My jaw dropped at 9:22. There's no greater feeling than watching your deeply theorical models match reality 1:1. All the kudos to this great team of pioneers.
How is it exciting when a curve-fitting theory fits some data? Without a physical basis (like actually finding dark matter and dark energy), hypotheticals are nothing more than that.
@@thecasualparry7797 No, it isn't. Curve-fitting theories are a sophisticated form of "monkey see, monkey do". Without a physical basis, like actually finding dark matter, it's purely hypothetical, regardless of how well it fits the curve of data.
I thought the last phase of matter is Bose-Einstein condensate, but possibility to make super little tornado in quantum scale is out of my wildest dream 😅
@@philharmer198 First thing is that we don't know what dark energy is. We don't even know if it is real. Observations of the distribution of galaxies in the Universe and their movement, suggest that some kind of force is at play. There are a high chance that so called filaments (where matter is denser) is a manifestation of constructive interference of gravity waves. So called voids in space (where matter density is lower) could be spaces, where is a destructive interference. This simple explanation of interference of gravity waves in 3D could explain many things without the need for dark energy and dark matter.
@@philharmer198 that just observation, galaxies move closer together from far distance, might be the year end 's party between galaxies locating somewhere but not inviting us
0:49 Einstein didn‘t predict an expanding universe! He originally added the cosmological constant to his equation because otherwise a stationary universe would not be allowed in general relativity. Later, the expansion of the universe was discovered and Einstein called his cosmological constant the biggest blunder of his life (as otherwise he would have predicted said expansion, but due to his constant he didn’t). It was only even later when it was discovered that the universes expansion is slowing down that the cosmological constant (Lambda) in his equation became relevant again. Edit: The universes acceleration was of course found to be accelerating, not slowing down.
The Universe's expansion was found to be accelerating and that's when the cosmological constant became relevant again. This year the DESI collaboration announced hints that this acceleration may not be constant over cosmological time.
That's what I thought, thanks for pointing out. Now I'm confused. Shouldn't the channel clarify it, because Einstein made a mistake that he himself corrected it later.
Did anyone else see the Triskelion? The Triskele symbolizes infinity and connection, deriving its name from ancient Greek words that mean 'three times. ' In Celtic cultures, the fusion of three joining spirals in the design further enhances its significance. The number three held special symbolism for Celtic civilizations.
Colleges are over-rated. Self learning with a good mentor is the way to go. The college completely disregards your learning rate if it is slow. Learn at your own pace bro. It is better.
Basically they realised that the sums they usually use to compute complicated particle trajectories when you smash them together or observe them in a space (because they usually move in awkward, unpredictable ways), could be directly crushed together into one simpler sum, the area of that shape. Thus they could just plug in the number for the area of the shape which is a lot simpler into their maths instead of all the other formulas, thus saving time and energy!
@@jumpingjack7769 Mayyybe Nima Arkani-Hamed understands it, and it is possible Sebastian Mizera and Carolina Figueiredo (the one in the video) get glimpses of the big picture, lol.
@@peperoni_pepino No they don't, at least not yet. They understand the math and how to apply it (which physicists have known for ~100 years), but they still can't explain what's "actually happening" at the subatomic level. If they did, then *that* would be the breakthrough of the century (the Nobel committee would literally drop everything they're doing and schedule a same-day award ceremony just for that). That said, maybe this new way of doing math takes us one step closer to figuring out what's actually happening.
@@jumpingjack7769 Oh yeah for sure. The mentioned people may understand the maths; they most definitely do not understand the physics. I thought you were talking about the maths.
"To understand what the cosmological constant is, we have to start at the beginning, the Big Bang." When he said _beginning_ he really meant *beginning*
@@williamschlosser maybe everything simply always was. time doesn’t work the same in singularities and neutron stars, so maybe this extremely dense collection of all matter in the universe violated time in such an abstract way that there was no need for there to even be a “beginning”. we just don’t know at the moment!
@@monokumasussy9685 I am a creationist ultimately, but not in orthodox terms, I see the big bang as a transfer of energy. the simplest way I can explain this is the same as transferring a bit from the source, to a hard disk drive. I still haven't seen anything in physics, philosophy and mathematics (my maths is 1+1 =2) but when you look at it like a bit being transferred, i,e, a full hdd weighs more than an empty one etc. Nothing can't exist without something, and something can't exist without nothing. i,e, binary terms and dna, everything working in pairs etc. just my two cents.
Well, Einstien didn't thought that the universe expansion is accelerating, on the contrary he added a cosmological constant in his equations to maintain his vision of a static universe, without expansion. He later suppressed this constant when Hubble discovered that the universe was indeed expanding.
You're right that Einstein initially introduced the cosmological constant () to keep his equations consistent with a static universe, which was the prevailing belief at the time. However, when Hubble observed the expansion of the universe, Einstein considered the constant unnecessary and reportedly called it his 'biggest blunder.' Ironically, the cosmological constant has made a comeback in modern cosmology to explain dark energy and the accelerated expansion of the universe discovered in the late 20th century. So while Einstein's vision of a static universe was incorrect, the cosmological constant itself remains very relevant today
@@CoolguyMcCool Wow! I'm really confused. I knew the first part of the story, about Einstein's biggest mistake. But didn't know that "cosmologial constant" cameback, and apparently to justify the contrary: a accelerated expansion of the universe, not a static.
