As a historian, I find science just as fascinating. I could also listen to professor Cox all day. Absolutely skilled at making complex things sound simple.
Brian Cox does not know. He is the 'face' of unknowing.. Currently a very profitable pastime.. But if it is genuine knowing you want to achieve, there are ways.. However, the first requirement is to realise that knowing is its own 'prize'. It does not need to be lavished with capitalist adornments and/or piles of cash.. So here is one of the main problems of understanding.. People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable.. Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily.. All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective. spaceandmotion
It expanded into the universe as it is now! Plenty there to explore. As for "Where" the single point was, that's a fallacious question if space and time came into existence by that point inflating into what is space and time which didn't exist up until then. No space = no place for the singularity, and no time = no time for it to exist in. Remove the 3 spatial dimensions and the forth one: time, and you are left with a single point of no size, nowhere. It sounds impossible to us as such, but only because we don't know, and cannot access such things as other dimensions, opposite/negative dimensions... all being out of our scope of not just exploration, but existence as we know it altogether, yet possibly existence not much different for a whole other, possibly immeasurable amounts of universes within the same space and time that aren't space and time to each other, and can coexist without interfering with each other, or exist being entwined with each other within the many quantum fields, just on different frequency harmonics than what give our universe mass and energy, and allow interactions between them, even if not apparent. Mind melting I know, but such are very possible truths of theoretical physics.
I think what OP is Saying is that when something is said to expand it is implied that there is a space into which it is expanding. Big bang contained all of space along with all matter, then what space was there for it to possibly expand through? The answer to this question I have always been given is that the universe is not expanding into anything, but rather simply expanding. Growing larger in size. This isn’t exactly an answer to the question but rather a clarification of the meaning of the word expand, or the more specific meaning of it In this context
Again, I think I've I've finally got it (took long enough). "In the middle of a timeless nothing in the midst of a non-existent nowhere ... something suddenly changed and triggered a massive explosion; the fallout from which is us and the universe." Okay, Scottie, NOW you can beam me up ...
When the WHY is clear then the HOW is easy.... Example: Why I need to know time Then.. Invent a watch (how is afterwards easy) Why I need to communicate long distance Then invent a phone....(how to invent is afterwards easy) Why I need to calculate... Invented a calculator (how is afterwards easy) Then
How can you measure the distance between planets to get an idea of when this happened if we don’t know where the exact center of the entire universe is wouldn’t we need to know the center point or where the bang took place to know how far away things have moved since the explosion happened?
I like when Brian says, " We Know" with such conviction and assurance. In a world where so much is just guesswork, it's reassuring that there are things that we know to be true. Thx Brian.
Yeah and in the past people have said such things before, like the world is flat and if you go over the speed limit of 27 mph you'll suffocate, or this person will never wake up from this coma or this person will never walk again, or it's not possible to reach the stars.. He and all those in his field do not have all the answers. And should not be saying such thing's to answers that do not have. You'd have thought that from just a small amount of thing's i've pointed out here to you, that they'd learn not to be so rash and quick to spout off on thing's that have no knowledge of.
@@patrickdoyle9369 2+2=4 does it not. The scientific method makes it possible for scientists to say we "know" due to observation, measurement and experiment. and it's never just one person, it's a whole community of people, saying we "know". If physics was makebelieve then we wouldn't have, what we have today. Just my opinion.
Most of the "we know" examples are either loose statements made by individuals or predate scientific method. When he says we know in context of big bang this means what we actually know and have hard data up to 10^-13 seconds after big bang. We know how matter behaves in such conditions based on rewound laws of physics and LHC research.
(0:50) When following logic, "Why?" is the first question to be asked followed by all other inquiries. You don't take the #1 information-gathering question off the table merely for the appearance of presupposition.
So here is one of the main problems of understanding.. People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable.. Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily.. All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective. spaceandmotion
The atom sized universe might have been the size of a grapefruit. However, this only describes the observable universe. If the universe is flat and infinite, then the primordial grapefruit would have floated amongst the cosmos which may or may not have been compressed.
"Why" is a philosophical question. It's the philosophy's final question. The answer lies in the following dilemma: If you had a choice between: - being Nothingness; - deluding yourself into believing this dream equals reality to create and feel love. You would do anything to create and feel love, hence why you exist. Note that my words have an expanded meaning: - Nothingness = a state where nothing exists at all, yet something exists that allows the creation of the dream; a true paradox. - Dreaming = believing this reality is real while it cannot be real due to the paradox of inability to create something out of nothing. - You = God, Everything that exists, Absolute, All-encompassing infinity of all possible realities. - Creativity = Love = Everything that exists, all possible combinations of things and no-things, Being, Togetherness, Intelligence, etc, etc, etc (includes everything, both Evil and Good because evil and good are relative to the POV of the material form).
I hope Brian reads this because it's a question I long to try and understand an answer for. If travelling at the speed of light, strange things happen to time (as far as we understand). So what happens to particles say from an exploding star that travel at the speed of light? Does this mean these particles are somehow travelling in time? If so, is the universe a soup of different times? How can different times exist together, because these particles would reappear in space at different times from their origin?
i dont believe particles traveling from exploding stars CAN travel at the speed of light. from my understanding of nova and electron degeneracy pressure within stars, it is NOT possible for them to reach the speed of light because they CANNOT travel at the speed of light. As the gravity of stars contract the cores and force the particles to move ever-so quickly, they do not ever reach the speed of light.
Search RUclips for videos on Special Relativity. Only light travels at the speed of light. Nothing else. Light particles (photons) could not experience time even if they had eyes and a brain. Imagine a photon leaving Earth at the speed of light and as it started it was looking a clock, the time displayed on that clock would never change, no matter how long the photon looked back at that clock as it raced into space. Because new photons showing different times could never catch the Our photon flying away at the speed of light To someone on Earth the clock would continue to work normally. Humans on Earth would experience time normally, protons never experience time.... that's Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. How we experience time is affected by how fast we travel and how far we are from massive objects. So if you stayed on the International Space Station for a year, time would slow for you compared to someone who stayed on Earth. But the difference would not that much, the Space station is flying fast enough nor its orbit that distant from Earth. On practical problem caused not to work well if adjustments aren't made for the speed of their satellites and how the height of their orbit. So GPS would be impractical if Special Reality was ignored. Crazy as it might seem time passes differently depending on your location and the speed at which you are moving.
'Time' is simply the motions of existence. Humans have invented a measurement system based on their own subjective experience and called it 'time'.. spaceandmotion
@@fluentpiffle Trains played a large part in our standard uniform of time on Earth. The Royal Observatory, Greenwich, provided the standard for 'London time', counting noon from the Sun's zenith over the 0° meridian. In 1852, the timekeepers at Greenwich...
@@catalinacurio That's right, and before that we invented 'sundials'.. All Human inventions, to measure the motions of existence form a purely Human perspective..
The universe itself, its size and how it came to be its incomprehensible to the human mind. I think that was always there, We are just trying to explain it on human terms.
@@sinclairj7492 how do you know that? More research needs to be done to find the answers. Until then though, it is entirely possible that our universe has infinitely existed, in one form or another. The big bang might have been a transition, rather than a creation.
@@allstarwatt7246 If the universe was infinite, then the past would be infinite, if the past was infinite then there would be no today and tomorrow would never come
Humans are aspects of existence, so in order to explain we have to be able to think in universal terms, which is possible, but is a step much like that one on the moon.. So here is one of the main problems of understanding.. People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable.. Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily.. All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
Feels good to know that even my "teacher" askes if/why Big Bang bang happened. He was the first giving a lecture even I could understand. Still think the singularity theory could be true, like the universe just starts in a Black Hole.
The Big Bang is understood as the beginning of our universe, where all matter and energy were concentrated in an extremely hot and dense state before rapidly expanding. However, the question of "why" the Big Bang happened is still a subject of scientific inquiry and philosophical debate. Some theories suggest it could be a result of quantum fluctuations in a vacuum, while others explore ideas related to multiverses or the laws of physics as we understand them. What do you think about the idea that our universe could be just one of many in a multiverse?
I love science and have a lot of trust in the the theories we currently have. My only struggle is when we start talking about what happened 10^-30 seconds and stuff like the when the 4 force broke up into their own. I think because I don’t know the math.
No, it’s because there is no definitive answer, like when BC said that the atoms “crystalized” from the energy is a guess, there is no mathematically theory as to how it happened, there is a theory that there was a field that decayed into the quarks and electrons, again no supporting evidence or math. The truth is what BC also said, we just don’t know
@@wdbressl It's not just a guess, it is an educated one backed by evidence. Using colliders like the LHC, they have been able to replicate conditions that existed in the universe shortly after the big bang and are able to see how nature plays out from those conditions. It may not be 100% definitive, but when results from your experiments exactly replicate what your theories predicted, it gives a lot of credibility tot he theory as a whole
I would argue that "WHY?" isn't really asking for a rationale but rather simply doesn't presume that creation was *inevitable* . "How?" presumes that since it is, it was always going to be. That simply is unsatisfying from *within* the universe but may be THE answer before/outside it...
The existentially logical answer is that whatever possibility exists is BOUND to occur at some stage, given that there is an 'eternity' in which to do so.. So it is a question that is also tied to the nature of how things exist, and how we can determine what 'eternity' might mean.. Here is one of the main problems of understanding.. People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable.. Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily.. All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
The Qur'an says that "the heavens and the earth were joined together as one unit, before We clove them asunder" (21:30). Following this big explosion, Allah "turned to the sky, and it had been (as) smoke. He said to it and to the earth: 'Come together, willingly or unwillingly.
Yeah, I've been saying for years that people need to stop asking "why" and start asking "how" when talking about the universe. People are obsessed with finding some "divine meaning" and "purpose." There's no such thing and that mindset has held us back for thousands of years. We're not special. We're not "put here for a reason." We're here because that's how it played out. Asking "why" leads to Creationism. Asking "how" leads to finding a possible answer.
Time is fascinating. I worked the subway stations for nearly 10 years. From one end of the city to the other. Every so often I would notice the city would be saying that, "Today just flew by" or "The day was just dragging along." How can an entire city complain about the same time paradox unless it was effected by it. Maybe a time distorted bubble the earth passes through in its revolution around the sun. Maybe random waves of time distortion hitting the earth? Maybe they're randomly given off by the sun. Maybe they're from outside our Terran system and reach us in intervals. ???? Ti-i-i-ime, is on my side. Yes, it is!
My question is: why is universe expanding to its time proportional to the relative space of a parallel universe in an infinite loop of cosmos and never ending space???
Prior to the "big bang", I don't think that time really existed, it's a kind of by-product of "stuff" existing, I don't think that time exists outside the "shell" of the total universe (not just the observable one) space defined as physical dimensions can only reach as far as light/time has travelled so can't be infinite.
Maybe the entire universe has always been infinite and at time zero was also of infinite density. Stay with me on this one. If our finite observable universe was at time zero, of infinite density then it must have been of zero volume. If the entire universe is currently of infinite volume then even if it were at time zero also of infinite density it may still have been of infinite volume. A finite value divide by an infinite value = zero ( observable universe) An infinite value divided by an infinite values = infinite value, or zero, or 1 or all of the above. Infinities don’t make mathematical sense.
