What is Gravity? The Illusion of Force by a Curved Dimension

[@jonbaker3728]

I'm high enough to understand this and yet too high to remember it tomorrow. Great video dude.

[@valentinlishkov9540]

Massive bodies do not distort space. The general theory of relativity only obscures the real situation. From the variational principles and the solution of the problem for brachystochron we know that the trajectory of motion of a material point between two extreme positions at different heights and not lying on one line is the cycloid, ie. is not a straight line. Under the same conditions, the light is located next to massive objects. Ie it does not distort space, but manifests a variational principle.

[@parrogakaparadise9477]

@@valentinlishkov9540 the perfect explanation for those of us who get high

[@pantheroleoleo536]

😂😁

[@gamervoyoger]

i get you, i used to do the same thing, get high and watch science videos and movies, then i would have these massively genius revelations.. and every time i forgot them, so the next day i would be like "oh wow what was that genius revelation i had yesterday?!?!" and reality probably just some dumb shit ;D ahh i miss the simpler times when i couldnt remember my finest moments or my worst and could always just assume i would be a rich scientist if only i could remember :)

[@D3NM0NT3UR]

@@gamervoyoger Yea... Thats why 👀

[@GamingProdogy13]

If we struggle to understand this now with visuals and precise details, just imagine the kind of genius that Einstein had to be to CREATE this theory (theory of relativity) before any one else in the world even thought about it… makes you truly appreciate how smart this guy was..

[@Thrna_1]

David Hilbert was a secondary collaborator on the project and was the adept mathmatician of the two. It was more that he was inspired by Einstein as they were working together, so you are mostly correct.

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@Thrna_1 UNDERSTANDING TIME (AND TIME DILATION) PURSUANT TO THE BALANCED, THEORETICAL, AND CLEAR MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT E=MC2 IS F=MA (OF NECESSITY): Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma IN BALANCE !!! This explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 (from Einstein's field equations). Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY IS proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. So, it makes perfect sense that the planets will move away from WHAT IS THE SUN very, very, very SLIGHTLY. Carefully consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! (Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.) E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. (Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma IN BALANCE.) Carefully consider what is the speed of light (c). A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS clearly F=ma ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !!! Indeed, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground AND what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !!! The sky is BLUE, AND THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE. THE EARTH is a BALANCED MIDDLE DISTANCE form in relation to the speed of light (c) AND what is THE SUN (AS what is a linked AND BALANCED opposite) pursuant to the universal (and CLEAR) fact that E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. E=MC2 IS clearly proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. Carefully consider what is THE EARTH/ground !!! Great. "Mass"/ENERGY involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Accordingly, objects (AND WHAT IS the falling MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity is clearly ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma IN BALANCE !!! It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense, AS BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=MC2 is clearly F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE !!! (Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental.) I have mathematically unified physics/physical experience, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE !!! GREAT !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity !!! By Frank DiMeglio

[@Thrna_1]

@@frankdimeglio8216 i don't know im a little winded tbh i'll take a look tomorrow.......

[@karthikkr7561]

It wasn't entirely Einstein lol. I love how people were blindpilled like such.

[@iu2]

(Theory of relativity) You mean the theory of general relativity.

[@zyadmohamed5360]

The problem of Time Travel fantasies is the characters moves in time dimension only not space so supposedly when you go back in time the earth have to be in a completely different location and they are basically ejected into outer space

[@charlesg7926]

That’s deep AF, and true

[@charlesg7926]

So basically the only way you could travel back in time would be a space ship/satellite, so that you can catch up with the earth on its next revolution around the sun. And you’d have to pretty much only travel in increments of 1 year

[@zyadmohamed5360]

@@charlesg7926 even that wouldn't be enough considering that earth rotates the sun and the sun rotates around the center of galaxy and the galaxy as a whole moves around you would have to make a hell alot of calculations to account for all of that making big jumps through time more impossible than they are

[@antaresmc4407]

@@zyadmohamed5360 that's not true tho, not necessarily anyway. You are just choosing a different reference frame, and there's no preferred one, you just have to transform them correctly. If you focus from your POV, nothing changes, and enerything spins around you technically, if you focus from the sun, you have to add that velocity to yourself to represent the same physical reality from the different frame. For our time travellers if they'd appear somewhere else or not, it really depends on how the time travel works, as it's magic, it's up to whoever is making it up I guess, but it can be made to work similar enough to regular continuous movement, and in fact it's the easiest coherent way to do it if you follow physical laws, except for the handwave obviously.

[@kumarsukrit6962]

Holy sh*t! Never thought of that dude!

[@kellismith1993]

High school physics teacher here- this is the best gravity video on KZbin

[@creativesource3514]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/raPamHygd7qMjMU

[@marvfj6451]

This is sure different than how I learned gravity in high school in the mid-70s!

[@vyn8594]

In my school the teacher simply said mass attracts mass. Period. But it doesnt at all. Mass affects the blanket its on and thus affects the trajectory of nearby mass.

[@Bluebirdinhell]

@@vyn8594 It's convenient to teach the (pretty accurate) Newtonian method of gravity before trying to explain to students topics of differential geometry/topology. The methods learned when working with Newton's law of gravity (mass attracts mass, as you say) can be applied in the more advanced explanations of gravity (such as Einstein's field eqn's) once a student is more equipped to do so. I am not surprised at all your teacher said that. Further, If it is high school, I would not be surprised if the teacher doesn't even fully understand the mathematics of this explanation for gravity.

[@richardsaid973]

@@Bluebirdinhell they shouldn't. That's because you are introduced to this picture of gravity (aka einstien's field equations) in your last year bachelor but delve into its completeness by the end of your masters degree. Then by your phd you are essentially a master and have complete understanding of einstiens general relativity even enough to teach it to someone else (which is what researching physicists do)

[@huraibyel-huraiby7462]

I have watched so many videos on gravity and this is the ONLY video I have seen that explains gravitational attraction. To show a rubber sheet with heavy spheres was never enough. They never explained why the lighter sphere should move down a gravity well rather than just stay still or even rest half way ‘down’ the gravity well. Most videos rely on your familiarity with gravity to ‘expect’ the lighter ball to roll down the gravity well. They use your familiarity with the effects of gravity to explain gravity. That’s a cyclic reference. It never helped. Like saying the definition of a ‘cube’ is a ‘cube’. This video explains that everything in the universe is ALWAYS moving. That was always missed out in other explanations of gravity. Ever-moving masses create curvature in spacetime and converge into each others paths and move on together.