2024 has shown how breakthroughs in physics inspire progress across other fields, like biology, chemistry, and materials science. Physics truly remains the foundation of innovation!
It really boggles my mind, how those early scientists discovered these theories. In today's generation we have a lot of avenues, forums to discover many things. But those olden days! Man, they're really great.
Just remember that in the days before these discoveries were made, physicists thought that physics was solved. They thought everything was deterministic and could be solved with classical mechanics. And then the 20th century blew the lid off and whole new fields were created. It's possible that we're always on the cusp of another such revolution. Appreciating the past and its wonderful minds is important, but don't let that become a box that traps you.
Here, this is what got me started around 15 years ago, Quantum history with real-time interviews from Bell and Aspect etc... etc... "Quantum Entanglement Documentary - Atomic Physics and Reality - Bohr Einstein"
@@Mepharias I'm not saying we should just stop with discoveries. It's just the old days it was too difficult to understand many things related to physics. At present anybody can just go through RUclips and find a lot of educational videos. The number of people who get free access to these information is very huge. And in that a few people can be the next big brains of Physics. It's not the same in the Einstein era.
Reading these comments makes me emotional and excited that in the world of physics people are working together to solve the questions of our universe. It appears to me that science and math are the last strongholds of true cooperation in our skewed world.
1 is in fact the basic unit that everything is constructed from using the golden ratio spiral. Scribing an arc with a unit length of one then building from that basic 1 by 1 square using multiples of itself. It is the most direct and simple way to pack spheres into 3D space. Seemingly so abstract and complex and yet so simple at the fundamental basic elements.
Instead of forgetting things, imagine a world where you remember things that didn’t happen. Imagine looking at a cup in front of the cereal box. Now, you are 100 percent certain that when you put the cup behind the cereal box the memory of the cup being in front of the cereal box will definitely be the truth. But as soon as you put the cup behind the cereal box how can you be certain it was in front of the cereal box in a world where your memory doesn’t tell you the truth. Actually physically seeing the cup in front of the cereal box and the memory you have of the cup in front of the cereal box are both pictures, so how can you tell them apart. What difference is the memory you have of seeing something from actually seeing it. Let’s say you go on an excillarating roller coaster ride for the very first time. When the ride is over you can remember the experience of it but you can’t remember the exact experience because remembering the exact experience would involve not having any memory or recollection of you being on that ride before.
Hear me out.. The expanding is actually all matter falling back to its origin. The big bang was, matter, rising to a pinnacle like point and held there in a seemingly infinite density. The big bang is, the hold finally giving, and sending everything back down at an intense speed.
@AnthonyBarbian Just as it's unknown now, who really knows. All matter could have started this way at that height. It's mostly a playful idea too, ofc it's just a theory of mine backed up my no actual math 😅
me vuelve loco todo esto, es como si los 3 trabajos presentados tuvieran conexión en la verdad que te da la ciencia es el mejor puzlee jamás inventado y personas lo están descubriendo pieza a pieza
No survey needed. There is only one self-contained physical theory of the universe, Plasma Cosmology. All other theories are curve-fitting, not physical -- then they claim validity because it fits the curve of the data.
It's always funny to me how intertwined physics and chemistry are, yet physics majors are not required to take chemistry in their first two years. At least here in Seattle .
I also find this quite strange. My own personal opinion of this is that because what really underpins all of chemistry and how atoms and molecules behaves is because of the various physics involved (i.e electromagnetism, quantum mechanics, etc.). Essentially my opinion is that chemistry is the result of physics and not the other way around. This is all just the opinion of an organic chemist.
2) It must be about resonance of difference vortexes. Like, in radiowaves, two symmetrical waves increase the amplitude, and whenever they are asymmetrical, they decrease the amplitude.
"I am proud to be a cosmologist, exploring the "I'm proud to be a cosmologist, diving into the mysteries of the universe. It's a blessing to work on something as fascinating as Dark Energy."
Question about the DESI project: While they are mapping the multimillion galaxies by using red shift to determine distance (assumes red shift is correct at all distances)...are they correcting for the time it took for the light to get to us (along with the galaxy's velocity) so that they determine where each galaxy is now as opposed to just where it as opposed to where it was multiple million years ago? To make it more complex...to find out where they are now (i.e. at one point in time) you then have to take into account their velocity and mass as well as the fact that it takes time for them to interact (both ways) with very distant objects all of which has been going on between the time the light we see was emitted and our detection of it. So, are they doing that? or just looking at where we see them? If not doing that then we really are not seeing the universe the way it is.
It's possible that the Hubble Tension could be explained by a variation in the cosmological constant, which Einstein added as a means of keeping the universe from collapsing into itself and explaining the steady state universe, which was the common belief about the universe in 1915, when the Cosmological Constant was added on. When learning from Hubble that the universe was expanding, he called it "the greatest blunder of my career"..
your sound effects feels like the subject is changed or went deeper, although we are on the same subject or the same deepness level, i want you to know. love your videos.
is it possible to talk about forces of friction that incresse when the speed increases? what is then the limiting speed for which the forces of friction appear and start increasing?
