OK, help me out here: why do you assert that for the guy in the rocket, the lighting strikes did not happen at the same time? They did happen at the same time, he just experienced one before the other. Nothing unusual about that. What if the lightning strikes were recorded by synchronized clocks, one at each end of the rocket? When he compares them afterwards, will they not record that the 2 events happened at the same time?
@johnnyckrock Because he is accelerating at the speed of light, that is the only viable answer to the person within the craft. So relative to him it happened at two differant times. Relative to the outside camera it happened at the same time. :)
@ajstylesclash1 because c like in e = mc^2 is the speed of light only in a vacuum much like epsilon-not is the permeability of a empty space. It is not the actual speed of light under any other circumstances that would change it's speed.
special relativity is invalid. see my videos at 269cristo to see how the assumptions of special relativity are either unwarranted, false or resulting in impossible conclusions. the ideas trip over themselves. I welcome comments and criticism. thank you
4:55 - You're right. However, light ALWAYS travels in a vacuum (space between atoms/molecules). In a vacuum a photon of light has nothing to interact with and will cover, for example, a certain distance (d) as it would in space. But if it travelled through air, the photon would interact with the air molecules and would not travel in an overall straight path. The photon would travel at the normal speed of light from air molecule to air molecule, but would cover distance d at a slower speed
i wish i never seen your face. now you seem gangster to me. i am now afraid. i am also high. i will not be afraid because im one with the universe. join me, there is much you need to know....
@InFlamezzzzz that is what i'm talking about right there. now as for the past present and future that you mentioned, well we all have a past present and future don't we? we know that light travels, we know that it took the light from stars many years to come to our view but if light was everywhere at once then light does not travel but it was proved that it does travel. but time travel between 2 points past or future instantaniously is not possible, no matter how fast you are going.
@InFlamezzzzz well since you want to put it that way, the only reason you can see einstein in the first place is because of light, imagine this if you can, at the exact moment the light from einsteins face reaches your eye's - you start moving at the speed of light what do you think is going to happen? an experiment for you, hold out your hands, now move them both at the same time in 1 direction, imagine your left hand is the light from einstein & the other is you moving at the speed of light...
now i admit, some of my info may seem a bit towards some top university scientists but lets face it - how many attempts did it take a scientist to create a light bulb? scientists are wrong all the time - science is the study of what doesn't work because the only way you can find out if something can work is to find out why it doesn't work in the first place so scientists know just as much as you... in regards to all this but they are better equiped to run the tests to find what doesn';t work.
My final position on this is that nothing can move so fast that it bends space time because spacetime is not a real thing,,, it is simply a term used to explain special relativity, scientists have taken this too seriously and left them selves believing it is an actual fabric of some sort. they think that if we could fold 2 peices of the spacetime fabric then we could travel to a place faster than light would take to get there.... really? this is what millions of pounds and dollars are wasted on?
everything appears frozen to you. now for those of you who want to move at the speed of light to prove einsteins basic theory right or wrong you will need to do one thing first,,,, develope something that can give you a push,,,,lol this is kind of impossible because the only perfect products of infinite engergy is something that uses ZPE/Zero Point Energy and the only thing that seems to exhibit this is light and those fancy exotic neutrino's.
now unfortunately,,, einstein was a little wrong,,,, about the going back in time part of course and he knew that,,, that's why he said that the universe has a speed limit and that is the speed of light,,, but then in recent months einstein has been somewhat disproven because researches have found an neutrino that seems to travel faster than the speed of light but again if you were moving relative to that neutrino then everything would appear to be frozen you are moving to fast to notice change.
@santirock69 (In the previous comment) Basically I'm assuming that I'd never be able to see Einstein.
The neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light, I don't understand why everything would appear to be frozen, and what if you were travelling at the speed of light, (I'm not sure where exactly) how would your perception of the world be? ... The time travel idea confuses me, because doesn't light contain a past, present and a future? ... I'm so confused!
ok so now einstein is standing on the sun,,, he is waving to us although we don't see him waving until roughly 9 minutes later with our super eye sight but again,,, if we accellerated away from einstein at the speed of light he would appear to be just standing like an american indian "how".lol so einstein hypothasized that light travels faster in a vacuum and therefore the idea that if you were faster than the speed of light then you could set of at that speed and come back before you had left.
@santirock69 Just want to ask a question, keep in mind I don't study physics ;p but you obviously know what you're talking about it seems to me - if you accelerated away from Einstein (who in your example is standing on the sun waving at us) at the speed of light then wouldn't the light waves never reach me (for example) since I was accelerating in the opposite direction at the same constant speed which light travels at? ... Hope I made sense. Thanks!
so, einstein stands infront of a clock, einstein see's what time it is on the clock but is he really seeing the time for that exact moment or is he seeing it as it was after the light that reflected off the clock reached his eye's, then einstein starts to eccellerate away from the clock at the speed of light and with his super eye sight now einstein see's that time has slowed down, i'll explain more in my next comment,,,
@perther3 - Don't you have a hoover? lol i'm only joking, a vacuum refers to an empty space with nothing to deter light or stop it. by relfection or other.
ok, so basically what this guy is trying to explain is special relativity - but he is going about it the wrong way - i will explain this how einstein did in the following comment....
