Your claiming work can be performed by this rock in front of me if I multiply the mass of the rock by the speed of light squared. Once I solve the equation and write it down what how much work can I do with a number?
The best thing I can think of is use my energy to pick up the rock and through it in the general direction of insane people that think a rock can perform work with their calculators.
EXCELLENT!!!! You have hit the mark!!!!! you are right! and your close to understanding time travel Einstein realized this in his theory... it is proof of it's existence... If you were able to **Travel** at the speed of light squared and be able to bend time and have the ***Energy*** to re~integrate in theory you would be able to step through walls with dense **Mass**
So that explains why when you witness a car accident it looks like its in slow motion even though it happened very quickly. Or you see a plane moving very slowly across the sky even though its travelling at 600+mph. Everythings relative. So if you travel faster than the speed of light, time stands still and will start counting backwards and you would be travelling backwards through time. That would then mean both time and speed cancel each other out. So therefore if nothing moved would timestop?
Light does not ever slow down for anything, it is perpetual--always going the same speed even when it bounces of objects, it never slows...
only time does-it warps. can space warp ? yes
when light is absorbed after turning off a light in a room, it is no longer light ? no it is not, the fequency is changed and it goes from its omitted state of strait motion before, back to a form of heat.
Light does not ever slow down for anything, it is perpetual--always going the same speed even when it bounces of objects, it never slows...
only time does-it warps. can space warp ? yes
when light is absorbed after turning off a light in a room, it is no longer light ? no it is not, the fequency is changed and it goes back from its radiated state of motion.
Does this then mean that Light doesn't travel at the speed of light? For example. If you were travelling at what is perceived to be the speed of light by an onlooker you would actually be moving much slower yourself? Therefore is the speed of light really "The Speed Of Light" Is there an equation that can formulate The speed of time at different speeds?
Ok, what I am asking is: A on looker looking at the speed of light will see the speed different to someone travelling at the speed of light. As time is changing so therefore that is how we measure speed 'Distance covered in set time'. So as a on looker looking at the speed of light you would see it as just that 'The Speed Of Light' but actually travelling at the speed of light time would be different so you would not actually be traveling as fast as 'The Speed Of Light' ?????
@TheCoolfez Note that it is still a theory. There's a logical contradiction : Nothing is constant, not in energy and matter. So if nothing is constant, and light is matter, then I can conclude that light, including the speed of it, is not constant.
True definitions of reason and faith are telling you that you can know the truth in two ways: through reason and faith. But in both ways mind agrees that something is true but the difference is why mind agrees. Mind of God and mind of man. Faith and reason. One reality, one truth. Through faith you know the mind and heart of God. If God revealed his mind and heart why not to believe him and know the truth? Believe God, be Catholic and use your mind to know the truth revealed by God. Be wise.
Energy sources without the need for fuel or energy input exist ,But the big oil corporations don't want that technology revealed,Find a motor that needs no fuel or input at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be the revolution!
If you have 2 torches a kilometre apart shining their beams towards each other and someone travels back and forth between those torches at one third the speed of light, how can it be explained that the light from both torches is travelling at the speed of light relative to the person travelling back and forth between the torches?
The light on the stationary object only moved straight up and down. The light on the moving object moved in a diagonal path because you got to take in account for the horizontal motion too. Since light travels at the same speed no matter what, the light on the moving object will take longer to register a second. The diagonal path > straight path. Think of a triangle. The hypotenuse is longer than the adjacent side. The orange line is longer because it is a diagonal path, not str8
The faster you move the slower you move through time, and when you reach the speed of light you stop moving through time at all, and to you time stands still. So if you travel at 99.98% of the speed of light (the fastest speed ever reached in a atom accellerator), and you pass a person standing still, it's gonna take ages for you to pass him, and he won't even notice you couse you're traveling at allmost the speed of light. That means the moving persons clock should be more than the still one's.
My dad explained it to me in a way that I get, so it might clear somethings up. Correct me if I'm wrong. :)
Speed=distance divided by time
Drop a ball in a moving car 1m down, and it will reach the ground at the same moment as a ball dropped 1m outside. Speed and distance have not changed. Now imagine that the ball is a photon of light. If, in the above equation, speed and distance have not changed, then something else has. The answer is time, hence time is relative.
My dad explained it to me in a way that I get, so it might clear somethings up. Correct me if I'm wrong. :)
Speed=distance divided by time
Drop a ball in a moving car 1m down, and it will reach the ground at the same moment as a ball dropped 1m outside. Speed and distance have not changed. Now imagine that the ball is a photon of light. If, in the above equation, speed and distance have not changed, then something else has. The answer is time, hence time is relative.
except that time flies when watching Youtube videos, thus time has a velocity. However, time wasn't flying before. So, time has an acceleration. That's why I feel heavier when I try to stand up after watching a video.
@Michel0555 time on earth ticks slower than the time in space...GPS systems use time and they are out by enough for you to age slower than on earth,,,,in fact they have tested this theory on top of a mountain...time changes depending on the gravity...gravity and time should be calculated and not speed as far as im concerned... :)
@Michel0555 sorry dude ignore my last one i was right first time....time is slower on earth than in space...gravity or mass slows down time...the further you get to the centre of the earth the slower the time maybe....
@SASNIGHTCRAWLER "the further you get to the centre of the earth the slower the time maybe...."
If you could go into the centre of the earth, then there would be no gravity, since the mass above you balances the mass below you, likewise left/right, and forward/back. Since there's no gravity, a clock in the centre of the earth wouldn't suffer from time dilation due to gravity.
the rate of time does not speed up or slow down depending upon an object's velocity.
einstein was a smart guy, but sadly mathematical equations do not translate into a physical explanation. this is why no one on the planet knows, at least physically, what "warping of space" means. it only has meaning mathematically.
for all the people saying you dont understand SR...you are just being honest. minkowski space is nothing more than a mathematical abstraction.
Let's say - hypothetically - that you could accelerate an object to 100% LS. Light speed refers to the speed of LIGHT, not MASS. I still quite understand why scientist think that traveling near or at LS (in a vacuum) will AFFECT your mass. So if you could travel above LS, any visual distortions would become unreliable, because the light bouncing off the object is now "lagging behind" the actual mass, just as sounds behave supersonic. What you SEE is what the object looked like microseconds ago.
We are so accustomed to using light as a reference point - for example, you KNOW that a passing red car is red because light is moving so much faster in relation to the speed of the car, that it. strikes the car, all colors of the light except red is then absorbed by the paint, and the rest of the light bounces off and into your eyes. Now, what if that car were moving so fast, that light could not "catch up?" Light bouncing off of it has no bearing on it's mass other than how we perceive it.
So in essence, the "mass" of the car would still exist at above LS (although such an experiment would have to be conducted light yrs away, last for years, and be observed from here through a telescope to even be observed), but would appear black (as all objects do when no light hits them). As the car approached and then crossed the L barrier, "the red car" we see would slowly start to lag further and further behind the black mass, until finally the image of the red car would vanish.
because light is no longer bouncing off the object to give us any VISUAL reference of where it is or what it looks like --- or, what color it is. I think the reason light is a contant in the universe is because it has no mass, thus a light turned on while on a moving train would still travel at LS, because the light has no mass to "push" faster. A tennis ball thrown forward on moving train would travel faster, because it has mass for your hand to "push" faster than its already moving.
so technically, since mass can always be pushed harder unlike massless photons, objects can exceed the speed of light? As long as enough energy is somehow available?
