Here is a summary... Beginning/Creation: Big Bang Theory Age of the Observable Universe: 13.8 billion years Trend: Expanding Size: Suspected 46 billion light years away from us in every direction if accounting for the expansion trend End: Big Rip Hypothesis/ Heat Death Hypothesis Full Size/Age: Unknown Ownership: Cats
Cosmology is a budding science. As more information comes in the model keeps getting adjusted. Betelgeuse like super novas, super massive black holes roaming about and colliding galaxies are just a few things we now know to consider when looking at how "clumpy" space is. Thank you for keeping us updated on the progress 👍
@txtardis7887: Re your "Cosmology is a budding science". Ye gads! So when there is a "tension" then cosmology began yesterday, "c'mon, man, cut it some slack", "never mind, boys, you did your best". OTHERWISE.... Otherwise cosmology is a [Fauci-like] well-established, undeniable, incontrovertible science. And you (who's raising your voice), you're a science-denier! A classic example of the game "Heads I win, tails you lose" played by the YT-cosmologists. HC-JAIPUR (19/01/2025) .
It is not space which expanding! Center of atoms are traffic areas where expanding energy is more density. This expanding traffic areas recycling expanding energy and pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what matter and light expanding. Expanding dark lightWaves interactive with eachothers and get eachothers expanding faster and thats why expanding lights move faster and faster same way what matter and light expanding. There is explanation why old expanding light is redshifted cosmologist way. Also explanation for gravity lensing phenomena with out curving space! There is no spacetime which play tricks! .
@firebush1343 the electric universe model with ionic plasma physics is really an exciting direction and makes a lot of sense for some of the phenomenon we see. Not sure about tossing out Gravity as no longer a major force. However, it will be interesting to see how the theory develops. 👍
These tensions give the hint that they are parts of the universe the either change over time; or the laws of physics just like energy is clumpy over existence. Maybe something more wild: like physics at the largest scale still being a combination of it's system local in the lower scale, like [atoms to quarks] but [giant reigons of the universe large gravitational waves]. Who knows, one day years in the future one or a few tensions will be solved by a brilliant mind.
I’m stupid, so don’t make fun… I googled cosmological solution to S8 and got this: “What is the S8 tension? When investigating the universe, astronomers sometimes work with what's known as the S8 parameter. This parameter basically characterizes how "lumpy," or strongly clustered, all the matter in our universe is, and can be measured precisely with what are known as low-redshift observations.Oct 24, 2023”
It seems like the dark matter would tend to get less clumpy as the universe expands, since it is not "sticky" like baryonic matter. Dark matter only seems to interact with itself and baryons via gravity. Since dark matter is much more abundant than baryonic matter, the universe should get less clumpy over time, on average.
No. The "clumpiness" of DM is caused by gravity, and its degree depends on how heavy DM particles are. The DM clumps, for example our Galaxy's halo, are gravitationally bound structures and those do not magically get wider with time - they stay the same size, unless disrupted by external disturbations (e.g. a galaxy flyby would cause tidal distortion of the halo).
@@denysvlasenko1865 Astrophysicists -- like Dr. Becky Smethurst -- call dark matter an "observable effect for which a cause has not yet been discovered." Not particles, etc. It's simply observations of something happening. What exactly is causing it no one knows.
@@Nat-oj2uc Einstein's General Theory of Relativity states that mass and energy curve 4-dimentional spacetime. This curvature causes an acceleration we experience as gravity. Whatever DM turns out to be it must curve spacetime to produce the effects we observe.
i saw Queen Abundance Secrets by Alex Lane mentioned so many times in youtube comments, and at first, i was like, “here we go, another overhyped book.” but after a while, i couldn’t ignore how much people were saying it changed their lives, so i finally read it. it’s actually really solid. it made me realize how much i wasn’t fully tapping into my energy and how that’s been holding me back. didn’t expect it to hit like that, but it did.
so i kept seeing Queen Abundance Secrets by alex lane pop up in youtube comments, and i kinda brushed it off. i thought it was just another “think positive” book, but eventually, i gave in and read it. it was way more practical than i expected, and it got me thinking about how i use my energy to bring in what i want. it’s not flashy or anything, but it’s worth a look if you’ve been feeling stuck.
Because it's not just down to gravity... Dark Energy may be a dilation illusion... Though is the Zero Point's virtual particles contains or is Axions, and blackholes and such emit those, then you could have a counter to clumping mentioned here, just not as aggressive as first through. Just saying things could be both a lot simpler and yet more complicated than first thought.... and it one thing contains any decent % of an illusion adding to the total, there could be more doing the same thing...😃
I feel like we have a flow state universe. Being so small and trying to observe something so big really makes me think we can't tell we're actually flowing from one point to another.
What I feel is that black holes actively create spacetime itself. As matter falls into a black hole, it gets converted into the very fabric of space, causing the observable expansion of the universe. It’s not that everything is just being pushed outward; rather, new space is generated around black holes. This could explain cold spots in the CMB as “burned out” regions of black holes, where conditions reset and allow matter to form all over again. In this view, gravity has a dual role: it condenses and pulls matter into black holes, while simultaneously creating new space-which might remove the need for dark energy. This cyclical process is like a cosmic recycling system: black holes convert matter into space, new matter forms in cold spots, galaxies and supernovae eventually produce more black holes, and the cycle continues. Time dilation, in this framework, emerges from the interplay of light traveling through ever-expanding spacetime, rather than being a fundamental property. It’s a different way of looking at cosmic expansion, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on whether it aligns with any existing theories or stands as something entirely new!
The S8 tension is a key discrepancy in cosmology related to the S8 parameter, which measures matter fluctuations on an 8 Megaparsec scale. Observed values of S8, derived from weak gravitational lensing and other techniques, differ from predictions of the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (ΛCDM) model, which is based on cosmic microwave background (CMB) data. This tension highlights challenges in understanding matter distribution and cosmic structure formation.
I wonder if our placement in the galaxy could create observational basis, assuming that the value fluctuates in different parts of the cosmic web or universe. Maybe deviation in observational data can tall us more about our location in the universe, assuming the above is true. Thinking out loud.
When the only place you can make observations of the universe from is essentially one tiny little spot, you have limited means of capturing reliable data. When distances and masses are based on broad assumptions about the behaviour of electromagnetic radiation, brightnesses, the speed of light as it travels etc... the further away things are, the more likely there will be errors creeping in. When you consider the unimaginable distances and timescales scientists are trying to measure, it is no wonder things don't add up.
