Head to squarespace.com/floatheadphysics to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code FLOATHEADPHYSICS PS: I made a visual error in the last part. Since the space is shown as 2D, I should have used a flat aeroplane instead of a 3D aeroplane. I saw a question in the comment about what if the object was a sphere? Then it 'turning' wouldn't change the length of the shadow and so length contraction? That can't be right! Well, you cannot use a sphere because, again, we are only using two dimensions for space and one dimension for time. So, you would have to imagine a disc. And when a disc turns, it's shadow will contract. Sorry about that oversight.
@piyush3836
7 ай бұрын
So does it also applies for black holes as time ticks slower near them ?
@JustHackIt1
7 ай бұрын
@@Not_a_Physicist I'm from Nepal as well! To multiply two or more physical quantities is basically like combining them (not adding, combining) Area of a wall equals Length times Height is because for each number of horizontal unit there is, there is a unit of vertical as well. The same concept is for physical quantity, for each unit (length, mass, breadth, height, motion, etc) of one physical quantity, when you multiply it with another, there is another same equal unit of the physical quantity
@lih3391
7 ай бұрын
@Mahesh_Shenoy Sir, what about the spacetime invariant, (ct)^2-x^2=S^2? I believe this is what you are referring to, but you have forgotten about the hyperbolic geometry of time. This is what makes time different from space right? You can't move freely, only forwards by some amount.
@babyoda1973
7 ай бұрын
So maybe that's why entanglement seems to move faster we are seeing the actual extra dimension😮
@ayushsahoo2078
7 ай бұрын
Thats Great, thats mind blowing, keep making videos on such topics and thank you sir, for such marvelous experience!!!!!!!! Could you please provide the link for that book?
@manasyadav1993
7 ай бұрын
That was insane. The last part blew my mind. Probably the best explanation why time can’t flow backwards. Way better than the entropy explanation.
@mantrid777
7 ай бұрын
it doesn't mean time can't flow backwards. it actually assumes the particle moves forward in time (i.e. it doesn't explain that, it assumes that). then explains why we/particle don't have access to "time-travel" along time dimension like space but instead see "ghost" of time dimension instead (as clocks). if we assume a particle going back in time, we'll get same conclusions for a backward-time particle.
@Rudyard_Stripling
7 ай бұрын
If you sat on the event horizon in a black hole you would see everything in the past everything in the present and everything in the future all at once. It is written God has this view so he may well have his home in a black hole.
@alexb241
7 ай бұрын
Actually entropy is a super logical explanation why time flows in only one direction. It is one of the most accessible aspects about the whole theory.
@Rudyard_Stripling
7 ай бұрын
Actually, if everything goes the speed of light in the 4th dimension then there will be no entropy or death and any decay at all.@@alexb241
@the6millionliraman
7 ай бұрын
@@Rudyard_Stripling Unfortunately for that deity, if it lived in a black hole, it would have zero influence on the rest of the universe because its sphere of causality would be limited by the event horizon of the black hole it lived in.
@kcz6865
7 ай бұрын
It turns out that we really do live in Plato's cave, surrounded by the shadows of reality.
@abebuckingham8198
7 ай бұрын
Underrated comment.
7 ай бұрын
🤯
@forestvan4915
7 ай бұрын
This comment is arguably one of the most brilliant on KZitem
@bsadewitz
7 ай бұрын
Yeah, that's why the allegory is still fundamental in epistemology. ;-) It's not something that turned out; it always was (well, according to Platonists, anyway, but u don't have to be so committed for it to be worthwhile to contemplate). That was Plato's (well, at least Socrates' lol) point. He was using allegory to illustrate en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_forms
@abebuckingham8198
7 ай бұрын
@@bsadewitz It's also a reference to the two shadows he uses in the video. That's why it's so clever.
@THICCTHICCTHICC
7 ай бұрын
Your ability to explain such abstract and complex concepts so simply is genuinely unparalleled
@gordonhamilton7160
7 ай бұрын
I love this stuff so much. You do a great job, Mahesh!
