How can they still claim the universe is around 13 and a half billion years old, due to rewinding the expansion when they are now telling us dark energy is speeding up the expansion? Seriously, can anyone explain why the age has not been adjusted if dark energy theory is right. Not in the 5 years I've been asking has anyone been able to tell me
One thing guys: my mic conked out during audio editing, so I had to use my backup mic for the sound patches. Thank you again John Annerud for his help with my sound.
I barely noticed and likely wouldn't have had it not been mentioned. Edit: except for the one at 42:00, I'm not def! Still not an issue. I loved your explanation of the cosmological constant problem.
Yay,,glad to see you back.As the yt market matures to serious full length vids you'll be near the front.Isaac will be some tough competition though. :)
It was barely noticeable, and not at all distracting. You have a wonderful speaking voice and a clear delivery that makes these wonderfully informative videos an absolute delight. I've been very pleased to note that your sound work has steadily improved each time, and thank God you got rid of the background music. That was my only real complaint. By the way, I will be looking forward to that Eddington video you alluded to. Can't imagine anyone who could do it justice any better than you.
Watching for a second time. This is one of the best things I’ve ever seen on RUclips or television. Better than any other documentary about cosmology I’ve ever seen.
I have about as much exposure to cosmology and physics as the next interested guy but this utterly blows my mind. What an incredible story. I've long held the suspicion that despite our best efforts weve tripped somewhere along the way in our efforts to define our universe and that taking a phorensic expedition into the origins of this blunder would be so catastrophic to our current estimations that we would have to scrap an enormous margin of what we believe to be truth in order to get on the path to discovery of the real truths of the universe, rendering most of science all but useless and contrived. I'm sure of shared sentiment when I say this is terrifying. I hope, on the other hand, that there are just more discoveries along the way that tie up the loose ends.
I tend to agree with your assessment, Robert. In the flamboyantly Russian words of an actor from the film Armageddon: "I told you, you took a wrong way, a wrong road.” At some point between Hubble, and Einstein, we (humanity, et al.,) fumbled our theories, and stopped caring about how our theories matched up against reality and our observations of it. Einstein was described by many early astrophysicists and astronomers as being "blind to the fact that a forest exists beyond the trees that so fascinate him". Any time that one single human being's name and likeness is associated with an astronomical amount of so called discoveries, and those discoveries remain scientifically unchanged for over a century; that fact would seem to indicate that we've been set on a wild goose chase for a century.
Douglas Adams may have been on the right track when he wrote: "There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory mentioned, which states that this has already happened." More than once, apparently. 😀
Nick, your channel is destined for great things. It's very rare that I get to find a channel to follow *before* it has its sharp rise in popularity, but mark my words, yours is coming. Keep persevering through the endemic suffering of life and keep making videos. You're an inspiration and exactly what I've needed this year. Thank you.
There has been a bloom of high-quality science content on RUclips recently, but this is still the only channel that can compel me to put down whatever I am doing for 45min or an hour as soon as I become aware of a new upload. Due to an alphabet soup of mental health issues I won't go into, I am severely anhedonic and enjoy few things; but, Nick's writing and narration are two of them.
Amazing quality content once again! This is so much better than the "science popularization" docs we now have on mainstream TV. Thank you for doing this, this is just brilliant!
There are a handful of TV presenters* who do a great job of drawing you into their subject with enough depth to entice, and whose knowledge and enthusiasm naturally engage the viewer without the need for OTT effects, overly dramatic music, and 'talking years' forever telling us how wonderful / mysterious / unbelievable something is without adding to the content. When you also subtract from the latter kind the all-too-frequent recaps to cater to the and breaks (and ours in Britain now rival the American ones), if often leaves very little time for anything educational. * David Attenborough on nature; Michael Palin on travel; Alice Roberts on anything she turns her hand to are three that spring straight to mind. Bring back James Burke I say!
This is actually not much better than some of the better science docs, that's not detracting from the video tho, just giving props to others that also do it just as well
Seeing a ParallaxNick notification is more than enough to surge the endorphins through my body. I absolutely adore this channel. Such a special flair your personality adds to your videos... I love it.
I got this video in my recommendations and decided to give it a burl. I was pleasantly surprised at the well articulated unfolding of events and historically accurate information provided. You sir have earned my subscription and I wish you much success on your path to promoting scientific literacy and knowledge. Very well done 😎👍
A couple of months ago I stumble upon the video "The current crisis in Cosmology - it just got a lot worse | Night Sky News November 2019", by Dr. Becky. It made, in 9 months, half a million views. Yours, in 2 months, already made half that amount. The difference? Yours is a hundred times better!!! It's a true lesson of History!!! Congratulations!!! Keep on that path!!!
This is wonderfully calming voice describing the splendid wonders of the universe is so nice. My only criticism of this channel is that it needs more content.
"That's a time so short that in comparison, one second would be proportional to the age of the universe" Oh wow, that's really shor- "Squared." EXCUSE ME WHAT THE FUCK!!??!
Hey, I have just watched the video for the first time.... I felt that one also. It landed with an army of challenges, questions; a picknick for thought and ponderings ahead !! Have you given it much attention as yet ??
I've said it before and I'll say it again. When I see a notification that a ParallaxNick video is up, I smile. I know there may be nothing here that hasn't been covered by others, but I love the storytelling style and how you put it into the context of the history of how we got to this point. Plus I know it's an outlet for you as you have mentioned in the past. Keep up the good work!
What makes these videos stand out is not that they present new material, but that they put things in a historical perspective, and does it in a damn interesting, i would almost say spellbinding way.
The mention of Clyde Tombaugh reminds me that he went on to discover that lead in motor fuel was getting deposited all over the place, when he had to compensate for it while trying to trace the origin of meteorites -- in the 1930s! He wrote a letter, nobody cared.
I've watched this probably 10 times, and it blows my mind every time. I love all your videos, but this one is maybe the most powerful and beautiful science video ever made. It's seriously up there with the Sagan's Cosmos, but is much more informative and detailed. Thank you so much for everything you do. Keep up the good work.
OMG Nick just keeps improving all the time. Not only that but the rate he is improving seems to be increasing. We my have stumbled upon the Nick Constant!
@Astute Cingulus "Agnosticism is a state of confusion of the thinker. " Agnosticism is not the simultaneous assertion that God does and does not exist, which would be a contradiction. It is the frank admission "I do not know", which concept is fundamental to the toolbox of any scientific or academic investigator. The notion that the recognition of logical dilemma is the same as the resolution of the dilemma is a state of confusion of the thinker.
I suffer from a near total math dyslexia, yet I’m irresistibly drawn to hear the cosmic heavyweights go at it. This was pure joy and I wholeheartedly thank you.
I'm a physicist and a teacher in math and science. I love your videos. They are inspiring and gives me ideas to present difficult material to my students.
These videos by Nick are so much more detailed and cared for than those of the PBS and National Geographic varieties. Those are too full of dramatic fluff, ParallaxNick’s videos are all killer with no filler.
Agreed. I've subscribed to this channel because it's not dumbed down and far better quality than the commercial offerings with no moving on in the subject as soon as it starts to get interesting. I'm pretty sure if Nick's chosen subject involved some highly complex and specialised equations, he'd at least name them or maybe show them onscreen for a few seconds to give his viewers the chance to carry on research even if he did not go into detail.
@@larsalfredhenrikstahlin8012 They are. But apparently people here are 6 years old and need to put other content down to praise the one they are watching for some reason.
This is the single most incredible recap of the creation of the universe and our discovery of it. You have compacted a massive amount of science, history, and history of science into a narrative that's impossible to stop playing. You should get an award.
You're certainly not wrong in stating that the video is impossible to stop playing. This must be my seventh viewing, at least. History and science is an undeniably fascinating overlap, and Nick has a knack for narration.
The hundreds of videos I trawl through whilst mining the RUclips algorithm suddenly pay off when I discover a channel like yours. Subscribed with gusto! Glad to have found you. Can't wait to see what else you have to offer.
