This is the beginning of a really good channel

@chemicallystimulated476

3 жыл бұрын

Wait i thought this was a 1M+ subbed channel before seeing your comment

@madscientist347

2 жыл бұрын

I was here at 51k subs

@bal7530

2 жыл бұрын

But why?

@davidvojnickij2121

2 жыл бұрын

@@jingomcbright3687 bro?

@msdrks1

2 жыл бұрын

@@chemicallystimulated476 it deserves it

The last statement made my day - "If you feel time is slipping away the best way to slow it down is try to go to different paths and accelerate yourself and constantly have new experiences." I am just about to change my job and move to a different organization. However I'm a bit worried and anxious about how comfortable I am here and how it would turn out there but nonetheless I had the feeling of time passing by and I'm not able to do anything new or make any progress in life. After hearing this last sentence I'm assured once again that I made the right decision. 🙏

@neelroy2918

2 жыл бұрын

All the best. Use that statement to prepare for unforeseen things too. Only difference is you wont have control over it. But remember equivalence principle - as long you have acceleration it's okay. Doesn't matter _what_ gave that acceleration;-)

@liriodosvales2009

2 жыл бұрын

All the best for you.

@prateepdasgupta

2 жыл бұрын

@@neelroy2918 Thanks! That is a comforting statement as well

@dom85ross

2 жыл бұрын

It puts me at ease knowing it’s been a month since you wrote that

@prateepdasgupta

2 жыл бұрын

@@dom85ross Thanks and I have joined the new organization and things turned out to be quite good actually 😊

In Interstellar, Miller's planet isn't only deep in Gargantua's gravity well, but it's also orbiting at the innermost stable orbit, meaning its orbital velocity is relativistic. So you get a combination of the extreme curvature close to Gargantua's event horizon causing time dilation, combined with special relativistic time dilation of the whole planet orbiting at a significant fraction of c, bodies in orbit are in freefall and don't "feel" forces, which is why we don't feel a pull towards the earth, we just feel the earth pushing up against us. You don't feel centripetal force keeping your car on the bend in the road, you feel the car pushing back against your inertia as you go around the bend, you're pushed inward by the tires acting on the axle through the car chassis, but it feels like you're pulled outward by a fictitious centrifugal force. In Miller's planet's case, there is no force on the planet, but the relative motion to Gargantua and the other bodies results in a slower clock and the high curvature from proximity to Gargantua add together, but not the extreme gravitational "forces" so the only force felt by Coop, Brand and Doyle is the surface of Miller's planet pushing up against it's own curvature within the curvature of Gargantua, Romily is orbiting Gargantua at a farther orbit where the Endurance isn't moving at relativistic speeds, and is high enough in Gargantua's gravity well to experience 7 years for every hour that the Ranger's crew spends on Miller's planet. The only inaccuracies in the film were the lack of doppler shifting, since the prograde side of Miller's planet would reflect visible light back in x-rays and the retrograde side would be reflecting microwaves, same for the accretion disk. Other than that, everything is accurate.

@crowbrocaw

2 жыл бұрын

I read this twice and I still am confused But thanks anyways!

@markzambelli

2 жыл бұрын

Wow... beautifully put, thanks bud.

@Thebaconmurderer

2 жыл бұрын

So in all intense purposes what do you think it would look like to the observer on the endurance, and even better if he had someway of recording the said situation. Especially since if the gravity well was so intense that it could cause such a significant change in time yet hardly move in retrospect to the ship which is outside of the orbit.

@markzambelli

2 жыл бұрын

@@Thebaconmurderer 'To all intents and purposes' if you looked away from Gargantua you would see everything sped up (planets rotating about their axis more quickly and revolving around the Blackhole more quickly for example) and possibly somewhat blueshifted as you occupy a region that is slowed down to the outside universe... you are after all situated somewhere 'down' the 'funnel' of Gargantua's gravity 'well'. Looking towards Gargantua you would see things slowed down and redshifted to varying degrees.

@petermiao8970

2 жыл бұрын

Apart from that, everything except love-is-the-only-force-known-to-man-that-can-transcend-the-boundaries-of-space-and-time is accurate!

On average a human being has three billion heartbeats in his lifetime. And he'll have those heartbeats whether he's in a gravitational well, or being constantly accelerated, or just drifting in intergalactic space. An observer in another inertial frame of reference would simply see whether his pulse seemed speeded up or slowed down relative to his own. (Assuming both measure the same heart rate in their own frame).

@DeadDave666

2 жыл бұрын

This comment helped me understand it. Thanks.

@teamconspiracy

Жыл бұрын

Oh wow same here, very simply put

Keep up this sort of content. KZread needs less nonsense and more content that relates to reality.

Another way of putting this is that if a film strip is playing at 24 frames per second, and a DVD is playing at 30 frames per second for a 2 hour movie. Then ultimately, the 30 fps movie will have more frames that a 24 frame movie, even though they are both the same over all play time. If you were "walking" the distances frame by frame, the 30 fps journey would seem longer, even though it takes the same amount of time, because you are taking more steps to get to the same point. From your perspective, time slowed down.

@slinelol

2 жыл бұрын

that is a great exapmle I'm gonna totally steal and credit to some randome person on a youtube comment. This explanation will help some people out IMENSLY

@ironzombi

2 жыл бұрын

This is such a good way to visualise it!

@Michelino_M5

2 жыл бұрын

Uhm, would it feel longer? Aren't you "walking" a bit less between the 30fps frames than you are between the 24fps frames, precisely because two 24fps frames are further apart in time than two 30fps frames? You're just subdividing time into different amounts of varying size "brackets", this doesn't have anything to do with relativity, and it's a false analogy. What you're describing is more akin to Achilles and the Tortoise, or to Supertasks.