@Mahesh_Shenoy
7 ай бұрын
Thanks, Gordon :)
@williamwalker39
7 ай бұрын
@@Mahesh_ShenoyWe present an experiment that proves conclusively that information can be propagated nearly instantaneously across space, in the nearfield of an electromagnetic pulse. The experiment consists of a ~30kV high voltage spark generator creating an electromagnetic pulse that propagated 1.5m to a detector. The leading edge of the transmitted pulse and the leading edge of the detected pulse were then compared using an oscilloscope and no time delay within the capability of the scope was observed, where 5ns is predicted if it had propagated at the light speed. The maximum uncertainty in the measurement was 1ns due to noise in the electronics. Since a pulse is digital information. This experiment proves information can be transmitted across space nearly instantaneously. The results is perfectly predicted by Maxwell equations, which yield a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. Below is a link to see a preprint of the paper. We are currently looking for a journal for peer review and publication. The impact of this discovery has implications in both engineering and the foundations of modern physics. The result is completely incompatible with Relativity. Instantaneous signals invalidate Relativity of Simultaneity in all inertial frames and can be used to synchronize all their clocks. In addition, a derivation of Relativity using instantaneous electromagnetic fields (light) yields Galilean Relativity, where time is the same in all inertial frames of reference, and there is no speed limit for mass, fields, and, even light. This can be easily be seen by inserting c=infinity into the Lorentz Transform, yielding the Galilean Transform. This means that if a moving object is observed with farfield speed c light, then Relativistic effects will be observed. But the effects are not real and can be proved by simply changing the frequency of the light, such that instantaneous nearfield light is used, causing the Relativistic effects to disappear. This then proves that the effects of Relativity are just an optical illusion. Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, then it has the same problem. A better theory of Gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism which assumes gravity can be mathematically described by 4 Maxwell equations, similar to to those of electromagnetic theory. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak fields, which is all that we observe. Using this theory, analysis of an oscillating mass yields a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. This theory then accounts for all the observed gravitational effects including instantaneous nearfield and the speed of light farfield. The main difference is that this theory is a field theory, and not a geometrical theory like General Relativity. Because it is a field theory, Gravity can be then be quantized as the Graviton. Lastly it should be mentioned that this research shows that the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can no longer be criticized for requiring instantaneous interaction of the pilot wave, thereby violating Relativity. Consequently the Pilot wave interpretation should become the preferred interpretation of Quantum Mechanics due to its deterministic simplicity. Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper: www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1 KZitem presentation of above arguments: kzitem.info/news/bejne/1JuGyn5tr4WCqYY More extensive paper for the above arguments: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145 Dr. William Walker
@geenethmethmin2487
2 ай бұрын
@@Mahesh_Shenoywhat if spacetime moves through a 5th dimension?
@arman-cl6be
Ай бұрын
Probably the best educational video I’ve seen on KZitem. I really appreciate your enthusiasm for explaining these topics in an intuitive way
@rustyspygoat4089
7 ай бұрын
This channel is incredible. Exactly what I have been looking for...
@abhaychordiya6489
7 ай бұрын
Is that the Minecraft grass block as the floor😂😂 That's nice
@Mahesh_Shenoy
7 ай бұрын
Honestly, I just picked the first free photo I could find :D
@smithstudiertetwas8914
7 ай бұрын
Yes that definitely is the Minecraft grass block loll
@Snakyy1
7 ай бұрын
It’s not minecraft block textures are 16x16 this is double that
@remcodejong9149
7 ай бұрын
I understood fairly quickly what the implications of the two dimensional projection was on space time. I completely did not see length contraction coming though, that had me stunned.
@soberskater
7 ай бұрын
The enthusiasm is contagious! I'm going to read today instead of watching any more screens... great video!
@jameswebb3410
7 ай бұрын
One of the best(if not best) explanations of complex concepts I've ever come across on the internet.
@clairecelestin8437
4 ай бұрын
My favorite way to visualize higher dimensions is to recognize that what "a different dimension" means is that it can move independently on that dimension without impacting the other dimensions. So instead of worrying about "where" the 4th dimension is, I just imagine objects in 4d space as being some color on the spectrum from red to blue, and things can only interact with objects that are the same color. If I could tie a ball to a string and swing it in the vertical-color dimension, it would move up and down in a straight line in 3d space, and the ball would change color to be purple at the top and bottom of each swing, and it would be red as it passed the midpoint on the way down, blue as it passed the midpoint on the way up.
@garylcamp
7 ай бұрын
I asked "Starts With A Bang" a year or so ago about why we are moving through time at 1 sec/sec which I noted was 186,000m/s but I got no answer. You have really shown me more than I asked for. By far! It is truly wonderful. I can see why you are so excited. Great presentation.
@remcodejong9149
7 ай бұрын
This may be the best explanation of special relativity I have ever seen.
@Astronomator
23 күн бұрын
What a wonderful, simple explanation for perhaps the most complex attribute of our universe. Well done.
@mreclecticguy
6 ай бұрын
Wow. You explained a complicated idea in such an intuitive and visual way that it was easy to follow the logic.
@yoteach
7 ай бұрын
Awesome animations of this idea! It becomes even more intuitive if you replace "c" with the "speed of causality" rather than light. Then light, gravity - anything not anchored to spatial dimensions by mass - travels at the speed of causality: the fastest way information get from one point in spacetime to another point.
@sevenstarsofthedipper1047
7 ай бұрын
I am not a scientist nor was I a science major but, I thought that he was going to say that Gravity was a consequence of an object diverting some of its speed in the spatial direction because it looked like the plane was nosediving back into the ground the more it diverted its motion to the spatial direction. But he didn’t say that so, I am probably not really understanding what he is saying.
@sylfthesoundyoulongfor8363
7 ай бұрын
@@sevenstarsofthedipper1047 Gravity IS Indeed a conséquence of spacetime deformation. Check PBS "IS Gravity an illusion l'' on that matter
@sevenstarsofthedipper1047
7 ай бұрын
@@sylfthesoundyoulongfor8363 Are you saying that the “deformation” in spacetime we call Gravity is caused by mass in motion inside a moving Universe? So, then what is spacetime made of? It must be made of something, otherwise, this SR model makes no sense. Something has to generate the shadows that are used to explain length contraction in this model?
