Arthur was born in England well after Newton. Of course he would have learned the equations. Why wouldn't he fly? I, myself, have tried this but keep forgetting the miss part.
In 1969, when I was 12, my parents gave me a book about Isaac Newton. I was immediately hooked on science. Watching this video I finally “got” it, even affter graduating from University with a degree in engineering. Thanks Diana!
A fun way to visualize the laser beam while in motion idea is to substitute a tennis ball. As kids, two of us would climb on to opposite sides of a merry go round, spin it up, and play catch with the ball. Try it out, it's pretty fun.
Except that Einstein's equivalence principle tells us this perception is wrong and instead of us accelerating down towards Earth when we're falling it's actually Earth accelerating up towards us (just like the floor of an accelerating spaceship you're on is accelerating up towards you).
@@JerehmiaBoaz I have seen and heard that explanation. What I can not wrap my head around is this. If earth is accelerating toward me when I jump up, then how can it be for someone that would be on the opposite side of the planet and jumped up at the same time I did then how could earth accelerate in two different directions at the same time?
@@davetarrant6888 Thats where curvature of spacetime comes in; what looks to be two different directions in non-curved space is actually the same direction in curved space.
Usualy when i think on gravity i use to think in how the planes maniouver in relation to each other and how this affect their missiles and cannon rounds, also how the gravity affect the rounds of a rifle when you aim down or up and how this affect the range and point of impact; it's great to learn how the universe really work.
You deserver your own TV show! Educational and entertaining, the type of shows I grew up watching, Bill Nye, Mr. Wizard's World, Beckman's World to name a few.
At 1:08, "... an even heavier apple ..." Your humor is just so funny! I hope to see you back on The Tube soon. We all miss you and want the best for you.
I think every photon, electron, etc are in orbit with a dark matter particle pulling them into apparent wave packets as they travel explaining wave particle duality, the double slit, light polarization, uncertainty, etc.
The tides are due to the tidal effect and not to the direct gravitational force, the Sun exerts more force on the Earth than the Moon, but being further away its tidal effect is weaker.
Dont forget gravity on earth differs depending on location too! It's amazing how crust displacement and oceans can change things so much. And even more amazing that the Earths balance is just right for us🥰
Ma'am you have shown how to calculate Orbital velocity of a circular orbit. How do we do that in case of an elliptical orbit? How does that applies to satellite orbital dynamics?
Great video. You just underestimated the number of flies by many billions. There are 17 million flies per person on earth, not total (which would make their number million times more then number of stars in milky way, not 6000 times less).
Excellent video, loved the example of calculating the Mass of our Sun. Question; why do NASA use the term Zero G for items on the ISS, could Zero G exist at say an Legrange point ?
@@thomasewing2656 Agreed. The ISS is in over 90% of earth's gravity Well, where due to freefall; things in the ISS experience zero g-force, as you rightly say that is not in Zero Gravity. I find the NASA use of 'Zero G' very misleading.
Another great lesson. Thank you. You mention gravitational waves travel at the same speed as light (in a vacuum, in a previous lesson I think you said it varies, and potentially the key to my question below). I, for no valid reason, believe light is not travelling at the max speed possible. Said speed is just a limitation of light but there could be something that travels faster. We can't see it of course because our eyes work on the basis of light. I have asked a few if gravitational waves travel faster than light but am yet to get a satisfactory answer. I base this question on my extremely feeble brain recognising that light arrived 1.7 seconds later than a gravitational wave from the same location (if I understand correctly the observable gravity actually stopping). Kind of makes sense, then, that the gravitational wave was travelling faster. I am of course referring to the neutron star merger in NGC4993 and GW170817. The best information I can get is from Ask Ethan. Where the explanation is stuff got in the way, slowing light I think (by not being in a vacuum), at the point of explosion. So essentially light left (crudely speaking) 1.7 seconds later than the gravity wave stopped. Are you able to explain this in the moderately easy way you explain all your lessons? Probably an entire lesson after your 101 syllabus has finished. Or maybe I'm right and the speed of light in a vacuum is not the limitation of speed we have been taught. ;)
but gravity is not a force according to relaitvity is the path taken by objects to move the fastest the change of space time dimension is what causes gravity . u could have also said that but iam already ur fan (physics fan) .all the best wanna see more phyisics please!!!
