String theory nonsense makes comeback

[@lowlifeuk999]

I am neither a physicist nor a mathematician. As a data analysis practitioner I use some Machine Learning tools: the one I want to talk about here is Support Vector Machine (SVM). SVM works with a geometrical trick that is called the "kernel trick". Assume that you have data in N dimensions and those data are not linearly separable, the kernel trick will project those data into a space with a higher number of dimensions so that normally the linear separation becomes possible (of course I am over-simplifying here). Based on this insight I suspect that increasing the space dimensions of some data may actually help to overfit the data, more or less as when you add more parameters to your equations. So you overfit, get a better explanation of the data but the predictions (out-of-sample) will never work because the data are overfitted. I believe this thing goes back to the kaluza-klein model where one extra dimension beautifully explained electro-magnetism but could not verify any testable prediction. Maybe I am wrong, just a thought.

[@phutureproof]

If you are not neither does that make you both?

[@lowlifeuk999]

@@phutureproof ok, if you insist I will delete my comment. I was simply intrigued by the parallelism in overfitting when you work with predictive statistical models. About those, believe me, I have decades of experience. On the other hand, I would have expected a remark on what I have written, why did you put it on a personal level, what I am or what I am not? You could have simply said it is BS, I would have accepted it.

[@zantetsu8674]

@@lowlifeuk999 It's because your comment contains a typo in the first 4 words which is what they were referring to. But you took it as a personal insult. Maybe need to grow a thicker skin if you're going to post on the internet in general, let alone in KZbin comments sections.

[@deusexlacuna]

This is a well-known issue in physics and is known as the fine-tuning problem.

[@lowlifeuk999]

@@zantetsu8674 right, and English is not my first language and it shows. I rarely comment on the Internet as well, true. I only posted it because this idea came out in a conversation "in Bard" with google Gemini that told me that equating more dimensions to more variables when considering causes of overfitting was plausible. But Gemini is a machine so I seized the occasion to float the same idea in the real world.

[@kevinjones16]

Brane vs brian (4:29). My folks spelled my brother's name Bryan instead of Brian because they didn't want people to read it as "Brain"

[@anon69_q]

I work in biomedical research and I’ve seen literal neurologist, psychiatrist and neuroscientist make that mistake.

[@AdityaMehendale]

What to prevent those tormentors from reading it as Brayin'? Even the venerable Stephen Fry reads Parvati's name (Harry Potter) as "Pavarti" in the audiobook.

[@3p1cand3rs0n]

I think it was a message from Sabine to other real people. She wouldn't make such a careless mistake, and it especially wouldn't slip through editing. i don't know what the message means though.

[@martifingers]

@@3p1cand3rs0n He's still a very naughty boy, perhaps?

[@DragoNate]

@@3p1cand3rs0n she normally says afterward "just checking if you're listening" or does something else to make it obvious that she's joking or being sarcastic. but what exactly is the "careless mistake" anyway?

[@johnedwards2119]

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." ----Art Linkletter

[@nycbearff]

I haven't read an Art Linkletter quote in decades. I don't even care if it's really his or not (I doubt it is).

[@fesimco4339]

It's actually a maxim coined by Christopher Hitchens.

[@aupotter2584]

Besides nano and quantum, 'dark' is yet another common adjective that can create lots of business opportunity lol.

[@Arcgateway]

Dark Ai Blockchain. Take my money

[@NathanielHellerstein]

@@Arcgateway You mean dark _nano quantum_ Ai blockchain.

[@petitio_principii]

Maybe dark matter is really quantum fluctuations/probabilities manifested in hidden dimensions. Perhaps from that we can develop a technology that saves battery time and boosts wireless signals if we just plug it in a random electric outlet on the house. The physical nature is really convenient for a trade-secret technology, as it can take place mostly on hidden dimensions, so anyone who were to open the device to explore its inner workings would find only something like regular capacitors or whatever, and filler. Caveat: the energy economy and the wifi boosting at times might also be happening in the dark quantum realm.

[@eggimage]

like dark Brandon

[@chrissennfelder7249]

Dark chocolate

[@k9anticscolorado]

I just love it, it says if you were sitting here during all the conversations I've had in the last 2 weeks with my friends, thank you so much you have gained more followers just by me showing the people who've had these conversations with me in the last week!❤

[@PlanetDeLaTourette]

Science progresses one funeral at the time. It is the height of philosophy of science. That's why the fundamental scale has his name. Brilliant.

[@Jeff-zs2pq]

Planck.

[@christopherellis2663]

​@Jeff-zs2pq, as in thickness

[@generessler6282]

If you like this idea, try "The Nature of Scientific Revolutions" by Kuhn. One of his theses is that science advances mainly at generational boundaries. The old generation of eminent scientists dies off, allowing a new one to finally gain control of the disciplinary narrative. Lots of interesting examples.

