I have a confession: I listen to your videos before I go to sleep. I feel like I'm getting smarter and relaxing at the same time. Thanks David. You're doing great work.

@i_amelijah

3 жыл бұрын

Mike Kangaroo meee too! His voice is so relaxing 😍

@abelcolumba

3 жыл бұрын

So do I, I get so relaxed I get a good sleep

@pepsitwsit

3 жыл бұрын

I totally agree 😊 except with the getting smarter bit ... Ain't getting smarter if you go to sleep ...

@MichaelOfRohan

Жыл бұрын

I know exactly what you mean this is a good way to spend your twilight hours xD

@PhillipDiPrima

Жыл бұрын

Same here. I start off learning, but soon drift off to sleep. No offense Mr Butler

Meanwhile... Gravitational waves are discovered. Multiple times. Sir.. you are awesome.

These are excellent and professionally done. Thank you for you efforts David. Best way to start a Sunday morning!

Thank-you David. I get so tired of twerking girls and strutting boys posting garbage "content" online that kills my brain cells when I happen across it. You on the other hand consistently post material that is both wonderfully informative and beautifully complied. My heartiest thanks.

@timothyandrewnielsen

Жыл бұрын

U get tired of twerking girls? Whatchu watchin on the internet buddy?

Missed your videos good to see. love them 👍

thank you for all ur videos sir

Gravitational Waves: CONFIRMED.

Thank you Dr.Butler this is all truly amazing to learn!

These videos are awesome!

Sir: Your videobooks should be required watching in all HS science classes if not the entry level ones in college. Thank you for creating these enormously beneficial works of science for current and future generations. Keep going as long as you can because you advance humanity.

I've watched a number of your videos and thank you very much.

Great videos Mr .Butler. thank you very much

Interestingly, gravitational waves had been detected at the time this video was uploaded, and the announcement was made about two months later.

these are a much more effective tool of learning than one individually reading a textbook. Video book like this great. If a picture is 1000 words then a video is million words. I have become a great fan of David Butler

Another great astronomical Grand Slam for you . Mr . Butler

David you rock! thank you for your videos!!

David your channel is incredible. You take the time to teach concepts like these in ways that are intuitive and make it click for the learner. So many others just say the same phrases over and over again, not really getting through, but yours does. Thanks1

@erictko85

4 жыл бұрын

Your use of graphical demonstrations such as the train around 11:30 are very helpful. Speaking for myself, I learn best when i can see things play out in time and can see changes in space and time and how they relate to one another. Also helpful for understanding how different observers would see it.

Why couldn't I have found this channel earlier

you’re a treasure. i’ve watched tons of GR vids and these are truly the best.

@ThomasJr

4 жыл бұрын

This one is one of the few we can really follow. Somehow he knows what he needs to tell us in order for us to get it.

Excellent video !

Mr. Butler. You are really doing a great job with your video books. You make it much easier to understand everything for us who have non-scientific educations - keep up the great work you are awesome! Now that gravitational waves have been detected by the LIGO system could you please create a 2016 update about it? I'm very excited to hear your thoughts on the subject and what it means for Einstein's theories and the scientific understanding of space and time altogether :-)

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

+Naqthuul Thanks for your note. I am working on the LIGO event. But it will take a few months.

@Ninjahat

8 жыл бұрын

+David Butler Thank you sir. I will be looking forward to it.

I love your video how you explain things is interesting!

David we love u man!! Ur videos are brilliant in all depts.

I have recently started following your youtube videos on physics and science. I find them easy to follow while not shying away of adding basic mathematics needed for clarity, easy flow of subject and using great digital animation to bring to life equations and ideas! I find the PDF supplementary content very useful, if only some math expression could be presented in larger font. and if we could see more animated graphs and examples of working through the equations with real numbers and data! Thank you very much for nurturing our curiosity!

This is my favorite teacher I have Thank6 for teaching us

Thank you so much for these videos. I watch them with my 6 year old daughter, her twin brother and my 10 year old son. You are able to hold their attention despite the fact that they do not fully understand the subject matter. The music, your voice, the tasteful illustrations, and your obvious passion for physics makes for a very peaceful and stimulating experience. I am developing a deeper understanding of physics and my children are provoked to ask questions about physics because of your work. I am reminded of a time when the splendidness of the universe was recognized as being able to stand alone and not in need of outlandish cartoons, garish sound effects and insincerely dramatic commentary.

