I've too recently ordered his book SCIENCE: A HISTORY, let's hope I get my curiosity satisfied about the origins and gradual development of scientific knowledge
I’m a layman, but it seems the most obvious & logical explanation for particles acting like polarizable axial or circular, helical waves as they travel is that they’re orbiting something (a dark (or anti) matter particle perhaps). It's not unlike Earth being pulled into a wobble by the moon, or a distant star's wobble evidencing planet orbits making our trajectories as we fly thru space have an apparent axial or circular helical wave (like a packet) as well, depending on the orientation of the orbit. And since we think we know undetectable dark matter exists and should be 5 times as common as matter but don't yet know where it's distributed, it seems a logical possibility that we are in a sea of dark matter (the Higgs field), even in otherwise empty space, and every particle (photons, electrons, etc) is paired (entangled) in orbit with one. I think gravitational waves could be dark matter waves and that gravity might be caused by the density of dark matter. This could explain the double slit experiment results, including with a detector with some interaction between the dark matter and the detector (and perhaps dark matter entanglement), it could explain the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, as well as explain the deflection of the axis of the particle's wave motion (orbit orientation) moving thru polarizing filters rotated less than 45 degrees apart, etc. Perhaps the only reason for photons' max speed limit is caused by the dark matter they're paired in orbit with interacting with other dark matter. This could also explain why the universe is expanding from the central singularity point of the big bang outward in all directions faster than the speed of light into previously completely empty universe space, given that there is no dark matter there yet.
Almost a throwaway line at the end of this video ... "... we know they're both right ..." hits the nail on the head for me ... If you've got two sets of accurate answers, then _both_ are right, even if they appear to contradict one another ... It's not "logic", it's paradox.
John Gribbin's books are really good, and an easy read. I started with 'In search of the edge of time' and 'Schrodinger's cat' there are several since. :0)
Granted, I haven't gone through all of the lecture, but I don't understand why you say that - John Gribbin himself puts forth a Roman Catholic priest as one of the contributors to this outline of history (23:40). The truth is the truth, and whatever science finds to be absolutely true, faith will accept, as they are both aiming towards the same goal, just from different angles.
Your description of the video directly contradicts what mr Gribbin actually said. He didn't even remotely say anything about "bringing quantum theory and the general theory of relativity together in one mathematical package", but rather stressed that if they cannot be combined into a unified quantum gravity theory they work perfectly well independently. In short his conclusion was that it is largely irrelevant if they can be combined or not. Nothing was stated about an "answer to life and the universe" either. Maybe you should edit your description to reflect what the presentation was actually about.
Thank you for that explanation, I am 2/3rds through and couldn't understand what he was getting at so decided to check the comments, luckily your's was the 1st! I wonder if u know Nassim Harramien's work, he's the closest so far! Cheers! X
@@clivewells7090 his work is extremely controversial. some physicists regard it as utter garbage. i don't, i try to keep an open mind, but i don't know of many physicists that endorse his work. perhaps it's just ahead of its time. we will see.
@@Fire-Toolz ; just been looking into the 'Electric Universe' theory and they make very good points about many astrophysical mysteries that mainstream gatekeepers just gloss over with a new particle or force. I haven't got the whole theory down yet, but, I am slow and reckon 50% I understand is true. Dark Matter not only sounds like bollocks but it looks like ghost bollocks and dark energy smells of bullshitty bollocks. That Neil Turok said everything is simple and produced a load of formulas but it's all baby food to get you to sleep if they can't find 95% of reality! X
Q: There are colliding galaxies, galaxies that move away from each other, and galaxies that are in a standstill to each other? There is a redshift in the light of faraway galaxies also when the galaxies are in standstill to each other? Or not?
I've not seen of John Gribbin for yonks! I have his books _In Search of Schrodingers cat_ and _In Search of the edge of time_ - around 1992. Brilliant stuff! Thanks for posting :0)
My Current TOE: THE SETUP: 1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism. 2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them. 5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them. FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO: 6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field. 7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field. 8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality. 9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons. 10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. 11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks. 12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". 14. I also believe that a pulsating singularity (which is basically a pulsating photon) is the pure energy unit. 15. When these pulsating pure energy units interact with other pure energy units, they tangle together. Various shapes (string, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 16. When the pure energy units unite together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up. 20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the pure energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true. 26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting pure energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught? DISCLAIMER: 27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
If we can figure out dark matter/energy/flow we will massively increase our knowledge of how the universe works. Maybe that's what he meant. But all of these things the cosmic microwave background and all dark forces are big hurdles to have a provable theory of everything i believe.
The oldest star recently measured is 14.8 Billion years old and this of course presents us with a dilemma. We have observed what appears to be stars older than the universe. This will be interesting to see how it resolves.
Is anyone still asking about what gravity is? The big bang came from the Planck scale. I think that the mass-energy of the universe is trying to go back to the Planck scale, but it can't because the spacetime continuum is in the way, and blocks it.
