Is The Universe Finite?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- Thanks to Brilliant for supporting PBS. Learn more at: www.brilliant....
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to: to.pbs.org/Dona...
The universe is big, really, really big. Although according to a new paper, it may literally be infinitely smaller than we previously thought.
Sign Up on Patreon to get access to the Space Time Discord!
/ pbsspacetime
Check out the Space Time Merch Store
pbsspacetime.com/
Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Written by Matt O'Dowd
Graphics by Leonardo Scholzer & Adriano Leal
Directed by: Andrew Kornhaber
Executive Producers: Eric Brown & Andrew Kornhaber
End Credits Music by J.R.S. Schattenberg: / @jrsschattenberg
Every time you walk out the door, light from the Big Bang strikes your face, enters your eyes. This is the cosmic microwave background radiation - the left-over heat-glow from the very early universe. We can’t see this microwave light with our eyes, but we can catch it with even a simple radio antenna. As soon as we became aware of its existence we’ve been feverishly building better and better devices to collect it. Why? Because it encodes so many secrets. And within this light, a group of scientists have just found evidence of the limits of space. A clue that our universe may be actually be finite in size. Today on Space Time Journal Club we’ll delve into the Nature Astronomy paper that just reported this: Planck evidence for a closed Universe and a possible crisis for cosmology by Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, and Joe Silk.
Special Thanks to Our Patreons
Big Bang
Alexander Tamas
Andrew & Brenna
Craig Stonaha
David Barnholdt
David Nicklas
Fabrice Eap
John S
Juan Benet
Matt Miller
Morgan Hough
Quasar
Mark Heising
Mark Rosenthal
Vinnie Falco
Hypernova
Chuck Zegar
Danton Spivey
Donal Botkin
Edmund Fokschaner
Hank S
John Hofmann
John Pollock
John R. Slavik
Jordan Young
Joseph Salomone
Mathew
Matthew O'Connor
Syed Ansar
Gamma Ray Burst
A G
Adrian Hatch
Adrien Molyneux
AlecZero
Andreas Nautsch
Bradley Jenkins
Brandon labonte
Dan Warren
Daniel Lyons
David Bethala
DFaulk
Eric Kiebler
Frederic Simon
Geoffrey Short
Graydon Goss
Greg Smith
James Flowers
Jamie Frederick
John Funai
John Griffith
John Robinson
Jonathan Nesfeder
Joseph Dillman
Josh Thomas
Kevin Lee
Kevin Warne
Kyle Hofer
Malte Ubl
Michael Conroy
Nick Virtue
Nick Wright
Paul Rose
Scott Gossett
Sean Warniaha
Steve Bradshaw
Tatiana Vorovchenko
Tim Stephani
Tonyface
Yurii Konovaliuk
imagine if the universe being curved gets proven to be true and 100 years later Flat Versers will be a thing and worse yet is they would have little way of proving the other case
No, but if you look at an encyclopeedeeya from 61 years ago it shows proof that someone said something like there's a thunder dome 13000 parsecs above the southern-most sector of the universe and the governt-ment is hiding eeliums! Therefor: eeliums. *cough* I mean flat universe.
Summing up a flat earther for reference; hops in spaceship, goes into orbit, looks out window 'nah, this is fake, you're tricking me, how do I know this isn't a fake rocket, why don't you open a window and prove it'.
Fuck flat earthers.
@Danny Meeks ;o
@Danny Meeks well..figures.. flat earth
*1000 years. We've known the Earth round for 1000 years.
and thus the war between the flat universers and the curved universers began
meta
Don't let the flat earth guys see this ..
I tend to the side with the best data
@@hakmanp.8702 Yeah the flatards will probably confuse everything they hear...I can already hear them now, "Scientists said the universe is flat, thus the Earth is flat!"
@@big-ounce I like how you took this joke seriously lol
"the universe will expand forever, unless we were mistaken"
Perfect description of physics
You got it!! Theories are deemed to be correct until observations do not match the theory. Then scientists either stop using it or continue to use it because it fits the data from other types of observations. Theories are a set of hypotheses used to construct a mathematical model of all the data from all known observations of all relevant parameters of the physical universe.
If the initial assumptions used in this process are incorrect the model will fail to make good predictions. Another outcome can be the predictions well work for some observations but not for others. This indicates the theory is incomplete or assumptions of how the universe works are.
😂☝️
So true. I highly doubt the universe is actually infinite, physics goes wonky when the word infinite is used. The simple question of "what would the density be if I spread the atoms of this apple across the universe" becomes infinite as a fraction of infinite is still infinite. It's finite but expanding faster then light and thus is effectively infinite to us observers. The actual size of the current universe is impossible to know, just like what was going on before the universe expanded. We can make grand and complicated sounded guess, that are still guess's and only slightly more logical then a giant turtle carrying the universe around on it's back.
