Alan H. Guth - Why is the Universe Expanding?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 май 2024
- We know our universe is expanding-this is one of humankind's seminal discoveries. What caused such colossal expansion? We call it the Big Bang, but what were the forces involved? How do they work? What are the implications for understanding the cosmos? And why is the expansion of the universe accelerating? What does this hold for the future?
Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Watch more interviews on the universe: bit.ly/33CmEsD
Alan Harvey Guth is an American theoretical physicist and cosmologist. He is currently serving as Victor Weisskopf Professor of Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
My only critique of this channel is that we aren't told when they videos were made.
Exactly:) they posted a video of nick bostrom few days ago, he looked completely different I almost couldn't recognize him, but I cant complain and won't
Time is relative subjective and totally Fantasmigorical in the eye of the truth that is seen by you but not me
The same for me! This video seems from earlier 2000s. He says physicists though Ω=0.2 ten years before, and accelerated expansion just discovered.
@@mohammedphilonous6856
You’re ‘sort of’ complaining…..nothing wrong with that!
It was made an infinitely long time ago
I expected Alan to be super smart. What impresses even more is how smart Robert Kuhn is.
I mean, dude has a PhD in Neuroscience
I agree! Robert is the supposed layperson but is right in step with Alan.
It seems that people don't understand this was not a conversation after a random meeting in a local bar.
The big clue is that there were at least two cameras present.
@@482jpsquared
Robert Kuhn is a highly intelligent man. But, “right in step with Alan”? Don’t know about that(imho)…..just saying.
Hahahahaha. Right.
A really good man who oozes enthusiasm and devotion to science. I love listening to him.
He is definitely up there in my top five
Mt. Guth is one of the geniuses of our time, and he doesn't have that much recognition outside the world of physics....
Guth is one of the goats!
Yes he does. I recognize him and I live mostly outside this world of physics, just as meaning hovers over these words but is outside them. That IS everything -and I totally recognize and appreciate him. So there you go! That constitutes universal recognition outside the world of physics. 🤔
I hope this ameliorates your lamentations. Thanks 🙏🏻 😂🙌
@@spiralsun1 Thanks, but truly, he doesn't have that recognition, you can ask and maybe 1 in 100 people know about him; 1 in 5 know about Lebron James, or Justin Bieber and that is sad.
No, he is not a genius because he is insane. His inflation theory is based on mere insanity, not on actual reality. I proved the universe is not expanding to insanity in a post, while these geniuses just keep inflating their expansion insanity since they were in highschool and now theyre one step from the asylum and still cant prove anything they say.
@@vasile.effect See my comment with a logical explanation.
Another good one, still please would be nice to add information when this was recorded.
You again! 😄
It makes no difference when any of these videos were made. All of the problems have existed ever since the Big Bang theory was created as a fact.
@@infiniteuniverse123 I suppose the reason for wanting to know the date is, there might have been some advance in knowledge and research since the video was made. In other words, the information might be out dated.
@@infiniteuniverse123
If the Big Bang was a fact, it would be called the Big Bang Fact. But it’s not. So, there’s that…..
That's an older one.....but still valuable.
The wildest thing that humans have ever thought of that actually is in sync with our perceptions, curious Alan seems like such a mild mannered person.
I have heard about about Alan Guth for 50 years. I never expected to hear him explain in his own words his reasoning of how hyperinflation must have taken the universe from the size of an atomic particle to the embryo of our relativistic universe, with the creation of all the mass and energy we see today. My favorite quote -- "energy density equals geometry!" Thanks for making it possible!
Thank you Robert for producing this excellent series!
My mind expands when I watch these videos.
Hmmmm?
Mine does on L.S.D.
"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." ~ Carl Sagan
@@liberty-matrix
We live in houses and don't know how to build them. Same could be said for roads, growing food, forging pots and pans, building/fixing cars, etc....
It's call a civilized society because of "specialization". Love Carl but that might be the weakest quote I've ever heard from him.
