Hey Insane Curiosity Squad! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it with your friends or on other social networks like Facebook, Reddit Instagram, Tik Tok and Twitter, etc.. ( Since the algorithm is not cooperating in showing us to the public). In just 30 seconds, you will greatly help our Channel to grow and improve our future content. A big thank you from all of us.
Hi Guys, Do you prefer this editing style more "cinematic" or the Standard One Classic? Your feedback will be very useful, thank you! Type C for the Cinematic Type S for the Standard One
THEORY OF EVERYTHING IDEA: Revised TOE: 1/24/2024a: TOE Idea: Short version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test): The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe. The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is not matter warping the fabric of spacetime, 'gravity' is a part of spacetime that helps to make up matter. The gravity and 'em' modalities of matter interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime and the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of matter. TOE Idea: Longer version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test): 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. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Quarks, 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 quarks and electrons. In the case of the alpha particle (Helium nucleus), the electro-magnetic field interactions between the quarks themselves are what keeps them together in that specific structural format. 10. 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 neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.) 11. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 12. At this time, I personally believe that what is called 'gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is the force which allows a photon to travel across the vast universe without that swirling photon being flung apart or ripped apart by other photons and/or matter interactions. Gravity being a part of the 'em' photon could also possibly be how numbers exist in this existence for math to do what math does in this existence (the internal oscillations of the 3 different parts of the 'gem' photon, each modality having a maximum in one direction, a neutral, and a maximum in the other direction.) 'Gravity' is not matter warping the fabric of spacetime, 'gravity' is a part of spacetime that helps to make up matter. The gravity and 'em' modalities of matter interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime and the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of matter. 13. I also believe that the 'gem' photon is the energy unit in this universe that makes up everything else in this universe, including eternally existent space and time. ('Space' being eternally existent energy itself, the eternally existent 'gem' photon, 'Time' being the eternally existent flow of energy, 'Space Time' being eternally existent energy and it's eternally existent flow). 14. When these vibrating 'gem' photons interact with other vibrating 'gem' photons, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 15. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 16. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 17. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 18. 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. 19. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 20. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 24. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. 25. 'God' does not actually exist except for as a concept alone. The singular big bang theory is a fairy tale for various reasons. The CMBR from the supposed 'bang' should be long gone by now and should not even be able to be seen by us. Red Shift observations have a more 'normal' already known physics explanation, no dark energy nor dark matter needed. The universe always existed in some form and never had a beginning and will most probably never have an end. Galaxies collapse in upon themselves, 'bang', eventually generating new galaxies. Galaxies and 'life' just come and go in this eternally existent existence. DISCLAIMER: 26. 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. Currently, my gravity test has to be accomplished to prove or disprove that portion of the TOE idea. But, if not this way, then what exactly is the TOE of this existence?
Isn't this just a matter of semantics? You're defining "the Big Bang" as the period after inflation, but don't most people consider inflation itself to be part of the Big Bang?
My under educated theory is that the Universe expands to a critical point where it runs out of the energy causing it to expand and then gravitational forces slowly pull everything back in on itself and the process repeats again.
The "Big Crunch" is not a theory, it is not even a hypothesis, it is an idea that is NOT supported by actual observation. Having an idea is not evidence of genius. Being able to prove the idea true or false is evidence of genius, depending on the complexity of the idea and proof required.
Since it's been recently theorized that our observable universe is contained within a massive black hole, what if "the big bang" just signifies a moment in time whereby a collection of materials has internally expanded (within the black hole) as a result of a counter gravitational effect. Kind of like when a dying star expels jets of radiation from its poles.
Toward the end of the video, you said time came into being after the Big Bang. If that is true, then how could inflation have happened before the big bang? Doesn't "before" indicate that time was already in existence prior to the Big Bang?
There was no concept of time before a universe for it to occur in. The difference between a Moment and a Millennium were both indistinguishable and irrelevant
As long as there are singularities in the calculation, we won’t know for sure; even Einstein believed that the initiator of the Big Bang was God. As an agnostic, I believe that we cannot know for now.
I was thinking about the expansion of the universe, big rip or big crunch.... could it be both? Imagine the universe surrounded at all sides with blackhole and the gravity of the blackhole is pulling at our universe at every direction causing the expansion to speed up rapidly dispersing into the blackhole. And eventually the blackhole will crunch or collapse in on it self. After which it disapates disperses with a new big bang.. Or not.
