See people always think Physicists talk really fast. In reality, its the world that is moving really slowly around them as they have so much energy and are experiencing the relativistic effects of Special Relativity.
@Ikmal Axl Lol, yes, I can see that. No, I am not religious but I am a theist. So tell me, your name... is Ikmal a name or an abbreviation for Institut Kelautan Malaysia?
That the sun can lose 4 billion kilograms of its mass every second, second after second, and still only be _less than one tenth of 1% lighter_ even after 10 billion years of doing it, is truly mind boggling.
@@benspersonalacc2326 he may be wrong, but we will never know how much the Sun bends space/time. The Sun is HUGE and it obviously affects space/time very differently compared to us on Earth. And I'm not just talking about the surface of the Sun.
I don't think he's correct to say that the potential energy of bonded particles is negative. I think he meant that the differential between the potential energy of unbonded atom constituents from the potential energy of bonded atom constituents is negative. There's no such thing as negative energy. Potential energy can only be negative as a dynamic value, i.e., if the system is evaluated at two states. He was trying to say something shorthand and just threw me into a fifteen-minute loop of confusion. Please like this so that viewers will be able to understand it correctly.
Potential energy is already a differential. you can only know the value of potential energy if you have a zero value somewhere. Like gravitational potential energy in a gravitational field. As do you work to raise something, some of that spent energy goes into gravitational potential energy and turns that into a positive value. when you drop it and reaches the ground you can say its potential energy is zero, if you set the zero value to the ground level. In truth, you could say the zero value lies in the centre of the earth, but then your equations would be less readable and manageable. So you can have negative potential energies if the zero value is , as he put it, when 2 particles are infinitely far apart. If you bring them less than infinitely far apart, the potential energy is negative. there is no universal zero value for potential energy, depends entirely on the definition. It just has to make sense for a generalization of what you are measuring and measurements other people have performed
Its a physical convention.... It arises because, we assume the potential energy of objects infinitely far away as zero... In order to 'fall into' each other (due to gravity or electromagnetic attraction), they need to lose energy. This loss can be in the form of heat, or radiation or gravitational waves (in case of earth-sun system, or two merging black holes).... Overall, the net result is that you end up with lower energy than you initially started with.... (At infinity)... So, we can assume the energy at infinity to be a finite value, but it will make a lot of mathematical confusion... It makes it easier to assume it to be zero and gravitational potential energy as negative... . The actual energy isn't negative.. The negative number only indicates that the two objects lost energy during the process of gravitational merger or chemical bonding...
@@jaytomson7052 I didn't understand what you are asking... Mass and energy are equivalent when measured together in a system.. So, if you lose energy you would lose a bit of mass too... Thats why H2 molecule has slightly lower mass than two H atoms. And He nucleus has lower mass than 4 protons. Because they lose energy during chemical or nuclear bonding.. When two black holes merge, the resulting third black hole has lower mass than the sum of the masses of the colliding black holes... Some mass (energy) is always lost during the merger.
This guy is putting out very valuable information, explaining a lot. But I think that for most of us he just plain goes too fast. But the content is excellent. I appreciate the video.
I love how physics feels million times more interesting now that I'm not forced to learn it as I don't have the subject in college unlike my school days
I wish teacher would teach us this and actually make a deep conversation to us about this in middle school or freshman year in high school. I adore all this stuff, it never gets boring. There's so many amazing things to learn regarding space time, astrophysics, quantum mechanics, mass, atoms, space, black holes,etc .
If you're still interested. Try looking into purchasing "introduction to physics " textbooks or any other advance subjects online. Why wait to learn, right? Best of luck :)
There's no point in learning this stuff without the math to go with it and that is too advanced for high school. You'd probably find if you sat in on a physics university lecture on the subject that you wouldn't like it so much because it isn't made as entertainment like this video.
Isa pang bobo...Bobong tao pala itong si Lily C... si collins ka ba?BOBONG TAO KA PALA....Subrang bobong tao.. hindi maruning makaintindi...illiterates....ILLITERATE pala kayo.. ILITERATES ......
Just Be Upon another watch of the video, this time NOT at 3am, i found its not too fast and I was able to follow it. Thanks though, i didnt even notice there was an option to slow down the speed on RUclips!
Fair enough , but this video is pretty old, since about 5 years ago , the show has been hosted by Prof. Matt O'Dowd and it's still making episodes. Maybe you'll like his teaching style check some other episodes out
We lose significant amounts of mass continuously by: 1. water loss on breathing/sweating; 2. carbon loss via exhaled CO2; 3. heat loss through the air (convection); 4. infrared light emition. Activity levels do influence this rates
Really? thanks to the pictographs and constant background analogies and representations following his phrases, it's 900x easier to follow than a prof. and a chalkboard. I'm at 1.25x speed.
I love how you let the students know you are friends with their teacher. Obviously you're not on Space Time anymore, but that was still a cool thing to do.
Knew I'd find comments aplenty about verbal delivery speed. Perfect for RUclips environment of short attention spans. Intent viewers have the option to slow it down, watch it over again, or both.
Excellent content and presentation. Since the subject matter is more complex, it would be helpful to slow down the presentation to enable the audience process the meaning and implications of what is being explained.
@@DJ_Force THE PRECISE, SIMPLE, AND CLEAR DERIVATION, ORIGIN, MEANING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF E=MC2: E=mc2 is taken directly from F=ma. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Carefully consider what is THE SUN AND what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the NIGHT SKY. So, consider what is THE BLACK “space” of what is THE EYE. The sky is blue, AND what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE !! c squared is CLEARLY understood as a dimension (of what constitutes SPACE) ON BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! I have CLEARLY explained or proven the mathematical unification of gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy (ON/IN BALANCE), as I have demonstrated the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations (along with TIME); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). I have proven how and why this is mathematically consistent with F=ma AND E=mc2. TIME dilation ultimately proves on balance that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). In light of what has been CLEARLY proven here (on BALANCE), think about what is THE SUN in DIRECT comparison to/with what is outer “space”. GREAT !!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense, as BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. I'm going to more precisely explain the true origin (and the full meaning) of the equation E=mc2. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is (CLEARLY and necessarily) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This also CLEARLY explains, on balance, why and how this equation represents a two dimensional surface OR SPACE as what is a BALANCED AVERAGE. Indeed, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are (CLEARLY) linked AND BALANCED opposites (on balance); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance) !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Indeed, TIME is necessarily possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance). Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE on balance, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE. This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. This ALSO explains why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. I have truly (and fundamentally) revolutionized what is our understanding of physics/physical experience. Compare the setting and orange Sun with the fully illuminated and setting/WHITE Moon DIRECTLY. They do basically appear to give off the same illumination, in fact. Notice that the curvature or shape of said Moon matches that of THE EARTH/ground (given a clear horizon, that is). What is THE SUN AND what is THE MOON are then the SAME SIZE in the sky as what is THE EYE. Moreover, these two forms manifest (or form up) at what is EYE LEVEL/body height. GREAT !!! Now, I have CLEARLY proven why AND how this is so. The tides are (CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY) ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational ON BALANCE. Magnificent !!! The tides are CLEARLY and necessarily subject to F=ma AND E=mc2, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; and the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The sky is blue, and THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Excellent. I have explained why the sizes of said Moon and said Sun are the same as what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. So, I have CLEARLY explained why the diameter of the Moon is about one quarter (at 27 percent) in size compared with what is THE EARTH. By Frank DiMeglio How does what is the Sun survive or exist against what is outer “space" ? The answer is, ON BALANCE, invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium and BALANCE. Here's why. (Think about TIME as well.) WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION OF SPACE AND TIME ON BALANCE: Invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE. This necessarily and clearly involves interaction, on balance. Consider what is the eye (on balance). Logically consider what is a two dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE !!!! Notice the associated DOME AND the flat/black “space” of WHAT IS the eye AS WELL. Really think about it all. Consider WHAT IS THE SUN ON BALANCE. (NOW, think about time.) Outer “space” involves full inertia, AND it is fully invisible AND black. Consider one and three dimensions ON BALANCE !!! Now, consider what is the fourth dimension and the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. Think about ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy AND think about gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS actually standing ON what is THE EARTH/ground (ON BALANCE) !! Think about TIME !! Think about why there is something instead of nothing ON BALANCE. Consider that time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Think about the man (THE EYE) that actually IS IN what is outer “space”. Think about time. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE, and consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. NOW, consider what is THE SUN. Think closely about everything in this writing. Balance and completeness go hand in hand. Magnificent. ❤️ By Frank DiMeglio
The speed depends on your biological preference for recovery and excitement to finding something familiar. Everyone has perfect attention, it's the speed that matters to how we are able to capture it and be excited enough to follow along the information given.
Thank you for not speaking any faster otherwise you might have used up all the energy in the universe. I might have been left to suffocate away "negatively massed" oxygen atoms.
Man there’s no video that goes through why speed of light squared is used, minutephysics is the only one that glances over it by giving the equation for Doppler effect but no one goes through that part.
