What is Gravity? | Wondrium Perspectives

Want to stream more content like this… and 1,000’s of courses, documentaries & more?
👉 👉 Start Your Free Trial of Wondrium tinyurl.com/3vm2asbb 👈 👈
-------------------------------------------
What goes up must come down, right? We’ve heard that old saying many times throughout our lives. But as it turns out, gravity isn’t quite so simple.
In this episode of Perspectives, four experts discuss what we know about gravity as well as some of the things we’re still trying to figure out.
-------------------------------------------
Clips in this video are from the following series on Wondrium:
Understanding the Misconceptions of Science, presented by Don Lincoln
www.wondrium.com/understandin...
The Higgs Boson and Beyond, presented by Sean Carroll
www.wondrium.com/the-higgs-bo...
What Einstein Got Wrong, presented by Dan Hooper
www.wondrium.com/what-einstei...
Great Heroes and Discoveries of Astronomy, presented by Emily Levesque
www.wondrium.com/great-heroes...
The Evidence for Modern Physics: How We Know What We Know, presented by Don Lincoln
www.wondrium.com/the-evidence...
-------------------------------------------
Table of Contents
00:00 Gravity before Newton
03:57 Newton’s Universal Law of Gravitation
07:49 Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity
12:44 Proof of Gravitational Waves
16:08 What Is Quantum Gravity?
-------------------------------------------
Wondrium Perspectives is hosted by Rich Bernett.
---------
Welcome to Wondrium on KZbin.
Here, you can enjoy a carefully curated selection of the history, science, and math videos you’ve come to know and love from brands like The Great Courses, and more.
If you’ve ever wanted to travel back in time, wondered about the science of life, wished for a better understanding of math, or dreamt of exploring the stars … then Wondrium will be your new favorite channel on KZbin!
If you decide you’d like to learn more about what you love, check out the full experience at wondrium.com/KZbin
There, you’ll find in-depth answers to everything you’ve ever wondered, with mind-blowing surprises along the way.
Your brain is going to love this place!
-------------------------------------------
You can also read thousands of articles from the smartest experts in their fields at The Great Courses Daily: www.wondriumdaily.com
And, of course, check us out on all of our social channels:
-Facebook: / wondrium
-Twitter: / wondrium
-Instagram: / wondrium
-------------------------------------------
[Three hashtags that apply to the video topic]

[@ozgott1415]

I understood the data on gravitational waves better than I understood the multiple unnecessary camera angles and shifts in this video.

[@user-ud3fr9ni6e]

When ya bother too look up a dot in the sky,... ya see a STAR / PLANET ? Whadda ya see? A single point of LIGHT. That STAR / PLANET,...one single DOT,...is sending/ REFLECTING its LIGHT via A 360 DEGREE SPHERICAL TRANSMITION,...for ALL TO SEE! & It's just a DOT,....all can see,...just a single ***** dot of light!,....POINT OF -- view. Have you never watched / wittnesing a cloud DISAAPPEAR 'n' WONDERED? POINT of VIEW,...HUBBLE - JWST - YOUR OWN TELESOCPE? GET BINOCULARS----- "look up,.." amaze yer-SELF

[@garyc1384]

Almost as bad as that hair!!

[@StarCarlton]

The camera angles are a direct correlation between space time divided by the longitudical vertex of said optical point squared infinitely by sub atomic dense particles orbiting a quantum realm.

[@nicholasmccarthy8771]

Thank you. Really well put together presentation. Much appreciated.

[@davidmudry5622]

If gravity is space-time rather than a force, does that mean everything above the ground can only fall if the support below any object that is above the ground, must FIRST be weakened or removed?

[@TheodoreRizzo]

Up until recently I’ve become fascinated nerd and learn about the universe and all these educational videos are gold to me.

[@no36963]

Watch the Thunderbolts Project for science instead of standard Model religion.

[@TheodoreRizzo]

@@no36963 no

[@neildown7231]

@@TheodoreRizzo Bent space clocks isn’t science

[@rykehuss3435]

If you want some actual explanations, watch Eugene Khutoryansky and PBS Space Time. This channel is just pop-sci for the masses. This guy even failed to consider time in the GR part of the video, completely failing since space and time are inseparable. He was just talking about the geometry of space. There's a 4th dimension, and its because of the time-dimension that gravitational "attraction" even exists. For example, the Moon orbits the Earth not because Earth curves space like a weight on a sheet, but because gravitational time dilation. Time literally runs slower for the parts closer to Earth, and faster for those further from Earth. This causes gravitational attraction.

[@neildown7231]

@@rykehuss3435 Nope. Gravity is just a molecular force. It’s not bent shapes😏

[@robert100xx]

This gravity thing is really cool. Sitting on my sofa watching this I was able to leap around the studio so he had to keep turning to look at me. Quantum!

[@desertshadow6098]

Terrific video showcasing the chronology of major physic ideologies. Quantum’s gravitational impact intriguing.

[@nicholasmarino1733]

Hi, as a retired science teacher, I say this presentation is outstanding. Excellent!!!!!!!

[@gowdsake7103]

I found the constant changing of camera angles extremely annoying

[@PrimeMinisterAbhilashKalkiG]

Okay 👍

[@im1who84u]

@@gowdsake7103 9:30 Not to mention, this guy changed his pants right it middle of teaching us?

[@vinkeith]

Manipulation of gravity will usher in either the demise of humans or secure the propagation and legacy of our species for a millennia.

[@vinkeith]

@robert punu read a book please

[@FrankKoslowski]

I liked the way you wandered off the topic at the point when talking about a Universal field. Kind of like Goldfish sticking their heads out of the water to have a look around, and promptly fall back into the known darkness of the pond again. 😅

[@Gausinha]

your ability to connect with your audience is phenomenal!

[@Yeti_Boop]

This video is fascinating. How do you get so many different camera angles packed into one video? The scientist talks for about 7 seconds, turns, looks at a new camera, talks for 7 seconds, turns, looks at yet another camera, talks.. and so on over and over and over lol

[@Wondrium]

A great studio setup, a clever camera crew and a director that can multitask!

[@1pcfred]

They're using bullet time. Just not very well.

[@alexandrekassiantchouk1632]

Curving 4-dimensional model is not gravity. Physical answer is in "Time Matters eBook" pages 76-79: gravity is push force, from quantum fluctuations. Or to be more precise: difference in pushes, due to time difference, aka due to time dilation.

[@thomasmyers9128]

It keeps from cutting and trying to line up start overs……. Little short 7 second videos to splice together

[@vhawk1951kl]

What makes you suoppose he is a whatever-you-mean-by-but-have-no-idea " scientist"? Iwonder if those that use the word "quantum" as if it were a magician's wand know that it is the latin word for how_much; Whate next "Qnantuum butter-and-bread?- *Quantum* the vague -intimation-hhat-one-has-forgotten- something? *quantum* boredom *qunantum* being-as-credulous-as-an-imbecile-child? *Quantum* *quantim*? The high priests of the religion modernism-scientism know very well that they can trigger the weakness credulousnes in their fellow creatures and make the believe any-old-thing, if they preface whatever- it- is withe magic words " scientists -say", and sure enough: Baa baa baa they wil go if "scientists-say", it sinmply *must* be so, and could not possibly be otherwise. If course it never crosses their ovine minds that not everyone that claims to be " as scientisr" actually*Is* a scientist or if nor *Knows* anyhing-at - all. It suffices that you merely *say* you are "a scientist" and, sure enough, they will say " oh if you are "a scientist" whatever you say simple *must* be the case and cannot possibly be otherwise. Even beter if you wave your magic wand " Quantum*- that alone wil suffice. Tell them that " quantum" is merely, no more and no les that the Latin word for how much and it wil not make the slightest difference because " quantum is a *Mgic* word like 'scientist which simply means anyone-that-*Knows*. The fact that many soi-diant" scientiats " *Know* nothing-at-all, is neither here nor there.