Fascinating! I am Gregg's wife, Lisa. This is something I will have to watch several times to understand better. I bet my hubby Gregg will find it just as fascinating as well.
"...Something is going to happen, and I've been allowed to give you this warning." "What's going to happen?" "Something wonderful." - Arthur C. Clarke, "2010"
Little mistake in the graphic showing the red shift: only the black absorption bands should move to the right. The spectrum, the background colors, should stay put.
I Thoroughly enjoyed this piecing together of astrophysical history with regards to the emerging of the leading theory of the Big Bang and it’s problems! Thnx!
Fascinating! "The Universe is apparently older than itself." For some reason, that seems so intuitively correct and true. Roger Penrose Cyclic Universe comes to mind.
Maybe it doesn't cycle everywhere at the same rate and is more like a boiling liquid... with the snapshot that we can see through space and past being too small to show enough variation
@@E.T.S. A lot is said here and most of it is misunderstood by others. Concepts so far reaching from the reference point of our lives, yet what is said here encompasses all lives and their respective views of the universe. How can so many people look out into the universe and see a unified lie? Easy, the people around you distort your view and the reference point you exist.
@@patrickfle9172 Interesting that you mention liquid! We see the hard division between say the Ocean surface & the atmosphere above it, but few are aware that the gaseous atmosphere also behaves as liquids do, in fact as you rise off the Earth into space, this 'liquid' is still all around you, it is just not very dense.
@@lectrikdog I'm currently trying to understand mass as being identical with its apparent effects. Mass being the local curvature of spacetime, instead of causing it. So I had this thought of Spacetime possibly having properties of matter such as viscosity, elasticity... that in matter emerge from electromagnetic interactions, local excitations of the EM-field. So far it appears to me like it might behave like a compressible suprafluid
Maybe that smart guy can blast me too, gentlemen. The fact that a majority of scientists supports a theory or believes today that the age of the universe is 13.8 billion years is acknowledged. But it does not mean it's true. As the narrator in this clip states, it's big and I may add: there is nothing that proves it's finite. The statement "we are twelve billion light-years from the edge" in a song is no reason to "BLAST" someone. This distance is just an estimate and indicates nothing about possible infinity beyond that "edge". As an observer we are always in the "center" of an observable sphere. Think of a diver in a murky ocean. He may see hundreds of fish nearby, but the sphere that limits his view is not automatically the scientifically proven size of the ocean. The sphere is that big - the universe can be much bigger or infinite. Or transformed into time, the universe maybe that old or much older or eternal. Think about it and use your math properly. And you can blast me if you wish - but it won't make your theory more true!
Curt Coller ..see video...not evolutionary.😊....1hr 50 mins...what the many space probes have revealed...Mariner 10..voyager 1-2...ruclips.net/video/CzyQbOQ0dv0/видео.html
>>> This brief exposition is tour de force of clarity, conciseness and didactic skill. It ought to be required viewing for high school science classes. Thank you.
Wow. First, another spectacular production, full of info and humor and glimpses into the lives of people I knew existed and did not. The ending is like hurtling toward the finale in a particularly great action movie. Thank you so much for creating and publishing again - I really miss your work. And thank you even more for doing it now. I'll watch this several times over and enjoy every moment.
Well, the Electric Universe Theory (EUT) is providing a profound solution.. Very nice video presentation of the cosmology - tip of the iceberg - problem for the Natural Science. Over a century slavery under the "woke" mindset of "sect scientifism" now, one can only hope it will be enough
Simply superb, I'm always agog at how you can weave such abstruse scientific concepts into such a compelling narrative. You expose cold equations and hard earned data points as the all too human endeavours they really are. And, as far as this particular pedant can tell; this one was error free.
This is the best video on RUclips. Please take this compliment to heart because there are so many blasè nerdy animated (I don’t know what the word is...weird??) people/channels on RUclips. *very refreshing*
Don't take this the wrong way but I'm glad you released this now because I need to chill and get some sleep. I love watching your videos but listening to them is what I do time and time again. Your voice is soothing and I can't deal with harsh sounds right now.
what else is on try the “Journey to the Microcosmos”, narrated by Hank Green here on RUclips. It’s about very tiny organisms viewed through a microscope.
Something that always confused me was the fact that the Milky Way is 52000 light years across, and the closest galaxy is 2.5 million light years away. So most of the universe is just, nothing, even more so than I ever imagined
My guess is the inflationary epoch was caused by vacuum decay, which in addition to releasing an enormous amount of energy, also resulted in the separation of the 3 particulate forces (electromagnetism, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear). I'm not convinced that gravity _can_ be unified with the rest, as it appears to operate fundamentally differently. But I suppose it's possible that the Big Bang itself was caused by a vacuum decay that resulted in the separation of gravity from the 3 particulate forces.
@Shawn I'm with you on gravity not being the 4th force. There is no doubt that something is different about gravity that makes it a strong force to hold objects (planets, galaxies, etc) together yet also so weak that a .99 cent magnet put on your refrigerator can defeat the force of gravity. Also I'm thinking that maybe gravity isn't everything we make of it and electromagnetism is really the force that shapes and keeps everything together and in order. Just my 2 cents.
@@morningbite2023: Electromagnetism doesn't shape the universe. Electromagnetism, like the other particulate forces, can be repulsive as well as attractive depending on charge. Gravity is unique in that similar gravitational "charges" attract instead of repel -- in fact there is no known physical manifestation of repulsive gravity -- which is why gravity can pull countless fucktillions of particles together across millions of light years of distance. Electromagnetism can't do that, because every electromagnetically charged particle has a 50% chance of encountering another electromagnetically charged particle with a similar charge and repelling it instead of attracting it.
Wow. Completely fascinating. Makes me want to go back in time and tell Einstein he had become old and set in his ways and that his cosmological constant may not have been wrong and to thank him for his unequaled contribution to sciences.
But if you told him that, he'd want proof that " he had become old and set in his ways". The only thing that'd change his mind is mathematics showing that fact. So, to prove him wrong, you'd have to 'steal' someone else's future discoveries.
When I was in school the Milky Way had 100 Billion stars, some years ago it had 200-400 billions stars. Now its reported to have 250 to 500... You would think that someone that work with this should remember them many times when new discoverys have changed everything that nothing can be set in stone for all time.
Set in stone? Who set it in stone? The amounts most commonly given are based on the Milky Way’s mass and brightness are/were never anything more then an estimate. We simply do not have the tech for a more accuracy. Even if we did know the size there are still variables such as low mass stars that we simply can't detect. It's also why, even though we know the size of Andromeda, the number given is also an estimate. Honestly school is one of the worst places for accuracy. This is due to the outrages cost of buying new text books every time a new discovery in science overturns so called facts.
@@celdur4635 - Yup, and so now we can see better stars. Our sun is called a "dwarf star" - a yellow dwarf specifically. This is a legacy designation, because until recently it seemed that most stars were more massive than the sun. But in the last 50 years or so we have discovered tons and tons of red dwarf stars (some of these are quite close but only recently seen) which are much smaller than the sun. The sun is actually better described as a giant star.
@@celdur4635 I doubt that is the reason for the 100-250 billion discrepancies. Even with poor vision, you should be able to estimate what you can't see.
Your content has been a great comfort to me as I basically am unable to do anything meaningful during post retinal surgery recovery. Sure technically I can read or a tually watch content but my eyes have gotten fatigued easy lately, both because swelling and because I lack proper glasses for my one functioning eye So, thank you for your narration, and your humor. It's helped as much as my family in general has.
Another problem for me: The universe behaves in a way our current theory cannot explain. So we'll say that over 98 percent of the universe is composed of matter and energy that we can neither see nor detect. Houston, we have a problem.
We can't detect it for now. Just as we couldn't detect or see other galaxies for a long time. My guess is we need new technology to 'see' the invisible matter.
We can detect dark matter by observing how it bends space-time, and we detect dark energy by observing the acceleration of the expansion of the universe.
