We're so lucky to live in an age where each of us can attend this lecture in the comfort of our own homes. A couple decades ago and we wouldn't have even known about it.
Even an eighth-grader with very little understanding of science would know Einstein's relativity doesn't make sense, Albert has been fooling his brain dead sycophant followers for more than 130 years, whie people are so naïve :-). Testing the speed light in on Earth is like riding a bicycle up hill, gravity will show you down. If the light waves from the sun were 8 minutes and 20 seconds in a past dimension of Einstein's space-time then people on Earth are just imagining the infrared warmth of the sun coming up on the horizon. The communications delay between Earth and Mars is approximately 20 minutes. We're either viewing the light from Mars in the future, Einstein's past dimensions of space-time or in real time, which do you think is more logical? Einstein's relativity is wrong light has no limitation of speed; it cannot be slowed down because it isn't moving. From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions. Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. According to Einstein's relativity-time dilation's, photos taken of the Earth from the Discovery Space station traveled from the past to the future violating the laws of physics, conservation of energy and common sense. According to Einstein's projectile light particle proton light has a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second moving through spacetime, but if light has a (constant speed) then moving clocks cannot run slow through spacetime! :-) The speed of light according to Einstein's relativity is 186,000 miles per second, but according to physics if two mechanical watches were synchronized on earth and one traveled across the universe and back, there would be no difference in time between the mechanical watches proving the speed of light is instantaneous as the only way a mechanical watch will run slow is if you tighten the main spring. Big Bang, Einstein's relativity-time dilation and nearly all of science debunked. Using optical clocks, lasers and GPS to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. If the speed of light is constant then past and future dimensions of spacetime and an expanding universe would not be possible, obviously destroying the twins paradox as each twin cannot move faster or slower than the other. A mirror is a wave reflector that flips images from left to right, but according to Einstein the images you see are the result of projectile light particle photons being transported into past and future dimensions of space-time. Explain how particle light photons can re-converge their molecular structures in mirrors and how this is done without violating the law of conservation of energy. From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in all directions (forwards and backwards through Einstein's space-time) while violating the law of conservation of energy. Explain how Einstein's projectile light particle proton can travel all directions having a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second. Einstein would have made a great used car salesman :-). Light waves can stretch, bend-curve and occupy a state of superposition, whereas the hypothetical Einstein projectile light particle (photon), a particle that has never been observed cannot. Unlike a TV or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of frames that create the appearance of a moving image. There are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just video recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. Neither time, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch Time, energy, and matter like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. Einstein's projectile light particle proton has a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second moving through spacetime and because so wavelengths of light cannot stretch through spacetime! Red-shifts are simply the result of decelerating electrons, as moving electrons of charged electromagnetic waves-light travel through the plasma of the universe each lump (or "quanta") of energy in the electromagnetic waves are charged then discharged to the next lump, eventually the energy dissipates causing the delay in radio communications giving the appearance of time dilation - longer wavelengths in red shift. Will the James Webb Telescope view the birth of the first galaxies? Nope, the universe goes on to infinity. Neither time, the atom, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. The James Webb Space Telescope is not a time machine, you can’t travel back in time to view the beginning of the universe with telescopes that were made in the future :-). Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. If science uses Einstein's wrongly theorized speed of light like an odometer to calculate past dimensions of distance and time, then using that same method to calculate forward dimensions of distance and time would mean the Big Bang was created and expanded in the future before time existed. Unlike a television or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of still image frames that hypothetical Einstein projectile light particles photons create to give us the appearance of a moving image :-). The speed of electromagnetic wave is 186,282 miles per second vs Einstein's projectile light particle proton at 186,000 miles per second. Is this a coincidence or did Einstein plagiarize yet another phenomenon to fit the math of relativity? Electromagnetic waves in space can neither slow down or speed up, this is consistent with the law of conservation of energy. If light slowed down, its energy would decrease, thereby violating the law of conservation of energy so the