Making sense of string theory | Brian Greene

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 20 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 3,9 тис.

  • @JG-lt5mb
    @JG-lt5mb 8 років тому +1341

    I have a lot of respect for this guy. His ability to explain things in a way that allows you to really understand and not seem so abstract is a sign of true intelligence I think.. his books are even better

    • @g33xzi11a
      @g33xzi11a 7 років тому +14

      The books by Brian Greene

    • @mgominasian9206
      @mgominasian9206 7 років тому +14

      Madeline Monahan The Elegant Universe

    • @KhushiKumari-bo7sl
      @KhushiKumari-bo7sl 7 років тому +1

      my life i am any thing see ok mr

    • @singdancing8
      @singdancing8 7 років тому +1

      The Fabric of the Cosmos

    • @Raydensheraj
      @Raydensheraj 6 років тому +3

      I'm reading the elegant Universe by him, absolutely fantastic in every way.

  • @fungiuse
    @fungiuse 6 років тому +84

    The signature of a good teacher is his/her ability to explain very well what he is teaching. Brian Greene has that signature!

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 роки тому

      Einstein was a known weasel. Greene is knowingly and deceitfully lying about physics. WHY E=MC2 IS NECESSARILY F=MA (ON BALANCE), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity AS SPACE ON BALANCE:
      TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Hence, the Earth AND the Sun are CLEARLY E=MC2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE. (The sky is blue, AND the Earth is ALSO BLUE.) A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=MA !!!; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!) Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE !!!; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) E=mC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Great !!! Again, BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense.
      By Frank DiMeglio

  • @michaelogden5958
    @michaelogden5958 5 років тому +47

    I think Brian's ability to communicate such concepts is awesome.

  • @guydreamr
    @guydreamr 5 років тому +56

    Great speaker and his book "The Elegant Universe" is legendary.

  • @MarcelaKPreininger
    @MarcelaKPreininger 9 років тому +499

    This man communicates complex concepts with remarkable clarity!

    • @carnellereynolds2473
      @carnellereynolds2473 9 років тому +8

      Marcela K. Preininger It's funny, I was thinking the same thing. He must've memorized his speech and practiced several times. I also noticed that he told a few jokes that the audience didn't get. After a while he started having to explain his jokes. I guess they were too intrigued by his demonstration.

    • @allenev.8765
      @allenev.8765 9 років тому +2

      +Carnelle Reynolds absolutely - they have only 17 minutes for the talk. its the elevator pitch for string theory. mr. greene, i'm sure, has given this talk many times. it may be a subset of the 'elegant universe' material that brian did for nova.

    • @grim789
      @grim789 9 років тому +16

      +Marcela K. Preininger Made me think of this quote Albert Einstein - 'If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.'

    • @stevecreighton3352
      @stevecreighton3352 9 років тому +1

      +Marcela K. Preininger Brian Greene has written several books on string theory and his exceptional talent as a communicator brings string theory to everyone.....although an understanding of a little quantum theory and General relativity help!
      The LHC is just about to wind up to full power of about 14 TeV ( Terra electron volts ) and at these energies we may see some of it disappear into the hidden dimensions.

    • @shafiqifs
      @shafiqifs 9 років тому +1

      Brain Greene is actually misleading people. He was time & again asked to read the link www.linkedin.com/pulse/adopted-paradigm-physics-incorrect-shafiq-khan?trk=pulse_spock-articles before he talks about physics in any forum.
      Einstein was the greatest scientific trickster ever. Theories of relativity lead to Big Bang Theory whereas under Big Bang paradigm there is absolutely no possibility of existence of God for following reasons.
      1. Philosophically for existence; it has to be some substance (visible, invisible, perceivable or not perceivable) and this applies to God also. Substances occupy space but there is absolutely no space for God to exist at the time of Big Bang & before.
      2. Four things come out of Big Bang namely space, time, matter & light/radiation. We cannot look for eternal God in space & time as both had the beginning; secondly humans are in a position to produce all types of light/radiation and something which humans can produce could not be the God and since matter is made up of electrons, protons & neutrons these too could not be the God.
      However Big Bang Theory including Cosmic Inflation has been mathematically, theoretically & experimentally proved as baseless in the published paper "Experimental & Theoretical Evidences of Fallacy of Space-time Concept and Actual State of Existence of the Physical Universe" which is available at the journal site at indjst.org/index.php/indjst/issue/view/2885.

  • @superstringcheese
    @superstringcheese 8 років тому +86

    He's such a good writer; I had no idea he was also such a good speaker. Best of luck to those guys. Whether you think string theory is a valid enterprise or not, someone has to prove it either way, which is what they're doing. If they're right... what a discovery. If they're wrong... what a discovery.

    • @EdmundEquilibruimmentaiko
      @EdmundEquilibruimmentaiko 8 років тому +1

      superstringcheese I

    • @nealW2904
      @nealW2904 5 років тому +3

      A bit like proving god does or doesn’t exist do you think

    • @nickw9376
      @nickw9376 5 років тому +2

      There is a principle of science that it is impossible to prove that something does not exist. Even finding an alternative theory, and being to prove it, does not prove the non-existence, or total error of the previous theory.

    • @nickw9376
      @nickw9376 5 років тому +4

      @@nealW2904 To me, a lot of this stuff is like searching for a god. It has the same sort of endlessness to it....and the same problem that you can't prove the lack of something.

    • @rajmohan3840
      @rajmohan3840 4 роки тому +1

      555

  • @translucentorb
    @translucentorb 4 роки тому +40

    Sometimes when I start to think I'm really smart I like to watch stuff like this to keep my ego grounded.

    • @cleocarter
      @cleocarter 3 роки тому +4

      Laughing at this at 4am.

  • @mickeypopa
    @mickeypopa 5 років тому +112

    Fast forward 15 years and still nothing, jury is still out.

  • @joedoe783
    @joedoe783 2 роки тому +2

    I've watched many videos on string theory but this is the first time I think I've grasped it. This guy is an excellent communicator.

  • @AlpNewYork
    @AlpNewYork 9 років тому +302

    I can only show two dimensions on the screen but some of you guys will fix that some day :)

    • @henrikkoberstein
      @henrikkoberstein 5 років тому +4

      Hehe, in some sense, Brian Greene is the Steve Jobs of physics. :D

    • @willwinn8559
      @willwinn8559 5 років тому

      Best comment of the day 😎🏆👍

    • @gbachich
      @gbachich 5 років тому +1

      holograms?