Well in the ratio form m = (E/c^2), it’s not too hard to see that E is some number in units of kg*(m^2/s^2), so it makes sense that to get to units of mass , ie kg, we need to divide by some velocity squared. What velocity that happens to be can easily be experimentally determined by measuring mass gain in endothermic processes and mass loss in exothermic processes. That’s one way to easily calculate that it must be c. The real important thing here that isn’t explained well enough is the consequence that as long as mass-energy equivalence exists, mass could never exist with an infinite speed of light as the denominator would be infinite and any amount of energy would still have zero mass. This is also often missed by those videos which claim to simulate what things would be like if c was nearer a human-comprehensible value. If c was a much lower number, say 30 m/s, you would not be able to walk around marveling at the visible Doppler shift and length contraction/dilation of everything around you as you changed your velocity. You would be quite preoccupied with the fact that your mass and the mass of the earth had just both increased by 7 orders of magnitude. Given the mass of the earth is about 6 x 10^24 kg and 80 Jupiter masses is about 3 x 10^29 kg, the earth would instantly turn into a star. Specifically, a star about 15 times more massive than the sun. And of course even this would not even be the most pressing issue, as the Sun itself would instantly become a supermassive black hole of 10 million solar masses.
Rewatching this 6 years on and it's occurred to me that they totally dropped the ball with the name of the challenge... It should have been the "E = MC Hammer challenge"
Doing a rough analogy(please correct me if I'm wrong): Energy and mass are like ice and vapor; ice may turn to vapor and vice versa. But there are no transformations, only changes in the arrangement of the water molecules. Therefore, energy is just mass rearranged in some particular ways and vice versa.
Well, actually all energy has mass because mass is a property that all energy exhibits. But photons are the only form of energy to not have mass because only rest energy has mass.
@@mrepic8129 Bro I am just 15 and I got it in 1 go.I wrote it cuz the presentater is very fast enough while explaining.I can never tell someone dumb cuz Einstein was the world's smartest person ever but he didn't told someone dumb.He was thorough with his explanation.Even Einstein's driver understood everything Einstein said while Einstein used to go to conferences to explain his theories.You need to be thorough which the presentator isn't.Anyone can be thorough not only Einstein.But he isn't.I understood it at first go but there are many people out there who didn't bro....🤔🤔👍👍
@@jakeg3126 I know but I mentioned his Dad's name as a tribute to his dad who brought in the world the smartest person ever to live.Not only that but Einstein was not even able to speak at initial stages of his life.Then too his dad didn't used violence or scolded him for his conditions and didn't even scolded Einstein's mom for it....🤔👍
Dude, where has this guy been lately?!?! That was probably the most well-explained concept I've ever heard. Never even had the inkling to attempt to understand what E=mc2 meant. Now I feel like I could give a lecture. Amazing video.
Simply accept it as a fact. We assumed energy was always positive like how we assumed many things that turned out to be not true. The simple fact I guess is energy is relative and thus can be negative.
This is the second video of Space Time with PBS that I've ever seen and I've got to tell you, bumping into this channel feels like I've died and gone to wonderland. I just can't watch crash course physics as much anymore because it's a little too dumbed down. But this channel gives you to you fast and straight and assumes you know what they are talking about when they say physics terminology. I love that. I love you guys so much don't ever stop making videos. However I have one question, will you ever do this for chemistry and biology? Those subjects never get any love and it's kind of sad, we want to learn those too and they've got great visuals!
Great video, thanks a lot! just one question: Do I understand this correctly: - mass of an atomic nucleus < mass of all its protons and neutrons - mass of a single proton (or neutron) >> mass of the three quarks In both cases the potential energy should come from the strong interaction, why is it negative in the case of a nucleus (making its total mass being less than the mass of its constituents) but positive in the case of a single nucleon (making its mass bigger then the mass of its constituents)?
It would have been a WHOLE lot easier to understand if you STARTED with "Mass is a property that all energy exhibits. When we measure mass we are actually measuring the cumulative energy content of objects whenever you use a scale." Instead of explaining that at the end. Seriously.
+Talik And at school they tell you scale measures mass (facepalm) - Well at least your only forced to live in that delusion for your first 12-18 years, or until you seek to discover the truths yourself. Although questioning this too early could destroy your schooling career, if your in the wrong part of the world, and greatly limit your own potential for a period of time.... Which some people can never escape from. I just hope that schooling can evolve as quickly as our general understanding of the universe is. At elementary level that is.
I... I honestly can't tell if this is an insult or trying to point out that the school system should be restructured. If it's the later then I totally agree. I'm definitely NOT a scientist, so it's easier for people like me to grasp a new concept if we're told the conclusion first and then have the explanation as to why.
+InSilentSpaces Yeah, but the school system is essentially teaching kids incomplete/misleading information. Once that info sticks to the kids that actually do well, they will then go to university and should be more familiar with the misleading information. We then basically expect them to for the most part forget what they were judged on for most of their life and to learn the, as far as we know, truth. To me, this seems like a really screwed up system. We're basically judged for whether we're talented enough to go to post-secondary schooling based on how well we memorize things that are mostly wrong according to modern science.
The proton/neutron part is a bit off or at a "wrong" timing, since you were talking about negative potential energy (negative binding energy), while with quarks it's positive (potential energy/binding energy). Also not all energy has an equivalent amount of mass. For photons and EM-radiation E=mc2 does not apply, xept for in a photon gas.
So can a dark substance increase in mass If do an experiment that put a dark substance and bright one and put it on light bulb for a year Will the dark substance expand and have greater mass?
Theoretically, the dark substance will have slightly (very very slightly) greater mass, but not because of expansion. All that light will, if at all enough to do so, just increase the kinetic energy (and thereby thermal energy) of the atoms making up the dark substance. This will, in turn, also lead to an increase in size, if the substance is solid (solids expand on heating). Another thing you should consider is that, to check the change in mass of the substances, you should completely isolate them from external environment, but while doing so, you're essentially also making sure the light doesn't escape, and therefore even the mass of the white substance will seem to have increased, even when it's apparently not so.
so, is it because the dark substances absorbs heat and therefore a point will come where there is no mass of light available because it has been converted into energy and therefore the light is lost in dark hole?
True, but for that to happen there are two things you should know. That black object should be an ideal 'black body', one which 'completely' absorbs all the light. That includes not only the light in the visible spectrum, but even the IR, UV and X-rays (which has a higher penetrative force and can therefore, even pass through and through the object). And secondly, since all that light energy (EM energy) is transmitted to the black body, there will be an increase in the weight of the black object, but this will be very transient, because the temperature of the body would've increased and that temperature will finally again dissipate into the surrounding environment.
It's 03/14/2019 Happy 140th Birthday to the greatest Theoretical physicist that's ever lived. Thanks for opening our eyes to the perception of space and time in its entirety
Question. Black holes after some time will always bring space time toward them, even though space time is expanding, after some time won’t that become a net negative bringing them together at a certain endpoint?
In your mirrored box example, wouldn't the box still lose mass due to very small amounts of energy warming the walls and radiating outside of the box as heat? Even a mirrored service would still absorb some amount of light as heat.
gorRO roJO No, they do NOT, b/c an individual's photon energy can never be *localized* in a fixed region of space and made to have zero momentum (since it always has to move at the speed of light, as viewed by anyone). In this sense, you can also think of mass as being a property of energy that indicates whether that form of energy can be stationary, i.e. momentum-less. Individual photons cannot be momentum-less. But a whole BUNCH of photons bouncing off of mirrors inside a box CAN BE (each photon has a momentum vector pointing in different directions, but their vector-sum can be zero). So that *ensemble* of photons has mass even though none of the individual photons do. In contrast, an ensemble of photons moving coherently in the same direction must have momentum (no one can view it as stationary), and that ensemble will be massless. Get it?
PBS Space Time I get what you are saying, but still can't understand it completely. So if you take a bunch of massless individual photons and put them in a mirror box then they suddenly will get mass just because they are isolated? Or just the whole system gets mass because of photons, but not each individual photon itselft?
PBS Space Time Oh okay! I kept misunderstanding this comment. I read it as if you were saying photons have zero momentum, and it confused me because I thought E=pc. So even if they're in a fixed region of space, they still have momentum, but due to the fact that it's in a fixed area of space (like a mirrors inside a box), the photons keep bouncing off so they end up going nowhere, causing them to have zero momentum?
It's just a jump to the left And then a step to the right With your hands on your hips You bring your knees in tight But it's just the vocal throw-up That really drives you insane
I now feel dumb that a 4th grade class is watching this and half the episodes I have to watch twice to really understand, and I have a science degree! This give me hope for the next generation :)
I think the answer to the last question is "NO" The mass of earth will no change as a whole because if when we'll pick up hammer we will use our chemical energy (ATP) which will increase our temperature very slightly and also gravitational potential energy of the hammer. But every energywould still be on earth
So in summary: mass and energy aren't convertible instead energy is what makes up the mass? I used to thought energy as only a mathematical concept which "we" used to have only on pen and papers to solve problems but it seems its a real thing as it makes up the mass which we can definitely "feel"
You are so brilliant. I was brushing up on the 5 most fundamental equations ever created to teach my daughter tomorrow in class, and this video made that review SO EASY! You are a fantastic teacher! ☺️🙌📚🤩
The talking speed is a positive. Usually, I have to turn up the playback speed for most videos. And, of course, if you don't like SpaceTimes rate, just slow it down. On youtube, go to the gear icon (settings)> Speed> choose
Are these videos for laypeople or for people studying physics? If the former, the videos would benefit from being a little slower and perhaps introducing any ideas/terms not familiar to an intelligent layperson. Every time I watch these videos I have to pause them every thirty seconds to try and get my head around what he is saying. It's amazing, mind-expanding stuff, but jeez, it ain't easy to grasp. That being said, I love that these videos exist and I am learning an immense amount.