speed of light is instantaneous and cannot travel slower than it does. If Einstein's projectile light (particle photon) had mass it's light could not travel across the universe, high speed particles traveling at 186,000 miles per second would break the Hubble and James Webb telescope mirrors, debunking the speed of light, Big Bang, Einstein's relativity and any science that uses relativity in their theories. Similar to a mirror light is a real-time wave reflector where light and images travel in straight lines-in all directions in space as they do on earth. The faintest stars and galaxies are neither in a past or future dimension of Einstein's space-time, they're in real-time. Everyone knows cell phone electromagnetic radio waves travel both ways, yet Einstein's disciples believe time energy, mass and light can only travel one way back in time. If you simply run the Big Bang theory in reverse you reveal the insanity of Einstein's relativity and Big Bang theory. If the expansion of the Big Bang were true, time, energy, mass and light would be in the future from the vantage point of an expanding singularity-Big Bang and planet Earth would now reside in a past dimension of Einstein's time dilation (moving clocks run slow) space-time 13.8 billion years ago :-). From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions (forwards and backwards through Einstein's space-time) while violating the law of conservation of energy. Explain how Einstein's projectile light particle proton can travel in both directions having a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second :-) It's truly amazing how the science and politics of the left are able to keep people denying reality, there are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space, yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. Pretending not to notice the gross contradictions-pseudoscience in Relativity is typical of Einstein's disciples, devaluing the source of any information that's in contradiction with their beliefs-theories. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. If the light from the universe travels to past dimensions of time then it's light is also traveling into future dimensions of time (instantaneously). “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” a state of superposition where time and gravity run inwardly, outwardly, in all directions in the same time frame, similar to the electromagnetic field having no beginning and no end. The Doppler effect is wrongly conflated with cosmological Redshift. As one approaches a blowing horn the perceived pitch is higher until the horn is reached, then becomes lower as the horn is passed. This phenomenon is caused by the physical movement of a mechanical soundwave traveling through the medium of air, similar to throwing a rock in a pond, the rock creates physical movement in the medium of water. Cosmological Redshifts are merely the GoPro fisheye effect where wavelengths appear to lengthen-stretch from the phenomenon of gravitational lensing. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End" Revelation 22:13. Magnetron
It is always a pleasure to listen to Brian Cox. It is a shame we had such a poor photographer thanks to whom we, video audiences completely missed what the attendees saw when Brian projected the films.
Take A Moment Star's died and here we are. Let's chat about it rather than fighting about it. This planet is all we have We can do this Stay Safe Stay Free
1:00:14 "What happens if/after you find the Higgs particle?" Physicists in the audience: "She did _not_ just ask that!" Brian Cox, in his mind: "My professionalism prevents me from abruptly ending this talk."
Prof Cox would do well to slow down slightly during his presentation. Although I enjoy immensely what he has to say, I come away with an impression of someone in a desperate rush to get the message across. My observation in no way diminishes from the high regard in which he is held.
Religion is a ballast to progress in civilization. There are people of Faith who've done good works and continue to. They're engaged in helping the poor and charities but, there are those using religion to empower themselves and aspire to gain mastery over all of us. Its been demonstrated historically that whenever religious zealots gain control over a population they've evolved towards dominating them and coercing their beliefs to conform with theirs by force. They deliberately ignore reason and substitute Faith they reference from their authoritative texts. That logically is nothing but a sophistry that gets twisted towards their self promotion. Science and the reason its grounded in is tacitly in competition with Faith for relevance by a majority. Reason is only rational insofar as that it can be demonstrated and repeated via trial and error/cause and effect exhibition. Therein it contains a failsafe mechanism for honesty even rationality -- verifiability. The existence of Civilization itself may find itself in the balance out of the competition between the two approaches to understanding our place and what direction to take it. The said witnessings of sheepherders' and the little voices in their heads should never be taken as an authority. The religious rights' leaders have taken the fear and angst that comes with unfulfilled lives and hammered it into mass hysteria. Its being reinforced daily and practically immutable by now. Maybe, when the capability arrives, we can query a super computer from the future, how we can combat the phenomenon of religion and save Mankind from .... Crazy.
Humans have been here on this little planet for a super long time. Why is technology so young?? Why have we just now learned this technology we have??? Why didn't we discover cell phones a thousand years ago? We had the brain power.
