How many different Youtube videos are possible?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 окт 2024
- Download the podcast of my BBC Radio4 show, Domestic Science (Ep1) www.bbc.co.uk/p...
In this video I start with how many 256×256 greyscale images are possible and work my way up to the maximum number of possible RUclips videos.
Original question on twitter:
/ 755799688759037953
Here is our radio show on the BBC radio player. Let me know if it does not work for you.
www.bbc.co.uk/p...
Our Festival of the Spoken Nerd DVD and download:
shop.festivalo...
Galaxy M81 image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA/Harvard-Smithsonian CfA
Music by Howard Carter
Design by Simon Wright
MATT PARKER: Stand-up Mathematician
Website: standupmaths.com/
Maths book: makeanddo4D.com/
Nerdy maths toys: mathsgear.co.uk/
![Gunna - HIM ALL ALONG [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HiCxoDeo0hc/mqdefault.jpg)
using universe to do base 10^82 calculation. That is ingenious.
+YK L Hopefully it will catch on! I like to think big.
@@standupmaths "Um boss, I like to have a small salary increase, how about a universe?"
"I'm writing it in base universe" maybe the greatest line ever spoken
lol Funny seeing you here
I lost some of the rice cake I was eating when he said that !!
tf r u doing here?
and, unsurpisingly, that base is logarithmic
Well I never expected to find you here
If you generate all possible RUclips Videos, make sure you set the MPEG compression to max. This can easily save you a few universes of storage
I realize this is a joke, but that actually wouldn't matter. Most of these videos would just be filled with random data, and random data doesn't generally compress.
+dsman115276 OR is it random? If you went about generating the videos in a sequence and knew which number of video you were on you'd know about the difference between the video next and before you, etc... which sounds a lot like the principal that mpeg compression is based on..
Having every video in existence means you have every possible combination of 0's and 1's that forms a video, making it impossible to apply a generic compression algorithm per-video that would result in a net-loss of total data. My comment was specifically about MPEG compression, which is per-video.
What you described could work, but it is not a per-video compression algorithm. Without extra data, you could not immediately find and start playing any video from the list. If you wanted to play video 1,000,204 you would have to go through the first 1,000,203 to calculate what it should be. Because of this, the techniques are not equivalent.
Also he was using the file size as the upper bound, which includes the compression
It would not be filled with random data, it would be filled with all data, eventually, so only a few would actually not be compressible. There would be a LOT of redundant data iterating through all possibilities. Regardless, the time is the factor here, not the storage.
256 Shades of Gray, Sounds like a terrible novel to me.
50 Shades of Grey sounds like an even more terrible novel to me.
4 shades of off-green would be even worse
It leaves enough room for a sequal "The Next 50 Shades of Grey"
@@1e1001 1 shade of white is even worse
@@otesunki 0 shades of infrared is even worse
So there's a 1 in 2^524288 chance of generating that lovely face
I needed to know that
imawhale actually there will be a picture of every person in the universe and some porn as well
@@rubenspooky Also some small codes and passwords
Or even big ones, if you encrypt them in binary
So there is a chance.
@@Kokurorokuko why encrypt them in binary? theyre already encrypted in 256-ary, just use that
isnt it facinating that you can program a computer to randomly fill all pixels of a 256x256 square image with 1 of 256 different shades of grey and if you only wait long enough it would output matt parkers smiling face
+kausthubh Gadamsetty Hahah, yeah.
Have you seen the v sauce video about the library of Babel?
and the killer of JFK and how jesus really looked like
+
Or a parker square
if you were in posession of all possible greyscale 256x256 images, you would have literally a picture of everything: a portrait representation of yourself as you would be 10, 15, 20, 25, x number of years from now, all past present and future government secrets, exclusive shots of hitler's mustache from millions of different angles, visual depictions of every all alien race currently in existence in our universe, and matt parker doing a handstand while balancing two bananas on the soles of his feet... you name it. all to the accuracy that a 256x256 image can provide (in grayscale) which can be pretty crisp depending on the zoom.
good luck storing that. even if you had access all the materials in the galaxy at your disposal solely to manufacture hard drives.
It’s been 2 years and this man still has 4 likes
@@greenscreamyeet7966 +1 like, wish I could add more
It’s been 3 and this man still has seven likes
Make it 8 ...