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

Thank you Jon. I appreciate your comments and love that the younger folks are interested. My grandchildren were the motivation for getting this series going.

@ezindebar

6 жыл бұрын

" I am reminded of a time when the splendidness of the universe was recognized as being able to stand alone and not in need of outlandish cartoons, garish sound effects and insincerely dramatic commentary." My frequent thoughts exactly, expressed so well.. Yes, absolutely wonderful videos I have just discovered. Thank you Mr. Butler.

@EarlLedden

6 жыл бұрын

I approach your presentations in the same way as Jon's children except that I'm a senior adult.

👍🏻Love this, love you’re Chanel 💞

Thank you sir.

Beautiful job!! Thank you.

Excellent videos on Relativity. Thank you!

Tremendously done.

I love your videos; ALL of them. I wish you were my physics teacher. Much love from East Africa.

Thank you such great knowledge in your videos god bless you 🙏

Thank you for your videos Mr.David. I really love them. Easy to understand and they are very precious for education.

Great news gravitational waves has been detected

Thank you for the amazing video books David! I have watched all 3 series. I am sure you know this but the gravitational waves were found just a couple of months after the release of this video.

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

Thanks. I'll have the GW update out shortly.

great video

THANK YOU FOR SHOWING THE MATH!! NOBODY ELSE EVER DOES!! So I can NEVER understand these things. I am an algebra & differential equations guy (PhD in differential algebra), not geometry.

@howfarawayisit

5 жыл бұрын

You are very welcome. Have you seen my first math video? The best way to find it is through howfarawayisit.com. Your feedback on that would be great.

@ThomasJr

4 жыл бұрын

mm, if you have a PhD in diff algebra, geometry shouldn't be that harsh for you.

God bless you! Thank you

You cover everything, that's awesome. With GR, some of the things that are too convoluted are not worth trying to follow, such as the field equations. But this is.

Amazing

Seen this one before but, like other ones in your series of video books, I enjoy seeing them over & over and, as with many things I see a 2nd, 3rd time, etc. I almost always find or notice things that I didn't catch the 1st time. I was away from my PC for 2-3 months - just not in the mood for it - did a lot of reading instead during that time. But, when I did check back in, I noticed that you had started with a new video book - "How Old is It?" - I see that there are only, I think, 3 of them, including its introduction. I don't think it's a complete one (or is it?) - my question: are you going to have any more of this series (the "How Old Is It?" video book)? Or, are you doing any other new stuff? I certainly hope so. Your stuff is some of the best work I've found on You Tube or just about any other source on the internet. Much more enlightening and not so dumbed down like so many of the space documentary shows that appear on You Tube - "The Universe" is one example: always the exact same talking heads chattering away, making simple analogizing about the subject the show is covering. I was able to take a couple of those, but not too long into it, I started getting tired of seeing the same people oversimplifying things. i mean, that's great for, say, a science class for 6th or 7 graders, but it starts to get grating for those who want something more challenging. This is why I love your series - they're very intelligent but they can also be followed quite easily - e.g, you don't need a PhD to understand. And I love your use of music - great pieces!! Hope to see more stuff from you in the future!!

@howfarawayisit

6 жыл бұрын

Kent, Thanks for your kind comment. I am working on the rest of the "Hot old is it" video book. It will come out over the next year (or longer if the research gets extended). In the mean time, I'll have the 2017 update out in January and 4K updates to the Milky Way segments.

18:15 also need to take into account leaving earth and the acceleration involved for that action. It would seem that centrifugal forces also equate to gravitational, and acceleration time dilation? So if the space ship used a slingshot return from Vega, then the centrifugal forces and gravitational forces would seem to have some cancellation of time dilation?

I wanted to say "thank you," and leave it at that. But that seems so inadequate in light of how much I, as an interested non-scientist, enjoyed your work. I enjoyed how you clarified the history & discovery of variable space and time (pre-Einstein). I think popular media misled me to believe that Einstein was the first to break with the presumptions of time and space as constants. I also appreciated how you included more of the details of the respective experiments. Finally, your explanation of the Gargantuan black hole was perfect, for me. So, THANK YOU!! (...still inadequate.)

how do you feel about halton arp ? and his theory and study show that different but seemingly connected objects have wildly different redhifts?

a side note . when using utube for knowledge i keep an old phone with an old version of utube, this version isnt ad compatible so as such i get uninterupted viewing, the downside to this is that posting is limited to a certain amount of characters, i normally just ,shorten, my words but this gives the impression of a preschooler lol,ican ifu prefer use proper English but span a question if needed over 2posts, whatever is easiest for yrself,im just glad i found yr channel and eager 2learn rAyZoR.