1.)to get any mass to move at a certain speed you require energy and tht increases to infinity to light speed, its exponetial, according to einsteins E=mc squared equation to as the energy increases your mass increases becasue C speed of light is fixed according to maxwells equations, 2.)the light does not lagg behind it moves at the same speed jst time passes more quickly for the moving light
@Thymonico wouldnt you just increase the inertia of mass rather than mass itself? and rather than become infinate mass at just past the speed of light, wouldnt the mass lose energy and cancel its self out?As mass needs energy to exist in the first place, or are they saying energy is the result of the inertia from the particle? It must mean every particle has sub particles that determine the energy created or released.like a little friction dynamo.lol well they found spinions/holons in electrons
Well, mass can also be called "inertial mass". So, with increased inertia, it's the same as saying increased mass. As mass is defined often as how hard it is to move an object.
But could the spacetime continuum have symmetry and geometry? Newton believed Time was a thing in itself and connected to motion and Einstein believed there was something missing from quantum mechanics. In my video The Paradox of Schrodingers Cat an artist view it is Time that is the Hidden Variable.
no, because time always exists the same from your frame of reference. if you're in a car moving 100 miles an hour do you 'feel' like you're moving 100 miles an hour? no, but you are. the time outside of your frame of reference would be different because time is relative.
time travel....hmm .... that's impossible . time travel does not exist. i have a theory about this here : scienceray(DOT)com/physics/time-travel-reality-or-sci-fi/
does time slow down on earth if a person was in space? and also... it would take way more than a year for a ship to get to its destination. its possible for it to take a whole humans life time, youd still never be able to reach the end. so what does that tell you?... maybe that space has no end... or its bigger then we could ever imagine. and time, im not sure yet,
There are probably other factors at work there such as the constant motion's impact on your circulation, heart-rate, etc. But to put it in another way, if a person is in a vessel or simply travelling faster than another, this person would age slower considering that all aspects of their lives are otherwise the same.
light travels into black holes at the speed of light following the natural curvature of space until it reaches the singularity (having already gone out of an observers perceptual range at the event horizon. presumably it is destroyed at the singularity, but no one knows this for sure.
the point is that time isn't constant because time doesn't exist, time is just our perception of change, and our perception of change is relative. the only constant is the speed of light
wouldnt the speed of light also be our perception ? and wouldnt that perception make it relative again ? light not able to escape black holes shows us that its not constant no?
So I'm going the speed of light and I'm one light year away from home. It is going to take me one year to get home no matter what the perspective is. To the people at home it's one year, and to me it's one year. How could it be different?
The key is to understand that the speed of light is the same in all reference frames. If you are traveling 1 m/s slower than light, you will still see photons going past you at the speed of light. But an observer on Earth will see you going 1 m/s slower than the light.
Since speed is distance divided by time and speed of light is the same, distance and time have to change to make light always travel at the speed of light.
For people on earth, it would *look* like it took over a year for a ship to reach its destination because the light has to travel all the way back and that takes time - but I think in reality only 1 year has *actually* passed, its just delayed for earth.
I also think if they travel back to earth, it would add back up in reverse - by the time the ship got there (1 year) so would all the light from their travel in one instant (the speed of light).
If you're traveling near the speed of light for a year, the trip to you would be instantaneous, while a year would have gone by for those people at both your home and your destination.
Reading the comments make me smile in that science actually invite us to think and question the examples given to us and not just accept them because they say so. How do i know that about science? because I say so.
I agree with grozmo. Time is constant. It passes at the same rate, regardless of the speed of objects. If you increase the distance that light has to travel (the 2nd clock), you don't slow down time, you increase the AMOUNT OF TIME NEEDED for the light to travel the new distance.
Conclusion: Time passes at the same rate for an object traveling at 0 miles per second as it does for an object traveling at 186,000 miles per second. One second passes and they traveled different distances.
Question : Why do they say time itself changes, when to me it seems obvious that the only thing changing is distance??
Of course the 2nd clock will tick slower because the photon has a further *distance* to travel (making it an inaccurate measure, or, it's now measuring something different to the first clock)
So don't things only 'slow down' because everything has a further distance to travel (at a constant speed)??
I conclude time itself is constant, and 'measured time' is whatever...
That photon-clock should just demonstrate simplified consequences of special relativity to laymen. If you want more, look for the physics of dilated muon decay in relativistic reference frames. This should dispel your doubts about truely changing timespans. It's not just a flaw of our measuring.
E=mc2 is scientific fact that we have proven through the inventon of nuclear power and H-bombs. time-space and black holes are mere hopthosis with no experiments which can tie them too reality. To Einstein himself, being the brilliant mind he was , this was obvious and therefore he never claimed it was fact. but his followers did accept it as fact without experimentation
we have an apple, the outside is space-time where we live. and the inside of the apple, which we call time-space (where time travel is possible) look up montuak project.
then you have a worm, the worm represents. man. ripping a hole through the apple.
The ayuhuasca vine is a new modality of research i have able to use. EXPAND THE CONSCIOUSNESS.
I reckon time, motion, and dimensions haven't been properly defined yet. All that stuff Einstein said means that an object needs to compress the space around it (at c, it's at a pinpoint) in order to "move" at all. Also, a photon traveling at c doesn't even experience a journey, it just arrives instantly at the end destination and the rest of the universe expands away from it at c afterwards. Which I think renders the concept of "time" especially as a "fourth dimension" even more meaningless
the clock in motion has to loose that photon, because if clock has the speed of light and so the photon that meeans that the photon must go outside and not reflect back!!!!!!!
My only question is how can we tell that this is actually a breakthrough in physics as opposed to a flaw in an atomic clock. Perhaps our clock isn't perfect enough to measure "time". All I am saying is that this theory proves that an atom takes a longer path than normal when it is moving, i dont understand how that proves we're breaking time
G0 back to school kid, its been proven that traveling at speeds approaching the speed of light equals that time passes by slower then an observer on earth, speed of light is always the same for any observer whether in motion of not
how about the thought that the speed of light is actually the square root +or- apparently of energy divided by mass. now your stuck with defining energy and mass. maybe these all change some how and when all accounted for nothing actually changed at all except how these 3 factors interact with the space-time continuum...
Imagine going so fast that you are "catching up" to your own electrons? but probably time is a perception more than a reality and your own electrons don't actually slow down. the impossibility of getting mass to the speed of light makes this a problem nobody has to solve. I doubt for instance you can actually go back into time....the universe probably doesn't care what has already taken place
to finish of mr bone head,, you seem the type who read something and just accept the notion without much thought scrutinitly implemented. people are quick to tell you how food taste without taking into consideration the taste of the tongue.eistein was quick to tell you how light behaves in space without considering the nature of space itself....
no, the slower you move through the image of time. light isnt time, it is image. for example:
if you went faster then light, there would be a delay of when you went by a sertin point, and the actual image of such event. so it takes longer even though its in the same unit of time. however, that is only light, not actual existance. if we didnt see using light, it would be a different effect because we use what we see to measure time. and that way is light.
it is just a theory.. eistein say time stops at the speed of light, yet he also says nothing can travel at the speed of light.. basicaly hes was trying to say..i have a theory but i cant proove it to be fact...
