How One Line in the Oldest Math Text Hinted at Hidden Universes





Discover strange new universes that turn up at the core of Einstein’s General Relativity. Head to https://brilliant.org/veritasium to start your free 30-day trial, and the first 200 people get 20% off an annual premium subscription.

Special thanks to our Patreon supporters! Join the community to help us keep our videos free, forever:
https://ve42.co/PatreonDEB

If you’re looking for a molecular modeling kit, try Snatoms – a kit I invented where the atoms snap together magnetically – https://ve42.co/SnatomsV

▀▀▀
A massive thank you to Prof. Alex Kontorovich for all his help with this video.

A huge thank you to Prof. Geraint Lewis and Dr. Ashmeet Singh for helping us understand the applications of Non-Euclidean geometry in astronomy/cosmology.

Lastly, a big thank you to Dr. Henry Segerman and Dr. Rémi Coulon for helping us visualize what it’s like to be inside hyperbolic space and helping us understand hyperbolic geometry.

▀▀▀
Images:
Euclid via Science Museum Group – https://ve42.co/Euclid

Geodesy survey via ams – https://ve42.co/Geodesy

John Wheeler via NAS Online – https://ve42.co/Wheeler

▀▀▀
References:
Dunham, W. (1991). Journey through Genius: Great Theorems of Mathematics. John Wiley & Sons.

Bonola, R. (1955). Non-Euclidean geometry: A critical and historical study of its development. Courier Corporation.

Library of Congress. (n.d.). The Library of Congress. – https://ve42.co/LibofCongress

Euclid’s Elements, Wikipedia – https://ve42.co/Elements

The History of Non-Euclidean Geometry, Extra History via YouTube – https://ve42.co/ExtraHistory

We (could) live on a 4D Pringle – Physics for the Birds via YouTube – https://ve42.co/4DPringle

Parallel Postulate, Wikipedia – https://ve42.co/Parallel

Prékopa, A., & Molnár, E. (Eds.). (2006). Non-euclidean geometries: János Bolyai memorial volume (Vol. 581). Springer Science & Business Media.

St Andrews, University of. (n.d.). Bolyai. MacTutor History of Mathematics. – https://ve42.co/Bolyai

Bolyai, J. (1896). The Science Absolute of Space.. (Vol. 3). The Neomon.

Gauss, Wikipedia – https://ve42.co/Gauss

Singh, U. (2022). Gauss-Bolyai-Lobachevsky: The dawn of non-euclidean geometry. Medium. – https://ve42.co/CPNonEuclidean

Landvermessung, D. Z. (1929). Abhandlungen ueber Gauss’ wissenschaftliche Taetigkeit auf den Gebieten der Geodaesie, Physik und Astronomie Bd. 11, Abt. – https://ve42.co/Landvermessung

Nikolai Lobachevsky, Wikipedia – https://ve42.co/Lobachevsky

Lobachevskiĭ, N. I. (1891). Geometrical researches on the theory of parallels. University of Texas.

A Problem with the Parallel Postulate, Numberphile via YouTube – https://ve42.co/NumberphileParallel

Riemann, B. (2016). On the hypotheses which lie at the bases of geometry. Birkhäuser. – https://ve42.co/Riemann

Einstein, A. (1905). On the electrodynamics of moving bodies. Annalen der physik, 17(10), 891-921. – https://ve42.co/Einstein1905

ESA/Hubble. (n.d.). Hubblecast 90: The final frontier of the Frontier Fields. ESA/Hubble. – https://ve42.co/Einstein1905

Agazie, G., et al. (2023). The NANOGrav 15 yr data set: Constraints on supermassive black hole binaries from the gravitational-wave background. – https://ve42.co/NANOGrav

Secrets of the Cosmic Microwave Background, PBS Spacetime via YouTube – https://ve42.co/PBSCMB

Wood, C. (2020). How Ancient Light Reveals the Universe’s Contents. Quanta Magazine. – https://ve42.co/AncientLight

Collaboration (2014). Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters. A&A, 571, A16. – https://ve42.co/Planck2013

WMAP Science Team, NASA. (2014). Matter in the Universe. WMAP, NASA. – https://ve42.co/WMAP2014

What Is The Shape of Space, minutephysics via YouTube – https://ve42.co/SpaceShape

