Why Gravity is NOT a Force

9 okt 2020
3 555 004 visningar

The General Theory of Relativity tells us gravity is not a force, gravitational fields don't exist. Objects tend to move on straight paths through curved spacetime. Thanks to Caséta by Lutron for sponsoring this video. Find out more at: www.lutron.com/veritasium
Huge thanks to Prof. Geraint Lewis for hours of consulting on this video so I could get these ideas straight in my own brain. Check out his SEworld channel: ve42.co/gfl or his books: ve42.co/GFLbooks
Amazing VFX, compositing, and editing by Jonny Hyman
2D animations by Ivàn Tello
Filmed by Steven Warren and Raquel Nuno
Special thanks to Petr Lebedev for reviews and script consultation
Music by Jonny Hyman and from Epidemic Sound epidemicsound.com
Rocket made by Goodnight and Co.
Screen images in rocket by Geoff Barrett
Slow motion rocket exhaust footage from Joe Barnard at BPS.Space

  • Here's a question I've seen a lot in comments: OK, I'm accelerating up but then shouldn't someone on the other side of the globe fall off? No, here's why: Either watch again from 8:28 or read what I've written below... Spacetime is curved - it curves the opposite direction on the other side of the Earth. Neither us on this side of the Earth nor they on the other side are changing our spacial coordinates - we're not moving up, they're not moving down - Earth isn't flying into one of us. BUT we both ARE accelerating. In curved spacetime you have to accelerate just to remain stationary. The traditional definition of acceleration is something changing its velocity. In general relativity you have to embrace a new definition of acceleration: it means deviating from a geodesic - not going on a straight line path through spacetime. Near the Earth a geodesic is a parabola so unless you're moving in a parabolic arc (like on a zero-g plane) you are accelerating. This definition is the same as the old one so if you're accelerating in deep space then your velocity is changing. *BUT*... if you are near a large mass you are in curved spacetime, now acceleration your velocity is changing. You can stay stationary relative to Earth's surface and still be accelerating. This is because your acceleration should be measured not relative to the Earth's surface but relative to free-falling objects - they are inertial observers. Imagine this - I'm in deep space and I make horizontal rows and rows of stationary golf balls. Then I hop in my rocket and accelerate up through them. Just think about what that looks like. Now my rocket is back on Earth just sitting there. I freeze time for a sec and make horizontal rows and rows of golf balls up into the atmosphere. Now unfreeze time. What do you see? If you just look at the golf balls and the rocket ship it looks the same as the situation in space where the golf balls were stationary and the rocket was accelerating. Einstein's point was the golf balls have the better claim as the "stationary" thing since their experience is just like the golf balls in deep space - no forces experienced. The rocket on Earth is just like the rocket in space. It feels a force and hence an acceleration.

    VeritasiumVeritasium7 dagar sedan
    • Let me ask this then: If gravity doesn't exist and we are constantly accelerating due to the earth pushing us, what causes an object that is accelerated off the earth to return to the earth (A person jumping). If it's because the earth keeps accelerating and the person stops accelerating, that brings a different question. Accelerating is either a change in direction or change in velocity. If orbits are straight lines through space time, then the earth should be traveling in a "straight" line around the sun right? Then the earth is not changing direction. However, if the earth is not changing direction, that means the earth is changing velocity. If the earth is always accelerating by gaining more velocity...wouldn't countless aspects of known physics about earth change? "Gravity" would be getting stronger every second. Every year a year would be shorter. Countless things would be so different for us wouldn't it? So...what am I missing?

      Egan314Egan3144 timmar sedan
    • Veritasium: Very simple explanation why your theory is wrong: It would take a force to bend space-time.

      Guy TechGuy Tech5 timmar sedan
    • Well, I do agree, gravity is an illusion. It does not exist. What does exist is a reduced pressure zone around matter due to the depletion of dark matter by the protons, neutrons and electrons. Due to the reduced pressure, the Brownian motion of the remaining dark matter pushes normal matter towards the resultant low pressure region. This is also by the way why you will see the radiation from the stationary particle, you will see it eating dark matter to sustain itself.

      Tank You_AllTank You_All5 timmar sedan
    • Sierz-Pauli action

      Ricardo MVRicardo MV8 timmar sedan
    • Maybe you could do a video on how Space time is a concept rather than a tangible thing? - Briefly, spacetime is not a thing, it’s a concept, a talking point. Things happen in spacetime. Spacetime doesn’t happen because it isn’t a thing, it’s a guiding concept, a mental construct, an idea. Those who have invested a lot of energy into the narrative that treats spacetime like a real thing are going to resist being reminded that spacetime is the mathematical linking of two venerable, quantifiable, abstract concepts, and linking them together like that doesn’t magically transform those concepts into tangibles. Nor does bringing Riemannian geometry into Minkowski spacetime convert these ideas into concrete realities. This is called reification, the act of attributing realness onto imaginative thought structures like abstract concepts.