[@PlanetDeLaTourette]

@@generessler6282 I'm half familiar with it. I'm trying to see it as a deleuzian rhizome. Also: try to convince a man on the street. Baby steps. And cry.

[@GoatOfTheWoods]

@@PlanetDeLaTourette oh the pretentiousness...insert roll eyes gif.

[@arctic_haze]

I love the title. And I say that as another physicist burned by the string theory. There was time I really believed this was the solution to so many things

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Ah, I can relate to this so well!

[@kennethc2466]

It so cute an interaction bot like you pretends to be a physicist. The way Sabine responded, unquestioningly, to an OBVIOUS BOT ACCOUNT...I see she hired you. How shameful. Please cite the paper you wrote, that got you 'burned', so we can all see you for the BOT YOU ARE.

[@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler]

​@@SabineHossenfelderhonestly anyone talking about dimensions in this type of way does not understand the spatial Dimensions whatsoever... with each increase going up in a spatial Dimension infinite amounts of the previous Dimension can fit into any size version of the next dimension meaning all we need is a fourth spatial dimension for infinite three-dimensional spatial potentiality to fit inside any size four dimensional existence... we added another layer and now we actually have 5D which is like 3D and 4D to 5D is like 2D to 3D.

[@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler]

​@@SabineHossenfelderso let's go to this logically together 0 dimensional is absolute nothing you can fit INFINITE amounts of absolute nothing into any amount of 1d existence. The next logical progression is you can fit infinite amounts of one-dimensional existence into ANYSIZE two-dimensional existence.... now for the next logical progression layer you can fit infinite amounts of two-dimensional planes into any size three dimensional existence this should be able to be the one you can truly understand... it doesn't matter what size the three-dimensional object is infinite amounts of two-dimensional planes can fit into any size three dimensional object now all we have to do is follow the logical progression of the spatial dimensions and we can conclude exactly the behavior of higher spatial dimensions!

[@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler]

​@@SabineHossenfelderit's a shame you don't give me your phone number we might actually be able to come up with some good things for the betterment of all existence

[@ayoCC]

seems like taking a random guess and hoping it's right, vs just working with what we've observed so far.

[@technomage6736]

Nothing wrong taking plausible guesses and testing them. This sort of thinking outside the box may lead to new ideas or discoveries, and I argue is necessary if/when we run into dead ends.

[@poksnee]

It's all about the Benjamins.

[@thstroyur]

​@@technomage6736The key word there being, "plausible"

[@cjwrench07]

@@thstroyurit seems plausible, because it’s built on work/ideas of the past. It’s how western scientists finally got away from “the eather” or the 4 humors. Asking the wrong question is better than not asking new questions at all.

[@DrSmileyFace18]

@poksnee Have you looked at the average physicists salary recently? Literally every single physicist today could make 50% more (absolute minimum) if they went into finance​

[@myfriendscat]

To quote Dr. Frankenstein: " It lives. It lives." Hold-on extra dimensions, we'll find you!

[@red.aries1444]

I'm sure they are quite Abby Normal...

[@Jacobk-g7r]

Find is the keyword, when we create something, aren’t we finding it within the differences of reality and not really creating it? The difference is our guided nature. Sorry i just saw and thought about what you said.

[@ThatOpalGuy]

@@red.aries1444 when I say 'throw the switch....'

[@smlanka4u]

Binary Mathematical Physics with Buddhism theory shows the existence of extra dimensions.

[@davidkachel]

@@red.aries1444 Wish I'd thought of that one!

[@gerardopc1]

As a fellow theoretical physicist, I think that string theory is the aether of our time. I have the same opinion about the "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics.

[@ProPandaPlays]

Can

[@ProPandaPlays]

Had to check if I could comment WTF does aether mean lol sounds like your trying to sound intelligent while knowing f all lol

[@ProPandaPlays]

String theory has the same weight as religious bs

[@fernandoroman6494]

@@ProPandaPlaysHe is talking about Luminiferous Aether, a theory which proposed some invisible substance filled up all of space allowing light to travel through that substance (since it was still unknown how a wave (light) could propagate through the vacumm) The theory was tested and ruled out by many experiemnts, most famously Michelson and Morley. He does seem to know what he is talking about, doesnt hurt to ask without being impolite. Either way, dark matter seems to be the most direct current analogue of yesteryears aether, its this stuff that we cant see, our experiments fail to detect but somehow fills up all of space (or at least 80% of it) That said, at the end of day, I think we shouldnt care THAT MUCH, none of our physics models are real, they are just that "models", descriptions of nature that allow us to make predictions. If adding tons of some mysterious "dark stuff" makes our predictions better, then i just say "why not?" lets keep using it till a better contender shows up. At the end of the day, we know at least one (probably both) of our best models (QM and GR) are incomplete so its not outlandish to think our theory of gravity needs some modification to make our model better

[@robo5013]

@@ProPandaPlays If you don't know what aether means you are the one that doesn't know much.

