Why does the planets "fall" into the curvature of space/time from the mass the sun, would that not imply that there's a force causing it to fall? If gravity is the curvature of space/time, what makes the planets have mass and press against the fabric of space/time?
@ryanduds I totally agree. I never understood the metaphor of the bending or contracting space with the planet circling, because there is assumed gravity already in the model. Space would have to be accelerating into the large mass in order to bring the planets together... unlike like the static trampoline's surface.
Orrr all objects are accelerating relatively larger.. lol
@tucense You are happy enough to walk, sail, drive or fly around the Earth without going in a straight line & falling off, though? Isn't that in itself a little suggestive of spatial curvature?
You cannot have two causes working against one another. ONE cause will be the PRIMARY cause and the initial stronger of the two [or more] effects. The effects cannot cause the original cause to do anything!
Ex. The moon is in the grasp of the cause, which is the gravity of the earth; because of earths various strengths of gravitational pull on the moon, the tides rise and fall. The moon is in effect from the earth and is suspended in eliptical orbit. The moon cannot become the cause of earth.
Present knowledge claims the universe is based on harmonic balanced Laws of Physics.
Theory: TIME AND SPACE CAN BE CURVED BY MASS What is meant by "CURVED" time and space? What physical attributes does mass have, to effect space & time in any way? What PHYSICAL ELEMENTS can accomplish these theorhetical actions?
2 Theory : The curveture of space causes mass to move?
How can mass be effected by space, since there are no sub-atomic particles or wave constituents, composing the space vacuum?
WHILE CURVING SPACE & TIME BY MASS THE CAUSE IS MASS.
HOW CAN THE MASS BE MOVE WHEN IT HAS NOT CAUSED THE CURVITURE OF SPACE PRIMARILY YET? HOW CAN HOW CAN SPACE AND TIME BE THE PRIMARY CAUSE ALSO? ISN'T THIS A CONTRADICTION THEORY WHEN CONSIDERING APPLIED CAUSES AND EFFECTS & EFFECTS AND CAUSES?
It appears that the explanation here lacks the fact that the entire universe is truly hurtling at tremendous speed along with all celestial bodies in fluctuating times & areas of space ; therefore it is innacurate to assume measurments of space and time in a constant reformation of this universe; as is insinuated in this video. Part one.
I guess everyone's hear the latest breakthrough as of a few days ago saying time travel may be possible at least at a subatomic level.
I wonder if something I've stumbled across could open new doors in scientific research. If you follow my link to see my first upload "Witness a Miracle" you'll see what I'm talking about. The first few moments after it comes into focus are key to watch, and it easier to see full screen. I swear this footage is genuine. p.s I'm not selling anything.
@Awshbuscus "The speed of light" and "the speed of light in a vacuum" is different. In a vacuum (in space, no air molecules) the speed of light is 3 million meters per second, but on earth it is significantly less than that.
Where can I find the data of the Italian scientists ?
@KILLERDOGZ1 Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I read it out of a newspaper, The Denver Post, but I'm sure you could search for it on Google or something. It was called the CERN experiment, and took place in Italy.
If you wish to see GOD particle, Higgs Boson see YOU TUBE VK SONAKIA.FIT-lFuture Imaging tool or Certainty tool technology developed which is GOD Particle in Human body.Based on data in biometric or biosensor of hands where FITtechnology has blue prints of future diasters like earthquake,nuclear radiation,tsunami,Dam burst ,Hurricane, KATRINA , 9/11 2001 WTC Tragedy, 26/11 2008 mumbai serial blast.scientist welcome to see and test FIT
i do like these videos as they help open your mind but i think the trampoline analogy is majorly overused when trying to explain this phenomenon! i find the explanation too redundant anyway as it is using gravity to try and explain gravity... this idea could be useful to explain why an orbiting electron would fall into a nucleus after dissipating its energy in the older models of particle physics perhaps
0:58 Why is the video trying to explain gravity with a model that already assumes gravity exists. It's showing nothing but a redirection the downward pull of already existing gravity to a horizontal pull due to the normal force of a simple ramp. The orbit is not caused by space contraction.
The contraction of space would have to be continuous and always contracting at an ever increasing rate in order to accelerate the two objects closer together. It really isn't a good model..
Theory of Relativity, thanks to Olinto De Pretto, and many others that Einstein built his theory from. All hail the mega genius, "the great" einstein. Nothing is as false as modern history.
@biped19 So Einstein should get no credit? No one else thought to put the pieces together. If 100 people each made a part of a car, but they never came into contact, should we give them all credit for making a car? No, we shouldn't. We give credit to whoever thinks "Hey, maybe I should put all these pieces together and make something useful" and builds a car. If everyone came up with their own ideas we would be nowhere. You have to build off of others ideas and incorporate your own.
@wasdare32 Especially with General relativity. That involved a conceptual leap well beyond Special Relativity. I remember an essay in which Martin Gardner discussed this & how others probably would have fit the pieces together for Special Relativity, but the idea that Inertia & Gravity were the same force was so crazy - Newton would've have thought it positively insane - that he felt some creativity beyond "mere" excellent physical intuition & the application of 19th C maths was involved.
But the ping pong ball rolls toward the bowling ball because of earth's gravitational pull underneath it, not because the ball on the trampoline is creating gravity. This theory isn't working for me.
I also want someone to explain this w/out using gravity. I suppose that if matter distorts space, then matter moves thru warped space "thinking" it's going straight but actually moves along the curve of space. Like bending a garden hose w/ water flowing in it, the water is just going thru it's warped space? The garden hose picture doesn't work tho because the heavier bits flowing in the hose go to the outside of curves. Matter moving in warped space behave uniformly, I guess.
@Houstronic well we have to realize that the image of the trampoline only goes out in two dimensions. But in reality it has to create this curve in at least three dimensions. So if we're looking back at the trampoline it appears as though the ping pong ball can only orbit Earth on one track. But if we're imagining our real universe then the ping pong ball could orbit around Earth on a plane that is oriented in many different directions. It's just a visual to help imagine curved space.
In the graph paper illustration, aren't the sun/planet/moon bending space the wrong way? In the beginning of the animation (0:38) it shows the grid condensing, but then it changes and shows the grid stretching out.
this is good but it doesnt explain the thing ive been trying to work out, instead of the moon being attracted to the bottom of the whole it is attracted to a singal point level with the rest of the grid, the centre of the earth why is this?
A gravitational force field is made up of 2 basic components. 1 being an excursive which i've named the X-gravitational field factor that repels other worlds and which help to establish an orbital corridor for neighboring worlds, and gravity being an incursive component coalesces matter towards a concentric point within the planet from whence it emanates.
Earth's X-gravitional field factor repels its moon with an incremental cumulative force of approximately 587,999,940 lbs. per sq. in.
But in 1905, A.Einstein conclude that the ether hasn't a correspondent in reality and constitute not a medium which let can serve as reference system. Thus Einstein renounced to the ether notion and absolute space and emits the two restricted relativity principles. By it content the second principle excludes the ether, impose as limit of bodies' movement - the light speed - and denatured completely the classic dynamics reality.
But in 1905, A.Einstein conclude that the ether hasn't a correspondent in reality and constitute not a medium which let can serve as reference system. Thus Einstein renounced to the ether notion and absolute space and emits the two restricted relativity principles. By it content the second principle excludes the ether, impose as limit of bodies' movement - the light speed - and denatured completely the classic dynamics reality.
