What if the universe had a higher dimensional twist in it?
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 08. 2024
- Get free access to over 2500 documentaries on CuriosityStream: go.thoughtleaders.io/162152020... (use promo code "zachstar" at sign up)
Want a Klein bottle?: stemerch.com/collections/math...
Support the Channel: / zachstar
PayPal(one time donation): www.paypal.me/ZachStarYT
►Follow me
Instagram: / zachstar
Twitter: / imzachstar
►More videos on this topic
The things you'll find in higher dimensions: • The things you'll find...
Mathematics of the Universe: • The Mathematics of our...
If higher dimensions exist, they aren't what you think: • If higher dimensions e...
Mobius Loop Video (cutting part at 9:15): • A Look at Some Higher ...
►Hyperspace book: amzn.to/3aHjzGH
►Animations: Brainup Studios ( brainup.in )
►My Setup:
Space Pictures: amzn.to/2CC4Kqj
Magnetic Floating Globe: amzn.to/2VgPdn0
Camera: amzn.to/2RivYu5
Mic: amzn.to/35bKiri
Tripod: amzn.to/2RgMTNL
Equilibrium Tube: amzn.to/2SowDrh
►Check out the my Amazon Store: www.amazon.com/shop/zachstar
Want a Klein bottle?: stemerch.com/collections/maths-toys/products/klein-bottle-1
How do I smoke weed from it
Huh. So, basically, the film Tenet shows an example of a universe, non-oriented in time?
klein botle
kine botl
op ispekwrong
Me: "Ahh finally -- some direction in my life"
Zach: "Hold up there bucko"
Me--Ah finally an original comment
me: *sees notification and a blue picture*
also me: its that godamned engineer guy again
A rare example of an electrical engineering student who actually enjoyed physics 3
Wait, most don't?
Pssst, the most important EE skills are an MBA, Marx, and physics (quantum, entropy/statistical mechanics). The thing you're designing/testing/manufacturing is unfortunately an afterthought.
PS, much of our EE work is enabling war machines or outsourcing work. Try avoiding that.
0:37 "But what if it weren't?"
Hey Zach Star, Zach here...
Zach is slowly turning into Vsauce
Take enough acid and you’ll turn into vsauce too.
I saw this title and thought damn Zach really goin crazy during quarantine
bruh
Flammable Maths was already insane so no surprise there.
Same
Why you gotta call me out Chris?
Maybe he is... he forgot that he could look at Uranium 239 and watch it decay and see that electrons spin left.
I know I'm not the only one who stupidly and immediately thought, "This was my right"
"No Zach, that's your left". Haha. Awesome work as always!
Zach, I have recently found your channel, I have aphantasia which leaves me unable to visualize or use any senses in my imagination and I always had a hard time with math. I've been studying a lot of math and physics to get a better understanding and topology has really started to interest me especially, thank you for giving some in person visualizations for those that cannot imagine what you're saying! Thank you!
Relatable struggle folks! His videos help a lot
I thought this was going to be about the 3 directions/dimensions really existing, but I have to say this is an equally great topic.
I feel like we are watching Major Prep shift from an engineer to a theoretical physicist/mathematician and I'm all for it.
high level engineering uses differential geometry too.
Yeah engineers deal with nonlinear functions and differential topology/morse theory for many-dimensional mechanical systems.
@@jamesbra4410 Usually they let computers handle stuff like that though. Right?
@@thedoublehelix5661 Yeah usually always nonlinear functions have to be solved by approximations and other computational methods.
Love how it started with confusing left and right and ended with curvature of spacetime :D ^^
So all those people that confuse left and right must have traveled in the 4D spatial curvature. Makes sense now 🤔
Last time I was this early the channel name was still MajorPrep
Nah, one strange idea: the guy returns being "inverted" and cannot even eat some things, if I understand correctly. Since life on Earth can only uses one version of proteins from the two possible ("left" and "right") versions. But I'm curious that besides of the biological issues, are there any other "problems" he would experience to be able to exist? Like things, weak force (IIRC ...) seems to care about right/left symmetry though not other forces (however I have no idea if it causes problem for a living being when "inverted"). Again, if I'm correct with these, just guessing what would happen.