Not to mention the fact that they built the collider and the protons they're smashing together still adhere to the theory. As in, it takes as long as it's been taking for them to get those protons up to the never before reached energy levels that produced this never before observed event because, when E=mc^2, it takes more and more energy to keep speeding up the protons because they're gaining more and more mass as they gain more and more energy, and so on.
Are there actually people in here that think they're participating in this issue? You don't have a voice here. Shut the fuck up and let the physicists tell you what's going on and don't talk back. Until they tell you that E does not = mc^2, then E=mc^2.
As if the equation that revealed that we could get a shitload of Energy out of a small amount of Uranium is all of a sudden going to be completely wrong.
These are the brains that gave us the microchip. What have you done?
IM TRYING TO READ THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN GLITCHFAN AND EVERYONE ELSE BUT IT'S HURTING MY LITTLE NUT BRAIN CAUSE I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!!!!!!!!! so can you please stop... ,____,
well, the theory of relativity needs some work. if you look in the news under science a few weeks back- you will find that an atom smasher found a particle with mass that just went over the speed of light. i understand this is a sentence most physicists do not like to hear.
When I used to take mind altering vegetation, my thought process used to speed up to the point where "reality" used to have the appearance of slowing down. I could understand it a little easier and clearer. Does anyone watching this page know definitvely from a credible source that Einstien occasionally took mind altering plants?
@glitchfan Even if it holds true, that doesn't mean we'll have to throw out everything we know about relativity, just like relativity didn't mean we had to throw out everything we knew about Newton's laws.
@KurtRussell1963 I guess "meaningless" wasn't the right word to use. Obviously the laws of general relativity will still be pertinent and applicable, but I do believe this new finding would change certain aspects of it.
@Nordinavia Nope, you're right. I spoke too soon without further researching the topic. The data is currently inconclusive but will definitely be set straight soon. My own personal opinion on this is that I would think measuring or even attempting to measure something that's faster than the speed of light could not be done, simply because of the far reaching laws of Einstein's general relativity.
@glitchfan Wow, this is one of the more mature responses I've ever gotten in a Youtube comment XD. To clarify, I wasn't referring so much to the inconclusiveness of the results and more to the fact that if they're true it doesn't mean that Einstein's theory will become 'meaningless,' special relativity is absolutely 'true' and has been verified by many thousands of experiments. A particle with mass moving faster than light would mean a new theory was needed under certain, not all, conditions.
@Nordinavia Have a look at youtube.com/watch?v=Lvx945SP-RM and w w w . absolute-relativity . be where an important anomaly is described with respect to contemporary physics (paradigms) on photons. Einstein's thought experiment on simultaneity is also flawed as shown there. Also the Michelson&Morley null result can be explained. The Lorentz transformation is artificial (not conform to real space events) and the light clock paradigm is wrong. A new photon paradigm is thus needed.
@glitchfan At the same time, many scientists have also said that it must be a slight miscalculation. I remember hearing something about applying these findings to something like a super nova, and how long it took for particles to reach earth. Using the findings from CERN, those particles would have had to arrive earlier than they actually did, which goes to show that these "FTL" findings must not be entirely precise.
@Panjaquomi Yeah dude. I think you're right. The more I think about a miscalculation possibility, the more I believe that's how it's actually gonna go down. As much as I would love to see a new mystery in science crop up, I can't help but to think that the findings just don't make sense. It doesn't add up. But anyway, time will tell.
It'll be a very big deal if it is confirmed, another science revolutionary, but general relativity is not meaningless, just as classical physics (newtonian physics) is not useless, they're simply modified to better our understanding, that's how science always works..
@glitchfan the particles have no mass. we do. its not hard to have something with no mass travel faster than the speed of light, since their mass doesnt increase as their speed does. plus, they have concluded that their measurements could have been off, since you need incredibly sensitive instruments to measure these particles since they are virtually non-existant
@glitchfan ever consider the possibility that the theory of relativity does NOT apply to sub-atomic particles (quantum physics)? Or howabout the bending of space itself due to the exceeding of the speed of light which, by relativity, is kept constant by time? (as speed increases, time slows around the object in order to keep the moving object "static" (not speeding up to the speed of light) relative to itself. Which, in turn, keeps the speed of light constant.)
@glitchfan Though I am all for new ideas I believe that you cant make such far reaching conclusions yet. The idea hasnt been tested and their are HUGE margins for error including the virtual weightleness of the nutrenos (hard to detect). Plus when they did the test they werent actually trying to break the speed record C (the discovery was an accident). We'll just have to weight and see what happenes.
@nepalihercules This was 3 weeks ago, sir. Don't fucking tell me how to be, or act like you've never made errors or mistakes. People like you are the reason why the world is turning into a shit hole. Always "me, me, me" type of thinking, never having consideration for other people or any concern for how you treat them.
@glitchfan i wasn't trying to be rude, all im saying is it was up for verification and wasn't confirmed by any scientists other than those working at CERN. when the data isn't verified by third party we should never take it seriously. especially if the claim is of this magnitude.
