subt

Welcome to 2015 ! Aah, 2015… The year of hoverboards,

the year of “Jaws” Part 19…

What did you plan for October the 21th ?

Also ! As you got it, 2015 is the year when Marty McFly

takes himself to the future in “Back to the Future” Part II.

Thius we have a good opportunity to sum up about time travels.

So, can we travel through time, what about temporal paradoxes ?

How could we travel through time ?

What about technical issues ? And so on.

So first of all we have to define precisely thoses words :

“time travel”.

Because right now, we do travel in time, technically.

At every second, you’re a second later in the future.

So we all travel in time.

— Well, umh… ‘kay, but it’s not exactly… —

Moreover remember the 15th episode about the arrow of time, we saw that

time passing other than from past to future, is impossible.

— OK so it’s stinky, so, well… The end. —

But, of course this kind of time travel which consists in making a one second step every second…

That’s not our purpose.

That is the boring time travel.

I know it, you know it, he knows it, we know it, you know it, they know it.

[Achievement unlocked : simple present]

But still ! and so, technically, just to elude this very question :

the point is that we already know how to travel to the future.

We know it. For instance, if you move, special relativity tells us

that your clock will turn slower

than the clock of this guy sitting by, who doesn’t move.

So you travel into his future.

But not much.

In kind of the same manner : the higher you elevate,

the weaker the force of gravity will apply to you.

And what special relativity tells us is that, for this reason,

your clock will turn faster

than one at the ground level.

Ok so in that case somebody located on the ground travels into your future.

but once again not much,… almost not.

… Almost not ? it depends : if you go far enough

for instance if you get into orbit in space, the difference can be quickly substantial.

That’s the reason why — we already saw it in the episode about general relativity —

that’s the reason why the GPS satellites

are forced to resynchronize on a regular basis.

And the astronauts’ watches inside the International Space Station

are set to run a little more slower than watches on the ground.

So the super high-tech watch of an astronaut, at the ground level,

it’s worth… well… it’s basically shit, you know.

Finally — and even if it’s very poetic — watching the stars

doesn’t allow us travel through time.

Indeed, we can see the past of the stars,

and we can see their past passing continously

— So one second by one —

Nevertheless, we can’t travel to this very past.

We can just observe it.

So we don’t travel through time.

So all this is not time travel at all, let’s be clear.

Yes, exactly ! All this is not time travel,

or if it’s time travel it’s a boring one,

it’s not the one we want to talk about, it’s not the one that you want to talk about.

In its common meaning, time travel consists

in taking oneself physically to another period

— regardless about whether it’s in the future or in the past —

and becoming able to interact with this period.

It is the fact, by means of any machine, or not,

of being able to take myself back in 1850 and to walk through the streets of Paris.

In 1850,… not so confident about it…

So to put it simply, we’re going to make a distinction between two different things :

travelling forward into the future and travelling backward into the past.

Because it’s different.

Travelling to the future is possible and it’s not really complicated theoretically… Theoretically !

For instance you may move very, very fast.

— That comes from special relativity. —

For instance if you travel at 80% of the speed of light

time will be 60% dilated.

Therefore, this means that if you move at 80% of the speed of light,

For every six years passing to you,

ten years pass to those who don’t move.

Technically this is a travel forward to the future which is at least more exciting than walking on your feet,

but even to go twenty years ahead in the future, you’ll have to travel

at 80% of the speed of light during twelve years.

So that’s stinky.
Another possibilty could be travelling around a really, really huge mass,

— let’s say a blackhole for instance —

… so the effects of gravity become that strong

that your time seems really slowed down to an outside observer.

« Explain why this sucks anyway. »

This method is not the one I would recommend

because despite anything you could hear or read or see about blackholes

and about what happens when one comes closer to a black hole

— because you can see, hear and read such bullshit, seriously… —

The first problem when one comes closer to a black hole

lays in a strong gravitation.

By a strong gravition I mean

that you’re very, very, very much heavier than above the Earth.

