Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Professor Brian Cox explains using a simple light clock, time is not absolute. Because the speed of light remains constant, a light beam in a moving clock traces a longer, diagonal path from an outside observer's perspective, proving that moving clocks run slower and time literally bends to the...

cosmosarcive's profile picture

Cosmos Archive

22,813 subscribers

146,150 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Wissenschaft & Technologie
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson explains, the faster you move through space, the slower you move through time. As you approach the speed of light, time stretches and slows down until it reaches the ultimate cosmic speed limit, where time completely stops. This means that for a photon of light created at the Big Bang 13.8 billion years ago, the exact moment it was born is the exact same instant it strikes your eye; a mind-bending reality proving that for light, the entire history of the universe happens in a single, frozen moment.
0:58

Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson explains, the faster you move through space, the slower you move through time. As you approach the speed of light, time stretches and slows down until it reaches the ultimate cosmic speed limit, where time completely stops. This means that for a photon of light created at the Big Bang 13.8 billion years ago, the exact moment it was born is the exact same instant it strikes your eye; a mind-bending reality proving that for light, the entire history of the universe happens in a single, frozen moment.

Cosmos Archive

87,869 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Amazingly, you can travel for one hour at the speed of light in space, but when you'll return to earth, it will be 100 years later in earth time.. Would you travel to the future knowing that all the people, and reality you knew no longer exist?
0:42

Amazingly, you can travel for one hour at the speed of light in space, but when you'll return to earth, it will be 100 years later in earth time.. Would you travel to the future knowing that all the people, and reality you knew no longer exist?

Curiosity

456,613 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

Why do time slow down as you approach the speed of light? Because space and time are not separate things. They are woven together into spacetime, and the speed of light is built into its structure. Every object moves through spacetime at the same fundamental rate. When you are at rest, almost all of that motion is through time. As you move faster through space, some of that motion is redirected away from time. The total stays constant, so your clock must tick more slowly. This is not philosophy or metaphor. It has been measured with atomic clocks on airplanes and satellites. Move fast enough, and you do not just cross distances differently, you experience less time itself.
1:07

Why do time slow down as you approach the speed of light? Because space and time are not separate things. They are woven together into spacetime, and the speed of light is built into its structure. Every object moves through spacetime at the same fundamental rate. When you are at rest, almost all of that motion is through time. As you move faster through space, some of that motion is redirected away from time. The total stays constant, so your clock must tick more slowly. This is not philosophy or metaphor. It has been measured with atomic clocks on airplanes and satellites. Move fast enough, and you do not just cross distances differently, you experience less time itself.

