Easy Way to Understand Special Relativity | Lorentz Transformation | Time dilation
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 05. 2024
- Einstein asked question himself what a light wave would look like if you were to chase after it at exactly light speed. Since you and the light wave would be zipping through the space at exactly same speed, you would be keeping perfect pace with light. So from your perspective light should appear as though it wasn’t moving. So you should able to catch a handful of motionless light.
But Maxwell’s equation didn’t allow to catch the light. Because this equation doesn’t allow light to appear stationary. It means speed of light is constant. No matter the observer in motion or not, it always get measures 300000 km/s.
And einstein was well aware about that. And then he realized, if space is absolute, the speed of light would not be same for all observers. To maintain the speed of light constant space stretches or contracts. This is called Special relativity theory. Not only space, but time also stretches called time dilation.
In this video i tried to explain how space and time works when object is in motion with spacetime diagrams (Lorentz transformation).
To support on patreon : / klonusk975
Contact : Klonusk@gmail.com
#spacetime - Věda a technologie
Klonusk 1 dimensional objects are lines without widths i suppose and a singularity would be a 0 dimensional object
Right
One dimensional object like lines can’t exist in the real world since it depends on some width and then gets two dimensional.
One dimensional object only exists in theory.
So, my guess is that Klonusk is talking about real existing objects.
Yes that's correct
You’re right: you can feel the weirdness when he says “two dimensional objects have length and width” but the one dimensional ones had neither in the preceding description. Points are adimensional, zero dimensions.
Also very weird to start your video with a mistake like that. I couldn't bring myself to finish it, despite knowing it probably is made with good quality graphics.
I need to rewatch this about 10 times just so I can fully not understand it
10:14 I love the fact how both the drivers saved the girl...amazing 😮
Actually I'd have to say the universe is infinitely multi-dimensional. If you can measure it, it's dimensional.
A dimension is not a realm where something exists. That is a common mistake among so many academic fields of study. A dimension is a measurement. Width, depth, height and time are measurements of things in this universe or realm. They are not individual realms. They are a means to describe and measure using Cartesian polar, absolute or relative coordinates in our equations. We can measure temperature, polarity, charge, color, distance, size, mass, density, volume, weight, velocity, acceleration, trajectory and so much more. They are all considered dimensions, IE., measurements. They are not realms.
When someone says, there might be another you living in a parallel dimension, they're confused about the actual meaning of the word dimension. If they did say that then they're pretty much saying there might be another you living in a parallel measurement. Which doesn't make any sense.
A dimension isn't a realm by itself, it's a measurement of something in our realm. If it can't be measured then it can't be dimensioned. there are 1 dimensions, 2 dimensions and so on, depending how many variables are in you equations. If you include time, temperature, velocity, trajectory and mass then you went from describing 4 dimensions to 8. We can't see time or space but we can use them in our measurements to describe the things in our realm, thus they are considered dimensions.
Says you! 😂
@@mavelous1763 True beans.
Thanks, very well explained (and I appreciated the metric measurements)
point is zero dimensional object, not the 1. a line is 1 dimensional object
A straight line is one dimensional. When you make a squiggly line on a flat piece of paper it's 2 dimensional. When you cut it out and make it spiral it's 3 dimensional. If it moves then it's 4 dimensional. If it's on fire then it's more than 8 dimensional because you could potentially measure it's temperature, volume of smoke, it's smell, brightness and more. Each measurement we take would be another dimension in the equation.
😲@@ronaldkemp3952
Nice video and presentation.
An elite learns and think straight but deep. Elites learns the Theory of Special Relativity fast and can’t tell that is true or false.
Brilliant explanation
Such a good explanation👍 background music was very interesting
Awesome video!
continue to make this kinds of knowledgeble video❤❤.
Great video. I been trying to understand this for years. This is by far the farthest I’ve been getting close to grasp it. Still not completely but that’s might be my dumb brain lol
Good work bro ❤❤❤
Your mention about constant nature of speed of light is true... But want to know that what's so different 'fundamentally' in light that it behaves differently than other...
