Is Time Real?

[@dj_laundry_list]

Time is actually a function of the number of comments a youtube video has

[@greensombrero3641]

actually, time is on my side, yes it is

[@rushunnhfernandes]

😂😂haha innovative

[@larryscott3982]

I have time for this. I don’t have time flat earth vids.

[@ThePaulv12]

No only phd graduates from the university of KZbin can say whether time exists or not. Their opinions are unimpeachable. I know it, you know it. We mere mortals don't have the credentials to participate in their high brow exalted ontological and epistemological discussions on existential matters such as time. All we can do is sit back look at them and say, "Man that should be me up there!"

[@eyon150]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/infQfIyXhLdoqJo

[@upandatom]

I want to be Sabine when I grow up

[@nerdomania24]

you can become annoyed physicist at any day

[@EffySalcedo]

😅😆

[@bossoholic]

Physicists UNITE

[@dr.OgataSerizawa]

Up and Atom What a coincidence seeing you here, sweetie! 🌹🌹 Continued success with your channel in the new year. Love your "presentation"....

[@ps200306]

It's possible you'll never pronounce Ein-shtein like Sabine. But rumour has it that you (or someone you know) are the expert on pronouncing Fourier, Fermat, Germain, Hermite, Lagrange, Mersenne, and Poincaré. Which makes you quite Legendre ;-)

[@rubiks6]

All day long I've been asking people what time it is and they keep giving me different answers.

[@thewizzard3150]

It's a conspiracy. You got a theory?

[@frankdimeglio8216]

THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio

[@webgpu]

try asking then what time is it yesterday.

[@MaxDooDat2]

Quack!

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@MaxDooDat2 THE ULTIMATE (AND CLEAR) MATHEMATICAL UNIFICATION (AND PROOF) REGARDING PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE IS NOW DEMONSTRATED, AS E=MC2 IS F=MA: TIME DILATION ultimately proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (Importantly, balance and completeness go hand in hand.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. NOW, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of WHAT IS THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Indeed, ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. GREAT. Accordingly, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=mc2 IS F=ma. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=MA. GREAT !!! Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Consider THE MAN who is standing on what is THE EARTH/GROUND. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Great. MOREOVER, a given PLANET (including what is THE EARTH) then sweeps out equal areas in equal times consistent WITH/AS F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Objects (including WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/energy is gravity. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. THE DOME of a PERSON'S EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. (Notice the flat AND black space of what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is blue. THE EARTH/ground AND THE SUN are E=mc2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIVERSALLY PROVEN TO BE GRAVITY in what is a mathematically unified fashion. E=mc2 IS F=ma. The middle distance in/of/AS SPACE AND the full distance in/of/AS SPACE are NECESSARILY linked AND balanced. MAGNIFICENT !!!!!!!!!! INSTANTANEITY IS thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. Again, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GREAT. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It is all CLEARLY proven !!!!!!!! TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. GREAT !!!!!!!! BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio

[@sageinit]

[Enter Groucho Marx] "Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."

[@dlevi67]

That was Anthony Oettinger

[@jpe1]

@@dlevi67 I’m confident that all the people reading your comment who know your username and recognize your authority on the topic will have full confidence in your statement, but for the handful who might doubt you, here is a link to back up your assertion that can be used as a jumping off point to research further: quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/04/time-flies-arrow/

[@Bldyiii]

You people are too smart for your own good.

[@kensurrency2564]

Somehow it’s funnier when Groucho says it. 😉

[@edcunion]

Tally ho Groucho, an old school comedic genius!

[@vladeckk21]

Love this. I may not watch with complete understanding, but I always watch with intense interest.

[@kenchorney2724]

"Time is an illusion, lunch time doubly so" - Ford Prefect, The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

The truth is liberating, as it confers responsibility AND freedom. By Frank DiMeglio

[@KibyNykraft]

@Science Revolution Time has a physical existence in the sense that all baryons are in continuous motion. That is, that is the only existential-cosmological-scientific possible definition of time; motions measured to other motions (relativity). One can of course for the daily life define time as whatever. :) When we say that it takes time to get to another town, what we are really saying is that it needs energy + space to get to another town. (if there was no space(background), there would be no OTHER town)

[@KibyNykraft]

(energy = bound in particles, straight old particle mechanics... Space curvature is basically where Einstein fell off his chair, sadly.. .Before that he did most things very well, being one of the important teachers in the understanding that all is in continuous variable motion)

[@phillipholmes5206]

Time dialation is an optical illusion.

[@nelsonclub7722]

Time and space are relative. The more time I spend with my relatives the more space I need

[@KibyNykraft]

But one day they might be dead, you are left alone ,and you will miss them... Then you will think otherwise ;)

[@nelsonclub7722]

@@KibyNykraft You must be fun at parties?

[@KibyNykraft]

I don't speak intellectual subjects at parties :) Not relxng enogh

[@nelsonclub7722]

@@KibyNykraft I rest my case

[@obeelektro3668]

Unfortunately you have garnished some criticism. To me your comment shows your wittiness, fantastic humor and great intelligence. Your comment is truly funny. : ) Cheers

[@SkyIsTheLimit68]

I like her style. Easy to follow. Her English is actually excellent, considering that it's not her first language. I have high respect for Sabine. Please keep making these video.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

The truth is liberating, as it confers responsibility AND freedom. By Frank DiMeglio

[@DarkShroom]

@@frankdimeglio8216 who's Frank DiMeglio?

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@DarkShroom WHY ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIFIED AND BALANCED WITH/AS WHAT IS GRAVITY: Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are LINKED AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Therefore, Einstein's equations and Maxwell's equations are unified (given the addition of a fourth spatial dimension); AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma; AS TIME DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, Einstein's equations predict that SPACE is expanding OR contracting in and with TIME; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of the Moon MATCHES it's revolution. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. THE SUN purely exemplifies time DILATION. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Let's compare this directly with BOTH a falling object AND the speed of light (c). Great. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL to the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience. Ultimately and truly, TIME is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The ultimate unification of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND includes opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT. It ALL makes perfect sense. THINK !!! The Earth that undergoes time DILATION IS thus represented (ON BALANCE) as what is A POINT in the night sky, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (So, notice that the BLUE SKY IS no longer visible. Think.) E=mc2 IS F=ma. It is FULLY proven. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Alas, the INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. I have truly, CLEARLY, AND MATHEMATICALLY unified physics/physical experience. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. (Notice the black space of THE EYE, AND the DOME of a person's eye is ALSO visible.) THE EARTH is ALSO blue. Again, E=mc2 IS F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Time dilation proves that E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio

[@zoetropo1]

@@frankdimeglio8216 Too much capitalisation collapses an argument.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@DarkShroom ABSOLUTE MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: Time DILATION proves that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma. Einstein's equations are NECESSARILY QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. In fact, the mathematical unification of Maxwell's equations AND Einstein's equations (given the addition of a fourth spatial dimension) proves that ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE; AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY AND FUNDAMENTALLY DERIVED FROM F=ma; AS time DILATION proves that ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, Einstein's equations predict that SPACE is expanding OR contracting in and with time. ALL of SPACE is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This is, in fact, CLEARLY proven by BOTH F=ma AND E=mc2. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the SPEED OF LIGHT; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are linked AND BALANCED IN AND OUT of SPACE AND TIME, as this is CLEARLY proven by time DILATION, F=ma, AND E=mc2. This ALSO explains the cosmological redshift AND the "black hole(s)". Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE.) ACCORDINGLY, FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE, MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE, AND A POINT are all then in BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. GREAT !!! This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, and describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Therefore, I have demonstrated the true mathematical UNIFICATION of physics/physical experience AS what is NECESSARILY electromagnetic/gravitational IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. By Frank DiMeglio

[@julietwochholz9755]

Been studying non-duality. My experience is that it is always now. I cannot move out of the now and into the future (or the past.) Time is a concept, an incredibly useful one, but show me how there is anything but now.

