Blackbody Radiation: the Laws of Stefan, Wien, and Planck!

[@MZgamerLP]

I wish I have had a a teacher like Dr.Robitaille in school. But I guess its never to late to learn new things or repeat old know things to refresh your memory.

[@marc-andrebrunet5386]

🤭🤣🤣

[@ardi1463]

You talk like you really love this subject, and enjoy explaining it to others a lot, which makes learning way easier, thanks man

[@Taoss123KeyholeJourney]

You have a nice way of explaining big ideas in simple terms so we can all stick with you, even those of us who don't know or forgot calculus. I look forward to each lesson. Thank you.

[@asfnobambu]

This is another example why i envy my sons... they have access to this kind of true knowledge while the Academy is agonizing in mysticism and ignorance !

[@lifeunderthemic]

Yet you chose to watch someone who adheres to the same failed laws that don't adhere to the natural world.

[@nikolavideomaker]

@@lifeunderthemic they don't adhere?

[@gamaltk]

@@lifeunderthemic Please do explain how do they not adhere

[@lifeunderthemic]

@@gamaltk Newtonian laws of fiction from the start. There is no such thing as a straight line, anywhere, for a reason. The same can be said of the concepts of space and time. The problem is there are too many who haven't taken the time to go through the history of the sciences that has been rewritten instead just accepting what's been left over. Many great minds all writing about the spirals of life from micro-macro and the higher beliefs in something other than the self that goes along with this, for a reason. Instead many just go with the flow and fall into the simple sleight of hand presented that's just rehashed atomism. Nothing new to be discovered when there is no clarity as well as repeating the same failed thoughts of failure.

[@marc-andrebrunet5386]

🤭🤣🤣🤣

[@SanderBuruma]

I love your videos Robitaille, thank you so much!

[@chiragdugar8183]

I finally understood it, thank you sir :)

[@michaelclarage4145]

good stuff. Thank you. Great graphics too.

[@brendawilliams8062]

Thank you for sharing. It is an accomplishment and appreciated.

[@jooky87]

Wow I’m a chemical engineer and I just finally got black body radiation thanks to the professor here. Finally a clear explanation of its origins.

[@lifeunderthemic]

You must be huffing those chemicals. I'd love an explanation instead of a description. The rest of the world would as well.

[@carlubambi5541]

Great as always .Keep up the good word Doc

[@JaykeSapalaran-iq3qs]

Great video information ❤

[@sanikadixit9223]

After days of googling and watching videos I finally understood the concepts due to your way of making complicated things simple. Thank-you!!

[@gyj830]

Thank You So Much! After intensive googling and wikipedia and Mit opencourse for the first time I finally understood the black body radiation with this one... Thank you millions,,:D!!!

[@shainemaine1268]

Well then maybe you can explain it to me, because all this did was confuse me further

[@siddhantnandwani9089]

I wish I had a teacher like you, with the enthusiasm you have, I’d really be into the subject!

[@xkguy]

I took physics in college but this is far more interesting. I'm viewing these for a second and third time. PMR is a great teacher. He has an easy mastery of complicated material.

[@xenon9717]

Thanks for providing an actually clear explanation

[@juggernautsvaderdmunchkinland]

Thanks, Doc! Graph and equation break down was nice :)

[@freemillenniumideas]

I wonder how Plank derived such an excelent formula of the black body radation.

[@thatguy9502]

thank you

[@arnavsingh9156]

awesome

[@4istaAlkash]

Very very very helpful! Thank you very much. I hope you will continue posting good videos like this!

[@frankwilberforce119]

Your concise and understandable presentations are absolutely wonderful! Thank you!

[@marc-andrebrunet5386]

Ba-ba-ba Barbara-Ann 🤣🤣🤣

[@ydnartitcomb1]

Thank you

[@vinayJawla]

Very vivid explanation, sir.

