Nomenclature -- Special Relativity

[afifa2951]

dood wheres da 3rd part

[starofcctv94]

please hurry up its almost been 4 years

[PixelSlayer247]

You're great at explaining stuff.

[FixateYourself]

4 people dont have a clue what the shit is going on

[onlynameithoughtof]

@FixateYourself I had no idea, and still rated it up... oh well, hopefully science classes will give me stuff that I find interesting in the future... :(

[rembanation]

Great 2 videos! I just whish the other 3 were ready for my quiz in 2 hours

[MetaLMunchies]

i just shat brix. keep it coming

[dubaipete]

You have the gift of explaining things in a clear, interesting and effective manner. Thank you for making the effort. More please :-)

[heyZuesification]

I've got eposide 3 mapped out on a quantim binary process... Interested?

[aldomendesmartins]

Very good video... you really have a great sense o empathy to those of us that are layman!!! Thank you! and I wish you'd continue the series....

[syntopicon]

These are absolutely fantastic pieces of explanation.  You are truly a gifted instructor.

[TheSpockman]

i heard that vieo keno has something to do with physics they said the numbers land on the outside alot. someone please enlighten me

[hornetpalooza]

Where are parts 3 to 5?

[MindAsFocus]

he's "still working on it", 3 years later

[dcolarusso]

Yep, and it's going to blow your mind. ;)

[Norfeldt]

@dcolarusso Will there ever by 3 of 5 episode?

[dcolarusso]

@Norfeldt I've been working on episode three over the last several months, but it's coming very very slowly. I wish making these videos was my job, then I could focus on them, but as it is, in those "3 years" MindAsFocus mentioned, I've moved across the Atlantic, changed careers, got engaged, gone back to school and had to take on multiple concurrent jobs to pay for it all. One day it will be done. I just can't say when.

[TimJSwan89]

@dcolarusso Lemme know what I can do to help man. I like these vids.

[surgeyX]

@MindAsFocus

lol...oh well, at least he tried.

he'd rather bone wifey than work on science...the weakness of men :(

[Teflon65]

Okay, you lost me on this one.

[n0y0x]

cant find the third video....

[dreammmertrubo]

lol time/place' like if i said il meet you at 3pm... you will need to know where' or if i said il meet you at my place... you will go when'

[Nick28th]

wow you did the graph wrong, distance ALWAYS goes on the y axis, it is called a DISTANCE TIME GRAPH

[fix520]

yea Y IS distance go back and look at it. y=3.5m x=3.5s

[csskiller]

You're right in that when drawing a proper graph for scientific reports that's how you HAVE to do it.

But in this set up, that's how it is.  The "bus" is moving in the x direction and the paper in the y.

For it to be drawn in a "proper" fashion you would have to have the bus dropping straight down or driving straight up. Then the paper would be scrolling in the x direction. This makes little sense with respect to a bus driving on a road.

He acknowledges this fact in his comment:

1m10s

[dcolarusso]

To be clear, this is a space-time or Minkowski diagram, and by convention the time axis is vertical. This may be different from how position time graphs are traditionally rendered, but it's how physicist typically deal with graphing in relation to special relativity. If you'd like to know more, Google "Minkowski_diagram" and you'll find a pretty good Wikipedia article describing their use.

[Nick28th]

ok will do

[earnshaw8745]

@Nick28th

You're missinng the point. You would be correct in a distance (or displacement) vs. time graph but this is a space time graph. Space refers to a 3 dimensional position and is drawn on the x axis.

[softcros]

@Nick28th your right that you would usually put time on the x-axis, but when using this with reference to objects moving at the speed of light the y-axis is used to represent time "cT". as a consequence of this the world line as he calls it becomes the light line( the distance travelled by light per unit time) which will remain a constant, there called Minkowski diagrams and there really useful in helping to understand special relativity.

[Usien6]

Shut up, idiot!

[tomwillz91]

nick, shut up! its not a distance time graph, its a space time graph where the x axis denotes all of the 3 dimensions (x,y,z) and the y axis can now denote the 4th dimension - time

[Nick28th]

i havent fucking said anything in like a month + and nothing really to do with it in 2 months +. god damn i didnt know. fucking douche bag

[Ethurian]

@Nick28th Also if speed is in position / time and slope is delta x / delta y than this means distance or position must be on the x axis and time must be on the y axis.

[1708Sean]

@Ethurian traditionally gradient is dy/dx meaning that by your reasoning displacement will be on the y-axis and time on the x-axis. space-time graphs are the way they are for different reasons.

[KINGK4NGG]

time doesn't exist as a universale constant

[ScottMajor1993]

I don't think you're in a position to give Physics advice when you can't spell "universal"

[iempoor]

So, microscopically we are made up of billions of atoms, right? And the electrons are flying around the nucleus at what speed? About 99.9999999999etc...% the speed of light. Right? So aren't we all really moving already at least 99.99999999999% the speed of light? Huh? Huh? Ow. My brain.