The Scientific Lens

12,149 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Thought experiment for people regarding the concept of Absolute Time. Absolute means NO EXCEPTIONS. We are NOT looking back in time when we see galaxies and stars. We are NOT looking back in time 1.25 seconds when we see the moon. We're Not looking back in time 3 minutes when we see Mars. We're Not looking back in time 8.33 minutes when we see the Sun. If an astronaut lit a matchstick on Mars, the distant observer would see predator heat waves at the top of the matchstick in real-time while the matchstick started to blacken towards the astronaut's fingers. But there would be no orange light from that chemical reaction or flame seen. If the matchstick burnt out before the packet of orange light from that particular chemical reaction made it to Earth… then the distant observer would just see a disembodied orange flash of light with a lag. But the Earth-bound observer would never actually see the flame associated with the orange wavelength it put out. The wavelength of color emitted by the flame is not a recording of reality. If the orange light is 650 Thz, that means there are 650 trillion individual and separate bursts of orange light pulsating in 1 second. NOT that "the same light" is "waving" 650 trillion times a second and that light is a recording of reality. There are 650 trillion brand-new lights flashing in 1 second. Each Hertz is a brand-new emission and packet unto itself. Time does not re-emit 650 trillion times a second, nor is a photon a particle or a packet of reality acting like the frame of a reel of footage. The orange light that already left the flame will continue to propagate out until it meets the electrons making up the distant observer. But remember, it is never the same light within that packet. And the electrons making up the observer will absorb all of those different lights within that packet and re-emit brand-new lights that produce the product of illumination. A photon is a massless packet of energy, spherically expanding at the rate of c from the source it comes from. Illumination is the result of that energy being absorbed and RE-emitted by any other electrons that did not output that primary packet. But time is not associated with the same light. It's never the same light and time does not re-emit between packets. Time is not relative. Do NOT allow your mind Carte Blanche to think along the lines of relative time. DROP IT for this thought experiment. We are thinking along the lines of ABSOLUTE TIME/ Galilean VARIANCE. What does absolute time mean? It means time is constant in ALL frames of reference. Any frequency shifts between atomic clocks IS a literal change in the speed of light. But relativity forbids the speed of light from Ever changing, so relativity (Lorentz INVARIANCE) invented the concept of the 4th dimension and space-time. Because Relativity doesn't allow light speed to shift.. they interpret the same frequency shift between atomic clocks as being conclusive, irrefutable evidence that time and reality itself shifts. Rather than say it's just that ONE clock being affected by Earth's gravity and the oscillation of that ONE cesium clock is being altered compared to other clocks. People don't realize that in relativity... time dilation is SYMMETRICAL! Not even most relativists know their own theory. If Clock A and Clock B are synchronized and together... and then they accelerate apart... Einstein said Clock A would see Clock B as being slower itself. And Clock B would view Clock A as slower than ITself. NOT that only one observer would see back in time and the other would see forward or not at all. No... BOTH observers are supposed to see each other BACK in time relative to each other according to Einstein and the consequence of the math. It doesn't make ANY sense!! But relativists toss that part of time dilation under their 4th dimensional rug. The rug is woven from threads of gold that only the smart people can see apparently. So... here's a thought experiment/ Gedankenexperiment for absolute time. NO paradoxes... no nonsense or confusion. What do you see in a club? You see disco lights changing and a color wheel effect. You see everyone in REAL-TIME. Not just because they are so close to the lights. Light is not a recording of reality. Light is simply color. Illuminating reality in a certain color. Just because you can't see something yet or the color hasn't reached you doesn't mean it isn't happening in real-time. Zoom out and look at the people in the club through binoculars a mile away. You are still looking at them in real-time. The colors are shifting with a delay in the club. Now look at the club through a telescope from the surface of the moon. You're still looking at the people in real-time. But now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 1.25 seconds because it takes light 1.25 seconds to travel from the Earth to the moon. Now look at the club through an even bigger telescope from the surface of Mars. You're still looking at the people in real-time, but now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 3 minutes because it takes light 3 minutes to travel from Earth to Mars. fr you are a third hypothetical observer zoomed out and watching the person from Mars AND seeing the club on Earth... you're still seeing everything happening in real-time as well. But you see the colored wavepackets traveling with a delay to the observer on Mars. And the disco color wheel effect is just lagging before it affects the observer from Mars and the observer on the Moon. It doesn't matter how far you zoom out! There is only now to observe. But there WILL be a lag and delay for a given color/wavepacket to reach distant observers. But all points in space are already illuminated by other starlight. So if you're too far away... you'll just see the club in real-time but without any disco lights. Just see them in white light because that's the source already illuminating the scene. This is where it gets the most difficult because people think light itself is a recording of reality that replays a scene from where it came