Amazing video! I've seen so many documentaries that just recycle old documentaries information, but this was fresh and intriguing. Thoroughly enjoyed this and it has rekindle my love of Physics.
Many thanks for this. Wondering now how to account for the difference between the published age of the universe (13.8 billion years) and its actual age (14.27 billion years). Either a mistake has been made, or our knowledge is imperfect, or our understanding is in error. Hopefully we'll be able to find the answer.
ilokivi.....”Either a mistake has been made”....I think so 🏴....See vdeo ..what have the space probes shown...watch ALL.😊....🌖 🔭.....ruclips.net/video/CzyQbOQ0dv0/видео.html.
@@donaldmacdonald9940 I feel dumber after watching 2 minutes of that garbage. As a scientist and a Christian, I am appalled by that creationist nonsense and its lack of reason, honesty, and integrity. Just agree with the flat earthers and electric universe enthusiasts and claim all 'evolution' based science is based on lies and subterfuge.
@@gmork1090 ...If you can suspend your “dumber”ness for 10 mins and as a “scientist and Christian” Watch all of the video...”scientists”.sometimes look at evidence... In a court of law the jury is required to listen to all the evidence...you watched 2 mins... “Lift up you eyes on high, and behold who hath created these [things], that bringeth out their host [stars] by number, he calls them [stars] all by names by the greatness of his might”....Isaiah ch40v 26.........ruclips.net/video/vdiU2BdCyBY/видео.html ......take care....🏴
The only problem is galaxies are not all moving away from us at a constant rate (cosmological constant). The galaxies appear to be moving faster and faster,away actually, accelerating with distance (Hubble constant). Yet every time the Hubble constant is measured a different rate of acceleration to distance is found. Actual measurements indicate there is no such thing as a cosmological constant or a Hubble constant.
I appreciate the effort put into this so much, it's far more enlightening than the generic big bang articles and documentaries that make the big bang and the age and expansion of the universe sound clear cut. So far the coolest concept is the primeval singularity, which is a black hole that formed in another universe, leading to our universe' big bang, which created massive stars that collapsed into black holes, that are the primeval singularities of other universes.
There is one picture you are showing, when talking about Friedman, that is actually Karl Schwarzschild ( de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Schwarzschild#/media/Datei:Schwarzschild.jpg ).
== The Conglomerate - Universe Creation Theory (combining GOD, General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Chaos Theory) "The BIG Bang-Bit Bang inflation/expansion of energy and information into the void 13.8 billion years ago was a supermassive white hole spawned by a supermassive black hole at the heart of a galaxy in our 'parent universe'. This duality combines general relativity’s singularities of infinite density in a ‘Cosmic Egg’ birth of this and all universes within 'The Conglomerate': multiverse without random bubble universes and parallel worlds. Our Universe is inside the Planck density of that SBH and shares the same event horizon. That SBH-SWH seed phase transition was a 'quantum tunneling umbilical wormhole' with energy-matter and data transformed/transferred, albeit scrambled and encoded. Our Universe is 1-in-2 trillion 'self-similar offspring' each with the same inherited physical laws (‘DNA’). This simple cause-and-effect cycle/'circle of life' - birth-life-death-transformation-rebirth - explains both infinite space and eternity. Reproduction is GOD/Nature’s simplest plan for spreading life for everything from cells to universes." - Seal #1a of the 7seals.blogspot.com
This has triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is not the ‘end of the world‘ - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
You and MelodySheep should collaborate on a video one of these days. Their channel and yours are the only scientific channels I subscribe to. Keep up the great work!
Best science video I've seen in youtube, ever! Yeah, I never trusted and still don't trust Cosmology. Back of the envelope math: Say we observe a galaxy 12Bly away, and red shift is such that it seems to be moving away at c. How long ago was it "here" (near the place the big bang happened)? Well, even assuming constant speed, 12Byr to get there PLUS 12Byr for light to get back, so the universe would have to be 24Byrs old. There's also the superluminic early expansion and the mother of all slammings on the break. Given just those 2 megabsurdities it's a gigabsurdity to introduce dark this and dark that to fix minute problems in an island of theory in an ocean of contradictions. WMAP produced it's own contradictions by declaring the universe flat (with local curvature cases, but generally flat). The contradiction with that conclusion is that the whole premise of WMAP is that those stretched photons from the big bang are visible to us BECAUSE THE UNIVERSE IS CLOSED, so they've been going round and round. If the universe is flat, the only way those photons could be coming back is if the edge of the universe is mirror plated. Where did the silver or aluminium come from? Another similar crisis exists regarding the diameter of the proton, which when measured using moronic hydrogen yields a diameter that differs by 5% or so from other methods. Conceptual misunderstandings abound in science, too, like the idea that the Michaelson Morley experiment disproved "the ether". The ether was misconceived as a medium on which EM waves propagate LONGITUDINALLY, like sound waves. If that were true, indeed a speed vector in the medium would affect propagation. But nobody seems to have questioned this longitudinal assumption. When waves are transversal to the medium, such as waves on water, the waves' motion is not affected by motion of the medium (e.g. stones into river cause expanding, circular waves with a stationary center, regardless of water flow). The only thing Michaelson Morley proved is that EITHER there is no ether, OR that relative to the ether EM waves are transversal, --which should have been obvious...
1) As Tommy said, your initial assumption is incorrect. Astronomers don't observe light that is _reflected_ off distant objects, they observe light that was _emitted_ by distant objects. There is no need for a "mirror-plated universe". 2) Why are you assuming a constant rate of expansion? There is no evidence to support a constant rate of expansion. In fact, there is an increasing amount of evidence to support that the rate of expansion was initially very fast, followed by a decreasing rate of expansion, followed by an increasing rate of expansion that started a few billion years ago. 3) If a galaxy were moving away from us at _c,_ we wouldn't be able to see its light at all -- some galaxies are _extrapolated_ to _now_ be moving away from us at _c_ or even faster thanks to expanding space, but that's based on light that we can see which was emitted when they were moving at a speed less than _c._ 4) Of course transverse waves are affected by movement of the medium through which they pass. That's why turbulence from a waterfall doesn't propagate upstream (the waterfall is effectively an event horizon), and that's _also_ why light emitted from distant galaxies is redshifted. As for your example of throwing a rock into a moving stream, next time pay attention to the _location_ of those waves _relative to the point where the rock entered the water._ You will see very clearly (if the water is clear and you can see where the rock landed) that the circular ripples are moving downstream. It is only due to your own disconnection from the medium (i.e. the water) that you are able to observe the ripples without a Doppler shift.
@@parallaxnick637: Just curious. I saw your "like", then I corrected a typo, then the "like" disappeared, and I wondered if RUclips did that on purpose.
Thank you ParallaxNick, for another really interesting & informative video. Along with Sean Carroll and Brian Greene, you have made this dreary Lock-down more bearable. Please keep making more. Thanks again best regards. Paul C., West Wales (UK).
Given that there is a part of the Universe which has expanded outside the observable universe, how can we know how long ago the universe began it;s expansion?
WE haven't a clue. We cannot account for Dark Matter, Dark Energy or where the Universe came from EXCEPT after a "tiny while afterwards" which simply is not good enough. Your house is falling over so we are going to push it back up and pump concrete underneath it. Q. "For how long ?" A. For ever since we do not have a clue ! That sums up several Trillions of research to date. Q. How much do we need to spend on science to understand the Universe ? A. More money than we will ever have and forever BUT we will get there at the end !
Isent the simplest explainaiton that the acceleration of the expansion was faster in the early univers right after the big bang, and have since been slowing down to the expansion we messure today?? Why must the accesleraation be constant? In an ever expanding(changing) univers? Love your videos btw 👍
@@jamietaylor820 yes, that is what acceleration means. But there was an inflation periode from 10x-36 to 10x-32 sec after the big bang so in that sence atleast the acceleration of the expansion has not always been constant.
