At 4:32 you say "the average density of mars and earth are about the same." In fact mars is 28.6% less dense to be precise. That's not "about the same."
how do we actually know the mass of the object that is causing the lensing? there's so much stuff in space it all would have an effect on light, can we really find just one source for the light?
WTF! Can I have some of whatever it is you're smoking please"
MY ANSWER: Yes. I use Tetrahydrocannabinol (i.e., Δ⁹-THC ⇔ C₂₁H₃₀O₂) & Tobacco (e.g., C₁₀H₁₄N₂).
Nonetheless, irrelevant to the drug(s) I use it will never change the fact that according to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic I am 100% correct.
E = m (in all actuality) is complexity (e.g., E = m ≡ m = E) that might be viewed as simplicity, but it's not.
@dudejohnny did you watch the video? The bit at the end talking about lensing? the mass of the star doing the lensing would dictate how far the light was bent. The mass of it has to be assumed, how ever gravity would shift the polorazation properties of the light and that you can measure dirrectly.
sooo is it an optical illusion for the person on earth looking at the light from the star thats being deflected by the planet, and if so how do u know its an optical illusion is that because of Einstiens equations?
@dmanz007 You can normally tell it's lensing if you see two identical stars in the sky. Otherwise, you can sometimes tell if the planet causing the lensing moves, it will change how the light is bent and hence how we see it; a bit of detective work can then tell if it really is being lensed. And I'm not really sure you could call it an illusion, but I guess thats just semantics.
I don't mind a response or a challenge, it's the pointing out of irrelevant drivel rather than make an educated rebutle or argument. VVe are not idiots here, Don't tell me vvhat I meant to say or should have said, I'm here because I vvant to expand my understanding of physics by absorbing nevv theories and idea's that modern science has failed to deliver, because vve all knovv that free energy, antigravity, and a unified field theory are at the top of the grant list, for the last 120 years. :(
"VVe don't have a full theory.", "VVe don't understand this.", "VVe are not sure vvhat causes that." This is the trough of science?. If they don't undertand anything hovv can they teach society? So little knovvledge, and yet such big ego's. Too afraid to assume, and yet so quick to judge. Need to look at the big picture before you disect the canvas. Step back, look at everything and you'll see that everything is connected, everything is related, everything is one. Doesn't take a genius to see it
@projectmoses69 "Need to look at the big picture before you disect the canvas. Step back, look at everything and you'll see that everything is connected, everything is related, everything is one."
OK, so everything in the universe is a part of the universe and things interact with each other. Isn't it like, common knowledge?
"If they don't undertand anything hovv can they teach society?"
You are confusing not understanding certain bits with not understanding anything.
@RezoJaco One thing I dislike are literal cops. People vvho sit back and disect other people's comments and vvho feel they need to correct other people's opinions. if you are not satified vvith my comment on the subject matter, and require a more detailed explanation please feel free to study my video series. I vvould then be happy to ansvver any questions you may have as long as they are sincere. I believe the cure for ignorance is listening to other opinions and nevv idea's.
@salerio61 Gravity is the difference of tvvo opposite electromagnetic forces acting upon the atomic structure of matter. These are a contracting force and an expansive force (positve/negative) created by central black holes that eminate from the center of the atoms themselves on an atomic scale as vvell as on a planetary scale, a galactic scale, and a universal scale. The balance of these pushing and pulling forces vvithin the equilized field of space gives us the constant of gravity
@Juxtaroberto That "medium" you're not considering is the very same indigenous E = m the physicist(s) view as & call dark matter ± dark energy (+dr (+dt (+t Δ -t) -dt) -dr) that's in this 1st dimension (d¹) & forces nonnative Big-Bang E = m to coalesce, etc & neither of them is "dark".
ok, ok, I just had a brain lock, if an observed object in space is under the effect of a gravitational lense, but you only have one image of it, how can one surmise it's original position without knowing the force of gravity of object doing the "lensing" ???
@ZenSpider40 Yeah right.? I thought about that too.! I do not know the answer but the only way I see it comprehensible is this way:
You have an object in "A" but you see it in "B". The most reasonable way to know that, under my point of view, is because you see the object deflected all the way from "A" to "B".
If it is not like that I really would like to know it, thank you.
5:34 According to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic the term "spacetime" is 100% incorrect since it's based on the universal lie(s) that the Big-Bang created space & time. The act of gathering the E = m material(s) to build your house, etc do not create the location (e.g., dimensional space) that your house, etc will be built in.
The term "dark matter &, or dark energy" is 100% incorrect since it's not dark & trying to measure their mass is impossible as comoving distance proves
@Entrepreneur101 So that means you must be smarter than all of the physicists on Earth, because you, with all of your vast knowledge, have clearly come across a discovery that all of their feeble minds could not comprehend! Oh wait . . . .
(How come you might ask?) I do not subscribe to any of Darwin's nonscientific & non-mathematic evolutionary delusion(s) however 99.99% of all physicists, geneticists, chemists, etc do.
And your species wallows in & adheres speaking lies, in which is already exposed & delineate using the secular (i.e., science & math) tools of your species.
@bodinian impartially & unbiasedly speaking I thought you knew that, the institutions of (alleged) higher learning is nothing more than conduits, or portals for indoctrinating 99.99% of all attendees with Darwin's nonscientific & non-mathematic evolutionary delusion(s).
E = m is actually complexity (e.g., E = m ≡ m = E) that may be look at as being simple, but it's not.
@Juxtaroberto Since I am logically analytical &, or a bibliotist, I say...
FYI: It's a well known Biblical, historical & global fact that, your Satanic Edomite species pride themselves on how many scientific, mathematic, spiritual, governmental, sexual, etc lies that they via their father Satan (or, the father of lies) can speak &, or get others to believe too. A partial-list is below
@Entrepreneur101 I can understand how someone who does not have a degree in physics would not understand the first two, but the third one puzzles me. It takes a deep and severe lack of knowledge of classical mechanics to think that last one is a lie.
@Juxtaroberto As a physicist, geneticist, chemist, etc I say...
Edomites (or, so-called white people) naturally wallows in (nonscientific & non-mathematic) evolutionary Darwinian delusion(s) just like the imbecile Stephen Hawking.
