Chapter 1-4 Add'l: Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND), Inverse-Square Law, and Incompressible Jello

[@edylanr]

Can't believe we are still watching? This is some of the most exciting science I've seen in quite some time. And the editing is on point too lol. Keep the videos coming.

[@NauticalStrong]

I totally agree. Great work. Love it!

[@davidweiss3365]

Not really science until it’s peer reviewed It makes predictions that can falsify it and it holds up in testing. However, it is a very interesting idea. I just wish he would give us an actual formula and actual predictions that we should be seeing if this is true. I understand he doesn’t feel like doing a paper. While that’s annoying, he really should just provide a modified formula for his hypothesis

[@spooky-action]

I second that motion

[@DarqIce]

@@davidweiss3365 I don't think he's actually a physicist, so don't expect any papers. I would appreciate though if a fully fledged physicist could take the time to verify his assertions (at least in principle), so they could either be encouraged/amended or dismissed as unfeasible. Saving all of us time if this alll turns out to be speculative wishful thinking :) I usually watch more "reliable" sources (like PBS Spacetime) so I'm kind of on the fence when it comes to grabbing knowledge from other lay people like myself...

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Don't worry, there will be a paper(s) as I get farther along.

[@travislaechelin9048]

A great piece of advice I once received was to appologize with a thank you. Instead of "sorry for the video quality," people respond better to "thank you for disregarding the video quality." Thank you for sharing your ideas, I was so eager for more on this topic, I appreciate you getting it out so quickly! I look forward to your next, enjoy your break!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Good point, Thank you!

[@stg213]

I thought he made his apology crystal clear when he mentioned Force Units. And I think that was beautiful!

[@sanders555]

@@stg213 🤣🤣🤣 Chef's kiss on that one

[@krisspkriss]

That is very presumptuous to the listener. This advice, like most other advice on the framing and structure of our interactions, removes autonomy and sovereignty from the interlocutor. You replaced asking for forgiveness with... thanking them for their forgiveness before they had a chance to decide if they are going to forgive. Its low key manipulative in the same way the yes set (asking three question that will all be responded in the positive) is manipulative.

[@deamichaelis1]

​@@krisspkriss but with a video format (with a lack of immediate response) it is better to assume that your audience is kind and does forgive you. If you don't, then it could be assumed that you think your audience is made of unforgiving people (which could be construed as mean to the kind forgiving audience). Therefore to cater to the nice forgiving audience while not catering to the unforgiving audience (a group that you would probably be better off without), you must assume they forgive you.

[@yoyoschmo1]

You should not be nervous. I was telling my husband that for the first time in my life I felt like I understood concepts of dimensions and gravity in a very tangible way. I often fall asleep to videos on quantum realm and gravity and space travel, etc. I fell asleep to yours 4-5 times but made sure I finished it damn it because I liked it so much and truly wanted to listen to it lol.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Wow, thank you!

[@profilore]

I relate to this so hard

[@nicoraclejoyner]

Same!! I kept rewinding it to take notes and my husband was so impressed with it.

[@Spudcore]

I also agree. He totally explained it in a really intuitive way.

[@nickkwasak]

lol You should have told your pineal gland that you liked the video.

[@benjaminbeard3736]

Your theory was intuitive(in a good way) and made more sense than some other ways to think about gravity. I'd like to hear more from you.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@DasPreem]

Me too. I love exploring this topic.

[@SM-nz9ff]

Can't honestly say I've heard something described as intuitive in a bad way.

[@benjaminbeard3736]

@@SM-nz9ff I guess it's not often used but humans have plenty of bad intuition. Like, a lot.

[@arnonymous431]

Kudos to your daughter aka the editor aka 50% of the team. This is fantastic editing, I was very entertained :-) Of course also kudos to the other 50%, these are very interesting videos!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you so much 😁

[@mikeishome69]

​@@ChrisTheBrain Hey I am wondering if you would settle an "alien" question. I hold that gravity is what stops aliens from visiting. I say they have never been here and argue with friends especially with current news. Just wondering your view. Thanks for all you have been sharing Hope all is well with you and the family

[@ChrisTheBrain]

@@mikeishome69 Watch the next video in the series 😉😉

[@mikeishome69]

@@ChrisTheBrain Awesome I will do that Thanks

[@mikeishome69]

@@ChrisTheBrain If you meant #5 in the series, I am not sure my friends would understand I struggle myself to grasp some of the concepts. But if that's not what you meant I will stay tuned. Thanks for the response

[@Knardsh]

I come from the inter dimensional tesseract society to say, you’re doing great.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Appreciate it!

