На главнуюНаука и техникаПохожее видеоЕще от: Newsy Science

What Did Einstein Mean By 'Curved' Spacetime? - Newsy

Оценок: 1635 | Просмотров: 198641
We asked two physicists to walk us through one of the basic principles in Einstein's general theory of relativity. See more at http://www.newsy.com/ Follow Mikah Sargent: http://www.twitter.com/MikahSargent Sources: Library of Congress https://www.loc.gov/item/2004671908/#about-this-item Modify PBS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1nbZ4PctOI Modify Videoblocks http://www.videoblocks.com/video/3d-landscape-grid-in-motion/ Modify YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blXeQmfaAiE Modify NASA http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/galex/pia14094.html Modify NASA http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/gpb/gpb_012_prt.htm Modify European Space Agency http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2004/21/image/a/format/large_web/ Modify Library of Congress https://www.loc.gov/item/hec2013001572/ Modify NASA http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/video/details.php?id=1205 Modify NASA https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/details.cgi?aid=11437 Modify NASA https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/details.cgi?aid=10436 Modify European Southern Observatory https://www.eso.org/public/usa/videos/eso1319a/ Image via: Newsy
Категория: Наука и техника
Html code for embedding videos on your blog
Текстовые комментарии (367)
Geoffrey Payne (14 часов назад)
no only are they saying nothing of substance, but they are technically saying stuff that is wrong
Bend Em (2 дня назад)
Wow Einstein they are not.
Donny H (6 дней назад)
Take a big shit of rubber... Painfull learning curve.
Dan Echegoyen (9 дней назад)
An actual model of space time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KDS7HW5F8I&t=3s
Vyra Nightingale (13 дней назад)
At the end there, wouldn't you need to translate into 4D spacetime instead of just 3D space to get the complete picture? There's no good way to visualize or display 4D structures, I know, but shouldn't it have been mentioned?
Edinburgh Wellbeing Centre (24 дня назад)
It could be worth taking a look at the timecompressiontheory.com it is a plug-in to General Relativity and it means that a Unified Field Theory is now possible.
You are soul (1 месяц назад)
1.56 'If you take a big shit...' I'm keeping it classy. :)
F S (1 месяц назад)
“A big shit of rubber” 😂
Archangel Raphael (1 месяц назад)
2 physicists walk us through THEORETICAL BLAH BLAH BLAH in 2 minutes ... and what are we left with when these two PhDUHs who are ignorant of facts that Einstein was also ignorant of ... ? ANSWER one question ... *did Einstein suspect that GRAVITY was CHIRAL?* Now why did Einstein's [died in 1955] woo woo science which was ignorant of the Wu experiment in 1956 continue to live on? geesh and DUH folks the Einstein god was ignorant of a fact, that everybody knows today ... the 4 forces of physics are asymmetrical NOT symmetrical as his generation believed ... standard model of physics was turned upside down in 1956 ... when Einstein was 6 feet under ... ... so after about 100 years you are left with just more THEORETICAL bullshit waiting so desperately for another brain fART to take physics to the next level of AHA FAIL FAIL FAIL the paradox of the human intellect sharing a body with a dimwit lives on ...
Narendra Ghosh (1 месяц назад)
Super Science
Narendra Ghosh (1 месяц назад)
Super Science
W1ll P0w3R (1 месяц назад)
Not one word understood from Olec over here...I feel for his students.
SOURAV AGRAWAL (1 месяц назад)
To maintain a constant acceleration we need a energy supply. In other words if a constant force is applied to a body, for this we need a constant energy supply also. Now if we take earth and moon, earth is applying its gravitational force on moon on a constant basis, now from where earth is getting this energy from ? Certainly every body with a mass exert a gravitational force, but to do this where does a mass gets energy from ? If we consider above logic and if there is a energy source, will it decay like all others, doe that mean amount of gravitational force earth exerting now will be less and less with the time.
X Leshens (1 месяц назад)
2D grid is great for starters, but 3D grid makes much more sense and, I just can't wrap my head around it, cause the trampoline is holding us but 3D purposes, it's curved all around the Earth, at this *Point I give up on this comment*
one thousand percent (1 месяц назад)
see i love the universe i love it because it had to do with my creation, but does it not make sense for things to go up and down, i mean in space there is no up and down so how can gravity pull to all sides at once?
Fantomas (1 месяц назад)
So Antarctica is face down on the fabric of space time?
Sharthak Sarkar (1 месяц назад)
For applying trampoline theory you have to have gravity first.
Priority Save the planet (1 месяц назад)
I totally understand this concept space is in a constant wave form
iwe timer (1 месяц назад)
*_My brain crashed multiple times. Maybe I am not meant to be here_*
goerizal1 (1 месяц назад)
will the 3D or 2D grid work like a trampoline if it is located in space ( without gravity) as it seem to work on earth with earth's gravity pulling the object down the curved incline?
James Brunton (1 месяц назад)
They need to start using the 3d model cause it's creating miss-conceptions and confusing people
Brian Linwell (1 месяц назад)
No shit 3d messes einsteins concept completely. Let me set you straight. The light beam approaching a star does not get pushed out by curved space caused by the star. The foreign light beam gets bumped around our sun because our sun is pushing out light particle force. The original light beam from a distant star resumes its spooky connection from a distance as it travels around our sun. All you jave to do is git me and you'll eat your pudding.
ionut popescu (1 месяц назад)
curved? or de-curved flat space time?
Vinod Jain (1 месяц назад)
in this footage==i think==no one was scientist===all were idiots===time waster
Vicious Raccoon (1 месяц назад)
vishnu sits in the cosmic sea and whole universe is the result of his dreaming....its not fabric of timespace but sea ..as moving mass can created ripples in water so it does in spacetime , the gravitational waves..... we hindus found this way before,
MUHAMMAD SIDIK (1 месяц назад)
Why use trampoline? did God make this world to do some sport?