... actually you would not be confined to the 256x256 resolution. you might just take the images which are tiles of e.g. Parkers handstand+bananas in 4K resolution and add together the whole 4K image (even in color if you happen to find R, G and B tiles). You would even find images of that exact banana skin in electron microscopy resolution.
There would also be all images of the blueprints needed to build that super computer :-)
51
4:23
Matt Parker put himself in a square!
Must resist reference!
But you didn't. Also I didn't
he did. He didn't say Parker square!
Ludvig SC Games But he made an implicit reference. It still _is_ a reference. (Also the post contains the words "Parker" and "square")
Yeah, I apologize, that was a real Parker square on my part.
+Zejgar hahaha :) yeah a real parker square moment
The Library of Babel is currently updating their digital services to include RUclips. Instructions for accessing their digital services database are conveniently located in the conventional bound book collection, with multiple copies in every language, spaced throughout the library for the convenience of the patrons.
Every time a mathematician brings up the age of the universe, you know things are about to get a little crazy
4:25 One pixel is missing from that square. You know what almost perfect squares are called?
Richard S. PARKER SQUARES
Richard S. lol
You dare!?
@@AirIUnderwater PARKER SQUARES
The Parker Squaaaaare lol
While there are indeed 256^65536 possible combinations of grayscale pixels in a 256x256 matrix, not all of them produce a unique image, since 3/4 of them are just 90, 180 or 270 degrees rotated versions of the same image. And half of the remaining unique images are just a vertically mirrored version. And half of those are just a horizontally mirrored version.
Furthermore, if we could somehow predict which percentage of the images are just static noise containing no visually meaningful information, the number of unique images would drop drastically. Adding a noise-cancelling algorithm to detect that image B is essentially the same as image A with a bit of noise on top would narrow down even more.
Of course, for any of this to be of any help, the nature of these algorithms would have to be fully predictive so that we would somehow know which images to skip before creating them.
Question: what is the propability, that given these modifications, we could build a supercomputer which would be capable of producing all the possible visually meaningful images in our universe in less amount of time it has existed?
Petrik Salovaara 1. You can rotate images in much more angles, subpixel even. 2. You can avoid noise problem by droping definition down, but even 10x10@1bpp gives thausands times more variants than drops in ocean.
does the ocean have less than 10000 drops of water? 10x10 = 100... 100^2 = 10000
Petrik Salovaara probability*
"visually meaningful" would become subjective. Perspective is a thing, it can change the viewing of something that is technically the same
Raimar Lunardi Arguably, yes. The ocean is not made out of drops of water. And arguably, when ocean water forms a drop, it's no longer part of the ocean.
6:42 I thought I was very clever and wrote a small program that is searching for another power of 2 that doesn't have 1, 2, 4 nor 8 in it. It's been running for 2 hours now. Is there any proof that such a number doesn't exist?
+red13emerald I believe there is at least one more, but it's a long way up.
I'm curious whether 2048 is the highest power of 2 with only even digits. Proving or disproving that would be tricky
I found one: 0.5
I'll get my coat
mine has been running for the last 9 hours and has reached 16^280000 and not found another one yet.
16 hours in and i am at 16^370000 and taking nearly 40 seconds to go between 16^370000 and 16^370100
From the title I was expecting a reference to combinations of the RUclips video ID tag, perhaps in reference to Tom Scott's (semi)recent video.
+JB “AspenForester” Lewis Always enjoy Tom's videos. This was my way of looking at the possible videos, not just the max which can exist at once.
Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed the video, as always!
Something tells me youtube's hashing algorithm will have to evolve to account for 29,368,779.7 universes worth of content... just sayin'
Google has based their business model around assuming there will eventually being extremely cheap storage, and bandwidth, so I'm assuming they have it all figured out! ;-)
If you actually generate all possible RUclips videos, be sure to never watch them. You don't want to see some of the things that are in there...
I’ve already seen a cup too much of yourube
It will make every possible peppa pig ytp
Now we need to know how many of these videos would RUclips just put down if you upload them
Why not? It'll have every yet-to-be-discovered piece of mathematics with subtitles and insanely good visuals explained by none other than Parker-Man himself.