[@maxhunter3574]

F.U. = force unit. Lol, I'm gonna have to borrow that one. And wow, please keep going with the next parts of this series!!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

😉

[@EvenTheDogAgrees]

Reminds me of the previous video's "Two balls. Sorry, two _more_ balls." 😂

[@nicoraclejoyner]

I just watched your prelude video to this one and was so grateful that there was more! I left you a comment there, but if you don’t get to it; you are amazing and I am so proud of the fact that you have the courage to share the knowledge with the normal people!!! You rock!! And the concepts you introduce are very plausible!!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks so much!

[@nicoraclejoyner]

@@ChrisTheBrain please make more!!!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

@@nicoraclejoyner working on it 😉

[@nicoraclejoyner]

@@ChrisTheBrain it would be great to hear your explanation of the Walter Russell secret of light as applied to quantum physics

[@jesseaustin2438]

Read my comment Nicoracle, plz. 2, one w a Big Bang Theory Quote n another where i say, chris plz read all. See scinececlic english's youtube vid " a new way to visualize general relativity" and RI the royal institute's vid "quantum fields: the real building blocks of the universe- with David Tong". As for me,, i beleive there is an actual mechanism, not theres just a probability exist and stuff happens in quanta, but that there is a mechanism. My theory i say in the chris plz read all comment, My explanation for the Big Bang time 0, first instamce of anything imprints or it theoretically imprints Heisenberg uncertainty principle and quantum fluctuations, as 2 heads to my 1 phenomenom that is the start to space and time, and then space in a point, a literal point like a planq scale quanta, is how or where probability mechanisms are stored, in quantum entangled,, my growth of space(time) phenomenom and law entangles a point to a whole universe that it originated as 1 thing. Or 1 instance of nothing, math law 1(0) identity, then more growth of imprinted Heis Unc Princ as a quantum fluctuation within the 1 thing which is a point and a whole universe, which is described and proven as real thru my gravity= force= mass× acceleration= mass× distance/ time² Calculus differential equations.

[@christopherm3271]

I've been waiting for this followup vid, thanks Chris..feels like I'm following along with cutting edge physics that could transform our understanding of physics.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@dbyrd7827]

Thank you. Your first video is fabulous as is. The high speed pharmaceutical commercial disclaimer in this one is pure genius. Your flexible approach affects the 'identity' dimensions in some humans. The shock waves they experienced internally have a high probability amplitude of being projected caustically outward, rather than traced joyfully inward. Your gifts are noble and your 'crew' perfect. Please tell her, thanks.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@Caitlin_TheGreat]

Congrats on the sudden massive attention... hope the stress isn't too much. I'm just a "lay person" who has been quite interested in the concepts of additional / higher dimensions. Your earlier video was actually quite good for what it was. At least for me, for grasping the concept of gravity being a result of a 5th dimension. So I'm just hear to glean more of this theory. It _is_ quite interesting.

[@cjbeccarelli2294]

I really do like this approach. I'm excited to see you develop this idea further. Looking forward to your next video

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you very much!

[@ThisCanBePronounced]

Some people are saying you don't need to correct or explain so much, but if it's within reason this is just part of being educational. Especially since your first video was about being conceptual and accessible to as many people as possible, this is good to do. I understood everything you were trying to say and didn't really need anything you covered in this video, but it's still educational to hear the comments and your response. So, definitely just keep up a conscious choice to address what's most relevant for what you're trying to do here. Looking forward to your next video!

[@ThisCanBePronounced]

On a final "small" note (since I don't think it will be relevant to your theory), I introduce myself as the 4th Minor Lieutenant Marshall of the Keepers of Truth of the Council of the Sacred Tesseract and must say that your response to tesseracts makes me unsure where the misunderstanding is: the commenters you're replying to, you, or between you two. If you understand this, you don't need to ask for anyone to show you anything - we have roughly a century of accepted math and geometry and you could have said in this video what the definitive answer / take-away is. There is no doubt or guessing or inconsistency. We can't intuitively perceive a 4D shape as humans but we definitely know and understand its nature fully geometrically - even if more spatial dimensions turn out to not be real! We can code this, make animations, build 4D games, build Rubik's tesseracts, etc. Any shape has infinite depictions when projected to a smaller set of dimensions. As long as it's constructed properly, it doesn't mean the shape is wrong or in any way different. As you showed, a square seen from the "side" in 1D is still a square, even if it LOOKS like a line. Similarly, a tesseract seen from a lower dimension "side" will just look like a 3D cube. The variety of depictions are simply different projections / perspectives, and you can see many of them on the Wikipedia articles for the cube and tesseract. IMO, you just needed to educate your viewers on this and if desired, explain which projection you used and what it shows (ie., "the 'inner' cube is not inside, but actually just farther into the 4th dimension). Regarding preferences, as you showed with the square-in-a-square projection of the cube, I'm not a fan of the Schlegel diagram for introductory purposes. Unfortunately it's the pop-culture-favorite tesseract depiction probably because it admittedly looks really cool as a cube within a cube, but orthographic or perspective projections are better. With colors, what's shown on Wikipedia as a B4 Coxeter plane projection is my favorite because it can show all the cubes in it with (probably) least distortion or most consistent distortion. However, when drawing it in a single color, I prefer to stretch it into something like a Cavalier projection (similar to step 4 in the Construction section) because it shows 2 familiar cubes, and then I can point out how all the other connected lines create prisms, which are just how that perspective depicts those cubes. Again, hopefully you've said enough and don't need to speak about this in your videos anymore, but if you do happen to feel like you haven't quite wrapped your head around this and are curious about it, feel free to reach out. Could try a little call or something. I'm no geometer but I've studied and thought extensively to understand this conceptually (got a playlist of others' vids on my channel), even having a small flash of intuitive understanding after continuously staring at tesseract folding in true 3D, and seem to have gotten good at teaching this to people.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Ha! I think I will move on for now. As I get more into "what is a dimension" this will be less of an issue. Thanks!

