Einstein's Proof of E=mc²

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 10K

  • @rustysan
    @rustysan 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1572

    The teacher: Any questions?
    Me: Yeah, what the fck?

  • @tycoon3228
    @tycoon3228 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1042

    Literally i thought i was dumb when i didn't understand anything..but now i feel relaxed when any of us understood nothing...

    • @arham8441
      @arham8441 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      yeah me too. shoo

    • @mr.swiggles9679
      @mr.swiggles9679 4 ปีที่แล้ว +26

      Some people have that breakthrough moment in their head and understand the equation. I’m still trying hard to get mine

    • @DaxanDaxter
      @DaxanDaxter 4 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      @@mr.swiggles9679 well i understood some parts, most of them but, if u dont understand everything then u dont understand anything, or thats what i think, well were both dumb

    • @smartart6841
      @smartart6841 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @Kian Saliany the example part was hard to understand and all the nonsense but i know what the actual equation means

    • @smartart6841
      @smartart6841 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Kian Saliany tho i dont understand that for a moving object the calculation is E^2=(mc^2)^2+(pc)^2 and would you get the energy of the moving object when its moving or when its still and since its squared do you need to find the square root???

  • @skpapic
    @skpapic 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2873

    Cat is the new SI unit for everything

  • @Fjerid
    @Fjerid 3 ปีที่แล้ว +476

    Just when I was about to crack the code with the cat he moved on to a freakin' spaceship.

  • @JoakimKanon
    @JoakimKanon 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3800

    I’m even more confused now. Never heard of catnetic energy before.

    • @samirsiraj4860
      @samirsiraj4860 4 ปีที่แล้ว +51

      Kinetic energy means the energy created by the motion of an object . If a object having mass m goes in direction in v velocity the the kinetic energy of that object will be 1/2 mv^2

    • @apatriot6421
      @apatriot6421 4 ปีที่แล้ว +69

      @@samirsiraj4860 r/wooosh

    • @lorenaoyola5937
      @lorenaoyola5937 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      HSHAHAHAHAHA

    • @louiswong921
      @louiswong921 4 ปีที่แล้ว +22

      @@apatriot6421 Recommended to NOT use r/whoooosh if you don’t want to start a riot in the the replies section

    • @hagoraashraf5013
      @hagoraashraf5013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@louiswong921 what does this mean please

  • @blackfyre1351
    @blackfyre1351 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4515

    "Suppose there's a cat in space.......E=mc²"

  • @Yashodhan1917
    @Yashodhan1917 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4408

    I understood this perfectly. After watching it twice. After having done a General relativity course.

    • @benschmitt7035
      @benschmitt7035 5 ปีที่แล้ว +76

      Yashodhan Manerikar this is special relativity tho lol

    • @Being_Unidirectional
      @Being_Unidirectional 4 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Bcz u r Indian soooooooo 🙏🏼

    • @Yashodhan1917
      @Yashodhan1917 4 ปีที่แล้ว +29

      @@benschmitt7035 I am saying that it's a bit tough to understand at first even for a physics major. Great video though.

    • @zoltankurti
      @zoltankurti 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      Well, but the video is wrong. You can't use 1/2 mv^2 in special relativity, because it doesn't hold in special relativity... And the doppler effect in the case of the video is not uniform, the frequency and therefore the energy of the light would depend on the direction it's travelling in.

    • @zoltankurti
      @zoltankurti 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@Yashodhan1917 if you are a physics major and you didn't find this video wrong, shame on you.

  • @Tzadokite
    @Tzadokite ปีที่แล้ว +16

    some problems with the derivation: 1) the expression for relativistic doppler effect with v^2 means that there can only be "blue" shift for a light source moving towards the observer or away from the observer. obviously this is not true, 2) one cannot use relativistic doppler expression and combine it with non-relativistic kinetic energy expression where v

    • @michaelstratton9081
      @michaelstratton9081 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I fully agree... (not an absolute clue)

  • @gol.drodger5261
    @gol.drodger5261 10 ปีที่แล้ว +10801

    Literally all I understood was light cat and spaceship

    • @bajaj607
      @bajaj607 10 ปีที่แล้ว +72

      Ikr

    • @emjay2fly
      @emjay2fly 10 ปีที่แล้ว +59

      Me too.

    • @jrecker
      @jrecker 10 ปีที่แล้ว +29

      lol me too

    • @truestarwarsfreak
      @truestarwarsfreak 10 ปีที่แล้ว +17

      Lol ikr

    • @Traindriver321
      @Traindriver321 10 ปีที่แล้ว +24

      Your not Gol D. Rodger you are luffy.

  • @AirCommandRockets
    @AirCommandRockets 9 ปีที่แล้ว +1824

    Looks like the cat got out of the box again and is causing all kinds of havoc in the universe.

  • @m.elkhodeery7138
    @m.elkhodeery7138 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1807

    *Top 10 scientists Eminem was afraid of :*

    • @bobbaby6170
      @bobbaby6170 4 ปีที่แล้ว +18

      M. ELKHODEERY underrated bruh! Very very underrated 😂😂

    • @m.elkhodeery7138
      @m.elkhodeery7138 4 ปีที่แล้ว +20

      A good underrated content is far better than being a toxic overrated one.

    • @zankcrave1680
      @zankcrave1680 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      Brooooo🔥

    • @noble2694
      @noble2694 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Very underated comment

    • @mahirrain466
      @mahirrain466 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Can anyone explain this Eminem comment!😅

  • @Octane152
    @Octane152 3 ปีที่แล้ว +205

    Teacher: How could you not understand, the instructions were clear
    The instructions:

  • @Y.A94
    @Y.A94 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1217

    E=MC2 = Explanation Might Confuse Too

  • @giannismalakos632
    @giannismalakos632 5 ปีที่แล้ว +179

    At this time i want to thank 0.25× for supporting me through this video

  • @birenbhattacharya3748
    @birenbhattacharya3748 5 ปีที่แล้ว +457

    This guy's equation( rather videos) will forever be remembered as "The Cat equations"
    In the mean time in heaven-
    Schrodinger: That's my boy

    • @nasraaspari6282
      @nasraaspari6282 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Pavlov: how 'bout mine?😂

    • @aryanbista747
      @aryanbista747 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Didn't know even Nepalese are interested or most of them are busy 'rote learning'

    • @aryanbista747
      @aryanbista747 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Floofy shibe so?

    • @PhantomAyz
      @PhantomAyz 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Schrodinger: and... that's not my boy

    • @facemask6376
      @facemask6376 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Remember when we made it illegal to use Guinea pigs for experiments? I think cats should have the same treatment too

  • @nottomentionanyone
    @nottomentionanyone 4 ปีที่แล้ว +104

    Before: hope could understand more
    After: cat, energy, spaceship

  • @davidscott3412
    @davidscott3412 5 ปีที่แล้ว +435

    2:11 mins of physics about E=MC^2
    Observation: cats live in space
    Conclusion: cats are evolving

    • @shockwavegame
      @shockwavegame 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Lol

    • @egg9709
      @egg9709 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      egg = mc²

    • @beko466
      @beko466 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Conclusion.. cats are dead... lol...

