I wrote to Kip Thorne years ago with a question about rest mass. He wrote back very quickly - a nice letter that cleared up my confusion about it. His tone was kind even though I realize in hindsight that I was coming from a place of extreme ignorance. What a great guy!
I use to lose socks in the wash, then one day I said to myself "this is stupid, I will lose my socks no more" It's been two years since I've mysteriously lost a sock.
You're right about his credit as Executive Producer, but it's weird to say he was "in the credits", since he and producer Lynda Obst developed the concept for the whole film and he was the driving force behind literally all of the science the film presented. It's at the same level as saying that Matthew McConaughey was "in the credits" for his small role in the film.
Well, in interstellar the higher beings constructed this *representation* of a tesseract, so that the main character can actually understand it. This representation wasn't meant to be a blanket "this is what it looks like" it was meant to be a tool to help the main character understand.
One of the things I liked about that scene was that it projects the way the tesseract is moving 'around' him (1st person), he's not falling but the tesseract is moving around him with time being 'his' reality. I implore everyone to see it that way, it'll be a 'better' representation. Just really well done. (edit typo)
At the end of the day it's a 3d representation of a tesseract which is hard to do, same way a cube is hard to show in 3d, it just looks like a square, the 4d cubes where it moves around are the best representations I've seen because of the way it shows how the cubes are folded in and all connected at each side, in my opinion. But the interstellar tesseract definitely gives me the feel of the higher dimensional non linear aspect of the higher dimensions
Most of my subs page is shorts now from creators. Many of them are just multiple snippets from the full videos. Honestly shorts should go in a different channel so I never have to see them.
@@danlake7970 Agreed; shorts should go in another folder on a creator's channel. I've gone to sub a few creators because I've liked their shorts, then found that their channel list is made up of mostly shorts and had swallowed up their regular videos.
"I dont support shorts." Lol what? Might as well just say "I only like videos if they're long, because shorts are new and trendy and I want to not like something."
@@Immad1337 I don't think that's what he's saying though... I'm guessing he's talking about boycotting the trend of dumbing down videos to a few seconds to cater for the short attention span of the masses.
For me it's on par with what you see and experience in the film *2001 A Space Odyssey* there's a lot of room for metaphorical stuff like the Tesseract.
If you believe in a soul. Just a soul not religion or god. But, the simple concept of a soul a spirit an energy. Then you believe 4th dimension is real.
The tesseract was WAY more believable that Anne Hathaway's scientist character droning on about how love transcends understanding. She's a scientists that doesn't understand evolution. I get that she's not a biologist, but how is her view of love similar to that of a Christian Twitter bot channel?
Ok, now I'm done with the shorts-format. Tidbits of info are fun, until it's just a few fragments of tidbits. I want some kind of shielding against this mockery.
There is some evidence we live in 4d space (entanglement). However I don't think the tesseract was an appropriate showing of it but what else could they do?
It’s a five dimensional construct seen from a three dimensional viewpoint. The people complaining about it don’t even understand how many dimensions it has lol, so they should probably just not speak.
I think if there is any criticism to be levied at the “tesseract” in Interstellar, it should be in regards to calling it a tesseract more than at how it was represented. The object in the film was not a cube of four spatial dimensions, but an interface designed to allow a three dimensional being to interact with time.
Given that time is generally considered to be the 4th dimension (ie space-time) and depending on one's reference frame, time very well could and iirc mathematically is considered to be a spatial dimension. Humanity just travels through it linearly, at a 1-1 ratio.
How about criticizing the overuse of a dimension concept itself? There can’t be any physical prove that dimensions are existing in the reality. You can switch the cubic Euclidean space to something less useful like a stack of tetrahedrons and measure a point in space by length to each of its 4 points, therefore it would be 4th dimension without time.
If shorts from this channel start popping in my feed every day, I'll have to unsubscribe because they take space away from content that I might have been interested in.
Four spatial dimensions? You can't envision it exactly as it would be, but you could envision it using time as the fourth dimension. A hypersphere would be a sphere that appears out of nothing, grows more and more slowly until it reaches a maximum size, and then shrinks back to nothing. It's hard to imagine rotating most objects using this method though.
