@iamgig9876 yes "idiot", neutrinos were "discovered". How else do you think scientists started to study them? In 1933 when they were first DISCOVERED by Reines...that's how
The novice mistake that many people make is that "something out there can travel faster than light". The point is NOT that light is the fastest "thing", it is that light reaches the highest velocity possible for anything with mass. In other words, If something could travel faster than Light, then Light itself would travel faster than it does. It's not just semantics, it's Mathematics!
@randy95023 Einstein said, ''nothing can travel faster than the speed of light''. What does that mean? It means he said light was the fastest ''thing''. So there you go mr.smartypants.
This is an invitation to see an artist theory on the physics of light and time!
This theory is based on two postulates
1. Is that the quantum wave particle function Ψ represents the forward passage of time ∆E ∆t ≥ h/2π itself
2. Is that Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆p×≥h/4π that is formed by the w- function is the same uncertainty we have with any future event that we can interact with turning the possible into the actual!
@trZack "discover" really?? they just discovered neutrinos? obviously you are an alien to physics... now anyways that was proved wrong.. who the fuck in the right mind uses a damn gps mounted on a fucking satellite which is ACCELERATING to measure a beam travelling across europe? thats right, idiots like you...
@trZack those morons scientist can't seem to understand that neutrinos accelerate faster then light but don't travel faster than light, meaning they will arrive first at the target just because of acceleration, but the speed remains constant.
900ms difference in 7 billion years, that's 1ms = 10^-3s difference per 7.77~ million years.
10^-9s per 7.77~ years.
4.07697327 x 10^-18s per second.
The difference in energy and wavelength between the HIGHEST ENERGY and LOWEST ENERGY photon has to be around or lesser than the amount required to produce a difference of, in distance of light, 4.07697327 x 10^-18s per second.
A more probable theory would be that one of the photons was discharged earlier.
You have just stating some numbers in scientific notation, badly (you couldve used e instead of writing x10 every time), expanded a ratio using simple mathematics and written a long number to look smart. If you watched the video you will notice that the lady says 'there was a 900ms delay between arrival times', but then later she says 'because Fermi saw no delay in arrival times...'. Now, I thought a normal person would think this odd, but apparently not.
@eliasm307 I didn't even do the Math. God forbid expanding a ratio and copy pasting a result. The lady mentioned an analogy which implies that the 900ms is insignificant. If space is like bubbly foam, there would be a huge delay. I'm not sure if I want to be "normal" if it means I couldn't grasp what I thought was common sense. It's okay though, just throw me another ad hominem argument.
Uhm , didn't you catch that? Einsteins 'Theory of relativity' indicates a velocity C to the square... Evidently indicating a possible velocity of C * C .
@FlyKingRy That is mass and energy relationship. E=(m)(c)(c).
That is just for indicate that when how much energy can release when mass deflect occurs on an non-zero mass objects. But not the evidence of "a possible velocity of C * C ."
A neutron and proton are sitting in a bar where the neutron says why the long face and the proton says I think my girlfriend's left me,the neutron says are you positive and the proton says yes I am.
2:40 If gravity can bend photons than why can't they also slow them down? if two photons are shot at the same time but one has a higher level of energy and gravity effects higher energy particles more than lower energy particles than why couldn't that work?
I don't get it. The lady said that Fermi detected they arrived 900 milliseconds apart. Then she said "because Fermi saw no delay between the two photons" ????
I don't get it. Either they arrived 900 milliseconds apart, or they didn't.
What if the higher speed photons are still interfered with by large density masses which cause them to slow down? I am just drunk and I found it on accident but, serious as a heart attack, what if it moved like water molecules hitting solid object on a sea floor where energy gets refracted and the energy does not continues forward through the dense material at a slower rate. Just a thought. I am making an un-educated guess.
Okeeey guys .stop trying to imagine speed of light.now ur aim is notrinos.because scientists found that notrinos are faster than speed of ligth.change the theory please not facts:)) im glad im laughing at einstein:) just a joke dont be angry but notrinos are true..they are faster than speed of ligth.they have just found it!
we CAN'T travel faster (or even close to) the speed of light, we may not be able to achieve that VELOCITY through 3 dimensions, but we may end up being able to bend space, effectively "jumping" to the point in space/time that we want to be. Think of it as instead of MOVING from point A to B, simply bringing point B to us = Folding space. It seems crazy, but think about it..
note, "Quantum States" is the key to ( Time Travel ! ) how to Stabilizes mass when reaching the speed of ligth !!.. through - Negative Zero temps ..............! ( mass should stay the same and should not increase when in an Quantum state ) that's my hypothesis.. you can pay me later after you prove it !! Antony Fears 8-24-2011
If you turn on the light bulb and its in the midle of the room. The light will hit the south wall at the same time as the north wall, therefore you have just doubled the speed of light. 666,666 feet per second x2 LMAO
You may travel at any speed you wish, including those greater than c. The speed of light is itself an illusion, one of many created by the Universe. Even at 99.999999% the speed of light, you are still utterly motionless relative to your own spacecraft headlights. Think, man, think!
I have a teory but its not quite perfect due to actual knowladge of me:
well can the light speed change due to deformations of space(ex: blackhole)?
And since the velocity can me measure with v=deltaX/deltaT when the actuall deltaX is bended and the time is change cuz of the gravitational field will it stay with the same speed? or will it increase with a prespective outside of the black hole gravitational field but still remain the same speed(insde the field (due to the space-time changes) ?
Einstein isn't absolutely correct, BECAUSE in reference to the speed of light, light has various waveLenths. Therefore, it is a VARIABLE, rather than a CONSTANT...
why the light must be the max speed of the universe i disagree think that meteorite size of our milky way traveling at 800.000 km/h it will (overtake) the light.the difference is that if we could see it from close it would be invisible as a F16 breaking the speed of the sound...i mean when we will see the meteorite it will had already passed..
Yes, the meteorite would be massier at 99% the speed of light. The major portion of kinetic energy to accelerate the object would not accelerate it. Since energy cannot get lost (conservation of energy), the object must get heavier to absorb the additional energy.
The object is thus indeed heavier (or better: it has more kinetic energy than what Newton would predict).
Opps, question too long, was cut off... So, for example, if light travels travel 186K miles in 1sec, will this equation (186K M in "1 Sec) have a delta/change if we were to travel the same 186K miles while making that trip at or close to the speed of light?
