Does Time Cause Gravity?

PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to: to.pbs.org/DonateSPACE
↓ More info below ↓
Sign Up on Patreon to get access to the Space Time Discord!
/ pbsspacetime
We know that gravity must cause clocks to run slow on the basis of logical consistency. And we know that gravity DOES cause clocks to run slow based on many brilliant experiments. But I never explained WHY or HOW gravity causes the flow of time to slow down. And I’m not going to explain it now - because in a sense it’s not true. Gravity does NOT warp the flow of time. It’s the other way around - the warping of time causes gravity.
Check out the Space Time Merch Store
pbsspacetime.com
Sign up for the mailing list to get episode notifications and hear special announcements!
mailchi.mp/1a6eb8f2717d/space...
Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Written by Matt O'Dowd
Graphics by Leonardo Scholzer, Yago Ballarini, Pedro Osinski, Adriano Leal & Stephanie Faria
GFX Visualizations: Katherine Kornei
Directed by Andrew Kornhaber
Assistant Producer: Setare Gholipour
Executive Producers: Eric Brown & Andrew Kornhaber
Sabine Hossenfelder's episode "Do we travel through time at the speed of light?"
• Do we travel through t...
Sound of Pulsars
www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au/peop...
End Credits Music by J.R.S. Schattenberg: / @jrsschattenberg
Special Thanks to Our Patreon Supporters
Big Bang Sponsors
Rick DeWitt
Sandy Wu
Matthew Miller
Sean Maddox
Brodie Rao
Scott Gray
Ahmad Jodeh
Radu Negulescu
Alexander Tamas
Morgan Hough
Juan Benet
Fabrice Eap
Mark Rosenthal
David Nicklas
Quasar Sponsor
Hank S
Christina Oegren
Mark Heising
Vinnie Falco
Hypernova Sponsors
william bryan
Paul Stehr-Green
Leo Emerson
muOn Marketing
Russell Pope
Ben Delo
L. Wayne Ausbrooks
Nicholas Newlin
Mark Matthew Bosko
Drew Hart
Jason Finn
Антон Кочков
Alec S-L
Julian Tyacke
John R. Slavik
Mathew
Danton Spivey
Donal Botkin
John Pollock
Edmund Fokschaner
Joseph Salomone
Matthew O'Connor
chuck zegar
Jordan Young
m0nk
John Hofmann
Timothy McCulloch
Gamma Ray Burst Supporters
Ben Campbell
Lawrence Tholl, DVM
Faraz Khan
Almog Cohen
Alex Edwards
Nick
Ádám Kettinger
Sylvain Leduc
Anthony Kahng
MD3
Endre Pech
Daniel Jennings
Cameron Sampson
Pratik Mukherjee
Geoffrey Clarion
Nate
Adrian Posor
Darren Duncan
Lily kawaii
Russ Creech
Jeremy Reed
Magistrala Хемус [Kybrit]
Derek Davis
Eric Webster
Steven Sartore
DrJYou
David Johnston
J. King
Michael Barton
Christopher Barron
James Ramsey
Justin Jermyn
Mr T
Andrew Mann
Jeremiah Johnson
fieldsa eleanory
Peter Mertz
Kevin O'Connell
Richard Deighton
Isaac Suttell
Devon Rosenthal
Oliver Flanagan
Dawn M Fink
Bleys Goodson
Darryl J Lyle
Robert Walter
Bruce B
Ismael Montecel
Andrew Richmond
Simon Oliphant
Mirik Gogri
David Hughes
Christopher Hartnett
Mark Daniel Cohen
Brandon Lattin
Yannick Weyns
Nickolas Andrew Freeman
Shane Calimlim
Tybie Fitzhugh
Robert Ilardi
Astaurus
Eric Kiebler
Craig Stonaha
Martin Skans
Michael Conroy
Graydon Goss
Frederic Simon
Tonyface
John Robinson
A G
Kevin Lee
Adrian Hatch
Yurii Konovaliuk
John Funai
Cass Costello
Geoffrey Short
Bradley Jenkins
Kyle Hofer
Tim Stephani
Luaan
AlecZero
Cody
Malte Ubl
King Zeckendorff
Nick Virtue
Scott Gossett
Martin J Lollar
Dan Warren
Patrick Sutton
John Griffith
Daniel Lyons
DFaulk
Kevin Warne
Andreas Nautsch
Brandon labonte

[@brianmessemer2973]

So does that also mean: the heavier the topic, the more time it takes to understand it? 🧐

[@staas1737]

According to the video, the more time it takes to understand the topic, the heavier it is.

[@odinip]

Thats the truth of relativity

[@Restrocket]

Especially if you are stuck in gravity well like we are (((

[@mishael1339]

@@staas1737 That's perfect!

[@osmantekcan7260]

Actually he is saying that the more time it takes the "heavier" the topic.

[@manonthedollar]

Every time he says "In our last episode..." I think "woah, I must have missed that." But no, I never have.

[@spongebobsucks12]

Oh man this hits home. I'm in too deep LMAO

[@spacewitch3707]

i wouldnt want it any other way

[@chocodawwg]

lmfao, yea and I still can't understand

[@psychicspy1234]

Lol me too

[@wuutnopepe613]

view their videos as class and repeat them if you really wanna learn all. Is too much for 1 viewing

[@Sangsstuff]

I sometimes get a bit full of myself and think I am smart. Then I watch these videos and get reminded that I am very mediocre. Thank you Space Time for keeping me grounded!

[@Sangsstuff]

@Nathan Melia How would you explain it in a much quicker and equally comprehensive way?

[@realmilind]

I didn't understand anything in this video.

[@odmcclintic]

This video holds the record for how quickly Matt made my brain hurt.

[@christophermiller9242]

The only thing I understood was the word “boat”. Even then I was confused because they looked like kayaks.

[@durnsidh6483]

Kayaks are a type of boat. Hopefully this explains the entire video.

[@MrEscape314]

@@durnsidh6483 Nemo says it's pronounced but.

[@rsb014]

That is because they are actually canoes.

[@bucknunley359]

Underrated comedy gold.

[@joecraigslist9467]

Why didn't the boat in the fast timestream pull the slow timestream away from the bank. I just don't get it.

[@andorwid1880]

What I learn from these videos most of all, is that reality has no obligation to make sense to me.

[@davebartosh5]

The fun part is the seeming infinite complexity. We may never even have a grasp on reality.

[@EmeraldView]

42 up votes. It's going to have to take someone who doesn't know any better to upvote you again. 😛

[@Calikid331]

@@davebartosh5 Exactly, in order to understand reality we've have to leave reality, which we obviously can't.

