Yes! I know they exist, because every (god-damned, but also the not god-damned - and I know I shouldn't express it that way but with it I'm just expressing a kind of frustration over apparently being unable to get the following point across to people) star is a dark star in the sense that it contains at least the dark matter that comes from the entirety of the neutrinos that the star ever produces, since (as I've seen You in a recent video also acknowledge and point out to Sabine Hossenfelder) neutrinos indeed also at the very least count towards dark matter (if they aren't already the entirety of dark matter, as per my dark matter & dark energy theory supported by Lu Yin's scientific paper and other works). But actually, Prof. Keating, if you'd allow me to bring this to this topic related thought and question to your attention, what I heard from astrophysicists is that supernovae only really exist because of the neutrino pressure that builds up within them as they collapse, since they apparently contribute almost all of the pressure, instead of the internal light pressure, for the purpose of causing a supernova. And so a question from me to You (or astrophysicists and physicists in general also) would be about estimates on how many supernovae the entirety of a star's ever produced neutrinos (depending on the star's class, if e.g. K, G, O, or B star) could in principle cause (is it in the tens, hundreds, thousands, millions?) for if one were to estimate how large the fraction of neutrinos at a supernova is (of all the neutrinos produced at that time) that do collide with the star and hence contribute to the supernova, and to then estimate with what (likely large) positive coefficient this number of neutrinos would have to be multiplied with, in order to match the total number of by the star ever produced neutrinos. And You see, the answer to this particular question would especially be interesting to me because in my dark (hot, i.e. relativistic cosmic web filaments' neutrinos' kinetic) energy theory, it is hypothesized that each galaxy's hot neutrinos of all its stars is what's ultimately responsible for the entirety of the dark energy phenomenon (besides the expansionary contributing effect component that has to be attributed to the big bang itself), since if any particle could be responsible for it, and in the manner of an invisible mechanism, too, then all the neutrinos to me appear to be the canonical best candidate particles, since what other particles should be able to push galaxies apart from each other if not the very same particles that can with even just a fraction of their total amount that comes from any individual star make entire stars explode. And in this context, it should be worth noting that since the filaments of the cosmic web are (due to their inward gravitational pull in cross-section planes through them) not diluting their mass across the distances that they span, rather than the internal pressure exerted by them onto galaxies decreasing in an inverse square distance law manner, their pressure should be able to stay relatively constant throughout billions of years. In my opinion, all the neutrinos have been severely underestimated in the cosmological role that they play, because their problem seems to be that they usually don't find any place at which they can demonstrate their power, since they go through about anything, though neighboring galaxies' super-massive and stellar black holes should be able to catch the galactic amounts of in the cosmic web's filaments streaming hot neutrinos, and by conservation of momentum and billions of years time, they should be pulling on all those black holes, and the black holes in return should by their gravitation pull the nearby stars with them and hence whole galaxies, too. Oh! And also another important point that I should not miss out on to mention with this opportunity: Shouldn't one subtract the entirety of ever from a given star produced neutrinos' mass from the total baryonic-only mass of the star, and do the very same for all stars of a galaxy, when it comes to the comparison between the total baryonic mass of a galaxy versus its total dark matter? Because to me it'd seem to be a mistake if one were to account the entirety of any or all stars' mass only to the baryonic mass side of such equation.
However, to try to better answer Your question, if dark stars end up being what astrophysicists expect generation III stars to be like, namely to contain (quickly to super-massive extents growing) black holes in their interior, then yes indeed, with black holes in general being able to catch neutrinos into orbits (around the black hole) that come from the very star they're surrounded by, dark stars of such kind should exist.
If dark matter exists then dark stars must exist. The S8 tension suggests that light is entangled in the time dimension and is reversible. The CMB model requires an update to agree with current observations. So many new discoveries from JWST will probably take advances in AI to resolve.
Yes Dr Keating just wanted you to know I work over nights . I am usually going to bed at this time but for you I will stay up . I am retired US Army Veteran who has been reading about the universe and Physics on my own since 13 . Now I am 51 I only have AA in Criminology and I only got that to get promoted in the Army . If I have one thing I regret I wished I would have went to study Physics when I was younger at a major university.
I'm 53 & feel the same. I failed physics at school but got obsessively interested in it again in my 40's. I work in a dog food factory now ,,no one I work with or any of my friends are interested in it. Thankfully, my wife is & she's the brains in our marriage. One day I will study it more seriously & hope you do too. 👍
@@spaceinyourface that is awesome. I feel exactly what your talking about . At 13 I read Stephen Hawkins book and found it interesting. My Grandfather was well educated man he taught me to read non fiction books to learn what I want . So my whole life I studied Cosmology, Physics and Astronomy for fun . I can’t tell you how many times I have felt alone in this subject. I could tell you stories all day . But I tell you one that happened last month . My dad came down to visit me and wife . We were talking some how got on the subject of BlackHoles . When he made statement and corrected him that would happen and explain why . He said son that’s way over my head and can’t understand what your talking about. So I totally relate to what your saying. Hopefully my plan is one day to have the VA pay for me to go back to school so I can study Physics. My brother is Chemical Engineer he has Masters in Pharmaceutical Chemical Engineering and works for Pfizer . Maybe we can go back to school together. Cheers
@@samowens3 what a great story. When I started doing astrophotography about 10 years ago, I had to learn what photons were ,,I took a few nice pics of Galaxies & stuff,,my family thought I was a scientist...lol ,,now I follow Sean Carroll & a few others,,Allways been a fan of Brian Keating too. I listen to audible books every night with my wife,,allways physics based,, helps us both fall to sleep,,difference is she remembers it . But I never get bored of hearing the same stories. All the best for the future mate. Studying with your brother sounds perfect.
There is a reality yall scientists need to come to terms with: 1.- Universal constants are false. 2.- There only thing constant in the universe, is change. The sooner you digest this, the sooner we will be able to advance true knowledge of the universe. To think things are stationary, constant, not changing, is asinine. No evidence for that at all. (there are only local constants)
Neutralino mass estimates from 50GeV to 2TeV and the collisional cross section of the neutrino as proxy for neutralino's yields a cross-section to mass ratio range from 2.8e-20cm^2/gm to 1.1e-13cm^2/gm. If so, this can't account for the core cusp tension as empirically measured to require on the order of 1cm^2/gm.
Just on sharing the name… In 1968 Robert Hunter wrong the evocative song lyrics for Dark Star, that begins: Dark star crashes, pouring it's light into ashes Reason tatters, the forces tear loose from the axis Searchlight casting for faults in the clouds of delusion Shall we go, you and I while we can Through the transitive nightfall of diamonds?
