Are there 10^272,000 Universes? - Numberphile
Рет қаралды 293,529
Жыл бұрынFeaturing Tony Padilla. Check brilliant.org/numberphile for Brilliant and get 20% off their premium service (episode sponsor)
More links & stuff in full description below ↓↓↓
We have a physics channel too: / sixtysymbols
Order Tony's book Fantastic Numbers and Where to Find Them: A Cosmic Quest from Zero to Infinity
Amazon US - amzn.to/3JYQbws
Amazon UK - amzn.to/3M3yvB8
MacMillan US - us.macmillan.com/books/978037...
Penguin UK - www.penguin.co.uk/books/316/3...
Some videos with Tony on Numberphile - bit.ly/Padilla_Numberphile
And some videos with Tony on Sixty Symbols (our physics channel) - bit.ly/Padilla_SixtySymbols
Multiverse Videos on Sixty Symbols: bit.ly/MultiverseVids
Tony at the University of Nottingham - www.nottingham.ac.uk/physics/...
Numberphile is supported by the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute (MSRI): bit.ly/MSRINumberphile
We are also supported by Science Sandbox, a Simons Foundation initiative dedicated to engaging everyone with the process of science. www.simonsfoundation.org/outr...
And support from The Akamai Foundation - dedicated to encouraging the next generation of technology innovators and equitable access to STEM education - www.akamai.com/company/corpor...
NUMBERPHILE
Website: www.numberphile.com/
Numberphile on Facebook: / numberphile
Numberphile tweets: / numberphile
Subscribe: bit.ly/Numberphile_Sub
Videos by Brady Haran
Animations and art in this video by Pete McPartlan
Patreon: / numberphile
Numberphile T-Shirts and Merch: teespring.com/stores/numberphile
Brady's videos subreddit: / bradyharan
Brady's latest videos across all channels: www.bradyharanblog.com/
Sign up for (occasional) emails: eepurl.com/YdjL9
@numberphile Жыл бұрын
Check out more like this on our physics channel "Sixty Symbols" at: kzfaq.info Including some more multiverse videos: bit.ly/MultiverseVids Details for Tony's book... Fantastic Numbers and Where to Find Them: A Cosmic Quest from Zero to Infinity Amazon US - amzn.to/3JYQbws Amazon UK - amzn.to/3M3yvB8 MacMillan US - us.macmillan.com/books/9780374600570/fantasticnumbersandwheretofindthem Penguin UK - www.penguin.co.uk/books/316/316964/fantastic-numbers-and-where-to-find-them/9780241445372.html
@smlanka4u Жыл бұрын
The first universe could expand forever making island universes in between. Gravity (Gravitons) would bring all the matter back to the center as a rain of High Energy Plasma of elementary particles. Gravitons would turn back and return to the center of the universe and accelerate all the matter making them high-energy particles. And then, they would cool down and become compact objects again. Likely, the first expansion of matter happened during the Vivatta Asaṃkhyeya Kalpa. And then, galaxies formed during the Vivattai Kalpa. The universe would contract during the Sanvatta Kalpa. Planets keep destroying during the Sanvattai Kalpa. If we put the first expansion of matter to the end, then Mahā-Kalpa starts from Vivattai Kalpa. I developed a theory to explain the expansion of the first universe. And I could derive the fundamental forms of matter that we call elementary particles.
@peterburgess9735 Жыл бұрын
If gravity was weaker, you'd presumably need to tweak other parameters (like the strength of dark energy) to stop matter flying appart too quickly. Weaker gravity would presumably mean slower creation of stars and planets too, and lower chance of larger planets with decent atmospheres to create a safe environment, and different orbits around stars and all sorts. I can imagine some counter effects to the increase in tech progress that lower gravity could cultivate
@mlmimichaellucasmontereyin6765 Жыл бұрын
@@things_leftunsaid Yes, of course they can do a video on the topic, but not on the "dimesionality" of non-existent spacetime. Dimensionality is a subsidiary principle of form & structure, the metalogical principles that enable our concept & perception of places as having "space" and/or existing in a place having "space" and duration. Time is a conceptual construct or a measure of our limited perception of change. What changes is the totality of the 'field' of being's energy (enabling the present moment of the cosmos). So, the topic & its untestable, unprovable subject & concepts are pure nonsense, not science, nor holistic ontology concerning the reality of being (the cosmos).
@mlmimichaellucasmontereyin6765 Жыл бұрын
@Joe Duke Bravo! Hence, the name is appropriate (i.e., "uni-" = unitary). It's also the only one we can perceive, detect, study, test, and prove real. Everything else is totally unscientific BS & sci-fi fantasy or fictional.
@youtubersingingmoments4402 Жыл бұрын
They used a giant sheet of the ritualistic brown paper just to write down one number that was already in the title. I love it.
@mlmimichaellucasmontereyin6765 Жыл бұрын
LOL!!! Thanks! I needed that.
@rashaseden7062 Жыл бұрын
I enjoy Brady's "man on the street" approach, asking questions we would ask, while giving a platform (and brown paper with a Sharpie) for the experts to explain their topic. Well done series, and appreciated.