You say all matter was condensed into something the size of a tennis ball? I know Neutron Stars are already super dense but squeezing even one Neutron Star down by 50% is already pushing it.
I think dark matter is possibly unseen due to it being a form of matter that is only visible to observers who live in a 4d universe and dark energy is possibly a form of pollution like a carbon footprint or fossel fuel if you will a form of unknown radiation caused by proton decay
What if our observable universe itself is in some form of black hole equivalent “stuck if you will”, and a mere grain of sand on a beach of trillions of other such universes. This theory continues with trillions of universes existing inside of other universes that has been in existence for eternity. There can be no beginning. Nothing is a paradox and without it there’s infinite regression. It’s more difficult for the human mind to comprehend eternal. But just because we can’t comprehend it doesn’t disprove it.
Ahh, I remember the first time I tried Marijuana. Back then it looked like clumps of dried muddy grass and had a *ton* of seeds in it. Nothing like these kids have nowadays. What were we talking about again?
Physics, scientists et al STILL can answer the question HOW do you make something i.e. the Universe out of NOTHING. That's the question ONLY God knows as HE created it!
CMBR: (Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation): Consider the following: Per QED (Quantum Electro Dynamics, whereby 'em' interacts with the electrons in atoms and molecules) and QCD (Quantum Chromo Dynamics, whereby 'em' interacts with the nucleus of atoms), matter has to exist for 'em' to be given off by that matter. What matter exists in outer space for that microwave 'em' to be seen by us? And 'if' it were from when matter first came into existence during the fairy tale of the 'singular big bang', that 'em' should be long gone by now and should not even be able to be seen by us. BB -> Matter and 'em' are created -> 'em' moves at the speed of light, matter moves more slowly -> (Billions of years go by) -> matter (and us) here ..........................................'em' long gone. (And there is no matter 'out here' yet for any 'em' to come back to us via QED or QCD).
I will answer this question before I see the content. the big bang is a tag that to me describes a local event that is still happening somewhere. it takes a broad open mind to see the bigger picture. no start, no boundaries.
my take on it is when god said, "let there be light!" THAT WAS the big bang. and that kinda makes sense because, theoretically, with a bang of that magnitude, there DEFINTELY was a whole lotta light! LOL!
What occurred before the big bang is a new question? I’ve been asking myself that question for 45 years so how is this suddenly a valid question amongst scientists? Too much clowniness in the scientific community
R. Scarpa - "The Cosmic Expansion Hypothesis is Falsified, the Universe is not Expanding" ruclips.net/video/IJltuqBUbJM/видео.html "UV surface brightness of galaxies from the local universe to z ∼ 5"
"What caused the Big Bang?" People trying to justify a beginning to this universe so as to be able to justify a singular 'God' existing, so as to be able to justify them having a conscious existence throughout literally all of future eternity. But, it's all just fairy tales. Even 'God' does not actually exist except for as a concept alone.
@@RyanJones-ew8vm Some people have to justify a beginning of this existence so as to be able to justify a singular 'God' existing in control of it all, so as to justify us having a conscious existence literally throughout all of future eternity. The one singular ultimate answer to ALL questions in existence, including questions never even asked is: "It Does Not Ultimately Matter", or in today's vernacular "IDNUM". (OSICA)
@@RyanJones-ew8vm Charles is just your run of the mill internet wannabe genius. He's sitting around in his underwear in Mommy's basement typing random crap.
There is so much contradiction in your statements, that there is a lot of info that does not make sense. Just one ... "the Universe was the size of a tennis ball", so where was this "tennis ball"? The standard answer is it is everywhere because everywhere was inside the "tennis ball". This is a very weak way to answer this question. It should be relatively easy to figure out the region of our present Universe from where the past Universe seemed to come from just by reversing the expansion. I believe that science does not have a full or strong understanding of how the Universe works. My best guess is the expansion will eventually stop, then reverse into a "Big Crunch", which will reach a point that the "Big Bang" will repeat. This repeating cycle, just like the size of the Universe, is on such a large time scale that it is almost impossible to see the pattern, let alone prove it.
So like did god or something have parents? Who made god? Has god always just been? Yeah we will never know. This video does nothing to solve that issue. My best guess is we will never know. If you figure it out let me know. It’s insanity. We are literally nothing compared to this reality.