Hi everyone! I would like to complain about an issue that bothers me now for a while. It has nothing to do with the video that you're watching, but still might be off your interest. I am a fan off you tube and watch quiet a lot of videos and the ones I don't watch straight away, I save in my "watch later" list. In this list used to be a button called " remove watched videos", which since a while has vanished! It used to be very useful and I strongly recommend to you tube to bring it back!! If you should feel the same as me, please copy and paste this in as many comments as possible and who knows, we might get what we want after all! Thanks for your time and participation!!😊
Excellent information and lecture... I wonder if Ri could get a few of these very knowledgeable scientists on?? And have some lectures on the subject of the Voyager probes?? Especially a professor that can explain what we are seeing. In that last photo of Voyager probe turning camera back and taking that picture of OUR solar system. Amazing photo. I wonder why there hasn't be more info and comments on it??
we often hear about all those fantastic tools in science. but they are always presented as very trivial, basic things, like a stone axe or something. they work, period. Planck measures tiny little diferences in temperature, LIGO measures the miniscule changes caused by gravitational waves, scientists shoot one electron at a time in the dual slit exp, etc etc. but how? please, find a video about the engineering aspects of these (and other) scientific projects. thanx
Surprising that the guys that discovered the background microwave radiation didn't go crazy. Can you imagine them scratching their heads over that one?
The theory of everything can be found at neuvophysics.com but not for long because I'm taking that result of years of research and study down this year. Science has hit the wall while engineering continues to defy science but not for long.
As a thinker, ala Einstein, I wonder whether we have looked at space/time deeply enough. I think space/time is much more of a Force than we understand. It's spread, It's exponential growth, IS the force that limits the spin of large objects, such as Galaxies. And what of Space/Time? Can it exist without the existence of matter, as conversely, "There is no existence with out time and space" How can there be? If more of my own theory is sought after please, don't hesitate to contact me.
Yes. And cuboctohedrons, and snowflakes (not a joke, compare the two). And the division of spheres into 12 equal cones. 3's, 4's, 12's intersect at the hexagonal. All nature is based on it. Intersecting Fibonaccis. Good eye. :-) (like the stack exchange logo too.).
To John Gribbin! Maybe John Gribbin can clarify a question nobody has replied to or are able to address. Here it is: Assuming this is right: please explain this: At the pre-big bang moment all the four forces are combined into a lawless super small point and the outcome of the big bang event is unpredictable; why were untold numbers of identical hydrogen atoms created i.e. condensed out, to fill the inflating "universe" ? Here we have a clear cause and effect case. But how can something unpredictable result in something uniform and universally complex like hydrogen atoms? Why not an outcome of a formless quantum soup of pure mass-less energy. Seems like there is a law in effect here. Cause and effect. To me the big bang and its event came from a pre-existing universe with a cause and effect predecessor! Not a lawless point! Whoa! If John Gribbin or any famous and advanced scientist can clarify this, I would be eternally grateful! David Moses
I just came up with a brilliant theory that no one probably thought about. I think that space and time does run through a flat plain but the difference in Masses of galaxies change where a galaxy might be also dark energy isn’t driving the expansion of the universe it’s the actual black holes at the center of galaxies that’s effectively changing course or the speed of a galaxy per expansion. The fabric of space does not ripped and black holes do not die they do not erase information information is stored within the center of a blackhole after star formations are gone through out the universe black holes will pull all the matter within its galaxy into it but during that time it’s crashing with other galaxies you guys don’t see it??? All black holes collide together and I know that can last for ever before every black hole in the universe to come together but I think that’s what will happened then the pressure of empty space and gravity will push this singularity black hole back to a point so small that will jump start the Big Bang again.
Looks like what you're talking about is just called the Big Crunch. And the fact that the information is stored in the black hole is an obvious conclusion otherwise there wouldn't be another Big Bang.
The video name and text description are not correct. It's a historical review of cosmology, and he mentions that some people want to combine the ideas of quantum physics and and relativity. No one has succeeded at this dubious goal.
This is what you are looking for. It uses only scientific and computer terminology but is an alternative parallel analogy to a religious description. Go to RUclips search for UNM lecture The VICE Theory.
We actually may have it already. Around 1630 Galileo formulated a modern version of the relativity principle in his last book. In modern physics pretty much everything seems to follow from the relativity principle. The problem is that the logical arguments needed to unpack its consequences have kept us very busy for four centuries and we may just be at the beginning of the hardest parts of the puzzle.
I must disagree. We should be worried about the theory of everything. Where we stand now, we don't see the link between EMR , Gravity and the forces that bind nuclear particles. Once this is understood, we can then develop concepts about how to decouple/destabilize the kinetic energy which is stored as nuclear mass and use it instead of the much less efficient "chemical bonds" which we now use as our primary source of energy.
A "theory of everything" is an unattainable dream and the reason is very simple: Any theoretical modeling of a sufficiently "complex" model will be intrinsically incomplete, exactly in the same sense as the Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. The search of a theory of everything in Physics is a reflection of the dogmatism and complacency pervading academy today. Reality is extremely rich and the recent results from mathematical logic and the history of science clearly point to the idea that in any "niche" of reality you always will find "emergent" properties that can not be derived from any existing model of that "niche": these are the new independent facts that are not reducible to any existing assumptions, exactly as the parallel axiom is independent of the rest of the axioms in Euclidean geometry. And this intrinsic incompleteness of theoretical models is a very positive result as new generations of scientists always will have new things to study and that recurrent dream of many seating "experts" that there is really nothing new to discover( as Lord Kelvin for example) is always a reflection of their lack of perspective, dogmatism, complacency and not learning the history of science lessons.
