great to see.justin throwing his hat in the ring and giving a real sence of how theorist go about structuring an argument. wheather hes right or wrong is inconsequencial to the endeavour itself..great stuff...
I am so glad I found this. This exact thing has been in my brain for years and everyone I try to talk to about it looks at me like I was crazy. I became determined to make a simulation that could illustrate it and I'm so glad they already have and it's actually being thought about by physicists.
Its crazy that my son and I, on a drive out of town this morning, were talking about dark matter and what it could be. After some crazy thoughts we said what if it were some kind of dark water or clear liquid That you could see through? After watching this, I firmly believe that he is right! Great discussion 👍
Like on the show Dark on Netflix. Actually it was simultaneously a gas, liquid, and solid all at the same time !! But I like the superfluid theory a lot!
An insightful lecture. Never thought Dark Matter as a superfluid. To all those who think gravitational law of Newton is fundamental the lecture might break your belief's about it. The quantum nature of dark matter is also a remarkable observation. May the dark light up the future of physics. Namaskaram 🙏🏻🙏🏻
"100 light years" (size of galaxy) should read *"100 000 light years"* and "3 million light years" (size of galaxy cluster) should read *"3 billion light years"*
Dark Matter was "discovered" by Fritz Zwicky while studying the Coma Cluster and then really advanced by the work of Vera Rubin some thirty years later.
They misunderstand the galaxie frame, dont take in acount entanglemen as atraction, dont count with the cmb presure and dont see that realy matter inside systems really float.
This might be a stupid question. Can dark matter be on a totally different scale than matter. For instance, could the smallest piece of dark matter actually be like the size of a solar system or the size of a galaxy? Like a piece of sand inside a beach ball where the piece of sand is the galaxy at the center. And the dark matter is the beach ball? Like I said probably a stupid question.
@@zacharytrammell3382 explanation - we haven't found any dark matter as of this point. We know it exists because of the effects it has on matter but we still can't find a trace of it. So my theory is dark matter is like the empty space inside a bubble. To where a galaxy has a dark matter bubble around it and all of the empty space inside the bubble is dark matter but is naturally extremely dilute do to the shear vastness of space itself. Which also explains gravitational lensing that we observe around galaxies almost as if we were looking at an actual bubble and that light is being curved around said bubble. Another way to look at it would be it's like an incondesent light bulbs and the filiment is the galaxy and dark matter is the light bulb.
No, bcz dark matter interacts with gravity and we can see that it scatters evenly. If it was very large particles, then the clumps would create a big distortions in spacetime fabric, just like blackholes. So no, dark matter could be made of larger particles than ordinary matter but not to that greater scale. It just doesn’t interacts with ordinary matter in direct way only through gravity
I watched a video of sound frequencies moving sand (and in another part, fluids) on a flat plate. The sound waves created all of these incredible geometric shapes. I started wondering if that could explain the properties of dark matter and found this video on my search. Very exciting science, thank you for sharing!!
Seems it can only be oscillations in core-radiated gravity, as partly and unevenly backlit and delineated by bright matter, that modulate the uncannily huge-radius perfect circular "shell" forms in the galaxy at 49:17 which shells also in some places show a record of being pierced by a large fast interloper system. A galaxy I also particularly like, NGC 4775, seems to show a clumpier-light-matter-based flocculent variation with four periodic concentric wave-cycles visible in wide angle.
12:46 wow i am so happy now they made my work easy it easily fits in my Theory 😍😍😍😍😍 Now after finding lots of Prediction of my theory right , it seems mine theory is 100% right
An analogy I like is that of the universal gas laws. The relationships like Charles' Law, Boyle's Law, etc. are simple relationships but they are not fundamental. The relationships emerge from the properties of ideal gasses and Newton's laws.
@@ZeroOskul Oh, yeah, sure, "obviously". As "obvious" as the image on the screen behind him 'misspeaks' when it actually STATES "~100 light yrs" [at the 2:03 mark]. I don't think he "misspoke".
@@ZeroOskul You speak 'obviously' fluently. You: "This is obviously a farce of education intended to misinform the public." Oh? Really? And you "already know Brian Greene is a charlatan"? How does Greene come into it? The fellow featured in the presentation here is Justin Khoury, who does not resemble him in the slightest. Based on your three OBVIOUSLY wrong statements I could say that I shouldn't bother paying any further attention to what you have to say either, but what's the use? Instead I'll supply you with a reason why its ok to be critical. It is not a "tearing down" to point out a problem or an error. It is likely that Khoury is alluding to the characteristic scale of the primordial mass density fluctuations that are theoretically suspected to have initially seeded galaxy growth in the early universe. The remnants of those early primordial starburst regions today attend large mature galaxies as old globular clusters distributed around them in halos. Globular clusters have a characteristic scale of about 100 light-years, and by coincidence it also happens to be approximately the scale of the smallest 'clumps' of dark matter inferred from observational data of its distribution within galaxies and galaxy clusters. The problem is that Khoury just ignores it in his introduction. He presents an assertion along with a graphic showing a grand spiral galaxy citing a scale that is off by a factor of a thousand. Anyone can see the discrepancy. He could easily have clarified why he stipulates that scale straight away. It would have taken all of 30 seconds at most to explain why he chose it. But he doesn't. He just continues to sail on without bothering to address the confusion that must inevitably pop up in his attending audience and viewers here. It may very well be he gets around to describing all this later on in the talk, but his opening has already demonstrated he isn't doing a good job of it. As a physicist I recognize a bad presentation when I see one, and I'm not willing to waste any further time just to wince. If you like to watch people seeking celebrity status strut around on a stage, fine. But that doesn't serve physics or popular education. Go watch some TED talk if that's what you're after. I'd rather invest my time and attention on watching somebody who presents information clearly and keeps the subject more important than the speaker.
Dark matter is cooled plasma being ejected by stars and other plasma ejecting sources. Because plasma is matter. Even when ejected into a cooler space it still is a matter just now it's cooled and dark. And with all this now cooled matter filling the universe it's causing the expansion of the universe . so the more the matter the faster it pushes out causing faster expansion. Is this something that could be true?
No because stars and other 'plasma ejecting sources' don't create more matter so the "so the more matter the faster it pushes out causing faster expansion" statement doesn't make any sense. The interstellar medium does consist of plasma/charged particles and that is measured in part by gravity.
Beginning the talk with "what we think dark matter is and what we don't know" sums up how far we are from revealing the secrets. Anyone else connected the facts that most of the space in molecules and atoms is empty and we don't know why, and we don't know what dark matter and dark energy are, and that we cannot test their presence?
