Warped Spacetime, Gravitational Lensing, and Gravitational Waves (Corroborating General Relativity)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- We learned a bit about general relativity and the curvature of spacetime, both earlier in this series, as well as in the modern physics course. But let's talk a bit more about the astronomical observations that corroborate this theory. Let's look at black holes and the stars that orbit them. Let's look at gravitational lensing, and gravitational waves. These are all incredible phenomena that we can see in telescopes that tell us Einstein was absolutely right when he developed his theory a little bit over a century ago. Take a look!
More About General Relativity: • General Relativity: Th...
Watch the whole Astronomy/Astrophysics playlist: bit.ly/ProfDave...
Classical Physics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
Modern Physics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
Mathematics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
General Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
Organic Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
Biochemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
Biology Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveBio
EMAIL► ProfessorDaveExplains@gmail.com
PATREON► / professordaveexplains
Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
Amazon: amzn.to/2HtNpVH
Bookshop: bit.ly/39cKADM
Barnes and Noble: bit.ly/3pUjmrn
Book Depository: bit.ly/3aOVDlT
Okay can we just talk about something?
When we're all kids, we were just told and took on faith that Einstein was incredibly brilliant. So much so that it was basically a cliche that we all rolled our eyes at. But the more I learn about physics, the more I'm starting to realize that we didn't know the HALF of just how brilliant and influential Einstein really was.
This man really was a game-changer and somehow deserves even more credit than the average layman gives him.
I am *_addicted_* to this channel
I have a lot of respect for those who have not only taken the time to teach them selves so much, but they also help teach others. Respect.
Fantastic video. So many great visuals. Everything made perfect sense. I especially liked how you kept showing how discoveries keep validating relativity.
"Welcome to Burger King, Can I take your order?"
"A plate of Einstein rings please."
Man, 1 million is getting close. You deserve it Dave!
Ye he truly does. Especially with that annihilation of the Globebusters.
It took me being high to understand general relativity, and it was just so fun to visualize it.
Basically, just imagine that spacetime is like a blanket, and a star as a ball in that blanket. In that case, gravity is the pocket made by the ball.
You were high because you just described the visual Dave used at the beginning of the video lol
Waiting for flatheads to show up
Eric Dubay did a crappy response to 10 things flat earthers say yesterday
@ritemoelaw_books83 They're like poltergeists; you can draw attention to them by calling their names. They're also super annoying.
Hello. Theory. All theory. Everything you know.
@@CyberBrySkyNet Yes, it is theory. Do you know what theory means, buddy?
Did you see that globuster 10 challenges "completed" vid was an absolute joke they basically played. A video and kept repeating words underneath dramatic musoc in a way that they were tryna be all like oooo weve uncovered the truth... where in actual fact they didnt put any coherent arguments forward. How ppl swallow this shit is beyond me
"Gravitational time dilation"
You have to admit that's awesome
You should really look into all the aspects of it.
best professor ever..........keep it up.. more about space time plzz..
Love frm india
I have learned so much for my chem, bio and physics classes with you. I got the Galileo T-shirt and laugh every time I look at it. I have to say that I pay extra attention because of the massive crush I have on your voice.
Thank you very much for all your content.
I must say, I subscribe to about a dozen of these types of channels, and the narrator, Dave, is the best explainer of the lot. He's a Dennis Overbye-grade science writer, my highest compliment.
I am now an mbbs student ❤️❤️your lectures helped me alot
Can't wait to see what the JWST discovers.
mainly stuff that emmits infrared light
BillyCBoxingFan so excited
It should be ready to deploy just after the pandemic. 🤞
I don't even have a science class rn lol, I just like watching his videos, he explains them nicely.
It sure does I agree.
Well l done! You have become my favorite podcaster. Terse, succinct, and knowledgeable. I unhesitatingly recommend your productions! Keep it up, amigo!
