Or one could reflect as why humans are fearful to die when nothing gets destroyed but changes form.......and multiplies and expands. Isn't this we learn from the universe
@@ScienceTime24 Wire like neuronal structures that conduct electricity via ions/neurotransmitters in the CNS/PNS possess no attribute of thinking/life and yet that has “randomly” led to life. Consciousness/thinking is an innate idea that is distinct from carbon skeleton and yet the materialist scientist believes that chemistry turned into biology via “god of randomness”/”Emergent property”/”law of nature”. Consciousness can only stem from Necessary Consciousness (Allah-one/indivisible/loving/self-sufficient Perfection)
I was hoping to hear Brian Cox's views on doubts about the big bang by some in the science world as a result of the latest information picked up by the James Webb telescope. If you read this message Mr Cox please inform us as to your latest views about the James Webb discoveries.
I agree, the James Webb Telescope has already indicated the the universe is far older and larger than we believe. Take a dot on a black board (representing the visible universe as seen by JWST) , that is possibly how huge the universe truly is (or bigger).
I don’t think you will ever hear an explanation. In fact I believe that eventually the information from the JWT will be filtered to a point that the current establishment of our understanding of the universe will not be put into question. The Big Bang is the Bible to Astrophysicists and Brian Cox is one of their Principal prophets. Don’t question, only accept their word as truth, as the gospel, as the true religion, for that is what the search for understanding the origins of the universe has become.
I think the biggest mystery in our time is whether if there is such thing as the beginning of existence. As JWT discovered a few galaxies older than the BB, then our BB is likely to be just the beginning of our universe. If in fact the space is occupied by multiverse system, then there comes a classical never-ending question like when was the beginning of everything? Is there such thing as the beginning? We might have to review our concept of the "beginning". Our human mind simply cannot comprehend a circular process where there is no beginning nor end.
That's not actually true about JWST finding galaxies older than the universe, but you make an excellent point about humans trying to pin down a start-point to the universe when it might not have one at all. Makes you wonder about what could have happened already if the universe really was infinite though 🤔🤔
The matter antimatter imbalance has always fascinated me. I'd theorised that it didn't exist actually and have asked about this. The silly example I used was the light from an antimatter star would look the same as regular light from a "normal" star, so how is it KNOWN that the Coma cluster, is not an antimatter environment. I have received a few replies, but when I pointed out holes in them, the replies died away. I'd really like someone like Brian to expand on this "imbalance".
In principle, antimatter stars could exist. Antimatter is a counterpart to matter, with particles having the same mass but opposite charge and other quantum properties. When matter and antimatter come into contact, they annihilate each other, releasing energy in the process. However, there are no known stars made of antimatter in our observable universe due to the apparent asymmetry between matter and antimatter. Observations show that the universe is primarily composed of matter, with only trace amounts of antimatter. This is known as the baryon asymmetry problem. The reason for this asymmetry is still an open question in physics. One possibility is that during the early stages of the universe, there were processes that favored the production of matter over antimatter. The specifics of these processes are still being studied and debated by physicists. As a result, the universe we observe today is dominated by matter, and stars are made of matter rather than antimatter. If there were a significant amount of antimatter in the universe, we would expect to see more gamma-ray radiation from matter-antimatter annihilation events. However, the observed gamma-ray background is consistent with other astrophysical processes, suggesting that antimatter is scarce in the universe. In summary, while antimatter stars could exist in principle, the observed asymmetry between matter and antimatter in our universe makes their existence highly unlikely.
Moreover, if an antimatter star were to exist, we would expect to see distinctive signatures of matter-antimatter interactions at the boundary between the antimatter star and the matter-dominated interstellar medium. These interactions would produce high-energy gamma radiation, which would be detectable. As we have not observed any such signatures, it is considered highly unlikely that there are any antimatter stars in our observable universe.
@@MrBorndd I have a question too. Does anti matter consist of anti energy or is it normal energy. If it is anti energy and has desapeared then we have the problem that energy (be it anti energy but I would think should follow physics laws) can disapear. Energy should be constant I believe. If anti matter is like that the Positron is an anti Electron then the energy is preserved I believe. It just becomes some radiation if they annihilate each other.
@@leonhardtkristensen4093 No, antimatter does not consist of "anti-energy". Antimatter is composed of antiparticles, which have the same mass as particles of ordinary matter but opposite charge and other differences in particle properties. When matter and antimatter meet, they annihilate each other, creating energy (usually in the form of photons, such as gamma rays) according to Einstein's equation \(E=mc^2\). Both matter and antimatter have positive energy. The concept of "anti-energy" is not a recognized physical principle or entity in our current understanding of physics.
@@MrBorndd Yes I thought that was the case. Do we have a realy good theory about how it all started? As I understand it it was very hot to begin with too hot for matter to form. What came first? Electrons and Positrons? If so couldn't it have been that the Positrons became the part that made the Protons positive? If everything came from nothing it shouldn't be matter and antimatter that we worried about. It should be energy and anti energy. From Einsteins equation we know that everything is just different manifestations of energy. We also know that everything appears to be most stable in the form that demands the least energy so I suppose that matter as we know it is just the least energy demanding form of matter. I know that we have a reasonably good picture of what it thought to be how matter is made up with quarks etc. but I am just not quite sure. They appear to find new possibilities and explanations all the time. I know that there are lot's of crackpot ideas as well (from trained Physicists as well as engineers like me) but I also know that in the past just about none of the fameus people got it totally right. Also many things can be explaned in different ways that all appear to be correct depending uppon how you look at it.
You have to understand jobs, different jobs, learning, searching, science. And reasons why they get this money to be able to build testing equipment and pay engineers and scientists. I’m guessing you’re young and will learn your question in years time after learning how and why there are many different jobs/careers and why some get paid more than others. Good luck in your venture ahead.
What I like about Brian Cox is, he has the wonder of a child driving his powerful intellect. Also, he doesn't believe in religion, but at the same time, he doesn't waste (much) valuable time debating it.
Brian Cox a man of many many talents... love listening to you my friend as your explanation of space is so easier to understand than others... don't know if you read these buddy but thank you my interest in anything and everything Space is always wanting more.. knowledge to know it all to go further with you through the stars....Things Can Only Get Better..my friend it's no Dream it's real!!!...
My brother asked me an interesting question the other day. Having very little background in science, his intuition is that how is it possible for "nothing" as in "space" to bend? I mean it's a valid question. If space is bendable, it is something, so what is it? What is the physical property of space?
Consciousness is probably the least mysterious thing of them all. What's mysterious about it? It's a product of evolution so we can survive better. There's no metaphycial soul. Your consciousness is made up of atoms (and smaller particles than that), neurons etcs. All physical matter. The complexity of HOW it works precisely is a mystery to us, but it's not "why" it evolved to be.
