Sometimes The Shortest Distance Between Two Points is NOT a Straight Line: GEODESICS by Parth G

What happens when the shortest distance between two points is NOT a straight line, and exactly what is a geodesic?
Hey everyone, in this video we'll be looking at how the surface we happen to be studying impacts the definition of the "shortest" distance between two points on that surface. A geodesic is exactly that, the shortest distance on a specific surface.
On a flat surface like a piece of paper or a computer screen, the shortest distance is always a straight line. This can be proved rigorously using calculus of variations, but is also quite intuitive. For example, we can try to imagine any path that isn't a straight line between two points, and then laying a piece of string along it. The string can then be straightened and compared to the straight line path - and the not-straight path will always be longer. This also applies in 3D space, assuming the space is "flat", or "Euclidean" as it's known.
However, if we now consider two points on the surface of a sphere, then the shortest distance between them (if we are restricted to move along the surface) is a curve. And yet we can imagine digging into the surface along a straight line to take an even shorter path. But this only makes sense if we consider a 2D sphere "embedded" in 3D space.
In the study of relativity, embedding is just a useful visualization tool - but it doesn't necessarily refer to anything physical. Using our sphere example, it's a 2D surface that NEED NOT be embedded in 3D space, and so it makes no physical sense to dig into the sphere as we only have access to the two dimensions of the surface.
Similarly, our universe can be described by 4D spacetime in relativity. And it need not be embedded in anything 5D. So when spacetime itself is curved, the concept of a straight line does not have any physical meaning. Two points in this curved spacetime may have a curved geodesic between them.
It's important to note that light travels along these geodesics, which is why it is important that we study them. And it's also worth nothing that spacetime curvature is caused by mass or energy found within the spacetime, as explained by Einstein's Field Equations.
So the point is that the shortest distance between two points need not be a straight line, especially if the surface that the points are on is curved in some way. And the shortest distance for a given surface is known as a geodesic.
Many of you have asked about the stuff I use to make my videos, so I'm posting some affiliate links here! I make a small commission if you make a purchase through these links.
General Relativity Textbook: amzn.to/3ytaKwt
A Quantum Physics Book I Enjoy: amzn.to/3sxLlgL
My camera (Canon EOS M50): amzn.to/3lgq8FZ
My Lens (Canon EF-M 22mm): amzn.to/3qMBvqD
Microphone and Stand (Fifine): amzn.to/2OwyWvt
Thanks so much for watching - please do check out my socials here:
Instagram - @parthvlogs
Second (Music) Channel - Parth G's Shenanigans
Patreon - patreon.com/parthg
Merch - parth-gs-merch...

[@BBonBon]

7:20 "Even Wikipedia is a useful resource" Don't let my teachers see this 😂😂😂

[@markokriegel5787]

In general research should always start simple and Wiki for real is a good starting point. Not more but not less :)

[@dsdy1205]

Just cite what Wikipedia cites and your teachers will love you

[@cl0p38]

@@dsdy1205 it's like that meme of the guy blocking a door: Me: uses wikipedia Teachers: "No" Me: uses the sources wikipedia used Teachers: "Yes"

[@markokriegel5787]

@Komaru Naegi thats not really true. Most scientific articles are supervised regularly. But eitherway as a starting point it is quite ok, as u get an overview and will see possible mistakes when checking the citations in the wiki article

[@markokriegel5787]

@Komaru Naegi I really hope no university would except that :D I wouldn't use it as a source, just as a startibg point for the research. Then u get a good overview and conrinue with the citations given there. I mean when u dont have a clue about the topic at all. Otherwise start with a review article, but therefore u should already know basic concepts of the topic.

[@valentindion5573]

A French humorist (early 20th century), Pierre Dac, once said: "The shortest way of a point to another is the straight line, provided that they are well one facing the other. "

[@FactTalkOfficial]

Amazing video! Thanks for sharing! Can you make a video on Dark matter and dark energy?

