How Simple Math Led Einstein to Relativity

Damn this is well explained

yes, the reason 17 or any number of dimensions works is because it also works in one dimension. any number of dimensions boils down to a vactor of distance in one dimension

Not allay other time the math is baked on the fly by the physicist like in the case of Dirac

Now the next step is figuring out how general relativity and quantum mechanics fits together and once again time is the key. General relativity and quantum mechanics will never be combined until we realize that each individual observer is observing them both at different moments in time. Because causality has a speed limit (c) every point in space where one observes it from will be the closest to the present moment. When one looks out into the universe they see the past which is made of particles (GR). When one tries to measure the position of a particle they are observing smaller distances and getting closer to the present moment (QM). The wave property of particles appears when we start trying to predict the future of that particle. A particle that has not had an interaction exists in a future state. It is a probability wave because the future is probabilistic. Wave function collapse is what we perceive as the present moment and is what divides the past from the future. GR is making measurements in the observed past and therefore, predictable. It can predict the future but only from information collected from the past. QM is attempting to make measurements of the unobserved future and therefore, unpredictable. Only once a particle interacts with the present moment does it become predictable. This is an observational interpretation of the mathematics we currently use based on the limited perspective we have with the experiments we choose to observe the universe with.

Very good production. Melvyn Bragg in his BBC Radio 4 'In Our Time' repeatedly marvels at how abstract maths or things done just because someone thought about doing it often turn out to be part of or essential too later developments in science and / or technology.

This is the most informative piece I have ever seen about AE. I was amazed to learn of his initial disdain of higher level math and of his intuitive use of the axiomatic method. Congratulations to Ben and the team for creating this gem!

I wish there was a channel highlighting the great math and science races of history like Hillbert and Einstein... great video

wonderful❤.

Einstein never thought that math is beneficial for his theory. Awesome!

Speaking of math coming before physics, David Hilbert is the same Hilbert who created "Hilbert spaces", essentially the general abstraction of dimensional space, with possibly infinite dimensions, that lies at the heart of the math of Quantum physics.

This was lovely to watch; I am shocked to find out that Einstein wasn’t a mathematician. It’s so much more accurate to call him a logician with a focus in theoretical physics.

I think we should teach history of such amazing people instead of wars.

I would really have enjoyed your video if it weren't for the volume of the music, i had to leave halfway I couldn't put up with it any longer.

If you do an update without the crappy music I'll subscribe.

Cheers

That was a great video, I'll check out your other ones. Thanks.

EDIT: I was wrong, sorry!

I like how the ant is a she for inclusivity's sake in the example between minute 20 and 21, but the only female ants are the queens and not workers out foraging for food 😅

Need more such videos

badrock formula? wtf is badrock

I always struggled with math in high school but at 23 watching this video this made perfect sense to me?

Getting ready to start my phy 405 hw this just motivated tf out of me thank you

Thanks

Beautiful video

HOW DOES THIS GUY HAVE ONLY 13K SUBS????? I EXPECTED AT LEAST 300K..... CRIMINALLY UNDERRATED

Sorry but your historical accuracy and reliability is disastrous. You’re spreading lies after lies in a sea of bullshit. You should be a shame. Everyone of you claim is false.

Let’s start by the end when you claim that Einstein « verified » « his GR equations » in Mercury perihelion anomaly. This is blatant bullshit since Schwarzschild himself, before publishing his two master piece papers, immediately wrote a personal letter to Einstein in November, to politely inform him that Einstein approximate calculation was circular and mathematically false, but that he, Schwarzschild, had nevertheless found an exact solution. So Einstein didn’t « verify » anything, to start with.

And so Einstein actually didn’t ever do anything with « his » GR equations. Imagine Maxwell pretending to have discovered EM equations, but being incapable to solve them, nor to predict or verify anything with them… how absurd is that!

Thirdly Einstein didn’t discover « his » GR equations. Grossman did in 1912 by simply writing down the Euler-Lagrange equations for a riemannian Lagrangian. Einstein rejected them radically following his mesmerizing inner fairy tails. Which broke their partnership since Grossman understood that Einstein didn’t even understand what covariant actually means.

