Just remember something. Knowing that you do not know something is infact also knowing something or you couldt know u didn't know. Not so dumb after all.
No. This is a quick explanation of a complicated topic, the laws of general relativity. I recommend Eugene Khutoryanskis videos on GR for a better explanation. It boils down to, for light to travel the same distance, when according to 2 different observers, the path(literally length of space) is different, for the same event, and the light arrives to the same place and time, for both observers despite the 2 different paths, 1 longer path, 1 shorter, means the time experienced by both observers was not equal, instead it was relative to spacetime. Time and space were contracting or expanding for both observers equally to make up for the speed of light difference for those different paths that the observers saw. EG. Jim was moving relative to the camera and audience, for him, the light was moving with him, and thus all he saw was the light moving up and down, and the entire room was moving around him, contracting, to him he saw a slower universe with a perfectly fast light, that wasnt changed. But for the audience, we saw his light travel in a large triangle, as he moved it up, then down. For us stationary oberservers, the universe was not expanding or contracting anymore than normal, instead we saw the light travel a different distance, through a different path. But for both those to happen simultaneously, for us to agree on the end of that triangles point in space, we have to disagree about how much time has passed. Jim thinks not as much time as passed, as for him, the universe contracted due to his acceleration above our speed of relatively stationary, 0.
I believe it was Einstein who said, "If you can't explain it to a 6 year old, then you don't understand it well enough.", or "if you can't explain it in simply, then you don't understand it well enough." That's where real intelligence shines, the ability to break down complex ideas or processes into simple terms that almost anybody can follow along with. It's an admirable quality.
Einstein said that if you can't successfully explain it to a child, you don't understand it, yourself. I blame Brian Cox for my lack of comprehension. 😅
I managed to go to this presentation when he brought it to Edmonton. Incredible, he’s an unbelievably gifted teacher. If you ever get the chance to, go see him live. Loved it.
Definition of a right triangle. The vertex (light moving up and down) must be shorter than the hypotenuse (light moving in a zig-zag). Light by definition moves at a constant speed c regardless of observer. So for those watching the stage, light is traveling further (along the hypotenuse) than for the observer on the cart. If you remember your basic science (d=rt), distance/velocity = time. Velocity is c, which is constant. Only distance varies. So as distance increases, time interval decreases. This manifests as the difference in rate of passing time for each observer.
Information is perceived slower than the action itself. Sunlight takes 8 minutes to reach earth. Flipping a lightswitch, the light is produced before you see it. So the action happens before you realize it. It's spontaneous but our brain perceives information slower than the actual event per se. 2 different perceptions
While the stationary camera did show it moving in a triangular pattern, the ascent and decent of both still happened at the same speed. Jim was moving the light up and down, so the speed of the light never actually changed, just the observers view of it.
You missed the point. The point was how the same light travels differently for 2 different observers. At slow speeds of the object moving (here the sitting person), the time difference is insignificant. However as you approach higher speeds it becomes noticeable. GPS Satellites moving around Earth's orbit have to constantly sync up time with on ground clock because time on Satellites run faster due to relativity.
I dont get it, what am i missing? To me it's just the illusion of slow and fast pace, as in both frames, the light has the same speed to reach a certain height in the space.
If it takes 1 minute for the light to go from the lowest point to the highest point, it doesn't matter how fast to the side it's moving. I don't get this at all
@@gary5799 It’s time dilation. The speed of light is a constant and cannot change. The speed of everything else relative to light can change. Jim’s moving. If he’s moving with the light, the light takes longer to travel to you (because the light is becoming diagonal and moving, therefore the distance is increasing and the light is taking longer to reach you). For Jim, this isn’t the case, since the light is next to him the entire time.
@mackaytj @@shayannikeghbaliyou're absolutely right, but this is just a visual demonstration to help people understand the thought experiment. The actual thought experiment is a little bit different, so your concern doesn't work for the real experiment . A beam of light travelling vertically between two mirrors. If the mirrors are moving (and the beam with it, since motion is relative) the length of the beam must be longer in the moving reference frame compared to in the stationary one. The light does not travel outwards to an observer in the original thought experiment.
I think the amazing thing about all this is that the speed of light is constant no matter the frame of reference. Whoever discovered that (Michelson & Morley) are underappreciated geniuses. What Einstein then says about special relativity is, as Brian says, obvious. It logically follows.
I haven't seen this lecture so don't know if it's mentioned but yeah the invariance of light which is crucial seems to often be skipped. After that experiment there's the work of people like Lorentz, Lamor and Poincaré. I think the reason what we now take for granted wasn't so obvious is scientists of the day believing in the aether.
Oldie but goldie, although I wish the lecture was cut a little better for this clip, there were some great visuals that Cox showed that are helpful for understanding the concept better. It's hard to get all the relevant information in a short format. But either way, great job and keep it up. The more access, more people have to scientific information, the better.
Very interesting. And very clever representation, well done. As someone who needs to see/do to learn or even follow something, i really appreciate this.
How about this. Time does not slow down. It's the light that slows down but only relative to the observer. The Observer also being governed by the speed of light also slows down. So it's their perception of time that slows not time itself.
THIS! finally someone else gets it. these scientists are morons that are so blinded by previous work they refuse to go against it. they are worse than a religion
It's actually not true that the perception of time slowing down. The effects of time dilation is actually real and just not an issue of perception. The mu-on experiment to test for the presence of time dilatiom proves it very nicely.
This is correct. It is relative to the observer. If you run the experiment for 5 years for the stationary object, the object moving from the observer would appear to be moving very slowly, (basically frozen). When coming back, they would appear to be moving 2x as fast, and 10 years would pass for both.
@@krisevol3016 yes that is correct. But the person is aging slowly not because the time is slowed. But his atom or cells or whatever cause of aging is slower. Not time it's self.
Thats an interesting and novel representation. Its like a geometric proof of a physical law. A straight line up and down is a shorter path (faster movement in distance and time) than the triangular path.
A simple explanation of this: Remember that light has a MAXIMUM speed. Therefore, if the light that is in motion has a horizontal component, some percentage of its speed will be horizontal and some vertical. Therefore, the up-and-down speed of the light that has horizontal motion does not match the up-and-down speed of the light without horizontal motion.
Unless you can navigate the multiple dimensions AROUND the restrictions. Is the past truly gone, or is each second like a stop frame that can be revisited?
Yeah, but it requires huge amounts of energy to accelerate to relativitic speeds. And then you have to figure out how to slow down, otherwise you're stuck in that accelerated reference frame forever.
Yes, this has been well known and is observed EVERY time we send someone to space.... twins have been sent to space, leaving one on earth, and they are now days apart in age.