Electro-Positronic Field: -ve gas binds a ball of +ve cells freed by Full Escape Energy as electron-positron pairs Spin: particles pull gas in straight/pump out spirals at 90'. Motion increases gas intake, biasing spin at 90' Magnetism: spin flows straight to a neighbour. Gravity, energy conservation, field balance preservation cause circuits Mass: gas acceleration drags cells further apart inwardly but closer laterally. +ve shells, -ve gaps, packed core Gravity: like mass but slower acceleration with drag on field cells cancelled by dark energy so cells remain equidistant Dark Energy: more gas near mass shrinks field, expanded by less in voids + new matter creation / black hole growth Heavy Force: mass multiplier mechanism pulls in field before annihilating all heavy composite cored particles but protons Heavy Fusion: in the Big Bang (and stars?) 2 positrons oppositely hit 1 electron (more than 2 electrons hit 1 positron) Antimatter: 1,2 e_p pairs annihilate. 3: proton+anti proton or muon+anti muon. 4: neutron+anti neutron. 5: tau+anti tau Positronium: e_p. Muon: ep_e. Proton: pep. Neutron: pep_e. Tau: epep_e. Neutron mass is halfway between muon and tau Lifetime: heavy force starts when (anti) muons/taus slow from C. Electric force speed (C) and Time slow with gas density Beta- Decay: pep_e => pep e. Beta+: pep + new e_p => pep_e p. Weak Force: unstable atoms form and annihilate e_p pairs Nuclear Force: neutron electrons bond to protons. Mass and magnetism compact and strengthen the nucleus Black Hole: atoms cut into neutrons fused as tau cores (epep). Field spins, time slows, core annihilates, no singularity Dark Matter: (anti) muons/taus last longer as the galaxy thins out? Solitary (anti) muon/tau cores? 'black hole spin'? Photon: compressed, concentrated gas wave core pulls in field cells as it passes. Field warps diffract and interfere 2 Slit Experiment: photon/particle field warps diffract and interfere, guiding the core. Detectors interfere with guides Entanglement: correlation broken by measurement? Physical link?
Thanks, these kind of videos make sucha big difference for a layman who is interested in the topics. So many times you think the areas of science are stagnant and just on a halt after the "einstein days" but there is actually a thriving ecosystem of wisdom that is developing just like any other topic! Thank you agan!
39:30 I would like to offer my hypothesis on "tired light". Tired light was created in the early universe by gravitational lensing. The wavelength of light was stretched apart as it was lensed by gravity. This reduction in frequency means that there is less energy contained per unit volume, E=hf. This is tired light. Now you have to realize that the universal conservation of energy cannot be violated. The reduced energy of tired light has to go somewhere. As the CMB is stretched its energy is reduced per unit volume given the same equation as before. It becomes dark matter. In turn this dark matter creates the accelerated expansion of the universe. Further creating more tired light.
Wrong. In an expanding universe conservation of energy is violated. It is all tied up with Noether's theorem. There is no need to call the redshift phenomenon "tired light" it is just the redshift that arises from cosmic expansion.
@@rogerphelps9939 That's an interesting take. So you think the universe is supposed to expand forever from an infinite amount of energy then? I think the universe has a finite energy density and the conservation of energy applies. The universe only exists in the present. imo
Well, the idea is that dark energy is an attribute of empty space. With more space you get more rapid expansion, in fact the expansion is then exponential. This fits in with the initial slow expansion following inflation becoming overtaken by the expansion caused by dark energy. Taken to the limit this eventually results in the big rip where everything, even fundamental particles, is destroyed.@@Shadow_B4nned
@@rogerphelps9939 Right on, I thought the same thing for a while. But when I realized dark energy contributed to the total positive energy density of the universe. I knew it couldn't be true. Energy has to come from something. It can neither be created nor destroyed. These are fundamental laws of the universe. If we throw them out it's anything goes. I am well aware of ^CDM. But given the total energy budget of the universe. I remain skeptical. I believe the CDM is what creates the accelerated expansion as more tired light is created with the expansion. Thanks for mulling this over with me. Just bouncing thoughts around helps.
This is confusing... If dark matter is by definition matter that only interacts gravitationally or with very weak interactions like neutrinos, how does this idea of a dark matter "Star" support itself ?!
One possibility that occurs to me is that if dark matter, or a particular type of it, has antiparticles in equilibrium and that the annihilation reaction is just a matter of densification and that this densification is promoted by the attraction of normal matter... Then it would be It is possible to detect some energy production within any celestial body with a certain density that could only be explained by this mechanism.
Dr., could the quantum fluctuations cause dark energy or be the same? If energy and mass are equivalent, could these quantum fluctuations leading to virtual particles equal dark energy ?
Amazes me, the club of theoretical reality as a position in reality. Blackboard of math surely is proof of reality. Morning of physics, no outside possibility of the midday of a vacuum hole. Infinite energy and the physics of a vacuum hole. Enter of the idea of Pais affect. Sat in your tower you don't realise how far the rest of us have progressed.
let me be straight, quark stars is a must considering the quantum mechanics the most massive neutron star can be in 2,6 solar masses although the tolkoff limit says it's less than that like 2,5 solar masses the smallest black hole made of supernova 2 event cannot be less than 2,9 solar masses now, there is a gap between those two limits, and the gap is 0,3 solar masses 0,3 solar masses is a huge amount of mass the very last line of defence against total collapse is the strong force quark stars are entirely held togetherby the strong force only they are rare in comparison with other compact objects, but they exist
I’m so confused! Why are we calling something a dark star when it can be the brightest object? Every time I listen to a cosmologist talk about dark energy and dark stars I hear different things.
I’ve never met a Physicist who can tell me, in 30 to 90 seconds, how Schrödinger came up with his famous PDE. Reader’s Digest Physicists never read Schrödinger’s original papers, published in English by Blackie and Sons, LTD, 1928. 50 years ago I took a course in the Calculus of Variations, Weinstock, now a Dover Pub. Chapter 11 was an application of the Fundamental Lemma to the problem. It takes two points (in phase-space) to be Quantumy, the upper and lower integration limits in the Fundamental Lemma of the Calculus of Variations. Grad Physics Departments teach the math, very poorly as evidenced by the lack of any meaningful progress (string theory makes no predictions and is therefore not science!) The grad dept’s keep the hours in-house and do not let the students take mathematics classes in the mathematics department. Mathematics is Syntax! Duh.
Thank you dr Keating for these amazing interviews. Love these. If i may add any value, it would be edwark frankel seems like an amazing guest for you to interview!
So I have question Dr Keating. How is that we can see the CMB photons yet their parts of Universe we can’t see? Wouldn’t the CMB have been stretched out to by inflation?
Almost 90% of matter is dark today. The question as to why we don't see them all over the place in the more recent universe needed a lot more in-depth answer than that offered at this time code: t=2171
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
As I understand it, the values of copies of the “Standard Kilogram” in Paris have drifted. . . in what has to be considered “an instant” of cosmological time. How then, can we insist that the laws of physics have not changed since the time of the Big Bang? Is Cosmic Inflation not an example of dramatically different laws of physics? I feel that we are “epicycles” stage of cosmology, hanging successively more kludge bags on conjectures. “Where art thou, our new Copernicus?”
Dr. Freese is so interesting! If I can offer constructive criticism … Dr. Keating spoke waaaay too much, more than his obviously loquacious guest. Not his best interview. In fact, I’d argue that this wasn’t even an interview. It was a Dr. Keating lecture with a small amount of Dr. Freese commentary.
I don't think there's necessarily such a thing as dark energy. Energy is just energy. Energy can create particles that don't create light, "dark energy/dark matter". Just the same as energy can create particles that do create light. So, it's the particles themselves that are "dark" or "normal" not the energy.