I watched a show he did on the discovery channel (i think) & he visually & audible said that, time traveling & time dilation was the same thing, he said if you got on a train capable of v/c momentum went around the world, when you got off things will look different.
@Juxtaroberto Your comment(s) is a declaration that on your very best day you're a laymen &, or ineptly incognizant.
FYI: Sound waves is another form of E = m which consist of Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, Gluons, etc therefore if I were to view your comment(s) & apply it relative to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic it will be equivalent to you saying Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, Gluons, etc do not travel in the vacuum of space either.
@Entrepreneur101 No, no, no, that's all wrong. When the energy associated with sound travels its medium does NOT travel with it. There are simply compressions and rarefactions of the medium but NO NET MOVEMENT. You need a medium for sound to travel through... the thicker the better. THERE IS NO MEDIUM IN SPACE. You are OBVIOUSLY neither a physicist or geneticist or chemist, etc.
If you dug out a wee spherical hollow in the very centre of the earth and reinforced it enough, would anything happen to an object inside of the hollow?
@TheFutileFetus Let's assume that the Earth has a spherically symmetric mass distribution. Then nothing would happen. If we put a particle anywhere in the hollow you described, and then measure its gravitational potential energy using Newton's law, we will get a value independent of the particle's position. Thus, if the particle moves around in the hollow, the potential energy remains the same, meaning no gravitational work is done on it, so the gravitational force is 0.
Gravity has no particle to carry the force, because it doesn't need one! Gravity is the effect of mass! And mass makes space-time itself to fall towards the mass! So think about it! When you fall, you're not really falling, the space itself is falling, and you get only transported by the space!
@danielbluesmoke Think about it. The normal analogy of the "fabric" of space-time is just for people to understand the concept. Space-time isn't really a fabric, and mass can't "fall", bending space-time. You need a boson to actually cause an effect on space-time. You must break out of the concept of space-time "bending" as it isn't. Fermions can't interact with space-time.
@danielbluesmoke Yes, but if the photon has taught us anything it's that sometimes things have duality. Photons can act as both waves and particles. Electrons too. We should keep am open mind to the graviton.
@ispravljat I don't see the connection between those statements... A basic look into special and general relativity will show that the closer you get to a massive object the slower time is. As a wave passes through the surrounding space it is bent because the part of the wave that is closer to the object is moving slower than the part farther away. In essence, it causes a bend in the direction of light, relative to the object. Simply put, that is how it works. Do you understand?
@ispravljat Light is both a particle and a wave. Sometimes it behaves like the "stuff" in your microwave that makes things hot, sometimes it behaves like the grains of sand fired through a sandblaster. Gravity's effect on light falls in the behaviors associated with the latter. Far too much to fit in a YouTube comment, though our high school physics class learned all about it.
@ispravljat well, yes, it's quite hard to imagine, but that effect have been observed by observatories around the world. And, by the way, flat earth was a good theory back in the days - it served it's purpose (we still use it for local practical purposes), and present science too, presents only theories of how world works - no real scientist would say that there is a 100% accurate theory - there's no way of knowing that. At least yet.
Could we bend the light emitted from our own earth around a number of planets or objects, so that we could see it with a telescope? And if so, would we not view our own planet back in time?
@qkn30989 Yes, I suppose you could. The distance it would have to travel to actually double back around to it's source would be phenomenal though, given that we can just barely see (often not with visible light) massive planets orbiting other relatively close stars that would pretty much make it useless.
There is also the problem that the light would become distorted as it bent around so many sources of gravity, and the natural dispersal of the light eventually completely nullifying the image.
@LeconsdAnalyse She quite clearly says light from behind such heavy gravitational objects does bend light, and that we sometimes can see light from one planet bendt all around said objects.
But you might know better than I do, I'm just curious =)
The scientist from 5:35 to 8:00 Basically explained 2 weeks of studying in my school and discussing the big G and the effect of gravity on other things...
Should we let our own imagination take control over how we see things or should we let facts and observations take control of how we see things? That is my question to all creationists and darwinists.
@rizzdrums4life I of course have no clue about the calculator referenced here, but the Hewlett-Packard's HP-48 had this feature 15 years ago. I'm sure there are other HP models that also do, and probably some Texas Instruments scientific calculators as well.
@rizzdrums4life my $20 Casio has them built in as does my $200 HP-50G you pay your money and take your pick. Go for the HP, you also get the benefit of working in RPN
@soppybollocks11880 gravity as described by the video can even warp space, which is a vacuum (light travels at different speeds at different atmospheres we only get the constant when it is in a vacuum), so why can it not warp light?
@soppybollocks11880 There is no distinction between mass and energy in the light of general relativity. They are just the same thing appearing different from different frames of reference.
Nobody's gonna believe me, probably, but I imagined gravity exactly like in that analogy with that sofa's cushion (except in my mind it was a trampoline thingy xD) without even knowing it was the actual model for gravity. Of course it didn't just pop into my head, I'm no genius... I got the idea after reading an excerpt from Flatland, and then hearing some guy say gravity was a curvature in space-time. It was neat and frustrating at the same time when I learnt "my" theory was made 50 years ago .
I need to find the ‘’G’’ spot for my ‘’G’’f and after I am done she sais to me ‘’G’’ood job and I feel very ‘’G’’ood about myself.
All the important things in life start with a ‘’G’’, Glory , Gold, God, Guns, it’s in an equation in the world, some countries have lots of Guns others have Gold so the Guns steal the Gold and the once that lost the Gold pray to God for Guns and the once that have the Guns and the Gold live in Glory.
I read somewhere that Galileo never actually dropped anything from the Tower of Pisa! Instead, he looked at how different sized balls of different materials rolled down a slope and from there he deduced that gravity acted upon everything equally.
how awesome this vid would have been if they only explain what would happen if G happened to be any other value, say 3.5e-7, or 6.67e-12 or something...
Does that work in some way with the clouds and the moon? Twice I have seen a perfect circle of cloud with the moon in the centre and it couldn't have been random, how could it have been perfect from where I was standing. The only problem is that the clouds are in front of the moon.
@BULLBRANDDAN It's actually just the light of the moon (which is the light of the sun) refracted through either ice crystals in the atmosphere, or moisture in the clouds, much like a rainbow after a rain shower.