It's really fascinating how you can break it down to these simple facts and consequences. The real genius for me is that he put all of this in math, which is still to this day a mountain I have yet to climb to see the full works of nature. It's astounding that our math does describe the real world *that* well
Don't suppose i could get a link to the full lecture. Cuz i have known about this theory for as long as i can remember (had a dictionary program back in the win95 days that had videos that I'd watch for fun, this problem was on there) and all i ever can get out of it is "well then your light operated clock isn't keeping time with the other guys clock, that doesn't mean the speed of time changes based on how fast you were going"
Ive felt the same way about this idea, I feel like what's happening is that the light is just taking a longer journey and that's it... I feel like I must not be understanding it properly... When I was in physics class in college I asked my teacher who was a low effort substitute 'If the speed of light is the maximum velocity, then if you have two photons in an empty universe shooting directly towards each other then the relative speed from each perspective is twice the speed of light and therefore the speed of light isn't the max speed' he said good question and couldn't answer me.. is the speed of light just relative to itself because that would also make no sense, because if a photon going the speed of light were the only thing in existence, its speed would be a zero no matter how fast it was going... speed must be measured relative to other things, man I just find the whole speed of light time travel thing confusing
Best I can figure is that Time is not an actual force or dimension but a human invention so we can coordinate with eachother, And Time Dilation is simply the Doppler effect being applied to light and misunderstood for something more then it is. But that's just me thinking in practical terms about it, I know the math people like to think about things in an abstract and it makes them silly things but "the math checks out" because they don't actually have realities set of variables.
@@ARockRaider I totally get that but there's also physical evidence that movement does effect time which blows my mind, I think at the time I was learning about this in physics it was mentioned that scientists used atomic clocks which are the most precise ways of measuring time we have, and put them onboard airliners which flew around the world a few times then brought them back to compare to the one on the ground. The clocks were now misaligned which implies that motion effects the passage of time. Personally I dont know if its a correct or incorrect assumption, that time slowed with the clocks, what you say about time being a human expression of a phenomenon of being a biological creature, maybe whats happening is with additional velocity the overall movement of all particles making up these clocks or whatever object physically slows, not that time slows but a physical internal 'dampening'. With Cox showing the light moving side to side and tracing a longer path and then saying with the speed of light being constant, it takes a longer path. That's only relative to the observer, the light particles given off will be less dense and therefore dimmer than the static up and down version. When an object moves away at near light speed for 5 years and then back for 5 years and 29 years pass for the static observer, I feel like its a logical fallacy. Its like someone traveling away on horse back and sending birds back as a means of communication, when the rider is moving away the bird messages your receive will be hugely delayed and more staggered and will continue to become more delayed from any reply you sent. Now when the rider returns the messages will become less staggered and less delayed, the opposite effect starts to happen. Now with that in mind when Cox is explaining the same concept with light travel, he's doubling the recession effect, I would expect there to be a opposite effect where times 'dilation' reverses, which would cancel out any time difference lost or gained meaning that to the ground observer they will see someone shoot off into the distance and get slower and slower the further they get away and then when that person returns they would see them stop in their tracks and almost teleport from that far distance right back to where they started. Any time gained or lost would be 'cancelled out'.
True, but you could also base it on nature. Let's take something that decays at a fixed rate, or assume it does. Say radioactive waste or something right. Leave one canister on earth and send one at light speed across the universe for 20 years. Once placed next to each other again, one will be more decayed than the other. No construct of time in the scale here but can still show the proof of the experiment.
For those who don't understand, I'll try to explain in even more simple terms: moving at the speed of light changes how time functions. If a person left us here on Earth and travels at the speed of light for 5 years one way, and returns back (a round trip of 10 years), they would return to find 29 years have passed on earth. He used the glowing ball to demonstrate how time effects the way light is perceived (watching the ball in slow motion vs in normal speed), as it also proves this theory of time dilation.
My question or plausible theory is, a boy born without the ability of sight, but as he grows his ability to resolve mathematical problems at a level 6 grades ahead of him. He turns 10 yr old and has finished College level calculus and many other advanced arithmetic genres. His only exceptional unique trait is he does not have the ability to understand light. At some point in his own formulas and and having all of his working out the problems in his head , he finds a workable solution for traveling faster than the speed of light or a workable solution for traveling without light or the speed of said light. Though he has know way of explaining this formula because anyone he is explaining it to, the fact that they cannot imagine life without light and they don't have the ability to work out his solution in their head with their eyes closed. So , the blind master mathematician, just travels from place to place in the universe and no one ever saw him come or go, but he could explain everything he experienced on his travels and everything he explained was proven correct many years past his passing away. Because it to several hundreds of years, for the blind mans theory of traveling faster than the speed of light was realized.
@@farfromirrational all the premise was or is from a poem I had been writing, that the speed of light can be traveled by a person who has know ability to imagine light, so it's not a adversity. But on the flip side, if you are blind how would you know that you've traveled and how would you understand how long it took yourself to get there, the power to believe you are traveling is faster than the speed of light.
If you don't understand it, you can't evaluate if it is well explained. I personally don't think this is a good explanation if you don't know and understand some background info. If you're interested watching a longer form video about special relativity might actually allow you to understand the concepts.
No. It's only a part of his explanation. I don't think there's enough here to make it understandable. Keep looking around RUclips. Many people are trying to explain these difficult concepts. Brian Cox is a great guy though.
I still think the photograph is the closest to time travel. I mean, just the fact a moment in time can be forever frozen and still be observed in real time is mind blowing! Let’s not forget that 500 years ago this would be considered an offence punishable by burning at the stake. Perspective is EVERYTHING
In spirit world everything is possible. After you pass you will re-live your past deeds, good and bad. You will feel the pain you caused to other living things as they experienced it. You wouldn't wanna be in shoes of Stalin, Hitler, Putyin or 45Putyin, right?
Im convinced its a load of sh*t. Time is a unit of measurement, not some tangible force. It's like claiming a yard stick is longer in different locations....its just not accurate. Even if somehow an "observer" moved at close to the speed of light and their "perception" of time altered, it makes 0 logical sense that between us and them somehow one side or the other would have more or less time "occuring". The time it takes is a measurement. Maybe traveling at that speed has physical effects on the mind and body, but 10 years is the length of time it takes earth to go around the sun 10 times. If that happened, then 10 years passed. There is no "but I experienced 3 years and you experienced 10", the time didn't change, you did.
@@farfromirrational nah look it up. They actually did an experiment with these atomic highly accurate clocks and put one in a plane. They were then out of sync when the plane landed again compared to the "stationary" clock in the ground
It's the time it took for the information to be perceived after the action was provoked. Information travels slower than real time. Tracing equals 2 perceptions
The interesting question here is, in what timeframe does Jim return after his 10 year journey. Does he magically blend in with the people who moves on 39 years, or does he stay in his own timeframe? Because, this means not only time, but reality in itself is relative to the observer. Which in turn means that every observer experiences its own reality. This also means that when Jim returns, he meets his friends in his own reality, 10 years later, while *concurrently* his friends live in a reality which is 39 years later. In other words if our reality is 2024, other person's realities may be set in a different time
What? Watch the movie 'Interstellar' For Jim his clock is +10yrs, for you your clock is +29yrs. You're both at the same end point & reality is the same it just took less time for Jim to get there. The friends are also +29yrs as they were in your time frame. There's not 2 different realities simultaneously Jim steps out he's now moving at same rate as you. This all only works at relativistic speeds for Jim not our normal speeds.