QUESTION: If light travels at 186,000+ Miles Per Second, is that the speed/distance/time relative to the "Observer", OR, is that the speed/time/distance relative to the light itself (as if you & I were traveling along side the light at the same speed or close to the speed through time)? If "time" slows the closer we get to the speed of light, wouldn't that change the "186,000+" Miles PER SECOND Equation based upon the observers relative speed in relation to the speed of light? For example if li
@Darkcastleknights Length below the Planck length is meaningless, no it can't be broken down, there is a limit to the amount of everything, both because there is not infinite matter and because objects that large could not form due to dark energy. Relative to you, everything flows normally.
@Darkcastleknights There is nothing smaller than the Planck length( infact there is nothing actually that small), we don't know if there is something infinitely big but all evidence points to no. You would not see the light at all until it did reach you, but it would reach you at c (very very slightly faster than the speed of light on Earth due to the atmosphere)
@Darkcastleknights Most atoms are incredibly stable and there are still atoms remaining from the big bang. There are also a lot of photons remaining from the big bang. No solar system comes close to surviving that long, or galaxies. No that doesn't prove time is relative, time is relative but what you've said does not in anyway indicate that. Large masses do cause time to flow slower as well but not for the reason you say. Neither atoms, solar systems or galaxies have the same shape.
i was under the illusion that you could reach the speed of light but to stop you exceeding it time would act as another force and slow you down, which effectively, would slow time down as well
What interest me is if time stands still at the speed of light will the body still age and decay at normal rates? Further more if things become heavier at the speed of light won't it get crushed?
@OneSummerSky You can travel infinitely close to the speed of light, but you can't actually travel the speed of light. Your headlights would work, and the light coming from them would still appear to go the speed of light due to time and space dilation.
@wade239 They need to reproduce the data a few more time and check the consistency of their measurement devices before they can call it fact. In theory, if something were to travel faster than the speed of light, it would be going back in time. There is a paradox there though.
@Daniel39363 Unless I missed it in school, what proof do people have that light is the fastest thing? If you went faster than light, wouldn't your perception of things be the only thing that changes, meaning you experience something before you see it? Isn't it the same concept as a sonic boom, you see the thing before you hear it? I've always wanted a good good physicist to explain this to because I think this whole time travel thing is just perception.
@dingovory Look up special relativity. They don't usually teach this stuff in school, you have to go to college before you learn about it. I learned about it on the internet. 2.998x10^8 meters per second is the fastest anything can move in the universe relative to something else.
@Daniel39363 Thanks man. That's what I don't like about American schools sometimes, they hold back on some info, probably thinking you're too young for it or whatever. Anyways, your answer is a good start point for research.
Say, Someone was 1000th the size of me, And we both took a step at the same time and the same speed. I would travel further because of my size. What the hell does that mean?
WTF? The woman in the video said the rays arrived 9/10 second between them, then in the next sentence says they arrived at the same time. That's nearly a full second. What does make sense is that a ray with more energy even if it is almost completely massless would over 7billion years cause a 1 second shift in its own space/time towards the past relative to the lower energy ray. Mass=condensed energy. So yes. they both traveled the same speed but relative to their individual space/time.
@communistjesus , "LIGHT SPEED IS ONLY ACHIEVED IN THE VACUUM OF SPACE" .... really ? So if I turn on my flashlight in my basement, what speed are the beams of outward light traveling at ? I didn't know that light had different speeds. We better let Albert Einstein know about your latest findings. He, after-all said the speed of light is constant (as in never changing) . E=mc^2. Time to re-write the history books. What is your name that we will all see in print from now on ?
@JesusWasAnAsshole Einstein never said the speed of light was constant. He said the speed of light in vacuo was constant. n= c / cs(subscript) n of air =1.000036 c= 299792458ms^-1 therefore 299792458/1.000036= cs(subscript) so the speed of light in air is 299781666ms^-1. Therefore the speed of light in air is 99.9964002% of c. Very, very, very basic laws of optics. Why bother telling people they are wrong when you have no education in the matter?
My only regret in life is that most likely I will not be around when the theory of everything is finally discovered (my bets are on string theory). When this is discovered, the universe will unlock so many secrets and life on earth will change forever.
@grk2nv100 . I don't know how string theory can ever be proven. It certainly won't be within a 1,000 years.
What secrets do you think string theory would unlock ? It won't prove or disprove god, alien life, time travel or membranes. I'm curious as to what you think would change drastically.
@JesusWasAnAsshole the hydrong colloider is slowly proving string theory. It will give us an answer to what lies beyond the atom and whats it made of (by that i mean passed the nuetons and protons and etc) and that there are 11 dimentions (i think that goes with string theory correct me if im wrong)
@blue4596 , in any case, did you see the news this week from Fermilabs ? They think the may have discovered a new particle dubbed the W boson". Cool shit.
@TheAlexander356 Yes, of course. Electrons have mass ( 10 ^ -31 kilograms). Therefore, they should be affected by gravity the same as any other amount of mass.
@JesusWasAnAsshole that's what I thought! One guy just told me otherwise so I had to probe around to make certain he was wrong since that is absolutely essential to one of my thought experiments.
What has been considered to be the speed of light is actually the radiance spectral speed of matter. BEWARE that often what we learns that is wrong, we defend blindly without analitical perspective and therefore we are misguided by the context of falaceous theories. I urge you to be open minded before reacting to my theory and then present your questions in an intelligent fashion without prejusdistic overviews.
Atoms that have a short EMER field correspond to substances that are pliable and elastic like gold, copper, etc.Those that have very long field line correspond to chemical element that bind very tight and their mass is dence.The EMER's field react to what i've name black energies which excite the atom and cause it to radiate its spectral field in the form of light, such as day light. Other forms of lattices expell their fields in colorful expositions that produce the irridiscence of the world
Atoms have an average diameter of 3 billionths of one inch or 90 billionths of one millimeter according to my calculations.These tiny axioms are surrounded by an electromagnetic field that i've named the EMER's field.This field serves to weave its energies with other evolving atoms to form molecules. Not all atoms have EMERs.Some have short lines, others have them very long while some don't have any.Those void of the field correspond to substances that remain as liquid or gas. jqs43 @hotmail.com
The spectrum of frequency extends from zero all the way to infinity. Infinity, only because we're unable to quantify the value of a maximum to its reality. Everything that is of nature's creative power is defined as a weave of energies that interrelate with others of different values from different vectors to weave as intrinsic lattices of matter. The diameter of a world starts as a weave that has a diameter of 3 billionths of one inch or 90 billionths of one millimeter. That number is real.