[@jkhpbrn]

Gave a me good insight to understand Wien’s Displacement Law. I don’t find many educational videos engaging (exception of SciShow and VSauce), but yours was a refreshing find 🙂

[@emiljunvik3546]

Pausing at 0:50. Emissive properties, how about a piece of wood? If I add heat to a piece of wood, it changes character, it turns black. Yes. Black. The emissive properties change, into a "blacker" body, which absorbs and emits more efficiently. That process is very interesting, where heat transforms the absorber which starts to absorb and emit more of the energy over time. In that process work is done, where the heat re-organize matter from a lower emissivity state by doing work on the matter into a state where more heat is eventually absorbed and emitted. The heat flow, again, independently transform matter into structures when doing work as it flows through matter to optimize the flow of heat/energy. Matter depends on the flow of heat, it is secondary to the heat flow, which seems to be the backbone of the universe. I love thermodynamics! ;)

[@kommanaroopu9410]

Thank you very much doc it's pleasing to be a part of this learning system

[@drover7476]

really wonderful video mate, using some of the content in my astrophysics lab!

[@mrv1264]

I must admit that I don't fully understand the reason that "physics is quantized" (5:05). How is this measured experimentally? Those curves relating frequency (or wavelength) on the x-axis to intensity (luminosity?) on the y-axis were smooth. Is the difference between the macro and the micro (quantum) levels? I'm interested in approaching this from the "intuitive" view point, not the mathematical. One of the major problems with physics is its reliance on mathematical modeling. And aren't there many, many cases in physics where there is a lack of correlation between the mathematical result and the experimental (and in many cases the absence of experiment or experimental data)?

[@lifeunderthemic]

You should try Emmanuel Swedenborg and flush this atomistic quanta nonsense that does not explain and only describes today.

[@MenAtWorkMedia22]

Thank you!

[@sidneypickering9060]

Thank you✊🐢

[@Himanshu-wh8fk]

Very good video to learn

[@highschoolphysicist]

In 4:02, you said that hv is quantum of action. I think h itself is the quantum of action, with unit of Joule.second. And hv is photon energy (not action), with the unit of Joule. All the best for this channel. Thank you.

[@kirkwoodpaterson9510]

Thanks doc

[@4nukeman2]

You are awesome Dr. Thank you for these videos

[@marc-andrebrunet5386]

🤣🤣🤣

[@richardgivens9538]

Great subject. Very interesting.

[@budhachandrayumkhaibam6079]

good vid

[@electricallyengineered6443]

Wonderful video!

[@sunnypala9694]

Great sir awesome

[@samtigernotiger3886]

A question about the practical application of the Blackbody in measurement: Why is there an open path between the test object and the outlet opening? 1. The surface of the Blackbody has an absorbance of 1, any radiation of the test object should be absorbed if it hit the inner surface. 2. Only a thermal equilibrium between test object and Blackbody is necessary for the measurement. It would have to be enough to put the test object in a separate chamber in the Blackbody. Or just to connect the test object externally to the Blackbody.

[@danilkopaskudnik3002]

didn't understand but enjoyed ... sumthink 'bout presentation

[@cafeinst]

Keep the videos coming.

[@mohammadhafeezullah1846]

impressed

[@sooraj2463]

can be even better understandable

[@trytojustify]

jeez when he started with the practical use mit mind exploded. you can basically see the temperature of something, thats's insane!

[@TheLivirus]

What processes are generating the observed black-body spectrum as described by Planck's law? This question seems really difficult, because I've searched all over the internet without progress.

[@mohammedhashirkapadia2801]

Thank you sir .......you are doing a great job the video helped a lot

[@loveofphysics199]

THANK YOU

[@redstonewizard523]

Keep educating

[@rogerscottcathey]

I would think it would be good to discuss the so-called ultraviolet catastrophe in this series.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

QUESTIONS: Okay, 'wavelength' and 'frequency' appear to exist: 'Wavelength': How long the photon is in 'space'. 'Frequency': How many cycles per second in 'space'. 1. What exactly is 'space' that the photon exists in, OR does the photon itself make up 'space'? 2. What exactly is 'time' that there can be 'cycles per second'? 3. A photon is usually depicted in a sine wave pattern with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. The 'e' and 'm' energy fields go out together and come back in together, over and over and over, doing so even across the vast universe as far as we can see. Where does the energy in the energy fields go when both the 'e' and 'm' energy fields go to zero? And what causes the 'e' and 'm' energy fields to come back to 'full' from zero? Over and over again over vast distances.

[@ae_conrady612]

This lecture is easy to go at first glance, but it includes some fundamental (and important) statements on physics. Look into it more than once and think about it.

[@SocratesAlexander]

5:57 Did someone conduct an experiment using a real black body object painted with Vantablack?

[@AbuSayed-er9vs]

Great videos ! And plz make videos about how to derive plank equation...