@@anthonydavis9382 If you're referring to the lessening of frequency then yes you are on the right track. Given the equation E=hf when you have less frequency you have less energy. And so, when you pop that frequency out of the equation the energy of it doesn't just cease to exist. It becomes "energy in space" that can potentially become anything, including, become dark matter and add to the expansion of the universe.
Dark energy is an observation. Light from distant galaxies is "red shifted". The only explanation is that they are moving away from us. The "dark energy" is the mechanism that we "can't see" which is why it is labelled "dark" and the fact that galaxies are moving away from each other would suggest some force or "energy" is responsible. What this "dark energy" is hasn't been explained yet. The mechanism is still "dark" unseen, not visible. Its a term given to an observation that has no defined mechanism.
@@JamesCairney Duly noted, however, I think it's a needless distinction to make that gives wiggle room to conspiracy theorists and the like, much like string theory in general. It helps to stomp out pseudoscience where ever you can. Again, "energy" is invisible. Labeling it as "dark energy" isn't actually correct. It's not energy that should be denoted as invisible it's actually dark matter.
How your mind works ? Simple and easy, when everyone run around your mind will tell you to stay , when everyone building their money your mind will tell you to wait , when your stomach is hungry your mind will be so full, when your heart will be on fire your mind will start to bloom 😂 I love to listen INTELLECT all day LONG . Thank you for sharing with us 🙏
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
@@DrBrianKeating I have discovered a great physicist full of energy and good spirit and enjoyed your open discussion. interesting to see that some difficult theories can be tested.
I would ask this question? What if some of the info you said it must agree with is wrong? That would say to myself better to check the info your cross referencing to make sure it's a truth rather than assume correctness, so the answer must be correct. Thought for pause. I still remember how the universe works and what Katie said at the end. Well we'll see if we can help her out.
Time is the decay of mass or its creation in forward momentum interactions point to point changes. Infinity of changes. Creation to decay. Alpha to Omega. Clockwise and counterclockwise pressure equalization to resistance. Thermaldynamics and cold resistance equalization of pressure. Thermaldynamics is the only force universal. All mass loses heat as decay from cold resistance within mass as occupational space itself neutralized. Thermaldynamics is the variable. Space is in everything and around it. Cold resistance neutralizes thermaldynamics as illusionary solidity of liquidity as mass in equalization to resistance within and without. Spheres are proof of weak resistance to thermaldynamics throughout space. Thermaldynamics is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Only thermaldynamics can disrupt mass. Mass is replenished by stars as heat loss of decay from stars. Mass occupies space as neutralized resistance within it. Proximity mass is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance. Vibrations settle into the weakest point of resistance. Earth is our weakest point of resistance. We vibrate towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Gravity doesn't work. Heat waves do. Heat is all energy combined in various degrees of pressure. Resistance is weak. Thermaldynamics curves around cold and doesn't mix. It is repelled as perpetual motion. Only thermaldynamics is outward pressure of force in repulsion from cold space. Distance of forward maximum momentum velocity in resistance is constant cosmic speed limit in resistance as mass vibrates through space in equalization to resistance within and without entanglement of mass. The cosmic speed limit is constant in and out of entanglement of mass. Hydrogen circulation is smaller than helium. Helium circulation is smaller than carbon. Ect...temperature equalization throughout space is equalization of pressure in resistance. Conservation of maximum momentum velocity in resistance is constant cosmic speed limit in resistance in and out of entanglement of mass. Both clockwise and counterclockwise pressure. Magnetic fields show repulsion to forward momentum propulsion from repulsion reducing distances according to their mass in occupational space. Resistance is neutralized within mass making mass the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Proximity mass is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance. Heat waves are thermaldynamics singularities passing through space outside of entanglement of mass as a wave. Waves until resistance can't be overcome. If resistance can't be overcome, waves become parrticals when resistance is met. They are absorbed as heat or refracted as light. What kind of light depends on thermaldynamics in unification of unidirectional flow cycling thermaldynamics in resistance as mass. Frequency is created by waves in avoidance patterns until resistance can't be overcome. Only thermaldynamics can disrupt cycling patterns. Decay is heat loss. Lightning is refraction of heat, and electricity is heat loss rapidly being redirected trajectories of thermaldynamics from decay of atmospheres, creating a void where atmospheres collapse back in as thunder. Shivering is rapid heat loss. Lightning is rapid heat loss. Stars decay as heat loss. When a star repells its thermaldynamics outward pressure, it becomes a big bubble of space itself devoid of thermaldynamics. Its thermaldynamics is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. It becomes a hurricane of plasma circulation around the bubble and if the plasma circulation around it has proximity mass near the greater mass of neutralized resistance within, it will be bombarded by proximity masses losing pressure to the greater mass of neutralized weakest resistance. Galaxies are formed around these bubbles. If the redirected trajectories of thermaldynamics overcomes resistance the poles of these bubbles repell the trajectories of thermaldynamics outward as force of pressure jetting outward force. Physics works. Gravity doesn't work. Heat waves do. Pressure is an accumulation of heat. Resistance equalization to thermaldynamics is mass. Unequal pressure is decay or loss of heat. Loss of pressure. Decay or aging. Rapidly decay, slow aging? Clockwise and counterclockwise. Time is interactions of exchanges of pressure in motion point to point. Physics works. Theoretically factual possibilities? All mass decays as heat loss. Temperature equalization throughout space is thermaldynamics in cold resistance. Thermaldynamics curves, bends, and moves. Space itself is in everything and everywhere. The gelatin creates equalization to pressure. Tornadoes equalization. Hurricanes equalization. Lightning equalization. Stars replenish thermaldynamics and slows decay if it is absorbed in equalization to mass. Density can't exceed resistance within it as occupational space itself. Cold resistance is equal pressure in mass to thermaldynamics. Thermaldynamics is singularities of motion. Time is the interactions of exchanges of pressure in equalization to resistance within mass. Singularities are waves, and heat is a particle of singularities that can't overcome resistance. Quatum physics mechanics. Theoretically factual possibilities. Physics works. Gravity doesn't. Vibrations settle into the weakest point of resistance. We vibrate towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Physics works.
I have a notion, I call it "quantum cavitation". If we were to assume that time is a form of matter, and can be affected by the laws of thermodynamics, we can reconcile the passage of light through time with quantum gravity. The shear mass of time, when in solid form, ressembles smbhs, it eventually experiences compression induced fission, just like uranium or plutonium, converting into fluid and gaseous states, matter and the ubiquitous higgs field. Light from this event is seen as the cmb.
If you really want to know what Dark Matter and Dark Energy are. They can be explained and proven with very simple experiment that anyone can do at home. Forget the mathematics and think Logically. I would invite both Katie and Brian to read my hypothesis of 32 pages, or to ask any of their students to look at it. It will explain an alternative to the standard model which will give a very logical model that could work. You do not have to be famous to be able to think and invent.
