When ya bother too look up a dot in the sky,... ya see a STAR / PLANET ? Whadda ya see? A single point of LIGHT. That STAR / PLANET,...one single DOT,...is sending/ REFLECTING its LIGHT via A 360 DEGREE SPHERICAL TRANSMITION,...for ALL TO SEE! & It's just a DOT,....all can see,...just a single ***** dot of light!,....POINT OF -- view. Have you never watched / wittnesing a cloud DISAAPPEAR 'n' WONDERED? POINT of VIEW,...HUBBLE - JWST - YOUR OWN TELESOCPE? GET BINOCULARS----- "look up,.." amaze yer-SELF

Almost as bad as that hair!!

The camera angles are a direct correlation between space time divided by the longitudical vertex of said optical point squared infinitely by sub atomic dense particles orbiting a quantum realm.

You don't understand anything you just nod your head up & down & say "Yes Daddy NASA...whatever you say Daddy NASA" 🤦‍♂️

@@David-cv1se I UNDERSTAND,...THE SPEED of LIGHT is;...... [ significantly } greater than 186,000 miles per SECOND! I UNDERSTAND --a light year is LESS THAN 6,000,000,000,000 MILES. I am woke / INTELLIGENT / EDUCATED,...... A retired TOOL / MAKER / MACHNIST. I hope for YER EXTENDED FAMILY's sake that at the very best,....>YOU< are more than a MERE AMBULNCE chaser!

The best thing you can do is 'sleep'.

If gravity is space-time rather than a force, does that mean everything above the ground can only fall if the support below any object that is above the ground, must FIRST be weakened or removed?

Watch the Thunderbolts Project for science instead of standard Model religion.

@@no36963 no

@@TheodoreRizzo Bent space clocks isn’t science

If you want some actual explanations, watch Eugene Khutoryansky and PBS Space Time. This channel is just pop-sci for the masses. This guy even failed to consider time in the GR part of the video, completely failing since space and time are inseparable. He was just talking about the geometry of space. There's a 4th dimension, and its because of the time-dimension that gravitational "attraction" even exists. For example, the Moon orbits the Earth not because Earth curves space like a weight on a sheet, but because gravitational time dilation. Time literally runs slower for the parts closer to Earth, and faster for those further from Earth. This causes gravitational attraction.

@@rykehuss3435 Nope. Gravity is just a molecular force. It’s not bent shapes😏

A great studio setup, a clever camera crew and a director that can multitask!

They're using bullet time. Just not very well.

Curving 4-dimensional model is not gravity. Physical answer is in "Time Matters eBook" pages 76-79: gravity is push force, from quantum fluctuations. Or to be more precise: difference in pushes, due to time difference, aka due to time dilation.

It keeps from cutting and trying to line up start overs……. Little short 7 second videos to splice together

What makes you suoppose he is a whatever-you-mean-by-but-have-no-idea " scientist"? Iwonder if those that use the word "quantum" as if it were a magician's wand know that it is the latin word for how_much; Whate next "Qnantuum butter-and-bread?- *Quantum* the vague -intimation-hhat-one-has-forgotten- something? *quantum* boredom *qunantum* being-as-credulous-as-an-imbecile-child? *Quantum* *quantim*? The high priests of the religion modernism-scientism know very well that they can trigger the weakness credulousnes in their fellow creatures and make the believe any-old-thing, if they preface whatever- it- is withe magic words " scientists -say", and sure enough: Baa baa baa they wil go if "scientists-say", it sinmply *must* be so, and could not possibly be otherwise. If course it never crosses their ovine minds that not everyone that claims to be " as scientisr" actually*Is* a scientist or if nor *Knows* anyhing-at - all. It suffices that you merely *say* you are "a scientist" and, sure enough, they will say " oh if you are "a scientist" whatever you say simple *must* be the case and cannot possibly be otherwise. Even beter if you wave your magic wand " Quantum*- that alone wil suffice. Tell them that " quantum" is merely, no more and no les that the Latin word for how much and it wil not make the slightest difference because " quantum is a *Mgic* word like 'scientist which simply means anyone-that-*Knows*. The fact that many soi-diant" scientiats " *Know* nothing-at-all, is neither here nor there.

