I saw this comment first, it made no sense to me but there it was, present under the video... Then I forgot until I saw the paper cutting. The take away from this became about that, not that graviton.
I see you want to put and end to concept of death by natural causes. That will be in hereafter. But the question is what would happen if you bring hereafter(future in time) to on earth? That would be alreadily bringing the day of judgement.
@MBOYA Ogutu How is it fraudulent when they're being 100% transparent about it? It seems like the only reason why people hate science is because it doesn't feed their religious dogma. It explains the deceptive agendas pushed by Creationists which attempt to undermine the First Amendment of the Constitution.
@@ominous-omnipresent-they honestly, you'd have to be an idiot to believe all the matter in the universe was compressed down to an infinitesimal volume. So don't go preaching about religious dogma and the first amendment when what you believe is religious dogma wrapped in idiotic science.
I have to say, this channel (this guy, sorry, I'd seen your name, but I don't recall it) does a better job with comprehensible explanations of arcane topics in physics than any other other channel or video on youtube. This is stuff that LOTS of people want to know about, and, more or less, you are the only one providing explanations that are really meaningful to scientifically literate non-physicists. Thanks for all your videos.
there is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it. try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find everything falls or flies off and nothing sticks to or orbits it. to claim the existence of a physical law without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not ''science.'' gravity is a myth.
This is probably one of the best science explanations on any topic I've ever heard - and I've heard a lot! It well presented and and well organized. Bravo! Thanks
THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
I really liked the comment "don't send me any anti-relativity email", those people just drove me crazy this week!! Thank you Dr.Linkoln for this superb series
Yes. I was reading one of those papers just a week or two ago. I am convinced that overturning relativity would result in an even more complicated theory. Just saying that "relativity is wrong" is not convincing for me.
How can you call yourself a scientist, if you can't handle criticism? Part of the scientific method, is falsification. It holds that every theory is falsifiable based on new observable evidence. This is particularly true when technology is constantly creating new scientific instruments capable of providing new data never seen before.Einstein's theories should be just as falsifiable as any other scientific theory. Perhaps the "anti-relativity email" you refer to is not valid, but, that doesn't mean something valid isn't out there. Until a theory of gravity that works comes along, every theory of gravity should be considered.
I just love the way you explain it so clearly, even though i watched this video a lil bit drunk but i got everything you said, you have got yourself a subscriber.
I have a suggestion of what quantum theory could be. It assumes that multiverse interpretation of quantum mechanics is true and there is no such thing as collapse of wave function. Instead collapse of wave function is simply entanglement of observer with the particle, that's why from his point of view it looks like wave function collapsed, but it didn't. If this is true then we can calculate gravitational influence of a particle as an bending of spacetime in all quantum multiverses simultaneously. This theory would also explain existence of dark matter, as an influence of particles from other universes on our universe. This theory is also experimentally testable. Here is experiment to determine if it is true: Put 1 heavy object whose gravitational influence you can detect into an empty space. Put device onto the object that would detect quantum state of spin of a single particle. Make the wave function of the particle collapse. If the spin goes up, device will push the heavy object with some force to the left. If the spin goes down, device will push the heavy object with some force to the right. According to theory, what we did here is that we entangled the heavy object with the quantum state of the spin of the particle and if that theory is true we should be able to detect that the heavy object suddenly have 50% gravitational influence and at the same time there would be created bubble of dark matter with the rest of 50% gravitational influence of the heavy object going in opposite direction as the object, because the dark matter would be simply the same object in another universe.
ON THE NECESSARY, TRUE, AND ABSOLUTE PHYSICAL ESSENTIALITY (IN AND WITH TIME) OF THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA: Consider the EXPERIENCE of THE MAN (then involving WHAT IS THE EYE) who is suddenly exposed in what is outer "space" in BALANCED RELATION to the clear fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma (INCLUDING WHAT THEN CONSTITUTES the EXPERIENCE of both the Sun AND WHAT ARE THE POINTS IN THE NIGHT SKY). This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) SO, the Earth constitutes the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE in BALANCED and UNIVERSAL relation to what is the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. NOW, consider WHAT IS THE EYE. E=MC2 IS F=MA. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Consider what is outer "space". NOW, consider WHAT necessarily constitutes what is the Sun. E=MC2 IS F=ma. NOW, it ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Think INSTANTANEITY ! TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is the Earth. The sky is blue, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AND THEN very carefully consider what is the EXPERIENCE of what is the Sun. E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA. Think about THE EYE !!! Great. NOW, also consider what is the EARTH/ground in BALANCED RELATION to/with WHAT IS THE EYElid. LOOK around. Think INSTANTANEITY !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS F=MA !!! It ALL CLEARLY does make perfect sense. Indeed, BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Beautiful. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE. It is a very great truth that the ability of thought to DESCRIBE OR reconfigure sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT is similar to sensory experience. Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY. In dreams, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE !!! The EARTH AND THE SUN are E=MC2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE. There is no outsmarting the genius of dreams. Importantly, dream experience GROWS/increases. In dreams, it is you AND other than you are IN BALANCE. GREAT. SO, you don't see any people on what is THEN the BLUE EARTH. Think !!! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA !!! Think very carefully about the experience of THE MAN who is standing on what is the EARTH/ground. Magnificent !!! By Frank DiMeglio THE CLEAR AND UNIVERSAL MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA: Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. The Earth (A PLANET) is a MIDDLE DISTANCE form that is in BALANCED relation to the Sun AND the speed of light (c), AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. ACCORDINGLY, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. SO, the Earth constitutes the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE in BALANCED and UNIVERSAL relation to what is the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. SO, time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA !!! GREAT !!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Indeed, it ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Accordingly, the rotation of the Moon MATCHES it's revolution. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! By Frank DiMeglio WHY ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIFIED AND BALANCED WITH/AS WHAT IS GRAVITY: Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are LINKED AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Therefore, Einstein's equations and Maxwell's equations are unified (given the addition of a fourth spatial dimension); AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma; AS TIME DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, Einstein's equations predict that SPACE is expanding OR contracting in and with TIME; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of the Moon MATCHES it's revolution. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. THE SUN purely exemplifies time DILATION. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Let's compare this directly with BOTH a falling object AND the speed of light (c). Great. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL to the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience. Ultimately and truly, TIME is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The ultimate unification of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND includes opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT. It ALL makes perfect sense. THINK !!! The Earth that undergoes time DILATION IS thus represented (ON BALANCE) as what is A POINT in the night sky, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (So, notice that the BLUE SKY IS no longer visible. Think.) E=mc2 IS F=ma. It is FULLY proven. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Alas, the INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. I have truly, CLEARLY, AND MATHEMATICALLY unified physics/physical experience. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. (Notice the black space of THE EYE, AND the DOME of a person's eye is ALSO visible.) THE EARTH is ALSO blue. Again, E=mc2 IS F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Time dilation proves that E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
The fact (or seemingly) that we can ponder these questions upon this oblate spheroid called Earth at this particular point in something called time is really something to behold .Thank you for your time in making your excellent productions !
It is also astonishing that we live in an era where these conundrums are coming to life. Imagine, of all the times you could have been born in, you were born into the most amazing time.
Gravity to scale, as in mass. Its right. A black hole has a lot of mass, but isn't very big. Where as atoms with low mass, low size have other more powerful forces.
I am an engineer. It just amazes me how focused physicists are to include gravity to the standard model despite the fact it can't possibly have any relevant effect in any place we can reach. If you ever do find how to include gravity I have Dibbs to be the first engineer to say to you "that term is insignificant so I am dropping it from the equation."
Again, I thank you for these videos. I learned some stuff here that adds a lot of context to what I have been thinking about for a while. Keep up the good work and keep these videos coming please. if I was aware of some things a long time ago, then physics would have been my profession now.
Thank you, Dr. Lincoln, for your most cogent insight. It will greatly aid in integrating all this knowledge into a comprehensive understanding of what is and is not known in physics.
THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
WHY E=MC2 IS NECESSARILY F=MA (ON BALANCE), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity AS SPACE ON BALANCE: TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Hence, the Earth AND the Sun are CLEARLY E=MC2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE. (The sky is blue, AND the Earth is ALSO BLUE.) A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=MA !!!; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!) Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE !!!; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) E=mC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Great !!! Again, BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. By Frank DiMeglio
My wish is to have a face to face conversation with Don L about the variables of all that is seemingly unrelated to this Quantum Gravity in this looping infinity space.
I am really having a hard time with this. If gravity is curved space ( around a massive object ) then we do we need a force carrier at all for gravity?
Because there is no such thing as force! Not in the way that you visualise . What you call FORCE its just Fields that are vibrating . This fields are every where. Matter is just energy entraped in a closed space . This energy cannot be destroyed or created and wants to fill every space of this space evenly . When this energy its reaching 0,5MeV then the electron field start vibrating and imediatly creates a particle thats its called electron. And so on for every single of the known particles with different energies too. You try to move this particles then ( an electron lets say ) , at the place in space where this wave move it econters another particle . If this particle is charged then interact with it , and that means that at that 3D space point there is more than just 0,5 MeV. That means that outher fields start to vibrate and so a quark starts to emerge lets say. If you can name me a single particle that stay at rest (and not moving) I will admit that I am wrong. Why a particle must allways move? because particles and forces , given that forces derives from the interaction between particles , are just excitations in this Fields , and that its why particles are wave . Because fields move in a wavey form.
Those wavey form are the forces ! That its why Gravity needs its graviton (its gauge bosson ) because those wavey form are mediated by the gravitons that moves a long those wave lengths . Gravitys field its space itself. That its way even if the universe its infinite if you have two object , then the gravity force between them wont ever be zero !
@@cazymike87 why does it need to gauge tho, if gravity is just the curvature of spacetime then can't spacetime just be the field itself and graviton the scalar boson that describes how much it is being curved
+ Fermilab "Realistically, solving this problem (finding a quantum theory of gravity) will take a long time..." It has *already* taken a long time, so I guess that's a pretty safe statement!!
Dr. Lincoln, At what volume does quantum gravity start to interfere with the Standard Model’s concept of gravity? Is quantum gravity a problem of a given mass/energy only in a certain (small) volume? Thanks for your informative and interesting videos. Paul
Paul Heinrich the standard model doesn’t explain gravity. I think you mean what are the size values where quantum gravity can be expressed as Newtonian gravity!
Wayne, yes Paul's question is ambiguous. But you didn't answer it. That's because your answer was so profound that the answer is not yet known. It's so easy to ask a question; so hard to answer them.
@@edwardlulofs444 I don't know the answer. I am just trying to clarify the questions=>, which is half the battle. To clarify even further, I think what he is asking is at what mass density or energy does classical gravity theory (Newtonian or Einstein) breakdown and necessitate the use of quantum gravity. I do not know the answer but it would interesting if someone can frame it or answer it. ( I use the term "classical" here to refer to all non-quantum theories, but classical can sometime refer to ONLY non-quantum and non-relativistic. I prefer to label all non-quantum theories as classical because that's what they are.)
I am a bit confused. If gravity is a bending of spacetime why does it require a force carrier such as a gravitron? Is gravity fundamentally the same as the other 3 forces?
Several people such as yourself have remarked on the incompatibility between the general relativistic view of gravity (bending of space-time) and the quantum view (exchange of force carriers). This is exactly the point - there isn't a unified theory (at least, not one widely accepted let alone verified) that brings both perspectives together. It's almost an article of faith that all forces can be unified, but there is no direct evidence that gravity can be unified with the other 3. Part of the incompatibility between these views is that in general relativity, mass has an effect which "spreads out"; in quantum physics, we only discuss what happens essentially at a single point (or small volume of space more realistically given Heisenberg) when particles interact.
I am happy to see i am not the only one overly confused. I just recently came to terms with the fact that Gravity is a fictitious force which is only a manifestation of space-time curvature, and now i realize that my "old" views are still considered somewhat valid. Is there any good video that tackles this specific issue?
We can measure the force of gravity, not to mention that we can feel it. So I disagree in calling it fictitious. Could it be, borrowing from Newton, that the acceleration (force) field at a point is proportional to the square of the curvature at that point and is pointing in the direction of -N (normal to the surface)?
