers of the sky and made up intricate patterns in which the stars and planets moved around the earth. Think bigger
crudhousefull 2 months ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
@crudhousefull Do you even fucking study physics?
CartickPradeepan 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 3 months ago
*video of patrick's mind short-circuting*
shadow21491 3 months ago
I like Brian Greene and I have one of his books, however sometimes physicists don't pay attention to what they are saying "Left-right back-forth, up-down" ??? there is no such thing in space, even if he is trying to simplify things to the "average" population. "Special theory of relativity", no, sorry it's the "Theory of Special Relativity"
MrKnnknn 3 months ago
@MrKnnknn While both descriptions are permissible since "theory" is the noun, "special" and/or "general" being the adjective, you are incorrect; the formal name is "general theory" or "special relativity," not your attempt at splitting hairs. Indeed, as abbreviations, STR and GTR are commonly used. In addition, the sign of an excellent teacher is one who can TEACH and that equates to beginning with stating what the student already knows, then expanding that knowledge. "left-right..."
mishigreene 3 months ago
@MrKnnknn "Left-right, back-forth, up-down" that's our three known dimensions, the fourth being described as time.
sbybby 2 months ago
“Pure Meta Physical Voodoo” that’s what Physics has become, the so called “smart guys” are working for Goldman creating “credit default swaps” and bankrupting the world, and we are left with these new age voodoo spiritual prophets who have sacrificed Evidence for elegance and in the process have destroyed physics and truth with it for the last 3 decades.
MegaSingularity 3 months ago
@MegaSingularity Over the past three decades physics has cannibalised itself due to the increased understanding and research of quantum physics and the behavior of the universe on a sub-atomic level. For example, take a look at CERNs results of apparent 'dimension-hopping' neutrinos that appear to bust special relativity wide open. Many models describe the same phenomena and surely enough over the next five decades new ones will replace them with greater understanding and elegance.
sbybby 2 months ago
@MegaSingularity So you are implying Modern Physics have gone in the direction of New Age Eastern Philosophy or Religion Reincarnation???
BBQFanNo1 2 months ago
@BBQFanNo1 If a Science sacrifices Evidence for mathematical elegance what would you call it ?
MegaSingularity 2 months ago
why strings?
boogiebuddy01 3 months ago
@boogiebuddy01 Because they mathematically prove right.
Gytax0 3 months ago
i wish that all the universities in the world would tape their classes and put them online for free for everyone to use and discuss/contribute to
boogiebuddy01 3 months ago
@boogiebuddy01
Trust me, university classes build up on what you know, and this particularly the case in physics. You need a solid understanding of the math appropriate for the subject, and everything that comes before. Courses on cosmology/GR are taught assuming you at least know Classical Mech, SR, E&M. Most people in physics majors struggle with these classes, and they have a solid background.
Besides, MIT has a bunch of physics courses online, and only students with bad teachers check them.
IsaacRemnant 2 months ago
with the warping of spacetime does that mean that everything in our galaxy will eventually go down the drain so to speak of the massive black hole at the center of the galaxy?
boogiebuddy01 3 months ago
@boogiebuddy01 Actually, there is evidence that black holes exist in various stages depending on whether they are "eating." Our own super massive black hole, the one in the center of the milky way shows evidence that it is feeding again. It will eat until it burps a quasar that pushes the remaining galaxy outward. Then the cycle repeats so yes eventually you'll be food.
mishigreene 1 month ago
i would love to see more stuff like this online seriously we're desperate for learning out here!
boogiebuddy01 3 months ago
I got one theory too: it's 24 dimensional and there are 3 for space, 1 for time and 20 for known natural constanst. >:/
But frankly, String theory is nothing but fantasy and fancy math...
xjuhox 3 months ago
a lot of if and maybe XD
DoeBoi2525 3 months ago
Comment removed
jjojjorge 3 months ago
Fantastic! This is very inspirational, thank you so much!
TimeshipStudio 4 months ago
brilliant man, and remarkable discoveries.
emelybemely 4 months ago
he is so hot...
MissPheonix1 4 months ago
76 people didn't understand what he was talking about
tidler31 4 months ago
GENIUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
theELUSIV 4 months ago
[Quran 41.12] So [Allah] decreed them as seven heavens (one above the other) in two days and revealed to each heaven its orders. And We [Allah] adorned the lowest heaven with lights, and protection. Such is the decree of the Exalted; the Knowledgeable.
[Quran 65.12] Allah is the one who created seven Heavens and from Earth like them (of corresponding type); [Allah’s] command descends among them so that you may know that Allah is capable of anything and that Allah knows everything.
nabilj45 4 months ago
@nabilj45 allah did it hmm so islam can explane all there is but it cant get its head around sumthing as natural as homosexuality equlity of sexz an not cuting bits off childrens bodys were as the hindus story explanes all pretty well but without the 3 problums i just mentiond or at lest alot less homophobia sexism an kidy cuting then islam has go look up honduisn ull probly change ur fath im not a hindu but its better for mankind then ur shit im a nature worshiper a naturalist basicly
kingpharaohtsar 4 months ago
@nabilj45 People are talking about 11 dimensions, not 7 universes. Smart man.
seaFoodSifu 3 months ago
Any Muslim for the last 1400 years could have told anyone that there are 7 universes. The lowest one is the one we see. It’s by far the smallest. The size of our universe compared to the one above it is about the size of a ring, and the universe above it is the size of a desert. The second universe compared to the third universe is the size of a ring and the third universe is the size of a desert. Each universe above the other is again that much larger till you get to the 7th universe.
