It's the old bathtub curve. The newer something is the more likely it is too be wrong. And conversely again when something gets very old it gets discovered to also be wrong
Something thats been weighing on my mind: Would Anti-Strange matter (the inversion of strange matter; an Up, Down, and Strange quark) fit the behavior/properties of dark matter? How would someone determine this? I tried to figure it out as a normie (im a hobbyist in your field, at best), but i couldnt get consistent variables for "normal" Strange matter, let alone its anti-particle equivalent, or find the equation used to calculate dark matter. Im guessing theres plenty wrong with my presuppositions (like, an anti-particle existing at such a scale, stably, for example), but it's been eating at me for weeks/since i had the epiphany to try and find out. All in all, I'd really love to learn about your field and would appreciate any insight on where to start with things like these (I realise this is partially a particle/quantum physics issue/question, as well, so i understand if that complicates the answer, as well). Edit: Lambda Baryons are what I mean by "strange matter," so it would be the antiparticle of that
I first heard about the “Heat Death of the Universe” about 50 years ago and it made me feel so sad. Now that I’ve heard about the “Big Rip” I’m no longer sad. I’m terrified.
@@philipm3173not OP, but I have the same existential dread/intrusive thoughts in response to the universe having a definite end. As human scale existence is governed by cycles and things that "always were and will always be," anything that suggests the universe deviates from that in any fundamental way is simply upsetting. But it's at such a deep level, that it brings existence itself into the realm of instilling dread. So, topics such as the end of the universe and proton decay are things that tend to be "scary."
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (“I found it!”) but rather, “Hmm…that’s funny.” -Isaac Asimov
I remember when physicists worried that the end of physics was in sight. I'm so happy that it now looks like that we are very far from ending it. It was always about the journey and not the destination.
The moment of thinking that the end of discovery in any capacity is in sight is the height of ignorance. It's unbelievable how many times it seems to take for science to come across a new discovery before people stop saying "Now that we know this, we almost know everything there is for us to know". I'm guessing that's been said since the beginning of living organisms' ability to conceive of and communicate information. How could we ever possibly come to the determination that we've reached that point? What a silly species we are. I wonder if, at the discovery of fire, it was thought that was the peak of advancement. Until they learned fire could be used as more than light or for warmth. Etc etc. Thinking we're at the peak is probably a tale as old as the discovery of fire. Probably earlier.
The notion that a member of a puny untravelled species such as ours, with an average lifespan of 70 or 80, could sit at some point in a temporal curve at least 14 billion years long and say 'This is it, we nearly have all the answers, just a few more years now' is so laughable. At around the same time, right wing political theorists and historians were pronouncing the end of history. People are full of shit and love to sell it.
the big rip seems like a big bang. would the rip separate all the virtual pairs in existence at that moment, making them real? taking the universe into a hot dense state...
@@nmarbletoe8210Yeah that’s what Penrose says, that the timeless void “after” the big rip is indistinguishable from the infinite compression “prior to” the Big Bang.
At a wild guess: Would it be unreasonable to wonder if as the universe expands and cools it might go through a number of phase-changes? (analogous to matter's states) From our current perspective 'inflation' in the early universe was associated with such a phase-change and maybe we are some way through the next one? The next questions might be "In to what?" and "Will (some of) our matter 'survive' this phase-change?" Such a consideration might go some way to exploring how and why some of our assumed 'fundamentals' seem to be changing, and different depending on how you measure them.
I always wondered if the universe was cyclical in nature... cycles seem to be extremely common everywhere we look, so it makes sense to me that the universe would be as well. I hope one day we're able to confirm it in my life time. Either way this is extremely groundbreaking stuff! Can't wait to see what we'll continue to discover.
Well it's a lot better than the Universe being torn apart. As a kid I read every astronomy book in the school library and at that time the consensus was the Universe was closed. A few years later that was completely turned around. I've been living in an open Universe most of my life. Now we are back to closed! I am ecstatic about that. There is something philosophically wrong with the notion that the Universe started from nothing 13.8 billion years ago, and will expand for eternity. If nothing existed, neither time nor physical laws existed. I expect the Universe as a whole is infinitely old, and perhaps infinitely large. In other words, it _didn't have_ a beginning and was always here. Obviously that is not a scientific argument, but science as we know it depends on physical law remaining constant.
I am a Hindu and I think the Big Bang theory AND the Cyclical Universe theory are BOTH TRUE. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It's both, in my opinion. According to the ancient religion of Hinduism, Brahma (the creator of this universe in Hindu mythology) created this universe 155 trillion years ago and this universe will exist for a total of 311 trillion years. And when Brahma dies, this universe will 'die' along with him. Then a new Brahma will be born who will create a new universe to take the place of the old universe. And this process continues forever, without a beginning and without an end. Hinduism also teaches that there are an infinite number of universes and each of those universes (including our own universe) experience an infinite cycle of 'births' (which you can call 'Big Bangs' in a modern scientific way) and 'deaths' (which you can call 'Big Crunches' in a modern scientific way).
Anton YOU need a Nobel Prize for explaining such high level concepts and ideas and science to the masses, thank you as always for your great work and wow what a discovery. All the best from Australia :)
@Bobalicious it's just as easy for us who do know! It's field theory's ground state energy which Einstein called his cosmological constant and we've discovered it. See how easy?!
Anton, you've always been a the most personable and all-out appealing person to listen to and I've enjoyed your presentations for years. But now you are also the most handsome scientist on the web. I'm loving your new look.
Anton, I love your content, and in this video, the realistic take on what may be accomplished in the near future. Also wanted to say I always smile at your parting comments and happy wave. Makes me want to come back again for the next video
I'm pretty sure that's actually called the Big Bounce. The Big Crunch, at least to my knowledge, just describes everything getting smashed back down to the infinite point, but not the bounce back.
I imagine that if the universe starts expanding fast enough that it's ripping protons and neutrons apart, it'll start spawning quarks left and right until the ensuing gravity slows things down again, so the universe shows up again one way or the other.
oh damn, this completely changes the game about accurate sci-fi stories that delve into deep time. Absolutely crazy and fascinating study! Thankyou for your work as always anton :)
The fact that scientists where able to figure this out in the first place is absolutely incredible. These kind of people should be the real role models of society.
Well there's different kinds of science. There's science that these scientists used to get to where pop sciences view on expansion is now. Then there's an ancient science that these scientists don't know about, that those who knew that science knew all about the full structure of reality of the cosmos thousands of years ago.
How embarrassingly sycophantic for you, dude. These are just people, subject to all the same biases, prejudices, and influences by their peers and employers, as anyone else. In the fifty-plus years I've followed cosmology, they haven't figured out anything. If you want to find a role model to adulate, at least make it engineers, not cosmologists. At least engineers can be judged on whether what they've designed and built actually works or not. The same cannot be said of cosmologists.
@@VicMikesvideodiary They had the expansion of the universe figured out thousands of years ago, but not flush toilets? C'mon, dude. I mean, bronze wasn't even a thing until 3,500 BC(E). I'm not saying ancient scientists weren't smart or that we haven't lost knowledge along the way. But it's ludicrous to say that ancient scientists were able to know more about the universe than we know today when technology has advanced so far.
@@jennifersaar1611 Well there's different kinds of science. That's where your misunderstanding is. There's science that these scientists used to get to where pop sciences view on expansion is now. Then there's an ancient science that these scientists don't know about, that those who knew that science knew all about the full structure of reality of the cosmos thousands of years ago. Historically provable. But kept occult and only certain people knew it. I'm going to end this here because no doubt you're going to comer back at me with all sorts of questions or counter arguments, and I just can't ( meaning don't want to ) unleash a lifetime of research here in this simple discussion. BUT, if you are cleaver, intelligent, can follow a path by reason, I've given you enough to go on. Here, I'll give you one more "clue" read both books written by Fulcanelli.
Humbug! We all know our discworld is resting on the backs of four huge elephants which are in turn standing on the back of an enormous turtle, named Great A'Tuin.
@@farrier2708in the novel collection title A thousand and one arabian nights the turtle swims in the Sea of eternity. Hells first lair are the shores of this sea.
@@farrier2708 according to Dr. Seuss "a title you should not take lightly mind you" it is an irate, communist who doesn't believe in the common good named Yurtle the turtle
The hubble tension shows that things closer move away faster relative to distance. Basically the rate of expansion is higher for distant galaxies, but the rate over distance is lower for distant galaxies. Kinda awkward to explain but yeah.
When we are talking about cosmic expansion, it's not expansion in the sense of exploding outwards, but rather the volume of space itself expanding in all directions. He expansion rate is inferred by the snapshots we have of ancient galaxies and we can see that the universe was denser. The universe is isotropic meaning the density is the same when measured on the very large scale.
Anton misstated. That the universe accelerates does _not_ imply that things further away move away faster from us. It means that the rate with which the universe expands grows with time.
You are the happiest person on Earth bro, congrats, give her/him the best moral teaching you got, you are second after God now, it's the biggest call and challenge, but also the sweetest!
@@LyubomirIko Thank you, friend. Gonna be a huge adventure. Luckily I've gone through the trials myself and now have the morals, strength, love, and patience require! Be well!
We keep on getting so close to knowing everything, only to keep on finding out how little we actually know. I wonder how long it'll be until we almost know everything again...
Yeah, too bad current physics and astronomy is observe, analyze, and show horn into the current model rather realize the current model had a good run but isn't right. Start over.
At least it's actually taking new information and trying to make sense of it, instead of actively denying said information and/or not bothering to expand, like how most religious mindsets tend to be.@@risunokairu
Yes the current models of the universe are incomplete. Especially if Type 1a supernova vary overtime, quantized redshifts are a thing and who knows what the next JWST pictures show. Dark energy and matter a fable of our modern times.
Here's something I've never seen an answer for: Posit a galaxy G at a distance from Earth that puts it at the edge of the visible universe. As the expansion of the universe accelerates, at some point G will be receding from us faster than _c,_ the speed of light. At that point, light from G will never reach Earth because the space between us and G will be expanding faster than _c,_ the speed that light moves in our direction. There will always be more space between Earth and G than light can cross. It is known that at some distance from Earth space is already expanding faster than _c._ My question is, have we ever _observed_ something, say our good buddy G, crossing that threshold? It would seem that, once the last of the light from G that _can_ reach Earth _has_ reached Earth, and all subsequent light from G _cannot_ reach Earth, G should simply disappear from view. Have we ever observed that happening?
@CoolWorldsLab - Will have to make a new "Outlasting the Universe" video. Current one is hauntingly beautiful based on a continued expansion of the universe and increasingly scarce matter/energy.
Just a thought, lets say a Galaxy #1 is moving outward away from other Galaxies that may pull on it with gravity to slow down the rate of speed but as Galaxy #1 gets farther away from that pull, then the escape becomes faster in speed?