The “Tension” either the Supernovae data is wrong or the CMB data is wrong OR drum roll… both. I think that red shift interpretation has problems. Halton Arp was set aside and ignored but that will come back to bite. Science will pay for that. CMB data reduction is a huge problem (hand waving), monopole was not measured at L2 also reading the temperature of the Universe and deriving cosmology from it as you see thru the noisy galaxy. The miracle is that they are even that close. I think eventually both will be found in error. I hope I am wrong but scientists have been ignoring big issues. Then they find galaxies 400 M years after “creation” and they scratch their heads. You will always find new physics when the current physics is wrong😂 Dark stars sound very interesting. Want to learn more.
I wonder if she likes "Dark Star Orchestra?" I know I do, and you should too. They even play the imperfections 😂 silliness aside, they are a great band.
16:00 🙋🏻♂️I have a model that is made from the core sound of life it’s self and joins twin opposing forces at a 90 degree velocity angles with a self levelling automated torsional direction steering force built with in a single harness / chassis hopefully run by a heart engine of apposing magnetically pistons to go I don’t don’t know where ?👀up-down in-out who knows 😂 the Mrs wont let me upgrade the holden vectra alloy and all ya know😮 Can’t afford a Deloraine 😂 21:01 yeah found your singularity too ✋🏽👁🤚🏽 Could not have got here with out it 😊 26:58 well I always wanted to know dose the splitting of the atoms in the round thing give off sound. At what speed dose one need to pulse the light to get it to split. Is the there a correlation between the escape velocity to size of matter coming or going from our universe. Is lighting visible teleportation of positive changed particles 😂 oh I have more 👀🙃 Yet feel I know the answers already 😂 but hey ya don’t ask ya don’t get 🙏🏼
She's was wonderfully fascinating 👏 She's touches on the athiest over represented 1900s influences on physics and you know i still respectfully grapple with this based on how shared the physical lawism is between non or religious practicing jews along with Vatican 2 catholic plus some orthodox eastern Christians. No offense but its very deterministic and historical struggles with crusading beliefs into work or works. Lol The majority Bible believing American thats excluded has the dialectical vision where they intentionally combat crusading theyre beliefs into life. Philosophically having cake and eating to based on not Pretending the earth revolved around the sun in time when we know it didn't. Speaking to epochs ,taxonomy. Man made time inspired by God handed down to in the alphabetical exodus thru Jesus right all theos logos . But this is a very good epistemology that fights hard with intentions yet its been alienated in academia
Great video Brian. I would play poker with either of you. Your tells are quite apparent. Stop nodding your head Brian and correcting let her talk. No helium young lady. Pure hydrogen particles charged under an EMFS, just sayin. Stop lol.
The thing about physics is that it's consistent and measurable. We measure using numbers. We find ways to represent how the relationships between these numbers behave and we write them down as equations. Then we look at what the equations are telling us about reality. Sometimes if we are missing a piece of the puzzle we try to imagine an equation and then use that to try to identify and characterise the missing piece. So Mathematics will always be at the heart of physics. But if you don't like it because your brain isn't up to doing the maths, you can always go back to pulling pure uninformed guesses out of your arse and making up fairy stories to explain them.
@@X-boomer Maybe see an optician about that myopia. Tell all that to Maxwell + adjacent greatness. Or, Tesla. What do we have now, but 50-75 years of modest-at-best progress - stalled with epic failure of CERN. If your only thinking particles, you can only see dust in your eyes - and universe. Grit Physics is tiresome and dead-end. Sure, tweaking ‘tech’ gets easy as material treats called progress anymore, but no real advancements and inability to do anything, but try to fit Cinderella’s slipper on Ugly Step-Sisters.
@@jonathanedwardgibson you have just exposed your ignorance. As far as physics goes, Tesla was nobody. He was just an engineer. Maxwell kick-started the late 19thC revolution in physics by putting all aspects of electromagnetism on a solid mathematical footing. Without him I doubt Einstein would developed Special Relativity. Maxwell was a God of mathematical physics. I have no special love for particle physics. The standard model is just a useful tool by which we can identity and leverage emergent symmetries and test our theories by making concrete measurements . QFT is where it's at. It's at least closer to where we will find the underpinnings of reality. I think you should give up. You've imagined that you know something about physics by watching a load of woo woo graphics heavy pop sci RUclips videos without the maths in. That's where the delusion happened.
@@X-boomer I don’t need a physics degree to know counting how many cosmic string wrap ‘round head of pins leads to a nearly a century of no-progress {easy answer: all of them}. Rebrand it quantum this or dark-pixie-woo-that if you need to rebrand for grant money, but Einstein is has run out of runway and a low-level energy skien fills the empty equations. The question remains, why this compulsion to defend and belittle what is obvious to so many? We’ll see how important your ‘tude is in the history books, or we probably won’t since your too busy gaming for smug-points on social media.
Well, as long as you have a self-justified logic, then you can't be wrong, huh ? specially, when you can't test those assumptions. Theoretical physicists should set the boundaries of their studies on only the things that can be proven or tested. Otherwise, it's useless.
Theorists had better get the game on or give it up and go home. There is a risk that they will become as obsolete as amateur comet hunters. When AI gets a mission to crunch 120,000 papers on cosmology, QFT, particle physics and gravity theory it will probably spit out a complete theory in full. The theorists have too narrow a perspective and don't link problems well between fields of study which are ever more microscopic. There is always the problem of group thinking which is a menace to success. Why do they resist the 2Time ((bijection of time) models so vociferously? they cannot retrain their mind which is stuck in a particular model framework.
Cause of gravity published in 2002: “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon. “G” calculated from first principles- the hydrogen atom- in 2002.
Do you think Dark Stars really exist? Let me know and don't miss my Dark Matter playlist!
Yes! I know they exist, because every (god-damned, but also the not god-damned - and I know I shouldn't express it that way but with it I'm just expressing a kind of frustration over apparently being unable to get the following point across to people) star is a dark star in the sense that it contains at least the dark matter that comes from the entirety of the neutrinos that the star ever produces, since (as I've seen You in a recent video also acknowledge and point out to Sabine Hossenfelder) neutrinos indeed also at the very least count towards dark matter (if they aren't already the entirety of dark matter, as per my dark matter & dark energy theory supported by Lu Yin's scientific paper and other works).
But actually, Prof. Keating, if you'd allow me to bring this to this topic related thought and question to your attention, what I heard from astrophysicists is that supernovae only really exist because of the neutrino pressure that builds up within them as they collapse, since they apparently contribute almost all of the pressure, instead of the internal light pressure, for the purpose of causing a supernova. And so a question from me to You (or astrophysicists and physicists in general also) would be about estimates on how many supernovae the entirety of a star's ever produced neutrinos (depending on the star's class, if e.g. K, G, O, or B star) could in principle cause (is it in the tens, hundreds, thousands, millions?) for if one were to estimate how large the fraction of neutrinos at a supernova is (of all the neutrinos produced at that time) that do collide with the star and hence contribute to the supernova, and to then estimate with what (likely large) positive coefficient this number of neutrinos would have to be multiplied with, in order to match the total number of by the star ever produced neutrinos.
And You see, the answer to this particular question would especially be interesting to me because in my dark (hot, i.e. relativistic cosmic web filaments' neutrinos' kinetic) energy theory, it is hypothesized that each galaxy's hot neutrinos of all its stars is what's ultimately responsible for the entirety of the dark energy phenomenon (besides the expansionary contributing effect component that has to be attributed to the big bang itself), since if any particle could be responsible for it, and in the manner of an invisible mechanism, too, then all the neutrinos to me appear to be the canonical best candidate particles, since what other particles should be able to push galaxies apart from each other if not the very same particles that can with even just a fraction of their total amount that comes from any individual star make entire stars explode.