@@Xnoob545 lol
Uhm, femtohertz would be very slow. You _meant_ femtosecond cycle time or terahertz, +standupmaths
oof
You're right about femtohertz, but 10^12 corresponds to the tera prefix. 10^15 corresponds to peta.
Actually it's petahertz not terahertz
I guess Matt's supercomputer has a parkerhertz clock speed.
....sorry. I had to.
@@pranamd1 The electricity is Parker Squares
Know what else stopped around 65536? Dragon Warrior experience and gold. It's how I started figuring out how my game's data was stored when I was a kid. Experience and Gold stop at 65535 (but 0 is counted as well, giving us 65536). It was like magic to my 8-year-old mind that I could understand why my game was so limited (especially since my dad, who at that time was one of the smartest men in the world to me, akin to Einstein) couldn't understand why the numbers stopped. It's not often that an 8-year old gets to teach his dad something.
So thank you, Ms. Trask, for your "Powers of 2" poster in math class, that has fueled my neurotic obsession with powers of 2 for the past 24 years. Thanks a bunch!
"...a documentary ...indicating there were a different number of 'Shades of Grey...'" Classic.
At work we use the medical industry standard DICOM format images. Those are greyscale images of 16 bits/pixel, (ie 65536 grey levels), rather than just the 8bits/pixel (=256) assumption you start with. So there are *a lot* more possible greyscale inages. And I understand there are some 64bits/pixel formats out there.
So perhaps the reason the multiverse exists is to satisfy someone's desire to generate every possible RUclips video?
Amadeus Lol
"In base universe" matt what did you even do the calculations for this episode on?
Speed, probably.
i think he compared the number of combinations of pixels to the number of atoms in the universe by simple division. the numbers are big but they're just floating point numbers. he's just walking us through a long thought process about what the scales of these numbers actually mean
I don't think it's too complicated.
It's only multiplications and by using powers of 10 it can even be made mostly by hand
A Ga(la)xio calculator, of course.
@@kaitlyn__L 42
i really like base[universe] :D
My new favourite base :D
*****
i have to disagree.
base[googolplex] is a too concrete number.
base[universe] can be interpreted in many different ways.
the number of smallest things in a universe (atoms? smaller particles maybe?)
or maybe as base[all] or even as base[1] :)
Did you just trick me into counting in base-universe?
13:03 spoke too soon
That was one of the clearest explanations of a massively large number I've ever seen.
_256 Shades of Matt_
That could make a great book
I was like "Oh, 'now' is a while ago..." but then I realized that I watched this video when it went up.
me too!
I thought it was like a year ago
Loved episode 1! Can't wait for more! Thanks for making them available internationally!
I wanna start counting in base universe
"That'll be 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 dollars, please
In base universe (base 10^82) numbers grow really quickly both ways, so already 0.1 in base universe is an incredibly tiny amount, funny enough pretty close to the number you wrote. :)
I know i'm late, but 0.1 in base universe is less than 0.1 in base 10... so that's an INCREDIBLY small number you just wrote. To give you an idea how many zeros would be in the equivalent in base 10: Every 0 you wrote after the "." adds 10^82 zeros in base 10. ;) So if you add your number to itself and put 1 atom in a new universe, you would've created 138 universerses before you reach 1 (and 1 in b10 is eqaul to 1 bUniverse)
@@TomGalonska well he clearly has modest prices
Of all the videos you’ve ever made, on this channel and others, most of which I love and all of which I like, I think this is my favorite! I think it’s the atoms and universes thing, and the many nested layers of abstraction running through the entire video.
About your comments at the end, I think creativity is almost by definition the ability to sort through the huge amount of possible video/podcasts/anythings and pick out the small, finite amount of them that are valuable and have meaning. So when you say you just made one possible podcast picked from an enormous preexisting list, you really did make a very improbably choice in choosing one that actually means anything. I'm proud of you for that!
it's now!
Now now or now 8 minutes ago?
12 minutes and 38 seconds
What even is time
abcdefg No clue man. I'm confused. I guess yeah.
+abcdefg now now
A femtohertz would be 10^-15 though... that would be really slow. 10^15 would be a Petahertz processor.
This 50 Shades reference is amazing x)
Came 1 year later to comment that
I always enjoy whatever topic you pick, but i think its your enthusiasm that brings me back. Always look forward to a new vid.