Love the way his mind works. What a great interview
Another good video from Robert Kuhn's channel Closer to Truth. I love Alan Guth's personality. His reasoning is complete with it's spot on brevity. I can't help but wonder if the very beginning involves TIME... No event, no Strand of Quantum Possibility exists without time being involved. It might not be a result of the Big Bang, but rather the Progenitor of All. Even matter might have been localized to enable TIME to have something to push itself against. And that very matter was able to slow down the Expansion Rate after awhile to the SOL... and this enabled physics to begin.
This was awesome. This is a good explanation from looking down the tunnel of radiation in 3 dimensions humans use. They are so amazing.
Alan Guth is amazing to listen to. It has an extremely calming and joy-producing effect on me for some reason…🥰
But you can also tell why this happened when you look with new laws and senses. That’s why I am here. It’s my job to teach you that part. So by saying that I am not self-promoting. I’m just doing my job. I mention that because humans have a tendency to insulate themselves from advancing by placing people before themselves as idols, surrounding themselves with known celebrities in various social niches and thereby move themselves to be more in the center of the herd where they are safer. That’s fine. But they never accounted for the slayer of the demons, the coordinator of symphonies that lives beyond the periphery of their visual field by their doing so. They never advance to slay their dragons. When peering at the instrumentation available in the universe for the path of life, that is not a good sign of destiny in eternity. Just saying… Beyond the peripheries of thought, beyond the walls of cities I live, as humans live, interact, and develop outside the wombs of initial gestation in which their lives are assembled.
So philosophical 🧐 meandering aside, I absolutely loved this video. Thanks so much for this 🙏🏻❤️🔥
Alan Guth is brilliant! We need to get Ed Witten back on here.
👍⭐That was truly excellent. Taking indescribably complex ideas and making them fascinating and even slightly understandable to amateurs like me is 5 Stars for both Gentlemen. Outstanding.
(0:20) "The numbers are uncertain cause we don't know how much inflation there was." ~ Alan H. Guth
(5:49) "One could of course have assumed that the universe just started out uniformly to begin with since we don't really understand the ultimate origin of the universe but there you know we don't have any explanation there ." ~ Alan H. Guth
Yes, great scientist intellectually honest, even though quote miners will take him out of context.
@@Bandit19990 "I always quote people smarter than me." ~ Quote Miner
The universe could have started out as uniform. He simply dismisses that possibility because "we don't have any explanation" for that. That's not a good reason to automatically dismiss the possibility. The universe may have been uniform from the outset, so there's no need for inflation to explain it.
Also, it's curious that inflation would have to be fine-tuned to just the right amount so that matter, galaxies, etc. could form. If inflation were much stronger, sub-atomic particles would have flown apart so fast that they couldn't have formed into atoms. He has no explanation for the just-so nature of inflation. Lack of an explanation for his fine-tuned inflation doesn't cause him to doubt inflation, but the lack of an explanation for a uniform universe at the outset causes him to dismiss the possibility of an initial uniformity. He seems to be making arbitrary decisions, for no particular reason, about what he thinks needs an explanation and what doesn't need an explanation.
@@FrankCoffman Do you have evidence that the universe began uniformly?
There are obviously reasons they don't think it began uniformly which is why inflation was needed.
@@Bandit19990 ~ I didn't say that there's evidence the universe began uniformly. You missed my point. I merely said there's no reason to assume that it wasn't uniform.
He is also a very good teacher. Some 30 ya I took his class on the early universe, as an out-of-area class. It was pretty cool.
Interesting factoid: at the time his office was something like 2 feet deep in papers & books. I think I followed his model afterwards! lol
Guth rules
I love to listen to Alan Guth speak
Listening to Alan makes me realize how feeble my own thought processes really are, if I lived to be a thousand years old i could never be able to grasp or formulate the theories modern physics postulates.
Will anyone explain from where did the space coming for expansion of universe ? If unlimited space is there then all physics collapse cause as per our knowledge, there should be a limit or rule for every physical movement. But what rule apply for availability of infinite space for expension of universe?
Please bring experimentalists on too so we can hear the clever ways they've measured these things, and so that we can hear some of today's measurement problems
what year was this excellent interview recorded?
Did the entropy during inflation go from a higher entropy to a lower entropy (lower to higher temperature)? What is needed for entropy to go from higher state to lower state?