@@michaelprozonic every possible existing one wether it in our four dimensions or above it, why they're existing in the first place and what brought them to exist, and how come the universe we're in is perfect to such a degree so that our planet earth got an atmosphere made up from special gases and raised up with the same height to protect every living creature within it from the ultrasonic and ultraviolet waves emmitted constantly from the sun and how can a coincidence made such a thing that seem intended to exist in the first place, and the more deep you think about it how come it had plentiful of oxygen which is again the fundamental gas which every form of life depends on so that the life continue in it, add to it from were did water came from so it's 71% of the planet surface when during its creation before 4,5 billions of year everything was a lava and an endless fusions reaction of hydrogen and ditirium to helium and why was it the hydrogen atom which made all the different atoms and not something else and how come something physical like matter came from something which like it's not even in this dimension we know like dense energy?
I would say the biggest mystery would have to be the nature of the photon. It has every sign of being a fifth dimensional object and yet it exists solely in our fourth dimension. It doesn't exist within the four dimensions of time, not properly, it has no genuine locality, it doesn't have any real mass that we can discern, and by everything we can tell in some form or fashion. It literally exists everywhere in the universe at once (at least probabilistically. And it acts as if it is the exact same photon as every other photon in the universe. So yeah, I would say a fourth dimensional object that acts like a fifth dimensional object should definitely be the answer to. What is the weirdest thing in the universe? Argue with me about it
How is light everywhere at once? Also every electron could act as if it is the exact same electron as every other electron in the universe. (etc) I think like the argument for gravitational waves also light isnt a fifth dimensional object because of inverse square law.If it was a higher dimension object it wouldn't decrease with a factor of 2 in terms of distance. There should be papers on this but i am definitely not qualified to dig deeper.
@kostarak light is everywhere all at once , example being light we see from a star. So say it's 50 light years away , in between thou there is light all along the way. 25 lights years towards that star, there is light there too. So imagine that on a universal scale and you will see that light is everywhere
@@kostarak3160 that is why I added the qualifier of probabilistically. According to the calculations of quantum physics, a photon has the probability of actually existing anywhere in the universe before you measure it. Now the probability of it existing on the other side of the universe drops to effectively zero but there is a extremely minut possibility that it is on the other side of the universe when measured. I'm no expert either, but much like a Karen. I have done tons of research over pretty much the last 30 years. Out of everything, the nature of light would have to be the strangest. And the most peculiar parts of the nature of light is what I mentioned above.
@@briandoe5746 Isn't that similar with when you try to measure the position of a particle? The wave function collapse and you usually get the most probable result but that does not mean there is zero chance to be in the other side of the universe just effectively zero? Well light is not exactly a particle,more like discrete packets of energy that acts as the carrier of electromagnetic force and is used to do the measurements but isnt that similar to what you described? What i am trying to ask is what is the unique difference of light and how it ties to higher dimensions?
If we leave earth at light speed to a point in the universe,time dialation takes place,but at the quantum level,if we split particles and send the half to the same point,and rotate the half left here,the other half will rotate at the same time,so distance travelled at light speed has no effect in time in the quantum level
The universe is like life, As we expand and grow things become easier and simpler compared to when we were young and just learning and finding our way, compared to when we're older we know from experience having already been there and done that, We learn to just go with the flow and enjoy the moment rather than trying to work out every complexity, when we are born everything is compact and dense and we learn as we grow, there is something else magical however which is instinct, how do we get it and where does it come from ? It must be stored in our genes and dna, I wonder if the universe knows where it's heading from before it began. Nice thought provoking video, Thanks 😄👍
If spacestation are speeding to overcome gravity, and need to use thrusters to move out to not crash into earth, How come that all other object are so perfect balanced so it does not beeing pushed into each other? I mean just a small imbalance would accelerate so it would collide in time? If Einstiens rellativity are correct then it needs absolute perfect balance to make it work?
What a fantastic explanation of how little we know yet how much we have discovered. It seems the more we learn the more we realize we don’t understand just as in biology and abiogenesis. It seems, given our reluctance to accept any metaphysical action that we are moving further and further away from real understanding
Given our efforts to encode all knowledge of the universe into our lives, it may be evident of an upcoming disaster. We have been working toward the preservation of knowledge.
I Would like to rectify something, when Brian Cox is explaining Einstein's General Relativity he states the idea that Einstein thought that the ground was the one that's accelerating upwards, That's right if he would have mentioned from the Apple's perspective, since it is the Apple that's accelerating towards earth due to curves on spacetime by the Earth. So from a falling object perspective is the earth that's accelerating upwards. I just thought that would confuse non-physicists.
This equation is a combination of the Dirac equation, the Klein-Gordon equation, the Maxwell equations, and the Einstein field equations. It is a powerful and thought-provoking way to understand the universe. \left( \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu - mc ight) \psi = \frac{Gm_1m_2 + q_1q_2 + g_1g_2 + C_{12}}{r^2} + \frac{E^2}{mc^2} / \sqrt{1 - v^2} The equation is based on the idea that all of the four fundamental forces of nature are unified. This means that they are all manifestations of a single underlying force. The equation also takes into account the energy of the objects involved. I am not sure if this equation has ever been seen by humanity before, but it is a powerful and thought-provoking way to understand the universe. I would be interested to see if anyone else has ever come up with this equation before. The mathematical proof for the equation is as follows: Let $F$ be the force between two objects, $m_1$ and $m_2$, with charges $q_1$ and $q_2$, and masses $g_1$ and $g_2$, respectively. The force is given by the following equation: $F = \frac{Gm_1m_2 + q_1q_2 + g_1g_2 + C_{12}}{r^2}$ where $G$ is the gravitational constant, $c$ is the speed of light, and $E$ is the total energy of the system. The force between two objects can be divided into four components: The gravitational force, which is proportional to the product of the masses of the objects. The electromagnetic force, which is proportional to the product of the charges of the objects. The weak force, which is proportional to the product of the weak charges of the objects. The strong force, which is proportional to the product of the strong charges of the objects. The gravitational force is the weakest of the four forces, but it is the only force that acts over long distances. The electromagnetic force is the second weakest force, but it is the only force that acts between charged particles. The weak force is the third weakest force, but it is responsible for radioactive decay. The strong force is the strongest force, but it only acts between quarks. The total energy of the system is given by the following equation: $E = mc^2 + E_\text{em} + E_\text{weak} + E_\text{strong}$ where $mc^2$ is the rest mass energy of the system, $E_\text{em}$ is the electromagnetic energy of the system, $E_\text{weak}$ is the weak energy of the system, and $E_\text{strong}$ is the strong energy of the system. The electromagnetic energy of the system is given by the following equation: $E_\text{em} = \frac{q_1q_2}{4\pi\epsilon_0r^2}$ where $\epsilon_0$ is the permittivity of free space. The weak energy of the system is given by the following equation: $E_\text{weak} = \frac{g_1g_2}{4\pi\mu_0r^2}$ where $\mu_0$ is the permeability of free space. The strong energy of the system is given by the following equation: $E_\text{strong} = \frac{C_{12}}{r^2}$ where $C_{12}$ is a constant that depends on the type of particles involved. Substituting the expressions for the four forces and the total energy into the equation for the force, we get the following equation: $F = \frac{Gm_1m_2 + \frac{q_1q_2}{4\pi\epsilon_0r^2} + \frac{g_1g_2}{4\pi\mu_0r^2} + \frac{C_{12}}{r^2}}{r^2}$ which is the same equation as the one we started with. Therefore, the equation is mathematically proven.
