Inertia explains why I have a hard time getting off the couch since a body at rest wants to stay at rest.

As I'm seeking employment as a fact checker: yours was wrong with the 2010 Hawking radiation detection. it's believed it could have been Cerenkov radiation instead. Also it wasn't from a black hole obviously but from a complex prism-laser structure that may not really be the best representation of reality. It was also never followed up upon so it's also technically fringe science. It's a fringe science inception. Fringeception

13:37 That's not saying much about DARPA level of interest. 1.3m funding over 4 years is the DARPA equivalent of our idle google searching.

Dark matter and dark energy have always smacked of "Here there be monsters." I've always felt like they were just place holders until we finally understood the reality of the situation. I get the feeling that two hundred years from now, people will laugh at the concepts. As for saying QI is fringe science, well, plate tectonics was fringe science too for a hundred years.

Fact check: the Hawking radiation was not observed yet. It was just simulated in an analog lab system.

Bloody hell, my brain just fell outta my left ear . . and wow it's much smaller than I hoped . .

So glad that we have a 21st century answer for galactic gravitic anomalies. Dark matter/energy always seemed so desperate.

Thank you for being the one person (that I've come across) on the entire internet, that always makes 100 percent sense. Especially when it comes to topics like these.

I need one of those fact checkers. Edit: well one that doesn’t get so distracted.

Ok, ok... When can I have my Enterprise? 😐

I appreciate the fact that you try and explain these complex ideas for the non scientifically trained viewers. Keeping it as simple as possible with a refreshing dose of humor mixed in. THANK YOU!! - a new fan.

The Casimir effect helps your computer work. When you set up two plates really close together, the particles between the plates are forced to slow down and lose energy, creating a cooling effect in the plates. This is used to cool the microchips in your computer. It can only be done on a very small scale, but if you had a Casimir device the size of a piece of bread, it could air-condition your home for free. That is a very tall order, however, as manufacturing super-flat plates of that size is not possible right now.

"Fringe science" doesn't mean "pseudo-science," it just means outside of the mainstream interpretation of existing evidence, but still following accepted scientific practice.. Pseudo-science is something that presents itself as science but doesn't follow accepted practices for science inquiry - so using it with a real scientist is a seriously offensive slander.

0:35 there is strong evidence that many early cultures knew the world was round prior to Eratosthenes. He was just the first person to give a "scientific" and relatively accurate estimate of the earth's circumference.

I love your back ground beat that plays when you are explaining things. Perfect!

My favorite explanation for dark matter is the "Massive Gravity Theory" which states that the graviton actually has mass and therefore dark matter is huge amounts of gravity particles next to each other.

02:35 I knew we would see one of the clones again! =D

the ball wouldn't keep going up and up and up in space because there is no up in space ha got 'em .... i'll be leaving now

Ive watched this many times. Arguably one of your best. Not only positively enlightening, but incredibly entertaining to watch. Cheers! love your work mate 🤙💯

"The Rindler Horizon gets super complicated, Im not going to touch it with a 10 foot pole.." -Joe Scott

Fact check: erotosthenes calculateed the circumference of the earth in the 3rd century bc, not 100 bc. But you said that before you brought in your handsome fact checker.

Fact check: virtual particles are NOT when a particle/antipartice pair are created. When that happens, those are REAL particles. Virtual particles are instances where the math kinda needs a "particle" but which are doing impossible things for such a particle. PBS Spacetime did a terrific episode on this.

Great summary man! ...thank you :)

Really interesting. One of your best I ever saw. Accessible and mind blowing. Translating some hard stuff very well.

There’s something different about this channel. Idk what it’s just feels more personal and informal and I like it. Perfect mix of fun humor and facts. Keep up the good work👍🏻

The 'ruh' part of Professor's Unruh is pronounced 'roo' like in kangaroo.

VERY WELL composed video, compliments!! It has one hell of alot of ideas just how to break up complex material. Again well done!!