Entropy has been increasing steadily. The universe was at its peak of organization at the instant of creation.
Does the density of space/time decrease with the expansion of the Universe? If the density remains constant, what mechanism produces that?
That’s the real question: expanding universe. And, are objects accelerating? What’s the hurry? And, what triggered the velocity change?
But I thought inflation was still incredibly speculative, and there are many competing models of it, most of which are untestable.
Speculative? yes… Untestable?? Humans just shot a 10 billion dollar infrared telescope into space to test this hypothesis.
I think the Big Bang is just a horizon problem. 13.8b years is probably the amount of time it takes for light to degrade below a measurable amount of energy. The plank length/energy limit to optical information? Probably already has a name
I never did understand how they judged 1 sec, 1 hr, 100 million yrs after the big bang. Before expansion, there was no time. During expansion, wouldn't there be some time dilation effect? It makes you wonder.
Can it be determined the speed of inflation expansion before big bang start of universe, in contrast to the speed of dark energy expansion after big bang start of universe?
Our understanding is the one expanding not the universe but rather spreading.
Love professor Guth.
I'm often confused as to why scientists use years as the measurement of time shortly after the big bang. How can the 400,000 years immediately after the big bang be considered the same length of time as the 400,000 years leading up to today? Surely the 'yardstick' length measurement changes as spacetime expands? So the constraints of light speed may also have changed, due to spacetime not being as expanded? Or am I missing something? I assumed time was generally non-linear?
Wonder how Inflation corresponds/relates to CCC ?
Thank You for super presentation.
I can’t imagine an area of “infinite” temperature like before the Big Bang.
Easy. Mandelbroth set. A never ending infinity of infinitys, all branching inside one another containing an infinity of secrets. What else can you ask for? your imagination can go for another drink. ;)
Physics does not say that temperature was infinite. It was just VERY hot.
@@Mr.Not_Sure
I’m not implying that it was actually infinite, I’m just imagining it being that way.
But in the end, the “single point” before the Big Bang even having a certain value is paradoxical regardless. What asigns that value? We don’t know.
@@Bassotronics Nah. It just that modern theories stop working at the moment t=0.
@@Mr.Not_Sure It does kind of say that infinite density / singularities exist though.
Brilliant!
Why does the beginning of the video start out fuzzy?
Could inflation be a runaway dark energy that does not have any gravity / dark matter to counteract it? In which case maybe gravity is needed for entropy to increase, without which entropy decreases, as may have happened from inflation to big bang start of universe?
Inflation is intrinsic energy of empty space. Dark Energy and inflation are intrinsic properties of empty space. An empty Cosmos would natural inflate because there would be a uniform gravitational field.
@@kos-mos1127 What are the dynamics of uniform gravitation field and empty space?
@@jamesruscheinski8602 A gravitational field is curved space. A uniform gravitation filed does not have the gravity to pull things together so matter would just continuously fly apart.
@@kos-mos1127 flying apart (motion) would quickly ruin uniform space.
Black hole sublimation or polar jet blow off scattering would seem more consistent/plausible considering our current best observations (cmb) than with a magical point of near Infinite density- would also be the minimal entropy possible (hot). Seems like a god fearing persons last stand.
Just seems cyclical or there would be an ending. Crunch?
If there was a “start” i would propose that it was the first time matter and antimatter were flung far enough from each other that they have never reannihilated or the horizon that could be created from such an event. (Event horizon of black hole)
What makes a person smart?
I have a question here for anyone here who understands this science. If the universe is not only expanding but its expansion is accelerating, where is the energy coming from to fuel this acceleration? I grasp the concept of dark matter and dark energy, but it still seems like acceleration requires more of....something. Yes? No?
I don't claim to understand all the science, but in the mundane world, things tend to accelerate faster the closer they get to the force causing the acceleration... like a rocket ship caught in the gravitational pull of the Sun. Maybe the "rocket ship" is space and the Sun is dark matter/energy.
The energy that fuels the accelerated expansion comes form the inherent energy of empty space.