The physicists Hendrik A.Lorentz admits existence of the ether, but emit the hypothesis that any body which it move in report with the ether, with a speed V, suffers a contarction, in the sense that the parallel dimension with the motion's direction it decrease, creating a subunitary factor and arranging formulas in this sense,H.A.Lorentz showed that once with the process of contraction it admits and a dilatation of the time, he alters in this sense the relation to Galilei.
The Michelson-Morley experiments(1881) with the purpose to put in evidence the Earth movement face of one immobile ether, for too be taken as a reference system, had forever the same result. Thus the experiments had showed: 1).-that the ether is complete training with the mass and the Earth's atmosphere; 2).- and that our conception about ether as reference system is not right.
Through the relativity theory to Einstein of over century, it hold with strenght -as a conspiracy a general activity of intellectual stultify of the planetary population. from relativity theory proceed the notion of: singularity, Big bang, black holes and holes of worm. From 1905 and till now in 2011, the disciples of the Einstein, preach with contumely as scientific elements of high class these theoretical confusions, these absurdities from which they had made a business.
The science has and history. In the Fundamental Principle of Democrit(470..380BC) it show:"From nothing nothing's born, nothing that exist can not be destroyed and any transformation consist from a reunion and separation...Out of atoms and ether. all rest is not otherwise than rationament and not exist...The spirit as well as the ether consist of a small and spherical atoms, very mobile, atoms that their movement form the phenomenon of life".
It popularize the fantastical theories and stantardized theories with which it terrorize the inhabitants the Earth, after what Einstein with relativity theory had blocked the science of the century XX. Sptephen Hawking and roger Penrose had demonstrated in 1967 that the black holes proceed from the relativity theory. How it can conceive and it can say that the heart of the one black hole is a gravitational singularity whose volume tend to zero and whose mass tend to infinite?
Einstein revolutionized the way we view the world and the universe. GPS would not be possible without Einstein's theory of relatively. Overrated? Hardly!
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.
Free energy technology exists!But Elite controllers don't want ppl to be free from the costs of energy,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,take part in the revolution!
@Sh0ckEM We are actually moving away from the sun at a rate of 15cm a year. This is not fully understood but is thought to be possibly due to either cosmic expansion or the sun losing mass and therefore its gravitational pull. There are also other alternative explanations but i don't really understand them.
So if mass causes the gravity, and that warps space, then since mass is condensed energy or a different phase of it, then it's energy that is causing the gravity.
I though it would be more complicated...that is really simple to understand......and really logical unlike the other theory for gravity...this one is mor logical!
pls everybody i have a question i will like somebody to answer for me . can somebody tell me the;
1 Reason why relative motion causes relativity(variation in the physical quantity e.g time,distance or frequency, as measured by different frames).
2 Quantum theory says we cannot measure two motion properties of an electron at same time. Does that mean that even an electron cannot have knowledge of two of its motion properties at same time?
why does it curve downward, why not upward therefor repeling objects instead of a pulling them. what makes up, up and down, down in void or empty space? this space warping stuff by theory of relativity can only be visualized with such animations. However, the whole concept is based on false assumptions that void or empty space can be warped or has direction. Another one of those proof by animations
@maydayfire The trampoline explanation is a 2 dimensional representation of 3D space - this is used because it is extremely difficult for people to imagine a 3D space 'curving'. There is no 'up' or 'down' in space. However, gravity is ALWAYS positive, never negative. Hence massive objects are always attracted, never repelled by each other. Gravity only exists where there is mass. If all the mass in the universe was removed there would be no gravity!
@CombatRocks I am not a two year old. I get what you said after the first sentence. I have yet to see a good explanation/demonstration of warping of space/gravity in 3-D, if any. the tampoline explanation is fallacious from the beginning, you can not explain the gravity of 3-D object with a 2-D model. either make the object 2-D and explain it with the 2-D trampoline or make the model 3-D and explain what happens with a 3-d object
@maydayfire The only proper way to describe space-time curvature is to use mathematics. However, you would need a degree in the subject to understand it properly. It is virtually impossible to describe it using language since our spoken.written language is insufficiently complex to describe what is happening accurately. Only maths can illuminate you sufficiently.
@CombatRocks I believe physics should be explained with physics. Explaining physics by Theoretical mathematics makes assumptions in which they never tell you about in such programs. by the way I have an MS in engineering and am not talking out of my arse.
@maydayfire Physics is applied maths. It is all maths. Without maths there is no physics. You cannot properly explain physics with physics - that's just nonsense! If you have an engineering degree then you should know that already.
@NWOBUMICHAEL That's the point - the maths behind relativity is not complex. It is 'elegant' and simple compared to what it describes. That's why relativity has stood the test of time. When the maths becomes complex then usually a theory falls.
idoits! we all know that "matter occupies space" that means the bigger the object the larger it occupies... the trampoline serves as a fabric of space and time not to confuse with the external factor which is gravity... energy is equal to mass that means if your falling head first, it's the same with throwing the earth( with someone if possible) directly to your dumb head.
Correct. The gravity isn't created by the empty space, but by matter itself (anything which has mass), this includes invisible matter which is just floating around in empty space as well, not just matter on planets/start/etc. If you could exhale some air from your lungs into space, that air would have mass and therefore exert a gravitational pull on you. Scientists still haven't come up with an adequate explanation as to WHY this works, but this is HOW it works, and has been proven.
At the creation of earth another planet crashed into earth. Loads of rocks where thrown into space as a result of this. Those rocks clumped together and formed the moon, which is still moving away of os because of the force from the collision. You can say the pingpong ball bounced off the bowling ball with enough force to move uphill through the curved space.
Youre wrong. The Lunar recession has nothing to do with how the Moon was created, but rather its the current reaction with the rotation of the Earth. Put simply the tidal forces between the Earth and Moon accelerate the Moon while slowing the Earths rotation rate.
The reason the moon is moving away at an inch a year is as follows. Its gravity produces a tidal bulge in the Earth and Because Earth rotates faster the moon orbits this bulge is ahead of the moon. As a result this bulge gives the moon a slight tug forward speeding it up in it orbit causing it to recede at about an inch a years, while slowing the Earths rotation a little in the process.
There is absolutely gravity in space. We are in space right now, and everything in space is affected by gravity, regardless of whether or not it's "on" a planet or in an atmosphere.
Huge problem with the trampoline analogy: it relies on the existence of gravity to explain it, and in doing so does not explain it at all. This is like saying, "gravity is kind of like gravity, and it works because gravity pulls things down toward the center, that's why we have gravity".
I still do not fully understand one aspect of this theory. Since large objects bend space time, that causes smaller objects (i.e. moons) to fall into this curvature, which is how gravity functions.
However, what is to stop a moon/planet from continually falling into this curvature?
In other words, why don't smaller bodies continually fall down the funnel shaped curvature of space and time, until it eventually collides with the larger mass?
This video describes "centripetal force" which is very well illustrated by the trampoline model (small object attracted to big object). The force that, in the scenario you mention, keeps a celestial body in a somewhat static motion is the counter to centripetal force. It's called centrifugal force and you can experience this type of force if you take a sharp curve with your car. You'll feel "pushed" in the opposite direction of the curve's destination. I hope I made a bit of sense at least!
so at some point the planett will crash into the sun right just like the ping pong ball. eventually it will run out of enough inertia to move and will crash.
excellent point thelphoneappreviews, brings another thought..
the trampoline example will work on earth with gravity, but would it work in space ?.... if you stuck a bowling ball on a tampoline in space it wouldnt do anything. But i suppose dark matter and space must work on a larger scale.
