I never understood why you can't go faster than light - until now!

[@Mahesh_Shenoy]

I heard you folks! What do we see from the ship’s perspective? Here you go - kzbin.info/www/bejne/bKi7qJmZe75-gqc Hint: We discover the second consequence of special relativity. (one more to go)

[@-_Nuke_-]

Yeah, this explanation that you give requires the establishment of an absolute reference frame. If we can do that, then time dilation and length contraction are real phenomena. Otherwise, if we can't define an absolute reference frame, and spacetime really is absolutely relative - then time dilation and length contraction are NOT real phenomena, but simply visual illusions like the ones we get when we put a spoon inside a glass of water... The spoon doesn't change shape... So yes, a lot can be said about this, and honestly, I don't think that a full explanation really exist. Not even Einstein was sure what to make of all that. As for someone who has read his actual books, along his life, he was constantly changing his mind about if an absolute reference frame really exists or not...

[@jonasnangolo-sc5wi]

I like this guys explaination it is superb. God bless you bro thank you .

[@timhartherz5652]

I guess you won't notice the dilation from inside the ship, since it affects you as well, ship keeps accelerating at a constant rate, getting you to Lightspeed eventually. But you might arrive a couple of million years late at your destination. Ooops

[@-_Nuke_-]

@Mahesh_Shenoy I think that you are trying to say that the speed of an object is an inherent attribute of that object - and its not. For example, a neutrino - ISNT traveling close to the speed of light. Its only traveling close to the speed of light RELATIVE to us here on Earth. There should exist, at least 1 observer out in the Universe that measures the speed of that same neutrino and finds it to be equal to that of a bike... So what is it? Is the neutrino traveling close to the speed of light or the speed of a bike? Neither. The ONLY way to know the speed of a neutrino is if we had a global refference frame, which is absolute, and then yes - then we would be able to assign "close to lightspeed" as an inherent ATTRIBUTE to that netutrino. We will know for sure its exact speed relative to that 1 absolute frame. So to ask "Why can't something travel at the speed of light" is a question that implies - that we can somehow measure the exact speed of an object... Which in turn implies that there is a global refference frame that will give us that knowledge. Neither of these are shown to be true; The speed of light being a speed limit CANT be explained using relativity - because its an AXIOM of relativity.

[@invisalats841]

Well, it's fine, but it's basically theoretical. We currently have a very surface level understanding of the universe and its physics. We know the results but not really the underlying structure that determines the results. It's like understanding a car's functions, what it can and can't do, but having no knowledge of the engine, drive train, suspension, cooling. You only see the results and don't actually understand how the car works. So you keep pushing to see if the car can, in fact, do things it's not supposed to be able to and accept the results even though your lack of understanding of the components that make up the car could be the reason you are getting the results and not that your results are definitive.

[@Amidaegon]

They say there is always an Indian guy on KZbin with a tutorial for any topic. Now an Indian guy made the best tutorial for relativity. I guess we can see "how to build a time machine" tutorial soon from some Indian guy. Amazing job.

Hey , how is the war economy going on in Russia? Regards from India🇮🇳👳🏻‍♂️

[@ramrave2913]

Ohh poor soul because Everything originated from India

[@user-xq2fz5tz9t]

​@@ramrave2913including poverty and corruption

[@sys9208]

​@@ramrave2913 kuch bhi chu

[@neothewon]

​@@user-xq2fz5tz9tcopium

[@mehrdadhassanabadi3391]

After 38 years finally someone came along to explain this phenomenon in an intuitive and understandable way. Thank you for finally making me understand what is going on! 🙏

[@Zach-mi6to]

Well one thing always ruins the logic. He said the clocks time is affected when in motion. Motion however is relative, so you, observing the clock, are also moving sideways relative to the clock. So how does the universe decide which time frame slows in relation to the other? They cant both slow down.

[@BooleanDisorder]

​​@@Zach-mi6tobecause there is no universal frame of reference. This is all relative to something, a clock at rest compared to the moving object (relative to the resting clock). There is no universal frame or clock. Everything is relative to whatever resting object you measure from. In essence: you need to unthink the universal frame of the universe that feels intuitive. It doesn't exist.

[@Zach-mi6to]

@@BooleanDisorder u r missing your own point. There's no such thing as a "resting" reference point. There is no resting clock, bc as u mention, there's no universal reference. That's my point.

[@Zach-mi6to]

@@BooleanDisorder with acceleration yes, it then becomes an asymmetrical equation and dilates time just like a gravitational field. But two objects in uniform relative motion, for both to experience a slowing of time would suggest they are each creating a new version of reality. Or something like that. Doesn't make sense but maybe there's a consensus answer somewhere.

[@duxxxhm]

It is not a phenomenon it is a theory.

[@TechnooRam]

You have no idea how good you are at explaining stuff. Genius!

[@Mahesh_Shenoy]

Super glad that you think so!!!!

[@ReneSookdeo]

Yes I agree he did an amazing job

[@itzakehrenberg3449]

Hi Mahesh!! Can you make a video about Cherenkov radiation? Why does a charged particle emit electromagnetic radiation when it is traveling through a medium at a speed greater than that of light through the medium? @@Mahesh_Shenoy

[@karllev8763]

Massive thanks for this video, I haven't heard anyone explain this as good as you before!

[@ChineduOpara]

He blew my mind

[@justsayin4632]

The dichotomy of needing infinite energy to do it in a finite amount of time versus an infinite amount of time to do it with finite energy, was my “learn something new every day” moment.

[@5tre55full]

Never forget it is theory. He explained it well tho but it didn't magically became the fact

[@hannahchahal9506]

​@@5tre55fullA very very strong theory.

[@kenpaget2895]

this guy is THE BEST, MOST CLEAR EXPLAINER, after 50 years of attending lecttures, reading hundreds of books. the guy has a gift... thank you so much

[@foxxy-t4i]

his explanation is flawed though. at 8:40 he claims that hypotenuse is _ct`_ , without ever asking _why_ is it _c_ times _t`_ . this formula itself assumes that _c_ does not change, and therefore it's _t_ that must change, into _t`_ in this case. but why must this be the case? what if the speed changed, because of some effect? he never asks that, he just assumes that photon moves with the speed _c_ , not questioning it, and yet here lies the very question he ventured to answer. he completely misses it. and then after 11:40 he tries to answer the actual question of "why can't we go faster than light", and for that he proceeds to calculate some dilation values using the formula that _assumes c is max speed_ . you understand the fallacy here, right? so he tries to prove that _c_ is max using a formula that assumes _c_ is max.