Can't create either but both forced to react to each other when in a close vicinity

Or the future of humanity.

I found the constant changing of camera angles extremely annoying

Okay 👍

@@gowdsake7103 9:30 Not to mention, this guy changed his pants right it middle of teaching us?

Manipulation of gravity will usher in either the demise of humans or secure the propagation and legacy of our species for a millennia.

@robert punu read a book please

If gravity is space-time rather than a force, does that mean everything above the ground can only fall if the support below any object that is above the ground, must FIRST be weakened or removed?

It is both a theory and a law. The law of gravity calculates the amount of attraction while the theory describes why objects attract each other in the first place

Same here. I still think it sounds like bs.

Gravity is a measured effect, it is not theoretical, we can measure it and predict it and calculate it, what is theoretical is what causes that measured effect we know as gravity.

Emergent Inertial Gravity/ACCELEROMETER PHYSICS GRAVITY was introduced by James Carter in the year of 1971. He is alive and well and can be found on the Internet.

could you help me find a reason to dismiss a idea to unify gravity. an observable truth that dosent fit.

What makes you suppose there*are* any black holes- Just naturally credulous? If the idea of black holes were fully baked it would be obvious why there are *none*. It is clear to me that religion comes from the natural(whatever that means) passivity of mem(human beings/dreaming machines) ; they would not be so credulous were they not so passive and programmed or conditioned to be pasive by their maleficent invention that they call education. Moreover they are clearly not in the lest bit concerned by their pasivity. The true horror of the passivity is revealed by the fact that they*really_do* suppose there to be a democracy of truth known as the fallacy arumentim ad populum for with thre is a opithy saying from the1970's; there are seemingly ovine or grgious by nature. Hrdly ver o they question what they are * told*..... they are *that* passive- after eall it is so much easier to believe, which they do pasively mechanically(means choicelessly) automatically because that is how they are wound up or as-is-said educated.

No one still knows what causes gravity :)

Notice all guesswork there!

9:30 I got confused when this guy change his pants right in the middle teaching us?

Yeah , the old bowling ball on the trampoline warping spacetime just doesn't sell it for me.

Something tells me you shouldn't even worry about this question until you gain a lot more knowledge on the subject. Any good answer you receive you won't even understand anyway right? Otherwise you could just research it yourself rather than asking random youtubers.

@Marsh If you really are looking for a good video on gravity see (The Long Path to Understanding Gravity) by Wal Thornhill, excellent with plenty of references. Science that makes senses!

@@velikovskysghost thank you kind sir, you're a real one. I'm fixing to watch it tonight.

@@meltedmarshdaddy You're very welcome and I do hope you enjoy it. Wal is one of the most integral people I've even met.

@@meltedmarshdaddy keep yourself safe from pseudoscientific conmen.

@@velikovskysghost"Science which makes senses." More like pseudoscience which keeps contradicting itself.

Einstein was awarded honorary grants.

Yes, Einstein must have gotten his ideas from him

Actually there are some big philosophical leaps between them. Having some function in space (the codomain is just R) is a very different point of view than saying that space itself (the metric) is curved.

@@larscp nope he got them from inventions he read he worked for a patent office

@@onlythewise1 proof please

The top of this demolished building, using the French method where no explosives are used, falls completely off. But on WTC2 (the South Tower) the top starts to fall off, but then the rug is pulled out from under its feet and the top descends without falling completely off. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/l7qGi6tqybDOmIk.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rbiWo8t0sdq5hX0.html

Don’t be ridiculous. Gravity is not imaginary lines

@@neildown7231 But the twin towers accelerated to the ground, and that means while falling the towers had less weight force down than before they collapsed? Rocket man had zero weight while accelerating to the floor, so then any rate of acceleration should mean less weight until you hit the ground which is the rocket's floor? NIST WTC FAQ 31 says the towers fell in free fall. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jriiZM6SvbGmo4k.html

@robert punu GR is easily one of the dumbest ideas ever proposed. It blows my mind that people accept it

@robert punu General Relativity

Get a fish tank, get a round bobber. Now put the bobber in the center of the tank. Now the bobber is the blacksphere in the center of our galaxy. Now the water is space the top of the water is now the electromagnetic field plained out. So if you can keep the bobber spinning you would see the equator of the sphere has no effect it spins freely but if you add the electromagnetic field to the equator the area around the bobber would start to move the area around it. Put dye in the water to see effects. Have fun.