Does it seam right that light shouldn't decay or slow down? What is it that keeps its speed so high over such long distance. Many scientists believe light to have traveled many times faster in the past. If the speed of light is inconsistent then it leaves the door open to limitless theory's.
Indeed, I believe that can lead to many disturbing thoughts. If light really is inconsistent, just think, in far far future if light were to slow down how it would affect us physically. The light emitted on objects and reflected back to our eyes would have greater delayed; since we are already experiencing about one billionth of a second delay. Good question, what keeps it at high speed. I don't know and decaying doesn't seem right because space is isotropic, as we know so far.
yes, i am aware of that, i was just answering to his statement when he stated the idea of light decaying. Which is highly improbable but the idea if it were true it would surely be something awful. Of course I believe this goes against the natural law of physics because if we are able to see one of the oldest galaxy known, that is about 13 billion light years away, then we would've surely notice something by now because of such great cap in between.
I don't know how serious is your question or what kind of prove you're looking for. However one easy way to look at it is, if you're on your computer right now at this time in that place in space(not outer space) then you cannot be in the middle of the ocean or elsewhere at that same time. Your position is based on the time and space you are currently standing. You cannot exist in two places at the same time, therefore time and space go hand to hand.
Were introduced in physics the infinite mass phantoms, the infinite energy phantoms and the infinite impulse phantoms when a body or particle would touch the light speed in vacuum. Today we know that many particles were accelerate unill at the light speed, others had arrived with this speed from cosmos, but at none grow up not at infinite or near of infinite the mass, the energy or the impulse.
It renounce thus at the absolute space and at the absolute time. From the simple and linear transformations of the Galilei's relativity it arrive at the Lorentz- Einstein's transformations through the introduction to two factors, subunitary and superunitary. Thus, with these confusions about space and time it passed at the adequate changes about the whole physics.
It renounce thus at the absolute space and at the absolute time. From the simple and linear transformations of the Galilei's relativity it arrive at the Lorentz- Einstein's transformations through the introduction to two factors, subunitary and superunitary. Thus, with these confusions about space and time it passed at the adequate changes about the whole physics.
Actually Einstein, from theoretical confusion and of megalomania, establish that none object with mass can not outrun the light speed.He succeeding, how written publications of the time, let vex much people, then, whenever over a hundred of people of science had signed a petition in which they upholded that the relativity theory is mistaken, is fallacious.Einstein upholded his relativity theory, believing in the fact that then, nobody can not to demonstrate him the contrary.
But in 1905, A.Einstein conclude that the ether hasn't a correspondent in reality and constitute not a medium which let can serve as reference system. Thus Einstein renounced to the ether notion and absolute space and emits the two restricted relativity principles. By it content the second principle excludes the ether, impose as limit of bodies' movement - the light speed - and denatured completely the classic dynamics reality.
The physicists Hendrik A.Lorentz admits existence of the ether, but emit the hypothesis that any body which it move in report with the ether, with a speed V, suffers a contarction, in the sense that the parallel dimension with the motion's direction it decrease, creating a subunitary factor and arranging formulas in this sense,H.A.Lorentz showed that once with the process of contraction it admits and a dilatation of the time, he alters in this sense the relation to Galilei
The Michelson-Morley experiments(1881) with the purpose to put in evidence the Earth movement face of one immobile ether, for too be taken as a reference system, had forever the same result. Thus the experiments had showed: 1).-that the ether is complete training with the mass and the Earth's atmosphere; 2).- and that our conception about ether as reference system is not right.
Through the relativity theory to Einstein of over century, it hold with strenght -as a conspiracy a general activity of intellectual stultify of the planetary population. from relativity theory proceed the notion of: singularity, Big bang, black holes and holes of worm. From 1905 and till now in 2011, the disciples of the Einstein, preach with contumely as scientific elements of high class these theoretical confusions, these absurdities from which they had made a business.
The science has and history. In the Fundamental Principle of Democrit(470..380BC) it show:"From nothing nothing's born, nothing that exist can not be destroyed and any transformation consist from a reunion and separation...Out of atoms and ether. all rest is not otherwise than rationament and not exist...The spirit as well as the ether consist of a small and spherical atoms, very mobile, atoms that their movement form the phenomenon of life".
It popularize the fantastical theories and stantardized theories with which it terrorize the inhabitants the Earth, after what Einstein with relativity theory had blocked the science of the century XX. Sptephen Hawking and roger Penrose had demonstrated in 1967 that the black holes proceed from the relativity theory. How it can conceive and it can say that the heart of the one black hole is a gravitational singularity whose volume tend to zero and whose mass tend to infinite?
Put simply light can have drag the larger the object the more drag that will be applied. Find the source of the drag and energy needs for all will be met. light can slow light ?
The Speed of light is NOT the fastest one reason is because the black holes are so fast that even light can not eascape. That proves that th speed of light is not the fastest thing. Put thumbs up so everyone knows
@XXJhOnNyDuDEXX Actualy in a black hole, space itself is falling faster than light into event horizon. The running machine is faster than the runner , so its falls back.
Universe is the most mysterious object and once we get all the answers we need, we will be super organisms. But as I think more and more, I am convinced that as we find answers, they lead to more and more questions.
Great Video ... The alpha and omega of this work, the beginning and the end: "could light be the key to unlocking the final secrets" , "the high energy mysteries of our universe" and "the answers truly lie among the stars" point to a supernatural source of light. Einstein (at age 16) was determined to ride a light beam back to this Source. Einstein never forgot his childlike appreciation of the "Old One." It's a straight line back to the Creator, the Trinity. 3 x 10^8 m/s gives us a clue.
Well i could say this since we are huamans and our nature is not perfect whatever secrets we uncover on this project we will surely use them in the wrong way.The same way we did with the uranium power.
@MRizzio Thats such bullshit! FYI Einstein did not believe in "the trinity" he was a Jew later on having spinozistic philosophy. I hate it when morons like you misinform people for religious agendas.
@soulster1978 Are you serious or just being an asshole ? I saw your reaction before I started the video and when she appeared I lolled. I feel so evil.
guys omg eingsten wasn't even real they showed in newest scienece weekly. look it up b4 wtching this he was propagated turkish figure to bring fame to their motherland and it worked juding by all the people that thing hes ont he smart
actually he was wrong couple times, for example when he said the universe is shrinking since we all know it is expanding, and he was also wrong when he created the atomic bomb.....
all light particles travel at the same speed only in a vacuum unencumbered by obstacles. Obstacles such as gases and ethe-ric containing particles, in passing phases through space will distort the speed of light. Such obstacles usually cannot be picked up by observing instruments and thus the discrepancies arise.
