TV
How One Line in the Oldest Math Text Hinted at Hidden Universes
How One Line in the Oldest Math Text Hinted at Hidden Universes
Advertisement

LEAVE YOUR COMMENT

LATEST COMMENTS

@dionisiskout3470 Says:
His name it’s not Euclid!!!!! Learn his name and start saying it right!!!!!
@animekech Says:
so if you jump off a building you died by space time?
@solarion33 Says:
Spherical geometry was already studied in ancient times before plane geometry , astronomy was not modeled on the flat plane .. it is evident the Babylonians already had working knowledge of trigonometry as well as an effective numerical system . also its odd you didn't mention Projective Geometry
@rhoward30 Says:
If astronomers actually saw what he talks about at 24:14 then they proved that the speed of light varies which throws off Einstein’s theory
@EmmanuelEKSunu Says:
If the universe is a square, what’s at the ends?
@josephmango4628 Says:
The hubris of modern man. Just because someone existed in the distant past didn't make them less intelligent.
@rprLKA Says:
Why did you put a cartoon face on the falling man and your face on the astronaut?
@maevequigley3983 Says:
I was totally with you until the jump to the crochet fabric item and the "saddles on saddles" part. Any suggested resources to better understand this concept?
@timdecarlo4969 Says:
So coral grows the way u showed and explained the lines with the blue crochet. So some of it tracks with explaining the formation of coral
@bryanloch7747 Says:
I guess postulate 5 just makes sense to me. I don’t even believe it’s near as complex as they suggest here. My interpretation is verbatim what he says, two lines running along a horizontal plane near each other are intersected by a line running along a vertical plane. This intersection creates a total 4 angles on each individual line, however Euclid is only concerned with the interior angles of the intersection. He then states that whichever side does not equal or exceed the sum of two right angles, is the same side that the two line running on a vertical plane will meet and intersect each other. I really don’t understand where the idea comes from that he is suggesting these are parallel lines, that would only be the case if the angles created by the vertical line are all 90 degrees
@DrugzMunny Says:
"a^2 + b^2 = c^2. Now, technically, serious mathematicians agree that this means we co-exist with hidden universes, but I digress."
@-my-ssma9192 Says:
Never understood special relativity much better.
@DJ-co8qn Says:
In order to know the truth, one must first know everything. There's a really good example to illustrate this: In the past people were put to death for stating that the earth was not flat. This was a few hundred years ago and we've come a long way since then, but it is a very good example of the problems that ignorance can cause. Since no living human knows everything, then we can infer that no person alive knows the truth. So, as far as human beings are concerned, the truth is pretty much unattainable due to our limitations with knowledge. Without knowing everything, we cannot with certainty know what the truth is about pretty much anything. As far as human beings are concerned, the truth cannot be known, it is inaccessible, much like the knowledge required to know the difference between a lie and the truth. To summarize, for human beings, the truth does not exist. People who understand this, manipulate the facts to motivate and manipulate people to do what they want. This is the sad fact about humanity.
@fldallyb Says:
You may have already done this, but I wish you would make a short video that could be used to answer all the Flat Earthers. Something simple and undisputed. I’m so tired of seeing their post.
@herciliaday231 Says:
The magis as Balthasar, Melchior, and Gaspar (or Casper). According to Western church tradition, Balthasar is often represented as a king of Arabia or sometimes Ethiopia, Melchior as a king of Persia, and Gaspar as a king of India. They were astronomer meaning they had knowledge of stars. They were from those lands, and very knowledgeable in Math. We need to give credit to people from that area.
@rabenhell4782 Says:
i went to Bólyai János's elementary school in Hungary when i was younger and i didnt even know this about him, i was so shocked hearing his name :D thank you for this informative video!! :DD
@jakabas Says:
By flat does that mean the universe is it like a cube, or rectangular prism? And if so what does a spherical universe look like?
@M-dv1yj Says:
Omg THANKS that inspired a geometric understanding of a theory I am working on. So he defined it already without knowing what it was 👏
@-_brwne_-340 Says:
Euclid postulates are like a tutorial to drawing😂 postulate 5 is "add the details"
@EveryLastdrop-tw6rg Says:
you do realize that when measuring the universe from our point of view, it will always calculate flat even if it is hyperbolic because we would be the inertial observer and regardless of the shape it will appear flat to us from our perspective just like the concepts you brought up in the beginning.
@TroyIII Says:
Why are you misusing the term Universe in describing unfit notions that have had their own unique names for centuries? "Are you think that 'universe' and 'world', including notions such as 'actuality', 'circumstance' and 'reality' are interchangeable?" :) They're not! They're not even alike; they don't even belong to the same category. ;)
@leeturnbull2082 Says:
"Dude, look at my invention" "Nah dude, can't give you credit becuase it's my invention also" Ego of mathematicians
@j45002 Says:
I'm seeing this video very late, and I don't really expect a response. I do have a question though. If the universe is flat, how can things be above or below us on that plane? Is the universe being flat in reference to the space fabric that our gravity distorts? Also how can we see the cmb in all directions if it's flat?