@@chitlitlah yes, I should have specified spatial dimensions. I'm not sure how a temporal dimension could be depicted visually. Whatever, it's a science fiction film, it doesn't need to be realistic.
Yeah. The movie is taking four-dimensional spacetime, supposedly making it so a human can see it in three spatial dimensions, and then showing it to us on a two-dimensional screen. I don't think there's a way to do that realistically. But you can suspend your disbelief pretty easily.
If you mean "a human imagining a 4th dimensional object in 4D space", then I have a small task for you: You know how when a 3D being looks at a 2D square, they see all sides + the inside? Now imagine you're a 4D being looking at a 3D cube, seeing all 6 sides, all 8 corners, all 12 edges and inside all at once without the cube being translucent. Who knows whether anyone has managed that at all, let alone imagine a 4D tesseract like that? Would be a hard feat to prove as well. But if you simply mean conceptualizing, then that's simple. Take a 2D square, give it extra depth across a third spatial dimension and you got a cube. Take a 3D cube and give it extra depth across a 4th spatial dimension and you got a 4D terract.
Love the title but there's so little content - nothing new for me - that it ended up clickbait. In fact, I clicked it at least 4 times, convinced that there was more to come. I want "shorts" that are 2-5 minutes and thoughtful.
Maybe but we have no idea, we can't even see through the Event Horizon of a Blackhole so it's all speculation and I don't know what theory or idea I stand by.
Man I was just about to comment when saw this. My level 5 trip on shrooms, seeing all the moments of my life happening at the same time around me when I was peaking, before seeing this movie, then when I saw the movie I thought I Know where that ideas come from
Love your channel! Please keep making skits, they make a fun & engaging lead-in to your videos :) Also, I would love to see a video on the current floods in Pakistan & the climate change vulnerability of various regions of the world. Thanks!
LOL How TF fuq do people criticize about the thing they don't even have any clue??? I mean no one know what actually happened in there and the fking critique still got something to say about that??
I don't like shorts, they belong on TikTok. Because this is RUclips and I see something vertically filmed, I find this offensive and it clutters my feed. I was subscribed for years but will unsub to purge the shorts from my feed. Bye!
@@Aconspiracyofravens1 the recommendation algorithm was perfectly fine, this is only meant to compete with TikTok and I don't think the density is good at all, in this same video we're left with more questions than answers
It was dumb. Whole movie. Just art that ignored actual complete science but focused on basic ideas some sci-fi people had without any sort of in depth analysis. Star Trek was closer
Funny is no one gives a crap about Tesseract we didn't even know what it was called it's a movie I thought he was in just some kind of a matrix thing so all you people doing your own little world no one else knew what it was and didn't care
I hate these but YT is pushing hard for creators to use them, in this case we're left without an explanation on WHY it is more complex, it sucks. Maybe a new video Joe?
@@chitlitlah I didn’t watch it. Just started, paused and wrote the comment which is valid feedback to a content creator I am a fan of and have followed for years.
@@chitlitlah I'm interested on the creator and its content, if he posts something like this of course I'm going to be curious but that doesn't mean I like it in fact I was disappointed
The creator isn't making these because he wants to. He's making them because RUclips is coercing him into it. You can better show RUclips you don't like shorts by ignoring them rather than watching them and leaving comments, regardless of what you say. I don't mind the occasional short video personally, but RUclips is pushing them trying to be like Tiktok, and the more people watch them and comment, the worse it's going to get.
I hated the last act, i felt bamboozled out of a proper ending. In hindsight, it was only really the 2nd act that contained science, as the 1st act was mostly just "wtf?", but the 3rd was "WTF?!". Spending like 3 hours on a plot that doesn't matter, nice.
What about a tesseract (or indeed any hyper-shape) is unknown or made up? The challenge for the film was to show a structure with four spatial dimensions projected into a space with three spatial dimensions, have it be a set used in the story and navigated by the characters rather than just an abstract mathematical object, and have it be understood by the viewer without overt explanation. Mathematicians and scientists like Thorne deal with "unknown" objects like the tesseract all the time, and could easily spot and call out an implementation that did a poor job representing what needed to be understood. Especially when that means visualizing higher dimensions. Just like with the black hole, they didn't invent any concepts here; they just did the best anyone had done so far showing the concept on screen.