@@kos-mos1127 So dimensionality in a sense presses against itself to create additional, or expanded, dimensionality, and this expansion is cumulative so that the more dimensionality there is, the more dimensionality there is to create additional dimensionality. Is this more or less it?
From dark energy
Great talk
My theory follows the multi-verse theory - perhaps the universe(s) has forever been expanding ..maybe there was never a beginning and there will never be an end...just like matter/energy/consciousness cannot be created nor destroyed - that is because the universe is the same. To infinity and beyond!!
My brain just caught on fire. There are only charred brain cells remaining.
Good video
Given that inflation produced energy leading to big bang start of universe, in principle could find a way to measure energy from inflation, if could figure out what type of energy it would be?
This is such interesting stuff. It’s a shame the comments are so terrible. Around 5:50 Guth says the universe could have just started out uniform, but then he dismisses that idea in favor of inflation. I wish he had elaborated!
When universe started with big bang as inflation was ending was a minimum / lowest entropy for universe due to the high temperature generated from the end of inflation energy?
does it expand only in its 3 spacial dimensions, or also in its other dimensions (e.g. "expanding" also in time)?
Must be “expanding” in time. The universe has been around for ~13.785 billion years but is ~93 billion light years in diameter.
Would Inflation be needed to explain the near uniformity of the CMBR if the universe is really about twice the age we usually assume, 13.8 billion years?
As time goes by everything expands .....just like my belly!...that's life...🤷♂️
In the case that inflation led to big bang start of universe, does the universe explain everything that comes from inflation, such as energy and whatever else, or is there something from inflation left over after taking into account the universe?
Fascinating and terrifying
…..ohh yes.
Please schedule Dr. Roger Trigg of Oxford for your show.
Exponential growth and a ratio of one everywhere, flatness and uniformity. How could that happen, unless the expansion was not in our three dimensions ?
At many times the speed of light.
The Sanskrit word for the Universe is Brahm, ब्रह्म, meaning, “expansive”; that, the central property of which is expansion. The root for Brahm is brih, to grow, expand.
Is there any evidence that anyone believed the "universe" was anything other than what they could see with the naked eye?
@@dtrez3866 There is some evidence.
Upon marriage, Hindu couples are shown the star Alcor in the Ursa Major constellation. They are told that that star is two people: Arundhati, and her husband, the Sage Vasisht. In reality, Alcor is a twin star, Alcor and Mizar, though invisible to the naked eye. The custom is traced to 20 Century BC. This will be an example of knowing something unavailable to sensory experience, or reason or inference.
There are other unexplained insights.
Sage Gotama, asked how many grains of sand are there in all of world computed 10^32, a number very close to current “knowledge”.
The age of the universe mentioned on Hinduism, represented by a dream of the deity Brahma, closely approximated current estimates.
The Buddhists stated that human consciousness samples the world once every 20 ms. This is also the frequency of Omega waves.
@@hershchat Notice "they are told the star is two people", there was no mention that there was another star there which no one could see. And, what exactly would they tell us about what "the universe" is in their minds? Where exactly is it said that the universe was expanding? For someone to understand that the universe is expanding, that would need some idea of what the universe is. If all they could see and perceive was their universe, nothing inside their universe was expanding. Hubble discovered that galaxies were expanding. Until then, no one knew what the universe was to be able say it was expanding. And for Hubble to learn the universe was expanding, he needed to see beyond the milky way. I would just like to know who knew that there was a beyond the milky way before Hubble.
@@dtrez3866 thanks for your point of view. You realize of course that convincing you isn’t my objective. As Roark said to Keating, “I don’t care”.
You’re right in asserting a different standard of evidence for science. If my job was to do research on astronomy in a modern astronomy program, then I too would not rely on these two examples that I provide.
Science hews to the epistemology of empiricism, and the metaphysics of objectivism. That is one metaphysical position, and a necessary & useful one. It is not, however, the only, sufficient, or the most satisfactory one.
Consider how human-intelligence is counterpoised to empiricism. When I throw you a ball, and your arm moves to enable your hand to catch it, there isn’t any objective Newtonian (or Relativistic) calculation taking place. Intelligence models reality subjectively. It’s based on learning within self referential framework.