That can be calculated in a naive fashion, but would be meaningless, as electrons do not really 'orbit' the nucleus. That is not what the video was talking about. time of decay (due to gravity waves for massive bodies) = 5 (a^4) / 256 * M1 * M2 * (M1 + M2) where 'a' is the distance between M1 (mass 1) and M2 (mass 2). This will not work for electrons as electrons do not really 'orbit' The video was talking about the electron orbit's decay die to radiating away electromagnetic waves. There used to be a model of atoms as little 'solar systems' with electrons in orbit around a central nucleus, like planets in orbit around a sun. This created a paradox that led to the development of quantum mechanics. When a body, like a planet, is in orbit around a much larger body, the planet is constantly accelerating. The planet may be going around the sun at a constant speed, but velocity is a vector with both speed and direction. Since the planet is following an elliptical path, it is constantly changing its direction, even if the speed is the same. We'll leave out gravity waves for now. Charged particles, like electrons, emit radiation when they are accelerated. The radiation is in the form of electromagnetic waves. look up the Larmor Formula for more information on how to calculate the power radiated by an accelerated point charge. If you picture an atom like a tiny solar system with an electron in orbit around a nucleus you know that the system is stable because the electron's orbit does not spiral down into the nucleus. The 'velocity' of the electron must be 'fast' enough that, even though it feels a strong electric charge attraction to the protons in the nucleus it has enough velocity to maintain 'orbit'. However, a body in orbit is a body that is constantly accelerating, and a constantly accelerating point charge is constantly emitting electromagnetic radiation. The radiation means that energy is leaving the system, and the expected result is that the 'orbit' of the electron would decay and spiral into the nucleus. It does not decay. It does not emit radiation (due to its 'orbit'). It is extremely stable. Quantum mechanics was developed to explain the 'orbits' of electrons. the term 'orbit' was kept, but it is not like the orbit of a classical body. It is an energy state that the electron and nucleus system can exist in. The states are discrete, or 'quantized' in that an electron can be in one state or another, but never an in between state. It can be in state 1, 2, 3 but never in state 1.79. When an electron moves between states it either emits or absorbs a photon of the exact wavelength (a measure of a photon's energy) needed to jump the electron from the beginning level to the final level. (this is the origin of emission and absorption lines in spectrum analysis) Since the electron is not really in orbit, it does not make sense to calculate the gravity waves generated by its orbit. You can find a formula for calculating the time in years for two massive bodies in orbit around each other in equation number 44 of the following paper: www.tapir.caltech.edu/~chirata/ph236/2011-12/lec15.pdf However, this does not really apply to electrons and a nucleus, because we know that electrons do not orbit the nucleus. If they did, they would radiate and matter all would decay on timescales of seconds. We know matter is pretty stable, so the idea of electrons in orbits is not accurate. It may be something our brains can picture better that quantum wave probabilities, but nature is under no obligation to care about what we humans feel comfortable with being able to picture and understand.
Instead of one particle, gravity may get generated with two particles. More particles implies more gravity. It can have relativistic properties. At quantum level, gravity could be just letting other particles "form" from energy. Gravity could be related to stability, swarm properties and clustering without fusing.
Feynman looked at this idea, if I understand what you said. If you have written anything mathematical about this model I would be interested in reading it. His idea is sometimes called the "pushon" model. It doesn't agree with experiment. But maybe your idea is different. However, the further your idea is from the standard model and GR the less likely it will work. But I enjoy reading new ideas.
@@edwardlulofs444 I am not physics person, but software. I tried to reverse engineered what gravity could be just philosophically. I'm not using GR or quantum as base, trying to express my thought below. Gravity holds things together, so for that at minute level, there has to be non holdable entity, like energy. Energy has properties like harmonic or flow or vibration etc. If energy is not infinite then it may start to wear out eventually at some point in space, because of vibrations, flow etc. Gravity property could isolate wearing out and create a particle. Gravity could also cluster these particles so as not to get destroyed by energy, could be due to law of conservation. So gravity could naturally support swarm properties and clustering. It doesn't fully fuse entities due to either 'isolating other energies' property of gravity or it could fuse gravity properties in particles itself and then they don't fuse. Total fusion is energy's property. Effect of gravity may be observable only when two particles interacts, like momentum property, when a particle consists of more smaller particles. Particle purely implies "size" if it does not consist of other particles. Size is space property, implying presence of gravity everywhere in space in some form, similar to luminous eather. Just size property implies sheer presence, dominance and hence slow attraction property at distance, but nonlinear attraction in close proximity. Gravity itself could be hunter energy of weakness of other stronger energies. This is just a thought without any mathematical base or model. But this could be simulated on computers. It also implies bondage for energy and space due to which energies could start to wear out eventually. Different types of particles implies different amounts of wear out energy or presence of different energies. Humans have evolved in highly quantized world and see energies only through particles and photons. So we may not detect non quantized energy directly, even our devices are quantized. In double slit experiment, when electron passes through both slits, we can say that energy of electron start to wear out due to possible two paths and gravity creates two electrons from wearing out energy which then passes through each slit.
You were talking about the electron spiralling down into the proton in an atom but given that gravity is so weak, as you said like 100 trillion trillion trillion times weaker than the strong force, then surely the time scale upon which this would be so large that it would mask the age of the universe easily and too long a time and small a change that scientific instruments probably cannot measure it
the electron would spiral down because of the elctromagnetic radiation he creates (which causes a loss of energy) and this has nothing to do with gravitation. the answer to this (false) prediction lies in the principle of quantification of the levels of energy within an atom.
the "planetary" idea of atoms with protons in the center and eletrons orbiting it is pretty much wrong. one more accurate view is that in an atom, eletrons have a chance of being in a certain distance to protons.
A little bit like some basic one dimension chaotic attractors for which it could take an infinite time to reach them. Take a particule for which when it is at position x, its speed is -x. (Don't ask me how it is possible, it is just for illustration.) So, when the particule is in the negative positions, its speed is toward the origine, and when it is in the positive positions, its speed is also toward the origine, but such a particule will never reach the origine (unless it starts there). It is linked to convergence/divergence of infinite sums. So, indeed, it could take an infinite time for gravity to accomplish the described goal, but the "reason" explaining while the electric attraction forbid it in the first place, while being much stronger, would still forbid it, anyhow...
That is a thought experiment to show how classical electrodynamics fail to explain the observed fact that they dont spiral in to the nucleus, which is solved by quantized energy levels, you can apply the same thing to gravitation, sammbos argument is that even if the electron would radiate gravitational waves, the effect is so small it wouldnt me measurable.
@@addajjalsonofallah6217 a field is a set of parameters. It's mathematical, rather than physical. Space is physical. Space is not the gravitational field. The cosmos is comprised of a unified body called Space-time; it is not comprised of a unified body called Gravitational Field-time.
@@adamspears3819 the Universe itself is pure energy/knowledge/intelligence. Geometry and mathematics is its basic design. We became conscious of mathematics (it already existed since before this Universe and the many others) when our brains were ready (just the other day in time).
What about gravity waves? Maybe exist way to use them in experiments. Maybe they can show us something? Maybe we should focus on creating experiments which using gravity waves? Becouse what they are for , if we cant use them in any way?
The picture of an electron in a planet-like orbit and spiraling in was an example of how you CAN'T use a classical theory to explain the structure of atoms, and need a quantum mechanical theory. Would have been nice to follow it up with a visual representation of a quantum mechanical atom, but it isn't clear what is the best way to do this in a video of this length.
Because he had to explain the electromagnetic force interactions between the orbiting object and the centre. Emission of energy will ultimately lead to the orbiting object falling into the centre, just like how a neutron and an electron are together.
@@yoondami1127 But that's the thing: In any atom not subject to electron capture decay, electrons CAN'T emit energy to fall all the way in to the nucleus -- the innermost orbital not already occupied by other electrons is the lowest orbital an electron can enter with the release of energy, and any attempt to get an electron to go into a lower orbital or to confine it to the nucleus consumes energy. Note that electrons and the components of nuclei are fermions; bosons would be able to spiral all the way in. This doesn't work in gravitationally-bound systems on a macroscopic scale, in which orbiting objects can spiral in with emission of gravitational wave energy limited only by collision of the objects (or in the case of black holes, complete merger). Supposedly down at the scale at which quantum mechanics begin to dominate, fermions moving according to gravitational interactions would start to obey the same rules of quantum mechanics (and orbitals derived therefrom) as fermions moving according to electromagnetic interactions, but currently we have no way to test that.
I see progress. Hawking, Green, Witten, and many others have all added clues. Putting all the pieces together and seeing for the first time the big picture is what I find to be engaging and absorbing.
I'm taking a graduate course on general relativity at UC Berkeley and teaching myself quantum field theory on the side just to begin to understand this stuff. I gotta say these videoes just giving me more and more incentive to keep pushing forward. I may not come up with anything at all but oh boy, I wanna see how far into this puzzle I can go. I'll probably just go back to engineering at some point, lool.
Thats because the theory itself doesnt exist yet. but our current theories predict that a gravaton should exist as explained in the video. the thing is that its force is so weak that it is near impossible to detect on the quantum level. So in order to gather enough information, or any information at all, to get a theory on it we have to use black holes or other points of large amouts of mass in a very small volume. Because it is in that place we might find that gravatons have an influence on the quantum level.
Layperson question: Is it possible gravity is a "side effect" of the other three forces? A type of interference pattern generated by the interaction of the other forces? Also, if gravity is quantum, wouldn't it be instantaneous at any distance, like entanglement? Is It?
No, gravity is not instantaneous (as in Newton's theory). This in fact was how Einstein began his general theory - his special theory implied that no information could be transmitted faster than light (let alone instantaneously), and that includes gravity. If you wiggle a mass, in Newton's theory other masses would immediately feel the change in direction of the force from the wiggled body. In GR, that can't happen, so instead the wiggled body emits gravitational waves - which HAVE now been detected.
But the falling of objects is not the force, the force is the curvature of space-time- so is THAT instantaneous? Surely gravitons would act in space-time warping, not pulling objects together, because GR already gives us the reason why objects are pulled together if space-time is warped.
The effects of gravity move at the speed of light. So if some how the Sun just vanished we the Earth would continue to orbit the location where the Sun was for another eight minutes and twenty seconds. It's not instantaneous. The fact that there are measurable gravity waves prove that it's not instantaneous. There are also ways to measure the propagation of gravity in a lab.
+ScienceNinjaDude I know this is the Theory of General Relativity...and my comment was maybe there's nothing more to reality than that...large or small and gravity isn't a fundamental force...period.
+ScienceNinjaDude - I like you - you seem smart and open minded enough to challenge current paradigms that clearly fail every area of science - people think particle physics is some high grade learning only for boff's - but this shit really dictates our reality - every area of life everyon should get to know some of it - I mean if the standard model of particle physics and it's minion can't tell us more about the nature of subatomic particles then they auto fail as scientists - For example what's really occurring in our sun - as standard solar model doesn't even include the weight of neutrino's (do they?) - we even see radio-active nuclear decay rates in laboratories around the world now varying due to the rubbing off effects of neutrino oscillation - this is a bit mind blowing. - Anyway point being could neutrinos not be the origin of matter-antimatter asymmetry and the origins of matter itself - I heard it might be a resolve for super-symmetry and higher unification principles correlating to quantum gravity and proton decay. - The Cosmic microwave background (CMB) is thermal - electromagnetic radiation - a cosmic sea of energy left over from the primordial universe - and is referred to as relic neutrinos or (CNB) - postulated as the "Dirac Sea" at one stage - electrons, muon and tau neutrinos are the second most abundant sub-atomic particles in the universe other than photons and weigh a minuscule amount far preceding that of an electron - Even the Higgs-Boson doesn't have as much significance against the neutrino - while travelling through space, a neutrino apparently continuously flips between different "types" of neutrino, changing the way they interact with matter. This is called neutrino oscillations and thus has an extremely minuscule amount of weight. - This is the missing universal mass preceding that of the Higgs-Boson - the masses of other matter particles, generated by coupling to the famous Higgs particle, vary widely - from the electron, about 2,000 times smaller than the mass of a proton, to the top quark, which weighs nearly 200 times more than the mass of a proton. The neutrino mass, however, is at least 10,000,000,000 times smaller than the proton mass hence it is referred to as a WIMP. - Most people will have heard of electrons, neutrons and protons - and perhaps even quarks, which make up the latter two. But to me, the neutrino is the most amazing fundamental particle. They are everywhere. About 65 billion neutrinos, produced by nuclear fusion in the Sun, pass through every square centimeter of area on Earth, every second, without doing much of anything. - Formed in the first seconds of the so-called big bang, the CNB is a dark, invisible candidate for the seat of electromagnetic phenomena. Like the Cosmic Microwave Background, the CNB can provide a universal rest frame and, at a temperature of 1.95 K⁰, the CNB forms a frictionless superfluid that permeates space. - Recent experiments suggest that the electronic neutrino is a tachyon - a tachyonic CNB is also a dark energy candidate; while, at the same time, analogous to cosmology‘s - quintessence‘. (Aether - Quinta Essentia - Prima Materia) - Question is could it be really be an Aether candidate and would it not be the best substitute for the cause gravitational fields due density, mass and the electromagnetic field resistance of particles - i.e. generating EG fields (electrogravitics) - are they not much better suited as a gravitational candidate than so-called gravitons?