Kelvin Harris Top contributor · Just now · I hypothesize: That the universe was not created by the Big Bang. The Big Bang was the manifestation of the true cause of the event. The true cause of the event that created our universe was " Interdimensional balancing " Not to be confused with the multiverse. But with our universe and its subatomic universe as well as its interdimensional universe. When one of these universes becomes void or close to void of matter the other universes are holding the matter that used to exist in it. When the tipping point is reached, they dump all of their matter into this space that will be home to a new universe and then the sharing begins where each universe starts passing material back and forth to one another through half-life radiation or black hole digestion. The effect we call the Big Bang Was the manifestation of this rebalancing. And if this is true it will occur again and has probably occurred billions of times before in the past. So, it's not the Big Bang that created the universe it's interdimensional balancing!
By calling it a theory, you are putting it in the realm of evolution... and gravity and germ theory and many other fact based concepts. Perhaps you should learn how science works before you unintentionally bless a concept that you meant to disagree with.
Believing in the big bang is worse than believing in religion. Theres absolutely no proof that either happened. We know very little about the universe now, how do we have the audacity to think that we know what happened a gazillion years ago.
Hey Insane Curiosity Squad! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it with your friends or on other social networks like Facebook, Reddit Instagram, Tik Tok and Twitter, etc.. ( Since the algorithm is not cooperating in showing us to the public). In just 30 seconds, you will greatly help our Channel to grow and improve our future content. A big thank you from all of us.
Before the BigBang, there were ads....every 30 sec an ads woud pop up
😂🤣😂
Awesome!!!!!!😂
Hi Guys, Do you prefer this editing style more "cinematic" or the Standard One Classic? Your feedback will be very useful, thank you!
Type C for the Cinematic
Type S for the Standard One
S
THEORY OF EVERYTHING IDEA: Revised TOE: 1/24/2024a:
TOE Idea: Short version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test):
The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe.
The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is not matter warping the fabric of spacetime, 'gravity' is a part of spacetime that helps to make up matter. The gravity and 'em' modalities of matter interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime and the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of matter.
TOE Idea: Longer version: (currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test):
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. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.).
3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them.
4. Quarks, 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 quarks and electrons. In the case of the alpha particle (Helium nucleus), the electro-magnetic field interactions between the quarks themselves are what keeps them together in that specific structural format.
10. 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 neutrino being a substance with a very high gravitational modality with very low 'em' modalities.)
11. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary.
THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA:
12. At this time, I personally believe that what is called 'gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is the force which allows a photon to travel across the vast universe without that swirling photon being flung apart or ripped apart by other photons and/or matter interactions. Gravity being a part of the 'em' photon could also possibly be how numbers exist in this existence for math to do what math does in this existence (the internal oscillations of the 3 different parts of the 'gem' photon, each modality having a maximum in one direction, a neutral, and a maximum in the other direction.) 'Gravity' is not matter warping the fabric of spacetime, 'gravity' is a part of spacetime that helps to make up matter. The gravity and 'em' modalities of matter interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime and the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of matter.
13. I also believe that the 'gem' photon is the energy unit in this universe that makes up everything else in this universe, including eternally existent space and time. ('Space' being eternally existent energy itself, the eternally existent 'gem' photon, 'Time' being the eternally existent flow of energy, 'Space Time' being eternally existent energy and it's eternally existent flow).
14. When these vibrating 'gem' photons interact with other vibrating 'gem' photons, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe.
15. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate.
16. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure.
17. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons).
THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY:
18. 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.
19. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency.
20. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies.
NOTES:
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well.
24. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now.
25. 'God' does not actually exist except for as a concept alone. The singular big bang theory is a fairy tale for various reasons. The CMBR from the supposed 'bang' should be long gone by now and should not even be able to be seen by us. Red Shift observations have a more 'normal' already known physics explanation, no dark energy nor dark matter needed. The universe always existed in some form and never had a beginning and will most probably never have an end. Galaxies collapse in upon themselves, 'bang', eventually generating new galaxies. Galaxies and 'life' just come and go in this eternally existent existence.
DISCLAIMER:
26. 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. Currently, my gravity test has to be accomplished to prove or disprove that portion of the TOE idea. But, if not this way, then what exactly is the TOE of this existence?