Downloaded that podcast just to be supportive of it, but it was genuinely the most enjoyable part of my entire day. Thanks for the great show.
Now here is a follow-on question... how much prison time would you get if found guilty of copyright violation for every copyrighted image which you produced by iterating through all of the images? I'd also ask how many other crimes you would be guilty of from generating every possible otherwise illegal image (illegal pornography and the like)... but that would probably not be calculable in any reasonable way. For copyright, you could probably estimate it reasonably well. Would you be in prison for longer than the age of the universe thus far?
WRT the number existing before the universe... unlikely. The universes fundamental structure is probabilistic. The natural numbers are not really natural, they're an artifact of the human experience of the universe. Things look definite and discrete, but those are only emergent properties of the interactions of those probabilistic particle/waves. Additionally, the idea of 'before the universe' inherently makes no sense. In order for the word "before" to have meaning, time must exist and proceed in an ordered fashion. Spacetime was created at the Big Bang, and is not causally connected to anything 'before'. Mathematics is amazingly useful for understanding some parts of our universe (it doesn't seem to like nonlinear differential equations with trillions of variables though and unfortunately that's what is necessary to model almost anything real accurately) but it's completely unrelated to it. WHY it works so well is a complete mystery. A pretty nifty one if you ask me.
13:02 IM WRITING IT IN BASE UNIVERSE hahahhaha that should be on a tshirt
team correct now! :D
*Team Mystic
*Team Valor
...good grief.
+Thisisgaming #TeamKeem
Wooooo! The other guys are schmucks!
Pro Tip: When superimposing white text on a black background (which it looks like you pre-composed), change your blend mode to screen. This will remove the stark black background from the pre-composed image and have the text appear on top of your existing background for a much cleaner look. Conversely, black text on a white background can be superimposed nicely via the multiply blend mode.
+Emiliano Paternostro Thanks! I did the edit for this super late at night when I should be sleeping. I knew there must be a better way.
As I continue to watch, it appears you did apply some blend to the universes. That or you placed a luma key, or removed the background in Photoshop before hand.
i'll be that guy. technically the total possible number of youtube videos is 73,786,976,294,838,206,464. 64^11 before they run out of video IDs.
+SuperFpac That's possible videos which can exist at once. Not total possible in theory.
Tom Scott made a Video called "Will RUclips ever run out of IDs?"
They could just add a 64-it. With the way they select IDs they'd likely add one before that would happen. The problem is that they select them randomly, with the assumption that incidence is negligible.
+Luca Kommentarkanal that's where I got the number.
sugarfrosted They actually choose them randomly, but then the server that generated it asks every other server if it is already taken.
Wouldn't a femtohertz be 10^-15 Hz instead of 10^15 Hz? A hertz is a cycle per second so a femtohertz would be 0.000 000 000 000 001 cycles per second which is absurd. A Petahertz would be more correct.
ty
10^15 operatikns per second, which means each operation is done in 10^-15.So hes correct anyway
+Mr Aquiles later in the video he was right, it's just the fact he said femtohertz that is incorrect
ok.Now I undestood what you meant
thats what i was wondering
all the possible videos yet Leafy has managed to release the same video hundreds of times over
If the final number is incredibly large, you have to consider that a same set of images can have *a lot* of sets of sounds
Subscribed to the podcast, and downloaded both episodes. I'm a little bit behind on RUclips watch later list, but thank Glob I'm not even one base universe behind.
Matt did the "_% of my viewers aren't subscribed" before it was cool
10:25 "there's a universe i've just wiped clean". wow.
asa I get home I'll make program to export all possible 256x256 images
watches video
ok maybe I'll try 64x64
goes to claculator
ok maybe I'll try all 32×32 3 bit grayscale images
Not gonna finish either. It's 256^(64*64), which is 2^32768 possibilities, it's just insanely large.
That's still 2³²⁷⁶⁸ images, which has 9,863 digits...
Even with just 2x2 every image combined gives a total of 2.1 gigabytes.
+Dow Row nope. don't try anything above 4*4 and even that is too many (even in gray scale)
Dang, once again I find myself in the wrong "now".
