Five Scientific Theories That Will Blow Your Mind
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 май 2024
- The more we learn about the Universe, the more we realize how much we don't know.
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Warographics: / @warographics643
MegaProjects: / @megaprojects9649
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
Thanks for another video my son and I can bond over. He finds many videos, about what he likes, to share with me. I like it when I can reciprocate with videos I find. Keep up the awesome work.
I miss when my dad and I did this. He’s passed now
Good on you. I always wished my Dad was more interested in things like this but he's a simple man who barely understands how to search for car videos on RUclips, let alone scientific topics.
@@jtonthatrack3984 I'm sorry to hear that. But, it sounds like he made a positive, lasting impression on you. I hope when I die, my son will feel that way as well. Take care.
@@DieNextInLINE ironically, I feel I learned how to really search RUclips from watching my son do it. And, just because someone is simple, doesn't mean they only know very little. They often know a great deal about other things.
@@danielreuben1058 I would normally agree but my dad is the first person to say he's a simple man. He came to the country early as a teenager and just focused on making a living as a welder. He even got super stressed and confused about the new 'Real ID' licenses/cards. It hasn't stopped him from teaching me plenty of physical activities like cars and house maintenance.
“Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.”
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Came here to say just this.
I thought this, but then realized it might be more instructive to point out how easy it is, even for someone proceeding carefully and in good faith, to underestimate the size of the observable universe by 12 or 13 orders of magnitude. Sagan was famous for talking about “billions and billions” of stars. Simon mentioned in this video how there were hundreds of billions of stars. However, the fact of the matter is that, just in what we can see, there are hundreds of billions OF hundreds of billions of stars. Throw in another order of magnitude to see how many planets there are, and there you have JUST the visible universe, which doesn’t even scratch the infinity of the conceivable universe.
42
After that the style settles down a bit and tells you things you need to know.
@@altortugas5979 FYI, That is actually a misquote. He has a book titled "Billions and Billions" but he never said it. In his own words: I said there are maybe 100 billion galaxies and 10 billion trillion stars. It's hard to talk about the Cosmos without using big numbers...But I never said 'billions and billions.' For one thing, it's too imprecise."
I've been obsessed with what the universe is and how it works since I was 13. I live to understand it better and think about it and while I've taken a fondness to this channel after recently discovering it, these space and physics themed videos will always be my very favorite.
Me too, i like his videos its explained very well and not all dumbed down with stupid animations and crap. That ki da stuff is hard to findif youre lookingfor an explaination for certain things
Good! Such is the nature of child-like curiosity that makes a good scientist...degrees etc. notwithstanding! Keep enquiring! It's so much more fun than wandering around as though you'd had shit replacing your brain...literally...although that would result in automatic death, so it'll just have to be metaphorical shit, sadly; it's the case with a large proportion of the human population, very sadly indeed. ⚛💥❕😲😵💫🤤❗🤣🤣😆👍❕Have fun! Science is the only way to probe!
Your animation of the Solar System, in particular the depiction of the Asteroid Belt, brings up another interesting space fact. Despite there being up to 1.9 million asteroids in the belt if you were to stand on one asteroid you would not be able to see its neighbours as they would be too far away to see! It is not the crowded area of asteroids that is popularly conveyed in images and movies. Flying a space ship through it would not be hazardous!
It's like when our galaxy collides with Andromeda, it's unlikely that any stars or planets will actually hit each other
woah I never thought of that but that actually makes sense thinking about it because if they were close together they would be attracted by gravity causing them to become one
@@DrPsychotic Not to mention collisions altering their course and then the resulting free projectile being attracted to the most massive thing in the Solar system....thus possibly taking it right across our nose lol. Scary stuff when you think about it.
@@AsmodeusMictian yeah space is wild
If their distribution was as dense as most people seem to think, there wouldn't be an asteroid belt but a planet(oid) instead.
0:35 - Chapter 1 - Quantum entanglement
3:05 - Chapter 2 - The collatz conjecture
6:20 - Chapter 3 - Alien descendance
9:05 - Chapter 4 - False vacuum theory
11:20 - Chapter 5 - The immensity of the universe
Noice.
You should partner with vsauce
Physicist here. Quantum entanglement would make particles change in relation to their entangled partner, but it would not yield useful information. You could see one particle with spin up and then go to the other particle and see the spin down. However, you cannot force the original particle into one state. The ramification of this is that faster than light communication would be impossible. There are things in the universe that go faster than light (like the expansion of the universe, and even entanglement) but it is information that it yields which cannot exceed light speed.
Are aliens controlling the quantum states of all particles and setting them to 'read-only'? What if all particles' quantum states already have information but we can't understand it - first contact fail?
Really interesting! Any recommendations on videos or books that describe it further? I have read Chaos and Friedman’s work. I’m just an interested outsider to the field.
@@MB-hh6mi it is hard to recommend one specific book. Most of this information I obtained from my professors in undergraduate school. It was fairly common knowledge that information was the key element that could never exceed light speed.
To add, you also cant put information in the fact of measuring the spin state or not and therefore hide information in the action. You need the outcomes of both experiments to conclude that both changed their spin state simultaneously. (Correct me if im wrong)
@@DrummerRF right. As soon as you measure the particle. The wave equation coalesce. At this point you can understand what the particle is doing, and at the same time know what the second entangled particle is doing, but you can't inject information or force the first particle into any state. Therefore you can never send information using this method.
There is a theory which states that, if anybody should ever discover just exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced with something even more bizarrely inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened
-- Douglas Adams.
Considering he's such a voyeur I thought the universe was here for god's amusement.
42
Douglas Adams was very clever. I would stop short of Genius, but he was certainly highly intelligent and poetic. IMHO his best thing was the infinite Improbability Drive. Oh wait, perhaps he really was a genius.