@@mitseraffej5812 Managed to "stay with you", I think!!!!! Interesting enough for me not to comment on it straight away! The way I see it, these 'ideas' have exactly the same merit as the most advanced theories because none of them can be proven at this time, hence the word 'theory' You have an interesting idea!
@@mitseraffej5812 okay, my thoughts on your ideas are more or less agreeable, but if there existed an infinately massive object, would it actually be able to escape itself thereby causing the initial inflation period? Or is it possible that because time did not exist before the inflation, there couldn't be any time dilation occurring which creates the effect that we recognise as gravity? If so, could the strong nuclear attractive force be responsible for everything being in that one "place"?
@@stuartmoulton6426 How, where or when does that one “place” even exist if space-time was not yet a thing? I often think that human intelligence lacks the ability to intuitively understand or visualise such things. I expect that like myself, you find it astounding that most people have not the slightest curiosity about this subject.
@@mitseraffej5812 Not sure about yourself but I didn't get very far with my physics studies at school (a long time ago) because my understanding of advanced mathematics let me down! I was always "up to speed" understanding the theoretical stuff because I have always had the "imagination" required. For this reason, most of the ideas I have are the products of my imagination and nuggets of knowledge that I've picked up along the way that kind of stand up to my own scrutiny, but is not based upon "recognized fact" and unfortunately I don't have access to any major league astrophysicists who would be able to explain to me why I am either right or wrong in my thoughts.... The fact is that I cannot answer the question of how stuff could exist in the absence of time/space. I do however agree with you in the not understanding why more people don't think about this stuff, maybe they start to but once they get too far down the rabbit hole to see the sun they become worried about their own sanity!!!!
Not if there was never a beginning? Also a valid question is 'Why should there be a 'beginning' at all, and why can we not accept reality for what it is when it is all around us? spaceandmotion
@@immigrationadviser4711 But it is not a question of whether anyone is 'right', it is a question of necessity and plausibility.. We use these to eventually develop an alignment with 'what is'.. With 'seeking', we must realise that it can only be that which actually exists that CAN be sought.. Looking for things that only exist as a mathematical hypothesis is a waste of time...but I suspect the continued 'funding' is good..
Because of how fantastically unlikely the fine tuning was, seems the best explanation is that our universe was created as part of a series of infinite other similar events. Still doesn't answer the question, but gives a new idea of a multiverse and the idea that our universe itself is part of something much bigger still, a place we couldn't begin to understand.
I believe our little place in the universe allowed stars and planets to evolve and that because our universe is geometrically flat or almost flat it is trillions of times bigger. I also believe consciousness is fundamental and consciousness is all that exists. This stems from philosophy however rookie presumptions have been made in science such as the reductionist view of what is the base particle or strings ect...science will rectify these mistakes in the near future and discover something about consciousness that is far more incredible than we can currently imagine. Check out Bernardo Kastrup's videos about this.
It’s difficult to wrap your head around the concept of infinity, so perhaps this universe is just another iteration of the last one. Etcetera, etcetera…..for infinity, in both directions (or every direction) in time?
@@dr.jamesolack8504 Yeah. Although I think time is meaningless in a multiverse which goes back to my "place we couldn't begin to understand" point. It is so far removed from our reality in this universe it would be as hopelessly inaccessible to our understanding as quantum mechanics would be to an ant.
Allah is the the lord of all the worlds. He is the most high and he is the creator of the 7 heavens (multiverses) and the earth. I honestly think… and this is just a theory of mine,I think Allah (God) is always creating none stop hence why he is the creator of all things, that he creates space such as the universe almost as a storage for all of his creatures such as US and many other things out there that our minds can’t comprehend! So the universe is some what storage space for fine tuning for existence of life. One day it will all come to an end the Universe and everything in it will come to an end and we all will return back to our lord because the afterlife is the forever life. Choose to believe in it or not it’s going to happen either way.
So here is one of the main problems of understanding.. People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable.. Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily.. All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
20 seconds into this video and you are already mis-representing BC. We have absolutely no idea how it all started. You can find him on RUclips in an interview in Australia saying he's fed up of this stuff. All we can say, he says, is that the universe was small, dense and incredibly hot 13.8 billion years ago.
No, everything in the universe didn't come from something the size of an atom, nor is the universe expanding. These concepts will be the subject of humour someday when the foibles are realized.
Right. Some random person on the Internet who presents exactly ZERO subject matter expertise tells the cosmologists that they've got it all wrong, and we should believe him for NO SPECIFIED REASON. Sure, buddy. I hope that panhandling is working out for you as a lifestyle choice. And don't forget to wear your tinfoil hat because of, you know, the alien rays.
The word *WHY* is lot harder than *HOW*? . At most times *WHY* isn't even a valid question to ask! *Science* is *HARD* , needs a lot of energy ⚡ to your 🧠 to process it. *At the fundamental level there's no validity to WHY all this 🌌 including 🌎 exists!*
There is one major problem I have with the big bang theory. When ever the big bang theory is mentioned they always say observable universe. But as we all know there are galaxies in which the light from them will never reach us. Due to this fact it leads me to believe that this is a major flaw in the big bang theory. There is also a problem I have with red shift, Due to the expansion of the universe the light waves are stretched. what if the light gets stretched so much we are unable to detect it
@@laughingbuddha2948 So I am to accept the current theory as being the fact and it is not my place to question the experts. If we all followed you thinking then the human race would still be in the stone age. Yes the calculations that have been done are only as good as the data that is available. I have a feeling that the James Web telescope will solve a few of the questions but inevitably will pose more questions than answers. Rather than you dismiss my questions as being nonsensical it would be more prudent if you would try to dispel my questions with facts. Theories are just that, theories and until they become scientific fact they will be unverified theories.
@@laughingbuddha2948 Yes, you are correct I do not discuss the Theory of relativity to my plumber, but as history has shown us what we thought was true has turned out to be incorrect. The difference between you and me, I question everything where as you accept everything. There are many theories, a single big bang multiple big bangs, the universe generates and regenerates itself, a multiverse, the incredible bulk and so on. These theories are so far just as plausible. Your post is the living proof that most humans are sheep and are constantly being lead. Thank you for you UN-informative conversation. You have a good life.
@@drsatan9617 Yes, I already knew that but it still does not validate the Big Bang theory or any of the other theories. The Hubble constant assumes that at the beginning there was zero expansion. What if the expansion of the universe was never at zero.
Could that extremely dense single point that preceded the Big Bang have been a black hole? Was there ever a universe that preceded the Big Bang? The theories and questions are endless. The idea of nothing existing just blows the mind.
Earth was formless and void ,you can,t have nothing full stop , What exploded and to really understand owt how can explosion exploded in to nothing from nothing , Do these clowns get in a room together and bet each other who can come up with the most stupid things
yeah its kinda funny for me, the 2 ideas that "something" whatever that may be, has existed for eternity (eternity itself being unfathomable) vs the idea that something just popped into exitance from absolutely nothing.... are equally mind blowing.... as is the idea of a god, but lets not go there lol...
@@charliedavis8447 why not go there? Everything has a purpose. Why does the universe care that you want to eat in order to survive and live? Why are you programmed for that?
Before the video started, came a pay advert from PETA describing the horrific conditions a monkey is being kept in confinement in a tiny solitary box for the past 16 ....16!!!!!!!...years!!! For research porpuses in a lab. It brought the most deep painfull tears I've cried in the past 10 years or so. After seing that cry for help from PETA, I really couldn't pay any attention to this clip about the Big Bang. I just hope the Big Bang didn't happen, in order for us humans, to do this cruelty actions over other animals. I'm sorry about my comment....but believe me, I'm still crying like a baby :(
Constant interaction creates constant expansion. I have a solid theory as to the why and how the universe came into existence. No one can seem to counter my theory either. One day I'll get to explain it to someone who matters.
The part of the universe we know about is meniscule in comparison to what we don’t know about. Here is my theory: The universe goes on forever…. Has been here forever….. life as we recognize it and life as we wouldn’t recognize it also exists throughout the universe. Life has gone on forever before we became aware of it and life will go on forever after our galaxy is gone. The stars too numerous to count , grow exponentially and are responsible for all life and planets and galaxies here and far far away and the cycle of life never ends but we only live once.
Reality is stranger than we can suppose. We used to think the Earth was the center of the universe. We used to think space travel was impossible. Mysteries are endless
In order to follow the law of conservation, I have a gut feeling that it's possible there's a whole bunch of bubbles interacting with each other on a grand medium like oil in water where the density's separate the oil in perfect little circles and they can absorb each other and move and maybe black holes are grand recycling machines in the universe and the laws of conservation of matter aren't broken, they take a form of matter and they convert it to other forms of matter but it doesn't gain or disappear, it just alters, maybe into gas form or plasma who knows, they could travel through the black hole 🕳️ into another universe bubble and recycle ♻️ energy there still with the universe, or it could transfer to a different far off region of the same universe bubble? Maybe in different bubbles they all run by the same base laws but maybe in every bubble the factors to the power and the interactions of those base forces are randomly jumbled up, and there's many bubbles that are unstable, but through natural selection, you would come across stable bubbles but it would be like nature and evolution or if babies survive to past birth and childhood to adult hood... Idk just a random theory but of course nothing answers how that started I don't understand how we will ever figure that out and honestly I'm okay with that. I've found peace with finding that it's okay to not find the answers for everything, for certain things, maybe that's the point. It's probably impossible for us in our human perspective to figure out these questions and that's okay, nature has it's ways and I'm sure it will all work out in the end or else why would it function the way it does. Nature is very therapeutic for me. Observing the seasons as I hike with my dogs, how trees get recycled by fungi, interconnection within ecosystems. It all can teach us things about other things if we look at those things with the right Perspective.