    • @carrerasrivera
      @carrerasrivera 5 років тому

      ua-cam.com/video/-EA2FQXs4dw/v-deo.html
      You are welcome 2019yr

  • @sharinglanguage
    @sharinglanguage 5 років тому +56

    This is a fantastic summary of his book: "The elegant universe"

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 роки тому

      Greene 💰 is knowingly and deceitfully lying about physics.

  • @Boogieplex
    @Boogieplex 5 років тому +1

    Brian Greene is the total package.
    He’s a brilliant mathmatician,theorist,physicist,cosmologist,scientist all with the ability to explain things that would be otherwise impossible to understand. I remember watching “the elegant universe “ as a kid and being blown away.

  • @Lo2y
    @Lo2y 5 років тому +13

    The best explanation of string theory ever ❤️

  • @frankhoffman3566
    @frankhoffman3566 5 років тому +3

    11 years on from this video, and the Large Hadron Collider has been in use for years. As yet, I'm seeing good results (the Higgs boson), but I'm not seeing any major announcements about other dimensions or about string theory. I appreciate this guy's ability to teach with clarity, but I don't see us closer to a theory of everything.
    I get the impression that the right theory is simple, right in front of us, and when we finally see it, we will say "of course".

    • @jaapongeveer6203
      @jaapongeveer6203 5 років тому

      You may know they are proposing a more massive collider in the order of 100 kms around so that higher energies can be produced to make more energetic collisions. If built it could possibly provide the evidence. Question is will 100 kms do it or 1,000 ...

  • @janicechiaretto7082
    @janicechiaretto7082 5 років тому +1

    I'm visual. That rendering of the warping of space causing gravity made a big difference... but the ANTS made it really happen . I love this man. I love his passion! He is very clear and enjoyable to listen to. I finally understand some of this!!

  • @Joesotherself
    @Joesotherself 11 років тому +355

    begins by talking about the year 1907
    length of video- 19:07

    • @WalterWWelle
      @WalterWWelle 7 років тому +47

      Joseph Sewell illuminati confirmed. Well done sir...

    • @Noth3ng
      @Noth3ng 7 років тому +27

      Joseph Sewell - though it's not as impressive as the fact that it took almost 3 years before one of those "illuminati confirmed" messages appeared in this thread.

    • @AlienPsyTing1
      @AlienPsyTing1 7 років тому +1

      spooky

    • @miloudabouichou
      @miloudabouichou 7 років тому +4

      illuminati confirmed

    • @jimscobie6646
      @jimscobie6646 6 років тому +1

      Too coincidental!

  • @AkbarRazaSyed
    @AkbarRazaSyed 8 років тому +145

    I Didn't Know I'd End Up Watching Full Video... Amazing explanation

  • @jozseforgovan8621
    @jozseforgovan8621 5 років тому +2

    Brian Greene is my favorite, love to listen him, and he always demonstrate thing visually.Easy to learn from him. Very educational.

  • @SeasonOfWhatNow
    @SeasonOfWhatNow 9 років тому +5

    I've used DMT several times and I'm almost positive what I experienced under its effects were these extra dimensions. In fact the visual aspects were very similar to what he showed in this video, particularly how the dimensions effect the strings. Cool stuff.

    • @hOREP245
      @hOREP245 2 роки тому +1

      dmt users lmao

    • @rivas97
      @rivas97 2 роки тому

      Nice to hear, but don't touch this Stuff anymore please, Ok?! 😂😂😂

  • @norbitcleaverhook5040
    @norbitcleaverhook5040 10 років тому +39

    How'd the experiment go?

    • @ryzimski5749
      @ryzimski5749 9 років тому +9

      Norbit CleaverHook They did one, if space could tear, an einsteinian law if I am not mistaken, says that space can be warped, but not torn, they relatively recently did a calculation in which the first few times they mucked up the solved it correctly, the answer inferred that space could be torn if of course string theory was right.

    • @scottdylanwoolf
      @scottdylanwoolf 9 років тому +31

      +FrankCoffman lol you are nowhere near educated enough to make that kind of assumption but everyone has the right to their own opinion no matter how bad.

    • @DarkenRaul1
      @DarkenRaul1 9 років тому +15

      FrankCoffman This article you posted is from 2007. The scientists at CERN have discovered the Higgs Boson last year. This proves that the mathematical theories of String Theory are accurate as their experimentation meet their projected calculations.
      We have the Standard Model of Fundamental Particles because of String Theory, and as time goes on, we are finding more and more particles that we are expecting to find from this theory. If this theory is wrong, then why are we keep finding good results and able to make practical use from it under the assumption it is correct? Now I will admit that my level of understanding of physics isn't high enough yet to fully understand String Theory (still an undergraduate in college), but from my understanding, this is new stuff that the scientific community is just starting to accept as fact in an age where all physics textbooks are wrong, as Michio Kaku points out, because they all say "The Universe is mainly made out of atoms," when we know that about 96 percent of it is Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

    • @benjaminmoldrup6286
      @benjaminmoldrup6286 9 років тому +7

      +FrankCoffman Let's presume you are right. If string theory is wrong, which science always will stay open to, it will not really do any harm to have tested it. It's not like creationism which is plain stupid because it's based on an old unscientific book, this is resting on and derived from the body of science. I mean, it must be the best current explanation since a lot of very smart people, who understand stuff that you and i don't, dedicate their time and carrier to it. Even if not all physicists agree with it, it is still unwise to dismiss it before giving it a fair trial. AND if it turns out to be wrong, some smart people would have spent their time, thinking about a major theory for some time for a scientific reason, and i don't really see how that is a problem. If you have any VALID argument for ridiculing the super-string-theory, bring them on. I don't think you have.

    • @benjaminmoldrup6286
      @benjaminmoldrup6286 9 років тому

      I agree, noone should present something unproved as a fact. :) I hope the research will teach us something, and i'm 99% confident they will eventually find a solution to the problems from which the string-theory arose. But you seem like you have been following the development on this issue a little, do you know where to view some of the test results?

  • @pacandpal3
    @pacandpal3 5 років тому +1

    Its going to be a breakthrough when we prove the existence of other dimensions with particle collision and converge the ideas and theories of every scientific genius. To know we are one collision away just makes it that more exciting . We found the higgs boson particle now onward to the graviton !! Love this TED talk btw !! Very smart man.

  • @fortuner123
    @fortuner123 5 років тому +3

    Excellent. Very easy to understand with his perfect delivery.