[@dimit73]

very nice video. How the Planck ypothesis explains the Ultraviolet Catastrophe ? I mean why the fact that emitted radiation has energy E= nhf, leads us to predict the actual distribution of the black body radiation at all wavelengths? why most of the emitted energy is located at a very small area of the spectrum?

[@diegogamba2601]

Magnifico!

[@robertcaesar868]

Bruh am I tripping or does this video look high quality as shit?

[@jameshartley668]

Just way cool...my brain loves this stuff...

[@oluwagbengakosoko9014]

Thanks for this it is lucid enough

[@lifeunderthemic]

*ludicrous

[@jahpunk7]

thank you Doc! your passion is infectious...and this is probably getting ahead of ourselves, but i have watched as many of your EU talks as i can find, and i wonder, why did math become more sacred and primary than actual data? is it like terrence mckenna says, "we worship the incomprehensible "? anyhow, it is a new age! that mindset is the poop for the next generation's garden!

[@billkiele5819]

Hi @Samuel, as a Math Guy, and NOT a physicist--nothing negative there, once an "ideal" model could be derived from some initial data via some regression process, if the variance is "small enough", then we have a model that can be used to approximate reality to some level of precision. As is normally the case, errors propagate with further calculations, and the next "ideal" model extension has to carry this propagated error or must derive a follow-on to chop some of that propagated error, ideally to the same precision of the original regression/variance. Some formulas do that inherently, other magnify the propagated error. The prettier the formula, the greater the desire to employ it, and the experts aren't there to bring back first variance values. The models are perfectly accurate for the universe approximated. Where this breaks down are at mathematical singularities, which limit the domain of validity. Values inside a certain epsilon distance of the singularity are not part of a universal domain without making some assumptions about the singularity and about space itself. If it is a regular (1st order) singularity, a diffeq can paper over it. If it is an essential singularity (order two or higher) , they cannot be papered over. Here's a troubling thought for physicists that . A space has to be continuous, piecewise continuous, or continuous almost everywhere, inside a set of measure zero. Dirac's impulse function--I forget whose it really is (Pauli?)--required that last kind of "continuity" to justify mathematically why one could define an impulse function as a limit function of a sequence of Riemann integrals with constant sums. I ask myself the following question, for which I don't know the answer: --Is space continuous, "dense" in the rational number sense, or "rare" in the Cantor sense? Take a Planck box (a 3-d unit of space traveling through time. Inside 10^(-33) cm of its center, can we determine other points consistent with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle? Can we recognize the path of any photon traveling through it to know its entry and exit? Or do we have to ASSUME it takes on a value so that we can treat that Planck box as intrinsically continuous? --If spacetime (or space through time) is "rare", (nowhere dense), calculus is a poor approximation tool for all the rules. This is what I think the Quantum Loop gravity people have been wrestling mightily with--finite sums aren't as slick as integrals of elementary functions. IF that was too big a bite, I apologize.

[@stevehoward1980]

What about 9280 Angstroms size in blackbody Curious

[@lucascosta1603]

nice vid helped alot

[@saikanamsiam2000]

Thanks! But I was wondering whether or how the first derivative of Planck's law produce Wien's approximation. I haven't seen anything on this in any book or other website.

[@piyashdebnath7522]

I wish i have had a teacher like you in my university ♥️♥️ you are the boss

[@lifeunderthemic]

I'm sure your teacher only repeats and can't explain a single thing too.

[@marc-andrebrunet5386]

🤣🤣

[@michaelzlab]

Great video and teaching! I do have a question about the solar constant. How come there is not a time factor in the equation? It would seem this is an important part of the problem. I am to assume it is per second? Thank you!!

[@riyadey_24]

Thank you sir.... this is a awesome video...can you please derive the equations... that will more helpful for me...

[@drscott1]

👍🏼

[@stevenbaxter1138]

But the jump the quantized realization was not explained at all? why not? too hard? if so why the f didn't you say it was too hard? otherwise this was really good

[@brendawilliams8062]

The empty or not empty Vacuum problems keep them vacillating over the Issues.

