😊 don't give science nothing keep it to yourself.... 😊 The science they talk is the same you don't need 😊 Something is definitely to go wrong it's called you
"But I am one-sided. I speak and the voice goes out into the air and doesn't come fucking back into my mouth when I open it." - Richard Feynman, to my bad ears
I didnt watch this now. I watched it then. And always saw it happen in the past. Im pretty sure there's no here and now, nor any future. Just then and there.
When I drive my car, and look through the front window, I see the future. The car is in the present. I look in the rearview mirror and see the past. It’s so simple.
full video is hosted on cern videos titled 'the character of physical laws: the distinction of past and future' as well as other entries in the series such as 'the character of physical laws: seeking new laws'
full video is hosted on cern videos titled 'the character of physical laws: the distinction of past and future' as well as other entries in the series such as 'the character of physical laws: seeking new laws'
I can't believe it. I caught Feynman saying something wrong. The movement of oceans due to tide would cancel out, so it can't gradually slow down the speed of rotation of the Earth.
the earth's rotational angular momentum decreases and consequently the length of the day increases, why do you suppose this happens if not the gravitational affect of the moon on the earth's oceans (tide)
@@PK-tc2uq really, your question should be: what causes tidal lock, or the days on earth to be getting longer? once you accept these two phenomena exist, then it's simple. the moon cannot lose rotational force without that force going somewhere, and the days cannot be getting longer for no reason
@@PK-tc2uq detailed explanation: the moon's gravity affects the earth, it has a different affect on the side closest to the moon to the side furthest due to gravity relating to radius. this affects the ocean to form a bulge nearest the moon, and another bulge furthest from the moon due to inertia-the two bulges and the moon align. the earth has a similar force on the moon, this force affects the moon's crust on one side since it has no ocean, here lies tidal frictional force which slows the rate of rotation of the moon. a frictional force loses energy due to heat, this results discrepancy between the line of bulges and the moon, and so a torque occurs between the bodies. the moon's orbital period and rate of rotation are nearly equal, over time the tidal friction causes the moon to slow down so its rate of rotational matches its orbital period, here is the reason for the existence of tidal lock. due to law of conservation of energy the existence of tidal lock proves that the moon has taken rotational energy from the earth. another fact which proves this, is that the days on earth are getting longer, it's again due to the torque which boosts the moon in its orbit, and thus slows the rotation of the earth
OK, he discusses why laws aren't reversible. And we can discuss this in various ways. But let's say they actually found that the laws may be reversed, how would we do that practically? Electrons spins around the nucleus. How could we create an artificial haven where they spin backwards? It is a simple fact that real matter actually behaves in a particular way. How could we persuade it to go the other way? So, this kind of thinking is just a sandbox for our minds to play with. The reality is what it is, like a terminator. You can't argument with a terminator. We humans are the product of the real matter. How could we turn the reality that forms os in the opposite direction?
Feynman's lecture is based upon an erroneous assumption that time is a real entity. In fact it is not only intangible, but also imaginary, an invention of mankind for convenience of daily living and mathematics. The more fundamental concept is that all exists in the ever present "now", and that motion in space is indeed the more fundamental characteristic quantity. That is, the accepted definition of motion (velocity) that has come to be accepted is v=d/t (or velocity equals distance divided by time). The more correct way to view this is that time is DEFINED by distance and velocity: t=d/v (or time is defined by an item moving through a measured distance.) This may be the balance wheel of a wristwatch or the rotation of the earth. Thus it is completely a man made construct and has no physical reality. Past and Future lose meaning. Think about it.
@@ayyleeuz4892 Well thanks for reading my comment and giving me some feedback on it. Most folks can't wrap their heads around the concept at all. Time being a real thing is too firmly entrenched. Distance or displacement; all seem like pretty much the same thing to me. And I can SEE and interact with those. Time I can only sense by the motion of objects within space.
@@andrewhanson5942 as you already know, you interact with displacement only through velocity and time, just like you interact with time only through velocity and distance-whether it is apparent to you or not; I don't think any of it is particularly apparent. you can draw a line on a chalkboard and believe you have represented a displacement better than you could possibly represent time, and believe it proves it is more real, but that's just wrong and you are victim to your perceptions. here lies the issue with your idea, maybe you can consider dreaming and see your perception of time is quite different to your perception of displacement or velocity; and it is certainly a perception of something. so basing your idea in the expectation of your perceptions of these different things should be further refined. I don't think time is any more contrived than displacement, but I agree our perceptions would have us believe otherwise
@@ayyleeuz4892 True, without velocity of some sort there would be no way to perceive displacement. So perhaps it is simply my personal preference to assign velocity a higher reality than time. I find it more intuitive to think of, for instance, velocity slowing down in an extreme gravity field than to think that time does the same. So does time actually stop inside a black hole, or do the vibrations of molecules simply cease under that gravity extreme? Either way, same result. And in my experience, the simpler the explanation the more accurate picture it portrays. Thanks for the chat.
@@andrewhanson5942 I'm dubious of any proof that requires you to consider things like inside of a black hole, or in a universe with 11 dimensions, etc. we don't know much about any of gravity, nuclear strong and weak, and electric and magnetic forces at all but I imagine it does require better study of things like blackholes, I just can't tell you about it
Quantum behavior is Actually probabLustic You cannot go backwards in time because The world would be different. Where particles would be would be different each and every time
This was not Feynman's finest hours. The whole notion of reversibility needs to be explained before he can use the example of the plenet and the sun. And then he would be wrong. It is simply not reversible.
The person with the highest IQ in history, William James Sidis, wrote a book about this. I wonder if it contains any insights that are of value. The book's title is _The Animate and the Inanimate_
An alternative to the past-present-future model is the eternal present. There is only the present moment - only the present exists - only the present has that status - in which things move and change (or appear to do so), and it is eternally existent.
i think according to me future can be predicted for those particle which have constant force and constant space time dimenson just like non leaving thing but for leaving thing which can have uncertain force which can very at any time ,we cant predict future easily ,just because we need some more information about this particle ..............and hello guys ,I think future could be seen of any particle whether that is living or non living .........and this day will definitely come soon when every one can see there future ........................ 👀👀👀👀👀👀👀👀