[@nathanwoodruff9422]

@@davebartosh5 _"The fun part is the seeming infinite complexity."_ The sad part about this is that gravity is easily explained and can be understood by someone that has a 5th grade education. The even sadder part about this is all the college professors of physics and PhD's created quantum mechanics only to get funding to further their careers along to do nothing more than creating more stupid $#!+ to live off more funding for the rest of their lives while basically doing nothing their entire career all the while the world has soaked up these worthless ideas like a religion because some college professor said it was so.

[@davebartosh5]

@@nathanwoodruff9422 Go back to living in a mud hut then if you don't like science. Leave a like and subscribe while you're here. Your comments help the channel!

[@ning-chang]

Ok. Let’s admit it, we don’t know how this world works.

[@ThomasDowning-ud6fz]

At the risk of sounding cliche , you sir are a gracious host. You work very hard to try to explain it as simply and intuitively as possible. I should qualify that by saying, what you are trying to explain is also easily the most difficult (or at least reached the limit of human intellectual capability) to comprehend profession one can undertake. Your grace of course comes from the fact you know you are speaking to a lot of people who are not at that paid grade, so to speak. Present company included! I can see that you are striving wth great humor and humility to try make us see what you do. Not for ego but because you know it's true and beautiful information in a crazy world!! And you want to share it!!!! Great job bro!!!! Everyone involved!!! Thanks!!!! I love this show!!! Even if 45% of the time I'm, " in the weeds" too one degree or another!!!

[@Elzilcho87]

Every single one of these physics videos makes me feel like I'm touching the very edges of my mental abilities. Thanks for that.

[@DJ_Koob]

That's because they're trying to get you to believe in unicorn farts...

[@ph00xy]

My mental abilities do not come close to reaching that far. I tell myself that gravity does not exist. What people think as gravity is really a universal force called laziness. All things on earth are lazy and want to lay down on the ground for a nap. At least I can relate to and wrap my brain around this theory.

[@MeTooMan]

It isn’t real science.

[@cory99998]

@@DJ_Koob this guy definitely doesn't have major cognitive dissonance in his life

[@dejorgensen10]

Don't you mean "Mental Dilation?"

[@richiegurdler2793]

I love how this channel makes me feel both simultaneously smart and dumb at the same time

[@FirstLast-sy3rj]

Superposition

[@K4inan]

@NeverAloneWithCHRIST I don't think you know what a scientific theory is.

[@mroberts566]

I agree, but mostly dumb.

[@booksteer7057]

When you observe how smart you are, you're acting dumb. When you observe how dumb you are, you're acting smart. Heisenberg understood.

[@ashleyurban8674]

@NeverAloneWithCHRIST my faith is not in science but in the lord Jesus but I also believe that they coincide. I am still wowed when I see how intricate a strand of DNA is and the depths he went thru in his beautiful creation. I dont believe the human mind can ever figure everything out and i dont believe we are supposed to. But I do believe how powerful and feel science explains (scratches the surface really), the amount of work he has put into his creation and how much love it must take for such efforts. I dont rely on science but in my search have recognized the force, power, love, our creator and God has for us.

[@Daahrien]

This is the best video I have ever seen in my life. And I have always been interested in science. It makes a lot of sense. The why time and gravity are so tightly related.

[@wingsuiter2392]

I watched this video when it first came out. I also remember thinking about this very idea a few years before this video came out. One thing that could be causal in this relationship is the possibility (perhaps likelihood) of our living in a simulation. The more Matter in a given area within the simulation would make it more difficult in that area to simulate the goings on there. Slowing down time in that area would make it easier to simulate the Universe there. Furthermore, gravity slows down the actions of anything moving in the area (assuming most things are not collapsing into the gravity field).

[@kevino.7348]

Pleas me stop with the “simulation” theory. It’s ridiculous.

[@divinefevil]

I'm so ready to feel dumb. Bring it on.

[@generichomosapien4666]

yea, been studying this stuff for like soooo long (probably a little over a month) while keeping up with school,

[@ScienceAsylum]

You're one of my favorite physics channels too Matt 😊

[@adityasonawane686]

Hi sciences asylum , your biggg fan ! Your channel Is awesome , both of you are my favourite phy channels

[@narfwhals7843]

I'm telling ScienceClick and Eugene!

[@GraveUypo]

agreed, but you did an even better job on this topic! it was through your video that this concept finally clicked. sorta.

[@definesigint2823]

Aww, it's nice when these guys like each other 🤗

[@adityasonawane686]

@@GraveUypo yeah his video upon gravity because of time was mind blowing literally , science Asylum is underrated but awesome

[@BarryKort]

The interaction of timekeeping and gravitational field strength has profound implications for diagnosing the error in Bell's Theorem. If Einstein had been alive when John Bell published his derivation, I reckon Einstein would have reminded Bell that timekeeping is local. When the eastbound particle is at distance +x and the westbound particle is at -x, they are not the same age. The time-varying components of λ(x,t) have decohered and do not have the same phase. Any gravitational gradient along the path suffices to produce dechorence of the phase of λ(x,t). That decoherence explains why Bell's inequality does not agree with experimental observation. In short, the violation of Bell's Inequality proved that Einstein was correct about the warping of spacetime. Bell's derivation would only apply to a cosmos free of gravitational gradients.

[@scribebat]

Thanks! i finally get where gravity comes from. At least in General Relativity. The example of the two boats is brilliant. Time, gravity and light... gravitational lensing... Has anyone ever looked at wavelengths in gravitational lensing? i can't find any info on anyone ever specifically looking at that, if gravity could possibly attenuate light wave frequency... Light from distant stars has to pass through a lot of gravitational variations in space. If this has any impact on light frequency, this would result in a radical rethink of the notion of an expanding universe based on cosmological red shift. It would also actually predict the microwave background radiation, not as a residue of a cosmic 'big bang', but simply a result of light traveling through curved space. If gravity can bend light, it seems entirely reasonable to expect gravity to be able also to reduce its energy.

[@saritp101]

"Speak for yourself. I'm still quite confused." Bold of you to assume the rest of us aren't confused 😂

[@78grafikal]

Its because how he talks using alot of fancy words

[@XEinstein]

6:48 great to see a shout out to Nick's channel, PBS!

[@adityasonawane686]

Yes !

[@goclbert]

And Eugene as well!

[@JustNow42]

Already in 1962 I wrote about that. It is the quantum property of the particle in the gravitational field that make it move in direction of the time gradient ( also influenced by the space distortion). Part of the probability distribution of the particle will spend more time where time goes slower so the properbility that it is where the time go slower increases and it moves. Easy peasy

[@davidelliott5843]

Everything takes the easiest route. Time ticking slow is easier than time going fast. So everything migrates (aka falls) towards slower time.