nabilj45 4 months ago
@nabilj45 the path u follow has no sense nor science .. dont comment on scientific videos which u nor ur foolish scholars understand. and dont try to use science to convert islam scientific like the biggest fool in the universe zakir naik
jvyutube 3 months ago
Modern physicists should first read Kepler's harmonie of the worlds book 5. The vibrations of the strings will be proved to range about 3 and a half octaves, enough for 10 dimensions and+1 time as quantum phase OR time as linear. This means that membrane theory is correct if also taking in the mathematicians final result (constrained by deterministic numbers) that there are an infinite number of infinities. So there is the multiverse. But in practical human terms, we can manage pretty well with
kepler5813 4 months ago
*applause* I wanna go back to school
hyphymovement3579 4 months ago
What is out there that we do not have the eyes to see, the nose to smell, the ears to hear, the skin to touch, the tongue to taste? What is out there we do not have the ability to sense?
myirish429 4 months ago
@myirish429 Here's one example. High frequency sound. You cannot sense it being present but your doggie can. Your ability to "sense" is limited by your "receptor's sensitivity limitations You cannot see radio waves but they are there
MultiHotNERD 4 months ago 18
@myirish429 sound that only a dog can here, radio waves, x rays anything that goes beyond a human's ability to perceive.
mishigreene 4 months ago
of course there are additional dimensions!...i've seen more that most, its kinda crazy that there is a huge gap of human intelligent. between the Sumerians and Einstein and many beginning scientists lol. I must say we have de-evolved. lol
AnaCatalina17yahoo 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
@AnaCatalina17yahoo well, u can say that our society is doing this
cptmuska 4 months ago
of course there are additional dimensions!...i've seen more that most
AnaCatalina17yahoo 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
Part 4 Don't get hung up on "names" "Dark Matter" is a stupid name. in 1934 it sounded "cool" and was coined byFritz Zwicky in 1934 when Boris Karloff horror movies were the thing [think Twilight Zone music] "Gravity of an Unknown Source" would be a far less confusing label. Dark Energy is also a stupiid name and coined to be in vogue with DM. A better term "Acceleration Forces acting on matter in the universe probably created by the big band or inflation." Get it, or an I unintelligible?
mishigreene 4 months ago
I cannot find fault in what you said because you really didn't say anything. In an intellectual, high brow tone [actually quite hollow] ,,you merely complained. That sir is what annoyed ,me. Physics is right down into what is "energy." If all matter is a condensed energy and electron clouds are so distant from the nucleus, why are things solid? You cannot poopoo something without presenting reasons why. Referring back to lack of unified big/small theory is too easy. Say something.
mishigreene 4 months ago
@mishigreene PART 2 I'm actually sick of all this myself. Applied physics and quantum physics is far cooler than cosmology and theoretical physics any day. But even I a "disinterested" grad student can shoot off a better bitch session than yours. HERE. oscillations in "space-time" are the "strings" to which Greene calls strings. Those "vibrations" warp ST resulting in surrounding "gravity. That G is what holds stuff together. The Higgs boson is not as heavy as they think but merely a cont
mishigreene 4 months ago
@mishigreene Part 3 "clumping" of warped ST, a "gravity clump." That why people err calling G one of the 4 primary forces. It is really only there if energy [strings] are present to create it. The problem with what I just said it the mathematics of it is so complicated as to rival string theory and all the other crap they are working on. THE MATH MAY prove my model correct or that of Prof Greene or Elmer Fudd but it's the math that's the answer. NOT YOUR COMPLAINTS AMEN BROTHER!
mishigreene 4 months ago
Oh man, i wish I was better at math to understand this more. Mathematicians must feel so powerful. You're so lucky to have that capability.
MagaThePanda 4 months ago
@MagaThePanda Search "khanAcademy" on youtube.
QuantumGh0st 4 months ago
Wow, he did a really good job explaining string theory
christphert 4 months ago
@christphert Yes. My sense is that this is getting toward the limit of how well you can possibly explain & understand it without getting into the math. "The Elegant Universe" is worth a read too if you enjoy trying to understand this stuff (and who wouldn't??).
vonkruel 4 months ago
This whole concept was created to explain the anomalous behavior of gravity on the subatomic scale. However, we've never had a workable theory of gravity to begin with. We've tweaked one equation that works pretty well on our scale... but when applied to the scale of solar systems, the accuracy goes down. On the scale of galaxies, it's wildly wrong.
So to salvage a broken theory, we invent dark matter on the one end, and string theory on the other. Both are ad hoc and unscientific.
zapproowsdower 5 months ago
@zapproowsdower are you a real knowledgable guy or a fruitcake huckster like Bill Gaedes. If you're are real, you have an in depth knowledge of tensir calculus which helps explains this. "We invent dark matter." You include yourself. So how did "we" invent D.M.? Or what is your theory? Alternative theories subject to peer review are always welcome. Where's yours? DON'T ACT THE BIG SHOT UNLESS YOU KNOW SOMETHING. Otherwise stick to Baseball, beer and sex!! UR a "wannabee."
mishigreene 4 months ago
@mishigreene Yes I'm very knowledgable about these things. No, I don't need to provide an all-encompassing theory to point out the deep flaws of another theory. Care to point out a fl