      Quantum BaboonsQuantum Baboons9 timmar sedan
  • nice Vid (and Love the way you mispronounce Geodesic)

    DanielDaniel4 timmar sedan
  • And ppl made fun of flat earthers lol

    G GG G4 timmar sedan
  • You are a hack who is lying to people. Force - strength or energy exerted or brought to bear : cause of motion or change : active power Gravity - (1) : the gravitational attraction of the mass of the earth, the moon, or a planet for bodies at or near its surface (2) : a fundamental physical force that is responsible for interactions which occur because of mass between particles, between aggregations of matter (such as stars and planets), and between particles (such as photons) and aggregations of matter, that is 10^-39 times the strength of the strong force, and that extends over infinite distances but is dominant over macroscopic distances especially between aggregations of matter - called also gravitation, gravitational force - compare electromagnetism sense 2a, strong force, weak force Inertial Reference Frame's are a area where everything should be experiencing the same force. An example would be a plane, you can drop a ball on a plane and it doesn't fly backwards even though the plane is moving incredibly fast. That is because their is no absolute motion, only relative motion. Things move in relation to each other. Acceleration - rate at which velocity changes with time, in terms of both speed and direction It is not possible to be accelerating without a force, "an object at rest stays at rest unless acted upon by an outside force, an object in motion stays in motion unless acted upon by an outside force," nor is it possible to accelerate continuously in any direction because acceleration means you are gaining velocity and therefore we would eventually pass the speed of light. If you could fire a Halo Super MAC Cannon from one of the orbital defense stations it would move at 4% the speed of light until it hit something, no longer how far it flew. According to the definition I could find of inertial observer Inertial Observer - a hypothetical observer who is not accelerated with respect to an inertial system. Newton's laws of motion and the special theory of relativity apply to the measurements which would be made by such observers They are still subject to Newtonian laws and while the Theory of Relativity replaced the Newtonian Theory, Newton's laws are still used today in reference to motion and forces that are less than the speed of light.

    Silver CrescentSilver Crescent4 timmar sedan
  • Making frames of reference relatable should not be incompatible with relativity.

    gual micolgual micol4 timmar sedan
  • I've always sensed gravity as a result, kind of like displacement pressure, but instead of increased pressure at depth, it's increased pressure at mass.

    colmhaincolmhain4 timmar sedan
  • omg

    Prasanth NarayananPrasanth Narayanan4 timmar sedan
  • I wonder how many people will switch their own "lights" off while trying to install the smart switches...

    Lucca GasserLucca Gasser4 timmar sedan
  • I’m a theoretical physicist who studies gravity, and this is the best video I’ve ever seen on it. Well done!!

    Brian SeymourBrian Seymour5 timmar sedan
  • Ok man, that's a little to much click bate of a title, your about science and know gravity is a fundamental force

    Red Hot1331Red Hot13315 timmar sedan
    • Maybe, great video nonetheless

      Red Hot1331Red Hot13315 timmar sedan
    • Graviton

      Red Hot1331Red Hot13315 timmar sedan
  • If I may ask, I'd like to hear some good explanation of why the "space-time warping effect" doesn't affect the earth (🌎) or any other space object itself? Just think about it for a second: how come our planet "IS ACCELERATING OUTWARD" in the "FIXED TIME-SPACE"? Thanks everyone who will bring the conclusions to this particular nuance.