@ErvaarT809
7 ай бұрын
Wow you are a hero. I started studying by myself at 30 because I couldn’t memorize anything at school in the past. And with time I realized that it was because they weren’t teaching correctly. I was scared of gravity, light…and all because I knew that they were controversial subjects and I didn’t have time to discover everything by myself so thank you very much to you and to the author of the book.
@anjin77
7 ай бұрын
You are an exceptional teacher and communicator, inspiring others with your passion. I wish you much success, happiness and fulfillment! Thanks for providing such great content Mahesh! Subscribed.
@TommyTheMooch
7 ай бұрын
Amazing way to illustrate spacetime. I'm once again excited after being bored with other methods.
@Raj-yv7xt
7 ай бұрын
after seeing this video i would recommend to move around alot ...so that u r moving slower in time's axis and thus live more than the people of the same age...
@divxxx
7 ай бұрын
You don't actually live longer, you can simply delay your death with respect to others. Don't forget that from your own perspective you are at rest, therefore your clock is ticking normally.
@kylelochlann5053
7 ай бұрын
There is no "time axis" in the world to move relative to - there are only the world-lines of objects.
@Raj-yv7xt
7 ай бұрын
@@kylelochlann5053 i am sorry i don't have proper words to say my thoughts...but what I wanted to say is like even if the one moving doesn't feel anything different in time he experiences... but as a third person we know that the one traveling or moving is experiencing time dilation and will not age similar to that of a person stationary or consider on earth....one traveling will experience the time normally but he can know in his head that he is experiencing time dilation and when he meets his counterpart he will be younger than him..and when i mean at rest or stationary it is all relative ...in this intuition of his he says everything is moving at max. Speed ..i.e light speed ..so if we consider relative velocity we r all at rest ...or constant velocity..which we can't differentiate...time axis and all is intuition we just move through time but the time itself is measured by motion of something(photon)....but yes that's what i wanted to tell...so i said even if insignificantly small..if u move alot then u will age late or die after ur twin or any other counterpart....
@THICCTHICCTHICC
7 ай бұрын
At best you might somehow snag an extra femtosecond or something
@Raj-yv7xt
7 ай бұрын
@@THICCTHICCTHICC yep..ik that...but man even a part of second matters...😂
@nickdegroot222
5 ай бұрын
Profound and beautiful! Traveling through time at the speed of c from our own reference frame. Wow!!
@prayagpr3449
7 ай бұрын
I have always wondered this, but didnt have the explanation. You know whats even more cool, like how we just studied 2D and apply on 3D what about 4D creatures(hypothetical,like the shadow people). Well the 4D people will be able to freely move in the time dimension (i think) isn't that cool, u can just easily go to yesterday and then to tomorrow. I wonder what dimension would confine them 🤔
@charubalatushhar8122
7 ай бұрын
Hmmm interesting
@Cliff_P
6 ай бұрын
Finally! I used to use the example a block of matter in a empty universe with a powerful rocket motor that ran and then burned out, with the time frame change always being negative with the introduction of kinetic energy. And also a satellite orbiting Earth with the gravity being slightly more on the near side of the craft versus the outside of the craft causing a relativistic time difference. Your explanation clarified everything.
@Atrocitus-k2j
6 ай бұрын
My mental model for GR has been to think of any given object or particle having a total energy budget for movement through spacetime that stays constant, and so when it moves faster in either space or time, it has to draw energy from the budget for movement through the other domain. A kind of zero sum game scenario; to accelerate in space requires slowing movement through time, and vice versa. The key is realizing that it takes phenomenally more energy to move through time, because it’s got a sort of rigidity due to only being able to “flow” in one direction, so that for any practical reference frames that we as humans experience, our changing velocity in space makes virtually no difference in our velocity down the time dimension. It only becomes apparent when we study objects or particles that have been accelerated to nearly the total energy budget’s expenditure in movement through space.
@sherrinisadumbass211
5 ай бұрын
your enthusiasm is truly infectious, I was on the edge of my seat the entire video what an incredible explanation :0
@horseios3655
7 ай бұрын
This is easily the best video you have ever published on this channel. Well Done!
@napotronix
7 ай бұрын
This is by far the best explanation of special relativity I've ever seen.
@masoodakram1950
7 ай бұрын
Sir, I'm being very greatful to god that I discovered your channel. I never felt the same enthusiasm even during my graduation studies.
@himeshph
6 ай бұрын
"If it's just told, I don't like it, I want to discover things myself and piece things together and come with conclusion myself." - Mahesh The above quote is powerful. 👌
@TheForbiddenDance
5 ай бұрын
This was the best video I've ever seen. One thing I'm trying to wrap my head around is if we are always moving at c in the same direction together how can you change "direction/perpendicularity" to cause the twins paradox at all. At what scale are these things measured or considered to be meaningful change?
@femalwolf
7 ай бұрын
OMG!!!!!! , I had been confused for months, viewed so many videos, trying to make sense of special relativity, Now, Finally, this solved my confusion!!!
@audiodead7302
7 ай бұрын
Personally, I find relativity more profound than QM. It implies very startling things about the nature of reality. p.s. Probably the best video I've ever seen on relativity.