For Gods sake, the only thing that can slow down light or change its direction is matter, by changing the direction of a light wave, you are in effect increasing the distance for the energy to go. And that woman talks to fast, she sounds like a mouse on drugs.
if you travel at the speed of light, then the light behind the direction of movement would be to slow to get to your eyes, the only thing you could see would be objects infront, and once you stopped traveling at light speed, you could look back and see objects as they were the instant you started, but it you were to go back, it would be different
some sweet info here
willbirful 14 hours ago
damm she talks at the speed of light!
Venoxisify 4 days ago in playlist Light Speed, Rockets, Science, OH MY! - YouTube Space Lab
@iamgig9876 yes "idiot", neutrinos were "discovered". How else do you think scientists started to study them? In 1933 when they were first DISCOVERED by Reines...that's how
zachgosteady 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NASA faked the moon landings. Here's a link to some of the evidence.
spurstalk (dot) com/forums/showthread (dot) php?t=144487
Cosmored 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What I would like to know is: just because photons are limited to the speed of light, why does that mean other particles are as well?
PlatesManUK 1 week ago
The novice mistake that many people make is that "something out there can travel faster than light". The point is NOT that light is the fastest "thing", it is that light reaches the highest velocity possible for anything with mass. In other words, If something could travel faster than Light, then Light itself would travel faster than it does. It's not just semantics, it's Mathematics!
randy95023 1 month ago
@randy95023 Einstein said, ''nothing can travel faster than the speed of light''. What does that mean? It means he said light was the fastest ''thing''. So there you go mr.smartypants.
matt876mma 1 month ago
soooo.... they are just saying that some light particles move at different speeds in space....
or neutrinos
MrJakel111 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please see this entry /watch?v=qs2t9VvrT88&feature=youtu.be
thejk3710 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is an invitation to see an artist theory on the physics of light and time!
This theory is based on two postulates
1. Is that the quantum wave particle function Ψ represents the forward passage of time ∆E ∆t ≥ h/2π itself
2. Is that Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle ∆×∆p×≥h/4π that is formed by the w- function is the same uncertainty we have with any future event that we can interact with turning the possible into the actual!
nickharvey7 1 month ago
Wasn't this proved wrong with the discover of neutrinos?
trZack 2 months ago 8
@trZack "discover" really?? they just discovered neutrinos? obviously you are an alien to physics... now anyways that was proved wrong.. who the fuck in the right mind uses a damn gps mounted on a fucking satellite which is ACCELERATING to measure a beam travelling across europe? thats right, idiots like you...
iamgig9876 1 week ago
@trZack those morons scientist can't seem to understand that neutrinos accelerate faster then light but don't travel faster than light, meaning they will arrive first at the target just because of acceleration, but the speed remains constant.
Venoxisify 4 days ago in playlist Light Speed, Rockets, Science, OH MY! - YouTube Space Lab
its all gibberish to me
2Crystalight 2 months ago
didnt she just say they arrived 900ms apart?
eliasm307 3 months ago in playlist Liked 4
@eliasm307 Let me break it down for you.
900ms difference in 7 billion years, that's 1ms = 10^-3s difference per 7.77~ million years.
10^-9s per 7.77~ years.
4.07697327 x 10^-18s per second.
The difference in energy and wavelength between the HIGHEST ENERGY and LOWEST ENERGY photon has to be around or lesser than the amount required to produce a difference of, in distance of light, 4.07697327 x 10^-18s per second.
A more probable theory would be that one of the photons was discharged earlier.
ttJinn 4 days ago
@ttJinn let me break it down for you.
You have just stating some numbers in scientific notation, badly (you couldve used e instead of writing x10 every time), expanded a ratio using simple mathematics and written a long number to look smart. If you watched the video you will notice that the lady says 'there was a 900ms delay between arrival times', but then later she says 'because Fermi saw no delay in arrival times...'. Now, I thought a normal person would think this odd, but apparently not.
eliasm307 2 days ago
@eliasm307 I didn't even do the Math. God forbid expanding a ratio and copy pasting a result. The lady mentioned an analogy which implies that the 900ms is insignificant. If space is like bubbly foam, there would be a huge delay. I'm not sure if I want to be "normal" if it means I couldn't grasp what I thought was common sense. It's okay though, just throw me another ad hominem argument.
ttJinn 2 days ago
didnt she just say they arived 900ms apart?
eliasm307 3 months ago in playlist Liked
Einstein is soooo coool in this pic 4:30 :D
piloooogen 3 months ago
Uhm , didn't you catch that? Einsteins 'Theory of relativity' indicates a velocity C to the square... Evidently indicating a possible velocity of C * C .
FlyKingRy 3 months ago
@FlyKingRy That is mass and energy relationship. E=(m)(c)(c).
That is just for indicate that when how much energy can release when mass deflect occurs on an non-zero mass objects. But not the evidence of "a possible velocity of C * C ."
lose1000 1 week ago
A neutron and proton are sitting in a bar where the neutron says why the long face and the proton says I think my girlfriend's left me,the neutron says are you positive and the proton says yes I am.
handsupbud 3 months ago
@handsupbud fallout 3 hmm?
screech130 3 months ago
i say the speed of light is defined by the gravitational field of the nearest object.
Cult1022 3 months ago
2:40 If gravity can bend photons than why can't they also slow them down? if two photons are shot at the same time but one has a higher level of energy and gravity effects higher energy particles more than lower energy particles than why couldn't that work?
GypsyCrusher 3 months ago
anybody else thought she talks like a squirrel on coffee ?
hollofiedassassin 3 months ago in playlist Light Speed, Rockets, Science, OH MY! - YouTube Space Lab
When the universe got born,it expanded the first microseconds,faster then the speed of light.
Wasakracker79 3 months ago
science just got more exciting!
thepcguy01 3 months ago
it is 2011 and the cosmic speed limit proposed by einstein just got proven wrong.
thepcguy01 3 months ago
I don't get it. The lady said that Fermi detected they arrived 900 milliseconds apart. Then she said "because Fermi saw no delay between the two photons" ????
I don't get it. Either they arrived 900 milliseconds apart, or they didn't.
sarmenemras 3 months ago
@sarmenemras
I was thinkin the same thing...
Scatcycle01 3 months ago
yep E=MC2 is false cracker jack
bluekangaroo46 3 months ago
They found something just a tiny bit faster then the speed of light!
XtremeWeed 3 months ago
@XtremeWeed No, the higher energy particle moved slower then the speed of light, which proves Einstein was wrong.