Can someone elaborate on/explain the amplituhedron? What is its purpose and how was it made? Why do we use it? I think I’m missing some background information on this topic so those things didn’t make sense to me 😅
What i think about the some galaxies are coming together and some are moving apart is multi-point big bang. When we see two galaxies coming together, this can be the intersection sphere of two big bang point, where they are actually expanding from each of their big bang point. But when we see them together they can be seen coming together. And for, expanding galaxies this can be within the expanding sphere of single big bang point.
Great video. Thank you very much. I signed up straight away. Also because I really liked other videos from the channel and of course because the topics are fascinating. I'm looking forward to seeing more.
The last one is particularly interesting. I wonder if this new mathematical model might lead us to finally understand quantum mechanics. That'd be like the biggest thing of all time.
He’s not female so it looks bad for this glossy video. This magazine/channel is clearly motivated by some sort of DEI agenda, so instead of hearing from Nima, one of the smartest dudes on earth right now, we have to hear from his female grad student about what he did. Oxford did the same thing to Penrose. It’s all gross.
Mad that the quantum vortices at 9:23 resemble cymatics! I'm not one of those sacred geometry hippies but I do believe there is a lot to think about when it comes to natural patterns!
An Abrikosov vortex refers to a vortex of supercurrent within a type-II superconductor, essentially a tiny region where magnetic flux can penetrate the material, forming a stable pattern due to circulating superconducting currents around a normal core;
ऊर्जा का चक्र: कृति* ऊर्जा का चक्र, जिसे कृति कहा जाता है, अनंत और निरंतर है। यह चक्र ऊर्जा के विभिन्न रूपों और अवस्थाओं के बीच के संबंध को दर्शाता है। *ऊर्जा की अवस्थाएँ* 1. अव्यक्त ऊर्जा: ऊर्जा की उच्चतम अवस्था, जिसमें ऊर्जा अदृश्य और अनंत है। 2. व्यक्त ऊर्जा: ऊर्जा की मध्यम अवस्था, जिसमें ऊर्जा दृश्य और सीमित है। 3. स्पष्ट ऊर्जा: ऊर्जा की निम्नतम अवस्था, जिसमें ऊर्जा स्पष्ट और व्याकुल है। *ऊर्जा का संचार* 1. विजातीय छोरों का जुड़ना और छुटना। 2. रश्मियों का स्पंदन। 3. ऊर्जा की आवृत्ति में बदलाव। *कृति के नियम* 1. ऊर्जा का संचार अनंत है। 2. ऊर्जा का परिवर्तन निरंतर है। 3. ऊर्जा के विभिन्न रूपों और अवस्थाओं के बीच का संबंध है। *वैज्ञानिक सिद्धांत* 1. ऊर्जा संरक्षण का नियम (Law of Conservation of Energy) 2. थर्मोडायनामिक्स (Thermodynamics) 3. क्वांटम मैकेनिक्स (Quantum Mechanics) . अपारदर्शी से पारदर्शिता और दर्शीता यह संरचना की आवृति मे दो विजातीय छोरों के बीच स्पंदन जो ऊर्जा को व्याकुल कर देता है , वही ऊर्जा, वायु से अग्नि से वरूण से स्फटिक बनती है और आवृति के अनुसार खुद को अवस्था में बनाये रखती है । पदार्थ ऊर्जा की संचित अवस्था हैं । जिस में ऊर्जा स्पष्ट और व्याकुल है । आवृति सिमित होने से ऊर्जा व्याकुल होती हैं । यह सब वर्तमान हैं । यह ऊर्जा का वर्तन हैं अनंत और निरंतरता का जिसके कारण वह चमकती हैं और स्पष्ट ऊर्जा की अवस्था में व्यक्त होती हैं जिस को आप अवलोकन के सिद्धांत से सुपर पोजीशन कहते हो पर वह मानवीय संवेदना का आभास मात्र है । जैसे ध्वनि वैसे प्रकाश ।0=(-0/-0)
I'm so excited to see all the armchair experts in the comments go on about their theory on dark energy/ dark matter. I'm sure there is no Dunning Krueger effect to be seen in this place...
Also to be clear, I'm not saying I understand astrophysics in any way. I'm saying that everytime I watch a video that mentions dark matter and energy inevitably gets people who claim they solved it.
@@carterwegler9205 either claim they now know what dark matter is or that physicists are dumb for thinking they know what it is (they don't think that)
Dark energy is a little tricky. A lot of physicists have an idea for what it might be but none of those theories (to my knowledge) have had any solid way of being tested. It's like trying to explain ghosts, but we know it exists because the universe is expanding. We just don't know what it is or how to interact with it.
If you are traveling to the past, at the same time as traveling @(at, around, about, also, or against) C, it will counteract the time dilation, am I wrong?
Amplituhedron, hypergraphs, morphic resonance,...... of current era. Epicycles, deferents, eccentrics,....... of pre Copernocan era. Doesn't that ring a bell?
perhaps you will mention it (I'm only 11:12 into it so far) but I wonder do these vortices only spin one way? if not, what defines which direction these vortices spin? And if they can spin different ways- what happens from the total of angular momentums of two squaring vortices? and can it (the spin of the vortices and axis) be directed?