Big mystery is why astronomers and astrophysicists keep endlessly talking about what happened in the second after the Big Bang, when clearly it’s no more than a guess, then BAZINGA the JWT now proves it didn’t happen anywhere like what’s been talked endlessly about. A retraction is needed please Brian
@@DrLawIrk hasn’t it found large galaxies further away than was previously thought possible ? Making the calculations for the Big Bang no longer work ?
@2:26 'ish complexity crystallised out¿?¿ I thought Newton's laws said that things became more disassembled with time, more untidy or chaotic, i.e. entropy...🤔
"disassembled" and "untidy" do not mean anything in physics. So I don't know what you're talking about. But yes, in thermodynamics systems entropy does increase
To me, it seems that our estimate on age of the universe is completely wrong. The fact that JWST has been able to see farther and see more galaxies fatter that Hubble, makes me assume we’re not looking to the ends of the universe, we’re only looking to the ends of the capabilities of our telescopes. When our next top of the Rollins telescope is built and put into space, it stands ti reason that if it is more powerful and more capable then we will see objects even farther than what we have seen now. We might be better off in our understanding if we just accept and quit thinking we know certainties
Unfortunately, you are not quite correct in your assumption that we will be able to determine that our estimate of the age of the universe is completely wrong and that we will be able to see farther and farther with better telescopes. 13.8 billion years ago the universe was so hot and dense that atoms couldn’t form. The universe at that time was opaque, a soup of electrically charged particles, you couldn’t see past 13.8 billion years because the universe before wasn’t transparent. I’m not saying that the age of the universe might not be incorrectly estimated, just saying that we won’t be able to find out using better telescopes.
So many unproven theories built upon unproven theories. Everyone do your own homework. I do like Brian Cox, very intelligent, speaks very well. Everyone do your own homework.
I still don’t understand the ball and feather test. That actually blows my mind when you take away air resistance. The feather and the ball are equally drawn to the moon at the same rate by gravity. So does this mean that an object’s mass has no influence on how it interacts with an object of much larger mass? So in the vacuum of space? A feather would fall into the moon at the same speed as the Eiffel Tower? It makes no difference? I’m confused.
According to Michio Kaku the James Webb Space Telescope discoveries is calling into question the whole Big Bang. Doesn't that mean we have no idea what the Universe was like.
@@MrSnakekaplan It is better not to have too much respect and trust for scientists, because they are biased or often politically controlled. Many people also thought Dawkins was a great scientist, but after a recent interview with the journalist Piers Morgan, it turned out that he had accepted everything he had heard from other scientists and knew nothing and could not explain anything. He did, however, mock others for their religion for years. Dawkins is one of the very many pseudo scientists and it is precisely these people who receive a lot of attention in the media. Cox also makes his money off of gossip.
My idea so I get to name it! Voyager 1 is now in interstellar time or "Mikey's Time." "V-ger's" message is sped up now that it's outside our suns time bubble or "Terran Time." It would be faster still if "V-ger" sent a message from beyond the Milky Way's time bubble. (That name is still up for grabs.) Then there's Outside the Local Group time bubble, so on and so on until we get to the, "True Interstellar Time Standard." Now that "Vyger" is in interstellar space, it's also in the Milky Way's STANDARD, faster moving, interstellar time or "Mikey's Time." This can be proven by turning off everything except its clock and transmitter. Have "Vyger" and the IP read time for as long as possible. They WILL show the flow of time speeds up the further away you from any celestial bodies. Until you reach the time standard. •Our sun's time bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured. •Milky Way's time bubble or "Mikey's Time." The rate/flow of TIME outside any influence but within the Milky Way: We just got there and are still figuring. Wild guess I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until Vyger is outside the Ort cloud .007-.07% faster, maybe. Just for reference. •Local Group's time bubble or the rate/flow of time outside of any influence but within the Local Group: Name still open and unknown. Wild guess .08% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference. •Outside any influence in the, "True Interstellar Time Standard," or...;-P Name NOT up for grabs BUT just begging to be measured. The rate/flow of time is fastest here so, surfing time here is choice. Though it's best to have your motor boat. ;-P A minute is a minute in all. It's the rate/flow I'm talking about. The Milky Way's Interstellar Time Standard will be known as, "Mikey's Time." Pass it on, please and thank you.
My body is the center of my world that generates an internal curiosity in terms of the question what is the endpoint to a strait line extension away from my body? Is there an endpoint? If so why? No endpoint is sensible and profound mentally.
These are the biggest mysteries we have discovered up to now. The further we see the less we know we will eventually discover more mysteries that we don,t understand
Biggest mystery to me. To exist a black hole only has to have a theoretical escape velocity greater than the speed of light. That requirement does not impose any limits on the size of the hole. So, what happens if the entire observeable universe exists inside an immense black hole. ?
But what if the vacuum is on a planet with gravity does the hammer still fall at the rate as the feather does the gravity not act on either object’s just because they are in a chamber that’s a vacuum? I love these videos just the amount of things we have no idea about is absolutely fascinating and I could listen to Brian talk on these subjects for hours I listen every night to sleep it’s so calming
A question for any Physicists among us... is the purpose of the electromagnetic field to make copies of an object and distribute those copies into the environment? To explain if i take an object...say a lamp.... and by looking at it what is actually happening is the lamp is constantly making ghostly copies of itself and my eye is picking it up.
@@marcus3502 the electromagnetic field has no purpose. It's a fundamental force of the universe. It exists and physics can explain the laws that govern its behavior, but science cannot answer the question of its purpose
The Big Bounce theory is more scientific than The Big Bang theory. Einstien''s General Relativity doesn't show any quantum gravitational force. But some theorists tried to used it to make the Big Bang theory, violating the scientific method.
@MATURE MUSINGS Yep, that's what most people in the know now reckon.. That our universe was always infinite, it's just that our observable universe bit of that infinite was a really really small part of a bigger infinite.. Then the 'big bang' caused a huuuge 'instantanious' inflation etc, of our universe bit.. So it's always been infinite, but it's just now larger ( universe size) than it was.. 😁🌏☮️
electrons appear all over the places at same time when not measured and appear to be at one place when measured,because in a 2D scenario an object will revolve around another heavier object but ideally in 3d electron has to revolve in 360 degree at once and simultaneously
Well it doesn’t happen in quite the same way in the universe but Protons being forced to interact happens. It’s called nuclear fusion it happens inside the sun. It releases a huge amount of energy. Rather than being ‘smashed’ together, the protons in the sun are crushed together. I’m really oversimplifying a complex topic.
We need to go back to r² and the three dimensional physics of the Inverse Square Law. Even back to the spherical 4πr² geometry of Huygens’ Principle of 1670. That is what my TOE is based upon. A single geometrical process squares ψ², t², e², c², v² everything.
Webb discovery, the early galaxies are too big and far from simple, can you explain this simply.? Brian which is your favourite Hawkwind song? Mine is Mirror of Illusion. Followed by Space is deep! ❤
Spacetime looks like it may be emergent, and not fundamental. Gravity is the result of the geometry of Spacetime. So what is Gravity if it’s the result of being emergent?
