How to travel faster than light

Traveling faster than light is one of humanity’s dreams. Sadly, modern physics doesn’t cooperate. However there are examples where it really is possible to travel faster than light. In this video, Fermilab’s Dr. Don Lincoln tells us of these ways in which the universe breaks the ultimate speed limit.

[@MollyWi]

I will definitely bring this up at the next dinner party .... and see how quickly the space between me and the other guests expands.

[@patrickfoster4586]

In which case you may be the very first person to witness "inflation"! Meaning if conditions are just right you may run off the other guests at a rate beyond the speed of light. At which point they would seem to disappear. Of course they didn't really disappear, but once they started moving faster than light speed, the light can no longer reach your eyes. Yeah, I know. I took your very humorous comment and just ran it in the ground. Sorry about that- just can't help myself sometimes. Cheers!

[@messerschnitt7943]

@@patrickfoster4586 you can also achieve this by covering your eyes. The light can no longer reach your eyes, which definitely means you are travelling faster than light at that point, right? :-)

[@perfection4749]

😂😂😂

[@perfection4749]

“Who’s the weird guy in the corner talking about space n stuff!!??” “Did you see the kardashians last night?” 😒

[@omairtech6711]

So true and relatable. People are in a sense "anti intellectuals". They hate intelligent discussions and instead prefer to discuss their neighbor's girlfriend to death.

[@manojmotra8323]

1st one was like Question "How to go faster than usain bolt" Answer "Break his legs"

[@sebastianlukito6686]

Lol that's valid. Let's challenge him. @usain.bolt

[@christianheichel]

That's horrible and funny

[@LongIslandicedteaaa]

Can we just tie them for fucks sake!

[@deeveevideos]

@@LongIslandicedteaaa where is the fun in that?

[@joaquinel]

@@LongIslandicedteaaa No ties, that would be cheating.

[@sridharsarangapani6179]

You have an uncanny ability to finish every video in style Dr. Lincoln and you do it with so much simplicity that I'll forever be in awe

[@frankdimeglio8216]

WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. Great. By Frank Martin DiMeglio

[@allenjenkins7947]

It's a well-known fact that malicious gossip is the only thing which travels faster than the speed of light.

[@indecisiverift]

and left swipes on my tinder account.

[@menot23]

You must have grown up in my neighborhood.....

[@ASlopedRoof]

Entagled gossip.

[@rwood1995]

Toilet paper after a pandemic is announced!!

[@perrynnlynch3811]

Great comment.

[@Cuyvuldar]

Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it. Terry Pratchett

[@christianheichel]

Deep thoughts man. Way groovy

[@Hunter-pk7ym]

Cuyvuldar 😂😂😂😂😂

[@kristian.kalmanlehto]

If the universe is expanding no matter what at the speed of light or faster, it means that there is nothing outside of it, not even darkness. Darkness is probably lack of light and no physical substance in itself like light. The question still remains, what is there beyond the expansion frontline? If the universe is expanding in some kind of a space that can be prefigured, it means that there is some kind of a space where the universe is expanding. I think the cosmologists will never find an explanation on this issue and it remains more or less a matter of belief or hermeneutic reasoning.

[@Sannypowa]

True until you discover that at the edge of the Universe there is a ring of light leaving behind only dark energy, consuming dark energy would shrink spacetime as we know it, here we go, you can now travel long distances faster than light would :D

[@oscarb9139]

Nothing is faster than the speed of dark.

[@Mark-qg8hm]

First train really, really hard. Like every day kind of hard, until you can run at the speed of light. And THEN give it 110%.

[@usedtobejosh_dinkshotst_t575]

Yes, as if I am Saitama from one punch man...

[@ultimatewarriors1291]

have you

[@usedtobejosh_dinkshotst_t575]

@@ultimatewarriors1291 He is Saitama from one punch man...

[@ultimatewarriors1291]

@@usedtobejosh_dinkshotst_t575 o

[@irokosalei5133]

Also drink plenty of juice.

[@BaldwinBay]

I'm just a notch more intelligent than a monkey. But I truly love this stuff. Thanks for making this video.

[@BaldwinBay]

@walker john Thank you.

[@stevejquest]

​@B4JesusChrist Most people with a penchant for science, realize that gods and devils are delusions, fiction, pure myth. If Jesus actually did exist and was not a fictional character (which is the position I take, as it is the most plausible) then it is quite possible that he was either a lunatic or a liar -- as we see no indication he was Lord, since the Universe did not require an infinite regression of creators creating the universe to bring it into existence. We can not explain EVERYTHING just yet, but we CAN explain enough to know that gods are not required, therefore they are no more than just wishful thinking of the ancients. A simplistic answer at best.

[@stevejquest]

​@B4JesusChrist The cross or crux is an astrological symbol. Jesus is a sun god, the halo about his head is the rays of the sun. He is the sun (son) of god. For thousands of years, carvings on temples, cave walls, monuments and artifacts have honored the sun, bringer of warmth, security, life and light. The ancient zodiac wheel with its four cardinal points traces the passage of the sun as it moves through each of the 12 constellations marking the four seasons, the spring and autumn equinoxes and the summer and winter solstices. Our ancestors personified the sun, worshiping it as the light of the world, the sun god, the savior of mankind. It is no coincidence that our principal day of worship is called Sun Day. The Bible tells us that three wise men came from the east, following a star that led them to Bethlehem to celebrate the birth of Jesus the Messiah. Joseph claims that the star in the east was Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, which on December 24th aligns with the three brightest stars in the constellation of Orion (Orion’s belt). The stars were referred to by many ancient cultures as the Three Kings. And when Sirius (the brightest star) lined up with the Three Kings, they pointed to the place of sunrise on December 25th - the symbolic birth place of the sun or son. So why December 25th? As the days grow shorter in the period leading up to the winter solstice, the sun appears to stop moving south and stay still for three days - the 22nd, 23rd and 24th December in the northern hemisphere. This is the meaning of the word ‘sol-stice’ - sun standing still. To our ancestors this period symbolized the death of the sun god (son of god) and when three days later on the 25th December the sun started moving again, the sun was reborn - hence the birth of Jesus at this time - the sun god or son of god. During this three day period, the sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross constellation and appears to ‘hang’ on the cross, hence the story of the crucifixion. However the resurrection of the sun or son is celebrated three months later at the spring equinox (Easter) when once again the forces of light defeat the forces of darkness and the days grow longer than the nights. And why was Jesus born in Bethlehem of the Virgin Mary? The Virgin Mary is the personification of the constellation Virgo - Virgo has represented the great female deities (the Goddess) since time immemorial. The Divine Mother and her Consort/Savior Son is a strong theme in goddess mythology, making the Virgin Mary/Mary Magdalene a likely composite. The name "Mary" is etymologically related to water, the element of birth and the astrological glyph for Virgo is an ‘M’. The Virgo portion of the heavens was known as the House of Bread because the Sun is in the house of Virgo in August-September - harvest time in the northern hemisphere. Virgo is usually depicted as a woman holding a sheaf of wheat like the great goddess Demeter/Ceres. The words ‘bet lehem’ (Bethlehem) in Hebrew translate into House of Bread. So on the night of the 24th December, Virgo the great maiden/mother of Bethlehem rises in the northern hemisphere night sky from 10 pm to dawn, heralding the birth of the new-born sun, three days after the winter solstice. I hope that helps clear up the confusion.