@vgrzen34 Yep. Heard about this already 10 thousand times. Seriously considering deleting my post due to how many people have brought it to my attention.
I've been hearing about this everywhere but nothing seems to be getting done on it. Has there been any news on the subject following those recordings?
@TheDiplomaticScout Yep. Only been told this about a hundred times already. Thanks bud. Oh and thanks for the "umm" part. That's always nice and also necessary to say.
Even if there is such a thing as FTL speeds, you shouldn't expect all works of science previous to it's discovery to become meaningless. After all, Newton theory of gravity wasn't invalidated by Einstein's.
@glitchfan General relativity is not Special relativity, special relativity accounts for both time dilation, time travel and even wormholes so this video will in fact not become meaningless. Look it up.
@robthebuilder321 well its simply because your car or any car in the world are NOT travelling at or near the speed of light. only then, time slows down around u.....ironic isn it? we now know the concept of travelling into the future, yet we cannot do anything about it yet lol!
Thanks a nice video Relative Gbarak, I will be sharing about evolution as well as folding space soon. Math is relative to the times. New math (oldest language math 1-9) is coming, to shed light (awaken) about the Rainbow Clan. White Buffalo Calf Woman, elder crystal child, rainbow warriors of prophecy.
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
Good video, except I'm pretty sure that the speed of light is the same in all materials it's is just that it has to travel further in some as it is absorbed and bounced around more so it's overall journey is longer and therefore takes more time.
@TheGiantSponge AFAIK, its the time between absorption and re-emitting light that differs in different materials which makes for a lower average speed.
I commend the fact that in the demonstration of the Relativity of Simultaneity here, it actually made clear the conclusion of the thought experiment - that the emission of the one flash physically occurs before the other in the traveller's frame. For some reason it's quite popular, when describing this thought experiment, to miss out the very crux of it!
@usefulmusic A will measure B running slow. B will measure A running slow. If A and B meet up then you're right, obviously they can't both be slow. To do that A has to slow down, turn around and come back and stop. When (de)accelerating, A breaks its inertial reference frame and A will measure B's clock speeding up until it reenters an inertial ref frame when it will measure B running slow again. When they meet up A will be way behind clock B so only one is slow at the end. Kinda screwey eh?
Imagine two identical spacecrafts with two identical clocks, A and B. Clock A moves, B doesn't. The Special Theory of Relativity says clock A runs more slowly than clock B. The Special T of R also says it is equally valid to say that A is still and B moves. In which case clock B now runs more slowly than clock A.
Something's wrong with the Special T of R; It's obviously impossible for two clocks to run more slowly than each other. What's the explanation?
"[...] they have been tested in NUMERABLE NUMBER of times [..]"
Damn that must be many times! ;D
Seriously, i doubt that he is right about the ball being thrown in the car there. That kind of "scene" is usually used to explain that the speed of light is independant of the speed of the lightsource. When throwing a ball inside a car in the direction the car is travelling ,speed of the ball = speed of the car + speed at which it leaves the hand but speed of light in fwd direction remain same.
it seems french have this barrier against learning "th", and that is always a neglectance at the teacher's side. The explanation with ball in car is kinda redundant. I'm not quite sure if non-vacuum speed of light has some time modifying effect.
I watch a good video series on physics and the only thing i couldn't understand was length contraction. But your video did a great job of laying it out
@wayolukinat lol, inorite? I came back to this video one day and saw that my comment was one of the top comments, and I wondered why on earth I'd written "ten seconds" when the video was eleven. I still wonder to this day. I have no idea. lol.
OK, help me out here: why do you assert that for the guy in the rocket, the lighting strikes did not happen at the same time? They did happen at the same time, he just experienced one before the other. Nothing unusual about that. What if the lightning strikes were recorded by synchronized clocks, one at each end of the rocket? When he compares them afterwards, will they not record that the 2 events happened at the same time?
johnnyckrock 5 days ago
@johnnyckrock Because he is accelerating at the speed of light, that is the only viable answer to the person within the craft. So relative to him it happened at two differant times. Relative to the outside camera it happened at the same time. :)
TheTaben 3 days ago
the problem with relativity is that the speed of light is based on absolute space.
partonace 1 week ago
@ajstylesclash1 speed of light in a medium is constant... speed of light in vacuum being the highest...
ksceriath 1 week ago
If the speed of light is constant how can it slow down inside of air particles?
ajstylesclash1 1 week ago
@ajstylesclash1 Particles have mass and drag every single one of them. even photons, or light.
