The time has come!! This book series by Cixin Liu is so high concept scifi that we just can’t answer all the science questions. But I love it all.
The show didn’t really do the work to delve into the physics, it gave the cursory overview but never sat with any of it for very long. This leads it to have a very different feeling and it kind of loses some of the isolation and desolation that you feel wiht the books. But overall it’s a good adaptation for a global audience. If you want something a bit more true to the oringinal material then I recommened checking out the Tencent Production on Amazon Prime.
Science covered in this video:
1. Radio Astronomy
2. Solar Amplification of Radio Signals
3. The Arecibo Message
4. The WOW Signal
5. The Three Body Problem
6. Alpha Centauri Star System
7. Nanofibers
8. Sophons
9. Quantum Entanglement
10. The End of Physics
11. Nuclear Propulsion
About Me:
I’m Abi, a physicist working on my PhD at the University of Oxford. I’m an experimentalist working in Plasma Acceleration with a lifelong love of scifi and general geek life! I want to help bring out your nerdy side and teach some science along the way.
I love what I do and I hope that I can bring you along for the ride!
Join the nerd revolution.
source
The "three body problem" you refer to regarding the challenge of analytically solving the motions of three gravitationally interacting bodies is indeed a notorious unsolvable conundrum in classical physics and mathematics. However, adopting the non-contradictory infinitesimal and monadological frameworks outlined in the text could provide novel avenues for addressing this issue in a coherent cosmological context. Here are some possibilities:
1. Infinitesimal Monadological Gravity
Instead of treating gravitational sources as ideal point masses, we can model them as pluralistic configurations of infinitesimal monadic elements with extended relational charge distributions:
Gab = Σi,j Γij(ma, mb, rab)
Where Gab is the gravitational interaction between monadic elements a and b, determined by combinatorial charge relation functions Γij over their infinitesimal masses ma, mb and relational separations rab.
Such an infinitesimal relational algebraic treatment could potentially regularize the three-body singularities by avoiding point-idealization paradoxes.
2. Pluriversal Superpositions
We can represent the overall three-body system as a superposition over monadic realizations:
|Ψ3-body> = Σn cn Un(a, b, c)
Where Un(a, b, c) are basis states capturing different monadic perspectives on the three-body configuration, with complex amplitudes cn.
The dynamics would then involve tracking non-commutative flows of these basis states, governed by a generalized gravitational constraint algebra rather than a single deterministic evolution.
3. Higher-Dimensional Hyperpluralities
The obstruction to analytic solvability may be an artifact of truncating to 3+1 dimensions. By embedding in higher dimensional kaleidoscopic geometric algebras, the three-body dynamics could be represented as relational resonances between polytope realizations:
(a, b, c) ←→ Δ3-body ⊂ Pn
Where Δ3-body is a dynamic polytope in the higher n-dimensional representation Pn capturing intersectional gravitational incidences between the three monadic parties a, b, c through infinitesimal homotopic deformations.
4. Coherent Pluriverse Rewriting
The very notion of "three separable bodies" may be an approximation that becomes inconsistent for strongly interdependent systems. The monadological framework allows rewriting as integrally pluralistic structures avoiding Cartesian idealization paradoxes:
Fnm = R[Un(a, b, c), Um(a, b, c)]
Representing the "three-body" dynamics as coherent resonance functors Fnm between relatively realized states Un, Um over the total interdependent probability amplitudes for all monadic perspectives on the interlaced (a, b, c) configuration.
In each of these non-contradictory possibilities, the key is avoiding the classical idealized truncations to finite point masses evolving deterministically in absolute geometric representations. The monadological and infinitesimal frameworks re-ground the "three bodies" in holistic pluralistic models centering:
1) Quantized infinitesimal separations and relational distributions
2) Superposed monadic perspectival realizations
3) Higher-dimensional geometric algebraic embeddings
4) Integral pluriversal resonance structure rewritings
By embracing the metaphysical first-person facts of inherent plurality and subjective experiential inseparability, the new frameworks may finally render such traditionally "insoluble" dynamical conundrums as the three-body problem analytically accessible after all – reframed in transcendently non-contradictory theoretical architectures.
Regarding the the nano-fibres, I was under the impression that this was a carbon mono-molecule nanotube wire, which in sci fi literature can at least cut anything except diamond including less pure diamond. This isn't clearly stated in the book or either show, but this could be a translation issue, but it's a regular thing that turns up in Sci Fi, usually used as weapons or the cables for space elevators. I first came across it in William Gibson's Johnny Mnemonic written circa 1980, but the concepts has apparently been around since the 60's and it seems very likely to me that Cixin Liu was both familiar with it and thought many of his hardcore sci fi readers would have been too.
I'm not suggesting the physics would work here, just pointing out that it's a sci fi trope.