This depends on the method used to generate the vortices. In this experiment, we spun the magnetic field continuously in one direction, and so every vortex is spinning the same way. However, there are other ways to generate vortices that make random numbers of vortices and antivortices, spinning in opposite directions. What makes these vortices special is that they're all identical, spinning with exactly the same speed. So, if a vortex and antivortex touch they, and their angular momentum, annihilate!
When dynamite explodes, is there conversion of matter into heat and energy, and there's an expansion that accompanies the explosion? What if when matter becomes heat (released energy), that is driving the expansion of the universe? Does matter in effect become space over time?
Could the DESI's deviation be caused by blackholes or something like that? I've know that such 'objects' in space causes the phenomena of gravitational lensing, so maybe they lead to a false impression that the galaxies are moving closer, whereas in reality they aren't? Would someone share their thoughts on this?
Gravity's acting force on an objection is inversely proportional to the center of gravity. Hence dark matter/gravitational force slowly disappeares with distance. If the big bang's premordial ball is held by gravity then this is the reason why expansion is and much faster especially at the outside part of the ball. Though it can be presumed that some remnant of that ball exists somewhere as it is still bound by the gravity of the ball itself much more likely how a star implodes.
Dark energy is simply the vacuum of space and the pressure it forms on matter. The larger the object the more pressure on the object. This pressure is gravity connecting all the universe.
People who understand three-phase power or the principles of AC power as well as things with the way plasmas and light move in wave-like fashion. There is always a give and take. There is no constant. like gravitational constant . When you look into it it's not constant it's general .Nothing is always accelerating at exactly the same constantly. It changes on all the forces being acted upon it.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
It figures that Figueiredo figured it out
Great one
🤣💀
Figured what out ?
@@philharmer198my thoughts exactly. I didn’t understand what the Nobel prize was for.
U figured out the joke.
pretty hard to believe a lot of the time that this is real life discoveries and not the plot thickening in a sci fi movie
It is the plot. He also said that one can't solve a problem with the same mind that one created it. The plot is apparently plotting itself lol
Why not both!?
Don't let any producer near it ☺️☺️
Well the sci fi genre is supposed to be exploring the theoretical possibilities of real life science so would make sense for them to be similar
❤
My jaw dropped at 9:22.
There's no greater feeling than watching your deeply theorical models match reality 1:1.
All the kudos to this great team of pioneers.
How is it exciting when a curve-fitting theory fits some data? Without a physical basis (like actually finding dark matter and dark energy), hypotheticals are nothing more than that.
@williamschlosser They show two graphs comparing theoretical models and experimental data, the physical basis is there...
@@thecasualparry7797 No, it isn't. Curve-fitting theories are a sophisticated form of "monkey see, monkey do". Without a physical basis, like actually finding dark matter, it's purely hypothetical, regardless of how well it fits the curve of data.
I thought the last phase of matter is Bose-Einstein condensate, but possibility to make super little tornado in quantum scale is out of my wildest dream 😅
@@thecasualparry7797 So if there is a physical basis, tell us exactly what dark matter consists of.
I watch this every year thankyou for these videos
We have to thank Jim Simons. He has passed away, but the money he donated is still supporting the magazine.
(2)
Yeah they're absolutely great!
So do I, and I've yet to really understand a single thing they are talking about... still fascinating...
0:00 1 Weakening Dark Energy
5:48 2 Supersolids in the Lab
11:08 3 Quantum Geometry
Thanks
How do you weaken dark energy ?
What's the thinking ?
@@philharmer198 First thing is that we don't know what dark energy is. We don't even know if it is real. Observations of the distribution of galaxies in the Universe and their movement, suggest that some kind of force is at play. There are a high chance that so called filaments (where matter is denser) is a manifestation of constructive interference of gravity waves. So called voids in space (where matter density is lower) could be spaces, where is a destructive interference. This simple explanation of interference of gravity waves in 3D could explain many things without the need for dark energy and dark matter.
@@philharmer198have you watched the video?
@@philharmer198 that just observation, galaxies move closer together from far distance, might be the year end 's party between galaxies locating somewhere but not inviting us
That last one in particular is huge! Great discovery
i love these "biggest breakthroughs" videos, i wait all year for them!!!!
Dark Energy
- Not **constant** (contradicts Einstein)
- **3.5σ** confidence
- Requires **new physics**
Supersolids
- Matter simultaneously **solid+superfluid**
- Explains **neutron star rotation changes**
Particle Physics
- **Geometric method** replaces Feynman diagrams
- Works w/ **real particles**
- **Unifies 3 theories**
Thanks
MIGHT Explain *neutron star rotation changes*
Quite excited for third one
0:49 Einstein didn‘t predict an expanding universe! He originally added the cosmological constant to his equation because otherwise a stationary universe would not be allowed in general relativity. Later, the expansion of the universe was discovered and Einstein called his cosmological constant the biggest blunder of his life (as otherwise he would have predicted said expansion, but due to his constant he didn’t). It was only even later when it was discovered that the universes expansion is slowing down that the cosmological constant (Lambda) in his equation became relevant again.
