0:01

Tired of spills and Stains

0:03

on your sofa, wash away

0:06

your worries with Annabay. Annabay

0:08

is the only machine washable

0:11

sofa inside and out where

0:13

designer quality meets budget-friendly prices.

0:15

That's right. Sofas start at

0:18

just $699. Enjoy a no-risk

0:20

experience with pet-friendly, stain-resistant and

0:23

changeable slip covers made with

0:25

performance fabric. Experience cloud-like comfort

0:28

with high resilience foam that's

0:30

hypoallergenic and never needs fluffing.

0:32

The sturdy steel frame ensures

0:34

longevity and the modular pieces

0:37

can be rearranged any time.

0:39

Shop washable sofas.com for up

0:41

to 60% off site-wide. That's

0:43

by a 30-day satisfaction guarantee.

0:45

If you're not absolutely in

0:47

love, send it back for

0:49

a full refund. No return

0:51

shipping or restocking fees. Every

0:53

penny back. upgrade now at

0:55

washable sofas.com. Offers are subject

0:57

to change and certain restrictions

0:59

may apply. has hit 17 million

1:02

downloads and ranks in the top

1:04

1% of all podcasts. She's gotten

1:06

real with the likes of Matthew

1:08

McConaughey, Krista Tibbit, Dan Harris, and

1:10

Kate Bowler. In a new series,

1:13

Kelly explores what it takes to

1:15

connect across deep... divides. Hear the

1:17

story of a husband and wife

1:19

raising a severely autistic son, close

1:22

friends whose uncles fought on opposite

1:24

sides of the Arab-Israeli war, and

1:26

a prosecutor who sat down with

1:28

the convict she put behind bars.

1:31

Listen to Kelly Corrigan wonders

1:33

wherever you get your podcasts.

1:35

We asked parents who adopted teens

1:37

to share their journey. We just

1:39

kind of knew from the beginning that

1:41

we were family. They showcased a sense

1:43

of love that I never had before.

1:45

I mean, he's not only my parent,

1:47

like he's like my best friend. At

1:49

the end of the day, it's all

1:51

been worth it. I wouldn't change thing

1:53

about our lives. Learn about adopting a

1:56

teen from foster care. Visit AdoptUS

1:58

kids.org to learn more. brought Dr.

2:06

Joy from Therapy for Black Girls.

2:09

We've had 400 episodes of conversations,

2:11

growth, and healing. So we are

2:13

celebrating. Join us for a special

2:15

episode with internationally recognized yogi, Chelsea

2:17

Jackson Roberts, as she shares wisdom

2:19

on mindfulness, movement, and motherhood. I

2:21

waited later to have children and

2:23

I still have exactly what I

2:25

knew that I wanted. You don't

2:27

want to miss this special episode.

2:30

Listen to Therapy for Black Girls on

2:32

the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

2:34

or wherever you get your podcast.

2:41

Why do we love to

2:43

watch slow motion in the

2:46

movies? What do Bonnie and

2:48

Clyde or Inception or The

2:50

Matrix tell us about brains

2:53

and time perception? And what

2:55

does any of this have

2:58

to do with unmasking hidden

3:00

data or champion bicyclists or

3:03

elementary particles or murderers or

3:05

HGwell's time machine? I'm a

3:07

neuroscientist and an author at

3:10

Stanford, and in these episodes

3:12

we dive deeply into our

3:15

three pound universe to understand

3:17

some of the most surprising

3:20

aspects of our lives. Today's

3:22

episode is about slow motion

3:24

and what's going on in

3:27

the brain and why we

3:29

are attracted to it. So

3:32

we all know that if

3:34

you go to any random

3:37

blockbuster, you're really likely to

3:39

see some of the sequences

3:41

in slow motion. This gets

3:44

employed to accentuate the choreography

3:46

of gun battles or sword

3:49

fights. And of course, it

3:51

doesn't even have to be

3:53

fighting. You might see it

3:56

in a shot of a

3:58

basketball dunk or a flip.

4:01

car or sprinters crossing the

4:03

finish line. Whatever the shot,

4:06

what we get to witness

4:08

is fluidity and elegance in

4:10

a visually captivating spectacle that

4:13

has become a hallmark of

4:15

Hollywood. And it goes even

4:18

beyond action movies, even in

4:20

dramas and romances, we see

4:23

slow motion get leveraged to

4:25

capture intimate emotional moments. We

4:27

savor the subtleties of someone's

4:30

eye movements or facial expressions

4:32

or body movements. We understand

4:35

something about the unspoken longing

4:37

and restrained passion between two

4:39

protagonists or... We watch a

4:42

tear fall or we see

4:44

the moment that someone has

4:46

an unexpected revelation. So we

4:49

see slow motion all the

4:51

time, but have you ever

4:54

wondered from a neuroscience perspective

4:56

what that's all about and

4:58

why brains love it so

5:01

much? Yeah, me too, and hence

5:03

today's podcast. So let's start by

5:05

zooming way out. When did slow

5:08

motion really start in movies?

5:10

You may be surprised to

5:12

know that the era of

5:14

slowmo didn't really begin until

5:17

1967. And what stuns me

5:19

about this is that by

5:21

1967, we already had supersonic

5:24

flight and bionic limbs and

5:26

credit cards and digital music

5:28

and the space race was

5:30

in full swing. But nobody

5:33

was using slow motion. Until...

5:35

I thought, listen, I have an

5:37

idea about the end that

5:39

should be like a spastic

5:41

ballet. And that was the

5:43

image. That's Arthur Penn, the

5:45

director of the 1967 film,

5:48

Bonnie and Clyde. This was

5:50

a big Hollywood blockbuster that

5:52

dramatized the real-life crime spree

5:55

of Bonnie Parker and Clyde

5:57

Beryl. And the star... were

6:00

Faye Dunaway and Warren Beatty.

6:02

So Bonnie and Clyde were

6:04

a young couple who became

6:06

bank robbers during the Great

6:09

Depression. And in the movie,

6:11

they travel across the country

6:13

with their growing gang and

6:15

their crimes escalate. And this

6:18

attracts the relentless pursuit by

6:20

law enforcement, which culminates in

6:22

a violent ambush. And then so

6:24

I came to the technicians and

6:26

I said, Look, this is what I

6:29

want to get. They said you

6:31

can't do that. I said,

6:33

I want four cameras. I

6:35

want them running at different

6:37

speeds. I want them gang

6:39

together. And I want to roll

6:42

them all at the same time. And

6:44

so that's what happened

6:46

in the final scene.

6:48

The cinematography decelerates into

6:50

a balladic slow motion

6:52

as Bonnie and Clyde

6:54

meet their bloody end

6:56

under a hailstorm of

6:58

police bullets. So as

7:00

they experience their final

7:02

moment, the audience is

7:04

given some extra seconds

7:06

to be witnessed to

7:09

it. Now

7:11

this really shocked a lot

7:13

of people. Critics called Arthur

7:15

Penn's slowed-down death scene gratuitous

7:17

and callous, but the idea

7:20

caught on. Bonnie and Clyde

7:22

had opened the door to

7:24

slow motion and it's never

7:26

been shut since. Now, by

7:29

the way, it's not that

7:31

the technology was new. The

7:33

method for slow motion movies

7:35

came into being in 1904.

