The idea of mixing the lecture with Meditation was amazing while explaining Gravity was one of the most creative ways to explain something. She is amazing.

That was a beautiful lecture, thank you Dr. Dowker. Would love to hear more from you about the new theories you are working on. Such a clear presentation of the difference between Newton's view of gravity and that of Einstein ! I am a school level Physics teacher in India and am going to use this. Thank you.

Her careful pace and deliberate selection of words allowed her message to "sink in." Her intention was to see that I understood complex ideas rather than impress me with her brilliance. I did learn and at the same time I learned she is brilliant. I will look for more lessons from Fay Dowker. What an honest teacher. Her ego never got in the way of learning. Bravo! We need more of her.

Finally, someone who understands the subject.

Dr Dowker, Thank you for your fascinating lecture. Absolutely riveting stuff. I didn't get every point you were making so I will be taking several goes at seeing how far my understanding can be expanded. Thanks again.

Thank you Ms. Dowker for this enlightening lecture. I'm one step closer to understanding GR and gravity then i was before.

I fucking love this channel

Obviously the lecture itself was good...but Its the mention & encouragement of the use of meditative/reflective/original thinking techniques by the professor that i found really useful not just here but in general as a tool to think 'out of the box'...thank you!

Leonardo da Vinci ( 1452 - 1519 ) said that objects fall to the centre of the Earth. Not just that objects fall to the Earth but that object fall to the centre of the Earth, and he said this before Galileo ( 1564 - 1642 ) and Newton ( 1642 - 1727 ). It was a ground-breaking piece of insight!

Thank you, Fay, for such an illuminating lecture on General Relativity, presented so carefully. I even learnt something about meditation!

Excellent lecture Professor Fowker. Very easy to follow and the material is very relevant and important to the story of spacetime

Leonardo da Vinci ( 1452 - 1519 ) said that objects fall to the centre of the Earth, not just that objects fall to Earth but that they fall to the centre of the Earth, and it was before Galileo ( 1564 - 1642 ) and before Newton ( 1642 - 1727 ). It was a ground-breaking piece of thinking!

Very clear and relaxing lecture :)

Truly the most concise & inspiring speech, thank you

Great talk. I actually visualised complicated theory's that previously I had struggled with. Basically: there are no forces between objects only the curvature of space time that they make. The changing of space time by an object acts apon other objects instantaneously. The speed of light remains constant and is independent of space time. Thanks

Fascinating and engaging talk;made more accessible by the very talented Ms Dowker. Wait to you hear her thoughts and understanding on "causal set theory!" Incidentally, the graphics and overheads are very well designed.

Such a calm and clear presentation! I really appreciate it! Great done Prof. Dowker! I wish I had had my physics lectures with this woman... instead extravert blackboard animal mine lecturer was.

My subjective reaction: There is something intuitively correct about the idea of new grains of space time popping into existence. It is a pleasing and somehow liberating idea.

Brilliantly explained. I learned a lot. Thanks

One of the best lectures I have seen on the subject. Fay succeed to explain very complicated issues in a simplistic way - and thats very hard and tricky ! Well done.

This was great. Loved her meditation on not feeling gravity but only the normal force to introduce the value of Einstein

As a freediving instructor, I never ever suspected that teaching the breathing and relaxation techniques for freediving I teach the special relativity theory... nice to know

I found that the meditation part was helpful. Remember that it isn't meant to confirm the theory, it's meant to support the conjecture that General Relativity is more in line with experience--which isn't exactly an empirical claim anyway. However there is plenty of good evidence which shows that our active or fast thinking mechanisms often make broad generalizations about what we are experience--if a little reflective thinking can get me to focus just on what I'm experiencing and not my interpretation of what I'm experiencing, then great.

What a wonderful, thoughtful, and entertaining lecture. You don't often come across a teacher both so smart and engaging.

this is golden.

How does mass actually act on space time and warp it ? I understand that is what is happening but I never hear it explained.