Franz Janganieri Barbosa (1 месяц назад)
It's exactly the 3D that I don't understand.
Crazy Candy Crush (2 месяца назад)
Enstein is a con man. He can't even pass the entrance math exam to uni.
Gina Tan (2 месяца назад)
Crazy Candy Crush u wish lol.
KLJF (2 месяца назад)
it messes with your head BECAUSE IT DOE NOT WORK , IT'S NONSENCE .
Tshego Kwele (2 месяца назад)
Did you know, 1.Time 2.Matter 3.Space = 1.Father 2.Son 3.Holy Ghost. Einstein was making people pay attention to the fact that we're neglecting the thing which, 'matters'. lol.
Troy Mason (2 месяца назад)
what set everything into motion??? Just chance by the way everything bursted out of the big bang expansion?? It happened to spin?
Xi Le (2 месяца назад)
How does the moon's gravity cause tides on earth by *Issac Newton's equation of gravity or Albert Einstein's equation of relativity?* http://wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2013/05/09/why-does-the-moons-gravity-cause-tides-on-earth-but-the-suns-gravity-doesnt/
Adam Mangler (2 месяца назад)
The rubber sheet analogy is okay up to a point, it gives the general idea, BUT rarely reminds people that there should a kind of infinite number of 'rubber sheets' surrounding any mass. Think in 3 dimensions; and then imagine that the space also has a time element too. :0)
leveltype (2 месяца назад)
I understood the 2D fabric sheet / trampoline concept since I was 12 or so... pretty simple starting point. The 3D grid is what I always picture first thing when gravity and space time are discussed anyway.
Dave Crowder (2 месяца назад)
Thanks again for your contribution about space-time. I used this as a premise in my video on Einstein vs. Newton on Gravity: https://youtu.be/k3i1QQiqSrY
SwissRoll Otaku (2 месяца назад)
okay. So we're all just carbon atoms, that are somehow alive through electrical signals, floating on a rock in space, spinning around the sun because the sun has dented space time? great I love being in year 11 (grade 10)
Marcelo Azotief (2 месяца назад)
Einstein's Theory of General Reactivity with the idea of ​​the space-time fabric is simply absurd, and goes totally against the physical-observational reality. In the event that it were real and existed, that tissue should totally block or block the light that would emanate from the stars, why space surrounds and is in all the neighborhoods or on the sides and above the stars and is not only below them as a floor or as I see in the drawings and graphs of modern cosmology on relativistic space-time fabric. Then, that ethereal fabric of space-time should be filling the entire environment of the stars and as it is present for all directions in the environment of the stars, the lights that the stars emit would never escape and be emitted by space, that the particles or continuous elements constituting the fabric were going to sweep the light until it absorbed it totally, as a material obstacle! Even if the fabric of the space-time of Einstein's relativity was a kind of ground for the stars and was just below them, as shown in the drawings and graphs of modern cosmology, the curvature that the stars made in that one tissue would form a slope, and the planets would all go down that ramp to the surface of the sun, fall on the Sun and they would all be destroyed. This questioning of general relativity can be done experimentally with a simple simulation, it is just taking a trampoline and placing in its center a heavy bowling ball that would correspond to the Sun, and on the peripheries of the bed put gude balls, tennis and several sizes smaller. It will be verified experimentally that the heavy bowling ball will make a slope in the trampoline and the smaller and lighter ones will all roll in that decline falling on the big and heavy central ball! The following video shows an example of scientific refutation in physical - experimental simulation of the general relativity of Einstein, in the video shown below by the physics teacher himself! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-BVkHRLPfo The video above is in accordance with my experimental physical refutations of relativity, if there were curvature of space, the planets go down the slope in the fabric of Einsteinian space - time and roll down that ramp falling on the Sun and being all completely destroyed! Then, existence as we know and observe would be impossible. Not to mention that the teacher in the video, throw the balls to the side of the slope and turning them to obey a translative orbit and try to make it seem proven that with that Einstein's general relativity is scientifically proven. The demonstration that he wanted to give of relativity had the opposite effect of what he tried to pass, served to refute experimentally what he accepts as well as an absurd belief about curvature of space, without empirical and consequently scientific foundation! Then, in various ways, with solid logical, philosophical, empirical reasoning and physical - experimental simulations, the theory of general relativity suffers from immense physical difficulties and impossibilities is rigorously refuted. Source: http: //feitoza-filosofia.blogspot.com/2014/07/refutacao-da-relatividade-geral-de.html
Marcelo Azotief (2 месяца назад)
PelycheeaceRA did not read all his comments, but 1) general relativity does not even postulate the existence of a "fabric" of space-time. the whole fabric thing was only created to give lay people an understanding of the concept. Answer 1: False Einstein in a 1920 letter to Leipz University in response to his Belgian physicist friend Paul Eiwseinherofest said clearly that the idea of ​​time space curvature would imply a new type of ether introduced into the theory of relativity, that space without ether was unthinkable, that purely mathematical space exists only on paper 2) The reason why marbles spiral toward the central mass in your video is because they lose momentum due to friction. there is virtually no friction in space, so the planets continue to orbit (conservation of angular momentum) Answer 2 : False again, because once the curvature of the ether time space is affirmed by the contact of the masses of the stars and stars on this material structure pressing to the sides for it to bend and through its deformation attract the astronomical bodies, these planets are in contact with the physical structure - time space or time space, all the friction observed in the example of the burquinhas falling in the center of the elastic bed should also be observed necessarily with the flexible physical structure time space denominated by the Einsteinians of time space fabric.