7:38

when the Austrian physicist August

7:40

Musker invented the technique. So

7:42

what's the technique? You just speed

7:44

up the recording camera. So you're

7:47

capturing more frames per second. In

7:49

this way, what you're doing is

7:51

capturing faster changes. The time in

7:54

between each picture is shorter than

7:56

normal. So then when you play

7:58

the film strip... back at regular

8:00

speed, like 24 frames per

8:03

second, then the scene appears to

8:05

be in slow motion because

8:07

the change from one frame to

8:09

the next is very small. This

8:12

was initially just getting used for

8:14

scientific purposes to slow down

8:16

processes that you can't see well

8:18

with the naked eye. But

8:21

eventually slow motion was adopted by

8:23

filmmakers to enhance visual storytelling.

8:25

Now, before we go on, I

8:27

wanna make sure we have

8:29

a clear distinction between slow motion

8:31

in movies and the impression

8:33

that you might have if you

8:36

have experienced a life -threatening situation

8:38

and it feels like the

8:40

event took a long time. Is

8:42

this because the frame

8:44

rate of your brain changes?

8:47

No. 99 episodes ago,

8:49

I talked about the impression we

8:51

have of very frightening events having taken

8:54

a long time. This is something

8:56

I first experienced as a child

8:58

when I fell off of a

9:00

roof. I have very clear memories

9:02

and it feels like the whole

9:04

thing took a few seconds, even though

9:06

I can calculate that it only

9:08

took 0 .6 seconds to get

9:10

from the top to the bottom.

9:12

Now, it turns out that this observation

9:14

about scary events seeming to last

9:16

longer, this is at least 100

9:18

years old in the scientific literature,

9:20

although I imagine that people

9:22

have noticed this from time

9:24

immemorial. But my laboratory was

9:27

the first to run experiments

9:29

on it to see if

9:31

it was an issue of

9:33

a faster perceptual frame rate,

9:35

which again is how a

9:37

movie camera captures slow motion,

9:39

or instead, does it happen

9:41

to us because of the

9:43

laying down of denser memories

9:45

and the retrospective estimate of

9:47

how much time had passed?

9:50

We ran experiments by presenting information at

9:52

a faster rate than a person

9:54

could normally see, and then we

9:56

put them in a very scary

9:58

situation where we draw... them from

10:00

a 150 foot tall tower and

10:03

they were caught in a net

10:05

below. If a person is like

10:07

a camera speeding up its frame

10:09

rate, then they would be able

10:12

to easily see the information we

10:14

were flashing at them. But our

10:16

results indicated that the slow motion

10:18

effect was a trick of memory.

10:21

In other words, when you're in

10:23

fear for your life, your brain

10:25

writes down dense memory. It's capturing

10:27

everything it can, whereas normally your

10:30

memory is very leaky. So when

10:32

your brain then asks, what

10:34

just happened, what just happened,

10:36

and reads out all those

10:38

dense memories, it estimates that

10:40

the event must have taken

10:42

longer. Your brain has all

10:44

these rich memories, let's say

10:46

the hood crumpling and the

10:48

rear view mirror falling off

10:50

and the expression on the

10:52

other driver's face and so

10:54

on, and given that... Opulence

10:56

of memory, your brain calculates

10:58

that the whole event must

11:00

have represented a slightly longer

11:02

duration. In other words, what happens

11:05

during a scary event is

11:07

a totally different mechanism than

11:09

slow motion video. Now, when

11:11

I published our findings, some

11:13

people said to me, hey,

11:15

I don't think your conclusion

11:17

is correct because I had

11:19

a life-threatening car accident and

11:21

I know what I experienced.

11:23

So I said to them,

11:25

okay, but the guy in

11:27

your passenger seat who was

11:29

yelling, watch out, did it

11:31

actually sound like he was saying,

11:34

because if not, that means

11:36

that time was not... actually

11:38

dilated because if you are

11:40

recording something with a faster

11:42

frame rate, then when you

11:44

play it back out, everything

11:46

is stretched. So with your

11:48

experience of time dilation, it's

11:50

not an issue of faster

11:52

frame rate like a movie

11:54

camera, but instead of denser

11:56

memory. Please listen to episode

11:58

one of this podcast. for much

12:00

more about that. And the reason

12:02

I'm telling you about this now

12:05

is because we're going to return

12:07

to this in a few minutes.

12:09

For now, let's get back to

12:12

filmmaking, where the mechanism is very

12:14

straightforward. You just take more frames

12:16

per second. Now, I said that

12:19

Bonnie and Clyde was the first

12:21

major movie to use slow motion,

12:23

but there were actually experiments with

12:26

it before that. One of the

12:28

earliest uses in cinema was in

12:30

an epic silent film called Intolerance

12:33

in 1916. This was made by

12:35

a director named D.W. Griffith, who

12:37

was experimenting with all kinds of

12:40

techniques of filmmaking, and he used

12:42

slow motion just a little bit

12:44

to accentuate dramatic moments and heightened

12:46

emotional tension. But two world wars

12:49

at over half a century passed

12:51

before it was used in Bonnie

12:53

and Clyde, in part because the

12:56

technology had to advance to make

12:58

slow motion more accessible and versatile.

13:00

By the 1960s people were building

13:03

high-speed cameras which were capable of

13:05

capturing hundreds of frames per second

13:07

and eventually thousands. And this is

13:10

what allowed filmmakers to push new

13:12

boundaries of representing time. and creating

13:14

effects that audiences were captivated by.

13:17

And the 1969 film The Wild

13:19

Bunch, two years after Bonnie and

13:21

Clyde, really helped popularize the technique.

13:24

And now, of course, we don't

13:26

even think about it much because

13:28

it's a staple of modern filmmaking.

13:31

For example, I recently watched a

13:33

movie called Wanted, which uses super

13:35

slow motion every time there's a

13:37

gun battle, or you may remember

13:40

Christopher Nolan's movie Inception. which has

13:42

these beautiful slow motion dream sequences,

13:44

especially in the kick moments where

13:47

they're transitioning from one reality to

13:49

another. So increasingly since 1967, movies

13:51

use time warping all the time

13:54

and the success of this approach

13:56

has overtaken. in commercials and music

13:58

videos, and it's a standard tool

14:01

on our cell phones. And in

14:03

fact, you can tell when something

14:05

has become a staple because then

14:08

it shifts into the focus of

14:10

the comedians. Some years ago, the

14:12

comedian Dave Chappelle did a skit

14:15

in which he was proving that

14:17

everything, quote, looks cooler in slow

14:19

motion. So in the skit he

14:21

walks into the laundromat and says

14:24

hello to a kindly middle-aged woman

14:26

who is preparing her laundry and

14:28

she takes off her sweatshirt so

14:30

she can add it to her hamper.