@slinelol

2 жыл бұрын

@@Michelino_M5 This analogy is more about the "feeling" part imo. Maybe to put it in a different way. Do you know the feeling when you're driving down a road by bike (or car, but I personally have it more on a bike) and stretches of industrial area feel shorter than stretches of individual housing even though they are the same length? I think this is because our brain is registering more and it feels like there is more space to cross because on the on side are 10 buildings and on the other side only one. In a smiliar manner the 30fps movie "feels" longer (and is longer if you would lay it out frame by frame) than the 24fps movie, eventhough they have the same runtime.

@Michelino_M5

2 жыл бұрын

@@slinelol Ok sure, but then I could also say that a good analogy to general relativity is this: When I sleep, time seems to skip from the moment I fall asleep, to the moment I wake again, while if I stay awake all night, time goes slower. This doesn't have anything to do with relativity, but (according to you) since it's more about the "feeling" part it still holds. An analogy is only any good when you're making an apples to apples comparison, and how exactly two movies playing at different framerates are supposed to be some relativistic phenomenon is beyond me. It's like saying that Earth is attracted to the Sun in a way that's analogous to the action of gluons. Those are two entirely different things. Also, no, the 30fps movie is not longer if you "lay it out frame by frame". What does that mean? You take every frame, you print them to paper, then you put them one next to the other, and then say "they cover a longer distance, therefore the movie is longer"? It's like saying that since a movie in .mp4 is 2 GB, but the same movie in raw format is 2 TB, the movie in raw format is longer. That's even farther away from a reasonable comparison.

I actually can't believe this video only has 200 views

@ButWhySci

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the kind words, I still think I have room to improve and hopefully you can enjoy it along the way. I'm really excited about my next video, it's more in my field of expertise.

@michaeldamolsen

4 жыл бұрын

3 days later, I am viewer number 2344 :)

@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885

3 жыл бұрын

@@ButWhySci this vid is awesome. thanks

@goofyfoot2001

3 жыл бұрын

would like to travel into the chicks britches

@rudolphguarnacci197

3 жыл бұрын

It's up to 15k. Has the increase in views improved or have had a positive effect on your life?

When the police stop me for driving at 90mph in a 70mph limit I will use this video to explain that they might just be using a different frame of reference to me.

its funny how light going faster is absolutely impossible but the time itself slowing down is completelly fine

@macon8638

Жыл бұрын

Ikr 😭

@AMC2283

Жыл бұрын

Time is relative precisely because c is constant

@stewiesaidthat

Жыл бұрын

@@AMC2283 time itself does not slow down. 'c' is not constant otherwise GPS satellites wouldn't work.

6:30 time slows to allow the clock to think about how much buffering is needed? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on the nobel prize for that theory...

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

It would difference in the clocks of the accelerated and inertial frames. The accelerated clock is slower so it adds time - the buffer.

That was a great video. Watched it twice to make sure I could kind of understand it. Thanks, dude

i love your explanations the hypothetical scenarios + 3D animations really work for me

I never understood time dilation until now. I knew what it was but couldn’t grip a basic understanding of the why. You’re a great teacher

0:04 I wish I could be there with my father. So many things I never understand, so many times I failed express my deepest emotions. I love you dad & still miss you.

@sidviscous5959

2 жыл бұрын

but why did you drink and hit me?

@SkinsFirstGeneration

2 жыл бұрын

wait wtf are you two talking about?

@Pravin.Shidore

2 жыл бұрын

@@sidviscous5959 it's nothing to do with me with any sort.

@Michelino_M5

2 жыл бұрын

@@SkinsFirstGeneration this is some Theater of the Absurd level of incoherence to context lmao what does 0:04 have to do with anything

Love your work. Everyone always tries to explain time dilation in terms of the difference between observable clocks and sort of just add "time slows down at relatiivistic speeds" as a footnote. But you showed a hard experiment that demonstrates the principle perfectly. Keep explaining Samwell Tarly. :)

@judethaddeus9856

2 жыл бұрын

Everyone learns differently,

Very good video mate. One thing, though: the "computer analogy" has something which breaks the fondamental symmetry two reference frames have.

@AfricanLionBat

2 жыл бұрын

How so

@frankdimeglio8216

2 жыл бұрын

@@AfricanLionBat WHY AND HOW THE CLEAR, TOP DOWN, ULTIMATE, AND BALANCED MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF THE FACT THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY IS GIVEN BY THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA: Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. 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 !!! SO, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Moreover, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. 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 !!!) Accordingly, 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. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. Think. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Great !!! SO, 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 E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. 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 (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great !!!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense. MAGNIFICENT !!!! By Frank DiMeglio

@xela4854

2 жыл бұрын

@@frankdimeglio8216 WHY are you WRITING LIKE THIS?

This has got to be one of the best visual explanations I've ever seen. Please make more of these physics videos!

@Youtube_Stole_My_Handle_Too

2 жыл бұрын

This is the dumbest explanation I have ever seen. The analogy doesn't give rise to insight and is flawed in how it explain the mechanism for what makes time go slower.

@jaredf6205

2 жыл бұрын

I disagree, it wasn’t helpful and i feel like it’s not even correct.

@johnbrah364

2 жыл бұрын

@@jaredf6205 same I'm so confused still like the time it takes for someone to get from one point back is the same time you'll have to wait for them

@macon8638

Жыл бұрын

@@johnbrah364 if you want elaborate on what you don’t get and I could try explain it

This is one of the best explanations I’ve ever seen

@CosmicNomadis22

4 жыл бұрын

Indeed👏🏾... and this is like the 10th video I'm watching. Glad it's my last😌

Underrated channel, glad the algorithm sent you to me.

Outstanding video. Well done!

0:01 Best part of the video

@LALEL-yt

2 жыл бұрын

Most beautiful woman I've ever seen

In the smallest clock, the atom, the electron has to adjust it's path as the video describes how time flow changes. With a higher velocity, or in high gravity, the electron has to adjust it's orbit in the atom. To adjust for the electron's behavior, maintaining the constant speed of C, the "clock" has to slow down by widening the orbital path of the electron. Mass is actually stretched out like a raindrop, or a parabolic orbit. Reaching the boundaries of the speed of C, or the event horizon of a black hole, the electrons separate from nucleus and the electrons orbit the black hole just outside the event horizon, as the protons and neutrons fall into the singularity. A black hole is actually an atomic structure which amassed such a nucleus that it has exceeded normal boundaries for chemistry. It's stability is in it's unopposable gravity. The constant C suggests that the event horizon of a black hole is the boundary of electron orbit. You don't hang in infinitely slowed time at the edge of a black hole. Only your frame of reference for time slows down. Which means, before you know it, you turn into plasma as your electrons separate on their own journey.