@jack504 Жыл бұрын
It's almost as if he trained as a journalist 😂
@noeatnosleep Жыл бұрын
I absolutely agree. He more or less asked the questions I was about to be upset about, right when I wanted to ask them. 🔥
@ArawnOfAnnwn Жыл бұрын
@@jack504 He's better than most journalists. Most of the time they just ask useless rhetorical questions.
@geekjokes8458 Жыл бұрын
no wonder he won A MEDAL OF THE ORDER OF AUSTRALIA
@jamirimaj6880 Жыл бұрын
@@jack504 Perfect description of him: a math journalist.
@Bradley_UA Жыл бұрын
I love how Brady doesn't pretend to understand it, but manages to ask really good questions on the spot.
@NoNameAtAll2 Жыл бұрын
ку, брудли как жизнь сс13 админа?
@DanielQRT Жыл бұрын
asking good questions is a skill in itself
@Bradley_UA Жыл бұрын
@@NoNameAtAll2 ого! Ну жизнь так себе с учетом того что сервера у меня нет, а еще меня пытаются загрифонить в ИРЛ. Ну а так все пучком.
@vkvk3525 Жыл бұрын
Brady's probably smarter than you think. You just fall for the persona he creates.
@andrewkepert923 Жыл бұрын
It’s Brady’s superpower.
@morkmon Жыл бұрын
Man questions like 3:00 is why brady is one of the best in the biz, it was what I was wondering too. Thanks for all the effort you all put into these videos, they are fantastic.
@cruxofthecookie Жыл бұрын
And 4:32 as well.
@ryanjohnson4565 Жыл бұрын
I don’t know how he does it
@kindlin Жыл бұрын
He's an intelligent interviewer, something relatively rare in today's age. KZfaq, of all things, is bringing that back, and it's always nice seeing someone ask probing questions that engage the interviewee that really lets their passion show.
@smlanka4u Жыл бұрын
I made a verifiable theory to derive the forms of matter and the universe. It is a much better theory than string theory. I could verify that theory using Buddhist teachings about fundamental elements, etc. So, I'm sure that it is the correct theory.
@morkmon Жыл бұрын
@@smlanka4u i dont think most physics papers accept that as a basis for theories
@AGENTX506 Жыл бұрын
For anyone looking for some intuition about how you could 'hide' extra dimensions, imagine a flat 2D universe where you can move up/down and left/right. We could fold this plane into a vertical cylinder by connecting the left and right 'edges' together. Moving up/down would still move you as if you were in a flat 2D universe as normal, but moving left/right around the cylinder would quickly put you back where you started. If the radius of this cylinder was made arbitrarily small then moving left or right would effectively not change your position at all. Congrats, you've essentially turned a 2D universe into a 1D universe by hiding a dimension.
@piyushpathak1186 Жыл бұрын
Wow thanks for sharing
@invictor2761 Жыл бұрын
backrooms = escaping the cylinder.
@ikitclaw7146 Жыл бұрын
Very well put, this is a really intuitive way to think about this subject.
@cyborgninjamonkey Жыл бұрын
If you take the folded 2 →1 dimension and make it's length arbitrarily small, you get a 2D universe disguised as... wait, let's start with a 3D cube universe and make the height arbitrarily small before the folding transform, so it's a whole 3D universe; as for what's in it, no reason to assume the same kind of stuff as our universe, how about we put some kind of field with imaginary mass and the result is... another 3D universe with new forces and fields that is a non-interacting volumeless point particle. If the properties of this universe happen to satisfy the equations for some unsolved problem, well, it sure seems *convenient* that it's hiding and therefore it existence can't be disproven. Just the things that would need to be true for the equations you chose to explain some observed phenomenon, simply can't be helped that there's no way to try to falsify the hypothesis. Unfalsifiable, if you will.
@AGENTX506 Жыл бұрын
@@cyborgninjamonkey I'll be sure to pass your skepticism along to the annual string theorist conference, where the world's leading physicists scour youtube comments for critique. Sarcasm aside, I'm not here to comment on what is or isn't - I'm just here to pass along an intuitive understanding of the discussion topic.
@DakotaFiles Жыл бұрын
I think this has been one of my favourite "impossible to understand 10 dimensional multiverse"-type video. Very approachable conversation despite the complexity behind what is being discussed!
@stevealikonis9467 Жыл бұрын
I'm far from a math dude (I did take Math up until I was a sophomore in college but stopped) but videos like this is why this is one of my favorite channels. They really distill complex problems enough that I can mostly understand yet fully appreciate.
@kdSU30 Жыл бұрын
Brody always asks very pointed questions! Amazing!
@pedror598 Жыл бұрын
That's what so great about his channels. The questions are aways great
@_Insert_Username Жыл бұрын
I am pretty sure they are scripted
@kdSU30 Жыл бұрын
@@_Insert_Username I don’t think so.
@GrandPianoGamer Жыл бұрын
Who's "Brody"?