[@Zayden.]

Fossils, rocks, the field of geology, biology, paleontology

[@robertsutherland7378]

The real question is, is how long does now(the present) exist? Assuming it's a time period it should be measurable, like seconds and minutes, if not it doesn't exist and perhaps only the past and present exist.

[@Crallux]

​@@Zayden. The fossiles are now fossiles. Yes they depict what happend in the past but they are now in the state that you can find them, not in the past form. You cannot interact with the past, only with the products of the past that now exist You can also not interact with the future, but you can make predictions of the future according to past events and current state.

[@nathanhittle9457]

"Now" might not even exist!!! The relativity of simultaneity suggests "now" is highly dependent on your position as an observer of events... truly wild!

[@isetmfriendsofire]

That doesn't explain time dilation based on speed or gravity.

[@retiredteacher6289]

I have to watch this again when I have more time.

[@MrGodofcar]

lol

[@AndrewBlucher]

To have more time you will need to go backwards. But she only released the video a few hours ago.

[@jamielondon6436]

We only ever have less time than we have ever had before. ;-)

[@retiredteacher6289]

@@AndrewBlucher Well I was going backwards as fast as I could but a cop pulled me over and said I am going to be doing some time, sometime.

[@retiredteacher6289]

@@jamielondon6436 I used to have more time but it was slipping slipping into the future so fast it's all past.

[@treysonmcgrady4750]

I’ve never heard time explained like this before, this was a wonderful video. That definition makes so much sense, really interesting topic.

[@stevesmodelbuilds5473]

Sabine's great. 😀

[@silentmajority8365]

Too time consuming🤣🤣

[@Murdo2112]

Indeed. It's not often, on KZbin, that you get some great "penny dropping" epiphany, but this was one for me. Thinking of velocity through space altering your angle through time suddenly made time dilation make sense, beyond a simple "ok,if you say so". I now how a simple model of how to visualise what's happening. Outstanding.

[@ericrichmond7296]

"We can stand still in space..." Is that possible other than in relation to our immediate surroundings?

[@a.randomjack6661]

No... every thing moves all the time. Atoms, waves, planets, stars, galaxies, clusters. Time is relative.

[@marsovac]

You could say that you are standing still in respect to the expansion of the universe.

[@nic.h]

Standing still relative to what?

[@Lord_Volkner]

@@nic.h Your own reference frame.

[@Mr.Not_Sure]

Well, if we blow a big bomb in deep space, producing debris moving in all directions in all speeds from zero to some high speed, then for any inertial frame (even for not immediate surroundings) there will be a fragment standing still regarding to it.

[@MamaZShaman]

Love your content, delivery, thoughtfulness, and, humor! Thank you Sabine

[@thwh77]

"The time we take is time that gives us something." Ernst Ferstl (Poet) If you take time for Sabine, you always get real value.

[@geoffreygushue2280]

Yeah, just finished watching one of her "lectures" from four months ago entitled ""Flat Earth Science...wrong, but not stupid". Aaah, no ... it's stupid!

[@dogwalker666]

"Time is an illusion, Lunchtime doubly so" Douglas Addams HHG.

[@primonomeultimonome]

Déjà vu. 😉

[@huepix]

HGG

[@dogwalker666]

@@huepix yes The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, written by the late great Douglas Addams.

[@a.randomjack6661]

Stop me if I didn't hear this 42 times...

[@dogwalker666]

@@a.randomjack6661 are you aware of the location of your Towel ?

[@BabyDespair]

I never get tired of Sabine's explanations

[@درودچطوری]

Dr. Hossenfelder, I've watched several videos about this subject and yours was by far more understandable than the others!!!! Thank you.

[@TheLuminousOne]

stop sucking up

[@ValirAmaril]

boss: 'you're late again!' me: 'is time even real?'

[@GaZonk100]

haha!

[@Estevaohaeser]

That's a perfect applyance for this information!

[@louf7178]

"OK. Then no paycheck necessary"

[@TheG7thcapo]

I tried this approach before it did not worked well. 🤣🤣🤣

[@gibbsm]

In the US Army you can be late by being 19 mins early, how's that for a time fuck?

[@eleanorpowellfan]

I come here mostly to hear her say "Einstein".

[@michaelblacktree]

LOL

[@hookflash699]

Don't you mean "Ein-shhhstein"? ;-)

[@arthurmee]

Take some German lessons. That should cure your fetish.

[@gordon9995]

Or "universe."

[@thomaspsyy]

She's German, therefore she pronounces it correctly, just as Einstein himself would spell it

[@Doodlebird138]

Sabine: is time real? KZbin: 10 hours ago

[@ThunderBassistJay]

Interesting thought that I've been having for a long time: Time can be replaced by "distance travelled by a photon through vacuum". The speed of light (in vacuum) is absolute and doesn't necessarily have to be expressed in distance per time. Speed itself can be expressed as a fraction of the distance a photon would have travelled through vacuum. In other words, do we prefer frequency or wavelength?

[@fred8281]

So time is a unitless ratio of distance over distance? Implying that distance is a fundamental property, and time is just a useful derivation of that fundamental property? Not a fundamental property itself?

[@ThunderBassistJay]

​@@fred8281 See this as a thought experiment. We're so used to time that it's hard to imagine a universe without. If there's no such thing as absolute time, then duration may be a useful 'substitute'. Duration can be derived from the distance a photon travels in vacuum. We could give it a unit, or simply express duration in photon-metres. The metre can be defined as the distance a photon travels during an agreed number of pulses from a caesium standard. Again, this is just a thought experiment. 😊

[@mikewalker7385]

I think we may all be chasing shadows. Trying to discover the composition of a shadow because it's something we perceive. When it is actually the effect of two other things.

[@alexstewart8097]

Above all the effect of the son, don't you think?

[@aaronseet2738]

I've always felt we can't answer these questions, especially dark matter and dark energy, unless we have perspective from the fifth or sixth dimension.

[@neerkoli]

@@aaronseet2738 I don't think we'll ever get an ultimate answer to these questions. At what point can we say confidently that we have found the theory of everything? It could be turtles all the way down.

[@AndreasDelleske]

Sure, consciousness and matter. Now you need to model consciousness.

[@MenacingBanjo]

Is that a Plato reference?

[@Branpanman]

My favorite KZbinr, by far. My mind is edified and blown every single time.

[@Dr.Shwan.Hameed]

This topic that I have always been waiting for you to explain

[@MichaelDeHaven]

Agreed, I love a good discussion on philosophical theories of time. PBS spacetime has some good ones too. Still, I can't believe you didn't make a more direct "time" joke in your comment.

[@larryscott3982]

When I was about to click on it, I noticed it was posted “1 hour ago”. Now I’m I’m confused. Was it always posted and my arrival was an hour after? But before and after .... well, I’ve returned to a configuration.