Back in 1960s I read of how universe dating was done, obviously by a few, without your superb discription of cosmic theories. I was taught in general schooling that the universe was presumed to be somewhere between 18-24 billion years. When digging into that, those numbers were based on presumed element abundances and the matching of heavy element half-lives and the daughter elements to those abundances.
If our current theories fail to explain the data, it should be treated as a challenge rather than a crisis which is a more positive approach, and might be more productive.
Once you realize you have to throw away 95% of the conventional mainstream physics model to explain reality the Universe is not so much of a mystery. 150 years ago Physics was on the right track until Einstein destroyed this paradigm with his warped spacetime rubbish. The Universe explains herself through Ether torsion fields ie The Di-Electric and Magnetic non Cartesian force vectors....ie pressure mediations. The Universe is both Etheric and Electric.
@@whatabouttheearth Thank you for making my point. Hint: When your theory no longer matches reality, your theory is wrong, regardless of the beauty of your math. ;)
The more I watch videos from this channel, more I appreciate the details.... Here, for instance, the picture showing a "suspicious Einstein" (14:33) to really fit the narrative... These videos are amazing at so many levels!!!
"Every point in space is its own center, from which the universe expands." I've been trying to find these words to explain my understanding for months now, but was stuck on saying "everywhere sees equally far so everywhere is the center, and thus nowhere"
That makes me feel more or less up to speed with current cosmology. Nice job making it compelling and interesting. If I may offer a lay person’s intuition, which I know is an undesirable handicap in science, but 13.8 billion years, and now 14.2 billion years strike me as a very modest amount of time for the universe to have developed to it’s current size and form from a single point of its origin. Given the kind of distances of the furthest objects we can detect in deep space. If you had told me the universe were 50 billion years old, I wouldn’t have batted an eye.
Edwin Hubble thought that Light over great distances became "tired" or weaker. That may explain why the Novas they checked at extreme distances would look dimmer, plus there is dust everywhere in space and hydrogen is exceedingly plentiful. We see a cloud of it between us and the center of our Galaxy. When light passes through hydrogen it gives a red light. Possibly the faraway nova are bright, but get dimmed by the intergalactic dust. Just something I read.
A couple of thousand years ago you could happily make stuff up and most people would accept it. But for the curious few the earth would still be the centre of the universe, as it was until 500ya. But now everywhere is the centre. From certainty to crisis. Thank you Nick but I was not ready for this video to end.
Everyone first time arriving here might have thought this is just a boring bed story to help to sleep . But it isn't , instead it's the otherwise , it makes your brain think and probably in some cases it makes u can't sleep with the overflowing ideas, dopamine and chemical rushes in the brain as you think about the real world . Good job indeed ParallaxNick , i found your channel on "accident" , and i never regret it , you deserve more views and subscribe.
I have been teaching Physics and Astronomy for 20 years. There are many other experimental results that neither GR or QM can explain. Particle Physics also faces monumental problems. However, attempting to accurately date the Big Bang has brought it all to a head. To me, both GR and QM must be approximate. They must be discarded as foundational assumptions. However, for the past 50 years, GR and QM have been treated as religious tenets. Physics won't progress until a groundswell of Physicists agree that it is OK to propose alternative foundations. Unfortunately, the vast majority of academic journals flat out reject any attempts to formulate alternative foundational postulates. A culture of exploration needs to return to fundamental Physics.
Agree that there is a near religious devotion to relativity (among other things). Seeing the same fervor across the board in academe. Seems to me there is a movement away from empiricism broadly in the culture. Figured that physicists would be less susceptible to groupthink and willing to challenge assumptions when faced with facts, but...
I think the Universe is simply eternal without begging or end, and is not expanding as the Tolman surface brightness test indicates. The SN Ia dilation that purported to prove expansion were likely an error resulting from an over assumption of the standard-candle nature derived from Chandrasekhar limits which ignore many other aspects like rotation and magnetic fields which can vary the mass and magnitude of the SN.
Type 1as are only one standard candle. There are others, like cepheid variables. And I don't see how measuring the brightness of our nearest star could have an impact on the values of galactic motion.
I know that the statement that, "The universe is one big star...", was mostly metaphorical... But, just imagine it in a literal sense. Imagine humans, one day achieving the necessary technology, to travel at great enough speed... to reach the "edge" of the universe... and BEYOND. Imagine our "craft", traveling outward... through the various layers, experiencing the requisite changes in temperature, etc... until finally "popping out" of the Corona of "the star that IS our universe"... and INTO A GREATER, COMPLETE UNIVERSE OUTSIDE OF IT... Someone should scifi the sh*t outta this idea, lol.
You are one of the best story tellers of science and the universe. Thank you so much for this beautiful work! I enjoy all your work immensely.
I love the description of the Horn Telescope
@Ezra Layton ehh I watch on flixportal. You can find it by googling :P -thiago
@Thiago Mitchell thank you, I signed up and it seems like they got a lot of movies there :) I appreciate it!
@Ezra Layton Happy to help =)
I watched the whole presentation and I think I actually got about 70% of it. Thanks for making it both interesting and understandable.
Yes, the concepts aren't that hard. The math is.
Funny, I watched the whole video and got about 105% of it!
Ek
How can they still claim the universe is around 13 and a half billion years old, due to rewinding the expansion when they are now telling us dark energy is speeding up the expansion? Seriously, can anyone explain why the age has not been adjusted if dark energy theory is right. Not in the 5 years I've been asking has anyone been able to tell me
@Commander Anderson big bang expansion was caused by gravity???
One thing guys: my mic conked out during audio editing, so I had to use my backup mic for the sound patches. Thank you again John Annerud for his help with my sound.
honestly your vids could be with a DIY slide projector with cassette tape audio and I'd have no complaints.
I barely noticed and likely wouldn't have had it not been mentioned. Edit: except for the one at 42:00, I'm not def! Still not an issue. I loved your explanation of the cosmological constant problem.
Yay,,glad to see you back.As the yt market matures to serious full length vids you'll be near the front.Isaac will be some tough competition though. :)
Thank you so much! I had a great day, but never imagined I could end it with another of your amazing videos!
It was barely noticeable, and not at all distracting. You have a wonderful speaking voice and a clear delivery that makes these wonderfully informative videos an absolute delight. I've been very pleased to note that your sound work has steadily improved each time, and thank God you got rid of the background music. That was my only real complaint.
By the way, I will be looking forward to that Eddington video you alluded to. Can't imagine anyone who could do it justice any better than you.
Watching for a second time. This is one of the best things I’ve ever seen on RUclips or television. Better than any other documentary about cosmology I’ve ever seen.
I have about as much exposure to cosmology and physics as the next interested guy but this utterly blows my mind. What an incredible story. I've long held the suspicion that despite our best efforts weve tripped somewhere along the way in our efforts to define our universe and that taking a phorensic expedition into the origins of this blunder would be so catastrophic to our current estimations that we would have to scrap an enormous margin of what we believe to be truth in order to get on the path to discovery of the real truths of the universe, rendering most of science all but useless and contrived. I'm sure of shared sentiment when I say this is terrifying. I hope, on the other hand, that there are just more discoveries along the way that tie up the loose ends.
I tend to agree with your assessment, Robert. In the flamboyantly Russian words of an actor from the film Armageddon: "I told you, you took a wrong way, a wrong road.”
At some point between Hubble, and Einstein, we (humanity, et al.,) fumbled our theories, and stopped caring about how our theories matched up against reality and our observations of it. Einstein was described by many early astrophysicists and astronomers as being "blind to the fact that a forest exists beyond the trees that so fascinate him". Any time that one single human being's name and likeness is associated with an astronomical amount of so called discoveries, and those discoveries remain scientifically unchanged for over a century; that fact would seem to indicate that we've been set on a wild goose chase for a century.
Finally RUclips algorithm worked and brought me to your channel. Subscribed 👍
Yet another masterpiece by Nick! It always makes my day to see an upload from you man. Thanks for all the hard work
@Astute Cingulus Umm . . . what you mean, "we"?
