What is Relativity? | Sean Carroll on Einstein's View of Time and Space

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 21 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 542

  • @Chukwu1848
    @Chukwu1848 3 роки тому +108

    I like how Sean Carroll explains these complex ideas in a way that is well within reach of the minds of non-physicists. Well done sir.

    • @ManorexicPanda
      @ManorexicPanda 2 роки тому +8

      Him and brian Greene are the most understandable lecturers I’ve watched

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 2 роки тому

      @@ManorexicPanda THE CLEAR, INTEGRATED, EXTENSIVE, LOGICAL, BALANCED, AND MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity:
      Consider what is E=MC2. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. The MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE AND the full distance in/of SPACE are CLEARLY linked AND BALANCED opposites (ON BALANCE), AS c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE (ON BALANCE); AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. This CLEARLY explains and proves TIME dilation AND what is the fourth dimension. CLEARLY, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites (ON BALANCE); AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Notice what is the TRANSLUCENT blue sky ON BALANCE in relation to what is THE EYE. What are OBJECTS may fall at the SAME RATE in order to VANISH as part of what is THE EARTH/ground (ON BALANCE). TIME dilation CLEARLY proves that what is E=MC2 is CLEARLY in FULL accordance with TIME AND the fact that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. (Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE). Notice what is the orange (AND SETTING) SUN in what constitutes direct comparison WITH what is the FULLY ILLUMINATED (AND SETTING WHITE) MOON. (They are the SAME SIZE as what is THE EYE, AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON then matches it's revolution; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH what is E=MC2, TIME, AND what is THE EYE ON BALANCE.) Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. LOOK directly overhead at what is the BLUE AND TRANSLUCENT sky. (Consider what is invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE.) NOW, lava is orange; AND it is even blood red. Excellent. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) pursuant to what are E=MC2 AND TIME. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution; AND the cosmological redshift proves that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. (Consider TIME AND TIME dilation ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity ON/IN BALANCE). INDEED, GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AND “mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY; AND gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH E=MC2 AND TIME. This CLEARLY explains and proves what is the fourth dimension. I have also CLEARLY explained (ON BALANCE) why THE PLANETS move away very, very, very, very slightly in relation to WHAT IS THE SUN, AND I have CLEARLY explained ON BALANCE why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.) Excellent. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT AND description is improved in the truly superior mind. Again, consider what is the BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE (ON BALANCE) in accordance WITH WHAT IS E=MC2 AND TIME; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE !!! Indeed, now consider what is THE EYE. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE. Magnificent !!!
      By Frank DiMeglio

    • @gregbrown5020
      @gregbrown5020 Рік тому

      Well within reach, lol.

    • @roberthvistendahl8635
      @roberthvistendahl8635 10 місяців тому

      I second that! It's encouraged me to do more of the same, I'm gonna hit the like button.

  • @nicholasgarcia6402
    @nicholasgarcia6402 3 роки тому +35

    I always thought Sean Carroll was one of the best science communicators. Great to see him in his element like this

  • @ahmedrafea8542
    @ahmedrafea8542 3 роки тому +22

    It is always a joy to watch and listen to professor Carroll. Complicated concepts are clearly explained and visualized. Thanks for this very informative lecture.

    • @kiabtoomlauj6249
      @kiabtoomlauj6249 3 роки тому +2

      I like him above all others, too, when it comes to explaining complex things. I like Carl Sagan the most, if we included past scientists as well when it comes to "who's better" at explaining complex science and scientific ideas to folks.
      Anyway, it always bothers me, though, when people like Sagan, Carroll et al fall into the same unscientific trap of saying "regardless how fast you're going, even if you're going at 200,000 miles per second ---- this is a SUBJUNCTIVE or IMPOSSIBLE situation ---- light is still traveling at 300,000 miles per second with respect to you." Okay, even that is true... and it likely is true.... it still doesn't mean the "speed of light is absolute to all other moving" things or particles. More accurately, photons speed is "absolute to all other moving OBJECTS;" but it is NOT absolute speed (by which we mean it always passes by all other moving particles at the speed of light, regardless how fast other particles travels.
      THAT is clearly mathematically and logically insupportable. Muons are not photons. Nor are electrons. Nor protons. They are moving close to the speed of photons/light or can be made to do so, by powerful apparatuses like giant magnets. It is not attainable to say even if "you" (a muon or one of the protons accelerated by the Large Hadron Collider) travel at, say, 99.9999991% the speed of light... that like would come passing you by at a speed of 300,000 meters per second.... like you, that muon or protons being accelerated at that large machine.
      If moving at 99.9999991% the speed of light is still ZERO relatively to like moving at a snail's pace, with respect to light, then there is no reason to do any experiment, to get some particle, other than photons, to move at 99.9999991% the speed of photons!
      But when you're moving at 99.9999991% at the speed of light, as a muon or accelerated proton ---- AND THIS IS REAL, NOT A SUBJUNCTIVE situation as noted above, in terms of a classical, large object being erroneously hypothesized as being able to move at 200,000 meters per second --- "you" ARE moving virtually as fast as light & "relativity" (or a certain natural or cosmic reality or property) starts to come into play, for "you" ... like it is for pure photons.... so to say regardless how fast "you" move, light moves at 300,000 meters per second with respect to "you" IS OBVIOUSLY not right....

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 Рік тому

      ​@@kiabtoomlauj6249 WHY AND HOW GRAVITY AND TWO DIMENSIONAL SPACE ARE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS E=MC2:
      E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) !!! The TRANSLUCENT blue sky is manifest as (or consistent with/as) what is BALANCED BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the TRANSLUCENT blue sky is true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY !!!! THINK !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. Importantly, what is GRAVITY is an INTERACTION that cannot be shielded (or blocked) ON BALANCE. Great. You didn't forget to consider what is the orange (AND setting) Sun ON BALANCE, did you !!!!? Magnificent. I have FUNDAMENTALLY and truly revolutionized physics. (Lava is orange, AND it is even blood red.) GREAT !!!! Obviously, carefully and CLEARLY consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE, as it ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE !!! (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.). Fantastic !!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. What is E=MC2 IS dimensionally consistent !!! The density of what is THE SUN is then necessarily about ONE QUARTER of that of what is THE EARTH !!! INDEED, notice what is the fully illuminated (AND setting/WHITE) MOON ON BALANCE !!!! What is E=MC2 IS dimensionally consistent !!!! Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) !!! CLEAR water comes from what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! Excellent. Think.
      By Frank Martin DiMeglio

  • @poolbeasttv9664
    @poolbeasttv9664 3 роки тому +17

    Amazing lecture
    This man has a wonderful voice

  • @clydedurden1555
    @clydedurden1555 2 роки тому +4

    i’ve been on this rabbit hole for months now.. this is the best explanation i’ve ever heard!! seems like others almost try to make it more confusing than it needs to be ? idk

  • @funkiskunki
    @funkiskunki 2 роки тому +5

    I now know that as much as science interests and amazes me especially astrophysics...astronomy...I will never fully grasp it, if I still mostly struggle even listening to Sean...still enjoyable..thanks for trying Sean Carrol...does anyone know anything that someone, who struggles like myself, could watch and maybe find easier to understand.

  • @josephcollins6033
    @josephcollins6033 3 роки тому +4

    I wish I had words to express how much I want to understand all of this. Why can't it be explained? You are the very best I have seen. I like the way you present (OMG, can I say that now?) and pace what you say. I am rather intelligent in everything else! WTF? Help!!!