TheTaben 3 days ago
@TheTaben Photons don't have mass. That's how they are able to travel at the speed of light.
movcrit 2 days ago
@ajstylesclash1 because c like in e = mc^2 is the speed of light only in a vacuum much like epsilon-not is the permeability of a empty space. It is not the actual speed of light under any other circumstances that would change it's speed.
movcrit 2 days ago
wasted 5 min ,,,
minsikkim111 1 week ago
Time seems to slow down while i watch this video
mickstarify 1 week ago
special relativity is invalid. see my videos at 269cristo to see how the assumptions of special relativity are either unwarranted, false or resulting in impossible conclusions. the ideas trip over themselves. I welcome comments and criticism. thank you
269Cristo 2 weeks ago
holy fuck english translation ?
jessicahope612 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
4:55 - You're right. However, light ALWAYS travels in a vacuum (space between atoms/molecules). In a vacuum a photon of light has nothing to interact with and will cover, for example, a certain distance (d) as it would in space. But if it travelled through air, the photon would interact with the air molecules and would not travel in an overall straight path. The photon would travel at the normal speed of light from air molecule to air molecule, but would cover distance d at a slower speed
UniverseIsAwesome 1 month ago
Comment removed
UniverseIsAwesome 1 month ago
thankyou very much!
wullz16 1 month ago
i wish i never seen your face. now you seem gangster to me. i am now afraid. i am also high. i will not be afraid because im one with the universe. join me, there is much you need to know....
Prymer55 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i just cant get this. really annoying :(
trixapete 1 month ago
thank you very much for this
mogotron 2 months ago
if einstein could see what happend to his theory he would be amazed
killha1988 2 months ago
@InFlamezzzzz that is what i'm talking about right there. now as for the past present and future that you mentioned, well we all have a past present and future don't we? we know that light travels, we know that it took the light from stars many years to come to our view but if light was everywhere at once then light does not travel but it was proved that it does travel. but time travel between 2 points past or future instantaniously is not possible, no matter how fast you are going.
santirock69 2 months ago
@InFlamezzzzz well since you want to put it that way, the only reason you can see einstein in the first place is because of light, imagine this if you can, at the exact moment the light from einsteins face reaches your eye's - you start moving at the speed of light what do you think is going to happen? an experiment for you, hold out your hands, now move them both at the same time in 1 direction, imagine your left hand is the light from einstein & the other is you moving at the speed of light...
santirock69 2 months ago
toda raba ahi
MultiAlbert1992 2 months ago
Thank you, this helps a lot. :D
SandyChehade 2 months ago
To the uploader of this video
I see from your Youtube account that your are from Israel
i was watching some arab guy posting video of how "great" allah and videos of marines death in iraq
i conclude that most of arabians are fuked up minded with their f uc king religion
Gretting from Honduras
Go Israel !!!
axedrecista 2 months ago
@axedrecista Relitive to everyone else your a moron. Nice demonstartion axe. Thanks for sharring.
Shilo2010 2 months ago
why is there like pr0n in the suggestion abr on the right
zavix87 2 months ago
rant over.......
santirock69 2 months ago
now i admit, some of my info may seem a bit towards some top university scientists but lets face it - how many attempts did it take a scientist to create a light bulb? scientists are wrong all the time - science is the study of what doesn't work because the only way you can find out if something can work is to find out why it doesn't work in the first place so scientists know just as much as you... in regards to all this but they are better equiped to run the tests to find what doesn';t work.
santirock69 2 months ago
My final position on this is that nothing can move so fast that it bends space time because spacetime is not a real thing,,, it is simply a term used to explain special relativity, scientists have taken this too seriously and left them selves believing it is an actual fabric of some sort. they think that if we could fold 2 peices of the spacetime fabric then we could travel to a place faster than light would take to get there.... really? this is what millions of pounds and dollars are wasted on?
santirock69 2 months ago
everything appears frozen to you. now for those of you who want to move at the speed of light to prove einsteins basic theory right or wrong you will need to do one thing first,,,, develope something that can give you a push,,,,lol this is kind of impossible because the only perfect products of infinite engergy is something that uses ZPE/Zero Point Energy and the only thing that seems to exhibit this is light and those fancy exotic neutrino's.
santirock69 2 months ago
now unfortunately,,, einstein was a little wrong,,,, about the going back in time part of course and he knew that,,, that's why he said that the universe has a speed limit and that is the speed of light,,, but then in recent months einstein has been somewhat disproven because researches have found an neutrino that seems to travel faster than the speed of light but again if you were moving relative to that neutrino then everything would appear to be frozen you are moving to fast to notice change.
santirock69 2 months ago
@santirock69 (In the previous comment) Basically I'm assuming that I'd never be able to see Einstein.
The neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light, I don't understand why everything would appear to be frozen, and what if you were travelling at the speed of light, (I'm not sure where exactly) how would your perception of the world be? ... The time travel idea confuses me, because doesn't light contain a past, present and a future? ... I'm so confused!
InFlamezzzzz 2 months ago
ok so now einstein is standing on the sun,,, he is waving to us although we don't see him waving until roughly 9 minutes later with our super eye sight but again,,, if we accellerated away from einstein at the speed of light he would appear to be just standing like an american indian "how".lol so einstein hypothasized that light travels faster in a vacuum and therefore the idea that if you were faster than the speed of light then you could set of at that speed and come back before you had left.
santirock69 2 months ago
@santirock69 Just want to ask a question, keep in mind I don't study physics ;p but you obviously know what you're talking about it seems to me - if you accelerated away from Einstein (who in your example is standing on the sun waving at us) at the speed of light then wouldn't the light waves never reach me (for example) since I was accelerating in the opposite direction at the same constant speed which light travels at? ... Hope I made sense. Thanks!
