This scares me because I play vr a lot

I was arguing with someone on stack exchange whether string theory was background independent. I suspect it isn't (in it's most basic form). String field theory is a good idea but I don't think it has been developed very far especially the closed string version. What is your opinion?

I love your graphics. Reminds me of Flash animations.

Nice video! I subbed. Love the art style! I favour the "modified gravity" explanation to explain the galaxy movement curves. (I did my own video on it). Keep up the good work. I predict I will see you get 1 million subs this year.

😂 Resicle ALL the burried waste and find a way to nutrilise the negative particles mushrooms 😂😂

Pure fantasy rubbish

The AMA and the US Healthcare Industry will never allow this to happen. I have an In-Law who is a doctor who just examines X-Rays and MRIs (i.e. Radiologist) and makes $500k+ a year. His job should be outsourced to India. The US was able to outsource a lot of its jobs (e.g., Accounting, Programming, etc.) to Third World countries, but the AMA and US Healthcare Industry would never allow their Industry to be outsourced. No wonder Healthcare costs in the US are ridiculous.

What if Dark Matter can never collapse into a particle (i.e. cannot be observed) in our universe, and always exists in the form of a wave?

Dark matter is dilated mass. Mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an Earthbound observer. It's what our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass. This includes the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers. The mass at the center of our own galaxy is dilated. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have no dark matter, in other words they have normal rotation rates. All planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates for this reason.

Great video, thanks and congratulations ... This other video teaches new physics, show hidden variables to study gravity, with a rational demonstration of the non-existence of dark matter kzbin.info/www/bejne/mGa3hmCPf9eAjKc

Good video!

Detail video editing

Tachyons do NOT exist, emprically, theoretically vor otherwwise. That is sci fi. NOT real physics. troubles with utube again. sigh.....

Where are the actual experiments to prove the speed of gravity? after we don't seem to be able make and block gravity at will like light for instance, so it can theme measured over a distance to calculate its speed.I think the speed of gravity is faster, so much faster than light, gravity itself effects everything else and seems to limit C via the Lorenz factor to 299 792 458 m / s, that does not necessarily have to apply to itself? if gravity was the same as C then wouldn't C be twice as slow?

No Gravitation is a manifestation of space time curvature

Is it possible gravitons are stationary - compared to the universe - everything else goes zipping by them? Could gravitons have infinite mass(relative to the space they take up in the universe) but zero energy? Gravitational waves then being produced through their interaction with the energy of moving matter. Light being massless has no effect on nor is it affected by individual gravitons. When we observe "gravitational lensing" it is a result of the gravitational field produced by matter in a graviton-filled space. Could this possibly be tested in space, using focused energy from the sun and look for emissions of mass as gravitons passing through absorbing energy - receiving a "push" resulting in matter? Could dark matter be a result similar to this? Could black holes emit gravitons contributing to this cycle? We could change their name to Black Chickens laying the graviton eggs along their journeys through space? Now, that's just silly!

Is it possible gravitons are stationary - unmoving relative to Everything else in the universe? Could gravitons have infinite mass(relative to the space they take up in the universe) but zero energy? Gravitational waves then being produced through their interaction with the energy of moving matter. Light being massless has no effect on nor is it affected by individual gravitons. When we observe "gravitational lensing" it is a result of the gravitational field produced by matter in a graviton filled space.

I’m in the middle of exam rn😄

Gives you headaches after 10 mins, causes nausea and motion sickness...yeah I'd say that's your body telling you it doesn't like that crap. Fun as a novelty but it's not realistic...doesn't feel like your there at all, feels like your wearing a sweaty headband with a screen jammed 1mm from your eyeballs. I tried to like it but it sucks.

2:04 why did I hear shitting💀😭

7:20 points of view are irrelevant to reality. A thing happens, whether you were or weren't there to see it. Irrelevant to count observers as a relevant factor.

They've been doing it for years.Read "the black awakening " by Russ Dizdar.

When i was in vr all was easy, like take objects with telekinesis but when come back to the reality was really dramatic and depressive..

When he returns from the space ship, his watch is STILL moving slower? No, not quite

That you're 'pushing' the idea of gravitons as a particle makes me consider the vacuum around a large body. Gravitons seem implausible to me now because if you have a single atom of matter at rest within the sphere of influence of a large gravitational body, that atom will be 'attracted' to that large body. But by what? Its own gravitons and the gravitons of the large body? Hows that possible? S/T curvature seems to me more plausible for large and tiny bodies.

@1:30--1:34 (Helium-3 illustration).

lol ok

Great 👍

I can hear the tap-dancing from here. Hey, careers are on the line.

I have a question, is a tachyon faster than a yoctosecond?

Discussions of tachyons seem quite different from discussions of other undiscovered particles. Usually particle theory is based on physics that can predict the properties - mass, charge, spin, etc. Are they like counterparts to the basic particles we already know of such as proton, neutron, electron, quark, etc? Tachyon discussion never even touches on these very basic properties. Also the question of whether there is A tachyon particle or are there many different kinds of faster than light particles. Or is it even a particle at all?