[@DavidMcMahon100]

Well done summary of the history of gravity and the current paradigm.

[@waterproof4403]

No one still knows what causes gravity :)

[@velimirstanimirovic4904]

Notice all guesswork there!

[@im1who84u]

9:30 I got confused when this guy change his pants right in the middle teaching us?

[@timothylongmore7325]

Yeah , the old bowling ball on the trampoline warping spacetime just doesn't sell it for me.

[@eddiedelzer8823]

My dad taught me about gravity when I was 16. He woke me up I was sound sleep and said son, I have to teach you a thing or two about life. I go oh no here it comes, he said no you don't understand. 1. If you fall the ground will catch you. 2. Two gravity never sleeps. 3. Now for the most important part, you never see a dollar bill with his eyes closed so get your butt out of bed and go get a job gravity is up.

[@nancymencke503]

So glad to find you thank you so much

[@penguinista]

Very well done. Thank you!

[@nHans]

A week after this video was uploaded, it has 334 comments. I read through all of them, and they're-boy oh boy-not at all what I expected for a science video! Now I'm seriously worried for the future of science. 😱

[@johnlonkert7187]

Or the future of humanity.

[@miraicnbs7323]

Thanks. It is so informative.

[@2quick4u84]

Hi , i want to ask why the fabric/matrix of space-time is always drawn as a net of squares or sometimes triangles (half squares)? does is it have a real physical meaning? thanks

[@JanPBtest]

8:27 Strictly speaking Einstein says that the energy-momentum and spacetime curvature are _correlated_ in a certain strict way, it does not say that one _causes_ the other.

[@dantemalay4528]

Can't create either but both forced to react to each other when in a close vicinity

[@z.C.008]

Very clearly articulated so much so that it becomes easier to imagine what they state. Thanks for the awesome explanation. ❤

[@davidmudry5622]

The top of this demolished building, using the French method where no explosives are used, falls completely off. But on WTC2 (the South Tower) the top starts to fall off, but then the rug is pulled out from under its feet and the top descends without falling completely off. kzbin.info/www/bejne/l4W5iXtvma-dnrc kzbin.info/www/bejne/rYPJoZt5gdmIi6s

[@neildown7231]

Don’t be ridiculous. Gravity is not imaginary lines

[@davidmudry5622]

@@neildown7231 But the twin towers accelerated to the ground, and that means while falling the towers had less weight force down than before they collapsed? Rocket man had zero weight while accelerating to the floor, so then any rate of acceleration should mean less weight until you hit the ground which is the rocket's floor? NIST WTC FAQ 31 says the towers fell in free fall. kzbin.info/www/bejne/joPVYp6XjbB1qbc

[@neildown7231]

@robert punu GR is easily one of the dumbest ideas ever proposed. It blows my mind that people accept it

[@neildown7231]

@robert punu General Relativity

[@torrokasparov2210]

Keep at it guys, and never give up !!

[@SnakeAndTurtleQigong]

Sending gratitude from a Daoist monastery near Seattle (US)! 🌲☯️👍🏻

[@gorojo1]

Wow! What a great video, with cast of the greatest explainers.

[@meltedmarshdaddy]

YES! I've been recently looking for a new Wondrium Video on gravity! This is perfect. Can't wait to watch tonight 😀

[@velikovskysghost]

@Marsh If you really are looking for a good video on gravity see (The Long Path to Understanding Gravity) by Wal Thornhill, excellent with plenty of references. Science that makes senses!

[@meltedmarshdaddy]

@@velikovskysghost thank you kind sir, you're a real one. I'm fixing to watch it tonight.

[@velikovskysghost]

@@meltedmarshdaddy You're very welcome and I do hope you enjoy it. Wal is one of the most integral people I've even met.

[@laxminarayanbhandari855]

@@meltedmarshdaddy keep yourself safe from pseudoscientific conmen.

[@laxminarayanbhandari855]

@@velikovskysghost"Science which makes senses." More like pseudoscience which keeps contradicting itself.

[@michelelane4662]

Interesting. What about the positive/negative ions? Just curious to see if there’s some kind of connection.

[@trevorpsy]

Excellent! Thanks.

[@nickcalmes8987]

It's so crazy how close LePlace was to actually explaining general relativity. Insane how close he was.

[@HB-mn8lh]

Einstein was awarded honorary grants.

[@larscp]

Yes, Einstein must have gotten his ideas from him

[@urosgrandovec3409]

Actually there are some big philosophical leaps between them. Having some function in space (the codomain is just R) is a very different point of view than saying that space itself (the metric) is curved.

[@onlythewise1]

@@larscp nope he got them from inventions he read he worked for a patent office

[@henrick589]

@@onlythewise1 proof please

[@Sarnt_T]

The fact that it's 2023 and gravity is still just theoretical is mind-blowing. I'm by no means the smartest person, but that is wild.

[@davidmudry5622]

If gravity is space-time rather than a force, does that mean everything above the ground can only fall if the support below any object that is above the ground, must FIRST be weakened or removed?

[@johncronin7875]

It is both a theory and a law. The law of gravity calculates the amount of attraction while the theory describes why objects attract each other in the first place

[@timothylongmore7325]

Same here. I still think it sounds like bs.

[@genome616]

Gravity is a measured effect, it is not theoretical, we can measure it and predict it and calculate it, what is theoretical is what causes that measured effect we know as gravity.

[@jaeyang9540]

I remember that event. Examined 1/4 second for like 6 months and forced me to redo my entire perspective of Time Dilation perception and how we could record it and quantify it. Found out or deduced my entire theory was upside down and backwards. Relativity perception of Time dilation. I went through countless scenarios of what would happen if 2 blackholes merged. The type of energy spike I would get, my Time perception was flawed. I thought Time would slow down, however, my perception of it sped up. 2 black holes gave me a quarter second energy chirp. I was like, where’s the rest of it. Expecting a big package, got something I could barely record with LIGO. I figured LIGOs equipment not sensitive enough to pick through all the nuances in that energy burst, since everything is being argued as Theoretical until proven. For all you CERN physicists. I usually make my discoveries accidentally, usually looking for something else, then my data or predictions are not accurate then going back and reviewing data and calibration and instruments used. Trying to figure out what went wrong then finding something new. Most of my discoveries found looking for something else lol

[@atticuswalker8970]

could you help me find a reason to dismiss a idea to unify gravity. an observable truth that dosent fit.

[@vhawk1951kl]

What makes you suppose there*are* any black holes- Just naturally credulous? If the idea of black holes were fully baked it would be obvious why there are *none*. It is clear to me that religion comes from the natural(whatever that means) passivity of mem(human beings/dreaming machines) ; they would not be so credulous were they not so passive and programmed or conditioned to be pasive by their maleficent invention that they call education. Moreover they are clearly not in the lest bit concerned by their pasivity. The true horror of the passivity is revealed by the fact that they*really_do* suppose there to be a democracy of truth known as the fallacy arumentim ad populum for with thre is a opithy saying from the1970's; there are seemingly ovine or grgious by nature. Hrdly ver o they question what they are * told*..... they are *that* passive- after eall it is so much easier to believe, which they do pasively mechanically(means choicelessly) automatically because that is how they are wound up or as-is-said educated.

[@Spitfireseven]

This was great.

[@maggs131]

The siver fox in the grey shirt looks like he wants to kill me every time he stops speaking 🫢

[@saadabbas8976]

Post-Newtonian Gravitational and Scalar Waves in Scalar-Gauss-Bonnet Gravity By Banafsheh Shiralilou, Tanja Hinderer, Samaya Nissanke, Néstor Ortiz, Helvi Witek

[@josephnarvaez9507]

@@JamesHawkeKZbin How?