And also
InFlamezzzzz 2 months ago
so, einstein stands infront of a clock, einstein see's what time it is on the clock but is he really seeing the time for that exact moment or is he seeing it as it was after the light that reflected off the clock reached his eye's, then einstein starts to eccellerate away from the clock at the speed of light and with his super eye sight now einstein see's that time has slowed down, i'll explain more in my next comment,,,
santirock69 2 months ago
@perther3 - Don't you have a hoover? lol i'm only joking, a vacuum refers to an empty space with nothing to deter light or stop it. by relfection or other.
ok, so basically what this guy is trying to explain is special relativity - but he is going about it the wrong way - i will explain this how einstein did in the following comment....
santirock69 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
RELATIVITY ＩＳ ＦＡＮＣＹ！
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Neueregel 2 months ago
E=mc2 is the only thing i get. The other stuff is fuck you einstein type complicated
shmoriy 2 months ago
Too complicated!
shmoriy 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"BELIEVE ONLY IN JESUS BEFORE TOO LATE" OR "BURN IN HELL FOREVER"
"BELIEVE ONLY IN JESUS BEFORE TOO LATE" OR "BURN IN HELL FOREVER"
"BELIEVE ONLY IN JESUS BEFORE TOO LATE" OR "BURN IN HELL FOREVER"
fuckmania07 3 months ago
Wait why did it show the lightning strikes striking at different times?
link4265 3 months ago
Not to mention the fact that they built the collider and the protons they're smashing together still adhere to the theory. As in, it takes as long as it's been taking for them to get those protons up to the never before reached energy levels that produced this never before observed event because, when E=mc^2, it takes more and more energy to keep speeding up the protons because they're gaining more and more mass as they gain more and more energy, and so on.
MikeDeFi 3 months ago
Are there actually people in here that think they're participating in this issue? You don't have a voice here. Shut the fuck up and let the physicists tell you what's going on and don't talk back. Until they tell you that E does not = mc^2, then E=mc^2.
As if the equation that revealed that we could get a shitload of Energy out of a small amount of Uranium is all of a sudden going to be completely wrong.
These are the brains that gave us the microchip. What have you done?
MikeDeFi 3 months ago
IM TRYING TO READ THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN GLITCHFAN AND EVERYONE ELSE BUT IT'S HURTING MY LITTLE NUT BRAIN CAUSE I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!!!!!!!!! so can you please stop... ,____,
McCheezburger 3 months ago
this guy actually knows perfect english. he just speaks with an accent to sound smarter
chrismillar03 3 months ago
Relativity in 42 seconds. watch?v=Dh-MME4IT0s
TheCavecricket 3 months ago
Now do you know why the speed of light is the same for every observer? The theory of relativity seems weird if you don't know that.
SuperFinGuy 3 months ago
well, the theory of relativity needs some work. if you look in the news under science a few weeks back- you will find that an atom smasher found a particle with mass that just went over the speed of light. i understand this is a sentence most physicists do not like to hear.
ZombieBlobs 3 months ago
On of the best videos on Youtube. It actually tries to achieve something, unlike those random clips which you see everyday.
NitKop 4 months ago
When I used to take mind altering vegetation, my thought process used to speed up to the point where "reality" used to have the appearance of slowing down. I could understand it a little easier and clearer. Does anyone watching this page know definitvely from a credible source that Einstien occasionally took mind altering plants?
phoneke 4 months ago
Comment removed
glitchfan 4 months ago 19
@glitchfan Take your heathen talks out of this fine website.
>:(
Banewind 4 months ago
@glitchfan Even if it holds true, that doesn't mean we'll have to throw out everything we know about relativity, just like relativity didn't mean we had to throw out everything we knew about Newton's laws.
PelicanGodOfJupiter 4 months ago
@PelicanGodOfJupiter Yeah you're right, that's very true. I should've said that differently.
glitchfan 4 months ago
@glitchfan yes BUT meaningless to WHO?
KurtRussell1963 4 months ago
@KurtRussell1963 I guess "meaningless" wasn't the right word to use. Obviously the laws of general relativity will still be pertinent and applicable, but I do believe this new finding would change certain aspects of it.
glitchfan 4 months ago
@glitchfan I meant that actually as a joke b/c 4 some physicists their world would blow apart!
KurtRussell1963 4 months ago
@glitchfan Sorry, science doesn't work like that...
Nordinavia 4 months ago
@Nordinavia Nope, you're right. I spoke too soon without further researching the topic. The data is currently inconclusive but will definitely be set straight soon. My own personal opinion on this is that I would think measuring or even attempting to measure something that's faster than the speed of light could not be done, simply because of the far reaching laws of Einstein's general relativity.
glitchfan 4 months ago
@glitchfan Wow, this is one of the more mature responses I've ever gotten in a Youtube comment XD. To clarify, I wasn't referring so much to the inconclusiveness of the results and more to the fact that if they're true it doesn't mean that Einstein's theory will become 'meaningless,' special relativity is absolutely 'true' and has been verified by many thousands of experiments. A particle with mass moving faster than light would mean a new theory was needed under certain, not all, conditions.
