I have always wondered if our age of the universe was correct since immediately after the big bang all matter would have been more condensed and gravity would cause time to move slower and speed up as matter spread out, I guess I've just assumed that people smarter than me had already accounted for that.
A potentially really elegant solution. No exotic or new physics needed, just what we already understand applied with a finer detail. I like it! Looking forwards to hearing how this idea stands up against the new data to come.
This finally gives me hope that we can finally make progress. To me it seemed like for decades scientists have been trying to one up each other with crazier and crazier theories to the point of the earlier crazy theories becoming more accepted.
@@spugelo359 their ideas have merit, maybe some parts of their model are wrong and can be remoced and replaced with parts of other "crazy" models. schrodingers cat was a joke because even he thought superposition was "crazy"
those models still have to mathematically make sense and match with observation, so while they may be odd, there is still some possibility of truth behind any one of them. It's exactly as @frustjune6072 says; some parts could actually be partially or wholly true, even if the larger theory is incorrect
@@spugelo359 Yes, it reminds me of the song about "the old woman who swallowed a fly" and kept swallowing more things to catch the others - she swallowed a dog to catch the cat, she swallowed a cat to catch the mouse....etc
Very elegant if I understand it correctly: If time is faster in voids, then it means light would have less time to pass them. Therefore voids are actually smaller, but they appear bigger. This appearance of greater distance is accumulated further we look. So far away objects appear further then they are. And they appear to move away faster then they are. And this perceived speed is ever more bigger for every void in between is. Therefore universe appears to be accelerating away while it is not. Redshift is relative speed to us. Far object redshift appears non-linear to its distance, this indicates acceleration in universe expansion. Redshift should be linear if expansion is linear. If difference in distance is accumulating then difference in redshift is as well. This tricks us into seing acceleration while there is none.
This makes me so happy. It's an idea I had maybe 15 years ago. But I was a bartender, so everyone just threw plastic cups at me. Now who's laughing you old drunks?!?!
Oh yeah? Well I came up with theory 16 years ago! During a drinking binge a lousy bartender stole my papers. I became dpressed and became alcoholic and were never able to reproduce them.
I know I don't often comment Anton, but you and your channel are, to me at least, the very reason why RUclips should exist; you break down complex topics so well and you really widen your audiences understanding and appreciation of all the wonderful science that is otherwise going largely ignored in media. Thank you, and your family, for providing us with such a gift.
It came as a bit of a surprise that time dilation wasn’t already accounted for. I actually thought about it but more in the context of inflation. In the early universe you could imagine that small inhomogeneities would cause rabbit expansion that may appear even faster due to steep gradients in time dilation. Well cool stuff. Happy new year 🎉
I always thought it a bit strange that the position of distant galaxies in relation to time is something that is rarely being addressed. In my own thought experiment I imagined the distant galaxies to not only represent their appearance billions of years ago relative to their distance from us, but also their position in space as those galaxies exhibit in relation to us as causality expands. I thought that the acceleration observed must be due to the position of distant galaxies changing from our point of view due to some relativistic phenomenon which isn't fully accounted for and that dark energy isn't actually a force, just like gravity isn't a force in itself, even though physicists are still trying to discover the force causing the effect of gravity by trying to understanding how mass distorts spacetime on the quantum level.
@@catoni I was surprised it wasn't already a given. Couldn't the expansion be caused by stretch bubbles, as in the opposite to a warp bubble, or the back part of a warp bubble, in terms of it being used as a propellant for space travel? Also, could entangled particles create a warp bubble between them, that covers any distance they become parted by or, in other words, do they fold space through a higher spatial dimension, which creates a portal between them? Both would be relative to an observation/observer.
There is an episode of Star Trek TNG called "timescape" where time moves differently at different points in space. In the show it's because technobable caused by a ship which used an artificial singularity as an energy source broke and shattered time in that area of space. They realised that the Enterprise was exploding in slow motion and were able to technobable time into going backwards and then preventing the shattering of spacetime in the first (or second) place.
Gotta love how you can "techno-babble" your way out of any peril within a runtime of a single episode. How convenient! We should definitely pursue the technobabble technology before we even attempt stuff like fusion power or CO2 sequestering
TNG often felt like the writers were 12 year old boys with a very limited set of ideas they recycled constantly. DS9 was much better (though still far short of the world building of the best writers and TV shows).
fuu, i was once in altered state of energy, ~6x slower. for 4months. aka 2 years. that was a bit of a nuisance. And i could not sleep. And mega headache. Especially as all the movements in the body were auto visualized - heart, blood, lymph, biofield flux... Going backwards in time is also quite common. this is when precogpanic takes over and one can change timelines (avoid timeline ends) that are just not possible without smth being able to suck data form the future. That may not happen. But did happen. This is no scifi mambo. Real life. This reality is also largely scripted, or lets say future is written and freely accessible. This may hurt brain even more, but... that`s what it is. News is scfi, and scfi is reallife.
Something to do with aliens that live in or feed from natural singularities that caused the artificial singularity powering the Romulan ship to go haywire.
The most interesting story I've heard this year, Anton, and well explained too. I've often wondered if the universe we observe isn't warped and twisted by gravitational lensing and time delay. Thanks and season's Greetings too.
Read about this the other day in my news feed and I'm super happy you took some time to talk about this today! A wonderful person doing a wonderful job helping explain what the mysteries of the universe are, and how we're trying to solve them!
The great revolution in astronomy of our lives will be replacing "there must be a factor we haven't discovered" with "this effect we already knew about is stronger than we had previously thought."
More like the effect of known forces is difficult to observe accurately from the singular reference point in our solar system. Therefore this is a non zero chance that what we think is another force is really just a known force observed from the wrong reference point (or not enough reference points to construct an accurate cosmological model).
There's also the fact that almost all these big simulations that studies use dont factor magnetic feilds because they're just way too hard to compute atm
This is a really clever idea. We have to see how well it fits observational data but if it does, not only dark energy would become unnecessary but may be even the Hubble tension would be gone (but at this moment, I do not even know if the idea changes the Hubble constant in the correct direction).
Yes I thought of this as well! I kept calling it my fishbowl theory. Like you're looking at the rest of space through your own time dilated fishbowl. And you're looking through other fish bowls etc. brilliant! So glad you covered this! Excited to hear more about this
I too have been discussing this with the brother for years as a more plausible and simpler explanation, occam's razor Delighted the spotlights been shone on it now Love the way you describe it "fishbowl theory"😂
I've been wondering for some years whether the cosmic voids expand because of the expansion of the universe, or does the universe expand because of the expansion of the cosmic voids. I've also wondered if the cosmic voids expand more quickly over time, causing the universe to expand more quickly as well.
@@Ivan.Wrightvery interesting, my next hypothesis/intuition would be to map black holes in relation to CMB, is there somehow a correlation between the two? The boiling part that breaks through the surface of the water could represent the “cold spots” in our universe that are driving the movement and the black holes subduct the matter into a different state. Is the edge of our observable universe just the edge of the pot? Where is the steam going? If the subduction and “evaporation” occur simultaneously, is our universe literally just always being converted into another, just our perspective is warped as it looks like there exists a beginning? Are we being “pushed” to the edge of the pot?
This is really surprising to me. Not this idea, but the fact that it's new. Based on the bits and pieces I know about cosmology, I guess I just always assumed this sort of time dilation effect was already incorporated into existing models/theories and dark energy was still needed on top of it. It just always seemed so obvious to me as an outside observer to the field. Like I assumed surely they already considered it before resorting to positing the existence of some unknown dark energy.
I’ve always thought this. The missing dark energy idea always seemed like a cop out due to lack of full understanding. I had no idea it was seriously being studied, thanks for the information!
This honestly makes a ton of sense. The math already tells us that gravity effects time and slows it down so a true void would have time moving much faster then inside galaxies. So any galatic cluster on the opposite side of a void from us would appear to be moving much further faster then it actually is itself because of the void
@ hell the more i think about this.. we have all been asuming that Time was the same everywhere in the universe and with that assumption the observations showed some force seeming accelerating expansion. But we already new that assumption is wrong… Black holes, even the earliest descriptions of them expressed how the intense gravitational fields slowed realitive time and that anything that “falls into” black hole effectively never experiences reaching its singularity as the time of the “fall” constantly stretches into infinity. So we already know that in spots all over the universe there is effectively dragging to a near halt time. So time is not universal and our observations built on the assumption of its universality are flawed.
I am trying to understand your last sentence. So how a light traveling from a galaxy of high gravity and then through the void of low gravity makes it look faster than it is? In other words how light looks more red shifted than it actually is because of void?
Dark energy does not exist. The expansion of space is not accelerating, it just looks like that because of perspective. To objects moving away from each other at constant speed no matter how slow will look like they are speeding up until they are moving away so fast relative to each other that it is faster then the speed of light. That is because of the distance between them is expanding and they are still moving at the same speed. We know this effect very well and when that happens that it moves faster then the speed of light away from us it is called that it has passed the particle horizon and it is lost to us forever. Parts of the outer universe passes this particle horizon all the time but we can still see it. But we can never send a signal or travel to those parts as they are lost forever because it is moving away from us faster then the speed of light due the the expanding distance between us. Those part is still traveling at the same speed, no acceleration has happened, only thing that happened is that the space between us is getting larger. Replyæoik
What if the same is applied to galaxies, maybe dark matter doesn’t exist after-all, where density is higher in the center of the galaxy compared with the edge, thus time passes faster around the edge compared to the center of the galaxy, thus creating an illusion that the edge of the galaxy is rotating faster than it should.
I have been thinking the same thing for the last couple of years that maybe time at the center of a galaxy runs at a different rate to time at the edge of that galaxy this giving the impression that the stars are moving at the same speed.
No, we have evidence that dark matter is really a thing because of micro-lensing effects. We observe that space-time is much more curved at a galactic scale than the matter we see. (included black holes, neutron stars, etc...) Hence there is much more mass that we can see.
