Why Einstein's Theory of Relativity Doesn't Need Ether to Exist⁉️ #physics #science

Why Einstein's Theory of Relativity Doesn't Need Ether to Exist? Neil deGrasse Tyson explained Einstein theory of relativity. The Rise and Fall of Ether: How Einstein's Theories Changed Physics Forever. Related topics #alberteinstein #physics #science #universe #neildegrassetyson #quantum #speedoflight #ether #relativity #quantumgravity

Also watch Special Theory of Relativity

Speed of light is constant

For educational purposes only.

Credits: American Museum of Natural History

[DMAN-eynb]

I’ve watched so many of these shorts, I should be a fucking genius by now.

[vargata]

still nobody have ever proven that there is no ether nor that the speed of light is constant, in fact it isnt

[G]

The Ether, it turns out, is SpaceTime which, as such, propagates information at a constant rate, per the nature of vibrations in mediums, that the speed of light approaches in a vacuum.

[granadosvm]

I get the impression this editing is not very good. I get the feeling that the message is "Thanks to Einstein we realized there is not ether, and instead w... <sudden cut>"

[markstipulkoski]

It's a matter of semantics to me. The ether was supposed to be the "substance" through which light propagated, the thing that was "waving". We now call that thing fields.

[John-tcgp]

It does need dark matter and energy though, which is the same type of made up gap filler as the aether

[Михайло-дп]

Lie. He replaced ether with space-time. Moreover, without explaining what space-time is made of, he also endowed it with the ability to stretch. After all, what does not consist of matter cannot be stretched, because it does not exist.

[jan_phd]

Morley claimed that Michelson fabricated many of the numbers. Being an expert in interferometry myself, I could see that.

[dexter]

I'll believe him when they start doing test in inertial reference frame, until then light isn't a constant, time doesn't dilate!

[jonbold]

Einstein 1920: C is variable. Orbits are relative to something real.

[enghockonn]

Speed of light is constant that space is either in darkness or brightness

[lonelycubicle]

Einstein actually worked with equations that include minus 4ac?

[technowey]

There's no ether, however, doesn't the Standard Model have multiple "fields, " such as the electromagnetic field, the Higgs field, etc.?

What are the wave-like particles in?

For particles and antiparticles to spontaneously be created and destroyed, doesn't there need to be something that exists for that to happen?

[DonJohnSpain]

I wonder what happens with photons just before the moment of getting "swallowed" by a black hole. I mean, just before the event horizon while they were about to bearly pass that black hole, in another direction than where they are pulled to. I doubt, without any evidence, that the speed of light is not affected by this pull of the black hole. Inside the black hole, their travel space may be limited, and photons may be bouncing back in every direction within the limited space but never able to escape.

And what is likely to happen to a photon after being in a black hole? Will this massless particle sease to exist? Who already know that every atom may exist much longer than universe. Unless they end up in a black hole? There are probably many millions of black holes in universe, all with a point of singularity. Many points of singularity. That doesn't sound like one singular point in universe. Maybe nobody on this planet has even the beginning of an idea what a black hole does with information, we only have mathematical equations that indicate probabilities. But quantum physics also makes uses of calculus, and that also leads to theoretical possibilities. Nothing is certain regarding the inside of a black hole, there are too many speculations and too many mathematical models, each with different results. That is very unsatisfying. We should skip all the theories of the inside of black holes, and especially those of Einstein. His equations are most certainly not valid for many strange events at a distance. His space/time fabrics, gravity, where all very close to what we can calculate and measure now. He didn't have the tools. That makes his work even more very spectacular. But he could not explain tiny differences or huge red shifts, that exceed the possibility of his equations. Dark matter, dark energy... we still have no idea what it is although they are by far the most the common elements or forces in universe. We cannot tell how much the accumulate knowledge of all scientists combined would cover the known because it is unknown how much we don't know. It could be that we know only or a million trillionth of that. The smartest man on this planet, allegedly dr Edward Witten, may be like a dog that can count to three, compared to aliens that started a billion years ago and were not exterminated by themselves or other aliens. We are nothing else than dogs that can do a trick. And 99% of us is not aware of that. We started in the 1960s to explore our direct neighbourhood. And since 1972, we never left the orbit of our tiny planet. That is over 50 years ago! Suppose we started these little adventures 1 million years ago. I think we cannot rule out that some civilisations in universe are that advanced. We cannot detect them in any wavelength, frequency, or in any light spectrum. They may travel in unimaginable ways. They may be as undetectable as dark matter even if thousands of them, of your human size, would stand directly around you. They would have fun, seeing us using MRI, AI, superstring theory, like we look at manmade stone tools, made tens of thousands of years ago.

Human arrogance doesn't allow us to see our achievements in the proper perspective. Yes, it was smart of those people that they could make stone tools. Absolutely. We forget that we are not at the end of the chain of evolution, maybe not even halfway. And perhaps other chains in universe are a million times longer and better developed. Nobody on this planet knows. But we shall continue to do our tricks. In a million years we might even become level 3 people. Right now, we are very far from reaching level 1.

[cjonwickham]

I disagree speed of light constant. Yes thru medium a vacuum but not true outside forces like black holes.

[honodle]

It's 'aether'. Duh
'Ether' was the chemical used as early anesthesia.

Duh

[bobthegoblin]

Feels like they stole some alien high schoolers science homework one day and just made all these insane tech leaps one after the other. From farmers to rocket scientists over night lol…someone call Georgio

[shnup]

Bro is that clip from the cosmos? Used to watch it all the time

[shawns]

Black holes are based on a mathematical misconception. Most people don't know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote "the essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. This is illustrated in a common 2 axis relativity graph with velocity on the horizontal line and dilation on the vertical. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
General relativity does not predict singularities when you factor in dilation. Einstein is known to have repeatedly spoken about this. Nobody believed in black holes when he was alive for this reason.
Wherever you have an astronomical quantity of mass, dilation will occur because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy.
According to Einstein's math, the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the missing mass is dilated mass.
According to Einstein's math, galaxies with very, very low mass would show no signs of dark matter because they do not have enough mass at the center to achieve relativistic velocities, therefore they are not infused with dilated mass. This has recently been confirmed with galaxy NGC 1052-DF2.
The shape of a galaxy is common in nature. From atoms to our solar system, the overwhelming majority of the mass is in the center. The same must be true for galaxies. Where there is mass there is energy. The night sky should be lit up from the galactic center but it isn't.
The modern explanation for this is because gravitational forces are so strong there that not even light can escape, even though the mass of the photon is zero. Einstein's answer would be because the mass there is dilated relative to an Earthbound observer.
The reason why we cannot see light from the galactic center is because there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it. You can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. Or more precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid.

[neuvocastezero]

Hmm, ether, it exists, or it doesn't.