This channel is underrated. I love how I'm getting Astronomy AND History lessons
Douglas Adams may have been on the right track when he wrote:
"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory mentioned, which states that this has already happened."
More than once, apparently. 😀
Reverse to the last save state.
It's a prison, but it's made in a way to develop us into better beings, instead of punishing us.
What a punishing thought.
Actually it will just dissolve and say "Welcome to Level 2" :D
more then 42 times apparently !
Nick, your channel is destined for great things. It's very rare that I get to find a channel to follow *before* it has its sharp rise in popularity, but mark my words, yours is coming. Keep persevering through the endemic suffering of life and keep making videos. You're an inspiration and exactly what I've needed this year. Thank you.
Yes, life is definitely suffering. This is why we must find meaning in each of our lives, something worth suffering for - I recommend children.
@@jimsteen911 😀
Endemic suffering...
If there is a God and artist's are his chosen people, he doesn't show it.
There has been a bloom of high-quality science content on RUclips recently, but this is still the only channel that can compel me to put down whatever I am doing for 45min or an hour as soon as I become aware of a new upload. Due to an alphabet soup of mental health issues I won't go into, I am severely anhedonic and enjoy few things; but, Nick's writing and narration are two of them.
Hear you brother. Got my own alphabet too. One of the reasons I'm a RUclipsr.
Amazing quality content once again! This is so much better than the "science popularization" docs we now have on mainstream TV. Thank you for doing this, this is just brilliant!
There are a handful of TV presenters* who do a great job of drawing you into their subject with enough depth to entice, and whose knowledge and enthusiasm naturally engage the viewer without the need for OTT effects, overly dramatic music, and 'talking years' forever telling us how wonderful / mysterious / unbelievable something is without adding to the content. When you also subtract from the latter kind the all-too-frequent recaps to cater to the and breaks (and ours in Britain now rival the American ones), if often leaves very little time for anything educational.
* David Attenborough on nature; Michael Palin on travel; Alice Roberts on anything she turns her hand to are three that spring straight to mind. Bring back James Burke I say!
This is actually not much better than some of the better science docs, that's not detracting from the video tho, just giving props to others that also do it just as well
Seeing a ParallaxNick notification is more than enough to surge the endorphins through my body. I absolutely adore this channel. Such a special flair your personality adds to your videos... I love it.
I've been on a long shift at work and I come home to this...you've made my day. My favourite youtuber...thanks Nick
same
I got this video in my recommendations and decided to give it a burl. I was pleasantly surprised at the well articulated unfolding of events and historically accurate information provided. You sir have earned my subscription and I wish you much success on your path to promoting scientific literacy and knowledge. Very well done 😎👍
A couple of months ago I stumble upon the video "The current crisis in Cosmology - it just got a lot worse | Night Sky News November 2019", by
Dr. Becky. It made, in 9 months, half a million views. Yours, in 2 months, already made half that amount. The difference? Yours is a hundred times better!!! It's a true lesson of History!!! Congratulations!!! Keep on that path!!!
This is wonderfully calming voice describing the splendid wonders of the universe is so nice. My only criticism of this channel is that it needs more content.
"That's a time so short that in comparison, one second would be proportional to the age of the universe" Oh wow, that's really shor- "Squared." EXCUSE ME WHAT THE FUCK!!??!
Hey, I have just watched the video for the first time.... I felt that one also. It landed with an army of challenges, questions; a picknick for thought and ponderings ahead !! Have you given it much attention as yet ??
Earth's heading through the galaxy towards Leo at 1.3 million kilometres an hour... don't they think we should look into seat belts and helmets.
Mind blowing thought exercise!
Yes, I've never really recovered from Nick dropping this time bomb.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. When I see a notification that a ParallaxNick video is up, I smile. I know there may be nothing here that hasn't been covered by others, but I love the storytelling style and how you put it into the context of the history of how we got to this point. Plus I know it's an outlet for you as you have mentioned in the past.
Keep up the good work!
What makes these videos stand out is not that they present new material, but that they put things in a historical perspective, and does it in a damn interesting, i would almost say spellbinding way.
Just clicked start. Thank you in advance because I am 100% certain this is going to be great.
Hope you enjoy it!
I did mate, thank you!
Was yet another good one!
The mention of Clyde Tombaugh reminds me that he went on to discover that lead in motor fuel was getting deposited all over the place, when he had to compensate for it while trying to trace the origin of meteorites -- in the 1930s! He wrote a letter, nobody cared.
i thought that was Clair Patterson - Cosmos did a whole episode on it.
He also would’ve kicked the shit out of Marsden if he wasn’t too busy doing real science shit like discovering PLANETS 🤬
I've watched this probably 10 times, and it blows my mind every time. I love all your videos, but this one is maybe the most powerful and beautiful science video ever made. It's seriously up there with the Sagan's Cosmos, but is much more informative and detailed. Thank you so much for everything you do. Keep up the good work.
Wow, thank you!
OMG Nick just keeps improving all the time. Not only that but the rate he is improving seems to be increasing. We my have stumbled upon the Nick Constant!
@Astute Cingulus "Agnosticism is a state of confusion of the thinker. "
Agnosticism is not the simultaneous assertion that God does and does not exist, which would be a contradiction. It is the frank admission "I do not know", which concept is fundamental to the toolbox of any scientific or academic investigator. The notion that the recognition of logical dilemma is the same as the resolution of the dilemma is a state of confusion of the thinker.
I suffer from a near total math dyslexia, yet I’m irresistibly drawn to hear the cosmic heavyweights go at it. This was pure joy and I wholeheartedly thank you.
I don't know if I have math dyslexia, but I certainly have some very basic math problems, so I know how you feel.
I'm a physicist and a teacher in math and science. I love your videos. They are inspiring and gives me ideas to present difficult material to my students.
That's the best outcome I could have hoped for
This topic is not new to me, but your narration and voice are superbly soothing and engaging. Thank you so much for this.
These videos by Nick are so much more detailed and cared for than those of the PBS and National Geographic varieties. Those are too full of dramatic fluff, ParallaxNick’s videos are all killer with no filler.
Agreed. I've subscribed to this channel because it's not dumbed down and far better quality than the commercial offerings with no moving on in the subject as soon as it starts to get interesting. I'm pretty sure if Nick's chosen subject involved some highly complex and specialised equations, he'd at least name them or maybe show them onscreen for a few seconds to give his viewers the chance to carry on research even if he did not go into detail.
Well I mean PBS Spacetime is pretty dope...
@@larsalfredhenrikstahlin8012 They are. But apparently people here are 6 years old and need to put other content down to praise the one they are watching for some reason.
The for-profit broadcasting channels are even less worth speaking of. I don't even bother watching any of them.
Exactly!
This is the single most incredible recap of the creation of the universe and our discovery of it. You have compacted a massive amount of science, history, and history of science into a narrative that's impossible to stop playing. You should get an award.
You're certainly not wrong in stating that the video is impossible to stop playing. This must be my seventh viewing, at least. History and science is an undeniably fascinating overlap, and Nick has a knack for narration.
I have long wondered why this channel does not have more views and subs when this type of content is extremely popular on RUclips.
The hundreds of videos I trawl through whilst mining the RUclips algorithm suddenly pay off when I discover a channel like yours.
Subscribed with gusto! Glad to have found you. Can't wait to see what else you have to offer.
Omg thank you for making another video! Best in the business
Really?! You must be kidding
Fascinating! I am Gregg's wife, Lisa. This is something I will have to watch several times to understand better. I bet my hubby Gregg will find it just as fascinating as well.
Glad it was helpful!
"...Something is going to happen, and I've been allowed to give you this warning."
"What's going to happen?"
"Something wonderful."
- Arthur C. Clarke, "2010"
Little mistake in the graphic showing the red shift: only the black absorption bands should move to the right. The spectrum, the background colors, should stay put.
Okay I wasn't going to say anything but if you're going to be a pedant I'm going to agree. It was really bugging me XD
I Thoroughly enjoyed this piecing together of astrophysical history with regards to the emerging of the leading theory of the Big Bang and it’s problems! Thnx!