@ randalibraner8157 That' similar to my suspicion. We don't even know if gravity is quantum in nature yet... that it has a mediating particle, the placeholder name of which is the graviton. If the graviton DOES exist and it is the exchange of a massive objects' worth of gravitons with other massive objects' gravitons that causes gravity, then what happens if the speed of gravitons is limited like the speed of photons and like redshift of light eventually causes objects to be causually unbound, no information EVER be able to pass between these distant objects, and effectively disappear from our vantage point; maybe gravitons also experience a similar redshift and it's the gravitons never being able to reach between extremely distant objects that gravitationally unbound them and THAT contributes to the acceleration or a large part of it, currently attributed to Dark Energy.
Thank you for sharing. These measurements and mathematics are confusing and annoying to me, but Nature has no obligation to behave in a way that we understand. I hope to hear the solution to these mysteries before I die; you have around 30 years.
I love Anton's description and simple explanations. His description of the "big bang - big crunch" hypothesis reminds me of Hindu cosmology and the idea of a "breathing" universe.
I always had hope for the "Big Crunch" theory just because I was always fond of a cyclical universe. This is honestly pretty optimistic with this single, discovered value for said theory. Great video!!
Surely observation itself could be a factor as in quantum eigenstates, yet I still theorize our interpretation of space/time must be in someways unique to our species individual abilities or the restrictions we have. Maybe in our future we will have direct effects on universe by merely existing. which is also a paradox to creation in that evolution(?) takes place for that reason. If there were no life to see it, would it be there? Is it just an egotistic point to think it wouldn't? And if so why life then? Maybe it's just all there so pizza could be eaten and that's fine with me.
Waxing philosophical today? That's cool. I'm pretty sure that the universe would go right on ticking without us being here. Getting on to more important matters, bring on the pizza!
@@OMNIDON2000 Smoking before sex, smoking after sex....smoking during sex wihen she puts that cold ash tray on your back....Is there sex after death? Harrison Forn and Carrie Fisher had sex after Death Star apparently, which is the closest I've seen. I think that ice cream is very important to (y)our President but I would tend towards a nice fruit sorbet being more.......relevant, or at the very least moreso than the role of leader of the free world. Falling up stairs or the nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain of drinking bleach should NOT be a part of any rationale political landscape, so in all seriousness (as you can tell I dedicated to being) ice cream I feel is a fairly (no offence to you) mediocre substance unless banana, pineapple, cinnamon, cloves, and wintergreen (bubblegum) flavour is added.
Reminds me of the episode of Futurama where Farnsworth discovered the universal formula. He was depressed there was nothing more to study, but then they found out something new, and now he had an endless amount of stuff to study, making him happy again.
The thing that confuses me about a "Big Crunch" is what happens to entropy? A lot of people seem to assume that after a Big Crunch there will be another Big Bang/expansion...but then entropy would already be high which suggests you wouldn't get anything resembling a Universe 2.0 out of it unless when contraction begins entropy actually reverses and goes down. Which...what about time? Would time flow the opposite direction too?
Many scientific discoveries expand on previous ones. It could very well be that entropy is tied to expansion. We've only ever seen an expanding universe. But also, humans can be wrong. Just because something is a law, doesn't mean we're right about it. It just means we have a very high degree of certainty. Time has to do with causality. Don't forget that time is relative. There's no such thing as the present moment. Each particle experiences time at a different rate. Time doesn't have to flow backwards just because entropy increases.
1. No, the entropy law only applies to closed systems, where there is no energy inflow or outflow. We do not know if the universe is closed or not. Some energy might flow in from another universe or flow out, or interact with many other universes for example via gravitation... 2. The time would not go backwards. You can put energy into a system, for example you fix a broken glass, it does not mean the times goes backwards, because its not a closed system, the entropy law does not apply here... 3. What the universe seems to do, it converts the movement energy into potential energy, at some point it's all converted and then the potential energy will be converted back to movement energy, in the opposite direction. Just as if you were throwing the stone upwards. It does not mean the time goes backwards if the stone is dropping back to earth. 4. By the way, It's not easy to say if entropy increases or decreases, as I said before, it only applies to closed systems. In our universe it might decrease, and it's still not a broken law, because in other universes it might still increase and all universes combined might still grow. So it would be just a local phenomenon and would not violate the law... As you can see it stands and falls with the fact if our universe is a closed system or not. But the biggest part of the universe is not even visible to us, so we don't know. 5... You might think that a fixed road has a lower entropy than a broken road, it's true. But when the universe reduces it's entropy with the stored potential energy, it won't make the broken road fixed again. It also won't make dead people alive, even though fixed roads or living people have lower entropy. That's what would look to you like the time reverse.The reason it is not going to happen is the fact, that there are ways to make entropy even lower. You could combine the whole matter in one place, and that's what is perhaps going to happen.
If Hindu thought is correct, maybe entropy reverses accordingly as the "crunch" increases and all forces come to equilibrium when motion has ceased. Philosophically, the first equilibrium may be at the moment expansion ceases, and the second when contraction ceases. YHWH, a Hebrew name for God, simply translated is "the breath."
For some reason this just reminds me of the way the Three Body Problem series took a shot at explaining why the universe expands the way it does. It was a nice touch there
You are truly a treasure Anton!!! Honestly, you have made space and science cool and fun again! I love these vids you do! The best space and science channel on all of RUclips 💯 and I wouldn't want to listen to anybody else talk about it all other than you. Thank you Anton 👍
"He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea." Job 9:8 "He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in." isaiah 40:22 (b) “This is what the LORD says- the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands? It is I who made the earth and created mankind on it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts." Isaiah 45:11,12 This would explain why "dark energy" seems to be variable in nature.
Reading about the sudden appearance of dark energy 3.8 billion years ago, I'm instantly enraptured and fascinated at what insane natural processes could have brought that about, but I admit that the SciFi part of my brain is already asking "What if we are late to the evolutionary table, and Dark Matter is the result of another civilization's oopsie, irrevocably changing the course of the universe as we know it?"
Sorry, that was me. I left the thringabobulator on overnight about 3.8 billion years ago and it just kinda... well... i mean, just look at it. Oh well. Night crew will figure it out and put it back together.
“The farther away the supernovae are, the faster they are moving away”. Is this not the same as saying “ the universe was expanding faster in the past”? Would this not suggest that the expansion rate is slowing? What am I missing?
The objects in the universe are flying away from each other, but not because of some explosive force. It's space itself that's expanding and it's carrying everything with it. The weird thing is, observations show us that the expansion is accelerating. Strange, to say the least.
Easy. We live inside a black hole formed in the universe above ours. The black hole is eating space and feeding it into our universe. All the matter and energy we have is from the collapsed star that formed a black hole. We just need to figure out how to come out of our black hole and into the universe above. See how far it goes until we reach Azathoth.
Imagine a universe where your physical matter is recycled into the next world and the next and the next. There’s something that feels safe in knowing that my substance will continue beyond just me into many new things, and not just decay into the cold and dark. That is if this is true, which I’m holding out hope for lol.
@@Palafico3 Yeah cyclical cosmology as a way to resseting the universe entropy isa concept I really like. Means our big bang was just another in the cycle of big bangs, and that our universe is truly eternal. It kinda bothers me that the universe has an age or is constantly decaying into disorder thanks to entropy. But cyclical cosmology answer both of those things and fits the -0.8 parameter described on the video :)
Yeah, but decades ago physicists did the representational survey of the total matter in the universe and modelled it out and found that there is not enough matter to close the universe and cause a big crunch so the universe will expand forever and matter will be distributed more and more finely eventually succumbing to the heat death of the universe. And if the proton has a finite life then even all matter will dissipate into an increasingly sparse sea of elementary quantum particles, up and down quarks. I used to prefer the idea of cyclic universes with big crunches and subsequent big bangs too, but the scientific method precluded that for me. We have to give up our preferred notions that don't comport with evidence.
I am a Hindu and I think the Big Bang theory AND the Cyclical Universe theory are BOTH TRUE. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It's both, in my opinion. According to the ancient religion of Hinduism, Brahma (the creator of this universe in Hindu mythology) created this universe 155 trillion years ago and this universe will exist for a total of 311 trillion years. And when Brahma dies, this universe will 'die' along with him. Then a new Brahma will be born who will create a new universe to take the place of the old universe. And this process continues forever, without a beginning and without an end. Hinduism also teaches that there are an infinite number of universes and each of those universes (including our own universe) experience an infinite cycle of 'births' (which you can call 'Big Bangs' in a modern scientific way) and 'deaths' (which you can call 'Big Crunches' in a modern scientific way).
Anton, I'm an astrophysicist, and just want to clarify something. During inflation, you mention that it was too hot for matter. It's more that when the universe is that hot, matter will be created by then immediately destroyed again. The cooling down is required for matter to be created and then not immediately destroyed again. From a practical point of view you can say that the universe has to be cool enough to create matter, but it might be confusing.
if dark energy changes, and we have no idea what it is, and string theory says there are more dimensions than just the 3 spatial and 1 time, could dark energy just be matter (or something) within a dimension that we dont directly experience, one that could still indirectly affect the things even in the dimensions that we experience?
It is the waste products from the Dimension where All Of The Mysteries Come From like Sasquatch, ETs, chupacabras and Jaysus. You are surely on to something.
Wonderful video and analysis, thank you for your work anton! im from Chile and i have been to the Telescope you mention, its in La Serena, beautiful place.
Since matter and energy can't be destroyed, could everything be reconstituted after the big crunch? As in a big bang again, repeating everything infinitum. For all we know, this could of been repeated infinite times already.
With the possibility of a cyclic universe come infinite repetitions which in term means an infinite high chance of EXACTLY THE SAME run. Kinda like a dice throw with more than one dice, with a fixed number of throws certain sum values tend to come more often than others, BUT if you have a non finite number of throws, that statistic can't be made. So in a nutshell, those deja vu feelings that some ppl sometimes get, "been that place", "met that person", "done that before" or the other condition of having dreamt something that actually happens days, months or even years later could also be "real" and stored in to us unknown energy forms. Very hypothetical, pretty occult, definitely not provable, but not entirely to be dismissed. Some movies and games based on this idea come to my mind, Minority Report, Riddick Chronicles the Necros, Dune and maybe Warhammer 40k space travel.
@@bloeckmoep ... Fuck. I'm not sure how I feel about that. Does that mean the awareness in me wakes up again in this body instantly from my perspective? Like countless cycles pass in an instant and then bam back into this life born again? Or does our awareness look out through different sensory organs each time? Do we all get to experience being Hitler, and those in the concentration camps, the cows and animals that we've all eaten? This is the kind of thing that gives me existential terror, free will becomes meaningless, things become purely deterministic and guaranteed to happen again, "Time is a flat circle" True Detective type shit. We keep hurting ourselves, and eating ourselves on repeat infinitely... Thank fuck we can't remember any of it I guess if thats true. On the plus side it does mean we get to bang all those chicks we never got to bang, and oh be them as well, that's weird. Minds breaking down at this point, just accept and go with it, whatever 'it' may be.