Hi Diana, are you not oversimplifying Newton’s discovery? Gravity was known before Newton (see Galileo’s work) but was thought to apply only on Earth. Ancient scholars believed there were two sets of the laws of physics: one for the Earth and one for the Cosmos. With objects on Earth having naturally downward motion (i.e. gravity) and objects in space having a naturally circular motion. Newton’s is a law of UNIVERSAL gravity, meaning Newton postulated that gravity also works in space and unified the two domains of different laws of physics. (And that's a cooler story IMO).
The audio on this video is too quiet. Right click on this video and select 'Stats for Nerds'. From there, you can see that UA-cam measures the audio as more than 13 dB too quiet. You need to check your audio levels before and after uploading to UA-cam.
Omg this is great I love it!! You're the best!! ❤❤ Do you teach classes?? Where!?? Anyway, it's really good but I think it would have been better if you explained where those equations came from, as in guiding us to come up with those equations ourselves, to understand it better. Anyway keep it up!
One thing I remember being told about the light bending properties of gravity is that at the point that you witness the setting sun touch the horizon, the sun has already set.
No, no. One, it set 8 minutes ago because it is 8 light minutes from earth but more importantly the thickness of the atmosphere as you approach the horizon refracts the sun so it appears higher in the sky than it actually is.
The escape velocity at a given height is sqrt(2) times the speed in a circular orbit at the same height. If we change the r² into a r³ in Newton's law of universal gravitation, we can see the escape velocity is the the same as the speed in a circular orbit. This means there is no stable planet systeme in a four dimensional space. Is my calculation and conclusion correct?
Girl you do math at the speed of Sheldon. I get the idea of what you are talking about and then that you will be back next week. Do you have any remedial videos? I graduated HS in 63, most of this stuff wasn't invented then
Why massive objects don't cut across the timespace fabric? How/Why molecules and dust congregated to become massive objects, and forced atoms to fuse and become stars?
if i threw an apple and it would just not collide with anything else (fly through solid ground and without air ressistance but still being affected by gravity) would it then come back to me a few minutes later and essentially completing a very very ellyptical orbit?
"The masses cancel out or every time an astronaut stepped out of the ISS there'd be a problem" was a wonderful revelation for me. I inherently knew that it didn't affect the orbit radius or velocity, but seeing the math in this episode is what actual lit the bulb above my head. Thanks! Do you know of any experiments where we can see lasers being affected by gravity?
At small scale, (few meters) The lights bends to a size of a proton! Not enough for observation. I doubt we have an experiment for that. Even LHC needs gravational wave distortions to identify it. But at very large scale it happens! Gravitational lensing!!!
I love it. Learning about gravity was my favourite thing in high school. I just find astrophysics absolutely incredible. Like to imagine measuring the mass of a star without using a weight is just simply astonishing. I love these lessons.
Einstein's equivalence (20:25) that inertial mass and gravitational mass are the same. When you accelerate an object that acceleration acts on all parts of the object to the same extent. However when an object is in a gravitational field the effect differs due to some parts of the object being closer to the centre of gravity than other parts. So this equivalence only works for points, not for real-life objects with finite dimensions. In theory, at least, it should be possible to detect this change in gravitational attraction across the size of an object. While the effect will be very, very, small it would still exist.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ ❤Sending all my positive and healing thoughts to you and wish you a speedy and full recovery! ❤ ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Question to get lost in the ether: How much mass would we have to bring from other planets/moons to Earth to significantly mess up orbit/tides? eg mining on the moon without swapping mass out
Mining the moon for current human needs (and with currently available mining technology), won't make any significant change to the mass of the moon and therefore, tides on the earth. For example, if the current annual iron ore mining is at 130 million tones per year (1.3 x 10^11 kg/year), it would take a little more than half a billion years to reduce the moon's mass by 0.1%. Assuming humans (or human descendants) survive for half a billion years, they would probably be mining quasars for energy 🤣 (or something else that's totally out of today's speculation/human knowledge).
If the mass of Earth suddenly increased by a significant amount somehow, like a collision with another planet, it would give the moon an eccentric orbit, so the tides would be much stronger or weaker at different times of the month. If the mass was added slowly over many years, it would increase the orbital velocity of the moon and make the lunar cycle shorter. It might pull it a little bit closer but I haven't mathed that out. In which case tides would be stronger. But again, the numbers that humans could realistically achieve in the foreseeable future is completely insignificant.