And in this context, it should be worth noting that since the filaments of the cosmic web are (due to their inward gravitational pull in cross-section planes through them) not diluting their mass across the distances that they span, rather than the internal pressure exerted by them onto galaxies decreasing in an inverse square distance law manner, their pressure should be able to stay relatively constant throughout billions of years.
In my opinion, all the neutrinos have been severely underestimated in the cosmological role that they play, because their problem seems to be that they usually don't find any place at which they can demonstrate their power, since they go through about anything, though neighboring galaxies' super-massive and stellar black holes should be able to catch the galactic amounts of in the cosmic web's filaments streaming hot neutrinos, and by conservation of momentum and billions of years time, they should be pulling on all those black holes, and the black holes in return should by their gravitation pull the nearby stars with them and hence whole galaxies, too.
Oh! And also another important point that I should not miss out on to mention with this opportunity: Shouldn't one subtract the entirety of ever from a given star produced neutrinos' mass from the total baryonic-only mass of the star, and do the very same for all stars of a galaxy, when it comes to the comparison between the total baryonic mass of a galaxy versus its total dark matter? Because to me it'd seem to be a mistake if one were to account the entirety of any or all stars' mass only to the baryonic mass side of such equation.
However, to try to better answer Your question, if dark stars end up being what astrophysicists expect generation III stars to be like, namely to contain (quickly to super-massive extents growing) black holes in their interior, then yes indeed, with black holes in general being able to catch neutrinos into orbits (around the black hole) that come from the very star they're surrounded by, dark stars of such kind should exist.
Does dark matter include the elements or is it energy of levels of intensity? I ask because it exists as the seen and unseen.
If dark matter exists then dark stars must exist. The S8 tension suggests that light is entangled in the time dimension and is reversible. The CMB model requires an update to agree with current observations. So many new discoveries from JWST will probably take advances in AI to resolve.
Hi, i think that its possible, if any evidence its a Nobel, good luck, whit observations and theory, amazing guest, amazing talk....
Yes Dr Keating just wanted you to know I work over nights . I am usually going to bed at this time but for you I will stay up . I am retired US Army Veteran who has been reading about the universe and Physics on my own since 13 . Now I am 51 I only have AA in Criminology and I only got that to get promoted in the Army . If I have one thing I regret I wished I would have went to study Physics when I was younger at a major university.
you dont need a university, all you need is a library and the will
I'm 53 & feel the same. I failed physics at school but got obsessively interested in it again in my 40's. I work in a dog food factory now ,,no one I work with or any of my friends are interested in it. Thankfully, my wife is & she's the brains in our marriage. One day I will study it more seriously & hope you do too. 👍
@@spaceinyourface that is awesome. I feel exactly what your talking about . At 13 I read Stephen Hawkins book and found it interesting. My Grandfather was well educated man he taught me to read non fiction books to learn what I want . So my whole life I studied Cosmology, Physics and Astronomy for fun . I can’t tell you how many times I have felt alone in this subject. I could tell you stories all day . But I tell you one that happened last month . My dad came down to visit me and wife . We were talking some how got on the subject of BlackHoles . When he made statement and corrected him that would happen and explain why . He said son that’s way over my head and can’t understand what your talking about. So I totally relate to what your saying. Hopefully my plan is one day to have the VA pay for me to go back to school so I can study Physics. My brother is Chemical Engineer he has Masters in Pharmaceutical Chemical Engineering and works for Pfizer . Maybe we can go back to school together. Cheers
@@samowens3 what a great story. When I started doing astrophotography about 10 years ago, I had to learn what photons were ,,I took a few nice pics of Galaxies & stuff,,my family thought I was a scientist...lol ,,now I follow Sean Carroll & a few others,,Allways been a fan of Brian Keating too.
I listen to audible books every night with my wife,,allways physics based,, helps us both fall to sleep,,difference is she remembers it . But I never get bored of hearing the same stories. All the best for the future mate. Studying with your brother sounds perfect.
Great to see the channel returning to its roots.
There is a reality yall scientists need to come to terms with:
1.- Universal constants are false.
2.- There only thing constant in the universe, is change.
The sooner you digest this, the sooner we will be able to advance true knowledge of the universe. To think things are stationary, constant, not changing, is asinine. No evidence for that at all.
(there are only local constants)
Thanks!
Appreciated so mucb
I was an astronomer in my past life. I absolutely love it
Neutralino mass estimates from 50GeV to 2TeV and the collisional cross section of the neutrino as proxy for neutralino's yields a cross-section to mass ratio range from 2.8e-20cm^2/gm to 1.1e-13cm^2/gm. If so, this can't account for the core cusp tension as empirically measured to require on the order of 1cm^2/gm.
Just on sharing the name… In 1968 Robert Hunter wrong the evocative song lyrics for Dark Star, that begins: Dark star crashes, pouring it's light into ashes
Reason tatters, the forces tear loose from the axis
Searchlight casting for faults in the clouds of delusion
Shall we go, you and I while we can
Through the transitive nightfall of diamonds?
Electro-Positronic Field: -ve gas binds a ball of +ve cells freed by Full Escape Energy as electron-positron pairs
Spin: particles pull gas in straight/pump out spirals at 90'. Motion increases gas intake, biasing spin at 90'
Magnetism: spin flows straight to a neighbour. Gravity, energy conservation, field balance preservation cause circuits
Mass: gas acceleration drags cells further apart inwardly but closer laterally. +ve shells, -ve gaps, packed core
Gravity: like mass but slower acceleration with drag on field cells cancelled by dark energy so cells remain equidistant
Dark Energy: more gas near mass shrinks field, expanded by less in voids + new matter creation / black hole growth
Heavy Force: mass multiplier mechanism pulls in field before annihilating all heavy composite cored particles but protons
Heavy Fusion: in the Big Bang (and stars?) 2 positrons oppositely hit 1 electron (more than 2 electrons hit 1 positron)
Antimatter: 1,2 e_p pairs annihilate. 3: proton+anti proton or muon+anti muon. 4: neutron+anti neutron. 5: tau+anti tau
Positronium: e_p. Muon: ep_e. Proton: pep. Neutron: pep_e. Tau: epep_e. Neutron mass is halfway between muon and tau
Lifetime: heavy force starts when (anti) muons/taus slow from C. Electric force speed (C) and Time slow with gas density
Beta- Decay: pep_e => pep e. Beta+: pep + new e_p => pep_e p. Weak Force: unstable atoms form and annihilate e_p pairs
Nuclear Force: neutron electrons bond to protons. Mass and magnetism compact and strengthen the nucleus
Black Hole: atoms cut into neutrons fused as tau cores (epep). Field spins, time slows, core annihilates, no singularity
Dark Matter: (anti) muons/taus last longer as the galaxy thins out? Solitary (anti) muon/tau cores? 'black hole spin'?