  • @sujitkumardash5650
    @sujitkumardash5650 3 роки тому +7

    That was really a great lecture to watch. I got my own CONE out of intuition. LOL. Joke aside, To grasp such an idea of spacetime isn't easy as you might think ,but Mr. Carroll nailed it. Thank you sir.

  • @binuvarghese5545
    @binuvarghese5545 3 роки тому +7

    Really very helpful to understand time... his explanation is very precise and even a layman can also understand the concept and importance of relativity and time

  • @Nah_Bohdi
    @Nah_Bohdi 3 роки тому +13

    He's one of the few people I disagree with in fundamental physics but still listen to for general discussion.

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 роки тому +2

      WHY E=MC2 AS F=MA NECESSARILY AND FUNDAMENTALLY IS A SURFACE (AND SPACE) THAT IS ESSENTIALLY TWO DIMENSIONAL AS WELL (ON BALANCE):
      E=mc2 IS F=ma. Is a two dimensional surface or SPACE VISIBLE or invisible ? The answer is that it is BOTH (IN BALANCE) AS invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE. I have now explained why the electron AND the photon are NECESSARILY structureless IN BALANCE in accordance with the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The EARTH is ALSO BLUE, AND the sky is blue. NOW, THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE SPACE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Great. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Hence, WHAT IS the Earth is the linked AND BALANCED opposite in relation to WHAT IS the Sun ON BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. I have CLEARLY explained c4 from Einstein's field equations, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AND I have mathematically unified physics. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!!
      GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY and truly proven !!!!!!!! Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. E=mc2 IS F=ma.
      By Frank DiMeglio

    • @ericleung232
      @ericleung232 3 роки тому +4

      Sure. Would like to hear your disagreements. If you happen to be a physicist, is there anywhere I can look up to read your publications or viewpoints against Sean’s?

    • @JoshuaWillis89
      @JoshuaWillis89 3 роки тому +7

      @@frankdimeglio8216 why are you screaming physics at a guy who didn’t even propose a specific concept for you to explain or debunk? Calm down, bro.

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 2 роки тому +1

      @@JoshuaWillis89 Modern “physics” is political. It is basically an affair of maximum money making agenda “physics”. Einstein was a low level genius who definitely was not open and honest. He was lazy. There is a glaring lack of top down thinking and common sense in physics today. The truth is simple, and it involves very hard work. TRUTH, reality, AND nature/natural experience go hand in hand. We never got the full truth out of Einstein, and we never will.
      ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. Here is the proof. Hundreds of scientists and physicists are already in agreement with this over the course of many years. (Also, I have plenty more proof.) One step at a time. Let's focus on this for now. This is super important work. It's all CLEARLY proven.
      Einstein never nearly understood F=MA, E=mc2, philosophy, mathematics, physics/physical experience, and TIME. He was a known weasel who was extremely selfish. FACTS. IMPORTANT. Can WHAT IS the Sun be shielded or blocked ? No. Can what is the Earth be shielded or blocked ? No. The truth is simple. Common sense is very lacking in physics today. Keep it simple. Keep it real. Gravity is fundamental. Top down thinking is very lacking in physics today. The truth is simple. We need physics that makes sense, as BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.
      Gravity is fundamental, as it cannot be shielded (or blocked). ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. It is obvious. In fact, the truth is clearly IRRESISTIBLE. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.
      The tides are ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational in a balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE fashion/relation, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. This is consistent with F=ma AND E=mc2. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution !! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as this balances gravity AND inertia; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. This is consistent with F=ma AND E=mc2 AS WELL. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy on balance, as gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites ON BALANCE. Carefully consider, in direct comparison, the fully illuminated (and setting) Moon AND what is the ORANGE (and setting) Sun !! They are both the same size as the eye. Now, the sky is blue; and THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. (WHAT IS the Moon is also blue !!) ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. (Gravity is CLEARLY AND necessarily proven to be ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE.)
      TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. (This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as gravity is, CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY, proven to be ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE.) Indeed, TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE. Great !!! (Gravity is, CLEARLY AND necessarily, proven to be ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE.)
      By Frank DiMeglio

    • @ManorexicPanda
      @ManorexicPanda 2 роки тому +1

      @@frankdimeglio8216 you make no sense. Your comments are just a bunch of jumbled Minho jumbo. Cite experiments and scientific articles that have proven what you said to be true. Calling Einstein a low level genius is truly laughable. You think you’re smarter than Einstein? Where’s your contributions to civilization??

  • @marthareal8398
    @marthareal8398 2 роки тому +3

    This particular “chapter” was extremely bright for me. It explains space and time relative to my life, past, present and future. Thank you very much, I fear less the more and better I understand. My brain is racing in an exciting way, with thoughts and analysis. Thank you Professor Carroll!

  • @guitart4909
    @guitart4909 5 місяців тому +1

    Highly recommend watching the full course

  • @stevea.b.9282
    @stevea.b.9282 2 роки тому +1

    One of the best teachers I've seen. Absolutely brilliant explanation for someone (like myself) who is just starting to explore relativity. Many thanks

  • @unknownPLfan
    @unknownPLfan 3 роки тому +45

    I don't really care for Great Courses. Just clicked for our boi younger Sean Carroll

    • @martinds4895
      @martinds4895 3 роки тому +1

      Yeah me too

    • @orsozapata
      @orsozapata 3 роки тому +1

      Well said mate

    • @unknownPLfan
      @unknownPLfan 3 роки тому +1

      @@thishandleistacken and @X95 23 A few things - I think the obvious thing that many people will agree with me that something like Great Courses provides less benefit for the cost considering how many university level courses are uploaded for free these days - or even that Sean Carroll himself on his own time uploaded an excellent key ideas series on his own channel that covers a lot of the same topics.
      Next, the aesthetics are ugly. I'm just gonna say it, I hate the interior design of the room, Sean's stereotypical professor look in this, and the graphics used in the video. Just using a blackboard or screen-sharing a tablet I think is more effective and looks better (I know you we didn't have mass market tablets when this was filmed).
      Finally, and this is less obvious, if I'm paying for physics content at the high prices offered by great courses, my expectation is that it should be technical - with worked examples of calculations or proofs - and the benefit for course-length series with this format is pretty marginal imo and I have to admit having been in the category of people much earlier in my life sort of duped into thinking they know science because they read the popular books and the high prices of Great Courses would've add to this effect. It's not that this sort of content has no place, but great-courses style content seems like something from another era when we literally only had university courses and science channel documentaries - where the only benefit to it in 2021 is at least I can trust that it's curated. Where I give Sean Carroll credit for is his ability to do an incredible job of mapping ideas you generally learn from the math onto the English language - and these days he does it for free on UA-cam and his podcast - and I'm glad that a big chunk of his career has been turned towards inspiring people to study physics.

    • @angelaparaski
      @angelaparaski 3 роки тому

      Kkkkk.... He is an intelligent scientist,peoples!

    • @TheGreatCourses
      @TheGreatCourses  3 роки тому +2

      Thank you for your feedback. We will share this with our team.

  • @jmanj3917
    @jmanj3917 2 роки тому +4

    Great job explaining complicated material!
    I find it interesting that our modern model of (space-) time, with its forward and backward looking light cones, looks so similar to one of our oldest timekeeping devices, an hourglass

  • @dennisgalvin2521
    @dennisgalvin2521 2 роки тому +6

    "There's no such thing as one moment spread through out the universe that everyone can agree on" [Sean Carrol] Interestingly the word moment despite being defined as "..a brief period of time" is in fact a brief period of an event because moment comes from momentum which is tantamount to events. Meaning that periods \ duration are of events not time. So events have duration that are measured by time as space has distance that's measured by the metric system or imperial units.
    What we perceive as the passing of time is just the passing of events.