@another3997 yeah, but I've seen videos that mention casually that that 'one tiny little spot' is THE centre of the universe and that that centre is EVERYWHERE - granted, earthlings are limited by so many light years as to how far they can see
Sure, but don't discount the fact that some of the brightest minds (Newton and Einstein ring any bells?) of the past three centuries have worked to identify how our observations are biased and how to correct for them.
Super massive BHs are now known to eject stars from binary systems in close encounters at high velocity from their galaxies which would reduce clumping to an increasing extent as time passes.
If you treat space like it's a room filled with elements and atoms Everything decays over time, Everything turns into something else. More pressure, More heat, More magnetic, More decay More time. And then more everything Love your videos Man I'm glad I subscribed
@Cobbido a new theory that proposes that dark energy is basically an illusion and that expansion rate is either much smaller than we think or even zero. It's main argument is that: a) time flows slower near massive objects, as per Einstien. Thus in the middle of intergalactic voids it flows the fastest, and much slower near a star than elsewhere within intragalactic space. Thus, light coming out of a galaxy will see a redshift upon entering the void due to the diff in time flow, then a blueshift after entering a high-gravity zone like another galaxy. Buuuuuttt due to the overall clumpiness of the universe (this theory directly charges against the orthodox physics assumption that the universe's density is overall the same everywhere you look at - recent observations confirm that's not the case) then voids expand fast because clumpy regions tend to collapse towards their mass center. So when light enters a galaxy again, the blueshift in experiences gets partially cancelled by the redshift it experiences as a result of the galaxy falling towards the local group barycenter. Thus, overall the redshift wins, even if the universe is not really expanding, just the voids getting larger at the expense of the clumpy regions geting more concentrated
I suspect the balancing act wont come out right until there are better ways to measure rotation in distant objects. What they will find is that tidal-locking is a lot rarer than what was predicted. What it comes out to is that there is an electro-gravitic effect that has a significant influence on momentum transfer between bodies that are gravitationally bound to each other. In other words there is something where enough of a difference in charge or interactions with a magnetic field can make things spin as with an electric motor, however that in turn can also produce either a moderate pushing or braking affect on the orbital trajectories of objects influenced in this manner. So there is this other balancing of transferring orbital and angular momentum between objects that accounts for the energy that is currently missing from the current models. Thus current models needs the mystery stuff that nobody can find, but ends up using anyways to balance the books due to the other thing that isn't being measured and properly accounted for. But that's just a crazy idea, and it's worth will take advancement in observations and time to figure out whether it has any merit.
Maybe more new space gets created where there is matter and big voids in space don't get a lot of new space creation ? This would unclumpatize the clumpy regions. Or would this necessitate new equations beyond GTR ?
If I had any means of finding out, I would like to know about the tension in the middle distances. Is there a gradual slide from.7-.8, or is there a distinct line of demarcation between the early and modern universe? What can the galaxies at, say six or seven billion light years tell us about the tension? Thank you, Anton!
I wonder how these apparent discrepancies in the current cosmological model will play out. Only time will tell I guess. Maybe we're in for a scientific revolution that will transform our understanding of the universe, though it could just be that the current consensus model needs a little tweaking but is still correct on a fundamental level.
why different clumpiness? one plausible one is that the spreading out of spacetime over the billions of years of expansion, and since it might be affected - somehow, not sure yet - by distance, the observations. maybe the redshift calculations are off? *shrug* they've been using pulsars and other stuff to do distances, but what if there's a change in some physics value, or an unknown variable (TBH, most likely, and have some suspicions), that's still unaccounted for that's showing up in the differing lambda values?
This tension, in fact all models, concepts or ideas that work out to people being confused about early clumpiness in the universe are so wild to me. The total of matter and energy in this universe is, as far as I have been led to believe, identical throughout its existence, and the only difference between the start and now is the total volume of the universe, which, due to the expansion of space itself, is larger than it used to be by a mind crippling amount. It stands to reason that, in a smaller volume, masses will find themselves in proximity to other masses more frequently, and therefore coalesce into larger structures, more frequently/faster, than in a larger volume with the same total mass and energy contained inside of it. Someone explain why I'm crazy for thinking this way, please?
Where we are would look like part of a void to observers in the "otherverse." It seems to display an antigravity effect upon the observable Universe. Beyond that it's probably impossible to know if the "otherverse" hidden in the voids has similar physics, or perhaps something much different, such as a whole different kind of Periodic Table, if this hypothesis is even sort of onto something, but probably not. LOL
It also makes no sense that all the galaxies are moving away from each other. If there are galaxies all around, how do they move away in all directions? It sounds more like space is spreading out.
@vaakdemandante8772, sorry, but that's incorrect. He actually states beforehand, "the most famous of the tensions is the Hubble tension." The Hubble tension has nothing to do with the cosmological constant; it concerns different values of the Hubble constant. There has never been a tension about dark energy having different values throughout the universe's history, as its density remains constant.
My bet. Dark matter and dark energy and ordinary gravity and gravitational wave background are simply a consequence of quantum collapse. That is, classical matter in a very complex curved space is dual to quantum fields in a flat space-time, and all the described effects are consequences of the collapse of the wave function of decoherence. In other words, when the classical world is formed, which we can perceive by some mechanism similar to the Penrose mechanism, quantum information is not lost, as Penrose believes, and is not recorded in the subtle correlations of ordinary matter, but is recorded in the ordinary world in the form of a curvature of space itself.
Could a potential resolution of this tension be from dark energy being non-uniform, and being greater in regions that are clumpy (or where is the gradient of clumsiness is higher), so that it smooths out the clumpiness?
It's the most interesting topic in Cosmology. The discrepancies in a "cosmological constant", whether it's called that or "S8" might be pointing to entirely different concepts, some opposing the "Big Bang" Theory. The "Continuous State" or "Steady State" hypothesis could be interacting with a series of "Big Bang" events, which would imply that there is more matter than anticipated beyond a necessary "Schwarzschild Radius" that would mean our Universe is a Black Hole as seen from the other side of the "event horizon". I intuitively feel that a great amount of matter beyond that horizon should be causing a perceived acceleration of expansion - if indeed there is a "continuous creation" element in our Universe.