It has been observed. Satellites that provide the signals for you gps require that the technicians program in time corrections to account for the dilation of time they experience in orbit. this is more due to the fact that gravity warps spacetime (another of Einstein's brilliant ideas) than it does to do with orbit or velocity, but if it wasn't corrected for your gps would drift by 30 or so km per day.
stfu faget obviously u don't understand the speed of light cannot be reached its physically impossible if u were to amass all the energy in the universe to accelerate something as low in mass and weight as an electron you would only be able to get to 99.99999Repeating to the speed of light even now electrons are being accelerated to 99.999996% speed of light or something like that may be a place holder off but still it takes a great deal of energy just to accelerate .0000001 closer to speed of l
now bonehead, yes that sums you up very well. firstly i dont try to understand or overstand,, i try to wholestand..not like you know what i mean.. who said that it is physically impossible to accelerate mass to the same speed as light? now answer the second question.. who then gave a mathmatical interpretation of occuring events at light speed? now what good is you telling me that the grass is greener on the other side if you are telling me also that i can never get to the other side?
Time is our perception of existence, it's not real. Only humans and animals sense it, time its self is not TIME. It's our interpretation to reality is our own. We can't see ultraviolet light, that caould be a far off comparison, but we a biological entities. Space and matter is not. The faster a car goes, the shorter the distance it seems to travel, thus you have a visual effect of speed time and movement. Im high, i know it, but can't really explain. Just think of how your brain works. ( =
seriously.. i guess.. time is constant.. moving fast or slow.. and i think.. to prove this thing.. why not invent a spaceship that can a travel almost a speed of light, imagine a twins were on the experiment, one is on the earth and the other will be riding the spaceship.. then this spaceship goes to the other solar system.. after, he goes back, and lets see the result.. if the other twin looks younger. then, maybe the theory is right..
there are clocks on GPS satellites that need to be adjusted every once in a while because of special relativity. This theory has never been proved wrong, it has only been proved right till today. We dont need a spaceship going almost at the speed of light.
ramtinhaj.. i think the required adjustment of time on gps clocks may have something to do with the variation of gravitational intensity due to distances from the center of the earth,, not the velocity of the satelites..
I don't know about GPS, but I do know they did an experiment with planes flying around the world carrying cesium clocks. On those clocks less time had passed then those on earth.
Yes it only proves that we can see fast movements in a stressed state. The device is move as fast as him so it is moving normally with the highten scenes he sees the numbers. For it to truly work the person on the ground would have to view the device or use a giant version of the device so the person falling can see it.
there two different times this is my theory came up with fiftten years ago now some professores now saying it amazing how noc=body want to give credit to the one who does the thinking and inventions shame on the asses of america
dimension is understood to be up and down, back and forward, left and right. Where does time extends to. If no object would move there would be no way to measure time. time is a man made mesurement or concept.
yeah, most things einstein theorized are amazing and seem true, but i could never see what he was thinking here. I must be missing something. In which case, the dude in this video is responsible for that.
yes they can and they did you are just to stupid to understand what it is. hours and minutes is how humans measure the day, with the earth's rotation. has nothing to do with time itself
hey i just proved nikola teslas one wire transmission principle ! a very important discovery against a closed system. that is one step closer to faster than light energy transfer through the earth. come check it out its nobel prize work for sure.
Time is SUBJECTIVE unit used to measure dynamic concepts. Like a yardstick or ruler. "Dimensions" only apply to the shape of an object. Sure time is relative, but it has to be used CONSISTENTLY to be of any use. It would be like not using a word consistently. Blue can mean red to different people, but they're still just words that in reality have nothing to do with what colors are. You can't "travel" through time, its just a yardstick used for measurement. The only real thing is the present.
so, the idea is if you are moving you are always slowing down time, as opposed to stationary object.Does that mean that you can expand your years of living by moving every time as opposed to resting at place. If i am moving i am gonna live 100 yrs as opposed to 60 yrs?
shit... example : If you sit on a balet the time is moving slowly like evry second is an hour but if you are on a Metallica Concert than time goes fast like a minute if you want to live long then you have to do boring stuff so time will not move fast... this is just about that too open your eyes that time is never the same like other stuffs like : Pounds,miles, time is something wich is hard to explaine what is that ... you can´t really tell what the time is ...
This is wrong. You cannot "move faster through space" because you cannot move "with respect to space". Absolute motion does not exist. The clock that is "moving" has its own proper time too, it does not tick slower because it is "moving" (because in its own reference frame it is stationary). Also, yes, he got time dialation backwards.
No, it's just contrary I think. They say "the faster you travel, the slower time passes." So for the car driver, the time will pass slower. e.g.: the car driver's clock says that the race lastet 1 hour. But the spactaters' clock runs faster than the driver's clock, so for the the spectaters the race would have lasted for example 1h and 5 minutes.
So the car driver will conclude that the race has lasted 5 minutes shorter.
The speeds that is required to make any significance in slowing down time is close to 3600 x 186,000 Miles per hour. Compared to this a race care is relatively motionless. It's been proven that digital watches brought into the Int'l Space station is slower when compared to those on earth. This is because they are taveling at much higher speeds. This is FACT.
that sanme idea can be explained with the difference in capacitance of earth timing systems and space systems, the capacitors charge differently and at different times proving error in an experiment like that, most timing systems have capacitors in them.tesla figured that out 100 yrs ago, he showed that capacit
the more father away electronic systems are from earth, the more their capaitance systems change because the earth mass is not influencing its capacitance so there can be a big differnence in height differences and show why the clocks showed different times because all timing systems have capacitors in them especially digital!!! that can explain this experiment without jumping to relativity to explain it!
It's an analogy. Time is actually different, even if we used a quantum clock, or took a lump of radioactive substance and used its rate of decay as a clock. Read up pls. Obviously you have not heard of this before.
yea you read up too lol. any substance has capacitance to its surrounds no matter what it is, that means that the clock no matter if there quantum/radioactive decay will respond differently from the surroundings. read up pls.
no its still 24 hours, but because thy r smaller and hav quicker heart paces and quicker bodily functions then im guessin a day 'feels' longer to thm compared to what we kno a day as, if thts wot u ment
technically yes, but its such a minor time differnce, in fact, everyone has their own special time fame which differs from everyone else's by astronomical numbers in less that a nano second which makes sense because light hits everyones eyes at a different time thus a delay has been made, so what ever you see is not real time, real time is impossible to observe because of what i have just explained unless you froze time which is impossible alos
And they say "waiting takes long", so it also has to do with the fase of your brains. When people are borred everything seems to take longer as it actually does take.