And indeed Einstein was totally lost afterwards publishing randomly false ideas after false ideas, until he met Hilbert in 1915, and realise that Hilbert had discovered by his own and by the same method, the same correct GR equations that Grossman did three years earlier. And you’re saying bullshit again in claiming that Hilbert equations « were not exactly… ». Blatant lye. What is your evidence. Because on the contrary there is a well know scandal about Hilbert article having been caviarded on the precise page and passage where his GR equations were written. But there is no doubt that his equations are GR ones since he derives them by the same method and premises as Grossman did. It takes a few lines for a good student to perform the easy calculation. Not to speak of skilled mathematicians as Grossman and Hilbert.

On the contrary all that was a total out of reach mystery for Einstein who was extremely ignorant in Mathematics. It took him 10 years not to master a fundamental tool that was perfectly mastered by Poincaré, Planck, Grossman, Hilbert.

But there is more of your bullshit when you claim Minkowski invented « space time » blabla. Shear nonsense. All Poincaré articles on Relativity, from 1895 to 1905 express explicitly all the relativistic quadratic invariants, not only space-time ones but also the EM ones. And when Poincaré corrected immediately Lorentz 1895 original incorrect space-time transformations, he proved them rigourously based on group theory. Which is the Poincaré group that summarize the entire theory of Relativity.

At that time Einstein was failing his bachelor. And Poincaré achieving the theory of Relativity. Starting in 1985 when he realized that « aether » concept plays no actual role in Hertz theory of EM, and that it was thus essentially obsolete. Than in 1885-1890 when he discovered the revolutionary two ways clock’s synchronization algorithm that is the physical core of Relativity. Then in 1895 when he exposes the correct space-time transformations, and with it the hyperbolic space-time quadratic invariant. Before officially upgrading in 1900 the old Galilean mechanical principle of relativity, to a universal principle, governing all physics, and explaining the failure of MM experiments to all orders.

Poincaré also established in 1900 in an article for Lorentz Nobel prince jubilee, the existence of inertia for light and EM, and its consequence : the famous formula E=mc^2.

And so, not only Poincaré did all the job, with some help from Lorentz, to established the theory of Relativity, which was essentially achieved in 1900, but applies such achieved theory, the 5 june 1905, in front of the Paris Academy, to gravitation, and predicting gravitational waves propagating at the speed of light.

So please stop repeating like a blind perrot all the bullshit propaganda others perrots have spread before you. Be a minimum serious and with accurate historical facts. Wiki is also full of bullshit. One has to read the original articles. Especially Poincaré ones from 1885 to 1906, which shows that he has been during 20 years, the actually discoverer and builder of the theory of Relativity, with some help from Lorentz.

Great music in the foreground.

excellent video... explanation... personal anecdotes making it seem I was there... well done!

I’ve seen hundreds of videos about Einstein and relativity. This is top 3 for me. Glad I found it

Bro that was awesome

Tesla described Einstein's relativity work as "a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors".

Gravitational lensing is simply refraction.
Gravity is a Reactionary force. The resistance of the mass to being accelerated by an external force.
Motion is absolute. Nothing can travel faster than light.
Motion is absolute (bounded) to the frame of reference. Light travels in its own frame of reference.

Space and Time are separate frames of reference. There is no Relativity. No time-dilation. No gravitational lensing. No mass attraction. Mass is not an actionable force.

Newton's laws of Motion. F=ma. Force comes from Acceleration of the mass. Not the mass itself.
E=mc. Acceleration defines/creates mass. Mass does not create acceleration.

Congratulations. Those of you looking for a god to worship have picked the worst god possible. You are not going to find the fountain of youth or eternal life in Einstein’s relativity nonsense.

Not a single experiment has validated Einstein's relativity nonsense. Not a single experiment. In fact, many have disproved. The bowling ball and feathers in a vacuum chamber. An increase in mass did not result in an increase in acceleration. Mass is not an actionable force.

The Hafel-Keating synchronized clock experiments. Both clocks used the same amount of energy. Where is the time-dilation if they both had the same amount of runtime on the battery? Where are the biometrics showing decreased heart rates? Nasa's flight log data shows accelerated heart rates during lift-off. Accelerated. Not decelerated. Proving that motion is absolute (bounded) to the frame of reference.