PelycheeaceRA (2 месяца назад)
i didnt read your whole comments, but 1) general relativity does not even postulate the existence of a "fabric" of spacetime. the whole fabric thing has only been brought up to give laymen an understanding of the concept. 2) the reason why the marbles spiral towards the central mass in your video is because they loose momentum due to friction. there is virtually no friction in space, so the planets keep orbiting (conservation of angular momentum)
Marcelo Azotief (2 месяца назад)
Space does not suffer from curvature of anything and does not interact with anything. For matter and bodies move, space most probably must be empty and immaterial, if not the movement of things, bodies and phenomena or it would be difficult or impossible! They are the things that move in space, but space itself is not moved by anything, is not distorted or curved by bodies or stars and remains always in its usual place. As César Lattes said, Einstein was foolish. Einstein's theory of relativity is a pseudo-scientific theory, in the very terms of relativity it is spoken in pseudo-Euclidean metric, pseudo-Riemannian variety and etc ... (In English) "Space-time intervals, conceived in a variety (mathematical term), define a pseudo-Euclidean metric called a Lorentz Metric.This metric is similar to that of distances in Euclidean space, but it is observed that while distances always are positive, space-time intervals can be positive, null or negative Events with a space-time interval of zero are only separated by the propagation of a cones of light light Events with a positive space-time interval, in the sense that the observer was traveling between them Spacetime, seen in light of this pseudo-Euclidean metric, constitutes a pseudo-Riemannian variety. One of the simplest and most interesting examples of spacetime is R4 with the space-time interval already defined behind. This, is known as Minkowski space, being the usual model of the Theory of Relativity restricted. In contrast, General Relativity proposes that the underlying variety should not be flat in the presence of gravity, so space-time rather than Minkowski's space is preferred. Source: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espa%C3%A7-tempo Below are some of my reasonings and philosophical, logical and empirical demonstrations that space is empty and immaterial: Space is immutable and indestructible because it is empty and immaterial, it is the things and bodies that move in space and move only because space is empty, immaterial and immutable. When we move our arms, what is moving is only our arm over space, but space by vacuum and immaterial manages to cross our material and corporeal arms and maintain itself in its immutability and indestructibility. When we destroy and demolish houses and walls, what is destroyed are only the material buildings, but the space where this building was standing, remained unchanged and indestructible in its same place as always. We never manage to move the space of the place, because it is empty and immaterial, being consequently immobile, indestructible and not reactive with anything, with any material body. Source: http://feitoza-filosofia.blogspot.com/2014/07/o-espaco-e-vazio-o-espaco-nao-sofre.html
Aldestructo4321 (2 месяца назад)
2:35 Also why is the fabric bending inward
Aldestructo4321 (2 месяца назад)
Wait so the 2d grid is simply a representation of the bend occuring from a single perspecitve because it is 2d and not 3d?
JohnnyD63007 (2 месяца назад)
Space-time is a concept not a physical entity....The moronic idea of time being the fourth dimension can be traced back to d'Alembert from 18th century. Einstein space-time has no physical reality and is there to replace the Aether...Time  is just a Relative Measure between two movements ....there is no metaphysical Time being part of a fourth dimension .....the whole thing is a  FRAUD. The bending of light is caused by refraction of light thru plasma matter (plasma that form  the corolla of the sun), nothing to do with space-time curvature.
JohnnyD63007 (2 месяца назад)
Man not only you're an ignorant but you're just an IDIOT on top of that enough said....prediction my ass...
PelycheeaceRA (2 месяца назад)
no predictions made? now youre just deliberately ignorant. not gonna argue with that. peace out.
JohnnyD63007 (2 месяца назад)
Still there is no prediction made by General Relativity...The result from the eclipse in 1919 are not meaningful since they took result from north Africa and discarded the one from Sobral,  Brazil .They had 1.5 '' instead of 0.90 ''(which had an error more than 50%) ....the whole thing is just a scam . It's ridiculous to think that a concept like time ( derived from measurement between two relative  movement) can become somehow a secret dimension in union with the already existing 3 dimension of space....Maybe it's good for science fiction books and Hollywood movies .It gives you the impression that time is an entity by itself that can be change (time dilatation)....The only thing that dilates I thing is  Einstein's head....
PelycheeaceRA (2 месяца назад)
sure. theyre mathematical tools we can use to describe reality and make predictions. thats the whole point.
JohnnyD63007 (2 месяца назад)
Time as a 4 th dimension is useful to track a movement just like when you plot speed as y variable against  time for x variable to track acceleration using derivative or force as a y variable against time for x variable to calculate the total impulsion using  integral. Those are MATHEMATICAL TOOLS not REALITY. Time as a 4 dimension attached to space dimension is a FANTASY inspired by French Scientist Jean Le Rond D'Alembert who came up  first with that concept in 18th century .Einstein then paid a visit to an other famous mathematician ,David Hilbert, to put that fancy metric (space-time) in mathematical equation (and by the way , big bang theory and black holes are direct chimeras offspring from that theory)....Einstein is a plagiarist... he took e=mc2 from mathematician Henri Poincare who came up with that conclusion 1 year before him (in 1904). The previous formula calculated by others before Poincare  was e= 4/3 mc2 but Poincare subtracted  to it 1/3 mc2 to take in account the energy needed  to stabilize the electron (and prevented it to become a 'crepe') because of that theoretical space compression along  the x axis. Also his theory of special relativity is inspired from Poincare relativity and Lorentz transformation .When he talks about relative simultaneity is talking about relative perception not reality ...just an other twist from Einstein so called thought experiment...The photoelectric effect is just an application of Max Planck quantic formula for energy (E=hv) applied to the electron. Einstein didn't invent the H bomb , Oppenheimer did...Einstein is just an opportunist and a plagiarist who happen to be at the right place at the right time  and with the help of  Zionist controlled media , has been elevated to a world genius hero stature .