In addition, as the black hole becomes closer, one must be aware of the fact

that the gaps in gravitation are such important that if you bring yourself vertically

with you feet oriented toward the black hole,

your feet are much more attracted

toward the black hole

than your head.

Hence you’re completely stretched and you end being torn in pieces

in atrocious suffering.

But with a clock turning slower than others.
So it’s stinky.

Furthermore, there is no known way that permits a travel backward in past.

So the issue about time travel is more
an matter of travel into the past than a matter of travel into the future.

But still.

OK so to be precise, time travel

is the issue about either being able to travel backward in the past

or travelling simply and quickly forward in the future. OK ?

Before we wonder about how we do to travel in time,

let’s see if there are no problems that couldn’t be overcome

with the fact of travelling through time.

Because if there’s a problem we cannot overcome with the fact of travelling through time

this means that travelling through time is impossible.

So there would be no point in seeking a method to travel in time… t’-time ! …

And, no surprise — well, at least for those who watched the episode about the arrow of time —

the first and strongest brake on time travel

is the principle of causality.

The principle of causality, let’s say it again, means that a cause always comes before its effects,

and an effect can never retroact on its cause.

Simply the principle of causality.

So as to point out the problems

that could be more or less overwhelming with time travel
nothing’s better than a good old temporal paradox.

Speaking about temporal paradoxes there are two of them

which are real classics.

Two ones… plus their variations, huh. We’ll see that in a while.

First we have the grandfather paradox : imagine you travel back to the past

and you kill your grandfather before he’s got the time to conceive your father or mother,
therefore you cannot be born.

And if you can’t be born you can’t travel back to the past and kill your grandfather.

So he doesn’t die.

So you can be born.

And if you can be born, you can go to the past and kill your grandfather, and so on.

Paradox !

Let me just make a quick point concerning the notion of paradox

because I read many things… everything and anything about paradoxes.

A paradox is not just some trick seemingly impossible

or some curious or surprising stuff.

A paradox is something saying everything and its opposite.

It’s something saying, that something isn’t possible

but at the same time that this thing is possible. THAT is a paradox.

A paradox, it’s like, “bang”, that’s it.

It’s not just “hey, this is incredible !” No, this is not a paradox.

The second temporal paradox is called the writer paradox.

You travel into the past, meet William Shakespeare when he’s fifteen,

and you give him Hamlet.

You tell him : “take it, you’ll see, it’s gonna be kick-ass, enjoy yourself !”

So William Shakespeare publishes Hamlet.
Hamlet meets a huge success and become a great classic.

This classic ends up in your library,

then you travel through time to give it to Shakespeare.

And then, the paradox :

who wrote Hamlet ? One might be tempted to say it’s Shakespeare.

Except that Shakespeare got it from you.

You’re going to say that you had first a book written by Shakespeare.

No, you had not : maybe you had a book by Shakespeare, who got it from you.

Paradox !

Then, like I told you before, there are several variations for these temporal paradoxes.

For instance, imagine that your grandfather was assassinated when you’re a little child.

So you go back to the past to kill your grandfather’s murderer.

— Eespecially right now, one could never say it too much : killing is bad ! —

So of course in this case, there’s nothing preventing you from existing,

since you were already born when he was murdered anyway. Nothing changes.

Now you’ll just be allowed to live you life with your grandfather by your side, and that’s cool.

That’s cool, yes, except that you’ve got no reason to go back to the past to save his life,

so you don’t go back to the past and save his, so you don’t save his life,

so he is well and truly murdered. Paradox !

Another variation on the same subject : you go back to the past to kill yourself.

In legal terms, isn’t it a suicide ?

So, you kill yourself,

So you cannot live long enough

to go back to the past and kill yourself,

so you don’t kill yourself, so you can live long enough to… Well.

Paradox !

But there are also variations on the writer’s paradox.

Imagine that you decided that you’re going to dedicate you life

to build a time-travel machine.

You spend your whole life to build this machine,

As a result : when you have finished this machine, you’re old.

Yes… You are old.

And as you spent your whole time to do this and didn’t live out your life,

you decide to go back to the past to give the time machine to yourself

when you are young.