***** - Thanks for that anyway I am sure that there will be more mysteries to be revealed by neutrinos in the near future - what a blessing a unified field theory would be especially if it was as elegant as that - only more experimentation will tell - but I can't really see how general relativity will be included it though.
General relativity said gravity is caused by massive objects curving space and time. Quantum mechanics said that gravity is caused by particles called gravitons. How do both explanations make sense? In other words, what has bending space and time got to do with gravitons????🤔😡
May be dark matter has something to do with the creation of gravity. ¨Since the information contained within a region of space depends upon the arrangement of objects within that region, moving the objects can change the entropy within the region. Verlinde demonstrated that this produces an entropic force that acts like gravity. From the basic idea of information entropy, one can derive Einstein's equations of general relativity exactly.¨ www.forbes.com/sites/briankoberlein/2016/11/08/solution-to-dark-matter-proposes-that-gravity-is-an-illusion/#27d5d1813058
Not that I'm a physicist or anything, but I think they're wrong about both. I think it's more likely that gravity is an equal and opposite reaction to the effect mass has on space-time. They say time slows down, or drags, on mass. Well that's why matter can't reach the speed of light, right? Because as it accelerates it gains "mass" in the form of velocity, to the point time would slow down and the particles would become too "heavy" (massive) to accelerate any further. Or that's why they say flying around a black hole would cause you to age slower. Or why going faster than light would cause you to travel back in time. So anyways, if mass accelerating through space causes time to slow down, could time slowing down cause mass to accelerate? In other words, the gravity is strongest at the center of mass. So time must be moving slower at the ground than above head. That's why we are constantly being pulled or "accelerated" toward the ground. I know I'm sometimes all over the place and bad at explaining things, but my hypothesis works with everything. If time slows down when you move faster, (atomic clocks on airplanes) and bigger planets have stonger gravity (because more mass) and fat people weigh more (isn't weight really just a measurement of gravity?)... I dunno. I rambled at NASA about this idea, and they gave me a "atta boy, have a sticker" type of response lol so maybe it sounds crazier to others than to me. But in my mind, it seems more correct than following the curve. Because when I'm not moving through space, I'm just sitting here, I'm still accelerating toward the earth. That's got to be a reaction to something, not just a line being followed. Who knows. Whatever.
Quantum gravity doesn't say gravity is caused by graviton. It just say a particle called graviton with such and such property should exit. Think of graviton as a 'quantum' of space-time 'bending-ness'
I'll just mention one error in your post. You say: "the gravity is strongest at the center of mass". This is false. For example, if you have a hollow sphere of equal density (a shell), there is no gravitational field anywhere within the shell (even at the center of mass), due to the shell itself.
10 years from now when all this is figured out we'll come back to this and say "Look at this crazy video with its obsolete questions and it's crazy editing!!!"
I really like these videos. I am still a student without any college-level knowledge of physics but still I can understand these videos. He makes the topics really easy to understand.
3:26 But why are we still talking about gravity as a force? When Einstein showed what it really is. What is the problem with applying Einstein’s theory at the scale of subatomic particles? I get that this will lead to the prediction that an electron orbiting a proton will lose energy and spiral inwards eventually...but so what? How quickly is this spiralling predicted to happen? Do we know for a fact it never happens?
What if gravity doesn't exist at all and what we perceive as gravity is just a huge coincidence regarding particle interactions? Or maybe mass can futz with particles wave functions making them slightly more likely to be closer to the mass than further away?
What if gravity is just a distortion of space... then gravity is not a force at all. At the quantum level it would affect the quantum vacuum fluctuations. Digging further this... would also explain how the big bang started and why it did not repeat it self.
@@alwaysdisputin9930 I like to think space it is just distorted by density, just like light speed change propagation on different materials. Density changes the magnetic and electric permeability therefore the speed of light. Quantum vacuum fluctuations, on this line of thinking, are the means for the electro-magnetic wave propagation. On the old times called "eter". This idea was abandoned because nothing was found on vacuum, however no further explanation was given about how wave propagation occur. I will put this in math terms: The integral: Weight of a vacuum volume over time with time -> infinity = constant The derivative: Weight of a vacuum volume (time->0) -> ~ infinity by the teachings of A. Einstein . and M. Planck - I am just an electrical engineer.
Thanks for the video(s). One thing though: Matter, before the Big Bang, was not all clustered together in a point. The energy that formed matter was. A big distinction.
K. Chris Caldwell .... theories change as new evidence is introduced in to science. The big bang theory was trashed ..... as the evidence showed galaxies at the edge of the observable universe are moveing away at the speed of light ( or greater) which .... according to physics is impossible. So.... the expanding universe theory was put forward. With NO evidence . The error is in the red shift distance measurement method. We do not know what happens to light waves over millions of years or traveling through massive amounts of other electromagnetic waves.... dust particles.... gravitational forces over billions of years. I do like that these sience shows are stating which are theorys and which are firm science.... now. But..... search YT and you will find 4 different theories for why light bends as it goes through water..... all with great graphics and all claiming to be scientists.
Perhaps the graviton exists in 2 dimensional space. Your suggestion that this will take a long time could be correct, but when it happens it will be incredibly simple and was staring us in the face all along. :)
A Research Paper which shows 'an astrophysical effect' which is an indication towards the ""quantum theory of gravity", which is yet to be achieved. www.researchgate.net/publication/325334315 Please give your review about it
Reminds me of a guy standing in front of a black board talking. One could say its 1800 School house Style - or could call it modern as it was released only a bit ago. Everyone's a critic.
it is impressive how the inner constructs of us to represent knowledge that is quite abstract tend to have a pretty diverse latent space for every different speaker. Usually we don't really grasp this because, the cannon content stands out. But if we imagine that concepts are derived from a multiple dimensional space (not speaking of physical dimensions, rather expressive dimensions), although all the dimensions must be compressed into a converged global optimum, the idea of looking to a single formula and expecting it to spit all out, is rather simplistic. We would have far more success if we could explore the latent space of the knowledge, instead of iterating to get always the same convergence at the end. Sometimes is the convergence that fail to compute an important dimension to the outcome. I loved the part that implied that maybe we have to consider something that exists that is not physical, this is so absurd, but yet the latent space revealed by it is huge - basically we are open to some serious refactoring of our theories. I have come to believe that gravity actually is the true bearer of the most fundamental information to form our universe. We would flip the notion that matter would have a feature that is expressed as gravity, and actually all the particles come from gravity.
So the gravity would behave like a probability wave, and as probability gets more dense, it would start expressing itself as some particular kind of content in the universe. The universe would be like a strum on a guitar string. Black holes would be the guitarists. which would indeed imply that for the universe to exist it would have to be generated from the tension of the center of a black hole. Which would also explain the rate of the universe expansion being fractal in space.
Excellent series on Quantum Mechanics!!! The best!!! My complements. Love the easy, confident tone, And the graphics. We are visual learners and you do it the best. Would love to get into the equations with you leading the way!!! Thank you for your videos.
Gravity and Quantum gravity is one and the same. Inertial mass exerts is effects on us every day. Inertial mass is different than gravitational mass until there is an observer. When we measure inertial mass, we collapse its wave function and we get gravitational mass.
Fermi Lab should do a video on Quantum Loop Gravity and spin networks. According to Rovelli quantum foam should be come apparent at 10 to the - 45 etc. range and spin networks to 10 to the -65 level. if they exist the smallest dimension could be made down to 10 to the - 65 instead of to the -35.
Here's a thought experiment I've been playing with: Let's say that space is not really empty but is made up of particles even tinier then the tiniest ones that we can measure and that each of these particles exist within a cubic pattern equidistant from one another all the way from one edge of the universe to the other. Now, lets say that matter appears and pushes or compresses these smaller particles. The particles attempt to push and consolidate the now present matter into the same location. The more that the smaller particles are displaced or compressed together, the greater their density and the harder they push against the matter. Get enough matter consolidated together, the displaced particles become super compressed and super dense creating a super amount of gravity around the object. Picture it like a bowling ball that magically appears in the middle of the material that makes up a foam mattress and how tight the foam would be around it, but getting further away, although the foam would still be slightly compressed, it would not be as compressed as it is within the area of the bowling ball. It's probably a stupid thought, but since we don't know what actually causes gravity, guess it's as good as any.
Oppenheim has a recent paper out about splicing together GR and quantum field theories like the Standard Model. If the paper is right, the claim at 3:20 is wrong. Title is "Postquantum Theory of Classical Gravity". I am a native English speaker with a PhD and it is beyond my reading level.
something the smartest people in the world have been trying to solve for almost a century had been solved by dozens of people in this comment section. Incredible...
1. The Bohr model relied on an orbiting electron deBroglie wavelength, which described the quantum nature of where-the-electron-is... so it'd prevent gravity radiation as well as E&M... 2. Hubble expansion of cosmic space would counter the weak collapse of an electron orbit and, since we don't see the Earth's orbit expand around the sun, we know it's countered...
A physicist's notion of gravity is vague: 1. the gravitational wave from coorbiting merging mass holes carries solar-mass-worths of energy already always outside their hollowed holes, 2. a solar-mass-worth of photons falling-together can't gain energy from itself, so maybe particles don't neither but convert their rest mass....
More specifically 4.6% of a mass hole's mass-energy is outside its time radius and radiated as gravitation waves each merger, keeping 95.4% after... so, over the wide range of this arithmetic most of a hole's mass is outside the little halfway-inside.... (So our 4.2Msol galaxy core hole may be 36% of its original 22 merger level mass.)
Classical calculus of gravity and particle physics have already been proven consistent. Idescribed the nature of gravity in the ancient quantum field at a certain Cheikh Anta Diop conference and presented graviton at g+ in 2015. Classical calculus of gravity and particle physics are already consistent in the reconstructed Pharaonic measurements of physical quantities. Dr. Don Lincoln takes us here in the right direction.
Kes Co Have you or anyone that you know heard of gravitational foam? I do not remember where I encountered the term and it is driving me up the wall trying to understand what physics may be in play and how it would display its self. Thank you.
yes in classical terms it is the force due to gravity from Newton. from relativity, instead of it being an interaction it is basically the deformation of space-time.
I would like to ask two questions: 1- why are dark matter and dark energy not mentioned in this video? 2- "where" are linear and rotational motion energies stored?
Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared is Einstein's famous equation E=MC², but why and what process links energy, mass and light together in this way? In this theory E=MC² is an approximation of (E=ˠM˳C²)∞ with energy, mass, light and time dilation all part of one process. Energy ∆E slows the rate that time ∆t flows as a process of continuous creation relative to the energy & momentum of each object or life form. Mass will increase relative to this with the inward force of gravity linked to the outward momentum of light. Therefore both gravitational and electromagnetic force are relative to the inverse square law!