(0+x)+(0-x)=(0-0)=(0-x)+(0+x) Oops! Infinite nothing must not contain anything. Gravity is pressure. The infinitely small must also be infinitely large. The Big Bang was a big SQUIRT- or there would remain a huge mass marking its location. You're welcome😏
Your first sentence directly contradicts the end point in your statement above. The answer is within this reply field... but it will remain hidden from the blind, deaf and dumb > (0-0) < there it is... in it's most simple form.... "Everything and Nothing" , "Zero & Infinity" , call it what you will- They stand alone and along, and we live between "-0" and "+0". Good luck fitting that in your condescending bonnett, pal.
Smooth talk with a problem: space doesn't bend, expand or contract, cannot be created! Matter cannot be created. There could not have been a "big bang" as the hypothesis presumes that even space was created. Think about it, it's common sense. Space is self evident, three dimensional and infinite! The universe is infinite, has always existed and will exist forever. Bigger and better telescopes will reveal more and more galaxies to infinity, so trying to measure the age of the universe ever more accurately is futile! This is the theory of everything!
The big bang, we can all read books. The problem is the books need to be rewritten , to think everything just appeared from nothing. The joke is in the title the Theory of Everything.
John Gribbin: the man who taught us that earthquakes are caused by the other planets of the Solar system lining up and pulling in the same direction (and the reason I haven't taken New Scientist seriously since then).
Thermonuclear energy is hopelessly inadequate to explain solar dynamics. Fortunately plasmatic science saves the day. Plasma is the first state of matter - we live in a plasmatic universe. Plasma is that which curls up into stars and galaxies - and ultimately everything.
I just got his In The Beginning in my Kindle. It was the first book I read that opened my mind to how vast and (apparently) purposeful the universe is. A "Goldilock Universe" if I remember - I read it first back in 01996-97, a soft cover English, in Brazil. Since then I've learned so much that I want to re-read it with new eyes.
"...and how we know the age of the universe." Within the first minute, we are compelled to accept that we *know* something that is entirely theory, that is rife with flaws and critical holes that are so large the entire theory could fit through the gaping opening. This is the standard procedure in modern cosmology.
There is a good candidate for dark matter which is neutron groups. This is a group of two or more neutrons which bond together like neutrons in an atomic nucleus. The neutron groups do not interact with light but they do have mass and are detectable gravitationally when they exist in large quantities in the galactic halo. To understand the dark energy proposal you have to go back and consider the observations of the distant type 1A supernovae. The apparent expansion of space for more distant galaxies is less than expected so the conclusion made was that the expansion is varying with time and so the expansion must be accelerating. If instead you conclude that the variation in expansion is with distance then the conclusion is that the recession of these distant galaxies is reduced by some effect. This could be gravitational or a general variation with distance. www.academia.edu/5009126/The_evolution_of_the_universe For a paper on the unification of GR and quantum theory see: www.academia.edu/5038836/The_Unification_of_Physics Richard
The need for a concept that explains everything is perceived, not necessary. A dynamic universe is a theory, never finalized. Perhaps the title should be "The Processes of Everything". "Everything " is theory in self-defining modulation terms of dynamic continuous creation mechanism.
If the Universe "EXPANDS" at an accelerating rate,...it cannot be as OLD as you say! H ve you calculated in the accelerated speed slowing going backward,...and what is it?????????
The universe is expanding at an accelerated rate now but it wasn't the case earlier in the matter-dominated era. What you want to read about is the scale factor.
The Royal Institution is a foundation dedicated to promoting the popular understanding of scientific discoveries. The lecture series of which this video is a part goes back to the time of Faraday, who delivered lectures to the public in that very auditorium, at that very desk.
Dark matter is seriously overdue. If it was real it would have been found long time ago and most likely it would have been reproduced in the lab. Perhaps its time to look for a better explanation to the galaxy rotation anomaly.
These people talk so self importantly and so confident in what they are describing when in reality what they are attempting to discuss are of so little importance in the grand scheme of things It's obvious we are barking up the wrong street. It reminds me of an English teacher who has spent his life in academia after coming from a privileged background and is totally engrossed in the importance of grammar before moving to an underachieving school and teaching some of the less successful students. The teacher is on a mission now to teach everything he knows. The problem is the things he knows are not important to the people he is trying to help. He doesn't have any of the really important answers. These children want to know to use English in their community and allow them to communicate with each other. Grammar is not important to these children. Many of these students don't use formal grammar at all. This teacher is well qualified and has an excellent understanding of what he teaches the finer aspects of grammar, but it's useless to these children who the important questions answered . This teacher is fooling himself because he doesn't know the answers to any of the children's questions. In the same way these people talk in circle's about what whey know, but can't answer any of the really important questions we all want to know. I just wish these educator's would start a sentence with I think or we believe rather than I or we know as if they honestly belief our understanding of reality and the cosmos will be even close to what we believe in five hundred never mind a thousand years time. We should be teaching physics and science in general as this is our best guess at the moment and not as this is how it is!
That god shall never talk to a woman? You do know that he told Adam not to eat from the tree before he had even made Eve, right? Look how that turned out for him. :-0
The sun is a boring star? Are you kidding? Its been on fire for who knows how long, is on fire right now and will be on fire for who knows how long and he has the audacity to say boring.