Years ago I did this sort of calculation for the number of possible windows icons. The number of combinations was easy to calculate, the problem was I was trying to work out the number that was useful. I had to eliminate icons based on a number of criteria:
- Humans have a hard time discerning contrast changes
I love that you are counting in 10^82, it does sort of make it more accessible but it does mess with my head.
Where is the number of possible youtube videos in relation to grahams number?
it is a minute fraction of grahams number
This number is laughably tiny compared to grahams number.
+clearz It is relatively equal to zero, from G64's standpoint. As in, you haven't made any progress. At All.
Graham's Number is fucking mindboggling.
Um, Samrux, no. You're not even close.
It's actually equal to (mind boggling)↑(mind boggling)
;)
We are used to compare in factors. And that's usefull: if my car goes twice the normal speed it's a fast car. If it's 100 times faster it will probably burn up in the atmosphere so that's where everyday applications end. But in the world of exponents..... I'm just guessing but I bet the number of times grahams number is bigger is so large that the number of its digits would be unimaginable....
I was only aware of 50 shades of grey. Good to know.
Heavyboxes DIY Master these new ones are 50 shades darker
MegaMGstudios You mean 206 shades darker :)
Luke O'Reilly lmao you got that humour Freed
The best thing is: Somewhere in Pi, there's a sequence of digits containing all of these possible binary codes in a row, then a million times 1337 and then the same sequence the other way around!
It is not proven that Pi is normal, see any reputable site about maths for this
+Edward Nutt just because it's not repeating and irrational doesn't mean it contains every possible sequence. For example if we took pi and removed every instance of "12345" it would still be both irrational and not repeating. But this new number would not contain the sequence "12345".
+Edward Nutt take a look at 0.12112111211112111112...
WHAAAT? How do you know that? Are you some sort of mathologist? That's a CRAZY coincidence! :DDD
normal means that it contains all the other finite sequences inside of it. We think pi is normal but we dont know
Thanks Matt for a great video! I too enjoy that that "mind boggling number" is finite.
Awesome ! You are soo freaking smart - I love watching you every single day Matt.... and on OAOS
8:01: ...I don't want a computer that runs in femtohertz.
Why not?
+Zacchon Mat should have said Petahertz, femtohertz are what you measure incredibly slow things in like galaxies rotating, if a computer was running at 1 femtohertz it would take 10^15 seconds to do one thing
Zacchon did you even read the comments? :/
samdude278 Oh that's true, thank you. I can't say I use bigger or smaller prefixes than tera or pico that often ;)
404NameN0tF0und No, this was one of the first comments I read.
2⁻¹ seems to work. :P
Clever!
***** It's not sarcasm, he's referring to the 'dare' at 6:40 in the video
If you ignore the fractional form, for which every digit is a power of two.
and it's the smallest one, all smaller negative powers of 2 end with 25
As does 2^4 = 16
Your 4 episode BBC 4 programs are no longer available for download. Please give us a link to them. I wanna hear them!! PPLLEEAASSEE!!
www.bbc.co.uk/search?filter=programmes&q=festival+of+the+spoken+nerd
I was chewing gum while listening to Domestic Science, and started to chew in beat with the "clearly very capable"-bit. I believe that I somehow enforced the effect of that experiment (or torture), thus, I always hear "clearly very capable" when I a chewing now... Gee, thank you so much Matt Parker! (Great show though Matt!)
14:40 . . . (depending on your personal view of the philosophy of mathematics) . . .
Thank you. "What are numbers" and "what is mathematics" are two of my favorite subjects.
I have another Question: How many possible Universes are there? If you would imagine one single Atom as a cube of 1 Angstrom x 1 Angstrom, and then build up the entire Universe out of these cubes; given that there are 118 Elements in the periodic table... Tell me how many, in base universe and in base 10 please. :D
10^(10^111) in base ten or a row of 10^109 universes.
What's the size limit of that universe?
I just took the volume of the observable universe
Frederik Tessmann I was asking Xperia347.
Base universe is a great numbering system.
“High in the North in a land called Svithjod there is a mountain. It is a hundred miles long and a hundred miles high and once every thousand years a little bird comes to this mountain to sharpen its beak. When the mountain has thus been worn away a single day of eternity will have passed.”