    • @vinnce9288
      @vinnce9288 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      socrates be shaking in his grave rn

  • @freddyfredrickson
    @freddyfredrickson 9 ปีที่แล้ว +997

    Okay, not ashamed to say it, but my brain just melted.

    • @snazzysnake5051
      @snazzysnake5051 9 ปีที่แล้ว +30

      Still melting

    • @asianbeggar
      @asianbeggar 8 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      its hurting my brainwash.. my

    • @theweirdones7544
      @theweirdones7544 8 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      yea no mine is broken!

    • @xali808
      @xali808 8 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      mine just disintegrared

    • @xali808
      @xali808 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      mine just disintegrared

  • @theimprovingnoob2014
    @theimprovingnoob2014 7 ปีที่แล้ว +332

    Where can I found a radioactive floating cat

    • @harithdanial9068
      @harithdanial9068 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Rick c-137 I thought u were smart rick

    • @minhazrakin2588
      @minhazrakin2588 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Rick c-137 shut up rick

    • @baeu8360
      @baeu8360 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      You are rick c137 figure it out by yourself

    • @VijayThakurMD
      @VijayThakurMD 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      WAVALAVA DUBDUB

    • @i.l.zz.a.r1487
      @i.l.zz.a.r1487 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Shrodinger cat

  • @chem7553
    @chem7553 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    This is beautiful! I love how you do not need to use any calculus, as well as how short it is

  • @seawatch5799
    @seawatch5799 4 ปีที่แล้ว +453

    You're faster than the speed of light

    • @v4r146
      @v4r146 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      That is mathematically not possible XD but ok

    • @hagoraashraf5013
      @hagoraashraf5013 3 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      @@v4r146 since he said that so he definitely knows this :)

    • @v4r146
      @v4r146 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@hagoraashraf5013 ok Albert Einstein 2.0 :)

    • @vedantsridhar8378
      @vedantsridhar8378 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@v4r146 lol u called @Hagora Ashraf Albert Einstein 2.0

    • @deepbaker4862
      @deepbaker4862 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@v4r146 You run faster than the speed of light if you Naruto run.

  • @sreejith7578
    @sreejith7578 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2774

    Speed of light is nothing when compared to your speed of talking 😐

  • @nix3l_
    @nix3l_ 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1624

    I have one question:
    WHAT?

  • @findstr.s-hi-c._w
    @findstr.s-hi-c._w ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Title: "Energy, Mass, and Light: An Exploration of Fundamental Concepts"
    Abstract: This paper explores fundamental concepts related to energy, mass, and the nature of light. It delves into the famous equation E=mc^2 and its implications, discussing the energy-mass equivalence principle. Additionally, it examines the concept of light as both wave and particle, discussing its energy, frequency, and speed. The paper also addresses the idea of photons having mass and explores the relationship between energy, frequency, and mass in the context of light.
    Introduction: The concept of energy-mass equivalence, as encapsulated by Einstein's equation E=mc^2, is a fundamental principle in modern physics. It states that energy (E) and mass (m) are interchangeable, with the speed of light (c) acting as the conversion factor. This equation has profound implications for our understanding of the universe.
    Section 1: E=mc^2
    E=mc^2 explains the relationship between energy, mass, and the speed of light.
    Mass can be converted into energy and vice versa.
    Practical applications and implications include nuclear energy and the mass-defect in chemical reactions.
    Section 2: The Nature of Light
    Light exhibits both wave-like and particle-like behaviors.
    As a wave, light is characterized by its frequency (f) and wavelength (λ).
    As a particle, light is composed of photons, carrying energy and exhibiting mass-energy equivalence.
    Section 3: Photons and Mass
    Photons are associated with a tiny amount of mass due to their energy content.
    Calculations for the mass of photons yield extremely small values.
    Section 4: Energy, Frequency, and Mass
    The relationship between energy, frequency, and mass in the context of light is explored.
    The equation E=hf (where h is Planck's constant) is discussed in relation to E=mc^2.
    Key Values and Concepts:
    Speed of light (c) = 299,792,458 meters per second.
    Planck's constant (h) = 6.62607015 x 10^-34 Joule seconds (approximately).
    List of Colors and Corresponding Frequencies:
    Red Light: Wavelength Range: 620 nm to 750 nm, Frequency Range: 400 THz to 483 THz
    Orange Light: Wavelength Range: 590 nm to 620 nm, Frequency Range: 483 THz to 508 THz
    Yellow Light: Wavelength Range: 570 nm to 590 nm, Frequency Range: 508 THz to 526 THz
    Green Light: Wavelength Range: 495 nm to 570 nm, Frequency Range: 526 THz to 606 THz
    Blue Light: Wavelength Range: 450 nm to 495 nm, Frequency Range: 606 THz to 668 THz
    Violet Light: Wavelength Range: 380 nm to 450 nm, Frequency Range: 668 THz to 789 THz
    Mass of Photons for Each Color (based on energy content):
    Red Light: Approximately 5.5217 x 10^-36 kilograms
    Orange Light: Approximately 4.4897 x 10^-36 kilograms
    Yellow Light: Approximately 3.6565 x 10^-36 kilograms
    Green Light: Approximately 2.6649 x 10^-36 kilograms
    Blue Light: Approximately 1.6783 x 10^-36 kilograms
    Violet Light: Approximately 9.2951 x 10^-37 kilograms
    Conversion Calculations:
    Conversion of energy to mass: Using E=mc^2, mass (m) can be calculated by dividing energy (E) by the speed of light squared (c^2).
    Conversion of mass to energy: Using E=mc^2, energy (E) can be calculated by multiplying mass (m) by the speed of light squared (c^2).
    Conclusion: This paper has provided an overview of fundamental concepts related to energy, mass, and light, emphasizing the interconnectedness of these concepts. It highlights the significance of E=mc^2 in understanding the conversion of mass into energy and the role of photons in carrying both energy and a minute amount of mass. Further research and exploration in these areas continue to deepen our understanding of the physical world.
    Please note that this summary includes numerical values and lists of colors, frequencies, and corresponding masses, providing a quantitative aspect to the paper's content.

  • @CassiusColeman
    @CassiusColeman 6 ปีที่แล้ว +68

    1:26 "But, this is silly!"
    No, silly would be me thinking I could somehow comprehend any of this.

  • @icedlemontea6042
    @icedlemontea6042 4 ปีที่แล้ว +590

    My knowledge before watching this vid: 0
    My knowledge after watching this vid: 0

    • @0anant0
      @0anant0 4 ปีที่แล้ว +29

      Law of conservation of energy and mass :-)

    • @ArifBillahOnGoogle
      @ArifBillahOnGoogle 4 ปีที่แล้ว +32

      You're wrong. After watching, it must be 00 since you gained another 🅾.

    • @vedantsridhar8378
      @vedantsridhar8378 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I understood it perfectly after watching it over and over again

    • @claudiofonseca879
      @claudiofonseca879 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      -0

    • @laxminarayanbhandari855
      @laxminarayanbhandari855 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Get a brain😂

  • @takyc7883
    @takyc7883 4 ปีที่แล้ว +64

    Its so crazy that you can prove this formula algebraically using an anecdote! Never would have thought of combining the Doppler effect and the conservation energy, in order to create a formula for everything!