  • @norahnoman8661
    @norahnoman8661 9 років тому +5

    Brian Greene is really an amazing teacher

  • @JoseGarcia-dw9tt
    @JoseGarcia-dw9tt 5 років тому

    What we must always remember is that when we find the answer to the meaningful we realize how little later we know. What makes times so special as to be one and absolute? There’s always more, let’s all work together in unity and love

  • @rfinkels22
    @rfinkels22 5 років тому +94

    he says we will know in 5, 7 , 10 years if he is right from LHC experiments. As of today, ELEVEN years have elapsed.

    • @alpheusOne
      @alpheusOne 5 років тому +16

      Richard Finkelstein in this dimension 🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️

    • @jonmelon9792
      @jonmelon9792 5 років тому +5

      If you think about discoveries about stuff quantum is probably being made since soon after the LHC was started.
      But I wouldn't be holding my breath in expectation of detailed info about these discoveries coming out anytime soon;
      I just t couldn't be risked that, for example,a rogue group could, possibly, potentially, however remotely, acquire enough knowledge to, for instance, unleash a maybe a tiny black hole that could destroy life as we know it,.

    • @MiamiUFO
      @MiamiUFO 5 років тому +10

      Brian Greene is one of the merchants of hype bordering in dishonesty and milking the cow of social gullibility with fairytale physics with zero testable predictions and far detached from Reality.

    • @Garrstar
      @Garrstar 5 років тому

      @@MiamiUFO Who else would you qualify in this group?

    • @MiamiUFO
      @MiamiUFO 5 років тому +4

      Almost all promoters of String Theory as a "scientific theory", the people talking about "post empirical science"(very convenient when their ideas are not supported by empirical data), etc; these people are not hard to spot; their signature is hype. Some people call this fairytale Physics. It

  • @raptorekpl
    @raptorekpl 8 років тому +260

    "Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively..."

    • @hajtom6280
      @hajtom6280 8 років тому +10

      Well no, just because we are built by the same means does not mean we are the same consciousness, sorry but no.

    • @cedrix57
      @cedrix57 8 років тому +1

      I am trying to understand this theory. Do you have a video or an article that explains this »we are built by the same»?

    • @Terra101
      @Terra101 8 років тому +30

      Here is Tom with the weather!

    • @GenoVeseMekanik
      @GenoVeseMekanik 7 років тому +5

      raptorekpl bill hicks

    • @markjones6358
      @markjones6358 7 років тому +24

      That is exactly what Einstein was trying to say, if you crushed a whole lot of energy down and therefore slowed it's vibration, you would have a mass, like a doughnut or a couch or a pair of glasses but that mass would still retain the same amount of energy if the process could be reversed. The man on ACID got it right.

  • @_bxrryYT
    @_bxrryYT 5 років тому +1

    The world needs people like him

  • @faithhope4480
    @faithhope4480 5 років тому +3

    Thank you for sharing this awesome info. Not an area of my interest originally, BUT I've felt that there are more dimensions than we initially see, and so it is most satisfying to get this information clarified it actually makes it easier even on a spiritual level. Thank you very much.

    • @pereraddison932
      @pereraddison932 5 років тому

      ... yrs ...
      GOD BLESS EVERYONE BLESS EVERYTHING ALWAYS AMEN*XOX*the ROCK OF PHAGES ...

  • @OlemVolle
    @OlemVolle 8 років тому +8

    Showing graphics of something that exists in 10+1 dimensions, and talking about finding out "what these things look like", does that even make sense? From the animations it looks like these 11 dimensions are just things existing in three dimensions but on a really small scale. If they operate in all 11 dimensions I guess they could be "seen" in our three dimensions of space too, but. Can these strings really be visualised? Does it even matter what they look like? I'm confused.

  • @ZaChYmO
    @ZaChYmO 7 років тому +1

    Still after almost 2 decades, the best string theory Beautifully explained by Dr. Brian Greene

  • @s13silly
    @s13silly 8 років тому +65

    So much easier to listen to Mr Greene, than actually doing the math... oh my brain hurts...

    • @WSCLATER
      @WSCLATER 5 років тому +2

      Easy to listen to because he is talking so much bullshit. You don't really need to pay attntion to it

    • @MsMissyinMissouri
      @MsMissyinMissouri 5 років тому +1

      @@WSCLATER Maybe you think it's bullshit from your perspective because you can't wrap your mind around it.

  • @shubhamrodage9070
    @shubhamrodage9070 6 років тому +4

    Now it's 10 years after his explanation ! Is any proofs we got from the HLC machine?
    And what happens if we apply gravitational waves into string theory?

  • @fawnwoods6123
    @fawnwoods6123 6 років тому

    I'm grateful for his talks, because his books are over my head.

  • @TheChurchofCacti
    @TheChurchofCacti 9 років тому +16

    You want to know what's trippy? Everything has gravitational pull, even humans. Our pull is small because we don't have that much mass but we emit gravitational pull regardless. So right now as you sit by your computer you are effecting space fabric. Everywhere you go and everything you do you are warping the fabric of space. Everything you do from taking a breath, to scratching your balls eventually effects everything in the universe in some way or another. By typing this right now I will eventually effect everything in the universe, even a planet hundreds of million light years away that may have a person identical to me typing this very same thing. That's not to say it will be a huge change, maybe just a displacement of a molecule or a microscopic reaction, but it's a change nonetheless.

    • @hector-m-carrillo
      @hector-m-carrillo 9 років тому

      Yes, that is gravity in a nut shell

    • @isaiahphillip4112
      @isaiahphillip4112 9 років тому

      Nope, you won't effect anything you don't directly touch. Unless you're in space, all other forces are superior to gravity. Not even the earth's gravity can dislodge an atom. If there was no nuclear attractions, or friction, and you stood still for a few weeks, you might notice small objects have made the smallest of movements towards you. But that is not the case, the light waves that just bounced off of you and back into outer space will have more of an effect on something than your gravity.