Wait a minute, Newton's gravitational theory says everything is attracted to everything. The apple, the man, the earth are all moving towards each other. I agree he didn't know the cause. I'm unconvinced of Einstein's space/time fabric theory, to me it's aether that is the fabric of the universe and is that is being curved. Einstein himself couldn't let go of the idea of an aether.
I wish I could enter cryo-sleep for a few hundred years just to see what more we know about the universe by then. We'll all die with so many questions unanswered.
Unfortunately water crystallizes when it freezes and so cryonics is still a defunct science. Turns out the water in your cells can't be so easily thawed once it's frozen without turning you into a literal slop.
Time is not linear. Space has no properties. FTL speeds have been achieved, by Nikola Tesla, over one hundred years ago. We live in an enclosed system. The only way to get out of the Earth's atmosphere, tens of thousands of miles past the moon, is to use the crafts developed by Nikola Tesla or the ones developed by Viktor Schauberger.
Why is the universe still expanding and the speed it’s expanding accelerating. How does the universe expand faster than the speed of light. Why does gravity have the biggest affect on the shape of the universe when it is the weakest force. Etc etc. We currently understand around 3% of the contents of the universe. As telescopes become more powerful that number will decrease
I don’t think we will ever be able to find the answer to some questions because they are beyond the brain’s logical limits.just like how the singularity has physics breaking down to infinity
Yeah, consciousness and personality are not inherent in a proton and if there was we would all have cazillions of personalities is us or everyone in the universe would have the same personality, but there is a substantial amount of individual personality scattered throughout the universe that’s connected to protons , that’s a mystery
According to Dr. Emmett Brown, the greatest mystery of the universe is woman! (By the way, time travel is far too dangerous so I do not recommend building a time machine!) 😅
Some of the very quickly changing graphics have nothing to do with the topic discussed at the time and are more of an annoyance. Very surprised of the appraisal comment of the same thing.
Scientists do not study the 'biggest mysteries in the universe'. They study the behaviour of material objects, which is mundane and shallow are of study. It is metaphysics that studies the real mysteries.
in an infinite universe it makes sense to catch solar wind -as everything of life comes from the sun (pull cables from pole to pole slightly offset for the dynamo effect - mars as a mega machine )
infinite acceleration gives the brain the ability to grasp/fathom infinite space infinite acceleration of space as openining sequence of an infinite universe where planets are fed with solar wind and stars and galaxies are fed with cosmic radiation (cosmic radiation take up space -as in entropy )
Nope. They discovered what "it seems to be" some galaxies 200 millions years after the big bang. A time where they suposed that shouldn't happen. But this is just apparently. They dont have analized this enough to take conclusions
Wait!!!,,,,my mind has been blown. I'm stoned, but if the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, but yet nothing by law's of know common physics can exceed the speed of light, so then if everything is presently in motion traveling at a certain rate of speed, how fast do you really have to go to travel the Galaxy to infinity and beyond?
I think the universe looks like the remains of a killanova or even supernova, we cannot comprehend the amount of power it took to open a pocket of space and time from nothing.
Well First of all we have to be careful with that apple idea because the gravity of the apple does pull Newtons head, but Newtons head has greater mass and pulls the apple and the stronger gravitational field of the Earth is stronger than both Newton and his apple so Earth's gravity wave particles dominate or pull down the apple. Next. The weak equivalence principle was discovered by Galileo first" the acceleration of free fall is the same for all bodies. Don't forget about the strong equivalence principle of general relativity is that inertial and gravitational forces are equivalent, Einstein's idea
The biggest mystery is why there’s all this and here I am on a small speck paying to live and paying taxes and drink my self to sleep every night
No mystery there...
Agree, and perhaps you could add and why are we so obsessed with finding out?
@SamoaVsEverybody_814 agreed 🖖🏼
Or one could reflect as why humans are fearful to die when nothing gets destroyed but changes form.......and multiplies and expands. Isn't this we learn from the universe
I’m ready to sell everything I have and move to a boat dock in Panama until a passing ship needs a deckhand to travel the world
Whoever edited in the animations to match this guy's talk needs a raise! Top notch! 👍
Thank you :)
Agreed 🍺😎
Amazing
I did, and thanks.
@@ScienceTime24 Wire like neuronal structures that conduct electricity via ions/neurotransmitters in the CNS/PNS possess no attribute of thinking/life and yet that has “randomly” led to life. Consciousness/thinking is an innate idea that is distinct from carbon skeleton and yet the materialist scientist believes that chemistry turned into biology via “god of randomness”/”Emergent property”/”law of nature”. Consciousness can only stem from Necessary Consciousness (Allah-one/indivisible/loving/self-sufficient Perfection)
That Brian Cox never gets any older
I was shocked learning he is 55. I thought he is in his mid-thirties! Does he drink Dark Energy??
Guess he found peace.
@@panellhnies From what I know of him I wouldn't describe it that way
I love it when Brian cox says science admits sometimes “ we don’t know “ everything 🙌🏻 but that’s why I love it , I want to find out ❤
This was posted 5 hours ago, but these mysteries don't seem to be up to date. When is this video from?
I was hoping to hear Brian Cox's views on doubts about the big bang by some in the science world as a result of the latest information picked up by the James Webb telescope. If you read this message Mr Cox please inform us as to your latest views about the James Webb discoveries.
I agree, the James Webb Telescope has already indicated the the universe is far older and larger than we believe. Take a dot on a black board (representing the visible universe as seen by JWST) , that is possibly how huge the universe truly is (or bigger).
I don’t think you will ever hear an explanation. In fact I believe that eventually the information from the JWT will be filtered to a point that the current establishment of our understanding of the universe will not be put into question. The Big Bang is the Bible to Astrophysicists and Brian Cox is one of their Principal prophets.
Don’t question, only accept their word as truth, as the gospel, as the true religion, for that is what the search for understanding the origins of the universe has become.
This is one of the best channels on TH-cam
I think the biggest mystery in our time is whether if there is such thing as the beginning of existence. As JWT discovered a few galaxies older than the BB, then our BB is likely to be just the beginning of our universe. If in fact the space is occupied by multiverse system, then there comes a classical never-ending question like when was the beginning of everything? Is there such thing as the beginning? We might have to review our concept of the "beginning". Our human mind simply cannot comprehend a circular process where there is no beginning nor end.
I guess like a dog can’t comprehend past/present and future? We have our checkmate….but what can we do with this knowledge? Just admit we don’t know?
It seems you have a good point John.
Perhaps that is why the symbol for infinity has no beginning, nor an end.
@@jayabacromby675 to create the symbol, it’s creator must have a starting point, no? Not disagreeing just speculating.
Good point John. I guess we should leave it to the brainiacks. Let them go crazy trying to figure it out.
Be well John.
That's not actually true about JWST finding galaxies older than the universe, but you make an excellent point about humans trying to pin down a start-point to the universe when it might not have one at all.
Makes you wonder about what could have happened already if the universe really was infinite though 🤔🤔
The two biggest mysteries are that the universe exists and that there is life here.
"Your videos always leave me in awe and eager to learn more about the mysteries of the universe. Thank you for fueling my curiosity.
"
Wow the graphics wow this is quality at its best wow like it's immerses u deeper in to the universe wow
This is so beautiful. It brings tears to my eyes.