@BULLBRANDDAN: As the others here say, what you're seeing is the light bent not by gravity but by refraction through ice crstals in a very high, thin cloud. Go to wiki and look up "moon dog". The moon does bend light but since it is much less massive than a galaxy, he bend is too small to notice.
I propose: What if gravity is a property of space just as time is. It isnt a particle. And so are other fields - like magnetic fields. I see gravity and time as being connected.
I see gravity as the warping and twisting of space due to matter. However it isnt a one-to-one relationship. The more matter you cram into a space - the gravity 'warp' is logrithmic and can be inifinite.
Dark matter is space twisted and distorted on itself for some reason and not really matter at all. What do you think
@shagster1970 It's possible. However, the Standard Model has predicted the graviton (which, although I am not sure, might also be the Higgs boson), and all its previously predicted particles have been found. A theory's predictive power gives credence to its validity.
I still dont get the fist on the couch - gravity warping space - analogy. Her fist warps the couch instantly - but warping space/time occurs at a finite speed (c I think). Isn't there a better analogy?? Also like the ball - the light would speed up as it nears the object. This seems to be impossible.
it does occur, i'm not sure when the next time this will be observable is, i remember seeing a simple, large home telescope with a distant image of Jupiter, as it passed near the view of a star, and right before it contacted (visually) the star, the star apeared to move. Videos of this with the sun are on youtube durring an eclipse when u can see the relativly dim stars behind the sun.
That´s one of the pickles of gravity....its effects are instantaneous.
If the Sun disapeared, you would know it ~8 minutes after because the last photon that the Sun emited would take that long to reach the Earth.
But the Gravitational effect would be instantaneous, meaning that when the Sun disapeared the Earth would immediately start to drift out of the solar system because of the centrifugal force of our orbit around the Sun.
Wait - you said the gravitational effects are instantaneous. How is that possible? If it is a particle ("gravitron" is used in this movie) - nothing travels faster than light (as far as we know). I guess it comes down to: what is gravity????
You can travel faster then light by using gravity. If you could generate gravity (which we cant do-even though we are working on it) You can pull space to the craft and move through space that way.
In order for that to work you would have to be able to produce gravity that works in only one direction. Plus to generate a force that would pull oh lets say the next star closer to us, would require massive amounts of energy or a massive amount of matter.
actually thats how the universe expands faster than light ..the objects in the universe dont move faster than light , its the universe itself that expands faster than light ...
no object can ever go faster than light , that would literally mean u go backwards in time ...wich doesnt make any sense ...it doesnt even work with interdimensional theories ...
distant galaxies are receeding faster than light but they dont actually move at light speed , hey even nature can cheat the speed limit :)
No no no no no!!! All effects due to changes in mass would radiate at the speed of light.
As I understand it (which isn't very well), fixed masses interacting (such as planets in orbit) have several relativistic effects going on which almost cancel out and give a net effect very similar to instantaneous Newtonian gravity. However, CHANGES in gravity, caused by a changes in mass, radiate at the speed of light.
You are right, i´ve read some more things and by the General Relativity Theory its ~ the speed of light.
But i´ve seen that on a documentary (dont remember the name) and i remember it because it´s counter intuitive acording the laws of physics that we know, so in that regard thanks for correcting an old and corrupt data bit on my memory ;)
@shagster1970 Analogy alert! If the fist is removed instantaneously, the couch reforms at its own 'slow' rate. There will be a time when the fist has gone but a dip remains, still pulling the ball in.
actually the couch doesnt warp instantly ...the couch warps at a finite speed ..
in slow motion u would see the fabric shuddering like a "wave" ....like when u throw a ball against a glass window , in slow motion the window "warps" like a wave ..
thats how space works ...but faster ..at the speed of light , gravitational waves move at "c"
I disagree. The possibility of Life, as I understand it is an emergent quality of systems arising from an energy rich environment.
Yes, we need all of our environmental variables just right to support OUR bodies, but a completely alien set of variables can still support other forms of life.
It's very sci-fi, but I don't see any reason life cannot emerge on the surface of a sun or in the plume of a supernova.
It's just a matter of big enough numbers of similar units.
At 4:32 you say "the average density of mars and earth are about the same." In fact mars is 28.6% less dense to be precise. That's not "about the same."
how do we actually know the mass of the object that is causing the lensing? there's so much stuff in space it all would have an effect on light, can we really find just one source for the light?
WTF! Can I have some of whatever it is you're smoking please"
MY ANSWER: Yes. I use Tetrahydrocannabinol (i.e., Δ⁹-THC ⇔ C₂₁H₃₀O₂) & Tobacco (e.g., C₁₀H₁₄N₂).
Nonetheless, irrelevant to the drug(s) I use it will never change the fact that according to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic I am 100% correct.
E = m (in all actuality) is complexity (e.g., E = m ≡ m = E) that might be viewed as simplicity, but it's not.
@dudejohnny did you watch the video? The bit at the end talking about lensing? the mass of the star doing the lensing would dictate how far the light was bent. The mass of it has to be assumed, how ever gravity would shift the polorazation properties of the light and that you can measure dirrectly.
sooo is it an optical illusion for the person on earth looking at the light from the star thats being deflected by the planet, and if so how do u know its an optical illusion is that because of Einstiens equations?
@dmanz007 You can normally tell it's lensing if you see two identical stars in the sky. Otherwise, you can sometimes tell if the planet causing the lensing moves, it will change how the light is bent and hence how we see it; a bit of detective work can then tell if it really is being lensed. And I'm not really sure you could call it an illusion, but I guess thats just semantics.
I don't mind a response or a challenge, it's the pointing out of irrelevant drivel rather than make an educated rebutle or argument. VVe are not idiots here, Don't tell me vvhat I meant to say or should have said, I'm here because I vvant to expand my understanding of physics by absorbing nevv theories and idea's that modern science has failed to deliver, because vve all knovv that free energy, antigravity, and a unified field theory are at the top of the grant list, for the last 120 years. :(
Where can I get a flashing institute of physics ball?
jakeedmans 2 days ago
what am I going to do , Ive almost watched all the sixtysymbols videos !
Poponfu1 2 days ago
At 4:32 you say "the average density of mars and earth are about the same." In fact mars is 28.6% less dense to be precise. That's not "about the same."
Other than that ...I liked your video.
MegaSkills9 5 days ago
@MegaSkills9 For the purpose of that demonstration, that's obviously accurate enough.