The last part of this video had me thinking about another Adams quote:
“Space [...] is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.”
These aren't theories, they aren't falsifiable, are unsupported by evidence, and make no testable predictions. They are just philosophical what-ifs, ramblings.
For the last one, you didn't even consider that those galaxy estimates are just for the OBSERVABLE universe. Our little pocket of the observable universe may only be 1/1000000 of the entire universe.
What if what's beyond the observable universe just loops back around into our universe?
Wouldn't matter if it's just the observable universe or the whole thing. It's just using orders of magnitude to give the feel of its scope. He got it right enough.
True. Cosmologists still debate whether the universe is infinite or not! (I don't think it is because I can't do easy maths with infinity...)
In the (distant) future, after all galaxies and globular clusters in the local group form one giant ultra galaxy, if a new civilization were to arise and look up in the sky.. everything would be so far away that would be no light at all.. the distant galaxies we can see now, will disappear behind our observable horizon.
People of that civilization, would think their galaxy is all that there is to the universe, because they could never see anything else.
We live in the best time in the universe, while all this fun stuff is going on for us to see, and we are still in the early enough stages, that even without FTL travel, we could still get to the point go go to other galaxy clusters.
@@cosmogoblin Life is an anomaly. There might be many other inconsistencies that break current known logic.
Simon you have a wonderful talent in communication. Thank you for making these educational teaching videos. My students actually stop talking and pay attention when you're on the screen 📚
You sound like a awesome teacher
Thank you, Simon. Well researched, informative, and interesting. Your entertaining format is both amusing and inspiring. I appreciate learning more about the world and beyond from you and your team. Please keep it coming!👍
The immensity of space is even more terrifying when you realize that we only see the observable universe. With space-time expanding faster than the speed of light there are stars that we will literally never be able to see because there is literally not enough time in the universe, even if it never ends, for the light from those stars to reach Earth.
literally
@@davemccombs Ergo. Vis-à-vis. Indubitably
I am just literally shaking in my shoes over this terrifying realization. I can't sleep, have trouble breathing and it feels like the walls are coming in on me. I went to see a counsellor and she said get over it, it is what it is.
we know nothing.
And 99.99% of what we CAN see is actually by this point moving away from us faster than light, so we’ll likely never be able to reach it, even if we had infinite time and could travel at the speed of light.
If the universe is so big, why won't it fight me?
Well I'm sure if you give it a cold it might fight you. If the universe was a person, you'd be smaller than a tardigrade(can't spell that thing)
It does. It's just very, very sneaky about it.
Loved when you said "documentary" lol
I watch Ancient Aliens as a purely entertaining show.
They take speculative facts and dubious extrapolation to come to doubtful conclusions that support their view.
The phrase "ancient alien theorists say yes" has become a drinking game.
Just seems like a good reason to date ancient alien theorists.
That reminds me, I was visiting a friend several years ago , having drinks while doing an Ancient Aliens marathon, neither of us had heard of the drinking game, but by the second episode it just seemed the obvious thing to do, lol! We took a couple of minutes to agree on the rules, a shot every time the narrator says "ancient alien theorists" (I remember there being one or two other possible words or phrases we considered), and we ended up doing about ten shots over just one episode!
Now that's funny. It never occurred to me. But then I never watched more than a few minutes of Ancient Aliens before crying BS.
Me too
The way the narrator of that show pronounces "extraterRESTRial" drives me nuts haha
The vastness of space is just incomprehensible. I saw a couple videos talking about it that really did a fantastic job of making me realize I’ll never even be able to come close to comprehending how little I can comprehend the vastness of space.
It’s just not on a scale my brain is capable of thinking about it’s so absurdly large. Words don’t exist to explain how gargantuan it is.
It's like contemplating eternity, no matter how far you zoom ahead into the future, it's still longer, still not the end, just cant wrap my brain around it.
Anyone interested in quantum entanglement, false vacuum, and other related subjects should also be watching PBS SpaceTIme, which goes into these subjects in detail. Not the detail a student who could actually grasp the mathematics would get, but the host actually understands the subjects and can simplify them for a general intelligent audience.
Definitely agree, it's a brilliant channel
Mr Average agrees to.
Yeah, and he’s proved this video wrong. Quantum entangled particules don’t actually transfer any information. FTL information transfer breaks causality and his first point is wrong.
@@MrHockeyNation That's what you'd expect but it does *seem* like it is transferring information FTL. In reality this is probably due to our lack of understanding more than anything else. Science Asylum just did a good video on this
I love PBS Spacetime 😁
If I recall correctly, the conclusion that quantum entanglement can be used to do faster-than-light communication is, unfortunately, incorrect.
Yes, you are correct. Turns out if you force an entangled particle into a certain state you break the entanglement.
Yeah, that's how I see it. Faster than light communication would create paradoxes where effects precede causes. Or, to put it differently, it would violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy).
Trying to observe (which I mean the proverbial scientific quantum observance which is synonymous with direct interaction through measurement/quantification) any form of quantum entanglement, however miniscule, would inevitably skew any information one were to try to send. However, utilizing quantum entanglement via passive communication is theoretically possible. Which mainly involves identification through passive means like discrete quantitative statistical analysis in order to attempt quantum probability to convey direct information in real time is the only possible candidate. Of course, the simple premise of transmitting and receiving qubits of information, even if instantly, would be somewhat overshadowed by the factor that it will be an indeterminate process where the application of information wouldn't be a 100% action per request practical tool, like the software that networks with transmitting servers on your smart phone, for example.
you are correct by saying the assertion is incorrect. Quantum Entanglement is indistinguishable from two basketballs that were spinning against each other in opposite directions and then separated. Knowing which way one is spinning isn't special - of course they're spinning in opposite directions, they were touching while spinning previously, like two cogs. It's not FTL - it's just being careful with the basketballs so they continue to spin in the direction they had when they were together.