[@scoreprinceton]

Great explanation that is understandable thanks Now if I can get people to accept the notion that societal spacetime/natural languages spacetime are all varieties of network configurations but different from the geographical spacetime of the theory of relativity and similar in concept to the Wolfram’s proposed fundamental theory of physics but applicable mostly to abstractions.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

THE SIMPLE, PROPER, FULL, AND BALANCED UNDERSTANDING OF THE SHAPE, FORM, AND RELATIONAL MOTION OF WHAT IS THE MOON IN UNIVERSAL ACCORDANCE WITH THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA: What is THE MOON is moving AND not moving IN BALANCED RELATION to the Earth AND the Sun AS a linked AND BALANCED opposite in accordance with the UNIVERSAL fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. THEREFORE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON necessarily matches it's revolution; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the shape AND form of the Moon is basically constant or invariant. The Moon is a BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE manifestation or form that is in fundamental accordance with the Earth/Sun BALANCE pursuant to the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!! Therefore, the Moon is electromagnetically/gravitationally extended AND contracted ON BALANCE in true agreement with the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravitational force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. By Frank DiMeglio

[@rafaboanova]

I really enjoy watching Sabine's videos about complicated stuff. I keep thinking about them after and realizing I don't know enough about the basics to absorb even half of what she said. That's when I get watch other videos about the subject and then come back to rewatch the video and enjoy it even more the second time.

[@schmetterling4477]

Well, you clearly didn't listen as a five year old when they explained the clock to you. ;-)

[@walshamite]

​@Vlasko60Exactly so. We're trying to understand how the cosmos works while physicists continue to debate some of the concepts we have hitherto believed were immutable certainties. I guess we're all learning together, physicists and non-physicists alike. If relativity is only a holding theory while we get quantum gravity pinned down, who's the expert?

[@BalancedBlackwood]

I love your subtitle of “Science with out the gobbledygook”! I love watching your videos, especially because I am not good at math and yet I still very much understand you explanations. Thank you for your knowledge. 🙏

[@TheWeatherbuff]

"Time" for another cup of coffee before I watch this again.

[@b5904]

Always time for that.

[@richardkammerer2814]

Good coffee decreases my rate of intake.

[@ronconner8420]

Wonderful video. Liked how you avoid unnecessarily long explanations. Time as an emergent concept is really thought provoking.

[@Bult]

One thing... As you said, we cannot stand still in time,* but we cannot stand still in space either. Everything is moving through space and space is also expanding. There is nothing in the universe that isn't moving in space. (*Exception: theoretically, to observers, we remain frozen in time upon entering the event horizon of a black hole.)

[@algorithminc.8850]

Always time to learn and build ... never forget time for family and friends ... otherwise the cost of that time to learn and build is too high. Great channel ...

[@musikinspace]

The first 30 seconds are pure poetry.

[@NKernytskyy]

PROOF that Sabine is gorgeous: Nature is beautiful, physics is the language of nature, physics is beautiful. This woman is beautiful, this woman speaks physics. That makes physics twice as beautiful as nature. So this woman is twice as beautiful as any other woman. Hence, Sabine is gorgeous. Q. E. D.

[@digger411digger411]

That seems a bit circular.

[@NKernytskyy]

@@digger411digger411 when talking about women, logic typically vanishes

[@pokeman123451]

i cringe Q. E. D.

[@NuntiusLegis]

For me, part of her attractiveness is her seriousness, the denial to smile constantly, which women are trained to do in patriarchy.

[@digger411digger411]

Being a sapiophile, I am highly attracted to intelligent women. Geekiness is sexy to me. A pair of plastic-framed eyeglasses is to me what high heels are to most men. Talking about black holes and quantum entanglement is to me what talking dirty is to most men. Go figure.

[@ChrisEchoesMusic]

I’ve asked this elsewhere: does time assign a direction to gravity? In other words, is gravitational attraction a constant regardless of time’s arrow? In even more words, is the relation between time passage and gravitational strength reversed if time’s flow is reversed, or does this explain why entropy always increases regardless of time’s direction.

[@andregomesdasilva]

As far as I'm concerned, gravity is totally reversible in time, just as 99.9% +- 0.01% (just a joke) of the whole physics. What makes objects goes towards the center of mass instead of the opposite, is just a matter of probability (entropy). As the initial configuration has less entropy, the final configuration is extremely likely to be the center of masses going towards each other.

[@ChrisEchoesMusic]

@@andregomesdasilva thanks for engaging. I suppose I'm imagining some fanciful outside force pushing time backward instead of seeing reversal as more of a statistical likelihood in an eternal universe cranking out chance events. That's probably where I'm going wrong.

[@andregomesdasilva]

@@ChrisEchoesMusic ok, if we try to explain it this way (external force), the general relativity would be a much better model. Gravity is not a force, it's actually the path that a particle will go though while moving in a certain reference. If you consider this, if I'm mistaken, a particle traveling though space will lose energy when interacting gravitationaly with another body (ie, it will lose energy while going though that gravitational field). Therefore, by moving towards the gravitational center of mass, the total workable energy will be reduced. Therefore, the entropy will increase. Now, consider that the particle is probably never under just one body's gravitational field influence: at any moment, lot's of different bodies will influence that particle. Considering the time doesn't exist as per itself, the only thing that remains is the multiple interactions of each body with the particle. The particle will be influenced by the body 1, then with the body 2 and so on. The final direction the particle will follow could be the highest probability among all possible directions, and each interaction, and the interactions will decrease the total workable energy at the end. But now again, this is a stupid explanation, because entropy is a macro phenomenon. You probably cannot use a single particle to describe entropy, it has to consider lots of particles interacting together. The statistical result will tell about the direction of time.

[@johncnorris]

The timing of this video was directly related to my position in space.

[@RashadSaleh92]

I think this is the best comment I’ve read so far on this video

[@tommyvictorbuch6960]

From the perspective of a frog: Time is fun, when you're having flies.

[@fixups6536]

This frog is eating time flies.

[@dr.OgataSerizawa]

Tommy Victor Buch Wish I'd thought of that.....good one, Tom!

[@YanivGorali]

Haha (We need awards for youtube comments)

[@ishworshrestha3559]

Ok

[@jorgepeterbarton]

Fun is time when you are having frog. Said the fly larvae at some later date

[@PauloSilva-cl3gv]

I can say it's a good time when I receive this channel's notifications.

[@JohnHarmer]

Another great video. One point that surprised me though was Sabine mentioning Lee Smolin as arguing for Time not being real. I associate that position more with Carlo Rovelli in his book "The Order of Time". Lee Smolin's "Time Reborn" argues against this position, and if anything comes to the tentative conclusion that time is the most fundamental thing of all. They are both working on formulating Quantum Gravity theories.

[@shelley-anneharrisberg7409]

"Chairs are not real" - I knew it! Great video, thank you! :)

[@Shifter-1040ST]

Yes, when science proves that chairs are not real and all chairs suddenly cease to exist, a lot of people are going to be butthurt about that.

[@rotorblade9508]

It depends on what you mean by chair 😂 define chair

[@tTtt-ho3tq]

@@rotorblade9508 it also depends in gravity? Are chairs relevant in free-falling space?

[@emceeboogieboots1608]

When she said that I almost fell off my...wait, what!

[@Steven_Rowe]

Meanwhile the curtains were drawn, But the furniture is real. (Spike Milligan)

[@ASLUHLUHC3]

Is it correct to say that time (and mass) emerge from timeless (and massless) particles/fields bumping around, resisting acceleration?

[@lsdap1969]

If they resist acceleration wouldn't it mean that they already have mass? And if they do they're already subject to the effects of the time dimension

[@MusicalRaichu]

I would have thought that to speak of acceleration already assumes time exists. If it "emerges", it does so because you've already assumed it.