  • @eamon_concannon
    @eamon_concannon หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    1:30 Is it an assumption that the total energy change of the cat is the same in both scenarios? If not, then why?
    After all, in the first scenario the total energy change from both emitted radiation and kinetic energy is entirely measured in a frame moving with velocity v relative to cat while in the second scenario, the total energy change is measured using TWO frames , one frame at rest when measuring emitted energy from cat and then the kinetic energy is measured in a frame moving at constant velocity v relative to cat.

    • @aleeex2683
      @aleeex2683 20 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      Let me explain this in a better way.
      instead of saying that i saw the cat emit photons and then got into the spaceship, lets say that there are two observers( me and my bro). lets say me and the cat are both at rest while my bro is travelling at a spaceship. After i see the cat emit photons i get into my bro's spaceship. on the other hand my bro had been on the spaceship from the very beginning. so when he saw the cat emit photons, the cat was still moving with respect to him. right now me and my bro are both in the spaceship meaning our frame of reference are the same. so we must see the cat having the same amount of energy. thats why the 1st equation that described the cat's energy from my pov for the entire experiment must be equal to the 2nd equation that described the cat's energy from my bro's pov for the entire experiment. if you want to understand anything else about this video feel free to ask

  • @NarsBars
    @NarsBars 10 ปีที่แล้ว +494

    But what if the cat is Schrödinger's cat?

    • @jacketsj
      @jacketsj 9 ปีที่แล้ว +40

      The cat can be either alive or dead when it's moving, I don't see how this changes anything.

    • @jacketsj
      @jacketsj 9 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      skunkFU25
      *really bad joke that relies taking a previous joke seriously* was the first result

    • @jacketsj
      @jacketsj 9 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      skunkFU25
      hold on, that was a _pun_, not a joke. Edit for my comment: *really bad joke that relies on taking a previous **_pun_** seriously*

    • @jacketsj
      @jacketsj 9 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      skunkFU25
      _immediately attemps to think of a way to continue..._
      _can't_
      _twitches_

    • @Dank_McMeme
      @Dank_McMeme 9 ปีที่แล้ว +24

      Maniac12G It is Schrödinger's cat. But it's also simultaneously not Schrödinger's cat.

  • @sixpetrov
    @sixpetrov 8 ปีที่แล้ว +2164

    can you talk faster?

    • @lillith193
      @lillith193 8 ปีที่แล้ว +40

      I think most of the audio was edited to be x2 speed.

    • @sareinhart
      @sareinhart 8 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I really does! LOL

    • @adarshsrinivas9
      @adarshsrinivas9 8 ปีที่แล้ว +28

      next time speak English!

    • @rendermangl
      @rendermangl 8 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Hahahahaah !!!!!! :'D !!! Laughed my ass offffff

    • @Hyf5
      @Hyf5 7 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Oh man i never laughed like that in years.

  • @kint5ugee
    @kint5ugee 6 ปีที่แล้ว +230

    I like how the videos explaining the most complicated stuff in the universe are always the quickest and shortest. Way to go 👏👏👏

    • @egg9709
      @egg9709 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      egg = mc²

    • @sebastianjost
      @sebastianjost 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      This is special relativity. It doesn't use very advanced math.
      So as long as your are comfortable with math up to grade 10 you can realatively easily understand all the formulas and proofs of special relativity.
      General relativity is way more advanced and even Einstein didn't understand all of it. That's why the Mathematician (Minkovski) helped him.

    • @thebeast5215
      @thebeast5215 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@sebastianjost it uses lots of vectors and math like that right? In Canada you don't learn vectors in school until the 12th grade

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@sebastianjost Since gravity cannot be shielded (or blocked), it has to be fundamentally BALANCED with (or equivalent to) what is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy regarding what is invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in BALANCE.
      This CLEARLY explains the fourth dimension AND the term c4 from Einstein's field equations (along WITH E=mc2 AND F=ma). Indeed, consider what is a TWO dimensional surface OR SPACE ON BALANCE. (So, ON BALANCE, consider what is THE EYE.) The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky ON BALANCE, AND consider what is the speed of light (c) ON BALANCE. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE, as BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand. BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is fundamental (ON BALANCE).
      By Frank DiMeglio
      Boris Stoyanov is a super bright and an HONEST physicist. He has agreed that the following writing (and I quote) is "crystal clear":
      "ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. Accordingly, gravity/acceleration involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. "Mass"/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent with/as what is balanced ELECTROMAGNETIC/GRAVITATIONAL force/energy, as electromagnetism/energy is gravity. Gravity IS electromagnetism/energy. That objects fall at the same rate (neglecting air resistance, of course) PROVES that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Think about it.
      By Frank DiMeglio”
      Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE on balance, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity ON/IN BALANCE. This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. This ALSO explains why the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches it's revolution. Inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE is proportional to (or BALANCED with/as) GRAVITATIONAL force/ENERGY, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). This explains F=ma AND E=mc2. I have truly (and fundamentally) revolutionized what is our understanding of physics/physical experience.
      By Frank DiMeglio
      The following provides overwhelming, CLEAR, BALANCED, precise, consistent, additional, and extensive proof that I have now mathematically unified physics. (I have surpassed Newton and Einstein.) My answer to Why is it that only Dongfang can perfectly realize the unity of macro and micro quantum theory and prove that LIGO's gravitational waves are lies (ORCID)? Frank DiMeglio's answer to Why is it that only Dongfang can perfectly realize the unity of macro and micro quantum theory and prove that LIGO's gravitational waves are lies (orcid.org/0000-0002-3644-5170)? in Historical Physics

    • @frankdimeglio8216
      @frankdimeglio8216 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@sebastianjost c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE.
      By Frank DiMeglio

  • @sagarshrestha5800
    @sagarshrestha5800 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Photon has speed limit if it is alone but in huge amount it can increase its speed.
    To remember.
    1. For something to oppose something, they should exhibit or made up of same basic materials. For eg. Only the positive mass can repel positive mass. Or imagine 🧲 magnet with two similar pole.
    Let's imagine a scenario ,
    A) Ball(having mass 'm') has speed limit because of air.(terminal velocity)
    Here both air and ball has same properties i.e. mass and occupy same space.
    Scenario 1.
    Ball falls down on earth with initial velocity=0. at some velocity it reaches terminal velocity called " C "
    because of opposing force which later equals to the force exerted by ball (mass 'm')
    Scenario 2.
    Ball is thrown by a person vertically downward .
    At first, the ball(m) velocity will increase greater than terminal velocity 'C' but afterwards it will come back to the speed of terminal velocity 'C' since the air limited to that area needs more time to oppose that additional energy in ball than in scenario 1.
    B) Let's increase the mass of the ball (i.e increase the number of atoms in the ball)
    I.e. (m+1)
    Scenario 3.
    the ball (m+1) will fall down with initial velocity '0'.
    But here since the mass of the ball is increased but the amount of air remains the same, the ball will have increased terminal velocity 'N'
    N > C
    1.This means that for the light to have constant velocity, there must be some small particle (smaller than light) having same properties as that of light in the so called vacuum.
    2. We can increase the velocity of light similarly by adding the similar properties properties that made the light.

  • @nadima.d812
    @nadima.d812 5 ปีที่แล้ว +404

    Tip : watch with speed x0.75 .

