Finally someone explains me the work of Einstein, everybody says that Einstein is a genius but they didn't explain, neither they know why is a genius, they just said a about e=mc^2 but never explain until you come to undo the tie on my head. Thank you
Believe or not, the thumbnails contribute a GREAT deal to the success of your videos. Not only are they relevant to each lecture but they are professionally done. If all I saw, as a thumbnail, every time I come to your channel was a white board and you standing next to it, I would not be as enthusiastic. In fact, I think I would lose interest! Seeing the colorful thumbnails and a preview of what I am about to watch gives me immense joy. I’m almost certain everyone experiences this, some consciously and others subconsciously. Psychology at its best :) I couldn’t wait to reach this lecture on Einstein. Outstanding explanation as always.
Thank you for the feedback and I totally agree. The person responsible for making these thumbnails is my wife who has spent countless hours making over 6000 of them and as you indicated has given the videos a unique look and introduction. In addition, she does all the filming, editing, and producing of the videos. They would not exist without her.
Professor please make a series on general relativity.... I am sure you will do it in the simplest yet elegant way...by the way thank you for such great lectures...
Yes, you are not the first person to request that and it is a great idea. We do have plans to make a series, and we'll move it up the priority list. That will be a fun and interesting series.
I'm still somewhat skeptical about time moving slower near a large object. Does this suggest time moves a bit slower on Mercury because it's closer to the sun? Have there actually been studies that validate this in any way?
hmata3, There have been studies on the orbit of Mercury, which validated the theory of general relativity. Einstein predicted it and careful study of the orbit of Mercury have shown that the predictions of Einstein actually were true.
Yeah, this many years later I have a better understanding of how this all works now. Looks like I was quite new to this concept then. Awesome channel, great videos.
Please, how is it possible that during the Solar eclipse the light coming from further stars wasn't bent? I thought that the light is bend because of the some existence of the Sun (the Sun is a heavy object so it bends the time-space and since the time-space around the Sun is bend, light that goes close to the Sun is also bend). But even if there's a total solar eclipse, the Sun of course still exists, so even though we don't see the light from it, it should still bend the time-space and therefore bend all the light that travels close to it. How come that the light is no longer bend when we don't see the Sun?
We only use the solar eclipse, so that the brighter stars in the sky will be visible, so that we can compare the star positions when the light passes the Sun and when the light does not pass the Sun. The position of the stars were observed months earlier when the Sun was in a different part of the sky relative to those stars (not right before the eclipse, since we cannot see the stars when the Sun is in the sky). The ligh is always bent when it passes closely to the Sun.
I have never seen anyone make the correlation between the two similar equations, Newton's F=ma, and Einstein's E=mc². I've often wondered why. F is a form of energy (E). Now, take the velocity of light (c) squared - is that not an acceleration? How do these two equations differ? So from the perspective of a stationary observer, light would take 100,000 years to travel from one end of the Milky Way Galaxy to the other end, however, if that observer were to make that same journey across the Milky Way at the speed of light, it would take zero time. It would also take zero (0) time to travel across the entire known universe, let alone a mere galaxy!
Finally someone explains me the work of Einstein, everybody says that Einstein is a genius but they didn't explain, neither they know why is a genius, they just said a about e=mc^2 but never explain until you come to undo the tie on my head. Thank you
All of your playlists are great. Thanks a lot for your work!
Believe or not, the thumbnails contribute a GREAT deal to the success of your videos. Not only are they relevant to each lecture but they are professionally done. If all I saw, as a thumbnail, every time I come to your channel was a white board and you standing next to it, I would not be as enthusiastic. In fact, I think I would lose interest! Seeing the colorful thumbnails and a preview of what I am about to watch gives me immense joy. I’m almost certain everyone experiences this, some consciously and others subconsciously. Psychology at its best :)
I couldn’t wait to reach this lecture on Einstein. Outstanding explanation as always.
Thank you for the feedback and I totally agree. The person responsible for making these thumbnails is my wife who has spent countless hours making over 6000 of them and as you indicated has given the videos a unique look and introduction. In addition, she does all the filming, editing, and producing of the videos. They would not exist without her.
@@MichelvanBiezen So forward our gratitude to her again from us
HATS OFF to the couple. Is it your wife who is asking questions at the end of some videos?
@@Rajeshgodsown yes it's her wife
Merry Christmas Prof Biezen...🌲☃️🌲
Thank you, and Merry Christmas to you as well. 🙂
Professor please make a series on general relativity.... I am sure you will do it in the simplest yet elegant way...by the way thank you for such great lectures...
Yes, you are not the first person to request that and it is a great idea. We do have plans to make a series, and we'll move it up the priority list. That will be a fun and interesting series.
@@MichelvanBiezen looking forward to it😊😊
I'm still somewhat skeptical about time moving slower near a large object. Does this suggest time moves a bit slower on Mercury because it's closer to the sun? Have there actually been studies that validate this in any way?
hmata3,
There have been studies on the orbit of Mercury, which validated the theory of general relativity.
Einstein predicted it and careful study of the orbit of Mercury have shown that the predictions of Einstein actually were true.
Yes many
Yeah, this many years later I have a better understanding of how this all works now. Looks like I was quite new to this concept then. Awesome channel, great videos.
Thank you so much
Please, how is it possible that during the Solar eclipse the light coming from further stars wasn't bent? I thought that the light is bend because of the some existence of the Sun (the Sun is a heavy object so it bends the time-space and since the time-space around the Sun is bend, light that goes close to the Sun is also bend). But even if there's a total solar eclipse, the Sun of course still exists, so even though we don't see the light from it, it should still bend the time-space and therefore bend all the light that travels close to it. How come that the light is no longer bend when we don't see the Sun?
We only use the solar eclipse, so that the brighter stars in the sky will be visible, so that we can compare the star positions when the light passes the Sun and when the light does not pass the Sun. The position of the stars were observed months earlier when the Sun was in a different part of the sky relative to those stars (not right before the eclipse, since we cannot see the stars when the Sun is in the sky). The ligh is always bent when it passes closely to the Sun.
I have never seen anyone make the correlation between the two similar equations, Newton's F=ma, and Einstein's E=mc². I've often wondered why. F is a form of energy (E). Now, take the velocity of light (c) squared - is that not an acceleration? How do these two equations differ?
So from the perspective of a stationary observer, light would take 100,000 years to travel from one end of the Milky Way Galaxy to the other end, however, if that observer were to make that same journey across the Milky Way at the speed of light, it would take zero time. It would also take zero (0) time to travel across the entire known universe, let alone a mere galaxy!
Mark,
You are correct in your second paragraph.
But in the first paragraph, c^2 has the units m^2 / sec^2 which is not the units of acceleration.
Part 17 Stephen Hawking.