[@naotamf1588]

yeah, also: the resistence they experience is proportional to the passage of time. this way the overall energy of the given system remains constant, due to friccion it divereges more into the time axis.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@lsdap1969 Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS E=MC2 is F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. ("Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS F=ma.) "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The Earth is ALSO CLEARLY then E=MC2 AS F=ma ON BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! By Frank DiMeglio

[@damianketcham]

It’s real if you’re late for your wedding.

[@dudbait]

I resemble, that remark!

[@jjeherrera]

Or if you're late for your income tax declaration!

[@alejandroungaro4488]

But that's only Donald Hoffman's fitness payoffs.

[@alejandroungaro4488]

@@mightymouse2024 Yeah,a lubric superposition!!

[@SpectatorAlius]

@@dylanhunt5655 It is certain that Einstein did not "fail math". He was quite a good at math, better than most. But still not good enough to be a professional mathematician: his forte was definitely physics. But he showed his math prowess just by learning all the new ideas for differential geometry that he used very productively in the General Theory of Relativity. Back then, this was definitely very advanced stuff, not covered in undergraduate courses, not even in upper division courses. It takes more effort & aptitude to learn what is on the forefront than it does to learn what is already taught in universities. Yet he not only learned on the forefront but applied it very well. He also corresponded with Hilbert even during the darkest years of World War I.

[@jeffreyspinner9720]

I was thinking about this without realizing I was thinking about this as a background process, and I realized we don't even understand what being "real" actually means. So anything after that is already catastrophically unknowable.

[@Tnowion]

as soon as i could properly think (i think at the age of four) i wanted to know everything about this. about reality, origins, manifestation, blablabla. i have almost finished my physics b.sc. and still have a lot to learn but people like in this video have done so much work for me already and you bring it directly to my doorstep for free. you are basically a knowledge shortcut. i love your channel. thank you for filling my heart with this and giving us the literature hints and everything.

[@TheSwiftCreek2]

properly think vs remember. consider newborn babies have very little frame of reference for the world they're dumped into, know no language, and figure out who is safe, who loves them, how to speak the language, etc. etc. for all you know they think much more before they start dumping to long term memory than afterwards.

[@Tnowion]

@@TheSwiftCreek2 i remember a lot from before 4 years old. i definitely started to fill up storage before sorting stuff ^^

[@josephdestaubin7426]

"No shortage of speculation" indeed. The sarcasm runs deep with this one, and is one of the many reasons I love this channel.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

Drama isn't fact.

[@nomchompsky3012]

It is certainly interesting to hear a contrarian view. The problem is that every theoretical physicist wants funding to prove their theories...nobody ever says "Well, my theory's good but the money's better spent testing this other person's theory", do they?

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@nomchompsky3012 Mr. Paresh Dave has given the following writing the thumbs up. Great. WHY EINSTEIN'S EQUATIONS PREDICT THAT SPACE IS EXPANDING OR CONTRACTING IN AND WITH TIME: Ultimately and truly, TIME is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL to the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. ACCORDINGLY, the known mathematical unification of Einstein's equations AND Maxwell's equations (given the addition of A FOURTH SPATIAL DIMENSION) is proven and explained. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. (Notice the term c4 from Einstein's equations.) It is CLEARLY proven. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. This is the ultimate unification of physics/physical experience. It ALL makes perfect sense. I have truly unified physics. Consider THE MAN who IS standing on what is the Earth/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE. (Notice that THE DOME of a person's eye is ALSO VISIBLE.) OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND DESCRIPTION) is improved in the truly superior mind. Indeed, the ability of thought to describe OR reconfigure sensory experience is ULTIMATELY dependent upon the extent to which THOUGHT IS SIMILAR TO sensory experience. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. It is ALL CLEARLY proven. In fact, I have also clarified, clearly identified, and corrected the limited notion of curved "SPACE". MY UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS SURPASSES ALL OTHERS. E=mc2 IS F=ma. A galaxy is basically FLAT. Think !!! GREAT. Notice the black space of what is THE EYE as well. It ALL makes perfect sense. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The Sun AND the Earth are F=ma AND E=mc2, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!! LOOK at what is the BLUE SKY. The EARTH is ALSO blue. NOW, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Beautiful !!! Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. ACCORDINGLY, the rotation of what is THE MOON MATCHES it's revolution. It is fully, CLEARLY, and consistently proven. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. By Frank DiMeglio

[@nomchompsky3012]

@@frankdimeglio8216 what kind of bot are you?

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@nomchompsky3012 It is generally recognized that I have mathematically unified physics.

[@bkrharold]

This reminds me of an incident years ago, when I was hanging out with one my friends. We were both very high on hash and having a discussion about the nature of time. As we pondered the question, we were approached by a stranger asking, "Do you have the right time?" We both burst out laughing, much to his surprise.

[@nathanielhellerstein5871]

Once two hippies, high on hash, were standing at the corner of Haight and Ashbury. Suddenly an ambulance rushed past them, lights flashing, sirens screaming. The two hippies turned their heads in unison as the ambulance screeched around the corner in front of them and hurtled down Ashbury. While their long hair was still waving in the wind left by the ambulance, one of the hippies said to the other, "Man, I thought he'd *_never_* leave."

[@rickh3714]

@@nathanielhellerstein5871 The hippies names were David Oppler and Ed Ffect. I knew them well.

[@lexlex44]

1:18 It's hard to stand still in space because the earth moves ! And eve in space you still move ! It's basically kinda hard to stand still while you exist in a galaxy, you always move, even if you don't realize it !

[@Aerxis]

Clever, at the end she thanked us for our non existent time.

[@Kj16V]

Gonna discuss this with my boss when I'm inevitably late on my first day back to work.

[@josephososkie3029]

Yes. That’s a very good idea.

[@astro_gabe]

I like the new editing! It's very clean and, hopefully, leaves Sabine with more "time" to write her awesome scripts.

[@hrkp06a]

If space configurations are sufficient how can change be accommodated? If there is no change, then the universe seems static. In quantum gravity, quantum exists. What does quantum look like? Is the Schrodinger equation involved? Is that equation a wave function? How can one have waves without time?

[@anticorncob6]

Those are all excellent points, and I won't be able to take seriously the "time doesn't exist" crowd until they can answer them.

[@BojanBojovic]

I believe there is no better way of organizing and explaining something but to have a German person to do it. 🙂 What a channel, Sabine is just incredible.

[@adityanarain9428]

Oh no you Germans, please don't bring race here

[@3rdPartyIntervener]

Worked well for the trains, too.

[@Joseph-fw6xx]

Very smart people

[@davidhess6593]

Adolph would agree with you.

[@BojanBojovic]

@@davidhess6593 First of all it is Adolf, and second get bent with your nationalism!

[@michaelpost7352]

I would like to see you do a video entitled, “Do photons exist?” They puzzle me, since time does not exist for a photon. I guess it depends on the observer, but does this mean they exist and do not exist at the same time? I would ask a photon, but they just don’t have time for me.

[@richardkerner5817]

Quite often we don't know what to do with our time. But time always knows what to do with us.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

DREAM EXPERIENCE IS/INVOLVES TRUE/REAL QUANTUM GRAVITY: In dreams, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE in BALANCE. This is why we are able to UNDERSTAND so much about the human body. (There is no outsmarting the genius of dreams.) In dream experience, it is you AND other than you are IN BALANCE. (Dreams balance being AND EXPERIENCE.) Dream EXPERIENCE is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. (It is, OBVIOUSLY, real OR ACTUAL EXPERIENCE.) Importantly, dream experience GROWS/increases. SO, E=mc2 IS F=ma. Ultimately and truly, TIME is necessarily possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. By Frank DiMeglio

[@1Domaine]

Space is a dimension because you can go up or down ; forward and backwards; side to side, but you can't do this with time therefore time is not a dimension: you can't go back in time. Time is a construct of the human mind use for measuring movement. Time doesn't exist independent of everything else. It's just a measuring tool to measure movement of everything else.