Boom! There was a brain explosion when she said there's no force of gravity on the body. Body just follows the curvature. It's just because space-time is curved. But in Newtonian mechanics we conveniently use force of gravity for that effect.

Hey! It's my math analysis lecturer...

Excellent! Thank you very much. Carlo Rovelli explanation says that there is no time at all: it´s all a comparison of movement. I found that notion useful to understand "space time" (taking away time). The movement of anything is affected by the space in where it takes place.

"Try to become aware of the sensations in and on your bottom". Will do miss thanks.

Great talk. One correction I thought Einstein happiest thought was his thought experiment where he managed a man falling in an elevator and deduced he would not know the difference between gravity and deceleration/acceleration.

Absolutely well done and definitely keep it up!!! 👍👍👍👍👍

23:50 Force without force. Infinite gravity from nothing - a gravitational field composed of nothing made of 'space time itself' which is made of nothing with infinite force but it's not force because if gravity was a force than the gravitational field of nothing has infinite potential. Circular and paradoxical. General Relativity.

Whatever you observe is past What you realise is present What you anticipate is future.

The amount of armchair experts on the wrong end of the dunning-kruger curve or just complete crackpots that come out in these fascinating video series comments sections can be so depressing.

if some region of spacetime is curved, what is it curved in?ie, what is the reference frame that we consider to be straight?

Let me repeat.. Wouldn't it be bothersome if all Mass were repulsive including the mass of Near-Vacuum, "That's right no such thing as a magical attraction" and what's more the more energetic the mass the more repulsive it would be, Which would mean the Near-Vacuum would actually be the most repulsive as its ratio of Energy to Mass would have it as the most energetic, it's the only "constituent" or "Matter" supporting Maximum Velocity, which BTW is faster than the local speed of light Eg: "Our location within a Galaxy" And yes I treat Near-vacuum as matter, a highly energetic mass with near to zero density as it hasn't experienced fusion, a media that makes up all atoms. The fact is, Near-Vacuums repulsion is responsible for Fusion, and for that matter the accumulation of all less energetic matter, but that becomes only apparent if one understands how Energy is stored or converted to Mass via "opposing velocities being cancelled out", Which basically means the Near-Vacuums accelerating expansion must expand into all the newly created spaces left over after the fusion of atoms. So yeah.. Does that accelerating expansion sound suspiciously like anything else you may have heard about? Could it be that simple? Mind you this would mean the Entire Universe is actually a wave Function rather than some crazy Big-Bang Theory, thus no need to refer to contradictory terms such as a zero point in time etc. And what about that accelerating inward momentum as fusion occurs? What would that force be? Repulsive or Attractive? The ignorant see it as some magical attraction, Whilst those of us who clearly understand Force, General Relativity and Mass/Energy must also clearly understand the mechanics, in fact we have no need to rely on Dark Matter and Dark Energy to explain a Galaxies physics, as those terms are only for morons who simply don't understand the basic physics, and more than likely are just bleeping like sheep lost in a wash of theoretical Mathematics. Here's another thought, what if the Universe were Finite? It would make perfect sense, because once EVERYTHING is quantified we have nothing left, Only then can we treat Everything as a single closed system (The Universe=1), Everything sums up to a single closed Universe, ergo all quanta/s would then have to be a percentage or fraction of 1 and thus if we are to mathematically prove expansion, Some quanta would need to accrue whilst another quanta or set of quanta's reciprocate, Put simply it just needs us to work with Mass/Energy or if you wish Space-Time right down to the Quantum level. But only if we treat all space as matter, a ratio of Mass/Energy, only then will it make so much more sense, and this would be right down to the quantum level, Granted working with this simplistic model, we don't have the luxury of the current disparity at the Quantum level like main stream has, So unfortunately, we may need to fudge some figures into this model so it too may have the current disparity, but until someone knows what those figures need to be, Then this is how I understand the universe to be..