@@ernestareheart4238 - If the equally valid Pilot Wave Theory is correct? then Quantum Entanglement doesn't exist - and since it's impossible to prove the FTL communication of entanglement? since it behaves exactly like it doesn't exist - and there's a fully valid theory that states that it doesn't exist? I think it's time to admit that the "luminiferous aether" isn't real.
I miss VSauce 😢
While the size of the universe is mind bending, what really blows my mind is, "What is outside of the universe?"
If we define universe as totality, nothing.
@@user-kcrpine we define the universe as totality in regards to space and time as we know it. The fact is we dont know if the universe is a self contained phenomenon that willed itself into existence or if it had a precursor outside the bounds of space and time. So nothing is a bad answer.
By definition there is no outside of the universe, right?
@@SteveGrin that would be true if we had a complete and total understanding of everything. Unfortunately we do not, so we are unable to say. Only speculate.
Look up "E8 theory" for some ideas...
If Simon talks any faster he’s gonna end up inventing faster than light communication all by himself.
Got a good chuckle from that.
🤣
Good to know that I'm not the only one that says "breath Simon!"
Or become Ben Shapiro
love all your channels mate..keep up the awesome work u have taught me so much in the past couple of years..love from the UK
Cheers.
Also from the UK, (Exeter), its really good to listen to non American videos (I'm not a little Englander)
What would be more mind boggling though? A universe that goes on forever or one that had a distinct "end". We would be just as mind blown contemplating questions like "Why is it the size that it is?" "Whats beyond the end?" "What is the end made of?" "What is it expanding into?". Both a finite or infinite universe are equally incomprehensible.
Something I read that really blew my mind about the size of our universe is this: when the milky way and Andromeda eventually collide and form "Milkdromeda", it's unlikely that any actual collisions between stars or planets even occurs, simply bc of the vast distances between them. That blew my mind!
I'm sure there will be some collisions, just rare
Don't believe everything 100% lol these people are smart but sometimes for their own good...keep common sense aroundn
@@caviestcaveman8691you can't apply common sense to things that aren't common.. like galaxy mergers
@@somemagellanic pretty sure collisions will happen..
@@caviestcaveman8691 and I'm pretty sure they won't. did any one of us did much actual thinking on how, what and why? even if we did, did we share that right alongside the opinion? what even is the purpose of just doubting without checkig?
Simon, the fact that you went through the close of the this video without quoting Douglas Adams definition of space means you are hereby banned from using the term "maths" for the next 30 days! Keep up the good work!
YES! That was the first thing that popped into my head:
Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
Some clarification about his mind bogglingly big the universe is. Since there are hundreds of billions of galaxies, there are not hundreds of billions of stars. There are hundreds of billions of hundreds of billions of stars. And, given what we’ve seen about exoplanets, there are consequently hundreds of billions of hundreds of billions of tens of planets.
And that's only just now
But in all those gazillions of planets, there is only one me. Only one! Aren't I amazing? 🤔
Probably not. Sure, there might be only one you in the visible universe. But if the universe is infinite ( and I can’t see why it wouldn’t just keep going), then you and I are actually having this same conversation on some far away planet. In fact, I’m pretty sure someone has calculated how big the universe would have to be (or how far you’d have to go) to find a second “you.”
@@altortugas5979 In order for the second "me" and the second "you" to have exactly this conversation, we would also need to be surrounded by exactly the same universe because of all the effects that our environment exerts on our bodies and our behavior. This seems logically impossible, because the universe cannot contain an identical copy of itself and still remain itself. An interesting speculation, though...
@@altortugas5979 but even then, it wouldn,t be "me". It would be a doppleganger of me. And then just as I typed the last part of this sentence, the doppleganger would type it too but one letter would be wrong and the butterfly effect would change everythink.
The vastness of the universe is difficult to grasp, but the vastness of the natural numbers is in my opinion even more mind blowing, especially since it's just adding one each time.
Compared to the infinite, our universe is puny, laughably small.
And it's like your nodding going right, exactly, of course...wait.
I thought this was vsauce Michael
Me too
They are both awesome.
I love your videos Simon. Your story telling / narratives are fantastic. Your team of writers & researchers do a great job to bring the content to you to determine which stories you create videos from. I watch all your channels and enjoy them all. I love learning and challenging my thoughts / assumptions about the world around us. Love the notifications of new videos.
Thank you.
@@Sideprojects absolutely agree. Your videos are always interesting and thought provoking. You and your content creators and editors are legends.
This guy is a joke
@@Sideprojects
If Space is super Empty then how come JWST got hit by a meteor in just a few months and probably more are coming its way.? Facts contradict your statements.
@@reasonerenlightened2456 It's a shooting gallery that's vastly empty in a universe full of stuff. The facts contradict your statement.
Fantastic video Simon. Always entertaining and informative 👌👏
I’m glad you added the enormity of the universe as one of your mind-blowing theories. I don’t think it’s truly appreciated by a lot of people. I’m not pretending to be some deep thinker or expert, I just believe if you sit down and truly try to comprehend its size you will be really dumbfounded. It’s honestly absurd how vast it is.
Can't even fathom just how ginormous it all is. Those Webb pictures, 13 billion light years back, the amount of miles in just 1 light year is almost incomprehensible. Now times that number by 13,000,000,000. Insane
I'd love to hear Simon read Douglass Adams Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy...
Remember your towel!
Hot damn! Kevin made the Collatz Conjecture interesting!
Now, Simon, when will you let Kevin write a Biographic for Danny?
When has it not been interesting?
Isn't being worried about things we can not control a big part of what existential dread is?
the size of the universe is a truly incomprehensible concept; I don't know if anybody can truly grasp that.
