Great good knowledge And very good work. God bless you and me too.Vijay Shankar Tiwary.

I guess it's pretty off topic but do anyone know a good site to stream new tv shows online ?

@Jaxton Abraham try FlixZone. Just search on google for it =)

Him

@@VijayShankar-mn3eq j

Hahahaha

Very good teacher

I agree. I understand it all.

Wow, thank you!

He blew your mind with smoke and mirrors.

Ism

He doesn't know... He is just another Nasa scientist!

Thank you so much! View all my Lessons and Courses! Visit: www.MathTutorDVD.com

I appreciate that!

I really appreciate it! Jason, MathAndScience.com

Wow thanks!

@@MathAndScience UNDERSTANDING HOW AND WHY E=MC2 IS CLEARLY PROVEN TO CONSTITUTE F=MA ON BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: C2 can represent a dimension, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The sky is blue, AND the Earth is ALSO BLUE. (E=MC2 IS F=ma.) Consider what is THE EYE. LOOK at what is the black space of THE EYE. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS TIME DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that E=MC2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. INDEED, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand. The Earth AND the Sun are CLEARLY E=MC2 AND F=ma IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. OVERLAY what is the EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH !!!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light (c); AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; AS E=MC2 IS F=ma ON BALANCE. NOW, consider what is THE EARTH (A PLANET). Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, AS E=MC2 IS F=ma. It all CLEARLY makes perfect sense. Consider c. Great !!!! By Frank DiMeglio

Glad you enjoyed it!

Thanks so much!

You've hit the nail on the head on the weakness of this presentation. He says things like "...the object is _trying to move_ and..." and I'm like "yeah, is it?" You can curve space/time all you want and that's great. You've got your bowling ball that nobody pushed, dropped, threw, or pulled. So that sucker just gonna stay there. It ain't going nowhere, curves, world-lines, geodesics, and the whole nine yards be damned. They're like window-dressing. This makes Newtonian 'force' _easier_ to understand, irrespective of its 'spooky-action-at-a-distance'. Newton: The highway is straight. Einstein: Nope, it's got a curve in it, and by the way your clock is going to run funny too. But Newton's gravity puts an engine in the car. _That is what's missing from 90% of these 'explanations', math or no math_ .

@@-danR After giving this some more thought after I made the post, what settled my mind regarding this, was to realise that everything in the universe is in a state of motion. Therefore, when holding an object, both you and the object would appear to be at rest relative to the earth, but as soon as you let it go, that initial motion would cause the object to travel through the curved space, which leads to the surface of the earth, but it would to you to fall vertically, since you and it are both moving through space. That's my understanding of it.

@@shango6164 bro can u tell me why does gravity decreases on mountains(not Newton one I am asking about einstine's gravity)? plz answer my question And also why does gravity become zero at Centre of earth(einstine gravity)

By that logic, that begs the question of why isn't the Earth expanding, in order for it to be accelerating upward in all directions simultaneously?

@@carultch Well Carl it should be obvious that you don't' perceive the outward acceleration because your moving with the earth acceleration. It's like no different inside a moving car when your moving the same speed as the object it's perceived as a frozen inertial frame for you and when the car accelerates when your in contact you feel the pressure in the seat. As for earth you feel the pressure/weight from the ground. I have a feeling your also confused of why the earth doesn't disintegrate as of that you have to intuitively realize the space-time expansion originates from the core outwards, strongest at the core as indicates by the internal pressures of the earth and decreases towards the outer layers. That's the nature of why it doesn't fly apart that way.

So glad!

That makes no sense..

Many thanks

You're most welcome

Thanks!

You can’t travel faster than the speed of light.

Ok, so to rephrase your question: An object is falling to a planet, and then all of a sudden, the planet ceases to exist. Let's apply numbers to this. Assume a uniform 10 m/s^2 gravitational field. Suppose the object falls from rest at 400 km to 200 km, and the planet ceases to exist when the object is at 200 km. In this distance, the object gains a speed from 0 to 63 m/s. The object is 200 km away from the planet, so it takes 667 nanoseconds for the object to "learn" about the planet ceasing to exist. The object continues accelerating during this time. Once the object "learns" that the planet ceased to exist, the gravitational field will abruptly drop to zero. The object will continue at a constant speed thereafter, with all the speed it initially gained.