[@paulmontgomery3993]

Given wo points in space then an observer can always adjust his view to where the points are aligned, i.e., the points appear to be on top of each other, so no distance between them!(from his view), so although it is true that the shortest distance between two points is depicted(measured) by a straight line, you can actually go one step further and state that the shortest straightline is zero!

[@prathamshah2058]

Shortest distance cannot always be the displacement practically

[@BadBoy-ls5vn]

Please parth reply....I really injoy ur content thanks so much....u said that there are vids on youtube that can go through General relativity can u please tell us the name of the channels if that's okay....and I'm a self taught peraon i didn't go to school...do u think i can make it?

[@jacobburgesson-dove8640]

could you make a video on step potential?

[@bmw123ck]

Curved parth, straight parth... I'd take them all!

[@itspi7184]

I 'm from Bangladesh .. I like u videos very much bro....

[@itspi7184]

@@abcxyz9034 ok good

[@joshuazeidner8419]

just look at an international flight path on a world map that's been projected onto a flat surface. The path is curved for the same reason that geodesics are curved.

[@alext5497]

Obligatory event horizon refrence

[@tszchunlau223]

Geodesics are not necessarily the shortest distance of a curved surface, but the "straightest" line on that surface.

[@livedandletdie]

I mean, the shortest distance between point A and point B is always a straight line... Even in Non-Euclidean Space... However, if space itself is twisted, it's still a straight line, it's just a straight line through not so straight space. After all, if space is wavy or whatever, then the straight line's shadow in 2 dimensional Euclidean space is the waviness of the space itself. So there are still no instances where the Shortest distance between A and B isn't a straight line. Oh and a geodesic is a straight line, through curved space.

[@decadent.]

You are smarter than this guy :) - To believe in relativity despite all the flaws shows the guy is a liar or a dumbass.

[@Vox24]

I doubt the shortest distance between ANY two points on a sphere are part of a great circle. For instance, take two points both 60 degrees into the north hemisphere and lets say 10 km apart. The shortest arch between them would be one that is parallel to the equator and does not share the center of its circle with the center of Earth.

[@Potti314]

I thought the same but it's true that the shortest path is a great circle. Do your research on wikipedia.

[@Vox24]

@@Potti314 yap, that's right, it took me some time to picture it in my mind but now I think I understand :)

[@DGaryGrady]

Minor quibble: At about 2:08 I think it would be better to say "circumference" rather than "diameter." That is, the length of a great circle on a sphere is the circumference of the sphere.

[@ParthGChannel]

Whoops! Totally missed that, you're absolutely right!

[@aryanyadav9322]

@@ParthGChannel hello

[@danielbaech4272]

I hate to be that guy, but another minor quibble: when visualizing warped space, space warps away from the mass rather than toward the mass.

[@trudellepierre9610]

@@ParthGChannel No Mistake my friend by describing With Great Circle That open way to different solution depending on viewer I'm a navigator and help me lot lolll. Really hope to see you soon LIVE 3D in relief and natural size like you see you soon

[@akhileshkumar-mu8gb]

Your explanation to difficult concepts is very encouraging for further exploration...keep it up!

[@xiaoshen194]

I learnt this in a Doraemon movie👍

[@aadarsh_1303x]

which one

[@xiaoshen194]

@@aadarsh_1303x I don't remember clearly, there are so many of them!! But he subtly explains the working of anywhere door👍

[@natansandle9284]

The shortest path on the surface of the sphere is "kind of" a straight line. It appears straight to someone living on that surface. If the surface isn't embedded in 3d space, it is as straight as a line can get.

[@spacejunky4380]

yeah, take a straight line on a road trip from texas to boston. Then, zoom far, far away and all of sudden that "straight line" becomes curved because you are able to see the line curving on the surface that you couldn't see when you were close to it. Now, picture space itself as flat. Or at least space around your room, then think of that "space" or everything occupying that area being warped by a larger object near it. I'm not sure how intuitively break down this idea into the metaphor. I guess, "space" isn't such a simple idea.

[@markhalpin4377]

There are two Geodesic Arcs between any two points on the surface of a sphere , equidistant in length and, a mirror image of each other. Unless, they are 180 Degrees apart (Antipodes)(Poles) which would then be a great circle route ....!The old stretching string between two points on a sphere trick ....the arcs formed would work for two paths between the same two set of points .

