*Minor Correction 1:* The elliptical tunnel at 1:37 is a little sloppy. If the squirrel is of typical squirrel-mass, then the bottom of the ellipse should dip farther down so that the center of the Earth is at a focus of the ellipse. If the squirrel is _abnormally massive,_ then the ellipse's location is fine (but the Earth should also be orbiting the focus on its own smaller ellipse). *Minor Correction 2:* I've been told that the prefix "peri-" means "around" or "about" as opposed to "close." I think all 3 of those English words mean the same thing given the context, but I acknowledge and respect your pedanticism 😉
@@georgemayanja7805 Compact objects in close orbit bleed off velocity by making gravitational waves. So besides the normal interactions you get orbits declining. It will result in collisions. This will not happen if the objects are far apart, but then the nature of the object doesn't matter anymore either.
But you got it right about "peri". Peri- as a prefix means "around" or "near" depending on the word. Perihelion means near the Sun. (Perimeter for example; around a meter.) So .. wth! We don't live in ancient Greece now do we? (Where peri NOT as a prefix meant "around" or "about".)
And as Douglas Adams once so aptly put it in the Hithchiker's Guide.... “There is an art, ( it says), or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to *throw yourself at the ground and miss* … Clearly, it is this second part, the missing, which presents the difficulties.”
Yes, I was surprised. By the 3 body free falling orbit. I was like "woah, living on such a planet must be interessting", but before you said it, I also thought "and that's never gonna happen due to all the other stuff flying around. No way this is stable enough for billions of years".
@H K i read somewhere the universe isn't infinite "only" 250 times bigger than the observable universe, but how can they prove this? I have absolutely no idea. If the universe is truly infinite tho, any and all patterns would repeat themselves, however complex they might be. So yes in that case there must be an infinite number of these system, an infinite numbers of solar systems exactly like ours containing an infinite number of earths exactly like ours, with an infinite number of you and me- typing this exact thing an infinite number of times. Simplified: "everything that could have happened wil have happened, and everything that can happen wil happen an infinite number of times" (Sry about the long reply)
Another brilliant piece of teaching that actually makes me want to learn more! Discovered the channel early in quarantine and it's made it a lot more enjoyable 😃 Thanks for all the great videos and please keep it up😁👍
Years ago I wrote a program that simulates what you call free fall orbits using Newtons equations. It randomly generates a cluster of stars of various masses and gives them their initial velocities. When you click the Start button you can watch the cluster evolve. Some of the stars will eventually get kicked out of the cluster in pairs and become their own binary system.
I've done the same almost 33y ago on a Commodore +4. It was not really fast but it was able to simulate in 3D in a reasonable speed almost 10 object and it was amazing to see those objects zips around the screen, some in a kind of stable orbits and some going somewhere outside the screen limits.
It feels criminal that I didn't discover this channel until recently. It joins the likes of Vsauce, Veritasium, Numberphile, and MinutePhysics for my favorite math and science channels. I will probably end up watching most of your videos a ton of times each. I love rewatching educational content.
Wow. I knew that there was something that relativity predicted about Mercury that proved to be true but I didn't know what it was. So thank you for presenting it in such a Lucid way.
unfortunately, no natural moon moons have been discovered as of yet. This is mostly because moons tend to orbit so close to their planets, that the tidal forces make moon moon orbits unstable. There are some examples of artificial moon moons. Some Apollo missions are a good example.
@@KohuGaly Some large asteroids actually have tiny moons. No joke. One of the bigger dwarf planets, Haumea, actually has a ring system around it! Also has two moons. Not quite moon moon moons, but still! Crazy universe!
The most intriguing to me was that 3 body free falling orbits. Very fascinating actually. Most of us are taught that orbits as closed-bodied repetitive paths, but that's just so wrong, fundamentally. Thanks Nick for shedding light on this. We crazies will bear this in mind 😊
Hey! I have a masters degree in mathematical and theoretical physics and have just started my career as a physics teacher, and I have to say that what is great about this channel is just how brief and straight to-the-point these explanations are, and yet they are precisely correct. I’ve seen too many YT videos that try to explain the things that you explain, but they don’t include the important deep, fundamental details that you manage to integrate into your videos, which I find awesome. You’re clearly extremely knowledgeable, as being able to explain these concepts as simply as you do in these videos requires a much greater level of understanding - one which I haven’t managed to achieve quite yet. Like you, I need to keep studying. Keep it up!
It took me a long time to get here. Your teaching career is going to help _a lot_ with that. I learned more about physics and about people in my first year of teaching than I did in my 7 years at the university.
I admire those who wish to teach physics and i must say, although i may be a year late, many teachers will neglect their given ability to simply watch youtube to obtain knowledge for their teaching, but you however seek more information to improve yourself, I trust that your gratitude for this channel and the interest you have in his relaxed and methodical communication skills will lead your career to be more attracting and successful. But i want to point out to you that using methods like he does or explaining things like he does or channel's similar to this and Kursgesagt, etc, is something students would enjoy more than Anything. I remember in my school during my last years there were a few teachers that decided to do this as well, however the students seemed to come from the depths of hell, and the teachers would leave the next year. I want to give you the advice that if you haven't settled your teaching position already, just always be aware if the school your applying for is worth it, seeing a teacher being used for their kindness or skill is something i've come across one too many times and i especially don't want the same to happen to you. I do believe that you have your priorities straight and you're probably aware of toxic, bait and switch systems that employer's can use, but i'd rather inform you even when it's a bit late, just in case because i admire your perseverance. I hope you're doing well and that everything i said wasn't useless.