[@hrishikeshnirgude9790]

Great

[@georgekanev6644]

The Plank’s law cannot apply in equilibrium condition (such conditions don’t exist in reality, see below). The Plank constant can to be numerically equal to 1 (energy equilibrium) only in case of full (not approximately) but full reflection. Even I assert below about new material (nuclear chain nature joromachine www.kanevuniverse.com ) which has full but not approximate reflection, it is valid only about known now existing spectrum of radiations which recover all video, nuclear spectrum, including heat spectrums which is interesting to us because we will try to produce rocket chamber from this material, where we can directly ignite thermonuclear synthesis and this chamber will withstand these huge pressure and temperature. But we cannot assert that this is the all possible spectrum in the universe, because if we success to create such material (nuclear chain), then this material will has very specific resonance spectrum of vibration of nuclei knots of such imagine “crystal lattice”. So what should be this frequency? It will be somewhere between the frequencies of gamma rays and ultra violet rays. So if we make “laser crystal” from such material then we can use this unknown for now rays to tools this material! So see this: Whether the constant of Plank is universal all over the universe? Of course not, no constant is absolutely in the universe, all is changes depending by the time, but some processes is changes so slowly that practically it is impossible to detect not only experimentally but mathematically as well because represented it by some mathematical sequence it inclines to zero. So in concrete case this theory it isn’t correct simply because there it isn’t fulfills energy preservation, the equation of Plank is about some concrete frequency E=h.γ no matter whether this frequency radiation is illuminated particularly, or fully as it is in case of absolute black body. So about our position of observation, the radius position of our Sun in the Galaxy, this constant as well other known constant (for example the constant of velocity of light) are “absolutely”. But what about the time dependence?.... Well because we know from USM www.kanevuniverse.com that the Sun was born on the center of our galaxy and shifting towards the periphery the protons and electrons there become heavier and the neutrino become lighter, follows that the conditions about radiation process is changes as well. What kind of changes?....let see firstly this: Very interesting question: “whether the speed of light is absolutely…” Of course not, but this is related only to the constant of light spread like a real number, not as a limited which we can’t reach! What I mean? Firstly see pages: 94 to 98 and pages: 198 to 202 USM www.kanevuniverse.com here was delivered these formulae: r=h/(C.m) where: r - is the resonance radius of the particle; h - is the constant of Plank; C - is the velocity of light; m - is the mass of particle; and this formula: C_i=m_p/m_i .C where: C_i - is the constant of velocity of light (like a real number) about the different possible worlds (see shown pages); m_p - is the mass of proton; m_i - is the mass of current stable particle about current possible world; C - is velocity of light in our world where the velocity of light has this value (C). As it is seen on the shown above pages the resonance radius is connected with the mass of the particle which is stable particle in examined world and the real number of the velocity of spread of the field in this possible world. The important conclusion is not only possibility to be created “Oracul” (see the pages), but more importantly is the consequence that on the center of our galaxy (in fact any galaxy) where are situated and was born the proto particles the limited constant of spread of field (“light”) is different like a real number compare to this value in our space which is (C). That is one of the reason that we can’t see the central zone of any galaxy! And this: So what is the Planck length in the center of any (including our) galaxy? It is inclines to zero and it is so close to zero as the energy of this spot is close to zero. Because there the thickening of the space is also inclines to zero and of course the velocity of light spreading inclines to infinity. There springs up the following question “if the light spreading inclines to infinity whether this spot contains infinity energy because of the equation:E=m.c^2 “. Because we are asserting that there the energy inclines to zero. Let return towards page 49 formula 14 and page 50 formulae 15, 16, 17 and explanation to page 51 USM www.kanevuniverse.com and as to take into account that these equations are actually belated ones (see part I USM) we can write: E=0,98024.〖lim〗_(m→0) (m).〖lim〗_(V→C) (V).〖lim〗_(C→∞) (C) If we replace the limits there we can obtain that the energy inclines to infinity, because there the light velocity appears risen in second power. But that is wrong, because we have to imagine that this mass (m) in fact is part of orbital system (see part I USM) to be possible to exist and when mass (m) disappear (inclines to zero), passes time t=R/C which is needed the light ray to communicates to the center of orbit about has coming changes. So the mass (m) inclines to zero before the velocity (v) to inclined to (C) and obviously the energy in this spot inclines to zero. So you can see that if we follow mathematic strictly the energy in the center of any galaxy (“big bang” or “black hole”) has to be infinity, which hasn’t physical meant, but if we observe that in the universe there absent purely interaction (without accelerations - special theory of relativity and that we cannot synchronize the clocks, because to exist some object we must to have dynamically interaction with it and there is needed time to reach the field, the light there), follows that the shown above limit of energy

[@briankerr4512]

Is a photon the out put of any experiment ?