[@achillecasciaro]

This explanation of yours is the only one which makes sense to me, brilliant!

[@billshiff2060]

Bothers me that it shouldn't be possible to fall into a black hole since time stops at the horizon.

[@timefactortheoryofgravitya7578]

Check out Time Factor Theory for a different approach. Click the big T to the left!

[@ThePurza]

Time seems to stop from the perspective of an observer (elsewhere) but the person falling carries on as normal The observer would see the "faller" getting more and more red-shifted until they were no longer visible. Trippy

[@johnnyreb280]

@billshiff2060 Your statement sir, that "time stops at the horizon of a black hole" is a simplification often used in popular science to explain certain aspects of black holes. However, it's important to clarify that time doesn't literally stop at the event horizon; rather, it appears to slow down significantly from the perspective of an outside observer due to gravitational time dilation. Now, from the viewpoint of someone outside the black hole observing an object falling towards it, time appears to slow down for the object as it approaches the event horizon. As the object gets closer to the event horizon, its clock appears to tick slower and slower, approaching a standstill as it reaches the event horizon. This phenomenon occurs because the gravitational field near the black hole is so intense that it warps spacetime, causing time to behave differently than in regions of weaker gravity. But.... from the perspective of the object falling into the black hole, time continues to progress as normal. The person or object falling into the black hole would not experience time stopping; rather, they would continue to experience time passing as they cross the event horizon and eventually reach the singularity at the center of the black hole. So..., the idea that "it shouldn't be possible to fall into a black hole since time stops at the horizon" is not accurate. Objects can indeed fall into black holes, and from their perspective, time continues to progress normally. The phenomenon of time dilation near black holes is a fascinating part of general relativity, but it does not prevent objects from crossing the event horizon.

[@billshiff2060]

@@johnnyreb280 uh huh so tell me How long will it take for you to watch someone fall through the event horizon? If the person falling in is watching you at the same time, what will he see? You will never see him fall in. He will see the entire future of the universe as he watches you. So nothing prevents objects from falling in EXCEPT it will take all of future time to see it happen. You fall in normally EXCEPT you will see the end of the universe before you do.

[@BobfromSydney]

The explanation that all objects are moving at light speed through SPACETIME blew my mind.

[@SjoerdMentens]

Objects=Matter?

[@alejandrogutierrez6367]

Think about this, gravity is not created but it's a wave function and only when we measure it is when it appears 🤔

[@timokimo8206]

This guy can say anything and people will believe him😂

[@stewiesaidthat]

SPACE is nothing and TIME is SPACE therefore SPACETIME IS NOTHING. How can nothing travel.

[@timokimo8206]

@@stewiesaidthat how did they measure it🤔

[@nerdy_white_guy8511]

Matt @ 12:23: "So, who wants to play?" Me: ***EVERYONE!***

[@dicebar_]

Right? When do we roll for initiative?

[@daviddelaney2407]

@@dicebar_, if you have to ask... --Dave, ... you're in your surprise round

[@Rastafa469]

Everyone: ME!

[@you2tooyou2too]

Thank you for this closer, perspectived look at the rate of time. This is why, since I started thinking about the formation of black holes, I have been convinced there can not be any occurrences of the often presumed 'singularity', since none of the matter even very close to the SR/EH has experienced enough time to make any progress toward where that 'singularity' is purported to be. The SR grows with the approach of accreting matter, and envelopes the closer, unaging (relative to most of the the rest of the universe) infall matter.

[@bxorn]

On point! The time collapses when the time measures itself. The begins when the time ends🌅

[@Sir.Craze-]

"well, the answer is 'Lol no'" XD This is the kind of thing that brings science from this unreachable thing to something we can all have fun discussing. Not to mention, shows you are absolutely great sports! Thanks a ton for the smile! 🎩👌

[@Millea314]

The boat analogy is wonderful and was really clear. I was trying to think about it theoretically, but with that analogy it's a LOT easier to picture.

[@wyskass861]

I agree. It was a very effective method of clarification. Gave me a major step forward in understanding as well.

[@wiscgaloot]

I have a decent education in physics. BS and MS. And my first answer is "yes". If time was not progressing, you would not be attracted to the nearest massive object.

[@tgrigsby7]

I've been saying for a long time that gravity is an emergent system caused by the effect of mass on time. Nice to see someone fully explain it.

[@vincecox8376]

Anti gravity is a product of the center of a magnet, However you need to know keep iron out of the picture. If you want to play with anti gravity you will find everything you need at the center of a magnetic force. But keep in mind iron is not part of the energy you would be working with. PROOF: Take a bar magnet and tap just the center of same on Plastic, glass or granite rocks and you will see them loose significant weight!!

[@bumcrackwatchco.]

No , try again ...

[@lucastornado9496]

@@bumcrackwatchco.lmao who tf are you? Quit yapping

[@hijack29]

A guy named Albert einstiene said this very long time ago

[@anonomous7936]

Just what einstein said

[@NewMessage]

11:56 And just like that... Matt's 'The physics of D&D' side channel was born.

[@FisicoNuclearCuantico]

Department of Defense?

[@daviddelaney2407]

Matt: "would you like to play ... a game?" --Dave, the ultimate goal is to survive heat death. GO!

[@FisicoNuclearCuantico]

@@daviddelaney2407 Never had a doubt.

[@KuK137]

Even he can't explain the peasant railgun, though :

[@Scanlaid]

"Our old friend the Spacetime diagram. Let's have just two dimensions of space so we have space, for time" Beautiful sentence. Felt like a bonk on the head

[@madcircle7311]

penrose diagram joins the chat

[@Nevertook]

Was hitting clips listening to you. Good fun thanks for the cast.

[@DamnBoiya]

To many big words for me I would have to sit down and study to understand. But I enjoy how your looking at the relationship between gravity and time, never pondered that.. Thank you

[@DamnBoiya]

You're

[@sergey3746]

When you approach massive object, server node in that part of a simulation is under heavy load from calculation all those particles, so calculations are performed at a lower rate and your clock ticks slower ^_^

[@hyperactivists9390]

most umderrated comment ever

[@nelsonyurok]

I like your style of thinking.

[@communist-hippie]

Its lagging. Perfect. My friends will have a blast with this fact

[@Shifter-1040ST]

Yeah, framerate sucks down here. That's why it's so windy down here, them giant fans are trying to cool the GPU.

[@danakuss2567]

@@LUXINK subconscious is powerful. We are recreating reality through a more playful form, probably as a defense.