[midnighticy]

First, it's wrong to say 'microscopically' when describing atoms and electrons.

Second, at that subatomic level, yes electrons are moving extremely quickly around the nucleus of an atom. But, the sheer scale of the particles is what makes the difference, because billions of atoms are clustered together to form matter on a scale in which we are familiar, but nothing on this scale that we are familiar with is moving close to the speed of light. The smaller the scale, the faster it moves...

[midnighticy]

..quantum mechanics deals with the subatomic levels and how strange particles behave because of the discreet levels of energy and how there are gaps between them. Special Relativity deals with concepts on the astronomically large scale, and how large masses behave when approaching the speed of light, and also the sheer fabric of spacetime itself. General Relativity goes further to postulate that accelerated motion is indistinguisable from gravity, which is merely a consquence of curved spacetime

[iempoor]

Let me rephrase my original comment here. Science theorizes EVERYTHING is made up of atoms, quarks, leptons, etc.... If we are made of stuff moving so fast, doesn't that mean we really are as well?

[iempoor]

When I said 'micro...' you knew what I meant, right? I'm no professor or doctor, so my terminology may not be up to you're standards, smart guy. BUT...... saying that the smaller the scale, the faster things move is not exactly correct either. Planets are way bigger than we and hurtle through space at hundreds of thousands of km/h. If your thought were to be correct, logically we would be moving pretty damn fast, considering we're smaller than planets.

[VCat2006]

So a snail beats a Ferrari?

[iempoor]

Of course!

[diademonster]

Electrons don't move quite that fast unless the are some how recieving alot of energy, like in particle colliders.

[DerCrossi]

Not just billions of atoms, that' would be tiny. Octillions (In the magnitude of a 1 with 27 zeroes).

Further: Electrons are mostly delocated when bound to an atom. They are not particles orbiting around the nucleus but diffuse probability waves. See quantum mechanical wave functions of the hydrogen atom with one electron. Though there are electron density peaks depending on the energystate of the electron, there is no pinpointable location of the electron. It's everywhere (or nowhere) at once.

[Agentoxedo07]

Holy-Terrorist:>*=* super

[RoastHardey]

if movement is relative, and light speed is constant, i could measure my absolute pace by comparing the radiation frequency of e.g. a light bulb from every side to determine which way i move in timespace, right? because lightspeed is constant, the frequency 'll change, is that correct?

[jc0ng]

No, you'd be measuring your speed relative to the source of the light. We call the frequency shift a doppler shift (red shifts or blue shifts).

[DragonBuddah]

if you and your bulb have the same uniform motion, then you might as well both be standing still, so you won't see anything special happening.

[VCat2006]

You can't move or stand still without anything to compare movement to. If there was only Earth and the sunlight, we'd circle around the source of that light instead of going straight at it, because the angle of the photons keeps changing.

[WeAreTheStreet]

that'll infer a wavelength change which isn't the case, it's not like a soundwave.

[Chooky707]

No, look up special reletivity.

[edlimuD]

That is very easy to understand.

[big1buddy]

Please please make more. These videos are easy to understand. But, considering this information (in my opinion) has never EVER been "easy" to understand, you have an extremely daunting task at hand. Therefore, I urge you to think, take your time, and...

and...

I want more videos!

[milzy2k8babes]

you cant stop a single space in time, if you did then there would be other places inbetween making a gap of which nothing happened, n it would mean that half the time we do something we do nothing because theres not a point in time inbetween

[Snydercrew]

Xeno's Paradox

[good4usoul]

Well, mine doesn't have the good script or cute drawings, but maybe it will help.

watch?v=1_qy0XQHAE8

[cielonagel]

He was not able to continue the 3rd to the 5th video due to the world crisis.

[centralfootball3]

World crisis?

[intrga86]

he died before he could finish the other 3. It was some kind of freak car accident

[dcolarusso]

Career change and political engagement actually. When the craziness of law school cools off I'll get back to the relativity vids. :\

[evilsinz]

How dare you place your life above 5 minutes of our curiosity? where is your sense of collectivism?

[jbuswellutk]

ahhhhhhh!!!! what a cliffhanger

[Xoblic]

...if you look at his profile, he hasn't logged on since '07.... great vid. though

[dcolarusso]

Not true. That's the "Joined" field. May last video was posted 3 months ago. :(

Sorry, life tends to get in the way.

[Xoblic]

No worries. I know all about life getting in the way :)

Where are you going to school?

[CASEwithscience]

I suspect he used up all his funds on the graphics for the first two videos.

[seb538835]

lol

[Localbandito1]

we all will boot you out of here if you donnot furnish the third video already; it's been a year and a half already.

[dcolarusso]

A year and a half in your reference frame that is. ;)

[SuperfuryanimaL01]

Hurry up and post the third vid, i've got an exam soon lol!