@@iRossco the neurons in flies act faster than the neurons in our brain so they experience the time differently. So the relativity makes the brains of those in moving framework act faster and faster for the person to experience time slower. If this is true then even the speed, at 40 percent of light, will fry his brain. This is just a thought experiment.
@@muhammadansarahmed6039No. In your own framework, nothing different happens. You cannot experience the effect of relativity within a single framework, that goes against the entire of point of relativity. Also this would mean that there somehow is a "default" framework were neurons work normally, which is again entirely against the concept of relativity. When Jim is traveling much faster than us, he is not "experiencing time slower", every biological function works perfectly normal, it is time that literally is slower for him compared to us. Emphasis on the compared to us, because there is no default time, everything is relative.
@@pepperT358 thanks but that wasn't my question. I know who Brian Cox is and even if I didn't, his name is in the title. I was asking where I can find the full video which this short snippet was extracted from.
The moment he said time passed at a different rate for jim I just can't swallow, cause what light has to do with time? The light takes longer, not the action. Thats why we say we might be seeing tons of dead stars. They are not what we see
Yes I believe that's true. Time will appear to go slower when the object is still in motion because the light is traveling to the observer slower, but the object's time is still the same as always.
He meant that if you were physically going close to the speed of light, the point is not light itself is just the speed that you are going at. At those velocities, you’ll experience time normally but compared to us your clock would be going way slower. This goes on asymptotically, and at the exact speed of light, time stops. Photon this never experience time
Information travels at light speed. The effect of an action can only move at the same speed of light. When we say those star might be dead, it means that if we were to travel to them, we would see them dead. But for us on earth, those stars are alive. There is no way for us to know whether they are dead or not, we will be able to tell when the information reaches us. Simultaneity of events is not objective, it is relative to the framework. Everything is relative
@@MatrixVectorPSI Time at the speed of light is infinity. The photons experience no movement of time. The past, present and future are all one for the photon.
@@mtrest4 Non-sense. Photons exist in the present and experience time just like everything else. It's not a magical particle. Photons move at a finite speed. It is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second. You're confusing observational time dilation for actual time dilation.
I think the distance / time it takes for the light to go up and down vs to go up and down “triangularly” is shorter or is witnessed as shorter. What that means is hard to explain, is like, “in the heat of the moment” When you’re in a fight or a car crash, everything “slows down” and if the entire thing wa recorded and played back to you, the lack of emotion (I think) and PoV would make it seem like what occurred was far less exhilarating than what was expirenced
@@Phoenix_Arise_J No, the physical clock ticks slower not just perceived. Eg. GPS only works because they have atomic clocks to account for the faster time passes on satellite than on the Earth. Time is real.
There are factors which seem to be not talked about regarding this theory anytime I hear people discuss it. Why doesn’t time go by faster as the person travels back towards the origin of the clock that appears to slowdown while going away? The traveller would be seeing the images faster going towards it? How fast are we moving through space while relatively stationary on earth? As astronauts are sent to space, their speed is increased to a value to maintain orbit. Does a watch on their wrist move slower? Do astronauts age less during the time they are in space than everyone else on Earth? Depending on the latitude people live their life, people are rotating around the center of the Earth at different speeds. Does living closer to the equator affect the time we perceived while living?
But what if Jim is actually the one who is standing still and the camera is moving? Which one is actually moving? There is no absolute reference for movement. So now what?
The traveller's clock will be ticking the same as you'd expect, once a second, the observer's clock, will also do that, but from the traveller's perspective (if they look back at the observer) the observer's clock will tick faster than his, both going away and going back.
Yes to all of your other questions. You seem to grasp this fine. The faster you move in reference to someone else, you will experience less total time when you measure against them. Again, time won't feel any different to the individuals.
If a is moving faster than b, a will "live" longer than b, but only when in comparison, both a and b will experience their own time as usual, you don't notice any difference in your own time
This is known as the twin paradox. As the first reply points out, who's actually travelling and who's stationary depends on your frame of reference. The answer comes in the follow up theory of General Relativity which introduces gravity and acceleration. The person who experiences the time dilation is the one who accelerates to their velocity. Astronauts do experience time dialation but it's miniscule.
consider this, you have clocks with different orientations on the same spaceship. clock 1 stops when moving at the speed of light the other slows the 3rd clock is a casio
if this isn't making sense to you visually, it's because the the camera on the guy's head has a faster shutter speed, so it's not showing the trail of light from his perspective the way the other camera is. according to what cox is saying, from his perspective the trail would be straight up and down.
It doesnt take theight lomger of its own perspektive ... Its longer for the observer only ... This is so fascinating that bedimg time is actual a common thing to happen in nature
I totally get this. But one point i can never understand. For the person in the moving frame, when he looks at stationary person, the light will exactly look like triangular instead of straight (but backwards). So we can apply same calculations and conclude that time is slow in moving frame? Or does going backward mean something?
A²+b²=c². The two sides of the hypothetical triangle the light travels will never be shorter combined than the hypothetical hypotenuse "the straight line".
The perspective is different for Jim, because he is moving with the light, but it doesn't change the amount of time it takes for the light to move from start to finish.
The speed of light is constant but not the speed at which the source of light moves. The horizontal velocity and the vertical velocity add their own components to the speed of the moving clock making it move faster
The reason time takes longer is because the hypotenuse of a triangle is larger than it's height. So when moving the particle needs to cover a larger distance in the same amount of time
it's always been a problem of technical issues, the original thought experiment was to the nearest star wich is 5 light years away and back. with the same time comparison. but the definition of light-year is what destroys this. it takes a year for time to travel a light year. so 10 year trip, 10 years for us ...... hopefully everyone can see my point
I grasp the idea but it makes no sense to me. The time it takes for both, the audience and the light bulb holder, for the light to reach the highest and lowest point in this interval is the same. Time hasn't changed just the perception of the motion depending on the view. The distance traveled looks different but is the same. I can't write down all my thoughts on this, it's just too much. Maybe I am too stupid to understand it but how would you explain that theory to a blind person?
I don't even know if this question makes sense but, is light a vector quantity? if so then coming back to the starting point should negate any time difference bringing everyone back to the same time.
Moving 5 years away i agree on what is being said but when the return journey is made wouldn't the time appear to move slower for jim than the observer thus making it 10 years passing for both when he arrives back?
For those who dont understand ill dumb it down bc thats how i translate it anyways lol. When the blue dot starts ticking up and down, the line that goes up and down is 2 seconds. 1 second up and once second down. (Im just giving the line a value of 1 second up and one down) but in motion, that up and down line is now a diagonal line. And that diagonal line is a longer segment that 1 second. Depending on the speed, it could take 3 seconds to go up and down or 20 seconds to go up and down. But there a lot of variables we dont know about traveling at the speed of light. So this is why this statement einstein suggests isnt a truth. Bc weve never gone that fast. Obviously. I think theres a variable that takes place during traveling that fast that has some type of equilibrium effects on relativity of time. Its cool to think about but well never know in this lifetime. Its all speculative theory. Basically, we be guessing. Lol. Just like when we girst flew on earth, we then learnt about gforces to its extents. The same i believe will happen when we travel that fast in space. Perhaps gravity has an unknown effect on time. We dont know until it happens.