14:33

And it's all very innocent and

14:35

laundromatty. And then he says,

14:37

let's replay this video in slow

14:39

motion. And now everything changes from

14:42

mundane to sexy. In the slow

14:44

motion replay, the woman lifts the

14:46

sweatshirt over her head and is

14:49

suddenly replaced by a beautiful young

14:51

model who tosses her hair in

14:53

a vigorous breeze. And she and

14:56

Dave Chappelle start dancing around each

14:58

other as the wind blows. So

15:00

this skit cracked up the audience,

15:03

but this just underscores our question.

15:05

What is the appeal of

15:07

slow motion? Why do we

15:09

find it so? attractive. I

15:12

propose four reasons. The first

15:14

is the increased aesthetic appeal.

15:16

When you decelerate time, you

15:18

can experience so many more

15:20

details of the scene. And

15:23

just like Dave Chappelle noticed,

15:25

even ordinary moments get turned

15:27

into extraordinary visual spectacles. And

15:29

this is because by slowing

15:31

down time, you highlight the

15:33

intricate features of a scene.

15:36

The human eye is naturally

15:38

attracted to detail and slow

15:40

motion allows us to appreciate

15:42

the subtle. nuances of a

15:44

character's movement or the play of

15:46

light and shadow or birds exploding

15:49

out of a tree or the

15:51

look on someone's face as they

15:53

turn to see that their lover

15:55

has left. So you remember the

15:58

Matrix which came out in And

16:00

you certainly remember this bullet

16:02

-dodging scene where Neo bends

16:04

backward to avoid a series

16:06

of bullets fired at him.

16:08

And this beautiful, slow, sweeping

16:11

shot captures the fluidity and

16:13

the wondrous precision of his

16:15

movements. The scene could never

16:17

have worked at normal speed

16:19

because the key was how

16:22

he was making a move

16:24

that was not normally physically

16:26

possible. And the otherworldly nature

16:28

of this required immersing us

16:30

to have time to really

16:33

take it in. Just like

16:35

with Bonnie and Clyde, the

16:37

slowness heightens the tension and

16:39

the drama. We the audience

16:41

get to squeeze every moment

16:44

out of the scene rather

16:46

than have it zip by

16:48

while we're reaching for our

16:50

popcorn. And again, it doesn't

16:52

have to be action scenes.

16:54

Look at Terrence Malick's film

16:57

The Tree of Life, or

16:59

Darren Aronofsky's Requiem for a

17:01

Dream. The slow motion allows

17:03

viewers to fully absorb the

17:05

emotional weight of a scene. At

17:23

an affordable price, Annabé

17:25

has designed the only

17:28

fully machine washable sofa from

17:30

top to bottom. The

17:32

stain -resistant performance fabric slipcovers

17:34

and cloud -like frame duvet

17:36

can go straight into your

17:38

wash. Perfect for anyone

17:40

with kids, pets, or anyone

17:42

who loves an easy -to

17:44

-clean, spotless sofa. With a

17:46

modular design and changeable

17:49

slipcovers, you can customize your

17:51

sofa to fit any

17:53

space and style, whether you

17:55

need a single chair,

17:57

love seat, or a luxuriously

17:59

large sectional Annabé has

18:01

you covered. Visit washablesofas.com to

18:03

upgrade your home. Sofas

18:05

started just so... 699 dollars and right

18:07

now you can shop up to 60% off store-wide

18:09

with a 30 day money back guarantee. Shop now

18:12

at washable sofas.com. Add a little to your life.

18:14

Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may

18:16

apply. Kelly Corrigan wonders has hit

18:18

17 million downloads and ranks in

18:20

the top 1% of all podcasts.

18:23

She's gotten real with the likes

18:25

of Matthew McConaughey, Krista, Krista. In

18:27

a new series, Kelly explores what

18:29

it takes to connect across deep

18:32

divides. Hear the story of a

18:34

husband and wife raising a severely

18:36

autistic son. Close friends whose uncles

18:39

fought on opposite sides of the

18:41

Arab-Israeli war and a prosecutor who

18:43

sat down with the convict she

18:46

put behind bars. Listen to

18:48

Kelly Corrigan wonders wherever you

18:50

get your podcasts. Have you ever Have

18:53

you ever wondered if your pet is lying to you?

18:55

Why is my cat not here? And I go in

18:57

and she's eating my lunch? Or if hypnotism is

18:59

real, you will use the suggestion in

19:01

order to enhance your cognitive control. But

19:03

what's inside a black hole? Black holes could

19:06

be a consequence of the way that we

19:08

understand the universe. Will we have answers

19:10

for you in the new, I-heart original

19:12

podcast, science stuff? Join me, Jorge Jam,

19:14

as we tackle questions you've always wanted

19:16

to know the answer to about animals,

19:18

space, our brains, and our bodies. Questions

19:20

like, can you survive being cryogenically frozen?

19:22

This is experimental. This may never work

19:24

for you. What's a quantum computer? It's

19:26

not just a faster computer. It performs

19:29

in a fundamentally different way. Do you

19:31

really have to wait 30 minutes after

19:33

eating before you can go swimming? It's

19:35

not really a safety issue. It's more

19:37

of a comfort issue. We'll talk to

19:39

experts, break it down, and give you

19:41

easy to understand explanations to fascinating scientific

19:43

questions. So give yourself permission to be

19:45

a science geek and listen to science

19:47

stuff on the iHeart Radio app, Apple

19:49

Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast.

19:51

flash is real folks and rapidly changing

19:53

economic policies. They affect all of us

19:55

to one degree or another Trump 1.0.

19:57

So that was more tariff talk now

19:59

we are experiencing the widespread tariff action

20:02

totally scatter shot totally random. The theory

20:04

Matt I think is that we're trading

20:06

short-term pain for long-term gain that's the

20:08

tariff theory at least but I have

20:11

a hard time envisioning the long game

20:13

rosy outcomes if these policy priorities kind

20:15

of continue. It can be hard to know

20:17

how to react to news of accelerating layoffs,

20:19

increasing stock market volatility. That's why the How

20:21

to Money podcast exists. We cut through the

20:24

hype to give you crucial information that can

20:26

help you to achieve your money goals no

20:28

matter what is going on in the world.

20:30

Yeah, it's our goal to help you make

20:32

wise money choices that will allow you to

20:34

build wealth over time and reduce anxiety levels

20:36

so you can sleep well at night. How

20:39

do money comes out three times a week,

20:41

but our Friday flight episodes speak directly to

20:43

what's happening in the financial news so you

20:45

can digest. this week's headlines without

20:47

freaking out. Listen to how

20:49

to money on the I

20:52

Heart Radio app, Apple

20:55

podcasts, or wherever you

20:57

get your podcasts. Okay,

20:59

so increasing the aesthetic

21:01

appeal, that's the obvious reason. But

21:04

from a neuroscience point of

21:06

view, I'm going to suggest there

21:08

are deeper reasons why slow motion

21:11

works. And this leads to

21:13

my suggestion number two, which is

21:15

that slow motion film serves as

21:17

a proxy for denser memories.