Shape of the universe, Wikipedia – https://ve42.co/UniverseShape

Crocheting Hyperbolic Planes: Daina Taimina by Ted, via YouTube – https://ve42.co/Hyperbolic

Hyperbolic Crochet model – https://ve42.co/Crochet

▀▀▀
Special thanks to our Patreon supporters:
Adam Foreman, Amadeo Bee, Anton Ragin, Balkrishna Heroor, Bernard McGee, Bill Linder, Burt Humburg, Dave Kircher, Diffbot, Evgeny Skvortsov, Gnare, Jesse Brandsoy, John H. Austin, Jr., john kiehl, Josh Hibschman, Juan Benet, KeyWestr, Lee Redden, Marinus Kuivenhoven, Mario Bottion, Max Maladino, Meekay, meg noah, Michael Krugman, Paul Peijzel, Richard Sundvall, Sam Lutfi, Stephen Wilcox, Tj Steyn, TTST, Ubiquity Ventures

▀▀▀
Directed by Casper Mebius
Written by Casper Mebius, Petr Lebedev, Emily Zhang, Derek Muller, and Alex Kontorovich
Edited by Jack Saxon
Animated by Fabio Albertelli, Ivy Tello, and Mike Radjabov
Illustrations by Jakub Misiek and Celia Bode
Filmed by Derek Muller
Produced by Casper Mebius, Derek Muller, and Han Evans

Additional video/photos supplied by Getty Images, Pond5, and by courtesy of: NASA, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA Goddard Flight Lab/ CI Lab, NASA’s WMAP science teams, ESO, and ESA/Hubble.
Music from Epidemic Sound
Thumbnail by Ren Hurley

source

35 Replies to “How One Line in the Oldest Math Text Hinted at Hidden Universes”

Blows my mind on the persistence of the mathematicians, proving something with logic is a sure fire way of boosting knowledge. “The battle is won by the one who does not give up, no matter how long the struggle may last.” – Paramhansa Yogananda. Bolyai displayed this.

Odd Perfect Number Theory

User

So i'm watching a math video of the oldest problem or something like that, it's do any odd perfect numbers exists?

The known perfect numbers for that time, that lasted 1000 years so, i copied them down and the 6 & 28 are prominent in the set.

Here's what I was messing with ..

98/16=6.125

98/48=2.04

6.125/2.04=3.00

6248/868=7.198

6868-6248=620

6868/6248=1.099

496/81=6.123456790123457

28-16=12 – took the 28-16=12

from the bottom number set .. continued

98/12=8.16

6 – ^

28

496 – 16

8128 – 28

-12

1 – 13 – 25 – 37 – 49 – 61 – 73 – 85 – 97 – 109

5 – 17 – 29 – 41 – 53 – 65 – 77 – 89 – 91 – 113

113+109=222

113=56.5=111

109=54.5=111

222/4=55.5

55.5/4=13.875

222/6=37

55.5/6=9.25

13.875-9.25=4.625

55.5/4.625=12

222/12=18.5 – /12=1.54

37/9.25=4 – (5.4 -4) – (2.22 -21)

55.5/9.25=6 – (1.11 -7) – (1.5 -11)

55.5-37=18.5

55.5+37=92.5

92.5/18.5=5

37/5=7.4 – /5=1.48 /5=0.296 is 148×2 /5=0.0592 is doubling after shifting a place holder

55.5/37=1.5 – /37=0.0405405 – (8.00 -7)

55.5×37=2053.5 – /222=9.25 – (8.45 -7)

Answer

You've embarked on a fascinating journey of numerical exploration!

I'll try to decipher and connect the various calculations and patterns you've discovered:

1. Initial calculations:

You started with some divisions:

98/16 = 6.125

98/48 = 2.04

6.125/2.04 = 3.00

These calculations seem to be exploring the relationships between these numbers.

1. Perfect numbers and differences:

You extracted differences between perfect numbers:

28 – 16 = 12

And used this difference in subsequent calculations.