Thanks a lot for this presentation of major phenomena which supports GR. Theory and Experiment must go hand in hand! and a good presenter like you Prof. Dave is needed.
Another awesome video from professor Dave. I always learn something when I watch your videos, thanks 😁👍
Another fun fact for people is we can detect gravitational waves from their effect on pulsars very precise pulses. My astronomy professor is currently researching in this field.
The 3d animation of stars orbiting the black hole were breathtaking.
Man, how on earth do you manage to make so many high quality and so fast videos?! I'm impressed! Love, regards from Greece.
Thank you for making such informative videos which help our youth generation to gain knowledge...
We want more videos on these astronomy series....😁
Sir you are Kohinoor only one in the world.
Love from India.😍😍😍😍😍😍😍
Namaste
Professor dave please make video about velocity time dilation
I did that! Check my modern physics playlist.
Great video, Dave. I would be a much better science educator if I could do that sort of graphics representations.
I would love to see you do something specifically on LIGO.
Cheers
Phil
Hey Professor Dave, I was reading/confused by a book by Kip Thorne called The Science of Interstellar and where Thorne said, "Black holes are made from warped space and warped time. Nothing else-no matter whatsoever." I was confused because I'd thought that black holes were made when the fabric of spacetime was distorted by a high density of matter. I googled it and all the easy answers say that black holes have mass (and are made of matter?). The two statements are contradictory and I guess I'm wondering if I'm just not smart enough (likely), if there is some nuance that I'm missing in Kip Thorne's explanation (possible) or if Thorne is wrong/misleading (probably not but idk). I'll add a longer section of the chapter so you can see Thorne's full explanation (if you want more context to judge his argument).
This passage is from the Chapter titled "Black Holes":
---
"The Black hole Gargantua plays a major role in Interstellar. Let's look at the basic facts about black holes in this chapter and then focus on Garganua in the next.
First, a weird claim: Black holes are made from warped space and warped time. Nothing else-no matter whatsoever. Now some explanation.
Ant on a Trampoline: A Black Hole's Warped Space
Imagine you're an ant any you live on a child's trampoline-a sheet of rubber stretched between tall poles. A heavy rock bends the rubber downward, as shown in Figure 5.1. You're a blind and, so you can't see the poles or the rock or the bent rubber sheet. But you're a smart ant. The rubber sheed is your entire universe, and you suspect it's warped. To determine its shape, you walk around a circle in the upper region measuring its circumference, and then walk through the center from one side of the circle to the other, measuring its diameter. If your universe were flat, then the circumference would be pi=3.14159... times the diameter. But the circumference, you discover, is highly warped!
Space around a non-spinning black hole has the same warping as the trampoline: Take an equatorial slice through the black hole. This is a two-dimensional surface. As seen from the bulk, this surface is warped in the same manner as the trampoline. Figure 5.2 is the same as figure 5.1, with the ant and poles removed and the rock replaced by a singularity at the black hole's center.
The singularity is a tiny region where the surface forms a point and thus is "infinitely warped," and where, it turns out, tidal gravitational forces are infinitely strong, so matter as we know it gets stretched and squeezed out of existence. In Chapters 26, 28, and 29, we see that Gargantual's singularity is somewhat different from this one, and why.
For the trampoline, the warping of space is produced by the rock's weight. Similarly, one might suspect, the black hole's space warp is produced by the singluarity at its center. Not so. In fact, the hole's space is warped by the enormous energy of its warping. Yes, that's what I meant to say. If this seems a bit circular to you, well, it is. But it has a deep meaning.
Just as it requires a lot of energy to bend a stiff bow in preparation for shooting an arrow, so it requires a lot of energy to bend space; to warp it. And just as the bending energy is stored in the bent bow (until the string is released and feeds the bow's energy into the arrow), so the warping energy is stored in the black hole's warped space. And for a black hole, that energy of warping is so great that it generates the warping.