VoguishArts 3 months ago
@VoguishArts No I mean they just found something faster then light like 2 weeks ago.
XtremeWeed 3 months ago
@XtremeWeed Oh yes, I had heard of that! Amazing right?
VoguishArts 3 months ago
@VoguishArts Very, its not much faster tho it's like 0.01% faster I think.
XtremeWeed 3 months ago
@XtremeWeed true, in the CERN they discovered that a neutrino traveled faster than speed of light
MrNaya8 3 months ago
FUCKING JEWS...LIARS LIKE HISTORY TOLD US
xuphoriaa 3 months ago
I have thought of an idea about the universe. So, Can you tell me where can I post my idea?
tusharrable 3 months ago in playlist YouTube Space Lab - Discover Rocket Science
What if the higher speed photons are still interfered with by large density masses which cause them to slow down? I am just drunk and I found it on accident but, serious as a heart attack, what if it moved like water molecules hitting solid object on a sea floor where energy gets refracted and the energy does not continues forward through the dense material at a slower rate. Just a thought. I am making an un-educated guess.
streetfightinmanrs 3 months ago
Okeeey guys .stop trying to imagine speed of light.now ur aim is notrinos.because scientists found that notrinos are faster than speed of ligth.change the theory please not facts:)) im glad im laughing at einstein:) just a joke dont be angry but notrinos are true..they are faster than speed of ligth.they have just found it!
esraretin 4 months ago
@esraretin It isn't proven yet, the Hadron Collider could have been corrupted and it could have been a mistake, we just don't know!
rockrollies 4 months ago
@rockrollies true.im too curious about it:)
esraretin 4 months ago
@esraretin But then again they changed the settings and re-ran it 1500 times, so i think it's probably right
rockrollies 4 months ago
@rockrollies yes i read it too. i wonder wht all physicist will say about it.
esraretin 4 months ago
what the hell
bin9Laden11 4 months ago
The key to speeds in space is relativity.
kufpipa 4 months ago
we CAN'T travel faster (or even close to) the speed of light, we may not be able to achieve that VELOCITY through 3 dimensions, but we may end up being able to bend space, effectively "jumping" to the point in space/time that we want to be. Think of it as instead of MOVING from point A to B, simply bringing point B to us = Folding space. It seems crazy, but think about it..
ROTARYBIZNESS 4 months ago
note, "Quantum States" is the key to ( Time Travel ! ) how to Stabilizes mass when reaching the speed of ligth !!.. through - Negative Zero temps ..............! ( mass should stay the same and should not increase when in an Quantum state ) that's my hypothesis.. you can pay me later after you prove it !! Antony Fears 8-24-2011
tonyfears 5 months ago
If you turn on the light bulb and its in the midle of the room. The light will hit the south wall at the same time as the north wall, therefore you have just doubled the speed of light. 666,666 feet per second x2 LMAO
61miroman 6 months ago
the expansion of the universe sets the cosmic speed limit,not light
jjmommy100 6 months ago
You may travel at any speed you wish, including those greater than c. The speed of light is itself an illusion, one of many created by the Universe. Even at 99.999999% the speed of light, you are still utterly motionless relative to your own spacecraft headlights. Think, man, think!
SuperMagnetizer 6 months ago
Malasses
sprjcube 6 months ago
What is the word she is pronouncing at 4:17. One raceboat races throw water and the other throw ..?
DomesofDoom 6 months ago
@DomesofDoom molasses or however you spell it.
jemz99 4 months ago
I dont know if anything is true or not.. But Einstein is never wrong.. Do any experiment!
ravishethwala 6 months ago
i guess nothing can go faster then light
the only thing that goes faster is the universe its self
FIGHTFANNERD3 6 months ago
flash is 100x faster than light lol
TheZoom1994 6 months ago
I have a teory but its not quite perfect due to actual knowladge of me:
well can the light speed change due to deformations of space(ex: blackhole)?
And since the velocity can me measure with v=deltaX/deltaT when the actuall deltaX is bended and the time is change cuz of the gravitational field will it stay with the same speed? or will it increase with a prespective outside of the black hole gravitational field but still remain the same speed(insde the field (due to the space-time changes) ?
MrSuicideMan 6 months ago
Is it only me. Or is it, every-time you hear the word "scientist's'' You think of dudes in white coats in this secret lab. Lol.
cobolt13 6 months ago
@cobolt13 No its only you... :)
ravishethwala 6 months ago
@ravishethwala Fantastic.
cobolt13 6 months ago
@cobolt13 :)
ravishethwala 6 months ago
Einstein isn't absolutely correct, BECAUSE in reference to the speed of light, light has various waveLenths. Therefore, it is a VARIABLE, rather than a CONSTANT...
OpionatedOldMan 6 months ago
Who can help me build the speed of light spacecraft, e-mail me.wmv
The spacecraft can beyond the speed of light.
I tell you the secrets of electricity and magnetism, you help me build the spacecraft.
Seek cooperation the global.
----Xuhui
zxhthinker 6 months ago
Who can help me build the speed of light spacecraft, e-mail me.wmv
I tell you the secrets of electricity and magnetism, you help me build the spacecraft.
Seek cooperation the global.
----Xuhui
zxhthinker 6 months ago
why the light must be the max speed of the universe i disagree think that meteorite size of our milky way traveling at 800.000 km/h it will (overtake) the light.the difference is that if we could see it from close it would be invisible as a F16 breaking the speed of the sound...i mean when we will see the meteorite it will had already passed..
NukeBluff 6 months ago
Comment removed
NukeBluff 6 months ago
@orkneymist
Yes, the meteorite would be massier at 99% the speed of light. The major portion of kinetic energy to accelerate the object would not accelerate it. Since energy cannot get lost (conservation of energy), the object must get heavier to absorb the additional energy.
The object is thus indeed heavier (or better: it has more kinetic energy than what Newton would predict).
sebking 7 months ago
Comment removed
BachRiff 7 months ago
Opps, question too long, was cut off... So, for example, if light travels travel 186K miles in 1sec, will this equation (186K M in "1 Sec) have a delta/change if we were to travel the same 186K miles while making that trip at or close to the speed of light?
BachRiff 7 months ago
QUESTION: If light travels at 186,000+ Miles Per Second, is that the speed/distance/time relative to the "Observer", OR, is that the speed/time/distance relative to the light itself (as if you & I were traveling along side the light at the same speed or close to the speed through time)? If "time" slows the closer we get to the speed of light, wouldn't that change the "186,000+" Miles PER SECOND Equation based upon the observers relative speed in relation to the speed of light? For example if li
BachRiff 7 months ago
@Darkcastleknights Length below the Planck length is meaningless, no it can't be broken down, there is a limit to the amount of everything, both because there is not infinite matter and because objects that large could not form due to dark energy. Relative to you, everything flows normally.