+Aaron Horrell It's what's 'hip' in the current video trend. Speaking a lot of advanced material to overwhelm the laypeople(dumb people, like me). And laypeople like to get entertained, but I watch videos like this with 'a grain of salt'. It helps that he provided source materials.
+Aaron Horrell and others say it's too slow to make a point. i'm like you and pause a lot but for others that'd be neat to have a summary feature. maybe they can make a summary digest version of this video. and us slower people can have a slower version. youtube accommodates.
+ThisNoName Why not play the video at a slower speed. One suitable for you for the subject material at hand. These are challenging for people not already familiar with this kind of thing. But to be honest these are hardly massively overwhelming. And we do have the ability to pause or rewind parts until absorbed sufficiently. It is a perfectly reasonable speed in my opinion. And to ascribe a feigning of intelligence to someone who merely talks fast is somewhat asinine. Does that also mean a person who naturally talks slowly is feigning being dumb? People merely think, talk and communicate at differing speeds. No need for psychoanalysis.
That video explains it all, earth comes from energy, everything we touch is energy combined together, it all started with a huge amount of dark energy and small pieces started forming their own tiny relations, it's like removing small pieces from a completed puzzle.
As the Hindu's, Buddhists and Yoda says, we are not crude forms matter but ENERGY, all life is Miya-energy spirit. But noes we must discriminate and hate each other over it.
Okay ...sometimes you need a COMIC re-lie-f to ease all the built up tension( energy) in the air..bravo...for proving Einstein right..release of energy DOES MAKE US LIGHTER....be-aware of your power and use the Force 4 good jet- EYE. ..okay.. no more energy for U.😀
Nice video. Thanks for not using a clunky jolting edit every one or two sentences like many others do. Also, please drop the background music. It's distracting. Thanks!
Great series thus far, one idea for the future could be adding timestamps for different ideas. I found myself sifting through the video to rewatch some of the tough concepts! Thank you for the time and effort it takes to make this stuff accessible :D
@@gilbertorossi6446 THE PRECISE, SIMPLE, TOP DOWN, AND CLEAR DERIVATION, ORIGIN, MEANING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF E=MC2: E=mc2 is taken directly from F=ma. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Carefully consider what is THE SUN AND what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the NIGHT SKY. So, consider what is THE BLACK “space” of what is THE EYE. The sky is blue, AND what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE !! c squared is CLEARLY understood as a dimension (of what constitutes SPACE) ON BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! I have CLEARLY explained or proven the mathematical unification of gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy (ON/IN BALANCE), as I have demonstrated the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations (along with TIME); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). I have proven how and why this is mathematically consistent with F=ma AND E=mc2. TIME dilation ultimately proves on balance that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). In light of what has been CLEARLY proven here (on BALANCE), think about what is THE SUN in DIRECT comparison to/with what is outer “space”. GREAT !!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense, as BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. I'm going to more precisely explain the true origin (and the full meaning) of the equation E=mc2. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is (CLEARLY and necessarily) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This also CLEARLY explains, on balance, why and how this equation represents a two dimensional surface OR SPACE as what is a BALANCED AVERAGE. Indeed, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are (CLEARLY) linked AND BALANCED opposites (on balance); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance) !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Indeed, TIME is necessarily possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance). Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE on balance, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE. This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. This ALSO explains why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. I have truly (and fundamentally) revolutionized what is our understanding of physics/physical experience. Compare the setting and orange Sun with the fully illuminated and setting/WHITE Moon DIRECTLY. They do basically appear to give off the same illumination, in fact. Notice that the curvature or shape of said Moon matches that of THE EARTH/ground (given a clear horizon, that is). What is THE SUN AND what is THE MOON are then the SAME SIZE in the sky as what is THE EYE. Moreover, these two forms manifest (or form up) at what is EYE LEVEL/body height. GREAT !!! Now, I have CLEARLY proven why AND how this is so. The tides are (CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY) ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational ON BALANCE. Magnificent !!! The tides are CLEARLY and necessarily subject to F=ma AND E=mc2, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; and the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The sky is blue, and THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Excellent. I have explained why the sizes of said Moon and said Sun are the same as what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. So, I have CLEARLY explained why the diameter of the Moon is about one quarter (at 27 percent) in size compared with what is THE EARTH. How does what is the Sun survive or exist against what is outer “space" ? The answer is, ON BALANCE, invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium and BALANCE. Here's why. (Think about TIME as well.) WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION OF SPACE AND TIME ON BALANCE: Invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE. This necessarily and clearly involves interaction, on balance. Consider what is the eye (on balance). Logically consider what is a two dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE !!!! Notice the associated DOME AND the flat/black “space” of WHAT IS the eye AS WELL. Really think about it all. Consider WHAT IS THE SUN ON BALANCE. (NOW, think about time.) Outer “space” involves full inertia, AND it is fully invisible AND black. Consider one and three dimensions ON BALANCE !!! Now, consider what is the fourth dimension and the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. Think about ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy AND think about gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS actually standing ON what is THE EARTH/ground (ON BALANCE) !! Think about TIME !! Think about why there is something instead of nothing ON BALANCE. Consider that time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Think about the man (THE EYE) that actually IS IN what is outer “space”. Think about time. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE, and consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. NOW, consider what is THE SUN. Think closely about everything in this writing. Balance and completeness go hand in hand. Magnificent. ❤️ c squared CLEARLY means an INTERACTION on balance, as the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Consider E and “m" on balance. Great. The fourth dimension is only consistent with what is (on balance) a TWO dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE. Consider what is the eye. Consider what is the balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. So, consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. This CLEARLY explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. Time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, as BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental pursuant to F=ma AND E=mc2 in balance. A galaxy consists of invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium and BALANCE, thereby eliminating the need for any "dark" "matter" or "dark" "energy"; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is then CLEARLY gravity ON/in BALANCE. By Frank DiMeglio
When he makes a comparison of two stop watches he should say, an unwound watch vs a wound watch . It's about the total energy which includes the potential energy of the wound spring and the kinetic energy of the moving arms.
A deeper look into the equation E=MC² to begin, we will denote M as total mass and m1 dark m2 light as fractional representations of total mass M. This allows m1 and m2 to function as fractions of M and multiply as such. Space: Variations in spatial coordinates affect how 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 are perceived. For example, the distribution of mass or energy in space can change how these quantities are measured. Time: Time variations can affect 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 as the system evolves. For example, kinetic and potential energies change over time. In relativity, measurements of time and space depend on the observer’s frame of reference. This means that 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 can vary based on relative motion and gravitational effects. Dynamic Adjustment: c1(x,t) and c2(x,t) where x represents spatial coordinates and t represents time. Sum and Product Relationships: c1(x,t) + c2(x,t)=C c1(x,t) × c2(x,t)=C² Here, 𝐶 and C² are constants, while 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 vary with space and time. Kinetic and Potential Energy: In a system with varying spatial distribution, 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 represent different forms of energy. As the system evolves in time and space, these energies adjust while maintaining their sum and product relationships. Gravitational Effects: In a gravitational field, mass distribution affects the measurements of energy and can cause 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 to vary depending on location and time. Relativistic Variations: For different observers in relative motion, c1 and c2 might be perceived differently due to time dilation and length contraction. Despite these variations, the fundamental relationships 𝑐1+𝑐2=𝐶 and c1×𝑐2=C² hold true within each observer’s frame. Spacetime Interactions: Changes in spacetime curvature and metric can affect 𝑐1 and 𝑐2, but their interactions still reflect the underlying constants. Functions of Space and Time: Define c1(x,t) and c2 (x,t) such that: c1(x,t)+c2(x,t)=C c1(x,t)xc2(x,t)=C² Consistency: Ensure that as x and t vary, c1 and 𝑐2 adjust dynamically but satisfy these equations at every point. Observer Frames: For different frames of reference, adjust c1(x,t) and c2(x,t) based on the observer’s motion and gravitational field. The relationships c1+c2=C and c1×c2=C² remain consistent in each frame, reflecting how energy and mass interact in spacetime. Quadratic Relationship: The relationship between 𝑐1 and c2 can be framed as roots of a quadratic equation: x2−Cx+c2=0 where 𝑐1 and c2 are the roots. The dynamic nature means that for different values of t, 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 adjust accordingly but still satisfy the equation Consider a specific example where C and C² are given: Let C=5 and C²=6. The quadratic equation becomes: 𝑥2−5𝑥+6=0 factoring this, (x−2)(x−3)=0 so the roots are c1=2 and c2=3. Sum: c1 + c2 = 2 + 3=5 Product: c1 × c2 = 2 × 3=6 If 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 are dynamic functions of a parameter t, then they can adjust while maintaining the sum and product relationships. For example suppose 𝑐1(𝑡)=𝛼(𝑡) and 𝑐2(𝑡)=𝛽(𝑡) you could define, 𝛼(𝑡)+𝛽(𝑡)=𝐶 & α(t)×β(t)=C² as t changes α(t) and 𝛽(𝑡) adjust, but their sum and product still match the specified C and C².