[@FerrelFrequency]

Last video was actually pretty well produced. It MADE it interesting till the end and all the way through. You made my head hurt, but I made some new connections and understandings that I never made my WHOLE LIFE! Can’t wait to finish this one! Thanks! AND despite the “Jello” technicality, I GOT the idea of what you meant. THATs what’s important. NOT the Jello. NOT using the word in the definition, as is done, with the trampoline. Your extra dimension explanation of the “force” of gravity is BRILLIANT, and it makes PERFECT sense to me. AND, one more thing…for such a COMPLEX IDEA and subject matter, you could NOT HAVE illustrated this ANY MORE intuitively. I almost was going to give up when I heard it, I gave it a chance, and I DON’T REGRET IT at all!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

That means a lot, thank you!

[@oldmankatan7383]

Ha! Epic disclaimer! Watching science unfold in front of us is a miracle of the modern day. Whether you end up being right, wrong, or more likely somewhere in between, is a great service to develop trust in the scientific community. Thank you for working hard to bring non-PhDs like me along on your journey!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks for the encouragement!

[@chrisellis4997]

I am learning more about physics from you than I have from any academics online and I have absorbed a _lot_ of content. My model predicts that this community will grow and any errors in your theory will be quickly identified which will only make it stronger.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

I can get behind that theory. 😉

[@brandonmarquette7476]

Jello is a good pedagogical tool because Spacetime acts , seemingly, like a Dark Superfluid, which is not only compressible, but expandable.

[@shinguyee]

I liked the other video as an exploration of an idea, like it was intended. Thank you for that. Your daughter is a good editor, the video flowed well and was very entertaining given the content.

[@willow_the_bob4322]

Love your videos! KZbin can be pretty ruthless sometimes from what I’ve seen, and people can be quick to jump on just about anything. Don’t worry about all the crazy backlash over the really minuscule things if you can help it! All of us who love your content wish you to be a stress free as possible. Can’t wait for whatever comes next!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you so much! I appreciate it.

[@somebodyelse3004]

I studied physics and I agree with the view that the interpretation of what the equations really mean is very interesting and important. For me thinking about different interpretation is fun, and it is a good way to train your brain :) I am looking forward to your next video

[@Setbreak]

Really interesting ideas. Looking forward to more content from you. Keep up the great work, Chris (and fam).

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@robertmotsch7535]

Many thanks. No shorts, just shorter longs (more often). Kudos to your daughter for her work!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@karlhauser893]

Bro I love your edits. Kudos to your 2 person team.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you so much 😃

[@johnshearing]

Loved your video. It was the first time I was able to visualize entanglement and gravity. I shared it with my whole family.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Wonderful! Thank you!

[@MrDeanWeen]

I would say the success with the last video had to do with it not being polished. It made it more real to me to see you as just "some guy"(please don't take that as bad). And your honesty and modesty go a long way. I'm here for that. Keep it up and I'll keep watching.

[@addisondraper6444]

Dear Mr. The Brain, I am so glad that you are continuing to make videos. I really enjoyed not only the content, but I think your demeanor and style make the content easy to digest. Please do keep up the good work. I will continue to be a fan. Thank you. That's all. Carry on. - the only addison

[@McShrimpies]

Excited for more of your interesting perspective on this subject!

[@leonlee8524]

Brother I am 2 minutes in and dying from the dry humor "I apologize for several reasons" 🤣 I can't wait to see you with Dr. Brian Keating and or Sabine Hossenfelder. You're in my top 3 😁!! Rooting for ya (anyways, back to your vid lol)

[@LettersAndNumbers300]

Oh please let it be Sabine, not the religious Dr. Cognitive Dissonance

[@ChrisTheBrain]

😂

[@religionishipocrisy]

Fascinating! I think you're doing a great job explaining it for the lay person. I'm really looking forward to your next chapters.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you so much!

[@patmacd8886]

For a non physicist to do this level of work and care about a new thinking and to look for ways to make it work, very admirable! This is the cornerstone of physics and you should be proud.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Wow, thank you!

