Added: 5 years ago
From: mooeypoo
Views: 16,554
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (197)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Those are massive! What do they weigh?

  • wow, my two favorite things all in one video...

  • This video would be more effective if it wasn't wrong. Pounds ARE a unit of force or weight, not just mass. 1 pound of mass IS one pound of weight on earth, a scale using pounds measures weight, which IS correct usage. Newtons are NOT the only correct units. They are the correct SI or metric units.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Great vid. Perfect mass, cute and SMART.

  • titties say what....

  • BOOOOOBIESSS!!!!!!!!!!!

  • We owuld like to listen to your face not your chest -.-^

  • G33|{

  • this clearly shows the effect of the female form on the male mind.

  • Bozhe moi! you are hot. Teach me baby.

  • she was sexi

  • I'm sorry, I couldn't focus on what you were saying.

  • How much would you weigh on the Moon ?

  • Which moon? On Luna I would weigh only eight pounds; however on Europa, a moon of Jupiter, I would weigh about only six pounds!

  • what?

  • wish my teacher could've done this instead.

  • LOL

  • I... Love... You.

  • Muy interesante y muy creativo el video

  • Brilliant... I watched the whole video!

  • Congratulations, you managed they imposible. You actually got me to pay atention and take in what was being said when the subject was physics. Unique lecture and very eloquently put.

  • that was one hot lecture

    =]

  • This is how to do a physics lecture and hold your audience's attention.

    We need more lady physics teachers.

    I thought you had a vague resemblance to the actress America Ferrara. I know you do now:D

  • I Surrender!

  • Yeahm, that doesn't mean we can't make a statement about it.

    and this lecture is about known subjects (relatively) so I didn't think it is THAT bad if people uhn... "spaced out" during it :P

  • So when you ride a centerfuge on earth it can reduce your weight depending on how fast it spins?

  • centerfuge applies different forces (Centrifugal Force) that acctually causes your body to continue the circular motion, as the force is applied towards the center (which is why you feel like you're "flying" outwards when you swerve in a car, or ride a centrifuge). Weight doesn't have to do with SPEED, it has to do with gravity.

  • In one system the kilopond is the kilogramforce & the hyl is unit mass (=9.8kg). That is the so-called "gravitational" system. A similar thing w/ foot-pound units. There is one system where the pound is unit mass & the poundal is unit force (=c.1/32 poundforce). In another the pound is unit force & the slug is unit mass (c. 32lb). This slug-pound system is also "gravitational". In short it's a total mess. & then there's those engineers who use kg or lb as both unit mass and unit force :O

  • that was half the point though :P tribute against censorship with a censored shirt! :P hehe

  • So if i found tomatoes on the moon how would i measure the mass!?

  • You would have to know what the gravity is, and calculate it with a scale. So you see the strength of the force of the "moon tomatoes" (by putting them on the scale) and since you know the gravity force, you calculate the mass from there. There are other ways but this could be the easiest one (if anyone has another idea, feel free to add).

  • so if i found some tomatoes on the moon how would i measure the mass!?

  • Lovely tits.

  • i would never want my boobs that big, because someone wants to cut my nipples so i can become part of the 13 ghost, do you think i want that type of gravity?

  • No offense but it shouldn't take you 9 minutes to explain the difference between weight and mass.

    Mass - A measurement of matter

    Weight - A force on a mass due to gravity

    That should save you some time.

  • lol wtf, i think ive just been sexually harassed over youtube ^^, maybe you should rethink your paedagogical concept if you want the viewer to remember anything later (other than tomatoes maybe)

  • OGTronn, shut up. Why the heck are you asking for her to show her brests to you? Get a life sicko...

  • as an american who was always taught feet and inches, i can visualize feet and inches easily, not so much with centimetres and....whats a metric foot called?

    anyway as far as the chest....im gay...so i didnt care...shes right about the science, so cool...and censorship does indeedy suck.....mabey ill post videos on youtube if i ever get a camcorder that works on a computer

  • your gay!?! WTF!! no one likes you! SO SUCK IT!!!!! oh wait nvm you actually might

  • your gay!?! wtf you retarded! no one likes you fag! haha you have sword fights with guys what a queer!!! SO SUCK IT!!! oh wait nevermind you probably would.

  • Hey, If you want to preach about censorship, show me your tits. Fatass.

  • Troll. Reported.

  • haha i like weight and mass...or do I? yeah I definately do!

  • for some reason I couldn't follow you...

    you distracted me ;-) Anyways somewhere I had read that the NASA on a mission in collaboration with ESA didnt convert the units in the metric system and the satellite or whatever was that they were doing was lost in space.