Newton would laugh at Einstein’s light speed limit because earth would eventually swing outside the solar system when gravity takes 8 more minutes to reach earth. That nothing moves faster than speed of light is a declaration but laws of nature. The reason why you are reading this message safely on earth is because gravity is instantaneous that is another reason suggesting that Einstein is a daydreamer far from being a practical physicists.

Ms. Fay Dowker... what a Beautiful Woman with a Beautiful Mind! I love her voice, she should be the new Voice of Siri and I would switch to Apple's iOS immediately :)... BUT I Digress... I have been obsessed with Quantum Physics since my 10th grade Science Project on Light as a Particle versus a Wave using a Medical Electron Accelerator my father had access to as Chief of Vascular & Interventional Radiology... CHEERS RI :) !

I propose that both Newton and Einstein were right. Its just that attraction between 2 large bodies is caused by the sub atomic particles. When they are condensed into one large body the force becomes intense.

Can someone explain to me why: over the last 50 years of studying black holes, we learned that the clock slows down as you approach the event horizon (go deeper into the gravity well). But nobody has proposed that there could be higher gravity potential energy "planes" or "dimensions" where the clock runs faster. Like a skyscraper where the event horizon is in the basement, we are in the first floor. The clock runs faster on the second floor, so that spaceships can move faster on the second gravitational floor or dimension. Maybe you have to get to the 50th gravity floor, where the clock runs 50x as fast, before you can think about using the 50th floor for interstellar travel.

Interesting hypothesis by Rafael Sorkin. Could this explain entropy?

I love listening to her,

I like her she's holding back a lot in some of her interviews

wow I love her clarity!!!

If an object is in a range of gravitational force, where the force is still in reach of its own arm, then the force act as a magnetic field, in a sense, where the sign of force is already glued to the object. This can be envisioned from the demonstration that the scientist, Ms. Dowker, performed during her lecture. Thus, the sign of change of gravitational force due to change of distance between an astronaut and the earth doesn’t relate to the case where the special relativity may be concerned, because the gravitational force, in another words, can be considered as gravitational field where the signal of the force doesn’t have to travel; the force already and always resides in its own criteria. I’m simply saying that the 'Newtonian gravitational force' doesn’t seem to contradict to the Special Relativity.

Assuming a circular pattern of the cosmos they form what are called circular numbers. The concept of circular numbers arise from right angle triangles. Any triangle can be split into two right angle triangles. So wave nature of particles spread. Calculating the spread gives the numbers 1 +2+3+4+5+.... = -1/12 . Twice is 24. So inverse log is ten power 240 is the micrograins possible.

I have been studying gravity on my own out of my own interest and curiosity for 7 years now. 90% of the videos on gravity do not properly explain it. There are some videos that explain it better than others but even those videos do not properly explain it. It amazes me how many of these videos just explain Einstein's view of "curved spacetime" but they do not explain HOW Einstein came to this idea. They just show you a picture of a trampoline with a ball in it and tell you that's what's going on. 7 years of my own study has got me to learn things that aren't mentioned in 90% of the videos on gravity. These videos are meant to simplify gravity for the public. For me, they did not simplify anything, they raised more questions than they answered. It has taken me 7 god damn years of casual study (my most intense study has been since 2015-2017) to sift through all the bs and come to some real answers. These videos are just meant to dumb down gravity and feed it to the public than to explain what's really going on.

I don't understand why there wouldn't be an universal 'now'. I would think that it's possible to take a snapshot of the universe, which requires that universal now moment. For us, observers on Earth, the now on Alpha Centauri is not what we observe happening there at the moment, but what we observe after 4 years, once the information from the same now moment has reached us. The talk was wonderful. I have to rethink the whole concept of spacetime. According to this talk, spacetime cancels the concept of gravity, in the traditional way. That would make a whole lot of physics calculations way different in the gravity dip, like Earth, compared to the open space, away from the gravity centres?

I needed this after watching Flat Earth videos.