from. But another punch in the gut of relativity is that in order to see REFLECTED light... that would require a TWO-WAY transit. Which means the light would have to be sent out... record the scene of a distant event and then RETURN in order to REplay the event. Which means it would take 6 minutes to see the club from Mars by that logic and 2.5 seconds to see the club from the moon by that logic. The difference in tick rates between clocks has NOTHING to do with time dilation. Wait.. what?! How can that be? Because a clock itself doesn't represent all of time and reality. The difference between clocks is a "Transverse relative time shift." If the only light in the universe was from the lighter… the only way a distant observer would be able to see the astronaut on Mars is if the astronaut held down the button of the lighter for longer than 3 minutes. It takes 3 minutes for the packet of light to travel from Mars to Earth. The distant observer would never be able to see Mars, unless the light stretched from Mars all the way to Earth, and illuminated the path between Mars and Earth. And that would take 3 minutes for the boundary and first part of that wave packet to reach Earth. But if the distant observer wanted to observe Mars in real-time… then that packet of light would have to be on for longer than 3 minutes. So if the astronaut on Mars flicked the lighter at 12:00, the distant observer on Earth wouldn't see anything until 12:03. If the light was on for 3 minutes and 10 seconds, and the distant observer is 3 light minutes away... the distant observer would be able to see Mars in real-time for 10 seconds starting at 12:03. In the 20 second video clip of the rotating planet with shifting colors... just imagine you're a couple light minutes or light seconds away. You're still seeing the planet spin in real-time. But there is simply a delay of switching colors. You are Not looking back in time. It's just a color wheel effect from a great distance away. That's it!! There are many major flaws which tarnish people's critical thinking on this thought experiment. 1. Light does NOT ricochet or bounce. Electrons absorb, emit and re-emit ALL electromagnetic radiation. The electrons, making up the glass of a mirror will absorb the incoming light and re-emit a brand-new light as an equal and opposite reaction. NOT that "the same light" bounced off the mirror and continued on within the same frame of reference.  2. Light is NOT a recording of reality. 3. It is NOT the same light being observed from a source. It's never the same light. Each Hertz is a new light. Think of half of a sine wave as being its own emission. On an oscilloscope, a stimulus generates a peak which initiates an equal and opposite trough. Or vice versa. That repeating process is not "the same light." If you cut and paste that sine wave to another sine wave, the boundary between the waves will always be in phase. (thus refraction) 4. The speed of light is NOT the same in ALL frames of reference, no matter what. 5. Light is NOT made of particles and waves that flip back-and-forth. 6. Time is NOT connected to the speed of light. Time remains constant regardless if you accelerate towards or away from a clock. The clocks themselves will indeed be off! But that's an affect on the electrons making up the atomic clock affecting the oscillation of the isotope which is ASSUMED to ALWAYS be the same. So ANY difference in oscillation is treated as a literal distortion in space-time. 7. Space and time are not linked at all. That is a mathematical artifice under Lorentz invariance. Time is relative under Lorentz invariance. But time is absolute under Galilean VARIANCE. When people hear or see the word GALILEAN... their brains switch to auto pilot to "aether theory" and "classical physics." What people don't realize is that aether theory used Galilean INVARIANCE. Rather than space-time being used as an excuse to explain the difference in frequencies between atomic clocks... it was originally aether being used as an excuse to keep the speed of light the same. But None of those things are valid! We are thinking under the framework of Galilean VARIANCE! Completely new revolutionary model returning to Isaac Newton and Classical physics but without the corpuscular theory (particle) theory for light... without a particle-wave duality... without an aether... without a 4th dimension. Just good ol elementary math within 3D Euclidean space. Everything happening in real-time, right now. This reformulation of Galilean transformations was offered by Dr. Edward Dowdye in 1991 called The Extinction Shift Principle. Effectivity as opposed to Relativity. If light required a two-way transit, in order to travel out… Record an event, and travel back to replay the recording…  then it would take 6 minutes to see the astronaut on Mars instead of 3.  Remember… They say the SAME light is a recording, and must travel there and travel back in order to REplay. Relativity says time is relative: t' ≠ t time is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and t = tₒ / √1 - v²/c² but Galilean Variance says time is not relative: t' = t (Time IS the same from all frames of reference) and τ_tr = τₒ / √1 - v²/c² Relativity says c' = c (The velocity of light is the same from all frames of reference) but Galilean variance says c' ≠ c (The velocity of light is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and that c' = c ± v (The velocity of light in one frame of reference is dependent upon the velocity of the light source relative to an observer in another frame of reference. Whether that light source is approaching or receding away from that observer) Relativity says E = mc² (Energy and mass are universally equivalent and literally interchangeable under All conditions.) but Galilean variance says E = Δmc² = mₒc² (Energy changes in a system are the result from changes in mass. mₒ represents the original mass. Mass and energy do not literally interchange. There is an equivalence, not an interchange.) The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity Star light and illumination: Flicking a Lighter on Mars visual example:
0:21