It’s not, it just moves at the speed of causality. Gravitational effects move at the same speed as well
@@stdesy What I mean is why constant and not relative like other objects...?
Einstein made the assumption that the Speed of Light is constant in the Special Theory of Relativity. This has been confirmed by experimental evidence, many times.
Light does not have any mass that’s why
@@xgaming4216 what mass has to do with the constant nature of light? Why it is same for the all observer whether they are in stationary position or in motion (even at the significant speed of light)? Einstein made the assumption that is right, but on what basis?
Four-Dimensional Space was developed by Minkowski (who gave us the “Light-cone”).
In Einstein’s article of 1905, he treated Space and Time separately.
In fact, Einstein stated that “he no longer understood The Special Theory of Relativity” after Minkowski’s lectures.
However, Einstein soon adopted Minkowski’s Four-Dimensional point of view (and built on this to develop the General Theory of Relativity in 1915).
I believe that if all matter stood still, like not moving at all, time is slowed down until it stops,
so, the speed of time depends on the speed of matter and the speed of matter depends on the speed of time which absolutely makes no sense to me. I also believe that acceleration never stops to zero but rather goes on decreasing at a constant ratio.
❤ Very good 👍🏼
Problematically your definition of time could be better thought of as, a dynamic operator rather than an orthogonal direction. In the observer model, it's merely a convention that is used to organize entangled sub systems of the universe into A more stasis -based configuration. Which is more entropicly favorable to the observers.
Good explanations. However, I don't seem to understand the connection between the maths and time. It appears that we arbitrarily assign T = time without ever having observed or defined what a unit of time actually is - in the real world.
I understand the variables length, width and height because they have real observable counterparts that can be verified. However, when it comes to the variable time, we automatically assume that it will also behave and evolve just like numbers do.
I find it hard to believe that linearly progressing numbers could capture the nature of (non-linear) time and that the results of such mathematical calculations would necessarily map onto real time.
A unit of time from the human perspective is 1second per second . This could be different in other parts of the universe . It is certainly different for a photon .
Suppose two Events occur at the same position, then the Time between those two Events (at that position) is what a Clock measures (when it is located at the same position).
Time actually slows down if we are moving fast relative to our surroundings: Suppose some Uranium was cut in half, and half is sent around an Accelerator (like at Berne). When we get the Uranium back again, we find less of it has decayed (compared to stationary lump). This is because Time progressed more slowly for the fast-moving Uranium.
As Einstein said: “Time is what a Clock measures”.
Why the need for a 4th dimension when events unfold in 3, progression of existence and events is just causality.
Bruce Dillon
If we turn it around and look at every thing from the travellers point of view IN HIS TIME FRAME then we will find that everything is fine. At 14:07 we will find that in the "Constant motion" time frame the "Stationary" will not have travelled 200000km but possibly only 120000km in the time light travels 300000km.
It is simply that felt or measured time just slows down with motion. This also means that if you look out from the train at 7:27 you will not see the platform travel at 100 km/h but slightly slower.
At 11:26 light is NOT flying away from the traveller in OUR perspective. It is only flying away from him in HIS time perspective. As his time should stand still if he travels at the speed of light it should go nowhere. Now traveling at speed of light is not possible (according to these formula's for any mass) then this picture is not possible. At nearly the speed of light the travellers clock is going very slow so from our prospective it will take a long time for the light to get 300000km away from him even though he thinks it only takes a second..
I have the feeling that as everything we know of actually moves then we are all slowed down a little in time. I believe that any EME (light being one of them) is stationary at it's origin point. We can not measure that as we can not measure one way speed of light as yet. I believe that there is an ABSOLUTE in space.
What do you think of the Brans-Dicke theory of gravity.
Let's do the Michelson-Morley experiment on a school bus and determine the speed in a straight line - this is exactly the experiment Einstein dreamed of. Perhaps we will see the postulates: “Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta, and Dominant gravitational fields control the speed of light in a vacuum.” There is a proposal for the joint invention of a HYBRID gyroscope from non-circular, two coils with optical fiber, where the light in each arm travels 18,000 meters, without exceeding the parameters of 0.4/0.4/0.4 meters and mass - 4 kg.