[@saadabbas8976]

“Unlike general relativity, the canonical momenta of ESGB theories are nonlinear in the extrinsic curvature. This has two main implications: (i) the ADM Hamiltonian is generically multivalued, and the associated Hamiltonian evolution is not predictable; (ii) the “d+1” equations of motion are quasilinear, and they may break down in strongly curved, highly dynamical regimes. “

[@kylelochlann5053]

So let's say we have a field U^a and another field, V^a, and for simplicity let's say they're the same U^a=V^a, how would you show that U_a=V_a?

[@dimension2788]

Nice job!

[@colinmaharaj]

12:20 yes I myself am thinking that ... even the mention of the term 'gravitational wave' is a contradiction of sorts. I have a hypothesis that uses time to explain how gravity works

[@SirFency]

if a gravitational wave is so difficult to detect on a planet the size of the earth its no wonder that we cannot see the effects on the molecular level.

[@robert_costello]

“Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it.” Moreover, “the mere act of indirectly observing the atomic realm changes the outcome of quantum interactions.” -Niels Bohr I can’t help but wonder if consciousness is an underlying factor.

[@mikkel715]

Key point of the mind boggling Quantum Mechanics. As only information of particles make them behaved according to that, since last known event.

[@Drewteam88]

NO!

[@robert_costello]

@@Drewteam88 Your answer doesn’t leave much room for negotiation, in a world of complete and total “uncertainty“.

[@rw2452]

@@robert_costello Consciousness is the soul, ie. the software computed into the brain(hard drive). All information goes out with the soul when the flesh body dies. In effect, yes I would say quantum mechanics is part of it, but so is everything else.

[@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself]

It's not.

[@roddneyfett444]

I am still trying to sort out the difference between a Field and a Force. It appears that a Force is the interaction of mass/energy and, a changing velocity vector/differential Field (F=ma). The equivalence principal of being inside an elevator and feeling a force. So how do we get rest mass? A knot in space-time like the 1/2 angular momentum spin of a fermion? How many angular momentum spins are possible, three? Perhaps the exchange of force particle is the quantized differential Field. Is the differential sum of virtual particles = to the differential Gravitational Field? How could we measure the rate of virtual particles at different distances from an object?

[@JohnRoach-jn4dg]

Explain the Pound - Rebka experiment at Harvard University in 1959. Explain the accelerometer detecting and measuring the acceleration of the unmoving surface of the ground.Thank you.

[@Freddy18w]

Sweet....so well orated & informative this should win a prize. I give it a GOLDEN DRAGON.

[@bertoid]

The thing that has always bugged me about forces on particles being explained by the exchange of force carriers, is that I have never seen an explanation of how the interacting particles know of each others presence, so that the force carrier can be sent (and where to send it).

[@darkgreenambulance]

I think they must have tiny mobiles.

[@1SpudderR]

Yep! Like it.....It Always amazes me that we accept the Invisible Force between magnets, and gravity! This Space Of powerful Nothings! And now we are becoming aware of “Nothing” being full of everything!? The majority of scientists seem stuck in an educational rut and will not reinvent what is old fashioned! “The field is everywhere! And this is Gravity?” Einstein Two.....required!

[@88JayQue]

This is just my opinion from what I've gleamed. Everything vibrates, everything in this realm. Gravity can't vibrate unless it is a molecule. Probably, a quantum one, and is carried along by tachyons, neutrinos, protons, etc. I believe that as mass, which is compressed light, carries gravity in every particle on a subatomic quantum level (we aren't able to observe at this present time) the gravity particle is already present and working in conjunction with the electron particles. As the electromagnetic waves from two masses come into contact with eachother, the gravity and electron particles form convergence waves. In this union of forces, the information is traded as particles collide. I hope I explain the process enough for you to visualize the function. If you have a question ask away! Blessing!

[@ozymandiasnullifidian5590]

@@88JayQue mass is compressed light??? Man, you are far from real physics... You can't compress light, light is made of photons, and for photons, the Pauli exclusion principle is not working, it has to do with something called spin...

[@nmarbletoe8210]

the force carriers go out in all directions but unless they meat up with another object they jus fizzle out

[@johnholme783]

It reminds me of a sound wave. Has the sound wave travels the air gets stretched and compressed. Having said that, the space-time medium is a little more esoteric!

[@urielstud]

I thought this is very cool how you ended up with a prospective theory of Quantum-Gravity 😃 and also how very much more effective your new semi-closeup, and off camera filming technique is. It helps to get away from what my UCSC professors called “hand waiving” arguments. (The way to do those, as Dr. Hooper sometimes does, is to use gestures in the Left hand together with the left side of the head being slightly raised-an emotional or Feeling approach as opposed to the standard “male” left-brain/right sided dominant one. Remember, we’re just students here.) But the new filming technique is really superb, and quite attractive! I think it helps to deal with attention spans if you are going over the standard 20 minute recommended length in denser material like this. Dr. Carroll would look excellent with it; so thanks and Cheers! 🙏🏻

[@Wondrium]

Thank you so much for your feedback! We truly pride ourselves on our professors and the depth of our content and are very glad you're enjoying our offerings. Thanks for being a fan!

[@helensteely6890]

Left and right brained idea has changed, We use both sides together. Hey, I am 74 and have read this upgraded idea so please realize as some guy named Asimov said, nothing so permanent as change.

[@mustafayilmaz2259]

Çok etkileyici bir yazı olmuş Griclcl ..... Dokuz şiddetinde deprem gibi... Bilimsel...edebi..epik..... romantik..tirajik..komik..yani yazının içinde ne ararsan var.. Yüz puan aldiniz

[@mustafayilmaz2259]

@@helensteely6890 beynin sagi solu yok......böyle mi dediniz. Sağ sol yoksa....güney kuzey de yok demektir....hiç bir şey yok demektir.... Ama ben varım...bakın bu yazıları yaziyorum.

[@uneducatedguess6740]

The simplest approach read in Bob Lazar Cutting Edge: gravity = gradient in time dilation - not only gives straight solution to Vera Rubin and Hubble puzzles, but explains UFO stories and debunks dark matter.

[@whirledpeas3477]

Don, Sean and Dan all in one video, Perfect.

[@PrimeMinisterAbhilashKalkiG]

That's Right All In One😀

[@nickmerix2900]

What is the fabric of spacetime made of ? Sold by the yard? Available at Walmart ? Or amazon?

[@NOMAD-qp3dd]

Excellent.👏👏

[@vinceypma8962]

Sean Carroll is one of my heroes.

[@desertshadow6098]

A brilliant communicator of the complex

[@redneckshaman3099]

I'm addicted to pigger nussy 🤠

[@ViggoHinrichsen]

Don't forget Dan Lincoln from Fermilab. He is brilliant as well :)

[@Meineself]

Long Don is a fav of mine cept for his atheism.

[@Briantreeu123]

How blessed are we to have so many great physicists im one video.

[@johnwythe1409]

Can you explain how a proton and and electron attract each other? If there is an exchange of a photon between the two electrons, doesn’t that mean there is also an exchange of energy?

[@trout3685]

Something tells me you shouldn't even worry about this question until you gain a lot more knowledge on the subject. Any good answer you receive you won't even understand anyway right? Otherwise you could just research it yourself rather than asking random youtubers.

[@davidcopson5800]

This video really pulled me in.

[@TomTom-rh5gk]

Gravity:avity: Imagine a sheet called space moving through a 4th dimension where the 4th dimension was called time. The fabric’s direction of travel is from a place we call the past to a place we call the future. The surface of the sheet is what we will call the present. This 4th dimension is not the same as our ordinary experience of time but is related to it. If you put a lead ball on the moving fabric the ball would resist the movement so as to cause the fabric to deform. The ball and the fabric pushing the ball would lag behind the rest of the fabric. According to our definitions, the ball could be said to be in the past. If another ball were put on the fabric it would deform the fabric too. If the two balls were close together they would approach. The balls would seem to be attracted to one another but in reality, they would be both moving toward the same place.