Just love your style, philosophy, inquisitiveness for outside the box, lost technology, science answers, all your research as well as your skill for awesome documentaries on such interesting topics. Great stuff as always 💜🧐

Joe, Quantized inertia might be a thing, but it's most definitely not a viable explanation for the collection of phenomena that lead astrophysicists to the conclusion of dark matter. McCulloch's claim on this point is an example of doing science backwards: Start with a pet theory, interpret an observation through a lens that assumes the correctness of the theory, then explain away or entirely ignore observations that are inconsistent with the theory. His ideas (at the very least in relation to dark matter) are largely ignored by mainstream scientists not because they are too controversial or because astrophysicists can't let go of dark matter as he would have people believe, but because they are wholly without merit and easily disproven. If galactic rotation rates were the only evidence for dark matter, QI would still be in the running as a possible explanation. There is, however, overwhelming and varied evidence against all modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND) species of explanations (of which QI is one) for the galactic rotation anomaly. Scientists DID at one time consider MOND theories to be viable and did not discard them simply out of a bias in favor of dark matter. If QI or another MOND theory were the true explanation, one would expect to see the same amount of dark matter (or the same amount of QI or MOND masquerading as dark matter, if you will) wherever we look in the universe. This is not at all the case. Most notably, there are recent discoveries of a few diffuse galaxies behaving as if they contain almost no dark matter. These could not exist if QI were the reason most galaxies don't fly apart. All galaxies would obey the same laws. But if matter and dark matter are two different, separable things, it's easy to imagine how their proportions might not be the same everywhere. Speaking of which.... The Bullet Cluster and others like it also rule out non-dark matter explanations. These are galaxy clusters that we observe in the aftermath of a "passthrough" collision. The galaxies pass through without touching each other, but the intergalactic gas collides, heats up, and is currently concentrated between the galaxy clusters. When you measure, using gravitational lensing effects, both the total mass of the entire complex, as well as the masses of the lobes (galaxies) and of the central gas, you find that most of the mass is concentrated in the galaxies. However, when taking inventory of the visible light matter, most of it lies in the central gas. This is exactly as dark matter regimes would predict (the dark matter halos stay with their galaxies, since dark matter doesn't interact with normal matter except gravitationally) and requires an alternative (and almost necessarily convoluted) explanation if you're using something like quantised inertia to explain the galactic rotation anomaly. Gravitation lensing can also be used to map the mass of non-colliding galaxies and clusters of galaxies. Again, the maps show massive halos surround and engulfing the visible matter in galaxies in a manner that is inconsistent with Dr. McCulloch's ideas and would therefore require an alternative (and almost necessarily convoluted) explanation if you're using something like quantised inertia to explain the galactic rotation anomaly. Large scale simulations done by supercomputers fed only the known laws of physics and the observed proportions of dark matter, regular matter, and dark energy yield results that are substantially similar to the observed universe, from the time of the CMB all the way up to the present day. They also simulate back to the Plank era (I think), but of course we don't have direct ovservations to match up with that. If dark matter doesn't exist one would expect these simulations to yield results that look nothing like the observed universe. Similarly, galaxy collisions can be modeled by supercomputers using the known laws of physics, dark matter, and ordinary matter (dark energy is not relevant on this scale). Again, the simulations match very well with observations. If dark matter did not exist, the simulations should not match observations. I am not a physicist and confess I lack the expertise to evaluate Dr. McCulloch's many other claims. As a scientifically literate layperson, I can, however, say that his body of work contains many fantastic claims made without the same equivocation or caution you would expect to hear from virtually any reputable person in any field, especially science, when discussing potentially game-changing ideas. The fact that the one claim he has made that falls within my realm of knowledge and understanding can be easily dismissed tells me the rest is most likely junk science and can be safely ignored until and unless the mainstream scientific community decides it has merit.

What about Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall? And there's another theory which explains galaxy rotation curve without dark matter, it calls "Metric dynamics" by Russian scientist Sergei Siparov (or "Anisotropic geometrodynamics", which is expansion of special and general relativity theories), which states (from the second name) that our space is in fact anisotropic. I am no expert either in these, so Joe, if you'll able to do video on that, it would be awesome.

Why do I watch stuff like this in the morning when my brain has hung up a sign in my head saying "Gone fishing"

Thank you Joe, that was hilarious and twice as much informative, you are awesome!

Let's hope that this QI theory will enable us to boldly go where no one has gone before, to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations... :) Perhaps we already have our Zefram Cochrane, and his real name is Mike McCulloch. ;)

no, Ernst Mach's name is NOT pronounced like 'mak' . It's a German name, pronounced exactly like 'Bach' -- as in Johann Sebastian Bach - just with an M.

Great job! Very interesting topic, I'd love to see a follow up on it in a year or two. It

Hi Joe, thank you for all of your videos, I really love them and I hope to see many more :) . I am a research physicist working in testing Quantum Field Theories in the presence of gravity so Hawking Radiation and Unruh effect is very important for my work. If I could just point out one thing, Hawking Radiation was not seen in 2010. What Belgiorno saw was analog effects that are mathematically similar to Black Hole Event Horizon effects far away from the Black Hole but the analogy breaks down for events closer. Belgiorno's experiments were impressive, but they have been greatly oversold.