[@martinfederico7269]

“Time is what keeps everything from happening at once. Space is what keeps everything from happening to you.” I don’t remember who added that, I think it was a woman (no joke there)

[@frankdimeglio8216]

Astro-Physics Community (with 12,541 likes) has now given the following three writings the thumbs up. TOTAL PERFECTION: E=MC2 AS F=MA CLEARLY PROVES (ON BALANCE) WHY AND HOW THE PROPER AND FULL UNDERSTANDING OF TIME (AND TIME DILATION) UNIVERSALLY ESTABLISHES THE FACT THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Indeed, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=MC2 IS F=MA. Great. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. E=mc2 IS F=ma. (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. I have mathematically unified physics/physical experience, as I have CLEARLY proven that E=mc2 IS F=ma in what is a truly universal and BALANCED fashion. By Frank DiMeglio Mr. Boris Stoyanov is a super bright and an HONEST physicist. He has agreed that the following post is "crystal clear": ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. Accordingly, gravity/acceleration involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. "Mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent with/as what is balanced ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL force/energy, as electromagnetism/energy is gravity. Gravity IS electromagnetism/energy. That objects fall at the same rate (neglecting air resistance, of course) PROVES that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Think about it. By Frank DiMeglio THE SIMPLE, PROPER, FULL, AND BALANCED UNDERSTANDING OF THE SHAPE, FORM, AND RELATIONAL MOTION OF WHAT IS THE MOON IN UNIVERSAL ACCORDANCE WITH THE FACT THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA: What is THE MOON is moving AND not moving IN BALANCED RELATION to the Earth AND the Sun AS a linked AND BALANCED opposite in accordance with the UNIVERSAL fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. THEREFORE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON necessarily matches it's revolution; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the shape AND form of the Moon is basically constant or invariant. The Moon is a BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE manifestation or form that is in fundamental accordance with the Earth/Sun BALANCE pursuant to the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!! Therefore, the Moon is electromagnetically/gravitationally extended AND contracted ON BALANCE in true agreement with the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravitational force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/AS what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. By Frank DiMeglio

[@lilith4961]

It actually helps me understand the concepts

[@Bobbel888]

Think it's from Arthur Wheeler.

[@KibyNykraft]

@@frankdimeglio8216 What is electromagnetism? That you forgot to explain :) :) So for now, your claim is just semantics.

[@KibyNykraft]

@Science Revolution Now every one of your questions can be answered ,that is, some of them are not possible to answer with detailed certainties of the supersmall scales- the problem is more that you asked a huge amount of questions in one comment... So to answer that for anyone would take 3-4 books.

[@DeElSendero]

After viewing this I'm not sure if you can tell me what time it is but one thing I know for sure and that is you are an excellent teacher! Thank you for this video!

[@skydivekrazy76]

"Thanks for your time..." I'm not stoopid, I see what you did there?

[@generybarczyk6993]

Can we stand still in space? (1:19) Earth is moving, the universe is expanding, how can "still" be determined? Perhaps we can no better stand still in space then we can in time. Perhaps space is like a river: you can never step into the same river twice. Moreover, time actually is what keeps everything from happening all at once. (0:27) Consider that "eternity" is actually an expression of timelessness, where everything _does_ happen all at once.

[@johnstonewall917]

Dr. Hossenfelder, thank you again for directing my thoughts in a new direction,

[@alyoshakaramazov8469]

How about this: Time is a measurable and perceptible quality that consists in increasing entropy of large systems. It is not seen in quantum mechanics as there is no change in entropy of a quanta. (Photons, for example, do not experience time.) Once enough particles are assembled, they exhibit entropy changes, some large and some small, some positive and some negative, but if the system is large enough, (a human mind or the universe, for example) entropy will increase in a regular manner that creates clocks and thereby time becomes measurable and perceptible.

[@NVidea-yz1fg]

Time is the order of events something experiences. In a univers with only one, i.e. electron, there is no time as no events happen. Lets say, there are three electrons in our universe, A, B and C. A collides with B and then B collides with C. For B, as frame of reference, A->B came first, B->C came later. That two distinct events happened, is what we describe as "Time has passed". The collision B->C might not have happened if not A->B occured earlier. This is the "Arrow of Time" that only moves from "cause" to "effect" and is responsible for the increasing entropy. At least this is my idea, my attempt to make at least remotely sense of all this stuff for me as a layman in this field. ^^

[@alyoshakaramazov8469]

​@@NVidea-yz1fg Excellent point! I understand this. Yet in order to know which collision occurred first, do you not need you need a clock? Once you have determined that events have an order, you have created a clock. Collisions among small groups of particles, say a universe of 3 electrons, are identical in either direction. Say A collides with B and B collides with C, and a clock shows that A->B occurred before B->C. That clock introduced more to the universe than the 3 electrons. It introduced a system that increases entropy in order to create the clock. Without the clock, the collisions between three electrons are physically the same going A->B B->C or C->B B->A. This is why there is no time at these levels. Could you not you draw a Feynman Diagram in either direction and show the same interaction? Start adding more electrons and you get a system where entropy increases, and now you can see the arrow of time. Add a whole lot of electrons and you can make clocks to determine which collision occurred first. But I confess I could be all wrong. I do not have the honor of being included among the august fraternity of physicists. I am but a mere chemist.

[@NVidea-yz1fg]

@@alyoshakaramazov8469 Time is relative, Einstein taught us. Even an additional clock would not help, because it can only measure its own time. It experiences it's own tick-tock-tick-tock events, but can not really correlate these with what happens to A, B or C. An observer (i.e. particle D in our 3-particle universe) can not determine if A->B or B-> C occured first. D might _see_ B->C first and A->B later - due to the speed of light limitation and the speed of all involved particles (including D itself). But particle B can distinguish between colliding with A and colldiding with C. It will not know how long the timespan between those events are, but it knows the sequence: first A, then C. So only B experiences "the Arrow of Time", A and C have no clue. But as you said, when we add more and more particles to our universe, A and C are no longer isolated but experience their own sequences of events.

[@alyoshakaramazov8469]

@@NVidea-yz1fg Of course, Einsteins relativity does not apply in the realm of elementary particles, and a can a particle "observe" another particle?

[@ASLUHLUHC3]

It seems the way some physicists talk about the non-existence of time, they do mean time in the emergent/macro level.

[@chriskennedy2846]

Even if you consider time as a necessary ingredient for describing phenomena in nature - the spacetime model with time as a dimension is certainly not a "necessary ingredient." Time can be considered emergent from local behaviors (every atom is its own clock) and each clock's local environment (extent of gravity, velocity) will dictate the relative rate at which these behaviors are expressed. This model is consistent with every experiment to date. In addition, what is curiously never discussed (by any physicist, not just Sabine) is the lack of self-consistency when using the Principle of Equivalence to explain time dilation effects in accelerating systems. Kind of an important thing, especially when it is invoked to offset the reciprocal dilation proposed to take place during relative inertial motion. Time dilation is very real. A number of experiments have proven this beyond a shadow of a doubt. But the "official" explanation for how it all happens is very sloppy and needs work.