Well there couldn't be a sense of chirality of elementary particles. In nature only left chiral particles can interact via the weak force, even though as time goes on left-chiral particles constantly oscillate back and forth between left and Right chirality. (This can be imagined to arise from the Higgs interaction). So there are two possibilites for the moebius strip, there's either no weak force at all, since there are no left chiral particles or all particles Count as left chiral and there is a weak force. As it seems the first Option would be catastrophic to live as we know it whilst the second seems to not cause any problems at first glance.
I remember reading a story like that but I can’t remember the name of it
That example didn't make sense since the body should have been inverted in atomic/molecular level and not as aggregate
Turns out someone asked that Question already in Physics stack Exchange:
physics.stackexchange.com/questions/261473/would-life-as-we-know-it-be-possible-without-the-weak-interaction
It seems to me that the weak force in of itself is certainly the most expendable of the fundamental Forces.
But the Connection between chirality and the weak interaction is not well understood at all today. Without a weak interaction there's no mass Generation from the Higgs mechanism. I'm not sure if massless electrons and quarks could form stable matter, since they'd have to move at the Speed of light.
Generally speaking we could clearly distinguish the Higgs Mechanism from the weak force. So it might exist even without the weak force but that relationship is not well understood, since in our universe we can only get both of them.
@@deenrqqwe6794 wind and mr ug
Great Content as always. This guy never disappoints😁
Thank you!
This seems like a vsauce topic
Or does it?
It is
it was that pen throw. it felt Vsause 2
because It was
yeah
12:30 I don’t know what it was about that pen throw but it was awesome
For the hypothetical twin who travels and gets inverted, I assume from his perspective once he completes the trip around, he wouldn't view himself as having changed at all, but instead would see me as being inverted? Is that correct?
Yes, you are correct. He would in fact view the entire world as inverted.
your videos are so great at explaining things. i love content like this, but often the pacing of the video is off and its hard to follow, but your way of explaining even pretty complex topics is so great and easy to follow
you make really high quality videos that make incredibly difficult concepts understandable and have a great way of talking things through with models/analogies. thanks
Higher dimensional being: *twists the universe*
People who just found their way again after being lost: “Ah shit, here we go again”
Fascinating topic. That’s why I love your channel...Great content brosky!
Love this videos dude. Ik they prolly take alot of time to make but would really love to see more like these!
Thank you! Next one will be similar cause there was some stuff I couldn't get to in this one.
One of the best so far! And an instant favourite! Great video indeed!
I thought you were going to demonstrate the intrinsic curvature without the need for a higher dimension. I missed that part.
I was waiting for the same. I come away from this video not understanding what instrinsic curvature is - Zach missed the mark on that one.
The example of Gaussian curvature being an instrinsic curvature because it's the multiplication of two extrinsic curvatures, one of which is 0, doesn't make any sense - what if you deformed the paper such that it was bent in both the x and y directions at the same time? Sure, the Gaussian curvature might still be 0 at some points or even lines on the surface, but in other places it wouldn't be, which means that it's not an inherent property of the paper.
I also think that presenting Gaussian curvature as the same kind of curvature as extrinsic curvature is misleading. Extrinsic curvature appeared to be a very obvious, literal curving of the paper; but Gaussian curvature is some sort of abstraction. While I now know how to calculate it, I'm not sure what it *is*, and even less sure how that applies to instrinsic curvature.
Love your videos!!! Could you do a video on quantum computing and what majors/minors needed in your undergrad to get into the field?
I love the reference to "Flatland creatures" since I just finished that book. It's so brilliant and helps us question the totality of our understanding of space in reality.
nobody:
vsauce: 0:36
Does directions really exist?
*Vsauce music plays*
I'm so glad I found your channel..
Does direction exist?
Not in my life.
ye, it does, ngl
more videos please Zach !
I am one of the first subscribers of MajorPrep(Zach Star) and I am really enjoying this type of contents.
Thanks for sticking around!
"This is what you get when you join two mobius strips together".
Or what you get when you give Cliff Stoll currency. Good man.
This video (and channel) is explaining some astrophysics concepts way better than many “spacetime” channels
Sat nav: On 24th street turn right
Zack star: Yeah, but, is there really direction
Sat nav: *confused screaming*
Minutephysics has a video on establishing relative directions using physics. It is possible to make a device that can determine clockwise by looking at how subatomic particles interact. What would such a device do as you complete a lap around a twisted universe?