[@killermetalwolf2843]

I'm loving this! I am extremely interested in all this conceptual math, and will probably going into the field in college (only like a year or two!). I await your next installment with bated breath!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@jbear3478]

Yeah we love longer videos. I know that once I find a KZbinr I like, I only want to watch them for a while and the longer the video the less I have to search around for other things I don't like as much 😅

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Well, this video almost killed me. So I might need to break it up a bit next round. Nevertheless, I appreciate hearing that people have the patience and interest for long form content.

[@thehappypittie]

The editing on the first vid wasn't that bad, honestly. It was definitely made by someone that doesn't do a ton of editing but it was still done in a way that was very fun and fitting to the video. It added a lot to it, i think.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@MrTooter66]

You are a deep thinker and a great explainer of ideas that are hard to grasp. Your ideas are very provocative and I am sure if you keep this up, you will have cracked or inspired others to crack the fundamental mystery surrounding gravitation and perhaps even quantum physics.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@deamichaelis1]

Thumbs up to the editor. I enjoyed every bit of it! 👍

[@shampson1975]

Mate, thanks so much for this. It's one thing to be smart enough to understand all of this and keep all the concepts in your head, but it's another level to be able to think about that and also have an empathetic understanding of how that works in the mind of a "normal" person and THEN think of ways you can improve the understanding and capability of that normal person. BUT it's even more important than that. Even the geniuses among us have limited ability to process a mental model of something we can't see. If today those geniuses are spending 99% of their mental attention on keeping the model "cached" in their head and 1% on developing the model, imagine what happens if you reduce the overhead of that cache by even 1%. You are attempting to do just that and at the same time entertaining and inspiring both normal people, and most likely future geniuses also. Mate your future is a shining star and if you keep this up you are going to have amazing resources at your disposal to further your goals and I'm super excited just to watch.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Wow, thank you.

[@mikPet81]

As an engineer, with computer science background, dabling in science waaaay above my "paygrade", I fully support of this type of content, and style of presentation, and I would say go forth and prosper (har har) Let haters be haters, cause that's basically the internet today, the moment someone tries to bring a bit of NON-PROFIT FREE content to help those who don't have the background or time to get knowledge out of this, he pitchforks are out and you have a french revolution on your hands. Ignore that and simply continue to do what you do. And possibly keep the editor around, this is the soft spot of geek-nerd-sciency funny way to do stuff.

[@spacey_432]

When the world needed him the most, he returned.

[@xpg2124]

oh my god thank you i watched your other video and it really stuck with me, but when i went back to rewatch i completely forgot the name of the video and could not find it in my history for the life of me, and this just popped up in my recommended. I personally believe all the ways we look at physics aren’t necessarily “right” but there are certain ways that make it much more intuitive and makes it make sense.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@RyuuTenno]

I'm very surprised this came out so quickly, but, loving it all the same. You and your all-in-one editor are a wonderful team. And loving the fun stuff scattered throughout the videos. Still looking forward to those later chapters, but, please don't feel pressured to get them out sooner. Do take your time to get everything worked out and polished (and to give yourself and your editor a chance to breathe). Thank you for both this and the previous videos, they're quite wonderful and extremely informative. I even went back to watch all of your previous videos, and I'm rather hoping you'll be able to do more of those as well, because I thought those were great to watch. (Would you like a pen? *toss*). And, I'm most definitely glad that you had someone comment on the previous video who was in the science community like that (or extremely close to them, if they weren't), I really believe that's done a lot for you to help you continue down this rabbit hole. Keep up the good work, this is truly amazing stuff! ❤

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you so much!

[@Just.A.T-Rex]

It just shows that this content is much wanted to be consumed. No one really cares about the mistakes except maybe trolls. Keep on trucking!

[@alien5589]

I’m so glad I stumbled onto these videos! Can’t wait for what you have coming out next! Keep on doing you!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you! Will do!

[@FatScrub]

Keep it up! Insane display of your dedication to this field of study. Bravo 👏

[@user-bx4ox9is3m]

man your doing a fantastic job and straight up are an inspiration. "i didnt think people would wanna watch a weird guy talk for an hour about physics" chris said and Nathan says "man watching some weird guy who actually has the courage and knowledge to make videos spreading the love of learning is what i live3 for chris. keep up the great work n keep em coming big dog" :) :) :) thanks

[@ChrisTheBrain]

That means a lot, thank you!

[@sethmortimer1161]

I love the time being a facet of dimension. It will explain a hell of a lot. I’m so engaged by the intuition that our reality is relative and a and an artefact of our forearm length universe

[@urekah37]

Thanks for taking the time to make this video response. I am looking forward to your next video.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@RohanBojja]

I'm glad I found your channel, quality content. Thoroughly enjoyed watching the two videos. These are some really intriguing ideas, and the way you've put them is just perfect. Thanks for putting in the effort, looking forward for more of these!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Awesome, thank you!

