Blows me away that Einstein figured all this out in 1905. I too find myself performing thought experiments like Albert did but the only result I get is a headache.
Have you ever gotten into a 1 on 1 conversation with someone mega interesting, who's at the top of their game, and they're telling you something you find fascinating but above your pay grade? And all the while you're thinking 'you lost me 30 seconds in but I'm just going to nod my way through this and ask no questions'....
We're traveling in a time machine right now, on the planet Earth, traveling into the future one second at a time. And we didn't even have to build this one
You're experiencing time. If you left the earth you're still moving forward in time between events. The length of the path is irrelevant. However, I believe we exist in a relationship with all of space time past and future all at once. Have you looked at the stars...on weed ? Yeah man..yeah
@bluntedvegas702 You're technically right. Light, which is how we perceive time, bounces and reflects. So, any point in space is a soup/stew of light from different angles and times coming together. A light going at one angle hits a planet and bounces off to another angle. We only see the current angle it's traveling at. Meanwhile it's been traveling for millions of years and bouncing in different trajectories the whole time. Light/time could even be split, like through a prism, creating multiple instances of the same time going multiple directions. This would create paradoxes where things seem to be in two places at the same time. Making the universe seem connected at every point in time.
I'm 58 years old,and I never knew definitively,or exactly what the speed of light was. About 3 months ago, I Googled it. The speed of light is roughly 1.6 million miles per hour. Let that sink in.
You can't experience the speed of light. You can only experience reflections in time. At the speed of light, the everything is there presently. The observer is the observed.
So is it possible Han Solo really could make the Kessel Run (spelling??) shorter? A parsec is a measure of distance, not time, but he made it shorter. Maybe this explains it. Then again I dont know if hyperspace and the speed of light are the same so maybe its still not possible.
Everyone talks about getting to the speed of light no one talks about slowing back down from the speed of light…not a lot to do or interact with at those high speeds must slow back down.
Put yourself in the mind of a photon of light that has been travelling for billions of years to reach the Hubble. To the photon of light from the time the photon was created to the time it was detected was instantaneous. That is a mind bender for me.
TL:DR Math doesn't require something to multiply, but grammar does. It's a translation error when translating the language of numbers into the language of words. Terrence isn't a nit-wit. He's just self-taught and is missing what comes with learning in a group. He also brought up a great point about the 1x1=2 stuff. It's a grammatical riddle. In grammar, to multiply you require something to multiply. Numbers are numbers, and words have meanings. The numbers guys use the wrong word to describe the multiply function, so when translating numbers into words you get mistranslation. Two examples. "When you get a gremlin wet IT multiplies" and "take that 7 and multiply IT 3 times" Grammar requires an "IT" to multiply. You have to start with a value greater than 0. This doesn't change how math or numbers work, it's just shows that the math people chose the wrong word to describe the multiply function. Multiply is just shorthand for repeating addition. It's just adding a number. There isn't really any multiplying going on. 8x3 = 8+8+8. Same thing. Edit: we have two words for the same function. Times and multiply. "Times" works perfectly to describe the math function. "Multiply" does not describe the multiply function and how it works in math.
@@DrSpoculus Uh...no he's a nitwit. 1x1=2 thing is just the tip of the iceberg of idiocy that is him. I feel pity for you that you've been sucked in by his crap. Good luck.
It’s worth mentioning that when you try to accelerate an object with mass, even if it’s one subatomic particle, the faster you go the more energy it takes, to achieve light speed requires an infinite amount of energy. Therefore, pushing any object with mass to light speed is impossible.
Mathematically it seems impossible, but I disagree. Technically nothing would move, ever. That sunlight travelling at the speed of light, would not reach us..mathematically..but here we are. Newtons law works on earth, low earth orbit Einsteins theory takes over, and special theory is just a theory not a fact.
Anything with mass cannot achieve FTL, as we currently understand it, and we're at least a millenia away from being capable of calculating how to work around that.
@@sammuslu2992 The amount of arrogance for one to actually believe that they're so much smarter and/or insightful than someone like Brian Cox, is immesurable. Just like stupidity :D
@@georgexanthopoulos3003 He’s not shouting ‘BS’ cus he knows more than an actual physicist. Hes just saying ‘BS’ out of frustration, because his little brain couldn’t comprehend what was being said. It’s sad cus what brain said was not even difficult at all. It’s quite simple really
this is all pure nonsense, I think they say this to keep it so confusing that everybody just assumes these guys are too smart for us and don't question anything.