Wouldnt it just be the perception that changes? Just a thought but wouldnt moving on a different axis involve a different multiplication/division equation for moving vertically and horizontally rather than just vertically?
It is possible to derive 2 contradictory time dilation equations. Imagine that Sally is in a spaceship and moving to the right and is aiming a flashlight straight up and down so that Sally sees the light moving straight up and down and John is outside the spaceship and sees the light forming a triangle with the floor of the spaceship. Now imagine that Sally is aiming a flashlight upwards and towards the left while the spaceship moves to the right. Now the situation is exactly reversed. Sally sees the light forming a triangle with the floor and John sees the light bouncing straight up and down. Here's the details... Sally is in a moving spaceship. John is outside the spaceship. Sally is moving to the right at .6c. The height of her spaceship is .8 light-seconds. If Sally has a flashlight with the light bouncing straight up and down the light will make a 3-4-5 right triangle from the viewpoint of John. If the change in time for Sally is delta T_o and the change in time for John is delta T then the following equation can be derived: delta T = delta T_o/((1-.6^2)^.5) Now Sally has a flashlight but this time she is holding the flashlight at an angle of 53.13 degrees above the horizontal and pointed to the left. Now the leftward movement of the light exactly matches the rightward movement of the spaceship from John's viewpoint. Now the light is bouncing straight up and down from the viewpoint of John and the light is making a 3-4-5 right triangle from viewpoint of Sally. If the change in time for Sally is delta T_o and the change in time for John is delta T then the following equation can be derived: delta T_o = delta T/((1-.6^2)^.5) The 2 equations are in direct contradiction to each other.
Speed = distance / time. Like mph or miles per hour. In this formula the speed is constant as the speed of light doesn’t change (aka constant). We clearly see that the distance, measured by each observer (one is the person sitting on the moving chair and the other one is the us, the outside observer) is different for each observer. The distance for the moving chair seems shorter than for the external observer. In order for the formula to work the time has to change. 1. moving chair. Let’s say speed = 100 Distance = 1000 Time = 10 So 100 = 1000/10. 2. outside observer Speed = 100 (per definition the speed of light is a constant aka always the same) Distance = 2000 (the light travel farther on a triangular path) So the time has to be 20 to make the formula work. So for the moving chair this experiment only took 10 time units (i.e. minutes) for the observer 20 time units. (i.e minutes). That’s why they say time travelers (moving chair) don’t age as fast as people on earth (observers)
I too have trouble with this einstein theorie. In my humble opinion, the lightparticles are more apart when going up and down, so the light seems fader but still travels at the same speed.making it the same time
Well, the same amount of time has passed, both bulbs are the same bulb, our position relative to it just caused the emitted photons to be more dense than the other perspective? Because one is emitting to the front and the other towards the side and across a horizon relative to our position?
My take is... watching a constent light seems longer to go by, rather than a light that is intermittent....in which your geussing/more time thinking about when the ligjt will appear next...All depending/relative to the individual...? = difference. Again just my understanding. Correct me where im wrong 😅
Everything that is happening innthe entire universe is happening at the same time . The speed of light is just the speed of light. We measure visual distance with the speed of it relative to a complete rotation of our planet . The perception of time on every planet will be different for its native inhabitants depending on how long it takes to complete an orbit.
So funny how many people think they know more than thousands of incredibly intelligent people whom have a collective thousands of years of experience and knowledge in these fields..
None of those "thousands" of "intelligent" people have conducted a single real experiment where they sent a person in a spaceship at 99.94% of the speed of light anywhere to see what really happens to their clocks. They might as well be Star Trek fans explaining how warp drive "works". It's entirely imaginary.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
It’s good to be reminded how dumb I am once in a while. Thank you.
everytime u feel that just remember that flat erthers exist
youre not dumn this guy blindly follows everything he reads
Just remember something. Knowing that you do not know something is infact also knowing something or you couldt know u didn't know. Not so dumb after all.
No. This is a quick explanation of a complicated topic, the laws of general relativity. I recommend Eugene Khutoryanskis videos on GR for a better explanation.
It boils down to, for light to travel the same distance, when according to 2 different observers, the path(literally length of space) is different, for the same event, and the light arrives to the same place and time, for both observers despite the 2 different paths, 1 longer path, 1 shorter, means the time experienced by both observers was not equal, instead it was relative to spacetime. Time and space were contracting or expanding for both observers equally to make up for the speed of light difference for those different paths that the observers saw.
EG. Jim was moving relative to the camera and audience, for him, the light was moving with him, and thus all he saw was the light moving up and down, and the entire room was moving around him, contracting, to him he saw a slower universe with a perfectly fast light, that wasnt changed. But for the audience, we saw his light travel in a large triangle, as he moved it up, then down. For us stationary oberservers, the universe was not expanding or contracting anymore than normal, instead we saw the light travel a different distance, through a different path. But for both those to happen simultaneously, for us to agree on the end of that triangles point in space, we have to disagree about how much time has passed. Jim thinks not as much time as passed, as for him, the universe contracted due to his acceleration above our speed of relatively stationary, 0.
That's deep.
You have to be incredibly intelligent to explain something so complicated so simply I can understand it.
I believe it was Einstein who said, "If you can't explain it to a 6 year old, then you don't understand it well enough.", or "if you can't explain it in simply, then you don't understand it well enough."
That's where real intelligence shines, the ability to break down complex ideas or processes into simple terms that almost anybody can follow along with. It's an admirable quality.
Einstein said that if you can't successfully explain it to a child, you don't understand it, yourself.
I blame Brian Cox for my lack of comprehension. 😅
Nah. Don’t let the English accent woo you. This is an unproven (and dumb) theory.
Still, @@rwfwcfii439, sounds nice and soothing ;)
@@BoggleMeBog Welcome to your opinion on the matter of course. Not sure the profanity is called for honestly.
Brian Cox is a fantastic person and physicist.
We are privileged to be able to watch him explain science.
I managed to go to this presentation when he brought it to Edmonton. Incredible, he’s an unbelievably gifted teacher. If you ever get the chance to, go see him live. Loved it.
I want to get this so bad but I just can’t 😂
Only works at relativistic speeds not our normal speeds across the stage
@@iRossco It does work at normal speeds, but the time differential is very minuscule.
Definition of a right triangle. The vertex (light moving up and down) must be shorter than the hypotenuse (light moving in a zig-zag).
Light by definition moves at a constant speed c regardless of observer. So for those watching the stage, light is traveling further (along the hypotenuse) than for the observer on the cart.
If you remember your basic science (d=rt), distance/velocity = time.
Velocity is c, which is constant. Only distance varies. So as distance increases, time interval decreases. This manifests as the difference in rate of passing time for each observer.