@SANHEDRIN666 yeah it annoys me how every general relativity animation depicts space time as a 2 dimensional plane. It's obviously not sufficient to actually explain general relativity.
you have to take into account all three dimensions, in which a trampoline would be a good model of only two of those dimensions. it would be hard to understand a model of all 3.
Look, physicians are too frightened to decide to build their theories either with pushing or pulling. To have a consistent theory one doesn't use both, but decids for one. They do the same philosophy when they go to the scale called electricity: one time they speak of resistance, and one of conductance. They think this is clever - but it truly ain't. That's also the reason for their "invention" of the dark matter and antiparticles...
its not stupid, there is alot of other factors not mentioned, as in the reason the moon doesnt fall into use is because its spinning same reason the earth doent fall into the earth. gravity in a sence is not real its just the name for the dipping around planets and stars.
@TheIphoneappreviews I thought that too.. and pondered about it for a good while :P But if space is curved, objects follow that curvature. If space is curved, the shortest distance between 2 segments becomes a curve also. It's difficult to wrap your mind around but that's what they mean.
@TheIphoneappreviews Exactly. That's a 2-dimensional metaphor of what happens in our 3-dimensional space. There is a 3-dimensional dip in that fabric that causes the ball to be pulled down, towards the bowling ball. So you could say that, in our universe, there is a 4-dimensional "dip" in the 3-dimensional fabric of space that causes planets to be pulled "down" towards the sun.
One big question remains: Did Einstein really had the brilliance to visualize and fully understand the rather illogical behavior of light, or, as the skeptics say, he only exploited the human inability to discern between inertial movement and steady state, thinking: "yes, it's very illogical, but you'll never prove it otherwise".
Einstein's whole work builds on his first claim that "the speed of light remains the same regardless of the velocity of the observer", throwing away the concept of aether that has been thought to fill the Universe for about 200 years since Newton. That sentence must be understood in order to get ahead on his later claims.
Einstein realized that there isn't any distinction between the 3 spatial coordinates and the 4th one, time. They are the same. Only WE are perceiving them separately and differently. So he felt a different geometry should be applied.
Yet still, when people hear about spacetime, they think of a warped lattice and wondering where time is implied in all this? People still regard it as a separate 3D+1 dimension.
satilites revolve around planets, planets around stars, stars are often binary so they revolve around each other (has the sun ever been binary? or is it still?), solar systems revolve withing galaxies which have a core, etc...
It makes me wonder if galaxies themselves have a similar elliptical pattern, and if there's something bigger than the observable universe, making it another cycle wagon.
@Skaterman3323 Earth isn't moving it's falling? Last I checked if you're falling you're moving. I get what you said but try wording it better next time.
@Skaterman3323 Earth isn't moving it's falling? Last I checked if you're falling you're moving. I understand what you're trying to say but try wording it better next time
The mass bends the space-time. I think I (hardly) get that. But I don't understand why that bending in space-time causes a force that pulls things towards the object..
@KayBeeEee1983 I still don't know why the curvature of spacetime translates in a gravity field or force. They don't explain it.. they just say it happens.
@UntakenNick the problem is they think they know why (it involves gravitons), but could easily be wrong and nobody wants to teach something like that considering gravitons havent yet been proved exist... i know i don't understand it, and for right now i think saying it just happens is easier...
@UntakenNick iYes...it's always presented as 2D when it's a 3D relationship. But I guess the force of gravity increases because of, or as represented by the increase in the angle of the dimple in time/space as you approach a planet or matter. And physics is a model that works not the total absolute truth as only god knows that.
The Earth's real gravitational pull is forcing the ping pong ball towards the bowling ball (the trampoline is only guiding it), not the trampoline. The only logical way to conduct that model would be to do so in outer space, where the Earth's gravity does not affect the experiment.
you seem to missunderstand something. when you introduce mass In space, or in an area free of gravitation, the space-time bends. its not the gravity of this newly introduced mass that bends the space-time, its the mass of this new mass that bends it. and in turn, this bending of space-time is the gravity of this new mass.
I'm not the only one here. In a more recent comment, someone said the same thing.
The reason the ping pong ball is moving towards the bowling ball is because of the downward pull of gravity. In the so-called "space-time fabric" of the universe, there is no gravity, despite there being a bend in the fabric.
Furthermore, I don't even believe that a "space-time fabric" even exists. How can pure empty space have any sort of structure at all? Only matter can have a structure.
ofcourse the "space-time fabric" dont actually exist. ist not as if you would go out in space and find fabric everywhere or something. its just happens to be an explanation that as of current date explains all questions about gravity. atleast in the macro scale.
on earth, the thing that makes the objects on the trampolin roll towards eachoter is the gravity under the trampoline.
in space things are attracted to eachoter by there gravitational pull.
but it isnt sufficient to say that masses are just attracted to eachoter. since heavy masses can bend light, which have no mass, something other than just this ordinary attraction between objects must be going on. hence the "bent fabric". it has the same "attraction" effect, and bends light.
I would like to know are dreams another dimension? Sometimes in my sleep I feel like i'm on some adventrue for hours and hours, but when I wake up I realize I've only been sleeping for about 20 minutes. If dreams are another dimension, It could be used to explain the relativaty theory. Makes sense?
Why the planets don't float off into space and still remain in orbit around the sun is the gravitational pull and rotation of the planets around the sun.
See if a planet close to the sun would be standing still and not move it would eventually move closer and closer to the sun.
it is the constant speed of the planet wanting to leave the "orbit" and the gravitational pull of the mass/density of the sun that keep it in orbit an equilibrium of forces.
placing the bowling ball on the trampoline causes the curvature of it. an interesting question to ask: what causes the curvature of the trampoline? a pressing force due to the mass of the object? if it's true it'll be GRAVITY causing it. it raises another problem to be solved then...
The trampoline analogy simply explains that the ball's surrounding is causing movement NOT a force within the balls. The Earth doesn't have a magnet in it that makes it sticky. It's mass curves space which pushes us and the Earth together. The trampoline is just an example.
@regca3 I've always found the trampoline example a bit misleading. When the trampoline is curved there is actually a force acting on the ball around the big one that curves it: Gravity (the same gravity that keeps the trampoline stood still). Without gravity, the smaller ball won't orbit or go away from the big ball: It shouldn't move at all.
@nesyyz Ah, someone else who, like me, has misgivings about the trampoline analogy of gravity.
What we need is an alternative analogy which is equally easy to visualise but doesn't depend on the imposition of any outside forces (gravity in this case). Ideas anyone?
Yes your right.. If the mass is the cause of curving of the space of time.. Therefore, there's another gravity which pulls the sun.. My question is "Where is that gravity coming from?"
will the smaller ball still fly of into space if the warping or depression on the space time fabric is only slowly enough returned back to whatever its shape was before the existence of the sun? this is only for the sake of discussion so please do not get too excited.
wait, if the example of the trampoline is true, then why aren't we moving closer to the sun? how is it that we have stayed in the same distance all this time?
friction. on a trampoline theres friction between matter, in space the cellestial bodies are moving freely through space (or darkmatter). no friction exists and the inertia carries them for an inperceivable amount of time.
because when you're in orbit, you don't get closer to the object that's inflicting gravity on you. When you are moving in a circle, you're always accelerating towards the center of the circle. That acceleration causes the direction of your velocity to constantly change, which is why we orbit around the sun in an ellipse.