The crazy part about General Relativity is not that Newton's model is wrong, it's that you have to throw out your intuition about what you are observing when the apple "falls" to the ground... The apple isn't being pulled to the ground. My hand is accelerating away from the apple and the ground is accelerating up to meet the apple... Sounds like BS, but is in fact what is happening. 4D movement is so mind blowing...
Between 2000 and 2002 I did my masters research at NASA Glenn on the vomit comit. It would fly up to Cleveland for a week for us to fly on. My reasearch was zero gravity combustion of pure carbon in an oxygen enriched atmosphere. I got to see spherical flames in person more times than I care to remember. I was one of the lucky few who got to fly in the KC-135 numerous times and fly hundreds of parabolas!
So should Romeo Zt547, a super rich alien kid, one day decide to show off with his brand new spaceship with unlimited power and pass earth at the speed of light (in vacuum) just to impress you, he would pull earth out of its orbit and kidnap not only you but all of mankind? I mean inertial mass= gravitational mass, right? Shouldn't the spaceships inertial mass be much higher than earths gravitational mass? Do I need to worry?
Particles mass causes gravity. The space between those particles cause hydromagnetism. Electro magnetism flows along hydro magnetic trails along not just matter like electricity along a copper wire but travel through pure space as well. Gravity can effect it but hydro magnetic allows it the pathway before gravity get to put its tug . .expansive is more than death or there would be nothing at all. Gravity would kill everything if it was the base force.
I love that you still make mistakes, even though you edit them to make it correct. Just shows that anybody can make them, and we need to double check what we do before we submit our work.
How does this all tie into the theory that everything is moving in a straight line through time but that line is curved across the surface of spacetime where it is bent by massive objects and therefore appears to 'fall' to an outside observer? Does that mean there isn't a 'pull' at all by an object on another object? ie if there was no object there at all but spacetime was curved as though there was we would still see the effects of gravity.
Some questions : What would happen if we drop another earth, on earth?Would the solar system be distributed and hence the universe? If we will move something in the universe such that it's trajectory is changed,would it effect the universe, the grav field all around? Radius of the earth is variable , then what is 6400km? How do we calculate the mass of the earth?
If the mass of Earth suddenly doubled one day, I don't think the other planets would notice too much, there would be a small affect, maybe to asteroids, but we'd stay in our orbit around the sun. The moon however, would take on an eccentric orbit around the Earth, making tides vary in strength at different times of the month. I'm not sure what you mean by distributed, though. Technically every atom has a gravitational influence that extends across the entire universe, so even the orbits of distant planets send out gravitational waves, it's just too faint and the wavelength is too long to ever notice. So, yes, but not in any real significant way. Usually when people quote the radius of Earth they mean the equatorial radius, but it never hurts to make a distinction. Considering that we can bounce lasers off the moon and measure its distance directly, you could use the same trick that Diana used to "weigh the sun" on the earth/moon system. We know r by direct measurement, and the period by the lunar cycle (time between full moons). I'm sure there are other ways to get the mass of Earth just a search away as well. ;)
@@DFPercush THE mass of earth is not that great when compares that to the distances betwenn planets is too huge infact u urself can fit 30 earths in between earth and mooon so if earth and another earth collide it would cause a lot of debris and the debrois may revolve around the moon and the moon trajectory may change
@@akshinbarathi8914 I'm just assuming we could magically double the mass of Earth without affecting its own trajectory. But yes, if an actual rogue planet or something collided with Earth it would mess with all kind of things, it just depends on the relative speed and direction, where the moon was in relation at the time, lots of factors.
See don't get offended but in your channel most of intelligent person comes here and they know all this stuff and there are many youtuber that teach us so you have to make content like veritasium
Inertial mass is the same everywhere (even in deep space) where there is no gravitational mass. But that formula in the top left corner says that it doesn't matter how much mass M and m is, you still get the same mass that the inertia indicates. Also Einstein says that going around a corner fast (but constant speed) in a car is like accelerating straight ahead in a car. So accelerating in a rocket at 1 g is the same as the planet's gravity. And you aren't meant to understand it. DON'T TRY cos none of us ever will cos (with the planet's gravity) it's sort of space-time bent into the 4th dimension (also IPOSSIBLE to get your head around). lol
Oh my gosh physics girl I love you and your content. Please make more physics content because of you I am really enjoying science not that I didn’t already but I just love it even more thank you from the UK 🇬🇧❤️
I love physics, with Dianna Cowern its just perfect to watch! Cant wait to see your pretty face collaboration with others physics Master, Neil de Grass? Michio kaku? Just too excited!