Very well explained introduction of Einsteins theory of relativity. I'd love it if you could come with some practical application of the properties of this (:
PBS Space Time Thanks. It's been a while since i studied physics. Does E=mc^2 have any implication on the photo-electric effect, and general relativity? I remember Einsteins name popping up several times when i studied the photo-electric effect, and the states of excitations when concerning the energy levels of atoms. Maybe you could include it in a later video? I'll find my old physics textbooks in the meantime.
IchBinEin Deeply connected to both, but more closely to the latter (general relativity). Yeah, we're going to try to do more episodes about this. But it's tough for me to figure out how to get the concepts across clearly in only a few minutes without creating more confusion in the process. I need to figure out a way to spread this out over several episodes but still have each episode make sense individually. By the way, bear in mind that your physics textbooks may not be very clear or accurate conceptually. Most physics textbooks aren't (unfortunately).
PBS Space Time Thanks for the reply, and keep up the good work. I imagine there is a LOT of work and coordination in making each episode. I enjoy them immensely ^^
IchBinEin Hi. I think a good application is the LightSail project from the Planetary Society. The sail will be completely propelled by the energy produced from the bombardment of light particles hitting the sail.
Matter is really a form of stored energy. When matter and antimatter come together the mass is converted into pure energy, as in the forms of Gamma rays. An example of this would be the collision of an electron and a positron.
I am probably incorrect, but this equation in its simplest explanation is that the faster you accelerate towards light speed, the more energy is required to continue acceleration as a consequence of mass increases. To the piont you will need infinite energy to accomplish light speed because you are pushing infinite mass. Also the faster the rate of acceleration, the more energy required to overcome inertia of rest multiplied by mass. Feel free to educate me.
Wow I had the whole e= mc squared wrong. I always thought it mean the mass is equal to the energy. This is eye opening. Mass is considered a property, rather than an amount...
As a thirteen year old, this video was truly mind boggling. I really appreciate you giving info about the veritasium video, I shall watch you now. Thank you sir and I hope you upload more great videos like this 😊
See people always think Physicists talk really fast. In reality, its the world that is moving really slowly around them as they have so much energy and are experiencing the relativistic effects of Special Relativity.
hahahaahah
Nerd
It might have something to do with the fact that this dude doesn't inhale EVER! 😂😂😂
That explains Red Bull
😂😂😂😂
So when you turn a flashlight on, it gets lighter :-D
Good one
Rosie j just about to say that
Well done
nice! LOL xD
Trevor Best all I know is.. when I take a dump, I’m lighter!!!
He was a machine gun in a previous life.
LMFAO 😂😂💀
R u religious?
Ikmal Axl12 R u sexy?
@@brianhyde5900 yes
@Ikmal Axl Lol, yes, I can see that. No, I am not religious but I am a theist. So tell me, your name... is Ikmal a name or an abbreviation for Institut Kelautan Malaysia?
That the sun can lose 4 billion kilograms of its mass every second, second after second, and still only be _less than one tenth of 1% lighter_ even after 10 billion years of doing it, is truly mind boggling.
Sun is just a small time fish in the ocean. Imagine the output of UY Scuti.
Also, did you know that for every 3.12hrs there on the sun, 100 years passes here on Earth.
@@TimothyTooher92 wrong
@@benspersonalacc2326 he may be wrong, but we will never know how much the Sun bends space/time. The Sun is HUGE and it obviously affects space/time very differently compared to us on Earth. And I'm not just talking about the surface of the Sun.
@@TimothyTooher92 child stop watching RUclips and go to school :👴
I don't think he's correct to say that the potential energy of bonded particles is negative. I think he meant that the differential between the potential energy of unbonded atom constituents from the potential energy of bonded atom constituents is negative. There's no such thing as negative energy. Potential energy can only be negative as a dynamic value, i.e., if the system is evaluated at two states. He was trying to say something shorthand and just threw me into a fifteen-minute loop of confusion. Please like this so that viewers will be able to understand it correctly.
Potential energy is already a differential. you can only know the value of potential energy if you have a zero value somewhere. Like gravitational potential energy in a gravitational field.
As do you work to raise something, some of that spent energy goes into gravitational potential energy and turns that into a positive value. when you drop it and reaches the ground you can say its potential energy is zero, if you set the zero value to the ground level.
In truth, you could say the zero value lies in the centre of the earth, but then your equations would be less readable and manageable.
So you can have negative potential energies if the zero value is , as he put it, when 2 particles are infinitely far apart. If you bring them less than infinitely far apart, the potential energy is negative.
there is no universal zero value for potential energy, depends entirely on the definition. It just has to make sense for a generalization of what you are measuring and measurements other people have performed
Its a physical convention....
It arises because, we assume the potential energy of objects infinitely far away as zero...
In order to 'fall into' each other (due to gravity or electromagnetic attraction), they need to lose energy.
This loss can be in the form of heat, or radiation or gravitational waves (in case of earth-sun system, or two merging black holes)....
Overall, the net result is that you end up with lower energy than you initially started with.... (At infinity)...
So, we can assume the energy at infinity to be a finite value, but it will make a lot of mathematical confusion... It makes it easier to assume it to be zero and gravitational potential energy as negative... .
The actual energy isn't negative.. The negative number only indicates that the two objects lost energy during the process of gravitational merger or chemical bonding...
@@mahadevparmekar2565 So, a loss of energy can result from a gain of stable mass?
@@jaytomson7052 I didn't understand what you are asking...
Mass and energy are equivalent when measured together in a system..
So, if you lose energy you would lose a bit of mass too...
Thats why H2 molecule has slightly lower mass than two H atoms. And He nucleus has lower mass than 4 protons.
Because they lose energy during chemical or nuclear bonding..
When two black holes merge, the resulting third black hole has lower mass than the sum of the masses of the colliding black holes... Some mass (energy) is always lost during the merger.
If there is a positive, there is a negative opposite.
This guy is putting out very valuable information, explaining a lot. But I think that for most of us he just plain goes too fast. But the content is excellent. I appreciate the video.
You're right he's way too fast
i actually watch most youtube videos at 1.5x, so this speed is perfect
That's true
he is right bit he is also quite wrong
@@Toujeo , you know. If you're going to say someone is wrong, at LEAST try to explain why they are wrong.
So im not fat, I'm energetic lol
Energy dense... yes fat ass :-)
Or you’re moving really fast
Yes, man, you're a nuke!
Lol. Your energy is stored as fat. Like a battery.
0123mandatory No, youre fat.
I love how physics feels million times more interesting now that I'm not forced to learn it as I don't have the subject in college unlike my school days
I wish teacher would teach us this and actually make a deep conversation to us about this in middle school or freshman year in high school. I adore all this stuff, it never gets boring. There's so many amazing things to learn regarding space time, astrophysics, quantum mechanics, mass, atoms, space, black holes,etc .
If you're still interested. Try looking into purchasing "introduction to physics " textbooks or any other advance subjects online. Why wait to learn, right? Best of luck :)
There's no point in learning this stuff without the math to go with it and that is too advanced for high school. You'd probably find if you sat in on a physics university lecture on the subject that you wouldn't like it so much because it isn't made as entertainment like this video.
Learn all you can, but learn calculus, because you will never understand physics without adequate mathematical preparation.
How do u understand ?
Isa pang bobo...Bobong tao pala itong si Lily C... si collins ka ba?BOBONG TAO KA PALA....Subrang bobong tao.. hindi maruning makaintindi...illiterates....ILLITERATE pala kayo.. ILITERATES ......
Could you talk a little faster? I'm still catching some of this.
You can speed up the video in the video options on most standard platforms.
jealous
hhahahaahahahahah
VaterOrlaag he weighed 89lbs at end of video.weighed 189 at start.
No kidding this should be a 20 minute video!! Thanks for nothing I heard about 10 words what are you a speed talker.
Talk fast. Make mind blowing sense. That's how you get multiple views from the same viewer. Gotcha. This dude is something.
that doesn't actually work u can't get more than 1 view from the same ip
He speaks too fast. By about 50% in my opinion.
Cori Wood .75 speed. 👍
personally i slow down the video speed on youtube setting. :)
Just Be Upon another watch of the video, this time NOT at 3am, i found its not too fast and I was able to follow it. Thanks though, i didnt even notice there was an option to slow down the speed on RUclips!
This is a great topic -- I just wish he wasn't yelling at me while trying to explain it.
He needs to make it exciting for the kids, I'm sure you can find a channel with 1000 views who explain it differently.
@@Martin-qb2mw he talks too fast. I had to watch it a couple of times to understand it and also pause it.
If he slowed down his delivery, more people would understand, and it is a great subject close to my heart.
Fair enough , but this video is pretty old, since about 5 years ago , the show has been hosted by Prof. Matt O'Dowd and it's still making episodes. Maybe you'll like his teaching style check some other episodes out
@@Martin-qb2mw what kinda kids are gonna watch vids about science and physics
My phone is becoming heavier due to your KE
chaosworld chaosworld 😭😭😭😭
Nailed it
when you charge a phone it becomes heavy. when you use it it becomes lighter.