The communications delay between Earth and Mars is approximately 20 minutes. We're either viewing the light from Mars in the future, Einstein's past dimensions of space-time or in real time, which do you think is more logical? The speed of light according to Einstein's relativity is 186,000 miles per second, but according to physics if two mechanical watches were synchronized on earth and one traveled across the universe and back, there would be no difference in time between the mechanical watches proving the speed of light is instantaneous as the only way a mechanical watch will run slow is if you tighten the main spring :-). Big Bang, Einstein's relativity-time dilation and nearly all of science debunked. There are 7.7 billion people on planet Earth, yet I was the only one who knew I was viewing the light and images of the universe in real time, maybe I should be working for NASA or Elon Musk :-) Light waves can stretch, bend-curve and occupy a state of superposition, whereas the hypothetical Einstein projectile light particle (photon), a particle that has never been observed cannot be both a particle and wave. There are no space-time fantasy unions or gravity waves that can join a particle, wave and time together then bend, curve and stretch them like a rubber band. Neither time nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch time like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. The James Webb Space Telescope is not a time machine, you can’t travel back in time to view the beginning of the universe with telescopes that were made in the future :-). Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. The speed of light can be slowed from 186,000 miles per second down to 38 mph by shooting a laser through extremely cold sodium atoms acting as “optical molasses” If the universe were suddenly destroyed, collapsed or fell into a black hole do you honestly think slowing down the speed of light with sodium atoms would save the earth from being destroyed, giving people on earth time to find another planet to colonize and destroy :-). Using optical clocks, lasers and GPS to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. If black holes reside in a region of Einstein's theorized space-time where gravity and mass are so dense that nothing, neither mass-particles nor electromagnetic radiation such as light can escape then how could it be possible for the entire mass of our universe to escape the unimaginable density of the proposed Big Bang? According to general relativity sufficient compact mass-density will deform space-time to form a black hole which obviously debunks both Big Bang theory and relativity! Big Bang theorists rely on red shift to support the hypothesis that the universe is expanding, the very phenomena that supports the hypothesis of a (non-expanding static universe). You can duplicate the ion thruster jets of a black hole in a vacuum using a Tesla coil or build one using high voltage-an array of magnets-a CRT-TV yoke or inductor coil. Black holes are nothing but plasma driven vortex electromagnetic fields expanding electromagnetic waves in space. Since the vortex of black holes are thought to be at the center of all galaxies they might be the very force that created them. Gravitational lensing occurs in all wavelengths of light including (red shift-microwave background radiation). Gravity from huge celestial objects of galaxies bend, curve and expand light giving the appearance of what Einstein wrongly theorized as time dilation-space-time-debunking the big bang. Mass from galaxies, planets and black hole electromagnet fields bend, curve and expand light giving the appearance of what Einstein wrongly theorized as time dilation-space-time dimensions. Light like all electromagnetic radiation and electricity is the result of moving electrons, as moving electrons of charged electromagnetic waves-light travel through the plasma of the universe each lump (or "quanta") of energy in the electromagnetic waves are charged then discharged to the next lump, eventually the energy dissipates causing the delay in radio communications giving the appearance of time dilation - the appearance of longer wavelengths in red shift. Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. If space was curved-warped according to Albert Einstein's curved-warped gravity theory, like a boat in the ocean these same gravity waves would affect time and the perfect balance in solar system orbital mechanics throwing planets off course-out of orbit in a collision course towards the sun where a planets gravity and time would increase and decrease with different velocity rates as they ascend and descend the curves of gravity waves. Using optical clocks and lasers to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. If gravity is the result of mass then before the universe came into being gravity couldn't have existed simply because mass was not yet created! Galaxies with massive gravity from the early Big Bang would have been gravitationally bound like the Andromeda galaxy is to the Milky Way galaxy, the sun, moon and planets in all solar systems in the universe yet these early galaxies were able to somehow escape these massive gravitational forces continuing to expand at an increasingly faster rate. Into what, nothing? Nothing has no properties! Neither the atom, universe nor time can be created or destroyed. Albert Einstein an autistic violinist patent clerk that had access to more papers than Suzanne Somers litter box yet creates theories with more bugs than Terminix. “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” a state of superposition where time, and gravity run inwardly, outwardly, in all directions in the same time frame, similar to the electromagnetic field having no beginning and no end. If space was curved-warped according to Albert Einstein's curved-warped gravity theory, like a boat in the ocean these same gravity waves would effect time and the perfect balance in solar system orbital mechanics throwing planets off course-out of orbit in a collision course towards the sun where a planets gravity and time would increase and decrease with different velocity rates as they ascend and descend the curves of gravity waves. Using optical clocks and lasers to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. Neither time nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch time like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. Albert Einstein, an autistic violinist patent clerk that had access to more papers than Suzanne Somers litter box yet creates theories with more bugs than Terminix-Magnetron.
The theory of everything according to humans that believe their intellect evolved from a monkeys brain. If the light waves from the sun were 8 minutes and 20 seconds in a past dimension of Einstein's space-time then people on Earth are just imagining the infrared warmth of the sun coming up on the horizon. The communications delay between Earth and Mars is approximately 20 minutes. We're either viewing the light from Mars in the future, Einstein's past dimensions of space-time or in real time, which do you think is more logical? Einstein's relativity is wrong light has no limitation of speed; it cannot be slowed down because it isn't moving. From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions. Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. According to Einstein's relativity-time dilation's, photos taken of the Earth from the Discovery Space station traveled from the past to the future violating the laws of physics, conservation of energy and common sense :-) The speed of light according to Einstein's relativity is 186,000 miles per second, but according to physics if two mechanical watches were synchronized on earth and one traveled across the universe and back, there would be no difference in time between the mechanical watches proving the speed of light is instantaneous as the only way a mechanical watch will run slow is if you tighten the main spring. Big Bang, Einstein's relativity-time dilation and nearly all of science debunked. Using optical clocks, lasers and GPS to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. Light waves can stretch, bend-curve and occupy a state of superposition, whereas the hypothetical Einstein projectile light particle (photon), a particle that has never been observed cannot. Unlike a TV or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of frames that create the appearance of a moving image. There are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just video recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. Neither time, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch Time, energy, and matter like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. Monkey see monkey do, the science of monkeys have brainwashed you. Will the James Webb Telescope view the birth of the first galaxies? Nope, the universe goes on to infinity. Neither time, the atom, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. The James Webb Space Telescope is not a time machine, you can’t travel back in time to view the beginning of the universe with telescopes that were made in the future :-). Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. If science uses Einstein's wrongly theorized speed of light like an odometer to calculate past dimensions of distance and time, then using that same method to calculate forward dimensions of distance and time would mean the Big Bang was created and expanded in the future before time existed. Unlike a television or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of still image frames that hypothetical Einstein projectile light particles photons create to give us the appearance of a moving image :-). The speed of electromagnetic wave is 186,282 miles per second vs Einstein's projectile light particle proton at 186,000 miles per second. Is this a coincidence or did Einstein plagiarize yet another phenomenon to fit the math of relativity? Electromagnetic waves in space can neither slow down or speed up, this is consistent with the law of conservation of energy. If light slowed down, its energy would decrease, thereby violating the law of conservation of energy so the speed of light is instantaneous and cannot travel slower than it does. If Einstein's projectile light (particle photon) had mass it's light could not travel across the universe, high speed particles traveling at 186,000 miles per second would break the Hubble and James Webb telescope mirrors, debunking the speed of light, Big Bang, Einstein's relativity and any science that uses relativity in their theories. Everyone knows cell phone electromagnetic radio waves travel both ways, yet Einstein's disciples believe time energy, mass and light can only travel one way back in time. If you simply run the Big Bang theory in reverse you reveal the insanity of Einstein's relativity and Big Bang theory. If the expansion of the Big Bang were true, time, energy, mass and light would be in the future from the vantage point of an expanding singularity-Big Bang and planet Earth would now reside in a past dimension of Einstein's time dilation (moving clocks run slow) space-time 13.8 billion years ago :-). It's truly amazing how the science and politics of the left are able to keep people denying reality, there are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space, yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. Pretending not to notice the gross contradictions-pseudoscience in Relativity is typical of Einstein's disciples, devaluing the source of any information that's in contradiction with their beliefs-theories. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. If the light from the universe travels to past dimensions of time then it's light is also traveling into future dimensions of time (instantaneously). “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” a state of superposition where time and gravity run inwardly, outwardly, in all directions in the same time frame, similar to the electromagnetic field having no beginning and no end. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End" Revelation 22:13. Disciples, remember thy 1st commandment, thou shalt not question thy lawgiver of relativity for blasphemers are the devil's pawn. Let thee not dwell in dissension of our Lord Albert, shun them, drive them back to their jungle lair amen. Albert Einstein, an autistic violinist patent clerk that had access to more papers than Suzanne Somers litter box yet creates theories with more bugs than Terminix- Magnetron. View my paper on academia (Big Bang, Einstein's Relativity-Time dilation and nearly all of science debunked) You can also find me on Twitter, Facebook, Truth Social and Mewe
Disappointing when in mid program they interjected speculative nonsense about the multiverse. Their rationale for accepting it without evidence was absurd.
Maybe the CMB is the fingerprint for our universe and defines us from a myriad of other universes throughout the vastness of infinite emptiness. Our SM and it's physics are applicable only to our universe. Each universe will have it's own unique signature and physics, which defines it from others and the dynamics, mechanics, content etc will be completely incomprehensible for our intelligence.
I like the idea that space was not created or pre-existed but began with time at Big Bang and continues to expand. this is not science but my Sunday Bible school stuff. I like it that scientists are coming full circle to the simple utter, "let there be light!"
21:30 Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and then We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?
We definitely do not live in an infinite string of cause and effect, that's logically ludicrous! All things must come from something that has no beginning. Any thinking person can come to this conclusion.
How did the singularity come into existence? Is Big Bang cyclic? Is there ever a possibility that the universe which is expanding at an accelerated pace will ever contract, and collapse to form another singularity?
@@Misses-Hippy First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. The total amount of energy and matter in the Universe remains constant, merely changing from one form to another. Boom I solved it.
@@andrewdouglas1963I guess you start with space gas, star stuff, but we probably go back further to another universal flux. I consider amoeba my early cousins.
Who are we to even talk about this subject in OUR language. When we don't actually speak the language of the Universe. We will never know how or why we became. We will NEVER KNOW.
Like a water fall could it be something similar? A mass amount of water carrying a massive flow of energy and dump it energy flow running out every where?
Black hole's effect TIME just like forces, energy and matter. (Not light, no mass) We already know, TIME is effected just like everything else. If black holes can focus all it collects to one point, by the same thinking, black holes are focusing all that it collects into one TIME. Pushing (or pulling) down, INTO TIME. Until pieces exist in past, present, and future at the same TIME, in TIME. (QUANTUM PARTICLES, Duh!) Makes sense to me. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a force, it might not be just a causality. Before you out yourself as a, "stuffed-shirt expert," know where I come from, crazy is a compliment. So to those who think me crazy, Thank You.
My idea so I get to name it! Voyager 1 is now in interstellar TIME! (Mikey's Time) Think of it like Alvin and the chipmunks. "Vyger's" message is fine. It's just sped up now that it's outside our suns time bubble or "Terran Time." It would be faster still if "Vyger" sent a message from beyond the Milky Way's time bubble. That name is still up for grabs. Outside the Local Group TIME is open, too. Now that "Vyger" is in interstellar space, it's also in the Milky Way's STANDARD, faster moving, interstellar TIME or "Mikey's Time." •Our sun's TIME bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured. •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. Wild guess I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until Vyger is outside the Ort cloud .007-.07% faster, maybe. Just for reference. •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% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference. •Outside any influence in True interstellar TIME: Name still open and unknown. ???? Here is where surfing time is SO choice. A minute is a minute in all. It's the rate/flow I'm talking about. Pass it on, please and thank you.
here is what the Holy Ari writes to us: The Tree of Life - a Poem, And he actually referred to the reason, that is, to the question why. Behold that before the emanations were emanated and the creatures were created, The Upper Simple Light had filled the whole existence. And there was no vacancy, such as an empty air, a hollow, But all was filled with that Simple, Boundless Light. And there was no such part as head, or end, But everything was One, Simple Light, balanced evenly and equally, And it was called “the Light of Ein Sof (Infinity).” And when upon His simple will, came the desire to create the worlds and emanate the emanations, To bring to light the perfection of His deeds, His names, His appellations, Which was the cause of the creation of the worlds, Then the Ein Sof restricted Himself, in His middle point, precisely at the center, And He restricted that Light, and drew far off to the sides around that middle point. And there remained an empty space, an empty air, a vacuum Precisely from the middle point. And that restriction was equally around that empty, middle point, So that the space was evenly circled around it. And after the restriction, when the vacant space remained empty Precisely in the middle of the Light of Ein Sof, A place was formed, where the Emanations, Creations, Formations, and Actions might reside. Then from the Light of Ein Sof, a single line hung down from Above, lowered into that space. And through that line, He emanated, created, formed, and made all the worlds. Prior to these four worlds, there was one Light of Ein Sof, whose Name is One, in wondrous, hidden unity, And even in the angels closest to Him There is no force and no attainment in The Ein Sof, As there is no mind of a created that could attain Him, For He has no place, no boundary, no name. --The Ari, The Tree of Life, Part One, Gate One
It's just so so strange, where did every matter in the universe come from, what was happening infinity ago?? What will happen infinity after. And then, what is reality and what is non-reality. We are all born few years/decades ago, what was it like before we were born, what will it be like when we are gone, what the fukk is all this really. Whoever is responsible, know this, it's not fair!