Now we found the gravitational waves. Yes!!

Thanks!

It is possible that the ecliptic, which contains lines similar to the magnetic field lines, around the straight current. The sun with two poles created an ecliptic plane containing concentric circles, similar to the magnetic field lines and that is the orbit of the planets.

Hello, May I congratulate you on a exquisite video book, the work gone into producing this must have taken some long hours burning the midnight oil. Question, if I was dragged over the event horizon feet first wouldn't I be stretched between my head and feet as I would be crossing this horizon at different times. If so I would not survive going into the black hole with or without a spacecraft. Thank you in advance. Sam

You are awesome

First of all, let me congratulate you on the wonderful work you have accomplished. And gravitational waves have been recently observed by the LIGO observatory. (Feb 2016). The question I have is, that will the acceleration caused by electric charges lead to time dilation as well? If I were a charged object in an electric field, will my clock tick slower? And if it does, should charge too be looked at as a distortion in space time? Thanks for taking time out to go through the comment, and for all your good work. :-)

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

+Professor Chaos LegionOfDoom Professor, In our example, the elevator is being accelerated by rocket power. The situation would be the same if electric charges were the cause of the acceleration. The gravitational effects are not dependent on the force that create the acceleration. Neither the rocket engine nor the electric charge in these examples would be considered a distortion of space-time in their own right. Does this answer your question?

THANKS bud

18:14 Here it would be interesting if you had told us how much energy it would've taken for her to accelerate to 99%c in terms of something that we're familiar with. Is that more energy than exists in a galaxy?

For the graphic at minute 12:06 - If the 2 clocks are in the elevator, both fixed in place relative to each other, wouldn't they both experience the exact same acceleration from the brackets that holds them in place? Doesn't that differ greatly from actually being at "different distances from a source of gravity?" Would the previous example of the "Falling constellation of balls" be a better representation? Both being fixed together in the elevator with one source of acceleration gives them both the same "gravitational" force vectors. No???

Mr Butler with my respect. I like very much how you explain about how far and how small is it. Interstellar it is one of my very favorite movie, i like the Interstellar because of story but as a scientifically i am 50% agree with movie. I like scien so i listen many different scientist but i like to listen you because your explanation +music and your very good. Thank you

@howfarawayisit

7 жыл бұрын

You're welcome. Thanks for the comment.

@shafikhan7571

7 жыл бұрын

any time sir

Great episode again. May I point out that Schwarzschild was German, therefore the pronounciation of his name is [ˈʃvaʁtsʃilt] (Shvarts - shield). It means black shield, literally.

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

+Arc Kocsog Thanks for the correction.

David u r the man. Ur teachings are so addictive by ur voice, how u teach and the love u have for Physics. I wish I was ur relative. Sorry bad joke!! How dare anyone put thumbs down to this, they have no class at all.

I enjoy your videos but the noise gate on your microphone is kind of distracting from your excellent narration.

at 13:00, I don't see why the simultanety plane would tilt. Both A and B and accelerating at the same rate, so there would be no way to know which one is closer to the "source" of gravity, so there would be no reason for A's clock to run slower.

@0626love

4 жыл бұрын

x-axis is measuring the closeness to the source of gravity on this graph

18:14 still this problem, if Vega is 25ly away, wouldn't the twin on earth have aged by at least 50 years during the time her traveling twin is able to get to Vega and back? How come she only aged 48 years? Oh, the 48 years is just the portion that matches the 70 days the traveling twin had been accelerating right?

They were found. Lol Love your videos doc

Hello, Mr. David Butler, my loving Universe Uncle. Sometimes, the Universe speaks to us at our Uncle in the Universe (sometimes by mathematics too). ✨

@dukaduka506

3 жыл бұрын

UNIVERSE UNCLE

Muy interesante 24-10-2018

. . . Oh blast, there is a problem at work that i have to go and attend, i kinda get a feel now how you yrself felt with yr career going oneway and yr passion another . . . i better go and see to the problem that pays the bills 1st, i guess im like most peeps,, overworked, underappreciated and a thirst for a world outside of my chosen field. i know its not going to be a small problem cos its my 1st break in 6weeks, i just hope ican atleast get started on yr vids tomorrow. spk to you soon,rAyZoR

If there is no fourth spatial dimension, does that mean that intrinsically curved space is an effect of the rate at which time passes near a gravitational body?