Marek Garamond (3 месяца назад)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkWiBxWieQU Wallace Thornhill: The Long Path to Understanding Gravity | EU2015
Alcides Duarte Falcao (3 месяца назад)
Great video about this wonderful matter. Thanks for the job. This is how science works!
Abdul Azeez (3 месяца назад)
Great !! I like the 3d model
FICTION (3 месяца назад)
Nearly 1400 yrs before its in Quran.... --Chapter 36, verse 38-40. “It is not for the Sun to overtake the Moon nor for the night to outstrip the day; each one is swimming in a sphere.” --Chapter 50, verse 6.
"Do they(Man) not look at the sky above them, how We have built it and adorned it, and there are no rifts in it." --Chapter 31, verse 10:
"(God) created the sky without any pillars that you can see..." --Chapter 51 , verse 47: And the sky, We(God) built it with craftsmanship and We are still expanding it. --Chapter 81, verse 15-18 So verily, I swear by the stars that are veiled(Have blackness/hidden for our eyes). And by the (sweeping) stars that move swiftly and hide themselves. And by the night as it departs; And by the dawn as it brightens. The holy Quran mentions the black holes by its very specific characteristics, these are : 1 - They are running stars. 2 - They are veiled or receded. 3 - They are sweeping stars. --Chapter 56, verse 75-77 Then I(God) swear by the places where stars fall/drop. And indeed, this is a great evidence/oath if you could know. That this Quran is a very noble book(Sayings of God, signs for those who read & Research).
David Crowder (3 месяца назад)
This a lesson I made for my middle school science classes on Gravity: https://youtu.be/1kpmCheiDrw Respectfully, I used some of your content as part of it. I do not monetize my videos. Much thanks for your addition to the internet knowledge base! Dave
MrMarco84 (4 месяца назад)
2:37 isn't that grid bent in the wrong direction? as far as i get it, the space is suppressed by a heavy mass object, the light goes around it. Imagine a 3D grid, now press a ball in it, the lines would bent convex around it and not towards it.
Jesper (4 месяца назад)
Was looking at my phone, as the male physicist said: "if you take big shiit of rubber" I thought to my self. Science is messy.... and a little gross.
pkt rkt (4 месяца назад)
To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view. Tesla
K. Chris Caldwell (4 месяца назад)
There are only two entities in the universe: Energy, in all of its forms, and space. Period. Time is only apparent from the interaction of energy with space. Some energy here, a change in energy here, let us call that one second. Or, some energy here, over there, back here, let that be called one second. Time then is not a real entity, the passing of time is, but time itself is a change of energy in relation to space. It follows then that _space-time_ is nonsense. To say _space-time_ is to say _space-and change of all the energy of the universe in relation to all the universe's space._ Or to use space as a coordinate is to say, 3 from that, 4 from that, 6 from this, and all the energy in the universe as related to all the space in the universe. Yes, _Relativity_ is real, but the interpretation is wrong. Until mankind defines time properly, physics and the understanding of the universe will remain stymied.
Marcelo Azotief (2 месяца назад)
Einstein's Theory of General Reactivity with the idea of ​​the space-time fabric is simply absurd, and goes totally against the physical-observational reality. In the event that it were real and existed, that tissue should totally block or block the light that would emanate from the stars, why space surrounds and is in all the neighborhoods or on the sides and above the stars and is not only below them as a floor or as I see in the drawings and graphs of modern cosmology on relativistic space-time fabric. Then, that ethereal fabric of space-time should be filling the entire environment of the stars and as it is present for all directions in the environment of the stars, the lights that the stars emit would never escape and be emitted by space, that the particles or continuous elements constituting the fabric were going to sweep the light until it absorbed it totally, as a material obstacle! Even if the fabric of the space-time of Einstein's relativity was a kind of ground for the stars and was just below them, as shown in the drawings and graphs of modern cosmology, the curvature that the stars made in that one tissue would form a slope, and the planets would all go down that ramp to the surface of the sun, fall on the Sun and they would all be destroyed. This questioning of general relativity can be done experimentally with a simple simulation, it is just taking a trampoline and placing in its center a heavy bowling ball that would correspond to the Sun, and on the peripheries of the bed put gude balls, tennis and several sizes smaller. It will be verified experimentally that the heavy bowling ball will make a slope in the trampoline and the smaller and lighter ones will all roll in that decline falling on the big and heavy central ball! The following video shows an example of scientific refutation in physical - experimental simulation of the general relativity of Einstein, in the video shown below by the physics teacher himself! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-BVkHRLPfo The video above is in accordance with my experimental physical refutations of relativity, if there were curvature of space, the planets go down the slope in the fabric of Einsteinian space - time and roll down that ramp falling on the Sun and being all completely destroyed! Then, existence as we know and observe would be impossible. Not to mention that the teacher in the video, throw the balls to the side of the slope and turning them to obey a translative orbit and try to make it seem proven that with that Einstein's general relativity is scientifically proven. The demonstration that he wanted to give of relativity had the opposite effect of what he tried to pass, served to refute experimentally what he accepts as well as an absurd belief about curvature of space, without empirical and consequently scientific foundation! Then, in various ways, with solid logical, philosophical, empirical reasoning and physical - experimental simulations, the theory of general relativity suffers from immense physical difficulties and impossibilities is rigorously refuted. Source: http: //feitoza-filosofia.blogspot.com/2014/07/refutacao-da-relatividade-geral-de.html
KV Jithin (4 месяца назад)
A giant stone inside a water bents or displaces water. But only the water exerts the pressure of its displacement back on the giant stone. How can some other object, maybe a small nail get attracted and stick on to this giant stone. Isnt that the gravitational pull explained here in a manner. But I feel this is impossible. because only space is supposed to be bent. And empty space is empty and how can emptiness exert pressure or force on other objects.