"First of all we (DON"T) know that it is a form of matter." Unbelievable most real scientist state that as fact. Novel Dark Matter Hypothesis Dark Matter is simply unaccounted for gravity. GR states that gravity is the consequence of the curvature of spacetime. Is it possible that the structure of spacetime itself could be warped without the presence of mass? Spacetime has been shown to react like a fabric by warping, twisting, and propagating independently of mass, and all have been proven with observations from gravitational lensing, frame dragging, and now gravitational waves! Fabrics can be stretched, pressured, and/or heated to the point of causing a deformation. All of these conditions were extreme during inflation, so it is plausible that the “fabric” of spacetime analog could extend having its elastic property have hit a yield point. Therefore, if gravity is the consequence of the warping of spacetime, and fabrics can be permanently overstretched, then those empty warped geodesics would create gravitational wells independent of mass. My hypothesis of DM is subatomic black hole imprints of the quantum fluctuations that popped in at the moment of inflation. These would be clouds of quantum sized floating fixed geodesics, so they couldn’t expand or evaporate. Perhaps nothing has been detected because there is nothing to detect, and GR wouldn’t require modification of mass interactions because DM would just be an extension of how space-time behaves at extreme conditions. No WIMPS, no MOND, no parallel universes, just empty spacetime deformations that produce gravitational wells to help jump start galaxy accretion processes.
I also came to a conclusion quite similar to yours.but in my conjecture the dark matter is more like an echo after gravity deformed the space-time fabric
At 0:44: He says: "First of all we know dark matter is a form of matter". Does that not conflict with what Einstein told us that gravity is caused by energy? So, I would say: First of all we know dark matter is a form of energy. This may seem like splitting hairs because matter and energy are equivalent, but in this case, if dark matter researchers are assuming that dark matter is matter then they are on a wild goose chase if it turns out that dark matter is some other form of energy. Anyway, this does not invalidate anything he is saying here. I just think you need to do a global replace of "matter" with "energy" and ignore when he says that dark matter has mass.
Space time has its own properties, matter takes material from some space time sink and adds entropy to it continuously, forever. This energized space time fluid causes the gravitational effects we see easily and pressure or expansion. I think the rings around large clusters are differential pressure and bow shock as the slightly higher galactic pressure hits the much low energy Hubble universe background pressure. I think the very small gravitation is differential pressures of the gravitational fluid as you go from denser to less dense areas.
45:12 the the galaxie cluster dont clump togather due that any matter in the cosmos follows atomic weight as well is due that to what evers side they are they are same charge and they to a point repeal each other.
I disagree on the fact that Kepler’s laws should apply to complex galaxy systems same as to much simpler and different solar system. Based on this assumption current cosmologists accept that DM has to exist.
At time 7:58 THE BULLET CLUSTER is shown where he says that what you see in red is matter from the clusters in GAS FORM but take a good look to it and see that the red right part is very alike the effects we see when a quasar light from a galaxie hits with electromagnetism from the same system that surrounds the quasar so the quasars light gets reffracted back to the system, of course in this red parts is where you see the most gas due that is the same gas that dont make it out through the system as we could see in quasars. - l they clame that the red part is part of the whole clusters but that cant be just take a look and see that there is a system to the right up corner in the BACK that its light hits with this red part that looks is not in BETWEEN the clusters but to the front of the picture, SAY SO due that the back light of the system when hits with the red gas produces a kind of a circle that with maybe 30 of them we could fill the whole front part of the clusters when the clusters SIZE is of 3720000000 so HOW COULD THAT BE POSIBLE?¡¡¡¡
Dear Justin, you'd need high-temperature superfluidity because your mechanism had had to be in place at much smaller scale factor a(z) already, and much higher T(z) too.
If you see space-time both as a system or apart then time as well space must to have positive, negative and a neutral made of both, are past, present and future the charges of time? how could you fit the 3 charges states in a flat space when space is not a thing or is it?
The wave-scale of the gravitational discrepancy using Einstein's bent space is too large for the cause to not be a massless boson and the best first guess is that it's a spin=2 non-Einsteinian graviton, imo. I have been operating under that assumption for decades, anyway. Scientists are finally figuring out that making gravity fields oscillate over space wavelike over multiple scales, in effect like adding a sparse line-spectrum of frozen ripples to the galactic-scaled-and-beyond Newtonian gravity well, can explain dark matter effects over the entire cosmos. These scientists still don't seem to realize that frozen oscillations fit an average spin=2 vector field consisting of ultra-slowly synchronously rotating vectors carrying a few different rates of ultraslow rotation. Maybe the rotation is so slow that the fastest of all oscillates in effect only once or twice across an entire galaxy. Maybe it has a nuclear origin in differences between two much-faster intranuclear rotations, I like to suppose the shortest wavelength arises from re-scaling the shortest distance, around 10^-15 meters, between two protons reasonably jammed together, increasing it by the 10^+36 ratio between the gravitational and electrostatic forces expected between protons regardless of their distance, yielding 10^+21 meters, a nice fit to a normal largely-placid galaxy like MW.
Most people dont know that Einstein repeatedly said that something like a black hole (he died before the term was coined) can not exist. At the center of high mass galaxies such as our own mass is nearing the speed of light therefore as per relativity that mass is dilated through spacetime. The mass that we think of as being at the center is all around us. This is the explanation for the higher than expected rotation rates of stars in high mass galaxies. Low mass galaxies have normal star rotation rates because mass at the center is not approaching light speed relative to stars in the bands. Nobody believed in black holes when Einstein was alive because he would promptly explain that wherever you had an astronomical quantity of mass dilation would occur. If you pose the question "why cant we see light from the galactic center" the modern answer would be that gravitational forces there are so strong that light cannot escape (even though the mass of the photon is zero). Einstein's answer would be - because mass there is partially or completely dilated through spacetime relative to an Earth bound observer. Einstein wrote about this in the 1939 journal "Annals of mathematics". There is no dark matter or black holes there is just relativity, its an elephant in the room.
dark matter doesnt interact , but is there when 'needed' to keep galaxies together. a galaxy takes up place in space time. perhaps the darkmatter is on the outside of the place ordinary matter occupies. like the ball on a trampoline to show the curving of s.t. So if dark matter is not a thing, but only manifests when visible space is filled by gravitatational objects, it is the effect of being pushed away and therefor clumping around the gravitational objects. when the dark matter on the outside gets pushed away, it needs more space and causes the galaxies to move away from eachother. when the dark matter regains enough place, the acceleration can slow down again. how about that?