[@stevejquest]

​@B4JesusChrist "The universe is created through God." I warned you before about the infinite regression paradox. If god created the universe, then someone had to create god, create god's creator, create god's creator's creator and on into infinity. I am an atheist EXPRESSLY because I have read and studied the bible. Had I never read the bible, I likely would have believed in it. But the contradictory nature of the bible and many inaccuracies (such as the earth being flat, having four corners and describing earthquakes as God shaking the wickedness off the earth) was just false. If so much of the bible is demonstrably false, I extrapolate ALL of it is false. Atheism doesn't provide any delusional rewards so I am actually stronger than you, psychologically. You have to be strong, to be an atheist. Religion is for the weak and crippled. I am apparently neither weak nor crippled. ;-)

[@stevejquest]

​@B4JesusChrist "I have read and studied the bible too" There is a difference between reading and studying, analyzing. "I know the bible has no mistakes or contradictions." Here are but a few: I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.” - Genesis 32:30 “No man hath seen God at any time”- John 1:18 “with God all things are possible.” - Matthew 19:26 “The LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.” - Judges 1:19 “thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. ” - Exodus 21:23-25 “ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” - Matthew 5:39 “This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.” - Genesis 17:10 “if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” - Galatians 5:2 “The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father” - Ezekiel 18:20 “I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation” - Exodus 20:5 “Honor thy father and thy mother”- Exodus 20:12 “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. ” - Luke 14:26 And so on.

[@betaneptune]

Or as Dr. Lawrence Krauss says: You can't go _through_ space FTL, but space can do what it wants.

[@pubuduweerakoon7174]

Yes that is the idea...

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

Yeah. I should have called him on that when I met him after Penn & Teller's show. Because how can space "want" to do anything?

[@MCWaffles2003-1]

Peter Kosen have you tried asking it?

[@alaskanbound6842]

Fermilab: “Why you can’t travel faster than the speed of light” Also Fermilab: “How to travel faster than the speed of light”

[@ceejayhaughton7360]

You saw it too👍

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

June 15th 2061, Fermilab: "How we travelled FTL"

[@marksnow8838]

It's in the title????? How to travel faster than light, not how to travel faster than light speed???

[@101franny]

@@marksnow8838 at last, someone in this comment section actually get’s what the video is about, nicely put. ( if ppl don’t understand the concept why comment right, although I do like the joke comments 😉 )

[@brianroberts5740]

I too noticed that he has two videos that directly contradict each other.

[@waynewhiteguitar1]

"As for c, that is the speed of light in vacuum, and if you ask why c, the answer is that it is the initial letter of celeritas, the Latin word meaning speed."

[@christianheichel]

Awesome tidbit of information

[@matthewtheobald1231]

I thought C stood for Causality. C is the fastest speed anything in the universe can interact with something

[@drjerrygalloway]

I always took c to mean a constant... an unchanging value. Yes - speed in a vacuum. But, in a calculation (like E=mc2), this equals that times a constant (reliable) unchanging value. I.e., speed of light. So I thought c stood for "constant."

[@bradleyweiss1089]

Mr. H Yeah. Duh!

[@mortenolsen838]

The letter c means constant. There's nothing fancy about it. Maxwell used V or b but Weber used c for constant in his work around the middle of the 19th century.

[@MrWick-oe5ij]

Albert Einstein : Nothing is faster than light Sunday : Hold my beer

[@ervinpajazetovic9834]

He actually said that nothing can move faster than light through space. Space itself is another thing. I think a great example is in the end of the video with the balloon and dots or the duck and the river.

[@LianeAsel]

within a gravitational field !!!!

[@LianeAsel]

@@ervinpajazetovic9834 congratulation for making it to the end of this vid

[@davidjones-vx9ju]

@@LianeAsel i didn't make it that far

[@ShangZilla]

Aaaaaand it's gone!

[@debibaird]

I will be using this for Science night with my grandkids. Thank you for making it accessible with the balloon demo! I foresee star stickers and balloons in our future.

[@GaganKP]

Nothing can go faster than speed of light in space But space itself can go.

[@cipher1579]

alcubierre drive *eyebrows expand*

[@Pepsolman]

You have to travel at the speed of space without a change in time.

[@einherz]

@@Pepsolman time no changes only befor gravity was appear, so no time was yet, but wit speed of light you are exist in the "everytime" in same time, this is opposit things, first is no time, second is all time, first is speed of time 0, second is speed of time infinity

[@justinreschke3642]

@@Pepsolman You just defined Ludicrous Speed

[@alfonsobun5239]

@@justinreschke3642 Dark Helmet has Spaceballs of steel. Knowingly goes faster than the speed of light and refuses to wear a seatbelt. Watchout! We got a badass over here.

[@BobDiaz123]

I remember the limerick, there was a young lady named bright, who could travel faster than light, she left Earth one day in a relative way, and came back the previous night.

[@akakakakakak3084]

If she did come back yesterday, that's nonsense or no reason for she to leave tomorrow.

[@QuantumRift]

..there was a young lady from Wheeling...

[@ZomBeeNature]

Is that who the young hermit named Dave keeps in his cave?

[@mr.b1670]

I love the new ideas come out when people want to get back into the news. Old ideas, brushed off with a few new ideas srrinkeled around for WOW effect. I believe this depiction of the universe to be wrong. I have brought this before many people. The chicken man Tyson, and others but none will return my emails.