KV Jithin (1 месяц назад)
+PelycheeaceRA Atleast, if u know it better way, please give guidelines to understand the curvature of space time. I am hardly able to fit this concept in to understanding the real world. For me it looks like that is a much more complex determination and leading me to flat earth concept because of curved space time.
KV Jithin (1 месяц назад)
+PelycheeaceRA Buddy. When physics can't explain certain things, don't leave it to philosophy or religion. As I know, "why" is always better explained by physics (Except this subject as I know). No philosophy, no religion does ever explained "why" or "how" as better as science does.
PelycheeaceRA (1 месяц назад)
well no it doesnt explain "why" things follow geodesics. just like quantum physics doesnt explain "why" opposite charges attract each other, or "why" two identical fermions cant occupy the same quantum state. but its a representation of reality that fits our observations better than the 3d method. and thats the whole point of physics. "why" is a question for philosophy or religion, not for physics.
KV Jithin (1 месяц назад)
+PelycheeaceRA You explained well from a 4 dimensional perspective. But the problem here needs more details to prove. First of all there is no such thing as 3 dimensions or 4 dimensions in the real world. Its just a globally accepted term created by human mind to analyse real world materials fundamentally. In 3 dimensional system, we measure only length in horizontal (x), vertical (y), and field depth(z). It doesnt mean that the world is 3 dimensional, but we humans use this method to analyze any particular object in size using 3 dimensional method. Now if u want to reason out why do objects fall, using 3 dimensional system, u will get a straight down, because the basic of 3 dimension system is implemented with the factors of horizontal, vertical etc Its basic itself is formed from us standing on earth. Now if u implement a four dimensional system where the 4th axis is time, it simply just went to a complex method of analysis of real world material. Only the analysis method is changing and u r getting a different shape result of graph representation. Such as u said above, using that complex 4 dimensional analysis, if u will reason out, why do objects fall, the 4 dimensional analysis (space time) was made to be curved and objects fall can be graphically represented as a straight line. Graphically, but the real world is still real world, and its not just these 4 dimensions that exist simultaneously. My point is simply easy to understand if u can relate this example. Consider water freezing at 0 degree celcius. Well its again another human made analysis to relatively understand temperature of any material. If u use this system of measurement, the water always freezes at 0 degree celcius, but if u use another system of temp measurement such as kelvin, u get the same water freezing at 273 k. This explains that if u use two methods of analysis, u get two entirely different results. But it doesnt explain why water freezes. Now bring up the real question, as why do objects fall. (1) If u use the 3 dimensional analysis, u are pointing a negative value in the y axis or a straight vertical downward graph representation. (2) if u use 4 dimensional method of analysis, u get a straight graphical representation, since the spacetime method is explained to be curved around. But it doesnt explain why do objects fall, that only gives a different graph representation or value. It is different simply because the method of analysis is different. The difference doesn't prove nor explain the fact as to why do objects fall.
PelycheeaceRA (2 месяца назад)
spaceTIME is bent. things move in straight lines unless a force acts on them. but a line that looks straight in 3 dimensions doesnt have to be straight in 4 dimensions. imagine a curved stick. if you hold it so that the direction of its curvature aligns with your line of sight, you dont see the curvature. thats why the "time" in spacetime is important. when an object is attracted by gravity, it still follows a straight line in 4 dimensional spacetime (called geodesic). theres no force needed. its just that spacetime is curved in a way so the objects FUTURE doesnt coincide with a line thats straight in 3 dimensions.
jukodebu (4 месяца назад)
more 3D explanation
star of shield (4 месяца назад)
Im here for my college homework..
James Wiliams (4 месяца назад)
The Physical characteristics of TIME in relation to Time Travel The presence of matter gives birth to Time being the ideal means by which man can ascertain the perfection of the movement through which God created the universe. As there can be no Light without the sun, so there cannot be TIME without matter. TIME is a tool for man like the stethoscope that reads the beats of the heart but without ever being able to intervene or influence the way the heart works or functions! https://plus.google.com/+jameswiliams How God created Time http://curezone.com/ig/i.asp?i=44451 God bless
saurave bhatia (4 месяца назад)
These all are theories with no credible evidence. Infact Gravity itself a theory to define how objects fall down straight and how things work. But there is no physical evidence of such force.
Pat O'Malley (2 месяца назад)
Newton explained gravity, Cavendish demonstrated it and Einstein refined it in relation to the speed of light constant.
PelycheeaceRA (2 месяца назад)
things fall. we call that phenomenon "gravity". you can argue about what causes it, but you cant deny that it exists. or are you denying that things do in fact fall?
Surprize Toyz Collector (4 месяца назад)
2:33 When we try to model it in 3D it messes it completely, cos it is all a bullshit !!!
Nitin B (4 месяца назад)
say if there was a 3d trampoline with sun at the centre then not all planets would have almost the same plan of orbit. some would be rotating on a plain that passes through sun's north and south pole and others on plain through sun's equator and yet others on even different plains. but even more likely, they would not orbit. they would just smash into sun and merge. afterall, in any kind of trampoline , whether 2d or 3d, it's all downhill once you are inside the depression.
PelycheeaceRA (2 месяца назад)
the planets orbit in one plane because they also attract each other. they dont crash into the sun because while they keep falling towards it, they keep missing the sun because of the tangential component of their orbital velocity. and they dont loose that velocity because theres no friction in space.
Mojo (5 месяцев назад)
but what if your all wrong?
Ranjit Kumar (5 месяцев назад)
Enstiens theory of relativity and tgeory of black holes cant relate with each other eiher of them is wrong
prakash rao (5 месяцев назад)
even after that ill be just thinking of gravitation field
Alex Borderli (5 месяцев назад)
no one of the speaking about the subject really knows what the curved spacetime means they just repeat what someone said to them before
Green Envy (5 месяцев назад)
Amy Schumer bends space time.