@@palladin9479
> The simple question of "what would the density be if I spread the atoms of this apple across the universe" becomes infinite as a fraction of infinite is still infinite.
not necessarily. with calculus we can ask what is the _limit_ as the distance between each atom of the apple approaches infinity. as we stretch out our apple, the density gets lower and lower, approaching 0. so, we can say that the density in the limit (where each atom of the apple is infinitely far away from eachother) _is_ 0 (which should make intuitive sense).
Since we have discovered that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light, this implies that the universe might be made up of all three geometries, depending on the mass of each section. As space expands, portions of it become causally disconnected as the rate of expansion from any given point becomes superluminal. Therefore, as matter passes beyond this event horizon, its mass effectively leaves the universre, and, that means the universe could, theoretically transition from positive curvature to negative curvature.
"...and, that means the universe could, theoretically transition from positive curvature to negative curvature." An amusing side issue, I'm a Heretic. The net energy value of the Universe is always 1. I love gravity waves travelling at the speed of light. Baryonic Matter isn't even 1%. That alone, tells me alot.
“Is the universe infinite?”
“No”
“Could you check?”
“No”
Do you think you're being funny, or are you just an idiot?
“Is the universe infinite?”
“No”
“Could you check?”
"No need. If the universe was infinite, there'd be no space."
EOM
@@Mick0722MX
"is the universe infinite?"
"Yes"
"Could you check?"
"No need. If the universe wasn't infinte, dog farts would've had a smell of strawberries"
^same level of argument, of what you wrote there.
@@dushas9871 You're a moron. The universe is finite. If it wasn't, there would be no space. Good luck, dipshit.
You doofuses, it's a Spongebob reference
@@Mick0722MX watch out we have a badass round universer out here
It's so cool how he always creatively manages to finish with the phrase spacetime. Good, deep episode.
I LOVE PBS SPACETIME!!. I just wanted to say thanks for everything you guys do. I've been a follower for years now and I have seen every video multiple times. Keep it up PBS SPACETIME. Thanks for producing these videos and making them an essential part of my perception of... Spacetime :P
You made me smile, have a great day!
Yup, it's insane how much knowledge I've gained off TH-cam from channels like this. The best thing to come out of my computer addiction from childhood
Arvin Ash and MindScape are good too.
👏🏻 👏🏻
Some of them get super heady for me, and I just nod along to the equations, but I totally echo your sentiment 😸
put it on half speed and it's like you've just run into him at a bar and struck up a conversation
Hahahaha
I'd love to have a drunken / stoned conversation with him
Half speed, would that double infinity?
My problem with all this size/shape of the Universe stuff is that we can only see a tiny part of it - and what we can see right now is already billions of years out of date. For all we know, space civil engineers could have knocked down the entire Universe several light years away and built a car park around us and we won't even know about it for years.
Yea, but we'd be able to tell them how far of from 'level' their park is based on the curvature of the space-time it's built in. And mocking engineers for imperfections in their designs is good enough for me.
Bruuh🤣😂🤣
Yes but this is just something we have to accept when observing space, we will always see things long after they happen cuz the speed of causality
Buh... We can see the big bang.
Also, we can see proto-galaxies.
i still subscribe to the simulated universe theory. i think data is densest around earth (or whatever set of celestial bodies are being actively simulated) and sparser the further you go from it. since there would be no meaning to make data that is inaccessible from where we are, there just... isn't.
Can the Universe transition between different geometries?
Start off closed, then get more and more towards flatness and then 'invert' into negative curvature?
And then it turns in on itself and eats itself and is once again reborn.
Perhaps, at this stage, anything is possible.
@@elias_xp95 There is a theory about this actually, it says that the universe might expand so much that the forces will colapse (like if we were going backwards in time) then producing another big bang. As far as we know this could be x number of times that this has already happened
I would assume there’s some form of conservation as that would require it to expand infinitely instantaneously and then shrink infinity instantaneously
If a flat infinite universe curves into a closed finite universe, what happens to the infinite matter/energy in the infinite space?
If dark energy density isn't constant
Professionals in every other field: "Omg, our models are not correct, we are screwed!"
Physicists: "Awesome, all we know might be wrong, more fun stuff to think about!!"
Call it ... job security
Also physicists: sadly, we were probably right.
Too bad climate scientists aren't so open minded. They say their science is settled. They say anyone who doesn't agree is funded by fossil fuel companies or just stupid.
@@JoeZorzin
What would you say if a flatearther said you are not open minded?
@@omeke9336 I blew my mind in the '60s, so it's totally open.
It's only when you consider how much we don't know that you get really can hold the universe in awe.
It's only consider you when get we know in don't much universe you hold really can in awe.
@VeroMithril What are you talking about? Religion and spiritualism often talk about not knowing it all.