    • @anymaths
      @anymaths 5 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      watch my maths tricks.

    • @qingyuanwu476
      @qingyuanwu476 4 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      you are dilating time

    • @vitoskrjanc9036
      @vitoskrjanc9036 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      This is 0.75x for you....but have you asked yourself if that is also 0.75x for us...?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

    • @danieal5506
      @danieal5506 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      my mind 🤯

    • @mirkx7382
      @mirkx7382 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      his mom was calling that's why he was in hurry

  • @ericklopes4046
    @ericklopes4046 8 ปีที่แล้ว +433

    Me dumb. Me not unsderstand. Me watch again.

    • @l.o.gfauzan1877
      @l.o.gfauzan1877 8 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      I just 13 and I seriously want to now and I will never give up (evil laught )

    • @cloroxbleach1200
      @cloroxbleach1200 8 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Bad for my Sorry english

    • @ericklopes4046
      @ericklopes4046 8 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      +YSC You meant "sorry for my bad English". Me Tarzan. You dumb.

    • @sareinhart
      @sareinhart 8 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      I think this really requires some previous understanding of physics. And since I forget all my high school physics I imagine that means I'm screwed.

    • @Alanedu1000
      @Alanedu1000 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Tinha que ser br kkkkkk

  • @Rogun987
    @Rogun987 8 ปีที่แล้ว +586

    i completely understood all of this. Also, I am a liar

    • @JamFilledDonut
      @JamFilledDonut 8 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      +Rav That's literally impossible, I believe

    • @1Man2Go
      @1Man2Go 8 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      okay. Then derive where he got E*(1+ v^2/2c^2) from?

    • @andrasfogarasi5014
      @andrasfogarasi5014 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Point me to a person that isn't.

    • @nattiebats
      @nattiebats 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Rogun987 lmao

    • @nishitkrsingh
      @nishitkrsingh 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      E=MC^2
      th-cam.com/video/xkkT-uUhIqg/w-d-xo.html

  • @InsecureCreator
    @InsecureCreator 2 ปีที่แล้ว +70

    That was surprisingly simple to understand so I assume you did a great job explaining it.

    • @stylishmitochondria2556
      @stylishmitochondria2556 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@jinjleproducts5650 get done with classic physics first then get into modern physics you'll get it.

  • @mohdafiq6088
    @mohdafiq6088 8 ปีที่แล้ว +152

    I used a calculator for 10+12 in a test just to be sure.

    • @insanelygeek7956
      @insanelygeek7956 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Mohd Afiq
      If you are a physics geek and love to learn new and interesting theories describing universe than do watch this Nova model, a theory giving end to singularity, answer to infinity and to so many other questions of universe which you would love to know.. So watch till end and join our journey to know all about universe that will fascinate you😊
      😊th-cam.com/video/33bKztHBFFA/w-d-xo.html
      If you find something very new and interesting then do like, share and subscribe😊😊
      The world of Nova welcomes you😊

    • @IcySlime1
      @IcySlime1 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      in calc and still do that ngl

    • @bottlebeard
      @bottlebeard 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Btw it's 22

    • @RealestRealist14
      @RealestRealist14 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@bottlebeardno it’s 21

  • @AnubhavChandrakarIITB
    @AnubhavChandrakarIITB 7 ปีที่แล้ว +779

    Who else came to this video with lots of expectations and went back with an empty head 😂😁

    • @computeraddiction7082
      @computeraddiction7082 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Anubhav Chandrakar me

    • @zombiespartan73
      @zombiespartan73 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      me

    • @Sednas
      @Sednas 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Not me

    • @guriaquedanca
      @guriaquedanca 6 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      Video obviously designed to be confusing. Guy just wanting to show off.

    • @ro0b0
      @ro0b0 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@guriaquedanca It's a 2 minute video, what did you expect?

  • @Savvy07
    @Savvy07 5 ปีที่แล้ว +180

    Now I feel like I understood more in "Rap god" than this ;)

    • @mayankjain04
      @mayankjain04 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Something's wrong, i can feel it

    • @ronish4312
      @ronish4312 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@mayankjain04 something is about to happen but I don't know what 😂😂

    • @adwaitpandey2526
      @adwaitpandey2526 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ronish4312 Just a feeling ive got

  • @conanngan645
    @conanngan645 2 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Can someone explain to me how this relates to the regular doppler effect. Like the dominant effect of an object moving away from you is to red shift it, so when we measure the light it should have lost energy instead of gaining it like the video suggests. Also, can we know that KE + energy of the light accounts for all the energy in the system?

  • @EPaulIII
    @EPaulIII 4 ปีที่แล้ว +114

    I have a degree in physics and I am going to have to watch that two or a dozen more times.

    • @fyu1945
      @fyu1945 3 ปีที่แล้ว +32

      Pretty sure you don't have a degree in physics then

    • @peterturner6497
      @peterturner6497 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@fyu1945 And I am pretty sure that you are a cretin 'cos this is bullshit.

    • @JustTheCreep
      @JustTheCreep 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@fyu1945 I second this

    • @gapplssb
      @gapplssb 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@fyu1945 i third this

    • @qyralkent9918
      @qyralkent9918 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@fyu1945 i fourth this

  • @dziesebeiangela2098
    @dziesebeiangela2098 5 ปีที่แล้ว +167

    And I though E was the short form of einstein

    • @johnjonjhonjonathanjohnson3559
      @johnjonjhonjonathanjohnson3559 4 ปีที่แล้ว +32

      einstein=minecraft^2

    • @benkao8253
      @benkao8253 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@johnjonjhonjonathanjohnson3559 Einstein = Moustacheˆ2

    • @nauka7565
      @nauka7565 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Energy=mass•the speed of light²

    • @nandhakishor103
      @nandhakishor103 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      @@nauka7565 genius 👏

    • @nauka7565
      @nauka7565 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@nandhakishor103 is that a sarcasm? xD

  • @finlaymcewan
    @finlaymcewan 8 ปีที่แล้ว +450

    I didn't get all of this, please speak faster next time

    • @محمدعبدالرحمن-ص8ن
      @محمدعبدالرحمن-ص8ن 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Finlay McEwan do mean talk slower

    • @trmbne
      @trmbne 7 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      Lol he is being sarcastic because it's hard to understand when he is speaking fast.

    • @marcoatienza8884
      @marcoatienza8884 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      +trmbne2014 NO WAY

    • @mukundthorat5672
      @mukundthorat5672 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Finlay I will not get it even if I watch this at 1/4 speed.

    • @ulyssesmartinez6720
      @ulyssesmartinez6720 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Play at .75 speed

  • @78anurag
    @78anurag 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Simple Explaination of the video as I understood it:
    0:15 Cat's Energy is converted into light energy of amount E.
    0:41 Relativity observation, you probably understand this. It is just a viewer observation which is a part of Relativity.
    0:44 Cat has energy since from your point of view it is moving and hence has kinetic energy. The kinetic energy converts into light energy meaning Energy of cat= KE-E
    1:08 Doppler effect which is relativistic light energy
    1:12 Recap of every scenario we have created yet.
    1:31 Law of conservation of energy
    1:49 Simplification
    1:57 E=Mc²

  • @JoseSantos-fg2wv
    @JoseSantos-fg2wv 11 ปีที่แล้ว +77

    You have to make longer videos. I had to watch this video like 666 times to understand this...