People only understand the idea of the universe because the reality of it falls under human logic but in fact it doesn’t and only when we put our own logic aside is when u get closer to the answer. Just like ppl can’t see certain gases or atoms is why we will never understand the why
So when a singularity is assumed as the beginning where exactly was the singularity? Of course I don't know for a fact but if I was to guess I would say that the singularity is the result of the beginning not the cause. I would also say that space is a different medium separate. I myself believe that blacksphere's are singularities and when the first one was born it was as small as it could get compared to the space that surrounds it. Very small in deed. As we were not here to observe it size is irrelevant.
I believe your question was specifically answered in the video. The singularity took place EVERYWHERE. That point was the only "where" which existed, in any sense of existence that we can understand.
@@starfishsystems you see if we actually did rewind time I think you find gas just gases. All these galaxies we see wouldn't have formed yet. So I think there was a starting position a single star that started the process of entropy to what we see now. From the first star and the meganova that occur a singularity was left and that's a blacksphere ( hole) so looking at it from that perspective the theory does have merit. The known universe did start after that blacksphere was born. And the first galaxy as a result. The meganova is what caused star formation from that point to today. All the stars after that first star are population 3 stars how do we know that's where the helium came from the first star produced helium and that's all it produced. How does that sound pretty good?
So this is where I have a small problem with the size of a singularity ? People say it was smaller then a grain of sand well that's impossibly and QM says nothing can infinitely small. But that's not entirely true. You see a blacksphere is infinitely small it can't get any smaller that's as small as anything can get. It doesn't matter how big it is to us. The definition is correct and if space was already there then how big would that blacksphere actually be compared to infinite space smaller then a grain of sand very small indeed. So really it just depends on how you interpret the theory your perspective 🤔 and who's perspective is correct. That's how I interpret the theory. So the theory? I think that maybe it's not the wrong theory I think it's trying to make something harder than it is. If you look at it from my point of view you don't have to add anything the theory holds up and if u don't need to add anything and it adds up maybe it might have some merit to it. Something to think about eh.
I guess if everything collapsed almost into a singularity then maybe you get infinite gravity and density but doesn't that leak radiation like a black hole?
I see what you mean. Like Hawking radiation. I wonder if it would be possible to one day make a space telescope that could look pass the cosmic horizon and see primordial hawking radiation left over from that moment of the singularity just before inflation. Like the cosmic background radiation. Or maybe we have it all wrong and what we see as the CMB is the Hawking radiation. Boom, mind blown across the depths of the universe!
@@SuperiorDave I guess not even Hawking radiation theory may apply when you have a singularity that small that is essentially all of space/time and operating at a quantum level. The mind boggles at it all.
@@alex79suited In fact we have no basis to know this. The singularity has not been observed. It's what happens when we extrapolate backwards to t=0, but it's not demonstrated that there ever was a t=0. More plausibly, it's asymptotic.
So here is one of the main problems of understanding.. People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable.. Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily.. All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective. spaceandmotion
I'm not a scientist, but when we say infinite, it's a euphemism, right? They keep saying "infinitely small/dense". Do they mean it's incalculable? And the acceleration of the expansion of space-time is only apparent from our observation. If one could "observe" our universe from the outside, it may appear inside-out, and be constantly contracting, like a black hole, or something.
Why is always said..or similar.. that the current universe we see was once compressed into something the size of an atom. Isnt that like saying a tree was once compressed into a seed? Not really. Isnt it better to say ..it grew from that
Big Bang is where space came from. Yet time already existed. How else could you ask what came before the BB. The only way to have a before is if time already exists.
@@drsatan9617 See as with all things time & space are currently explained by theories. All theory is debatable. Try this if you don't have anything nice to say then STFU. Since we have yet to truly define time my theory is every bit as relevant as all others.It is not your job to educate me. Look at it this way we have no idea what is outside the visible horizon. Therefore what we see as the universe could be just an expanding bubble within a larger structure. That larger structure will also be moving through time. So the time you refer to is not just a part of what we see as the universe, but is a part of the overall universe. It could also be that the BB made space and time combine , meaning time could have existed prior to what we see as the universe then at the BB the space that was being create was then made part of time. It is possible that what we see as the BB was truly a Big Bounce if that was the case then time existed prior to our beginning, so once again we have time before. They have yet to completely define gravity, with that in mind who's to say that gravity can or can't experience a critical mass. If critical mass can be achieved then even in a heat death under the proper conditions a black hole that reaches a critical mass and becomes a white hole in essence a BB. That does not recreate time it instead make it more like a lap time on a stopwatch. Meaning time started some time before the black hole went beyond the mass that can be held by gravity in a singularly. The larger universe experiences a localized BB and everything except time begins again. There are a lot of wrinkles to be explored, so don't except a theory just because Google says it is blah, blah. Do your best not to call the ideas of others stupid. It really makes you look that way. Try being civil and having a discussion with them instead of acting like your omnipotent, well like you and Google are that way. If you ask why someone thinks a certain way in the end you can walk away with new knowledge or no new knowledge yet you at least won't have gone out of your way to insult anyone. Cuz normally those who do things like that are covering something in themselves.
Center of the universe is easy it is the center from wherever the Observer is for all intents and purposes you can't get to the end of where you can see before it is gone out of your reach
![Yailin La Mas Viral, @kreizyk.official - Dale 2 (Remix) [Video Oficial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JaYHBzgqz94/mqdefault.jpg)
The only thing I know about the speed of light is that it arrives too early in the morning
Haha that’s facts
There it is
Best thing I’ve ever read! Thanks!
Except in winter.
We all start blowing in one direction at the same time...I think we might get a few more secounds
As a historian, I find science just as fascinating. I could also listen to professor Cox all day. Absolutely skilled at making complex things sound simple.
Yes: the documentaries e has done are great!
simple for simple minds?
@@jnrmack Usually I watch him explain
Quantum physics. Nothing simple about that
@@davyjones7177 Quantum physics.a word made up to discribe not knowing what they talk about.
Simple,
Definitely.
The stupid leading the stupid.
"We don't know." - Brian Cox
Brian Cox does not know. He is the 'face' of unknowing.. Currently a very profitable pastime..
But if it is genuine knowing you want to achieve, there are ways.. However, the first requirement is to realise that knowing is its own 'prize'. It does not need to be lavished with capitalist adornments and/or piles of cash..
So here is one of the main problems of understanding..
People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable..
Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily..
All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
spaceandmotion
I can comprehend everything starting at a single point, what I can't comprehend is where that single points was and what it expanded into
It expanded into the universe as it is now! Plenty there to explore. As for "Where" the single point was, that's a fallacious question if space and time came into existence by that point inflating into what is space and time which didn't exist up until then. No space = no place for the singularity, and no time = no time for it to exist in. Remove the 3 spatial dimensions and the forth one: time, and you are left with a single point of no size, nowhere. It sounds impossible to us as such, but only because we don't know, and cannot access such things as other dimensions, opposite/negative dimensions... all being out of our scope of not just exploration, but existence as we know it altogether, yet possibly existence not much different for a whole other, possibly immeasurable amounts of universes within the same space and time that aren't space and time to each other, and can coexist without interfering with each other, or exist being entwined with each other within the many quantum fields, just on different frequency harmonics than what give our universe mass and energy, and allow interactions between them, even if not apparent.
Mind melting I know, but such are very possible truths of theoretical physics.
Exactly, and this is how we know the bbtheory is absolutely correct. 🤯
I think what OP is Saying is that when something is said to expand it is implied that there is a space into which it is expanding. Big bang contained all of space along with all matter, then what space was there for it to possibly expand through? The answer to this question I have always been given is that the universe is not expanding into anything, but rather simply expanding. Growing larger in size. This isn’t exactly an answer to the question but rather a clarification of the meaning of the word expand, or the more specific meaning of it In this context
So my understanding is it’s not expanding into any space but creating the space as it expands
It was actually Carl Sagen who said "The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you". NDT might have just been quoting him.
NDT said it and didn't attribute it to Sagan. There's a video of him talking to William shatner about space-time and he says it
Quiet nerds
@@aliensarereal5316 yet your watching .....lol .....and reading the comments ....double lol
@@mikethompson7132 "Nerd" isn't an insult anymore, insecure boomer, and it's funny. Go away troll.
Stupidest reason I have heard for the lack of reasoning.
Again, I think I've I've finally got it (took long enough).
"In the middle of a timeless nothing in the midst of a non-existent nowhere ... something suddenly changed and triggered a massive explosion; the fallout from which is us and the universe."
Okay, Scottie, NOW you can beam me up ...
When the WHY is clear
then the HOW is easy....
Example:
Why I need to know time
Then.. Invent a watch (how is afterwards easy)
Why I need to communicate long distance
Then invent a phone....(how to invent is afterwards easy)
Why I need to calculate... Invented a calculator (how is afterwards easy)
Then
How can you measure the distance between planets to get an idea of when this happened if we don’t know where the exact center of the entire universe is wouldn’t we need to know the center point or where the bang took place to know how far away things have moved since the explosion happened?
I like when Brian says, " We Know" with such conviction and assurance. In a world where so much is just guesswork, it's reassuring that there are things that we know to be true. Thx Brian.
Yeah and in the past people have said such things before, like the world is flat and if you go over the speed limit of 27 mph you'll suffocate, or this person will never wake up from this coma or this person will never walk again, or it's not possible to reach the stars..
He and all those in his field do not have all the answers.
And should not be saying such thing's to answers that do not have. You'd have thought that from just a small amount of thing's i've pointed out here to you, that they'd learn not to be so rash and quick to spout off on thing's that have no knowledge of.
@@patrickdoyle9369 2+2=4 does it not. The scientific method makes it possible for scientists to say we "know" due to observation, measurement and experiment. and it's never just one person, it's a whole community of people, saying we "know". If physics was makebelieve then we wouldn't have, what we have today. Just my opinion.
He actually says, several times « as far as we know » since all theories are open to revision.
@@petyrkowalski9887 yes, and he's very clear on what they don't know, eg. dark matter and dark energy.
Most of the "we know" examples are either loose statements made by individuals or predate scientific method. When he says we know in context of big bang this means what we actually know and have hard data up to 10^-13 seconds after big bang. We know how matter behaves in such conditions based on rewound laws of physics and LHC research.