    • @Igorbujhm
      @Igorbujhm 2 роки тому

      Wibbly wobbly, timey wimey

    • @SP-pf4er
      @SP-pf4er 2 роки тому +1

      You are so right, my friend. And here's a clock that shows what you've just explained: ua-cam.com/video/9-L_D2cB1ks/v-deo.html Kudos and love 🖖

  • @karlosjeffers4791
    @karlosjeffers4791 3 роки тому +11

    Can I go back in time and learn this fascinating science in school....when I should’ve been learning it?

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas 3 роки тому +3

      paradoxically, yes. close your eyes and go back, back, back....

    • @adrian72300
      @adrian72300 3 роки тому +1

      @@HarryNicNicholas Exactly! with your current way of thinking, you can close your eyes and go back and kick the bullies butt or get the girl you always wanted, you can alter past events with your thoughts

    • @nvraman
      @nvraman 2 роки тому +1

      Yes, and actually you are doing the same now. I have lived many of infantile thoughts again, and i am not interested in the present, i lose touch with what happens around me, and when i see a child playing, i get excited.

  • @el_meza9154
    @el_meza9154 2 роки тому +2

    I would’ve never had the brains or knowledge to study any sort of physics but I’ve been really intrigued and really really REALLY inspired by Mr Sean Carrol In quantum physics i feel like I’m closer and closer to finding the perfect combination in spirituality physics science and geometry and symmetry and etc etc👌👍🙌

  • @Ozgipsy
    @Ozgipsy Рік тому +1

    He summarises this very well.

  • @liveinfra6820
    @liveinfra6820 3 роки тому +18

    Absolutely wonderful lecture , thankyou great courses plus for bringing these insightful sessions available to everyone 🙏 .

  • @BlueSkiesTruthRadio
    @BlueSkiesTruthRadio 8 днів тому

    Loved this lecture so much that I just purchased it for future viewing! Can't wait to received the textbook 🎉

  • @sagarg4287
    @sagarg4287 2 роки тому +2

    Awesome explanation! And the way speaks is so clear! Thoroghly enjoyed this lecture

  • @mareksamsel3123
    @mareksamsel3123 3 роки тому +1

    So many of these kind of. Vids yet this one, actually explains things in the most wonderful
    way, I'm impressed and grateful

    • @TheGreatCourses
      @TheGreatCourses  3 роки тому

      Thank you, Marek, we are happy to hear your feedback.

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 2 роки тому

      @@TheGreatCourses WHY E=MC2 AS F=MA NECESSARILY AND FUNDAMENTALLY IS A SURFACE (AND SPACE) THAT IS ESSENTIALLY TWO DIMENSIONAL AS WELL (ON BALANCE):
      E=mc2 IS F=ma. Is a two dimensional surface or SPACE VISIBLE or invisible ? The answer is that it is BOTH (IN BALANCE) AS invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE. I have now explained why the electron AND the photon are NECESSARILY structureless IN BALANCE in accordance with the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The EARTH is ALSO BLUE, AND the sky is blue. NOW, THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE SPACE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Great. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Hence, WHAT IS the Earth is the linked AND BALANCED opposite in relation to WHAT IS the Sun ON BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. I have CLEARLY explained c4 from Einstein's field equations, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AND I have mathematically unified physics. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!!
      GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY and truly proven !!!!!!!! Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. E=mc2 IS F=ma.
      By Frank DiMeglio

    • @educatedguest1510
      @educatedguest1510 8 місяців тому

      Einstein's GR was recently expressed classically through elementary potential, read: Einstein’s General Relativity Becomes Elementary in 2024

  • @gotatochigs314
    @gotatochigs314 3 роки тому +6

    It's interesting to think from the muon's perspective, where the earth is moving towards it at close to the speed of light. The earth still reaches it before it decays though, since the earth experienced less than 2 microseconds of time along the way.

  • @new-knowledge8040
    @new-knowledge8040 3 роки тому +25

    How did he do it ? He looks so much younger. We, the people, believe he knows of, and has practised, time travel. Either that, or this one really old video.

    • @Nixontheman
      @Nixontheman 3 роки тому +5

      The suit would indicate the latter 😂

    • @whirledpeas3477
      @whirledpeas3477 3 роки тому

      Makeup

    • @Quantum_GirlE
      @Quantum_GirlE 3 роки тому

      @@Nixontheman 🤣 that's great

    • @josephhall5681
      @josephhall5681 3 роки тому

      NEWKNOWLEDGE = NOKNOWLEDGE

    • @new-knowledge8040
      @new-knowledge8040 3 роки тому

      @@josephhall5681 True, I don't know much. But I did manage to derive the SR mathematical equations, even though I had no physics education at all.

  • @zack_120
    @zack_120 3 роки тому +2

    12:37 - they came back with 'different reading' of time is because they were affected by different forces by each going through different path/speed/trajectory, while the TIME remains the same everywhere which is an abstract thing that nothing can change it, i.e. it is absolute. So the Newtonian theory seems to make sense.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 3 роки тому

      Two clocks moving relative to each other say otherwise.

    • @SP-pf4er
      @SP-pf4er 2 роки тому

      The problem is our paradigm about time. We think that time is passing in the first place. Take a look at this clock and you'll see that objects are actually moving through time and time stands still: ua-cam.com/video/9-L_D2cB1ks/v-deo.html

    • @princesizwe2952
      @princesizwe2952 2 роки тому

      It will turn out, Scientists where to quickly to dismiss Newton😁

  • @karlwashere123
    @karlwashere123 3 роки тому +4

    Sean always crushes a good lecture

  • @STaSHZILLA420
    @STaSHZILLA420 3 роки тому +28

    Me: "Hey Sean, What time is it?"
    Sean: " *Yes* ."

  • @ashmoore9945
    @ashmoore9945 2 роки тому +1

    You may b able to move your "light cones" around. but you can not change the origin of your light cone. If your light cone cone starts on Earth, it is always based on Earth, relative to your change of position in the solar system or galactic plane. Your space-time come from your relative place in the universal plane. Remember it's all relative to where you are.

  • @kylesmonstermadness1770
    @kylesmonstermadness1770 2 роки тому +1

    Man it’s amazing listening to you guys

  • @naturemc2
    @naturemc2 3 роки тому +15

    Thanks. I appreciate the time and effort to put all these information.

    • @matydrum
      @matydrum 3 роки тому +4

      Should have said "space-time and effort"!😉😁

  • @tonyhill2318
    @tonyhill2318 2 роки тому +1

    You lost me at lightcones. But blew my mind with the muon thing.

  • @apricotcomputers3943
    @apricotcomputers3943 14 днів тому

    everything uploaded on this channel/topic I'm subscribing to 😂

  • @philoso377
    @philoso377 10 місяців тому

    Nice video and presentation.
    Siddhartha Gautama conceived the principle of wisdom from meditation.
    Einstein conceived the principle of relativity from thought experiment. They both adored and worship by their disciples around the world.

  • @Luca-xr7bs
    @Luca-xr7bs 3 роки тому +7

    prof. Carroll is phenomenal

  • @AbdulHafeez-cq6oo
    @AbdulHafeez-cq6oo 2 роки тому +1

    Great description of time and space

  • @dmreturns6485
    @dmreturns6485 3 роки тому +1

    Why is it easier when Sean explains it?

  • @jjourz612
    @jjourz612 2 роки тому +1

    Simply brilliant, they way he explains it all

  • @yoyo54314
    @yoyo54314 2 роки тому +4

    Simply wonderful.