Warping begets warping in a non-linear, self-bootstrapping manner. This is a fundamental feature of Einstein's relativistic laws, and so different from everyday experience. It's somewhat like a hypothetical science-fiction character who goes backward in time and gives birth to herself.
This warping-begets-warping scenario does not happen in our solar system at all. Throughout our solar system the space warps are so weak that their energy is miniscule, far too small to produce much boot strapped warping. Almost all the space wraping in our solar system is produced directly by matter-the Sun's matter, the Earth' matter, the matter of the other planets-by contrasts with a black hole where the warping is fully resposible for the warping." (pp. 45-7)
---
If you read this far, thank you so much for your time Professor Dave.
gr8 content as always. Now i have a question! if we can break up the suns light and detect radio waves etc. can we detect radio waves within a candle light as well?
The sun radiates electromagnetic radiation in many wavelengths, in many different radio bands - a candle does mostly a couple bands of the former and very little of the latter.
Dave you are the man
Very useful video Professor Dave... the animation is really useful in understanding the concept... Hi from India. :)
Well ..his entry is fab...i love the song...he knows lot about science stufff... professor dave explains....wuhuuuuu
Nice video mate the explanation was so simple that i as a 15 year old could understand it and my dreams of being an astronomer could come true
Reach for the sky my friend, good luck on your ASTRONOMICAL (😀) quest! 😉👍
@@francischimenti1374 Thank you mate
Professor. Your incredible. I had no idea you could sing
Sorry, there's one thing I don't get: in the 1919 experiment, why the light of the star goes around the sun? That looks like gravity is repulsive, deforming spacetime away from the sun. Shouldn't the light curve towards the sun, and not be able to be seen? What makes sense to me is the light being curved towards the sun gravity pull and not away from it.
It is deflected towards the sun, that's how we are able to see it.
Our eyes assume that light travels in a straight line, so which ever direction the light is hitting our eyes from is assumed to be the point it comes from. Since light is deflected towards the sun it comes at a sharper angle than it should and so appears to come from a point further from the Sun.
It's much easier to understand with a diagram so have a look at this: qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a9523de0c5a28dd8d64d06fa06f52116
So you are contributing to shape the new era.
Professor, do we know how time moves in intergalactic space? If all mass warps space-time, then what do the effects of huge empty spaces have on space-time compared to the way we perceive time?
That's an interesting question... I'm commenting so I'll know if you get an answer, lol.
Seems to me... in the presence of really massive objects (such as black holes) time runs very slowly... so, in an absolute absence of mass... maybe time runs very quickly???
Edited to add: Also... if that's the case... what would the implications be with regard to time dilation caused by traveling at relativistic speeds (your experience of time slows down), while crossing a vast expanse where there is no mass (speeding time up)?
@@bobinthewest8559 I think our time dilation understanding suggests that for time dilation significant enough that ordinary clocks and not just atomic clocks to measure it, you need at least stellar masses.
The intro- Just Iuvv it 😁😁
I find myself singing it sometimes while cooking breakfast lol
I love Astrophysics.
Like the videos 👍when are engineering videos coming out
Hey, Dave: have you been asked how you make your videos (like, the entire process from start to finish)? I would be really interested. Could it maybe be another "Ask Professor Dave" video?
Explain frame dragging
Thanks for another great video.
Does light curve around objects or does light simply follow a straight path and the expanding universe causes light to curve?
If the curve is caused by the expansion of space, can't we calculate how much the universe is expanding by calculating the degree of curve (how much distance) against the speed of which light travels?
If space would expand twice as fast wouldn't the light curve double in distance?
This is just stuff I learned from other videos, but if I understand it correctly light follow a straight path in 4D spacetime, it only looks curved because it is flattened to visualize it in 3D. And yes, people have estimated the expansion of the universe by measuring the delay between the 'same' light curved differently.