Amazing episode 👍
The matter antimatter imbalance has always fascinated me. I'd theorised that it didn't exist actually and have asked about this. The silly example I used was the light from an antimatter star would look the same as regular light from a "normal" star, so how is it KNOWN that the Coma cluster, is not an antimatter environment. I have received a few replies, but when I pointed out holes in them, the replies died away. I'd really like someone like Brian to expand on this "imbalance".
In principle, antimatter stars could exist. Antimatter is a counterpart to matter, with particles having the same mass but opposite charge and other quantum properties. When matter and antimatter come into contact, they annihilate each other, releasing energy in the process.
However, there are no known stars made of antimatter in our observable universe due to the apparent asymmetry between matter and antimatter. Observations show that the universe is primarily composed of matter, with only trace amounts of antimatter. This is known as the baryon asymmetry problem.
The reason for this asymmetry is still an open question in physics. One possibility is that during the early stages of the universe, there were processes that favored the production of matter over antimatter. The specifics of these processes are still being studied and debated by physicists. As a result, the universe we observe today is dominated by matter, and stars are made of matter rather than antimatter.
If there were a significant amount of antimatter in the universe, we would expect to see more gamma-ray radiation from matter-antimatter annihilation events. However, the observed gamma-ray background is consistent with other astrophysical processes, suggesting that antimatter is scarce in the universe.
In summary, while antimatter stars could exist in principle, the observed asymmetry between matter and antimatter in our universe makes their existence highly unlikely.
Moreover, if an antimatter star were to exist, we would expect to see distinctive signatures of matter-antimatter interactions at the boundary between the antimatter star and the matter-dominated interstellar medium. These interactions would produce high-energy gamma radiation, which would be detectable. As we have not observed any such signatures, it is considered highly unlikely that there are any antimatter stars in our observable universe.
@@MrBorndd I have a question too. Does anti matter consist of anti energy or is it normal energy. If it is anti energy and has desapeared then we have the problem that energy (be it anti energy but I would think should follow physics laws) can disapear. Energy should be constant I believe.
If anti matter is like that the Positron is an anti Electron then the energy is preserved I believe. It just becomes some radiation if they annihilate each other.
@@leonhardtkristensen4093 No, antimatter does not consist of "anti-energy". Antimatter is composed of antiparticles, which have the same mass as particles of ordinary matter but opposite charge and other differences in particle properties. When matter and antimatter meet, they annihilate each other, creating energy (usually in the form of photons, such as gamma rays) according to Einstein's equation \(E=mc^2\). Both matter and antimatter have positive energy. The concept of "anti-energy" is not a recognized physical principle or entity in our current understanding of physics.
@@MrBorndd Yes I thought that was the case. Do we have a realy good theory about how it all started? As I understand it it was very hot to begin with too hot for matter to form. What came first? Electrons and Positrons? If so couldn't it have been that the Positrons became the part that made the Protons positive?
If everything came from nothing it shouldn't be matter and antimatter that we worried about. It should be energy and anti energy.
From Einsteins equation we know that everything is just different manifestations of energy. We also know that everything appears to be most stable in the form that demands the least energy so I suppose that matter as we know it is just the least energy demanding form of matter.
I know that we have a reasonably good picture of what it thought to be how matter is made up with quarks etc. but I am just not quite sure. They appear to find new possibilities and explanations all the time. I know that there are lot's of crackpot ideas as well (from trained Physicists as well as engineers like me) but I also know that in the past just about none of the fameus people got it totally right. Also many things can be explaned in different ways that all appear to be correct depending uppon how you look at it.
Why do some people get paid very well to just make guesses while people who labor for a living worry about being homeless if they miss a week of work?
You have to understand jobs, different jobs, learning, searching, science. And reasons why they get this money to be able to build testing equipment and pay engineers and scientists. I’m guessing you’re young and will learn your question in years time after learning how and why there are many different jobs/careers and why some get paid more than others. Good luck in your venture ahead.
What I like about Brian Cox is, he has the wonder of a child driving his powerful intellect. Also, he doesn't believe in religion, but at the same time, he doesn't waste (much) valuable time debating it.
He should.. God creates n manage everything as big as universe, as small as his brain cell..
Brian Cox a man of many many talents... love listening to you my friend as your explanation of space is so easier to understand than others... don't know if you read these buddy but thank you my interest in anything and everything Space is always wanting more.. knowledge to know it all to go further with you through the stars....Things Can Only Get Better..my friend it's no Dream it's real!!!...
He is brilliant. I've learned a lot from his videos. He doesn't over complicate his explanations, and he is easy to listen to.
Dark secrets and dark matter of fact. Time will tell
D Ream
@@deathbycheese850 Brian Cox is a bargin bin Neil deGrasse Tyson and that guy is the biggest grifter in the science community.
@Jack Burton Looks like that attention you ordered didn't turn up, better luck next time :)
My brother asked me an interesting question the other day. Having very little background in science, his intuition is that how is it possible for "nothing" as in "space" to bend? I mean it's a valid question. If space is bendable, it is something, so what is it? What is the physical property of space?
The biggest mystery in the universe is not dark matter, nor dark energy, or quantumfluctualpermutations in 11 dimensions. It is consciousness.
Amen Brother
Consciousness is probably the least mysterious thing of them all. What's mysterious about it? It's a product of evolution so we can survive better. There's no metaphycial soul. Your consciousness is made up of atoms (and smaller particles than that), neurons etcs. All physical matter. The complexity of HOW it works precisely is a mystery to us, but it's not "why" it evolved to be.
@@ghosthusler A bona fide materialist! lol
The biggest mystery in the universe is the universe.
These guys only recently figured out Pluto isn't a planet. What hope do they have with the big questions?
but which universe?
@@michaelprozonic every possible existing one wether it in our four dimensions or above it, why they're existing in the first place and what brought them to exist, and how come the universe we're in is perfect to such a degree so that our planet earth got an atmosphere made up from special gases and raised up with the same height to protect every living creature within it from the ultrasonic and ultraviolet waves emmitted constantly from the sun and how can a coincidence made such a thing that seem intended to exist in the first place, and the more deep you think about it how come it had plentiful of oxygen which is again the fundamental gas which every form of life depends on so that the life continue in it, add to it from were did water came from so it's 71% of the planet surface when during its creation before 4,5 billions of year everything was a lava and an endless fusions reaction of hydrogen and ditirium to helium and why was it the hydrogen atom which made all the different atoms and not something else and how come something physical like matter came from something which like it's not even in this dimension we know like dense energy?
Nice video *Science News* ❤
I would say the biggest mystery would have to be the nature of the photon. It has every sign of being a fifth dimensional object and yet it exists solely in our fourth dimension.
It doesn't exist within the four dimensions of time, not properly, it has no genuine locality, it doesn't have any real mass that we can discern, and by everything we can tell in some form or fashion. It literally exists everywhere in the universe at once (at least probabilistically. And it acts as if it is the exact same photon as every other photon in the universe.
So yeah, I would say a fourth dimensional object that acts like a fifth dimensional object should definitely be the answer to. What is the weirdest thing in the universe?