@@america1st721The gps example confirms that everything else he said is real. He didnt made it up, einstein figured it, and there were experiments to confirms this.
Cox did a TH-cam video demonstrating objects of vastly differing mass falling at the same rate in a vacuum chamber at NASA. When he showed the actual event he did so in slow motion which completely ruined the affect. IMHO that was a stupid thing to do. Did not clearly show reality.
yes and a liar. i am sick of modern day physicists spouting imagination as if it’s scientific thought. physics is a passion of mine and all the real world work being done is in tech and by accident. multiverses, string theory, expanding and collapsing universes? great in star trek. no real work has come out of the industry in 70 years. brian cox belongs on reading rainbow, not on any panel of people where science and math actually matter.
Would you like to experience the speed of light? Tell us what you think! 🎉
I understood everything perfectly...that Joe Rogan said.
lol, thanks for the laugh.
Light Speed is too slow, we're gonna have to go right to Ludicrous Speed.
Gotta go fast!
Nah, buckle this !!
Nah, let's go plaid
Great movie
What's the matter Colonel Sandurz? Chicken?
Blows me away that Einstein figured all this out in 1905. I too find myself performing thought experiments like Albert did but the only result I get is a headache.
Have you ever gotten into a 1 on 1 conversation with someone mega interesting, who's at the top of their game, and they're telling you something you find fascinating but above your pay grade? And all the while you're thinking 'you lost me 30 seconds in but I'm just going to nod my way through this and ask no questions'....
We NEED to get Brian Cox in a room with Karl Pilkington.
With Ronnie Pickering
i get the sinking feeling that Karl won't ask the questions we'd expect him to ask - like why didn't giraffes grow wings
@@seshadrianantharaman7676 giraffes....do we need em?
"God uses imperial units" is the absolute best statement ever...
We're traveling in a time machine right now, on the planet Earth, traveling into the future one second at a time. And we didn't even have to build this one
You're experiencing time. If you left the earth you're still moving forward in time between events. The length of the path is irrelevant. However, I believe we exist in a relationship with all of space time past and future all at once. Have you looked at the stars...on weed ? Yeah man..yeah
No, we are staying at the same time, not into the future by any measure
Only in our trajectory. The future coming at us from behind, we're moving away from.
Only in our trajectory. The future coming at us from behind, we're moving away from.
@bluntedvegas702 You're technically right. Light, which is how we perceive time, bounces and reflects. So, any point in space is a soup/stew of light from different angles and times coming together.
A light going at one angle hits a planet and bounces off to another angle. We only see the current angle it's traveling at. Meanwhile it's been traveling for millions of years and bouncing in different trajectories the whole time.
Light/time could even be split, like through a prism, creating multiple instances of the same time going multiple directions.
This would create paradoxes where things seem to be in two places at the same time. Making the universe seem connected at every point in time.
I'm 58 years old,and I never knew definitively,or exactly what the speed of light was. About 3 months ago, I Googled it. The speed of light is roughly 1.6 million miles per hour. Let that sink in.
You can't experience the speed of light. You can only experience reflections in time. At the speed of light, the everything is there presently. The observer is the observed.
So is it possible Han Solo really could make the Kessel Run (spelling??) shorter? A parsec is a measure of distance, not time, but he made it shorter. Maybe this explains it. Then again I dont know if hyperspace and the speed of light are the same so maybe its still not possible.
He "flew" close to blackholes to help cut distance down
Everyone talks about getting to the speed of light no one talks about slowing back down from the speed of light…not a lot to do or interact with at those high speeds must slow back down.
Isaac Arthur talks a lot about this on his Science & Futurism channel.
Imagine explaining science to a dragon believer. 😂
This distance compression is why muons are able to be detected on earth.
So....
In not perceiving time, would you cease to exist? Is time necessary for matter to exist?
Time, like distance, is a measure we use. You could say time is not calculated, but it exists, yaknow?
Put yourself in the mind of a photon of light that has been travelling for billions of years to reach the Hubble. To the photon of light from the time the photon was created to the time it was detected was instantaneous. That is a mind bender for me.
U just have to return even faster
Hard to believe Rogan gives an equal platform to a bonafide scientist and brilliant mind like Brian Cox ...and that nitwit Terrance Howard.
TL:DR Math doesn't require something to multiply, but grammar does. It's a translation error when translating the language of numbers into the language of words.