Please see the movie "MR. NOBODY" (2009). There may be no such thing as Dark Energy. Our universe borders other universes. As the others contract, ours expand. Once a multi-universe tension reaches a limit, these switch. The universal number, "0", is maintained.
I'll second that. So essentially we have once again confirmed that we don't understand what's going on. This is like celebrating the fact that we have basically learned nothing in the last 25 years.
I've been a subscriber to the big crunch hypothesis for years. There are many, many reasons why, but it also just makes the most sense. The other two has so many logical problems, i think. The concept of eternal time, but started just a few billion years ago is one of them. I mean, being alive just a few billion years after the start of ETERNAL time, is pretty fucking significant. I don't think time ever had a "start". I think it is eternal, but both in the future and in the past.
Nothing of this makes any sense. Big crunch hypothesis? Really? We don´t even know how life came to be and can´t even send people to Mars, our own neighborhood. But we are going to determine the future of the universe, that we don´t even comprehend? Makes perfect sense. lol
IMO time is an illusion. God created the universe in 6 days and He rested on the 7th. So what's the standard for True Universal Time? It isn't this tiny ball revolving around another tiny ball in this little corner of a universe so vast that the human mind can't grasp the volume. Those 6 days were very, very long and they were so long that God desired a rest... without motion, time cannot be measured. So that means time would cease as well. God rested on the 7th day and woke up, and the 8th day is Eternity since all of this continues. I believe in God but I believe in the pursuit of knowledge as well. I'm not a "creationist" per se, I love dwelling in the place between science and religion/mysticism/philosophy to find the places where they truly intersect. That's where the best thoughts come from.
@@nikmontecristo3683 How life came to be might be an even greater mystery and harder to find out than how the universe will likely end. And yes, we could send people to mars, but they would never come back. Sending people to mars is also actually DOING stuff in space, rather than figuring out how it works from earth. Two vastly differnet things all together. We know how we could send people to mars perfectly well, but we lack the ability to actually DO it.
Does anyone else feel oddly comforted by Dark Matter? The fact that our entire universe and every last thing in it is only a sliver of the entire story makes me feel like death really can't be final. Dark Matter could just be another exotic universe that's already collided with ours and our souls occasionally pops into every few life times for a ride.
Astrophysicists call dark matter an "observable effect for which a cause has not yet been discovered." A college kid built his own radio telescope and observed that our galaxy is rotating too quickly for the amount of observable baryonic matter.
Rather the opposite, I still have a feeling that dark matter is a simply a maguffin. We could just as accurately be calling it "the force" or "pixie dust." To be sure this is a necessary part of the theoretical process, but my gut feeling is the truth is much much stranger.
What if Dark Energy varies not just over time, but space as well? Like, what if our observable portion of the universe (the radius within light has had enough time to travel towards us since the CMB; there should be much more universe beyond that horizon that is impossible to see from our vantage point) happens to be located in a big "lump" in the geometry of the universe where Dark Energy levels are higher than average? Could there be locations in the cosmos beyond our cosmic event horizon where the universe is expanding much slower, or even contracting?
@@acllhes By gravity, yes, but it's already been determined that has no baring on the Hubble tension. If anything, factoring that data in makes the Hubble tension even MORE extreme. Many videos done on that very topic.
I would say that if anything, it's more likely than not that what you're considering is absolutely possible. But what do I know? I'm no scientist with nearly all the answers, at the pinnacle of understanding. Oh wait, that's literally nobody.
I understand how these explanations are considered to be the "most likely"... What I struggle with is the number of assumptions that are relied upon in the process of modeling. I believe that as our technological ability progresses, we will be presenting much different conclusions as fact.
Then think of it as "Most likely, to our knowledge." Of course we never know what's actually most likely. We just know what is most likely to us right now.
@@catpoke9557 I completely agree. I'm getting older so I have witnessed everything from black and white tv... through our current level of tech. I remember a time where science swore up and down that no human being set foot on North or South America prior to 13,000 years ago. Even today, despite absolute proof of human presence as far back as 130,000 years ago, many scientists still cling to clovis first... and actively try to ruin the careers of anyone who attempts to publish contradicting findings. I hope that we will soon learn that ego has no place in science. Thank you for your response.
perhaps the universe is not expanding, but we are instead retreating towards a singularity (and accelerating as we get closer) and that would also explain why the JWST sees fully formed galaxies at what we presumed to be the early universe but instead the JWSt is seeing what has always been there inside the event horizon.
@plSzq1 Does the singularity have to be in one direction? Could the Universe be curved in some way like the surface of a planet. As you walk away from one pole the surface expands, then as you get nearer the other pole it starts to contract again. I don't really know what I'm talking about !
I like the idea that the big bang actually was a white hole. In that way we might also have been in a black hole but that black hole created this universe.
Great video again. We will have more and more questions indeed but they get better :D You stay wonderful too Anton, thank you for your effort and your nice smile today hahaha cheers
Hey! They can't just casually throw it out there that Dark Energy density, varies with time, and expect us to not notice. Inconstant Constants???- it's all getting a bit, 'Wibbly-wobbly, Timey-wimey.'
Hey, who said that constants have to be constant all the time or even a fraction of the time? Some know-it-all scientists? What happens when we take time out of the equation? Do any constants even exist then?
we can. We can causally throw out that mamamals dont have any defining line between male and female its a gradiant thats fairly evenly populated, dark energy changes over time, and wave functions are random and thats what causes solid matter to be solid, time is a human social construct and not real but the speed of light is constant, there is no way to prove or disprove how many spatial dimentions there are, a finiante universe requires curved spacetime something we cannot observe at the moment but we can infer from the big bang there at least must be some curve even if its just residual, and all predictive models are just analogs and not true, it may be impossible for human to comprehend or observe actual reality, and almost all predictive models break down if time travel doesnt exsit but they all break down if it does.
"constant" can mean different things, depending on context. Something can be constant with respect to space, i. e. has the same value everywhere, or constant with respect to time, i. e. has the same value at every time.
@@AnonymousAnarchist2 "a finiante universe requires curved spacetime" I won't bother commenting on the rest, but at least this is factually wrong. Even a flat spacetime can lead to a finite universe.
'Know-it-all scientists?' I should be so lucky; I was tricked into listening to some 'so-called experts'. (...shudders.) Without time, I think it's very uncertain what, if anything, would exist. Clocks and digital watches. They're gone! They're toast! They are not around no more! No one would even know what you were talking about.@@thisisme5487
I am a Hindu and I think the Big Bang theory AND the Cyclical Universe theory are BOTH TRUE. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It's both, in my opinion. According to the ancient religion of Hinduism, Brahma (the creator of this universe in Hindu mythology) created this universe 155 trillion years ago and this universe will exist for a total of 311 trillion years. And when Brahma dies, this universe will 'die' along with him. Then a new Brahma will be born who will create a new universe to take the place of the old universe. And this process continues forever, without a beginning and without an end. Hinduism also teaches that there are an infinite number of universes and each of those universes (including our own universe) experience an infinite cycle of 'births' (which you can call 'Big Bangs' in a modern scientific way) and 'deaths' (which you can call 'Big Crunches' in a modern scientific way).
I don't know. Maybe we SHOULD stop observing. I stopped observing my neighbors because it kept raising perplexing questions. Maybe some things are better left as mysteries, lest we wind up on some galactic version of The History Channel : "Humans - The Tragic Story Of What Really Happened In The Outer Milky Way That Day."
The universe isn't expanding into anything really. Imagine an infinite grid that goes on in every direction forever. Lets say the squares making up the grid are 1 unit big. If we increase the size of the squares to 2 units, the distance between each point on the grid gets bigger, but the grid never expanded into anything, it's still infinite.
5:51 The big rip is an almost. The big rip is more like ripples and thats similar to how things die and break apart and are reused in other forms kinda the same with language and other things in reality. Food for example is a controlled rip by the environment known as our stomach and it utilizes chemicals to break down a similar object the same way we use the right tool for the right job, extracting the components needed. Its all connected just separated by the current, thats why time isnt linear and we could create/find any future or past and thats why we could bring dinosaurs back and bring things from the "unreal" here to the real or current.
If there is one thing I know, it's that there is no such thing as a constant. Obviously, this is problematic when attempting to calculate events from the perspective of a singular point of view. It's time for a new paradigm in math that allows for infinite simultanous points of view. Of course, this would necessitate measurements from every reference frame all at once, and there is only one theoretical, or theological interpretation of that, namely omnipotence. Buckle up, because as we probe deeper, the boundaries disappear.
Lmaaaao, God arguments. Math is math, it doesn't lie. And we know that constants are constants, thanks to observations and calculations. Physics is not governed by our primate brains.
@@Greenmachine305 Could you explain? It does seem that some level of ignorance is likely to be a constant. The only thing that wouldn't be constant is the level of ignorance. Forgive my ignorance as I seem to be missing your point both in your original comment and in your response indicating that he should be disrespected - as well as how he proved your point, and why your response is structured such that you believe he might be disrespected for unwittingly proving your point.
I love this stuff. Oddly, it was the game starfield that got me thinking about dark energy, and I finally understand it in more intuitive way, I think. I dunno, I'm not smart, but it does seem like maybe if we have mass and energy that warps spacetime in a positive way, maybe there could also be some that warps it in the other way. It would push, not pull. And if there were something that had opposite gravity, it would scoot as far away from us as possible. but if that were true, wouldn't it make light go 'faster' when the light goes near it, the same way light goes slower near a massive object? If a heavy object bends light one way, wouldn't the opposite of gravity warp it the other direction? I dunno, I'm probably so far off that I should be embarrassed lol. Still, I love thinking about this stuff.
@@P4INKiller right but it does move slower relative to the rest of the universe when it moves through an object or a gravitational field. That's how prisms work right? Some of the light takes longer to pass through the glass than other frequencies. Maybe I don't get it though.
This is a fantastic channel, Anton! Thank you for making it understandable to the masses 😊 I have a theory on the expansion...what if it's the Akashic records made visible, and the expansion is happening as we learn and advance in this physical realm? I had a transcendental experience a few decades ago that ties to this theory. The experience itself left me increasingly inquisitive, and being in it was quite mind blowing. It was as much a physical experience as it was memtal or spiritual. I hope live long enough to see the answer to this theory play out.
Just a thought, if closer things move away slower than things that are further away and the farther away they are the longer ago that motion occurred does it not make sense that the expansion rate is slowing down?