[@0xbinarylol]

@@foxxy-t4i Maxwell have already and experiments already shows speed of light is constant no matter what ever.

[@TheSastoke]

​@foxxy-t4i ? Are you actually questioning if light always travels at C? It's as proven as you can get in physics or anything for that matter

[@MarcSherwood]

@@TheSastoke We all once agreed that it might be a small dwarf, or a toad living in that hunch on your back. To question that would get you a dip on the witch's chair. Old SNL reference there.

[@muckerwood]

If only he could be understood...

[@MouadhCosmic93]

Everybody who makes physics videos talk about time dilation and special relativity.. but no one explained it as intuitively and as simply as you did, I have stumbled upon time dilation equation many times and never seemed to understand where it came from... But now I can perfectly see it and make sense of it, keep up this beautiful work and I am deeply grateful for your efforts

[@johndow8725]

Agreed. Best layman’s terms breakdown while still utilizing the actual science involved.

[@chrisking6695]

I believe that’s because they don’t understand it either. They just regurgitate information. If one can break down information to an intuitive level then one has truly understood it.

[@jayuppercase3398]

Just remember there are 1000s of videos explaining why the earth is flat and the moon doesnt exist

[@animalyze7120]

Time dilation and other time related views are all based mostly on a Linear view point. Some scientists are already understanding that Space and Time are connected and not so separate as some theories suggest. We've a long way to go but at least we have a road to follow.

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@Poodleballin]

Wow. I have read countless Quora posts/comments, watched many YT vids, read science mags, articles, etc. and this FINALLY explained it to me. Only took like 40 years! Thanks so much for what you do.

[@Mahesh_Shenoy]

Wow, thank you :)

[@Durzo1259]

I know you posted this 11 months ago, but I just have to share in this moment of epiphany. In 20 some-odd years of watching and reading about relativity, I *Finally* understand it too!

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@kennythompson9682]

@@Sergiu.antifascist Except the clocks they used in the experiment he talks about at 4:08 ?

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

@@kennythompson9682 no clock can make any exception from what i said, as the time and space emanate from under Plack distance and Planck time. the clock with photons, is misdirection. it is always under what i said

[@joshuawilson7629]

I like that this guy is getting so excited explaining this concept he is literally slurping through his mouth for air to talk. I do mean that unironically, it's genuinely nice to see someone so excited to relay information they find interesting.

[@一个说话大声的中国人]

Did you realize that your conclusion ends with the energy required, infinite or finite? Did you know that you also need energy to see the photon in the photon clock bounce? Just for reference, the photon in the photon clock must split off a photon to your retina in order for you to see it. Even if you only see the photon in the photon clock once a second, the photon in the photon clock must split off a photon to your retina every second, not to mention that Einstein also saw it. So, at least two photons are needed. Of course, to connect the dots or photons you see and form the jagged image, do you know how many photons you need to see? Does the photon clock on the spacecraft have enough energy to emit enough photons for you to see it, whether you see it or not? Indians are the best at regurgitating what they have eaten and acting as if they have understood it. After all, at a speed v comparable to the speed of light c, does the Pythagorean formula still apply?

[@cobracharmer6178]

You're right, it is a concept. Which it is not tangible.

[@jjones503]

2 AP classes in high-school, and 4 years of high level mathematics in college, but the random guy I find on youtube explains this better than any teacher or professor I've ever had.

[@Famous_Mist]

Uau... That school was really bad.

[@jinxsterr_Dispenser3741]

It’s all in the accent jjones503.

[@manan-543]

Let's be real. You never paid attention in school. U just wanted to get thru the exams. Even if u had a good teacher wouldn't care

[@jjones503]

@@manan-543 I tried to pay attention, but got tired of paying someone to tell me which page to read just for a piece of paper.

[@arjun-j2g9o]

@@manan-543 yes never blame teachers, first of all today education is business

[@Major.Tom.1973]

😮 You taught me in 16 minutes something I wasn't able to understand after years of self-study! 👏👏👏🙌🙏

[@DanniDuck]

You might want to learn something a little easier if it took you years to not learn something.

[@Pommes736]

Don't worry you still haven't learned anything

[@99Gara99]

You still don't understand, you just think you do

[@helifynoe6956]

Sorry to hear that man. I dropped out of school due to the side effects of a nasty head injury that also left a ceramic plate on the left side of my head. But despite teachers thinking that I was just one step away from being labeled as "Mentally Challenged", I still managed to independently discover the special relativity(SR) phenomena, derive the SR mathematical equations, along with independently deriving the Lorentz transformation equations, and the method that I used to derive these equations has not even been thought of by others as of yet.

[@andyjones7121]

This thread cracks me up. A self deprecating post by a confident person and a bunch of low self esteem jackasses piling on. "Sorry you not smart. Me understand everything because ceramic brain." It's pretty hilarious to me.

[@Cryptic808]

My man. This was one of the most joyous videos I’ve ever watched on physics. Your joy is contagious and I love every second of it. Love the way you explain everything and your emotion behind it all.

[@Kunfucious577]

I love watching people talking about things they love. I’ve noticed that physicists seem to enjoy their jobs more than anyone. It’s probably because if it’s amazing shit.

[@ofnir123]

@@Kunfucious577 Couldn't care about chemistry when I was in high school, but physics? I ate that for breakfast! Understanding how energy transfers work is just so damn fascinating!

[@illpilgrims]

I found it off-putting and performative

[@eunickissimo]

As a brazilian I feel like your accent is closer to Portuguese. I love it. Great work man

[@Scritley]

With no exaggeration, this man and his videos should be in every high school and college classroom. I've struggled with this topic for years and in two 15-20 minute videos, he clearly and concisely explains time and distance dilation in a way that someone like me, with a great interest in astronomy/physics/special relativity but who does not possess a degree in these areas, can understand. Furthermore, the way he unfolds the narrative, like a building conversation with Einstein and with his contagious excitement of the topic and of finally understanding it sprinkled in, completely amplifies the greatness here. Well done! You've earned a life-long subscriber.

[@royfeigel2535]

If you think what he says makes sense you are still struggling

[@firstnamelastname4749]

​@@royfeigel2535 What this video does is explain time dilation in a way that can be easily understood. I now grasp the concept. I do not understand it, but If I were to learn the details I would be able to link the equations with my understanding of the concept to fully grasp it

[@ksalarang]

same!

