Comments on: CERN scientists simplify space-time in 3 short videos https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/ Tue, 09 Jan 2018 04:31:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6 By: Emilie Soffe https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-759048 Emilie Soffe Thu, 19 Mar 2015 14:23:59 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-759048 While this specific series was written by Andrew Pontzen and Tom Whyntie, we do have lessons written by female scientists from CERN as well:
http://ed.ted.com/lessons/how-cosmic-rays-help-us-understand-the-universe-veronica-bindi
http://ed.ted.com/lessons/if-matter-falls-down-does-antimatter-fall-up-chloe-malbrunot

]]> By: Tuesday https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-758090 Tuesday Wed, 18 Mar 2015 18:14:40 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-758090 Nice. But why are there always only men? Women exist. And with a bit of chance they become even scientists ;-)

]]> By: chelseyam https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-278192 chelseyam Tue, 19 Aug 2014 03:17:11 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-278192 Awesome set of lessons! Could this be a jumping on point for more lessons on, say, hyperspace travel and black holes? I’d really love to see those. Kids are really lucky now that they get such to the point examples, rather than having to listen to the drone narration of an hour and a half video.
http://emailwire.com/release/125219-New-novel-Spidersilk-combines-technology-fringe-science.html

]]> By: timo https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-277872 timo Fri, 15 Aug 2014 17:05:29 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-277872 Well, just add in ‘E’ or energy the same way gravity was added in. After all, it all builds on itself. Then transform all parts of other forces to meshed ‘energy’ or strings, and you have your universal binder. Oh, you will need a new transform to handle the energy part ;) You’re welcome.

]]> By: Tony Shaw https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-277856 Tony Shaw Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:12:07 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-277856 It’s to do with the deceleration and acceleration of the travelling twin A, when she slows down, turns round and speeds up to return to Twin B. Brian Cox explains it well in his book co-written with Jeff Forshaw ‘Why does E=MC squared?’

]]> By: Sol https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-277848 Sol Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:33:33 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-277848 Thank you guys.

I always wondered how these stuff work and how scientists talk about their theories about universe and its curves.

Now, I understand it a little more.

Looking forward to see your Quantum video :)

Thanks

]]> By: Disabled Dave https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-277842 Disabled Dave Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:28:32 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-277842 That is a very good question. Since all speeds are relative to the observer, no-one can say which is actually static and which moving. We see ourselves as stationary when in fact we are travelling through space at thousands of miles an hour as we orbit the Sun, but the Sun is equally orbiting round the Milky Way galaxy at thousands of miles an hour. In your question in fact they could both be travelling at half the speed of light relative to a point central between them, so they would end up appearing the same age.

Moving on from that, the claim is that nothing can travel faster than light, so lets imagine five points in space, in a straight line:
A B C D E
Now say the Earth is at C and B and D are at the limits of our observation where things appear to be travelling away from us at almost the speed of light. Given that space is roughly evenly spread out, then from point B, A and C appear to be travelling away from them at nearly the speed of light, similarly for points C and E relative to D, that means that relative to us at point C both A and E are travelling at nearly twice the speed of light, and from point A, E is travelling at nearly four times the speed of light. It doesn’t matter where you are on the line A to E some of the other points on the line have to be travelling faster than light speed.

The only way round this is to say that there is nothing beyond B and D, the Sun orbits the Earth, the Milky Way orbits the Sun, and the Earth is stationary at the exact centre of the universe.

If you like thought experiments of this kind try this one:
Take a copy of the theory of Dark Matter and go through it with a multiple edit replacing every reference to “Dark Matter” with “Green Unicorns”. You now have the theory of Green Unicorns, and since all of the other data, deductions, calculations, conclusions, etc are exactly the same as for the theory of Dark Matter, the theory of Green Unicorns is just as valid as the theory of Dark Matter.

In fact the theory of Green Unicorns is more likely to be true because no-one has ever actually seen anything created by nature that resembles Dark Matter, but nature has produced things like green unicorns:
Horse shaped – horses, zebras, donkeys, etc
Green skin – some lizards, snakes, beetles, etc
Horn on the central body line – rhinos, angler fish, narwhals, etc.

Clearly nature is far more likely to combine the necessary parts to form a green unicorn, than to produce Dark Matter which is unlike anything any human has ever seen.

What do you think?

]]> By: Dengke https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-277841 Dengke Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:26:53 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-277841 Because time dilates based on the speed you’re travelling. Twin A is the one actually doing the travelling from Twin B’s frame of reference. Therefore no time has dilated for Twin B, but it has for Twin A (it slowed down, from Twin B’s frame of reference).

But I guess that’s not the full answer. Does anyone have a more complete answer?

]]> By: Jeff https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-277825 Jeff Fri, 15 Aug 2014 07:05:21 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-277825 The twin paradox time occurs because time is relative. As one twin (twin A) moves close to the speed of light, time slows down for that twin. Therefore upon her return, she will be younger than the twin on Earth (twin B). This is taught in Modern Physics where they discuss the Theory of Relativity.

Time is relative and the evidence is objects we carry everyday. For example, for accurate GPS calculations, one must take into account that a satellite’s time is actually slower than our time on Earth!

]]> By: Chris https://blog.ed.ted.com/2014/08/14/cern-scientists-simplify-space-time-in-3-short-videos/#comment-277823 Chris Fri, 15 Aug 2014 04:59:27 +0000 http://blog.ed.ted.com/?p=3989#comment-277823 Eduardo: If twin A is travelling at the speed of light time for her will seem slower, if she looks out her spaceship she’ll see everyone else running around very quickly. If twin B looks up at twin A and sees her at the window of her spaceship A will appear frozen (or at least very slow).
As you approach the speed of light time slows down, relative to a static object.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

some nice animations here
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module4_time_dilation.htm

Hope this helps and it is a tricky area that does hurt the brain!

]]>