@@JamesHawkeKZfaq How?

“Unlike general relativity, the canonical momenta of ESGB theories are nonlinear in the extrinsic curvature. This has two main implications: (i) the ADM Hamiltonian is generically multivalued, and the associated Hamiltonian evolution is not predictable; (ii) the “d+1” equations of motion are quasilinear, and they may break down in strongly curved, highly dynamical regimes. “

So let's say we have a field U^a and another field, V^a, and for simplicity let's say they're the same U^a=V^a, how would you show that U_a=V_a?

We need something that can explain UFO's antigravity maneuvers. 👽🛀

@@Mindcroscope Maybe with a better understanding of quantum field Theory we will be able to artificially manipulate the expansion of space-time around a chosen object. If you could slow down the expansion of space in front of you the same way a gravitational field does, you would fall in that direction. It would not be the sudden movement you see UFOs do.

I see it as a distortion of space-time. With the highest concentration of distortion closer to the cause of said distortion and dissipating outwards.

Key point of the mind boggling Quantum Mechanics. As only information of particles make them behaved according to that, since last known event.

NO!

@@Drewteam88 Your answer doesn’t leave much room for negotiation, in a world of complete and total “uncertainty“.

@@robert_costello Consciousness is the soul, ie. the software computed into the brain(hard drive). All information goes out with the soul when the flesh body dies. In effect, yes I would say quantum mechanics is part of it, but so is everything else.

It's not.

I think they must have tiny mobiles.

Yep! Like it.....It Always amazes me that we accept the Invisible Force between magnets, and gravity! This Space Of powerful Nothings! And now we are becoming aware of “Nothing” being full of everything!? The majority of scientists seem stuck in an educational rut and will not reinvent what is old fashioned! “The field is everywhere! And this is Gravity?” Einstein Two.....required!

This is just my opinion from what I've gleamed. Everything vibrates, everything in this realm. Gravity can't vibrate unless it is a molecule. Probably, a quantum one, and is carried along by tachyons, neutrinos, protons, etc. I believe that as mass, which is compressed light, carries gravity in every particle on a subatomic quantum level (we aren't able to observe at this present time) the gravity particle is already present and working in conjunction with the electron particles. As the electromagnetic waves from two masses come into contact with eachother, the gravity and electron particles form convergence waves. In this union of forces, the information is traded as particles collide. I hope I explain the process enough for you to visualize the function. If you have a question ask away! Blessing!

@@Erythang808 mass is compressed light??? Man, you are far from real physics... You can't compress light, light is made of photons, and for photons, the Pauli exclusion principle is not working, it has to do with something called spin...

the force carriers go out in all directions but unless they meat up with another object they jus fizzle out

No, photons do not communicate the EM force, which is ascribed to virtual photons, but these are mathematical abstractions that show up in the perturbative description.

That's Right All In One😀

@@MrWhodatsay That was delightful to be sure, and I'd say 1,000,000,000 times more interesting than this talk!

It looks correct, but within our exclusive perspective, we can't find an inclusive solution to the infinite system of nature. Mathematics is the code version of a description. It can't give you conclusive result from an exclusive description.

@@HB-mn8lh Thank you for the feedback. The physicist was Edward Harrison from University of Massachusetts. The book was called Cosmology 1st addition. I can't find it. I makes every thing clear. Time is change in the 3 space dimensions. There is no river of time and no time travel. But time is still the 4th dimension because the 3 space dimensions move through it. The math has to work and I have no idea about math. Please make it work if you can. Or show it to someone who can make the math work. Again thank you for reading. I have been trying to get someone to look at this for years.