I always see the title of your Vids and think "yeah I know all about that.." Watch them then think " Wow.. now I know MORE about that.. and Understand it this time"
Four things... 1) If we are living in a simulation, the simulators solved the 3-body problem 😄 2) Which part of spacetime is curved more: space or time? 3) Asked #2 because it's weird to think of overlapping curvatures, for example any orbiting satellite will be in the curvature caused by the moon, while both are following the curvature of the Earth, while all three are following the curvature of the sun, while all four are following the curvature from the galaxy's center... so how does that even work? (How does one curvature override the other) 4) So does the Mercury discrepancy also eliminates the graviton theory? Awesome video Nick!
1) Maybe they just solve them numerically like I did for this video 🤷♂️ 2) Since massive things move more through time than they do through space, they're more affected by time curvature. 3) It works just like you've described. It's just that we can't write down the math for it on paper because it's too complicated. 4) No, gravitons are still possible. That's a completely different model for gravity, one that works with QFT. The problems is we've never gotten any of those models to match reality.
@@ScienceAsylum Ah it makes so much more sense that mass is more affected by time curvature... so THAT'S why those diagrams are wrong that show a dimple in space, causing so many misconceptions! #4: Oh wow I thought gravitons were only compatible with Newton's gravity since it seemed to only offer a mechanism for gravity's 'force'. What part of gravitons makes it compatible with quantum field theory?
I can't understand your video by watching once so I download it right away. In quarantine I watched it more than 10x times . Now I feel I know more in quarantine than in my school year. For First time I do not wasted my holiday.
Great job explaining orbital mechanics, plan to show this to my HS physics classes next year as a part of my gravity unit. Your video provides the reason why polyconic sections are taught in intermediate algebra. Students always complain about learning polyyconics and not knowing the why for and what to do I do with it.
I cannot express how much I love your content. I think that I've already told each of my friends about your channel, even those, who are not interested in physics xD I really hope that one day you'll get as many views as Veritasium for example.
Well done! I appreciate the work you put into researching this, especially the coding of your animations. You should do a 'behind the scenes' on how much work some of these videos has taken you (like why it took one year for the video referred to at the end).
So glad I discovered this channel, it deserves more views! Thanks for these great videos! Question: Is there a connection between the solutions to the two body problem being conic sections and the curvature of spacetime? I seen to remember vsauce using cones to describe objects moving in straight lines in curved spacetime, but it's been a while since I saw it...
Michael didn't have to use a cone. He could have used _any_ curved 3D shape. My bet is that everyone always uses a sphere and he wanted to be different.
All your videos are to my liking. Occasionally a real brain buster is a good thing. You just keep doing the projects you enjoy, and we'll keep suckling at the teat of your knowledge.
@@ScienceAsylum But .. (just my experience and humble opinion) .. I liked that video uhm .. how do I say this. It's more educational for me (though I learn something new almost every video .. their all good). But in my experience .. at some point physics can't be explained anymore without making it (too) simple. There's a kinda gap or something. So maybe .. these more complex videos should be a bit longer? Or in parts? (It's probably hard though. Making people happy with math ;-)) (But I personally would love more of those videos, though I understand the larger audience isn't really waiting for that.)
What I took from this vid... "Moons can have moons... We call them moon moons" 😂 I love science... always learning something new or knowing something better then yesterday
"Were you surprised by any of these orbits?" Me: Yes. The Squirrel who kept bursting into flames with each pass through his Tunnel-Earth orbit: "Quite"🔥"Qui"🔥"Qui"🔥"Quite"[and on and on and on and...]
Speaking of black hole light orbits, I've often wondered whether, in principle, you could position your spaceship at just the right distance from a black hole to fire a laser against its rotation so that the light comes back to you with more energy than you emitted. Just from the exchange of momentum I mean.
I don't know about _against_ the rotation. That's not even possible inside the ergosphere. I do know that we can use light to extract energy from a black hole. That's a real thing. The black hole's spin would slow down as the energy was extracted.
@@ScienceAsylum I said against by the simple reasoning that if you rob angular momentum from the blackhole, then by applying the conservation of momentum, energy must be imparted into the wavelength of the light. It's just the childlike reasoning of an interested layman, I've no doubt you're right. :)
I don't know but it was ultra supercool to watch , the ZOOM SWIRL ORBIT. And your expressions after that super dope it's like falling in really nervous and just dodged the problem, like adrenaline rush, those who can feel it by seeing or roller coaster ride which I've not been to more than 2 times I think
I've been following your channel unregularily from the early beginning from a kind of average / mediocre channel to now regularly what it is today. The improvement is truly impressive. What I especially like is your tendency of going from simple problems to generalization and solutions on a more abstract level. You do that far better than anyone else. The only thing I have to criticize is the lack of maths. Otherwise: great development. The time watching you is well spent. BTW, the last episode (before this one) was wasn't weird, but probably the best you ever made.