Added: OK sorry for the smarmy tone. But giving up is a poor choice of paths. There is an answer !!..... hahaha. dude gives up, cause HE can't figure it out, so he says "nobody should bother, we don't need it". It's good enough to believe in creation "the big bang theory, where quadrillions of stars were fit into a proton, suddenly exploded and made all things. AND believe 14 billion years later we just happen to be in the middle of a 96 billion light year universe. (Copernicus and Galileo would have a good laugh we still think that way. AND believe in forces (action at a distance). AND believe in simultaneity (you know, a cat that is dead and alive at the same time). AND believe time goes at different speeds instead of realizing time is a local phenomena, and it is "speed of operation" that is variable. Not the rate of the flow of time. AND believe that from waves, we get chirality and lorentz boost and orbits with no underlying medium or mechanism. AND believe in "Dark Matter and Dark Energy" in order to protect the sanctity of relativity. As thought there could be no better answer. As though we "shouldn't bother" This is a laughable approach to physics. I might be more polite about it, but the stupid video was called "Theory of Everything". If you don't got one, don't use the name to lure interested individuals into watching a video that says "give up", when there is no need to. We just have to think harder. Total lunchbag let down. (that's when you think your mom packed you roast beef, but when you open your lunch bag you got egg salad yet again!) Change the title, please. Something like, "let's give up on a theory of everything because I can't conceive of one", or "NOT a theory of everything" or "Theory of everything...don't look here for answers". or "vacuum catastrophe..what's a vacuum catastrophe". Or "roll over Copernicus, make some room for me, I'm done too". Yes, I am totally disappointed by these contents. It's not actually that hard to figure out. Wave-deformed spheroid particles that are planck scale and always vibrating toroidally.. Creating a medium filled with waves, which propagate through said underlying physical mechanical medium. Done. That was easy..
Must be a genius. He looks like the old geezer down the road that runs the little two pump gas station with a little general store whose main offering seems to be sticky strips covered with dead flies hanging from the ceiling. Roy talks like that too. Same hand gestures. Roy is no genius though. All he cares about is blasting ducks with shotguns on foggy days in the fall.
If you have any idea about the truth. Then you would understand that theory is exactly nothing. It's not solid, theory isn't reality. Theory is exactly nothing. Theology is nothing. Not even close to explaining what?
End of the 1920's!! really?! so you wrote a book about it and you do not know who KIRCHHOFF is? REALLY? stop watching around 2:10...waste of time...i thought it was about string theory..rubbish! who is this guy?!
Comprehensive history, but wrong as science. The subject was inverted cone. Standing on smallest point. Those small point are light and gravity. Mankind do not know structure of light(photon) or Gravity interaction with it. this make all current model of space and matter wrong. correct mass /energy equivalence is E = M4/3pi(C+G) Cubed by Ferydoon Shirazi. I have released schematic picture of photon. The detail is withheld like all my other information which others presented as theirs as proof of authorship. When I am given a public platform to present them, you will be able for first time since 1900 build the correct models of space and matter. Secret services who have been gathering my rubbish for their scientist know my information has substance. MG1
![Lethal Company Music Video 🎵 "Follow The Orders" [VERSION A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QeooZB4Z7RA/mqdefault.jpg)
The title of the video is a nod to John's books from around 1989 to 1995, I read 3 of them and he is my favorite science writer ever since.
I've too recently ordered his book SCIENCE: A HISTORY, let's hope I get my curiosity satisfied about the origins and gradual development of scientific knowledge
I’m a layman, but it seems the most obvious & logical explanation for particles acting like polarizable axial or circular, helical waves as they travel is that they’re orbiting something (a dark (or anti) matter particle perhaps).
It's not unlike Earth being pulled into a wobble by the moon, or a distant star's wobble evidencing planet orbits making our trajectories as we fly thru space have an apparent axial or circular helical wave (like a packet) as well, depending on the orientation of the orbit.
And since we think we know undetectable dark matter exists and should be 5 times as common as matter but don't yet know where it's distributed, it seems a logical possibility that we are in a sea of dark matter (the Higgs field), even in otherwise empty space, and every particle (photons, electrons, etc) is paired (entangled) in orbit with one. I think gravitational waves could be dark matter waves and that gravity might be caused by the density of dark matter.
This could explain the double slit experiment results, including with a detector with some interaction between the dark matter and the detector (and perhaps dark matter entanglement), it could explain the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, as well as explain the deflection of the axis of the particle's wave motion (orbit orientation) moving thru polarizing filters rotated less than 45 degrees apart, etc.
Perhaps the only reason for photons' max speed limit is caused by the dark matter they're paired in orbit with interacting with other dark matter.
This could also explain why the universe is expanding from the central singularity point of the big bang outward in all directions faster than the speed of light into previously completely empty universe space, given that there is no dark matter there yet.
why there's no other talks (I could find) of this man on the internet. He is an amazing lecturer. Wonderful talk!
Almost a throwaway line at the end of this video ... "... we know they're both right ..." hits the nail on the head for me ... If you've got two sets of accurate answers, then _both_ are right, even if they appear to contradict one another ... It's not "logic", it's paradox.
John Gribbin's books are really good, and an easy read. I started with 'In search of the edge of time' and 'Schrodinger's cat' there are several since. :0)
Very important information that many need to know to understand the origins of our universe. I would recommend this to any religious nut.
Granted, I haven't gone through all of the lecture, but I don't understand why you say that - John Gribbin himself puts forth a Roman Catholic priest as one of the contributors to this outline of history (23:40). The truth is the truth, and whatever science finds to be absolutely true, faith will accept, as they are both aiming towards the same goal, just from different angles.