[@johnyfausman959]

Can I study general relativity using high school calculus xD? I have got two months before uni begins.

[@suanlsrm6488]

I would love to get notified on this as well if anyone does reply

[@AJD...]

2:05 CIRCUMFERENCE. NOT DIAMETER. BUT ALL IN ALL, GOOD VIDEO. SORRY I'LL STOP shouting now.

[@deepanshuchouhan7110]

Hello bhaiya , I always wanted to ask that can you please tell me the way to become an astrophysicist I have dreamt of it since my childhood but never got the mentor to tell the path. Also your videos are a lot fun and physics.

[@mairisberzins8677]

Do well in school. Get into a uni that provides physics course or astrophysics specifically. If you choose the normal physics degree, depending on the uni you are attending either you can specialize astrophysics in your last year or go on to do astrophysics in masters or PhD.

[@DGaryGrady]

There are various ways of being an astrophysicist. The most obvious is to get a PhD in the field, but that doesn't necessarily mean you would work as an astrophysicist. There are a remarkable number of people with physics backgrounds who wind up with jobs on high finance. (I used to know a cluster of them in London. In practice people doing astrophysics sometimes start out in some other branch of theoretical physics, such as nuclear chemistry (because that's what stars do for a living). The term "astrophysics" is itself quite broad. Everything from classical celestial mechanics to cosmology to particle physics to planetology can be called astrophysics. Brian May of the rock group Queen got his PhD based on research on dust particles in the plane of ecliptic in our solar system and I've heard that referred to as astrophysics. In terms of practical advice, it depends on your circumstances. Obviously you need to learn as much physics as you can. The easiest way to do that, and to proceed on to getting a PhD, is through the usual process of undergraduate and post-graduate education, learning as much and as broadly as possible. I used to date a physicist until she came to her senses, and she told me that in her final oral exam before being awarded her PhD in experimental particle physics, the first question she had to answer was the available chemical energy from burning a molecule of gasoline. (I assume she could pick which specific molecule.) If for some reason you can't follow the usual well-trod path you can learn on your own. KZbin is positively infested with videos of university courses in physics and you can order new or used textbooks on line. Unfortunately math in particular is hard to learn without someone to ask questions of, preferably in person. So you at least need friends in the field. Basically, you probably need to live somewhere near a university even if you're not a student there. If you get good at physics and you develop some contacts you could very well work your way into physics from the side. it doesn't happen often, but that doesn't mean it never happens.

[@deepanshuchouhan7110]

@@mairisberzins8677 thank you

[@deepanshuchouhan7110]

@@DGaryGrady thank you too for helping me.

[@Draginx]

I just started studying general relativity because i am very passionate about physics, and i was having trouble comprehending geodesics and tensors, and here you are!!! I love your channel! Please make a video about tensors used in relativity please! That would be great

[@imaginer04]

Loves your passion for physics.To learn tensors and Genaral Relativity you can checkout "Eigenchris " Channel.

[@Draginx]

@@imaginer04 thanks!

[@Ultiminati]

I saw that Andrew Dotson made some videos about those

[@imaginer04]

@@Ultiminati Yep,he is awesome.

[@gouranggehlot4896]

Watch Ashok Sen general relativity: Best few flaws: Unclear what is written on greenboard Accent may be trouble for you Cons Best content He can even make a dog learn physics.

[@mihicakhare242]

Calculus of variation..... Here we go....just a suggestion, you can tell why a rope suspended from 2 points forms a parabola and exactly why a Catenary Curve minimizes the potential energy

[@mbpl10]

A rope suspended from two points doesn't form a parabola. It forms a Catenary Curve (the graph of hyperbolic cosine). Check out this video for explanation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/e3mud5WiaLuqg9E

[@ERROR204.]