Second one. Since objects in motion on a certain path stay in motion on that same path, objects will always try to go in a straight line. Thing is, straight lines in curved space look like curved lines in normal space. Since we can't see spacetime curving, we perceive gravity as a force pulling things together. Sort of like how longitude lines on a globe go inwards towards the north pole. Someone following one of these lines will feel like they are going in a straight line; because they _are_ going in a straight line, just on a curved surface. However, if another person was going alongside them, they would appear to be pulled towards the first. That is what gravity is, judt with 4 dimensions and lots of maths and I've also forgotten to mention time haven't I? Well, i won't here, too complicated.
But yeah, that's gravity.
Can u use actual lenses like concave and convex lenses to demonstrate gravitational lensing?
Hi
👋
So I've never understood why every gravitational lens isn't perfectly spherical or some function of a sphere. Is there some other function other than mathematically spherical EH's on BH's? Why aren't the galaxies at 4:19 not long strings or arcs? Mathematically, this would require immensely customized space-time that is FAR from spherical lensing.
Please help me out here.
I'm going to look into it further when I get more information I'll drop you an email my email is hazmatdanielsliveops2017@gmail.com
Look up cefu star galaxy I've got some info major info email me I'm julie seattle near there 40 aged female
Mainly because the light can be coming from different angles rather than just straight-on, and for objects like galaxies, the distribution of mass is not perfectly even.
Good stuff!
The question that needs to be asked is can aliens see us with gravitational lensing? It’s been 14,000 years since artificial light can be distinguished on regular bases from our large cities/villages. 14,000 light years, that is getting some distance. So that's like 10% to 14% of the Milky Way. So that is 40 to 50 billion stars. Each star system having 6 planets. That’s 300 billion planets. However, saying 14,000 light years is the planet's detectable limit is probably underestimating our light bubble by a few hundred million years. If you add in the 'Cambrian Explosion' were animals started changing the visible atmosphere, it makes the earth's noticeable life light bubble quite a bit further out. In fact, it puts it at 541 million light years. I realize that even with gravitational lensing it would be impossible to distinguish us at that distance. Unless they were advance enough to make the lensing happen with two or more gravitational bodies. They would need the right gravitational bodies to be aligned but they would only need a fraction of second out of millions upon millions of years to detect us. This brings up the question that Dr. Fermi asked while eating lunch at a Los Alamos cafeteria a few miniscule decades ago, "So where are all the aliens?
That was a good one.
I wonder how content like this get dislikes... well done, again, sir.
Dumb flat Earthers
I'm not a flat earther but I dislike him on a separate matter entirely.
@@hdtv2296 electric universe fanatic?
@@user-pk9qo1gd6r
Sock account
Did anyone else find this channel from their teacher, but now since school is over you're just here for the ride?
For me it's the other way around XD
@@jacobbeitner8796 I love Dave, he's the physical embodiment of Christ.
@Detected Outside I would say that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but yes, he’s a very nice, smart, and understanding guy
@@jacobbeitner8796 nah, I'm fully convinced that this man is the true embodiment of Van der Weyden who worked from life models, and his observations were closely observed. Yet he often idealised certain elements of his models' facial features, who were typically statuesque, especially in his triptychs. All of his forms are rendered with rich, warm colourisation and a sympathetic expression, while he is known for his expressive pathos and naturalism. His portraits tend to be half length and half profile, and he is as sympathetic here as in his religious triptychs. Van der Weyden used an unusually broad range of colours and varied tones; in his finest work the same tone is not repeated in any other area of the canvas, so even the whites are varied.
LIGO didn't use live observations. It used 250k+ computer generated collisions of variable sized black hole and neutron star combinations. THEN armed with computer generated theoretical observations they went on a pattern hunt to compare the data of the detectors to the simulated data. Great use of the scientific method. If collisional observations don't exist, make your own!
This is what pretty much all Flatheads and Electric Universe cranks get wrong. Even if we can't put black holes and neutron stars in a lab, we can still make predictions about what these phenomena would look like through various detection methods, and then compare the data we get to our predictions. Predictive power is vital to a scientific theory and astrophysics has it.