Edit: The universes acceleration was of course found to be accelerating, not slowing down.
The Universe's expansion was found to be accelerating and that's when the cosmological constant became relevant again. This year the DESI collaboration announced hints that this acceleration may not be constant over cosmological time.
Look up Georges Lemaître. It gets into all that, and Einstein's praises for one of the most beautiful things he had ever herad.
I am amazed that someone put this out there. Awesome dude! Truth be told.
That's what I thought, thanks for pointing out. Now I'm confused. Shouldn't the channel clarify it, because Einstein made a mistake that he himself corrected it later.
@@andr_line He accidentally predicted it.
Sorry my understanding of this is not an element of the volume of the comprehedron
My comprehedron has collapsed to a lower dimension
Your comprehedeon is the geometric object that represents the different interactions of this video's information content with your mind?
LOLOL WHAT
😂🤯🤣💕
The visuals were fantastic. Thank you!
Fantastic video, really appreciate your effort!
At 2:04 the spreading of space while the 2 galaxies in the midle merging is genius. Explains visually the expansion of the universe.
Ah yes... The feeling of learning something without actually learning anything :)
Did anyone else see the Triskelion? The Triskele symbolizes infinity and connection, deriving its name from ancient Greek words that mean 'three times. ' In Celtic cultures, the fusion of three joining spirals in the design further enhances its significance. The number three held special symbolism for Celtic civilizations.
Yeah, baby! It's time for a Physics recap! 🎉
I am your dj x here's the physics that you were in to this year.
Nice production. Very informative.
I dident go to colage and I still watch this
I can tell.
Good for you. Never stop learning.
That’s good. You don’t need college to learn. Learning is limitless.
High school?
Colleges are over-rated. Self learning with a good mentor is the way to go. The college completely disregards your learning rate if it is slow. Learn at your own pace bro. It is better.
I’m so glad there’s ppl out there that understand all this
That third one with Figueiredo... my God too complicated. Fried my brain how complicated is this stuff.
Basically they realised that the sums they usually use to compute complicated particle trajectories when you smash them together or observe them in a space (because they usually move in awkward, unpredictable ways), could be directly crushed together into one simpler sum, the area of that shape. Thus they could just plug in the number for the area of the shape which is a lot simpler into their maths instead of all the other formulas, thus saving time and energy!
@@jameswilkes451 It's volume, not surface area, yo. (Not that I understand how any of this stuff works (though neither does anybody else).)
@@jumpingjack7769 Mayyybe Nima Arkani-Hamed understands it, and it is possible Sebastian Mizera and Carolina Figueiredo (the one in the video) get glimpses of the big picture, lol.
@@peperoni_pepino No they don't, at least not yet. They understand the math and how to apply it (which physicists have known for ~100 years), but they still can't explain what's "actually happening" at the subatomic level. If they did, then *that* would be the breakthrough of the century (the Nobel committee would literally drop everything they're doing and schedule a same-day award ceremony just for that).
That said, maybe this new way of doing math takes us one step closer to figuring out what's actually happening.
@@jumpingjack7769 Oh yeah for sure. The mentioned people may understand the maths; they most definitely do not understand the physics. I thought you were talking about the maths.
Our favorite yearly video series!
My favorite thing about physics is when people do a shit ton of calculus and algebra and then the answer is 1 or 0 XD or pi. Its the best.
"To understand what the cosmological constant is, we have to start at the beginning, the Big Bang."
When he said _beginning_ he really meant *beginning*
The beninging
Ini de beningi
Yes, someone needs to explain how it's possible for everything to come out of nothing.
@@williamschlosser maybe everything simply always was. time doesn’t work the same in singularities and neutron stars, so maybe this extremely dense collection of all matter in the universe violated time in such an abstract way that there was no need for there to even be a “beginning”. we just don’t know at the moment!
@@monokumasussy9685 I am a creationist ultimately, but not in orthodox terms, I see the big bang as a transfer of energy. the simplest way I can explain this is the same as transferring a bit from the source, to a hard disk drive. I still haven't seen anything in physics, philosophy and mathematics (my maths is 1+1 =2) but when you look at it like a bit being transferred, i,e, a full hdd weighs more than an empty one etc. Nothing can't exist without something, and something can't exist without nothing. i,e, binary terms and dna, everything working in pairs etc. just my two cents.
Well, Einstien didn't thought that the universe expansion is accelerating, on the contrary he added a cosmological constant in his equations to maintain his vision of a static universe, without expansion. He later suppressed this constant when Hubble discovered that the universe was indeed expanding.
You're right that Einstein initially introduced the cosmological constant () to keep his equations consistent with a static universe, which was the prevailing belief at the time. However, when Hubble observed the expansion of the universe, Einstein considered the constant unnecessary and reportedly called it his 'biggest blunder.' Ironically, the cosmological constant has made a comeback in modern cosmology to explain dark energy and the accelerated expansion of the universe discovered in the late 20th century. So while Einstein's vision of a static universe was incorrect, the cosmological constant itself remains very relevant today
@@CoolguyMcCool Wow! I'm really confused. I knew the first part of the story, about Einstein's biggest mistake. But didn't know that "cosmologial constant" cameback, and apparently to justify the contrary: a accelerated expansion of the universe, not a static.