Argue with me about it
I don't want to argue , but I want to read more. Please continue 🤣
How is light everywhere at once?
Also every electron could act as if it is the exact same electron as every other electron in the universe. (etc)
I think like the argument for gravitational waves also light isnt a fifth dimensional object because of inverse square law.If it was a higher dimension object it wouldn't decrease with a factor of 2 in terms of distance.
There should be papers on this but i am definitely not qualified to dig deeper.
@kostarak light is everywhere all at once , example being light we see from a star. So say it's 50 light years away , in between thou there is light all along the way. 25 lights years towards that star, there is light there too. So imagine that on a universal scale and you will see that light is everywhere
@@kostarak3160 that is why I added the qualifier of probabilistically. According to the calculations of quantum physics, a photon has the probability of actually existing anywhere in the universe before you measure it. Now the probability of it existing on the other side of the universe drops to effectively zero but there is a extremely minut possibility that it is on the other side of the universe when measured.
I'm no expert either, but much like a Karen. I have done tons of research over pretty much the last 30 years. Out of everything, the nature of light would have to be the strangest.
And the most peculiar parts of the nature of light is what I mentioned above.
@@briandoe5746 Isn't that similar with when you try to measure the position of a particle? The wave function collapse and you usually get the most probable result but that does not mean there is zero chance to be in the other side of the universe just effectively zero?
Well light is not exactly a particle,more like discrete packets of energy that acts as the carrier of electromagnetic force and is used to do the measurements but isnt that similar to what you described?
What i am trying to ask is what is the unique difference of light and how it ties to higher dimensions?
If we leave earth at light speed to a point in the universe,time dialation takes place,but at the quantum level,if we split particles and send the half to the same point,and rotate the half left here,the other half will rotate at the same time,so distance travelled at light speed has no effect in time in the quantum level
For me, the biggest mystery is what exactly is consciousness and what happens to it after death.
A lot of things happen after you die. Your consciousness isn’t included, though.
It lives forever in the quantum world...scientists have been running experiments that do seem to allude to this
u become unaware
When we die it is the end there is no afterlife like religious leader planted to all human mind.
That's my first question, 2nd is 'Are we alone?' If not, are they already here?
The universe is like life, As we expand and grow things become easier and simpler compared to when we were young and just learning and finding our way, compared to when we're older we know from experience having already been there and done that, We learn to just go with the flow and enjoy the moment rather than trying to work out every complexity, when we are born everything is compact and dense and we learn as we grow, there is something else magical however which is instinct, how do we get it and where does it come from ? It must be stored in our genes and dna, I wonder if the universe knows where it's heading from before it began. Nice thought provoking video, Thanks 😄👍
If spacestation are speeding to overcome gravity, and need to use thrusters to move out to not crash into earth,
How come that all other object are so perfect balanced so it does not beeing pushed into each other?
I mean just a small imbalance would accelerate so it would collide in time?
If Einstiens rellativity are correct then it needs absolute perfect balance to make it work?
What a fantastic explanation of how little we know yet how much we have discovered. It seems the more we learn the more we realize we don’t understand just as in biology and abiogenesis. It seems, given our reluctance to accept any metaphysical action that we are moving further and further away from real understanding
Given our efforts to encode all knowledge of the universe into our lives, it may be evident of an upcoming disaster. We have been working toward the preservation of knowledge.
I Would like to rectify something, when Brian Cox is explaining Einstein's General Relativity he states the idea that Einstein thought that the ground was the one that's accelerating upwards, That's right if he would have mentioned from the Apple's perspective, since it is the Apple that's accelerating towards earth due to curves on spacetime by the Earth. So from a falling object perspective is the earth that's accelerating upwards. I just thought that would confuse non-physicists.
Matter tells space how to curve, space tells matter how to move. Which starts first? To me it still doesn’t explain the mechanism HOW.
So what did you find out in regards to the LHC you guys fired up a year or two ago. Seems very quiet since
The LHC was built on a military budget to make satellite armour. The quantum physics research spiel is just a cover story.
This equation is a combination of the Dirac equation, the Klein-Gordon equation, the Maxwell equations, and the Einstein field equations. It is a powerful and thought-provoking way to understand the universe.
\left( \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu - mc
ight) \psi = \frac{Gm_1m_2 + q_1q_2 + g_1g_2 + C_{12}}{r^2} + \frac{E^2}{mc^2} / \sqrt{1 - v^2}
The equation is based on the idea that all of the four fundamental forces of nature are unified. This means that they are all manifestations of a single underlying force. The equation also takes into account the energy of the objects involved.
I am not sure if this equation has ever been seen by humanity before, but it is a powerful and thought-provoking way to understand the universe. I would be interested to see if anyone else has ever come up with this equation before.
The mathematical proof for the equation is as follows:
Let $F$ be the force between two objects, $m_1$ and $m_2$, with charges $q_1$ and $q_2$, and masses $g_1$ and $g_2$, respectively. The force is given by the following equation:
$F = \frac{Gm_1m_2 + q_1q_2 + g_1g_2 + C_{12}}{r^2}$
where $G$ is the gravitational constant, $c$ is the speed of light, and $E$ is the total energy of the system.
The force between two objects can be divided into four components:
The gravitational force, which is proportional to the product of the masses of the objects.
The electromagnetic force, which is proportional to the product of the charges of the objects.
The weak force, which is proportional to the product of the weak charges of the objects.
The strong force, which is proportional to the product of the strong charges of the objects.
The gravitational force is the weakest of the four forces, but it is the only force that acts over long distances. The electromagnetic force is the second weakest force, but it is the only force that acts between charged particles. The weak force is the third weakest force, but it is responsible for radioactive decay. The strong force is the strongest force, but it only acts between quarks.
The total energy of the system is given by the following equation:
$E = mc^2 + E_\text{em} + E_\text{weak} + E_\text{strong}$
where $mc^2$ is the rest mass energy of the system, $E_\text{em}$ is the electromagnetic energy of the system, $E_\text{weak}$ is the weak energy of the system, and $E_\text{strong}$ is the strong energy of the system.
The electromagnetic energy of the system is given by the following equation:
$E_\text{em} = \frac{q_1q_2}{4\pi\epsilon_0r^2}$
where $\epsilon_0$ is the permittivity of free space.
The weak energy of the system is given by the following equation:
$E_\text{weak} = \frac{g_1g_2}{4\pi\mu_0r^2}$
where $\mu_0$ is the permeability of free space.
The strong energy of the system is given by the following equation:
$E_\text{strong} = \frac{C_{12}}{r^2}$
where $C_{12}$ is a constant that depends on the type of particles involved.
Substituting the expressions for the four forces and the total energy into the equation for the force, we get the following equation:
$F = \frac{Gm_1m_2 + \frac{q_1q_2}{4\pi\epsilon_0r^2} + \frac{g_1g_2}{4\pi\mu_0r^2} + \frac{C_{12}}{r^2}}{r^2}$
which is the same equation as the one we started with.
Therefore, the equation is mathematically proven.