Your description of the video directly contradicts what mr Gribbin actually said. He didn't even remotely say anything about "bringing quantum theory and the general theory of relativity together in one mathematical package", but rather stressed that if they cannot be combined into a unified quantum gravity theory they work perfectly well independently. In short his conclusion was that it is largely irrelevant if they can be combined or not. Nothing was stated about an "answer to life and the universe" either. Maybe you should edit your description to reflect what the presentation was actually about.
Yes, but the clickbait is set by an undertitle of this physicist himself. Smart cookie😆
Thank you for that explanation, I am 2/3rds through and couldn't understand what he was getting at so decided to check the comments, luckily your's was the 1st! I wonder if u know Nassim Harramien's work, he's the closest so far! Cheers! X
@@clivewells7090 his work is extremely controversial. some physicists regard it as utter garbage. i don't, i try to keep an open mind, but i don't know of many physicists that endorse his work. perhaps it's just ahead of its time. we will see.
@@Fire-Toolz ; just been looking into the 'Electric Universe' theory and they make very good points about many astrophysical mysteries that mainstream gatekeepers just gloss over with a new particle or force. I haven't got the whole theory down yet, but, I am slow and reckon 50% I understand is true. Dark Matter not only sounds like bollocks but it looks like ghost bollocks and dark energy smells of bullshitty bollocks. That Neil Turok said everything is simple and produced a load of formulas but it's all baby food to get you to sleep if they can't find 95% of reality! X
Q:
There are colliding galaxies,
galaxies that move away from each other,
and galaxies that are in a standstill
to each other?
There is a redshift in the light of faraway galaxies
also when the galaxies are in standstill to each other?
Or not?
That's the rub. Nothing in this reality is standing still. Sometimes it just appears to, until you look closer.
I've not seen of John Gribbin for yonks! I have his books _In Search of Schrodingers cat_ and _In Search of the edge of time_ - around 1992. Brilliant stuff! Thanks for posting :0)
My Current TOE:
THE SETUP:
1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism.
2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too).
3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them.
4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them.
FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO:
6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field.
7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field.
8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality.
9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons.
10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary.
11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks.
12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do.
THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA:
13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity".
14. I also believe that a pulsating singularity (which is basically a pulsating photon) is the pure energy unit.
15. When these pulsating pure energy units interact with other pure energy units, they tangle together. Various shapes (string, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe.
16. When the pure energy units unite together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate.
17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure.
18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons).
THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY:
19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up.
20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency.
21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies.
NOTES:
22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well.
25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the pure energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true.
26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting pure energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught?
DISCLAIMER:
27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
The default position is that anything speculated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Good talk, but the title sounds like appealing marketing, quite far from the subject
If we can figure out dark matter/energy/flow we will massively increase our knowledge of how the universe works. Maybe that's what he meant. But all of these things the cosmic microwave background and all dark forces are big hurdles to have a provable theory of everything i believe.
yeah, for a moment i felt like i was watching it on RUclips!
Thanks for sharing. JG is one of my favourite authors. Never seen him present until today :)
The oldest star recently measured is 14.8 Billion years old and this of course presents us with a dilemma.
We have observed what appears to be stars older than the universe.
This will be interesting to see how it resolves.
Source? And I mean the actual paper, not articles with click-baity titles
What's the error margin for the measurement?
@@AntiProtonBoy that is where the answer is. The way the OP wrote the question gave away its sensationalist aim already.
Didn't get the name of the book, but definitely looking forward to reading the latest offering from John Gribbin!
Believe it or not, it is "The Search for the Theory of Everything".
OHH nice one. Gribbin is brilliant. looking forward to this.
Wow, what a great speaker and scientist.
Is anyone still asking about what gravity is? The big bang came from the Planck scale. I think that the mass-energy of the universe is trying to go back to the Planck scale, but it can't because the spacetime continuum is in the way, and blocks it.
Hi everyone! I would like to complain about an issue that bothers me now for a while. It has nothing to do with the video that you're watching, but still might be off your interest. I am a fan off you tube and watch quiet a lot of videos and the ones I don't watch straight away, I save in my "watch later" list. In this list used to be a button called " remove watched videos", which since a while has vanished! It used to be very useful and I strongly recommend to you tube to bring it back!! If you should feel the same as me, please copy and paste this in as many comments as possible and who knows, we might get what we want after all! Thanks for your time and participation!!😊
This guy doesn't like Hubble. That's all I got out of this talk.
Excellent information and lecture...
I wonder if Ri could get a few of these very knowledgeable scientists on?? And have some lectures on the subject of the Voyager probes?? Especially a professor that can explain what we are seeing. In that last photo of Voyager probe turning camera back and taking that picture of OUR solar system. Amazing photo. I wonder why there hasn't be more info and comments on it??
we often hear about all those fantastic tools in science. but they are always presented as very trivial, basic things, like a stone axe or something. they work, period. Planck measures tiny little diferences in temperature, LIGO measures the miniscule changes caused by gravitational waves, scientists shoot one electron at a time in the dual slit exp, etc etc. but how? please, find a video about the engineering aspects of these (and other) scientific projects. thanx
Surprising that the guys that discovered the background microwave radiation didn't go crazy. Can you imagine them scratching their heads over that one?
The theory of everything can be found at neuvophysics.com but not for long because I'm taking that result of years of research and study down this year. Science has hit the wall while engineering continues to defy science but not for long.