@@MrWhodatsay Time is change but we have to account for the false ideas. Memories make people think that the past still exists. Thinking about future makes us think time travel of possible.

@@MrWhodatsay What are you talking about. I am talking about gravity. inertia. change. and time. Colors are about light.

Thank you so much for your feedback! We truly pride ourselves on our professors and the depth of our content and are very glad you're enjoying our offerings. Thanks for being a fan!

Left and right brained idea has changed, We use both sides together. Hey, I am 74 and have read this upgraded idea so please realize as some guy named Asimov said, nothing so permanent as change.

Çok etkileyici bir yazı olmuş Griclcl ..... Dokuz şiddetinde deprem gibi... Bilimsel...edebi..epik..... romantik..tirajik..komik..yani yazının içinde ne ararsan var.. Yüz puan aldiniz

@@helensteely6890 beynin sagi solu yok......böyle mi dediniz. Sağ sol yoksa....güney kuzey de yok demektir....hiç bir şey yok demektir.... Ama ben varım...bakın bu yazıları yaziyorum.

The simplest approach read in Bob Lazar Cutting Edge: gravity = gradient in time dilation - not only gives straight solution to Vera Rubin and Hubble puzzles, but explains UFO stories and debunks dark matter.

And for my downfall

I blame atmospheric pressure, all that weight pressing down on me all the time.

A brilliant communicator of the complex

I'm addicted to pigger nussy 🤠

Don't forget Dan Lincoln from Fermilab. He is brilliant as well :)

Long Don is a fav of mine cept for his atheism.

It's one possibly but have lots of constraints given by observations

This is not a crazy idea and even many respected scientists think about it too. The general term for this is "modified gravity theory" and you'll find many papers and even some youtube videos about it. Happy thought experimenting!

No, there is no relationship whatsoever between the work of Laplace and GR.

@@kylelochlann5053 Why not..? Seems to me he was on the right path....

@@paulklee5790 For clarity we'll call the Laplace object a Dark Object (DO) and the GR object a black hole (BH). 1. The D.O. has a surface, the BH does not. 2. The D.O.has a physical radius r=2GM/c^2. A Schwarzschild BH event horizon has a Schwarzschild radius of r=2GM/c^2, but BH radial coordinates are not physical distances and a BH does not have a unique radius of any kind (it's observer dependent). 3. Laplace's D.O.has an escape velocity, a BH does not. Light and objects can be launched into space from below its surface. The escape velocity equal to light simply means that objects slower than this come back down and light is emitted into space but is redshifted to infinity at infinity. The BH interior spacetime is a causally disconnect region of spacetime, meaning, there are no causal curves that can extend into the exterior spacetime. 4. A D.O. is a dense ball of matter, a black hole is a vacuum spacetime (T_{ab}=0} and so is just empty space. 5. A BH has a singularity, a D.O.does not. 6. The interiors of each are basically opposites, e.g. the tidal forces in a D.O. go to zero at the center, a BH has no meaningful center, but the tidal force go to infinity as the radial coordinate decreases, etc. Then there is the absence of relativistic effects for a D.O. and entire conceptual frameworks of what gravity is, is completely different. A D.O. and BH are almost perfectly unrelated, if not opposites.

@@kylelochlann5053 thanks for your fulsome reply but what ‘on Earth’ is a Laplace Dark Object? I was thinking that Laplace’s ideas about fields removing the problem of ‘action at a distance’ might have lead him to consider whys in which the field might be distorted and how that was analogous to a gravity ‘force’... to a layman it doesn’t seem that far a jump.

@@paulklee5790 Oh! I must have zoned out during that part of Carroll's talk on the first play through. Laplace, along with John Michell, are well-known for having proposed a planet/star so dense that it had an escape velocity equal to the speed of light to which some people with no understanding of relativity claim is the reference to a black hole. Carroll is referring to Laplace's theory of gravity where gravity is a fluid flowing into every massive object and in Laplace's own words "we must suppose that the gravitating fluid has a velocity, in Laplace's own words "we suppose that the gravitating fluid must have a velocity of least hundreds of millions of times greater than light." Anyway, there is no resemblance to GR even if Laplace's idea bears a vague resemblance to Gullstrand-Painleve coordinates. Laplace's gravity is a decidedly non-metric theory of gravity (GR is the simplest case metric theory) where in GR gravitational effects are the result of nothing happening - it is just inertial motion in spacetime.