Imagine if being "inverted" in a non orientable universe didnt invert your appearance, but your wave function(or whatever youd call the wave like properties of the matter that comprises you) so that you cause destructive interference with regular matter. We could call it "anti matter" or something. It would form along side the creation of regular matter~ there wouldnt be a true distinction between the two except the "orientation" of their waves.
this is very thoughtful way of visualizing this topic. i allways imagined the orinted surface as it was a network of very small gears each one is connected to the neighboring ones, and one can drive this system while in a non orinted surface one can not.
This video syncs up so well with the Science Asylum video on the curvature of space. Were these videos coordinated?
Great video BTW, really interesting stuff
They were not! Just a coincidence haha.
6:01 for a brief moment, you have become God in the eyes of the flat lander
When you threw the marker at 12:30, I felt that and had a real-life reaction to want to go and pick that up.
Very cool vid
Wow, bro... You blew my mind!
Hey zach is it possible to make a video about pros and cons of mechatronics cuz I really can't find a right answer if it's worth it.
BTW this is a great video
In most videos I seen of yours there is always some practical use for these things, so I was hoping to see it about this, but you didn't mention any. So in case you read this, does this line of thinking have any use? Cheers.
Thanks Zach 🙂
Me: trying to understand everything he is saying
Him: if you want a more detailed video…
I have never gotten to a video so early
Question: Would a higher-dimensional twist only cause inversion, or could it also cause eversion? That is, could traveling in a 3D non-orientable universe cause things to turn inside-out as well as inverted?
1:45 Did you rotate the R round 180 degrees? Wouldn't that have made it upside down if it was kept orientated relative to the strip? (facing the way it was travelling)
Hi Zach. At 13:30, shouldn't the real star position be on the right and the observed position on the left (since the light is curving to the left)? Please let me know if my understanding is correct.
I imagine intrinsic curvature like a rubber sheet stretched over a table surface. When you pull a point over with your finger still keeping it on the table, then there are areas more stretched and less stretched. Formerly straight lines are curved now, lines you draw straight now will be curved when you release the tension.
The cosmos forming a Möebius strip at "scales" bigger than what we call universe at the time is one part of the Janus model which does explain dark energy, dark matter and other things like where and what antimatter really is.
The theory is actually quite solid and is in dire need of objective peer reviewing and eventual testing. Started by Sakarov (the Tsar bomba engineer) and later developed by Jean-Pierre Petit (former lead researcher at CERN, in France).
Check it out, it's quite a can of worms.
You are onto something Zach... I think you should start doing research on alternative space geometries if you haven't already have.
CAN YOU DO THE COLOR THING WITH ORIENTATION???
Like my brain interpret the image from left to right and yours interpret it from right to left, so for me your image would be mirrored. Does this works?
Still waiting for history of mathematics part 2
Nice vid
Trying to *wrap* my head *around* intrinsic curvature. Do the differing lengths measured in Gaussian curvature arise due to the stretching/compressing of space when it's deformed? I can't think of why they'd give differing values otherwise.
And if that's the case, then isn't it in fact necessary for said space to be deformed in a higher dimension?
And so even if it's measurable intrinsically, it isn't curved intrinsically. It's warped intrinsically, but the curve is inherently extrinsic.
Therefore Gaussian curvature as an analogy for relativity doesn't fit as that would still imply deformations in higher dimensions.
Am I missing something?
Ok so, I just watched the movie Tenet and this video made me wonder, if there was a higher time dimension (so 5d space: 3 space dimensions and 2 time dimensions) would it be possible for time to be 1, non-orientable and 2, as a result, to be able to be flipped in time?
I recall from a diff. geometry class that direction can change on a sphere. Say I'm on a small sphere, like in the Little Prince, and I stand on the equator facing the north pole. I walk to the horth pole and when I get there I stop. Then, without turning, I step sideways to the left until I reach the equator again. Now I walk backwards, along the equator until I reach my starting point. Not only have I reached my starting point after two 90-degree changes in motion, but the direction I'm facing has changed from facing north to facing west. But this was 40 years ago so I might have it wrong.
If we have wormholes or if hypothetical wormholes exist, they are presented as a paper being folded in two, then connecting two points and boom, you got a wormhole.
How would that work in 3d though? If we notice that with the 2d paper example, the paper folds outwards into 3d space, so would that mean if we had a wormhole, that it would fold outwards into 4d?
This video is amazing!!