9hello123 7 months ago
@Darkcastleknights There is nothing smaller than the Planck length( infact there is nothing actually that small), we don't know if there is something infinitely big but all evidence points to no. You would not see the light at all until it did reach you, but it would reach you at c (very very slightly faster than the speed of light on Earth due to the atmosphere)
9hello123 7 months ago
@Darkcastleknights Most atoms are incredibly stable and there are still atoms remaining from the big bang. There are also a lot of photons remaining from the big bang. No solar system comes close to surviving that long, or galaxies. No that doesn't prove time is relative, time is relative but what you've said does not in anyway indicate that. Large masses do cause time to flow slower as well but not for the reason you say. Neither atoms, solar systems or galaxies have the same shape.
9hello123 7 months ago
if speed of light is so fast how come it never caught a ninja before OOOOOOO WHAT NOW!!!
Beinggreatfull 7 months ago
I'd probe Julies fundamental structure in Space and time.
Daveylopop 7 months ago
people know the speed of light, but whats the speed of dark? lol
TheSupraTRD 7 months ago
@TheSupraTRD its faster. why ninjas are never seen
Beinggreatfull 7 months ago
1-0 to Einstein
RamboLastManStanding 7 months ago
so wait, both energy gamma photons arrived at the same time and einstein was right ?
virginboy92 8 months ago
speed limit, NO TRUCKS lol
virginboy92 8 months ago
I actually thought the video was fast forwarding because she spoke so fast
MrDoable 8 months ago
people in black suit will take her when world's end(as shown in hollywood) lol
GameDoctor21 8 months ago
i was under the illusion that you could reach the speed of light but to stop you exceeding it time would act as another force and slow you down, which effectively, would slow time down as well
wubwubwub100 9 months ago
or they could have just arrived at different times......
023132 9 months ago
What interest me is if time stands still at the speed of light will the body still age and decay at normal rates? Further more if things become heavier at the speed of light won't it get crushed?
DorkVader26 9 months ago
Many thanks for this excellent video.
HatshepsutSheba 9 months ago
i have a question. how does the constant (independent of your speed, always measured as the same) speed of light relate to Newtons first law?
wubs23 9 months ago
If your car could travel at the speed of light, would your headlights work?
OneSummerSky 9 months ago
@OneSummerSky You can travel infinitely close to the speed of light, but you can't actually travel the speed of light. Your headlights would work, and the light coming from them would still appear to go the speed of light due to time and space dilation.
Daniel39363 9 months ago 12
@Daniel39363 scientists made a neutrino travel FASTER than the speed of light
wade239 4 months ago
@wade239 They need to reproduce the data a few more time and check the consistency of their measurement devices before they can call it fact. In theory, if something were to travel faster than the speed of light, it would be going back in time. There is a paradox there though.
Daniel39363 4 months ago
@Daniel39363 Unless I missed it in school, what proof do people have that light is the fastest thing? If you went faster than light, wouldn't your perception of things be the only thing that changes, meaning you experience something before you see it? Isn't it the same concept as a sonic boom, you see the thing before you hear it? I've always wanted a good good physicist to explain this to because I think this whole time travel thing is just perception.
dingovory 3 months ago
@dingovory Look up special relativity. They don't usually teach this stuff in school, you have to go to college before you learn about it. I learned about it on the internet. 2.998x10^8 meters per second is the fastest anything can move in the universe relative to something else.
Daniel39363 3 months ago
@Daniel39363 Thanks man. That's what I don't like about American schools sometimes, they hold back on some info, probably thinking you're too young for it or whatever. Anyways, your answer is a good start point for research.
dingovory 3 months ago
@dingovory thats interesting, might that explain why you can't see dark matter? perhaps it travels faster then light and cannot be seen.
jewlzorjay 3 months ago
he is gay!
arra009 9 months ago
Say, Someone was 1000th the size of me, And we both took a step at the same time and the same speed. I would travel further because of my size. What the hell does that mean?
Simplemindedgenius 9 months ago
WTF? The woman in the video said the rays arrived 9/10 second between them, then in the next sentence says they arrived at the same time. That's nearly a full second. What does make sense is that a ray with more energy even if it is almost completely massless would over 7billion years cause a 1 second shift in its own space/time towards the past relative to the lower energy ray. Mass=condensed energy. So yes. they both traveled the same speed but relative to their individual space/time.
thinkrealify 9 months ago
Comment removed
thinkrealify 9 months ago
excellent
agubaia 10 months ago
LIGHT SPEED IS ONLY ACHIEVED IN THE VACUUM OF SPACE...
communistjesus 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@communistjesus , "LIGHT SPEED IS ONLY ACHIEVED IN THE VACUUM OF SPACE" .... really ? So if I turn on my flashlight in my basement, what speed are the beams of outward light traveling at ? I didn't know that light had different speeds. We better let Albert Einstein know about your latest findings. He, after-all said the speed of light is constant (as in never changing) . E=mc^2. Time to re-write the history books. What is your name that we will all see in print from now on ?
JesusWasAnAsshole 9 months ago
@JesusWasAnAsshole Einstein never said the speed of light was constant. He said the speed of light in vacuo was constant. n= c / cs(subscript) n of air =1.000036 c= 299792458ms^-1 therefore 299792458/1.000036= cs(subscript) so the speed of light in air is 299781666ms^-1. Therefore the speed of light in air is 99.9964002% of c. Very, very, very basic laws of optics. Why bother telling people they are wrong when you have no education in the matter?
9hello123 7 months ago
My only regret in life is that most likely I will not be around when the theory of everything is finally discovered (my bets are on string theory). When this is discovered, the universe will unlock so many secrets and life on earth will change forever.
grk2nv100 10 months ago
@grk2nv100 i feel the same way as you do :/
TheGuyWantsYouHappy 10 months ago
@grk2nv100 . I don't know how string theory can ever be proven. It certainly won't be within a 1,000 years.
What secrets do you think string theory would unlock ? It won't prove or disprove god, alien life, time travel or membranes. I'm curious as to what you think would change drastically.