*cue severe lisp* 1:40 AhcTuaLLy, the center of the ellipse (not its focus) should coincide with the center of the earth here. The way it's drawn is true only if the Earth itself is contracted to a point so all of the mass is at all times below (the orbit of) the squirrel (and not for a...well... massive combustible ghost-squirrel). The reason being is that the gravity gets weaker as we fall towards the center: If we partition the earth into small pieces of mass each exerting its own gravity on the squirrel, then, as the squirrel falls, more and more pieces (above the squirrel) pull the squirrel upwards and less and less pieces (below the squirrel) pull the squirrel downwards. This is clearly illustrated at 1:05. In particular (for a uniform earth), the gravitational pull on the squirrel towards the center grows linearly with the radial distance of the squirrel to the center provided that the squirrel is inside the earth (one can show this quickly using Squi... I mean Gauss's theorem). From there we see that we actually have a squirrel on a spring (more accurately two identical springs placed in x and y directions, i.e. an isotropic 2D harmonic oscillator) so ellipses are still solutions - just not the way it's drawn. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a monitor to wipe.
Cool video. The behaviour of light around black holes was recently discussed on the weekly space hangout, nice to see it here. Thanks! Another topic you didn't cover is planets around double stars. The different stellar masses must have an effect, but there are even some which safely pass between the two stars. Of course there are also triple star systems like alpha Centauri.
You are making very good videos. Have been viewing them for a long time. But forgot to comment. I generally like science. And you have made a lot of theories simple. Thanks.
I am most surprised by the three-body free falling orbit. Somehow this orbit feels much less natural than the closed orbits. To the point that it even gives me some slight discomfort. Oh well, the irrationality of a human mind. Thank you for the video.
There is a small moon in the space game "Elite Dangerous" called "Mitterand Hollow", it's orbit around the planet ( New Africa) is fast, very fast. To quote the wiki article "It has a radius of 684 km, and travels at an approximate speed of 876 km per second, allowing it to complete a full orbit around New Africa in only 1 minute and 26 seconds"
I didn t react yet to the previous "difficult" video but liked it a lot, I just need to revisit a few times more to turn my gutt feeling that ubderstands it into comprehension ... I do hope you will keep making videos that require some more effort too. Warmest greetings, Ronny.
The thing that surprised me was that physicists call an orbit that zooms and whirls about a black hole a zoom-whirl orbit. It makes it sound so much fun.
If the planar orbit around the black hole is called a "zoom and whirl" orbit, then I propose that the off-plane orbits be called "tilt-a-whirl" orbits.
Great video. You have a gift for explaining these concepts. Have you considered granting an open license to educators to use your videos in the classroom?
This video has blown my mind completely . Nick my mentor this was the best video ever on your channel and there was everything new to learn. Well the reason of weird orbits near a neutron star and blackholes is due to continuous gravitational waves and the procession of perihelion is due to frame dragging well the usual 2D representation of curved space-time is wrong .Write 3D representation of curved space-time on RUclips and you will see how the real curvature looks like . One thing which I noticed the most is that the wavy oribit of earth-moon system around the sun is somewhat similar to the wavy bohr orbit of electron around the neucleus . The weirds 3D orbits around neutron stars and blackholes reminded me of the weird orbitals of electrons around nucleus and i think that in quantum spin the dezhanibekov effect (tennis racket theorem /intermediate axis theorem) is involved . This can be the result of weird electron orbitals around the nucleus . Sir I request you to make another video on gravitational waves with true 3D representation in terms of both vector fields and 3D curved space (right representation) and also please make a video on frame dragging . A topic on which there is no video on RUclips is Ehrenfest paradox (relativistic rotating disc) and bell's spaceship paradox . Please also make a video on relativistic aberration of light and relativistic hall effect (relativistic rolling wheels)
Here is the link of that video in which gravitational waves are explained in terms of vector fields ruclips.net/video/YHS9g72npqA/видео.html I recommend you to see this.
MinutePhysics is great, but occasionally Henry leaves out details that I would include in my videos. For example, gravitational waves are on a higher order than EM waves, so they have different behavior. His video makes them sound the same. It's fine. We just have different styles.
The Science Asylum is a great channel. Thanks Nick. You also made a video on quantum spin. Can you cover this fact bumping in my mind. Quantum spin must be the consequence of Dzhanibekov effect ( intermediate axis theorem ) . I will soon send you a link on this topic. Your job is to somehow relate or separate Dzhanibekov effect and quantum spin. I hope you will do it . I actually came up with this idea because Dzhanibekov effect is (according to me) the biggest proof of the existence of quarks.
The Science Asylum here is the link (35 seconds video). This shows how am object flips spin in free space ruclips.net/video/f6z7WA7U7NA/видео.html You can also find a beautiful explanation of this on a channel named ventusium . You will find the video of this channel on the top when you will write and search Dzhanibekov effect on RUclips .