  • It was the mars rover, and it was ALMOST destroyed, yes. And it wasn't the first time, either. Hubble got a similar stroke of bad conversion.

    America should join the world and practice the metric system already. Geesh :P

  • More videos. Less shirt.

  • mmmm boobies! I don't get it, can hold the mass? Maybe that will help me understand!

  • very brave video. I have been thinking about the idea that mass and velocity cannot be exchanged, for example in (momentum) p=mv, the mass is never converted into velocity and vice versa, but mass and velocity I think are conserved. I'm not sure velocity is conserved because velocity can be created just from gravitational attraction. How about number of photons as a base unit of matter? How aobut spiral galaxies eventually evolving into globular galaxies?

  • Even in the beginning while you're still sitting down, you look really good in this video. I don't know if it's the hair or the collar or what.

  • I like the effect of gravity on your objects! Sorry, just had to say it ;) Very interesting clip.

  • THIS IS EDUCATION!!! =D

  • silly me i thought mass was the density of an object within specific boundaries , where weight was the force of gravity placed on that object ,

  • MMM this sounds way too simple STRESSED999, Mooo likes to go round and round in circles so she doesnt really explain anything.

  • i'm quit slow

  • I think you completely missed the point of the video. If she had said what you said, how long would her breasts have been on the screen? Use your mind.

  • i'll have another joint ,it will all seem like a bad dream

  • I like your 1 kg of tomatoes :) .. Funny, that I looked up that exact same question of mass/weight yesterday LOL

  • Excellent explanation. Also nice pair of newtons. Would like to see more.

  • m = E/C^2

  • You remind me of this great girlfriend I had in the 5th grade. She was a real science nerd, I loved her brain!

  • I figure that having boobs on the screen must have made the subject seem harder for non initiated to basic physics! :o) Good video though!

  • Absolutely, we should measure weight in Newtons. In 1921, Duncan McDougall preformed an experiment to detect the exit of the soul from the body by detecting the body's loss in weight before and after death. One patient's "delta-weight" was "43 grams."

    43g x 9.8 N/g = 421.4N x .225N/lb = 94lbs lost upon death! I highly doubt it.

  • Oops. I screwed up my units.

    .043kg x 9.8 N/kg = .4214N

    .4214N x .225N/lb = .094lbs lost upon death.

    Eh, I still think it's a bunch of crud, because follow up experiments never replicated McDougall's findings.

  • Yeah it was completely and utterly debunked. There is no such loss of neither mass nor weight after death.

    The source of the confusion, i think, lies in the fact that on EARTH, Newtons are 9.8, which is often rounded up to 10, which is just an "added zero", and seems to be less important.

    The problems would start (and do now, as we see with NASA's math problems :P ) when we go to other planets, or build stuff for space.

  • Actually, that was proven to be bogus :)

    Good point, though, nevertheless :)

  • Wow! What a mass :D

    Your sense of humor _must_ be appreciated! I wish i could hold 'em...

  • Nice Tomatoes jk  :)

  • They don't really cheat us when we buy tomatoes. Since we are all on Earth, 1 kg of mass will allways have weight of 9.8 N (in metric units) or 2.2 lb. (in english units).

  • I didn't say they cheat, I said we don't use the right terminology.

  • So are you saying that when we buy tomatoes at stores (mind you that I do recognize that, thats not the point you were making) they are in fact cheating us, in making us think that we are getting more if it weight more? Or am I missing a factor (variable)?

  • Pound is actually unit of force. English unit for mass is slug. :)

  • yes, I understand that (though, in english, it's a bit mixed up as well, only the other way around, 'pound' is used for mass sometimes) -- but i accept the correction, and added it a while ago to the comment tab at the right side :)

  • pound is actually measure of weight. The english unit for mass is slug :)

  • BB -ountiful  BB -eauty

    May you always be your own master of the Law of Levity.

  • GREATESS COMMENT EVAR!!!

  • Nice... T-shirt :)

    So basically; The same object will have a different weight on different planets, or in space. But the mass remins constant (Unless something happened to the object while being transported).

  • Precisely. Mass is the AMMOUNT of matter in an object. Weight is the result of the force activated on it (Gravitation).

    On earth, gravity is ALMOST 10 (9.8) so instead of saying "1 kilo mass and 10 newton weight" we just say 1 kilo is both mass and weight. People make it easy, but it doesnt mean it's true :)

  • I got about 1:47 into the video and suddenly I went deaf. i don't understand it. My vision was still working fine, but I suddenly couldn't hear a damn thing.