[@Chuck-gd9rr]

A tinkle in rhyme.

[@Palladiumavoid]

Breaks light speed Physics: you wasn't supposed to do that

[@Pooh68]

Turn on a field around your space ship dropping your realistic weight to near zero. Turn on your engines bringing your space ship to light speed.....(and beyond) ... you are not a particle of light.

[@drawforge3920]

@@Pooh682nd step:ignore friction somehow

[@edmundparowski5458]

Breaking the rules of physics and grammar...

[@OrpheusSonOfCalliope]

@@edmundparowski5458 🤣🤣

[@juddvance7721]

I really enjoyed that and learned a lot. Thanks for making it!

[@BillAnt]

By far the best visualization of the 14-billion light-year limitation I've seen to date at 8:16 just mind-bending stuff :D A great visual of how the expansion is traveling so fast that the light can never ever reach us.

[@AlexanderTalks]

Ummm. I have a problem with this. Light is not affected by inertia. According to the theory of relativity, the speed of light is constant with respect to any object, which would include the observer. So, the speed of the object emitting the light is irrelevant.

[@barryfay5637]

@@AlexanderTalks You are correct, the point that you're not getting is that the space between the light source and your eyes is expanding faster than the light can travel so it will never reach your eyes.

[@TheGreatToucan]

I figured this out on my own long ago. But he is wrong about one thing: "space" is NOT expanding. The only thing that is expanding is the amount of space occupied by galaxies which we can see: these galaxies are moving into space, but "unoccupied" (as far as we know) space. What he has failed to explain is if galaxies in every direction are moving away from us (presumably in speeds related to a constant dependent upon the galaxy's distance from us). If this is the theory, it sounds rather "Milky Way centric" to me. Also, the Big Bang Theory would seem to be disproven by this presumed fact. Why are some galaxies closer to us than others? Are some coming towards us? Stuff to keep you awake at night.

[@caccioman]

TheGreatToucan if you Look at the balloon (Imagine the balloon as perfectly round sphere) every point on its surface is the center with regard to all other points, no matter where it is. So we are also moving away faster than the speed of light from all points further than 14 billion light years. Nothing milky way centric at all. Also only Space itself is expanding: the Surface of the balloon (=Space) keeps getting larger and larger. Its not that the Galaxys are expanding into empty Space which has been there before. In the beginning everything was in a Single Point (big bang). Just the Expansion of the Universe and space made it possible that things as eg Particle and matter which later would form galaxies could exist separately from each other. If you cover a very tin y deflated balloon completely in paint and it starts inflating, sooner or later little stretches will show which the paint in the beginning couldnt cover. If you keep on inflating (much larger as possible with a real balloon) the stretches not covered in paint will become much larger in relation to the Spots with paint. Keep in mind: even as the balloon stretches infinitely, the amount of paint from the beginning stays the same. So the paint finally rests just in little Spots (galaxies) while the balloon (Space) keeps on inflating. Thats at least how i understand it

[@jaspernatchez]

I'm a pianist. Some folks are wonderful pianists but have no clue how to teach. Dr Lincoln not only is a great physicist, but a wonderful teacher.

[@NimbleBard48]

Finally a new video from The Don!

[@foxabilo]

Did Fermilab just click bait me?

[@disruptivetimes8738]

They did it the smart way ;)

[@juzoli]

foxabilo Science needs to keep up with fake news...

[@kostantinos2297]

ScienceNinjaDude "How to travel faster than light"

[@MidnighterClub]

Yes.

[@damirskrjanec]

Yes and no. :)

[@yashranjan]

@Fermilab Thank you, Dr. Don Lincoln, for igniting the love for physics in me. I appreciate your ability to explain complex physics such that anybody with an eagerness to learn can understand. Envisioning about the universe and space-time is a feeling which is beyond what our senses can experience.

[@jacobmartin8332]

Of all the shirts you've worn on this channel, this one is my favorite.

[@xuchun1024]

peed mit?

[@lillyanneserrelio2187]

@@xuchun1024 1:56 Actually its Peed imit

[@masbaiy4858]

To put cherenkov radiation and quantum entanglement in a single video, that's wild!

[@ptduff]

I've actually seen Cerenkov radiation in person as I work at a nuclear plant. It never fails to impress me to see a spent fuel rod glowing blue in the water.

[@4thdoctor284]

@@ptduff The reactor uses deuterium water doesn't it?

[@ptduff]

@@4thdoctor284 the reactors where I work are pressurized water reactors and use straight up filtered river water. Of course, other chemicals are added or subtracted to increase/decrease reactivity. Water chemistry is a whole other story.

[@4thdoctor284]

@@ptduff I lived a couple miles from 3 nuclear power plants in Scriba NY. Nine Mile 1 and 2 and Fitzpatrick. A couple years ago an oily sheen was seen on Lake Ontario right in front of where the 3 plants were. That story kind of faded away with no answers as to what it was. I'm thinking it was something hydraulic related since there is nothing matching the description of that sheen that would be from the reactors like everyone ran around hand wringing over.

[@wayneyadams]

@@4thdoctor284 It was probably oil. If it was some kind of radioactive material as you are implying, there would have been alarms.

[@dondee16888]

Exactly what is "Space" ? and why is it expanding? is the galaxy a separate entity than the space that the galaxy resides in? if the galaxy and the space are separate, then why are they expanding together? and how is the galaxy attached to the space that it resides in? what glues them together? I am confused.

[@MrTizenhatkarakter]

I believe Hubble’s law v=H*R is only an empirical thing like Moore’s “law”, hence what the guy is saying is nothing but philosophy in order to explain this phenomenon until we dont reveal the exact abstract law of it. If you choose two dots on an expanding balloon, you can measure their absolute distance increasing as the balloon expands. God must be able to see the same with our Universe. Right now it reminds me of the theory created of Luminiferous aether a hundred years ago.

[@stefanfeist9893]

Picard, Spaceballs, Millennium Falcon, great t-shirt. Also, awesome talk. Currently binge watching all of them!

[@gunlokman]

As I said in my last lecture to the cat - 'speed is all relative'. It depends what parameter you are measuring it against. If I travel at 60mph in my car on the M1 - relative to the trees and stuff, I'm actually also travelling at thousands of m.p.h relative to some astral body or other perhaps going in the opposite direction. And, possibly much, much faster relative to another thing in space - and so on. (The cat had already left at this point)

[@juniorcyans2988]

I just found your channel by searching why nothing can go faster than light. You talked about most topics I'm wondering about since I was little!