@howfarawayisit

4 жыл бұрын

I don't think so.

Suppose after the ship reached Vega, after looking around for a day, the twin takes off from Vega with the same acceleration but moving away from Earth for 35 days. For the deceleration coming into Vega, Earth was at the top of the gravity well. Now for the acceleration away from Vega (and away from Earth) Earth is at the bottom of the gravity well. Would this reverse the time dilation?

@massimoacerbis8138

5 жыл бұрын

Acceleration is causing time dilation No matter the direction And anyway to compare times the events must be in the Sam place ie the twins must. Meet

fantastic videos

16:58 Hi Mr. Butler, 1.6% is not that negligible. Would the predicted value be closer to the actual, if the metric used were more realistic and not the Schwarzschild metric? The Schwarzschild's metric must be an approximation in this case, right?

@howfarawayisit

4 жыл бұрын

This was a very good validation of the metric.

@ThomasJr

4 жыл бұрын

@@howfarawayisit Yes, it makes sense, even though statistically 1.6% is not a very small deviation (definitely not a 6 sigma).

David great videos thanks. Some questions on the formula for GTD - why is the whole GF on Vega used at 98m/s^2 and not the Net difference between that and Earth's 9.8m/s^2 ? If I understand this concept correctly only the net difference between the two fields will actually dilate time relatively? I also note that those two GFs are pulling in opposite directions, which suggests that some Calculus is required to correctly assess the whole of the transitionary periods throughout the voyage. I wonder if perhaps an Integral or Differential function of both "a" and "d" in the formula used (1 + ad/c^2) may give a more accurate appraisal of a true time dilation outcome? I'd be thrilled if you were able to clarify any of the above - albeit I have no idea how I'd hope to know if you did respond, perhaps an email at gswizz@live.com.au ? But I would appreciate any answer being posted here if possible? I'm sure I'm not the only one to ponder on this. Many thanks again for great videos.

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

+Garry Short Good question. The way I looked at it was that (from the twin on Earth's view) the clock on the ship went from ticking at one rate due to the ships velocity to ticking at a different rate due to the ships acceleration. During the process, the gravitational field on Earth remained constant. This gave me simplifying assumptions that simplify the equations. More complex (more accurate) analysis is possible, but it doesn't shed any new light on the basics. I'm glad you are enjoying the videos.

Quick question David, if the universe is expanding, does that include the Higgs Boson field? If it does, then like sound waves lose more energy as it travels through less air molicules, would light do the same thing? If this is true, would this be one of the reasons we can only see a "visible" universe? Because light travels at a finite speed, that would mean we have not seen light that is already billions of years old. That light contains information we have yet to see, perhaps the universe on its outer most edges, if I can call it that, will yeild information that might say the expansion has an end, and gravity has turned the expansion around? Is this possible? Your fan, snow.

@howfarawayisit

7 жыл бұрын

Light waves do lose energy as space expands. This is the cosmological redshift we use to see how far away distant galaxies are. And you are correct to assume this has an impact on how far we can see. There is light that has not and will not ever get to us. I am working on the Big Bang Cosmology video. It should be ready in a few months.

