Scrapbook photo 1
Henry Reich
Works at MinuteEarth
Attended Grinnell College
187,706 followers|3,203,364 views


This has nothing to do with physics, but I thought it was important so I made a video about it: uprisings in Venezuela.
Daniel Mora's profile photoJames Earle's profile photoScott Corbin's profile photoJuan Martínez's profile photo
Thank you Henry!
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
NEW DISCOVERY About the Big Bang! (and a new video explaining that discovery!)
Joëlle Skaf's profile photoRazgrits .'s profile photoChristopher White's profile photoMichael McCrea's profile photo
+Todd Scheving
That's because religion clearly doesn't work out. It only tells false stories about the universe. Science FTW!
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
How do Modern Light Bulbs Work? NEW VIDEO!
Markus Brorson's profile photoTony Godshall's profile photoPaul Maplesden's profile photoChettair Sivarajan's profile photo
great way to explain free electrons and holes of PN junction in LED.
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
There is a lot of discussion in various online mathematical forums currently about the interpretation, derivation, and significance of Ramanujan's famous (but extremely unintuitive) formula

1+2+3+4+... = -1/12   (1)

or similar divergent series formulae such as

1-1+1-1+... = 1/2 (2)


1+2+4+8+... = -1. (3)

One can view this topic from either a pre-rigorous, rigorous, or post-rigorous perspective (see this page of mine for a description of these three terms:  ).  The pre-rigorous approach is not particularly satisfactory: here one is taught the basic rules for manipulating finite sums (e.g. how to add or subtract one finite sum from another), and one is permitted to blindly apply these rules to infinite sums.  This approach can give derivations of identities such as (1), but can also lead to derivations of even more blatant absurdities such as 0=1, which of course makes any similar derivation of (1) look quite suspicious.

From a rigorous perspective, one learns in undergraduate analysis classes the notion of a convergent series and a divergent series, with the former having a well defined limit, which enjoys most of the same laws of series that finite series do (particularly if one restricts attention to absolutely convergent series).  In more advanced courses, one can then learn of more exotic summation methods (e.g. Cesaro summation, p-adic summation or Ramanujan summation) which can sometimes (but not always) be applied to certain divergent series, and which obey some (but not all) of the rules that finite series or absolutely convergent series do.  One can then carefully derive, manipulate, and use identities such as (1), so long as it is made precise at any given time what notion of summation is in force.  For instance, (1) is not true if summation is interpreted in the classical sense of convergent series, but it is true for some other notions of summation, such as Ramanujan summation, or a real-variable analogue of that summation that I describe in this post:

From a post-rigorous perspective, I believe that an equation such as (1) should more accurately be rendered as

1+2+3+4+... = -1/12 + ...

where the "..." on the right-hand side denotes terms which could be infinitely large (or divergent) when interpreted classically, but which one wishes to view as "negligible" for one's intended application (or at least "orthogonal" to that application).  For instance, as a rough first approximation (and assuming implicitly that the summation index in these series starts from n=1 rather than n=0), (1), (2), (3) should actually be written as

1+2+3+4+... = -1/12  + 1/2 infinity^2   (1)'

1-1+1-1+... = 1/2 - (-1)^{infinity} /2 (2)'


1+2+4+8+... = -1 + 2^{infinity}  (3)'

and more generally

1+x+x^2+x^3+... = 1/(1-x) + x^{infinity}/(x-1)

where the terms involving infinity do not make particularly rigorous sense, but would be considered orthogonal to the application at hand (a physicist would call these quantities unphysical) and so can often be neglected in one's manipulations.  (If one wanted to be even more accurate here, the 1/2 infinity^2 term should really be the integral of x dx from 0 to infinity.)  To rigorously formalise the notion of ignoring certain types of infinite expressions, one needs to use one of the summation methods mentioned above (with different summation methods corresponding to different classes of infinite terms that one is permitted to delete); but the above post-rigorous formulae can still provide clarifying intuition, once one has understood their rigorous counterparts.  For instance, the formulae (1)' and (3)' are now consistent with the left-hand side being positive and diverging to infinity, and the formula (2)' is consistent with the left-hand side being indeterminate in limit, with both 0 and 1 as limit points.  The fact that divergent series often do not behave well with respect to shifting the series can now be traced back to the fact that the infinite terms in the above identities produce some finite remainders when the infinity in those terms is shifted, say to infinity+1.