Photon: compressed, concentrated gas wave core pulls in field cells as it passes. Field warps diffract and interfere
2 Slit Experiment: photon/particle field warps diffract and interfere, guiding the core. Detectors interfere with guides
Entanglement: correlation broken by measurement? Physical link?
Katie's amazing communication ability is a joy to witness.
Thanks, these kind of videos make sucha big difference for a layman who is interested in the topics. So many times you think the areas of science are stagnant and just on a halt after the "einstein days" but there is actually a thriving ecosystem of wisdom that is developing just like any other topic! Thank you agan!
39:30 I would like to offer my hypothesis on "tired light". Tired light was created in the early universe by gravitational lensing. The wavelength of light was stretched apart as it was lensed by gravity. This reduction in frequency means that there is less energy contained per unit volume, E=hf. This is tired light.
Now you have to realize that the universal conservation of energy cannot be violated. The reduced energy of tired light has to go somewhere. As the CMB is stretched its energy is reduced per unit volume given the same equation as before. It becomes dark matter. In turn this dark matter creates the accelerated expansion of the universe. Further creating more tired light.
Wrong. In an expanding universe conservation of energy is violated. It is all tied up with Noether's theorem. There is no need to call the redshift phenomenon "tired light" it is just the redshift that arises from cosmic expansion.
@@rogerphelps9939 That's an interesting take. So you think the universe is supposed to expand forever from an infinite amount of energy then? I think the universe has a finite energy density and the conservation of energy applies. The universe only exists in the present. imo
Well, the idea is that dark energy is an attribute of empty space. With more space you get more rapid expansion, in fact the expansion is then exponential. This fits in with the initial slow expansion following inflation becoming overtaken by the expansion caused by dark energy. Taken to the limit this eventually results in the big rip where everything, even fundamental particles, is destroyed.@@Shadow_B4nned
@@rogerphelps9939 Right on, I thought the same thing for a while. But when I realized dark energy contributed to the total positive energy density of the universe. I knew it couldn't be true. Energy has to come from something. It can neither be created nor destroyed. These are fundamental laws of the universe. If we throw them out it's anything goes. I am well aware of ^CDM. But given the total energy budget of the universe. I remain skeptical. I believe the CDM is what creates the accelerated expansion as more tired light is created with the expansion. Thanks for mulling this over with me. Just bouncing thoughts around helps.
This is confusing... If dark matter is by definition matter that only interacts gravitationally or with very weak interactions like neutrinos, how does this idea of a dark matter "Star" support itself ?!
PBS space time did a video explaining the idea about two months ago. Its worth a watch.
@@JamesCairney thank you for recommending the video.
One possibility that occurs to me is that if dark matter, or a particular type of it, has antiparticles in equilibrium and that the annihilation reaction is just a matter of densification and that this densification is promoted by the attraction of normal matter... Then it would be It is possible to detect some energy production within any celestial body with a certain density that could only be explained by this mechanism.
Also a good read is Dr Claudia Albers ,physicist from South Africa
The ego stroking is off the chart... if she is as good as you claim, she wont need it
Dr., could the quantum fluctuations cause dark energy or be the same? If energy and mass are equivalent, could these quantum fluctuations leading to virtual particles equal dark energy ?
Show the book
what kind of upper bounds are there on heating in dark stars implied by the current lack of dark matter detection empirically?
Amazes me, the club of theoretical reality as a position in reality. Blackboard of math surely is proof of reality. Morning of physics, no outside possibility of the midday of a vacuum hole. Infinite energy and the physics of a vacuum hole. Enter of the idea of Pais affect. Sat in your tower you don't realise how far the rest of us have progressed.
let me be straight, quark stars is a must considering the quantum mechanics
the most massive neutron star can be in 2,6 solar masses although the tolkoff limit says it's less than that like 2,5 solar masses
the smallest black hole made of supernova 2 event cannot be less than 2,9 solar masses
now, there is a gap between those two limits, and the gap is 0,3 solar masses
0,3 solar masses is a huge amount of mass
the very last line of defence against total collapse is the strong force
quark stars are entirely held togetherby the strong force only
they are rare in comparison with other compact objects, but they exist
Dark matter = frequency
I’m so confused!
Why are we calling something a dark star when it can be the brightest object?
Every time I listen to a cosmologist talk about dark energy and dark stars I hear different things.
I’ve never met a Physicist who can tell me, in 30 to 90 seconds, how Schrödinger came up with his famous PDE. Reader’s Digest Physicists never read Schrödinger’s original papers, published in English by Blackie and Sons, LTD, 1928. 50 years ago I took a course in the Calculus of Variations, Weinstock, now a Dover Pub. Chapter 11 was an application of the Fundamental Lemma to the problem. It takes two points (in phase-space) to be Quantumy, the upper and lower integration limits in the Fundamental Lemma of the Calculus of Variations. Grad Physics Departments teach the math, very poorly as evidenced by the lack of any meaningful progress (string theory makes no predictions and is therefore not science!) The grad dept’s keep the hours in-house and do not let the students take mathematics classes in the mathematics department. Mathematics is Syntax! Duh.
String theory does make predictions dumbass
Thank you dr Keating for these amazing interviews. Love these. If i may add any value, it would be edwark frankel seems like an amazing guest for you to interview!
Why are the other 4 spectra not available to the public? JWT was publicly funded.
So I have question Dr Keating. How is that we can see the CMB photons yet their parts of Universe we can’t see? Wouldn’t the CMB have been stretched out to by inflation?
No because inflation came 380,000 years before the Cosmic Microwave Background was produced
Almost 90% of matter is dark today. The question as to why we don't see them all over the place in the more recent universe needed a lot more in-depth answer than that offered at this time code: t=2171
Great guest!
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
What justifies the existence of more than 3+1 dimensions?
The fact that they can't be ruled out or proven to be "not true" plus mathematical monsters like E8 require an explanation.
Her ideas on earliest stars finally make a bit of sense. Skeptical gases congest and don’t expand. Black body Sol, much?
As I understand it, the values of copies of the “Standard Kilogram” in Paris have drifted. . . in what has to be considered “an instant” of cosmological time. How then, can we insist that the laws of physics have not changed since the time of the Big Bang? Is Cosmic Inflation not an example of dramatically different laws of physics?
I feel that we are “epicycles” stage of cosmology, hanging successively more kludge bags on conjectures. “Where art thou, our new Copernicus?”
Modifying the laws of physics to be different at different times without having any evidence that this has happened is the same as adding epicycles
Dr. Freese is so interesting!
If I can offer constructive criticism …
Dr. Keating spoke waaaay too much, more than his obviously loquacious guest. Not his best interview.
In fact, I’d argue that this wasn’t even an interview. It was a Dr. Keating lecture with a small amount of Dr. Freese commentary.
Dr. Keating, did you sew that Sagan yourself?
I don't think there's necessarily such a thing as dark energy. Energy is just energy. Energy can create particles that don't create light, "dark energy/dark matter". Just the same as energy can create particles that do create light. So, it's the particles themselves that are "dark" or "normal" not the energy.
It's just frequency
@@anthonydavis9382 wdym?
@@anthonydavis9382 If you're referring to the lessening of frequency then yes you are on the right track. Given the equation E=hf when you have less frequency you have less energy. And so, when you pop that frequency out of the equation the energy of it doesn't just cease to exist. It becomes "energy in space" that can potentially become anything, including, become dark matter and add to the expansion of the universe.
