I wish Professor Leonard Susskind, the Emergence team, all students, and all subscribers a wonderful holiday season and a healthy, happy 2025! Thank you for all the videos this year!
2:005:00 First he takes concrete region of the universe, then superimposes an imaginary two-dimensional grid on it and concludes that if galaxies move in relation to one another, the imaginary points of the grid move in tandem. Well, take a stationary flock of birds, superimpose a grid on it , observe the flock scattered and then ask yourself do the points of the gird scatter too ?
Gravity and space time are an interaction via phase waves of positive and negative charges accepting Higgs fields interacts with both , (opposites attract ,likes repel ??? )
If H is time dependent and otherwise a constant for each point in the universe, then H becomes a function H(t), which is the same for everyone in our universe. This means all the pionts in the universe share the same accellaration history independently of each other.
I don't know the cliche, but a pen (or any massive body) falling near Earth's surface is _not_ united with it. Any objects freely falling are inertial, while the Earth is constantly accelerating (outwardly) as it expands due to its own internal pressure. Objects in contact with the surface of the Earth can be thought of as "united" with it, and objects that are accelerating are related to it, but freely falling objects aren't (for all intents and purposes) either united _or_ related to it.
Gravity is not a force, rather it is spase that's distorted in the presence of mass and objects accelerate in the distortion. It's like if a billiard ball is rolling uniformly on a horizontal track, then you incline the track down, you'll see the ball accelerate down.
Is there an equilibrium point between Moon and Earth where their gravities cancel out ? Difficult to know when the whole system is in motion around the Sun .
[시간과 막대기의 관계..] 막대기는 이 세상에 무한대의 속도가 존재함을 증명합니다. 우리가 지구에서 안드로메다까지 긴 막대기를 설치할수있다면 이 막대기를 밀고 당기면서 안드로메다까지 무한대의 속도로 신호를 보낼수가 있겠죠. 그런데 이 막대기로 증명한 시간이 무한대의 속도로 흐른다는것은 시간이 없다는것을 의미합니다. 왜냐하면 무한대의 속도는 현실에서 존재할수가 없으니까요. 시간이 존재하지 않으니까 시간이 끝없는 모든 속도를 담을수 있는거죠.
속도에 의해 시간이 느려진다는 시간 지연이 얼마나 터무니가 없냐면 단순히 시간이 천천히 가니까 천천히 늙는다 정도로 생각하고서 끝이잖아? 그런데 구체적으로 들어가면 시간의 지연은 현실에서 단순하지가 않아. 광속을 넘어가는순간 시간이 역행하게 되는데 그런면 젊어지겠지밖에 상상을 못하잖아? (그냥 시간의 역행을 타임머신을 타고 과거로 가는걸로 상상할수도 있으나 시간 지연에서는 시간이 늦게 간다고 했으니까 과거로 가는것은 불가능. 천천히 늙고 젊어지는것만 가능.) 그러나 계속 젊어지면은 엄마 뱃속에 들어가야 되는데 엄마가 어디있냐이거야. 이런 문제가 왜 생기냐면 속도를 시간이라고 했기때문에 현실에서 똥싸고 밥먹고 계속 움직여온 인생이 거꾸로 갈수가 없으니까 나이만 젊어지는걸로밖에 설정할수가 없기 때문이지… 그러니까 속도에 의한 시간 지연, 시간 역행은 현실성 측면에서 봐도 말이 안된다는거야 그냥 속도가 시간이라는 이론을 억지로 맞추려다보니까 싹 다 무시한다고 봐야지
You can't show me dimensions 1 or 2 in any real sense, and time is remember and anticipate in your brain. In college I asked, "How is light constant per observer and there's still a red-shift?" He wrote this √(1-v²/c²) on the board. This is a number between 0 and 1, and this was his answer to my question. This changes those fictional dimensions that are only for math on paper. Everyone on this planet ignores that there is a NON-transformed reality left behind that does NOT disappear when you transform your dimensions on your paper. There should be AT LEAST two working theories with this situation. The relative and constant-per-observer concept is the same narcissism that made the observer the center of the Universe. Acceleration is absolute and observed the same by all observers, yet somehow this is not as important as relative things that do nothing. Look at my latest gyro video that shows a mechanism for precession that trained scientists can't see, because a paradigm shift is hard. My math don't need a right-hand rule first, and it describes the actual cause.