    • @FedericoYulita
      @FedericoYulita 11 ปีที่แล้ว +17

      Landau Martin
      His lips move at 99.99999% the speed of light

    • @frepi
      @frepi 11 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      if you travel in a spaceship that travel fast enough, the video will slow down

    • @JoseSantos-fg2wv
      @JoseSantos-fg2wv 10 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      ._. but then i would have to bring the computer with me, and it wouldn't slow down...

    • @frepi
      @frepi 10 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      You got a point

    • @bengski68
      @bengski68 10 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      José Santos You could bring your computer sufficiently close to a black hole, with the computer closer to the black hole than you are. Assuming you and your computer survive the tidal forces, time will be faster for you than for the computer, so that the video will be in slow motion.
      Obviously, this is the simplest solution to your problem.

  • @ojust4fun960
    @ojust4fun960 4 ปีที่แล้ว +133

    This guy doesn’t even want us to understand
    He is just showing of

    • @muhammadhashirsalman4193
      @muhammadhashirsalman4193 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @vaishaligoel2321
      @vaishaligoel2321 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Uh well he tried. It should be fairly simple to understand if you're class 11 or older. But yeah younger than that I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have gotten it

    • @Tom-vu1wr
      @Tom-vu1wr 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@vaishaligoel2321 ye exactly

    • @avatarxsonofgod4315
      @avatarxsonofgod4315 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@vaishaligoel2321 I understood it when I was in 9th bruh, I'm in 11th now(10 boards cancelled YAY)

    • @Tempst
      @Tempst 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@vaishaligoel2321 I'm pretty sure we aren't taught special relativity and Doppler effect of light in class 11th. You can understand everything in the video except the formula :
      E' = E(1+v²/2c²)

  • @michaloslav8563
    @michaloslav8563 7 ปีที่แล้ว +965

    ... Am I the only person here that actually thinks this was a great explanation and that he doesn't talk too fast?

    • @akhil-ng5yj
      @akhil-ng5yj 7 ปีที่แล้ว +70

      Michael Farník how's it feel like being the only one?

    • @jpribeiroo
      @jpribeiroo 7 ปีที่แล้ว +27

      you're probably in touch with something physical in university or knew this before, cuz i'm not and I couldn't understand a damn thing

    • @zeynaviegas
      @zeynaviegas 7 ปีที่แล้ว +21

      i loved his explanation, and I'm so surprised how a high school student like me, at the peak of its 16, could get this. I love physics, damn.
      Hope I get good grades on ENEM e.e

    • @francoischarpentier5914
      @francoischarpentier5914 7 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Felipe Viegas Same for me I'm 17 and we just learned the doppler effect at highschool so I get along :p

    • @francoischarpentier5914
      @francoischarpentier5914 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Learned that in France and this is still right on the other side of the Atlantic, amazing science ;)

  • @josephkearney3780
    @josephkearney3780 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    At 1:09 you introduce a formula with c squared. I can see now how the c squared gets into the Einstein equation but… I now have no idea where to look to understand the equation you used to introduce the c squared. Any suggestions on what to search for in Google for this?

    • @mokshsurya1681
      @mokshsurya1681 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Same question😢

    • @mokshsurya1681
      @mokshsurya1681 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      May be doppler effect😅

  • @anirudhrao4829
    @anirudhrao4829 6 ปีที่แล้ว +585

    Cat 🐈 cat 🐈 cat 🐈cat cat 🐈
    E=mc²

    • @pavan69420
      @pavan69420 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      😂 😂 😂 😂

    • @egg9709
      @egg9709 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      egg = mc²

    • @That_One_Guy...
      @That_One_Guy... 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      🥚=🐁🐈🐈

  • @cadkls
    @cadkls 10 ปีที่แล้ว +79

    A radioactive cat? It must have 18 half-lives then...

    • @SuperPunchout3
      @SuperPunchout3 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      2/10

    • @cadkls
      @cadkls 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      d Kim No, 18, not two tenths.

    • @SuperPunchout3
      @SuperPunchout3 10 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      I like your sass: 12/10

    • @TheChains1000
      @TheChains1000 10 ปีที่แล้ว +18

      Half life 18 confirmed

    • @theprisoner3
      @theprisoner3 10 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Hahaha! Good one!

  • @reguigdoha6498
    @reguigdoha6498 5 ปีที่แล้ว +24

    Me : "oh! A 2 min video that explains einstein's famous equation? That's awsome!"
    *After watching the video*
    Also me : "Well, I think I was wrong"

  • @worldaviation4k
    @worldaviation4k 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    So Relative means like, I look at an airplane flying 6 miles above and it looks like it's going slow near the horizon when it's not really? So it's just about looks?

  • @as_positive_as_proton
    @as_positive_as_proton 4 ปีที่แล้ว +133

    Albert Einstein:So my ten years observation is just a 2:11 minute video.

    • @brycesabin4787
      @brycesabin4787 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      To be fair finding a new groundbreaking equation is a lot harder than explaining it to a general audience

    • @vedantsridhar8378
      @vedantsridhar8378 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      2:11 minute video where I didn't understand anything!
      Edit: I understood it at last after watching it the 15th time

    • @kedarrana2747
      @kedarrana2747 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      well, this video hardly explained a thing about the eqution, it was just a simple way to tell a little about the equation's theoretical aspect to general audience and einstein wrote a whole theory of relativity in 10 years not just 1 equation.:)

    • @pasijutaulietuviuesas9174
      @pasijutaulietuviuesas9174 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Einstein would be very happy with that. He dreamed about finding an elegant little equation that explains how nature works.

    • @megha663
      @megha663 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      😂😂😂😂

  • @willwei98
    @willwei98 11 ปีที่แล้ว +100

    I am pretending that I understand this to feel smart. =)

    • @masonlutes
      @masonlutes 11 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Do you think that even the makers of this video understood it?*

    • @wowtrax
      @wowtrax 11 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      Poontang_Pounder Yes.

    • @wowtrax
      @wowtrax 11 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      No, it's mathematics and makes complete sense. It has been supported by experimental evidence.

    • @rubenvela44
      @rubenvela44 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      ^ pretends he understands to feel smart

  • @maxcosic4987
    @maxcosic4987 4 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    From where did that doppler effect equation come from?

  • @Hyporama
    @Hyporama 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    This was simply amazing. Thank you so much for this. 00:38-1:00 that's where I began to understand the kernel of the idea.

  • @goomba008
    @goomba008 9 ปีที่แล้ว +158

    Having read Einstein's paper a long time ago, I recall that his explanation was a lot easier to follow, and it didn't need to introduce silly objects like spaceships or a cat. Nice attempt, but I think your derivation is too fast, doesn't explain the fundamental concepts enough, and has superfluous elements on top. Redo it at once.

    • @ItzEddd
      @ItzEddd 9 ปีที่แล้ว +37

      yanxtar What in the hell?

    • @ItzEddd
      @ItzEddd 9 ปีที่แล้ว +23

      yanxtar Um, I was just startled at the randomness of your comment you moron. And by the way, I'm not a liberal so stop jumping to conclusions you dipshit.