[@michaelmiddlefinger1406]

​@@royfeigel2535🤫🤓

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@stevenweller9413]

I’m 52 and have a college degree (granted in history) and am also a big sci fi guy. This is the first explanation I’ve heard that actually made sense, even in physics classes. Thank you.

[@redbean9410]

so essentially you don't have a college degree

[@teacher_fher]

​@redbean9410 ???? You do understand that history as a field of human knowledge is older than any natural science, right?

[@redbean9410]

@@teacher_fher lmao okay and? a history degree isn't gonna get you anything, except maybe a job as a history professor lmao

[@STho205]

Despite the rude jabs here..."Oh the Humanities!"....your statement is very common in our population. Many people highly educated or stopping at HS are highly specialized in education today. There are far fewer hard sciences students than non empirical students in most of society. However there are a great number of Sci Fi fans that have picked up science sounding terms but applied by fantasy writers as a vague technobabble. I (physical chemist) run into a lot of people that insist they understand and are experts on some material theory or another (astrophysics, medicine, chemistry, biology, geology, etc...). Yet in casual conversation I can often find out exactly where they picked up the idea. I'm sure you find the same is true when you meet someone that learned history at the box office. History is a fine and honorable degree and profession.

[@redbean9410]

@@STho205 there’s less hard science students because it’s not for everyone. Most people can’t obtain the degrees for those jobs

[@nguyentrananhnguyen7900]

people usually only talk about going faster than light, but hardly anyone talks about time dilation you are the first one to help me understand it, thank you

[@goodcitizen3780]

There is no time dilation, only measurement dilation. Time remains constant regardless if, or how, we measure it. A 10 meter tree is still 10 meters if no one measures it, if someone measures it poorly, even if the device used to measure it fails.

[@devastorm356]

​@@goodcitizen3780I'm not a science-y person and I thought this video would have cartoons explaining or something but I decided to try to understand it but, now, you're saying there's no time dilation? I think time is only constant relative to environment. Like what about the planet stuff in the movie "Interstellar" where every second for them was like days or months on Earth because of gravity or something? Doesn't that mean that time is a constant in perception but can be slowed or "sped up" based on time dilation?

[@goodcitizen3780]

@@devastorm356 One of the biggest hiccups with the theory is that time requires measurement in order to know that it even exists. If measurement devices are altered in the theory, which they very clearly and admittedly are, then no accurate measurement can be taken. This is very hypothetical though, if you'll allow the expression. The theory really only describes how means of measurement might be disrupted and altered. Everything after that is based upon the presupposition. That is, there is no way to show that time has been altered without a measurement and any method of measuring would be altered and this unreliable. Now we expand to calculating the alterations in the measurement device and we can infer how time may or may not have been altered but, as the most meager of arguments to begin an onslaught of arguments, it would only be an inference.

[@TomJakobW]

This is just rambling and a good example of how people just use science-y words to trick others into believing they know a thing.

[@TheFirstRealChewy]

There is no time dilation. If you are traveling at the speed of light then turn of a light. The light particles that are moving in the same direction will travel as 2X the speed of light. The speed of light is based on being stationary. It's all relative.

[@Sheepy765.]

The way it sounds like you’re figuring out as you go makes it feel like I’m with a friend learning about time dilation. I’m more interested now than I’ve ever been when learning about this. Thank you!

[@louischen1280]

I think the fact he's explaining this to you, eye to eye and never cuts away or edits away, helps a big ton. The rigid logic becomes more relatable especially when he infuses the lesson with emotion. Great educator!

[@thingsiplay]

I really enjoy videos like these without music in the background. He is explaining it like someone who understands it in front of you, like a teacher. I'm subscribing to his channel now, this video is excellent.

[@M3ladi]

so what im getting is that the photon does not accelerate or decelerate but rather the vertical and horizontal vectors get smaller and larger respectively

[@michaeldavis6993]

@@M3ladi No actually, the vertical distance the photon travels per tick STAYS THE SAME regardless of whether the system is moving or not, but the HORIZONTAL component increases as the ship moves faster. Speed is constant, but distance has increased, meaning time must increase as well.

[@AdityaPatwardhanJ]

You, sir, are a gift to physics students everywhere!

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@Subhumanoid_]

@@Sergiu.antifascist I read this copied paragraph in other comments and it still makes no sense. _" no real clock measures time, not distance"_ This makes grammatically no sense. So ... does a real clock measure time or distance?

[@DigitalWinner]

Amazing! You sumarized the whole thing in 16 minutes and you spoke in a way that a non-scientist can grasp it very easily!

[@Alex-d3l9b]

The only thing im left not understanding tho is, wtf is a photon.

[@noxsamus397]

@@Alex-d3l9b a light particle

[@Nishantaugh]

@@Alex-d3l9b a ray of light itself, is made of photons. they are like particles in the ray. like molecules make up items

[@tip00former1]

@@noxsamus397 It's not just a "light particle", it is an "electromagnetic-radiation-particle". This includes feeling warm and fuzzy 🙂

[@noxsamus397]

@@tip00former1 no need to go into extra details, photons usually means a light particle. don't make it more complicated then it need be.

[@Leenux]

As a dude that studied physics for 10 years... kudos to you brother, you are living example that more than half of the universities personel (in my country - Poland) should simply lose the job.

[@AbdousamadMohamed]

the shit that i watch at 4am

[@TheTrevler]

Too relatable

[@gorway6807]

It is 3:40 am and we are kindred spirits

[@astralwerk]

You are not alone

[@PurushaDesa]

Literally watching this at 04:38 GMT! 😂 His enthusiasm is infectious.

[@DardhaUndercover]

@@gorway6807LMFAO guys 03:07 rn, i seem to be a little early today

[@Rosetulippp]

Who want Mahesh to infinitely keep making videos?

[@misterlau5246]

🥺 No way, that's too long, poor Mahe🥺

[@UmaKumari-x1s]

✋️

[@brilanto]

That would need infinite time and/or energy...

[@sumibordoloi2000]

So easily explained....plz make such videos

[@olucascanavarro]

🖐🏼

[@m5nut]

BRILLIANT! In my 45 years I have never had this explained in such an easily understandable manner. You sir are a seriously gifted teacher, thank you. Keep up the fantastic work.

[@AnoNymous-dh2sv]

The video is a circular fallacy. You're supposedly trying to prove why it can't go faster than light, and you start by saying "the photon always moves with the speed of light".