    Alexander GolovatiyAlexander Golovatiy5 timmar sedan
  • Thanks for this great explanation, the best I've ever seen, and you're exactly correct. I am currently towards the completion stages of a 10 year research effort describing a Unified Field Theory (UFT) of the 4 "forces" of the universe, which one is commonly known as gravity. Although what you say about the force of gravity being an "illusion" (true that), the scientific community will most probably maintain defining it as one of the 4 universal forces. I do have a suggestion for you on a followup video which this video promotes the perfect Segway into. That is, perhaps a video entitled "Gravity is a Push". If you investigate this, you will find common sense dictating the truth of this. I'll give a quick "Rocket Ship" scenario for you to get the ball rolling in your mind, AND if you find the truth, you get to use your cool rocket ship again for this "Push" video! Start on Earth, driving a car. You're on an interstate going North, and wish to exit onto an intersecting interstate heading west. You turn off taking the cloverleaf turning along a Clockwise (CW) exit 270deg until you reach your West destination. As you travel about the cloverleaf, you "feel" your body being pushed to the left. Question: "WHAT IS PUSHING YOU". Yes, we all know the equation showing that a change in velocity or direction causes a force upon a mass body, yet note that this explanation does not answer the question! Newton states that if there is a force, then an equal and opposite force must also exist, therefore your body must be pushing against SOMETHING. It turns out that this "something" is (listen carefully) the STRUCTURE of the curve of space that you mention in this, your gravity video. It is along this same structure upon which the "curves" of gravity are forced to travel. Cross those curves, and you will "feel" a force attempting to maintain you and accelerating you along the path, ONLY BECAUSE there is an accelerating flow of "something" following this path. Think of it as flowing water down a stream, if you remain in the stream, you feel no force. Move contrary to the flow, force appears. This begs the question "what is flowing". To answer this question is to answer the "what is pushing you" question. The answer, is the long known term for centuries called the "luminiferous aether", or today many know it as "dark energy" or "zero point energy" among many other names. Einstein actually made a statement later in his life that "space without the aether is unthinkable". James C. Maxwell, Newton, and many other scientific greats from our past were also believers in the aether. The findings of the famous Michelson and Morley aether experiments were correct, only their conclusions were flawed about the non-existence of the aether. Just because the aether does not "hinder" the speed of light, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Therefore their experiment had correct findings... that the aether doesn't hinder the speed of light. With all that said, we can now finally fly our spaceship into space and have a look see. Here we are hanging out at a zero aether flow acceleration point where we will most likely be building the next space station, at Libration Point 1 (L1), a position where the aether's acceleration flow into earth just equals the same acceleration flow into the moon, and therefore at our L1 position, we feel no force because the flow of aether equals zero here (equal and opposite), with an equal desire to flow in two directions at the same time. The key word here is "flow", or rather a "push" towards both bodies of mass. Now, if we give ourselves just a bit of a push towards either the earth or moon, we will enter into that particular flow, and end up hitting that particular mass body. As we look out our spaceship window between the Earth and Moon, we can see only one side of each planet. What about the opposite sides of these planets? How is the aether flowing out there? Well assuming that the aether (dark energy) has an equal potential of energy per unit of space, then say on the far side of the of Moon, the aether is not torn in an attempt to divide its potential energy between planets, giving all of its pushing potential flow towards the Moon. Whereas in the space between the Earth and Moon (at our spaceship) this potential flow is divided between the two bodies, and therefore the push on the Moon here is less than the push on the opposite side. Therefore, the Moon is being "pushed" towards the earth, APPEARING that its attracted to the Earth by gravity (which is an illusion), while in fact both planets are being "pushed" towards each other by the potential energy of curved space, known as the aether... the same push you experienced driving on the cloverleaf. One last note. This is a very top level synopsis of the reality of the aether. I include several quantum mechanic derivations and proofs employing the same aether space-time structure which the atomic nucleus and electron must also follow, correctly mapping out all 17 Standard Model particles (i.e. quark, photon, gluon...etc) showing their correct charges, spins, orbits, and signs. - J.L. Brady Author of "A Geometric based Theory of the Unified Field", due to be published 2022. Find me on Researchgate.com www.researchgate.net/profile/Jl_Brady

    lee bradylee brady5 timmar sedan
  • All the people that for a split second hoped they could fly when he said “gravity is an illusion” 👇

    ConnorForTheSubsConnorForTheSubs5 timmar sedan
  • so g-force is wrong?

    alfonso daculloalfonso dacullo5 timmar sedan
  • *What if you're on the side of the earth that isn't currently being pushed by the Earth? Did you think of THAT???*

    Bonjour ZereBonjour Zere5 timmar sedan
  • I dont believe in flat earth but this video makes me wonder...

    ireton jeffireton jeff5 timmar sedan
  • *This is the story of how Albert Einstein justified suicide.*

    Bonjour ZereBonjour Zere5 timmar sedan
  • I was thinking if I can imagine Earth being a circle, we living on the circunference (not on the plane), the circle moving through time (timeline in perpendicular diretion to the circle plane), so Earth 2D moving through time and illusion of things falling due to time curving along the time direction. Is it possible to imagine a 2D world to be able to visualize how gravity works?

    Nilson RodriguesNilson Rodrigues5 timmar sedan
  • This video did not just broke the internet, it broke the Newtonian physics on Earth...