REALLY interesting....but it makes my brain hurt....I'm too old to really learn this stuff now....but I REALLY wished I had done so in high school....kids don't realize how lucky they are to have access to this type of learning.......take it from me....learn it while you're young
Was just explaining this to my kids yesterday (13 and 9) and guess how much they cared/listened..... zero lol. the ability they have and speed with which they have access to information nowadays they could learn so much so quick, and like you I wish I would of craved knowledge when I was young like I do now! Guess I could just make them? They would act like I’m torturing them
What a great informative video! I’ve listened to several physics/astronomy courses and this was the first lecture that made orbits make sense. Will have to show my kids as I think they will enjoy it as well.
hey dayana ! I solved the questions you showed in the last section of this video. but how will I know that i did correct? hey you should make a new series with solves of these interesting problems.
This is the most awesome video I've seen in a long time. She brings together so many concepts, with an obvious enthusiasm. I love it that she starts with the historical problem. And does the math (including cancelling out units - the magic trick of physics!) And I'm gobsmacked by the video of a candle burning in freefall - brilliant! I wish they had spent more time on that. Because it illustrates the equivalence principle of general relativity so well - if you know that flames act the same way on the ISS. (And the slinky thing is mind-boggling, too.)
The reliable sources back the scientific consensus was the sun orbits the earth and were all per previewed .do you know what that means people who already agree with you
8 minutes, yes, 8 minutes and I already learned what I didn't learn at high school. I wish every teacher would teach as you do :( Cheers and respect from Mexico!
11:01 "...Fall around Earth and keep missing." That's how Arthur Dent learned how to fly... he threw himself at the ground, but missed.
Excellent !!!
Genius
He was in orbit
Arthur was born in England well after Newton. Of course he would have learned the equations. Why wouldn't he fly? I, myself, have tried this but keep forgetting the miss part.
This series is soooo educational, informative and entertaining. I am thinking about doing something like this too. Keep up the amazing work!
ikr
In 1969, when I was 12, my parents gave me a book about Isaac Newton. I was immediately hooked on science. Watching this video I finally “got” it, even affter graduating from University with a degree in engineering. Thanks
Diana!
3:21 “holy Europa!” lol!!! Love that, especially since Jupiter has a moon called Europa
Its one of the four biggest moons, called Galilean moons
I think that's why she said it. She knew that. She's a sharp one. Her humor with that intellectual base to it.
A fun way to visualize the laser beam while in motion idea is to substitute a tennis ball. As kids, two of us would climb on to opposite sides of a merry go round, spin it up, and play catch with the ball. Try it out, it's pretty fun.
Awesome! When Gravity pulls us down to the Earth while we jump, it's the best example that anyone on EARTH could understand :)
Except that Einstein's equivalence principle tells us this perception is wrong and instead of us accelerating down towards Earth when we're falling it's actually Earth accelerating up towards us (just like the floor of an accelerating spaceship you're on is accelerating up towards you).
@@JerehmiaBoaz I have seen and heard that explanation. What I can not wrap my head around is this. If earth is accelerating toward me when I jump up, then how can it be for someone that would be on the opposite side of the planet and jumped up at the same time I did then how could earth accelerate in two different directions at the same time?
@@davetarrant6888 Thats where curvature of spacetime comes in; what looks to be two different directions in non-curved space is actually the same direction in curved space.
You are an amazing teacher. I am taking AP Physics 1 and your videos are of great help.
Usualy when i think on gravity i use to think in how the planes maniouver in relation to each other and how this affect their missiles and cannon rounds, also how the gravity affect the rounds of a rifle when you aim down or up and how this affect the range and point of impact; it's great to learn how the universe really work.
I pray your health improves exponentially ❤ just discovered your amazing work.
You deserver your own TV show! Educational and entertaining, the type of shows I grew up watching, Bill Nye, Mr. Wizard's World, Beckman's World to name a few.
One hundred thousand million stars?
Loved it!
One billion should indeed be million millions.
Well, for now you have to accept that one billion is one thousand millions. Changing that would make things really confusing.
At 1:08, "... an even heavier apple ..." Your humor is just so funny! I hope to see you back on The Tube soon. We all miss you and want the best for you.