To complete stop time, you would have to travel the speed of light 186,000 miles per second. However it's impossible to travel that fast. From the perspective of light a photon leaves it's origin and arives at it's destination at the exact same time.
to go back in time you hav to curve space extremely for something to spin back into the past, as someone else has said here its impossible to go light speed, but you can manipulate light to bend space enough for this to occur
bush made up al quaeda. spread the truth. bush plans to dominate the world. there's no such thing as terrorists. long live europe. fuck usa and their fat ppl.
I think the whole idea of Bush being responsible for 911 is kinda nuts, but what do you mean "how dare you accuse somebody of intetionally killing thousands of their own citizens"? That's happened a LOT in history.
why is it that if we are busy time seems to travel so fast but if we are not doing something it takes so long for the time to passed.
MrMinstrel786 1 month ago
Your claiming work can be performed by this rock in front of me if I multiply the mass of the rock by the speed of light squared. Once I solve the equation and write it down what how much work can I do with a number?
The best thing I can think of is use my energy to pick up the rock and through it in the general direction of insane people that think a rock can perform work with their calculators.
bridgetroll9 2 months ago
Why does the light travel different distances in the visual representation? I still don't understand the concept, it seems.
EnvyAbomination 3 months ago
He would be asian.
Beautiful explination, i finally get it.
WhySoBass 7 months ago
Ha Ha explain this GIJ,J=0
SUNBLAKCARBON666 9 months ago
EXCELLENT!!!! You have hit the mark!!!!! you are right! and your close to understanding time travel Einstein realized this in his theory... it is proof of it's existence... If you were able to **Travel** at the speed of light squared and be able to bend time and have the ***Energy*** to re~integrate in theory you would be able to step through walls with dense **Mass**
theonlyraybenz 10 months ago
So that explains why when you witness a car accident it looks like its in slow motion even though it happened very quickly. Or you see a plane moving very slowly across the sky even though its travelling at 600+mph. Everythings relative. So if you travel faster than the speed of light, time stands still and will start counting backwards and you would be travelling backwards through time. That would then mean both time and speed cancel each other out. So therefore if nothing moved would timestop?
blarson12 10 months ago
Light does not ever slow down for anything, it is perpetual--always going the same speed even when it bounces of objects, it never slows...
only time does-it warps. can space warp ? yes
when light is absorbed after turning off a light in a room, it is no longer light ? no it is not, the fequency is changed and it goes from its omitted state of strait motion before, back to a form of heat.
sizzlerjoe1 11 months ago
Light does not ever slow down for anything, it is perpetual--always going the same speed even when it bounces of objects, it never slows...
only time does-it warps. can space warp ? yes
when light is absorbed after turning off a light in a room, it is no longer light ? no it is not, the fequency is changed and it goes back from its radiated state of motion.
sizzlerjoe1 11 months ago
Does this then mean that Light doesn't travel at the speed of light? For example. If you were travelling at what is perceived to be the speed of light by an onlooker you would actually be moving much slower yourself? Therefore is the speed of light really "The Speed Of Light" Is there an equation that can formulate The speed of time at different speeds?
0bennett 1 year ago
@0bennett
No, Speed of light is constant! It will always be. Time is what is changing.
TheCoolfez 11 months ago
@TheCoolfez
Ok, what I am asking is: A on looker looking at the speed of light will see the speed different to someone travelling at the speed of light. As time is changing so therefore that is how we measure speed 'Distance covered in set time'. So as a on looker looking at the speed of light you would see it as just that 'The Speed Of Light' but actually travelling at the speed of light time would be different so you would not actually be traveling as fast as 'The Speed Of Light' ?????
0bennett 11 months ago
@TheCoolfez Note that it is still a theory. There's a logical contradiction : Nothing is constant, not in energy and matter. So if nothing is constant, and light is matter, then I can conclude that light, including the speed of it, is not constant.
qiankundanuoyi1 4 months ago
I don't beleive it, you can't beat time which is a constant.
cyberspirt 1 year ago
well i think that even time as a speed but is smaller than the speed of light! but the distance counts to;) nice vid
SuKaru93 1 year ago
by space do u mean outer space
or personal space
shadow123dog 1 year ago
@shadow123dog All parts of space.
hsharma92 1 year ago
@shadow123dog
He is talking about outer space, because any space here on Earth, is the same reference frame since everyone else is on Earth. Does that make sense?
TheCoolfez 11 months ago
i love black people
SirELTONJOHNable 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
True definitions of reason and faith are telling you that you can know the truth in two ways: through reason and faith. But in both ways mind agrees that something is true but the difference is why mind agrees. Mind of God and mind of man. Faith and reason. One reality, one truth. Through faith you know the mind and heart of God. If God revealed his mind and heart why not to believe him and know the truth? Believe God, be Catholic and use your mind to know the truth revealed by God. Be wise.
akwinata1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Energy sources without the need for fuel or energy input exist ,But the big oil corporations don't want that technology revealed,Find a motor that needs no fuel or input at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be the revolution!
cloudburstlenepmhq 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you have 2 torches a kilometre apart shining their beams towards each other and someone travels back and forth between those torches at one third the speed of light, how can it be explained that the light from both torches is travelling at the speed of light relative to the person travelling back and forth between the torches?
freshfreenlovinit 1 year ago
This guy just put me to sleeeeeppp
hankaaron1961 1 year ago
why is the orange line with 6 bars longer than the yellow line with 5 bars?
MontyInMotion 1 year ago
@MontyInMotion
The light on the stationary object only moved straight up and down. The light on the moving object moved in a diagonal path because you got to take in account for the horizontal motion too. Since light travels at the same speed no matter what, the light on the moving object will take longer to register a second. The diagonal path > straight path. Think of a triangle. The hypotenuse is longer than the adjacent side. The orange line is longer because it is a diagonal path, not str8
GunsNRosesbitches 1 year ago
Comment removed
SASNIGHTCRAWLER 1 year ago
Comment removed
SASNIGHTCRAWLER 1 year ago
The faster you move the slower you move through time, and when you reach the speed of light you stop moving through time at all, and to you time stands still. So if you travel at 99.98% of the speed of light (the fastest speed ever reached in a atom accellerator), and you pass a person standing still, it's gonna take ages for you to pass him, and he won't even notice you couse you're traveling at allmost the speed of light. That means the moving persons clock should be more than the still one's.
RectumPilum 1 year ago
* sorry i've posted that twice :S SORRY!!
BrainyBabe24 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
My dad explained it to me in a way that I get, so it might clear somethings up. Correct me if I'm wrong. :)
Speed=distance divided by time
Drop a ball in a moving car 1m down, and it will reach the ground at the same moment as a ball dropped 1m outside. Speed and distance have not changed. Now imagine that the ball is a photon of light. If, in the above equation, speed and distance have not changed, then something else has. The answer is time, hence time is relative.
BrainyBabe24 1 year ago
My dad explained it to me in a way that I get, so it might clear somethings up. Correct me if I'm wrong. :)
Speed=distance divided by time
Drop a ball in a moving car 1m down, and it will reach the ground at the same moment as a ball dropped 1m outside. Speed and distance have not changed. Now imagine that the ball is a photon of light. If, in the above equation, speed and distance have not changed, then something else has. The answer is time, hence time is relative.