Imagine scolding scientists for using predictions to test their model
Speaking of another Einstein...🤔 I saw this amazing experiment conducted by a guy in a butchers smock...with an egg 🙃
Sort of Einstein with greater density
Hahaha. It's sad I know EXACTLY what you are talking about. Where did my life go so wrong. :-)
Who else see's 'cat stevens' when they look at professor dave??
It can't just be me.
haha that's literally the only lookalike people toss out that i actually agree with
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Hi Professor Dave!
Sorry if I made you annoyed a little bit before.
I think you look more like Tom Cruise when he had the long hair in I think it was Vanilla Sky.
Oh yeah definitely, no doubt about it. Btw guys, what does Cat Stevens look like? 🤔
@@ProfessorDaveExplains its a striking resemblance haha atleast he's a great artist 😅
@@francischimenti1374 Now that I watch this, Dave does resemble Cat Stevens. ua-cam.com/video/P6zaCV4niKk/v-deo.html
Very good video and you know If space were void no
system would hold its bodies relative to each other in their orbits.
The "time" field of the Sun establishes a zero field of time relative to
the planet's opposition of hemispherical polarities. The opposition of
the Earth's polarities relative to the energy charge of its mass is what
establishes its position in the solar system.
A small planet can be of greater density than a larger one. Its
composition of the elements may be such, however, that its charge
relative to its mass may be less.
The "time" field of the Earth is at the magnetic equator. At the Earth's
surface it is narrowed down to about the thickness of a razor blade.
So that is why we don't Time Travel because the Time Field at Earth's surface is the width of a razor blade but higher up the Time Field is open and that allowed Thoth the Ancient Wisdom God to Time Travel through Earth's past and Future. Got it.
What i dont get right...... Lets say spacetime is fluid like the ocean.... Blackholes are what like mini waterfalls...... Is it possible that the universe isnt expanding but yet thw multiple of blackholes combine are stretching spacetime... To make it appear as if it is
4:57 Sauron?
Would we need five space math for traversing deep space
Could you explain a bit more about the deep space part please?
Julie
Unless you're doing it at relativistic speeds, no.
Does time exist ? ⏱️🔮
Do you even exist?
Or is it's my mind that is creating reality!
Do this thing on which I am typing right now exist or is it an elaborate hoax?
You decide
@nukes top 5
Maybe. There! Answered. Where's my Nobel prize?
@@francischimenti1374
You already got Nobel prize in your another existent reality just like we all did!
See veritasium video(on multiverse) to get what I want to say!
@@francischimenti1374 not much old!
2 months old video
@@anilkamalsharma4687 YAY! 🤗 Now all I have to do is find a way to defy the laws of physics, time and space and merge minds with the me in that other reality to receive my well deserved Nobel prize..... here I go! *Clenches REALLY hard* HEY! IT WORKED! This is amazi- oh wait... no I just crapped my pants. Oh well, sorry false alarm everybody! 🤪
i love this guy. he's brilliant.
nice video👍
Fab video. Thanks.
Do you think Blackholes' massive mass leads to a different dimensional universe where space and time collide together, therefore traveling into that universe is going to make space travel possible? Maybe we can recreate ourselves the same blackholes some other easiest way, we may just have to find out the technology to do it?
Maybe, when we die, we all probably go to a similar blackhole or wormhole?
No. Generql relativity is not like this. "Space and time collide together" has no meaning in general relativity. Currently it seems impossible to create big black holes without having the required mass, so no, we probably won't create big black holes. There is no comnection between consciousness and general relativity.
Hello Zoltan,
You are looking into your own paradigm of illusions. You can be a good follower but never be a free-thinking leader or an individual. We all know Einstein's relativity theory but that's not all. There is more way beyond the relativity theories. Things can move thousands of times faster than the speed of light but it is not traveling on a plane and push that with combustion engines. It is not even traveling it is space travel! It is way more complicated to explain to you on this UA-cam bb.