21:19

So a few moments ago, I

21:22

told you what happens during a

21:24

life-threatening situation. Although you don't actually

21:27

see the event unfold in slow

21:29

motion, The denser memories that

21:31

you have make it seem

21:33

like it must have been

21:35

that way in retrospect, because

21:37

there's a greater than normal

21:39

amount of detail when the

21:41

memory is read back out.

21:44

And I suggest that slow

21:46

motion film is a stand-in,

21:48

a substitute for this extra

21:50

dense memory. By watching a movie

21:52

scene slowly, we get to

21:54

enjoy a rich experience with

21:56

plenty of time to dwell

21:59

on all the details that

22:01

would normally streak right past us.

22:03

We have the opportunity to attend

22:05

to the details and commit them

22:07

to memory, just like we have

22:09

after a real life high adrenaline

22:11

moment. In other words, slow motion

22:13

film recreates the sensation of grasping

22:16

all the details. And this explains

22:18

the natural partnership of slow motion

22:20

videography with high adrenaline moments. It's

22:22

no accident that the first time

22:24

it really got used was the

22:26

ambush death scene of Bonnie and

22:29

Clyde. The director Arthur Penn said

22:31

in an interview, quote, the intention

22:33

there was to get this attenuation

22:35

of time that one experience is

22:37

when you see something like a

22:39

terrible automobile accident, end quote. and

22:41

giving the audience a heightened ability

22:44

to catch and remember details worked

22:46

well and it's become a standard

22:48

signature of high-stakes moments. Arthur Penn

22:50

went on to say in 1989,

22:52

quote, God knows we've been imitated

22:54

thousands and thousands of times now.

22:56

Every time you see someone attempting

22:59

violence, they go into that basic

23:01

slow motion, end quote. So my

23:03

assertion is that when we witness

23:05

a moment unfold bit by bit

23:07

in the movies, we get to

23:09

appreciate its import as though we

23:12

were experiencing the high adrenaline moment

23:14

ourselves. But not all interesting slow

23:16

motion video involves high adrenaline situations,

23:18

so there is more to our

23:20

love of it. And this leads

23:22

us to my third suggestion for

23:24

the success of slow motion, which

23:27

is that it extends human perception

23:29

by unmasking hidden data. It allows

23:31

the revelation of data that's hidden

23:33

in the folds of time, just

23:35

like a microscope allows us to

23:37

appreciate the details of a fly's

23:39

wing. And I'm not just talking

23:42

about action sequences

23:44

here, or NEO's

23:46

unusual movements in

23:48

the matrix, there's

23:50

much more that

23:52

can be unmasked.

23:55

Consider something like

23:57

micro expressions. These

23:59

are fast movements

24:01

of facial muscles

24:03

that pass rapidly

24:05

and unconsciously over

24:07

people's faces. Now

24:10

everyone's face does

24:12

this naturally all

24:14

the time, but

24:16

you can't really

24:18

see someone else's

24:20

micro expressions because

24:22

they're too brief.

24:25

You're not aware

24:27

that you're making

24:29

micro expressions and someone watching

24:31

you isn't consciously aware that

24:33

you did it, but it

24:35

turns out that micro expressions

24:37

can carry information and can

24:39

reveal secrets, including things like

24:42

deception. For example,

24:44

you may remember the story of

24:46

Susan Smith who claimed that

24:48

her children had been kidnapped in

24:50

a car jacking when in

24:52

fact she had drowned them. For

24:54

several days she was on

24:57

the TV news pleading for help

24:59

in finding her children, but

25:01

some colleagues of mine claimed that

25:03

a slowed down version of

25:05

the video revealed micro expressions that

25:07

suggested she was lying about

25:09

the whole event. The idea is

25:12

that slow motion video unmasks the

25:14

world of these temporally

25:16

hidden facial clues. And

25:18

by unveiling things that are

25:20

undetectable by consciousness, slow motion

25:22

can allow not just temporal

25:24

sleuthing but temporal intimacy. Consider

25:26

this passage by the British

25:28

sports writer Matt Rendell about

25:30

the Tour de France winner

25:33

Marco Pantani. Writing about the

25:35

use of super slow motion

25:37

cameras in sport, Rendell wrote

25:39

what I think is one

25:41

of the most beautiful passages

25:43

in sports writing. Here it

25:45

is read by the actor

25:47

Sean Judge. Now,

25:49

as he rives towards victory

25:51

in the Giro d 'Italia,

25:53

the camera almost caresses him.

25:56

The five seconds between the

25:58

moment Marco appeared in the... closing

26:00

straight, and the moment he

26:02

crossed the finish line are

26:04

extruded to fifteen and during

26:06

seconds. The

26:08

image frames his head and

26:11

little else, revealing details invisible

26:13

in real time and at

26:15

standard resolution. A drop of

26:17

sweat that falls from his

26:19

chin as he makes the

26:22

bend, the gaping jaw and

26:24

crumpled forehead and lines beneath

26:26

the eyes that deepen as

26:28

Marco rings still more speed

26:31

from the mountain. Then,

26:33

and it must be the

26:35

moment he crosses the line,

26:37

he begins to rise out

26:40

of his agony. The torso

26:42

rises to vertical, the arms

26:44

spread out into a crucifix

26:46

position, the eyelids descend and

26:48

Marco's face lifts towards the

26:51

sky. It

26:53

is a moment of

26:55

transfiguration, visible only in

26:57

super slow -mo or instill

26:59

and only the best

27:01

of the finish line

27:03

photographers catch it. Super

27:05

slow -mo shows us

27:07

something we could never

27:09

otherwise see. In voluntary

27:11

gestures Marco never chose

27:14

to reveal, perhaps because

27:16

without super slow -mo technology

27:18

he cannot know he

27:20

makes them. The

27:22

public knows more about Marco

27:24

than Marco himself. A

27:27

truth we are tempted to

27:29

imagine and one that has nothing

27:31

to do with the race

27:33

outcome as such for the pictures

27:36

frame out the finish line

27:38

in the clock and show nothing

27:40

of his work rate, muscular

27:42

toil or the relative positions of

27:44

the riders that yield the

27:46

race result. Instead, we find ourselves

27:49

looking into Marco's face the

27:51

way a mother and her baby

27:53

might or lovers at the

27:55

moment their affection is first reciprocated.

28:00

Slow motion allows us to

28:02

pick up on the world

28:04

that would otherwise rush past

28:06

us. And in this slowed

28:08

world, we get to luxuriate

28:11

in the otherwise invisible details

28:13

with which we're always surrounded,

28:15

but we never see. And

28:17

now we're ready for my fourth

28:20

point. Slow motion video holds

28:22

our attention by violating expectations.

28:24

So, during a lifetime of

28:26

experience, your brain develops deeply

28:28

wired expectations about Newtonian physics.