I must have one of Newton's laws stuck in my head...the one about an object at rest remaining at rest, etc...because I cannot believe the dropped object moves without a force acting upon it. I did not stay with her when she answered the question about the dropped microphone. I would enjoy hearing a more detailed explanation of that portion.

i find it very hard to understand the concept of the curviture of spacetime in a 2 dimensional space like in the picture around 25:00 . Im wondering what the spacetime curviture would look like in 3D drawing. Lets say you could draw that dip in spacetime by earth from every imaginable angle, wouldnt they eventually cancel eachother out?

Great Professor, 🎓

Me having difficulty in understanding how a curved surface forces an object to go inward particularly in the absence of a pushing or pulling force. And when we come on the earth How this is related to an event when an object fells down from a bed to the floor. Why??

June 15, 2018: 1) The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands. Psalm 19:1; and 2) Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, and marked off the heavens by the span, and calculated the dust of the earth by the measure, and weighed the mountains in a balance and the hills in a pair of scales? Isaiah 40:12

Now, objects responding to a curvature in spacetime would experience a change in direction if they are already in motion, but if you place an object at rest along the curvature of spacetime, and there is no force to motivate said object in one direction or another, this really does not explain why an object at rest along the curvature of space/time should magically be attracted towards or repelled away from the earth either one. If there is no actual gravitational force pulling objects down to the earth, then when Galileo dropped objects from the tower, they should have remained suspended in mid air until acted upon by some force to help identify what direction they should move in. Remember, she went through a whole explanation of why you only feel the force of your chair pushing up, but no force pulling you down. Yet, Galileo clearly showed experimentally that the objects he was dropping did not remain at rest in mid air to comply with this woman’s explanation, but rather the objects Galileo dropped accelerated downwards towards the earth as if motivated by a force with a specific direction to accelerate the objects in that specified direction, and not some other direction. That direction happened to be down towards the earth which suggests that trusting our feeling of pressure on our bottom while meditating, as she had her audience do, is not necessarily an accurate way to identify what is really going on. The first step, as she calls it, depends heavily on our ability to precisely distinguish how much of the pressure we are feeling between our bottom and the chair is due to the normal force pushing up from the chair under us and how much of that pressure is due to the force of gravity pushing down on us. Nothing in this woman’s explanation proved that the pressure we felt was due exclusively to the upward exertion of the normal force while at the same time there being supposedly zero gravitational force pulling down on us.

"At a distance" shouldn't this be the same problem with magnetic and electric forces? Any force that ever felt or produced doesn't have a continuous matter between force producer and experiencer Eg: I push a ball on a flat surface with my hand. Is there continuous matter between my hand and the ball? How can you accept that force can act over small distance without a medium but not over large distance

Great one. THANKS FOR THIS.

?? not able to fully grasp what she was try to convey? regarding the gravity example, just because you cannot feel gravity pushing down on you does it mean its not there ? so is the chair pushing up on you like acceleration/g-force, that would mean you are flying vertically up through space? and if gravity is not pushing down on you then what about falling, if you remove the chair and their is a 1000 feet drop underneath the chair ? now regarding the 2nd example of time, she said that there is no "global moment of now" or slices of time in GR, there is no way to connect/link time between two her birth-death "world-line" , but that does not mean that there is no time connection between two separate world-lines for example I have my world-line and I am experiencing time with everyone that is living on earth. or anywhere else. just because I don't meet/interact with someone 5 miles away that does not mean we are not experiencing the same time/weather/local-events.....

Oppenheimer once told his brother, "I need physics more than friends".

This new theory of spacetime that she is investigating is revolutionary, if it can be proved... it will be an astronomical discovery.

Really engaging. Though a bit weird that she continually refers to space-time granularity as being a worked on (but as yet untested, speculative) theory rather than a (very legitimate) hypothesis. Hope it's just confused terminology.

Has the speed of gravitational attraction ever been measured? Does it propagate at the speed of light? What about gravitational waves - do they propagate at the speed of light?