RBuckminsterFuller 1 day ago
how do we actually know the mass of the object that is causing the lensing? there's so much stuff in space it all would have an effect on light, can we really find just one source for the light?
crazystrongtower 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
YOUR QUESTION: "All I can say to that is
WTF! Can I have some of whatever it is you're smoking please"
MY ANSWER: Yes. I use Tetrahydrocannabinol (i.e., Δ⁹-THC ⇔ C₂₁H₃₀O₂) & Tobacco (e.g., C₁₀H₁₄N₂).
Nonetheless, irrelevant to the drug(s) I use it will never change the fact that according to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic I am 100% correct.
E = m (in all actuality) is complexity (e.g., E = m ≡ m = E) that might be viewed as simplicity, but it's not.
@salerio61
Entrepreneur101 1 month ago
how can you tell how far it has been rotated, by how much light is polorized in particular directions?
masluxx 1 month ago
@masluxx
Are you referring to something in the video?
dudejohnny 1 week ago
@dudejohnny did you watch the video? The bit at the end talking about lensing? the mass of the star doing the lensing would dictate how far the light was bent. The mass of it has to be assumed, how ever gravity would shift the polorazation properties of the light and that you can measure dirrectly.
masluxx 1 week ago
@masluxx
I don't think it would change the polarization of light, but then again I wouldn't know. It doesn't seem intuitive to me
dudejohnny 1 week ago
You guys should sell the Bill Nye cards I would so buy one.
mzyzer19 1 month ago
Please rename this video to "how to fist a couch".
willd3rbeast 1 month ago
sooo is it an optical illusion for the person on earth looking at the light from the star thats being deflected by the planet, and if so how do u know its an optical illusion is that because of Einstiens equations?
dmanz007 2 months ago
@dmanz007 You can normally tell it's lensing if you see two identical stars in the sky. Otherwise, you can sometimes tell if the planet causing the lensing moves, it will change how the light is bent and hence how we see it; a bit of detective work can then tell if it really is being lensed. And I'm not really sure you could call it an illusion, but I guess thats just semantics.
fightthepurple 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So what do you guys think about Entropic Gravity? Something along the lines of Gravity being an emergent, and not fundamental, force.
doubleja 2 months ago
Comment removed
doubleja 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't mind a response or a challenge, it's the pointing out of irrelevant drivel rather than make an educated rebutle or argument. VVe are not idiots here, Don't tell me vvhat I meant to say or should have said, I'm here because I vvant to expand my understanding of physics by absorbing nevv theories and idea's that modern science has failed to deliver, because vve all knovv that free energy, antigravity, and a unified field theory are at the top of the grant list, for the last 120 years. :(
projectmoses69 2 months ago
Comment removed
projectmoses69 2 months ago
If you don't like people responding to your opinions, don't voice them :/
If you do state your opinion, you must be aware that people might not agree with it, more, they can even challenge it.
RezoJaco 2 months ago
"VVe don't have a full theory.", "VVe don't understand this.", "VVe are not sure vvhat causes that." This is the trough of science?. If they don't undertand anything hovv can they teach society? So little knovvledge, and yet such big ego's. Too afraid to assume, and yet so quick to judge. Need to look at the big picture before you disect the canvas. Step back, look at everything and you'll see that everything is connected, everything is related, everything is one. Doesn't take a genius to see it
projectmoses69 2 months ago
Comment removed
RezoJaco 2 months ago
@projectmoses69 "Need to look at the big picture before you disect the canvas. Step back, look at everything and you'll see that everything is connected, everything is related, everything is one."
OK, so everything in the universe is a part of the universe and things interact with each other. Isn't it like, common knowledge?
"If they don't undertand anything hovv can they teach society?"
You are confusing not understanding certain bits with not understanding anything.
RezoJaco 2 months ago
@RezoJaco One thing I dislike are literal cops. People vvho sit back and disect other people's comments and vvho feel they need to correct other people's opinions. if you are not satified vvith my comment on the subject matter, and require a more detailed explanation please feel free to study my video series. I vvould then be happy to ansvver any questions you may have as long as they are sincere. I believe the cure for ignorance is listening to other opinions and nevv idea's.
projectmoses69 2 months ago
@projectmoses69
Have you lost the "w" key on your keyboard?
Cus that would make it very easy to make you jealous, look:
wwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWwwWWww
wybo2 2 months ago
@wybo2 LoL,VVvvVVvvVVvvVVvv ya it's definately broken, have to use double v's. one of the kids broke the key off.
projectmoses69 2 months ago
@projectmoses69 word salad and total nonsense. Why don't you tell us all about gravity then seeing as you have this amazing insight
salerio61 2 months ago
Comment removed
projectmoses69 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@salerio61 Gravity is the difference of tvvo opposite electromagnetic forces acting upon the atomic structure of matter. These are a contracting force and an expansive force (positve/negative) created by central black holes that eminate from the center of the atoms themselves on an atomic scale as vvell as on a planetary scale, a galactic scale, and a universal scale. The balance of these pushing and pulling forces vvithin the equilized field of space gives us the constant of gravity
projectmoses69 2 months ago
@Juxtaroberto Based upon analytical logic there's a 99.99% chance that you're a Edomite & I'm correct.
Entrepreneur101 2 months ago 3
@Juxtaroberto That "medium" you're not considering is the very same indigenous E = m the physicist(s) view as & call dark matter ± dark energy (+dr (+dt (+t Δ -t) -dt) -dr) that's in this 1st dimension (d¹) & forces nonnative Big-Bang E = m to coalesce, etc & neither of them is "dark".
+ (±) - ≡ ⁺∞ (±) ⁻∞ ≡ +F (±) -F, etc proves they're pressurized.
They both consist of a transparently unilluminated E = m relative to the Illuminous E = m & identical to Neutrinos it's not impeded by normal E = m.
Entrepreneur101 2 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 All I can say to that is
WTF! Can I have some of whatever it is you're smoking please
salerio61 2 months ago
Why are there so many penis videos to the right...
humpfry24 3 months ago
ok, ok, I just had a brain lock, if an observed object in space is under the effect of a gravitational lense, but you only have one image of it, how can one surmise it's original position without knowing the force of gravity of object doing the "lensing" ???