Kinetic energy..
Overpowered comment😂
I wonder how much mass he lost making this video.
A kilo'th... Whatever that means😂😂😂😂
Lol 😂
Lol🤣
You can also say " how much calories did he burn......"
We lose significant amounts of mass continuously by: 1. water loss on breathing/sweating; 2. carbon loss via exhaled CO2; 3. heat loss through the air (convection); 4. infrared light emition. Activity levels do influence this rates
Think 0.75 speed is good for this video
spread the knowledge save the nature tea
Yeah
Really? thanks to the pictographs and constant background analogies and representations following his phrases, it's 900x easier to follow than a prof. and a chalkboard. I'm at 1.25x speed.
Yeah
Watching it high and him saying mass isn’t anything at
Why do I understand you so good?? I don’t even need to rewind, it’s as if you put it together perfectly.
eminem has been real quiet since this dropped
shhhh
Lol 😂
I didn't get it...
I don't get it
This guy's lyrics make more sense than Eminem's.
Recommend watching at 0.75% speed. Takes the methamphetamine out of the equation.
0.75%speed🤔 actually is 0.0075 times of the original speed🌚
Tsz Chung Liu n- no.
@@tszchungliu448 True that =)
@@tszchungliu448 That's how slow it needs to be. Lol just jking
This guy needs to take diazepam so we don't have to drink 3 coffees to keep up.
If I understand correctly your words have more mass than mine because there’s more energy
You've got an ass full of mass, got any word's?
Haha
@@roshmidutta4336 u didn't got the joke🤣
Is that a pun?
Yeah I got it😁😁😅
I love how you let the students know you are friends with their teacher. Obviously you're not on Space Time anymore, but that was still a cool thing to do.
usually i increase the playback speed of yt videos, here i had to watch it at 0.75x😂
you're not alone😜
😂😂😂😂🏴🤪
Knew I'd find comments aplenty about verbal delivery speed. Perfect for RUclips environment of short attention spans. Intent viewers have the option to slow it down, watch it over again, or both.
i watched it on 1.5x speed
same
Excellent content and presentation.
Since the subject matter is more complex, it would be helpful to slow down the presentation to enable the audience process the meaning and implications of what is being explained.
Adjust the RUclips payback speed if you need.
@@DJ_Force THE PRECISE, SIMPLE, AND CLEAR DERIVATION, ORIGIN, MEANING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF E=MC2:
E=mc2 is taken directly from F=ma. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Carefully consider what is THE SUN AND what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the NIGHT SKY. So, consider what is THE BLACK “space” of what is THE EYE. The sky is blue, AND what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE !! c squared is CLEARLY understood as a dimension (of what constitutes SPACE) ON BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! I have CLEARLY explained or proven the mathematical unification of gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy (ON/IN BALANCE), as I have demonstrated the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations (along with TIME); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). I have proven how and why this is mathematically consistent with F=ma AND E=mc2. TIME dilation ultimately proves on balance that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). In light of what has been CLEARLY proven here (on BALANCE), think about what is THE SUN in DIRECT comparison to/with what is outer “space”. GREAT !!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense, as BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.
I'm going to more precisely explain the true origin (and the full meaning) of the equation E=mc2. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is (CLEARLY and necessarily) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This also CLEARLY explains, on balance, why and how this equation represents a two dimensional surface OR SPACE as what is a BALANCED AVERAGE. Indeed, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are (CLEARLY) linked AND BALANCED opposites (on balance); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance) !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.
TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Indeed, TIME is necessarily possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance).
Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE on balance, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE. This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. This ALSO explains why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. I have truly (and fundamentally) revolutionized what is our understanding of physics/physical experience.
Compare the setting and orange Sun with the fully illuminated and setting/WHITE Moon DIRECTLY. They do basically appear to give off the same illumination, in fact. Notice that the curvature or shape of said Moon matches that of THE EARTH/ground (given a clear horizon, that is). What is THE SUN AND what is THE MOON are then the SAME SIZE in the sky as what is THE EYE. Moreover, these two forms manifest (or form up) at what is EYE LEVEL/body height. GREAT !!! Now, I have CLEARLY proven why AND how this is so. The tides are (CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY) ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational ON BALANCE. Magnificent !!! The tides are CLEARLY and necessarily subject to F=ma AND E=mc2, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; and the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The sky is blue, and THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Excellent. I have explained why the sizes of said Moon and said Sun are the same as what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. So, I have CLEARLY explained why the diameter of the Moon is about one quarter (at 27 percent) in size compared with what is THE EARTH.
By Frank DiMeglio
How does what is the Sun survive or exist against what is outer “space" ? The answer is, ON BALANCE, invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium and BALANCE. Here's why. (Think about TIME as well.)
WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION OF SPACE AND TIME ON BALANCE:
Invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE. This necessarily and clearly involves interaction, on balance. Consider what is the eye (on balance). Logically consider what is a two dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE !!!! Notice the associated DOME AND the flat/black “space” of WHAT IS the eye AS WELL. Really think about it all. Consider WHAT IS THE SUN ON BALANCE. (NOW, think about time.) Outer “space” involves full inertia, AND it is fully invisible AND black. Consider one and three dimensions ON BALANCE !!! Now, consider what is the fourth dimension and the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. Think about ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy AND think about gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS actually standing ON what is THE EARTH/ground (ON BALANCE) !! Think about TIME !! Think about why there is something instead of nothing ON BALANCE. Consider that time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Think about the man (THE EYE) that actually IS IN what is outer “space”. Think about time. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE, and consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. NOW, consider what is THE SUN. Think closely about everything in this writing. Balance and completeness go hand in hand. Magnificent. ❤️
By Frank DiMeglio
75% playback speed is perfect
@@Sidius303 You're correct! I just tried it, and 75% is indeed just right.
@@1VirginiaL this means when you slow it down your laptop has less mass because the video is not moving as fast. this is the tldr of the whole video
Thank you for not speaking any slower, that's how you keep my attention.
The speed depends on your biological preference for recovery and excitement to finding something familiar. Everyone has perfect attention, it's the speed that matters to how we are able to capture it and be excited enough to follow along the information given.
A little info on curiosity
Thank you for not speaking any faster otherwise you might have used up all the energy in the universe. I might have been left to suffocate away "negatively massed" oxygen atoms.
@@Ray2311us well that is perfectly make sense, thanks for the shared
Ya I too find it easier to concentrate when someone speaks faster than the speed I am used to
Man there’s no video that goes through why speed of light squared is used, minutephysics is the only one that glances over it by giving the equation for Doppler effect but no one goes through that part.
Well in the ratio form m = (E/c^2), it’s not too hard to see that E is some number in units of kg*(m^2/s^2), so it makes sense that to get to units of mass , ie kg, we need to divide by some velocity squared.
What velocity that happens to be can easily be experimentally determined by measuring mass gain in endothermic processes and mass loss in exothermic processes. That’s one way to easily calculate that it must be c.
The real important thing here that isn’t explained well enough is the consequence that as long as mass-energy equivalence exists, mass could never exist with an infinite speed of light as the denominator would be infinite and any amount of energy would still have zero mass.
This is also often missed by those videos which claim to simulate what things would be like if c was nearer a human-comprehensible value. If c was a much lower number, say 30 m/s, you would not be able to walk around marveling at the visible Doppler shift and length contraction/dilation of everything around you as you changed your velocity. You would be quite preoccupied with the fact that your mass and the mass of the earth had just both increased by 7 orders of magnitude. Given the mass of the earth is about 6 x 10^24 kg and 80 Jupiter masses is about 3 x 10^29 kg, the earth would instantly turn into a star. Specifically, a star about 15 times more massive than the sun. And of course even this would not even be the most pressing issue, as the Sun itself would instantly become a supermassive black hole of 10 million solar masses.
@@MegaBrokenstar Wouldn't everything be 10^14 times more massive? As c is squared, ratio is (3E8)^2 / (30)^2 = 10^14 ?
Rewatching this 6 years on and it's occurred to me that they totally dropped the ball with the name of the challenge... It should have been the "E = MC Hammer challenge"
Highly underrated comment
There has to be a Captain physics
I hate your pfp, actually scared me for a second, smh
How do you understand....Gravity
Ha!😅
Fewer cappuchinos would be advised before making this video.
Tubmaster 5000
And keep of the Sudafed as well.
Say that at speed of lighg
Too latte
Before working out I was 175.5 but after half an hour of intense workout I become 175.6. Now understand why, Thanx Einstein
Nidhin Vinod lol
shouldn't you become lighter? because you lost all that energy working out
I think you would have got much lighter because of water lose
because you inhale lots of air that increase your mass
lol😂
Toran Gurung idk y I’m laughing at this 😂😂
Doing a rough analogy(please correct me if I'm wrong): Energy and mass are like ice and vapor; ice may turn to vapor and vice versa. But there are no transformations, only changes in the arrangement of the water molecules. Therefore, energy is just mass rearranged in some particular ways and vice versa.
Well, actually all energy has mass because mass is a property that all energy exhibits. But photons are the only form of energy to not have mass because only rest energy has mass.