As a physics teacher I am looking forward to some student questions when I next discuss dark energy. The wonderful thing about Timescape is it was hiding in plain sight, we just had to apply the General Theory of Relativity correctly. Instead we came up with an unsatisfactory plaster that is fraying around the sides and we added it to the curriculum! I love science!!
I find it arrogant that human beings, cooking up an idea or an assumption in their heads, claim it as if it is a factual truth because some data agrees with it. Nature does not give 2 fucks about what humans think and almost 100% of the time wrongly interpret observations. As a teacher I would say, before stating facts; we think, we assume, we reason in such a way THAT ... BUT we are not 100% sure.
I love it when a scientist creates a model I had actually speculated. I am, of course, nowhere near as smart -- I only speculated while the scientist took the deep dive. Love the science -- thank you, Anton! And Happy New Year!
You are absolutely as smart if you considered it a possibility! I would say we just didn’t have the specific life experiences to make us the type to follow through and find out definitively. :)
@ it’s never too late!! I’m 30 and starting to undertake steps to becoming a polymath in my own right. It’s not easy, some days I’m just a potato. But I don’t look away from my goal. If it’s something you want I’d say go for it, otherwise find out what you do want, and aim for that ♥️
@ there are some fascinating unknown unknowns out there. I think for academic science groups they have more of an interest in more classically experimental topics (ie) reproducible investigations. Unknown Aerial Phenomena, or Unidentified Flying Objects may be too wide a descriptor for most mainstream scientists to get into. But I wish you the best of luck! There’s also a lot is misinformation and conspiracies out there that muddy the waters without providing reputable evidence people can work with.
More likely, lambda-cdm doesn't work but we want to stick to it, so let just add just the 95% missing matter and energy to the equations and call them dark to keep it alive, for a century now
I agree, dark energy makes very little sense. How can you explain a mystery by invoking another invented mystery. That's magic, it's not science. I'm also amazed that some of the world's top scientists constructed the theory of dark energy without considering the effects of Relativity. Unlike dark energy, this new theory explains a mystery with something that is already known, in this case time dilation. Dark matter is another example of a mystery being explained by another mystery. It just seems wrong....
I love how you bring up and talk about new theoretical physics. This makes so much more intuitive sense of dark matter, it almost makes too much sense for comforters. Can’t wait to find out more.
I always assumed they accounted for time dilation when figuring out the expansion rate and acceleration of the expansion. It surprises me that this is a new thing.
One thing major thing is glossed over in this video - How our measurements of red shifts are affected by whether the light has travelled through voids or gravitational wells. Just like light travelling from one media to another. So everything we have measured about red shifts is wrong, because they assumed a homogenous universe (even though gravitational lensing was known). The Pulsar timing array has already shown how inhomogeneous space-time really is and that's just the beginning.
@@RowOfMushyTiT "So everything we have measured about red shifts is wrong" Drat, I *knew* something was wrong with my redshift measurements! Young Earth Creationists were right!
Was thinking the same thing. Imagine a galactic civilization choosing where it wants to colonize based on how fast or slow time moves in that region relative to other parts of the universe.
Oh yes, Cixin Liu delivers some bright ideas when he travels into (and beyond) four-dimentional space in "Deaths End". -And of course the saddest lovestory in spacetime: "Taking care of God" from his collection "Wandering Earth".
The bigger implication with this theory is that it might explain the big bang. If eventually the universe contracts instead of our previous theory of infinite expansion then death and rebirth of the universe may have occurred an infinite amount of times. Also ties into the multiverse theory
Never liked the idea of dark energy, it's just putting a plaster on the problem. I like this idea tho and it ties in with current theory to a certain extent. And maybe gravity isn't as weak as we think...
You misunderstand what ”Dark Energy” is. It’s not a solution to the problem of unexplained energy, it’s the name of the problem itself. Same goes with dark matter
@@victorforsgren6478 What you've stated is partially correct. However, it would appear that we've put a Band-Aid over a problem in gravity. The phenomenon actually shows that our understanding of gravity does not hold up on large scales, so we would be wise to revisit our theory of gravity instead of coming up with the term dark matter and saying that dark matter actually exists in the universe. It's a terrible name for the phenomena.
@@victorforsgren6478 yes and no, why assume its unexplained energy instead of error in calculation, theory or observation. saying dark energy is confusing and it already assume that switch thing exist even if that not ur attention. same thing with dark matter another bad name for unexplained difference we observe.
@@TravisLee33This video is on the specific topic of dark energy. Why would you revisit _general_ Relativity, dark matter, or the behavior of gravity on the largest scales based upon the results of this study? This is a topic of cosmology, but you're making the assumption that there's sufficient observational data that shows a problem with our best theory of gravity.
@@TravisLee33Dark matter is just regular mass that is dilated. Dilation/gamma is the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This does not mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, this includes the centers of high mass stars and the majority of galaxy centers. This has been accepted for a long time. Dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves. It doesn't occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have normal rotation rates, in other words they have no dark matter/dilated mass.
The timescape model is so intuitive to me, that I always assumed it was the current model lol. My mistake was assuming that time differences due to uneven mass distribution was taken into consideration by astrophysicists, and still couldn't account for the expansion being observed, hence the need for dark energy in the model. Fascinating, I look forward to hear more studies made about this.
@rienkhoek4169 I was speaking of MY intuition here. I've always found relativity to be quite intuitive personally, unlike Quantum mechanics. And of course this isn't the basis of any scientific theory. Not sure how you got that from my comment.
@@rienkhoek4169 'intuitive' as in 'it seems natural to me'. special relativity is more intuitive to some than others, it does not mean it is based on intuition, that it hasn't been proven to be correct. it means for some people things make sense quicker/easier than for others and it's not always a matter of how 'intelligent' one person is.
I really love your explanations, I've always been curious and fascinated by everything around me and it's videos like this that really cement things into my memory. Easy to understand and great analogies. If only I had people around me to have these conversations. Most truck drivers don't have the same drive as me, maybe I'm in the wrong field. But having recently learned at 41 I have ADHD truck driving was the best job for me, perfect stimulation and deadlines. Looking forward to learning more new ideas and evolving facts! I usually never comment, the meds must have kicked in xD
A ‘mechanism’.. yeah wouldn’t it. Let’s try to find the mechanism that explains why time goes forward the week after that. Maybe physicists should figure out the mechanism that gravity works around the week after that, right?
Yes but I think the previous thinking was that the effect was a lot more subtle and therefore wouldn’t make the large differences that this paper now seems to propose. As I never thought that Dark Energy sounded credible anyway, this sounds kinda interesting!
@dukedex5043 Makes me wonder about the 'flash' on the outside of the observable universe Could it be that it isn't due to the big bang, but due to DRAMATIC deceleration of time as you approach a region that contains any mass? Could a perfect vacuum have strange impacts on time dilation?
I think the inhomogeniety of the universe is much higher than anticipated in the past, after all, these large voids were only confirmed in recent years. In a homogeneous universe, the average time dilation would be roughly the same everywhere and the differences would kind of cancel out. It probably was an unfortunate oversight that the connection between a granular universe and the Hubble tension was not acknowledged to the degree it should have.
I brought this idea up to Don Lincoln several years ago and he dismissed it outright. I didn't really know it would be from time differential, it just made sense that as light was traveling greater distance it would change somehow. This makes MUCH more sense than dark energy.
If time dilation causes our observations to be wrong then how can any observation be trusted. Time dilation would be caused by greater or lesser masses in different areas of the universe. The wrinkle is dark matter if it exists. So far we can not measure dark matter unless it is done by inference to our observations. So if we can not trust our observations than all current theories would or could be wrong as all of the evidence would be suspect due to time dilation. This is like correcting every part of the picture using criteria that changes because of unknown physics that can not be observed, destroying all models of distant observations that are currently in use by cosmology. For example the ruler would be changing constantly and dynamically so there is no common reference to reach any conclusion.
Right. Will we now conjecture what amounts of dark matter are here or there according to observed expansion rates? We'll use two unknowns to bilaterally measure the other?
Approximations are useful as the science becomes more precise. Newton to Einstein and so forth. All of our sciences will seem primitive relative to the next 100 years. Just a wrinkle along the way.
@@fariesz6786 I suggest you check the amount of historic usage of both terms in google ngram viewer... inhomogeneous was pretty much never used until it suddenly popped up circa 1920 and has declined a lot ever since, while heterogeneous has always been a lot more present. Both meaning the same, my guess is that some people started using it in lieu of the proper antonym of homogeneous maybe due to ignorance (or *conspiracy alert* to avoid the "hetero" prefix")
inhomogenous implies that something is mostly homogeneous with some exceptions while heterogeneous would refer to systems with large amounts of different phases with varying distributions. So its a small difference in detail. at least thats how it works in chemistry/chemical engineering
LCDM may be wrong but dark energy and eternal inflation isn't, - it predicts the more dense galaxies in the early Universe, the increase in expansion speed (because the overall density is lessening and ET, eternal inflation, pulls us along), and much more. Supernovas are in motion coming towards us and moving away, over time if you remember the WMAP data and do not serve as a meaningful candle.
Dark energy. From the people that said Pluto isn’t a planet and invent parallel universes to explain when they are bad at math. A mistake plus keleven gets you home by seven.
Why are you so emotionally attached to whether pluto is a planet or not? If pluto was a planet then we would need to classify a dozen plus objects as planets too.
I'm not a scientist or anything but I love hearing about it. The last couple years I had an inkling that time may be a factor in the cosmological constant issue. I thought to myself what if time moved more slowly in the early dense universe ( you had a video on yhat also) and also thought maybe time is moving differently in different parts of the universe now. And here is another video that expresses thoughts I'd had that I had not idea others have had also. Science is so cool! The universe is amazing! Thank you!