ZenSpider40 4 months ago
@ZenSpider40 Yeah right.? I thought about that too.! I do not know the answer but the only way I see it comprehensible is this way:
You have an object in "A" but you see it in "B". The most reasonable way to know that, under my point of view, is because you see the object deflected all the way from "A" to "B".
If it is not like that I really would like to know it, thank you.
skiingfreestyle 3 months ago
5:34 According to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic the term "spacetime" is 100% incorrect since it's based on the universal lie(s) that the Big-Bang created space & time. The act of gathering the E = m material(s) to build your house, etc do not create the location (e.g., dimensional space) that your house, etc will be built in.
The term "dark matter &, or dark energy" is 100% incorrect since it's not dark & trying to measure their mass is impossible as comoving distance proves
Entrepreneur101 4 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 So that means you must be smarter than all of the physicists on Earth, because you, with all of your vast knowledge, have clearly come across a discovery that all of their feeble minds could not comprehend! Oh wait . . . .
bodinian 4 months ago
@bodinian Yes I am.
(How come you might ask?) I do not subscribe to any of Darwin's nonscientific & non-mathematic evolutionary delusion(s) however 99.99% of all physicists, geneticists, chemists, etc do.
And your species wallows in & adheres speaking lies, in which is already exposed & delineate using the secular (i.e., science & math) tools of your species.
Entrepreneur101 4 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 So, you are a creationist on a video about the gravity constant?
I smell a troll here.
bodinian 4 months ago
@bodinian I am nonpartisan, nondenominational, impartial & unbiased TRUTH arbitrator.
Entrepreneur101 4 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 I stand corrected, start a university, I would attend
bodinian 4 months ago
@bodinian impartially & unbiasedly speaking I thought you knew that, the institutions of (alleged) higher learning is nothing more than conduits, or portals for indoctrinating 99.99% of all attendees with Darwin's nonscientific & non-mathematic evolutionary delusion(s).
E = m is actually complexity (e.g., E = m ≡ m = E) that may be look at as being simple, but it's not.
Entrepreneur101 4 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 Wow, conspiracy much?
Juxtaroberto 3 months ago
@Juxtaroberto Since I am logically analytical &, or a bibliotist, I say...
FYI: It's a well known Biblical, historical & global fact that, your Satanic Edomite species pride themselves on how many scientific, mathematic, spiritual, governmental, sexual, etc lies that they via their father Satan (or, the father of lies) can speak &, or get others to believe too. A partial-list is below
● Black holes destroys E = m
● The Big-Bang created space & time
● Sound do not travel in the vacuum of space
Entrepreneur101 2 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 I can understand how someone who does not have a degree in physics would not understand the first two, but the third one puzzles me. It takes a deep and severe lack of knowledge of classical mechanics to think that last one is a lie.
Juxtaroberto 2 months ago
@Juxtaroberto As a physicist, geneticist, chemist, etc I say...
Edomites (or, so-called white people) naturally wallows in (nonscientific & non-mathematic) evolutionary Darwinian delusion(s) just like the imbecile Stephen Hawking.
I watched a show he did on the discovery channel (i think) & he visually & audible said that, time traveling & time dilation was the same thing, he said if you got on a train capable of v/c momentum went around the world, when you got off things will look different.
Entrepreneur101 2 months ago
@Juxtaroberto Your comment(s) is a declaration that on your very best day you're a laymen &, or ineptly incognizant.
FYI: Sound waves is another form of E = m which consist of Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, Gluons, etc therefore if I were to view your comment(s) & apply it relative to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic it will be equivalent to you saying Protons, Neutrons, Electrons, Gluons, etc do not travel in the vacuum of space either.
I suggest that you stop using the drug(s).
Entrepreneur101 2 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 No, no, no, that's all wrong. When the energy associated with sound travels its medium does NOT travel with it. There are simply compressions and rarefactions of the medium but NO NET MOVEMENT. You need a medium for sound to travel through... the thicker the better. THERE IS NO MEDIUM IN SPACE. You are OBVIOUSLY neither a physicist or geneticist or chemist, etc.
Juxtaroberto 2 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 Also, I'm not white. So your racial profiling of me falls flat on its face. Moron.
Juxtaroberto 2 months ago
@Entrepreneur101 I do agree with you on the point that the English language does not make sense sometimes, though. I am being honest about that part.
bodinian 4 months ago
I love the sofa space-time example. I'm totally stealing that and using it.
REDEEMER10000 4 months ago
Why the Einstein's cross is a cross but not a ring?
TheDingiso 4 months ago
@TheDingiso
That's a very good question.
Apjooz 4 months ago
@TheDingiso
Ha! Watch to the end of the video. There it's been said that the ring requires perfect alignment.
Apjooz 4 months ago
If you dug out a wee spherical hollow in the very centre of the earth and reinforced it enough, would anything happen to an object inside of the hollow?
TheFutileFetus 4 months ago
Comment removed
UltraProle21 4 months ago
@TheFutileFetus Let's assume that the Earth has a spherically symmetric mass distribution. Then nothing would happen. If we put a particle anywhere in the hollow you described, and then measure its gravitational potential energy using Newton's law, we will get a value independent of the particle's position. Thus, if the particle moves around in the hollow, the potential energy remains the same, meaning no gravitational work is done on it, so the gravitational force is 0.
UltraProle21 4 months ago
Comment removed
Acrimonator 5 months ago
Gravity has no particle to carry the force, because it doesn't need one! Gravity is the effect of mass! And mass makes space-time itself to fall towards the mass! So think about it! When you fall, you're not really falling, the space itself is falling, and you get only transported by the space!
danielbluesmoke 5 months ago
@danielbluesmoke Think about it. The normal analogy of the "fabric" of space-time is just for people to understand the concept. Space-time isn't really a fabric, and mass can't "fall", bending space-time. You need a boson to actually cause an effect on space-time. You must break out of the concept of space-time "bending" as it isn't. Fermions can't interact with space-time.
Aviatorsmith 5 months ago
@danielbluesmoke Yes, but if the photon has taught us anything it's that sometimes things have duality. Photons can act as both waves and particles. Electrons too. We should keep am open mind to the graviton.
Juxtaroberto 2 months ago
Fist F*ck My Face In Ass 4: Staring Woman physicist
TheExtractor1 5 months ago in playlist Sixty Symbols
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The bald guy first draws his cock as the leaning tower of pisa, then draws his balls as earth and mars.