As a thinker, ala Einstein, I wonder whether we have looked at space/time deeply enough. I think space/time is much more of a Force than we understand. It's spread, It's exponential growth, IS the force that limits the spin of large objects, such as Galaxies.
And what of Space/Time? Can it exist without the existence of matter, as conversely, "There is no existence with out time and space" How can there be?
If more of my own theory is sought after please, don't hesitate to contact me.
No thanks, we're good.
Is there a link between the patterns on the wall behind these speakers and the Giant Hexagon Storm on the Northern pole of Saturn ?
Yes. And cuboctohedrons, and snowflakes (not a joke, compare the two). And the division of spheres into 12 equal cones. 3's, 4's, 12's intersect at the hexagonal. All nature is based on it. Intersecting Fibonaccis.
Good eye. :-)
(like the stack exchange logo too.).
Probably more to do with Penrose.
@@AlistairRiddochSHBEW and therein lies the key to the Epstein Drive.
Very nice easy to follow good sleep material give a thumbs up if you a sleeping!!
Really well explained; thank you.
To John Gribbin! Maybe John Gribbin can clarify a question nobody has replied to or are able to address. Here it is: Assuming this is right: please explain this: At the pre-big bang moment all the four forces are combined into a lawless super small point and the outcome of the big bang event is unpredictable; why were untold numbers of identical hydrogen atoms created i.e. condensed out, to fill the inflating "universe" ? Here we have a clear cause and effect case. But how can something unpredictable result in something uniform and universally complex like hydrogen atoms? Why not an outcome of a formless quantum soup of pure mass-less energy. Seems like there is a law in effect here. Cause and effect. To me the big bang and its event came from a pre-existing universe with a cause and effect predecessor! Not a lawless point! Whoa!
If John Gribbin or any famous and advanced scientist can clarify this, I would be eternally grateful! David Moses
ruclips.net/video/2JsKwyRFiYY/видео.html
I just came up with a brilliant theory that no one probably thought about. I think that space and time does run through a flat plain but the difference in Masses of galaxies change where a galaxy might be also dark energy isn’t driving the expansion of the universe it’s the actual black holes at the center of galaxies that’s effectively changing course or the speed of a galaxy per expansion. The fabric of space does not ripped and black holes do not die they do not erase information information is stored within the center of a blackhole after star formations are gone through out the universe black holes will pull all the matter within its galaxy into it but during that time it’s crashing with other galaxies you guys don’t see it??? All black holes collide together and I know that can last for ever before every black hole in the universe to come together but I think that’s what will happened then the pressure of empty space and gravity will push this singularity black hole back to a point so small that will jump start the Big Bang again.
Looks like what you're talking about is just called the Big Crunch. And the fact that the information is stored in the black hole is an obvious conclusion otherwise there wouldn't be another Big Bang.
How has the recent data from the probe to the sun changed what you've said about out local star?
Excellent talk
The video name and text description are not correct. It's a historical review of cosmology, and he mentions that some people want to combine the ideas of quantum physics and and relativity. No one has succeeded at this dubious goal.
This is what you are looking for. It uses only scientific and computer terminology but is an alternative parallel analogy to a religious description. Go to RUclips search for UNM lecture The VICE Theory.
Knew facts about universe helps to search for reality
What would it even mean to have a "theory of everything"? And what would it matter if we did?
We actually may have it already. Around 1630 Galileo formulated a modern version of the relativity principle in his last book. In modern physics pretty much everything seems to follow from the relativity principle. The problem is that the logical arguments needed to unpack its consequences have kept us very busy for four centuries and we may just be at the beginning of the hardest parts of the puzzle.
I must disagree. We should be worried about the theory of everything. Where we stand now, we don't see the link between EMR , Gravity and the forces that bind nuclear particles. Once this is understood, we can then develop concepts about how to decouple/destabilize the kinetic energy which is stored as nuclear mass and use it instead of the much less efficient "chemical bonds" which we now use as our primary source of energy.
A "theory of everything" is an unattainable dream and the reason is very simple: Any theoretical modeling of a sufficiently "complex" model will be intrinsically incomplete, exactly in the same sense as the Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. The search of a theory of everything in Physics is a reflection of the dogmatism and complacency pervading academy today. Reality is extremely rich and the recent results from mathematical logic and the history of science clearly point to the idea that in any "niche" of reality you always will find "emergent" properties that can not be derived from any existing model of that "niche": these are the new independent facts that are not reducible to any existing assumptions, exactly as the parallel axiom is independent of the rest of the axioms in Euclidean geometry. And this intrinsic incompleteness of theoretical models is a very positive result as new generations of scientists always will have new things to study and that recurrent dream of many seating "experts" that there is really nothing new to discover( as Lord Kelvin for example) is always a reflection of their lack of perspective, dogmatism, complacency and not learning the history of science lessons.
well said, i agree
(0+x)+(0-x)=(0-0)=(0-x)-(0+x)
(0+x)+(0-x)=(0-0)=(0-x)+(0+x)
Oops! Infinite nothing must not contain anything. Gravity is pressure. The infinitely small must also be infinitely large. The Big Bang was a big SQUIRT- or there would remain a huge mass marking its location.
You're welcome😏
"0"= both -infinity and nothing- simultaneously. BOOM- the end?
Your first sentence directly contradicts the end point in your statement above. The answer is within this reply field... but it will remain hidden from the blind, deaf and dumb > (0-0) < there it is... in it's most simple form.... "Everything and Nothing" , "Zero & Infinity" , call it what you will- They stand alone and along, and we live between "-0" and "+0". Good luck fitting that in your condescending bonnett, pal.