[@maheshwarannarayanan]

Could you enlighten me on why they converge....I didn't get the part exactly....cuz they are parallel and moving in space time with a curvature and why do they converge even if they have curvatures around them...doesn't this also rely on the classical notion of gravity.

[@davisdupreez5397]

You nailed it exactly. I never realised before how much the trampoline analogy depended on my initial assumption about gravity as a force!

[@elcidgaming]

Even Verit had difficulty explaining what this guy was able to. he might be a genious

[@elcidgaming]

@Enter the Bragn’ Funny thats how jew scholars who use eastern philosphies on how they intepret the Torah and the scriptures describe God as "its a sin to give attributes to God". Like Spacetime; Maybe they were unto something.

[@insertaverygenericnamehere]

I can recommend this video explanation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oJ23h3yDhM6raas

[@lolbroek1295]

3:21 I literally paused the video I finally after years I understand how the speed of light and spacetime and the passing of time are connected I never thought of it like more speed must equal slower time because of C honestly this channel should become one of the all-time greats. I'm so thankful for you letting me understand C honestly thank you.

[@MrMoose1347]

So can you articulate back to me how and why it’s relative?

[@ahsanafzal3558]

Im in a the 5th dimension called Confusion

[@mauriciopeterlevitz8902]

I am so confused , that i did not even understood, what needs to be understand. I guess I Will Go back to my popcorn

[@Auntie-wow]

@@mauriciopeterlevitz8902 it is alright. it is a hard grasp to concept at first. but just keep thinking about it and learning it.

[@amitrao3346]

its fine... but just don't blow up something 😅

[@flymastera8199]

Mauricio Peterlevitz , you can’t get it because it’s baloney. Time is not a dimension. The 5th Dimension is a musical group. I’ve working in 3D space for 50 years, and time. They are not related.

[@ahsanafzal3558]

Im in the sexth dimension. Get it

[@RAHISTILLL]

7:33 blew my mind. I understood that if we move in curved spacetime, we end up colliding (but we only will collide IF we are moving).. So I was so confused as to why do things move on their own accord towards each other (because curved spacetime doesn't explain how can motion start!)... The answer was because everything is already in motion and when matter is already in motion and passes through curved spacetime, it collides which we recognise as result of gravity. I am so relieved to finally find this answer. Thank you! Love from India!

[@Unpopular_0pinion]

The science asylum channel has a cool explanation of gravity too

[@RAHISTILLL]

@@Unpopular_0pinion as much as i love that dude.. the squirrel spinning and falling to ground animation isnt actually accurate.. The best video out there (along with this one) is by "idea list" called "how time dilation causes gravity and how interia works" U need to go check it out

[@Unpopular_0pinion]

@@RAHISTILLL was just trying to be helpful

[@RAHISTILLL]

@@Unpopular_0pinion ohh yes of course mate.. i didn't mean to seem ungrateful.. just expressed my opinion on the video 😊

[@superduper9812]

Thats the eureka moment! Love it....hahahha

[@josephherron7671]

This is by far the best video about gravity ever produced anywhere, on any platform or any media throughout history. The visualization is simple, yet so effective. It finally makes sense to me why objects have a gravitation pull.

[@chrisbrown1241]

That's incredible. I always thought gravity was the weirdest thing to describe but you did it, effortlessly. Thank you.

[@DrZedDrZedDrZed]

It's still weird. Try to explain why mass/energy warps spacetime.

[@beanzthumbz]

@@DrZedDrZedDrZedI’m 2 years late here, but we don’t have to know WHY mass warps space time, just that it does. It’s the same as saying that we understand that 2 hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom make H2O, but WHY does H20 appear to us as water? Science can’t answer the why questions. I don’t think religion can either!

[@artooWieldsSaber]

The best explanation of space-time I've seen till date. I had my eureka moment! I was thinking, me and my best friend are in constant motion through space time. Why aren't we meeting? The answer, I finally got is that we will meet, at the centre of the earth, except that the physical earth is stopping us from meeting!

[@harishkumarbio]

I can't understand the topic, 4th dimension, space time

[@carloscastanheiro2933]

@Beyonder Bingo.

[@rosskstar]

@Beyonder Isn't space filled with dark energy? Might be the true source of the Cassimir Effect, no?

[@heywrandom8924]

Well if you and your friend was in an environment with no friction you would still meet because both of you deform Space-time as well. In Newtonian terms you both have mass so there is a force there it's just that the friction of your feet on the ground is stronger

[@vaibhavsane8829]

@Beyonder yeah right it behaves like a fabric

[@nomad4k]

This will drive any sane human being to insanity. Albert Einstein tackled this and a lot more without becoming an alcoholic or an addict. Kudos to his greatness and his contributions to our world.

[@Ken15643]

This is the clearest description Iof gravity I have ever seen. It is difficult to comprehend, but this is the closest I have ever come. Thank you.

[@kimjameslequigan6178]

“So we dont have to worry about the angular velocity of our balls moving.” 👁👄👁

[@badlandskid]

If you do it can cause your body to fold in half

[@jmadratz]

@@badlandskid If it feels good do it!

[@Brindlebrother]

And that's when Einstein created boxer briefs

[@TheOneAndOnlySame]

Best explanation so far. I've seen hundreds of videos about gravity, time dilation etc and none have allowed me to understand its nature like this one. Brilliant! Thanks!

[@mozartips]

If space folds like trampoline (as shown 8:24 ) then why gravity still can be felt at the bottom of that ball? If 2 objects (1 small and 1 big) traveling at the same speed then the small object most likely should collide at the opposite side (the side which is opposite to the direction it heading to) but it doesn't happen like that, why?

[@TheOneAndOnlySame]

@@mozartips The trampoline part is an oversimplification, it's really quite bad actually but it's more easy to read (and animate!) , but still, a terrible approximation because it induces a fundamental mistake.. Spacetime is actually pushed outwards in all directions by the massive object and thus retracts on itself and you can see it greatly illustrated at 4:44 . There's no "bottom of the ball". That's why the trampoline illustration is really bad ... because it uses an analogy of what happens on earth in our human experience when an heavy object is resting on a trampoline or on a outstretched piece of fabric and is pulled down by gravity : it doesnt help in getting rid of the instinctual/everyday (false) idea of gravity that everything always falls or weigh down.. it doesn't work like that in space. Nothing "falls down" or weigh down in space .There's no down, there's no "bottom" . Look at 4:44 again. There's nothing pulling the smaller object "down", the smaller object creates its own gravity "bubble" (well, it's not a bubble, look at 4:44 again ) and the bigger one its own too. Now this part you're pointing out is only an illustration and real celestial bodies could never behave like this, they would eventually always crash onto each other if they are not in an orbit

[@jehanr]

Wow, its like einstein has travelled through time to start a KZbin channel. Excellent explanation

[@BigIdeasMarketing]

So that explains, when I pray, and sit still for a while, I will feel my energy increase within my chest area, and I know it's an outside force entering my realm, and I feel more grounded. Like all my energy from my Brian's activity alows down, and comes within me .. and so Gods energy , entering my grid , weighs it down with His energy and I fall in. Eventually at death, will converge with God completely. As near death experiences vidoes show that Gid is there in full weight and power..