I think we can take Prof. Brian’s advice here which is to look at it in context. I think there might be ancient technologies that may not have recorded in history or yet to be discovered…also, ancient people might be more preoccupied with other things other than cellphone not to mention that are brains might be a result of years of evolution…there might be a lot of factors…technology could be how early humans learned how to use fire…or sharp rocks…also, i’m no expert on this so i think someone else can give a better answer…
Ypu have the braon power too. And you studied. And you cant makr any of the components in a phone. Because knowledge takes time to build up but once you hace the scientific method it accelerates
Ironically, Mr Cox is here involved in the explicit rejection of science communication. He prefers the Summary for Policymakers, i.e. political communication.
Because they're in a very intellectual and scientifically advanced community of people where decorum, class and culture are exuded. They're pointing out achievements and the merits of the speaker. This is something that's very common in intellectual circles, but apparently not so much in the 'why are the intros so long' types of circles. It's not a rock concert, it's a scientific community lecture.
How, oh how, can we talk about the history of science communication and not mention the original creator of “Cosmos”, “Kosmos” by Alexander Von Humboldt? How can we omit the man who invented scientific communication?
Gravity is an interaction, as it has been written. Indeed, SPACE that is invisible AND VISIBLE in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium AND BALANCE is CLEARLY of fundamental significance. Notice that gravity cannot be shielded or blocked ON BALANCE. (BALANCE is FUNDAMENTALLY important regarding time AND physics/physical experience.) Consider the dimensions of SPACE ON BALANCE. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Great. INSTANTaneity is fundamental to what is the FULL and proper understanding of TIME AND physics/physical experience. SIMPLE AND CLEAR MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF WHY AND HOW ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE: Regarding E=mc2, c squared CLEARLY (AND necessarily) represents or INVOLVES balanced acceleration. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Gravity cannot be shielded (or blocked) ON BALANCE. c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. E=mc2 is taken directly from F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental (ON BALANCE). LOOK directly upward at what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky ON BALANCE. Great. By Frank DiMeglio My answer to What dimensions would involve the maximum area of SPACE? Frank DiMeglio's answer to What dimensions would involve the maximum area of SPACE? in Pure physics (PHYS) By Frank DiMeglio
You say it really started in Manchester by Rutherford. You should of said it was discovered by the New Zealander Rutherford while he was in Manchester. Details are important in science are they not? Just saying.
You serious? Would you like him to delve into the sort of garb Rutherford was wearing on the day he made the discovery as well? Why stop there? What did he eat for lunch? What time of the day did he wake? Details are important in science are they not? Just saying.
I think you missed the part where Cox was talking about scientists from all over the world working together at CERN and pale blue dot speech at the end, scientists don't care "where" one is from as it is not relevant in any way. Let's face it, borders and countries are irrelevant, have no scientific reason to exist.
I can't take anything seriously from a person who uses 'should of' rather than the proper 'should have'. That's freaking elementary level English that you mucked up, and yet you're trying to espouse some kind of intellectual responsibility while you possess a vacuous lack of proper grammar.
We're so lucky to live in an age where each of us can attend this lecture in the comfort of our own homes. A couple decades ago and we wouldn't have even known about it.
Even an eighth-grader with very little understanding of science would know Einstein's relativity doesn't make sense, Albert has been fooling his brain dead sycophant followers for more than 130 years, whie people are so naïve :-). Testing the speed light in on Earth is like riding a bicycle up hill, gravity will show you down. If the light waves from the sun were 8 minutes and 20 seconds in a past dimension of Einstein's space-time then people on Earth are just imagining the infrared warmth of the sun coming up on the horizon. The communications delay between Earth and Mars is approximately 20 minutes. We're either viewing the light from Mars in the future, Einstein's past dimensions of space-time or in real time, which do you think is more logical? Einstein's relativity is wrong light has no limitation of speed; it cannot be slowed down because it isn't moving. From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions. Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. According to Einstein's relativity-time dilation's, photos taken of the Earth from the Discovery Space station traveled from the past to the future violating the laws of physics, conservation of energy and common sense. According to Einstein's projectile light particle proton light has a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second moving through spacetime, but if light has a (constant speed) then moving clocks cannot run slow through spacetime! :-)
The speed of light according to Einstein's relativity is 186,000 miles per second, but according to physics if two mechanical watches were synchronized on earth and one traveled across the universe and back, there would be no difference in time between the mechanical watches proving the speed of light is instantaneous as the only way a mechanical watch will run slow is if you tighten the main spring. Big Bang, Einstein's relativity-time dilation and nearly all of science debunked. Using optical clocks, lasers and GPS to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. If the speed of light is constant then past and future dimensions of spacetime and an expanding universe would not be possible, obviously destroying the twins paradox as each twin cannot move faster or slower than the other. A mirror is a wave reflector that flips images from left to right, but according to Einstein the images you see are the result of projectile light particle photons being transported into past and future dimensions of space-time. Explain how particle light photons can re-converge their molecular structures in mirrors and how this is done without violating the law of conservation of energy.