RichardTheThirdd 6 months ago
Measuring the angle of bent light to calculate mass... brilliant.
n3wbuo 6 months ago
@ispravljat I don't see the connection between those statements... A basic look into special and general relativity will show that the closer you get to a massive object the slower time is. As a wave passes through the surrounding space it is bent because the part of the wave that is closer to the object is moving slower than the part farther away. In essence, it causes a bend in the direction of light, relative to the object. Simply put, that is how it works. Do you understand?
TheCopaceticMan 7 months ago
@ispravljat Light is both a particle and a wave. Sometimes it behaves like the "stuff" in your microwave that makes things hot, sometimes it behaves like the grains of sand fired through a sandblaster. Gravity's effect on light falls in the behaviors associated with the latter. Far too much to fit in a YouTube comment, though our high school physics class learned all about it.
OOZ662 7 months ago
@ispravljat well, yes, it's quite hard to imagine, but that effect have been observed by observatories around the world. And, by the way, flat earth was a good theory back in the days - it served it's purpose (we still use it for local practical purposes), and present science too, presents only theories of how world works - no real scientist would say that there is a 100% accurate theory - there's no way of knowing that. At least yet.
fe328 7 months ago
Comment removed
AzianBoy1998 7 months ago
"So, we go back to my fist here.." - You just have to love physics..
appelelle 8 months ago 31
@appelelle The third time she called the attention on her fist I felt a little intimidated (my little g actually) *chills*.
Jokes apart, this whole series is awesome!
damianpaz 7 months ago
Could we bend the light emitted from our own earth around a number of planets or objects, so that we could see it with a telescope? And if so, would we not view our own planet back in time?
qkn30989 8 months ago
@qkn30989 Yes, I suppose you could. The distance it would have to travel to actually double back around to it's source would be phenomenal though, given that we can just barely see (often not with visible light) massive planets orbiting other relatively close stars that would pretty much make it useless.
There is also the problem that the light would become distorted as it bent around so many sources of gravity, and the natural dispersal of the light eventually completely nullifying the image.
Nadritch 8 months ago
@qkn30989 NO. Light doesn`t orbit a center of mass, a material object does.
LeconsdAnalyse 8 months ago
@LeconsdAnalyse She quite clearly says light from behind such heavy gravitational objects does bend light, and that we sometimes can see light from one planet bendt all around said objects.
But you might know better than I do, I'm just curious =)
qkn30989 8 months ago
@qkn30989 YES. That`s true. She is correct. But your original question is another story.
LeconsdAnalyse 8 months ago
Awesome video, especially there at the end.
nicoheckens1 8 months ago
would a gigantic poo be attractive?
sikhfukk 8 months ago
@sikhfukk yes
dinmorerengeit 8 months ago
The scientist from 5:35 to 8:00 Basically explained 2 weeks of studying in my school and discussing the big G and the effect of gravity on other things...
Big kudos to her, she's really great..
klesstwo 9 months ago
Should we let our own imagination take control over how we see things or should we let facts and observations take control of how we see things? That is my question to all creationists and darwinists.
Wacram 9 months ago
@Wacram Why Darwinists?
AkaiTsukiShimitsu 9 months ago
At one point you say, (around 1:10) that you have a calculator with the constants built in..
Can you tell me what the calculator is, make/model or anything, an/or where to get one.
THANKS GUYS KEEP UP THE VIDEOS !!
rizzdrums4life 10 months ago
@rizzdrums4life It's also possible that he's talking about some sort of calculation software on his PC.
MindLessWiz 10 months ago
@rizzdrums4life I of course have no clue about the calculator referenced here, but the Hewlett-Packard's HP-48 had this feature 15 years ago. I'm sure there are other HP models that also do, and probably some Texas Instruments scientific calculators as well.
disorganizedorg 9 months ago
@rizzdrums4life my $20 Casio has them built in as does my $200 HP-50G you pay your money and take your pick. Go for the HP, you also get the benefit of working in RPN
salerio61 2 months ago
g=GM/R2
F(g) = GMm/R2
CRISNCHIPS12398 11 months ago
"Big G" sounds like the name of a pimp.
eggroll9000 11 months ago 102
@eggroll9000 oh but it is.. get on its bad side and you get an ultimate bitch slap... its called FAAAAAT!!
ZeroZenth 5 months ago
F = M1M2G/r^2
g = (m2G/r^2)
F = M1g
MarijnStevens 11 months ago
Longest intro evar.
Zeldakitteh 1 year ago
If photons have no mass then why is light deflected by gravity?
soppybollocks11880 1 year ago
@soppybollocks11880 gravity as described by the video can even warp space, which is a vacuum (light travels at different speeds at different atmospheres we only get the constant when it is in a vacuum), so why can it not warp light?
thus in layman's terms
gravity > vacuum > light
animaniacdestroyer 1 year ago
@soppybollocks11880
Photons have mass, they don't, however, have any rest mass.
As the particle moves it exhibits energy and from E-mc^2 we can see that energy is directly proportional to mass.
This shows us that photons have mass in motion.
RazorN6 1 year ago
@soppybollocks11880 There is no distinction between mass and energy in the light of general relativity. They are just the same thing appearing different from different frames of reference.
subh1 1 year ago
Nobody's gonna believe me, probably, but I imagined gravity exactly like in that analogy with that sofa's cushion (except in my mind it was a trampoline thingy xD) without even knowing it was the actual model for gravity. Of course it didn't just pop into my head, I'm no genius... I got the idea after reading an excerpt from Flatland, and then hearing some guy say gravity was a curvature in space-time. It was neat and frustrating at the same time when I learnt "my" theory was made 50 years ago .
Chirigami 1 year ago
why is it such a close up on the first guy lol
Trouterr 1 year ago
I will be sure to show my girlfriend this video, she is always demanding me for a big G!
daddyschlong14 1 year ago
prety chick...
manolis1080 1 year ago
my GF said i need to find her G-spot... but this didn't seem to help at all
isrealjason 1 year ago
Yes the ‘’G’’ is very important.
I need to find the ‘’G’’ spot for my ‘’G’’f and after I am done she sais to me ‘’G’’ood job and I feel very ‘’G’’ood about myself.