[@JarieSuicune]

@@AnoNymous-dh2sv Photons go the speed of light. The speed of light is not faster than the speed of light, so no contradiction. So, where is this "circular fallacy"? It's perfectly fine for energy to move at the speed of light, that is the speed limit. (Just because you might see a speed limit as the lower, rather than upper, bound when driving doesn't mean that applies to physics. Everything goes at a speed of "x

[@AnoNymous-dh2sv]

@@JarieSuicune Because your axiom is already what you're trying to prove on the title of the video. Or at least the question is formed in a click-baity way. You could ask "why is something with mass able to only have a speed lower than that of the photon?".

[@UchihaAditya]

Mind was blown man!! 🤯 Finally!! Finally I understood time dilation. Have been hearing this since high school, photon clock, Lorenz equation everything. Never understood why physical clocks would slow down as well. I can finally understand so many other things too with this understanding. What passionate man you are!! Looking forward to more such content.

[@IlIlIlIlIlIllIlIlI]

Same bro👍

[@GG-lp2ex]

This was the best explanation ever. You’ve asked the same questions I had, a real clock and now I understand why we simplify it. Thank you for this in depth answer. My physics professor just keeps saying well you can’t travel at the speed of light, you just can’t, doesn’t provide an answer. Now finally I understand why time dilation matters. ❤

[@AlbertTheGamer-gk7sn]

And because of time dilation combined with dividing by 0 to unleash the power of quantum effects, the light barrier can be broken, all we need is to make such machine that can divide by 0, a computer high-tech enough to program such machine, and fuel potent enough to allow the machine to use quantum effects. As long as we break away, everything becomes possible.

[@markiv2942]

@@AlbertTheGamer-gk7snThis is utter nonsense.

[@pythondrink]

Yes lmao ​@@markiv2942

[@paulg6671]

@@AlbertTheGamer-gk7sn If you divide anything besides 0 by 0 you get infinity, if you divide 0 by 0 you get 0. Done, i can make a script that does that, when is the break of the light barrier gonna happen? :))

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@Mahesh_Shenoy]

I made a boo boo. The formula for the relativistic kinetic energy is WRONG at 0:10! But the concept is accurate and this doesn't affect the rest of the video. Sorry! Thanks Adrian for pointing that out.

[@Adrian-Carstea]

Keep up the good job.

[@Agni_Puthra]

Sheldon Cooper said the same thing when he gave Dr Stephen Hawking his paper with a math error I believe 😅 Context: The big Bang theory

[@Mahesh_Shenoy]

@@Agni_Puthra Oh really? :D Haha.

[@Agni_Puthra]

@@Mahesh_Shenoy To quote him, "Oh my gosh golly! I made a boo boo... And I gave it to Stephen Hawking" and then he faints...

[@hadigmail]

I like your videos. How can we explain the biological aging difference in the twin paradox ?

[@derpataur1162]

It never once occurred to me, that because the speed of light is constant, when an object is moving it effectively means that light has to travel more distance... but it's not going any faster to compensate... and that is literally what time dilation spawns from. I love that. Thanks man.

[@seawaterjohnmiller7118]

speed of light is infinite

[@emerson3539]

@@seawaterjohnmiller7118huh

[@donaldslayer]

@@seawaterjohnmiller7118the slow mo guys disproved this

[@seawaterjohnmiller7118]

@@donaldslayer where? how do you test light in another universe when ur in this universe? can't be proven here.... light is a wave, it is slowed down when travelling through a medium, the vacuum of space is not empty..... ever heard of dark matter ? maybe that is what gives light its constant speed.... derrrr

[@darkracer1252]

@@donaldslayer the slomo guys only proved that light moving through a medium has a slower speed. (if you don't understand the subject it's generally a good idea to shut up untill you do understand it) light basicly has infinate speed. but only from it's own perspective. from our outside perspective there is still the speed of causality to take into account. the speed of information. if you were a light particle. a photon. you would basicly die as soon as you are born. not even any time to experiance anything. from the exact moment you are emitted. you smack into whatever surface you are shining on. doesn't matter if this is a flashlight shining at a wall. or the light of a star billions of lightyears away reaching your eye. it's in the same exact instant. from the outside looking in however. you move at nearly 300k kilometers per second. 299.792.458 km/s or almost 190k miles per second. 186.000 miles/sec and it's always that speed. no matter how fast you are moving. and no matter in what direction you are travelling. the only thing that can slow light down is it moving through something. like air. or a gel. or whatever. and that's how they slow light down enoegh that you can capture the propegation of reflections move through something with a camera. it's physicly impossible to make a camera fast enoegh to capture the speed of light in a vacuum. because it would take infinate energy.

[@KojoBailey]

You have blown my mind. I hope more people can see this!

[@FilthyGreen]

No other video on this topic has explained it as well as you have. I suddenly am able to comprehend time dilation and why it actually happens. You are an awesome teacher!

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@lanierosenberg]

Took me a second to realize that what Mahesh calls "t dash" is what I would call "t prime". This was a great video! First time I have ever seen a good explanation of why not just time slows down, but so do actual physical phenomena when approaching the speed of light.

[@Mahesh_Shenoy]

Ah yes! I could have used the same lingo! Prime would have made it that much easier. Great feedback to be mindful about using shared vocab!

[@ColeTrain94]

9:40 is where you earned my sub. The amazing complexities of the universe are astounding and our grasp on them is so awe inspiring. I can feel in your voice the passion for this! Keep producing content! The world needs this!

[@peterrauth118]

Me too, just now

[@the-dave-house-project]

Read your comment before reaching 9:40... so, of course, I had to keep watching to see what inspired you. Pretty cool stuff. :)

[@VN9001]

I can't count all the "simplified" explanations I've read or viewed for Relativity and still didn't have a 100% grasp on it. Now I do. You took away the "maybe I'm just too stupid to understand" and replaced it with "yeah, I get that now!". Thank-you so much for this video.

[@Cheetahhh]

The most intuitive explanation of time dilation I've seen, and the animations are clear and well done. Fantastic video :)

[@AaravGhate]

Oh hello there, didn't think I'd see you here

[@apoorvakashyap3534]

tf u cheetahhh.....

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@RedHammerBodyShop]

I finally understand it completely. Thank you sir. My logic and ignorance has had me fighting this theory for years, and my brain finally "clicked" and I now fully understand. Thank you.

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

no, you don't it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@Nizav-qu5zt]

what u understand? explain it clearly cause you said completely understand

[@patrykk63]

@@Sergiu.antifascist Can you cite any papers or books that expand upon your view?

