Click bait, indeed. The title kept me engaged throughout the first 15 mins, thinking I would hear something about the future of particle physics. There was nothing new until the speaker was cut off in mid-sentence at 15:48 when most of us lost access.
The entire video is linked in the description on their website. I was able to hit play for free. Why are you trolling instead of looking in the description. Not very curious or scientific...
8:13 "Space time is a physical dynamical object that can be stretched and bent." This assertion has always disturbed me. It suggests an Aether and that space (void) and time are fundamental components upon which the universe is built. I can't reconcile that with other aspects of Relativity. It leads me to think that they were really unsure about what space and time is back when this was created and kind of mashed a few different concepts together.
This post title is a total LIE. It isn't about the FUTURE of particle physics, it's about the HISTORY of particle physics, which I've heard 1000 times before. I pass...
Everything is always explained as if no problems exist. They get to do that because they get paid. They don't have to make any sense. Thats the problem. The people paying science have no idea what is going on. Money decides science not the scientific method.
10:31 Beyond MOND. BEC and electric coupling from lines. The parts of electric universe theory people use and that have been proven. Casimir arrays to help with phased density of space. Particle production from quantum foam and gravitational waves and energy density regimes. Neutrino density, ect.. Even using all the viable possibilities there is more to find. Parts of dark energy and matter overlap from the framing. Work being done in space, energy density and curved space time and short lived particles and such. Or at least that's how I see it. Everything viable and it still points to more to find. 15:48 Test for quantum. Tunable metamaterial for slits and the orbital energy levels for band manipulation. A rainbow added for extra gradient mapping. Nice you went over hydrogen lines. But gets to my point of a type of test to find out which type for further descriptions. One othrr thing to look at. The valley of stability for antimatter and the imbalances from the matter side. Weight, isotopes, life time/decay rates, shorter vs. Longer valleys and such.
@@dang-x3n0t1ct I know I butchered some, but gets the point across fast. Also not so much concepts but theories. Like testing for defraction gradient from the slits and surface orbital shell energy levels. New gold nano tech can make the tunable metamaterial needed. Ether way it turns out tells a story. As far as antimatter valley of stability. The mass and decay times. Besides they need to calculate it out to go with the matter version.
8:03 “THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE FORCE OF GRAVITY”! Einstein wrote: "It is wrong to think that 'geometrization' is something essential. It is only a kind of crutch [Eselsbrücke] for the finding of numerical laws. Whether one links 'geometrical' intuitions with a theory is a ... private matter." (Letter to Reichenbach, April 8, 1926, as quoted by Lehmkuhl in 10.1016/ j.shpsb.2013.08.002 .) Hmm, how gravity is “interpreted” has significant implications.
I often wished I could understand general relativity, beyond the easy version. But it really has no relevance to life and the circular logic of why we do anything.
My own view is that the reason Mercury's perihelion shift cannot be accurately calculated by Newtonian physics is that the displacement of the perihelion shift is probably due to the drag from the sun's rotation. The sun is a celestial body of enormous size. It is obvious that as the Sun rotates on its axis, its gravitational pull drags Mercury along with it. In Newtonian physics, calculations are performed by considering celestial bodies as points. So, Newton's physics could not reflect the drag of the sun's rotation in the calculation results. By the way, does Einstein take into account the drag caused by the sun's rotation? From the above article, it is clear that he did not take it into account. Nevertheless, the calculations are correct, and we can only conclude that the theory of relativity is, after all, a bogus theory.
GR is not bogus. It’s the second most successful theory ever, and it was formalized by one man. If you think you need more than the center of mass to correctly calculate mercury’s orbit with Newtonian mechanics, then do the math and show us.