General relativity doesn't always work. That's why dark matter and dark energy were imagined. Because general relativity is unable to explain the motion of about 99.86% of the visible matter in the universe. So, general relativity doesn't always work.

@@BigNewGames Agreed in the literal sense. But then our best theories all have things they explain beautifully and things that seem to elude the scope of the theory. Relativity and QM, given their flaws, are still the most useful theories we have to frame our understanding of the universe. There are certainly things that relativity does not deal with too well, like the galactic rotation issue, for example. For me, though, the glaring issue is that breakdown at Planck length which sends our theoretical framework for the micro and the macro right into the weeds. I have begun to wonder, if we could solve that problem as the universe itself does, we'd have a tie between the two, which might make all manner of things more clear.

@@skyhorseprice6591 General relativity is far from being complete. Einstein tried for years to complete his equations and died before he could finish them. That's why his theory is unable to merge with QM and why it is unable to explain the motion of about 99.86% of the matter in the universe, my estimate. Ask any physicist or astrophysicist what's missing from general relativity and they will be clueless. They don't know what's missing or how to complete his equations. If they knew what was missing and were able to fix his equations then dark matter and dark energy would disappear. the reason why they show up as possibilities is because Einstein's equations come up short. I believe general relativity and QM will never be able to merge. I don't believe gravity exists at the quantum scale because it is a reaction, not an action. The same reason why gravity is weaker than electromagnetism or the strong nuclear force because it is a reaction to the other 2 forces, not an action or force.

Plank length is a unit of distance. Light speed is a unit of distance over time. Both are said to be universal constraints. Those two constraints are related by time. It seems possible that until and unless time can be quantified in terms of energy/mass, then the relationship between quantum and relativity observations at the micro and macro levels cannot be discerned.

@@gmarie701 I have an idea about this. If we look at particles *and* waves as distortions or twists in spacetime itself, we can actually visualize how space, time, mass, and gravitation are related. We know that gravity has a direct effect upon spacetime because of the atomic clock experiment; place one such clock at sea level & another in earth orbit. Calibrate both clocks to be synchronous to the highest degree possible. Observe the time record of each. Over that time record, the clock at sea level starts to fall behind the one in orbit because of spacetime dilation in a gravity well. Spacetime is literally stretched out the further/deeper we go into any gravity well. Why is this? Well, it's because mass bends spacetime. Why does mass bend spacetime? Because particles and waves are all the same thing- distortions or twists in spacetime. Imagine a large, perfectly flat and smooth tablecloth just floating before you. Now, put a bunch of little twists into the cloth. What would you see? You'd see the cloth being stretched into a curved shape that (roughly. This is an analogy, after all) that looks very much like the well known diagram of an unspecified ball of mass sinking into the middle of an increasingly distorted grid. The thing is, this distortion also affects *time,* which is never made clear. So the primary thing this does is, it answers the question, "why does mass affect spacetime and cause it to curve?" That answer is, "mass does not 'affect spacetime', *matter (mass) is COMPOSED OF SPACETIME THAT IS DISTORTED.* " What this does is reveal a universe that is energy based; matter arises from pure energy (spacetime), not the other way round. If this is so, we would then have a key to the long sought TOE.

Yes, a slinky will contract on its own, from tension, to it's original compressed state. As all springs will do, they will return to their original state. Once in their original state, they will remain there until a compression or expansion force (mechanical, heating, cooling, etc) is acted upon them, they will not expand or contract on their own. So, in order for this image of gravity to work, there must be an attracting and repelling force on both ends of the wave or in between both ends, these forces oscillating in unison with each other, one pulling and the other pushing at the same time. The closer one end gets to the opposite end, the force pulling is diminished and evolves into a repelling force. A wave, on the other hand, moves away from the energy source until it contacts resistance. The resistance absorbs some of the wave's energy as it changes direction. A wave will eventually loses all it's energy and expire; it is not perpetual unless another force is introduced to perpetuate the motion. Yeah, I still don't get it.........