This video is really nice, physics and math together, great job! Hello from DR
Indeed, these episodes are great. Helps the beginner as well as some seasoned people. 😉👏🏻👍🏻
No cross outs , magic marker use is perfect. Awesome
You are the best you are even on UA-cam Kids!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Physics girl has been watching veritasium recently... the tangent at the en (about relativity) is a tell
I think every photon, electron, etc are in orbit with a dark matter particle pulling them into apparent wave packets as they travel explaining wave particle duality, the double slit, light polarization, uncertainty, etc.
It’s not even 6am yet and I’ve learned so much! Thanks you!
The tides are due to the tidal effect and not to the direct gravitational force, the Sun exerts more force on the Earth than the Moon, but being further away its tidal effect is weaker.
Dont forget gravity on earth differs depending on location too! It's amazing how crust displacement and oceans can change things so much. And even more amazing that the Earths balance is just right for us🥰
Or, as we evolved here, we adapted to live in this gravity.
Ma'am you have shown how to calculate Orbital velocity of a circular orbit. How do we do that in case of an elliptical orbit? How does that applies to satellite orbital dynamics?
Where have you been all my life! Thank you for this, you're awesome ! Xox
Great video. You just underestimated the number of flies by many billions.
There are 17 million flies per person on earth, not total (which would make their number million times more then number of stars in milky way, not 6000 times less).
As a great philosopher once said,
“Gravity, working against me,
Gravity, wants to bring me down”
Excellent video, loved the example of calculating the Mass of our Sun.
Question; why do NASA use the term Zero G for items on the ISS, could Zero G exist at say an Legrange point ?
There is no 'zero G' anywhere in the cosmos, but only a relative reduction of gravity's effect. Lagrange points are fairly stable.
@@thomasewing2656 Agreed. The ISS is in over 90% of earth's gravity Well, where due to freefall; things in the ISS experience zero g-force, as you rightly say that is not in Zero Gravity. I find the NASA use of 'Zero G' very misleading.
The slow sizzle is universal. Big bangs happen on galactic scale.
Another great lesson. Thank you.
You mention gravitational waves travel at the same speed as light (in a vacuum, in a previous lesson I think you said it varies, and potentially the key to my question below). I, for no valid reason, believe light is not travelling at the max speed possible. Said speed is just a limitation of light but there could be something that travels faster. We can't see it of course because our eyes work on the basis of light.
I have asked a few if gravitational waves travel faster than light but am yet to get a satisfactory answer. I base this question on my extremely feeble brain recognising that light arrived 1.7 seconds later than a gravitational wave from the same location (if I understand correctly the observable gravity actually stopping). Kind of makes sense, then, that the gravitational wave was travelling faster. I am of course referring to the neutron star merger in NGC4993 and GW170817. The best information I can get is from Ask Ethan. Where the explanation is stuff got in the way, slowing light I think (by not being in a vacuum), at the point of explosion. So essentially light left (crudely speaking) 1.7 seconds later than the gravity wave stopped.
Are you able to explain this in the moderately easy way you explain all your lessons? Probably an entire lesson after your 101 syllabus has finished. Or maybe I'm right and the speed of light in a vacuum is not the limitation of speed we have been taught. ;)
abbout Gravitational waves i suggest to watch youtube video by Steve Crothers.
but gravity is not a force according to relaitvity is the path taken by objects to move the fastest the change of space time dimension is what causes gravity . u could have also said that but iam already ur fan (physics fan) .all the best wanna see more phyisics please!!!
Diana,
You are too good to be true-almost.
Thank you.
excellent thank you very much 💓💓💓💓💓
I watch these from all the way from Pakistan!
Hi Diana, are you not oversimplifying Newton’s discovery? Gravity was known before Newton (see Galileo’s work) but was thought to apply only on Earth. Ancient scholars believed there were two sets of the laws of physics: one for the Earth and one for the Cosmos. With objects on Earth having naturally downward motion (i.e. gravity) and objects in space having a naturally circular motion. Newton’s is a law of UNIVERSAL gravity, meaning Newton postulated that gravity also works in space and unified the two domains of different laws of physics. (And that's a cooler story IMO).
The audio on this video is too quiet. Right click on this video and select 'Stats for Nerds'. From there, you can see that UA-cam measures the audio as more than 13 dB too quiet. You need to check your audio levels before and after uploading to UA-cam.