28:31

So when a ball gets

28:33

thrown to you, your brain

28:35

unconsciously uses these internal models

28:37

to predict where and when

28:39

it's going to go, and

28:42

you move your body in

28:44

your hand to the right

28:46

spot. These models are so

28:48

ingrained into our nervous systems that

28:50

if you lob a ball to

28:53

an astronaut floating in zero G,

28:55

she will move her hand to

28:57

the wrong spot. She'll move to

28:59

catch it as though she's in

29:02

a normal one-g environment.

29:04

So, part of the high

29:06

level of engagement during slow

29:08

motion comes from a violation

29:11

of these expectations about physics.

29:13

Imagine you're watching The Matrix

29:15

and you observe Trinity leap

29:17

into the air to kick

29:19

an agent. Your brain makes

29:22

unconscious predictions about exactly when

29:24

she's going to come back

29:26

down. But to your brain's

29:28

surprise... Time slows down and

29:30

Trinity hangs in the air

29:33

longer than expected. Your expectations

29:35

about when she's gonna hit

29:37

the ground have been violated

29:39

and this draws us in.

29:42

Our brains zoom in on

29:44

this because attention is maximally

29:46

attracted to whatever we predict

29:49

incorrectly. Conversely, when everything

29:51

goes according to plan, we don't

29:53

pay any attention at all. We are

29:55

fond of slow motion

29:57

video because it engages our

30:00

attention. constantly get the temporal

30:02

predictions wrong. And so we are

30:04

perpetually on alert. In fact, I

30:06

did a very surprising experiment on

30:08

this some years ago. I started

30:11

with this hypothesis that your internal

30:13

model is always calibrating itself, keeping

30:15

itself tuned up by comparing against

30:17

the physics of the real world.

30:20

So if it's running too slowly,

30:22

it watches a ball hit the

30:24

ground and realizes that its prediction

30:26

was just slightly behind so it

30:29

speeds up its expectations. And the

30:31

same if it watches the ball

30:33

and it realizes that its prediction

30:35

was just slightly ahead, then it

30:38

slows itself down. So it uses

30:40

the outside world as the ground

30:42

truth to keep itself nicely calibrated.

30:44

Now you might think, how would

30:47

you ever prove a hypothesis like

30:49

that? Well here's how. I had

30:51

people compare the durations of two

30:53

brief flashes on the screen. So

30:56

on the screen you see a

30:58

little circle that goes flash and

31:00

then a moment later another little

31:02

circle that goes flash and on

31:05

every trial I'm slightly tweaking the

31:07

duration so that one is slightly

31:09

longer than the other and you

31:11

just say which was longer than

31:14

which. Okay, now here's the trick.

31:16

I have people watch a video,

31:18

for example, a camera that follows

31:20

a cheetah sprinting across the seren

31:23

Getty. Now, if I just superimpose

31:25

one flash and then the second

31:27

flash, on top of the video,

31:29

you have no trouble saying which

31:32

one was longer than which. But

31:34

now I do something special. At

31:36

some point in the video, it

31:38

suddenly goes into slow motion. Now

31:41

you might know that when cheetahs

31:43

run, all four of their legs

31:45

come off the ground. So now

31:47

you're seeing this sleek animal floating

31:50

in the air and you're waiting

31:52

for his front paws to hit

31:54

the ground. But now that we're

31:56

suddenly in slow motion, your time

31:59

prediction is off. You expect it?

32:01

his legs to hit the ground,

32:03

but they haven't yet. And because

32:05

we evolved in a world with

32:08

no such thing as slow motion,

32:10

your brain's only choice is to

32:12

assume that the mistake is its

32:14

own. And it compensates by slowing

32:17

down its expectation. Now how do

32:19

I know the brain does this?

32:21

It's because I can see how

32:23

you judge the duration of a

32:25

flash during the sudden slow motion.

32:27

The flash now appears to

32:29

last a shorter time, about

32:31

27% shorter. Why? Roughly speaking,

32:33

it's because your brain is

32:36

forced to slightly tweak its

32:38

estimate of the pace of

32:40

time during the slow motion

32:42

bit. Think of it like

32:45

a clock ticking more slowly.

32:47

And now, the flash covers

32:49

fewer ticks. And so it

32:52

is judged to last less.

32:54

time. I did various control

32:56

versions of this experiment in

32:58

which I shuffled the frames or

33:01

I shuffled all the pixels or

33:03

I ran the whole thing upside

33:05

down and in all these cases

33:07

there was no distortion of the

33:09

apparent duration of the flashes. It

33:11

only happened when the future position

33:13

of an object was predictable by

33:16

physics. So let me just

33:18

summarize this. When your brain

33:20

is watching any scene... It's

33:23

making predictions about where things

33:25

will be, and if the

33:27

scene suddenly changes speed, then

33:29

your internal model will predict

33:32

incorrectly. But I suggest the

33:34

nervous system can eliminate these

33:36

feedback prediction errors with a

33:39

simple trick by modifying its

33:41

estimated speed of the flow

33:43

of physical time. It's a

33:45

very subtle change, but it

33:48

has measurable... perceptual consequences, which are

33:50

exposed by this novel time distortion

33:52

illusion. Okay, that was a little

33:55

technical, but it's one of my

33:57

favorite experiments. Now we've been talking.

34:00

making all about slow motion,

34:02

but on the flip side

34:04

of slow motion, there is

34:06

a world unmasked by fast

34:08

motion. Think about quickly blossoming

34:11

flowers, or imagine the arterial

34:13

traffic patterns of cities, or

34:15

watch the laminar rush of

34:17

clouds across the sky, or

34:19

observe the way that the

34:22

sun drops like a ball

34:24

behind the mountain and the

34:26

world dimms as though by

34:28

a dimmer switch. So fast

34:30

motion reveals... secrets not so

34:33

much in the domain of

34:35

human facial expressions, but instead

34:37

in the dance of the

34:39

very large. Let's be real.

34:41

Life happens. Kids spill. Pets

34:44

shed. And accidents are inevitable.

34:46

That's why you need a

34:48

washable sofa that can keep

34:50

up. Our sofas are fully

34:52

machine washable, inside and out,

34:55

so you can say goodbye

34:57

to stains and hello to

34:59

worry-free living. Made with liquid

35:01

and stain-resistant fabrics, their kid-proof,

35:03

pet-friendly, and built for everyday

35:06

life. Plus, changeable fabric covers

35:08

let you refresh your sofa

35:10

whenever you want. Need flexibility?

35:12

Our modular design lets you

35:14

rearrange your sofa any time

35:17

to fit your space, whether

35:19

it's a growing family room

35:21

or a cozy apartment. Plus,

35:23

they're earth-friendly and trusted by

35:25

over 200,000 happy customers. Starting

35:28

at just $699, it's time

35:30

to upgrade to a stress-free

35:32

miss-proof sofa. Visit washablesofas.com today

35:34

and save. That's washable sofas.com.

35:36

Offers are subject to change

35:39

and certain restrictions may apply.