No? Didn't Newton nail it?

two objects with mass attracts , as the distance between said objects increases the gravitational pull decreases. Does that explain "what is gravity"? Really? Great handle by the way.@@MrBollocks10

​@@MrBollocks10gravity is the resistance to being accelerated. The compression of atoms.

Easy. Everything is in space. Mass curves space. Things in space slide around depending on the curvature.

Yea it’s ultimately a phenomenon 🤷🏼‍♂️ god did it I think

We live in at least four dimensions, never forget TIME. The one humanity can't travel within. Cats of course Wrinkle time, LOL

As a physically 3-dimensional being I so agree with this. But have you ever tried drawing 3-dimensional space on a 2-dimensional LCD monitor? And then tried drawing a representation of a warping of spacetime as an additional dimension on top of that? I've seen an attempt at it and it just looks, well... different but not any better honestly. The problem you're having with understanding those drawings that seem to have a concept of up/down is simply because they've actually done that on purpose. They've deleted one of the 3 spatial dimensions and replaced it with your intuition of "things always fall down" so that they can depict as many spatial dimensions as possible (2) in the same drawing as the gravitational warping dimension (the up/down, which is the whole point of the drawing) and do it in a way that we can intuitively interpret. You're meant to interpret the "down" direction as "this is a trampoline with people standing here and here and notice how a ball therefore rolls in this left/right direction, just like gravity would do in real life if we could draw the full 3 dimensions with a 4th dimension of gravity warp". You're meant to imagine that we are in fact 2 dimensional beings living on a 2 dimensional universe that exists on the plane/surface of a god-like 3 dimensional trampoline and that the 3rd dimension that you see in the imagery is actually representing the gravitational curvature of spacetime because nobody has ever figured out how to draw ourselves as proper 3 dimensional beings being warped into a 4th dimension. It's confusing and it's bad but you can search youtube for videos on "flatland" and related to help fix the badness because you're right that it just doesn't make sense as presented if you're not already indoctrinated into the idea of deleting one or more spatial dimensions to fit them on a 2d/3d picture. Just wait until you get into "spacetime diagrams" where we delete all but one spatial dimension. Actually it turns out that in most of physics we only need to talk about one spatial dimension to demonstrate most concepts. Thank goodness for that because I still can't wrap my 3d brain around what a 4d tesseract actually looks like and I think anyone who can is necessarily a dimensional savant. As a side note, or perhaps the preceding was the side note and this was all you meant to ask: the reason planets don't fall into the Sun is the same reason that if you throw a baseball sideways it won't fall back to Earth. I mean you have to throw it a lot faster than 100 MPH, like, a LOT faster. Ignoring atmospheric drag, if you throw a ball over your neighbor's house at around 6 kilometers per second it will go so far that because the Earth isn't flat it will keep going around the globe and won't land until somewhere in China. If you throw it at EXACTLY (err, approximately) 8 kilometers per second (again, ignoring atmospheric drag) it will keep going around the globe in a perfect circle and smack you EXACTLY in the back of the head. Please don't do that; at that speed even a small baseball would obliterate the top half of your body due to kinetic energy. And if you throw it at some 12 kilometers per second, even if you're aiming only a hair over your neighbor's roof, it will leave Earth's gravity well and never return. It just so happens, after billions of years of planetary evolution, that Earth is traveling around the Sun at around 30 kilometers per second, which is right at the "smack you in the back of the head" perfect circle speed which is why Earth just keeps going round and round the Sun in a nearly perfect circle, never stopping because there's no atmospheric drag to slow us down. The thing that made Earth find our happy "back of the head" orbit is that all the other proto-planets either collided with proto-Earth or proto-Mars etc. or were ejected out at high velocities to never return to our solar system. The only planetary orbits that remain after 4 billion years of this billiard game are the orbits that are circular enough to not crash in to other planets. Or to say the same thing in another way: planets DO get pulled toward the Sun. Earth is pulled toward the Sun by an amount that exactly balances our 30 kilometer per second orbital speed, and so we keep going exactly in a circular orbit. If the Sun suddenly stopped pulling, we'd fly off never to return. And if Earth suddenly stopped our 30 kilometer per second orbital speed, we'd fall directly down into the Sun like an apple falls from a tree.

