This one is more elaborate but worth checking out: passionatelycurioussci.weebly.com/blog/wall-push
@writer79Ай бұрын
Encore Carl Sagan Nova time 42 Pulitzer Prize💙
@madden8021Ай бұрын
We were warned and didn't listen.
@Average_Fizz_Enjoyer252 ай бұрын
Arlo: i survived a flood Mr Incredible: i stopped a train in its tracks Wall-e: Aww thats cute [Grabbed onto a Rocket moving at full speed and held on to it during its Two BILLION miles worth of travel across the solar system]
@The_Green_Man_OAP2 ай бұрын
10:32 (r+s)²=r²+d² 2rs+s²=d² 2rs=d²-s²=(d-s)(d+s) s=(d/r -s/r)(d+s)/2 s=(tanθ - λ)q, θ is clockwise, ...(1) q=(d+s)/2=(1+s/d)d/2=½(1+sinθ')d ...(1i) Let AB be the straight line from the top of the circle to where s meets the 2nd r line. We see that: rθ>|AB|. For example, say that: rθ/|AB|=1+rφ/|AB|, for some φ<θ. => r(θ-φ)=|AB|. But, also: |AB|²=s²+d²-2sd·cosα, where α is opposite line AB, so cosα≈s/d. Therefore: (rθ)²>s²+d²-2sd·cosα Actually: r²(θ-φ)²=s²+d²-2sd·cosα Using 1 & 1i with the eqn above, we have: r²(θ-φ)²=(tanθ -λ)²q²+d²-2(tanθ -λ)qd·cosα Divide all by r²: (θ-φ)²=¼(tanθ -λ)²(1+sinθ')²tan²θ+tan²θ -(tanθ -λ)(1+sinθ')tan²θ·cosα => (((θ-φ)/tanθ)² -1)/((tanθ -λ)(1+sinθ')) =¼(tanθ -λ)(1+sinθ')-cosα If we say θ≈θ' and make it small so that sinθ≈θ, then: (((θ-φ)/θ)² -1)/(θ -λ)(1+θ))≈¼(θ -λ)(1+θ)-cosα => ((-2(φ/θ)+(φ/θ)² )/(θ -1+1 -λ)(1+θ)) ≈¼(θ -1+1 -λ)(1+θ)-cosα => ((-2(φ/θ)+(φ/θ)² )/(θ² -1+1 -λ+θ -λθ)) ≈¼(θ² -λ+θ-λθ)-cosα θ and λ=s/r are both small => ((-2(φ/θ)+(φ/θ)² )/(-λ+θ))≈¼( -λ+θ)-cosα Now multiply by θ => ((-2(φ)+(φ²/θ))/(-λ+θ))≈¼( -λ+θ)θ-θ·cosα Small θ & λ =>((-2(φ)+(φ²/θ))/(-λ+θ))≈ -θ·cosα As θ decreases, cosα decreases & α approaches ½π, therefore θ·cosα is small. =>((-2(½π)θ+(¼π²))/(-λ+θ)) ≈0 => -2(½π)θ+(¼π²)≈ 0 => θ≈ ¼/π radians Also, (θ-φ)=|AB|/r , |AB| will approach d. => φ≈ ¼/π -d/r ≈ ¼/π -tan(¼/π) ≈0. Therefore r/4π ≈ d, which kinda indicates the validity of the relevant laws of Poisson & Gauss. i.e Gravity flux area = 4πd², although this is meant to be part of a sphere... The trajectory is QUANTIZED!!! If r= 320,000km then d≈ 25,464 km which is about 2 times Earth's diameter !! We see that the area 4πd² is also the area of a rectangle equal to r·d, so each gravity impulse from Earth that affects the moon must be acting as the Earth moves from one position to the next. That distance is equivalent to about 1.93 minutes of travel relative to the MW Galaxy (v=220km/s), or 14mins 15secs relative the Sun (v=29.78km/s). The speed of the moon relative Earth is about v=1km/s (slightly over), so the time taken for my particular d to be traversed is: t= d/v > 25464 secs ≈ 7.07 hours. In that time, the Earth moves about 7.58*10⁵ km relative the Sun and 5.6*10⁶ km relative to MWG. Therefore the impulse it sends to the moon must be as it traverses about 59 and 437 Earth diameters respectively. As d≈r/4π , we have 2rs+s²≈r²/4π² Thus s≈ -r±½√(4r² -4r²/4π²)=r(-1±√(1-1/4π²)) Take r= 320,000km , then s≈ -4078.8km or s≈ 63.6*10⁴ km. The only value that makes sense is the negative value, and so s≈ -4.08*10³ km. s/d & 90°-α≈atan(s/d)° are then about -0.16 & -9.1°, so that α≈80.9° to 83.5°. Perhaps someone could carry on this analysis and work out if Earth's orbit around the Sun or MWG has more affect on the moon's trajectory. Interesting stuff.