[@lloydwelch6492]

I was going to ask that same question.

[@heckler73]

What about phonons or plasmons?

[@ShifuCareaga]

Brian Kerr photons are released all the time what do you mean? Lasers rely on precise photonic release.

[@taxsaversteve]

photons are not released because there are no photons. Photons are a ridiculous theory because it would mean that somehow there are an unlimited amount of photons ready to "emit" each time a light is turned on. That's crazy talk. I like Robitaille a lot, but he needs to address the issue of the mythical "photon." Of course Robitaille is right about CMB and WMAP. I guess people want so badly to "believe" in something. Physics is plenty fascinating without dreaming up fantasies about non-existent particles, Big Bangs, accretion disks, Hawking Radiation, and whatever other nonsense bandied about in the last 80 years of "science."

[@ShifuCareaga]

Steven Schrader this may be true but it is a working model that has useful applications. Just like Newtonian mechanics.

[@trihorus]

Why isn't he blinking? :/

[@ezhilmathiv5681]

Nice observation LoL...

[@anthonyyee7481]

Hi Doc...the human body emits characteristic radiation that is linked to it's temperature..is the human body a Blackbody? Tq,

[@richardtofield9959]

should Wien be pronounced veeyen?

[@hairdie]

❤️

[@georgekanev6644]

must to judge contra mathematically. So whether in the center of our galaxy the constant of Plank is the same as it is in our present position - the Sun? The correct answer is no, because in the center of our galaxy and in fact about any galaxy we have the very first orbital system contained from two almost equal masses (protoparticles) orbiting each other, so the condition of quantum action is far more different in such orbital system than the hydrogen atom in our position of observation and as it is now. That is why we cannot see the center of our galaxy, because the constant of Plank there is different and it is inclines to zero there as well the length of Plank also inclines to zero. I like to propose this article: About pulsars, this explanation is correct with one exception, namely remainder after the star explosion in fact is nuclear chain material with common magnetic moment (see joromachine www.kanevuniverse.com ) which can’t radiate anything because such material has full (not approximately) but full reflection….. that is why such material shine so brightly but not because it is in high energy state eventually! So what is the constant of Plank about such material?... Of course it is equal to 1, because whole coming to the surface of this material waves is radiates fully. That is opposite to the absolute black body swallowing of radiation where theoretically the constant of Plank must to be equal to zero (there absent any radiation and energy of this radiation is equal to zero), but whether it is possible?.. Of course not, because to exist some object we must to have dynamically interaction with it and therefore see this: What is the light nature spreading in the universe, which isn’t explains in Maxwell Lorentz equations? In these equations is supposed that light does represent chain perpendicular each other magnetic and electric fields which inducted each other…….that is right, but is it possible these fields to exist and spread in empty or absolute space? This theory suggests that the light can spread in vacuum, which is correct and hence in empty or absolute space, which is wrong, not only because according to USM www.kanevuniverse.com such absolute space doesn’t exist, but because of the nature of light spreading according to USM. This nature shows that any light touching with atom’s or nuclei’s matter is in fact dynamically interaction, which proof that to exist any object we have to have dynamically interaction with this object. Let begin with pages 70 to 84 USM www.kanevuniverse.com where in summarizing fashion the electrical field is inertial balance in orbital system (see fig.4, fig.5 part I USM) and the magnetic field is mechanical inertial moment of revolving mass, as to take into account that the quantity difference between the gravitational and electrical forces comes from the expansion of the universe (see part II USM). According to spectral analysis in atoms (pages 86 to 98 USM) and spectral analysis in nuclei (pages 151 to 174 USM), quantum stimulation in fact shifted orbital mass: electron in atom and nucleon in nucleus, from low to high orbit which is dynamically force (F=m.a) and therefore the light cannot spread and even exist in empty or absolute space where masses absent (that is related to the Higgs boson as well). But there is one question, if the magnetic moment is inertial mechanical moment of revolving mass, then which mass we should take in to account, the mass of proton or the mass of electron? The answer is both: the mass of electron defined additional mass in balance of orbital system, which is 1800 times or so smaller than the mass of proton which dominated the whole mechanical inertial moment of whole orbital system. So therefore if we accept the equations of special relativity in their known form, we can estimate that the dynamically interaction is approximate 1800 times weaker than the usual mechanical interaction between two massive bodies in strong coil magnetic field for example. If we multiply this coefficient with the time necessary to the light ray to reach this newly existed object, then we can estimate the error of the measured velocity of this object from our position of observation, because of this dynamically interaction. G.Kanev

[@rethinkscience8454]

In most physics equations the assumption c the speed of light is constant, this is not true - physics is limited by this. Additionally time is a energy like a radiating wave. Where it doesn’t exist black space occurs, confused with dark energy which is an absence of time which has a life of micro seconds before real time races in to fill the void. I guess we’ll hear about dark energy for another generation or so until we run out of money.