BrainyBabe24 1 year ago
except that time flies when watching Youtube videos, thus time has a velocity. However, time wasn't flying before. So, time has an acceleration. That's why I feel heavier when I try to stand up after watching a video.
compmeist 1 year ago
Speed is not fixed but time is fixed, time never changes.
Michel0555 1 year ago
@Michel0555 time on earth ticks slower than the time in space...GPS systems use time and they are out by enough for you to age slower than on earth,,,,in fact they have tested this theory on top of a mountain...time changes depending on the gravity...gravity and time should be calculated and not speed as far as im concerned... :)
SASNIGHTCRAWLER 1 year ago
Comment removed
SASNIGHTCRAWLER 1 year ago
@Michel0555 sorry dude ignore my last one i was right first time....time is slower on earth than in space...gravity or mass slows down time...the further you get to the centre of the earth the slower the time maybe....
SASNIGHTCRAWLER 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SASNIGHTCRAWLER "the further you get to the centre of the earth the slower the time maybe...."
If you could go into the centre of the earth, then there would be no gravity, since the mass above you balances the mass below you, likewise left/right, and forward/back. Since there's no gravity, a clock in the centre of the earth wouldn't suffer from time dilation due to gravity.
mandolinic 1 year ago
first time ive understood that. cheers
anddodo4 1 year ago
the rate of time does not speed up or slow down depending upon an object's velocity.
einstein was a smart guy, but sadly mathematical equations do not translate into a physical explanation. this is why no one on the planet knows, at least physically, what "warping of space" means. it only has meaning mathematically.
for all the people saying you dont understand SR...you are just being honest. minkowski space is nothing more than a mathematical abstraction.
junior00bacon00chee 1 year ago
this is the first video which helps me understand this whole procedure, just a bit too complicated still. But thanks a lot.
kami645464 1 year ago
ok thanks. I did not know that.
godtheonyt 2 years ago
omg im so confused... this physics chapter is killing mee.
Eunhyex3 2 years ago
That's, incredible.
nikkidikki1 2 years ago
That light clock shown would not behave like that. The flash would be lost when the light clock moved a c speed.
EGMAG 2 years ago
Let's say - hypothetically - that you could accelerate an object to 100% LS. Light speed refers to the speed of LIGHT, not MASS. I still quite understand why scientist think that traveling near or at LS (in a vacuum) will AFFECT your mass. So if you could travel above LS, any visual distortions would become unreliable, because the light bouncing off the object is now "lagging behind" the actual mass, just as sounds behave supersonic. What you SEE is what the object looked like microseconds ago.
sixstanger00 2 years ago
We are so accustomed to using light as a reference point - for example, you KNOW that a passing red car is red because light is moving so much faster in relation to the speed of the car, that it. strikes the car, all colors of the light except red is then absorbed by the paint, and the rest of the light bounces off and into your eyes. Now, what if that car were moving so fast, that light could not "catch up?" Light bouncing off of it has no bearing on it's mass other than how we perceive it.
sixstanger00 2 years ago
So in essence, the "mass" of the car would still exist at above LS (although such an experiment would have to be conducted light yrs away, last for years, and be observed from here through a telescope to even be observed), but would appear black (as all objects do when no light hits them). As the car approached and then crossed the L barrier, "the red car" we see would slowly start to lag further and further behind the black mass, until finally the image of the red car would vanish.
sixstanger00 2 years ago
because light is no longer bouncing off the object to give us any VISUAL reference of where it is or what it looks like --- or, what color it is. I think the reason light is a contant in the universe is because it has no mass, thus a light turned on while on a moving train would still travel at LS, because the light has no mass to "push" faster. A tennis ball thrown forward on moving train would travel faster, because it has mass for your hand to "push" faster than its already moving.
sixstanger00 2 years ago
so technically, since mass can always be pushed harder unlike massless photons, objects can exceed the speed of light? As long as enough energy is somehow available?
fluffaduck 2 years ago
1.)to get any mass to move at a certain speed you require energy and tht increases to infinity to light speed, its exponetial, according to einsteins E=mc squared equation to as the energy increases your mass increases becasue C speed of light is fixed according to maxwells equations, 2.)the light does not lagg behind it moves at the same speed jst time passes more quickly for the moving light
DomhnallX50 2 years ago
If those clocks went at the photons speed. The photon (time) would never catch up. So would time stop if i can walk the speed of light.
godtheonyt 2 years ago
you can not walk at light speed because ur mass would become infinte so you would need a endless force to make you move.....
jonian22 2 years ago
i thought ur mass gets smaller as you go faster!
godtheonyt 2 years ago
(
Nope, mass increases with increased velocity!
m=m0*gamma
m is mass, m0 is rest mass, gamma is 1/(sqrt(1-(v^2)/(c^2))).
:)
Thymonico 2 years ago
@Thymonico wouldnt you just increase the inertia of mass rather than mass itself? and rather than become infinate mass at just past the speed of light, wouldnt the mass lose energy and cancel its self out?As mass needs energy to exist in the first place, or are they saying energy is the result of the inertia from the particle? It must mean every particle has sub particles that determine the energy created or released.like a little friction dynamo.lol well they found spinions/holons in electrons
SASNIGHTCRAWLER 1 year ago
@SASNIGHTCRAWLER
Well, mass can also be called "inertial mass". So, with increased inertia, it's the same as saying increased mass. As mass is defined often as how hard it is to move an object.
Oh well.. I'm not an expert in definitions.. :P
Thymonico 1 year ago
correct, that happens when u are moving almost at speed of time, not before u go that fast.
theoraticly that is :)
phtmexplo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
attn: all writers world-wide
I want to know when is Dan Brown going to work
with Jeff Fisher and Jane Bowell since the Davinci Code is true.
The site is called JesusChristLovesForeverAmen blogspot
Toni Maples
Alberta Canada
tonimaples hotmail
I got an email from a man named Richard Saskle.
ToniMaples 2 years ago
This is very good !
But could the spacetime continuum have symmetry and geometry? Newton believed Time was a thing in itself and connected to motion and Einstein believed there was something missing from quantum mechanics. In my video The Paradox of Schrodingers Cat an artist view it is Time that is the Hidden Variable.
nickharvey7 2 years ago
lol husein bolt will outlive us all
Telepcanin 2 years ago 20
So theoretically, if you go fast enough, you could "stop" time?
ToyMachineLurkfest 2 years ago
no, because time always exists the same from your frame of reference. if you're in a car moving 100 miles an hour do you 'feel' like you're moving 100 miles an hour? no, but you are. the time outside of your frame of reference would be different because time is relative.
livefromthe781 2 years ago
btw, if time stops at the centre of a blackhole - then if your being sucked into it.. youll never actually get there.