  • @dmitryn9090
    @dmitryn9090 3 роки тому +7

    Thanks for the great explanation! And for the undeniable proof that the past exists - the tie :)

    • @SP-pf4er
      @SP-pf4er 2 роки тому

      And yet, here is a clock that shows that the past does not exist: ua-cam.com/video/9-L_D2cB1ks/v-deo.html 😱😎

  • @tourdeforce2881
    @tourdeforce2881 2 роки тому +2

    Very clear and entertaining....thank you!

  • @AlexanderKoryagin
    @AlexanderKoryagin 3 роки тому +6

    Excellent lecture, thank you!

  • @davidfinley4050
    @davidfinley4050 2 роки тому +2

    Well explained sean

  • @amitgurung8739
    @amitgurung8739 Рік тому +1

    Respected sir, can we collapse time and space through our imagination? Through our imagination we change the reality with out taking any action.

  • @leooz8071
    @leooz8071 2 роки тому

    I never move from my couch while in my trousers. I guess time flies by so fast in my experience.

  • @neillibertine3044
    @neillibertine3044 3 роки тому

    Q. What is gravity.
    A. Gravity is phenomenon of objects falling down to ground with force and it seems that intensity of force or energy decreases with square of distance. This is observed on earth only that objects are pulled down but by inference we generalized it to whole planetary system and universe also.
    Q. What is cause or mechanism of gravity.
    A. Thermal energy emitted from sun generating pressure in space causing vacuum and thus creating thermal gradient for pressure wind. This pressure expand space by lowering matter concentration and further cause of motion of planets orbitting. Torsion by planetary motion concentrate matter to planets like cables. Yes this is possible explanation on basis of forces and matter in action. Gravity is equivalent to buyoant force in fluids.
    Q. What happen if star extinguishes or pressure cease. Does matter and large bodies lumps at centre and space is shrinked, like concept of black hole.
    A. Black hole is conceptual thing for purposed model to work. There is no observational evidence of any kind to prove its existence. No, large masses not fused at centre. First the vacuum created by pressure is filled with space matter that was removed and space becomes homogeneous of space matter. Speed of planets, which is same for given planetary system, continually slower down as resistance by matter increases. This arise two situation either radius of orbit shrink to keep speed intact and eventually planets merge at centre. This happens when star dies slowly, but if it dies abruptly which is more probable because power is constant, then angular speed of planets decreasing and finally planets comes to rest.

  • @AmongTheSheaves
    @AmongTheSheaves 5 місяців тому

    I’m here because of an interest in science- but really I just read Project Hail Mary by Andy Weir and want to know what they were talking about 😂 so grateful there are wonderful resources like this available on UA-cam!

  • @venkatbabu1722
    @venkatbabu1722 3 роки тому +1

    Relativity is the time differential of light to create mass. Everything moves at the speed of light except when slowed down.

  • @davez4285
    @davez4285 3 роки тому

    In Galileo system, x=vt, if only if dx/dt is constant. Lorentz transformation goal is distances (x, x’) x=f(v,t)and x’=g(c, t’) are mathematically equal in both systems with symmetry. So c is not Galileo or classic velocity, and t’ is not classic time. In Galileo, v varies, t is uniform at any point in space; whilst in Lorentz, t’ varies, c is constant in space. c =eu , is really the property of the space, or medium, or Ether. It is not velocity in Galileo.( v, C),(t,t’), they are (Apple, Orange), (Peach,Grape) in two math systems. People are still thinking they are same things. That causes confusion. Saying 1) if an object moves at speed of light, time stops. Moving object slows clock, etc. That’s wrong. It should be said t’ in Lorentz stops, or equal to 0. In Galileo, t is uniform, it doesn’t stop or slow. 2). Speed of light C is constant from any observer at different speeds. That is wrong. c in Galileo changes from observers, C in Lorentz as the property of space is constant. Then there is no ambiguity, confusing, both accurate in their own system for/from measurements. Time dilution, space-time curvature, etc. are all bogus by mixing concepts in two systems. If you use Fourier series to express a signal S, it is not the signal in time domain, it’s amplitude A in frequency domain. Nobody treats A-S as “signal dancing”. But sigma of all these series by frequency goes back to the value of signal in time domain. They are just mathematically equivalent, not necessarily physically same. There are many ways to do it mathematically, too.
    Relativity is just another way of measuring of the nature using electric magnetic wave in Lorentz system. It has advantages over Galileo system in Astronomy, because Maxwells equations describe electromagnetic wave in vacuum with eu as constant, which is the space property and its value equals to speed of light in Galileo.
    In Algol events, it can prove that light speed varies with observer’s speed( visit Algol website)

  • @SillyRobbit
    @SillyRobbit 2 роки тому +1

    If a photon were to wear a watch (silly but hear me out), that watch would never tick. Since the photo is massless and thus traveling at c, its movement in space-time is all in space and not at all in time. So in the photon’s context, time is still. And it’s not even traveling, because you can’t travel without time. The photon, to itself, is simply everywhere at once. Yet in our context, we see the photon move on the edge of the time cone. Therefor, I believe time itself is traveling at c. Light is riding the wave of time… How am I wrong?

    • @princesizwe2952
      @princesizwe2952 2 роки тому

      You are likely not wrong, SW THEORY 🧐, may prove you to be true...
      Great insight btw...
      If interested let's connect to discuss more

  • @gyro5d
    @gyro5d 3 роки тому

    Time started when Dielectric energy decayed from the Inertial Plane/Counterspace. Inflation.
    Dielectric energy decays into Dielectric Voidance Field/Magnetism. The Grand Expand.
    Gravity is centripetal acceleration into the Inertial Plane. Gravity is Magnetism/Dielectric Voidance Field returning to Dielectric energy, then the Inertial Plane/Counterspace.

  • @ericpham8205
    @ericpham8205 3 роки тому +3

    In multi body problems each axis has it's own time function depending on its acceleration therefore spacetime are bending and changing in multi body problem is mind boggling. Meaning our time is not known by another outside of our body and so are the other bodies. Just like the same harddrive memory could be used by many clients on same physical drive but the time of CPU and access time are different could get different data because of accessing method just like existence is different

  • @quannga99
    @quannga99 2 роки тому

    Time as we think we know it is only a concept of the human mind. Time neither starts nor ends. Relativity effects of time appear only when we try to make measurements.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 2 роки тому

      Time is that which the clocks show. We try to teach that to our five year old children... but very few are intelligent enough to remember it. ;-)

  • @eighthgate1420
    @eighthgate1420 3 роки тому +1

    Light and the speed of it play the most important part of time!