One can't make a theory of everything without first having observed everything. We are far, far away from having made all relevant observations.
Which book is he referring to????
Smooth talk with a problem: space doesn't bend, expand or contract, cannot be created! Matter cannot be created. There could not have been a "big bang" as the hypothesis presumes that even space was created. Think about it, it's common sense. Space is self evident, three dimensional and infinite! The universe is infinite, has always existed and will exist forever. Bigger and better telescopes will reveal more and more galaxies to infinity, so trying to measure the age of the universe ever more accurately is futile! This is the theory of everything!
Well presented! What a guy! Thanks for the video. Yes, the title is a bit off!
The big bang, we can all read books. The problem is the books need to be rewritten , to think everything just appeared from nothing. The joke is in the title the Theory of Everything.
Exactly.
Excellent!
Georges Lemaître finally getting some credit.
He wasn't getting any credit before? In which universe?
John Gribbin: the man who taught us that earthquakes are caused by the other planets of the Solar system lining up and pulling in the same direction (and the reason I haven't taken New Scientist seriously since then).
I found it. Time is nothing more than lifes perception. Its not real its an illusion.
Thermonuclear energy is hopelessly inadequate to explain solar dynamics.
Fortunately plasmatic science saves the day.
Plasma is the first state of matter - we live in a plasmatic universe.
Plasma is that which curls up into stars and galaxies - and ultimately everything.
When you get clickbaited by a 60 y. o. and become thankful soon after...
I just got his In The Beginning in my Kindle. It was the first book I read that opened my mind to how vast and (apparently) purposeful the universe is. A "Goldilock Universe" if I remember - I read it first back in 01996-97, a soft cover English, in Brazil. Since then I've learned so much that I want to re-read it with new eyes.
EVERYTHING means SOMETHING
but
NOTHING means ANYTHING
"...and how we know the age of the universe." Within the first minute, we are compelled to accept that we *know* something that is entirely theory, that is rife with flaws and critical holes that are so large the entire theory could fit through the gaping opening. This is the standard procedure in modern cosmology.
that's my grandad!!!
The aztec calendar is the equation for the theory of everything
We have determined the specific mass of the Photon...
There is no such thing as a photon. You are seeing an effect and assuming a particle's existence. Light is a transverse co-axial wave within a field.
@@cvan7681 Watch more RUclips videos, mabe youll find the right answer sometime..
@@cvan7681 The third meaning from you is correct though..
It's both.
@@barrerasciencelabuniverse6606 You are both wrong. I win. :-)
The universe is a singularity.
+eXtremeDR _was*_
There is a good candidate for dark matter which is neutron groups. This is a group of two or more neutrons which bond together like neutrons in an atomic nucleus. The neutron groups do not interact with light but they do have mass and are detectable gravitationally when they exist in large quantities in the galactic halo.
To understand the dark energy proposal you have to go back and consider the observations of the distant type 1A supernovae. The apparent expansion of space for more distant galaxies is less than expected so the conclusion made was that the expansion is varying with time and so the expansion must be accelerating. If instead you conclude that the variation in expansion is with distance then the conclusion is that the recession of these distant galaxies is reduced by some effect. This could be gravitational or a general variation with distance.
www.academia.edu/5009126/The_evolution_of_the_universe
For a paper on the unification of GR and quantum theory see:
www.academia.edu/5038836/The_Unification_of_Physics
Richard
The law of the infinite universe is logic
The need for a concept that explains everything is perceived, not necessary. A dynamic universe is a theory, never finalized. Perhaps the title should be "The Processes of Everything".
"Everything " is theory in self-defining modulation terms of dynamic continuous creation mechanism.
If the Universe "EXPANDS" at an accelerating rate,...it cannot be as OLD as you say! H ve you calculated in the accelerated speed slowing going backward,...and what is it?????????
The universe is expanding at an accelerated rate now but it wasn't the case earlier in the matter-dominated era. What you want to read about is the scale factor.
search here for PBS space-time,
Your intro is not so appealing for headphone users that are unprepared... -_-
Thanks anyway, gonna watch your video now...
There's only truth and reality. Everything else is not.
answer to the universe is 42, everyone knows
Our Milky Way? Is there another?
+dontbeknowing Maybe he said it in romantic sence, because it is our home?
Your Milkyway? My Milkyway! Whos Milkyways more?Mine cause its just a little meteor...
that's an university?
The Royal Institution is a foundation dedicated to promoting the popular understanding of scientific discoveries. The lecture series of which this video is a part goes back to the time of Faraday, who delivered lectures to the public in that very auditorium, at that very desk.
42
// don't you dare do that again. Every time I read the comments some godless hitchhiker posts what you did. Knock it off.
This guy really hates Hubble
Oh no 😲 Did I just get click baited?! 😲 😂 🤣
Dark matter is seriously overdue.
If it was real it would have been found long time ago and most likely it would have been reproduced in the lab.
Perhaps its time to look for a better explanation to the galaxy rotation anomaly.