Thank you Ms. Dianna!❤🤗
Instant like!
Omg this is great I love it!! You're the best!! ❤❤ Do you teach classes?? Where!??
Anyway, it's really good but I think it would have been better if you explained where those equations came from, as in guiding us to come up with those equations ourselves, to understand it better. Anyway keep it up!
Physics Girl was wondering why they say nothing is smaller than the Plank Length when you can cut the distance in 1/2 between 2 objects forever
One thing I remember being told about the light bending properties of gravity is that at the point that you witness the setting sun touch the horizon, the sun has already set.
No, no. One, it set 8 minutes ago because it is 8 light minutes from earth but more importantly the thickness of the atmosphere as you approach the horizon refracts the sun so it appears higher in the sky than it actually is.
I love the enthusiasm in your words and the smile on your face. Congratulations for your work.
The escape velocity at a given height is sqrt(2) times the speed in a circular orbit at the same height. If we change the r² into a r³ in Newton's law of universal gravitation, we can see the escape velocity is the the same as the speed in a circular orbit. This means there is no stable planet systeme in a four dimensional space. Is my calculation and conclusion correct?
Kepler 22b is my favorite planet
I don't know much, but was wondering does this work with the idea that gravity somehow warps time-space? Thank you
Girl you do math at the speed of Sheldon. I get the idea of what you are talking about and then that you will be back next week. Do you have any remedial videos? I graduated HS in 63, most of this stuff wasn't invented then
Gravity is an Illusion
Why massive objects don't cut across the timespace fabric? How/Why molecules and dust congregated to become massive objects, and forced atoms to fuse and become stars?
if i threw an apple and it would just not collide with anything else (fly through solid ground and without air ressistance but still being affected by gravity) would it then come back to me a few minutes later and essentially completing a very very ellyptical orbit?
That π² was freaking me out. I thought I was still asleep, lol.
π² is six times the sum of the reciprocal of the squares:
(1+1/4+1/9+ 1/16+1/25+1/36+...)*6=π²
"The masses cancel out or every time an astronaut stepped out of the ISS there'd be a problem" was a wonderful revelation for me. I inherently knew that it didn't affect the orbit radius or velocity, but seeing the math in this episode is what actual lit the bulb above my head. Thanks! Do you know of any experiments where we can see lasers being affected by gravity?
At small scale, (few meters) The lights bends to a size of a proton! Not enough for observation. I doubt we have an experiment for that. Even LHC needs gravational wave distortions to identify it. But at very large scale it happens! Gravitational lensing!!!
If only teachers taught me this interesting I would not sleep during my physics class
When Diana uploads, I click fast. :D
Nice.
I thought you were mocking physicests
I love it. Learning about gravity was my favourite thing in high school. I just find astrophysics absolutely incredible. Like to imagine measuring the mass of a star without using a weight is just simply astonishing. I love these lessons.
Wow I’m Learning physics and I’m nine years old and my brother watches you
i thought the title of the thumbnail is “i ♥ gravity“
i have bamboozled yet again...
Einstein's equivalence (20:25) that inertial mass and gravitational mass are the same.
When you accelerate an object that acceleration acts on all parts of the object to the same extent. However when an object is in a gravitational field the effect differs due to some parts of the object being closer to the centre of gravity than other parts.
So this equivalence only works for points, not for real-life objects with finite dimensions.
In theory, at least, it should be possible to detect this change in gravitational attraction across the size of an object. While the effect will be very, very, small it would still exist.
"an even heavier apple" when lifting up the PINEapple lol
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
❤Sending all my positive and healing thoughts to you and wish you a speedy and full recovery! ❤
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Question to get lost in the ether: How much mass would we have to bring from other planets/moons to Earth to significantly mess up orbit/tides? eg mining on the moon without swapping mass out
Mining the moon for current human needs (and with currently available mining technology), won't make any significant change to the mass of the moon and therefore, tides on the earth. For example, if the current annual iron ore mining is at 130 million tones per year (1.3 x 10^11 kg/year), it would take a little more than half a billion years to reduce the moon's mass by 0.1%.
Assuming humans (or human descendants) survive for half a billion years, they would probably be mining quasars for energy 🤣 (or something else that's totally out of today's speculation/human knowledge).