Einstein's elevator gedanken for the bending of a light beam doesn't work if we examine it closely. A proper application of Einstein's elevator gedanken tells us that a photon passing the Sun follows an S kind of traject, not a U type of traject. 1. The first problem is that according to a proper application of Einstein's silly elevator gedanken the bending of light approaching & brushing the Sun would be 0.438 arcsec, & when the light reaches Earth's orbit, on the far side of the Sun, the bending would be 0.875 arcsec, not Einstein's claimed 1.75 arcsec. The silly elevator gedanken gives us no more than the equivalent of the well known ballistic bending calculated by Soldner. The theoretical 1.75 arcsec is only obtained if including theoretical assumptions not existing in or near a theoretical elevator. This was obvious to me from the first. And i see that Paul Marmet pointed it out in a paper in 1999 -- Incompatibility between Einstein's General Relativity and the Principle of Equivalence. But i don’t want to go into any of that today. 2. Marmet (& everybody else) missed seeing another problem for Einstein. Marmet made the same mistake as Einstein. They both looked at a beam or a ray of light. Me myself i looked at the individual photons in the beam, & the photons told me that Einstein goofed. I usually think of a photon as being a cylinder, but today i will call it an arrow. Hence a pencil of light is a straight line of parallel arrows. If we look at individual photons in the pencil crossing the elevator then every photon/arrow is parallel to its initial alignment at all times. The pencil appears dead straight for an outside observer, at all times, no matter whether the elevator is stationary or moving or accelerating. So, the pencil of light crossing the elevator consists of say horizontal arrows. For an inside observer the pencil appears to bend down (the elevator is accelerating up), but the arrows nonetheless remain horizontal (for the inside observer)(& for the outside observer). Nextly we apply the elevator gedanken to a pencil passing the Sun. Now, Einstein was happy to use one elevator, & he was happy to use one pencil & one bend. But, lets look at our one pencil crossing millions of elevators, each accelerating radially away from the Sun. Each time a photon/arrow crosses an elevator its traject (ie the pencil) bends down, but the arrow retains its initial orientation. No matter how many elevators the arrow crosses it retains its initial orientation. The traject of an arrow can be drawn as a downwards bending arc, as the arrow approaches & reaches its closest point to the Sun. The arc curves upwards after the arrow passes the Sun. The 2 arcs form a kind of S curve. The arrow ends up flying parallel to its initial direction, but offset a distance (due to falling towards the Sun). At all times the arrow retains its initial orientation, for ever. The above describes a proper application of Einstein's silly elevator gedanken. Einstein didn’t know about photons. He merely looked at a ray/beam/pencil of light. And he came up with a U traject. No, his silly gedanken gives an S traject.

@atheistaetherist2747

Жыл бұрын

Now, if the photon/arrow was moving tangentially to the Sun as it passed (by definition), then we can draw a centerline passing throo the center of the Sun parallel to that tangent. A simple examination of the traject for an arrow shows that it can never cross the centerline. When or if the arrow eventually enters the last elevator, the elevator at or next to the centerline, the acceleration of the elevator will be parallel to the arrow. The arrow will never get to the far wall. Or if u like it gets to the far wall at infinity. But it can never cross the centerline. So, the arrow traject bends towards the Sun on approach, in a ballistic way, & then is parallel to the Sun at closest approach, & after passing the Sun the traject must reverse, such that the arrow never reaches the centerline. Hence the traject follows an S kind of traject. The arrow at some time reaches a point of closest approach to the centerline, & then diverges away & leaves the centerline, & much later its traject becomes nearnuff parallel to its original traject, albeit displaced sideways towards the Sun. Hence, according to a proper application of Einstein's elevator gedanken, it will be difficult to see an Einsteinian Ring if we are located at/near the point of convergence. The point of convergence is the place where the pencil of light entering your eye is propagating parallel to a line drawn/running from your eye to the center of the say super massive galaxy. At/near the point of convergence we might see a ring, but it will appear to be at/near the center of the super massive galaxy, hence if the super massive galaxy is very bright the ring will be difficult or impossible to see. And, according to a proper application of Einstein's elevator gedanken, there can be no visible ring effect if we are located very far beyond the point of convergence. Here the pencils of light are very much diverging from each other. According to a proper application of Einstein's elevator gedanken, there can be a visible ring effect if we are located closer than the point of convergence. Here the pencils of light are converging. But, the ring might be inside the area of the super massive galaxy (ie difficult to see). The above wordage of mine is not meant to describe what actually happens to light passing the Sun - it merely describes a proper application of silly Einstein's silly elevator gedanken (re his silly bending of light).

@RtB68

5 ай бұрын

Breathtaking.

Great video, but there is one slight issue: at 5:48 it says "Haydes" star cluster when it should be "Hyades" Star Cluster.

@howfarawayisit

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the catch.

Tell like it is! Way to class the place up a bit. =)

do one on possible faster then light travel theory

Muy interesqnte 6-12-2018

Why was time not slowed for the earth twin? She was accelerating at one g the whole time.

There are no tidal effects in the accelerated elevator if it isn't near a large body.

I have a question. if gravity causes curvature in space-time, does electromagnetism also cause a different type of curvature in space-time? Also, is there a such thing as a magnetic hole that has a magnetic field so powerful that anything with a charge will not be able to escape it, even travelling at light speed? It would be the same thing as a black hole, but instead of infinite gravity, it would have infinite magnetism.

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

+Jatatan Globustead EM depends on the permittivity and permeability of empty space. Gravity is about the curvature of empty space. Quite different things in my mind. The matter in a black hole can have charge and be spinning. So strong magnetic fields are expected. But such a field has no effect on uncharged particles.