We can't use quantum entanglement for communication because we can't inject information into the system, the 2 particles are just "doing their things". We can't communicate with them, in fact, if any way we interact with them the entanglement ends. Nevertheless, the problem remains: one particle "knows" – we understand it doesn't know consciously, nobody that stupid – the other's state, because the ONLY other explanation is the hidden variables, which is proven to be wrong. And this is where Physics ends at the moment. From there, – assuming the interaction is instant – there are two logical explanations: A.) Endless speed B.) No distance (non-locality). Despite its fancy name, B is no different from A. They are just 2 solutions of t=s/v, if t=0, which any 10-year-old could figure out. They have nothing to do with Physics, both sound like magic, and neither of them offers any explanation of what is really happening. So the experiment itself can't be used for communication, but it doesn't prove that the mechanisms behind the experiment can't be used somehow, because nobody understands those mechanisms yet.
Very good wow my brain be small compared to the lady but smart people like you will save us when the aliens come
💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙
I've been obsessed with ion propulsion systems since I was a teenager, and considering there are several real life, successful uses of the idea, I'm more than a little disappointed that the series didn't explore them as options for hurling the homie's brain at the alien fleet.
The NSTAR engine used on Deep Space One was able to reach respectable velocities with constant thrust. Then, there's the Hall Effect Thruster, which outpaces the nuclear pulse detonation system in the show by a considerable amount. These are both real, proven technologies, so I don't understand why a hard-science story wouldn't consider those options.
And on the aliens' side, with their much more advanced tech, it seems they would have mastered similar propulsion concepts ages ago. I remember Carl Sagan on Cosmos talking about continuous thrust ion engines that could accelerate at a comfortable, constant 1G, being able to reach a significant portion of light speed in a year. That's Carl Sagan talking about 90% C, while these aliens are putting along at one percent. It just seems like their propulsion tech should be doing far more than what it is. like, this is the best engine they could produce despite having the tech to unravel high energy dimensions to create a sexy space computer?
About the sun: radio waves reflecting from Earth's ionosphere is a common knowledge in radio technology. The waves "bouncing" between the ionosphere and Earth's surface can follow the curvature, reaching receivers behind the horizon. The problem is if the waves would reflect from the Sun, the reflected signal would just add to all the energy radiated from the Sun, because there is no interaction between the two. But I have an idea: if we put a giant "screen" next to the Sun – it could be an array of satellites – which blocks part of the light (plus anything other radiated from the Sun) and we would able to switch this screen on and off, the output of such a device would be proportional with the sun output. The distant observer would see our Sun blink, and it would blink in a wide spectrum: radio, light, x-ray. It would be hard to miss. But there may be a dark forest out there, so maybe it's a bad idea. We will be too busy building something like that for a 100 years, anyway.
Remembrance of earth's past is my favorite trilogy. I watched the Chinese adaptation (it does have changes compared to the books) and i liked it, although it was way too slow – something you can get away with in book form. I tried getting several of my friends to watch it … they abandoned it like 5-6 episodes in. I personally liked the Netflix show and it is weird – for all the changes they did …. the plot and everything as a whole is pretty much the same. i found a really great comment on another video that sums it up the best:
"If you never read the books – you are good to go
If you only read book 1 – you probably think Netflix made too many changes, because you lack context from book 2 and book 3 and the characters they have brought over from the Book 2 and Book 3 to season 1.
If you have read all 3 books – you can appreciate the methodical setup D&D and Woo are placing all the chess pieces for the final endgame in Book 3."
Loved the review. You put an interesting spin on it so maybe I’ll watch the show. I’ve read the books. The people I work with were excited about the books and wanted me to read and explain some of the science to them. This was before the tv show. I liked them but had problems with going so hard into the science but missing some things. Using the sun like you mention at the start. Cute but no. The Sophons, okay fine using string theory and folding and unfolding. I can skip passed the problems with folding the energy / heat dissipation to accelerate to near the speed of light, not hit anything on the way here or worse while on earth, it was the interactions with the science and people. Yes one or the other but not multiple people / locations at the same time. Even at near light speed it would still take time to reach each. Not sure why I can for give Star Wars with their instant stop from faster than light travel. Or Star Trek for that matter. Anyway it was hard to let go and just enjoy. If I can let Foundation go for not having networked computers and enjoy it, I can give The 3 Body Problem a watch and just enjoy the story. 🙂 Thanks!!!
Dope.