It is being discovered that AI can “solve” heretofore unsolved problems (three body, multibody problems), but do so like human int does: subjectivity, with no objective theory or formula adduced to explicate the solution. A trained AI might pronounce that a certain star is in fact a dual star. We’d know what inputs it made the decision on, but not what it “knows” that helps it reach that ascertainment.
This is conjectural sport. No one comes to harm from empiricism, such as yours. It’s a fine metaphysical standpoint.
Emmanuel Kant and his ilk would, in their critique of pure reason, recognize the flaws in your reasoning. As did Nagarjuna, in his Mula madhamika karika, a few centuries before Kant. There are the intuitions of time (appearance, existence, change, passage), space (location and extent), & identity (one, many, associations) that are non-sensory. But that doesn’t add carrots to your soup. Understood.
I know most people ignorant of Kantian polemic argue back that they can prove that time, space and identity are firmly sensory conclusions. It is OBVIOUS to them, “trivially true”. It’s not mine to educate. One can only suggest and recommend.
@@hershchat "But that doesn't add up to carrots in your soup. Understood".
In this context, I am glad that is understood.
Riddle me this, how can they tell it's expanding? What if it's gaining speed enclosing? How can they tell where's the center etc. If they see it expanding it could be the opposite from where they are looking from.
The singularity didn't appear in space; rather, space began inside of the singularity. Prior to the singularity, nothing existed, not space, time, matter, or energy - nothing. So where and in what did the singularity appear if not in space? We don't know. We don't know where it came from, why it's here, or even where it is. All we really know is that we are inside of it and at one time it didn't exist and neither did we.
We don’t know that it didn’t exist. It may have always existed. Without a beginning. Food for thought, heh?
Question: If the universe speeding up.
Is Time also accelerating?
1998. The year my belly expanded with pregnancy and the expanding universe.
From small to big ~ like the Universe and then you had a baby which now lives in its own Universe as we all do.
We talkin Walmart fat or McDonald’s fat
One of my thoughts to the subject is;
What if the invisible cosmos already existed? and a world of diversed particles flying around until a rare unification crashed together causing the big bang. The enormous created heat at its expansion molted with particles of the invisible cosmos creating visual galaxies and so on.
The remaining invisible cosmos is a steady body that existed before the big bang.
The particles that builds space play a role in the expansion. Could it be?
I think Dark matter reacts to gravity the same as anything else, so it would have also been part of singularity and big bang.
Inflation starts off with an almost empty region of the Cosmos than exponentially expands it.
The cosmos is empty to our vision, but it may be full of diverse particle that builds a compact body. The question is; do extreme heat like from a nuclear explosion, caused the creation of galaxies by burning through the cosmos structure causing all kinds of particles to melt and form stars, galaxies, planets, komets, asteroids, and meteors?
I think that gravity would slow down the expansion, that's why I dont think that the cosmos has to do with gravity. Maybe some particles influence the movements of suns, planets, moons, and their orbits.
You are thinking of the "steady state" theory that Alan Guth annihilated.
@@jamesdavison6290 well, a big bang out of nothing, out of nowhere, is hard to comprehend. There must have been some nuclear fusion, if, the theory of a big bang should be true. And I can imagine a cosmos, that's transparent, permeable, unless its heated up that out of particles elements forms, and are the results of what we call universe.
This video has a completely wrong title, because it does not explain why the universe expands, but why the expansion of the universe is likely a correct theory
I think he's saying if you could manage to make it to the edge of the universe you would find more big bang's as the universe continues 🤔
The universe oscillate between chaos and equilibrium when it s in one phase it goes toward the other
Why questions are of two kinds, How, and From what intent.
Q: If there is a redshift of light in the universe because of distance,
then galaxies that move away with constant velocity seem to move away with acceleration.
If so, the bigbang-theory is possibly wrong?
Inflation explains away most of the problems with the big bang. I still think it explains the MBR so well it gives me chills. To think that entire galaxies formed from the tiniest variations of density in the big bang inflated to the current size is amazing 👏
How does it explain light traveling through a space that expands much faster than light ? How does it explain the flat geometry of the universe, which is not at all like an inflated baloon as these big-bang idiots claimed for decades until recently when their cosmic balloon has popped ? Or the lack of anti-matter, which according to the big-bang there should have been equal amounts of matter and anti-matter created ?