Lovely factoid. My contribution to science is that I am old enough to still remember Gimbels.

It was popular in the 90s after Soviet Union collapsed and Western imports started flooding the market. Mostly were plastic with rainbow color, but a few were made from Steel.

General Relativity is not wild guesswork. It is a wildly successful theory. In fact without General and Special Relativity corrections GPS would be off by 10s of miles per day and useless. Our clocks also could not be synchronized and the internet you used to post your comment and this video would not exist.

@@robertspence7766 Not GPS, again. That was debunked years ago. In the code there is nothing to do with it. Check.

@@peterclark6290 Geez. There is nothing to debunk regarding GPS corrections. Time runs at a different rate due to velocity difference between your device and the satellite as well as proximity to earth's gravity well. It is absolutely a feature required or GPS will not function. If someone "debunked" this it is 100% disinformation to support an agenda. It is so easy to validate.

@@robertspence7766 Find some GPS code and check it out. I have. Moving objects produce a temporary relativity: similar to combat pilots needing to lead their shots when using guns. That relativity requires everything to stay the same - which rarely happens. Hence the constants have be updated all the time. Any construction requires rock solid basic elements and the mere fact that we are here in a functioning Universe indicates a permanency of basic form. As I understand it there is only Energy and Space. The fundamental energy 'packets' can compound into atoms and from those to acids, alkalines, minerals, etc. Which can break down which indicates that the basic units are not Legoland uniform and some rare harmonic imbalance can undo the structure = Entropy. The energy packets, because they are Electro-Magnetic invoke a binary logic (attract/repel, etc). Every manifestation is based on that rock solid foundation. Ergo: Life and Intelligence are 'of the Universe' unless you prefer to see friendly, smiling faces up there. BTW Time is merely a by-product of the Cosmos not being static. It too is absolute. The Cosmos is Infinite and Time is Eternal.

@@peterclark6290 No, you haven't. Either you do not understand the correction or you are lying because it is what it is. There is no debating with the anti-science conspiracists. Do you teach physics for a national research laboratory? Well, I do. End of conversation.

I want to learn about what you said.

@@rw2452 I learned the basics of "Field Theory" from Ken Wheeler. It's the Aether, that is a word the phd's won't mention. That's why I use it as much as I can. Aether answers everything, Standard Model Science Fiction just makes up names for the same things, different energies. Aether has a Dielectric energy hyperboloid that rotates in one direction. It's really 2 vortices, an electron and a positron. Separated by the near infinite capacitance of the Inertial plane/Counterspace. Surrounded by Aether's Dielectric voidence field/Magnetism. That creates nodes from there coaxial circuit, transverse waves, that EM waves/Light propagate on. Light does not have a speed, Light has a rate of induction. Light is instantaneous/entangled, creating these nodes. Light's rate of induction is Magnetism's rate of node creation. The Universe began when Dielectric energy tunneled from the Inertial plane/Counterspace. Dielectric energy created Space to exist in. This is when Time began. Ken Wheeler and Eric Dollard. Dielectric energy is Terminate to Terminate, Inflation. Dielectric energy became it's own field of Dielectric voidence field/Magnetism. Magnetism gives Magnitude to the Universe. The Grand Expand/Big Bang. Dielectric energy and Magnetism transverse waves created the nodes, that EM waves/Light propagate on. Temporal into Spacial. And then some! Ha!! Ken Wheeler has over a thousand videos on "Platos Field Theory". Aether was believed in for thousands of years. It's against Einstein, So that's why! Ha!

@@gyro5d Thanks. I've heard of the Ether and was curious about it. Thanks again for the sources for me to look up👍👍Update: I know who your talking about now. The guy with the tattooed arms. I checked pout videos on magmatism. Very interesting.