So as you guess, it’s quite the same issue as Hamlet’s.

That is, finally : who did build this time machine ?

With something subtle in addition : if, once you’re old and had a lot of fun,

you’ve got your time machine, so you’ve played with stock exchange,

gambling and all this, you really enjoyed yourself.

If once you’re old, you decide not to go back to the past to give yourself the time machine ?

Well, there we have another more paradox, because you would have spent your whole lifetime travelling through time

with a time machine that you gave to yourself

although you built it when you’re younger, so, at the time before !

But therefore you wouldn’t have get the time machine when you’re younger

therefore you couldn’t have done all this.

In a word, temporal paradoxes are a hassle

and it’s not without a reason that almost all the movies speaking about time travel

completely fail at some point.

It’s only logic, you know…

Because these are paradoxes. Complex stuff.

Except for «Timecop » of course. *LOL*

But, so : can these paradoxes be solved,

or can’t they ?

Because if they can’t be solved, you’ll agree with this,

it isn’t worth seeking means to travel through time.

If we can’t solve them, we cannot solve them.

On the other hand, if we can solve them, we may take two or three minutes to seek something.

Given that the solutions to these paradoxes

will have to comply with the principle of causality.

The first way is that of several different lines of spacetime

but let’s make it simple and call it that of “parallel universes”.

This one can be found in « Back to the Future ».

The basic idea is that every change you apply to the past

generates a new space-time continuum,

just as if it created a new universe,

in which the following events will happen naturally.

That means if you go back to the past and kill your grandfather,

you’ll still be existing

in your original universe
and your grandfather will never be murdered by your hands, in your original universe.

But he will be murdered by someone people don’t know

in another alternative universe that’s going to be created

and in which therefore you’ll never be born,

since you killed your grandfather.

But it’s another universe.

So, the “you” travelling back into the past will remember your grandfather,

And then the other universe is another one.

In the same manner, if you give « Hamlet » to Shakespeare,

the « Hamlet » you’ve got would have been created by William Shakespeare from your universe,

and William Shakespeare will publish a « Hamlet » in another universe

which was written by a guy who gave it to him.

As you guessed this hypothesis bears an uncanny resemblance to the many-worlds interpretation of the multiverse,

that one where, every time a particle can find itself in two different states,

a universe is created for each possible state of this particle,

And it’s not a coincidence if these hypothesis look alike.

And there’s a reason if we like this one.

It’s the simpliest one

that solves quite every temporal paradoxes.

Because by way of construction, it solves all temporal paradoxes.

It solves every temporal paradoxes obviously by way of contruction

since it was built for it.

That is, we took for a cause the fact of travelling back into the past,

and, in fact, all its effects happen in another universe

so none of those effects could interact with this very cause.

Because the problem with travelling into the past

is that you could have an effect prior to its cause

and so that could retroact on it, and that is not possible.
So this is the method using parallel universes : it works great !

… But these are parallel universes.

In particular, this means that if you expected to travel back into the past some day

so as to give to your younger “you” all the winning lotto numbers

for the twenty years to come

In fact you’ll give them to somebody who’s exactly the same as you,

but who lives in another universe.

To you, it makes no difference.

The second method for solving temporal paradoxes

is that of predestination and which I generally call

that of « it always fucking was the case ».

Because it fucking always was the case !

Here’s its principle : what happened always happened.

And that’s all.

Well yes, sounds poor said that way but it’s not as dumb is it seems.

The basic idea is, if you go back to the past to kill your grandfather,

you’ll always have gone back to the past to kill your grandfather.

And it fucking always was the case !

And if you were born it means that your grandfather wasn’t your grandfather,

your grandmother hid something from you.

There’s always a solution somewhere,

always some stuff making it possible,

but if you go back to the past to kill your grandfather,

you’ll always have gone back to the past to kill your grandfather.

It fucking always was the case !

It works well,but it does… not.

It’s indeed a really pleasing solution because

it enables a unique timeline in which actually nothing can be changed.

Precisely there’s some kind of predestination, fate, or destiny, or anything you want in it.