Our Earth is basically moving / orbiting in a perfect vacuum as far as I know. Einstein's Gen Rel says the only thing that could slow it down is radiation of gravitational waves. We aren't heavy enough to generate those, so we keep on moving - just because we already are moving.
whats keeping the sun from falling to the center of the milky way? who knows, it quite logical that we are. "strong" science has only been around for a few hundred years. these things take trillions of years; or one second, depending on your point of observation.
I think this is a fake analogy. The only reason the balls are moving together in the depicted scene is because gravity (in the way we experience it daily) is pulling down and the "trampolene" then pushes the balls together. You can't implicitly *use* gravity to explain gravity. It's like saying "gravity exists because of gravity" It isn't really saying anything at all. Instead they should show how warping space time creates "straight" lines in different reference points.
Well..either you didnt pay atention, or your an idiot. id dosent say gravity pulls them together. it says TIME pulls them together. time and movement is what keeps the ping pong ball orbiting the bowling ball. (in theory, anyway)
Whoops, didn't see this comment before I posted mine. What I meant to say was, "Thank you. I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices this and has always thought this a flawed analogy from the start."
Why does the planets "fall" into the curvature of space/time from the mass the sun, would that not imply that there's a force causing it to fall? If gravity is the curvature of space/time, what makes the planets have mass and press against the fabric of space/time?
ryanduds 1 month ago
@ryanduds I totally agree. I never understood the metaphor of the bending or contracting space with the planet circling, because there is assumed gravity already in the model. Space would have to be accelerating into the large mass in order to bring the planets together... unlike like the static trampoline's surface.
Orrr all objects are accelerating relatively larger.. lol
tucense 1 month ago
@tucense You are happy enough to walk, sail, drive or fly around the Earth without going in a straight line & falling off, though? Isn't that in itself a little suggestive of spatial curvature?
MrIamSamIam2 1 week ago
@MrIamSamIam2 Not to mention Gravity! With all respect, of course.
MrIamSamIam2 1 week ago
You cannot have two causes working against one another. ONE cause will be the PRIMARY cause and the initial stronger of the two [or more] effects. The effects cannot cause the original cause to do anything!
Ex. The moon is in the grasp of the cause, which is the gravity of the earth; because of earths various strengths of gravitational pull on the moon, the tides rise and fall. The moon is in effect from the earth and is suspended in eliptical orbit. The moon cannot become the cause of earth.
EGMAG 2 months ago
Present knowledge claims the universe is based on harmonic balanced Laws of Physics.
Theory: TIME AND SPACE CAN BE CURVED BY MASS What is meant by "CURVED" time and space? What physical attributes does mass have, to effect space & time in any way? What PHYSICAL ELEMENTS can accomplish these theorhetical actions?
2 Theory : The curveture of space causes mass to move?
How can mass be effected by space, since there are no sub-atomic particles or wave constituents, composing the space vacuum?
EGMAG 2 months ago
CAN SPACE AND TIME BE CURVED BY MASS?
CAN THE CURVATURE OF SPACE CAUSE MASS TO MOVE?
DON'T THESE TWO IDEAS NEUTRALIZE ONE ANOTHER?
WHILE CURVING SPACE & TIME BY MASS THE CAUSE IS MASS.
HOW CAN THE MASS BE MOVE WHEN IT HAS NOT CAUSED THE CURVITURE OF SPACE PRIMARILY YET? HOW CAN HOW CAN SPACE AND TIME BE THE PRIMARY CAUSE ALSO? ISN'T THIS A CONTRADICTION THEORY WHEN CONSIDERING APPLIED CAUSES AND EFFECTS & EFFECTS AND CAUSES?
EGMAG 2 months ago
It appears that the explanation here lacks the fact that the entire universe is truly hurtling at tremendous speed along with all celestial bodies in fluctuating times & areas of space ; therefore it is innacurate to assume measurments of space and time in a constant reformation of this universe; as is insinuated in this video. Part one.
EGMAG 2 months ago
These videos don't explain shit. A trampoline isn't the universe.
eggsstink 3 months ago in playlist Albert Einstein / Michio Kaku Quotes
this isnt even the theory of relitivity
figisligit 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I guess everyone's hear the latest breakthrough as of a few days ago saying time travel may be possible at least at a subatomic level.
I wonder if something I've stumbled across could open new doors in scientific research. If you follow my link to see my first upload "Witness a Miracle" you'll see what I'm talking about. The first few moments after it comes into focus are key to watch, and it easier to see full screen. I swear this footage is genuine. p.s I'm not selling anything.
veracityfilms 4 months ago
e=mc2 was proven wrong just a little bit ago by some Italian scientists. They passed the speed of light by a couple hundred nano seconds.
Awshbuscus 4 months ago
@Awshbuscus lies
tomyferland1234 4 months ago
@Awshbuscus
They proved nothing!
cfg7777 4 months ago
@Awshbuscus "The speed of light" and "the speed of light in a vacuum" is different. In a vacuum (in space, no air molecules) the speed of light is 3 million meters per second, but on earth it is significantly less than that.
Where can I find the data of the Italian scientists ?
KILLERDOGZ1 3 months ago
@KILLERDOGZ1 Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I read it out of a newspaper, The Denver Post, but I'm sure you could search for it on Google or something. It was called the CERN experiment, and took place in Italy.
Awshbuscus 3 months ago
@Awshbuscus -_- Check back up on that. False alarm.
TheDiplomaticScout 3 months ago
@Awshbuscus ......that italian scientist was a big fucker......he don't know antthing...madhar chod tha woo sala
TheSanni007 2 months ago
@Awshbuscus that.....that has nothing to do with the speed of light.....
e=mc2 explaines that mass and energy are interchangable.
and the correct formula is E2=m2c4+p2c2
you have to account for momentum ;)
killeroftheshadows96 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you wish to see GOD particle, Higgs Boson see YOU TUBE VK SONAKIA.FIT-lFuture Imaging tool or Certainty tool technology developed which is GOD Particle in Human body.Based on data in biometric or biosensor of hands where FITtechnology has blue prints of future diasters like earthquake,nuclear radiation,tsunami,Dam burst ,Hurricane, KATRINA , 9/11 2001 WTC Tragedy, 26/11 2008 mumbai serial blast.scientist welcome to see and test FIT
vksonakia@yahoo.co.in
unified field scientist
India
vksonakia 5 months ago
The trampoline analogy is retarded eventually that model moon will stop orbiting around the earth on the trampoline and crash right into the h
that earth model!
canuckman87 5 months ago
i do like these videos as they help open your mind but i think the trampoline analogy is majorly overused when trying to explain this phenomenon! i find the explanation too redundant anyway as it is using gravity to try and explain gravity... this idea could be useful to explain why an orbiting electron would fall into a nucleus after dissipating its energy in the older models of particle physics perhaps
truantz91 4 months ago
@canuckman87 The trampolne analogy is not "retarded", it is given to help explain how distortions in spacetime cause orbit.
There is a negligible ammount of friction in space. That is why orbiting bodies don't lose their inertia.
BlueSquareMusic 4 months ago
0:58 Why is the video trying to explain gravity with a model that already assumes gravity exists. It's showing nothing but a redirection the downward pull of already existing gravity to a horizontal pull due to the normal force of a simple ramp. The orbit is not caused by space contraction.
