Man, that was an abrupt ending. I was really immersed in this video even at a minute long and I wanted more. You really did a fantastic job conveying a complicated subject in an easy to grasp manner. Don't stop making videos!

@GalacticYuna

2 жыл бұрын

He's got a longer video going further into gravity

@Sciencedoneright

2 жыл бұрын

It's short because this is a submission to the veritasium science communicator contest, btw

@317cmrogers

2 жыл бұрын

I thought my phone messed up🤣

I don’t care if you win you won my Sub.

Wow, this is honestly the best video on gravity and spacetime I have seen so far. I started watching all your videos, and they all explain every topic so great and easy to understand. Looks like you are becoming my favorite science channel. :D

@frankdimeglio8216

2 жыл бұрын

Wrong. TIME DILATION IS FULLY EXPLAINED, AS THE ULTIMATE MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS CLEARLY PROVEN: A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, as C4 is a POINT that is ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL (ON BALANCE) as SPACE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. E=mc2 IS F=ma. A planet AND a star thus constitute what is A POINT in the night sky. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ACCORDINGLY, I have ALSO fully explained the MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION of Einstein's equations and Maxwell's equations (GIVEN THE ADDITION OF A FOURTH SPATIAL DIMENSION); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. The Sun AND the Earth are F=ma AND E=mc2. Great. SO, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. AGAIN, time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Indeed, this NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (E=mc2 IS F=ma.) Therefore, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. SO, GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS E=MC2, F=MA, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. E=mc2 IS F=ma. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) E=MC2 IS F=ma. Objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS F=ma. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Magnificent !!! Einstein never nearly understood TIME, E=MC2, F=ma, gravity, or ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. He was, in fact, a total weasel. c2 represents a dimension ON BALANCE, as E=MC2 IS F=ma in accordance with the following: UNDERSTANDING THE ULTIMATE, BALANCED, TOP DOWN, AND CLEAR MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION OF ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy AND gravity, AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=ma: The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS this proves the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. SO, ON BALANCE, this proves the fourth dimension. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy !!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. INDEED, TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mC2 IS CLEARLY F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy !!! By Frank DiMeglio

@crackedemerald4930

2 жыл бұрын

I've seen better by Science clic, they did a whole series on explaining the maths of general relativity, if you liked this explanation, you'd probably like that one too

Hopefully, this gets some recognition for it is a great video.

@NKY5223

2 жыл бұрын

hi thoth

Never had it explained this way. Finally makes sense and it excites me.

I love your crazy explanation

The way you put stuff breaks down the dams in my misunderstandings.

@houserhouse

2 жыл бұрын

Well said

If the contest was to explain that in under a minute, you nailed it!!! We have a winner. 🖖

I have heard this "curve in space-time" thing being said so many times but never actually explained, and you did a very good job, thanks.

Such subtle and to the point explanation loved it !!

Your animation gets better and better

Bravo, excellent!! 👏👏👏👏👏😎 0:41 I finally understand that fascinating idea, in a simple, visual and intuitive way.Thanks!👍

I so glad I found this channel!

It is just amazing ... no one else can make me understand it ....

Wow, like what the f*ck, I expected like 10 minutes of this, and I'm positioned in my bed comfortably.

I hope you win.. This video of yours and also your other videos are awesome..

That is what we call in math "Riemannian geometry" and it's so complex but without it Einstein would not have been able to explain his general theory.

Love the animation and the short but very well done and interesting explanation ☺️

Always been confused by this explanation of space time. This one minute video clarified years of confusion

Great topic. In 1min you could only explain so much. I thought an even better illustration would be to drop from the 2D (two people walking on the surface of the Earth), to a 1D world as an analogy, instead of talking about the extra curved dimension we in a 3D world cannot easily conceive in our head. But then I clicked on your longer video on the same topic from a year ago, and that's exactly what you started with in that video. Cool :)

Wow!! I really hope you win!! 😊

Thanks for this. I finally understood.