Sry mate, you selected the wrong career, you should be working with Eminem.
You know I'm kidding.Excellent video btw!
omg I tried rapping like Eminem it didn't go that bad
@@Evtrex13 I know! I tried crapping like John wyan and died.
He doesn't talk that fast
😂😂😂eminem
Hehe
as his words near the speed of light my understanding takes on a neg value.
If you can't explain it to others than You don't understand it by yourself
- Albert Hermann Einstein
Hey Einstein....Albert Einstein didn’t have a middle name Hermann was his dads name.
What? I didn't get it.
That's literally not very true tho some people are dumb or don't pay enough attention......think about it bro
@@mrepic8129 Bro I am just 15 and I got it in 1 go.I wrote it cuz the presentater is very fast enough while explaining.I can never tell someone dumb cuz Einstein was the world's smartest person ever but he didn't told someone dumb.He was thorough with his explanation.Even Einstein's driver understood everything Einstein said while Einstein used to go to conferences to explain his theories.You need to be thorough which the presentator isn't.Anyone can be thorough not only Einstein.But he isn't.I understood it at first go but there are many people out there who didn't bro....🤔🤔👍👍
@@jakeg3126 I know but I mentioned his Dad's name as a tribute to his dad who brought in the world the smartest person ever to live.Not only that but Einstein was not even able to speak at initial stages of his life.Then too his dad didn't used violence or scolded him for his conditions and didn't even scolded Einstein's mom for it....🤔👍
This guy is literally amazing at explaining physics
6:45 I thought you were going to say "Every time he (Veritasium) says 'gluons' in that video, take a shot.
Lol 😆😆😆
I was just explaining this to my cat last night. For some reason he figured out how to open the liquor cabinet.
Dude, where has this guy been lately?!?! That was probably the most well-explained concept I've ever heard. Never even had the inkling to attempt to understand what E=mc2 meant. Now I feel like I could give a lecture. Amazing video.
The Real King ... see my explanation about the real meaning of E=mc2. It has to do with winning the lottery.
I don’t understand the possibility of negative potential energy. I’d love to see a video that expands on that
Simply accept it as a fact. We assumed energy was always positive like how we assumed many things that turned out to be not true. The simple fact I guess is energy is relative and thus can be negative.
Excellent! You really corrected some misunderstandings that have kept me from understanding basic physics for a long time. Thanks.
Where are you from
after watching this video, my tablets mass had decreased..
At first i thought i meant you had to reach for your tablet stash and pop a few to make it through the video
😂😂😂
Lol
Yeah cause you’re tablet gives of energy
+Bob Yes, yes it does.
This is the second video of Space Time with PBS that I've ever seen and I've got to tell you, bumping into this channel feels like I've died and gone to wonderland. I just can't watch crash course physics as much anymore because it's a little too dumbed down. But this channel gives you to you fast and straight and assumes you know what they are talking about when they say physics terminology. I love that. I love you guys so much don't ever stop making videos. However I have one question, will you ever do this for chemistry and biology? Those subjects never get any love and it's kind of sad, we want to learn those too and they've got great visuals!
Great video, thanks a lot! just one question:
Do I understand this correctly:
- mass of an atomic nucleus < mass of all its protons and neutrons
- mass of a single proton (or neutron) >> mass of the three quarks
In both cases the potential energy should come from the strong interaction, why is it negative in the case of a nucleus (making its total mass being less than the mass of its constituents) but positive in the case of a single nucleon (making its mass bigger then the mass of its constituents)?
Someone needs to do a video on how this guy can talk non-stop with no breathing and not die.
You'd be watching video montage guides then.
beasthunt Hilarious
i am amazed of how fast his brain throws out all those words
he has a script ;)
I woouldn't buy a car from this man.
+Muhammad Hanif ☺👍
Same here
I think he has memorize all sentences before making this video
It would have been a WHOLE lot easier to understand if you STARTED with "Mass is a property that all energy exhibits. When we measure mass we are actually measuring the cumulative energy content of objects whenever you use a scale." Instead of explaining that at the end.
Seriously.
+Talik And at school they tell you scale measures mass (facepalm) - Well at least your only forced to live in that delusion for your first 12-18 years, or until you seek to discover the truths yourself. Although questioning this too early could destroy your schooling career, if your in the wrong part of the world, and greatly limit your own potential for a period of time.... Which some people can never escape from. I just hope that schooling can evolve as quickly as our general understanding of the universe is. At elementary level that is.
I... I honestly can't tell if this is an insult or trying to point out that the school system should be restructured. If it's the later then I totally agree.
I'm definitely NOT a scientist, so it's easier for people like me to grasp a new concept if we're told the conclusion first and then have the explanation as to why.
School system restructured at earlier stages. It seems pretty legit at College and Varsity level (from my understanding)
+InSilentSpaces Yeah, but the school system is essentially teaching kids incomplete/misleading information. Once that info sticks to the kids that actually do well, they will then go to university and should be more familiar with the misleading information. We then basically expect them to for the most part forget what they were judged on for most of their life and to learn the, as far as we know, truth. To me, this seems like a really screwed up system. We're basically judged for whether we're talented enough to go to post-secondary schooling based on how well we memorize things that are mostly wrong according to modern science.
+InSilentSpaces I wish the person making the presentation would slow down a bit while doing so. Is he suffering from hypertension or what?
The proton/neutron part is a bit off or at a "wrong" timing, since you were talking about negative potential energy (negative binding energy), while with quarks it's positive (potential energy/binding energy).
Also not all energy has an equivalent amount of mass. For photons and EM-radiation E=mc2 does not apply, xept for in a photon gas.
I have a question: does black substance has greater mass than a bright substance cuz black absorbs light And gains energy?
yeah
So can a dark substance increase in mass
If do an experiment that put a dark substance and bright one and put it on light bulb for a year
Will the dark substance expand and have greater mass?
Theoretically, the dark substance will have slightly (very very slightly) greater mass, but not because of expansion. All that light will, if at all enough to do so, just increase the kinetic energy (and thereby thermal energy) of the atoms making up the dark substance. This will, in turn, also lead to an increase in size, if the substance is solid (solids expand on heating).
Another thing you should consider is that, to check the change in mass of the substances, you should completely isolate them from external environment, but while doing so, you're essentially also making sure the light doesn't escape, and therefore even the mass of the white substance will seem to have increased, even when it's apparently not so.
so, is it because the dark substances absorbs heat and therefore a point will come where there is no mass of light available because it has been converted into energy and therefore the light is lost in dark hole?
True, but for that to happen there are two things you should know. That black object should be an ideal 'black body', one which 'completely' absorbs all the light. That includes not only the light in the visible spectrum, but even the IR, UV and X-rays (which has a higher penetrative force and can therefore, even pass through and through the object). And secondly, since all that light energy (EM energy) is transmitted to the black body, there will be an increase in the weight of the black object, but this will be very transient, because the temperature of the body would've increased and that temperature will finally again dissipate into the surrounding environment.
It's 03/14/2019 Happy 140th Birthday to the greatest Theoretical physicist that's ever lived. Thanks for opening our eyes to the perception of space and time in its entirety
The answer to the question at the end is that you cannot pick up Thor's hammer, so its a trick question.
Gonna have to watch this at least 3 times.
Your not alone. I have to hear this guy at least 3 times.
Does anyone else think he looks like Joe from the Impractical Jokers? 🤔
I swear I've only come to the comments to make that same comparison 😂
True! 🤣🤣
lol… I thought the same thing
KINDA LMAOOO
Ok
who else thought of joe gatto from impractical jokers when you saw this guy?
Lol.
THANK YOU!
Larry!!
That's awesome; a well-rounded guy that can enjoy both Impractical Jokers as well as Space-Time
Ṗṛẫḃḝṩȟ Sṹɓéḓì me too
This guy gives the open challenge to the speed of lighT 🚀
👀
🤕
🙏
SOMETIMES SPEED OF LIGHT GETS SHIGH WHEN IT SEES THE SPEED OF HIS SPEAKING
Question. Black holes after some time will always bring space time toward them, even though space time is expanding, after some time won’t that become a net negative bringing them together at a certain endpoint?
for as far as i know. black holes also constantly lose energy, altough extremely slow this does mean they wont neccisarily stay intact forever.
Smoking on a chillum and watching Space Time.
These are two of my favorite things.
Really a worthy explanation about the mother equation of physics. I must appreciate your simpleness which is stimulating profoundness. Thanks 😊
*simulating
sri ram
Maybe you could reexplain it to me 🤔
@stuffed animals Ok Einstein
I love matt but man I miss this guy still. So much enthusiasm and excitement!
In your mirrored box example, wouldn't the box still lose mass due to very small amounts of energy warming the walls and radiating outside of the box as heat? Even a mirrored service would still absorb some amount of light as heat.
He is assuming perfect mirrors. In a real scenario the light would be radiated away as heat in a very short time.