    • @AtticusHimself
      @AtticusHimself 9 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Alfredo Rodriguez Obama is just a hologram and 9/11 was the best broadway show imo can't believe so man

    • @ItzEddd
      @ItzEddd 9 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      yanxtar Obvious troll is obvious.

    • @AtticusHimself
      @AtticusHimself 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      ye u are

  • @justacat2318
    @justacat2318 6 ปีที่แล้ว +152

    Me: Wow thanks for all the knowledge and answers you gave me.
    Also Me: Does breed of the cat matters?

    • @shashankgupta7460
      @shashankgupta7460 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      But you are just a cat 🐈 🐈 🐈🐈🐈🐈.

    • @souravsahoo1582
      @souravsahoo1582 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      The cat must be radioactive 😎😎

  • @pashinp
    @pashinp 4 ปีที่แล้ว +27

    No one:
    Absolutely no one
    TH-cam recommending me 8 yrs old video 😂😂😂

  • @rashidkhan-pd8cf
    @rashidkhan-pd8cf 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Now this Einstein's nephew made it more hard to comprehend.welldone.

  • @JaguarBST
    @JaguarBST 9 ปีที่แล้ว +104

    CAT CAT CAT CAT CAT CAT E=MC2

    • @JaguarBST
      @JaguarBST 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @9 Jordan8 widemon10 TF do you want with this ancient comment?

  • @asadul22-f3b
    @asadul22-f3b 5 ปีที่แล้ว +30

    All I understood was a psychotic cat roaming around in space 🤣🤣

  • @veteran_dino
    @veteran_dino 6 ปีที่แล้ว +59

    There is a new most famous equasion in the world:
    2+2=4-1=3 QUICK MATHS

    • @yogeshnagpal3671
      @yogeshnagpal3671 5 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      Wrong 2+2=4
      4-1=3 but2+2 does not equal 3

    • @murtazakhan946
      @murtazakhan946 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Wtf

    • @ChrisZombiesGamer
      @ChrisZombiesGamer 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      CoCANE LorD i mean he’s right the first two equations are not equivalent.

    • @egg9709
      @egg9709 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      stupid. egg = mc²

    • @Kostas_epic_gamer
      @Kostas_epic_gamer 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Man with all this stupid advanced math's we are learning in school l am gonna forget to do simple equation

  • @Shazali-ke4sd
    @Shazali-ke4sd 22 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Einstein said only a few close to him understood how he came out with the formula ... about 8 scientists ...

  • @koenschouten7994
    @koenschouten7994 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    You should put a disclaimer that this is more of a illustration of the concept, rather than a real proof. Both the equations of the kinetic energy and doppler effect are not the correct equations. You only used your equation for the doppler effect such that it has the desired outcome, rather than that it is physically correct.

    • @zoltankurti
      @zoltankurti 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Finally somebody who noticed...

    • @jpaxonreyes
      @jpaxonreyes 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      That makes sense. I tried to redo the calculation with the relativistic kinetic energy instead of the classical, but kept everything else the same, and found that it didn't work. I just assumed that the Doppler shift in the video was correct. Now that you say it's not, I'm guessing there was a gamma in the Doppler shift factor that Minute Physics Taylor-expanded for small v (because I recognize the 1 + e²/2 signature of the expansion of gamma to second-order of e). Then with that gamma expanded for small v, he had to use the expanded (i.e., classical) kinetic energy. Is that what happened?

  • @beastboy7327
    @beastboy7327 5 ปีที่แล้ว +170

    Einstein see this video
    And forget
    How he proove this equation 😂😂

  • @Sharkiuli
    @Sharkiuli 10 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    you know what was truly amazing about Einstein, that he did all this before the 1st self-propelled aircraft flight( Aurel Vlaicu 1906) witch is mind blowing

    • @TheByQQ
      @TheByQQ 10 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Yeah, but after the wheel, boats, steam machines, sails, combustion engines, lighbulbs, electricity... So, what's your point?

    • @Sharkiuli
      @Sharkiuli 9 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      ***** the year was 1905, before WW1 and WW2 :)
      I made just a analogy... my point was how could someone though about the things he did
      like the mass of a star banding the space around it, mass and energy being equivalent...
      when we(as a species), couldn't even fly :))

  • @solamistad3836
    @solamistad3836 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I should be studying for a Math Test but I'm learning this instead I already understand this more

  • @rustyblade9366
    @rustyblade9366 9 ปีที่แล้ว +18

    so..... there's a cat floating in space somewhere?

  • @bballercheetahfan3
    @bballercheetahfan3 11 ปีที่แล้ว +71

    .....um yeahh..i dont get it

  • @yellowlynx
    @yellowlynx 10 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    There are several principles involved when Einstein tried to find out light relative to motion. That's how I understand it:
    (1) Light speed stays constant
    (2) By principle of relative motion in constant speed, there is no way you can detect your own motion in your own frame of reference, otherwise you can measure the change in speed of light to determine your motion (i.e. light is not the absolute reference frame in the universe where you can detect your own motion WITHOUT another reference frame). Thus speed and time dilation occurs.
    (3) Applying to motion about the speed and time dilation, when an object approaches to speed of light, it appears to get heavier and heavier, as though there is an inherent resistance which you need energy to overcome
    (4) The energy of the moving mass is then found to have 2 parts - one part involving just mass and light speed (mc^2), the other is the kinetic energy. Take away the kinetic energy (i.e. the object is stationery), and then you have E=mc^2

    • @CodecMe
      @CodecMe 10 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Nice way of understanding the concept. Thanks

    • @Kneedragon1962
      @Kneedragon1962 10 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I don't actually know whether you're quite right, but that certainly does explain it in a way that's almost understandable. Thank you.

    • @larrybardo
      @larrybardo 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      ***** contant speed of light in relativity is an assumption, not principle. not proven but taken granted in special relativity. in other word, whole theory would fail if this assumption turns out to be incorrect.

    • @andrewm9425
      @andrewm9425 9 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      larrybardo Except that the consequences of the theory have been confirmed repeatedly for 100 years, which leads to a very strong suspicion that the postulate of the theory must be right. If the assumption were wrong, the whole theory would have already failed by now. Plus, Michelson-Morley fail to find any difference in light speed, and pion decay confirms that speed of light is independent of motion of source.

    • @larrybardo
      @larrybardo 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      Andrew M Much like Newton's classical mechanics, theory of relativity leads to some confirmation but not all. This theory is usable but not perfect. There are many problems with this theory. We need a new theory to replace Classical Mechanics. We also need a new theory to replace Relativity. String Theory is a candidate but it is doomed on its extra dimensions E=mc2 is not from Einstein. Do you know who created it in 1907? This equation was not popular until 1945. What made it popular?

  • @Thecringyone.
    @Thecringyone. 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    pretty useful.......The subtitles

  • @Xzs23
    @Xzs23 11 ปีที่แล้ว +35

    I lost you after the word "in"

  • @McKyoorius
    @McKyoorius 7 ปีที่แล้ว +65

    the comments are funny af!!

  • @marcop3841
    @marcop3841 10 ปีที่แล้ว +32

    why would you go through it so quick like this???