JesusWasAnAsshole 10 months ago
@JesusWasAnAsshole the hydrong colloider is slowly proving string theory. It will give us an answer to what lies beyond the atom and whats it made of (by that i mean passed the nuetons and protons and etc) and that there are 11 dimentions (i think that goes with string theory correct me if im wrong)
blue4596 9 months ago
@blue4596 , in any case, did you see the news this week from Fermilabs ? They think the may have discovered a new particle dubbed the W boson". Cool shit.
JesusWasAnAsshole 9 months ago
@JesusWasAnAsshole no i didnt hear about it but thats pretty cool.
blue4596 9 months ago
@JesusWasAnAsshole W boson news? That was discovered through experiment literally about 30 years ago, and known about a long time before that.
9hello123 7 months ago
@9hello123 , theorized 30+ years ago. Just recently proven.
JesusWasAnAsshole 7 months ago
@JesusWasAnAsshole Erm, no. It was proven a long time ago.
9hello123 7 months ago
@blue4596 wrong
kenny8331 9 months ago
Is is possible for gravity to slow down electrons even a tiny fraction of a second?
Please, anyone, respond...
TheAlexander356 10 months ago
@TheAlexander356 Yes, of course. Electrons have mass ( 10 ^ -31 kilograms). Therefore, they should be affected by gravity the same as any other amount of mass.
JesusWasAnAsshole 10 months ago
@JesusWasAnAsshole that's what I thought! One guy just told me otherwise so I had to probe around to make certain he was wrong since that is absolutely essential to one of my thought experiments.
Thanks for the reply, nice name btw :P
TheAlexander356 10 months ago
What has been considered to be the speed of light is actually the radiance spectral speed of matter. BEWARE that often what we learns that is wrong, we defend blindly without analitical perspective and therefore we are misguided by the context of falaceous theories. I urge you to be open minded before reacting to my theory and then present your questions in an intelligent fashion without prejusdistic overviews.
BUY MADE IN THE U.S.A. HELP THE ECCONOMY!
jqs1943 10 months ago
Atoms that have a short EMER field correspond to substances that are pliable and elastic like gold, copper, etc.Those that have very long field line correspond to chemical element that bind very tight and their mass is dence.The EMER's field react to what i've name black energies which excite the atom and cause it to radiate its spectral field in the form of light, such as day light. Other forms of lattices expell their fields in colorful expositions that produce the irridiscence of the world
jqs1943 10 months ago
Atoms have an average diameter of 3 billionths of one inch or 90 billionths of one millimeter according to my calculations.These tiny axioms are surrounded by an electromagnetic field that i've named the EMER's field.This field serves to weave its energies with other evolving atoms to form molecules. Not all atoms have EMERs.Some have short lines, others have them very long while some don't have any.Those void of the field correspond to substances that remain as liquid or gas. jqs43 @hotmail.com
jqs1943 10 months ago
The spectrum of frequency extends from zero all the way to infinity. Infinity, only because we're unable to quantify the value of a maximum to its reality. Everything that is of nature's creative power is defined as a weave of energies that interrelate with others of different values from different vectors to weave as intrinsic lattices of matter. The diameter of a world starts as a weave that has a diameter of 3 billionths of one inch or 90 billionths of one millimeter. That number is real.
jqs1943 10 months ago
15 rednecks
yourmajezty 11 months ago
Does it seam right that light shouldn't decay or slow down? What is it that keeps its speed so high over such long distance. Many scientists believe light to have traveled many times faster in the past. If the speed of light is inconsistent then it leaves the door open to limitless theory's.
smoothpeople33 11 months ago
@smoothpeople33
Indeed, I believe that can lead to many disturbing thoughts. If light really is inconsistent, just think, in far far future if light were to slow down how it would affect us physically. The light emitted on objects and reflected back to our eyes would have greater delayed; since we are already experiencing about one billionth of a second delay. Good question, what keeps it at high speed. I don't know and decaying doesn't seem right because space is isotropic, as we know so far.
KonKaji 10 months ago
@KonKaji,@smoothpeople33, light is consistent ... time is not.
JesusWasAnAsshole 10 months ago
@JesusWasAnAsshole
yes, i am aware of that, i was just answering to his statement when he stated the idea of light decaying. Which is highly improbable but the idea if it were true it would surely be something awful. Of course I believe this goes against the natural law of physics because if we are able to see one of the oldest galaxy known, that is about 13 billion light years away, then we would've surely notice something by now because of such great cap in between.
KonKaji 10 months ago
is there some kind of actual proof that space/time actually exists?
boogiebuddy01 11 months ago
@boogiebuddy01
I don't know how serious is your question or what kind of prove you're looking for. However one easy way to look at it is, if you're on your computer right now at this time in that place in space(not outer space) then you cannot be in the middle of the ocean or elsewhere at that same time. Your position is based on the time and space you are currently standing. You cannot exist in two places at the same time, therefore time and space go hand to hand.
KonKaji 10 months ago
there is only one and leading theory about everything and it is the string theory
leikimchen 11 months ago
Einstein's wrong quarks are faster than the speed of light*
piejordan101man 11 months ago
Einstein's wrong quarks are faster than the spped of light*
piejordan101man 11 months ago
Einstein's wrong quarks are faster
piejordan101man 11 months ago
do anyone know what is the music
berkayandworms 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
• SandustanBrasov
Were introduced in physics the infinite mass phantoms, the infinite energy phantoms and the infinite impulse phantoms when a body or particle would touch the light speed in vacuum. Today we know that many particles were accelerate unill at the light speed, others had arrived with this speed from cosmos, but at none grow up not at infinite or near of infinite the mass, the energy or the impulse.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
It renounce thus at the absolute space and at the absolute time. From the simple and linear transformations of the Galilei's relativity it arrive at the Lorentz- Einstein's transformations through the introduction to two factors, subunitary and superunitary. Thus, with these confusions about space and time it passed at the adequate changes about the whole physics.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
• SandustanBrasov
It renounce thus at the absolute space and at the absolute time. From the simple and linear transformations of the Galilei's relativity it arrive at the Lorentz- Einstein's transformations through the introduction to two factors, subunitary and superunitary. Thus, with these confusions about space and time it passed at the adequate changes about the whole physics.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
Actually Einstein, from theoretical confusion and of megalomania, establish that none object with mass can not outrun the light speed.He succeeding, how written publications of the time, let vex much people, then, whenever over a hundred of people of science had signed a petition in which they upholded that the relativity theory is mistaken, is fallacious.Einstein upholded his relativity theory, believing in the fact that then, nobody can not to demonstrate him the contrary.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
But in 1905, A.Einstein conclude that the ether hasn't a correspondent in reality and constitute not a medium which let can serve as reference system. Thus Einstein renounced to the ether notion and absolute space and emits the two restricted relativity principles. By it content the second principle excludes the ether, impose as limit of bodies' movement - the light speed - and denatured completely the classic dynamics reality.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
The physicists Hendrik A.Lorentz admits existence of the ether, but emit the hypothesis that any body which it move in report with the ether, with a speed V, suffers a contarction, in the sense that the parallel dimension with the motion's direction it decrease, creating a subunitary factor and arranging formulas in this sense,H.A.Lorentz showed that once with the process of contraction it admits and a dilatation of the time, he alters in this sense the relation to Galilei
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
The Michelson-Morley experiments(1881) with the purpose to put in evidence the Earth movement face of one immobile ether, for too be taken as a reference system, had forever the same result. Thus the experiments had showed: 1).-that the ether is complete training with the mass and the Earth's atmosphere; 2).- and that our conception about ether as reference system is not right.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
Through the relativity theory to Einstein of over century, it hold with strenght -as a conspiracy a general activity of intellectual stultify of the planetary population. from relativity theory proceed the notion of: singularity, Big bang, black holes and holes of worm. From 1905 and till now in 2011, the disciples of the Einstein, preach with contumely as scientific elements of high class these theoretical confusions, these absurdities from which they had made a business.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
The science has and history. In the Fundamental Principle of Democrit(470..380BC) it show:"From nothing nothing's born, nothing that exist can not be destroyed and any transformation consist from a reunion and separation...Out of atoms and ether. all rest is not otherwise than rationament and not exist...The spirit as well as the ether consist of a small and spherical atoms, very mobile, atoms that their movement form the phenomenon of life".