I am so glad to see this path is being researched. It's exactly where my mind has been going for the past couple of decades. Knowing what we know about the variation in density of the universe, and how it affects time dilation, along with the Hubble tension, it always seemed over simplistic to me to consider that, because the universe is radially anisotropic, it should also be volumetrically smooth in terms of time dilation. This timescape model seems very promising, I hope it will be proven to be the correct approach!! Interesting thing is the light we capture and study has to come from dense, "fast paced" regions of the universe, which will cross large "slow paced" voids, because that is what we can observe. And this looks like accelerating away from us. I wonder what we would see if we could observe something that came from a void instead. Would it look like it's moving closer to us...
Even if this isn't it exactly, the idea of gravitational waves affecting the rate of space and time expansion feels like a promising piece of the picture.
Finally, someone else has explained what I have thought since I was only 12 years old and learned about the side effects of gravity. All things in the universe are dilated, most specifically near the Event Horizon of a black hole; the effect of 'gravity' itself causes this, and the inverse square law applies. Gravity is most likely an emergent property, or radical novelty, raised by the 'coherence' of a stable particle and has collective values (we call this mass). This radical novelty is like a ripple through the web of what we call spacetime and, as data, is collected in matter itself, cohering into larger and larger waves until they collapse on themselves (black holes). What we have learned about black holes in the last 30 years kind of confirms to me that galaxies are coherence of the lower scale on a larger scale. The effect of 'gravity' scales up with matter much like the electromagnetic force itself which also scales up (Radcliffe Waves) and time dilation is required as scales change: On atomic scales it is picoseconds for cycles; on galactic scales it is literal eons. Our Milky Way cycles once every 225-250 million years. The extremity of a black hole is the drive that pushes the change throughout the universe. They act as gigantic 'spacetime spoons' that, as they spin, force polarization, polarity reversals, and atomic change. That gravitational drag (time dilation) causes atomic stretching and thus decay. The entire universe is designed to operate and function on every single one of these scales using a fractal method built upon Pi, Phi, and Alpha. These scales go below, and above, our visible universe. Math is a beautiful language because it is beginning to understand the depth and complexity that is infinity/God. Sadly, we will never have the computational depth to truly comprehend God this way; only a quantum computer AI will be able to. That's coming soon. Fun Fact: The most efficient and representative geometric shape for the universe is not a circle, it is a pyramid. Every level of the pyramid is made on the concreteneess (coherence) of the level below it, and ascends or descends literally forever, scale to scale, as a fractal. Philosophy is more effective explaining this than science is, but science is getting closer.
Been watching you for almost 10 years and love your content… keep it up Anton i always look forward to watching your videos and yes I hope to be there on the update on that later mission
Ive been saying this for over 20 years. I gave an example of space were given a coordinate system. If you could zero your velocity to all objects and your coordinate did not change your time would speed up. The closer you get to fixed coordinate to that of space time changes. When you are influenced by matter or within a gravitation field time will slow down the closer and deeper you get into this field. Ive also said the same thing about Dark Matter. That dark matter is also an illusion of what I call gravitational wake. When a super massive object moves, its gravitational field moves slower behind it because this field is light years in diameter and gravity is limited to the speed of light. So the super massive object changes coordinates but its field lags behind leaving behind the impression and influence but when we look we see no massive object there but we do see the gravitational influence. This is what got labeled dark matter but its just gravitational lag.
It is important to clarify that dark matter is not necessarily related to dark energy as many people may think. However this is an interesting question. Dark matter is more so to explain the speeds of gases orbiting on the outer edge of the galaxy. Without dark matter there isn’t enough mass for those speeds to be “valid” for the orbit at that distance. I suppose you could say perhaps time dilation can explain the dark matter phenomenon too, but for that we would need to essentially map time dilation and I’m not sure that has been done. I am now thinking that assuming time is faster at the outer edge of the galaxy maybe that can explain the apparent orbital velocities we see.
@@tylera2226 Without doing the math, it seems that the time dilation would have to be pretty extreme to explain that much apparent speed discrepancy across certain galaxies, which then begs the question of why some apparently massive galaxies do not demonstrate this effect while other, practically invisible galaxies experience a quite extreme effect. On the other hand, we have the unhomogenous space-time surface that could be expanding and contracting the apparent space between us and the galaxy we are viewing, perhaps distorting our image and thus throwing off our numbers by a considerable amount? It seems like this could be more easily tested by applying a distortion factor to the voids and scaling them across some of these errant galaxies to see if a pattern emerges. Very exciting stuff!
@@yokotaashi there are plenty of theories out there without dark matter. Dark energy and dark matter describe the shortcomings of LambdaCDM based on our current modelling of the universe
May we wish you and your family and support staff for your Channel a very educational and wonderful New Year in 2025. I don't get a chance to hear many of your videocasts, but every time I do I walk away a lot more knowledgeable than before.
SCP 1666. A creature that assumes the gravitational reality of a particular region in space which tricks all sentient life in its local vicinity into observing a false model of the universe. Its reasoning at this time is unknown. Further studies are required to fully understand and mitigate its effect.
Some years ago I heard about a similar theory, which proposes that our observations of the expansion of the universe are wrong because of the gravitational lensing effect. I think it’s much more likely that there’s something off with our observations or calculations with these observation than there being huge quantities of some undetectable matter (which, honestly, feels like creative bookkeeping).
It's a new way to save the Big bang theory since dark energy or dark matter doesn't exist. JWST has pretty much killed the Big bang theory. The Big bang theory is like a religion, they refuse to accept any information against the BBT.
As much as I love the success of relativity; I can't help but get the sinking feeling it's the primary reason we can't get these cosmic & quantum puzzles solved. Not that it's wrong; but moreso that time/space curvature is an emergent property and not an inherent aspect of what's going on.
@@jalifritz8033 So it's a long and complex idea in my brainspace but here's a poorly written basic summation of where my thoughts lay(TLDR at bottom): The inextricable combination of space and time aswell as a few other principles of the universe (uncertainty) arise from our ability to measure in only specific ways. Which, of course, makes sense. We use photons and electromagnetic interactions ALMOST exclusively to measure the universe and only just recently have been able to expand that to include gravity but only gravity indirectly as it interacts with electromagnetism. This is completely fine from a practical standpoint, the EM force is strong, abundant, easily detectable, interacts with almost all things we really care about (shoutout to you, dark matter). However this also makes one very very specific limiter aswell - we have no real way to compare our measurements with one measurement method to another. Photons are, fundamentally, what we've got to work with right now. It is the primary way that information is communicated. Even when we are observing other information communicated - such as the nuclear forces - we are still observing them as they interact with light and extrapolating from there. Now, for hypothetical, let's say gravity is graviton, spin 2 boson, waveparticle, travels at C, doesn't self interact except in specific conditions. Basically all the same properties as light... Except one. We know, factually, observationally, that light is directly effected by gravity. Its path is curved in gravitational fields, its wavelength is shifted red or blue depending on some specific gravitational conditions(but not exclusively by those). If we could figure out a way to directly, rather than indirectly, gather information from gravitons, suddenly we have a second standard measuring stick to compare our measurements with. We could then, plausibly in my mind, find out that the curvature of spacetime is actually a "smooth" process because the interactions of gravitons are so impossibly small that they have to build up over distance/intensity to have any noticeably measurable effect. That would be /one/ of the ways spacetime curvature would arise. BUT that also allows me to lead into the idea of why spacetime is currently inextricably linked - Having a singular measurement method. We can, currently, only have any information transfer from one source. So the limitations of that source will limit our measurements. C being a speed limit for information exchange, for example. A singular measurement type with a speed limit means that certain things should probably happen. Relativistic time dilation is the example i'm going for - since C cannot be exceeded, to our knowledge (excluding frame dragging/ other funky relativity math for this example) then the exchange rate of information will be limited to within that system. A measurement of distance will be "warped" at speeds nearing C in a noticeable way because it takes T for the information carrier (photon) to travel in 3d. To a singular observer. To an outside observer, the effect will be a little different, length contraction effects will also exist but at a different level dependent on their relative position and speed. But, and this is the part that really jostles my noodle with relativity, the interpretation that the lengths are all physically different depending on the observer? Is just a BAD interpretation to me. I like to use the analog of C VS Sound. doppler shift of sound in a controlled environment is analogous to relativistic doppler shift of light. However, because we have light to be able to measure what's actually going on with sound, we can compensate our data with a second info source. If all we had was sound(control environment) to measure lengths, we'd inevitably run into the same spacial contraction/stretching problems that we do with light, at a much much slower speed. But because we have light, C, as a comparison tool, we don't run into that problem. I have literally never understood why the bulk body of science dismisses that comparison, but whatever, it's just something that has to be worked within for me. TL;DR - inherently "linked" spacetime is derived from limits on our ability to measure/gather information exchange, almost exclusively through electromagnetic interaction. Boy howdy that was a poorly put together summation. I do hope that made atleast a little bit of sense? I feel like i went a little bit roundabout but my brain is scrambled from IRL stuff at the moment and am not sure, right now, how to formulate that better.
@@jalifritz8033 Well i wrote a big reply earlier but youtube decided not to post it. Thanks youtube. Essentially; "Spacetime" should not be inexorably linked, so "spacetime" wouldn't arise out of anything. An illusory curved space would arise out of actually changing exchange rate of information. What this means is that because of the limitations of how we exchange information - being almost exclusively through electromagnetic interaction - we have no other functionally useful ways to vet and verify it. This could potentially be changed by being able to measure gravity directly (say, for example, if gravitons) rather than indirectly (phase decoherence of photons like how we currently do). How to do that? Great question! No idea. But having a secondary measuring stick would be great. An example I like to use is speed of sound (idealized environment). Doppler shift happens in sound much as relativistic doppler shift happens with light. If we ONLY had sound to measure, we'd run into the same problems of length contraction/stretching at speed. But because we also have secondary measuring methods, we can go go "Oh, no, okay, that's not what's happening, it's just funky interactions of waves and information exchange". We wouldn't even necessarily need such a drastic difference in measurement speed like with sound/light, it could be something as simple as the measurement methods do not mutually interact (gravity interacting with light to change its direction vector or redshift/blueshift its wavelength, but light not returning the favor. This would make sense if light and gravity both carry a momentum vector but only one of them carries a different property that can't be expressed on the graviton... like electromagnetism). Boy howdy that's a really bad way of summarizing it down to super low, but like. I had a big written comment earlier that seemingly doesn't exist and I really don't want to put that much effort into it again. Sorry mate.