The Science Asylum , I loved the way you curved space-time diagram in this video . But that was quiet unintuite we know how the 3D space is curved near a massive body but the fact you told us that time is curved actually fused my mind and I am totally confused how can time be curved. One major misconception is that you showed 2D curved space-time diagram in this video with one space and one time axis . But I have a request and wish if you can fulfill it. Please demostrate that vast concept of curved space-time in 3D space-time diagram with 2 axis for space and one for time. Please nick I wish to visualize this 😭😭😭. This is the link (I min 20 sec video) showing how true space curvature looks like which 70% people don't know. ruclips.net/video/DbhuRcmSkMg/видео.html
In the perihelion, objects accelerate. We can visualize it easily if we take space-time grid and put the flat objects on it (sun and earth). It takes higher speeds on the more curved area of space-time to stay in orbit :)
*Minor Correction 1:* The elliptical tunnel at 1:37 is a little sloppy. If the squirrel is of typical squirrel-mass, then the bottom of the ellipse should dip farther down so that the center of the Earth is at a focus of the ellipse. If the squirrel is _abnormally massive,_ then the ellipse's location is fine (but the Earth should also be orbiting the focus on its own smaller ellipse).
*Minor Correction 2:* I've been told that the prefix "peri-" means "around" or "about" as opposed to "close." I think all 3 of those English words mean the same thing given the context, but I acknowledge and respect your pedanticism 😉
So you’re saying, what the squirrel had for breakfast will alter its relationship with the “black hole” version of earth?
How would a Many Body Problem look like for non-Planar Orbits of {3or 5} BlackHoles
I have a question I have been wondering for a while now. When a electromagnetic peak meets with a troupe where does the cancelled energy go?
@@georgemayanja7805 Compact objects in close orbit bleed off velocity by making gravitational waves. So besides the normal interactions you get orbits declining. It will result in collisions. This will not happen if the objects are far apart, but then the nature of the object doesn't matter anymore either.
But you got it right about "peri". Peri- as a prefix means "around" or "near" depending on the word. Perihelion means near the Sun. (Perimeter for example; around a meter.) So .. wth! We don't live in ancient Greece now do we? (Where peri NOT as a prefix meant "around" or "about".)
For now on, every time a rocket in kerbal space program fails it was still a successful orbit
Yep .... it's _soo_ unfair whenever the ground is allowed to interfere with what would otherwise be a stable orbit. Stupid ground.
But doesnt the atmosphere and you know the planet also effect the trajectory? Therefor making it not an orbit by definition?
Vatsyayana weren’t you listening? As long as GRAVITY is the ONLY influence... it is an orbit...
@@pauligrossinoz make sure it just clips through the earth and you're all good
And as Douglas Adams once so aptly put it in the Hithchiker's Guide....
“There is an art, ( it says), or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to *throw yourself at the ground and miss* … Clearly, it is this second part, the missing, which presents the difficulties.”
'In a nutshell', 'The Science Asylum' and 'Minute Physics' are probably the best science channels on RUclips
And PBS Spacetime.
Kyle Hill [The Facility]
What about Veritasium and Sixty Symbols?
Veritasium
True
No One:
The rotating blackhole non planar orbit: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Sisyphos: "Gravity sucks"
Burned squirrel: "You have no idea ..."
Yes, I was surprised. By the 3 body free falling orbit.
I was like "woah, living on such a planet must be interessting", but before you said it, I also thought "and that's never gonna happen due to all the other stuff flying around. No way this is stable enough for billions of years".
True. It would have to be a _very_ isolated system.
@@ScienceAsylum Never ending space roller coaster
@H K i read somewhere the universe isn't infinite "only" 250 times bigger than the observable universe, but how can they prove this? I have absolutely no idea. If the universe is truly infinite tho, any and all patterns would repeat themselves, however complex they might be. So yes in that case there must be an infinite number of these system, an infinite numbers of solar systems exactly like ours containing an infinite number of earths exactly like ours, with an infinite number of you and me- typing this exact thing an infinite number of times. Simplified: "everything that could have happened wil have happened, and everything that can happen wil happen an infinite number of times" (Sry about the long reply)
@@BenjaminBjornsen 250 times is the minimum, assuming the universe doesn't have a weird shape.
@H K Yes but it might take you an infinitely long time to find one.
i keep orbiting this channel and whenever there's a new upload, it's straight free fall
This is your best video so far. You introduced just enough jargon so that we could understand what you were saying without going overboard.
Thanks! I'm always looking for that balance.
True Alexander
Another brilliant piece of teaching that actually makes me want to learn more!
Discovered the channel early in quarantine and it's made it a lot more enjoyable 😃
Thanks for all the great videos and please keep it up😁👍
Years ago I wrote a program that simulates what you call free fall orbits using Newtons equations. It randomly generates a cluster of stars of various masses and gives them their initial velocities. When you click the Start button you can watch the cluster evolve. Some of the stars will eventually get kicked out of the cluster in pairs and become their own binary system.
github?
Jack CF can you please tell me that app name
Github please?
Cool!