Information is perceived slower than the action itself. Sunlight takes 8 minutes to reach earth. Flipping a lightswitch, the light is produced before you see it. So the action happens before you realize it. It's spontaneous but our brain perceives information slower than the actual event per se. 2 different perceptions
❤
I love this guy. He is 100% listening and understanding simply beautiful. Thank you for sharing the video.❤
While the stationary camera did show it moving in a triangular pattern, the ascent and decent of both still happened at the same speed. Jim was moving the light up and down, so the speed of the light never actually changed, just the observers view of it.
You missed the point. The point was how the same light travels differently for 2 different observers. At slow speeds of the object moving (here the sitting person), the time difference is insignificant. However as you approach higher speeds it becomes noticeable.
GPS Satellites moving around Earth's orbit have to constantly sync up time with on ground clock because time on Satellites run faster due to relativity.
I dont get it, what am i missing? To me it's just the illusion of slow and fast pace, as in both frames, the light has the same speed to reach a certain height in the space.
If it takes 1 minute for the light to go from the lowest point to the highest point, it doesn't matter how fast to the side it's moving. I don't get this at all
@@gary5799
It’s time dilation. The speed of light is a constant and cannot change. The speed of everything else relative to light can change.
Jim’s moving. If he’s moving with the light, the light takes longer to travel to you (because the light is becoming diagonal and moving, therefore the distance is increasing and the light is taking longer to reach you). For Jim, this isn’t the case, since the light is next to him the entire time.
@mackaytj @@shayannikeghbaliyou're absolutely right, but this is just a visual demonstration to help people understand the thought experiment.
The actual thought experiment is a little bit different, so your concern doesn't work for the real experiment .
A beam of light travelling vertically between two mirrors. If the mirrors are moving (and the beam with it, since motion is relative) the length of the beam must be longer in the moving reference frame compared to in the stationary one. The light does not travel outwards to an observer in the original thought experiment.
I think the amazing thing about all this is that the speed of light is constant no matter the frame of reference. Whoever discovered that (Michelson & Morley) are underappreciated geniuses. What Einstein then says about special relativity is, as Brian says, obvious. It logically follows.
I haven't seen this lecture so don't know if it's mentioned but yeah the invariance of light which is crucial seems to often be skipped. After that experiment there's the work of people like Lorentz, Lamor and Poincaré. I think the reason what we now take for granted wasn't so obvious is scientists of the day believing in the aether.
Oldie but goldie, although I wish the lecture was cut a little better for this clip, there were some great visuals that Cox showed that are helpful for understanding the concept better. It's hard to get all the relevant information in a short format. But either way, great job and keep it up. The more access, more people have to scientific information, the better.
If i was in this class, id be holding my chin, nodding my head, but thinking about Al Pastor tacos.
Very interesting. And very clever representation, well done. As someone who needs to see/do to learn or even follow something, i really appreciate this.
I could listen to this dude explain anything to me and it would be bliss. His calm demeanor is amazing:)
The concept of Time Dilation tickles my brain and makes me feel like a kid in a cosmic candy store.
Ive been trying to understand this concept since i first heard about it..... i finally understand!! 😮
All this time, humanity should have been looking for the ‘PHOTON of Youth’, not a Fountain.
Love this. What a brilliantly simple demo
That is the best explanation that I have seen. Thank you for posting.
Incredible explanation!!
How about this. Time does not slow down. It's the light that slows down but only relative to the observer. The Observer also being governed by the speed of light also slows down. So it's their perception of time that slows not time itself.
THIS! finally someone else gets it. these scientists are morons that are so blinded by previous work they refuse to go against it. they are worse than a religion
But the person coming back from a trip would be physically younger than what they should be.
It's actually not true that the perception of time slowing down. The effects of time dilation is actually real and just not an issue of perception. The mu-on experiment to test for the presence of time dilatiom proves it very nicely.
This is correct. It is relative to the observer. If you run the experiment for 5 years for the stationary object, the object moving from the observer would appear to be moving very slowly, (basically frozen). When coming back, they would appear to be moving 2x as fast, and 10 years would pass for both.
@@krisevol3016 yes that is correct.
But the person is aging slowly not because the time is slowed.
But his atom or cells or whatever cause of aging is slower. Not time it's self.
I would love nothing more than to be a student of Brian Cox. That man is a genious
You can feel his passion through his voice😊 he talks like kid describing candy store he really do wat he loves
Thats an interesting and novel representation. Its like a geometric proof of a physical law. A straight line up and down is a shorter path (faster movement in distance and time) than the triangular path.
A simple explanation of this: Remember that light has a MAXIMUM speed. Therefore, if the light that is in motion has a horizontal component, some percentage of its speed will be horizontal and some vertical. Therefore, the up-and-down speed of the light that has horizontal motion does not match the up-and-down speed of the light without horizontal motion.
I feel less stupid now thanks to your much clearer explanation
So time travel is possible, only into the future! Never back!
Correct
Unless you can navigate the multiple dimensions AROUND the restrictions. Is the past truly gone, or is each second like a stop frame that can be revisited?
Yeah... were constantly time traveling into the future....
Yeah, but it requires huge amounts of energy to accelerate to relativitic speeds.
And then you have to figure out how to slow down, otherwise you're stuck in that accelerated reference frame forever.
Yes, this has been well known and is observed EVERY time we send someone to space.... twins have been sent to space, leaving one on earth, and they are now days apart in age.
It's really fascinating how you can break it down to these simple facts and consequences. The real genius for me is that he put all of this in math, which is still to this day a mountain I have yet to climb to see the full works of nature. It's astounding that our math does describe the real world *that* well
Don't suppose i could get a link to the full lecture.
Cuz i have known about this theory for as long as i can remember (had a dictionary program back in the win95 days that had videos that I'd watch for fun, this problem was on there) and all i ever can get out of it is "well then your light operated clock isn't keeping time with the other guys clock, that doesn't mean the speed of time changes based on how fast you were going"
Ive felt the same way about this idea, I feel like what's happening is that the light is just taking a longer journey and that's it... I feel like I must not be understanding it properly...
When I was in physics class in college I asked my teacher who was a low effort substitute 'If the speed of light is the maximum velocity, then if you have two photons in an empty universe shooting directly towards each other then the relative speed from each perspective is twice the speed of light and therefore the speed of light isn't the max speed' he said good question and couldn't answer me.. is the speed of light just relative to itself because that would also make no sense, because if a photon going the speed of light were the only thing in existence, its speed would be a zero no matter how fast it was going... speed must be measured relative to other things, man I just find the whole speed of light time travel thing confusing
@@GyandhiWorkshop People thinking it is possible to travel in time are confused.
Best I can figure is that Time is not an actual force or dimension but a human invention so we can coordinate with eachother,
And Time Dilation is simply the Doppler effect being applied to light and misunderstood for something more then it is.
But that's just me thinking in practical terms about it, I know the math people like to think about things in an abstract and it makes them silly things but "the math checks out" because they don't actually have realities set of variables.
@@ARockRaider I totally get that but there's also physical evidence that movement does effect time which blows my mind, I think at the time I was learning about this in physics it was mentioned that scientists used atomic clocks which are the most precise ways of measuring time we have, and put them onboard airliners which flew around the world a few times then brought them back to compare to the one on the ground. The clocks were now misaligned which implies that motion effects the passage of time.