@onemediuminmotion
6 ай бұрын
Notice that in your example @ 7:03 1) the "V-only" direction is only defined as that of the single-point center of mass of a non-accelerating mass-object "over time" (as defined by the impingement/emission of multiple photons with that mass-object). 2) The "H-only" direction is only defined as that of the path of any photon(s) emitted by or impinging on that "stationary" mass-object. 3) The hypotenuse, then, defines the "stationary [over time] spatial extension" of said mass-object and/or the "spatial extension" of its [acceleration-pulse initiated] geodesic path motion [over time] relative to another such (e.g. "observer") mass-object. In either case, said "mass-object" [which by definition includes its "extension in space over time"] is entirely comprised of "acceleration [as differentiation from the speed of light defined by the path of said photons]" as "self-relative [by definition over/as time] motion". Foundationally the self-relative motion of what? Of the otherwise scale-uniform 'hyper-fluid' that Einstein implicitly referenced by his use of the term "spacetime". Bonus hint #1: The phenomenon we "human[ particulate mass-object]s" refer to as "consciousness" is comprised of (and comprises) a cybernetically self-configuring 'standing' momentum waveform. Bonus hint #2: What is the overall (as in universal-scale) self-contained, and self-(as in [network of] individual mass-particle[s]-scale)-containing geometry of this "self-relative motion"? That of a horn-toroidal fluid vortex --- also currently referred to by us "human[ particulate mass-object]s" as a "Black Hole". So welcome to "The Graviton" (if you will) folks.
@drzoom3696
5 ай бұрын
Thank God Mahesh is doing the explaining and not you. 😅
@RémiSaintier
6 ай бұрын
That was great ! One thing I have trouble to wrap my head around though: in all examples you assume at one point that the plane doesn’t move trough space, so it moves at full speed through time. But what does it actually mean to not move through space?
@ufuk5396
7 ай бұрын
This concept blowed my mind in major classes too. Glad someone talked about that.
@imagiro1
5 ай бұрын
Not sure what I like more: Your explanations or your excitement :)
@evannison3059
5 ай бұрын
This has been blowing my mind all week. Is there a way to use this to explain why/how mass bends spacetime? I've been thinking about that too and trying to connect them.
@deepasandeepa
6 ай бұрын
I don't think that I will be able to sleep tonight 🤯
@jonathangardner4128
Ай бұрын
The part at the end is particularly interesting in that, if in the beginning, the distribution of velocity in the 4 dimensions was randomized, there would be an equal mirror of our universe that began from all particles that had the negative "time" dimension velocity.
@ddichny
Ай бұрын
I've wondered that myself, especially since in the view described in the video, there's nothing special about the "time" dimension nor does it have a preferred "direction". It would imply that the "time" dimension is simply what we consider the axis (in 4D) that we happen to be traversing. As such, other particles are free to happen to be moving in the "opposite" direction to that travel axis of ours. I wonder if this might be the basis of dark matter/energy -- things in the "opposite" motion might be hard for us to interact with, and be mostly "dark" to us aside from gravitational interaction as they pass by us, and some other residual effects.
@jonathangardner4128
Ай бұрын
@@ddichny Thats immediately where I went too. Don't know how to connect those dots, but there are a lot of entanglements between time and gravity. And the backward universe would be laid over the same 3 space coordinates as ours, just backwards in the time dimension. Also, another interesting question is why everything we see is moving through this particular dimension "time" at the speed of light, when this is not the case with the other dimensions. Similar to how the higgs boson gives mass (which photons lack) thus allowing photons to travel c through space, I would wonder if there could be particles that cannot move c through time due to an interaction with a field, and everything we see lacks a "time boson".
@Helloo-c1e
7 ай бұрын
You are replica of my physics teacher I thought i will not able to compare any one in india with my physics teacher but i found one person Today
@bernstock
7 ай бұрын
My man! That was an epic video!! I never thought to just crunch down the 3 spatial dimensions into one perpendicular time… what a great way to explain it. Last bit was awesome, STRONG FINISH 💪🏼 Loving your videos, keep em coming!
@jgoogle4256
6 ай бұрын
Maybe the best physics video I’ve ever seen on YT. If I must criticize, the last part about time felt a bit hand wavy. Why do we all experience the same dimension of time? Maybe other particles could’ve had their velocity in another direction, leading them to experience time in another direction. As I write this, I realize maybe that’s precisely what you described - those other particles simply seem to take on a spatial velocity as well as temporal. But in the extreme case, why can’t a particle have its time velocity in the complete opposite direction? Would it be flowing back in time relative to us? And why does length contracting it down to zero result in the experience of time as we know it? That was not explained as far as I can tell. Thanks a lot, amazing that our reality is so fundamentally different from what we may consider to be definitely true based on everyday expedience
@qui11
7 ай бұрын
This guy is a god at explaining length contraction
@novataco5412
Ай бұрын
14:40 “[Just because we can’t comprehend it], that shouldn’t stop us from trying to understand the implications of this,” me with physics.