[@superman9894]

This is the best description I have ever heard! You did a great job showing intuitively why it's impossible to reach or surpass the speed of light.

[@durbanpoison031]

What’s that t shirt say

[@settingsun1]

@@durbanpoison031 Dont be a jerk

[@superman9894]

@@durbanpoison031 The expression is the third derivative of 𝑥 with respect to 𝑡. In physics, the first derivative of position 𝑥 with respect to time 𝑡 is velocity (𝑣=𝑑𝑥/𝑑𝑡). The second derivative is acceleration (𝑎=𝑑^2𝑥/𝑑𝑡^2). The third derivative is called jerk (𝑗=𝑑^3𝑥/𝑑𝑡^3) So, "Don't be 𝑑^3𝑥/𝑑𝑡^3) is a way of saying, "Don't be a jerk!"

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@simonkembo]

Your ability to explain complex physics in a way dummies like me can understand is amazing. Excellent 👌

[@chunkymonky5364]

Absolutely adore your excitement and the love that you put into the content you produce. Never understood time dilation until now, and your joy from physics is contagious :) Please continue with such a high quality content! :D

[@yerramahesh7744]

I've read the same concept in two different text books for hours... But this man gave me the complete intuition in just 16 minutes... Hats off to your work sir...

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@Istealtoast]

@@Sergiu.antifascist did you watch the video?

[@shaice]

90 min of applause. Great video. Your excitation is contagious.

[@marvinjno-baptiste726]

I was sceptical, after watching many video claiming they could make me understand and failing - but finally....a legitimately brilliant explanation that has finally unlocked my mind to "get it". Kudos!!!

[@kashrut18]

This is a really straightforward and clear explanation of time dilation. Keep up the good work on this and similar subjects.

[@johnceena7322]

Time doesn't dilate. The photon-clock may slow down, but not the other clocks.

[@hermanwillem7057]

​@@johnceena7322should we call it subjective time dilation then

[@goodcitizen3780]

Regardless, if a clock slows, time remains constant. The apparatus that we use to measure it may change, but the measured remains constant. If you measure a board at ten inches, stretch your tape measure out or shrink it down, and then remeasure, the number changes, sure, but the board remains unchanged.

[@MertKaanTorukojin]

This video doesn't just explain why we can't reach speed of light. It explains much more than that. For example, it explains why time slows down when you move very fast, but the moment I felt like I was enlightened by this video was when I realized that this can also explain something that I never understood before. I am talking about how the concept of relative speed doesn't apply to light and we always see the light moving at light speed regardless of our own speed. I still don't understand it fully but I feel like this video gave me a big hint about why that's happening.

[@huskypup3489]

I find it useful to consider that ALL objects move at the same speed through spacetime at the rate of c. A stationary object is moving only through time and a photon is moving only through space. Other objects move at different ratios of space vs. time depending on their speed, but an object's speed through spacetime never changes.

[@Noblp]

So basically two photons are emitted from one source - a lightbulb on a moving spaceship. One hits the eye of a traveler onboard, the other hits yours (and you are outside the ship and at rest in space. Wearing a spacesuit, of course, cause you’re smart). Two possibilities exist: 1. The ship moves away from you. 2. Or towards. In first case photon “forced” to “move” more distance towards yourself than it would’ve if the ship was at rest same as you, in second vice versa. But! And it’s a big fundamental physic’s BUT(t) 😉 Photons always travel at the speed of light at all reference systems, no mater what, so it will reach both of you and the traveler all the same, however it travels as a wave not as particle. And since distance was increased or decreased wave gets “stretched” or “compressed” in spacetime, which means it will have lower frequency in first case and higher in second. So for the traveler it would be ordinary light - nothing’s changed, but for you it would be red-shifted or blue-shifted accordingly. To visualise it: imagine photon as a particle skipping on a bridge. The bridge represents the distance between point of emission(in our case lightbulb) and your eye. At rest everything is simple: photon happily skipped on the bridge towards you at the speed of light and smiles meeting you (because you have inquisitive mind and want to understand him) Now imagine the point of emission goes away from you. Photon looks at the bridge sighs quietly and starts it’s journey at the speed of light as usual. However every jump, the bridge gets stretched a little bit underneath him. So even though our little but very determined photon jumps as high as he can and travels at the same speed of light, he lands a little bit farther away from you and from where he should’ve landed if damn bridge just kept still. But it’s keeps stretching and stretching… Every single jump (how exhausting!) So no matter from what perspective we look at him now we still know it’s a photon because he jumps a photon high and travels at the speed of light. But remember he’s very determined to meet you(for reasons stated previously)! So finally he will reach you, tired and red from exhaustion (poor little fellow is completely red-shifted! now it’s easier to remember which way is which, right?), but of course the distance he traveled was bigger and because we know speed was the same, it means it took more time (v=d/t). In the other case bridge unexpectedly starting to shorten every time he jumps and although he’s very happy about meeting you sooner it’s still freaks him up a little bit too. So he jumps as high as photons should, but his jumps are just shorter this time because the part of the bridge he planed to jump over is became shorter instead (what a world! What a strange world we are all existing in! He probably thinks. Well of course. He doesn’t understand speed - he is born to know only one and never can accelerate or slow down). Nonetheless he reaches you very excited because it took so less time to get to you! He happily bounces around you, but unfortunately you can’t see him he was jumping so closely so short distance he accidentally blue-shifted into blue then violet, ultraviolet and finally into microwave range. But don’t worry science got you both covered. You can still meet with the help of radio-telescope. It will greet photon with it’s antennae and translates him into visible spectrum for you. Happy end. Hope it helps. It’s overly simplified, but at the core is correct. Just remember photons do not (under usual circumstances) propagate as particle in reality. The cake is a lie…. I mean the bridge! 😅 In this visualisation the bridge represents spacetime for the wave to propagate in and the photon represents every other characteristics of light (electromagnetic force). To understand it further we have to dive into wave functions and quantum theory which is beyond the scope of this explanation. Keep asking questions, reading science literature and watching educational videos. See you on the other side of electromagnetic spectrum!