[@brianjlevine]

I'm afraid that if I played D&D with Matt as the Dungeon Master, I would never truly understand the quest he was sending me on.

[@nmarbletoe8210]

it'd be fun to play a barbarian in that case

[@anarchistangel2314]

@@nmarbletoe8210 me, playing a barbarian with 20 INT: ah yes this gravity is made out of time but the real question is CAN YOU EAT IT

[@Lightning_Lance]

@@anarchistangel2314 Yes, you can eat it. It's called a banana.

[@markodowd3476]

I have to.

[@brianjlevine]

@@markodowd3476 sending out prayers.😁

[@markhuebner7580]

Very interesting! Not sure which video comes before this. Like explanation of gravity as differential flow through spacetime. Still puzzled by photon frame-of-reference timelessnes/omnipresence and apparent discounting of physics' time description at event horizon as being stopped?

[@Mrmder]

"The answer is lol, no" cracked me up.

[@willis936]

I had to pause to stop laughing.

[@sonofsupernova3455]

An odd choice to include that user name, did I miss something?

[@thegreathadoken6808]

@@sonofsupernova3455 Well I assume it was just a way of answering what was probably accidentally a pretty good question by explaining how they can be fairly sure the Neutrino Background exists. The username was coincidental. Funny (to my juvenile mind), but coincidental. I suppose they could have avoided using the name by attributing the question to someone else, but that just wouldn't be cricket, would it.

[@DGP406]

"Do we now understand how gravity works?" Me: yeah Him: No Me: No

[@hdskl2150]

😂

[@kingo_friver]

So did I, ashamed of myself😁

[@rundata]

🤣

[@newhorizon3229]

🥲

[@rundata]

@@newhorizon3229 obscure unused emoji by anyone but you emojii Indeed

[@fonkyfesh-old]

I have never visualized gravitation as a variance in the flow of time through an object but that makes perfect sense now

[@wyskass861]

I learned not too long ago to prefer to think of the speed of light as the speed of causality. Light being massless is not subject to acceleration constraints from mass, so it's speed limit is causality itself. So rather than thinking of speed of light being some arbitrary value that can't be exceeded, it's more useful to think of causality as not possible to exceeded, which makes better logical sense. This helps with logic of other concepts involving speed of light. It's like saying nothing can travel faster than the speed of a car, when a better way to think of it would be to refer directly to the speed limit of the road. Nothing would exist without causality having a speed limit because everything would happen at once from past to future.

[@MajKetchup347]

You can never fully understand how much this episode blew my mind! It's like someone proving to you that red is now blue.

[@JessSimpson1313]

"If you haven't watched the last video" would be a lot better advisory if you put a link in the comments, or numbered your videos, or anything other than have your audience search the last 8 months of videos for this videos name. Love your guys videos but it would be super helpful if you guys had some numbering or something for easy reference.

[@Liz-xq2wi]

They would be helpful in the description! If you didn’t know however, in the upper right hand corner a box pops up when they are talking about another video/channel with links.

[@d4b]

I had the same concern. I searched for "gravity" in the channel, and found this video from a similar creation date: "How Does Gravity Warp the Flow of Time? " kzbin.info/www/bejne/fXynYql6drWefLM

[@b4tran]

No I think this dude of all the physics channels manages to over-complicate everything with the way he explains thing. There are better channels imo

[@skydengelis3758]

I find all this super fascinating. Iv been reading tons of physics books, and watching tons of physics videos, and This week is the first time in my life Iv really clearly wrapped my head around why we have gravity and why there is a cosmic speed limit "the speed of light" Iv always had an intuitive sense of these things, but to understand it completely is like a huge breath of fresh air, probably the closest thing to a religious experience or epiphany Iv had. So thank you.

[@RKarmaKill]

Which strain of mushrooms would you recommend 🤔

[@macysondheim]

Speak for yourself. Maybe there’s a cosmic speed limit for you, but not me. I don’t hold myself back by prescribing self-defeating limits & thoughts like that onto myself.

[@prdoyle]

5:16 - top-tier special effects

[@ghevisartor6005]

aaaaahh these videos make me want to start learning physics from scratch but i have no time velocity to exchange

[@secretdiva9414]

I felt like you and I found lectures at Stanford University in KZbin by Lennard Susskind for free. There’s whole units at Stanford you can do free on KZbin in cosmology, all of relativity, quantum and Newtonian physics and much more. You go at your own pace without having to cram for exams. At the end of and during the lectures Susskind answers questions from the students he’s lecturing to.

[@travis5732]

@@secretdiva9414 Thanks for that information. Will get to that.

[@nomadml9716]

@Science Revolution its not impossible for gravity to move water horizontally. Gravitational force acts in all directions not merely perpendicularly down from the moon for example. Some of the gravitational force will resolve to a direction other than perpendicular. Therefore it will move the water "horizontally".

[@It-b-Blair]

@Science Revolution you fail to grasp some basic aspects which interact and produce very complex outcomes. Seems like your post is a preamble for flat /hollow world… 🤦‍♂️

[@nomadml9716]

Also take into consideration the moon and earth spin and shift on their axis. So gravitational force exerts in directions to shift the water horizontally. Explains tides I guess too.

[@MrJdcirbo]

I gotta say: the shout-outs the science content creator community has been doing for each other is a welcome sight. I've been watching and following all of you for A WHILE, and to see this solidarity playing out makes me happy beyond description. Keep being awesome, guys!

[@toddmcdaniels1567]

Space and time are interchangeable depending on your frame of reference (space-time continuum). So, it would seemingly be space-time that causes gravity. With this in mind, we are back at the starting point and this whole proposal seems rather vacuous on the face it, if I’m not missing something.

[@tepan]

Great visualization, thanks! It made me wonder: since all matter is made up of infinitesimal "clocks" that move around in some way, even a stationary object like a teapot can't move at the speed of light through time because a little bit of its four-speed has to account for the internal movements of its "clocks" (vibrations of the teapot's molecules, and probably sub-atomic dynamics as well?). So these questions arise for me: • Are the internal dynamics of composite stuff (i.e. matter) causing their rest mass? • Are the internal dynamics of matter linked to their entropy, so it's safe to say that entropy is causing mass? Is that what Hawking's "S = A ..." is about? • If one could freeze a teapot to absolute zero, would it lose all its rest mass and jump to lightspeed instantaneously?