Nordinavia 4 months ago 5
@Nordinavia Well said, sir.
glitchfan 4 months ago
@Nordinavia Have a look at youtube.com/watch?v=Lvx945SP-RM and w w w . absolute-relativity . be where an important anomaly is described with respect to contemporary physics (paradigms) on photons. Einstein's thought experiment on simultaneity is also flawed as shown there. Also the Michelson&Morley null result can be explained. The Lorentz transformation is artificial (not conform to real space events) and the light clock paradigm is wrong. A new photon paradigm is thus needed.
ebrauns789 1 month ago
@glitchfan Sorry I was so trite!
Nordinavia 4 months ago
@glitchfan At the same time, many scientists have also said that it must be a slight miscalculation. I remember hearing something about applying these findings to something like a super nova, and how long it took for particles to reach earth. Using the findings from CERN, those particles would have had to arrive earlier than they actually did, which goes to show that these "FTL" findings must not be entirely precise.
Panjaquomi 4 months ago
@Panjaquomi Yeah dude. I think you're right. The more I think about a miscalculation possibility, the more I believe that's how it's actually gonna go down. As much as I would love to see a new mystery in science crop up, I can't help but to think that the findings just don't make sense. It doesn't add up. But anyway, time will tell.
glitchfan 4 months ago
@glitchfan That still a theory
CodeNameJsXCa 4 months ago
@CodeNameJsXCa it's not even a theory -.-
AugustinusSextus 4 months ago
Comment removed
AugustinusSextus 4 months ago
It'll be a very big deal if it is confirmed, another science revolutionary, but general relativity is not meaningless, just as classical physics (newtonian physics) is not useless, they're simply modified to better our understanding, that's how science always works..
AugustinusSextus 4 months ago
@glitchfan the particles have no mass. we do. its not hard to have something with no mass travel faster than the speed of light, since their mass doesnt increase as their speed does. plus, they have concluded that their measurements could have been off, since you need incredibly sensitive instruments to measure these particles since they are virtually non-existant
pantsfalldown 3 months ago
@glitchfan ever consider the possibility that the theory of relativity does NOT apply to sub-atomic particles (quantum physics)? Or howabout the bending of space itself due to the exceeding of the speed of light which, by relativity, is kept constant by time? (as speed increases, time slows around the object in order to keep the moving object "static" (not speeding up to the speed of light) relative to itself. Which, in turn, keeps the speed of light constant.)
Ethenbros 3 months ago
@glitchfan These particles were accounted for by newton, not enough is known about them and most of the are massless
Quantum physics is different
duliptulip 3 months ago
@glitchfan Though I am all for new ideas I believe that you cant make such far reaching conclusions yet. The idea hasnt been tested and their are HUGE margins for error including the virtual weightleness of the nutrenos (hard to detect). Plus when they did the test they werent actually trying to break the speed record C (the discovery was an accident). We'll just have to weight and see what happenes.
Firestorm7773 3 months ago
@glitchfan Toobad it's just a scam to raise awareness to physics...
K4inan 3 months ago
@glitchfan lies
msms47 3 months ago
@glitchfan wel its false. google it. don't be so gullable.
nepalihercules 3 months ago
@nepalihercules This was 3 weeks ago, sir. Don't fucking tell me how to be, or act like you've never made errors or mistakes. People like you are the reason why the world is turning into a shit hole. Always "me, me, me" type of thinking, never having consideration for other people or any concern for how you treat them.
glitchfan 3 months ago
@glitchfan i wasn't trying to be rude, all im saying is it was up for verification and wasn't confirmed by any scientists other than those working at CERN. when the data isn't verified by third party we should never take it seriously. especially if the claim is of this magnitude.
nepalihercules 3 months ago
@glitchfan that's kind of a big "if."
merryjman 3 months ago
@glitchfan look again, miscalculated. einstein's theory still holds true
vgrzen34 3 months ago
@vgrzen34 Yep. Heard about this already 10 thousand times. Seriously considering deleting my post due to how many people have brought it to my attention.
glitchfan 3 months ago
@glitchfan
I've been hearing about this everywhere but nothing seems to be getting done on it. Has there been any news on the subject following those recordings?
BlockisticStudios 3 months ago
@BlockisticStudios Apparently it's false.
glitchfan 3 months ago
Comment removed
BlockisticStudios 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@glitchfan
That's rather disappointing.
BlockisticStudios 3 months ago
@BlockisticStudios
Is it known what caused the error?
BlockisticStudios 3 months ago
@glitchfan Ummm, check your info, that was a false alarm.
TheDiplomaticScout 3 months ago
@TheDiplomaticScout Yep. Only been told this about a hundred times already. Thanks bud. Oh and thanks for the "umm" part. That's always nice and also necessary to say.
glitchfan 3 months ago
@glitchfan Well, no, I disagree.
Even if there is such a thing as FTL speeds, you shouldn't expect all works of science previous to it's discovery to become meaningless. After all, Newton theory of gravity wasn't invalidated by Einstein's.