    Oscar HanzelyOscar Hanzely5 timmar sedan
  • What about gravitons

    callous21callous216 timmar sedan
  • Vsauce explaining the same thing: seworld.info/will/jpuY3b7FmYenknU/video Also very good.

    M GM G6 timmar sedan
  • Hold on... if this guy crashing into the planet is actually moving in a straight line in curved spacetime, and astronauts orbiting Earth in a circle are also moving in a straight line in curved spacetime, how come light jumps the rails of this curved spacetime and fails to orbit Earth in little circles? I've always understood that light bends slightly when passing by a massive star, and no doubt very slightly when passing by the Earth, and I've understood that this was due to the distortion of spacetime, but what we are talking about there is on a radically smaller scale of bending compared to the effect gravity has on ordinary physical objects. The Earth is not a black hole, where it can bend spacetime into circular orbits. I can appreciate that light is moving at a much higher speed than an orbiting spacecraft, but if the spacetime it travels through is already so sharply pre-bent, how can speed alone allow light to cut across lanes?

    FuzzybeanerizerFuzzybeanerizer6 timmar sedan
  • so we are always accelerating?

    Bright SpaceBright Space6 timmar sedan
  • If gravitational fields and forces don't exist, then observed gravitational waves from colliding black holes are simply "waves" in space time, and not waves in gravitational fields--and therefore the notion of finding theoretical gravitons is misguided. Yet many physicists continue to work on Grand Unification theories and devise experiments to detect gravitons--when it seems to me that, based on the very notion of perceived gravity as simply the bending of spacetime, it would suggest that General Relativity *specifically precludes* force/field/particle-based theories. Doesn't this just mean that physicists pursuing GUT research are wasting their time on a misunderstanding of GR? Or worse, they're "GR heretics"?

    demongo2007demongo20076 timmar sedan
    • More like those images are just made up nonsense

      Ying YangYing Yang6 timmar sedan
  • Fantastic video. Why are scientists still hunting for the "graviton" then?

    Scott EganScott Egan6 timmar sedan
    • $$$

      Ying YangYing Yang6 timmar sedan
  • You are teaching this wrong. From where did you learn this. You talk only about about the falling observer. By the principle of equivalence an observer in a inercial frame subjected to gravity will see the guy falling due a gravitational field to which he is subjected.

    Sergio MaiaSergio Maia6 timmar sedan
    • An observer on earth will see the light bending You are confused about frames.

      Sergio MaiaSergio Maia6 timmar sedan
  • So things that aren’t moving are actually accelerating and the things that are falling are stationary?

    jessejames1999jessejames19996 timmar sedan
  • So if we don’t use the correct framework of physics we would never approach our destination.

    jessejames1999jessejames19996 timmar sedan
  • If gravity is not a force then are there only 3 forces of nature?

    anthony mananthony man6 timmar sedan
  • So I am what’s holding me back?

    jessejames1999jessejames19996 timmar sedan
  • A straight path is not a straight path if you are on a curve that will run you into each other

    ryublueblankaryublueblanka6 timmar sedan
  • Albert Einstein knows nothing about physics or gravity. He copied the theory of relativity from a French physicist and said it was his theory. Type in youtube search:

    Ka HeKa He6 timmar sedan
  • If I felt weightless I'd be floating not falling like a sack of bricks

    ryublueblankaryublueblanka6 timmar sedan
  • The intro to this video would give the younger version of myself a panic attack with the fear of falling into space by making up down.

    jessejames1999jessejames19996 timmar sedan
  • Remember how people say: I'm too old for this sh*t? Well, I'm too dumb for this sh*t.

    Alejandro RodriguezAlejandro Rodriguez7 timmar sedan
  • how do orbits work then, if the earth is not expanding but it is then why do things stay in orbit and why don't distant orbiting objects crash into the planet like the iss, one could argue that its because its moving so fast around the planet ,but there is not energy being put into the system so this cant be the case. and why do inertial observers experience the expanding earth but the iss doesn't? how does interplanetary travel even work? the standard Newtonian theory is for more comprehendible, one would argue that the laws of physics don't and shouldn't conform to our perception of the universe, but maybe it should. maybe its better to understand the universe as we see it and most easily comprehend it. please answer, someone.

    Nolan JoslinNolan Joslin7 timmar sedan
    • @Ying Yang I know, but how then do things get on a strait line trough spacetime? why are the rules so different in "orbit" but not on earth the iss is only like 250km above us so why can they avoid this complicated expanding earth thing but we cant

      Nolan JoslinNolan Joslin5 timmar sedan
    • No such thing as orbits

      Ying YangYing Yang6 timmar sedan
    • and how does reentry work

      Nolan JoslinNolan Joslin6 timmar sedan
    • and if I cant travel in a geodesic why can the iss. In curved spacetime you have to accelerate just to remain stationary, how does this work

      Nolan JoslinNolan Joslin6 timmar sedan
  • Why has the charged particle test mentioned at the end of the video logistically not been possible yet?