(0:50) When following logic, "Why?" is the first question to be asked followed by all other inquiries. You don't take the #1 information-gathering question off the table merely for the appearance of presupposition.
As a creator of film shorts, I find aspects of this fin troubling. Unusual for Brian Cox works.
So, if the universe began at a point that could be as small as an atom, in what was that atom sized universe floating in?
Nothing
The void
So here is one of the main problems of understanding..
People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable..
Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily..
All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
spaceandmotion
The atom sized universe might have been the size of a grapefruit. However, this only describes the observable universe. If the universe is flat and infinite, then the primordial grapefruit would have floated amongst the cosmos which may or may not have been compressed.
"Why" is a philosophical question. It's the philosophy's final question. The answer lies in the following dilemma:
If you had a choice between:
- being Nothingness;
- deluding yourself into believing this dream equals reality to create and feel love.
You would do anything to create and feel love, hence why you exist.
Note that my words have an expanded meaning:
- Nothingness = a state where nothing exists at all, yet something exists that allows the creation of the dream; a true paradox.
- Dreaming = believing this reality is real while it cannot be real due to the paradox of inability to create something out of nothing.
- You = God, Everything that exists, Absolute, All-encompassing infinity of all possible realities.
- Creativity = Love = Everything that exists, all possible combinations of things and no-things, Being, Togetherness, Intelligence, etc, etc, etc (includes everything, both Evil and Good because evil and good are relative to the POV of the material form).
I hope Brian reads this because it's a question I long to try and understand an answer for. If travelling at the speed of light, strange things happen to time (as far as we understand). So what happens to particles say from an exploding star that travel at the speed of light? Does this mean these particles are somehow travelling in time? If so, is the universe a soup of different times? How can different times exist together, because these particles would reappear in space at different times from their origin?
i dont believe particles traveling from exploding stars CAN travel at the speed of light. from my understanding of nova and electron degeneracy pressure within stars, it is NOT possible for them to reach the speed of light because they CANNOT travel at the speed of light. As the gravity of stars contract the cores and force the particles to move ever-so quickly, they do not ever reach the speed of light.
Search RUclips for videos on Special Relativity. Only light travels at the speed of light. Nothing else. Light particles (photons) could not experience time even if they had eyes and a brain. Imagine a photon leaving Earth at the speed of light and as it started it was looking a clock, the time displayed on that clock would never change, no matter how long the photon looked back at that clock as it raced into space. Because new photons showing different times could never catch the Our photon flying away at the speed of light To someone on Earth the clock would continue to work normally. Humans on Earth would experience time normally, protons never experience time.... that's Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. How we experience time is affected by how fast we travel and how far we are from massive objects. So if you stayed on the International Space Station for a year, time would slow for you compared to someone who stayed on Earth. But the difference would not that much, the Space station is flying fast enough nor its orbit that distant from Earth. On practical problem caused not to work well if adjustments aren't made for the speed of their satellites and how the height of their orbit. So GPS would be impractical if Special Reality was ignored. Crazy as it might seem time passes differently depending on your location and the speed at which you are moving.
'Time' is simply the motions of existence. Humans have invented a measurement system based on their own subjective experience and called it 'time'..
spaceandmotion
@@fluentpiffle Trains played a large part in our standard uniform of time on Earth. The Royal Observatory, Greenwich, provided the standard for 'London time', counting noon from the Sun's zenith over the 0° meridian. In 1852, the timekeepers at Greenwich...
@@catalinacurio That's right, and before that we invented 'sundials'.. All Human inventions, to measure the motions of existence form a purely Human perspective..
Misleading title, this was not 'why' it was 'how'
The universe itself, its size and how it came to be its incomprehensible to the human mind.
I think that was always there,
We are just trying to explain it on human terms.
The universe can’t be infinite, it had to have a beginning
@@sinclairj7492 how do you know that? More research needs to be done to find the answers. Until then though, it is entirely possible that our universe has infinitely existed, in one form or another. The big bang might have been a transition, rather than a creation.
@@allstarwatt7246 If the universe was infinite, then the past would be infinite, if the past was infinite then there would be no today and tomorrow would never come
Humans are aspects of existence, so in order to explain we have to be able to think in universal terms, which is possible, but is a step much like that one on the moon..
So here is one of the main problems of understanding..
People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable..
Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily..
All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
It's only humans who give meaning to the known universe, without humans it all meaningless
And our human nature doesn't change
Do you have permission to use these clips?
Feels good to know that even my "teacher" askes if/why Big Bang bang happened. He was the first giving a lecture even I could understand. Still think the singularity theory could be true, like the universe just starts in a Black Hole.
Realities are not always imaginable and all imagination need not be Real.
The Big Bang is understood as the beginning of our universe, where all matter and energy were concentrated in an extremely hot and dense state before rapidly expanding. However, the question of "why" the Big Bang happened is still a subject of scientific inquiry and philosophical debate. Some theories suggest it could be a result of quantum fluctuations in a vacuum, while others explore ideas related to multiverses or the laws of physics as we understand them.
What do you think about the idea that our universe could be just one of many in a multiverse?
I love science and have a lot of trust in the the theories we currently have. My only struggle is when we start talking about what happened 10^-30 seconds and stuff like the when the 4 force broke up into their own. I think because I don’t know the math.
No, it’s because there is no definitive answer, like when BC said that the atoms “crystalized” from the energy is a guess, there is no mathematically theory as to how it happened, there is a theory that there was a field that decayed into the quarks and electrons, again no supporting evidence or math. The truth is what BC also said, we just don’t know
No one does.
The math is needed to discribe an event you really understand
@@wdbressl It's not just a guess, it is an educated one backed by evidence. Using colliders like the LHC, they have been able to replicate conditions that existed in the universe shortly after the big bang and are able to see how nature plays out from those conditions. It may not be 100% definitive, but when results from your experiments exactly replicate what your theories predicted, it gives a lot of credibility tot he theory as a whole
@@mattwasilewicz9677 no they haven't. That's as true as people who claim, the experiments have been done that prove abiogenesis
Very good, but please do not add distracting background music.
" just because something is unimaginable to us doesn't mean it can't be a reality" when I use this it's wrong but when others use it it's fine
Since the video doesn’t explain ”why”, title is misleading
I would argue that "WHY?" isn't really asking for a rationale but rather simply doesn't presume that creation was *inevitable* . "How?" presumes that since it is, it was always going to be. That simply is unsatisfying from *within* the universe but may be THE answer before/outside it...
The existentially logical answer is that whatever possibility exists is BOUND to occur at some stage, given that there is an 'eternity' in which to do so..
So it is a question that is also tied to the nature of how things exist, and how we can determine what 'eternity' might mean..
Here is one of the main problems of understanding..
People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable..
Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily..
All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
The Qur'an says that "the heavens and the earth were joined together as one unit, before We clove them asunder" (21:30). Following this big explosion, Allah "turned to the sky, and it had been (as) smoke. He said to it and to the earth: 'Come together, willingly or unwillingly.
Yeah, I've been saying for years that people need to stop asking "why" and start asking "how" when talking about the universe. People are obsessed with finding some "divine meaning" and "purpose."
There's no such thing and that mindset has held us back for thousands of years.
We're not special. We're not "put here for a reason."
We're here because that's how it played out.
Asking "why" leads to Creationism.
Asking "how" leads to finding a possible answer.
Thumbs up. I always enjoy the videos. Thanks!
Time is fascinating. I worked the subway stations for nearly 10 years. From one end of the city to the other. Every so often I would notice the city would be saying that, "Today just flew by" or "The day was just dragging along." How can an entire city complain about the same time paradox unless it was effected by it. Maybe a time distorted bubble the earth passes through in its revolution around the sun. Maybe random waves of time distortion hitting the earth? Maybe they're randomly given off by the sun. Maybe they're from outside our Terran system and reach us in intervals. ???? Ti-i-i-ime, is on my side. Yes, it is!
Leave the weed alone
Time is fascinating until there's a deadline 💀
@@michaelking9818 never during work. Which is when this happened. Sorry, not applicable.
My question is: why is universe expanding to its time proportional to the relative space of a parallel universe in an infinite loop of cosmos and never ending space???
|\Psi
angle = \sum_{s_{z1}} \sum_{s_{z2}}\cdots\sum_{s_{zN}}\int_{V_1}\int_{V_2}\cdots\int_{V_N} \mathrm{d}\mathbf{r}_1\mathrm{d}\mathbf{r}_2\cdots\mathrm{d}\mathbf{r}_N \Psi |\mathbf{r}, \mathbf{s_z}
angle
Prior to the "big bang", I don't think that time really existed, it's a kind of by-product of "stuff" existing, I don't think that time exists outside the "shell" of the total universe (not just the observable one) space defined as physical dimensions can only reach as far as light/time has travelled so can't be infinite.
Maybe the entire universe has always been infinite and at time zero was also of infinite density. Stay with me on this one.
If our finite observable universe was at time zero, of infinite density then it must have been of zero volume.
If the entire universe is currently of infinite volume then even if it were at time zero also of infinite density it may still have been of infinite volume.
A finite value divide by an infinite value = zero ( observable universe)
An infinite value divided by an infinite values = infinite value, or zero, or 1
or all of the above.
Infinities don’t make mathematical sense.
@@mitseraffej5812 Managed to "stay with you", I think!!!!! Interesting enough for me not to comment on it straight away!
The way I see it, these 'ideas' have exactly the same merit as the most advanced theories because none of them can be proven at this time, hence the word 'theory'
You have an interesting idea!
@@mitseraffej5812 okay, my thoughts on your ideas are more or less agreeable, but if there existed an infinately massive object, would it actually be able to escape itself thereby causing the initial inflation period? Or is it possible that because time did not exist before the inflation, there couldn't be any time dilation occurring which creates the effect that we recognise as gravity?
If so, could the strong nuclear attractive force be responsible for everything being in that one "place"?
@@stuartmoulton6426 How, where or when does that one “place” even exist if space-time was not yet a thing?
I often think that human intelligence lacks the ability to intuitively understand or visualise such things.
I expect that like myself, you find it astounding that most people have not the slightest curiosity about this subject.
@@mitseraffej5812 Not sure about yourself but I didn't get very far with my physics studies at school (a long time ago) because my understanding of advanced mathematics let me down! I was always "up to speed" understanding the theoretical stuff because I have always had the "imagination" required.
For this reason, most of the ideas I have are the products of my imagination and nuggets of knowledge that I've picked up along the way that kind of stand up to my own scrutiny, but is not based upon "recognized fact" and unfortunately I don't have access to any major league astrophysicists who would be able to explain to me why I am either right or wrong in my thoughts....
The fact is that I cannot answer the question of how stuff could exist in the absence of time/space.
I do however agree with you in the not understanding why more people don't think about this stuff, maybe they start to but once they get too far down the rabbit hole to see the sun they become worried about their own sanity!!!!
Just because the science does not have the answer to “ why the universe began “ ,it should not discourage this question.
This is a valid question.
Not if there was never a beginning? Also a valid question is 'Why should there be a 'beginning' at all, and why can we not accept reality for what it is when it is all around us?
spaceandmotion
@@fluentpiffle you may well be right. We could be living in a cyclic universe. Seeking is human nature and we all are seeking for ultimate answer.