When we say space is expanding, does that mean the dark matter is thinning out? We know the stars, the planets the solid matter is all moving away from each other, away from the point of the big bang. But are the solid things just moving through the space? If space itself is expanding....the dark matter concentration should also be decreasing.
"... MOND ... an empirical fact about galaxies ..." Alternative 1: F = GMm/r^2 and modified-F = ma^2/a(0), where a(0) is the MOND acceleration constant. Alternative 2: F = (1 + ϵ) * GMm/r^2 and F = ma . Claim: Merely on the mathematics of the situation, in the deep MOND regime, Alternative 1 is approximately equivalent to Alternative 2.
@@peterquinn2997 Think doubt this: MOND indicates that there is a bizarre, unexpected acceleration. But in general relativity theory, acceleration can be logically associated with gravitational redshift. Study pages 83-92 of Einstein's "The Meaning of Relativity", 5th edition.
The lady at the back-corner ( 25:24 ) has been inattentive & face-down throughout the session as & when seen on the camera. Maybe she was more interested in playing with her mobile phone. Science doesn't need such low-spirited souls, rather Science would be better off without them.
Dude. The "dynamical friction" is fluid dynamics. Gravtions don't exist. Spacetime is a fluid. Alleged gravity wells are Spacetime pressure, same as air bubbles in soap on the surface of water. Just as water molecules hit soap bubbles, pushing them together, versus apart, Spacetime pushes atomic and energy together, if there is less "space" between them than outside them.
Computers wont tell you the true that the univers locks due that the data that you put in a computer does not have levels as ligh always fall into or is part of them.
There's no such word as dynamical, he made it up. Just like it seems he made up this story he is telling to justify his grants most probably. Sorry, this guy is not very convincing and his posture and gestures indicate he is not credible and that he is hoping that everyone listening will believe him. His terminology is not very scientific. I get conman vibes.
It takes literally a second to debunk your claims here regarding the word "Dynamical" unless you want to argue that mathematics and physics aren't a thing. google dynamical alone and like any other word you will get the dictionary definition dynamical Also found in: Thesaurus, Medical, Financial, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia. dy·nam·ic (dī-năm′ĭk) adj. also dy·nam·i·cal (-ĭ-kəl) 1. a. Of or relating to energy or to objects in motion. b. Of or relating to the study of dynamics. 2. Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress: a dynamic housing market. 3. Characterized by much activity and vigor, especially in bringing about change; energetic and forceful. See Synonyms at active. 4. Of or relating to variation of intensity, as in musical sound. n. 1. An interactive system or process, especially one involving competing or conflicting forces: "The traditional nineteenth-century dynamic between the sexes had begun to erode" (Jean Zimmerman). 2. A force, especially political, social, or psychological: the main dynamic behind the revolution. FYI in case you aren't aware dynamics is the study of time dependent systems, a pretty damn important discipline. In general next time you don't know the definition of a word rather than assuming it doesn't exist *look it up*. As for the rest while he clearly wasn't the best speaker his information checks out he isn't making things up. Admittedly he didn't approach this in its most natural perspective I would have started with the MOND formalism resembling the equation of state for superfluid matter. That is a very powerful insight and he underemphasized it. The terminology wise he did try and reduce the Jargon used which is generally a good thing if you are doing public speaking.
I apologise if I insult You by pointing out that neither the viability of this theory nor the veracity or honesty of his presentation has ANY correlation to what a person who judges the viability of a theory of physical phenomena ((or anything for that matter)) by how they (You in this case) perceive the posture of the presenter. And I don't really know if we should "laugh or cry" at the fact that there are people who believe that it is, though it does a lot to explain the "sorry state" the world is in when it comes to the lack of understanding the scientific process and belief and trust in pseudo science and superstitions. Regarding the existence of the term dynamical I would suggest You look up adverbs, what they are and how they are formed and things just might ""appear"" differently to You. Best regards
First he is French or French Canadian, so choice of words may be linked to that. Second the fact he seems stressed and not comfortable speaking in public has nothing to do with what he says. It's refreshing to see other ideas, even if they are wrong. We've been such in dark matter ghost stories for decades
Dark matter tuns slowly into Dark Energy. Matter is attractive and energy is repulsive. Neither are on our plane so we cannot see them. However both Dark matter and energy are on a very close interactive dimension.
Any system will work if you change the formulas to fit the data the question is does that formula actually mean anything from fist principals. That is what separates physics from math you can have a nice solution but if it doesn't help build a better understanding of the underlying system it is analogous to the epicycles of Ptolemy's geocentric universe. With enough correction terms you can make anything fit a function or related distribution.
@@Dragrath1 You are right some how but take a look to the rainbow doesnt it always come in same way with out not even one time the colors changed? As my self see it light is the essence of light, just look at stars dont they all emmite light of what ever they are made? if you boil water you will have water vapor so for sure is the same with stars. Most of the things in the cosmos is misunderstood just because they dont see levels as they should, my self think that as well matter is acomodated by levels through out the universe following same order of the rainbow that to me is how matter is spreaded out all over so when they see out farther and farther of course the wave length will be seen longer and longer. The universe could be seen as 2 circles where one is inside the other, the inside one is half the out side one in dimeter. The cosmos go by levels say atoms make the stars, stars make galaxies, galaxies make clusters of galaxies, clusters of galaxies make super clusters of galaxies and so on till make our cell universe and may go on why not? What I have to told you is based in one work of mine based in 3 celestial bodys: venus, earth and moon; another one is based in a dna picture and what you find in one you find in the other and that is as real the cosmos is as well you and me very similar but never one the same. If you click my logo you will find more about it. Dark energy is a misinterpretation of levels, while dark matter is a misunderstood of gravity. Hope you will keep on touch like the cosmos is where not a star is out of been part for small that could be the comparison of a star with the cosmos as an atom is from its star.
I love this guy. Such a brilliant presentation. What I'm struggling with is how to understand temperature in the universe. Heat I get. It comes from bodies like stars. So what is cold. The absence of heat? Where does cold come from?
Difference in temperature in systems is what moves the cycles, the inside asteroid belt that has the 4 rocky planets inside is hotter than the out side belt that holds the 4 gaseous planets so the union of both asteroids belt in between the rocky side and the gaseous side is what produces turbulances.
What you see in time 6:39 acting like a lense is not dark matter, remember that this is a picture taken by the Hubble deep space that was seen THROUGH A BLACK SPOT in our visible cosmos, this black spot is one just like the black spots that our Sun has, in this case the black spot is made by the light from a galaxie at the back of the picture when its light-matter from the galaxie is directed to the north and to the south perpendicular to the galaxie disk through a kind of a LONG CONE V SHAPE that one goes to the south and one to the north, so we are seeing through one of this tunels from the back galaxie and it is what ACTS AS LENSING but not black matter to me.