The universe is older than itself makes perfect sense to me. The great I am that always has been and always will be...
Fascinating!
"The Universe is apparently older than itself."
For some reason, that seems so intuitively correct and true.
Roger Penrose Cyclic Universe comes to mind.
Maybe it doesn't cycle everywhere at the same rate and is more like a boiling liquid... with the snapshot that we can see through space and past being too small to show enough variation
@@patrickfle9172 I see it, what at strange concept,
@@E.T.S. A lot is said here and most of it is misunderstood by others. Concepts so far reaching from the reference point of our lives, yet what is said here encompasses all lives and their respective views of the universe. How can so many people look out into the universe and see a unified lie? Easy, the people around you distort your view and the reference point you exist.
@@patrickfle9172 Interesting that you mention liquid! We see the hard division between say the Ocean surface & the atmosphere above it, but few are aware that the gaseous atmosphere also behaves as liquids do, in fact as you rise off the Earth into space, this 'liquid' is still all around you, it is just not very dense.
@@lectrikdog I'm currently trying to understand mass as being identical with its apparent effects. Mass being the local curvature of spacetime, instead of causing it. So I had this thought of Spacetime possibly having properties of matter such as viscosity, elasticity... that in matter emerge from electromagnetic interactions, local excitations of the EM-field. So far it appears to me like it might behave like a compressible suprafluid
Thank you for not ruining your videos with distracting music like so many others who try to make science videos.
Glad to see Leavitt getting some love! Just finished reading a biography of her.
I learned new things I hadn't known before. I was also mildly amused. Very good. Thank you.
Maybe that smart guy can blast me too, gentlemen. The fact that a majority of scientists supports a theory or believes today that the age of the universe is 13.8 billion years is acknowledged. But it does not mean it's true.
As the narrator in this clip states, it's big and I may add: there is nothing that proves it's finite.
The statement "we are twelve billion light-years from the edge" in a song is no reason to "BLAST" someone.
This distance is just an estimate and indicates nothing about possible infinity beyond that "edge".
As an observer we are always in the "center" of an observable sphere. Think of a diver in a murky ocean. He may see hundreds of fish nearby, but the sphere that limits his view is not automatically the scientifically proven size of the ocean. The sphere is that big - the universe can be much bigger or infinite. Or transformed into time, the universe maybe that old or much older or eternal. Think about it and use your math properly.
And you can blast me if you wish - but it won't make your theory more true!
Curt Coller ..see video...not evolutionary.😊....1hr 50 mins...what the many space probes have revealed...Mariner 10..voyager 1-2...ruclips.net/video/CzyQbOQ0dv0/видео.html
>>> This brief exposition is tour de force of clarity, conciseness and didactic skill. It ought to be required viewing for high school science classes. Thank you.
This comment is a great example of someone trying to sound smart.
Broken Wave >>> Thnx, but I don’t need to try ;-)
Wow. First, another spectacular production, full of info and humor and glimpses into the lives of people I knew existed and did not. The ending is like hurtling toward the finale in a particularly great action movie. Thank you so much for creating and publishing again - I really miss your work. And thank you even more for doing it now. I'll watch this several times over and enjoy every moment.
Well, the Electric Universe Theory (EUT) is providing a profound solution..
Very nice video presentation of the cosmology - tip of the iceberg - problem for the Natural Science. Over a century slavery under the "woke" mindset of "sect scientifism" now, one can only hope it will be enough
Simply superb, I'm always agog at how you can weave such abstruse scientific concepts into such a compelling narrative. You expose cold equations and hard earned data points as the all too human endeavours they really are.
And, as far as this particular pedant can tell; this one was error free.
This is the best video on RUclips. Please take this compliment to heart because there are so many blasè nerdy animated (I don’t know what the word is...weird??) people/channels on RUclips. *very refreshing*
Don't take this the wrong way but I'm glad you released this now because I need to chill and get some sleep. I love watching your videos but listening to them is what I do time and time again. Your voice is soothing and I can't deal with harsh sounds right now.
what else is on try the “Journey to the Microcosmos”, narrated by Hank Green here on RUclips. It’s about very tiny organisms viewed through a microscope.
Something that always confused me was the fact that the Milky Way is 52000 light years across, and the closest galaxy is 2.5 million light years away. So most of the universe is just, nothing, even more so than I ever imagined
RUclips algorithm finally proposed your channel to me.
Great content. Subscribed.
Godspeed to your success.
Vesto Slipher sounds like a super villain.
Or like a character from Overlord. Something like Prince Vesto Slipher Edric Eeb Vaiself
Happy 4th of July people! Thanks Nick for bestowing another wonderful video upon us.
Happy 4th! My day always improves when Nick uploads.
My guess is the inflationary epoch was caused by vacuum decay, which in addition to releasing an enormous amount of energy, also resulted in the separation of the 3 particulate forces (electromagnetism, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear). I'm not convinced that gravity _can_ be unified with the rest, as it appears to operate fundamentally differently. But I suppose it's possible that the Big Bang itself was caused by a vacuum decay that resulted in the separation of gravity from the 3 particulate forces.
@Shawn I'm with you on gravity not being the 4th force. There is no doubt that something is different about gravity that makes it a strong force to hold objects (planets, galaxies, etc) together yet also so weak that a .99 cent magnet put on your refrigerator can defeat the force of gravity. Also I'm thinking that maybe gravity isn't everything we make of it and electromagnetism is really the force that shapes and keeps everything together and in order. Just my 2 cents.
@@morningbite2023: Electromagnetism doesn't shape the universe. Electromagnetism, like the other particulate forces, can be repulsive as well as attractive depending on charge. Gravity is unique in that similar gravitational "charges" attract instead of repel -- in fact there is no known physical manifestation of repulsive gravity -- which is why gravity can pull countless fucktillions of particles together across millions of light years of distance. Electromagnetism can't do that, because every electromagnetically charged particle has a 50% chance of encountering another electromagnetically charged particle with a similar charge and repelling it instead of attracting it.
@@morningbite2023 Be careful with that kind of talk. You might be confused with a flat earther...
Wow. Completely fascinating. Makes me want to go back in time and tell Einstein he had become old and set in his ways and that his cosmological constant may not have been wrong and to thank him for his unequaled contribution to sciences.
But if you told him that, he'd want proof that " he had become old and set in his ways". The only thing that'd change his mind is mathematics showing that fact.
So, to prove him wrong, you'd have to 'steal' someone else's future discoveries.
When I was in school the Milky Way had 100 Billion stars, some years ago it had 200-400 billions stars. Now its reported to have 250 to 500...
You would think that someone that work with this should remember them many times when new discoverys have changed everything that nothing can be set in stone for all time.
Yeah its confusing. It was 400 billion in Cosmos with Carl Sagan. Now I hear as low as 100 billion. Not sure what's goin on
Set in stone? Who set it in stone? The amounts most commonly given are based on the Milky Way’s mass and brightness are/were never anything more then an estimate. We simply do not have the tech for a more accuracy. Even if we did know the size there are still variables such as low mass stars that we simply can't detect. It's also why, even though we know the size of Andromeda, the number given is also an estimate. Honestly school is one of the worst places for accuracy. This is due to the outrages cost of buying new text books every time a new discovery in science overturns so called facts.
@@stevencoardvenice What's going on is that we build better and better telescopes so we have more accurate observations.
@@celdur4635 - Yup, and so now we can see better stars. Our sun is called a "dwarf star" - a yellow dwarf specifically. This is a legacy designation, because until recently it seemed that most stars were more massive than the sun. But in the last 50 years or so we have discovered tons and tons of red dwarf stars (some of these are quite close but only recently seen) which are much smaller than the sun. The sun is actually better described as a giant star.
@@celdur4635 I doubt that is the reason for the 100-250 billion discrepancies. Even with poor vision, you should be able to estimate what you can't see.