[@JumboStiltskin]

Note: I’m not a physicist by profession, but think the answer to all of these questions is “basically yes” - Sum totality of all subatomic motion for a given object is analogous to the cumulative energy of the object - And since E=MC^2, that translates to the object’s mass. Measurement of Entropy is a measurement of thermodynamic decay within a closed system; this is analogous to what we observe in the red shifting of a massless particle (photon), for particles with mass it implies slower and slower motion/vibration in spatial dimensions, so therefore more variance/acceleration in the causal plane/time axis. This is why particles near absolute zero become indeterminate in their precise location as net motion within space is reduced to nothingness, and net speed through time approaches the causal limit - this is demonstrated within Einstein Bose Condensation and the nonlocality principles. “Jump to light speed” implies that the object would still be “an object” at the point of achieving absolute zero, but it’s more like a field distortion / wave. To be pedantic - like the speed of light itself, it’s essentially impossible to achieve absolute zero for a massive particle, but we can asymptotically approach the limit and begin seeing the telltale signs of quantum nonlocality as the particle system forms into an EBC. Einstein Bose Condensates of sufficient density can even “trap light” which passes across the field distortion, slowing it down to a speed that is totally pedestrian, like less than the speed of an automobile. This property can hypothetically be used in photonic quantum computation to store information in a molecular EBC cloud/time crystal

[@element5377]

@@JumboStiltskin there is no "motionless" in the universe, everything moves constantly at ludicrous speed. your teapot (i assume on earth) has lots of speed vectors added together. earth rotation and revolution, stellar revolution around the galaxy center. and the speed of our galactic cluster and mega-cluster towards the great attractor. though every object seems motionless in its own frame, un-compared with other objects

[@JumboStiltskin]

Yes I understand this - reduction in temperature of a particle to absolute zero does reduce its atomic momentum *within a closed system* down towards zero, however, correct? This is why the precise location of the particle within the frame observation becomes increasingly indeterminate as the temperature nears absolute zero

[@arpioisme]

"actually general relativity doesn't need quantum mechanics to explain gravity" Dr. Don Lincoln: Hold my lepton

[@scientificdevil4672]

You are correct sir! You get a star 🌟 on your paper!

[@crisdeleon]

Hahaha

[@johnpettit6886]

Another good channel :)

[@earthstorm3696]

Your very right

[@dougnulton]

3:54 the intro music made me laugh out loud, I love when editors have fun 😂

[@gargamel6480]

this is first time im having trouble understanding some gravitational theory, but from what I somewhat understood is that the slower time move the higher gravity which mean slower time and cycle repeats itsef?

[@user-me4xf6bp1u]

Great mind exercise. My conclusion is gravity is the catalyst, not the other way around unless, you know, other dimensions... Excellent. Never thought of time as a primary fundamental.

[@nickllama5296]

"Do we now perfectly understand the source of gravity?" *rewatches video five times*.... no ...

[@RWin-fp5jn]

indeed. Even after 100 years...but he came close....its is the SPEED of mass that causes frontal spacetime(ST) to contract (Einsteins SR' length contraction') as ST wraps around a speeding object..so warped time now becomes the particle property of 'inertia'. the higher the speed the more inverse time the object has and therefor it takes more time to yet move it (the in-product of both is constant). Although this ST contraction is linear, in restmass you have the accumulative speeds of all tiny unaligned sub atomic particles. this unalignment is what gives the illusion of radially working gravity in the case of restmass . but fundamentally the effect is linear. thats all....capice?

[@hrsmp]

You could read a book instead of wasting time on videos. Just saying.

[@luminumII]

@@RWin-fp5jn nicely put there

[@MichaelClifford164]

@@hrsmp Videos are just books with moving pictures, assuming both the video and the book contain the same information.

[@mariadanielalavia8877]

No dude, it's like trying to understand economics through a 15 min vídeo instead of reading a 100+ pages essay with much more depth and concepts that usually get overlooked by media makers

[@robkunzweiler9671]

So when I yell "SLOW DOWN" at parked cars I'm not crazy.

[@definesigint2823]

Nah; that's only when they yell back.

[@photinodecay]

Well you are kind of crazy because there's no way for anything to speed up or slow down. Everything is travelling at exactly the same total speed through space-time!

[@photinodecay]

(Also, you may be crazy for completely unrelated reasons ;) )

[@likebot.]

Yes! Yes you are. They can hear quite fine and you need not yell. See... the newer cars have antennae built into the windscreen or roof.

[@dylconnaway9976]

This all has nothing to do with cows.

[@chloecockburn4135]

It would be very helpful if you could link to subsequent videos promised at the end of this episode once you’ve made them (similar requests for other videos where you allude to forthcoming videos in a series). Thank you!

[@timefactortheoryofgravitya7578]

Check out Time Factor Theory for a different approach. Click the big T to the left!

[@mikeck4609]

I know it’s an old video but just popped up for me (subscribed). But man….it’s concepts like this that led me to stop the eye-rolling whenever I heard “we are living in a simulation”. Seriously…how did the universe “develop” these rules??

[@patricksarama4963]

I love watching these despite not understanding a thing ❤️

[@tomf3150]

Tea pot in space: Oh no, not again.

[@zsheets7483]

My first thought: That's the wrong kind of teapot.

[@nelsonyurok]

Tea pot in space: wait...I've been here before...wasn't I a whale last time?

[@GuinessOriginal]

@@nelsonyurok that was the bowl of petunias. You're thinking of the long dark tea time of the soul

[@TheChzoronzon]

Ole Bertie would be proud of his legacy

[@Mines2013]

This was great and the but at the end was hilarious.

[@johnnyreb280]

In the complex world of spacetime, our perception of time is intricately linked with the gravitational field around us. As mass and energy warp the fabric of spacetime according to Einstein's theory of general relativity, the flow of time itself is altered. So, when you get into the depths of the cosmos, the gravitational forces at play not only bend the paths of objects but also sculpt the passage of time, revealing to us the profound interplay between gravity and the temporal dimension.

[@__rikaisuru]

Top-notch editing. Whoever is the team/individual responsible for this, I love you. Also, I can't quite put it into words, but the writing has become far more enjoyable! Love you too, Matt.

[@ketsuekikumori9145]

So in a very true sense of the phrase, time is "wibbly wobbly, timey wimey"

[@pauljack5240]

😂 It sure is

[@vitezjura]

Can you use this change of perspective to describe other attractive forces such as magnetism?