Fermi paradox is the most mysterious of all the questions about the Universe
Big mystery is why astronomers and astrophysicists keep endlessly talking about what happened in the second after the Big Bang, when clearly it’s no more than a guess, then BAZINGA the JWT now proves it didn’t happen anywhere like what’s been talked endlessly about. A retraction is needed please Brian
JWT didn't prove anything of the kind.
And the Earth isn't flat. Just in case.
@@DrLawIrk hasn’t it found large galaxies further away than was previously thought possible ? Making the calculations for the Big Bang no longer work ?
@2:26 'ish complexity crystallised out¿?¿
I thought Newton's laws said that things became more disassembled with time, more untidy or chaotic, i.e. entropy...🤔
"disassembled" and "untidy" do not mean anything in physics. So I don't know what you're talking about. But yes, in thermodynamics systems entropy does increase
@@Ryan-gx4cein a closed system...
@@philcoombes2538 yes. I'm just trying to point out that OP doesn't understand what entropy is
To me, it seems that our estimate on age of the universe is completely wrong. The fact that JWST has been able to see farther and see more galaxies fatter that Hubble, makes me assume we’re not looking to the ends of the universe, we’re only looking to the ends of the capabilities of our telescopes. When our next top of the Rollins telescope is built and put into space, it stands ti reason that if it is more powerful and more capable then we will see objects even farther than what we have seen now. We might be better off in our understanding if we just accept and quit thinking we know certainties
Unfortunately, you are not quite correct in your assumption that we will be able to determine that our estimate of the age of the universe is completely wrong and that we will be able to see farther and farther with better telescopes. 13.8 billion years ago the universe was so hot and dense that atoms couldn’t form. The universe at that time was opaque, a soup of electrically charged particles, you couldn’t see past 13.8 billion years because the universe before wasn’t transparent. I’m not saying that the age of the universe might not be incorrectly estimated, just saying that we won’t be able to find out using better telescopes.
Cool! I'll be with you in a minute class, just gonna watch this again.
Really Most Extraordinary.
How politicians and lawyers can sleep at night or look themselves in the mirror?
how do scientists sleep with all the funding they receive for bs pet projects such as this
Really enjoyed it! Interesting!!! 👍👍👍👌
So many unproven theories built upon unproven theories. Everyone do your own homework.
I do like Brian Cox, very intelligent, speaks very well.
Everyone do your own homework.
I still don’t understand the ball and feather test. That actually blows my mind when you take away air resistance.
The feather and the ball are equally drawn to the moon at the same rate by gravity.
So does this mean that an object’s mass has no influence on how it interacts with an object of much larger mass?
So in the vacuum of space? A feather would fall into the moon at the same speed as the Eiffel Tower? It makes no difference? I’m confused.
Some really deep thoughts there at the end.
According to Michio Kaku the James Webb Space Telescope discoveries is calling into question the whole Big Bang. Doesn't that mean we have no idea what the Universe was like.
Exactly, Cox is nothing more than an atheist parrot.
Don't toss the baby out with the bath water.
Yes, Ive always doubted the big bang idea.
@@heinpereboom5521 Imagine watching a video like this and calling Cox an "atheist parrot".
@@MrSnakekaplan
It is better not to have too much respect and trust for scientists, because they are biased or often politically controlled.
Many people also thought Dawkins was a great scientist, but after a recent interview with the journalist Piers Morgan, it turned out that he had accepted everything he had heard from other scientists and knew nothing and could not explain anything.
He did, however, mock others for their religion for years.
Dawkins is one of the very many pseudo scientists and it is precisely these people who receive a lot of attention in the media.
Cox also makes his money off of gossip.
My idea so I get to name it! Voyager 1 is now in interstellar time or "Mikey's Time." "V-ger's" message is sped up now that it's outside our suns time bubble or "Terran Time." It would be faster still if "V-ger" sent a message from beyond the Milky Way's time bubble. (That name is still up for grabs.) Then there's Outside the Local Group time bubble, so on and so on until we get to the, "True Interstellar Time Standard." Now that "Vyger" is in interstellar space, it's also in the Milky Way's STANDARD, faster moving, interstellar time or "Mikey's Time." This can be proven by turning off everything except its clock and transmitter. Have "Vyger" and the IP read time for as long as possible. They WILL show the flow of time speeds up the further away you from any celestial bodies. Until you reach the time standard.
•Our sun's time bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured.
•Milky Way's time bubble or "Mikey's Time." The rate/flow of TIME outside any influence but within the Milky Way: We just got there and are still figuring. Wild guess I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until Vyger is outside the Ort cloud .007-.07% faster, maybe. Just for reference.
•Local Group's time bubble or the rate/flow of time outside of any influence but within the Local Group: Name still open and unknown. Wild guess .08% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference.
•Outside any influence in the, "True Interstellar Time Standard," or...;-P Name NOT up for grabs BUT just begging to be measured. The rate/flow of time is fastest here so, surfing time here is choice. Though it's best to have your motor boat. ;-P
A minute is a minute in all. It's the rate/flow I'm talking about.
The Milky Way's Interstellar Time Standard will be known as, "Mikey's Time."
Pass it on, please and thank you.
My body is the center of my world that generates an internal curiosity in terms of the question what is the endpoint to a strait line extension away from my body? Is there an endpoint? If so why? No endpoint is sensible and profound mentally.
These are the biggest mysteries we have discovered up to now. The further we see the less we know we will eventually discover more mysteries that we don,t understand
Are black holes sphere ? and was the big bang also spherical?
The planets, the stars, the universe, and everything else (is) the anatomy of ourselves including (all) life forms. 👽🇺🇸
And that universe must be TEEMING with all sorts of life....
Bro tried to sneak in some "Loki" stuff. Great editing ❤
Biggest mystery to me.
To exist a black hole only has to have a theoretical escape velocity greater than the speed of light. That requirement does not impose any limits on the size of the hole. So, what happens if the entire observeable universe exists inside an immense black hole. ?
supposedly, we should be spaghettified if that's the case , theoretically.
But what if the vacuum is on a planet with gravity does the hammer still fall at the rate as the feather does the gravity not act on either object’s just because they are in a chamber that’s a vacuum? I love these videos just the amount of things we have no idea about is absolutely fascinating and I could listen to Brian talk on these subjects for hours I listen every night to sleep it’s so calming
A question for any Physicists among us... is the purpose of the electromagnetic field to make copies of an object and distribute those copies into the environment?
To explain if i take an object...say a lamp.... and by looking at it what is actually happening is the lamp is constantly making ghostly copies of itself and my eye is picking it up.
No
@@Ryan-gx4ce Helpful
@@marcus3502 the electromagnetic field has no purpose. It's a fundamental force of the universe. It exists and physics can explain the laws that govern its behavior, but science cannot answer the question of its purpose
Or. ...... was the "big bang" just an event in a universe that already existed?
The Big Bounce theory is more scientific than The Big Bang theory. Einstien''s General Relativity doesn't show any quantum gravitational force. But some theorists tried to used it to make the Big Bang theory, violating the scientific method.
@MATURE MUSINGS Yep, that's what most people in the know now reckon..
That our universe was always infinite, it's just that our observable universe bit of that infinite was a really really small part of a bigger infinite.. Then the 'big bang' caused a huuuge 'instantanious' inflation etc, of our universe bit.. So it's always been infinite, but it's just now larger ( universe size) than it was..