@hubbyhaqq9802

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you. Best reasoning I've been able to find

@fugitive6549

2 жыл бұрын

I always wondered how time dilation occurs in the microscopic level but everyone seems to use the same argument. Could you please elaborate on what you are saying or refer me to a specific chapter of a book or link a website or article or a video where it explains this phenomena thoroughly and leaves no questions to be asked because I have found all these explanations in these videos unsatisfying and incomplete.

@enjerth78

2 жыл бұрын

@@fugitive6549 I'm just using my imagination to work a model from what I know. I don't find the video a satisfying explanation, either.

@kevincloud574

6 ай бұрын

​@@enjerth78look up the KZreadr floatheadphysics and check out his explanations he tried to make it intuitive understanding since the reason for time dilation is physical. Since time doesn't exist and the universe is in constant motion I believe that the phrase "spacetime" itself is counterintuitive. I believe that they tried to help by combining both concepts but really there's only one. When is honesty less of it's own thing and just another way of saying where.

I love the animations that you put into the videos

This was really good, I always struggled to understand why time dilation occurred! Great explanation!

@phall7031

9 ай бұрын

I found it easier to visualize a ball being bounced on a moving train. On the train, it just goes up and down. Seen from the side of the tracks by a stationary observer, the ball has a horizontal component in addition to the vertical, therefore, travels a longer distance.

I didn’t do nearly enough drugs to be watching this at 10p right before bed.

i don't understand how Fred moving the car slower in a straight line to make it a 5 second trip is the same thing, but i think im just missing something lol

@irok1

2 жыл бұрын

The shortest path between two points is a straight line, basically. You've overcomplicated

@crateer

2 жыл бұрын

Same. Like, he had to drive slower for the car to move from A to B in 5 seconds. What does this have to do with time dilation haha

@irok1

2 жыл бұрын

@@crateer He was moving slower, therefore the speed of the photon was not pushed farther, leading to less time dilation

@smileyp4535

2 жыл бұрын

@@irok1 he was moving slower, yes, and the photon bounced the same amount of times yes, but he was moving SLOWER (and I know that that leads to time dilation of an insignificant amount) but I'm still confused. He wasn't moving at the same speed he was moving slower therefore the photon moved less distance in the same amount of time

@irok1

2 жыл бұрын

@@smileyp4535 The photon moved the same distance in the same relative time. As the frame of reference speeds up to an outside observer, the photon must not travel a further distance in the same time. To fix this, time dilates. Time is sped up for that frame of reference from an outside perspective, meaning that the photon travels more in more time

Absolutely fantastic video!

Awesome, this channel will go to the top!

@juliomaldonado7581

4 жыл бұрын

I agree.

My understanding is that the closer you get to a black hole, the faster your time will pass relative to those outside. I think it is exponential so that by the time you hit the event horizon, you will be stopped in time from an external point of view and from your point of view the universe will fizzle out into the end times what ever that may be.

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

A distant observer would see objects freeze. But if you were hovering like the space ship, you would see a lot of light before it red shifted too much. So, you would see the object fall into the black hole (kind of).

@skillfulfighter23

2 жыл бұрын

Well the event horizon doesn't mark the end there, that's just the point that light can't escape. Time still goes on, although slower, but the universe doesn't fizzle out at your reference just yet. Only when you reach the singularity does that (perhaps) happen

@rishithkumar1969

2 жыл бұрын

Time will stop at the space-time singularity in the centre......not at the event horizon

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

@@skillfulfighter23 According to Dr Matt Dowd at PBS Spacetime, time and space flip roles at the event horizon. The Einstein field equations demonstrate this phenomenon, but we have no idea what it physically means.

@barbarianlife

2 жыл бұрын

Apparently am wrong. See the end of this excellent video: kzread.info/dash/bejne/ZqaI2JuwptnHpJs.html

Time can behave like an illusion, your perspective determines a large portion of your ideas about time. It's set in one direction (I owe someone money) for sure but it's able to appear to speed up to slow down but that's the flow of your being in relation to the flow of what's being judged.

@frankdimeglio8216

2 жыл бұрын

THE FULL UNDERSTANDING OF TIME (AND TIME DILATION), AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity: INSTANTANEITY is fundamental to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience (in and with TIME), AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.) THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are CLEARLY E=MC2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!! TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Balance and completeness go hand in hand. E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! Comparatively, consider the man who IS in outer "space". Great. AGAIN, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !! AGAIN, TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves in what is a BALANCED FASHION that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE. E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE !!! NOW, carefully consider that the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!! Great !!! "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is balanced electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE !!! By Frank DiMeglio

@imsorryyoutube6774

2 жыл бұрын

I want my fucking money, by the way.

Such a good video, i always would get confused thinking that surly its just the way we measure time that is the issue but you have explained it way more clearly than any of my teachers/other youtube vids have in the past.

I like your channel's name. I immediately Subscribed.

“This looks interesting. I would love to learn about the intricacies of time dilation.” …. “Stock footage tits!”

So is that why time on work passes slowly but when im playing videogames it passes faster than speed of light?

@desmondwatson9079

2 жыл бұрын

Vsauce made a good video about this specific topic.

Really a good way of explaining

So just because light “can’t” travel faster than its maximum velocity the universe has to alter every other scientific law to keep from speeding tickets?

@roos698

2 жыл бұрын

Love this comment

There is a direct cause and effect between the passage of time and being in class, going to the dentist, and doing your taxes. In each case, time is like, well, just slow all clocks down to 1/10th for the aforementioned activities

It’s a well known fact that it is essential for a KZread-video to catch the users attention in the first few seconds in the video, a technique this creator made good use of.