From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in all directions (forwards and backwards through Einstein's space-time) while violating the law of conservation of energy. Explain how Einstein's projectile light particle proton can travel all directions having a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second. Einstein would have made a great used car salesman :-). Light waves can stretch, bend-curve and occupy a state of superposition, whereas the hypothetical Einstein projectile light particle (photon), a particle that has never been observed cannot. Unlike a TV or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of frames that create the appearance of a moving image. There are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just video recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. Neither time, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch Time, energy, and matter like a rubber band into space-time dimensions.
Einstein's projectile light particle proton has a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second moving through spacetime and because so wavelengths of light cannot stretch through spacetime! Red-shifts are simply the result of decelerating electrons, as moving electrons of charged electromagnetic waves-light travel through the plasma of the universe each lump (or "quanta") of energy in the electromagnetic waves are charged then discharged to the next lump, eventually the energy dissipates causing the delay in radio communications giving the appearance of time dilation - longer wavelengths in red shift. Will the James Webb Telescope view the birth of the first galaxies? Nope, the universe goes on to infinity. Neither time, the atom, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. The James Webb Space Telescope is not a time machine, you can’t travel back in time to view the beginning of the universe with telescopes that were made in the future :-). Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. If science uses Einstein's wrongly theorized speed of light like an odometer to calculate past dimensions of distance and time, then using that same method to calculate forward dimensions of distance and time would mean the Big Bang was created and expanded in the future before time existed. Unlike a television or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of still image frames that hypothetical Einstein projectile light particles photons create to give us the appearance of a moving image :-).
The speed of electromagnetic wave is 186,282 miles per second vs Einstein's projectile light particle proton at 186,000 miles per second. Is this a coincidence or did Einstein plagiarize yet another phenomenon to fit the math of relativity? Electromagnetic waves in space can neither slow down or speed up, this is consistent with the law of conservation of energy. If light slowed down, its energy would decrease, thereby violating the law of conservation of energy so the speed of light is instantaneous and cannot travel slower than it does. If Einstein's projectile light (particle photon) had mass it's light could not travel across the universe, high speed particles traveling at 186,000 miles per second would break the Hubble and James Webb telescope mirrors, debunking the speed of light, Big Bang, Einstein's relativity and any science that uses relativity in their theories. Similar to a mirror light is a real-time wave reflector where light and images travel in straight lines-in all directions in space as they do on earth. The faintest stars and galaxies are neither in a past or future dimension of Einstein's space-time, they're in real-time.
Everyone knows cell phone electromagnetic radio waves travel both ways, yet Einstein's disciples believe time energy, mass and light can only travel one way back in time. If you simply run the Big Bang theory in reverse you reveal the insanity of Einstein's relativity and Big Bang theory. If the expansion of the Big Bang were true, time, energy, mass and light would be in the future from the vantage point of an expanding singularity-Big Bang and planet Earth would now reside in a past dimension of Einstein's time dilation (moving clocks run slow) space-time 13.8 billion years ago :-). From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions (forwards and backwards through Einstein's space-time) while violating the law of conservation of energy. Explain how Einstein's projectile light particle proton can travel in both directions having a (constant speed) of 186,000 miles per second :-)
It's truly amazing how the science and politics of the left are able to keep people denying reality, there are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space, yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. Pretending not to notice the gross contradictions-pseudoscience in Relativity is typical of Einstein's disciples, devaluing the source of any information that's in contradiction with their beliefs-theories. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. If the light from the universe travels to past dimensions of time then it's light is also traveling into future dimensions of time (instantaneously). “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” a state of superposition where time and gravity run inwardly, outwardly, in all directions in the same time frame, similar to the electromagnetic field having no beginning and no end.