Thought experiment for people regarding the concept of Absolute Time. Absolute means NO EXCEPTIONS. We are NOT looking back in time when we see galaxies and stars. We are NOT looking back in time 1.25 seconds when we see the moon. We're Not looking back in time 3 minutes when we see Mars. We're Not looking back in time 8.33 minutes when we see the Sun. If an astronaut lit a matchstick on Mars, the distant observer would see predator heat waves at the top of the matchstick in real-time while the matchstick started to blacken towards the astronaut's fingers. But there would be no orange light from that chemical reaction or flame seen. If the matchstick burnt out before the packet of orange light from that particular chemical reaction made it to Earth… then the distant observer would just see a disembodied orange flash of light with a lag. But the Earth-bound observer would never actually see the flame associated with the orange wavelength it put out. The wavelength of color emitted by the flame is not a recording of reality. If the orange light is 650 Thz, that means there are 650 trillion individual and separate bursts of orange light pulsating in 1 second. NOT that "the same light" is "waving" 650 trillion times a second and that light is a recording of reality. There are 650 trillion brand-new lights flashing in 1 second. Each Hertz is a brand-new emission and packet unto itself. Time does not re-emit 650 trillion times a second, nor is a photon a particle or a packet of reality acting like the frame of a reel of footage. The orange light that already left the flame will continue to propagate out until it meets the electrons making up the distant observer. But remember, it is never the same light within that packet. And the electrons making up the observer will absorb all of those different lights within that packet and re-emit brand-new lights that produce the product of illumination. A photon is a massless packet of energy, spherically expanding at the rate of c from the source it comes from. Illumination is the result of that energy being absorbed and RE-emitted by any other electrons that did not output that primary packet. But time is not associated with the same light. It's never the same light and time does not re-emit between packets. Time is not relative. Do NOT allow your mind Carte Blanche to think along the lines of relative time. DROP IT for this thought experiment. We are thinking along the lines of ABSOLUTE TIME/ Galilean VARIANCE. What does absolute time mean? It means time is constant in ALL frames of reference. Any frequency shifts between atomic clocks IS a literal change in the speed of light. But relativity forbids the speed of light from Ever changing, so relativity (Lorentz INVARIANCE) invented the concept of the 4th dimension and space-time. Because Relativity doesn't allow light speed to shift.. they interpret the same frequency shift between atomic clocks as being conclusive, irrefutable evidence that time and reality itself shifts. Rather than say it's just that ONE clock being affected by Earth's gravity and the oscillation of that ONE cesium clock is being altered compared to other clocks. People don't realize that in relativity... time dilation is SYMMETRICAL! Not even most relativists know their own theory. If Clock A and Clock B are synchronized and together... and then they accelerate apart... Einstein said Clock A would see Clock B as being slower itself. And Clock B would view Clock A as slower than ITself. NOT that only one observer would see back in time and the other would see forward or not at all. No... BOTH observers are supposed to see each other BACK in time relative to each other according to Einstein and the consequence of the math. It doesn't make ANY sense!! But relativists toss that part of time dilation under their 4th dimensional rug. The rug is woven from threads of gold that only the smart people can see apparently. So... here's a thought experiment/ Gedankenexperiment for absolute time. NO paradoxes... no nonsense or confusion. What do you see in a club? You see disco lights changing and a color wheel effect. You see everyone in REAL-TIME. Not just because they are so close to the lights. Light is not a recording of reality. Light is simply color. Illuminating reality in a certain color. Just because you can't see something yet or the color hasn't reached you doesn't mean it isn't happening in real-time. Zoom out and look at the people in the club through binoculars a mile away. You are still looking at them in real-time. The colors are shifting with a delay in the club. Now look at the club through a telescope from the surface of the moon. You're still looking at the people in real-time. But now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 1.25 seconds because it takes light 1.25 seconds to travel from the Earth to the moon. Now look at the club through an even bigger telescope from the surface of Mars. You're still looking at the people in real-time, but now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 3 minutes because it takes light 3 minutes to travel from Earth to Mars. fr you are a third hypothetical observer zoomed out and watching the person from Mars AND seeing the club on Earth... you're still seeing everything happening in real-time as well. But you see the colored wavepackets traveling with a delay to the observer on Mars. And the disco color wheel effect is just lagging before it affects the observer from Mars and the observer on the Moon. It doesn't matter how far you zoom out! There is only now to observe. But there WILL be a lag and delay for a given color/wavepacket to reach distant observers. But all points in space are already illuminated by other starlight. So if you're too far away... you'll just see the club in real-time but without any disco lights. Just see them in white light because that's the source already illuminating the scene. This is where it gets the most difficult because people think light itself is a recording of reality that replays a scene from where it came from. But another punch in the gut of