35:41

Kelly Corrigan Wanders has hit

35:43

17 million downloads and ranks

35:45

in the top 1% of

35:47

all podcasts She's gotten real

35:50

with the likes of Matthew

35:52

McConaughey, Krista Tibet, Dan Harris,

35:54

and Kate Bowler in a

35:56

new series Kelly Explorer what

35:58

it takes to connect across

36:01

deep divides. Hear the story

36:03

of a husband and wife

36:05

raising a severely autistic son,

36:07

close friends whose uncles fought on

36:09

opposite sides of the Arab-Israeli war,

36:12

and a prosecutor who sat down

36:14

with the convict she put behind

36:17

bars. Listen to Kelly Corrigan wonders

36:19

wherever you get your podcasts. Have

36:21

you ever wondered if your pet is lying to you?

36:23

Why is Have you ever wondered if your pet is lying to you? Why is my

36:25

cat not here? And I go in and she's eating

36:27

my lunch? Or if hypnotism is real, you

36:30

will use the suggestion in order to

36:32

enhance your cognitive control. But what's inside

36:34

a black hole? Black holes could be a

36:36

consequence of the way that we understand the

36:38

universe. Will we have answers for you

36:40

in the new, I-heart original podcast, science

36:42

stuff? Join me, Jorge Jam, as we

36:45

tackle questions you've always wanted to know

36:47

the answer to about animals, space, our

36:49

brains, and our bodies. Questions like, can

36:51

you survive being cryogenically frozen? This is

36:53

experimental. This may never work for you.

36:55

What's a quantum computer? It's not just

36:57

a faster computer. It performs in a

36:59

fundamentally different way. Do you really have

37:01

to wait 30 minutes after eating before

37:03

you can go swimming? It's not really

37:05

a safety issue. It's more of a

37:07

comfort issue. We'll talk to experts, break

37:09

it down, and give you easy to

37:12

understand explanations to fascinating scientific questions. So

37:14

give yourself permission to be a science

37:16

geek and listen to science stuff on

37:18

the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or

37:20

wherever you get your podcast. flash is real folks and

37:22

rapidly changing economic policies. They affect all

37:24

of us to one degree or another.

37:27

Trump 1.0. So that was more tariff

37:29

talk. Now we are experiencing the widespread

37:31

tariff action. Totally scatter shot, totally random.

37:33

The theory, Matt, I think is that

37:35

we're trading short-term pain for long-term gain.

37:38

That's the tariff theory at least. But

37:40

I have a hard time envisioning the

37:42

long game rosy outcomes if these policy

37:44

priorities kind of continue. It can be hard

37:46

to know how to react to news

37:49

of accelerating layoffs, increasing stock market volatility.

37:51

That's why the How to Money podcast

37:53

exists. We cut through the hype to

37:55

give you crucial information that can help

37:57

you to achieve your money goals, no

37:59

matter what is going on in the world.

38:01

Yeah, it's our goal to help you make

38:03

wise money choices that will allow you to

38:05

build wealth over time and reduce anxiety levels

38:08

so you can sleep well at night. How

38:10

to money comes out three times a week,

38:12

but our Friday flight episodes speak directly to

38:14

what's happening in the financial news so you

38:16

can digest this week's headlines without freaking out.

38:18

Listen to how to money on the iHeart

38:20

Radio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you get

38:22

your podcasts. So

38:31

let's take a look at the

38:34

kind of descriptions you can generate

38:36

when speeding up the world. In

38:38

1895, H.G. Wells published The Time

38:40

Machine. He did this as a

38:42

serial novel in a magazine. It's

38:45

one of the earliest and most

38:47

influential works of science fiction, in

38:49

part because it introduced this concept

38:51

of a time travel device which

38:53

became a staple in the genre.

38:56

But it's beautifully written and we

38:58

can see the imagination of fast

39:00

time when the unnamed time traveler

39:02

builds this device and travels to

39:04

the the very distant future of

39:07

the year, 802, 701. But here's

39:09

the part I want to share

39:11

with you, when he cranks the

39:13

lever down on the machine and

39:15

gets going. This passage is read

39:17

again by actor Sean Judge. As

39:20

I put on pace, night followed

39:22

day like the flapping of a

39:24

black wing. I saw the sun

39:26

hopping swiftly across the sky, leaping

39:28

it every minute, and every minute

39:31

marking a day. The slowest snail

39:33

that ever crawled dashed by too

39:35

fast for me. Presently as I

39:37

went on, still gaining velocity, the

39:39

palpitation of day and night merged

39:42

into one continuous grayness. The jerking

39:44

sun became a streak of fire.

39:46

The moon, a fainter fluctuating band.

39:48

I saw trees growing and changing

39:50

like puffs of vapor. Huge buildings

39:53

rise up faint and fair and

39:55

pass like dreams. The

39:57

whole surface of

39:59

the Earth seemed

40:01

changed, melting and flowing

40:04

under my eyes." So in

40:06

the same way that slow

40:08

motion allows us to see

40:10

details that we would not

40:12

otherwise catch, fast motion plays

40:14

that same game. It's no

40:16

surprise then that a very

40:18

engaging style of cinematography is

40:20

to rapidly alternate between speeding

40:22

and slowing. Think of the

40:24

battle scenes in the movie

40:26

300. As the Spartans charge,

40:28

the camera captures their ferocity

40:30

in real time, the thunder

40:32

of their shields clashing and

40:34

the spears piercing, and

40:37

then suddenly the world slows,

40:39

and every movement stretches

40:41

into a balletic display of

40:43

destruction, sweat, glistens, blood

40:45

arcs grace flees through the

40:47

air like crimson silk.

40:49

The slow motion lingers on

40:51

every ripple of flesh,

40:53

every grimace of pain, before

40:55

snapping back to faster

40:57

than normal speed. You see

40:59

this explosion of chaos

41:02

and bodies tumbling and dust

41:04

swirling under the fury of

41:06

combat. If you've seen this

41:08

part of the movie you know

41:10

it's like an epic painting

41:12

that's come to life. But the

41:14

point I want to make

41:16

is that by alternating between slow

41:18

and fast the cinematography continues

41:20

to violate our predictions and so

41:22

it holds our attention throughout.

41:24

Now, one thing I find amazing

41:26

is that H .G. Wells wrote

41:28

his passage before there was

41:30

fast motion video to watch. So

41:32

he did this the old

41:34

fashioned way by imagining the whole

41:36

thing. Now it turns out

41:38

if you are sufficiently imaginative

41:40

you can really do an

41:42

amazing job on this even

41:44

before witnessing it yourself. For

41:47

example, five years before H .G.

41:49

Wells' time machine, the great

41:51

psychologist William James wrote a

41:53

book called Principles of Psychology.