Someone please tell me what is BELOW (opposite) side of a black hole..... i.e., if I could "fly" through space and look from UNDERNEATH (on opposite side) of a black hole, what would I see?? Do I see a big bang coming out or see the SINGULARITY? Do I see the bottom of a black PAN? Or, are things also being sucked inside the hole on both (opposite) sides of the black hole?? No one talks about a view from (the other side) below a black hole... and WHY not ?? !!! In other words, since the Milk Way is a "flattened" spiral disk, and If I fly on one side (below) the Milk Way galaxy, and YOU fly on the other side (above), and we both go towards the CENTER of the Milk Way to LOOK AT THE BLACK HOLE, then on one side you'd see everything falling INTO the black hole. But I would see the OTHER SIDE of the center of Milk Way spiral (below), would I ALSO see everything falling INTO the black hole... OR would I see things coming OUT ??

@Scott-eo7lj

5 жыл бұрын

You're thinking of a black hole as a 2 dimensional object because of the photos and diagrams they show. it's not. Below, behind, to the left, to the right of the black hole will look the same. Just as though a planet or a star is a 3 dimensional object, so is a black hole. It is not flat.

29:03 "As yet, gravitational waves have not been found." This dates the video. "The gravitational waves were detected on September 14, 2015 at 5:51 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time (09:51 UTC) " goo.gl/JQPc56

@howfarawayisit

7 жыл бұрын

I released the video on Gravitational Waves last month. Take a look and let me know what you think.

that Robroy music?

Why is a black hole referred to as a flat disk. Wouldn't it have spherical shape like an star with a mass so large it would be collecting light and matter.

@giuseppe3010

5 жыл бұрын

Black hole is not a FLAT disk.... The galaxy has a relative "flat" shape, but is not really flat ... it's billions of light yrs thick !!

@massimoacerbis8138

5 жыл бұрын

The exacts shape of a black hole is described by the metric equation Exaple schwartschild metric I remember kip Thorne stating the for space dimensions a black hole is a perfect sphere And when modified by absorbing an external object the perfect sphere is reached again at the speed of light

@massimoacerbis8138

5 жыл бұрын

We have to always remember that we are dealing with space time hence 4 dimensions metric

When we don't understand queries come, then we understand but then next question come, What i think understanding and not understanding its like a stair sometime climbing whole stair and some time we dont have to.

Einstein was a god among men. I hope we get more anomalies like him.

@jataim4197

3 жыл бұрын

I think that as well! :) But after u go and see what Newton did and compare the two? Newton makes Einstein,(and well basically everyone else?), pale in comparison. I think Newton was seriously "Divinely" touched-if there is such a thing???? But then again I don't believe in the conventional 'god' that most religions regurgitate so??? But yes-Einstein is 'Da BOMB!' (no pun intended ;)

with yr twin paradox what if the spaceship didnt have to stop and turn around, so instead it used an eliptical route back to earth at a constant speed.

@howfarawayisit

6 жыл бұрын

The elliptical route involves less gravitational field creation, but for a longer time. The results are the same.

@massimoacerbis8138

5 жыл бұрын

Acceleration is a modification of velocity Y ou can keep speed constant and modify direction It is anyway acceleration and it causes time dilation

@Scott-eo7lj

5 жыл бұрын

The speed at which the spacecraft is traveling is creating the time dilation so instead of the gravity of Vega adding to the dilation the speed and the time spent traveling at that speed will equal out to the same dilation that would occur if she went to vega and turned around.

The base of general relativity is very simple: light speed does not change.

gravitational waves discovered

"if you watch the movie again" I see you know my thoughts on the movie already.

..well I guess most of us know that gravitational waves were detected 14.09.2015...another clue that points to the existence of the graviton...

I'm confused. If time is slower near a large mass, then why is it those that travel in space age less? And those on earth are really old when the space traveler returns, like in the movie Interstellar. Shouldn't it be the opposite? If time is moving faster for the space traveler, shouldn't he or she be aging quicker? Can someone help me to understand this?

@howfarawayisit

2 жыл бұрын

Time appears to slow down in a reference frame moving fast with respect to the observer. And time appears to slow down for a clock in a gravitational field that is stronger than the field in the observer's frame.

@primemagi

Жыл бұрын

in fiction everything possible. picture you and friend are hungry. you eat chocolate (high gravity) and friend eat marshmallow (low gravity) you feel full and stop. your friend has plenty room for low density marsh mallow. ageing is result of matter''s interaction with gravity. low gravity mean slower and high gravity means faster.