Galileo-> the tides are the result of the Earth's motion in space. Not some unquantifiable force emanating from the moon. How can a celestial object with 1/4th the size of the earth have more gravitational pull than the earth?
JWST imaged a solar system with a bulge on the opposite side of the Jupiter size planet. Once again, how can the miniscule gravity of a planet .1% the mass of the parent star gravitationally affect the star?

E=mc where mass is a form of energy and c is absolute acceleration of the mass. The point at which energy is transformed into another form of matter.
E=mc then becomes E=a, or Everything comes from Acceleration. Not Mass. Acceleration.
The Equivalence Principle. Acceleration creates gravity.
Newton's laws of motion. Action and Reaction. Acceleration creates gravity. A Reactionary force.

You've wasted your time on this video. Einstein was a fraud. Said motion was absolute and then claimed it to be relative. Said gravity came from Acceleration then backflipped and said mass warps space. What are the properties of space? Space has no properties becsuse its not a physical entity. Mass is just stored energy. How can it warp something that doesn't exist.

The only reason you have idiots like Einstein running around claiming everything is relative is because of the alternative.

E=mc. Acceleration defines mass. What defines Acceleration.

F=ma. Acceleration creates force. What creates Acceleration.

The Bible invokes the hand of god.
Giordano Bruno theorized an infinite universe with no cosmological center.

As Carl Sagan would say, Both possibilities are equally frightening to a physisist.

How do you get something from nothing. How can the universe have always existed. Newton saw where F=ma was going. What creates Acceleration. And buried his head in the sand and let the flat earthers interpretation of the observation prevail.

There is no evidence for gravitational attraction. There is no evidence for relativity. There is, in fact, plenty of evidence to the contrary.

Einstein thought it was best to understand Relativity intuitively rather than focusing on the math. The best way to understand dilation/gamma/y is to imagine a spaceship traveling at a constant acceleration rate. When the ship reaches 50% light speed, as viewed from an Earthbound observer with a magically powerful telescope, it would appear normal because as the graph nothing has changed at that point.
When the ship reaches 75% light speed it would appear fuzzy because as the graph shows relativistic effects would be noticeable at that point.
When the ship reaches 99% light speed it would not be visible because every aspect of its existence would be smeared through spacetime relative to an Earthbound observer, not onto itself.
This is the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Dilation/gamma/y occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. This includes the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers.

Einstein had previously obtained the same incorrect value with his variable speed of light theory, because in 1911 he had assumed that the variability originated from a variable lapse of time only. He did not realize that length scales were also shortened in the gravitational field. The discrepancy between the wrongly calculated 0.85 arc-seconds and the correct (double) value of 1.7 arc-seconds was always considered by Einstein as experimentum crucis deciding between the two mathematical versions that he had published in 1913 and 1915. He did not suspect that the correct value came out as well from a variable speed of light assumption, as Robert Dicke showed in 1957. On the contrary: the success of the 1915 formulation was certainly main reason why Einstein himself came to see his brilliant idea of 1911 as a preliminary, misguided attempt. -->> Einstein's Lost Key: How We Overlooked The Best Idea Of The XX Century by Alexander Unzicker

Great music and production quality. May I ask what software/assets you used in producing this video?

Excellent video

Nice 🙂 documentaric information 👍.

Love how everything comes together in the end and things work out

This was so great!!! Our history of innovation is just thrilling. I loved seeing the ways people worked together to do something no one ever thought possible!

That's a really cool new proof of the Pythagorean theorem.

Great video! Only: that music is to loud, unnecessary, and distracting!

By using animation, right brained ppl like me can finally understand mathematics.
I feel like I'm really learning for the first time in my 57 years.
Thanks for your effort to educate the masses who want to learn.

*cockamamie……❤

I knew from some reading that Einstein had always help from many people including Grossman and even there is a lot of correspondence with an Italian guy (whose name I forget). Why aren't they also part of the theory of relativity?!

wow I wasn't expecting this wild ride! A very well made video! Subscribed!

Thank you for watching! I hope you enjoyed this one as much as I enjoyed making it. I'm thinking about what story from the history of mathematics to tell in my next video, so please drop a comment if you have a suggestion!