@@immigrationadviser4711 But it is not a question of whether anyone is 'right', it is a question of necessity and plausibility.. We use these to eventually develop an alignment with 'what is'.. With 'seeking', we must realise that it can only be that which actually exists that CAN be sought.. Looking for things that only exist as a mathematical hypothesis is a waste of time...but I suspect the continued 'funding' is good..
In today’s climate the theory with the least attention is likely to be the closest to truth..
spaceandmotion
Because of how fantastically unlikely the fine tuning was, seems the best explanation is that our universe was created as part of a series of infinite other similar events.
Still doesn't answer the question, but gives a new idea of a multiverse and the idea that our universe itself is part of something much bigger still, a place we couldn't begin to understand.
I believe our little place in the universe allowed stars and planets to evolve and that because our universe is geometrically flat or almost flat it is trillions of times bigger. I also believe consciousness is fundamental and consciousness is all that exists. This stems from philosophy however rookie presumptions have been made in science such as the reductionist view of what is the base particle or strings ect...science will rectify these mistakes in the near future and discover something about consciousness that is far more incredible than we can currently imagine. Check out Bernardo Kastrup's videos about this.
It’s difficult to wrap your head around the concept of infinity, so perhaps this universe is just another iteration of the last one. Etcetera, etcetera…..for infinity, in both directions (or every direction) in time?
@@dr.jamesolack8504 Yeah. Although I think time is meaningless in a multiverse which goes back to my "place we couldn't begin to understand" point. It is so far removed from our reality in this universe it would be as hopelessly inaccessible to our understanding as quantum mechanics would be to an ant.
Allah is the the lord of all the worlds. He is the most high and he is the creator of the 7 heavens (multiverses) and the earth. I honestly think… and this is just a theory of mine,I think Allah (God) is always creating none stop hence why he is the creator of all things, that he creates space such as the universe almost as a storage for all of his creatures such as US and many other things out there that our minds can’t comprehend! So the universe is some what storage space for fine tuning for existence of life. One day it will all come to an end the Universe and everything in it will come to an end and we all will return back to our lord because the afterlife is the forever life. Choose to believe in it or not it’s going to happen either way.
So here is one of the main problems of understanding..
People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable..
Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily..
All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
20 seconds into this video and you are already mis-representing BC. We have absolutely no idea how it all started. You can find him on RUclips in an interview in Australia saying he's fed up of this stuff. All we can say, he says, is that the universe was small, dense and incredibly hot 13.8 billion years ago.
Great Vids! keep up the good work!
Please, and I think I speak for everyone, start uploading in 4K! (or 1440p/60fps)
No you don't
Real question is what is space 🤗
And what is behind the worl??!!!...
Space is the absence of...
Space is mostly consisted of dark matter and energy. Little sprinkles of matter and gas drift in space.
@@wolff_tk9421 that's what it consists of...not what it is
Space are the holes in between the string in a net
You can see the feeling (which is possible), of Mr Pro. Brian Cox's grin.
No, everything in the universe didn't come from something the size of an atom, nor is the universe expanding. These concepts will be the subject of humour someday when the foibles are realized.
Yes and No.
The universe is expanding. Look at the red light shift of stars all around us.
Someday real soon!
spaceandmotion
Right. Some random person on the Internet who presents exactly ZERO subject matter expertise tells the cosmologists that they've got it all wrong, and we should believe him for NO SPECIFIED REASON.
Sure, buddy. I hope that panhandling is working out for you as a lifestyle choice. And don't forget to wear your tinfoil hat because of, you know, the alien rays.
Ron b you play guitar dads name is Robert just passed ? Just wondering if that's you. If so this is ur cousin lol
The word *WHY* is lot harder than *HOW*? .
At most times *WHY* isn't even a valid question to ask!
*Science* is *HARD* , needs a lot of energy ⚡ to your 🧠 to process it.
*At the fundamental level there's no validity to WHY all this 🌌 including 🌎 exists!*
There is one major problem I have with the big bang theory. When ever the big bang theory is mentioned they always say observable universe. But as we all know there are galaxies in which the light from them will never reach us. Due to this fact it leads me to believe that this is a major flaw in the big bang theory. There is also a problem I have with red shift, Due to the expansion of the universe the light waves are stretched. what if the light gets stretched so much we are unable to detect it
I don't think you ever did complex calculations.
@@laughingbuddha2948 So I am to accept the current theory as being the fact and it is not my place to question the experts. If we all followed you thinking then the human race would still be in the stone age. Yes the calculations that have been done are only as good as the data that is available. I have a feeling that the James Web telescope will solve a few of the questions but inevitably will pose more questions than answers. Rather than you dismiss my questions as being nonsensical it would be more prudent if you would try to dispel my questions with facts. Theories are just that, theories and until they become scientific fact they will be unverified theories.
@@liketoknow6566 You don't discuss the theory of relativity with your plumber. Your post is the living proof of that.
@@laughingbuddha2948 Yes, you are correct I do not discuss the Theory of relativity to my plumber, but as history has shown us what we thought was true has turned out to be incorrect. The difference between you and me, I question everything where as you accept everything. There are many theories, a single big bang multiple big bangs, the universe generates and regenerates itself, a multiverse, the incredible bulk and so on. These theories are so far just as plausible. Your post is the living proof that most humans are sheep and are constantly being lead. Thank you for you UN-informative conversation. You have a good life.
@@drsatan9617 Yes, I already knew that but it still does not validate the Big Bang theory or any of the other theories. The Hubble constant assumes that at the beginning there was zero expansion. What if the expansion of the universe was never at zero.
wait did you just steal brians audio and splice it into your video?
Could that extremely dense single point that preceded the Big Bang have been a black hole? Was there ever a universe that preceded the Big Bang? The theories and questions are endless. The idea of nothing existing just blows the mind.
Earth was formless and void ,you can,t have nothing full stop ,
What exploded and to really understand owt how can explosion exploded in to nothing from nothing ,
Do these clowns get in a room together and bet each other who can come up with the most stupid things
@@trudealcarpets4511 Sorry mate I have no idea what you’re going on about
yeah its kinda funny for me, the 2 ideas that "something" whatever that may be, has existed for eternity (eternity itself being unfathomable) vs the idea that something just popped into exitance from absolutely nothing.... are equally mind blowing.... as is the idea of a god, but lets not go there lol...
@@trudealcarpets4511 🤣
@@charliedavis8447 why not go there? Everything has a purpose. Why does the universe care that you want to eat in order to survive and live? Why are you programmed for that?
Lsd will help you connect to these parallel universes if used correctly
How could it all be compressed in an atom, it's unbelievable to get it.
Before the video started, came a pay advert from PETA describing the horrific conditions a monkey is being kept in confinement in a tiny solitary box for the past 16 ....16!!!!!!!...years!!! For research porpuses in a lab. It brought the most deep painfull tears I've cried in the past 10 years or so. After seing that cry for help from PETA, I really couldn't pay any attention to this clip about the Big Bang.
I just hope the Big Bang didn't happen, in order for us humans, to do this cruelty actions over other animals.
I'm sorry about my comment....but believe me, I'm still crying like a baby :(
Constant interaction creates constant expansion. I have a solid theory as to the why and how the universe came into existence. No one can seem to counter my theory either. One day I'll get to explain it to someone who matters.
Im interested 😀
I matter
And Nixon had a secret plan to get out of Vietnam
Write a paper.Submit it to physical review letters.
Bullshit
The part of the universe we know about is meniscule in comparison to what we don’t know about.
Here is my theory: The universe goes on forever…. Has been here forever….. life as we recognize it and life as we wouldn’t recognize it also exists throughout the universe.
Life has gone on forever before we became aware of it and life will go on forever after our galaxy is gone.
The stars too numerous to count , grow exponentially and are responsible for all life and planets and galaxies here and far far away and the cycle of life never ends but we only live once.
If the universe is infinite then there can only be one universe. You can’t say there’s an infinite number of marbles in my hand, but one in my pocket.
In today’s climate the theory with the least attention is likely to be the closest to truth..
spaceandmotion
Reality is stranger than we can suppose. We used to think the Earth was the center of the universe. We used to think space travel was impossible. Mysteries are endless
In order to follow the law of conservation, I have a gut feeling that it's possible there's a whole bunch of bubbles interacting with each other on a grand medium like oil in water where the density's separate the oil in perfect little circles and they can absorb each other and move and maybe black holes are grand recycling machines in the universe and the laws of conservation of matter aren't broken, they take a form of matter and they convert it to other forms of matter but it doesn't gain or disappear, it just alters, maybe into gas form or plasma who knows, they could travel through the black hole 🕳️ into another universe bubble and recycle ♻️ energy there still with the universe, or it could transfer to a different far off region of the same universe bubble? Maybe in different bubbles they all run by the same base laws but maybe in every bubble the factors to the power and the interactions of those base forces are randomly jumbled up, and there's many bubbles that are unstable, but through natural selection, you would come across stable bubbles but it would be like nature and evolution or if babies survive to past birth and childhood to adult hood... Idk just a random theory but of course nothing answers how that started I don't understand how we will ever figure that out and honestly I'm okay with that. I've found peace with finding that it's okay to not find the answers for everything, for certain things, maybe that's the point. It's probably impossible for us in our human perspective to figure out these questions and that's okay, nature has it's ways and I'm sure it will all work out in the end or else why would it function the way it does. Nature is very therapeutic for me. Observing the seasons as I hike with my dogs, how trees get recycled by fungi, interconnection within ecosystems. It all can teach us things about other things if we look at those things with the right Perspective.
Great explanation sir !!
I kind of agree with you !!!
Well thank God that science isnt governed by "gut feelings"
Seems like there is no evidence for this but hey maybe
The communications delay between Earth and Mars is approximately 20 minutes. We're either viewing the light from Mars in the future, Einstein's past dimensions of space-time or in real time, which do you think is more logical? The speed of light according to Einstein's relativity is 186,000 miles per second, but according to physics if two mechanical watches were synchronized on earth and one traveled across the universe and back, there would be no difference in time between the mechanical watches proving the speed of light is instantaneous as the only way a mechanical watch will run slow is if you tighten the main spring :-). Big Bang, Einstein's relativity-time dilation and nearly all of science debunked. There are 7.7 billion people on planet Earth, yet I was the only one who knew I was viewing the light and images of the universe in real time, maybe I should be working for NASA or Elon Musk :-)
Light waves can stretch, bend-curve and occupy a state of superposition, whereas the hypothetical Einstein projectile light particle (photon), a particle that has never been observed cannot be both a particle and wave. There are no space-time fantasy unions or gravity waves that can join a particle, wave and time together then bend, curve and stretch them like a rubber band. Neither time nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch time like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. The James Webb Space Telescope is not a time machine, you can’t travel back in time to view the beginning of the universe with telescopes that were made in the future :-). Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other.
The speed of light can be slowed from 186,000 miles per second down to 38 mph by shooting a laser through extremely cold sodium atoms acting as “optical molasses” If the universe were suddenly destroyed, collapsed or fell into a black hole do you honestly think slowing down the speed of light with sodium atoms would save the earth from being destroyed, giving people on earth time to find another planet to colonize and destroy :-). Using optical clocks, lasers and GPS to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing.