@@ExploreLove-lm8qq "Things can move thousands of times of times faster than the speed of light", wtf fool
This is fucking bonkers, we’ll done for explaining it so simply
If the space time fabric is afected by matter and gets compressed into the most central point causing gravity, then (talking about planet earth) there are gazilions of points where the space time yarns intersect eachother. And this crisscross of space time yarns theoretically is more dense in the equatorial circunference. Can this be the area where north and south magnetic poles get created when this pure space time energy transforms itselft into electromagnetic force?
the magnetic poles are created by the core of the earth
There is no known method by which gravitational energy can produce electromagnetic energy.
Flat earthers: *confused screaming*
Lol
They have a special type of antimatter inside their heads that pushes logic away. 😜👍
@@jbirdmax 🤘🤟
@@jbirdmax LOL
@@jbirdmax
That's the best explanation to flatearthers ideology I have ever found😂
The intro makes me feel like a little kid again.
Thanks, now i know how to find diamonds in minecraft.
Im not a physicist or an astrophysicist so lately I've been confused by statements like " gravity is soo weak " or "gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces" . But ive never heard about the strong or weak neuclear forces having an effect on an object a half a billion miles away from it like the sun has on jupiter or a super massive black hole has on an entire galaxy? Or am i missing something. I really dont want to be one of those people with an even smaller fraction if u know what i mean
You have to look at their range of action. The nuclear forces drop off after about the diameter of a nucleus. Electromagnetism is strong and far reaching, but it is both attractive and repulsive, so it has no impact on bulk matter which is neutral. Gravity is only attractive so it is the dominant force in the universe.
@Ramiz Amca more spooky action at a distance . . . ? That question is up there with questions such as : what is the purpose of life ? , how exactly does quantum mechanics work ? Where did GOD go ? and why is the earth and my ole'ladies chest flat ? We may never know 🤪😅✌
Like charges repel, opposite charges attract.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains ahh ! I guess thats simular to black and white holes ? One being a dip in space/time and a spike in space/time ?
@@ProfessorDaveExplains 🤔is it possible (math or theory ) for a star to have a "in/out " affect , via gravitation(in) solar wind(out) on all matter ?
Anyone else here after the first James Webb image?
So what we feel as gravity is a warping of the space-time fabric of the known universe. I love knowing that.
If gas giant Jupiter and Neptune size planets are in front of rocky earth or mars sized planets and the larger gas Giants orbit fast would be this larger faster gas planets make it harder to detected the smaller rocky planets
You will also break the brain of a one Ben Davidson who in his infinite IQ will say that "Errraa, general relativity is wrong".
Or prism
On prism, light, spectrum, in deep space anyone knowledge there of¿?
Like a Henry...
Julie
🦜🦜🦎👸🤴🦗🥶🤩
Hi prof
Where are you a professor? Actually been bothered by that title for a while. Big fan though!
watch "ask professor dave #2"
OK, Professor Dave Einstein. Get busy.
You know gravity doesn't exist. Well, neither does space.
You know your going to break the brains of flat erfers? DO IT!
I have a question, so these ripples, are they ripples in the 4th dimension ?
Ripples in the 4d manifold called space-time. So yeah sort of like ripples in a 4d continuum
🤷♂️
@@harshildeora1001 how is a disturbance in the fourth dimension able to cause a change in the laser beam in the LIGO observatory ?