  • @williamwalker39
    @williamwalker39 Рік тому

    I have been investigating propagating Electromagnetic fields for many years. My investigations revealed that these fields and the information in these fields propagate nearly instantaneously when they are created and reduce to the speed of light as they propagate into the farfield.
    According to Albert Einstein, if the speed of light is not a constant, then his theories of Special and General Relativity are wrong. This can be seen in Einstein's time dilation result due to a moving observer: t=r t' and the length contraction result: L=L'/r, where t and L are reference to the stationary frame, and t' and L ' are reference to the moving frame, and r is the Relativistic gamma factor: r =1/Sqrt(1-(v/c)^2). These results are easily derived using Einstein's light clock thought experiment using simple algebra. But if propagating EM fields with infinite speed near the source are used in the derivation, then c = Infinity, and r=1. If propagating EM fields far from the source are used, then c = the speed of light, and r= the standard Relativistic gamma factor. What comes out of this is that the effects on time and space are completely different depending on whether one uses propagating fields near or far away from the source, which can't be true since time and space are real. So the conclusion must be that Einstein's Relativity is wrong and time and space do not change with respect to moving reference frames, Galilean Relativity is correct, and that Einstein's equations just enable us to back calculate to the correct answer, givin the time delays observed by the propagating EM fields used in measuring the effects.
    But these results do not account for the time dilation observed by moving atomic clocks in airplane experiments, but can be accounted for using variable light speed theory (VLS), origionally proposed by Einstein, and later improved by Robert Dicky in 1957. In this theory, spacetime is not curved by gravity as suggested by General Relativity, instead Newtons theory of gravity is correct and the many other known effects of gravity are due to the affect of gravity on the of light speed. For instance the observed bending of light by mass, which caused General Relativity to be accepted, can be explained, by the gravity generated by the mass, changing the speed of light, causing the light to bend around the mass. This effect is analogous to the bending of light in glass. Since lasers are used in atomic clocks to measure time, then the observed time dilation in atomic clocks in moving airplanes can be explained as due to the effects of light speed changes in the clocks due to changes in gravitation as the plane goes up and down. It should also be noted that several researchers have shown the relation E=mc^2 can be derived without Relativity using Newtonian mechanics, and the Michelson Morley experiment can be explained using the Doppler effect, ref Nathan Rapport 2021
    In summary, this research shows that Einstein's theories are wrong and that time and space do not change with respect to moving observers, Galilean Relativity is correct, Newtons theory of gravity is correct, and many of the other effects of gravity can be explained as gravity simply changing the speed of light. The importance of this research is that it completely changes our understanding of time and space and gravity, and simplifies our theories. Perhaps this new understanding will finally enable researchers to finally unite Gravitational theory with quantum mechanics which have been incompatible since scientists accepted Einstein's theories for Special and General Relativity. For instance, Relativity is incompatible with quantum entanglement, which requires communication faster than light, but can perhaps can be explained by
    superluminal propagating fields between entangled particles.
    It should be mentioned that this superluminal effect is also observed in the propagating gravitational fields generated by an oscillating mass using Newtonian gravitational theory, and is nearly infinite near the source and reduces to speed of light far from the source. This matches very well with observations of the stability of the planets, which would not be possible if gravity propagates at light speed, and was origionally proposed by Simone Laplace in his famous book: Mécanique Céleste in the late 1700's, where he estimated the speed of gravity to be 7x10^6 times greater than the speed of light.

  • @michaelccopelandsr7120
    @michaelccopelandsr7120 Рік тому

    Time is fascinating. I worked the subway stations for nearly 10 years. From one end of the city to the other. Every so often I would notice the city would be saying that, "Today just flew by" or "The day was just dragging along." How can an entire city, with no interaction with each other until they used the subway, complain about the same time paradox unless it was effected by it? Maybe a time distorted bubble the earth passes through in its revolution around the sun. Maybe random waves of time distortion hitting the earth? Maybe they're given off by the sun. Maybe they're from outside our Terran system and reach us in intervals. ???? 🎶"Ti-i-i-ime, is on my side. Yes, it is!"🎶
    If you can think of a better way to do a blind survey of an entire city, in the small window of opportunity, I'm all in. Until then, I invite you to spend a couple years in the subways, between 2pm-10pm and you'll see for yourself. Just listen as an entire city gets off of work and gets out of school. You'll see it's more than a, "coincidence of circumstances" ;-P

  • @KillianTwew
    @KillianTwew 6 місяців тому

    Maybe space becomes a point in time inside of a blackhole because it's so compressed that there is no vacuum for the quantum field to propogate inside what we call, "time".

  • @EvgenyMuryshkin
    @EvgenyMuryshkin 6 місяців тому +1

    Why would time go slower on these rockets in thought experiment? How can this be deduced from thought experiments?

  • @dexter8705
    @dexter8705 2 роки тому +1

    I don't think anyone has ever explained why the faster you travel through space the slower you travel through time or even if it does, pretty sure we're just explaining the movement of space which is our gravitational field.

    • @joepierson3859
      @joepierson3859 2 роки тому

      It's because the speed of light is constant

    • @dexter8705
      @dexter8705 2 роки тому

      @@joepierson3859 so your saying time dilation is caused by the consistency of the speed of light.. you get that makes no sense at all right? Or could you please explain so I understand.

    • @joepierson3859
      @joepierson3859 2 роки тому

      @@dexter8705 You can understand it clearly if you study the light clock experiment and do some simple trigonometry, then it will "click".
      That is IF the speed of light is constant and finite for all observers then time dilation must occur.

    • @dexter8705
      @dexter8705 2 роки тому

      @@joepierson3859 but we don't move side to side like a photon in a photon clock, in general relativity you'd have to realise that space moves through us the way that (dialect) and science Clic explain.

    • @joepierson3859
      @joepierson3859 2 роки тому

      @@dexter8705 Dialect, ugh. College textbooks should be your source.
      Anyway, the clock experiment has nothing to do with light per se you can use a gravitational wave clock if you like, or any other massless particle for that matter.
      The point of the light clock experiment is that there's a universal max speed of causation. Meaning if there's something a meter away from me I can't instantly affect it.
      This simple fact has far-reaching effects, in that if something is moving relative to me, and there's a maximum speed limit of the universe, passage of time between both of us has to be different. That difference is called time dilation.

  • @videosbymathew
    @videosbymathew 3 роки тому +3

    The 'clocks on spaceships' reference as a test idea, but then it was sad that relativity shows us that you can't measure time throughout the universe as one single moment that everyone agrees on. Key words here are "everyone agrees on" I feel. We should also hold to the importance of the idea that we can still identify a single 'moment in time', at least in principle. Say you freeze all of spacetime and look at it as a whole from a god's eye point of view. That's your single moment in time. Sure, the clocks of those spaceships and their viewpoints with each other will be different from their starting location, but that's just their rate of cause and effect (their time) changing. You can still justifiably state that picture as "a single moment in time", which if everyone could also look back and view, could all then agree upon that picture as well. Please correct me if I'm somehow wrong on this idea.

    • @videosbymathew
      @videosbymathew 3 роки тому

      I should add that the "observers disagreeing" is entirely beside the point. Agreeing on personal "at the moment" observations doesn't change the nature of a frozen slice of time, that's simply an information problem.
      I think some viewers may get hung up no the idea that "we have our own times" when really we inhabit slices of the same moment of time "at varying rates of cause and effect".
      If you view time (and spacetime of course) as a cause and effect machine, I think this whole view of the universe becomes much simpler and more clear.

    • @4pharaoh
      @4pharaoh 3 роки тому

      If God put a “time stamp” on every point and particle in the universe it would be off almost immediately since the rate at which _time progresses_ is different from point to point, so the date and time from the “Devine time stamp” would drift at different rates from particle to particle.
      The absolute value of _”what time is it now”_ can have no real meaning, but what is important _”how fast is your second progressing compared to mine.”

    • @videosbymathew
      @videosbymathew 3 роки тому

      ​@@4pharaoh Yes, I agree, but that's not what we're talking about here. All I'm saying is, yes, we can in fact in principle view time in a single instance across all of space from a god's eye view and see one 'slice'. That's it. You're overcomplicating the simplicity of what I'm expressing.

    • @4pharaoh
      @4pharaoh 3 роки тому

      @@videosbymathew I get ya...
      We are discussing different definitions of Time: The video discussed the first three, you mention the forth.
      1. The rate at which Time progresses (“ticks”) at different locations and velocities.
      2. The comparisons of perceptions of those “ticks” from different frames of reference.
      3. How observers in those different frames of reference perceive their “now” and duration between events.
      4. A time out side of time. Affecting all space and “Time” faster than light, as if stopped everywhere.