[@rishabh635OT]

That means we are also moving at the speed of light for someone. And the also can't se us.

[@bormisha]

So there is spacetime justice, after all!

[@anthonyrodgers6613]

The talk in my town moves faster then the speed of light 🙄

[@JonSmith-cx7gr]

There is no shame in being gay Anthony. People will get over it.

[@bradleyweiss1089]

Same at work. We were standing around on break at work one day and talking about that very subject. And as an experiment we agreed to tell someone something and before break was over someone came over to up to tell the false thing we had started. It was funny but not.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

@Gary Krug Since when did Truth become a He? :) (lol!)

[@calebandxion]

Apparently it's inaccurate. Otherwise, you would have used "than" instead of "then"

[@wayneyadams]

Everyone knows that gossip is a function of quantum entanglement so it spreads instantaneously.

[@Kevin-wo3kp]

Dr Don's students are very lucky to have him as their tutor. An incredibly engaging teacher.

[@jeffo9396]

Luck is something that happens by chance. Students enrolling in Don's classes know in advance that he's the professor.

[@Kevin-wo3kp]

@@jeffo9396 is that pedentism or autism? You should get checked out. My luck comment is simply a phrase of speech recognised as such generally.

[@oscarb9139]

The speed of light; it’s not just a good idea, it’s the law.

[@stu176mmm]

and laws are there to be broken

[@thirdworldrider6991]

Laws can be re written so when I hear the laws of physics I lol.

[@oscarb9139]

Third World Rider The laws of physics are rewritten when they are proven wrong. Can you name one that has been rewritten?

[@coronachinesevirus8808]

Oscar Blue Law in this universe.

[@paskky913]

Us: Can we move faster than light? Fermilab: *Well yes, but actually no*

[@wayneyadams]

You can only travel faster than light if it is travelling through some medium that slows it down. In the vacuum of space light travels at its greatest speed and nothing can travel faster.

[@wayneyadams]

@Stable Genius Absolutely not. Our ability to measure the speed of light has nothing to do with the operation of the Universe no matter how arrogant we are in assuming it is so. Bodies with mass can never travel at or faster than the speed of light, it is fact supported by thousands of experiments, just accept it. If you have an open mind and are wiling to take the time to read a simple explanation that does not involve time dilation, length contraction, increasing mass, or any other exotic concept, of why this is true, I will gladly post it here for you. Just say the word.

[@Felixmz]

@@wayneyadams I would love the explanation if you have the time. Thanks in advance and, if not, have a great Christmas.

[@kaidencrip7565]

Not even a grain of sand can travel the speed of light. Because it is too heavy.

[@Rami-bi9xj]

In short Way, we mean anything that has mass and in a vacumm

[@alanclark7807]

I like how Dr. Lincoln hired a kitty consultant to help him with this subject matter!

[@60framesorbust86]

I can feel how socially awkward you must be in public situations.... just like me :) This makes me trust you

[@proghostbusters1627]

I just love these videos. Thanks Dr. Lincoln.

[@AbbasAli-gs2fm]

A very amazing and true notion; the space is expanding, not that the galaxies are moving in accelaration.

[@RCDesertRat]

The expansion of space-that feeling you get after eating your thanksgiving dinner

[@brenbaroque]

Great job Don. I doubt there's a better way to explain this complex subject for non-physicists.

[@to-rome]

What if faster than light is possible in our lifetime, but we'd 1st have to know what gravity is? What if a dude, a nobody, promises to have an answer that agrees with and is based on observations, theory and the actual reality and has implications on everything, from transport to energy production and matter manipulation? What if he needs support so he can answer this question? Would you support him? I'm that guy & if I get 10k likes to my account, I will make a video explaining what gravity is, starting from The Beginning, the Big Bang. Wondering why I want followers first? I've spent too much time and energy on this question to give the answer away for free.

[@b.brodsky2021]

Dr. Don Lincoln is is fascinating. Thank you very much!!! Great job

[@jonvance69]

Ludicrous Speed! Lol. Seriously, I'd like more information on Cherenkov radiation, that's cool stuff!

[@eddiewilliams9490]

Jon Vance 99 no

[@JasonMasters]

As I understand it (and I may be wrong, but I think I'm close), the radiation charges the atoms in the water molecules, but the charged atoms are unstable and in order to return to stability, they release the charge in the form of a photon (a particle of light) which just happens to naturally vibrate at the frequency for blue light.

[@thstroyur]

If you want technical stuff, check out Jackson's ridiculously famous book; he sure talks about it there

[@Yora21]

Wish granted.

[@MervynPartin]

It's very impressive. Just visit your local nuclear power station (if they will let you visit) and look at freshly discharged fuel in the cooling ponds with the overhead lights switched off.

[@cosmoshivani]

Clear and Precise!! I really liked the way you explained the three different situations.

[@kkinva68]

i changed majors from physics to computer science because the profs had no social or communication skills, keep up the great videos

[@lorenzobarbano]

I would like to know more about Cherenkov light. Keep up the Great work Dot. Lincoln!!

[@josephpacchetti5997]

Thank You Don, you have a way of explaining things, that anyone with a basic understanding of the Cosmos, can understand, without a degree in Physics, I've been subscribed to this channel for several years, and you do an Excellent Job of explaining this, Thank You Sir, Stay Strong My Friend! And Keep Looking Up, 🔭

[@gc-foi-espoir-amour]

Very well explained. Super interesting!!! 😊

[@paritosh4643]

How to travel faster than light? Turn off the light.

[@MyJudyKim]

Warp Coil drive?

[@alphagt62]

That reminds me of an old joke. An old man bragging about his son said, “He’s so fast, he can turn the light out and get in the bed before it gets dark”. I know, it’s corny.

[@ronnieroberts7414]

Muhammad Ali used this joke in a press conference during his reign

[@nirmalsinghsingh4941]

Ask the magnetic jets emerging from a black hole 👌😎😎😎😎

[@simflyr1957]

LOL...

[@casaolec]

When you say: the metric crowd. You actually mean: the whole WORLD!?

[@wayneyadams]

We mean the insignificant part of the world outside the United States.

[@nareshlathia5334]

Apart from the BrUtish.

[@wayneyadams]

@@nareshlathia5334 If that is meant as an insult to the United States, I can only say, who cares?