Just because we can see planets moving away, doesnt mean that this we call space is expanding. If it is, and i dont think it is. whats it expanding into?
If there was nothing before the big bang happened what did the universe pop into
What sort of explanation were you looking for sir? If the nature of the question is, “what physical reality was present before the Big Bang”, then we end up with infinite regress. Anything that came before X, must have come from some preceding Y. All physical entities and phenomena have sources and causes. If it was satisfactory to claim, of any physical entity, that it was always there, then we could say that of the tiny seed that became Big Bang, and be done with it.
If we think of “reality”, we realize that there is physical and nonphysical existence. The clock is a physical, the pendulum
and the force of gravity too are physical entities. They exists in the physical universe. The concepts, the blueprint that underlies the physical manifestation of gravitational attraction, that is a nonmaterial physical reality. If you subscribe to the Newtonian formulation, then R, the distance from mass A to mass B, is a material-physical entity. The concept of space (dimensionality) is non physical. It exists only in brains.
Take away brains and concepts go away. If you use Einsteinian space-time curvature model, then too tools of time measurement are physical, but the intuition of past-present-future is nonmaterial physical.
So, there are two levels of reality in our discussion
Physical-material (matter, space, time)
Physical-nonmaterial (designs and information that underlie the expressed, material physical universe. The measures, and arrangements of, and changes in the material physical).
The nonmaterial must precede the material. When God said, “Let there be light”, at that time and before then there was no light. After it there was light. Clearly, for His command to have any meaning, he invoked a concept of something as yet nonexistent. His concept was nonmaterial physical, and the result of his command was material physical.
So, non-material physical preceded the material physical. The designs and probabilities preceded the expression and existence of physical universe.
What preceded the Physical, nonmaterial? Nonphysical sentient must’ve preceded the physical. I am not religious, and definitely not Christian, but “God” is an acceptable word for “nonphysical sentient cause of the physical universe”. Why is sentient necessary? Because the nature of the nonmaterial-physical requires a “mind” or a comprehending faculty. Designs and possibilities exist in a sentient medium.
I believe we reach the necessary “Cause of all causes” since, by definition, the blue prints and probabilities are “the causes”.
This nonphysical sentient entity is called Dao, Atman, or Arete. It has been said to be the God the Father, the Yahweh. It is also what lends us our sense of awareness.
That's exactly what I was thinking.
A rippled space-time would help explain dark matter and filaments of galaxies...and curved "downward" space-time would help explain dark energy (along with space-time "relaxation")
So... A particular "law" of physics will not allow the transmission of energy fast enough to account for the uniform temperature seen in the CBR.... So let's postulate Inflation (which breaks every single "law" in physics to solve the problem). Not sure I get that logic no matter how cool Guth is.
Inflation and inspiration seem to go right hand in hand.
The universe could have started out as uniform. He simply dismisses that possibility because "we don't have any explanation" for that. That's not a good reason to automatically dismiss the possibility. The universe may have been uniform from the outset, so there's no need for inflation to explain it.
Also, it's curious that inflation would have to be fine-tuned to just the right amount so that matter, galaxies, etc. could form. If inflation were much stronger, sub-atomic particles would have flown apart so fast that they couldn't have formed into atoms. He has no explanation for the just-so nature of inflation. Lack of an explanation for his fine-tuned inflation doesn't cause him to doubt inflation, but the lack of an explanation for a uniform universe at the outset causes him to airily dismiss the possibility of an initial uniformity.
He seems to be making arbitrary assumptions about what he thinks needs an explanation and what doesn't need an explanation. He assumes, for no particular reason, that there's a problem with the conventional big bang (which he assumes wasn't uniform), and then he offers a solution (inflation) without any explanation for why it works so perfectly and why it's better than simply assuming there was no real problem in the first place.
The whole damn thing is just counting angels on the head of a pin. Put that funding and brain power towards practical research until we run out of problems; then, in our spare time, we can concentrate on the philosophy of the beginning of all things.