@zaurgamkrelidze1064 Says:
Amazing video
@AaronSkone Says:
You should do a video on the “flatness” of the universe to clear up misconceptions about what flat means in this context.
@martolomew956 Says:
Its hard to comprehend how the first people found mathematics
@romzeek Says:
Glad to see Ben Affleck is doing scientific documentaries now
@rawrrawriting Says:
If the universe is flat, why is the earth round?
@DaiDaisWay Says:
Hello! Please make a video about the two teen women who solved Pythagorean's Theorem using Trigonometry! Some exciting news in the math/science world :)
@vhawk1951kl Says:
Who*Does't* understand that univeerse_s is semantic gibberish or an oxymoron?
@shineisland7447 Says:
4 postulates make a square, the fifth IS parallel to the square any way you look at it ...he was thinking "outside of the box"
@milkybar8254 Says:
A great video. Just one little carp. You show Gauss measuring his "large" trangles using optical instruments. If this is so, then he is not measuring the angles of triangles constructed ON the 2D spherical surface of the Earth, but of triangles IN flat 3D space, so he would inevitable find the angles add to 180, however large he made his triangles.
@tusharhbk Says:
It is sad how Ancient India's contribution in such videos are ignored such as Aryabhatta and Bhaskara.
@adrianmuresan7764 Says:
On a geodesic on a sphere for example, each trajectory is the same regardless of the speed one object travels along the geodesic. In General Relativity it seems as if the geodesic has different shape depending on the relative velocity of the two masses that circle each other (their center of mass). How does this dependence on the relative velocity enters the General RElativity to give different shapes to the geodesics? Is it because space time is curved and not just space? Still the velocities where the geodesics are vastly different are way below the light speed.
@mohamedidhssaine7429 Says:
applause to this guy❤
@Padraigp Says:
I didnt understand most of this but i like that a circle can represent an infinite space. Thats good enough for me. Not a clue what the fifth thing sentence was saying. Maybe cos i wasnt looking ..maybe ill rewatch.
@oofy69 Says:
si gel do masoen😂
@SilverScythe65 Says:
Why is this such a hard concept for ancient people to grasp? You stick a line through two other lines. If both inner angles are less than 90 degrees, that means those two lines are going to touch at some point... It's super simple. How did that take thousands of years to conclude? I bet you if they told any random carpenter of their time that statement, he would have confirmed it for them.
@umami0247 Says:
This can make your brain hurt. Just saying.
@dembro27 Says:
Great explanation of non-Euclidean geometry! From a non-mathematician's perspective, I'm surprised so many brilliant minds spent that much effort trying to prove something that seems rather intuitive/obvious. I'm sure that I'm oversimplifying the reality, but to me, the fifth postulate is logical if you accept the second postulate and know how angles work (on a flat 2D plane, anyways). It's a postulate because you can't draw a line of infinite length, so you accept it as true (the wholr point) and move on. Was the drive to prove the fifth posulate simply due to the fact that it was a longer sentence than the others?
@littlefeetvampire Says:
So he must have observe a pieces of weaved cloth. Specially loosely knitted one
@airrad22 Says:
this whole thing, really crossed a line for me 😒
@jonpatchmodular Says:
Your changing of these excessively clickbait titles really throws me off when trying to figure out which videos I've seen. Like, parallel universes? really?
@midgetydeath Says:
When you drew the fifth postulate, I understood it. My question is why he thought he needed that as a postulate. It seems obvious and like it is already proven by the first two postulates, rather than being a candidate for being postulate on its own. I might suck at math, but I'm dang good at logic. And I can see the theme here that shows it shouldn't be one of the postulates he gave. Yet, he believed it was necessary. Or, perhaps he put it as a postulate not because he believed it truly was one, but that he believed it was too important to leave for later and so he fudged it.
@edwardhuang5885 Says:
bro just took me on a spiritual journey
@OrangeMonkey2112 Says:
Real science started with mans knowledge of God. Sir Issac Newton was one of many who openly admitted to God being the catalyst of ALL knowledge and understanding, He was just ONE OF MANY. Science isnt bad! Bad science IS!------When man takes God out of science he is lost to the truest understanding of it. Today scientist still cant understan how the 66 molecules in water work together. Thats just one of thousands of things they cant understand. Dont get me started on physics, who now are saying openly we ARE a created universe and NOT a aggregate of accidental chance as the "big bang" group had insisted for so long. The Scripure in the Bible have given us more prven science theory than ALL the "great" minds of mans science put together. The children of wrath deny God irrationally.......
@linyenchin6773 Says:
12:07 "paradoxical" is idiot for "paradox," you mouth-breathers are idiots as you insist on redundant suffix where your already know the root word civers every instance you might lay your misused suffix. *The quality and state of being a paradox, is just a paradox.*
@linyenchin6773 Says:
Fascinating idiot noise. Listening to you mouth-breathers is always a pain in my brain.
@linyenchin6773 Says:
*hidden dimensions, only idiots perpetuate the "multiverse" lie.
@jayashreesmani5641 Says:
There were Math texts in India LOOONG before Euclid: 300 BC - The oldest source of knowledge for Indian Mathematics is Sulba Sutras (800 BCE) followed by the Pingala’s Chanda Sastra,

More Science Videos