It’s nice to see everyone has their opinion but the first step to learning is the omit you do not truly know this man those were you talking about sometimes you really can’t understand Something complex places it takes time to absorb it
This is horrifying in its wrongness. Is this the state of cosmology? Why can you ignore mass outside of the "sphere"? Really? Can I ignore Lorenz and Poincarre at the same time? So in a 3 body problem, I can always ignore the 3rd body because it outside the sphere of the 2nd body with the 1st at the origin.
@@MusingsAndIdeas Newton gave up on the three body problem, let alone a cloud of gigamoles of "independently acting" atoms/molecules behaving "ideally" in orbit that don't collide. We are still left with the problem of where does the cloud decide to put the origin (maybe a magical lump of dark matter?)... let alone why there are spirals in galaxies and why does the cloud have to be cold and turbulent to form a star? Everything isn't down to gravity alone and this clockworks, gravity only approach to the physics betrays astronomy's astrological heritage. Please read about thermodynamics, fluid mechanics and non-linear dynamics.
It’s relative to where you are in relation to some point at that moment. At first glance it works for any two points. Just form a new sphere for a new point. It does need some clarification. I hope his next lecture factors in the Cosmological Constant.
@@oznerriznick2474 I see, that if the shell is symmetric, one can do the shell calculation. The problem is that a gas cloud won't be symmetric, unless it is orbiting something. But the same shell theorem would imply that the centre of a symmetric sphere has no net gravity. So we need a mass in the centre of the sphere. But then viscosity would take over, and there is no spherical stable density profile that allows a spherical gas cloud to exist without getting sucked into the centre. Viscosity is dispersive in nature. There is one configuration that can be stable, and that is a disc that has an increasing density with radius that varies linearly with r. But this involves consideration of what things do outside of the shell. One configuration can be metastable, with a mass at the centre and that is a spiral galaxy that achieves a density that increases with radius with its spiral, which in itself is a cylinder. Two are required so it doesn't wobble to much. The whole point of the spiral galactic configuration is that it minimized viscous energy dissipation. As for a star formation, a cloud won't collapse without a point mass at its centre - that makes sure g increases towards the middle that a simple spherical gas cloud can't do. The mass actually provides a stop sign to stop any gas molecules from simply passing right through. Now you definitely can't do that with an ideal gas, which is inviscid - hence the need for thremodynamics, fluid mechanics, and non-linear dynamics.
One deduces space time as an energy interaction of phase waves at different stages of construction via temp of an area (+ CMBR ) thy are in , there for space time is dependent on temp and time there in =time is fast in hot area and slow in cold area ie a fluid flux of energies interactions , but if in a craft mk11 to mk v space time is constant to the crafts energy state there for any person there in would age normally due to the crafts energy system being air there in ( air being an energy state) acting on the body of said person . but craft would not age differently in a hot or cold area due to it makes its own energy from space its self yes complex interactions in space ??? ( phase waves don't have the same energy systems as the crafts ???)not omitting time in are interpritation of time is a degenerative system in a reaction energy system of which are dimension is ??? in a negative dimension there is no time due to no reaction
I wish Professor Leonard Susskind, the Emergence team, all students, and all subscribers a wonderful holiday season and a healthy, happy 2025! Thank you for all the videos this year!
there goes my hero.
Omuamua ACCELERATED out of the solar system.
I agree what a heroic man
2:00 5:00 First he takes concrete region of the universe, then superimposes an imaginary two-dimensional grid on it and concludes that if galaxies move in relation to one another, the imaginary points of the grid move in tandem. Well, take a stationary flock of birds, superimpose a grid on it , observe the flock scattered and then ask yourself do the points of the gird scatter too ?