Given E = mc^2, then how does this equation relate to black holes? If E = mc^2 does not apply to black holes, is this due to the nature of space-time of a black hole? That is, how does space-time relate to energy and matter in E = mc^2, if at all? If energy/mass is being concentrated into warped space-time, how is space-time explained in the equation E = mc^2 ?? Black holes may be extremely cold (near absolute zero) to us from the outside, but if the gravity of the black hole swallows up all matter and energy, then how do we know that all that mass and energy inside, which cannot escape the event horizon and is trapped inside, is not in fact extremely hot inside? How do we know what the temperature is just inside of the event horizon? If there is no radiation emitted by the black hole, then what are the astrophysical jets that come from the black hole?

@howfarawayisit

3 жыл бұрын

We know very little about what goes on inside a black hole. E=mc^2 is just a conversion formula from mass to energy.

@reginaldbauer5243

3 жыл бұрын

@@howfarawayisit Let me rephrase it in a more simple way: Is E=mc^2 valid with black holes? How do black holes convert mass into energy? Articles about LIGO discovery state that some percentage of mass from black hole mergers is converted into energy, resulting in a black hole that is smaller than the sum of the original mergers. They found two black holes - of 36 and 29 solar masses - merging together to create a new black hole of 62 solar masses. Where did the other 3 solar masses (about 5% of the total system's mass) go? Into the energy of gravitational waves? So, it isn’t that the black holes are losing mass but that the total amount of energy in spacetime is transforming from one form (in two well-separated, unbound masses) to another form (a single, tightly bound mass plus gravitational radiation). How does this process happen? If in the very last second of the merger is where most energy is released (in the form of gravitational waves), then these gravitational waves are pure energy (not particles of any kind)? It is accepted that nothing escapes black holes. So: how is energy radiated from black hole mergers? How are these gravitational waves able to escape black holes? Thank you very much for your videos. The best space channel out there.

@frankdimeglio8216

2 жыл бұрын

@@reginaldbauer5243 THE CLEAR, TOP DOWN, AND BALANCED MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF THE FACT THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY IS GIVEN BY THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA: Consider the man who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. The Earth constitutes the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE in BALANCED and UNIVERSAL relation to what is the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! (The sky is BLUE, AND THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) Time DILATION ultimately proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. By Frank DiMeglio

@alexburke1899

2 жыл бұрын

@@reginaldbauer5243 I would think the 3 solar masses could easily have been ejected in jets or gas. There’s a talk on the Hubble telescope channel about BH’s and the speaker showed some pictures of jets that shot clear across their galaxies and several thousand light years. This leads to star formation or sometimes has the opposite affect blowing the material out of the galaxy. They also emit gas upon collapse so I assume some of that collapse loss happens with 2 BH’s.

i dont get why Einstein is given so much prestige particularly when theory of relativity already existed and he didn't create it or come up with it. he only did what any smart person could have eventually done i.e. work on the previously known data and make adjustments to it so it may be additionally corrected... its not as if he perfected it and we can call it Fact of relativity... its still a theory at the end of the day. Sure his additions brought it closer to completion but all his work is based upon previously studied and already established works of another person and its that person who actually came up with relativity we should give precedence to! Respect!

@howfarawayisit

4 жыл бұрын

Your argument has some merit when it comes to special relativity. But general relativity was new - totally new and revolutionary. One one had thought that space itself was curved.

@billyjoejimbob75

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah. I've never heard it called Germ Fact or Music Fact. It's still Germ theory and Music theory. Not like either of those were proven.

@valoriel4464

4 жыл бұрын

@@billyjoejimbob75 😉

When i think about fast i just look simply two different watch like one big clock and one small both gives same time but two different speed. Then there much more example i am sure

18:09 for the life of me I cannot get 48 out of the gravitational time dilation formula.

@howfarawayisit

4 жыл бұрын

convert ly to meters and c units are actually m/s

@nadavdanieli

4 жыл бұрын

@@howfarawayisit I did, closest I can get is 49.58. Anyway this suggest that we will observe the acceleration process to take different time than it took near earth Using the following equations -(forgot where I found them)- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_acceleration#Acceleration_in_(1+1)D α = w/Δt = η/Δτ = Δy/x η = sinh⁻¹ w = tanh⁻¹ v/c = ±cosh⁻¹ y I get ~248 days for the acceleration process as observed by earth, and ~93 days as observed by the rocket.