David Bacote (5 месяцев назад)
Ok she says that it isn't true the space is empty but what she never answers and none these"explainations" ever answer is what is space made of if it isn't empty !!! Is it an EM field or what ?!? What exactly is being curved. Don't tell me space because that doesn't answer what space is if it isn't empty !
g srinivasa rao (5 месяцев назад)
Why does space bend due to gravity
AL Can (5 месяцев назад)
Planets don’t sit on space, space contours, or squeezes, around objects equally on all sides. This is what causes planets “gravity”. The object in space has a magnetic field that causes a sort of “top and bottom”. The stretched out middle of the object, due to the magnetic field and the squeezing of space, is where planets gets “caught” and end up circling around said object, gravity.
Sucky Gamer (5 месяцев назад)
If the fabric of space warps massive objects shouldn’t space itself have a boundary? This boundary should deflect the fabric of space in all directions in the universe. What if space was program at a scale that it knows what size it needs to be to contain all the matter and dark matter from the expansion it’s self and keep everything within the time to expand out into the multiverse?
Marcelo Azotief (2 месяца назад)
Einstein's Theory of General Reactivity with the idea of ​​the space-time fabric is simply absurd, and goes totally against the physical-observational reality. In the event that it were real and existed, that tissue should totally block or block the light that would emanate from the stars, why space surrounds and is in all the neighborhoods or on the sides and above the stars and is not only below them as a floor or as I see in the drawings and graphs of modern cosmology on relativistic space-time fabric. Then, that ethereal fabric of space-time should be filling the entire environment of the stars and as it is present for all directions in the environment of the stars, the lights that the stars emit would never escape and be emitted by space, that the particles or continuous elements constituting the fabric were going to sweep the light until it absorbed it totally, as a material obstacle! Even if the fabric of the space-time of Einstein's relativity was a kind of ground for the stars and was just below them, as shown in the drawings and graphs of modern cosmology, the curvature that the stars made in that one tissue would form a slope, and the planets would all go down that ramp to the surface of the sun, fall on the Sun and they would all be destroyed. This questioning of general relativity can be done experimentally with a simple simulation, it is just taking a trampoline and placing in its center a heavy bowling ball that would correspond to the Sun, and on the peripheries of the bed put gude balls, tennis and several sizes smaller. It will be verified experimentally that the heavy bowling ball will make a slope in the trampoline and the smaller and lighter ones will all roll in that decline falling on the big and heavy central ball! The following video shows an example of scientific refutation in physical - experimental simulation of the general relativity of Einstein, in the video shown below by the physics teacher himself! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-BVkHRLPfo The video above is in accordance with my experimental physical refutations of relativity, if there were curvature of space, the planets go down the slope in the fabric of Einsteinian space - time and roll down that ramp falling on the Sun and being all completely destroyed! Then, existence as we know and observe would be impossible. Not to mention that the teacher in the video, throw the balls to the side of the slope and turning them to obey a translative orbit and try to make it seem proven that with that Einstein's general relativity is scientifically proven. The demonstration that he wanted to give of relativity had the opposite effect of what he tried to pass, served to refute experimentally what he accepts as well as an absurd belief about curvature of space, without empirical and consequently scientific foundation! Then, in various ways, with solid logical, philosophical, empirical reasoning and physical - experimental simulations, the theory of general relativity suffers from immense physical difficulties and impossibilities is rigorously refuted. Source: http: //feitoza-filosofia.blogspot.com/2014/07/refutacao-da-relatividade-geral-de.html
Hassan Khan (5 месяцев назад)
How can a massive body be placed on the (space-time) trampoline to make it bend... I mean that how can time be treated as a space related phenomenon and bend... Please someone help me...!!
Wes Baumguardner (5 месяцев назад)
Einstein was a lunatic, not a scientist. The model does not work for 3D space, which is quite obvious. Neither space nor time have properties of physical geometry and cannot be bent or warped. Only energy has physical properties, which is why all observations are made of and with energy. Space is not energy and is both inside and outside of all energy so when energy moves, space is completely unaffected, however other energy is affected. Only energy can effect energy. To claim space effects energy is equivalent to saying leprechans effect energy.
Marcelo Azotief (2 месяца назад)
Space does not suffer from curvature of anything and does not interact with anything. For matter and bodies move, space most probably must be empty and immaterial, if not the movement of things, bodies and phenomena or it would be difficult or impossible! They are the things that move in space, but space itself is not moved by anything, is not distorted or curved by bodies or stars and remains always in its usual place. As César Lattes said, Einstein was foolish. Einstein's theory of relativity is a pseudo-scientific theory, in the very terms of relativity it is spoken in pseudo-Euclidean metric, pseudo-Riemannian variety and etc ... (In English) "Space-time intervals, conceived in a variety (mathematical term), define a pseudo-Euclidean metric called a Lorentz Metric.This metric is similar to that of distances in Euclidean space, but it is observed that while distances always are positive, space-time intervals can be positive, null or negative Events with a space-time interval of zero are only separated by the propagation of a cones of light light Events with a positive space-time interval, in the sense that the observer was traveling between them Spacetime, seen in light of this pseudo-Euclidean metric, constitutes a pseudo-Riemannian variety. One of the simplest and most interesting examples of spacetime is R4 with the space-time interval already defined behind. This, is known as Minkowski space, being the usual model of the Theory of Relativity restricted. In contrast, General Relativity proposes that the underlying variety should not be flat in the presence of gravity, so space-time rather than Minkowski's space is preferred. Source: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espa%C3%A7-tempo Below are some of my reasonings and philosophical, logical and empirical demonstrations that space is empty and immaterial: Space is immutable and indestructible because it is empty and immaterial, it is the things and bodies that move in space and move only because space is empty, immaterial and immutable. When we move our arms, what is moving is only our arm over space, but space by vacuum and immaterial manages to cross our material and corporeal arms and maintain itself in its immutability and indestructibility. When we destroy and demolish houses and walls, what is destroyed are only the material buildings, but the space where this building was standing, remained unchanged and indestructible in its same place as always. We never manage to move the space of the place, because it is empty and immaterial, being consequently immobile, indestructible and not reactive with anything, with any material body. Source: http://feitoza-filosofia.blogspot.com/2014/07/o-espaco-e-vazio-o-espaco-nao-sofre.html
Isaac Berry (5 месяцев назад)
Clock In The Centrifuge Is Just An Einstein Way Of Measuring Gravity. Gravity Is A Bend In Space. When You Are On An Amusement Park Ride & Are Pushed Outward, That Is Gravity. A "Bend In Space You Went Through" Without Even Knowing It. It's Not Theory It's Just A Measured Effect.