    Bearrito42Bearrito427 timmar sedan
  • this is wrong because the earth is expanding. and everything else along with it including us which is the whole point of a relative view. point.

    george hincklegeorge hinckle7 timmar sedan
    • How is the Earth expanding?....getting bigger? How?

      Jeremy RiptonJeremy Ripton4 timmar sedan
  • So we are all Thor’s hammer... the universe just moves around us.

    Go away I have comments to makeGo away I have comments to make7 timmar sedan
  • This video is the perfect example why people need to go to school. Is there a part 2 to this video that actually proves that Gravity is not a force?

    worldofazerothworldofazeroth7 timmar sedan
  • Does the spacetime around me varies as my velocity varies?

    Haidar BazzounHaidar Bazzoun7 timmar sedan
  • Watched this video many times. Its a masterpiece..

    Vineet TalashiVineet Talashi7 timmar sedan
  • thanks for the video, didn't get a thing of what you explained

    arie bronsarie brons7 timmar sedan
  • Question: why are the orbits elliptical and not round.

    Alexander WerdichAlexander Werdich7 timmar sedan
  • Matter tells spacetime how to curve, Spacetime tells matter how to move. 🤯 yet?

    V MCV MC7 timmar sedan
  • I probably didn't understand this video completely, because despite the great explanation, it's kind of hard wrap my head around it. but does this explain why black holes are so immensely powerful? If gravity doesn't exist, what is it then.

    Thomas NonameThomas Noname7 timmar sedan
    • Extreme spacetime curvature. At the event horizon all geodesics point inwards.

      Narf WhalsNarf Whals7 timmar sedan
  • The son of Carl Sagan!

    TheokondakTheokondak8 timmar sedan
  • If the earth is pushing up at 9.8 meters squared and if objects don't fall but the earth moves up to meet it then why does the earth meet the feather and brick at the same time?

    david baileydavid bailey8 timmar sedan
    • @Narf Whals so the air molecules are slowing down the deceleration of the feather because it too is moving at that speed. So when the air pushes up on the bowling ball it has less effect on its deceleration. Basically the ball is losing its speeder quicker than the feather due to the air slowing down the feather decrease in speed from the original 1000 mph.

      david baileydavid bailey5 timmar sedan
    • @david bailey Not quite. When you jump you are still moving at earth's velocity. Just like you are still moving at the same velocity as the bus when you jump in a moving bus. You don't fall behind. But the earth is also accelerating the air and the air molecules each other. That is what creates air pressure and resistance. The air pushes up against the feather because it is being pushed by the earth.

      Narf WhalsNarf Whals6 timmar sedan
    • @Narf Whals just thought this right now, is this correct? So the earth moves at 1000 miles per hours. So objects on earth are moving at the same speed. When something falls it is no longer attached to the earth therefore no longer going earth's speed. The objects acceleration slows down based on air resistance, that's why when. The earth catches up to the objects they hit different because each object has a different speed...

      david baileydavid bailey6 timmar sedan
    • @Narf Whals if you drop a brick and a feather at the same time in a non vacume the brick hits the earth first , I guess because of air resistance..... But if it's the earth actually pushing up on everything and meeting the objects why would air resistance matter? Because when you drop the objects they are stationary right...so if we're all coming to it then it should hit both no matter the wieght. That's what I'm getting from the video. But I'm a idiot so eh.

      david baileydavid bailey7 timmar sedan
    • Of the object stand still and the earth moves to meet them, why wouldn't it hit them at the same time?

      Narf WhalsNarf Whals7 timmar sedan
  • So then everyone on the ISS is just taking the scenic route?

    Ichirou KoorinoIchirou Koorino8 timmar sedan
    • Actors

      Ying YangYing Yang6 timmar sedan
  • Bois, veritasium has joined the flat earthers squad

    Mir MohsinMir Mohsin8 timmar sedan
  • A future idea for a video; Why do sweets give off an electric charge when hit with a hammer? Destin tried to cover it but there appears to be no explanation!

    MarkMark8 timmar sedan
  • What is the name of this guy's twin brother?

    Mason GilbertMason Gilbert8 timmar sedan
  • Really unique

    Dheeraj KumarDheeraj Kumar8 timmar sedan
  • Is acceleration on an electron getting attracted to a positive charge also a deviation from a geodesic?