Congratulations on the award Parth! Linking to the the textbook for a more complete explanation was a nice touch. These videos keep getting better and better. You truly are a G Parth

[@diconicabastion5790]

Miss use of terminology. The shortest distance is always the strait line. The shortest path you can travel may not be a strait line. Regardless of that fact the shortest distance is still the strait line. Thus the title of this video is bunk and nothing more than the miss use of terms. You could have simply jumped to saying the shortest "path" not "Distance" between to points could be an arch. Hell it might not even be an arch depending on the surface deformation or contour. You could have to make multiple turns falls and rises. It's also not the only miss use of terms in this video. What possessed you to make a video on a topic nearly everyone past 5th grade already understands. I'm going to chalk this video up to you have an off day or something most your videos appear to be better. Keep up the good work.

[@rc4828]

Which class you studying?

[@manavmnair6975]

Hey Parth! I've been watching your videos regularly for a long time. Your easily explained concepts help me understand physics better. I wish that you would make more concept based videos(like time dilation, neutrino oscillation or the twin paradox) along with the equations made easy videos... You have our support

[@tulaib4393]

This is a bit misleading. It still is a straight line. It’s just that a straight line on a sphere is depicted as a curved line on a 2D plane, and vice versa

[@kumarinidhi4000]

Hey parth, please make a video on holographic theory

[@mairisberzins8677]

Ah yes... the paradox of wikipedia. The more complex the subject, the more likely is it to be false. Because writing something like fake page of relativity in Wikipedia requires at least basic knowledge of relativity to even sound plausible. Therefore such inaccuracies are easier to spot and correct.

[@vaibhavcm7503]

Thought u might speak about brachistochrone problem......

[@musicboyaryan2773]

Are you a Indian but you got a citizenship of UK

[@ktvx.94]

Missed opportunity for "this is a hard idea to *warp* your head around" lmao

[@drenz1523]

Lol

[@SquidBobCircleJeans]

2:09 it's actually the circumference?!

[@nilesh3646]

Fortunately that sometimes is out of syllabus

[@PhysicsforCause]

Hi bro Please share ur linked in profile

[@kidnarutojapan5730]

I love ❤ your videos

[@thevegg3275]

Is there an easier way to find a geodesic on a sphere? Place two points anywhere on a sphere. Using these any-two points you can define a great circle. Useing this great circle, define a cross-section. Viewing this cross-section you will see the two points between which you can trace a curve (following the outer edge of the sphere). And using the length of a curve formula you will determine the shortest distance and straightest path between these two points. No need for a metric tensor or Christoffel symbols. Thoughts?

[@YT_Admin_]

Brachistochrone Vsauce

[@arpitabanerjee4875]

Why time is scalar quantity

[@Dent42]

I didn’t believe in nominative determinism until I watched a Brit named “Parth” describing paths for 8 minutes. - some bloke whose name starts with “math” and who watches YT videos explaining geodesics

[@bharathrango6786]

Do a video on space-geometry

[@markhalpin4377]

There are two Geodesic Arcs between any two points on the surface of a sphere , equidistant in length and, a mirror image of each other. Unless, they are 180 Degrees apart (Antipodes)(Poles) which would then be a great circle route ....!The old stretching string between two points on a sphere trick ....the arcs formed would work for two paths between the same two set of points .

[@slipstream311]

Just think more carefully for a moment.The shortest distance between two points will ALWAYS be a straight line. It's the law; the same way 1 plus 2 equals 3, and no amount of bullshit or wishful thinking will ever change that fact. Take a look around, because reality isn't what you think it is. Sometimes, the simplest explanation for how things work, really is the right one. Geodesy is an attempt to reconcile a different fact, that namely because it would entail the expenditure of vastly more significant amounts of energy to travel in a straight line between two points far enough away from each other on the surface of a sphere, than it would to move along the curved arc length of the portion of the sphere's total diameter represented by the distance between them, still does not mean that distance is ever shorter along the curve. Rather, the energy expenditure is so much the less, because it's magnitudes easier to walk on a slightly curved and therefore longer path through air than it is to drill through solid rock and thereby take the marginally more direct route, but the one with huge energy costs associated with it due to the impenetrability and resistance of solid rock to movement through it, versus the relative conductance and minimal resistance of air to motion by way of direct comparison.