If black holes reside in a region of Einstein's theorized space-time where gravity and mass are so dense that nothing, neither mass-particles nor electromagnetic radiation such as light can escape then how could it be possible for the entire mass of our universe to escape the unimaginable density of the proposed Big Bang? According to general relativity sufficient compact mass-density will deform space-time to form a black hole which obviously debunks both Big Bang theory and relativity! Big Bang theorists rely on red shift to support the hypothesis that the universe is expanding, the very phenomena that supports the hypothesis of a (non-expanding static universe). You can duplicate the ion thruster jets of a black hole in a vacuum using a Tesla coil or build one using high voltage-an array of magnets-a CRT-TV yoke or inductor coil. Black holes are nothing but plasma driven vortex electromagnetic fields expanding electromagnetic waves in space. Since the vortex of black holes are thought to be at the center of all galaxies they might be the very force that created them.
Gravitational lensing occurs in all wavelengths of light including (red shift-microwave background radiation). Gravity from huge celestial objects of galaxies bend, curve and expand light giving the appearance of what Einstein wrongly theorized as time dilation-space-time-debunking the big bang. Mass from galaxies, planets and black hole electromagnet fields bend, curve and expand light giving the appearance of what Einstein wrongly theorized as time dilation-space-time dimensions. Light like all electromagnetic radiation and electricity is the result of moving electrons, as moving electrons of charged electromagnetic waves-light travel through the plasma of the universe each lump (or "quanta") of energy in the electromagnetic waves are charged then discharged to the next lump, eventually the energy dissipates causing the delay in radio communications giving the appearance of time dilation - the appearance of longer wavelengths in red shift. Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other.
If space was curved-warped according to Albert Einstein's curved-warped gravity theory, like a boat in the ocean these same gravity waves would affect time and the perfect balance in solar system orbital mechanics throwing planets off course-out of orbit in a collision course towards the sun where a planets gravity and time would increase and decrease with different velocity rates as they ascend and descend the curves of gravity waves. Using optical clocks and lasers to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing.
If gravity is the result of mass then before the universe came into being gravity couldn't have existed simply because mass was not yet created! Galaxies with massive gravity from the early Big Bang would have been gravitationally bound like the Andromeda galaxy is to the Milky Way galaxy, the sun, moon and planets in all solar systems in the universe yet these early galaxies were able to somehow escape these massive gravitational forces continuing to expand at an increasingly faster rate. Into what, nothing? Nothing has no properties! Neither the atom, universe nor time can be created or destroyed. Albert Einstein an autistic violinist patent clerk that had access to more papers than Suzanne Somers litter box yet creates theories with more bugs than Terminix. “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” a state of superposition where time, and gravity run inwardly, outwardly, in all directions in the same time frame, similar to the electromagnetic field having no beginning and no end.
If space was curved-warped according to Albert Einstein's curved-warped gravity theory, like a boat in the ocean these same gravity waves would effect time and the perfect balance in solar system orbital mechanics throwing planets off course-out of orbit in a collision course towards the sun where a planets gravity and time would increase and decrease with different velocity rates as they ascend and descend the curves of gravity waves. Using optical clocks and lasers to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing. Neither time nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch time like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. Albert Einstein, an autistic violinist patent clerk that had access to more papers than Suzanne Somers litter box yet creates theories with more bugs than Terminix-Magnetron.
The theory of everything according to humans that believe their intellect evolved from a monkeys brain. If the light waves from the sun were 8 minutes and 20 seconds in a past dimension of Einstein's space-time then people on Earth are just imagining the infrared warmth of the sun coming up on the horizon. The communications delay between Earth and Mars is approximately 20 minutes. We're either viewing the light from Mars in the future, Einstein's past dimensions of space-time or in real time, which do you think is more logical? Einstein's relativity is wrong light has no limitation of speed; it cannot be slowed down because it isn't moving. From every vantage point in the universe light is omnidirectional-instantaneously traveling in both directions. Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. According to Einstein's relativity-time dilation's, photos taken of the Earth from the Discovery Space station traveled from the past to the future violating the laws of physics, conservation of energy and common sense :-)
The speed of light according to Einstein's relativity is 186,000 miles per second, but according to physics if two mechanical watches were synchronized on earth and one traveled across the universe and back, there would be no difference in time between the mechanical watches proving the speed of light is instantaneous as the only way a mechanical watch will run slow is if you tighten the main spring. Big Bang, Einstein's relativity-time dilation and nearly all of science debunked. Using optical clocks, lasers and GPS to prove Einstein's time dilation-space-time curvature is like using a metal detector to find gold at Fort Knox. The closer you are to the electromagnetic fields, mass and gravity of the earth the more light bends aka gravitational lensing.
Light waves can stretch, bend-curve and occupy a state of superposition, whereas the hypothetical Einstein projectile light particle (photon), a particle that has never been observed cannot. Unlike a TV or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of frames that create the appearance of a moving image. There are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just video recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. Neither time, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. Time and space are independent of each other, not material bodies or fantasy unions that magically stretch Time, energy, and matter like a rubber band into space-time dimensions. Monkey see monkey do, the science of monkeys have brainwashed you.
Will the James Webb Telescope view the birth of the first galaxies? Nope, the universe goes on to infinity. Neither time, the atom, energy nor mass can create itself into nothing, reside in nothing or expand into nothing simply because nothing has no properties. The James Webb Space Telescope is not a time machine, you can’t travel back in time to view the beginning of the universe with telescopes that were made in the future :-). Light and electromagnetic waves are independent of each other. If science uses Einstein's wrongly theorized speed of light like an odometer to calculate past dimensions of distance and time, then using that same method to calculate forward dimensions of distance and time would mean the Big Bang was created and expanded in the future before time existed. Unlike a television or computer monitor the images we are viewing in the universe are in real time, not a series of still image frames that hypothetical Einstein projectile light particles photons create to give us the appearance of a moving image :-).
The speed of electromagnetic wave is 186,282 miles per second vs Einstein's projectile light particle proton at 186,000 miles per second. Is this a coincidence or did Einstein plagiarize yet another phenomenon to fit the math of relativity? Electromagnetic waves in space can neither slow down or speed up, this is consistent with the law of conservation of energy. If light slowed down, its energy would decrease, thereby violating the law of conservation of energy so the speed of light is instantaneous and cannot travel slower than it does. If Einstein's projectile light (particle photon) had mass it's light could not travel across the universe, high speed particles traveling at 186,000 miles per second would break the Hubble and James Webb telescope mirrors, debunking the speed of light, Big Bang, Einstein's relativity and any science that uses relativity in their theories.
Everyone knows cell phone electromagnetic radio waves travel both ways, yet Einstein's disciples believe time energy, mass and light can only travel one way back in time. If you simply run the Big Bang theory in reverse you reveal the insanity of Einstein's relativity and Big Bang theory. If the expansion of the Big Bang were true, time, energy, mass and light would be in the future from the vantage point of an expanding singularity-Big Bang and planet Earth would now reside in a past dimension of Einstein's time dilation (moving clocks run slow) space-time 13.8 billion years ago :-).
It's truly amazing how the science and politics of the left are able to keep people denying reality, there are no DCU digital convergence circuits in space, yet Einstein's disciples believe the light and moving images they see in the universe aren't really there, they're just recorded images of the past 13.8 billion years. Pretending not to notice the gross contradictions-pseudoscience in Relativity is typical of Einstein's disciples, devaluing the source of any information that's in contradiction with their beliefs-theories. You could lead a cult to water, but you can't make them think. If the light from the universe travels to past dimensions of time then it's light is also traveling into future dimensions of time (instantaneously). “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” a state of superposition where time and gravity run inwardly, outwardly, in all directions in the same time frame, similar to the electromagnetic field having no beginning and no end. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End" Revelation 22:13. Disciples, remember thy 1st commandment, thou shalt not question thy lawgiver of relativity for blasphemers are the devil's pawn. Let thee not dwell in dissension of our Lord Albert, shun them, drive them back to their jungle lair amen.
Albert Einstein, an autistic violinist patent clerk that had access to more papers than Suzanne Somers litter box yet creates theories with more bugs than Terminix- Magnetron. View my paper on academia (Big Bang, Einstein's Relativity-Time dilation and nearly all of science debunked) You can also find me on Twitter, Facebook, Truth Social and Mewe
Disappointing when in mid program they interjected speculative nonsense about the multiverse. Their rationale for accepting it without evidence was absurd.
It’s a theory it probably happened but it might not have.
To lead to this moment of my first comment. That might probably get a lot of likes.
Why is Freddie Mercury drawn at the 8:46 mark?
Ok, we don’t “know” what happen before Big Bang.. but what is the main theory?
Maybe the CMB is the fingerprint for our universe and defines us from a myriad of other universes throughout the vastness of infinite emptiness. Our SM and it's physics are applicable only to our universe. Each universe will have it's own unique signature and physics, which defines it from others and the dynamics, mechanics, content etc will be completely incomprehensible for our intelligence.
I like the idea that space was not created or pre-existed but began with time at Big Bang and continues to expand. this is not science but my Sunday Bible school stuff. I like it that scientists are coming full circle to the simple utter, "let there be light!"
Space is not a thing. It's the absence of things.
21:30
Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and then We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?
Answers are commensurate with the quality of questioning..
spaceandmotion
Well this video just became irrelevant since the new findings.
We definitely do not live in an infinite string of cause and effect, that's logically ludicrous! All things must come from something that has no beginning. Any thinking person can come to this conclusion.
How did the singularity come into existence? Is Big Bang cyclic? Is there ever a possibility that the universe which is expanding at an accelerated pace will ever contract, and collapse to form another singularity?
I think so. That is infinity. Expanding and contracting with no loss of energy, just transformations.
@@Misses-Hippy First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. The total amount of energy and matter in the Universe remains constant, merely changing from one form to another.
Boom I solved it.
@@Haha-bu7bi Fascinating, isn't it?
@@Misses-Hippy
How do we get here from infinity? We can't.
It's an oxymoron.
Logically there must be a beginning of every natural thing.
@@andrewdouglas1963I guess you start with space gas, star stuff, but we probably go back further to another universal flux. I consider amoeba my early cousins.
Love the intro you were on the right track then 👍
Who are we to even talk about this subject in OUR language. When we don't actually speak the language of the Universe. We will never know how or why we became. We will NEVER KNOW.
is continuous expansion simply" bang momentum "?
no, it is not becz it's not jus expanding, it's accelerating, getting faster and faster every second. That is not what momentum does.
Very interesting but the question remains: Where does it all come from?
The how and the why puzzled me once. Not any more
Easy: It didn’t.
Like a water fall could it be something similar? A mass amount of water carrying a massive flow of energy and dump it energy flow running out every where?
How did it comes into existence
A fantastic, very interesting video! Thanks.
Just because something can be described or theorised mathematically doesn't mean it exists.
Douglas Adams would love this
Black hole's effect TIME just like forces, energy and matter. (Not light, no mass) We already know, TIME is effected just like everything else. If black holes can focus all it collects to one point, by the same thinking, black holes are focusing all that it collects into one TIME. Pushing (or pulling) down, INTO TIME. Until pieces exist in past, present, and future at the same TIME, in TIME. (QUANTUM PARTICLES, Duh!) Makes sense to me. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a force, it might not be just a causality. Before you out yourself as a, "stuffed-shirt expert," know where I come from, crazy is a compliment. So to those who think me crazy, Thank You.