If Fred knew what an apex was he'd be even faster :) Nice work!

Keep going with this great job!! You are in another level!!

Dude... did I just finally understand time dilation? And what is your channel doing having so very few subscribers? I just wanna say thanks for this video bro keep it up! +1 subscriber

Time dilation is the main reason I believe in simulation theory. I had this idea the first time I learned about time dilation.

@eddieluna2439

2 жыл бұрын

Care to elaborate? I'd love to hear your idea

@OBtheamazing

2 жыл бұрын

@@frankdimeglio8216 😂

@frankdimeglio8216

2 жыл бұрын

WHY EINSTEIN'S EQUATIONS PREDICT THAT SPACE IS EXPANDING OR CONTRACTING IN AND WITH TIME, AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=MA ON BALANCE: Ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL to the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience, AS E=MC2 is clearly 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. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is clearly F=ma ON BALANCE. ACCORDINGLY, the known mathematical unification of Einstein's equations AND Maxwell's equations (given the addition of A FOURTH SPATIAL DIMENSION) is proven and explained. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. 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 (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground ON BALANCE !!! Great. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. (Notice the term c4 from Einstein's equations.) It is all CLEARLY proven. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. This is the ultimate mathematical unification of physics/physical experience. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. I have truly unified physics/physical experience. Consider THE MAN who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE. (Notice that THE DOME of a person's eye is ALSO VISIBLE.) OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND DESCRIPTION) is improved in the truly superior mind. Indeed, the ability of thought to describe OR reconfigure sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT IS SIMILAR TO sensory experience. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. In fact, I have also clarified, clearly identified, and corrected the limited notion of curved "SPACE" !!! MY BALANCED UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS SURPASSES ALL OTHERS. E=mc2 IS F=ma. A galaxy is basically FLAT. Think !!! GREAT. Notice the black space of what is THE EYE as well. ON BALANCE, it ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. (Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is F=ma ON BALANCE.) ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The Sun AND the Earth are F=ma AND E=mc2, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!! LOOK at what is the BLUE SKY. The EARTH is ALSO blue. NOW, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE !!!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Beautiful !!! BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This CLEARY explains F=ma AND E=mc2 ON BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! ACCORDINGLY, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution. It is fully, CLEARLY, and consistently proven ON BALANCE !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma (ON BALANCE); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. So, carefully consider what is the speed of light (c). Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (and WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS E=MC2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is clearly gravity ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. I have also CLEARLY explained ON BALANCE why the planets will move away very, very, very slightly in relation to what is THE SUN. SO, BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand; AS it ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense !!! E=MC2 is F=ma ON BALANCE. Finally, carefully consider what is the speed of light (c) !!! NOW, ON BALANCE, carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground as well !!! Great !!! E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. By Frank DiMeglio

@OBtheamazing

2 жыл бұрын

@@frankdimeglio8216 😂 What a clown.

@ExistenceUniversity

6 ай бұрын

How has your brain gone from "time is relative" to "I am a computer program"? Reasonable arguments only.

Hey Nice content! How did you make the animations?

I have experienced extreme time dilation.. It was when I was at school. Double maths lesson, all of Friday afternoon. Time went SOOOOOO SLOOOOWLYYYY!!!!!

This is a well-meaning video but unfortunately it suffers from many conceptual problems about how the theory of relativity works: 1. In the example of the rocket shooting a bullet into the glass panel, you said that we don't have a defined frame of reference and hence multiple outcomes are possible. This is not true, as every observer must measure the same physical phenomena. This is because frames of reference aren't physical, they are just useful but imaginary tools we use to make calculations, like parallels and meridians on Earth. This means that changing from one frame to another must not change the behavior of the physics, since, well, that's what's real. In the example you gave, assuming the 90 m/s thing is according to the glass, then in every frame you define the bullet always breaks the glass, since it's still relative to the ship, so only one outcome happens, as it should. 2. I don't see how from your example you conclude that the speed of light must be constant. 3. Time dilation and length contraction not just apply with acceleration, in fact you just need different relative speeds to have both. This means that time dilation and length contraction depend on reference frame. In the part of your video with the car, the car gets contracted according to an external observer, but for the person in the car, it is the rest of the universe that gets contracted, not the car. Same with time dilation. So time dilation and length contraction happen because of how you compare different frames of reference. 4. Laws of Physics DO NOT change in different frames of reference, since they are also physical or 'real' phenomena. This is actually one of the pillars of relativity and it has a name: Principle of Relativity. The speed of light doesn't change in different frames because it is also a law of physics. 5. Gravity is NOT a force (in relativity), and hence it doesn't cause acceleration. Time doesn't run slower in Miller's planet than on Earth because it experiences acceleration (in fact, it doesn't experience any since the planet is in free fall), but because of the spacetime curvature caused by the black hole. You can watch this video that explains how time dilation actually happens: kzread.info/dash/bejne/Z6WFyseDnpCseMY.html

Got my attention from first 4 seconds. Great video btw.

Your explanation method is great👌👌👏👏👏

How has this channel not exploded

Ok, I'll try. In Interstellar, because the black was so large you can be relatively close to the event horizon and not feel crushed or pulled by gravity because the resulting curvature is spread over a large volume around the horizon. It's not until you're deep inside the horizon that you would start to feel the "tidal forces" of gravity.

@WILLYLYNCH.

2 жыл бұрын

So it shouldn't of slowed time down so much then, right?