Personally I dont know if its a correct or incorrect assumption, that time slowed with the clocks, what you say about time being a human expression of a phenomenon of being a biological creature, maybe whats happening is with additional velocity the overall movement of all particles making up these clocks or whatever object physically slows, not that time slows but a physical internal 'dampening'.
With Cox showing the light moving side to side and tracing a longer path and then saying with the speed of light being constant, it takes a longer path. That's only relative to the observer, the light particles given off will be less dense and therefore dimmer than the static up and down version. When an object moves away at near light speed for 5 years and then back for 5 years and 29 years pass for the static observer, I feel like its a logical fallacy. Its like someone traveling away on horse back and sending birds back as a means of communication, when the rider is moving away the bird messages your receive will be hugely delayed and more staggered and will continue to become more delayed from any reply you sent. Now when the rider returns the messages will become less staggered and less delayed, the opposite effect starts to happen. Now with that in mind when Cox is explaining the same concept with light travel, he's doubling the recession effect, I would expect there to be a opposite effect where times 'dilation' reverses, which would cancel out any time difference lost or gained meaning that to the ground observer they will see someone shoot off into the distance and get slower and slower the further they get away and then when that person returns they would see them stop in their tracks and almost teleport from that far distance right back to where they started. Any time gained or lost would be 'cancelled out'.
Time dilation is fascinating, i love learning and understanding these concepts.
Measurement of time only exists as a concept because we decided to start measuring it from our perspective.
Nuff said!
Did you even watch the video
@@1man1bike1road did you understand my comment?
True, but you could also base it on nature. Let's take something that decays at a fixed rate, or assume it does. Say radioactive waste or something right. Leave one canister on earth and send one at light speed across the universe for 20 years. Once placed next to each other again, one will be more decayed than the other. No construct of time in the scale here but can still show the proof of the experiment.
@@krishogan3503 my guess is that your first statement looked too close to the 'time is a human construct' bs
For those who don't understand, I'll try to explain in even more simple terms: moving at the speed of light changes how time functions. If a person left us here on Earth and travels at the speed of light for 5 years one way, and returns back (a round trip of 10 years), they would return to find 29 years have passed on earth. He used the glowing ball to demonstrate how time effects the way light is perceived (watching the ball in slow motion vs in normal speed), as it also proves this theory of time dilation.
My question or plausible theory is, a boy born without the ability of sight, but as he grows his ability to resolve mathematical problems at a level 6 grades ahead of him. He turns 10 yr old and has finished College level calculus and many other advanced arithmetic genres.
His only exceptional unique trait is he does not have the ability to understand light.
At some point in his own formulas and and having all of his working out the problems in his head , he finds a workable solution for traveling faster than the speed of light or a workable solution for traveling without light or the speed of said light.
Though he has know way of explaining this formula because anyone he is explaining it to, the fact that they cannot imagine life without light and they don't have the ability to work out his solution in their head with their eyes closed. So , the blind master mathematician, just travels from place to place in the universe and no one ever saw him come or go, but he could explain everything he experienced on his travels and everything he explained was proven correct many years past his passing away. Because it to several hundreds of years, for the blind mans theory of traveling faster than the speed of light was realized.
This would make for some great science fiction.
@@brianwill5929 Thank you for acknowledging my long winded idea.
Love it
Starts with "plausible theory"....ends with "blind man has super powers because he's blind and good at math"
😂 thanks for the laugh
@@farfromirrational all the premise was or is from a poem I had been writing, that the speed of light can be traveled by a person who has know ability to imagine light, so it's not a adversity. But on the flip side, if you are blind how would you know that you've traveled and how would you understand how long it took yourself to get there, the power to believe you are traveling is faster than the speed of light.
Brian cox aways comes off as super passionate for science.
He explains it so well but I'm still too dumb to understand it.
If you don't understand it, you can't evaluate if it is well explained. I personally don't think this is a good explanation if you don't know and understand some background info. If you're interested watching a longer form video about special relativity might actually allow you to understand the concepts.
No. It's only a part of his explanation. I don't think there's enough here to make it understandable. Keep looking around RUclips. Many people are trying to explain these difficult concepts. Brian Cox is a great guy though.
Awesome explanation on how time travel to future is possible
I still think the photograph is the closest to time travel. I mean, just the fact a moment in time can be forever frozen and still be observed in real time is mind blowing! Let’s not forget that 500 years ago this would be considered an offence punishable by burning at the stake. Perspective is EVERYTHING
In spirit world everything is possible. After you pass you will re-live your past deeds, good and bad. You will feel the pain you caused to other living things as they experienced it. You wouldn't wanna be in shoes of Stalin, Hitler, Putyin or 45Putyin, right?
Best demonstration yet
Bruh time dilation sounds simple but when i try to really understand it i understand it less 😂
Im convinced its a load of sh*t.
Time is a unit of measurement, not some tangible force. It's like claiming a yard stick is longer in different locations....its just not accurate.
Even if somehow an "observer" moved at close to the speed of light and their "perception" of time altered, it makes 0 logical sense that between us and them somehow one side or the other would have more or less time "occuring". The time it takes is a measurement. Maybe traveling at that speed has physical effects on the mind and body, but 10 years is the length of time it takes earth to go around the sun 10 times. If that happened, then 10 years passed. There is no "but I experienced 3 years and you experienced 10", the time didn't change, you did.
@@farfromirrational nah look it up. They actually did an experiment with these atomic highly accurate clocks and put one in a plane. They were then out of sync when the plane landed again compared to the "stationary" clock in the ground
@@farfromirrational Nah, it's true. It's the reason we calibrate the time on GPS satellites.
Unsurprisingly, this was genius!
It's the time it took for the information to be perceived after the action was provoked. Information travels slower than real time. Tracing equals 2 perceptions
That Jim guy really works with the speed of light..I remember (partially) my last sparring session with him...
The interesting question here is, in what timeframe does Jim return after his 10 year journey. Does he magically blend in with the people who moves on 39 years, or does he stay in his own timeframe?
Because, this means not only time, but reality in itself is relative to the observer. Which in turn means that every observer experiences its own reality.
This also means that when Jim returns, he meets his friends in his own reality, 10 years later, while *concurrently* his friends live in a reality which is 39 years later.
In other words if our reality is 2024, other person's realities may be set in a different time
What? Watch the movie 'Interstellar'
For Jim his clock is +10yrs, for you your clock is +29yrs. You're both at the same end point & reality is the same it just took less time for Jim to get there. The friends are also +29yrs as they were in your time frame. There's not 2 different realities simultaneously Jim steps out he's now moving at same rate as you. This all only works at relativistic speeds for Jim not our normal speeds.
@@iRossco the neurons in flies act faster than the neurons in our brain so they experience the time differently. So the relativity makes the brains of those in moving framework act faster and faster for the person to experience time slower. If this is true then even the speed, at 40 percent of light, will fry his brain. This is just a thought experiment.