So force is just the manifestation of a higher dimension. That's mind blowing.

Beautiful video!

Thank you for another great video

amazing I love it

Hey what software do you use for your 3d visualization? I'm a software engineer that is looking to create videos like this about comp sci stuff. Love your videos by the way!

Wonderful exercice of conciseness!

Damn... okay. I "get" space-time curvature, but never in such a perfectly concise way...

Short and sweet

How do you make those animations? They are beautiful!

short & sweet

this was so simple i i i i love this

Great 👌 explanation

Looks good, and clearer than most! I still can't get my head around why everything is treated as permanently moving along a curved geodesic, at all times, despite being at rest in their own reference? If relativity has no fixed reference, what are the earth and apple moving relative to, to be able to converge?

Amazing

0:10, if they're travelling in parallel, then shouldnt rhey be traveling on their respecrive latitudes? And hence never crach into eachother?

Shortest physics video ever. This should be atleast 1 hr long

How'd u animate the spactime curvature with earth?

Bro keep this video going

I've never experienced such an abrupt ending like this one, it's crazy

Sheet analogy is always weird, I wish you depicted it in three dimensions, with space compressing towards the planet in all directions (more intense as you get closer to the center). That is a more accurate depictions than the sheet

Wow 🤩

informative, thanks

Hey! I already conceptualize gravity as the next spatial dimension (ex. 2D gravity is 3D space)

Are u a professor? If you are then you are the best of the best

I got this book about Zero Gravity, now I can't put it down.

Sir can i use these graphics in my video

I sometimes try to imagine space time as 3d model, like a sponge like structure and in it regions become compressed or deformed from there present masses.

But what causes spacetime to curve toward the matter? I mean to ask, what causes spacetime to shrink in empty space when gravity itself is absent?

I explain gravity to me by comparing it to the effect of how air pressure in the atmosphere is automatically causing particles to move into the direction of the area with the lower pressure, and the higher the difference the faster the particles move: Mass causes time to slow down and elements in space move automatically into the direction where time is slower ("lower time pressure"), and the higher the difference of the speed of time the faster the elements move into the direction (causing a stronger gravity effect).

Which software did you use for the CGI?

@ButWhySci

2 жыл бұрын

Blender

What about all the planets and other celestial bodies.

niceeeee

new video plz.. love u

TIME is the force that expands exponentially to exist, by spinning atoms - spin creates centrifugal force which naturally causes the atom to expand - big stuff like Earth expands faster than small stuff like me so i feel a push under my feet we named “gravity” - simple proof is that all objects regardless of mass “fall” at the same rate of speed; actually, the Earth is expanding up to meet the objects - thus TIME is the dark energy expanding the universe. Since TIME is omnidirectional, two objects in space have a shadow in time between them that causes an attraction which varies according to size, speed and distance; also called gravity - this shadow accumulates at the center of galaxies creating an a sense of TIME we call a black hole = simple, like all of creation.

Conceptualizing other dimensions. Damn

nice

so the 4th dimension is perceived by us as gravity?

Might be a dumb question but...If gravity is the thing we call it when two objects travelling in parallel which shouldn't meet, do in fact meet, as a result of space-time being curved by their mass, then why are we looking for a graviton? It seems to me that there is probably no 'force carrying particle' for gravity bc there is no 'force', Or conversely, that maybe the Higgs IS the 'force carrying particle' for gravity since it seems to be mass that actually curves spacetime. And the Higgs Boson, or things moving through the Higgs field, gives things mass, right? So the Higgs is maybe what causes gravity? I'm probably wrong, but why?? (In the spirit of your channel, lol), Thanks, Annie (not a physicist of any kind, just interested)

@bernadeth2520

2 жыл бұрын

I think gravity is not a force at all to begin, according to general relativity theory