41:55

He has a chapter called

41:57

The Perception of Time. In

42:00

it, he writes this strikingly poetic

42:02

passage. We have every reason to

42:04

think that creatures may possibly differ

42:06

enormously in the amounts of duration

42:08

which they intuitively feel, and in

42:10

the fineness of the events that

42:12

may fill it. Von Bayer has

42:15

indulged in some interesting computations of

42:17

the effect of such differences in

42:19

changing the aspect of nature. Suppose

42:21

we were able, within the length

42:23

of a second, to note 10,000

42:25

events distinctly instead of barely 10

42:27

as now. If our life were

42:29

then destined to hold the same

42:31

number of impressions, it might be

42:33

one thousand times as short. We

42:35

should live less than a month

42:38

and personally know nothing of the

42:40

change of seasons. If born in

42:42

winter, we should now believe in

42:44

summer, as we now believe in

42:46

the heats of the Carboniferous era.

42:48

The motions of organic beings would

42:50

be so slow to our senses

42:52

as to be inferred, not seen.

42:54

The sun would stand still in

42:56

the sky. the moon be almost

42:58

free from change, and so on.

43:01

But now, reverse the hypothesis, and

43:03

suppose a being to get only

43:05

one thousandth part of the sensations

43:07

that we get in a given

43:09

time, and consequently live one thousand

43:11

times as long. Winters and summers

43:13

will be to him like quarters

43:15

of an hour. Mushrooms and the

43:17

swifter-growing plants will shoot into being

43:19

so rapidly as to appear instantaneous

43:22

creations. annual shrubs will rise and

43:24

fall from the earth like restlessly

43:26

boiling water springs. The motions of

43:28

animals will be as invisible as

43:30

are to us the movements of

43:32

bullets and cannonballs. The sun will

43:34

scour through the sky like a

43:36

meteor, leaving a fiery trail behind

43:38

him, etc. That such imaginary cases,

43:40

barring the superhuman longevity, may be

43:42

realized somewhere in the animal kingdom,

43:45

it would be rash to deny.

43:47

Now, HG Wells may well have

43:50

read this passage from William James,

43:52

and the descriptions of them are

43:54

beautiful, so none of them actually

43:57

needed to see a Hollywood movie

43:59

to envision this. But I do

44:01

think that it doesn't hurt to

44:03

grow up around movie technology so

44:06

that one becomes very comfortable in

44:08

thinking about time in different ways

44:10

by actually seeing the experience oneself

44:12

by directly learning new ways of

44:15

perceiving. I'll give you an example.

44:17

Some of you in your 50s

44:19

or older will remember when your

44:22

teachers showed 8mm films in school.

44:24

Now if you've never seen this,

44:26

the way it works is that

44:28

the film strip is on a

44:30

reel, a big circular job. And as

44:33

the movie plays, that reel is unwinding

44:35

and the film is moving to a

44:37

second reel, which is collecting the film

44:39

strip. So the movie starts off wound

44:41

up on the first and... up wound

44:43

up around the second reel. But of

44:45

course, the beginning of the movie is

44:47

now in the middle of the second

44:49

reel and the end of the movie

44:51

is on the outside, so you have

44:53

to rewind the whole thing back onto

44:55

the first reel. So when you're done

44:57

watching the movie, you just pull the

44:59

lever to set the whole thing

45:02

in reverse. And you get to

45:04

witness the whole movie backwards. People

45:06

are walking backwards, bicyclists are biking

45:08

backwards, the train is reversing up

45:10

the track, the diner is getting

45:12

more food on his plate, the

45:14

person who slipped on the banana

45:16

peel now slips upward. So typically

45:19

the teacher reverses the film at

45:21

a much higher speed, so you

45:23

see the whole thing running backwards

45:25

quickly. But what I remember as

45:27

a little kid in school was

45:29

the delight this process always brought

45:32

to the whole class. So starting

45:34

many decades ago, everyone got to

45:36

see what backwards motion looked like.

45:39

Now, it's hard to prove this

45:41

with certainty, but one possibility is

45:43

that this helped people to think

45:45

about things in a new way,

45:48

to open up this new time

45:50

domain of things running backwards. So

45:52

take the Swiss physicist Ernst Stukelberg.

45:55

In the 1940s, he was chewing

45:57

on a problem about elementary particles.

45:59

His colleague Paul Dirac had published

46:02

a paper that unified a whole

46:04

bunch of things in physics, but

46:06

something came out of Dirac's equation

46:08

that was unexpected to everyone. The

46:11

math suggested there should be a

46:13

particle like an electron, but with

46:15

positive charge instead of negative. And

46:17

no one had ever seen this.

46:20

But here was the math saying

46:22

it should exist. Eventually this came

46:24

to be called a positron, but

46:26

no one knew what could explain

46:28

the existence of such a particle.

46:31

And in 1941, Stukelberg realized that

46:33

a positron and an electron are

46:35

the same little particle, but a

46:37

positron is just an electron traveling

46:40

backward in time. And that made

46:42

all the math work. Now, it's

46:44

impossible to know the answer, but

46:46

the question is, would Stukelberg have

46:49

had a harder time coming up

46:51

with this hypothesis if he had

46:53

never seen backward motion? Once you've

46:55

seen a film strip run, once

46:57

you've seen time run backward that

47:00

way, then that door of possibility

47:02

is opened up in your internal

47:04

model. And once it's open, you

47:06

can't shut it, and it's much

47:09

easier to think about things like

47:11

it. This is a specific case

47:13

of a more general truism that

47:15

new technologies allow us to experience

47:18

things that we could not have

47:20

experienced otherwise. And that really opens

47:22

up our mental space to new

47:24

ideas. And I'm very interested in

47:26

seeing where future technology takes us,

47:29

because we can nowadays try out

47:31

experiments in very simple ways that

47:33

were impossible last century. For example,

47:35

my son plays a V- our

47:38

game called Super Hot in which

47:40

you're fending off gun men who

47:42

are all trying to get you

47:44

but the key is that the

47:47

speed of motion of the world

47:49

depends on the movement of your

47:51

own body. So if you stand

47:53

very still the world creeps along

47:56

and super slow motion, but as

47:58

soon as you make a move

48:00

to lift your gun or move

48:02

a little bit, the world speeds

48:04

up. And if you're moving really

48:07

fast, the world around you moves

48:09

fast as well. It's an incredible

48:11

experience to play this. And for

48:13

the generation of children growing up,

48:16

it's just part of the background

48:18

furniture that you can play a

48:20

game where the passage of time

48:22

is variable and under your control.

48:25

But for the rest of us,

48:27

this is a whole new dimension

48:29

of time to explore. The final

48:31

thing we'll address today is why

48:33

we're not attracted to slow motion

48:36

in an audio-only format. I suggest

48:38

it's because with words, we're only

48:40

analyzing for the meaning. We're just

48:42

working to capture all the words

48:45

so that we can translate that

48:47

into an understanding of the message.

48:49

And in fact, we all know

48:51

from audio books and YouTube videos.