[@parsoniareigns]

To quote Mr. Mark Twain. 'German humour is no laughing matter'😊

[@briansass9551]

Thank you for the way you present such information. I've always struggled with the advanced maths that explain such topics but you are exemplary in how you generalize the topic. Please keep doing what you're doing!!

[@Techmagus76]

Now i understand string theory and why it is called so. The string is the one on a stick with a carrot on its end that is held directly a bit before our face and we are the donkey. Unimportant how hard we try we could never reach the carrot as they ride on our back and the distant to the carrot is always the same, if we move the carrot moves too.

[@friedmule5403]

Yes exactly, except the donkey do only wish there is a carrot, but not able to see or smell it.

[@Earwaxfire909]

Schrodinger's cat, loves playing with String, as it walks the Plank, across my Brane.

[@Dracu666]

The cat is dead kzbin.info/www/bejne/f5CTnZR3ndt7gac

[@curtislaketek2822]

The Brian joke got me

[@msingh1932]

The teacher was just trying to see whether you were awake and listening to her.

[@kingo_friver]

I had to rewound that part to confirm what she said 4 times😂

[@not2busy]

Was that Cox, Greene or Keating?

[@CAThompson]

​@@not2busyIf they're not Brian, they're Steven/Stephen, or maybe Phillip.

[@erdossuitcase7667]

Stay on the Brian!

[@jcortese3300]

This kind of thing was part of my massive disillusionment in physics grad school after I passed my quals. I started to get the creeping sense that they were just making sh*t up. WIMPs, strings, etc. Everything. All I could think was that we really had no idea WTF was happening, and they were just throwing stuff around at random. There seemed to be no difference to them between a theory and an idea you batted back and forth over Dos Equis and chips at the El Torito on Friday night after everyone left the lab. All I was left with is what I have now: Terry Pratchett's bromeliad metaphor. We have no clue.

[@David-l6c3w]

The term sunk cost fallacy comes to mind when someone tries to propose string theory solutions to an array of problems from dark matter to dead dinosaurs and lost socks to justify string theory research.

[@ProPandaPlays]

String theory is for crack pots lol it’s as bad as religion

[@zorglubmagnus455]

Lost socks has been solved: it’s sock goblins.

[@duprie37]

Rubbish. I _saw_ the ninth dimension when I ate magic mushrooms last weekend. String theory is real!

[@ProPandaPlays]

Right lol haha crackpots all of em@@duprie37

[@zorglubmagnus455]

Were they white and bulbous with dark blades? They taste good in an omelet.@@duprie37

[@wertigon]

It is possible that String theory does exist after all, research does work in mysterious ways and there have been several instances where research reached a local minimum / maximum where further research seemed pointless. Blue LEDs are one such area, where the method everyone had ruled out eventually turned out to be the method that enabled the technology. That said, with our current knowledge string theory is very unlikely to be the correct theory. I am not discounting it completely, just not holding my breath for a breakthrough :)

[@Thomas-gk42]

Snow White and the seven (?) extra dimensions...LXD🍎 PS: Lisa Randall among the "stringers"?

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Well, she used to be. But last time I heard from here she was more doing general particle phenomenology. (Haven't checked recently.)

[@Mentaculus42]

Yeah, TWO jabs at Lisa Randall in a very short timeframe (the other had to do with dimensions & dinosaurs) with a Brian Greene “cherry on top”! Along with a quote in a BBC Article about wasting money. Not how to “win friends and influence people”. No wonder that Steven Weinberg had an opinion, and Sabine had a song “about …”!

[@ProPandaPlays]

Hiiiii Sabine ! Your super cool ❤❤@@SabineHossenfelder

[@Thomas-gk42]

That´s what she indeed is.😊

[@Audio_noodle]

I still don't get why gravity needs to be quantized, since it's not like position is quantized either.

[@r.phillips9061]

I appreciate how Sabine looks at facts before conjecture, rather than alot of other scientists that seemed to have forgotten how to use their brian.

[@l.rongardner2150]

Physics, unfortunately, has come over to the "dark side." We have dark matter, dark energy, and now dark dimensions. What will be the next form of darkness to shroud real physics.

[@my-tschischlak]

I have dark cookies, too ! You cant see or detect them, and you cannot eat them, but they are real ! It contains dark matter cookie stuff, MAYBE its cacao, but no one knows :)

[@RoboticusMusic]

I need a visualization for where the tubes go and how they interact, the one provided didn't explain anything.

[@Mr_KultiVator]

“…but Albert doesn’t like that at all!” Doink!!! 😂

[@Thomas-gk42]

I´m afraid, the bubble head will have a bald one time...

[@timothymalone7067]

Thanks! Always love listening to your content!!