[@misterphmpg8106]

@@chriskennedy2846 Single atoms are not a good example for time because they are quantum objects with very little possibly different states. So their entropy can not increase unless they are radioactive. And even then there is no way to exactly predict when a single atom will decay. That is only possible for a macroscopic amount say trillions of them. In this case if you have a few grams of any rsdioactive substance it is very well possible to calculate and measure the time until half of that substance will be decayed. So there is your time.

[@chriskennedy2846]

@@misterphmpg8106 The point you are making is correct but it is not the same point I'm making. Every atom is its own clock which means all of its behaviors are subject to occurring faster or slower depending on the gravity and/or velocity environment it is exposed to. This could be repeating behaviors in the case of cesium atom vibrations or non-repeating decay events like you mentioned. A container full of neutrons on the moon will decay to half quantity slightly faster from our vantagepoint since they would be in weaker gravity. And each individual neutron is doing what it is doing slightly faster than it would on earth to give a slightly different collective half life value. But I agree with you that it doesn't always mean a single atom would necessarily be a useful clock for us on the macro level. In the case of decay - it couldn't possibly be. It is its own clock - not ours.

[@defenestrator9119]

@@chriskennedy2846 Time dilation is intriguing that it exists. It's something that I could imagine being built into a simulation to keep it functioning no matter what occurs. In areas where lots of interactions occur, or things are moving very quickly, time slows down because more calculations are necessary.

[@chriskennedy2846]

@@defenestrator9119 I have tried to make sense out of the various contributors of time dilation. What does the effect of a gravitational field on a system of atoms have in common with increasing their velocity? Several years ago, I proposed that both cases are either having an effect on the atoms' own surrounding fields or effecting some separate background field that is everywhere and as a result, this slows the rate of all behaviors that atoms experience (along with subatomic particles like muons, quark-gluon interactions, weak force transactions, etc.). In other words - gravity and/or velocity impair the ability of atoms, muons, etc. to "do their thing" at maximum rate.

[@dansmif]

I think time is just the name we give to the physical movement matter from one position/configuration to another. Imagine you could isolate yourself in a protective bubble, and then pause the movement of all other matter in the universe. From your perspective you could say "time has stopped" but it would really just be the matter not moving.

[@ayodejiesan416]

Yh, I know,I've thought of this,but then again time is used for interval between events so everything stopping would by definition mean time has also stopped and not just the matter...😏

[@marscience7819]

Here is the way my 7th grade teacher explained time to me. "Say Shanda (my girlfriend at the time) calls you and says she wants to meet you at the entrance to the Hangar (a popular spot adjacent to the local YMCA), and she just left it at that. Would you be able to meet her?" My answer--"No". His response---"Why not?" My answer---"Because she never told me when". His response-----"That's what time is. It's just simply another piece of information to tell you how to meet her. Her telling you 'at the entrance to the Hanger' tells you where to meet, which is basically the same as giving you two numbers for say, latitude and longitude. But that's not good enough to actually meet her, she has to give you a third number. That third number we call time."

[@eraser9812]

I love you and your channel, you are the hero we need!

[@ElonTrump19]

Your honest way is refreshing and reminds me of my Omi. Thank you 😊!

[@robbie8142]

It was nice to see the name Omi as I had a German Grandma who my kids called Omi. She was my beautiful Mum and I regret I was not a better son. I digress. Thankyou my friend! 🤗🤗🤗

[@burdeninmyhand]

Years ago (around 2016) I've personally arrived at the possibility that in a physical sense (maybe at an astronomical level) the concept of what we call time, or the variable "time" may just be a redundancy, and that maybe only the positions of objects alone (its configuration) ultimately define "complete state". That day, I arrived at those conclusions all by myself, but asking two fundamental questions that Sabine here named "what is time?" and "what is a clock?". Also that day, fueled by those thoughts I did a google search to try to find some physicist that did research on "timeless physics", and I found some of them, maybe the most interesting of them being Dr Julian Barbour (also named here by Sabine). Maybe the most interesting part of all this is finding out that the nature of time isn't as studied as other topics in science, like again, asking "What is time?" and "What is a clock?". Like Dr Barbour points out, maybe the most interesting, deeper thoughts on the nature of time were written by Isaac Newton in his Principia, and maybe Ernst Mach also had ideas such as Barbour's, and it's interesting also to compare all this with Einsteinian's notions of time embedded in his own theory

[@Nikioko]

"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." - Douglas Adams

[@danwylie-sears1134]

I understand the definitions as going in the opposite direction. That is, formally, you don't define time as a dimension in a theory, and then define a clock as anything that measures time. Rather, you define a clock as anything that has either an oscillator, a counter, and a display; or a uniform process, a device for measuring the degree to which the process has proceeded, and a display. Then you note, as an empirical fact, that all clocks display the same result, as though they were measuring something, and you paraphrase it by saying that they measure the same time. (Then you refine your empirical fact, with the aid of some theory, and say that all clocks in the same reference frame measure the same time, and you say how to convert between time measured in different reference frames.) Then you have a choice: you can take this empirical fact as a postulate of a theory designed to explain other facts (relativity), or you can take this same empirical fact as an explanandum and try to come up with a theory to explain it in terms of something more fundamental (the "time is not real" attempts). Either way, time is defined to be what a clock measures, and it's an empirical question how far the definition is usable.

[@pietkraan1429]

Time is a measurement of change. Nothing more, nothing less. If nothing changes, there is no time.

[@johnmqueripel2367]

If nothing changes there is no existence, so I guess no time either.

[@pietkraan1429]

@@johnmqueripel2367 so we agree. Time is an interdependent technical means of measuring the longevity of change. Not the intensity.

[@pietkraan1429]

@@NeverStopRockingAQ dubito ergo sum

[@willbrink]

Time is an emergent property of entropy according to one theory, and time and entropy only go in one direction, which is obviously not a coincidence.

[@throwabrick]

Lee Smolin suggests time may be real, that universes actually evolve in time as they are propagated through black holes.

[@briancannard7335]

All theories about time are mere speculations at the time.

[@teaser6089]

Again, no evidence = let's not assume :D

[@pompeomagno5916]

Time is ticking away the moments that make up a dull day

[@lightfoot9485]

So you run and you run to catch up with the sun but its sinking!

[@hypothesesnonfingo8374]

@Julian P. *"you're older" *"Shorter of breath"

[@Skibbityboo0580]

Everybody already covered how awesome this channel is, and how great of a teacher she is, but can we all just take a moment to admire her fashion sense? This lady is always to the 9's!

[@misterphmpg8106]

why dont people ever comment on the looks of male scientists?

[@larryscott3982]

@@misterphmpg8106 Reasons

[@larryscott3982]

Whether it’s Chanel or blue jeans.

[@Skibbityboo0580]

@@misterphmpg8106 Lol, go visit the comment section on SpaceTime, there is plenty of that there too! Anyways, I was simply saying that she dressed very nice, and she does!

[@henrycgs]

@@misterphmpg8106 ikr? sabine gets a LOT of weirdos in the comments.

[@Robinson8491]

I discovered yesterday that time has an inversely proportional relationship to momentum: you could say one is the opposite of the other, or their mutual product is a constant You can figure this out by studying the gravitational blueshift of the photon and comparing it to a classical pendulum in the similar circumstances Still working on it

[@albertforletta1498]

If I’m late for work, my boss will let me know just how real time is.

[@lukebarratt101]

You've got to be one of the coolest people on the Internet.