@VeroMithril And that is also a principal in science even though a lot of scientists think they do know it all.
@VeroMithril You see that's your problem. You read one book and you think all religions are the same. Educate yourself on the various religions first then come back to me.
A lot of scientist and so called "TH-cam scientist" think they know everything while claiming they know little at the same time. Just like you.
@VeroMithril And that's why you'll never learn anything. Because anyone with eyes can read what I said and not find anything about me discrediting science but of course you made it up.
But since you have very limited reading ability I'll reiterate it for you. Scientists think they know everything. There is nothing wrong with science itself. So go ahead and twist what I said again so it can suite your beliefs. You are just some random guy on the web who's existence means nothing to me so why would I care if you block me or not?
I'm just correcting your ignorance so future people can benefit from it.
Lord Kelvin : “There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now.”
Physics : “hold my ......”
I doubt that's historically accurate. Lord Kelvin taught a master class on what he called the "dark clouds" over physics of the late 1800s, which included radioactivity, the ultraviolet catastrophe, and the photoelectric effect.
Quantum mechanics?!
@@nirbhaygurjar7015 In the long run everything is physics. Physics all the way down.
@@daedalus-7 I have no idea where you got that from. But I learned this bit of history from "The Quantum Revolution: A Historical Perspective" by Kent A. Peacock, a book I picked up from my university library, definitely reliable. In any case, assuming what you say is correct, he was simply not being himself in his later years. People can and do become senile.
hold my physics
3:16 Isn't that technically a 2-D projection of a 3-D projection of a 4-D hypersphere.
In your 1-D brain.
@@adityasaklani8710 oof, I guess that you're right.
@@randomguy263 Have you heard of our lord and savior 0-d consciousness?
It is a attempt to do so, which is incorrect. A 3d sphere has the property that its surface is contiguous at all points, the 2d projection mapping here is not even close and is only half the sphere. let alone a 4d mapping. 2d is rectangular by nature, mathematically as well.
@@SomeGuy-nr9id are you basing that off of the 3d coordinate system? If so then you should look into polar coordinates.
Your idea of a donut shaped universe is intriguing, Homer. I may have to steal it.
- Stephen Hawking, 2016
@Simon Read while kidnapping himself 🤣
@The Illegitimate President Agreed. It should be obvious to anyone, that it's shaped like a pretzel.
@The Illegitimate President Toroidal things occur all the time.
No biggie. It's just another type of sphere.
But the curvature would be fatter in one direction than another. There's no evidence for that (currently).
Plus 🍩 aren't good for you.
A lot of people seem to be asking if the universe can change shape due to the ever faster expansion increases over-time. Like one that started off as a closed sphere, currently opening up to be flat, and then gets inverted to become whatever 4D-pringle-saddle-hypershape the negative curve was supposed to be
so, will we have flatuniversers and globeuniversers now?
don't forget the saddleuniversers either
@@csehszlovakze they're just silly though
@@discomfort5760 how dare you! #teamsaddleuniverse
@@dewalderasmus8655 You know what they say about your worldview? It's all CROOKED
@@discomfort5760 all i'm saying is do some research and I think you will find the universe is a saddle. we have a meeting every Sunday in the saddle universe society club
I'll forever be thankful to this channel and the people behind it, i could honestly watch all these videos in a row and it's channels like this that keep my passion for space going and going!
Just got out of school, literally learned more right now than in the seven hours past.
Actually, I enjoy watching a good Numberphile or Arvin Ash video.
You didn't learn more from this vid than you did in the past several hours. Watching this vid has taught you something that you aren't learning in school at all, and the brain processes new data with greater emotion. This vid didn't tell you how to calculate the curvature of space, and you haven't even read the paper that the vid is based on 😑. Don't forsake what you're learning in school now.
Btw all this stuff, even Numberphile's content, vsauce, veritasium, etc are college level stuff, which means if you want access to the treasure trove of info that they're using to make their vids, then buy college level textbooks. You'll literally learn more than what you're getting from the content creators.
Don't let school get in the way of education.
@BBB H I wasn't replying to you. But anyways, when I say the brain processes new information with greater emotion, I mean seeing or experiencing something absolutely new floods your brain with hormones like dopamine, and adrenaline. It's partly why people feel good when they buy something new. Partly why you are amazed/disgusted at a new sight. Partly why you feel a thrill during an eureka moment.
OP has an interest in astronomy, and seeing new information about astronomy, especially considering this isn't what he/she typically learns at school causes op to feel he/she has learned a lot, when it's really just an emotional response to what he/she is experiencing.
The topics that channels like veritasium and numberphile address are indeed college level, but their appeal is that they simplify the information to make it accessible to more people. After watching vids by veritasium, a highschooler might say "this is amazing! Why haven't I been taught this?", while someone in college might say "oh, I learned all of that last semester." This is of course dependent on what you're studying btw.