I beleive dark matter to be a fictitious force; the effects of dark energy on regular matter. The mass we are measuring is relativistic mass added to matter due to the positive pressure of the vacuum energy. a positive pressure exerted by the vacuum energy of space-time predicts; -the accelerating universe -gravitational lensing such as seen in the bullet cluster, where a region of less, higher density matter will warp space-time more than a region with more, lesser density matter. -Matter in the outer regions of galaxies / clusters, should be moving faster than we predict -Matter in the center region of galaxies / clusters should have added relativistic mass due to the additional vacuum pressure, increasing its escape velocity, allowing the stars in outer regions of the galaxies / clusters to travel faster than we predict possible without flying out of orbit -we should measure there to be more mass than we can see But this halo effect and extra mass being measures is explained by a positive pressure exerted by the vacuum energy of space-time. Dark matter is a fictitious force, nothing more than the effect or dark energy on braionic matter(regular matter)
perhaps the universe just has different climates in different zones and those climates influence the behaviour. Everything seems to have a halo of some sort. So if the universe is also one, it will have different climates like within any sort of sphere
Any thing that is a thing always will have 2 sides and both thread or make a third one that is the neutral part and really as you say one side will be always a bit different in temperature like say the inside rocky planets that are encircled by the inside meteors belt is HOTTER than the out side one that encircles the 4 gaseous planets. such thing happens in all stars, stars make galaxies, galaxies make clusters of galaxies, clusters of galaxies make super clusters of galaxies and so on to the point to make our universe that must be made of stars so for sure for phisics to make sence it needs to take COLD in account.
Keep looking you’ll never find it. It doesn’t exist. The more its looked for, the further they get from finding it. They know it doesn’t exist but can’t admit it or they’ll be out of a job.
how is there so much knowledge of space, but barely any of the sea? .. another thing, why you guys use so much big numbers that we cannot comprehend to teach us something? clearly you're not trying to teach you are trying to indoctrinate us with stupid regurgitation.. you said no facts, entire thing was about "what you or another person purposed" why you guys never have tangible evidence? why so many "lets imagine" why do we need an imagination for something that's supposed to be a fact? I've watch this entire thing all because I have critical thinking I can use my discernment to see you're just spewing a bunch of scientism
@@thawiseninja1559 sorta, threoretical physic is the nickname of Scientism. you have it backwards lol.. this isn't even science anymore.. the world is living like all these theories has been proven.. we live in a world where you can be called dumb for questioning a theory lmaoooo .. like the word is literally questionable in itself yet ppl like me are look at crazy
1. We know a lot about the sea, it's just that there's loads of water fucking up our sensors. 2. There are plenty of channels that teach science without big numbers, this one is for people with a more in depth understanding of the subject 3.Theories work. I don't get why you think they don't: remember, if general relativity didn't work our satellites wouldn't work either
great to see.justin throwing his hat in the ring and giving a real sence of how theorist go about structuring an argument. wheather hes right or wrong is inconsequencial to the endeavour itself..great stuff...
36:00 are those vorticies reponsible for intensive creation of stars and stellar systems in spiral galaxies? vs more diffuse and dwarf galaxies?
I am so glad I found this. This exact thing has been in my brain for years and everyone I try to talk to about it looks at me like I was crazy. I became determined to make a simulation that could illustrate it and I'm so glad they already have and it's actually being thought about by physicists.
Its crazy that my son and I, on a drive out of town this morning, were talking about dark matter and what it could be. After some crazy thoughts we said what if it were some kind of dark water or clear liquid That you could see through? After watching this, I firmly believe that he is right! Great discussion 👍
Like on the show Dark on Netflix. Actually it was simultaneously a gas, liquid, and solid all at the same time !! But I like the superfluid theory a lot!
An insightful lecture. Never thought Dark Matter as a superfluid. To all those who think gravitational law of Newton is fundamental the lecture might break your belief's about it. The quantum nature of dark matter is also a remarkable observation.
May the dark light up the future of physics.
Namaskaram 🙏🏻🙏🏻
Dark matter is a misunderstood of systems in the cosmos.
This is the most stimulating, enlightning science presentation I have seen in the last month or more. Thanks!
Thanks for revealing more of the potential characteristics of this material - that's not looking so dark anymore.
"100 light years" (size of galaxy) should read *"100 000 light years"* and "3 million light years" (size of galaxy cluster) should read *"3 billion light years"*
Lol p
P0p
You are getting very close! Damn fine work!
Indeed so, very good explanation of the dark matter entanglement.
Dark Matter was "discovered" by Fritz Zwicky while studying the Coma Cluster and then really advanced by the work of Vera Rubin some thirty years later.
They misunderstand the galaxie frame, dont take in acount entanglemen as atraction, dont count with the cmb presure and dont see that realy matter inside systems really float.
@@SernasHeptaDimesionalSpace entanglement isn't useful explaining dark matter tho
I found you lecture Beyond the Excellent .
So unique so thankful
This might be a stupid question. Can dark matter be on a totally different scale than matter. For instance, could the smallest piece of dark matter actually be like the size of a solar system or the size of a galaxy? Like a piece of sand inside a beach ball where the piece of sand is the galaxy at the center. And the dark matter is the beach ball? Like I said probably a stupid question.
@@zacharytrammell3382 interesting. I appreciate your thoughts on the matter. (Matter) lol
No genius, Because then the amount of dark matter would be consistent everywhere, which it is not.
@@timewalker6654 so you found a way to detect it then. Otherwise how would you know it wasn't genius
@@zacharytrammell3382 explanation - we haven't found any dark matter as of this point. We know it exists because of the effects it has on matter but we still can't find a trace of it. So my theory is dark matter is like the empty space inside a bubble. To where a galaxy has a dark matter bubble around it and all of the empty space inside the bubble is dark matter but is naturally extremely dilute do to the shear vastness of space itself. Which also explains gravitational lensing that we observe around galaxies almost as if we were looking at an actual bubble and that light is being curved around said bubble. Another way to look at it would be it's like an incondesent light bulbs and the filiment is the galaxy and dark matter is the light bulb.
No, bcz dark matter interacts with gravity and we can see that it scatters evenly. If it was very large particles, then the clumps would create a big distortions in spacetime fabric, just like blackholes. So no, dark matter could be made of larger particles than ordinary matter but not to that greater scale. It just doesn’t interacts with ordinary matter in direct way only through gravity
I watched a video of sound frequencies moving sand (and in another part, fluids) on a flat plate. The sound waves created all of these incredible geometric shapes. I started wondering if that could explain the properties of dark matter and found this video on my search. Very exciting science, thank you for sharing!!