@@Shenron557 cant believe I didnt think of it like that. Strange to wrap your head around numbers and masses that big when you arent a numbers person
If the mass of Earth suddenly increased by a significant amount somehow, like a collision with another planet, it would give the moon an eccentric orbit, so the tides would be much stronger or weaker at different times of the month. If the mass was added slowly over many years, it would increase the orbital velocity of the moon and make the lunar cycle shorter. It might pull it a little bit closer but I haven't mathed that out. In which case tides would be stronger. But again, the numbers that humans could realistically achieve in the foreseeable future is completely insignificant.
@physics_Girl, you are amazing at explaining stuff!! Thank you.
The crazy part about General Relativity is not that Newton's model is wrong, it's that you have to throw out your intuition about what you are observing when the apple "falls" to the ground...
The apple isn't being pulled to the ground. My hand is accelerating away from the apple and the ground is accelerating up to meet the apple... Sounds like BS, but is in fact what is happening. 4D movement is so mind blowing...
Good job. Then you get flat Earthers saying Gravity is fake.🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️🤦🏼♀️ Glad to know people are still educated.
Between 2000 and 2002 I did my masters research at NASA Glenn on the vomit comit. It would fly up to Cleveland for a week for us to fly on. My reasearch was zero gravity combustion of pure carbon in an oxygen enriched atmosphere. I got to see spherical flames in person more times than I care to remember. I was one of the lucky few who got to fly in the KC-135 numerous times and fly hundreds of parabolas!
So should Romeo Zt547, a super rich alien kid, one day decide to show off with his brand new spaceship with unlimited power and pass earth at the speed of light (in vacuum) just to impress you, he would pull earth out of its orbit and kidnap not only you but all of mankind? I mean inertial mass= gravitational mass, right? Shouldn't the spaceships inertial mass be much higher than earths gravitational mass? Do I need to worry?
Begs the question... why aren't 'Apple Newtons' a cookie yet?
Because Apple would sue for trademark violation.
Brilliant lecture that I was able to share with my grandchildren. Thank you for the excellent lecture. Two thumbs Up!
Particles mass causes gravity. The space between those particles cause hydromagnetism. Electro magnetism flows along hydro magnetic trails along not just matter like electricity along a copper wire but travel through pure space as well. Gravity can effect it but hydro magnetic allows it the pathway before gravity get to put its tug . .expansive is more than death or there would be nothing at all. Gravity would kill everything if it was the base force.
I love that you still make mistakes, even though you edit them to make it correct. Just shows that anybody can make them, and we need to double check what we do before we submit our work.
Amazing how each equation connected to the next. Math is truly the universal language of the universe.
Thumbs up if you think Diana forgot to take the blue protective film off of her helmets plexiglass. :)
How does this all tie into the theory that everything is moving in a straight line through time but that line is curved across the surface of spacetime where it is bent by massive objects and therefore appears to 'fall' to an outside observer? Does that mean there isn't a 'pull' at all by an object on another object? ie if there was no object there at all but spacetime was curved as though there was we would still see the effects of gravity.
Some questions :
What would happen if we drop another earth, on earth?Would the solar system be distributed and hence the universe?
If we will move something in the universe such that it's trajectory is changed,would it effect the universe, the grav field all around?
Radius of the earth is variable , then what is 6400km?
How do we calculate the mass of the earth?
If the mass of Earth suddenly doubled one day, I don't think the other planets would notice too much, there would be a small affect, maybe to asteroids, but we'd stay in our orbit around the sun. The moon however, would take on an eccentric orbit around the Earth, making tides vary in strength at different times of the month. I'm not sure what you mean by distributed, though.
Technically every atom has a gravitational influence that extends across the entire universe, so even the orbits of distant planets send out gravitational waves, it's just too faint and the wavelength is too long to ever notice. So, yes, but not in any real significant way.
Usually when people quote the radius of Earth they mean the equatorial radius, but it never hurts to make a distinction.
Considering that we can bounce lasers off the moon and measure its distance directly, you could use the same trick that Diana used to "weigh the sun" on the earth/moon system. We know r by direct measurement, and the period by the lunar cycle (time between full moons). I'm sure there are other ways to get the mass of Earth just a search away as well. ;)
@@DFPercush THE mass of earth is not that great when compares that to the distances betwenn planets is too huge infact u urself can fit 30 earths in between earth and mooon so if earth and another earth collide it would cause a lot of debris and the debrois may revolve around the moon and the moon trajectory may change
@@akshinbarathi8914 I'm just assuming we could magically double the mass of Earth without affecting its own trajectory. But yes, if an actual rogue planet or something collided with Earth it would mess with all kind of things, it just depends on the relative speed and direction, where the moon was in relation at the time, lots of factors.