@tommy aronson
OK, boomer!
Questions I've had since I was just a boy:
-What was the first thing created? What created it? What or who created the creator of the first thing? Is it possible at all to have a first thing created?
-What is outside of the universe? What is outside of the things that are outside of our universe? What is outside that too?
Really ? This a serious science channel and if you're going to come here and ask such childish questions then we might as well give up and .......oh ! wait you're right .....
@@elizabethwinsor-strumpetqueen :D :D
It is mind blowing to me that they can actually compensate for such much gravitational lensing at all. I mean, that has got to be a LOT of work.
It'd be nice if the universe was a hyper-torus. Then parallel lines would stay parallel, even while the universe is finite.
@fynes leigh - So you correctly identified my comment as a joke, but attempt to address it seriously? Fine, I'll play.
You can ascertain that the earth is a sphere (roughly) without leaving its surface. A hypertoroid is also a finite shape, and so this could potentially be measured from within the universe. A hypertoroid is even in keeping with current observation inasmuch as parallel lines don't intersect as best we can measure.
The Hard Problem that clap back though 😂😂😂
fynes leigh You’ve got some deep issues going on. Who hurt you?
There might be more than one universe. Don't fall into that semantic trap. Remember the ministry of peace refers to the war department.
The universe simply refers to any spot we could in theory explore in normal 3d space.
fynes leigh you seem to be someone who hasn’t the faintest idea of good grammar.
The visual presentation of this channel is breathtakingly well done.
My high school math professor was occasionally saying something along these lines: "Parallel lines meet or diverge somewhere in the infinity of the universe." now this makes much more sense :D
Then they are not parallel lines by defintion
@@roberts8524 Nothing is precise enough to be infinitely precise .
"(Space/)Time is a flat circle."
- Rustin Cohle, True Detective
All circles are flat
@@MathaelTheDestroyer everything flat is a circle
Earth is flat
@enigma locally,Yes.Globally NO. are you a flat earther?
@enigma No.HELL NO
11:00 Dark energy is an evil super flower, I knew it!
Global Digital Direct Subsidiarity Democracy . Most likely the bunch that Adam gave to Eve on their first date. Big mistake.
Undertale's flowy confirmed
"Feed me, Seymour, and you might just learn the secret to the entire universe."
"world war 3 will be fought with flowers"
-Einstein
The flowers look to be a species of cosmos - maybe Cosmos bipinnatus daydream.
Nice touch.
Thank you for making this at least somewhat understandable by big dummies like me. I don't pretend to understand most of what is discussed, but feel a little proud of myself that I am at least follow along and not be totally lost....well most of the time. :p
If the universe is curved/round. *That means there has to be a center of the universe.* what could be at the center of the universe?
That center would not be inside the universe, of course, just like the center of a sphere is not on its surface.
@@thomaskoller8282 still very intresting thought. Would that be where the big bang started? I know the center wouldn't be like the core of a planet.
So if the universe is sphererical or round. Then there has to be a center?
I don't know much about this. But logically speaking. *If* the universe is curved or round than must be logically a center.
@@thomaskoller8282 that's very interesting, I hope he talks about this
@@tyler5914 every point is at the center (like a dot on the surface of a sphere would be)
Can you do a video on what it means to say the universe is ‘flat’? I find it confusing because if the universe is expanding in all directions, how can it be flat? Also, if you could explain what the gravity graphs mean in relation to to a flat but expanding universe that would be amazing!
The space in which galaxies and stars exist is not infinite, space itself is
2019 flat earthers, 2020 flat universers
Both wrong...funny
NOT a coincidence my friend. Soros up to no good again.
hearing it from a science channel that finite might be a reality for our universe has somehow scared me much much more than infinity - what is this emotion.
claustrophobia?
Existential dread?
For me personally an infinite universe lends itself less to a creator (and/or being a simulation) while being finite doesn't prove there is one... It certainly makes it seem more of a possible option. That makes me more uncomfortable than i thought it would.
🤯 ikr
A realization ,that maybe your original thought could be ....or could not be. Epiphany , maybe ?
Great video, Space Time team! ^_^
What about a closed but still flat geometry like a torus though (specifically a 3-torus embedded in 6D space so it stays flat)? Although, in the game Asteroids, the universe is a 2-torus (which would require 4D space to stay flat) but doesn't require an actual embedding space since it's a simulation.
P.S. - Pretty please could y'all make a video about Sir Roger Penrose's objective collapse interpretation of quantum mechanics? ^_^
I am glad someone had bring up this
+1 for wanting a video on objective collapse!
The visuals on this video are outstanding!
It still boggles the mind that the universe is expanding at the speed of light *and its accelerating*. That makes about as much sense as magnets.
