[Youtube Review][Veritasium] Why Gravity is NOT a Force

(Recommended)Popular Videos : [Veritasium] Why Gravity is NOT a Force

 

This time, I will review the popular YouTube videos.

These days, even if it's good to watch on YouTube, sometimes people skip it or don't watch it if it's too long.

When you watch Youtube, do you scroll and read the comments first?

To save your busy time, why don't you check out the fun contents, summary, and empathy comments of popular YouTube videos first and watch YouTube?

(Recommended)Popular Videos : [Veritasium] Why Gravity is NOT a Force

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRr1kaXKBsU

 

---

 

Playtime Comments : [Veritasium] Why Gravity is NOT a Force

bu*********:

7:50 Ha! Joke's on you, because I'm watching this while falling from a

k4****:

12:31 I like how the guy kicked you in the head and laugh at it it XD XD

Ge***:

8:33 Dang, really captures the fact that my spine slightly extends into my skull. Points for anatomical accuracy ;P
I don't quite understand this model of gravity yet, but I now have a slightly better understanding of why gravity due to the sun would continue to affect us normally for about 8 minutes if the sun were to spontaneously, completely disappear from our solar system

Ra******:

5:40 example is bit misleading and i cant explain on my mobile keyboard ,

ya*****:

10:20 on words :: flat earthers seen dancing

TE**:

4:07 I guess slow mo was turned off?

Li***********:

1:00 I laughed way too hard at that

Ai****:

12:31 my mans got kicked in the face

AR*:

12:30 lol that kick on face....

Sw***:

4:46 wait so that tracker on the planes dosnt mean altitude? dude you just ruined turbulence for me

 

---

 

Top Comments : [Veritasium] Why Gravity is NOT a Force

An*************:

On a lighter note, this means that the apple didn’t fall on Newton’s head. He accelerated right into it.

Go****:

Oh yeah, it's big brain time

Ca*******:

I’ve always wondered though, isn’t the man accelerating in a rocket in a provably different situation if it’s true that you can’t exceed the speed of light ? A man could sit on the earth forever and feel gravity the whole time. Wouldn’t a man accelerating through space eventually not be able to accelerate any faster and thus lose “gravity”?

Az*********:

"I used the sponsor money to buy a rocket" lmao

Vi*****:

In a Nutshell:
Why Did Newton hit the apple ?

Cr*******:

Haters will say it’s CGI

Id*******:

this changed my view on everything, now i say "you are accelerating up" to every person i see

Ya*************:

12:31 how to get bruce lee’d in 0g

Fr************:

Oh, to be roof man and experience the feeling of finally not accelerating through spacetime

Ne************:

Imagine having a physics class where you learn gravitation fields and forces then go on to watch this video right after...

MR*:

Veritasium: u r not an inertial observer
Me who is jumping off a roof: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAH U FOOL

Tu********:

flat earth believer: geodic what? Straight line is straight line.

BI*****:

“Are you in an inertial frame of reference? No!”

The people on the ISS watching this video:

Te***:

So you're saying in Soviet Russia....
You don't hit the ground
The ground hits you

Ic***************:

Newton: apple fall from a tree
Einstein: man fall from a roof

Au*********:

"You are not an inertial observer"
Astronauts watching this: Am I a joke to you?

Go*********:

Saying that gravity is an illusion and that it is simply a symptom of curvature of spacetime is a bit of an oversimplification. The truth is that we do not understand gravity. We can observe and predict the effects of gravity but we do not fully understand it which is why there is such a problem as soon as we go from macro to microcosmos of quantum physics and quantum gravity and why the idea of gravitons was proposed in the first place. Also, there is no such thing as being at rest outside of the effects of gravity. There is always some gravity well you would be in. Even if there was only one star in the entire universe and you were on the other side of the observable Universe, you would still be in the gravity well of that star, no matter how shallow it would be. The only reason we talk about escape velocity is that you manage to escape from a deeper gravity well into a more shallow one.

Bo*****:

Its still an observed force within the reference frame, this is jus beeing "smart". Following this logic, nothing is a force, but just a probabilistic quantum effect.

Ga*************:

Good animations

To*************:

Man falling off roof: "I'm going to die in a few seconds, but at least I don't feel my own weight."

Zi*****:

"Gravity is just time travel"
- Vsauce

An*******:

"Do you feel weightless?"
ISS astronauts watching your video: "Yes..."