[@velikovskysghost]

@@MrWhodatsay That was delightful to be sure, and I'd say 1,000,000,000 times more interesting than this talk!

[@HB-mn8lh]

It looks correct, but within our exclusive perspective, we can't find an inclusive solution to the infinite system of nature. Mathematics is the code version of a description. It can't give you conclusive result from an exclusive description.

[@TomTom-rh5gk]

@@HB-mn8lh Thank you for the feedback. The physicist was Edward Harrison from University of Massachusetts. The book was called Cosmology 1st addition. I can't find it. I makes every thing clear. Time is change in the 3 space dimensions. There is no river of time and no time travel. But time is still the 4th dimension because the 3 space dimensions move through it. The math has to work and I have no idea about math. Please make it work if you can. Or show it to someone who can make the math work. Again thank you for reading. I have been trying to get someone to look at this for years.

[@TomTom-rh5gk]

@@MrWhodatsay Time is change but we have to account for the false ideas. Memories make people think that the past still exists. Thinking about future makes us think time travel of possible.

[@TomTom-rh5gk]

@@MrWhodatsay What are you talking about. I am talking about gravity. inertia. change. and time. Colors are about light.

[@innertubez]

Holy cow I never knew about Laplace’s theory of gravity. He conceptually was extremely close to the General Theory of Relativity - about a century earlier!

[@kylelochlann5053]

No, there is no relationship whatsoever between the work of Laplace and GR.

[@paulklee5790]

@@kylelochlann5053 Why not..? Seems to me he was on the right path....

[@kylelochlann5053]

@@paulklee5790 For clarity we'll call the Laplace object a Dark Object (DO) and the GR object a black hole (BH). 1. The D.O. has a surface, the BH does not. 2. The D.O.has a physical radius r=2GM/c^2. A Schwarzschild BH event horizon has a Schwarzschild radius of r=2GM/c^2, but BH radial coordinates are not physical distances and a BH does not have a unique radius of any kind (it's observer dependent). 3. Laplace's D.O.has an escape velocity, a BH does not. Light and objects can be launched into space from below its surface. The escape velocity equal to light simply means that objects slower than this come back down and light is emitted into space but is redshifted to infinity at infinity. The BH interior spacetime is a causally disconnect region of spacetime, meaning, there are no causal curves that can extend into the exterior spacetime. 4. A D.O. is a dense ball of matter, a black hole is a vacuum spacetime (T_{ab}=0} and so is just empty space. 5. A BH has a singularity, a D.O.does not. 6. The interiors of each are basically opposites, e.g. the tidal forces in a D.O. go to zero at the center, a BH has no meaningful center, but the tidal force go to infinity as the radial coordinate decreases, etc. Then there is the absence of relativistic effects for a D.O. and entire conceptual frameworks of what gravity is, is completely different. A D.O. and BH are almost perfectly unrelated, if not opposites.

[@paulklee5790]

@@kylelochlann5053 thanks for your fulsome reply but what ‘on Earth’ is a Laplace Dark Object? I was thinking that Laplace’s ideas about fields removing the problem of ‘action at a distance’ might have lead him to consider whys in which the field might be distorted and how that was analogous to a gravity ‘force’... to a layman it doesn’t seem that far a jump.

[@kylelochlann5053]

@@paulklee5790 Oh! I must have zoned out during that part of Carroll's talk on the first play through. Laplace, along with John Michell, are well-known for having proposed a planet/star so dense that it had an escape velocity equal to the speed of light to which some people with no understanding of relativity claim is the reference to a black hole. Carroll is referring to Laplace's theory of gravity where gravity is a fluid flowing into every massive object and in Laplace's own words "we must suppose that the gravitating fluid has a velocity, in Laplace's own words "we suppose that the gravitating fluid must have a velocity of least hundreds of millions of times greater than light." Anyway, there is no resemblance to GR even if Laplace's idea bears a vague resemblance to Gullstrand-Painleve coordinates. Laplace's gravity is a decidedly non-metric theory of gravity (GR is the simplest case metric theory) where in GR gravitational effects are the result of nothing happening - it is just inertial motion in spacetime.

[@rodneyrenfro5375]

if the field of two south pole magnets being pushed together, and force is passed by electro magnetic photons. can they be detected? what wavelength and if i hold them close, quite a bit of mass to energy or at least a release of some of those photons

[@kylelochlann5053]

No, photons do not communicate the EM force, which is ascribed to virtual photons, but these are mathematical abstractions that show up in the perturbative description.

[@anurabodiyabadu]

Excellent, Excellant

[@benmcreynolds8581]

I'm curious if instead of dark matter, could it be extra layers to gravity? So we could just improve off of the gravity we already know that works to an extent already? Like there could be the layer we know, then a large scale layer that's on the scale of entire galaxies and nebula's and other complex and diverse grand massive objects that have all sorts of behaviors interacting with in each other that I'm sure needs to be factored in to get this layer of grand scale gravity correctly. Then there could be sub atomic gravity or micro gravity or atomic gravity layer. That can essentially be the strong force and the weak force but it's just a different version of gravity on the smallest scale. So right now I'm just theorizing 3 layers of gravity, as an improved concept of the nature of gravity withing the natural world. The smaller layer, the normal layer we have understood very well that relates to our solar system type scale. Then there is the 3rd layer, the massive layer. Dealing with things that are light years across, vast temperature differences, density's, velocity's and diversity. Intense pressures, electro static charges, electromagnetism, plasma clouds, black holes, pulsar, quasars, neutron star's, super Nova explosions, gas clouds, solar winds, radiation, tons of interwoven orbital interactions and angular momentum velocities, multiple galaxies interacting upon other galaxies. Just so many things that probably all have to be accounted for when we are dealing with scales with such vast massive intracity, and scales as vast layers of complexity that the 3rd layer of gravity hypothetically could be covering? This is just a gut feeling, and I'm just doing a thought experiment with and I'd love it if someone else wants to improve onto it. I'm all for that.

[@nihlify]

It's one possibly but have lots of constraints given by observations

[@quantumtacos]

This is not a crazy idea and even many respected scientists think about it too. The general term for this is "modified gravity theory" and you'll find many papers and even some youtube videos about it. Happy thought experimenting!

[@President_NotSure]

i blame gravity for my laziness

[@steviereedeker3314]

And for my downfall

[@TheGrimReaper1]

I blame atmospheric pressure, all that weight pressing down on me all the time.

[@NickSam121]

nice video. very good explanation...but there are still some other cases that we do need another theory of gravity, for example the edges of the solar system, or weak-gravity limits...

[@douche8980]

Gravity gets weaker from it's starting point the further you go out and while never vanishing altogether ot will eventually get overtaken by gravity fields from other celestial objects with stronger gravity fields the further you travel away from any given center of gravity. There are most certainly places on the universe far away enough from any center of gravity where it would hardly be bound toward any given object.

[@ty9884]

@@douche8980 I get that on a cosmic scale. But what does space bending have to do with watching an ant crawl up a blade of grass, defying the gravity of the entire planet?

[@JD-xd4sy]

@@ty9884 I've heard it explained as gravity being a much weaker force than the nuclear force that holds atoms together. On a grander scale, that "weaker force" holds the planets in their orbits, but it doesn't stop the ant from climbing or us humans moving against the gravitational pull.

[@ty9884]

@@JD-xd4sy I hear you and I agree. But I often hear guys saying gravity is not a force. It bends space.

[@Fuji-Kengamine]

Thank you for the wonderful video. Explain gravity, On this earth quantum strings are state of entanglement, this is a state where everyday gravity is at work. When this state is released becomes superconducting, this is a natural status free from gravity. The key point is the entanglement of quantum strings,there are double helix structures.