Your content has been a great comfort to me as I basically am unable to do anything meaningful during post retinal surgery recovery. Sure technically I can read or a tually watch content but my eyes have gotten fatigued easy lately, both because swelling and because I lack proper glasses for my one functioning eye
So, thank you for your narration, and your humor.
It's helped as much as my family in general has.
Another problem for me: The universe behaves in a way our current theory cannot explain. So we'll say that over 98 percent of the universe is composed of matter and energy that we can neither see nor detect.
Houston, we have a problem.
It's a recurring theme in cosmology. Happened before Einstein showed up too.
We can't detect it for now. Just as we couldn't detect or see other galaxies for a long time. My guess is we need new technology to 'see' the invisible matter.
We live and learn. What a marvellous spacetime to be alive.
@@neendevi2477 And energy.
We can detect dark matter by observing how it bends space-time, and we detect dark energy by observing the acceleration of the expansion of the universe.
Amazing video! I've seen so many documentaries that just recycle old documentaries information, but this was fresh and intriguing. Thoroughly enjoyed this and it has rekindle my love of Physics.
Yeeeesssss my favorite RUclipsr! You should really get paid for this. 💋💋💋
Katie mellua 12 billion years was priceless. Great video filled with dry humour that I actually get.. cheers Nick
I was waiting for the section on Halton Arp and his work which also informs the crisis in cosmology. Yet, somehow you never mentioned him.
Or Hans Alfen or Anthony Peratt
Nick, thanks for this. There's nothing like a good beer, listening to your video and gaze into the sky tonight with wonder. ✨
Many thanks for this. Wondering now how to account for the difference between the published age of the universe (13.8 billion years) and its actual age (14.27 billion years). Either a mistake has been made, or our knowledge is imperfect, or our understanding is in error. Hopefully we'll be able to find the answer.
ilokivi.....”Either a mistake has been made”....I think so 🏴....See vdeo ..what have the space probes shown...watch ALL.😊....🌖 🔭.....ruclips.net/video/CzyQbOQ0dv0/видео.html.
@@donaldmacdonald9940 I feel dumber after watching 2 minutes of that garbage. As a scientist and a Christian, I am appalled by that creationist nonsense and its lack of reason, honesty, and integrity. Just agree with the flat earthers and electric universe enthusiasts and claim all 'evolution' based science is based on lies and subterfuge.
@@gmork1090 ...If you can suspend your “dumber”ness for 10 mins and as a “scientist and Christian” Watch all of the video...”scientists”.sometimes look at evidence...
In a court of law the jury is required to listen to all the evidence...you watched 2 mins...
“Lift up you eyes on high, and behold who hath created these [things], that bringeth out their host [stars] by number, he calls them [stars] all by names
by the greatness of his might”....Isaiah ch40v 26.........ruclips.net/video/vdiU2BdCyBY/видео.html ......take care....🏴
The only problem is galaxies are not all moving away from us at a constant rate (cosmological constant). The galaxies appear to be moving faster and faster,away actually, accelerating with distance (Hubble constant). Yet every time the Hubble constant is measured a different rate of acceleration to distance is found. Actual measurements indicate there is no such thing as a cosmological constant or a Hubble constant.
39:48 I hope the person who figures it out is watching this
I appreciate the effort put into this so much, it's far more enlightening than the generic big bang articles and documentaries that make the big bang and the age and expansion of the universe sound clear cut. So far the coolest concept is the primeval singularity, which is a black hole that formed in another universe, leading to our universe' big bang, which created massive stars that collapsed into black holes, that are the primeval singularities of other universes.
"And in November 1989..." *shows poster of The Little Mermaid* lmao
This is an outstanding video. One of my top pics of all time...thank you, sincerely
There is one picture you are showing, when talking about Friedman, that is actually Karl Schwarzschild ( de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Schwarzschild#/media/Datei:Schwarzschild.jpg ).
== The Conglomerate - Universe Creation Theory (combining GOD, General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Chaos Theory)
"The BIG Bang-Bit Bang inflation/expansion of energy and information into the void 13.8 billion years ago was a supermassive white hole spawned by a supermassive black hole at the heart of a galaxy in our 'parent universe'. This duality combines general relativity’s singularities of infinite density in a ‘Cosmic Egg’ birth of this and all universes within 'The Conglomerate': multiverse without random bubble universes and parallel worlds. Our Universe is inside the Planck density of that SBH and shares the same event horizon. That SBH-SWH seed phase transition was a 'quantum tunneling umbilical wormhole' with energy-matter and data transformed/transferred, albeit scrambled and encoded. Our Universe is 1-in-2 trillion 'self-similar offspring' each with the same inherited physical laws (‘DNA’). This simple cause-and-effect cycle/'circle of life' - birth-life-death-transformation-rebirth - explains both infinite space and eternity. Reproduction is GOD/Nature’s simplest plan for spreading life for everything from cells to universes." - Seal #1a of the 7seals.blogspot.com
This has triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is not the ‘end of the world‘ - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
L
@@JohnBaker821 MC^2
@@BradWatsonMiami αποκάλυψη 15:3
I remember thinking that guy's appearance really evolved
You and MelodySheep should collaborate on a video one of these days. Their channel and yours are the only scientific channels I subscribe to. Keep up the great work!
You might want to check my sub list. I'm sure there are other science channels on there worth watching.
Best science video I've seen in youtube, ever!
Yeah, I never trusted and still don't trust Cosmology.
Back of the envelope math:
Say we observe a galaxy 12Bly away, and red shift is such that it seems to be moving away at c. How long ago was it "here" (near the place the big bang happened)? Well, even assuming constant speed, 12Byr to get there PLUS 12Byr for light to get back, so the universe would have to be 24Byrs old.
There's also the superluminic early expansion and the mother of all slammings on the break.
Given just those 2 megabsurdities it's a gigabsurdity to introduce dark this and dark that to fix minute problems in an island of theory in an ocean of contradictions.
WMAP produced it's own contradictions by declaring the universe flat (with local curvature cases, but generally flat). The contradiction with that conclusion is that the whole premise of WMAP is that those stretched photons from the big bang are visible to us BECAUSE THE UNIVERSE IS CLOSED, so they've been going round and round. If the universe is flat, the only way those photons could be coming back is if the edge of the universe is mirror plated. Where did the silver or aluminium come from?
Another similar crisis exists regarding the diameter of the proton, which when measured using moronic hydrogen yields a diameter that differs by 5% or so from other methods.
Conceptual misunderstandings abound in science, too, like the idea that the Michaelson Morley experiment disproved "the ether". The ether was misconceived as a medium on which EM waves propagate LONGITUDINALLY, like sound waves. If that were true, indeed a speed vector in the medium would affect propagation.
But nobody seems to have questioned this longitudinal assumption.
When waves are transversal to the medium, such as waves on water, the waves' motion is not affected by motion of the medium (e.g. stones into river cause expanding, circular waves with a stationary center, regardless of water flow).
The only thing Michaelson Morley proved is that EITHER there is no ether, OR that relative to the ether EM waves are transversal, --which should have been obvious...
MUONIC hydrogen.
This moronic editing software by Google retards keeps mis-correcting my spelling...
1) As Tommy said, your initial assumption is incorrect. Astronomers don't observe light that is _reflected_ off distant objects, they observe light that was _emitted_ by distant objects. There is no need for a "mirror-plated universe".
2) Why are you assuming a constant rate of expansion? There is no evidence to support a constant rate of expansion. In fact, there is an increasing amount of evidence to support that the rate of expansion was initially very fast, followed by a decreasing rate of expansion, followed by an increasing rate of expansion that started a few billion years ago.
3) If a galaxy were moving away from us at _c,_ we wouldn't be able to see its light at all -- some galaxies are _extrapolated_ to _now_ be moving away from us at _c_ or even faster thanks to expanding space, but that's based on light that we can see which was emitted when they were moving at a speed less than _c._
4) Of course transverse waves are affected by movement of the medium through which they pass. That's why turbulence from a waterfall doesn't propagate upstream (the waterfall is effectively an event horizon), and that's _also_ why light emitted from distant galaxies is redshifted. As for your example of throwing a rock into a moving stream, next time pay attention to the _location_ of those waves _relative to the point where the rock entered the water._ You will see very clearly (if the water is clear and you can see where the rock landed) that the circular ripples are moving downstream. It is only due to your own disconnection from the medium (i.e. the water) that you are able to observe the ripples without a Doppler shift.