Wow, Simon! I love these scientific observations that mess with our ideas about the world. Makes me wonder if there is a "world behind our world" and these observations are seeing the intersection of realities . . .
modern physics makes Han Solo look like a frightened child. when the Milky Way crashes into the Andromeda galaxy planets and stars will wave peacefully as they pass each other by. How long should it really take to calculate a hyperspace jump.
@@channingdeadnight I can just see them waving . . . lol!
These videos are fun and interesting as always, so thank you for making them!
You're welcome, thanks for watching :)
I first learned about quantum entanglement from Mass Effect. It was how they explained how Commander Shepherd could talk to people in different parts of the galaxy instantaneously. They had the same quark. So when they would send digital information to the quark on their ship it was the same as sending it to the quark back on Earth. It's literally the same quark. It blew my mind.
Strange thing. When I first learned about quantum entanglement I thought "instant communications! But apparently it can't be used quite that way.
it doesnt work that way, you cant use the quantum entanglement to sent any meaningful information as you cant control what information is sent, you can only send gibberish.
@@SP-kt1dq Yes, it's an outrage! It seems a shame that the phenomenon of entanglement exists and we can't use it to communicate. I imagine being able to do so would break causality. So it can't happen.
@@SP-kt1dq However you could still use the quantum state change to mean a 1 or 0. For instance, sending information is a 1 and it's 0 otherwise. I'm probably just talking out my ass. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..." something something lol.
@@GalactusTheDestroyer Nah, there's no way around the "you can only send random garbage" problem. ruclips.net/video/BLqk7uaENAY/видео.html
I appreciate your approach to provide information on your channels without interjecting your opinion or interpreting elements for your audience.
Always a well presented, well thought out video from Simon. Instant like!
Fascinating eggskull
I understand the collatze theory as you explained, what I don't understand is why people think it means something. I'm not saying it doesn't, just that I personally don't understand it.
As for the alien descendance, the possibility can be proved if we're able to detect the DNA of any life we find on Mars. This won't prove that life originated here or on a meteor, but that it is possible for life to begin after arriving from space.
It doesn't necessarily mean anything. It's more a part of recreational math than anything serious. Still, it's so simple and intuitive that it's crazy it can't be proven
@@ThatWriterKevin But could that not be applied to make anything unprovable? Like, do we know that pigs cannot fly, merely because we haven't yet seen one that can?
@@ajstevens1652 We can prove pigs can't fly, because we know the mechanics for flight and pigs have no capability to do so
I like the idea that the universe is like the rear of an old CRT style TV screen...whereby there's a point behind it from which all emanates...we are merely a spec of dust stuck to the rear lining of the screen itself with everything else spreading out across the surface in every direction around you
The first time I was really given a sense of scale for the solar system (let alone the Universe!) was a website called 'if the moon is a pixel'. The premise is what it says on the tin - a to-scale render of the solar system, starting at the sun. It was truly mind-boggling how long I was scrolling before I reached Mercury and how tiny it was. The distance between Mars and Jupiter blew my mind.
The most mind blowing fact of all: Simon has so many channels that he works on his RUclips videos for 36 hours a day.
It's a time-space thing.
I wonder how much he rakes in.
So, are you saying is he's actually a clone, or a bot?
He must be Amish and maybe a bowler
Interesting video as always. Of course, here's the obligatory pronunciation correction, because there's always at least one, Brain Boy. "Coelacanth" is pronounced "SEE-la-canth".
I’d love a brain blaze version of the same title…but 5 basic facts that would only blow the minds of flat earthers….but presented as though they really are astonishing news to Simon, Danny, and Sam
One of my kids had a pair of identical twins in his soccer team. These two kids I am sure were quantum entangled. They always knew where the other was on the field and seemed to be able to pass the ball between themselves without even looking.
I don't understand why the Collatz conjecture is such an issue. An even number will either start off as a power of 2 and reduce down via repeated halving, or eventually halve into an odd number, at which point 3x+1 makes it even again, and the halving continues. Until you find me an odd number that remains odd after 3x+1, that's proof enough for me that the conjecture holds.
Yeah, but you've offered nothing more than mathematicians already know. And that is not a proof.
What I would like to know is if Simon in our universe furiously gesticulated, would a negatively charged Simon in another universe be equally compelled to wash his hands?
PSA : as far as the panspermia theory, as of 2022 all 5 dna building blocks have been found in meteorites!
You have JUST the right amount of snark in your presentation. You can appreciate irony when you see it and smile or chuckle when telling the rest of us. I think I saw you break down and laugh once...ever...and it was over something worth laughing about. And yet, when stuff gets serious, it's presented with an appropriate tone and gravitas.
I think that for something to be truly mind blowing you have to have an example that can be visually understood. The next time you are on a sandy beach, preferably a very long one, pick up a handful of sand and let it sink in that there are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on all the world's beaches. That's mind blowing.
You should look into Dr. Erik Verlinde, and his theories about the universe being a black hole... etc..
The math problem is like trying to reach the final fraction of Pi.
Seems kinda pointless to try.
What I heard about the false vacuum thing is that if part of the universe started to collapse to a more stable state, the wave of universe destruction would propagate at the speed of light.
That is correct.
12:45 and this is when you turned into Jeremy Clarkson, I was laughing out loud...
The particles aren't really spinning like a spinning top. They have spin as a property, but it related to magnetism not actual spinning - it is kind of more complex than that...
And one thing more - quantum entanglement does not allow for FTL communications. The entangled particles does not communicate between each other in any detectable way - they are parts of one quantum system that behaviors non-locally, i.e. its properties does not change with change of its size or distance between its parts.
How this man doesn’t have his own TV show, is beyond me. Great narrator!