Which makes that anything could happened, the same causes leading to the same effects,

the universe is…

The same things happen.

The fact that you travel back into the past changes nothing to it.

It fucking always was the case !

Well so it doesn’t work… because ?

It doesn’t work because it doesn’t solve the paradoxes.

It maybe solves the grandfather paradox, quick and dirty.

You can even imagine that when you go back to the past to kill your grandfather’s murderer,

in fact you were wrong about the murderer

and that he was killed all the same by somebody else, but you never knew it

and you always thought that this person was the one you killed,

therefore nothing changes.

But most important, still speaking about the grandfather paradox and its variations,

it doesn’t work if you’re in the past to kill yourself. That’s all.

Because if you travel back into the past to kill yourself

hence, you’re dead,

so there’s no way you can go back to the past later.

The paradox remains intact.

And it’s even worse with the writer’s paradox.

It’s even worse, because if it’s definitely true that you’ve gone back to the past

and give « Hamlet » to Shakespeare, it means that

Shakespeare NEVER wrote « Hamlet ».

And so we have a critical paradox : WHO has written « Hamlet » ?

— It’s not worth leaving a comment saying that the number Pi wrote « Hamlet ». —

— Even if it’s a great comment. —
[Translator’s note : see the ‘quickie’ ep. #04 about Emile Borel and rich numbers !]

Subsquently, there’s a third theory, which isn’t really a theory, as we’ll see it,

but is interesting anyway, so I’m going to tell a bit about it,

it is that of individual timelines.

Yes I did invent this name.

This stuff’s probably got a name but I didn’t find it, so,

I invented this one : individual timelines.
The basic idea is : if you travel back into the past,

no matter if it was to kill your grandfather, his murderer, yourself,

or to give « Hamlet » to Shakespeare, or anything else,
what you’ve done in the past will be found in your own future.

If you wear a watch displaying precisely 13 o’clock,

then you go back to the past a minute later, it’ll display 13:01.

It’s your OWN future ; and in the same manner,

your grandfather, who’ll be killed by you in the past, will die in his own future.

If his watch displays 15:50 one minute before he was killed, it’s 15:51 when he’s being killed.

So you can never affect anyone’s past, you can only affect their future.

So there’s no problem with the principle of causality.

Except that it is rather a philosophical argument

that’s quite interesting

but the point is that by affecting your grandfather’s future

you’ll affect the past of whom will later go back to the future

and kill one’s grandfather.

Hence one cannot solve the paradox so easily.

This solves quite nothing.

This very method do not solve anything.

Well, so it solves nothing except with the fourth theory

which seems a bit like that of parallel universes but is even more simple.

It’s the dual universe theory.

With this one it’s much more simple

because as you’ll notice, only two universes are required

so we can solve these paradoxes.

Only two universes for any paradox, indeed :

Imagine you go back to the future and kill your grandfather ;

You’re grandfather doesn’t exist, so you don’t.

so you can’t go back to the future and kill your grandfather,

so he does exist, so you were born,

so you can go back to the future and kill your grandfather.

Let’s make it clearer.

Your grandfather exists, he’s in the A-universe.

Later on, you also exist in the same A-universe.

You go back to the future and kill him ;

from the instant when you kill him you grandfather doesn’t exist anymore and we get into the B-universe.

In this B-universe,
you don’t exist, since your grandfather’s dead,

so you can’t go back to the past to kill your grandfather.

So you grandfather exists again… in the A-universe.

Things have come full circle.

In the same manner if William Shakespeare has written « Hamlet » in the A-universe,

and later on you’ve got the book, and you travel back into the past

to give it to him so he didn’t write it, we are now in the B-universe ;

And from this point we’re going to go round in the B-universe.

At every time, you’ll have the book that he didn’t write and you’ll give to him

and you remain inside the B-universe.

Two universes.

Only two universes, no more.

And that’s pretty cool.

And even considering the extreme case where you go back to the past and kill yourself :

you exist in the A-universe, then you go back to the past and kill yourself,

so you don’t exist anymore : you are in the B-universe.

If you don’t exist anymore, you can’t go back to the past and kill yourself,

so you’ll exist again in the A-universe, and that’s all.