But what forms gravity?
Curvature of spacetime
Sorry a lot of typos I talk Text
This lecture reminded me of the adage, "If we had some ham, we could have ham and eggs, if we had some eggs".
Gravity and space time are an interaction via phase waves of positive and negative charges accepting Higgs fields interacts with both , (opposites attract ,likes repel ??? )
If H is time dependent and otherwise a constant for each point in the universe, then H becomes a function H(t), which is the same for everyone in our universe. This means all the pionts in the universe share the same accellaration history independently of each other.
One cliche is to forget that the falling pen and the whole earth are essentially one entity ,not two separate ones.
I don't know the cliche, but a pen (or any massive body) falling near Earth's surface is _not_ united with it. Any objects freely falling are inertial, while the Earth is constantly accelerating (outwardly) as it expands due to its own internal pressure. Objects in contact with the surface of the Earth can be thought of as "united" with it, and objects that are accelerating are related to it, but freely falling objects aren't (for all intents and purposes) either united _or_ related to it.
Gravity is not a force, rather it is spase that's distorted in the presence of mass and objects accelerate in the distortion. It's like if a billiard ball is rolling uniformly on a horizontal track, then you incline the track down, you'll see the ball accelerate down.
You are using gravity to explain gravity
Is there an equilibrium point between Moon and Earth where their gravities cancel out ? Difficult to know when the whole system is in motion around the Sun .
Yes, the LaGrange points
[시간과 막대기의 관계..]
막대기는 이 세상에 무한대의 속도가 존재함을 증명합니다.
우리가 지구에서 안드로메다까지 긴 막대기를 설치할수있다면
이 막대기를 밀고 당기면서 안드로메다까지 무한대의 속도로 신호를 보낼수가 있겠죠.
그런데 이 막대기로 증명한 시간이 무한대의 속도로 흐른다는것은
시간이 없다는것을 의미합니다.
왜냐하면 무한대의 속도는 현실에서 존재할수가 없으니까요.
시간이 존재하지 않으니까 시간이 끝없는 모든 속도를 담을수 있는거죠.
속도에 의해 시간이 느려진다는 시간 지연이 얼마나 터무니가 없냐면
단순히 시간이 천천히 가니까 천천히 늙는다 정도로 생각하고서 끝이잖아?
그런데 구체적으로 들어가면 시간의 지연은 현실에서 단순하지가 않아.
광속을 넘어가는순간 시간이 역행하게 되는데
그런면 젊어지겠지밖에 상상을 못하잖아?
(그냥 시간의 역행을 타임머신을 타고 과거로 가는걸로 상상할수도 있으나 시간 지연에서는 시간이 늦게 간다고 했으니까 과거로 가는것은 불가능. 천천히 늙고 젊어지는것만 가능.)
그러나 계속 젊어지면은 엄마 뱃속에 들어가야 되는데 엄마가 어디있냐이거야.
이런 문제가 왜 생기냐면
속도를 시간이라고 했기때문에 현실에서 똥싸고 밥먹고 계속 움직여온 인생이 거꾸로 갈수가 없으니까 나이만 젊어지는걸로밖에 설정할수가 없기 때문이지…
그러니까 속도에 의한 시간 지연, 시간 역행은 현실성 측면에서 봐도 말이 안된다는거야
그냥 속도가 시간이라는 이론을 억지로 맞추려다보니까 싹 다 무시한다고 봐야지
So basically…..
If everything is at it’s own centre….
Then nothing is moving..