The contraction of space would have to be continuous and always contracting at an ever increasing rate in order to accelerate the two objects closer together. It really isn't a good model..
tucense 1 month ago
/watch?v=Qg4nWT3FYJI
MrSharan1997 7 months ago
Theory of Relativity, thanks to Olinto De Pretto, and many others that Einstein built his theory from. All hail the mega genius, "the great" einstein. Nothing is as false as modern history.
biped19 8 months ago
@biped19 So Einstein should get no credit? No one else thought to put the pieces together. If 100 people each made a part of a car, but they never came into contact, should we give them all credit for making a car? No, we shouldn't. We give credit to whoever thinks "Hey, maybe I should put all these pieces together and make something useful" and builds a car. If everyone came up with their own ideas we would be nowhere. You have to build off of others ideas and incorporate your own.
wasdare32 7 months ago 17
@wasdare32 Especially with General relativity. That involved a conceptual leap well beyond Special Relativity. I remember an essay in which Martin Gardner discussed this & how others probably would have fit the pieces together for Special Relativity, but the idea that Inertia & Gravity were the same force was so crazy - Newton would've have thought it positively insane - that he felt some creativity beyond "mere" excellent physical intuition & the application of 19th C maths was involved.
MrIamSamIam2 1 week ago
But the ping pong ball rolls toward the bowling ball because of earth's gravitational pull underneath it, not because the ball on the trampoline is creating gravity. This theory isn't working for me.
Houstronic 8 months ago 2
@Houstronic
I also want someone to explain this w/out using gravity. I suppose that if matter distorts space, then matter moves thru warped space "thinking" it's going straight but actually moves along the curve of space. Like bending a garden hose w/ water flowing in it, the water is just going thru it's warped space? The garden hose picture doesn't work tho because the heavier bits flowing in the hose go to the outside of curves. Matter moving in warped space behave uniformly, I guess.
deezynar 7 months ago
@Houstronic You're right
GeorgeDaPunk 6 months ago
@Houstronic well we have to realize that the image of the trampoline only goes out in two dimensions. But in reality it has to create this curve in at least three dimensions. So if we're looking back at the trampoline it appears as though the ping pong ball can only orbit Earth on one track. But if we're imagining our real universe then the ping pong ball could orbit around Earth on a plane that is oriented in many different directions. It's just a visual to help imagine curved space.
ntm112294 6 months ago
Pink Floyd! ;P
namelsess93 10 months ago 13
@namelsess93 ANDDDD The Beatles
guzylad5 5 months ago
In the graph paper illustration, aren't the sun/planet/moon bending space the wrong way? In the beginning of the animation (0:38) it shows the grid condensing, but then it changes and shows the grid stretching out.
KayBeeEee1983 11 months ago
this is good but it doesnt explain the thing ive been trying to work out, instead of the moon being attracted to the bottom of the whole it is attracted to a singal point level with the rest of the grid, the centre of the earth why is this?
escottproductions 11 months ago
A gravitational force field is made up of 2 basic components. 1 being an excursive which i've named the X-gravitational field factor that repels other worlds and which help to establish an orbital corridor for neighboring worlds, and gravity being an incursive component coalesces matter towards a concentric point within the planet from whence it emanates.
Earth's X-gravitional field factor repels its moon with an incremental cumulative force of approximately 587,999,940 lbs. per sq. in.
jqs1943 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
• SandustanBrasov
But in 1905, A.Einstein conclude that the ether hasn't a correspondent in reality and constitute not a medium which let can serve as reference system. Thus Einstein renounced to the ether notion and absolute space and emits the two restricted relativity principles. By it content the second principle excludes the ether, impose as limit of bodies' movement - the light speed - and denatured completely the classic dynamics reality.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
• SandustanBrasov
But in 1905, A.Einstein conclude that the ether hasn't a correspondent in reality and constitute not a medium which let can serve as reference system. Thus Einstein renounced to the ether notion and absolute space and emits the two restricted relativity principles. By it content the second principle excludes the ether, impose as limit of bodies' movement - the light speed - and denatured completely the classic dynamics reality.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
The physicists Hendrik A.Lorentz admits existence of the ether, but emit the hypothesis that any body which it move in report with the ether, with a speed V, suffers a contarction, in the sense that the parallel dimension with the motion's direction it decrease, creating a subunitary factor and arranging formulas in this sense,H.A.Lorentz showed that once with the process of contraction it admits and a dilatation of the time, he alters in this sense the relation to Galilei.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
The Michelson-Morley experiments(1881) with the purpose to put in evidence the Earth movement face of one immobile ether, for too be taken as a reference system, had forever the same result. Thus the experiments had showed: 1).-that the ether is complete training with the mass and the Earth's atmosphere; 2).- and that our conception about ether as reference system is not right.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
Through the relativity theory to Einstein of over century, it hold with strenght -as a conspiracy a general activity of intellectual stultify of the planetary population. from relativity theory proceed the notion of: singularity, Big bang, black holes and holes of worm. From 1905 and till now in 2011, the disciples of the Einstein, preach with contumely as scientific elements of high class these theoretical confusions, these absurdities from which they had made a business.
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
The science has and history. In the Fundamental Principle of Democrit(470..380BC) it show:"From nothing nothing's born, nothing that exist can not be destroyed and any transformation consist from a reunion and separation...Out of atoms and ether. all rest is not otherwise than rationament and not exist...The spirit as well as the ether consist of a small and spherical atoms, very mobile, atoms that their movement form the phenomenon of life".
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
• SandustanBrasov
It popularize the fantastical theories and stantardized theories with which it terrorize the inhabitants the Earth, after what Einstein with relativity theory had blocked the science of the century XX. Sptephen Hawking and roger Penrose had demonstrated in 1967 that the black holes proceed from the relativity theory. How it can conceive and it can say that the heart of the one black hole is a gravitational singularity whose volume tend to zero and whose mass tend to infinite?
sandustanBrasov 11 months ago
Einstein revolutionized the way we view the world and the universe. GPS would not be possible without Einstein's theory of relatively. Overrated? Hardly!
Theobviouswilsuffice 1 year ago
Nothing special,
einstein is overrated.
USFullOfLies 1 year ago
But if the trampoline analogy of gravity was true, we would float right? Space is actually 3-dimensional.
MyVideoHubOnDell 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
Iv been researching this for about 4 days now, and it seems like the planets would eventually roll into the sun.
Xachyy 1 year ago
@Xachyy No, that's because they still have enough momentum.
MyVideoHubOnDell 1 year ago
@MyVideoHubOnDell Enough momentum to circle around forever?
Xachyy 1 year ago
@Xachyy lmao, it does according to the trampoline demonstration.
DriftXperience27 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Free energy technology exists!But Elite controllers don't want ppl to be free from the costs of energy,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,take part in the revolution!
checksummedchest 1 year ago
Omgosh im getting as headace just watching -.-
dubbeltid 1 year ago
So tell me when light approaches a large star is it actaully getting to the the star faster because of the bending of space?
KingWing777 1 year ago
wait so r we going to slam with the sun 1day?
Sh0ckEM 1 year ago
@Sh0ckEM We are actually moving away from the sun at a rate of 15cm a year. This is not fully understood but is thought to be possibly due to either cosmic expansion or the sun losing mass and therefore its gravitational pull. There are also other alternative explanations but i don't really understand them.
ashwoods21 1 year ago
@Sh0ckEM very very long time....... probably human civilisation has ended?