Force (physics) does not exist physically in the same way that an object with mass, thus making it “not” the initial cause of pushing, pulling, shaping objects, motion, work or being a Vector Quantity (Magnitude + Direction). In physics, the word, “Force” as we know it, turns out to be nothing more than an expression to express an idea, like one would use the word “Love” to express one's feelings. But, physics and in mathematics, still use “Force” as thou it were something physical that could enable the initial cause of motion making it counterintuitive. Example: Without applying the Energy from within you, choose an object of your choices to push and pull by simply applying “only” the Force or Net Force. Meaning that Energy (applied energy) is the origin of motion and not “Force”. Once Energy (E) is applied, it creates what is known as Momentum (p). When this Momentum (object in motion) comes in contact with another object(s), it makes a surface contact that will enable you to push and pull. Example: Ep=ma, Ep=mv and so on. Note: Ep is not to be confused as Kinetic Energy in any way. Momentum represents things like work, wave, gravity, light, lightning, tsunami, earthquake, current, electricity, motion, magnetism, etc. Without Energy, there is no Momentum. Without Momentum, there is no surface contact on an object(s) to push, pull, work, shaping objects, motion, gravity, etc. Momentum does not and cannot exist without the applied Energy that creates it. Energy and Momentum or “Ep” is the one and only common denominator that links all fundamental forces of nature. Without Ep, all fundamental forces of nature would be inert and non-existence. Energy is energy, but it’s when Energy (E) is being applied that creates the Momentum (p) making it the initial cause of motion. Example: Ep. By applying the right amount of Energy, nothing is immovable or unstoppable. ~ Guadalupe Guerra
Dr Lincoln, thank you for another great video. I have one perennial issue with this approach to gravity. Am I wrong in thinking that there are really only 3 fundamental FORCES: Strong weak and Electromagnetic each mediated by it’s own gauge boson. When we discuss gravity we are not talking about a FORCE, we are (if I understand relativity at all) talking about the curvature of spacetime due to huge concentrations of matter. Why does this require a gauge boson at all? Surely gravity is so resistant to being combined with the other forces because it’s not a force it’s a distortion.
+ScienceNinjaDude And how fascinating is that (and I know I’m not telling you anything you don’t know…that is the point of your video after all) because surely a massive object (like the earth) is simply a collection of a huge quantity of subatomic particles. If we reduce the quantity of these particles by half we reduce the force of gravity by (and correct me if I’m wrong ) by 4? times. Reduce by half again and the same effect occurs. Is there a point where gravity completely disappears and is replaced by Quantum Mechanical forces and what exactly happens at that threshold. If we add one more atom at that threshold what is the change. This is fascinating stuff, what a great universe we live in :-)
@05:05 Could 'Scale' be that extra dimension?! (moving/shrinking from the very small or expanding to the astronomical large). Thus having: Length, Width, Height, Time and Scale
I have been looking at a candidate for a unified field theory for a few years. Dr Felix Finster has been working on this for a dozen years. He's a prof of mathematics in Germany studying the mathematical foundations of QFT. I have been impressed with the new ideas that he and his team have been writing about in a dozen papers. If I understand his work, he has found a way to not subtract the infinite terms during renormalization but that these infinities are caused by the standard model being formulated in flat spacetime. He calls it "casual fermion system." I found his work while forming a new model of dark matter. I have a PhD in physics from UC Irvine but I have not found a problem with Finster's work yet. If you could kindly spend 5 minutes googling this material and send me a sentence of why it's wrong I would be grateful. Thank you. Ed Lulofs
I am mostly a physics hobbyist. Curious but unaccredited. I am kicking around the idea that quarks are tetrahedrons rather than points or spheres. Their orientation (which face contacts another ) forms the strong or weak nuclear force and the ability to carry a charge the electromagnetic force. Matter always has positive mass. Negative mass is an imaginary number like wishful thinking. Mass always has momentum corresponding to density of mass and velocity. Matter having mass also has the property of affection time. The larger the mass, the slower time progresses. The current thinking is that the Higgs Boson is responsible for mass, but the boson is a more complex form than a quark. What my basic premise is that quarks have alignments. Spin has to have a axis, even if not the center of mass. Ellipses have two axis. The question is; could gravity be an alignment pointing to mass and could gravity be a vector of momentum. There would be larger factors of momentum in motion / velocity, but the alignment would always point to the largest local mass. The larger the mass, the more offset the alignment toward mass and thereby affect the curvature of mass/momentum vector in a gravity well. No need for a specific force carrier like a graviton. Thanks for even spending the time to read this. I'll keep playing with my 3-D models and diagrams.
My suggestion proposes that space time is made up of dipole magnetics, which are small particles with randomly distributed magnetic fields. According to this idea, the connections between these particles create an elasticity in space, allowing for the bending and twisting of space time. This elasticity allows for the explanation of the force of gravity through the bending of space, and the creation of magnetic fields from pulsars through the twisting of space time. Additionally, the suggestion compares subatomic particles to air bubbles in a magnet superfluid.
But to ask a question: what is the 'force' of gravity? -GR would imply its not the pulling together of objects....that's due to the flow of time, geodesics in space-time, the nature of speed of light etc.etc. -but, it is the 'force' that somehow warps space-time due to mass, right?
Probably dumb question, but why do gravitons need to exist, if gravity is simply the warping of space time? Why do particles need to exist for matter to follow the curves of space?
The page Nexus of Physics has now given the following two writings the thumbs up on their page. ALSO consider this: E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE UNIVERSAL AND MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. SO, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE SUN AND THE EARTH are described and represented by BOTH F=ma AND E=mc2. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational (IN BALANCE). Objects fall at the same rate (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS the SPEED OF LIGHT is RELATIVELY CONSTANT AS WELL. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. In fact, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. So, THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are not "falling" in what is "curved SPACE" in RELATION to what is THE SUN. This is nonsense. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma. This truly explains PERPETUAL MOTION. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. By Frank DiMeglio EINSTEIN NEVER UNDERSTOOD PHILOSOPHY, MATHEMATICS, AND PHYSICS, AS HE HAS BEEN TOTALLY OUTSMARTED BY SIR FRANK MARTIN DIMEGLIO: The balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is ESSENTIAL. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. THE SELF represents, FORMS, and experiences a COMPREHENSIVE approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience. MOREOVER, the ability of THOUGHT to DESCRIBE OR RECONFIGURE sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT IS SIMILAR TO sensory experience. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE. Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. MOST IMPORTANTLY, in dreams, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE. IMPORTANTLY, dream experience is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. THE EYE is ALSO the body. Dreams improve upon memory AND UNDERSTANDING. Indeed, there is no outsmarting the GENIUS of dreams. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/with what is THE EARTH. NOW, get a good LOOK at what is the translucent, SEMI-SPHERICAL, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE sky. Excellent. The DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. THE EARTH IS also BLUE (as water). F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that, why, and how ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, and describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. SO, it is NECESSARILY a matter of precisely how these equations are understood in a BALANCED, EXTENSIVE, AND INTEGRATED fashion in RELATION to/with WHAT IS THOUGHT. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Get a good LOOK at what is THE EYE. POINTS are points. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. OPEN your EYES. NOW, LOOK at what is the FLAT, SETTING, AND ORANGE SUN (with the SPACE around it THEN going invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE). This ORANGE SUN manifests or forms at what is EYE LEVEL/BODY HEIGHT as well. This ORANGE SUN is manifest ON BALANCE as what is NECESSARILY the BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE of THE EARTH/LAVA. The viscosity of LAVA IS BETWEEN what is manifest as WATER AND THE EARTH/GROUND. ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. F=ma AND E=mc2 do provide absolute, BALANCED, THEORETICAL, and CLEAR proof that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THEREFORE, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AND this is THEN consistent with/as what is F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is PERPETUAL MOTION; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are NOT "falling" in what is "curved SPACE". In fact, this is nonsense. It is PROVEN. By Frank DiMeglio
Einstein and others seem to be suggesting that gravity does not exist as a force (and therefore has no force carrying Graviton particle) like the forces we know but rather gravity as a force is an illusion caused by mass (or energy as per e=mc2) bending spacetime which is affecting the paths of real particles and photons. This effect is what we, as humans, interpret as gravity. Saying all that I still hear physicists talk about the force of gravity so which is it? Is it a real force or is it a virtual force?
I have a lot of thoughts and will post some some questions but I have to ask this one now. From the plank size with all of that incredible space to electrons, are there particles in between them? That is one incredible gap for something not to be there. Because of quantam mechanics and the weird stuff going on there, is there any hints of any kind of what is going on in that space?
Don, in your presentation, you mention that no one understands why the speed of light is what it is. But, couldn't one go to Maxwell's equations, and look at the resistances to changes in electric fields and magnetic fields, and from there determine why the speed of light is what it is? I believe that this has been done, by Maxwell and others. Now, why those resistances are what they are may truly be unknown...something in the nature of spacetime itself, perhaps. Thanks for the great presentations!
IIRC, one problem with quantum gravity is that as predicted by general relativity, gravity effects how time moves. But for quantum mechanics, time must be the same everywhere.
I really love this channel, it's so complete, even for a non physicists
+joão vitor mendes Yeah!
+joão vitor mendes I really love this channel, it's so complete, even for a non physicists
kent davidge sim ;)
aff como tu detectou q eu sou br
+joão vitor mendes aeiou
I like when they were cutting paper into a plank length and just gave up at about 1 inch.
im sure there is a size, a piece of paper, could be cut down to, which couldnt be seen, but heck im sure its not with scissors
@ Jeffrey Harrison - YOU QUITTER!!! YOU JUST MISSED YOUR NOBEL PRIZE!!! - just joking, I would have given up after the first cut.
I saw this comment first, it made no sense to me but there it was, present under the video... Then I forgot until I saw the paper cutting. The take away from this became about that, not that graviton.
"And by successful, I mean still possible" - science :)
Satánico 😈👈 asqueroso 😑 cruz de las 👉😇 cristiano🌱🌴🍀🐦🌴🌵 no Progreso mucho más lo tengo 100% comprobado la marido de la gente es una basura
@@danieltorresdeluna4844 Cálmese, buen hombre, por favor.
De otro modo, le va a subir la tensión arterial y lo mismo tenemos un disgusto. 😇
I see you want to put and end to concept of death by natural causes. That will be in hereafter. But the question is what would happen if you bring hereafter(future in time) to on earth? That would be alreadily bringing the day of judgement.
@MBOYA Ogutu How is it fraudulent when they're being 100% transparent about it? It seems like the only reason why people hate science is because it doesn't feed their religious dogma. It explains the deceptive agendas pushed by Creationists which attempt to undermine the First Amendment of the Constitution.
@@ominous-omnipresent-they honestly, you'd have to be an idiot to believe all the matter in the universe was compressed down to an infinitesimal volume. So don't go preaching about religious dogma and the first amendment when what you believe is religious dogma wrapped in idiotic science.
I have to say, this channel (this guy, sorry, I'd seen your name, but I don't recall it) does a better job with comprehensible explanations of arcane topics in physics than any other other channel or video on youtube. This is stuff that LOTS of people want to know about, and, more or less, you are the only one providing explanations that are really meaningful to scientifically literate non-physicists. Thanks for all your videos.
there is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it. try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find everything falls or flies off and nothing sticks to or orbits it. to claim the existence of a physical law without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not ''science.'' gravity is a myth.
This is probably one of the best science explanations on any topic I've ever heard - and I've heard a lot!
It well presented and and well organized. Bravo!
Thanks
THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
I really liked the comment "don't send me any anti-relativity email", those people just drove me crazy this week!! Thank you Dr.Linkoln for this superb series
Yes. I was reading one of those papers just a week or two ago. I am convinced that overturning relativity would result in an even more complicated theory. Just saying that "relativity is wrong" is not convincing for me.
Relativity is almost certainly not wrong, it has more evidence than most theories in science. It just has its limitations.
@@renx81 same with qp
Edward Lulofs where can I read them?
How can you call yourself a scientist, if you can't handle criticism? Part of the scientific method, is falsification. It holds that every theory is falsifiable based on new observable evidence. This is particularly true when technology is constantly creating new scientific instruments capable of providing new data never seen before.Einstein's theories should be just as falsifiable as any other scientific theory. Perhaps the "anti-relativity email" you refer to is not valid, but, that doesn't mean something valid isn't out there. Until a theory of gravity that works comes along, every theory of gravity should be considered.
5:29
"so, getting back to the more basic idea of quantum gravity..."
I’m quite fond of this channel. So matter-of-fact about the non-intuitive, and so mind-blowing about the things we take for granted!
I just love the way you explain it so clearly, even though i watched this video a lil bit drunk but i got everything you said, you have got yourself a subscriber.
I have a suggestion of what quantum theory could be.
It assumes that multiverse interpretation of quantum mechanics is true and there is no such thing as collapse of wave function.
Instead collapse of wave function is simply entanglement of observer with the particle, that's why from his point of view it looks like wave function collapsed, but it didn't.