@@KyleJMitchell Apparently you believe what they say about it's existence, which they cannot prove. I am supposing that, you also approve of the man approving of a simulation of something that is basically only a mathematical idea, to try to explain things we don't understand. My intension is not to insult you, you may believe anything you wish. I just don't subscribe to these theories that are supposed facts about things unknown
Love is the one thing we're capable of perceiving that transcends time and space... is one of the most dumb as fuck movie lines ever committed to film.
@@raaaaaaaaaam496 Well, I've seen it. Including that jaw droopingly stupid ending. The reason it gets so much hate is because of it was so good up to then. Just like game of thrones. IF they were that bad to start with, no one would care.
I wrote to Kip Thorne years ago with a question about rest mass. He wrote back very quickly - a nice letter that cleared up my confusion about it. His tone was kind even though I realize in hindsight that I was coming from a place of extreme ignorance. What a great guy!
what was the question?
The Tesseract is where all the left socks go when they disappear from the clothes dryer.
@Jerms_McErms 🤣🤣
@Jerms_McErms Then what about stuff disappearing from my basket?
_laughs in using garment bag to wash socks_
I use to lose socks in the wash, then one day I said to myself "this is stupid, I will lose my socks no more"
It's been two years since I've mysteriously lost a sock.
@Jerms_McErms I'm asking because if you know the answer, why does that happen?
at the end of the day its a work of art, and its a beautiful and well made piece that ppl enjoy, which is all that rly matters
well said
Of course Kip Thorne is a fan, he was a paid consultant on the film, he was even in the credits as Executive Producer🤣
You're right about his credit as Executive Producer, but it's weird to say he was "in the credits", since he and producer Lynda Obst developed the concept for the whole film and he was the driving force behind literally all of the science the film presented. It's at the same level as saying that Matthew McConaughey was "in the credits" for his small role in the film.
If that’s true. The tesseract is flawless 😊
Well, in interstellar the higher beings constructed this *representation* of a tesseract, so that the main character can actually understand it.
This representation wasn't meant to be a blanket "this is what it looks like" it was meant to be a tool to help the main character understand.
I loved it, it was a great design for an unknown thing that made sense for the story.
the also say in the movie that where he was was dimensionally modified for him to be able to understand it as a 3d being
One of the things I liked about that scene was that it projects the way the tesseract is moving 'around' him (1st person), he's not falling but the tesseract is moving around him with time being 'his' reality.
I implore everyone to see it that way, it'll be a 'better' representation.
Just really well done.
(edit typo)
At the end of the day it's a 3d representation of a tesseract which is hard to do, same way a cube is hard to show in 3d, it just looks like a square, the 4d cubes where it moves around are the best representations I've seen because of the way it shows how the cubes are folded in and all connected at each side, in my opinion. But the interstellar tesseract definitely gives me the feel of the higher dimensional non linear aspect of the higher dimensions
Great vid... I don't support these shorts, but i like you Joe
Most of my subs page is shorts now from creators. Many of them are just multiple snippets from the full videos. Honestly shorts should go in a different channel so I never have to see them.
@@danlake7970 Agreed; shorts should go in another folder on a creator's channel. I've gone to sub a few creators because I've liked their shorts, then found that their channel list is made up of mostly shorts and had swallowed up their regular videos.
"I dont support shorts." Lol what? Might as well just say "I only like videos if they're long, because shorts are new and trendy and I want to not like something."
@@Immad1337 I don't think that's what he's saying though... I'm guessing he's talking about boycotting the trend of dumbing down videos to a few seconds to cater for the short attention span of the masses.
@@Immad1337 my home page just gets worse and worse with these scrolling sessions
This is the perfect kind of content for shorts on your channel and I love it! Keep up the cool work, Joe!
Could you explore some of the programs/games that deal with higher dimensions? It be a fascinating topic.