@ButWhySci

2 жыл бұрын

Not dumb at all. The biggest issue in physics is curved/warped spacetime has passed every experiment we can throw at it so we're pretty certain that's what it is. But the most accurate model of the universe we have (The Standard Model) doesn't "fit" with curved spacetime. The biggest issue is that in the Standard model, the universe is quantized, meaning you can and can not have particles. But gravity is described as a field which is differentiable. Meaning you can't NOT have gravity. So the standard model wants gravity to be quantized (the graviton) but if it was quantized our current field equations for gravity wouldn't work. It's weird. Seeing as we are still discovering things about fundamental particles, I'd have to imagine there's an extra layer in the Standard model we haven't discovered that would explain it's interaction with gravitational fields. But I'm also not a fundamental physicist so this could be naive thinking. Who knows?

@annietube1

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks, I’m not sure that clears it up, but at least I know I’m not alone in being confused about it! A new question about your answer tho, is there such a thing as gravity without mass? Like, in a region of space with no particles with mass at all, would there still be gravity? I got the feeling from your video that the answer would be no, but from what you were saying about quantized gravity, that the answer would be yes. Is that the conflict in the field, or am I not understanding it? Or, is it to be understood exactly like the Higgs field, that there is a ‘gravity field’ and when objects with mass move through it, the gravity field bends space in a way that makes the objects attract each other? So if that was the case, then the gravity field would be there always but it would only effect things when something with mass came around, right? If this is right, I still don’t think I get why they think the field would be made up of gravitons. But I guess it has to be made of something. Huh. Is the electromagnetic field made of something in the same way as the Higgs field is described as being made up of Higgs bosons? Are there magnatons? (my guess for magnate version of ‘gravitons’) Why don’t I know this? I know how electromagnetism works, mostly-I know what happens and why when two bar magnets come together to be attracted or repelled, I could draw the lines of force on a diagram, and I understand how we get electricity out of a coil of copper wire and a moving magnet-but I don’t know what the field itself actually IS. What the field is made of. If anything. Do any of you know? Am I just missing something obvious here?

@ButWhySci

2 жыл бұрын

@@annietube1 The only way you could have no gravity would be to have an empty universe. Now granted if you're far away from something the gravity is humanly non-existent. But mathematically, technically gravity extends forever from every bit of mass. The thing with quantized fields is you can have points in the field with a zero value (absence of a particle) so if the graviton was real, then intergalactic space would certainly have instances of zero gravity or gravitons. But I believe the graviton would have similar interactions as electromagnetism (if it exists) so although gravitons may be absence from a particular point in space, their influence and thus the field would still be there. I'm not very well read in in the following answers so take them a bit critically. But my understanding is that the electromagnetic field isn't "made" of anything it's just a field of potential from the quantum interactions of charged particles and we use virtual particles to help conceptualize that idea. The higgs field is unique because unlike all other fields (including gravity) the higgs field is scalar. Meaning it doesn't have an intrinsic momentum or direction. Whereas every other field does. So moving in different directions in an electrical field has different implications, but in the higgs field the interaction would be the same in all directions.

@annietube1

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks again, I find I'm constantly confused about whether concepts in physics are thought-experiments meant to simplify hard mathematical ideas or if physicists are saying these things actually really exist IRL. Like how Hawking Radiation is always described using pairs of entangled particles at the event horizon of a black hole but when you look into the real paper, that's not it. So I'm never really sure if these 'fields' are 'really-real' or if they are just the best way to describe what the math says. It's easy to imagine a photon popping into existence whenever a field has a non-zero value--but what is happening IRL? Can it be described without using probabilities or math? For example, I could explain why a river meanders without using any math--can a physicist do the same with fields? Like, what happens when a field has a value that isn't zero but also isn't quite big enough to make a particle? Or can this just not happen for some reason? Sometimes the process is described as the field 'clumping together' to make a photon, which suggests IRL physicality. I'd imagine then that the not big-enough 'almost-particle' would be a really-real, detectable thing. But then other times, experts don't talk about the fields in this real-world, 'clumpy' way at all, they keep it all pure math, much like you do. It's really confusing, your videos tend to clear things up better than most, but I have to say, physics seems uniquely difficult for the lay-person to get a handle on bc of stuff like this. Even tho the ambiguity/mystery can be fun, sometimes you just want to know: are these fields really real? What exactly is happening in the real world when a field gets a positive value? But maybe nobody knows these answers for real??