@sedeheless
3 ай бұрын
Your explanations really give me another eye on the beautifull discipline I have the luck to teach ! Thank you so much for your insane enthusiasm and accuracy ! There is, however, one small point that concerns me. I know scientific popularization is hard because of the choices you have to make, but I never saw you tell anything about the hyperbolic geometry of space-time. I all your videos you're considering the global speed as if space-time were a euclidian manifold, using Pythagore (the sum the squared components instead of there difference). I know this makes it easier to understand, but I think it has strong limits. Especially on your last part, I never heard about this way of considering time as a random direction in the origin of space-time... But I don't see how this can be possible, considering the fact that time counts as the opposite of space in the Minkowski metric. I may need some documentation to understand this better, but I have to say, this is very confusing :) One can easily create paradoxes with this euclidian metric. Even the explanations in your videos could be challenged using some simple thought experiments. So it would be great to tell about it ones, may be in a future video ? :D I hope I didn't miss the one where you explain that detail, if it exists. Ones again, thank you so much for the insane content you give us !
@ashishgmath
7 ай бұрын
Amazing video, Mahesh! Hats off!
@sharthakghosh970
2 ай бұрын
I watched this video twice not because I didn't understand it the first time but because I wanted my mind to be blown twice. Especially the last part of the video.
@gonegahgah
7 ай бұрын
Glad you are enthusiastic. What if the table starts moving the opposite way? This also brings up the issue of the twin paradox issue. If you take the opposite position that the plane is stationery and the table is making those maenovres, then the plane observer should experience the time dilation of a shadow moving on its hull. The problem with the twin paradox is that both twins think the other twin is the one moving.
@valorianbronze2683
5 ай бұрын
I like many of your other videos, but not this one. It was wrong to assume that the plane shadow as it moved vertically would appear to be at rest by the "flatlanders". It is not. In the 1st example, the shadow moving vertically would grow, unless you assume a constant and original condition that all light rays are completely parallel and vertically oriented. You'd have to specifically say that for your analogy to make sense. Likewise, for the 2nd plane example all lamps would have light directed in parallel rays either vertically or horizontally. A more interesting extrapolation would be to explore the idea that a growing black hole could be explained as a 3D "shadow" as the light starts to move in a non-spatial direction relative to our space-time.
@Stephen-yd7ce
7 ай бұрын
Wow, that was a really good one! Could it be that we are trying to find the answer to space travel backwards? Instead of trying to figure out how to go fast, maybe we should be trying to figure out how to slow down and access the 4th dimension?
@tenminuteretreat807
7 ай бұрын
Regarding the very last part of this video, one thing I wonder about is, if you divert almost all your motion into one of the space dimensions, won't that dimension then simply become your time dimension (being almost entirely contracted away), while what was previously your time dimension becomes "spacialized?"
@ddichny
Ай бұрын
Correct.
@konstantinivanov4714
7 ай бұрын
Love you Mahesh, great explanations! Still a question on my side... Time dilation is observed from the frame of the still observer where events happen at *same place*. But... length contraction is an effect seen from the moving frame in which events happen in *same time*. How do these projections make sense in the both cases? Are these just a teaching metaphor or do you think it is more real than that?
@scotttcp3880
5 ай бұрын
Great teacher. Love the passion.
@AndrewSchiessl
7 ай бұрын
I absolutely love your enthusiasm! Your videos are so much fun and I learn amazing things!
@harrisbinkhurram
7 ай бұрын
You're now one of my favorite youtubers.
@Devendr7
Ай бұрын
This video really took the physics to the next level
@royhsieh4307
6 ай бұрын
you are damn right, we all move at the speed of light at our space time. If we don't move at the speed of light in our space time, we'd be moving at the speed of light in other spacetime, aka the blackhole/dark energy of our spacetime
@ayushsahoo2078
7 ай бұрын
That's Great, that's mind-blowing, keep making videos on such topics, and thank you, sir, for such a marvelous experience!!!!!!!! Could you please provide the link for that book?
@Paul71H
5 ай бұрын
This video is great and it makes a lot of sense. But... measuring speed (whether the speed of light or any other speed) means measuring distance traveled per unit of time. How can we meaningfully talk about the speed at which something travels along the dimension of time? Doesn't a notion of speed require a notion of time that is completely separate from the notion of distance traveled? So if we are travelling a distance along the time axis, then what is the "time" that we are using to measure the speed of that travel?
@Mahesh_Shenoy
5 ай бұрын
No. of your clock ticks per my clock tick. Just like how I measure your spatial speed as no. of your foot steps per my clock tick.
@phutureproof
6 ай бұрын
if you could be perfectly still, how quickly would you travel through time? we cant do this on earth because earth itself is spinning around and orbiting a star, that star is in an arm of a spiral galaxy that is rotating around a black hole. but if you could find a place that is actually still, how fast would time be from that position, would it pass at the speed of light?