@lucasliewys1262 ай бұрын
???
@cor22502 ай бұрын
Same if you are stoned like me ,your mind goes slow so your mind stay little in the past ,your body in the same time goes to the future ,when you get sober ,time is going fast for us . Think about that ,same dreams bring you in the past or future ,and before you know its hours later and you wake up .
@scottm54252 ай бұрын
I wonder what the spacecraft was doing all the while they were running about, must have been pitching about, especially with them being all bunched up at one side. It would be interesting if spacex could get a larger diameter tank up to low orbit so they could try spinning it instead, see how sick they all got! I haven't read what it felt like, if it was like running up a slope or constantly tumbling over.
@shungite49532 ай бұрын
I'm honestly questioning why BnL needed that much satellites
@KartikPatel-nt4ff2 ай бұрын
😅😮😅😮😅😅😅😅well information good show you 😅😅😅
@alex304252 ай бұрын
Hopefully the onboard computer didn’t go mad and kill the crew. Damn it HAL!
@raydelaforce81492 ай бұрын
That's the way to lecture - notice the humour which converts to understanding. Without any effort, it is easy to see change in momentum requires a force to promotes that change. That is the way Aristotle viewed science which after all is Naturay Science. This lecture could have been done 3,000 years ago. Great demonstration Dan. I shall include in the training (as an engineer) in future, so also; thanks for the lesson.
@dickobob3 ай бұрын
talked for too long L+Ratio and he look mad ayo pause no diddy
@user-qg5dp4tl8c3 ай бұрын
An exchange of velocities demo gets across info. very fast. Thanks
@HunterGoodwin-bb5ey3 ай бұрын
Why is it that the bouncy side provides more force into the 2x4 rather than the firm side? It seems to me that the bouncy side would provide less force into the 2x4 because it maintains kinetic energy by bouncing off. While the firm side does not recoil as much and because of this it seems that it should distribute its kinetic energy into the 2x4 better than the bouncy side.
@kilroi222 ай бұрын
If the ball hits and sticks, it transfers momentum to the board. If the board were to "throw" the ball away from it, that would transfer momentum to the board. The bouncing ball is like the board is catching AND throwing it back. I go to great lengths to show this here: kzread.info/dash/bejne/d6SVpNyPn8aZf7g.html
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
Toy Story 2
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
The Incredibles
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones
@AndreiAbajero-ru1of3 ай бұрын
THX
@sorcerermickeyfanguy62713 ай бұрын
That scene is so satisfying to watch
@Angela-ct8wr3 ай бұрын
Paul Hewitt never misses 👏
@williamwalker393 ай бұрын
Time travel is not possible because time is absolute and is the same for all inertial frames! The proof for this is that nearfield light has been experimentally measured to be infinite, and deriving Relativity using infinite speed nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity. See papers below for proof. This can easily be seen by inserting c=infinity into the Lorentz Transform, yielding the Galilean Transform. where time is the same for all inertial observers and no Relativistic effects are observed. Also only the present exists, the past is gone, and the future has yet to be. So if a moving object is observed with farfield speed c light, then Relativistic effects will be observed. But if the frequency of the light is reduced such that instantaneous nearfield light is used, then no Relativistic effects will be observed. So with the flick of a switch, Relativistic effects can be made to vanish. Since Time and Space are real and are independent of the frequency of the light used to observe it, then the effects of Relativity are not real and are simply an optical illusion. Many researchers have independently verified nearfield light is instantaneous, and it has been measured in different ways. In addition theoretical analysis using Maxwells equations agree perfectly with these results. These results show that the phase speed, group speed, and front speed (information speed) are all instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light c in the farfield after about one wavelength. Some may say that many experiments have proven Relativity, so how can Relativity be wrong? Well no experiment can prove an experiment right. They can only provide evidence toward a theory. But one experiment can absolutely prove a theory wrong, and the experimental measurement that nearfield light is instantaneous proves Relativity is wrong. The evidence here shows that it describes only an optical illusion. Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, then it has the same problem. A better theory of Gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism which assumes gravity can be mathematically described by 4 Maxwell equations, similar to to those of electromagnetic theory. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak fields, which is all that we observe. Using this theory, analysis of an oscillating mass yields a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. This theory then accounts for all the observed gravitational effects including instantaneous nearfield and the speed of light farfield. The main difference is that this theory is a field theory, and not a geometrical theory like General Relativity. Because it is a field theory, Gravity can be then be quantized as the Graviton. Lastly it should be mentioned that this research shows that the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can no longer be criticized for requiring instantaneous interaction of the pilot wave, thereby violating Relativity. Consequently the Pilot wave interpretation should become the preferred interpretation of Quantum Mechanics due to its deterministic simplicity. Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper: www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1 KZread presentation of above arguments: kzread.info/dash/bejne/pZmExqxwpra3prQ.html <kzread.info/dash/bejne/pZmExqxwpra3prQ.html> More extensive paper for the above arguments: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145 Dr. William Walker - PhD Physics ETH Zurich, 1997
@user-qm8bc4bu1t3 ай бұрын
You are just stating things without questioning them.
@ananominity3 ай бұрын
The newest theory says a black hole may continue to expand infinitely. I wonder what Kip Thorn thinks about the newest theory that says that our universe may be inside a black hole.
@user-qm8bc4bu1t3 ай бұрын
The fact is we wouldn't know if it still is inside of the black hole or not.
@johnedb97894 ай бұрын
That’s is very helpful! Thanks 👍🏼
@sachinrath2194 ай бұрын
why the work done by torque not considered, thanks
@pixelsamurai50864 ай бұрын
What about an old dining table with detached glass on top and some old bedsheets
@StingerFlynnShorts50004 ай бұрын
oh my god it's a transformer 0:06
@katherinaarcos53414 ай бұрын
Heck, BNL is even making Business in the f*cking moon
@charliecharliecharliecharl85544 ай бұрын
Is that huge open area in space
@mrbibs3502 ай бұрын
It was. Skylab was a second stage saturn V that was stripped out. There were huge areas where the fuel tanks used to be. It crashed a few years later.
@charliecharliecharliecharl85542 ай бұрын
@mrbibs350 it's like 2001 space Odyssey I went to Kennedy space center in 1980 when I was 6 and I remember the sateen rocket on view on its side in its stages also the other smaller rockets stood up with wires and I stood next to the massive catapiller that moved the shuttle which was going to launch but we're only there for a visit so we missed it , we stayed at Fontainebleau hotel
@steveschunk57022 ай бұрын
Actually a third stage (S4B). Came down in 1979, while the STS Shuttle was being built.
@charliecharliecharliecharl85542 ай бұрын
@steveschunk5702 that a huge thing falling back to earth
@pravda.o.zrenii4 ай бұрын
That's amazing!
@Renegat1975 ай бұрын
Better call Saul
@angelocedrickmacasaet68645 ай бұрын
Wow 👌 Wall-e also gets to experience the outer space. Beautiful
@gladefuller70125 ай бұрын
Brass in the background just blasting like there's no tomorrow
@LPH-TUX5 ай бұрын
Has anyone put his lecture notes for this workshop online?
@kilroi225 ай бұрын
They don't exist, feel free to make and post them. You might be interested in the Conceptual Physics Instructor Manual by Hewitt, you can find a pdf posted online like here: ebin.pub/instructors-manual-for-conceptual-physics-12th-edition-12nbsped-9780321909107.html
@LPH-TUX5 ай бұрын
As always ... thank you @@kilroi22
@wowyummyyy5 ай бұрын
L I K E 👍🏿👍🏼 👍👍🏼 👍🏿💯❣💯 ❣💯🤩 🤩 🤩🤩🤩
@scottgreen38075 ай бұрын
We do do time travel. This is my third comment and you will experience in REVERSE time order. Not the answer so keep reading.
@scottgreen38075 ай бұрын
Mostly all ridiculous. And no! I have a better and obvious answer but I won’t say unless I’m hired as a consultant. Its about how the universe expresses itself and implements its parts. Way to easy when you think my way! First you must ask what would you do if you were god and, ask what else would you do if you were a god scientist whom could do it anyway you like.