Dark energy is an observation. Light from distant galaxies is "red shifted". The only explanation is that they are moving away from us. The "dark energy" is the mechanism that we "can't see" which is why it is labelled "dark" and the fact that galaxies are moving away from each other would suggest some force or "energy" is responsible. What this "dark energy" is hasn't been explained yet. The mechanism is still "dark" unseen, not visible.
Its a term given to an observation that has no defined mechanism.
@@JamesCairney Duly noted, however, I think it's a needless distinction to make that gives wiggle room to conspiracy theorists and the like, much like string theory in general. It helps to stomp out pseudoscience where ever you can. Again, "energy" is invisible. Labeling it as "dark energy" isn't actually correct. It's not energy that should be denoted as invisible it's actually dark matter.
How your mind works ? Simple and easy, when everyone run around your mind will tell you to stay , when everyone building their money your mind will tell you to wait , when your stomach is hungry your mind will be so full, when your heart will be on fire your mind will start to bloom 😂
I love to listen INTELLECT all day LONG . Thank you for sharing with us 🙏
How did the universe end up as it is?
Blame it on the black star.
Blame it on the falling sky.
Blame it on the satellite that beams me home.
Great podcast Mr. K!
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
@@DrBrianKeating I have discovered a great physicist full of energy and good spirit and enjoyed your open discussion. interesting to see that some difficult theories can be tested.
Cute pink headlights!
Grit science is goofey. School in Berlin uses mod-Newtonian that disproves the inertial estimates, makes mice galaxy sims: no dark matter
I would ask this question? What if some of the info you said it must agree with is wrong? That would say to myself better to check the info your cross referencing to make sure it's a truth rather than assume correctness, so the answer must be correct. Thought for pause. I still remember how the universe works and what Katie said at the end. Well we'll see if we can help her out.
What’s a “Knobellist”?
That intro ! it was a cocktail of greatness/cringe/funny. Good one professor XDDD
So dark molecular hydrogen and dark helium clouds collapsed under dark gravity, condensed into darker fusion pressures, forming dark stars... got it.
This is interesting. Hard to say until dark matter is resolved...
Time is the decay of mass or its creation in forward momentum interactions point to point changes. Infinity of changes. Creation to decay. Alpha to Omega. Clockwise and counterclockwise pressure equalization to resistance. Thermaldynamics and cold resistance equalization of pressure. Thermaldynamics is the only force universal. All mass loses heat as decay from cold resistance within mass as occupational space itself neutralized. Thermaldynamics is the variable. Space is in everything and around it. Cold resistance neutralizes thermaldynamics as illusionary solidity of liquidity as mass in equalization to resistance within and without. Spheres are proof of weak resistance to thermaldynamics throughout space. Thermaldynamics is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Only thermaldynamics can disrupt mass. Mass is replenished by stars as heat loss of decay from stars. Mass occupies space as neutralized resistance within it. Proximity mass is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance. Vibrations settle into the weakest point of resistance. Earth is our weakest point of resistance. We vibrate towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Gravity doesn't work. Heat waves do. Heat is all energy combined in various degrees of pressure. Resistance is weak. Thermaldynamics curves around cold and doesn't mix. It is repelled as perpetual motion. Only thermaldynamics is outward pressure of force in repulsion from cold space. Distance of forward maximum momentum velocity in resistance is constant cosmic speed limit in resistance as mass vibrates through space in equalization to resistance within and without entanglement of mass. The cosmic speed limit is constant in and out of entanglement of mass. Hydrogen circulation is smaller than helium. Helium circulation is smaller than carbon. Ect...temperature equalization throughout space is equalization of pressure in resistance. Conservation of maximum momentum velocity in resistance is constant cosmic speed limit in resistance in and out of entanglement of mass. Both clockwise and counterclockwise pressure. Magnetic fields show repulsion to forward momentum propulsion from repulsion reducing distances according to their mass in occupational space. Resistance is neutralized within mass making mass the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Proximity mass is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance. Heat waves are thermaldynamics singularities passing through space outside of entanglement of mass as a wave. Waves until resistance can't be overcome. If resistance can't be overcome, waves become parrticals when resistance is met. They are absorbed as heat or refracted as light. What kind of light depends on thermaldynamics in unification of unidirectional flow cycling thermaldynamics in resistance as mass. Frequency is created by waves in avoidance patterns until resistance can't be overcome. Only thermaldynamics can disrupt cycling patterns. Decay is heat loss. Lightning is refraction of heat, and electricity is heat loss rapidly being redirected trajectories of thermaldynamics from decay of atmospheres, creating a void where atmospheres collapse back in as thunder. Shivering is rapid heat loss. Lightning is rapid heat loss. Stars decay as heat loss. When a star repells its thermaldynamics outward pressure, it becomes a big bubble of space itself devoid of thermaldynamics. Its thermaldynamics is repelled towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. It becomes a hurricane of plasma circulation around the bubble and if the plasma circulation around it has proximity mass near the greater mass of neutralized resistance within, it will be bombarded by proximity masses losing pressure to the greater mass of neutralized weakest resistance. Galaxies are formed around these bubbles. If the redirected trajectories of thermaldynamics overcomes resistance the poles of these bubbles repell the trajectories of thermaldynamics outward as force of pressure jetting outward force. Physics works. Gravity doesn't work. Heat waves do. Pressure is an accumulation of heat. Resistance equalization to thermaldynamics is mass. Unequal pressure is decay or loss of heat. Loss of pressure. Decay or aging. Rapidly decay, slow aging? Clockwise and counterclockwise. Time is interactions of exchanges of pressure in motion point to point. Physics works. Theoretically factual possibilities? All mass decays as heat loss. Temperature equalization throughout space is thermaldynamics in cold resistance. Thermaldynamics curves, bends, and moves. Space itself is in everything and everywhere. The gelatin creates equalization to pressure. Tornadoes equalization. Hurricanes equalization. Lightning equalization. Stars replenish thermaldynamics and slows decay if it is absorbed in equalization to mass. Density can't exceed resistance within it as occupational space itself. Cold resistance is equal pressure in mass to thermaldynamics. Thermaldynamics is singularities of motion. Time is the interactions of exchanges of pressure in equalization to resistance within mass. Singularities are waves, and heat is a particle of singularities that can't overcome resistance. Quatum physics mechanics. Theoretically factual possibilities. Physics works. Gravity doesn't. Vibrations settle into the weakest point of resistance. We vibrate towards the weakest point of resistance until resistance can't be overcome. Physics works.
Huh.
Do you have an abstract for this comment?
Some think their thesis will get peer reviewed approval when they post on RUclips comments section.
I have a notion, I call it "quantum cavitation". If we were to assume that time is a form of matter, and can be affected by the laws of thermodynamics, we can reconcile the passage of light through time with quantum gravity. The shear mass of time, when in solid form, ressembles smbhs, it eventually experiences compression induced fission, just like uranium or plutonium, converting into fluid and gaseous states, matter and the ubiquitous higgs field. Light from this event is seen as the cmb.