[@Noblp]

@@huskypup3489​​⁠I’m so sorry to shatter your understanding, but you’re wrong and Einstein is right. It’s all about reference frame. Objects do travel through spacetime at different speeds depending on point of reference, same as force carrier particles such as photon, we don’t know does the time goes “forward” “for them” or “standing still” or something else entirely, however the can observe and measure their speed, which is constant in any frame of reference, and means they do indeed travel in spacetime. Basically bosons except for mesons are incapable of slowing down beyond light speed in any reference frame, while aforementioned mesons and generally hadrons and fermions can, yet they have mass and are incapable of reaching speed of light instead. Your explanation fails at black holes for example. Gravity there is so strong it stretches spacetime so far that light needs infinite time to travel from source of emission beyond event horizon and since our universe have measurable time frame since the formation of a black hole to any point of time in the future (in our understanding of spacetime at the current state) we can observe no light escapes black holes, which in oneself reinforces our current models. Einstein’s theory explains it perfectly yours doesn’t, sorry. Mathematically speed, time and space come together in this formula v=dt. It’s been tested and always predicted results correctly to a certain degree, you can check yourself if needed. Now if you were right it would mean everything’s speed is c, which is kinda weird on it’s on but harder to debunk in simple terms. So lets look at photons in your model t=0 for them always hence for photon v=0 always 😮 according to your model photons are at perpetual rest to everything in the universe. Incapable of travailing any distance at all. No matter from which point of space or time you look at a photon it should always be at rest relative to you! So sorry again but it’s better to be mistaken and find out then believe in a wrong thing, you on the right trek just didn’t reached the destination yet. Be patient and eventually everything will click into places. By the way interesting thinking, never heard something like this, made me think for a second, thank you for what! I can recommend to start from understanding that space and time are kinda sorta the same thing like matter and energy is. Not exactly but it’s a good enough start, what is established for now is they are intrinsically connected and inseparable hence the actual name spacetime. It’s just describes four dimensions of the universe which we can confirm at the moment. Good luck, hope I’ve been helpful and didn’t dissuaded you from digging deeper, it’s crazy out there, but fun I promise.

[@Mavrik9000]

@@Noblp As @huskypup3489 said C is constant for everything, which means that speed through space and rate of time trade-off in a reciprocal relationship when comparing two frames of reference, otherwise known as relativity. For an excellent visual representation and explanation watch the video called "We all move at the Speed of Light."

[@speedforce8970]

The speed of light being constant is a convention though, it could just be that the speed really is different in different directions.

[@SrikarDurgi]

This is the most intuitive explanation of time dilation I've seen to date. Imaginary conversations with Einstein are a delight :D

[@JohariW]

I've known about this since high school 20+ years ago, but this is actually the first time I've ever understood why. Thank you so much, you have truly enlightened me, and everything finally makes sense.

[@stevenk8189]

It's great to see someone explaining what he loves with so much passion.

[@codelinx]

Why isn't your channel way more popular!? Holy crap. I literally understood everything... 🤯🤯 your video also clarified a lot of things "explained" by other videos and other people and other writings.

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@patrykk63]

@@Sergiu.antifascist Can you cite any papers or books that expand upon your view?

[@kamisa7362]

Never understood why people say that... Every content creator has to start from 0 and work their way up. It takes time and many things play a role in that. His viewership skyrocketed over a year ago and it likely had to do with him changing the way he executed his videos.

[@CainZio]

Not only you made a such complex topic easy to understand, but you also explained it with such entusiasm that it drives people to want to know even more! Keep it up man, and thank you VERY much for this video.

[@chrisbarter7627]

I've been reading and discussing Sagan's "Cosmos" with my 9yo daughter for a little while, and I just found this video right around when we were talking about time dilation as it appears in the book. I just wanted to say that the video is great and you do wonderful work. I really appreciate your channel, as does my kiddo. Keep up the good work!

[@brunodinis7454]

google spies

[@Andrijko85]

This guy is my absolute favorite science communicator. Keep it up Mahesh! If we had more professors as excited as him, to teach their respective subjects, kids would definitely be doing better in school.

[@lordirek1]

This is possibly the best explanation for this I've ever seen. I understood it to be a similar issue to a singularity, a curve approaching an asymptote, whereby infinity becomes a limiting factor, and I understood the frames of reference, I've even seen the photon clock described and drawn out, but this put all the pieces together in a brilliantly easy to follow way. Well done!

[@alvinuli5174]

Infinity has nothing to do with this issue. It's finiteness instead.

[@lordirek1]

@alvinuli5174 the speed is ultimately finite, but the energy required to achieve it approaches infinity as you get closer to it.

[@chemicalmix]

Wow, what a fantastic video that explains this perfectly. After decades of just not getting it, and endless other videos, this one has finally cracked it for me.

[@jeffwilson3818]

Reading the chapter about atoms in Richard Feynman's Six Easy Pieces led to an epiphany and an entirely new view of nature for me. It was the moment that atomic theory finally really "clicked" for me. I think I've just experienced that feeling again for SR after watching your explanation! By far the best, most intuitive explanation I've seen.

[@kfawell]

It has been so long since I read that book. I can say that I effectively remember nothing from the book. I have knowledge but by now at nearly 60 it is hard to keep track of where my knowledge came from . In short, would you mind offering a brief explanation of the epiphany?

[@jeffwilson3818]

@@kfawell It's been years since I read it and don't remember the specifics of what led to the epiphany, but I definitely remember the emotional feeling of that "aha!" moment. I think he was describing either evaporation or condensation, and how the normal interaction of atoms leads to these as emergent phenomena.

[@kfawell]

@@jeffwilson3818 thanks for telling me. I guess a good plan would be for me to read it again.

[@YanivGorali]

I cant recall the number of videos on the subject and i never quite felt like i got it. Thanks to you and your ability to communicate so well, i finally got it. Keep up the great work!

[@zuqini]

I never had an intuition for what physicists meant when they said time is an illusion, but your explanation of how photons affect how we perceive time gave me some intuition on what time really is! Amazing video!

[@R.Akerman-oz1tf]

Keep in mind; The speed of DARK is faster(or is that biblical?).

[@Queazyboot3]

​@@R.Akerman-oz1tf darkness is just the absence of visible light

[@damonedrington3453]

@@R.Akerman-oz1tfit’s not, because you can’t measure the speed of something that’s not a thing. Darkness isn’t a thing. It’s a lack of light. Even if we’re generous and call darkness a thing, it travels at light speed because, as stated, it’s a lack of light, and light travels at… well, light speed

[@conormurphy4328]

“I never said that shit” ~ Einstein

[@ustbot7047]

😆

[@travisfrench147]

It shouldn’t be as funny as it is…

[@bigmikeinoz]

Einstein actually said almost exactly that. Just with a different accent, and no computer animations.