[@Alaayedi]

million like

[@charlesbates6178]

Physics. It's what's for dinner.

[@ShifuCareaga]

Methinks you're heading towards your paper and the hypothesis that the CBR is coming from the ocean. I think that's a fine destination, but you need to make sure to explain the big picture since this series is not for your critics but the public and laymen. It is for the public, right? Are you going to drop a bomb like how the WMAP sat images are all useless, as Crothers did? I hope there is just something more broad we are getting to, because anyone can listen to your lectures on blackbody or the podcasts. Cheers. PS I don't think believing that CBR comes from the oceans makes you a "Nobel disease crank" because firstly that isn't a real disease and secondly rationalwiki is a shit site of narrow minded drivel. Your hypothesis has some logical validity and I hope one day you get a chance to be heard. You and Arp and all the others they lampoon.

[@rushthezeppelin]

He has already dropped the bomb that WMAP and COBI are useless in an EU 2014 talk. I think it's wonderful that he's doing these fairly in depth but well explained preliminary concepts leading up to his bombshells that he has already dropped regarding the CMB being a signal from the oceans and the sun being (at least partially) a liquid metallic hydrogen sphere. He is SOOO much easier for me to follow than Crothers (to be fair it's partially my fault because I can never find the time to learn the tensor calc required to fully understand Crothers) and I've already learned quite a bit in this series..

[@daemonnice]

Totally agree

[@kennethkustren3966]

With all THINGS balanced, it's hot to be cool. Wait ... With all things balanced, it's cool t.... hmm.

[@hg2.]

Sorry, this is not good for the general audience: too much gesticulation, formulas thrown at the audience, and just plain geekiness of the presenter.

[@michaelgolfetto9619]

The source of this black body radiation is what today we call quantum dots; carbon or graphene. There is a constant delay between the relaxation time of excited electrons (electron holes) and the photon emission; dependent on size of the quantum dots lattice

[@xkguy]

Einstein had it easy. All he had to do was apply smarts and imagination and come up with new concepts. Dr Robitaille however is now in the position of having to correct 100 years of incorrect interpretation of blackbody radiation concepts. He won't make friends easily doing this. He is the Great Undoer.

[@mathsbyaasir6067]

sir pls come india we all are invited u

[@taylormichaelj1]

Hi Dr Robitaille. Please don't loose me with talk about 'photons'. Light cannot be a particle... I and many others in the EU community have this view point. I would like to really know where your expertise and education stands on the debate of Photons and just what light is and even is not. As I said, I do not see light as a particle...

[@FindLiberty]

Okay! Good enough for me so far, but then that "wave" still needs to be disturbing or moving through something... like the Aether, right?. Maybe the accepted disproving of the Aether theory _needs to be revisited!_ Could the Aether soup medium be so thin that moving through it has no effect on anything, yet extremely high gravity/proximity slightly changes its density?

[@emiljunvik3546]

Consider a tan

[@sakthikrish6355]

Hi

[@theskyatnightrawunderthedome]

UGH~

[@c.crespo8196]

Bro your fit is too loose

[@rethinkscience8454]

In most physics equations the assumption c the speed of light is constant, this is not true - physics is limited by this. Additionally time is a energy like a radiating wave. Where it doesn’t exist black space occurs, confused with dark energy which is an absence of time which has a life of micro seconds before real time races in to fill the void. I guess we’ll hear about dark energy for another generation or so until we run out of money.

[@rethinkscience8454]

In most physics equations the assumption c the speed of light is constant, this is not true - physics is limited by this. Additionally time is a energy like a radiating wave. Where it doesn’t exist black space occurs, confused with dark energy which is an absence of time which has a life of micro seconds before real time races in to fill the void. I guess we’ll hear about dark energy for another generation or so until we run out of money.