The trick is that while traveling "through space" is limited to light speed, there is no issue in relativity with space itself moving faster than light
An episode on better explanation for positive curvature finite universe and expansion so no big crunch type scenario.
Is it like a sphere that keeps expanding in volume yet the surface will always loop?
Yep!
Imagine an inflating balloon
This changes everything. Literally.
Loved the Douglas Adams reference at the very beginning :)
I caught that too!
Extra like 👍 for the “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” reference 😅 “Don’t Panic” and know where your towel is ✌️
OI if you give 2 likes they cancel each other out
Boy do I love knowledge and theories of infinite possibilities. The mind is filled with madness and is full of vanity.
Is there a way to determine how the geometry of the universe changes with time? For example, could we tell that it was more closed in the past or had a tighter curvature? And is it possible for it to become open in the future?
At the present (13,4.bl.) the Universe the proto mass ⊙ flouting around in a Browning spirals ☆
That makes up the fabric ☆☆☆
It is unlikely that something infinite can become finite or vice versa.
@@gravitonthongs1363 I agree with you about that, but we seem to be in the minority.
Sam Harper
It is also possible that there are fluctuations and the observable universe is mostly positively curved surrounded mostly by negative curvature or vice versa.
I think anything but infinite space creates force value fluctuations which we don’t observe.
You forget the cause of all spacial curvature.. Causes i should say, there's only two: mass, which causes inward curvature (damn Higgs field), and dark energy, which is/could be (?) just a small positive curvature. We don't know what causes it so we don't know if it can change. If you look at any of those block diagrams of spacetime it shows several changes in the value of dark energy---including the start and stop of the early 'initial' expansion, but also a slow increase in it's value (hyperbolic by the look of it) in later times. I would think that they have some motivation for these changes.
I like how they took the time to deviate to explain everything you need to know to understand the conversation. While saying the universe curves in on itself is easy to visualize, it's hard to understand the universe mathematically without delving into some difficult geometry first! Amazing visuals that make it super simple to understand such a mind-shattering revelation of a finite universe!
According to the anthropic principle, it’s infinitely more likely we’re living in an infinite universe, because theoretically, one infinite universe contains infinite number of intelligent life forms, whereas one finite universe contains finite numbers of intelligent life forms, infinitely less than one infinite universe.
Šimon Rataj universe isn’t infinite dumb dumb
If the universe were infinite then there wouldn't be stars that are older than the universe (as currently claimed that some are), because the age of the universe would have to be infinite.
The universe, by definition, includes "all existing matter and space". A universe of infinite size would have to be of infinite age. Because the universe is apparently expanding; that defies the idea of it being of infinite size, or being of infinite age. Because it is expanding it had to have started somewhere and at some time.
@@stevelux9854 How can a star possibly be older than the Universe/big bang?
I know, right? Until very recently there is a star that was being claimed to be older than the universe. This just exemplifies to me that there are a lot of things that scientists simply seem to be guessing about. Just one of the videos: th-cam.com/video/jiSwvxA5v4Q/w-d-xo.html
could it be possible that there is an unusual amount of mass in our local visible area that could cause a local curvature deviation while the rest of the universe maintains a different state?
Sure that's possible. That's the problem with ideas about what is outside of the observable universe... you can't observe it, so you can't rule out anything. Note that these researchers start out with a model of the whole universe (beyond what can be observed), which amounts to making a lot of assumptions.
goes without saying
or then it is bubbles in bubles
1:23-1:39 What if everything we know as our "universe" is just a bubble in a solid rock on a much larger scale?
And what if what we think is "freezing" is actually the wave's final impact residue?
Love the occasional Hitchhikers Guide references. 👍
Yes the quote and the bunch of flowers in the graphic (can't spell petu.... oh you know what I mean)
Love you Matt, you have plenty of subscribers from Greece
Ισχυει!
Σωστός
Swstos
You may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
Heads Tails GNU Douglas Adams.
I am majoring in both physics and chemistry, does that mean I am a very long person, but very small on the cosmic scale?
"in which he proves that the whole fabric of the space-time continuum is not merely curved, it is in fact totally bent."
Matt O'Dowd - Professor of Neomathematics at the University of Maximegalon
11:30 If, if and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas!
remember at the end of Stargate Universe - they reveal that the actual mission for the ship was to reach the edge of the universe to study the object seen in the background radiation - is this why the show was cancelled - too accurate - MGM couldve funded it even during bankruptcy with partners. nah I rate this is something else here yo im loosing it.
lol
stargate needs to be brought back!
SGU was the best
@@muaddib7037 3rd best
I remember just after watching that video, like the same week, there was a news article about physicists finding concentric circles in the CMBR. Super prescient.
5:00 Hahahahaha, that jab at flat-earthers! 😂😂😂
definitely shots fired
That was BRILLIANT!!!!