[@snoopah3077]

einstein never even spoke english lmao

[@bigmikeinoz]

​@@snoopah3077 Einstein lived and worked in the USA and held US citizenship for the last 15 years of his life.

[@tony7830]

Wow, I watched this video for the 2nd time pausing it and rewinding to try and grasp what you are explaining. And I think I had a small light bulb moment. Thankyou so much. I failed high school , but went back years later to night school and did quite well. Your enthusiasm is contagious and makes me want to get out my old maths books and brush up. Well done.

[@aneesh7123]

proud of you :)

[@jamildrareni4304]

That's time dilation working in your favour 😀

[@AathielVaDaath]

I just got you channel in my suggestions yesterday and I've been binge watching you since then. You are a great science explainer and I love your willingness to look at the math- I appreciate the people who try to explain without the math, but it's such a crucial part... I look forward to your career taking off.

[@Rexy-lf6gc]

out of thousands of videos and materials online, finally found someone who can explain it properly with it making sense, big thanks

[@1conchitaloca]

After watching and reading so many explanations of time dilation, yours is by far the best, all others always left me with a "weird" feeling of just having to believe, but yours definitely didn't! Very well done! (I also had the question about the ship's perspective, but your second video solves that 🙂)

[@ilin.andrii]

Man, you’re so good teacher! This content is definitely underrated. Wish you the best, man. Keep up a great work.

[@raffaelebernardo2801]

This was brilliant. Thank you. Mastering knowledge means being able to transfer it effectively within simple terms. Well done.

[@anthonyhorst7116]

Love the video. Best explanation of this ive seen so far. Indeed this is the first explanation i can confidently say i fully understand. Thank you.

[@duckeydutch2088]

Best explanation I’ve ever seen. I actually understand this one 👍. Thanks!! What you could add is when you go faster and faster, de photons in the clock will describe flatter and flatter lines. At lightspeed they will go horizontal and don’t bounce anymore at all. Hence, time stands still.

[@unhpsychology3909]

I consume quite a bit of physics content on KZbin, and this video truly stands out as one of the best I’ve seen. I’ve never seen any of your videos before, but I am looking forward to seeing more!!!

[@srinivasvellore447]

I am amazed how simplified explanations you come up with complex concepts. Hats off to you 👏 🙌 🙏

[@ftheisinger5464]

This explanation is so great and simple. Countless professors have failed to explain the why in an understandable way (or do not understand it either without having seen this video). Surprisingly no advanced math is required.

[@jasonfu6440]

This is literally the best illustration of special relativity and time dialation. I don't think anyone has explained it better. Thank you for making it so clear.

[@mojojo_san]

Finance and Data Analytics guy here, passionate about math and astrophysics just got the most clearest explanation of why we can't reach speed of light on a random Saturday at 2 AM. Thanks for dumbing it down for us, and your enthusiasm !!! You just gain a subscriber.

[@jwcarnal]

This guy is a great teacher. He uniquely adds the emotional dimension which is present in a student struggling to understand. He adds that to his explanation. The student, while listening, says to himself/herself "This guy knows what I am going through. I bet he can help me if I listen closely."

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@keq1688]

​@@Sergiu.antifascist can you explain how real clocks measure time*distance? and how is that a non-variable when time itself isn't a constant?

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

​@@keq1688 answer for the clocks question: the available space for the functioning of the clocks, any clocks, including atomic, the available space shrinks to the same depth the time dilates, therefore the product spe*time is constant, and the clocks tick the same number of ticks. the available space for the clocking mechanism, gets into the synchronization of the travelling bodies, and cannot be separated. by Special Relativity, all clocks tick the same number of ticks, and to that pseudo-time, that is number of ticks in space*time, Special Relativity must give same results as the Classical Relativity. different results are given for the Theoretical Time, not for Measured Time. and ANY referencial time we can establish in experiments, is measurable time, not theoretical time. theoretical time, we use for energy and other corrections, because we cling to the old rules we know, even though great distances and high speeds require different approach, radical change, much more than all relativity theories we have now. everything, to a single aspect, must be reconsidered, and revolutionized.

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

@@keq1688 "can you explain how real clocks measure time*distance? and how is that a non-variable when time itself isn't a constant?" if you ask this, it means you are not qualified to discuss science. i did not say time is constant, i said for all things time adds up same quantities, and Einsteiné relativity does not change that. the is the sense in which i said it is non-variable. you should have known it. if not, you are not qualified. let those qualified have opinions in the matter!

[@octs609]

@@Sergiu.antifascist Your making absolutely zero sense lmfao.

[@electroncat]

I figured this out earlier today, the explanation people gave made no sense. Thank you so much for reinforcing my understanding.

[@itskittyme]

7:35 I have wondered about this part half my life, the "material time vs philosophical time" and this is the first time someone actually answered / explained the difference between these 2 concepts of time 😲 🙏

[@chromacobble]

On an unrelated note, your t-shirt caused me to search the derivative of acceleration with respect to time, which is Jerk, nice one man 😄

[@Chris-dm1je]

Thank you! I was at a loss as to how to even start finding that out.

[@L_H_Try]

Yeah it took me a sec to realize it meant "dont be a jerk" luckily i remebered calc and physics

[@willv88]

How does that lead to Jerk (for the rest of us)?

[@chromacobble]

@@willv88 No worries! You can think of derivation as the change of something, let's call it a function, now speed is a result of change of distance with accordance to time, which derivation can also give us with minimal time differences. If we apply the same logic to speed with accordance to time, the change is equivalent to velocity etc etc. You can also think of an object with varying velocities, it would appear to be in a jerking motion, thus the name :D

[@L_H_Try]

@@willv88 Ok, so if some function f(x) represents distance, the first derivative represents velocity, (distance/time) the second derivative represents acceleration, (constantly changing speed/time) and the third would be jerk, the really fast changing of speed. Another way is, lets say your in a car. It is accelerating from 45mph up to 80mph, then suddenly brakes really fast. What you would feel is the jerk, and probably bounce around in the car, yes? That's the third derivative of motion. i.e, dont be a "Jerk" (third derivative of motion.) If that's a bit confusing, srry, you're not alone. kzbin.info/www/bejne/kHaQfGudrreUZqM

[@wesbeuning1733]

Please continue to explain absolutely any and everything you possibly can. Brilliant!

[@sanjeev.101]

ahh! For years, now I have gotten the video which almost explains me why can't we reach the speed of light. Great one. And the best part is you are more excited to explain it.