[@skyhorseprice6591]

As I was watching this, a singular thought began to pulsate in my mind: Quantum mechanics works. Relativity works. These are probably the two best and most successful theories in all of physics, yet (if theories could have emotions and personhood🤣😅) they seem to 'dislike' each other to the point of breaking down when extended to each others' domain of influence. Specifically, above Planck length, Quantum mechanics breaks. Below Planck length, it's relativity that coughs up a hairball. No matter how hard we try, we just cannot 'shoehorn' one into the other, either mathematically or existentially. This discontinuity has certaiy wrecked a lot of physicists' sleep cycle. The thought that I had regarding this is probably going to sound silly, but I don't think it _is_ silly. _Human science cannot unify quantum mechanics and relativity, but the universe does it flawlessly. Until science (meaning scientISTS😱🤣) figures out how to look at this problem from the POV of the universe, we probably won't be able to gain much traction on it._ I have noticed that the infamous Planck length is the one thing that the 'quantumly' small and the 'Relatively' large share in common. It's almost like some sort of mathematical event horizon that serves as a barrier to the Microcosm communicating with the Macrocosm, except once again, the universe has no problem at all, it's just us human across-structure computational meat sacks who can't do so. Aaaannnnd, that leads me to the question that is the point if all this. _Is it possible that there exists some process or function or interaction, occurring at that Planck level, which serves as a sort of 'transitioner' which ties the two disparate levels of reality, Quantum & Relativistic, together?_ We're missing something, probably something elegantly simple that slithers around in between the equations describing relativistic phenomena and those describing the quantum world. There has to be _something_ , because if the universe had the same problem that we have in unifying the two, we likely wouldn't be here, nor would the universe in this form. Is this even possible? If it is, _then what is that process/function?_ *Things that make us go, "so how many successive nights of lost sleep does it take to fry our neurotransmitter renewal contract & thereby render us incapable of such ponderings?"_ * 👽🤣👀

[@BigNewGames]

General relativity doesn't always work. That's why dark matter and dark energy were imagined. Because general relativity is unable to explain the motion of about 99.86% of the visible matter in the universe. So, general relativity doesn't always work.

[@skyhorseprice6591]

@@BigNewGames Agreed in the literal sense. But then our best theories all have things they explain beautifully and things that seem to elude the scope of the theory. Relativity and QM, given their flaws, are still the most useful theories we have to frame our understanding of the universe. There are certainly things that relativity does not deal with too well, like the galactic rotation issue, for example. For me, though, the glaring issue is that breakdown at Planck length which sends our theoretical framework for the micro and the macro right into the weeds. I have begun to wonder, if we could solve that problem as the universe itself does, we'd have a tie between the two, which might make all manner of things more clear.

[@BigNewGames]

@@skyhorseprice6591 General relativity is far from being complete. Einstein tried for years to complete his equations and died before he could finish them. That's why his theory is unable to merge with QM and why it is unable to explain the motion of about 99.86% of the matter in the universe, my estimate. Ask any physicist or astrophysicist what's missing from general relativity and they will be clueless. They don't know what's missing or how to complete his equations. If they knew what was missing and were able to fix his equations then dark matter and dark energy would disappear. the reason why they show up as possibilities is because Einstein's equations come up short. I believe general relativity and QM will never be able to merge. I don't believe gravity exists at the quantum scale because it is a reaction, not an action. The same reason why gravity is weaker than electromagnetism or the strong nuclear force because it is a reaction to the other 2 forces, not an action or force.

[@gmarie701]

Plank length is a unit of distance. Light speed is a unit of distance over time. Both are said to be universal constraints. Those two constraints are related by time. It seems possible that until and unless time can be quantified in terms of energy/mass, then the relationship between quantum and relativity observations at the micro and macro levels cannot be discerned.

[@skyhorseprice6591]

@@gmarie701 I have an idea about this. If we look at particles *and* waves as distortions or twists in spacetime itself, we can actually visualize how space, time, mass, and gravitation are related. We know that gravity has a direct effect upon spacetime because of the atomic clock experiment; place one such clock at sea level & another in earth orbit. Calibrate both clocks to be synchronous to the highest degree possible. Observe the time record of each. Over that time record, the clock at sea level starts to fall behind the one in orbit because of spacetime dilation in a gravity well. Spacetime is literally stretched out the further/deeper we go into any gravity well. Why is this? Well, it's because mass bends spacetime. Why does mass bend spacetime? Because particles and waves are all the same thing- distortions or twists in spacetime. Imagine a large, perfectly flat and smooth tablecloth just floating before you. Now, put a bunch of little twists into the cloth. What would you see? You'd see the cloth being stretched into a curved shape that (roughly. This is an analogy, after all) that looks very much like the well known diagram of an unspecified ball of mass sinking into the middle of an increasingly distorted grid. The thing is, this distortion also affects *time,* which is never made clear. So the primary thing this does is, it answers the question, "why does mass affect spacetime and cause it to curve?" That answer is, "mass does not 'affect spacetime', *matter (mass) is COMPOSED OF SPACETIME THAT IS DISTORTED.* " What this does is reveal a universe that is energy based; matter arises from pure energy (spacetime), not the other way round. If this is so, we would then have a key to the long sought TOE.

[@therearenogods3716]

Yet still no one can explain gravity?

[@MrBollocks10]

No? Didn't Newton nail it?

[@therearenogods3716]

two objects with mass attracts , as the distance between said objects increases the gravitational pull decreases. Does that explain "what is gravity"? Really? Great handle by the way.@@MrBollocks10

[@stewiesaidthat]

​@@MrBollocks10gravity is the resistance to being accelerated. The compression of atoms.

[@metaparcel]

You mean you're too lazy to Google?

[@jddang3738]

Easy. Everything is in space. Mass curves space. Things in space slide around depending on the curvature.

[@emkoravo]

16:15 so is there a level of harmony between the expansion and contraction? Does it enable the ability of the object to stay in relatively neutral to itself? What implications does that have on objects effects on others and the motions of travel through space?

[@djdrocco]

If you're asking about the compression and expansion of matter objects caused by gravitational waves, then yeah technically, propogating through matter should cause infinitesimal tidal forces within the object as its component particles react to suddenly being alternately closer and further away from each other. As I (barely) understand it, this should rob the object of some vanishingly small amount of angular momentum, but also heat it up a similarly tiny bit. I don't think gravitational waves have a push/pull effect with regards to an object's velocity, since the wave itself imparts no momentum to matter it moves through. Someone with a more accurate GW model in their head will hopefully be able to tell me how wrong I am and why.

[@Rayagoldendropofsun]

I've got no GW model, whatever that is, but Gravitational Waves are misleading concepts. Newton's Gravity MOTION is a myth and has been Debunked. His equations works perfect with Energy, while the mythical Gravity get all the credits ! Based on MOTION, here are some of Earth Energy Activity's in MOTION, Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Dirt Devils, Earth Quakes, water spouts,ocean waves, lightening, thunder storms, jet stream, Tsunami, Earth's Core, the atmosphere, plant growth, photons rain, the drift of the spoken words, traveling sound of the bell, the wind, satellites, communication, birds and plane flights, cars in MOTION, and much more, including the human body internal and external MOTION, feel free everyone to prove me wrong, and physically connect Newton's Debunked Gravity MOTION with the above Activity's .

[@martinhirsch94]

We might be getting better at measuring the effects of gravity but not so much when it comes to figuring out where gravity itself comes from, or what it actually is. I might have an idea on that issue but I need to figure out an experiment or two to help explain it. Time to connect the dots, so to speak.

[@alex79suited]

Get a fish tank, get a round bobber. Now put the bobber in the center of the tank. Now the bobber is the blacksphere in the center of our galaxy. Now the water is space the top of the water is now the electromagnetic field plained out. So if you can keep the bobber spinning you would see the equator of the sphere has no effect it spins freely but if you add the electromagnetic field to the equator the area around the bobber would start to move the area around it. Put dye in the water to see effects. Have fun.

[@turdfurgeson517]

It sure seems to me like man has trouble thinking in a 3 dimensional world. I’m very confused by the hill terminology because we are not dealing with a flat plane in space. I also don’t like the gravity represented as a distortion of space because that always acts like space has an up or a down. The bigger question for me is why the planets don’t get pulled into the sun. What makes a planet find its happy spot in orbit. Must be something to do with the electric field put out. Perhaps that’s what orientates the planters from spinning uncontrollably. I don’t think that thinking of space as a fabric is gonna get us far fast. It’s hard for me to even have a thought experiment where your in a place where there is no ⬆️. I’m just thinking out loud here and am probably way wrong.

[@helensteely6890]

We live in at least four dimensions, never forget TIME. The one humanity can't travel within. Cats of course Wrinkle time, LOL

[@quantumtacos]

As a physically 3-dimensional being I so agree with this. But have you ever tried drawing 3-dimensional space on a 2-dimensional LCD monitor? And then tried drawing a representation of a warping of spacetime as an additional dimension on top of that? I've seen an attempt at it and it just looks, well... different but not any better honestly. The problem you're having with understanding those drawings that seem to have a concept of up/down is simply because they've actually done that on purpose. They've deleted one of the 3 spatial dimensions and replaced it with your intuition of "things always fall down" so that they can depict as many spatial dimensions as possible (2) in the same drawing as the gravitational warping dimension (the up/down, which is the whole point of the drawing) and do it in a way that we can intuitively interpret. You're meant to interpret the "down" direction as "this is a trampoline with people standing here and here and notice how a ball therefore rolls in this left/right direction, just like gravity would do in real life if we could draw the full 3 dimensions with a 4th dimension of gravity warp". You're meant to imagine that we are in fact 2 dimensional beings living on a 2 dimensional universe that exists on the plane/surface of a god-like 3 dimensional trampoline and that the 3rd dimension that you see in the imagery is actually representing the gravitational curvature of spacetime because nobody has ever figured out how to draw ourselves as proper 3 dimensional beings being warped into a 4th dimension. It's confusing and it's bad but you can search youtube for videos on "flatland" and related to help fix the badness because you're right that it just doesn't make sense as presented if you're not already indoctrinated into the idea of deleting one or more spatial dimensions to fit them on a 2d/3d picture. Just wait until you get into "spacetime diagrams" where we delete all but one spatial dimension. Actually it turns out that in most of physics we only need to talk about one spatial dimension to demonstrate most concepts. Thank goodness for that because I still can't wrap my 3d brain around what a 4d tesseract actually looks like and I think anyone who can is necessarily a dimensional savant. As a side note, or perhaps the preceding was the side note and this was all you meant to ask: the reason planets don't fall into the Sun is the same reason that if you throw a baseball sideways it won't fall back to Earth. I mean you have to throw it a lot faster than 100 MPH, like, a LOT faster. Ignoring atmospheric drag, if you throw a ball over your neighbor's house at around 6 kilometers per second it will go so far that because the Earth isn't flat it will keep going around the globe and won't land until somewhere in China. If you throw it at EXACTLY (err, approximately) 8 kilometers per second (again, ignoring atmospheric drag) it will keep going around the globe in a perfect circle and smack you EXACTLY in the back of the head. Please don't do that; at that speed even a small baseball would obliterate the top half of your body due to kinetic energy. And if you throw it at some 12 kilometers per second, even if you're aiming only a hair over your neighbor's roof, it will leave Earth's gravity well and never return. It just so happens, after billions of years of planetary evolution, that Earth is traveling around the Sun at around 30 kilometers per second, which is right at the "smack you in the back of the head" perfect circle speed which is why Earth just keeps going round and round the Sun in a nearly perfect circle, never stopping because there's no atmospheric drag to slow us down. The thing that made Earth find our happy "back of the head" orbit is that all the other proto-planets either collided with proto-Earth or proto-Mars etc. or were ejected out at high velocities to never return to our solar system. The only planetary orbits that remain after 4 billion years of this billiard game are the orbits that are circular enough to not crash in to other planets. Or to say the same thing in another way: planets DO get pulled toward the Sun. Earth is pulled toward the Sun by an amount that exactly balances our 30 kilometer per second orbital speed, and so we keep going exactly in a circular orbit. If the Sun suddenly stopped pulling, we'd fly off never to return. And if Earth suddenly stopped our 30 kilometer per second orbital speed, we'd fall directly down into the Sun like an apple falls from a tree.

[@peterclark6290]

We already suspect that there are attractive and repellent forces that hold atoms in balance. We also suspect that atomic materials are made up of perpetual energy even smaller than electrons, protons... We know that some materials have an attractive force similar to Gravity called Magnetism. Putting together the experiment to prove they are one and the same: i.e., excess attractive waves unused by the atomic structure are able to reach beyond the 'mass' will earn the first person to do it a Nobel. Guaranteed. Furthermore demonstrating that the Universe (indeed the Cosmos) is made possible by the binary logic of those energies by compounding them is the key to Science, and by extraction Physics. By looking for simplicity first. e.g., the larger the mass the greater the attractive energy tells you... that energies are under-used so they can do other things...? You don't need Einstein's wild guesswork anymore, be free. BTW we will never be able to prove any of it, we came along (17 billion years) too late to see 'inside' and collect evidence but common sense says it ain't what you got, it's what you do with it.

[@robertspence7766]

General Relativity is not wild guesswork. It is a wildly successful theory. In fact without General and Special Relativity corrections GPS would be off by 10s of miles per day and useless. Our clocks also could not be synchronized and the internet you used to post your comment and this video would not exist.

[@peterclark6290]

@@robertspence7766 Not GPS, again. That was debunked years ago. In the code there is nothing to do with it. Check.

[@robertspence7766]

@@peterclark6290 Geez. There is nothing to debunk regarding GPS corrections. Time runs at a different rate due to velocity difference between your device and the satellite as well as proximity to earth's gravity well. It is absolutely a feature required or GPS will not function. If someone "debunked" this it is 100% disinformation to support an agenda. It is so easy to validate.

[@peterclark6290]

@@robertspence7766 Find some GPS code and check it out. I have. Moving objects produce a temporary relativity: similar to combat pilots needing to lead their shots when using guns. That relativity requires everything to stay the same - which rarely happens. Hence the constants have be updated all the time. Any construction requires rock solid basic elements and the mere fact that we are here in a functioning Universe indicates a permanency of basic form. As I understand it there is only Energy and Space. The fundamental energy 'packets' can compound into atoms and from those to acids, alkalines, minerals, etc. Which can break down which indicates that the basic units are not Legoland uniform and some rare harmonic imbalance can undo the structure = Entropy. The energy packets, because they are Electro-Magnetic invoke a binary logic (attract/repel, etc). Every manifestation is based on that rock solid foundation. Ergo: Life and Intelligence are 'of the Universe' unless you prefer to see friendly, smiling faces up there. BTW Time is merely a by-product of the Cosmos not being static. It too is absolute. The Cosmos is Infinite and Time is Eternal.

[@robertspence7766]

@@peterclark6290 No, you haven't. Either you do not understand the correction or you are lying because it is what it is. There is no debating with the anti-science conspiracists. Do you teach physics for a national research laboratory? Well, I do. End of conversation.

[@pevegaraoperivenkatagangad9570]

As far as Solar System in concerned there are many things involve there. 1) The planets are arranged in the form of conic section from top to bottom with two naves of cones maintaining all the norms of circles and ellipses. 2) Probably the Sun is kept at the centre which governs all other planets. There are reactions between the different elements in the Sun with the elemen ts present in other planets. That may be the reason for the different vibrational sounds in planets. Otherwise there is no source for vibrations for such large bodies.3) We can apprehend anorher reason for the activity of the planets ie. While the planets are moving in elliptical orbits in conic section the central axis must be working like a very huge solenoid.

[@rohitchat5538]

Sean caroll is one of Who I when I learn from about .. I takes seriously my Interest Nd exciting knowledge

[@whirledpeas3477]

What?

[@invent5540]

It was my understanding that Einstein was referring to the prediction of photons being either waves or partials and the prediction of quantum duality... when he refers to spooky action at a distance... not gravity. Correct me if I'm wrong?

[@catkeys6911]

Beautifully explained! I had to picture a traveling compression wave in my head, though, because the animation at 15:46 was unable to show that. It just shows a "slinky" stretching and compressing. With a *real* slinky in your hands, though you CAN see this effect if you hold one end steady, and make a quick compression motion with the other - you will see a compression wave travel from that hand towards the steady hand.

[@AmmoDude]

Yes, a slinky will contract on its own, from tension, to it's original compressed state. As all springs will do, they will return to their original state. Once in their original state, they will remain there until a compression or expansion force (mechanical, heating, cooling, etc) is acted upon them, they will not expand or contract on their own. So, in order for this image of gravity to work, there must be an attracting and repelling force on both ends of the wave or in between both ends, these forces oscillating in unison with each other, one pulling and the other pushing at the same time. The closer one end gets to the opposite end, the force pulling is diminished and evolves into a repelling force. A wave, on the other hand, moves away from the energy source until it contacts resistance. The resistance absorbs some of the wave's energy as it changes direction. A wave will eventually loses all it's energy and expire; it is not perpetual unless another force is introduced to perpetuate the motion. Yeah, I still don't get it.........

[@DirtyMikeACTUAL13]

Every one is asking “what is gravity?” But no one is asking “HOW is gravity?”

[@alexandrekassiantchouk1632]

Try mere time dilation that solves Vera Rubin puzzle as well.

[@saigonmonopoly1105]

that many push pull spin rotate spiral connecting air tail under water how it seperate oxygen force under water hence bubble pop up right

[@tomlakosh1833]

Here’s an amateur TOE based upon a quantum gravity particle. The force carrying particle of the Big Bang also had to combine to form matter as it cooled because there was nothing else to combine into structure. My choice is Planck length photons which are composed of 4 brane and 3 brane strings, (the source of entanglement), interlaced on the surface of a prolate spheroid that has protruding positive and negative poles. These poles are functional worm drive gears that allow the photons to form daisychain into chiral loops that can form straight shafts and one to three aspect ratio tori. These shafts and tori combine to form ambipolar solenoids, (aka gluons), that have counter-rotating shafts, which amplify the ambient electromagnetic fields to produce a much more powerful local field. The gluons can then fuse to form ring shapes that combine to form the charged fields constituting the shells of leptons and baryons. The gluons can condense in galactic EMF via Feshbach resonance to be dispersed as dark matter back upon the galaxy to generate BTFR. The gluons generate gravitational thrust by penetrating the spherical leptons and baryon and accelerating as a superfluid waveform in the subwavelength cavity to generate vectored thrust as exhaust from the South pole of the particle that polar orients toward the dominant gluon flux. The exhaust is vectored by the external quantum fluid formed by gluons on the surface that were at an acute angle or were too slow to penetrate into the spherical particle. This surface fluid also forms a dual membrane slipstream at the equator where the fluid from both hemispheres collide to form something like a disc MHD generator field. That field interacts with the gluon flux to stifle acceleration as space-time viscosity by absorbing the momentum of the flux thus generating an opposing thrust to gravity in the wide field. This slowing of the gluon flux via the viscosity mechanism eventually renders the flux to slow to penetrate the spherical particles and instead enhances the viscosity field to manifest dark energy where the gluon flux crossing megaparsecs is repulsive but the fast local gravity still works. This is why the galaxies in high Z superclusters act like windsocks in the laminar flow of the slow gluons, with all disks in the same plane and with their long axes all parallel to the direction of red shift propagation. Indeed, the Hubble constant is just a measure of the average percentage of gluon slowed to a repulsive velocity over a megaparsec. Just guessing. BTW, black holes are likely solitons surrounded by Fermi slush, (a Fermi solid mixed with quantum fluid generated by friction caused by incoming particles). The exterior skin presents a subwavelength cavity forcing all incoming particle into a waveform that maintains a superfluid state confined by the other waveforms.

[@emkoravo]

07:49 So is the gravitational field a soup filled torus of a supermassive black hole inside another one? The image of the infinity symbol comes to mind

[@maelradec6766]

Gonna learn today

[@billybobhouse9559]

This was great. Really enjoyed it. However, the constant camera switches are distracting.

[@matthewjacobs141]

Question: does a rotating mass generate the same gravitational force as a nonrotating body?

[@quantumtacos]

No not exactly. There will be an additional Lense-Thirring effect at least, and perhaps other effects which are not yet understood.

[@solapowsj25]

The kinetic motion called gravity, though least understood it cannot be ignored because of its presence in our daily lives. Take the time when gravitational waves passed through earth 🌎. I stirred my glass to have hot tea ☕, but it split into two neat cylinders. I took a flask for hot water, and it imploded and shattered. Pulled out the spare one from the cupboard, and it did the same. Decided to fry breakfast on the induction stove but the 12 inch glass cover shattered into uniform tiny pieces. But nothing happened to me (my wife was out of station for a month). With kind regards, Mr. Joseph.

[@mustafayilmaz2259]

Durumunuza üzüldüm jozeph....

[@solapowsj25]

​@@mustafayilmaz2259That's fine. The kinetic motion with greater than 170 GeV creates a dual vacua which is called the graviton. It comes as the gravitational wave and split 💔my glass into two cylinders. Interesting physics.

[@briankepner7569]

I thought comes to mind that the initial annihilation of the matter and antimatter that sprung from the quantum firmament in the first few seconds of the universe resulted in nearly 100% entropy. That very small amounts of matter and antimatter was left over. However collapsing space-time versus expanding space-time must have also had its annihilation. That what was left over was collapsing space-time in a large degree being dominant over expanding space-time. A space-time that allows for the expansion of space pretty huge volumes of empty space and that matter is generally pressured into confines or filaments of collapsing space time. If they could run a model of the universe in reverse taking out the filaments and reversing time to win the expanding space-time was at zero.

[@DennisMathias]

No such thing as empty space.

[@theholyspiritempoweredendo68]

Gravitational force and direction, is the vectoral summation of all the electron deflection forces exerted on all the electrons in any given mass, as they rotate, oscillate, or move at any angular velocity relative to the magnetic field component of all the radiant photon energy generated within the mass, intrinsic to the quantum entropy pattern of electron motion as required to sustain the interdependent coexistence of all the atomic components in any observed mass.

[@teepee431]

Good God, you guys. Breath-taking. Carry on. Winderful.

[@pedrofigueiredo7850]

How do you explain the interaction between an electron and a positron ?

[@gowdsake7103]

Opposites attract !

[@eensio]

The spring illustrates very well the complexity of waves. The gravity needs mass, but not necessary matter to be produced. In the beginnig time started, because space ”needed” time. And at the same time gravity started, because mass ”needed” gravity. The matter came later.

[@WashingtonHoax]

A wave is not a thing. A magnet (aligned crystal matter) creates a Vortex. Latest finding is the vast void we call Space has Dark Matter and Dark Energy that seems to be present but can only be called a constant by mathematical means. Matter whether a Planet, Sun or Blackhole is modifying something. You can call it a well, vortex, warped fabric. Everything we so far know about the Universe is spinning (rotating) and expanding. Here's a thought... if the Universe is expanding - everything in it - is falling (action - reaction).