    • @hector-m-carrillo
      @hector-m-carrillo 9 років тому

      Isaiah Phillip well, in theory, we never touch anything, it's just a repulsion between electrons we feel
      Regardless, what the guy is trying to say is that we apply a 1x10^-99999 N (not real number, in other words, tiny) force on every object in the universe simply because we exist
      And if there were no nuclear attractions (which by I presume you mean electric forces) we would return to a singularity point, since there is nothing pushing us out and we'd all collapse onto ourselves

    • @hector-m-carrillo
      @hector-m-carrillo 9 років тому

      Having re read his comment, I forfeit my defense towards him, but my corrections stand

  • @Cognitoman
    @Cognitoman 10 років тому +5

    I just had an idea. I know I am not very smart at this type stuff but maybe this explains black holes? ok so if the proton collider gets particles to crash into each other at nearly the speed light and you have less of material to begin with it will mean some of the material went into a different dimension. Just a thought but Maybe black holes are so strong they get light particles to crash into each other and instead of getting some of the matter to "push through" are dimension like the proton collider does...a black hole actually a punches a hole in our dimension? We know that some matter that goes into a black hole disappears and cant be accounting for , so does black holes prove that we have many dimensions?

  • @whoisray1680
    @whoisray1680 5 років тому

    I can keep listening to him forever without getting tired of it and still understand all of it

  • @mervynsookun5995
    @mervynsookun5995 5 років тому +3

    The Demosthenes of 21st Century physics..what a powerful communicator

  • @samanthamccall4522
    @samanthamccall4522 11 років тому +72

    I'm just curious about why these other dimensions all have to be so SMALL that we can't see them with our eyes or other currently created observational technology? Is there the possibility that they are so LARGE that we can't observe them? Like how at one point we thought the Earth was flat because we couldn't observe the curvature of the Earth. There could be some obvious reason that I'm missing - science and mathematics aren't my strong suit - but if anyone cares to explain this to me I'd appreciate it :).

    • @Souledgex1
      @Souledgex1 11 років тому +15

      The dimensions are small because we are looking deeper into the particles of the particles within an atom. Greene explained how there's a machine in which scientists are colliding particles to observe the results of the collisions. This video was five years ago. In 2012, scientists discovered the Higgs Boson, which is the result of these collisions, so indeed the dimensions are small.

    • @ireneabraham906
      @ireneabraham906 8 років тому +30

      Scientists have universally agreed to expect 11 dimensions around us - 10 dimensions of space and one of time. We know 3 of us space and the 1 of time already leaving 7 dimensions of space unknown to us. The size of these dimensions are immaterial if I am not wrong. Dimensions are not bound by physical targets. It is the features and characteristics that matter. A line (2D) can be long or short. Height can be tall or short. Time can be measured but it is not bounded. Hope you get the point :)

    • @rohit28agrawal
      @rohit28agrawal 7 років тому +5

      Samantha McCall
      we already have 3 dimensions explaining Newtonian physics...All we r looking for is 1 equation to explain the entire physics...newtonian as well as quantum.
      so whatever new discovery/ theory is there will be from the quantum side...so if there exist any extra dimension it has to be of quantum scale.
      i hope i answered your query :)

    • @sinsemiliasam14
      @sinsemiliasam14 7 років тому +5

      Samantha McCall maybe they are vibrating at such a different vibration of our own we can't see them. we can only see about a 3rd or 13th of observable light, correct? so maybe they are here or around us and just at a different vibration. idk that's my beat guess

    • @flateartcreatorssolja6558
      @flateartcreatorssolja6558 6 років тому

      Samantha McCall earth is flat hun

  • @savranorganik3555
    @savranorganik3555 5 років тому +1

    This is the clearest talk this guy ever did. Nothing later really compares.

  • @neilAneerGAmAI
    @neilAneerGAmAI 7 років тому +7

    Super cool guy. Saw him live yesterday at the Starmus festival. Also looks just the same, maybe he is time traveler.

    • @neilAneerGAmAI
      @neilAneerGAmAI 7 років тому

      He also used the same animations to show how gravity warp space-time.

    • @captain6876
      @captain6876 3 роки тому +2

      I also saw him yesterday at brazzers

    • @neilAneerGAmAI
      @neilAneerGAmAI 3 роки тому

      @@captain6876 I am sure you did!

  • @szaki
    @szaki 8 років тому +127

    I'll have another drink, maybe I understand it better!

    • @alexkije
      @alexkije 6 років тому +2

      And some popcorn!

    • @boutchie06
      @boutchie06 6 років тому +1

      I was thinking the same. I would like to do some LSD and listen to this vid again.

    • @drrydog
      @drrydog 5 років тому +1

      rather a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy

    • @georgeedward602
      @georgeedward602 5 років тому

      Three years later, but I noticed the comment for a reason I think.
      Drop acid and you will see it clearly. Maybe only in your own head but what an experience.

    • @georgeedward602
      @georgeedward602 5 років тому

      @Seditia Rose Dude just noticed your reply. I am late to the party.

  • @FrankCoffman
    @FrankCoffman 5 років тому

    He gave this talk in 2005 (three years before it was posted here). So now (2019), it has been 14 years since he enthused that "it's very exciting that in the next five years or so we may be able to test for the existence of these extra dimension." (16:35) It's amazing how undetectable these supposed extra dimensions are. It's almost like they don't exist. ; )

    • @andreab380
      @andreab380 5 років тому

      Alas! In the first twenty years of my life, up to about 10 years ago, physics looked like some amazing Holy Grail of human knowledge. They were really persuaded that we were so closed to basically explaining Everything. As experiments accumulated, untestable theories, holes, and more untestable theories to fill the gaps seemed to multiply.
      It was so exciting before, but now it starts to look like they're bullshitting their way out of a dead end...

  • @maxmoseley7490
    @maxmoseley7490 5 років тому +30

    It’s been 11 years, is there a sequel to this video

    • @nasrallahbeydoun
      @nasrallahbeydoun 5 років тому +2

      Not yet. I will check again after 11 years.

    • @jdburns1384
      @jdburns1384 5 років тому

      They are waiting for the James Webb telescope to launch to ensure every human possible vantage post can be high alert B.O.L.O. for ANY extra dimensions trying to hide still.....'Not Today Satin'

    • @davidburns1753
      @davidburns1753 5 років тому +2

      My question exactly. Part two please!! Wondering too, when the religions of the world will step in and claim that their God is the String Builder. Sorry, could not help myself.

    • @maxmoseley7490
      @maxmoseley7490 5 років тому

      David Burns what would be wrong with saying that God is the string builder? Logically speaking, Christians or other religions believe that God made the universe. They don’t explain how he made it or how it works. That doesn’t mean it’s false, right? If string theory is true that doesn’t disprove God. Just because the Bible never said the earth wasn’t flat but spherical, that doesn’t mean that the Bible is wrong because it never said that the earth wasn’t spherical. Same principle for this in my opinion. If string theory is the most logical explanation for laws of the universe, seems to me that that’s just how God designed it to work. I just don’t think the concepts of science and God are mutually exclusive. In fact, the fact that everything is so orderly and logical seems to point more towards an intelligence than not in my opinion. Anywhozzles😂im sure you weren’t looking for a rebuttal.