[@YooosheerWZ]

The only guy from India that I wouldn't immediately hang up the phone if he called me. Nah, but seriously this was explained as good as you possible could explain anything. I don't know algebra and I am horrible at math, while I couldn't do the equations I understood what was represented and why the results are what they are. Good job, got yourself a new subscriber!

[@truthbsaid1600]

This is THE BEST explanation of the light speed barrier I have ever seen (and I have seen dozens)! Genius is the ability to see the simplicity of the laws of nature.

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

it is wrong. no real clock slows down, because no real clock measures time, not distance. all real clocks measure time*distance, and that is a non-variable. Einstein was often confused

[@jeffrowe6004]

@@Sergiu.antifascist I am glad I am not the only one in the world that understands this.

[@Sergiu.antifascist]

@@jeffrowe6004 another thing, the interdiction for travel at "speed of light" or above... it is wrongly said relativity interdicts that. relativity interdicts nothing, as relativity is not cause, it is final effect. there is different cause for impossibility to travel at "c" or above, and that is the lack of interractions that are faster than that. that is a cause. relativity is not the cause.

[@Istealtoast]

@@Sergiu.antifascist I don't understand what you mean?

[@octs609]

@@Istealtoast He is spewing bullshit

[@jasonmoquin]

You did a pretty good job at explaining this. FAR better than the professors did back in the day when I was a college student.

[@ARCWoodCraft]

Only someone who REALLY understands this kind of stuff can explain it this well, while being this excited about it! 🥳

[@luntuafrica]

I still don't understand, but I'm so inspired by how much fun you're having 😂 You simplified it nicely so I look forward to listening again and building that intuitive understanding.

[@RussellSivalingam]

The knowledge, the passion, You sir are a born a brilliant teacher. After years, someone finally explained it to me in a way it's intuitive. for me you won't the internet today!

[@thomasdarscheid3665]

Just incredible. You have the very rare talent to explain these very complex issue to non physicists so they are actually getting it, only by use of a few graphs and your unique way of breaking the basics down. Never seen anything like this before. Greatest respect to you. And a huge THANKS.

[@shev26]

4:45 Vsauce reference detected

[@sb_ty3486]

That's what I thought immediately

[@davidmgnl]

I heard the Vsauce noice instantly in my head

[@reishin4346]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW Thanks for sorting this out for me man, I've been puzzling about this since high school, and my teacher literally tells me he don't think anyone understands this...

[@ArshPhirphire]

Best teacher we'll ever have Cheers for mahesh

[@ponchogutz]

You are brilliant, not only because you understand what you explain, but because you got the amazing talent to explain it to us.

[@JanPaepke]

This is the most intuitive explanation of time dilation I have seen in all of science KZbin!

[@randmayfield5695]

Beautifully well done! Complete with many detailed explanations both in visual and audible form. Thank you. I subscribed and 'liked'.

[@sagsolyukariasagi]

16:38 a proof that exercising keeps you young.

[@aloksingh-we2xf]

By how much?

[@aloksingh-we2xf]

And from that logic even if you don't workout but just travel a lot, you might stay even younger.

[@aloksingh-we2xf]

There might be some significance to our everyday movement we do on our aging but it doesn't make much of a difference. And Exercise keeps us young because of various other reasons but not time dilation.

[@moggingskull]

​@@aloksingh-we2xf if you want to stay yonger you have to atleast do youga at 10000km/s/s which is impossible

[@lucid4entrelises]

You got to be proud explaining such a complex concept so easily that anyone can understand. God bless you forever

[@eoala9338]

Your enthusiasm for physics is simply inspiring. Keep up the good work!!

[@luiscustodio5983]

Brilliant. Excellent understandable, illustrations for a non-intuitive concept. Great job Mahesh. Without Pythagoras and Einstein and others, you would not be able to arrive and take us at C. Thank you, you all.

[@boowiebear]

I had always heard about the infinite energy and kind of understood but now that I know that it is required to make up for the time dilation it makes total sense. …and for relativity that is saying something. Bravo!

[@aryanparuthi5649]

Absolutely loved this video..u explained this to me so well in just 16 min..amazing

[@deschia_]

Very well done. It really IS intuitive. Hundreds of YT videos and I don't know why no one else explained the time it takes to transfer energy between atoms. That is literally what makes it make sense.

[@manjunathg3]

This was THE missing ingredient in all the other explanations i have seen so far. It was very frustrating no one else address this issue of the physical implications at the material, atomic level. The communication at the atomic level also is limited to the speed of light.

[@ikremaidrees5931]

I had no idea what you were talking about, but I kept watching because your explanation was superb.

[@ronalddonahue8325]

these are the most intuitive explanations of general relativity ive ever sen. absolutely fantastic work. i also apprciate that you stay inside the scope of experimentation too. mathematical validity does not necessarily imply metaphysical status and its really easy for communicators to get off in the weeds when straying too far from whats observable, which you do not do.

[@MonkeyK1ng369]

I know your vid is a yr old, but it's an awesome explanation and your passion for science is refreshing.

[@DJ_Force]

What I find interesting is how many different ways you can interpret Relativity and get the same outcome. You could also show that as velocity increases, length contracts along the direction of motion. As you accelerate, the apparent length shrinks so that the muon lives the same time, but the distance to Earth is shorter. Also, since length contractions is exponential, the faster you go, the more contracted the increase in distance the new velocity delivers. At c, the length is 0 so any increases in speed adds 0 more distance per time.

[@briandbeaudin9166]

Maybe I'm looking at it differently, but lengths (distances) obviously don't change, whereas the time changes can easily be measured. I see what you're getting at, the apparent distance is shorter because your speed is greater, so it takes less time to get there. That, however, is not what is actually happening. Time is the variable, not distance.

[@DJ_Force]

@@briandbeaudin9166 You say "apparent" distance, implying there is a universal distance all can agree upon. However, in Relativity, the only things all observers can agree upon are the speed of light and cause/effect. Distance and time are observer dependent.

[@johnmunton-G7SSE]

Agree with DJ_Force regarding distance & length being dependant on observer reference frame. Look-up "the ladder in the barn paradox" @@briandbeaudin9166

[@sattkrit_pathak]

the wavelength contract i guess ? red and blue shift. i might be wrong

[@Ivotas]

Unbelievable! You use so many physical rules, which actually go way over my head and manage to create an explenation out of it that intuitively makes me comprehend the exact point you are making. Props to use sir. Explaining complex subjects in a way that a laymen like me can understand it is a very special skill.