Yeah, nah. Beware the mushrooms.
More ppl should know about steven weinberg
Cosmic hyper-rotation may produce Dark energy, it's called centrifugal force & as the universe gets bigger, so does the expansion.
If you really want to know what Dark Matter and Dark Energy are. They can be explained and proven with very simple experiment that anyone can do at home. Forget the mathematics and think Logically. I would invite both Katie and Brian to read my hypothesis of 32 pages, or to ask any of their students to look at it. It will explain an alternative to the standard model which will give a very logical model that could work. You do not have to be famous to be able to think and invent.
This comments section has gone nuts.
The “Tension” either the Supernovae data is wrong or the CMB data is wrong OR drum roll… both. I think that red shift interpretation has problems. Halton Arp was set aside and ignored but that will come back to bite. Science will pay for that. CMB data reduction is a huge problem (hand waving), monopole was not measured at L2 also reading the temperature of the Universe and deriving cosmology from it as you see thru the noisy galaxy. The miracle is that they are even that close. I think eventually both will be found in error.
I hope I am wrong but scientists have been ignoring big issues. Then they find galaxies 400 M years after “creation” and they scratch their heads.
You will always find new physics when the current physics is wrong😂
Dark stars sound very interesting. Want to learn more.
Why Dr. Abdus Salam's role you will not mention while speaking about Standard
Model ?
I wonder if she likes "Dark Star Orchestra?" I know I do, and you should too. They even play the imperfections 😂 silliness aside, they are a great band.
16:00 🙋🏻♂️I have a model that is made from the core sound of life it’s self and joins twin opposing forces at a 90 degree velocity angles with a self levelling automated torsional direction steering force built with in a single harness / chassis hopefully run by a heart engine of apposing magnetically pistons to go I don’t don’t know where ?👀up-down in-out who knows 😂 the Mrs wont let me upgrade the holden vectra
alloy and all ya know😮
Can’t afford a Deloraine 😂
21:01 yeah found your singularity too ✋🏽👁🤚🏽
Could not have got here with out it 😊
26:58 well
I always wanted to know dose the splitting of the atoms in the round thing give off sound. At what speed dose one need to pulse the light to get it to split. Is the there a correlation between the escape velocity to size of matter coming or going from our universe. Is lighting visible teleportation of positive changed particles 😂
oh I have more 👀🙃
Yet feel I know the answers already 😂 but hey
ya don’t ask ya don’t get 🙏🏼
You posted this video at 5 o’clock in the morning? Do you sleep?!
It doesn't sound like male students have the same opportunities with her
You're picking on Sabina for not making public outreach.😂
Would
She's was wonderfully fascinating 👏
She's touches on the athiest over represented 1900s influences on physics and you know i still respectfully grapple with this based on how shared the physical lawism is between non or religious practicing jews along with Vatican 2 catholic plus some orthodox eastern Christians.
No offense but its very deterministic and historical struggles with crusading beliefs into work or works. Lol
The majority Bible believing American thats excluded
has the dialectical vision where they intentionally combat crusading theyre beliefs into life. Philosophically having cake and eating to based on not
Pretending the earth revolved around the sun in time when we know it didn't.
Speaking to epochs ,taxonomy.
Man made time inspired by God handed down to in the alphabetical exodus thru Jesus right all theos logos .
But this is a very good epistemology that fights hard with intentions yet its been alienated in academia
Like Harry Belafonte ?
Her phase is familiar.
Great video Brian. I would play poker with either of you. Your tells are quite apparent. Stop nodding your head Brian and correcting let her talk. No helium young lady. Pure hydrogen particles charged under an EMFS, just sayin. Stop lol.
Sounds familiar 🤔 .
21:50 Where did God come from ?
Too much mathification. It’s delusional.
Focus on the little words, my man...
The thing about physics is that it's consistent and measurable. We measure using numbers. We find ways to represent how the relationships between these numbers behave and we write them down as equations. Then we look at what the equations are telling us about reality. Sometimes if we are missing a piece of the puzzle we try to imagine an equation and then use that to try to identify and characterise the missing piece.
So Mathematics will always be at the heart of physics.
But if you don't like it because your brain isn't up to doing the maths, you can always go back to pulling pure uninformed guesses out of your arse and making up fairy stories to explain them.
@@X-boomer Maybe see an optician about that myopia. Tell all that to Maxwell + adjacent greatness. Or, Tesla. What do we have now, but 50-75 years of modest-at-best progress - stalled with epic failure of CERN.
If your only thinking particles, you can only see dust in your eyes - and universe. Grit Physics is tiresome and dead-end.
Sure, tweaking ‘tech’ gets easy as material treats called progress anymore, but no real advancements and inability to do anything, but try to fit Cinderella’s slipper on Ugly Step-Sisters.
@@jonathanedwardgibson you have just exposed your ignorance. As far as physics goes, Tesla was nobody. He was just an engineer.
Maxwell kick-started the late 19thC revolution in physics by putting all aspects of electromagnetism on a solid mathematical footing. Without him I doubt Einstein would developed Special Relativity. Maxwell was a God of mathematical physics.
I have no special love for particle physics. The standard model is just a useful tool by which we can identity and leverage emergent symmetries and test our theories by making concrete measurements . QFT is where it's at. It's at least closer to where we will find the underpinnings of reality.
I think you should give up. You've imagined that you know something about physics by watching a load of woo woo graphics heavy pop sci RUclips videos without the maths in. That's where the delusion happened.
@@X-boomer I don’t need a physics degree to know counting how many cosmic string wrap ‘round head of pins leads to a nearly a century of no-progress {easy answer: all of them}. Rebrand it quantum this or dark-pixie-woo-that if you need to rebrand for grant money, but Einstein is has run out of runway and a low-level energy skien fills the empty equations.
The question remains, why this compulsion to defend and belittle what is obvious to so many? We’ll see how important your ‘tude is in the history books, or we probably won’t since your too busy gaming for smug-points on social media.
Well, as long as you have a self-justified logic, then you can't be wrong, huh ? specially, when you can't test those assumptions. Theoretical physicists should set the boundaries of their studies on only the things that can be proven or tested. Otherwise, it's useless.
Theorists had better get the game on or give it up and go home. There is a risk that they will become as obsolete as amateur comet hunters. When AI gets a mission to crunch 120,000 papers on cosmology, QFT, particle physics and gravity theory it will probably spit out a complete theory in full. The theorists have too narrow a perspective and don't link problems well between fields of study which are ever more microscopic. There is always the problem of group thinking which is a menace to success. Why do they resist the 2Time ((bijection of time) models so vociferously? they cannot retrain their mind which is stuck in a particular model framework.
sure is the dark ages for cosmology
Dr Keaten please say SteelMan or SteelWomen or SteelNonBinaryPersonOfColorLatinX.. Great podcast, thanks!!
If you don’t know what gravity is don’t call yourself a physicist, astronomer or cosmologist or indeed even a well informed human being. So,no.
Tbf no one knows what gravity is. We have algorithms that works most of the time, but fail at the very large and very small scales.
Gravity = = It ain't heavy.
Cause of gravity published in 2002: “The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy “, Mark McCutcheon. “G” calculated from first principles- the hydrogen atom- in 2002.