My all time favorite movie!!! Anytime I tell someone about it I almost always rewatch it
Interstellar was awesome.
And entering the tesseract, he reduced his possibility to the limits of the tesseract.
It's the fifth dimension where you can see all of the 4th at the same time.
For me it's on par with what you see and experience in the film *2001 A Space Odyssey* there's a lot of room for metaphorical stuff like the Tesseract.
If you believe in a soul. Just a soul not religion or god. But, the simple concept of a soul a spirit an energy. Then you believe 4th dimension is real.
The tesseract was WAY more believable that Anne Hathaway's scientist character droning on about how love transcends understanding. She's a scientists that doesn't understand evolution. I get that she's not a biologist, but how is her view of love similar to that of a Christian Twitter bot channel?
Ooooh, sick burn.
A tesseract is not a 4D cube. It’s a mathematical inquiry of a 4D space set within an Euclidean geometrical system.
Ok, now I'm done with the shorts-format.
Tidbits of info are fun, until it's just a few fragments of tidbits.
I want some kind of shielding against this mockery.
That was one of the best parts of the movie. It made sense of so many oddities especially the bookshelf. I loved that movie.
There is some evidence we live in 4d space (entanglement). However I don't think the tesseract was an appropriate showing of it but what else could they do?
Too many #shorts Joe. Cluttering up by subs page with these.
It’s a five dimensional construct seen from a three dimensional viewpoint. The people complaining about it don’t even understand how many dimensions it has lol, so they should probably just not speak.
I think if there is any criticism to be levied at the “tesseract” in Interstellar, it should be in regards to calling it a tesseract more than at how it was represented. The object in the film was not a cube of four spatial dimensions, but an interface designed to allow a three dimensional being to interact with time.
Given that time is generally considered to be the 4th dimension (ie space-time) and depending on one's reference frame, time very well could and iirc mathematically is considered to be a spatial dimension. Humanity just travels through it linearly, at a 1-1 ratio.
@@TheMariusDarkwolf Ok, so maybe you could describe the Interstellar tesseract as a 3 dimensional net of 4D space-time?
How about criticizing the overuse of a dimension concept itself? There can’t be any physical prove that dimensions are existing in the reality. You can switch the cubic Euclidean space to something less useful like a stack of tetrahedrons and measure a point in space by length to each of its 4 points, therefore it would be 4th dimension without time.
That movie has no flaw. That is all. Good day to you all 😂❤
Wasn't Kip the consultant for the blackhole graphics?
If shorts from this channel start popping in my feed every day, I'll have to unsubscribe because they take space away from content that I might have been interested in.
27 second video… what is the point Joe? .. It’s really annoying that these videos litter up the subscriptions list.
Got to have your critics. If you're not being criticised you're doing nothing of any value.
Trying to represent something visually that is impossible for us to even conceive of is no mean feat. They get points for the attempt.
A lattice of continuous shape and form?
Is the human mind even capable of conceptualizing a four dimensional object?
They say it in the film; it's a fourth-dimensional object created in three dimensions in a way we can interact with it.
Four spatial dimensions? You can't envision it exactly as it would be, but you could envision it using time as the fourth dimension. A hypersphere would be a sphere that appears out of nothing, grows more and more slowly until it reaches a maximum size, and then shrinks back to nothing. It's hard to imagine rotating most objects using this method though.
@@chitlitlah yes, I should have specified spatial dimensions. I'm not sure how a temporal dimension could be depicted visually.
Whatever, it's a science fiction film, it doesn't need to be realistic.
Yeah. The movie is taking four-dimensional spacetime, supposedly making it so a human can see it in three spatial dimensions, and then showing it to us on a two-dimensional screen. I don't think there's a way to do that realistically.
But you can suspend your disbelief pretty easily.
If you mean "a human imagining a 4th dimensional object in 4D space", then I have a small task for you:
You know how when a 3D being looks at a 2D square, they see all sides + the inside? Now imagine you're a 4D being looking at a 3D cube, seeing all 6 sides, all 8 corners, all 12 edges and inside all at once without the cube being translucent. Who knows whether anyone has managed that at all, let alone imagine a 4D tesseract like that? Would be a hard feat to prove as well.