@@muhammadansarahmed6039brilliant response, absolutely perfect... thank you
😮@@iRossco
@@muhammadansarahmed6039No. In your own framework, nothing different happens. You cannot experience the effect of relativity within a single framework, that goes against the entire of point of relativity. Also this would mean that there somehow is a "default" framework were neurons work normally, which is again entirely against the concept of relativity. When Jim is traveling much faster than us, he is not "experiencing time slower", every biological function works perfectly normal, it is time that literally is slower for him compared to us. Emphasis on the compared to us, because there is no default time, everything is relative.
Where can i find the full versions of these videos?
The guy talking is called Brian Cox
@@pepperT358 thanks but that wasn't my question. I know who Brian Cox is and even if I didn't, his name is in the title.
I was asking where I can find the full video which this short snippet was extracted from.
The moment he said time passed at a different rate for jim I just can't swallow, cause what light has to do with time? The light takes longer, not the action. Thats why we say we might be seeing tons of dead stars. They are not what we see
Yes I believe that's true. Time will appear to go slower when the object is still in motion because the light is traveling to the observer slower, but the object's time is still the same as always.
Time doesn't appear to go slower it does go slower. His clock ticks slower than ours, but only at relativistic speeds not our everyday speeds
He meant that if you were physically going close to the speed of light, the point is not light itself is just the speed that you are going at. At those velocities, you’ll experience time normally but compared to us your clock would be going way slower. This goes on asymptotically, and at the exact speed of light, time stops. Photon this never experience time
Exactly l've never liked this concept. It always felt so try hard to me.
Information travels at light speed. The effect of an action can only move at the same speed of light. When we say those star might be dead, it means that if we were to travel to them, we would see them dead. But for us on earth, those stars are alive. There is no way for us to know whether they are dead or not, we will be able to tell when the information reaches us. Simultaneity of events is not objective, it is relative to the framework. Everything is relative
That is why photons don’t experience time.
Photons have never experienced time.
They are at time 0.
@@mtrest4way to really add to OP’s comment. 😂
Non-sense. Light moves at a finite speed as denoted by the letter c in the equations.
@@MatrixVectorPSI
Time at the speed of light is infinity. The photons experience no movement of time. The past, present and future are all one for the photon.
@@mtrest4 Non-sense. Photons exist in the present and experience time just like everything else. It's not a magical particle. Photons move at a finite speed. It is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second. You're confusing observational time dilation for actual time dilation.
I think the distance / time it takes for the light to go up and down vs to go up and down “triangularly” is shorter or is witnessed as shorter.
What that means is hard to explain, is like, “in the heat of the moment”
When you’re in a fight or a car crash, everything “slows down” and if the entire thing wa recorded and played back to you, the lack of emotion (I think) and PoV would make it seem like what occurred was far less exhilarating than what was expirenced
Neil Degrasse tyson but without the political opinions
Neil degrasse tyson without the intelligence
@@ups-gaming-officialNDT thinks men can be women, so... not the brightest.
@@ups-gaming-officialCox rubs circles around Tyson
@@dRoscoAZ men can do and be anything they want because DUDES ROCK
@@easypete2936NDT rubs cox
Great explanation!
I mean, this is not so groundbreaking to think about. What is way more interesting is WHY the speed of light must me constant for all observers.
If you travel with high speed the speed of light is slower for you than for a stationary observer therefore you age less.
By far my favourite scientist.
Time is an illusion.
Ever notice how it speeds up when your having fun, and slows down while watching paint dry?
Time is an illusion, unlike leisure time, which is very real and not to be disturbed.
That’s not time that’s your minds perception of time. Time is a fact of the universe
Time doesn’t exist it’s an abstract measurement “we” invented to use it in math and physics
@@Phoenix_Arise_J No, the physical clock ticks slower not just perceived.
Eg. GPS only works because they have atomic clocks to account for the faster time passes on satellite than on the Earth. Time is real.
I have fun watching paint dry, now what ?
Thank you sir Einstein, for everything 🫡 Without your contributions to free science, man wouldn’t have stretched so far into the universe!
There are factors which seem to be not talked about regarding this theory anytime I hear people discuss it.
Why doesn’t time go by faster as the person travels back towards the origin of the clock that appears to slowdown while going away? The traveller would be seeing the images faster going towards it?
How fast are we moving through space while relatively stationary on earth?
As astronauts are sent to space, their speed is increased to a value to maintain orbit. Does a watch on their wrist move slower? Do astronauts age less during the time they are in space than everyone else on Earth?
Depending on the latitude people live their life, people are rotating around the center of the Earth at different speeds. Does living closer to the equator affect the time we perceived while living?
But what if Jim is actually the one who is standing still and the camera is moving?
Which one is actually moving?
There is no absolute reference for movement.
So now what?
The traveller's clock will be ticking the same as you'd expect, once a second, the observer's clock, will also do that, but from the traveller's perspective (if they look back at the observer) the observer's clock will tick faster than his, both going away and going back.
Yes to all of your other questions. You seem to grasp this fine. The faster you move in reference to someone else, you will experience less total time when you measure against them. Again, time won't feel any different to the individuals.
If a is moving faster than b, a will "live" longer than b, but only when in comparison, both a and b will experience their own time as usual, you don't notice any difference in your own time
This is known as the twin paradox. As the first reply points out, who's actually travelling and who's stationary depends on your frame of reference. The answer comes in the follow up theory of General Relativity which introduces gravity and acceleration. The person who experiences the time dilation is the one who accelerates to their velocity. Astronauts do experience time dialation but it's miniscule.
consider this, you have clocks with different orientations on the same spaceship.
clock 1 stops when moving at the speed of light
the other slows
the 3rd clock is a casio
That a simple frame of reference puzzle is being used as an example of time dilation is why I remain continually skeptical of time dilation.
if this isn't making sense to you visually, it's because the the camera on the guy's head has a faster shutter speed, so it's not showing the trail of light from his perspective the way the other camera is. according to what cox is saying, from his perspective the trail would be straight up and down.
I think that the moment we can actually wrap our heads around what he's saying and truly comprehend what he's saying we can achieve time travel
You realise you're basically saying he doesn't know what he's talking about, right?
It doesnt take theight lomger of its own perspektive ... Its longer for the observer only ... This is so fascinating that bedimg time is actual a common thing to happen in nature
I totally get this. But one point i can never understand. For the person in the moving frame, when he looks at stationary person, the light will exactly look like triangular instead of straight (but backwards). So we can apply same calculations and conclude that time is slow in moving frame? Or does going backward mean something?
A²+b²=c². The two sides of the hypothetical triangle the light travels will never be shorter combined than the hypothetical hypotenuse "the straight line".
What's even scarier is the closer you try to reach that 100% the more crazy it gets. Those 10 years for him could be a million here on earth also.
The perspective is different for Jim, because he is moving with the light, but it doesn't change the amount of time it takes for the light to move from start to finish.
I absolutely love Brian Cox. I have Wonders of the Universe and Wonders of the Solar System movies on DVD.
The speed of light is constant but not the speed at which the source of light moves. The horizontal velocity and the vertical velocity add their own components to the speed of the moving clock making it move faster
aliens: you humans are actually learning something.