If this is true then we can calculate gravitational influence of a particle as an bending of spacetime in all quantum multiverses simultaneously.
This theory would also explain existence of dark matter, as an influence of particles from other universes on our universe.
This theory is also experimentally testable.
Here is experiment to determine if it is true:
Put 1 heavy object whose gravitational influence you can detect into an empty space. Put device onto the object that would detect quantum state of spin of a single particle.
Make the wave function of the particle collapse. If the spin goes up, device will push the heavy object with some force to the left. If the spin goes down, device will push the heavy object with some force to the right. According to theory, what we did here is that we entangled the heavy object with the quantum state of the spin of the particle and if that theory is true we should be able to detect that the heavy object suddenly have 50% gravitational influence and at the same time there would be created bubble of dark matter with the rest of 50% gravitational influence of the heavy object going in opposite direction as the object, because the dark matter would be simply the same object in another universe.
This is so interesting.
Thanks alot.
ON THE NECESSARY, TRUE, AND ABSOLUTE PHYSICAL ESSENTIALITY (IN AND WITH TIME) OF THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA:
Consider the EXPERIENCE of THE MAN (then involving WHAT IS THE EYE) who is suddenly exposed in what is outer "space" in BALANCED RELATION to the clear fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma (INCLUDING WHAT THEN CONSTITUTES the EXPERIENCE of both the Sun AND WHAT ARE THE POINTS IN THE NIGHT SKY). This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) SO, the Earth constitutes the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE in BALANCED and UNIVERSAL relation to what is the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. NOW, consider WHAT IS THE EYE. E=MC2 IS F=MA. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Consider what is outer "space". NOW, consider WHAT necessarily constitutes what is the Sun. E=MC2 IS F=ma. NOW, it ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Think INSTANTANEITY ! TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is the Earth. The sky is blue, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AND THEN very carefully consider what is the EXPERIENCE of what is the Sun. E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA. Think about THE EYE !!! Great. NOW, also consider what is the EARTH/ground in BALANCED RELATION to/with WHAT IS THE EYElid. LOOK around. Think INSTANTANEITY !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS F=MA !!! It ALL CLEARLY does make perfect sense. Indeed, BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Beautiful. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE. It is a very great truth that the ability of thought to DESCRIBE OR reconfigure sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT is similar to sensory experience. Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY. In dreams, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE !!! The EARTH AND THE SUN are E=MC2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE. There is no outsmarting the genius of dreams. Importantly, dream experience GROWS/increases. In dreams, it is you AND other than you are IN BALANCE. GREAT. SO, you don't see any people on what is THEN the BLUE EARTH. Think !!! Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA !!! Think very carefully about the experience of THE MAN who is standing on what is the EARTH/ground. Magnificent !!!
By Frank DiMeglio
THE CLEAR AND UNIVERSAL MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA:
Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. The Earth (A PLANET) is a MIDDLE DISTANCE form that is in BALANCED relation to the Sun AND the speed of light (c), AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. ACCORDINGLY, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. SO, the Earth constitutes the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE in BALANCED and UNIVERSAL relation to what is the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. SO, time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA !!! GREAT !!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. Indeed, it ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense.
Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. (The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.) "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Accordingly, the rotation of the Moon MATCHES it's revolution. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY !!!
By Frank DiMeglio
WHY ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIFIED AND BALANCED WITH/AS WHAT IS GRAVITY:
Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are LINKED AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Therefore, Einstein's equations and Maxwell's equations are unified (given the addition of a fourth spatial dimension); AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma; AS TIME DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, Einstein's equations predict that SPACE is expanding OR contracting in and with TIME; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.)
Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of the Moon MATCHES it's revolution. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. THE SUN purely exemplifies time DILATION. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!!
The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Let's compare this directly with BOTH a falling object AND the speed of light (c). Great. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL to the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience. Ultimately and truly, TIME is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The ultimate unification of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND includes opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT. It ALL makes perfect sense. THINK !!!
The Earth that undergoes time DILATION IS thus represented (ON BALANCE) as what is A POINT in the night sky, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (So, notice that the BLUE SKY IS no longer visible. Think.) E=mc2 IS F=ma. It is FULLY proven. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Alas, the INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. I have truly, CLEARLY, AND MATHEMATICALLY unified physics/physical experience. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. (Notice the black space of THE EYE, AND the DOME of a person's eye is ALSO visible.) THE EARTH is ALSO blue. Again, E=mc2 IS F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Time dilation proves that E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.
By Frank DiMeglio
The fact (or seemingly) that we can ponder these questions upon this oblate spheroid called Earth at this particular point in something called time is really something to behold .Thank you for your time in making your excellent productions !
It is also astonishing that we live in an era where these conundrums are coming to life. Imagine, of all the times you could have been born in, you were born into the most amazing time.
"Gravity is the weakest force"
Black hole: Hold my beer.
Haha! crazy to think that a force that can accelerate mass to near light speed is the weakest force still!
That's why black holes are a joke.
Gravity to scale, as in mass. Its right.
A black hole has a lot of mass, but isn't very big. Where as atoms with low mass, low size have other more powerful forces.
He is talking about particle physics which in that field, gravity is weak.
@@xeldredgej2 how does gravity do this exactly?
I am an engineer. It just amazes me how focused physicists are to include gravity to the standard model despite the fact it can't possibly have any relevant effect in any place we can reach. If you ever do find how to include gravity I have Dibbs to be the first engineer to say to you "that term is insignificant so I am dropping it from the equation."
Again, I thank you for these videos. I learned some stuff here that adds a lot of context to what I have been thinking about for a while. Keep up the good work and keep these videos coming please. if I was aware of some things a long time ago, then physics would have been my profession now.
He's able to explain complex matters in an interesting way and in a way that any person can understand.
*_Plot Twist: The universe is a Graviton._*
Best talk on the subject ever. And it's not the first time I think that after watching your videos. I understand things I never got before.
Thank you, Dr. Lincoln, for your most cogent insight. It will greatly aid in integrating all this knowledge into a comprehensive understanding of what is and is not known in physics.
THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. 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; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio
WHY E=MC2 IS NECESSARILY F=MA (ON BALANCE), AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity AS SPACE ON BALANCE:
TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Hence, the Earth AND the Sun are CLEARLY E=MC2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE. (The sky is blue, AND the Earth is ALSO BLUE.) A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=MA !!!; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!!) Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE !!!; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) E=mC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Great !!! Again, BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense.
By Frank DiMeglio
OUT OF VARIOUS VIDEOS I WATCHED TRYING TO LEARN MORE ABOUT QG, THIS SEEMS THE BEST. WOW.
Hey mister scientist, I have a question: Um, how does like... how does reality work and stuff?
42.
@@emjay9280 accurate
I can’t tell you enough how much I love this simple comment lol
My wish is to have a face to face conversation with Don L about the variables of all that is seemingly unrelated to this Quantum Gravity in this looping infinity space.
I am really having a hard time with this. If gravity is curved space ( around a massive object ) then we do we need a force carrier at all for gravity?
Because there is no such thing as force! Not in the way that you visualise . What you call FORCE its just Fields that are vibrating . This fields are every where. Matter is just energy entraped in a closed space . This energy cannot be destroyed or created and wants to fill every space of this space evenly . When this energy its reaching 0,5MeV then the electron field start vibrating and imediatly creates a particle thats its called electron. And so on for every single of the known particles with different energies too.
You try to move this particles then ( an electron lets say ) , at the place in space where this wave move it econters another particle . If this particle is charged then interact with it , and that means that at that 3D space point there is more than just 0,5 MeV. That means that outher fields start to vibrate and so a quark starts to emerge lets say.
If you can name me a single particle that stay at rest (and not moving) I will admit that I am wrong. Why a particle must allways move? because particles and forces , given that forces derives from the interaction between particles , are just excitations in this Fields , and that its why particles are wave . Because fields move in a wavey form.
Those wavey form are the forces ! That its why Gravity needs its graviton (its gauge bosson ) because those wavey form are mediated by the gravitons that moves a long those wave lengths . Gravitys field its space itself. That its way even if the universe its infinite if you have two object , then the gravity force between them wont ever be zero !
The carriers are to explain how particles in space time interact with the curvature of spacetime. How do they 'feel' is space is curved.
JaimeCharaf As far as I know General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics is not yet combined although string theory can explain it.
@@cazymike87 why does it need to gauge tho, if gravity is just the curvature of spacetime then can't spacetime just be the field itself and graviton the scalar boson that describes how much it is being curved
Since we have detected “Gravity Waves”, shouldn’t we conclude that “Gravitons” also exist, due to particle/wave dual nature?
Interesting talk.
...now what does it say on his T shirt?
+Chris Bamford Thanks, that's a good T shirt.
@@chrisbamford2196 No brother, it is actually a Y shirt, sorry about that...
Dr. Lincoln, you are an awesome teacher - because you clearly understand things first, then you teach them 👏
think of this you have the gravitational pull of the entire earth on you, yet you can still jump!
Yes, that is due to the much greater strength of the electromagnetic field which underlies chemistry and thus life.
Remember, it's not just the mass of the earth. It's the product of your mass and the mass if the earth. And because if this, not everyone can jump.
@@ZimZam131 Rip elephants
@@AlejandroBachi 🤣🤣🤣🤣
+ Fermilab
"Realistically, solving this problem (finding a quantum theory of gravity) will take a long time..."
It has *already* taken a long time, so I guess that's a pretty safe statement!!
Dr. Lincoln,
At what volume does quantum gravity start to interfere with the Standard Model’s concept of gravity?
Is quantum gravity a problem of a given mass/energy only in a certain (small) volume?
Thanks for your informative and interesting videos.
Paul
Paul Heinrich the standard model doesn’t explain gravity. I think you mean what are the size values where quantum gravity can be expressed as Newtonian gravity!
Wayne, yes Paul's question is ambiguous. But you didn't answer it. That's because your answer was so profound that the answer is not yet known. It's so easy to ask a question; so hard to answer them.
@@edwardlulofs444 I don't know the answer. I am just trying to clarify the questions=>, which is half the battle. To clarify even further, I think what he is asking is at what mass density or energy does classical gravity theory (Newtonian or Einstein) breakdown and necessitate the use of quantum gravity. I do not know the answer but it would interesting if someone can frame it or answer it. ( I use the term "classical" here to refer to all non-quantum theories, but classical can sometime refer to ONLY non-quantum and non-relativistic. I prefer to label all non-quantum theories as classical because that's what they are.)
I am a bit confused. If gravity is a bending of spacetime why does it require a force carrier such as a gravitron? Is gravity fundamentally the same as the other 3 forces?
Several people such as yourself have remarked on the incompatibility between the general relativistic view of gravity (bending of space-time) and the quantum view (exchange of force carriers). This is exactly the point - there isn't a unified theory (at least, not one widely accepted let alone verified) that brings both perspectives together. It's almost an article of faith that all forces can be unified, but there is no direct evidence that gravity can be unified with the other 3. Part of the incompatibility between these views is that in general relativity, mass has an effect which "spreads out"; in quantum physics, we only discuss what happens essentially at a single point (or small volume of space more realistically given Heisenberg) when particles interact.
I am happy to see i am not the only one overly confused.
I just recently came to terms with the fact that Gravity is a fictitious force which is only a manifestation of space-time curvature, and now i realize that my "old" views are still considered somewhat valid.
Is there any good video that tackles this specific issue?
We can measure the force of gravity, not to mention that we can feel it. So I disagree in calling it fictitious. Could it be, borrowing from Newton, that the acceleration (force) field at a point is proportional to the square of the curvature at that point and is pointing in the direction of -N (normal to the surface)?
me too!!!
Its because we havent an Unified Theory or Theory of Everything, this is the "holy grail" of Physics
How long would it take for an electron spiral in to the photon by emitting gravity waves. Sounds like that can be calculated
That can be calculated in a naive fashion, but would be meaningless, as electrons do not really 'orbit' the nucleus. That is not what the video was talking about.
time of decay (due to gravity waves for massive bodies) =
5 (a^4) / 256 * M1 * M2 * (M1 + M2)
where 'a' is the distance between M1 (mass 1) and M2 (mass 2).
This will not work for electrons as electrons do not really 'orbit' The video was talking about the electron orbit's decay die to radiating away electromagnetic waves.