  • That's the most pleasant physics lesson I've ever had. You're brilliant. :)

  • ...i thought u were a dude (up until i saw this video) BARRRRF

  • My two favorite things, astronomy and breasts, I just had to subscribe!

  • This video was a serious exercise in multitasking.

  • Hahaha... I was tempted to show my crotch in a video response, but I figured after measuring my mass in kilos (or pounds), you might think I lived on the moon. When you said "Allow me to elaborate", I thought your top was coming off! lolol (nice job)

  • Brainy chicks are sexy. 5 stars...subscribed.

  • You are my new hero.

  • Ok I've watch until the end... What was the difference again?

  • NICE SHIRT

  • Good vid, just next time coulod just wear a bra? please. lol

    peace

  • OMG <3 Not for the breasts or nothing, but i've yet to see a woman who actually takes a liking to astronomy not only that, your freaking lecturing it to people keep em coming you got a subby:)

  • I must say your distinctions between mass and weight were a bright ray of sun on an otherwise cloudy day ;)

  • Yes! You should do every video like this. Except with less clothing. Dancing. Wildly.

  • I noticed that your other videos don't have as many views as this effort. You may want to crack out that t-shirt again ;-)

  • yeah I just noticed that too.. How wonderful, people ACTUALLY like physics!

    :P

  • Ever see Christians trying to use Einstein and time dilation to reconcile the disparity between 6000 years and 13.7 billion? Their astronomical pretzeling is even more entertaining than their efforts towards biology.

  • No more than string theory, or Hawkings imaginary time.

  • Firstly, it is WAY more because string theory and imaginary time make mathematical sense, using (they don't use the theory, they just say the word relativity because they don't know how to use the theory) relativity to claim to claim a young earth does NOT make mathematical sense, it's BACKWARDS, and wrong. Plus scientists don't base their lives on thse things and rationalize them later, they are searching for truth, not trying to justify the fantasies of their forefthers.

  • Ever see the atheist trying to use imaginary time to reconcile the discrepency of the obvious fact that the universe had a beginning with their preconceived prejudices? Their astronomical pretzeling is even more entertaining than their efforts toward dismissing CSI (Complex Specification Information) or Intelligent Design;-)

  • You said " No more than string theory, or Hawkings imaginary time." which is nonsense because those things work out mathematically, while the creationist use of relativity is backwards. So you avoided that and just repeated what I said. So I'll just say this, it's the scientists who are making progress, not the theologians. And there is no incentive to be an atheist, unless you count the lack of fear from imaginary threats.

  • Many things that have "worked out mathematically" laterare not acccepted as the way things are. Einstein belived in a steady state universe. A steady stste universe can be expalined mathmatically it does not make it true. My only point is that the evidence points to a beginning but science is frantically trying to avoid the obvious.

  • Einstein had to insert a cosmological constant to make his model steady and he called it the biggest bluner of his career. Your point was that creationism misuse of relativity was on par with modern theoretical physics. NOBODY asserts string theory as fact anyway, it's just a BRILLIANT mathematical possibility as opposed to a completely unreasonable, insensible, abandonment of logic like saying relativity reconciles a young earth with the evidence.

  • ...this made no sense. What?

  • Are you talking to me? I was talking about how some creationists use the malleability of time to reconcile 13 billion year old light with a 6000 year old universe. They claim when we see distant galaxies, we're looking into the future which is backwards. This guy kelark tried to compare that egregious misuse of the human mind with mathematical endeavors like string theory. After I fell out of my chair, I committed the cardinal sin, "thou shalt not discuss science with creationists".

  • Over the last 100 years "science" has claimed the universe to be 75,000 years old, 240 milion, 2.4 billion, 5 billion, 10, 12, 14 etecetra etcetera. I never said I wasw a creationist. I am only reacting to your certainty in the face of uncertainty

  • Bullshit, I made a simple comment that claiming the earth is young because of relativity was retarded and you show compare that special brand of idiocy with string theory. Now you appear to making what point? That because science actually LEARNS and refines itself that 6000 years is not a number beyond all reasonability?

  • I don't believe the 6000 years figure. However i did hear a briliant man Schroeder describe how using relativity that 6000 years and 13 billion could happen simultaneously. It was not stated as fact rahter it was a brilliant mathematical possibility as opposed to the completely unreasonable, insensible, abandomnet of logic like saying imaginary time reconciles a crated universe with an infinte one.

  • See what I mean, you're comparing creationism with Hawking. What a useless response, like your last few. Do you now completely back off your original assertion?