    • @somethingtojenga
      @somethingtojenga 9 ปีที่แล้ว +36

      *Minute* Physics

    • @niteexplorer9934
      @niteexplorer9934 9 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      pon33villin 2 Minute Physics

    • @salmakassimi5365
      @salmakassimi5365 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      Totally

    • @ANeonSkinJoke
      @ANeonSkinJoke 9 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Marco P I can never get this fit in my head. This guy have a channel called MINUTE physics, and still each and every video people are complaining that it's hurried. READ THE TITLE. If you want more in-depth, there's plenty of full lectures in youtube as well. Go watch MIT OpenCourseWare, it's not hurried. Just leave MINUTE physics alone of this.

    • @vedantsridhar8378
      @vedantsridhar8378 22 วันที่ผ่านมา

      He wanted to be minutephysics

  • @dandro18048
    @dandro18048 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Near the end of the video he finishes with E/c^2 = m1- m2. Now he says it’s change in mass but if the mass doesn’t change then he would have 0 for mass and therefore E = 0, which wouldn’t make any sense. Is it because to maintain the conservation of energy, the loss of energy must either come from the difference in velocity or a change in mass? Additionally if the object that we are talking about in this case the cat, loses mass to account for the loss of energy, how exactly is that mass lost? Does it get destroyed? What kind of force applies onto the body? Can someone (who really knows about the subject) explain this please?

  • @CurtisDyer
    @CurtisDyer 8 ปีที่แล้ว +34

    Listen to the video at 0.5 times speed. Henry's drunk.

    • @Jnic296
      @Jnic296 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Best comment of 2020😂😂😂🤥

  • @sukritmanikandan3184
    @sukritmanikandan3184 8 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    how was the (-E) canceled out at 1:32? also how was v^2 and 2 canceled out in E*v^2/2c^2 at 1:49?

    • @MaurDL
      @MaurDL 8 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I was looking for the answer to these as well.

    • @sukritmanikandan3184
      @sukritmanikandan3184 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      not helping

    • @pavelvrba6415
      @pavelvrba6415 8 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Ok, so first:
      -E+EK2 = EK1-E*(1+xxx)
      EK2=EK1+E-E*(1+xxx)
      EK2=EK1+E(1-1-xxx)
      EK2=EK1-E*xxx
      E*xxx+EK2=EK1

    • @gokulanvethanayakam564
      @gokulanvethanayakam564 8 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Following on, at 1:49,
      Ev^2/2c^2 + 0.5*m2*v^2 = 0.5*m1*v^2
      Ev^2/2c^2 = 0.5*m1*v^2 - 0.5*m2*v^2
      Ev^2/2c^2 = 0.5*(m1-m2)*v^2
      Now the LH v^2 and the 2 can be cancelled out with the RH v^2 and 0.5 respectively.

    • @kuldeepsojitra418
      @kuldeepsojitra418 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@pavelvrba6415 thanks mate

  • @eminmerden1072
    @eminmerden1072 5 ปีที่แล้ว +92

    2012:nope
    2013:nope
    2014:nope
    2015:nope
    2016:nope
    2017:nope
    2018:nope
    2019:now its time to place recommedations

    • @gijsvanhulten9703
      @gijsvanhulten9703 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Stfu noone cares about these kinds of comments

    • @Project_Kritical
      @Project_Kritical 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Gijs van Hulten The 50+ likes say otherwise

    • @moayad80
      @moayad80 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Project_Kritical its those people who sees this comment And be like " OMG HAHAHAHA VERY FUNNY THANKS MAN HAVE YOUR LIKE" They must be living in a rock the past year

  • @spacetime9673
    @spacetime9673 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So the KE remains unchanged and Light energy is come from the cat’s mass this I get it but where is c squared come from ? Kinda confuse abt E•(1+v^2/2c^2)how this formula is formed acc to the Doppler effect ?

  • @RiseJosePerson
    @RiseJosePerson 11 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    No idea what u just said. :)

  • @Fematika
    @Fematika 8 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    The "real" equation (more accurate) is actually E^2=m^2c^4+p^2c^2

    • @KalinGames
      @KalinGames 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      how do you end up in the full one from the proof giving in this video?

    • @Fematika
      @Fematika 8 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Well, that equation only applies to objects that aren't moving. He made a video on it. This is a proof, and also applies to the equation accounting for movement.

    • @kalebbruwer
      @kalebbruwer 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      +Fematika that looks confusing
      E^2=(mc^2)^2+(pc)^2
      pythagoras

    • @Fematika
      @Fematika 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yeah, you can do it that way as well.

    • @awesomeatude5565
      @awesomeatude5565 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      How is that gonna help

  • @phantompig
    @phantompig 4 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    1:05 damnit, why couldn't i have seen this a week ago when i had a science project on the doppler effect?

  • @lyr5436
    @lyr5436 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The Doppler Effect, when you state the energy relation between the energy in the two frames, do you get that via the relativistic doppler effect formula relating the frequencies in the two frames and if so how? I tried taylor expanding in the limit v

    • @eliasb3403
      @eliasb3403 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I think the correct factor is gamma*(1-beta*cos(theta)) where beta=v/c, gamma =(1-beta^2)^(-1/2) and theta is the angle between the direction of the emitter at the time of emission and the observed direction of the light at the reception.
      In the original derivation, Einstein considers two waves of light emitted by a body in opposites directions so the cosines cancel each other, and he obtains that the difference in kinetic energy is equal to the light's energy times gamma-1, and gamma-1=beta^2/2+ o(beta^2).

  • @everydaygamer9195
    @everydaygamer9195 9 ปีที่แล้ว +240

    I'm in grade 5 and I asked my teacher what e=mc2 means out of the blue. And I screwed myself up she said "since you ask a lot of questions, it's your homework to find it out and tell the WHOLE CLASS". And she was serious. Then I watched this video and it helped me a lot so thx and everyone will think I'm real smart... And it's time to go back to video games 😎. Thx again

    • @arthurdemasi5937
      @arthurdemasi5937 9 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      everyday gamer919 how'd it go?

    • @everydaygamer9195
      @everydaygamer9195 9 ปีที่แล้ว +50

      Arthur it went went well everyone thinks I'm smart now

    • @eslammessi100
      @eslammessi100 9 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Good for you
      Keep searching about these categories it will be helpful in the future :)

    • @ivanereiz1533
      @ivanereiz1533 9 ปีที่แล้ว +23

      Eslam Essam he is not telling truth.. did u really get baited ?

    • @zephyr056
      @zephyr056 9 ปีที่แล้ว +53

      everyday gamer919 The teacher probably didn't know the answer and didn't want to admit.

  • @demon2199
    @demon2199 4 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    Fascinating, I understood not a single word that came out of his mouth.

  • @Raquel_Incorporated
    @Raquel_Incorporated 7 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Ahh right. This is a genuinely clear (albeit slightly quick) explanation. I was always confused where the c^2 came from. Thank you!

    • @zoltankurti
      @zoltankurti 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      But it couldn't be more wrong. The dormula for kinetic energy and the redshift of the light are both wrong.

    • @78anurag
      @78anurag 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@zoltankurti No

    • @zoltankurti
      @zoltankurti 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@78anurag yes they are, he used nonrelativistic formulas to get a result from relativity. It's just a coincidence he got the right equation.