TV is dying. Might be better off staying on RUclips.
are you from 1970s?
@@kingdodongo4126 He’ll yes bad music and terrible outfits!
With just RUclips you make about $10,000 with a million views. I wonder what tv pays these days.
The false vacuum thingy messes with my sanity
04:32 ... You should get the reward. I think that you just proved the theory when you explained it. Any odd number multiplied by three will be an odd number. Plus one makesi it even, then it boils down to one again. By the way 4-2-1 is a great French dice game played with three die.
Erdos is pronounced roughly like "air dish" btw.
Edit: really appreciate you talking about mathematics.
This is the first time I've heard anyone actually call tardigrades "water bears". 🙂 They are always "tardigrades, also known as water bears" or something similar. Are they really also called water bears if people don't call them that?
My mind is now "BLOWN"...
Thank you for the seads of my further venture to learn more Simon!
Awesome Science Playlist!! Mr. Whistler, you are a legend homie.
It's definitely an interesting video that I enjoyed watching! I'm just left wondering why there is a Mandelbrot set in the thumbnail which is never mentioned in the video?
I was wondering the same thing
I was wondering as well.
I think one of the best arguments against panspermia is how quickly life started on earth after it cooled enough for it to become possible. It happened shockingly fast. The oldest stromatolites are 3.5 billion years old, and these are built by quite complex photosynthesizing cyanobacteria, found in fossils as far back as 3.8 billion years. There is no way these are the first life, as they are extremely complex, to the point of being capable of photosynthesis and complex metabolic activity. It seems that pretty much as soon as the planet was able to support life it was supporting life. Sure, it's possible that we got hit with one of those lucky life-containing meteors within a few hundred thousand years after the planet cooled off, but it seems more likely to me that life, at least on the microbial level, is just actually pretty likely so long as the proper conditions are met, and that when you have the right soup of stuff in the right conditions, it almost inevitably comes together into something that can start reproducing and evolving. We can't recreate this, of course, both because we neither know what the soup contained nor what the necessary conditions were, and because we don't have the time to wait around to see if a given combination of soup + conditions is right. A few hundred thousand years may be a flash in the pan on geological scales, but it's still longer than we can plan out an experiment for. Just the fact that life seemed to start so fast here though seems, to me, to indicate that life just sort of happens when the conditions are right for it to happen, and probably usually just dies out just as quickly because the whole universe is trying to kill us. We were lucky enough to come into being on a planet with pretty good conditions in a fairly stable region of the galaxy during a fairly stable time in the history of the universe, and if we weren't, then we wouldn't know any better because we probably would have been snuffed out as barely formed sacks of protoplasm less than a billion years after the earth got slimy. Life being common but fragile and hard to sustain seems more likely than life being so rare it only forms once and so hardy that it can travel all over the universe frozen in space rocks.
And if life did originate on earth we would have dna that spun in both directions and not just one, all life on earth the DNA helix is spun in the same direction
@@cislife7140 That's just not true. DNA needs to spin in a single direction in order to work. It doesn't matter which one it chooses but it has to pick one or the helix structure is impossible. Same reason that we see chirality in play with regards to proteins and sugars as well. It is true that molecules of the opposite chirality would have /existed/ in the early earth, which is why we still find things like D amino acids in a few bacterial proteins today. However, natural selection would have worked very quickly to make sure that everything that had to form big, complex molecules accounted for chirality.
Edit: Just for clarity, saying that life must have come from somewhere else because all DNA spins the same way is like saying that aliens must have created arctic foxes because they are all white. All DNA has to spin the same way or we wouldn't be able to reproduce or transcribe proteins. Natural selection can easily make things that, when looked at in hindsight, appear designed. DNA is always in the D configuration because all sugars, including deoxyribose, are always in the D configuration. Proteins are always in the L configuration because all amino acids are in the L configuration. L sugars and D amino acids are possible, and would have been floating around in the primordial soup, but, as complex polysaccharides and proteins wouldn't work with mixtures of components twisting every which way, natural selection did its thing and now, with a few very, very rare exceptions, these molecules are no longer found in nature.
You call 700 million years quick? 700 million years ago, Earth was a snowball and life was almost completely extinguished. Look at what we have now and what we've had there inbetween.
@@TheYannir What does a mass extinction event have to do with the first life? Did you think there was nothing before the snowball earth? But yeah, 700 million years isn't exactly slow in the grand scheme of things anyway.
@@achristiananarchist2509 Let's spare each other the petty derisive comments. 700 million years isn't a huge number in the cosmic scale of things but it's still a massive period between the spaces of Earth becoming able to support life and the appearance of the first single-cell organisms. I don't believe in panspermia either, I just don't think "how quick it was" is a good argument to disprove it either.
'Space is super empty, and it's super big.' Tell that to the James Webb telescope! XD
I like the ' I don't feel like counting them ' answer.
True smarts.
Communication faster than light is not possible with quantum entanglement either. If both partners of communication would have an entangled particle, neither of them would know if the other has already looked at it's state. Without this information you can't get any information out of the revelation of the state.
right, that's why the US and China are in a race (and spending bucket loads of money) to build the first quantum entangled satellite communications system, with the US far behind of course.
Here's a 6 one for you. There is a very strange dip in the cosmic background radiation (a sort of picture of the universe when it was born), called the Cold Spot. It shouldn't exist, but it does. For now there are just a few ideas of why and nothing conclusive, but an interesting theory is that it's caused by an imprint from another Universe into ours.
Quantum entanglement doesn't enable faster than light communication, because the outcome of the quantum measurement is random. In order to actually send information, you would need to be able to choose the outcome.
Wanna know what *REALLY* blew my mind?