[@jenaparadies]

Hair styling appearing around 6:25 could proof existence of more dimensions. :-)

[@friskeysunset]

I saw that too. An appointment opened up and continuity be damned.

[@danhnguyen-fn9eb]

Thanks Sabine!!!! Just a layman here that has been interested in things like this for about 40 years. The only real Strings I've been able to verify is when I step on a wad of chewing gum and pull my foot up while looking down and seeing the stringy mess. As for the rest of it Dark "anything, gravitons, extra-dimensions and gravity the only one of those things we have evidence and concrete proof for is gravity. So sorry Albert, a fresh new look into "gravity anything" should be the thing to do in order to truly understand it and understand why the universe is like it is. Sometimes the simplest answers or ideas are the correct ones. The hard part is expressing that in a short and sweet equation.

[@Thomas-gk42]

Interested layperson here too. Hihi, chewing gum...a thing for the next physics Noble perhaps..

[@pjhgerlach]

'This is really some dark stuff that will make waves in science', I'm thinking while twisting my fork into a plate of spaghetti.

[@roberthunter6927]

I worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the noodley one, and of course he approves of strings. :-)

[@Shitinthemorning]

Spiril the spaghetti

[@waduz4891]

The german hosenfelder is very frustrated- she did invent that we know nothing from nothing - and for this she will get the next nobel price! Congratulations for this lady!

[@bonevgm]

I love the amount of sarcasm in this video.

[@vanalles96]

Thank you 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

[@JamesYale1977]

We just need to let string theory go...

[@AMan-xz7tx]

If rubber bands have taught me anything from experience, it's that any string that can stretch can also come back and hit the user in the face, so string theory will probably stick around longer than we'd like it to, likely until someone gets hit in the face by it

[@JohnVKaravitis]

Yeah, it's got us all tied up in knots.

[@johnsondoeboy2772]

“Over my dead body” -Michio Kaku

[@keith.anthony.infinity.h]

Yes we should but keep the good parts of the theory.

[@danielt1337]

Kaku and string theory inspired me to get into physics. Only made it through a bachelor's and admittedly I still can't grasp alot of the maths. Still it is very enticing to have a theory of everything.

[@alesvondra6614]

I read the article a few days ago on Quanta magazine and liked it. However, after watching your video, I changed my opinion. Mentioning history was good for context

[@Gothmatix]

Who is Brian...

[@Alex_Mitchell]

A dyslexic string theorist, perhaps?

[@rhkavli]

Watch Monty Python, and you'll watch his complete and utter biography.

[@blackshard641]

@@rhkavli he's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy.

[@Alex_Mitchell]

@@rhkavli ....and discover that he is "a very naughty boy".

[@Diamond_Tiara]

THE MAN THEY CALL BRIAAAAN!

[@Miss__Understands]

Feynman agrees with you. He was wrong too.

[@paulrapp6]

But Sabine, the swampland is real. We are draining it now to create a new subdivision especially for slightly insane physicists and demented cosmologists.

[@johnmccombe6342]

I would be so happy to hear you and Dr. Kaku have a conversation about string theory. It would be greater then any christmas present ever to hear you two insanely smart people discuss that subject.

[@Jack-r2v9b]

Ed Witten

[@partymantis3421]

Oh that would be fun Kaku making the case for string theory & Sabine arguing against it . hope they can make that happen someday

[@angharadhafod]

He's not the Brane, he's a very naughty boy. 4:26

[@Diamond_Tiara]

i was looking in the coments for at least a Brian ref!

[@MCsCreations]

Very interesting indeed, Sabine. Thanks! 😊 We shall see, but my skepticism is on point as well. Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

[@peterdobos1606]

Sometimes this stuff seems like a modern equivalent of the orrery, where they just kept adding spheres and epicycles to try to keep up with observations.

[@andreab380]

Yup, it's epicycles and phlogiston all over again. And it's quite disheartening, to be honest.

[@ramkumarr1725]

Certainly, here are three simplified causal principles from string theory: 1. **Vibrational Harmony:** Objects in string theory, like tiny strings, vibrate at specific frequencies, creating different particles and forces. The harmony or resonance of these vibrations determines their behavior and interactions, akin to how harmonious vibrations produce pleasing music. 2. **Unified Interaction:** String theory proposes a unified framework where all fundamental forces, such as gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces, arise from the same underlying principles. This suggests a causal link between seemingly disparate phenomena, highlighting a fundamental interconnectedness in the universe. 3. **Higher-Dimensional Influence:** String theory posits the existence of extra spatial dimensions beyond the familiar three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. These additional dimensions can influence the behavior of particles and forces in our observable universe, suggesting a causal relationship between phenomena that might appear unrelated in lower-dimensional space. ChatGPT Bad bad joke : String theory explains why gravity is shocking. 😉😉😉😉

[@CanuckBeaver]

How many dimensions can fit on the point of a pin?