There used to be a model of atoms as little 'solar systems' with electrons in orbit around a central nucleus, like planets in orbit around a sun. This created a paradox that led to the development of quantum mechanics. When a body, like a planet, is in orbit around a much larger body, the planet is constantly accelerating. The planet may be going around the sun at a constant speed, but velocity is a vector with both speed and direction. Since the planet is following an elliptical path, it is constantly changing its direction, even if the speed is the same. We'll leave out gravity waves for now.
Charged particles, like electrons, emit radiation when they are accelerated. The radiation is in the form of electromagnetic waves. look up the Larmor Formula for more information on how to calculate the power radiated by an accelerated point charge.
If you picture an atom like a tiny solar system with an electron in orbit around a nucleus you know that the system is stable because the electron's orbit does not spiral down into the nucleus. The 'velocity' of the electron must be 'fast' enough that, even though it feels a strong electric charge attraction to the protons in the nucleus it has enough velocity to maintain 'orbit'. However, a body in orbit is a body that is constantly accelerating, and a constantly accelerating point charge is constantly emitting electromagnetic radiation. The radiation means that energy is leaving the system, and the expected result is that the 'orbit' of the electron would decay and spiral into the nucleus.
It does not decay. It does not emit radiation (due to its 'orbit'). It is extremely stable. Quantum mechanics was developed to explain the 'orbits' of electrons. the term 'orbit' was kept, but it is not like the orbit of a classical body. It is an energy state that the electron and nucleus system can exist in. The states are discrete, or 'quantized' in that an electron can be in one state or another, but never an in between state. It can be in state 1, 2, 3 but never in state 1.79. When an electron moves between states it either emits or absorbs a photon of the exact wavelength (a measure of a photon's energy) needed to jump the electron from the beginning level to the final level. (this is the origin of emission and absorption lines in spectrum analysis)
Since the electron is not really in orbit, it does not make sense to calculate the gravity waves generated by its orbit.
You can find a formula for calculating the time in years for two massive bodies in orbit around each other in equation number 44 of the following paper:
www.tapir.caltech.edu/~chirata/ph236/2011-12/lec15.pdf
However, this does not really apply to electrons and a nucleus, because we know that electrons do not orbit the nucleus. If they did, they would radiate and matter all would decay on timescales of seconds. We know matter is pretty stable, so the idea of electrons in orbits is not accurate. It may be something our brains can picture better that quantum wave probabilities, but nature is under no obligation to care about what we humans feel comfortable with being able to picture and understand.
Instead of one particle, gravity may get generated with two particles. More particles implies more gravity.
It can have relativistic properties.
At quantum level, gravity could be just letting other particles "form" from energy.
Gravity could be related to stability, swarm properties and clustering without fusing.
Feynman looked at this idea, if I understand what you said. If you have written anything mathematical about this model I would be interested in reading it. His idea is sometimes called the "pushon" model. It doesn't agree with experiment. But maybe your idea is different. However, the further your idea is from the standard model and GR the less likely it will work. But I enjoy reading new ideas.
@@edwardlulofs444 I am not physics person, but software. I tried to reverse engineered what gravity could be just philosophically.
I'm not using GR or quantum as base, trying to express my thought below.
Gravity holds things together, so for that at minute level, there has to be non holdable entity, like energy. Energy has properties like harmonic or flow or vibration etc. If energy is not infinite then it may start to wear out eventually at some point in space, because of vibrations, flow etc.
Gravity property could isolate wearing out and create a particle. Gravity could also cluster these particles so as not to get destroyed by energy, could be due to law of conservation. So gravity could naturally support swarm properties and clustering. It doesn't fully fuse entities due to either 'isolating other energies' property of gravity or it could fuse gravity properties in particles itself and then they don't fuse. Total fusion is energy's property. Effect of gravity may be observable only when two particles interacts, like momentum property, when a particle consists of more smaller particles. Particle purely implies "size" if it does not consist of other particles. Size is space property, implying presence of gravity everywhere in space in some form, similar to luminous eather. Just size property implies sheer presence, dominance and hence slow attraction property at distance, but nonlinear attraction in close proximity.
Gravity itself could be hunter energy of weakness of other stronger energies.
This is just a thought without any mathematical base or model. But this could be simulated on computers.
It also implies bondage for energy and space due to which energies could start to wear out eventually. Different types of particles implies different amounts of wear out energy or presence of different energies.
Humans have evolved in highly quantized world and see energies only through particles and photons. So we may not detect non quantized energy directly, even our devices are quantized.
In double slit experiment, when electron passes through both slits, we can say that energy of electron start to wear out due to possible two paths and gravity creates two electrons from wearing out energy which then passes through each slit.
You were talking about the electron spiralling down into the proton in an atom but given that gravity is so weak, as you said like 100 trillion trillion trillion times weaker than the strong force, then surely the time scale upon which this would be so large that it would mask the age of the universe easily and too long a time and small a change that scientific instruments probably cannot measure it
the electron would spiral down because of the elctromagnetic radiation he creates (which causes a loss of energy) and this has nothing to do with gravitation. the answer to this (false) prediction lies in the principle of quantification of the levels of energy within an atom.
the "planetary" idea of atoms with protons in the center and eletrons orbiting it is pretty much wrong. one more accurate view is that in an atom, eletrons have a chance of being in a certain distance to protons.
A little bit like some basic one dimension chaotic attractors for which it could take an infinite time to reach them.
Take a particule for which when it is at position x, its speed is -x. (Don't ask me how it is possible, it is just for illustration.) So, when the particule is in the negative positions, its speed is toward the origine, and when it is in the positive positions, its speed is also toward the origine, but such a particule will never reach the origine (unless it starts there). It is linked to convergence/divergence of infinite sums.
So, indeed, it could take an infinite time for gravity to accomplish the described goal, but the "reason" explaining while the electric attraction forbid it in the first place, while being much stronger, would still forbid it, anyhow...
That is a thought experiment to show how classical electrodynamics fail to explain the observed fact that they dont spiral in to the nucleus, which is solved by quantized energy levels, you can apply the same thing to gravitation, sammbos argument is that even if the electron would radiate gravitational waves, the effect is so small it wouldnt me measurable.
The energy the electron would lose because of gravity waves is a lot maller than the smallest possible package of energy.
Thanks a lot for the subtitles in English, they make the google translator very easy for other languages.
But if gravity is just a manifestation the warpage of space-time, does there really need to be a quantum particle?
Zbigniew Modrzejewski i thought negative matter was repulsive with gravity, not anti matter
Yes because space is the gravitational field
@@addajjalsonofallah6217 a field is a set of parameters.
It's mathematical, rather than physical.
Space is physical.
Space is not the gravitational field.
The cosmos is comprised of a unified body called Space-time; it is not comprised of a unified body called Gravitational Field-time.
@@adamspears3819 the Universe itself is pure energy/knowledge/intelligence. Geometry and mathematics is its basic design. We became conscious of mathematics (it already existed since before this Universe and the many others) when our brains were ready (just the other day in time).
@@adamspears3819 reality is 17 fluids called fields
What about gravity waves? Maybe exist way to use them in experiments. Maybe they can show us something? Maybe we should focus on creating experiments which using gravity waves? Becouse what they are for , if we cant use them in any way?
But,electrons don't orbit the nucleus? why use that as an example?
They do, but it is the electromagnetic force that keeps them together, just as gravity keeps the Earth and the Moon together.
The picture of an electron in a planet-like orbit and spiraling in was an example of how you CAN'T use a classical theory to explain the structure of atoms, and need a quantum mechanical theory. Would have been nice to follow it up with a visual representation of a quantum mechanical atom, but it isn't clear what is the best way to do this in a video of this length.
Because he had to explain the electromagnetic force interactions between the orbiting object and the centre. Emission of energy will ultimately lead to the orbiting object falling into the centre, just like how a neutron and an electron are together.
@@yoondami1127 But that's the thing: In any atom not subject to electron capture decay, electrons CAN'T emit energy to fall all the way in to the nucleus -- the innermost orbital not already occupied by other electrons is the lowest orbital an electron can enter with the release of energy, and any attempt to get an electron to go into a lower orbital or to confine it to the nucleus consumes energy. Note that electrons and the components of nuclei are fermions; bosons would be able to spiral all the way in. This doesn't work in gravitationally-bound systems on a macroscopic scale, in which orbiting objects can spiral in with emission of gravitational wave energy limited only by collision of the objects (or in the case of black holes, complete merger). Supposedly down at the scale at which quantum mechanics begin to dominate, fermions moving according to gravitational interactions would start to obey the same rules of quantum mechanics (and orbitals derived therefrom) as fermions moving according to electromagnetic interactions, but currently we have no way to test that.
You're stance on Planck's length confuses me. I love it!
@doggy style You are so funny! Go play in traffic. 🙂
“Has there been any theoretical progress on this subject?”
Well yes, but actually no.
I see progress. Hawking, Green, Witten, and many others have all added clues. Putting all the pieces together and seeing for the first time the big picture is what I find to be engaging and absorbing.
I'm taking a graduate course on general relativity at UC Berkeley and teaching myself quantum field theory on the side just to begin to understand this stuff. I gotta say these videoes just giving me more and more incentive to keep pushing forward. I may not come up with anything at all but oh boy, I wanna see how far into this puzzle I can go. I'll probably just go back to engineering at some point, lool.
I couldnt understand anything about what quantum gravity theory is.
Thats because the theory itself doesnt exist yet.
but our current theories predict that a gravaton should exist as explained in the video. the thing is that its force is so weak that it is near impossible to detect on the quantum level.
So in order to gather enough information, or any information at all, to get a theory on it we have to use black holes or other points of large amouts of mass in a very small volume. Because it is in that place we might find that gravatons have an influence on the quantum level.
Layperson question: Is it possible gravity is a "side effect" of the other three forces? A type of interference pattern generated by the interaction of the other forces? Also, if gravity is quantum, wouldn't it be instantaneous at any distance, like entanglement? Is It?
No, gravity is not instantaneous (as in Newton's theory). This in fact was how Einstein began his general theory - his special theory implied that no information could be transmitted faster than light (let alone instantaneously), and that includes gravity. If you wiggle a mass, in Newton's theory other masses would immediately feel the change in direction of the force from the wiggled body. In GR, that can't happen, so instead the wiggled body emits gravitational waves - which HAVE now been detected.
But the falling of objects is not the force, the force is the curvature of space-time- so is THAT instantaneous? Surely gravitons would act in space-time warping, not pulling objects together, because GR already gives us the reason why objects are pulled together if space-time is warped.
The effects of gravity move at the speed of light. So if some how the Sun just vanished we the Earth would continue to orbit the location where the Sun was for another eight minutes and twenty seconds. It's not instantaneous. The fact that there are measurable gravity waves prove that it's not instantaneous. There are also ways to measure the propagation of gravity in a lab.
Have we considered that gravity isn't a force and just the emergent effects of the bending of spacetime?
+ScienceNinjaDude I know this is the Theory of General Relativity...and my comment was maybe there's nothing more to reality than that...large or small and gravity isn't a fundamental force...period.
+ScienceNinjaDude Is it just on quantum scales it (bending of spacetime) is meaningless?
So is the universe digital or analog...or a bit of both?
+ScienceNinjaDude
- I like you - you seem smart and open minded enough to challenge current paradigms that clearly fail every area of science - people think particle physics is some high grade learning only for boff's - but this shit really dictates our reality - every area of life everyon should get to know some of it - I mean if the standard model of particle physics and it's minion can't tell us more about the nature of subatomic particles then they auto fail as scientists
- For example what's really occurring in our sun - as standard solar model doesn't even include the weight of neutrino's (do they?) - we even see radio-active nuclear decay rates in laboratories around the world now varying due to the rubbing off effects of neutrino oscillation - this is a bit mind blowing.
- Anyway point being could neutrinos not be the origin of matter-antimatter asymmetry and the origins of matter itself - I heard it might be a resolve for super-symmetry and higher unification principles correlating to quantum gravity and proton decay.