SakeBottle 1 year ago
So if mass causes the gravity, and that warps space, then since mass is condensed energy or a different phase of it, then it's energy that is causing the gravity.
trailkeeper 1 year ago
I though it would be more complicated...that is really simple to understand......and really logical unlike the other theory for gravity...this one is mor logical!
CrownChanel 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ithme1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ithme1 1 year ago
ithme1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
pls everybody i have a question i will like somebody to answer for me . can somebody tell me the;
1 Reason why relative motion causes relativity(variation in the physical quantity e.g time,distance or frequency, as measured by different frames).
2 Quantum theory says we cannot measure two motion properties of an electron at same time. Does that mean that even an electron cannot have knowledge of two of its motion properties at same time?
NWOBUMICHAEL 1 year ago
lol, i learned stuff! : D
ThuLarryR 1 year ago
It does not make sence if this is true wouldent the moon eventually fall out of orbit??
Tech101Tv 1 year ago
@Tech101Tv no
jannikmt 1 year ago
why does it curve downward, why not upward therefor repeling objects instead of a pulling them. what makes up, up and down, down in void or empty space? this space warping stuff by theory of relativity can only be visualized with such animations. However, the whole concept is based on false assumptions that void or empty space can be warped or has direction. Another one of those proof by animations
maydayfire 1 year ago
@maydayfire The trampoline explanation is a 2 dimensional representation of 3D space - this is used because it is extremely difficult for people to imagine a 3D space 'curving'. There is no 'up' or 'down' in space. However, gravity is ALWAYS positive, never negative. Hence massive objects are always attracted, never repelled by each other. Gravity only exists where there is mass. If all the mass in the universe was removed there would be no gravity!
CombatRocks 1 year ago
@CombatRocks I am not a two year old. I get what you said after the first sentence. I have yet to see a good explanation/demonstration of warping of space/gravity in 3-D, if any. the tampoline explanation is fallacious from the beginning, you can not explain the gravity of 3-D object with a 2-D model. either make the object 2-D and explain it with the 2-D trampoline or make the model 3-D and explain what happens with a 3-d object
maydayfire 1 year ago
@maydayfire The only proper way to describe space-time curvature is to use mathematics. However, you would need a degree in the subject to understand it properly. It is virtually impossible to describe it using language since our spoken.written language is insufficiently complex to describe what is happening accurately. Only maths can illuminate you sufficiently.
CombatRocks 1 year ago
@CombatRocks I believe physics should be explained with physics. Explaining physics by Theoretical mathematics makes assumptions in which they never tell you about in such programs. by the way I have an MS in engineering and am not talking out of my arse.
maydayfire 1 year ago
@maydayfire Physics is applied maths. It is all maths. Without maths there is no physics. You cannot properly explain physics with physics - that's just nonsense! If you have an engineering degree then you should know that already.
CombatRocks 1 year ago
@maydayfire
"WHEN A THEORY STARTS SURVIVING AT THE EXPENSE OF VERY COMPLEX MATHEMATICS, I START SUSPECTING IT'S ACCURACY". O.M.NWOBU
NWOBUMICHAEL 1 year ago
@NWOBUMICHAEL That's the point - the maths behind relativity is not complex. It is 'elegant' and simple compared to what it describes. That's why relativity has stood the test of time. When the maths becomes complex then usually a theory falls.
CombatRocks 1 year ago
idoits! we all know that "matter occupies space" that means the bigger the object the larger it occupies... the trampoline serves as a fabric of space and time not to confuse with the external factor which is gravity... energy is equal to mass that means if your falling head first, it's the same with throwing the earth( with someone if possible) directly to your dumb head.
ralecto 1 year ago
I didnt waste my time :)
TheNataliaRR 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The trampoline represents gravity. I think he means the trampoline pushes the ball in, the same way gravity pulls in a planet.
kickthedonkey01 1 year ago
The trampoline represents gravity. I think he means the trampoline pushes the ball in, the same way gravity pulls in a planet.
kickthedonkey01 1 year ago
so that means that space is like a trampoline and its flat?
yyyy2999 1 year ago
Space is flat if there is no mass around, but any mass even a bowling ball, it curves space, similar to the trampoline here.
chuckpcr 1 year ago
Correct. The gravity isn't created by the empty space, but by matter itself (anything which has mass), this includes invisible matter which is just floating around in empty space as well, not just matter on planets/start/etc. If you could exhale some air from your lungs into space, that air would have mass and therefore exert a gravitational pull on you. Scientists still haven't come up with an adequate explanation as to WHY this works, but this is HOW it works, and has been proven.
AutoPsychotic 1 year ago
But this curvature in space fabric doesn't explain to me anyhow that the moon is moving away 1inch a year is it?
liam4754 1 year ago
At the creation of earth another planet crashed into earth. Loads of rocks where thrown into space as a result of this. Those rocks clumped together and formed the moon, which is still moving away of os because of the force from the collision. You can say the pingpong ball bounced off the bowling ball with enough force to move uphill through the curved space.
paulmag91 1 year ago
Youre wrong. The Lunar recession has nothing to do with how the Moon was created, but rather its the current reaction with the rotation of the Earth. Put simply the tidal forces between the Earth and Moon accelerate the Moon while slowing the Earths rotation rate.
chuckpcr 1 year ago
The reason the moon is moving away at an inch a year is as follows. Its gravity produces a tidal bulge in the Earth and Because Earth rotates faster the moon orbits this bulge is ahead of the moon. As a result this bulge gives the moon a slight tug forward speeding it up in it orbit causing it to recede at about an inch a years, while slowing the Earths rotation a little in the process.
I hope this helps.
chuckpcr 1 year ago
There is absolutely gravity in space. We are in space right now, and everything in space is affected by gravity, regardless of whether or not it's "on" a planet or in an atmosphere.
AutoPsychotic 1 year ago
Huge problem with the trampoline analogy: it relies on the existence of gravity to explain it, and in doing so does not explain it at all. This is like saying, "gravity is kind of like gravity, and it works because gravity pulls things down toward the center, that's why we have gravity".
AutoPsychotic 1 year ago
what changes when the clock moves is distance, thats why it takes more time but the light moves the same speed
markwasthere 2 years ago
I still do not fully understand one aspect of this theory. Since large objects bend space time, that causes smaller objects (i.e. moons) to fall into this curvature, which is how gravity functions.
However, what is to stop a moon/planet from continually falling into this curvature?
In other words, why don't smaller bodies continually fall down the funnel shaped curvature of space and time, until it eventually collides with the larger mass?
rhcp4565 2 years ago
Angular momentum.
The same thing which stops planets falling down a Newtonian gravitational potential well.
TheCrazyCello 2 years ago
distance.
ilbi00 2 years ago
This video describes "centripetal force" which is very well illustrated by the trampoline model (small object attracted to big object). The force that, in the scenario you mention, keeps a celestial body in a somewhat static motion is the counter to centripetal force. It's called centrifugal force and you can experience this type of force if you take a sharp curve with your car. You'll feel "pushed" in the opposite direction of the curve's destination. I hope I made a bit of sense at least!
noterra 2 years ago
this is a brillian simulation!....Einstein would have been proud ;)!.
hamoan66boi 2 years ago
so at some point the planett will crash into the sun right just like the ping pong ball. eventually it will run out of enough inertia to move and will crash.
bushgbh 2 years ago
i think the "web" covers the planets completely, instead of being just in the bottom.
blackzeppelion 2 years ago
Einstein theory is true, but it is only geometrical theory
We know nothing about the mass
Simple question :
Where was the mass, which curved the space, came from ?