If the surface is cuved due to earths mass objects above it will fall dowards but what about objects or masses below this curve? Shouldn't they repel ? So obejects on south pole for example should not attract gravity ?

@Stellarainn

26 күн бұрын

Theres no south or north in space

Please watch science clic, dude is amazing

why does mass create those curves

On addition: mass isn’t really the the cause because if so photons which are massless wouldn’t be affected by gravity. It’s actually energy which is obviously equivalent to mass that creates the curvature in spacetime.

@frankdimeglio8216

2 жыл бұрын

TIME DILATION ultimately proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. News flash ! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. The Earth (A PLANET) is a MIDDLE DISTANCE form that is in BALANCED relation to the Sun AND the speed of light (c), AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! By Frank DiMeglio

I wanted more :(

I deeply feel we really, as a human race, have not really understood the so-called 4th dimension. I have watched tons of videos explaining such topics and I really have not got a good grasp, and believe me my IQ is not bad. The whole topic of the 4th dimension and time dilation, etc is as should be expressed in another language that we do not get.

I have a thought after watching this video. So just like the earth makes a curve in the space and so does the rocket. Now, if we humans are "x" times lighter than earth and we fall towards earth. Then if we could have something that is "x" times lighter than the rocket then that particle should also fall towards the rocket in outer space. Cause the rocket also made a curve around it.

So blue balled it huts.

Is this information accurate?: "our plane of existence is curved in a fourth dimension and we call this gravity." I can't verify it. Is this 4th dimension spatial?

*_Why does energy curves spacetime_*

Earth is just a sphere beyblade

The Curvature of Space May Be Caused by Anti Gravity, Not Gravity. The curvature of space is now defined as this: Massive bodies, like planets, have gravitational fields around them that causes light or any matter to travel in curved paths around them. My suggestion is that the expanding space caused by dark energy, an anti gravity like force, causes light or matter to travel in curved paths around massive bodies. Therefore it's not gravity causing curved space, but the anti gravity force, dark energy causing curved space. The expanding force of dark energy is 70% of the universe and by far the greatest force in the universe. It pushes and expands everywhere in space. But it is weakest where there is massive bodies; because, there is no empty space there to push back from! The dark energy drops off significantly near massive bodies. This dark energy pushes or expands from all sides. But there is little dark energy pushing back between the planet and a passing photon, or matter of any kind. That's where dark energy is the weakest. Therefore any photons or matter of any kind that is nearing a planet are pushed by dark energy toward the planet. They are pushed toward it from empty space, not pulled toward it because of gravity. The expanding force of dark energy between any planet and a photon is weak and weaker the closer the two objects are to each other. This is the opposite of gravity. See drawing. When the photon traveling from left to right approaches the planet, dark energy striking the planet from all sides is much greater than the weak amount of dark energy between the photon and planet. This causes the photon to be pushed toward the planet in a curved path. This helps explains an alternate reason for the curvature of space. This suggests curvature of space is caused by dark energy.

Excpet the 2 blue balls on the big green ball didnt make a straight line. The arrow was straight and the balls went inward.

Its the curvature of time that causes gravity.

Four dimensions of space-time would be curved in a fifth higher dimension, yes? Although from what I understand, the mathematics is based on intrinsic curvature, and doesn't require a fifth.

@ButWhySci

2 жыл бұрын

If we were able to perceive all four dimensions yes. But like how someone on earths surface can't directly perceive its curvature in the Z dimension, we in spacetime cannot directly perceive the curvature in the t dimension. However, in both scenarios we can conduct experiments to detect these curvatures.