[@CAThompson]

How many string theorists does it take to change a lightbulb? I don't know but I think there's only lightbulbs for sale in one dimension, so one theorist?

[@NathanielHellerstein]

@@CAThompson It takes _10^500_ string theorists to change a lightbulb. Why did the string theorist curl up tight? To get to another dimension. When did the string theorist write a field equation? Ten years from now, for the past four decades.

[@goodfortunetoyou]

Consider a vector of length n > k+3, where the dimensions setting the pin tip's location are determined by fixing a point in the first three entries. Now consider a universe that can be defined in a finite number of dimensions k. Build it, repeat until you're bored.

[@ricktownend9144]

One thing I liked about string theory is those extra small dimensions, one of which could be 'helpfulness' - in the same way that a particle can change its spin, a thing can change from being helpful to unhelpful - or vice versa. We all observe this happening all the time in everyday life, though I suppose a series of experiments could be designed to demonstrate it formally. You may say 'but this requires a person to find the thing helpful or unhelpful' - yes, just as quantum physics requires an observer to make a particle decide where it is ...

[@theeiszeitmann928]

Ah yes dark dimensions very interesting but how many dark angels can dance on the head of a dark pin?

[@naamadossantossilva4736]

None,the power armor is too heavy.

[@NathanielHellerstein]

All of them!

[@atlasfeynman1039]

4:25 It's Brane, not Brain, Brian.

[@luigicantoviani323]

Vafa throws shade at Sabine, and Sabine replicates. The thing is that Cumru and friends keep looking for funding chasing an army of pink bunnies invading earth....in a parallel universe, that's possible, of course.

[@friskeysunset]

But THEY don't want you to know about the Pink Bunnies!

[@raktoda707]

Just enough info to stimulate further thought ( research) Thank you

[@anthonyashwood1438]

9 dimensions not 10/11/26 ? I thought current versions of string theory require 10 dimensions total? 11 for M-Theory ? 26 in bosonic.

[@thstroyur]

9+1=10 25+1=26

[@layitluke7139]

t

[@ZeroOskul]

"So, ZeroOskul says: 'Brian Greene is a charlatan!' Thank you, ZeroOskul, I appreciate that." -Brian Greene

[@caseytailfly]

Max Planck was such a badass 😂

[@edus9636]

Yet greater than Albert 😛

[@futureshocked]

String Theory was "The Aether". I really do hope it signals that some big discoveries are around the corner, but yeah that shit wasted decades of people's time.

[@DekarNL]

I thought gravitons moved at light speed. Why would they have mass in the other dimensions?

[@manuelgrewer7456]

Sabine, thanks for pointing out the nonsense and pseudo science. As a fellow german physicist, I think we need much more of this. In fact we need a major change in scientific culture. To many theories that can't properly predict stuff, and always rely on the next "better" experiment. Particle colliders like LHC come to mind.

[@AlexandruVoda]

But the LHC did have results. We predicted the Higgs. Before the LHC there was no experiment capable of finding the Higgs. Then the LHC did indeed find the Higgs.

[@jasperpike242]

​@@AlexandruVodai thought there was some dispute as to whether it was actually observed?

[@SpaceBearEngineer]

​@@jasperpike242 Do you have a reference for that? I searched but couldn't actually find anything.

[@jasperpike242]

​@@SpaceBearEngineeri,'m sorry can't track it down. I gather the argument was that it was a mathematical construct and they tagged onto a supposed observation. Ask Sabine!

[@manuelgrewer7456]

@@AlexandruVoda Debate about validity of Higgs detection aside. Yes, the Higgs was predicted over 60 years ago. It was the last missing part of the "standard" model of particle physics. Since then, no actionable prediction was made. If your running on fumes for 60+ years, maybe there is some thing wrong with your theory. Imo it's time to go back to the drawing board.

[@sheole5165]

"Naturalness" could even be a useful concept, although probably not in the context of string theory. Why everywhere else? Because nature is not a model. The earth is a sphere? Certainly, idealized. All right, then it's an elliptoid? Certainly, idealized. Without idealization, it is actually a geoid, and thus a completely irregularly shaped body for whose calculations we make idealized assumptions. To capture its actual shape mathematically, we would have to borrow heavily from chaos theory or from an almost infinitely powerful finite element program. I suspect that this also applies in a similar way to many physical theories that deal with the "last things" or the "really big questions".

[@ichbin1984]

I am currently massivly undersugared and all I can think of, is that Sabine is saying funny words

[@frankmccann29]

iIt"s Gravitons at rest. Would be the amount they're looking for? Super excellent explanation as usual. Have some experimental work. We're crunching numbers now. What goes up must come down under most circumstances. 😊❤

[@PtolemyJones]

Brian? LOL...