Either away or towards…👍
You can't show me dimensions 1 or 2 in any real sense, and time is remember and anticipate in your brain. In college I asked, "How is light constant per observer and there's still a red-shift?" He wrote this √(1-v²/c²) on the board. This is a number between 0 and 1, and this was his answer to my question. This changes those fictional dimensions that are only for math on paper. Everyone on this planet ignores that there is a NON-transformed reality left behind that does NOT disappear when you transform your dimensions on your paper. There should be AT LEAST two working theories with this situation. The relative and constant-per-observer concept is the same narcissism that made the observer the center of the Universe. Acceleration is absolute and observed the same by all observers, yet somehow this is not as important as relative things that do nothing. Look at my latest gyro video that shows a mechanism for precession that trained scientists can't see, because a paradigm shift is hard. My math don't need a right-hand rule first, and it describes the actual cause.
the only net force on the universe is income tax, property tax, inheritance tax, and sales tax
It’s nice to see everyone has their opinion but the first step to learning is the omit you do not truly know this man those were you talking about sometimes you really can’t understand Something complex places it takes time to absorb it
This is horrifying in its wrongness. Is this the state of cosmology? Why can you ignore mass outside of the "sphere"? Really? Can I ignore Lorenz and Poincarre at the same time? So in a 3 body problem, I can always ignore the 3rd body because it outside the sphere of the 2nd body with the 1st at the origin.
Shell Theorem. A well known result that Newton himself derived from
@@MusingsAndIdeas Newton gave up on the three body problem, let alone a cloud of gigamoles of "independently acting" atoms/molecules behaving "ideally" in orbit that don't collide. We are still left with the problem of where does the cloud decide to put the origin (maybe a magical lump of dark matter?)... let alone why there are spirals in galaxies and why does the cloud have to be cold and turbulent to form a star? Everything isn't down to gravity alone and this clockworks, gravity only approach to the physics betrays astronomy's astrological heritage. Please read about thermodynamics, fluid mechanics and non-linear dynamics.
It’s relative to where you are in relation to some point at that moment.
At first glance it works for any two points.
Just form a new sphere for a new point.
It does need some clarification. I hope his next lecture factors in the Cosmological Constant.
@@oznerriznick2474 I see, that if the shell is symmetric, one can do the shell calculation. The problem is that a gas cloud won't be symmetric, unless it is orbiting something. But the same shell theorem would imply that the centre of a symmetric sphere has no net gravity. So we need a mass in the centre of the sphere. But then viscosity would take over, and there is no spherical stable density profile that allows a spherical gas cloud to exist without getting sucked into the centre. Viscosity is dispersive in nature.
There is one configuration that can be stable, and that is a disc that has an increasing density with radius that varies linearly with r. But this involves consideration of what things do outside of the shell. One configuration can be metastable, with a mass at the centre and that is a spiral galaxy that achieves a density that increases with radius with its spiral, which in itself is a cylinder. Two are required so it doesn't wobble to much. The whole point of the spiral galactic configuration is that it minimized viscous energy dissipation.
As for a star formation, a cloud won't collapse without a point mass at its centre - that makes sure g increases towards the middle that a simple spherical gas cloud can't do. The mass actually provides a stop sign to stop any gas molecules from simply passing right through.
Now you definitely can't do that with an ideal gas, which is inviscid - hence the need for thremodynamics, fluid mechanics, and non-linear dynamics.
One deduces space time as an energy interaction of phase waves at different stages of construction via temp of an area (+ CMBR ) thy are in , there for space time is dependent on temp and time there in =time is fast in hot area and slow in cold area ie a fluid flux of energies interactions , but if in a craft mk11 to mk v space time is constant to the crafts energy state there for any person there in would age normally due to the crafts energy system being air there in ( air being an energy state) acting on the body of said person . but craft would not age differently in a hot or cold area due to it makes its own energy from space its self yes complex interactions in space ??? ( phase waves don't have the same energy systems as the crafts ???)not omitting time in are interpritation of time is a degenerative system in a reaction energy system of which are dimension is ??? in a negative dimension there is no time due to no reaction
Silly intellectuals! The fabric of space time is nylo-silko-graphenel-hexa-blasphemy! PRAISE JESUS AMEN!
Ignorant crap