    • @davidburns1753
      @davidburns1753 5 років тому

      Definitely not looking for a rebuttal, but I accept it willingly. It allows me to ponder this about myself, "In order for me to know how little I know, wouldn't I have to know something?" ... not 'believe' in something, but actually 'know', as in scientifically provable repeatedly, not assumed because there's a Sky Fairy, cheers!@@maxmoseley7490

  • @eddieadams4770
    @eddieadams4770 5 років тому +12

    That was 2008. Now it's 2019, 11 years later. So? What's the answer? And if he is right, what about it? What're the practical implications?

    • @SaithMasu12
      @SaithMasu12 5 років тому +5

      They couldnt find anything in matter that relates to the String Theory so far.
      Thats the current standing.
      Usually the approach is: Physics suspect to find something and then they go and look for it.
      If they find traces of it they look further until their theory is proven.

    • @iceboorg9737
      @iceboorg9737 5 років тому

      It's impossible for us humans to find or understand more than 3 dimensions.

    • @kirkwolschleger4468
      @kirkwolschleger4468 5 років тому +1

      It was 2005...uploaded 2008

  • @kritikitti3868
    @kritikitti3868 5 років тому +1

    Brian Greene makes this so interesting & understandable to us ordinary folk.👽Thx Brian

  • @denisespurlock7869
    @denisespurlock7869 5 років тому +17

    It is the year 2019. How did this experiment go?

    • @dimator
      @dimator 5 років тому +11

      The LHC has not revealed hidden dimensions, unfortunately. It has made lots of other discoveries, but not along string theory.

    • @davids.688
      @davids.688 5 років тому +10

      There's a movie about this very experiment he's describing called PARTICLE FEVER - on Netflix, I believe (at least, it was a few years ago when I watched it). To my recollection, it doesn't discover or unveil these extra dimensions, but it does chronicle the discovery/proof of the existence of the Higgs-Boson particle, the so-called (and so-feared) "God particle." For a documentary about a topic most people would find tedious and boring, it's actually a well-paced and rather suspenseful film; and like Dr. Greene, it makes an enormously complex topic very accessible to those of us for whom such topics are above our intellectual pay grade. Give it a watch - if you like this TED talk, I'd be surprised if you didn't find PARTICLE FEVER equally compelling. Cheers!

    • @someonlinevideos
      @someonlinevideos 5 років тому +2

      David S. Thanks for recommending! I couldn’t find it on Netflix but it’s on Amazon Prime Video for free for me. Watching now.

    • @Benzknees
      @Benzknees 5 років тому +1

      They’re stringing it along. All governed by the equation no conclusions yet = more grants = rich scientists.

    • @someonlinevideos
      @someonlinevideos 5 років тому +2

      Benzknees love the pun. Is there any way to verify this doubt. Not to be rude but what gives you the ability to say that a fundamental theory is just being strung along for funding?

  • @alexandrabara3052
    @alexandrabara3052 10 років тому +37

    "..i can only show 2 dimensions on the screen, some of you guys will fix that one day.."

  • @leleslie45
    @leleslie45 5 років тому +1

    He's so young! This is old but the theory still holds plus so much more.

  • @ftheunstoppable
    @ftheunstoppable 8 років тому +16

    8 years & still waiting for the result!!

    • @Arya_amsha
      @Arya_amsha 7 років тому

      Ahmed Yousuf results is higs bosan

    • @dbrast
      @dbrast 6 років тому

      It's now been 13 years since the video was made. That was in 2005. It's now 2018,

    • @VestigialHead
      @VestigialHead 5 років тому +1

      +
      Ahmed Yousuf
      It may be 50 or 100 years before you have your answer. Do not be impatient. Science is not like that.

    • @mervynsookun5995
      @mervynsookun5995 5 років тому

      Black hole or arsehole ?

    • @waynereinert787
      @waynereinert787 5 років тому

      @@VestigialHead so true! Also, what says that our perception of time is only because of 1 definition. 10 years in our earth time is only a slight fraction of time if we get to Mars, their definition has to be different and that's just using our fundamental measurement system.

  • @hipeople5157
    @hipeople5157 5 років тому +48

    I have always wondered how these people who think about such principles are then able to switch their mind to the mundane such as a grocery list, sorting laundry, and such.

    • @CarMake
      @CarMake 5 років тому +3

      They don't. that's for people like you to do

    • @vmodsm
      @vmodsm 5 років тому

      They don’t

    • @kevinjohnson8016
      @kevinjohnson8016 5 років тому +2

      Because they're desperate to deny God

    • @ProfessorJayTee
      @ProfessorJayTee 5 років тому +9

      @@kevinjohnson8016 Because are not handicapped by the need to hypothesize that there is a god in order to explain things in our universe. That outdated and unsupported hypothesis has some fatal flaws in it, anyhow.

    • @RolandKarlBryce
      @RolandKarlBryce 5 років тому +1

      Kevin Johnson they actually believe there is a Gode, sorry I mean a Code... the creator’s Code

  • @bm8406
    @bm8406 6 років тому

    It takes an outstanding teacher to take such material and make it remotely understandable to a person like me. This is an outstanding teacher.

  • @damocles4744
    @damocles4744 5 років тому +4

    18:00 any new news on this theory? because this video is from 2008

    • @marckpadilla
      @marckpadilla 5 років тому +1

      Nop!!! So sad

    • @marckpadilla
      @marckpadilla 5 років тому +1

      String theory has become even greater but no evidence still!

    • @Shadow77999
      @Shadow77999 5 років тому +1

      Its from 2005

  • @thinhthai1172
    @thinhthai1172 8 років тому +4

    17:00- Law of Conservation of Energy?

    • @alexschopbarteld922
      @alexschopbarteld922 8 років тому +1

      thinh thai Do you mean that there will be loss of energy? if i understand correclty it would still exist in the other dimention?

  • @matthewzarate9116
    @matthewzarate9116 7 років тому

    Dr. Greene at my college regarding String Theory & gravitational waves, phenomenal lecturer

  • @projectstart6850
    @projectstart6850 7 років тому +3

    No extra dimensions in LHC by 2017. No supersymmetric particles, and there should be at 1-14 TeV energies.