relativity is that in order to see REFLECTED light... that would require a TWO-WAY transit. Which means the light would have to be sent out... record the scene of a distant event and then RETURN in order to REplay the event. Which means it would take 6 minutes to see the club from Mars by that logic and 2.5 seconds to see the club from the moon by that logic. The difference in tick rates between clocks has NOTHING to do with time dilation. Wait.. what?! How can that be? Because a clock itself doesn't represent all of time and reality. The difference between clocks is a "Transverse relative time shift." If the only light in the universe was from the lighter… the only way a distant observer would be able to see the astronaut on Mars is if the astronaut held down the button of the lighter for longer than 3 minutes. It takes 3 minutes for the packet of light to travel from Mars to Earth. The distant observer would never be able to see Mars, unless the light stretched from Mars all the way to Earth, and illuminated the path between Mars and Earth. And that would take 3 minutes for the boundary and first part of that wave packet to reach Earth. But if the distant observer wanted to observe Mars in real-time… then that packet of light would have to be on for longer than 3 minutes. So if the astronaut on Mars flicked the lighter at 12:00, the distant observer on Earth wouldn't see anything until 12:03. If the light was on for 3 minutes and 10 seconds, and the distant observer is 3 light minutes away... the distant observer would be able to see Mars in real-time for 10 seconds starting at 12:03. In the 20 second video clip of the rotating planet with shifting colors... just imagine you're a couple light minutes or light seconds away. You're still seeing the planet spin in real-time. But there is simply a delay of switching colors. You are Not looking back in time. It's just a color wheel effect from a great distance away. That's it!! There are many major flaws which tarnish people's critical thinking on this thought experiment. 1. Light does NOT ricochet or bounce. Electrons absorb, emit and re-emit ALL electromagnetic radiation. The electrons, making up the glass of a mirror will absorb the incoming light and re-emit a brand-new light as an equal and opposite reaction. NOT that "the same light" bounced off the mirror and continued on within the same frame of reference.  2. Light is NOT a recording of reality. 3. It is NOT the same light being observed from a source. It's never the same light. Each Hertz is a new light. Think of half of a sine wave as being its own emission. On an oscilloscope, a stimulus generates a peak which initiates an equal and opposite trough. Or vice versa. That repeating process is not "the same light." If you cut and paste that sine wave to another sine wave, the boundary between the waves will always be in phase. (thus refraction) 4. The speed of light is NOT the same in ALL frames of reference, no matter what. 5. Light is NOT made of particles and waves that flip back-and-forth. 6. Time is NOT connected to the speed of light. Time remains constant regardless if you accelerate towards or away from a clock. The clocks themselves will indeed be off! But that's an affect on the electrons making up the atomic clock affecting the oscillation of the isotope which is ASSUMED to ALWAYS be the same. So ANY difference in oscillation is treated as a literal distortion in space-time. 7. Space and time are not linked at all. That is a mathematical artifice under Lorentz invariance. Time is relative under Lorentz invariance. But time is absolute under Galilean VARIANCE. When people hear or see the word GALILEAN... their brains switch to auto pilot to "aether theory" and "classical physics." What people don't realize is that aether theory used Galilean INVARIANCE. Rather than space-time being used as an excuse to explain the difference in frequencies between atomic clocks... it was originally aether being used as an excuse to keep the speed of light the same. But None of those things are valid! We are thinking under the framework of Galilean VARIANCE! Completely new revolutionary model returning to Isaac Newton and Classical physics but without the corpuscular theory (particle) theory for light... without a particle-wave duality... without an aether... without a 4th dimension. Just good ol elementary math within 3D Euclidean space. Everything happening in real-time, right now. This reformulation of Galilean transformations was offered by Dr. Edward Dowdye in 1991 called The Extinction Shift Principle. Effectivity as opposed to Relativity. If light required a two-way transit, in order to travel out… Record an event, and travel back to replay the recording…  then it would take 6 minutes to see the astronaut on Mars instead of 3.  Remember… They say the SAME light is a recording, and must travel there and travel back in order to REplay. Relativity says time is relative: t' ≠ t time is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and t = tₒ / √1 - v²/c² but Galilean Variance says time is not relative: t' = t (Time IS the same from all frames of reference) and τ_tr = τₒ / √1 - v²/c² Relativity says c' = c (The velocity of light is the same from all frames of reference) but Galilean variance says c' ≠ c (The velocity of light is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and that c' = c ± v (The velocity of light in one frame of reference is dependent upon the velocity of the light source relative to an observer in another frame of reference. Whether that light source is approaching or receding away from that observer) Relativity says E = mc² (Energy and mass are universally equivalent and literally interchangeable under All conditions.) but Galilean variance says E = Δmc² = mₒc² (Energy changes in a system are the result from changes in mass. mₒ represents the original mass. Mass and energy do not literally interchange. There is an equivalence, not an interchange.) The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity Star light and illumination: Flicking a Lighter on Mars visual example:

TheRealVerbz (Jason Verbelli)

16,608 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Every time you look at the stars, you are literally looking back in time. As Professor Brian Cox explains, because light takes time to travel through the vastness of space, we see the Andromeda Galaxy not as it is today, but as it was 2 million years ago. This means that if we look deep enough into the cosmos, we can actually see the oldest light in existence—the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation—a glowing echo that began its journey 13.8 billion years ago, right at the very dawn of the universe.
0:40

Every time you look at the stars, you are literally looking back in time. As Professor Brian Cox explains, because light takes time to travel through the vastness of space, we see the Andromeda Galaxy not as it is today, but as it was 2 million years ago. This means that if we look deep enough into the cosmos, we can actually see the oldest light in existence—the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation—a glowing echo that began its journey 13.8 billion years ago, right at the very dawn of the universe.

Cosmos Archive

21,481 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Dr. Eric Haseltine, former NSA Director: “NASA has funded warp drive propulsion research.” 🛸 "This is why the study of UFO's is so important" He told Jesse Michels - “We know that space time can move at faster than the speed of light. Imagine a surfer who’s on a wave, and is stationary with respect to the wave. But the wave is moving.” If you’re in a bubble of space time that’s moving faster than the speed of light, “You’re not gonna experience any acceleration or deceleration because you’re not moving in that frame.” This is the Alcubierre drive - positive energy in front, negative energy behind, creating a spacetime wave. What do you think? Is faster-than-light travel closer than we realize? Would you sign up for a warp drive mission to the stars?
2:45

Dr. Eric Haseltine, former NSA Director: “NASA has funded warp drive propulsion research.” 🛸 "This is why the study of UFO's is so important" He told Jesse Michels - “We know that space time can move at faster than the speed of light. Imagine a surfer who’s on a wave, and is stationary with respect to the wave. But the wave is moving.” If you’re in a bubble of space time that’s moving faster than the speed of light, “You’re not gonna experience any acceleration or deceleration because you’re not moving in that frame.” This is the Alcubierre drive - positive energy in front, negative energy behind, creating a spacetime wave. What do you think? Is faster-than-light travel closer than we realize? Would you sign up for a warp drive mission to the stars?

