Video Transcript
Okay, the main event, chat. The main event. Breaking space-time. Well, first of all, the dramatic happenings. Ashton, they're coming at me. We're over the target, guys. Here you go. There it is. Teleportation. Teleportation, right there. You say, Ashton, why is this relevant for teleportation? Why is this little video here of this ball showing us this a phase inversion, where you see it flip over? Why is this relevant? Because what you're looking at there is a concave mirror. You're looking at a mirror that's bent like a bowl. That's what you're looking at right there. And so, the analogy for space-time that we're we're dealing with, when we are making a wormhole, we are plucking a guitar string. So, imagine I've got my guitar string right here, and I pluck that guitar string. The phase inversion point is when that guitar string hits the zero point and then goes below it. And then the guitar string vibrates, right? Up and down. Does that seem familiar? It should, because that's what we're dealing with right here. Right? The moment the ball passes the zero point, there's an inversion that occurs. This is the same thing that happens with the orbs teleporting the plane. We can actually even see total internal reflection of the tail of the plane from the event that occurs. So, the first thing that we need to understand for this is Salvatore Pais. What did Salvatore Pais teach us about manipulating space-time? He said, if we want to pluck that string, we need to produce energy, positive energy. We're going to use positive energy to overwhelm space-time and cause bum bum bum the phase inversion to occur. So, what are we going to do to teleport? We are going to pluck the guitar string. Now, what's the challenge? The challenge associated with this, now that we've got a methodology, is that guitar string that we want to pull on? It's like really, really tight. Space-time itself is very stiff. Space-time is stiff, so if we want to pluck the guitar string, it's going to be really difficult. We either need a lot of energy to pull it off, or we need another method to do it. Now, Salvatore Pais taught us that the phase inversion, the breaking of space-time happens at the Schwinger limit. I say this cuz we're going to watch a video right now where it goes through the math. Prepare yourself, there will be math. And the whole point of the video is to try to figure out where is the energy level by which space-time breaks apart. By which we can do this snapping of space-time to cause the teleportation to occur. So, that is tonight's live stream, breaking space-time. Now, here's the video that we're going to be reviewing. And I think I've got a few clips. We may have to pull in a few extras. Wait, whoops. That's not right. This one. Here we go. Can you actually break space time? So, where are we going to start? I think we're starting Where do I have my time stamps? 17 minutes in about, okay? So, we're going to skip in here a little bit. And here's the main idea. I'm going to just going to show you a quick piece of this. Wait, come on now. This piece right here. The main idea is this. Is that what if we treat space time like an elastic medium? What if we treat just like this metal rod, if I bend this metal rod, if I deform space time, I can pull on this metal rod, I can deform the metal rod. And in fact, we can calculate the stiffness of the metal rod as well. So, in theory, we can take these same principles and we can find out what is the stiffness of space time itself. So, watch this whole video if you want to see everything about it. Can you actually break space time by Physics Explained? I'll put a link in the chat right now for you guys if you need it. Yes, like a rubber band. Exactly like a rubber band. In fact, a rubber band is a good example. A rubber band has a very, very low stiffness, obviously. Steel has a very, very high stiffness. Now, can you imagine what the stiffness of space time is? The stiffness of space time as we're about to find out is much, much stiffer than steel. Here we go. Okay, so let's skip ahead a little bit. So we're going to do some calculations. We're going to calculate space-time stiffness. Here we go. >> And so by comparison with the elastic material result, we can define an effective elastic model energy density for space-time of the following form, where here YF represents the effective Young's modulus using this approach, and H represents the gravitational wave strain. Now, this does not mean that space-time is literally an elastic material. Rather, it means that we're asking if space-time behaved like an elastic material, what stiffness, aka Young's modulus, would it need to have in order for us to observe what we did at LIGO? And so if we can find a way of estimating the energy density carried by the gravitational wave, >> So, the whole first half of this video is trying to figure out the stiffness of space-time. And what we're going to use as our baseline is LIGO. LIGO has detected gravitational waves, so we can use those frequencies, plug it into the math, and we can figure out a generic idea for how much space how much stiffness there is in space-time. >> Then we can estimate this effective Young's modulus by rearranging our energy density equation. Okay, so that's what the material science side of things is saying. But how do we now think from a gravitational wave perspective and derive an analogous expression for the energy density from our gravitational wave