Why as 'How come', and why as 'What for'.
Earth, Stars,Galaxy and so .... all their size location etc., is random in nature, are we trying to fix any consistent laws in random field ?
Does the time require the expansion of space to exist?
its spacetime.
spacetime is expanding.
@@spatrk6634 thanks, perhaps a better question is if space time stopped expanding would time stop?
@@michaelclement1337 Time wouldn't stop.
Same way space wouldn't seize to exist.
My idea so I get to name it! Voyager 1 is now in interstellar TIME! (Mikey's Time) Think of it like Alvin and the chipmunks. "Vyger's" message is fine. It's just sped up now that it's outside our suns time bubble or "Terran Time." It would be faster still if "Vyger" sent a message from beyond the Milky Way's time bubble. That name is still up for grabs. Outside the Local Group TIME is open, too. Now that "Vyger" is in interstellar space, it's also in the Milky Way's STANDARD, faster moving, interstellar TIME or "Mikey's Time."
•Our sun's TIME bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured.
•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. Wild guess I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until Vyger is outside the Ort cloud .007-.07% faster, maybe. Just for reference.
•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% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference.
•Outside any influence in True interstellar TIME: Name still open and unknown. ???? Here is where surfing time is SO choice.
A minute is a minute in all. It's the rate/flow I'm talking about.
Pass it on, please and thank you.
Interesting, but I don't think the video answered either question (why or how).
here is what the Holy Ari writes to us: The Tree of Life - a Poem, And he actually referred to the reason, that is, to the question why.
Behold that before the emanations were emanated and the creatures were created,
The Upper Simple Light had filled the whole existence.
And there was no vacancy, such as an empty air, a hollow,
But all was filled with that Simple, Boundless Light.
And there was no such part as head, or end,
But everything was One, Simple Light, balanced evenly and equally,
And it was called “the Light of Ein Sof (Infinity).”
And when upon His simple will, came the desire to create the worlds and emanate the emanations,
To bring to light the perfection of His deeds, His names, His appellations,
Which was the cause of the creation of the worlds,
Then the Ein Sof restricted Himself, in His middle point, precisely at the center,
And He restricted that Light, and drew far off to the sides around that middle point.
And there remained an empty space, an empty air, a vacuum
Precisely from the middle point.
And that restriction was equally around that empty, middle point,
So that the space was evenly circled around it.
And after the restriction, when the vacant space remained empty
Precisely in the middle of the Light of Ein Sof,
A place was formed, where the Emanations, Creations, Formations, and Actions might reside.
Then from the Light of Ein Sof, a single line hung down from Above, lowered into that space.
And through that line, He emanated, created, formed, and made all the worlds.
Prior to these four worlds, there was one Light of Ein Sof, whose Name is One, in wondrous, hidden unity,
And even in the angels closest to Him
There is no force and no attainment in The Ein Sof,
As there is no mind of a created that could attain Him,
For He has no place, no boundary, no name.
--The Ari, The Tree of Life, Part One, Gate One
At least the answer, "we don't know", came out early.
Yes why questions are wrong questions 🤔 How Universe works is the RIGHT ✅️ APROCH
It's just so so strange, where did every matter in the universe come from, what was happening infinity ago?? What will happen infinity after.
And then, what is reality and what is non-reality. We are all born few years/decades ago, what was it like before we were born, what will it be like when we are gone, what the fukk is all this really. Whoever is responsible, know this, it's not fair!
People only understand the idea of the universe because the reality of it falls under human logic but in fact it doesn’t and only when we put our own logic aside is when u get closer to the answer. Just like ppl can’t see certain gases or atoms is why we will never understand the why
so how far away does a particle have to be before there is no time?
as long as an elephant trunk
Infinite density, that's heavy man !! 😶😶
So when a singularity is assumed as the beginning where exactly was the singularity? Of course I don't know for a fact but if I was to guess I would say that the singularity is the result of the beginning not the cause. I would also say that space is a different medium separate. I myself believe that blacksphere's are singularities and when the first one was born it was as small as it could get compared to the space that surrounds it. Very small in deed. As we were not here to observe it size is irrelevant.
I believe your question was specifically answered in the video. The singularity took place EVERYWHERE. That point was the only "where" which existed, in any sense of existence that we can understand.
@@starfishsystems you see if we actually did rewind time I think you find gas just gases. All these galaxies we see wouldn't have formed yet. So I think there was a starting position a single star that started the process of entropy to what we see now. From the first star and the meganova that occur a singularity was left and that's a blacksphere ( hole) so looking at it from that perspective the theory does have merit. The known universe did start after that blacksphere was born. And the first galaxy as a result. The meganova is what caused star formation from that point to today. All the stars after that first star are population 3 stars how do we know that's where the helium came from the first star produced helium and that's all it produced. How does that sound pretty good?
So this is where I have a small problem with the size of a singularity ? People say it was smaller then a grain of sand well that's impossibly and QM says nothing can infinitely small. But that's not entirely true. You see a blacksphere is infinitely small it can't get any smaller that's as small as anything can get. It doesn't matter how big it is to us. The definition is correct and if space was already there then how big would that blacksphere actually be compared to infinite space smaller then a grain of sand very small indeed. So really it just depends on how you interpret the theory your perspective 🤔 and who's perspective is correct. That's how I interpret the theory. So the theory? I think that maybe it's not the wrong theory I think it's trying to make something harder than it is. If you look at it from my point of view you don't have to add anything the theory holds up and if u don't need to add anything and it adds up maybe it might have some merit to it. Something to think about eh.
I guess if everything collapsed almost into a singularity then maybe you get infinite gravity and density but doesn't that leak radiation like a black hole?
I see what you mean. Like Hawking radiation. I wonder if it would be possible to one day make a space telescope that could look pass the cosmic horizon and see primordial hawking radiation left over from that moment of the singularity just before inflation. Like the cosmic background radiation. Or maybe we have it all wrong and what we see as the CMB is the Hawking radiation. Boom, mind blown across the depths of the universe!
@@SuperiorDave I guess not even Hawking radiation theory may apply when you have a singularity that small that is essentially all of space/time and operating at a quantum level. The mind boggles at it all.
The only issue with the singularity for myself is the singularity isn't what everything started from but is a result of our universe starting.
@@alex79suited
In fact we have no basis to know this.
The singularity has not been observed. It's what happens when we extrapolate backwards to t=0, but it's not demonstrated that there ever was a t=0. More plausibly, it's asymptotic.
So here is one of the main problems of understanding..
People have a very poor understanding of what the word 'infinite' actually means.. This is not any kind of 'fault', but just that we have evolved within the confines of what appears to be a finite environment, and we thus try to look at things in finite ways, also justifying those 'finite' thoughts. When I first approached the 'problem' I had the same difficulties, so it takes our minds a lot of effort to reach another perspective of understanding, but it IS achievable..
Firstly, there cannot be more than one 'instance' of infinitude, otherwise a secondary 'thing' would render them both 'finite'. So we are describing a 'oneness'.. Also, it can have no 'beginning' nor 'ending' as these would also necessitate a secondary 'thing' (or the utter nonsense of a 'nothing'!), so we are describing 'eternity' when we apply 'time' concepts. Then, we have to admit that it can only be the one thing that interconnects all other 'things', and we deduce this to be 'Space', necessarily..
All references to 'size' or 'direction' do not apply to the nature of infinitude, and thus have no relevance to our understanding of the true nature of existence. 'Measurement' has limitations.. When we point to any position in Space, we effectively create a 'beginning' to any subsequent forms of measurement, which only has relevance to the entity desiring to understand said 'measurement'. This does not make it a feature of the nature of reality, only a desire from a Human perspective.
spaceandmotion
I'm not a scientist, but when we say infinite, it's a euphemism, right? They keep saying "infinitely small/dense". Do they mean it's incalculable? And the acceleration of the expansion of space-time is only apparent from our observation. If one could "observe" our universe from the outside, it may appear inside-out, and be constantly contracting, like a black hole, or something.
yes, and that is part of the deep concept!!
@@morbidmanmusic Too bad you have to die to experience that. But we can all rest assured that each an every one of us will see the truth as we exit.
I agree. I don't believe that anything is actually infinite.
@@simongross3122 try going to a Catholic mass. Then you'll understand that time is infinite and can pass infinitely slowly.
@@stevec6427 LOL
what's crazy is there is no South ,North,West or East in space!
Where did the matter come from?
Does it ‘matter’?😆
Because man said so
I don’t understand most of what this guy says but I’m high and I love looking at the stars ✨
Nice discussion of the big expansion and multiple universes...what about HOW? Seems mistitled. Liked it anyway.
Why is always said..or similar.. that the current universe we see was once compressed into something the size of an atom. Isnt that like saying a tree was once compressed into a seed? Not really. Isnt it better to say ..it grew from that
Big Bang is where space came from. Yet time already existed. How else could you ask what came before the BB. The only way to have a before is if time already exists.
@@drsatan9617
See as with all things time & space are currently explained by theories. All theory is debatable. Try this if you don't have anything nice to say then STFU. Since we have yet to truly define time my theory is every bit as relevant as all others.It is not your job to educate me. Look at it this way we have no idea what is outside the visible horizon. Therefore what we see as the universe could be just an expanding bubble within a larger structure. That larger structure will also be moving through time. So the time you refer to is not just a part of what we see as the universe, but is a part of the overall universe. It could also be that the BB made space and time combine , meaning time could have existed prior to what we see as the universe then at the BB the space that was being create was then made part of time. It is possible that what we see as the BB was truly a Big Bounce if that was the case then time existed prior to our beginning, so once again we have time before. They have yet to completely define gravity, with that in mind who's to say that gravity can or can't experience a critical mass. If critical mass can be achieved then even in a heat death under the proper conditions a black hole that reaches a critical mass and becomes a white hole in essence a BB. That does not recreate time it instead make it more like a lap time on a stopwatch. Meaning time started some time before the black hole went beyond the mass that can be held by gravity in a singularly. The larger universe experiences a localized BB and everything except time begins again. There are a lot of wrinkles to be explored, so don't except a theory just because Google says it is blah, blah. Do your best not to call the ideas of others stupid. It really makes you look that way. Try being civil and having a discussion with them instead of acting like your omnipotent, well like you and Google are that way. If you ask why someone thinks a certain way in the end you can walk away with new knowledge or no new knowledge yet you at least won't have gone out of your way to insult anyone. Cuz normally those who do things like that are covering something in themselves.
In today’s climate the theory with the least attention is likely to be the closest to truth..
spaceandmotion
Please share with other people my two brief videos. Thank you!
No!
Its just you spreading b.s propaganda from science denial Creation type cults.
How about the Big Bang was caused by a collision in someone’s super collider.
It was Tetsuo.
I think we are in a game. We are all controlled. We are all looking for the same answers. Every human. With a mind. It’s a game, it has to be!
You are certainly being played..
spaceandmotion
Needs more pictures of people in white coats.
Center of the universe is easy it is the center from wherever the Observer is for all intents and purposes you can't get to the end of where you can see before it is gone out of your reach
There are other dimensions around and above the observable universe