In other words, the GRT is only a small and not finished
part of the knowledge in the Physics.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
socratus1 2 years ago
excellent point thelphoneappreviews, brings another thought..
the trampoline example will work on earth with gravity, but would it work in space ?.... if you stuck a bowling ball on a tampoline in space it wouldnt do anything. But i suppose dark matter and space must work on a larger scale.
SANHEDRIN666 2 years ago
@SANHEDRIN666 yeah it annoys me how every general relativity animation depicts space time as a 2 dimensional plane. It's obviously not sufficient to actually explain general relativity.
drongovids 2 years ago
the bending of space time pushes it towards the larger object that causes the bending
Skaterman3323 2 years ago
this is stupid... the trampoline example: it uses gravity to pull the ball in. the ball isnt getting pushed in by the trampoline?????
TheIphoneappreviews 2 years ago
you have to take into account all three dimensions, in which a trampoline would be a good model of only two of those dimensions. it would be hard to understand a model of all 3.
wafflecopter08 2 years ago
exactly what i was thinking
RudyChickenz 2 years ago
Look, physicians are too frightened to decide to build their theories either with pushing or pulling. To have a consistent theory one doesn't use both, but decids for one. They do the same philosophy when they go to the scale called electricity: one time they speak of resistance, and one of conductance. They think this is clever - but it truly ain't. That's also the reason for their "invention" of the dark matter and antiparticles...
cururox 2 years ago
lol i think you mean physicists
RudyChickenz 2 years ago
its not stupid, there is alot of other factors not mentioned, as in the reason the moon doesnt fall into use is because its spinning same reason the earth doent fall into the earth. gravity in a sence is not real its just the name for the dipping around planets and stars.
BabyFartMcGeezax420 2 years ago
@TheIphoneappreviews I thought that too.. and pondered about it for a good while :P But if space is curved, objects follow that curvature. If space is curved, the shortest distance between 2 segments becomes a curve also. It's difficult to wrap your mind around but that's what they mean.
VahnsGrl244 1 year ago
@TheIphoneappreviews Exactly. That's a 2-dimensional metaphor of what happens in our 3-dimensional space. There is a 3-dimensional dip in that fabric that causes the ball to be pulled down, towards the bowling ball. So you could say that, in our universe, there is a 4-dimensional "dip" in the 3-dimensional fabric of space that causes planets to be pulled "down" towards the sun.
sniperGasMask 1 year ago
it only goes down because of gravity in the explination. flawed example.
Skaterman3323 2 years ago
In the later case obviously, Einstein would be nothing more than a clever speculator, rather than a superman.
McGuywer 2 years ago
One big question remains: Did Einstein really had the brilliance to visualize and fully understand the rather illogical behavior of light, or, as the skeptics say, he only exploited the human inability to discern between inertial movement and steady state, thinking: "yes, it's very illogical, but you'll never prove it otherwise".
McGuywer 2 years ago
Einstein's whole work builds on his first claim that "the speed of light remains the same regardless of the velocity of the observer", throwing away the concept of aether that has been thought to fill the Universe for about 200 years since Newton. That sentence must be understood in order to get ahead on his later claims.
McGuywer 2 years ago
Einstein realized that there isn't any distinction between the 3 spatial coordinates and the 4th one, time. They are the same. Only WE are perceiving them separately and differently. So he felt a different geometry should be applied.
Yet still, when people hear about spacetime, they think of a warped lattice and wondering where time is implied in all this? People still regard it as a separate 3D+1 dimension.
And this trambline analogy is obviously crap.
McGuywer 2 years ago
What keeps the earth moving?
satilites revolve around planets, planets around stars, stars are often binary so they revolve around each other (has the sun ever been binary? or is it still?), solar systems revolve withing galaxies which have a core, etc...
It makes me wonder if galaxies themselves have a similar elliptical pattern, and if there's something bigger than the observable universe, making it another cycle wagon.
Anyway... I think my head hurts.
edlimuD 2 years ago
earth isnt moving. its falling. towards the sun, but the momentum keeps it away
Skaterman3323 2 years ago 21
could you elaborate?
edlimuD 2 years ago
@Skaterman3323 Earth isn't moving it's falling? Last I checked if you're falling you're moving. I get what you said but try wording it better next time.
josh93s1 1 year ago
@Skaterman3323 Earth isn't moving it's falling? Last I checked if you're falling you're moving. I understand what you're trying to say but try wording it better next time
josh93s1 1 year ago
@Skaterman3323 "isnt moving. Its falling. So.. its moving?"
FlashMaster20000 1 year ago
@Skaterman3323 There is no up and down in space.
jonasmarchalenta 11 months ago
@Skaterman3323 whether if something is moving or not it all depends on the relativity
7150285 6 months ago
but what isnt explained is why the moon is moving away
Tagard1995 2 years ago
The mass bends the space-time. I think I (hardly) get that. But I don't understand why that bending in space-time causes a force that pulls things towards the object..
UntakenNick 2 years ago
I think the analogy at about 0:50 explains that pretty well.
thebigfatmonkey 2 years ago
The trampolin and the ball are afected by an external factor (the earth gravity)..
UntakenNick 2 years ago 10
@UntakenNick actually when they explain it in that way it becomes very easier to understand
Xmastermusty 1 year ago
@UntakenNick good point, but its just an example
bwillwall 1 year ago
@UntakenNick That's why I've always hated that analogy. And everyone describes it that way.
KayBeeEee1983 11 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 I still don't know why the curvature of spacetime translates in a gravity field or force. They don't explain it.. they just say it happens.
UntakenNick 11 months ago
@UntakenNick the problem is they think they know why (it involves gravitons), but could easily be wrong and nobody wants to teach something like that considering gravitons havent yet been proved exist... i know i don't understand it, and for right now i think saying it just happens is easier...
42connorzielinski42 9 months ago
@UntakenNick iYes...it's always presented as 2D when it's a 3D relationship. But I guess the force of gravity increases because of, or as represented by the increase in the angle of the dimple in time/space as you approach a planet or matter. And physics is a model that works not the total absolute truth as only god knows that.
rolin600 7 months ago
Zajímalo by mě, jestli fakt, že funguje.
2t22tornadosiren 2 years ago
The Earth's real gravitational pull is forcing the ping pong ball towards the bowling ball (the trampoline is only guiding it), not the trampoline. The only logical way to conduct that model would be to do so in outer space, where the Earth's gravity does not affect the experiment.
pnoozi 3 years ago
Therefore that "bent fabric of the universe" crap does NOT explain where gravitational pull comes from.
pnoozi 3 years ago
@pnoozi
you seem to missunderstand something. when you introduce mass In space, or in an area free of gravitation, the space-time bends. its not the gravity of this newly introduced mass that bends the space-time, its the mass of this new mass that bends it. and in turn, this bending of space-time is the gravity of this new mass.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
I'm not the only one here. In a more recent comment, someone said the same thing.
The reason the ping pong ball is moving towards the bowling ball is because of the downward pull of gravity. In the so-called "space-time fabric" of the universe, there is no gravity, despite there being a bend in the fabric.