G3org3Master 2 years ago
As you move faster, time slows down, it is as if time has no properties that effect you.
sinisterweapons 2 years ago
time travel....hmm .... that's impossible . time travel does not exist. i have a theory about this here : scienceray(DOT)com/physics/time-travel-reality-or-sci-fi/
Borgilian 2 years ago
does time slow down on earth if a person was in space? and also... it would take way more than a year for a ship to get to its destination. its possible for it to take a whole humans life time, youd still never be able to reach the end. so what does that tell you?... maybe that space has no end... or its bigger then we could ever imagine. and time, im not sure yet,
RavenakaSkittlz 2 years ago
Does this mean if I kick my right leg out repeatedly for ages - it would grow slower than my left leg? lol
btw awsome way of explaining with the light bouncing off mirrors animation.
G3org3Master 2 years ago
There are probably other factors at work there such as the constant motion's impact on your circulation, heart-rate, etc. But to put it in another way, if a person is in a vessel or simply travelling faster than another, this person would age slower considering that all aspects of their lives are otherwise the same.
NightmareContinues 2 years ago
the speed of light is constant
light travels into black holes at the speed of light following the natural curvature of space until it reaches the singularity (having already gone out of an observers perceptual range at the event horizon. presumably it is destroyed at the singularity, but no one knows this for sure.
BrokenBassBin 2 years ago
the point is that time isn't constant because time doesn't exist, time is just our perception of change, and our perception of change is relative. the only constant is the speed of light
BrokenBassBin 2 years ago 3
wouldnt the speed of light also be our perception ? and wouldnt that perception make it relative again ? light not able to escape black holes shows us that its not constant no?
yourboycal 2 years ago
how old is this guy....i love that example he gave with the mirrors fukken genius
captainofyourstarshi 2 years ago
It doesn't make sense to me!
So I'm going the speed of light and I'm one light year away from home. It is going to take me one year to get home no matter what the perspective is. To the people at home it's one year, and to me it's one year. How could it be different?
Jvideo12 2 years ago
When you arrive at home, one year has passed for the people at home, but less for you.
antipul446 2 years ago
How so? If I am traveling the speed of light, it will take me one year to go on light year. How can it be shorter for the one traveling.
Jvideo12 2 years ago
The key is to understand that the speed of light is the same in all reference frames. If you are traveling 1 m/s slower than light, you will still see photons going past you at the speed of light. But an observer on Earth will see you going 1 m/s slower than the light.
Since speed is distance divided by time and speed of light is the same, distance and time have to change to make light always travel at the speed of light.
antipul446 2 years ago
I agree with you..
For people on earth, it would *look* like it took over a year for a ship to reach its destination because the light has to travel all the way back and that takes time - but I think in reality only 1 year has *actually* passed, its just delayed for earth.
I also think if they travel back to earth, it would add back up in reverse - by the time the ship got there (1 year) so would all the light from their travel in one instant (the speed of light).
grozmo1 2 years ago
If you're traveling near the speed of light for a year, the trip to you would be instantaneous, while a year would have gone by for those people at both your home and your destination.
DSAhmed 2 years ago
Reading the comments make me smile in that science actually invite us to think and question the examples given to us and not just accept them because they say so. How do i know that about science? because I say so.
davcar23 2 years ago
I agree with grozmo. Time is constant. It passes at the same rate, regardless of the speed of objects. If you increase the distance that light has to travel (the 2nd clock), you don't slow down time, you increase the AMOUNT OF TIME NEEDED for the light to travel the new distance.
Conclusion: Time passes at the same rate for an object traveling at 0 miles per second as it does for an object traveling at 186,000 miles per second. One second passes and they traveled different distances.
IRA166 2 years ago
Question : Why do they say time itself changes, when to me it seems obvious that the only thing changing is distance??
Of course the 2nd clock will tick slower because the photon has a further *distance* to travel (making it an inaccurate measure, or, it's now measuring something different to the first clock)
So don't things only 'slow down' because everything has a further distance to travel (at a constant speed)??
I conclude time itself is constant, and 'measured time' is whatever...
grozmo1 2 years ago
That photon-clock should just demonstrate simplified consequences of special relativity to laymen. If you want more, look for the physics of dilated muon decay in relativistic reference frames. This should dispel your doubts about truely changing timespans. It's not just a flaw of our measuring.
DerCrossi 2 years ago
We have measured time dilation with atomic clocks.
Gps satellites have to change their clocks by about 38 ms every day to be in sync with clocks on Earth.
antipul446 2 years ago
Personally I think there is a slight discrepancy in something moving because of the physical force on the atoms (or something along those lines)
or even a difference due to stronger gravity on the ground, affecting the atoms movement *slightly* differently than in high orbit.
Is this proven wrong?
Are there any physical clock experiments taken in deep space? (I would pay more attention to those results..)
grozmo1 2 years ago
Gravity causes time dilation aswell.
The cesium atoms used in atomic clocks will always resonate at the same frequency. You can take any atom of cesium and it will always be the same.
antipul446 2 years ago
E=mc2 is scientific fact that we have proven through the inventon of nuclear power and H-bombs. time-space and black holes are mere hopthosis with no experiments which can tie them too reality. To Einstein himself, being the brilliant mind he was , this was obvious and therefore he never claimed it was fact. but his followers did accept it as fact without experimentation
robertwc82 2 years ago
there is time-space and space-time.
two COMPLETELY different things.
let be put it like this.
we have an apple, the outside is space-time where we live. and the inside of the apple, which we call time-space (where time travel is possible) look up montuak project.
then you have a worm, the worm represents. man. ripping a hole through the apple.
The ayuhuasca vine is a new modality of research i have able to use. EXPAND THE CONSCIOUSNESS.
ONE LOVE
Vega88beats 2 years ago
what is love?
baby dont hurt me
dont hurt me
no more
haha!
hectorandrespv 2 years ago
how about a pendulum vs. a moving pendulum?
jdubs2004 2 years ago
Uniform motion or acceleration?
boredman443 2 years ago
So we can control time
JagexGotServed 2 years ago
Yes, JagexGotServed, we can control time in this way. In fact, we do unknowingly whenever we move.
EarthboundEnigma 2 years ago
Thank You very much!!! you helped me a lot
cajhdz 2 years ago
This is a great illustration. Good work, 5 stars
tacoma200 2 years ago 12
I reckon time, motion, and dimensions haven't been properly defined yet. All that stuff Einstein said means that an object needs to compress the space around it (at c, it's at a pinpoint) in order to "move" at all. Also, a photon traveling at c doesn't even experience a journey, it just arrives instantly at the end destination and the rest of the universe expands away from it at c afterwards. Which I think renders the concept of "time" especially as a "fourth dimension" even more meaningless
votshtoyalyoobloo 2 years ago
this is wrong ...
the clock in motion has to loose that photon, because if clock has the speed of light and so the photon that meeans that the photon must go outside and not reflect back!!!!!!!
empeus 2 years ago
My only question is how can we tell that this is actually a breakthrough in physics as opposed to a flaw in an atomic clock. Perhaps our clock isn't perfect enough to measure "time". All I am saying is that this theory proves that an atom takes a longer path than normal when it is moving, i dont understand how that proves we're breaking time
fanbasketballalex 2 years ago
G0 back to school kid, its been proven that traveling at speeds approaching the speed of light equals that time passes by slower then an observer on earth, speed of light is always the same for any observer whether in motion of not
philm85 2 years ago
Im talking purely about the clock, not the light fuck face
fanbasketballalex 2 years ago
if you want proof, please search and make an investigation about subject "Effects of relativity on GPS". I believe this would remove your doubts ;)
selant07 2 years ago
how about the thought that the speed of light is actually the square root +or- apparently of energy divided by mass. now your stuck with defining energy and mass. maybe these all change some how and when all accounted for nothing actually changed at all except how these 3 factors interact with the space-time continuum...