Brilliant communicator and explained the concepts brilliantly. Just thought that meditation experience in that kind of detail was really not needed.

between 17:15 and 17:25 there is too many 'tch' sounds, is that an audio anomaly or she was doing it ?

So, this lecture goes as this: Gravity is not a force => Gravity is similar to the EM field => Gravity is a "gravitational field" => Let's find out if Spacetime is granular. Seriously? How is this any different than looking for the Graviton or the Quantum Field of Gravity? Maybe I should start my own research group to find out if Spacetime is flaky...anyone cares to fund us?

Time is real, it's not an illusion, unless we want to think other than that. Every event need time and space to take place, so we always notice the strong relation between time and space. We need to describe when and where an event took place or taking place or will take place, so the wonderful idea of the genius Albert Einstein to make from space and time one fabric called spacetime was an amazing idea, then phenomena like mass wrap to spacetime in form of gravity, and according to mass of an object how big or small that curvature become, all those phenomena and more happen according to GR of the genius Albert Einstein.

Really enchanting.

The British.... personally I'd like to see more explanation by way of hard math. I understand it I just enjoy hearing different lecturers wax eloquent about their thingys along with a bit of understated British wit. Kai to the Uploader!! My deepest accord's

I've watched this twice now and I still don't get it. I think i'd have a better chance if she'd just break out the tensor calculus. All these bottom metaphors aren't helping.

Time is the GUT. We measure everything as a measurement of time. Time is not linear, it's omni-directional.

Moments are felt as continous experience due to our conciousness and memory, present when we are alive...when we died, we then understand atoms & such, keep appear & disappear in discontinous pixelated world (?)

Man is constantly seeking to understand how the universe works. After working out a mathematical model that works and explains a lot a paradox arises which causes us to develop the next model. Did you notice that you have to use gravity on the trampoline to understand the bowling ball explanation of gravity between objects? Can there be a better illustration of gravity?

Beautiful lecture

Timespace positioning here-now synchronicity forever, "makes sense" because it's emulated in the projection of our (meditative) thinking.

The constant speed of light and gravity, it self, can be explained if one assumes that all matter is composed of tiny quantum fields(qf) that are flat discrete and flipping at a constant speed between 3 dimensions. Each (qf) is fixed in place at 3 coordinates and entangled with several adjacent (qf) in our dimension as with other separate (qf) in other matter in each separate dimension. Thus matter attracts mater. We can only see 1/3 of matter from our dimension, the rest being dark matter. Light waves cause each (qf) to vibrate and pass on the vibration only while in our dimension, thus limiting the speed in the same way it limits the ultimate temperature matter can be heated and the reason our universe has not burned up. As the fields flip there is a brief instant when it can not be seen by any of the 3 dimensions, Time would not exist at that short period seen from each of the 3 dimensions, whereas time would be linked being the same in all dimensions. Thus causing time distortion around black holes.

I really felt SPACETIME flying faster than speed of light at my BOTTOM during meditation exercise !! Thus, my bottom taught me a lesson!!

I need a book on Tensor theory with exercises. Can anyone please suggest me the best pdf available online which is free ? (It must have exercises)

I am here because of the Discovery of the Gravity wave...>.

I didn't know Kundalini awakening at the Mooladhara chakra is a way to disprove Newtonian gravity! Amazing! According to Eastern thought, space is not nothing; and it is from space that matter is projected. Maybe she can research these ideas and take forward her granular theory of spacetime!

So, it is not gravity that pushes my whiskey to my stomach, it is the curvature of my throat and stomach.

Something I don't get is if the moon's orbit around the Earth is caused by the curvature of spacetime caused by the mass of the Earth, and the moon is actually moving in a constant "straight line" through this curved space... ok, but why then does light, say starlight, pass through an actual straight line through the same region of space?

Mass and Spacetime have equality of gender: one bosses the other because mass always forces spacetime to curve and the curved spacetime makes mass to follow it wherever it wants to!!!.... i.e, Mass says: I shall curve you.... Spacetime says: but I shall make you follow me in my curves!!