Acid.... 😂
On the faster that light communication with quantum entanglement: I've read that this is impossible. Basically you can say giggle one particle and the other jiggles the opposite way. But the person looking at the other particle doesn't know *when* to read the giggles to make sense of them. It ties in a bit to relativity (perceived time is not smooth) and I think the impossibility of knowing the one-way speed of light is a factor too. Essentially it's impossible to sync two clocks up over a large (in astronomical terms) distance without having a connection of some kind (via radio signal), which defeats the point of communicating over a distance without a connection.
Coherent quantum systems (entangled) aren't necessarily subject to the same restrictions as incoherent systems (normal). Recent experiments involve measuring one property of one particle and a different property of the other particle, and these are harder to explain without FTL communication within the entangled system.
Internet conspiracy theorist confusing people into believing that knowing the speed of light is impossible...
Using quantum entanglement for communication is as of our current understanding, probably impossible. We have no way of manipulating information on an entangled state. We can only measure it, once one side is measured, we can determine the other side.
The nature of a quantum measurement is random. Even if we could force the outcome, in any way. Unless we can compare the results as instantaniously as the quantum entanglement operates, our transfer of information is still limited by the speed of light.
That is only half true. Every physicist knows entangled Bell pairs are already used for communication, but not for FLT communication (as you correctly point out), for secure encryption (preventing eaves-dropping).
I think strange matter could have made this list. It is theoretical matter made of strange quarks possibly comprising the cores of neutron stars. It too is metastable but could be the catalyst to causing the False Vacuum theory to precipitate. In essence it is a type of matter that would convert anything into itself and cause a chain reaction throughout the universe, ending everything as we know it. Or not.
English please
Strange matter is only hypothetical.
Using QE as a communication tool has been bandied about for some time now, and from a fundamental understanding seems possible. Although, you would have to physically deliver one end of the communication channel (device) to it's destination, which could take a while. Being able to instantly control and communicate with an exoplanet rover would be kinda awesome!!
Yes that's how I'd imagined it as well, then you'd have arrays of entangled particles, the data communicated would be limited by the number of particles
You can't use QE for communication because as soon as you modify one of the entangled particles you break the entanglement
@@pmrd yes I have read that, it might be an insurmountable problem or, who knows, someone might come up with an ingenious work around
@@matgeezer2094 Seems impossible without breaking the laws of physics.
@@pmrd can you detect if entanglement has been broken?
I like the thought that all mass effect players saw the first one and were like,”oh quantum entanglement. We know that one.” 😂
Frank Sinatra's "Balls in Yo Jaws" used to play at my uncle's house all the time when I was young! I remember him picking me up in his van after t-ball practice, it was cool because it always had candy! He always had a warm popsicle in his pants too, cream-filled I think? He used to compliment me on how good I could keep secrets. The song really takes me back to a better time!
I was sad that in the last theory (the size of our universe) Simon didn't talk about the cosmic event horizon; the distance at which we would never be able to detect other galaxies because the universe is expanding faster than the distance the light from those galaxies would have to travel. Also the theory that our universe could just be the event horizon of a 4D black hole. Trippy and fascinating theories.
as per the 1st theory we don't necessarily need light to detect things in the future
@@PLF... true, but even shooting out entangled particles at the speed of light (which the particles themselves cant go faster) we would still be bound by the cosmic event horizon. I.e. if the rate of expansion of the universe doesnt slow down there will be galaxies no particle from us could reach, or from there could reach us.
I assumed he was going to talk about it, but, it seemed rather poetic and made me feel really special, and really humble at the same time.
He didn't talk about the dark matter all around either.
Something that is very mundane but also kind of mind blowing:
I went hiking in the Alps with a few friends and kept an eye open, looking for pieces of raw iron. I eventually managed to find one that's like an inch in length and half an inch each in width and height. This is very mundane, depending on where you are, you will find many such pieces of iron in the ground or on the surface.
Where this becomes kind of mind-blowing (at least to me):
That piece of iron was, at some point in an unfathomably distant past, part of a star's core for millions of years. It got hurled into space by some major event, maybe the star exploded, maybe it collapsed into a white dwarf that then collided with another white dwarf... the point is: At some point, a chunk of iron was torn from that star's core, hurled through space and after millions, if not billions of years, it hit earth, got lodged deep inside the crust and then, through unfathomably slow processes slowly re-emerged on top... where I picked it up.
A piece of a star, billions of years old. And it's sitting on my desk, right in front of me, as I type this.
polish it up & then stick it up your urethra. Its fun. trust me.
Or it simply came from the Earth's core which is mostly iron, which incidentally is also why the Earth has a magnetic field protecting us from the most harmful emissions from the Sun.
Many events in the Earth's history before life started caused the iron from the core to be brought to the surface to be found by you many millions of years later.
The sixth scientific theory that will blow your mind is the physics involved in dowsing have been reverse-engineered along with how to build the modern light weight ball bearing dowsing rod for accurately gauging what is being dowsed. Read the book, The Art of Dowsing - Separating Science from Superstition, then practice the dowsing lessons for becoming a professional dowser. Thank you for reading this post and I hope you have a safe, healthy, good day.
"Spooky action at a distance"
Is the one true name for Quantum Entanglement!
You know Perelman could have just taken the prize and gave that other dude half if he felt so strongly about it.
My thoughts exactly. Coulda split the money between them.
He clearly felt that the failure to co-recognize Hamilton was, at the very least, an act of immorality.
I say Kudos to Perelman for adhering to his own righteous scruples.
Domari Nolo
PA III
I remember the moment, as a child of about 10, that the size of the universe hit me. I realized I can't wrap my head about infinity. (I still can't). Scarier yet, if it's not infinite, what's beyond it and is that space infinite or wrapped around itself. Then the anxiety hit me. Ok, I def sound crazy now lol. Is there a name for this fear of infinity? I think there is and I think I might have even seen it on one of Simon's great videos! BTW, loved this one.