I like how AI put it: the universe is likely a living organism and we are components deep within an atom of its bodily structure; the galactic filaments we see are neural networks, the 'expansion' is an effect of this organization into a neural network, and that the fractal nature of reality becomes obvious when the observer considers the compilation of structures from the stubatomic to the galactic and their inter-related natures (as above so below). The entirety is a single thing, a component of a larger structure thay is part of a larger structure, on and on...essentially the universal fractal we find ourselves in is built from the ground up and defined more by its 'higher forms' as you scale higher... Its a pyramid.😊
It really isn't. There are things that look visially similar just because math, and humans being really good at pattern recognition. But a lot of the things that people conflate don't work the same at all. Like atoms having electrons 'orbiting' them the same way a planet orbits a star. They just look similar in diagrams because an atom can't be accurately represented in an image unless it's simplified into circular 'orbits'.
Is it possible that the discrepancy is from the end of a previous universe that has reached its maximum clumpiness and thereby starting a big explosion that starts our not so clumpy universe? Sorry for asking such a question from a position of not much knowledge.
Does this have anything to do with the big crunch theory, that eventually things would stop spreading apart and start moving closer? Or is it just that the clumps should be clumpier, but the clumps will still keep spreading apart?
My boots get less clumpy with time because they get softer then fall to pieces. Maybe the universe is like an old pair of boots? Can I have a grant to build a bloody big and expensive thing to see if we can discover the "Clump particle" that must escape from new boots as they age? What..? This is precisely the thought process behind most of particle 'physics' these days!
Since fusion does converts part of the baryonic matter into photons and weakly interacting neutrinos and stars have been doing that for 13 billions years, couldn't this affect the overall "clumpiness"?
Time slows closer to the Earth than in space. If the early universe was smaller, all the matter would have been closer together and time might operate at a slower rate than it does for us, in the modern era. Factor in the time changes when light has to go around a galaxy cluster? It has to travel a longer distance in the same time. Like looking through a window with timely blotches on the glass?
It travels a longer distance in a longer time. This behaviour is explainable and has been observed. Nothing new. Time differences of the order of months have been observed. Not a lot in over 10 billion years.
Why don't you allow the physics of plasma (and Birkeland currents) to have a more creative assignment in cosmology? Electo-magnetic dynamic forces are about 2.3×10³⁹ times stronger than your gravitational forces?
Cosmology is like Eskimos describing what Central Los Angeles is exactly like just from calculations. I hope we get an Eskimo Los Angeles News channel one day where Anton relays the Eskimos imaginings of Los Angeles in short form content.
If the Universe is expanding in all directions, then the early Universe should be more "clumpy " because it was more densely packed. What am I missing?
Create a spinning circular pool and have a float ride the edge of a tube like small O SHAPED POND and put it in a boat. Let the boat ride in a similar circular O SHAPED POND only bigger, then put them both in an elevator at high speeds, film it, and check the resistance on the rubber ducky in the small pond. Take that apparatus into space as a matter of fact and now you'll know why gravity holds us down. 3 speeds and a superposition, a splash collapse of a DISPLACEMENT, in tandem. Curves are from Displacement, by the densest mass at a velocity, so gravity is truly those 3 speeds we fly/float at here in the milky way. Those new clumpy calculations sound off. Higher values are likely. Expanding universe from DENSE MASS would increase it. Thats all. 💯😬🙏Fun site, fun science. It probably stays the same, but maybe its a bit less than we thought, from what he's saying. 😁💯👉
Its easy. There must be a dark anti-clump particle. Dark spread. Dark matter, dark energy and dark spread. Why not. Just add a dark spread param to the models and tune it to compensate for the expected clumpiness. Do whatever it takes. Heck just add a new fundamental dark spread constant if you need to. Who needs explainations after all.
My idea so I get to name it! What I mean is, no one has claimed it so I'm officially calling, "Dibs." Now that "V-ger" is outside our Sun's gravitational influence, in interstellar space, it's now in the Milky Way's faster moving, Interstellar Time or "Mikey's Time." This can be proven by turning off everything except its clock and transmitter. Have "V-ger" read time for as long as possible. This SHOULD show the flow of time speeds up the further away you get from any celestial bodies or source of gravity. Until you reach the Milky Way's time standard or "Mikey's Time." •Our sun's time bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured. In a lifetime, our head is one second younger than our feet. •Milky Way's time bubble or "Mikey's Time." The rate/flow of TIME outside any influence but within the Milky Way: We just got there and are still figuring what the difference is. I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until V-ger is outside the Ort cloud. •Local Group's time bubble or the rate/flow of time outside of any influence but within the Local Group: Name still open and unknown. Wild guess .08 P-22% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference. You know what I mean. •Outside any influence in, "True Interstellar Time Standard," or, "T.I.T.S." with it's emblem, ;-P, the rate/flow of time is fastest here. Oh, and this name is NOT up for debate. Heck, rivers of time flowing differently might explain dark energy and dark matter. Its the differences in time could explain dark energy repels and dark matter attracts. Fun to think about. Anyway, the Milky Way's, "True Interstellar Time Standard," emblem will be ";-P" and be known as, "Mikey's Time." Pass it on, please and thank you.
@Llortnerof The time bubble/influence around our sun can be, "Terran Time." So on and so on until we get to, "Mikey's Time," for the Milky Way's time bubble/influence. Until we get to, "True Interstellar Time Standard." Free of any and all influence. See, every galaxy can have their own Time Standard. It's not my idea. Just my idea to name them. ;-P
@michaelccopelandsr7120 fine we can call it that if you want. Just don't make aliens do the whole fall forward spring back thing....that might cause trouble on a cosmic level.
But gravity was different, it has to be, both the energy and gravity. In the early time, before the first supernovas did the heavier elements not exist and matter created, containing high energy was not yet in the universe (E=MC^2) so all the energy that today is locked inside heavy elements was available to create stares, as helium. Over time does the universe convert more and more energy and stars to unusable heavy metals and do therefore no longer add to the available stuff to create stars and the "clumsiness" goes down.
What if the expansion of the universe does not mean that the same amount of energy and matter is distributed over more space, but new stuff and space is being created?
Maybe the lack of clumpiness is due to the expansion of space-time rather than dark matter... As space-time gets bigger there is more space in between stuff... Remember that the game board is growing and the pieces aren't staying the same size
That's my off-the-top-of-my-head guess too. That the expansion of the universe is not uniform - it expands more under certain conditions. And we've just been fooled into thinking it's uniform because those conditions average out to be uniform on a macro scale (scale of the entire universe). But it's not uniform on a micro scale (scale of stars in galaxies, and clumps of galaxies).