...some (most?) astro physicists claimed even >90% are of the (not visible, not measurable) "dark matter" and/or "dark energy"... Which I thought is a quite stupid theory... (Especially, when in all known solar systems NO dark matter was/is necessary)
I think dark energy is the result of matter existing in parallel universes with relatively inverse arrows of time, and dark matter is the result of matter in parallel universes with adjacent arrows of time. In this model, black holes pierce through the fabric of space-time to pair with white holes in these parallel universes, and our big bang was a white hole paired with a black hole near the end of a universe(s) relatively temporally inverse to ours.
Anton, how is it that establishment cosmologists have just worked out what the rest of us have known for decades? Please could you do a piece on why establishment astronomy is so far behind the curve? Many of us have felt for decades that adherence to the assumptions of isotropy (obviously wrong) and time independent cosmological properties (dubious) were unsafe. What is wrong with cosmology that the establishment can be so oblivious to the published evidence?
@@KierenSummers Anton's comment section is riddled with pseudo-intellectuals and the type of people who post bad 'science' on their Facebook page. It's actually quite disheartening to see. I wish he'd address it and ask his viewers to stop assuming they know so much just because they watch his videos.
Because the scientific method builds on previous findings. That's the entire point of the method. Previous conceptions that work well enough in terms of practical or explanatory utility that can be quantified based on known information have far more momentum to them than a bunch of people spitballing on what "could be" the answer. A bunch of people spitballing, unburdened by the whole scope of the problem as it is currently understood, might be able to scattershot ideas and have one of them be conceptually closer to the objective reality than the contemporary scientific understanding but that in of itself isn't valuable to the scientific process of iteratively refining a useful map of information. Amateurs or "intellectual" types who are uninvolved in academia are in the awkward position of both being less contaminated with the inertia of prior ideas and also being uninvolved with the process that might be able to change the paradigm.
I've thought about this for years. It made sense to me that if dense gravity slows time, the opposite or rather not being slowed, would happen in the voids. Every time I talked to someone about it, they dismissed the idea. I'm glad to see some research on the subject.
If you use the formula for gravitational time dilation: Td=T*SQRT(1-2GM/rc^2), where T is time on low gravity (far away from most masses in a void), Td TIME in stronger gravity, M is the mass of MilkYway, r is about 20,000 light years (distance from its center) and c the speed of light, you will get the time dilation to be about 0.1%....where did they get to 35%?
Scientifically, I am more a biology, psychology person than physics person, (which i am studying to understand it, and it’s working on a basic level). So i sort of understand what you’re saying. Kinetic energy makes so much sense! Don’t quite get the faster or slower expansion though. Thanks much - love your talks :)) You a such a wonderful person, Anton. I love your smile. 😋✨🌷🌱
@@ceb1970 I invented this idea back in the 80s when I was wasted on vodka. I can prove my priority with a witness (a bum I told that still lives in a cardbox near the bar I still go to).
Our observable universe exists inside of a relative void and dark energy is the gravity of the super dense super massive (think of a black hole as a drop of water, this would be an ocean) structure surrounding that void pulling our universe towards it.
This could explain why Galxys rotate at the same speed througout - in the more diffuse outer regions faster time makes the stars move faster matching the inner stars.
I worked out this EXACT THEORY in my head! It started as just a thought experiment, as me just trying to work out various phenomenon based on my layman's understanding of cosmology. I never imagined my idea was something that was considered by actual astrophysicists/cosmologists!
Part of what led to my personal experimental theory was the consideration of the affect of gravity/mass on the passage of time. If time dilation affects matter/energy locally, why wouldn't it affect entire regions of space the same? Wouldn't places with more mass experience time, and thus expansjin of the universe, at a slower rate, leaving relatively empty regions to expand more quickly, relatively? In my head, it explained the formation of galactic filements. Anyway, maybe I'm misunderstanding the subject, but it makes sense to me.
A dogmatic philosophical assumption (the homogeneity of the universe) has become the foundational basis of the standard cosmological model despite being experimentally unproven and unprovable. The reason is that an inhomogeneous (but still isotropic) universe would invalidate the copernican/mediocrity principle and reintroduce anthropocentrism back into science.
@@paddipat There only one way the universe can be inhomogeneus, but still isotropic, and that's if we are at the center of the universe. And by we I mean our local piece of universe.
It is more elegant to explain tthe thing as huge as dark energy by oversimplifications in our models than with new physic. Only time will show which theory is the right one, but I am grateful to love in a time when these theories are discussed and when we have so good science communicators that can explain it to us.
I love it. Its simple, almost obvious with hindsight and is a simpler explanation, which science goes for when the evidence holds up. Now it's time for a whole sky survey to make sure density lines up with apparent expansion everywhere.
The idea of a 'time mirage' being the solution is so simple, I love it!
I have always wondered if our age of the universe was correct since immediately after the big bang all matter would have been more condensed and gravity would cause time to move slower and speed up as matter spread out, I guess I've just assumed that people smarter than me had already accounted for that.
It is an old theory with new wrapping. I vote for it.
@@maelstrom2594 i thought that as well!
It would be disappointing though...
@@abdelrahmanmohammed9405 Because no new science?
A potentially really elegant solution. No exotic or new physics needed, just what we already understand applied with a finer detail. I like it! Looking forwards to hearing how this idea stands up against the new data to come.
This finally gives me hope that we can finally make progress. To me it seemed like for decades scientists have been trying to one up each other with crazier and crazier theories to the point of the earlier crazy theories becoming more accepted.
@@spugelo359 their ideas have merit, maybe some parts of their model are wrong and can be remoced and replaced with parts of other "crazy" models. schrodingers cat was a joke because even he thought superposition was "crazy"
those models still have to mathematically make sense and match with observation, so while they may be odd, there is still some possibility of truth behind any one of them. It's exactly as @frustjune6072 says; some parts could actually be partially or wholly true, even if the larger theory is incorrect
@@spugelo359 Yes, it reminds me of the song about "the old woman who swallowed a fly" and kept swallowing more things to catch the others
- she swallowed a dog to catch the cat, she swallowed a cat to catch the mouse....etc
Very elegant if I understand it correctly:
If time is faster in voids, then it means light would have less time to pass them. Therefore voids are actually smaller, but they appear bigger. This appearance of greater distance is accumulated further we look. So far away objects appear further then they are. And they appear to move away faster then they are. And this perceived speed is ever more bigger for every void in between is. Therefore universe appears to be accelerating away while it is not.
Redshift is relative speed to us. Far object redshift appears non-linear to its distance, this indicates acceleration in universe expansion. Redshift should be linear if expansion is linear. If difference in distance is accumulating then difference in redshift is as well. This tricks us into seing acceleration while there is none.
This makes me so happy. It's an idea I had maybe 15 years ago. But I was a bartender, so everyone just threw plastic cups at me. Now who's laughing you old drunks?!?!
GET HIM!!!
Oh yeah? Well I came up with theory 16 years ago! During a drinking binge a lousy bartender stole my papers. I became dpressed and became alcoholic and were never able to reproduce them.
Did you explain it mathematically? Or were you wasted?
Now just dark matter and we can move on after ages of bullshit
@@Warp10x The only way I could explain it would be if I were wasted.
I know I don't often comment Anton, but you and your channel are, to me at least, the very reason why RUclips should exist; you break down complex topics so well and you really widen your audiences understanding and appreciation of all the wonderful science that is otherwise going largely ignored in media. Thank you, and your family, for providing us with such a gift.
It came as a bit of a surprise that time dilation wasn’t already accounted for. I actually thought about it but more in the context of inflation. In the early universe you could imagine that small inhomogeneities would cause rabbit expansion that may appear even faster due to steep gradients in time dilation. Well cool stuff. Happy new year 🎉
I always thought it a bit strange that the position of distant galaxies in relation to time is something that is rarely being addressed. In my own thought experiment I imagined the distant galaxies to not only represent their appearance billions of years ago relative to their distance from us, but also their position in space as those galaxies exhibit in relation to us as causality expands. I thought that the acceleration observed must be due to the position of distant galaxies changing from our point of view due to some relativistic phenomenon which isn't fully accounted for and that dark energy isn't actually a force, just like gravity isn't a force in itself, even though physicists are still trying to discover the force causing the effect of gravity by trying to understanding how mass distorts spacetime on the quantum level.
Exactly. It's not that this discovery is profound it just shows how profoundly incompetent $cientists are
@@catoni I was surprised it wasn't already a given.
Couldn't the expansion be caused by stretch bubbles, as in the opposite to a warp bubble, or the back part of a warp bubble, in terms of it being used as a propellant for space travel?
Also, could entangled particles create a warp bubble between them, that covers any distance they become parted by or, in other words, do they fold space through a higher spatial dimension, which creates a portal between them?
Both would be relative to an observation/observer.
There is an episode of Star Trek TNG called "timescape" where time moves differently at different points in space. In the show it's because technobable caused by a ship which used an artificial singularity as an energy source broke and shattered time in that area of space. They realised that the Enterprise was exploding in slow motion and were able to technobable time into going backwards and then preventing the shattering of spacetime in the first (or second) place.
Gotta love how you can "techno-babble" your way out of any peril within a runtime of a single episode. How convenient! We should definitely pursue the technobabble technology before we even attempt stuff like fusion power or CO2 sequestering
I gotta watch that one. I thought I'd seen all of TNG but that doesn't sound familiar
TNG often felt like the writers were 12 year old boys with a very limited set of ideas they recycled constantly. DS9 was much better (though still far short of the world building of the best writers and TV shows).
fuu, i was once in altered state of energy, ~6x slower. for 4months. aka 2 years. that was a bit of a nuisance. And i could not sleep. And mega headache. Especially as all the movements in the body were auto visualized - heart, blood, lymph, biofield flux... Going backwards in time is also quite common. this is when precogpanic takes over and one can change timelines (avoid timeline ends) that are just not possible without smth being able to suck data form the future. That may not happen. But did happen. This is no scifi mambo. Real life. This reality is also largely scripted, or lets say future is written and freely accessible. This may hurt brain even more, but... that`s what it is. News is scfi, and scfi is reallife.