If it is infinite what is beyond
@@daveherbert6215 exactly. This is where my brain get discombobulated
@@MsTasha217 Don't feel bad. This is where a lot of brains (even the really smart ones) get discombobulated.
@@daveherbert6215there’s nothing beyond because beyond doesn’t exist. Personally I don’t think it’s infinite for this reason and because if it was infinite, how is there a beginning to infinity
Think of it like an inverted mobius strip, constantly moving. It's the illusion of infinity, hence nothing beyond.
I've often showed people the different sizes of stars, and they express amazement. And then I tell them to try to Fathom the space between all the stars now because it's infinitely larger.
Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is.
With the final segment, you could've added that because 'everything' (contextually speaking) is moving away from everything else at an ever increasing rate, and at some point in the future, galaxies will be so far from each other that we'll never be able to see the next 'closest' galaxy even with levels of high technology that can't be imagined.
The universe is expanding. What is the universe? Literally everything. Literally everything is expanding.
Eventually according to that theory even atoms will separate.
@@MalleusDei275 only according to some versions of that theory.
@@MalleusDei275 atoms won't separate but entropy will eventually happen. What that means is an atom can exist for billions of years as but at some point the electrons, protons and neutrons (or the quarks leptons comprising them) will lose their energy. Whether it falls apart or decays I don't know. And im guessing it would reach a state of non energy at absolute zero......but fundamental particles are just states of energy as I understand it so god knows!!! Maybe they just dissipate....but either way entropy is the ultimate end for them.
Yeah, that’s if the standard model of cosmology is correct. According to cosmologists, of course it is. Thankfully nature doesn’t care what that bunch of virgins thinks lol.
Simon,
You neglected to mention just how far apart the planets in our own solar system are.
It's one thing for Columbus to cross the Ocean and arrive at a place that was physically like Europe.
It's a whole different matter(literally) on Mars which lacks the gravity and Bacteria and trace elements
from which we and all other life on Earth was created.
We are of Earth and most likely will be until the sun goes Nova or another meteorite solves all our
problems.
Meanwhile, while we are here with all due respect to Mr. Musk, he isn't Columbus and a supply chain to Mars over
loooong distances is very unlikely, we can't even control the supply chain plaguing the
world right now!
Serendipity aside, perhaps he should spend his billions on helping humanity here and now!
Cheers,
Frederick "Rik" Spector
Columbus was such a terrible person. Can we make someone else's name synonymous with exploration? Himilco? Abubakari? Estevanico? (Just a friendly question... not "woke," WHATEVER that really means...)
@@rickythe2nd63 Yes he was, but he was like so many of the Spaniards of His time, however my point was a bout the comparison between known unknowns and space.
Cheers,
Rik Spector
@@rikspector True. I whole-heartedly agree.
The only difference I can eke out is that, even though we don’t have a definitive time frame, we know we have a finite timeframe on earth. It makes sense to solve the problem of impending doom while we can, rather than try to save an unsavable planet first. The timelines make more sense to begin earlier.
3n+1 & n/2 seems pretty silly to try and "prove." As long as we're turning odd numbers even and dividing by 2, we will eventually reach a number that is 2^n which ultimately resolves to 4, 2, 1. Why are people trying to prove/disprove it?
I'm thinking the same thing. The concept is so simple and obvious I'm wondering what exactly constitutes a "proof" by scientific standards🤔
Has anybody thought to ever try reading brain waves from outer space? Radiofrequency is light. Sound is as well, part of the energy Spectrum that we have exposure to. The Misunderstood element about quantum physics and things that move faster than the speed of light, is LOVE. It most definitely travels faster than light, has energy, has power, checks several boxes so far... See where im going? May or may not be felt from a far enough distance, but is instantaneous... Quantum is the key here. My answer is most definitely inspired by Einstein, I spent part of my childhood living on his favorite road to walk, to get to work while studying Atomic physics. For as amazing as love can be, to anyone in their own universe as well as the collective one, it should be recognized that this is uniquely powerful to the intangible world as a very strong force that CAN ABSOLUTELY OVERCOME JUST ABOUT ANYTHING and MAKE ANYTHING POSSIBLE and without the speed of conveyance of such a force it wouldnt mean a thing folks. I love you.
So, in theory, we could build remotely a telescope, just by teletransporting particles, and the get real time view from that telescope across the universe to know hoy it looks just now.
Well... as they say, "Anything's possible in theory"... ;o)
The size of the Universe part is just insane. Everything you just said applies to the part of it we can see. I've seen videos on RUclips saying it is possible that the rest of the Universe beyond what we can see is so many times larger that it would be like comparing a light bulb to The Moon.
The guy should've accepted the prize money, then given half to the guy who didn't get credited... instead of saying no to both of them... apparently mathematicians aren't that smart
In your example of quantum entanglement, your friend is beating you. It would suck to play yahtzee with quantum entangled dice.
Just one thing - that "colocanth" of yours is pronounced "seal-oh-canth". Thank you otherwise for a very thought provoking video. Now to decide how many of those 100's of billions of planets in the 100's of billions of galaxies sustain life.... 🙂
I've heard it pronounced Cee-Luh-Kanth, as well.
@@DieNextInLINE I think we are saying the same thing, perhaps from opposite sides of the Atlantic? Yes, the way I know it to be pronounced could also be spelled as Cee-Luh-Canth. Derived from Koilos ancient Greek for a hollow, for example, inside the body of an animal or human (eg. Hydrocoele - fluid hernia in a sac surrounding the male testicle). Not sure what "hollow" a coelacanth has inside its body to justify the name. Do you know? (have you read JLB Smith's original book "Old Four Legs"?)