I like your thinking! Too bad I was missing all of the math classes back in the day to be able to calculate ideas from relativity and Euclidean geometry...
@@LyubomirIko I avoided all the more advanced math classes myself 'cause I was not about to do all that homework. I do wish that I was more forward thinking in my teen years.
This thing that has been dubbed "Dark Energy" is the most basic of fundamental motions ("forces") in the Reciprocal System of physical theory originated by Dewey B. Larson. This theoretical entity is incorporated into thousands of computations of the properties of matter, where it is anything but an "unknown entity" or something separate from regular matter. See for example, Larson's book Basic Properties of Matter, a complete edition of which has only recently become available.
Dark Engergy began around the same time life began on Earth? Well, that just proves we're evil. In seriousness: this is really interesting because it seemed like the idea of a cyclical universe had been waning. I've sometimes wondered if the universe isn't merely the interaction of waves converging in an extra-universal matrix. It doesn't help to answer anything, but I've always found that to be an interesting idea.
Could we suppose also that matter may not exist, so that it would be one form of stabilized energy that we can observe (by observe, I mean, see, touch, size, weigh) ??
@@sandplasma Actually, it doesn't interact with matter (the word "other" makes no sense here) at all by any of the three usual forces (electromagnetic, weak, strong). And the word "dark" says that it doesn't interact with _light_ (i. e. electromagnetic radiation).
@@oakhauser Matter is also energy, the relationship between matter and energy was discovered by Einstein E = MC^2. So it does exist. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.
This reminds me of pre-Einstein astrophysics.Where people were confidently building up theories on the static model of the universe which is pervaded by ether. There were hints at discrepancy that are obvious in hindsight. But it took a massive paradigm shift like Einsteins theories to change all that. I think it will be a similar paradigm shift when we figure out why our numbers point to dark energy and dark matter, but our cameras see nothing.
Not gonna lie, this really helped ease a big anxiety for me. Big rip is an unnecessary fear 😢 but at least we know that's not gonna happen. Now panspermia is totally more viable, in one of Antons other videos he spoke of the universe being seeded from a previous one 😮. Oh man, reincarnation and stuff ? This stuff is wild man. Also really exciting to hear this news, the universe not being the same everywhere (cosmological constants) especially over time is kind of poetic. It's kind of like mods using a slider to fine tune conditions. What a time to be alive, honestly this news is so wonderful, a great mystery has been solved.
What about galactic/local scale time dilation? Time dilation would cause the universe to either appear to expand, or appear to be contracting. Additionally, we know that as galaxies age, they get more dense. An increase in density would cause the kind of time dilation where everything appears to be expanding.
Dark energy and dark matter havent been discovered. They were invented to patch the failed gravity driven model. Red shift is not recession. See halton arp on this.
they're predicted mostly, like anything else was - black holes which in start of 20th century predicted as "black stars". They can find andvprove dark matter only by particle accelerator.
scientists keep inventing words to explain their flawed beliefs. the redshift of light is caused by the increase in density not expansion. just like the light at sunrise and sunset.
I agree on dark energy. Dark matter is dilated mass. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from the galactic center. It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. Sound familiar? This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies. The "missing mass" is dilated mass. Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in "large clusters of stars" which is basically a very low mass galaxy. For a galaxy to have no/low dilation it must have very, very low mass (or low mass in its center). It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter. For the same reason binary stars will always have predictable rotation rates. What we see in modern astronomy has been known since 1925. This is when the existence of galaxies was confirmed. It was clear that there should be an astronomical quantity of light emanating from our own galactic center. It wasn't until television and movies began to popularize singularities that the concept gradually became mainstream. There was clarity in astronomy before that happened.
@9:50 it's not necessarily the case that the dark energy (vacuum energy density) changes with time, it's that the _effect of it_ on the galaxy redshifts can change with time, or more precisely, the effect of vacuum energy on the observations we make of the redshifts can change with time and with how much redshift there is (the measurements are dependent on instrument tech and theory, we cannot make raw on-the-nose measurements of the expansion) . That's the astrophysics puzzle. Quantum theory is pretty good and solid on what the dark energy density is (vacuum energy density), and predicts it probably does not change with time, since that'd mean the most basic laws of physics would change with time, and there's no evidence for that.
my father has a theory about the universe, the universe is the inside of a black hole and the expansion of the universe is matter falling into it, for years he's been saying " they'll see, it'll vary expansion rates throughout the history of the universe! "
“There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.” - The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
An interesting thought experiment/ theory: (Note: ignore the actual physics of the analogy, its just supposed to be conceptual) Imagine the entire universe is a basketball, that is falling under gravity. Inside the ball there is a fixed amount of "stuff" that acts normally, but also there is a force acting on everything that is accelerating, but it's impossible to figure out the cause. If you instead imagine the universe is a helium filled balloon, which would rise against gravity. As it does there is a change in atmospheric pressure, which causes the balloon to expand, without any "stuff" being added. You could also go as far to say, start with a deflated, sealed balloon that is filled with some amount of reactive compounds, that as they react, convert from solid into a lighter-than-air gas. As the conversion happens, the balloon expands in an observably, measurally predictable way to anyone "inside". At a certain point in the conversion, the balloon's boyency becomes such that it starts to rise. You now have two factors affecting the expansion of the balloon. As the rest of the compounds are converted, the increased bouancy would accelerate the rise of the balloon. (In this scenario, the acceleration would slow, and even decelerate until the balloon reached atmospheric equilibrium) Essentially, the universe would be experiencing (perhaps even known) force(s) just completely external to it. And even though the universe can see and measure the effects, the source would not only be impossible to see, but that the effect can change over time in ways that would defy explanation. (I.e. Maybe the basketball bounces off the ground, drastically halting the acceleration before causing it to reverse, or the "ball" is actually in non-circular orbit, and its speed changes in a sort of bell-curve) Just random thoughts :)
Very exciting! Though either fate of the universe is far beyond my lifetime, I used to like the Big Bang/Big Crunch theory more than the Big Freeze and such, but in recent decades had resigned myself to the idea that the theory had been disproven. I never thought I’d hear that it was back!
As an astrophysicist, I love how the more we do cosmology, the more confused we get 🤣
It's the old bathtub curve. The newer something is the more likely it is too be wrong. And conversely again when something gets very old it gets discovered to also be wrong
Something thats been weighing on my mind:
Would Anti-Strange matter (the inversion of strange matter; an Up, Down, and Strange quark) fit the behavior/properties of dark matter? How would someone determine this? I tried to figure it out as a normie (im a hobbyist in your field, at best), but i couldnt get consistent variables for "normal" Strange matter, let alone its anti-particle equivalent, or find the equation used to calculate dark matter.
Im guessing theres plenty wrong with my presuppositions (like, an anti-particle existing at such a scale, stably, for example), but it's been eating at me for weeks/since i had the epiphany to try and find out.
All in all, I'd really love to learn about your field and would appreciate any insight on where to start with things like these (I realise this is partially a particle/quantum physics issue/question, as well, so i understand if that complicates the answer, as well).
Edit:
Lambda Baryons are what I mean by "strange matter," so it would be the antiparticle of that
Yeah, probably because you all took a detour at Einstein, and haven't been able to get back on the highway toward truth ever since.
Almost like we’re just winging it huh? Lol
@@fastradioburst253 I coudn't agree more. Well said.
I first heard about the “Heat Death of the Universe” about 50 years ago and it made me feel so sad. Now that I’ve heard about the “Big Rip” I’m no longer sad.
I’m terrified.
lol
Its all false so you were worried about nothing
Why? It's literally trillions of years in the future...
@@philipm3173not OP, but I have the same existential dread/intrusive thoughts in response to the universe having a definite end.
As human scale existence is governed by cycles and things that "always were and will always be," anything that suggests the universe deviates from that in any fundamental way is simply upsetting. But it's at such a deep level, that it brings existence itself into the realm of instilling dread.
So, topics such as the end of the universe and proton decay are things that tend to be "scary."
@@philipm3173 Because it's like reading a 600 page book but knowing the depressing ending
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (“I found it!”) but rather, “Hmm…that’s funny.”
-Isaac Asimov
Probably not what you want to hear during a medical examination
@@antoniopannuti2088 Better that than, "Oh my God!"
@@TimeSurfer206 True, unless it's a particle that elicits that response
@@TimeSurfer206What about "Oh no..." ?
@@antoniopannuti2088 "hmm that's funny" is a hint of a practitioner humble enough to acknowledge they don't know.
The waving at the end is always so wholesome, I always wave back Anton!
I remember when physicists worried that the end of physics was in sight. I'm so happy that it now looks like that we are very far from ending it. It was always about the journey and not the destination.
❤
The moment of thinking that the end of discovery in any capacity is in sight is the height of ignorance. It's unbelievable how many times it seems to take for science to come across a new discovery before people stop saying "Now that we know this, we almost know everything there is for us to know". I'm guessing that's been said since the beginning of living organisms' ability to conceive of and communicate information. How could we ever possibly come to the determination that we've reached that point? What a silly species we are.
I wonder if, at the discovery of fire, it was thought that was the peak of advancement. Until they learned fire could be used as more than light or for warmth. Etc etc. Thinking we're at the peak is probably a tale as old as the discovery of fire. Probably earlier.
The notion that a member of a puny untravelled species such as ours, with an average lifespan of 70 or 80, could sit at some point in a temporal curve at least 14 billion years long and say 'This is it, we nearly have all the answers, just a few more years now' is so laughable.
At around the same time, right wing political theorists and historians were pronouncing the end of history.
People are full of shit and love to sell it.
Move to chemistry and quantun chemistry. Not even all basics of chemistry are properly understood.
@@thisisme5487the truth is that no matter how advanced our species gets, we will never have all the answers, just way, way more of them lol
I am absolutely chuffed to hear that w > -1. I really didn't want a Big Rip. For me that would be a hugely unsatisfying conclusion to the universe.
Personally Id like there to be something that could be called a definitive endpoint to the universe.
the big rip seems like a big bang. would the rip separate all the virtual pairs in existence at that moment, making them real? taking the universe into a hot dense state...
@@nmarbletoe8210Yeah that’s what Penrose says, that the timeless void “after” the big rip is indistinguishable from the infinite compression “prior to” the Big Bang.
worry not, a "Big Rip" might really end up being something just wanting to swallow itself in a manner 'outside our normal boundaries' of physics... :)
At a wild guess:
Would it be unreasonable to wonder if as the universe expands and cools it might go through a number of phase-changes? (analogous to matter's states) From our current perspective 'inflation' in the early universe was associated with such a phase-change and maybe we are some way through the next one? The next questions might be "In to what?" and "Will (some of) our matter 'survive' this phase-change?"
Such a consideration might go some way to exploring how and why some of our assumed 'fundamentals' seem to be changing, and different depending on how you measure them.