[@erisdiscordia5429]

I would love to hear more about how to stop moving through space. Far as I know, that's as impossible as standing still in time.

[@joecaner]

The universe is like a loaf of raisin bread that is rising. As the universe expands, the raisins get further apart. The god who cuts a slice off that loaf and eats it is standing still. Got it? 😉

[@erisdiscordia5429]

@@joecaner Sure don't, but thanks for playing.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

Exactly! Everything in space is moving relative to almost everything else. Things never reverse direction for no reason. But, re "as impossible as standing still in time", I'd like to add this consideration... There is no such 'thing' as Time. Time is a concept only and entirely unnecessary for the physical to go about its movements. There are in all the universe only physical existents moving. The concept of time was invented directly from our cognitions about the movements of objects relative to each other. It may have taken the invention of civilization to realize the concept of time. Besides the obvious daily, monthly and yearly cycles that have been too obvious since the evolution of the first conscious beings on the planet, consider also the movements of the hands on the conductors watch relative to the movement of the train pulling into the station. There is no time involved, only movement. No timepiece contains some aethereal antenna being wafted into oscillation by the flowing river of time. The very good reason for that is, the river of time flows in imagination only and at the heart of every timepiece there is only something moving, shadow on a dial, water dropping, pendulum swinging, spring unwinding, crystal vibrating or oscillating atom, in every case, only something moving. There are things. They are moving. That's all there is to existence. IMHO, naturally. Cheers!

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

p.s. The word time is a most convenient replacement for a whole lot of speech about moving objects. When the sun comes up begin the attack with a volley of arrows. When the sun is up the width of your hand send in the chariots. I will meet you at the fork in the river in three moons. When the wheel has turned this whole bag of wheat into flour take a break.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

p.p.s It's not time that changes near a black hole. What actually happens is existents move differently when in the grip of gravity and in direct proportion to gravity's intensity. If your identical twin took a ten year relativistic space trip and you had, all the while, been frozen down near absolute zero then when you thawed and met your brother, you would actually look a decade younger than him. You would actually *be* a decade younger than him because he had changed and you had not despite the fact that the planet had made seventy orbits and during which your children became senior citizens while you lay there, frozen. unchanging in your cold sarcophagus. Perhaps they made emotionally driven pilgrimages to your cold sarcophagus on your birthdays and to make sure the refrigeration unit was still working. We age, not because time passes but because the atoms that constitute us are relocating and doing so in strict obedience to the physical processes of life, that is to say, according to the laws of movement as described by chemistry and physics.

[@jimclark9826]

There is a description of time which may leave readers thinking we may not be able to know what Time itself is - but at least what it isn’t. Or to quote fictional Ada Veen, “We can know the time, we can know a time. We can never know Time.” So what does that mean? Her lover Van explained it by describing what it isn’t: “Maybe the only thing that hints at a sense of Time is rhythm; not the recurrent beats of the rhythm but the gap between two such beats, the gray gap between black beats: the Time interval.” Neither of them (or Nabokov, their creator) can describe what Time is. That “gray gap between black beats” is where Time exists and gives us our sense of duration. I think this means I need to listen to this talk again. Maybe my mathematically-challenged mind will be helped by it. Thanks, Ms. Hossenfelder.

[@spacematter431]

Would it be wrong to just treat time as a tool to quantify the changes matter goes through. Akin to distance is used to quantify the space between matter. Are there any physicist who take that approach? Ever since I've studied my physics modules in uni I've had that understanding, that in reality it's just an abstraction for us to communicate and deal with the way matter keeps changing.

[@anuraagpaul6610]

Yeah, I feel that too. "Is time fundamental or an emergent property?" is probably a wrong question to ask in the first place imo. Quantum mechanics doesn't sufficiently makes sense and isn't even consistent with general relativistic theories and so both these two extremes of physics need required modification. It would be unjust to completely abide by theory of QM and treat space and time on a different footing (most likely its not going to have the correct consequences at some later stage). Space time together can be treated as an emergent property (not just time alone). One such approach is the idea of Twistor theory developed and spear headed by Sir R. Penrose. Most important of all, this approach doesn't relies on exotic assumption and has so far produced correct results (theory is in progress).

[@anuraagpaul6610]

@@GriuGriu64 It is quite a popular hypothesis though. Not sure of its implications

[@anuraagpaul6610]

@@GriuGriu64 Look, it might be possible that at some fundamental level the concept of time can take a different meaning , different from the way we interpret time classically,..but there are currently no strong motivation why one should consider it in the first place ( my biased opinion though ). Also, your justification seems sketchy. I liked your interpretation of entanglement, but there are other ways one can quantify non local property of wave functions , for instance in twistor theory you can quantify such properties without requiring time to be more fundamental. Before you are planning to invest your time and energy on a particular hypothesis, see that it's foundation is strong enough (i mean, ideally one should always check that), because anything can follow from a wrong proposition.

[@anuraagpaul6610]

@@GriuGriu64 I will go through it

[@anuraagpaul6610]

@@GriuGriu64 Should we continue discussion somewhere else? private messages through youtube will be fine (i'm not used to it though)

[@KutWrite]

A fun exploration. I think the subject is at least as much philosophical as scientific. Love your dress, Sabine!

[@ianmclean5541]

“She blinded me…with SCIENCE!”

[@alainbergeron1675]

From Montreal Canada! Sabine I love your channel. Most of these discussions are way over and above my comprehension, but I still love your video's. Keep up the good work and keep on educating. :)

[@stevefaure415]

She's like a post -graduate Stevie Nicks. Such a great channel!

[@ericmalone3213]

"Clocks are no more time than rulers are what they measure." --Charles Muses.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

WHY ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS UNIFIED AND BALANCED WITH/AS WHAT IS GRAVITY: Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY are LINKED AND BALANCED opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Therefore, Einstein's equations and Maxwell's equations are unified (given the addition of a fourth spatial dimension); AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma; AS TIME DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ACCORDINGLY, Einstein's equations predict that SPACE is expanding OR contracting in and with TIME; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, the rotation of the Moon MATCHES it's revolution. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent WITH/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Accordingly, objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. THE SUN purely exemplifies time DILATION. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT !!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Let's compare this directly with BOTH a falling object AND the speed of light (c). Great. E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND describes what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Time DILATION proves that electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY, AS E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma. INSTANTANEITY is FUNDAMENTAL to the FULL and proper understanding of physics/physical experience. Ultimately and truly, TIME is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The ultimate unification of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND includes opposites, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. GREAT. It ALL makes perfect sense. THINK !!! The Earth that undergoes time DILATION IS thus represented (ON BALANCE) as what is A POINT in the night sky, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (So, notice that the BLUE SKY IS no longer visible. Think.) E=mc2 IS F=ma. It is FULLY proven. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Alas, the INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. I have truly, CLEARLY, AND MATHEMATICALLY unified physics/physical experience. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. (Notice the black space of THE EYE, AND the DOME of a person's eye is ALSO visible.) THE EARTH is ALSO blue. Again, E=mc2 IS F=ma. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Time dilation proves that E=mc2 is DIRECTLY and fundamentally derived from F=ma, AS electromagnetism/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL makes perfect sense. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. By Frank DiMeglio

[@ericmalone3213]

@@frankdimeglio8216 And sitting is the new smoking, Frank.

[@jongya]

@@frankdimeglio8216 the minute I saw randomly interspersed words in all caps I knew I was about to see some silly bs

[@Aarkwrite]

I love you Sabine! Hilarious and informative as always. Keep up the great work.