[@bareusbareus3689]

12:49 was a Savage moment i really enjoy content like this, and i look forward to the next video!

[@anthraxcrab2222]

Keep it going , the editing is great btw

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Appreciate it

[@TheMetoG]

Your theory sits perfectly with me since i intuitively always thought of gravity as a side effect or a consequence rather than a fundamental force, im just not educated nowhere near the point of a scientific explanation, and i loved how your video explains the how's and why's with actual science

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@EverythingCameFromNothing]

Keep up the good work!!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@jimfoulk4042]

I think you are on the right track. I think more people are starting to accept that ER = EPR, which is directly related to higher dimensional spatial geometry. Keep up the good work! Edit: It may also help to start thinking about dimensionality as a spectrum. Might time be a fractional dimension? Just spitballing here :)

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Dimensions are definitely going to get an overhaul by the end of this. Thank you!

[@chriscurry2496]

@@ChrisTheBrainI’m currently watching this video, so keep that in mind if you might have mentioned this-but have you considered Stephen Wolfram’s approach to finding the fundamental laws of physics? He’s a long, long way away, but he imagines the laws as computable, with cellular autonoma or binary sets of relations, and the radical nature of the approach is refreshing to me. That being said, as a research scientist who works in computer science and cybersecurity in a quantum computing lab, I also find your ideas refreshing…not bad for a marketing guy! Not at all!!!

[@thehelderheid]

I prefer your visualizations and explanations as to how an extension to an extra dimension slows down time/movement over to the other channels I subscribe to. I love their videos too but your previous video made it waaaaay easier to understand. Maybe there'd be a chance you could partner with some of them like Science Asylum, Veritasium, and such and create more content! Looking forward to see more from your, good sir!

[@addisondraper6444]

...also, I appreciate the addition of humor and dry wit in this video (unlike in drug commercials ...or politics).

[@DerrickJLive]

Was eagerly awaiting this. Thank you.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@richarddahlgren3228]

I don’t have a degree in anything, but I enjoy your videos and am able to follow most of it without problems. Your 4+1 is very intriguing to say the least. And I love your humor. “Force Units” - good on ya. May not have been a direct “I’m #1” at the negative commenters, but I think it should have been. Please keep up the good work!! I look forward to the next video.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Awesome! Thank you!

[@zebedeeira2129]

I was really excited to see a new video from you on the subject! And I look forward to the continuation of your hypothesis for extra dimensions. I do not carry the approval and accreditation of academia but in my days spent navel gazing I have pondered whether matter displaces space as well. When I visualize the distortion of space (in two dimensions) by a massive object I imagine a grid with squares getting smaller towards the center of the distortion while still representing the same amount of space in some unit of area.

[@keithavery3388]

Love the Force Units! FUs for all the critics. Loved the video very thought provoking.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@RafaelBezerraDallaCosta]

The Force Unit is there for the haters. Great video, awesome explanation of the 4th dimension, made a lot of sense to me.

[@cwjsmit64]

I 100% want to watch some random weird guy talk about theoretical physics for an hour. Your presentation is excellent, and the polish will come later. Keep them coming, we will keep watching!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks so much! XD

[@dingerma]

Dude, do not focus on the tiny errors in the past video. You are truly on the right path. I have been mulling the topics covered in your video for over 40 years. It recent times, I have viewed nearly all of the videos that you recommended before I found your video. I have known that a new kind of math is going to be created for us to build a TARDIS. The next 90 degrees off 4D is the multiverse. Keep making content. You are doing a great job.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Appreciate it. I know most people can see past the small stuff, and I ultimately won't get too hung up on it. But, I am continually improving the production process as I go. For some they are a genuine hang up, or excuse to dismiss the rest. I want my videos to be as accessible as possible, even to the anal retentive. 😉

[@singularity844]

I watch to the end because you’re great! Keep it up.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@quinto3969]

Your zeal to educate is admirable.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks! ☺️

[@jeffholland3502]

- I'm still enjoying this and looking forward to upcoming chapters!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks!

[@animebossfights]

Appreciate the editor’s sarcasm as it keeps me awake throughout the whole video 😂, also loved the jello oopsie.

[@ultravioletiris6241]

Cant wait for the next parts! Thank you

[@ChrisTheBrain]

😊

[@gustavosmith7648]

“1 FU” was that a sly dig at the haters?? 🤣 You did and are doing a great job. Some people like to make drama wherever they go. Keep it up and I’m looking forward to the next video.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you! Honestly, I was just being silly, but you are welcome to take that interpretation. 😉

[@mrwillard95]

Was waiting for this!!!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Hope you're not disappointed, not as highly produced as my last video. Just a follow-up.