@ToxicallyMasculinelol

2 жыл бұрын

I don't know if the event horizon corresponds to the curvature of spacetime in any real sense, because the mass distribution of a black hole, whether traditional (in the sense of a singularity) or alternative (in theories that propose some kind of repellant force that overcomes gravity just before a singularity occurs) is effectively pointlike. so shouldn't tidal forces be extremely steep, even outside the horizon? I always thought that was the reason for christopher nolan showing massive tidal waves on the planet. the gravitational field from the planet's frame of reference is extremely anisotropic because the huge majority of mass is confined to the singularity, the center of mass. so the gravitational field is extremely distorted in the axis parallel to both the planet's center and to the singularity. hence, tidal waves in that direction. although I guess it also depends on the amount of mass energy in the accretion disk. they don't show relativistic jets but I would assume a black hole of that prodigious size and obvious activity would probably have jets, but someone correct me if I'm wrong

@jasonbrady3606

2 жыл бұрын

@@ToxicallyMasculinelol a gravity field provides constant acceleration. Just being in the field slows time. Think, you're being accelerated towards the ground by an offset inertia, or if it makes makes more sense it's the offset force of angular momentum thats causing the force of gravity. Going in two directions simultaneously creates that offset angle of accelerative force. The precession force that makes a top wobble. Once it's at rest on the surface of the graviting object, all it's momentum is combined with the momentum of the objects angular momentum which terminates to a point which causes that force to be expressed as the gravitational force. Now when the main gravitional object enters a black hole horizon is where there's a duality with electromagnetic forces of charges and the gravitional forces of mass and acceleration have at least mathematical duality. As in the same equations using charge determining charges are used only in a blackhole, it's just the variables are mass and velocities. All because of that pesky horizon. Termination to point maybe like a third force that forces some of that angular acceleration to cause the force what we call gravity to be directly under our feet. The central point may be the cause of creating the third offset

@MirlitronOne

2 жыл бұрын

My problem with Interstellar was wondering what idiot ever thought that a planet parked right next to a black hole would make a good candidate for colonization? Duh.

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

@@ToxicallyMasculinelol You are correct for normal black holes. It's the super massive black holes that are different. Because of their size, the event horizon is pushed so far away from the singularity that it would have the same effect as a star with equal mass. The gravity would be immense but, it would be ubiquitous. You wouldn't be "spaghettified," as they say. CAVEAT - I get my info from KZread

So... is the time actually slowing down with acceleration, or is just the measuring of time delayed? =)

@delayedcreator4783

3 жыл бұрын

yeah right , like isnt time a constant , how could it slow down

@thanksfornoprivacy

3 жыл бұрын

​@@delayedcreator4783 Because everything is relative to the observer. The "time" that surrounds me as an entity (more like every single point in spacetime that makes up the matter of my body) is constant - but only for me. No matter what happens, 1 second is equal to 1 second. It helps if you think of "1 second" as being equivalent to the amount of time it takes light to travel from point A to point B, and not so much an abstract force imposing itself on you. Light will always travel at the speed of light - for me. The same is true for you, and everyone else (every other point in spacetime). But you are not me. So from an outside reference (you observing me and vice versa) we are 'traveling' through time at different 'speeds.' Time is essentially warping around us to make sure that for EVERY frame of reference, the speed of light is constant. If we both calibrated clocks, and then I got on a high speed jet and flew around the world, our clocks would measure two different times when I got back, even though we both went through the same 'length' of time -- relatively. This is why a lot of science fiction uses the concept of 'warping' spacetime to travel faster than light, but that's a whole other post. We've gotten pretty far with understanding HOW relativistic physics (time dilation) works, but as far as WHY it happens? Well, if you could answer that you would probably go down in history as one of the greatest physicists to have ever lived. I hope that helps.

@delayedcreator4783

3 жыл бұрын

@@thanksfornoprivacy " If we both calibrated clocks, and then I got on a high speed jet and flew around the world, our clocks would measure two different times when I got back, even though we both went through the same 'length' of time " is this true

@thanksfornoprivacy

3 жыл бұрын

@@delayedcreator4783 Yes. To be clear, the time dilation in that instance would be so miniscule that it would be imperceptible to us, but there would be a measurable discrepancy. When I landed and we checked the clocks: To me -- You would have 'traveled' through more time, i.e. you would be older than you were "supposed" to be; and to you --- I would have "traveled" through less time, i.e. I would be younger than I was "supposed" to be. In fact, this time dilation effect is something that scientists actually have to take into account when building GPS satellites. They have to continually correct for the fact that they are 'traveling' through time slower than stuff here on the Earth's surface (this is a function of gravity and mass as well but I digress). I don't think I can post a link here but if you search on google for "satellite gps time dilation" there's a bunch of links that talk about it. There's a lot of complicated math that goes into calculating the specifics, but you don't really need to know that to understand the general concepts.

@delayedcreator4783

3 жыл бұрын

@@thanksfornoprivacy so if you travel faster , your time slows down ??? I think that's cap bro (it's too hard to believe )

5:10 the best explanation I've seen, dang

It's pretty easy to visualize. Just think about the moving photon clock. You notice that the photons have to travel a further distance to "tick". The physics, and chemical reactions in in an accelerating body take longer because the particles need to move a further distance from our reference frame.

Cumbersome explanation. Analogies need to be simpler and directly correlated to our experiences with time, speed and distance.

With the ship and the glass, how do we know the glass isn't accelerating toward the ship and bullet?

@pigofapilot1

4 жыл бұрын

Because of the law of relative motion. In reality all three objects ARE moving relative to each other but at different relative velocities. Acceleration is quite different to relative (or constant) motion in space because it requires the application of a constant force in order to accelerate. An object moving at a constant velocity in space will continue to move without the need for an applied force. Therefore, you can always tell which object is accelerating and which is not because its velocity will vary over time if it is accelerating (or decelerating, which is the same thing).

@mvpfocus

2 жыл бұрын

Same way you know that you must travel to a store... the store doesn't come to you; unless, you get something delivered. But, let's say that Earth started trading glass with Zeta Reticuli... then your question would become quite relevant, as to the relative time it would take to meet up in space.

Which program do you use for the 3d animations? I'd like to experiment!

Before this video, I got an ad for planks constant. Took me half a minute to realise it wasn't the video.

I wish time slowed down such that this video is always on the first image.