- The Cosmic microwave background (CMB) is thermal - electromagnetic radiation - a cosmic sea of energy left over from the primordial universe - and is referred to as relic neutrinos or (CNB) - postulated as the "Dirac Sea" at one stage - electrons, muon and tau neutrinos are the second most abundant sub-atomic particles in the universe other than photons and weigh a minuscule amount far preceding that of an electron
- Even the Higgs-Boson doesn't have as much significance against the neutrino - while travelling through space, a neutrino apparently continuously flips between different "types" of neutrino, changing the way they interact with matter. This is called neutrino oscillations and thus has an extremely minuscule amount of weight.
- This is the missing universal mass preceding that of the Higgs-Boson - the masses of other matter particles, generated by coupling to the famous Higgs particle, vary widely - from the electron, about 2,000 times smaller than the mass of a proton, to the top quark, which weighs nearly 200 times more than the mass of a proton. The neutrino mass, however, is at least 10,000,000,000 times smaller than the proton mass hence it is referred to as a WIMP.
- Most people will have heard of electrons, neutrons and protons - and perhaps even quarks, which make up the latter two. But to me, the neutrino is the most amazing fundamental particle. They are everywhere. About 65 billion neutrinos, produced by nuclear fusion in the Sun, pass through every square centimeter of area on Earth, every second, without doing much of anything.
- Formed in the first seconds of the so-called big bang, the CNB is a dark, invisible candidate for the seat of electromagnetic phenomena. Like the Cosmic Microwave Background, the CNB can provide a universal rest frame and, at a temperature of 1.95 K⁰, the CNB forms a frictionless superfluid that permeates space.
- Recent experiments suggest that the electronic neutrino is a tachyon - a tachyonic CNB is also a dark energy candidate; while, at the same time, analogous to cosmology‘s - quintessence‘. (Aether - Quinta Essentia - Prima Materia)
- Question is could it be really be an Aether candidate and would it not be the best substitute for the cause gravitational fields due density, mass and the electromagnetic field resistance of particles - i.e. generating EG fields (electrogravitics) - are they not much better suited as a gravitational candidate than so-called gravitons?
***** - Thanks for that anyway I am sure that there will be more mysteries to be revealed by neutrinos in the near future - what a blessing a unified field theory would be especially if it was as elegant as that - only more experimentation will tell - but I can't really see how general relativity will be included it though.
The best scientific channel, thanks to the best lecturer!
General relativity said gravity is caused by massive objects curving space and time. Quantum mechanics said that gravity is caused by particles called gravitons.
How do both explanations make sense?
In other words, what has bending space and time got to do with gravitons????🤔😡
May be dark matter has something to do with the creation of gravity. ¨Since the information contained within a region of space depends upon
the arrangement of objects within that region, moving the objects can
change the entropy within the region. Verlinde demonstrated that this
produces an entropic force that acts like gravity. From the basic idea
of information entropy, one can derive Einstein's equations of general
relativity exactly.¨ www.forbes.com/sites/briankoberlein/2016/11/08/solution-to-dark-matter-proposes-that-gravity-is-an-illusion/#27d5d1813058
Not that I'm a physicist or anything, but I think they're wrong about both. I think it's more likely that gravity is an equal and opposite reaction to the effect mass has on space-time. They say time slows down, or drags, on mass. Well that's why matter can't reach the speed of light, right? Because as it accelerates it gains "mass" in the form of velocity, to the point time would slow down and the particles would become too "heavy" (massive) to accelerate any further. Or that's why they say flying around a black hole would cause you to age slower. Or why going faster than light would cause you to travel back in time. So anyways, if mass accelerating through space causes time to slow down, could time slowing down cause mass to accelerate? In other words, the gravity is strongest at the center of mass. So time must be moving slower at the ground than above head. That's why we are constantly being pulled or "accelerated" toward the ground. I know I'm sometimes all over the place and bad at explaining things, but my hypothesis works with everything. If time slows down when you move faster, (atomic clocks on airplanes) and bigger planets have stonger gravity (because more mass) and fat people weigh more (isn't weight really just a measurement of gravity?)... I dunno. I rambled at NASA about this idea, and they gave me a "atta boy, have a sticker" type of response lol so maybe it sounds crazier to others than to me. But in my mind, it seems more correct than following the curve. Because when I'm not moving through space, I'm just sitting here, I'm still accelerating toward the earth. That's got to be a reaction to something, not just a line being followed. Who knows. Whatever.
Quantum gravity doesn't say gravity is caused by graviton. It just say a particle called graviton with such and such property should exit. Think of graviton as a 'quantum' of space-time 'bending-ness'
I'll just mention one error in your post. You say: "the gravity is strongest at the center of mass". This is false. For example, if you have a hollow sphere of equal density (a shell), there is no gravitational field anywhere within the shell (even at the center of mass), due to the shell itself.
Atta boy. You seem to be close to the right track. Read about General Relativity a bit more and you will give the big heads more credit.
10 years from now when all this is figured out we'll come back to this and say "Look at this crazy video with its obsolete questions and it's crazy editing!!!"
That was incredibly well-explained. Thanks for that.
Yeah... Allah created universe in a few days... As other gods... So who cares what science says... Thats all absurd.. Isn't it?
Please put links to referenced videos in the description. Some browsers do not allow links over videos.
When Someone Lives In Physics :- *Anti-Relativity E-Mail
I really like these videos. I am still a student without any college-level knowledge of physics but still I can understand these videos. He makes the topics really easy to understand.
Isaac Newton by his own words 'DID NOT' understand the 'WORKINGS' OF GRAVITY but he did know how to quantify its effect
3:26
But why are we still talking about gravity as a force? When Einstein showed what it really is.
What is the problem with applying Einstein’s theory at the scale of subatomic particles? I get that this will lead to the prediction that an electron orbiting a proton will lose energy and spiral inwards eventually...but so what? How quickly is this spiralling predicted to happen? Do we know for a fact it never happens?
Nobody:gravity is very weak
Black hole:sad gravity noises
🤣🤣
What if gravity doesn't exist at all and what we perceive as gravity is just a huge coincidence regarding particle interactions?
Or maybe mass can futz with particles wave functions making them slightly more likely to be closer to the mass than further away?
What if gravity is just a distortion of space... then gravity is not a force at all. At the quantum level it would affect the quantum vacuum fluctuations. Digging further this... would also explain how the big bang started and why it did not repeat it self.
You just stated the general relativity.
how did the space get distorted if not by some sort of force? wizards?
@@alwaysdisputin9930 I like to think space it is just distorted by density, just like light speed change propagation on different materials. Density changes the magnetic and electric permeability therefore the speed of light. Quantum vacuum fluctuations, on this line of thinking, are the means for the electro-magnetic wave propagation. On the old times called "eter". This idea was abandoned because nothing was found on vacuum, however no further explanation was given about how wave propagation occur.
I will put this in math terms:
The integral: Weight of a vacuum volume over time with time -> infinity = constant
The derivative: Weight of a vacuum volume (time->0) -> ~ infinity
by the teachings of A. Einstein . and M. Planck - I am just an electrical engineer.
Thanks for the video(s).
One thing though: Matter, before the Big Bang, was not all clustered together in a point. The energy that formed matter was. A big distinction.
K. Chris Caldwell .... theories change as new evidence is introduced in to science. The big bang theory was trashed ..... as the evidence showed galaxies at the edge of the observable universe are moveing away at the speed of light ( or greater) which .... according to physics is impossible. So.... the expanding universe theory was put forward. With NO evidence . The error is in the red shift distance measurement method. We do not know what happens to light waves over millions of years or traveling through massive amounts of other electromagnetic waves.... dust particles.... gravitational forces over billions of years. I do like that these sience shows are stating which are theorys and which are firm science.... now. But..... search YT and you will find 4 different theories for why light bends as it goes through water..... all with great graphics and all claiming to be scientists.
Perhaps the graviton exists in 2 dimensional space. Your suggestion that this will take a long time could be correct, but when it happens it will be incredibly simple and was staring us in the face all along. :)
Space isn't 2-dimensional.
A Research Paper which shows 'an astrophysical effect' which is an indication towards
the ""quantum theory of gravity", which is yet to be achieved.
www.researchgate.net/publication/325334315
Please give your review about it
Would the predictions of loop quantum gravity be the plank length and plank time, or are they totally separate ideas?
That into needs to be stopped, it's like the teachers just put a vintage VHS on
I like it just fine.
I understand what you're saying. It also reminds me of video from late 70s or 80s, I graduated in 84.
Reminds me of a guy standing in front of a black board talking. One could say its 1800 School house Style - or could call it modern as it was released only a bit ago. Everyone's a critic.
What's wrong with a vintage VHS as long as the content is still valid ?
5:35 - "Solving this problem will take a long time".
How long will take?
What do the scientists need to solve it?
Trump would call this " low energy "
it is impressive how the inner constructs of us to represent knowledge that is quite abstract tend to have a pretty diverse latent space for every different speaker. Usually we don't really grasp this because, the cannon content stands out. But if we imagine that concepts are derived from a multiple dimensional space (not speaking of physical dimensions, rather expressive dimensions), although all the dimensions must be compressed into a converged global optimum, the idea of looking to a single formula and expecting it to spit all out, is rather simplistic. We would have far more success if we could explore the latent space of the knowledge, instead of iterating to get always the same convergence at the end. Sometimes is the convergence that fail to compute an important dimension to the outcome. I loved the part that implied that maybe we have to consider something that exists that is not physical, this is so absurd, but yet the latent space revealed by it is huge - basically we are open to some serious refactoring of our theories. I have come to believe that gravity actually is the true bearer of the most fundamental information to form our universe. We would flip the notion that matter would have a feature that is expressed as gravity, and actually all the particles come from gravity.
So the gravity would behave like a probability wave, and as probability gets more dense, it would start expressing itself as some particular kind of content in the universe. The universe would be like a strum on a guitar string. Black holes would be the guitarists. which would indeed imply that for the universe to exist it would have to be generated from the tension of the center of a black hole. Which would also explain the rate of the universe expansion being fractal in space.
I'm EXTREMELY disappointed I didn't pay more attention in science class (during HS) ... I freaking love this stuff!
Always enjoy Dr. Lincoln's explanatory videos.
Thinking about buying your Teaching Company's lecture on the Theory of Everything. Is it a continuation of this interesting lecture?
Excellent series on Quantum Mechanics!!! The best!!! My complements. Love the easy, confident tone, And the graphics. We are visual learners and you do it the best. Would love to get into the equations with you leading the way!!! Thank you for your videos.
I love you. Please put the links in the description.
+ScienceNinjaDude good question. It appears i don't know what I was talkgin about. But I still love you.
Gravity and Quantum gravity is one and the same. Inertial mass exerts is effects on us every day. Inertial mass is different than
gravitational mass until there is an observer. When we measure inertial mass, we collapse its wave function and we get gravitational mass.
Fascinating topic indeed, thx for your efforts Sir
Fermi Lab should do a video on Quantum Loop Gravity and spin networks. According to Rovelli quantum foam should be come apparent at 10 to the - 45 etc. range and spin networks to 10 to the -65 level. if they exist the smallest dimension could be made down to 10 to the - 65 instead of to the -35.
Sir pls explain the whole particle physics in your channel so that I can have some basic knowledge on this.....
Here's a thought experiment I've been playing with: Let's say that space is not really empty but is made up of particles even tinier then the tiniest ones that we can measure and that each of these particles exist within a cubic pattern equidistant from one another all the way from one edge of the universe to the other. Now, lets say that matter appears and pushes or compresses these smaller particles. The particles attempt to push and consolidate the now present matter into the same location. The more that the smaller particles are displaced or compressed together, the greater their density and the harder they push against the matter. Get enough matter consolidated together, the displaced particles become super compressed and super dense creating a super amount of gravity around the object.
Picture it like a bowling ball that magically appears in the middle of the material that makes up a foam mattress and how tight the foam would be around it, but getting further away, although the foam would still be slightly compressed, it would not be as compressed as it is within the area of the bowling ball. It's probably a stupid thought, but since we don't know what actually causes gravity, guess it's as good as any.
Oppenheim has a recent paper out about splicing together GR and quantum field theories like the Standard Model. If the paper is right, the claim at 3:20 is wrong. Title is "Postquantum Theory of Classical Gravity". I am a native English speaker with a PhD and it is beyond my reading level.
something the smartest people in the world have been trying to solve for almost a century had been solved by dozens of people in this comment section. Incredible...
1. The Bohr model relied on an orbiting electron deBroglie wavelength, which described the quantum nature of where-the-electron-is... so it'd prevent gravity radiation as well as E&M...