[@chenuka999]

jehan fucking R! was hannin bro? why you dont make no more videos maan?

[@jehanr]

@@chenuka999 hahahahah I have no time! I need to slow the rate of time!!

[@nimeshfernando4635]

Agree

[@MeeMee-gz5vp]

@Enter the Bragn’ well no wonder I can't figure it out. Been trying to understand this and it just doesn't make sense

[@chanceopinion]

This is a great explanation for gravity, never thought of it this way!

[@elkrutarth]

me too, feeling same.

[@lucidstate4664]

Don't.

[@kevinisawake]

No one knows what gravity is - so its rubbish. Gravity wells are overrated.

[@harishkumarbio]

So what is gravity

[@timhallas4275]

Koos van Vugt... this is a bad way of thinking of gravity.. gravity cannot effect space, unless space was matter.. it is not. it is the dimension that matter occupies.

[@Legxnd]

Wow this just changed my perspective on gravity

[@PatStarDJ]

This is the first time I’ve been able to fully conceptualize spacetime and a fourth dimension. Great job and thanks!

[@Auden.]

Me too bro

[@frankdimeglio8216]

@@Auden. The ultimate unification and understanding of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND INCLUDES opposites, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY manifest as F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Here's the proof. This also explains why objects (including WHAT IS THE FALLING MAN) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY F=MA ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that E=MC2 IS clearly and necessarily F=ma ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE. ON THE CLEAR, EXTENSIVE, SENSIBLE, BALANCED, THEORETICAL, AND UNIVERSAL PROOF THAT ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 IS clearly PROVEN TO BE F=MA ON BALANCE: Balanced inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Energy has/involves GRAVITY, AND ENERGY has/involves inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; AS gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma ON BALANCE. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Indeed, A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course); AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON BALANCE; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!! Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy ON BALANCE, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY proven to be F=ma IN BALANCE. TIME dilation ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, it makes perfect sense that THE PLANETS (including WHAT IS THE EARTH) will move away very, very, very slightly in relation to what is THE SUN !!! ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as this balances gravity AND inertia; AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. GREAT. I have explained the cosmological redshift AND the supergiant stars. Stellar clustering ALSO proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, AS E=MC2 is CLEARLY F=ma IN BALANCE !!! By Frank DiMeglio

[@Auden.]

@@frankdimeglio8216 i will save that thank you

[@MrMoose1347]

@@frankdimeglio8216that’s a lot of words to be wrong as fuck 😂

[@kamiziatk1519]

The fact that we are all always moving, I really needed that seed in my head for my eurika moment :) thx G

[@kamiziatk1519]

@ShonenAce could u tell if u were in a car travelling on a constant highway speed (cruise control) with no windows and no wind/tire friction?

[@kamiziatk1519]

@ShonenAce reread your own sentence now⬆️laws of physics have no boundary mate

[@NiToNi2002]

The point is that you are constantly moving through time. You can’t stop time. Time is the 4th dimension. Einstein taught us that space and time are intertwined, space time. And since mass warps space time, if you’re close to it, your geodesics are going to cross as you travel through time. Of course we are always rushing through space (Earth’s spinning around its axis, its rotation around the sun, the solar system’s rotation around Sagittarus A*, Miky Way being pulled towards Andromeda and so on) but that motion in 3D is not what he’s talking about.

[@steveturner3864]

Not only is the earth turning at a thousand MPH we are hurtling around our sun at an astounding speed

[@potaterjim]

@@NiToNi2002 So wait, I don't understand the geodesics bit. Even if time is curved, why are our paths through time connected by anything more than sheer coincidence? Gravity is a clear constant, but if we interpret gravity as an intersection where two objects moving through time happen to bump into each other, why do all objects obey gravity at a constant, predictable rate? From what I gather so far, based on the trampoline and the visual aid at 4:52, matter affects spacetime by pushing itself out, or effectively, shrinking the distances between two objects, but then why do they get "stuck" together? If a faster mass travels through space time at a faster rate, even if it deforms spacetime around itself strongly, shouldn't it just bump past stuff and keep going? If I'm going to guess, I'm going to assume that that describes things like the old sci fi "gravitational slingshot" trope, where an object uses the gravity of a planet to swing around, gaining velocity by falling into an object and then leaving orbit with that same velocity. In spacetime, this is two objects very nearly intersecting, and then as they pass each other, since they continue to warp space time, the distance between them grows exponentially as space is decompressed between them, with the idea being that space gets denser and denser the closer you get to an object, and bigger objects extend this affect further out. Am I getting close?

[@akmalrafiaa4772]

Oh man, that conclusion really made me think for a while and you were right, it was a wonderful eureka moment. Really opens up your perspective on the world and how see you them, especially when I've watched your other videos on related topics.

[@urabe7180]

my teacher just throws a pen into the air and when it falls down she says its gravity

[@LS-pv4dh]

Lololololololol yeah jus sn effect of gravity. Not actual gravity. Til this day we still don't know exactly what gravity is, jus some of the things it does. I guess an understanding of the 4th dimension will get us started. This vid did a get job helping with that.

[@LS-pv4dh]

@Bernd DasBrot u could b rite....they saying it's the calculated curvature of space/time due to mass. But how is the curvature a calculated constant. Up, down.....no such thang out there.

[@healthyskeptic1938]

No body knows what gravity is but explanations for unknown mysterious effects can easily be attributed to gravity without much thought.

[@nmcg2587]

The pen doesn't actually fall down - the Earth is falling up

[@urabe7180]

@@nmcg2587 reALYY

[@wadatamana]

You are a good teacher however my mind just refuses to comprehend.

[@tastyfrzz1]

In other words, you don't know either. You can only explain the effects of it. Magnetic and electrostatic force fields are the same.