Seems it can only be oscillations in core-radiated gravity, as partly and unevenly backlit and delineated by bright matter, that modulate the uncannily huge-radius perfect circular "shell" forms in the galaxy at 49:17 which shells also in some places show a record of being pierced by a large fast interloper system.
A galaxy I also particularly like, NGC 4775, seems to show a clumpier-light-matter-based flocculent variation with four periodic concentric wave-cycles visible in wide angle.
12:46 wow i am so happy now they made my work easy it easily fits in my Theory
😍😍😍😍😍
Now after finding lots of Prediction of my theory right , it seems mine theory is 100% right
An analogy I like is that of the universal gas laws. The relationships like Charles' Law, Boyle's Law, etc. are simple relationships but they are not fundamental. The relationships emerge from the properties of ideal gasses and Newton's laws.
As as a layman i have a question, is it correct to think space/dark matter as a least dense state of matter?
Really good presentation
The characteristic scale of galaxies is "100 light-years"? (2:22) Hmmm. Why should I bother listening to the rest of what this fellow has to say?
Exactly my thoughts too.
@@ddmcdono still some ideas in this programs spark my mind.
@@ZeroOskul Oh, yeah, sure, "obviously". As "obvious" as the image on the screen behind him 'misspeaks' when it actually STATES "~100 light yrs" [at the 2:03 mark]. I don't think he "misspoke".
@@ZeroOskul You speak 'obviously' fluently.
You: "This is obviously a farce of education intended to misinform the public."
Oh? Really?
And you "already know Brian Greene is a charlatan"?
How does Greene come into it? The fellow featured in the presentation here is Justin Khoury, who does not resemble him in the slightest.
Based on your three OBVIOUSLY wrong statements I could say that I shouldn't bother paying any further attention to what you have to say either, but what's the use?
Instead I'll supply you with a reason why its ok to be critical.
It is not a "tearing down" to point out a problem or an error. It is likely that Khoury is alluding to the characteristic scale of the primordial mass density fluctuations that are theoretically suspected to have initially seeded galaxy growth in the early universe. The remnants of those early primordial starburst regions today attend large mature galaxies as old globular clusters distributed around them in halos. Globular clusters have a characteristic scale of about 100 light-years, and by coincidence it also happens to be approximately the scale of the smallest 'clumps' of dark matter inferred from observational data of its distribution within galaxies and galaxy clusters.
The problem is that Khoury just ignores it in his introduction. He presents an assertion along with a graphic showing a grand spiral galaxy citing a scale that is off by a factor of a thousand. Anyone can see the discrepancy. He could easily have clarified why he stipulates that scale straight away. It would have taken all of 30 seconds at most to explain why he chose it. But he doesn't. He just continues to sail on without bothering to address the confusion that must inevitably pop up in his attending audience and viewers here. It may very well be he gets around to describing all this later on in the talk, but his opening has already demonstrated he isn't doing a good job of it. As a physicist I recognize a bad presentation when I see one, and I'm not willing to waste any further time just to wince.
If you like to watch people seeking celebrity status strut around on a stage, fine. But that doesn't serve physics or popular education. Go watch some TED talk if that's what you're after. I'd rather invest my time and attention on watching somebody who presents information clearly and keeps the subject more important than the speaker.
Dark matter is cooled plasma being ejected by stars and other plasma ejecting sources. Because plasma is matter. Even when ejected into a cooler space it still is a matter just now it's cooled and dark. And with all this now cooled matter filling the universe it's causing the expansion of the universe . so the more the matter the faster it pushes out causing faster expansion. Is this something that could be true?
No because stars and other 'plasma ejecting sources' don't create more matter so the "so the more matter the faster it pushes out causing faster expansion" statement doesn't make any sense. The interstellar medium does consist of plasma/charged particles and that is measured in part by gravity.
Beginning the talk with "what we think dark matter is and what we don't know" sums up how far we are from revealing the secrets.
Anyone else connected the facts that most of the space in molecules and atoms is empty and we don't know why, and we don't know what dark matter and dark energy are, and that we cannot test their presence?
So what would be the connection between those two facts? Fascinating stuff
I had this playing while i was sleeping. TRIPPY DREAM
"First of all we (DON"T) know that it is a form of matter." Unbelievable most real scientist state that as fact.
Novel Dark Matter Hypothesis
Dark Matter is simply unaccounted for gravity. GR states that gravity is the consequence of the curvature of spacetime. Is it possible that the structure of spacetime itself could be warped without the presence of mass? Spacetime has been shown to react like a fabric by warping, twisting, and propagating independently of mass, and all have been proven with observations from gravitational lensing, frame dragging, and now gravitational waves! Fabrics can be stretched, pressured, and/or heated to the point of causing a deformation. All of these conditions were extreme during inflation, so it is plausible that the “fabric” of spacetime analog could extend having its elastic property have hit a yield point.
Therefore, if gravity is the consequence of the warping of spacetime, and fabrics can be permanently overstretched, then those empty warped geodesics would create gravitational wells independent of mass. My hypothesis of DM is subatomic black hole imprints of the quantum fluctuations that popped in at the moment of inflation. These would be clouds of quantum sized floating fixed geodesics, so they couldn’t expand or evaporate. Perhaps nothing has been detected because there is nothing to detect, and GR wouldn’t require modification of mass interactions because DM would just be an extension of how space-time behaves at extreme conditions. No WIMPS, no MOND, no parallel universes, just empty spacetime deformations that produce gravitational wells to help jump start galaxy accretion processes.
I also came to a conclusion quite similar to yours.but in my conjecture the dark matter is more like an echo after gravity deformed the space-time fabric
@@mirceapintelie361 Could be. They need to start exploring new ideas.
46:30 The 3 middle galaxies are under more grate pressure than the outer so their halos must to overslap for sure one to the other.
Actually all stars halos overslap a bit.
At 0:44: He says: "First of all we know dark matter is a form of matter". Does that not conflict with what Einstein told us that gravity is caused by energy? So, I would say: First of all we know dark matter is a form of energy. This may seem like splitting hairs because matter and energy are equivalent, but in this case, if dark matter researchers are assuming that dark matter is matter then they are on a wild goose chase if it turns out that dark matter is some other form of energy. Anyway, this does not invalidate anything he is saying here. I just think you need to do a global replace of "matter" with "energy" and ignore when he says that dark matter has mass.
Any news over the past 5 years on whether the astronomical evidence of dynamical friction agrees with his predictions?