  • @herwighuener3256
    @herwighuener3256 5 років тому +3

    Apart from the physics - your English is exceptional good. I would like to see your video-clips used in school in my (Germany) country.

    • @1BeGe
      @1BeGe 4 роки тому +1

      Well...English is his first/main language. It would be rather disconcerting if he didn't speak it well.

    • @captain6876
      @captain6876 3 роки тому

      @@1BeGe I find his precise elaborations very comprehensive.

  • @Sabrina96
    @Sabrina96 7 років тому

    He is excellent at communicating and passionate. I could listen to him for hours.

    • @pintificate
      @pintificate 6 років тому

      And be no smarter at the end of it.

  • @lisanicholls9026
    @lisanicholls9026 7 років тому +4

    Thank you , great video.😊

  • @johnfullwood1095
    @johnfullwood1095 5 років тому +3

    Pure Brilliance Dr Green!!!, perfect 👌

  • @goerizal1
    @goerizal1 6 років тому +1

    amazing presentation, so helpful to non-physicists like me trying to understand - up to a point- how this world functions beyond the obvious. thanks.

  • @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time
    @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time 11 років тому +5

    This is an invitation to see an artist theory of the physics of ‘time’ as a physical process. In this theory the extra dimensions of String Theory and parallel universes of Hugh Everett Many worlds interpretation are just future possibilities and opportunities in our one three dimensional Universe of continuous energy exchange or what I like to call continuous creation!

  • @mralleycat6589
    @mralleycat6589 10 років тому +17

    " With no strings attached, they're still stringing you along! "

  • @Kevinrothwell1959
    @Kevinrothwell1959 5 років тому +1

    At last! Now I understand string theory! Very clearly explained.

  • @gpramvr
    @gpramvr 8 років тому +6

    Every word is of importance. Great speech.

  • @JerryMetal
    @JerryMetal 9 років тому +20

    *How life began in the universe:*
    One little string wanted to be more than just another string. He wanted to be recognized by his kin. He wanted to make the most beautiful music, he wanted to play in the largest of theaters of Broadway. He wanted to be a string on a violin so he could resonate his vibrations into the world and all would know his uniqueness. So he started a club in which many other talented strings joined and together they made molecules. Many types of molecules, even biological molecules! After millenia of dilligent work and concentration they made their first self-replicating molecule: DNA.
    The rest of the story is called evolution by natural selection ^^

  • @jamesgentner93
    @jamesgentner93 7 років тому +1

    At 18:00 if we don't loose atom debris from our universe isn't it possible that other atom debris from another universe entered ours by the same method?

  • @AnoopToffy
    @AnoopToffy 9 років тому +12

    vibrating strings of energy. that seems interesting, then what causes it to vibrate?
    what exactly is vibrating?

    • @donlowell
      @donlowell 9 років тому +3

      +Anoop Toffy "what causes it to vibrate?" I am going to try to answer that. Answer: energy. Somewhere I got the concept of what happens inside a quark (2 up quarks and 1 down quark makes a proton) is the most radical lightening storm you could ever image. Also, I got the concept somewhere of what goes on in each of our cells (muscle, skin, etc.). Molecules are zipping around fast and furious. Not like the images that you see everything moving slowly along. Things in the sub-atomic level works different than our everyday experiences. That would be my pseudo-intellectual answer.

    • @donlowell
      @donlowell 9 років тому

      GReaperEx, thanks for doing some research.
      Now, if Richard Feynman couldn't explain what energy was to any satisfaction, why are you asking joe blow on the Internet that question?

    • @donlowell
      @donlowell 9 років тому

      GReaperEx, In 1928, Paul Dirac predicted the possibility of anti-electrons based on theoretical evidence. In 1928, would you have discounted this whole notion of anti-matter? I think you would. You wouldn't be alone. Positrons were discovered in 1932 and Dirac received the Nobel Prize in 1933. One case in a million. Most theories go in the trash can.
      So what? Are you going to fault every scientist for working on theories that you have not a clue if it's right or wrong. I still don't understand why this theory bothers you.

    • @NadaII
      @NadaII 9 років тому +1

      +GReaperEx Modern science is to pompous to admit they are delving into what they used to call 'pseudo-science' or 'mysticism' to find answers. Nikola Tesla said,. "If you want to find the secrets of the Universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration." but what made out to be a nut. If you go through the history if scientific discovery you find that all the big names speak highly of ancient teachings, but of course this is rarely, if ever, mentioned these days. Look up the Vedas or Vedic science and see how many scientists attest to their teachings.

    • @MarcosFMolina
      @MarcosFMolina 9 років тому

      +Anoop Toffy
      >>vibrating strings of energy
      >>what exactly is vibrating?
      Energy.
      >>what causes it to vibrate?
      Energy
      Energy is the capacity of a physical system to perform work.

  • @AzuliManni
    @AzuliManni 8 років тому +161

    I'm here because like most, I'm also a curious Human being.

    • @TheDavid771
      @TheDavid771 5 років тому

      quick question Azuli

    • @chuckschillingvideos
      @chuckschillingvideos 5 років тому

      Curiosity is good. But curiosity without skepticism is not.

    • @captain6876
      @captain6876 3 роки тому

      You are a girl, you cannot feel curious

  • @kingtiger2.2002
    @kingtiger2.2002 2 роки тому +1

    I love brian greene, he has an incredible mind. 👏

  • @jellymop
    @jellymop 5 років тому +6

    Man, Brian Greene is a Feynman level orator and explainer. I’d take him over Tyson any day

    • @onggi3388
      @onggi3388 5 років тому

      and now u are fucked for saying that !

  • @thetimelords911
    @thetimelords911 7 років тому +7

    I think Ant-Man actually showed the Calabi-Yau Manifolds in the last "subatomic" scene

  • @jamesdolan4042
    @jamesdolan4042 5 років тому

    Brian Greene is a very articulate theoretical physicists and communicator of physics for people like me, who may be lacking knowledge in that regard. I am kind of sentimental in that I like the periodic table of elements, because essentially elements have character, and when combined to make molecules, elements have even greater character. Most everythiing I know life and non life can be explained by elements.
    So while the Standard Model making up the fundamental particles and forces of nature is impressive and an impressive accomplishment, somehow I felt a beauty was lost when it emerged. These days dealing with String Theory, fields, and halograms I feel we are moving to a much colder place.