@haumea22 Жыл бұрын
*Brady
@heaslyben Жыл бұрын
There's something provocative, perhaps profound, about the large Numberphile paper with nothing on it besides "10^272,000".
@fritz46 Жыл бұрын
String theory is the most complex way to say "We don't know."
@adarshmohapatra5058 Жыл бұрын
7:00 "computational power of an 'ultimate laptop' with a mass of one kilogram confined to a volume of one liter." The most computational physic-y thing I've heard
@LemonArsonist Жыл бұрын
Saying String Theory is our best candidate for quantum gravity is such a contentious thing to say. A LOT of physicist would say string theory is highly unlikely to be true at this point.
@stanbridgescientific3969 Жыл бұрын
yes, very true...
@bobengelhardt856 Жыл бұрын
And the rest would say that even if it were true, there is no way to confirm, or deny, it.
@adamqazsedc Жыл бұрын
True
@santerisatama5409 Жыл бұрын
Or that it's "not even a theory".
@popscola2574 Жыл бұрын
What is quantum gravity?
@Rubbergnome Жыл бұрын
If I may make a comment, Calabi-Yau compactifications of 10d strings are not the only way to go. String theory can in principle work in other dimensions and/or other backgrounds, and braneworld models offer alternatives to compactification. It's a wild landscape out there... beware of the swampland ;) cheers!
@ganonscrub Жыл бұрын
But do they factor in dark energy equations?
@sk8pkl Жыл бұрын
I dont get the multiverse thing. If there are multiple "universes" dont they make a single "universe" all together? Can the word universe even be plurial? Are "dimensions" just a misconception of orders of magnitudes/ocatves within the wave stucture of the universe?
@Rubbergnome Жыл бұрын
@@ganonscrub Dark energy is an open problem in string theory. There are hints that is impossible to realize it as a positive cosmological constant within compactifications (this is the "de Sitter conjecture"). On the other hand, braneworld models arising from certain metastable vacua do yield positive cosmological constant (finding a stringy construction of this scenario was the result of a paper of mine, actually :) ), but it is yet to be established whether the rest of the physics would be as we want (namely general relativity + stuff, which in compactifications works perfectly). Yet another option is to realize dark energy in compactifications but not as a positive cosmological constant, rather as some sort of quintessence.
@Rubbergnome Жыл бұрын
@@sk8pkl I would say that in this context "multiverse" refers to what is usually called a "landscape". That is, a set of possible realizations of the one physical universe. Different vacuum-like states of the same universe, if you will.
@mastershooter64 Жыл бұрын
is it possible to find some fancy complex or hypercomplex manifolds into which we can compactify these extra dimensions and get a much smaller number than 10^272,000 perhaps something like 10^12 which is easier to search with a computer or something
@overtactsofkindness Жыл бұрын
If I understood correctly, wouldn't this be the number of *types* of universes? So, more than one universe with the same type, or configuration, could exist at once?
@kurtu5 Жыл бұрын
Pretty sure this is what it's saying. So in our we still have the same physical constants, but then you have the extended family of possible multiverses having the same constants. Ones from our comos's inflation period, ones that might exist if the cosmos is infinite and therefore there are infinite hubblespheres.. and etc.
@juanausensi499 Жыл бұрын
That's how I understand it.
@jorgechavesfilho Жыл бұрын
"Speculative scientific ideas fail not just when they make incorrect predictions, but also when they turn out to be vacuous and incapable of predicting anything." (Peter Woit)
@adamqazsedc Жыл бұрын
Such is the string theory
@KatzRool Жыл бұрын
Sometimes you've got to wonder who the audience of the string theory videos is. It's at an odd balance between almost too complicated to explain to normal people and almost too simple a video to mean anything to those who know something. Difficult stuff.
@blinkcatmeowmeow8484 Жыл бұрын
But I guess its only for people who love science I guess
@Arikayx13 Жыл бұрын
Same, it often gives an air of mysticism to it without ever even seeing the math that literally is the theory.
@TimothyReeves Жыл бұрын
It’s for me. I’m not normal, but I don’t know anything.
@BLClark-wf2yk Жыл бұрын
I love this show so damn much. Please don’t ever stop making content
@widearchshark3981 Жыл бұрын
It did take Dr Strange a while to work out which one could defeat Thanos. So yeah, I'm comfortable with this number.
@variousthings6470 Жыл бұрын
Compared to the number in this video, Dr Strange's 14,000,605 is essentially zero!
@prikarsartam Жыл бұрын
properly getting to those key questions, really shows how intuitively strong Brady Haran is, also that says why he's such a great scientific documentarian.
@aditya95sriram Жыл бұрын
Here's some (hopefully constructive) criticism: Usually I really enjoy the more abstract videos but I felt this one was way too hand-wavy, and the explanation behind how one comes up with such a number remains as much a mystery after the video as it was at the start. I get that string theory is a super-complicated concept but then in terms of "math entertainment" I don't think I got anything out of this video.