picture? Well, to do that, we're first going to derive an expression for the energy flux of a gravitational wave, which is the energy carried through 1 square meter per second. And we will label this flux Fgw, where the GW stands for gravitational wave. So, what might this energy flux depend on? Well, as we've already seen, when the gravitational wave passes through the ring of masses, it causes the strain to vary sinusoidally as space-time stretches and compresses. And so, we can write that h of t is equal to h naught * sin 2 pi f t, where here h naught is the maximum value of the strain, and f is the frequency of the wave. Um Hm. Now, I couldn't find an exact connection here, but the moment he starts graphing it as a sine wave, this is exactly how the orbs are graphed around the plane. The orb spinning around the plane graph is a perfect sine wave in two dimensions, just like what you're seeing on the screen right here. Which I think just implies, it's not necessarily a direct connection, but implies that we're dealing with the same physics here. Is that the physics to bring down the Schwinger limit is finding the perfect resonance of sinusoidal waves. So, we might naturally imagine that the energy flux is related to the strain, with larger strain corresponding to larger energy. But, it's not just the size of the strain that determines the energy. It's also connected to the rate at which the strain changes, and this is simply equal to the gradient of the strain-time graph. The rate at which the strain changes. So, if we think about the orbs spinning around the plane, this is crazy because we have a real-life experiment. When we watch this, we can think about it in our head. We've seen this happen. The rate of change is what's important. This is why the orbs aren't just sinusoidally wiggling back and forth. That's not enough. The wiggle back and forth or whatever they're doing spinning around the plane is not enough. They need to also converge on the plane. They need to converge because they need an accelerated bear They need the the walls to be collapsing ex- in an accelerated way. That's the trigger mechanism that causes it to break. >> So if we plot the changing gradient, then in a loose sense it tells us how quickly space-time is going from stretch to squeezed and back again. But notice that this gradient can be both positive and negative. During one part of the cycle the strain is increasing, during another part it's decreasing. Energy however should not depend on that sign. Whether space-time is going from stretch to squeezed or squeezed to stretch. >> Let's skip ahead a little bit. I think we understand this part. Now let's move up here. So he does some math here. And somewhere right around 24. Let's just start a little bit ahead. Let's go like right around here. Okay, so we did some math here. >> So then we end up with the following result. >> Okay, let me let's just go back like to about right here. Let's watch this part. >> squared. And we can now compare this to what we derived when considering elastic materials. >> So what are we doing? We're still trying to calculate the stiffness of space-time and we're about to calculate it right now, okay? So essentially we took this 3D model, we imagined gravitational waves in an imaginary cube, and we said, "Okay, let's figure out what the stiffness of space-time is based on this." >> You recall from the elastic model side we had that the energy density was equal to half Y effective times A squared. And if we consider the >> Now Y effective is our Young's modulus, which is a factor of stiffness. So here we go, we're comparing stiffness to gravity. We're saying, "Is there a way where we compare gravity to stiffness? And therefore can we determine what an accurate value of stiffness of space-time is?" >> maximum strain when H equals H naught, then we can write that U model is equal to half Y effective H naught squared. And we can now ask what Young's modulus would an ordinary elastic medium need to store the same energy density for the same strain. To answer this question, we simply need to equate the two expressions we have derived for the energy density. And if we then sub in the equations and rearrange for the effective Young's modulus, we see that the strain cancels and we end up with the following result. >> So, this is pretty interesting. When you look at that, the strain cancels out on this. The H is zero cancels out on both sides. And so, you end up getting an effective Young's modulus, an effective stress of the medium is equal to the speed of light squared * frequency squared / big G. Okay. I mean, that equation right there has is just has the speed of light in it, frequency, and big G gravity to figure out the stiffness of space-time. This is exactly the same math that Alcubierre went down to find out that we can make a warp drive. >> And so, we see that the effective Young's modulus of space-time does not depend on the size of the strain. It depends only on the frequency of the gravitational wave. So, let's now sub in some number >> It only depends the Young's modulus only depends on the frequency of the gravitational wave. I still need to wrap my brain around this, but it almost makes it sound like the frequency will determine the stiffness of space-time. If you have a higher frequency, the stiffness of space-time gets lower? Is that accurate? I'm going to have to double-check this afterwards. I didn't get to do enough uh fact-checking