    • @AurelienCarnoy
      @AurelienCarnoy 3 роки тому

      For starters, god is not in time. All of the universe is happening within his consciousness. All of it is happening at the same moment called "now".
      See for yourself. Have you ever seen anything outside of now?
      You remember now
      You imaging now
      But before you do any of that,
      "Now" is already here.
      😘

  • @StaticBlaster
    @StaticBlaster 2 роки тому

    Great courses changed their name to Wondrium.

  • @thealphanigga7129
    @thealphanigga7129 3 роки тому +1

    It must be nice being Einstein, he's given credit for things that he didn't come up with i.e Light cone idea, the spacetime-diagram as a whole, those are Minkowski's ideas.

  • @mickmccrory8534
    @mickmccrory8534 2 роки тому

    "If it's Dec. 7th, 1941 here in Casablanca, what time is it in New York,?"
    "I don't know, boss. My watch stopped."

  • @momentirott
    @momentirott 2 роки тому +1

    Inside an atomic clock an oscillator emits about 4GHz photon that reaches a Cesium atom, which absorbs and emits about 4G photon times per second. If I place a second atomic clock near a mass the Cesium atom emits 4G - a small value of photons per second. The mass influences what? The frequency of the photon of the oscillator? The oscillation frequency of Cesium? How ? By lengthening the space between the oscillator and the atom?

  • @PaulHigginbothamSr
    @PaulHigginbothamSr 3 роки тому +1

    I don't know who Ponkray is but I have studied Poincare. An exceptional mind.

  • @ryuseiiijima7562
    @ryuseiiijima7562 3 роки тому

    this video or channel this is my first watch,this is a fantastic and brilliant video thankyou for great lecture sire

  • @frankmccoy2305
    @frankmccoy2305 Рік тому

    Studying special relativity and have watched Sabine Hossenfelder, and Brian Greene etc. Coming back here for a review. What amazes me is that none of these folks ever try to define TIME. Why is that? I know our brains did not evolve to understand it, just to use it to survive. But really, these science folks have got to try to define TIMEt in words. It appears to our brain as some kind of "gap" between events. Is that the best we can do? Hossenfelder states that time dilation is caused when movement is on a parabola which is by definition, acceleration. See Hossenfelder on UA-cam. I see Carroll has a video called "What is Time." I'll check that out.

    • @stewiesaidthat
      @stewiesaidthat Рік тому

      Einstein mucked up physics with his BS theories and now physicists are dancing around the maypole trying to validate Relativity. Once they let go of Relativity and all its inherent nonsense, they will see that time is just acceleration. Acceleration in space as measured by atomic clocks and acceleration in lifespan as measured by biological clocks.

  • @haroldfloyd5518
    @haroldfloyd5518 3 роки тому +3

    Did Newton really have all that hair? I am skeptical. Love the “running back” analogy…the profound insight of relativity for me (that took me years to comprehend) is that C is the only constant, it’s space and time that are mutable, light speed never varies ever.

    • @dibaldgyfm9933
      @dibaldgyfm9933 3 роки тому

      They used wigs at that time, like the judges in UK still do (as far as I know). In effect it does the same as a hat, changing how we perceive the person. There is a painting of Georg Friedrich Handel (around the year 1740) without a wig, showing a "little ugly man" but on the other hand that painting is an honest picture of a great mind.

  • @vesuvandoppelganger
    @vesuvandoppelganger Місяць тому

    What if there are 3 lights in the form of a triangle? A, B, and C are lights and are stationary with respect to each other. S1, S2, S3 are spaceships. S1 is moving from B towards A. S2 is moving from C towards B. S3 is moving from A towards C. A, B, and C flash simultaneously in the frame of reference that is at rest relative to these lights. So in the frame of reference of S1, A flashes first followed by B flashing. In the frame of reference of S2, B flashes first followed by C flashing. In the frame of reference of S3, C flashes first followed by A flashing. So the sequence of flashing is A, B, C, A. But wait! A flashed first. How can it flash last? How can A flash both first and last? It only flashed once in the frame of reference that is at rest relative to these lights. Therefore there is a paradox.

    • @willtrepanier2550
      @willtrepanier2550 Місяць тому

      I love this and it's a fun thought but it only works in the way that you read it because you didn't mention that s1, s2 and s3 will see all of the lights from A, B, and C but if you you read it the way you did where they all only see the light infront and behind them and you exclude the third light source all together then of course on light will be seen first and last no matter what letter you start with, whether you start by saying s2 saw B's light first and C's last and s1 saw A's light first and B's light last and then s3 saw C's light first and A's last then how did s2 see C's light last before s3 saw it first. Do you see what I mean? It's how your reading it. It's still fun to think about but I don't think it's fair to call it a paradox when there's a third light source you exclude in the experiment that all three ships will eventually see all three light sources.

    • @vesuvandoppelganger
      @vesuvandoppelganger Місяць тому

      I think that you are saying then you can take one of the lights and follow the sequence around so that it flashes earlier than itself. It seems that there is no way of describing what happens without running into a problem.

  • @michaelccopelandsr7120
    @michaelccopelandsr7120 Рік тому

    I need help with my new years resolution. I've figured out how to change the stars.
    My idea for changing the stars includes Orion and Pleiades (Subaru). I figure it's time to put something up there that's relevant to us, don't you think? Take Orion's belt and Betelgeuse becomes the head with a baseball hat. Below the belt are two legs bending at the knee. The feet aligning perfectly under the bent knees. The 3 stars of Orion's belt align perfectly as the 3 fat belt loops on a baseball uniform. The spear pointing at "Subaru" is the bat being swung and "Pleiades" is the baseball flying away after being hit. Put it all together and you get, "THE ALL-STAR." In my case, I see a left-handed batter and I imagine a "7" on the jersey. Which makes him, "Mickey." (As it should be ;-) But you can put any number you want, making, "THE ALL-STAR," any player you want. It'd be wrong of me to not, at least, try. This is me, trying. Pass it on, please and thank you. Don't worry, where I come from, crazy is a compliment! ;-P

  • @vesuvandoppelganger
    @vesuvandoppelganger Місяць тому

    "In May and November, the Earth is moving at "right angles" to the line to Algol. During this time we see minima happening regularly at their 2.867321 day intervals. However, during August, the Earth is rapidly moving towards Algol at about 107,229 km/hr as explained on my How Fast Are We Moving? page. (The Earth moves approximately 202 times its own size in one day.) So in 2.867321 days the Earth moves about 7,379,039 km closer to Algol. _But the varying light from Algol doesn't know this - its light waves left Algol 93 years ago and are travelling at a constant speed._ The result - we "catch a bunch of minima early" during August as shown on Chart 2. Exactly the opposite happens during February - the Earth is moving away from Algol that fast and it takes longer for the group of minima to reach us so we see them taking longer between events. How long? 7,379,039 km divided by the speed of light 299,792.458 km/sec is 24.61382 seconds. So in May and November when we are not moving towards or away from Algol - the period seems constant. It is our rapid movement towards or away from the events in August and February that causes the timing differences."
    I assume that light is passing the earth at c when the earth isn't moving towards or away from Algol.
    In February the earth is moving away from Algol and the time between the eclipses is 2.8675875347 days and the light is passing the earth at 186,265 mi/sec.
    In May and November the earth is not moving towards or away from Algol and the time between eclipses is 2.867321 days and the light is passing the earth at 186,282 mi/sec.
    In August the earth is moving towards Algol and the time between eclipses is 2.8670608912 days and the light is passing the earth at 186,299 mi/sec.