@howfarawayisit

4 жыл бұрын

@@nadavdanieli I would like you to post this on the hfaii wiki for further discussion. howfarawayisit.fandom.com/wiki/Blog:Recent_posts Thanks.

The film needs to be updated :) "Gravitation waves were not found yet"

@tumbleddry2887

Жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/kZOrmMl-g8iwo6Q.html Here you go....updated!

@jasonhollister7497

Жыл бұрын

........................... "this "Democe" = "TWISTED",for ( "AMERICA" ) !!GO,GO,GO,GO "REPULIN" ....& "REPULIN" "POWER" FOR "AMERICA" ........!!

Mr. Butler sir, i ashamedly admit that i posed you a question as atest .A test you past in everyway,the speed of yr reply, was awesome sir. Yr answer,,i had to ask you something that i already knew,, yr answer was spot on,finally the information you gave was precise and str8 to the point. Now sir would you allow me the honour of subbing yr channel in my pursuit of knowledge,my asking of this is because ido know that iwill have many questions 2trouble yr time with.Thanks. rAyZoR.

@howfarawayisit

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your note. If you would like updates, feel free to subscribe. Either way, I try answer questions when I can.

You state that the halfway point is the interesting point where the ship begins decelerating at 98 m/s squared. The ship then comes to a halt and reverses in 35 days continuing acceleration for 35 days to regain .99c. How is this the halfway point since the ship has travelled more than 12.5 years to reach halfway ?? If we decelerate at the halfway point at 98 ms squared, we will slow to 0 but we won't nearly reach Vega. In resolving the time difference due to acceleration (pseudo-gravitational field?) you use the difference as (1+ ad/c squared). Why is d = 25 light years, the distance to Vega? If we travelled to a star 50 light years away we would still require 70 days to decelerate and accelerate and this is the period used to resolve the twin paradox. Why isn't d the distance travelled during the 70 day acceleration.

@howfarawayisit

8 жыл бұрын

Good catch. It is not at the half-way point that deceleration begins. The point is that no matter when the deceleration occurs, it is the reason for the distinction between the two twin's observations. Thanks.

@troymcelreath244

8 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the reply. I truly enjoyed all of your videos.But, I guess the twin paradox must remain, somewhat, paradoxical to me. I can wrap my head around the conflict of how both twins think the others clock is running slower during constant velocity; their view of simultaneous differs. I can also grasp how an accelerating frame of motion makes the time slow down and differ for only the travelling twin since the instantaneous velocity change is unique to them. But, the pseudo gravitational force necessary to counterbalance the rockets thrust during deceleration (allowing the traveler to assume they are stationary) and how this pseudo-gravity affects the stay at home twin; greatly affecting time 25 light years away escapes me (25 years later since no message can go faser than c). But this is what the t' = (1+ad/c**2) equation means if d is the distance between the twin during the 70 days of acceleration.

new videos please

question : lets say the girl on earth fires up a telescope and sets up a recording video of her sister and eventually u get a 50 year movie at what year in the movie the girl will reach 99% of speed of light and what happens in the movie afterwardss at what year in the movie u see the sister reaching vega is she going to go veeeeery verrry slowly on vega and then almost instantly come back at the last hour of the movie?

@napo3393

Жыл бұрын

hmmmm thinking about it i bet she will start slowing down and come to almost stop at half way point wich will arrive at 50 years in the movie so instead of seeing 25 year and 25 year back u see a 50 year slowing down spaceship then at the last couple of months u see her coming back at almost 100 times the speed of light (??????) and almost arriving instantly with a journey of lets say less than a month from vega? does that make sense? i guess the only way to go faster than light is in the movies

@napo3393

Жыл бұрын

k i think igot it the movie will show the spaceship accelarating to 99% of speed of light until after about 50 days or something it will reach it and then it will start slowing down to a complete stop until it reaches vega and at this point the movie will hit 50 years and then it will start accelarating and the movie will show the spaceship traveling at 100 times the speed of light so it will take just 2 months to come to earth but thats gonna be slowing down journey again in the same sense until it reaches earth system where the 100c will be reduced to only 0.99c. and then some 20 days for slowing back to normal speeds and done i wonder how the movie will portrait something traveling at such speeds. assuming a movie can show infinite frames per second are we gonna see a spaceship that will almost be flat like 1cm small ?