cleveque (5 месяцев назад)
Here's some advice for the uploader: The trampoline analogy is entirely unhelpful, and the reason people say "oh, I get it now" is that they assume that you don't know what you're talking about or that you're a terrible teacher and they don't want to embarrass you. Listening to you any further would probably be a complete waste of their time and if they say "oh, I get it now" perhaps you'll shut up and leave. It's a very misleading analogy. Explain it in 3 dimensions. It's not that hard. Your 3D diagram isn't even consistent with the trampoline, because the trampoline is wrong.
Dijon Brown (5 месяцев назад)
It messes with your head completely.... Yeah, thanks Einstein.
Sanny K (6 месяцев назад)
Well the 3D version would be like water and has a velocity where Mass can fload. Can also see iT as different layers like oil on water, would also explain the “waves” Funny would be when at the start all matter was at he same level, but “time” and “space density” Lets matter sink and drift. Together with the “waves” “current” makes ‘m spin while the object with the most Mass Lets em form a galaxy. And are the waves the golden ratio? That would explain why we see iT everywhere.
Ken Behrendt (6 месяцев назад)
The Einsteinian concept of warped "spacetime" is total nonsense folks. Space is nothingness and nothingness can not be bent, flexed, stretched, twisted, warped, weighed, or painted green! One does not need to warp space in order to explain how the straight line path of a photon gets deflected as it passes near a massive body in space. All one needs to do is say that the photon has some gravitational mass and it is being attracted to the body's gravity field.
Donny H (6 дней назад)
Einstein messed with Newton theory so things can be proven wrong or at least not correct, but I figure you having no equations and backup for your mix, Einstein is the way forward.
Marcelo Azotief (2 месяца назад)
Space does not suffer from curvature of anything and does not interact with anything. For matter and bodies move, space most probably must be empty and immaterial, if not the movement of things, bodies and phenomena or it would be difficult or impossible! They are the things that move in space, but space itself is not moved by anything, is not distorted or curved by bodies or stars and remains always in its usual place. As César Lattes said, Einstein was foolish. Einstein's theory of relativity is a pseudo-scientific theory, in the very terms of relativity it is spoken in pseudo-Euclidean metric, pseudo-Riemannian variety and etc ... (In English) "Space-time intervals, conceived in a variety (mathematical term), define a pseudo-Euclidean metric called a Lorentz Metric.This metric is similar to that of distances in Euclidean space, but it is observed that while distances always are positive, space-time intervals can be positive, null or negative Events with a space-time interval of zero are only separated by the propagation of a cones of light light Events with a positive space-time interval, in the sense that the observer was traveling between them Spacetime, seen in light of this pseudo-Euclidean metric, constitutes a pseudo-Riemannian variety. One of the simplest and most interesting examples of spacetime is R4 with the space-time interval already defined behind. This, is known as Minkowski space, being the usual model of the Theory of Relativity restricted. In contrast, General Relativity proposes that the underlying variety should not be flat in the presence of gravity, so space-time rather than Minkowski's space is preferred. Source: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espa%C3%A7-tempo Below are some of my reasonings and philosophical, logical and empirical demonstrations that space is empty and immaterial: Space is immutable and indestructible because it is empty and immaterial, it is the things and bodies that move in space and move only because space is empty, immaterial and immutable. When we move our arms, what is moving is only our arm over space, but space by vacuum and immaterial manages to cross our material and corporeal arms and maintain itself in its immutability and indestructibility. When we destroy and demolish houses and walls, what is destroyed are only the material buildings, but the space where this building was standing, remained unchanged and indestructible in its same place as always. We never manage to move the space of the place, because it is empty and immaterial, being consequently immobile, indestructible and not reactive with anything, with any material body. Source: http://feitoza-filosofia.blogspot.com/2014/07/o-espaco-e-vazio-o-espaco-nao-sofre.html
Ken Behrendt (5 месяцев назад)
I'm not the only one finding fault with Einsteinian relativity. Here's a short article that may help you overcome the spell Einstein's "revelations" cast upon several generations of people who accepted them without question: http://living-universe.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/19-Einstein%E2%80%99s-Bogus-Deflection-of-Starlight.pdf
THINKOFTHE CHILDREN (5 месяцев назад)
u right I'll trust the random guy on the internet over 100 years of rigorously tested physics.
akhilz illuminati (6 месяцев назад)
Now what is your doubt
akhilz illuminati (6 месяцев назад)
They are telling the space bend due to weight then why the light can' t bent. they are totally wrong I know the answer. As light travels in straight line as it does not have weight then why it have to cure or Bend .If it is correct comment me
Mr. Nonchalant (6 месяцев назад)
It makes more sence to me when i think about the grid 3 dimensionally.
facepalm (6 месяцев назад)
It shouldn't, because they both lack the dimension of time. The way it is explained here and in virtually all popular science material available, is that light just follows the curvature of space. And the analogy with marbles on a sheet with dimple is actually using your intuitive understanding of gravity, to explain gravity! If you hold an apple in your hand and release it, then why does it start to move towards the Earth? It's not because it follows the curved space, because it's not moving to begin with. It's because it also follows the curved time! That is a very important detail. You can not explain gravity without taking time into account.