Many of the details here are just a bit off which is a bit misleading and kind of annoying. Special Relativity is about inertial frames not accelerated frames. There seems to be some conflation between Special and General Relativity. (The latter *is* about accelerated frames.) Both Special and General Relativity result in time dilation but for different reasons. I feel like the effort to simplify these concepts has led to some misinformation. The way the equivalence principle is presented is not particularly clear either. *Locally* an observer could not perform any experiment that differentiated between gravity and being accelerated (for example in a closed box). But that doesn't mean that acceleration and gravity are the same universally. Lots of gravitational effects couldn't be reproduced with acceleration (I'm thinking frame dragging, tidal forces, gravitational waves... I'm sure there are others...). Finally, the physicist Kip Thorne was the science advisor on Interstellar and he is a widely recognized expert in gravitational physics and black holes, having won the Nobel Prize... I'm pretty sure he got the relativity calculations right. My understanding is that they did fudge what the black hole would look like for cinematic effect... but all the time dilation stuff was right on.

@MikeSmith-cl4ix

2 жыл бұрын

If we understand a theory we should be able to explain it simply so I don't think we understand it at all unless we do understand it and it proves we are in a simulated universe.

@ldl50

2 жыл бұрын

@@MikeSmith-cl4ix well general relativity is a complicated theory, so a demand that it be explainable in a simple way is not really a reasonable one. The statement that a simple explanation for the general theory not being forthcoming means we don't understand it (what is 'it'? gravity? accelerated frames? not clear) at all, is a false dilemma logical fallacy. But general relativity is explainable. From personal experience I can say that with a couple of years of calculus, some linear algebra and the basics of tensor calculus, you can get a reasonable *basic* understanding of Einstein's field equations in a couple of quarters. It's not clear how a lack of a coherent theory of "it" would prove a simulated reality. Does the simulated reality not have gravity or accelerated frames? I feel like you are just kicking the can down the road. In any case, general relativity accurately predicts how the universe behaves in a broad set of circumstances. Understandable or not, it is experimentally verifiable. In any case, my comment was a criticism of the clarity of the explanation, not the theory. There is short shrift given to the equivalence principle in the video even though that is where Einstein began with General Relativity. Further, why does the video substitute a confusing thought experiment involving curved motion, and therefore centripetal acceleration, for Einstein's own thought experiment of an elevator, free falling and accelerated. On further review of the video, it seems to imply that all inertial frames will agree on timing of events. (Something it refers to as a "constant frame of reference".) But special relativity already demonstrates this is not true. For two events that are spatially separated (that is, neither is within the light cone of the other), generally two observers will not agree on whether they were simultaneous or which precede the other. It's a lot to wrap one's head around, but I don't think this video does a good job of helping viewers do so...

@MikeSmith-cl4ix

2 жыл бұрын

@@ldl50 you're funny because you can't even give a simple answer to a simple statement.

@EricMalette

2 жыл бұрын

@@MikeSmith-cl4ix I think what he's saying here is that you have to have a decent grasp of the language in order to understand the theory and that the translation to examples without knowing that language of math is trickier than it seems. I don't think his comment is unreasonable at all.

@MikeSmith-cl4ix

2 жыл бұрын

@@ldl50 don't mean to be insulting, you sound very well-educated but you and the one who made this video should recognize that if you have to use 20 minutes of analogies to answer a simple question then you should throw out the theory and start over..

This is excellent. I've been studying Time Dilation for some months and most physicists use the photon clock and claim one can extrapolate automatically to all mechanical clocks and all entropy events (heat beat, metabolism, the aging of everything including humans, etc.) That is not obvious and they fail to present a good case for that statement. Sabine Hossenfelder did mention "acceleration" but she failed to give detail and explain. Such a critical theory or fact like this needs good explanations and this one is fantastic. Who is the person creating this site?

Fantastic content the animations really help! And are done very nicely

Good vid but who is the girl in red?

@michaeldamolsen

4 жыл бұрын

Fiona Johnson :D I am just kidding, I have no idea. Fiona is the actress that played the girl in the red dress in the Matrix movie.

@garyslifetips3074

4 жыл бұрын

LOL

Hey, it's Silpo at 00:34 and Comfy ua at 00:37! But why?

@yurii851

2 жыл бұрын

holy shit balls even testicles, man i am shocked

@cptn_rokit

2 жыл бұрын

+

That final sentence won my sub. This is great.

My hypothesis on that was based on the event horizon of black holes. Where I came to the conclusion that time and motion are the same thing, and they're modulated by the variable density of spacetime. So it's like a tube in a rubber block being extended via the whole block deforming, and time is the speed at which you move through that tube. And when I say motion is time, I mean every motion, down to every subatomic quantum particle or energy knot, so the physical progression of anything within that range is effectively slowed.

I think you don't need acceleration for time dilation. Any relative velocity is enough for clocks to slow down in comparison to clocks that are at rest.

I don't think the car salesman example is a good explanation of time dilation. Both men travel for 5 seconds, and they travel at different speeds. The light clock acts the same in both journeys. So what?? It matters not that one man traveled a greater distance than the other. He was driving at a higher rate of speed! What is the significance here? If both men drove at the same speed and used the same amount of time for different distances, then I'd say you have something very interesting here. But you don't. The photon went back and forth the same number of times in both journeys because the amount of time for each journey was the same. It's just two guys traveling two different distances in the same amount of time by driving different speeds.

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

Both men drove at speeds that allowed them to arrive at the destination in 5 seconds. However, their clocks didn't match because the curved path experienced acceleration (you must accelerate in another direction to curve) - hence, time dilation.