TLDR
Isn't this just a matter of semantics? You're defining "the Big Bang" as the period after inflation, but don't most people consider inflation itself to be part of the Big Bang?
My under educated theory is that the Universe expands to a critical point where it runs out of the energy causing it to expand and then gravitational forces slowly pull everything back in on itself and the process repeats again.
That's called 'The Big Crunch", it's already taken.
@@chbu7081 I must be a genius then, or at least on par with those who already theorised it.
The "Big Crunch" is not a theory, it is not even a hypothesis, it is an idea that is NOT supported by actual observation.
Having an idea is not evidence of genius. Being able to prove the idea true or false is evidence of genius, depending on the complexity of the idea and proof required.
Since it's been recently theorized that our observable universe is contained within a massive black hole, what if "the big bang" just signifies a moment in time whereby a collection of materials has internally expanded (within the black hole) as a result of a counter gravitational effect. Kind of like when a dying star expels jets of radiation from its poles.
We will never know why energy is there. What it is when it is not manifested.
Toward the end of the video, you said time came into being after the Big Bang. If that is true, then how could inflation have happened before the big bang? Doesn't "before" indicate that time was already in existence prior to the Big Bang?
There was no concept of time before a universe for it to occur in. The difference between a Moment and a Millennium were both indistinguishable and irrelevant
As long as there are singularities in the calculation, we won’t know for sure; even Einstein believed that the initiator of the Big Bang was God. As an agnostic, I believe that we cannot know for now.
nothing doesn't have to be created, it's there already.
I was thinking about the expansion of the universe, big rip or big crunch.... could it be both?
Imagine the universe surrounded at all sides with blackhole and the gravity of the blackhole is pulling at our universe at every direction causing the expansion to speed up rapidly dispersing into the blackhole. And eventually the blackhole will crunch or collapse in on it self. After which it disapates disperses with a new big bang..
Or not.
When something explodes there's no oder to it, our universe has order to it everything, nothing is disorder like a boom explosion
You say all matter was condensed into something the size of a tennis ball? I know Neutron Stars are already super dense but squeezing even one Neutron Star down by 50% is already pushing it.
I think dark matter is possibly unseen due to it being a form of matter that is only visible to observers who live in a 4d universe and dark energy is possibly a form of pollution like a carbon footprint or fossel fuel if you will a form of unknown radiation caused by proton decay
A nice meal for 2, and some wine.
Normally before a fairytale someone thinks up that fairytale in their head.
What if our observable universe itself is in some form of black hole equivalent “stuck if you will”, and a mere grain of sand on a beach of trillions of other such universes. This theory continues with trillions of universes existing inside of other universes that has been in existence for eternity. There can be no beginning. Nothing is a paradox and without it there’s infinite regression. It’s more difficult for the human mind to comprehend eternal. But just because we can’t comprehend it doesn’t disprove it.
Thanks for watching!
Did consciousness create the universe or did the universe create consciousness 🤔
Ahh, I remember the first time I tried Marijuana. Back then it looked like clumps of dried muddy grass and had a *ton* of seeds in it. Nothing like these kids have nowadays. What were we talking about again?
@@PapaTroll86but it got you high, didn't it?
Could God create a rock that is too heavy for God to lift?
😯
@@PapaTroll86 I bet ur the coolest kid on the short bus 🚌
Awesome video, please upload similar video's in near future in detail. 🍓🍒🚀😘🌷
Physics, scientists et al STILL can answer the question HOW do you make something i.e. the Universe out of NOTHING. That's the question ONLY God knows as HE created it!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
CMBR: (Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation): Consider the following: Per QED (Quantum Electro Dynamics, whereby 'em' interacts with the electrons in atoms and molecules) and QCD (Quantum Chromo Dynamics, whereby 'em' interacts with the nucleus of atoms), matter has to exist for 'em' to be given off by that matter. What matter exists in outer space for that microwave 'em' to be seen by us? And 'if' it were from when matter first came into existence during the fairy tale of the 'singular big bang', that 'em' should be long gone by now and should not even be able to be seen by us.
BB -> Matter and 'em' are created -> 'em' moves at the speed of light, matter moves more slowly -> (Billions of years go by) -> matter (and us) here ..........................................'em' long gone. (And there is no matter 'out here' yet for any 'em' to come back to us via QED or QCD).