@jensphiliphohmann1876
7 ай бұрын
12:44 The problem with this model is that the horizontal line _does_ represent a coordinate line whereas the vertical does _not._ The model actually swaps coordinate time with proper time and thus doesn't really represented spacetime. In this picture, the proper timepoint τ respectively the proper timespan Δτ, is represented by the vertical coordinate z respectively the coordinate difference Δz. The coordinate timepoint t respectively timespan Δt is represented by the position s along respectively the length Δs of the path the body has travelled between some events. In real spacetime, it's the other way around: Coordinate time is a coordinate or a coordinate difference whereas proper time is a path parameter respectively a path length between two events along a world line. So the actual hypotenuse of a rectangular triangle in a t-x-plane of spacetime is not Δt but Δτ, and we have (1) Δτ² = Δt² - Δx²/c² which is called the MINKOWSKI metric, similar to PYTHAGORAS but not the same. The minus sign in (1) also gives us another difference between the t coordinate and, say, the x coordinate, and between timelikely separated events where Δτ is a real quantity, lightlikely separated events where Δτ is zero and spacelikely separated events where Δτ is an imaginary quantity. What does an imaginary proper time even mean? A spatial distance, actually. In pairs of events where Δt
@APaleDot
7 ай бұрын
Thank you! I knew there was simplification happening that wasn't vibing with more detailed explanations I've heard and you've articulated the exact issue. My question is what are the implications for this visualization? We are dealing with hyperbolic rotations in that case, right?
@jensphiliphohmann1876
7 ай бұрын
@@APaleDot Of course we are dealing with hyperbolic rotation which is the LORENTZ transformation. The rotation "angle" is called rapidity whos hyperbolic tangent, multiplied by c, is the velocity.
@lincolnkaden7758
6 ай бұрын
What a brilliant explanation! So intuitive. Thank you
@mumj9
7 ай бұрын
Question at 19:43 based on this, the only way the twins can meet up is if the brother deviates while the sister stays in the same space. This will make it so theyre again the same age when they meet up and they can never meet up with different ages. Is that true? In other words, time dilation is not real but imaginary?
@Darisiabgal7573
7 ай бұрын
I can get to this much faster. GR. No natural reference point in the universe, no universal reference inertia. We can create a reference intertia by averaging the motion of things far-far away (say 1 billion) and then create a point to go with that comoving inertial frame, but if I move say 10 million ly that reference point will change. So what is Spacetime. Its a field, it doesnt have a force g, but the curvature indirectly causes it. It does more directly create a force, called the tidal force which is much weaker than gravity which is just to say different points in space have different curvature tensors. In this example suppose we are trying to build a colony in space and we attach each of the buildings with a string each building surrounding a city hall. The buildings above and below the hall though moving exactly the same speed and direction will exert a outward force. When you get close to a black hole this force is called spaggetification. So the question is why and the answer is that each object in an orbit is in its own hamiltonian and thus PE + KE are osscilating relative to each other. The next thing we realize is that everything has an instance of the same. If you throw a basketball at a hoop, the while in flight shrank the hole earth to a hoop, that basketball would assume an orbit. What force is applied to the ball is the ball striking the electrostatic forces associated with the ground. OK so GR posits no universal reference frame or points, objects move according to inertia through the curvature of spacetime. Does Soacetime have a mass, no. Does it have energy, very little. What causes spacetime to curve, energy within it. If energy is added to spacetime at a point how fast does the curvature change. Since spacetime has no resting mass and very little energy waves in spacetime travel at C. In fact we should change this, light in a vacuum travels at the rate spacetime evolves. Lets step backwards, what is the inertial reference frame? There is none. Spacetime evolves in all directions at c. So when we measure a pruturbation in spacetime, say with ligo, that wave is propogating through spacetime. No stop. the wave is spacetime, the difference between the purturbation and normality is the wave is big enough to detect under certain circumstances, in fact space time is a dynamic equilibrium of waves and, if we carry the analogy, particles. The particles are evoloving in every direction at c all the time. Technically we are moving through spacetime at C, but more accurately spacetime converges and diverges from us at C. If we were to get close enough to a black hole so that we could see a probe fall into a black hole, and we had a very sturdy clock that clock on the ship would register time as normal, but our observation of its time is that it slowed, and the ship would almost stop on entry. The reason is that spacetime convergence around the ship from our perspective is altering the ship, flattening it along the radial. But the ship doesn't see its flattening. The ships component in its space is normal but its in pancaked space. That is the nature of spacetime. Here is a question for you. Lets say we have a black hole and we have isolated this black hole so that no energy can fall into it. And so we take Elon's orbiting red sports car and drop it into the black hole and we see the car flatten and merge with the event horizon. So then we monitor Hawking radiation increase frequency for trillions of years and finally one day the black hole disappeared in a great flash of ultra-high energy gamma. We go to the place and no thing remains. What happened to the sports car? Did it disappear from the black holes mass first or last? Car enters event horizon, low frequency radiation comes out then higher frequency, but no matter. Harder question, as we look out at expanding space we can see back to the CMBR, but lets imagine there is a hole in the CMBR so that we can see electrons traveling at an earlier time, from our perspective their spacetime is