What?

Gravity gets weaker from it's starting point the further you go out and while never vanishing altogether ot will eventually get overtaken by gravity fields from other celestial objects with stronger gravity fields the further you travel away from any given center of gravity. There are most certainly places on the universe far away enough from any center of gravity where it would hardly be bound toward any given object.

@@douche8980 I get that on a cosmic scale. But what does space bending have to do with watching an ant crawl up a blade of grass, defying the gravity of the entire planet?

@@ty9884 I've heard it explained as gravity being a much weaker force than the nuclear force that holds atoms together. On a grander scale, that "weaker force" holds the planets in their orbits, but it doesn't stop the ant from climbing or us humans moving against the gravitational pull.

@@JD-xd4sy I hear you and I agree. But I often hear guys saying gravity is not a force. It bends space.

No not exactly. There will be an additional Lense-Thirring effect at least, and perhaps other effects which are not yet understood.

So how about why objects weigh less at higher altitudes.. When objects weight less in denser mediums.

SpongeBob SquarePants. Forget everything you know and concentrate on fine dining. Here is the equation you need to understand. F=ma. Since a hammer and feather fall at the same rate in a vacuum, the mass contributes zero to the force. So it becomes F=0a. Anything times zero is zero. No external force is acting upon the apple. The apple doesn't fall, it stops accelerating. The laws of physics are the same in all frames. A car being towed and the cable snaps. What happens? The car is no longer being accelerated so it slows down. An object in motion stays in motion until acted upon by an outside force.. Force decreases with distance. The car is slowing down because of rolling resistance. The apple is slowing down because of air resistance.. The earth is spinning in a circle so your trajectory through space is curved. It's basically two runners on a track in the same lane one stops accelerating and is run into by the following runner who then accelerates the first runner. Since the air underneath the apple doesn't have enough force, the apple keeps slowing down as more runners come up from behind to accelerate it. In an infinite universe with everything spinning in circles, which direction is up? The direction with the most acceleration. The greater the radius, the more acceleration there is. Newton had it right with his Laws of Motion. With Acceleration as the frame of reference. But then went on to use mass as the frame of reference and physics as been using the wrong frame of reference ever since..Mass doesn't curve space. Motion curves space. Motion is acceleration. Newton's Laws of Motion perfectly explains 'gravity' when properly understood.

If you're asking about the compression and expansion of matter objects caused by gravitational waves, then yeah technically, propogating through matter should cause infinitesimal tidal forces within the object as its component particles react to suddenly being alternately closer and further away from each other. As I (barely) understand it, this should rob the object of some vanishingly small amount of angular momentum, but also heat it up a similarly tiny bit. I don't think gravitational waves have a push/pull effect with regards to an object's velocity, since the wave itself imparts no momentum to matter it moves through. Someone with a more accurate GW model in their head will hopefully be able to tell me how wrong I am and why.

I've got no GW model, whatever that is, but Gravitational Waves are misleading concepts. Newton's Gravity MOTION is a myth and has been Debunked. His equations works perfect with Energy, while the mythical Gravity get all the credits ! Based on MOTION, here are some of Earth Energy Activity's in MOTION, Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Dirt Devils, Earth Quakes, water spouts,ocean waves, lightening, thunder storms, jet stream, Tsunami, Earth's Core, the atmosphere, plant growth, photons rain, the drift of the spoken words, traveling sound of the bell, the wind, satellites, communication, birds and plane flights, cars in MOTION, and much more, including the human body internal and external MOTION, feel free everyone to prove me wrong, and physically connect Newton's Debunked Gravity MOTION with the above Activity's .

No such thing as empty space.

Both Einstein and Newtonian mechanics explain that the source of gravity as the local density of matter, energy, and momentum. Black holes are compact and have higher mass/energy densities. General Relativity does explain black holes.

Thanks

Any signal or information without mass moves at the speed of light. That's the velocity of cause and effect, and since light and gravity are both information about mass and energy, they move at the speed of light.