Something to do with aliens that live in or feed from natural singularities that caused the artificial singularity powering the Romulan ship to go haywire.
The most interesting story I've heard this year, Anton, and well explained too. I've often wondered if the universe we observe isn't warped and twisted by gravitational lensing and time delay. Thanks and season's Greetings too.
Read about this the other day in my news feed and I'm super happy you took some time to talk about this today! A wonderful person doing a wonderful job helping explain what the mysteries of the universe are, and how we're trying to solve them!
Thanks!
The great revolution in astronomy of our lives will be replacing "there must be a factor we haven't discovered" with "this effect we already knew about is stronger than we had previously thought."
And the generation after that will be 'ah f we over calculated the effects' and we'll be back where we were
More like the effect of known forces is difficult to observe accurately from the singular reference point in our solar system.
Therefore this is a non zero chance that what we think is another force is really just a known force observed from the wrong reference point (or not enough reference points to construct an accurate cosmological model).
There's also the fact that almost all these big simulations that studies use dont factor magnetic feilds because they're just way too hard to compute atm
Dark energy? Nah, real cows are just now round.
Can’t really call this a great revolution though
This is a really clever idea. We have to see how well it fits observational data but if it does, not only dark energy would become unnecessary but may be even the Hubble tension would be gone (but at this moment, I do not even know if the idea changes the Hubble constant in the correct direction).
I see you comment often on Sabine's channel and now I find you here too?
You can definitely make a model to fit the data, but it needs to make predictions about new interactions or tests we can make
@@I.amthatrealJuan I am a member of both channels (see the yellow icon next to my account name).
🥤🥤
@@I.amthatrealJuan Why would you find that surprising? Both are science channels.
Yes I thought of this as well! I kept calling it my fishbowl theory. Like you're looking at the rest of space through your own time dilated fishbowl. And you're looking through other fish bowls etc.
brilliant! So glad you covered this! Excited to hear more about this
I too have been discussing this with the brother for years as a more plausible and simpler explanation, occam's razor
Delighted the spotlights been shone on it now
Love the way you describe it "fishbowl theory"😂
I've been wondering for some years whether the cosmic voids expand because of the expansion of the universe, or does the universe expand because of the expansion of the cosmic voids.
I've also wondered if the cosmic voids expand more quickly over time, causing the universe to expand more quickly as well.
@@walternullifidian Sometimes I view the voids like I view the surface of boiling water. Very similar forms
@@Ivan.Wrightvery interesting, my next hypothesis/intuition would be to map black holes in relation to CMB, is there somehow a correlation between the two? The boiling part that breaks through the surface of the water could represent the “cold spots” in our universe that are driving the movement and the black holes subduct the matter into a different state. Is the edge of our observable universe just the edge of the pot? Where is the steam going? If the subduction and “evaporation” occur simultaneously, is our universe literally just always being converted into another, just our perspective is warped as it looks like there exists a beginning? Are we being “pushed” to the edge of the pot?
In effect, the space outside this galaxy could have a “refractive index” between 0 and 1.
This is really surprising to me. Not this idea, but the fact that it's new. Based on the bits and pieces I know about cosmology, I guess I just always assumed this sort of time dilation effect was already incorporated into existing models/theories and dark energy was still needed on top of it. It just always seemed so obvious to me as an outside observer to the field. Like I assumed surely they already considered it before resorting to positing the existence of some unknown dark energy.
It was. Time dilation was already in the model along with dark energy.
I always love Anton’s smile and wave at the end of each presentation 🫶🏽
I’ve always thought this. The missing dark energy idea always seemed like a cop out due to lack of full understanding. I had no idea it was seriously being studied, thanks for the information!
This honestly makes a ton of sense. The math already tells us that gravity effects time and slows it down so a true void would have time moving much faster then inside galaxies. So any galatic cluster on the opposite side of a void from us would appear to be moving much further faster then it actually is itself because of the void
It definitely makes sense, yet I admit I would have never thought of it.
@ hell the more i think about this.. we have all been asuming that Time was the same everywhere in the universe and with that assumption the observations showed some force seeming accelerating expansion. But we already new that assumption is wrong…
Black holes, even the earliest descriptions of them expressed how the intense gravitational fields slowed realitive time and that anything that “falls into” black hole effectively never experiences reaching its singularity as the time of the “fall” constantly stretches into infinity. So we already know that in spots all over the universe there is effectively dragging to a near halt time. So time is not universal and our observations built on the assumption of its universality are flawed.
I am trying to understand your last sentence. So how a light traveling from a galaxy of high gravity and then through the void of low gravity makes it look faster than it is? In other words how light looks more red shifted than it actually is because of void?
That is just incredible to visualize and contemplate.
Dark energy does not exist. The expansion of space is not accelerating, it just looks like that because of perspective. To objects moving away from each other at constant speed no matter how slow will look like they are speeding up until they are moving away so fast relative to each other that it is faster then the speed of light. That is because of the distance between them is expanding and they are still moving at the same speed.
We know this effect very well and when that happens that it moves faster then the speed of light away from us it is called that it has passed the particle horizon and it is lost to us forever. Parts of the outer universe passes this particle horizon all the time but we can still see it. But we can never send a signal or travel to those parts as they are lost forever because it is moving away from us faster then the speed of light due the the expanding distance between us. Those part is still traveling at the same speed, no acceleration has happened, only thing that happened is that the space between us is getting larger.
Replyæoik
What if the same is applied to galaxies, maybe dark matter doesn’t exist after-all, where density is higher in the center of the galaxy compared with the edge, thus time passes faster around the edge compared to the center of the galaxy, thus creating an illusion that the edge of the galaxy is rotating faster than it should.
I have been thinking the same thing for the last couple of years that maybe time at the center of a galaxy runs at a different rate to time at the edge of that galaxy this giving the impression that the stars are moving at the same speed.
No, we have evidence that dark matter is really a thing because of micro-lensing effects. We observe that space-time is much more curved at a galactic scale than the matter we see. (included black holes, neutron stars, etc...) Hence there is much more mass that we can see.
imagine how horrible that is. Time flow is not constant even at short distances. How can you run a civilization with different time dilations
another video I saw the other day said dark matter might not exist, completely flipped from this one, using the same reasoning as this video.
This doesn’t explain the increased gravitational effects we attribute to Dark Matter.
Damn dude, I love this channel. Keeping us up to date on all this stuff in a clear and understandable format. Cheers.
As a physics teacher I am looking forward to some student questions when I next discuss dark energy. The wonderful thing about Timescape is it was hiding in plain sight, we just had to apply the General Theory of Relativity correctly. Instead we came up with an unsatisfactory plaster that is fraying around the sides and we added it to the curriculum! I love science!!
I find it arrogant that human beings, cooking up an idea or an assumption in their heads, claim it as if it is a factual truth because some data agrees with it. Nature does not give 2 fucks about what humans think and almost 100% of the time wrongly interpret observations. As a teacher I would say, before stating facts; we think, we assume, we reason in such a way THAT ... BUT we are not 100% sure.
I love it when a scientist creates a model I had actually speculated. I am, of course, nowhere near as smart -- I only speculated while the scientist took the deep dive. Love the science -- thank you, Anton! And Happy New Year!
You are absolutely as smart if you considered it a possibility! I would say we just didn’t have the specific life experiences to make us the type to follow through and find out definitively. :)
@@sodadrinkhat5696 Would've been cool to be a scientist. Thanks for your kind words.
@ it’s never too late!! I’m 30 and starting to undertake steps to becoming a polymath in my own right. It’s not easy, some days I’m just a potato. But I don’t look away from my goal. If it’s something you want I’d say go for it, otherwise find out what you do want, and aim for that ♥️
@@sodadrinkhat5696 I'm 60 years old now. For 50 years, I've been researching UFOs. I would LOVE to see more scientists doing that very thing.
@ there are some fascinating unknown unknowns out there. I think for academic science groups they have more of an interest in more classically experimental topics (ie) reproducible investigations. Unknown Aerial Phenomena, or Unidentified Flying Objects may be too wide a descriptor for most mainstream scientists to get into.
But I wish you the best of luck! There’s also a lot is misinformation and conspiracies out there that muddy the waters without providing reputable evidence people can work with.
Yea, the term"dark" means :"We don't know what it might be". The only constant in human knowlege is change.
Don't Actually Really Know = DARK.
"Dark" means "not coupled to the electromagnetic field".
@ No one ever observed dark matter. It is literally a fudge factor.
More likely, lambda-cdm doesn't work but we want to stick to it, so let just add just the 95% missing matter and energy to the equations and call them dark to keep it alive, for a century now
@@rascal1234 it is the name of an observation
I’ve always felt that dark energy didn’t make sense, glad to see I’m not alone.
It's the Luminferous Aether, all over again: an unobserved phenomenon that exists solely to balance the equations.
It's like when we know the solution but attempt to use incorrect math to reach the correct answer and just expect teacher to accept it 😅
Yeah to me it always sounded like it was made up.
Same, I always likened it to the Ether from the 19th century.
I agree, dark energy makes very little sense. How can you explain a mystery by invoking another invented mystery. That's magic, it's not science.
I'm also amazed that some of the world's top scientists constructed the theory of dark energy without considering the effects of Relativity.
Unlike dark energy, this new theory explains a mystery with something that is already known, in this case time dilation.
Dark matter is another example of a mystery being explained by another mystery. It just seems wrong....
🙋🏽♀️ Anton everyday
Thank you for the meticulous approach to creating each video. It's hard to imagine how much time it takes to do all this on a daily basis.
