13:20 "The rocket must measure a dilated time for both of these events" but wasn't the rocket's time of 1 hour considered proper time? Is there something I'm missing?
Yes he initially mentioned that rocket had proper time frame because it was always at rest with respect to itself. I think the value that we knew was on the rocket, we must proceed with considering it as proper time and calculating dilated time for earth..like what he did.
What if the rocket turned around as it was sending the signal? Would we change "+3/5*(ct)" for "(-3/5)*ct" because of the fact that the Earth is now moving towards the rocket ?
I get a) and b), but when you’re doing c) I fail to understand why the earth would be moving away from the rocket. There should be a frozen coördinate where the signal is emitted by the rocket, and then it just travels (3/5 c)m at a speed of c. So in 3/5 hours. Then the final answer would be 8/5 hours. In your calculation however, the earth moves away. So you’re basically trying to find the point where the light (that travels faster) catches up. But why is the earth moving? Should you always pretend the other object is the one that is in motion? Also why does the rocket have the proper time whilst it is the thing in motion. Wouldn’t that mean time goes slower in the rocket and therefor the lorentzfactor should be reversed?
if you're an observed on the rocket you have no idea that you are moving. When you look back you see the distance between you and earth getting bigger and you can interpret this as the earth moving away from you. If you measure the time in any reference frame between events that happen at different positions you must measure a dilated time. It took me years to understand this and i had to solve literally 50 problems before i truly understood it. This might not be the best video to emphasize this point.
I have a doubt that in the rocket frame if the earth is moving away with 3/5 c then signal which is traveling with c should be seen moving with 3/5 c + c by the observer at rocket frame but in part 3 you have not considered that to calculate time ..why?
A signal travelling at the speed of light travels that speed in all reference frames. For example, a car travelling near light speed, if it turns its headlights on, would emit beams of light travelling at c, not c + speed of the car.
Would some kind whizkid here please tell me the velocity of a spacecraft moving (as a fraction of C) for an arbitrary 1 Hz signal sent from it to reach stationary Earth?
For part a, when determining proper time, why can't you say do the same thing but with the earth? i.e there are two events, one where the earth is here, and one where it is here. In the earth's frame of reference both happen in the same place, but from the rockets POV, they happen in different places, therefore the earth experiences proper time? Does the concept of "proper time" only exist relative to the events in question? So because the events I described are different than the ones in the video, that is why proper time changes?
Good question and this brings up an important point that is often overlooked in these problems. It might look like there's a paradox here, because you can pick the observer on the earth or the observer on the rocket and get the same answer. The main problem with this (which is not addressed in my video) is that you really need to use the full Lorentz transformation to answer these problems and avoid the paradox. Most introductory textbooks don't cover this very well. Here's link to a video that describes it the approach. ruclips.net/video/svwWKi9sSAA/видео.html They don't provide examples however. This is not an easy topic and you may need to watch the video several times and review a few textbooks, and solve several problems before you get the hang of it. I spent a lot of time when i was a student looking at this topic. I will eventually get around to making more special relativity videos
@@PhysicsNinja UNDERSTANDING TIME (AND TIME DILATION) PURSUANT TO THE BALANCED, THEORETICAL, AND CLEAR MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA (OF NECESSITY): Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma IN BALANCE !!! This explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 (from Einstein's field equations). Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. So, it makes perfect sense that the planets will move away from WHAT IS THE SUN very, very, very SLIGHTLY. Carefully consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma IN BALANCE.) Carefully consider what is the speed of light (c). A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!! Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground AND what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! The sky is BLUE, AND THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. THE EARTH is a BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE form in relation to the speed of light (c) AND what is THE SUN (AS what is a linked AND BALANCED opposite) pursuant to the universal (and CLEAR) fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS clearly proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. Carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground !!! Great. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Accordingly, objects (AND WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity is clearly ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma IN BALANCE !!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE !!! (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental.) I have mathematically unified physics/physical experience, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! By Frank DiMeglio
The ultimate unification and understanding of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND INCLUDES opposites, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY manifest as F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Here's the proof. This also explains why objects (including WHAT IS THE FALLING MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that E=MC2 IS clearly and necessarily F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE. ON THE CLEAR, EXTENSIVE, SENSIBLE, BALANCED, THEORETICAL, AND UNIVERSAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS clearly PROVEN TO BE F=MA ON BALANCE: Balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Indeed, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!! Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma IN BALANCE. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, it makes perfect sense that THE PLANETS (including WHAT IS THE EARTH) will move away very, very, very slightly in relation to what is THE SUN !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as this balances gravity AND inertia; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. I have explained the cosmological redshift AND the supergiant stars. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!! By Frank DiMeglio
I didn't know rocket can take a shit in space wow
Anyone else notice the typo? "The rocket shit"
Oops.. Lol
After reading the comments nope just you.
@@stevendee6800 nah lots of peoplem did
Alphix I see what you did there...
I just want to know what poor soul took a shit so powerful that it escaped the earth at 3/5 the speed of light...Very good video though
That’s funny shit! LOL
@@PhysicsNinja Ahahahahaha LMAO
That poor soul is superman
You are really good in understanding us
Me sees the word shit in the presentation
*Immediately scrolls to the comments*
13:20 "The rocket must measure a dilated time for both of these events" but wasn't the rocket's time of 1 hour considered proper time? Is there something I'm missing?