The Doppler effect is wrongly conflated with cosmological Redshift. As one approaches a blowing horn the perceived pitch is higher until the horn is reached, then becomes lower as the horn is passed. This phenomenon is caused by the physical movement of a mechanical soundwave traveling through the medium of air, similar to throwing a rock in a pond, the rock creates physical movement in the medium of water. Cosmological Redshifts are merely the GoPro fisheye effect where wavelengths appear to lengthen-stretch from the phenomenon of gravitational lensing. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End" Revelation 22:13. Magnetron
Most don't.
You tube shorts
@@julesdumont2625 0😊
Absolutely spot on
It is always a pleasure to listen to Brian Cox. It is a shame we had such a poor photographer thanks to whom we, video audiences completely missed what the attendees saw when Brian projected the films.
Your opinion is of no interest to me
@@roymusic45the irony being that your opinion on this is of no interest to the rest of us.
It was by design. The 2 projected films that weren't shown were protected by BBC copyrights. Annoying, I know..
Thank you! Nice presentation 👍💐
Starts at 4:04.
Daniel Frederikson you're doing gods work
People like you are the reason why we can have nice things.
🍺
The intro starts from 00:00 to 04:04
Lmao you can tell every person in the room is like: yeah we know who he is...bring him out already..
Take A Moment
Star's died and here we are.
Let's chat about it rather than fighting about it.
This planet is all we have
We can do this
Stay Safe
Stay Free
"Physics is to math what sex is to masturbation."
Richard P. Feynman
Excellent, thanks you for your wonderful presentation, couldn't be better Brian!
Nauseating.
The photographer went to sleep I think, because while Brian shows the audience a clip, we see the audience! (instead of the actual clip).
Who thinks Brian should be the next Dr Who ?
Grow up you fantasist.
@@uppercut2246 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Wasted talent
Just the right amount of comments to read before it actually starts.
Goodnight
Ernest Walton written out of the script?
gravity comes about through the movement of matter like magnetic field from movement of electron
Other than the casual satanic chants seemingly happening behind Brian’s mic, this was greatly enjoyable.
🧐
1:00:14 "What happens if/after you find the Higgs particle?"
Physicists in the audience: "She did _not_ just ask that!"
Brian Cox, in his mind: "My professionalism prevents me from abruptly ending this talk."
please change that horrible thumbnail
i'd suggest a frame from around 54:15 , where he reads Sagan and we vaguely see the pale blue dot
Now that i know it, i will do my best to forget it.
Can't hear what's being said
Prof Cox would do well to slow down slightly during his presentation. Although I enjoy immensely what he has to say, I come away with an impression of someone in a desperate rush to get the message across. My observation in no way diminishes from the high regard in which he is held.
We may be traveling a different space-time "road". That is why we do not encounter other life forms that may exist in the universe...?
The Alumni!
I've heard of them!!
I never thought they would be in Manchester, of all places
Religion is a ballast to progress in civilization. There are people of Faith who've done good works and continue to. They're engaged in helping the poor and charities but, there are those using religion to empower themselves and aspire to gain mastery over all of us. Its been demonstrated historically that whenever religious zealots gain control over a population they've evolved towards dominating them and coercing their beliefs to conform with theirs by force. They deliberately ignore reason and substitute Faith they reference from their authoritative texts. That logically is nothing but a sophistry that gets twisted towards their self promotion. Science and the reason its grounded in is tacitly in competition with Faith for relevance by a majority. Reason is only rational insofar as that it can be demonstrated and repeated via trial and error/cause and effect exhibition. Therein it contains a failsafe mechanism for honesty even rationality -- verifiability. The existence of Civilization itself may find itself in the balance out of the competition between the two approaches to understanding our place and what direction to take it. The said witnessings of sheepherders' and the little voices in their heads should never be taken as an authority. The religious rights' leaders have taken the fear and angst that comes with unfulfilled lives and hammered it into mass hysteria. Its being reinforced daily and practically immutable by now. Maybe, when the capability arrives, we can query a super computer from the future, how we can combat the phenomenon of religion and save Mankind from .... Crazy.