[@mineduck3050]

Ive taken a deep dive into the abstract and fundamental reasons behind things like gravity. It takes a broad generalized look to reach a better understanding. I believe ive nailed some of the mystery, but in the abstract. As long of an explanation as it is, ill try to simplify. We have matter and the volume it occupies. That is existence. Matter does things, but all things it does, reduce to it being motion. Whats in motion? Ah hah. Exactly. It IS motion, its motion itself. Abstract motion is what matter is, its motion making form. Its expansive, but its also INspansive. There is motion within motion, making the form, and motion without. Only the perspective changes to observe it. Volume is polarized. This ominexpansion of motion is straight. It is charge/energy. Matter is energy, motion, charge, and it is straight. Gravity is curved. There is nothing outside of the parameters of straight and curved. Everything, even in imagination, is constrained to these two forms. Omniexpansion of motion would collide, connect, stop itself into stasis. This is not what we see. What we see is that matter (motion) never touches. It doesnt because its motion itself, not an IT. It can only move. So it moves away from itself in omnidirection. This move away, this redirection curves. This curve from all directions creates spheres of motion with motion barriers. The units of matter. Gravity is the curve away. Gravity is the opposite of motion, it is a reduction of energy, it is stillness and stasis. BUT since matter does not touch, this curve away acts instead as a coil or battery of motion/matter. Hence why the more mass an object has, the more potential energy, yet also the more energy needed to make its curved trajectory straight again. Time is the direction of motion. Making it both linear and relative to the observer. There is one moment, with varying degrees of time within it. The degress are your perspective of size and speed basically. If you would like to know how this abstract "big banged" ill continue.

[@jasonremy1627]

Nice shout out to Science Asylum. He's got some of the most entertaining science content on KZbin. He's a modern day Bill Nye or Beakman. He really needs more subs. He's so good.

[@Jobobn1998]

He's also really good at interacting with the community in a helpful way to explain things. Definitely a great educator.

[@definesigint2823]

Yeah I like Nick's content a lot; I've been watching his stuff for a while now.

[@JohnAlbertRigali]

Don’t insult him by referencing Bill Nye. Nye uses a mixture of real science and junk science to justify a manifold leftist agenda - downright evil.

[@anthonyschroeder521]

I feel like this series would be a very helpful one in saying "speed of causality" instead of "speed of light" as discussed previously on the channel. When you consider causality as constant, the shifting into and out of time makes things less confusing and easier to keep straight

[@DJ_Force]

Still eagerly awaiting the next videos on this topic!

[@luciojorgelourenco2574]

I am not a Physicist but as a Designer I watched the video and I belive having this unified theory not in details, instead using very simple demonstrations. Time, energy (and "gravitons") are part of the "impossible" mess we call life. Time, dynamics (kinetics) and energy is inside us as part of our lives and outside us as part of the universe. The power of attraction comes from a phylosophic thought from paternal or maternal feeling (I formulated while discovering the origin of the colors). Something like one cannot explain why the little birds pick on the stick painted with red just by seeing the color red on the stick). It is preset in nature. To find out about "gravitons" we should research about the reasons of the presets of nature. Another example is: "If everything has one side, should have another" where I demonstrated using the formula for the surface area of the sphere explaining what time is. Constrained we moved from inside, making the "gravitons" together with the other energies (time) outside in a linking instinct to make alliances to survive. There is, attracting. Thanks.

[@NunoTiagoMartins]

Drinking game: do a shot every time Matt says “time”... promise gravity will increase in no... time 😬

[@Dro210]

When I read this I counted that he said “time” like 7 times and like 6 more “times” before I got this wrote 😂

[@DFloyd84]

Gravity had to have increased, because I somehow ended up on the floor.

[@blinkin304]

so if gravity increases in no time then it is only increasing in space?

[@tomf3150]

Badum Tss !

[@blinkin304]

@Science Revolution care to provide your alternative explanation? the whole purpose behind science is to explain natural activities with the best known explanation that fits all of the known evidence. if you don't have an alternative theory that fits all of the evidence, then all you are doing is pointlessly ranting.

[@thenasadude6878]

The nod to the Science Asylum and Eugene Khutoryansky was really galant. I'll add Science Click as an honorable mention

[@squatcitygaming1726]

The Science Click Vid on "we are all travelling at the speed of light" literally blew my mind.

[@petarnovakovich240]

Equally, you could ask, "Does Gravity Cause Time?", especially because intense gravity fields can alter the flow of time.

[@Shockmeslow]

The coolest thing that Neil Tyson said that changed my conception of the universe as of late was that at the speed of light, time is technically 0. That means when a photon has traveled from its origin to its destination, from its perspective it was created and appeared at its destination. Even though photons emitted from our Sun take 8 minutes to get here, for the photon it was an instantaneous emission and absorption.

[@RegisBladeStudios]

I love this video. I've always hated the idea of using the heavy ball on a rubber sheet to show how gravity works when you are literally using gravity to explain gravity. So, all we have to do is reduce the flow of time on the side of an object that's the direction we want it to go ... physicists! Get right on that! :D

[@robertt9342]

It's tough to represent a 4 dimensional concept in 2 dimensions.

[@rapid13]

Only way to reduce that flow of time is with a source mass.

[@darkracer1252]

@Scott Henderson when you say that gravity is a force. you already lost the right to call yourself educated

[@DERIVATIVES-mh6ej]

"#39 ON TRENDING" wow, didn't know people loved this stuff so much.

[@jazzyoz]

Yeah I think this channel proves that many more humans then we think really crave a deeper understanding of the nature of reality, with THE most up-to-date scientific explanations, WITHOUT dumbing it down (even if we don’t fully understand). It’ comes from desire for exploration, the desire to TRY and understand..to TRY and see the future of humanity’s technological and intellect growth, without surviving long enough to see “it” happen.

[@jimmym3352]

@@jazzyoz Yup, I'll never fully understand, but I do have an interest in this stuff. I'm always curious how things work.

[@eskay3442]

39 not 3

[@belowmeoff]

All I know is the more time I'm alive the more I feel gravity...

[@scottgreen3807]

Scientist have discovered how to slow and speed up time. To speed it up have fun and smile, to slow it frown and have a bad time. I enjoy learning this great stuff but the time to do so always runs out fast.

[@meangeneokerlund9129]

I feel like a dog watching a tv trying to figure out how it works

[@fatmn]

Last time I was this early, my feet were here slightly less early

[@scienceisall2632]

Gravity doesn’t cause matter to change it’s position relative to other matter in a time line. It’s just a matter of the rate at which the “clocks” tick

[@ritemolawbks8012]

@@scienceisall2632 It was a funny comment. Don't do him like that.

[@seriousmaran9414]

Due to the gravitational laws time for your head is very slightly faster than your feet. So your feet are slower. In practice this makes minimal difference at all.

[@user-bu8vc1gl3r]

@@scienceisall2632 However, from the POV of his phone / eyes, his feet are late, since it took information some time to get from his feet to his eyes (via light).

[@isthisthekrustykrab8646]

10:15 That’s um... quite the user name they got you to say there Matt

[@Mirandorl]

The username kinda made me do a double take too.