on myself yet. >> This is using the data >> Somebody's saying yes in the chat. If that's true, if the frequency is Look, we're looking at math right here, right? Frequency squared in the in the numerator means that this Young's modulus, this effective Young's modulus is going to go down when frequency goes up. So, in theory, if you increase your frequency here, you might reduce the stiffness of space-time. That would mean the vibration like Salvatore Pais says is definitely how you manipulate space-time. I mean, that's what the equation shows. That's it right there. There's no other variables. The only variable there is frequency. Everything else is a constant. >> from LIGO. As mentioned at the start of the video, for the first gravitational wave signal detected by LIGO, we can use a representative frequency of around 100 Hz. And if we then sub this into our Young's modulus equation along with the speed of light and Newton's gravitational >> Oh, this is why. Oh, chat. It's coming to me in real time while we're live streaming. You guys are even helping me. Why? Because they use a frequency of 100 Hz, which is what we're using with LIGO. But guess what? LIGO's frequency is super low, guys. LIGO's frequency is not catching manufactured gravitational waves. It's not catching gravitational waves produced by aliens or produced by humans. So, if you if you increase that frequency significantly, that's going to change the Young's modulus significantly as well. >> constants, we find an effective Young's modulus of around 1.3 * 10 ^ 31 pascals, which is quite extraordinary. To see just how extraordinary, recall that steel has a Young's modulus of order 10 ^ 11 pascals. And if we take their ratio, we find an answer of 10 ^ 20. And this is precisely the value stated by Rainer Weiss at the end of Kip Thorne's lecture. And we now have a sense of where this quoted value actually comes from. >> Uh wow, chat. Welcome to felony physics, by the way. This is where we teach you the physics that'll get you killed, get you disappeared, get you General McCaslin, get you MH370. The stiffness of space-time, if we assume LIGO level gravitational frequency, which is 100 hertz, is 20 orders of 20 orders of magnitude times stronger than steel. 20 orders of magnitude times stronger than steel. You guys are wondering why we can't make gravitational waves very well? Uh cuz the stiffness is like impossible. That's 20 zeros more than steel. This is why it's such a challenge to manipulate space-time. The math makes it very challenging. Here we go. >> So, in this very specific sense, a gravitational wave at LIGO frequencies behaves as though it is deforming something roughly 10 to the 20 times stiffer than steel. And it's important to emphasize what this actually means. It means that if an ordinary elastic material carried waves with the same strain and the same energy density as a gravitational wave of 100 hertz, that material would need a Young's modulus of roughly 10 to the 31 pascals. And this then leads naturally to our next question. If we are already entertaining the idea that space-time has something like stiffness, could it also have something like a breaking point? >> So, we're going to skip this part because this has to do with Actually, no, this is probably fine. Um cuz yeah, this is the part where like can you shatter space-time? Can you break space-time? So, we do a slightly different calculation. Instead of trying to say, "What is the general stiffness of space-time?" now we're trying to say, "What is the point in which space-time will fall apart? Space-time will crack." I'm just going to let it play out, I decided. >> Well, to answer that, we need to borrow a tool from a completely different corner of physics, fracture mechanics. This is the physics of cracks growing in materials, and that's what makes this so fun. We're going to take an idea normally used to understand why glass shatters, and ask what happens if we apply it to space-time itself. And this idea is not plucked out of thin air. A recent paper called breaking space-time does exactly this as a fun >> So, here you go. Here's a scientific paper called breaking space-time by Pablo Tello and Imagin Strong, March 31st, 2025. This note proposes a new interpretation of hypothesized maximum force in general relativity by drawing an analogy between space-time and brittle materials. Now, this is the kind of stuff I love, and look at what it says down here in the keywords. Keywords, right over here, guys. Schwinger effect. There you go, right there. Schwinger effect. It says, "Finally, it speculates on the formulation of a Kugelblitz, concluding that vacuum polarization Schwinger effect would prevent it from from its formation even at Planck sizes." I don't know what the hell a Kugelblitz is, but there you go. >> Ignoring numerical constants that depend on the exact geometry of the crack, the result is that sigma c squared scales as Y times gamma subscript S divided by D, where sigma subscript c is the critical stress at which the fracture occurs. >> Wait, wait, that means ball lightning in German? No, no, it doesn't. No way. No way, chat. It says Look up cool No way, chat. Okay. The real-time chat, hold on. Here we go. >> [clears throat] >> Theoretical black hole formed from concentrated energy. German term translates to ball lightning. What the hell? What? A theoretical black hole formed from concentrated energy or light rather than matter. Black ball lightning. What?