[@Cake...]

The 2 current competing theories on the nature of gravity are quantum loop gravity and string theory.

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

Life is Eternal, the Life-Desire is the MOTOR of Life, in direct extension of the Life-Desire, We have the Will, (Life-Side) and Gravity, (stuff-Side) by the Will, We do balance Gravity, of Earth, with our own, when We lift the cup. The slightly slinger of Earth, cause the Tides, Moon just follow the slinger. Also, Walter Russell, explain the Stuff-side, and Gravity in a Eternal Perspective.

[@Mysixofnine]

What is the physical mediator for gravity? Space/time gravitons or black magic?

[@trout3685]

White magic.

[@whtghst8105]

I asked that exact question in third grade! I'm now in my 60s and still have no answer?

[@stick9648]

Thanks

[@prettysmile6869]

The Slinky was invented and developed by American naval engineer Richard T. James in 1943 and demonstrated at Gimbels department store in Philadelphia in November 1945. The toy was a hit, selling its entire inventory of 400 units in 90 minutes.

[@KpxUrz5745]

Lovely factoid. My contribution to science is that I am old enough to still remember Gimbels.

[@olgastepanov8479]

It was popular in the 90s after Soviet Union collapsed and Western imports started flooding the market. Mostly were plastic with rainbow color, but a few were made from Steel.

[@mikewalker7385]

I visualize gravity as the expansion of space-time. The universe expands into time slower around an object that has mass.

[@Mindcroscope]

We need something that can explain UFO's antigravity maneuvers. 👽🛀

[@mikewalker7385]

@@Mindcroscope Maybe with a better understanding of quantum field Theory we will be able to artificially manipulate the expansion of space-time around a chosen object. If you could slow down the expansion of space in front of you the same way a gravitational field does, you would fall in that direction. It would not be the sudden movement you see UFOs do.

[@anthony212459]

I see it as a distortion of space-time. With the highest concentration of distortion closer to the cause of said distortion and dissipating outwards.

[@mitseraffej5812]

8:00 Something is warping this guys space time. The continual change in camera detracts from what he is saying.

[@longcastle4863]

16:55... In exchanging a photon, how does the one electron know the other electron is there? And is there evidence for the one electron changing course slightly before the other electron? Addendum _:_ but then there must not be, because then we would know which electron emitted the photon and which absorbed it. How is it we can't tell this? Or is the illustration provided to go along with the narrative just misleading? Regardless, still wondering how the one electron knows the other is there if fields are not at play?

[@christianlibertarian5488]

I really am confused. What does the Planck length have to do with Tex-Mex food?

[@stolasamon-seere5319]

Hyperbolic curve for speed of light. Matrices for electromagnetics. Spacetime. There's a connection there. Higher dimensions. Time drag. Multiverse?

[@satorimystic]

What of Giordano Bruno's levitation? ;-) Did he tap into something that still transcends our understanding?

[@denischarette8547]

How come a gravitational wave moves at the same speed as light? What is the ``link`` between the two?

[@ritemolawbks8012]

Any signal or information without mass moves at the speed of light. That's the velocity of cause and effect, and since light and gravity are both information about mass and energy, they move at the speed of light.

[@mikkel715]

If gravity from a particle in superposition moves by another particle in superposition, is the gravity also in superposition? So gravity only manifest out of superposition when it affects a particle not in superposition. Not in superposition means the particle is measured. Measured by what before gravity is not in superposition...

[@mustafayilmaz2259]

Gerçek bilgileri space x alınız...

[@albert6157]

In quantum mechanics, fields and particles dont produce gravity, it is just too weak. Gravity, spacetime in general relativity is still currently incompatible with Quantum Field theory for now. Superposition is just a way of describing the chaotic yet predictable behaviour at the quantum scales. "Measurement" just describe interaction with other particles, when this happens, a superposition collapse (decoherence). Particles in superposition decohere whenever it interact with other particles.

[@mustafayilmaz2259]

Ne soruyorsunuz anlamıyorum...siz beni dinleyin ....konunun uzmanı Elon Musk ....başkalarına itibar etmeyin..sizi kandirirlar....sonra pişman olursunuz...

[@mikkel715]

@@albert6157 Actually particles in superposition decohere also by indirect measurement without interaction. Collapse of wave function is a realization of the particle and its events.

[@albert6157]

@@mikkel715 yeah you are right, quantum fluctuations and self-interaction and self-coupling is a reason particles collapse and decohere randomly and why particles decay

[@patrickregan3302]

Well as a kid we often put gravity on our mashed potato’s. Biscuits and gravity made a good breakfast too!!!!😊

[@jerryw4520]

How do elections know when (or where for that matter) to emit force carrying particles?

[@aucourant9998]

As the two electrons approach each other, how does either electron know that the other electron is close enough to cause it to emit a photon? What triggers the photon release?

[@periklisspanos7185]

General relativity doesn’t care about our explanations, it does his thing

[@tobywestfall2970]

Why does the camera go from side to side? And you have to keep repositioning yourself to look at the camera?

[@jamesraymond1158]

Dr. Hooper says that Einstein said that gravitational waves move at the speed of light. Were those Einstein's exact words? What is the basis of this statement? Why should the speed of photons (an electromagnetic phenomenon) have anything to do with the speed of grav. waves? (I am aware that measurements show that the speed of grav waves is very close to the speed of light, but that is different from saying they are the same).

[@gyro5d]

There is no magnetic attraction. The magnetic fields are attached to a low pressure vortex, between the magnets, into Counterspace. Ken Wheeler. 5) Magnetism gives Magnitude to the Universe. Gravity is Magnetism of objects attracted to a low pressure vortex into Counterspace. Mediated to center of everything is Counterspace/its Mass. Center of mass, mass' mediated to its center of Mass/low pressure vortex. Mass is in Counterspace, Matter is in Space. Momentum is Matter moving in Space and Mass moving in Counterspace. When Matter is altered in Space, it's Mass is continuing in Counterspace. The Bullet Cluster Galaxy. "Gator Team"

[@rw2452]

I want to learn about what you said.

[@gyro5d]

@@rw2452 I learned the basics of "Field Theory" from Ken Wheeler. It's the Aether, that is a word the phd's won't mention. That's why I use it as much as I can. Aether answers everything, Standard Model Science Fiction just makes up names for the same things, different energies. Aether has a Dielectric energy hyperboloid that rotates in one direction. It's really 2 vortices, an electron and a positron. Separated by the near infinite capacitance of the Inertial plane/Counterspace. Surrounded by Aether's Dielectric voidence field/Magnetism. That creates nodes from there coaxial circuit, transverse waves, that EM waves/Light propagate on. Light does not have a speed, Light has a rate of induction. Light is instantaneous/entangled, creating these nodes. Light's rate of induction is Magnetism's rate of node creation. The Universe began when Dielectric energy tunneled from the Inertial plane/Counterspace. Dielectric energy created Space to exist in. This is when Time began. Ken Wheeler and Eric Dollard. Dielectric energy is Terminate to Terminate, Inflation. Dielectric energy became it's own field of Dielectric voidence field/Magnetism. Magnetism gives Magnitude to the Universe. The Grand Expand/Big Bang. Dielectric energy and Magnetism transverse waves created the nodes, that EM waves/Light propagate on. Temporal into Spacial. And then some! Ha!! Ken Wheeler has over a thousand videos on "Platos Field Theory". Aether was believed in for thousands of years. It's against Einstein, So that's why! Ha!

[@rw2452]

@@gyro5d Thanks. I've heard of the Ether and was curious about it. Thanks again for the sources for me to look up👍👍Update: I know who your talking about now. The guy with the tattooed arms. I checked pout videos on magmatism. Very interesting.