[@JEIWILBER]

@@nareshlathia5334 Even the commonwealth use Metric...

[@dothien4835]

Talk to me when the whole world does something significant for space travel/science

[@andrewbodor4891]

From a source of light, light begins traveling in opposite directions. An observer will see the light beams, each one, travel at twice the speed of "C". So will each beam of light as it views the other beam of light. Targets placed at the same distance from the source will be impacted at same time; so will each light beam. If one light beam "sees" the other travel at "2C" ???

[@chrisreedbates]

Thanks a lot Dr. Lincoln, love the channel! Don't mean to be greedy but three questions: 1.) Can you discuss at some point the alcubierre drive? 2.) If space is expanding does this also mean the Planck Length is of different sizes depending on where you are in the universe? 3.) What happens to the Higgs field and the interaction with the Higgs field in expanded space?

[@ludicrous7044]

If you think you can stump him: Think again!!😁

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@ludicrous7044 TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution; AS WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS “mass”/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY; AS inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (OR BALANCED WITH/AS) what is gravitational force/ENERGY. INDEED, witness what is the fully illuminated (AND setting/WHITE) MOON ON BALANCE. WHAT IS GRAVITY is an INTERACTION that cannot be shielded or blocked ON BALANCE. (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.) GREAT. By Frank Martin DiMeglio

[@deanmaher3969]

Does the subatomic particle remain in the "plus or minus" spin once you stop measuring it? Or does it revert back to "plus and minus"? Thank-you for the video.

[@brothermine2292]

My understanding is that if you measure it a second time (or third, etc) the result will be the same as the first measurement, which implies its state does NOT revert between measurements to a superposition of Up and Down spins.

[@Chrizzldiable]

I have just watched a very well done video from Fermilab: “Why you cannot travel faster than light.” And now KZbin's algorithm is making fun of me suggesting: “How to travel faster than light” by Fermilab. :D Well done, I'll watch it anyway. Now that I understood that space and time are entangled and have the feeling nothing will be able to crush my fundamental knowledge!

[@bhavbhutirawat]

The last case you mentioned here sir proves that we already are moving at speed faster than light. Since the object far away from us is moving away from us at speed faster than light. That being said it is never said that we are the center of universe and we hold our position in the universe very statically. Hence we are also at a place that is traveling away from a distant place in universe at speed faster than light.

[@joramarentved]

Didn't get it?

[@MaxPower-zw7go]

😂 “ My brains are going into my feet “!!!

[@eironjones8037]

They've gone to plaid!

[@jensphiliphohmann1876]

There is a 4th way: At a low gravitational potential, e.g. at the r sphere around a heavy object, the time tact of a local clock is longer than a clock far away by a factor 1/√{1 − 2м/r} where м = GM/c² is the gravitational radius of the mass M body, G being the gravitational constant. This implies that, judged from far, even light travels at only c(r) = c√{1 − 2м/r}. At the other hand, judged from the r spere, clocks far away tick at higher rates and thus even light travels at c(∞) = c(r)/√{1 − 2м/r}which is the supremum for far away particles.

[@warren286]

For exploration purposes, it could be more advantageous to travel near the speed of light, utilizing time dilation to travel to the edges of the universe in a lifetime.

[@simonbyholm350]

Only problem when you get back, there is no-one left here to tell about what you found.

[@juzoli]

Is light actually slower in glass/water? Or is it just taking a longer path, bouncing from atom to atom?

[@ludvercz]

The bouncing thing is a false explanation. (or oversimplified at the very least) If it were true, light would spread all over the place, but the reality is that a laser beam (albeit bent) will stay a coherent beam in glass, water or whatever.

[@hunterp913]

Instead of bouncing the electrons in the medium absorb the photo then emit a photon making it seem slower.

[@Munku81]

slower.

[@Munku81]

then a leading edge (the part of light that doesn't get absorbed by chance) would still be at vaccuum speed of light. Light is not absorbed and reemitted, it coherently interacts with matter.

[@haroldwhitney6130]

That's a deep question. I like the way you think.

[@sweet123shweta]

I think that means that even we are moving away at speed of light or faster with the same logic, but there is a problem. If something is moving away at the speed of light for us let's say, then with the same logic, it must be moving slower than the speed of light for another galaxy which is more near to it, but that's not possible in our world.

[@feelingzhakkaas]

Truly mindboggling puzzle. Thanks for enlightening

[@andreavorname4442]

I would like to see a video where you explain the Cherenkow effect please. With all math formula I mean. Why don't you open another channel where you explain some hardest topic for undergraduate student but really with a true mathematical approach? You have a very clear way to explain tough stuff. I am sure you will have success on youtube. Thank you.

[@kurdmanpouyesh]

Andrea Angeletti agreed

[@andreavorname4442]

alysdexia actually you can 'wikipedia' everything that is on fermilab channel... I would like to see an explanation from his point of view.

[@armanozcelik1183]

We see light as something moving while it is not. What you see is: you leaving the space-moment where the "thing" (light) has stopped "being". When you switch the light on, you create a "space time stop" that is the anomaly we "see". We should actually say we are "decelerating" when we try to reach the anomaly ("speed of light"). We can never reach that thing because this is the "where-thing" ceases simply "existing". Nothing can reach the "light speed" because there is "nothing" there. And going "faster" has no meaning. Can you see through light?

[@SlideRulePirate]

"Anything that is possible can happen". Agreed.

[@Jopie65]

SlideRulePirate And if it happens, it is possible...

[@drdca8263]

That seems to be a tautology?

[@Onnozelfilmpje]

Murphy's Law is even stronger: anything impossible will happen.

[@willinton06]

Peter N that’s not the law, check google for the full info

[@kurdmanpouyesh]

It is not "Can happen". It is "will happen"

[@TheWyrdSmythe]

Expansion hits c at ~14 billion LY; the universe is 13.8 billion years old... are those connected? Are the two always linked?

[@inox1ck]

I far as I understand it is possible, because the Universe at the time of the BB was actually infinite and the expansion happened everywhere.

[@stuartwadlow1650]

Does mean the age of the universe is unknowable until one exceeeds the speed of light?