  • @neillibertine3044
    @neillibertine3044 3 роки тому +1

    So how would length of an object is measure. By placing it against standard scale, its one end is marked on scale then other end. The difference in value of two ends is length. One thing is assumed here that an object is at rest with scale which is also called as coordinate or frame. Now if an object have some speed against the scale or frame then does its length could be measured accurately. No, because it's not possible to mark both ends at same time and if object and scale have relative speed then one of end either contract or expand the measured length of object. This is relative measurement and when object is at rest with scale is proper or absolute measurement.
    Now relativists says that both measurement are correct and more than that if either object or scale is moving then relative measurement is giving actual description of object's physical quantity. So whether length contract or expand that relative measurement define physical state of object as by relativists.
    Further than that, in most conditions there is no frame moving with light speed and some events happening in it. Observation of planet is not relative because observer with scale like clock and angular scale is on earth. In case of far objects it's not possible to directly measure object so light is used. But relativists says that speed of light is constant whether source or observer have relative speed or not. First thing, general science laws doesnt allow it, second it require that light should have special quality which it has not so. In classical relativity that replaced by theory of relativity which we know now, has no problem with measurement of distant objects because its absolute and relative measurements are same so no problem. All problems start with insistence of relativists that speed of light is constant so they change fundamental quantities like length, time, mass.
    Suppose some children are playing in ground which is stationary. Now if an observer moving with quarter of light speed measure length of ground as per theory of relativity, found that length of ground is small as compared to what is told. Another observer with half light speed measure length of ground and found that length is contracted and also differ from first observer, then who is right, observer at rest with ground or moving observers. Does measurement of moving observers that differ from rest one, in any way affect or give actual representation, no. Same thing is with time, moving observers says children are slow. Does clock of moving observer change the movement of children on ground, no.
    Question is why they are doing so inspite of evidences against their theories. Reason is that constancy of speed of light is required for their model of universe, if that is changed then their model collapse.

  • @Tushar_roy11
    @Tushar_roy11 3 роки тому +1

    In my opinion
    Time Itself Exist Because of Existence, Now How You mesure Existence its upto you, if Total Existance of Our universe is =0, The Sum Of Time =0 , Time Stop

    • @AurelienCarnoy
      @AurelienCarnoy 3 роки тому

      When you stop measuring time you find yourself in the present moment that you never left.

    • @Tushar_roy11
      @Tushar_roy11 3 роки тому

      @@AurelienCarnoy I said suppose not a single things exist in this universe then sum of time will be=0, we mesure time in respect to some thing, if time once start it will go to infinite

  • @dmofOfficial
    @dmofOfficial 3 роки тому +1

    The sky isn't the limit, your light cone is! Lol!

  • @danbreeden1801
    @danbreeden1801 3 роки тому +4

    I'm very thankful for his teaching he presents his information very clearly

  • @FiveNineO
    @FiveNineO 2 роки тому

    Time and space emerge from motion. We live in a universe of motion. Matter has an "inward" motion (gravity) and forces have an "outward" motion

  • @AurelienCarnoy
    @AurelienCarnoy 3 роки тому +1

    Early universe had low entropy because is was born out of the singularity of a black hole. Where the black hole s gravity is the dark energy of the expansion of the universe we see.
    Any one fallow? 😘

  • @dougporter2356
    @dougporter2356 3 роки тому

    Excellent video...

  • @dibaldgyfm9933
    @dibaldgyfm9933 2 роки тому

    at 08:47 -- Suddenly I think that Simultaneity is impossible. Every lightray in the eye has wandered through space, and space is only possible because of individual time. ... or ...

  • @wplg
    @wplg 2 роки тому

    Question :
    If the universe is expanding with more entropy.
    Is time speeding up, which we cannot measure?

  • @sixofone
    @sixofone 6 місяців тому

    I’ll have to watch this a few more times and see what happens. Seems like a better way to explain it but I just can’t grasp it. It seems to me from the perspective of light time does not exist so how could there be a cone? I keep trying to understand it but I’m probably not smart enough.

  • @ColbyNye
    @ColbyNye 3 роки тому +3

    Fantastic lecture!

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 роки тому

      WHY E=MC2 AS F=MA NECESSARILY AND FUNDAMENTALLY IS A SURFACE (AND SPACE) THAT IS ESSENTIALLY TWO DIMENSIONAL AS WELL (ON BALANCE):
      E=mc2 IS F=ma. Is a two dimensional surface or SPACE VISIBLE or invisible ? The answer is that it is BOTH (IN BALANCE) AS invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE. I have now explained why the electron AND the photon are NECESSARILY structureless IN BALANCE in accordance with the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The EARTH is ALSO BLUE, AND the sky is blue. NOW, THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE SPACE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Great. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Hence, WHAT IS the Earth is the linked AND BALANCED opposite in relation to WHAT IS the Sun ON BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. I have CLEARLY explained c4 from Einstein's field equations, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AND I have mathematically unified physics. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!!
      GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY and truly proven !!!!!!!! Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. E=mc2 IS F=ma.
      By Frank DiMeglio

  • @snjsilvan
    @snjsilvan 2 роки тому

    At the end Dr. Carroll refers to General Relativity. Does he have another lecture specifically about GR?

  • @tichaonamachiya3204
    @tichaonamachiya3204 2 роки тому

    I think what Einstein did was an observation. He interpreted the results well. We however lack similar observation and interpretation

  • @weegeepee
    @weegeepee 3 роки тому +2

    He explains very well, but I just don't understand. I am relatively dumb. :(

  • @luke31ish
    @luke31ish 3 роки тому +4

    I understand Sean's words, grammatically, but it's hard for me to understand the concepts that he's talking about.

    • @Chicken_Little_Syndrome
      @Chicken_Little_Syndrome 3 роки тому

      You can't understand nonsense.

    • @calvinjackson8110
      @calvinjackson8110 3 роки тому +4

      @@Chicken_Little_Syndrome Perhaps its nonsense to you because you dont understand it. He has a PHD in theoretical physics. He has studied and taken advanced levels of physics and mathematics you probably know nothing about. How can you just dismiss and put down what he is saying as just "nonsense"? I suppose you feel that way about Einstein himself. I admit I dont understand much of what he is saying, but I will definitely not dismiss it as "nonsense".

  • @walterreese9575
    @walterreese9575 2 роки тому

    I wish you could ask questions. Mine would be "Why light cones instead of light spheres?"

  • @amaliaantonopoulou2644
    @amaliaantonopoulou2644 3 роки тому

    please check the settings of the subtitles, I tried to change the subtitles in English but they are stuck in the Korean language. Great video though.

    • @TheGreatCourses
      @TheGreatCourses  3 роки тому +1

      Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Amalia! This should be fixed now.

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 3 роки тому

      @@TheGreatCourses WHY E=MC2 AS F=MA NECESSARILY AND FUNDAMENTALLY IS A SURFACE (AND SPACE) THAT IS ESSENTIALLY TWO DIMENSIONAL AS WELL (ON BALANCE):
      E=mc2 IS F=ma. Is a two dimensional surface or SPACE VISIBLE or invisible ? The answer is that it is BOTH (IN BALANCE) AS invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE. I have now explained why the electron AND the photon are NECESSARILY structureless IN BALANCE in accordance with the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The EARTH is ALSO BLUE, AND the sky is blue. NOW, THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE SPACE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Great. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Hence, WHAT IS the Earth is the linked AND BALANCED opposite in relation to WHAT IS the Sun ON BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. I have CLEARLY explained c4 from Einstein's field equations, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AND I have mathematically unified physics. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
      TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!!
      GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY and truly proven !!!!!!!! Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. E=mc2 IS F=ma.
      By Frank DiMeglio

  • @albertods611
    @albertods611 3 роки тому

    Terrific explanation

  • @vorador4365
    @vorador4365 3 роки тому +8

    1st! Let’s go Sean!!