    • @78anurag
      @78anurag 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@zoltankurti No just because he used an equation from Newtonian mechanics in Relativity does not mean it is wrong. You just can't say that everything from Newtonian mechanics is wrong, they are just approximations and are 100% accurate only when it is used for fundamental purposes, like in this video. Equations from any part of physics are universal.

    • @zoltankurti
      @zoltankurti 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@78anurag but you shouldn't trust a relativistic conclusion from non relativitic formulas. It works the other way around, non relativistic conclusions are ok from relativistic formulas, other way around no one can guarantee you are right.

  • @venkybabu8140
    @venkybabu8140 ปีที่แล้ว

    The equation says about the number of possible distributions for matter. Max is when c. Matter always tends to separate to lower the energy content. Strings are possible forms. Ordinary normal bell curves are about matter forms. Extremity is about pi. 2 pi is about chemical reactions.

  • @quesopez98
    @quesopez98 5 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Me before watching this video: oh boy I hope I can prove E=mc^2
    Me after watching this video: oh boy I hope I can prove E=mc^2

  • @manolotenorio8093
    @manolotenorio8093 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    How do you get the E(1-[v^2/c^2]) for the second energý? I can´t seem to find that one and I´d love to follow that step (The rest I believe I´ve got it)

    • @vedantsridhar8378
      @vedantsridhar8378 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Same! Many people say they don't understand this, but that's just because they watched it once. But I continued watching, paused the video, and processed the thought experiment in my mind and I got it. But somehow this relativistic doppler effect doesn't seem to be that famous, even though Einstein derived E=mc^2 from that.

    • @zoltankurti
      @zoltankurti 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@vedantsridhar8378 here, I can do one better. Anybody who said they understood the video successfully decived themselves. That is because this video has multiple mistakes in it which cancel out. Kinetic energy is not 1/2mv^2 in relativity, and the doppler shift is similarly incorrectly calculated in the video.

  • @mcbrayam127
    @mcbrayam127 5 ปีที่แล้ว +27

    I have one question: May i go to the bathroom please?

  • @crwillis101
    @crwillis101 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    where did the factor (1 + V*V/2*C*C) come from? That is the key to everything and it popped out of the air.

    • @Mysoi123
      @Mysoi123 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      It is gamma, the Lorentz factor but has been approximating for low velocity compared to light.
      the actual form of gamma is 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2).
      Given the value x= v^2/c^2
      Using binomial approximation, sqrt(1-x) = 1-x/2) you get for slow velocity, gamma = 1/(1-v^2/2c^2).
      Now, binomial again, 1/(1-x) = 1 + x if x were small.
      You get gamma = 1+v^2/2c^2 .
      The purpose of finding approximate forms are to simplified the structure of equation to match perfectly with slow velocity and classical kinetic energy.

  • @momergil
    @momergil 8 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    Actually the most famous (and important) equation is:
    the answer to life, the universe and everything else = 42

    • @VezixHaikal
      @VezixHaikal 8 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      the equation is incomplete,
      its 42--0 blaze it

    • @pablogriswold421
      @pablogriswold421 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      What do you get when you multiply six by nine? Forty-two.

    • @markoneill2447
      @markoneill2447 8 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Um, do you mean 6*7?

    • @cloroxbleach1200
      @cloroxbleach1200 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      42 = (sqrt(life)*sqrt(universe)^sqrt(everythingelse))^2/everythingelse
      I have no idea what I just did :)

    • @pablogriswold421
      @pablogriswold421 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      +Mark1nc Nah, in The Restaurant at the End of the Universe, there's a part where it's six×nine. I assume you haven't read it?

  • @alansmithee419
    @alansmithee419 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    That is staggeringly simple for such a huge discovery.
    Makes me wonder what else we've missed.
    Maybe people are too focused on the complicated stuff that they don't look at the simple stuff and see what they can derive from it. I'm sure people do look at it, but maybe not enough people do.

    • @angelmendez-rivera351
      @angelmendez-rivera351 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      It isn't simple. The video presented many incorrect statements.

  • @greg.sym.4115
    @greg.sym.4115 9 ปีที่แล้ว +27

    You lost me at radioactive cat. I caught up a little at rocketship but the you lost me when you went back to the radioactive cat. What was the point of the cat?!

    • @prophetoffun
      @prophetoffun 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      Greg. Sym. It's any object that emits a particle. The cat and spaceship can be substituted for a) any particle emitting object and b) the observer, respectively. It's just the minutephysics guys creating a hypothetical situation that we could relate to more as non-physicists.

    • @Bik3rboy666
      @Bik3rboy666 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      The most important question here is.... How did the cat got up there???

    • @purewaterruler
      @purewaterruler 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      prophetoffun yes, because people regularly see cats randomly emitting light on a daily basis :P

    • @MrBeiragua
      @MrBeiragua 9 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      +Greg. Sym. nyancat

    • @tejasdevgekar1154
      @tejasdevgekar1154 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      +Greg. Sym. the cat being radioactive was the confusing part

  • @pizzapoundcake4043
    @pizzapoundcake4043 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The handwriting and doodles in the minutephysics videos are so much like my own that it's really freaking me out!

  • @maxzet368
    @maxzet368 10 ปีที่แล้ว +52

    As a not native english speaker it's really hard to understand everything in this "fast way" you talk.

    • @daBuzzY90
      @daBuzzY90 10 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Slow it down with the youtube super slomow option.

    • @Phazon8058MS
      @Phazon8058MS 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      daBuzzY90 You know that ancient TH-cam video of the kid hopped up on dentist drugs in the car? Henry sounds like that on 0.5x speed.

    • @TheByQQ
      @TheByQQ 10 ปีที่แล้ว

      PhazonSpaceSystems That kid was also in "charlie bit my finger", right?

    • @onetwoBias
      @onetwoBias 9 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      What you need is "Several minute physics" ;)

    • @maxzet368
      @maxzet368 9 ปีที่แล้ว

      ***** Besides the fact that my language is not in this list.. you really want me to read the whole subs and watch what happens above them? it's already hard for me to see and understand all the things happening in the video.

  • @willsonbasyal7883
    @willsonbasyal7883 8 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    It is an awesome video. By far the simplest and the easiest way to come to realize the equation.
    But i was a bit not satisfied with the approximation of relativistic Doppler effect you took into account. Where does that term (1+v^2/2c^2) come from??

    • @portal9935
      @portal9935 8 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      fucking show off

    • @KungFuKeni
      @KungFuKeni 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      Willson Basyal i think it's from Lorenz transformations, specifically Lorenz length contraction

    • @mosantw2014
      @mosantw2014 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      People who get it love it when people say this

    • @willsonbasyal7883
      @willsonbasyal7883 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      Daniel Hsu exactly!!

    • @edek3159
      @edek3159 8 ปีที่แล้ว

      wait.. how is he a show off??

  • @mustafasonmez24
    @mustafasonmez24 7 ปีที่แล้ว +29

    Need to proof relativistic doppler formula first.

    • @noone7692
      @noone7692 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      for me tooo

  • @sravanbob
    @sravanbob 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Now every one has understood that energy you put into this video is equivalent to the knowledge that gained to the viewers was equivalent, it's like the knowledge of urs energy u trying to explain = knowledge of viewers to process is always relatively equal but in different perception and multitudes as same as our star galaxies with infinite ♾