Yes you would not think early space would be clumpy. But early space consisted of aether. Not the aether of Michelson-Morley but an aether that has properties. Space was literally much thicker than that of today. This thicker space allowed developing matter to be easily captured by developing stellar structures. Thicker space slows down matter. This thicker space is partially responsible for the galaxies flat rotation curve and the rapid development of early galaxies. The increased mass in the galactic plane and inner portion slows down moving matter causing an apparent violation of angular momentum conservation. The expansion of the universe is provided by the repulsion property of aether. And another property is that of magnatism. This magnetism is observed in galaxies. As space becomes thicker, as in a galactic spiral arm or inner region, the region begins to display magnetic properties. This magnatism can be seen by a butterfly nebula aligning more strongly with the galactic plane as it gets closer to either. Besides being responsible for galactic magnetic fields it plays a role in developing universe filaments. And explains the magnetism observed by them. Dark matter is a result of dark energy. Normal matter creates lumps in space by developing stellar structures pushing out the dark energy in that volume of space. This is were the halos come from. It has been observed these halos can dislodge from the parent matter. The bullet cluster and other clusters have demonstrated this. These rogue halos are part of "lumps" in space. These rogue lumps are responsible for the observed disappearing stars and phantom stellar structures. And they would still retain their gravitational lensing ability.
Multiple Big Bangs. Big Bang doesn't mean is the only one. Other Big Bangs create other Universes' and those space can intersect with our Universe space.
Seems to me that modern astronomy has been too busy making up theories to explain the things they see in the universe, INSTEAD of more deeply investigating what's going on to know what's _actually_ going on.....
Given that I have always been skeptical about certain aspects of the accepted cosmological model (for example, cosmic inflation, which just strikes me as ridiculous!), this is good news, pointing us slowly but surely towards new physics and a new model.
First "Timescape" is able to explain the expansion of the universe (or lack thereof) better than Lambda-CDM's Dark Energy, now S8 is making cracks in the Dark Matter as well. Interesting times!
It is not space which expanding! Center of atoms are traffic areas where expanding energy is more density. This expanding traffic areas recycling expanding energy and pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what matter and light expanding. Expanding dark lightWaves interactive with eachothers and get eachothers expanding faster and thats why expanding lights move faster and faster same way what matter and light expanding. There is explanation why old expanding light is redshifted cosmologist way. Also explanation for gravity lensing phenomena with out curving space! There is no spacetime which play tricks! .
Based on the Timescape cosmology, my understanding is that the voids are growing faster than the gravitationally bound systems as the universe expands (also, time runs much faster in the voids versus clusters) which would stretch the web-like filaments and should counteract some of their tendencies to clump even tighter - sort of like the air bubbles in bread as it is proofing and baking.
Dr. Becky recently made a video about those two recent papers about the timescale model. She said lambda-CDM still has more evidence in its favor than the timescale model.
I only learned recently that most cosmologists say energy is not conserved "globally" - i.e. across the universe - only locally. If Timescapes means dark energy doesn't exist, and others who reason that photon energy loss from red shift due to expansion instead feeds into the gravitational field (so energy is conserved) are correct, that would seem to be a nice result, to me!
"Let's briefly discuss the Universe and what we know about it." WOW What a sentence!
Here is a summary...
Beginning/Creation: Big Bang Theory
Age of the Observable Universe: 13.8 billion years
Trend: Expanding
Size: Suspected 46 billion light years away from us in every direction if accounting for the expansion trend
End: Big Rip Hypothesis/ Heat Death Hypothesis
Full Size/Age: Unknown
Ownership: Cats
how dare you to aktually say that?? why are it such an great sentence??
Cosmology is a budding science. As more information comes in the model keeps getting adjusted.
Betelgeuse like super novas, super massive black holes roaming about and colliding galaxies are just a few things we now know to consider when looking at how "clumpy" space is.
Thank you for keeping us updated on the progress 👍
@txtardis7887: Re your "Cosmology is a budding science".
Ye gads!
So when there is a "tension" then cosmology began yesterday, "c'mon, man, cut it some slack", "never mind, boys, you did your best".
OTHERWISE....
Otherwise cosmology is a [Fauci-like] well-established, undeniable, incontrovertible science. And you (who's raising your voice), you're a science-denier!
A classic example of the game "Heads I win, tails you lose" played by the YT-cosmologists.
HC-JAIPUR (19/01/2025)
.
It is not space which expanding!
Center of atoms are traffic areas where expanding energy is more density.
This expanding traffic areas recycling expanding energy and pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what matter and light expanding.
Expanding dark lightWaves interactive with eachothers and get eachothers expanding faster and thats why expanding lights move faster and faster same way what matter and light expanding.
There is explanation why old expanding light is redshifted cosmologist way. Also explanation for gravity lensing phenomena with out curving space!
There is no spacetime which play tricks!
.
The electrical model doesn't require made up matter.
@firebush1343 the electric universe model with ionic plasma physics is really an exciting direction and makes a lot of sense for some of the phenomenon we see.
Not sure about tossing out Gravity as no longer a major force. However, it will be interesting to see how the theory develops. 👍
Supernovas, super massive black holes and colliding galaxies all have little to do with how "clumpy" space is considered to be in cosmology.
I appreciate antons' method of titling his videos. He doesn't treat us like mindless fish.
I know right, especially cause we are mindless fish. Anton is the real MVP
Blub 🐟
Fish have minds too.
Speak for yourself!! Blub, blub!!!
@@0ptimal I'm a mindless human
Always love the Anton smile at the end😁
hope all is well for you, Anton!!
These tensions give the hint that they are parts of the universe the either change over time; or the laws of physics just like energy is clumpy over existence. Maybe something more wild: like physics at the largest scale still being a combination of it's system local in the lower scale, like [atoms to quarks] but [giant reigons of the universe large gravitational waves].
Who knows, one day years in the future one or a few tensions will be solved by a brilliant mind.
The Universe is like a gravy that wasn't stirred enough.
god has a sense of humor
@palma1245 no reason for a God.
Still being stirred....