Was that a "Chasing Amy" poster next to the fact checker?!

You should make a video clarifying the difference in science between: Law, Theory, and Hypothesis. You say theoretical when you mean hypothetical. Theory has predictive power and is supported by observation (gravity, evolution, etc.). An idea that is put forward, but not proven is a hypothesis. A law is a statement consistent with observation, but does not predict or explain.

Awesome video Joe, so much to learn.

Excellent explanations. Very much appreciated this videos as I was able to follow it, and it educated me on something I wasn't aware of.. also tying in things I thought I was aware of (hawking radiation) but really wasn't well enough informed about. Great context!

When 2 EM fields collide, i.e., come to a rest, the energy of the fields convert into pairs of particles. See law of conservation, energy cannot be destroyed. Thus the energy of the two fields colliding does not cancel out or destroyed but instead is converted into pairs of particles, see pair production theory. The unruh horizon 'radiation' hypothesis appears to be another example of pair production theory, see rendered images of the bow shock along the sun's Heliosphere. The casimir affect may have nothing to do with virtual particles but instead Fe in the metal may be causing a magnetic attraction between the two plates. I do like the fringe hypothesis. I've did the math on the movement of stars and galaxies and found that their movement was not related to their mass at all. In fact the correlation I discovered was with their age. It appears the older a galaxy or star is the faster speeds they reach, at a near perfect acceleration rate of about 1 mi/h increase every 10,000 years. Evidence which supports the Fringe hypothesis, seeing how the fringe hypothesis does not rely on the amount of mass in the star or galaxy either.

It's funny to think that the Earth being round was probably once considered fringe.

very entertaining yet informative, way to go young man :)

A blackhole's Event horizon is legit, even Chuck Norris broke into a sweat when he jumped out of it. Just glad he let the blackhole be.

Great video and funny as hell, Joe! I'm really not sure about QI but then again I'm not a theoretical physicist so it's more than out of my lane. I'd love it if it were true, but it'll take a lot more work to see if there's anything to it. Minor quip - Hawking radiation hasn't been observed. At least not conclusively, though there have been some interesting results by some researchers. All in all, brilliant job!

Great video as usual Joe! I LOVE that shirt too!

I'V had that happen on alpine skis. You explained it better than any lecture I've heard. I was calling it like a quantum.Bernoulli effect.

Science: can't find exotic dark matter. Hold my beer! Invents exotic radiation.

Joe is one of the funniest KZfaqrs around. I really appreciate this channel.

Reminds me of some thought experiments, one of which was trying to find the amount of space the was generated by creation/recombination of virtual particles that would mathematically equate the expansion of the universe

I love this channel! The videos aren't too bad either, thanks, Joe!!

Anything that disproves Dark Matter or comes up with a better explanation is good for me. Dark Matter comes across as a bit wishy-washy hand waving in the air explanation for something unexplained. Scientists are giving up too quickly when they give a reason of DM for something rather than really trying to find out the real cause.

Great info delivered greatly - thanks Joe

I love to humor you using your videos... 👍 thanks for the information

When Joe talked about Mach's principle I remembered reading about it as a kid in Dead Famous: Albert Einstein. Amazing book must read.

10:47 so it is true that when you throw an object, little angels go pushing it all the way, keeping the object's momentum. Renaissance guys were right.

Isn't the Rindler Horizon behind the observer or am I mistaken? Shouldn't the horizon be generated opposite the direction of acceleration?

Love all the knowledge and laughs you provide. 👍

Joe, I’ve gotta say, I always enjoy your videos, and you do a great job of explaining complicated subjects. But what I am most impressed by is your way with a camera! You are a Natural! I always feel like we are having a personal conversation, you inject the right amount of humor, and you are perfectly comfortable talking to millions in front of a camera! I honestly think you should have a gig with the Science Channel or Discovery! If you had an hour’s show on cable television each week I would never miss it, move over Neil Tyson! Sure he’s a real smart guy, but he doesn’t have your way with the camera. It truly is a great and rare talent, you deserve all the success coming your way!

Have you considered starting to include more interviews with experts on these topics?

5:04 your first prouncation of Mach was better :D.

You nailed it. Keep it up !!!!!!

Very interesting. And I liked your presentation.

My translator says you had Mach right the first time, but gargle on that ‘ch’ like a good German.