[@davidtalbot2061]

My question exactly

[@TheAutoChannel]

When I was 18, more than half a century ago, I postulated that the speed of gravity was faster than the speed of light. And this deduction made me think of how a spaceship could travel at the speed of gravity (faster than the speed of light). Here's how I deduced all this: I imagined that a laser light briefly turned on and off (pulsed), and that as the light pulses or beam moved forward it would be bent or otherwise distorted by gravity. In order for the pulses to be "captured" and distorted by gravity, the force of gravity had to move quicker than the light pulses could move. Therefore, gravity was faster than the speed of light. With this in mind, I imagined a round spaceship (a flying saucer) with a giant size gyroscope inside. I had a large enclosed gyroscope toy that had a crank to wind it up (instead of a pull string). I noticed that when I cranked it really fast, not only did it perform as gyroscopes do to balance themselves, but if I tossed the gyro up, it appeared to pause at the apex of the ascent - demonstrating an anti-gravitational characteristic. This seemed different than the mere tossing of a ball into the air, which I would say demonstrates no delay of any kind in switching from ascending to descending. I then imagined that if the gyro could spin fast enough that it would become anti-gravitational. I likened the force of gravity and anti-gravity to different magnetic fields (like and unlike fields), which would instantly (at the speed of gravity) attract or repel each other. The result would be that the flying saucer would have the ability to be repelled from, or attracted to, a celestial body such as a planet at the speed of gravity. From this, I had to work out how a flying saucer would be able to hover (not be instantly repelled completely away from a planet), how it could move gradually up and down, move horizontally, what could possibly power the internal gyroscope to reach its anti-gravitational speed. I presumed then, and still maintain now, that a nuclear-powered engine would be used, and that a computer(s) would automatically and rather instantly adjust the speed of the spinning gyro to keep the ship steady to hover, increase to ascend, or decrease to descend. Moving horizontally or diagonally would be accomplished by slight tilts in the balance of the ship which would act somewhat similar to how a sailboat can move forward against a wind by tacking. The tacking actions would be so instantly controlled by the onboard computers that the minute zigzagging movements would appear to observers as being in a straight line. I imagined that space travel would be possible by using the ship's anti-gravitational forces to repel from one planet or star towards another, and then ricochet from one to another - similar to how a ball in a pinball machine picks up speed as it bounces from one bumper to another. I imagined that any onboard computer(s) could chart the cosmic path and make adjustments at the speed of electricity (the speed of light). Moreover, I imagined that cosmic knowledge and "charts" would be used to best determine when voyages could be made in order to use closely aligned bodies to bounce from one celestial body, thereby shortening the distances, and perhaps even multiplying the speed at which the ship could travel - twice the speed of gravity, three times the speed of gravity, etc., etc. In Star Trek vocabulary, Warp 1, Warp 2, Warp 3, and so on. Somebody get Elon Musk on the phone! Any thoughts or criticisms?

[@AstronomywithManas]

Its not that as the universe is expanding we are stationary we are also moving at a speed of 230 km/s so the calculation might change every time you check the co-ordinates.

[@HandfisH100]

If all these galaxies are moving away from us at high speeds, what do they know that we don't know?

[@benjietofis]

No, we are moving away from them

[@tcivrilli]

None. It seems like that, because the space is expanding between our and the other galaxy

[@larryclark9191]

It probably means we smell worse than we thought.

[@SpectatorAlius]

Nice try, but one of the important points he forgot to make is that this expansion is homogeneous in space. That is, although he described the expansion as "moving away from Earth", he could have picked any other point in the visible universe and made the exact same statement about expansion as moving away from that point.

[@laurahall907]

"Space is the variable that's moving"

[@GMan958]

9:11 "Be careful space is expanding, galaxy is not moving" for an observer located in a galaxy exactly moving at the speed of light respect to us, are we moving at the speed of light to that observer? Is the stretching of space only occurs at the very edge of the sphere mentioned in 7:55? If there are two galaxies diametrically opposed to said sphere would observers in those two galaxies "see" the other galaxy moving at 2 times the speed of light?

[@ciprianstanescu]

So being in 2 states at the same time and entanglement are now official physics? I've heard about them for years, but still waiting for a definite proof. Please make a video with the proof that these exist

[@Nautilus1972]

Oh JEsus. Schrodinger's cat.

[@busterbiloxi3833]

Answer: Dilithium crystals!

[@EchoPrograms]

if anything that is more than 14 billion light-years away, we will never be able to reach it because it will be moving away from us faster than we could get to it, that means if we can't travel to the closest new solar system by the time it is 14 billion light-years away, we will be confined to our universe. If we wait even longer, we might be confined to our own solar system.

[@solanumtinkr8280]

If you have to measure to know which of the two entangled particles has the + spin and which has the -, you have to measure it to know which is which, how can you know that the entanglement didn't sync the particles instead? I'll be really impressed when we can actually "measure" superposition. If instead the entangled particles "superposition" is them being in sync with each other, then that FTL information transmission vanishes, I would think. But without being able to "see" superposition and know for sure it is happening, even if only indicated indirectly, then we cannot say for sure that they were +/- instead of being in sync with one already a + and the other a -. Not quiet the same thing to my mind, but maybe that is just me.

[@xtieburn]

'how can you know that the entanglement didn't sync the particles instead?' Bells inequality. Its a bit tricky to explain in a satisfying way, you might want to check out some videos on that term as its surprisingly tricky to really grasp, but if the particles were somehow preset (Which is called a hidden variable hypothesis.) then they should have a different rate of correlation in a Bell test to if they were not preset. The experiments always find that they trend toward not being preset. Its a little like ignoring the results that are directly entangled for a moment and just looking at what happens when you just prod at what the state of the particles are in. If they are preset youd expect a nice linear correlation between the results trending up to a clear 1 on one side means 0 on the other, but thats not what you get in reality. This doesnt entirely rule out hidden variables for a few reasons, but theyve kept searching with increasingly excessive experiments for any way that hidden variables can still remain, so far nothing turns up.

[@Hank254]

Look up Bell's inequalities. The current interpretation of experiments is that the entangled particles don't have a specific spin until one of them is measured. When one is measured, the other instantly obtains the opposite spin. This is an old but very good documentary that explains it fairly well: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eHfZe4KQapano8U

[@gnanay8555]

You suppose the entangled particles are already determined when still together, but it's been proved to be false. (Bell's inequality, if you want to look it up). (ok, not if hidden variables are non local).