1. More calculations and patterns:

The following calculations appear to be searching for connections between various numbers:

98/12 = 8.166 – ^ 28 ( unclear what this notation means ) 496/81 = 6.123456790123457

You also listed a series of numbers with differences:

-13, -25, -37, -49, -61, -73, -85, -97, -109

And another series:

5, 17, 29, 41, 53, 65, 77, 89, 91, 113

Sums, products, and divisions;

The subsequent calculations involve sums, products, and divisions:

113 + 109 = 222

113 = 56.5 = 111 ( unclear what this notation means )

109 = 54.5 = 111

You also performed various divisions:

222/4 = 55.5

55.5/4 = 13.875

222/6 = 37

55.5/6 = 9.25

And explored the relationships between these results:

13.875 – 9.25 = 4.625

55.5/4.625 = 12

Connections to previous patterns; Some calculations seem to reconnect with earlier patterns:

37/5 = 7.4

7.4/5 = 1.48

1.48/5 = 0.296

This sequence resembles the earlier exploration of the "doubling after shifting a placeholder" pattern.

Final calculations;

The last few calculations involve further explorations:

55.5/37 = 1.5

55.5×37 = 2053.5

These calculations might be searching for additional connections or patterns.

Please feel free to clarify or provide context for any of the calculations or notations that are unclear. I'll do my best to help you unravel the mysteries hidden within these numbers!

User

in this number sequence was derived from the 222 somehow, I forget because i realized the relationship and in the scramble to remember one i forgot the other ..

Part 1

“You can have a triangle that is infinitely long, but the area is finite.” Sort of reminds of the event horizon surrounding a singularity. You have a finite volume and area surrounding and infinitely dense, infinitely small point (the singularity).

The story of Bolyai is absolutely heartbreaking. I can only imagine the trajectory his life would have took had he made his work known while he was alive. It sucks he misunderstood what was being said in that letter. He really failed to see how high of a compliment he was given.

So the 5th is symbolised now as =
Two lines or anything numbers which are language same sames and the processing of two lines or two points of a equation or theory.

It's which one will tilt or have more weight to the measure over the length of equations or hypothesis….

And we continue to this day to drag out stretch out debate and always trying to adjust alter each other's 5 th….

A line of reason/s or argument and debate ..
It's all most like democracy was symbolised with the symbol =
And based apon another which gives merit to adjustment in % and we are always there for ÷ or trying to keep or hold a symbol of divided but if that sat perfect there is no weight measure or adjustment no motion drive energy so we are left with a balancing Act….

So do the both . ÷ upper and lower move in natural forces as a balance of perfect flow and movement and we only utilise or able to the one on top theory.

Or is it us on the top nature under that line or vice versa…..

General relativity has been remarkably unsuccessful. You cannot even measure big-G, and you have zero predictive power in cosmology. Read my stuff if you want to know what real physics looks like.

Dr. Alex is on the right path, but he shouldn't stop too soon.

It's not just the jump from defining the thing to defining the relationship, it's the trajectories traced by the movement from one system of thought to the next. Just how, from the first scene of a movie, you can already see the bend of the plot, so, too, can you see how the movement from circular definitions to systems of relationships is only the opening overture of a much grander symphony.

Keep bending that path away from human bias. Even relationships aren't enough. What would it mean to set that system in motion and see what values it reveals?

Can someone define what a single line is parallel too, in order for it to be confirmed as a "parallel line"? If I draw a single line it cannot be a parallel line if there isn't any other line to use as a datum or reference or can the single parallel line be in two places at once but the human eye cannot see it? A kind of quantum physics situation.

Wait, you're speaking English, and he wrote in Greek. @ 17:50 You might be terribly wrong, as he didn't say that, English people say that, and he was Greek. There are so many logical differences in the language, you're crazy and predatorial to attack him with English when he was Greek.

17:25 As a grad student, this part sends chills down my spine. This is what happens when you and your advisor sit together, completely demolish whatever you've done for the last week, and then rebuild it from the ground up to find out what to do next.

There’s a good chance this comment gets lost within the realm of YouTube, but here it goes. I’m posting this comment on April 16, 2025, shortly after the Emmy Noether/Einstein video. One key insight in that video was that energy is no longer conserved over large timescales. This leads me to believe that our measurement of average mass energy density is changing. If energy is no longer conserved, this means that once upon a time our universe could have been spherical or hyperbolic.

This is an epic video, you just walked us through a 2000 years journey of greatest minds trying to understand how this universe works, and yet on another level you gently exposed how little and endlessly evolving is our understanding of universe. A beautiful paradox in which we walk away from and toward the core of truth at the same moment, assuming the truth is a singularity.

Leave a Reply