I've done the same almost 33y ago on a Commodore +4. It was not really fast but it was able to simulate in 3D in a reasonable speed almost 10 object and it was amazing to see those objects zips around the screen, some in a kind of stable orbits and some going somewhere outside the screen limits.
"Whatever 'this' is"... I love science jargon! 🖖
🖖
Let's call it ξ (xi) ...
It feels criminal that I didn't discover this channel until recently. It joins the likes of Vsauce, Veritasium, Numberphile, and MinutePhysics for my favorite math and science channels. I will probably end up watching most of your videos a ton of times each. I love rewatching educational content.
Glad you found us 🤓
Gonna sound like a nerd, but: Edutubers are the best RUclipsrs!
Some day, Question Clone is going to steal your lab coat and impersonate you.
I've got my eye on him. If I'm being honest, Nerd Clone is more dangerous. He already vaporized at least one clone that I know of.
Hahahahahahahahahaha
@@ScienceAsylum made me laugh out loud, scared my cat and i now theres blood :(
@@BenjaminBjornsen gahahaaaa
@@ScienceAsylum
Next time set all weapons to stun.
I love how there’s always a cliffhanger feeling to your video’s. That binge watch feeling that tells you: “Watch one more! Just one!”
That's science. You've never figured it all.
Wow. I knew that there was something that relativity predicted about Mercury that proved to be true but I didn't know what it was. So thank you for presenting it in such a Lucid way.
"Lucid" I see what you did there.
I'd been wondering about Moon Moons for a while and if any had been confirmed. Now onto Moon Moon Moons.
unfortunately, no natural moon moons have been discovered as of yet. This is mostly because moons tend to orbit so close to their planets, that the tidal forces make moon moon orbits unstable. There are some examples of artificial moon moons. Some Apollo missions are a good example.
If you cheat by calling the planets the sun's moons, then all the moons become moon moons. Now you're one step ahead.
What if Moon Moons could be found on moon moons?
Would they be moon moon Moon Moons?
@@KohuGaly Some large asteroids actually have tiny moons. No joke. One of the bigger dwarf planets, Haumea, actually has a ring system around it! Also has two moons. Not quite moon moon moons, but still! Crazy universe!
@@utetopia1620 Thats kinda like to go forever. moon moon moon moon moon ... moons
The most intriguing to me was that 3 body free falling orbits. Very fascinating actually. Most of us are taught that orbits as closed-bodied repetitive paths, but that's just so wrong, fundamentally.
Thanks Nick for shedding light on this. We crazies will bear this in mind 😊
Hey! I have a masters degree in mathematical and theoretical physics and have just started my career as a physics teacher, and I have to say that what is great about this channel is just how brief and straight to-the-point these explanations are, and yet they are precisely correct. I’ve seen too many YT videos that try to explain the things that you explain, but they don’t include the important deep, fundamental details that you manage to integrate into your videos, which I find awesome. You’re clearly extremely knowledgeable, as being able to explain these concepts as simply as you do in these videos requires a much greater level of understanding - one which I haven’t managed to achieve quite yet. Like you, I need to keep studying. Keep it up!
It took me a long time to get here. Your teaching career is going to help _a lot_ with that. I learned more about physics and about people in my first year of teaching than I did in my 7 years at the university.
I admire those who wish to teach physics and i must say, although i may be a year late, many teachers will neglect their given ability to simply watch youtube to obtain knowledge for their teaching, but you however seek more information to improve yourself, I trust that your gratitude for this channel and the interest you have in his relaxed and methodical communication skills will lead your career to be more attracting and successful.
But i want to point out to you that using methods like he does or explaining things like he does or channel's similar to this and Kursgesagt, etc, is something students would enjoy more than Anything.
I remember in my school during my last years there were a few teachers that decided to do this as well, however the students seemed to come from the depths of hell, and the teachers would leave the next year.
I want to give you the advice that if you haven't settled your teaching position already, just always be aware if the school your applying for is worth it, seeing a teacher being used for their kindness or skill is something i've come across one too many times and i especially don't want the same to happen to you.
I do believe that you have your priorities straight and you're probably aware of toxic, bait and switch systems that employer's can use, but i'd rather inform you even when it's a bit late, just in case because i admire your perseverance. I hope you're doing well and that everything i said wasn't useless.
Actually, never heard of free fall orbits, thank you for this bit!
I don't know why don't RUclips support such a good channel , I think this channel deserves nearly 10 million views
This was an excellent lecture
I felt like I just watched a 1 hour lecture within 10 mins
Please do some longer videos.
Thanks a lot
The Three Body Problem trilogy by Liu Cixin is the greatest sci-fi trilogy ever
I always see the title of your Vids and think "yeah I know all about that.." Watch them then think " Wow.. now I know MORE about that.. and Understand it this time"
Four things...
1) If we are living in a simulation, the simulators solved the 3-body problem 😄
2) Which part of spacetime is curved more: space or time?
3) Asked #2 because it's weird to think of overlapping curvatures, for example any orbiting satellite will be in the curvature caused by the moon, while both are following the curvature of the Earth, while all three are following the curvature of the sun, while all four are following the curvature from the galaxy's center... so how does that even work? (How does one curvature override the other)
4) So does the Mercury discrepancy also eliminates the graviton theory?