Deepu Jacob by creating a super massive black hole
@@deepu_btbx He was saying that spacetime is 4d itself, not that gravitational ripples are in the fourth dimension. The 4th dimension is purely temporal, but gravitational waves are observed by us in our 3 spacial dimensions.
so, Space around Sun is warped we can't imagine it, Sun is rotating 24x7, so Space around Sun is also rotateing? If Yes then is it really earth & other planets rotateing around Sun or Sun's rotateing space forceing planets to rotate. It's like you tk a bucket of water , rotate it fast, place a big floating ball, then place small flaoting balls, eventually everting will rotate, bcz underlining water is rotateing. When water speed gets way less, big ball will come at center and other rotates around it.
sun's rotateing speed is less, what if it's very high , I mean million times more then will space around it will also rotate million times more fast. Which will actually distort space time.
I guess black hole r just planets with no thermo nuclear fuel , rotateing at ultra high speed, which causes space around them to rotate at high speed , which intern causes no light pass through them which is why we can't see them.
Calculating mass of an object based on how much light it bends may not be true always. Light bends when space bends, what if space is non-linear, who proved space is linear in all direction? We assumed it.
You should stop pretending you understand astrophysics and just actually learn astrophysics.
We need another Einstein, zweistein, dreistein
Epstein
@@rufusthepotato1735 but they killed him off 😢 maybe one of his kids could carry the job 🤷♂️
HTF can someone be such a genius as Einstein ? The mind boggles, his brain was definitely wired different to 99.999999% of the population...
time is a human defined dimention. time has an unit definition of seconds hours etc. scientists says time is variable in space etc. they are mistakenly saying this. in extra ordinary space areas time definition parameters changes. you measure different timeout in extraordinary spaces. some idiotic theories says gravitation has waves. its all false because in space there are so much different gravitational force source massive areas all of them have different accelerations.
People who actually understand physics disagree with you.
You sound like a twat. Your narcissim and lack of any knowledge of physics is astounding. Go away please.
And now ask a flat earther what he thinks about this video.
They wouldn't watch it. That's the problem. They'd scream "IT'S ALL FUCKING CARTOONS. SEE? NONE OF THIS IS REAL." They don't understand, animations are a great way to visualize a difficult, or exotic, long-time based event. Like 2-decades worth of observations of a star rapidly being flung by a black hole, oh and when it is at the nearest part of the ellipse a not-insignificant portion of mass is being siphoned off.
Flat earth has simply become a giant genetic fallacy. If they literally have not witnessed it, and it's not a physical phenomena, they'll scream it's fake. I mean look at Nathan oaktard, 'WHY WOULD YOU LOOK AT THE SKY TO DETERMINE THE SHAPE OF THE GROUND?!" Totally ignoring triangulation exists, or how one would use the stars to navigate and make sure they're where they think they are on the land, while doing surveying.
They expect "the globetards" to do 100% of the legwork to learn absolutely every field of science and math, and study for the shape of the earth. Then scream it's all fake when we try to explain anything.
To hell with them. Just ignore them and enjoy what scientific discovery and intrigue has to offer
Is that a slide whistle at the end of the theme song? lol
I think it is just a regular flute.
Whistle? Will you comment a reply back more info ? On seti help?
Ment on a set satallite frequency
Set was a typo
Satallite frequency for seti program at 8. 2 herz maybe light year can it be done?
it bends space
I love this. But understand none of it. And that's okay.
F's in chat for Einstein.
One of these days, someone is going to quantize gauge theory gravity, and curved spacetime will join phlogiston and the ptolemaic universe as a quaint, old-fashioned notion from the past. Gauge theory gravity and general relativity are both derived from the Einstein-Hilbert action, so they make almost the same predictions. Orbital precession, gravitational lensing, everything. But gauge theory gravity models gravity as a field in flat Minkowsky space, so it may be less pathological at subatomic scales, and it may be easier to combine with field theory into a "theory of everything". No curvature required, just a sort of "index of refraction" that slows light down in a gravitational field.
Well no, that won't happen, because of everything in this entire video which you did not address in the slightest.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains I addressed your whole post, Professor Dave. I said "Gauge theory gravity and general relativity make almost the same predictions."