Imagine you have a spinning hot gaseous sphere and a firm solid mass inside it which slowly moves outward and beyond the spinning gaseous sphere. When leaving this spinning gaseous sphere, it will lead to an elliptic orbital motion around its "mother sphere" which continuously will wander (precess) according to its original dispersive dynamics. I think this is the natural explanation - Of course in opposition to the standing formation theory. ----- BTW: Both Newton and Einstein calculated already known celestial motions without knowing of the causal dynamics. And Einsteins "bended space time" is IMO a pure mental construct. Ivar Nielsen Natural Philosopher Denmark
If gravitational effects are produced by the curvature of space/time, are the effects ubiquitous, in that the gravitational effect of, say, EARTH, is felt across the entire universe at the present local time and universal time?
There's no symmetry in the dark energy and dark matter. Think Ying Yang, or mathematical equations what ever you have one one side must have = mathematical equations on the other side to make physical principles realistic
The entire video is linked in the description on their website. I was able to hit play for free. Why are you trolling instead of looking in the description? Not very curious or scientific... I am starting to think these comments are from paid trolls, because there are literally several on every one of their videos I've watched and every one has a link to a longer video FOR FREE.
The entire video is linked in the description on their website. I was able to hit play FOR FREE. Why are you trolling instead of looking in the description. Not very curious or scientific... I see these comments on every video from this channel, so I am beginning to think you are all paid trolls...
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
Click bait, indeed. The title kept me engaged throughout the first 15 mins, thinking I would hear something about the future of particle physics. There was nothing new until the speaker was cut off in mid-sentence at 15:48 when most of us lost access.
The entire video is linked in the description on their website. I was able to hit play for free. Why are you trolling instead of looking in the description. Not very curious or scientific...
@AndreaCrisp They are collecting information.
@@stephenbrickwood1602 as is everyone online
8:13 "Space time is a physical dynamical object that can be stretched and bent."
This assertion has always disturbed me. It suggests an Aether and that space (void) and time are fundamental components upon which the universe is built. I can't reconcile that with other aspects of Relativity. It leads me to think that they were really unsure about what space and time is back when this was created and kind of mashed a few different concepts together.
This post title is a total LIE. It isn't about the FUTURE of particle physics, it's about the HISTORY of particle physics, which I've heard 1000 times before. I pass...
Fair enough
You are working without all the information. This is just a clip of a longer talk. And the title refers to the whole talk, not just this clip.
Everything is always explained as if no problems exist.
They get to do that because they get paid. They don't have to make any sense.
Thats the problem. The people paying science have no idea what is going on. Money decides science not the scientific method.
@@thomasdequincey5811 but that doesn't make the title of THIS clip any more accurate, does it?
Nice *REVIEW* of particle physics
This is not a talk its an undeclared advert for iai TV -
10:31 Beyond MOND. BEC and electric coupling from lines. The parts of electric universe theory people use and that have been proven. Casimir arrays to help with phased density of space. Particle production from quantum foam and gravitational waves and energy density regimes. Neutrino density, ect.. Even using all the viable possibilities there is more to find. Parts of dark energy and matter overlap from the framing. Work being done in space, energy density and curved space time and short lived particles and such. Or at least that's how I see it. Everything viable and it still points to more to find.
15:48 Test for quantum. Tunable metamaterial for slits and the orbital energy levels for band manipulation. A rainbow added for extra gradient mapping. Nice you went over hydrogen lines. But gets to my point of a type of test to find out which type for further descriptions.
One othrr thing to look at. The valley of stability for antimatter and the imbalances from the matter side. Weight, isotopes, life time/decay rates, shorter vs. Longer valleys and such.
@@LaboriousCretin your phrasing is so weird I feel like you're just listing concepts
@@dang-x3n0t1ct I know I butchered some, but gets the point across fast. Also not so much concepts but theories. Like testing for defraction gradient from the slits and surface orbital shell energy levels. New gold nano tech can make the tunable metamaterial needed. Ether way it turns out tells a story.
As far as antimatter valley of stability. The mass and decay times. Besides they need to calculate it out to go with the matter version.
Space time is distorted way beyond what we can see.
We can see radio waves now and gravitational waves, so we need a better way to see.