    Subhrodeep SahaSubhrodeep Saha8 timmar sedan
  • Sierz-Pauli action

    Ricardo MVRicardo MV8 timmar sedan
  • Plz do sauce. No sauce, no believ for many ppl

    XaverderschnitzelfanXaverderschnitzelfan8 timmar sedan
  • Gravity sucks.. 😂

    sikandar shahsikandar shah9 timmar sedan
  • Frick you riley!

    Anonymous Waffles • 9 years agoAnonymous Waffles • 9 years ago9 timmar sedan
  • so If a person is trying to jump from a 10storey bilding ....are we suppose to say ..please dont do it ...the earth will accelerate to you with g and you may suffer serious damage ?????? Really ..this will help that person from not jumping ..lets think twice

    Aarush ChhatriAarush Chhatri9 timmar sedan
  • One question I have is how you can use this in a static equilibrium equation? Of course in school you are taught sum of forces = 0 and you have to include gravitational force when summing the forces. I'll use a box sitting on a level surface as a example where m is mass, g is acceleration due to gravity and N is normal force. N-mg = 0 Here we treat gravity as a force, so how would this work if we only treat it as an acceleration? Would you just say the box is actually acceleration and put N = ma?

    Teach'EMTeach'EM9 timmar sedan
  • 10:52 Me change my "space coordinates" I need to accelerate but, why when I'm in out in space, with no influence of any massive bodies, not accelerating I'm still changing my coordinates? In theory I'm in a flat space-time.

    Vitor DruzianVitor Druzian9 timmar sedan
  • Well this would explain why we dont have a carrier particle for gravity

    Skin Is deliciousSkin Is delicious9 timmar sedan
  • Didn’t know gravity can be rhis exciting again

    Carlos Dala ICarlos Dala I9 timmar sedan
  • Something that is confusing to think about is the solar system is moving at 200 kilometres per second 🤯 presumably in a straight path toward a supermassive black hole

    McPhazerMcPhazer9 timmar sedan
  • I totally understand this

    Debraj RudraDebraj Rudra9 timmar sedan
  • Well, if anyone can devise a way to remove the illusion of gravity from everyone's life and experience, interplanetary travel, and possibly trans-light speed interstellar and intergalactic travel as well. Unfortunately, without the illusion of gravity many people would fall fatally to the ground.

    John WilsonJohn Wilson9 timmar sedan
  • Can you explain to people how a centrifugal force out in deep space without being near any body of mass, would NOT hold you down to the floor. If you jumped, you would move away from the floor. And despite its spinning, and not moving forward, there’s no gravity, or downward motion. So you would basically tumble violently as it moves around you while you float away in space. Everything around you is still without gravity and only the floor is spinning. But nothing to hold you against the rotation. Now if it was moving in addition to, then it would have a force to react upon and pull you down. Make sense?

    Jason HartsoeJason Hartsoe9 timmar sedan
  • I liked the idea of promotion videos being at the end...

    deiz007tyagideiz007tyagi9 timmar sedan
  • So if spacetime is curved and objects which are in an orbit of a planet are still travelling in a straight line then why does speed of the object alter with the orbit. For example, if space station turns its thrusters on then it will eventually fly out of orbit into outer space and if it slows down then it will fall back to earth which should not happen because the space time is curved around the planet and if an object is in stable orbit then it should remain on the same line. Why does the space rime change with change in object's speed??

    Chaitanya BhardwajChaitanya Bhardwaj9 timmar sedan
  • This video blowed up my brain

    Adam KurentAdam Kurent9 timmar sedan
  • I failed physics exam because of this video.

    Aleaf BanzaiAleaf Banzai9 timmar sedan
  • People do whatever it takes 5o get youtube views.... For money..

    Tony MindTony Mind9 timmar sedan
  • 2 types of mass are the same or else the inertial dampers on the USS Enterprise in Star Trek wouldn't function.

    HouseofRecordsTacomaHouseofRecordsTacoma10 timmar sedan
  • So ur saying Made in Heaven isn't possible?

    Afiq Zul-StarAfiq Zul-Star10 timmar sedan
  • I originally saw your ad for this video in which you said this was the best explanation of relativity that you’ve ever seen. I said to myself, “that’s cocky” haha so I watched it. I definitely will say I finally feel like I somewhat grasped it this time! Very good job! Thank you for the hard work in teaching this concept. One additional question I have that always confused me is how the speed of light works and time dilation. I think in light of this unique explanation, it would be good to hear how those concepts are addressed.