  • I think you miss point. Since when is using a theory(reletivity) to falsify or confirm another theory (6000 year universe) a misuse of science. I thought that was science. The only compariosion I am making are that both are making wild unsupported speculations based on very little demonstrable science. Hawking is a litlle more humble about his postulations than you are about his postulations.

  • "I think you miss point. Since when is using a theory(reletivity) to falsify or confirm another theory (6000 year universe) a misuse of science. I thought that was science." OMG, they don't UNDERSTAND the theory and they are MISusing the theory. They think it works BACKWARDS and OUT OF PROPORTION than it really does. You are so full of shit it's not funny. One is mathematical investigation, the other is clear example of someone not understanding what they are saying.

  • Falsify the claim rather than pretending to know something. If they are misusing it demonstrate it. You seem to like to avoid the issue, I don't know if you are dense or are afraid to face the facts. Whichever it is it is sad that your God is so weak. Relativity of simultaneity: two events that appear simultaneous to an observer A will not be simultaneous to an observer B if B is moving with respect to A. I suppose you have a problem with taht as well?

  • Time dilation — the time lapse between two events is not invariant from one observer to another, but is dependent on the relative speeds of the observers' reference frames (e.g., the twin paradox which concerns a twin who flies off in a spaceship travelling near the speed of light and returns to discover that his twin has aged much more).

  • "Falsify the claim rather than pretending to know something." You know what, I just heard a guy on youtube named VenomfangX say relativity reconciles it and I immediately thought "this guy has it backwards". For your benefit I looked up the official YEC position on it and I was blown away. The YEC claim is WAY crazier than I thought. It assumes the earth is in the center of the newlyy created universe resting at the bottom of a huge gravity well. LOL

  • This claim can be falsified in a number of ways. How many different ways do you want me to falsify this claim? All they did was say "gravity distorts time, lets pretend there's a gazillion times more gravity". If we sat in one of these silly gravity wells, distant galaxies would be BLUE shifted. Our sun is at least a second generation star, meaning entire stars would have had to have gone nova first, to account for all the heavy elements in the solar system. Want more?

  • Let me put it into simple terms you can understand. If someone believes the scriptures then it would be natural to try and determine if the observations in nature match the scripture. It is science to start with a hypothesis and try to confirm it or falsify it. Just because you have a preconception, that does not make the application of scientific methodolgy a "wrong misuse of science" it is science. Rather than dismiss them out of hand prove them wrong.

  • "If someone believes the scriptures then it would be natural to try and determine if the observations in nature match the scripture". Natural human behavior isn't always scientific. Do you believe the scriptures? Talking snakes, people living inside of whales, virgin births, resurrections? If one thinks these claims make sense, then evidence contradicting, universal gravity wells might not sound retarded. To bad cosmology almost (accept religious folk) universally rejects it as worthless.

  • "try and determine if the observations in nature match the scripture" But that's not even close to what they do. They don't check to see if they match, they reject anything that doesn't match and twist some select nonsense into neat little packages that predisposed religious folk will eat up. That's why they peddle their crap in red state public school boards and not in the free market of scientific scrutiny, where it fails miserably.

  • Who is the one rejecting? I personally have seen someone pronounced dead be resuscitated, virgin birth is clearly possible with in vitro fertilization, there have been modern instances of men being swallowed by sperm whales and surviving. I sure hope that not all scientists start out with your premise of

    "impossible"!

  • 1) That's not even close to the resurrection I was talking about.

    2) Nor is that the virgin birth.

    3) If you believe those "modern" whale stories then you're even more gullible then I thought. The guy's wife admitted it was a lie.

    So you do believe the magical nonsense in the bible as literal history? Do you back away from your earlier comparison of evidence contradicting, apologetic gravity wells and string theory?

  • No but they are possible.

  • oh how I love this claim.. yeah.. kelark.. how 'bout you stop believing the traitorous science.

    We'll see what THEOLOGY gives you in terms of *progress* if you do. Deal?

  • If Hawking turns out to wrong about lets say Imaginary Time would it be fair to call his theory idiotic?

    Another question would it be possible for an event lets say creation to be have a time a differnt duration based upon the location of those observing such an event?

  • "If Hawking turns out to wrong about lets say Imaginary Time would it be fair to call his theory idiotic?" No.

    "Another question would it be possible for an event lets say creation to be have a time a differnt duration based upon the location of those observing such an event?" Not nearly that different.

    "No but they are possible." Not through nature. Supernatural magic is required.

  • I love visual aids. What a perfect example of weight and mass.