As far as I can tell, this amyloid 56 may have been a reasonable mistake, not a fraud. It happens sometimes. And, for info, there is plenty of research done outside amyloid peptides. For example, some antibodies against tau are being tested in clinical trials. Also, several drugs to manage brain inflammation are tested in clinical trials. I know the latter quite well as I am co-leading trials on two anti-inflammatory molecules tested on early Alzheimer’s patients…

A lot of my relatives have had it, one currently. I've read that Alzheimer's is the cause of about a third of the dementia cases, is that accurate? There doesn't seem to be much that can be done once you have it, but there have been some studies that show it can be delayed by both mental exercises and other interventions.

Anyone know a place where I can share my thoughts and opinions about vr gaming please share a link with me vr could be so much better and I would like to expresses myself

If you don't set the particle's speed to be greater than c but instead set time to be negative in the case of the tachyon, you don't run into the same problems. The tachyon is identical to the photon (or graviton) moving "backwards" in time. "Backwards" in in quotation marks because the flow of time is relative to the observer. An observer in the domain of tachyons would have the same laws of physics as us and still measure the speed of light to be the same. An observer in a domain where time travels in a direction opposite the direction we experience might hypothesize about faster than light particles in a domain with time flowing in an opposite direction to theirs. That would be us. Just because we perceive time flowing in one direction does not preclude time moving in a direction opposite to our flow. You don't need to accelerate an object beyond the speed of light for it to be tachyonic. At the speed of light the sign of time changes and further acceleration (from our standpoint) causes the object to slow from the point of view of a person in that opposite time domain. You can't accelerate a mass to c, you might say. And that's true enough but the structure, the topology, of spacetime can possibly cause objects to reach c due to cosmic expansion. (We really don't understand what it means to travel "through" space as opposed to traveling "with" space). Then further expansion would result in the objects moving in the direction opposite to us -- "backwards" in time and, apparently, moving faster than c.

wow

Omg

"where are the funds" I forgot

The problem with the graviton theory is that it trying to account for gravitational attraction between any two particles, let us say between 2 quarks. Well, that means that each quark has a mechanism to emit gravitons, as well as simultaneously having the ability to detect gravitons. But a quark is supposedly NOT composed of parts - a quark cannot be further subdivided. But it would need to be able to store an infinite number of gravitons, as it is constantly emitting them in 3 dimensions of physical space. When I think of something that can detect an external signal AND that can then respond to detecting that signal, I think of something like the retina (which is part of the brain) and its connections in the brain. But the retina is infinitely more complex than a quark, having many components. How can a quark carry out the detection and response like a retina would do? Also, what is true for the quark is also true for every one of the dozens of fundamental particles. How can each of these vastly different objects all have exactly the same mechanisms for graviton emission and graviton detection? Then too, the quark would need to tell the difference between a graviton that it produced (and NOT react to that graviton) and a graviton that came from the other quark (and react to that one). The quark would need to have little flagellae to propel itself along the graviton gradient that is the resultant of possibly a gigantic number of other quarks, photons, etc.

3:41 - "easy to pick up an apple" - this is an unfairly selected misleading example. You could have used the example of trying to pick up a car, but then you would not make the point you are trying for (ie, how weak gravity is). Gravity may be weak, but you cannot prove that by choosing a self-serving example.

1:16 - the visual implies that the two Russians are twin sister?

Bip literally plyin his head like drum

Scientists can't accurately measure the speed of light. They're giving an imperfect number 2. That action things go faster than the speed of light all the time. Tachyons, tardyons & gravitons for example. Maybe do some fucking research before you make yourself look so stupid.

I think the propagation wavelength of gravity, is the particle faster than light, or tachyon. A wavelength that cannot be measured, reaching edges past to that of inflation and then a positive vaccum energy from infinite inflation speed returns or ripples the wavelength from its source back to the mass of the object. Creating a proposition wavelength to be deduced as gravity, and this wave constant is the measure of time relative to mass. So in essence. Space-time is, gravity-space-time, either a single tachyon like particle ora tri-pair particle symmetry, consisting of time, gravity, and space fabric. The fundamental notion that spacetime is incoherable and cannot be be measured but is emergent from strings or dimers 0, is not fundamental. Even for the theory of a multi verse a negative brane or postulate is required for the replacement of spacetime, and therefore, forgoing the the presence of time we observe. Theoretically there may be particle and energy like objects beyond inflation and the data within. But this coheres into a fundamental beginning, or an impossible property. The same as the big bang, where all forces and particle interactions do not cohere to models we can create. It's the inverse effect of possibility, by binding spacetimegravity, the quantum dual observer effect of collapse when observed..... "But gluons are not collapsable into a particle, or in essence produce a dual property" gluons are not present, they represent a vaccim energy between quarks at any distance. As such our model of quark matter is incoherent. Virtual particle possibilities are values of there coherent particle interaction with spacetimegravity, or somewhat or something like a tachyon or tri-particle-pair creating gravity spacetime

Omg

I want a tachyon drive!

Maybe tachyons are the missing matter (aka dark matter).

This fancy mathematics brings us nowhere.Gravity is matters absorbing infrared radiation in the 0.3mm to 4.3mm wavelenght range.Bombard matter with this frequency range at high intensity and check for gravitational effects.

👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐Great video.