@tim40gabby25 Жыл бұрын
I happened to see this video in a noisy environment. The hand waving remained conspicuous. I didn't gain too much, though the thickness of long plank limitations apply.
@rickshermantal5002 Жыл бұрын
omg these are my favourite Numberphile videos, those about big numbers with Tony. I love it!
@shufflecat3334 Жыл бұрын
Two people were walking through the park when they came upon a chess board laid out all by itself on a table. "It looks like someone was in the middle of a game" "Yeah... Huh, it's funny, out of all of the possible configurations the board could have been in when we found it, that it should be THIS one that we find" "Do you think there's other chess boards in this park?" "It's not impossible" "Do you think every possible combination of chess board is here?" "Hah! No, the shear number of-" "Do you think there's a chess board where Hitler is a penguin???" "Excuse me?" This is basically what the multiverse conversation sounds like.
@ps.2 Жыл бұрын
Yes! Except that somehow there is absolutely no way to look around the park to see if there be, in fact, any other chessboards, and if so, what they look like. All you can do is talk about the possibilities.
@gcewing Жыл бұрын
And then some physicists come up with Chess Theory, and get roundly criticised because there's no way to tell which of the vast number of possible chess games leads to the board configuration that was found.
@knxcholx Жыл бұрын
@@ps.2 sure. But then you could also spend that time trying to find out if it's possible, doing something else that actually will make a difference in the world
@maxtonuponry Жыл бұрын
It really felt like the universe nodded at him by moving the paper after he said it had positive vacuum energy at 4:19
@djayjp Жыл бұрын
Funny, I remember a paper published around the same time that was claiming that many of the 10^500 universes originally posited were actually contradictory and physically impossible, so the actual number of actually possible universes was much smaller.
@GaryDunion Жыл бұрын
Are universes always completely insulated from each other, in other words is it always impossible for information to pass from one universe to another? And if so, what does it mean in practice to say that another universe, or whatever number of other universes, "exists"?
@Richard-ox6zk Жыл бұрын
I can give you any answer you want to hear because for nothing in your question is ANY proof.
@GaryDunion Жыл бұрын
@@Richard-ox6zk I'm very sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "because for nothing in your question is any proof."
@pkarsy Жыл бұрын
I agree it means nothing ! The question of the "existence" of something than cannot be tested with any experiment is not a scientific question.(As Wolfram Pauli said, the question is "not even wrong") Actually a significant number of physicists are unhappy with the last decades trend of "fairy tail physics". And of course the possibility that the string theory describes our universe is practically zero (not a single experiment supports it and the SUSY in witch it is based is dying) let alone the other 10^272,000-1 universes
@Wilsbourne Жыл бұрын
@@GaryDunion Yeah I have no idea what that guy was talking about. What he said wasn't even English lol
@abhishekdahal7384 Жыл бұрын
These kinds of small pockets of conversations, comments within comments are more intresting and funny than the pocket dimensions and dimensions within dimensions he was trying to explain.
@DesmodiumGames Жыл бұрын
Brilliant video, great questions and visualisations and loads of enthusiasm from Tony who had me captivated from the start! So interesting!
@stevemonkey6666 Жыл бұрын
Prof. Padilla is always interesting.
@nikosje Жыл бұрын
what a great interview. Full of information. Well done to both interviewer and interviewee
@Mutual_Information Жыл бұрын
A wonder if this number could ever be big enough that string theorists would start doubting string theory.
@luckyw4ss4bi Жыл бұрын
Mathematicians are rarely dissuaded by extremely large numbers :)
@GaryDunion Жыл бұрын
I would think if anything, it would cast more doubt on string theory if the number was too small!
@hughcaldwell1034 Жыл бұрын
@@luckyw4ss4bi I think you hit the nail on the head. String theorists are mathematicians who wish they were physicists. Lord knows why - maths is lots more fun.
@TimothyReeves Жыл бұрын
If 10^272,000 doesn’t do it, then no, I don’t think so.
@TheWerelf Жыл бұрын
field theories have infinite number of possible vacua, so maybe we should throw away all field theories lol
@taakotuesday Жыл бұрын
god I would just love a crash course exclusively over this subject. it's so complex that even in an amazingly explained video like this one, you're just scratching the surface of the mathematics and the theory behind it
@davedee6745 Жыл бұрын
"There's a compact manifold that wraps up six extra dimensions" Like wow, man. That sounds so funky and groovy.
@SuviTuuliAllan Жыл бұрын
roflmao
@fyradur Жыл бұрын
A manifold is a space "with no sharp edges". So a sphere is a manifold, but a cone or a pyramid is not. Compact means it is not infinitely big and all edges are included. If I say "all numbers bigger than 0 and less than 5" then there's no right edge right? 4.9 is not one because 4.99 is closer, but then again 4.999 is closer etc... 5 doesn't work because it isn't less than 5. We need to include the edges 0 and 5 for it to become compact. If you tried to put a bunch of pencils 90 degrees all to each other, you would find out that 3 is the maximum. We say that reality has 3 dimensions. If you tried to draw lines on a paper where each line is 90 degrees to each other you would find out 2 is the maximum, we say the paper has 2 dimensions.