― Hendrik Willem Van Loon, The Story of Mankind
Clearly very capable.
clearly very capable
clearly
Trivial
Now I want a downloadable loop of "clearly very capable"
we.tl/dbWOLIsOke
Makes my day every time i watch a standupmaths video, bloody hilarious.
Fun fact: The 'newer' (verified about 6 years ago) versions of Excel have 1,048,576 (2^1024) rows. XFD 1,048,576 is the bottom right corner of a spreadsheet.
There is an incredible amount of redundant filler in this video.
+The Chopping Block Thank goodness this comment is all killer.
+standupmaths ?
Nigga the man is a living meme.
+standupmaths are you able to calculate how many kilometres of 'wooosh' did your comment fly above the commentee's head?
Turn the colour off on your screen. That should help.
2^524,288 images, huh? How many of them would be dank memes?
Finitely many
There would be every meme that could ever exist
Anyone else get a vsauce vibe from this?
Matt is clearly very capable of a collaboration video.
Vsauce actually references Matt on at least two occasions and Michael visited Nottingham, where Parker works
What the heck is vsause?
+TheRedstoneBrony you've been missing out on a large part of RUclips
He was making a joke about the spelling of vsauce in the original comment. -_-
If you think about it, if all works of art are just some of the more interesting configurations of matter then an artist is not someone who creates but who selects some of the most interesting configurations. So really, comission could be considered a finder's fee.
6:45 Incidentally, my favorite two-power is 2^25 = 33554432, where three consecutive pairs are found, and all digits of this number are below 6.
Starts at 04:00.
I love coming back to this video every now and again just to have my mind blown by the pure scale of it all.
What's insane is that if you set the supercomputer running at one image a femtosecond, you could also, say set your wealth to accumulate at the same rate of one penny (USD) per femtosecond. That way you have the same amount of pennies as images. How long would it take for you to become the richest man on the planet?
Well, since a femtosecond is 1/10^15 and Bezos' net worth in pennies is around 10^13, you are literally 100 times richer than the richest man on the planet after just one second of your supercomputer running. In fact if you were to blink (roughly 0.1 seconds) you would still be a trillionaire and therefore around 10 times richer than Bezos.
Every second. 100 Bezoses. And it takes 29 million universes one atom every single femtosecond to complete the RUclips task. It's unbelievable.
I think that's underestimating the mind blown-ness, it's more accurate to say it takes a whole universe per atom in the universe per atom in the universe per atom in the universe per atom in the universe (repeat writing this out 29 million times). Once you ran the first 13.8 billion years of RUclips videos, one video every femtosecond, only then would you put one atom in the 2nd universe, and after running another 13.8 billion years, you could put another atom in, so you'd have to run the whole universe an entire universe of atoms number of times to fill the 2nd universe, but that lets you put only 1 atom in the 3rd universe. You then have to run 13.8 billion years to start another 1st atom in the 2nd universe, another 13.8 billion years to put the 2nd atom in the 2nd universe and so on and refill the 2nd universe with atoms all over again just to put the 2nd atom in the 3rd universe.......Just like you have to run RUclips videos the whole universe to put 1 atom in the 2nd universe, so must you refill the whole 2nd universe for each atom you put in the 3rd.
Once the 3rd universe fills up with atoms, then you can place an atom in the 4th universe, and it begins again: Run RUclips videos 13.8 billion years -> 1 atom in 2nd universe -> whole universe of atoms in 2nd universe -> 1 atom in 3rd universe -> whole universe of atoms in 3rd universe -> 1 atom in 4th universe -> whole universe of atoms in 4th universe -> 1 atom in 5th universe.....and so on for 29 million universes. In other words, for each level of universe, you have to redo the level below it a universe of atoms number of times going back every level to the beginning just to add 1 atom.
But the YT-Video number is just for the images and not the sound, what about that?
This is mind-boggling. Incredible video. You're awesome!
"BBC" Oh cool, congrats!
"BBC RADIO" Pretty good
"BBC RADIO 4" Ok, that's still awesome
"BBC RADIO 4 at 11:15" Is before lunchtime a good time?
"BBC RADIO 4 at 11:15 PM" OH COME ON, they deserve more!