By this definition, do photons actually have mass given that the have or carry energy?
gorRO roJO No, they do NOT, b/c an individual's photon energy can never be *localized* in a fixed region of space and made to have zero momentum (since it always has to move at the speed of light, as viewed by anyone). In this sense, you can also think of mass as being a property of energy that indicates whether that form of energy can be stationary, i.e. momentum-less. Individual photons cannot be momentum-less. But a whole BUNCH of photons bouncing off of mirrors inside a box CAN BE (each photon has a momentum vector pointing in different directions, but their vector-sum can be zero). So that *ensemble* of photons has mass even though none of the individual photons do. In contrast, an ensemble of photons moving coherently in the same direction must have momentum (no one can view it as stationary), and that ensemble will be massless. Get it?
I...think so, thanks, this was really buggering me haha.
PBS Space Time I get what you are saying, but still can't understand it completely. So if you take a bunch of massless individual photons and put them in a mirror box then they suddenly will get mass just because they are isolated? Or just the whole system gets mass because of photons, but not each individual photon itselft?
PBS Space Time Oh okay! I kept misunderstanding this comment. I read it as if you were saying photons have zero momentum, and it confused me because I thought E=pc. So even if they're in a fixed region of space, they still have momentum, but due to the fact that it's in a fixed area of space (like a mirrors inside a box), the photons keep bouncing off so they end up going nowhere, causing them to have zero momentum?
PBS Space Time by "can never be localized in a fixed region" do you mean because of "Heisenberg uncertainty principle" ?
The amount of time it took me to view this video is greater that the sum of the seconds of each portion of the video that I watched
Awesome video, Gabe! What if the mirrored box had a tiny hole in it that allowed a bit of light to escape, would the mass go down then?
yeah
It's Okay To Be Smart yes
It's Okay To Be Smart Wouldn't it go down ever so slightly anyways, since mirrors do not reflect 100% of light?
UnknownXV no because even though mirrors dont reflect 100 percent of light, the energy of the light is still in the contained system.
kevin smith If some photons escape, some of that energy escaped too (since light has energy).
It's just a jump to the left
And then a step to the right
With your hands on your hips
You bring your knees in tight
But it's just the vocal throw-up
That really drives you insane
I now feel dumb that a 4th grade class is watching this and half the episodes I have to watch twice to really understand, and I have a science degree! This give me hope for the next generation :)
5:47 I think my brain just pulled a muscle...
Damn so hydogenn mass is 0000000000,1 geez that's crazy
I'm that guy Yeah¡ it’s easy to me.
Sounds like magic to me.
I think the answer to the last question is "NO" The mass of earth will no change as a whole because if when we'll pick up hammer we will use our chemical energy (ATP) which will increase our temperature very slightly and also gravitational potential energy of the hammer. But every energywould still be on earth
Sounds right
Me before the video: Oh okay.....I guess
Me watching the video: So how is this about that....oh.....what?
Me after: I don't get life....
OMFGZ LEL!
So what you are trying to tell me is the fatter I get, the more energy I have ? Got it! #roadtogoku
...or Majin Boo..
+Kristijan Mihov Yes!!...but more potential energy. No kinetic energy....sorry mate
Yes
can anyone explain why the c is squared?
I'm not a physicist, but I think it is because a little variation (+) of mass can potentialy create a huge amount energy.
I play a lot of these science videos at .9 speed, and it sounds like normal speech. This is a great lesson, too.
So in summary: mass and energy aren't convertible instead energy is what makes up the mass? I used to thought energy as only a mathematical concept which "we" used to have only on pen and papers to solve problems but it seems its a real thing as it makes up the mass which we can definitely "feel"
You are so brilliant. I was brushing up on the 5 most fundamental equations ever created to teach my daughter tomorrow in class, and this video made that review SO EASY! You are a fantastic teacher! ☺️🙌📚🤩
The speed of this guys voice defies the laws of Physics! You should real slow when talking about this!!
The talking speed is a positive. Usually, I have to turn up the playback speed for most videos.
And, of course, if you don't like SpaceTimes rate, just slow it down. On youtube, go to the gear icon (settings)> Speed> choose
use .5 speed.
John Hewison : run.... run..... catch that flight.... It is departing... Slow down man....
i like the speed hes at you just need to pay attention
John Hewison you must be an idiot
Are these videos for laypeople or for people studying physics? If the former, the videos would benefit from being a little slower and perhaps introducing any ideas/terms not familiar to an intelligent layperson.
Every time I watch these videos I have to pause them every thirty seconds to try and get my head around what he is saying. It's amazing, mind-expanding stuff, but jeez, it ain't easy to grasp.
That being said, I love that these videos exist and I am learning an immense amount.
+Aaron Horrell It's what's 'hip' in the current video trend. Speaking a lot of advanced material to overwhelm the laypeople(dumb people, like me). And laypeople like to get entertained, but I watch videos like this with 'a grain of salt'. It helps that he provided source materials.
+Aaron Horrell I dont speak english, so i have to stop too, but, just for the language.
+Aaron Horrell and others say it's too slow to make a point. i'm like you and pause a lot but for others that'd be neat to have a summary feature. maybe they can make a summary digest version of this video. and us slower people can have a slower version. youtube accommodates.
+ThisNoName
Why not play the video at a slower speed. One suitable for you for the subject material at hand.
These are challenging for people not already familiar with this kind of thing. But to be honest these are hardly massively overwhelming.
And we do have the ability to pause or rewind parts until absorbed sufficiently.
It is a perfectly reasonable speed in my opinion. And to ascribe a feigning of intelligence to someone who merely talks fast is somewhat asinine.
Does that also mean a person who naturally talks slowly is feigning being dumb? People merely think, talk and communicate at differing speeds. No need for psychoanalysis.
+Aaron Horrell Those that need the "go slow button" are less likely to know how to use the "go slow button".
That video explains it all, earth comes from energy, everything we touch is energy combined together, it all started with a huge amount of dark energy and small pieces started forming their own tiny relations, it's like removing small pieces from a completed puzzle.
he lifted Thor's hammer, he's worthy
As the Hindu's, Buddhists and Yoda says, we are not crude forms matter but ENERGY, all life is Miya-energy spirit. But noes we must discriminate and hate each other over it.
Okay ...sometimes you need a COMIC re-lie-f to ease all the built up tension( energy) in the air..bravo...for proving Einstein right..release of energy DOES MAKE US LIGHTER....be-aware of your power and use the Force 4 good jet- EYE. ..okay.. no more energy for U.😀
Coronavirus lockdown
RUclips: *Do you want to learn the meaning of E=MC2?*
Ok
Lol 💀
Way too slow
Recommended watch in 2x speed
MemesAreHealthy you must mean to fast. This guy is talking pretty fast so idk why you would watch at 2x speed. You must have super hearing
r/woooosh
Tony Correia Smell the Sarcasm, smh.
Video is already recorded in 2X.
Is it bad that I’m actually watching this at 2x speed.
PBS Space Time and World Science Festival are my favorite science channels
this implies that light will never fade away in space unless converted into a different energy state. which is why distant galaxies are visible
@@IABITVpresents sorry...u implaing to expanding universe.?..
Sorry for bad english.
Light is crazy if u think about it.
Thank you I have spent more than 2weeks trying to understand this equation and I finally understood
Nice video. Thanks for not using a clunky jolting edit every one or two sentences like many others do. Also, please drop the background music. It's distracting. Thanks!
Thank You for this video.
Great series thus far, one idea for the future could be adding timestamps for different ideas. I found myself sifting through the video to rewatch some of the tough concepts! Thank you for the time and effort it takes to make this stuff accessible :D
Please slow down. That's more than I can chew.
the smaller you are the faster time goes
Why,speak so fast?
Timestamps .... you mean like time travel lol :)
@@gilbertorossi6446 THE PRECISE, SIMPLE, TOP DOWN, AND CLEAR DERIVATION, ORIGIN, MEANING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF E=MC2:
E=mc2 is taken directly from F=ma. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Carefully consider what is THE SUN AND what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the NIGHT SKY. So, consider what is THE BLACK “space” of what is THE EYE. The sky is blue, AND what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE !! c squared is CLEARLY understood as a dimension (of what constitutes SPACE) ON BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! I have CLEARLY explained or proven the mathematical unification of gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy (ON/IN BALANCE), as I have demonstrated the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations (along with TIME); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). I have proven how and why this is mathematically consistent with F=ma AND E=mc2. TIME dilation ultimately proves on balance that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). In light of what has been CLEARLY proven here (on BALANCE), think about what is THE SUN in DIRECT comparison to/with what is outer “space”. GREAT !!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense, as BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.
I'm going to more precisely explain the true origin (and the full meaning) of the equation E=mc2. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is (CLEARLY and necessarily) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This also CLEARLY explains, on balance, why and how this equation represents a two dimensional surface OR SPACE as what is a BALANCED AVERAGE. Indeed, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are (CLEARLY) linked AND BALANCED opposites (on balance); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance) !!! Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.
TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Indeed, TIME is necessarily possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (on/in balance).
Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE on balance, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE. This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. This ALSO explains why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. I have truly (and fundamentally) revolutionized what is our understanding of physics/physical experience.