I have one question though. Isn't the surface of a sphere (2D) intrinsically curved? And it still needs 3 dimensions "to curve". So, isn't this a counterexample to what you said, that intrinsic curvature doesn't need higher dimension to "bend into" (?)
What about 2-D manifolds that cannot be represented in 3D, like a surface of constant negative curvature? Is that the same as not being embeddable?
Is there a particular example of a 2d surface with intrinsic curvature? Or would you just have to take a piece of paper and draw curved lines on it and then define those as geodesics.
in one of your older videos where you explain that the way that we view the world does not actually line up with the data you finish by essentially calling us out on viewing that video through the lens of confirmation bias. That's pretty cool you have a nice gotcha moment there and really challenged me to think about how I am interpreting data. But in seeing this nice example of confirmation bias how do I actually use that information going forward. This is a question that has bothered me regarding other logical fallacy's and/or phycological ideas. Now that I know "hey I can fall victim to confirmation bias" how do I spot it and stop it in everyday life?
It's funny because The Science Asylum posted video about similar topic today too.
Good video
Thanks, I was losing sleep over this.
You are the best
Does curvature of spacetime means also stretching in some parts an compression on other parts.
3:53 5:33 We could use a Universal Direction Line, sort of like the International Date Line we use on Earth.
Beautiful
The only directions that count are those that are relative to the axial rotation of the planet. Ie, either parallel to the axis, or parallel to the plane of rotation. Thus, north or south, and east or west, the latter being the direction of rotation. Left and right are observer dependant, along with over, under, ahead and behind. Möbius Strip world does not exist. The rotational directions are a factor of Newtonian Physics. This video is an exercise in Rhetoric only
the mobius orientation really baffles my brain - and this video dedicates to that!
Zach loved being a TA so much he just started doing it on CZcams I guess
Is chirality different from direction/orientation here or no?
What should I do for leaving cert to do this kind of stuff?
in 5:10 : why he sits in in the opposite direction. This would mean the universe would handle the atoms in the person different, then the ones in the rocket, or am i wrong?
What’s the background music in the beginning of the video?
If time is the fourth dimension... Would the twist in a fifth dimension possibly result in moving though time mirrored ie backwards?
Could a build-up of intrinsic curvature cause an extrinsic curvature to happen or is it impossible?
what if we pretend time is just a 4th spacial dimension does that make gravity bend into that dimension(time)?
11:10 is the surface of a sphere an example of extrinsic curvature? You can draw two line segments intersecting each other by 90 degrees and both are the most and least curved. 1 and 1 = 1. Given your example that suggests a sphere is extrinsic if a Gaussian curve is intrinsic. Unless there's an extra rule that when most and least are the same, it becomes 0 and 0 = 0, like if it was flat.
@Shimmy Shai Thanks. I guess that's why there is no perfect 2D map for Earth where all countries are in their correct proportions.
I never cease to be amazed at how clear Mr. Star's explanations are.
By the way, the physicist Alexander Unzicker argues that perhaps Einstein's original guess at why light bends in the presence of gravity is right: the speed of light is not constant in a vacuum. That would rule out spacetime curvature. Whether or not that is true, it is interesting to see how even experts can still disagree about such fundamental matters. In any case, trying to understand the distinction between extrinsic and intrinsic curvature makes me doubt my own sanity!
is this because of asymmetricry in the y direction?
The objects on your Moebius strip are actually orientable; it's just that you're not considering the full number of variables at play. The left/right orientations are consistent GIVEN THE PARITY OF the number of times the two objects have progressed around the strip; that is to say, if you consider BOTH the position AND the parity, you can always agree on a particular direction.
How many times have you made a mobous strip exactly?
how would it feel to be very close to a gravitational wave?
It would be interesting to see how this would affect our biochemistry, since many biomolecules are chiral (i.e. possess handedness) 🤔
Take the same strip, do three half twists, tape it. Poof infinity. Which also folds into a triangle for some reason.
Sometimes I wonder if time isn't one dimensional but two dimensional. So everytime a "random" quantum operation happens, there are actually two time "lines" going from this, one where it happened this way, and the other where it happened otherwise.