@methatis3013 Жыл бұрын
@@fyradur what would it mean for a dimensiom to be a manifold though? How would you illustrate that?
@fyradur Жыл бұрын
@@methatis3013 For a manifold to have a certain dimension, means that if you cut out any piece of your manifold and straighten it out then it becomes a space with that many dimensions. So let's take a sphere, if you cut out a piece and straighten it out then it becomes like a flat paper, which has 2 dimensions. Thus a sphere has 2 dimensions. Let's say you have a circle. If you cut out a segment and straighten it out then it looks like a straight line, which has 1 dimension.
@methatis3013 Жыл бұрын
@@fyradur ah, ok, thanks. Now it's a bit clearer. But what would it mean in the context of string theory? Does it mean that each elemental particle has a multidimensional manifold around it? Does it mean that out entire universe has a couple of multidemnsional manifolds that curl all around it? Im having a hard time understanding in what way do these manifolds "interact" with our space (I know they don't necessarily interact in the real sense of the word. I meant just as an infinite amount of planes is incapsulated in our 3d space, does it mean that we are incapsulated in higher dimension space?)
@stevejay8106 Жыл бұрын
Can there be negative gravity in these different universes?
@wolfpak128 Жыл бұрын
Only one number written on the Brown Paper. Brilliant 👏
@MarekKowalczyk Жыл бұрын
Entertaining as it Is, this is no longer science but just mathematical mindsturbation.
@christopherellis2663 Жыл бұрын
Cosmological Constipation
@adamqazsedc Жыл бұрын
String Theory do be like that
@OhhCrapGuy Жыл бұрын
I think that we have to be careful when interpreting "number of solutions" to a model as "number of extant cases". If we model the speed of a car that is slowing down as "Speed = SqRt(-x)", where x = 0 is the time that the car stops, we can see the curve of the car coming to a stop. But of course positive values of X are valid solutions to the equation, they just result in a speed with an imaginary component. Does that mean that the car has an imaginary speed after it stops? Well, i mean if we use the plain english definition of "imaginary", sure, but that's a semantic game. The truth is that our model of the universe gives many *real* solutions to the equation when x is negative, and many nonsense solutions to the equation when x is positive. So it's possible that a string theory model could provide 10^1000^2 solutions, but not all of those solutions reflect anything in reality. And similarly, when you look at your model and then observe the car instantaneously, you will find only one solution to your equation ever actually matches reality. Which means even if every solution in string theory is viable and a sensible solution which reflects a possible structure to the universe, it doesn't mean that all of those solutions are actually reflected in reality. Maybe only 7 of those solutions actually exist in reality, maybe only 1, maybe all of them.
@invictor2761 Жыл бұрын
imaginary numbers exist as a concept, there is just application we can use them for in reality.
@saxy1player Жыл бұрын
You say "in reality". You cannot conceive any universe but your own so dismissing them on account of being imaginary is a mistake on account of being unable to even imagine a "different universe"
@OhhCrapGuy Жыл бұрын
@@saxy1player I literally said that perhaps all of them exist. I have no idea why you're criticizing a point I explicitly didn't make.
@OhhCrapGuy Жыл бұрын
@@invictor2761 The fact that imaginary numbers don't reflect reality in this particular case doesn't mean that I'm not keenly aware that imaginary numbers are actually part of real meaningful solutions in quantum mechanics. I specifically said that comparing "imaginary numbers" to the common meaning of "imaginary" is a semantic game. I'm not going to play that game with you.
@zzstoner Жыл бұрын
Remember to always terminate your String theories with a \0.
@raopsepol Жыл бұрын
Kudos to Numberphile team to keep the Numberphile alive. I guess the new content is so scarce that this is probably the first time the number was elaborated without any work done on the brown paper; Or maybe the 10-dimension is too complicated for a brown paper.
@lyrimetacurl0 7 ай бұрын
It's an infinite subject so unlimited content. Could always make anew video about a number or an update on it. They haven't even done one on my favourite number (4900, the cannonball number).
@dizont Жыл бұрын
I love videos with Tony Padilla!
@Omnifarious0 Жыл бұрын
I think string theory is largely pointless. A hypothesis that can't make testable predictions, or that is so amorphous it can predict anything, isn't a hypothesis at all. The math might be interesting for its own sake.
@adamqazsedc Жыл бұрын
Just like prof Moriarty said on Sixty Symbols, "Just because it's beautiful and elegant doesn't mean it's right". And to this very day, String Theory can only provide 'hypothesis', with no actual experimental evidence or testable predictions whatsoever.
@nmarbletoe8210 Жыл бұрын
didn't he say that all solutions had a negative energy? seems testable
@NateJRauba Жыл бұрын
I feel like watching this is what watching any normal video would seem like if you were high out of your mind
@peterromero284 Жыл бұрын
When theories predict crazy things that either cannot be tested or disagree with observations, the solution isn’t to discard the theory. It’s to layer even crazier theories on top of it.