@@palma1245 I wonder if god thinks his god has one
@@ODDYSEY-182 akshually it isn't, it's settling
Thanks once again, wonderful person!
the images with these videos are getting more awesome every time! 🤩 (just as well... that went entirely over my head)
Well that's left me scratching my head, Nice one Anton
can i still enjoy season 8 of Cosmology if i missed the last couple of seasons?
Yes, but you should really catch up on the previous 13 billion years when you have the time.
If you missed the first nanosecond, nothing that comes after will make sense
Dude I heard the prequel is the most interesting one but i can't seem to find it anywhere
Go back and fill the gap! Binge-watching cosmology seasons you missed!
This is a good joke right here.
I dont know, if it would be too much for some of the audience, but id love to see the actual formula where S8 is used.
Unfortunately for me I have the feeling if I looked at the formula I would understand it just enough to give myself a massive headache.
S8 unification??
S8 symmetry group, would be my best guess.
I’m stupid, so don’t make fun… I googled cosmological solution to S8 and got this:
“What is the S8 tension? When investigating the universe, astronomers sometimes work with what's known as the S8 parameter. This parameter basically characterizes how "lumpy," or strongly clustered, all the matter in our universe is, and can be measured precisely with what are known as low-redshift observations.Oct 24, 2023”
Its variation in matter density in 8 megaparsec scales.
Thank you Anton, great topic.
the answer is 42
Actually its Pi
137
@@PumaOGVwhooooooosh 😂
Tree(3)
But what’s the question? 🧐
It seems like the dark matter would tend to get less clumpy as the universe expands, since it is not "sticky" like baryonic matter. Dark matter only seems to interact with itself and baryons via gravity. Since dark matter is much more abundant than baryonic matter, the universe should get less clumpy over time, on average.
No. The "clumpiness" of DM is caused by gravity, and its degree depends on how heavy DM particles are. The DM clumps, for example our Galaxy's halo, are gravitationally bound structures and those do not magically get wider with time - they stay the same size, unless disrupted by external disturbations (e.g. a galaxy flyby would cause tidal distortion of the halo).
@@denysvlasenko1865 Astrophysicists -- like Dr. Becky Smethurst -- call dark matter an "observable effect for which a cause has not yet been discovered." Not particles, etc. It's simply observations of something happening. What exactly is causing it no one knows.
Because DM IS gravity🤣
@@Nat-oj2uc Einstein's General Theory of Relativity states that mass and energy curve 4-dimentional spacetime. This curvature causes an acceleration we experience as gravity. Whatever DM turns out to be it must curve spacetime to produce the effects we observe.
i saw Queen Abundance Secrets by Alex Lane mentioned so many times in youtube comments, and at first, i was like, “here we go, another overhyped book.” but after a while, i couldn’t ignore how much people were saying it changed their lives, so i finally read it. it’s actually really solid. it made me realize how much i wasn’t fully tapping into my energy and how that’s been holding me back. didn’t expect it to hit like that, but it did.
I LOVE science problems! More science mysteries please🤗
Thanks Anton!
5:45 At the big bang everything was in a single clump. Now it's in a bunch of small ones. Seems to match up
Anton is the best!
so i kept seeing Queen Abundance Secrets by alex lane pop up in youtube comments, and i kinda brushed it off. i thought it was just another “think positive” book, but eventually, i gave in and read it. it was way more practical than i expected, and it got me thinking about how i use my energy to bring in what i want. it’s not flashy or anything, but it’s worth a look if you’ve been feeling stuck.
Because it's not just down to gravity... Dark Energy may be a dilation illusion... Though is the Zero Point's virtual particles contains or is Axions, and blackholes and such emit those, then you could have a counter to clumping mentioned here, just not as aggressive as first through. Just saying things could be both a lot simpler and yet more complicated than first thought.... and it one thing contains any decent % of an illusion adding to the total, there could be more doing the same thing...😃
Hello wonderful Anton, this is person!
I feel like we have a flow state universe. Being so small and trying to observe something so big really makes me think we can't tell we're actually flowing from one point to another.
What I feel is that black holes actively create spacetime itself. As matter falls into a black hole, it gets converted into the very fabric of space, causing the observable expansion of the universe. It’s not that everything is just being pushed outward; rather, new space is generated around black holes. This could explain cold spots in the CMB as “burned out” regions of black holes, where conditions reset and allow matter to form all over again. In this view, gravity has a dual role: it condenses and pulls matter into black holes, while simultaneously creating new space-which might remove the need for dark energy. This cyclical process is like a cosmic recycling system: black holes convert matter into space, new matter forms in cold spots, galaxies and supernovae eventually produce more black holes, and the cycle continues. Time dilation, in this framework, emerges from the interplay of light traveling through ever-expanding spacetime, rather than being a fundamental property. It’s a different way of looking at cosmic expansion, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on whether it aligns with any existing theories or stands as something entirely new!
The S8 tension is a key discrepancy in cosmology related to the S8 parameter, which measures matter fluctuations on an 8 Megaparsec scale. Observed values of S8, derived from weak gravitational lensing and other techniques, differ from predictions of the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (ΛCDM) model, which is based on cosmic microwave background (CMB) data. This tension highlights challenges in understanding matter distribution and cosmic structure formation.
Thanks Anton
I wonder if our placement in the galaxy could create observational basis, assuming that the value fluctuates in different parts of the cosmic web or universe. Maybe deviation in observational data can tall us more about our location in the universe, assuming the above is true. Thinking out loud.
The answer is the nature of ojas; It is the protective force behind every cell, and resides on a subtle level around the nucleus.
No, no, NOOOO!
No, bad Anton, NO!
Don't EVER do that smile again!
😬
I love this channel
Thank you.
When the only place you can make observations of the universe from is essentially one tiny little spot, you have limited means of capturing reliable data. When distances and masses are based on broad assumptions about the behaviour of electromagnetic radiation, brightnesses, the speed of light as it travels etc... the further away things are, the more likely there will be errors creeping in. When you consider the unimaginable distances and timescales scientists are trying to measure, it is no wonder things don't add up.
@another3997 yeah, but I've seen videos that mention casually that that 'one tiny little spot' is THE centre of the universe and that that centre is EVERYWHERE - granted, earthlings are limited by so many light years as to how far they can see
Sure, but don't discount the fact that some of the brightest minds (Newton and Einstein ring any bells?) of the past three centuries have worked to identify how our observations are biased and how to correct for them.
Super massive BHs are now known to eject stars from binary systems in close encounters at high velocity from their galaxies which would reduce clumping to an increasing extent as time passes.