@scptime1188

2 жыл бұрын

It doesn't really "curve into" a fith dimension. It's more like a... contraction? As in everything is being pulled to a point or area, and this changes the geodesics worldlines that enter the contracted space.

What is this theory based on?

@Jackie-wn5hx

7 ай бұрын

Relativity and classical field theory.

It would be nice to see 3d curvature rather than the usual 2d curvature.

!!!!!!!

So the reason why everybody uses this 2D model for explanation is because it's impossible to visualize gravity in 3D, it's a 4D thing?

this video VERY unexpectedly ended

Sir. I dont get your point if gravity is curvature of space pls show this curvature from all side in your video not only under the earth

@Stellarainn

26 күн бұрын

The curvature is affected by the mass of objects. It curves under a planet or a star.. if theres an empty section of space..theres nothing to weight on it so its flat

The ball will eventually bump into the space ship..,

you are infinite

360 799

So then gravity is proof there is in fact a 4th dimension?

@chrisu7023

2 жыл бұрын

if anything i think entropy proves that

Gravity is the 4th dimension? Interesting

@skurinski

2 жыл бұрын

no, time is

I’m confused.

Still don't quit get it but thanks

@davidmurphy563

2 жыл бұрын

This is a great video but unfortunately, this takes work to understand. You need to understand Galileo's Principle of Relativity. That means that objects within an inertial frame of reference (not accelerating) can be said to be at rest / constant motion. Otherwise you're in a non-interial frame and you feel acceleration, like being in a plane taking off. Maybe google this, watch a few vids on it until you get reference frames. This is the cornerstone to everything. Then you'll realise that Newton's 1st Law of Motion is just a restatement of this. Look up a video on Newton's 1st. Now, you can probably skip Newtonian gravity and go straight to special relativity (SR). It's probably simpler believe it or not. Now, Galileo thought that if you fire a cannon forwards from a moving train then its speed is the bullet's plus the train's (ignoring wind). But experimental evidence showed that light always moved at the same speed. Imagine somebody on the train watching a light clock where a photon of light bounces up and down between the ceiling and the floor at the speed of light. Bit odd but you could keep time that was, right? Now, imagine someone watching the train pass. He sees the light bounce up and down but from his frame it also moves sideways. It goes faster. Except it can't, light only goes at one speed. We know that is a fact. Well, what is speed? It's distance over time. So, what if you changed distance and time to keep speed the same? Working this out literally requires nothing more than Pythagoras. Remember a^2 + b^2 = c^2? You're just working out the length of the hypotenuse, the long side of the triangle. This established, Einstein asked: what if gravity when falling was being in a non-inertial state / being at rest? What if sitting on your chair now was the same as accelerating upwards on a rocket? This is the Principle of Equivalence but really it's just a restatement of Galileo's Principle of Relativity. What if there isn't space and time but one singular thing, spacetime. And our motion is a vector (an arrow) through a geometry that is curved (like the people walking on the sphere). What if gravity is just geometry and not really a force at all? Hope that helped, if you can watch [reputable] videos on the topics I suggested then you can definitely get there. I won't lie though, after that point the maths gets hard.

@BinaryRhyme.JackOfArts

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidmurphy563 The simple part of the simplified explanations that everyone glosses over is that they show two folks moving in a straight line, and converging, but never explain why they are moving in the first place. The simple answer is that we are all moving forward in time (if time stood still, you wouldn't fall to earth) and it is this motion in the temporal that causes the gravitational effect.

@davidmurphy563

2 жыл бұрын

@@BinaryRhyme.JackOfArts Well, I agree in that within your reference frame you have a normalised direction vector in 4d spacetime; a fixed magnitude. Falling is being at rest. My imagination can't grapple with the geometry considering time separately but if it works for you, go for it. Honestly though, I think the way to understand this is the journey: Galileo --> Newton --> SR --> GR. Plus Lorenz. By the time you get to the end of that it's time to start learning about vectors, scalars, matrices, gamma and the hard graft of sitting down with a pen and paper laboriously going through the equations begins. At least that's my experience anyway. I think you can get your way to SR and to the edge of GR largely with just intuition though if you follow a nice path.