@josecorchete3732 Жыл бұрын
String Theory has proven mathematically a lot of things that we see in the universe, and that other theories failed to explain, or predicted impossible when we could see that were happening. Currently is the best model of the universe that we have.
@peterromero284 Жыл бұрын
@@josecorchete3732 what are some predictions it has made that have been shown to match observations?
@josecorchete3732 Жыл бұрын
@@peterromero284 Black holes, dark matter detection, quantum computing.
@zackpi7874 Жыл бұрын
@@josecorchete3732 I’m sorry but none of those have anything to do with string theory
@grayaj23 Жыл бұрын
Is it unavoidable that only one of the dimension can be "time"? What would multiple time dimensions imply?
@jackhand4073 Жыл бұрын
That was my question!
@jackhand4073 Жыл бұрын
Can the other dimensions be temporal? Or is it always 1 time X spacial?
@FleshWizard69420 Жыл бұрын
Multiple timelines existing simultaneously and able to interact, I think.
@gtziavelis Жыл бұрын
10^500, then 10^272000 -- may as well work all the way up to infinity.
@orang1921 Жыл бұрын
no bc even though there's a large number of differences in position and time across dimensions it's limited - except if the properties of a universe (strength of gravity, etc) are also available to be changed bc you can go to infinitesimal changes with that
@Richard-ox6zk Жыл бұрын
That's what you get with scientific theories with no proof.
@boernsi2000 Жыл бұрын
He must be very careful. If he bends over a little bit more, he might fold up to some dimensions by himself... Thanks for the upload. I dont understand it, but I get the idea. Thats enough for my universe.
@simesaid Жыл бұрын
"Not only is the universe stranger than you think, it's stranger than you *can* think!" - Werner Heisenberg
@paolovallejo5500 Жыл бұрын
I loved that whole idea about universes with weaker gravity could harbour more advanced intelligence. What a psychedelic episode.
@CypressPunk34 Жыл бұрын
I enjoy how String Theory is both one of the best bets as to how the universe works and also we don't really know that much about how its supposed to work.
@HermanVonPetri Жыл бұрын
I very much wish that the label "string theory" had not been applied to what is really the _search_ for a string theory. Scientifically, the term theory is meant to be reserved for frameworks that have survived rigorous empirical testing and are now considered foundational explanations of reality in fact. Calling it "string theory" makes it difficult to defend the theory of evolution, and the big bang to laymen who relate the term "theory" to unproven guesses.
@mikedoe1737 Жыл бұрын
So, basically, it's a hypothesis.
@HermanVonPetri Жыл бұрын
@@mikedoe1737 It's many different and incompatible hypotheses. We don't even know if it's even possible to test most of them.
@adamqazsedc Жыл бұрын
What makes a hypothesis in science is that we can test them. String Theory isn't testable to begin with
@nmarbletoe8210 Жыл бұрын
@@adamqazsedc He says string theory predicts negative vacuum energy. Since the vacuum is everywhere... why can't we test it's energy?
@sakkikoyumikishi Жыл бұрын
I think it's really interesting that we try to use our own experiences as a frame of reference for potential developments in universes entirely different from our own. Maybe that is also the actual answer to the Fermi paradox: we *have* encountered intelligent alien life. We just didn't recognise it as life because our own frame of reference failed to give us the perspective necessary to realise we are dealing with something alive.
@jacobohnstad4432 Жыл бұрын
Yup that's already one of the solutions. Life can exist in unrecognizable ways.
@M4rtingale Жыл бұрын
Bigger question is: how did you comment on this video 6 hours before it was published.
@dudealllava1208 Жыл бұрын
@@M4rtingale Only thing i could think of is them bein a member but u cant become a member on this channel...
@dudealllava1208 Жыл бұрын
@@M4rtingale so idk
@dudealllava1208 Жыл бұрын
@@M4rtingale maybe they are a patreon member and got it released while it was unlisted
@EstevaoFloripa Жыл бұрын
thank you very much! made my day!
@overestimatedforesight Жыл бұрын
Maybe I've misunderstood badly but the interviewee's tangent on Moore's law appears to be "because I pushed Moore's law past where it applies we can conclude civilizations is cyclical and other species live in low gravity universes"
@louislouie5037 Жыл бұрын
Our existence could be a simulation in one of those super long lived universes with mass computing power. An experiment about which “abnormal” universal arrangements could produce sentient life. *takes another hit* a friggin mini-verse, like Rick and Morty.
@franziscoschmidt Жыл бұрын
Well that was a well used brown paper…
@youcantata Жыл бұрын
The huge number is just possibilities of combination, not actual existing universe number. There are huge possibilities in even short gene DNA strings. But actual DNA combinations of existing and long extinct life forms are just tiny, tiny minuscular fraction of such possibilities. Same goes to the Universe. There may be trillions or trillion trillions of universes. Our universe is just very lucky one that can harbor viable galaxy and life. Of course there may be other lucky universes other than ours.
@TimothyReeves Жыл бұрын
5:05 “…you can imagine it quite easily…well, not easily, no one knows how to do it.” LOL.