I'm just waiting for for someone to claim that if the universe is flat then the Earth MUST be flat too!
@@kirkhamandy
Maybe we should take bets on who claims it first.
@@kirkhamandy Nathan Oakley or maybe Allegedly Dave...There is just so many to choose from!
2:19 When (La)TeX suddenly decided not to parse your symbols anymore
Me: Heyo, need a plusminus sign here
LaTeX: *groan, can't you just copy/paste a UTF-8 glyph? I feel lazy today...
@@ANDSENS or tell me to go into math mode.
And what if the whole universe is actually on a wave as well? Such an incredibly long wave that we can barely detect this curvature.
Then, instead of being a closed sphere, it would reach a "zero" point when it would kinda bounce back its geometry (couldn't be negative/positive matter related to it?)
Does it make sense? I dreamed it these days :)
Its nasas plan to keep us here on earth and never go up there, space has lots of life up there to be seen
Could the universe have had different geometries at different points in time as the universe evolved ?
Love this channel and the host. Watching these vids made me change my major to theoretical physicist.
I’ve always found that a positively curved universe makes the most intuitive sense, and a negatively curved one the least, with flat stuck in between. I wonder how many others feel this way as well.
In any case, we should not be too quick to accept or reject any findings on the curvature of spacetime, as it is still early days and we should strive to avoid any potential confirmation bias.
the universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.
serges I agree
yup agreed
@@alien9279 Even in 4 dimensions, a HOMOGENEOUS negative curvature cannot be extended finitely, much less infinitely. The closest thing to a REGULAR negative curvature is the inside of a torus, which maintains uniform curvature on a "latitude line" around the greater radius of the torus, but varies in curvature as you move on longitude around the lesser curve on a "longitude" line, becoming positive curvature on the outside of the torus. That's why the lower dimensional representations of negative curvature shown are always finite and truncated.
It is true that the universe is under no obligation to first order to make sense to us. However, it is problematic to assert that what we say means anything when we try to assert something we don't understand. Science is the attempt to make sense of the universe. The universe may transcend us, but WE can't.
The bias is itself something worth understanding. I like the idea of a finite universe better because the alternative is somehow more daunting.
So the game Asteroid was even more physics-accurate than we thought -- keep going in one direction and you *will* eventually wind up back where you started!
Yes, but it's Astroids Deluxe. The rocks rotate. MUCH more realistic! 👍
No. The geometry of asteroid is a torus , that has 0 curvature but is compact; this is not the geometry of the sphere
The thought of a positively curved Universe is what makes me feel safe at night
It's like a infinite blanked over one...
I liked the idea of a flat infinite Universe because as an infinite number line every single possible thing must happen which makes my existence a statistical inevitability as a possible combination
Infinite outside of math scares me.
Is time infinite?
Ironically it gives me nightmares
Like Singapore Breaking News, I also listen to spacetime while I play games. I tell -myself- I'm getting brainy though. It might be working too, I recognize more words/diagrams than I did at the start. (obligatory "you may think it's a long walk down the road to the chemist but that's peanuts to space! Listen-!" and so on...)
Could one way of reconciling different data be to suggest that the geometry of the early universe was closed, and then at some point it changed to open? Why do we have to assume the universe has always had the same geometry?
Colossus: “ together we will solve all the mysteries of the universe “
Or else.
Love the HHGTTG reference at the beginning
Please tell me how different our observations would be under the following set of assumptions,
1. The Universe has always been there
2. The Universe will continue forever
3. The Universe is infinite in size
4. There is no such thing as gravitational attraction. What we experience is the partial blocking of an all pervading force of repulsion
Was that "infinitely smaller than we previously thought" a joke about infinite being infinitely bigger than almost infinite?
I think so
But there's no such thing as "almost infinite". No matter how big the universe is, if it's finite, it will be infinitely smaller than an infinite one.
I always wonder about this infinitely small singularity... then some popularizers will say that it was about the size of a grape. Are grapes infinitely small?
I think it's a joke about infinity being infinitely bigger than infinity 😋
@@gordo64ful anything big enough for us could be almost infinite. No one's saying this is a technical description
We are all inside of somebody’s huge snow globe but instead of snowflakes, it’s filled with galaxies.
some people are micro-snowflakes floating around
Is the universe finite?
Short answer: We don't have a fvcking clue
Long answer: We will never have a fvcking clue
We have yet been able to leave our own solar system, but pretend to know about the true nature of the whole universe.
@@greygreenblack get real, fella. You fail to understand that no matter how strong or how smart, the human body has limitations... both physical and mental. There is only so much that can be done or learned. In contrast, the universe itself has no boundaries or limitations. So by definition, we are physically incapable of fully understanding it to its fullest. To deny this simple fact of life is to deny reality itself. You foolishly and incorrectly jumped to the conclusion that I think we should never TRY to understand it all. Of course we can try, but our human physical limitations will always prevent us from knowing everything.