The reason time takes longer is because the hypotenuse of a triangle is larger than it's height. So when moving the particle needs to cover a larger distance in the same amount of time
it's always been a problem of technical issues, the original thought experiment was to the nearest star wich is 5 light years away and back. with the same time comparison. but the definition of light-year is what destroys this. it takes a year for time to travel a light year. so 10 year trip, 10 years for us ...... hopefully everyone can see my point
❤ The speed of thought is faster than the speed of light.
I grasp the idea but it makes no sense to me.
The time it takes for both, the audience and the light bulb holder, for the light to reach the highest and lowest point in this interval is the same.
Time hasn't changed just the perception of the motion depending on the view.
The distance traveled looks different but is the same.
I can't write down all my thoughts on this, it's just too much.
Maybe I am too stupid to understand it but how would you explain that theory to a blind person?
You can hear the different of people discoverd something by themself or when it is giving to them on a golden dinnerplate!
"honey, I think I just figured out my golf swing"
relative to an observer near no mass, no clock can tick faster, but every clock ticks slower.
The faster you go the close you get to lights perspective 😮
Interesting
You know you're seriously smart when you're using Jim Al Khalili as a stage prop!
If the speed of light does not change, what is this red shift and blue shift that we use to determine if a star is moving toward us or away from us?
Change in frequency. Wave lengths increase when an object is travelling away from us, frequency and energy decrease because of it
I don't even know if this question makes sense but, is light a vector quantity? if so then coming back to the starting point should negate any time difference bringing everyone back to the same time.
Moving 5 years away i agree on what is being said but when the return journey is made wouldn't the time appear to move slower for jim than the observer thus making it 10 years passing for both when he arrives back?
For those who dont understand ill dumb it down bc thats how i translate it anyways lol.
When the blue dot starts ticking up and down, the line that goes up and down is 2 seconds. 1 second up and once second down. (Im just giving the line a value of 1 second up and one down) but in motion, that up and down line is now a diagonal line. And that diagonal line is a longer segment that 1 second. Depending on the speed, it could take 3 seconds to go up and down or 20 seconds to go up and down.
But there a lot of variables we dont know about traveling at the speed of light. So this is why this statement einstein suggests isnt a truth. Bc weve never gone that fast. Obviously.
I think theres a variable that takes place during traveling that fast that has some type of equilibrium effects on relativity of time. Its cool to think about but well never know in this lifetime. Its all speculative theory. Basically, we be guessing. Lol.
Just like when we girst flew on earth, we then learnt about gforces to its extents. The same i believe will happen when we travel that fast in space. Perhaps gravity has an unknown effect on time. We dont know until it happens.
Love how he starts the real explanation with" it is obvious" 🤪😂
This is your brain on science 🍳
You're missing some critical information if you want to explain it to the layman, but you got the right point
It is only the clock that is affected according to the range of distance it takes a second to cover.
This is why sometimes I week feels like only 1 day has passed.
This is so damn awesome.
Wouldnt it just be the perception that changes? Just a thought but wouldnt moving on a different axis involve a different multiplication/division equation for moving vertically and horizontally rather than just vertically?
These people like to try and make something out of nothing all the time. Just take it for what it is and you will understand more.
It is possible to derive 2 contradictory time dilation equations. Imagine that Sally is in a spaceship and moving to the right and is aiming a flashlight straight up and down so that Sally sees the light moving straight up and down and John is outside the spaceship and sees the light forming a triangle with the floor of the spaceship. Now imagine that Sally is aiming a flashlight upwards and towards the left while the spaceship moves to the right. Now the situation is exactly reversed. Sally sees the light forming a triangle with the floor and John sees the light bouncing straight up and down. Here's the details...
Sally is in a moving spaceship. John is outside the spaceship. Sally is moving to the right at .6c. The height of her spaceship is .8 light-seconds. If Sally has a flashlight with the light bouncing straight up and down the light will make a 3-4-5 right triangle from the viewpoint of John. If the change in time for Sally is delta T_o and the change in time for John is delta T then the following equation can be derived:
delta T = delta T_o/((1-.6^2)^.5)
Now Sally has a flashlight but this time she is holding the flashlight at an angle of 53.13 degrees above the horizontal and pointed to the left. Now the leftward movement of the light exactly matches the rightward movement of the spaceship from John's viewpoint. Now the light is bouncing straight up and down from the viewpoint of John and the light is making a 3-4-5 right triangle from viewpoint of Sally. If the change in time for Sally is delta T_o and the change in time for John is delta T then the following equation can be derived:
delta T_o = delta T/((1-.6^2)^.5)
The 2 equations are in direct contradiction to each other.
Thank you Josh Gorban for your science lesson
Speed = distance / time. Like mph or miles per hour. In this formula the speed is constant as the speed of light doesn’t change (aka constant). We clearly see that the distance, measured by each observer (one is the person sitting on the moving chair and the other one is the us, the outside observer) is different for each observer. The distance for the moving chair seems shorter than for the external observer. In order for the formula to work the time has to change.
1. moving chair.
Let’s say speed = 100
Distance = 1000
Time = 10
So 100 = 1000/10.
2. outside observer
Speed = 100 (per definition the speed of light is a constant aka always the same)
Distance = 2000 (the light travel farther on a triangular path)
So the time has to be 20 to make the formula work.
So for the moving chair this experiment only took 10 time units (i.e. minutes) for the observer 20 time units. (i.e minutes).
That’s why they say time travelers (moving chair) don’t age as fast as people on earth (observers)
A lesson learnt watching gunbuster back in the day...
I too have trouble with this einstein theorie. In my humble opinion, the lightparticles are more apart when going up and down, so the light seems fader but still travels at the same speed.making it the same time
Anyone trying to understand.Speed of light is constant. However since two observer have different observations. Time is relative.
Awesome 🎉🎉🎉
Well, the same amount of time has passed, both bulbs are the same bulb, our position relative to it just caused the emitted photons to be more dense than the other perspective? Because one is emitting to the front and the other towards the side and across a horizon relative to our position?
If he didn’t become a scientist he would have definitely been a British rockstar
Everybody: uses whiteboards
Physicists: uses blackboards
I am going to have to watcb this more than once.
My take is... watching a constent light seems longer to go by, rather than a light that is intermittent....in which your geussing/more time thinking about when the ligjt will appear next...All depending/relative to the individual...? = difference. Again just my understanding. Correct me where im wrong 😅
This guy is just amazing
Imagine the ideas that the greatest minds in history didn't have the chance to develop and write down.
Everything that is happening innthe entire universe is happening at the same time . The speed of light is just the speed of light.
We measure visual distance with the speed of it relative to a complete rotation of our planet .
The perception of time on every planet will be different for its native inhabitants depending on how long it takes to complete an orbit.
By the time Jim gets back I might've understood.
So funny how many people think they know more than thousands of incredibly intelligent people whom have a collective thousands of years of experience and knowledge in these fields..
None of those "thousands" of "intelligent" people have conducted a single real experiment where they sent a person in a spaceship at 99.94% of the speed of light anywhere to see what really happens to their clocks. They might as well be Star Trek fans explaining how warp drive "works". It's entirely imaginary.