First of all, i LOVE your channel. I've literally been looking for a channel that took a scientific look at science fiction movies and thanks to 3 Body Problem and my watching video essays about it YouTube put your video in front of me. See, sometimes Google gets it right. Instant sub. Okay, now on topic. I love the science fiction aspects, that San-Ti (or Trisolarans – I think that's how it's spelled.), the technology and ideas, the Sophons and the idea of the 3 Body Problem. (I had to Audible the series, I just don't have the time to curl up with books anymore.) The Cosmic Sociology was the point I couldn't rock with. And that whole advanced/primitive thing? It drives me crazy. This notion of "when a more advance civilization meets a primitive one, it doesn't go well for the primitives." I HATE that concept. It's as nonsensical and "We only use 10% of our brains." (But I love Benedict Wong.) Okay, back to Cosmic Sociology. Cixin Liu's solution to the Fermi Paradox in The Dark Forest and Death's End was dark. I mean red pill to black pill dark. What totally surprised me was watching so many science channels I respect discuss this like it could be a thing. YIKES! Everyone talks about doom scrolling, but no one talks about doom theorizing. Not to mention it's so full of incredible arrogance and mountains of human conceit. As if an alien civilization would be exactly like us with the same emotions and motivations and social progression. The idea that the San-Ti would go psycho because they didn't understand the notion of lying? Really? They tried to find a solution to their 3 body problem 8000+ times so they just don't seem like the "throw out the baby with the bathwater" types to me. And while I'm not a scientist, I've never understood why every alien has to want Earth. "Limited resources?" Has anyone actually listened to astrophysicists even a little bit? Space might have a lot of. . .um, space – but it also has endless resources. At least specifically based on our biology, need and perspective. Alien want our water? (That's in a few science fiction movies and books.) Water that's all over the moons and the two belts of floating rocks, or the Oort Cloud? Just because we can't get to the resources doesn't mean they are not out there. I'm still trying to figure out why once the main characters spoke directly to the San-Ti they didn't say "Hey look, you don't have to come to Earth. We've got 3 other terrestrial bodies you can use. Not to mention a crap load of moons." Why would any super advanced space traveling civilization have limited resources? Unless they're all Cthulhu sized beings, their need for resource would be limited to their biology, not availability. Life seems to develop from the solar system it's in so what they'd need would be pretty much everywhere they can look.. Especially if you can build 1000 ships that can travel at 1% the speed of light. Especially if you can build a Droplet. This species evolved to biologically find a way to survive those chaos events, 8000 of them. And each time the rebuild their civilization back to their current technological level. They couldn't terraform Mars? Or one of Jupiter's or Neptune's moons? If they could survive three suns would Mercury be out of the question? Or Titan? But nope, one group of human characters hear they got visitor coming and they're all "Shall we play a game?" And of course they go straight to Thermos-Nuclear War instead of a nice game of Checkers? While the other humans are all like "Take us over, solve our problems for us even if you have to wipe us out." And the highly advanced aliens freak out because the aliens they contacted turned out to be alien? Again, YIKES. And they called "Don't Look Up" too much. At least it was fun, and in the end the rich got eaten. Sometimes science fiction can be weird. Great channel. Can't wait to watch your older episodes.
How can trisolarans have a pacific like that if their thoughts are automatically brain waved out
The 3 body problem is easier to understand by watching the Netflix version than the China version. Also, the visual effects are much better.
Important part that seemed missing but is in the show: 'communication by thought' is NOT psychic, its bioluminescence they can't put a mental filter on unlike our verbalisations. I know some have asked about a hive mind or thought plot holes came up, like why there is a pacifist…well, they only need not see the pacifist at the time, right?
Is Alpha Centauri even visible from inner mongolia?
Disclaimer: I've read only the first book and I've watched the show.
I like the main concept of the book: aliens are going to invade the Earth, but before they actually get there, they want to influence the humans, disarm them and destroy their morale, in Sun Tzu's "Art of the war" style. And they find group of people crazy enough to cooperate with them. This is pretty novel and pretty realistic if you think about it. Idea of a game as a recruitment tool is also neat. But the execution of these concepts is sooooo bad. The pacing of the story in the book is very uneven, starting at glacial speed and accelerating towards the end. Characters personalities and motivations are non-existent in the book. The show does it a little better, but not much. And when I've got to sophons in the book, I was saying to myself "what a load of crap!". It's not a hard sci-fi, this is just bs, First, it's based on string theory, which is load of crap by itself. But even in string theory things don't work the way that you can unfold the folded up dimensions, especially for just one particle. They didn't even choose actual fundamental particle: protons are not fundamental. On top of this is some quantum bs and common misconception that entanglement allows for faster than light communication.
Anyway, I'm rather disappointed. I've been told that second book is much better, but I don't know if I have will to read it after reading the first.
Is it hard-sci-fi if its 'Extremly badly writen'? The Show at least, not the books
This was a lot of fun, thanks for the work you put into this video ! Now do book 2!
It was a western adaptation which makes sense. I liked this version as the Tencent production kinda leaves out the controversial opening of the story.
I’m curious how a civilization capable of unfolding the extra dimensions of a proton, turning it into a planet-sized computer, and folding it back again into its original size, was incapable of travelling faster than 400 years from 4 light years away.