Bi1ch1 2 years ago
Imagine going so fast that you are "catching up" to your own electrons? but probably time is a perception more than a reality and your own electrons don't actually slow down. the impossibility of getting mass to the speed of light makes this a problem nobody has to solve. I doubt for instance you can actually go back into time....the universe probably doesn't care what has already taken place
Bi1ch1 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You stupid mongoloid. you can't understand these very advanced fields you stupid fool. Time and space are the same thing.
blacklions714 3 years ago
to finish of mr bone head,, you seem the type who read something and just accept the notion without much thought scrutinitly implemented. people are quick to tell you how food taste without taking into consideration the taste of the tongue.eistein was quick to tell you how light behaves in space without considering the nature of space itself....
circle559 3 years ago
no, the slower you move through the image of time. light isnt time, it is image. for example:
if you went faster then light, there would be a delay of when you went by a sertin point, and the actual image of such event. so it takes longer even though its in the same unit of time. however, that is only light, not actual existance. if we didnt see using light, it would be a different effect because we use what we see to measure time. and that way is light.
Skaterman3323 3 years ago
skateman.. good one sir.. then they also need to comprehend the brain for the brain allows sight.. now let me deal with bonehead for a minute...
circle559 3 years ago
it is just a theory.. eistein say time stops at the speed of light, yet he also says nothing can travel at the speed of light.. basicaly hes was trying to say..i have a theory but i cant proove it to be fact...
circle559 3 years ago
It has been observed. Satellites that provide the signals for you gps require that the technicians program in time corrections to account for the dilation of time they experience in orbit. this is more due to the fact that gravity warps spacetime (another of Einstein's brilliant ideas) than it does to do with orbit or velocity, but if it wasn't corrected for your gps would drift by 30 or so km per day.
shameoncanada 3 years ago
read my comment that was posted about 5 0r six days ago
circle559 3 years ago
stfu faget obviously u don't understand the speed of light cannot be reached its physically impossible if u were to amass all the energy in the universe to accelerate something as low in mass and weight as an electron you would only be able to get to 99.99999Repeating to the speed of light even now electrons are being accelerated to 99.999996% speed of light or something like that may be a place holder off but still it takes a great deal of energy just to accelerate .0000001 closer to speed of l
stkbonehead 3 years ago
now bonehead, yes that sums you up very well. firstly i dont try to understand or overstand,, i try to wholestand..not like you know what i mean.. who said that it is physically impossible to accelerate mass to the same speed as light? now answer the second question.. who then gave a mathmatical interpretation of occuring events at light speed? now what good is you telling me that the grass is greener on the other side if you are telling me also that i can never get to the other side?
circle559 3 years ago
What about the centrifugal rotation of a particle trapped inside of a black hole?
venomousbird 2 years ago
Time is our perception of existence, it's not real. Only humans and animals sense it, time its self is not TIME. It's our interpretation to reality is our own. We can't see ultraviolet light, that caould be a far off comparison, but we a biological entities. Space and matter is not. The faster a car goes, the shorter the distance it seems to travel, thus you have a visual effect of speed time and movement. Im high, i know it, but can't really explain. Just think of how your brain works. ( =
12GaugeLosAngeles 3 years ago
No you are.
d34dly4rr0w 3 years ago
hehehe.. i got their point already... sorry for being inconsistent.. light speed is more constant than the time^^ and i believe it so...
dalirakaayo 3 years ago
seriously.. i guess.. time is constant.. moving fast or slow.. and i think.. to prove this thing.. why not invent a spaceship that can a travel almost a speed of light, imagine a twins were on the experiment, one is on the earth and the other will be riding the spaceship.. then this spaceship goes to the other solar system.. after, he goes back, and lets see the result.. if the other twin looks younger. then, maybe the theory is right..
dalirakaayo 3 years ago
there are clocks on GPS satellites that need to be adjusted every once in a while because of special relativity. This theory has never been proved wrong, it has only been proved right till today. We dont need a spaceship going almost at the speed of light.
RamtinHaji 3 years ago
seriously?
frogger832 3 years ago
ramtinhaj.. i think the required adjustment of time on gps clocks may have something to do with the variation of gravitational intensity due to distances from the center of the earth,, not the velocity of the satelites..
circle559 3 years ago 2
I don't know about GPS, but I do know they did an experiment with planes flying around the world carrying cesium clocks. On those clocks less time had passed then those on earth.
phozk 3 years ago
i wonder if i'll stay younger if i keep on riding a train with a high speed..^^lol
i mean.. while im riding.. my time is slower than that of the standing still in their offices or classrooms... they grow faster and older...^^
dalirakaayo 3 years ago
Let me know when you find you a train that can travel close to the speed of light. ;-)
phozk 3 years ago
time is an illusion, just like death.
EasterBunnySucks 3 years ago
Yes it only proves that we can see fast movements in a stressed state. The device is move as fast as him so it is moving normally with the highten scenes he sees the numbers. For it to truly work the person on the ground would have to view the device or use a giant version of the device so the person falling can see it.
casenumber13 3 years ago
just say some 1 died.and his Time stoped?Im wondering how many Times are there!
solidsnake112 3 years ago
i think Time for here is only third dimension stop watch.
solidsnake112 3 years ago
Or is it (time) only for guidence?
solidsnake112 3 years ago
imagine we live a world without a time?
solidsnake112 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What is your point. What you are talking about doesn't matter to anyone one. It does nothing. Big Freakin deal, MORON!
smartestmanalive101 3 years ago
there two different times this is my theory came up with fiftten years ago now some professores now saying it amazing how noc=body want to give credit to the one who does the thinking and inventions shame on the asses of america
tomanyasses 3 years ago
yeah so what? its a useless invention nothing special
St0nedM0nkey 3 years ago
dimension is understood to be up and down, back and forward, left and right. Where does time extends to. If no object would move there would be no way to measure time. time is a man made mesurement or concept.
jespriella 3 years ago
yeah, most things einstein theorized are amazing and seem true, but i could never see what he was thinking here. I must be missing something. In which case, the dude in this video is responsible for that.
godsizedhole 3 years ago
I somewhat agree with you regarding movement jespriella. I think the same could be said of temperature, weight or the various vibrations of color.
All are human descriptions for our recognition of contrast in physical reality, right?
Have you seen the videos on the Electric Universe? They have an interesting theory that could change the way we view everything.
barrywilliamsmb 3 years ago
we have constructed the time with hours and minutes but we still can´t explaine it and Einstein tried to figure out what is that...