The anisotropy of the CMBR suggests according to James Michel Hughes that the universe has a double rotation, I think it may have a single hyperdimensional rotation. If you take a sphere & rotate it the part moving towards you appears to get bigger, whilst the part moving away from you appears to shrink, in the universe there are two aspects of the universe that shrink & get bigger, the many black holes where space-time recess to maybe a singularity & with the whole universe, dark energy the ever increasing expansion. I think the universe is a multi-holed Klein bottle rotating in on itself at the Black holes & rotating out with the whole, the centrifugal force of which is dark energy.
What programms do you use as an engineer?
Here's a short layman argument against non-orientability of the universe:
We know that some processes are chiral, i.e., they change between their right and left versions.
Now assume you take such a process and take it with you "around" the universe, such that you come back oriented the other way around. Now this process should behave as its mirror counterpart.
But that means that there was somewhere a jump between the right-process and the left one, yet we assume that space should be continuous in that sense.
Therefore, we must conclude that our initial assumption of non-orientability cannot be true.
I'm also a layman, but a have a different thought:
See, imagine someone walking around the earth. It walk around the whole circumference of the planet, doing a whole turn. In some point halfway through, it would be in the oppose end of the planet relative to where it started.
Nonetheless, it doesn't fell that it's walking trough the "invisible higher third dimension". From it's point of view, it's only walking in a straight line, it did not (from it's poit of view) "curved" in any sense. Yet, since the world is spherical, it turned around, making a half circle trajectory. Why? Why doesn't it realize it walked in a semi circle? Because it's so small and the sphere is so big.
If somehow we lived in a non orientable universe, and we walked to the edge of reality, being flipped around in 4-D, what would that fell like? Well, if the universe curves suddenly around the fourth dimension, we would fell that, in which case your argument would no apply, I think, because you would actually see the process twisting from right handed to left handed. So there were no contradiction.
In the opposite case, what if the universe twisted slowly, in a practically invisible way? Well, you would, indeed, "get left handed", but it would be a slow process, almost invisible. Think of growing: as you grow, you can't see happening 'cause it's such a slow process, nonetheless, after the process accumulate during some years, there it is, you is now a adult. In no moment during the growing you saw it happening continuously, and yet, after some time, you noticed it have happened already. So no contradiction, 'cause you where slowly being turned into a mirrored version of yourself, you just didn't notice as it happened.
Jut one more thought: A object, when it's spinning, from it's point of view it looks as if everything is moving oppositely and it itself is actually not moving at all. If you crossed the edge of a non orientable universe, it would not really look as if you have turned around, it would only happens that, when you come back to your home planet, everything is mirrored, but everyone else keeps insisting that you is the one that's is inverted. So, in some sense, you actually wouldn't be flipping by walking indefinitely in some direction, you would come back to the place you stated, but it earth would be mirror-flipped: that is what it would look like to live in a non orientable universe, i think.
No counter intuitive 4-D flip, at least from our local point of view. Just you walking straight forward indefinitely, and, as in a game of snake, "disappear in one edge of the universe to appear in the other". As you do that, though, everything seems mirrored.
That's only my opinion, though.
I don't believe we live in a non orientable universe. You know, from our current general relativity understanding of things, that doesn't seems to be the case. It just happens that I don't agree with the argument.
@@jorgealexandre4616 My point, that I might not have emphasized enough, is that as far as we know, being right- and left-handed (RH and LH, respectively, in the following) is discrete; either the RH process occurs or the LH one.
Imagine you continue an experiment which succeeds in the RH system but doesn't in the LH one. Then you perform it continuously on your trip "around" the universe. If the universe is non-orientable, when you arrive back, the result should be different. But when did it change?
I love the video...
But I am thinking,
A 3d mobius surface is closed in 2 dimensions... A 4d mobius surface has to be closed in 3d, wouldn't thatresult in abnormalities in thermodynamics?
The redshifts of galaxies would eventually turn blue?
There is a great idea! For the dark side of the Universe - suppose that it consists of short-term interactions in long-lived fractal networks, the smallest quantum operators in energy, spherical rosebuds, consisting of a large set; 1 - rolled into a sphere, 2 - half collapsed into a sphere and 3 - flat, vibrating quantum membranes relative to their working centers in the sphere.
Direction is a vector of distance, and needs to apply to an object large enough to generate its own magnetic field. Hence Direction is an electromagnetic phenomenon, also known as magic.
What is the best program for draw graphs ?
Wolframe alpha?
desmos is my favorite
To be honest, I feel like my future becomes clearer everytime I watch one of your videos. Thank you.