Using Einstein's theory of gravity to explain the tides, is like using a micrometer to rip-cut a 2x4 in half. Sure you can do it, but it is overkill on the precision you really need. Newtonian gravitation is sufficient for explaining the tides, which is the basis of most explanations of the tides that you'll find. From that point, you just need to show how Newtonian gravity in general, is a simplified case of Einstein's theory of gravity, where gravitational fields are moderate and speeds are insignificant fractions of light speed.

I hear what you are saying and it is a truly weird concept, but I encourage you to learn more. Time is indeed just a measurement, but the flow of time, the spacing of the ticks of time, is NOT a constant thing. That is the mind blowing thing. Time flow changes depending on gravity and also on speed. The "flatness" of space also changes depending on gravity. We have measured both of these thing experimentally very precisely. Jason

@@MathAndScience Thanks for the reply, I'm always learning and always questioning what I learn. I do think alot . The flow of time and spacing of ticks ,I think seems to be nothing more than measuring the instrument that measures time if we alter its speed. I think we certainly need to be inquisitive about the things we don't understand. Gravity and speed is probably where we should look. I think that will close the door on what it is and open new ones. Thanks again for the reply.

Wish i had seen this during my college days.

Lol yeah I hear ya. For the most part, in physics we all use SI.

@@MathAndScience Wow, that was fast reply :) Yeah I saw that you use mostly SI units in the calculations but I was curious if there is anything said to young people that it would be much less inconsistency in the world that USA will finally transition to metric. You already use units like Volts, Watts etc in daily life - those units are based on kilogram, meter. Why have so many units in daily life for simple distance? Miles, nautical miles, feets, inches, yards. Usually when I talked with Americans they are really proud that they have Imperial System and they don't really want to even listen to arguments that it would simplify a lot of things. The physics class in school might be the place were the minds set might be changed. I know that for daily life Imperial is as good as metric then you learn it as a kid but metric is just much more consistent + entire world is using it except America :)

@@rfly-fpv Believe me if I were in charge it would be 100% metric. In my education, all physics, chemistry, and engineering are all 100% SI units. In some engineering classes some imperial units still hang on but that is because a lot of machinery in real life still uses some English units. I think the people you talk to who are proud of English units are probably not in science or engineering fields. One day those old units will die out! Take care, Jason

@@rfly-fpv Americans do learn the metric system in math and science class. I don't know of a single teacher who has outright refused to teach what kilograms and meters are. It's usually the other way around, where a teacher insists on avoiding the US customary system in their class, in favor of keeping the class in SI. There may be individual students who forget what meters, kilograms and SI prefixes are, ten years after they graduate, and only are accustomed to thinking in feet/inches/miles, but they certainly are exposed to the knowledge of the fact that these units exist, and have done calculations with them in school.

4u2nvinmtl it is the invisible curving of space and time that we perceive as gravity.

@@MathAndScience Surely we must be able to take advantage of this curvature? I am trying to grasp how curned space is on the surface of Earth (i.e. boxes of "space time" stretched to a sword shape being dragged/compressed inwards at 9.8m/s² - at the surface). I am also wondering when/how the space that gets curved by Earth uncurves (does it stay curved after the earth is gone)? Could that curvature information be the dark energy i(f spacetime stays curved)? What about objects that follow the same path in space year after year (stationary stars in non-spiral cluster galaxies), does the curvature of space get more pronounced with each pass of an object? Sorry I just have so many questions on this subject, thank you for your time!

9.8 m/s is the speed after 1 second when an object falls from rest. 9.8 m/s^2 refers to a rate of change in speed (more specifically velocity), of 9.8 m/s every second. So it starts at rest, the next second its speed is 9.8 m/s. Then 2 seconds after release, its speed is 19.6 m/s. 3 seconds after release, and its speed is 29.4 m/s. And so forth. The speed keeps increasing until either air drag becomes significant, or it hits an object and ends its time in free fall. Gravity is an acceleration, rather than a velocity. If your falling speed were continuously 9.8 m/s as you fell from rest, you would be able to jump from any height and survive, as that would be no different than crashing in to a wall at the speed of a novice cyclist (25 mph or 40 km/hr). That's about the speed you'll hit the ground at, if you jump from a balcony that is just one level above the ground. Most falls from that height will injure you, but not kill you. However, you can't survive a fall from a lot higher than that, because the terminal speed of a person falling without a parachute is a lot greater than 9.8 m/s. It is about 50 m/s.