[@badlandskid]

“Do not worry about your difficulties in mathematics, I assure you that mine are greater.” ~Einstein

[@IzayoiMeiHigu]

I was understanding slowly but I started asking myself so many questions I return to ignorance..and his examples are too "real" to make sense with theses concepts . But I appreciate the effort

[@ss2gora0]

@@IzayoiMeiHigudude I'm high and I got the eureka moment. This guy's explanation on gravity is amazing

[@REDandBLUEandORANGE]

4:17 The way you said under your breath “But it’s not my favourite” I love it so much

[@colelacey2875]

Wow! By far the best layman's explanation of gravity I've ever seen!

[@MdSifatullahBari]

After watching like 20-25 videos on Gravity and General Relativity, I think this video is the one that took me closest to understanding the concept. Thanks.

[@garrettord3304]

Best explanation of space time I've seen since next year.

[@davidcatanach2620]

This is the most comprehensible explanation of Gravity on YT. Well done and thank you.

[@savrajhunjan2129]

It’s absolutely crazy how good the explanation is, couldn’t have thought of a better way to explain 😂

[@bayudewantoro4805]

it really gives me "eureka" when it shows how ball and earth moving in a parallel line would finally collide each other

[@Thedoctorjosh]

This is by far the best explanation of the illusion of gravity that I've ever seen and I've been looking for years.

[@xiaoxiao-kg5np]

shame that its all just BS. Gravity has nothing to do with abstract Mathematically generated Geometries. Nothing. Its a Force. Einstein is no genius, he's just a guy. A wrong guy.

[@charlottekohnen2200]

damn why did i have to watch this just before i wanted to sleep

[@wmdtone]

This is the best gravity video in youtube. A lot of videos neglect or poorly explain the basic concepts.

[@Harvles93]

You are worth so much more than 18.4k subs. The 3d animation is quite unique, its not too cartoony, its not attempting to be super realistic and its not complicated to follow unlike SO many bigger channels. You information is very concise, to the point and covers what you need to know. You provide a very good stepping stone into the world of physics. I am very happy to have stumbled upon your channel after watching a dreadful video trying to explain time dilation; it simply wasn't informative nor did it explain much, if anything.

[@snrnsjd]

1.3 million views now :)

[@al1383]

262,000 currently 👍

[@Harvles93]

@@al1383 Glad to see!

[@smileyguy5594]

Aged like wine

[@akibunhaque3373]

wow one of the most fascinating explanation of gravity on KZbin, this vedio definitely demands subscription to the channel

[@farouqhisham6238]

I've been trying to understand the relationship between gravity and time for a very long time but I could never grasp the concept from the other video. I did get the Eureka moment as you said, and for that I would like to sincerely thank you. Brilliant video.

[@fellowabhi]

I have the same mistake as you thought. You have a unique way of explaining things, don't stop keep making videos.

[@JB91710]

Ok! Try explaining what gravity is. When you pick up and object and let it go, why does it fall to the floor? Why doesn't it go straight up or sideways?

[@maheshwarannarayanan]

@@JB91710 The point is simple bro.....You throw a ball up ....Technically in our reference frame it comes towards us. But go outside earth and look at it. Both the earth and ball are taking a path , the curvature around the earth's surface is very large that you wont notice that the ball actually took a parabolic path even if you threw it up at exactly 90 degrees. But the ball is actually moving sideways also. If you wanna experience it in real , take the example of satellites , they are constantly falling as per our conventional classic notion of gravity but you can find satellites orbitting around the earth. Since most of the calculations we do is set in earth's frame of reference the classical notion of gravity works , since we can utilise the Newton's equation for gravity and achieve required results , but for very small objects like protons electrons and very heavy objects like black holes and neutron stars and planets , the Newton's equation doesn't work out and fails to explain some stuff. In short the Newton's equation is like a definite integral proper ty you use to simplify a complex integral but in fact the actual process is very huge.

[@JB91710]

@@maheshwarannarayanan I fully understand that we are moving with the surface of the Earth at around 1500 mph. Laterally. When we let go of that ball, why doesn't it stay right were our hand was and continue along that path. A object in motion....... Why wouldn't that ball follow a straight line and not the curved path We created by holding onto it? "A race car is going fast through a corner. The tires and aerodynamic downforce are keeping it glued to the track along with gravity. If that car hit a patch of oil in the middle of the curve, it would then continue on a straight path in the direction of it's momentum at that moment and not follow the curve. The steering front tires could be looked at as gravity pulling it to the left but when that gravity/traction is switched off, it will no longer follow that curved path." Centrifugal force at the surface of the curve of the Earth is trying to through us off the surface. Gravity is keeping us attached to the surface. If our feet are anchored to the surface but gravity is switched off, the ball will move 1500 mph laterally with us but will move up rather than down. So what makes us stay glued to the Earth and why does that ball fall down? The correct Lateral speed would keep us hovering 10' off the ground if that is where we were when the correct speed was applied. Just like a satellite. Stop that momentum and we fall to Earth. But why? If the Earth stopped rotating around the sun, it would move straight towards it. Why? Why wouldn't it just take a parallel path through space?

[@maheshwarannarayanan]

@@JB91710 I didn't tell that gravity didn't exist.....I meant to convey that it doesn't work as per what we studied , it ain't a "mysterious" force as per Newton's definition . All the examples and scenarios you stated work with just the classical notion of gravity because we are very very very very tinier than the surface of earth and you'd never really notice the difference bro. And as per your fav example of why the ball falls down , it's gravity obviously. But it isn't just G(m1)(m2)/r². It's more than that..... I TOLD YOU THAT GRAVITY CANT BE EXPLAINED BY NEWTONS EQUATION IN ALL CASES. I NEVER TOLD THAT GRAVITY DOESN'T EXIST. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE

[@JB91710]

@@maheshwarannarayanan Calling me Bro doesn't justify or explain your comment. It just shows desperation that you just might not know what gravity is and that your explanation might not stick. "fav" introduces childishness to that desperation. So does that calculation that the vast majority of humans would not understand and you are using to make the reader feel stupid and that you Must be right otherwise you couldn't have written it. I hope you aren't a teacher. NOW THE CASPS COME OUT!!! "Help, save me from this guy." The original commenter said the presenter "explained" the title which was "What is gravity." That means he understands what gravity is now. I asked him to explain it now that he knows. Then you come along and you can't explain it either. I counter your comment with clear and easy to understand examples which you couldn't comment on. So then the bros and favs and caps come out. If you want to keep this up, address my comment example by example. But whatever you do don't bore me.

[@numeristatech]

Omg. This is is so good. Remembering that everything is moving through space-time, thinking outside of any reference frame is brilliant. Also the graphics do help as the trampoline model is transposing a 3D fact into 2D I think oversimplifies things. Great vid.

