Sorry, this is an apples and oranges comparison and more of a funny anecdote than an argument: the theory of relativity concerns gravity, the standard model the other forces, completely different phenomena. Why should they agree? Even assuming that the cosmology constant is an energy, the calculation says, that it does not contribute a lot to a vacuum energy.

Unless absorb energy instead of trying to expend it past infinity

Love the music on this video any idea what the music is called?

More like the math hasn’t been developed to explain Quantum Mechanics correctly. So hand-wavey technics are used for now to explain observations.

I checked already by going faster than light. It was rather inconvenient! The light was falling behind me and the path ✨️ 😌 in front of me went dark. So, I jammed on the brakes and opted to travel slower 😕 🤔 than the light 💡 🔦 itself ! I allowed it to go past me by my own will and not by any theory of General Relativity or whatever!

Your thumbnails look like youre exposing yourself

Classical angular momentum depends on the history of the universe, whereas quantum angular momentum does not.

Way to avoid the question Akshay!

The difference between a line drawn on a flat surface and a line drawn through a volume is not immediately evident. What has been called refraction in Optics may be nothing else but the confusion between those two shapes. An oblique line starting at a flat surface, like water, and going through that surface, in depth, instead of staying on the surface, will necessarily go through the deeper surface at a different point, giving the familiar impression of a broken line.

Amazing video, animation, very clear and easy to understand.

Anti-matter fields?

I have created a neutrino with zero velocity. It has no kinetic energy, just rest mass energy. So now it just sits there, uncertain as to what its mass and hence its energy is, happily violating the conservation of energy. But at least it doesn't have extra dimensions of space and time.

How can You say that the jury is still out in the matter of particle or wave theory and at the same time deny the simple fact that Consciousness is the only repeatedly shown factor that affects the outcome of either particle or wave results on the rear screen ??

Stable right-hand (relatively massive) neutrinos are my favorite candidate for dark matter.

Man's guesses do not make good arguments. Why are you limiting God?

What came first information or physics? Seems a bit intertwined just like spacetime...

The whole moving vs. stationary thing (or here primed/unprimed) has always confused me, since it's contrary to what I would usually call them. In a previous video I learned the stationary time is the time of the observer that SEES the clock NOT moving (so IS moving alongside the clock) while the moving time is the time of the observer that SEES the clock moving (so is not moving alongside the clock). Now this part at 1:30 hopelessly confuses me. Based on the whole stationary/moving thing I just mentioned, the person SEEING the situation NOT moving should be the moving person, no? But now apparently it isn't? I just don't get it. Well, it's not like I expect an answer on a six year old video 😆

Looks like that inqnet display runs on Ubuntu Linux

Is magnetic field a force? No? Then why should a gravity field be? Even regardless of the mechanism that generates the field. AFAICT Einstein's relativity is a complete replacement for Newtonian dynamics. It's not 1687. While I have huge respect for Fermilab and Dr. Don Lincoln I feel that this video is a bit of sophism covering for an earlier "whoopsie".

Newton gravity vs einstein gravity pls explain

Bioloski sat ne zavisi od brzine . Nemoguc poŕadoks !!!

Op

Thanks Don, I liked this video. Thumbs up here!

In the case of a current in a ring, this means that the number of moving charge carriers increases. - So the number is relative.

10 years on and we're still waiting for someone to figure it out. That Dude will be famous.

You show a totally different example, the twin paradox should start at the same point and one twin would move away, that is not shown in the video. I am wondering, imagine there are no twins but triplets and there are two Earths far apart. One triplet flies away very slowly with her spaceship to Earth 2, due to her slow speed, there is no time dilation effect that is significant. When she arrive on Earth 2 she sends a signal to Earth 1 and when Earth 1 receives it triplet number 2 is flying towards Earth 2 with very high velocity, we can do the calculation including the acceleration.

Don't bother mate - it's not there.

0:34 you KNOW a lot of things that you don't know. 😂

Wait, didn't you recently suggest that gravity wasn't a force? That it was a property of curved space time? Sorry, but I'm not a science person. I might misremember.

Best science videos I have ever seen and heard.

Yo Mama so big, it's an Aerial photograph on her driver's license. Ha. Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love

It takes around 2 million years for the photon to make it through the turmoil of the centre of the Sun to reach the Photosphere. It then takes another 8+ minutes to leave the photosphere to reach either the rods in your eye, or the nerves in your skin. Yet from the Photons perspective, no time at all has passed since it left it's source. It arrived instantly at it's destination the moment it was created. Thus, from the Photons perspective, every single photon that ever has been, or will be, has already reached it's destination. This happened at the same time the big bang. The universe began, and from the photons point of view. Ended just as suddenly. Everything around us, is but the echo, the reverberation, the afterglow of that instant. The universe began, and has already ended. You're basically trying to measure ghosts and reflections at this point.

Productive drug use. Methamatics

Inside a black hole, beyond the event horizon, aren’t there speeds beyond the speed of light?

Neither can explain the "action at a distance"

Uh......question...... photons do not experience time. So velocity of a photon (distance/time) is zero? So p= 0*0? Yes I am a troll.

5:58 - dirt becomes grass? I thought the carbon came from the CO2 in the air!

The weak force produces neutrinos, and we know neutrinos experience time. I have come to the conclusion that the weak force is the force of time. If you differentiate all the fundamental equations for time, you will see that time has the units of force

Regarding the double slit experiment. Why don't they try more slits? See what happens with 3 or 4 slits. Maybe the detector is interfering with the atoms. I mean it has to in order to detect the atoms right? Maybe that's what it does different patterns when being observed and not observed? Invent another way to detect and observe and see if it's the same. I bet it would be different. Then again I'm pretty dumb so idfk

3:28 Doc Don: "For instance, at the LHC, when you smash two protons,..." Me: "Cool! When do I start?"

I’m a scholar that’s been fascinated with muons as well as non hermitian morphological topology for a very long time now and I wish I knew about this video earlier on

math model is a virtual particle.

An otherwise serious series cannot avoid a temptation to speak of empty and superficial speculations, a mocking of physics as natural philosophy. Lincoln says that he does not believe or disbelieve in multiverse, but that is the issue - the point is that the multiverse concept is ill understood and should not be talked about. Science is about using well understood concepts and experiences to explain new, less understood phenomena, while multiverse is a total opposite: using something not understood to 'explain' what we know. In a sense this is anti science. As a physicist devoted to my craft, it breaks my heart to see more and more present divulgation of physics focused on bombastic. Great physics is extraordinarily mundane, and it is simple and deep, not complicated and shallow.

We observe things by hitting them with other things. We're literally slapping the photon, so it kinda makes sense. When you wanna measure stuff that is as small as the thing you use to measure it -- it's inevitable.

question, how do we know the kasamir effect is not just the plates own gravitational pulls?

Yes. It's the outside observer who sees the photon's clock not ticking. An observer who rides the photon will see the clock ticking normally.

Ok I am really curious, when matter and antimatter annihilates they tend to release energy as a bi product, so why don’t virtual particles do so, am I missing something here, has something been explained improperly to me?

why use a distracting background?

To answer the question. It falls down, just like regular matter.

After your answer, Is it still correct to use the word "force", instead of -let´s say- "phenomenon"??