Greetings, dear souls , I am Gion, and I welcome you with an open heart to ''FACT MEDIA'', a sanctuary of hope, resilience, skills, knowledge and variety of content that will help you achieve your goal in life.
On this channel, we provide you facts, motivational, inspirational, and educational concepts that can drive transformation in every aspect of your life.
Join us we uncover the secrets to unleashing your true potential and achieving your goals.
My goal is to motivate you and share positivity, motivation, inspiration, education, creativity and my experiences.
Live your dreams and don't let anyone stope you from doing what makes you happy.
If you find this Channel helpful to you please consider subscribing. Thank you !
Good video about time in general. But one should clearly separate physical time (time emanating from the rate of change in atoms) and psychological time, how brains perceive time. Below I describe physical time (it's a little bit technical/ mathematical), and how Einstein did not quite have the correct view on that in his early years. Einstein was undoubtedly a very creative person, with groundbreaking ideas/statements about reality. But he also made mistakes, the most wellknown is perhaps believing in a static universe, until he changed his mind 1931, long after the General theory of relativity was produced (1915). Another fairly wellknown mistake by Einstein, was to reject the existence of black holes. He did that in a published paper 1939. Slightly remarkable concerning this is that Karl Schwarzschild (clearly also an astrophysics genious) mathematically showed (1916) that black holes should exist, using Einsteins own basic equation system in General relativity! From Schwarzschild's equation (called the Schwarzschild metric) the gravitational time dilation equation, used since then, could be derived. In the Special Theory of relativity (1905) there unfortunately seems to be a profound mistake (a thought error concerning the physical interpretation of certain equations), which actually can be proven without much mathematical acrobatics after understanding the conceptual aspect of it. I do that below. I think a big problem at that time for scientists was the lack of knowledge of the atom structure, and how physical time basically is relative rates of change in such structures. Physical time emanates from matter, not from a dimension in space. 1. When reasoning about clocks and time, one should use atomic clocks. Because physical time emanates from rate of change of the parts (electrons, quarks) atoms are made up of. Mechanical acceleration (not free fall with gravitational acceleration) cause time dilation, slowed rate of change in atoms. Einsteins equivalence principle is correct *, but not completely correctly interpreted physically by the mainstream science community imo. * The rate of change in atoms in an object positioned fixed in a gravitational field (it is then mechanically accelerated upwards), is the same as the rate of change in atoms in an object similarly mechanically accelerated in a non-gravitational environment (and while accelerated, moving in an absolute sense). 2. It is a mathematical fact in the Lorentz factor, used in the Special Relativity (SR) time dilation equation, that the squared velocity variable there is equal to: 2 • acceleration • distance. Which is an equation originally derived by Torricelli (v squared = 2 • acceleration • distance, assuming initial velocity = 0), later incorporated among Newtons equations of motion. What that means is that the SR time dilation equation is not valid (can not be used) for calculating time dilation for time intervals where acceleration does not take place. Which means that the so called Clock hypothesis is false, which assumes that acceleration as such has no effect on time dilation. Instead, it is ONLY accelerated motion (but not gravitational acceleration with free fall) which creates physical time dilation. In summary: - Equations in Special relativity, containing the v^2 variable can not be used for inertial (non-accelerated) motions, they are only mathematically valid for accelerated motions. This seems to be a very common mistake by many physicists in calculation examples. - The twin "paradox" can then be fully explained/understood, intuitively, logically, mathematically and physically. Physical processes in atoms slow down when a rocket is accelerated. Only one twin is accelerated and it does not matter how far he/she travels back and forth with a non-accelerated coasting motion, the physical time dilation will be the same. The so called distance proof, that velocity as such, in inertial or non-inertial motion, is the source of time dilation is false. It is an invalid use (interpretation) of the time dilation equation, which produces different time dilations for different travelled total distances for the travelling twin.
This world needs more ppl that respect and love the nature because if we didn't have trees or animals we couldn't eat because of the food chain and we wouldn't be able to breathe because trees produce oxygen so that is why we need more ppl that love and respect the earth and nature😊