If only there was a book that explained this in detail that was free and available in every language. 🤔 oh there is…
I will answer this question before I see the content.
the big bang is a tag that to me describes a local event that is still happening somewhere. it takes a broad open mind to see the bigger picture. no start, no boundaries.
my take on it is when god said, "let there be light!" THAT WAS the big bang. and that kinda makes sense because, theoretically, with a bang of that magnitude, there DEFINTELY was a whole lotta light! LOL!
Big Wrang!
What occurred before the big bang is a new question?
I’ve been asking myself that question for 45 years so how is this suddenly a valid question amongst scientists?
Too much clowniness in the scientific community
R. Scarpa - "The Cosmic Expansion Hypothesis is Falsified, the Universe is not Expanding" ruclips.net/video/IJltuqBUbJM/видео.html "UV surface brightness of galaxies from the local universe to z ∼ 5"
What caused the Big Bang?
We don't know.
"What caused the Big Bang?" People trying to justify a beginning to this universe so as to be able to justify a singular 'God' existing, so as to be able to justify them having a conscious existence throughout literally all of future eternity. But, it's all just fairy tales. Even 'God' does not actually exist except for as a concept alone.
@@charlesbrightman4237 what are you taking about Charles? I'm a atheist, nobody mentioned god. Somebody had a question.
@@RyanJones-ew8vm Some people have to justify a beginning of this existence so as to be able to justify a singular 'God' existing in control of it all, so as to justify us having a conscious existence literally throughout all of future eternity.
The one singular ultimate answer to ALL questions in existence, including questions never even asked is: "It Does Not Ultimately Matter", or in today's vernacular "IDNUM". (OSICA)
@@RyanJones-ew8vm
Charles is just your run of the mill internet wannabe genius. He's sitting around in his underwear in Mommy's basement typing random crap.
I like it
There is so much contradiction in your statements, that there is a lot of info that does not make sense. Just one ... "the Universe was the size of a tennis ball", so where was this "tennis ball"? The standard answer is it is everywhere because everywhere was inside the "tennis ball". This is a very weak way to answer this question. It should be relatively easy to figure out the region of our present Universe from where the past Universe seemed to come from just by reversing the expansion. I believe that science does not have a full or strong understanding of how the Universe works. My best guess is the expansion will eventually stop, then reverse into a "Big Crunch", which will reach a point that the "Big Bang" will repeat. This repeating cycle, just like the size of the Universe, is on such a large time scale that it is almost impossible to see the pattern, let alone prove it.
So like did god or something have parents? Who made god? Has god always just been? Yeah we will never know. This video does nothing to solve that issue. My best guess is we will never know. If you figure it out let me know. It’s insanity. We are literally nothing compared to this reality.
།དངོས ཡོད་ཐོག་མཐའ་མེད་་པ།
WHY NOT JUST LET THERE BE LIGHT 🕯️.....
MAYBE COULD IT COULD BE JUST THE BLENDING OF UNIVERSE THAT WE KNOW TODAY....AND WHO PAID FOR THAT.....
Nobody
Kelvin Harris
Top contributor
· Just now ·
I hypothesize: That the universe was not created by the Big Bang. The Big Bang was the manifestation of the true cause of the event. The true cause of the event that created our universe was " Interdimensional balancing " Not to be confused with the multiverse. But with our universe and its subatomic universe as well as its interdimensional universe. When one of these universes becomes void or close to void of matter the other universes are holding the matter that used to exist in it. When the tipping point is reached, they dump all of their matter into this space that will be home to a new universe and then the sharing begins where each universe starts passing material back and forth to one another through half-life radiation or black hole digestion. The effect we call the Big Bang Was the manifestation of this rebalancing. And if this is true it will occur again and has probably occurred billions of times before in the past. So, it's not the Big Bang that created the universe it's interdimensional balancing!
It’s just a theory with many flaws if you believe it .
By calling it a theory, you are putting it in the realm of evolution... and gravity and germ theory and many other fact based concepts.
Perhaps you should learn how science works before you unintentionally bless a concept that you meant to disagree with.
@@ThatGuyz82someone's a grumpy gnome
Believing in the big bang is worse than believing in religion. Theres absolutely no proof that either happened. We know very little about the universe now, how do we have the audacity to think that we know what happened a gazillion years ago.
How many years is a gazillion ?
@@steviereedeker3314 whatever your heart desires.
What nothing is nothing what dark is nothing
Probably always has n always will be. Doubt there was any big bang