[BYMYSYD]

well, wheres the other video?

[princessofswanlexia]

thanks for the 2 uploads! they realy helped me for the first part of my uni course :)

[apollo1268]

Stupid question: The fact that light is not instantanious means we only see an event after it happens. Since this is true, does it imply that we are not living in the present, but in the past?

[ogo08]

eh, you could look at it like that philosophically, but you must remember that whatever you are looking at has to wait to see u back. If you are both stationary relative to each other then u have to wait x time to see them, but they have to wait x time as well to see you. So its more of a delay. Plus you could argue that we live in the past because it takes time for our brain to process info. and for it to become real to us.

[13248396]

no i believ e we r not when u see light from a 10 billion light years away galaxy u r i nfact watching has she was that time ago, u have no clue about the present, but that doesnt mean u r in the past because you cant see it , whatever state she is now (death ,shining) its not changed for the fact you can only see her light 10 billion years later.u see the past , but that dont go back to the past. If u watch a video made long ago, just because you r seing it now doesnt make things happen again.

[archaedemos]

i liked your two videos , and i look forward to seeing the third. (:

[Prometheus1st]

My question is one from a purely 'what if' mindset not grounded in hard science.

Is it possible, that since both space and time can be thought to be curved, so can all our rigid "graphs" which are always represented in linear fashion? -Or, is that already taken into consideration via the math that keeps me from my fascination of physics?

Sorry for my neophyte question in advance.

-Regards...

[dcolarusso]

Prometheus1st, you're getting ahead of the series here. ;) The next video will start to "distort" these graphs. However, to see them actually curve we would need to be discussing General Relativity.

[libbeingcool]

each of these videos are short! they dont cover as much and then i have to go to the next video which takes quite a while

[Derek0783]

it's almost not fair being deprived of 3 of 5, 4 of 5, and 5 of 5......i'm always checking to see if they've been added......

[fedupx5900]

Aaagh!

I really enjoyed the first 2 parts. Where are the other 3?

You have a real talent for explaining things.

[Cosmodot256]

Great video. Simple and well illustrated.

It's almost tragic that some people completely miss the simplicity of this demonstration because they fail to realize how complex the idea really is. I'm currently trying to break down the Lorentz Diagram to relate it to intuition, but so far I've failed.

Failure leads to success. I just hope I live long enough to understand more than I do today. Fortunately it only takes a single moment to move from one to the next.

Learning and growing!

[tomanyasses]

no it isnt not for all observers were do you get this crap your a parrot you leanred shit now you repeat it like a parrot

[Johnnyboy2010]

WTF! where are the rest?? dam

i was getting into it so much

good job. keep it up!

[KleenezeOpportunity]

"Postulate"

[arkor7]

Where's the rest of the videos?

[Tomar17]

awesome man, looking forward to the rest

[dcolarusso]

Life's sort have gotten in the way as of late, but I'm hoping to get to the next installment this Christmas/New Year's.

[KleenezeOpportunity]

Hope it's soon, this is really useful stuff.

[UncleKennybobs]

Any news?

[Abdulmelik2007]

where is 3-5. Remember to finish a great thing you start.

[slateport0]

wow this is amazing and so interesting! one question though... where the heck are videos 3-5? I have watched the first and second videos... but have yet to find the third through fifth videos. amazing explanations though! I am a high school junior interested in physics... particularly this kind. thanks!

-Chase

[paologeminiani]

Great job man, but try to speak without chewing on your words ,half of what you say is very hard to even hear properly. Remember you are trying to communicate.Thanks! I appreciate your videos, make more of them.

[Zevcollins]

What? He was speaking perfectly clear and coherantly. I understood every single word.

Heh, and if you have trouble following a very simple outline of what can be followed logically in the mind of a 5 year old then I think that says it all.

[noumman]

excellent job, please make more of them

thank you

[tomahawk465]

hello - are you ever going to finish the series??

[topcard101]

your explinations are good, and nicly layed out. but i would still rather read lol

good job

5 stars

[espaceman000]

Yeah, I was all excited for it, but it doesn't look like he's made it yet. :(

[biggugly0402]

love the jazzy music! cool stuff!

[hibbaejibbae]

nice job

[NihilAdmirari]

Waiting for episode 3

[mkohram]

great series. the rest is not coming?

[dcolarusso]

The rest is coming, I've just gotten a little busy. I hope to have the series done by summer holiday.

[BrandonFurtwangler]

These videos are great. I look forward to seeing the rest this summer. What software do you use to make the animations?

[dcolarusso]

It's a combination. This video used 3D Studio Max for the 3D elements, Flash MX for the character animation, and iMovie for the final editing. Also, of you're looking forward to the next installment, you should subscribe to my channel.

[Roamdawg]

Hi there. An online education thing? That's awesome. Man, I didn't know so much can be obtained from a line. Amazing.

ROMEDAWG