[@braqmorphie6434]

I will never be able to see the world same again thank you my friend

[@sphexism]

This was the best video trying to explain spacetime I've seen yet. They key insight that you're always moving through spacetime at c and that you could have a "default" velocity in space just like you have a "default" velocity in time is what I was missing.

[@MrMoose1347]

@@sphexism you are not moving at c

[@phenomenalphysics3548]

I CANNOT THANK YOU ENOUGH FOR THIS!!! I've been looking for such an explanation for general theory for years now thank you so much!!💞

[@JB91710]

Ok! Try explaining what gravity is. When you pick up and object and let it go, why does it fall to the floor? Why doesn't it go straight up or sideways?

[@Mr_Bartt]

@@JB91710 The free faling object will have th same inertial speed that Earth have, so you don't realy put some extra energy to move it differently than the Earth. So the trajectory of moving object through space-time is paralel with Earth (their geodesic lines are paralel), but since Earth has a lot of mass it bends space-time and an object eventually "fall" (cross the Earth geodesic line) on the ground. Less speed you have - more vulnerable you to curved space-time (since you are more moving though time and its slower near mass objects (curved)). So the stationary object will fall in a straight line (not too much through space, but a lot more through time) and the more faster will have more parabolic or even paralel to the ground trajectory (much more through space and lesser through time. And you must understand that it's all relative: Earth to object or Earth to Sun.

[@igorknapp2460]

@@JB91710 Because the floor of the earth is accelerating

[@stevebrindle1724]

@@Mr_Bartt Correct, well put sir(Or madam)

[@hawklee1983]

Thanks, now I can understand gravity thoroughly.

[@GleeAllmighty]

From traditional materialistic POV it makes sense to reason that “matter curves spacetime and thus emerges gravity”, from different POV it is equally true that “from curves of ‘spacetime’ emerges that which we percieve as ‘matter’ and experience its ‘interaction’ as ‘gravity’” - hence viewing ‘matter’ as a consequence rather than ‘source’. Great video! A+ for effort and presentation.

[@DariaNadezhda]

After I watched a few dozen of videos talking about this, finally you explained in a way I could fully understand. Thanks a lot :)

[@JB91710]

Ok! Try explaining what gravity is. When you pick up and object and let it go, why does it fall to the floor? Why doesn't it go straight up or sideways?

[@totzinfo]

do you mean that if gravity looks like that, all of the earths weight is on Antarctica?, what I learn about gravity is, it is all to the center whether it is a universe, a galaxy, a star system and planetary, earths gravity is all pushing to the center of earths core not to Antarctica

[@fjames208]

Really

[@maheshwarannarayanan]

@@totzinfo no....It's not like that , you probably got confused cuz the trampoline visualisation is in 2D , for a more better explanation and visualisation try visualising it in 3D graphs and you can find the videos in YT

[@nvkotian7539]

Amanda, you better eat one more Hot Dog and feel the difference!

[@mrjgilbert]

I’ve seen the “trampoline” demo a half dozen times and it never clicked. This is the first time I’m getting it! Thank you! The switching back and forth from 2D to 3D to 4D models were really helpful.

[@robj7481]

You’ve demonstrated the curvature of spacetime due to gravity, but no one knows if the universe itself is flat or curved. If the ball moves parallel to Earth, but outside of the Earth’s sphere of gravitational influence, then it becomes questionable whether they would ever merge. It’s shown that galaxies are flying apart, but they could be flying apart on a flat plane.

[@luisaazul]

Galaxies arent flying apart in fact they are all converging towards the great atracctor probably the biggest cluster of galaxies ever And also in theory the range of gravity is infinite so everything is atraccting everything even If it's not enough to move even a atom

[@sebidotorg]

@@luisaazul Only the galaxies close to us are converging on the Great Attractor. On larger scales, galaxies move apart, and the further away they are, the faster they recede from us.

[@barouchkrakauer7815]

@@luisaazul no. The are ALL accelarating away.

[@kyle857]

@@luisaazul No, most galaxies are red shifting away

[@ivanbastos4963]

It's crazy how we figured out the mathematical properties of gravity, like the gravitational constant, and gravitational acceleration in our planet and in our moon without comprehending how it was happening

[@MrMoose1347]

We did comprehend it as we made the experiments to test it and we gained better understanding after that

[@Carlos_Mendoza_]

This channel is an underrated gem

[@philoandy]

Wow, this video was such an eye opener. The explanation was great and now I can't help but think of gravity this way. The whole trampoline explanation was always unsatisfactory from my perspective.

[@hruaiapachuau8989]

This video was so helpful, especially that last example. I was scratching my head for the last 2-3 days wondering about it 😂

[@JAHinHK]

That was an amazing video. Thank you for posting.

[@alexliger1893]

What an awesome explanation!! Seriously, this is at a level a freshman high school student could understand. Bravo. I was really.. sad ?... that it didn’t go a step further to show how this explains the Moon orbiting the Earth (as constantly falling because the Earth is a moving target, or something like that?)

[@sisyphus1017]

The moon does not move through the spacetime with the same velocity as the Earth does. Therefore the moon does not fall all the way to the Earth.

[@reda6357]

I have watched tens of videos about this subject. i only understand it now that i've seen yours. i've watched other videos and your way of explaining things is masterful. your video on photosynthesis is of unparalleled quality. Thank you

[@ddonahue3436]

Excellent work. Using displacement as an example really clicked with me.

[@vishveshpatel8117]

The question at 7:47 , you asked, was the same question I was dealing with untill now. You gave a good possible explaination. Thank you.

[@subhayansarkar4202]

Me too

[@213phattown]

Can you explain this part? Does space time fabric have a normal force that pushes the balls towards each other?

[@vishveshpatel8117]

@@213phattown No, there is no normal force, it is just that the bodies are always moving(in space time fabric) and space time is itself curved so the bodies seems to come together. Your doubt must that if they are stationary (wrt space time fabric) then how they come towards each other though the space time is curved. Something must be pulling them towards each other!! Answer is, they are never stationary (wrt space time fabric), everything is always in motion(wrt space time fabric) so as they are are moving, they tend to go were the curvature leads. So nothing is pulling or pushing them. Ultimate question is what is this space time fabric? 🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯(Unsolved problem)

[@dvdcamp7187]

Dude! I’ve been a huge science fan since my teen years and I’ve watched a handful of videos on gravity as well as many other topics. But your explanation towards the end is what finally clicked for me. The visuals and the way you laid out your explanation was excellent. Edit: I typed my comment around the 6-7 min mark. Then about 30 seconds after I submitted my comment I hear you say “I hope this clicks for you”........ dude.

[@sumitmahto8838]

I liked the channel name so much that I immediately subscribed to it, even before the video started.