All the important things in life start with a ‘’G’’, Glory , Gold, God, Guns, it’s in an equation in the world, some countries have lots of Guns others have Gold so the Guns steal the Gold and the once that lost the Gold pray to God for Guns and the once that have the Guns and the Gold live in Glory.
FlyingRayzorBlade 1 year ago
@FlyingRayzorBlade um.
G3org3Master 1 year ago
I think she's motioning for me to sit on that representation of space time next to her?
Chaosynthesis 1 year ago
this video sums up evry ting i think about fellow humans
davidprust 1 year ago
She's rather skilled at fisting.
BuBBaGump014 1 year ago
now when i see two identical looking stars i will know what is really going on
Zee96969696 1 year ago
so does that guy always carry that card and that black marker because in every vid hes in hes always writing with that thing O.o
HighlordSarnex 1 year ago
If only Einstein had the power of PCs today...
koffypr 1 year ago
I read somewhere that Galileo never actually dropped anything from the Tower of Pisa! Instead, he looked at how different sized balls of different materials rolled down a slope and from there he deduced that gravity acted upon everything equally.
nevets66s 1 year ago
Thumbs up for the female physicist ! whoop, looks like my secondary school physics teacher !
BenPsOhYeah 1 year ago
these physicists are proper inspiration! dont ever stop making these videos.
makes mne want to to go to uni of nottingham.
intemister 1 year ago
This is what the discovery channel should have been like, +subscribe for you
GenusCastor 1 year ago 47
how awesome this vid would have been if they only explain what would happen if G happened to be any other value, say 3.5e-7, or 6.67e-12 or something...
ggonmar 1 year ago
Does that work in some way with the clouds and the moon? Twice I have seen a perfect circle of cloud with the moon in the centre and it couldn't have been random, how could it have been perfect from where I was standing. The only problem is that the clouds are in front of the moon.
BULLBRANDDAN 1 year ago
@BULLBRANDDAN Errr, no... the clouds were probably just thin enough that the moon could shine through.
Juxtaroberto 1 year ago
@BULLBRANDDAN It's actually just the light of the moon (which is the light of the sun) refracted through either ice crystals in the atmosphere, or moisture in the clouds, much like a rainbow after a rain shower.
benjidan130 1 year ago
@BULLBRANDDAN: As the others here say, what you're seeing is the light bent not by gravity but by refraction through ice crstals in a very high, thin cloud. Go to wiki and look up "moon dog". The moon does bend light but since it is much less massive than a galaxy, he bend is too small to notice.
puncheex 1 year ago
GRAVITY cat not amused
xato909 1 year ago
What's her name? Love her explanations!
filipeaa320 1 year ago
I propose: What if gravity is a property of space just as time is. It isnt a particle. And so are other fields - like magnetic fields. I see gravity and time as being connected.
I see gravity as the warping and twisting of space due to matter. However it isnt a one-to-one relationship. The more matter you cram into a space - the gravity 'warp' is logrithmic and can be inifinite.
Dark matter is space twisted and distorted on itself for some reason and not really matter at all. What do you think
shagster1970 1 year ago
@shagster1970 It's possible. However, the Standard Model has predicted the graviton (which, although I am not sure, might also be the Higgs boson), and all its previously predicted particles have been found. A theory's predictive power gives credence to its validity.
Juxtaroberto 1 year ago
good work predicting so many stuff einstein .....
now thats what i call a prediction , not some cheap lady with a crystal ball telling me my future :D
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
lol 1:43 "I'm partial to gravity."
HumeAnnoyed 2 years ago
getting paid by making stories lol! what a nice job.
Baraquiel62 2 years ago
This is why I will never get the Einstein view of gravity...
2D model sounds good but space is 3D...
Hard to wrap my head around that...
Kalital 2 years ago
Well, you just take each case of gravity between 2 objects on the 2d plane win which the centres of mass occur,
elv3nm 2 years ago
2d plane curves in 3d ..
3d plane curved in 4d ...
and so on ..4d space curves in 5d ....5 in 6 ...6in 7.....bla bla ...10 in 11 the end.
impossible to imagine ....but thats how it happens ...
string theory brings a better explanation ...but i cant say it ...i can barely understand it.
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
I still dont get the fist on the couch - gravity warping space - analogy. Her fist warps the couch instantly - but warping space/time occurs at a finite speed (c I think). Isn't there a better analogy?? Also like the ball - the light would speed up as it nears the object. This seems to be impossible.
shagster1970 2 years ago
it does occur, i'm not sure when the next time this will be observable is, i remember seeing a simple, large home telescope with a distant image of Jupiter, as it passed near the view of a star, and right before it contacted (visually) the star, the star apeared to move. Videos of this with the sun are on youtube durring an eclipse when u can see the relativly dim stars behind the sun.
edm3048 2 years ago
@shagster1970
That´s one of the pickles of gravity....its effects are instantaneous.
If the Sun disapeared, you would know it ~8 minutes after because the last photon that the Sun emited would take that long to reach the Earth.
But the Gravitational effect would be instantaneous, meaning that when the Sun disapeared the Earth would immediately start to drift out of the solar system because of the centrifugal force of our orbit around the Sun.
Micr0chiP 2 years ago
Wait - you said the gravitational effects are instantaneous. How is that possible? If it is a particle ("gravitron" is used in this movie) - nothing travels faster than light (as far as we know). I guess it comes down to: what is gravity????
shagster1970 2 years ago
You can travel faster then light by using gravity. If you could generate gravity (which we cant do-even though we are working on it) You can pull space to the craft and move through space that way.
xxMafia101 2 years ago
In order for that to work you would have to be able to produce gravity that works in only one direction. Plus to generate a force that would pull oh lets say the next star closer to us, would require massive amounts of energy or a massive amount of matter.
omegavalerius 2 years ago
actually thats how the universe expands faster than light ..the objects in the universe dont move faster than light , its the universe itself that expands faster than light ...
no object can ever go faster than light , that would literally mean u go backwards in time ...wich doesnt make any sense ...it doesnt even work with interdimensional theories ...
distant galaxies are receeding faster than light but they dont actually move at light speed , hey even nature can cheat the speed limit :)
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
oh and no way to generate that kind of gravity :)
it would be much easier to use curved space to "beat" gravity to a location by taking an extradimensional shortcut..
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
No no no no no!!! All effects due to changes in mass would radiate at the speed of light.