8:03 “THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE FORCE OF GRAVITY”!
Einstein wrote:
"It is wrong to think that 'geometrization' is something essential. It is only a kind of crutch [Eselsbrücke] for the finding of numerical laws.
Whether one links 'geometrical' intuitions with a theory is a ... private matter." (Letter to Reichenbach, April 8, 1926, as quoted by Lehmkuhl in 10.1016/ j.shpsb.2013.08.002 .)
Hmm, how gravity is “interpreted” has significant implications.
46 minutes each year is 1 in a million difference. 😊😊
Where do thoughts / awareness / consciousness fit into the pie chart of the universe (atoms/ dark matter / dark energy?) thank you 🙏
I often wished I could understand general relativity, beyond the easy version. But it really has no relevance to life and the circular logic of why we do anything.
Mercury "anomaly" is simply explained by oblateness of sun with Newtonian physics.
My own view is that the reason Mercury's perihelion shift cannot be accurately calculated by Newtonian physics is that the displacement of the perihelion shift is probably due to the drag from the sun's rotation.
The sun is a celestial body of enormous size. It is obvious that as the Sun rotates on its axis, its gravitational pull drags Mercury along with it.
In Newtonian physics, calculations are performed by considering celestial bodies as points. So, Newton's physics could not reflect the drag of the sun's rotation in the calculation results.
By the way, does Einstein take into account the drag caused by the sun's rotation?
From the above article, it is clear that he did not take it into account.
Nevertheless, the calculations are correct, and we can only conclude that the theory of relativity is, after all, a bogus theory.
GR is not bogus. It’s the second most successful theory ever, and it was formalized by one man. If you think you need more than the center of mass to correctly calculate mercury’s orbit with Newtonian mechanics, then do the math and show us.
Imagine you have a spinning hot gaseous sphere and a firm solid mass inside it which slowly moves outward and beyond the spinning gaseous sphere.
When leaving this spinning gaseous sphere, it will lead to an elliptic orbital motion around its "mother sphere" which continuously will wander (precess) according to its original dispersive dynamics.
I think this is the natural explanation - Of course in opposition to the standing formation theory.
-----
BTW: Both Newton and Einstein calculated already known celestial motions without knowing of the causal dynamics.
And Einsteins "bended space time" is IMO a pure mental construct.
Ivar Nielsen
Natural Philosopher
Denmark
If gravitational effects are produced by the curvature of space/time, are the effects ubiquitous, in that the gravitational effect of, say, EARTH, is felt across the entire universe at the present local time and universal time?
No. The larger the object,the more gravitational pull It has.
Just as it was getting interesting !!!😢
It's linked in the description to the full video.
There's no symmetry in the dark energy and dark matter. Think Ying Yang, or mathematical equations what ever you have one one side must have = mathematical equations on the other side to make physical principles realistic
I can't watch full movie
It's linked in the description to the full video.
Einstein didn’t do the math alone, Mileva Maric did plenty of it.
Ok ... you do know Einstein was a Physicist. It's how he applied the math to experiment and observation that makes him special.
Harry my Love. You are a wonderful man. You remind me of all the Special People in my Life. Wendy👑🇨🇦👁️👁️🏴🏴🏴
France in 1846? What is “two hours away”? By train, by car or horse carriage. Stupid metric. Just tell us how far away it is.
clickbait for paid subscriptions
Click bait with Ads. Keep it
clickbait. the rest of the talk is behind a paywall
The entire video is linked in the description on their website. I was able to hit play for free. Why are you trolling instead of looking in the description? Not very curious or scientific... I am starting to think these comments are from paid trolls, because there are literally several on every one of their videos I've watched and every one has a link to a longer video FOR FREE.
The entire video is linked in the description on their website. I was able to hit play FOR FREE. Why are you trolling instead of looking in the description. Not very curious or scientific... I see these comments on every video from this channel, so I am beginning to think you are all paid trolls...
The institute of the Art of Making Money