@scottgreen38075 ай бұрын
Absolutly wrong! If I could exceed the speed of light, I would jump to somewhere in the future or be there to soon not jump to the past. Obvious to me.
@rougeone72435 ай бұрын
Thank you the way my teacher was telling us how to solve was very hard to understand and your way is honestly so much easier.
@AmandaCatheyChoreographer5 ай бұрын
0:25 Hal sterwlt. Has 20 years ago. 0:56 No commercial gaming. Ouchie no records splinter. Saturday December 7 2003.
@TuMundoAndroideMania5 ай бұрын
Friend, if you heat a knife or afertar blade, you will take it out of the buckets. or with heat gun
@4iMRyan6 ай бұрын
Awesome! 😁
@Roboseal26 ай бұрын
I really like how they showed it was windy when burning through the atmosphere but as soon as he got to space it stopped.
Пікірлер
It's hard to believe that this came out in 2008.
I don't ever remember Carl looking so frail 0:58
Carl Sagan the Pagan! RESPECT 🤙
I'll use this demo in my physics class. Thanks!
This one is more elaborate but worth checking out: passionatelycurioussci.weebly.com/blog/wall-push
Encore Carl Sagan Nova time 42 Pulitzer Prize💙
We were warned and didn't listen.
Arlo: i survived a flood Mr Incredible: i stopped a train in its tracks Wall-e: Aww thats cute [Grabbed onto a Rocket moving at full speed and held on to it during its Two BILLION miles worth of travel across the solar system]
10:32 (r+s)²=r²+d² 2rs+s²=d² 2rs=d²-s²=(d-s)(d+s) s=(d/r -s/r)(d+s)/2 s=(tanθ - λ)q, θ is clockwise, ...(1) q=(d+s)/2=(1+s/d)d/2=½(1+sinθ')d ...(1i) Let AB be the straight line from the top of the circle to where s meets the 2nd r line. We see that: rθ>|AB|. For example, say that: rθ/|AB|=1+rφ/|AB|, for some φ<θ. => r(θ-φ)=|AB|. But, also: |AB|²=s²+d²-2sd·cosα, where α is opposite line AB, so cosα≈s/d. Therefore: (rθ)²>s²+d²-2sd·cosα Actually: r²(θ-φ)²=s²+d²-2sd·cosα Using 1 & 1i with the eqn above, we have: r²(θ-φ)²=(tanθ -λ)²q²+d²-2(tanθ -λ)qd·cosα Divide all by r²: (θ-φ)²=¼(tanθ -λ)²(1+sinθ')²tan²θ+tan²θ -(tanθ -λ)(1+sinθ')tan²θ·cosα => (((θ-φ)/tanθ)² -1)/((tanθ -λ)(1+sinθ')) =¼(tanθ -λ)(1+sinθ')-cosα If we say θ≈θ' and make it small so that sinθ≈θ, then: (((θ-φ)/θ)² -1)/(θ -λ)(1+θ))≈¼(θ -λ)(1+θ)-cosα => ((-2(φ/θ)+(φ/θ)² )/(θ -1+1 -λ)(1+θ)) ≈¼(θ -1+1 -λ)(1+θ)-cosα => ((-2(φ/θ)+(φ/θ)² )/(θ² -1+1 -λ+θ -λθ)) ≈¼(θ² -λ+θ-λθ)-cosα θ and λ=s/r are both small => ((-2(φ/θ)+(φ/θ)² )/(-λ+θ))≈¼( -λ+θ)-cosα Now multiply by θ => ((-2(φ)+(φ²/θ))/(-λ+θ))≈¼( -λ+θ)θ-θ·cosα Small θ & λ =>((-2(φ)+(φ²/θ))/(-λ+θ))≈ -θ·cosα As θ decreases, cosα decreases & α approaches ½π, therefore θ·cosα is small. =>((-2(½π)θ+(¼π²))/(-λ+θ)) ≈0 => -2(½π)θ+(¼π²)≈ 0 => θ≈ ¼/π radians Also, (θ-φ)=|AB|/r , |AB| will approach d. => φ≈ ¼/π -d/r ≈ ¼/π -tan(¼/π) ≈0. Therefore r/4π ≈ d, which kinda indicates the validity of the relevant laws of Poisson & Gauss. i.e Gravity flux area = 4πd², although this is meant to be part of a sphere... The trajectory is QUANTIZED!!! If r= 320,000km then d≈ 25,464 km which is about 2 times Earth's diameter !! We see that the area 4πd² is also the area of a rectangle equal to r·d, so each gravity impulse from Earth that affects the moon must be acting as the Earth moves from one position to the next. That distance is equivalent to about 1.93 minutes of travel relative to the MW Galaxy (v=220km/s), or 14mins 15secs relative the Sun (v=29.78km/s). The speed of the moon relative Earth is about v=1km/s (slightly over), so the time taken for my particular d to be traversed is: t= d/v > 25464 secs ≈ 7.07 hours. In that time, the Earth moves about 7.58*10⁵ km relative the Sun and 5.6*10⁶ km relative to MWG. Therefore the impulse it sends to the moon must be as it traverses about 59 and 437 Earth diameters respectively. As d≈r/4π , we have 2rs+s²≈r²/4π² Thus s≈ -r±½√(4r² -4r²/4π²)=r(-1±√(1-1/4π²)) Take r= 320,000km , then s≈ -4078.8km or s≈ 63.6*10⁴ km. The only value that makes sense is the negative value, and so s≈ -4.08*10³ km. s/d & 90°-α≈atan(s/d)° are then about -0.16 & -9.1°, so that α≈80.9° to 83.5°. Perhaps someone could carry on this analysis and work out if Earth's orbit around the Sun or MWG has more affect on the moon's trajectory. Interesting stuff.
???
Same if you are stoned like me ,your mind goes slow so your mind stay little in the past ,your body in the same time goes to the future ,when you get sober ,time is going fast for us . Think about that ,same dreams bring you in the past or future ,and before you know its hours later and you wake up .
I wonder what the spacecraft was doing all the while they were running about, must have been pitching about, especially with them being all bunched up at one side. It would be interesting if spacex could get a larger diameter tank up to low orbit so they could try spinning it instead, see how sick they all got! I haven't read what it felt like, if it was like running up a slope or constantly tumbling over.
I'm honestly questioning why BnL needed that much satellites
😅😮😅😮😅😅😅😅well information good show you 😅😅😅
Hopefully the onboard computer didn’t go mad and kill the crew. Damn it HAL!
That's the way to lecture - notice the humour which converts to understanding. Without any effort, it is easy to see change in momentum requires a force to promotes that change. That is the way Aristotle viewed science which after all is Naturay Science. This lecture could have been done 3,000 years ago. Great demonstration Dan. I shall include in the training (as an engineer) in future, so also; thanks for the lesson.
talked for too long L+Ratio and he look mad ayo pause no diddy
An exchange of velocities demo gets across info. very fast. Thanks
Why is it that the bouncy side provides more force into the 2x4 rather than the firm side? It seems to me that the bouncy side would provide less force into the 2x4 because it maintains kinetic energy by bouncing off. While the firm side does not recoil as much and because of this it seems that it should distribute its kinetic energy into the 2x4 better than the bouncy side.