Awesome video Nick!
1) Maybe they just solve them numerically like I did for this video 🤷♂️
2) Since massive things move more through time than they do through space, they're more affected by time curvature.
3) It works just like you've described. It's just that we can't write down the math for it on paper because it's too complicated.
4) No, gravitons are still possible. That's a completely different model for gravity, one that works with QFT. The problems is we've never gotten any of those models to match reality.
@@ScienceAsylum Ah it makes so much more sense that mass is more affected by time curvature... so THAT'S why those diagrams are wrong that show a dimple in space, causing so many misconceptions! #4: Oh wow I thought gravitons were only compatible with Newton's gravity since it seemed to only offer a mechanism for gravity's 'force'. What part of gravitons makes it compatible with quantum field theory?
@@localverse Gravitons are the QFT gravity model. You don't have to make it compatible with QFT if QFT is where it comes from 🙂
Almost clicked next one minute in, but had to stay for gratuitous cartoon squirrel violence. A+
I can't understand your video by watching once so I download it right away. In quarantine I watched it more than 10x times . Now I feel I know more in quarantine than in my school year. For First time I do not wasted my holiday.
Moon Moon jokes are still alive in 2020, thank you for keeping it real👌👌👌
???
Great job explaining orbital mechanics, plan to show this to my HS physics classes next year as a part of my gravity unit. Your video provides the reason why polyconic sections are taught in intermediate algebra. Students always complain about learning polyyconics and not knowing the why for and what to do I do with it.
That's great! I'm glad it's useful 🤓
I request science asylum to make a video on polyconics
I cannot express how much I love your content. I think that I've already told each of my friends about your channel, even those, who are not interested in physics xD I really hope that one day you'll get as many views as Veritasium for example.
Well done! I appreciate the work you put into researching this, especially the coding of your animations. You should do a 'behind the scenes' on how much work some of these videos has taken you (like why it took one year for the video referred to at the end).
That "one year" was about 80% research, 18% deciding what was important/how to explain it, 2% actually producing it (for that video specifically).
A 1 hour version of zoom whirl orbits would be amazing, the path really was hypnotic.
So glad I discovered this channel, it deserves more views! Thanks for these great videos!
Question:
Is there a connection between the solutions to the two body problem being conic sections and the curvature of spacetime? I seen to remember vsauce using cones to describe objects moving in straight lines in curved spacetime, but it's been a while since I saw it...
Michael didn't have to use a cone. He could have used _any_ curved 3D shape. My bet is that everyone always uses a sphere and he wanted to be different.
WOAH I've never heard of those crazy orbits around a Black Hole before!
All your videos are to my liking. Occasionally a real brain buster is a good thing.
You just keep doing the projects you enjoy, and we'll keep suckling at the teat of your knowledge.
Last video was definitely one of the most complex ones you’ve done but I think those are ok once in a while
Yeah, as long as I don't make a habit out of it.
@@ScienceAsylum But .. (just my experience and humble opinion) .. I liked that video uhm .. how do I say this. It's more educational for me (though I learn something new almost every video .. their all good). But in my experience .. at some point physics can't be explained anymore without making it (too) simple. There's a kinda gap or something.
So maybe .. these more complex videos should be a bit longer? Or in parts? (It's probably hard though. Making people happy with math ;-))
(But I personally would love more of those videos, though I understand the larger audience isn't really waiting for that.)
How does this channel have only 500k subs?!?
Easily the most entertaining physics on RUclips!
Nick : How weird can orbits get ???
Me: Not more than you....
😋😋😋 Science Asylum rocks...
Great video! Orbits around non-spherical objects like asteroids can be pretty crazy as well.
What I took from this vid...
"Moons can have moons... We call them moon moons" 😂
I love science... always learning something new or knowing something better then yesterday
"Were you surprised by any of these orbits?"
Me: Yes.
The Squirrel who kept bursting into flames with each pass through his Tunnel-Earth orbit:
"Quite"🔥"Qui"🔥"Qui"🔥"Quite"[and on and on and on and...]
Your content is great. Keep up the good work! One question, what software do you usually use in your simulations/animations?
Usually After Effects, but a lot of the simulations in this video were done in Python (because After Effects has limits).
@@ScienceAsylum thanks! Yes, I use both. Pygame for creating graphics in Python?
@@ScienceAsylum did you ever try Universe Sandbox?
@@heliumhydride Nope. Just the visual package add-on.
@@rottenpoet6675 I've seen it but never used it. It's only available on Steam and I don't have a Steam account.
Speaking of black hole light orbits, I've often wondered whether, in principle, you could position your spaceship at just the right distance from a black hole to fire a laser against its rotation so that the light comes back to you with more energy than you emitted. Just from the exchange of momentum I mean.
I don't know about _against_ the rotation. That's not even possible inside the ergosphere. I do know that we can use light to extract energy from a black hole. That's a real thing. The black hole's spin would slow down as the energy was extracted.
@@ScienceAsylum I said against by the simple reasoning that if you rob angular momentum from the blackhole, then by applying the conservation of momentum, energy must be imparted into the wavelength of the light.