Thank you, Anton.
Dark energy is also the reason my pants don't fit anymore
its my damned spoons that are making me fat!
Don't confuse dark energy with loser energy
@@Dios_of_Autumn-1999no worries, you embody it
@@Dios_of_Autumn-1999Says the one with an anime pfp
that's chocolate, dark chocolate
Thanks!
I always wondered if the universe was cyclical in nature... cycles seem to be extremely common everywhere we look, so it makes sense to me that the universe would be as well. I hope one day we're able to confirm it in my life time. Either way this is extremely groundbreaking stuff! Can't wait to see what we'll continue to discover.
Well it's a lot better than the Universe being torn apart. As a kid I read every astronomy book in the school library and at that time the consensus was the Universe was closed. A few years later that was completely turned around. I've been living in an open Universe most of my life. Now we are back to closed! I am ecstatic about that.
There is something philosophically wrong with the notion that the Universe started from nothing 13.8 billion years ago, and will expand for eternity. If nothing existed, neither time nor physical laws existed. I expect the Universe as a whole is infinitely old, and perhaps infinitely large. In other words, it _didn't have_ a beginning and was always here. Obviously that is not a scientific argument, but science as we know it depends on physical law remaining constant.
@@Starchface
Here, here!! 👍
I am a Hindu and I think the Big Bang theory AND the Cyclical Universe theory are BOTH TRUE. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It's both, in my opinion. According to the ancient religion of Hinduism, Brahma (the creator of this universe in Hindu mythology) created this universe 155 trillion years ago and this universe will exist for a total of 311 trillion years. And when Brahma dies, this universe will 'die' along with him. Then a new Brahma will be born who will create a new universe to take the place of the old universe. And this process continues forever, without a beginning and without an end. Hinduism also teaches that there are an infinite number of universes and each of those universes (including our own universe) experience an infinite cycle of 'births' (which you can call 'Big Bangs' in a modern scientific way) and 'deaths' (which you can call 'Big Crunches' in a modern scientific way).
Cycles seem to be extremely common?!? Err, no. Actually, cycles are extremely rare. Decay is much more common.
@@Starchface Huh? The consensus for several decades has been that the universe is _flat_, neither open nor closed.
Anton YOU need a Nobel Prize for explaining such high level concepts and ideas and science to the masses, thank you as always for your great work and wow what a discovery. All the best from Australia :)
It's interesting to say we've discovered Dark Energy when we have no idea what that means.
@Bobalicious it's just as easy for us who do know!
It's field theory's ground state energy which Einstein called his cosmological constant and we've discovered it. See how easy?!
@@JosBergervoet Einstein did no such thing. Stop perpetuating that scientifically inaccurate revisionist history.
Dark energy is
Dark
i guess we've discovered expansion and postulated dark energy to explain it
Anton, you've always been a the most personable and all-out appealing person to listen to and I've enjoyed your presentations for years. But now you are also the most handsome scientist on the web. I'm loving your new look.
I'm really busy and you are one of my few sources of physics knowledge, thank you.
Anton, I love your content, and in this video, the realistic take on what may be accomplished in the near future. Also wanted to say I always smile at your parting comments and happy wave. Makes me want to come back again for the next video
Ive always loved the idea of the big crunch. I hope that it turns out to be true, and the universe keeps reforming.
I'm pretty sure that's actually called the Big Bounce. The Big Crunch, at least to my knowledge, just describes everything getting smashed back down to the infinite point, but not the bounce back.
I imagine that if the universe starts expanding fast enough that it's ripping protons and neutrons apart, it'll start spawning quarks left and right until the ensuing gravity slows things down again, so the universe shows up again one way or the other.
@Ithirahad, if you consider this gravity eventually, will win again and the universe will be reborn
oh damn, this completely changes the game about accurate sci-fi stories that delve into deep time. Absolutely crazy and fascinating study! Thankyou for your work as always anton :)
This stuff will matter only in billions of years so nah
The fact that scientists where able to figure this out in the first place is absolutely incredible. These kind of people should be the real role models of society.
Well there's different kinds of science. There's science that these scientists used to get to where pop sciences view on expansion is now. Then there's an ancient science that these scientists don't know about, that those who knew that science knew all about the full structure of reality of the cosmos thousands of years ago.
How embarrassingly sycophantic for you, dude. These are just people, subject to all the same biases, prejudices, and influences by their peers and employers, as anyone else. In the fifty-plus years I've followed cosmology, they haven't figured out anything. If you want to find a role model to adulate, at least make it engineers, not cosmologists. At least engineers can be judged on whether what they've designed and built actually works or not. The same cannot be said of cosmologists.
@@VicMikesvideodiary They had the expansion of the universe figured out thousands of years ago, but not flush toilets? C'mon, dude. I mean, bronze wasn't even a thing until 3,500 BC(E). I'm not saying ancient scientists weren't smart or that we haven't lost knowledge along the way. But it's ludicrous to say that ancient scientists were able to know more about the universe than we know today when technology has advanced so far.
@@jennifersaar1611 Well there's different kinds of science. That's where your misunderstanding is. There's science that these scientists used to get to where pop sciences view on expansion is now. Then there's an ancient science that these scientists don't know about, that those who knew that science knew all about the full structure of reality of the cosmos thousands of years ago. Historically provable. But kept occult and only certain people knew it. I'm going to end this here because no doubt you're going to comer back at me with all sorts of questions or counter arguments, and I just can't ( meaning don't want to ) unleash a lifetime of research here in this simple discussion. BUT, if you are cleaver, intelligent, can follow a path by reason, I've given you enough to go on. Here, I'll give you one more "clue" read both books written by Fulcanelli.
Grow a brain.@@VicMikesvideodiary
Humbug! We all know our discworld is resting on the backs of four huge elephants which are in turn standing on the back of an enormous turtle, named Great A'Tuin.
What then does A'Tuin stand on?
Please don't say "It's turtles all the way down."
but it is turtles, turtles all the way down.@@farrier2708
@@farrier2708in the novel collection title A thousand and one arabian nights the turtle swims in the Sea of eternity. Hells first lair are the shores of this sea.
@@farrier2708 according to Dr. Seuss "a title you should not take lightly mind you" it is an irate, communist who doesn't believe in the common good named Yurtle the turtle
Great A'Tuin is swimming through the universe.
RIP Terry Pratchett, great story teller (author)
Further away is back in time. Doesn't that suggest that it was moving faster in the past?
The hubble tension shows that things closer move away faster relative to distance. Basically the rate of expansion is higher for distant galaxies, but the rate over distance is lower for distant galaxies. Kinda awkward to explain but yeah.
@@Garresh1that was an awesome explanation! Explaining it for an hour wouldn't make it any less awkward, so you may as well just say it like it is!
When we are talking about cosmic expansion, it's not expansion in the sense of exploding outwards, but rather the volume of space itself expanding in all directions. He expansion rate is inferred by the snapshots we have of ancient galaxies and we can see that the universe was denser. The universe is isotropic meaning the density is the same when measured on the very large scale.
Anton misstated. That the universe accelerates does _not_ imply that things further away move away faster from us. It means that the rate with which the universe expands grows with time.
No.
Dark magical energy 🦄🧚✨
We believe! We believe!
Thanks for all that you do Anton, and thanks to everyone that supports him and his work. :)
Just had a baby and I will never take that for granted, my love to you Anton.
You are the happiest person on Earth bro, congrats, give her/him the best moral teaching you got, you are second after God now, it's the biggest call and challenge, but also the sweetest!
@@LyubomirIko holy cringe. Shitting out a little sentient meatsack doesnt magically make you great or happy.
@@LyubomirIko Thank you, friend. Gonna be a huge adventure. Luckily I've gone through the trials myself and now have the morals, strength, love, and patience require!
Be well!
There sure is a lot we don't know. The only way to learn is to observe and analize. Thanks for bringing us the results daily, Anton!
We keep on getting so close to knowing everything, only to keep on finding out how little we actually know. I wonder how long it'll be until we almost know everything again...
Yeah, too bad current physics and astronomy is observe, analyze, and show horn into the current model rather realize the current model had a good run but isn't right. Start over.
@@risunokairu why don't you tell us about your model
At least it's actually taking new information and trying to make sense of it, instead of actively denying said information and/or not bothering to expand, like how most religious mindsets tend to be.@@risunokairu
Yes the current models of the universe are incomplete. Especially if Type 1a supernova vary overtime, quantized redshifts are a thing and who knows what the next JWST pictures show. Dark energy and matter a fable of our modern times.
Seems to me we don't seem to know anymore than when we started, just ever more questions.
as so often, the more you know, the more you know how much you don't know.
Not really. We know more, and that knowledge allowed us to ask even more questions
@@KnightspaceORGBingo! Spot-on!
As it should be. Ignorant to assume we know everything or close to it
Here's something I've never seen an answer for:
Posit a galaxy G at a distance from Earth that puts it at the edge of the visible universe. As the expansion of the universe accelerates, at some point G will be receding from us faster than _c,_ the speed of light. At that point, light from G will never reach Earth because the space between us and G will be expanding faster than _c,_ the speed that light moves in our direction. There will always be more space between Earth and G than light can cross.
It is known that at some distance from Earth space is already expanding faster than _c._ My question is, have we ever _observed_ something, say our good buddy G, crossing that threshold? It would seem that, once the last of the light from G that _can_ reach Earth _has_ reached Earth, and all subsequent light from G _cannot_ reach Earth, G should simply disappear from view. Have we ever observed that happening?
@CoolWorldsLab - Will have to make a new "Outlasting the Universe" video. Current one is hauntingly beautiful based on a continued expansion of the universe and increasingly scarce matter/energy.
Even though I dont understand alot, I really like this channel, keep it up sir.
Just a thought, lets say a Galaxy #1 is moving outward away from other Galaxies that may pull on it with gravity to slow down the rate of speed but as Galaxy #1 gets farther away from that pull, then the escape becomes faster in speed?
Yep that's dark energy. That's why galactic clusters outside of a certain size are not gravitationally bound anymore.
@ randalibraner8157 That' similar to my suspicion. We don't even know if gravity is quantum in nature yet... that it has a mediating particle, the placeholder name of which is the graviton. If the graviton DOES exist and it is the exchange of a massive objects' worth of gravitons with other massive objects' gravitons that causes gravity, then what happens if the speed of gravitons is limited like the speed of photons and like redshift of light eventually causes objects to be causually unbound, no information EVER be able to pass between these distant objects, and effectively disappear from our vantage point; maybe gravitons also experience a similar redshift and it's the gravitons never being able to reach between extremely distant objects that gravitationally unbound them and THAT contributes to the acceleration or a large part of it, currently attributed to Dark Energy.
?