48:54

You can take in words at

48:56

a much faster pace than I

48:58

would be able to naturally produce

49:00

them. And so there's no benefit

49:02

in slowing them down. So that's

49:04

why we don't do the speeding

49:06

and slowing we see in the

49:08

movie 300 if we were reading

49:10

an audio book about the Battle

49:13

of Thermopylae. Like... Leonides swung

49:15

the broadsword and hit the Persian soldier

49:17

under the ribs. And then Leonides stepped

49:19

over the body and looked around until

49:22

he saw his next target, horseman charging

49:24

at him with a lance. And he

49:26

spun and ducked the lance. I don't

49:29

know. Maybe we've just invented a new

49:31

style there, but I doubt it. So...

49:33

We love to do slow motion with

49:35

videos, but not text. But I think

49:38

there's an interesting realm in between. Although

49:40

video is just over a century old,

49:42

I think there's a sense in which

49:45

people have for millennia figured out

49:47

how to dance in some way

49:49

between slow motion and fast motion.

49:51

And this is something I learned

49:53

from my friend Tony Brandt. We

49:55

were talking about these kinds of

49:57

ideas once, and Tony pointed out

49:59

the different... in opera between

50:01

the aria and the recitative.

50:03

And aria spends several minutes

50:05

on a single idea like

50:07

the love of the protagonist

50:10

for the beautiful maiden. It's

50:12

all about deep emotions and

50:14

reflections and it pauses the

50:16

plot to focus on the

50:19

character's inner feelings. But the

50:21

recitative is the opposite. First

50:23

of all, it's speech-like, there's

50:25

no rhythm, maybe just a

50:27

harpsichord, plays along. And the

50:30

only job of the recitative

50:32

is to crank the plot

50:34

along. It just tells you

50:36

about some big passage of

50:38

time. So... Arias explore something

50:41

simple in great depth, the

50:43

recitative moves the story forward.

50:45

So Arias might be considered

50:47

perhaps the medieval version of

50:50

Slomo in the cinema really

50:52

zooming in on the moment

50:54

while the recitative is the

50:56

fast motion speeding up. of

50:58

the plot. Okay, so I've

51:01

told you that we don't

51:03

do fast in slow motion

51:05

when there's only audio involved,

51:07

and there's a sense in

51:09

which we grasp at this

51:12

speeding or slowing with opera.

51:14

But it's different with visual

51:16

scenes, because here we're not

51:18

just trying to decrypt a

51:21

message, but instead we're watching

51:23

the incredibly high bandwidth visual

51:25

world. And we're making predictions

51:27

about the physics and getting

51:29

feedback from what we're seeing.

51:32

And if my hypothesis is

51:34

correct, we're calibrating our own

51:36

internal clocks to the world

51:38

of what we see. And

51:40

that's why fast and slow

51:43

motion, although they are relatively

51:45

recent additions to the canon

51:47

of cinema, this is why

51:49

they grab our attention and

51:52

are here to stay. So

51:54

let's wrap up. Beyond its

51:56

aesthetic and emotional appeal, slow

51:58

motion serves a critical narrative

52:00

function in filmmaking. manipulating time,

52:03

directors can emphasize key moments.

52:05

They can reveal hidden details.

52:07

They can grab your attention

52:09

by violating your brain's expectations.

52:11

Slow motion is more than

52:14

just a visual trick. It's

52:16

a way of stretching moments,

52:18

suspending us in the gravity

52:20

of an emotion or a

52:23

decision or a final breath

52:25

before impact. It allows us

52:27

to live inside the... flicker

52:29

of an instant to taste

52:31

the weight of time. Perhaps

52:34

this is why our brains

52:36

are so captivated by it.

52:38

Because in life, time generally

52:40

moves at one relentless speed.

52:43

But in film, we can

52:45

linger in a moment. We

52:47

can turn seconds into

52:49

minutes. We can reveal

52:52

the invisible in the

52:54

visible. Slow motion reminds

52:56

us that buried in

52:58

every blink, every heartbeat,

53:00

every fleeting instant, there

53:03

is a world of

53:05

depth waiting to be

53:07

discovered. Go to eagleman.com

53:10

slash podcast for more

53:12

information and to find

53:15

further reading. Send me

53:17

an email at podcast

53:20

at eagleman.com with questions

53:22

or discussion and check

53:25

out and subscribe to

53:27

inner cosmos on YouTube

53:30

for videos of each

53:33

episode and to leave

53:35

comments. Until next time,

53:38

I'm David Eagleman and

53:40

this is the 100th episode

53:43

of inner cosmos. Kids still, pets

53:45

shed, and accidents are inevitable. That's

53:48

why you need a washable sofa

53:50

that can keep up. Our sofas

53:52

are fully machine washable, inside and

53:55

out, so you can say goodbye

53:57

to stains and hello to worry.

53:59

free living. Made with liquid and

54:02

stain-resistant fabrics, their kid-proof, pet-friendly

54:04

and built for everyday life.

54:06

Plus, changeable fabric covers let

54:08

you refresh your sofa whenever

54:10

you want. Need flexibility? Our

54:12

modular design lets you rearrange

54:14

your sofa any time to

54:16

fit your space. Whether it's

54:18

a growing family room or

54:20

a cozy apartment. Plus, they're

54:22

earth-friendly and trusted by over

54:24

200,000 happy customers. Starting at

54:26

just $699, it's time to

54:28

upgrade to a stress-free mess-proof

54:30

sofa. Visit washablesofas.com today and

54:33

save. That's washablesofas.com. Offers are

54:35

subject to change and certain

54:37

restrictions may apply. This is

54:40

Dr. Laurie Santos This

54:42

is Dr. Laurie Santos from the

54:44

Happiness Lab. At the Boston Marathon

54:46

presented by Bank of America,

54:49

thousands of runners are raising

54:51

funds for life-changing causes,

54:53

and you can help make an impact.

54:55

Visit b of a.com/help a cause

54:58

to donate and support a runner's

55:00

fundraising efforts. Together, we're making a

55:02

difference, one step at a time. What would

55:05

you like the power to do? Bank of

55:07

America. Bring Spring to your

55:09

door with Target Circle 360! Get

55:11

all you need for Easter hosting,

55:14

Spring Get- Togethers, and more! With

55:16

unlimited Same Day delivery through Target

55:18

Circle 360. From Easter basket goodies

55:20

to Fresh Florals, getting everything the

55:23

same day is easy. Open the

55:25

Target app and bring the magic

55:27

of the season to your door

55:30

with unlimited Same Day delivery through

55:32

Target Circle 360. Visit target.com/Circle or

55:34

the Target app for more details

55:36

for more details. I always had to be

55:39

so good no one could ignore me. Carve

55:41

my path with data and drive. But

55:43

some people only see who I am

55:45

on paper. The paper ceiling. The limitations

55:47

from degree screens to stereotypes that

55:50

are holding back over 70 million

55:52

stars. Workers skilled through alternative rocks

55:54

rather than a bachelor's degree. It's

55:57

time for skills to speak for

55:59

themselves. Find resources for

56:01

breaking through barriers at Taylor Paper silling.org

56:04

brought to you by opportunity at work

56:06

and the ad council