Comments by "RiteMo LawBks" (@ritemolawbks8012) on "Stanford" channel.

  1. I enjoy his lectures and can listen to him for hours. If only there wasn't a language barrier, I would have loved to have experienced the classroom lectures from Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, and Galileo Galilei. The Q&A sessions would have been legendary.
    4
  2. Are you saying Dr. Susskind doesn't fully understand the questions or GR?
    4
  3. People who hate blue chalkboards.
    3
  4.  @NeedsEvidence  He probably got embarrassed and deleted it. I was thinking you assumed the speed of light was always constant for all observers (including accelerated frames) because I did and was surprised that only applied to special relativity.
    2
  5. ​ @user-wb1ew8sl5u  Your message is probably the most civil and polite online message I've read in a decade. It's evident that you value respect and the opinion of others, like most decent people do. I've watched this lecture so many times, and never noticed the questions asked by the first students. There was a question from a male and female in the audience asking whether a coordinate transformation could mimic tidal forces. Was the same question you were commenting about? If so, that is a very good question. He didn’t spend enough time explaining his justification, but that’s not a question I, personally, would ask him. In a normal lecture setting, I would bring the question to a professor. Dr. Susskind appears casual and open to taking questions; but he’s used to lecturing on narrow topics, getting prepared questions, and at the end of class a standing ovation. I could have misinterpreted his body language, but I think he views the excessive questions as an indication that his teaching techniques are ineffective.
    2
  6. Peter Griffin teaching calculus? He's clearly got an accent from the South Bronx instead of Rhode Island. This course is way above normal calculus.
    2
  7. You'd have to take my word, but this is definitely GR.
    2
  8. He's okay for a man who never took an undergrad or graduate course in General Relativity.
    2
  9. You're just showing humility to lower expectations. You probably already have an A+ average and have been practicing and mastering the GR final exam since summer break.
    2
  10. The observers with constant acceleration are "spacelike" as long as they keep accelerating. If the Rindler observer decelerates and stops moving in space (only in time), then the horizon will go away. Given enough time[1], its worldline will enter the "timelike" region and can become causally connected to a non-accelerating observer. It's closely related to the "Twin Paradox." _________ [1] There's a similar example @ [ 1:02:25 ] when it stops accelerating and returns to the "timelike" region.
    1
  11. It's short for "R-subscript-i," so you can pronounce it as "are-sub-eye."
    1
  12. ​ @NeedsEvidence  Hearing a professional physicist ask for clarification (i.e., the laws of physics in non-internal frames) make me feel a lot less self-conscious about being confused and asking for help. Most viewers learning outside of university would likely be surprised to find out that classical physics and differential geometry aren't Dr. Susskind's fields of expertise either, but his descriptions, simplifications, and teaching style are what make the Stanford Lecture Series popular to anyone wanting to learn or get a refresher on general relativity. On the topic of Minkowski, the spacetime diagrams, paradoxes, and deceptively simple-looking light cones from special relativity are hard for the general and non-physicist audience to fully grasp. Just as you learned the speed of light is not always constant in all frames, I've learned that time-like intervals and vectors between two events are causally connected when there's more time to transverse than there is space to keep them separate. Dr. Susskind is a very gifted lecturer and we're fortunate to have free access to his teaching.
    1
  13. There were probably people who got a once-in-a-lifetime chance to hear Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein lecture about gravity, and it got totally ruined by the same type of guy who wanted the class to hear his pre-rehearsed questions to the guest lecturer. This is probably that guy's 100th lecture from Prof. Susskind on Modern Physics and General Relativity and Cosmology.
    1
  14. If the weekend family entertainment is made or Susskind general relativity lectures, then it sounds like you have a highly educated household.
    1
  15.  @Neurotoxin-q2r  Doesn't matter who made it. If it's matter and you make it move, it obeys laws of mechanics. That it includes the few "bright people," like you, and the mostly "dark matter" that anchors our galaxy.
    1
  16. I could listen to Professor Susskind for days. I even started walking like him. He's a brilliant man. I can't match his knowledge of relativity and string theory, but even I know you can't see sound 👉🏾[ 1:02:01 ]. No disrespect, but I know my five senses very well.
    1
  17. What part of any of this looked easy?
    1
  18. Are you referring to the equations derived directly from the Einstein Field Equations and Special Relativity, or the ones that are equivalent to the well-tested formulas in Newtonian mechanics, electrodynamics, and classical field theory?
    1
  19. Calling the Principle of Equivalence, "wrong," places the burden on you to explain with science how it's wrong. For most people learning general relativity, they have a false sense of confidence because they can't properly explain the Einsteinian Equivalence Principle.
    1
  20. Calculus 1/2/3, Newtonian mechanics and Universal law of gravity, Electrodynamics, and special relativity.
    1
  21. It's hard to believe he's was never considered an expert in General Relativity or Classical Mechanics; that was Stephen Hawkins. He specialized in Quantum Field Theory and String Theory. The closeted mortal we ever had to a "god" in physics was Sir Isaac Newton.
    1
  22. A lot of them are there to learn about his teaching style and engage with him rather than being educated on cosmology and gravity.
    1
  23. A lot of professors and lecturer are too tough on non-traditional student in continuing-education courses. I'm different because General relativity and classical physics are difficult for even graduate students, so as long as the following is complete, you're all set in my physics course: 1) you have excellent attendance; 2) you ask great questions in class; 3) you stay engaged in the changing topics; 4) you make a serious attempt at my final exam; and 5) I am forced to give a grade curve, then I'd probably give you 0 or (F-) as well. There's no reason to be taking up space in an advanced university physics course. That's a complete waste of tuition.
    1
  24. Was the remark @ [ 20:21 ] so revolutionary that it was worth interrupting the lecture?
    1
  25. Telling you to get more schooling wouldn't change much in your goal of understanding General Relativity ("GR"). It takes years just to grasp the abstract concepts and thought experiments of GR. The mathematics used to derive the field equation are beyond what most STEM undergraduates have used during the eight years in high school and college. What helped Einstein to develop his theory, was his mastery of Newtonian Physics. It's virtually impossible to learn GR and Special Relativity without first knowing and mastering (1) Newtonian Mechanics; (2) Electricity and Magnetism; and (3) Galilean Relativity. There are plenty of videos on YouTube that explain the basics of GR without the extremely complicated math. Anyone can learn the theory; but typically a university course in gravitation, modern physics, and relativity is geared toward physics majors, who plan on going to graduate school or teaching. Since Newtonian Physics accurately describes nearly every physical observation, it's the preferred course for STEM students who are not physics majors.
    1