The expansion of the universe causes light to lose energy as it traverses distance, where does that energy go?
Light does not lose energy. It is just stretched to cover more space as the universe expands.
@@jamesdavison6290 It's frequency drops, which is a loss of energy, and energy is conserved.
I love to listen to Guth.
We will never know what was the first beginning of everything.
That’s if there was a first beginning of everything. Maybe there always has been something, as strange as it might sound.
Yes, but what happened before that?
@@jamesdavison6290 something
@@jamesdavison6290
Perhaps there was no beginning. If there was no beginning, there was no ‘before’. It’s like trying to think rationally about infinity. Or pi.
Sentences beginning with "We will never know" are suspicious to me as they have been proven wrong time and time again. You can not know how ingenious people (or maybe even AIs) can get.
Regarding _Our observable universe appears flat..._ If you took a blown up balloon and measured out on its surface a spot a billionth of a pin point thick, would that area appear flat or curved?
That looks like a super old video. Inflation is a smart theory just with no physical evidence for the inflaton field, and now with a bunch of issues that people either gloss over or ignore.
Honestly someone just shout out Bugs Bunny! and it would be as true as this explanation. It's not criticism, I totally appreciate this super deep dive, the amount of thinking and reading and study required to even consider things like this let alone come up with a coherent theory like Guth does here. But for us, all flesh and blood and have to pay our bills, it means no more than Bugs Bunny.
Honestly we could use some geniuses running governments around the world. We need a larger population of geniuses .
More logical than collapsing
If the universe is expanding in every direction, it must also be contracting in every direction ??
Its amazing to think, that since this interview has been recorded, tottenham have won zero trophies
Let there be light.
The whole universe was in a hot, dense state when, nearly fourteen billion years ago, expansion started… wait…
I see ultrafast replication of singularity one at a time rather than inflation .
The inability to think multidimensionally restricts our mental powers to the point where science is reduced to mathematical equations based on our three dimensional experience. This leads to irreconcilable contradictions. The big bang could be the result of a white hole, the far end of a black hole in other dimensions or it could be the result of a prior big crunch. Assuming our methods of measurement are correct which is a big assumption the universe appears to be expanding due to forces pushing it apart from within or pulling it apart from beyond what we can so far detect. If we live on some sort of curved multidimensional surface then its curvature could limit how far we can see just as the curvature of the earth limits the distance we can see from the surface. If there are other dimensions how do we detect them? How do we travel into them? And if we ever do, how do we get back to report what we see for the first time? Nobody knows yet. Maybe maybe never will. There may be things that affect the universe that are beyond our ability to explore.
Agreed!
In favor of your theory is that our visible universe is surrounded by an event horizon in which distant objects are receding at a speed greater than light. However your idea is not original.
If there are multiple dimensions we are already part of them. Our mind just cannot comprehend them. Maybe in future?
@@RolandHuettmann I think you're right. Of all the things I ever studied Euclidian geometry was a subject I devoured when I was 14 years old. The transition to extending my skills to three dimensions when I got to calculus and analytical geometry wasn't hard at all. My brain works best by visualization and it frustrated me no end that I couldn't visualize beyond 3 dimensions. Then in my mid 20s I invented two tricks. One involved a problem in acoustic fields which is a 6 dimensional problem. I broke it down into two three dimensional problems one superimposed on the other. I have a patent on a device that applies the solution. The other relates to particle physics I was able to visualize as a 4 dimensional problem with a different trick. Evidence suggesting at least 4 dimensions is for me quite convincing. It explains how quantum energy jumps occur and quantum entanglement. Are time and space quantized? The Planck distance and Planck frequency suggest to me in the dimensions we can sense they are. They define the smallest increments in space and time. This creates the problem of how do particles get from one node to another. One day I might publish my theory. Although I'm an engineer I'm an inactive member of the American Institute of Physics. I could just pay my dues to reactivate my membership.
What if the speed of light is not constant but proportional to the size of the universe
Because information is increasing.
Information is linked to entropy. It is all leaking away . . .