Interstellar

35,569 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

ELON: YOU CAN’T BREAK THE SPEED OF LIGHT WITHOUT BREAKING REALITY, UNLESS WE’RE A SIMULATION “You can’t break the speed of light without breaking reality... Time travel would break it too. Unless, this is a very important conditional here, unless we're a simulation.” Source: Katie Miller Elon Musk
1:25

ELON: YOU CAN’T BREAK THE SPEED OF LIGHT WITHOUT BREAKING REALITY, UNLESS WE’RE A SIMULATION “You can’t break the speed of light without breaking reality... Time travel would break it too. Unless, this is a very important conditional here, unless we're a simulation.” Source: Katie Miller Elon Musk

Mario Nawfal

357,889 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

How it is possible to something is moving faster than the speed of light if the speed of light in the fastest thing in the universe?
2:22

How it is possible to something is moving faster than the speed of light if the speed of light in the fastest thing in the universe?

Philosophy Of Physics

110,004 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

ELON: TIME TRAVEL AND TELEPORTATION WOULD BREAK REALITY, UNLESS WE’RE IN A SIMULATION “Actually, those things are almost the same thing in that you can’t break the speed of light without breaking reality, and you know, so if you could teleport somewhere instantly, if you’re talking about teleportation faster than the speed of light, presumably would be, then that would break our reality, as would time travel. Unless, those are a very important conditional here, unless we’re a simulation. Time travel does not break a simulation.” Source: Alina St. John
4:11

ELON: TIME TRAVEL AND TELEPORTATION WOULD BREAK REALITY, UNLESS WE’RE IN A SIMULATION “Actually, those things are almost the same thing in that you can’t break the speed of light without breaking reality, and you know, so if you could teleport somewhere instantly, if you’re talking about teleportation faster than the speed of light, presumably would be, then that would break our reality, as would time travel. Unless, those are a very important conditional here, unless we’re a simulation. Time travel does not break a simulation.” Source: Alina St. John

Mario Nawfal

431,749 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

YouTuber AlphaPhoenix pulled off something that sounds impossible. He recorded a laser moving across a room at 2 billion frames per second. That is fast enough to watch light itself travel, something the human eye can never perceive in real time. The camera he used was not a normal high speed camera. It recorded only one pixel at a time. To build a full video, he fired the laser again and again, each time recording a single pixel from a slightly different point. After thousands of captures, he stitched the pixels together into a full frame sequence that reveals the light wave moving through space. It is a mind bending mix of physics and creativity. The end result lets us watch one of the fastest phenomena in the universe at a speed we can finally understand.
0:20

YouTuber AlphaPhoenix pulled off something that sounds impossible. He recorded a laser moving across a room at 2 billion frames per second. That is fast enough to watch light itself travel, something the human eye can never perceive in real time. The camera he used was not a normal high speed camera. It recorded only one pixel at a time. To build a full video, he fired the laser again and again, each time recording a single pixel from a slightly different point. After thousands of captures, he stitched the pixels together into a full frame sequence that reveals the light wave moving through space. It is a mind bending mix of physics and creativity. The end result lets us watch one of the fastest phenomena in the universe at a speed we can finally understand.

Kekius Maximus

697,040 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

PHYSICIST REVEALS WARP DRIVE THAT COULD BREAK LIGHT SPEED Physicist Miguel Alcubierre proposed a faster-than-light engine by bending space itself. Instead of pushing a ship, the Alcubierre Drive compresses space ahead and expands it behind. The craft doesn’t move faster than light, space around it does. Like surfing a cosmic wave, the ship rides distortions of spacetime at superluminal speed. Einstein’s relativity allows this because the speed limit applies to objects, not space itself. The universe already expands faster than light. Alcubierre showed a spacecraft could too. Source: thegalacticgal
0:53

PHYSICIST REVEALS WARP DRIVE THAT COULD BREAK LIGHT SPEED Physicist Miguel Alcubierre proposed a faster-than-light engine by bending space itself. Instead of pushing a ship, the Alcubierre Drive compresses space ahead and expands it behind. The craft doesn’t move faster than light, space around it does. Like surfing a cosmic wave, the ship rides distortions of spacetime at superluminal speed. Einstein’s relativity allows this because the speed limit applies to objects, not space itself. The universe already expands faster than light. Alcubierre showed a spacecraft could too. Source: thegalacticgal

Mario Nawfal

113,354 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

If you could move away from Earth at the speed of light, the journey would feel endless.
1:15

If you could move away from Earth at the speed of light, the journey would feel endless.