[@robotussin_synths]

Man, this is literally the first time I've understood why gravity has anything to do with time from a perspective that makes sense. Honestly thank you. The trampoline never made sense to me!

[@webseriesmovies1219]

Really Gravity has something do with time? Please explain me..I miss the point

[@JB91710]

Ok! Try explaining what gravity is. When you pick up and object and let it go, why does it fall to the floor? Why doesn't it go straight up or sideways?

[@robotussin_synths]

​@@JB91710 Hi JB91710, it does move sideways, parallel to us, as everything is shooting through space, but we don't perceive this because we're moving at the same speed and direction as the Earth and everything in on it. It also moves down ("towards" the Earth), because the mass of the earth is curving space so the two parallel lines of motion converge. Gravity is what it looks like when a mass travels along the fourth dimension (the one that is curved by the Earth's mass). We don't perceive it as dimension of space because to us it's perceived as a constant -- time. It's hard to describe, and I'm probably missing or over-simplifying some bits, but my understanding has taken a large step forward. Thank you "But why?"

[@igorknapp2460]

@@webseriesmovies1219 It's not just the 3-dimensional space but the 4-dimensional spacetime that is curved.

[@Shreysoldier]

The video was phenomenal. The last sentence was motivating! Thank you ❤️

[@kazejah1014]

If time is the 4th dimension, perhaps there is an additional dimension where the curve exists but we dont see. If time is the 4th, we have an awareness of time, enough to not see curvature with time where gravity is concerned. Maybe this is why there are elements of the concept of gravity stay kicking our ass, it involves a 5th dimension that we are incapable of modeling in our 3 dimensional universe + time existence. Because looking at how heavy celestial bodies seem to produce gravity in 3 dimensional space and would supposedly bend space time, the gravity path is rather not consistent with what you expect given 3 spacial dimensions + the 4th being time. We're missing something.

[@harshitgupta1468]

This explains the singularity and disapproves the big bang theory. Since all matter is in motion and on a collision course then there must be an eventuality in time when paths of all matter collide and hence all matter exist at the same place at same time creating a singularity. Further in time the matter will keep on moving in straight line where as we the three dimensional beings will perceive it as a big bang. This will create a never ending existence of matter and energy in a totally conservative system. Thinking about writing a paper on this stuff.

[@vimalcurio]

Then write that

[@kyle857]

All matter isn't on a collision course though. The big bang is still happening. Spacetime is still expanding as evidenced by the the red shift of most galaxies (that means they are accelerating away from us)

[@POPMaxsterGod]

Thing is, even if we understand 100% how gravity works, we still could be 100% wrong as we are studying gravity from the 3rd dimension. They only was to truely understand what we call "gravity" is to escape the 3rd dimension and observe our dimension from the 4th dimension.

[@MrMoose1347]

That’s just ignorant

[@khaqxor]

The best explanation i ve ever seen. I ve been trying to comprehend all my life ( i am 33) and this video helped me a lot. Now i am tell to anyone who loves physics. I think only few people really understand this concept. ( except people who watched the video)

[@jeffinthefalls2212]

I watched many videos on this topic - This was perfect

[@Lucas01legend]

Omg omg omg! I got it, world will never seem the same - thank you 🙏 so much for this video!!!

[@lillym.9626]

Really? Lucky you ..l can't understand

[@MikeAW2010]

Amazing description. Basically, ALL matter is constantly moving through space-time, ALWAYS... Matter does not replace space-time. It displaces it... When space time is displaced, the trajectories of travel are altered. The trajectories are the lines we see that run in parallels or intersect, matter moves along these trajectories. These trajectories, like fabric are bent toward the object with the most mass causing objects through space-time to intersect with them, or what we consider as 'falling'

[@JeffTheHokie]

I've always been under the impression that gravity is the result of cosmic expansion. From our perspective the expansion of space is very similar to fluid pressure. It is an outward push in all directions. By the principal of inertia, mass resists being pushed- that is essentially the definition of mass. That resistance to the "push" of cosmic expansion creates "low pressure" regions around massive objects. How does a 4th dimension of time figure into it? What if time is the radial dimension- the distance from a central point?

[@dailykittencuteness5598]

I find this idea really unique, and I would love to hear more about this? Do you know if this idea has any research done behind it? The only problem I can find in it is that the expansion doesn’t actually move objects at all, but the space in between two objects is constantly expanding, but this could still be a clue too the unification of inertia and gravity, maybe something more fundamental that affects more than just massive particles.

[@livesh684]

@@dailykittencuteness5598 bt how do we know that its just not the objects moving further away and instead the time space is what that is expending? i mean how did we even come to that conclusion that the emptiness in space is actually not really empty. i also always feel like although the universe is so big there is a short cut to a place far from earth that we can access just from earth itself. it always feels like with Einstein's theory there is just a possibility for teleportation. bt then once again they say some sort of law is preventing matter to move as fast as light. that's the annoying part. because the fact is that if we can move faster than light then time has no use to us cuz we could be doing literally millions of things in the fraction of a second. bt that does not mean a second or even an hour does not exist. bt funny how at the same time the existence of matter is what gives time its value. and then once again the existence of matter itself is the biggest mystery of our life time. let alone anti matter and black hole which essevtially is the ultimate meaning to nothingness or a possible dimension to the spiritual realm. after all this universe is bound by a set of rules that we have no idea why it exist in the first place. we are like a lizard trying to understand how a ceiling light works. we just do not have the brain for such knowledge. even if the creator explain to us we be lookin stupid af. just like how sometimes in class even after going thru something for the 100th time some kids just dun get it. their brain isn't meant for it. we need a brain that can compute 4D

[@isaacbruner65]

@@livesh684 there's a lot of math behind it, but a big part of the reason that we know far away galactic clusters are getting farther away due to the expansion of the universe and not simply moving away from us is because there's no way we could explain why they would be moving away from us at all, let alone at the speeds they appear to be moving at (faster than the speed of light). This expansion of the universe only affects gravitationally unbound objects (mainly galactic superclusters). As this video shows, gravity brings stellar objects closer together, so nearby galaxies are getting closer to ours even as further ones get more distant. Eventually the Milky Way will merge with Andromeda. Gravity cannot explain why further galaxies would be moving away at impossible speeds.

[@timmytim338]

I'm just going to act like I understood it so I can feel better about myself

[@kennya51]

This is the most intuitive video about gravity i've seen so far!