    Victor FragaVictor Fraga10 timmar sedan
  • Relativity is the single most beautiful human achievement in history!

    otiagomarquesotiagomarques10 timmar sedan
  • Greatest and simplest explaination ❤️

    Nasima KhanNasima Khan10 timmar sedan
  • Excellent. Could gravity be a "medium" we're in?

    GobbledygookGobbledygook10 timmar sedan
  • I listened very carefully and I cannot answer the final question. Derek's point is the free falling charge does NOT give off electromagnetic energy. Is a magnet less magnetic during freefall?

    Exist64Exist6410 timmar sedan
  • Gravity IS a force; Einstein is a FARCE and Nikola Tesla is the greatest inventor and genius of ALL TIMES !!!!! case closed

    ITILIIITILII10 timmar sedan
  • what you was saying about geodesics and two people starting a thousand miles apart walking towards the north pole like some force pulling them together it doesn't matter how far apart you start your journey if you both have the same destination point it is inevitable that you will reach the same point? Also I have a question which is; If in 1687 Newton had known about Electromagnetism, The forces of energy like the Electron and Resonance and electricity Ac and Dc and things like Ohms and Lenses Law and Flemming's L/hand rule would he not have used electromagnetism instead of Gravity?

    Gary DickinsonGary Dickinson10 timmar sedan
  • quanta of electromagnetism is photon a quanta of gravity is love gravity is a property of infinity ultimate relaity is infinity omnipresence newton and einstein describe the manifestation of this property of infinity in manifest material realm as a force . in the unmanifest infinity the omnipresence gravity is a field of love thats what god is love means

    stefan stossstefan stoss10 timmar sedan
  • Counterpoint, all mass has gravity (or curves spacetime). Scientists were able to measure the attraction between two bowling balls suspended in proximity. We have OBSERVABLE and REPEATABLE evidence that the two objects are pulled together with a constant force of km1m2/r^2 newtons. Even the atom of oxygen (atomic mass of 32/(6*10^23) grams) in the water molecule in the cytoplasm of a bloodcell in the smallest capillary of your big toe is exerting a gravitational force on every other atom that makes up your body. We can never NOT be under the "Curved spacetime" of another mass because we are not one single mass. Please remember that Einstein never left the planet. He also never fell off a roof. He died before we ever put an object in orbit around our planet. He died before we standardized how many atoms were in a mol.

    Metrion77Metrion7710 timmar sedan
  • God The Father. Pray this before voting; "Eternal Father, bathe my heart in the Truth. Assist me in voting the way You would. Help me to decide according to Your Divine Will." God The Father. (This coming election PLEASE Say this prayer before voting) Publicly September 22, 2020 ·PLEASE SAY THIS PRAYER BEFORE VOTING Share on FacebookTweet about this on Twitter Once again, I (Maureen) see a Great Flame that I have come to know as the Heart of God the Father. He says: "Children, prepare your hearts in advance as you go to vote in this* or any election. Pray ahead of time saying:" "Eternal Father, bathe my heart in the Truth. Assist me in voting the way You would. Help me to decide according to Your Divine Will." "If you pray this prayer from the heart, all the pretentious promises of the candidates will be seen for what they are. The Truth of the impact of your votes will be made clear. I desire very much that no one is tricked by the flurry of untruths surrounding this election, which are supported by mass media. This includes the results of certain polls."" "I am entrusting the Holy Angels with propagating this prayer quickly, as some ballots have already been cast." Read 2 Thessalonians 3:5+ May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God and to the steadfastness of Christ. + Scripture verses asked to be read by God the Father. (Please note: all Scripture given by Heaven refers to the Bible used by the visionary. Ignatius Press - Holy Bible - Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition.) * U.S. Presidential Election on November 3, 2020,, St. Thomas More* says: "Praise be to Jesus." (Ex-chancellor of England St Thomas More came to warn us about the fake DNC, don’t vote for it) "The New World Order is based upon lies. Proponents of this lie see the U.S. Constitution** as a threat to their agenda. Therefore, they go about trying to destroy national pride and promote anarchy. An agenda of the New World Order is to take down civil authority - the police - so that their own form of law and order can move in." "Children, this election*** is for or against the New World Order. Do not allow democracy - so long fought for - to be shredded. Spread this Truth." * Ex-chancellor of England beheaded by Henry VIII along with St. John Cardinal Fisher. He is the patron of adopted children, lawyers, civil servants, politicians, and difficult marriages. ** The Constitution of the United States - see: constitution.congress.gov/constitution/ *** U.S. Presidential election on Tuesday, November 3, 2020., ,,,,,,

    2coryman2coryman10 timmar sedan
  • 4:26 kira!!! (Death note ref)

    Samarth Singh ThakurSamarth Singh Thakur10 timmar sedan
  • 12:30 got beat by the old man lol

    Davi FagundesDavi Fagundes10 timmar sedan
  • This video is the best explanation of gravity I've ever seen. Keep up the good work.