I look forward to this every year. Thank you!!
i love when you make vireos of breakthroughs of every science at once.
2024 has shown how breakthroughs in physics inspire progress across other fields, like biology, chemistry, and materials science. Physics truly remains the foundation of innovation!
Fantastically exciting results!! Bravo!!
Wow this is all incredibly interesting and significant breakthroughs!!!!
It really boggles my mind, how those early scientists discovered these theories.
In today's generation we have a lot of avenues, forums to discover many things. But those olden days! Man, they're really great.
Regulation kills.
Just remember that in the days before these discoveries were made, physicists thought that physics was solved. They thought everything was deterministic and could be solved with classical mechanics. And then the 20th century blew the lid off and whole new fields were created. It's possible that we're always on the cusp of another such revolution. Appreciating the past and its wonderful minds is important, but don't let that become a box that traps you.
Here, this is what got me started around 15 years ago, Quantum history with real-time interviews from Bell and Aspect etc... etc...
"Quantum Entanglement Documentary - Atomic Physics and Reality - Bohr Einstein"
@@Mepharias I'm not saying we should just stop with discoveries. It's just the old days it was too difficult to understand many things related to physics.
At present anybody can just go through RUclips and find a lot of educational videos. The number of people who get free access to these information is very huge. And in that a few people can be the next big brains of Physics. It's not the same in the Einstein era.
I wouldn't be surprises the supersolid evidency would make them win a Nobel prize
Reading these comments makes me emotional and excited that in the world of physics people are working together to solve the questions of our universe. It appears to me that science and math are the last strongholds of true cooperation in our skewed world.
science, math, and farmer's markets holding the world together
I love this kind of people! wish i could hear their words more
These videos are on my waitlist every year. Thank you!
Look forward to these type of videos all year!
What a great video!
I feel that last one will be a powerhouse for future physics, just as Feynman diagrams were for current physics
1 is in fact the basic unit that everything is constructed from using the golden ratio spiral. Scribing an arc with a unit length of one then building from that basic 1 by 1 square using multiples of itself. It is the most direct and simple way to pack spheres into 3D space. Seemingly so abstract and complex and yet so simple at the fundamental basic elements.
Instead of forgetting things, imagine a world where you remember things that didn’t happen. Imagine looking at a cup in front of the cereal box. Now, you are 100 percent certain that when you put the cup behind the cereal box the memory of the cup being in front of the cereal box will definitely be the truth. But as soon as you put the cup behind the cereal box how can you be certain it was in front of the cereal box in a world where your memory doesn’t tell you the truth.
Actually physically seeing the cup in front of the cereal box and the memory you have of the cup in front of the cereal box are both pictures, so how can you tell them apart. What difference is the memory you have of seeing something from actually seeing it. Let’s say you go on an excillarating roller coaster ride for the very first time. When the ride is over you can remember the experience of it but you can’t remember the exact experience because remembering the exact experience would involve not having any memory or recollection of you being on that ride before.
I'm just gonna pretend I understood everything and move on with my day
Amazing video 😮😮😮
Hear me out.. The expanding is actually all matter falling back to its origin. The big bang was, matter, rising to a pinnacle like point and held there in a seemingly infinite density. The big bang is, the hold finally giving, and sending everything back down at an intense speed.
But where did the original pinnacle come from tho
@AnthonyBarbian Just as it's unknown now, who really knows. All matter could have started this way at that height. It's mostly a playful idea too, ofc it's just a theory of mine backed up my no actual math 😅
me vuelve loco todo esto, es como si los 3 trabajos presentados tuvieran conexión en la verdad que te da la ciencia es el mejor puzlee jamás inventado y personas lo están descubriendo pieza a pieza
Do the vortices ever change once unobserved?
I love those physics year recap videos ! Thank you. Science gives us progress, progress gives hope, hope makes us act. Virtuous circle
Imagine having this much lore over a bubble
0:14 Perhaps dark energy hasn't learned to release its white paper yet, but the hypothesis is still growing and being tested through time
The associahedron having anything to do with particles is insane, it is originally defined to model different ways of putting matching parenthesis
Excellent, thank you for putting this together and sharing freely!
When are you planning to start a section on chemistry?
For small move in the foundation of physics see you tube video: Electric Charge Physical Definition.
Proud to see DESI headlining the results. Can't wait for the survey to reach completion so we can see if we need a new standard model of cosmology!
No survey needed. There is only one self-contained physical theory of the universe, Plasma Cosmology. All other theories are curve-fitting, not physical -- then they claim validity because it fits the curve of the data.
I am highs cooler and this channel is one of my favorite.
It's always funny to me how intertwined physics and chemistry are, yet physics majors are not required to take chemistry in their first two years. At least here in Seattle .
I also find this quite strange. My own personal opinion of this is that because what really underpins all of chemistry and how atoms and molecules behaves is because of the various physics involved (i.e electromagnetism, quantum mechanics, etc.). Essentially my opinion is that chemistry is the result of physics and not the other way around. This is all just the opinion of an organic chemist.
Thank you so much for these!