@kamana6435 Жыл бұрын
In some distant multiverse some sentient creature has what we would recognise as a VR device and is able to simulate all of the these possible universes and experience them. For us it’s theoretical for them it’s entertainment.
@cidercreekranch Жыл бұрын
10^272,000... Now that's a proportionality constant!
@doublezeroun Жыл бұрын
you're such a nice and fun channel, thx guies
@thepuzzlemaker2159 Жыл бұрын
I love that string theory gives you an excuse to have cool psychedelic graphics like at 2:40
@kickassgreek Жыл бұрын
always a great video
@stevenverhaegen8729 Жыл бұрын
Love that two-dimensional sheet of brown paper curling around the edge of the desk...😱 Quite a metaphore... 🤭
@xenialafleur Жыл бұрын
I'm not sure about any of this. Dark matter and dark energy sound too much like the aether. We can't see it, we can't directly detect it (only detect it's affects), but our current theories don't work without it.
@handreieiacasa Жыл бұрын
Dark matter is actually less unknown than dark energy
@Arikayx13 Жыл бұрын
Our current theories very much work without it, and that’s why it’s so mysterious! It’s that our current observations that don’t match our current theories that has produced theories on dark matter and dark energy.
@key_coffee Жыл бұрын
The brown paper itself leapt with excitement / surprise at that suggestion at 04:25
@Aladin__Aladin Жыл бұрын
I really love the questions you ask, man! This makes the video way more informative and interesting.
@xenockz Жыл бұрын
String theory may be our best candidate for quantum gravity, but as I've heard from a professor/someone who's been doing research in the field for 20+ years, it also fails horribly at working with it, and there are many more convincing ways quantum gravity may work.
@laur-unstagenameactuallyca1587 Жыл бұрын
this is such a beautiful video
@ZTenski Жыл бұрын
The problem with string theory is that it's mentally pleasing, but fails to make any predictions about anything that can be tested with the scientific method... so it's more of a faith thing than a science thing, at least with current understanding. The only thing even remotely testable is supersymmetry, which is predicted by many models.
@adamqazsedc Жыл бұрын
All hail experimental evidence!
@IceMetalPunk Жыл бұрын
I wouldn't call it a "faith thing" so much as a "math thing". It's a mathematical model more than a scientific framework, but that requires at least logical consistency and peer review, making it more rigorous than just faith.
@mastershooter64 Жыл бұрын
It makes several predictions, all of which can be tested with the scientific method, but the only problem is that it's far far ahead of it's time, we just don't have the technology yet to test these predictions. (well I personally think that we might have a chance at testing these predictions in the next few decades if we built a really advanced wakefield accelerator that's a 1000 km long lol we have that technology but it's in the early experimental stages also I don't think anyone will be willing to spend that much money on it)
@____spacecadet____ Жыл бұрын
I'll say it right now - I love this feller's videos on big numbers
@numberphile Жыл бұрын
You should buy his new book!!! Link in description. ;)
@ThePCguy17 Жыл бұрын
What I don't understand is why extra dimensions are assumed to be 'compressed' or something similar. As I understand it, it's perfectly possible for there to be extra spatial dimensions that aren't compressed at all. We can't interact with them because we're only 3 dimensional and moving exclusively one direction through time, just like a 2D flatlander can't interact with the third dimension. They can still impact our daily life, but we might not recognize them as such right away depending on what that interaction looks like. Why are we so convinced that extra dimensions are hidden and completely undetectable?
@Smokin438 Жыл бұрын
Man if this existed when I was in elementary school. This is truly wonderful.
@sphakamisozondi Жыл бұрын
Brady's questioning skills are underrated.
@dthomason1630 Жыл бұрын
I guess that the string theorists will never give up on string theory even though the only thing they can do is wave their arms and tell us that they are not going into "that". Bring on the unicorns. The most truthful statement made was "We just don't know".
@jesscarter6504 Жыл бұрын
Yes
@ColinBroderickMaths Жыл бұрын
I studied my MSc at Nottingham and if I remember correctly, Tony did say that he very much thinks string theory is on the right track. Of course the particular details are all subject to change. I'm sure even the people who came up with this number would not put any real stock in it. As Tony said, it's active research. So I think his gut feeling is that string theory is right (in fact I think he even said it was "obviously" right!), notwithstanding the details. But it was a few years ago that he told me this so maybe he has changed his outlook.
@avantesma1 Жыл бұрын
I think Tony was more ansewring the question as framed by this particular problem of number of possible universes. For String Theory as a whole, he has an entire video (awesome video, BTW) on Sixty Symbols explaining why it's solid and why he strongly believes in it.
@stephenaustin3026 Жыл бұрын
I'd very much like him to state explicitly what possible developments - mathematical, theoretical or experimental - could lead him to change his mind about this approach to HEP. That shouldn't be a difficult question for a scientist to answer.