If the ball hits and sticks, it transfers momentum to the board. If the board were to "throw" the ball away from it, that would transfer momentum to the board. The bouncing ball is like the board is catching AND throwing it back. I go to great lengths to show this here: kzread.info/dash/bejne/d6SVpNyPn8aZf7g.html
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Toy Story 2
The Incredibles
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones
THX
That scene is so satisfying to watch
Paul Hewitt never misses 👏
Time travel is not possible because time is absolute and is the same for all inertial frames! The proof for this is that nearfield light has been experimentally measured to be infinite, and deriving Relativity using infinite speed nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity. See papers below for proof. This can easily be seen by inserting c=infinity into the Lorentz Transform, yielding the Galilean Transform. where time is the same for all inertial observers and no Relativistic effects are observed. Also only the present exists, the past is gone, and the future has yet to be. So if a moving object is observed with farfield speed c light, then Relativistic effects will be observed. But if the frequency of the light is reduced such that instantaneous nearfield light is used, then no Relativistic effects will be observed. So with the flick of a switch, Relativistic effects can be made to vanish. Since Time and Space are real and are independent of the frequency of the light used to observe it, then the effects of Relativity are not real and are simply an optical illusion. Many researchers have independently verified nearfield light is instantaneous, and it has been measured in different ways. In addition theoretical analysis using Maxwells equations agree perfectly with these results. These results show that the phase speed, group speed, and front speed (information speed) are all instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light c in the farfield after about one wavelength. Some may say that many experiments have proven Relativity, so how can Relativity be wrong? Well no experiment can prove an experiment right. They can only provide evidence toward a theory. But one experiment can absolutely prove a theory wrong, and the experimental measurement that nearfield light is instantaneous proves Relativity is wrong. The evidence here shows that it describes only an optical illusion. Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, then it has the same problem. A better theory of Gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism which assumes gravity can be mathematically described by 4 Maxwell equations, similar to to those of electromagnetic theory. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak fields, which is all that we observe. Using this theory, analysis of an oscillating mass yields a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. This theory then accounts for all the observed gravitational effects including instantaneous nearfield and the speed of light farfield. The main difference is that this theory is a field theory, and not a geometrical theory like General Relativity. Because it is a field theory, Gravity can be then be quantized as the Graviton. Lastly it should be mentioned that this research shows that the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can no longer be criticized for requiring instantaneous interaction of the pilot wave, thereby violating Relativity. Consequently the Pilot wave interpretation should become the preferred interpretation of Quantum Mechanics due to its deterministic simplicity. Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper: www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1 KZread presentation of above arguments: kzread.info/dash/bejne/pZmExqxwpra3prQ.html <kzread.info/dash/bejne/pZmExqxwpra3prQ.html> More extensive paper for the above arguments: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145 Dr. William Walker - PhD Physics ETH Zurich, 1997
You are just stating things without questioning them.
The newest theory says a black hole may continue to expand infinitely. I wonder what Kip Thorn thinks about the newest theory that says that our universe may be inside a black hole.
The fact is we wouldn't know if it still is inside of the black hole or not.
That’s is very helpful! Thanks 👍🏼
why the work done by torque not considered, thanks
What about an old dining table with detached glass on top and some old bedsheets
oh my god it's a transformer 0:06
Heck, BNL is even making Business in the f*cking moon
Is that huge open area in space
It was. Skylab was a second stage saturn V that was stripped out. There were huge areas where the fuel tanks used to be. It crashed a few years later.
@mrbibs350 it's like 2001 space Odyssey I went to Kennedy space center in 1980 when I was 6 and I remember the sateen rocket on view on its side in its stages also the other smaller rockets stood up with wires and I stood next to the massive catapiller that moved the shuttle which was going to launch but we're only there for a visit so we missed it , we stayed at Fontainebleau hotel
Actually a third stage (S4B). Came down in 1979, while the STS Shuttle was being built.
@steveschunk5702 that a huge thing falling back to earth
That's amazing!
Better call Saul
Wow 👌 Wall-e also gets to experience the outer space. Beautiful
Brass in the background just blasting like there's no tomorrow
Has anyone put his lecture notes for this workshop online?
They don't exist, feel free to make and post them. You might be interested in the Conceptual Physics Instructor Manual by Hewitt, you can find a pdf posted online like here: ebin.pub/instructors-manual-for-conceptual-physics-12th-edition-12nbsped-9780321909107.html
As always ... thank you @@kilroi22
L I K E 👍🏿👍🏼 👍👍🏼 👍🏿💯❣💯 ❣💯🤩 🤩 🤩🤩🤩
We do do time travel. This is my third comment and you will experience in REVERSE time order. Not the answer so keep reading.
Mostly all ridiculous. And no! I have a better and obvious answer but I won’t say unless I’m hired as a consultant. Its about how the universe expresses itself and implements its parts. Way to easy when you think my way! First you must ask what would you do if you were god and, ask what else would you do if you were a god scientist whom could do it anyway you like.
Absolutly wrong! If I could exceed the speed of light, I would jump to somewhere in the future or be there to soon not jump to the past. Obvious to me.
Thank you the way my teacher was telling us how to solve was very hard to understand and your way is honestly so much easier.
0:25 Hal sterwlt. Has 20 years ago. 0:56 No commercial gaming. Ouchie no records splinter. Saturday December 7 2003.
Friend, if you heat a knife or afertar blade, you will take it out of the buckets. or with heat gun
Awesome! 😁
I really like how they showed it was windy when burning through the atmosphere but as soon as he got to space it stopped.