Aditya Maru (6 месяцев назад)
Great!!!! 🙂🙂🙂🙂
Heriberto Villanueva (6 месяцев назад)
Short cuts for long distance that's what l learned
METO U (6 месяцев назад)
Don't listen to this bullshit. Space does not Warp. You can see the star behind the Sun during eclipse not because space is being warped. It's the magnetism of the Sun that is repelling the light. Exactly like you would expect from magnets. Einstein's theory is meant to confuse people. They will do everything but say what gravity is magnetism. Which is the only Force.
MachadoSwag (6 месяцев назад)
"If you take a big shit of rubber ... "
Hammer Lirox (6 месяцев назад)
And then add time. Try to imagine in 4D...
Maccario ako (6 месяцев назад)
Einstein is wrong. There is no curviture in outer space. Light is the ultimate creator thats how we see everything. Space is nothing,its just part of the never ending reason to underatand. Humans are so fool in reaching the ultimate creator of this world we live.
facepalm (6 месяцев назад)
You're right, there is no "curviture".
aviv s (6 месяцев назад)
things in the universe dont disapear they are just stuck in time like death for instance
aviv s (6 месяцев назад)
the rate of univerese inflated is much greater than the speed of light
aviv s (6 месяцев назад)
gravity is some kind of time debt
aviv s (6 месяцев назад)
space is growing like a cake by time .black holes are prove to that cause they are 'stuck in the past .time is everything
CozmicK G (6 месяцев назад)
I feel like Vsauce's video is the only one that's ever caused the concept to click for me. The idea of how gravity is literally a result of geometry and accepting the idea that an object with mass bends time, and how we are constantly moving at a straight line through time. EDIT: Here's the link https://youtu.be/Xc4xYacTu-E
Jose Garcia (6 месяцев назад)
thank you; the last illustration at the end is wrong
Siken Dongol (6 месяцев назад)
2:36
Hans Lepoeter (6 месяцев назад)
Well, I explained to my son several times that when an apple drops from a tree it's not the apple falling down, but it's the ground accelerating up till it hits the apple. Thats hilarious to my son because the entire earth would be expanding continously. But thats just because he does not take curved space time into account. There is no difference between the force when accelerating an object or force as a result of gravity. It's just the same thing.
Jean von Pickartz (6 месяцев назад)
Now how would they explain saturn with its rings in there model. The 2d model would suggest a cone shape ring structure and in the 3d model would suggest a atmospheric structure around the planet. And how does there theory explain the angel of the rings and axis of saturnus.
Amir Ghahrai (6 месяцев назад)
That is exactly what messed up my mind when thinking about the trampoline effect . which way is up?! most of the planets in the solar system are nearly in a same orbital horizon except one which is moving in a an orbit which contradicts the trampoline law. How ever I still can not figure out which way earth is pressing down on the space ?! Can any body explain?
Apodictic (6 месяцев назад)
This is bullshit, here is your gravity in reality; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McdMMmclGVc&list=LLR2pgDjnXgwpQvboY8cRlXg&t=0s&index=7
Cyber Zombie (6 месяцев назад)
Can these curvatures slow down the speed of light??
sweiland75 (6 месяцев назад)
Is this the cause of gravitational lensing?
Hungry Dolphin (6 месяцев назад)
Gravity does not literally curve spacetime. Gravity attracts energy which includes quantum particles, atoms, and groups of atoms. The curvature of spacetime merely represents an attractive force.
Dr.Mohammad Niqab Khan (6 месяцев назад)
Very strange you are explaining gravity with refrence to existing gravity..the rubber sheet and happy object example happens due to earth gravity amd curce allowes other objects like balls to fall in circular path..Where is the point..remove the existing earth gravity and then explain.
Fat Bastard Pipes (6 месяцев назад)
In Russia trampoline curves you. 👍
NoMaD_Berberian (7 месяцев назад)
This Matches Exactlt what GOD stated in the holly Quran about how planets and other objects in space are behave in space 1400 years ago.... The Verse which states this is as follow: Curved Spacetime: Surah Al-Anbya [21:33] "And it is He (Allah) who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all heavenly bodies in an orbit are swimming." Big bang theory + water creation of life: Surah Al-Anbya [21:30] “Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, then We separated them, and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?” Expanding Universe: Surah Adh-Dhariyat [51:47] “And the heaven We created with might, and indeed We are expanding it” (Quran 51:47)
NUKE (7 месяцев назад)
The rubber sheet actually uses gravity (because gravity will pull down the heavy ball in the 1st place) to explain gravity. This is not how explanations work. You need to use something that is not a direct consequence of gravity - in order to explain it, and so far this is not what the rubber sheet actually does. But on the other hand, it might not explain gravity (obviously it's much more difficult) but it gives people a better intuition of the weirdness of our reality. If you really want to understand gravity, you need to let go of EVERYTHING and I mean *EVERYTHING* your senses tell you. I'll just say this to show you how much you need to let go... If you let an apple fall (in a vacuum inside a gravitational field) the apple doesn't fall. Its the floor that rushes up and meets the apple! The reason why the apple seem to fall (even though it doesn't) is for the same reason why the Sun seems to move in the sky (although it doesn't). Its US that move not the Sun or the falling object. Its us that move both in space and time, and suddenly release an apple - the apple has no longer any force acting on it (so it stays stationary) and our perception that creates the illusion of the falling apple when in reality the apple doesn't move. And it goes even weirder after this... So... yeah, better stick to the rubber sheet explanation!

Хотите оставить комментарий?

Присоединитесь к YouTube, или войдите, если вы уже зарегистрированы.