But if you simply mean conceptualizing, then that's simple. Take a 2D square, give it extra depth across a third spatial dimension and you got a cube. Take a 3D cube and give it extra depth across a 4th spatial dimension and you got a 4D terract.
My biggest criticism is the planet with gravity so massive that one hour on the surface is 30 years in orbit. PUHLEEEEAAAASSSSEEEE!
Thats... that's real science though?? 😄 lol
@@KabbalahSherry 1 hour to 30 years? I think not.
Love the title but there's so little content - nothing new for me - that it ended up clickbait. In fact, I clicked it at least 4 times, convinced that there was more to come. I want "shorts" that are 2-5 minutes and thoughtful.
Maybe but we have no idea, we can't even see through the Event Horizon of a Blackhole so it's all speculation and I don't know what theory or idea I stand by.
All cubes that exist in this universe are 4D... You do realize that the 4th dimension is time
This guy has a BA in Radio Broadcasting. Yea, he knows string theory and quantum mechanics lol
Actually is a borgesian library...
Sure but what does Rip Torn think?
Well, he was the scientific adviser for the movie…
Imagine not being called Kip(like me lol)
My biggest critique is the black hole time dilation. Its wayyyy too exagerrated
If you have taken acid before you understand a tesseract without actually understanding a tesseract
Man I was just about to comment when saw this.
My level 5 trip on shrooms, seeing all the moments of my life happening at the same time around me when I was peaking, before seeing this movie, then when I saw the movie I thought I Know where that ideas come from
I teach metaphysics and you are both correct
All dimensions after the 3rd are theoretical not hypothetical
Way to pat yourself on the back Kip. I mean it was his idea for the movie 😂
I hate shorts, I understand YT is pushing for them but here we're left with more questions than answers, maybe a new video Joe?
turns out there's one already: ruclips.net/video/wWU8aDEuQ-c/видео.html
It's not a tesseract cause it's clearly a sphere and not a cube.
yeah, so?
Until MCU had their own "Tesseract"
I think it's funny because I've never seen Interstellar and I think at this point the only way I will end up seeing it is by accident.
You're missing out on a beautiful film
Melissa, dollars to donuts that it will grow on you, when you watch it for the first few times.
Its a lot like when I enter a k hole
Love your channel! Please keep making skits, they make a fun & engaging lead-in to your videos :)
Also, I would love to see a video on the current floods in Pakistan & the climate change vulnerability of various regions of the world.
Thanks!
Well he was also the consulting physicist on the movie soooo 🤷🏽♂️
Love the new Shorts! And they're improving by the day!
Quick tip, rapidly changing subtitles is more engaging in these shorts than long still ones.
Lol I’m imagining one-word subtitles
Its fiction..... Science... Fiction.
LOL How TF fuq do people criticize about the thing they don't even have any clue??? I mean no one know what actually happened in there and the fking critique still got something to say about that??
its called science-fiction not science-science
I thought it was fantastic
Wow y’all really salty about this. Read his post, and if you really can’t stand this then go get Nebula instead.
I hate these shorts I need full videos
No science about space is backed by facts. It’s all theoretical. Look it up
good movie
Joe Scott
stopped watching this guy when he cried cuz hrc lost her bid for prez. don't know why it popped up on my feed. at least he's not still crying...
And we care because why
How anyone can hate on more content is insane
quality over quantity
I don't like shorts, they belong on TikTok. Because this is RUclips and I see something vertically filmed, I find this offensive and it clutters my feed. I was subscribed for years but will unsub to purge the shorts from my feed. Bye!
I wonder if humans can comprehend a 5 dimension object or space
Ah yes, my favorite movie, "The Astronaut in the Bookshelf" 😑
I hate it when my favorite youtubers resort to wannabe ticktock mode.
could you chill a bit?
they have to to make money. is he really your favorite youtuber if u want him to go broke?