As I understand it (which isn't very well), fixed masses interacting (such as planets in orbit) have several relativistic effects going on which almost cancel out and give a net effect very similar to instantaneous Newtonian gravity. However, CHANGES in gravity, caused by a changes in mass, radiate at the speed of light.
chrisofnottingham 2 years ago
You are right, i´ve read some more things and by the General Relativity Theory its ~ the speed of light.
But i´ve seen that on a documentary (dont remember the name) and i remember it because it´s counter intuitive acording the laws of physics that we know, so in that regard thanks for correcting an old and corrupt data bit on my memory ;)
Micr0chiP 2 years ago
@Micr0chiP no it wouldn't, it would take 8 minutes no information can propagate faster than the speed of light
salerio61 2 months ago
you see the ball taking speed from your point of view in 3d... it's going at constant speed form the 2d point of view... (or something similar...)
eltharynd 2 years ago
@shagster1970 Analogy alert! If the fist is removed instantaneously, the couch reforms at its own 'slow' rate. There will be a time when the fist has gone but a dip remains, still pulling the ball in.
chrisofnottingham 2 years ago
thats actually what would happen
if the sun dissapears suddenly (just imagine it could happen)
then we would still spin around in orbit for 8 minutes, and still see the sun for 8 minutes
since everything we see is "delayed" cus of the light speed limit
and gravity also works at light speed ....
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
Comment removed
CenaxKikia 1 year ago
@CenaxKikia yes it does ....thats the basis of einstein's theory ...
what u just said is newtonian physics ...but u cant apply that to gravity.
gravity works at light speed ...and this is already prooven by countless experiments .
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
@CenaxKikia #
sidewaysfcs0718 is right gravity works at light speed.
ajuinkonijn 1 year ago
@CenaxKikia That's not the case. Gravity has the speed limit of light.
ivanogor 1 year ago
I know this ;p
CenaxKikia 1 year ago
actually the couch doesnt warp instantly ...the couch warps at a finite speed ..
in slow motion u would see the fabric shuddering like a "wave" ....like when u throw a ball against a glass window , in slow motion the window "warps" like a wave ..
thats how space works ...but faster ..at the speed of light , gravitational waves move at "c"
sidewaysfcs0718 1 year ago
9.81 Newton.
CoolKidAceSpade 2 years ago
Depending if you're at the equator or at the poles. The earth is not a perfect sphere and bulges at the equator.
sbrenn 2 years ago
I disagree. The possibility of Life, as I understand it is an emergent quality of systems arising from an energy rich environment.
Yes, we need all of our environmental variables just right to support OUR bodies, but a completely alien set of variables can still support other forms of life.
It's very sci-fi, but I don't see any reason life cannot emerge on the surface of a sun or in the plume of a supernova.
It's just a matter of big enough numbers of similar units.
clearmenser 2 years ago
Is that ball a Pulsar, it's pulsing on and off LOL, I am just being silly :)
Films4You 2 years ago 3
Where can I get a flashing institute of physics ball?
jakeedmans 2 days ago
what am I going to do , Ive almost watched all the sixtysymbols videos !
Poponfu1 2 days ago
At 4:32 you say "the average density of mars and earth are about the same." In fact mars is 28.6% less dense to be precise. That's not "about the same."
Other than that ...I liked your video.
MegaSkills9 5 days ago
@MegaSkills9 For the purpose of that demonstration, that's obviously accurate enough.
RBuckminsterFuller 1 day ago
how do we actually know the mass of the object that is causing the lensing? there's so much stuff in space it all would have an effect on light, can we really find just one source for the light?
crazystrongtower 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
YOUR QUESTION: "All I can say to that is
WTF! Can I have some of whatever it is you're smoking please"
MY ANSWER: Yes. I use Tetrahydrocannabinol (i.e., Δ⁹-THC ⇔ C₂₁H₃₀O₂) & Tobacco (e.g., C₁₀H₁₄N₂).
Nonetheless, irrelevant to the drug(s) I use it will never change the fact that according to physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic I am 100% correct.
E = m (in all actuality) is complexity (e.g., E = m ≡ m = E) that might be viewed as simplicity, but it's not.
@salerio61
Entrepreneur101 1 month ago
how can you tell how far it has been rotated, by how much light is polorized in particular directions?
masluxx 1 month ago
@masluxx
Are you referring to something in the video?
dudejohnny 1 week ago
@dudejohnny did you watch the video? The bit at the end talking about lensing? the mass of the star doing the lensing would dictate how far the light was bent. The mass of it has to be assumed, how ever gravity would shift the polorazation properties of the light and that you can measure dirrectly.
masluxx 1 week ago
@masluxx
I don't think it would change the polarization of light, but then again I wouldn't know. It doesn't seem intuitive to me
dudejohnny 1 week ago
You guys should sell the Bill Nye cards I would so buy one.
mzyzer19 1 month ago
Please rename this video to "how to fist a couch".
willd3rbeast 1 month ago
sooo is it an optical illusion for the person on earth looking at the light from the star thats being deflected by the planet, and if so how do u know its an optical illusion is that because of Einstiens equations?
dmanz007 2 months ago
@dmanz007 You can normally tell it's lensing if you see two identical stars in the sky. Otherwise, you can sometimes tell if the planet causing the lensing moves, it will change how the light is bent and hence how we see it; a bit of detective work can then tell if it really is being lensed. And I'm not really sure you could call it an illusion, but I guess thats just semantics.
fightthepurple 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So what do you guys think about Entropic Gravity? Something along the lines of Gravity being an emergent, and not fundamental, force.
doubleja 2 months ago
Comment removed
doubleja 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't mind a response or a challenge, it's the pointing out of irrelevant drivel rather than make an educated rebutle or argument. VVe are not idiots here, Don't tell me vvhat I meant to say or should have said, I'm here because I vvant to expand my understanding of physics by absorbing nevv theories and idea's that modern science has failed to deliver, because vve all knovv that free energy, antigravity, and a unified field theory are at the top of the grant list, for the last 120 years. :(
projectmoses69 2 months ago
Comment removed
projectmoses69 2 months ago
If you don't like people responding to your opinions, don't voice them :/
If you do state your opinion, you must be aware that people might not agree with it, more, they can even challenge it.
RezoJaco 2 months ago