If you find 2 colliding galaxies you should be able to detect increase in temperature due to darkmatter friction.
Space time has its own properties, matter takes material from some space time sink and adds entropy to it continuously, forever. This energized space time fluid causes the gravitational effects we see easily and pressure or expansion. I think the rings around large clusters are differential pressure and bow shock as the slightly higher galactic pressure hits the much low energy Hubble universe background pressure. I think the very small gravitation is differential pressures of the gravitational fluid as you go from denser to less dense areas.
45:12 the the galaxie cluster dont clump togather due that any matter in the cosmos follows atomic weight as well is due that to what evers side they are they are same charge and they to a point repeal each other.
I disagree on the fact that Kepler’s laws should apply to complex galaxy systems same as to much simpler and different solar system. Based on this assumption current cosmologists accept that DM has to exist.
It has to do with Einstein's special theory of relativity (gravity) and if not, Einstein was wrong perhaps. But I doubt it
At time 7:58 THE BULLET CLUSTER is shown where he says that what you see in red is matter from the clusters in GAS FORM but take a good look to it and see that the red right part is very alike the effects we see when a quasar light from a galaxie hits with electromagnetism from the same system that surrounds the quasar so the quasars light gets reffracted back to the system, of course in this red parts is where you see the most gas due that is the same gas that dont make it out through the system as we could see in quasars. - l they clame that the red part is part of the whole clusters but that cant be just take a look and see that there is a system to the right up corner in the BACK that its light hits with this red part that looks is not in BETWEEN the clusters but to the front of the picture, SAY SO due that the back light of the system when hits with the red gas produces a kind of a circle that with maybe 30 of them we could fill the whole front part of the clusters when the clusters SIZE is of 3720000000 so HOW COULD THAT BE POSIBLE?¡¡¡¡
Dear Justin, you'd need high-temperature superfluidity because your mechanism had had to be in place at much smaller scale factor a(z) already, and much higher T(z) too.
Einstein is The Best!
@FLAT EARTH DATA Hello ape, I hope you evolve soon to consider that earth is not f*cking FLAT.
@FLAT EARTH DATA That's is what crazy about him.
@@pramathbhatt547 Take it easy man. People know Sir Albert Einstein was insane.
If you see space-time both as a system or apart then time as well space must to have positive, negative and a neutral made of both, are past, present and future the charges of time? how could you fit the 3 charges states in a flat space when space is not a thing or is it?
The wave-scale of the gravitational discrepancy using Einstein's bent space is too large for the cause to not be a massless boson and the best first guess is that it's a spin=2 non-Einsteinian graviton, imo. I have been operating under that assumption for decades, anyway. Scientists are finally figuring out that making gravity fields oscillate over space wavelike over multiple scales, in effect like adding a sparse line-spectrum of frozen ripples to the galactic-scaled-and-beyond Newtonian gravity well, can explain dark matter effects over the entire cosmos. These scientists still don't seem to realize that frozen oscillations fit an average spin=2 vector field consisting of ultra-slowly synchronously rotating vectors carrying a few different rates of ultraslow rotation. Maybe the rotation is so slow that the fastest of all oscillates in effect only once or twice across an entire galaxy. Maybe it has a nuclear origin in differences between two much-faster intranuclear rotations, I like to suppose the shortest wavelength arises from re-scaling the shortest distance, around 10^-15 meters, between two protons reasonably jammed together, increasing it by the 10^+36 ratio between the gravitational and electrostatic forces expected between protons regardless of their distance, yielding 10^+21 meters, a nice fit to a normal largely-placid galaxy like MW.
What if we are the dark matter and galaxies are the tiny vortices swirling and the reacting force is gravity. Would sort of look like the mapping UMD.
Most people dont know that Einstein repeatedly said that something like a black hole (he died before the term was coined) can not exist. At the center of high mass galaxies such as our own mass is nearing the speed of light therefore as per relativity that mass is dilated through spacetime. The mass that we think of as being at the center is all around us. This is the explanation for the higher than expected rotation rates of stars in high mass galaxies. Low mass galaxies have normal star rotation rates because mass at the center is not approaching light speed relative to stars in the bands.
Nobody believed in black holes when Einstein was alive because he would promptly explain that wherever you had an astronomical quantity of mass dilation would occur. If you pose the question "why cant we see light from the galactic center" the modern answer would be that gravitational forces there are so strong that light cannot escape (even though the mass of the photon is zero). Einstein's answer would be - because mass there is partially or completely dilated through spacetime relative to an Earth bound observer.
Einstein wrote about this in the 1939 journal "Annals of mathematics". There is no dark matter or black holes there is just relativity, its an elephant in the room.
dark matter doesnt interact , but is there when 'needed' to keep galaxies together. a galaxy takes up place in space time. perhaps the darkmatter is on the outside of the place ordinary matter occupies. like the ball on a trampoline to show the curving of s.t. So if dark matter is not a thing, but only manifests when visible space is filled by gravitatational objects, it is the effect of being pushed away and therefor clumping around the gravitational objects.
when the dark matter on the outside gets pushed away, it needs more space and causes the galaxies to move away from eachother. when the dark matter regains enough place, the acceleration can slow down again.
how about that?
Why don't you feel the heat keeping it liquid. Almost like it's impossible to make it a solid , without pressure.
When we say space is expanding, does that mean the dark matter is thinning out? We know the stars, the planets the solid matter is all moving away from each other, away from the point of the big bang. But are the solid things just moving through the space? If space itself is expanding....the dark matter concentration should also be decreasing.
It flows with the ether as it propagates
Don't forget about the dielectric field and force and acceleration
"... MOND ... an empirical fact about galaxies ..." Alternative 1: F = GMm/r^2 and modified-F = ma^2/a(0), where a(0) is the MOND acceleration constant. Alternative 2: F = (1 + ϵ) * GMm/r^2 and F = ma . Claim: Merely on the mathematics of the situation, in the deep MOND regime, Alternative 1 is approximately equivalent to Alternative 2.
You are incorrect sir.
@@peterquinn2997 Think doubt this: MOND indicates that there is a bizarre, unexpected acceleration. But in general relativity theory, acceleration can be logically associated with gravitational redshift. Study pages 83-92 of Einstein's "The Meaning of Relativity", 5th edition.
the last question, there is already a proposition called superfluid vacuum theory
The lady at the back-corner ( 25:24 ) has been inattentive & face-down throughout the session as & when seen on the camera. Maybe she was more interested in playing with her mobile phone. Science doesn't need such low-spirited souls, rather Science would be better off without them.