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
SandustanBrasov
It popularize the fantastical theories and stantardized theories with which it terrorize the inhabitants the Earth, after what Einstein with relativity theory had blocked the science of the century XX. Sptephen Hawking and roger Penrose had demonstrated in 1967 that the black holes proceed from the relativity theory. How it can conceive and it can say that the heart of the one black hole is a gravitational singularity whose volume tend to zero and whose mass tend to infinite?
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
Put simply light can have drag the larger the object the more drag that will be applied. Find the source of the drag and energy needs for all will be met. light can slow light ?
blackbass4u2c 11 months ago
The Speed of light is NOT the fastest one reason is because the black holes are so fast that even light can not eascape. That proves that th speed of light is not the fastest thing. Put thumbs up so everyone knows
XXJhOnNyDuDEXX 1 year ago
@XXJhOnNyDuDEXX Actualy in a black hole, space itself is falling faster than light into event horizon. The running machine is faster than the runner , so its falls back.
The Speed of Light is the Ultimate Speed.
Zelron4 1 year ago
Universe is the most mysterious object and once we get all the answers we need, we will be super organisms. But as I think more and more, I am convinced that as we find answers, they lead to more and more questions.
ProttoyEinstein 1 year ago
Great Video ... The alpha and omega of this work, the beginning and the end: "could light be the key to unlocking the final secrets" , "the high energy mysteries of our universe" and "the answers truly lie among the stars" point to a supernatural source of light. Einstein (at age 16) was determined to ride a light beam back to this Source. Einstein never forgot his childlike appreciation of the "Old One." It's a straight line back to the Creator, the Trinity. 3 x 10^8 m/s gives us a clue.
MRizzio 1 year ago
@MRizzio
Well i could say this since we are huamans and our nature is not perfect whatever secrets we uncover on this project we will surely use them in the wrong way.The same way we did with the uranium power.
NEMESIS1999 1 year ago
@MRizzio Thats such bullshit! FYI Einstein did not believe in "the trinity" he was a Jew later on having spinozistic philosophy. I hate it when morons like you misinform people for religious agendas.
zzzIdividedbyzerozzz 10 months ago
julie is hot man.... hubba hubba
soulster1978 1 year ago 12
@soulster1978 hahahahahahahahahah
GDH140 1 year ago
@soulster1978 Are you serious or just being an asshole ? I saw your reaction before I started the video and when she appeared I lolled. I feel so evil.
manwithouthat44 8 months ago
julie needs a good probing herself
soulster1978 1 year ago
Einstein said that nothing can be faster than the speed of light.Probably Chuck Norris hadn't kicked him.
chilibilly18 1 year ago
freakin hate that chick
superjetism 1 year ago
guys omg eingsten wasn't even real they showed in newest scienece weekly. look it up b4 wtching this he was propagated turkish figure to bring fame to their motherland and it worked juding by all the people that thing hes ont he smart
thehowardcneal 1 year ago
I hold the secret and will sell it for one mmmmiiiiilllliiiioooonnnn dollars!
ArtisanTony 1 year ago
Einstein is never wrong
123456789million 1 year ago
actually he was wrong couple times, for example when he said the universe is shrinking since we all know it is expanding, and he was also wrong when he created the atomic bomb.....
franciswywy 1 year ago
@franciswywy how was he wrong about the atomic bomb?
eah2119 1 year ago
@franciswywy He said the universe was static not shrinking.
9hello123 7 months ago
Faster than speed of light is possible.
xsCrApPybXx 1 year ago
Where this scientist might be from ?? Texas?
alexanderssson 1 year ago
Einstein was wrong... fabric of Space and Time doesn't exist.. watch Einstein Defied.. you will be the Judge.. post you comment...
UnifiedPhysics 1 year ago
@UnifiedPhysics That video was crazy, full of spelling errors and radically weak and childish theories.
kaderoder 1 year ago
ALOTTA BIG WORDS zomg what she said?????
kalabok2 1 year ago
bullshit
mknomad5 1 year ago
2:31 I love it when she says that Einstein was right then a picture of him fades in where he's all gangsta with his pipe.
MarkArandjus 1 year ago
Girl you need to slow down when you talk XD
Buccura 1 year ago
all light particles travel at the same speed only in a vacuum unencumbered by obstacles. Obstacles such as gases and ethe-ric containing particles, in passing phases through space will distort the speed of light. Such obstacles usually cannot be picked up by observing instruments and thus the discrepancies arise.
EGMAG 1 year ago
For Gods sake, the only thing that can slow down light or change its direction is matter, by changing the direction of a light wave, you are in effect increasing the distance for the energy to go. And that woman talks to fast, she sounds like a mouse on drugs.
SASNIGHTCRAWLER 1 year ago
if you travel at the speed of light, then the light behind the direction of movement would be to slow to get to your eyes, the only thing you could see would be objects infront, and once you stopped traveling at light speed, you could look back and see objects as they were the instant you started, but it you were to go back, it would be different