For a more advanced example, I believe that the "field of one element" should really be called "the field of 1+... elements", where the ... denotes an expression which one believes to be orthogonal to one's application.
Nick G's profile photoRosario Fortugno's profile photoGible Fog's profile photoArjan Hummel's profile photo
Nick G
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
Why is the Solar System Flat? NEW VIDEO!
margo murillo's profile photoLeobardo Oscar Alcántara Ocaña's profile photojeis g's profile photoKARSTEN HOLLAND's profile photo
+Henry Reich  is +MinutePhysics g+ page abandoned?
Add a comment...
Have them in circles
187,706 people

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
NEW VIDEO! Relativity Isn't Relative
Monica Llanes's profile photoAIReject's profile photoEoin Dowling's profile photoSumit Rathore's profile photo
Calculation of mass of the body seems to be an illusion. Anyway thanks +VeryEvilPettingZoo
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
How much mass energy is there in a raisin? Or a mosquito? Or the earth? Find out in the newest lab from MinuteLabs
Understandable masses and energies and how they relate
krishnanaren's profile photoDean Addison's profile photoLucrezia kVilla's profile photoCasey Jade Bryant's profile photo
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
Are any Animals Truly Monogamous? NEW VIDEO
i saiah's profile photoEdwin Perello's profile photoFerdinand Laguatan's profile photoDana Zinatbakhsh's profile photo
Interesting video. I think monogamy is a word invented for the human species for practical purposes since human babies need to be cared for and nurtured. Also that we invented the concept of home, nation and country that has to be sustained by taxes. Most importantly, sexually transmitted diseases. The Old Testament has stories showing humans were not monogamous on the part of the male and was the accepted practice at the time. Without the order monogamy, there would be no cheating. Good or bad the order has been established.
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
Evolution vs Natural Selection: NEW VIDEO
William Brine's profile photoGreg Dillon's profile photoAlconai Ndigo's profile photoDas Geek's profile photo
That is what happened!
Add a comment...

Henry Reich

Shared publicly  - 
What should you do when it's really really cold outside? Go swimming, for one...
Senor Muerte's profile photoKalvetu Kalvetu's profile photoSuyog Kuwar's profile photofaye mohamed's profile photo

Add a comment...
Have them in circles
187,706 people
Filmmaker, youtuber
  • MinuteEarth
    Creator, 2013 - present
  • MinutePhysics
    Youtuber, 2011 - present
  • Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics
    Digital Media Artist, 2012 - 2013
  • Freddiew youtube channel
    vfx & other stuff, 2011 - 2011
Basic Information
Other names
Minute physics, Minutephysics
Minutephysics: cool physics and other sweet science. On Youtube.
I'm constantly in awe at the world. Isn't it spectacular? I like physics (and science in general) because the rules of physics, chemistry and biology apply regardless of opinion polls of scientists or the public. The goal of science is to find out how the world (universe, nature, etc) works by careful observation. It doesn't matter at all if you believe in a theory or not - what matters is whether nature works that way. A lot of popular ideas (for example, "the earth is flat") turned out to be wrong, and a lot of uncomfortable ideas (like quantum mechanics and plate tectonics) turned out to be right. It's a dictatorship – nature decides how nature works, and you get no vote! But you get to decide which questions to ask - and that's what makes science fun. 
Bragging rights
1st graduating class of PSI @perimeterinstitute!
  • Grinnell College
    Physics and Mathematics, 2005 - 2009
  • Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics
    Physics, 2009 - 2010
  • University of Southern California
    Film Production, 2011 - 2011