IT*********:

My physics teacher to me: How You Know all those staffs?
Me: Derek Muller, Micle, Mehdi Sadaghdar

Th****************:

7:50
Me Watching this while Falling off a House: Yes

Hu**********:

jokes on you, i watched this in a crashing airplane so yes. i am a inertial observer

LO*:

But the question is, why does space time curve around massive objects?

Ph********:

You should be wearing a mask when you're so close to yourself on the couch.

Wa**********:

I just had an epiphany. I'm sure everyone else already knew this, though.

I used to wonder what would happen if you threw a ball up in the air on a space station that used centrifugal force to simulate gravity. Would the ball stay floating? Would it go backward? Would the ball float all the way to the center of the hub?

I just realized it would fall back to your hand just as it would on earth. The ball is following the same curved motion as the space station. On the outside of the space station, an observer would see the ball move in a straight line when the person inside throws the ball up, but due to the curvature of the space station, anyone inside the space station would just see the ball go up and down. They would throw the ball up at point A, the space station would spin in a curve while the ball moves in a straight line so the person could catch it at point B. My mind is blown.

wa**********:

Might be interesting to do a video on "the feeling of acceleration" (the physics of the inner ear wherein we have the Earth, the human body, and the free fluid inside the ear acting on the tissue of that body) the fluid is "being accelerated" in both conditions of the body free falling and standing still on the surface but the human body experiences completely opposite sensations, rendering the word "acceleration" nearly incomprehensible when applied to Newtown and Einstein. Also begs the question, would a solid body at the exact center of the Earth not experience a sort of weightlessness rather than crushing pressure if the plasma of the nuclear reactions taking place there acts more like a fluid, like the source of turbulence in the Earth's core has both a rotational friction component (which it wouldn't have if it was solid) from the surface and some sort of "space bent away" in every direction by completely external inertial frames of reference when crushed to the point of nuclear reaction?

Br************:

The Earth is Flat... our senses and perceptions when given credence prove this fact! We live on a stationary flat plane not a plane(t). Water finds it's own level. It can not wrap around a ball as we have been led to believe. There exists an Identifiable North pole. the South "Pole" however is in-fact a perceptible ice wall which acts much like the sides of a pool and keeps all water (oceans) contained. SEE: Samuel Rowbotham, The Bedford Level Experiment.

You are right, gravity does not exist. Movement within a column of air/water is base solely on an objects density/buoyancy relative to it's surrounding. A piece of wood and a rock will both fall through the air... the wood however will cease it's descent once the surface of the water has been contacted, while the rock will continue to descend downward in the water... Why??? because the rock is more dense relative to it's surroundings (water) and thus lacks buoyancy. The piece of would is less dense then the water thus it floats on the water but is more dense then the air that surrounds it causing the wood to remain at the waters surface. A gas, which is lighter than air (less dense), will of course move upward through both the water/air column. Movement through the water/air column is strictly a function of an objects buoyancy/density...

 

---

 

[Veritasium] We gathered comments about popular videos and looked at them in summary, including play time, and order of popularity.

It's a good video or channel, but if you're sad because it's too long, please leave a YouTube channel or video link and I'll post it on this blog.

 

---

 

[Veritasium] Channel Posting

[Veritasium] 13 Misconceptions About Global Warming

[Veritasium] Anti-Gravity Wheel?

[Veritasium] Backspin Basketball Flies Off Dam

[Veritasium] Can Silence Actually Drive You Crazy?

[Veritasium] Can You Swim in Shade Balls?

[Veritasium] Does Planet 9 Exist?

[Veritasium] Drinking in ZERO-G! (and other challenges of a trip to Mars)

[Veritasium] First Image of a Black Hole!

[Veritasium] How Were the Pyramids Built?

[Veritasium] I Waterproofed Myself With Aerogel!

[Veritasium] Is This What Quantum Mechanics Looks Like?

[Veritasium] Making Liquid Nitrogen From Scratch!

[Veritasium] What's In A Candle Flame?

[Veritasium] Why Machines That Bend Are Better

[Veritasium] Would You Take This Bet?

[Veritasium] 도대체 화씨란?

[Veritasium] 왜 맹독성 동물들은 온대 기후에 살까?

[Veritasium] 이중 슬릿 실험

[Veritasium] 임의적이지 않다는게 뭘까요?

[Veritasium] 파괴 불가능한 코팅!?

 

---