Terrence isn't a nit-wit. He's just self-taught and is missing what comes with learning in a group.
He also brought up a great point about the 1x1=2 stuff. It's a grammatical riddle. In grammar, to multiply you require something to multiply.
Numbers are numbers, and words have meanings. The numbers guys use the wrong word to describe the multiply function, so when translating numbers into words you get mistranslation.
Two examples. "When you get a gremlin wet IT multiplies" and "take that 7 and multiply IT 3 times"
Grammar requires an "IT" to multiply. You have to start with a value greater than 0.
This doesn't change how math or numbers work, it's just shows that the math people chose the wrong word to describe the multiply function.
Multiply is just shorthand for repeating addition. It's just adding a number. There isn't really any multiplying going on. 8x3 = 8+8+8. Same thing.
Edit: we have two words for the same function. Times and multiply. "Times" works perfectly to describe the math function. "Multiply" does not describe the multiply function and how it works in math.
@@DrSpoculus Uh...no he's a nitwit. 1x1=2 thing is just the tip of the iceberg of idiocy that is him. I feel pity for you that you've been sucked in by his crap. Good luck.
Can space bend at the speed of light?
Speed of light. 670, 616, 629. 38 mph
Much faster than your broken Mustang fart machine.
I just never can get my head round it. A minute is a minute to me. I know it’s not cos Brian says it’s not and what do I know….but I don’t get it 😅
NDT has always explained things that I can more easily grasp. Try him.
Hella confusing 😓
It’s worth mentioning that when you try to accelerate an object with mass, even if it’s one subatomic particle, the faster you go the more energy it takes, to achieve light speed requires an infinite amount of energy. Therefore, pushing any object with mass to light speed is impossible.
Mathematically it seems impossible, but I disagree. Technically nothing would move, ever. That sunlight travelling at the speed of light, would not reach us..mathematically..but here we are.
Newtons law works on earth, low earth orbit Einsteins theory takes over, and special theory is just a theory not a fact.
It was said that traveling faster than the speed of sound was impossible.
@@machineman268 the speed of sound and light is every so slightly different though
We (humans) just know a fraction of a fraction of information we'll gather in the next thousand years. Look how far we advanced in the last 150 years.
We (animals) know everything
So what....
Anything with mass cannot achieve FTL, as we currently understand it, and we're at least a millenia away from being capable of calculating how to work around that.
In less than 100 years we will have craft that can catch up to Voyager2 in a weekend.
The speed of light and traveling through time are unrelated.
Which is not what he said. He was talking about relativistic time travel.
THWY Clickbait t(*.*t)
load of bs
Just say that you don't understand😂
Bullshit to a primitive mind
@@jamaicandood-i8b neither do you
@@sammuslu2992 The amount of arrogance for one to actually believe that they're so much smarter and/or insightful than someone like Brian Cox, is immesurable. Just like stupidity :D
@@georgexanthopoulos3003 He’s not shouting ‘BS’ cus he knows more than an actual physicist.
Hes just saying ‘BS’ out of frustration, because his little brain couldn’t comprehend what was being said. It’s sad cus what brain said was not even difficult at all. It’s quite simple really
How the pretentious make gobbledegook sound "real"!!!
Said the guy using a computer connected to a global telecommunications network to post smooth-brained commentary
@@blidge8282 😂😂😂 I know right?
this is all pure nonsense, I think they say this to keep it so confusing that everybody just assumes these guys are too smart for us and don't question anything.
No. It’s provably real. If it wasn’t true GPS wouldn’t work. It does.
@@MrChiddler GPS is a satellite reading and has nothing to do with light speed.
@@america1st721The gps example confirms that everything else he said is real. He didnt made it up, einstein figured it, and there were experiments to confirms this.
Cox did a TH-cam video demonstrating objects of vastly differing mass falling at the same rate in a vacuum chamber at NASA. When he showed the actual event he did so in slow motion which completely ruined the affect. IMHO that was a stupid thing to do. Did not clearly show reality.
Anyone else finds Cox annoying?
Nope
No
yes and a liar. i am sick of modern day physicists spouting imagination as if it’s scientific thought. physics is a passion of mine and all the real world work being done is in tech and by accident. multiverses, string theory, expanding and collapsing universes? great in star trek. no real work has come out of the industry in 70 years. brian cox belongs on reading rainbow, not on any panel of people where science and math actually matter.
@ so you don’t think the universe is expanding?
YES!
🤯