[@craigsutherland3484]

Yeah that was extremely jarring, been a long time since I've heard _that_ word

[@daolinh108]

loooooooool

[@isthisthekrustykrab8646]

@@hash8169 Pretty sure Milf means the same thing everywhere though lol

[@ameteuraspirant]

PBS - A Family Company

[@petertrahan9785]

The first big step to understanding time properly is to recognize that time cannot be separated from space. Once we have space-time, we realize that gravity is a curvature of space-time. Does time create gravity? No. Does space-time curvature create gravity? Yes. Can this make it seem like time creates gravity if we limit our gaze upon but a part of the whole? Yes.

[@RobertSmith-kj6eb]

We know that the wavelength of light from distant stars can be stretched if it is moving towards or away from us.(Redshift/Blueshift) So light traveling past a star could be bent by the time dilation.

[@bablo82]

This stuff is basically the closest we can get to real life "arcane knowledge" lol. Mind boggling...

[@Aquatarkus96]

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, and I'd apply a similar line of thinking to theoretical knowledge.

[@jacobcharleszimmerman7934]

I now feel like I know the secrets of life and death and can begin my journey to becoming a necromancer.

[@robertlawrence9000]

@@Aquatarkus96 we are all wizards!

[@mythicdawn9574]

This episode was strangely quite understandable (thanks to the super animation at 2:55 ), previous episodes on gravity had their quirks but were somewhat accessible too. But their whole series on quantum field was definitely Arcane Knowledge, only accessible to ones who did advanced math AND quantum physics. I have an okay kinda advanced but not pro knowledge on math, and all the episodes on quantum fields and whatnot were a real pain x) But all this arcane thing is really dependent on your current knowledge. If you wrote basic formulas that involve derivatives and primitives, like the formula for mean value of periodic signal, or anything that involves sums with the big Sigma, a non-STEM person would see it as dark magic already ^^ Just like I can't understand a thing when Laplacian, Rotationals, matrixes, Einstein convention and other advanced tools and writing conventions are all mixed into the same equation :p

[@bablo82]

@@mythicdawn9574Well this is just how I felt about this channel in general lol, very eye-opening stuff. Even if this episode was easier to follow, it was still very enlightening imo.

[@AnonymityIx]

I've watched all the videos in the past 2 years and some before that. This has been my favorite. This is the only one I had to come back to multiple times to truly grasp what's being told to me. Truly fascinating.

[@Google_Does_Evil_Now]

Is this video explaining the topic clearly? He said temporal direction 5:36, so I googled temporal direction. It's defined as division from your eye looking forward and they tell you how many degrees to the left to the right up and down You can see when looking forward. But he shows an three person podium for for gold silver and bronze, or 1st, 2nd and 3rd. And he calls that temporal direction. So the way he's using it doesn't seem to work with Google's definition. I'm finding his explanations on this video in another video unclear. It's like they're being explained by someone who kind of understands the subject but not that deeply and not that fully so their explanation is a little bit hard to follow. Is anyone else having this problem? Can you usually follow every science video you watch? I can usually follow all of the science videos I watch but I have to admit that quantum is a bit tricky.

[@Google_Does_Evil_Now]

5:43 "the 4 velocity of a massive object is pointed almost entirely in the time direction" - What is a '4 velocity'? He's talking quickly, I'm not sure his emphasis is in the right places, Do you know of a video that explains this concept in a different way, that you found more understandable? To the guy, in case you read this, please can you review with a small audience if they understand each part of the video, and where they start to struggle? Maybe give them a clicker or button they can press while watching the video. Any time they start to struggle they can press the button. You'll get feedback on the areas that need some thought on how to communicate them in a better way. I think you're fairly good, and you could possibly become a very good communicator. This is why I'm writing this constructive comment. I think there's a chance that if you read it that you'll actually be able to see that I'm trying to be constructive and give you a tool which will help you become an even better communicator. Prof Brian Cox is great but we need more science communicators. Tibees is good too.

[@panner11]

@@Google_Does_Evil_Now Yeah it's true these videos are pretty heavy. It's mostly because these topics are not possible to explain step by step in full detail in 15 minute videos. A lot of the content of this channel is gradually building up, with the earlier videos explaining easier concepts and building on top of those concepts more and more. (in the video, he references one such video you may want to watch before this one) The videos do seem to be geared more towards people who already have hobbyist interest in the topic, and not beginners, but it's certainly possible for beginners to dig deeper and find understanding. Tbh, for hobbyists, this channel really is the best, expert explanations can often be extremely dry and difficult to comprehend, so this channel takes a different approach and is able to explain really hard concepts and give you that aha moment. To answer your specific questions, "temporal direction" just means direction through time. You can think of space as 3d with 3 dimensions or 3 "vectors". A velocity through space has 3 vectors. Now, spacetime is a singular concept, meaning time can also be thought of as a vector. So put it together, and spacetime has 4 vectors, 3 of space and 1 of time. The time vector is the "temporal direction". And a "4 velocity" is a velocity vector described in space time with all 4 vectors accounted for.

[@ahmadmumtaz4947]

Einstein’s general theory of relativity (GTR) can be summed up in just 12 words: “Space-time tells matter how to move; matter tells space-time how to curve”.

[@meinbherpieg4723]

So, as an object moves past a more massive object, the warp in spacetime causes the smaller mass's time trajectory to convert partially into a space trajectory which causes a gradient toward the more massive object.

[@NanoBurger]

All I heard was "Timey, Wimey."

[@benedictul]

not gonna lie, it was kinda wibbly-wobbly

[@Thatwhiteblackkid]

This is the greatest comment of all time

[@kevin9218]

Wibly wobbley

[@Merennulli]

This video explained the Wimey part. Watch the other for the Timey part.

[@Raych666]

Well you heard more than me then 😅

[@feynstein1004]

Something I realized recently: Time is just a way for different things to happen at the same location/place.

[@Chance57]

I was forced to come to a similar conclusion when I was first confronted with the "time is a human construct" argument. Like, no... Time is demonstrable and things have distance from each other in it. Especially the "same" things.