Dude. The "dynamical friction" is fluid dynamics. Gravtions don't exist. Spacetime is a fluid. Alleged gravity wells are Spacetime pressure, same as air bubbles in soap on the surface of water. Just as water molecules hit soap bubbles, pushing them together, versus apart, Spacetime pushes atomic and energy together, if there is less "space" between them than outside them.
@Pisstake it takes time just see Penrose from 60 till 2020. I WANT MINE TOO please,
So why not go with ancient history formenant as this substance is so identical to what humans thought space was for millenia?
Wonder what physicists are thinking now, that a new study came out that shows that rotations of 153 galaxies fit only the hypothesis of MOND Gravity.
That was a long talk about something that doesn't exist. I can sum up something that does exist in two words " plasma cosmology " ; )
There we go, a fellow observer! Your comment is like finding a nugget of gold on sandy beach!
Eyes open, no fear, be safe everyone!😉
Just a theory
Computers wont tell you the true that the univers locks due that the data that you put in a computer does not have levels as ligh always fall into or is part of them.
Very instructive, large scale explanation of the dark matter.
It's more easy to simulate the universe than for it to really exist.
Because it does not exist.
Dark matter is quite interesting to me
did you change your pic for this post 😋... i bet had it been called 'white matter', it was known 100 years ago.
@@red8884 not at all... as a mathematician and I really love 'Dark matter'
Dark matter is a misunderstood of the galaxie of how it works.
Dark matter is consciousness.
Only when in the super fluid state.
I always connected dark matter to something like this. The world we can't see. The spirit. But it is just a thought
There's no such word as dynamical, he made it up. Just like it seems he made up this story he is telling to justify his grants most probably. Sorry, this guy is not very convincing and his posture and gestures indicate he is not credible and that he is hoping that everyone listening will believe him. His terminology is not very scientific. I get conman vibes.
Me too
It takes literally a second to debunk your claims here regarding the word "Dynamical" unless you want to argue that mathematics and physics aren't a thing. google dynamical alone and like any other word you will get the dictionary definition
dynamical
Also found in: Thesaurus, Medical, Financial, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
dy·nam·ic (dī-năm′ĭk)
adj. also dy·nam·i·cal (-ĭ-kəl)
1.
a. Of or relating to energy or to objects in motion.
b. Of or relating to the study of dynamics.
2. Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress: a dynamic housing market.
3. Characterized by much activity and vigor, especially in bringing about change; energetic and forceful. See Synonyms at active.
4. Of or relating to variation of intensity, as in musical sound.
n.
1. An interactive system or process, especially one involving competing or conflicting forces: "The traditional nineteenth-century dynamic between the sexes had begun to erode" (Jean Zimmerman).
2. A force, especially political, social, or psychological: the main dynamic behind the revolution.
FYI in case you aren't aware dynamics is the study of time dependent systems, a pretty damn important discipline. In general next time you don't know the definition of a word rather than assuming it doesn't exist *look it up*.
As for the rest while he clearly wasn't the best speaker his information checks out he isn't making things up. Admittedly he didn't approach this in its most natural perspective I would have started with the MOND formalism resembling the equation of state for superfluid matter. That is a very powerful insight and he underemphasized it.
The terminology wise he did try and reduce the Jargon used which is generally a good thing if you are doing public speaking.
I apologise if I insult You by pointing out that neither the viability of this theory nor the veracity or honesty of his presentation has ANY correlation to what a person who judges the viability of a theory of physical phenomena ((or anything for that matter)) by how they (You in this case) perceive the posture of the presenter.
And I don't really know if we should "laugh or cry" at the fact that there are people who believe that it is, though it does a lot to explain the "sorry state" the world is in when it comes to the lack of understanding the scientific process and belief and trust in pseudo science and superstitions.
Regarding the existence of the term dynamical I would suggest You look up adverbs, what they are and how they are formed and things just might ""appear"" differently to You.
Best regards
First he is French or French Canadian, so choice of words may be linked to that. Second the fact he seems stressed and not comfortable speaking in public has nothing to do with what he says. It's refreshing to see other ideas, even if they are wrong. We've been such in dark matter ghost stories for decades
Get a better dictionary?
Dark matter tuns slowly into Dark Energy. Matter is attractive and energy is repulsive. Neither are on our plane so we cannot see them. However both Dark matter and energy are on a very close interactive dimension.
MOND do not work at higher scales due that you have to change the formulas as you go to another scales or levels.
Any system will work if you change the formulas to fit the data the question is does that formula actually mean anything from fist principals. That is what separates physics from math you can have a nice solution but if it doesn't help build a better understanding of the underlying system it is analogous to the epicycles of Ptolemy's geocentric universe. With enough correction terms you can make anything fit a function or related distribution.
@@Dragrath1 You are right some how but take a look to the rainbow doesnt it always come in same way with out not even one time the colors changed? As my self see it light is the essence of light, just look at stars dont they all emmite light of what ever they are made? if you boil water you will have water vapor so for sure is the same with stars. Most of the things in the cosmos is misunderstood just because they dont see levels as they should, my self think that as well matter is acomodated by levels through out the universe following same order of the rainbow that to me is how matter is spreaded out all over so when they see out farther and farther of course the wave length will be seen longer and longer.
The universe could be seen as 2 circles where one is inside the other, the inside one is half the out side one in dimeter.
The cosmos go by levels say atoms make the stars, stars make galaxies, galaxies make clusters of galaxies, clusters of galaxies make super clusters of galaxies and so on till make our cell universe and may go on why not?
What I have to told you is based in one work of mine based in 3 celestial bodys: venus, earth and moon; another one is based in a dna picture and what you find in one you find in the other and that is as real the cosmos is as well you and me very similar but never one the same. If you click my logo you will find more about it.
Dark energy is a misinterpretation of levels, while dark matter is a misunderstood of gravity.
Hope you will keep on touch like the cosmos is where not a star is out of been part for small that could be the comparison of a star with the cosmos as an atom is from its star.
Light is the essence of matter.
The jury: _you are in to something_
The judge sentencing: _you need some time to prove your innocence_
Wow
this is ridiculous and amazing.
I love this guy. Such a brilliant presentation. What I'm struggling with is how to understand temperature in the universe. Heat I get. It comes from bodies like stars. So what is cold. The absence of heat? Where does cold come from?
Difference in temperature in systems is what moves the cycles, the inside asteroid belt that has the 4 rocky planets inside is hotter than the out side belt that holds the 4 gaseous planets so the union of both asteroids belt in between the rocky side and the gaseous side is what produces turbulances.
the lack of movement in atoms..ie low atom density plus low movment = plenty cold
Temperature equals the amount the particle is vibrating.