@landsgevaer Жыл бұрын
And for a completely opposite view, Sabine Hossenfelder abhors string theory for the almost religious sense of "it must be true because it would be so beautiful" and so far utter lack of testability. Oh well, nothing wrong with high-D mathematical recreations with uncertain spin-off, but let's please not call it mainstream physics yet.
@Alex_Deam Жыл бұрын
Maybe he was hoping the LHC would find evidence of supersymmetry?
@stanbridgescientific3969 Жыл бұрын
I did my PhD in Physics at Cambridge (not in string theory), and as much as I respect all scientists who do great science, string theory has many many issues ... unfortunately. And it seems that the problems with string theory are only becoming bigger and bigger as we discover more.
@MrRandomcommentguy Жыл бұрын
2:10 The Everything Bagel!
@mylonoceda Жыл бұрын
Now that's the real Multiverse of Madness
@YoutubeHandlesSuckBalls Жыл бұрын
"We've come up with a theory on the true reality of our universe" "Cool, can it describe our universe?" "Well, we've not been able to do that just yet. But I'm sure we will! Any... minute... now...""
@cesarmoreno987y Жыл бұрын
Great video
@bruinflight1 Жыл бұрын
love those science fiction numbers!
@arnabsngpt95 Жыл бұрын
thanks a googol! great insights as ever.
@gullukumar4497 Жыл бұрын
Dust on Tony's computer made me clear my phone screen many times lol, thanks bro for great video
@ChicagoMicrofarm Жыл бұрын
Does it make any sense to think about if there is a relationship between gravity “always being attractive” and “time always moving forward”? Or am I just glue-gunning together words I’ve heard in popular, non-mathematical explanations of physics concepts that I don’t actually understand?
@shruggzdastr8-facedclown Жыл бұрын
This one feels more like a Sixty Symbols episode to me than a Numberphile one.
@dandupaysdegex Жыл бұрын
Maybe positive vacuum energy is a rare feature that is necessary for generating long living universes that can contain life.
@harpintn Жыл бұрын
Reality: we have no way of knowing or of even detecting another universe.
@charlesochoa8191 Жыл бұрын
If you can't see the shapes of the strings on 2:22 maybe changing the video quality to 1080p would fix it
@manueldelrio7147 Жыл бұрын
Bit confused with Tony's book(s). Can anyone clarify? There seem to be three versions available: one by Penguin, one by Allen Lane (with same cover) and one from Farrar Straus & Giroux. Is there any difference among them?
@BytebroUK Жыл бұрын
May have missed this, but isn't the end of Moore's Law when the chip-builders hit quantum size limits? (Some would say you can't quantise any smaller than the pixel size of the simulation in which we are running (maybe the Plank Length), but that's a whole other thing!)
@rwesenberg Жыл бұрын
Just a couple questions. Is string theory not one theory but many? How are they validated, that is, how is their internal consistency demonstrated? What attributes would allow picking out which is correct? What predictions do they make and have any been verified? Thanks.
@NLGeebee Жыл бұрын
@7:00 He has a point there… If you want to calculate the answer to life, the universe and everything, you will need to build a computer the size of planet Earth…
@SuperYoonHo Жыл бұрын
thanks!
@Searcher123456789 Жыл бұрын
My math-guts tell me that the strings and particuls are somehow the same:the tragectory of particuls become string when the speed of evens compared to the speed of evens for the observator, become enormous. In simple term the exchange of any pariculs between two or more elements with great speed makes the tragectories become strings.29june2022
@raiden3576 Жыл бұрын
Can you make a video on how the SCG Function works
@alansmithee419 Жыл бұрын
How exactly do these universes differ from ours? Are they the same laws of physics but with different cosmological constants, or are they completely different? Can you calculate their laws from a set of chosen shapes?
@Pidxr Жыл бұрын
I passed out halfway through this last evening, and this may be why. Do you ever hear ideas that knock you out when you are already tired?
@StefanLopuszanski Жыл бұрын
From the idea of every possible probability of every number of possible quanta and that branching out. Wouldn't that be even more if every single probability could exponentially branch every possibility being a different reality?
@apocalypticbean Жыл бұрын
this video is a great example among many of why brady is an excellent journalist
@dankra01 Жыл бұрын
Now I wonder, if not knowing how our universe would look could be solved the other way around. If we get an answer, could we check, if this is ours and truly correct? Is it basically an NP-problem?
@stanbridgescientific3969 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for this very interesting video. An impossible number of weird universes sounds really cool, however, as Richard Feynman said: "it doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiments, it is WRONG!". For example, results from the Large Hadron Collider have not showed evidence of several claims of string theory, like extra dimensions or supersymmetry.There are also many weird, unprovable hypotheses and concpets like negative energy... it makes the equations work somehow but no one really knows what they are. See Tony's expression at 4:35 when he's asked if string theory is wrong. This theory is so complex that no one can really say it is correct.
@mlmimichaellucasmontereyin6765 Жыл бұрын
Bravo SS!!! Great, succinct retort.
@hiteshsagtani9823 Жыл бұрын
fascinating !!
Numberphile
Рет қаралды 238 М.
GStore Mobile
Рет қаралды 1,1 МЛН