Thank you for sharing. These measurements and mathematics are confusing and annoying to me, but Nature has no obligation to behave in a way that we understand. I hope to hear the solution to these mysteries before I die; you have around 30 years.
Great video
As always.
I love Anton's description and simple explanations. His description of the "big bang - big crunch" hypothesis reminds me of Hindu cosmology and the idea of a "breathing" universe.
I always had hope for the "Big Crunch" theory just because I was always fond of a cyclical universe. This is honestly pretty optimistic with this single, discovered value for said theory. Great video!!
Surely observation itself could be a factor as in quantum eigenstates, yet I still theorize our interpretation of space/time must be in someways unique to our species individual abilities or the restrictions we have. Maybe in our future we will have direct effects on universe by merely existing. which is also a paradox to creation in that evolution(?) takes place for that reason.
If there were no life to see it, would it be there? Is it just an egotistic point to think it wouldn't? And if so why life then?
Maybe it's just all there so pizza could be eaten and that's fine with me.
Waxing philosophical today? That's cool. I'm pretty sure that the universe would go right on ticking without us being here. Getting on to more important matters, bring on the pizza!
I concur, but don't count out other things, like maybe sex? And ice cream 🍦!😸
@@OMNIDON2000 Smoking before sex, smoking after sex....smoking during sex wihen she puts that cold ash tray on your back....Is there sex after death? Harrison Forn and Carrie Fisher had sex after Death Star apparently, which is the closest I've seen.
I think that ice cream is very important to (y)our President but I would tend towards a nice fruit sorbet being more.......relevant, or at the very least moreso than the role of leader of the free world. Falling up stairs or the nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain of drinking bleach should NOT be a part of any rationale political landscape, so in all seriousness (as you can tell I dedicated to being) ice cream I feel is a fairly (no offence to you) mediocre substance unless banana, pineapple, cinnamon, cloves, and wintergreen (bubblegum) flavour is added.
Reminds me of the episode of Futurama where Farnsworth discovered the universal formula. He was depressed there was nothing more to study, but then they found out something new, and now he had an endless amount of stuff to study, making him happy again.
The thing that confuses me about a "Big Crunch" is what happens to entropy? A lot of people seem to assume that after a Big Crunch there will be another Big Bang/expansion...but then entropy would already be high which suggests you wouldn't get anything resembling a Universe 2.0 out of it unless when contraction begins entropy actually reverses and goes down. Which...what about time? Would time flow the opposite direction too?
Many scientific discoveries expand on previous ones. It could very well be that entropy is tied to expansion. We've only ever seen an expanding universe. But also, humans can be wrong. Just because something is a law, doesn't mean we're right about it. It just means we have a very high degree of certainty.
Time has to do with causality. Don't forget that time is relative. There's no such thing as the present moment. Each particle experiences time at a different rate. Time doesn't have to flow backwards just because entropy increases.
1. No, the entropy law only applies to closed systems, where there is no energy inflow or outflow. We do not know if the universe is closed or not. Some energy might flow in from another universe or flow out, or interact with many other universes for example via gravitation...
2. The time would not go backwards. You can put energy into a system, for example you fix a broken glass, it does not mean the times goes backwards, because its not a closed system, the entropy law does not apply here... 3. What the universe seems to do, it converts the movement energy into potential energy, at some point it's all converted and then the potential energy will be converted back to movement energy, in the opposite direction. Just as if you were throwing the stone upwards. It does not mean the time goes backwards if the stone is dropping back to earth.
4. By the way, It's not easy to say if entropy increases or decreases, as I said before, it only applies to closed systems. In our universe it might decrease, and it's still not a broken law, because in other universes it might still increase and all universes combined might still grow. So it would be just a local phenomenon and would not violate the law... As you can see it stands and falls with the fact if our universe is a closed system or not. But the biggest part of the universe is not even visible to us, so we don't know.
5... You might think that a fixed road has a lower entropy than a broken road, it's true. But when the universe reduces it's entropy with the stored potential energy, it won't make the broken road fixed again. It also won't make dead people alive, even though fixed roads or living people have lower entropy. That's what would look to you like the time reverse.The reason it is not going to happen is the fact, that there are ways to make entropy even lower. You could combine the whole matter in one place, and that's what is perhaps going to happen.
Short answer: No, because all processes that increase entropy now, are also true in a contracting Universe. So entropy would still increase
Is dark matter just barionic matter that is somehow hidden in Higher spatial dimensions?
If Hindu thought is correct, maybe entropy reverses accordingly as the "crunch" increases and all forces come to equilibrium when motion has ceased. Philosophically, the first equilibrium may be at the moment expansion ceases, and the second when contraction ceases. YHWH, a Hebrew name for God, simply translated is "the breath."
For some reason this just reminds me of the way the Three Body Problem series took a shot at explaining why the universe expands the way it does. It was a nice touch there
You are truly a treasure Anton!!! Honestly, you have made space and science cool and fun again! I love these vids you do! The best space and science channel on all of RUclips 💯 and I wouldn't want to listen to anybody else talk about it all other than you. Thank you Anton 👍
"He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea."
Job 9:8
"He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."
isaiah 40:22 (b)
“This is what the LORD says- the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands? It is I who made the earth and created mankind on it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts."
Isaiah 45:11,12
This would explain why "dark energy" seems to be variable in nature.
Reading about the sudden appearance of dark energy 3.8 billion years ago, I'm instantly enraptured and fascinated at what insane natural processes could have brought that about, but I admit that the SciFi part of my brain is already asking "What if we are late to the evolutionary table, and Dark Matter is the result of another civilization's oopsie, irrevocably changing the course of the universe as we know it?"
A wonderful brain you have there. 😊
It didn't "suddenly appear" it just had a more pronounced effect on the universe than before, according to THIS data.
If it’s possible for people to totally mess up the universe …
… people will totally mess up the universe.
@@JohnDoe-qz1qlhow?
Sorry, that was me. I left the thringabobulator on overnight about 3.8 billion years ago and it just kinda... well... i mean, just look at it. Oh well. Night crew will figure it out and put it back together.
“The farther away the supernovae are, the faster they are moving away”. Is this not the same as saying “ the universe was expanding faster in the past”? Would this not suggest that the expansion rate is slowing? What am I missing?
The objects in the universe are flying away from each other, but not because of some explosive force. It's space itself that's expanding and it's carrying everything with it. The weird thing is, observations show us that the expansion is accelerating. Strange, to say the least.
Hello wonderful Anton, your videos are always on point! Thank you for making the science understandable.
Easy. We live inside a black hole formed in the universe above ours. The black hole is eating space and feeding it into our universe. All the matter and energy we have is from the collapsed star that formed a black hole. We just need to figure out how to come out of our black hole and into the universe above. See how far it goes until we reach Azathoth.
Super interesting! Love that we're getting some conclusions at last for the confusion of the Hubble tension.
RAAAHHH, Chile mentioned. I'm glad to know ALMA is as useful as it is.
Somehow the idea that the big rip is not going to happen calms my mind despite it being something that will literally never affect my life :)
But it might affect your after-life...
Imagine a universe where your physical matter is recycled into the next world and the next and the next. There’s something that feels safe in knowing that my substance will continue beyond just me into many new things, and not just decay into the cold and dark. That is if this is true, which I’m holding out hope for lol.
@@Palafico3 Yeah cyclical cosmology as a way to resseting the universe entropy isa concept I really like. Means our big bang was just another in the cycle of big bangs, and that our universe is truly eternal. It kinda bothers me that the universe has an age or is constantly decaying into disorder thanks to entropy. But cyclical cosmology answer both of those things and fits the -0.8 parameter described on the video :)
I always learn from you, man. You're a good teacher. Thanks again.
If the big crunch is the fate of the universe, it begs the question how many big bangs have there been in the past.
Yeah, but decades ago physicists did the representational survey of the total matter in the universe and modelled it out and found that there is not enough matter to close the universe and cause a big crunch so the universe will expand forever and matter will be distributed more and more finely eventually succumbing to the heat death of the universe. And if the proton has a finite life then even all matter will dissipate into an increasingly sparse sea of elementary quantum particles, up and down quarks. I used to prefer the idea of cyclic universes with big crunches and subsequent big bangs too, but the scientific method precluded that for me. We have to give up our preferred notions that don't comport with evidence.
I am a Hindu and I think the Big Bang theory AND the Cyclical Universe theory are BOTH TRUE. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It's both, in my opinion. According to the ancient religion of Hinduism, Brahma (the creator of this universe in Hindu mythology) created this universe 155 trillion years ago and this universe will exist for a total of 311 trillion years. And when Brahma dies, this universe will 'die' along with him. Then a new Brahma will be born who will create a new universe to take the place of the old universe. And this process continues forever, without a beginning and without an end. Hinduism also teaches that there are an infinite number of universes and each of those universes (including our own universe) experience an infinite cycle of 'births' (which you can call 'Big Bangs' in a modern scientific way) and 'deaths' (which you can call 'Big Crunches' in a modern scientific way).
An Infinite number of big poofs.
Anton, I'm an astrophysicist, and just want to clarify something. During inflation, you mention that it was too hot for matter. It's more that when the universe is that hot, matter will be created by then immediately destroyed again. The cooling down is required for matter to be created and then not immediately destroyed again. From a practical point of view you can say that the universe has to be cool enough to create matter, but it might be confusing.
if dark energy changes, and we have no idea what it is, and string theory says there are more dimensions than just the 3 spatial and 1 time, could dark energy just be matter (or something) within a dimension that we dont directly experience, one that could still indirectly affect the things even in the dimensions that we experience?
Yes but that would in my mind be an explanation for dark matter not dark energy. Because gravity might be able to affect matter from those dimensions.
Well it could be in a similar effect to the higgs boson field or the pion field crap
It is the waste products from the Dimension where All Of The Mysteries Come From like Sasquatch, ETs, chupacabras and Jaysus. You are surely on to something.
100%. I know nobody likes it when I say it, but The Book of Enoch was removed from the Bible for a reason, along with a lot of other relevant info.
String theory is a dry well of pop science bs. It's pretty much entirely impossible to test or experiment on.
I like how your naming choice implies that the dark energy's existence confirmation isn't intriguing enough, love your stuff 💕
I bet Sir Roger Penrose is sitting there rubbing his hands together right now as this falls into the realm of his cyclic universe theory
Wonderful video and analysis, thank you for your work anton! im from Chile and i have been to the Telescope you mention, its in La Serena, beautiful place.
Since matter and energy can't be destroyed, could everything be reconstituted after the big crunch?
As in a big bang again, repeating everything infinitum.
For all we know, this could of been repeated infinite times already.
big bang is for CULTISTS
your talking about The cyclic universe theory
With the possibility of a cyclic universe come infinite repetitions which in term means an infinite high chance of EXACTLY THE SAME run.