stretched out thus an electron from our perspective can travel faster than we can C, but if it travels faster than c, then we cannot see it traveling away from us or orthogonally, and if its traveling towards us because of spatial expansion it slows down. So if something is traveling faster than C how would we know in this experment we only know because it traveled to us and thus slowed down. In fact the CMBR horizon tells us something, the Z value shift indicates that it is very close to points in space far enough from our comoving frame in the early universe that we could no longer see them and thus we can make no assessment of velocity, the only thing we can argue is these aphysical comoving points are moving faster away from each other than C. And so lets quantitize space and start with a point. P1, P1 is the entire universe and is dimensionless, time does not exist. P1 evolves into p2 and 3, you develop a spatial dimension, prototime, spacetime is radiating. Lets say these two evolve from each other at c (time is not real and so it could be any speed, but lets just argue that these particles evolve consistently). p2,3 then diverge into p4,5,6,7 depending how this occurs you get 2 or three spatial dimensions they also diverge at c , if this secodary divergence occurs orthogonally to the first then some particles are traveling away from each other 1.414c. Then the particles diverge into 8 particles and some particles are radiating at 1.732c, its not until we get 16 particles that a field begins to start to form, very tangentially close back in on itself. From this model space expands rapidly except at the center as it equilibrates. There is nothing to stop the inflation process only stabilize the interior through a dynamic equibrium of spatial creation and deletion. Thus C is a constant in the dynamic equilibrium, it need not have always been a constant. But the only real reason C would not be a constant is the smallest useful spatial division of the universe is such a high proportion of the universe that we are essentially merging planck scale variation with cosmology. In other words we would need to take a physical perspective completely different from relativistic physics. This is the nature of trying to do theoretical physics before the CMBR. The problem with QM is the nature of reality and then using QM to describe early inflation while at the same time trying to describe it as a past reality. So I break this down as follows. When we consider spacetime its like water flowing in and out of a bucket from many pipes in and many pipes out. Because we float on the bucket we only experience the ripples, the dynamic is manifested in c and G. If we we could inspect the process of a point particle moving through spacetime the process would not be beautiful but chaotic, it would speed up at places, slow down at others, change course this way and that, the particles motion would be like a cocktail waiters motion across a busy dancefloor. But particle must conserve momentum and energy, and so there is a process known as a lagrangian that tells us how to minimize action, its probably not real in the sense that time is linear, but the outcomes are real. IOW things can move faster than c, but within an objective framework of reality in which time is linear, such motions are unreal. So to answer the question, to describe superluminal motion you need a definition of reality that allows it, that means you are setting aside newtonian and relativistic physics and saying that variables in QM motion, no matter how transitory or unmeasurable, can also be real.
@juliavixen176
7 ай бұрын
You should do a video on Terrell Rotation.
@landosllim4576
7 ай бұрын
My fuckin’ chemist… I’m beside myself realizing how many of my physics uncertainties you just holistically resolved. Seriously appreciated. Not sure if you’re not familiar with “Chris the Brain” on KZitem, but I think you both would geek out and come up with some intriguing ideas if you talked. Edit: grammar
@kkarlsen_06
5 ай бұрын
20:00 I'm so curious: You say that since we move at the speed of light through time, it is completely length contracted. Wouldn't that mean that when we divert the speed vector so we get a space component, we aren't moving at the speed of light through time anymore and it shouldn't be 'completely' length contracted?
@deanjelbertaustria6174
7 ай бұрын
I hope someday we can find hacks to travel backwards in the time dimensions, like how we travel through spatial dimensions.. i wanna meet my grandparents again..
@scikick
7 ай бұрын
I don't quite understand the last piece. By "particle" are we referring to subatomic particles or something more encompassing? Like when universe was born, why then do all particles choose to move in the same direction out of possible infinite ones in then 4d space?
@dreamwork69
6 ай бұрын
imma need to watch this video many times to fully understand. but thank u ❤
@chrisehmke1651
7 ай бұрын
As for the twin paradox, the picture suggests that the moving twin experienced more seconds than the stationary twin. So he should be older, but relativity tells us he should be younger. What did I miss?
@veervishalmishra4526
7 ай бұрын
Best explanation
@SurajitGarai-l8j
2 ай бұрын
Your animations are so good😊
@girlinagale
5 ай бұрын
In my 20s I went off travelling in Europe. Always when I returned I appeared younger than friends who had stayed at home :-)
@bubblecast
7 ай бұрын
Surely we can use large language models or ai to fix the length distortion.
@padrickscar
6 ай бұрын
I LOVE this theory! 🤯 And you explained it so well!
@pranavvela3069
7 ай бұрын
I really like your thoughts experiments, they answered many of my questions. Keep it up 👍
@vastcosmos2051
6 ай бұрын
Your energy is as good as your information!
@dglebla
5 ай бұрын
How do we get “time” (eg clocks) by us moving at the speed of light in one dimension?
@stridedeck
7 ай бұрын
Here's the next step which I postulated 3 years ago that is more mind boggling! At every point in space and at every moment in time there is a force expanding at the speed of light in all directions (ie a 4D hypersphere) that moves everything, all objects, even your neurons and neural patterns! In other words, this expanding force causes and creates all motions and movements (our 4 laws of energies)! It also leads to our consciousness and how we got something from nothing (creates matter from nothing)!