@BinaryRhyme.JackOfArts

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidmurphy563 Oh, been there. The challenge is devising an accurate-ish yet simple visualization. Most of these rely on the basic thought that, because there is curvature, you move together... so, what if I don't "move" - but the movement isn't optional, is my point.

I'm so confused right now...

What?

I really think it’s best seen as density of space. The graph lines move inward. This lopsided nature, asymmetry, of our manifold is key. Neutron collapse, re emergence and decay into primordial hydrogen is the cycle of the universe.

@frankdimeglio8216

2 жыл бұрын

TIME DILATION ultimately proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. News flash ! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. The Earth (A PLANET) is a MIDDLE DISTANCE form that is in BALANCED relation to the Sun AND the speed of light (c), AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! By Frank DiMeglio

But space is in 3d... not flat

@scptime1188

2 жыл бұрын

Yes. But we can't draw 3D space curving in 4D

i am still waiting for the flat-earther , that somehow manages to properly use 4d-minkowski-space-time diagram calculations (by chance obviously, like random monkeys typing Shakespeare), while still holding onto flat-erath-delusions, in an attempted argument for "flat earth within curved spacetime"

why you guys are so fast in speaking.

UNDERSTANDING TIME AND TIME DILATION (ON BALANCE), AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Let's talk about what Einstein curiously didn't talk about, at least publicly. Let's talk about TIME along with the VISUAL experience of the man who actually IS in outer "space", AS this is to be DIRECTLY compared with the BALANCED BODILY/VISUAL experience of the man who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground (in and WITH TIME). In the first case, there is no feeling of gravity. There isn't relational motion (or mobility); AND, basically, there is INSTANTANEOUS death. So, THEN carefully and FULLY consider what is THE SUN (as it IS, AND as it must be/REMAIN). Great !!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience. Indeed, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) For the man who IS actually IN outer "space", basically, obviously, and fundamentally, there is NO TIME. Excellent. Again, WITH this INSTANTANEOUS VISUAL EXPERIENCE, WITH the RELATIONAL consideration of what is THE SUN, what is THE EYE, AND what are the POINTS in the night sky, there is NO TIME (basically, obviously, and FUNDAMENTALLY). Great. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Therefore, BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE !!! GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity.) Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE. Consider what is THE MAN who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Our energy density is the same as water. Consider what is BALANCED BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE. (THE EYE is the body ON BALANCE.) The sky is BLUE, AND what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. THEREFORE, objects AND MEN fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Great !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. This explains the PERPETUAL motion of WHAT IS THE EARTH/ground on balance, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE. SO, I have mathematically unified physics/physical experience; AS I have mathematically proven why and how the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution AS WELL !!!! CAREFULLY CONSIDER WHAT IS THE SUN !! GREAT. E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, consider what is the speed of light (c). Accordingly, I have explained why the planets move away very, very, very slightly in comparison to what is THE SUN. It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma ON BALANCE. Indeed, HALF of the galaxies are "dead" or inert. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy on balance. By Frank DiMeglio

Let's put a ball on a plastic sheet and ask a physicist why the rubber sheet bends into a bump / hole. The physicist answers, it's because the Earth curves space. Let's ask a physicist, what is this curved space? How does the Earth curve space? What allows space to curve? What does the physicist answer? Does he take the same ball from the same rubber film and put it back on the same rubber film and use this same rubber film to describe this so-called curved space? 🤔 Curving space is naked emperor!!!! 🙂

what we call mass in reality is the area intersection betwen multiple dots, we all to wrong with today physics...

I think 1 minute 30 seconds would have been better

I don't like this explanation. Spacetime isn't curved. It's non-Euclidian. It makes a lot more sense when you realize that a "Straight Line" is a concept that you can't isomorphically map onto the real world.

Do you believe in gravity, Jolyne?