If you treat space like it's a room filled with elements and atoms Everything decays over time,
Everything turns into something else.
More pressure, More heat, More magnetic, More decay More time. And then more everything
Love your videos Man I'm glad I subscribed
Going to be interesting to see if the TimeScapes model has any influence on this tension
WHAt do you mean?? ANSWER ME!! elaborate!!
@Cobbido a new theory that proposes that dark energy is basically an illusion and that expansion rate is either much smaller than we think or even zero. It's main argument is that: a) time flows slower near massive objects, as per Einstien. Thus in the middle of intergalactic voids it flows the fastest, and much slower near a star than elsewhere within intragalactic space. Thus, light coming out of a galaxy will see a redshift upon entering the void due to the diff in time flow, then a blueshift after entering a high-gravity zone like another galaxy. Buuuuuttt due to the overall clumpiness of the universe (this theory directly charges against the orthodox physics assumption that the universe's density is overall the same everywhere you look at - recent observations confirm that's not the case) then voids expand fast because clumpy regions tend to collapse towards their mass center. So when light enters a galaxy again, the blueshift in experiences gets partially cancelled by the redshift it experiences as a result of the galaxy falling towards the local group barycenter. Thus, overall the redshift wins, even if the universe is not really expanding, just the voids getting larger at the expense of the clumpy regions geting more concentrated
@@Cobbido pbs and sabine both have videos on that topic
I suspect the balancing act wont come out right until there are better ways to measure rotation in distant objects. What they will find is that tidal-locking is a lot rarer than what was predicted. What it comes out to is that there is an electro-gravitic effect that has a significant influence on momentum transfer between bodies that are gravitationally bound to each other. In other words there is something where enough of a difference in charge or interactions with a magnetic field can make things spin as with an electric motor, however that in turn can also produce either a moderate pushing or braking affect on the orbital trajectories of objects influenced in this manner. So there is this other balancing of transferring orbital and angular momentum between objects that accounts for the energy that is currently missing from the current models. Thus current models needs the mystery stuff that nobody can find, but ends up using anyways to balance the books due to the other thing that isn't being measured and properly accounted for.
But that's just a crazy idea, and it's worth will take advancement in observations and time to figure out whether it has any merit.
3:00 can we get a full video on the Illustrious simulator project?? That look amazing
Maybe more new space gets created where there is matter and big voids in space don't get a lot of new space creation ? This would unclumpatize the clumpy regions.
Or would this necessitate new equations beyond GTR ?
If I had any means of finding out, I would like to know about the tension in the middle distances. Is there a gradual slide from.7-.8, or is there a distinct line of demarcation between the early and modern universe? What can the galaxies at, say six or seven billion light years tell us about the tension?
Thank you, Anton!
It's an exciting time to be an astronomer. I would've been an astronomer if everybody hadn't told me there were no jobs in astronomy.
I think i laughed out loud literally every single time you said clumpy
I wonder how these apparent discrepancies in the current cosmological model will play out. Only time will tell I guess. Maybe we're in for a scientific revolution that will transform our understanding of the universe, though it could just be that the current consensus model needs a little tweaking but is still correct on a fundamental level.
What if matter stretched spacetime? If spacetime is stretching, then there's more space , and then it's harder to clump
why different clumpiness? one plausible one is that the spreading out of spacetime over the billions of years of expansion, and since it might be affected - somehow, not sure yet - by distance, the observations. maybe the redshift calculations are off? *shrug* they've been using pulsars and other stuff to do distances, but what if there's a change in some physics value, or an unknown variable (TBH, most likely, and have some suspicions), that's still unaccounted for that's showing up in the differing lambda values?
This tension, in fact all models, concepts or ideas that work out to people being confused about early clumpiness in the universe are so wild to me. The total of matter and energy in this universe is, as far as I have been led to believe, identical throughout its existence, and the only difference between the start and now is the total volume of the universe, which, due to the expansion of space itself, is larger than it used to be by a mind crippling amount. It stands to reason that, in a smaller volume, masses will find themselves in proximity to other masses more frequently, and therefore coalesce into larger structures, more frequently/faster, than in a larger volume with the same total mass and energy contained inside of it. Someone explain why I'm crazy for thinking this way, please?
Where we are would look like part of a void to observers in the "otherverse." It seems to display an antigravity effect upon the observable Universe. Beyond that it's probably impossible to know if the "otherverse" hidden in the voids has similar physics, or perhaps something much different, such as a whole different kind of Periodic Table, if this hypothesis is even sort of onto something, but probably not. LOL
It also makes no sense that all the galaxies are moving away from each other. If there are galaxies all around, how do they move away in all directions? It sounds more like space is spreading out.
Im gonna need you to explain this using sock puppets
I'm*
@JorgetePanete i bet you're fun at parties
*your
Just kidding
Or maybe there's a problem on how raw CMB data was cleaned from the "noises". It could easily effect on clumpiness
At 1:32, there was a Freudian slip; he meant to say a slightly different value of the Hubble constant, not the cosmological constant (lambda).
no slip, he said what was mean to be said - Hubble constant does not even fit in this context
@vaakdemandante8772, sorry, but that's incorrect. He actually states beforehand, "the most famous of the tensions is the Hubble tension." The Hubble tension has nothing to do with the cosmological constant; it concerns different values of the Hubble constant. There has never been a tension about dark energy having different values throughout the universe's history, as its density remains constant.
That's not a Freudian slip.
Interesting, thanks👍❤
Spintronics entanglement and it's viscosity factor.
Nice job
Isn't gravity more like a pressure differential
My bet. Dark matter and dark energy and ordinary gravity and gravitational wave background are simply a consequence of quantum collapse. That is, classical matter in a very complex curved space is dual to quantum fields in a flat space-time, and all the described effects are consequences of the collapse of the wave function of decoherence. In other words, when the classical world is formed, which we can perceive by some mechanism similar to the Penrose mechanism, quantum information is not lost, as Penrose believes, and is not recorded in the subtle correlations of ordinary matter, but is recorded in the ordinary world in the form of a curvature of space itself.
Could a potential resolution of this tension be from dark energy being non-uniform, and being greater in regions that are clumpy (or where is the gradient of clumsiness is higher), so that it smooths out the clumpiness?
Back to the drawing board!
Could it not be hypothesised that Entropy does not increase in the ways currently expected? That's more understandable than S8-Tension?