I love how you bring up and talk about new theoretical physics. This makes so much more intuitive sense of dark matter, it almost makes too much sense for comforters. Can’t wait to find out more.
I seriously doubt they overlooked this.
I was hoping you were going to cover this. It seems like a very important question that needs to be answered.
I always assumed they accounted for time dilation when figuring out the expansion rate and acceleration of the expansion. It surprises me that this is a new thing.
They simplified in with the homogeneous and isotropic argument at the bases of lambda CDM.
One thing major thing is glossed over in this video - How our measurements of red shifts are affected by whether the light has travelled through voids or gravitational wells. Just like light travelling from one media to another. So everything we have measured about red shifts is wrong, because they assumed a homogenous universe (even though gravitational lensing was known). The Pulsar timing array has already shown how inhomogeneous space-time really is and that's just the beginning.
@@RowOfMushyTiT "So everything we have measured about red shifts is wrong"
Drat, I *knew* something was wrong with my redshift measurements! Young Earth Creationists were right!
I agree and it's unlikely they overlooked it.
This seems way more likely than there being some mysterious undetectable force.
It also makes for some interesting Sci Fi.
nonsense, next you will be saying phlogiston isn't real
Was thinking the same thing. Imagine a galactic civilization choosing where it wants to colonize based on how fast or slow time moves in that region relative to other parts of the universe.
Oh yes, Cixin Liu delivers some bright ideas when he travels into (and beyond) four-dimentional space in "Deaths End". -And of course the saddest lovestory in spacetime: "Taking care of God" from his collection "Wandering Earth".
May the force not be with us.
The bigger implication with this theory is that it might explain the big bang. If eventually the universe contracts instead of our previous theory of infinite expansion then death and rebirth of the universe may have occurred an infinite amount of times. Also ties into the multiverse theory
Ok... This is fascinating stuff. Time-Flow theory is pretty interesting, I hope this brings more people into the work, I can't wait to hear more.
Thanks for explaining the Timescale Model so clearly. It makes perfect sense.
The theory seems sound.
And anything that doesn't require invisible non-interactable particles will always have my support.
I also support theories that do not include pink invisible immaterial unicorns 😂
Never liked the idea of dark energy, it's just putting a plaster on the problem. I like this idea tho and it ties in with current theory to a certain extent. And maybe gravity isn't as weak as we think...
You misunderstand what ”Dark Energy” is. It’s not a solution to the problem of unexplained energy, it’s the name of the problem itself. Same goes with dark matter
@@victorforsgren6478 What you've stated is partially correct. However, it would appear that we've put a Band-Aid over a problem in gravity. The phenomenon actually shows that our understanding of gravity does not hold up on large scales, so we would be wise to revisit our theory of gravity instead of coming up with the term dark matter and saying that dark matter actually exists in the universe. It's a terrible name for the phenomena.
@@victorforsgren6478 yes and no, why assume its unexplained energy instead of error in calculation, theory or observation.
saying dark energy is confusing and it already assume that switch thing exist even if that not ur attention.
same thing with dark matter another bad name for unexplained difference we observe.
@@TravisLee33This video is on the specific topic of dark energy. Why would you revisit _general_ Relativity, dark matter, or the behavior of gravity on the largest scales based upon the results of this study?
This is a topic of cosmology, but you're making the assumption that there's sufficient observational data that shows a problem with our best theory of gravity.
@@TravisLee33Dark matter is just regular mass that is dilated. Dilation/gamma is the phenomenon our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". This does not mean mass increases, it means mass becomes spread throughout spacetime relative to an outside observer. Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, this includes the centers of high mass stars and the majority of galaxy centers. This has been accepted for a long time.
Dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves.
It doesn't occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have normal rotation rates, in other words they have no dark matter/dilated mass.
The timescape model is so intuitive to me, that I always assumed it was the current model lol.
My mistake was assuming that time differences due to uneven mass distribution was taken into consideration by astrophysicists, and still couldn't account for the expansion being observed, hence the need for dark energy in the model.
Fascinating, I look forward to hear more studies made about this.
I would not use intuition as the base of any theory. Special relativity is not intuitive but proven again and again.
@rienkhoek4169 I was speaking of MY intuition here. I've always found relativity to be quite intuitive personally, unlike Quantum mechanics.
And of course this isn't the basis of any scientific theory. Not sure how you got that from my comment.
@@rienkhoek4169 'intuitive' as in 'it seems natural to me'. special relativity is more intuitive to some than others, it does not mean it is based on intuition, that it hasn't been proven to be correct. it means for some people things make sense quicker/easier than for others and it's not always a matter of how 'intelligent' one person is.
Ahhhh I basically been saying something similar for a year now. Exciting!! Can't wait until we learn more!
Thank you for taking the time to research this topic!
3:35 I've heard the balloon analogy. I've never heard the raisin bread one. That one tickles me. 🙃
If the universe is stretching at a different rate at different places, it wouldn't be far fetched to suggest that time dilation happens.
you mean it wouldnt be far stretched to suggest :)
time is space and space is time
matter is energy and energy is matter
No wonder it looks like an accelerating expansion. They've been stating that as a fact since 1998. Incredible.
This is simply another illusion of time dilation
@@Apollo1011 I dont think anyone was saying it was a fact, it was a theory and one that was believed to be most likely given the evidence
So incredibly interesting. You've got to be the best science communicator since Carl Sagan. Thank you
I really love your explanations, I've always been curious and fascinated by everything around me and it's videos like this that really cement things into my memory. Easy to understand and great analogies. If only I had people around me to have these conversations. Most truck drivers don't have the same drive as me, maybe I'm in the wrong field. But having recently learned at 41 I have ADHD truck driving was the best job for me, perfect stimulation and deadlines. Looking forward to learning more new ideas and evolving facts! I usually never comment, the meds must have kicked in xD
This is so cool. It also feels like this solution was staring us in the face the whole time.
Finding a mechanism explaining a cyclical universe would be great.
A ‘mechanism’.. yeah wouldn’t it. Let’s try to find the mechanism that explains why time goes forward the week after that. Maybe physicists should figure out the mechanism that gravity works around the week after that, right?
I thought we always knew gravity slowed time???
Did I imagine that?
My guess is time may be much faster in voids than we expected, and slower outside of galaxies than we thought.
Yes but I think the previous thinking was that the effect was a lot more subtle and therefore wouldn’t make the large differences that this paper now seems to propose. As I never thought that Dark Energy sounded credible anyway, this sounds kinda interesting!
gravity increases friction which slows down mechanical function making it appear to have slowed down in time.
@dukedex5043 Makes me wonder about the 'flash' on the outside of the observable universe
Could it be that it isn't due to the big bang, but due to DRAMATIC deceleration of time as you approach a region that contains any mass? Could a perfect vacuum have strange impacts on time dilation?
I think the inhomogeniety of the universe is much higher than anticipated in the past, after all, these large voids were only confirmed in recent years. In a homogeneous universe, the average time dilation would be roughly the same everywhere and the differences would kind of cancel out. It probably was an unfortunate oversight that the connection between a granular universe and the Hubble tension was not acknowledged to the degree it should have.
I brought this idea up to Don Lincoln several years ago and he dismissed it outright. I didn't really know it would be from time differential, it just made sense that as light was traveling greater distance it would change somehow. This makes MUCH more sense than dark energy.
Thank you so much! I've seen a couple videos on this subject but you explained it the best!
This is one of those ideas that somehow just feels really good -- and I love it!
If time dilation causes our observations to be wrong then how can any observation be trusted. Time dilation would be caused by greater or lesser masses in different areas of the universe. The wrinkle is dark matter if it exists. So far we can not measure dark matter unless it is done by inference to our observations. So if we can not trust our observations than all current theories would or could be wrong as all of the evidence would be suspect due to time dilation. This is like correcting every part of the picture using criteria that changes because of unknown physics that can not be observed, destroying all models of distant observations that are currently in use by cosmology. For example the ruler would be changing constantly and dynamically so there is no common reference to reach any conclusion.
Right. Will we now conjecture what amounts of dark matter are here or there according to observed expansion rates? We'll use two unknowns to bilaterally measure the other?
IDN It seems just as weird as time dilation near a Black Hole and is more straightforward than Dark Energy. Maybe I'm wrong?
Yes! Any distortion in time necessitates a distortion in space. The ruler is different everywhere!
But it is the right way to go even if it means to check all existing models
Approximations are useful as the science becomes more precise.
Newton to Einstein and so forth.
All of our sciences will seem primitive relative to the next 100 years.
Just a wrinkle along the way.
03:37 - Seriously tho, who named it "inhomogenous" instead of you know, heterogeneous, like an actual word that means just that.
"inhomogeneous" is a quite established word though
@@fariesz6786 I suggest you check the amount of historic usage of both terms in google ngram viewer... inhomogeneous was pretty much never used until it suddenly popped up circa 1920 and has declined a lot ever since, while heterogeneous has always been a lot more present. Both meaning the same, my guess is that some people started using it in lieu of the proper antonym of homogeneous maybe due to ignorance (or *conspiracy alert* to avoid the "hetero" prefix")
lol yeah kinda like saying inflammable instead of flammable
inhomogenous implies that something is mostly homogeneous with some exceptions while heterogeneous would refer to systems with large amounts of different phases with varying distributions. So its a small difference in detail. at least thats how it works in chemistry/chemical engineering
7:04 ... I think, these are olives rather than raisins :-)
You mean grapes...?
@@pattirockgarden4423 dried grapes.
Or garlic bulbs.
@@rhoddryice5412how long did it take for the grapes to turn into raisins?
There was no valid raisin for such comment.. it will just further oliviate the need to do butter research.. :)
Fascinating Anton. I've thought for decades now that there was some simple mistake or oversight in observations. IDK, this just feels logical.
Happy New year Anton Petrov and everyone around the earth! blessings and Love to you all.
David “The Haircut” Kipping also did an explainer video about this, but yours was much better. Well done.