Quantum Tech ⚛

56,851 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Brian Cox ~ Consequences of Traveling at the Speed of Light
1:23

Brian Cox ~ Consequences of Traveling at the Speed of Light

Saganism

115,548 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Andromeda is the nearest spiral galaxy which is 2.5 million light years away. At normal speeds, it's impossibly far. But if a spacecraft could travel at relativistic speeds (close to the speed of light), everything changes. ( 🎥 Brian Cox )
1:13

Andromeda is the nearest spiral galaxy which is 2.5 million light years away. At normal speeds, it's impossibly far. But if a spacecraft could travel at relativistic speeds (close to the speed of light), everything changes. ( 🎥 Brian Cox )

Philosophy Of Physics

48,108 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

When light passes through a lens, it bends—this is called refraction. It happens because light changes speed when moving between materials (like from air into glass or plastic).
0:31

When light passes through a lens, it bends—this is called refraction. It happens because light changes speed when moving between materials (like from air into glass or plastic).

HOW THINGS WORK

87,194 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

cameraman deserves a raise for moving at the speed of light the second wooseok started working out 🤣
0:37

cameraman deserves a raise for moving at the speed of light the second wooseok started working out 🤣

mel 🍂

116,622 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

🇨🇳China's Longyin-7 just took down a target moving at 20 times the speed of sound! The Longyin-7 can accelerate charged particles to sub-light speed in just 0.08 seconds while locking onto space targets at the same time!
1:41

🇨🇳China's Longyin-7 just took down a target moving at 20 times the speed of sound! The Longyin-7 can accelerate charged particles to sub-light speed in just 0.08 seconds while locking onto space targets at the same time!

Dominic Lee 李梓敬

60,870 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

What happens if we threw a whale at Earth at the speed of light?
0:21

What happens if we threw a whale at Earth at the speed of light?

Curiosity

167,416 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Some people have DMed me saying that it is impossible for things to move faster than the speed of light as described by Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Therefore a higher intelligence from another star system would be too far away to visit earth. Here Bob Lazar explains how a gravitational drive (warp drive) operates by distorting or warping space-time. The spacecraft itself is not actually moving/traveling in linear space therefore it has a linear velocity of Zero. It is not actually moving in Newtonian physics terms. Thus it is not traveling faster than the speed of light and Einstein’s theory of general relativity stands. Watch this short 3 minute clip: 👇 UAP James
3:04

Some people have DMed me saying that it is impossible for things to move faster than the speed of light as described by Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Therefore a higher intelligence from another star system would be too far away to visit earth. Here Bob Lazar explains how a gravitational drive (warp drive) operates by distorting or warping space-time. The spacecraft itself is not actually moving/traveling in linear space therefore it has a linear velocity of Zero. It is not actually moving in Newtonian physics terms. Thus it is not traveling faster than the speed of light and Einstein’s theory of general relativity stands. Watch this short 3 minute clip: 👇 UAP James

Eric Yeung 👍🚀🌕

17,612 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Chamath Says It May Be Time to Shrink the Fed “We have an extremely vibrant … $130 Trillion global economy. It's moving at the speed of light. The Fed gets together once a month … based on data that is often incorrect … We've turned over responsibility to a handful of humans using bad inputs.”
4:43

Chamath Says It May Be Time to Shrink the Fed “We have an extremely vibrant … $130 Trillion global economy. It's moving at the speed of light. The Fed gets together once a month … based on data that is often incorrect … We've turned over responsibility to a handful of humans using bad inputs.”

Chief Nerd

328,905 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten