Nobody could do the math Einstein came up with. Not because they were not as smart but because it was fraudulent. You can learn science without ever having to go to school. A degree to go into debt for is just a piece of paper giving you permission to work in the field of your choice. It is a nice scam.
***** Read my research papers in the following link to understand how Einstein's theory does not stand the test of time. www.researchgate.net/profile/Pradeep_Koshy4
+armynso Well Kaku even explained possible theories to why the SWISS were wrong. He wasn't even the one to come up with the anti-relativity hypothesis.
Varun Oregunta haha that is exactly what happened! but Einstein hasn’t even finished his work?? what is light relèvent to! they think tachyons could move faster instead of neutrinos
Well, Michio Kaku is actually saying Einstein was not wrong: he clearly says he thinks there was an error in the calibration of the system used in the latest experiment, therefore Einstein was right
I think Einstein said: If I am right, the Germans will say that I am a German, and the French will call me a "citizen of the world". But, said Einstein, if I am wrong, the French will say that I am a German, and the Germans will say that I am a Jew!
The problems of general relativity arise when you look at the Universe at very small or at very large scales. What's wrong with general relativity ? New finding in 2010 you don't know before, in general theory of relativity Albert Einstein ignored refraction of light. Einstein's proving method (EPM) via eclipse is unscientific and deeply wrong. It is very surprising. Einstein was wrong. Please read on the reliable source the book The Universe and DR.Einstein, by Lincoln Barnett, London, 1949, Preface by Albert Einstein himself, page 78 - 79. Einstein's gravity is wrong. Deflection of light is caused by refraction, not gravity. Shapiro delay is false, time delay is caused by refraction, not gravity. Gravitational redshift is false.Redshift is caused by refraction. Redshift is not Doppler shift, Lensing is caused by refraction, not gravity.....etc.
+GSA New Physics Let me guess. You never read the book, you got your information from a pseudo science blog, and you have no idea how refraction works. Am I close?
Jon Snow is a Targaryen in the show but probably won't be in the books(unless it was a triplet birth.)...How about this spoiler, do you find it more to your liking?
GPS doesnt prove relativity. There are no relativistic corrections on GPS satellites. Talk to the people who built them Secondly, nuclear power and weapons were known to be possible prior to Einstein, and could have happened without his work.. All Einstein did was mathematically harmonize newton with a few other theories. Mr. Kaku should know all of this. He is propagating cancer and stupidity.
I'm mad because I'm right and everyone ignores me. :( Regarding time, relativity, and two planes flying opposite directions with atomic clocks (Hafele-Keating experiment) ... There is reason to doubt it because, as proven by Reich, orgone (life) energy affects rates of radioactive decay. A plane moving one direction moves through more of it in one direction vs ground and the other. For the same reason, Pons & Fleischmann may have been correct about cold fusion. If the container they used to control temperature was built more like an orgone accumulator than those who tried to reproduce it. Radioactive decay rates are not constant as assumed. You can see them change over the next few days just subjecting samples to 50KV for 30 minutes (AC or DC, doesn't matter). For that reason, our dates are unreliable with carbon-dating, it depends on how many times the sample has been hit by lightning. On a similar note, the Samsung phone batteries that were exploding would be those delivered from Korea with a flight near the pole when the aurora was active. See: A Theory about the Boeing 787 Lithium-Ion Battery Problem Belief in accreditation is for CYA and so we don't have to think much. I don't need no stinking bachelors, I have a gift. :P
He promised the Nobel prize money to his ex wife for child support. He later added the cosmic constant to his equations to created a static universe. "the Einstein blunder" that also proved with that addition to the equation to show an expanding universe. The constant he added would be what he'd be happy to have gotten wrong. just a TL;DR :)
Perfectly agree ! The more you know the more you realize all what you didn't know, this is a big lesson of humility. For me a true genious is modest, humble. He know much than the common people, understand better lots of things, but this level of understanding and comprehension push him to realize that all is knowledge is quite ridiculous compared to all his ignorance.
If you correct an error of Einstein which has stunted the growth of physics for about 110 years would someone please proof this E=mv^3 where v = lights variable speed. If this is not proofed you will not believe the result. It comes out being that light speed is possible means Einstein made a human error since we are all human and did not take into account that light is variable due to its speed can change such as a speed in a different medium since this has already been proved by the lights refractive index.
If it wasn't for Einstein questioning the current state and understanding of physics, in his day, let alone the top physicist at his time (Isaac Newton), then he would never discovered anything. Moral of the story? Always question. Einstein's theories might be just one small step towards the greater picture, just as Newton was for relativity. To assume that one guy had it all correct and we need not question his theory is to not be scientific whatsoever.
+John Doe before relativity, there was 2 theories about the speed of light: Isaac Newton thought that light and gravity acts instantly. So Einstein did prove Newton Wrong as we know. Also, Newton's equations could not explain Planet Mercury's orbit, but Einstein's equation explained it. It was a big step towards the validation of relativity.
It's not so much the speed of light that Einstein questioned, but it's behavior in relation to everything else (including time and space). Einstein had the insight to see that the speed of light was the same for all observers, and basic algebra would show that if one thing stays constant, everything else must give (that being time and space). It was such a profound thing to claim, but something that was not considered or discussed in his day, or ever in the past. That's what I meant about questioning the current state and understanding of physics. He wasn't questioning the laws, per se, but how those laws interacted with each other. It was just a simple paradigm shift. But that same principle can be applied today. Perhaps our understanding of light, space, and time is still skewed because of some simple change of perspective no one has yet to notice?
No, it was Lorentz that formulated the idea of length contraction and time dilation based on more precise measurements of the speed of light that had been done. Then before Einstein Poincaré had already worked with a constant speed of light and relativity, building upon Lorentz' work. Lorentz' original theory contained however an absolute ether that could neither be experimentally confirmed nor is it compatible with relativity. Poincaré knew that. So Einstein dropped the ether, postulated that Lorentz transformed coordinate systems are frames of reference (which are a theoretical construct) ... and that's special relativity. He also noticed that the speed of light is not just about light by recognizing c in Maxwell's equations. You see, this was a chain of small steps taken by several smart people and technological advances were also very important in order to be able to do the experiments.
He act in the lerning of sciens, if he would talk pure fact you could not lissen and thats called Retorik, if he just talk facts any new would not lissen. And for other he has theorised request like light saber,warp, and so much more. Becuse of this if you whant sciens you need to lissen and lern from your mistakes !
I remember in school when I'm calculating speed of a car on a physics problem I found out that it was faster than speed of light. I was shocked at my multiplication capability
I hate any reference to "proving Einstein wrong". He was a brilliant man, but he wasn't perfect. The man was wrong about lots of things because his job required him to make new conjectures on a regular basis.
What a wonderful man! I would love to have him as my physics teacher. He has everything a great teacher needs: abundant intelligence and knowledge, great anecdotes, also a tremendous vitality and wit. He's passionate about his subject, but he doesn't take it or himself too seriously. He also radiates simple, down-to-earth human warmth, unlike many physicists.
james eremine The world desperately needs people who understand science and can passionately explain it to non-scientists, especially because so many young people are turning against science. Just look at all the pseudoscience and anti-science suspicion and even hatred here on TH-cam. Researching and publishing isn't a prerequisite.
@Hans Coventrierenhabenmachen In case you are serious and not trolling, I suppose you are referring to volts (V) who were named in honour of Alessandro Volta. And AFAIK, Voltaire wasn't a physicist. Nevertheless, he was also a scientist
If I were to refer to everything, it would be a Closed and isolated system, Behold I refer to the Universe, in short a finite ergo a CERTAINTY, is that absurd? NO! Truth "Facts" can never be absurd, truth is certain, contradictions though are uncertain, so honestly why is this certainty which is everything absurd? I insist all uncertainties treated as certainties are the absurd, and it's high time more data is accrued so that all uncertainty is eliminated..
@heatedvoltz No they didn't. It was a computer simulation of a photo of a black hole. Einstein was proven wrong through Frame Dragging or the lack of it.
I love how the people that are watching this have SpongeBob and Pikachu as their profile pic. It's like they're just giving society the middle finger, as if to say 'PEOPLE WHO WATCH SPONGEBOB AND POKEMON ARE NOT ALL STUPID!'
SonicGraffitiArtist Well I watch neither. I just love the derp face pikachu does. I have a whole collection of about 40 pictures with all derp pictures of Pikachu. You can google "retarded Pikachu" and find out for yourself xD
He is talking about the OPERA experiment in 2011, which turned out to be a faulty measurement due two to errors in their equipment. Two months after this video was uploaded, an attempt to reproduce the experiment failed to exceed the speed of light in full accordance with relativity theory. Another three months later they had fully analysed the original experiment and concluded that it simply was a faulty measurement.
Its not something to understand. And I honestly don't think someone traveling right under lightspeed is traveling to the future, while just past lighspeed were then traveling to the past. What in the Marvel Multiverse bullshit is that logic? Its whatever, humans will die off long before getting to even 1% of lightspeed.
Rmember... Einstein published relativity when we didn't have any super tech stuff and still can't even understand them correctly.. so imagine if he lived in modern era we might be travelling between galaxies in few years...
I really respect that physicist have the balls to admit that some of their theories could be wrong while some groups won't ever imagine that conclusion.
alz230 The problem is that the scientists themselves are flawed, ordinary humans and they protect their accomplishments and are not quick to embrace change. This can be both and good thing and a bad thing. Don't get me wrong though, compared to other things in life, the pace of science is still one of the fastest when it comes to progress and regardless of egos, the truth will always prevail.
Mello Keehl Especially if like most creationists they were taught ever since they were young. It's kind of hard to throw away something that you thought you knew for 20+ years. Another unfortunate thing is some groups shun their family and friends just because they don't want to be proven wrong. It's a narrow-minded life for some folks.
+is reality is comprised of light segmented by dark matter; the very thing that gives light a home is itself built out of condensed segments (e=mc sq) of the very light whom's highest ambition is to illuminate any and all revisions of itself (every facet of reality). From our level, matter came before the light, and is therefore faster and always a step ahead of the light (manifesting is impossible for light unless it allows itself to be condensed by dark matter in order to manifest on this plane ((fallen angels)) but the light can only do what the dark matter allows for . Anything that can potentially give light energy a platform to persuade all other revisions of itself to override the material world (everything) would give light too much influence (Jesus or some light deity) and eventually it will embody the material and light will have acquired the ability to create matter and obliterate it on the fly (like dreams, we create temporary realities based on intent, then terminate them
Too many people believe these minds now long gone were somehow Gods. Einstein himself acknowledged the possibility that his whole life's work could be wrong. We will never advance until we forget the past and begin to challenge deeply seeded paradigms. Not saying he is wrong, because I'm not a physicist, but the possibility is very real.
The problem is many careers and reputations rely on the accepted theories, this kind of approach in my opinion hinders science and reminescent of the old catholic churches tendancy to ignore theories that might threaten them. Old minds are not usually very open to new ideas, even those scientists. I Personally i believe we have'nt even begun to scratch the surface of what this existence is.
KingZam You take Einsteins word as definite and 100% correct and your comeback is "youre not smarter then Einstein" or "all physycists belive in in relativity" therefore anyone who goes againts it must be retarded. Posibbly the greatest mind to ever exist, a guy who could put Einstein to shame, the very person responsible for 75% of modern day technology, Nikola Tesla, thought the theory of relativity was complete horseshit. When asked how it feels to be the smartest person in the world, Einstein replied "I dont know, go ask Tesla" 😘
If Einstein lived today he would not be known by many people. There are many people doing remarkable research nowadays, but who knows their names? Also we are not making much of a progress today. Not the progress compared to the progress scientists made when all was discovered a long time ago. This is why we are still referring to people like Einstein, Tesla, etc. We are still using their foundations. Only additions to those foundations are being made. If Einstein lived today he would not be groundbreaking.
***** Although my questions was blocked (presumably by Thunder Zephyr) it was a trick question: "Would that knowledge include things we know now, like the photoelectric effect?" I'd say your reply reveals your inadequate research skills to the community. Yes, it was too deep for you?
Debate is part of what science is about. Questioning things that were previously “established”. If you don’t understand this, I encourage you to take a few science philosophy courses. Stop trying to be a gate keeper. It’s unbecoming, and doesn’t advance science in the least.
@@bosshogg8447 There are limits to the so-called debate. People don't debate about the shape of the earth for example because it's done, we know the earth is round.
@@ZERO_ULTRA And who decides what is allowed to be debated, and what isn’t? And why shouldn’t someone be allowed to put forth a theory that “muh Earth is flat”? It will either check out, or it won’t, based on peer review. No offense intended, but I hear stances similar to the one you are making, and it seems like programming to me. It’s not a scientific way of looking at the world. It sounds, in fact, like the resurrection of Old World principles where one did not question the word of people who sat at the top of the church. And look how far that set us back.
But the essence of knowledge is that it must be timeless and must have a universality Which science lacks, but we're working on it to refine it as much as possible
@@sarwarghouris nope knowledge can be temporary or inconsistent. Knowledge literally mean knowing about something. It's very subjective all those theories of "universality" etc only fits with a certain things which is once again very subjective.
and time do. es not go backward when you go faster than light. I think it's just that you can see things happened before but you are not being in that moment. But I might be wrong im not the physicist here
plus the max speed of universe is not determined by the speed of the light, in the opposite, it is the max speed of universe determines the speed of light
+Weilun Mo No. When the "speed of light" was determined to be a set figure is what some physicist will find to be just the figure that needs to be fixed. The equipment I have here at my house isn't good enough to tell me by exactly how much but I'm finding that the speed of light must have been based on an average of the visible spectrum. The speed that light travels faster at one end of the spectrum than the other. So, if this is true, the speed of light in an equation and a variable depending on the frequency of light you are using for accuracies sake. There is a lot of light we'll never be able to see because now that the universe is expanding at faster than the "speed of light" any light no matter how bright it is, even if it's as bright as a super nova and shining directly at us and it's generated from only a foot away from us will never be seen it because it's moving away from of us faster than the light can travel towards us.
Almost all of the light emitted from that tiny galaxy a foot away, is seen, just because C is constant. That's why the expansion is said to be "metric". 10% of 1 foot is much less for that little photon to fly in a second than 10% of 3,000,001 kilometres. In the latter case the poor particle might face a hopeless task, indeed. That is, if Einstein was right.
You would be able to see "faster than light "LIGHT" unless it's traveling AWAY from you because it would be impossible to see something traveling AWAY from you if it's emitted light is moving away from you at a speed greater than it's emissions can travel.
One link is this one news.sciencemag.org/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster-light-neutrino-results and if you want to really read up on it here's a wikipedia article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly
actually he probably got something wrong since Relativity breaks down at the quantum level, and he couldn't stand the idea of quantum entanglement ( spooky action at a distance, as he called it), wich was proven to be real.
the universe did began, and it will probably end when the last black hole evaporates, what we call time is nothing but the ever forward evolution of the universe. At least as far as i understand the laws of physics.
lol. as long as there is movement there is time. the reason for ur claim being hard to grasp isnt because everyone except for u has a limited brain, its because ur claim is fucking stupid. please just go away.
Correct. But Mr. Kaka here says it was due to an error in calculating a relativistic system. Just another time he has been wrong in his videos and people eat this stuff up. SMH.
They think it is a mistake but they have not found any malfunction. In other words, physicists are trying to prove they are right without the proving there is a mistake.
And disclosing potentially revolutionary results before reviewing all the possible sources of error. Sloppy and undisciplined physics leads to this kind of bullcrap.
Shouldn't, cuz he still can be wrong... But we don't know it yet :P Open title is good for us to describe how (possible) Einstein error will take effect in our reality.
He personally hates Einstein. He wishes to outshine Einstein. Appearing all over only to come close as he can to Einstein's celebrity scientist status. I wonder what real contribution this guy has on the real world... I mean, besides sounding pseudo smartellectual
This video is the best example for showcasing the misunderstanding which arises by only reading the Headline of news which is more often than not misleading. And the truth is revealed when one reads the whole news.
Ghost khiz. I agree physics is the best thing ever and phenomenal but we don’t need to call him dumb 😂 we’re all just a bit hurt about Einstein being wrong that’s all...which I can’t believe
+Noxus Finest they alway reach for straws Miller urey test en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment The christian restating and getting the Miller Urey test wrong to support "intelligent life" creation.com/why-the-miller-urey-research-argues-against-abiogenesis
+naihanchin Kempo That creation article is actually *really LAUGHABLE*... The Urey-Miller experiment was actually an even *GREATER* success than thought at first, especially with the new discoveries about the prebiotic earth and how it was even MORE hospitable to life than previously thought. Except for the fact that aminoacids and even proteins could form in those conditions, there are even comets millions of years older than the earth that have aminoacids in them, so that's not even a necessary step anymore xD
DeathLordFhyeg yep,,it's a form of a strawman argument. they expect people who believe the way they do, to only read their take.. and do no research..So they can restate the facts, to fit their story of the world.. Lying to theirself to smooth over feelings they have, Because the truth of science, and what their preacher and mother told told them as a child doesn't jibe..As a Child my mother told me thunder was, God in a Bowling match getting a strike..I gave that that belief up after i found out the truth :)
What if you're chest pains only occurred after farting so you'd have a warning sign for prevention, and you actually didn't use that method to survive? What if we're asking all the wrong questions? What if we're asking the right questions and it's they're fault for putting this video here where we ask these types of questions?
princesslibra20 what question to ask, in what manner and method is the ultimate challenge for the unacqainted ones in the field of question pondering, the chronology of possibilities of actions to undertake is quite enourmous
The governing mantra of science: "It is not about what we know -- it's about what we believe to know thus far..." Einstein blew Newton out of the water, though he didn't necessarily contradict him. Newton blew Copernicus and Galileo out of the water, though he didn't necessarily contradict them." Knowledge is always growing, new laws become old laws, and old laws are changed by new discoveries. There very likely is a chance that someone could shatter Einstein's theories, just as much as Einstein's theories could be irrevocable. The great mysteries of science.
actually I had already done that. But almost nobody wants to listen. As a start, please have a look at my public talk: www.researchgate.net/publication/323691934_The_Crisis_of_Modern_Theoretical_Physics_and_its_Simple_and_Beautiful_Solution
R.B. Ratieta No one will ever shatter Einstein's theories. Einstein was NEVER once wrong and never will be. Now, you can expand from his knowledge and not contradict him as you even stated but you will never in your life discredit him. For example, NASA states space is a square with no edges. Einstein did not understand the geometrical shape of space at that time because the actual density of space was not measured. There is no such thing as a square with no edges. Space is made of parallel circles with infinite curvature that cause the equal and opposite reaction of flat parallel lines in the interior and accelerated expansion. Physicists state that Einstein's theories stop at black holes when gravity pushes and it does not pull. Thus, the gravity of the atom that caused the Big Bang is pushing against the deflating gravity of the universe when time space is broken down in a black hole. They attempted to discredit Einstein and failed so miserably that they became flat Earthers as a result.
John Doe Various Aether theories and Classical Newtonian physics. Newton wasn't really necessarily incorrect but his model only works roughly and with medium sized things
TheFinnishBolshevik I don't think that aether "theories" were anything more than hypotheses and classical Newtonian physics works beautifully in many cases. It's not fundamentally wrong, it just didn't take the finite speed of light into account.
John Doe from the point of view of trying to explain basic physics it doesn't really matter if light is particles or waves going through the aether. Its kinda the same with Newton. His stuff works fine within limits. My point is that our current understanding might be the aether theory of it's day. Within our narrow context it seems to make sense but in the grand scheme of things it could still be wrong. For example so called 'dark energy' is not a real thing. Its just a concept physicists invented to patch some holes in the theory of relativity. Nobody has ever seen or observed 'dark energy' and its probably not even real. It may just be that the whole theory of relativity is somehow wrong in a way we dont understand and it results in these weird glitches and things working differently then they're supposed to. Still 99% of the time it appears to work fine just like Newtonian physics or even some of those aether models.
TheFinnishBolshevik Our current theories are actual scientific theories supported by mountains of evidence and countless experiments. Aether "theories" were not. That's why I said they were merely hypotheses. 'Dark energy' is a hypothesis too, albeit one that is largely accepted as the one that fits data best so far. But it's still a hypothesized unknown form of energy ... So yeah, that's not exactly scientific theory material either.
I remember watching this when i was 18...and i now realise i had no idea what was going on...5 years later after an engineering degree it all makes sense
Albert Einstein: “There could be no fairer destiny for any… theory than that it should point the way to a more comprehensive theory in which it lives on, as a limiting case."
I'm a programmer and when doing debugging, it often saves a lot of time to ask yourself the question "where did I botched up" and just start from the presumption that you made a coding mistake which is altering the entire thread and hence the output (inside out) than to start the process backwards from the symptoms of the problem, through the entire thread, towards the source of the problem (outside in). Obviously this is not always the best solution, and you need many years of experience to gain this instinct of guesstimating directly the source of the problem than going through the normal process, and some times it just doesn't work and your instinct is wrong, you must always keep in mind that everything is possible and be opened to the possibility that you may be totally wrong. I guess the point I'm trying to make is, most of the times, the most simplest explanation is the right explanation for an apparently inexplicable phenomenon. In this case, there is much more likely a problem in the actual method of measurement of the experiment, than the theory of relativity being wrong. However, that does not mean the theory of relativity is bullet proof, and a good scientist must keep that in mind, because nothing is more disruptive to progress than not being able to see the forest because of the trees. If in this particular case the simplest explanation is the measurements being wrong, it's possible that in other cases, the simplest explanation might just be that relativity is not quite that... relative.
I don't believe that there is a scientist who thinks that relativity is the end of physics and should be written in stone tablets somewhere and left for the generations. Every theory should be thought of as "not yet proved wrong", or "the best we have". And relativity is had been pretty useful so far. I mean, everything tech related we have because of Einstein's work. So is relativity 100% correct? Probably not. Is it good enough for now? Hell yea.
Nerubz That's what I like in Science. We (as humanity) may one day discover that speed of light is not strictly constant but depends on something. If this happens, it won't mean that everything need recalibration and Einstein was wrong, it will just mean that Einstein was on the right track but just didn't see the bigger picture and it would mean that we'll be able to do more than we could before. Considering how little we know about the time, I think that theory of relativity just scratched the surface of something much much bigger.
TESLA was the king , no one will ever match him , Einstein was a joke math never gets you anywhere in the universe , mathemagic I call it , in the end all theories will fail miserably . .. .
Tesla gets the praise he deserves. Have you ever seen an electrical engineer not fanboy over Tesla? Stop being silly. Einstein's results were just a lot more far-reaching than Tesla's. Get over it.
Einstein struggled with his theories , especially GR, during his mid to late career. He questioned a lot of their fundamentals. He even wrote a personal letter to a friend claiming that one day his theories would likely be replaced because at least one of his assumptions is wrong. Evidence for a timeless universe is building. That is, the universe may evolve in only 3 spatial dimensions. In a timeless universe, time is independent parameter used when making measurement of things in 3D. The starlight deflection calculation that helped launch GR into stardom and replace Newtonian physics can also be done using purely Newtonian physics. Unfortunately the corrected calculation only happened recently, so it will be met with skepticism, etc...a lot more more such calculations are needed before people start to take a 3D timeless universe seriously. Whatever happens, Einstein will still be remembered, by many, as one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century planet (and that is my view too).
You are on the right track. The Universe cannot begin the way it is presented at his point. The expansion theory in itself is an admission of error or lack of understanding. WATCH THIS SPACE. Dene GREGG. AUSTRALIA
@@cpt191021 RE: last comment correction (this point not his point) > Science has in some respects drifted away from reality. Theory and Calculation does not always answer the questions we cannot see or accurately measure. Put it this way, just because super glue sticks most substances together well, does not mean that it fills holes just as well. It doesn't. My disagreement is that Inflation theory attempts to do a similar feat. . . with similar results. It astounds me that highly paid scientists from most areas don't apply the fundamentals to come up with their assumptions. . . and much of it is merely hazy assumptions at best. Seriously, the Universe is physical in nature. That is why E=mc2. Inflation theory is like asking a Sheep " Dear Mr. Sheep, what is the answer to our existence? The Sheeps' answer is generally more plausible. Sheeps' answer is Baaaa ! I could go on, however it seems pointless (RE: Big Bang, Inflation Theory, Hubble Constant etc. . . . . . Oh ! don't knock Eistein too much. He did always try to make sense of his theories and thoughts... and he had the sense to flee from the Dictator who ruled over another mob of sheep... Agghhh ! or is that Baaah !
***** I'm afraid you were misled by the dumb new youtube/google+ commenting system. I wasn't talking to you. I was agreeing with you, criticizing B tac for stopping before the end. He thinks Michio was saying that time travel is possible.
We currently have the technology for teleportation (minuscule fragments, but you get the point), what makes you think we can't get time travel? We'll be long dead before teleportation can teleport humans but, it might be possible in the far future, as long as the race doesn't destroy itself.
All you people complaining about what Crazycool1128 said - Chill, Michio Kaku is of Asian decent, there is nothing wrong with saying that in the way he said it. Please refrain from being super PC to the point where saying something that isn't intended to be offensive (and simply isn't), and turning it (or making it sound like) something that should be considered offensive.
This video is outdate. A few months later, scientists re-checked their instruments, and discovered that there was a poorly connected optical fiber in a measuring instrument from the Italian laboratory. Einstein is saved :-P
probably covering their tracks because noone wants to say "Einstein is wrong" Look at when Hawkins made a black hole theory, he had theories and data and they physics community just said "Yeah well Einsteins E=MC2 says it cant happen." But then this proved that his theory could be right and suddenly they claim "Instrument error"
Newton was not wrong or proven wrong. His models just dont work at very large scales and more extreme circumstances. Einsteins model works on both scales but also doesnt address the absolute most extreme scales and circumstances. One day there will probably a model that works in all situations which will probably be the theory of everything. It will supercede newton and einstein, but it doesnt mean that they were wrong. Thats the point.
Exactly, each person's theory is a modified version of the other, Einsteins studies were based on Newton. We will keep modifying it until the theory includes all circumstances.
Actually, Stephen Hawking felt, that there could be no single unifying theory which combines both quantum mechanics and relativity or any other theory. He felt that there would only be a set of interlocking theories, which we would just try and make better fitting with each other, and more precise.
Quentin Pearson - You said, "Keep in mind the Theory of Relativity is still a theory." I did not read anything after this. This is one of the biggest misconceptions about science that there is. Still a theory? As if it could become MORE than a theory? You should be aware that in science, there is NOTHING more than a theory. It is the absolute highest step on the ladder of scientific knowledge. Theories do not become laws. Theories and laws are two different things. There will never be a "law of relativity". Ever. There will never be a "law of evolution". The laws of thermodynamics were never "theory of thermodynamics". Newton's three laws of motion were never "theories of motion". You hold a very common misconception. Because you started off your comment endorsing a very wrong and very common misconception, nothing else you say is worth reading - or taking the slightest bit seriously.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg A "theory" about relativity on a link that discusses Einstein *needs* the information provided to determine the validity of Einstein's efforts to justify *gravity* by way of circular logic and a *miracle* curvature of space/time through simply saying it was so ... The link, and other information provided by this site, demonstrates that the *theories* derived from Einstein's effort to play God are nothing but science-fiction *theories* ... or do you disagree that circular logic is not a valid way to form *theory*? www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/
tongmaa Circular logic is not a valid means to formulate a scientific theory. I find that you have failed to demonstrate that this was the case - - and by the way - - invalidating conclusions on the sole basis that a logical fallacy was employed to arrive at that conclusion is in itself a logical fallacy, so you are just as guilty of employing deceiving tactics if this is the route you wish to take. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy We are done here. You're way out of your league.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg My replies echo the argument made by someone (Crothers) who is out of your league, as well as mine. However, I certainly understand the arguments he makes, and which show that the *Curvature of Space/Time* is a logical fallacy via a circular argument. I was specific in highlighting that part of the *Theory of Relativity* which is incorrect, but the information that Crothers provides in his other links shows many errors in the *theory* which tends to invalidate it. If you, yourself, were in the *League*, you would show how Crothers' arguments are incorrect ... I won't hold my breath ...
Man, Jimmy Page should just get the mighty Zeppelin back together and bounce from this gig. Just sayin'. He can help the kids better that way. By rockin', I mean.
Carlos Cifer They did though... If I did, believe me they did too, even Kaku says they did. Amazing, that the original scientists even publicized their findings. Like I said, just knowing HOW GPS works would give you enough common sense to realize that. Granted I'm no idiot, I've read all of Mr. Kaku's books, as well as other studies, and have a college degree, so your and sigbert's little attempt at public shaming might have been invested into someone you probably thought I am not. Must've been the avatar ;)
+peruface check out www.aetherius.org There ate recordings taken by the founder in mediumistic trance from Venusian intelligences (eg the Master Jesus, and the Master Aetherius).
+peruface Tesla was an idiot. He really blurred the line between genius inventor and crackpot. Get this, he literally believed electrons weren't real. He is an inventor, but by no means a reputable research physicist.
Don't neutrinos get here faster than the light of a supernova? I thought neutrinos make there way out of the center of the blast before the actual light is cast out into space...
You're right but sometimes it makes it easier to explain this way cause if he said the neutrinos came first than he has to spend a lot more time explaining why.
***** Nothing travels faster than light, like this video just explained. We didn't 'create' the boundary of the speed of light, we just realized that giving any piece of matter an infinite amount of energy would only cause that matter to approach the speed of light. The boundary absolutely does exist, and nothing can or will go faster than light. To explain the problem with the neutrinos, you have to realize that if neutrinos travelling the speed of light are emitted from a supernova before electromagnetic radiation, or light, is emitted, then the neutrinos will get here "faster". One event simply happened before the other. So it's not that neutrinos get here "faster", they just get here first. Both neutrinos and light travel at the speed of light, but if neutrinos leave the center of a supernova first, they will get here first. Neutrinos leaving a supernova and light leaving a supernova are not simultaneous events. Adding energy to any object, like a neutrino, can never cause it to go faster than the speed of light. Adding an infinite amount of energy to any piece of matter in our universe would only make it approach the speed of light. So no amount of energy could ever make something go faster than the speed of light, which is how we figured out (not created) the limit of light speed.
BigRaindrop That's what I thought was the case; not that neutrinos actually travel faster, but simply that they get here sooner because they erupt out of a supernova's core before the light does
In the case of neutrinos and light both leaving a star, then yes. the neutrinos would escape the stars gravity uninhibited while the light would be slowed due to gravity and scattering off all of the hydroden and helium. but in the case of a supernova exploding, the light near the edge of the explosion would not be inhibited like light generated in the core of the star/supernova, so it's feasible that the light and neutrinos would reach us at the same time. However in my opinion this could tell us something about the nature of dark matter (or lack of it) because for light to travel 10 light years and reach us at exactly the same time as the neutrinos then the light could not have been slowed by any dark matter along it's 10 light year path to Earth.
It is a scientific theory not just a theory and scientific theory find evidences and proof until it will be taken while theory is more like an a opinion
This anomaly of the neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light was a mistake. The equipment used to get this measure was faulty. A fibre optic cable attached improperly and a clock oscillator ticking too fast. The problems were fixed and the results showed that neutrinos speeds are in fact consistent with that of light.
Meanwhile i stand on the couch puting this on replay for an hour waiting for my mom to come home and be impressed of what her son is actually interested into
When Kaku talks about light and neutrinos from the same event reaching the detectors at the 'same time', does he mean it literally? Mustn't there be at least some latency, since neutrinos have now been proven to have mass?
Its a coincidence, had it been a few thousand light years farther, there would be a good delay(not saying there was no delay, but in cosmic scales its likely not inportant) But the reason they got here at the same time even though they have mass is bacause they almost ignore matter, and supernovas take a few hours to explode, so the neutrinos at the beginning of the supernova shot out of the star like it as nothing, but the photons took quite some time to leave the star as they were blocked by the matter, and so over these thousands of years the light has been catching up to the neutrinos and we happen to be very close to their point of intersection (Do not take my word for a fact, but i am 90% sure on this info, and if you doubt it, please search for info for this on your own)
Eduardo P is pretty much correct, and Kaku's explanation about neutrinos and photons travelling the same speed is rather incorrect. Neutrinos are slightly slower, but they get a head start.
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.82[1/2] แก๊ง 3 สาวเพื่อนซี้บุก CAMPปลิ้นครั้งนี้ห้ามเสียอาการ](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_6WUjXHe1TM/mqdefault.jpg)
Want to get Smarter, Faster™?
Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/SmarterFaster
What if Einstein is not born
Don't do drugs
"Want to get Smarter, Faster™?" Sorry, my brain cannot exceed the speed of light.
Ol
No
Me at school : Fails in physics exam
Me at TH-cam : *_What if Einstein is wrong_*
😂😂
@@csmeitt1188 😂😂😂
lmao same.
On TH-cam we are searching Einstein, Newton, Tesla and on paper I can't solve shit
Nobody could do the math Einstein came up with. Not because they were not as smart but because it was fraudulent. You can learn science without ever having to go to school. A degree to go into debt for is just a piece of paper giving you permission to work in the field of your choice. It is a nice scam.
@@MeasuredFlat Bullshit
Einsten would be glad to be proven wrong if enough evidence is provided.
Jessrey Mark Solijon He's a true scientist.
AlchemistOfNirnroot *was
AlchemistOfNirnroot Do you claim that he's still alive?
Yes...beautiful hu?
+Jessrey Mark
I bet Einstein didn't even know his own self. So how could he know the entire universe?
Einstein: What If Michio Kaku Is Wrong?
armynso dat plot twist
***** Read my research papers in the following link to understand how Einstein's theory does not stand the test of time. www.researchgate.net/profile/Pradeep_Koshy4
Pradeep Koshy but it's toooo long
+armynso Well Kaku even explained possible theories to why the SWISS were wrong. He wasn't even the one to come up with the anti-relativity hypothesis.
+Jacob Zondag Did you not watch the video? MK is arguing that relativity still holds and the experiment was flawed..which is was
Ahh I see, so what you're saying is, einstein was Probably right.
I don't get wat he is talkin' bout
U big brain
No buddy they goofed these secrets. But I think the CERN has a delay due to the some loss of fiber wire. Which in delayed the collision.
Varun Oregunta haha that is exactly what happened! but Einstein hasn’t even finished his work?? what is light relèvent to! they think tachyons could move faster instead of neutrinos
How so did you conclude this? I’m a philosopher 🇺🇸
Albert Einstein: What If Michio Kaku Is Wrong?
Rival Gangs. The Swiss get beat up.
Well, Michio Kaku is actually saying Einstein was not wrong: he clearly says he thinks there was an error in the calibration of the system used in the latest experiment, therefore Einstein was right
Paolo Costa r/wooosh
O3o
This made me laugh.
I think Einstein said:
If I am right, the Germans will say that I am a German, and the French will call me a "citizen of the world".
But, said Einstein, if I am wrong, the French will say that I am a German, and the Germans will say that I am a Jew!
such is life
It turned out to be just a error of measurment. Nothing is faster than c and Einstein still is German ;-)
The problems of general relativity arise when you look at the Universe at very small or at very large scales. What's wrong with general relativity ?
New finding in 2010 you don't know before, in general theory of relativity Albert Einstein ignored refraction of light. Einstein's proving method (EPM) via eclipse is unscientific and deeply wrong. It is very surprising. Einstein was wrong.
Please read on the reliable source the book The Universe and DR.Einstein, by Lincoln Barnett, London, 1949, Preface by Albert Einstein himself, page 78 - 79.
Einstein's gravity is wrong. Deflection of light is caused by refraction, not gravity. Shapiro delay is false, time delay is caused by refraction, not gravity. Gravitational redshift is false.Redshift is caused by refraction. Redshift is not Doppler shift, Lensing is caused by refraction, not gravity.....etc.
jew factor
+GSA New Physics
Let me guess. You never read the book, you got your information from a pseudo science blog, and you have no idea how refraction works.
Am I close?
Thanks for spoiling Superman....
HAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAA xD
gladJonas Well played!
gladJonas you wasn’t going to watch it
lol hi jonas i didnt expect to see you as the top comment
If an individual has not seen Superman, well then they deserve to be spoiled.
He explains everything so well.
This person is great.
He does have a gift for explaining extremely complex subjects.
You are a swifty
@@srishtirana9191 well yes i am a swifty. cheers.
@@steffliot3788 what is a swifty?
@@vidcooldrake3059 A Taylor Swift stan. I see you fancy drake;)
I didn't come here for Superman spoilers, GEEZ!
Imagine watching Superman with Dr. Michio Kaku
LukeSumIpsePatremTe this comment made my day 😂😂
I hate spoilers and can feel you. Nevertheless, be soft on Mr Kaku for spoiling a movie that's been released almost 40 years ago (in 1978).
Jon Snow is a Targaryen in the show but probably won't be in the books(unless it was a triplet birth.)...How about this spoiler, do you find it more to your liking?
Lol
"GPS, Nuclear weapons..."
Me : "Dang that escalated quickly"
Yup
I near get my reward fore all the work t j at i did more then whate i was suporter dow the promis me money i near got but i dont give up
Hahaaha
I was just trying to find the nearest donut shop.
GPS doesnt prove relativity. There are no relativistic corrections on GPS satellites. Talk to the people who built them
Secondly, nuclear power and weapons were known to be possible prior to Einstein, and could have happened without his work.. All Einstein did was mathematically harmonize newton with a few other theories.
Mr. Kaku should know all of this. He is propagating cancer and stupidity.
"So in a sense, they are using relativity to disprove relativity"
Michio Thanos, 2012
I didnt get the thanos part
@@chewinggum5550 one of Thanos's most famous lines is "I used the stones to destroy the stones". They're similar
@@giorgiomauceri410 ohh
😂
I think they use the ether
I saved this to my playlist, only to play when someone is around me who might peek to find out what I am watching
They'll probably think he is a smartass or an intellectual
LOL
👊😄👍
I swear to God dats what I'm doing right now.... I'm in a room full of my sisters friends
I like your style dude.
Lmao why is everyone in the comment section mad?
They need some milk
@@javierherrera8782 From his mama.lol
I'm mad because I'm right and everyone ignores me. :(
Regarding time, relativity, and two planes flying opposite directions with atomic clocks (Hafele-Keating experiment) ...
There is reason to doubt it because, as proven by Reich, orgone (life) energy affects rates of radioactive decay.
A plane moving one direction moves through more of it in one direction vs ground and the other.
For the same reason, Pons & Fleischmann may have been correct about cold fusion.
If the container they used to control temperature was built more like an orgone accumulator than those who tried to reproduce it.
Radioactive decay rates are not constant as assumed.
You can see them change over the next few days just subjecting samples to 50KV for 30 minutes (AC or DC, doesn't matter).
For that reason, our dates are unreliable with carbon-dating, it depends on how many times the sample has been hit by lightning.
On a similar note, the Samsung phone batteries that were exploding would be those delivered from Korea with a flight near the pole when the aurora was active.
See: A Theory about the Boeing 787 Lithium-Ion Battery Problem
Belief in accreditation is for CYA and so we don't have to think much. I don't need no stinking bachelors, I have a gift. :P
garyha I don't need a bachelors*
Hey albert
I'm way too stupid for this
no, admitting you don't know something is also an act of intelligence
I can asure you that you are not stupid. Stupid is way to broad a term to be used for a person.
Me explain Bernard. No use termometer in sunlight. You dum dum.
**Socrates has entered the chat**
@@tentailmadara2500 10/10
Einstein would be happy to be wrong.
+Robert “TangFiend” James .......i cannot agree MORE!!!............YOU damn right!!!
+Robert „TangFiend“ James it is just f(x) = 2² ...
incorrect, Einstein would be happy to be proven wrong*
Wrong, Doctor Einstein would be happy to be proven wrong*
He promised the Nobel prize money to his ex wife for child support. He later added the cosmic constant to his equations to created a static universe. "the Einstein blunder" that also proved with that addition to the equation to show an expanding universe. The constant he added would be what he'd be happy to have gotten wrong. just a TL;DR :)
Einstein's last words were : *_Don't believe any quote said by anyone I said including this one_*
That's Buddha
lmao no, his lasts words were in german and the nurse didnt know german
@@samichloricacid that nurse must be lived whole sad life because of not understanding Einstein.
@@samichloricacid R/wooosh
Ok
Einstein would rather be happy if he is proven wrong.cause knowing the truth is more important.
Ego inversely proportional to knowledge.
Well said sir
Perfectly agree ! The more you know the more you realize all what you didn't know, this is a big lesson of humility. For me a true genious is modest, humble. He know much than the common people, understand better lots of things, but this level of understanding and comprehension push him to realize that all is knowledge is quite ridiculous compared to all his ignorance.
Robertson longjam - oh yeah? Einstein told you this?
If you correct an error of Einstein which has stunted the growth of physics for about 110 years would someone please proof this E=mv^3 where v = lights variable speed. If this is not proofed you will not believe the result. It comes out being that light speed is possible means Einstein made a human error since we are all human and did not take into account that light is variable due to its speed can change such as a speed in a different medium since this has already been proved by the lights refractive index.
Robertson longjam einstein was fraud and he stole the theory of relativity
If it wasn't for Einstein questioning the current state and understanding of physics, in his day, let alone the top physicist at his time (Isaac Newton), then he would never discovered anything.
Moral of the story? Always question. Einstein's theories might be just one small step towards the greater picture, just as Newton was for relativity. To assume that one guy had it all correct and we need not question his theory is to not be scientific whatsoever.
+It's Me
Einstein didn't question the then current state. In fact, he built on the work/discoveries of e.g. Lorentz and Maxwell.
+John Doe before relativity, there was 2 theories about the speed of light: Isaac Newton thought that light and gravity acts instantly. So Einstein did prove Newton Wrong as we know.
Also, Newton's equations could not explain Planet Mercury's orbit, but Einstein's equation explained it. It was a big step towards the validation of relativity.
Molun The speed of light had already been measured before Einstein.
It's not so much the speed of light that Einstein questioned, but it's behavior in relation to everything else (including time and space).
Einstein had the insight to see that the speed of light was the same for all observers, and basic algebra would show that if one thing stays constant, everything else must give (that being time and space).
It was such a profound thing to claim, but something that was not considered or discussed in his day, or ever in the past.
That's what I meant about questioning the current state and understanding of physics. He wasn't questioning the laws, per se, but how those laws interacted with each other.
It was just a simple paradigm shift. But that same principle can be applied today. Perhaps our understanding of light, space, and time is still skewed because of some simple change of perspective no one has yet to notice?
No, it was Lorentz that formulated the idea of length contraction and time dilation based on more precise measurements of the speed of light that had been done.
Then before Einstein Poincaré had already worked with a constant speed of light and relativity, building upon Lorentz' work.
Lorentz' original theory contained however an absolute ether that could neither be experimentally confirmed nor is it compatible with relativity. Poincaré knew that.
So Einstein dropped the ether, postulated that Lorentz transformed coordinate systems are frames of reference (which are a theoretical construct) ... and that's special relativity.
He also noticed that the speed of light is not just about light by recognizing c in Maxwell's equations.
You see, this was a chain of small steps taken by several smart people and technological advances were also very important in order to be able to do the experiments.
Its so nice to listen to Michio when he explain, its just pure joy !
because he is a good actor
*on startalk he always acts better than Chuck, but then again I would too*
II Reggie II, he is a scientist, not an actor. Why do you even claim that shit? For some likes?
He act in the lerning of sciens, if he would talk pure fact you could not lissen and thats called Retorik, if he just talk facts any new would not lissen. And for other he has theorised request like light saber,warp, and so much more. Becuse of this if you whant sciens you need to lissen and lern from your mistakes !
Mats Johansson
Science* Listen* Rhetoric*.
Till nästa gång. ;)
I remember in school when I'm calculating speed of a car on a physics problem I found out that it was faster than speed of light.
I was shocked at my multiplication capability
😂😂😂
I hate any reference to "proving Einstein wrong". He was a brilliant man, but he wasn't perfect. The man was wrong about lots of things because his job required him to make new conjectures on a regular basis.
If someone could prove him wrong in all this. That would be scientific find of the century.
Maybe you can do it, you'll never know, if you do Physics
I did have of the mishen when i fist stared it i was called alier that i near beet the mishen when poeple prove it
That just dont wont two here the truth
Oliver St.pierre Dude you have to learn how to spell.
Red Rat , My point precisely. Theory is not truth.
What a wonderful man! I would love to have him as my physics teacher. He has everything a great teacher needs: abundant intelligence and knowledge, great anecdotes, also a tremendous vitality and wit. He's passionate about his subject, but he doesn't take it or himself too seriously. He also radiates simple, down-to-earth human warmth, unlike many physicists.
+Rob Stuart I can't stand him. He's arrogant.
dlwatib I don't find him arrogant at all. I would say he is self-confident and passionate
***** Hate? That seems an unnecessarily strong emotion.
+IAmKing720 Whatever turns you on! You have to live with it.
james eremine The world desperately needs people who understand science and can passionately explain it to non-scientists, especially because so many young people are turning against science. Just look at all the pseudoscience and anti-science suspicion and even hatred here on TH-cam. Researching and publishing isn't a prerequisite.
“Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position but certainty is absurd.” Voltaire
@Hans Coventrierenhabenmachen In case you are serious and not trolling, I suppose you are referring to volts (V) who were named in honour of Alessandro Volta. And AFAIK, Voltaire wasn't a physicist. Nevertheless, he was also a scientist
If I were to refer to everything, it would be a Closed and isolated system, Behold I refer to the Universe, in short a finite ergo a CERTAINTY, is that absurd? NO! Truth "Facts" can never be absurd, truth is certain, contradictions though are uncertain, so honestly why is this certainty which is everything absurd?
I insist all uncertainties treated as certainties are the absurd, and it's high time more data is accrued so that all uncertainty is eliminated..
@@KorAllRBare well…..that’s a start!
What if einstein is wrong
EINSTEIN:
*you dare opose me mortal*
@heatedvoltz....... Okay?
@heatedvoltz yeah you being a bit slow
Wow what a great coment section
Oppose*
@heatedvoltz No they didn't. It was a computer simulation of a photo of a black hole. Einstein was proven wrong through Frame Dragging or the lack of it.
The title should be "Michio Kaku: Einstein Isn't Wrong"
Atlas Slates Then noone would bother to listen to the obvious ;)
Atlas Slates he actually talked about the scenario where Einstein was wrong, so the title is correct.
Atlas Slates It should be called:"you can't beat relativity with relativity".
I love how the people that are watching this have SpongeBob and Pikachu as their profile pic. It's like they're just giving society the middle finger, as if to say 'PEOPLE WHO WATCH SPONGEBOB AND POKEMON ARE NOT ALL STUPID!'
SonicGraffitiArtist Well I watch neither. I just love the derp face pikachu does. I have a whole collection of about 40 pictures with all derp pictures of Pikachu. You can google "retarded Pikachu" and find out for yourself xD
He is talking about the OPERA experiment in 2011, which turned out to be a faulty measurement due two to errors in their equipment.
Two months after this video was uploaded, an attempt to reproduce the experiment failed to exceed the speed of light in full accordance with relativity theory. Another three months later they had fully analysed the original experiment and concluded that it simply was a faulty measurement.
T33K3SS3LCH3N thank you sir
Why is this not the top comment? Thank you.
This is why I was reading the comments. Thanks!
Thank you
Finally found another physicist aside from Neil DeGrasse Tyson who can explain complicated stuff and make a regular man like me somehow understand.
And you found one who isn’t a pompous, asshole like that infamous “scoffer” Idiot Neil.
You’ve upgraded. Well played.
@@bosshogg8447 ikr 😆
Its not something to understand. And I honestly don't think someone traveling right under lightspeed is traveling to the future, while just past lighspeed were then traveling to the past. What in the Marvel Multiverse bullshit is that logic? Its whatever, humans will die off long before getting to even 1% of lightspeed.
look up Dr Brian Cox
Brian Cox does it better
He explains things so well.
Because things make sense in his head like that. He sees the math and thinks that ^ so he can explain it to us commoners lol.
We can reverse time
But I need an answer
Anu V A Anu I don't know ask Einstine.
see my remark about his inaccuracies ...
Couldve given a spoiler alert for the superman movie jeez
Actually, i didnt watch the movie and just went and saw the clip after this😂
Yeah ikr, he just jumped right in
There was a pop-up saying spoiler alert from 1978 to 1988
Ok
Don't you just wish that he could have been your teacher at school?
ammar qahtani why
no
ofcourse yes!!
normanshafty yes, yes,...
I wish!
He looks on this thumbnail like he would say: "Your soul is mine!"
*"Your brother soul is mine!"*
Mortal Combat. Classic
Rmember...
Einstein published relativity when we didn't have any super tech stuff and still can't even understand them correctly.. so imagine if he lived in modern era we might be travelling between galaxies in few years...
I really respect that physicist have the balls to admit that some of their theories could be wrong while some groups won't ever imagine that conclusion.
everything could be wrong ... that's how science is. Everything is a theory waiting to be replaced. Everything is refutable
alz230
The problem is that the scientists themselves are flawed, ordinary humans and they protect their accomplishments and are not quick to embrace change. This can be both and good thing and a bad thing. Don't get me wrong though, compared to other things in life, the pace of science is still one of the fastest when it comes to progress and regardless of egos, the truth will always prevail.
kalimul
Egos are stronger than to admit new theories.
Mello Keehl
Especially if like most creationists they were taught ever since they were young. It's kind of hard to throw away something that you thought you knew for 20+ years. Another unfortunate thing is some groups shun their family and friends just because they don't want to be proven wrong.
It's a narrow-minded life for some folks.
That's science in a nutshell.
I wouldn't be impressed unless the neutrinos arrived at the detector before they were sent.
What if you choose not to fire the neutrinos after seeing them arrive before you actually did anything?
Could go with Back to the Future rules?- if you don't send the neutrinos, that reality fades away and nobody remembers receiving the signal.
Which means it could have happened but we wouldnt remember it
True. I don't like his statement, without basis, that if you exceed the speed of light, time goes backwards! It's cliche.
+is reality is comprised of light segmented by dark matter; the very thing that gives light a home is itself built out of condensed segments (e=mc sq) of the very light whom's highest ambition is to illuminate any and all revisions of itself (every facet of reality). From our level, matter came before the light, and is therefore faster and always a step ahead of the light (manifesting is impossible for light unless it allows itself to be condensed by dark matter in order to manifest on this plane ((fallen angels)) but the light can only do what the dark matter allows for . Anything that can potentially give light energy a platform to persuade all other revisions of itself to override the material world (everything) would give light too much influence (Jesus or some light deity) and eventually it will embody the material and light will have acquired the ability to create matter and obliterate it on the fly (like dreams, we create temporary realities based on intent, then terminate them
Here after it’s announced that he may be wrong 😂
Too many people believe these minds now long gone were somehow Gods. Einstein himself acknowledged the possibility that his whole life's work could be wrong.
We will never advance until we forget the past and begin to challenge deeply seeded paradigms.
Not saying he is wrong, because I'm not a physicist, but the possibility is very real.
Two idiots who have probably never taken a physics class...
Beauty of being human
The problem is many careers and reputations rely on the accepted theories, this kind of approach in my opinion hinders science and reminescent of the old catholic churches tendancy to ignore theories that might threaten them. Old minds are not usually very open to new ideas, even those scientists. I Personally i believe we have'nt even begun to scratch the surface of what this existence is.
+Gabriel cazorla persson You're not smarter than Einstein and you're wrong.
KingZam You take Einsteins word as definite and 100% correct and your comeback is "youre not smarter then Einstein" or "all physycists belive in in relativity" therefore anyone who goes againts it must be retarded.
Posibbly the greatest mind to ever exist, a guy who could put Einstein to shame, the very person responsible for 75% of modern day technology, Nikola Tesla, thought the theory of relativity was complete horseshit.
When asked how it feels to be the smartest person in the world, Einstein replied "I dont know, go ask Tesla" 😘
I love how half speed can make anyone seem a little drunk or high.
Lmao
Principally Jeff Goldblum.
You made my day bro
He's high as fuck! :DD
Oh my god, I died laughing. That's amazing.
einstein isnt right or wrong ..he is old
what would einstein say if he had access to todays knowledge?
couldn't agree more
If Einstein lived today he would not be known by many people. There are many people doing remarkable research nowadays, but who knows their names? Also we are not making much of a progress today. Not the progress compared to the progress scientists made when all was discovered a long time ago. This is why we are still referring to people like Einstein, Tesla, etc. We are still using their foundations. Only additions to those foundations are being made. If Einstein lived today he would not be groundbreaking.
the world has lot of problem with this theory
my name you are kinda missing the point
***** Although my questions was blocked (presumably by Thunder Zephyr) it was a trick question: "Would that knowledge include things we know now, like the photoelectric effect?"
I'd say your reply reveals your inadequate research skills to the community. Yes, it was too deep for you?
Here comes the comment sections, where everyone is an expert about time and space than the scientists themselves.
And scientists have never *ever* been wrong about anything
Yeah, cause getting in here and calling everyone an idiot is such an interesting contribution
Debate is part of what science is about. Questioning things that were previously “established”. If you don’t understand this, I encourage you to take a few science philosophy courses.
Stop trying to be a gate keeper. It’s unbecoming, and doesn’t advance science in the least.
@@bosshogg8447 There are limits to the so-called debate. People don't debate about the shape of the earth for example because it's done, we know the earth is round.
@@ZERO_ULTRA And who decides what is allowed to be debated, and what isn’t?
And why shouldn’t someone be allowed to put forth a theory that “muh Earth is flat”? It will either check out, or it won’t, based on peer review.
No offense intended, but I hear stances similar to the one you are making, and it seems like programming to me. It’s not a scientific way of looking at the world. It sounds, in fact, like the resurrection of Old World principles where one did not question the word of people who sat at the top of the church. And look how far that set us back.
There is a reason these are all called "theories" ladies and gentlemen. At any given time Science, Mathematics, Physics etc could change.
What if Einstein, Newton, and others were slightly wrong or biased or incomplete? Welcome to the world where nobody knows anything finally.
Memory of the Stars
How can you call something knowledge which always changes
~Socrates
Math, when properly applied, is never wrong, biased or incomplete.
@@sarwarghouris well knowledge is knowing something about something at any given time. However I didn't get your point with that quote?
But the essence of knowledge is that it must be timeless and must have a universality
Which science lacks, but we're working on it to refine it as much as possible
@@sarwarghouris nope knowledge can be temporary or inconsistent. Knowledge literally mean knowing about something. It's very subjective all those theories of "universality" etc only fits with a certain things which is once again very subjective.
"In 2011, the OPERA experiment mistakenly observed neutrinos appearing to travel faster than light. " from wiki
and time do. es not go backward when you go faster than light. I think it's just that you can see things happened before but you are not being in that moment. But I might be wrong im not the physicist here
plus the max speed of universe is not determined by the speed of the light, in the opposite, it is the max speed of universe determines the speed of light
+Weilun Mo No. When the "speed of light" was determined to be a set figure is what some physicist will find to be just the figure that needs to be fixed. The equipment I have here at my house isn't good enough to tell me by exactly how much but I'm finding that the speed of light must have been based on an average of the visible spectrum. The speed that light travels faster at one end of the spectrum than the other. So, if this is true, the speed of light in an equation and a variable depending on the frequency of light you are using for accuracies sake. There is a lot of light we'll never be able to see because now that the universe is expanding at faster than the "speed of light" any light no matter how bright it is, even if it's as bright as a super nova and shining directly at us and it's generated from only a foot away from us will never be seen it because it's moving away from of us faster than the light can travel towards us.
Almost all of the light emitted from that tiny galaxy a foot away, is seen, just because C is constant. That's why the expansion is said to be "metric". 10% of 1 foot is much less for that little photon to fly in a second than 10% of 3,000,001 kilometres. In the latter case the poor particle might face a hopeless task, indeed. That is, if Einstein was right.
You would be able to see "faster than light "LIGHT" unless it's traveling AWAY from you because it would be impossible to see something traveling AWAY from you if it's emitted light is moving away from you at a speed greater than it's emissions can travel.
Besides being a great theoretical physicist, he is also a great science communicator! One of my favourite personalities in science.
Really? What is your favorite scientific theory of his?
Just to say, he was right. it was actually just a GPS failure
Really? Got a link? I would like to learn about it.
One link is this one news.sciencemag.org/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster-light-neutrino-results
and if you want to really read up on it here's a wikipedia article
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_anomaly
please come back to led zeppelin
Haha
Ahahahahah
is this guy a scientific commercial clown?.Big Mouth
Hahahahahahah
listen to stair way to heaven backwards on youtube please
Einstein would be glad if he knew that he is wrong if enough evidence is provided
But he is not wrong as has been well proven.
actually he probably got something wrong since Relativity breaks down at the quantum level, and he couldn't stand the idea of quantum entanglement ( spooky action at a distance, as he called it), wich was proven to be real.
The universe did begin with the big bang. Evolve? Yes, so did the universe. Think about the contradictions in your statements.
the universe did began, and it will probably end when the last black hole evaporates, what we call time is nothing but the ever forward evolution of the universe. At least as far as i understand the laws of physics.
lol. as long as there is movement there is time. the reason for ur claim being hard to grasp isnt because everyone except for u has a limited brain, its because ur claim is fucking stupid. please just go away.
It was due to a equipment malfunction.
Correct. But Mr. Kaka here says it was due to an error in calculating a relativistic system. Just another time he has been wrong in his videos and people eat this stuff up. SMH.
They think it is a mistake but they have not found any malfunction. In other words, physicists are trying to prove they are right without the proving there is a mistake.
And disclosing potentially revolutionary results before reviewing all the possible sources of error. Sloppy and undisciplined physics leads to this kind of bullcrap.
Definitely one of the coolest guys on earth.
Should have been called "_Why_ Einstein Isn't Wrong".
Shouldn't, cuz he still can be wrong... But we don't know it yet :P Open title is good for us to describe how (possible) Einstein error will take effect in our reality.
He personally hates Einstein. He wishes to outshine Einstein. Appearing all over only to come close as he can to Einstein's celebrity scientist status. I wonder what real contribution this guy has on the real world... I mean, besides sounding pseudo smartellectual
i have the same feeling about him.. he is promoting a string theory which is pure science fiction and there is no fucking way to prove it
But you know, views.
+Vlad Marcu New things cant be discovered unless you venture outside the realm of what you think is possible.
This video is the best example for showcasing the misunderstanding which arises by only reading the Headline of news which is more often than not misleading. And the truth is revealed when one reads the whole news.
There was an electrical malfunction for the exact amount of time the neutrinos beat the light.
Michio makes physics sound fun
Literally everything you define as fun happens because of physics.
Physics IS FUN. You're just too dumb or uninterested to figure it out.
Ghost khiz. I agree physics is the best thing ever and phenomenal but we don’t need to call him dumb 😂 we’re all just a bit hurt about Einstein being wrong that’s all...which I can’t believe
Well he's a science communicator that's literally his job.
The greatest advacements in science were not made by coat-tailing on others ideas, but from challenging old ideas constantly.
The crazy Japanese man michio kaku talks about Albert Einstein hahaha
Inb4 some shitter says god
+Noxus Finest they alway reach for straws Miller urey test en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment The christian restating and getting the Miller Urey test wrong to support "intelligent life" creation.com/why-the-miller-urey-research-argues-against-abiogenesis
+Noxus Finest god.
+naihanchin Kempo
That creation article is actually *really LAUGHABLE*...
The Urey-Miller experiment was actually an even *GREATER* success than thought at first, especially with the new discoveries about the prebiotic earth and how it was even MORE hospitable to life than previously thought. Except for the fact that aminoacids and even proteins could form in those conditions, there are even comets millions of years older than the earth that have aminoacids in them, so that's not even a necessary step anymore xD
DeathLordFhyeg yep,,it's a form of a strawman argument. they expect people who believe the way they do, to only read their take.. and do no research..So they can restate the facts, to fit their story of the world.. Lying to theirself to smooth over feelings they have, Because the truth of science, and what their preacher and mother told told them as a child doesn't jibe..As a Child my mother told me thunder was, God in a Bowling match getting a strike..I gave that that belief up after i found out the truth :)
naihanchin Kempo
lol, so how do you know that's *NOT* what thunder is? Were you there? XD
"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious." - Albert Einstein
No
Bullshit. Lol
what if i farted at the moment i had those chest pains instead of when i actually did fart... would i live or not, is the question
What if you're chest pains only occurred after farting so you'd have a warning sign for prevention, and you actually didn't use that method to survive? What if we're asking all the wrong questions? What if we're asking the right questions and it's they're fault for putting this video here where we ask these types of questions?
princesslibra20 what question to ask, in what manner and method is the ultimate challenge for the unacqainted ones in the field of question pondering, the chronology of possibilities of actions to undertake is quite enourmous
^touché
"If facts don't agree with theory, change the facts" @Einstein.
The governing mantra of science: "It is not about what we know -- it's about what we believe to know thus far..."
Einstein blew Newton out of the water, though he didn't necessarily contradict him. Newton blew Copernicus and Galileo out of the water, though he didn't necessarily contradict them."
Knowledge is always growing, new laws become old laws, and old laws are changed by new discoveries.
There very likely is a chance that someone could shatter Einstein's theories, just as much as Einstein's theories could be irrevocable.
The great mysteries of science.
R.B. Ratieta my friend even newton
Called gravity as a myterious force einstine defined relativity with sufficient proofs
actually I had already done that. But almost nobody wants to listen. As a start, please have a look at my public talk:
www.researchgate.net/publication/323691934_The_Crisis_of_Modern_Theoretical_Physics_and_its_Simple_and_Beautiful_Solution
IOW, the former just expounded on the latter.
The great mysteries of the “religion” science
R.B. Ratieta No one will ever shatter Einstein's theories. Einstein was NEVER once wrong and never will be. Now, you can expand from his knowledge and not contradict him as you even stated but you will never in your life discredit him. For example, NASA states space is a square with no edges. Einstein did not understand the geometrical shape of space at that time because the actual density of space was not measured. There is no such thing as a square with no edges. Space is made of parallel circles with infinite curvature that cause the equal and opposite reaction of flat parallel lines in the interior and accelerated expansion. Physicists state that Einstein's theories stop at black holes when gravity pushes and it does not pull. Thus, the gravity of the atom that caused the Big Bang is pushing against the deflating gravity of the universe when time space is broken down in a black hole. They attempted to discredit Einstein and failed so miserably that they became flat Earthers as a result.
A big thumbs up for mentioning Superman. Science!
There's plenty of models in science that explained stuff pretty well and worked yet were fundamentally incorrect
+TheFinnishBolshevik Any examples?
John Doe Various Aether theories and Classical Newtonian physics. Newton wasn't really necessarily incorrect but his model only works roughly and with medium sized things
TheFinnishBolshevik
I don't think that aether "theories" were anything more than hypotheses and classical Newtonian physics works beautifully in many cases.
It's not fundamentally wrong, it just didn't take the finite speed of light into account.
John Doe from the point of view of trying to explain basic physics it doesn't really matter if light is particles or waves going through the aether. Its kinda the same with Newton. His stuff works fine within limits.
My point is that our current understanding might be the aether theory of it's day. Within our narrow context it seems to make sense but in the grand scheme of things it could still be wrong.
For example so called 'dark energy' is not a real thing. Its just a concept physicists invented to patch some holes in the theory of relativity. Nobody has ever seen or observed 'dark energy' and its probably not even real. It may just be that the whole theory of relativity is somehow wrong in a way we dont understand and it results in these weird glitches and things working differently then they're supposed to. Still 99% of the time it appears to work fine just like Newtonian physics or even some of those aether models.
TheFinnishBolshevik
Our current theories are actual scientific theories supported by mountains of evidence and countless experiments.
Aether "theories" were not. That's why I said they were merely hypotheses.
'Dark energy' is a hypothesis too, albeit one that is largely accepted as the one that fits data best so far. But it's still a hypothesized unknown form of energy ...
So yeah, that's not exactly scientific theory material either.
I remember watching this when i was 18...and i now realise i had no idea what was going on...5 years later after an engineering degree it all makes sense
i have a degree in engineering and still don't understand shit, what does speed of light have to do with traveling through time wtf
@@Sonyetc I am 14 and i Can understand , You just need to Study A Lot of physics.
@@inspirex1831 define a lot
Engineers? You guys have no phD?
Albert Einstein: “There could be no fairer destiny for any… theory than that it should point the way to a more comprehensive theory in
which it lives on, as a limiting case."
I'm a programmer and when doing debugging, it often saves a lot of time to ask yourself the question "where did I botched up" and just start from the presumption that you made a coding mistake which is altering the entire thread and hence the output (inside out) than to start the process backwards from the symptoms of the problem, through the entire thread, towards the source of the problem (outside in).
Obviously this is not always the best solution, and you need many years of experience to gain this instinct of guesstimating directly the source of the problem than going through the normal process, and some times it just doesn't work and your instinct is wrong, you must always keep in mind that everything is possible and be opened to the possibility that you may be totally wrong.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is, most of the times, the most simplest explanation is the right explanation for an apparently inexplicable phenomenon. In this case, there is much more likely a problem in the actual method of measurement of the experiment, than the theory of relativity being wrong. However, that does not mean the theory of relativity is bullet proof, and a good scientist must keep that in mind, because nothing is more disruptive to progress than not being able to see the forest because of the trees. If in this particular case the simplest explanation is the measurements being wrong, it's possible that in other cases, the simplest explanation might just be that relativity is not quite that... relative.
I don't believe that there is a scientist who thinks that relativity is the end of physics and should be written in stone tablets somewhere and left for the generations. Every theory should be thought of as "not yet proved wrong", or "the best we have". And relativity is had been pretty useful so far. I mean, everything tech related we have because of Einstein's work. So is relativity 100% correct? Probably not. Is it good enough for now? Hell yea.
Nerubz
That's what I like in Science. We (as humanity) may one day discover that speed of light is not strictly constant but depends on something. If this happens, it won't mean that everything need recalibration and Einstein was wrong, it will just mean that Einstein was on the right track but just didn't see the bigger picture and it would mean that we'll be able to do more than we could before.
Considering how little we know about the time, I think that theory of relativity just scratched the surface of something much much bigger.
THEN BAM!! you just missed a semi-colon
GoodGameHunter Ever heard of Test Driven Development?
Enlightenment I have, and I think it's a nice concept but very impractical.
tesla was right he was not praised because he was not elite
Einstein is a wrole best geniius he can't be wrong written by Albert Einstein(2 )
Ishaq Niz edgelord
TESLA was the king , no one will ever match him , Einstein was a joke math never gets you anywhere in the universe , mathemagic I call it , in the end all theories will fail miserably . .. .
Yes and a random worker at the patent office is.
Tesla gets the praise he deserves. Have you ever seen an electrical engineer not fanboy over Tesla? Stop being silly. Einstein's results were just a lot more far-reaching than Tesla's. Get over it.
Einstein struggled with his theories , especially GR, during his mid to late career. He questioned a lot of their fundamentals. He even wrote a personal letter to a friend claiming that one day his theories would likely be replaced because at least one of his assumptions is wrong. Evidence for a timeless universe is building. That is, the universe may evolve in only 3 spatial dimensions. In a timeless universe, time is independent parameter used when making measurement of things in 3D. The starlight deflection calculation that helped launch GR into stardom and replace Newtonian physics can also be done using purely Newtonian physics. Unfortunately the corrected calculation only happened recently, so it will be met with skepticism, etc...a lot more more such calculations are needed before people start to take a 3D timeless universe seriously. Whatever happens, Einstein will still be remembered, by many, as one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century planet (and that is my view too).
You are on the right track. The Universe cannot begin the way it is presented at his point. The expansion theory in itself is an admission of error or lack of understanding. WATCH THIS SPACE. Dene GREGG. AUSTRALIA
what a coincidence almost like he ran out of material he stole from being a patent clerk
@@cpt191021 RE: last comment correction (this point not his point) > Science has in some respects drifted away from reality. Theory and Calculation does not always answer the questions we cannot see or accurately measure. Put it this way, just because super glue sticks most substances together well, does not mean that it fills holes just as well. It doesn't. My disagreement is that Inflation theory attempts to do a similar feat. . . with similar results. It astounds me that highly paid scientists from most areas don't apply the fundamentals to come up with their assumptions. . . and much of it is merely hazy assumptions at best. Seriously, the Universe is physical in nature. That is why E=mc2. Inflation theory is like asking a Sheep " Dear Mr. Sheep, what is the answer to our existence? The Sheeps' answer is generally more plausible. Sheeps' answer is Baaaa ! I could go on, however it seems pointless (RE: Big Bang, Inflation Theory, Hubble Constant etc. . . . . . Oh ! don't knock Eistein too much. He did always try to make sense of his theories and thoughts... and he had the sense to flee from the Dictator who ruled over another mob of sheep... Agghhh ! or is that Baaah !
I stopped listening at "time travel" Give it up people..its impossible
Too bad you did not watched until the end...
Wow. I wonder what else you don't know because you stopped listening too early?
greg55666
~ just curious... what do you mean? :)
***** I'm afraid you were misled by the dumb new youtube/google+ commenting system. I wasn't talking to you. I was agreeing with you, criticizing B tac for stopping before the end. He thinks Michio was saying that time travel is possible.
We currently have the technology for teleportation (minuscule fragments, but you get the point), what makes you think we can't get time travel? We'll be long dead before teleportation can teleport humans but, it might be possible in the far future, as long as the race doesn't destroy itself.
thank you, asian science guy!
he said all these crazy shit about science and all you can say is thank you asian guy? what the fuck is wrong with this generation?
mathew633man what generation are you talking about??
mathew633man
Chill bro...
All you people complaining about what Crazycool1128 said - Chill, Michio Kaku is of Asian decent, there is nothing wrong with saying that in the way he said it. Please refrain from being super PC to the point where saying something that isn't intended to be offensive (and simply isn't), and turning it (or making it sound like) something that should be considered offensive.
This video is outdate. A few months later, scientists re-checked their instruments, and discovered that there was a poorly connected optical fiber in a measuring instrument from the Italian laboratory. Einstein is saved :-P
probably covering their tracks because noone wants to say "Einstein is wrong" Look at when Hawkins made a black hole theory, he had theories and data and they physics community just said "Yeah well Einsteins E=MC2 says it cant happen." But then this proved that his theory could be right and suddenly they claim "Instrument error"
Nope more and more scientist trying to prove Einstein wrong now
Silent Gamer - That never happened.
seventh saucer how do you know that?
Not really. He concluded systematic errors, but he was explaining and giving examples of what was being claimed at the time as well.
"We use relativity to defeat relativity" That's quite a paradox!
What if michio kaku is wrong
What if reality is just an illusion of vanity and your thoughts aren't really yours?
@@-Vitalis- wtf. Im calling the fbi
@@brand5887 Aw, shit... not again.
it's not even his opinion or theory he's just reporting the facts lol
Maybe we all just live in a simulation, says Elon Musk th-cam.com/video/2KK_kzrJPS8/w-d-xo.html
Star trek will never be real if we cant go faster than light:(
It's called science FICTION for a reason.
I thought they called it that because its true
nashredderus warp drive is a workaround... actually the enterprise never moved faster than light... the space-time bubble around the enterprise did
Ramix09 Warp drive is totally hypothetical.
Ajay Kumar Singh so? Theoretically is possible
There is one thing faster than the speed of light - a man on a beer run 10 minutes before the game is about to start.
Helios77711 you are an earthling
shut up and have a little humor you nimrod.
the systematic error was that there was a reel of fibre optic “cable” in the light path (hidden somewhere) that hadn’t been accounted for.
for reel?
Boy, I really hope somebody got fired for that blunder.
Newton was not wrong or proven wrong. His models just dont work at very large scales and more extreme circumstances. Einsteins model works on both scales but also doesnt address the absolute most extreme scales and circumstances. One day there will probably a model that works in all situations which will probably be the theory of everything. It will supercede newton and einstein, but it doesnt mean that they were wrong. Thats the point.
exactly
Gar Nicht yess
Exactly, each person's theory is a modified version of the other, Einsteins studies were based on Newton. We will keep modifying it until the theory includes all circumstances.
Actually, Stephen Hawking felt, that there could be no single unifying theory which combines both quantum mechanics and relativity or any other theory. He felt that there would only be a set of interlocking theories, which we would just try and make better fitting with each other, and more precise.
You could not have written a more insane comment. Please dont waste our time, whether youre trolling or serious.
“Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity I do not understand it myself any more. ”
Quentin Pearson - You said, "Keep in mind the Theory of Relativity is still a theory."
I did not read anything after this. This is one of the biggest misconceptions about science that there is. Still a theory? As if it could become MORE than a theory? You should be aware that in science, there is NOTHING more than a theory. It is the absolute highest step on the ladder of scientific knowledge. Theories do not become laws. Theories and laws are two different things. There will never be a "law of relativity". Ever.
There will never be a "law of evolution". The laws of thermodynamics were never "theory of thermodynamics". Newton's three laws of motion were never "theories of motion".
You hold a very common misconception. Because you started off your comment endorsing a very wrong and very common misconception, nothing else you say is worth reading - or taking the slightest bit seriously.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg Circular arguments aren't valid in science or mathematics:
www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Ricci.html
tongmaa
What you said and what you linked have absolutely nothing to do with the argument I made. That's some good paying attention.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg A "theory" about relativity on a link that discusses Einstein *needs* the information provided to determine the validity of Einstein's efforts to justify *gravity* by way of circular logic and a *miracle* curvature of space/time through simply saying it was so ...
The link, and other information provided by this site, demonstrates that the *theories* derived from Einstein's effort to play God are nothing but science-fiction *theories* ... or do you disagree that circular logic is not a valid way to form *theory*?
www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/
tongmaa
Circular logic is not a valid means to formulate a scientific theory. I find that you have failed to demonstrate that this was the case - - and by the way - - invalidating conclusions on the sole basis that a logical fallacy was employed to arrive at that conclusion is in itself a logical fallacy, so you are just as guilty of employing deceiving tactics if this is the route you wish to take.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
We are done here.
You're way out of your league.
Willoughby Krenzteinburg My replies echo the argument made by someone (Crothers) who is out of your league, as well as mine. However, I certainly understand the arguments he makes, and which show that the *Curvature of Space/Time* is a logical fallacy via a circular argument. I was specific in highlighting that part of the *Theory of Relativity* which is incorrect, but the information that Crothers provides in his other links shows many errors in the *theory* which tends to invalidate it.
If you, yourself, were in the *League*, you would show how Crothers' arguments are incorrect ... I won't hold my breath ...
Flat earthers reading the tittle: *jackpot*
No one:
TH-cam algorithm: ITS 2019 AND YOU NEED TO KNOW HE WAS WRONGGG
Man, Jimmy Page should just get the mighty Zeppelin back together and bounce from this gig. Just sayin'. He can help the kids better that way. By rockin', I mean.
LOL
Einstien theory is true based on what he said like:
"the soup is hot"
-Albert Einstien
Frank DiMeglio has mathematically unified physics.
For the GPS of my phone I live 40 meters down the street.
That's mapping data error, not GPS.
Lol
Damn that liar Einstein!
Rodrigo, i'd suggest you get out of your neighbors house before he gets home.
:-))
Thank you jimmy page
Ghady Mrad hahahahaha
hahahaha
Hahahahahaha damn
ha, boi
hahahaaaa
fuck I shouldve been a physicist. As soon as he said their calculations where gps based I knew what was wrong : /
Not that hard since he already said at 1:48 that GPS was based on Einstein's theory.
Sigbert Schnösel also helps knowing how a gps works.im surprised those guys didnt think about it before making that kind of statement
Carlos Cifer They did though... If I did, believe me they did too, even Kaku says they did. Amazing, that the original scientists even publicized their findings. Like I said, just knowing HOW GPS works would give you enough common sense to realize that. Granted I'm no idiot, I've read all of Mr. Kaku's books, as well as other studies, and have a college degree, so your and sigbert's little attempt at public shaming might have been invested into someone you probably thought I am not. Must've been the avatar ;)
cool story bro
TheMrFloorball thank you bro I try
Professore da quando sono nata io Einstein è passato di moda 🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂✌️✌️✌️👽🛸
TELSA SAID EINSTEIN IS WRONG. LOOK IT UP
Tesla was the incarnation of the 4th aspect consciousness of a Venusian being
Patinho I listed to that interview thousands of times love it
+peruface check out www.aetherius.org
There ate recordings taken by the founder in mediumistic trance from Venusian intelligences (eg the Master Jesus, and the Master Aetherius).
+peruface telsa? frozen?
+peruface Tesla was an idiot. He really blurred the line between genius inventor and crackpot. Get this, he literally believed electrons weren't real. He is an inventor, but by no means a reputable research physicist.
Einstein is wrong about somethings, he has to be, no one really can be right about everything
+Hayden123457 Yes, it's just a matter of how long time it will take before his error begins to matter.
cimmik Exactly. Like the other theories in past which were considered correct and flawless untill someone contradicted them.
+Hayden123457 Unless your wrong! *Dun Dun Dunnn theme plays*
+Hayden123457 What about
Jesus?
Eltc Pntz he was a con man, and faked his death
Don't neutrinos get here faster than the light of a supernova? I thought neutrinos make there way out of the center of the blast before the actual light is cast out into space...
You're right but sometimes it makes it easier to explain this way cause if he said the neutrinos came first than he has to spend a lot more time explaining why.
***** Nothing travels faster than light, like this video just explained. We didn't 'create' the boundary of the speed of light, we just realized that giving any piece of matter an infinite amount of energy would only cause that matter to approach the speed of light. The boundary absolutely does exist, and nothing can or will go faster than light.
To explain the problem with the neutrinos, you have to realize that if neutrinos travelling the speed of light are emitted from a supernova before electromagnetic radiation, or light, is emitted, then the neutrinos will get here "faster". One event simply happened before the other. So it's not that neutrinos get here "faster", they just get here first. Both neutrinos and light travel at the speed of light, but if neutrinos leave the center of a supernova first, they will get here first. Neutrinos leaving a supernova and light leaving a supernova are not simultaneous events.
Adding energy to any object, like a neutrino, can never cause it to go faster than the speed of light. Adding an infinite amount of energy to any piece of matter in our universe would only make it approach the speed of light. So no amount of energy could ever make something go faster than the speed of light, which is how we figured out (not created) the limit of light speed.
BigRaindrop That's what I thought was the case; not that neutrinos actually travel faster, but simply that they get here sooner because they erupt out of a supernova's core before the light does
Neutrinos don't go faster than speed of light, where you read that?
In the case of neutrinos and light both leaving a star, then yes. the neutrinos would escape the stars gravity uninhibited while the light would be slowed due to gravity and scattering off all of the hydroden and helium. but in the case of a supernova exploding, the light near the edge of the explosion would not be inhibited like light generated in the core of the star/supernova, so it's feasible that the light and neutrinos would reach us at the same time. However in my opinion this could tell us something about the nature of dark matter (or lack of it) because for light to travel 10 light years and reach us at exactly the same time as the neutrinos then the light could not have been slowed by any dark matter along it's 10 light year path to Earth.
That's why he called it "THEORY of Relativity"
But, but, Theory's have been proven, right? Or have I been told a lie for my whole life?
@@blvp2145 some theories have been proven but some haven't been proven yet
@@hoobs4140 I would agree.
It is a scientific theory not just a theory and scientific theory find evidences and proof until it will be taken while theory is more like an a opinion
The theories of relativity have been extensively proven over and over
This anomaly of the neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light was a mistake. The equipment used to get this measure was faulty. A fibre optic cable attached improperly and a clock oscillator ticking too fast. The problems were fixed and the results showed that neutrinos speeds are in fact consistent with that of light.
Well that explains why I failed my physics exam today...guess I’m just too smart, I always knew that it made no sense 😏
Meanwhile i stand on the couch puting this on replay for an hour waiting for my mom to come home and be impressed of what her son is actually interested into
Tesla has right not Einstein.
Tesla was right. Einstein was a fuzzy haired crackpot. Bending space-time, seriously?
"Michio Kaku: What If Einstein Is Wrong?" GOOD question but we know for a fact Michio Kaku Is Wrong? EARTHSHINE ... give me 1000 breaks!
And what happened to the post?
Posts that go POOF ... got to love that! This is why I like Copy/pasting the relevant parts of what I am replying to :D Keeps the trolling alive!
When Kaku talks about light and neutrinos from the same event reaching the detectors at the 'same time', does he mean it literally? Mustn't there be at least some latency, since neutrinos have now been proven to have mass?
Its a coincidence, had it been a few thousand light years farther, there would be a good delay(not saying there was no delay, but in cosmic scales its likely not inportant)
But the reason they got here at the same time even though they have mass is bacause they almost ignore matter, and supernovas take a few hours to explode, so the neutrinos at the beginning of the supernova shot out of the star like it as nothing, but the photons took quite some time to leave the star as they were blocked by the matter, and so over these thousands of years the light has been catching up to the neutrinos and we happen to be very close to their point of intersection
(Do not take my word for a fact, but i am 90% sure on this info, and if you doubt it, please search for info for this on your own)
Eduardo P is pretty much correct, and Kaku's explanation about neutrinos and photons travelling the same speed is rather incorrect. Neutrinos are slightly slower, but they get a head start.
That happened in the 90s. They don't have our detectors then.
"What if Einstein is wrong"
If Einstein is wrong that's mean he is wrong.
Keeping it simple and straight to the point.
😂😂😂
my iq dropped a bit reading these comments
Underrated comment
I used the relativity to destroy the relativity
Jenius*
A positive person understands more negativity than the positivity
A small price to pay for salvation
How bro??? Plz tell me .. I'm already in confusion whether its true or not!
@bruh what???