It's just the childlike reasoning of an interested layman, I've no doubt you're right. :)
Kurgesat has a video about that.
how is this not a 1 million subs channel!?
Because it's neither about cosmetics nor about a cCT.
Wow! I never thought of non-equatorial orbits in the Kerr Metric. Thanks for the wake-up call.
:50 RIP Gravity Squirrel: You are gone but not forgotton
I don't know but it was ultra supercool to watch , the ZOOM SWIRL ORBIT. And your expressions after that super dope
it's like falling in really nervous and just dodged the problem, like adrenaline rush, those who can feel it by seeing or roller coaster ride which I've not been to more than 2 times I think
Viewer: "I'm bored."
Nick: "Check this out!"
This was lovely. I'm going to have to make extra popcorn whenever Nick decides to go into more depth about frame dragging. :)
**looks at that last black hole orbit**
Hmm... that's the first time I realized black holes were actually black cats playing with a ball of yarn.
Omg this was so good !! I love your vibe !! The “line” type of orbit really blew my mind
Not as weird as the drug dealer’s Orbit around my neighborhood.
There is no need to be so hyperbolic.
I've been following your channel unregularily from the early beginning from a kind of average / mediocre channel to now regularly what it is today. The improvement is truly impressive. What I especially like is your tendency of going from simple problems to generalization and solutions on a more abstract level. You do that far better than anyone else. The only thing I have to criticize is the lack of maths. Otherwise: great development. The time watching you is well spent.
BTW, the last episode (before this one) was wasn't weird, but probably the best you ever made.
The legend is back
The summary at the end was a nice feature. This video was amazing and brilliant as are all your videos.
"how can a path that ends be an orbit"
Just wait for the sun in a few billion years
I don't have that much time to wait, let's just watch things smash in Universe sandbox 2
Amazing point
Strictly speaking, it will be the sun that swells up to MEET our orbit. But point taken.
Another great video ... thanks for keeping us sane during the pandemic
My pleasure! We all need distractions right now I think.
Yes, this episode was perfectly dumbed-down so an armchair enthusiast trogolodyte like me could still feel smart after watching it. 😋
It’s nice that orbits are much easier to understand than the force that creates them.
You are really good teaching science in such a funny way
Surprised, no, but amazed by the amazing graphics.
*cue severe lisp*
1:40 AhcTuaLLy, the center of the ellipse (not its focus) should coincide with the center of the earth here.
The way it's drawn is true only if the Earth itself is contracted to a point so all of the mass is at all times below (the orbit of) the squirrel (and not for a...well... massive combustible ghost-squirrel).
The reason being is that the gravity gets weaker as we fall towards the center:
If we partition the earth into small pieces of mass each exerting its own gravity on the squirrel,
then, as the squirrel falls, more and more pieces (above the squirrel) pull the squirrel upwards and less and less pieces (below the squirrel) pull the squirrel downwards. This is clearly illustrated at 1:05.
In particular (for a uniform earth), the gravitational pull on the squirrel towards the center grows linearly with the radial distance of the squirrel to the center provided that the squirrel is inside the earth (one can show this quickly using Squi... I mean Gauss's theorem).
From there we see that we actually have a squirrel on a spring (more accurately two identical springs placed in x and y directions, i.e. an isotropic 2D harmonic oscillator) so ellipses are still solutions - just not the way it's drawn.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a monitor to wipe.
"There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying. the knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Douglas Adams
Watched the spaceX - NASA streaming today... this video just came in even nicer than usual!
Thanks a lot for this video. Some of these orbits reminded me of the spirograph toy which I liked to play with when I was a little boy...
Love this video! Great as always Nick
Speaking of orbits, I'd really like to see a video on orbitALS and why they have the shapes that they do. In your crazy style, of course!
Cool video. The behaviour of light around black holes was recently discussed on the weekly space hangout, nice to see it here. Thanks! Another topic you didn't cover is planets around double stars. The different stellar masses must have an effect, but there are even some which safely pass between the two stars. Of course there are also triple star systems like alpha Centauri.
Your videos are SO GOOD!!
Wow this channel is now one of my favorites.
At 4:20 those are the most suggestive orbits I’ve ever seen! That’s an interesting coincidence! 😜
never heard of a free fall orbit before now. i learned something, thank you!
Last two were new to me bro. Thanks
I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS ALL MY LIFE!
Yep
Me too!!!!
I still wonder to this day why teachers don't teach us "how to find earth's orbit mathematically"?
@@bk-sl8ee maybe cuz they don;t know themselves
The squirrel orbit was AWESOME.
It’s weird to think that he only has 517 likes. Not 100000000000. He deserves 10000000000000000000000000000 likes
All your videos are awesome. No exceptions.
Thanks Nick. Feels great to understand something new.
This GR is series gonna be great!
You are making very good videos. Have been viewing them for a long time. But forgot to comment. I generally like science. And you have made a lot of theories simple. Thanks.
You're welcome! 🙂
Yes that black hole 3d orbit was NUTS!
Video/ series suggestion:
Vacuum decay
False vacuum
Casimir effect
Virtual particles
Squirrel catching on fire while travelling through the core is a very nice touch.