Zotov13 2 months ago
@glitchfan General relativity is not Special relativity, special relativity accounts for both time dilation, time travel and even wormholes so this video will in fact not become meaningless. Look it up.
Bleppe 2 months ago
@Bleppe To be honest with you bro, I don't really give a shit about this anymore. It's a month old. Who gives a fuck?
glitchfan 2 months ago
@glitchfan they re calculated it and it was a miscalculation
mechkapechka 2 months ago
@mechkapechka Yep thanks. You're only like the 50th person who's told me that. Thanks bud.
glitchfan 2 months ago
great, thanks
JAAZZYYMINI 4 months ago
why is the clock in my car still the same as the clock in my house if the time is supposed to contract?
robthebuilder321 4 months ago
@robthebuilder321 well its simply because your car or any car in the world are NOT travelling at or near the speed of light. only then, time slows down around u.....ironic isn it? we now know the concept of travelling into the future, yet we cannot do anything about it yet lol!
Kandi7767 4 months ago
@Kandi7767 oops my mistake, u cannot travel at speed of light but only near it - ever! xD
Kandi7767 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@robthebuilder321 oops my mistake, u cannot travel at speed of light but only near it - ever! xD
Kandi7767 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@robthebuilder321 oops my bad, i mean u can only travel near speed of light but not at it - ever! xD
Kandi7767 4 months ago
@robthebuilder321 Because your car is going nowhere near the speed of light! Watch 3:10 onwards!
marcluc1988 4 months ago
how do u see lightning behind u? i'm just curious.
sniperdude5236 4 months ago
Thanks a nice video Relative Gbarak, I will be sharing about evolution as well as folding space soon. Math is relative to the times. New math (oldest language math 1-9) is coming, to shed light (awaken) about the Rainbow Clan. White Buffalo Calf Woman, elder crystal child, rainbow warriors of prophecy.
twindeermother 4 months ago
There is a truth that transcends relativity.
Relativity is old fashion .
PYTHAGORAS101 4 months ago
Thankyou.
howardroberttrain 4 months ago
sometimes he totally sounds like g-man
hrns 4 months ago
i scared when i heard his voice
CydexaN 4 months ago
@CydexaN He might be scared of your voice too. It's all relative.
SuperMagnetizer 4 months ago
Confused ^^
TheDrakaan 4 months ago
"when i was older, i got used to the motion that the world wasn't going up or down but the only one moving was me" I mean, well done sherlock
fishbowl38 4 months ago 3
I never knew G-Man was so intelligent.
DarkPikaruto 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
vividDC 4 months ago
whoa whoa whoa whoa! Shut the fuck up!
Cha0s7777 5 months ago
Can you repost a version of this spoken in english?
jabrooonni 5 months ago
@jabrooonni you wouldn't understand it anyways.
dadan79 4 months ago 4
@dadan79 e=mc2, daddy-O.
jabrooonni 4 months ago
this is too hard to follow bro,, can you upload a dummies version of this please?
ignatei 5 months ago
Some of Special Relativity in over 5 minutes :P
MrNathanCJMartin 5 months ago
'Weird, but real ......'
MarsMoonEuropa 5 months ago
love that clock
MarsMoonEuropa 5 months ago
Good video, except I'm pretty sure that the speed of light is the same in all materials it's is just that it has to travel further in some as it is absorbed and bounced around more so it's overall journey is longer and therefore takes more time.
TheGiantSponge 5 months ago
@TheGiantSponge Nope - the speed of light is less in non-vacuums
samurai1999 5 months ago
@TheGiantSponge AFAIK, its the time between absorption and re-emitting light that differs in different materials which makes for a lower average speed.
DrWhooooooooo 5 months ago
@TheGiantSponge That is pretty much it :)
skitt1z1 5 months ago
חחח חזק !!
hzyoni 5 months ago
i exactly got what the relativity is when i heard the elavaytours..
zerdaliopera 5 months ago
I love the way he's dubbed his voice over the video of himself speaking, so that it looks just a little weird, weird but real ...
samurai1999 5 months ago
@samurai1999 I think he just used Audacity or some program to take out the background noise.
tostrong4you 5 months ago
Comment removed
samurai1999 5 months ago
Comment removed
samurai1999 5 months ago
Comment removed
SovereignStatesman 5 months ago
do this same experiment without a windshield. and you get the truth.
nothadnotbad 5 months ago
so the speed of light remains constant and time and space are the ones changing
rockem001 6 months ago
the person conclude that the lightning he saw in the front..... he will say that it travels fiirst on front because he is looking at the front!!!!!
TheJaws0413 6 months ago
1:42 Why is he naked? O.o
Aleksei5055 6 months ago
@Aleksei5055
cuz ur a dummy
paranapoleon 6 months ago
@paranapoleon nice response..
Aleksei5055 6 months ago
@Aleksei5055
ya i know- well you see its my unique macho style that impresses gurls...in cyberland : -/
paranapoleon 6 months ago
@paranapoleon I see... well its working lol :P
Aleksei5055 6 months ago
You forgot to mention gravity's relitivity to time. do i hear a part two?