Kinda like a dice throw with more than one dice, with a fixed number of throws certain sum values tend to come more often than others, BUT if you have a non finite number of throws, that statistic can't be made.
So in a nutshell, those deja vu feelings that some ppl sometimes get, "been that place", "met that person", "done that before" or the other condition of having dreamt something that actually happens days, months or even years later could also be "real" and stored in to us unknown energy forms. Very hypothetical, pretty occult, definitely not provable, but not entirely to be dismissed.
Some movies and games based on this idea come to my mind, Minority Report, Riddick Chronicles the Necros, Dune and maybe Warhammer 40k space travel.
@@bloeckmoep ... Fuck. I'm not sure how I feel about that. Does that mean the awareness in me wakes up again in this body instantly from my perspective? Like countless cycles pass in an instant and then bam back into this life born again? Or does our awareness look out through different sensory organs each time? Do we all get to experience being Hitler, and those in the concentration camps, the cows and animals that we've all eaten? This is the kind of thing that gives me existential terror, free will becomes meaningless, things become purely deterministic and guaranteed to happen again, "Time is a flat circle" True Detective type shit. We keep hurting ourselves, and eating ourselves on repeat infinitely... Thank fuck we can't remember any of it I guess if thats true. On the plus side it does mean we get to bang all those chicks we never got to bang, and oh be them as well, that's weird. Minds breaking down at this point, just accept and go with it, whatever 'it' may be.
Ewige Wiederkehr des Gleiches. The idea goes back at least to Pythagoras.
Please see the movie "MR. NOBODY" (2009). There may be no such thing as Dark Energy. Our universe borders other universes. As the others contract, ours expand. Once a multi-universe tension reaches a limit, these switch. The universal number, "0", is maintained.
Dark energy and dark matter are code names for “we don’t have a clue what’s really going on”
I'll second that. So essentially we have once again confirmed that we don't understand what's going on. This is like celebrating the fact that we have basically learned nothing in the last 25 years.
"w = -0.8" with what error bars??
I've been a subscriber to the big crunch hypothesis for years. There are many, many reasons why, but it also just makes the most sense. The other two has so many logical problems, i think. The concept of eternal time, but started just a few billion years ago is one of them. I mean, being alive just a few billion years after the start of ETERNAL time, is pretty fucking significant. I don't think time ever had a "start". I think it is eternal, but both in the future and in the past.
Nothing of this makes any sense. Big crunch hypothesis? Really? We don´t even know how life came to be and can´t even send people to Mars, our own neighborhood. But we are going to determine the future of the universe, that we don´t even comprehend? Makes perfect sense. lol
IMO time is an illusion. God created the universe in 6 days and He rested on the 7th. So what's the standard for True Universal Time? It isn't this tiny ball revolving around another tiny ball in this little corner of a universe so vast that the human mind can't grasp the volume. Those 6 days were very, very long and they were so long that God desired a rest... without motion, time cannot be measured. So that means time would cease as well. God rested on the 7th day and woke up, and the 8th day is Eternity since all of this continues.
I believe in God but I believe in the pursuit of knowledge as well. I'm not a "creationist" per se, I love dwelling in the place between science and religion/mysticism/philosophy to find the places where they truly intersect. That's where the best thoughts come from.
Regardless of the data, I prefer the big crunch because it sounds a like it tastes better.
@@Garresh1 HAH! nice.
@@nikmontecristo3683 How life came to be might be an even greater mystery and harder to find out than how the universe will likely end. And yes, we could send people to mars, but they would never come back. Sending people to mars is also actually DOING stuff in space, rather than figuring out how it works from earth. Two vastly differnet things all together. We know how we could send people to mars perfectly well, but we lack the ability to actually DO it.
Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 😊
Does anyone else feel oddly comforted by Dark Matter? The fact that our entire universe and every last thing in it is only a sliver of the entire story makes me feel like death really can't be final. Dark Matter could just be another exotic universe that's already collided with ours and our souls occasionally pops into every few life times for a ride.
Uhhh...sure.
Astrophysicists call dark matter an "observable effect for which a cause has not yet been discovered." A college kid built his own radio telescope and observed that our galaxy is rotating too quickly for the amount of observable baryonic matter.
It's kind of nice that it may evolve again, into something entirely else.
Rather the opposite, I still have a feeling that dark matter is a simply a maguffin. We could just as accurately be calling it "the force" or "pixie dust."
To be sure this is a necessary part of the theoretical process, but my gut feeling is the truth is much much stranger.
Or you know... just matter you can't really detect due to it not really doing anything other than having an effect on gravity.
I'm OK with uncertainty. Keep it coming.
What if Dark Energy varies not just over time, but space as well? Like, what if our observable portion of the universe (the radius within light has had enough time to travel towards us since the CMB; there should be much more universe beyond that horizon that is impossible to see from our vantage point) happens to be located in a big "lump" in the geometry of the universe where Dark Energy levels are higher than average? Could there be locations in the cosmos beyond our cosmic event horizon where the universe is expanding much slower, or even contracting?
Aren’t we being pulled into the great attractor?
@@acllhes By gravity, yes, but it's already been determined that has no baring on the Hubble tension. If anything, factoring that data in makes the Hubble tension even MORE extreme. Many videos done on that very topic.
I would say that if anything, it's more likely than not that what you're considering is absolutely possible. But what do I know? I'm no scientist with nearly all the answers, at the pinnacle of understanding. Oh wait, that's literally nobody.
@@thisisme5487 True, but opening discourse and bouncing around ideas is an important part of the scientific process, is it not?
Definitely can. Space is flexible and malleable. At least I think it is.
I understand how these explanations are considered to be the "most likely"...
What I struggle with is the number of assumptions that are relied upon in the process of modeling. I believe that as our technological ability progresses, we will be presenting much different conclusions as fact.
Then think of it as "Most likely, to our knowledge." Of course we never know what's actually most likely. We just know what is most likely to us right now.
@@catpoke9557 I completely agree. I'm getting older so I have witnessed everything from black and white tv... through our current level of tech. I remember a time where science swore up and down that no human being set foot on North or South America prior to 13,000 years ago. Even today, despite absolute proof of human presence as far back as 130,000 years ago, many scientists still cling to clovis first... and actively try to ruin the careers of anyone who attempts to publish contradicting findings. I hope that we will soon learn that ego has no place in science. Thank you for your response.
perhaps the universe is not expanding, but we are instead retreating towards a singularity (and accelerating as we get closer) and that would also explain why the JWST sees fully formed galaxies at what we presumed to be the early universe but instead the JWSt is seeing what has always been there inside the event horizon.
@plSzq1 Does the singularity have to be in one direction? Could the Universe be curved in some way like the surface of a planet. As you walk away from one pole the surface expands, then as you get nearer the other pole it starts to contract again. I don't really know what I'm talking about !
I like the idea that the big bang actually was a white hole. In that way we might also have been in a black hole but that black hole created this universe.
Great video again. We will have more and more questions indeed but they get better :D
You stay wonderful too Anton, thank you for your effort and your nice smile today hahaha cheers
Hey! They can't just casually throw it out there that Dark Energy density, varies with time, and expect us to not notice. Inconstant Constants???- it's all getting a bit, 'Wibbly-wobbly, Timey-wimey.'
Hey, who said that constants have to be constant all the time or even a fraction of the time? Some know-it-all scientists? What happens when we take time out of the equation? Do any constants even exist then?
we can. We can causally throw out that mamamals dont have any defining line between male and female its a gradiant thats fairly evenly populated, dark energy changes over time, and wave functions are random and thats what causes solid matter to be solid, time is a human social construct and not real but the speed of light is constant, there is no way to prove or disprove how many spatial dimentions there are, a finiante universe requires curved spacetime something we cannot observe at the moment but we can infer from the big bang there at least must be some curve even if its just residual, and all predictive models are just analogs and not true, it may be impossible for human to comprehend or observe actual reality, and almost all predictive models break down if time travel doesnt exsit but they all break down if it does.
"constant" can mean different things, depending on context. Something can be constant with respect to space, i. e. has the same value everywhere, or constant with respect to time, i. e. has the same value at every time.
@@AnonymousAnarchist2 "a finiante universe requires curved spacetime"
I won't bother commenting on the rest, but at least this is factually wrong. Even a flat spacetime can lead to a finite universe.
'Know-it-all scientists?' I should be so lucky; I was tricked into listening to some 'so-called experts'. (...shudders.)
Without time, I think it's very uncertain what, if anything, would exist. Clocks and digital watches. They're gone! They're toast! They are not around no more! No one would even know what you were talking about.@@thisisme5487
A few years ago they had an experimental value of -1.028+-0.032...now -0.8?!...quite a big difference!
I think the Big Bang needs to have a refractory period. Maybe that’s 100 trillion years, but it ought to have a periodicity.
With the more we learn, the more it seems that the Big Bang didn’t happen.
Chocolate rain!
@@Darkside_1994what gives you that idea? Genuinely curious because i’d like to know what you saw so i can also watch/read it
@@crow2989did we actually ever discover "dark energy"? Or likely...
I am a Hindu and I think the Big Bang theory AND the Cyclical Universe theory are BOTH TRUE. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It's both, in my opinion. According to the ancient religion of Hinduism, Brahma (the creator of this universe in Hindu mythology) created this universe 155 trillion years ago and this universe will exist for a total of 311 trillion years. And when Brahma dies, this universe will 'die' along with him. Then a new Brahma will be born who will create a new universe to take the place of the old universe. And this process continues forever, without a beginning and without an end. Hinduism also teaches that there are an infinite number of universes and each of those universes (including our own universe) experience an infinite cycle of 'births' (which you can call 'Big Bangs' in a modern scientific way) and 'deaths' (which you can call 'Big Crunches' in a modern scientific way).
I don't know. Maybe we SHOULD stop observing. I stopped observing my neighbors because it kept raising perplexing questions. Maybe some things are better left as mysteries, lest we wind up on some galactic version of The History Channel : "Humans - The Tragic Story Of What Really Happened In The Outer Milky Way That Day."
What’s the speed of dark then and can we travel faster? And what is the universe expanding into?
"nothing" but its not a concept the human mind can grasp we can't comprehend it as it makes no sense
The universe is expanding into itself
The Universe is a soap bubble formed when God washes dishes.
The universe isn't expanding into anything really. Imagine an infinite grid that goes on in every direction forever. Lets say the squares making up the grid are 1 unit big. If we increase the size of the squares to 2 units, the distance between each point on the grid gets bigger, but the grid never expanded into anything, it's still infinite.
~70km/s per megaparsec
5:51 The big rip is an almost. The big rip is more like ripples and thats similar to how things die and break apart and are reused in other forms kinda the same with language and other things in reality. Food for example is a controlled rip by the environment known as our stomach and it utilizes chemicals to break down a similar object the same way we use the right tool for the right job, extracting the components needed. Its all connected just separated by the current, thats why time isnt linear and we could create/find any future or past and thats why we could bring dinosaurs back and bring things from the "unreal" here to the real or current.