  • @jonathanhunt8347
    @jonathanhunt8347 8 років тому +8

    The creators of Stranger Things must be big fans of Brian Greene.

  • @sherlockholmeslives.1605
    @sherlockholmeslives.1605 6 років тому +9

    0:16 Goethe said that "Time is a dimension."

  • @kenclarke1952
    @kenclarke1952 7 років тому +1

    as said before a very old vid (LHC not even up and runnnig) but what a excellant, charismatic guy Brian Greene is.

  • @ConsciousYouthInitiative
    @ConsciousYouthInitiative 8 років тому +3

    I'm here because I wanted to learn more about sting theory.

  • @gurpreetsingh793
    @gurpreetsingh793 8 років тому +6

    12:22 "If there's a tiny civilization of green people walking about"
    *He's talking about the Minish OMG*

  • @gurug9797
    @gurug9797 5 років тому

    'Precise and concise' the mark of a master of the subject

  • @yogadork_namaste
    @yogadork_namaste 8 років тому +4

    Very interesting.

  • @miks8
    @miks8 11 років тому +13

    It would not answer the why question at all! It would merely push the question one step further - why the shape of the extra dimensions is the why it is? It's an infinitely regressive question.

    • @gavincleland3338
      @gavincleland3338 11 років тому +1

      That's science, for you.

    • @Linkoftime2005
      @Linkoftime2005 11 років тому

      Why is subjective. Science offers us How instead and we all decide for ourselves Why it happened How it happened. With a higher definition of How, we can make better conclusions as to Why.

    • @miks8
      @miks8 11 років тому

      Derick Brown Thats fair enough, but I believe that in such presentations it is disingenuous to assert that there will be anything like one and only, clear answer to the Why question.

    • @isodoublet
      @isodoublet 11 років тому

      You can say that energy is conserved because it is, or you can use Noether's theorem and notice that it is because the laws of physics don't change with time. Which of the two explanations is more satisfactory?

    • @miks8
      @miks8 11 років тому

      gogerychwyrndrobwll And does that answer Why "the laws of physics don't change with time" ? No. Here you would also say - they don't change, because they don't. It was just put into a more detailed perspective, but no matter how far you stretch this chain at the end of it you will always two things - A. a statement that something is, because it is. B. a question of why is it the way it is?
      It is by definition inescapable.

  • @hindkhatib8692
    @hindkhatib8692 6 років тому

    Many thanks for you Mr.Brian Greene . It is the best lecture ever made by a scientist about extra dimensions and String Theory in this century , very compelling comprehensive an clear Thank you

  • @lucymerrett4045
    @lucymerrett4045 8 років тому +5

    So do the particles lose energy at CERN

    • @ShudiadWaiyantun
      @ShudiadWaiyantun 8 років тому +6

      lu see don't mind me.. Just waiting for answer together with you..

    • @mohsenraghian210
      @mohsenraghian210 5 років тому

      @@ShudiadWaiyantun Jim Baggott book "Fairytale Physics"

  • @thelol77
    @thelol77 10 років тому +6

    Maybe it's just me but I don't find the "spatial valley" model of gravity all that satisfying. The idea is that material bodies warp space and attract other bodies because of that curvature. Doesn't this already rely on our intuitions about how things "roll down hills", though? In other words, the intuitive explanation of gravity appeals to examples that already operate with some kind of folk-gravitational model. The question remains: why do bodies react at all to the bending of space?

    • @jorgepeterbarton
      @jorgepeterbarton 10 років тому

      Yes. I see tons of comments about 'you can't explain gravity with gravity' and waited a long time before it was actually explained to me properly. But still coupled with a good explanation it works pretty well as a model, however the true explanation is dumbed down too much (i don't mean we have to go indepth into equations either) so it causes confusion especially in the poor explanation on the video. Its space-time, not just space for a start. its actually 3d plus time in reality. i prefer a rollercoaster track or something, with a rolercoaster that never stops moving-it never stops moving because it has to be going through time or space...and this is space-time....it hits a corner and has to turn that corner (the track being space-time), but also it has to move towards that corner it can't stop...well still not enough dimensions of course(because really you can't), and lacking geometry because of the predetermined path, but its an alternative analogy. and i probably have confused people more.

    • @jorgepeterbarton
      @jorgepeterbarton 10 років тому

      ***** those are better. Also how about those Gifs of waves of particles in a liquid/gas, they manage well enough to describe their concept. A 3D picture just describing the warp by density of some dots (coordinates) would be an improvement, introducing up and down is the whole problem with the video's model.

    • @Mysteroo
      @Mysteroo 10 років тому

      I'm with you. Even *****'s pictures seem to still rely on some sort of basic understanding of how physics work. Things kinda slide down curves - in this case not because of gravity, but to cause gravity. But this still pretty much seems like it relies on physics to cause a law of physics to work- circular reasoning. So much of this is still theoretical and we're just kind of testing hypotheses out with other hypotheses. I could almost see there being a fourth dimension or even a fifth, but ten? It really seems like they're just scrounging for ways to make their ideas work at this point. Some people look at this kind of science and reassure themselves that religion is outdated superstition, but I look at so much that we don't know and that doesn't make sense and it reassures me that there's probably something supernatural that's holding it all together. Otherwise so much just doesn't make sense

    • @thelol77
      @thelol77 10 років тому

      Mysteroo Movies Ehh I mean I agreed with that until you jumped to the supernatural. Seems like a classic argument from ignorance to me. Sure a lot of it is just fitting data to theories, but that's what science has always been. It's only this theoretical because, at least I think, we don't yet know enough about the "frame of reference" for all this stuff, conceptually. At this point everything that's known about quantum and theoretical physics seems to be based on predictions. Hypotheses have falsifiable predictions and they work. That's always been the core of science. So I agree with you that it might not "make sense" yet, but that doesn't mean the evidence isn't there. Just not enough is known yet to put it together in a coherent and explanatory treatise.
      And even if we can never know, I don't think the supernatural elucidates any of this. That's just putting a name on the unknown and I don't think it's very useful. The second we do that is the second we concede that further investigation is basically useless. And any kind of non-physical "mind" out there seems just as absurd as many of the outlandish theories of string theory and quantum mechanics.