Gauge theory gravity projects the curved spacetime of general relativity onto the flat spacetime of special relativity, then compensates for the closer spacing of points (along the gradient in the gravitational potential) by adding something called the "displacement field". Relativity is better science fiction, but gauge theory is better science.
Sorry, still not getting it. General relativity makes quantitative predictions that are regularly verified, so whatever you're referencing must take that into account, and if they make almost the same predictions, they're therefore almost the same thing.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Let's put it this way: Gauge theory gravity demonstrates that curved spacetime isn't a proven fact. In a review of GTG, David Hestenes says "[Einstein's] conclusions depended critically on the mathematics at his disposal, and displacement gauge theory was not an option available to him." So relativity was the only way to formulate a gauge-invariant theory of gravity in the early 20th century. Personally, I suspect that a gauge theory in flat spacetime (GTG) will be more compatible with other gauge theories in flat spacetime (quantum field theory), since it differs from GR in not allowing exotic sci-fi phenomena like wormholes.
@@Raging.Geekazoid There's something you're not taking into account. Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates. GR allows them. GTG does not. If we can show K-S coordinates are a more accurate way to describe black holes than Gullstrand-Painlevé coordinates, which are allowed by GTG, then GTG is not adequate. I'm not an expert on this field by a long shot, maybe you know something about G-P and K-S coords that I don't, but since both allow black holes, then this is a position where GR and GTG give different predictions, so if we can somehow show one or the other to describe black holes more accurately, we can show one or the other to be a more accurate description of reality. As well, K-S coordinates can give a good description of a black hole's interior at every point before the singularity itself, which sounds like predictive power. Maybe future methodology will let us determine if K-S or G-P give a more accurate prediction of a black hole's insides, or maybe we'll find a wormhole and send something through it. Trying to predict the future of science is almost certainly going to be at least a little wrong.
Waiting for the professor to reconcile the theory of general relativity and quantum mechanics
Hasn't been done yet.
Scott Meyer thats the joke
@@MihadAlzayat singularities violate quantum mechanics.
Thanks so much!
gravity
How to become the next Einstein:
1. Get a cool haircut
2. Play an instrument
3.???
4. Success
get to work in a pattent office.
Thats pretty much what dave did.
espacio hexadimencional serna not the office part
"That not even light can escape the gravitational pull" I always disliked that explanation.
Light doesn't have mass, so gravity doesn't effect it, the curvature of spacetime does.
@James Attwood still light scapes out of the so called black holes.
@@SernasHeptaDimesionalSpace not after it crosses the event horizon
Thats like saying if light doesn't have mass, then how does it have energy given that E=mc^2?
Photons don't have rest mass, but they have relativistic mass. The full Einstein mass-energy equivalency formula is E^2 = m^2c^4 + p^2c^2. The photon has momentum, and therefore energy, which mean it has a mass-energy equivalency.
Regardless, the gravitational effect distorts/curves/bends spacetime and both mass and energy are affected by that distortion.
@@schifoso Yeah, people are lazy, so we cut the important part :D Thumbs up.
"Light doesn't have mass, so gravity doesn't effect it, the curvature of spacetime does."
...what do you think gravity is?
ah
so what’s the Earth spherical or flat?
Spherical for sure
Sir you deserve so.much than this............hope you will be rocking on UA-cam one day.........
By the way great video as others
My thinking is that light gets curved by lifht electromagnetis that stars have.
Walls info add me light year info or cefeus info
Walls. Information in deep space please or pictures if allowed in space time¿ ?
Julie
🌹🍁🦜🦜🦎
I love how gravitational lensing works.
Great work @Professor Dave, so far only one dislike from a flerf idiot.
Edit1: Was writing about Mercury's orbit precession when you talked about it.
Edit2: Isn't neutron star merger responsible for most elements heavier than iron?
Flerfer idiot lol
Now from TWO flerfer idiots *ding* *ding*
HELLO
👋