[@HealthyHomeGardening]

Take a look at the book, Time Waves on the Shores of Forever... Very illuminating on this subject

[@jerrychow5017]

Thanks for making this video, but I have an observation on gravity and time. In your example, two boats were used… one slower and one faster, and a pedal was used to demonstrate your point. Based on this example, slower boat is traveling on a y axis and when the pedal reaches the faster boat (also on the y axis) this created a plane or x-y axis or 2 dimensions. Let’s use dimensions further, this would explain as why the teapot closer to the earth would travel in a slower rate than a teapot in the outer space. This is because internally electrons and other boson particles are effected by the four dimensional fields as defined by physics. Time perhaps does not exist at all. electrons do have mass when energized by the Higgs field, so electrons carries energy or e = mc2, except the c here is not the speed of light or m/s but electrons spinning speed in space. Electrons do NOT need time to spin but they require space and dimensions. Many physicists have demonstrated that electrons spin differently around the magnetic field. At this moment, there are four or five fields that flowing through space, and they can all influence energy… hence the universal equation data match consistently with observed data. Yeah, dimensions maybe a better answer to explain physics than time… black hole as an example should have effects on all fields or all dimensions, so photons cannot escape it as well. So far most of Einstein time and time dilation issues can be explained more logically using dimensions… just double every point tangentially and a new dimension can be observed…. Go ahead try it on the famous two lightings striking the train theory…. Einstein observed dimensional distortion not time. Observation becomes more difficult as the vantage point gets closer to 180 degrees, because at 180 degree this is a 1 dimensional observation. At 179 observation or judgement of reality becomes a little easier. At the equilateral triangle tip where both lightnings can be observed 3 dimensionally the observer will clearly see local reality as true. In the quantum sense, if the observer exists four dimensionally the local reality of the lightings should be from the trains perspective. Thanks for reading this far and this is just my observation…. Not facts

[@HoD999x]

so... objects falling straight down are "rotating" from time-speed to space-speed?

[@ThePowerLover]

Yes.

[@seriousmaran9414]

You trade time for speed, hence you cannot go at the speed of light because you have run out of time to accelerate. In a gravity field you are accelerating down, slightly reducing available time.

[@mythicdawn9574]

@@seriousmaran9414 I'm gonna say something very stupid certainly. So you assume an object has a finite "amount of movement" in those 4 dimensions and you just transfer your time amount to space with energy ? Can't you somehow "bring more time" to your system with an external source, to allow yourself to accelerate more ? Like, you reach 99.9% of c, and then you "refill" your time movement with science magic to allow you to push further ? Or does bringing time in would always result in lowering your spatial movement ? What does mass represent in this thought experiment ? The time amount of movement ? A ratio describing how much energy is required to draw time to space movement ? I like your analogy, I take note. But it leads to weird ideas (at least me) when you want to push the limits.

[@photinodecay]

@@mythicdawn9574 You can't add anything more because you're still capped at the speed of light. Actually, I think what he's referring to is the 4-velocity of an object, which is the change in x^2+y^2+z^2+(ict)^2 = x^2+y^2+z^2-c^2.t^2=0, so it makes more sense than simply having the speed of light appear out of nowhere. In that formulation, the speed of light is actually the conversion factor between the dimensions of space and time, and the far-less-magical zero is the total magnitude of the 4-vector.

[@renatoigmed]

@@photinodecay can you try to explain this to someone who is starting to study fundamental math? because unfortunately your level is much more advanced than mine. :/

[@joshb6470]

I love and hate watching videos like this, for the moments where I have a thought that is above my knowledge and I feel there is an awakening to a new understanding happening, then losing it because I did not fully grasp the concepts that brought me to it and I have difficulties trying to recapture it to explore further

[@Kratos_TM]

Think as deeply as you can every time that happens! That's how your brain gets used to deep thinking about these topics

[@hereandnow3156]

I know exactly what you mean! I think that me trying to recapture it is part of what makes me lose it. Instead of going with wherever my understanding is moment to moment I will try to go back to where it was when I felt I was getting close to that "Aha" moment. Then I get lost thinking about how to get there again when I could be putting that energy into thinking further on the topic!

[@arsh5461]

Stop smoking weed kid

[@realmilind]

I didn't understand one bit. There are other videos that better explain this.

[@sammartano22]

They way you explain it makes it seem like neither time nor gravity cause each other. What if gravity and time are the same thing? If time and movement through space are added to the equations of gravity, does it more closely match the other "natural forces?"

[@hurmzz]

Is the next video on time already here? I can’t find it.. Also, is there a video on how mass creates the warping of space and how it with the warping of time together add to the effect of gravity?

[@thehorizontries4759]

I’m an astrophysics student and that just blew my mind. So some of my time is being extracted (causing me to move through time just a little bit slower) and used to keep me stuck to the surface of earth. Wow.

[@travis5732]

That is amazing really.

[@YouVWatcher]

Does that means that time stops inside a black hole?

[@Mick0722MX]

You don't sound much like an astrophysics student to me. Time is not being extracted from anything because, as you should know as a so-called physics student, that time is nothing more than a measurement of motion. Maybe you should actually enroll in a few college courses and become an actual student rather than come on KZbin pretending to be one.

[@dubsteppro777]

@@YouVWatcher that might explain black holes...

[@Mick0722MX]

@@madeleinecallan3153 I like astrophysics, but I don't like bullshit, and neither should you. I'm not arguing semantics. I'm arguing concepts. Learn the difference, genius. Who's the real fool here?

[@christianyaerger1751]

"Let's leave that teapot for now." *cries in British*

[@BatkoNashBandera774]

Smiles in *Union Jack*

[@kataseiko]

As long as it doesn't experience any force, it will be fine.

[@merrick8000]

throw all the teapots into the spacetime!

[@merrick8000]

new revolution. at the game store you know the one buy the movie theatre

[@fariesz6786]

@@merrick8000 are you staging a boson tea party?

[@CalamitousJonathan]

Depending on the molecular structure, depends on if time will cause gravity or not. Molecules attracted to like molecules over time will accrue in one place causing gravity, or what is preceived as gravitational waves or fluctuations.

[@1002chrisc]

So, if laminar flow with boundary drag is a great analogy to portray gravity in a gradient of time flows, what does it take to get turbulent flow and what would it look like to an external or internal observer? Yes, I know I'm taking the analogy too far, but the concept is still fun ;)

[@marshmallow_fellow]

I like the idea of time machines staying in one place and seeing everything pass at high speed so much more now

[@upsydaysy3042]

"let's posit a teapot in space". The whole situation became suddenly a lot Britishier.

[@thefance4708]

It's probably a reference to Russell's Teapot.

[@RBickersjr]

When they talk about time being affected by movement like clocks ticking slower because of movement, how do they account for the possibility that it's the movement that affects the physical ticking of the clock that is measuring the time instead of some deeper meaning with time itself?

[@AlexanderTzalumen]

Wouldn't the time gradient affect light by affecting the rate of change of the EM field oscillations with respect to position given that's how regular lensing works (the differing electrical permitivity and magnetic permeability of the two materials at the transition boundary)?