  • Now this is the first thing you said that made any sense.

  • LOL

  • This has to be one of the strangest vids i've ever watched, I was listening to a lecture about mass and weight with giant tits in my face. If only science class was like this..

  • Specificity is so necessary and yet such a pain.

  • after watching this video the only thing i got outta it was "mooeypoo can fit a 10 word sentence across her chest" I'm not sure what the purpose of this was. Weather it was to educate or to distract with breast...I donno

  • Kind of ironic that the words on your shirt are actually censored in your protest against censorship...

    If anyone doesn't understand the difference between mass and weight, I wonder how they managed to pass 4th grade science. I weep for the state of education.

  • What'd she say?

  • She was talking?

  • I heard something about mass and weight at the beginning and about anangel13's removed video then it was just "*indiscernable* tomatoes.... *indiscernable*" It's probably youtube up to their censorship tricks, what an outrage.

  • Fuck, and all we've got in the fridge is SOY milk!

  • Nice tits.

  • hahahaha nice.. well done!

  • May I just say, thanks for the mammaries!

  • Hmmm, great vid. I think if you use a bascule for measuring, you'll measure mass. 5 Kg of tomatoes over here will be 5 Kg of tomatoes on the moon. The problem began when whe started measuring with springs

  • now i understand why they call you moo (;

  • lmao.  Me likes.

  • Mmm... mass... (droool...)

  • Mass is constant, regardless of where you are, but weight is just a measuring system. If you're on the moon, you weigh less, but your mass is the same. Very nice T-Shirt, by the way.

  • Thankyou :D Very nice Clarification.

  • i want privet lessons 101

  • Great video!! I have just one question: I was always taught that pounds were a unit of weight and slugs were the corresponding unit of mass. Have I been deceived?? :)

  • Okay, I am mainly talking about the metric system, but I will have to do more thorough research into it to answer about the American units.. I've seen conflicting sources, so I don't want to mislead you. I'll check it out. :)

  • The metric system is so much easier I just wish everyone would use it.

    Is there a way to measure mass directly or are you always required to use force? For example you can measure the force of attraction between two objects (one know mass, the other unknown) and work Newton's equations backwards but I want to know if there is way to do it directly.

  • You always need to deduce it from other variables if it's unknown. Simple harmonic motion is another good way of finding mass, where you'd just have to measure the period of oscillation.

  • Pounds are a unit of weight indeed! I say weight, they're a unit of any force, just like newtons. A good way of seeing this is to consider the units of pressure. It is still common to measure pressure in psi, or pounds per square inch (blatent imperialism), whereas it's metric counterpart is the pascal, or newton per square metre.

  • Killograms, pounds, etc, are, scientifically, measures of mass. The two are only the same on Earth, because mass is based on how much that object weighs on Earth gravity. Scientinically, newtons are used as a measure of weight (If I'm not mistaken, a Newton = the weight on an apple)

  • There must be something thing wrong with my connection I cant hear anymore talking after 1:40. ;)

  • I have never confused the two(weight verses mass), and no, that was not a Freudian slip. ;o) The video was nicely done!

    Katalyzt

  • talk nerdly to me

  • Well done!

  • mmmmm b(.v.)bs

  • This must be downloaded to every American high school science class.  But I get stuck on the conversion of tomatoes to honeydew melons.

  • Damn! Only nine minutes? That was too short! I didn't want it to end. Very informative! You have really sweet brains!

  • hey nice tomatoes

  • I paid attention through the entire lecture.  Funny that.

  • Odd, I kind of always knew this, but still always thought of grams and ounces measurements of weight.

    I own you a beer!

  • I didn't hear a word, but that was a great video!! Kidding. Experiment on censorship, got it!!

  • Awesome!

    I think censorship on youtube has reached ludicrous proportions. They're yanking videos of women with barefeet because the foot-fetish crowd was getting off on them. They yanked videos of women with hairy armpits (don't know what that was about). My video, "Why is Sex a Sin?" has been flagged, Gisbourne's video showing embarrassiing quotes from the Quran have been yanked.

    Is there any other vid site that is more open to free speech? Maybe free-thinkers should do a mass exodus?

  • Is there an alternative? LiveVideo seems cool, but the community is weak there. And not many other websites like that have video communities.

  • I don't know. It really pisses me off that youtube is caving into censorship. Why?!? I can see people threatening to leave over a video they abhor... but all they have to do is not click on it. Censorship limits everyone. Grrrr.

  • Nice, this is when the body and the brain team up, there you have it,smarter turned on males.

  • great stuff