[@iamamcnea]

The example in the video wasn't the greatest because as you said they could just be "in sync" and if that's the case no FTL information is needed. However, there are experiments in which the outcome of entangled particles can not be determined by the particles being in sync. This is basically the Bell Inequality, which mean No Hidden Information in a classical system (i.e. being in sync) can explain the experimental outcomes. Here is a good video on it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/kKbZfGClmZtnbcU

[@zauberschatzkiste]

einstein did ask the same thing. he said if you have a pair of handgloves, and put them in different boxes, no matter how far away from each you move them to inspect, one box will always contain the complementary handglove to the other.

[@baylorhubble7113]

I’m related to Edwin Hubble, so it’s kinda cool to hear about him in a video

[@didievenask-_-2330]

WHAT

[@user-gn4uy1pr9w]

Nobody cares

[@phoenix-king779]

🧢. Just because your name is the same does not mean nothing

[@baylorhubble7113]

@@user-gn4uy1pr9w you care enough to comment

[@user-gn4uy1pr9w]

@@baylorhubble7113 no, I just wanted to say that because didn’t realize it.

[@92Jaghk]

I have found your videos WONDERFULLY informative! Keep up the great work!

[@Jadinandrews]

I clicked on this faster than the speed of light

[@watermark360]

no you didn't

[@apron01]

It does means that “we” are moving at speed of light for an observer situated on that far far away galaxies???

[@b1tm_ghz377]

Yup. Or faster than light...

[@SonGokutheramaneesh]

Well he wouldn't be an observer because the person can't see us or interact with us

@@SonGokutheramaneesh convenient

[@wayneyadams]

No. If the galaxy is located in a region of space that is moving away from us at a speed greater than light, it cannot be observed.

[@donjr5400]

I like how you explain how the universe is not expanding but slowing down . light is faster than causality that's why we can't go that fast but how much faster is the real question .

[@adams9248]

Thanks for making these videos they really help me understand quantum mechanics. Very good content! 👍👍

[@Ni999]

186,000 miles/second isn't just a good idea - it's the law!

[@oskardumanski8538]

Ni999 Is it comfortable to use imperial units in physic? What is the correlation between Joule and Newton using imperial units? What units do you use to describe density? What is Planck constant in imperial units? What about the gas constant R, do you use Fahrenheit degrees as a part of its unit instead of Kelvin? What is the mass of water in a cube with 1-foot or 1-yard edge? And finally what is the correlation between a foot or yard and a mile? Can you feel all these dependences using imperial units?

[@VerisimilitudeDude]

It's actually 186,282 miles per second.

[@Alinnagy88]

Laws are meant to be broken.

[@spaceflight1019]

C is merely the speed of electromagnetic waves in a vacuum. According to the scientists, gravity follows the same laws as EM.

[@kjelleriksson5122]

Derrick C We HAVE a universal everything. It’s not fun or good, only very silly, when I ask about a bolt thread and they reply ”7/64” or something that dumb. We had in the first half of the last or later several different Swedish inches, plus the Danish inch, plus ... you get it. It became impossible.

[@thomasciarlariello3228]

At an Engineering Conference held at MIT's Electrical Engineering Dept. off Vassar Street of Cambridge, MA. where I gave a presentation on nuclear aerospace propulsion there was a discussion of how to circumvent the light barrier.

[@asevado]

Futurama suggested: ok, we can't travel faster then the speed of light, so we increased the speed of light.

[@accidentalheadclunkers8517]

My daughter watched the whole video just to see the cat 🤫🤣

[@makantahi3731]

what cat?

[@ENiceGeo]

@@makantahi3731 The cat is a lie.

[@thomasciarlariello3228]

When I attended a by invite only engineering conference held at MIT's Electrical Engineering Dept. on Vassar Street of Cambridge, MA. there was discussion of circumvention of light barrier.

[@Bobsunfire]

You are my favorite Dr. Don. Don't stop these beautiful videos!

[@ldavid2]

"metric crowd" also known as sane people

[@joyalsaju8878]

Thats a good one😃

[@selfreference2]

Spotted the physicist

[@nookienookiebattiebottie3531]

Yeah, Don is so stupid, and such a time waster for mentioning this. EVERYONE knows what speed is, even of you quote it in Klingon units.

[@weebz1005]

How many of the metric crowd been to the moon?

[@nigai0amai]

@@weebz1005 as far as I know NASA has been the only one on the moon and guess what system they've been using :)

[@AmanDeep-yc4iz]

I am on KZbin and now it's time for a statement: The probability of me liking a KZbin video related to scientific principle if same if we measure the speed of a earth surface relative to earth's surface and divide it to the universal speed limit, now I am so relieved, so much relieved that I now reward your patience and hard work..with a like .....so that you make more of such things in future.. Hail the cosmological constant -c

[@jamesgraham6796]

How about we just change the “ Value” of what a mile IS ? That was easy.

[@aja749]

Photons : Nothing can travel faster than me Space : Hold my beer.

[@sergiotorloni5166]

Aniket Maurya tachyons do. The problem is we have predicted their existence but have been unable to detect that or those particles that have this habilitation.

[@bormisha]

@Sergio Torloni, we've never predicted their existence. "Tachyons" is simply a class name for particles that move faster than light IF they exist. But no theory demands or expects their existence. Moreover, anything moving FTL would break causality (i.e. would travel back in time). At the moment there are no phenomena known that require the existence of tachyons to explain them. So it remains a dream.

[@peterlombard2292]

4:35 "It's that it's both plus AND minus." What is the basis for this contradictory statement? I'm guessing a heat analogy would not suffice (i.e. both hot and cold = warm) because Dr. Don stated it is not a question of ignorance. So, simply how do we know it is both?

[@allthumbs3792]

Thank you, Dr. Lincoln for an excellent lay person’s tutorial! After watching 3 time I actually could understand some of this. I’ve always wondered how particles become entangled. Can this occur in nature or only in the particle physics lab? Spooky indeed!

[@mr.winter538]

I know I am late and this explanation is oversimplifying a really complicated phenomenon, however I’ll give it a shot anyway. Particle entanglement is a somewhat nebulous concept that isn’t verry well understood. Basically it happens when a particle interacts with another particle. Imagine two electrons crashing into each other. Before that we could know (for example) the position of one particle at a time. Afterwards we can calculate the position of the one particle by looking at the other. This is not really how it works, however it both isn’t verry well explained and I personally don’t quite understand it, so this approximation will have to do. Now you might also see how the information is supposedly traveling faster than light. If we ensure two electrons interact in a way, in which they need to have opposite spins, without knowing which spins these are, then we can know the spin of one by looking at the other. So if we take the two electrons a long distance apart without knowing which has which spin, we can look at one of them and immediately know the spin of the other. Therefor the information of what spin the other electron has to have must be traveling faster than the speed of light. As said I myself don’t quite understand this topic and have also left out a lot (such as the concept of quantum superposition), so if you are trying to learn more I highly recommend looking the topic up yourself, however I still hope this comment could help gain some insight into the topic. P.S. It is entirely possible my explanation is simply wrong so take everything said in this comment with a grain of salt.