If there is one thing I know, it's that there is no such thing as a constant. Obviously, this is problematic when attempting to calculate events from the perspective of a singular point of view. It's time for a new paradigm in math that allows for infinite simultanous points of view. Of course, this would necessitate measurements from every reference frame all at once, and there is only one theoretical, or theological interpretation of that, namely omnipotence. Buckle up, because as we probe deeper, the boundaries disappear.
Lmaaaao, God arguments.
Math is math, it doesn't lie. And we know that constants are constants, thanks to observations and calculations.
Physics is not governed by our primate brains.
ignorance is pretty constant.
@@tinygriffy No disrespect, but you just unwittingly proved my point.
@@Greenmachine305 Could you explain? It does seem that some level of ignorance is likely to be a constant. The only thing that wouldn't be constant is the level of ignorance. Forgive my ignorance as I seem to be missing your point both in your original comment and in your response indicating that he should be disrespected - as well as how he proved your point, and why your response is structured such that you believe he might be disrespected for unwittingly proving your point.
@@thisisme5487 Sure. Great questions. I'm formulating a reply. Please standby.
Now I can sleep better after that I knew about the Big Crunch, probably leading to a new Big Bang, that the universe won't end in a big rip! LOL
I love this stuff. Oddly, it was the game starfield that got me thinking about dark energy, and I finally understand it in more intuitive way, I think. I dunno, I'm not smart, but it does seem like maybe if we have mass and energy that warps spacetime in a positive way, maybe there could also be some that warps it in the other way. It would push, not pull. And if there were something that had opposite gravity, it would scoot as far away from us as possible. but if that were true, wouldn't it make light go 'faster' when the light goes near it, the same way light goes slower near a massive object? If a heavy object bends light one way, wouldn't the opposite of gravity warp it the other direction? I dunno, I'm probably so far off that I should be embarrassed lol. Still, I love thinking about this stuff.
Light does not change speeds.
@@P4INKiller right but it does move slower relative to the rest of the universe when it moves through an object or a gravitational field. That's how prisms work right? Some of the light takes longer to pass through the glass than other frequencies. Maybe I don't get it though.
Great summary and video.
This is a fantastic channel, Anton! Thank you for making it understandable to the masses 😊
I have a theory on the expansion...what if it's the Akashic records made visible, and the expansion is happening as we learn and advance in this physical realm? I had a transcendental experience a few decades ago that ties to this theory. The experience itself left me increasingly inquisitive, and being in it was quite mind blowing. It was as much a physical experience as it was memtal or spiritual. I hope live long enough to see the answer to this theory play out.
Put the pipe down
Just a thought, if closer things move away slower than things that are further away and the farther away they are the longer ago that motion occurred does it not make sense that the expansion rate is slowing down?
I like your thinking! Too bad I was missing all of the math classes back in the day to be able to calculate ideas from relativity and Euclidean geometry...
@@LyubomirIko I avoided all the more advanced math classes myself 'cause I was not about to do all that homework. I do wish that I was more forward thinking in my teen years.
This thing that has been dubbed "Dark Energy" is the most basic of fundamental motions ("forces") in the Reciprocal System of physical theory originated by Dewey B. Larson. This theoretical entity is incorporated into thousands of computations of the properties of matter, where it is anything but an "unknown entity" or something separate from regular matter. See for example, Larson's book Basic Properties of Matter, a complete edition of which has only recently become available.
It’s not funded by Jeffrey Epstein and his buddies in Hollywood like Stephen Hawking, so it won’t gain any traction 😉
It's good that we keep discovering new mysteries. It would be miserable to eventually know everything and have nothing new left to discover.
Dark Engergy began around the same time life began on Earth? Well, that just proves we're evil. In seriousness: this is really interesting because it seemed like the idea of a cyclical universe had been waning. I've sometimes wondered if the universe isn't merely the interaction of waves converging in an extra-universal matrix. It doesn't help to answer anything, but I've always found that to be an interesting idea.
It didn't begin then, that's when it started to dominate.
Its called dark energy because it interacts weakly with other matter, not because it has anything to do with good/evil.
Could we suppose also that matter may not exist, so that it would be one form of stabilized energy that we can observe (by observe, I mean, see, touch, size, weigh) ??
@@sandplasma Actually, it doesn't interact with matter (the word "other" makes no sense here) at all by any of the three usual forces (electromagnetic, weak, strong). And the word "dark" says that it doesn't interact with _light_ (i. e. electromagnetic radiation).
@@oakhauser Matter is also energy, the relationship between matter and energy was discovered by Einstein E = MC^2. So it does exist. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.
This reminds me of pre-Einstein astrophysics.Where people were confidently building up theories on the static model of the universe which is pervaded by ether.
There were hints at discrepancy that are obvious in hindsight. But it took a massive paradigm shift like Einsteins theories to change all that.
I think it will be a similar paradigm shift when we figure out why our numbers point to dark energy and dark matter, but our cameras see nothing.
I think you are spot on. By the time we figure what both dark energy and gravity are it will be painfully obvious.
While it may be true that matter only makes up 5 % of all the stuff in the Universe in my opinion this 5% is all that really matters!
unless you are of the opinion that the dark matter also matters somewhat. A matter of definition I guess.
"Baryonic" matter.
I needed that wave today. Thank you! 😀
Oh, the subject matter was fascinating, too.
Not gonna lie, this really helped ease a big anxiety for me. Big rip is an unnecessary fear 😢 but at least we know that's not gonna happen.
Now panspermia is totally more viable, in one of Antons other videos he spoke of the universe being seeded from a previous one 😮. Oh man, reincarnation and stuff ? This stuff is wild man.
Also really exciting to hear this news, the universe not being the same everywhere (cosmological constants) especially over time is kind of poetic.
It's kind of like mods using a slider to fine tune conditions.
What a time to be alive, honestly this news is so wonderful, a great mystery has been solved.
What about galactic/local scale time dilation? Time dilation would cause the universe to either appear to expand, or appear to be contracting.
Additionally, we know that as galaxies age, they get more dense. An increase in density would cause the kind of time dilation where everything appears to be expanding.
Dark energy and dark matter havent been discovered. They were invented to patch the failed gravity driven model. Red shift is not recession. See halton arp on this.
they're predicted mostly, like anything else was - black holes which in start of 20th century predicted as "black stars". They can find andvprove dark matter only by particle accelerator.
scientists keep inventing words to explain their flawed beliefs. the redshift of light is caused by the increase in density not expansion. just like the light at sunrise and sunset.
I agree on dark energy. Dark matter is dilated mass. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote -
"The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from the galactic center.
It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. Sound familiar? This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies. The "missing mass" is dilated mass.
Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in "large clusters of stars" which is basically a very low mass galaxy. For a galaxy to have no/low dilation it must have very, very low mass (or low mass in its center). It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter. For the same reason binary stars will always have predictable rotation rates.
What we see in modern astronomy has been known since 1925. This is when the existence of galaxies was confirmed. It was clear that there should be an astronomical quantity of light emanating from our own galactic center. It wasn't until television and movies began to popularize singularities that the concept gradually became mainstream. There was clarity in astronomy before that happened.
In a cyclical Universe, red shift is a must.
Please Gogle stop this censorship madness, this is not funny, who can really contact them to tell that their Ai destroying all platform?
@9:50 it's not necessarily the case that the dark energy (vacuum energy density) changes with time, it's that the _effect of it_ on the galaxy redshifts can change with time, or more precisely, the effect of vacuum energy on the observations we make of the redshifts can change with time and with how much redshift there is (the measurements are dependent on instrument tech and theory, we cannot make raw on-the-nose measurements of the expansion) . That's the astrophysics puzzle. Quantum theory is pretty good and solid on what the dark energy density is (vacuum energy density), and predicts it probably does not change with time, since that'd mean the most basic laws of physics would change with time, and there's no evidence for that.
my father has a theory about the universe, the universe is the inside of a black hole and the expansion of the universe is matter falling into it, for years he's been saying " they'll see, it'll vary expansion rates throughout the history of the universe! "
“There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.” - The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
The big fudge factor by anther name. Until we embrace the EU model the pantomime continues. : )
Lol no, pure nonsense
An interesting thought experiment/ theory:
(Note: ignore the actual physics of the analogy, its just supposed to be conceptual)
Imagine the entire universe is a basketball, that is falling under gravity. Inside the ball there is a fixed amount of "stuff" that acts normally, but also there is a force acting on everything that is accelerating, but it's impossible to figure out the cause.
If you instead imagine the universe is a helium filled balloon, which would rise against gravity. As it does there is a change in atmospheric pressure, which causes the balloon to expand, without any "stuff" being added.
You could also go as far to say, start with a deflated, sealed balloon that is filled with some amount of reactive compounds, that as they react, convert from solid into a lighter-than-air gas. As the conversion happens, the balloon expands in an observably, measurally predictable way to anyone "inside".
At a certain point in the conversion, the balloon's boyency becomes such that it starts to rise. You now have two factors affecting the expansion of the balloon. As the rest of the compounds are converted, the increased bouancy would accelerate the rise of the balloon.
(In this scenario, the acceleration would slow, and even decelerate until the balloon reached atmospheric equilibrium)
Essentially, the universe would be experiencing (perhaps even known) force(s) just completely external to it. And even though the universe can see and measure the effects, the source would not only be impossible to see, but that the effect can change over time in ways that would defy explanation.
(I.e. Maybe the basketball bounces off the ground, drastically halting the acceleration before causing it to reverse, or the "ball" is actually in non-circular orbit, and its speed changes in a sort of bell-curve)
Just random thoughts :)
More answers means more questions. More questions means more looking for answers.
Imaqine amount of energy needed to expand the entire universe faster then the speed of light?
maybe expansion is not constant because we are in a black hole and fluctuations are from 5d matter "falling" into it ...
"Who am I kidding?"---LOL, I agree with you on the future.😆😆
XD that point got me good
How about then supposing that matter doesn't exist so that it would be just observations of stabilized energy 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
Couldn't Dark Energy just be the negative effect from a vacuum around mass from every direction completely around it. Top, bottom and around.
"Negative effect of a vacuum" ? What negative effect ? Vacuums don't suck.
@@ColinWatters my Hoover does!
Makes sense
@@Cylawyer No it doesn't. Its the normal air pressure in the room that pushes the dust into a vacuum cleaner. :-)
Very exciting! Though either fate of the universe is far beyond my lifetime, I used to like the Big Bang/Big Crunch theory more than the Big Freeze and such, but in recent decades had resigned myself to the idea that the theory had been disproven. I never thought I’d hear that it was back!