[@stoyanfurdzhev]

Of spreading superstitions.

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

Time t², ψ², c², e² and velocity Eₖ=½mv² all squared, geometrical similarity formed out of spherical symmetry

[@seancullen99]

I love how she whispers those sweet 'Einstheins' in my ear...

[@alloomis1635]

or so you wish.

[@georgewang2947]

Einschtein

[@eltonparks659]

That was insightful, and I still am with Einstein for now; science is growing so we may discover much more in our lifetimes.

[@ulyssesfewl1059]

"We don't need time to begin with." Isn't it incredible that our language has words embedded within it which assume / require time in order to make sense, such as "begin"?

[@1oo1540]

It’s largely due to our linguistic “atoms,” the metaphysical objects upon which our observational understanding is based, being fundamentally macroscopic (and therefore temporal), I think

[@faikerdogan2802]

@@1oo1540 i like your funny words magic man :D

[@omarbriones2453]

Hi, Professor Hossenfelder. Thanks for sharing the video. I think special relativity needs to be updated to include energy. The current equation does not include energy. I speculate "slower time" at the speed of light just means the photons, which move as a wave and are massless, expend less energy as they move through outer space, which is nearly a vacuum, and thereby take "less time" to get to a destination than larger objects that do not behave as wave functions do. That is, although the mathematics say time is slower at the speed of light, I think the interpretation needs to include the change in energy of the photon as it travels from one point to another. So, in my opinion, the "slower time" is due to the photon having to expend less energy to get through spacetime than other, non-wave function objects, do. In other words, one second, as measured by a clock, would not change under any circumstance in the universe, but a photon can move a farther distance in one second than other, non-wave function objects do. (I'm not a scientist of any kind.) Why didn't Einstein think about energy-space-time? Isn't it true that at each point in space-time, there's also energy? I wonder whether in quantum gravity, there's just energy-space, and in general relativity, there's just space-time. Maybe at the moment before the big bang, there was mostly energy-time because space was very small. I'm convinced that changes in time result from changes in energy, and energy is more fundamental than time. Without a change in energy, there's no change in time.

[@RWSCOTT]

thanks for this lecture. Time is a concept I've struggled with for some time, lol. In a general sense whether it's real, more specifically that it might be a property or condition of the material universe that we perceive in a limited way, or misapprehend entirely.

[@markrichards9327]

I told the Mrs I’d be home from the pub just after 8, when she phoned at 11.30 moaning I told her I’d only had 7.!

[@yotube1ful]

Who was making her moan tho?! 😳 I think that call was just to be certain about how much more time she had.

[@markrichards9327]

@@yotube1ful now you got me thinking lol

[@SSJfraz]

What if everything does happen at once and our brains simply decode that information into separate events?

[@andregomesdasilva]

What if there's a spaghetti that governs the universe? Tip: our brain is made of atoms.

[@JelMain]

Given the relatavistic nature of things like voltage, and acceleration, and speed, time isn't quite a dimension so much as a relationship. That in turn comfortably allows for time in relativity, that it's different for an object in motion compared with a static observer. A dimension doesn't flex like that.

[@henktl3580]

"We don't need time to BEGIN with...." Interesting. 🤔

[@markwhitt8488]

Thanks for the great video! So I'm curious whether the apparent absence of time at the quantum level explains the apparent randomness that is observed as particles transition into our spaces time from the quantum level? Their appearance looks probabilistic to us because they're coming from a place that has no time - so that what we see as a wave function collapse is really an object 'condensing' into a universe of spaces time from some place that may have neither?

[@cornells.1727]

Interesting viewpoint!

[@lmomakeswaveshedoes322]

Speak English dude

[@HarmonicaFag]

@@lmomakeswaveshedoes322 that’s just rude. Did you know: not everybody was born in an english speaking country? Shocker right?

[@ZeeZee9]

@@HarmonicaFag I think he meant that the words he used were too complex for him? It was a compliment

[@saraeva]

Tickin' away, the moments that make up a dull day.

[@greensombrero3641]

Actually, I missed the starting gun

[@bodkinofnurk8898]

@@greensombrero3641 Yeah, me too. No-one told me when to run...

[@zibbezabba2491]

Time is entropy. Without entropy we would have no evidence (extra information) to show that time has happened.

[@Eldorado1239]

We need to revive Paul Dirac. I'm sure he would know what to do with quantum gravity given all the new data and tools we have.

[@AndDiracisHisProphet]

yeah, that would be nice

[@hyperduality2838]

Particles are dual to anti-particles -- Dirac equation. Spin up is dual to spin down -- Dirac equation. Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Space/time = "A priori" according to Immanuel Kant -- The Critique of Pure Reason. Events in space/time = "Synthetic a priori" knowledge -- Immanuel Kant. Time is dual. We remember the past but predict the future. Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality. My absolute time is your relative time and your absolute time is my relative time -- time duality. Space duality:- Up is dual to down, left is dual to right, in is dual to out. Length, distance or space is defined by two dual points. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Space duality is dual to time duality. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The arrow of time = entropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Ethico theology is dual to physico theology (science) synthesizes teleology -- Immanuel Kant. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Matter duality:- Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality, Bosons (symmetric wave functions) are dual to fermions (anti-symmetric wave functions). Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces). Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Mind duality is dual to matter duality.

[@hyperduality2838]

@@1newme425 Time duality means that personal identity is dual:- You are the same person now but different compared to a few hours ago. The passage of time means that you are a different person but still the same. Same is dual to different. Personal identity or the self is therefore a dual concept!

[@bidzapfc]

4:50 "Time is real because it is necessary ingredient of Einsteins theory of general relativity" - You trully go insane after staying a theoretical psysicist for a while.

[@hyperduality2838]

Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Space/time = "A priori" according to Immanuel Kant -- The Critique of Pure Reason. Events in space/time = "Synthetic a priori" knowledge -- Immanuel Kant. Time is dual. We remember the past but predict the future. Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality. My absolute time is your relative time and your absolute time is my relative time -- time duality. Space duality:- Up is dual to down, left is dual to right, in is dual to out. Length, distance or space is defined by two dual points. Points are dual to lines -- the principle of duality in geometry. Space duality is dual to time duality. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. The arrow of time = entropy. Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Ethico theology is dual to physico theology (science) synthesizes teleology -- Immanuel Kant. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Matter duality:- Waves are dual to particles -- quantum duality, Bosons (symmetric wave functions) are dual to fermions (anti-symmetric wave functions). Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces). Mind duality is dual to matter duality.

[@bidzapfc]

@@hyperduality2838 "A witty saying proves nothing" -Voltaire

[@hypothesesnonfingo8374]

Indeed, I'm working on the math for Elf Gravity Theory (elfs are holding us to the ground so we don't fly away) and... "Elfs are real because they are a necessary ingredient to the Elf Gravity Theory" 🤷🤡

[@hyperduality2838]

@@bidzapfc Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). The conservation of duality will be known as the 5th law of thermodynamics!

[@romantrix]

The evident non-existence of time is an ingredient to know that the Einstein's theory is wrong.

[@alexanderSydneyOz]

One complication with the topic, from the point of view of the laity such as I, is that "time" is also used to describe something very real indeed: the change in living things, including ourselves, from birth to death. If we were eternal, rather than just having ~40,000 more sleeps, it might be less relevant and seem less real.

[@onlythetruth9808]

I hope “Brilliant” appreciates the importance of their decision is in choosing to support this channel. I couldn’t think of one better...