[@rick15666]

@@mr.winter538 it sounds right man, but I don’t know really. The way you put it though disappoints me, I’m sorry to say, in that, I can’t think of a “workaround”, can’t even imagine how we could *exploit quantum entanglement for the purposes of us physically traveling*. The more I read about these things the more defeated I feel, in that we won’t find some kind of key to u locking some untapped potential to do some craaazy stuff. I was hoping that after James Webb telescope launch on 12/18/21, six months of setup, and like a year, we would make a groundbreaking discovery, the information key to unlocking an ability to exploit a phenomenon we find, and using it for cool stuff. Bah.. Well we might well find a planet along the way, while looking back at the Big Bang, that has such similar markers as ours in its atmosphere, that the potential for at least some form of life is highly probable, or hell maybe we see smog from burning fissile fuels, wouldn’t that be crazy!? I imagine we could also learn some relatively disappointing things, like for instance nothing on any planet ever. Totally possible. So you’ve blown a bit of my flame down, but it’s not out. Don’t feel bad, as much as I like to wonder about ‘impossible’ things, equally I would like to know how probable they are, like any amount greater than 0 would be cool.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@samueldavila2156 In understanding SPACE, what is gravity, TIME, AND time dilation (ON BALANCE), it is important is it to understand what is a BALANCED displacement of what is SPACE. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE. Consider what is E=MC2. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE. (c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE.) Indeed, the stars are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE. The rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. Consider what is THE EYE, AND notice what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky ON BALANCE. NOW, consider what is the BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE. CLEARLY, BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental (ON BALANCE). “Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ON BALANCE, consider what is the orange (AND setting) Sun. “Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE (ON BALANCE) consistent WITH E=MC2, F=ma, TIME, AND time dilation ON BALANCE. This CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY represents, DESCRIBES, AND INVOLVES what is possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Notice what is the fully illuminated (AND setting/WHITE) MOON ON BALANCE. Great. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Indeed, inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/AS) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This CLEARLY explains what is E=MC2 AND F=ma ON BALANCE, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE !! (Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE.) Great. Indeed, consider WHAT IS THE EARTH/ground ON BALANCE. I have mathematically proven why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE, AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE; AS c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. (Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE.) I have mathematically proven what is the fourth dimension, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) !!! I have explained why what are OBJECTS may fall at the SAME RATE. By Frank Martin DiMeglio

[@jackmeholff7353]

Theoretically then we are all moving faster then the speed of light?

[@mho...]

depends on you point of view!

[@kiryls1207]

for people that live farther than 14 billion light years radius, yes, for them we are the ones with speed greater than the speed of light. and i suppose that's bc space is expanding in all directions for everyone

[@ZomBeeNature]

That's what she said

[@boypogi5563]

depends on your frame of reference? But in QM subparticles can puffs up anywhere.

[@danb340]

Depending on if your looking or not, or who is seeing it.

[@Renfade]

@Fermilab So if i'm not mistaken, from 8:16 you're also explaining why the observable universe is around 14 bilion lightyears? Cause any further the light that emits from that space would never be able to reach us.

[@ultimateslider]

So we are moving at the speed of light in reference to those galaxies...

[@Freestyler-rr]

@@sriramn1809 Doesn't that mean as time passes on, more and more galaxies will disappear from observable universe, and ultimately there will come a time when we can't see any of our neighbouring galaxies??

[@nigai0amai]

@@Freestyler-rr in the video "If the universe is only 14 billion years old, how can it be 92 billion light years wide?" he explains that every second 20,000 stars move out of the observable universe, crossing a point where we'll never be able to see them again, so some time in the future the only stars and galaxies we'll be able to see are the ones in our local group.

[@manjsher3094]

I'm weak I clicked for the kitten.

[@Prasen1729]

At 8:20, isn't it that our hubble sphere is also expanding, so actually we would be able to see them? You missed the point or I missed something?

[@SvenTviking]

Cats can travel via Hyperspace to your lap without being noticed.

[@ZomBeeNature]

And they push things off shelves and make it to your lap before the things hit the ground! 😲

[@christianheichel]

I spent the first half of this video thinking his shirt said "peed imit c" b4 I realized he had a jacket on LMAO

[@dintexinformationsystems1004]

@@Blue_The_Back i detect a fellow indian

[@blackknightjack3850]

Honestly I was hoping this was going to be about wormholes or warping space. If I recall, that's what's actually happening in Star Trek. It's not that they're actually moving faster than light, but that the warp drive warps the space around it so that it can bridge the distances between two points at a rate that is faster than light. That would naturally be why it's called a warp drive at all. Honestly I don't know if this is actually true in the series. I'm just assuming it is because I've seen some material from physicists about trying to see if it was possible to do something like this in real life.

[@damn671]

My girlfriend goes shopping faster than the speed of light as soon as I get my paycheck.

[@ChallengeTheNarrative]

Hi Penis, suggesting to let Vagina go. She's not worth it.

[@huepix]

In all these "observations" of spin never seem to consider that the observer is also moving. All theories and calculations assume the observation point is stationary. It's not.

[@jameskono314]

huepix good point

[@wayneyadams]

Electrons don't actually spin like little spheres. Unfortunately it is one of those terms that lead the non-scientists astray. Electrons exhibit a measurable quantity that can be likened to a spinning charged particle. The rest of your comment does not make any sense at all. What do you mean the observer is "moving?"

[@wayneyadams]

@@jameskono314 No it isn't.

[@daka1272]

Love this channel, and I really appreciate that you also tell stuff in the metric system.

[@robode1945]

My brain is made of water, thus my thoughts are faster than the light in the universe around me. :)

[@ptduff]

Actually that's backward. Light moving through the water in your brain is slower than light in air or a vacuum. :-)

[@bradleyweiss1089]

Only if you’re quick witted. I guess.