[@extantsanity]

I hate these kinds of click-baity descriptions of science. But I get it. The psychology of advertising to humans, and all. If one were to examine the actual arguments, though, they're just pedantic quibbles about the lack of verbal qualifiers in the original statement, without any new, actionable insights provided. It still holds true that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, as long as the "straight" line is considered relative to the space it exists in. That is, if you removed the curvature of space-time, you'd still end up with a straight line, as originally described. It's not like you're playing with imaginary numbers to discover something new about how objects move in space. As soon as you learn about space-time curvature, the appropriate approach to short-distance discovery is a natural given. This is entirely different, for example, than Fermilab's video on why e=/=mc^2, where the explanation is that e=mc^2 only holds true for objects at rest because momentum (p) is zero, masking the importance of other terms in the equation. In that case, the video isn't click-baity because new insights are gained about the relevance of other terms that are regularly significant (for one, objects are always moving in space relative to something else; for two, knowing about the caveat informs you about when you can simplify your math). So, that video is about how the common equation that people memorize is actually just a special case, and a more accurate equation should be known (one that doesn't intuitively follow from the original premise).

[@JohnnyTokens1]

There is no such thing as a straight line on a sphere. From point A to point b unless it stays above the surface and does not stay at the same altitude which anyone flying always will start on the ground go up in the air Arc around the so called "globe" and come back down on the ground. Meaning it's irrelevant and idiotic to talk about a straight line and not compare apples to apples... Instead of comparing apples to non-existent and not even a logical concept

[@philoso377]

Nice video and presentation. The shortest distance between two pints (in 3D space) is a straight line. The shortest distance between two point on a SOLID sphere is the core of the great circle.

[@manta567]

Nice, I learned something. On second thought though this video has quite some problems I would say. It's nonsensical to say the shortest distance between 2 points is not a straight line when straight lines are simply not allowed/non-existing. It is rather the opposite. The shortest distance between two points would always be a "straight line" with geodesics being the generalization of straight lines.

[@pillutla32]

Urm, I don't know what it is, but hey, Parth? Have you changed something in the way you record audio? I didn't appreciate the audio as much as the previous videos. I don't mean to be rude. Im sorry

[@jayfordbersamin6042]

Congratulations!!

[@sunayvatansever5905]

Please when explaining something, explain it fully. In 2d surfaces, shortest distance is a strait line, in 3d surfaces is not. Specify the context of your statement first.

[@jamesraymond1158]

I don't understand the concept of two events. They occur at times t1 and t2. But what clock is used to define t1 and t2?

[@Т1000-м1и]

2 days ago, wow!

[@Dev-fv8io]

I don't saw bad info or time waste. But sorry, I can't understand anything...😭😭

[@MAULIK9654]

Hey Parth, Can I consult you for General relativity and stuff !! Hope you listen to this coment!

[@ramanujraman_]

Is it only me or anyone else can feel his voice bit odd?

[@gajendrakumar8672]

Only you, I guess.

[@anilsharma-ev2my]

Shortest run possible not the path Parth 😀😀😃😃😃😃👽👽😃😃😃😃😃😃😃

[@variousvideos5248]

valo

[@il_vero_saspacifico6141]

I haven't understood the grand circle part: It there were 2 point on tha same parallel, but not at the eqautor, the shortest path wouldn't be a piece of circle with the radius of the sphere

[@thecoloroctet1365]

It would still be a great sphere; the geodesic wouldn’t be along the parallel but along some other arc length between the two points. Try this out if you have a globe lying around, it’s pretty cool

[@DGaryGrady]

I think you're assuming that the shortest distance between two points on the same parallel (i.e., the same circle of constant latitude) would be along the parallel. That might seem intuitively reasonably, but it isn't true. This is why a flight between two cities of the same latitude curves toward the north or south pole. In fact, consider traveling from London to a place the same distance north of the equator and on the 180th meridian, If you look at a globe it's obvious that the most direct flight would cross the North Pole.

[@joeeeee8738]

For anyone wanting to know the math behind, follow EigenChris

[@anilsharma-ev2my]

G deshon key are paar ka hisab hai but definitely decimated geodesic hai Baki sarey desh dasi hai Bharat key Sabka guru hai Bharat

[@jorgeyanez5672]

Shortest distance between two point is to fold the plane and connect the two point 😊

[@rohanshah7960]

Can you please continue this and start a GR playlist?

[@moerkx1304]

I think the title is a bit click-baity, let me explain: I'm an undergaduate studying maths, I've had a Topology and Geometry class so I'm not coming from nowhere and I definitely don't want to be rude or discredit this great _introductory_ video, I even took my notes I made for the exam to fact check myself. Please correct me if I'm wrong about anything in a follow-up comment. 1. The discussion if it's a stright line or not: "Sometimes The Shortest Distance Between Two Points is NOT a Straight Line", well it depends on how you look at the path that is the shortest path. Like it was shown in the viedo the shortest path on a sphere is along a great circle, but if you're on the sphere and walking from point A to B on a great circle/geodesic, than you perceive the path as a straight line, since you never turn left or right (the path has a curvature of 0). -> So the question becomes who's perspective should we value more and thus determine, if it's a straight line or not, someone walking along the geodesic or some obeserver watching them? But also when we look down onto the sphere such that the geodesic from A to B is exactly between us and the centre of the sphere, the geodesic and the great circle as a whole looks just like a straight line. But this also holds if we walk/travel through curved space-time since the gravity will affect us too, not just the path we take. So if we are near a black hole and follow a geodesic, from our point of view we follow a straight line, since we never turn left or right, not even in the slighest. 2. Some comments on the visualization of curved space-time: The visuals shown starting at 6:29 are somewhat missleading. I know that this is a typical visualization of curved space-time. However, how it is shown the black hole would actually repel matter instead of attract matter since space-time is curving away from to black hole and not towards it. Here's a link of how I imagine curved space-time and that actually makes sense when we think about how gravity would act: www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/02/16/ask-ethan-how-can-we-measure-the-curvature-of-gravity/?sh=7521bdab134f 3. A remark about a certain phrase: "The shortest distance between two points is a straight line." The shortest distance between two points is not a straight line, since distance is a number. The shortest distance between two points is the length of the geodesic which connects the two points. I state this nit-picky looking argument, since it is very crucial to be precise when talking about complex topics and concepts, to audiences who are not that familiar with the subject. I hear you say "Shut up, we can understand what he is trying to say.", you might still _understand this particular sentence_ but if the sentence or the concepts behind the statement were more complex, you would not _understand_ that he phrased it poorly or even wrong since you might not be familiar with the concepts discussed. If anyone disagrees with anything I've stated, feel free to leave a comment explaining what I got wrong and maybe some source, that you would suggest to dig deeper into this subject.

[@rgb2296]

Nice ,I hope parth will reply to your comment.

[@RahilKhan-nx5iv]

Okay before watching this video I'mma have to say that is wrong. There's no way shortest distance isn't a straight line. Period. Edit: I'm stupid.

[@ParthGChannel]

No, you're not stupid at all! You're technically correct, but when spacetime itself starts to warp we have to be very careful with terminology :)

[@aniketsengupta9137]

Well I've learnt that shortest distance between 2 points in a plane is 0 when you fold the plane in such way that the 2 points coincide each other.

[@RafaelLambino]

you explained this very well!

[@peterkovinski8476]

Calling circumference as a diameter...🤣😂

[@sudhanshumaurya2860]

Now, I have trust issues with my daily life

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

Good info 👍

[@bd1487]

Was waiting for a video on higher dimensional geodesic for a long time! Thanks Parth! Love your vids! 🤩

[@sharmilasharma3227]

Why your voice change from low to deep

[@xtps1]

it is always a straight line, but what straight is depends on the dimension you are looking at

[@poojakashyap02]

A question sir, what is ur birth place

[@sujalsalgarkar360]

How much mathematical knowledge should one require in order to learn general relativity (beyond basic calculus)??