In my humble opinion.... No messy "birthing of space time atoms" is required (whatever that meant). All potential pathways have already been created and are continuously "groomed" by electromagnetic conciousness units that move faster than the speed of light. This creates the "grid" in crude terms, limiting probable outcomes whilst still allowing free choice. Our perception of time is based on our vantage point of our reality. If we can perceive our reality without the filtered manipulation applied by human brains, our experience of time could be vastly different. Apparently our species of conciousness chose to "forget" the larger details while we're playing on this earth playground in order to get the fullest experience out of free will and choice. Who knows. But I digress. The most important point is that (I believe) that particles such as photons (and these yet to be discovered conciousness units) travel the extents of the universe on every flash of time, slowing down some places, to take part in the coagulation of matter that we can, see. Even our own bodies flash in and out of existence in this way. Imagine a, swarm of beez coming together to make the shape of a, man, then flying off to collect honey etc, and flying back fast enough to reshape that form of the man before he notices that his body wasn't solid for a blink of time....

Whar we precive as time is really a perception of change. We experience xhange not time.

I very keenly listened to the lecture. Very good lecture. One question which I have been keen to know the answer of , never lucky so far, is this. Why is space-time wrapped near the massive objects? If it is not gravity, what is this that makes the lighter bodies to be trapped in pits of space-time created by massive objects? Why is not the space-time raised up causing to repel the other objects,instead of creating a pit and trap other masses? Dr. Dowker is requested to help. One more question that I have is related to your explanation of letting fall two different masses. You said, they start falling without gravity? What makes them move without force? Should we throw away Newton's second law of motion as well? Thanks. Once again well done with your theories and lecture.

Contradiction between Newtonian and Special/General Relativity : because Newton study laws of nature and summarized it into three laws representing nature precisely - while Einstein study in his mind experiment to summarize it into laws can only represents his imagination but nature. Don’t just learn but think Don’t just think but thinking outside the box - imposed on us by academia.

She is amazing.

whats up with the esoterics in the middle?

OMG. So much to think about.

If gravity does not pull us down into our chair but only pushes us up as Fay suggests, then why don't we fly up into the air?

"The inverse Lorentz transformation used in relativity is false, it does not define a division operation and using it produces incorrect results, which are called paradoxes, because they contradict common sense. There is a mathematically correct inverse Lorentz transform that can be derived by assuming a linear algebra with a multiplicative group structure in which a mathematical division operation is defined, and in this mathematical structure the traditional inverse Lorentz transformation is known as the adjoint or dual Lorentz transformation" Harry Ricker III Special Relativity Is Irksome www.naturalphilosophy.org/site/harryricker/2015/07/09/special-relativity-is-irksome/

All objects with mass, curve spacetime, not just massive ones.

Two balls of the same size, one made of wood and the other made of iron, released together, fall together and hit the ground at the same time, this appears natural if there is no gravitational force, BUT, which is then the cause that make them to accelerate?

'Spacetime' is not a physical reality. Matter attracts matter.

Newton can not explain Mercury's observed orbit exactly. GR can. This is because gravity is not really a force. The Earth is not being "pulled" by the sun by some "force". The Earth follows a straight path through space. It's path however is "bent" by the sun, which causes its orbit.

One of Einsteins quote if you can't explain it to a fourth grader you probably do not understand it yourself. this could apply to Einstein himself.

Wouldn't it be nice if to celebrate the centenary of GR, we could finally stop teaching school kids that gravity is a Newtonian force?

What a strange way to demonstrate a physics concept - she and Sam Harris should have a sit-down together ;)

I'm guessing this is the first time she's given this particular lecture. Unless the damn cameras are making her nervous. I imagine something like little tiny drones with super-resolution lenses on their tiny cameras. Unobtrusively recording and not messing up the speaker's attention span. Soon. For sure.