@stephenmcgrew8868

2 жыл бұрын

@@churchboy316 You said: "Both men drove at speeds that allowed them to arrive at the destination in 5 seconds. However, their clocks didn't match because the curved path experienced acceleration..." Well, if that's the case, then they both did not travel for 5 seconds. If they both traveled for 5 seconds, then their clocks would match up. Look at time dilation this way instead: Let's say a man is on a bus bouncing a basketball. The bus is traveling at 20 MPH. In his reference frame, he observes the basketball traveling only up and down. The total distance the basketball travels is the sum of the total distance the ball travels up, plus the total distance that the ball travels down. But his friend on the sidewalk who's watching the bus drive down the street sees things a bit differently. In his reference frame, he too can see the basketball traveling up and down, but he also see's it traveling down the street at 20 MPH. So, what's happening, is that an object is traveling two different distances during the same event. One guy sees the ball going up and down, while the other guy sees the ball going up and down and also horizontal. Because distance / speed = time, there will be two different amounts of time that have elapsed during this single event. The guy on the bus observe the movement of the ball as up and down only. They guy on the sidewalk observes the movement of the ball as a wavy line traveling down the street. Time Dilation is the difference in the amount of time that elapses during a single event, as observed by two different people each in their own reference frame.

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

@@stephenmcgrew8868 I understand it's difficult to see in the example, but it's actually mathematically correct. The equations of general relativity would yield the same results.

First of all, the idea of "Time" is a very delicate one. With carefull observation we could define "Time" as 2 different things. 1) coordinate time 2) proper time Coordinate time is your velocity in time through spacetime and proper time is the value of the velocity of time that YOU the observer measure. For example: 2 stars sit 1 light year appart. We have 2 objects, A and B: A is moving (relative to the 2 stars) at near the speed of light towards the 2nd star (lets say about 99.98% C... B is sitting stationary on the second star (stationary relative to both stars) B one will measure that A took about ~ 1 year to reach the 2nd star. That's coordinate time. A though, will measure that it only took about some ~ 7 days to make the same trip! That's proper time. So clearly someone can travel faster than 300,000 km/s if he wants... Completing the journey in 7 days, but he CAN'T be seen doing so for an entire year from any outside observer! ... Time dilation and lenth contraction are just visual distortions of reality due to its nature... Light itself is moving at infinite speed - therefore it will appear from every other observer's point of view as having a single, fixed and invariant speed because of the same visual effects. That number will be 1 light second per second.

I voted on your recent poll saying I had never gotten an ad, but I got one this time :(

I always found these kind of theories anthropocentric, to me is simple, time is something we cannot measure correctly (as most or every other metric), time is always the same everywhere and at everytime but, our devices to measure time always have to work with our own physics, thats what you call relativity, physics obviously change on a state of acceleration, there is no doubt, so it is logical to think that in this example time dind't change, but the physics of the box and the bouncing light which measured time did. In other words, we have not yet discover a way to measure time without physical means, since even digital devices work via physics. Time is just one and is moving at the same rate, matter and energy do not, taking the simulator example, imagine that the real time, the same we cannot measure yet without a physical mean, is the one that affects the CPU and not the one we are measuring as a part of the similation or software, since we only can function with the simulation physics, we cannot measure the time outside the CPU. My point is that we are making the same mistake as we did when we thought the earth was the center of the universe, quantum physics do not settle when we measure the particles, they are already settled, it is just that with our little minds and primitive tools we cannot know where they settled until we "measure" them, it is like trying to guess the hight of another person, you inmediatly compare his hight with yours eyeballing it, but maybe you are not taking into account the floor elevation because you think it is perfectly flat and you ended up calculating that the person was 5cm shorter than you when he is actually 5 cm taller. Science is about skepticism, and scientists today are anything but sckeptics, our academia bends the knee to politics and ideologies rather than followind the scientific method, which is essentially that we should always be skeptics and repeat the fucking experiment because maybe this time something different will occur because of a ridiculously tiny difference in the elements, remember that pure water does not conduct electricity by itself, it is the minerals in our skin that make the water a conductor.

@ChainsawGutsFuck

2 жыл бұрын

Basically time is an unseen basis for reality to exist; you can't see it, measure it, or interact with it, but the fact reality isn't a single, static state confirms that it exists. Humanity's imagination tries to think of ways it can be altered, but it cannot; it's a background constant that cannot be interacted with.

@samirgomeznovelo746

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChainsawGutsFuck You can't see it proper, but you can see its effect on everything, and it is constantly interacting with everything, I believe we even have a pretty good Idea of its concept, we just can't measure it acurately without altering the result, maybe in the future once we understand better the effect of acceleration/velocity/movement on objects, particles, waves and energy we would be able to measure it with more accuracy, for now this video literally just says that acceleration and/or velocity has an effect on the device used to measure time.

@theprinceofallsaiyans5830

2 жыл бұрын

Dude seek help

shoutout to the girl at the beginning for being the best part of this video 0:00

I always assumed time dilation was the result of all particles/energy in an affected frame of reference simply being slowed down, the same way they would in a lowering of it's temperature, but much more uniformly, perfectly. If I were on gargantuan, every particle in my body is moving slower, including the electrical impulses in my brain. To me, it would seem as though the universe around me were moving faster. To summarize, time isn't moving slower or faster in relation to a frame of reference. Energy is, and therefore matter.

Extremely valuable for the game career Thank you

Because the universe is a computer simulation which does not allow travel faster than light, so as you approach light speed time slows down and your mass increases so that you can not go faster than light. If you create 2 particles which are identical in every way, the universal computer simulation get fooled and treats the 2 particles as the same particle, allowing quantum entanglement.

I was stuck for ages on the first frame of this for some reason.

Do you use Blender?? Really cool content!

I made a 2 miniute video, "The Physical Reason time slows at the Speed of Light" which explains the actual reason why time slows. (Special Relativity). I hadn't seen anyone explain it this way before.

@zachmartinez7248

2 жыл бұрын

If velocity is relative, how can it cause time dilation? A ship moving past earth at the speed of light, technically means the earth (and many other objects) is speeding past the ship. Velocity is relative, gravity and acceleration are not.

The simulation/computer model is very good, if from "universe" you read "vacuum". If the vacuum has to implement/calculate motion, acceleration, and time using the same CPU (or distributed micro-CPUs), then time has to slow down when an object is moving and/or accelerating, because some of the CPU's processing power gets diverted into supporting the object's motion. Gravity may be an effect that compromises the CPU's overall processing speed.