No body can tell what is exactly the time is...
szotyi6 3 years ago
yes they can and they did you are just to stupid to understand what it is. hours and minutes is how humans measure the day, with the earth's rotation. has nothing to do with time itself
rfunkk 3 years ago
hey i just proved nikola teslas one wire transmission principle ! a very important discovery against a closed system. that is one step closer to faster than light energy transfer through the earth. come check it out its nobel prize work for sure.
boxa888 3 years ago
But tell me what is time?
jespriella 3 years ago
Time is SUBJECTIVE unit used to measure dynamic concepts. Like a yardstick or ruler. "Dimensions" only apply to the shape of an object. Sure time is relative, but it has to be used CONSISTENTLY to be of any use. It would be like not using a word consistently. Blue can mean red to different people, but they're still just words that in reality have nothing to do with what colors are. You can't "travel" through time, its just a yardstick used for measurement. The only real thing is the present.
BanjoNaps 3 years ago
What is time?
It's what I waste on YouTube.
pabzum 3 years ago 7
great
bminternet43 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I can explain gravity with out drawing force. With out bending space.
I can explain old light redshifting with out expanding space. I can explain galaxies twirling with out dark matter.
I can told how atoms nucleus energy expanding all a time.
You cant told how space expanding. I think that space dont expanding at all. I think there is no extra dimension at all.
Old time people believe stardome and you believe extradimensions. Lets forget extra dimensions!
Etimespace 3 years ago
so, the idea is if you are moving you are always slowing down time, as opposed to stationary object.Does that mean that you can expand your years of living by moving every time as opposed to resting at place. If i am moving i am gonna live 100 yrs as opposed to 60 yrs?
nc01sadh 3 years ago
only when you compare your years to those that are moving slower, its relative to their movement.
mtheoryrules 3 years ago
mismo!!!
bowil06 3 years ago
shit... example : If you sit on a balet the time is moving slowly like evry second is an hour but if you are on a Metallica Concert than time goes fast like a minute if you want to live long then you have to do boring stuff so time will not move fast... this is just about that too open your eyes that time is never the same like other stuffs like : Pounds,miles, time is something wich is hard to explaine what is that ... you can´t really tell what the time is ...
szotyi6 3 years ago
This is wrong. You cannot "move faster through space" because you cannot move "with respect to space". Absolute motion does not exist. The clock that is "moving" has its own proper time too, it does not tick slower because it is "moving" (because in its own reference frame it is stationary). Also, yes, he got time dialation backwards.
nagromdnalrehtus 3 years ago
that is somewhat incorrect if einstein is to be believe, where the constant of motion would be the speed of light.
mtheoryrules 3 years ago
No, it's just contrary I think. They say "the faster you travel, the slower time passes." So for the car driver, the time will pass slower. e.g.: the car driver's clock says that the race lastet 1 hour. But the spactaters' clock runs faster than the driver's clock, so for the the spectaters the race would have lasted for example 1h and 5 minutes.
So the car driver will conclude that the race has lasted 5 minutes shorter.
This is what I can conclude of this.
wtseyen 3 years ago
The speeds that is required to make any significance in slowing down time is close to 3600 x 186,000 Miles per hour. Compared to this a race care is relatively motionless. It's been proven that digital watches brought into the Int'l Space station is slower when compared to those on earth. This is because they are taveling at much higher speeds. This is FACT.
pcwhizmail 3 years ago
that sanme idea can be explained with the difference in capacitance of earth timing systems and space systems, the capacitors charge differently and at different times proving error in an experiment like that, most timing systems have capacitors in them.tesla figured that out 100 yrs ago, he showed that capacit
boxa888 3 years ago
the more father away electronic systems are from earth, the more their capaitance systems change because the earth mass is not influencing its capacitance so there can be a big differnence in height differences and show why the clocks showed different times because all timing systems have capacitors in them especially digital!!! that can explain this experiment without jumping to relativity to explain it!
boxa888 3 years ago
It's an analogy. Time is actually different, even if we used a quantum clock, or took a lump of radioactive substance and used its rate of decay as a clock. Read up pls. Obviously you have not heard of this before.
xiangyik 3 years ago
yea you read up too lol. any substance has capacitance to its surrounds no matter what it is, that means that the clock no matter if there quantum/radioactive decay will respond differently from the surroundings. read up pls.
boxa888 3 years ago
Time is a yardstick or a ruler. You have to use it consistently for it to be useful.
BanjoNaps 3 years ago
dude how in the FUCK do you start talking about BUSH.
bemjamin 4 years ago
lmao
directorwvp2 3 years ago
would daytime last longer for smaller animales?
zoukalicious 4 years ago
no its still 24 hours, but because thy r smaller and hav quicker heart paces and quicker bodily functions then im guessin a day 'feels' longer to thm compared to what we kno a day as, if thts wot u ment
ryan1111111555555555 3 years ago
technically yes, but its such a minor time differnce, in fact, everyone has their own special time fame which differs from everyone else's by astronomical numbers in less that a nano second which makes sense because light hits everyones eyes at a different time thus a delay has been made, so what ever you see is not real time, real time is impossible to observe because of what i have just explained unless you froze time which is impossible alos
cowofwhat334 4 years ago
And they say "waiting takes long", so it also has to do with the fase of your brains. When people are borred everything seems to take longer as it actually does take.
frozenlyoko 4 years ago
yeah but thats a TOTALLY different subject to relativity
ryan1111111555555555 3 years ago
if this would be so
and we can state that
by traveling by spead of light
time slow down dramaticly?
how fast would we need to go to stop time
entierly? this woul be only depending by
the speed we can produce technicaly...
but if we can stop time by travil a certain spead... sepose we would double that speed,
would one go back in time?...
strange......
zoukalicious 4 years ago
To complete stop time, you would have to travel the speed of light 186,000 miles per second. However it's impossible to travel that fast. From the perspective of light a photon leaves it's origin and arives at it's destination at the exact same time.
sonicgentile 4 years ago
to go back in time you hav to curve space extremely for something to spin back into the past, as someone else has said here its impossible to go light speed, but you can manipulate light to bend space enough for this to occur
ryan1111111555555555 3 years ago
ryan1111111... you really need mental aid tard
gbPRAN 3 years ago
what is wrong with what i said?
ryan1111111555555555 3 years ago
I think it's cool
shatroghistro 3 years ago
fake. time is a made up thing to scare us all by the bush administration. bush did 911 too.
modelun12 4 years ago
Haha yeah okay....Though I agree with the 9/11 bit
sgj101 4 years ago
bush made up al quaeda. spread the truth. bush plans to dominate the world. there's no such thing as terrorists. long live europe. fuck usa and their fat ppl.
modelun12 4 years ago
you are fucking crazy. and how dare you accuse somebody of intentionally killing thousands of their own citizens.
and if al quaeda is not real, then who is blowing up all the trains in britain, or is it bush dressed like a muslim?
awol09 4 years ago
I think the whole idea of Bush being responsible for 911 is kinda nuts, but what do you mean "how dare you accuse somebody of intetionally killing thousands of their own citizens"? That's happened a LOT in history.
styxd9 3 years ago
It has emergeged that British Train bombs were indeed an inside job, These Fake Flag attrocitties were a joint operation by Mossad and Mi5
blujufirst 3 years ago
you are crazy. and stupid.
awol09 4 years ago