It's the most interesting topic in Cosmology. The discrepancies in a "cosmological constant", whether it's called that or "S8" might be pointing to entirely different concepts, some opposing the "Big Bang" Theory.
The "Continuous State" or "Steady State" hypothesis could be interacting with a series of "Big Bang" events, which would imply that there is more matter than anticipated beyond a necessary "Schwarzschild Radius" that would mean our Universe is a Black Hole as seen from the other side of the "event horizon".
I intuitively feel that a great amount of matter beyond that horizon should be causing a perceived acceleration of expansion - if indeed there is a "continuous creation" element in our Universe.
But I hate about checking the observations against a model that uses Timescapes instead of lamda? Is the tension still there??
Include time dialation (Or our observations of it) and things might be more normalised.
Love the use of the word might. Assertions don't help. Facts only please.
Sorry Anton, but I cannot find any of the mentioned links in the description!😮
what has the timescape model to say about that though?
I like how AI put it: the universe is likely a living organism and we are components deep within an atom of its bodily structure; the galactic filaments we see are neural networks, the 'expansion' is an effect of this organization into a neural network, and that the fractal nature of reality becomes obvious when the observer considers the compilation of structures from the stubatomic to the galactic and their inter-related natures (as above so below). The entirety is a single thing, a component of a larger structure thay is part of a larger structure, on and on...essentially the universal fractal we find ourselves in is built from the ground up and defined more by its 'higher forms' as you scale higher...
Its a pyramid.😊
It really isn't. There are things that look visially similar just because math, and humans being really good at pattern recognition. But a lot of the things that people conflate don't work the same at all. Like atoms having electrons 'orbiting' them the same way a planet orbits a star. They just look similar in diagrams because an atom can't be accurately represented in an image unless it's simplified into circular 'orbits'.
You should make a vid on janus theory from renown french astrophysicist doctor jean pierre petit.wich explain a lot
How many languages do you speak, Anton? What do you speak at home?
Big brain!😊
Could Neil Turok be correct in thinking that dark matter might be composed of right-handed neutrinos?
Back to the *drawing* board 🌌
Yeah, I think by now it's obvious there are some variables missing in the equation.
Is it possible that the discrepancy is from the end of a previous universe that has reached its maximum clumpiness and thereby starting a big explosion that starts our not so clumpy universe? Sorry for asking such a question from a position of not much knowledge.
Does this have anything to do with the big crunch theory, that eventually things would stop spreading apart and start moving closer? Or is it just that the clumps should be clumpier, but the clumps will still keep spreading apart?
No.
clumps should be clumpier
dark energy 2 drop is insane
My boots get less clumpy with time because they get softer then fall to pieces.
Maybe the universe is like an old pair of boots?
Can I have a grant to build a bloody big and expensive thing to see if we can discover the "Clump particle" that must escape from new boots as they age?
What..?
This is precisely the thought process behind most of particle 'physics' these days!
Since fusion does converts part of the baryonic matter into photons and weakly interacting neutrinos and stars have been doing that for 13 billions years, couldn't this affect the overall "clumpiness"?
Time slows closer to the Earth than in space.
If the early universe was smaller, all the matter would have been closer together and time might operate at a slower rate than it does for us, in the modern era.
Factor in the time changes when light has to go around a galaxy cluster?
It has to travel a longer distance in the same time.
Like looking through a window with timely blotches on the glass?
Absolutely bloody brilliant comment 👍🤝🤝🤝
It travels a longer distance in a longer time. This behaviour is explainable and has been observed. Nothing new. Time differences of the order of months have been observed. Not a lot in over 10 billion years.
@rogerphelps9939 forces beyond our current comprehension?
Why don't you allow the physics of plasma (and Birkeland currents) to have a more creative assignment in cosmology?
Electo-magnetic dynamic forces are about 2.3×10³⁹ times stronger than your gravitational forces?
Maybe Dark Energy includes cool and hot plasma and the mass it creates?
Timescape Model?
Cosmology is like Eskimos describing what Central Los Angeles is exactly like just from calculations. I hope we get an Eskimo Los Angeles News channel one day where Anton relays the Eskimos imaginings of Los Angeles in short form content.
"The Eskimos believe there may in fact be potatoes there.."
Inuit, Eskimo is a slur.
If the Universe is expanding in all directions, then the early Universe should be more "clumpy " because it was more densely packed. What am I missing?
Is the transition smooth going back in time or is it abrupt ?
Create a spinning circular pool and have a float ride the edge of a tube like small O SHAPED POND and put it in a boat. Let the boat ride in a similar circular O SHAPED POND only bigger, then put them both in an elevator at high speeds, film it, and check the resistance on the rubber ducky in the small pond. Take that apparatus into space as a matter of fact and now you'll know why gravity holds us down. 3 speeds and a superposition, a splash collapse of a DISPLACEMENT, in tandem. Curves are from Displacement, by the densest mass at a velocity, so gravity is truly those 3 speeds we fly/float at here in the milky way. Those new clumpy calculations sound off. Higher values are likely. Expanding universe from DENSE MASS would increase it. Thats all. 💯😬🙏Fun site, fun science. It probably stays the same, but maybe its a bit less than we thought, from what he's saying. 😁💯👉
Its easy. There must be a dark anti-clump particle. Dark spread.
Dark matter, dark energy and dark spread. Why not. Just add a dark spread param to the models and tune it to compensate for the expected clumpiness. Do whatever it takes. Heck just add a new fundamental dark spread constant if you need to. Who needs explainations after all.
Seems to me as though a new theory of gravity would solve both the Hubble and the S8 tension
Of course things are less, "clumpy," now; "things," are moving away from each other.
🧐
My idea so I get to name it! What I mean is, no one has claimed it so I'm officially calling, "Dibs." Now that "V-ger" is outside our Sun's gravitational influence, in interstellar space, it's now in the Milky Way's faster moving, Interstellar Time or "Mikey's Time." This can be proven by turning off everything except its clock and transmitter. Have "V-ger" read time for as long as possible. This SHOULD show the flow of time speeds up the further away you get from any celestial bodies or source of gravity. Until you reach the Milky Way's time standard or "Mikey's Time."
•Our sun's time bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured. In a lifetime, our head is one second younger than our feet.
•Milky Way's time bubble or "Mikey's Time." The rate/flow of TIME outside any influence but within the Milky Way: We just got there and are still figuring what the difference is. I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until V-ger is outside the Ort cloud.