Well done!

9:02 that was golden advice 🏆

Amazing. Thanks.

*great video* 👍.

0:00 A man needs a name.

I love the profound ending line~

With respect to the movie interstellar, where they portray a planet orbiting a black hole, it is plausible that the gravity you would feel on that planet would be determined mostly by the size that planet. That's because for a planet to orbit a black hole it would have to be traveling at an incredible speed in order to maintain its orbit and not be sucked into the black hole. The planet is like a ship traveling at near light speed. Orbital speed cancels out most of the black hole's gravity except for bodies of water because large bodies of water are more sensitive to tidal force. At such an incredible orbital speed, time would be dilated to pass slower on that planet. Matching the gravitational time dilation with respect to proximity to the black hole. Every point of reference has it's own clock. As far as a spaceship actually being able to land on such a planet the spaceship would have to match the planet's speed in order to even approach it. The energy needed for a spaceship to reach and match that speed is the part I see as tricky.

That is *definitely* Tom Scott around 3:37 in the ball-throwing lab.

Hi But Why?, I have a question regarding gravitational time dilation. So if I'm understanding correctly gravity equates to acceleration which equates to the slowing of time. Therefore, the more intense the gravity the slower time passes, because the object is accelerating at a faster rate. If we freeze the frame at 8:05 we can see Miller's planet orbiting Gargantua. Because of Miller's proximity to the singularity it's experiencing a stronger gravitational pull than us (the viewer) which means it's accelerating faster than we are. Would that mean that to us, the viewer, Miller's planet would initially be slowly orbiting the black hole, but the closer we get to it the faster it would appear to orbit? The object would appear to cover more distance in less time the closer we get to it. Right?

I can watch the first 4 seconds of this video forever

Here before this channel blows up

My head 🤯 hurts. Hey but this video has done better in explaining than other. 👍🏻

6:44 bruh that hair particle system so realistic tho XD

I laughed so hard at the road sign at the end "same old" and "that new ish" LMAO \

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

I missed that

"Accelerated Frame of Reference" word thought. Time dilation is the engine of gravity - high pressure time vs. low pressure time, the difference yielding acceleration, known as gravity. Different from mechanical acceleration. Time is fluid.

8:57 The arrow should point upward, it's the reaction force that prevents me from falling by accelerating me upward. When I fall and accelerate downwards because of gravity I feel 0g (no acceleration)

very interesting i had thought about most of this already by myself but i thought i was maybe crazy if you start analyzing and understanding physics and the universe with the assumption that "reality" is some sort of computer game or simulation, a ton of things make sense, and we can finally start to find bugs in the system to exploit, like how this news about how with the help of google's quantum computer they created a time crystal, which is 100% a bug of the simulation, and can lead us to find zero point energy.

This guy explains physics better than any other channel I know. Why the fuck isn’t he at a million? Let’s help him get there.

This video is insanely, stupidly, imperceptibly cool 😎👌🙌

Thx very much for the video. Great insight. A quick question; We know acceleration causes non- reciprocal time dilation. In SR, time dilation is reciprocal as each observer in an inertial frame sees the moving clock as slowing down. Why does this not apply between an inertial observer and an observer in the accelerated frame. I mean,the observer in the accelerated frame can equally claim that he is at rest and the observer in the inertial frame is moving and his clock runs slower? Thx

I can’t find the music of the video from the link you posted. Can you give me the name?

Can anyone tell me the title of that Tom Scott video at 3:34? That looks really interesting I can’t find it because that guy has a ton of videos. Thanks in advance.

I'm not sure that light clock was a good example because if you think about it, let's say the light clock is 4 units wide when you move the light clock to the side, and you move in a certain very high speed - for example: a quarter of the speed of light, the photon will move 3 units to one side and 5 units to the other side instead of 4 to each side, basically meaning it will still move 8 units at the same amount of time as when it was stationary. Think about it. When you move the light clock, you don't really move the photon, you just change the space that the photon has to play with. If the photon moves to the right at one time and you move the light clock one unit to the left at the same time it takes the photon to complete a run, then the photon will move 3 units to the right, and then when the photon returns, and you still move the light clock one unit to the left for every 4 units that the photon moves, then it will have to go 5 units because the other end was moved far away by one unit at the same time the photon "tried" to complete the run. And thus no matter what speed you go, the photon's speed and distance traveled will still stay the same and won't even need to bend space time to be possible. Now don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to say that the theory of general relativity is false or something, I completely believe it is in fact very much real until more information is found and people potentially change it a bit (or not). What I'm trying to say is that I think his example wasn't as good. Just my theory though, I'm not an expert or anything so feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken.

@churchboy316

2 жыл бұрын

You seem to only use one frame of reference in your example. You wouldn't need General Relativity if there is nothing to relate (another frame of reference i.e. someone moving with the clock and someone stationary watching the clock move by).

@magicalplace3788

2 жыл бұрын

@@churchboy316 yeah you're right. General relativity isn't really relevant in what I said, I just added that part because I wanted to make sure people don't think I'm trying to claim that Einstein's general relativity is wrong :)

@JB940

2 жыл бұрын

This isn't entirely true. You're forgetting proportions in your example. You're measuring the units it has to travel, but you need to consider the time it takes to travel those units too. If time was stationary (ie his example was wrong) Suppose I have this clock but it's length is 1lightsecond. On standstill it would take 2s to travel two units. Now if I move the clock at half the speed of light, from the clock pov it still moves back and forth once, yes. But going from the front to back will take half the time and going forward will take double the time. 0.5 + 2 = 2.5. Hey that's not 2. So even from that thinking there is time dilation. It's true if you are in the same reference frame as the clock, you won't notice this dilation and that's exactly why it's a good example. Your example is in reference to the clock. Someone not traveling with it, standing still, will see this time dilation happen

@magicalplace3788

2 жыл бұрын

@@JB940 thanks for taking the time to explain this to me!