Why are you thanking them? This information is useless.
Great vid, thanks for this! It's fun seeing all these concepts talked about in PBS Spacetime brought up here as well!
2) It must be about resonance of difference vortexes. Like, in radiowaves, two symmetrical waves increase the amplitude, and whenever they are asymmetrical, they decrease the amplitude.
"I am proud to be a cosmologist, exploring the "I'm proud to be a cosmologist, diving into the mysteries of the universe. It's a blessing to work on something as fascinating as Dark Energy."
The attenuated nodes are just axial rotors 😢 literally made me tear up.. great coverage
Question about the DESI project: While they are mapping the multimillion galaxies by using red shift to determine distance (assumes red shift is correct at all distances)...are they correcting for the time it took for the light to get to us (along with the galaxy's velocity) so that they determine where each galaxy is now as opposed to just where it as opposed to where it was multiple million years ago? To make it more complex...to find out where they are now (i.e. at one point in time) you then have to take into account their velocity and mass as well as the fact that it takes time for them to interact (both ways) with very distant objects all of which has been going on between the time the light we see was emitted and our detection of it. So, are they doing that? or just looking at where we see them? If not doing that then we really are not seeing the universe the way it is.
Could black holes and neutron stars be creating invisible supersolid fields that push matter and contribute to cosmic rotation?
Can't believe 2024 is almost over. Felt like watching Quanta's 2023 recap few months ago.
I always love these videos and watch them every year! Could you please also do a chemistry one? 🥺
It's possible that the Hubble Tension could be explained by a variation in the cosmological constant, which Einstein added as a means of keeping the universe from collapsing into itself and explaining the steady state universe, which was the common belief about the universe in 1915, when the Cosmological Constant was added on. When learning from Hubble that the universe was expanding, he called it "the greatest blunder of my career"..
your sound effects feels like the subject is changed or went deeper, although we are on the same subject or the same deepness level, i want you to know. love your videos.
Make same video for chemistry please
Thanks for " the breakthrough in physics "videos
is it possible to talk about forces of friction that incresse when the speed increases? what is then the limiting speed for which the forces of friction appear and start increasing?
Can someone elaborate on/explain the amplituhedron? What is its purpose and how was it made? Why do we use it? I think I’m missing some background information on this topic so those things didn’t make sense to me 😅
Time crystals are hella epic!
What i think about the some galaxies are coming together and some are moving apart is multi-point big bang. When we see two galaxies coming together, this can be the intersection sphere of two big bang point, where they are actually expanding from each of their big bang point. But when we see them together they can be seen coming together. And for, expanding galaxies this can be within the expanding sphere of single big bang point.
Great video. Thank you very much. I signed up straight away. Also because I really liked other videos from the channel and of course because the topics are fascinating. I'm looking forward to seeing more.
Is Lamda now a constant or a variable upwards and then not?
The last one is particularly interesting. I wonder if this new mathematical model might lead us to finally understand quantum mechanics. That'd be like the biggest thing of all time.
wow amazing, the last section is new one for me
It would have been terrific to see NIma interviewed.
He’s not female so it looks bad for this glossy video. This magazine/channel is clearly motivated by some sort of DEI agenda, so instead of hearing from Nima, one of the smartest dudes on earth right now, we have to hear from his female grad student about what he did. Oxford did the same thing to Penrose. It’s all gross.
Mad that the quantum vortices at 9:23 resemble cymatics! I'm not one of those sacred geometry hippies but I do believe there is a lot to think about when it comes to natural patterns!
An Abrikosov vortex refers to a vortex of supercurrent within a type-II superconductor, essentially a tiny region where magnetic flux can penetrate the material, forming a stable pattern due to circulating superconducting currents around a normal core;
Dammm that last quantum geometry one is on another levelll 😮
ऊर्जा का चक्र: कृति* ऊर्जा का चक्र, जिसे कृति कहा जाता है, अनंत और निरंतर है। यह चक्र ऊर्जा के विभिन्न रूपों और अवस्थाओं के बीच के संबंध को दर्शाता है। *ऊर्जा की अवस्थाएँ* 1. अव्यक्त ऊर्जा: ऊर्जा की उच्चतम अवस्था, जिसमें ऊर्जा अदृश्य और अनंत है। 2. व्यक्त ऊर्जा: ऊर्जा की मध्यम अवस्था, जिसमें ऊर्जा दृश्य और सीमित है। 3. स्पष्ट ऊर्जा: ऊर्जा की निम्नतम अवस्था, जिसमें ऊर्जा स्पष्ट और व्याकुल है। *ऊर्जा का संचार* 1. विजातीय छोरों का जुड़ना और छुटना। 2. रश्मियों का स्पंदन। 3. ऊर्जा की आवृत्ति में बदलाव। *कृति के नियम* 1. ऊर्जा का संचार अनंत है। 2. ऊर्जा का परिवर्तन निरंतर है। 3. ऊर्जा के विभिन्न रूपों और अवस्थाओं के बीच का संबंध है। *वैज्ञानिक सिद्धांत* 1. ऊर्जा संरक्षण का नियम (Law of Conservation of Energy) 2. थर्मोडायनामिक्स (Thermodynamics) 3. क्वांटम मैकेनिक्स (Quantum Mechanics) . अपारदर्शी से पारदर्शिता और दर्शीता यह संरचना की आवृति मे दो विजातीय छोरों के बीच स्पंदन जो ऊर्जा को व्याकुल कर देता है , वही ऊर्जा, वायु से अग्नि से वरूण से स्फटिक बनती है और आवृति के अनुसार खुद को अवस्था में बनाये रखती है । पदार्थ ऊर्जा की संचित अवस्था हैं । जिस में ऊर्जा स्पष्ट और व्याकुल है । आवृति सिमित होने से ऊर्जा व्याकुल होती हैं । यह सब वर्तमान हैं । यह ऊर्जा का वर्तन हैं अनंत और निरंतरता का जिसके कारण वह चमकती हैं और स्पष्ट ऊर्जा की अवस्था में व्यक्त होती हैं जिस को आप अवलोकन के सिद्धांत से सुपर पोजीशन कहते हो पर वह मानवीय संवेदना का आभास मात्र है । जैसे ध्वनि वैसे प्रकाश ।0=(-0/-0)
I'm so excited to see all the armchair experts in the comments go on about their theory on dark energy/ dark matter.