[@Scienterrifical]

Great video, very well laid out and an authentic follow up. Love the side effects list on the warning 😂😂

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you! 😂

[@marksmith8667]

You are a rock star, congrats on your success,

[@zorsts]

thanks for clearing a few things up regarding time dilation and the "illusions" of an observer watching something travelling at really high speeds. ( I have watched your subsequent episodes)

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@stephendevine4341]

Chris, think it's important to reiterate some of the other comments below. Stop apologising, you are allowed the same leeway as all other scientists. Keep going man. Your delivery is wonderful. Your style is hugely watchable. STOP justifying yourself just pick up and move forward one step at a time. 👍👍👍👍

[@ChrisTheBrain]

I'm getting the message!

[@jhoblik]

Amazing, you helped me understand the theory of relativity better. I had so many questions when it was explained by somebody else, and I thought I was stupid to question their theory. Now I see that there are so many holes

[@ChrisTheBrain]

I'm glad it was helpful!

[@Spudcore]

Nice tie! I'm really digging this 5-dimensional model. W is the medium and T is the container.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks and thanks!

[@beartankoperator7950]

we are excited and waiting for your continued work presenting these concepts thank you and your daughter

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you! Very soon, if all goes well the next chapter will be up next weekend.

[@hansbberg7268]

Brother don’t take it to heart you explained yourself very well I only have a he’s but understood 95 % of what you were trying to get across. And not everyone is going to jump on the ride right at first it’ll catch

[@raymitchell9736]

Loved this video too... on content, suggestion: you could have shortened your intro and apology, I know others commented on this, so I'm just agreeing w/ them. I loved your first video even if it was rough around the edges, it's more about the content... And I like the cute editorial comments LOL... So I'm glad you addressed the comments and corrections. BTW: I liked our great back and forth in the comments from the first video, I hope we can continue when possible, I highly encourage you to keep going with your videos and keep making them. The points you make about analogies or models, of your own, or the bowling ball on a trampoline... what we fail to consider is that they are just constructs, the scaffolding needed to address the conceptual if you will. When I try to make an analogy to describe a software concept, no matter how clever I think they are, some one pokes holes in it and twists it out of what the model doesn't address or intended to address. I would say something like this "It's a house is built up from the foundation and what you're asking me to do is build the roof first"... To which they'd say, then you can lift that roof up and put the house underneath it... First of all this guy lives in fantasy land and missed the point that I was trying to make about order of operations. So the point here is that it is almost impossible to make a perfect analogy... it will be flawed in some manner and will never quite be perfect, nothing is better than the thing itself to represent itself. For example an analogy about a car... here take this car for example... but if you said here's a bike, or plane, or bowling ball in Jell-o... everything else will have an aspect missing... I hope you can get people unstuck from this "mental model" business so you can be freed to talk about the juicy stuff! So tell the story like you did about flatland and you explained it so well, then you say it is like what we are in 3D-Spaceland... It's a communications challenge as well as a physics challenge... It's about the story telling skills, and I know you can make it compelling! Best wishes!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks so much! I really appreciate it.

[@hunterlavish]

I just want to say I'm really glad you put these videos out there, I hope you keep making more. I don't expect you to reply to this necessarily with all the traffic you've gotten at this point - but I have a theory of my own on the topic of additional dimensions, but goes in a different direction (I'll take the pun) from yours. It would be fascinating to discuss it with you, and perhaps help further both of our ideas. I plan to watch both videos several times again to fully digest the contents. I've been playing with the idea of putting it in a video like this, versus publishing a paper (which it's not ready for), so seeing your format and reception it has had is very encouraging. Though I think the comment section would be too much to handle, and some of the critical responses you seem to have gotten is about what I expected haha. I'd almost rather just get torn apart by peer review I think haha.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

If you put a video out, let me know. The 'heart' of my theory will be more obvious in the next video.

[@hunterlavish]

@Chris "The Brain" If I do (really undecided on it still), I'll find this comment and let you know. Can't wait to see more from you!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

@@hunterlavish the comments are unreliable, hit me up on Twitter @christhebrain if you can.

[@hunterlavish]

@@ChrisTheBrain sure!

[@IconicDiver]

I am not even in the same science library (nevermind page) to contribute to this but I love that you are exploring other interpretations. Intuitively that seems right to me, our modern science gets so much right that we must be looking at it slightly off to not get the rest of it. Your approach and others will get us there I'm sure. When you cover gravity and energy and GR, I've often wondered why the EM field doesn't create gravity (if all energy is effectively mass through E=MC2). As we can only measure energy differences and not absolute energy values, then the EM field in a galaxy could be enormous?). Anyway, I wish I had your 'Brain' and free time to explore this, but I love that you do. Keep it up.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@sohamsuke]

If one of the mistakes you're most worried about is saying Sabine's name "wrong", then we're all set for a good theory for the future of physics, I assume. ;) Brilliant again, Chris. Ty. I can only hope to work one day with individuals as passionate and curious about the universe as you are. Keep that energy, it's priceless. :)

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks so much!