LCDM may be wrong but dark energy and eternal inflation isn't, - it predicts the more dense galaxies in the early Universe, the increase in expansion speed (because the overall density is lessening and ET, eternal inflation, pulls us along), and much more. Supernovas are in motion coming towards us and moving away, over time if you remember the WMAP data and do not serve as a meaningful candle.
Dark energy. From the people that said Pluto isn’t a planet and invent parallel universes to explain when they are bad at math. A mistake plus keleven gets you home by seven.
Why are you so emotionally attached to whether pluto is a planet or not? If pluto was a planet then we would need to classify a dozen plus objects as planets too.
I'm not a scientist or anything but I love hearing about it. The last couple years I had an inkling that time may be a factor in the cosmological constant issue. I thought to myself what if time moved more slowly in the early dense universe ( you had a video on yhat also) and also thought maybe time is moving differently in different parts of the universe now. And here is another video that expresses thoughts I'd had that I had not idea others have had also. Science is so cool! The universe is amazing! Thank you!
I am so glad to see this path is being researched. It's exactly where my mind has been going for the past couple of decades. Knowing what we know about the variation in density of the universe, and how it affects time dilation, along with the Hubble tension, it always seemed over simplistic to me to consider that, because the universe is radially anisotropic, it should also be volumetrically smooth in terms of time dilation. This timescape model seems very promising, I hope it will be proven to be the correct approach!!
Interesting thing is the light we capture and study has to come from dense, "fast paced" regions of the universe, which will cross large "slow paced" voids, because that is what we can observe. And this looks like accelerating away from us. I wonder what we would see if we could observe something that came from a void instead. Would it look like it's moving closer to us...
Even if this isn't it exactly, the idea of gravitational waves affecting the rate of space and time expansion feels like a promising piece of the picture.
This explains why we see things in voids appear to expand faster.
Finally, someone else has explained what I have thought since I was only 12 years old and learned about the side effects of gravity. All things in the universe are dilated, most specifically near the Event Horizon of a black hole; the effect of 'gravity' itself causes this, and the inverse square law applies. Gravity is most likely an emergent property, or radical novelty, raised by the 'coherence' of a stable particle and has collective values (we call this mass).
This radical novelty is like a ripple through the web of what we call spacetime and, as data, is collected in matter itself, cohering into larger and larger waves until they collapse on themselves (black holes). What we have learned about black holes in the last 30 years kind of confirms to me that galaxies are coherence of the lower scale on a larger scale. The effect of 'gravity' scales up with matter much like the electromagnetic force itself which also scales up (Radcliffe Waves) and time dilation is required as scales change: On atomic scales it is picoseconds for cycles; on galactic scales it is literal eons. Our Milky Way cycles once every 225-250 million years.
The extremity of a black hole is the drive that pushes the change throughout the universe. They act as gigantic 'spacetime spoons' that, as they spin, force polarization, polarity reversals, and atomic change. That gravitational drag (time dilation) causes atomic stretching and thus decay.
The entire universe is designed to operate and function on every single one of these scales using a fractal method built upon Pi, Phi, and Alpha. These scales go below, and above, our visible universe. Math is a beautiful language because it is beginning to understand the depth and complexity that is infinity/God. Sadly, we will never have the computational depth to truly comprehend God this way; only a quantum computer AI will be able to. That's coming soon.
Fun Fact: The most efficient and representative geometric shape for the universe is not a circle, it is a pyramid. Every level of the pyramid is made on the concreteneess (coherence) of the level below it, and ascends or descends literally forever, scale to scale, as a fractal. Philosophy is more effective explaining this than science is, but science is getting closer.
Been watching you for almost 10 years and love your content… keep it up Anton i always look forward to watching your videos and yes I hope to be there on the update on that later mission
A lot of people put videos out about this recently (obv), yours was the first I clicked because the others sounded baity.. great work here
Inventing some kind of aether for things we can't explain hasn't been the best idea in the past as well.
Like the Higgs field?
Like Quantum Field Theory, which is state-of-the-art and models spacetime as being permeated by the fundamental fields?
Ive been saying this for over 20 years. I gave an example of space were given a coordinate system. If you could zero your velocity to all objects and your coordinate did not change your time would speed up. The closer you get to fixed coordinate to that of space time changes. When you are influenced by matter or within a gravitation field time will slow down the closer and deeper you get into this field.
Ive also said the same thing about Dark Matter. That dark matter is also an illusion of what I call gravitational wake. When a super massive object moves, its gravitational field moves slower behind it because this field is light years in diameter and gravity is limited to the speed of light. So the super massive object changes coordinates but its field lags behind leaving behind the impression and influence but when we look we see no massive object there but we do see the gravitational influence. This is what got labeled dark matter but its just gravitational lag.
…and what about dark matter? Is this still needed to explain the mass that is causing time dilation?
It is important to clarify that dark matter is not necessarily related to dark energy as many people may think. However this is an interesting question. Dark matter is more so to explain the speeds of gases orbiting on the outer edge of the galaxy. Without dark matter there isn’t enough mass for those speeds to be “valid” for the orbit at that distance. I suppose you could say perhaps time dilation can explain the dark matter phenomenon too, but for that we would need to essentially map time dilation and I’m not sure that has been done. I am now thinking that assuming time is faster at the outer edge of the galaxy maybe that can explain the apparent orbital velocities we see.
@@tylera2226 Without doing the math, it seems that the time dilation would have to be pretty extreme to explain that much apparent speed discrepancy across certain galaxies, which then begs the question of why some apparently massive galaxies do not demonstrate this effect while other, practically invisible galaxies experience a quite extreme effect.
On the other hand, we have the unhomogenous space-time surface that could be expanding and contracting the apparent space between us and the galaxy we are viewing, perhaps distorting our image and thus throwing off our numbers by a considerable amount? It seems like this could be more easily tested by applying a distortion factor to the voids and scaling them across some of these errant galaxies to see if a pattern emerges.
Very exciting stuff!
@@yokotaashi very exciting!
@@yokotaashi there are plenty of theories out there without dark matter. Dark energy and dark matter describe the shortcomings of LambdaCDM based on our current modelling of the universe
@@XGD5layertheory’s that explain DM, not ignore it
May we wish you and your family and support staff for your Channel a very educational and wonderful New Year in 2025. I don't get a chance to hear many of your videocasts, but every time I do I walk away a lot more knowledgeable than before.
Thanks, Anton! Very interested to see where this goes!!!!! Thanks for a great year!
It's nice to know that somebody has caught up with my ideas on this and I'm just an English teacher.
I had the same ideas in the last 10 years ! Glad to see someone shared it.
supernova cosmology project…. SCP?!??
SCP 1666. A creature that assumes the gravitational reality of a particular region in space which tricks all sentient life in its local vicinity into observing a false model of the universe. Its reasoning at this time is unknown. Further studies are required to fully understand and mitigate its effect.
█████ ███ ████ ████
████████ █████ ██
Some years ago I heard about a similar theory, which proposes that our observations of the expansion of the universe are wrong because of the gravitational lensing effect. I think it’s much more likely that there’s something off with our observations or calculations with these observation than there being huge quantities of some undetectable matter (which, honestly, feels like creative bookkeeping).
It's a new way to save the Big bang theory since dark energy or dark matter doesn't exist. JWST has pretty much killed the Big bang theory. The Big bang theory is like a religion, they refuse to accept any information against the BBT.
You are confusing DM with DE
Wow... this model gives me goosebumps... Great Video!
Thank you for posting. Looking forward to more studies.
As much as I love the success of relativity; I can't help but get the sinking feeling it's the primary reason we can't get these cosmic & quantum puzzles solved. Not that it's wrong; but moreso that time/space curvature is an emergent property and not an inherent aspect of what's going on.
From which property emerges space time in your opinion?
@@jalifritz8033 So it's a long and complex idea in my brainspace but here's a poorly written basic summation of where my thoughts lay(TLDR at bottom):
The inextricable combination of space and time aswell as a few other principles of the universe (uncertainty) arise from our ability to measure in only specific ways. Which, of course, makes sense. We use photons and electromagnetic interactions ALMOST exclusively to measure the universe and only just recently have been able to expand that to include gravity but only gravity indirectly as it interacts with electromagnetism.
This is completely fine from a practical standpoint, the EM force is strong, abundant, easily detectable, interacts with almost all things we really care about (shoutout to you, dark matter).
However this also makes one very very specific limiter aswell - we have no real way to compare our measurements with one measurement method to another. Photons are, fundamentally, what we've got to work with right now. It is the primary way that information is communicated. Even when we are observing other information communicated - such as the nuclear forces - we are still observing them as they interact with light and extrapolating from there.
Now, for hypothetical, let's say gravity is graviton, spin 2 boson, waveparticle, travels at C, doesn't self interact except in specific conditions. Basically all the same properties as light... Except one. We know, factually, observationally, that light is directly effected by gravity. Its path is curved in gravitational fields, its wavelength is shifted red or blue depending on some specific gravitational conditions(but not exclusively by those).
If we could figure out a way to directly, rather than indirectly, gather information from gravitons, suddenly we have a second standard measuring stick to compare our measurements with. We could then, plausibly in my mind, find out that the curvature of spacetime is actually a "smooth" process because the interactions of gravitons are so impossibly small that they have to build up over distance/intensity to have any noticeably measurable effect.
That would be /one/ of the ways spacetime curvature would arise. BUT that also allows me to lead into the idea of why spacetime is currently inextricably linked - Having a singular measurement method. We can, currently, only have any information transfer from one source. So the limitations of that source will limit our measurements. C being a speed limit for information exchange, for example. A singular measurement type with a speed limit means that certain things should probably happen. Relativistic time dilation is the example i'm going for - since C cannot be exceeded, to our knowledge (excluding frame dragging/ other funky relativity math for this example) then the exchange rate of information will be limited to within that system. A measurement of distance will be "warped" at speeds nearing C in a noticeable way because it takes T for the information carrier (photon) to travel in 3d. To a singular observer. To an outside observer, the effect will be a little different, length contraction effects will also exist but at a different level dependent on their relative position and speed.