[@freakinstreakin9480]

I'm doing my best to follow, and I think I probably got lost somewhere in the weeds, but there are two points I was hoping to get clarified. 1.) We are assuming that the three dimensional plane that we travel through (with time as our fourth axis/dimension) is flat, and that the dense amount of energy (matter) is the manipulation of the space-time dimension that forces a curve. This curve in the "plane" of spacetime is our perception of gravity, and it is why energy packets are attracted to each other. I guess I'm a bit confused as to why that in and of itself wouldn't be considered a force (or an external influence on the nature of objects interactions), and as to why time itself is fourth dimension, which leads to my second point of confusion. 2.) Why would we assume time is the fourth dimension? Wouldn't it be more reasonable to assume that time is the change between dimensions? For example, if there was a 2nd dimension with a being that observed the second dimension (thereby a 3rd dimensional being) traveling along an X/Y plane and it observed change (i.e. time), would it be unreasonable for that change to be the passage of the Z plane through the X/Y planes? And as such, the observed change in our plane (X/Y/Z plane) would not be time itself as a fourth dimension, but the change of a fourth dimension in our perceived 3rd dimension? I am probably missing something but whenever time has been mentioned as the fourth dimension, this comes to head. Would love some clarification!

[@Jeremy.Bearemy]

1) It's not a force. When the 2D guys on the 3D sphere turned north, they didn't feel any force, but they still converged. You also would feel no force if you fell out of the space shuttle. You would be weightless, until your 4D path converged with the earth. 2) Time has to be the fourth dimension because of Einsteins theory of relativity. But in case he was wrong, the line at 3:15 has been verified experimentally by flying an atomic clock across the Atlantic at high speed, and comparing it to a stationary one on the earth's surface

[@Bevallalom]

That's my issue with this theory too (it's still a theory, not a scientific fact....). Time is nothing but particles moving relativ to each other (take a look at an atomic clock). Of course we see time as closely related to movements as time itself is nothing but movements. Theoretically, if we could stop all the movements (at particle level), there would be no time at all. So talking about spacetime is nonsense. I don't know what gravity is but space is not curved.... maybe it seems so. But when we dig deeper down to quantum level, time is nonexistent. Time is not in the quantum equations.

[@beaudanner]

Wow, that was so well illustrated. I now understand the 4th dimension in a way I never perceived before. Great work ☺️

[@RoyBatham]

Another sucker sucked in.

[@piratekev]

4:40 best explanation I have seen on the "why" matter curves spacetime. I hope they figure out why this displacement happens

[@nokian9005]

I feel excited to be witnessing the birth of a really good science KZbinr. Great job! Your videos are like diet VSauce. I predict that in a few years, you will have millions of subscribers.

[@NeelTigers]

1:35 *”Their OnE diMeNsiOnAl mindS aRe just unable to c0mprehend what’s happening”* LOL Poor Fellas

[@thereaction18]

The curvature of space is what makes the earth flat.

[@imomedvidek]

it finally clicked for me after watching your video. That trampoline example was a mystery to me, until I saw those lines moving... so simple, yet so effective. Thank you.

[@samm9017]

Dang! You just answered that question in the end I always had on my mind. Thanks!

[@heyitsahuva]

this was my "aha moment"

[@lucidstate4664]

Same. Nothing new

[@mohamedosman2183]

navin prithyani forex trader

[@vimalcurio]

Which one?

[@hippityhoppitus]

This illustration did more to help me understand than more flashy illustrations! Wow!

[@mmj19833891]

8:21 the ball falls down to the earth and since everything in space time is moving does it mean that everything earth, sun, galaxy is getting pulled towards something? Singularity?

[@tatituuuuup93]

the great attractor. fascinating subject to look into :)

[@emerther5843]

Everything is actually moving away from eachother, due to the expansion of the universe

[@jmitterii2]

mmj This is why I don't like his analogy. No. And motion of space has nothing to do with the progress of time. Time is the property of space, just as ability to accelerate and de-accelerate is a property in space. There is no absolute motion in space. C is the constant of causality; the fastest possible period of time elapse for something to happen in a cause then effect orderly manner. Cause and effect can happen slower than C to 0 never happening at all, but never faster than C. There are better analogies to why mass or even inertial mass (acceleration toward C) cause time dilation and length dilation. But none are super simple and I'm not going to try to type one out in this comment section, just google search for analogies on spacetime gravity and time dilation and simultaneity. There's many analogies to help picture the concepts. And always remember they're analogies; not literal explanations. As for our galactic motions: Our galaxy is in motion with our local group of galaxies; local group being gravitationally bounded to each other. Galaxies including ours are moving in different directions relative to each other, bound by gravity (in orbit). Our galaxy is in opposite direction motion toward Andromeda. Our local group is in relative motion at the edge of the Virgo Supercluster. The Virgo Supercluster is in relative motion about the nearby super clusters. At the scale of these super clusters; space itself is expanding at an ever increasing rate due to right now a place holder "dark energy" and bounded by a place holder "dark matter halos". This ever increasing space between the super clusters being created is pushing them further from each other... like a surface of a balloon with stickers representing these super clusters, as you blow the balloon to size the distance between the circles or marker dots get wider and wider from each other. Unlike the marker dots on the balloon expanding, the super clusters don't expand. They're gravitationally bounded to each other and adjust to the ever increasing space. The super clusters are not gravitionally bound, and that space between them makes all superclusters appear to be moving away from each other, the furthest out faster and faster than the closer ones. earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/galaxy-universe-location earthsky.org/space/gaia-new-insights-milky-way-andromeda-collision www.open.edu/openlearn/science-maths-technology/the-big-bang/content-section-6.2.4

[@celineguler]

isn't gravity explained by being the space-time's mechanic itself? Why we looking for a particle called graviton? I'm confused.

[@jayac6479]

kaolproly clasty graviton is the theoretical particle that makes spacetime ..

[@celineguler]

@@jayac6479 oh now it makes sence. thank you.

[@livesh684]

@@celineguler yes it seems to be the something in the nothing. and also honestly having a bunch of charged electrons getting attracted to one another simply doesn't explain why that phenomenon even occur. like why must it attract instead of just do nothing at all.

[@DGraze]

@@livesh684 there is magnetism too.

[@emc5190]

Gravity influences every atoms & molecules in a medium. External forces of gravitons are yet to be discovered. Consider, light, light is an energy that we witness everyday, but it’s massless, doesn’t take up space. Same for gravity, it’s a natural force from dense bodies causing to curve space time. Maybe in the future, quantum physicist are able to fabricate or synthesize an artificial graviton from gravity who knows.