  • @markuspfeifer8473
    @markuspfeifer8473 3 роки тому

    Time is symmetric only insofar that the operator that has us move forward through time has an inverse operator that moved us backward through time. Yet, as soon as you bring moving objects into the picture, you can’t just rotate the time axis and expect to get the same picture. There’s actually a phase shift. One has to wait until the curvature of the object‘s time axis has inverted its direction on my space axes. Also, in the real world, the falling object would collide with something eventually and thus produce heat, i.e. entropy.

  • @riraldi
    @riraldi Рік тому

    Can we define an absolute equal time for all reference system using Lorent's equations?
    A definition of absolute time can be given
    in accordance with the Lorentz equations
    Time dilation is not a good interpretation. see this demo
    The traveling clock is characterized by its position x=vt and the time observed from the stationary system dt' = dt/g. g is the relativistic factor
    we will write
    (dx, cdt')= (v, c/g) dt. c= light velocity
    (dx, cdt') = C dt

    C is a vector of magnitude c. after a time T all frames of reference have a timeline length equal to T.
    C is the transport vector towards the future, but the future has different directions (those of C) but the same magnitude, time dilation has no basis.
    Seeing the evolution at an angle, you can see a component that is used to give speed to the moving system and a component in the direction of the future of the stationary system t'. ua-cam.com/video/LrVrYbimj3I/v-deo.html

  • @kainajones9393
    @kainajones9393 8 місяців тому

    Theproblem I have always had in understanding this is: If I fly into space at nearly the speed of light and return, and I am now younger than my twin brother, HOW DOES MY BODY CHANGE BIOLOGICALLY???

    • @stewiesaidthat
      @stewiesaidthat 8 місяців тому

      E=mc. Atomic energy converts to radiant energy with acceleration. As you approach the speed of light, you become light. Should you manage to incorporate some sort of heat management into the system, you are still going to experience the same amount of time and be the same age as if you had stayed on earth.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 7 місяців тому +1

      It ages normally, except for the radiation damage, of course. ;-)

    • @stewiesaidthat
      @stewiesaidthat 7 місяців тому

      @@schmetterling4477 leave the science to the real scientists.

  • @Danny_6Handford
    @Danny_6Handford 7 місяців тому

    It appears that the universe started as something tiny and started to expand to what we can observe and detect today. It also appears that anything we can observe or detect is made from extremely tiny particles which interact and combine with each other based on some fundamental predetermined rules. We have identified quit a few of these extremely tiny particles and have identified quit a few of the rules these particles follow to interact and combine. Perhaps most of the particles and most of the rules but there probably are more.
    We also discovered that anything that we can observe or detect is made from the same basic stuff and we call this stuff energy. We know this because we have figured out how to calculate a value or quantity of energy for anything that we can observe or detect. I think we can say the fabric of the universe is space time but we can also say that the fabric of the universe is energy time because we now know that space is not empty and is also some type of energy and we can calculate or at least estimate how much energy is in a given volume of space.
    It also appears that after the universe started to expand, no more energy was added or removed as it continued to expand. We do not know what the rules were that determined the amount of energy in the universe nor what caused the energy in the universe to start expanding. The rules for how energy expands, transforms, interacts and combines cause energy to cycle from concentrated to diluted states. Although the cycles can be repeated almost an infinite number of times, there will be a time when they stop because as the cycles keep repeating, the total amount of energy in the universe keeps becoming more and more diluted. We call this rule entropy.
    At some point in time, all the energy will become so diluted that it will not be able to cycle back into more concentrated states and we think this is when the universe ends. We still do not know the rules before the universe started to expand and we still do not know the rules after the universe ends and there are probably still many rules that we do not know about what causes the energy in the universe to cycle back and forth from concentrated to diluted states as it continues to expand and dilute.

  • @eswarag
    @eswarag 10 місяців тому

    Exactly constant varies in space but event is real.

  • @williamgregory3786
    @williamgregory3786 3 роки тому

    Thank you for a better nomenclature.

  • @michaelccopelandsr7120
    @michaelccopelandsr7120 Рік тому

    My idea so I get to name it! What I mean is, no one has claimed it so I'm officially calling, "Dibs." Voyager 1 is now in the, "Milky Way's interstellar time" or "Mikey's Time."
    "V-ger's" message has sped up now that it's outside our Sun's, "Time Bubble," or, "Terran Time." It will be faster, still, when "V-ger" sends a message from beyond the Milky Way's time bubble. Then there's Outside the Local Group time bubble. So on and so on until we get outside any influence and into the, "True Interstellar Time Standard." Or, "T.I..." ;-P
    Now that "V-ger" is outside our Sun's reach, in interstellar space, it's now in the Milky Way's faster moving, Interstellar Time or "Mikey's Time." This can be proven by turning off everything except its clock and transmitter. Have "V-ger" read time for as long as possible. They WILL show the flow of time speeds up the further away you get from any celestial bodies. Until you reach the Milky Way's time standard or "Mikey's Time."
    •Our sun's time bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured. In a lifetime, our head is one second younger than our feet.
    •Milky Way's time bubble or "Mikey's Time." The rate/flow of TIME outside any influence but within the Milky Way: We just got there and are still figuring what the difference is. Wild guess I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until V-ger is outside the Ort cloud.
    •Local Group's time bubble or the rate/flow of time outside of any influence but within the Local Group: Name still open and unknown. Wild guess .08 P-22% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference.
    •Outside any influence in the, "True Interstellar Time Standard." (or T.I...) ;-P This name is NOT up for grabs. The rate/flow of time is fastest here. (Time flows fastest here so it's best to use a motor boat and hold tight. Always applies when you're in T.I....) ;-P
    A minute is a minute in all. It's the rate/flow I'm talking about. Heck, rivers of time flowing differently might explain dark energy and dark matter.
    The Milky Way's Interstellar Time Standard will be known as, "Mikey's Time."
    Pass it on, please and thank you!

  • @grahamflowers
    @grahamflowers 5 місяців тому

    The future is already there without it,it would not be possible to move in any direction at all

  • @AurelienCarnoy
    @AurelienCarnoy 3 роки тому +1

    When a galaxy is moving away from us, thanks to gravity, falling in black hole, it is red shifted.
    When a galaxy is moving away from us, thanks the dark energy that causes expansion, that galaxy is red shifted.
    Could dark energy and gravity be the same force seen from different angle?

    • @kylelochlann5053
      @kylelochlann5053 2 роки тому

      Dark energy does not cause, and is not related to, the expansion of the universe.

  • @miroru1
    @miroru1 3 роки тому +1

    Imagine we stopped the whole universe. Now we can see that only space exists and there is only one present moment in the whole universe.

    • @AurelienCarnoy
      @AurelienCarnoy 3 роки тому

      It turns out past is memory and future is imagination. We remember and imagine all we want. But we do that guessing work, that divination at the present moment.
      There is only the present moment.
      What happens is a gift.
      A present 🎁.
      It only happens in your presence.
      Presence = gift🎁=Present

    • @gyro5d
      @gyro5d 3 роки тому

      The Universe would disappear if it stopped.
      Space was created for Aether to exist in.
      Aether was created for Space to exist in.
      Empty Space does not exist.