[@spooky-action]

Great job, Chris! Don't let the static hold you back. Keep moving your views forward. Love the small bits of humor here and there, too. 😆 I've long wondered about MOND and am excited about the experiment you mentioned. Where can we find more information about that?

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Much appreciated!

[@ramzeitouni4295]

keep going dont do the shorts ur a scientist keep digging and making vids like this one, im inspired

[@davidhelander7899]

Thanks for your two videos. I enjoyed them. They were thought-provoking. One caution I always keep in mind, though, is the motion of the planets problem. Many proposals were made by the thinkers of the day, but it couldn't be solved until a major change was made to their view of the universe (earth centered to sun centered). Something that large or larger may be needed in this case. I hope to see more videos from you soon.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you! You are correct, there are some big implications

[@JeanDosSantosViegas]

I enjoyed those 2 videos really much! Thank you for sharing this

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@AurelienCarnoy]

Great video. Chapter 7 expression of energy. When i get angry and try to repress it it explods in action. If i act upon it is expressed in action too. But if i surrender to the fact that i feel angry and yet just observ it, then anger transmute into space. You have more stillness and presence.

[@kwennemar]

Interesting! Please continue the work. Don't sweat the production work

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@ChadnRanda]

Very interesting please please continue. I see you have a pretty smart following I see you, people that are watching..😉 No rush but I replied to your comment on the last video with a question if you can get to it haha. I feel like you're about to blow up man and I'm kind of worried for you, lil bit, you're saying a lot of stuff.., and things man. I do Appreciate new perspectives haha

[@ChadnRanda]

😶

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thanks for the encouragement. It is too hard to answer your question well at this point, but I think my next video will cover it.

[@Altered_Perceptions]

This is fascinating and the editing helps keep my ADHD brain focused on the information ❤

[@miklov]

I quite enjoyed hearing more on this, funny editing too. Thank you!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@LuisAldamiz]

Thank you for addressing everything... within possible. Take your time.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

I appreciate that

[@Adrian-foto]

speaking of jello... at time 8:11 makes me think of potential expansion of "the space" driven by a displacement of space in/into upper dimension by the "condensed energy in form of a matter" in 3+1 dimensions? Would need to give it a secound thought, just an idea of the moment.

[@joenalaska]

I love these videos, they make me feel smart, I get to pretend I actually understand any of this lol, due purely to your excellent teaching style!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Thank you!

[@jadedrakerider]

Been looking forward to this!

[@YawnGod]

So many are surprised at becoming viral. It is nice.

[@sebastiaomendonca1477]

First, I'd like to congratulate you on the excellent production quality of this video. Especially relative to the previous one. That said, I still see a few unresolved issues: 29:00 What are we measuring speed relative to? The most logical answer would be relative to the gravity well whose gravity is in question, but that circles back to the first problem which is that we know an object, completely stationary relative to the Earth (rotation accounted for), above the surface still experiences gravity. 35:00 To me, this is a conceptual misunderstanding of pressure. Pressure, like most of classical physics, is a simply a handy way to describe the macroscopic effects of a collection of much smaller processes. No force is ever truly applied over an area, it's just a group of infinitesimal one dimensional interactions. The force of a theoretical homogenous bullet is no different than the force of a singular theoretical particle of a gas hitting the wall of a container. What makes pressure relevant is studying the propagation of those one dimensional forces through the mesh of atoms of the target, or the container.

[@Kijozaneko]

1. V=C√(1-(1/ɣ)^2 ) follow the theory of relativity or use Newton's laws of physics to calculate velocity 2. You've seen how to set up a stress energy momentum Tensor in Einstein's formula (T(mu)(nu)? It's completely classical , not quantum. l

[@victorreis8110]

ever since you posted that other video it’s been living on my mind rent free. does it make sense we’re globes compressed in space because of that?

[@TheDrewb666]

this was quick work man, good job.

[@BetzalelMC]