Please insert subtitles , it's more comfortable !
Meanwhile
Flat earthers to themselves :: coool
Flat earthers to everyone :: earth is flat
Doubtful any flat earthers would waste their time. I just came to see what crap they were peddling and I found it.
I'm not a nerd, I swear.
I think this is an exelent
I think what you said is exelent
Hey is that Bradley Cooper
Workaholics?
Dark matter really annoys me.
We have to avoid galaxies and go to the destitution the long way.
erm. I meant destination, not destitution, but not a big deal
What you see in time 6:39 acting like a lense is not dark matter, remember that this is a picture taken by the Hubble deep space that was seen THROUGH A BLACK SPOT in our visible cosmos, this black spot is one just like the black spots that our Sun has, in this case the black spot is made by the light from a galaxie at the back of the picture when its light-matter from the galaxie is directed to the north and to the south perpendicular to the galaxie disk through a kind of a LONG CONE V SHAPE that one goes to the south and one to the north, so we are seeing through one of this tunels from the back galaxie and it is what ACTS AS LENSING but not black matter to me.
Avoid saying "We know" this and that about a particle that has not even been discovered yet. There are other theories...
Dark matter is Gods way of saying “ so you think you are so smart huh?”
kinda harsh but its true. think about a funny thought. why does god always act like a human? cuz man create god in HIS image.
i am so curious to know about the dark matter
I beleive dark matter to be a fictitious force; the effects of dark energy on regular matter.
The mass we are measuring is relativistic mass added to matter due to the positive pressure of the vacuum energy.
a positive pressure exerted by the vacuum energy of space-time predicts;
-the accelerating universe
-gravitational lensing such as seen in the bullet cluster, where a region of less, higher density matter will warp space-time more than a region with more, lesser density matter.
-Matter in the outer regions of galaxies / clusters, should be moving faster than we predict
-Matter in the center region of galaxies / clusters should have added relativistic mass due to the additional vacuum pressure, increasing its escape velocity, allowing the stars in outer regions of the galaxies / clusters to travel faster than we predict possible without flying out of orbit
-we should measure there to be more mass than we can see
But this halo effect and extra mass being measures is explained by a positive pressure exerted by the vacuum energy of space-time.
Dark matter is a fictitious force, nothing more than the effect or dark energy on braionic matter(regular matter)
Maybe it's that dark matter does interact with time correctly.
there could be dark matter planets and aliens
Nope
There isn't full proof of any particular life form but we do have some evidence of aliens
And dark matter planets is fiction that can't be real unless civilization does find one or more
But not dark matter aliens
Fish never see the water they swim in . I always thought we were in a soup. But I hear were in a pizza pi !
perhaps the universe just has different climates in different zones and those climates influence the behaviour. Everything seems to have a halo of some sort. So if the universe is also one, it will have different climates like within any sort of sphere
I like your comment. There could be some merit to it~
Just eat more hay, and you will come up with more horseshit
@@timewalker6654 says a guy called timewalker... star trek on already?
Any thing that is a thing always will have 2 sides and both thread or make a third one that is the neutral part and really as you say one side will be always a bit different in temperature like say the inside rocky planets that are encircled by the inside meteors belt is HOTTER than the out side one that encircles the 4 gaseous planets. such thing happens in all stars, stars make galaxies, galaxies make clusters of galaxies, clusters of galaxies make super clusters of galaxies and so on to the point to make our universe that must be made of stars so for sure for phisics to make sence it needs to take COLD in account.
Just ask Dr. Turok
Nice idea! He did some mess here and there, but good talk anyway.
Awevo, y pone el ejemplo de la materia obscura con un afroamericano
Es que dicen que son los mas fuertes.
❤❤❤
In the whole video you may hear a lot maybe, could be, looks like but... etc.
Because it is bs scientism.
@@dawnsites4232 still this programs ones in a while spark ideas on me.
Galaxies are not 100ly across but more near 100.000 ly. !!!!
comic sans? guilty!
Keep looking you’ll never find it. It doesn’t exist. The more its looked for, the further they get from finding it. They know it doesn’t exist but can’t admit it or they’ll be out of a job.
just bring me a bag with the stuff already...
Dark matter is such a reach and cop out for having no idea.
.
Here’s a new idea: they ain’t no such a thing.
The fragile dinosaur neatly report because company lamentably follow out a ignorant seagull. striped, lewd romanian
dark matter does not exist. Light speed is different across the galaxy. 😃
It must go by levels as atoms make stars, stars galaxies, galaxies make clusters of galaxies etc. 299792.45 k/s2 is just a jock.
you keep saying 'we know' when all this is theory only
Not very convincing
Wow = weird objectable wasteful
the cosmos has a song that Phisycists dont understand.
It appears you've heard the salacious rumor that even ambidextrous physicists can only find 4.8% of their .....
@@tomlakosh1833 the comment is not complite could you fix it?
@@SernasHeptaDimesionalSpace it would be impolite.
@@tomlakosh1833 what do you mean?
The 1st two commenters haven't seen the whole video yet. Even I 😅
Mass curves spacetime. Light follows the curvature of spacetime. Gravity doesn't affect light. Light had no mass.
He could resist interjection some racism. The only person he mentions in his lecture is a black man who was accused and tried for a crime. Shame.
Gravity does affect light
gravity IS spacetime curvature...
how is there so much knowledge of space, but barely any of the sea? .. another thing, why you guys use so much big numbers that we cannot comprehend to teach us something? clearly you're not trying to teach you are trying to indoctrinate us with stupid regurgitation.. you said no facts, entire thing was about "what you or another person purposed" why you guys never have tangible evidence? why so many "lets imagine" why do we need an imagination for something that's supposed to be a fact? I've watch this entire thing all because I have critical thinking I can use my discernment to see you're just spewing a bunch of scientism
Lol
That's why it's called theoretical physics
@@thawiseninja1559 sorta, threoretical physic is the nickname of Scientism. you have it backwards lol.. this isn't even science anymore.. the world is living like all these theories has been proven.. we live in a world where you can be called dumb for questioning a theory lmaoooo .. like the word is literally questionable in itself yet ppl like me are look at crazy
1. We know a lot about the sea, it's just that there's loads of water fucking up our sensors.
2. There are plenty of channels that teach science without big numbers, this one is for people with a more in depth understanding of the subject
3.Theories work. I don't get why you think they don't: remember, if general relativity didn't work our satellites wouldn't work either
@@Deathtobunny1 dont waste ur time just look at his name. Its one of those religious trolls that go on science videos to preach
.
.
.
.
.
.