[@atx-insider9055]

I noticed that, but she's smart & have taught me a lot, so she gets a pass. We all make mistake, no matter how intelligent. 😂

[@PtolemyJones]

@@atx-insider9055 it was just a slip, it was just a funny one

[@Andrew-vq9kg]

A 1 micron extra dimension? Nah, I'm with Sabine on this, we'd have detected that already in a thousand different ways.

[@AidanNaut0]

I thought it was currently understood that gravity is not a force by itself, but an emergent property of time dilation in the interaction between objects

[@_kopcsi_]

no. gravity is the curvature of spacetime. a geometrical property of it.

[@456MrPeople]

You're right that gravity is not thought of as a force in modern physics, but it is currently understood as a curvature of spacetime. Emergent gravity is still a hypothesis.

[@blackshard641]

@aidanNaut0 I am fond of the idea that both time's arrow and gravitation are emergent phenomena, but @456MrPeople is correct, this is still entirely hypothetical. Our best theoretical model for explaining gravity (GR) uses spacetime curvature.

[@_kopcsi_]

@@blackshard641 everything is emergent. tell me just one thing that is not emergent.

[@jamesedward9306]

Give them credit, when they decide to go woo woo.......they go full woo woo. You gotta admire the commitment.

[@zemm9003]

I don't even have a problem with the extra dimensions. If the theory fitted perfectly then we could always find some BS excuse why we cannot see them. The problem I have is with dishonesty. They claim that "string theory contains gravity". No it doesn't, it contains a random field associated with a spin 2 massless particle that they call the "graviton", but this isn't gravity at all it is just what string theorists like to call "gravity".

[@Lucius_Chiaraviglio]

I think your prediction of the future non-finding of massive graviton decay is most likely correct. And one thing they never seem to answer in string theory: What are the strings made of?

[@Charbracker2104]

Thank you Sabine, that you are talking so clearly about this branch of physics. I almost went to a similar direction and then thanks to you and your book I decided that I don't want to spend too much time with quanta. So I went into climate science where I can talk with other people about what I am doing without holding a complete lecture as an introduction.

[@MagnumInnominandum]

I can still remember the belly laugh i had when "The String Hypothesis" was first explained for me in the early 80's. It seems that many as yet still have not gotten the joke. 😮

[@crinolynneendymion8755]

On the other hand, the fact that you don't appear to see what the sentence says about you is the funniest ironic joke I've come across in a long time.

[@kensho123456]

I invented "String You Along" theory.

[@nagasolaire8462]

I watch Sabine by two reasons: 1. She makes my brain work on highest capacity (on which i still can comprend about 15% of what Sabine is taking about 2. Non stop abuse of particle phisicists and I live for it

[@janekmazur5985]

"Dark Dimension" sounds like good title for SF horror movie.

[@MagMar-kv9ne]

EVENT HORIZON. Travel to these Dark dimensions and you get mad and start cannibalizing and sodomizing your collegues. No, really.

[@nkronert]

Or an adult movie for that matter

[@PenguinDT]

Fun fact, we almost got that in an amazing way. After cancellation of Doctor Who in the 80s, there was a real project called Dark Dimensions, that would've starred Tom Baker meeting different versions of both himself and his foes. It had a full script and some amazing concept art (Henson studios was designing new Cybermen). Alas, it never happened, largely thanks to BBC not knowing what they had.

[@PBeringer]

4:30 ... Far out, I loved that Cypress Hill song "Insane in the Brian".

[@tommiest3769]

But if the people who said, "Let's stop looking for neutrinos or gravitational waves because experiment X has not found them yet" were successful neither of these phenomena would be known today; in fact, I remember some physicists argued against an upgrade to LIGO in the early 2000s using Sabine's same point about the supposed folly of upgrading experiments. This is a tricky problem because if those who said that had won out, then we would not have discovered either of these phenomena. We would have been deprived of two novel ways of seeing the Universe. On the other hand, upgrading experiments is expensive and risky.

[@SabineHossenfelder]

There were good reasons for why gravitational waves and neutrinos were *necessary*. It is basically impossible to make general relativity work without gravitational waves. Also, they had been indirectly detected previously. And neutrinos were necessary to fix a seeming violation of energy conservation. Of course they could have been wrong. But they had good motivations. This extra dimensions stuff is just an unnecessary complication.

[@Mentaculus42]

Somethings are / aren’t till they aren’t / are (isn’t that clear)! Let the “Big Branes / Brains / Brians” have their fun with their conjectures (just as long as they don’t usurp all the Benjamins).

[@nickrr5234]

​@@SabineHossenfelder Extra dimensions are certainly a complication. However we will only know whether they are unnecessary (or not) when someone shows that string theory is incorrect (or not).