And this theory is even more simple than that of the parallel universes.

Now, to tell whether it’s valid or not is another question.

So, solving these paradoxes is possible.

And if it’s possible to solve them, it is worth

taking 5 minutes to wonder how we could travel through time.

Strictly speaking about time travel

I’m going to be honnest, we haven’t got a thousand methods.

There are quite few.

And basically they’re all about gravitation.

Just as in « Interstellar »

which I’m not going to tell about now.

In 1949, Kurt Gödel lives in Princeton. He’s one of Einstein’s neighbours.

He works on finding clues to the equations of general relativity.

We’ll talk about Gödel later, not this time, but we will talk about him.

According to that solution Gödel found,
the existence of time loops may be possible.

And thus time would not only be linear, and there really might be time loops.

This implies that the universe would spin really, really fast

and distort space-time enough so it would generate

a time loop at some point.

This trick seriously bothers Einstein because, to his mind

there’s no possibility of time travel, there’s no time loop, it’s just like, NO.
And it makes Gödel laugh.

Because as you see Gödel was much of a funny guy.

Yeah.

So mathematically speaking this is a bloody complex solution,

which invokes light cones inversions

which are precisely the cause of time loops.

Although I’m not speaking about Gödel right now, let’s precise

that Gödel is one of the craziest mathematicians in the twentieth century.

Nobody gets a goddamn thing about what he says or does.

Well, some guys get it but it’s hugely complex.

Notice that this solution only allows travels backward into the past.

Not any travel forward into the future.

Well more precisely, in any other way than travelling really, really fast as mentionned before.

Moreover, a travel back to the past can be performed the same way :

by travelling really, really fast to the future until you buckle to your own past.

That is a time loop : it seems like you keep on going to the future

but at some point, the future… becomes the past again.

And Einstein will be glad to observe that,

even if mathematically it’s pretty lovely, the universe does not spin.

It’s expanding. So there’s no… Well, so, we don’t care.

Indeed, the most recent pictures of the cosmic microwave background

show us no rotation of the universe.

So going by all this… it’s stinky.

The second method would consist in using a black hole spinning really, really fast.

It’s a kind of the same thing :

the fact that it spins really fast distorts space-time

so time loops can be generated.

But of course this causes several problems : first it’s a local time loop, you know…

So one has to go next to that black hole

and needs to move fast enough to find back one’s own past.

And it’ll be a local past.

One will never come back 50,000 years earlier, a priori.

But should it be possible, for some reason I don’t know,…

— One never knows ! —

moving around a black hole, like I said,

it is not as simple as it seems in the movies…

At a fair enough distance, one could actually orbitate around a black hole

but er… you know it’s…

If one must reach a point where space-time is so distorted

that time loops could occur there,

it’s highly probable that gravitation is quite strong there.

And it’s highly probable that it would tear us out completely.

So it’s stinky.

Finally the third method that’s regularly spoken about

is that denoted of « wormholes ».

So I won’t explain what a « wormhole » is in details now,

just as blackholes it requires its own episode.

I’m going to say simply and quickly that a whormhole

is a distortion in space-time such that

a point of space-time

meets another point of space-time,

and some kind of tunnel is created within space-time, and there we are.

Damn, such an approximation !…

Speaking about wormholes, we don’t know whether they actually exist or not.

Theory explains that they could exist,
so if we got it right on the theory, they may exist,

though it does not mean they exist for all that.

But still : let’s imagine you do have a wormhole.

Indeed, this wormhole won’t lead you to somewhere else in space ;

It will lead you to somewhere in space-time.
So you may potentially travel through a wormhole

that will lead you near Aldebaran back in 1979.

And I’d rather tell you that 1979 near Aldebaran was a pretty rotten year.

Absolutely not worth it.
But so it’ll be tough to pay a visit to your grandfather, because it’s a long way…

However if you don’t want to use a wormhole

at an astronomic or cosmolgic level

but rather a wormhole at a quantum level,

it causes other issues.