But, and this is the part that really jostles my noodle with relativity, the interpretation that the lengths are all physically different depending on the observer? Is just a BAD interpretation to me.
I like to use the analog of C VS Sound. doppler shift of sound in a controlled environment is analogous to relativistic doppler shift of light. However, because we have light to be able to measure what's actually going on with sound, we can compensate our data with a second info source. If all we had was sound(control environment) to measure lengths, we'd inevitably run into the same spacial contraction/stretching problems that we do with light, at a much much slower speed. But because we have light, C, as a comparison tool, we don't run into that problem. I have literally never understood why the bulk body of science dismisses that comparison, but whatever, it's just something that has to be worked within for me.
TL;DR - inherently "linked" spacetime is derived from limits on our ability to measure/gather information exchange, almost exclusively through electromagnetic interaction.
Boy howdy that was a poorly put together summation. I do hope that made atleast a little bit of sense? I feel like i went a little bit roundabout but my brain is scrambled from IRL stuff at the moment and am not sure, right now, how to formulate that better.
@@jalifritz8033 Well i wrote a big reply earlier but youtube decided not to post it. Thanks youtube.
Essentially; "Spacetime" should not be inexorably linked, so "spacetime" wouldn't arise out of anything. An illusory curved space would arise out of actually changing exchange rate of information.
What this means is that because of the limitations of how we exchange information - being almost exclusively through electromagnetic interaction - we have no other functionally useful ways to vet and verify it. This could potentially be changed by being able to measure gravity directly (say, for example, if gravitons) rather than indirectly (phase decoherence of photons like how we currently do). How to do that? Great question! No idea. But having a secondary measuring stick would be great.
An example I like to use is speed of sound (idealized environment). Doppler shift happens in sound much as relativistic doppler shift happens with light. If we ONLY had sound to measure, we'd run into the same problems of length contraction/stretching at speed. But because we also have secondary measuring methods, we can go go "Oh, no, okay, that's not what's happening, it's just funky interactions of waves and information exchange". We wouldn't even necessarily need such a drastic difference in measurement speed like with sound/light, it could be something as simple as the measurement methods do not mutually interact (gravity interacting with light to change its direction vector or redshift/blueshift its wavelength, but light not returning the favor. This would make sense if light and gravity both carry a momentum vector but only one of them carries a different property that can't be expressed on the graviton... like electromagnetism).
Boy howdy that's a really bad way of summarizing it down to super low, but like. I had a big written comment earlier that seemingly doesn't exist and I really don't want to put that much effort into it again. Sorry mate.
"We dont know what 70% of the universe's energy is" is actually a really bad universal model tbh
It's all relative.
...some (most?) astro physicists claimed even >90% are of the (not visible, not measurable) "dark matter" and/or "dark energy"... Which I thought is a quite stupid theory...
(Especially, when in all known solar systems NO dark matter was/is necessary)
If it works for observations.
don't*
@@JorgetePanete get ben't*
This is cool i have some similar ideas, also since space is so cold, there could be near superconductivity or superfluidity in some places
Oooh, interesting!
Bose-Einstein condensates!🤯
...with MUCH lower lightspeeds!!!
I like the idea.. I hope there will be more studies to check this one out..
Breathtaking once again. Happy new year, Anton, or should I say: Happy dilated new year?
I think dark energy is the result of matter existing in parallel universes with relatively inverse arrows of time, and dark matter is the result of matter in parallel universes with adjacent arrows of time. In this model, black holes pierce through the fabric of space-time to pair with white holes in these parallel universes, and our big bang was a white hole paired with a black hole near the end of a universe(s) relatively temporally inverse to ours.
Anton, how is it that establishment cosmologists have just worked out what the rest of us have known for decades? Please could you do a piece on why establishment astronomy is so far behind the curve? Many of us have felt for decades that adherence to the assumptions of isotropy (obviously wrong) and time independent cosmological properties (dubious) were unsafe.
What is wrong with cosmology that the establishment can be so oblivious to the published evidence?
Tbey are literal Satanists. I kid you not.
Define your "known". I'd bet $100 that given enough space to describe what you "know", you'd eventually start contradicting yourself.
@@KierenSummers Anton's comment section is riddled with pseudo-intellectuals and the type of people who post bad 'science' on their Facebook page. It's actually quite disheartening to see. I wish he'd address it and ask his viewers to stop assuming they know so much just because they watch his videos.
Because the scientific method builds on previous findings. That's the entire point of the method. Previous conceptions that work well enough in terms of practical or explanatory utility that can be quantified based on known information have far more momentum to them than a bunch of people spitballing on what "could be" the answer. A bunch of people spitballing, unburdened by the whole scope of the problem as it is currently understood, might be able to scattershot ideas and have one of them be conceptually closer to the objective reality than the contemporary scientific understanding but that in of itself isn't valuable to the scientific process of iteratively refining a useful map of information.
Amateurs or "intellectual" types who are uninvolved in academia are in the awkward position of both being less contaminated with the inertia of prior ideas and also being uninvolved with the process that might be able to change the paradigm.
Because scientists are wrong all the time, they just pretend to speak about things as if they know the answer and build a "consensus"
I've thought about this for years. It made sense to me that if dense gravity slows time, the opposite or rather not being slowed, would happen in the voids. Every time I talked to someone about it, they dismissed the idea. I'm glad to see some research on the subject.
Hello wonderful Anton!
EXCELLENT WORK I LOOK FORWARD TO NEW VIDEOS! THANK YOU!!!
If you use the formula for gravitational time dilation: Td=T*SQRT(1-2GM/rc^2), where T is time on low gravity (far away from most masses in a void), Td TIME in stronger gravity, M is the mass of MilkYway, r is about 20,000 light years (distance from its center) and c the speed of light, you will get the time dilation to be about 0.1%....where did they get to 35%?
Wouldn't their conclusions and data be in their paper? One might want to start there.
Relative to what ??
You have two choices, Earth or "Empty" Space outside a Galactic structure.
1:13 Back in 1998 when The Undertaker threw Mankind of Hell in a Cell?
*I always believed that time is relative anyway?*
One time I quit a job but i gave them two weeks notice, that was the longest two weeks of my life.
Only the velocity of light is the same for all observers.
The only time I ever gave a "proper" two weeks notice, they had me outside the gates in twenty minutes.
Scientifically, I am more a biology, psychology person than physics person, (which i am studying to understand it, and it’s working on a basic level).
So i sort of understand what you’re saying. Kinetic energy makes so much sense! Don’t quite get the faster or slower expansion though. Thanks much - love your talks :)) You a such a wonderful person, Anton. I love your smile. 😋✨🌷🌱
Once again, great material. Well presented! Thank you
0:28 I've been suggesting this to scientists for over a decade!!!
Ideas like this have been around for a long time, there just hasn’t been any evidence to support it until now.
You’re a bot 🤖 😂
@@ceb1970 I invented this idea back in the 80s when I was wasted on vodka. I can prove my priority with a witness (a bum I told that still lives in a cardbox near the bar I still go to).
@@ammonitida What a remarkable coincidence! I am the bum, and I remember you! My cardboard box has WiFi now.
Dark energy never sat well with me, it just didn’t make sense
Our observable universe exists inside of a relative void and dark energy is the gravity of the super dense super massive (think of a black hole as a drop of water, this would be an ocean) structure surrounding that void pulling our universe towards it.
@ interesting theory, I’ve never heard it described in that way
This could explain why Galxys rotate at the same speed througout - in the more diffuse outer regions faster time makes the stars move faster matching the inner stars.
Bloody hell you're right!
There is no "faster time".
I love your intro catchphrase!
I worked out this EXACT THEORY in my head! It started as just a thought experiment, as me just trying to work out various phenomenon based on my layman's understanding of cosmology. I never imagined my idea was something that was considered by actual astrophysicists/cosmologists!
Part of what led to my personal experimental theory was the consideration of the affect of gravity/mass on the passage of time. If time dilation affects matter/energy locally, why wouldn't it affect entire regions of space the same? Wouldn't places with more mass experience time, and thus expansjin of the universe, at a slower rate, leaving relatively empty regions to expand more quickly, relatively? In my head, it explained the formation of galactic filements. Anyway, maybe I'm misunderstanding the subject, but it makes sense to me.
A dogmatic philosophical assumption (the homogeneity of the universe) has become the foundational basis of the standard cosmological model despite being experimentally unproven and unprovable.
The reason is that an inhomogeneous (but still isotropic) universe would invalidate the copernican/mediocrity principle and reintroduce anthropocentrism back into science.
Could you elaborate on the last sentence? I don't get it exactly but I wanna understand.
@@paddipat There only one way the universe can be inhomogeneus, but still isotropic, and that's if we are at the center of the universe. And by we I mean our local piece of universe.
@@Faustobellissimocan one also say that it is our Human limits that make our observations what they are, Limited by our perception of Time.
Yup, this has been the postulate I've been pushing for 20 years.
Dark matter will ALSO prove to be mostly an illusory effect.
No? Dark Matter is a real effect, we just don't know why and what creates it.
what a fascinating hypothesis. i hope to see some updates about this some tjme!
It is more elegant to explain tthe thing as huge as dark energy by oversimplifications in our models than with new physic. Only time will show which theory is the right one, but I am grateful to love in a time when these theories are discussed and when we have so good science communicators that can explain it to us.
I love it. Its simple, almost obvious with hindsight and is a simpler explanation, which science goes for when the evidence holds up. Now it's time for a whole sky survey to make sure density lines up with apparent expansion everywhere.
This absolutely makes sense! Fingers crossed that more data reveals this to be true!
Very good explanation of this interesting ,mysterious dark energy, thanks Anton👍❤
Love this idea and excited to see it it holds up
this makes so much sense that It makes me wonder why it wasn't thought of previously
Holy crap, i was working on this last spring. Even left a few comments saying so in videos that were pertinent.