CMSpartanz 6 months ago
I commend the fact that in the demonstration of the Relativity of Simultaneity here, it actually made clear the conclusion of the thought experiment - that the emission of the one flash physically occurs before the other in the traveller's frame. For some reason it's quite popular, when describing this thought experiment, to miss out the very crux of it!
ScalarPhotonZ 7 months ago
the only thing you could do better is to also show how mass changes with velocity.
DarthPickley 7 months ago
**to watch this clip in under 5 minutes, press play whilst travelling at the speed of light
araam101 7 months ago
gud
litegreenc 7 months ago
@usefulmusic A will measure B running slow. B will measure A running slow. If A and B meet up then you're right, obviously they can't both be slow. To do that A has to slow down, turn around and come back and stop. When (de)accelerating, A breaks its inertial reference frame and A will measure B's clock speeding up until it reenters an inertial ref frame when it will measure B running slow again. When they meet up A will be way behind clock B so only one is slow at the end. Kinda screwey eh?
TheJimtube123 7 months ago
Cool. I dig it
Jonathanedward2010 7 months ago
Imagine two identical spacecrafts with two identical clocks, A and B. Clock A moves, B doesn't. The Special Theory of Relativity says clock A runs more slowly than clock B. The Special T of R also says it is equally valid to say that A is still and B moves. In which case clock B now runs more slowly than clock A.
Something's wrong with the Special T of R; It's obviously impossible for two clocks to run more slowly than each other. What's the explanation?
usefulmusic 7 months ago
@usefulmusic Yes. good point.
Ameerali27 4 months ago
poderia ter a tradução em portugues ,Bresil.
MrIvair 7 months ago
Oh no I've gone cross eyed
Avidcomp 7 months ago
<3 physics
cheeches 8 months ago
Very confusing without former knowledge of the subject;
Basically Murphy's Law + Entropy = Reality
-or-
Everything is in motion nothing stands still and every thing you see is reflection of light.
ttopperr 8 months ago
4:30 those hand motions look like he's in a rap video haha
AlexIsSmalll 8 months ago
"[...] they have been tested in NUMERABLE NUMBER of times [..]"
Damn that must be many times! ;D
Seriously, i doubt that he is right about the ball being thrown in the car there. That kind of "scene" is usually used to explain that the speed of light is independant of the speed of the lightsource. When throwing a ball inside a car in the direction the car is travelling ,speed of the ball = speed of the car + speed at which it leaves the hand but speed of light in fwd direction remain same.
ZzzparkzzZ 8 months ago
Oh man i dont understand this
anthonylau1 8 months ago
When I'm in an evelator, I can't get my mind to think the world is going up or down. I just can't.
Anyone agree?
anticorncob6 8 months ago
Ven I vas yun I was farting in elevators.
Zeykieee 8 months ago
Schau doch mal bei Facebook unter "in 5 Minuten schmerzfrei" nach. Quantum Healing in der effektivsten Art.
Kronenschule 8 months ago
it seems french have this barrier against learning "th", and that is always a neglectance at the teacher's side. The explanation with ball in car is kinda redundant. I'm not quite sure if non-vacuum speed of light has some time modifying effect.
635574 8 months ago
I watch a good video series on physics and the only thing i couldn't understand was length contraction. But your video did a great job of laying it out
Thanks
TheMagicalHacker 8 months ago
Good video!
zadeh79 8 months ago
whoa whoa whoa whoa! that's 5 minutes and TEN seconds! D;
randombuddypotato 9 months ago 88
@randombuddypotato
Yes, but time is relative.
desprez10 8 months ago
@desprez10 ah. touché, sir.
randombuddypotato 8 months ago
@randombuddypotato Not from where I'm sitting...
rudyspeaks 8 months ago
@randombuddypotato 5 minutes and 11 seconds!
anthonylau1 8 months ago
@anthonylau1 hmm yes... oh dearie me
randombuddypotato 8 months ago
@randombuddypotato depending on the speed of ur monitor it might not be.
LovaBoij 8 months ago
@LovaBoij good lord, so many people are correcting me. I'm SORRY Y'ALL! D;
randombuddypotato 8 months ago
@randombuddypotato ten minute slower thanks to the relativity :) and by the way.. there are 11 minutes!
kaostwenty2 7 months ago
@randombuddypotato Not if you were almost going the speed of light.
11matt555 6 months ago
@randombuddypotato ...that's because you're the one sitting in the train..
Assimilate71 6 months ago
@randombuddypotato whoa whoa whoa! 5 minutes and ELEVEN second...
wayolukinat 5 months ago 56
@wayolukinat lol, inorite? I came back to this video one day and saw that my comment was one of the top comments, and I wondered why on earth I'd written "ten seconds" when the video was eleven. I still wonder to this day. I have no idea. lol.
randombuddypotato 5 months ago
@randombuddypotato sloppy, very sloppy!
samurai1999 5 months ago
@samurai1999 tis the sad truth
randombuddypotato 5 months ago
@wayolukinat only 5 mins according to my watch becouse i was watching it while travelling very fast...
s2jaeger 5 months ago
@wayolukinat
whoa whoa whoa! The explanation ends precisely at 5:00, what follows is credits
zly81 5 months ago 2