VSauce 1 - Supertasks - General

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffUnNaQTfZE[/media] Thanks for making me question my own existence again, Michael

A little too abstract for my taste, honestly. I like the ones that are a little more grounded and easily accessible.

That talkshow theme in the beginning made me think I had a fever hallucination, that was so surreal. Damn.

I really like that bit at the end. There's something about the image of early man striking out into the unending vastness of the ocean, in search of new lands and facing nearly certain death that's beautifully bleak.

More curious about the infinite amount of sweaters.

I can't believe that I stopped doing my studying of sequences and series to take a break to watch a random video that turned out to be about sequences and series

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;49269842]More curious about the infinite amount of sweaters.[/QUOTE] It's easy. Mark has an infinite amount of sweaters. He orders them from thickest on the outside to thinest on the inside. They amount to the total thickness of two sweaters. He is wearing cake. Don't you get it?

You know, it's tricky, but if I could travel back in time to any era, I'd probably want to go back to when humans and Neanderthals coexisted, and just.. observe. Imagine getting to see the origins of your own species, watching those people knowing that any one of them could be the ancestor of every single human being alive today.

From what I gather from that is everything is in a superposition. Where the entangled particles are is good question though.

I will never have an infinite amount of balls. :cry:

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;49270685]You know, it's tricky, but if I could travel back in time to any era, I'd probably want to go back to when humans and Neanderthals coexisted, and just.. observe. Imagine getting to see the origins of your own species, watching those people knowing that any one of them could be the ancestor of every single human being alive today.[/QUOTE] you'd have to gooooooooo way back that to see the origins talking about meeting lucy

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;49272510]you'd have to gooooooooo way back that to see the origins talking about meeting lucy[/QUOTE] Well, technically modern humans arose from minor breeding between homo sapiens and homo neanderthalis, though it didn't seem to change our biology that much.

Why are they perpetuating the myth that the Planck length is the smallest length? It's not, as far as we know. Our theories just don't work at smaller lengths yet. Astrophysics has given us an [I]experimental[/I] bound set on the "smallest possible size" that space could have, and it is much smaller than the Planck length. If space actually had a smallest possible distance of the Planck length, violations of relativity would be detectable with current experiments.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;49272679]Why are they perpetuating the myth that the Planck length is the smallest length? It's not, as far as we know. Our theories just don't work at smaller lengths yet. Astrophysics has given us an [I]experimental[/I] bound set on the "smallest possible size" that space could have, and it is much smaller than the Planck length. If space actually had a smallest possible distance of the Planck length, violations of relativity would be detectable with current experiments.[/QUOTE] He didn't specifically say it was the 'smallest length', he said it was the smallest 'meaningful' distance, and even conceded there were smaller lengths (7:41, any observations / interactions between particles "more accurate than this span" make no sense within physics as we understand it)

[QUOTE=NixNax123;49272738]He didn't specifically say it was the 'smallest length', he said it was the smallest 'meaningful' distance, and even conceded there were smaller lengths (7:41, any observations / interactions between particles "more accurate than this span" make no sense within physics as we understand it)[/QUOTE] I tried to interpret it that way, but I think his language was not clear enough, particularly when it immediately talking about what the case would be if there was a smallest unit of length, and saying that these things we know from physics make that idea sensible in the real world. [editline]8th December 2015[/editline] At best I think the wording was unclear enough to reinforce that myth for the average person.

I hate all this abstract mathematics nonsense his videos have been about lately. This one bored me so much I couldn't even watch all of it. Physics > math any day

[QUOTE=orgornot;49273163]I hate all this abstract mathematics nonsense his videos have been about lately. This one bored me so much I couldn't even watch all of it. Physics > math any day[/QUOTE] but physics is just applied math math is fun

[QUOTE=NixNax123;49273170]but physics is just applied math math is fun[/QUOTE] And math's just physics unconstrained by percepts of reality. Videos about subjects grounded in reality are far more relatable and thus more intriguing.

Michael from Vsauce looks like a bearded Jack from RLM

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;49272824]I tried to interpret it that way, but I think his language was not clear enough, particularly when it immediately talking about what the case would be if there was a smallest unit of length, and saying that these things we know from physics make that idea sensible in the real world. [editline]8th December 2015[/editline] At best I think the wording was unclear enough to reinforce that myth for the average person.[/QUOTE] The video screems "needy showy physics/math second semester" to me. [editline]9th December 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=NixNax123;49273170]but physics is just applied math math is fun[/QUOTE] Math IS fun but any mathematician would've immediately noticed that the question he was asking doesn't fit the problem. He even explains all of the paradoxes yet still mixes the concept/algorthm of infinity with actual numbers/finite reality. Asking "What flag would be up at the last step?" and then wondering about the paradox is similar to asking "Who's cooking the dinner after the fish finished their tapdance?" and wondering about the confusion.

[QUOTE=Killuah;49275188] Math IS fun but any mathematician would've immediately noticed that the question he was asking doesn't fit the problem. He even explains all of the paradoxes yet still mixes the concept/algorthm of infinity with actual numbers/finite reality. Asking "What flag would be up at the last step?" and then wondering about the paradox is similar to asking "Who's cooking the dinner after the fish finished their tapdance?" and wondering about the confusion.[/QUOTE] he directly acknowledges this

Its like Calculus II all over again

[QUOTE=NixNax123;49275238]he directly acknowledges this[/QUOTE] Yeah but he draws no conclusion from it.

[QUOTE=Killuah;49278630]Yeah but he draws no conclusion from it.[/QUOTE] I thought that the conclusion drawn was that there could [I]not[/I] be a conclusion drawn because there simply isn't enough given information.