3 dimensional beings such as humans, animals and birds would have a hard time seeing 4 dimensional things but also 2 dimensional objects in our 3 dimensional world if turned flat! I have seen videos of birds flying into strings in mid air used by humans to hoist up objects including bird feeders and they run into things turned on its flat side. I e have also seen humans on bicycles going fast like a bird would run right smack into a line or rope or something similar. Not that it’s impossible to see it’s that when things lie flat to our eyes as 3 dimensional beings we have a hard time seeing it there unless we change our position or it moved and when it doesn’t, we don’t perceive it being there until we’re right ontop of it or running into it or going slow enough to give ourselves time to see it’s there. Basically where 3 dimensional beings but seeing some 2D objects can be hard to see but not as hard as 4D. It’s easier to wrap our minds around 2 and 3D than it is 4D but 2 and 1D can be difficult for us 3D beings to pick up on as well if placed the right way and all stands still. A ball in the distance we assume is a ball but looks as a circle. We have to move through space and it takes time to move through space but once we change our vantage point, it confirms that circle we seen across the yard is actually a spear or ball. Shadows and light areas is what we use to give clues that that spear we see in the distance isn’t just a circle. A square in the corner of the room we assume is more than and actually a box because of the shadows created and the lines but confirmed once we change vantage points and see more of it we are proven right that square we think is a cube or box is a cube or box unless it’s purposefully an optical r illusion but only way to find out is to travel to it, get closer and change vantage points or move it to see it’s a 3D cube and not a 2D square leaning against the wall. A square on the floor can still be a cube of it is one by picking or lifting the edge of the square only to find it’s a cube in the floor.
Anyhow, I love the topic of dimensions and what it would look like to visualize other dimensions and why it’s so hard to visualize higher dimensions even as a 3 dimensional being not trapped by 1 and 2 dimensions.
Post new videos fastttttttt they are awesome
Der weit Weg steht ist im Dreieck näher dran, als der nah dransteht
1 dimension is a line not a dot. Dot is dimension 0
⚠️PLEASE READ THIS⚠️
This was such a great explanation on relativity I have seen but but ⚠️ Brother you have done a mistake in this video that is you said a point of singularity a 1 dimensional object which isn't true. A point is a 0 dimensional object with no length width or height, then comes 1 dimensional object for example a line, a line has length only so it can be considered as 1 dimensional and not a point object, then it is followed by 2d and 3d which was correct in video.
HOPE THIS HELPED 👍
I got lost at 11:10. It is my understanding that the sky is black at night, despite the existence of an uncountable number of stars because the light from those stars must travel distances that are greater than the speed of light allows. If it were possible to travel along side a single beam of light, looking forward, we would see nothing, because the light could not go faster than its limit.
12:35 One second is not the same for two observers.
Klonusk we have thought in school like a one dimensional object have length but not wight and height{ like a line on a plane }
P. Marmet "The Collapse of the Lorentz Transformation".
11:31 , I still don't understand why the speed of light is the same for all observers. You just gave more examples of it, but there's not much explanation. And in graph 13:53, the observer observes light travels at a speed of 200km/h. What are you trying to say?
Speed is distance over time, the faster you're going, the more things get squished due to length contraction so your measurement of the speed of light doesn't change. Floatheadphysics has some great explainers on this.
SR wrong due to reference frame mixing and bad math. GM follows as incorrect. “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon for proper physics including the CAUSE of gravity, electricity, magnetism, light and well.... everything.
I believe that only some of SR is wrong. I believe that "time keeping" varies with speed. I believe if we look around us light will always travel at apr. 300000km/s but at our time scale. I also believe that the starting point of an Electro Magnetic Emission (EME, light in our example) starts from a fixed point in space. This will only really influence things if we could make a one way measurement of EME speed but so far I don't believe any body have.
In regards to your last point then I would say maybe not so much the cause but what actually IS electricity, magnetism, energy etc.