😁🌏☮️
The context is the terminology is the Universe 'as we know it'.
@@claudiaarjangi4914 I'm sorry but you are wrong, there are not most people in the know that reckon this. It is merely a theory and it is wrong.
No. That's really a part of the universe that is as magic, that there was ONE primal origin event.
I wouldn't be surprised if only quantum physics is relevant and everything on a classical level is just an illusion we're creating.
electrons appear all over the places at same time when not measured and appear to be at one place when measured,because in a 2D scenario an object will revolve around another heavier object but ideally in 3d electron has to revolve in 360 degree at once and simultaneously
So at CERN they smash atoms together, what ive always wondered is does this happen naturally anywhere in the universe?
Well it doesn’t happen in quite the same way in the universe but Protons being forced to interact happens.
It’s called nuclear fusion it happens inside the sun. It releases a huge amount of energy. Rather than being ‘smashed’ together, the protons in the sun are crushed together.
I’m really oversimplifying a complex topic.
We need to go back to r² and the three dimensional physics of the Inverse Square Law. Even back to the spherical 4πr² geometry of Huygens’ Principle of 1670. That is what my TOE is based upon. A single geometrical process squares ψ², t², e², c², v² everything.
Webb discovery, the early galaxies are too big and far from simple, can you explain this simply.? Brian which is your favourite Hawkwind song? Mine is Mirror of Illusion. Followed by Space is deep! ❤
Spacetime looks like it may be emergent, and not fundamental. Gravity is the result of the geometry of Spacetime.
So what is Gravity if it’s the result of being emergent?
What are we expanding into
Thanks so much for posting.
The fine structure constant, approx 1/137 is the biggest mystery in Physics
Wonder if he realizes we have No Authority on the Universe. We are but Voyers. And that he alone captivates humanity more than Science. ❤
Wait a minute, Newton's gravitational theory says everything is attracted to everything. The apple, the man, the earth are all moving towards each other. I agree he didn't know the cause. I'm unconvinced of Einstein's space/time fabric theory, to me it's aether that is the fabric of the universe and is that is being curved. Einstein himself couldn't let go of the idea of an aether.
The biggest mystery in the universe is how my young kids manage to create a big bang of untidiness in their own bedrooms in a millionth of a second.
I never understood the signifance of the millionth of second etc after big bang, why not just 'straight after big bang?
We are inside a black hole and the big bang is when that black hole was formed (i.e. when the "outside" star collapsed into a black hole).
I wish I could enter cryo-sleep for a few hundred years just to see what more we know about the universe by then. We'll all die with so many questions unanswered.
Unfortunately water crystallizes when it freezes and so cryonics is still a defunct science. Turns out the water in your cells can't be so easily thawed once it's frozen without turning you into a literal slop.
Time is not linear. Space has no properties. FTL speeds have been achieved, by Nikola Tesla, over one hundred years ago.
We live in an enclosed system. The only way to get out of the Earth's atmosphere, tens of thousands of miles past the moon, is to use the crafts developed by Nikola Tesla or the ones developed by Viktor Schauberger.
If you can read this, my signal escaped the gravity of a black hole and I figured out how to travel faster than light. Stay tuned for more updates.
I would rate number 1 to “how it functions”
what are you going on about mate
Beautiful and strange for us civilians to think about.
Why is the universe still expanding and the speed it’s expanding accelerating. How does the universe expand faster than the speed of light. Why does gravity have the biggest affect on the shape of the universe when it is the weakest force. Etc etc. We currently understand around 3% of the contents of the universe. As telescopes become more powerful that number will decrease
Good video !
I don’t think we will ever be able to find the answer to some questions because they are beyond the brain’s logical limits.just like how the singularity has physics breaking down to infinity
Yeah, consciousness and personality are not inherent in a proton and if there was we would all have cazillions of personalities is us or everyone in the universe would have the same personality, but there is a substantial amount of individual personality scattered throughout the universe that’s connected to protons , that’s a mystery
The biggest mystery is why scientists research dark matter, some whole careers, on a guess.
It's not on a guess. They are trying to solve a real problem that's needs an explanation
@@Ryan-gx4cewhat problem
2:01 according to JSWT this may not be true anymore
According to Dr. Emmett Brown, the greatest mystery of the universe is woman! (By the way, time travel is far too dangerous so I do not recommend building a time machine!) 😅
The biggest mystery is how a cat as brilliant as Brian Cox willingly walks around with that haircut.
Hi Brian Cox this is Everett Cox can you say when your Biggest Mysteries In The Universe is coming to Texas I want to attend.
Some of the very quickly changing graphics have nothing to do with the topic discussed at the time and are more of an annoyance. Very surprised of the appraisal comment of the same thing.
Is the universe random or preordained?
Ephesians 5:32
This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Great explain awesome video ❤
Why can’t the universe be composed of ants eating discarded cheese cake? For ever.
"The power of a 'snowflake' in the palm of your hand" - Doc Cox
Scientists do not study the 'biggest mysteries in the universe'. They study the behaviour of material objects, which is mundane and shallow are of study. It is metaphysics that studies the real mysteries.
in an infinite universe it makes sense to catch solar wind -as everything of life comes from the sun
(pull cables from pole to pole slightly offset for the dynamo effect - mars as a mega machine )
infinite acceleration gives the brain the ability to grasp/fathom infinite space
infinite acceleration of space as openining sequence of an infinite universe where planets are fed with solar wind and stars and galaxies are fed with cosmic radiation (cosmic radiation take up space -as in entropy )
infinite acceleration eliminates time --> time is inertia
Oops, James Webb just discovered galaxies older than the big bang! Back to the drawing board!
Nope. They discovered what "it seems to be" some galaxies 200 millions years after the big bang. A time where they suposed that shouldn't happen. But this is just apparently. They dont have analized this enough to take conclusions
Wait!!!,,,,my mind has been blown. I'm stoned, but if the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, but yet nothing by law's of know common physics can exceed the speed of light, so then if everything is presently in motion traveling at a certain rate of speed, how fast do you really have to go to travel the Galaxy to infinity and beyond?
the biggest mystery in the Universe is human mind
I think the universe looks like the remains of a killanova or even supernova, we cannot comprehend the amount of power it took to open a pocket of space and time from nothing.
The non existence of a non CGI image of earth or curvature in 2023 is still a mystery.
The biggest mystery in the universe is the universe. Simple.
Universally known..
Well First of all we have to be careful with that apple idea because the gravity of the apple does pull Newtons head, but Newtons head has greater mass and pulls the apple and the stronger gravitational field of the Earth is stronger than both Newton and his apple so Earth's gravity wave particles dominate or pull down the apple. Next. The weak equivalence principle was discovered by Galileo first" the acceleration of free fall is the same for all bodies. Don't forget about the strong equivalence principle of general relativity is that inertial and gravitational forces are equivalent, Einstein's idea
The JWT is like the little boy in the story of the emperor who thought was clothed with beautiful garments, but was tricked by con men!
Then.... "who or what" gave the spark for the happening of " big bang"
One of the greatest mysteries is the existence of complex Life forms on planet Earth?