2. Hubble expansion of cosmic space would counter the weak collapse of an electron orbit and, since we don't see the Earth's orbit expand around the sun, we know it's countered...
A physicist's notion of gravity is vague: 1. the gravitational wave from coorbiting merging mass holes carries solar-mass-worths of energy already always outside their hollowed holes, 2. a solar-mass-worth of photons falling-together can't gain energy from itself, so maybe particles don't neither but convert their rest mass....
More specifically 4.6% of a mass hole's mass-energy is outside its time radius and radiated as gravitation waves each merger, keeping 95.4% after... so, over the wide range of this arithmetic most of a hole's mass is outside the little halfway-inside.... (So our 4.2Msol galaxy core hole may be 36% of its original 22 merger level mass.)
Classical calculus of gravity and particle physics have already been proven consistent. Idescribed the nature of gravity in the ancient quantum field at a certain Cheikh Anta Diop conference and presented graviton at g+ in 2015. Classical calculus of gravity and particle physics are already consistent in the reconstructed Pharaonic measurements of physical quantities. Dr. Don Lincoln takes us here in the right direction.
Kes Co Have you or anyone that you know heard of gravitational foam? I do not remember where I encountered the term and it is driving me up the wall trying to understand what physics may be in play and how it would display its self. Thank you.
Quantum gravity explained: The fatter you are the more the harder you fall.
Why is gravity spoken of as a force or particle if relativity says it is a geometry or topology from which it is emergent?
yes in classical terms it is the force due to gravity from Newton. from relativity, instead of it being an interaction it is basically the deformation of space-time.
I would like to ask two questions:
1- why are dark matter and dark energy not mentioned in this video?
2- "where" are linear and rotational motion energies stored?
such an amazing video. that soothing and confident voice. that lucid explanation of fundamental concepts. great job!
He explained nothing. he admited none of it was real.
Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared is Einstein's famous equation E=MC², but why and what process links energy, mass and light together in this way? In this theory E=MC² is an approximation of (E=ˠM˳C²)∞ with energy, mass, light and time dilation all part of one process. Energy ∆E slows the rate that time ∆t flows as a process of continuous creation relative to the energy & momentum of each object or life form. Mass will increase relative to this with the inward force of gravity linked to the outward momentum of light. Therefore both gravitational and electromagnetic force are relative to the inverse square law!
I have so many questions. You should do a segment called Ask A Physicist.
Force (physics) does not exist physically in the same way that an object with mass, thus making it “not” the initial cause of pushing, pulling, shaping objects, motion, work or being a Vector Quantity (Magnitude + Direction).
In physics, the word, “Force” as we know it, turns out to be nothing more than an expression to express an idea, like one would use the word “Love” to express one's feelings. But, physics and in mathematics, still use “Force” as thou it were something physical that could enable the initial cause of motion making it counterintuitive.
Example: Without applying the Energy from within you, choose an object of your choices to push and pull by simply applying “only” the Force or Net Force.
Meaning that Energy (applied energy) is the origin of motion and not “Force”. Once Energy (E) is applied, it creates what is known as Momentum (p). When this Momentum (object in motion) comes in contact with another object(s), it makes a surface contact that will enable you to push and pull. Example: Ep=ma, Ep=mv and so on. Note: Ep is not to be confused as Kinetic Energy in any way.
Momentum represents things like work, wave, gravity, light, lightning, tsunami, earthquake, current, electricity, motion, magnetism, etc.
Without Energy, there is no Momentum. Without Momentum, there is no surface contact on an object(s) to push, pull, work, shaping objects, motion, gravity, etc. Momentum does not and cannot exist without the applied Energy that creates it. Energy and Momentum or “Ep” is the one and only common denominator that links all fundamental forces of nature. Without Ep, all fundamental forces of nature would be inert and non-existence.
Energy is energy, but it’s when Energy (E) is being applied that creates the Momentum (p) making it the initial cause of motion. Example: Ep.
By applying the right amount of Energy, nothing is immovable or unstoppable. ~ Guadalupe Guerra
5:14 "massive gravitons" - Like "big" or the opposite of the property listed at: 4:08 ?
Yeah he means they actually have some mass
Dr Lincoln,
thank you for another great video. I have one perennial issue with this approach to gravity. Am I wrong in thinking that there are really only 3 fundamental FORCES: Strong weak and Electromagnetic each mediated by it’s own gauge boson. When we discuss gravity we are not talking about a FORCE, we are (if I understand relativity at all) talking about the curvature of spacetime due to huge concentrations of matter. Why does this require a gauge boson at all? Surely gravity is so resistant to being combined with the other forces because it’s not a force it’s a distortion.
+ScienceNinjaDude And how fascinating is that (and I know I’m not telling you anything you don’t know…that is the point of your video after all) because surely a massive object (like the earth) is simply a collection of a huge quantity of subatomic particles. If we reduce the quantity of these particles by half we reduce the force of gravity by (and correct me if I’m wrong ) by 4? times. Reduce by half again and the same effect occurs. Is there a point where gravity completely disappears and is replaced by Quantum Mechanical forces and what exactly happens at that threshold. If we add one more atom at that threshold what is the change. This is fascinating stuff, what a great universe we live in :-)
These are top notch and up to date.
@05:05 Could 'Scale' be that extra dimension?! (moving/shrinking from the very small or expanding to the astronomical large).
Thus having: Length, Width, Height, Time and Scale
I have been looking at a candidate for a unified field theory for a few years. Dr Felix Finster has been working on this for a dozen years. He's a prof of mathematics in Germany studying the mathematical foundations of QFT. I have been impressed with the new ideas that he and his team have been writing about in a dozen papers. If I understand his work, he has found a way to not subtract the infinite terms during renormalization but that these infinities are caused by the standard model being formulated in flat spacetime. He calls it "casual fermion system." I found his work while forming a new model of dark matter. I have a PhD in physics from UC Irvine but I have not found a problem with Finster's work yet. If you could kindly spend 5 minutes googling this material and send me a sentence of why it's wrong I would be grateful. Thank you. Ed Lulofs
I am mostly a physics hobbyist. Curious but unaccredited. I am kicking around the idea that quarks are tetrahedrons rather than points or spheres. Their orientation (which face contacts another ) forms the strong or weak nuclear force and the ability to carry a charge the electromagnetic force. Matter always has positive mass. Negative mass is an imaginary number like wishful thinking. Mass always has momentum corresponding to density of mass and velocity. Matter having mass also has the property of affection time. The larger the mass, the slower time progresses. The current thinking is that the Higgs Boson is responsible for mass, but the boson is a more complex form than a quark.
What my basic premise is that quarks have alignments. Spin has to have a axis, even if not the center of mass. Ellipses have two axis. The question is; could gravity be an alignment pointing to mass and could gravity be a vector of momentum. There would be larger factors of momentum in motion / velocity, but the alignment would always point to the largest local mass. The larger the mass, the more offset the alignment toward mass and thereby affect the curvature of mass/momentum vector in a gravity well. No need for a specific force carrier like a graviton. Thanks for even spending the time to read this. I'll keep playing with my 3-D models and diagrams.
Your show is so awesome. Im really grateful I can have access to such hard core information. I get lost a bit but ill just keep watching.
My suggestion proposes that space time is made up of dipole magnetics, which are small particles with randomly distributed magnetic fields. According to this idea, the connections between these particles create an elasticity in space, allowing for the bending and twisting of space time. This elasticity allows for the explanation of the force of gravity through the bending of space, and the creation of magnetic fields from pulsars through the twisting of space time. Additionally, the suggestion compares subatomic particles to air bubbles in a magnet superfluid.
But to ask a question: what is the 'force' of gravity?
-GR would imply its not the pulling together of objects....that's due to the flow of time, geodesics in space-time, the nature of speed of light etc.etc.
-but, it is the 'force' that somehow warps space-time due to mass, right?
Probably dumb question, but why do gravitons need to exist, if gravity is simply the warping of space time? Why do particles need to exist for matter to follow the curves of space?
Can we get an update on this video now that we have discovered Gravitons and Graviton Waves?
The page Nexus of Physics has now given the following two writings the thumbs up on their page. ALSO consider this: E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
THE UNIVERSAL AND MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY:
Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. SO, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE SUN AND THE EARTH are described and represented by BOTH F=ma AND E=mc2. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational (IN BALANCE). Objects fall at the same rate (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS the SPEED OF LIGHT is RELATIVELY CONSTANT AS WELL. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. In fact, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. So, THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are not "falling" in what is "curved SPACE" in RELATION to what is THE SUN. This is nonsense. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma. This truly explains PERPETUAL MOTION. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
By Frank DiMeglio
EINSTEIN NEVER UNDERSTOOD PHILOSOPHY, MATHEMATICS, AND PHYSICS, AS HE HAS BEEN TOTALLY OUTSMARTED BY SIR FRANK MARTIN DIMEGLIO:
The balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is ESSENTIAL. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.
THE SELF represents, FORMS, and experiences a COMPREHENSIVE approximation of experience in general by combining conscious and unconscious experience. MOREOVER, the ability of THOUGHT to DESCRIBE OR RECONFIGURE sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT IS SIMILAR TO sensory experience. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE.
Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. MOST IMPORTANTLY, in dreams, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE. IMPORTANTLY, dream experience is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. THE EYE is ALSO the body. Dreams improve upon memory AND UNDERSTANDING. Indeed, there is no outsmarting the GENIUS of dreams.
OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/with what is THE EARTH. NOW, get a good LOOK at what is the translucent, SEMI-SPHERICAL, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE sky. Excellent. The DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. THE EARTH IS also BLUE (as water).
F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that, why, and how ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, and describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. SO, it is NECESSARILY a matter of precisely how these equations are understood in a BALANCED, EXTENSIVE, AND INTEGRATED fashion in RELATION to/with WHAT IS THOUGHT. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma.
Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.
The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), as the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Get a good LOOK at what is THE EYE. POINTS are points. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. F=ma AND E=mc2 PROVE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT.
The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. OPEN your EYES. NOW, LOOK at what is the FLAT, SETTING, AND ORANGE SUN (with the SPACE around it THEN going invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE). This ORANGE SUN manifests or forms at what is EYE LEVEL/BODY HEIGHT as well. This ORANGE SUN is manifest ON BALANCE as what is NECESSARILY the BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE of THE EARTH/LAVA. The viscosity of LAVA IS BETWEEN what is manifest as WATER AND THE EARTH/GROUND. ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. F=ma AND E=mc2 do provide absolute, BALANCED, THEORETICAL, and CLEAR proof that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THEREFORE, the rotation of THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AND this is THEN consistent with/as what is F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is PERPETUAL MOTION; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.
THE PLANETS (INCLUDING WHAT IS THE EARTH) are NOT "falling" in what is "curved SPACE". In fact, this is nonsense. It is PROVEN.
By Frank DiMeglio
Einstein and others seem to be suggesting that gravity does not exist as a force (and therefore has no force carrying Graviton particle) like the forces we know but rather gravity as a force is an illusion caused by mass (or energy as per e=mc2) bending spacetime which is affecting the paths of real particles and photons. This effect is what we, as humans, interpret as gravity. Saying all that I still hear physicists talk about the force of gravity so which is it? Is it a real force or is it a virtual force?
This is a great question. If gravity is just the effect of curved spacetime, then why would we expect there to be a force carrying particle at all?
I have a lot of thoughts and will post some some questions but I have to ask this one now. From the plank size with all of that incredible space to electrons, are there particles in between them? That is one incredible gap for something not to be there. Because of quantam mechanics and the weird stuff going on there, is there any hints of any kind of what is going on in that space?
Pretty incredible. I need to look something up and will post it later.
Don, in your presentation, you mention that no one understands why the speed of light is what it is. But, couldn't one go to Maxwell's equations, and look at the resistances to changes in electric fields and magnetic fields, and from there determine why the speed of light is what it is? I believe that this has been done, by Maxwell and others. Now, why those resistances are what they are may truly be unknown...something in the nature of spacetime itself, perhaps. Thanks for the great presentations!
I love that the visual for the Higgs field is just a close-up of Peter Higgs's face
IIRC, one problem with quantum gravity is that as predicted by general relativity, gravity effects how time moves. But for quantum mechanics, time must be the same everywhere.