There is no possible way to know until we develop such advanced space travel that we can actually transcend the boundary or travel past the "edge" of the universe. OR die trying.
As Douglas Adams wrote "Space is big. Its huge. You might have thought it was a long way down the road to the Chemist's, but thats nothing compared to Space"
Have towel will hitch-hike ! See you at Milliways !
Haha, the flat earth/tin foil hat burn...
It looks like a SCI man Dan reference to me LOL
@@sandral9998 my thought exactly
I suddenly realized that the Flat Earth Society is being funded by Hershey's Chocolate Kisses...
Flat universe= flat earth confirmed!!!!!! It is turtles all the way down anyway, everyone knows that. Take that Hawking. Stupid, stupid head. We miss you. Turtles all the way down is a lady's reaction in one of his talks I believe. Might have been tortas all the way down. I'm to lazy to check. But he asked her a question and that was her answer. People believe some weird shit.
Where?
So what would be the ramifications of a finite universe? 🤔
Energy transmission and transformations
Geometry affects forces
God did it.
For us well nothing really
It's not infinite.
Would just mean there's no escape velocity for the universe, no? Wouldn't really have an 'edge' per se, other than 'nothing gets fast enough to go beyond this point'
Dr. O'Dowd, Thank you for opening up the scientific research and related healthy debate to us.
This proves it: the universe is an egg and it's getting bigger
*_E_* *_G_* *_G_*
So the true question we should be asking is: Where's the chicken?
I've always hated infinity.
Whick kind?
Which kind
So you hate Mondays too, huh
Why
You see where I'm going with this
Of course it's finite. The black hole containing our universe can't be infinitely big either. The big bang was a white hole, and the Einstein-Rosen Bridge connects(connected?) it to the black hole containing our universe.
And you just know this for certain? Lmao link me your paper
was on sabines channel watching "if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into"... and now im here!
be careful with such strong statements... "now", "here", "im"
.. and it repeats itself states again and again and again.. and we are one of the possible "flowers".. reborne again
I really hope I will not have to live this life ever again.
@@Trias805 ..sad, i am happy and do my best :) wish you the same from heart ! without death we would be all egomaniac psychos ;)
Why can’t I for once hear: “ we are 100% sure that the universe is …..”
we are 100% sure that the universe is pretty big, bigger than Earth at least.
"Of course science doesn't know everything! Otherwise it would just- stop."-Dara Ó Briain
Ummm...
We are very small and can't observe or imagine the leinght of our universe.
We aren't even close measuring our galaxy or nebulas.
Me hearing name Planck with connection to disproving something: Ah shit, here we go again.
The Universe is therfore slightly positive curved. Using Complex geometry we can define multi and paralell universes.
What if our universe is part of a greater universe that curves back in on itself and possibly leads back to 0 again? I'm kind of picturing a big lake surrounded by a gradually cascading waterfall. Once the contents of our universe falls off the edges of that lake it curves back in like the geodesic he spoke of earlier; like an infinite loop. But all of this incidentally takes a very long time (like 10 to the 10 billions of years) for the cycle to complete.
For hundreds of years, theorists and experimentalists have done what I call the "Its your fault" dance.
When theorists predict something and it doesnt quite fit the data from experiements, theres something wrong with their data.
But when experimental scientists find something that does fit the mathematical model, its the models fault.
Virtually every time there was a gap between data and theory, getting better data fixed it. So im on the theorists side on this one.
when you get to the edge of our universe and look out with your eyes squinched you can juuuuuust see your wild west universe self looking back wearing a cowboy hat
UncleBibby wild futurama appears
Honestly, even with the current model, I always wanted a closed universe. The idea of an open universe that would end in a thermal death is sad. In a closed universe there is the possibility of a "bounce" that would restart the universe.
@ In a closed universe the expansion will slow down and reverse.
@@gibranhenriquedesouza2843
Nope. There's too much dark energy closed into the universe. The universe is expanding faster and faster. It's like a bubble that keeps growing long after everything inside freezes. Eventually no galaxies other than this one would be visible with any manner of telescope because they're outside our viewable horizon.
And that's fine. There's nothing wrong with an end that doesn't "re-crunch."
@ Yes, you are right.
Matt, I teach this stuff. But not the way you do it. You go deep, I surf the shallows.
Wanted him to say "according to a paper, it may be as big as yo' mama"
"Your high school geometry" - so, my geometry...? Seriously though, a question. My understanding from this video was that to get a flat universe the energy in "matter" (regular matter, dark matter, photons, weird particles) needs to balance the energy in space itself. Yet, due to dark energy expansion isn't the overall energy held in the sum total of all universal vacuum going up all the time while the energy in "matter" remains constant? Won't the curvature of the universe change over time?