[@samirparajuli7433]

does ,the final statement meant that ''curved spacetime causes matter to curve''?

[@TheLethalDomain]

Matter causes space to curve, but that curvature of space tells matter how to move and flux about its density. The matter itself holds it's own intrinsic property and itself gains it shape via the stronger forces at the scale of individual atoms and below, that being electromagnetism and the strong+weak nuclear forces.

[@lawliet2263]

Someone tell me the physics behind his hairstyle

[@ikagura]

So in a non-euclidian environment.

[@rshkr92]

Great circle track. Aviation 101.

[@Villaboy78]

That's no sphere , it's a space station....

[@mrigankdayal5887]

What if you take a small Element of your curved path ,it would be a straight line

[@markhalpin4377]

There are two Geodesic Arcs between any two points on the surface of a sphere , equidistant in length and, a mirror image of each other. Unless, they are 180 Degrees apart (Antipodes)(Poles) which would then be a great circle route ....!The old stretching string between two points on a sphere trick ....the arcs formed would work for two paths between the same two set of points .

[@mohitjoc25]

Who dislikes the study vedio....😥

[@synchro-dentally1965]

Thank you! Could you make an explainer on geodesic vs geodetic?

[@markhalpin4377]

There are two Geodesic Arcs between any two points on the surface of a sphere , equidistant in length and, a mirror image of each other. Unless, they are 180 Degrees apart (Antipodes)(Poles) which would then be a great circle route ....!The old stretching string between two points on a sphere trick ....the arcs formed would work for two paths between the same two set of points .

[@badboy635]

This is a common concept bro .....

[@priyansu7346]

R U INDIAN VRO U LIVE IN FOREIGN ?

[@sudandevkota7268]

wow! what a explanation.

[@samarthchaplot2998]

I have a doubt in the very concept of electric field. we have defined that field is produced by a charged particle or body. But i often ponder that just like space-time fabric ,which bends in presence of a massive body, just similar to that what if there is some kind of different fabric which bends in presence of charged particles or charged bodies and is not affected by mass. This would mean that charges are not producing fields instead they are bending that other kind of fabric. Then wouldn't this completely change the way we study about electric fields ? Hoping for a positive and quick response thank you.

[@hieudang1789]

don't know if you found the answer to this yet. if you haven't then what you describe is the kaluza klein theory, which is an attempt to unify gravitation and electromagnetism. but it require five dimensions, a fifth spatial dimension to work. It is one of the many attempts to build a theory of everything, in which every force/interaction are unified. String theory takes this to an extreme by saying that there might be 11 dimensions or even more

[@samarthchaplot2998]

@@hieudang1789 appreciate your insightful response

[@jiyadubey2750]

Sir please a video on electromagnetic induction

[@aesthete_xo]

you're the best

[@allsfacilitated2630]

Wonderful Explanation!

[@chills2447]

*Sees the title Heresy!

[@shivanigoel7932]

You are from india

[@hinth_the_blessings.]

You are such a good guy.Very good explanation.Love from Bangladesh

[@shekharbhaskar3431]

I just love your accent😍 and how you beautifully explained the most complex topic👍

[@ayushagrawal8198]

congrats on the silver play button!!

[@thejuniorastrophysicist]

Amazing! I suppose this is why Racing Paths are always curved... Is it so?

[@eldersprig]

slalom

[@annisaamalia3981]

I found your channel yesterday, and has no doubt to subscribe it. By the way, it would be good if you share the video making process you did. I'm so curious to make one ☺️

[@parthranjan5606]

very nice name

[@spacejunky4380]

It's cool how a flat object on a curved space becomes curved itself. You don't imagine space being anything more than flat. My desk, the floor, my walls, are all based on something we assume is flat to us. But, when something massive enough is around what is first considered flat becomes rounded. Weird, fun concept. I can't wait to study this more.

[@swadhinrout5650]

Okay just a question what is happening in this channel? I mean how can someone be so good man😂😂😂 damn bro I love it. Also a physics undergrad here and somehow your videos makes me fall for physics even more. Lol feels like the next Richard Feynman (the way he explained difficult concepts).