Quantized inertia is not a credible idea. There are at least three reasons for this: 1. If inertia is due to Unruh radiation _pressure,_ that means inertia is really due to a radiation _force_ impinging on an object. To calculate how an object will move when subjected to a force, we use Newton's second law F = ma and... oh, wait, if you substitute F = 0, a = 0 too, so F = ma _already contains any meaningful notion of inertia._ That means that McCulloch's claim is based on circular reasoning. 2. The motion of any object that accelerates for only a finite amount of time (such as all objects you've ever met in your life) _is not_ associated with a Rindler horizon. A Rindler horizon is just a fancy name for the idea that if you accelerate at a constant velocity, light rays coming from certain places in the universe will never catch up to you since you're getting so close to light speed. So _if you stop accelerating, the light can catch up to you and no horizon is there at all._ This pulls the carpet out from under quantized inertia which requires these "horizons" to do various things. 3. Even for objects that accelerate indefinitely, Unruh radiation doesn't work the same as normal radiation. In particular, it has zero energy density and exerts zero pressure. This means it fundamentally can't do what McCulloch wishes -- it can't push on anything at all. It's a very unintuitive quantum mechanical effect. I've actually discussed McCulloch's ideas when I made my second video discussing the emdrive (another pseudoscientific gadget), so it's a little disappointing to see their influence has grown since then.

This is the quality content that I'm subscribed for. This guy, is awesome!!!

It is certainly the beginning of a fascinating conversation.

It's 2019 and Ether is making a comeback. I swear, the more I know, the less I understand.

As a German, let me tell you that "Mach" is most definitely NOT pronounced as advocated in this video. That German "ch"-sound is just something English throats aren't usually able to do. Also, Hawking Radiation *_from black holes_* has never been observed contrary to what this video implies. For actual stellar black holes (or larger ones), Hawking radiation would be too miniscule for observation even if it were as close to us as the moon. There was a lab-experiment related to Hawking radiation, but it wasn't really about black holes.

Awesome video, as usual 😊

this video was great, well done mr scott

I asked my physics teacher about this, his response: *eyes roll* “I don’t get paid enough for this” EDIT: My teacher is quite knowledgeable in his subject, as you require a master degree in whatever you teach (Australia). He was being sarcastic. My intention wasn’t to fuel everyone’s tangent on hating on the education system.

"I call it a Hawking Hole!" ... Stephen Hawking, Futurama, season 2 episode 29

me too, me too this is one of my most favorite episodes Joe, thank you

Super interesting, thank you!

Great...that choir chord will now be stuck in my head all day. AHHH (clouds parting)

Calling it pseudoscience seems a bit harsh, it’s as pseudoscience as string theory. Theoretical physics is not pseudoscience. It may be wrong but it has at least been peer reviewed and is founded on mathematics, not whimsy. Love the channel but that was a cheap shot.

Hey Joe, love your channel. Where did you get that T shirt ?

To date....this is the only video of Joe's that I simply couldn't make it to the end of. After the third or fourth angel singing definition I was toast! Thanks Joe!

Hey Joe, Would you be able to do a video on Perovskite Solar Cells? I hear that they are quickly gaining efficiently and practically take a fraction of the energy and rare materials to create. The complication of building these cells could be described somewhere around a modern day version of making “stained glass”. Boasting around %20 efficiency already in under 6 years and how cheap and easy they are to make, no wonder people are excited about them!

Chasing Amy. Yes. You’re my new fave, Joe. 🤷🏼‍♂️

Excellent video!

Good topic for conversation.

Hi Joe, could QI explain the otherwise unexplained acceleration of Oumuamua? Or is this due to the occupants hanging a left at Sol?

Love the alter ego fact checker ! Keep him on ;] You could use him to give you "fun" facts or semi-related interesting facts about your main subject. It's an awesome idea, keep it up!

Nice job!

I just came up with an amazing challenge. Take a huge bong hit and then try and get through this entire video without having your mind wander off and having to rewatch sections of this to keep up with what he is describing.

Did Mach write an autobiography titled “iMac”?

Dark matter/dark energy... The magical pixie dust of theoretical physics.

Mr. Petrov and Mr. Scott ; two of my favorite personalities on You Tube. Hello, and good tidings to you both.

Mess up and we hold you to it. I did that bicycle wheel experiment, you were correct. I also have a super collider in the basement. OK, but I do have the wheel and spinny chair.