@@zs1dfr Good response. Now explain to me why the English confuse "ground" and "floor."
@@drbuckley1 Not sure of your question. Do you mean electrical ground, or just the place we stand on? I presume the latter... I don't think I confuse them. Ground means to me the natural Earth I am standing on. Whether on a mountain or in a valley, I am standing on ground. Is that what you mean by the word? A floor on the other hand, is a man-made construction, of wood, metal or concrete, not necessarily on the ground (think 6 storeys up), on which you also stand. If you are referring to a Lift (in British English - Elevator in America), Ground refers to the same level as outside Earth, and Floors refer to levels above that. Below Ground would be Basements. Not sure if I am clearing or worsening the confusion? 🙂
@@zs1dfr I completely agree. But if you pay attention to the English (in England), they mean ground as an artificial surface covering the floor, the floor meaning the natural surface underneath the ground. That doesn't make any sense to me, an American, but then again I'm not English. So there's that. I suppose we do say the ocean's floor, not the ocean's ground...
Sometimes I like to take a moment and think about how - in a hundred years or so, let alone a couple thousand - we'll look back on "quantum theory" and "general relativity" the same way we look back at pre-heliocentric views of the universe, or astrology.
Like, "aww how quaint, humans used to believe in things like space-time, four fundamental forces, particles, etc." 😂
Well, if we survive til such times.
In 99999999999999999999 years general relativity and special relativity will be as true as they are today.. quantum theory still has room to grow, so I'll give that one.
@@Mathguy363 physics doesn't have a "problem"... We know for an absolute fact that the quantum world has a ton of discovery just waiting there for us to discover it... the "problem" is there is not enough money to build the equipment we need to make those discoveries. The physics department is very underfunded, we literally need to save up money for 15 years in order to afford to make new equipment to answer more questions.. For example, they already know they're going to need a MUCH bigger particular collider than CERN, they need one 100 miles in diameter, that's HUGE, but they are still paying on the 23 mile one they have, it's going to take at least 30 years before they have enough money for the 100 mile collider they need, so until then we have to rely on the math which is unflattering to the public, nobody cares about particle physics, they care about Kim Kardashian... So it's not that we CAN'T make new discoveries, its that we don't have the funding for the particle physics industry because not enough people care.. so money is tight.
@@Mathguy363 I agree with you.. but answering questions in particle physics gives us answers in quantum mechanics/quantum field theory, particle physics is different than quantum mechanics, but they have many of same answers they need before moving forward, and particle physics is where it's at! We have the technology down pat, we've worked out the bug's, all we need now is the money.. we certainly can't just jump over and start work on a brand new untested piece of equipment to look for string theory... We would be hurting ourselves trying to develop equipment that we still won't have in 50 years.. we have to make forward progress in a way that makes sense, which right now is a larger collider.. it's the closest project to our grasp right now, we could have one built by 2026, and it will provide more NECESSARY answers for both quantum mechanics and particle physics.. that's how it stands right now... So do you want a new particular excelerator in a few short years that will provide answers for everything, or do you want a piece of equipment we won't have until 2070 sucking up all of our time and budget money? I do appreciate the kindness in your response, often times people resort to name calling, but you didn't, and your response made excellent points!
It is more likely that our civilization will have collapsed in a thousand years and little of us will be remembered.
@@petergriffin383 but special and general relatively might break down under certain conditions. Like very small or large scales, within magnetic fields, or at the edge of the universe (if there is one). Just like Newtonian physics, it may be correct in certain cases. Didn't Einstein himself believe there were problems with relativity?
Certainty quantum entanglement should still be in the hypothesis category, where are these quantum computers some people keep talking about? All sounds like peoples imaginations overtaking reality.
Missed the chance of quoting Douglas Adams with the last topic. "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
The implications from the twin slit experiment always blew my mind in half
For a speech class in college, I did a comparative distance narrative about extreme distances and the size of the universe, like Simon does in this video. The professor let the class grade everyone's speeches - I got a "C" on mine because, literally: "who cares?". Nobody had a problem with how my speech was delivered or the content, it's just that - other than me - absolutely no one in the class was fascinated or even cared or had any desire to know about the size and vast distances in the universe. No wonder people think that folks from the Midwest (US) are a bit dim.
That's got to be the stupidest way to grade a speech ever.
Not caring about the size of the universe does not make a person dim. One might say instead that failing to connect with your audience earned you that C.
@@thymenwestrum7011 Why? emotional connection is an important part of speechmaking. Everyone who makes money speaking knows this, and exploits it. That's why the news agencies love drama, disaster, and crisis. Letting the audience grade the speech teaches the speaker that his words, thoughts, and facts don't really matter if the listeners just don't register it at all.
For other viewers: almost nothing he said about quantum entanglement is accurate. His dice analogy is broken. You can't use quantum entanglement to transfer information, much less faster than light.
The dice analogy isn't perfect, but it seems fine for trying to explain it to a layperson. Also, we can't transfer information using it yet, but there's absolutely a lot of research into figuring out how we can
That's right. To explain why you can't transfer information: your friend has no way of influencing what their dice show, so can't influence what yours show. Imagine you had two dice, one red and one blue. You take one in a sealed box, and your friend does as well. When you look and find out yours is red, you know theirs is blue; but you can't use this to communicate with your friend, except by telling them "yours is blue" by traditional, light-speed (or slower), means.
@@cosmogoblin Indeed! And grabbing a marker and painting the red dice blue does nothing to the other dice because it breaks entanglement.
@@cosmogoblin great analogy! Clear and concise. This helps me understand a bit better why this is being looked at for encryption rather than actual messaging.. your "dice" could act as an encryption "key" based on which spin the particle has at the time of observation!
I feel like I could get the same effect on a recording with a $30 pedal. But the natural reverb, in person, would be priceless.