"Even heavier apple" lol
See don't get offended but in your channel most of intelligent person comes here and they know all this stuff and there are many youtuber that teach us so you have to make content like veritasium
Wow your mind is amazing, you manage to explain things in such an easy to understand format.
Followed everything until the Einstein bit... You're really fun to learn physics from. Thank you!!
Me too
Inertial mass is the same everywhere (even in deep space) where there is no gravitational mass. But that formula in the top left corner says that it doesn't matter how much mass M and m is, you still get the same mass that the inertia indicates. Also Einstein says that going around a corner fast (but constant speed) in a car is like accelerating straight ahead in a car. So accelerating in a rocket at 1 g is the same as the planet's gravity. And you aren't meant to understand it. DON'T TRY cos none of us ever will cos (with the planet's gravity) it's sort of space-time bent into the 4th dimension (also IPOSSIBLE to get your head around). lol
@@Justwantahover it seems that Einstein was saying that when an object is moving, it means the object is changing its position in the future times.
@@evanwong7463 Seems pretty logical.
Oh my gosh physics girl I love you and your content. Please make more physics content because of you I am really enjoying science not that I didn’t already but I just love it even more thank you from the UK 🇬🇧❤️
The moon is a satellite placed there by the annunaki, duh pfffff👽🛸
I love physics, with Dianna Cowern its just perfect to watch! Cant wait to see your pretty face collaboration with others physics Master, Neil de Grass? Michio kaku? Just too excited!
REALLY interesting....but it makes my brain hurt....I'm too old to really learn this stuff now....but I REALLY wished I had done so in high school....kids don't realize how lucky they are to have access to this type of learning.......take it from me....learn it while you're young
Was just explaining this to my kids yesterday (13 and 9) and guess how much they cared/listened..... zero lol. the ability they have and speed with which they have access to information nowadays they could learn so much so quick, and like you I wish I would of craved knowledge when I was young like I do now! Guess I could just make them? They would act like I’m torturing them
What a great informative video! I’ve listened to several physics/astronomy courses and this was the first lecture that made orbits make sense. Will have to show my kids as I think they will enjoy it as well.
How can anyone dislike how enthusiastic Dianna is about physics? I mean c'mon!! It's seriously contagious!
I have a question though, why is it two objects with mass are attracted to each other?
Why Gravity is NOT a force: ua-cam.com/video/XRr1kaXKBsU/v-deo.html
now i know how gravity works but what even IS gravity?
Gravitational waves. I think you mean tensor pertubations
Anyone else read the thumbnail as I ❤️ gravity instead of | 🍎 gravity
V
I don't know what she is saying, but I like the way she says it.
2:56 You are wrong here. The first that proposed heliocentrism was a Greek astronomer named Aristarchus of Samos at 3rd century BC.
But not with any working model or mathematical emphasis.
hey dayana ! I solved the questions you showed in the last section of this video. but how will I know that i did correct?
hey you should make a new series with solves of these interesting problems.
Time and space are functions of ones conceptual scheme
This is the most awesome video I've seen in a long time. She brings together so many concepts, with an obvious enthusiasm. I love it that she starts with the historical problem. And does the math (including cancelling out units - the magic trick of physics!)
And I'm gobsmacked by the video of a candle burning in freefall - brilliant! I wish they had spent more time on that. Because it illustrates the equivalence principle of general relativity so well - if you know that flames act the same way on the ISS.
(And the slinky thing is mind-boggling, too.)
The reliable sources back the scientific consensus was the sun orbits the earth and were all per previewed .do you know what that means people who already agree with you
Diana explains more better than Mark Rober
You speak of the ‘force of gravity’ but gravity is not a force. :( Why you confuse me?
Gravity is not a force......But I adore you.
8 minutes, yes, 8 minutes and I already learned what I didn't learn at high school. I wish every teacher would teach as you do :(
Cheers and respect from Mexico!
“Gravity is an iluuuusion!!”
Wow, this is very neat and fascinating! 👍🏻😀 Keep up the good work!
Lol, I thought there was something weird going on when she said physics, I was confused from that video when she was explaining a lot of math
@@ohasis8331 lol
Too much less views for you😭😭