[@tommiest3769]

@@SabineHossenfelder You regularly criticize attempts to unify GR and QM and yet most physicists would say that a theory of quantum gravity is "necessary" to unify GR and QM. The efforts of various approaches to quantum gravity have "good motivations" in the same way neutrino theorists had motivations to postulate the existence of the neutrino, as they are attempts to reconcile discrepancies in our current understanding and our current observations. And you can only claim that neutrinos or gravitational waves are necessary *retrospectively* since, as you pointed out, they could have been wrong. But only experimental investigation can tell us if the ideas are wrong. If, for example, dark matter is detected, you will have physicists say that its discovery was well-motivated and/or necessary. This is why one has to be careful about saying this or that experimental effort should not be carried out.

[@DrSmileyFace18]

​@@SabineHossenfelderthey are only an unnecessary complication, if they fail to explain data from experiment better than a simpler theory. Otherwise they are exactly as complicated as necessary. That's literally how it works. You always flip flop between "searching for beauty is wrong" and "this theory is ugly in my opinion" while also saying we should defund any experiments which might be able to concretely tell us the difference!

[@kerryburns6041]

I found a naked string theorist hiding in the wardrobe when I came home early. I knew he was a string theorist because he said he could explain everything.

[@mitabpraga7487]

🤣🤣🤣

[@geekexmachina]

“Thats it that was your last chance “ , “no sir it appears we do have a brane” “ok centurion free bwane” lol

[@samuelrodrigues2939]

Awesome videos.. understable.by general public, fun to watch 👏👏

[@olegshevchenko5869]

Narrowing down the range of sensible ideas is also an important process. In fact, research that has positive results is overrepresented in scientific literature. It is important to keep in mind that failures are just as important for science as successes.

[@darrendrapkin4508]

If I understand Chris Lintott's recent lecture for Gresham College correctly: A possible origin of Dark Matter is the Kuyper Belt and, structures much larger around younger stars. The reason we have not seen it before is that it is made of bodies like Omuamua. They small, dark, and move fast. They are small and move fast becuse, they have been ejected from their star systems by the sling shot effect from gas giants in conjunction with eachother. They are dark because of the effect of cosmic rays on long lasting solid bodies. He explains it much better than I do.

[@axisskin]

6:28 - Let's do the timwarp again

[@rhkavli]

Is Tim the brother of Brian, perhaps?

[@axisskin]

@@rhkavli Nonsense

[@lookatthis5851]

..it's just a jump to the left...

[@friskeysunset]

Let's go up to the lab... and SEE what's on the slab! *Tim Curry shudder- goggle*

[@miketheburns]

> b-r-a-n-e not b-r-i-a-n love her humor 4:25

[@Thecrucialdruggy]

Dark dimensions are where your unique high detail childhood memories are stored

[@MichaelKingsfordGray]

Only yours, mate.

[@Thecrucialdruggy]

@@MichaelKingsfordGray fair enough, player one and all

[@mattsandell3792]

Thanks for the clarification, Sabine. For a moment there I was really worried about losing Brian to a dark dimension.

[@cykes5124]

Scientists trying to find Dormammu 💀

[@crow2989]

Imagine humanity finding a eldritch being through science and all it responds with is “Again?” before snapping its fingers to create another big bang restarting our local universe

[@gilgameshkingofheroes9466]

I've come to find you again dormammu

[@mitigatedrisk4264]

Ah, there it is

[@mr.mirror1213]

🤣🤣

[@Arashmickey]

Dormammu, I've come to bargain (for more research grants)

[@ronschwarz186]

That's what we call particle are just the tails of waves which moves in these extra dimensions. It is difficult to measure a dimension in which you move by yourself. Because the extra dimensions are in every point of the 3 dimensional space we might interpret them as endless smallness. If all matter moves into that smallness (shrinkage) you do not recognize much of it as long as the material waves are kept close together in smaller distances what can be seen as hypergravitation effect . On greater distances of course we observe the enlargement of space between matter (interpreted as big bang explosion) . By the way the hypergravitation effect seems to be a bid bigger than matter shrinkage and that's the observable gravitation.

[@georgikrastev]

Is Michio Kaku still in the string theory camp?

[@rogerstone3068]

That's B-R-A-N-E, not B-R-I-A-N, either Blessed, or Life Of, depending on the length of your string.

[@sunalwaysshinesonTVs]

Dark matter is that which astro-physicists made up to explain the unexplainable. But wtf do I know... Im a KZbin commentator/troller.

[@MCsCreations]

Perhaps, but you're not wrong.

[@nsf001-3]

Yes. A "secular god of the gaps" so-to-speak

[@dewiz9596]

But, Hey. . . Sabine had the “best trolls”

[@zemm9003]

Dark matter is not a farfetched idea though. It is quite a natural one. The reason being that if other forces require such a special arbitrary property like charge or wouldn't it be natural to assume that most matter does not exhibit "normal" interactions just because they don't have such specialized nature. It could exist because you can easily make an argument for it without even invoking the experimental evidence. But the dimensions for string theory exist simply because string theory needs them or it doesn't work, there really is no reason to postulate them otherwise, and the more experiments at high energy we conduct the harder it becomes to assume they are there "somewhere".