    Brett CarrieBrett Carrie11 timmar sedan
  • Another issue: the problem of a charge radiating in curved spacetime is not "unexplored", it's solved, and the math is pretty clear. Overall I'd say this video is pretty misleading and I hope it will be retracted or corrected.

    John SmithJohn Smith11 timmar sedan
  • yawn

    Joseph D'BennidettoJoseph D'Bennidetto11 timmar sedan
  • ...so why does space/time distort around large objects (e.g., planets, stars, etc.)?

    Aquarion H2OAquarion H2O11 timmar sedan
  • And another issue, quite major: the visualization of curved spacetime around Earth is very wrong. It implies that if you look out into the direction of the velocity of the orbit of the International Space Station with a very powerful telescope, you will see the back of your head, because spacetime warps completely around Earth - this is wrong. This is obviously not the case and the ISS does not follow a geodesic around Earth, it simply accelerates very slowly because the curvature of spacetime is less "deep" than on the Earth's surface. If you shine a laser in the direction of the orbit, it will not wrap around Earth and come back from behind you. The geodesic does not curve all the way around the Earth.

    John SmithJohn Smith11 timmar sedan
  • At least you show the math. Most of these posts don't.

    tastyfrzz1tastyfrzz111 timmar sedan
  • Another, more minor, correction: general relativity has not passed "virtually all" empirical tests, it has passed ALL empirical tests. This is in contrast to, say, quantum mechanics, which suffers from the graviton problem, proton radius problem, and vacuum catastrophe. Unlike quantum mechanics which we know is empirically imperfect, general relativity is, as far as we know, empirically perfect.

    John SmithJohn Smith11 timmar sedan
  • The terminology in the video is inaccurate. There are no "inertial frames of reference" in general relativity.

    John SmithJohn Smith11 timmar sedan
  • I just feel bad for EdwardCurrent.

    MarcSylexMarcSylex11 timmar sedan
  • Wrong

    Rob DuncanRob Duncan11 timmar sedan
  • *QUESTION* Do photons not follow geodesics? If they don't, why not? If they do, why don't they follow the same path as a rocket following a geodesic curving towards a planet? A rocket would curve much more towards a planet than a photon, why is that if they both move along geodesics and never actually accelerate because of gravitation?

    eskil forsbergeskil forsberg11 timmar sedan
  • What the hell is this, then how can you explain the magnetic field (magnetosphere) that protects Earth from a solar storm which creates auroras? And why are we accelerating then down horizontally towards Earth if the Earth is moving on it's own axis and revolve around the sun counterclockwise then the motion of acceleration is not horizontal but diagonal. So, if I jump at atleast a 100 feet up a building, that would be enough to see if I fall horizontally or somehow diagonally. As the Earth moves not upwards but sideways then I would not fall directly just below the location where I jump off if I just stay still but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna hit the ground at 90° from where I jump off a 100 ft. up. Gravity and that acceleration you're talking about both exist.

    Natsui DragneelNatsui Dragneel11 timmar sedan
  • Free falling man: I don’t feel any weight. Tidal forces: Am I joke to you?

    GDarGDar11 timmar sedan
  • To explain it in simpler way: Imagine you and your friend (objects of same mass) are driving a car on different paths. You are driving on a curved path and your friend is driving on a straight path but distance from starting point to end is same for you both. Your friend is going to go with constant velocity and therefore if to reach at end point together you will have to accelerate as length of your path is longer due to curve Now according to general relativity heavy objects bend space time around them (consider it like bent sheet 6:10 but only that sheet is not on one side but all the sides) So in our example you are near a heavy object say earth and your friend is in outer space. So your path is stretched (i.e. longer). But you and your friend both are not moving in real for our analogy but you are near heavy object so not only space but even 'Time' is bent (i.e. stretched or slowed). So even if you are not moving you are accelerating from your friend's frame of reference (constant velocity your friend travelling with here is 0) The force for this acceleration is provided by Normal reaction. As a free falling body is not acted upon by Normal reaction it's state is essentially same as that of your friend (object in space with no acceleration) Only difference I see between a free falling object and object in space is free falling object is in the need of acceleration as it is in the curved space time to prevent collision

    Govind DaheGovind Dahe11 timmar sedan