@takaidesu1046
7 ай бұрын
That was simply mindblowing
@Zalamedas
6 ай бұрын
Would that imply that hotter objects are moving slower in time relative to cooler objects and vice versa?
@iceseic
7 ай бұрын
you should make another video with the same framework but use the implication to explain gravity if that possible
@JoshuaWeidnerMagician
5 ай бұрын
I'm a little confused by the analogy. What makes the shadow people think the 1m/s speed is a speed limit? If anything, it seems like they may notice the plane's shadow has a speed limit but wouldn't they just see it as some strange object they don't know traveling at some speed, independently of them and whatever speed they can travel?
@MrRastique
7 ай бұрын
BRAVO. YOU NAILED IT.👏👏👏 NICE AND SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND
@samwheller
6 ай бұрын
I feel like we've got that analogy extrapolation from 2D to 3D wrong. (Or I'm an idiot maybe) wouldn't the shadows on the wall just be another 2D plane? I don't think our equivalent idea in this extrapolation is time, I think it's another 3D frame. I think all points in our time-space are 3D frames bound together by time and light is the constant medium within which space-time resides.
@donaldslayer
7 ай бұрын
Just the title made my jaw drop, going to watch but my first thought is: light is still in time, so locked at light speed through space, we move through space at x speed and, then all of the additional speed through time required to equal the speed of light through spacetime, so time dilation is that gradient maintaining our lightspeed movement through spacetime?
@antoniofumagalli3869
6 ай бұрын
Hi, I have a question. This explanation is so good. I understand lenght contraction but what if the moving object is a sphere?
@AlexWalkerSmith
6 ай бұрын
It'll contract just like anything else, becoming more of an oval shape.
@antoniofumagalli3869
6 ай бұрын
@@AlexWalkerSmith if lenght contraction is explained as the shadow of a rotating object, the shadow of a sphere doesn't change with rotation
@AlexWalkerSmith
6 ай бұрын
@@antoniofumagalli3869 true, that's where the analogy breaks down. Plus, the shadow of any 3-D object can't become a thin line, as length contraction would push toward. Not the perfect analogy.
@patrickbranco4537
7 ай бұрын
Absolutely brilliant video and way of explaining ! I have subscribed to your channel. Many thanks !
@Thrillr
6 ай бұрын
11:16 🤯🤔🧠🤯 13:28 time dilation ☝🏾👍🏾👏🏾
@Exuprince
7 ай бұрын
Simply brillant
@imaginingPhysics
7 ай бұрын
15:30 tilting nose up perhaps? I mean, the things in front shift forward in time so the nose of the plane lives a little bit ahead in time. The orientation and the fourvelocity would still be orthogonal in spacetime sense.
@jeffPeck99
7 ай бұрын
The last part and the finale has me in gaga mode 🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯
@somethingwithmint
16 күн бұрын
12:35 classic fallacy of KZitem explanations: 1) let’s make a neat visual that already incorporates the idea we are trying to prove 2) let’s look at working exactly as we designed it to work 3) let’s conclude that this explains the underlying “why?” of an idea 4) thousands of people say “oh my god, the visual performs exactly as designed, ergo the proof is done!” Bruh
@somethingwithmint
16 күн бұрын
The biggest problem with relativity content on YT in general is that no one clearly outlines the purpose of the video - to explain “WHY” or “HOW”. This video, for example, never aims at explaining “WHY”; it takes the constancy of speed through space-time as a core assumption at the beginning, and the rest of it offers analogies that show HOW it works. But since most viewers don’t understand the difference, they come out thinking they understand the “WHY”. And I think education-wise it’s quite a bad result 🤷🏻♂️
@swenic
7 ай бұрын
When I imagine two-dimensional beings I picture their reception to be "without" height so in a sense the only thing they are aware of is a single "horizontal" line consisting of different colours that change in length. I want to perceive depth (distance) in this line but am having trouble wrapping my head around that. It seems we might need three dimensions for the depth perception even if there is an infinitesimal height? Edit: nvm They are obviously using sonar for distance perception.
@michaeldewinter438
6 ай бұрын
Great video! Would you be able to apply these examples to traveling in a warp bubble like with an Alcubierre Drive?
@NiñoMathewAlin
Ай бұрын
i dont get the last part. Can somebody please explain it to me? That would be very much appreciated
@petevenuti7355
7 ай бұрын
So we are inside a four-dimensional black hole falling at the speed of light. We can't see what's ahead of us falling , any signal from what is falling in front of us can't escape, it can't get back to us so we can't see the future. I made a post on my community page to outline this hypothesis in more detail where I explain why you have the apparent expansion of the universe , dark matter etc , all based on this concept.
@johnishikawa2200
6 ай бұрын
Suppose that the astronaut who was coasting after her ship accelerated to it's final coasting speed - assume a large enough fraction of light speed so that these relativistic effects are observable , or macroscopic . So if she tuned in to her favorite tv programs broadcast from the Earth , wouldn't those programs appear to be in " slow motion " to her ? I mean , from her perspective in her ship , SHE can claim to be " at rest " , and it is the Earth that is moving with this constant speed - in the opposite direction . Thus , time has slowed down on Earth from time dilation .
Пікірлер: 1,4 М.