He measured unproper time using the formula for the Lorentz factor (dilated time)
Yes he initially mentioned that rocket had proper time frame because it was always at rest with respect to itself. I think the value that we knew was on the rocket, we must proceed with considering it as proper time and calculating dilated time for earth..like what he did.
@@itsmikeyishman1586 it's just stupidity.
Come on, dude, the letter T is not event close to P. Great way to get interest in your video though. Ahahaha.
Very nice explanation, you cleared my all doubts about time dilation.
Thanks
Do you know that only one inertial frame of reference has time dilation?
A rocket shit 😂😂
Am I the only one who noticed "the rocket shit" at the beginning of problem
U r not alone😂
whenever someone makes a typo like that I immediately check the keyboard to see if the letters are close to each other. t is not close to p.....
oops🤣
@@PhysicsNinja :)
What if the rocket turned around as it was sending the signal? Would we change "+3/5*(ct)" for "(-3/5)*ct" because of the fact that the Earth is now moving towards the rocket ?
Could not comprehend this.
Your video was amazing❤️
Rocket shit lmaoooooo
I get a) and b), but when you’re doing c) I fail to understand why the earth would be moving away from the rocket. There should be a frozen coördinate where the signal is emitted by the rocket, and then it just travels (3/5 c)m at a speed of c. So in 3/5 hours. Then the final answer would be 8/5 hours. In your calculation however, the earth moves away. So you’re basically trying to find the point where the light (that travels faster) catches up. But why is the earth moving? Should you always pretend the other object is the one that is in motion? Also why does the rocket have the proper time whilst it is the thing in motion. Wouldn’t that mean time goes slower in the rocket and therefor the lorentzfactor should be reversed?
if you're an observed on the rocket you have no idea that you are moving. When you look back you see the distance between you and earth getting bigger and you can interpret this as the earth moving away from you. If you measure the time in any reference frame between events that happen at different positions you must measure a dilated time. It took me years to understand this and i had to solve literally 50 problems before i truly understood it. This might not be the best video to emphasize this point.
Think you
شرح اكثر من رائع 🤩🤩
That sure is a fast rocket shit...
Super fast lol
I have a doubt that in the rocket frame if the earth is moving away with 3/5 c then signal which is traveling with c should be seen moving with 3/5 c + c by the observer at rocket frame but in part 3 you have not considered that to calculate time ..why?
A signal travelling at the speed of light travels that speed in all reference frames. For example, a car travelling near light speed, if it turns its headlights on, would emit beams of light travelling at c, not c + speed of the car.
Would some kind whizkid here please tell me the velocity of a spacecraft moving (as a fraction of C) for an arbitrary 1 Hz signal sent from it to reach stationary Earth?
For part a, when determining proper time, why can't you say do the same thing but with the earth? i.e there are two events, one where the earth is here, and one where it is here. In the earth's frame of reference both happen in the same place, but from the rockets POV, they happen in different places, therefore the earth experiences proper time?
Does the concept of "proper time" only exist relative to the events in question? So because the events I described are different than the ones in the video, that is why proper time changes?
Good question and this brings up an important point that is often overlooked in these problems. It might look like there's a paradox here, because you can pick the observer on the earth or the observer on the rocket and get the same answer. The main problem with this (which is not addressed in my video) is that you really need to use the full Lorentz transformation to answer these problems and avoid the paradox. Most introductory textbooks don't cover this very well. Here's link to a video that describes it the approach. ruclips.net/video/svwWKi9sSAA/видео.html
They don't provide examples however. This is not an easy topic and you may need to watch the video several times and review a few textbooks, and solve several problems before you get the hang of it. I spent a lot of time when i was a student looking at this topic. I will eventually get around to making more special relativity videos
@@PhysicsNinja UNDERSTANDING TIME (AND TIME DILATION) PURSUANT TO THE BALANCED, THEORETICAL, AND CLEAR MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA (OF NECESSITY):
Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma IN BALANCE !!! This explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 (from Einstein's field equations). Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. So, it makes perfect sense that the planets will move away from WHAT IS THE SUN very, very, very SLIGHTLY. Carefully consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma IN BALANCE.) Carefully consider what is the speed of light (c). A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!! Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground AND what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! The sky is BLUE, AND THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. THE EARTH is a BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE form in relation to the speed of light (c) AND what is THE SUN (AS what is a linked AND BALANCED opposite) pursuant to the universal (and CLEAR) fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS clearly proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. Carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground !!! Great. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Accordingly, objects (AND WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity is clearly ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma IN BALANCE !!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE !!! (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental.) I have mathematically unified physics/physical experience, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!
By Frank DiMeglio
A rocket shit?
A rocket shit
Does anybody know that only one inertial frame of reference has time dilation relative to the other one.
Einstein was the stupidest scientist ever😄
The ultimate unification and understanding of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND INCLUDES opposites, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY manifest as F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Here's the proof. This also explains why objects (including WHAT IS THE FALLING MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that E=MC2 IS clearly and necessarily F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE.
ON THE CLEAR, EXTENSIVE, SENSIBLE, BALANCED, THEORETICAL, AND UNIVERSAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS clearly PROVEN TO BE F=MA ON BALANCE:
Balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Indeed, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!! Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma IN BALANCE. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, it makes perfect sense that THE PLANETS (including WHAT IS THE EARTH) will move away very, very, very slightly in relation to what is THE SUN !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as this balances gravity AND inertia; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. I have explained the cosmological redshift AND the supergiant stars. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!!
By Frank DiMeglio