I'm sure there is no Dunning Krueger effect to be seen in this place...
we're all physicists when it comes to making up theories. when it comes to proving it with mathematics we resign.
The first person to mention Dunning Krueger is almost always the biggest example of it.
Also to be clear, I'm not saying I understand astrophysics in any way. I'm saying that everytime I watch a video that mentions dark matter and energy inevitably gets people who claim they solved it.
@@carterwegler9205 either claim they now know what dark matter is or that physicists are dumb for thinking they know what it is (they don't think that)
Dark energy is a little tricky. A lot of physicists have an idea for what it might be but none of those theories (to my knowledge) have had any solid way of being tested. It's like trying to explain ghosts, but we know it exists because the universe is expanding. We just don't know what it is or how to interact with it.
With quantum geometry would origami work, as I have seen that work with also predicting clusters
If you are traveling to the past, at the same time as traveling @(at, around, about, also, or against) C, it will counteract the time dilation, am I wrong?
Amplituhedron, hypergraphs, morphic resonance,...... of current era.
Epicycles, deferents, eccentrics,....... of pre Copernocan era.
Doesn't that ring a bell?
'We'll never be able to solve this. Just use the crystals, their shapes hold the answers' definitely a sci fi movie subplot.
Awaiting the cs recap 😊
perhaps you will mention it (I'm only 11:12 into it so far) but I wonder do these vortices only spin one way? if not, what defines which direction these vortices spin? And if they can spin different ways- what happens from the total of angular momentums of two squaring vortices? and can it (the spin of the vortices and axis) be directed?
This depends on the method used to generate the vortices. In this experiment, we spun the magnetic field continuously in one direction, and so every vortex is spinning the same way. However, there are other ways to generate vortices that make random numbers of vortices and antivortices, spinning in opposite directions. What makes these vortices special is that they're all identical, spinning with exactly the same speed. So, if a vortex and antivortex touch they, and their angular momentum, annihilate!
@@thomasbland713 Thank you for your work!
I hope "2024's biggest breakthroughs in chemistry" episode coming soon.
When dynamite explodes, is there conversion of matter into heat and energy, and there's an expansion that accompanies the explosion? What if when matter becomes heat (released energy), that is driving the expansion of the universe? Does matter in effect become space over time?
But is matter (in this case planets) breaking down (loss of mass) and releasing heat/ energy?
What if it was pointed at a spiral?
biggest blunder was the nobel prize given in physics and chemistry this year.
What about dark oxygen
Maybe they forgot
I didn't understand the use of the lathe in supersolids.
The cutting edge science really is crazy.
Yes. What could be crazier than saying everything came out of nothing in the Big Bang?
@ believing in magic
@@sloanNYC What exactly is the difference?
@ these are the comments of someone who is a time wasting troll. Move along.
@@sloanNYC Yes, if you can't answer a tough question, move along. Typical.
Could the DESI's deviation be caused by blackholes or something like that? I've know that such 'objects' in space causes the phenomena of gravitational lensing, so maybe they lead to a false impression that the galaxies are moving closer, whereas in reality they aren't? Would someone share their thoughts on this?
Could there be jolt involved, i.e. change in acceleration?
Gravity's acting force on an objection is inversely proportional to the center of gravity. Hence dark matter/gravitational force slowly disappeares with distance. If the big bang's premordial ball is held by gravity then this is the reason why expansion is and much faster especially at the outside part of the ball. Though it can be presumed that some remnant of that ball exists somewhere as it is still bound by the gravity of the ball itself much more likely how a star implodes.
Dark energy is simply the vacuum of space and the pressure it forms on matter. The larger the object the more pressure on the object. This pressure is gravity connecting all the universe.
People who understand three-phase power or the principles of AC power as well as things with the way plasmas and light move in wave-like fashion. There is always a give and take. There is no constant. like gravitational constant . When you look into it it's not constant it's general .Nothing is always accelerating at exactly the same constantly. It changes on all the forces being acted upon it.
Good informative vedio ❤