This is classic nerdsniping
The number of images containing sensible objects is thankfully a lot smaller. But still, it makes you appreciate how insane the task of pattern recognition actually is. Say you are training a computer to only distinguish cats from dogs. While a lot smaller than the set of all possible images, the set of images showing all possible cats and dogs is still absolutely astronomical. And you are trying to find a function that maps this insanely large set to the correct answers. When you look at the problem in this way it is kind of amazing how well these algorithms do.
just approximations, the latent space isn't at this scale
Is that number including sound? XD
Chroma Spark no.
@@suwinkhamchaiwong8382 Actually yes. He makes a lot of gross simplifications and unrealistic assumptions based on the maximum RUclips file size (128 GB), and considers all permutations of bits in a file of said size. In reality, only certain permutations of bits in a 128 GB file will result in a valid file of a certain file type. Video file types will indicate where the video is and where the audio is, but none of his calculations about RUclips videos take this into account.
Yay I was able to calculate the correct amount of images. Great video Matt!
I like to think about it as creatives "find" a meaningful "number" among the quasi-infinite "library" of "numbers".
how many AUDIO recordings of 1 minute can be? I dont even know where to start...
Infinite, assuming there is no limit on the frequency.
But there is a limit on the frequency, so it's not.
Audio CD format features 44100 samples per second in 16 bit resolution. This means every sample can have 65534 different values. 44100*60 = 2,646,000 that is the number of samples in one minute. Every sample has the respect the total number of combinations of all the other samples so the number of possibilities is 65,534^2,646,000. Of course waaaaay most of them would be random noise.
In a power of 2 that would be approximately 2^(256^21.33). The power written as a single number would be 52 digits long.
+ender_scythe smallest is planck left and largest is Idk maybe the size of the universe
That makes me one of your people for some time!!
+gakilb Alright! Good on you.
+standupmaths hey, uh, didn't tom Scott do the exact same thing just yesterday?
+that nerd in the corner no....
+Frostyy whoops, I meant few months ago
10^15 Hz is not a femtohertz its a petahertz. 10^-15 Hz would be a femtohertz.
This is one of your best videos!!!
"But it is finite" THANK YOU for mentioning this, as it will serve me well in future conversations with people who are utterly ignorant about infinity.
graham's number in base universe?
no
Someone yes
So, in theory, if someone makes this super computer. I could find a sex scene with my crush in there?
If you do, lemme know.
sk8rdman Dammit. Also, I was talking about the 4k thing he talked about at the end.
Not one, but all such scenes :P
Yes. But at that point, wouldn't it be easier to simply create the sex scene by individually shading each pixel?
What if you ignore the images that are rotations of existing images?
DickButt divide the number by 4
Going by a different interpretation of "how many RUclips videos are possible?"
The unique video addresses in URLs have 11 characters. Each character can have 64 possible values (0-9, A-Z, a-z, - or _) and so there are 64^11 possible RUclips video addresses, which is 2^66 or about 7.37x10^19 (73 quintillion). Still an incomprehensibly large number, but that hypothetical supercomputer would only take about 20.5 hours to get through that. Nowhere near base universe.
Very cool! I really liked how it put the age and size of the universe into context. It would be fun to see this expressed in terms of the old fable about a bird flying a scarf across a 6 mile x 6 mile granite mountain top once every hundred years. How many mountains would have been worn down in that amount of time?
höhö
>the video clocks 4:50
>i realize were talking about grayscale images, not Grace Kelly images
12:30 to 12:38 at .5 speed
Good thing we're creating a vast number of new universes in order to keep track of our actual computations-- because we're gonna need them.
There aren't enough atoms in the universe to build a memory that would store all possible RUclips videos, even if every atom could be used as a binary (two-state) indicator.
He pulled the good ol' dream "% of my viewers aren't subscribed" before it was cool
Matt Parker is CLEARLY VERY CAPABLE to explain these things!
allright, subscribed. there you go. have been lurking around long enough
It looks like the BBC actually is keeping the broadcasts online for a month not a week, which is great, since I just now saw this video and I still have a chance to listen to the broadcasts from week one.
since watching these videos the word primetime now means something else to me
I am almost 5 years into the future : ) Eddies in the flow of time ! Back in the days of possible look n feel copyright. I thought of releasing a program that could do this and then you could prove that all images produced after would be infringing on the output of this program.
This video is absolutely exceptional