Can You Imagine a Fourth Dimension?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around creating a YouTube video explaining the concept of four-dimensional space aimed at a teenage audience. The creator seeks constructive criticism, acknowledging the poor audio quality and suggesting the use of diagrams instead of personal visuals. Some participants express concerns about the creator's understanding of topology and the concept of four dimensions, emphasizing the need for a solid grasp of the topic before teaching it. The creator clarifies their intention to present a unique perspective on four-dimensional space, avoiding complex concepts like the four-dimensional Minkowski space to prevent confusion. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of clarity and comprehension in educational content creation.
Gebri Mishtaku
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hey there peers :smile:
I'm really keen on explaining science to others and I've been practicing it with my classmates lately, so I thought why not give it a try and make my first ever youtube video about a seemingly hard concept which is a space of 4 dimensions. I made this post just because I want to get constructive criticism from you out there that may be more familiar with the topic. So here's the link to it http://youtu.be/zT44y-jD2rk Hope you can be objective and keep in mind that I'm not targeting the explanation to a mathematically mature audience, but to the average teenager.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One thing I can say for sure is that the quality of the audio is terrible. I can understand what you are saying but it's too much of an effort. Secondly, I think you shouldn't use your laptop's built in microphone for such things. Lastly, instead of showing your face to the audience, use diagrams or drawings in the video to illustrate your points.
 
Gebri Mishtaku said:
Hey there peers :smile:
I'm really keen on explaining science to others and I've been practicing it with my classmates lately, so I thought why not give it a try and make my first ever youtube video about a seemingly hard concept which is a space of 4 dimensions. I made this post just because I want to get constructive criticism from you out there that may be more familiar with the topic. So here's the link to it http://youtu.be/zT44y-jD2rk Hope you can be objective and keep in mind that I'm not targeting the explanation to a mathematically mature audience, but to the average teenager.

I don't think you have understood topology that much, and furthermore, I don't know where you get the idea of "4 dimensions" from, but it is certainly not the 3 space + 1 time dimensions that is described in Special Relativity.

I think before you try to "teach" or explain something to others, you need to make sure you understand it at a higher level than the level you intend to explain it to. Certainly try to understand it first before you make a video out of it.

Zz.
 
@ZapperZ Thank you so much for responding! Actually, the one problem that came up in my mind while concocting the idea of the 4D space was to depict it differently from the 4 dimensional Minkowski space, because I knew that would just cause confusion, so I didn't even touch upon the subject in the video and didn't mention time at all. To add, I just wanted to give a different view of a supposed-4D world because every other video I've ever come across just put tesseracts in front of the viewer's face, so I thought hitting the problem with dimensional analogy would make it easier. Anyways, I really appreciate your comment :)
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top