Completely New Relativistic Effect Just Found! Viscosity at Speed of Light

[@germalganis]

A lot of bots just spamming how inspiring and amazing are Anton videos… joke’s on them, Anton videos are actually inspiring and amazing.

[@marshallmkerr]

They need to start claiming their investment portfolios use relativistic effects to increase yields.

[@DonnaPinciot]

They're just posting generic positive comments on videos to get interaction. To what end, I'm not sure. Maybe it boosts their 'channel' and comments, making it more likely people will see them and allow them to start pushing the real scam?

[@artor9175]

@@DonnaPinciot Building up a history on the bot account so it looks less like a bot in other applications.

[@Cirwlos]

But he wasted 12 minutes, and didn't explained the point of the video. Do viscosity grows, or reduces with the speed? A total failure.

[@Yantryman]

Is it not him buying the bots??!

[@venkyratnam]

I read about it long ago. NIFS, Japan, in a study discovered that turbulence moves faster than heat when heat escapes in plasmas in the Large Helical Device. Characteristic of this turbulence made it possible to predict changes in plasma temperature, and observation of turbulence may lead to development of a method for real time control of plasma temperature. Anyway, great video again Anton. 👍🏼

[@efdangotu]

That's a gem, thank you.

[@kingpiggins292]

Nice, should make fusion reactors more easier to control.

[@rodrigoff7456]

That is actually quite intuitive: from the liquid's perspective, it'd be flowing at "classical" viscosity, but from an outsider seeing the liquid closer to lightspeed, it'd be flowing slower.

[@axle.student]

So it would "appear" to be higher viscosity to the observer frame, but no change for the liquid? So just a TD due to velocity effect (relativistic effect)? > Anton didn't mention if high velocity made for higher or lower viscosity of the fluid :(

[@jamespaden8140]

I would not stick my finger in it to test that.

[@FredPilcher]

There once was a fencer named Fisk Whose thrust was exceedingly brisk. So fast was his action The Lorenz contraction Reduced his rapier to a disk.

[@GameraSoup]

Anton’s uploads are my universal constant.

[@JorgetePanete]

Viscosity at Speed of Light sounds like a fire new album

[@ChrisMissal]

Muse probably

[@bsodcat]

Viscosity at Maximum Velocity

[@TheJunky228]

@@bsodcat I could see that being a metal album or like something twrp would have

[@DrMackSplackem]

A concept album,

[@shiho1481]

Its relatively new

[@the80hdgaming]

So... This is pretty much the equivalent of aero drag on objects moving at speed in an atmosphere... ie: racecars or aircraft...

[@olic7266]

E=mc^2

[@shiho1481]

@@olic7266 ​ its mass to energy equivalence for non moving object. It can be ignored on low speed, but still In case of moving object or photons its different.

[@Phych_uk]

from a resting point of view

[@amelioravictoriadionyssia3323]

It's sort of like aero drag only aero drag is a fully kinetic/physical parameter rather than atomic... In terms of what kind of energy is influencing matter

[@LouisHansell]

A lot of people get weird at the speed of light

[@dotdot7911]

Yeah I hate that

[@nickcarroll8565]

You’d act weird too if everyone else stopped moving

[@juhajuntunen7866]

Even thinking of it made them crazy.

[@Bit-while_going]

And yet because of relativity, you can never be sure it's not actually you that is actually weird.

[@noob19087]

@@LouisHansell Me: Me at light speed: Send feet pictures

[@dishliquid]

I'm seeing more complaints about bot comments than actual bot comments

[@axle.student]

I can't say I have seen any bots at all yet :/

[@demonicsquid7217]

They get auto removed eventually, so unless you are here early on you don't see most of them. Also other users report them.

[@wayneharrison]

🤖

[@choopatroopa4445]

I work in the oil and gas industry and determining the viscosity of additives is the bane of my existence. Now we're adding relativistic effects? As if viscosity wasn't finicky enough.

[@geoffstrickler]

I think you can safely ignore the relativistic effects for the next 30+ years.

[@jonstreeter1540]

😄👍

[@mathieucaron4957]

Your coworkers believe in science?

[@bobmcbobson8368]

@@mathieucaron4957I suspect you don’t.

[@hugovandyk9918]

It might be key to light speed travel. I wonder what effects that viscosity change would have on engines and the like. Fuel turning into a gel in the engine sounds like it might go very wrong very quickly.

[@Kags]

it occurs to me that this would allow an observer to determine their speed in the theoretical "sealed in a box in space" experiments where an observer is unable to tell if they're moving or stationary to an outside observer

[@VulpisFoxfire]

That depends..will the viscosity change in the box's frame of reference, or just to that of an outside observer? I'm wondering if the apparent change in viscosity all comes down to time-dilation effects--it appears to be thicker because the dilation makes it appear to be moving slower.

[@tim40gabby25]

Nice thought, right or wrong.

[@MaxBrix]

The viscosity is relativistic. The observer is motionless.

[@simonwatson2399]

It's got to be that the relativistic plasma appears to have strange behavior to the non relativistic observer trying to interact with it but an observer comoving with the plasma sees the non relativistic observer doing something odd. Have a look at videos on how moving charges affect other charges for different observer speeds. That's whacky too.

[@codyramseur]

All this means is that 2 different observers 1 moving at relativistic speeds and one stationary would disagree on the viscosity of the fluid. Which isn’t a huge revelation. They would also disagree about many other properties like density, color, or shape.

[@blairleavell3501]

This guy is a for real genius. He’s extraordinarily curious about everything from viruses to epigenetics to astrophysics to quantum mechanics. The breadth and depth of his scholarship is astounding. He’s the ADD genius. The only reason he doesn’t have a Nobel prize is that he can’t focus on just one field long enough. We are lucky to have this brilliant science communicator

[@ChrisKatsu-]

Anton I just want to say your channel is a great source of joy and information.

[@DagarCoH]

I am kind of disappointed that the effects on people blood near the speed of light was not discussed. But kinda understandable, if the effects themselves are not entirely clear yet. Would love a follow-up that says "You can't go over 70% light speed or you will turn into a gummi bear. A dead gummi bear." Maybe we then start mixing lower viscuos fluids into everything to keep it flowing?

[@stevenkarnisky411]

I am interested in the content of Anton's vids. Some of the commenters further illuminate that content or offer reasonable arguments. Some are humorous. The others are nonsense. I ignore them. I have no idea whether they are bots, or not. They are simply unworthy of attention. So, thank you for the content, Anton. And thanks to those of you who contribute intelligent or humorous contentl

[@Greg042869]

It matters because if you are traveling close to the speed of light, you will want to choose a lighter weight engine oil, like a 0W20.

[@samtigernotiger3886]

Something is wrong. The equivalence principle, which forms the basis of the theory of relativity, also states that chemistry and fluid dynamics behave completely normally even in objects that move close to the speed of light; viewed in the object's inertial system. From the observer's perspective, relativistic effects naturally occur; lengths and time courses change. But the result of a chemical reaction must remain exactly the same, regardless of the relative speed. Of course, chemistry changes at extremely high temperatures, probably because individual particle speeds then become relativistically relevant. But even then, only in the observer's perception.

[@kylelochlann5053]

Exactly. Relativistic effects aren't physical effects upon matter but a recognition of a background geometry that differs from Euclidean expectation. If they were, I could take a glass of water and define a reference frame by writing 0.9999999999c on a sheet of paper next to it and observe said relativistic fluid dynamics.

[@axle.student]

To the best of my knowledge yes, it is just and effect for the observer (observers frame relative to the object of observation). People get confused with this. From an observer view it is much distorted, so we need to calculate out that distortion to see what the object (which we can't see directly) is "actually" doing :) This is only for SR velocity. Acceleration is something different.

[@tomsense404]

My understanding is that from the liquid’s reference frame, nothing appears strange. From an observer’s reference frame, of observing this thing moving so quickly, I think getting splattered by it wouldn’t be desired

[@axle.student]

I have got caught in some heated debates over the relativist effects of SRs TD due to velocity. But as far as I know it is an observer effect (or an effect seen from the relativistic (inertial) frame of the observer) and the object itself experiences nothing different. TD due to gravity (GR)(acceleration) is a very different thing which is real to the object under acceleration.

[@TheMcEwens419]

As an actual person, I can say, these bots ruin everything. KZbin can offer 60 min worth of ads every 5 min but can’t control bots? I doubt it

[@Flesh_Wizard]

Really shows where KZbin's priorities are🙄

[@CharveL88]

For reals.

[@ridethecurve55]

As an actual person, I can opine that Anton Really needs to lose that fake smile (grimace) at the end of his videos. Unless, of course, he's actually a bot!

[@nickcarroll8565]

They can also delete every other comment of mine, no matter how benign

[@niccreznic8259]

@@ridethecurve55My friend I don’t think you realize how cruel your comment is.

[@MaxStax1]

Your videos are gold! Stay golden Anton.

[@aleksandrpetrosyan1140]

I worked on this! Zaccone is my Proffessor, I was about to send him the link to this article, before checking the authors! Thank you!

[@Tyraelaus669]

Relativistic viscosity really highlights our current lack of understanding of physics as a whole and could potentially open an avenue of experimentation into the differentiation of the effects of velocity and gravitation.

[@MisakaMikotoDesu]

I remember when this channel was still called What Da Math. Thank you for the years of high quality educational content.

[@SaberFox-xo5jf]

My question is what would happen to the human body when we get up to these relativistic speeds and the viscosity of our bodily fluids change.

[@fikretyet]

I was looking for this question to answer or I would write this as a comment myself; any liquid, including what is inside the human body, would never be exposed to such speeds. We would have to consider equivalence principle inside a spaceship. This means, if you don't accelerate independently inside a spaceship or "without a spaceship" over %10 of speed of light, you would be fine. But for example, this effect would be about the blood of a person that has been shot by a laser gun.

[@ДмитрийФилиппов-в3н]

Nothing going to happen. It is all relative.

[@samgragas8467]

Your fluids can't move faster than the rest of your body. You are misunderstanding relativity.

[@samgragas8467]

@@shiho1481 Rest mass is an invariant, that is what an inertial observer moving at speed v measures. You don't notice anything different.

[@graxxor]

Blood is travelling at the same speed relatively speaking so we would notice no change. The only changes would be noticeable from an external observer travelling at relativistic speeds in relation to us.

[@jamespaden8140]

This man is amazing in his ability to explain the complex to the simple. My greatest trouble with academia is its' demanding that math be seen as exact. Far too often new discoveries force a change in our understanding of physics, which would seem to be proof that math is not exact, yet. We do not have ALL the information, so we cannot say, "It ALL adds up!" Without having understanding of even the concept of double digits, knowing one plus one equals two is not very impressive, and it cannot solve all the problems you find.

[@skysurfer5cva]

I am a civil engineer working mostly in the area of municipal infrastructure. Fortunately, I do not need to include relativistic effects when I model water, wastewater, storm drainage, and natural gas piping systems. 🙂

[@Flesh_Wizard]

Imagine the incredible water pressure you'd need to shoot it out of a pipe at close to light speed

[@CardinalTreehouse]

Sounds like your storm drains aren't moving fast enough, you should fix that

[@Rope_Adope]

@@Flesh_Wizardno plunger needed lol

[@Cirwlos]

Every time you use electricity, you use relativity, because relativity is included in Maxwell equations.

[@growthisfreedomunitedearth7584]

IDK... sometimes my poop flies out of me at light speed.

[@j6moon15]

All the comments are bots 😭 Edit: not literally, but when I commented this 90% of the comments were bait bots

[@awedelen2]

how can you tell?

[@Erichasadong]

Thanks for your contribution bot

[@SoftBreadSoft]

​@@awedelen2not 100% of them but theres a bunch down there with generic ai generated attractive lady photo, generic wow amazing video comment.

[@KtosoX]

I can see 3 very similar generic comments. Not all comments - but I agree that this is worrying.

[@Auroral_Anomaly]

@@ErichasadongBruh he joined 11 years ago.😭

[@-BuddyGuy]

I discovered this effect when I first tried Taco Bell. I've witnessed first hand how at ultra high velocity/temperature fluids can actually get thicker. Their stainless steel toilet bowls are built to take it though

[@Nardage]

No that's aids

[@thatcanadian6698]

Sounds like your meal went through you at relativistic speed.

[@kingpiggins292]

Dude I was blinded by Cherenkov Radiation because the toilet bowls acted like heavy shielding

[@mamneo2]

Incroyable.

[@jamesritter4813]

I too have experienced this with Milwaukee ice lol

[@shikazeevods]

as a current biochem student... I wish I understood.... geez

[@skyumi8392]

The idea of us slowly becoming more definite on relativity is just the best constantly running pun.

[@brucerazor5202]

Hi Anton, love your channel

[@ElecTrev]

Wow Anton, always something new and interesting!

[@tatianatub]

clanker detected

[@d.mort.]

I may be incorrect here, but you mentioned the satellite time moves slower due to their velocity. This is true, however the net effect is a quicker clock due to their increased distance from the earth! Oh the scale of +11ns for the velocity but -34ns for the distance per day

[@jimcurtis9052]

Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 👍😎

[@brubrusuryoutube]

reminder that like everything in relativity this change in viscosity will be relative to the reference frame. From its perspective the fluid will not experience time, length and viscosity changes

[@SeorkMaxx]

So, if things change according to their speed and how much pressure is applied, this makes a good testing point for the early universe. Because everything was moving/expanding at a very high speed and must have still been under extreme pressure. Looking forward to new findings, we are living in great times❤

[@springchic1977]

I can’t help but wonder….if fluids become more viscous the faster they travel, do they ever become solid?

[@UnfollowYourDreams]

Now try to imagine what happens when you go FTL 🤯

[@Kneedragon1962]

I don't know, but speculating ~ Glass is technically not a solid, it is a liquid. It just has an enormously high viscosity. If the moving liquid / fluid gains a viscosity like glass, then it effectively becomes a solid.

[@UnfollowYourDreams]

@@Kneedragon1962 it's a myth that glass isn't a liquid, it just doesn't crystalize due to the rapid cooling like for example ice would. But this effect is actually what happens when a liquid approaches the speed of light. This might actually be survivable.

[@christopherleubner6633]

It gets even more bizarre, they become glass like, and very close to light speed they would undergo a phase transition where they would behave similarly to Bose-Einstein condensate😮

[@m.streicher8286]

​@@UnfollowYourDreamsnothing because you can't

[@benryhenson]

wait so, when fluids approach the speed of light, they become non Newtonian?

[@lawsonwebb8182]

Anton presentation 10/10

[@codedinfortran]

Thank you. I had not heard of this and it is very interesting in its implications, both for experimental and observational physics. Thank you for covering them so well.

[@Chamuzi]

@1:43 Nice Klingon Battlecruiser.

[@magicyeti5630]

… Been telling Lazar for years we need to be able to Excite the atoms in order to envelope.

[@kaarlimakela3413]

Einstein is right!?!? AGAIN?? Even he can't believe it! I'm Shocked. SHOCKED!

[@Hiddensecret9]

According to Einstein's theory, no object can reach the speed of light (c) in a normal physical medium, so measuring 'viscosity at the speed of light' is a very difficult problem to imagine. If such an effect exists, it would need to surpass the fundamental physical limits that we currently understand.

[@blufynn]

Anton you're a blessing to my algorithm

[@petepanteraman]

This fluid thickening effect and heat description reminds me of the Earth's core and the effects of the core around us, i.e. lightning, magnetosphere and the mantle too. I wonder if geology has some answers in this case?

[@Tore_Lund]

Light speed fluid dynamics! Being an engineering student in the future will be fun.

[@danthesquirrel]

So the good news: We can get you to the Centari star system in 10 years from your perspective. The bad news: Your blood will have the viscosity of honey until you get there. It’s always something.

[@jimgraham6722]

Thanks for the briefing Anton

[@erasmus_locke]

2:00 looks a lot like a helicopter rotor seen through a camera shutter

[@TheJunky228]

good observation!

[@richardzeitz54]

As a neutron star collapses into a black hole, it must rotate faster and faster as its diameter decreases. Seeing as how they're full of fluid, this might have some bearing on the fate of rapidly spinning neutron stars above the mass limit. As they shrink towards a point, SOMETHING must happen to their angular momentum - they cannot spin faster than the speed of light but if they are to become point-like, any spin would tend towards infinity! Too bad we can't peak behind the event horizon. Anyhow at some point they must break down into a rapidly spinning quark-gluon plasma if they grow small, dense, and hot enough. A very viscous q-g plasma!

[@clay-tw5gc]

Sometimes, when I eat beans, a certain sensor should not record the results of that event that fast. Furthermore, the sensor registers a stronger effect in those cases. I am beginning to wonder if the relativistic effects of bean reactions affect such sensor data. There just might be a groundbreaking paper out of such a research effort.

[@danij5055]

Who better to write that paper than you! You've got the experimentation down 😉

[@clay-tw5gc]

@danij5055 as it turns out, it is not the paper that is groundbreaking. It's the ground that is breaking under the bean reaction release device. Relativistic bean effects are dangerous to do at home. The neighbors tend to be less than optimal after such an event.

[@RNMSC]

Based on the premise that the effects of relativity are the result of interactions between things that are moving at relativistic velocities relative to each other, I would imagine that we should be seeing some of those effects if one runs a particle beam accelerator to feed high velocity particles through a sufficiently large volume of plasma. I'm not sure how large that volume of plasma would need to be, but from the perspective of the particle, it's just moseying along and suddenly it's experiencing a volume of plasma passing it at something close to the speed of light. It would be interesting to see if the resulting effects are observable as particle interactions as we might see in a cloud chamber, or if they would be more detectable in monitoring the driver electronics for the plasma volume. I presume that the electromagnetic effect of the plasma itself would make for a more difficult or easier means of detecting those interactions. The results should presumably be fed into the AI modeling formula that are being used to generate the timings needed for the various fusion techniques under consideration. Hopefully it doesn't set back the effective commercialization predictions much further. I'm sure it still only needs another 20 years. My presumption at the moment is that the main question is going to be how does emitted particles in the fusion process interact with the fields. We know that one of the expected products of fusion is heat which is primarily what we are looking to take advantage of, but that heat needs to be moved from the point of fusion, to the place where it's going to be interacting with whatever is going to be turning that heat into electricity, or other useful energy products. We've long know that fusion in the sun releases both heat energy that changes the "shell" values of the electron fields of atoms in the sun, as well as generating Neutrinos. Neutrinos essentially provide a messenger service that lets us know that fusion is happening, however it's not particularily useful in gathering energy generated by the fusion process, simply because neutrinos interact with the rest of the universe so slightly. So we are most likely going to have to get that energy via some variety of either the Photon effect, or making use of a electromagnetic effect as the electron changes orbits. (which would simply result in a different photon effect except in this case we're talking about a process that is not kicking the electron entirely out of the shell of an atom. It is my impression that the question of relativistic effects of viscosity in fluids (related to the plasma) is where this is going to effect how well, or fluidly the energy can transfer. Should be interesting to learn more when new science observations are published..

[@Sutairn]

You hinted at a video that would get over 100 mil views, video name "why special relativity doesn't allow atoms over a certain size and kill the island of stability theories".

[@SebSN-y3f]

Thank you very much for your great work Anton!!!! This video was especially great. Very instructive and well explained.

[@RonnyAndersson-q9b]

Antons videos are amaizing and inspiring.

[@floretion]

To me it seems plausible that the orbitals of electrons in (say a solid) around atoms will also change as they approach the speed of light as the probabilty of an electon moving even faster in the direction of movement is less. Same goes for gas molecules in containers approaching the speed of light- the gas temperature should become cooler.

[@DeecentAnimal]

I think they would not slow down any

[@rdbchase]

You might have noted that time dilation is significant for GPR satellites despite the fact that they orbit far more slowly than .1c; you had just said that it was negligible at speeds less than .1c.

[@michaelholt7994]

Ok anton ,no mention of the density of this viscocity,it would only be able to maintain this with plasma.the strength of the plasma is the key,

[@narmale]

Anton video's are some of the few i auto click the like button as soon as i start the video :D

[@ice_fox]

And for the older among us, fluids turn weird in the dead of night.

[@kaarlimakela3413]

Thinking of all the properties of gold, 2 new amazing discoveries about gold's uniqueness seen here recently. What you explained reminds me of how the ancient Egyptians and others thought of gold as the skin of the Gods. They had good instincts there.

[@aristoclesathenaioi4939]

Given that different elements become solids, liquids or gases depending on temperature, there should be a relativistic effects on the phase transition temperatures of a material. This does relate to time dilation because objects moving with respect to one another at significant fractions of the speed of light will make objects apparently frozen in time. This change in the vviscosity of fluiids moving large fractions of the speed of light relative to the observer sounds like the same effects that cryogenic temperatures havee on matter that produces superfluids like liquid Helium at temperatures close to absolute zero as well as the formation of Bose-Einstein Condensates at very low temperatures. It is as if the relativitic speed also produces relativistic temperature levels where the temperature measured by one observer will differ from the temperature measured a by different observer depending on the velocity of one observer relative to the other.

[@marksuplinskas3474]

Thanks!

[@whatdamath]

thank you!

[@thomaslindell5448]

I was under the impression that anything traveling at the speed of light is operating in its on frame of reference. This seems to me that it would require constant acceleration

[@AceSpadeThePikachu]

So does this mean it is physically impossible to construct a space ship that can travel at relativistic speeds without killing the entire crew because their blood would basically turn to syrup?

[@dblockbass]

You're great Anton. Thanks for uploading and explaining in an unpatronizing, informative neutral manner.

[@edwardfortae2350]

So basically anything with blood will die at light speed.

[@kaptainwarp]

I clicked because you didn't mug the thumbnail

[@Randy12346]

Same and watched the video too

[@DeecentAnimal]

I’ve never seen so many people complain so much about a thumbnail.. you’re making nerds look like pricks also 😂😂😂😂

[@Midas2010]

So, as a layman, if fluids change viscosity with velocity… would a human heart be able to pump blood round our bodies?!

[@kylelochlann5053]

It doesn't, no need to worry.

[@FrancisFjordCupola]

6:30 in... it's ironic when Anton remarks on momentum and the most famous E=mc^2 formula. After all, that is the version of the original formula for objects "at rest". Objects where the momentum has been set to zero.

[@kerbangol.8386]

well, last time I checked, I am a bag of mostly water.

[@thomasgade226]

as a crystaline-based lifeform myself, I do not consider you ugly.

[@incinerativemario]

Great! Instead of always being 20 years away from fusion reactors, we are now 19!

[@gordonwallin2368]

Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.

[@jacobe2995]

The shutter speed of the universe in action

[@WhitefirePL]

So HOW does that viscosity change at near-lightspeed? Sorry but for Anton's vid this one is a little weak, lots of beating around and I don't see any specifics.

[@tomyamartino]

I had the same question, but Anton did mention that the authors call it "fluid thickening", so I assume viscosity goes up with speed. But I agree this was not really pointed out clearly.

[@SockPuppet-q4x]

Does this mean that if humans were to ever travel at relativistic speeds our blood would thicken and we would die?

[@graxxor]

No because our blood who is travelling with us at the same speeds and in the same frame of reference so with regards to our body it would behave completely normal.

[@SockPuppet-q4x]

@@graxxor Ok, so because of time dilation our blood would appear to thicken from the viewpoint of a stationary observer, but to us, and our bodies, it would still be the normal viscosity. Makes sense...

[@demonicsquid7217]

This is the same thinking that made Victorians scared to get on trains as they thought they would suffocate at speeds over 30 mph.

[@Jadix]

I'm...I'm a wonderful person? Damn.

[@ObiWanCannabi]

I can place the universe inside an evaporating black hole explaining pretty much everything we see and feel in the universe, from dark energy to gravity and orbital mechanics As that singularity cools a tiny event horizon right at its core where its void of its own gravity, can expand ever so slightly, everything inside with mass relaxes and fills the space, massless light not so much. I don't need dark energy to explain what we measure as expansion, but that expansion is an illusion of the 4th dimension relaxing and expanding as the universe evaporates inside a singularity. The true constant is an orbit. Think of it like this, at the centre of a planet you have no gravity, you translate and expand in all directions at the same rate as the massive object, and your speed relative to eachother is null.. you are weightless, there is no gravity effecting on you, just pressure of the planet.. out here on the edge of the skin you feel that translational difference being applied. You dont see it, but compared to the planet it grows much more than you and that outer skin pushes you like you are falling at 9.8mtr/s, if you could turn off collision you would fall to the central point, where you would settle out to the orbit, for what speed you was doing at the initial drop point. More speed = further from the core, but if you start at the core, anything you toss or even drop flys up and out, settling in its orbit for its speed in it. The universe is doing the same motion.. If I could pause my time dilation and rewind time, it all comes back to a point right in front of me, looking like the big bang.. wherever i start in the universe, it all seems to come back to the same area right in front of me, of course pausing your dilation is impossible right? so you would actually just shrink with the wave. As it shrinks it all scales. It always seems to take 13 billion years from now to the big bang in the 4th dimension.. If you paused the universe and set off using the map of the observable bubble, how accurate do you think it is. Knowing that light from our sun is 8 minutes old, things you map from here would be way off from where you think you are. Do you think in 46 billion years you would reach the big bang if you never changed direction and was travelling at the speed of light? I think you would just see the milky way looking like CMB.. These are the questions that keep my weed jars full so my mind can sleep. Is a straight flat line in time, also flat in spacetime? If so, the earth, universe and everything in it is flat, just expanding out in spherical bubbles, not cubes.. infinitely inside finite space. Like having 0 and 1. You can keep adding decimal places so you never actually get to 1. As long as the universe doesnt evaporate too fast, it can dilate to fit the space. the only evidence is light didnt conform, being massless.. Thought experiment: Say you was in a box that could ignore collision, a 2 mtr cube of spacetime with no windows. Inside you have a tape measure, a laser and a set of scales. Could you tell your resting point in the universe using the 3 tools you have. At the core of the planet you would be weightless, the tape measure and box all fill spacetime as spacetime allows, inside it seems pretty normal right? But you wouldnt be able to tell if you was in orbit would you.. so you cant be sure.. Would the box still look like a cube to an outside observer? If you was around a black hole, you again might not be able to tell, if you are at orbital velocity then you cancel out the gravity of the singularity, so you are weightless, but is a 2mtr cube of spacetime still looking the same.. Common belief if you are turned into ramen noodles.. but are you? or does your local box of spacetime exist as if nothing happened.. Everything inside the box that you can see tells you that straight lines are still all pretty straight.. at what point do you need to be away from you feet, to see the difference.. Could you measure it if your tape measure and scales and even light all seem to work the same.. This is the confusion about Earth having curvature. Does it curve.. that is the fundamental question, important to the Planet and observer in a box.. It sure looks curved in space, but its not curved in time is it. When you see the earth you see a 4D object, in 3D space, mapped in the dimension of time its conical. Do to the Earth what Einstein and Minkowski did to the universe, turn its curved lines into straight ones. Using the radius as the cones height and circumference as the diameter on top, i map space in the dimension of time, seeing dilatational difference in 4D spacetime. I can use the cones to track clocks ticks around different stars, useful for GPS satellites, or for quick gravity estimates of a planets surface. Put into python given enough time and information and I could map the galaxy or the universe. I bet it shows that no matter how far you go back, your cone always stays with the same scaling. Cut a cone in half by volume and its only 20% smaller, thats now how the universe looked 7 or so billion years ago, zoom in, it looks the same... as you dilate with the wave it always scales so an orbit of the observable universe takes the same time now as it always did. Weirdly tho, the furthest light that we see, didnt just pass us at our point in spacetime, it was once here. It all was, the universe was much smaller back when it was sent out into the void, Think of this, looking at dinosaur bones that are 65 million years old, if you popped back to then, with your current time dilation, who would be the giant, you or the dinosaur? It might seem like a chicken in size and scale to you. The universe is simply so much smaller relative to you, in the now. Their bones have dilated with the planets surface for 65 million years, constantly getting bigger, their DNA was the same size and scale (maybe) back then, but the remains scaled as they became one with the planet. sorry.. but yeah if my estimates are right, the true age of the universe is 13 billion years cubed or squared (im not too hot on the 4 dimensional math there). Everywhere one second happened another experienced 4.. its a logarithmic curve propagating as a vector.. always scaling.. Whenever you think you found the "oldest" there is going to be something older. Just further away, more red shifted until invisible from the here and now. Light waves too flat to measure Distance vs size, whats the difference.. Its the amount of energy per tick that spacetime demands to keep scaling. A star gives of the same amount of energy as you would if you was the size of a star to it... it might feel like an LED lightbulb from that perspective.. scale and perspective are everything in the universe, How do you keep cutting atoms in half when its just field energy on different scales. Its all just rippling energy bound by fundamental forces, crystallised stars energy The expansion in the 4th dimension demands energy from us all, it takes from you heat, in the form of IR, its the only wavelength you are really visible in without a light source. If you paused time and stopped that expansion, would we need to keep eating, is that entropic force the cost of our path in the 4th dimension.. What would it cost to grow in the 4th dimension to get back to the big bang, i bet it would cost the same to either shrink the universe, or expand you in the 4th dimension, or to go fast enough that you grow to be larger than the observable universe in the dimension of time.

[@ObiWanCannabi]

If i had a magic remote, where i could manipulate spacetime, i could pause my dilation and rewind the universe, in 13.5 billion years it all comes back to look like a singularity right in front of me, no matter where or when i start the rewind process, it will look the same, but if i didnt pause my dilation i would have shrank with the wave.. from an observers perspective I grew in the 4th dimension as time was reversed until i was larger than the observable universe and my light on my scale was red shifted to oblivion... If I simply set off now in any direction at the speed of light it would take me 46 billion light years to reach the big bang, the shorter path is that journey in 4D space, i just need to expand to travel back, or shrink to travel forward in time, once I get there i should fall onto my right orbital path for my speed in the 4th dimension, just like changing orbits is a matter of adding more energy in space to change orbital lines. it should work the same in the dimension of time. its hard to explain. in a youtube comment lol Imagine if you shrank down tho so a hydrogen atom was the size of a star, the universe outside would red shift to oblivion, it would be like time travel forward in time.. the IR lightwaves of the atom blue shifted from your perspective, it might look like a plasma ball in space rather than a collection of buckey balls around a proton.. If you was larger than a galaxy then a star would feel as warm to you as an LED light bulb.. scale and perspective seem to be everything in the universe.. there doesnt seem to be an absolute limit to things.. how do you keep cutting an atom in half, when its just a rippling wave of energy in quantum dynamics.. its just field energy... Just running on different scales and perspectives, its the same math that predicts a puddle of water evaporating and uranium decay, if you tweak C.. we use water to model supersonic air because it acts the same way... tick rates change a solid into a liquid or gas, look at the earth sped up fast enough and its surface is moving like a semi molten pool of magma In my reality the event horizon is our saviour, it filters higher energy coming through from a larger universe, time dilation outside is so different that we would be obliterated by the smallest amount of energy breaching causality. A lightwave might seem flat from our perspective but it is full of so much energy it would make the universe evaporate in an instant. We keep looking outward for answers. Maybe looking in is more obtainable. What if there is some reality to Ricks quantum battery.. maybe there is a universe inside every planet, every cell, every ion. it could all just be different scales of reality that all seem the same, but weirdly different.. They confuse the big bang like looking on a record, you have RPM which is constant, but with this perspective the information wave and orbital speed of the information looks different, its hard to keep causality like this, the tempo of the music changes otherwise as the needle moves inwards and spirals faster, chewing thru more information in seemingly less time, reverse the wave so it starts at the centre. this is the big bang model, light speed changes the tempo of the music ever so slightly as we look back at the information to analyse what happened, but yeah now imagine that the constant is the orbital period. The data is off for the tempo, but it all still works if you realise that things with mass are effected, light isnt just massless, its just another energy wave propagating through the void. Light isnt photons, just waves, photons are the event where energy is dumped into spacetime, it takes heat away from you, me, the sun, the planets, its all cooling as we grow in the 4th dimension. Photons are remnant energy tho, what we see are illusions of time. I imagine it like a rock hitting a pond, you fee the ripples as they hit your eye you see a spark saying "sh snap, light" but its just an echo of an event. so high frequency you cant see it was just a rock at higher frequencies.. If I recorded your bodies IR output for your life and played back the video so that your IR wavelengths were fast enough in the visible spectrum, you would shine like a star for a brief moment. The stars dumping so much energy into spacetime, it shines compared to you on this tiny scale and time dilation.. If I had a 1 light year cube of spacetime and generated one photon, it propagates its energy out in 4 dimensions, 3 in space 1 in time, before we start the experiment with it paused, you wouldnt even tell where the energy packet was, its just raw energy, about to dump its load into spacetime, when it does, any observer seeing the wave sees the same "photon" but they just witness the ripples. Light is a weird thing, when you see a red object it rejected only red, the world of science would call it red, but for the object, it could see its absorbed all spectrums but red, its anti red if anything... in a weird dimension its true, and if smarter men than me didnt figure it out first then photography wouldnt really be a thing would it.. Just because everyone agrees something is one way, it doesnt make it right. The worlds smartest men can be shown up by a Jewish German immigrant, telling them that they just need to wash their hands to save people. Ignaz Semmelweis was the man who put Germany on notice, not a Keiser, or Shitler, good job he did tho or 90% of the people alive now, wouldnt be., the UK leaders still love wearing the wigs that used to cover their lice and stank when 2 Joe Bidens ago the worlds most educated butchers were setting records like a 300% mortality rate in a single surgery. Their cures are always worse than living with the disease, look at Thalidomide or all the childhood leukaemia cases from x-raying kids in the womb.. DDT... PPFOAs Microplastics... we are full of their poisons.. and look who they demonise when he says they have chemicals turning frogs gay.. the guy exposing dupont.. not dupont.. look into agent orange, the lady boy epidemic across asia, the land air and water they have contaminated at home and around the world, wouldnt you want to know if your sexuality was as easy to screw with as your thyroid? You trust these guys??? with their lobbying powers to hide the truth? its as easy for them to burn my message as it is a train full of toxic chemicals.. they do love a good burning Im a British Athiest Immigrant in Germany, i hope i am taken seriously sometime after im dead too... if we ever explore the universe, doing it in cones is so useful. You could see time dilation across the universe, different planets and stars would all have their own tick rate in special relativity I can unite Einstein, Minkowski, Hawkin, flat earth and globes all back together, maybe even getting quantum dynamics in there too.. but hey, criminalise me because i refuse to bend with the rest of the universe... Politics, sports, science, its a popularity contest, the messenger became more important than the message, watch them jail the last tax payer and cut down our last tree for our own good. Give them enough space in the 4th dimension...

[@peterstrong772]

So the closer we get to light speed, the more likely we are to die, as we are mainly liquid.....

[@danij5055]

Well, not if we the observer are going that speed. That's just the observation from our inertial frame of reference of something moving that fast. If we're moving just as fast alongside it, we wouldn't notice any difference.

[@kylelochlann5053]

You are already moving at the speed of light and arbitrarily close to the speed of light... how do you feel?

[@JungleJargon]

It’s the changing rate of causation in both general and special relativity. It really has nothing to do with a change in viscosity.

[@kylelochlann5053]

"rate of causation" is meaningless word salad.

[@juimymary9951]

Would it mean that if a human were accellerated to relativistic speed their blood would literally curdle???

[@AndrewSternkern]

Length contraction and time dilation should have one common name as they are two sides of the same coin.

[@christopherronn8564]

I get that we use time in equations and our Daily lives, but time IS a construct of human origin, it is a tool to determine the speed of an object relative to other objects based on, the speed of, the decay of cesium 133. And I can not for the life of me understand why we view time as a constant, this limit our understanding of the universe around us.

[@WilliamTaylor-h4r]

The fluid becomes extremely valuable and can create a world buster to your credit, antara anzul.

[@TheNewPhysics]

According to Relativity, the Laws of Nature Should be Covariant. One shouldn't be able to do a measurement (e.g., measure viscosity) and determine the absolute velocity. In other words, this article only makes sense in my theory, where I have an Absolute Reference Frame and predicted that forces get weaker as Absolute Velocity increases. Weaker forces mean weaker dynamics, and that is equivalent to freezing... which is consistent with "Time Dilation" or Higher Viscosity. That said, within the moving body, that shouldn't be noticed. In other words, this paper has to be wrong if it respects Relativity. Check the Hypergeometrical Universe Theory.

[@octagonseventynine1253]

since we’re composed of mostly water and blood I wonder what it would do to us

[@jamesgordley5000]

Does this mean that traveling in a near-light-speed ship would actually wreck our body’s physical chemistry?

[@MCsCreations]

Ok, I can imagine a LOT of physicists calculating right now, to see how it influences fusion energy generation.

[@RaquelFoster]

Since our galaxy spins at 1/1400th the speed of light, and other galaxies spin up to 1/500th the speed of light, wouldn't that change the viscosity of all the matter in the galaxy and have a dark matter-like effect? I've heard people say time dilation is irrelevant unless you're going 90% of the speed of light. But it affects GPS satellites. The speed of light is 77,000 times faster than the orbital velocity of GPS satellites.

[@6DunJuan9]

On earth Newtons law applies. In space Einsteins theory takes over. At light speed, no one has figured it out and we are using old equations that are probably incorrect.

[@Atok595]

I just printed a life size Anton cut out. Next I want to make robot dolls. ❤

[@yclept9]

Unlikely analysis: it's not a fluid (one velocity at one position) and requires a Boltzmann equation, not the Navier Stokes equation. Viscosity doesn't come up because it's implicit in the velocity distributions. (What would viscosity do? produce heat? Heat is the motion itself)

[@morfeuzalas2102]

You all know what this means right? No humans near c. Not unless we make some advanced suspended animation system.

[@CardinalTreehouse]

2:10 This reminds me so much of Doppler Effect

[@chrislaezur730]

That’s neat. Thanks Anton.

[@sp_ce.]

2:10 oh wow I past here every day!!

[@xBINARYGODx]

hello wonderful Anton

[@stashorodnyansky1258]

A relatively established theory....a theory of relativity. Not gonna lie, you got me in the first half

[@Cazzacker]

Does this indicate that we may not be able to as humans travel at speeds approaching light speed without biological consequences as the liquids in our bodies are subjected to these viscosity-increasing relativistic effects? Could oxygen diffusion be affected among other things?

[@TheGinopilotino77]

I guess no since your reference frame remains untouched