@@leonhardtkristensen4093 No energy, charge, photons, waves, spin, fields, potential, quantum,quarks, space, time, space-time etc. All Standard Theory/Model was replaced by Expansion Theory in 2002. A “cause “ - by definition (?)- tells what something IS. Expanding electrons/ atoms do it all. Light is a cluster of expanding electrons and all EMR also manifestations of expanding electrons- things,objects, particles, matter. ‘Gravity’ is simple Galilean relative motion: the earth is approaching- expanding at 16 feet per second per second constant acceleration- the released object (apple). One way “c” is hard to measure: to say ‘time’ depends on “c” creates many ‘problems’; circular ‘reasoning’ among them.
Для константы скорости света "прямой" опыт Майкельсона Морли с 1881 по 2024 г выполнен всего на 50%. Вопрос - почему не 100%?
I clearly understood everything except last minute 😅
It helped me to think that even though both persons experienced time passing, they experienced it differently. The person in motion had time slowed down for them. So from the still persons point of view, by the time light had reached 500km, 1.66s has passed for them. And for the person in motion only 1second has passed because their time is slower.
Don't confuse it. Time is man made,movement is universal made.
If earth stops moving you still going to use Time to make sense of yourself,but light has its business our business is moving.
No one dimension is a line zero dimension is the point or singularity
the math is wrong.
if light can only travel 300k km in that time.
that same light would not have traveled 500k km in the same time just because of a person traveling 200k km to catch up.
he will see the light yes,
but the light would not have surpassed him at 300k km from his perspective.
at the same time the light has reached 300k km in total.
thats like saying a train traveling 300k km has traveled 500k km because i drove my car beside it for 200k km at the same amount of time and the train also surpassed me at 300k km. no it simply does not work like that.
Your starting point it self is wrong - 1Dimensional does not mean a singularity, it is a line.
🤦🏽♂️..... I just lost braincells reading that there's still time to delete this comment
how am I watching someone explain spacetime that doesn't understand one dimension?
Distance is relative not absolute
Thats because light doesnt feel time… it is born and dead at the same time
It's a cool idea to imagine it this way, but it's not quite accurate. The implication is that from a photon's perspective, it would exist both where it was emitted and absorbed simultaneously, across space. This is obviously not possible. However, the real answer is less nuanced. A photon has no mass, therefore it can never have any rest mass. Only objects that have rest mass can have a frame of reference. This is one of the tenets of special relativity. The idea of a photon's "perspective" is nonsensical, as the math does not allow it.
I think singularity is zero dimension. cmiiw
You are making the same mistake every other relativist does.
Motion is absolute. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light making it an absolute.
The other thing relativists dont understand is that light is information. The Lorentz transforms deals with INFORMATION being exchanged between two moving objects. Not time itself.
Space and Time are separate frames of reference.
Space is absolute.
Time is absolute.
Motion is absolute.
Knock off the relativiity crap because ot only deals with INFORMATION and you have every one confused thinking clocks measure time. They dont. They measure motion in space. Your motion in time is energy dependent as in E=mc or Energy equals time.
Einstein was just a lowly patent clerk who didnt understand basic physics. His relativity nonsense doesnt work in the real world because mistook time for information.
Motion in space changes your information cone. You may perceive events taking place differently from another but that doesnt mean they actually are.
Space is absolute
Motion is absolute.
Time is absolute.
The only thing that is relative is information and that comes directly from the Lorentz transforms which deals with the transmission of information between moving objects.
Quit trying to confuse people with your relativity nonsense.
Its a Space-Information frame.
And a Time-Energy frame.
Two vary separate frames when dealing with real-world physics.
.kt
Bullshit. There are no "dimensions". 2 dimension objects cant exist because they have no width. Space has not 3 "dimensions", thats just a practical way to map it.
There's no easy way to understand this.
Эйнштейна мечтал измерить скорость поезда, автомобиля - опытом Майкельсона 1881/2024 г., и только тогда, опыт будет выполнен на 100%. Это возможно выполнить с помощью оптоволоконного ГИБРИД гироскопа. Вот исходя из выполненного на 100% опыта Майкельсона, возможно доказать постулаты: Свет - это упорядоченная вибрация гравитационных квантов и доминантные гравитационные поля корректируют скорость света в вакууме.
В итоге получили "теорию всего" в простом устройстве.