YT is pushing for this, they'll probably be left out if they don't comply
@@SamusUy well, this content is good at finding new viewers while providing a good density of information
@@Aconspiracyofravens1 the recommendation algorithm was perfectly fine, this is only meant to compete with TikTok and I don't think the density is good at all, in this same video we're left with more questions than answers
It was dumb. Whole movie. Just art that ignored actual complete science but focused on basic ideas some sci-fi people had without any sort of in depth analysis. Star Trek was closer
Funny is no one gives a crap about Tesseract we didn't even know what it was called it's a movie I thought he was in just some kind of a matrix thing so all you people doing your own little world no one else knew what it was and didn't care
what is happening here, shorts with Joe? that's new...
i knew you were experimenting with us! XD
No. That scene sucked. It could have been a great movie.
Don’t want to support shorts… Do want to support Joe…
I guess Joe wins. :-)
YT shorts- uurghgh!🤬
I hate these but YT is pushing hard for creators to use them, in this case we're left without an explanation on WHY it is more complex, it sucks. Maybe a new video Joe?
You claim to hate them, yet you watched it and commented on it, all the more reason for RUclips to keep pushing them.
@@chitlitlah I didn’t watch it. Just started, paused and wrote the comment which is valid feedback to a content creator I am a fan of and have followed for years.
@@chitlitlah I'm interested on the creator and its content, if he posts something like this of course I'm going to be curious but that doesn't mean I like it in fact I was disappointed
The creator isn't making these because he wants to. He's making them because RUclips is coercing him into it. You can better show RUclips you don't like shorts by ignoring them rather than watching them and leaving comments, regardless of what you say.
I don't mind the occasional short video personally, but RUclips is pushing them trying to be like Tiktok, and the more people watch them and comment, the worse it's going to get.
The tesseract ending pretty much spoiled an already meh movie for me
I don't get why people can't just say that that scene was just really bad
I hated the last act, i felt bamboozled out of a proper ending.
In hindsight, it was only really the 2nd act that contained science, as the 1st act was mostly just "wtf?", but the 3rd was "WTF?!".
Spending like 3 hours on a plot that doesn't matter, nice.
Sigh... here I was waiting to see Rip Torn. :P RIP, Rip.
Full video: ruclips.net/video/wWU8aDEuQ-c/видео.html
ah nice, didn't knew there was already a video on this
👊👊👊👊👊👈
Repeat to yourself, it's just a show. You should really just relax.
Double thumbs up
Yeah, when you totally make up something unknown, you can back, or not back any idea that suits you...
What about a tesseract (or indeed any hyper-shape) is unknown or made up? The challenge for the film was to show a structure with four spatial dimensions projected into a space with three spatial dimensions, have it be a set used in the story and navigated by the characters rather than just an abstract mathematical object, and have it be understood by the viewer without overt explanation. Mathematicians and scientists like Thorne deal with "unknown" objects like the tesseract all the time, and could easily spot and call out an implementation that did a poor job representing what needed to be understood. Especially when that means visualizing higher dimensions.
Just like with the black hole, they didn't invent any concepts here; they just did the best anyone had done so far showing the concept on screen.
@@KyleJMitchell Apparently you believe what they say about it's existence, which they cannot prove. I am supposing that, you also approve of the man approving of a simulation of something that is basically only a mathematical idea, to try to explain things we don't understand. My intension is not to insult you, you may believe anything you wish. I just don't subscribe to these theories that are supposed facts about things unknown
I'm a simple man. I see Joe's notification, I click. Short, full video, all is fine.
.
That movie was so stupid and ridiculously melodramatic. Anyone who liked it is indicating their low intelligence andlack of taste.
Lmao. You should be a Rotten Tomatoes reviewer.
Love is the one thing we're capable of perceiving that transcends time and space... is one of the most dumb as fuck movie lines ever committed to film.
@@tycarne7850 it’s meant to be an argument she is using to go to her boyfriends planet. You shouldn’t take it seriously
The average interstellar hater has not even seen the movie I have found
@@raaaaaaaaaam496 Well, I've seen it. Including that jaw droopingly stupid ending. The reason it gets so much hate is because of it was so good up to then. Just like game of thrones. IF they were that bad to start with, no one would care.
Durp shorts don't pay. Toktik just take the data on all your devices and platform
Thank you.
Such a good movie.