What if everything stops when the universe stops expanding?
apprx 1:05 min in - hear even scientists/physicists and many others state powers this way; way too frequently. 10 to the 75th is not 10 with 75 zeros. it is 1 with 75 zeros. 10 to the 2nd is a 1 with 2 zeros. i am dumb so was confused for so long and am still hesitant to proclaim this.
The "Big Bang", if indeed there was a "Big Bang" instead of the "Big Sizzle", as some scientist postulate, need not have been hot but could have been a cold fusion event which I guess would negate the "Sizzle" and just leave the "Big", as in the event of creation as recorded in Scripture in Psalm 33:9 - For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast. Anyway, I don't know about exactly why the universe is expanding and I'm taking the word of the scientific community that the universe is expanding but I do know exactly what the Bible (KJV) says about what the universe is expanding into which is a finite firmament beyond which is that infinite expanse in which or of which is found or is all of that unaccounted for antimatter or in Scriptural terms, the kingdom of heaven or Light.
The crux of this, my Windham Hypothesis is that the word "earth" in the English translation of the Bible, specifically the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible or in Scripture, which is the most reliable English translation of Scripture, is a homonym that usually means the planet earth but sometimes the word "earth" means the "universe" as in the following verses of Scripture: Genesis 1:1, 2:1, Job 1:7, 2:2, Isaiah 40:22, 65:17, Matthew 6:10, 24:35, Mark 13:27, 2 Peter 3:13, Revelation 12:9, 21:1. Of special interest for some in this current era of ETs, UAPs, UFOs and the like, is Genesis 2:1 which when read with the understanding that the word "earth" here means the "universe", you have the understanding of God having created all of these other species billions of years before he created the man species, the male and the female of the man species which he created for the express purpose of becoming incarnate in these last of the last days. Then too, there is Revelation 12:9 that indicates that a third of the angels in the kingdom of heaven along with Satan, were cast out of the kingdom of heaven and "into" the earth/universe, not to be confused with the noncanonical account in the book of Enoch of those two hundred Watchers. Those fallen angels in Revelation 12:9 was and are so great in number that even with our engineer's shorthand it is still difficult to number them. The video to watch is found on RUclips by the search - Earth means Universe means Earth or just typing in - earth means universe. The title to this video is - Bible answer for - What is the universe expanding into?
Is everything over the edge of the visible universe in a quantum superstate? We can't observe it so... verry possible.
The space between matter is stretching
Interpreter please? Anyone?
“Why is the universe expanding”? This was never answered in the clip. This is a misleading title.
i know why..... wanna know!!!
Maybe it's expanding because space. We are only here because space. The inflaton field is a field in space. If it wasn't for space there would be no inflaton field. Which came first space or the inflaton field. I love tautologies.
The Big Bang theory is fantastic at describing everything after that, but before it, we're a bit lost. Get this: At small enough scales, we don't even know if the word "before" even makes sense!
In search for ultimate truth. Our willingness to ask the question with an open mind is fundamental to our ability to discover the truth behind the answer.
One of the first people to think scientifically about the origin of the universe was a Catholic priest.
In addition to his religious training and work, Georges Lemaître was a physicist who studied the general theory of relativity and worked out some of the conditions of the early cosmos in the 1920s and ’30s.
action on a subatomic scale, random fluctuations can produce matter and energy out of nothingness.
Or everything is shrinking at a universal constant
Of its expanding it can’t be infinite.
I've always thought the big bang was a result of a black hole in another universe finally taking in to much mass n tearing. So Couldn't expansion be that black hole still pumping matter into our universe from the other. Imagine the black hole is the end of a balloon n you blowing into it is like the black hole pulling in more matter
i second this, but then the inevitable question of how the original matter came into existence is still there.
Would that be a closed universe? It could be simpler like suns are blowers and black holes are suckers, zero energy universe. The question of where the matter came from initially is rendered moot by the trivial nature of the matter, it's the part that doesn't make it, the bits not being ground fine the first time under that big grinding wheel.
A black hole will never have too much mass. The bigger the black hole gets the slower it loses mass through hawking radiation. Getting more mass can get tricky when the black hole is big, but it will lose its mass only very very slowly. Black holes get explosive only when they get very very small.