Compare the setting and orange Sun with the fully illuminated and setting/WHITE Moon DIRECTLY. They do basically appear to give off the same illumination, in fact. Notice that the curvature or shape of said Moon matches that of THE EARTH/ground (given a clear horizon, that is). What is THE SUN AND what is THE MOON are then the SAME SIZE in the sky as what is THE EYE. Moreover, these two forms manifest (or form up) at what is EYE LEVEL/body height. GREAT !!! Now, I have CLEARLY proven why AND how this is so. The tides are (CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY) ELECTROMAGNETIC/gravitational ON BALANCE. Magnificent !!! The tides are CLEARLY and necessarily subject to F=ma AND E=mc2, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; and the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The sky is blue, and THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. Excellent. I have explained why the sizes of said Moon and said Sun are the same as what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. So, I have CLEARLY explained why the diameter of the Moon is about one quarter (at 27 percent) in size compared with what is THE EARTH.
How does what is the Sun survive or exist against what is outer “space" ? The answer is, ON BALANCE, invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium and BALANCE. Here's why. (Think about TIME as well.)
WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION OF SPACE AND TIME ON BALANCE:
Invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE. This necessarily and clearly involves interaction, on balance. Consider what is the eye (on balance). Logically consider what is a two dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE !!!! Notice the associated DOME AND the flat/black “space” of WHAT IS the eye AS WELL. Really think about it all. Consider WHAT IS THE SUN ON BALANCE. (NOW, think about time.) Outer “space” involves full inertia, AND it is fully invisible AND black. Consider one and three dimensions ON BALANCE !!! Now, consider what is the fourth dimension and the term c4 from Einstein's field equations. Think about ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy AND think about gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS actually standing ON what is THE EARTH/ground (ON BALANCE) !! Think about TIME !! Think about why there is something instead of nothing ON BALANCE. Consider that time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Think about the man (THE EYE) that actually IS IN what is outer “space”. Think about time. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE, and consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. NOW, consider what is THE SUN. Think closely about everything in this writing. Balance and completeness go hand in hand. Magnificent. ❤️
c squared CLEARLY means an INTERACTION on balance, as the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental. Consider E and “m" on balance. Great. The fourth dimension is only consistent with what is (on balance) a TWO dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE. Consider what is the eye. Consider what is the balanced MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. So, consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. This CLEARLY explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations.
Time is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, as BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental pursuant to F=ma AND E=mc2 in balance. A galaxy consists of invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium and BALANCE, thereby eliminating the need for any "dark" "matter" or "dark" "energy"; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is then CLEARLY gravity ON/in BALANCE.
By Frank DiMeglio
I just got this carpet cleaned and you've gone and put my blood and gray matter all over it.
Big Boss orginial, 10/10
+mosam beak actually both the spellings are correct.
"Grey" is for Gandalf, Earl, and hounds (proper nouns). "Gray" is a color (like that of a brain).
grAy= America, grEy=England
Wow, I'm glad everyone else commented on how fast he talked....I thought I was having a seizure.
Hahahahaha
This guy explain much much better than other in my opinion
That means anyone's real mass is changing time by time as he or she does some work and utilises energy.
When he makes a comparison of two stop watches he should say, an unwound watch vs a wound watch . It's about the total energy which includes the potential energy of the wound spring and the kinetic energy of the moving arms.
You are actually among few persons I could not watch at more than 1.25x speed :D
A deeper look into the equation E=MC² to begin, we will denote M as total mass and m1 dark m2 light as fractional representations of total mass M. This allows m1 and m2 to function as fractions of M and multiply as such.
Space: Variations in spatial coordinates affect how 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 are perceived. For example, the distribution of mass or energy in space can change how these quantities are measured.
Time: Time variations can affect 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 as the system evolves. For example, kinetic and potential energies change over time.
In relativity, measurements of time and space depend on the observer’s frame of reference. This means that 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 can vary based on relative motion and gravitational effects. Dynamic Adjustment: c1(x,t) and c2(x,t) where x represents spatial coordinates and t represents time.
Sum and Product Relationships:
c1(x,t) + c2(x,t)=C
c1(x,t) × c2(x,t)=C²
Here,
𝐶 and C² are constants, while 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 vary with space and time.
Kinetic and Potential Energy: In a system with varying spatial distribution, 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 represent different forms of energy. As the system evolves in time and space, these energies adjust while maintaining their sum and product relationships.
Gravitational Effects: In a gravitational field, mass distribution affects the measurements of energy and can cause 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 to vary depending on location and time.
Relativistic Variations: For different observers in relative motion, c1 and c2 might be perceived differently due to time dilation and length contraction. Despite these variations, the fundamental relationships 𝑐1+𝑐2=𝐶 and c1×𝑐2=C² hold true within each observer’s frame. Spacetime Interactions: Changes in spacetime curvature and metric can affect 𝑐1 and 𝑐2, but their interactions still reflect the underlying constants.
Functions of Space and Time: Define c1(x,t) and c2 (x,t) such that:
c1(x,t)+c2(x,t)=C
c1(x,t)xc2(x,t)=C²
Consistency: Ensure that as x and t vary, c1 and 𝑐2 adjust dynamically but satisfy these equations at every point.
Observer Frames: For different frames of reference, adjust c1(x,t) and c2(x,t) based on the observer’s motion and gravitational field. The relationships c1+c2=C and c1×c2=C² remain consistent in each frame, reflecting how energy and mass interact in spacetime.
Quadratic Relationship: The relationship between 𝑐1 and c2 can be framed as roots of a quadratic equation: x2−Cx+c2=0 where 𝑐1 and c2 are the roots. The dynamic nature means that for different values of t, 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 adjust accordingly but still satisfy the equation
Consider a specific example where C and C² are given: Let C=5 and C²=6. The quadratic equation becomes: 𝑥2−5𝑥+6=0 factoring this, (x−2)(x−3)=0 so the roots are c1=2 and c2=3.
Sum: c1 + c2 = 2 + 3=5
Product: c1 × c2 = 2 × 3=6
If 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 are dynamic functions of a parameter t, then they can adjust while maintaining the sum and product relationships. For example suppose 𝑐1(𝑡)=𝛼(𝑡) and 𝑐2(𝑡)=𝛽(𝑡) you could define, 𝛼(𝑡)+𝛽(𝑡)=𝐶 & α(t)×β(t)=C² as t changes α(t) and 𝛽(𝑡) adjust, but their sum and product still match the specified C and C².
Very well explained introduction of Einsteins theory of relativity. I'd love it if you could come with some practical application of the properties of this (:
IchBinEin Um, nuclear reactors (fission or fusion reactors)? And nuclear weapons, too. Those are just two examples that come to mind immediately.
PBS Space Time Thanks. It's been a while since i studied physics. Does E=mc^2 have any implication on the photo-electric effect, and general relativity?
I remember Einsteins name popping up several times when i studied the photo-electric effect, and the states of excitations when concerning the energy levels of atoms.
Maybe you could include it in a later video? I'll find my old physics textbooks in the meantime.
IchBinEin Deeply connected to both, but more closely to the latter (general relativity). Yeah, we're going to try to do more episodes about this. But it's tough for me to figure out how to get the concepts across clearly in only a few minutes without creating more confusion in the process. I need to figure out a way to spread this out over several episodes but still have each episode make sense individually. By the way, bear in mind that your physics textbooks may not be very clear or accurate conceptually. Most physics textbooks aren't (unfortunately).
PBS Space Time Thanks for the reply, and keep up the good work. I imagine there is a LOT of work and coordination in making each episode. I enjoy them immensely ^^
IchBinEin Hi. I think a good application is the LightSail project from the Planetary Society. The sail will be completely propelled by the energy produced from the bombardment of light particles hitting the sail.
I have gone permanently cross-eyed. Thank you.
Matter is really a form of stored energy.
When matter and antimatter come together the mass is converted into pure energy, as in the forms of Gamma rays.
An example of this would be the collision of an electron and a positron.
lol
I would like to think that I am smart since I watch these videos but to be honest this going like a bouncer over my head 😂
I am probably incorrect, but this equation in its simplest explanation is that the faster you accelerate towards light speed, the more energy is required to continue acceleration as a consequence of mass increases.
To the piont you will need infinite energy to accomplish light speed because you are pushing infinite mass.
Also the faster the rate of acceleration, the more energy required to overcome inertia of rest multiplied by mass.
Feel free to educate me.
For the record Gabe, you talking speed is perfectly fine and your episodes are the ones I prefer to come back to on this channel.
Yes I agree
I agree too...
Wow I had the whole e= mc squared wrong. I always thought it mean the mass is equal to the energy. This is eye opening. Mass is considered a property, rather than an amount...
Finally something reaching the speed of light
His voice
No matter how hard I try to understand this,I always fall short! So frustrating
Your energy of knowledge has been converted into mass in my brain so now my head is dizzy and heavy because I am too inferior to understand
This is a very enjoyable, witty reply. Do you read lots of Shakespeare by any chance???
Till today I did think it was a mass to energy alchemy. Thanks for changing my mind 🤠
Same here. I tend to forget that stars aren’t actually “burning” like wood in a campfire.
@@michaelcole506 Not like a campfire. Like a nuclear explosion.
No...he is wrong,..he is talking of principle of conservation of energies...actually mass can be converted to energy...!!
the 5 second rewind button would have been incredibly useful in physics class.
As a thirteen year old, this video was truly mind boggling. I really appreciate you giving info about the veritasium video, I shall watch you now.
Thank you sir and I hope you upload more great videos like this 😊