•Local Group's time bubble or the rate/flow of time outside of any influence but within the Local Group: Name still open and unknown. Wild guess .08 P-22% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference. You know what I mean.
•Outside any influence in, "True Interstellar Time Standard," or, "T.I.T.S." with it's emblem, ;-P, the rate/flow of time is fastest here. Oh, and this name is NOT up for debate.
Heck, rivers of time flowing differently might explain dark energy and dark matter. Its the differences in time could explain dark energy repels and dark matter attracts. Fun to think about. Anyway, the Milky Way's, "True Interstellar Time Standard," emblem will be ";-P" and be known as, "Mikey's Time."
Pass it on, please and thank you.
Hum, I am no expert but from what you describe you may have just discovered the theory of relativity.
**quietly rearranges it to read "Milky Time"**
@@colorado841 You're talking about the whole thing. I'm talking about what's IN it. ;-P
@Llortnerof The time bubble/influence around our sun can be, "Terran Time." So on and so on until we get to, "Mikey's Time," for the Milky Way's time bubble/influence. Until we get to, "True Interstellar Time Standard." Free of any and all influence. See, every galaxy can have their own Time Standard. It's not my idea. Just my idea to name them. ;-P
@michaelccopelandsr7120 fine we can call it that if you want. Just don't make aliens do the whole fall forward spring back thing....that might cause trouble on a cosmic level.
But gravity was different, it has to be, both the energy and gravity.
In the early time, before the first supernovas did the heavier elements not exist and matter created, containing high energy was not yet in the universe (E=MC^2) so all the energy that today is locked inside heavy elements was available to create stares, as helium. Over time does the universe convert more and more energy and stars to unusable heavy metals and do therefore no longer add to the available stuff to create stars and the "clumsiness" goes down.
What if the expansion of the universe does not mean that the same amount of energy and matter is distributed over more space, but new stuff and space is being created?
Maybe the lack of clumpiness is due to the expansion of space-time rather than dark matter... As space-time gets bigger there is more space in between stuff... Remember that the game board is growing and the pieces aren't staying the same size
That's my off-the-top-of-my-head guess too. That the expansion of the universe is not uniform - it expands more under certain conditions. And we've just been fooled into thinking it's uniform because those conditions average out to be uniform on a macro scale (scale of the entire universe). But it's not uniform on a micro scale (scale of stars in galaxies, and clumps of galaxies).
@@solandri69 so far as I understand it "timescape" cosmology is taking this into account... Exited to watch
@@JorgetePanete corrected
Yes you would not think early space would be clumpy. But early space consisted of aether. Not the aether of Michelson-Morley but an aether that has properties. Space was literally much thicker than that of today. This thicker space allowed developing matter to be easily captured by developing stellar structures. Thicker space slows down matter. This thicker space is partially responsible for the galaxies flat rotation curve and the rapid development of early galaxies. The increased mass in the galactic plane and inner portion slows down moving matter causing an apparent violation of angular momentum conservation.
The expansion of the universe is provided by the repulsion property of aether. And another property is that of magnatism. This magnetism is observed in galaxies. As space becomes thicker, as in a galactic spiral arm or inner region, the region begins to display magnetic properties. This magnatism can be seen by a butterfly nebula aligning more strongly with the galactic plane as it gets closer to either.
Besides being responsible for galactic magnetic fields it plays a role in developing universe filaments. And explains the magnetism observed by them.
Dark matter is a result of dark energy. Normal matter creates lumps in space by developing stellar structures pushing out the dark energy in that volume of space. This is were the halos come from. It has been observed these halos can dislodge from the parent matter. The bullet cluster and other clusters have demonstrated this. These rogue halos are part of "lumps" in space. These rogue lumps are responsible for the observed disappearing stars and phantom stellar structures. And they would still retain their gravitational lensing ability.
Hello wonderfull Anton!
Why did you have an SKELETOR avatar if SKELETOR are an evil character?
@@Cobbido He is not nice!
It just the Time clocks with different speed
I don't feel right until I see that smile. Thanks.
weird
@@tenbear5 Yes, I suspect he is a bottom.
maybe eventually the top bottom becomes the matter/universe quark core replacing the up, down reality we see today
🤔
Multiple Big Bangs.
Big Bang doesn't mean is the only one. Other Big Bangs create other Universes' and those space can intersect with our Universe space.
Seems to me that modern astronomy has been too busy making up theories to explain the things they see in the universe, INSTEAD of more deeply investigating what's going on to know what's _actually_ going on.....
Given that I have always been skeptical about certain aspects of the accepted cosmological model (for example, cosmic inflation, which just strikes me as ridiculous!), this is good news, pointing us slowly but surely towards new physics and a new model.
First "Timescape" is able to explain the expansion of the universe (or lack thereof) better than Lambda-CDM's Dark Energy, now S8 is making cracks in the Dark Matter as well. Interesting times!
Very true
It is not space which expanding!
Center of atoms are traffic areas where expanding energy is more density.
This expanding traffic areas recycling expanding energy and pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what matter and light expanding.
Expanding dark lightWaves interactive with eachothers and get eachothers expanding faster and thats why expanding lights move faster and faster same way what matter and light expanding.
There is explanation why old expanding light is redshifted cosmologist way. Also explanation for gravity lensing phenomena with out curving space!
There is no spacetime which play tricks!
.
Based on the Timescape cosmology, my understanding is that the voids are growing faster than the gravitationally bound systems as the universe expands (also, time runs much faster in the voids versus clusters) which would stretch the web-like filaments and should counteract some of their tendencies to clump even tighter - sort of like the air bubbles in bread as it is proofing and baking.
Dr. Becky recently made a video about those two recent papers about the timescale model. She said lambda-CDM still has more evidence in its favor than the timescale model.
I only learned recently that most cosmologists say energy is not conserved "globally" - i.e. across the universe - only locally.
If Timescapes means dark energy doesn't exist, and others who reason that photon energy loss from red shift due to expansion instead feeds into the gravitational field (so energy is conserved) are correct, that would seem to be a nice result, to me!
The science-humans could try adding PVA glue to the gravity in the universe? It might help it be more sticky.
8:33 you’re saying oxidized gama radiation trauma
I have a feeling that in a century or so, people are gonna look at dark matter the same way we now look at the vulcan hypothesis...