This might give you a better understanding of the situation: ruclips.net/video/jGi6coLERkk/видео.html
37 45
These people talk so self importantly and so confident in what they are describing when in reality what they are attempting to discuss are of so little importance in the grand scheme of things
It's obvious we are barking up the wrong street. It reminds me of an English teacher who has spent his life in academia after coming from a privileged background and is totally engrossed in the importance of grammar before moving to an underachieving school and teaching some of the less successful students. The teacher is on a mission now to teach everything he knows. The problem is the things he knows are not important to the people he is trying to help. He doesn't have any of the really important answers. These children want to know to use English in their community and allow them to communicate with each other. Grammar is not important to these children. Many of these students don't use formal grammar at all.
This teacher is well qualified and has an excellent understanding of what he teaches the finer aspects of grammar, but it's useless to these children who the important questions answered . This teacher is fooling himself because he doesn't know the answers to any of the children's questions. In the same way these people talk in circle's about what whey know, but can't answer any of the really important questions we all want to know.
I just wish these educator's would start a sentence with I think or we believe rather than I or we know as if they honestly belief our understanding of reality and the cosmos will be even close to what we believe in five hundred never mind a thousand years time. We should be teaching physics and science in general as this is our best guess at the moment and not as this is how it is!
Why so angry little man?
Why so frustrated or annoyed big boy would be a more suitable question Tammi?
@@timphillips9954 okay, why big boy?
@@whirledpeas3477 Oh, it's just a nickname my girlfriend gave me!
@@timphillips9954 The left one of the right one?
👍
one day our star will decay that's for sure, will we be at list galactic species or just planetary one.
Bait and switch.
They will be all connected by a electrical web...
So physics has nothing new to learn - except to tie up a few loose ends? Are you a decendant of a certain Mister Kelvin, by chance? 😄
Ah, crap ... I keep forgetting these "lectures" are geared towards children. Double crap!!
The law of everything is in Genesis chapter one don't believe atheist.
😂
That god shall never talk to a woman? You do know that he told Adam not to eat from the tree before he had even made Eve, right? Look how that turned out for him. :-0
The sun is a boring star? Are you kidding? Its been on fire for who knows how long, is on fire right now and will be on fire for who knows how long and he has the audacity to say boring.
It’s not “on fire.” That’s plasma you see when you look at the sun. Fire needs oxygen to burn 🙄
Í. Koi
Added: OK sorry for the smarmy tone. But giving up is a poor choice of paths. There is an answer !!.....
hahaha. dude gives up, cause HE can't figure it out, so he says "nobody should bother, we don't need it". It's good enough to believe in creation "the big bang theory, where quadrillions of stars were fit into a proton, suddenly exploded and made all things. AND believe 14 billion years later we just happen to be in the middle of a 96 billion light year universe. (Copernicus and Galileo would have a good laugh we still think that way. AND believe in forces (action at a distance). AND believe in simultaneity (you know, a cat that is dead and alive at the same time). AND believe time goes at different speeds instead of realizing time is a local phenomena, and it is "speed of operation" that is variable. Not the rate of the flow of time. AND believe that from waves, we get chirality and lorentz boost and orbits with no underlying medium or mechanism. AND believe in "Dark Matter and Dark Energy" in order to protect the sanctity of relativity.
As thought there could be no better answer. As though we "shouldn't bother"
This is a laughable approach to physics. I might be more polite about it, but the stupid video was called "Theory of Everything". If you don't got one, don't use the name to lure interested individuals into watching a video that says "give up", when there is no need to. We just have to think harder.
Total lunchbag let down. (that's when you think your mom packed you roast beef, but when you open your lunch bag you got egg salad yet again!)
Change the title, please. Something like, "let's give up on a theory of everything because I can't conceive of one", or "NOT a theory of everything" or "Theory of everything...don't look here for answers". or "vacuum catastrophe..what's a vacuum catastrophe". Or "roll over Copernicus, make some room for me, I'm done too".
Yes, I am totally disappointed by these contents.
It's not actually that hard to figure out. Wave-deformed spheroid particles that are planck scale and always vibrating toroidally.. Creating a medium filled with waves, which propagate through said underlying physical mechanical medium.
Done. That was easy..
Must be a genius. He looks like the old geezer down the road that runs the little two pump gas station with a little general store whose main offering seems to be sticky strips covered with dead flies hanging from the ceiling. Roy talks like that too. Same hand gestures. Roy is no genius though. All he cares about is blasting ducks with shotguns on foggy days in the fall.
If you have any idea about the truth. Then you would understand that theory is exactly nothing. It's not solid, theory isn't reality.
Theory is exactly nothing. Theology is nothing. Not even close to explaining what?
Bruh
Thats my dads name😂
End of the 1920's!! really?! so you wrote a book about it and you do not know who KIRCHHOFF is? REALLY? stop watching around 2:10...waste of time...i thought it was about string theory..rubbish! who is this guy?!
The plausible ray analogously force because golf ectrodactyly imagine modulo a cute butane. daily, uptight tennis
TRUMP 2020.
Nope
Stuff and nonsense.
Comprehensive history, but wrong as science. The subject was inverted cone. Standing on smallest point. Those small point are light and gravity. Mankind do not know structure of light(photon) or Gravity interaction with it. this make all current model of space and matter wrong. correct mass /energy equivalence is E = M4/3pi(C+G) Cubed by Ferydoon Shirazi. I have released schematic picture of photon. The detail is withheld like all my other information which others presented as theirs as proof of authorship. When I am given a public platform to present them, you will be able for first time since 1900 build the correct models of space and matter. Secret services who have been gathering my rubbish for their scientist know my information has substance. MG1
mg1s why would we believe someone who can’t even string together proper sentences