First of all, quantum wormholes,

even if we are quite convinced that they do exist theoretically,

we don’t really know.

This is the first point.

Then, another issue is that

nobody knows how to create a wormhole

at a quantum level.

It should be noticed that, theoretically, a quite important amount of negative energy would be required for it,

and we don’t really know what negative energy actually is. It’s rather complex.

All this is a damn mess.
Then the point is, if wormholes do actually exist at a quantum level,

they appear, then collapse almost immediatly.

No one knows how to prevent them from collapsing.

And we come to the final point : so as to travel through them,

we would first have to reconcile gravitation and quantum mechanics,

which isn’t done for now.

This is the very goal that string theory aims at.

And let’s say it frankly, string theory is the best candidate to solve this very issue

simply because, it’s the only candidate

to solve this issue.

So it isn’t done, not at all, you know.

Well, huh, we could have spared some time saying it from the beginning : time travels suck !

However, even if we got the ability of travelling through time,

that would still cause technical issues anyway.

Let me take some examples :

if I decide to travel back quite exactly one month ago,
where do I come out ?

Well, the problem is that there’s no fixed point in space :

everything moves and turns relatively to anything.

So indeed, back to a month ago : where do I come out, huh ?

Let’s admit that I’ve managed to immobilise a point in space.

So I should come out at the same place.

A month ago the Earth was not here.

A month ago, the Earth was on a distant point on its orbit around the Sun.

So it’s like : I’m coming and pff ! The end.

Nevertheless this is probably an issue that can be solved.

If we’re able to build a machine that’s able to tell :

« so here is when we arrive within time »

it should be able to tell : « so here is where we arrive within space. »
Which raises the issue of teleportation, and it’s another issue.

Now, same thing : I travel back into the past and to exactly the same place

so I come out into a place that isn’t empty.

Saying this I do not simply mean that exactly a month ago,

maybe I was already there and that I would blast myself breaking into that place.

Even if I anticipated it and wasn’t right there at this moment,

even if the appartment was perfectly empty, there’s still air anyway.

So my molecules will arrive in a space

filled with air molecules.

Why would I win against them ?

Rather than the air ?
And let’s say it clear, even if I we had previously planned

to make an absolute vacuum…

— first, this probably does not exist —

then tell me if it’s worth being able to travel through time

given that you must anticipate that at the end point,

an absolute vacuum had to be made.

— That’s one question. —
Even if technically it would be spectacular.

But still, it must be noticed that

when you come out something is already there.
There are collisions with some things… what happens at this moment, you know ?

Last but not least, if in the same manner I travel back one month ago,

I come out right at the same place

the molecules I’m made of right now disappear from the present universe

and add themselves to the past universe.

So didn’t I take out some energy

from the present universe

— which is theorically impossible —

and didn’t I create energy out of nothing

in the one-month-ago universe ?

Which is not possible !

Well I’m sorry to end with this conclusion, but indeed :

time travel stinks.

[ ATTENTION : short ad about the channel. Somewhat nothing. ]

[ But, well, then you know. Anyway. ]

Thanks to all of yours who are more and more wishing to “e-think”

So a short ad now : this episode will be the last of the “e-penser” channel.

From now on there will be nothing but episodes from the “Breaking Balls” channel.

Only kidding !

Obviously I’m kidding ! I’m not gonna stop the episodes.

So,

“e-penser” will remain through classic episodes, ‘”La preuve par vieux'”,

quickies…

I’m saying this because I feel some kind of worry

among the community.

And I wanted to be clear on that point.

For those who are talking about former sizes, these are not former sizes but short sizes.

“Breaking balls” is a mini-stand-alone serie of the channel.

You see I didn’t mess around with you : it’s a short-size serie besides classic episodes.

“Breaking Balls” was an opportunity for me to work

with these guys of French Ball

that I appreciate much and that I’m not the only one to appreciate !

The basic idea was that « The Balls’ Theory » is as far as I know

the only web-serie speaking about science in a not so stupid manner.