@ParallaxNick: Did you "de-like" my comment, or did I erase your "like" when I corrected a typo just now?
@@deusexaethera Sorry. Tired.
@@parallaxnick637: Just curious. I saw your "like", then I corrected a typo, then the "like" disappeared, and I wondered if RUclips did that on purpose.
Thank you ParallaxNick, for another really interesting & informative video. Along with Sean Carroll and Brian Greene, you have made this dreary Lock-down more bearable. Please keep making more. Thanks again best regards. Paul C., West Wales (UK).
Those pigeons died for science XD
They were the first victims of the Big Bang.
Given that there is a part of the Universe which has expanded outside the observable universe, how can we know how long ago the universe began it;s expansion?
WE haven't a clue.
We cannot account for Dark Matter, Dark Energy or where the Universe came from EXCEPT after a "tiny while afterwards" which simply is not good enough.
Your house is falling over so we are going to push it back up and pump concrete underneath it. Q. "For how long ?" A. For ever since we do not have a clue !
That sums up several Trillions of research to date.
Q. How much do we need to spend on science to understand the Universe ? A. More money than we will ever have and forever BUT we will get there at the end !
Isent the simplest explainaiton that the acceleration of the expansion was faster in the early univers right after the big bang, and have since been slowing down to the expansion we messure today?? Why must the accesleraation be constant? In an ever expanding(changing) univers? Love your videos btw 👍
Actually it is speeding up
@@jamietaylor820 yes, that is what acceleration means. But there was an inflation periode from 10x-36 to 10x-32 sec after the big bang so in that sence atleast the acceleration of the expansion has not always been constant.
Back in 1960s I read of how universe dating was done, obviously by a few, without your superb discription of cosmic theories. I was taught in general schooling that the universe was presumed to be somewhere between 18-24 billion years. When digging into that, those numbers were based on presumed element abundances and the matching of heavy element half-lives and the daughter elements to those abundances.
This is modern science, where theories are never in crisis. Just throw in a fudge factor and move on.
I really appreciate high quality science programming like this that doesn't pander to the lowest (stupidest) common denominator.
Yes, 120 views, lets go
If our current theories fail to explain the data, it should be treated as a challenge rather than a crisis which is a more positive approach, and might be more productive.
Once you realize you have to throw away 95% of the conventional mainstream physics model to explain reality the Universe is not so much of a mystery.
150 years ago Physics was on the right track until Einstein destroyed this paradigm with his warped spacetime rubbish.
The Universe explains herself through Ether torsion fields ie The Di-Electric and Magnetic non Cartesian force vectors....ie pressure mediations.
The Universe is both Etheric and Electric.
Some mornings I feel older than myself, so I see this not as a crisis, but rather a question of perspective.
Scientists: "We have almost all of it figured out!"
Reality enters the chat...
;)
What scientist has ever said "we have almost all of it figured out"?
Have you ever studied science in your freaking life?
@@whatabouttheearth Thank you for making my point.
Hint: When your theory no longer matches reality, your theory is wrong, regardless of the beauty of your math. ;)
@@theknave4415
ruclips.net/video/h0H-amOti_o/видео.html
Yey an upload ! Glad you're still going P. Nick ! The dopamine is palpable 🤗
The more I watch videos from this channel, more I appreciate the details.... Here, for instance, the picture showing a "suspicious Einstein" (14:33) to really fit the narrative... These videos are amazing at so many levels!!!
Fascinating. Wonderfully narrated presentation that was both understandable and wildly engaging. I'm left wanting MORE.
i just recently got interested in this part of science and it is fair to say I am in over my head.
Me too!
By far one the most apt and accurate presentation
"Every point in space is its own center, from which the universe expands."
I've been trying to find these words to explain my understanding for months now, but was stuck on saying "everywhere sees equally far so everywhere is the center, and thus nowhere"
"In the sphere I am everywhere the center, as she the circumference is nowhere found"
That makes me feel more or less up to speed with current cosmology. Nice job making it compelling and interesting. If I may offer a lay person’s intuition, which I know is an undesirable handicap in science, but 13.8 billion years, and now 14.2 billion years strike me as a very modest amount of time for the universe to have developed to it’s current size and form from a single point of its origin. Given the kind of distances of the furthest objects we can detect in deep space. If you had told me the universe were 50 billion years old, I wouldn’t have batted an eye.
This is hands down the best video on youtube.
Fascinating and just shows we have a long way to go to truly understand the universe.
Edwin Hubble thought that Light over great distances became "tired" or weaker. That may explain why the Novas they checked at extreme distances would look dimmer, plus there is dust everywhere in space and hydrogen is exceedingly plentiful. We see a cloud of it between us and the center of our Galaxy. When light passes through hydrogen it gives a red light. Possibly the faraway nova are bright, but get dimmed by the intergalactic dust. Just something I read.
Dust refracts light in a very specific way, and is invisible in infrared. So no that doesn't work as a solution I'm afraid.
I get so excited when I see a new video from you. Such an underrated channel.
A couple of thousand years ago you could happily make stuff up and most people would accept it. But for the curious few the earth would still be the centre of the universe, as it was until 500ya. But now everywhere is the centre. From certainty to crisis. Thank you Nick but I was not ready for this video to end.
Everything that can, is fleeing from The Earth.
This shows that these things are wise.
Hahahahaha
This guy should have a million subscribers.
Everyone first time arriving here might have thought this is just a boring bed story to help to sleep . But it isn't , instead it's the otherwise , it makes your brain think and probably in some cases it makes u can't sleep with the overflowing ideas, dopamine and chemical rushes in the brain as you think about the real world . Good job indeed ParallaxNick , i found your channel on "accident" , and i never regret it , you deserve more views and subscribe.
I have been teaching Physics and Astronomy for 20 years. There are many other experimental results that neither GR or QM can explain. Particle Physics also faces monumental problems.
However, attempting to accurately date the Big Bang has brought it all to a head.
To me, both GR and QM must be approximate. They must be discarded as foundational assumptions. However, for the past 50 years, GR and QM have been treated as religious tenets.
Physics won't progress until a groundswell of Physicists agree that it is OK to propose alternative foundations.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of academic journals flat out reject any attempts to formulate alternative foundational postulates.
A culture of exploration needs to return to fundamental Physics.
Agree that there is a near religious devotion to relativity (among other things). Seeing the same fervor across the board in academe. Seems to me there is a movement away from empiricism broadly in the culture. Figured that physicists would be less susceptible to groupthink and willing to challenge assumptions when faced with facts, but...
I think the Universe is simply eternal without begging or end, and is not expanding as the Tolman surface brightness test indicates. The SN Ia dilation that purported to prove expansion were likely an error resulting from an over assumption of the standard-candle nature derived from Chandrasekhar limits which ignore many other aspects like rotation and magnetic fields which can vary the mass and magnitude of the SN.
Type 1as are only one standard candle. There are others, like cepheid variables. And I don't see how measuring the brightness of our nearest star could have an impact on the values of galactic motion.
I know that the statement that, "The universe is one big star...", was mostly metaphorical...
But, just imagine it in a literal sense.
Imagine humans, one day achieving the necessary technology, to travel at great enough speed... to reach the "edge" of the universe... and BEYOND.
Imagine our "craft", traveling outward... through the various layers, experiencing the requisite changes in temperature, etc... until finally "popping out" of the Corona of "the star that IS our universe"... and INTO A GREATER, COMPLETE UNIVERSE OUTSIDE OF IT...
Someone should scifi the sh*t outta this idea, lol.
ruclips.net/video/XcdC-Y2dQto/видео.html