[@zemm9003]

The point is if dark matter does exist then you have to explain why we even have regular matter at all because it seems a lot more likely that almost everything in the universe would be dark matter and not regular matter.

[@MrLocokrang]

Loved this, more on dimensions anytime please

[@yds6268]

Research sponsored by Dormammu

[@বিজ্ঞানেরগান]

😂

[@geoffsutton78]

How can a small dimension have size? What is the size of length? Width? Height or time? Moreover which dimension contains this dimension? Length contains width. Height contains length and width. Time contains height and length and width. What contains time? The only feasible additional dimension (according to @ChrisTheBrain) is mass although I haven't yet worked out where mass fits into the containment theory (that I just made up...)

[@cynx1321]

i got so much h8 when i said string theory is stupid 10 years ago ''you have no idea what you are talking about, you are to stupid to understand it, bla bla bal....'' Its finally slowly dying, tnx for this video

[@AlexanderShamov]

At the very least, it has already inspired a lot of deep mathematical insights. Regardless of whether it has any value as a physical theory,, calling it stupid is... well, stupid.

[@cynx1321]

@@AlexanderShamov no it doesnt, it was senceless from beginning, it was based on nothing and milions were wasted to proof it. Sure it was interesting at 1st but it was theory shaped in a way that can explain everything in a bad way, idk how to explain it, its like inventing water and saying water made everything because it can shape into everything, same thing here theory can shape into anything we want and it can explain everything if we want it to without any evidence. Thats why its stupid, there are literaly bilions of theorys that can do the same thing

[@cynx1321]

@@AlexanderShamov no it doesnt, it was senceless from beginning, it was based on nothing and milions were wasted to proof it. Sure it was interesting at 1st but it was theory shaped in a way that can explain everything in a bad way, idk how to explain it, its like inventing water and saying water made everything because it can shape into everything, same thing here theory can shape into anything we want and it can explain everything if we want it to without any evidence. Thats why its dum, there are literaly bilions of theorys that can do the same thing

[@cynx1321]

@@AlexanderShamov no it doesnt, it was senceles from begining, it was based on nothing and a lot of money were wasted to proof it. Sure it was interesting at 1st but it was theory shaped in a way that can explain everything in a bad way, idk how to explain it, its like inventing water and saying water made everything because it can shape into everything, same thing here theory can shape into anything we want and it can explain everything if we want it to without any evidence. Thats why its stupid, there are literaly infinite number of theorys that can do the same thing

[@cynx1321]

@@AlexanderShamov no it doesnt, it was senceless from beginning, it was based on nothing and milions were wasted to proof it.

[@davidkachel]

To quote the great physicists known as, "The Stooges of Three"... "When I nod my head, you hit it!"

[@StreetComp]

Feels like we are overdue for the next Einstein or Newton - someone to help us see the uni/multi/whatever verse in a totally new way

[@pineapplesoda]

String “Theory” has always irritated me, so I am really here for this content. (No evidence? No theory!) Go, Sabine!

[@deepdrag8131]

4:26 That’s brane, not B-R-I-A-N And that’s the problem right there. No one will figure this out till we ask Brian about it.

[@brentpfister5058]

Coincidentally, the visible spectrum wavelength range is about 0.38 to 0.75 micrometers. The dark dimension is about 1 micrometer in size, which would be infra-red if it were a normal dimension.

[@LuisMailhos]

Calling it "dark science" is likely more apropos as time passes.

[@mrsoggyramen9596]

What if we live in 4.5, or 5.6, or 3.14, or 9.0210 dimensions?

[@chrissearle2055]

Its both wonderful and exciting how much more there is to discover!

[@kingnarothept6917]

String Theory is amazing, but it always needs fine tuning 🔧

[@samedwards6683]

Thanks so much for creating and sharing this informative video. Great job. Keep it up.

[@FredPlanatia]

I did some reading on Naturalness (wikipedia) and had the impression it is a kind of Occam's razor but not really. The other extreme that is opposed to Naturalness is "fine-tuning" where parameters are adjusted to some values which are very specific (and have a great disproportion to other parameters in the theory). The assumption of naturalness restricts the range of some predicted quantities such as e.g. the mass of some supersymmetry partners of existing particles in the standard model making it easier to look for them. It reminds me of the story about the physicist who was looking for his lost car key under a lamp although he lost it in a dark corner of the park without any illumination because "at least he had a chance of spotting it if it was under the lamp".

[@romanceano7519]

What I love from Sabine, beyond her ability as a KZbinr and her dry humour, is that she is an empiricist and empiricism must be the only ratio for science.