David Durant
It’s more like gravity vs dark energy, not matter vs DE 2:15
Prowler Cam
I’ll credit you on a good perspective, but you are focusing on the name more than the property. Dark energy has an effect like negative gravity. DE and gravity are more similar than the relationship or interaction of DE and matter in that effect.
I guess it could be gravity vs energy(including matter) and just the increasing size of the universe diminishes the effect of gravity, but the total energy does not need to increase for this effect.
Prowler Cam
Yes, but no🤨lol.
You are seeing:
Dark Energy(+)
Matter(+)
Gravity(-)
Negative gravity(+).
I am seeing:
Dark Energy(push)
Gravity(pull)
Negative gravity(push)
Matter(neutral)
Well, I can stand up. So the Universe clearly isn't flat!
I don't know if the universe is finite, and after this video, I predict I still won't.
Your statement about your own uncertainty turns out to be the most precise statement in the entire comment section.
Thank you so much for uploading this video. It is helping me get through the pandemic!
Einstein was not sure about the universe being infinite, but he had no doubts about the abilities of humanity to be silly. 😁
Thank you for making these videos for laypeople like me to (somewhat) understand, and marvel and ponder over.
Ok, so here's my idea. Maybe I'm being overly simplistic and maybe there's something I'm not considering, but it seems to me that the universe _has_ to be finite. The reason is simply that the big bang happened. If the universe is finitely old (13.8billion years), and it began at a size smaller than an atom and expanded from there, then how could it possibly be infinite? Yes, inflation made it grow crazy amounts, and it continues to expand today more and more, but no matter how fast or far it grows how could it ever be infinite? There's no way to cross over from finite to infinite, right? Or am I stupid?
Ahh see, the Big Bang Theory predicts the observable universe would be smaller than an atom at some very short time after the Big Bang. It says nothing about the size of the overall universe. Your analysis you be correct if not for that fact. If the universe is infinite today then it would have to be infinite at any time after the Big Bang, but that isn’t to say expansion didn’t occur. If I put a small circle on a plane and then expand that plane the circle gets bigger, but the plane is still infinite in extent. Hope that helps.
No, I don't think you're being simplistic. Since the universe contains a finite amount of energy and the law of entropy predicts an eventual 'heat death' of the universe, the universe will no longer expand. Hence, finite. There's also a fundamental problem with the big bang theory. A singularity is defined as being of infinite density and infinitesimal volume(infinitely small). So, by defintion a singularity can never be proven since it will always be ummeasurable. The big bang will always remain a theory because the foundation is defined as unprovable. It seems to me that's where the conflation of immense size and infinity is introduced. It also seems to be a disservice to the discipline of physics since a primary component of physics is precision, not ambiguity.
@@michael2974 No, the universe needn’t contain a finite amount of energy.
@@michaelupdike-bz6rg Hey, thanks for the response. You're right, it may not be finite but Alert Einstein's equation, E=mc2, along with current extrapolations on the total amount of energy would indicate a finite amount.
@@michael2974 Well no, if the universe was infinite then dark energy (a constant amount per volume of space) would also be infinite. IF the universe were finite then yes you’d be correct since infinite energy would imply infinite energy density and hence infinite spacetime curvature.
No. Just like a room , there's always something behind the wall(s) ...
@@myutubechannel_nr1 There's still something behind the wall(s) ...
@@Obeijin It occupies all the 3D space.
For us, humans - nothing. But theoretically there may be 4-th dimension so...
Hard to tell. I think noone knows at this point. Maybe someone would comment on that after 50 years ;-)
Pull up a picture of a galaxy on your computer. Just a single galaxy. The area covered by the tip of your mouse pointer represents more living space than humanity could ever occupy for our entire existence, even if our species develops interstellar travel and lives on for billions of years.
Is the universe infinite? The answer to this question is: it doesn't matter.
With all the various cosmological options theoretically, it sounds like the elephant and the five blind men metaphor. Depending on exactly what we’re observing, that’s which aspect we see. What if we put them all together?
If HYPOTHETICALLY, breaking like every law of science comprehensible you were able to move at a speed that was able to reach the end of the universe and faster than the expansion, what happens when you reach the edge?
Puppies!
It doesn't exist so the result doesn't exist.... Nothing.
You become the edge?
Hyper-alien's dad unplugs his console. Our universe collapses.
I don't think that sound effect was anything like the actual sound of the big bang. The actual sound of the big bang was Pavarotti.
This channel is dead the day they fired their graphic designer
The title answers the question. Uni meaning single or one. Universe is less than the multiverse. Therefore, if there is an Uni, there must be multi; hence a multiverse: which can be different dimensions
I haven't done an ounce of research on the subject, but you're wrong.
Wouldn’t that still mean a void outside of the universe boundaries regardless of its shape? Forgive my ignorance