That is, not using tricks like

« OK well all we have to do is to invert the polarity ! »
So we had a talk with Slimane Berthoun and François Descraques — who are the authors of « The Balls’ Theory » along with Raphaël Descraques —
and we brought up the idea that I could make a short serie

in which for every episode of « The Balls Theory », I would make an episode

in which I would validate (or not) the scientific theories that are discussed.

And Baptiste and I had a lot of fun doing this so

we hope many people will like it.
If you don’t like it I’m sorry but don’t worry,

the other episodes remain. Nothing changes on this side.

However I’d like to make it clear on two points.

The first point is that there is no commercial intent about this.

There’s no open or covered up advertising.

The only thing I want to say about it is that

I like « La Théorie des Balls » and I recommand it to you.

If you want to call it advertising, OK well it is so.

But in that case I told you about 45 books in my FAQ.

So I advertised for 45 books.

But there’s no commercial intent.

I didn’t sign any contract with anybody, it was no order.

I’m just envoying myself doing it.

And the second point I wanted to be clear,

— which is a little more serious issue —

Well, you make videos in the web so you can also experiment,

do something new, try new forms…

When you wish to work within a stiff frame,

perfectly closed and normalized,

you make television.

Television is OK. I have nothing against television.

I do watch television.
But this is for television. Web…
Web has been made for trying some things. So, I’d rather announce it right now,
I’ll keep trying things. There was only four “quickie” episodes

because it’s a recent form on the channel.

It was an experiment.

And it goes pretty good so I’m keeping up with them.

But regarding the mini-serie I’m going to make about Tesla

and the mini-serie I’m going to make about “are we alone in the universe ?”

like I previously announced in the last FAQ,

those are new forms.

They will be different. So far I don’t know how they will,

I don’t know if the studio will have a different set, if it’ll be with guests, if…

So far I don’t know it precisely.

But it will be another form.

I’ll keep innovating and I’ll keep thinking about
how to improve the concept, find new ideas and so on.

Because this is the reason why we make videos on Youtube,

to have this very liberty.

But…

Don’t worry !

The classic episode, « La Preuve par Vieux »

and the quickies will go on.
As long as I will have something to tell about those topics it’ll go on.

This closes debates and I hope that I reassured those who needed.

Because I was feeling they were really worried.

And it was starting to worry me too.

Another thing I know I’ll be asked :

why didn’t I speak about time travels in movies ?

Well there are two reasons : the first one is simply because

I believe it would be the subject of a full episode.

The second reason is that I could see it quite well

on the Movie Gravedigger’s channel (“Le Fossoyeur de Films”),

presented by the Movie Gravedigger.

In terms of neuromarketing, I’ve just made somewhat called a suggestion.

Got it François ?

However, at least I will speak about the issue raised by “Superman” (the very first one.)

At the end of the movie, something happens

and many people didn’t get it right.

I must make it clear. Many people think that at the end of the first “Superman” movie,

Superman moves very fast

around the Earth in reverse

to make it turn in reverse too

and thus, makes time go back in reverse.

That makes absolutely no sense.

That isn’t what is happening, not at all.
What happens is that Superman

begins to turn really, really fast

and so fast that he makes time go back.

And as time goes back in reverse, the Earth turns in reverse.

This is definitely what happens.

For sure, I’m not telling it’s less stupid.

I’m just saying that this is what happens.

[ In fact, I believe that the first explanation is indeed the one which was adopted in the script ]

[ but my utopic nature decide to reject this idea. Once and for all. ]

Thank you so much all of you Tippers, you’re just gone insane !

That’s it, you are insane.

It’s incredible.

Thanks ! As usual, bla-bla-bla, you know

that you can submit to the channel, share it on Twitter, Facebook,

You can share it with all of your friends. You may also share it on Google+.

I’ve been told I didn’t speak enough about Google+.

For some unknown reason I did truly not think of it.

— Maybe because, nobody there ? —

So now you can share it to all of your friends if you liked it ; and if you did so “thumbs up”
and if you didn’t “thumbs down”. That’s it, if you didn’t like it, just do as for « Breaking Balls » !
See you very soon for a new episode and of course till then,

stay curious, and take time to “e-think”.


Close Menu