Thanks for the clear disclaimer. I hung out with an awesome astrophysicist for a couple of weeks on a cruise to Belize ... where he couldn't get away from me :) At one point he commented that your videos often convey inaccurate information. While this is true, I replied, Joe doesn't claim to be a physicist and says so clearly, so go easy on him. In another example, not related to your channel, a FermiLab research physicist told me he doesn't like going on the FermiLab public tours because he has an uncontrollable urge to interject corrections to what they say. So, even in great places like FermiLab, a presentation to the public is intended to inform as best as they can while not confusing the audience with detailed nuances they wouldn't comprehend anyway. Love your channel. Thanks!

U r not only hilarious but brilliant!! I actually understand wat u were talking about.....okay kinda👍🤙😉

Very interesting presentation. I was folding laundry and when you switch to yourself on your cell phone, I had to laugh. I really was paying attention though. I also know several people who would be on their phones ignoring you. Their loss. Again, awesome presentation. Thank you!

Hi Joe, what you said here about our atmosphere in regards to its air pressure being very specific, got me thinking, ultimately leaving me with a major dilemma. How is it possible to have a pressure system next to a vaccuum? I can't seem to work this out and, if I'm lucky, I'll see another awesome video of yours answering this question. On the other hand, a simple reply would be all I need if I may. Thanks joe or anyone else who cares to provide me w an answer.

You won't touch a Rindler Horizon with a 10 foot pole, but would you touch it with a quantized pole?

Also "unruh" means "unquiet" in german. So it's the perfect name for some weird kind of quantum vacuum radiation!

Great video. Only fact I could add is that the plates demonstrating the Casimir effect have to be conductive. Please do a vid on quantum redshift .

I really like the conversational nature of your videos, I wouldn't be offended if you were wrong about some stuff. I sort of think of it like you're a really interesting friend that I meet up with for drinks every once in a while and get to listen to your rant about your newest interest. Great vid as always :)

Thank you for yet another awesome video. :-D Such an interesting subject, and a real rabbit hole to jump down... I've always had a big problem with the idea of "dark matter". To me it seemed too much like an added complication to fudge our lack of understanding of what's really going on. Rather like the Earth-centric model of the solar system prior to Copernicus - how to get planetary motion right with the Earth at the middle? Epicycles! But that's just a fudge that doesn't further our understanding of what's really going on, for a certain value of "really". Sounds a bit like dark mater, eh? So "QI" could potentially solve that issue (along with many others) just like Copernicus did when he "rearranged" the solar system and improved our understanding... but then it all goes a bit runny: Much to my own disappointment it seems "dark matter" really is a thing, that we don't understand, and not necessarily an artifact of our incomplete understanding. eg: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lcuDZ8mrl6_TkXk.html So: It's worse than not having the understanding of how a thing works, we really don't have the faintest clue how to even identify that thing! And: By extension "QI" is probably wrong, for a given value of wrong, because one of it's primary predictions (no dark matter) falls down... *sigh* and so we are also, probably, no closer to understanding what inertia actually is! Still, science would be very boring indeed if we had all the answers... and we'll probably be very wrong if we ever come to that conclusion. PS Here's some more fringe ideas: Maybe the reason we can't bring relativity and quantum mechanics together is we are looking at the problem in the wrong way. eg: -Maybe the arrow of causality is in the opposite direction to the way we think it is. The universe isn't built up from the bottom but down from the top - think of a clay sculpture. You're pretty sure how it looks but the smaller the scale the harder it becomes to predict how the clay moves as you push it about. - Sound familiar? -Maybe, highly disappointingly, the reason we haven't been able to put quantum mechanics together with relativity is because the latter has no intrinsic rules of it's own but is just a description of an emergent behavior based on the quantum realm? (eg: Langton's ant) That would be disappointing because there is no math that can predict specific emergent behaviors and so we'll never be able to bring the two theories together. -Maybe string theory just doesn't go far enough. Rather than a universe with 11ish dimentions consider a universe with a functionally infinite number of tiny dimensions all in contact with each other. Now consider those dimensions as a continuum where those "closest to you" appear to have "size" and those "further away" have less "size". Say you perceive the "nearest" 3 or 4 as "space-time" and the further ones as relatively so small you perceive them as the fundamental building blocks of matter out of which everything seems to be made... building blocks that are all actually and permanently in contact? Now consider how that relates to quantum mechanics (*cough* entanglement for instance) and relativity, and how that may link the two. Bonus points: I wonder if there is a way to change your "perspective" as to which dimensions appear large and which appear small? Sorry, I do like to ramble.