I have said that before but one of the most underrated channels!
I am most surprised by the three-body free falling orbit. Somehow this orbit feels much less natural than the closed orbits. To the point that it even gives me some slight discomfort. Oh well, the irrationality of a human mind. Thank you for the video.
I love your videos!
I had no idea a zoom wirl orbit was a thing
And I can't even think about that last one
There is a small moon in the space game "Elite Dangerous" called "Mitterand Hollow", it's orbit around the planet ( New Africa) is fast, very fast. To quote the wiki article "It has a radius of 684 km, and travels at an approximate speed of 876 km per second, allowing it to complete a full orbit around New Africa in only 1 minute and 26 seconds"
Cool didn’t expect to learn about space this morning
Your also pretty entertaining
you're*
We missed your videos the best teacher👍
I didn t react yet to the previous "difficult" video but liked it a lot, I just need to revisit a few times more to turn my gutt feeling that ubderstands it into comprehension ... I do hope you will keep making videos that require some more effort too. Warmest greetings, Ronny.
No one scared me away from them. I just need to spread the harder ones out a little bit.
The thing that surprised me was that physicists call an orbit that zooms and whirls about a black hole a zoom-whirl orbit. It makes it sound so much fun.
It's fun to _look at,_ but I doubt a human could survive it (unless the black hole was supermassive).
Thx for making an orbit video has not seen one before thx.
If the planar orbit around the black hole is called a "zoom and whirl" orbit, then I propose that the off-plane orbits be called "tilt-a-whirl" orbits.
I approve 👍
Your a great teacher. Thank you
Great video. You have a gift for explaining these concepts.
Have you considered granting an open license to educators to use your videos in the classroom?
Excellent, Keep It Up!
This video has blown my mind completely . Nick my mentor this was the best video ever on your channel and there was everything new to learn. Well the reason of weird orbits near a neutron star and blackholes is due to continuous gravitational waves and the procession of perihelion is due to frame dragging well the usual 2D representation of curved space-time is wrong .Write 3D representation of curved space-time on RUclips and you will see how the real curvature looks like . One thing which I noticed the most is that the wavy oribit of earth-moon system around the sun is somewhat similar to the wavy bohr orbit of electron around the neucleus . The weirds 3D orbits around neutron stars and blackholes reminded me of the weird orbitals of electrons around nucleus and i think that in quantum spin the dezhanibekov effect (tennis racket theorem /intermediate axis theorem) is involved . This can be the result of weird electron orbitals around the nucleus . Sir I request you to make another video on gravitational waves with true 3D representation in terms of both vector fields and 3D curved space (right representation) and also please make a video on frame dragging .
A topic on which there is no video on RUclips is Ehrenfest paradox (relativistic rotating disc) and bell's spaceship paradox . Please also make a video on relativistic aberration of light and relativistic hall effect (relativistic rolling wheels)
Here is the link of that video in which gravitational waves are explained in terms of vector fields
ruclips.net/video/YHS9g72npqA/видео.html
I recommend you to see this.
MinutePhysics is great, but occasionally Henry leaves out details that I would include in my videos. For example, gravitational waves are on a higher order than EM waves, so they have different behavior. His video makes them sound the same. It's fine. We just have different styles.
The Science Asylum is a great channel. Thanks Nick. You also made a video on quantum spin. Can you cover this fact bumping in my mind.
Quantum spin must be the consequence of Dzhanibekov effect ( intermediate axis theorem ) . I will soon send you a link on this topic. Your job is to somehow relate or separate Dzhanibekov effect and quantum spin. I hope you will do it . I actually came up with this idea because Dzhanibekov effect is (according to me) the biggest proof of the existence of quarks.
The Science Asylum here is the link (35 seconds video). This shows how am object flips spin in free space
ruclips.net/video/f6z7WA7U7NA/видео.html
You can also find a beautiful explanation of this on a channel named ventusium . You will find the video of this channel on the top when you will write and search Dzhanibekov effect on RUclips .
The Science Asylum , I loved the way you curved space-time diagram in this video .
But that was quiet unintuite we know how the 3D space is curved near a massive body but the fact you told us that time is curved actually fused my mind and I am totally confused how can time be curved. One major misconception is that you showed 2D curved space-time diagram in this video with one space and one time axis . But I have a request and wish if you can fulfill it. Please demostrate that vast concept of curved space-time in 3D space-time diagram with 2 axis for space and one for time. Please nick I wish to visualize this 😭😭😭.
This is the link (I min 20 sec video) showing how true space curvature looks like which 70% people don't know.
ruclips.net/video/DbhuRcmSkMg/видео.html
I wrote an orbital simulator back in the day. I always thought it had a bug because I was seeing some of these orbits.
Nope! Sometimes reality is just weird.
I have seen models of the crazy boi orbit but never really thought of it as something that actually happens until now for some reason.
The squirrel burning got me 🤣
In the perihelion, objects accelerate. We can visualize it easily if we take space-time grid and put the flat objects on it (sun and earth). It takes higher speeds on the more curved area of space-time to stay in orbit :)