[@anac1053]

I'm so glad this channel exists

[@alexneorivera4488]

8:30 -> me after a wild night out all drunk in my bed

[@aumshreeshah2322]

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

[@deadlightmusic9915]

ME AFTER METH OVERDOSE

[@38dragoon38]

So, if everything in the universe is flying away from everything else (the Big Bang) then, eventually, everything will meet up again?

[@maheshwarannarayanan]

Wait...you got a point....

[@BakkerJoopNL]

No. That's where dark energy comes in.

[@ssergium.4520]

I always struggled understanding why the earth isn’t expanding if it’s pushing up the ball. Now this explains how it works. Thanks so much!

[@PasiFourmyle]

So could our universe be a grid made of Planck lengths and, when you have mass inside a given volume of this grid, the grid lines are pressed together (because the grid doesn't just pass through the mass I guess, which means the mass isn't actually a piece of the grid?) making the distance needed to travel to the massive body shorter. We don't see this distance change from our perspective though, and what we end up seeing is pulling/acceleration toward the massive body to make up for this shorter distance in the spacetime grid. I think a good analogy for this is like when light enters an object where light travels at a different speed and gets "pulled" in a specific direction, or even "pulled" apart into its different wave lengths as in a prism creating a rainbow on a wall.

[@ABANAKAKABASANAPLAQ]

Interesting thought I had on your first point. Maybe Mass is just energy compressed into one plank length. The more mass something has, the more gravity it has. The more energy in one plank length then means spacetime is more distorted or in a less stable configuration. As we know from our 3D experience, things want to go into a more stable state. Therefore object A and B travelling through time colliding produce AB which is a more stable spacetime configuration.

[@wmpx34]

That would mean spacetime is discrete rather than continuous, right? I think the jury is still out on that one

[@thetooginator153]

I hope I understand correctly: everything moves through spacetime at c, and that never changes. What DOES change is that any increase in movement through space has a corresponding decrease through time. A little off topic, but I think c is the speed of causality, not the speed of light (which changes, depending on the medium). Decades ago, I asked my astronomy professor how fast gravity travels, and he didn’t want to explain it because how scientists know that gravity travels at the speed of causality is complicated. I think it’s interesting because gravity is a good example of causality. Say a large planet were to pop into existence halfway between Earth and Mars. The effect of gravity would start changing Earth’s orbit when the gravity reaches Earth at the speed of causality. The large planet would be there, but it would take time for its gravity to affect Earth.

[@saju7726]

Bcoz of d continous expansion of d universe, its energy increases and that results in the stretching and elongation of d space time fabric nd dats why any two objects on that sheet are always moving. And den meet up due to d curvature of space time caused by d heavier object and which in 3-d space looks like d smaller object is attracted to d heavier. This is one point which adds greater clarity to ur video but dis is one of d best explanations to gravity.

[@glidershower]

Entropy naturally is the root of gravity. We are forced to spend energy in order for time to move, as the constant loss of it forces objects to collide with each other in order to spend it. The moment entropy reaches stability, and chaos is as spread as it can possibly can, no more energy can be spent. Thus, an end to gravity, and consequently, an end to time itself.

[@user-uv2rh9gl9y]

But how is it proven that we’re moving at c (speed of light) through time?

[@kidzbop38isstraightfire92]

We move through Spacetime at c. This is because our Spacetime interval is spread throughout our movement between space and time (more spatial movement = less temporal movement). It's in Special relativity as the Lorentz Factor. Everything in universe moves at equivalent Spacetime intervals. Look up Minkowski diagrams and worldliness for more info. medium.com/predict/we-all-travel-through-spacetime-at-the-speed-of-light-d60cb389dfc2

[@williamgordonweddingphotog1729]

Because the speed of light is actually the speed of causality.

[@Rhovanion85]

We confuse ourselves with terms as "speed" and "time". These factors make less and less sense, the deeper you go into stuff like quantum physics for instance. It's because we depend on our language and terminology that it constraints a lot trying to make sense of the universe. Forget everything you learned.

[@kidzbop38isstraightfire92]

@@Rhovanion85 I'm not sure if that's entirely accurate. Speed and time have fairly distinct meanings in physics, as one is interval divided by time, and the other is time. As someone said earlier, the speed of light is the speed of causality, so we move through spacetime at the speed of causality. And as our "spatial" speed increases, our time interval decreases. I get your point about it being difficult to separate, but that's entirely the point.. space and time are not distinct entities.

[@Eman-wj8gq]

Amazing video. Such a good explaination. Guess I'll take the flat earth map down now.

[@FrancoDFernando]

Oh wow...This is the first time I even slightly understand the concept of spacetime and time as a 4th dimension...subbed

[@Rami_Elkady]

You forgot to lump quantum mechanics, string theory, and theology into this to make it much more clear than it already is ...

[@alexb3617]

Once the 3d+ world emerges from the quantum, you don't need quantum anymore to explain how 3d+ works. In the same way, you don't need biology to explain how the mind works. Or how you don't need physics to explain how the economy works, cause they just have gone one step further.

[@3mtech]

Rami: Funny comment Alex B: Stop joking, this shit aint funny

[@notyou6950]

Really? Define e, for energy. What is m (mass)? Where and when did you find and proven the existence of dark matter?

[@morshed2715]

Great explanation! Thanks

[@hanslepoeter5167]

I always say to me son, when an apple gets loose from a tree the apple is stationary and the earth bumps up against it. He thinks its hilarious ........

[@ButWhySci]

You're not wrong

[@Michael-jv2cn]

@@ButWhySci Why is the apple stationary? You just said everything is in motion.

[@ButWhySci]

@@Michael-jv2cn Everything is moving relative to everything else except your frame of reference. So if we imagine the apple as the frame of reference, then everything else moves and the apple stands still. Of course a rational person would use the largest land marks as your frame of reference (the earth for everything terrestrial or the sun in intra-system travel) but you aren't "wrong" for choosing anything you want as the frame of reference.

[@cautiousoptimist]

You're "half" right... :-)

[@aumshreeshah2322]

@@cautiousoptimist And you are half wrong....... understood😏😏

[@tommyvictorbuch6960]

"Spacetime is doomed." - Donald Hoffman.

[@lucidstate4664]

2 SHAI!

[@theanesthetist5172]

God does exist

[@tarker3241]

That little message at the end caught me off guard. A welcomed surprise, great video.

[@dove-august]

i barely understand this but by GOD was it fun to watch

[@oravlaful]

this made me grasp that concept way more than veritasium's video on the topic and for that i congratulate you

[@vusiliyK]

This is the best explanation I've heard on this subject. Thanks!

[@spacecomplex7180]

This is very clever and brilliant, and it took away my misconceptions in understanding the MATTER, literally ;) you've earned yourself a sub.