Humans have been here on this little planet for a super long time.
Why is technology so young??
Why have we just now learned this technology we have???
Why didn't we discover cell phones a thousand years ago?
We had the brain power.
See James Burke's "Connections", might answer your questions
I think we can take Prof. Brian’s advice here which is to look at it in context. I think there might be ancient technologies that may not have recorded in history or yet to be discovered…also, ancient people might be more preoccupied with other things other than cellphone not to mention that are brains might be a result of years of evolution…there might be a lot of factors…technology could be how early humans learned how to use fire…or sharp rocks…also, i’m no expert on this so i think someone else can give a better answer…
Ypu have the braon power too. And you studied. And you cant makr any of the components in a phone. Because knowledge takes time to build up but once you hace the scientific method it accelerates
Ironically, Mr Cox is here involved in the explicit rejection of science communication. He prefers the Summary for Policymakers, i.e. political communication.
why are these introductions soooooo long?
Because they're in a very intellectual and scientifically advanced community of people where decorum, class and culture are exuded. They're pointing out achievements and the merits of the speaker. This is something that's very common in intellectual circles, but apparently not so much in the 'why are the intros so long' types of circles. It's not a rock concert, it's a scientific community lecture.
How, oh how, can we talk about the history of science communication and not mention the original creator of “Cosmos”, “Kosmos” by Alexander Von Humboldt? How can we omit the man who invented scientific communication?
SCIENCE, BITCHES!
Yee olde Cockcroft
Gravity is an interaction, as it has been written. Indeed, SPACE that is invisible AND VISIBLE in FUNDAMENTAL equilibrium AND BALANCE is CLEARLY of fundamental significance. Notice that gravity cannot be shielded or blocked ON BALANCE. (BALANCE is FUNDAMENTALLY important regarding time AND physics/physical experience.) Consider the dimensions of SPACE ON BALANCE. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Great. INSTANTaneity is fundamental to what is the FULL and proper understanding of TIME AND physics/physical experience.
SIMPLE AND CLEAR MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF WHY AND HOW ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE:
Regarding E=mc2, c squared CLEARLY (AND necessarily) represents or INVOLVES balanced acceleration. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Gravity cannot be shielded (or blocked) ON BALANCE. c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. E=mc2 is taken directly from F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental (ON BALANCE). LOOK directly upward at what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky ON BALANCE. Great.
By Frank DiMeglio
My answer to What dimensions would involve the maximum area of SPACE? Frank DiMeglio's answer to What dimensions would involve the maximum area of SPACE? in Pure physics (PHYS)
By Frank DiMeglio
Why bring up politics?
Three words, that removes the smug grin & hs from Cox. 'The Scientific Method'.
A very bad copy
Great sound, not.
Yet another bad hair day for the keyboard player from D.Ream.
You say it really started in Manchester by Rutherford. You should of said it was discovered by the New Zealander Rutherford while he was in Manchester. Details are important in science are they not? Just saying.
You serious? Would you like him to delve into the sort of garb Rutherford was wearing on the day he made the discovery as well? Why stop there? What did he eat for lunch? What time of the day did he wake? Details are important in science are they not? Just saying.
I pass the memorials to Ernest Rutherford frequently in Brightwater, near Nelson in New Zealand. Yes, he was a New Zealander - not British.
I think you missed the part where Cox was talking about scientists from all over the world working together at CERN and pale blue dot speech at the end, scientists don't care "where" one is from as it is not relevant in any way. Let's face it, borders and countries are irrelevant, have no scientific reason to exist.
I can't take anything seriously from a person who uses 'should of' rather than the proper 'should have'. That's freaking elementary level English that you mucked up, and yet you're trying to espouse some kind of intellectual responsibility while you possess a vacuous lack of proper grammar.
Not my kind of entertainer.
Cockcroft Rutherford Lecture 2012: Professor Brian Cox. Only prick missing is Dick Dawkins..lol...