    • @marcellisrobinson
      @marcellisrobinson 10 років тому +1

      You need to read a physics textbook to get a handle on this. If you can't handle the math, then there's no chance you'll understand. In the realm of celestial mechanics, Einstein's theory of general relativity has passed every test thus far.
      Are you familiar with the "principle of least action"?
      Do you know what a geodesic is?

  • @user-so3uk9os4k
    @user-so3uk9os4k 5 років тому

    his explaination is so crystal clear.....

  • @roycephantom4me
    @roycephantom4me 9 років тому +36

    is anyone thinking of Antman right now...i do

    • @thetimelords911
      @thetimelords911 7 років тому

      haha me. I think the subatomic part of the movie even showed the Calabi-Yau manifolds!

    • @istvansipos9940
      @istvansipos9940 5 років тому +1

      kinda. I am thinking of the Wasp

    • @Shadow77999
      @Shadow77999 5 років тому

      Lol

    • @aaroncurtis8545
      @aaroncurtis8545 5 років тому

      That comment is even more relevant 3 years later, 😄

  • @medicobueno5925
    @medicobueno5925 5 років тому +3

    Where was this guy when I was taking organic chemistry in college??

  • @stardomee
    @stardomee 7 років тому +2

    all these are explained in detail in Brian Green's book 'The Elegant Universe', it seems that the maths for this theory is particularly tough so they're looking for workarounds

  • @daveatkins2816
    @daveatkins2816 5 років тому +3

    Who'd of thought windows media player visuals were the answer all along.

  • @Tarhtakam1038
    @Tarhtakam1038 5 років тому +4

    5 years!!
    Its 2019 now been like 9 years😱

    • @daviddement7312
      @daviddement7312 5 років тому

      @domhanda jcb vfc cc cc DC cc ss z ex ex sa was vvt CRT CRT databases b.c. cc guy5 mm by vvt case access cree floop pop o9 ui is

    • @mustafasiddiqui8203
      @mustafasiddiqui8203 4 роки тому

      12

  • @shinyheart3373
    @shinyheart3373 5 років тому +1

    This guy has perfect voice and teaching style for a teacher. 👍

    • @rock-tk1qf
      @rock-tk1qf 5 років тому

      Teachers are selected by Degrees ! Not by voice & styles

  • @amitnadig2884
    @amitnadig2884 9 років тому +13

    Hold on.. What if the Higgs boson is a particle ejected by the other dimensions.. And the only reason they stay for such less time is because they are not of the 3 physical dimensions we see..

    • @JeremyHughes184
      @JeremyHughes184 7 років тому

      I think something he may have not fully explained is that there's no certainty that the first tests would be able to capture any energy released into other dimensions, only that the post-collision energy was less than the pre-collision energy. If we cannot observe how the energy is released, I expect the explanation would either be standard sensitivity of technology or that the lost energy was transferred into a different dimension that currently cannot be observed. Maybe both.

  • @isaacgans290
    @isaacgans290 9 років тому +4

    One theory to rule them all, one theory to explain them!

    • @360.Tapestry
      @360.Tapestry 8 років тому

      one theory to bring them all and, in the darkness, bind them.

    • @tothesciencemobile4707
      @tothesciencemobile4707 8 років тому

      Sean Seaphan What do you mean by "one theory to bring them all and, in the darkness, blind them."??? Do you not think string theory has any potential?

    • @360.Tapestry
      @360.Tapestry 8 років тому

      lol i was just completing the quote. and it's to "bind them" (unify them), not blind them.

    • @tothesciencemobile4707
      @tothesciencemobile4707 8 років тому +1

      Sean Seaphan Ah, I see! Ha! That's funny.. weird how that happens sometimes.

  • @anshul5431
    @anshul5431 4 роки тому +1

    I think he was talking about the hadron collider at the end of the video that discovered the god particle (Higgs Boson Particle) in 2012.

  • @mrreymundo5383
    @mrreymundo5383 5 років тому +4

    This was 11 years ago. Is there a follow-up video/talk?

    • @billyjoejimbob75
      @billyjoejimbob75 5 років тому

      I think you're off by a few years. Look at 0:49

    • @mrreymundo5383
      @mrreymundo5383 5 років тому

      @@billyjoejimbob75 Publication date 2008

    • @billyjoejimbob75
      @billyjoejimbob75 5 років тому

      So, because this upload was 3 years after the talk, you have some kind of point?

    • @mrreymundo5383
      @mrreymundo5383 5 років тому

      @@billyjoejimbob75 Are you just looking for something to argue about? I was just expressing curiousity about whether there have been new developments. Sheesh!

  • @EmilCohenblackrose
    @EmilCohenblackrose 6 років тому

    Wao! All the learning years... I was never ready for that! Excellent delivery ! Thanks!

  • @superdiza
    @superdiza 5 років тому +13

    in 2005 he said the experiment will show the existence of other dimensions, have it?

    • @martinpickard6043
      @martinpickard6043 5 років тому +8

      The majority of theorists and physicists are saying that because the Large Hadron Colider/CERN etc after 20+ years of searching have not shown ANY evidence or proof for string theory, it is time to discount it and move on to other theories for evidence of a Unified Theory of Everything.
      This does not prove it wrong, just that after our 20+ years searching for strings and evidence to support string theory, no evidence has been able to support the theory 🤔😶
      Time to move on...🤓

    • @yelizavetapope3593
      @yelizavetapope3593 5 років тому

      Because theyre missing the Aether field

    • @boing-fwip9062
      @boing-fwip9062 5 років тому +1

      There are new theories around zero point energy and shifts in energy constants which are kinda interesting. Try not to let Christians interpret these though. They spoil everything.

    • @boing-fwip9062
      @boing-fwip9062 5 років тому +1

      @Hulagan 808 Punctuation, Dear.

    • @user-trrwvfk
      @user-trrwvfk 5 років тому

      No lol time to start looking for another theory.

  • @edjones8706
    @edjones8706 5 років тому +3

    Could you repeat that?. I didn't quite get that👻

  • @arnabzanbaishya7222
    @arnabzanbaishya7222 6 років тому

    when i was 15 i was able to understand it 20%...but now i m glad that i can understand everything he said...sir we have to appreciate your knowledge,thanks for that speech again❤️

    • @kitfisto2347
      @kitfisto2347 4 роки тому

      Arnab Zan Baishya low iq i guess

  • @the.amazing.spatterman
    @the.amazing.spatterman 9 років тому +22

    I really want string theory to be true

  • @Linux567
    @Linux567 8 років тому +18

    Who would dislike the video? I know Trolls, dam you Trolls.