Furthermore, I don't even believe that a "space-time fabric" even exists. How can pure empty space have any sort of structure at all? Only matter can have a structure.
pnoozi 2 years ago
@pnoozi
ofcourse the "space-time fabric" dont actually exist. ist not as if you would go out in space and find fabric everywhere or something. its just happens to be an explanation that as of current date explains all questions about gravity. atleast in the macro scale.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
@pnoozi 2
did you understand my first comment?
the mass of an object curves the fabric. this curve then acts as this mass's gravity on the surounding area of space.
and there are proof for this. heavy objects bend light around them. look up the eclipse experiments done.
of course there are no "downward pull" under the fabric of space, but things move as "if" they were placed on the fabric of a trampolin.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
@ poonzi 3
on earth, the thing that makes the objects on the trampolin roll towards eachoter is the gravity under the trampoline.
in space things are attracted to eachoter by there gravitational pull.
but it isnt sufficient to say that masses are just attracted to eachoter. since heavy masses can bend light, which have no mass, something other than just this ordinary attraction between objects must be going on. hence the "bent fabric". it has the same "attraction" effect, and bends light.
N3CR1S 2 years ago
I would like to know are dreams another dimension? Sometimes in my sleep I feel like i'm on some adventrue for hours and hours, but when I wake up I realize I've only been sleeping for about 20 minutes. If dreams are another dimension, It could be used to explain the relativaty theory. Makes sense?
kapplejacks22 3 years ago
LOL dude that was funny but could u believe that all the adventures u go through is just in 1 minute or 2
fantastic77777 3 years ago
Where the hell did Einstein come from to come up with all these theories. He must of being inspired by some super intelligence
sanshuz 3 years ago
he was born in Ulm, Germany. and he recieved a good education in Germany and Italy and Switzerland and places like that.
DillonR1024x 3 years ago
or maybe he did come from the future !!
meanofevil 2 years ago
Why the planets don't float off into space and still remain in orbit around the sun is the gravitational pull and rotation of the planets around the sun.
See if a planet close to the sun would be standing still and not move it would eventually move closer and closer to the sun.
it is the constant speed of the planet wanting to leave the "orbit" and the gravitational pull of the mass/density of the sun that keep it in orbit an equilibrium of forces.
If one would be to strong it would break.
Swecan76 3 years ago
This is why this raises the question.
If the surrounding area is the only cause for the movement and not the mass.
Why is anything affected on earth?
If you are already standing on the surface of earth it still wants you to remain on it and not float off.
This is mass gravity not curvature of space around me.
See the mass/density is what causes the curvature around the sphere/planet.
Large the density/mass/size the larger curvature and effect reach.
Swecan76 3 years ago
placing the bowling ball on the trampoline causes the curvature of it. an interesting question to ask: what causes the curvature of the trampoline? a pressing force due to the mass of the object? if it's true it'll be GRAVITY causing it. it raises another problem to be solved then...
hendrasusanto1991 3 years ago
The trampoline analogy simply explains that the ball's surrounding is causing movement NOT a force within the balls. The Earth doesn't have a magnet in it that makes it sticky. It's mass curves space which pushes us and the Earth together. The trampoline is just an example.
regca3 3 years ago 7
@regca3 I've always found the trampoline example a bit misleading. When the trampoline is curved there is actually a force acting on the ball around the big one that curves it: Gravity (the same gravity that keeps the trampoline stood still). Without gravity, the smaller ball won't orbit or go away from the big ball: It shouldn't move at all.
nesyyz 1 year ago
@nesyyz Ah, someone else who, like me, has misgivings about the trampoline analogy of gravity.
What we need is an alternative analogy which is equally easy to visualise but doesn't depend on the imposition of any outside forces (gravity in this case). Ideas anyone?
mandolinic 1 year ago
@hendrasusanto1991
Yes your right.. If the mass is the cause of curving of the space of time.. Therefore, there's another gravity which pulls the sun.. My question is "Where is that gravity coming from?"
carpet0222 1 year ago
will the smaller ball still fly of into space if the warping or depression on the space time fabric is only slowly enough returned back to whatever its shape was before the existence of the sun? this is only for the sake of discussion so please do not get too excited.
goerizal 3 years ago
wait, if the example of the trampoline is true, then why aren't we moving closer to the sun? how is it that we have stayed in the same distance all this time?
Punisher2all 3 years ago
the pingpongball is loosing speed, in space an object in motion tends to stay in motion. Give it a push and it goes forever
PredatorYT 3 years ago
friction. on a trampoline theres friction between matter, in space the cellestial bodies are moving freely through space (or darkmatter). no friction exists and the inertia carries them for an inperceivable amount of time.
agnosticwolf 3 years ago
because when you're in orbit, you don't get closer to the object that's inflicting gravity on you. When you are moving in a circle, you're always accelerating towards the center of the circle. That acceleration causes the direction of your velocity to constantly change, which is why we orbit around the sun in an ellipse.
Yakeyglee 3 years ago
Ooooooooh. That makes more sense
Punisher2all 3 years ago
sweet...pink floyd in the background
DeliciousTrailMix 3 years ago
Wow!! That's brilliant!
kobebryant0824 3 years ago
What keeps the Earth from falling to the Sun and the Moon from falling to the Earth?
jespriella 3 years ago
just the fact that they're moving.
if they stoppped, they'd fall straight in
[would probably take us about 3 months to get to the sun i think]
LeonSzillard 3 years ago
And what keeps the Erath moving?
jespriella 3 years ago
A general lack of friction in empty space
(no rocket motors are required)
Our Earth is basically moving / orbiting in a perfect vacuum as far as I know. Einstein's Gen Rel says the only thing that could slow it down is radiation of gravitational waves. We aren't heavy enough to generate those, so we keep on moving - just because we already are moving.
Just like Galileo said we should........
LeonSzillard 3 years ago
ps. I think I'm right, therefore I am.
LeonSzillard 3 years ago
whats keeping the sun from falling to the center of the milky way? who knows, it quite logical that we are. "strong" science has only been around for a few hundred years. these things take trillions of years; or one second, depending on your point of observation.
drsnooth23 3 years ago
I think this is a fake analogy. The only reason the balls are moving together in the depicted scene is because gravity (in the way we experience it daily) is pulling down and the "trampolene" then pushes the balls together. You can't implicitly *use* gravity to explain gravity. It's like saying "gravity exists because of gravity" It isn't really saying anything at all. Instead they should show how warping space time creates "straight" lines in different reference points.
jlmadill 3 years ago 3
Would you be happier if they'd used the pull of some vertical electric field?
You'd just have to give the balls a charge proportional to their size, that's all.
LeonSzillard 3 years ago
There is no definite answer for what creates or what endows gravity. Which is why it is called the "THEORY" of relativity. So noone knows.
blueshrooms 3 years ago
Well..either you didnt pay atention, or your an idiot. id dosent say gravity pulls them together. it says TIME pulls them together. time and movement is what keeps the ping pong ball orbiting the bowling ball. (in theory, anyway)
chiknhed6 3 years ago
so in essence, your saying eventually the moon will collide with the earth?
drsnooth23 3 years ago
Um...I guess that could be hypothetically theorized, yes.
chiknhed6 3 years ago
Whoops, didn't see this comment before I posted mine. What I meant to say was, "Thank you. I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices this and has always thought this a flawed analogy from the start."
AutoPsychotic 1 year ago