Love both videos! I was especially enthusiastic & nodding my head and saying yes, yes, finally someone else see’s GR like I’ve been thinking about it the last 20 years or so (granted I never got to adding a dimension) specifically when you said it’s more like displacement and then used bowling ball analogy (which was meh, but get it for general public) Now, in my own personal opinion and between your idea and Leonard Susskind’s ER=EPR conjecture, we should be able to rectify GR and QM/QFD. Again, love the extra spatial dimension concept to open this complex topic to the masses, but am also wondering if it can simply be thought that our 3 spacial dimensions (SD) of spacetime are being displaced by matter (planets stars Etc) and that it’s the 3 SD acting singularly and so appearing as an extra dimension, not actually being one but as you state also making the maths/visualization easier, or alternatively, that where matter exists it is in itself the extra, 4 SD. This has been a sticking point for me: that no ever ever seems to touch on the fact that although planets/stars/conglomerated matter exist within 3+1 spacetime [and that matter itself is mostly empty space per QM, our best understanding of atomic structure to date] it, the matter/planet/star, itself is not spacetime and no distinguishing concept ever brought fourth. So spacetime looks to / yearns to be everywhere, not unlike smoke filling a room/closed space, & matter is in the way, hence 3SD increased ‘pressure’ near matter looks like gravity. To tie in the ER=EPR bit, I have always loved popcorn theory ever since reading a 1930’s book called He Who Shrank by Henry Hasse, and realizing that in a black hole at least 1 SD>time and time > to 1 SD, it seems quasi-logical to make the jump to GR=QM but at (a) different scale(s), such that it’d be something akin to black hole = proton, stars=electrons and gravitational waves would be light of some larger existence and we’re just on an atom/compound (looking at even larger scales like local galaxy clusters). However, in the novel Hasse posits that stars=atomic nucleus and planets=electrons, I’ve adjusted this thought based on ER=EPR conjecture. Thus I posit, that GR would be equivalent to say, QED (or QCD/strong force) after having passed thru some event horizon and the SD shifts to time (& vice-versa) account for the differences we observe between GR/QM. All that because Leo S. (et al) found ERBs (wormholes) are mathematically equivalent to quantum entanglement. Thanks again for the great content, excellent brain food, apologies if this comes across unclear, at the very least unorganized, but here are my key takeaways from my comment here: 1. I believe your concept is completely on the right track, 2. I think marrying your idea with Leo S.’s conjecture can (& [hopefully] will) lead to rectifying GR & QM, 3. I love the idea of popcorn theory (PT), 4. PT seems probable / somewhat feasible when considering ER=EPR (when taking into account the strangeness of spacetime in a black hole), 5. Not sure how to say/ask this but what is matter (planet/stars) since it’s clearly not empty spacetime although exists within in it and is made of it(in part/kind of), crystallized spacetime? Don’t know, but GR/light, everything acts differently than in vacuum & not just due to gravity but also all of QM; so Whats the distinction here, don’t even know what I’m trying to say tbh, but hope this, more than anything else, comes thru; the point is, I think we’re all missing some small distinction here, weather boundary on surface or atmosphere, don’t know but wherever the boundary is, physics is different 6. Briefly stated before using smoke/room example, spatial displacement of 3SD by planets/stars can account for dark energy (meaning the more stuff/matter between us and some distant galaxy the more space is compensating due to more matter ‘in its way’, thus making sense that the further away the more redshift {unless we find it to be true when observing on the opposite side of some void, don’t know if we know this positively or negatively}), 7. None of this is pushback or criticism (don’t have any of that for ya), but should be considered food for thought (along with being entirely too long/convoluted). Thanks yet again & hope this finds someone eager, familiar, and brave enough to mathematically attempt to unify these thoughts (and/or at least take a stab at creating a GUT btwn GR/QM, if ya know ya know)!

[@ChrisTheBrain]

I don't think I have time to respond to all this but I will say that most of it will get covered in my later videos. I appreciate the feedback and input!

[@BetzalelMC]

Totally understand Chris, thanks for at least acknowledging me! I am mostly curious about your thoughts on (#5 above) if 4th SD being other 3 SD acting together uniformly (just being displaced by matter) or if enough consolidated matter (say earth or sun itself) although within and comprised of spacetime, is distinguishable enough to consider matter itself the 4th SD; I realize you said somewhere along the line that you wouldn’t really go into what it (4th SD) is.. hey thanks again for the amazing, thought provoking, and discussion welcoming content; love the work!

[@sylarkane8883]

Really interesting ideas. Really looking forward to more videos.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Awesome, thank you!

[@matthewbirdsey7231]

Love the second voice (text). I believe you have a great way to look at gravity. If only Einstein was around to explain the reality.

[@ChrisTheBrain]

Ha! We actually call it the "second voice" when editing. Thanks!

[@nicoraclejoyner]

Side effects was awesome!

[@phobosthemage260]

Cool, man. I reckon you are an actual teacher and I must say your students are lucky! I was raised my whole childhood around physics professors but never learned a thing from them because they quite literally believed that calculus and all the other types of math and jargon is a requirement to think about or talk about the nature of physics and reality. I am glad to learn more about mond because I really think the entire corpus of such characters as the big man himself, Newton, or Descartes, or anyone going all the way back to the time when the church domesticated science and mystery, and the mystery religions should be reassessed for their impact on epistemology and human civilization (and the Earth itself lets be real) as a whole. I posit this to you or anyone reading; the type of (wo)man that you would be directed to for conversing about the nature of reality, the realization of natural processes, or the infinite in any ancient and learned city would be the medicine man, the shaman, or the occultist. None of which would have time for Newton and his calculus - I THINK.